Nobility

[savage]

I don't see any practical difference from the pre-T5 state of affairs. Anyone whose family has held a domain for five or ten centuries could be expected to be wealthy enough to buy such plots of land on their own. The only difference is that here the plots are on loan from the Emperor (Which means said archduke would have bought up other plots of land that belong to him and not the Emperor).


Hans

It is not a loan system. That puts too much ownership in the Emperor's hand leading to dissent among nobles. In Dune, we see the noble houses trade worlds based on political favor and power, but by all appearances it is still their world. In the Czar's Russia we saw an extremely powerful Emperor with too much land get killed out of jealousy. The White Army was not powerful enough to withstand the Red Army faction in the rebellion.
In 3I, there is no reason to "loan" property. If the Emperor wants a solid empire it is in his favor to give plots of his enormous land holding to the limited number of nobles. If they do something unthinkable he can always take everything from one of them. Also, he has them on the hook to "lead" not just milk that worlds economic future. If he chooses to grant more than one noble (T5) ownership on a planet he can break it up in numerous fashions (continent, hemisphere, habitable or economic worlds in system). The T5 description is still very high level.

For example, planet X is in Sir Smith's fiefdom, the Emperor gives Sir Donnie on planet X and he is also now a noble of that world. What we don't see in the system that falls on the Ref is that Sir Smith and the population have both requested additional nobles be named for this backwater world, in an effort to introduce economic stimulation Sir Smith cannot justify on his own.
Leadership of Planet X also falls in the Ref's preview. The Emperor gave the fiefdom its not a loan. The second fiefdom could be in a different city or continent without impacting the first noble. Pre-T5 systems are different, of course. A Noble had 1+worlds and that was it. Now Marc, perhaps, thinks everyone wants 3I worlds but he could give out nobility through all of known space (Zho, etc...)

 

[rancke]

It is not a loan system.

It's not? I thought these were fiefs? Feudal fiefs?

That puts too much ownership in the Emperor's hand leading to dissent among nobles. In Dune, we see the noble houses trade worlds based on political favor and power, but by all appearances it is still their world. In the Czar's Russia we saw an extremely powerful Emperor with too much land get killed out of jealousy. The White Army was not powerful enough to withstand the Red Army faction in the rebellion.

None of this is relevant unless you're presenting reason for changing a setting detail that you consider almost inconcievable. Otherwise, all that matters is how T5 material describes the setup.

In 3I, there is no reason to "loan" property.

But that's what fiefs are. Property handed out by the overlord to the vassal in return for loyalty and support. The vassal enjoys the usufructs of administering the fief, but the ultimate ownership remains the overlord's. If 'loan' isn't an adequate informal description of the setup, I don't know what is. A formal description would involve words like 'homage' and 'fealthy', but I was being informal.

If the Emperor wants a solid empire it is in his favor to give plots of his enormous land holding to the limited number of nobles. If they do something unthinkable he can always take everything from one of them.

If by 'unthinkable' you mean something like treason, then that's true. Upon being convicted of treason a person can often be condemned to forfeit all his property to the state. But otherwise, no he can't. That's precisely the difference between fiefs that ultimately still belongs to the Emperor, and is thus his to dispose of, and personal property of an individual noble. To give a canon example, the Emperor can take away Delphine Muudashir's title as Duchess of Mora and any fiefs thereto appertaining. But he can't take away from her the position of Matriarch of Mora. Still less can he confiscate the personal property of the Muudashirs.

Leadership of Planet X also falls in the Ref's preview.

Leadership of any world in any referee's own TU is within his purview, true. And if there is no published information about the leadership of a particular world, then the referee HAS to make it up for himself. But if there's a published description of a world with all Imperial fiefs detailed, he has the option of using that instead of coming up with something of his own.

The Emperor gave the fiefdom its not a loan.

A fief is a loan. If it isn't, it's not a fief. (A feudal fief, that is. I have previously expressed the opinion that what MT describes as fiefs was something other than feudal-style fiefs that had had the term 'fief' assigned as a pseudo-feudal trapping.)

The second fiefdom could be in a different city or continent without impacting the first noble.

Not relevant.

Pre-T5 systems are different, of course. A Noble had 1+worlds and that was it. Now Marc, perhaps, thinks everyone wants 3I worlds but he could give out nobility through all of known space (Zho, etc...)

A high noble baronial or marquessal title was associated with a world. That was not the same thing as the noble owning or ruling that world (though that could happen). The worlds weren't fiefs, because they were not the Emperor's in the first place.

The Emperor did hand out smaller bits of land as fiefs, but the procedure was not explained in any but the crudest terms.


Hans

 

[Reban]

I can't really see a fief as a "loan".

Its a token of exchange; "You give me that and I'll give you this".

In return for the promise of support, military or practical, the lord gives the fief to the vassal.

A loan is something that is borrowed with the expectation that it will be paid back or given back with interest.

Imperial fiefs are given for one or more generations in return for the service of the noble as part of the Imperium. The noble may improve his fief during the time he holds it, but there is no requirement to do so. The fief only reverts to the Emperor in quite limited circumstances.

If I loan you a place to build a house or a business or a power base and you know one day I will take it back, at best that will limit your commitment to improve and care for it, at worst that will lead to instability and treason as you take steps to secure that property to prevent me taking back what is mine. The feudal system requires a lot more trust than that so a vassel must feel more secure in his fief.

 

[rancke]

I can't really see a fief as a "loan".

I used the word informally to indicate that the fief belonged to the Emperor rather than the fiefholder. Which it does.

Imperial fiefs are given for one or more generations in return for the service of the noble as part of the Imperium.

I never heard of the multiple generation option. OTOH, the Emperor is explicitly said to have the right to pass over an heir when a noble dies, to the point of being allowed to entirely alienate the title from the family.

The noble may improve his fief during the time he holds it, but there is no requirement to do so. The fief only reverts to the Emperor in quite limited circumstances.

Tell that to Empress Arbellatra. She moved nobles from one end of the Imperium to the other, presumably taking away their original fiefs in the process. Presumably she mostly gave them fiefs of roughly equivalent value instead, but there would be no legal requirement that she did so.

On a more generic level, the overlord taking away fiefs from one vassal and giving them to another is a common theme in stories.

If I loan you a place to build a house or a business or a power base and you know one day I will take it back, at best that will limit your commitment to improve and care for it, at worst that will lead to instability and treason as you take steps to secure that property to prevent me taking back what is mine. The feudal system requires a lot more trust than that so a vassel must feel more secure in his fief.

The feudal system doesn't really work all that well, true. Which is why I would prefer to see the Imperium as an autocracy with pseudo-feudal trappings rather than a feudal state. I see (or saw, prior to T5) the "fiefs" more like the house and lands attached to a parsonage or similar office, designed to provide the office-holder with an appropriate income.


Hans

 

[Reban]

I used the word informally to indicate that the fief belonged to the Emperor rather than the fiefholder. Which it does.

Fief and loan may be similar concepts but the words aren't interchangeable, but I do see what you were trying to say.

I never heard of the multiple generation option. OTOH, the Emperor is explicitly said to have the right to pass over an heir when a noble dies, to the point of being allowed to entirely alienate the title from the family.

The case I was thinking of was a fief awarded to a noble with a hereditary title. The intent would be that the fief usually passes along with the title to the next generation.

Tell that to Empress Arbellatra. She moved nobles from one end of the Imperium to the other, presumably taking away their original fiefs in the process. Presumably she mostly gave them fiefs of roughly equivalent value instead, but there would be no legal requirement that she did so.

Arbellatra was a New Broom. As first of her dynasty having a complete reshuffle and separating some nobles from their power base and seeding others where she needed them was probably a very good idea. But the example comes at the end of a period of civil war.

What I was thinking of when I mentioned limited circumstances for an Emperor taking a fief back was where the title associated with the fief goes extinct, where the noble is attainted a traitor, or other special cases. Constant reshuffles promote instability (Dune is an example of the trouble a reassignment of a fief can cause).

The feudal lord should, in my opinion, always strive to preserve stability. So moving a title and its associated fiefs to a new candidate, whether an outsider or a member of the previous holder's family is always a good option, but that is different from taking it back into his or her direct control.

On a more generic level, the overlord taking away fiefs from one vassal and giving them to another is a common theme in stories.

I wonder though how common a historical practice it was? The cases I can think of off the top of my head come from civil war scenarios where nobles were declared traitor and their titles and fiefs were given to loyal nobles who then had to take possession of the lands involved.

The feudal system doesn't really work all that well, true. Which is why I would prefer to see the Imperium as an autocracy with pseudo-feudal trappings rather than a feudal state. I see (or saw, prior to T5) the "fiefs" more like the house and lands attached to a parsonage or similar office, designed to provide the office-holder with an appropriate income.

I agree with you here mostly Hans. The pure pyramidal feudal set-up of the OTU doesn't ring true. I'd rather think of that Imperial Title and its associated Fiefs as being marks of rank and importance within the Imperium but not associated with Imperial Offices of government, which is where we probably differ.

A fief ties a noble to a world, making him or her a stakeholder in that world and hopefully making him or her interested in improving it and advocating on its behalf in the Imperium. It is also a physical manifestation of the Emperor's interest on or in a world. "Rights", whatever T5 might mean by that, in the economics of a World Hex sized region should act as a method of control for the Emperor on local politics.

My experience with nobles who hold government jobs is that the remuneration is only ever token, and to do the job the noble has to spend his or her money, which has three effects; only the rich can hold certain jobs, making them spend their own money prevents them from building up money and hence power to challenge the sovereign, and the governments burden of investment is eased because the nobles are investing their money.

 

[savage]

I used the word informally to indicate that the fief belonged to the Emperor rather than the fiefholder. Which it does.

No really it does not. Your response is not real world.
It no more belongs to the Emperor than the US government selling land to citizens is retained by the government. Fees (drawn from Fiefs) are an early version of taxes. These Fiefs we're medieval definitions for what we call property. Land was awarded for life of service during the Roman Empire and matured to fiefdom by the 13th century (Medieval Fiefs). It was hereditary service by that point. It is the foundation of property management by governments that we see today without the honorary trappings.

Like any contractual sale both sides must live up to their duties in 3I or any real world government. We must pay our taxes or the property will be foreclosed today for the lost revenue. The Emperor can only reclaim his "gift" if he has due cause. The Emperor can leverage these Fiefs for taxation, maintaining stability and economic growth.

 

[rancke]

No really it does not. Your response is not real world.

It no more belongs to the Emperor than the US government selling land to citizens is retained by the government. Fees (drawn from Fiefs) are an early version of taxes. These Fiefs we're medieval definitions for what we call property. Land was awarded for life of service during the Roman Empire and matured to fiefdom by the 13th century (Medieval Fiefs). It was hereditary service by that point. It is the foundation of property management by governments that we see today without the honorary trappings.

What can be said about this is that some of it is true, but most of it is not.

The granting of a landholding to a vassal did not relinquish the lord's property rights, but only the use of the lands and their income; the granting lord retained ultimate ownership of the fee and could, technically, recover the lands in case of disloyalty or death.[7] In 8th-century France Charles Martel was the first to make large scale and systematic use (the practice had remained until then sporadic) of the remuneration of vassals by the concession of the usufruct of lands (a beneficatium or "benefice" in the documents) for the life of the vassal, or, sometimes extending to the second or third generation.[8]

* Fief​

Emphasis mine.

(As an aside, there we have Reban's multiple generations. There's no indication that this is practiced in the Imperium, though.)

Fiefs did eventually tend to become hereditary, but

By the middle of the 10th century, fee had largely become hereditary.[9] The eldest son of a deceased vassal would inherit, but first he had to do homage and fealty to the lord and pay a "relief" for the land (a monetary recognition of the lord's continuing proprietary rights over the property).

Emphasis mine.

Like any contractual sale both sides must live up to their duties in 3I or any real world government. We must pay our taxes or the property will be foreclosed today for the lost revenue.

If you don't pay taxes, your property will be seized to cover those taxes, same as can happen with any other debt; anyting left over after the sale still belongs to you. This is quite different from what happens to a fief if the owner decides not to let your heir take it over.

The Emperor can only reclaim his "gift" if he has due cause. The Emperor can leverage these Fiefs for taxation, maintaining stability and economic growth.

Assuming that the fiefs in question are tied to the title and are lost if the title is lost, we have this information about the Emperor's powers:

Noble rank can be revoked by the Emperor, either personally or through the courts (subject to his approval). Some reasons for such revocation are treason, murder, kidnapping, and extortion as well other felonies [sic]. Incompetence can also be a reason for revocation of a title. Occasionally, a noble rank will not be confirmed upon inheritance (the Emperor has the option of not confirming, as well as does the holder). The rank may then go to another member of the same family, or lie vacant for the generation. Furthermore, the Emperor has the option of appointing a new family to hold the noble rank, displacing the former line.

Historically, personal property has not been forfeit for anything much less than treason. You certainly don't confiscate someone's property for incompetence. You do remove them from their office along with the property you've allowed them the use of during their tenure for incompetence.


Hans

 

[Reban]

No really it does not. Your response is not real world.
It no more belongs to the Emperor than the US government selling land to citizens is retained by the government.

>SNIP<

The actual definition lies somewhere between both opinions as to what a fief is.

A Fief is an estate of land, especially one held on condition of feudal service.

If the condition, i.e. feudal service, isn't met then the fief may revert to the Emperor. The holder of the fief doesn't have freehold (permanent and absolute tenure of land or property with freedom to dispose of it at will), and the Emperor doesn't have practical control unless holder of the fief fails to give the expected service.

Its a sort of limbo status based on the relationship between master and servant.

 

[rancke]

A Fief is an estate of land, especially one held on condition of feudal service.

When is a fief ever not held on condition of feudal service? If it isn't held on condition of feudal service, it's not a fief.

If the condition, i.e. feudal service, isn't met then the fief may revert to the Emperor. The holder of the fief doesn't have freehold (permanent and absolute tenure of land or property with freedom to dispose of it at will), and the Emperor doesn't have practical control unless holder of the fief fails to give the expected service.

Keep in mind that the setup in the Far Future is not necessarily a perfect cut-and-paste of any historical setup (Of which there are a number of different ones).


Hans

 

[Meteoric Assault]

Proposed imagery of the Order of the Domain of Deneb

mispost moving to another thread

 

[Reban]

When is a fief ever not held on condition of feudal service? If it isn't held on condition of feudal service, it's not a fief.

In certain systems a fief is attached to a fiscal castle for the upkeep of that castle. A fiscal castle is one maintained by the public or royal treasury. So the Letter of Enfeoffment is bestowed on the castle not a noble.

But thats a really niche case. How the original remark should have read was A Fief, especially an estate of land, is held on condition of feudal service. I say especially an estate of land because anything of value, such as rights or other properties may be a fief.

Keep in mind that the setup in the Far Future is not necessarily a perfect cut-and-paste of any historical setup (Of which there are a number of different ones).

I was actually trying to state it as the most general case possible not pegged to any era, but I'm intrigued as to what you think might not apply in the Far Future? Feudal service, reversion to an Emperor or lord if the vassal doesn't keep his bargain, or freehold?

 

[Drakon]

On a slight tack.

Suppose you are a fief holder, and owe allegance to the Emperor (Long may he reign) (and taxes, and all the other duties and responsibilities that fief holders have to their leige lords).

Then a civil war breaks out and your Emperor (or his usurper/successor) abandons your fiefdom, indeed your entire sector, by stripping almost all of the military units stationed there to fight in said civil war.

Several Questions:
1) From a legal standpoint, if the Emperor pulls out, what is the status of the fief and holdings? Granted, as a matter of practicality, the locals will decide if the barony exists or whether they want to stay with the Imperium, and with the Imperium so far away, will be unable to enforce whatever decision, it is a curiousity what the Imperial Law would say.

2) If said fief were conquered by, for example, the Vargr, would they be likely to respect Imperial Land Grants? On one hand I can see them coming in and and ignoring property rights of humans altogether. But, especially for a species that was designed to rule the universe (at least according to some religions), this seems short sighted. Unless you exterminate all humans, and repopulate with their own species, completely ignoring property rights will make governance (and more importantly, tax collection) difficult, costly and counterproductive. The Vargr might decide to co-opt the human nobles to help keep the peace.

3) Suppose two fiefs co-exist on a planet, and one fief holder decides to join the civil war, (for either side). Does the remaining fief holder have any duties or responsibilities for the remaining fief? What if the leaving fief holder is higher ranked? Again asking about Imperial Law, as a practical matter, without the Imperium around, the fief holder has a far greater range of action.

Each fief will still have their seneschals to attend to the day to day matters, obviously. And there may be some personal deal made between the two nobles, but I am curious about what the law says.

 

[savage]

The actual definition lies somewhere between both opinions as to what a fief is.

A Fief is an estate of land, especially one held on condition of feudal service.

If the condition, i.e. feudal service, isn't met then the fief may revert to the Emperor. The holder of the fief doesn't have freehold (permanent and absolute tenure of land or property with freedom to dispose of it at will), and the Emperor doesn't have practical control unless holder of the fief fails to give the expected service.

Its a sort of limbo status based on the relationship between master and servant.

I was trying to be brief. The fantasy of Magna Carta led to Baron Wars, etc and was the correcting foundation of personal liberties ( like owning property) after the American Revolution.

Also, it is important to identify which era of Fiefdom is being discussed.

 

[aramis]

Suppose you are a fief holder, and owe allegance to the Emperor (Long may he reign) (and taxes, and all the other duties and responsibilities that fief holders have to their leige lords).

Then a civil war breaks out and your Emperor (or his usurper/successor) abandons your fiefdom, indeed your entire sector, by stripping almost all of the military units stationed there to fight in said civil war.

Several Questions:
1) From a legal standpoint, if the Emperor pulls out, what is the status of the fief and holdings? Granted, as a matter of practicality, the locals will decide if the barony exists or whether they want to stay with the Imperium, and with the Imperium so far away, will be unable to enforce whatever decision, it is a curiousity what the Imperial Law would say.

2) If said fief were conquered by, for example, the Vargr, would they be likely to respect Imperial Land Grants? On one hand I can see them coming in and and ignoring property rights of humans altogether. But, especially for a species that was designed to rule the universe (at least according to some religions), this seems short sighted. Unless you exterminate all humans, and repopulate with their own species, completely ignoring property rights will make governance (and more importantly, tax collection) difficult, costly and counterproductive. The Vargr might decide to co-opt the human nobles to help keep the peace.

3) Suppose two fiefs co-exist on a planet, and one fief holder decides to join the civil war, (for either side). Does the remaining fief holder have any duties or responsibilities for the remaining fief? What if the leaving fief holder is higher ranked? Again asking about Imperial Law, as a practical matter, without the Imperium around, the fief holder has a far greater range of action.

Each fief will still have their seneschals to attend to the day to day matters, obviously. And there may be some personal deal made between the two nobles, but I am curious about what the law says.

Historically, the side which won determined who was right, no matter whether the holder was abandoned or not.

Moreover, not picking a side is grounds for either side to remove you after the war.

As for the dual fiefs, the Rebel is an enemy of the state. The loyalist is obliged to defend the rebel's people from the rebel...

Let's look at the hierarchy of noble obligations, as per the written works on such within a historical context (Pardon the undiscussable point 1 - I'm working from a written context going back to the 12th through 16th centuries.

1. to God
2. to one's Liege-Lord
3. to one's king
4. to the people of the fief
5. To one's own vassals
6. to other people under the crown
7. to nobles under the crown
8. to all mankind except...
9. those who are criminals... or
10. Oathbreakers and traitors.

 

[Drakon]

Historically, the side which won determined who was right, no matter whether the holder was abandoned or not.

Moreover, not picking a side is grounds for either side to remove you after the war.

Not a matter of not picking sides, more a matter of who represents the Imperium when everyone else has left? The Naval base will be pretty deserted. I suspect many of the imperial nobles would pick a side, and go to the fight, but someone has to man the watch back home. Besides their is an age issue with the baron.

As for the dual fiefs, the Rebel is an enemy of the state. The loyalist is obliged to defend the rebel's people from the rebel...

A distinction that does not present itself until after the war is over. Treason and rebellion are only called such if they fail. Today's Rebel is possibly tomorrow's Revolutionary.

Let's look at the hierarchy of noble obligations, as per the written works on such within a historical context (Pardon the undiscussable point 1 - I'm working from a written context going back to the 12th through 16th centuries.

1. to God
2. to one's Liege-Lord
3. to one's king
4. to the people of the fief
5. To one's own vassals
6. to other people under the crown
7. to nobles under the crown
8. to all mankind except...
9. those who are criminals... or
10. Oathbreakers and traitors.

Thank you for the list. As I understand it, the "chain of command" for a baron, would be, subsector duke, Sector duke, Domain Arch dukes and Emperor.

Hmm, need to figure out their dispositions, if there is any canonical sources for who sided with whom.

 

[savage]

Not a matter of not picking sides, more a matter of who represents the Imperium when everyone else has left? The Naval base will be pretty deserted. I suspect many of the imperial nobles would pick a side, and go to the fight, but someone has to man the watch back home. Besides their is an age issue with the baron.
.

Digest Group work appears to be written out of T5 for the most part. But for OTU they described highly automated military bases with the hustle of support services during the Rebellion & Fifth Frontier War. Also, some Humaniti nobles chose sides with the Vargr during the Rebellion. We've had lively discussions about this over the past 14+ years. I'd recommend searching past threads.

 

[GypsyComet]

Digest Group work appears to be written out of T5 for the most part.

DGP envisioned a schizophrenic Imperium, in which a large number of worlds were pushing strongly into TL16, the only ships worth flying were TL15+, and "G" was a chain of retailers purporting to be the next tech thing, while at the same time trying to maintain dark and isolated places to do dangerous things in. They were also showing us, in loving detail, what the Imperium of 1115 looked like at some level while also tearing it apart five years in the future. DGP gave us the Rebellion, but also led us to hate it. Passionately.

There are elements of the DGP rendition I really like, and elements that are, in hindsight, regrettable. Marc apparently feels the same way, though I doubt that his list is the same as mine. The Traveller Map shows that the march to TL16 is being slowed. Given that TL15 is being described as "just short of magic" to many inhabitants, and is only a century old, TL16 probably *should* be delayed. It was also largely unnecessary in the context of the Rebellion; even that one TL difference renders fleet combat increasingly lop-sided, which is very much NOT what was depicted.

The ubiquity of Imperial Culture depicted by DGP, while not all that surprising after a thousand years, still grates against the wild and wooly CT picture of the spinward frontier. There should certainly be parts of the Imperium like DGP's vision, but I disagree that it should *all* look like that.

For having a whole issue of the Digest dedicated to Capital, DGP was not all that helpful on the big picture of the Nobility.

 

[tjoneslo]

As I understand it, the "chain of command" for a baron, would be, subsector duke, Sector duke, Domain Arch dukes and Emperor.

According to most canon sources, the Sector duke is first of equals among the subsector dukes. So the direct line of command goes Subsector Duke, ArchDuke, Emperor. In theory the Sector duke, if not also your subsector duke, has some influence but no direct line of command.

 

[Drakon]

DGP gave us the Rebellion, but also led us to hate it. Passionately.

I didn't mean to open old wounds or anything. I do not have access to the DGP material so I have a ton of questions that are difficult to answer.

Also I had taken a Traveller break for several months. So I am trying to get back up to speed.

Given that, I can't say the rebellion or the Virus make me happy. But then in RL terms, I am not too happy about World War 1 either. History is what it is, and trying to figure out how to survive a very difficult era is part of the game, for me.

Granted, its more an intellectual curiosity, at this stage. But I had no intention bringing up bad memories.

 

[aramis]

I didn't mean to open old wounds or anything. I do not have access to the DGP material so I have a ton of questions that are difficult to answer.

Also I had taken a Traveller break for several months. So I am trying to get back up to speed.

Given that, I can't say the rebellion or the Virus make me happy. But then in RL terms, I am not too happy about World War 1 either. History is what it is, and trying to figure out how to survive a very difficult era is part of the game, for me.

Granted, its more an intellectual curiosity, at this stage. But I had no intention bringing up bad memories.

Some of us Loved the rebellion.

And the rebellion is canon. Dislike of it is definitely part of why the Lorenverse of GT was successful commercially, tho'.

So,the 3I wasn't the monolith it at first may appear. That it's at the breaking point wasn't evident, but that it wasn't monolithic was present in the fluff prior to MT's release... but it was pretty subtle.

Which also says something about the Nobles.