The Imperial Duchy

[salochin999]

But Traveller world populations are almost never distributed like that. Take Mora. The Mora system is surrounded by worlds with populations between 4 and 6, all of them utterly insignificant (as far as trade and taxes are concerned anyway). Two parsecs from Mora is Fornice with 20-29 billion people. But I say the odds are good that the two worlds are economic rivals and would very much not consider themselves part of the same political fraternity. And then you have Heroni in the extreme rimward/coreward corner, six parsecs from Mora and very much not part of any Morani cluster, and Pallique at the rimward edge, also six parsecs from Mora and also not part of any Morani cluster (I've not bothered to look at the pop 7 and 8 worlds). There is no informal border you can draw around a smaller Morani cluster that takes in all the important systems in the Mora Subsector.

Going the other way, you can't have two clusters in the same subsector that effectively answer to two different Imperial nobles, because any count of such a cluster would be a) not holding interstellar governmental authority in his own right, and b) subject to the subsector duke who would be very much interested in the major system(s) of the county.


Hans

I agree with a lot of that but that just makes it potentially more varied.

#

Traveller world populations are almost never distributed like that

I'm not sure I agree with the first point entirely as in a lot of sub-sectors the alpha system dwarfs the population of the rest of the sub-sector on its own but I agree there are exceptions.

#

Looking at the 3I bits of the Imperial marches

(using my current trade map to illustrate the point)

https://gameystuff.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/spinward_canonports_routes_map.pdf

Glisten, Lunion, Rhylanor all more or less fit as the centers of a spider web cluster with lots of Firefly systems outside or in the gaps.

Vilis and Jewell the same but with a very small cluster part.

Trin also except the important cluster is concentrated in the upper part of the sub-sector with the Firefly part in the lower half.

#

The exceptions to the general pattern are:

1) Lanth and Aramis which don't really have a cluster at all

2) Regina / Efate where the natural alpha cluster is around Efate with a secondary one around Regina

3) Mora sub-sector which as you say has three alpha systems in the same sub-sector

4) the collection of B star port systems in between Rhylanor, Mora and Lunion.

#

So using the exceptions to provide scenery / potential plot hooks:

1) Lanth and Aramis systems being consciously built up / colonized to provide a hub for the sub-sector

2) Regina being consciously built up as a counter weight to Efate implying a bit of conflict there for Zhodani to exploit

3) Mora / Palique / Fornice as the center of constant political intrigue as the three systems plot against each other

4) Haven't decided on the fourth region yet.

#

Also it doesn't have to work everywhere. If someone likes the idea of a 1/3 Coruscant, 2/3 Firefly game then they can set it in one of the sub-sectors where it fits best.

 

[rancke]

I'm not sure I agree with the first point entirely as in a lot of sub-sectors the alpha system dwarfs the population of the rest of the sub-sector on its own but I agree there are exceptions.

The average subsector has one pop 10, two pop 9 and three pop 8 worlds, distributed at random and with lesser worlds distributed at random in between. Clusters are entirely astrographical with no social coherence whatsoever.

Sheer random chance will presumably provide the odd subsector that conforms to your theory, but as a general feature, I don't see it.

Glisten, Lunion, Rhylanor all more or less fit as the centers of a spider web cluster with lots of Firefly systems outside or in the gaps.

No they don't. Glisten subsector has Aki next to Glisten, but there's Tirem and Crout as the center of a different cluster (except that the systems surrounding Glisten/Aki and Tirem/Crout aren't really clusters in a socio-political sense since they are not obviously related to the 'centers'). Lunion is 'split' between Lunion and Strouden. Rhylanor has Zivije and Natoko at opposite ends of the subsector.

Vilis and Jewell the same but with a very small cluster part.

Because they don't include all the worlds in their respective subsector.

Trin also except the important cluster is concentrated in the upper part of the sub-sector with the Firefly part in the lower half.

Trin isn't the center of a cluster unless you're thinking of a cluster of two systems. Any unofficial duchy border would either be around Trin alone or the entire subsector. I see no justification for including the Zyra Cluster while excluding the rimward part.

1) Lanth and Aramis which don't really have a cluster at all.

Aramis has the Towers Cluster, except that Towers is lowish-population and bracketed by Junidy and Aramanx.

2) Regina / Efate where the natural alpha cluster is around Efate with a secondary one around Regina.

And let's not forget Menorb, Enope, and Rethe, all systems with high populations and thus significant economic clout.

1) Lanth and Aramis systems being consciously built up / colonized to provide a hub for the sub-sector.

Something that the Imperium has had seven centuries to do but haven't. The Imperium seems to be rather hands-off when it comes to building up its member worlds. The primary colonization project in Regina (the Forboldn Project) seems to involve mere millions of colonists. Building up populations of level 7 and above would be tremendous undertakings.

2) Regina being consciously built up as a counter weight to Efate implying a bit of conflict there for Zhodani to exploit.

Regina has been the foremost world in the subsector for a millenium. It's more likely that Efate has overtaken it but has been kept in second place through political maneuvering.


Hans

 

[salochin999]

The average subsector has one pop 10, two pop 9 and three pop 8 worlds, distributed at random and with lesser worlds distributed at random in between. Clusters are entirely astrographical with no social coherence whatsoever.

Sheer random chance will presumably provide the odd subsector that conforms to your theory, but as a general feature, I don't see it.

One quick example.

The wiki has Lunion sub-sector with 20 billion people in total of which 8 billion are on Lunion and 9 billion on Strouden.

So that's 85% of the population of the sub-sector on just two systems and as both have high TL that will be substantially more than 85% of the total GDP.

If you throw in Tenalphi, Adabicci, Persephone and Capon those six systems will have 90%+ of the population and probably 95%+ of the GDP.

#

So if anyone prefers

Personally, I don't see why a duchy has to be associated with a fixed subsector size. Historically, they were of all different sizes and populations. I like that more chaotic approach, myself.

they can quite easily get that by simply accepting the obvious.

The importance of individual systems within a sub-sector

(nb where importance is a combination of star port class, population and tech level)

varies by many orders of magnitude so if they decide in their OTU that the 3I only cares about the important bits then in practical terms the "Duchy" is that collection of important systems with the rest either all backwaters or truck stops between the important systems and that can be the case even if officially the Duchy is the whole sub-sector in the same way all of Brittany was officially part of the Roman Empire even though for most practical purposes 90% of it wasn't.

#

Anyway, the point is very simple so people can make up their own mind what they prefer.

 

[rancke]

The wiki has Lunion sub-sector with 20 billion people in total of which 8 billion are on Lunion and 9 billion on Strouden.

So that's 85% of the population of the sub-sector on just two systems and as both have high TL that will be substantially more than 85% of the total GDP.

If you throw in Tenalphi, Adabicci, Persephone and Capon those six systems will have 90%+ of the population and probably 95%+ of the GDP.

Yes, and any unofficial border you draw around them will have a handful of insignificant systems outside the border and another handful of insignificant systems inside the border. There's no point in drawing such a border instead of the official subsector border; any insignificant system, inside or outside such a border, will be ignored (except by concientious dukes).

So if anyone prefers

Personally, I don't see why a duchy has to be associated with a fixed subsector size. Historically, they were of all different sizes and populations. I like that more chaotic approach, myself.

they can quite easily get that by simply accepting the obvious.

Perhaps I'm missing some trenchant bit of logic, because I don't see it. There are no 'safes' and 'wilds' in the subsectors. There are important worlds and unimportant worlds (or a gamut of significances) and they are distributed randomly in between each other. The Duke of Lunion presumably pays a lot of attention to Lunion and Strouden, but he presumably pays no attention to Carse and Sharrip¹, even though they're located between Lunion and Strouden and would be inside any border drawn around those two worlds.

¹ Actually, as Sharrip is located, it would have a LOT of J2 through traffic between Lunion and Strouden (which makes its population unbelievably small, but that's a digression), which would make it the obvious place to station a few squadrons of escorts to protect the traffic.​

The importance of individual systems within a sub-sector

(nb where importance is a combination of star port class, population and tech level)

varies by many orders of magnitude so if they decide in their OTU that the 3I only cares about the important bits then in practical terms the "Duchy" is that collection of important systems with the rest either all backwaters or truck stops between the important systems and that can be the case even if officially the Duchy is the whole sub-sector in the same way all of Brittany was officially part of the Roman Empire even though for most practical purposes 90% of it wasn't.

I'm not denying that. In fact, I've been saying that. But the ignoring would have everything to do with the insignificance of the systems that were ignored and nothing to do with their proximity to the subsector capital.

Anyway, the point is very simple so people can make up their own mind what they prefer.

Of course, especially since this is the IMTU forum. If you (generic you) want to turn the Duchy of Lunion into the Duchy of Lunion, the Duchy of Strouden, and the autonomous County of Tenalphi, there's nothing to stop you. But I read your claim as saying that one could stick to the OTU setup and just reinterpret it. And that's what I don't agree with.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

Isn't that what you were proposing by calling them duchies?

Taking the existing OTU and re-interpreting it?

It is something I wholly support by the way.

 

[rancke]

Isn't that what you were proposing by calling them duchies?

I'm propounding an explanation why the same term is used for the astrographical subsector and the political subsector (which examples show are not always actual subsectors) and suggesting that a new term be introduced to reduce the ambiguity and concomitant confusion caused by the use of 'subsector' for both concepts.

Taking the existing OTU and re-interpreting it?

I think I could make an argument for it being an interpretation rather than a re-interpretation. It really wasn't very well explained (or explained at all) originally.

It is something I wholly support by the way.

Thank you.

 

[aramis]

I'm propounding an explanation why the same term is used for the astrographical subsector and the political subsector (which examples show are not always actual subsectors) and suggesting that a new term be introduced to reduce the ambiguity and concomitant confusion caused by the use of 'subsector' for both concepts.


I think I could make an argument for it being an interpretation rather than a re-interpretation. It really wasn't very well explained (or explained at all) originally.


Thank you.

Actually, it seems quite clear from CT sources that the subsector with it's duke is a purely astrographic convention ideal - and that no "duchy" exists.

You keep insisting it does, when the term Duchy is absent entirely, and the see of a duke is a subsector or sector. And some subsectors have counts, while others are administered by the neighbor - canon specified this for not just the marches, but also Reft sector and a few other odd locations.

So, it's a wholecloth invention that some non-subsector non-sector "duchy" exists, when, until T5, no such thing exists. T5 is an admitted retcon.

Reducin the ambiguity is both unrealistic and (except for a very few people's apparent OCD) not useful.

Ambiguous terms, and especially apparently mismatched terms, abound in political and mapping systems.

Archepiscopos, Archbishop, Metropolitan Bishop	Archeparchy, Archdiocese, Metropolia
Earl, Count, Mayor	County
Mayor	County, City, Town, Borough
Governor	State, Province, Colony, Territory, Dominion, Nation*, Administrative Region, Occupation

Ambiguity is normative in reality.

 

[rancke]

Actually, it seems quite clear from CT sources that the subsector with it's duke is a purely astrographic convention ideal - and that no "duchy" exists.

I don't understand how you can keep claiming that, when what is actually clear from CT sources is that the subsector with its duke is not just an astrographical feature but also a political unit.

"Interstellar government begins at the subsector level -- on one world designated the subsector capital. The ruling figure at the subsector capital is a high-ranking noble selected by higher levels of government. This duke has a free hand in government, and is subject only to broad guidelines from his superiors." [LDAM:7]

"The peak of the bureaucracy -- a subsector duke at a subsector capital -- is an appropriate place for the group to present their case." [SMC:7]

"The fifth level of noble rank is the duke, and is associated with the subsector." [LDNZ:36]
​

You keep insisting it does, when the term Duchy is absent entirely, and the see of a duke is a subsector or sector.

I keep insisting that 'duchy' is a correct term for the territory ruled by a duke or duchess. And so it is.

And some subsectors have counts, while others are administered by the neighbor - canon specified this for not just the marches, but also Reft sector and a few other odd locations.

Which is why I suggest that although the CT texts all use 'subsector' and 'territory ruled by a duke or duchess' (aka 'duchy') synonymously, the two terms are not, in fact, synonymous.

So, it's a wholecloth invention that some non-subsector non-sector "duchy" exists...

No, it's a given that if you have territories ruled by dukes or duchesses then you have duchies. And if those territories are sometimes not coterminious with subsectors then their appellations are not always synonymous.

Reducing the ambiguity is both unrealistic and (except for a very few people's apparent OCD) not useful.

That's merely your opinion. Your opinion is not fact. I find it useful and I do not suffer from OCD. (What I do suffer from is a difficulty with refraining from arguing about and correcting fallacious statements. It's related to an upbringing that taught me that if you didn't contradict such statements, you tacitly agreed with them ("Den som tier samtykker" -- He who is silent acquiesces).

Ambiguous terms, and especially apparently mismatched terms, abound in political and mapping systems.

They do, but what does that have to do with anything?

Ambiguity is normative in reality.

And?


Hans

 

[salochin999]

If you (generic you) want to turn the Duchy of Lunion into the Duchy of Lunion, the Duchy of Strouden, and the autonomous County of Tenalphi, there's nothing to stop you. But I read your claim as saying that one could stick to the OTU setup and just reinterpret it. And that's what I don't agree with.

I'll try and be clearer for you.

If there are 30 systems in a sub-sector but only six are important then the "Duchy" can still officially cover all 30 systems but in practice only cover the six important ones.

 

[rancke]

If there are 30 systems in a sub-sector but only six are important then the "Duchy" can still officially cover all 30 systems but in practice only cover the six important ones.

And if it officially covers all 30 systems, its borders would be those of the subsector. And the duke could still neglect all but the six important ones.


Hans

 

[salochin999]

And if it officially covers all 30 systems, its borders would be those of the subsector. And the duke could still neglect all but the six important ones.


Hans

Yes, two versions of reality at the same time: the official version and the version that exists on the ground. In some cases the two versions might overlap 100% and in other cases only 10% and everything in between.

 

[rancke]

Yes, two versions of reality at the same time: the official version and the version that exists on the ground. In some cases the two versions might overlap 100% and in other cases only 10% and everything in between.

Let's drop the subject. We're evidently talking past each other.


Hans

 

[salochin999]

Let's drop the subject. We're evidently talking past each other.


Hans

Yes. You seem to think ambiguous = fallacious when in reality ambiguity, grey areas and fuzzy logic are the norm.

 

[rancke]

Yes. You seem to think ambiguous = fallacious when in reality ambiguity, grey areas and fuzzy logic are the norm.

That may be how it seems to you, but that's not the case at all.


Hans