Brecht nobility

[Kenneth Gauck]

From: Jeff Dunnett
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 9:51 AM

>Remeber that according to most things that I have read about the
>Brecht say that they don't really care about a formal rank structure.
>Most of them didn't have title until after the Anuirean occupation, so
>most of their titles would be self proclaimed. So they can say they
>are a Viscount and it could be considered the same rank as a duke or
>prince in Anuire. The point is that I prefer to think that the Bretch
>regent decides his\her own title.
>
>Jeff
>

Its an irony that your portrayal of Brecht language would be Stalinist in
character (annihilation of meaning) given the Stalinist view of nobility. I
suspect it was unintended to suggest in this way that a society without
nobility would be tyrannical or totalitarian.

However, while we find totalitarianism completly absent from our period,
tyranny is the period consequence of a degredation of nobility. In Italy
the Rennaisance saw many cities throw off seigniorial (noble) authority and
place in their stead men who ruled outside the law. (Same thing happened in
Greece at the end of the Archaic age.) Its an interesting interpretation of
Brecht society, patterned as it is after Northern German and Northern
Italian societies. We have no problem concieving of a de Medici (a great
guilder who later seccures power over a realm) in Brechtür.

But if this is the kind of thing we are talking about, then we must clarify
what we mean when we talk about the Brecht view of nobility. Certainly
saying that compared to Anuire, the Brechts don't place as much emphasis on
titles is something entirely different from using the word "democratic" to
describe them. Do we imagine the Brechts governing by plebicite and
choosing their leaders by lottery? Do they eschew the accumulation of
honors? Because if they do they are unlike most people everywhere, who do,
in fact desire honors and preferments and reputation.

The Khinasi have Sayim, which while being apart from titles, only serves to
provide a context for proper noble behavior, much as it can guide all
conduct. Even if the the Brecht look beyond the title for something more
(as people always do), and if they are not as impressed by titles as
Anurians, there is no reason to suggest they must distain titles, or make
them up (for indeed why make up a title only to distain it). If the Brechts
chose to invent titles they would no doubt be particular to the various
realms. Herr Protektor, Herr Magnat (for a guilder run realm), Kanzler,
Reichsvogt, or some realms may select animalistic offices, such as
Daurensbär, or Rheulslöwe. One that strikes my fancy is Herr Verteidiger.

Kenneth Gauck
c558382@earthlink.net

[Kai Beste]

> But if this is the kind of thing we are talking about, then we must clarify
> what we mean when we talk about the Brecht view of nobility. Certainly
> saying that compared to Anuire, the Brechts don't place as much emphasis on
> titles is something entirely different from using the word "democratic" to
> describe them. Do we imagine the Brechts governing by plebicite and
> choosing their leaders by lottery? Do they eschew the accumulation of
> honors? Because if they do they are unlike most people everywhere, who do,
> in fact desire honors and preferments and reputation.

In Brechtuer nobility is less important than in Anuire. At least
that's what the rulebooks state. I don't think this is meant to imply
that the Brecht have no need and no respect for their nobles. Maybe
it just means that things are done with much less bowing and
scraping. The Brechts are more cosmopolitan than the other races of
Cerilia. Maybe they have already questioned whether the regents
really have a "divine right" to rule. In Anuire no commoner would
dare to do so.
But as well as Khinasi sayim there has to be something they value in
their rulers. Let's just call it deferrence for now. I think the
Brecht system is a bit like the system used in ancient Rome. I
don't want to go too much into detail, so I'll try to be brief. We
always think Rome was a democracy, but in fact it was ruled by the
Roman version of nobility, the 'nobilitas'. A commoner could not be
senator, or consul, or dictator, period. The only official post that
was occupied by a commoner was that of 'tribunus', a kind of
'people's spokesman', who only had the right to veto some decisions.
So maybe the Brecht rulers are considered more as a kind of princeps
inter pares (first among equals) by their fellow nobles. For those of
you who want a more democratic element, you could invent a senate
which has the right to 'advise' the regent.
There is no reason why the Brecht should despise their regents. They
are just more likely to think about the regents motivation and
criticise him than are the Anuireans. Maybe it's just me, but I think
the average level of education in Brechtuer is much higher than in
Anuire.

> The Khinasi have Sayim, which while being apart from titles, only serves to
> provide a context for proper noble behavior, much as it can guide all
> conduct. Even if the the Brecht look beyond the title for something more
> (as people always do), and if they are not as impressed by titles as
> Anurians, there is no reason to suggest they must distain titles, or make
> them up (for indeed why make up a title only to distain it). If the Brechts
> chose to invent titles they would no doubt be particular to the various
> realms. Herr Protektor, Herr Magnat (for a guilder run realm), Kanzler,
> Reichsvogt, or some realms may select animalistic offices, such as
> Daurensbaer, or Rheulsloewe. One that strikes my fancy is Herr Verteidiger.

I'm not sure about the animalistic titles, but I must say I like the
other ones. Kanzler and Vogt were used as administrative titles (Vogt
= sherrif, Kanzler = chancellor). Other possibilities would be
Magistrat (magistrate), Gouverneur (governer) or Prokurator, or you
can make up quasinoble titles such as Seegraf (maybe for the
Zweilunds?).

laters

Kai

[Pieter Sleijpen]

Kai Beste wrote:

> I'm not sure about the animalistic titles, but I must say I like the
> other ones. Kanzler and Vogt were used as administrative titles (Vogt
> = sherrif, Kanzler = chancellor). Other possibilities would be
> Magistrat (magistrate), Gouverneur (governer) or Prokurator, or you
> can make up quasinoble titles such as Seegraf (maybe for the
> Zweilunds?).

Stadhouder might be an other title. It was the official title in the
Netherlands in the 16th century of the ruler. And this ruler had a
council under him. It shames me to say that I am not exactly aware of
how the power was devided between the Stadhouders (who became kings
after Napoleon, so the Netherlands is only a real 'monarchy' since that
time -it became a democratic monarchy rather quickly-) and the Staten
Generaal (the council). Since some of the Brechtur nations and culture
seems fairly simmilar to the Netherlands of the 16th century, it might
be a nice title to add. Dauren and Muden come to mind (both have a
council to advice their rulers).

Pieter Sleijpen

[the Falcon]

> Stadhouder might be an other title. It was the official title in the
> Netherlands in the 16th century of the ruler. And this ruler had a
> council under him. It shames me to say that I am not exactly aware of
> how the power was devided between the Stadhouders (who became kings
> after Napoleon, so the Netherlands is only a real 'monarchy' since that
> time -it became a democratic monarchy rather quickly-) and the Staten
> Generaal (the council). Since some of the Brechtur nations and culture
> seems fairly simmilar to the Netherlands of the 16th century, it might
> be a nice title to add. Dauren and Muden come to mind (both have a
> council to advice their rulers).

Just as an aside, Stadhouder literally means "Keeper of (the)
City/Cities". Staten means States, and Generaal means General, so Staten
Generaal can be somewhat approximated by "General Council of the States".

As to those states, the Netherlands is composed of several used-to-be
states, called Provincies (that's the plural form, singular it's
Provincie), which can be neatly translated as Provinces. :)

Anyways, while I'm on the subject of names, I noticed there's lots of
Dutch names in the name listings (you know, on the cardsheet in the
campaign box) of the Brechts, Rjuriks, and Vos alike. Karel, Pieter, and
Anneke for example. Funny.

- the Falcon