One of my longstanding issues with the definitions and presentations of some of the countries and cities of the Flanaess is a great deal of the assertion of a presumed total independence. This generally relates to two terms: palatine and free city.
In a medieval context, neither means independent or sovereign. In a thoroughly modern context, free city does mean sovereign, but that is 18th century and later, and not medieval. However, they are commonly treated as meaning just that, in the process obscuring who their actual sovereign should be.
Compounding this is the use of non-royal titles for so many countries, including those which are, rather obviously, actually sovereign. On Earth, there are traditional practices explaining why various countries did not assume royal titles after independence, and we could expect those hold on Oerth.
Which countries and such would this apply to?
A starting list starts with the following:
Bissel
County of Ulek
County of Urnst
Verbobonc
It would, if the reference to "palatine" in the text but not the title of the Duchy of Urnst is taken as controlling.
It would also apply to Dyver, as its paying taxes to Furyondy and Gold County appears in Marklands. However, this is not established in the Folio.
None of these are fully sovereign. They might have minting and jurisdiction powers, but as palatines or associates, they are not absolute sovereigns.
For any of these countries, and for any other countries, I would propose a simple test of actual sovereignty:
Could the ruler make an alliance with Iuz?
If the answer is "No", then clearly the ruler is not sovereign and is subject to answering to some feudal ruler.
If the answer is "Yes", then the ruler would be sovereign, and their title should be revised, or at least clarified. (There would be at least a minor reason for a count palatine to retain the "palatine" in the title to distinguish from "ordinary" counts.)
Of course, this is only the opening salvo of a greater question, that being the "feudal" nature of several realms and whether the rulers hold allodial title to their lands or are actual vassals.
County Ulek is explicitly called a "county palatine", inferring an active relationship to a feudal superior. The duchy and principality are more overtly referred to as independent, especially with their demihuman population.
Verbobonc is a "willing" participant with Veluna, with a strong suggestion of actual sovereignty.
Why did you list County Ulek but not Duchy or Principality?
Isn’t it stated somewhere that Verbobonc is a vassal to Veluna?
It does so state: in the LGG, in the boxed set, and in the original Folio.
Verbobonc is a vassal of Veluna but runs its own internal affairs.
Sterich is in a similar way. Technically owes fealty to Keoland but Querchard never renewed that vow. Keoland abandoned Sterich when the Giants invaded in 588, and again in 591. The Sterichers don't like Keolanders and are independent in all but name.
The Ulek states were part of Keoland during its Imperial Age but were granted independance when the last Rhola king died and another Neheli dynasty took over. The Duchy is neutral to Keoland. The Principality is pro Keoland. Each is independent.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
