It's a tactical decision, not a strategic one. We're not firmly in power yet: we need to placate the big shots. When we get enough power behind us, we can centralize.
Crusader Kings: A Byzantium Quest
- Thread starter Telamon
- Start date
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
How exactly are we becoming "just like feudal Europe" and more importantly, what part of feudal Europe?
Lastly, if you are of an opinion that an economic-socio-political structure is more harm than good. Then explain, why?
just repeating "Feudalism is bad " is not an argument.
Hell the word feudalism itself encompasses thousands of different structures.
Last edited:
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
Well yes, a powerful aristocracy of the right kind is an immense help to any empire. Not only do they provide defence, officers and officials, but they also act as massive investment engines that revitalise the economy at large. Not to mention thier role in spreading the court culture and ethos, as well as unique capabilities in maintaining public order.
The agency and the cliques:
Agency will not be annulled, but restructured to be more based on influence rather than direct force. Which is actually for the best, concerns of action bloat asides, delegating none-essential powers downwards both gives us good will, allows us to further divide the notables and have them at each other's throats, gives us candy to throw at potential trouble, and makes killing the emperor slightly less appealing. Not to mention it frees up imperial time.
As for powerful cliques. The best way to deal with them is to make more of them.
Currently there are a few very powerful dynasties in byzantium, which mean we are utterly fucked if we mess with them.
However, if there were two dozen such dynasties, then it give us plenty of breathing room and flexibility, as will as diluting the importance of the dynasties by sheer increase in numbers. (not to mention it'll guarantee that they will be too busy killing each other).
Lastly, we're giving a bit of privileges to the aristocrats at large, rather than select families. So we are in effect watering them down.
Last edited:
Ghostdevil
The Devil of Ghosts
- Location
- United States
[X] Plan Greek snake.
- Location
- USA
Eww. Greek snake is winning.
While that does build up our military strength and army...
I'd point out it does nothing to handle our internal politics(aside from Empress) and only makes us more beholden to external powers.
While that does build up our military strength and army...
I'd point out it does nothing to handle our internal politics(aside from Empress) and only makes us more beholden to external powers.
While I agree with the need for more cliques so we can play them against each other, the Dynatoi option specifically mentions the powerful houses and how we'd be granting them more power by loosening restrictions, offering protections and exempting them from certain taxes.
Yes, we might set the Notables against each other... By enabling them to eliminate their rivals without our intervention. Yes, this might divide them... for a while.
Rather than restructuring things to be based on influence, this could lead to direct force being more relevant.
Eroding Imperial authority doesn't give us candy. It takes away some of our stick, forcing us to rely on candy more even if the need for intervention would decrease.
Would they spread the culture of the court? They might, if they are friendly/loyal to the Emperor. Otherwise they might seek to spread the culture of their dynasty.
Using the Doukas and Dalassenos as a buffer against the rest of the nobility by elevating them above their peers and trying to play them against each other could work though. But that carries its own risks.
Edit:
External Power. Singular. One that we are also undermining to make seceding and swearing fealty to them a less attractive proposition and to make retaking whatever territories are lost to them more viable.
It's a little weak on vassal relations I'll admit. But it preserves(maybe even strengthens) crown authority by securing the loyalty of our personal army and by securing additional sources of income that do not rely on our vassals.
Last edited:
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
Prestige and status are the raison d'etre of nobility. No matter the time or place this has held true.
As such, so long as the imperial court is The center of culture, the most prestigious and glorious place. Then the nobility all over the empire would be doing thier damn best to be role models of the courtly culture.
You can see this with spread of Norman, later burgundian and finally French courtly culture across Europe.
As for the powers being given the nobility, this makes them get more buck for effort from their lands. This basically ties them to the land to some extent, and ensures that a healthy chunk of that new found power is spent within said lands. And as said before, so long as tolls, dues and fees are crown only, we are not losing anything of value.
In fact, we are giving the nobility more provincial options and tying them closer to us. For if we keep them nice and fat on privilege, they will fight tooth and nail against anyone who is disinclined to keep them as such (foreign invaders, rival claimants,.. Etc)
As for keeping then in line, there's plenty of ways, for example: a focus on courtly splendour is very effective at indirectly defanging and declawing the nobility. If it's wealth and power is spent on splendour and attempts at impressing the court, they aient spending it at fighting you. And it ensures rapid cultural spread and homogenisation, with a heap of innovations across the board courtesy of Patronage on steroids.
Or simply increasing the layers of nobility to such an extent that it becomes meaningless.
Or developing the crown fief to such an extent that it alone can keep the vassals in check.
Or dividing up the vassals into ever smaller chunks.
Or propping up the church.
Or establishing urban nobility and using it to dilute the landed one.
Or establish dérogeance such that they are powerless in the areas that truly matter.
All this deals with it effectively if indirectly.
Last edited:
Courtly splendor can keep the nobles in line IF the nobles seek the approval of the court and IF the ruler is perceived to be secure in his position.
It's not something to do in the first year of one's reign to muster the forces necessary to defend against a foreign invader. Gives an impression of weakness that could be more damaging than any goodwill generated.
One of the biggest pieces of Imperial authority the strategoi are chafing under is our ability to revoke their office-our ability to divide up the vassals into smaller chunks.
Our nobility is still very much filled with vultures and snakes, the issue isn't that they're not willing to fight tooth and nail against rival claimants, the issue is that some of the Themes/Dynasties are considerably stronger than others. To prevent the possibility of a rival growing strong enough to march on Constantinople, we'll want to break our nobles first(or at least achieve a position of strength) before fattening them with privileges to divert their attentions.
- Location
- USA
They already have ideas above their station. Every single one of them are gunning for our position
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
every single person in Byzantium, from the retarded half blind slave that works as a chamber pot carrier for the stable boy, to the most decorated and aristocratic of generals: has a head full of ideas far far far above their station. Self-worship and glorification are the premier cultural fixture of Byzantine society.
its flat out impossible for anyone not to have ideas and ambitions well above their station. that's why you need to keep them as distracted as possible and give them motivation to not follow through with those ideas, or at least follow them in a way that you approve of.
its flat out impossible for anyone not to have ideas and ambitions well above their station. that's why you need to keep them as distracted as possible and give them motivation to not follow through with those ideas, or at least follow them in a way that you approve of.
Max is a strong advocate for the feudal solution if it's not already clear. It's not a problem but a plus from that perspective.
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
By being pragmatic and taking a page from history.
Power and influence are ephemeral, not absolute values. You can cut in one era and another will flourish. And it's all based on appearance.
The emperor empowering the nobility by his own will, increases his standing rather than decrease.
If giving then power is negative, it when they force us into it, not the other way around.
Power is not just what legal right you hold. Its how highly are you esteemed, how influencial is your word, how deep you coffers, how pristigious your regard.
Last edited:
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
For all the nonsense about how fuedalism is oh so bad and evil.
The western fuedalists thrived while byzantium declined. They innovated while it regressed, and they survived while it fell.
It was upon the shoulders of the fuedal model that the modern world was birthed.
It was a bloody vital step in the path of progress.
The western fuedalists thrived while byzantium declined. They innovated while it regressed, and they survived while it fell.
It was upon the shoulders of the fuedal model that the modern world was birthed.
It was a bloody vital step in the path of progress.
Last edited:
- Location
- Orlando, Florida
Byzantium declined because it constantly under attack by Muslims, Nomads, etc, while Western Europe was safe and isolated. And Byzantium might have returned to greatness after the Kommenian Restoration if it hadn't been for the Fourth Crusade...
If you would have put the feudal nations in Western Europe under attack at the same level as the Eastern Roman Empire, they would have been conquered within a century.
maximillian
Civilised Sheep
- Location
- Ranch
Like the iberians? Or perhaps the German marches? The poles or Hungarians?
As for return to glory, its own structure was poison. The crusades were but a variable.
Byzantium was in a state of constant civil wars brought about by it own system. And it didn't have the landed elites to protect its land once it's armies where bested. Nor was it possible for loyalty to exist in any meaningful way.
The very centralised buecratic emperor oriented structure of byzantium was its Doom.
Last edited:
- Location
- Orlando, Florida
Western Europe was also constantly plagued by wars and succession crises, and every soldier staying with the landed elite is one less soldier fighting our enemies on the front-line. Feudalism doesn't magically give more defensive troops.
Ghostdevil
The Devil of Ghosts
- Location
- United States
So the Byzantines had a more modern system it seems, because if ANY nation's army is bested the "elites" won't be doing shit, even if they had their own armies
Droman
𐤊𐤍𐤏𐤍
No, but it is relatively more stable than the aristocratic system of the Byzantine empire.