On 07Apr2019 1617, Kenneth Barns wrote:

> Hmmm ... I'm not sold on the wisdom, or not, of Lucan proroguing or
> dissolving the Moot; I'm open to convincing one way or another here.
> Better a dissolved Moot than a Moot that is going to be implacably hostile,
> not only to Lucan, but to the forces that he was figurehead for.  (Which in
> turn suggests that the "Lucan" faction was composed mostly of military
> figures, and did not have a particularly strong influence in the Moot.)

The thing is, he didn't really have the right to do it, and without the
Moot's agreement that he was, in fact the Emperor, he was never fully
confirmed as such. Also, in so doing everyone who was part of the Moot
and on Capital immediately went home, and reported to their local peers
on what they saw.

In the short term, it made sense - he started by dissolving it for a
year, and could make a case for needing that time to settle things down,
clean up after Dulinor, etc. However, he didn't use that time
effectively, and then he extended the dissolution, making it look very
like he was afriad of what the Moot might find/do if it convened again.

> Definitely he needs to put any potentially legitimate candidates for the
> Throne under lock and key.  It is not Margaret (the individual) he needs to
> neutralise, it is the "Margaret" faction at court (and the "Dulinor"
> faction too, though they are going to be keeping a very low profile!).
> Buying off, or ignoring, an individual would not prevent that individual
> from becoming a figurehead for opposition factions - see Theodosius III.

Margaret's faction mostly wanted business as usual to resume. That's why
I think just letting her, and her supporters sit in Delphi and play and
running trains on time until Dulinor and Strephon (or his double, or
android, or whatever) were dealt with, and then going with a diplomatic
solution to Margaret's faction would've worked.

To be sure, by then Vland and Antares were also separate, but I think
Antares would've come back in with diplomacy, and the Vland resurgence
would've died over time (being completely surrounded by the Imperium.
Norris and the Spinward Marches would've declared for Lucan if his seat
on the throne looked firm and they were assured of 'business as usual'.
Daidei probably likewise, especially if reinforcements against the Aslan
and Solomani were part of the deal.

> Lucan's (and "Lucan's") greatest advantage was the strength of his personal
> claim to the Throne.  That advantage was compounded by making sure that no
> other candidate remained with even a passing personal claim.  With Margaret
> out of the picture, opponents would have to go back at least 3 or 4
> generations to find a legitimate alternative to Lucan.  We are speaking
> Henry VII-level dodgy claims to the throne here.
>
> And once there are no legitimate options, the only alternative for
> opponents of Lucan is a dynastic change.  Then every Archduke or head of a
> Great House is in with a shot ... which means that really, none of them do.

Or he or his heir marry into Margaret's line, uniting them.

> Lucan could have been the most noble and gentle soul in the Imperium.
> Still, his hold on the Throne is going to be much more secure once Margaret
> has an "accident".

Of course, it might be Lucan who has the accident.

The real problem, and this is why I don't think it works for Lucan's
policies to merely be from his advisors, is that he takes everything
personally. All splinter factions must be punished, because they failed
him personally. All failures are a personal insult, so he demands the
heads of his admirals after any set-back (causing all those with any
talent to sell to go elsewhere), and so on. Now, such people rapidly are
either removed or get themselves like-minded advisors and yes-men, and
they very quickly find that they have to humour their boss or they're on
the chopping block too.

Aside from the artificial nobbling of the Solomani, and the dirtying of
Margaret (which would've worked if it had been handled more carefully
over a longer period of time), I don't really have a problem with how
the 'rebellion' is described. Then again, I'm okay with Virus too (not
some of its mechanics, but the overall thing and how it played out), so
what do I know?

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief