> On Nov 21, 2015, at 11:36 PM, Jim Vassilakos <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Historically, and correct me if I'm wrong, nobles such as barons, counts, dukes, and such were powers in and of themselves, local strongmen who exercised direct authority over their populations.

The concept that Noble titles were imposed by the Imperium as a taxing authority is kind of muddied by the carrot and stick method of the growth of the Imperium (disregarding, for the moment, the genocidal clusterf*ck that the Zhunastu School of Contact would have produced): local powers were given Imperial titles in return for their support.

Those local barons, counts and dukes WERE the local powers co-opted into the larger kingdom by promises of power and military support.

if the imperium co-opted the local governing structure, the concept of ‘non-interference’ is kind of moot.

Yes, the Marquis Enerii of Anacreon VII is merely the Imperial tax collector, in theory divorced from the local power structure, but when the Marquis is ALSO The Chairman Of the Praesidium and Protector of Gungestan, Augustus 25th, absolute ruler of the planet, local rule and Imperial rule are the same.

Over the centuries, also, since local nobles are tasked with keeping the trade flowing, and credits moving upward, they will find it well-nigh impossible to do so without a significant level of local control, so that by the time of the classic OTU,  the Imperium de facto, if not de jure,  DOES in fact run everything. If the ‘local’ noble doesn’t actually run things, they’re extremely influential.

This all is also utterly disregarding the true backbone of the feudal system: the serfs, who were legally bound to the land. Nothing like this exists in the OTU...

--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs