Government of Aerelios

[Mr. R]

After going through the History of Aerelios to the present day, it is time to state the government.  

 

Now in the History, there was a time when Aerelios was split in two and under the control of two differing nations and having to answer to two different overlords.  Thus two mayors.  But as they had similar concerns from time to time, they co-operated when it came to emergency measures.  I feel like this system has continued in a slightly different format to this day.  

 

Before it was Aerelios East and Aerelios West.  

 

Now Rather than east and west it is.... and I am stuck.  

 

Any suggestions?

[assault]

Pretty easy. Collective Magistracies were historically quite common. Sparta had two Kings, Rome two Consuls. I'm sure there were others.

 

In the Spartan case, the kings came from separate dynasties. Most of the early Roman Consuls came from a small set of aristocratic families/clans.

 

In your case, the two mayors could similarly trace back their origins to the two old mayors.

[Mr. R]

21 hours ago, assault said:

Pretty easy. Collective Magistracies were historically quite common. Sparta had two Kings, Rome two Consuls. I'm sure there were others.

 

In the Spartan case, the kings came from separate dynasties. Most of the early Roman Consuls came from a small set of aristocratic families/clans.

 

In your case, the two mayors could similarly trace back their origins to the two old mayors.

 

 

I like that!

 

Should I make it hereditary OR should I have elections (on separate years)?  

 

If no elections could I go like the old roman emperors and choose my successor?  

[SCUBA Hero]

Elections, but the candidates have to be from the appropriate family or clan to be eligible to run?

[Lord Liaden]

While "collective magistracies" have historical precedents, rule by two or three people has never functioned well when those people attempted to share equal real power. Ego and ambition would inevitably lead to conflict, and often civil war. Such systems which have functioned have included a larger body of officials with the authority to curb the excesses of the rival leaders, and often collectively wield more practical power. These bodies could be an oligarchy made up of a certain class, e.g. nobility, merchants, priests; elected by all or a subset of the citizenry; or a combination of both, such as the English parliamentary system.

[assault]

Of course. Such bodies are key to a successful oligarchy, if rather toxic to democracy.

Trivia: the Roman term "Senate" is derived from the word "senex", meaning old man. That literally implies that the Senate is a council of elders. Unfortunately, senex is also the root of the word "senile".

A possibility: there could be a third mayor. Two could be hereditary, and one elected. That still tends to ensure a conservative bias, which would make it acceptable to the rich and powerful.

 

Another thought: if some people are allowed to vote, someone needs to keep track of who can and can't. The Romans had a term for this: Censor. That is, they were in charge of the Census. They could potentially also veto legislation that was against the traditions of the city, that is, be a censor in the modern sense. (There are so many Latin-derived words in the last couple of sentences...)

A modern example of co-rule: Andorra has two princes. One is the President of France. (In the past, the King (or Emperor) of France.) The other is the Bishop of Urgell, whose diocese is centred in Spain. Both hold this position on an ex officio basis. You get, and keep, the job because of your other position. Each appoints a personal representative.

Modern Andorra is otherwise a democracy (constitutional monarchy), but that wasn't always the case.

So there's another model of the kind of fine mess that could exist in Aerelios - a condominium between secular and religious authorities, with each having deep historical roots.

[Lord Liaden]

In Hero Games' Turakian Age fantasy world setting, there are a couple of "free cities" which have semi-democratic elements which might offer some inspiration. The most "democratic" is Tavrosel, which is governed by an elected Triumvirate. Each Triumvir is elected by a different class of Tavroselan society: the nobility vote for the Lords' Man (although women can also serve); the Guildmens' Man is elected by the trade guild members and the merchant class; everyone else votes for the Townsfolk's Man.

 

In theory the Triumvirs divide the duties of government between them and cooperate over wider issues. In practice they often don't get along or work well together. Tavrosel runs mostly thanks to its large bureaucracy, headed by the Heralds who adjudicate who can vote for which Triumvir. For my own games I elaborated that system a little beyond what's in the book. I defined the Heralds as being appointed by a Triumvir to run departments within the particular government functions they claim responsibility for. A Triumvir can appoint as many Heralds as he or she thinks appropriate, and may choose anyone; but by long custom a Herald is usually promoted from within the bureaucracy, a meritocratic service through which the common-born may attain influence and status.

 

Aarn, largest city in the world, is in principle an hereditary monarch; but the King, and his would-be successor, always have to demonstrate their fitness to rule to the other Aarnese. "If the king loses the support of the nobles, or of the people, the nobility usually deposes him for someone else. As long as the king rules well, he can usually hand the crown down to his son (or whomever else he chooses), but most Aarnese dynasties last no more than a century or two." (TA p. 59)

 

Steve Long didn't describe the mechanism by which this change in rulership could be reliably accomplished, so I formalized the process a little more. In my version of Aarn, there are two representative bodies: the Hall of Nobility, comprised of the heads of Aarn's patrician families; and the Hall of the People, with representatives elected by popular vote out of each of the districts of Aarn. The Halls act as advisory bodies to the King, and intermediaries between him and his people; they can also propose laws, but the king has final say. However, any law or decree from the king can be overruled by a vote by a two-thirds majority of either Hall. With the support of two-thirds of both Halls, the king can be deposed and a new one elevated.

 

The king has the authority to appoint whomever he wishes to head the various divisions of government, but traditionally chooses those officials from among members of both Halls. That gives him a large reward he can dangle to persuade the nobles and representatives to support him.

[Mr. R]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

In Hero Games' Turakian Age fantasy world setting, there are a couple of "free cities" which have semi-democratic elements which might offer some inspiration. The most "democratic" is Tavrosel, which is governed by an elected Triumvirate. Each Triumvir is elected by a different class of Tavroselan society: the nobility vote for the Lords' Man (although women can also serve); the Guildmens' Man is elected by the trade guild members and the merchant class; everyone else votes for the Townsfolk's Man.

 

In theory the Triumvirs divide the duties of government between them and cooperate over wider issues. In practice they often don't get along or work well together. Tavrosel runs mostly thanks to its large bureaucracy, headed by the Heralds who adjudicate who can vote for which Triumvir. For my own games I elaborated that system a little beyond what's in the book. I defined the Heralds as being appointed by a Triumvir to run departments within the particular government functions they claim responsibility for. A Triumvir can appoint as many Heralds as he or she thinks appropriate, and may choose anyone; but by long custom a Herald is usually promoted from within the bureaucracy, a meritocratic service through which the common-born may attain influence and status.

 

Aarn, largest city in the world, is in principle an hereditary monarch; but the King, and his would-be successor, always have to demonstrate their fitness to rule to the other Aarnese. "If the king loses the support of the nobles, or of the people, the nobility usually deposes him for someone else. As long as the king rules well, he can usually hand the crown down to his son (or whomever else he chooses), but most Aarnese dynasties last no more than a century or two." (TA p. 59)

 

Steve Long didn't describe the mechanism by which this change in rulership could be reliably accomplished, so I formalized the process a little more. In my version of Aarn, there are two representative bodies: the Hall of Nobility, comprised of the heads of Aarn's patrician families; and the Hall of the People, with representatives elected by popular vote out of each of the districts of Aarn. The Halls act as advisory bodies to the King, and intermediaries between him and his people; they can also propose laws, but the king has final say. However, any law or decree from the king can be overruled by a vote by a two-thirds majority of either Hall. With the support of two-thirds of both Halls, the king can be deposed and a new one elevated.

 

The king has the authority to appoint whomever he wishes to head the various divisions of government, but traditionally chooses those officials from among members of both Halls. That gives him a large reward he can dangle to persuade the nobles and representatives to support him.

 

 

 

Let me stew on this a bit and I'll come back with an idea tomorrow!

[Mr. R]

Before I go into it I need to explain how government works in the Northwest Territories of Canada.  Federally we follow national politics, with parties and party lines etc.  But territorially (think Province but smaller population) we have what is called a Consensus Government.  We have an election and Members are chosen for the Legislative Assembly.  So who leads?  Well the members chose from among themselves who will be Premier (think Prime Minister) who will be minister of <<<<<<<, and minister of >>>>>>>.  Etc.

 

My idea is this, there is an election where people vote for a representative from that district.  When the  Assembly gathers, they chose the Head Mayor and the Second Mayor as well as all the various minister.  After four years, the mayors switch places, a ministerial shuffle takes place.  Four years after that, new elections!

 

This keeps the idea if the two mayors from history, but also gives a way that said mayors change positions and how Power is ultimately handed down!

 

 

Thoughts?

 

Suggestions?