Government Types in the Middle Ages?

Typically (yes, I know there are many exceptions) D&D is based upon Medieval times - especially Medieval Europe where feudalism reigned - layers of nobles from the King on down to Dukes, Barons and Earls.

My question is, what were some other forms of government at the time? I know China & Japan had emperors, if I am not mistaken - but, what was below the Emperor? Was it just another version of feudalism with Asian names for the lesses nobles?

Or, Islam in the Middle East and northern Africa - Sultans, Amirs, Khalifs, etc. But, what was below the Sultan?

In Europe, you tended to have huge and varying amounts of nobility under the King or Emperor... here's a list of titles (in roughly hierarchical order, from highest to lowest... the actual prestige of each one depends on what country one is from)

Grand Prince
Prince
Grand Duke
Arch Duke
Duke
Count
Marquis
Viscount
Earl
Voivode
Baron

Thats off the top of my head, there was likely many many more...

In China, under the emperor's were usually the landed gentry... a rough nobility that was not as hereditary as in Europe. In China, the landed gentry tended to be Confuscian scholars, and one must pass the famous Confuscian examinations to become a scholar and take rank. It was possible for mere commoners, by miracles, to take the tests and pass, thus become part of the government bureaucracy, but it was exceedingly rare.

Japan had the Daimyos (barons) and under them the samurai, of course.

Actually, during feudal times in Japan, the Emperor had little real power. The Shogun was the guy who really ran the show. This didn't change until the 19th century when the modernization of Japan eliminated the Samurai class and the Emperor became the supreme ruler.

One of the big problems you can run into here is that some titles shift slightly (or majorly) in meaning from place to place. A "prince" in Russia means something quite different from a "prince" in England, for example. And I have read that the Muslims titles can become quite confusing that way, as some are military, some political, some religious, and some a combination of two (...or all three...) of these, but shift in time and place as to their precise meanings. Equally some titles appear in one place, but not another, such as the Earls of English history (more or less based on the older title Jarl, kind of equivalent to a Count, but some are as powerful as Dukes, a title that was little used in England until the later Middle Ages).

This is a decent site for explanations of European titles:

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/odegard/titlefaq.htm

Here is one on China (I have not really vetted it, only found it):

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Chinese-noble

And this one is very, very generic:

http://www.hostkingdom.net/glossary.html

Hope that give some help.

NewJeffCT said:

Typically (yes, I know there are many exceptions) D&D is based upon Medieval times - especially Medieval Europe where feudalism reigned - layers of nobles from the King on down to Dukes, Barons and Earls.

Click to expand...

The structuredness and importance of this hierarchy are greatly exaggerated. It amounted in practice to a legl fiction, and most countries denied that even as a legal fiction it applied to them. The theoretical construct was mostly based on the legal fictions of the Burgundians.

Don't forget that most kings were originally elected (the French were still holding sham elections for their kings until the fourteenth century), and that some, such as the kings of Germany, remained elective in theory, or such as Poland in practice, throughout the period.

And don't overlook the importance of more-or-less aristocratic republics in many cities, especially in the north of Italy and the South of France (until the conquest by the Kingdom of France in the early 13th century).

Regards,


Agback

Rather than focus on titles, I'll focus on institutions.

The "rulers" of our medieval cultures (I arbitrarily restrict it to Europe just because) were never really all that much in charge. They could rely upon their personal armies and that was it. Otherwise, they had to keep their vassals (powerful flunkies) happy. Vassalage was purely personal. If I had a vassal, and my vassal had a vassal, my vassal's vassal was not under my authority, and for me to insist upon such authority could be construed as "tyranny" and be considered grounds for "rightful" rebellion. In addition, cities might have a "charter" or some other agreement and be essentially self-ruling, so long as they paid their royal tax and/or supplied troops. In addition to the addition, nobility might also live in those cities, with their noble priviliges. In addition to the addition to the addition, within a city, a village, or lands of a noble, there could be locations or individuals who had special power, authority, or privilige, with no real logic behind the whole non-system. The concept of constitutional law didn't really exist in practice, no matter what lawyers of the day might like to claim.

The "Emperor" of the "Holy" "Roman" "Empire" had no more authority than any other "king", although he theoretically had more prestige. However, the Emperor was not the King of the Germans, although he might be. Likewise, the Emperor might or might not be the King of Bohemia. The King of France couldn't directly rule any land within the Empire, except when he managed to finagle it. The Duke of Burgundy was often as powerful as any king.

And there were also Republics (Venice--votes only for rich merchants) and a more-or-less democratic Confederation (Switzerland) and various independent little doogies here and there.

And then there was the Pope who kept claiming theoretical supremacy over everybody but never got listened to unless it was convenient.

Now, when one moves east, things get to be different.

Oh, and one thing that was considered very important was ownership of deodanths (things used in the crimes of manslaughter and murder) and the right of execution.

Oh, oh, the Republic of Venice was theoretically a property of the Empire whose emperor was in Constantinople.

NewJeffCT said:

My question is, what were some other forms of government at the time? I know China & Japan had emperors, if I am not mistaken - but, what was below the Emperor?

Click to expand...

China was not (usually) feudal. Usually it was essentially ruled by the Imperial bureacracy, through provincial governors and generals.

In Japan the Emperor (Mikado) was usually accorded divine respect but no real power. On a few occasions Emperors struggled to lay their hands on real power, and even actually got hold of part of the country. The ceremonial duties of the Mikado were so onerous that many mikados retired to become nominal Buddhist priests as soon as they were old enough to think of it. Some retired emperors, nominally regents of their young relatives on the throne, dabbled in politics.

The Japanese noble caste, the kuge, were similarly trammelled with duties and taboos, and their estates were 'protected' by buke, who kept nearly all the income. Buke lords also 'protected' most of the lands of religious institutions, just as the nobles did in Europe. They even pulled the same dodge as the nobles did in Europe, of 'giving' land to tax-exempt religious instutions but keeping the rule and income of it.

The country was actually run by a military dictator, the Shogun, or sometimes by a regent (not qualified by birth to be shogun). I forget the title of the regent, but I do recall that at one stage the shoguns were retiring to become nominal buddhisit priests to escape from the court protocol so that they could engage in a political contest with the regent and the retired emperors.

The Shogun was draw from the Minamoto family, which was of the buke military caste. The heads of other buke clans were the daimyo, equivalent to English peers or barons (in England, the category 'baron' included earls, lords, and some very powerful knights). Daimyo with very extensive lands would generally appoint relatives to manage them, not subinfeudinate them.

The lesser members of the buke military caste were samurai, more or less equivalent to European knights. Some owned land. Some were given estates to manage by their daimyo. Some (ji-zamurai, IIRC) were even so poor that they actually worked part of their own land. And at teh bottom of the heap were ronin, equivalent to European landless knights not in service.

Regards,


Agback

Like Dogbrain said - come up with whatever system you like - it probably existed somewhere and some point in the 'Medieval period' (which is like what 500 years? 1000 - 1500AD could all be cosidered 'Medieval/Dark Age' in lay terms)

You have Plutocracies, Democracies, Monarchies, Oligarchies, Geritocracies, Theocracies and Anarchies - sometimes in the same place at the same time!