44 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

So, there I was sitting and the question was about defining and distinguishing between the French executive system and the British judicial one.

 

And all I could think about was how in Ferelden, rulership arises from the support of the freeholders who swear their fealty to Arls who gather annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law.

In comparison, Orlais is an absolute monarchy where the supreme executive power resides with the Emperor.

[Dai Grepher]

Freeholders swear fealty to banns, not arls. The arls are just banns who also act as vassals for a teyrn.

 

GPA Greatly Disapproves.
 

[RoseLawliet]

A similar thing happened to me last year. I spent too much time playing Mass Effect and Dragon Age, and not enough time studying Chinese. Thankfully my history classes were taken before these games took over my life.

 

 

But yeah... Dai Grepher's right.

[MisterJB]

Freeholders swear fealty to banns, not arls. The arls are just banns who also act as vassals for a teyrn.

 

GPA Greatly Disapproves.
 

They can swear fealty to both, actually.

Arls are the equivalent of mayors and rule over the cities and areas nearby while Banns divide the Ferelden countryside.

A landowner whose terrain stood near the city of Amaranthine, for instance, would swear allegiance to the Arl of Amaranthine for practical reasons since his soldiers are the ones closest by.

On the other hand, Dragon's Peak and West Hills are Bannorns making their peasants vassals to Banns.

So, the social strata of Ferelden probably goes something like this.

 

Royal Family

Teyrn

Bann - Arl

Knight

Peasant.

[MisterJB]

The positions of Arls in the hierarchy is an interesting question.

Arl Howe was a vassal to Teyrn Cousland however, is this the norm? Do all Arls in the land have to be vassal of either the Couslands or the MacTirs?

Because, Arl Eamon never mentioned having qualms about going against his Liege Lord if it is Loghain nor does he ever mention the Human Noble being his rightful Lord.

[NRO TYN]

Im curious, do Arls and Bans have Castles or Keeps?

 

And for that matter whats the difference between a Castle and Keep?

[Aeratus]

A keep is a large tower within a castle. However, a Keep can also mean a small castle, or be synonymous with a castle, depending on usage context.

 

We know that Arls had pretty luxurious castles. Not much is said of Banns, but I'd imagine that they would have a smaller castle than what an Arl would.

 

Given that Arl = Earl, and Bann = Baron, a bann should still be high ranked enough to regularly own something sizable at least. 

[dragonflight288]

This thread shows it. We're all a bunch of nerds. 

[Kouzai]

So, there I was sitting and the question was about defining and distinguishing between the French executive system and the British judicial one.

 

And all I could think about was how in Ferelden, rulership arises from the support of the freeholders who swear their fealty to Arls who gather annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law.

In comparison, Orlais is an absolute monarchy where the supreme executive power resides with the Emperor.

In a way the comparisons between the French and Britsh system question and Ferelden/Orlais government are close enough to answer. Or at least that what was in my sub-par high school classes. How did you fare... Or at least think you did.

 

This scenerio actually helped me on a test. It was a bonus essay question on when were certain buildings finished. Thank you video games (AC mostly) for providing the answer.

 

I love learning more about anime, books, and games lore and finding comparisons irl. 'Tis fun to randomly burst in Elvish or Dovahzul (Skyrim - Dragon Language) in th middle of a mall.

[Serza]

High five me, JB.

[Hydwn]

So, there I was sitting and the question was about defining and distinguishing between the French executive system and the British judicial one.

 

And all I could think about was how in Ferelden, rulership arises from the support of the freeholders who swear their fealty to Arls who gather annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law.

In comparison, Orlais is an absolute monarchy where the supreme executive power resides with the Emperor.

 

If you're talking medieval law, the French system was also known as the "inquisitorial system"

 

When you pass a judgement in DAI, you're using the inquisitorial system.  You have a law expert there to present the case.  The accused gets no lawyers.  There is no jury.  The medieval French system, the judge had advisers, but there was no one there for the accused, and none of the "innocent until proven guilty" stuff that was part of the medieval British system.

 

(There were small trial systems that were local, but I'm talking the French court's system.  The court could try anything that was "treason" to the king, and the king's people defined larger and larger numbers of crimes as technically treason so they could expand the court's power over the law.  For instance, heresy was treason because the king got his power from God, and therefore any questioning of God was a questioning of the king.)

 

The Brits had a system much like the modern west's early on.  It had evolved out of the old Germanic system (that'd be the Alamarri barbarians of Ferelden) and involved juries, advocates, and a presumption of innocence - all re-affirmed and made modern by the Magna Carta.  In the early days, it also involved duels and other trials of ordeals, but the church finally stamped those out.

 

And you see that at the Landsmeet, when they decide to settle a dispute in full view of a house of lords with an old-fashioned trial by ordeal, when you fight Loghain.

 

As a medieval history geek, I'm always astonished by how well these guys have done their research

[Serza]

Wait, this whole thing is so close to reality?

 

I had no idea, and I'm studying British history at the moment, so Magna Carta rings a bell or two. Now if I only remembered what king... Henry V? After dethroning Richard II?

 

Edit: Unless it has nothing to do with the War of the Roses...

[MisterJB]

High five me, JB.

 

[Serza]

Hey, guys! The joke's on me! Magna Carta is a 1215 document. Something about John Lackland... Meh.

[Aimi]

In comparison, Orlais is an absolute monarchy where the supreme executive power resides with the Emperor.

 
ehhh
 

As a medieval history geek, I'm always astonished by how well these guys have done their research

about some things, anyway

[Serza]

I don't know, Orlais seems to be fairly feudal... wait, so is Ferelden.

 

Where is the difference.

 

 

Actually, I'm not sure I see one. King of Ferelden seems to summon the "Parliament" (Landsmeet) while Orlesians... are closer to the French kind of government...? I am uncertain.

[Hydwn]

Wait, this whole thing is so close to reality?

 

I had no idea, and I'm studying British history at the moment, so Magna Carta rings a bell or two. Now if I only remembered what king... Henry V? After dethroning Richard II?

 

Edit: Unless it has nothing to do with the War of the Roses...

 

Nope.  For the War of the Roses, you want Game of Thrones.

 

Basically, there's no Magna Carta here because Ferelden history took a detour from English.  That detour was 1066.  In real history, our England was conquered by our the Norman French, and stayed that way.  The French conquerors then went through a centuries-long integration - a very bumpy one - to hold the culturally different land they had taken.

 

The Magna Carta was a compromise.  Forced at swordpoint against a much-hated king.

 

In Thedosian history, their King Harold (King Brandel) had descendants who kept up the fight, and pushed their Normans out a hundred years later.  If Maric had not overthrown the Orlesians, then tensions would likely have risen to the point where a Magna Carta was needed.

 

Things are made muddier because the Fereldens are 13th-century English with 14th-century armour who fought against 17th-century French (Celene is definitely running the court of the Sun King over there) who also wield 14th-century armaments.

[Hydwn]

 
ehhh
 

about some things, anyway

 

It makes sense once you accept that Fereldes are 12th-century English and Orlesians are culturally 17th-century.  I'm guessing they projected the court of the Sun King backwards in time because, well, it's cool.  And it's what people tend to think of when they think pre-revolutionary France. 

[Serza]

Nope.  For the War of the Roses, you want Game of Thrones.

 

Basically, there's no Magna Carta here because Ferelden history took a detour from English.  That detour was 1066.  In real history, our England was conquered by our the Norman French, and stayed that way.  The French conquerors then went through a centuries-long integration - a very bumpy one - to hold the culturally different land they had taken.

 

The Magna Carta was a compromise.  Forced at swordpoint against a much-hated king.

 

In Thedosian history, their King Harold (King Brandel) had descendants who kept up the fight, and pushed their Normans out a hundred years later.  If Maric had not overthrown the Orlesians, then tensions would likely have risen to the point where a Magna Carta was needed.

 

Things are made muddier because the Fereldens are 13th-century English with 14th-century armour who fought against 17th-century French (Celene is definitely running the court of the Sun King over there) who also wield 14th-century armaments.

 

Interesting you make the links for me. I haven't linked the Normans to Orlesians before, despite being a readily offered comparison.

 

Otherwise, however, I think I'm well aware of Harold Hardrada's defeat, the march south, and victory of William the Conqueror, as well the bumpiness of Norman integration. And the fact that Magna Carta was issued to keep a hated king in reins.

 

I do not have my notes for full information right now (don't trust Wiki that much) but a decent amount if stuck in my mind regardless.

[Hydwn]

I don't know, Orlais seems to be fairly feudal... wait, so is Ferelden.

 

Where is the difference.

 

 

Actually, I'm not sure I see one. King of Ferelden seems to summon the "Parliament" (Landsmeet) while Orlesians... are closer to the French kind of government...? I am uncertain.

 

The landsmeet is based on the Witenagamot, the ancient precursor of parliaments.  Since the "French" Orlesians were driven out, the "English" never created a parliament, which was a kind of Witengamot updated and merged with French institutions.  

 

(Nerdy fun fact - Witenagamot is where JK Rowling got Wizengamot for her government in Harry Potter.)

[MisterJB]

In a way the comparisons between the French and Britsh system question and Ferelden/Orlais government are close enough to answer. Or at least that what was in my sub-par high school classes. How did you fare... Or at least think you did.

 

I remembered reading my notes on that and I know that what I wrote was correct but I could also clearly recall there was more written that I simply couldn't remember. So, probably an incomplete question. Let's see how charitable the professor is feeling.

Thanks for asking.
 

[Aimi]

It makes sense once you accept that Fereldes are 12th-century English and Orlesians are culturally 17th-century.  I'm guessing they projected the court of the Sun King backwards in time because, well, it's cool.  And it's what people tend to think of when they think pre-revolutionary France.

both of them are a lot more mishmashy than that, and although there are homages and references neither is exactly an Expy

and it's quite clear that they didn't do much research about stuff like, y'know, war, or food, or trade, or basic life patterns of non-settled societies; some of this stuff got better in Jaws of Hakkon but not all

[Serza]

both of them are a lot more mishmashy than that, and although there are homages and references neither is exactly an Expy

and it's quite clear that they didn't do much research about stuff like, y'know, war, or food, or trade, or basic life patterns of non-settled societies; some of this stuff got better in Jaws of Hakkon but not all

 

Your opinion of my historical blunder? Am I correct? I fully respect your opinion, on top of remembering you from the Sera thread. Nobody in that bunch ever was a bad seed.

[Hydwn]

Interesting you make the links for me. I haven't linked the Normans to Orlesians before, despite being a readily offered comparison.

 

Otherwise, however, I think I'm well aware of Harold Hardrada's defeat, the march south, and victory of William the Conqueror, as well the bumpiness of Norman integration. And the fact that Magna Carta was issued to keep a hated king in reins.

 

I do not have my notes for full information right now (don't trust Wiki that much) but a decent amount if stuck in my mind regardless.

 

So much of Dragon Age history is a series of "What ifs?"  So much of Ferelden is a "what if" Harold's descendants had retaken his land.  It's one of the things I love about this series

[Serza]

That is an interesting topic, I agree. However, didn't the Anglo-Saxons return to some degree some four centuries later?

 

Again, no notes on me, and the convenient excuse "I don't have an academic title" is being convenient. I should maybe know some of it.