Some points about Harchong

n7axw wrote:Here is another thought. Consider the bureaucrats. Corruption and bribes probably explain how at least some of them got their jobs. I wonder what percentage of the population they are. And we do know from textev that they are a power center countering the aristocracy, having managed to build an imperial army independent of the feudal levies. That suggests competence however corrupt they might be.

Don

So, to sum up what was discussed above:
- Harchong has an overgrown nobility which owns most - if not entire - land and industry;
- there's a bureaucratic class which is powerful enough to work against the nobles if necessary;
- there is some kind of middle class the bureaucrats come from (if they came from nobility, they would be unlikely to counter the aristocrats);
- the bureaucrats get their posts either by belonging to right family (which would make bureaucracy sort of "second nobility") or by the way of tests (which doesn't preclude the previous option);
- there are many, many, many peasants/workers/serfs/slaves who don't own their land and with whom the nobles can do as they please, which in past led to uprisings and revolts;
- Southern Harchong has bigger and/or newer industrial base than N. Harchong, but its nobles are likely less influential and imporant than N. Harchongese aristocracy.
- S. Harchong probably has more members of the middle/bureaucratic class than N. Harchong, which leads to some cultural differences between South and North;
- N. Harchong is more zealous/religious than S. Harchong.

I guess that gives us a rough sketch of what their society is like. Anything I missed?

Kakai wrote:

n7axw wrote:Here is another thought. Consider the bureaucrats. Corruption and bribes probably explain how at least some of them got their jobs. I wonder what percentage of the population they are. And we do know from textev that they are a power center countering the aristocracy, having managed to build an imperial army independent of the feudal levies. That suggests competence however corrupt they might be.

Don

So, to sum up what was discussed above:
- Harchong has an overgrown nobility which owns most - if not entire - land and industry;
- there's a bureaucratic class which is powerful enough to work against the nobles if necessary;
- there is some kind of middle class the bureaucrats come from (if they came from nobility, they would be unlikely to counter the aristocrats);
- the bureaucrats get their posts either by belonging to right family (which would make bureaucracy sort of "second nobility") or by the way of tests (which doesn't preclude the previous option);
- there are many, many, many peasants/workers/serfs/slaves who don't own their land and with whom the nobles can do as they please, which in past led to uprisings and revolts;
- Southern Harchong has bigger and/or newer industrial base than N. Harchong, but its nobles are likely less influential and imporant than N. Harchongese aristocracy.
- S. Harchong probably has more members of the middle/bureaucratic class than N. Harchong, which leads to some cultural differences between South and North;
- N. Harchong is more zealous/religious than S. Harchong.

I guess that gives us a rough sketch of what their society is like. Anything I missed?

Not that I think that there is anything that you missed, however, I would like to suggest that an alternate or additional source of the bureaucracy and the army officer class is 2nd, and 3rd or more sons who do not go into the priesthood. These sons are unlikely to inherit anything from the family, just as the noble class in the middle ages preserved their lands by reserving them for the eldest surviving son (except for Poland where there was a tendency to share the land between the children) and so needed to make their own way in the world as bureaucrats, soldiers, and possibly merchants or manufacturers, who in turn would have multiple sons who would then repeat the process.

Keith_w wrote:Not that I think that there is anything that you missed, however, I would like to suggest that an alternate or additional source of the bureaucracy and the army officer class is 2nd, and 3rd or more sons who do not go into the priesthood. These sons are unlikely to inherit anything from the family, just as the noble class in the middle ages preserved their lands by reserving them for the eldest surviving son (except for Poland where there was a tendency to share the land between the children) and so needed to make their own way in the world as bureaucrats, soldiers, and possibly merchants or manufacturers, who in turn would have multiple sons who would then repeat the process.

Huh. Makes sense. So in this case, would Harchongese "middle class" be noblemen offshots rather than lower classes who managed to get rich? Not sure about this, but I'm pretty sure it was the other way round in RL. Interesting.

Kakai wrote:

n7axw wrote:Here is another thought. Consider the bureaucrats. Corruption and bribes probably explain how at least some of them got their jobs. I wonder what percentage of the population they are. And we do know from textev that they are a power center countering the aristocracy, having managed to build an imperial army independent of the feudal levies. That suggests competence however corrupt they might be.

Don

So, to sum up what was discussed above:
- Harchong has an overgrown nobility which owns most - if not entire - land and industry;
- there's a bureaucratic class which is powerful enough to work against the nobles if necessary;
- there is some kind of middle class the bureaucrats come from (if they came from nobility, they would be unlikely to counter the aristocrats);
- the bureaucrats get their posts either by belonging to right family (which would make bureaucracy sort of "second nobility") or by the way of tests (which doesn't preclude the previous option);
- there are many, many, many peasants/workers/serfs/slaves who don't own their land and with whom the nobles can do as they please, which in past led to uprisings and revolts;
- Southern Harchong has bigger and/or newer industrial base than N. Harchong, but its nobles are likely less influential and imporant than N. Harchongese aristocracy.
- S. Harchong probably has more members of the middle/bureaucratic class than N. Harchong, which leads to some cultural differences between South and North;
- N. Harchong is more zealous/religious than S. Harchong.

I guess that gives us a rough sketch of what their society is like. Anything I missed?

The only thing I can see that we might be overlooking would be the church. Betwwen monastaries, parish churches, inquisitors, priests and so on, the church controls a massive percentage of the property, a overbliown amount of influence, and given a 20% tithe, is obscenely wealthy. The numbers of clergy would have to be quite high. When the church says "jump," the rest of Harchong probably says "how high?" Normally things wouldn't shake out quite as extreme as my hyperbole, but it would be headed in that direction.

Don

n7axw wrote:The only thing I can see that we might be overlooking would be the church. Betwwen monastaries, parish churches, inquisitors, priests and so on, the church controls a massive percentage of the property, a overbliown amount of influence, and given a 20% tithe, is obscenely wealthy. The numbers of clergy would have to be quite high. When the church says "jump," the rest of Harchong probably says "how high?" Normally things wouldn't shake out quite as extreme as my hyperbole, but it would be headed in that direction.

Don

I would estimate that each village has it's own village priest. With about 200 people / 10 families per village that's 0.5%. Add the number of members of monasteries, the inquisition and the upper church levels and that would give you an estimated maximum of 1% of the total population as members of the clergy.

BUT also have to remember that a certain (probably big) percentage of these priest come from younger sons and daughters of noble and bureaucratic families.

Sounour wrote:

n7axw wrote:The only thing I can see that we might be overlooking would be the church. Betwwen monastaries, parish churches, inquisitors, priests and so on, the church controls a massive percentage of the property, a overbliown amount of influence, and given a 20% tithe, is obscenely wealthy. The numbers of clergy would have to be quite high. When the church says "jump," the rest of Harchong probably says "how high?" Normally things wouldn't shake out quite as extreme as my hyperbole, but it would be headed in that direction.

Don

I would estimate that each village has it's own village priest. With about 200 people / 10 families per village that's 0.5%. Add the number of members of monasteries, the inquisition and the upper church levels and that would give you an estimated maximum of 1% of the total population as members of the clergy.

BUT also have to remember that a certain (probably big) percentage of these priest come from younger sons and daughters of noble and bureaucratic families.

I don't have any info to either affirm or contradict this... But percentage of population says nothing about wealth and influence. In Harchong, the church would have both of those to an extent all out of proportion to its actual numbers of clergy. To understand Harchong, that much has to be factored in.

Don

n7axw wrote:

Sounour wrote:
I would estimate that each village has it's own village priest. With about 200 people / 10 families per village that's 0.5%. Add the number of members of monasteries, the inquisition and the upper church levels and that would give you an estimated maximum of 1% of the total population as members of the clergy.

BUT also have to remember that a certain (probably big) percentage of these priest come from younger sons and daughters of noble and bureaucratic families.

I don't have any info to either affirm or contradict this... But percentage of population says nothing about wealth and influence. In Harchong, the church would have both of those to an extent all out of proportion to its actual numbers of clergy. To understand Harchong, that much has to be factored in.

Don

Of course the numbers aren't equival to the influence wielded. But we were talking about numbers. And numbers say, that max 1% of the population are various kinds of priests. That's an upper bound for the number of active priests. Also there are their dependents and that increases the number. And that number is most likely again a source for new bureaucrats if the children don't want to/ or can't follow their fathers.

Well, yes. We were talking about numbers. But that was only one vector in a discussion in which we are trying to draw a comprehensible picture of Harchong as a whole which is my understanding of what this thread is about.

Don

Louis R wrote:You missed the most likely variation: the Joseon [or maybe Goryeo, I don't have a reference handy on the date of this version, but it was in place throughout the Joseon] - admission to the bureaucracy strictly by competitive examinations accessible only to sons of noble or bureaucratic families. Competent - by whatever standard the exam setters use to define 'competent' - administration, no trace of social mobility. The Koreans did it this way precisely to address the 'problem' of mobility, which the aristocracy was objecting to.

That would still mean the nobility would be an extension of the Bureaucracy.

Zor

imperatorzor wrote:

Louis R wrote:You missed the most likely variation: the Joseon [or maybe Goryeo, I don't have a reference handy on the date of this version, but it was in place throughout the Joseon] - admission to the bureaucracy strictly by competitive examinations accessible only to sons of noble or bureaucratic families. Competent - by whatever standard the exam setters use to define 'competent' - administration, no trace of social mobility. The Koreans did it this way precisely to address the 'problem' of mobility, which the aristocracy was objecting to.

That would still mean the nobility would be an extension of the Bureaucracy.

Zor

No, that means that new bureaucrats come from 3, possible 4 sources:

1) Younger sons of the (lower) nobility who are very unlikely to inherit. I think the upper levels of the nobility are rich enough that they don't really need good paying jobs.
2) Sons of priests who don't want to become priest themselves
3) Sons of bureaucrats.
4) Exceptional children raised by the church/orphanages/in various households who have a sponsor

I think 4) is a very small number since it would allow too much social mobility but at least the church allows it