(HFAF Spoiler) Punishment for the treasonous nobles

hanuman wrote:

DrakBibliophile wrote:IMO Grand Duke Tohmas of Zebediah's treason might been seen as the greater treason as he had willingly joined the Empire and breaking his oath to Prince Hektor.

In addition, there's evidence that Tohmas and most of the other nobles of Zebediah were not liked by their subjects for good reasons.

Cayleb and Sharleyan likely believed that Zebediah needed a "house cleaning".

Politically they couldn't just remove Tohmas and the other nobles without good reasons.

Tohmas's treason gave them good reasons to replace Tohmas and replace him with a new Grand Duke.

Swayle's treason is another matter. First, if his heir was loyal and had no knowledge of Swayle's treason, then Cayleb and Sharleyan would be in the position of punishing an innocent.

In addition, the Chisholmian nobility wasn't as nasty as the Zebediahian nobility so there wasn't a need for a house cleaning in Chisholm.

Finally, attainderment is likely a weapon to used carefully. Use it too often and you may get nobles who fear that they have nothing to lose by rebelling.

There was a story told about a Chinese rebellion that started when soldiers rightly believed that they faced death even if they weren't in rebellion.

Why would Tohmas' breaking of his oath to Prince Hektor motivate Cayleb and Sharleyan to punish him harsher for his treason against them? Could you expand on that point, please?

You make an interesting point about his lack of popularity among the Zebediahan commoners. Unlike Corisande, where Hektor ruled directly as an 'enlightened despot' and his nobles would have followed his example, it's clear that he allowed the Zebediahan Grand Duke quite a bit of freedom to do as they wanted - as long as they refrained from challenging his supremacy, of course. Clearly, they thought his restraint allowed them to exploit Zebediah's commoners as much as they wanted. Such shortsightedness is simply foolish, as Tohmas learned in the end, when the Zebediahan commoners refused to protest his removal as their ruling nobleman.

DrakBibliophile wrote:I'm not sure now what I was thinking in regards to him "breaking his oath to Prince Hektor".

On the other hand, others have commented about other factors regarding Tohmas. One of which is that he was (in my words) the ruler of one of the member "states" of the Charisian Empire.

So the message intended is "if you bring your "state" into the Empire and then break your oath, your family will have no right to continue to rule".

Mind you, it might have been a different matter if Tohmas' heir was of age and it was known that he/she opposed Tohmas' treason.

hanuman wrote:

DrakBibliophile wrote:I'm not sure now what I was thinking in regards to him "breaking his oath to Prince Hektor".

On the other hand, others have commented about other factors regarding Tohmas. One of which is that he was (in my words) the ruler of one of the member "states" of the Charisian Empire.

So the message intended is "if you bring your "state" into the Empire and then break your oath, your family will have no right to continue to rule".

Mind you, it might have been a different matter if Tohmas' heir was of age and it was known that he/she opposed Tohmas' treason.

That's what I thought. Cayleb and Sharleyan really had no choice in punishing Tohmas as harshly as the law demanded. Theirs is still a feudal society, so the Zebediahan nobles' vows of fealty were to the Grand Duke, and through him, only secondarily to Cayleb and Sharleyan. As such, he committed treason not only against the Empire, but PERSONALLY against them. They couldn't let that pass, or even let him off less harshly than their vows to him demanded, because it might have set a precedent. Other nobles in Zebediah or elsewhere in the Empire might have been tempted to follow his example. Swayle and the Corisandian traitors' vows of fealty were NOT to them directly, but to Prince Daivyn - as such, it'd be up to him (or his Regents, in his absence) to punish them. But because they weren't the primary nobles of the Princedom, there was no need to punish them to the same extent as Tohmas was. It's a matter of appearance, really. Nobles who are not the direct viceroys of the crown in their own lands can get away with more than those who are.

Hank Plantagenet wrote:I thought that Swayle would have had to swear fealty to Queen Sharleyan, and this loyalty would have transferred to the empire. Certainly, as an Army officer, Swayle would have had an increased burden of loyalty. If I recall correctly, the Empire of Charis had the Corisandian nobles and clergy swear loyalty oaths to Charis in the interregnum between Hektor's death and the return of Daivyn to Corisande.

SYED wrote:A story i once read, had an empress punish a noble by taking away his lands then giving him a far larger estate with new rules. as it was virgin territory, the nobles had to invest alot of capital into establishing them in the new region.
there are plenty of empty unyet terraformed islands and land that can be claimed by the empire, send troublesome nobles there until they have established new dommains.

Tonto Silerheels wrote:I had thought that Zebediah got the harsher punishment because he made his oath to Cayleb in bad faith, fully intending to break it at a suitable point in time. Swayle got a lighter punishment because he fulfilled his oath until changing circumstances made him decide differently.

~Tonto