Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], penny and 36 guests

Information I'd love to know

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by Annachie   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 12:14 am

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

roseandheather wrote:
Annachie wrote:Multiple full term pregnancies are far more likely to cause problems than multiple abortions. By a long way.

But if the women are easily replacable things why would he care?


Correction: multiple correctly performed abortions are far less likely to cause problems than multiple full-term pregnancies.

Let's just say my faith that Masada has anything of the kind is rather low.

Lol, I suppose I was assuming correctly performed medical procedures.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 10:09 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 14951
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

If Elizabeth somehow finds herself a widow and she remarries, does textev explicitly state that it simply has to be a commoner, or should be a commoner?

If she falls in love with an uncommoner( :lol: ) is she just SOL?

Can she just elect to not marry? That way, she can just have a live-in uncommoner lover. Although that in itself, could be considered quite common. ;)

And, is it explicitly stated that it has to be a Manticoran commoner? Can she marry a commoner from Dresden, Haven, Grayson. Even an Andermani?

Is there a Mrs. Gustav Anderman? I can't seem to find any reference. Is he a widower?

Can she marry a female commoner?

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 12:03 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8752
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

cthia wrote:If Elizabeth somehow finds herself a widow and she remarries, does textev explicitly state that it simply has to be a commoner, or should be a commoner?

If she falls in love with an uncommoner( :lol: ) is she just SOL?

Can she just elect to not marry? That way, she can just have a live-in uncommoner lover. Although that in itself, could be considered quite common. ;)

And, is it explicitly stated that it has to be a Manticoran commoner? Can she marry a commoner from Dresden, Haven, Grayson. Even an Andermani?

Is there a Mrs. Gustav Anderman? I can't seem to find any reference. Is he a widower?

Can she marry a female commoner?
I can't recall any specific text-ev on remarrage. I suspect the wording is generic enough that any marrage or remarrage of the primary heir would have to be to a commoner.

But I guess it's possible that that constitutional restriction only says 'heir', not 'monarch and/or heir'. So depending on exactly how it's worded its possible that the restriction might not apply after your crowned. (Personally though I doubt they left that loophole, because it would allow an heir to circumvent the requirement simply by postponing marriage until after they assumed the crown)


I couldn't even speculate on how the constitution (or court decisions on it) have effective defined "commoner"


But I absolutely assume that, like any Manticoran, the King, Queen, or primary heir is free to marry someone (or ones) of either sex. (Though whether the Winton's particular branch of Christianity is happy their congregants being in multi-partner marriages is a different question)
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by SWM   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 12:25 pm

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

Jonathan_S wrote:But I guess it's possible that that constitutional restriction only says 'heir', not 'monarch and/or heir'. So depending on exactly how it's worded its possible that the restriction might not apply after your crowned. (Personally though I doubt they left that loophole, because it would allow an heir to circumvent the requirement simply by postponing marriage until after they assumed the crown)

Alternatively, it might simply require the heir to be married before attaining the crown.
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by roseandheather   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 12:47 pm

roseandheather
Admiral

Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:39 pm
Location: Republic of Haven

Jonathan_S wrote:
cthia wrote:If Elizabeth somehow finds herself a widow and she remarries, does textev explicitly state that it simply has to be a commoner, or should be a commoner?

If she falls in love with an uncommoner( :lol: ) is she just SOL?

Can she just elect to not marry? That way, she can just have a live-in uncommoner lover. Although that in itself, could be considered quite common. ;)

And, is it explicitly stated that it has to be a Manticoran commoner? Can she marry a commoner from Dresden, Haven, Grayson. Even an Andermani?

Is there a Mrs. Gustav Anderman? I can't seem to find any reference. Is he a widower?

Can she marry a female commoner?
I can't recall any specific text-ev on remarrage. I suspect the wording is generic enough that any marrage or remarrage of the primary heir would have to be to a commoner.

But I guess it's possible that that constitutional restriction only says 'heir', not 'monarch and/or heir'. So depending on exactly how it's worded its possible that the restriction might not apply after your crowned. (Personally though I doubt they left that loophole, because it would allow an heir to circumvent the requirement simply by postponing marriage until after they assumed the crown)


I couldn't even speculate on how the constitution (or court decisions on it) have effective defined "commoner"


But I absolutely assume that, like any Manticoran, the King, Queen, or primary heir is free to marry someone (or ones) of either sex. (Though whether the Winton's particular branch of Christianity is happy their congregants being in multi-partner marriages is a different question)


I can at least weigh in on the church thing - Elizabeth and the Winton dynasty are 2nd Reformation Catholic, like Hamish and Emily, and no, that particular church doesn't frown on multi-partner marriages. The chief issue impeding the Hamish/Emily/Honor debacle was that Hamish and Emily, when they married, chose to wed monogamously under Church law, meaning that Hamish's affair with Honor, despite Emily's consent, was adultery in the eyes of the Church. Of course, once everything got straightened out - and how this never occurred even to Emily when everything went to Hell I will never know - the Church was more than willing to allow them to modify those marriage vows to include Honor. But yes, 2nd Reformation Catholic does allow multi-partner marriages.

That said, I suspect the dynasty has wed monogamously 99% of the time; for one thing, it takes a particular sort of mental flexibility to handle a polyamorous relationship, one that most people don't have, and for another, a multi-partner marriage would, in purely practical terms, probably complicate the succession quite a bit. If a Winton really did want such an arrangement, I'm sure something would be worked out, but it doesn't seem like the situation has arisen historically.
~*~


I serve at the pleasure of President Pritchart.

Javier & Eloise
"You'll remember me when the west wind moves upon the fields of barley..."
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 1:24 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 14951
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

SWM wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:
But I guess it's possible that that constitutional restriction only says 'heir', not 'monarch and/or heir'. So depending on exactly how it's worded its possible that the restriction might not apply after your crowned. (Personally though I doubt they left that loophole, because it would allow an heir to circumvent the requirement simply by postponing marriage until after they assumed the crown)

Alternatively, it might simply require the heir to be married before attaining the crown.

Requiring marriage before crowning begs to be susceptible to a crisis reminiscent of Emily-White Haven-Honor and at some point may warrant a shotgun wedding of sorts, that may not be at all good for the crown. The heir may not even be dating anyone, or even old enough to, let alone be in love.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by SWM   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 1:45 pm

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

cthia wrote:
SWM wrote:Alternatively, it might simply require the heir to be married before attaining the crown.

Requiring marriage before crowning begs to be susceptible to a crisis reminiscent of Emily-White Haven-Honor and at some point may warrant a shotgun wedding of sorts, that may not be at all good for the crown. The heir may not even be dating anyone, or even old enough to, let alone be in love.

Possibly but, on the other hand, requiring the heir to be married before attaining the crown is a big step toward ensuring the succession. Also, heirs are already expected to avoid situations which would result in the kind of crisis or shotgun wedding that you are talking about. An heir that would get into such a situation might not be fit for the crown. A requirement of marriage is hardly unprecedented, at least in literature (I don't know whether any real monarchies had such a requirement).
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:23 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8752
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

SWM wrote:Possibly but, on the other hand, requiring the heir to be married before attaining the crown is a big step toward ensuring the succession. Also, heirs are already expected to avoid situations which would result in the kind of crisis or shotgun wedding that you are talking about. An heir that would get into such a situation might not be fit for the crown. A requirement of marriage is hardly unprecedented, at least in literature (I don't know whether any real monarchies had such a requirement).

Well they could avoid a "classic" knocked up the bride shotgun wedding. But a requirement to marry before being crowned could still result in a hasty marrage.

At it would take is for the heir to still be a kid and the current monarch dies. Now the kid has to be crowned (admittedly with a regency council providing guidance until they're of age) -- but with a requirement to be married before being crowned now this kid has to get married.

That's problematic if we're talking a teenager who might actually have a boyfriend or girlfriend at the moment. Its even worse if you're talking about someone less than 12 who isn't even interested yet. How do they (or their guardians) quickly pick a reasonable commoner to marry.


If they had such a requirement I really hope it's got a clause that, for a minor, postpones the requirement to be married from "before being crowned" until "before achieving their majority;" (when they'd no longer be under the guidance of their regency council)

But I really doubt they have a law requiring the heir to be married before assuming the crown.
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:56 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 14951
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

Jonathan_S wrote:
SWM wrote:
Possibly but, on the other hand, requiring the heir to be married before attaining the crown is a big step toward ensuring the succession. Also, heirs are already expected to avoid situations which would result in the kind of crisis or shotgun wedding that you are talking about. An heir that would get into such a situation might not be fit for the crown. A requirement of marriage is hardly unprecedented, at least in literature (I don't know whether any real monarchies had such a requirement).

Well they could avoid a "classic" knocked up the bride shotgun wedding. But a requirement to marry before being crowned could still result in a hasty marrage.

At it would take is for the heir to still be a kid and the current monarch dies. Now the kid has to be crowned (admittedly with a regency council providing guidance until they're of age) -- but with a requirement to be married before being crowned now this kid has to get married.

That's problematic if we're talking a teenager who might actually have a boyfriend or girlfriend at the moment. Its even worse if you're talking about someone less than 12 who isn't even interested yet. How do they (or their guardians) quickly pick a reasonable commoner to marry.


If they had such a requirement I really hope it's got a clause that, for a minor, postpones the requirement to be married from "before being crowned" until "before achieving their majority;" (when they'd no longer be under the guidance of their regency council)

But I really doubt they have a law requiring the heir to be married before assuming the crown.

My sentiments exactly.

Underage assumption of the crown isn't at all unprecedented in literature either. I suddenly fear arranged marriages.

At any rate, which came first for Elizabeth? The chicken (husband) or the egg (crown.)

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Information I'd love to know
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 30, 2014 3:25 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8752
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

cthia wrote:Underage assumption of the crown isn't at all unprecedented in literature either. I suddenly fear arranged marriages.

At any rate, what came first for Elizabeth? The chicken (husband) or the egg (crown.)
Oh, good point. It seems the egg (crown) came first.

Queen's Gambit in World of Honor has the story of King Roger III's assassination (and aftermath). During that story Elizabeth is already referred to as Queen (so I assume she's formally taken up the crown), but Justin is still "only" a her fiance

"Elizabeth III, Queen of Manticore, stood with her fiancé, Justin Zyrr, in the small ante-chamber into which they had retreated after viewing the holo-video of Roger III's death."

OTOH she was only 16 at the time.
World of Honor: Queen's Gambit wrote:Elizabeth rubbed her hands over her eyes. "By Manticoran law, I must have a regent until I'm twenty-one T-years. Since I'm past my sixteenth birthday, they can't foist just anyone on me. I nominate my regent; Parliament confirms or rejects my choice. We do this until we're both happy. I suspect it could be an ugly time."
She sat in thoughtful silence for a moment, then, twisting in his lap to face him, she twinkled.
"Then there will be the question of our marriage."
Justin felt a sudden, cold fear that somehow Elizabeth would be taken from him. They had been engaged with King Roger and Queen Angelique's full approval since soon after Elizabeth's seventeenth birthday. Could Parliament force Elizabeth to break the engagement, choose another spouse?
"Question?" he squeaked.
This time Ariel's reproving bleek was for both of them—Justin for doubting Elizabeth, and Elizabeth for her choice of a joke. The treecat rose and patted Justin on the side of his face, his other true-hand resting on Elizabeth's shoulder.
"I shouldn't tease," Elizabeth admitted ruefully. "Justin, no one can make me break my engagement with you. I don't even expect it to be questioned. However, the line of succession has just grown shorter by one. Originally, we planned to marry after I turned twenty-one, right?"
"Right," he answered, his voice back to normal.
"Now I expect there will be some pressure for us to marry sooner."
"I don't have a problem with that."
"Nor I, particularly," she said, "but there will be those who do. Some will think a proper mourning period should be observed. Others will worry that the distractions of a wedding, a husband, pressure to produce an heir, will distract me from my duties as Queen."
"So they'll want you to wait."
"Exactly. After all, there are the cadet branches of the House. My Aunt Caitrin and her children can carry on if something happens both to me and to Michael before I have children of my own. . . ."
Her voice trailed off. Small and forlorn, she leaned her head back against his shoulder, tears trailing down her face.
"Justin, I don't want to think about it!"
"Then don't," Justin suggested, "for right now. Don't think about anything at all."


So she was Queen, but needed a regent, and wasn't yet married. The timing of the marriage was going to be subject to political pressures, but apparently not constitutional questions.


So there we are, that seems to be the most relevant text-ev. (And one I didn't think about until your question)
Top

Return to Honorverse