Spoilers - Toll of Honor

penny wrote:What I really need help with is something that I find very interesting yet difficult for me to grasp and understand. As a steadholder, Honor has so much power over her steading. She is god. She is not Tester. But she is god. Her steading has to obey her every command that she may give. Although she cannot give a command that breaks any laws of the Constitution. This makes me wonder. Had Honor not stopped the crowd that was moving towards Solomon Marchant to exact justice when he called her a harlot in public, could she have been held responsible for his death if she didn't stop them?

Though (while we don't necessarily know in full detail what they are) House of Steel is quite clear that the Grayson constitution contains citizen's rights clauses, and a Steadholder cannot violate them. (And some of them are in the quote below)

That most likely precludes many things a Steadholder might wish to order their holders to do.

Since that constitution was imposed by Benjamin IV after a bloody civil war, to balance the power of the Protector and the Steaders against that of the Steadholders (at the same time the 2nd parliamentary house, the Conclave of Steaders, was created to ensure Steaders had the power to protect their new prerogatives) I'm sure it had some quite significant protections on the rights of Steaders.

That's quite a lot more limited that "a god" :rollseyes:

As for following an unlawful order

House of Steel wrote:The only limitation on legislation within the steading is that it may not conflict with either the Constitution or national legislation. The Constitution guarantees Grayson steaders’ civil rights, including freedom of speech and freedom, protection from unreasonable search or seizure, protection from arbitary arrest, and protection from self-incrimination, but that constitutes only the planetary baseline and a steadholder may extend greater rights to his subjects than are provided by the Constitution. Because personal armsmen are sworn to the steadholder, they are required to follow any order given by the steadholder, even if the action ordered is illegal under the Constitution. The steadholder who gave the order may be held liable, impeached, tried, and convicted of a crime committed by one of his personal armsmen at his command, but the fact that it was the order of his steadholder is a complete defense to any charges against the armsman, civil or criminal, resulting from his actions.

I assume that since this defense is only mentioned with respect to personal armsmen (a constitutionally limited number of people) that anybody else who obeyed an illegal order would not
have that complete defense against any charges. (Depending on whether or they they should have known it was illegal they might have effective defense in court; but that'd be a different matter). I also assume that the steadholder would still be legally liable for giving that illegal order.


I assume that anybody within a steading, whether citizen or visitor is required to follow its local laws. But there may be times when potentially the laws of more than one steading apply

House of Steel wrote:Because there is no uniformity of law among the steadings, disputes that cross steading lines, or that implicate choice of law questions, are heard by the Lower Division of the High Court. In that sense, the High Court’s Lower Division courts are the trial courts and courts of original jurisdiction for these cases. The Lower Division of the High Court also hears criminal cases where planetary law has been violated. Cases that do not meet these criteria are tried in a steading’s own courts, which are the courts of local jurisdiction.

tlb wrote:

penny wrote:I am only admitting my own feelings in this instance, and nothing more.

And yes, I have previously stated my distaste for dueling. But since then, a friend has softened by view of it. He said to me. "If some asshole had murdered your mother you'd want justice. Dueling allows you to legally exact that justice. In the manner that you would see fit. Instead of locking him up and feeding him for the rest of his life. You wouldn't think that is justice."

Ok, I am softened.

So do you accept that it was right and necessary for Honor to duel Denver Summervale and Pavel Young? Because that is precisely the circumstance which she found herself in, after substituting loved one for mother. Worse for her in a way, because there was no legal avenue to lock the two of them up for life. Dueling was her only chance to extract justice.

I never disagreed with Honor exacting and extracting justice. It was definitely understandable. My original distaste centered around a nation condoning it. And the aspect of it regarding my failure to understand it -- and my inability to suspend disbelief -- is centered around accepting a challenge. I can understand someone angry enough to want to kill you over something you've done, but I can't understand why someone would accept giving him his opportunity. Regardless of how it might make you look.

Now, the part I disagreed with Honor over is specifically her duel on Grayson. It was grossly unfair to Burdette. And unfairness in a religious event is unholy. That is an entirely separate can of worms that need not be opened again. It was adequately put paid to and it closed out the Honorverse ramblings and musings thread. I have said all I intend to say on that matter there.

tlb wrote:Still, that is only a softening, because most dueling was not a way to justice; instead it was over a social slight that impugned someone's honor. Honor is exceptional in that all three of her duels have been in pursuit of justice.

.

I would say it is an attempt at some measure of justice. A token offer.

penny wrote:Now, the part I disagreed with Honor over is specifically her duel on Grayson. It was grossly unfair to Burdette. And unfairness in a religious event is unholy. That is an entirely separate can of worms that need not be opened again. It was adequately put paid to and it closed out the Honorverse ramblings and musings thread. I have said all I intend to say on that matter there.

I disagreed with that then, and I disagree with it now. It represents a total misunderstanding of a Trial by Combat, which by its nature expects that God will physically aid the righteous. Here is some of what we said in that thread (text size changed by me):

tlb wrote:Consider if the Protector's Champion had been a 90 year old man, who had won the position when young. Forced to fight Burdette, where is your fairness in this case?

cthia wrote:Life isn't fair. Nor are the people we meet in our everyday walks of life righteous, but God is there to take up the slack, if we would only have faith. If we are not faced with seemingly insurmountable odds, then what is the need for faith? If a 30-yr-old man is the Protector's Champion facing a 90-yr-old man then where is the need for the Protector's Champion to have faith? Our faith truly needs to be strong daily. It needs to be unshakable, at least the size of a mustard seed when we are up against insurmountable odds. I don't need my God to help me crush an egg.

I have faith in that 90-yr-old man. And surely if he has even the smallest amount of faith in God, simply the size of a mustard seed, he shall prevail.

So, in a physically unequal fight where the odds favor Burdette, you accept that God will help a 90 year old man prevail. However you refuse to let God help Honor and say the result is unfair. Yet by this quote, Burdett's faith should have let him win, no matter what advantages Honor had; if God had truly favored him. This seems to me to be inconsistent.

PS: Note that what you accuse Nimitz of doing is no more than what the person did who yelled "Down" to Honor during the Pavel Young duel. Was that equally unfair, since it may have prevented him from killing her with a shot in the back?

tlb wrote:

penny wrote:Now, the part I disagreed with Honor over is specifically her duel on Grayson. It was grossly unfair to Burdette. And unfairness in a religious event is unholy. That is an entirely separate can of worms that need not be opened again. It was adequately put paid to and it closed out the Honorverse ramblings and musings thread. I have said all I intend to say on that matter there.

I disagreed with that then, and I disagree with it now. It represents a total misunderstanding of a Trial by Combat, which by its nature expects that God will physically aid the righteous. Here is some of what we said in that thread (text size changed by me):

tlb wrote:Consider if the Protector's Champion had been a 90 year old man, who had won the position when young. Forced to fight Burdette, where is your fairness in this case?

cthia wrote:Life isn't fair. Nor are the people we meet in our everyday walks of life righteous, but God is there to take up the slack, if we would only have faith. If we are not faced with seemingly insurmountable odds, then what is the need for faith? If a 30-yr-old man is the Protector's Champion facing a 90-yr-old man then where is the need for the Protector's Champion to have faith? Our faith truly needs to be strong daily. It needs to be unshakable, at least the size of a mustard seed when we are up against insurmountable odds. I don't need my God to help me crush an egg.

I have faith in that 90-yr-old man. And surely if he has even the smallest amount of faith in God, simply the size of a mustard seed, he shall prevail.

So, in a physically unequal fight where the odds favor Burdette, you accept that God will help a 90 year old man prevail. However you refuse to let God help Honor and say the result is unfair. Yet by this quote, Burdett's faith should have let him win, no matter what advantages Honor had; if God had truly favored him. This seems to me to be inconsistent.

PS: Note that what you accuse Nimitz of doing is no more than what the person did who yelled "Down" to Honor during the Pavel Young duel. Was that equally unfair, since it may have prevented him from killing her with a shot in the back?

I brought the thread forward for your or anyone else's convenience. Everything you can rehash I have responded to at length. Have yourself a ball rereading it. It's like Prego. It's in there.

But please don't restart the thread.

Jonathan_S wrote:

penny wrote:What I really need help with is something that I find very interesting yet difficult for me to grasp and understand. As a steadholder, Honor has so much power over her steading. She is god. She is not Tester. But she is god. Her steading has to obey her every command that she may give. Although she cannot give a command that breaks any laws of the Constitution. This makes me wonder. Had Honor not stopped the crowd that was moving towards Solomon Marchant to exact justice when he called her a harlot in public, could she have been held responsible for his death if she didn't stop them?

Though (while we don't necessarily know in full detail what they are) House of Steel is quite clear that the Grayson constitution contains citizen's rights clauses, and a Steadholder cannot violate them. (And some of them are in the quote below)

That most likely precludes many things a Steadholder might wish to order their holders to do.

Since that constitution was imposed by Benjamin IV after a bloody civil war, to balance the power of the Protector and the Steaders against that of the Steadholders (at the same time the 2nd parliamentary house, the Conclave of Steaders, was created to ensure Steaders had the power to protect their new prerogatives) I'm sure it had some quite significant protections on the rights of Steaders.

That's quite a lot more limited that "a god" :rollseyes:

As for following an unlawful order

House of Steel wrote:The only limitation on legislation within the steading is that it may not conflict with either the Constitution or national legislation. The Constitution guarantees Grayson steaders’ civil rights, including freedom of speech and freedom, protection from unreasonable search or seizure, protection from arbitary arrest, and protection from self-incrimination, but that constitutes only the planetary baseline and a steadholder may extend greater rights to his subjects than are provided by the Constitution. Because personal armsmen are sworn to the steadholder, they are required to follow any order given by the steadholder, even if the action ordered is illegal under the Constitution. The steadholder who gave the order may be held liable, impeached, tried, and convicted of a crime committed by one of his personal armsmen at his command, but the fact that it was the order of his steadholder is a complete defense to any charges against the armsman, civil or criminal, resulting from his actions.

I assume that since this defense is only mentioned with respect to personal armsmen (a constitutionally limited number of people) that anybody else who obeyed an illegal order would not
have that complete defense against any charges. (Depending on whether or they they should have known it was illegal they might have effective defense in court; but that'd be a different matter). I also assume that the steadholder would still be legally liable for giving that illegal order.


I assume that anybody within a steading, whether citizen or visitor is required to follow its local laws. But there may be times when potentially the laws of more than one steading apply

House of Steel wrote:Because there is no uniformity of law among the steadings, disputes that cross steading lines, or that implicate choice of law questions, are heard by the Lower Division of the High Court. In that sense, the High Court’s Lower Division courts are the trial courts and courts of original jurisdiction for these cases. The Lower Division of the High Court also hears criminal cases where planetary law has been violated. Cases that do not meet these criteria are tried in a steading’s own courts, which are the courts of local jurisdiction.

House of Steel 'eh? I still haven't read Steel. Only the free chapters offered online. I see I must rectify that error in judgement. I originally thought that book was a technical manual of sorts. OOPS.

But. Honor can give any illegal command to her armsmen and they have to obey her? And you don't think she's a god?*

God's subjects don't follow his only TEN COMMANDS. And they are legal.

*In a way that is understandable. In critical situations you need someone who will carry out his orders. Period. You need someone who will simply trust the chain of command. The navy does not need men in silos that won't push the button when the order to push the button is given.

P.S. Thanks for the passages!

penny wrote:House of Steel 'eh? I still haven't read Steel. Only the free chapters offered online. I see I must rectify that error in judgement. I originally thought that book was a technical manual of sorts. OOPS.

Much of it is a technical manual - though about the first 30% is a novella. But the technical details it overs include ranks, awards, patches, history history and governments of Manticore and Grayson, astrography, some precis biographies. Plus what you were probably expecting, ship-class specs, numbers, and info.

The bits I quoted were from the section on the judicial system(s) of Grayson.


But (aside from the novella) it is reference background information; so probably more interesting to pick and chose which bits interest you rather than trying to read it straight through cover to cover.

penny wrote:But. Honor can give any illegal command to her armsmen and they have to obey her? And you don't think she's a god?*

God's subjects don't follow his only TEN COMMANDS. And they are legal.

*In a way that is understandable. In critical situations you need someone who will carry out his orders. Period. You need someone who will simply trust the chain of command. The navy does not need men in silos that won't push the button when the order to push the button is given.

On the other hand, in most miliary units an illegal order is NOT to be obeyed and if there is a question, then a demand can be made to have the order in writing to fix responsibility.

Although Honor can give an illegal order to her armsman and it must be obeyed, Honor can be tried for giving that order (probably by the Conclave of Steadholders). The distinction is that the armsman is freed of responsibility, which shifts back to her.

“As Steadholder Harrington, you command the entire Guard, which can be enlarged to whatever extent the Steading requires. The Mayhew Steadholder’s Guard, for example, has a roster strength of over seven thousand. At the moment, the Harrington Guard is at only about four hundred.”

I don't know what Honor's financial situation was then, but I do not think she was rich at that time. Thank goodness she didn't have seven thousand armsmen to pay, but four hundred are not cheap either. On her navy salary? Imagine paying a decent yearly salary for four hundred people.

Their salary did come out of Honor's pocket didn't it? IINM, I think she was given support in some fashion in the beginning? And the steading most likely collected taxes, at the very least. Or would her subjects pay taxes to Grayson?

“As Steadholder Harrington, you command the entire Guard, which can be enlarged to whatever extent the Steading requires. The Mayhew Steadholder’s Guard, for example, has a roster strength of over seven thousand. At the moment, the Harrington Guard is at only about four hundred.”

penny wrote:I don't know what Honor's financial situation was then, but I do not think she was rich at that time. Thank goodness she didn't have seven thousand armsmen to pay, but four hundred are not cheap either. On her navy salary? Imagine paying a decent yearly salary for four hundred people.

Their salary did come out of Honor's pocket didn't it? IINM, I think she was given support in some fashion in the beginning? And the steading most likely collected taxes, at the very least. Or would her subjects pay taxes to Grayson?

She earned prize money at Basilisk for contraband confiscated and a share at Hancock of all the ships captured. From Field of Dishonor:

Chapter 4 wrote:Honor's prize money from Basilisk Station had made her a millionaire; Neufsteiler's management had made her a multi-millionaire several times over.

Chapter 4 wrote:"Dame Honor," he said patiently, "a dreadnought is valued at somewhere in the neighborhood of thirty-two billion dollars, and the prize court awards three percent of the value of a surrendered enemy ship to the task force which captured it, assuming the Navy buys the prize into service. Of that total, the flag captains of said task force split twelve percent among themselves, and there were only four flag captains in Hancock at the time Admiral Chin surrendered. The Admiralty survey judged two of her five surviving dreadnoughts too badly damaged for repair, but the Navy bought the other three in. Now, three percent of ninety-six billion dollars is two-point-eight-eight billion, and twelve percent of that is three hundred forty-five million, plus change. Which means, dear lady, that your share comes to a paltry eighty-six million four hundred thousand dollars—exclusive of the lighter vessels surrendered with them. Of course, they only added another six million to your total award, so I suppose we don't have to worry about them. Believe me, those figures are correct. In fact, if you look at page three, you'll see that the most junior enlisted person serving under you will receive almost fifty thousand dollars."

That was how she personally could create and fund the company to build domes on Grayson and which added a considerable sum to her net worth after that got clear of the sabotage damage. The Steading was producing money by the time of Flag in Exile.

penny wrote:

“As Steadholder Harrington, you command the entire Guard, which can be enlarged to whatever extent the Steading requires. The Mayhew Steadholder’s Guard, for example, has a roster strength of over seven thousand. At the moment, the Harrington Guard is at only about four hundred.”

I don't know what Honor's financial situation was then, but I do not think she was rich at that time. Thank goodness she didn't have seven thousand armsmen to pay, but four hundred are not cheap either. On her navy salary? Imagine paying a decent yearly salary for four hundred people.

Their salary did come out of Honor's pocket didn't it? IINM, I think she was given support in some fashion in the beginning? And the steading most likely collected taxes, at the very least. Or would her subjects pay taxes to Grayson?

She might have to pay for her 50 personal armsmen out of her own pocket; as they're personally sworn to her. (I don't recall anything to that effect; but I guess it's not impossible). That said, even if she does her personal income from her Steading is probably more than enough to cover that.

But her general armsmen aren't personally sworn to her and should be funded by the steading (possibly with some subsidy from the national government; as they're essentially the steading's police and militia and also in the reserves of the Grayson armed forces.


I can't be bothered to try to work out exactly when this conversation is occurring relative to chapter 4 of Field of Dishonor. But I think it's safe to say that by any normal measure Honor was already rich when it happened.

I see tlb posted while I was researching and included the full applicable quotes (so thanks for that), but just her prize money from Basilisk made Honor a millionaire; and FiE notes that by this point Neufsteiler's management of her finances had already made her "a multi-millionaire several times over." [FiE] Plus she had whatever lands were granted her when she was made Countess Harrington as the end of OBS; and any income they generated.


Then during that dinner at Cosmo's Neufsteiler let her know that
the first quarterly income from her estates on Grayson came in, as did the approximately 92 million dollars in (untaxable) prize money from her share of the Peep DNs and escorts captured at Hancock. At that point she went from rich to really rich.

(Not as rich as she'd be after coming back from Hades with even more prize ships, and being made Duchess Harrington, and the much larger and more valuable Dutchy she was granted with that. Not to mention once her investments in Blackbird and Skydomes started paying out. But still quite rich by any rational standard)