Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lyn Farel]

Apparently stumbled on what seems to be a major source of info hidden in the Amash-Akura first emperor article.

He also founded the Council of Apostles, which ruled the Amarr over 5,000 years before being dissolved in the Moral Reforms of 21875 AD.[1] The notion of a leadership council composed of the religious and secular rulers of the Empire persists with the Privy and Theology Councils, though in significantly different forms than envisioned by Amash-Akura.

Amash-Akura codified the right of Holders in the Scriptures, establishing a nobility out of whole cloth. He gave them broad, sweeping responsibilities and rights for land ownership, governing, and taxation.

Though religion was very powerful among the Amarr during his time, the church's influence in governance was limited. Amash-Akura directly tied the power of leadership to religious piety and divine right. He removed many of the boundaries between secular and religious life, paving the way for the ever-present church that would gain hold in the centuries following his death.

On the Early Empire article also :

By 16470 AD, Amash-Akura had conquered the entirety of Amarr Island, and was crowned Emperor by the church.[1] Those warlords who had willingly submitted, he named his Holders, firmly establishing a landed, hereditary nobility. He also merged the church and the government, placing his most religious Holders and loyal clergy on the new Empire's ruling council, which he named the Council of Apostles.

It would seem that the authority in the Amarr Empire progressively became more and more centralized on the clergy, which became more or less inter mingled with noble titles. Eventually we end up with lords and demesnes similar to those of prince archbishops in history, where some whole duchies were owned by archbishops. Holders seem to be like that, and so definitely not secular.

Eventually the secular part only applies now to commoners and slaves.

The question then is if the family of Holders are also part of the clergy or not. I would argue that not, since the clergy (men of the cloth) comes probably with the Holder title. I would then make non Holder nobles secular, but that's pure speculation.

The other question is also : is there then no distinction left anymore, so that everyone in command is part of clergy ? Now with the clear division of power between true men of the cloth and scholars like the Theology Council (religious body), and the Privy Council (political body), the both main powers under the Emperor, The Emperor coming from the Privy Council and thus from the political body, making him eligible to create edicts, but not to validate them (the job of the TC) ? This is a clear cut case of separation of powers to me, much like in any constitution where the executive body create laws, and the legislative body votes them.

However it makes it clear that the religious authority of every ruling class (Emperor as absolute monarch yes, but also Holders as men of the cloth) is completely pervasive. Holders have the pure authority to do so... Unless it is the job of the TC ? It reminds me heavily of investiture controversy seen that way, but we do not seem to have sources for that at the moment, sadly.

In any case, there is no conflict between clergy and secular powers in the Amarr like it was in RL history, but more like between the political religious spheres (embodied by the Privy Council and Holders), and the scholar religious spheres (embodied by the TC and priests). Eventually as much as religion has been removed from the distinction between spheres of power like it was IRL between lords and the pope/clergy, I think it is unreasonable to assume that there is no conflict left, merely that they shifted between those 2 types of clergy individuals, aka the ones with the political power, and the ones with the scholar power (since we know that scholars and knowledge holds a sacred place in Amarr society).

However I do not have in mind any piece of news/PF about such conflicts, but it would seem to me that they might matter a lot considering the nature of scripture creation.




__________________________

Note : secular to be taken in the old fashion, not the modern meaning. The old meaning just making the difference between men of the cloth / clergy, and the rest.

[Gaven Lok ri]

I am increasingly thinking in terms of different kinds of authority in Amarr. I am playing with the following Model:

Theological authority. People whose authority is over and grounded in the theological and legal background of the Empire. (I don't really see the two as particularly separate) This is the TC and the courts. These are the people who would be turning to scripture for evidence.

You have revelatory authority. This would be people who for one reason or another are considered conduits of information from God. Speakers of Truth. Brilliant scientists coming up with new weapons technology. The Emperor. The saints. These are the people who somehow produce new material that has the potential to be incorporated into the scripture. For one reason or another they are somehow considered closer to God.

Scripture then is the interaction of these two. The revelation that is inspired by God happens to an individual, who declares it. The statement is then considered by the Theologians and accepted or rejected. It creates the ability for amarr to add to its scripture without leaving the door open to mystical subversives.

Then last you have practical authority. These are the people who are orthopraxy and whose authority lies in the fact that they act like Amarrians are supposed to act. This would be the vast majority of holders and military officers and other officials whose authority comes from the job they do. This would also be the one that can scale down, a lowly Ni-Kunni might claim some spiritual authority because they do everything right according to the practices they have been taught.

I would actually put most clergy in Amarr in this category. Your average priest probably is more concerned with doing all of the rituals correctly and getting all the words right than they are with the theology behind those rituals. I think its likely that Theology is mostly left to the specialists in the courts and Theology council.

I think all of these are related to the divine in the Amarrian mindset, acting correctly is probably considered just as holy as knowing the scriptures. Revelatory is probably a class of its own, but with the exception of the Emperor and Speakers of Truth I don't think there are many people who make claims to regular revelatory experiences. Also, most people would have multiple of these. An Emperor who doesn't act like an Emperor should is going to find that his or her revelatory authority drops immediately.

I will have to develop this more, but I think its a reasonable model of how the religion might work that lets us move away from some of the real world models.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

I like that model a lot, Gaven. I think the  Special Station of poets in Amarr culture might e.g. be explained due to their revelatory potential. So they might be part of the caste that has revelatory authority. People that got acceptance as prophets are obviously part of this category as well.

[Graelyn]

Yeah, this was more or less how I had figured it.

[Vic Van Meter]

Bear with me if I'm thinking aloud, but I haven't had net in a few days so I'm sort of jumping back into a conversation that's moved a ways away.

I think a muddied theocratic/feudal government probably works out fairly well.  Having a sort of civil authority and religious authority, and weird juxtapositions where those cross, isn't necessarily unfounded in history.  Essentially, it was up to various feudal lords how things worked in their fiefdoms.  Sometimes, that meant religious authorities became landholders, sometimes the church held their lands as organizations, sometimes church leaders were held as advisers to their feudal counterparts.  That might surely be what goes on inside the Amarr Empire.

It might be that certain Holders have different ways of dealing with their clergy. Different branches of the church might have different agendas.  The kind of preaching Constantin does probably advances the religion a lot, but isn't as politically important.  Which might mean the particular wing of the church Constantin is affiliated with might espouse similar views, but he probably also has detractors above his head that disagree with his mode and method.  I think, given the size of Earth and the rather diverse views even members of similar sects have, that the Amarrian church is at least going to have some wiggle room.

I think the real question is what might get a priest in hot water.  Constantin's mission and preaching doesn't necessarily do much politically, but he isn't in a very politically important position (given his area).  Gaven is probably going to be a LOT more heavily leaning on the political side, given his area and what he does.  Those are both going to be extremely different than what an archaologist or theological lawyer might do.  In the end, the Amarrian religion is probably like most long-lived religions: a vast machine of disparate parts, some new and some outdated, all clamoring to make themselves most important in the discussion but all having a reasonably similar end goal.  Constantin, I don't think, has done anything that's going to get him defrocked yet.  He's probably not every senior, traditional priest's favorite, but he's probably not doing anything that gets him in big trouble.  Not yet anyway.

So when it comes to interactions between clergy (which is, I suppose, the point of all the behind-the-scenes work we're doing here) is that senior clergy can definitely give orders, but they might not be in the same church.  I think, given that Gaven is a cardinal (and going by the model I've been using, I'd say that makes him an extremely senior authority), Constantin has to give him a lot of public respect, but they're probably like an Army Colonel talking to an EPA representative.  Both might work for the same broad authority, but given their distinctly different jobs, they sort of trust the central authority to reign them in if they go over their bounds.

I am doing my best to make my character not completely step into the sights of the Theology Council.  I've always just assumed that the Theology Council, in some way or another, runs the entire business of religion and so essentially Constantin works for them however indirectly.  He's definitely subject to their laws, so if he, say, joins a heretical group or shoots down a few Amarrian ships, he's probably going to get defrocked.  As it stands, he's just an official doing his best to evangelize and organize foreign believers, but he's nowhere near the lawmaking or law enforcing end of the government.  I wouldn't even necessarily call him a government official, though Gaven's got a good point that they're probably all, in some way or another, government officials.

[Samira Kernher]

Graelyn is the cardinal, not Gaven.

[Arista Shahni]

At the end of the day you have two choices, if we allow wiggle room and an honor system of RP:

1) What the NPCs made up in your head giving Constantin the orders will do.  You write that up.  There are no GMs, just people giving advice.

2) What the Loyalist Amarr bloc (the players playing said characters), as well as those associated with other factions Constantin interacts with, will do on observations of your actions with the charafcter in an RP fashion, either through posts on the IGS or in game.

Arista is a Khanid Zealot.  This isn't news, so I'm not exactly leaking anything unknown here.  To dig through PF on them and point out the bits I work with to a greater or lesser extent based on her background:

In general:

The Khanid female tends to be fiercely independent and resourceful, long accustomed to fending for herself. She backs down from no one, and is very much the mistress of her own destiny.

Re: Zealots

The Khanid are not generally known to be as devout as the Amarr, but those who are tend to be fanatics even by Amarr standards. Religious Khanid are often inducted into zealous cults, generally based on their interpretation of the Scriptures. The Amarr regard these religious Khanid with suspicious interest; on the one hand the cultists' extremism alarms them, but on the other their religious fervor often results in deep theosophical insights.

I deal with both of these points in interaction with the Amarr bloc IC. 

I do 99% of my 'day to day' progression of RP in game, in live chat.  Anything that is not done there is recorded in documents I do not share because no one has witnessed them and it is not in Arista's nature to share, save in drips and drops.

Constantin, in my opinion, can't really step into the sights of the TC - the chances are miniscule that a CCP actor will point him out.  I've gently tried to point this sort of thing out to players who have added things in their bios about unsolved issues with Amarr Navy and the like, becasuse Amarr Navy isn't going to care if you're AWOL.  That's just fact for the most part - again, no GM to run an NPC who is going to read their bio and care.

The best way imo to be part of the world is to have your character be a part of the lives of the Capsuleers being roleplayed by the players.  Otherwise, as lovely as it may be, you are simply writing a story - in what's really exposition - that others can do little but react to the end result of.  If there are Caldari players here ad there Constantin has cut deals with - great.  This means you've got the multiplayer part of MMO down, and you're roleplaying, and not writing something that more realitiScally belongs in Eve Fiction, and not in the IGS.

Again a warning I'm in a shit of shit mood, and it is coming off in my thoughts.  But my tl;dr is - interact with people live.  It is the best way for real story to develop - real, deep, meaningful story, and not a forum peepee contest.

edited because as usual I can't type.  Even the red lines don't help.

[Gaven Lok ri]

Also Graelyn was proclaimed cardinal by the CVA if I remember right, (I might be wrong, if I am Grae should correct me) so its not a Theology Council granted rank.

Rather it follows the model of Holders (in this case Pod Pilot new holders of nominally Amarr aligned space) appointing clergy. 

Going to have to think about that for future PIE clergy endeavors. Can use Gaven's rank and make them PIE clergy appointed by the Lord Admiral.

[Vic Van Meter]

If that's the case, does that mean that the civic authority trumps the ecclesiastical authority?  CCP seems to regard them as distinct, but if the Holders grant ecclesiastical ranks, it seems to indicate that the Amarr Empire is definitely separated between church and state and that the state trumps the church.

I sort of got the impression that it wasn't so cut and dry.  EVElopedia's article seems to indicate that there are a lot of internal government and theological orders sort of elbowing for room, with the Empress at the top of the pyramid, the Heirs below, and the water getting murkier as it goes.  Essentially, you have all of these organizations, the Holders, Theology Council, etc., that all seem to have somewhat unlimited powers but all seem to have a series of checks and balances.  Even the Empress doesn't seem to have penultimate authority at all times.  Essentially, I thought that's how the Khanid quasi-independence autonomy thing worked as well.  The reason the Khanid seem so much different from the Amarrians is because they simply are.  Khanid has to respect the authority of those over his head, but he's essentially running his own show in the Kingdom.

But if ecclesiastical authorities are appointed solely by feudal interests, that really doesn't mean the Theology Council has any power.  I was under the impression that they were the ultimate religious authority so Constantin HAD to at least be approved by them and answered to them.  If Constantin and really all religious authorities are appointed by Holders with no input from the Council whatsoever, then there is no real internal regulation of the religion.  The Theology Council would probably be a fairly small and less effective body than I imagined them to be, because even the High Deacon would be appointed by a Holder.

I don't take anything personally, Arista, since this stuff's come up once during RP and otherwise hasn't mattered a lot.  Constantin's background isn't essentially what makes him interesting in a conversation.  But it does help if we're going over this stuff.  It's not like CCP gives us a lot of information, and that information is open to a lot of interpretation.  Which is ironically familiar.

The reason I think my interactions have largely gone well is because I'm willing to give people a pretty good amount of space as far as RP goes.  I had some pretty decent back-and-forth with Slaver Filth even if he was sort of a caricature because, at the very least, it's entirely possible that some corner of the Amarr Empire has the cranky old Holder who can't stand these young whippersnappers and thinks the Theology Council should declare every God-forsaken one of them a heretic and have them all wiped out.  We're not in a competition here, nobody really gets to win RP unless we all do.  So you just have to poke and give characters some room to breathe, then even the trolls have to flesh out a background.  I have fun with Slaver Filth, really, when he's around.

But the OOC stuff gets important enough that we've got to go over it, I guess, since it seems to be bleeding.  So I'll come and try to get things oriented just for the sake of details.  It isn't that big of a deal, though, as it's only really bled in seriously once and didn't bother that many people overall.  It's worth discussing, though, regardless of how important it is for actual RP.

[Gaven Lok ri]

I think the mistake you are making is to think of the theology council and bishops as "the church." I don't think they are that separate. The Holders are a *part* of the church. Theological specialists does not equal the church, it just equals a part of the whole.

Going back to my model of three sources of authority within the religion, the way to think of it is that church and state are completely indistinguishable and that what you have is a church-state with three branches of government:

Holders are practical authority and have the executive power. In day to day activities that means they are going to be calling the shots and doing the organization. They are still a part of the church, but they are the people calling the shots when it comes to how the empire is actually run. They would then appoint bishops and maybe even priests (though I would expect that they let the bishops pick their priests for the most part) and those priests would also be a part of the practical day to day organization of the empire.

The theology council's authority is separate from the holders, but almost certainly subordinate. They only seem to have power when there are disputes. When there aren't disputes and everything is going well they basically sit in the background and study law/theology/technology/whatever else. Most bishops and such would not be a part of this administration, I would expect that its mostly made up of people who retired from active ministry.

The revalatory types are the Amarr equivalent of a legislature branch. Direct revelation from God is the source of new laws and changes to the old laws. So the process works something like the following:

Normal day to day operations: The Emperor and Holders run everything according to the way they interpret the laws, the people they appoint do the day to day administration of all aspects of the empire.

If there is a conflict of interpretation between two holders, the Theology Council comes in to arbitrate.

If the current system is not working, a revelatory figure of some sort (Emperor or Speaker of Truth or something) uses the claim of a direct line to god to make a decree that has the potential to change the law of the land. If its the Emperor, that decree is considered valid for the length of their reign and only can be challenged after they die. If its one of the lesser revelatory figures I think the TC would become involved much earlier.

Either way, the revelatory decree gets kicked eventually to the TC, who decide if it should be incorporated into the scriptures. Once they make that decision, the Practical authorities learn about it and they implement the change. And we are back to step one, where the Emperor and Holders and the people they appoint run everything.

[Vic Van Meter]

I guess that means the Theology Council is a LOT less powerful than I thought it was.  In that case, is there a centralized version of the Amarrian religion?  If a Holder is also an ecclesiastical authority, does that mean all government figures are, in some way, religious authorities?

The reason I'm sort of asking that question is because it didn't seem like slave-keeping holders were necessarily very concerned with the religious aspects.  I thought the Moral Reforms essentially removed direct power from the church (at that time the Council of Apostles) and put it into the hands of the Privy Council, which was nominally not a religious but a civic authority.  The Theology Council was then created to sort of rewrite the religious end to suit the political authorities and then to maintain it.  It didn't seem like it was a very cut-and-dry interrelated system.

The articles on Holders and the Privy Council on EVElopedia just seemed to indicate that the Moral Reforms had essentially changed the religious status that was to be had during the days of the Council of Apostles.  That the five Holder families who remained were essentially more loyal to the Emperor and politics than to their religious studies and ministerial duties.  It seemed like it was definitely the state putting the church into a second-status role rather than continuing the way they had been going, which was essentially the state of Holders being ecclesiastical as well as civic authorities.

I mean, it's obvious that the separation of church and state isn't necessarily based on an American model as much as on a sort of British model.  The queen nominally is head of their church and the church is a function of the state, but the Anglican Church doesn't have a ton of political power as much as it has (had?) a sort of moral authority.  It didn't seem like the state WAS the church, as has been the case in theocracies or cults of personality around the world.

There's always the possibility that the Moral Reforms didn't actually change anything but the names and addresses, but I thought it was a little more important than just changing the Council of Apostles, Inc. to Emperor, Inc.  It seemed like the church, as it were, was being brought to heel beneath the political authorities and made to take a more subservient position.

Which might be exactly what you're getting at, but that does make me wonder how many interpretations of the religion there are if it's essentially decided from Holder to Holder who to appoint as an ecclesiastical authority.  I thought the Theology Council's role was what you described accurately above as well as inquisitors to keep an eye on the clergy and make sure they toed the line.  Hence why I set them up as sort of the ultimate ecclesiastical authority, since I didn't think your Holder could save you from your heresy just by making sure none of their subjects called you on it.  Maybe that means ordinary citizens have more power than the imperial system would have us believe?

Does that also mean I can essentially play Constantin as if he doesn't necessarily answer to anyone but his family?  They're ultimately loyal to an heir family, being essentially Holders themselves, but that also means Constantin is only going to get dragged into hot water when his own family thinks he's crossed the line.  I thought that would be a little far fetched since I thought the Theology Council and Privy Council would have a more centralized role in government, but if Constantin's parents and grandparents are not only his civic authority, but his entire ecclesiastical one, then he doesn't answer to anyone else outside of his direct line of superiors.  I wasn't playing the Baracca family as major landholders, but a sort of in-between ecclesiastical class of high-end commoners who weren't anywhere near nobility but wouldn't ever dare be called common by other people who held their religious duties in regard.

Maybe the Baracca family is like that, but they have an extremely wealthy backer as an heir?  How high up the food chain would someone like that be?  I really didn't want to step on too many toes, but if being a bishop also means essentially being a landholding civic as well as ecclesiastical authority, that changes the nature of who he has to answer to quite a bit.

[Odelya]

Maybe you should read this: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Apostle's_Clerics

And "Cardinals" and "Bishops" aren't really populating prime fiction, am I right?

We have: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Letters_of_Bishop_Dalamaid

And what else? Tons of Blood Raider ships. You're all heretics!

[Gaven Lok ri]

Maybe you should read this: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Apostle's_Clerics

And "Cardinals" and "Bishops" aren't really populating prime fiction, am I right?

We have: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Letters_of_Bishop_Dalamaid

And what else? Tons of Blood Raider ships. You're all heretics!

They have shown up a few other times. But its a mess. Someones addition to the PF in the last few years of those apostles clerics makes it messier, thanks for linking them. Those are interesting, and show just how much changed with the moral reforms.

The moral reforms isnt a state takeover against religion by my read, so much as a branch of the religion taking over the operation of the whole. It seems to me that the authority was much more centralized pre-moral reforms into the one body of the council of apostles. The emperors broke this by segmenting out the authority into different branches for everyone but themselves.

Pre moral reforms the emperor and the apostles all had all three types of religious authority, afterwards only the emperor gets all three.

The apostles clerics seem to be a relic of the period before things got messier, and i expect they would be an exception in their appointment rather than a rule.

Does that also mean I can essentially play Constantin as if he doesn't necessarily answer to anyone but his family?  They're ultimately loyal to an heir family, being essentially Holders themselves, but that also means Constantin is only going to get dragged into hot water when his own family thinks he's crossed the line.

By my read this would be about right.  though he could also get in trouble when an enemy of the family or the MIO gets involved and makes it into a dispute that gets taken to the TC. Basically the TC's role is primarily judicial, and the MIO is the prosecution whose job is to find examples of people breaking the law.

The only reason Constantin would have a need to claim TC sanction is if a complaint had made it to the TC and they had decided in his favor.

[Gaven Lok ri]

I wasn't playing the Baracca family as major landholders, but a sort of in-between ecclesiastical class of high-end commoners who weren't anywhere near nobility but wouldn't ever dare be called common by other people who held their religious duties in regard.

Families like this almost certainly exist. Religious specialists are a pretty common middle class phenomenon. I would suggest that they would likely have a long standing relationship with a holder family. The holder family wouldnt have to be big, i expect most any holder family would employ religious specialists.

[Vic Van Meter]

I'll run it that way from henceforth then.  Thanks Gaven!