Imperial Analysis

[VonEbs 1224]

Imperial Analysis

Ebs Telrunya, Elven Scholar

 

 

---

Introduction

 

The Holy Orenian Empire has come to dominate social, economic and political life among the Descendants. The Empire was born out of the wreckage of the old order so decisively repudiated by the Phoenix Rebellion. Godfrey I’s ascension as Holy Oren Emperor was not especially controversial to mali observers at its time, though the Silver State of Haelun’or was more sensitive to political headwinds in the Kingdom of Renatus due to their long standing alliance. Over and over, the Empire and its Emperors have redrawn national boundaries, reformed government and social institutions and waged war. It is necessary to admit that the Empire has seen a blossoming of scholarship, literature, philosophy and culture unrivaled amidst the other Descendant races. The elves, dwarves and orcs as well as their respective government have struggled to respond to the changing tides.

 

There have been numerous wars between the Empire and its peers as well as not shortage of armed struggles within the Empire, over the succession or otherwise. The Empire at its peak fields massive armies that the rest of the Descendants struggle to meet, even when uniting off of their forces. Yet, there has been very little serious attempt by those on the outside to understand the Empire. Those among the longer lived races tend to treat the antics of humanity with less seriousness than they deserve. This failure to take the Empire seriously has led to no end of trouble. The analysis contained herein is an initial attempt to observe the Empire on its own terms and understand it better. It was conducted as background on a larger work still in progress, yet it is hoped that the analysis will stand on its own merits.

 

Design

 

In order to render the following analysis as comprehensible as possible to laymen, the simplest design has been employed. Two datasets were created, one containing the Emperors of the Holy Orenian Empire and the other, slightly more abstract, containing all of the Imperial Successions. For each observation (either Emperor or Succession) data was collected for a number of variables, which will be expanded on below. Of note, when the term average is employed, it is taken to mean the median, as in, that half of all observations are less than the figure stated and half above. 

 

For the first dataset, Year α (First Year of Reign), Year ω (Final Year of Reign), Length of Reign (taken by subtracting Year α from Year ω), Year of Death, Age at Death, each Emperor’s Dynasty, the number of Legitimate Children, and each Emperor’s Ethnicity. For each Emperor’s Dynasty, the four possible entries were Horen, Carrion, Chivay, and Novellan. This may be a controversial move, but it was decided that those Emperors of the cadet branches of House Horen such as House Helene or Cascadia would be considered as being Horen Emperors. Novellan, though, is being treated as a separate dynasty, as though its Emperors and Empress trace their lineage to House Horen, they are also equally tied to House Carrion, creating something entirely new for the Empire. Ethnicity was a little harder to parse. The vast majority of Emperors have been Heartlanders, though some of those were the products of unions with Highlanders. For lack of a more obvious solution, ethnicity has been passed through the male line, which results in all of the Horen and Chivay emperors being considered Heartlanders with the Carrions being Highlanders. This leads to the current Emperor, John VIII, being coded as a Highlander from his father. Finally, in those cases where the year of death is not known for a given Emperor, that Emperor will be excluded from any analysis.

 

Turning to the second dataset on successions, all are binary variables, meaning that each variable has either a positive or a negative response. The variables are whether a succession is the result of a Death, the result of an Abdication, whether the crown passed within the same dynasty, whether it passed to either a son/grandson/daughter of the previous Emperor, whether the succession was caused by or was during a dissolution of the Empire and finally whether the succession was preceded by, concurrent with, or followed by a political crisis. The last of these is the trickiest to explain, as what qualifies as a political crisis is highly subjective. Roughly, what it meant by a political crisis for the purposes of this study is that a succession was brought about by political pressure by factors internal or external to the empire, that the succession kicked off a contested or even uncontested passing of the crown, or that the succession lead to the dissolution of the empire or the fall of the current dynasty. This is a broad definition and is certainly an area that could use further refinement in follow up research.

 

Findings

 

There have been 27 Emperors of the Holy Orenian Empire (including the 3 of the Empire of Man). Of those, 18 (two thirds) have been of House Horen or its cadet branches, 4 of House Carrion, 3 of House Novellan and 2 of House Chivay. Only 6 (two ninths) have been Highlanders with the balance of 21 being Heartlanders. The Emperors of the Holy Orenian Empire have had on average 3 legitimate children. John I was the most fertile, fathering 7 legitimate children. 7 Emperors have died without issue, though 3 of those were unwed at the times of their premature deaths. 26 of 27 have been men, with the one woman being the mother of the current Emperor, Anne I, who coruled with her husband, Joseph II.

The median length of time spent on the throne was 7 years. In total, Emperors have spent 307 years in office, the largest share of which was Peter III, who reigned 47 years (~15%). Of the 20 Emperors who age upon death is known, the average lifespan was 57 years. The oldest recorded Emperor was Aurelius I at an impressive 107 years, and the youngest was the boy Emperor John IV. The average number of years lived following their ascension was 17, with the longest lasting Emperor being John II. Three Emperors were driven from office the year of the ascension: Boris I, John IV and Robert II, the latter two of which were in the Year of the Four Emperors. 

 

Turning to Imperial Successions, there have been 32 instances of Imperial succession, though not all of those resulted in a new Emperor taking the throne. The “ideal” succession is that where the Emperor dies and his next closest male issue, either son or grandson, succeeds to the throne. That has occurred only 12 times, ~38% of the time. A further 5 times a succession has been within the same dynasty, for a total of just over half. The remaining half resulted in a change of dynasty, were the result of the formation or reformation of the Empire (6 times) or resulted in the dissolution of the dynasty (5 times). A succession has been caused by the death (14 times) or the abdication (11 times) of the current Emperor. Finally turning to the before described Political Crises, 20 of the 32 Imperial Successions were preceded by, occurred during, or were followed by a climate of political crisis within the Empire, nearly two thirds of the time. As could be gathered from the prior description, the year 1585, the Year of the Four Emperors, had 3 succession crises, the most. 1467 comes in second, with two successions and three Emperors. 

 

Conclusions

 

The most striking finding of the study is the paucity of “ideal” successions. Instead, the succession of the Holy Orenian Emperor is more often characterized by discord, political crisis. While there has been a recent run of mostly peaceful transfers of power, this has been the exception, not the rule. The succession of the Imperial Throne appears to be incredibly unstable, and there is a ~15% chance of a succession resulting in the dissolution of the Empire, and that increases to just under 20% when excluding those successions classified as ascensions to the Imperial throne due to the constitution or reconstitution of the Empire. However, excluding those same cases would produce a rate of 27% for the passage of the crown from father to son or grandson, better though still not spectacular. 

 

The average reign of the Emperors, seven years, seems to be incredibly short, though there is no data for other political systems to relate it to. This provides an interesting opportunity for follow up research, though records for all others exempting the Grand Kingdom of Urguan might prove impossibly fragmentary. Comparison to the Grand Kingdom of Urguan might be particularly instructive, as Oren and Urguan have alternated as the most powerful polities among the Descendants. Another route for future study is a deeper analysis of the political crises surrounding the factitious Imperial Successions, as there might be some way to form a qualitative schema that could bear revelations. Perhaps a keener or more informed researcher could find proscriptions for a successful Imperial reign or orderly succession, either by the avenues suggested above or a more detailed examination of each Emperor. There is hope that this analysis will produce enlightening discussion and further research on the Holy Orenian Empire, both by those without the Empire and those within it. If any reader would like a copy of the data utilized in this study or has some relevant commentary, please do not hesitate to contact the author. Attached to this report is an appendix containing some particularly revealing figures created for the edification of the reader.

---

 

Appendix I

 

 

 

 

                 

   Average Age at Death                   Average Length of Reign

 

 

 

[Minuvas 3193]

A letter is written to the Author;

 

"An excellent study on the seat of his Imperial Majesty. I would offer the author to consider data sets that include the Church of Canon, the level of integration between the two entities, and the nature of the Holy Father to the Empire. The two entities are wrapped in the same vine and we are missing some critical context when looking at how and why the Sovereign is in charge. 

 

We must further look, beyond 1750, at the strength and choice of the Arch Chancellor and the level of authority they ceded or used during their tenure - given the reforms of the era.

 

In addition, a study of his Excellency Arch Chancellor Simon Basrid and His Imperial Majesty Peter III is worthy of an epoch of itself. 

 

Otherwise, as an Imperial Scholar, I consider this work to be rather well done - and would gladly offer context and qualitative information a simple study of timelines may not yield. 

 

Servus,

Minuvas Melphestaus

Imperial High Elf & Scholar

[Taketheshot 3834]

A letter is also written to the author;

 

"My good author you should also know that the House of Novellen is a cadet branch of House Horen and as such should be included in the wider House Horen field upon the chart as the Johannians, pertinaxi and Helenians were. John IV was also not the youngest Emperor, the youngest was Emperor Alexander II who came to the throne at the age of 12 whilst John IV was 16."

 

Yours sincerely,

Joseph d'Azor 

[VonEbs 1224]

16 minutes ago, Minuvas said:

A letter is written to the Author;

 

"An excellent study on the seat of his Imperial Majesty. I would offer the author to consider data sets that include the Church of Canon, the level of integration between the two entities, and the nature of the Holy Father to the Empire. The two entities are wrapped in the same vine and we are missing some critical context when looking at how and why the Sovereign is in charge. 

 

We must further look, beyond 1750, at the strength and choice of the Arch Chancellor and the level of authority they ceded or used during their tenure - given the reforms of the era.

 

In addition, a study of his Excellency Arch Chancellor Simon Basrid and His Imperial Majesty Peter III is worthy of an epoch of itself. 

 

Otherwise, as an Imperial Scholar, I consider this work to be rather well done - and would gladly offer context and qualitative information a simple study of timelines may not yield. 

 

Servus,

Minuvas Melphestaus

Imperial High Elf & Scholar

 

A response is penned by the author:

 

Thank you for your kind words of support and your insightful suggestions for further study. I will confess that the interaction points between the Imperial Throne and the Church is where it is most difficult to see clearly what is occurring. As an outsider, I am limited in my access to Clerical sources, but I agree that the Church's role in succession and governance more broadly is a vital component that requires examination. 

 

In response to your comments on Arch Chancellor Basrid, I am pleased to report to you that you should be pleased by the contents of a forthcoming essay on closely related topics.

 

~Ebs Telrunya

18 minutes ago, Taketheshot said:

A letter is also written to the author;

 

"My good author you should also know that the House of Novellen is a cadet branch of House Horen and as such should be included in the wider House Horen field upon the chart as the Johannians, pertinaxi and Helenians were. John IV was also not the youngest Emperor, the youngest was Emperor Alexander II who came to the throne at the age of 12 whilst John IV was 16."

 

Yours sincerely,

Joseph d'Azor 

A response is penned by the author:

 

Thank you for the correction regarding the youngest Emperor, that will be corrected in any further editions. In regards to your first suggestion, I discussed the reasoning for Novellan being considered as a separate dynasty from Horen due to what, as an outsider, seemed to be an essentially different nature of the Novellan dynasty from that which proceeded it due to the coequal influence of House Carrion. I defend my choice on those grounds but grant that the alternate decision could have also been made by a reasonable scholar and is ultimately a matter of small importance to the work as a whole.

 

~Ebs Telrunya