Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Cule
I've contemplated a similar clan-based system but with each clan electing its head rather than having hereditary leaders. (Not to say that the more conservative clans wouldn't always favour particular bloodlines: "My dear, it just wouldn't be the same without a De Crucis in charge!". The Tribune in charge of their relations with the state just rolls his eyes every time and says: "Does anyone else wish to put their name forward?" whenever there's a turnover in the chieftainship and he has to supervise the election.)
You do get a permanent state of tension between the elected-by-the-people House and the elected-by-the-clanmembers House. The Clans are not equals except in voting power in the Chamber. Some are each others clients or otherwise obliged: some have much more financial clout than others. This isn't what we in the UK are used to: the submission of the Lords is over a century old. But the US seems to manage more tension, sometimes creatively.
|
In the version I have political adoptions are a common substitution for this. That is the previous chief is "officially" the father (or mother but consorts usually take the job of consigliere) but is really chosen by perception of their convenience to the Clan interest.