[Campaign Inspiration] What surprising things are owned by royalty

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Anders

What does LIC mean?

Limited Imperial Corporation. That is just a corporation filed with the Imperium instead of with a member world. There are other usages, but that is a common notation.

[jason taylor]

You know we might expand the OP's idea into peculiar privileges of royalty and not just possessions. I don't mean the privilege of saying, "Off with his head." That is to far afield. I mean a privilege that is just colorful or interesting and probably harmless enough to be amusing.

[jason taylor]

Numenorean royalty owned the Palantiri (which had effective Loyalty Spell). That is why Denethor could actually look and not be overpowered right away: he had a right to look as the deputy of the King.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Of course, for those that really like detail, there are layers of what she owns in what right: there are somethings, like the Tower of London, that belong to the crown and are the property of whoever is monarch, some that are her own personal property and some that belong to her in right of other titles (Head of the House of Windsor, Duke of Normandy … not to mention things like Queen of Canada/Australia/Mann … that sort of thing...).

There are also interesting layers of detail in what rights of ownership she has in those things. There are some listed that she cannot use, consume, consume or sell the product of, lend to a friend to use or consume, let to a tenant and have the rent from, give away, sell, or bequeath.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Numenorean royalty owned the Palantiri (which had effective Loyalty Spell). That is why Denethor could actually look and not be overpowered right away: he had a right to look as the deputy of the King.

That also touches on concept of 'ownership by capture' or 'spoils of war'.

Isildur claimed the One Ring under the concepts of spoils of war and personal wergild, in honor of his father's death. The first was sound de facto, the winner of a war can certainly take the loser's stuff on the principle of 'because I said so', and back it up by virtue of being the winner. Apparently the wergild claim was seen as legally valid under the laws of Elves and Men as well, because Elrond did not dispute Isildur's right do so, only the wisdom of it.

Of course, in actual fact the Ring still belonged to Sauron, as Gandalf observed...

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Agemegos

There are also interesting layers of detail in what rights of ownership she has in those things. There are some listed that she cannot use, consume, consume the product of, lend to a friend to use or consume, let to a tenant and have the rent from, give away, sell, or bequeath.

Which touches on feudal rights. Theoretically a monarch still 'owns' a fief even after granting it to a vassal, but he or she disclaims most rights to it, and it's usually seen as either illegal or uncustomary for the monarch to revoke such a grant without a 'just cause', such as failure of feudal duties by the vassal or lack of a valid heir. But just as the monarch can not reclaim his 'property' casually, the vassal in possession can't sell it, either, because it belongs to the monarch and not him.

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Which touches on feudal rights. Theoretically a monarch still 'owns' a fief even after granting it to a vassal, but he or she disclaims most rights to it, and it's usually seen as either illegal or uncustomary for the monarch to revoke such a grant without a 'just cause', such as failure of feudal duties by the vassal or lack of a valid heir. But just as the monarch can not reclaim his 'property' casually, the vassal in possession can't sell it, either, because it belongs to the monarch and not him.

There is also the concept of spoil - this is the concept of managing a property that you have a right to manage in a way that damages its inherent value. A traditional example would be clear-cutting a woodland on a property which you have tenancy and selling off the wood. In this case you may be liable to be sued for spoilage for the actual owner as, whilst you are entitled - indeed probably required - to manage the woodland and to profit from felled timber, felling the entire wood destroys future income for your short term benefit. This would impinge on what even a monarch can do with lands that are, for example, crown rather than personal land, as they have a duty to preserve the value of the estate for the next monarch. Of course, this is often open to interpretation and can lead to some involved chancery cases. It can also lead to some remarkably perverse outcomes in some circumstances - IIRC, Robert E. Lee, having strong feelings about such things, freed all of the slaves on his lands … with the exception of a few dozen that belonged to his wife's trust fund and, due to spoilage laws, could not be freed. Obviously spoilage laws were not the main problem there, but it does show how changing times can result in odd outcomes from old laws.

[sgtcallistan]

snip I rather wondered if it might not be better policy, if a regiment was straining budget to simply retire it, and make it's depot into a museum (and possibly a veteran's club), saving it of course for some future unhoped date when it needs to be fattened again. snip

My father's unit, the Rifle Brigade (to my knowledge not numbered among the Regiments) had it's HQ and training cadre at Winchester: this is now a museum for them and other Rifle and Fencible units like the Prince Consort's Own, the Artist's Rifles, etc.

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by sgtcallistan

snip I rather wondered if it might not be better policy, if a regiment was straining budget to simply retire it, and make it's depot into a museum (and possibly a veteran's club), saving it of course for some future unhoped date when it needs to be fattened again. snip

My father's unit, the Rifle Brigade (to my knowledge not numbered among the Regiments) had it's HQ and training cadre at Winchester: this is now a museum for them and other Rifle and Fencible units like the Prince Consort's Own, the Artist's Rifles, etc.

Your old man was in the Black Mafia* eh? Good for him. If he's still with us, see what he makes of the Show of Hands Song //Celer et Audax// - basically a hymn to the various incarnations of the men in dark green. The Rifle Brigade, of course, was descended from the 95th (Rifles) Foot during the amalgamations after the Napoleonic wars and then became part of the Royal Green Jackets (who also inherited the "Black Mafia" nickname) who were last seen merging into The Rifles. I rather thought that the Artists Rifles had ended up amalgamated into a very different mob whose museum can be found down by the Welsh border...

*Apparently due to the tendency of light infantry officers to ascend to remarkably senior positions and remain tightly networked.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

That also touches on concept of 'ownership by capture' or 'spoils of war'.

Isildur claimed the One Ring under the concepts of spoils of war and personal wergild, in honor of his father's death. The first was sound de facto, the winner of a war can certainly take the loser's stuff on the principle of 'because I said so', and back it up by virtue of being the winner. Apparently the wergild claim was seen as legally valid under the laws of Elves and Men as well, because Elrond did not dispute Isildur's right do so, only the wisdom of it.

Of course, in actual fact the Ring still belonged to Sauron, as Gandalf observed...

Apparently magic items don't count for that. Indeed only a few times does the victor deserve the spoils. One was the minor episode where the Hobbits were pillaging Orthanc as merrily as any soldiers in a conquering army.