bending stereotypes

[jason taylor]

A Renaissance Patrician who is pious, incorruptable, and honorable, and a skillful merchant-prince but has no taste for Humanist painting, thinks Gothic style is perfectly OK by him, and wouldn't have the slightest idea how to mix a poison.

A Medieval Monk who eats a good diet, studies and exercises regularly, does not obsess with ritual abasement, thinks miracles a possible event but is skeptical about any given report, and has never persecuted a single heretic in his life.

A bedouin who kicks weary travelers out of his tent.

A galley captain who if you suggested using slaves would laugh at such an inefficient method.

[David Johnston2]

Persecuting heretics isn't really a monk thing even in stereotype. But a Papal inquisitor who scrupulously investigates reports of assault and murder by witchcraft and only lays charges if he establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the accused really was trying to curse (or poison!) someone

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Persecuting heretics isn't really a monk thing even in stereotype. But a Papal inquisitor who scrupulously investigates reports of assault and murder by witchcraft and only lays charges if he establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the accused really was trying to curse (or poison!) someone

That might actually be a good one. How about a Papal Inquisitor who solves mysteries?

In practice it was somewhere between that. All courts back then were faulty beyond belief, though they were not as absurd as might be thought and had some rational ideas that would be useful when investigating technique caught up with legal principle. In any case they were not fools. I remember in The Last Duel when trial-by-combat was proposed, the attitude was not,"That's a good idea" but "Got a better idea anyone?"

[jason taylor]

How about a Sultan who only has four wives and never considered axing any of them, is more interested in attracting trade then in conquest, and whose Grand Vizier is a trustworthy and skillful administrator?

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

...
And is a private wielder of internal force(like a bouncer)a kind of mercenary?

So you see mercenary can be given an objective definition, but there is no one size fit's all.

Mercenary must mean hired aggressor otherwise you must define police as mercenaries. That would strike me as absurd.
Unless you mean it as a adjective then of course it can be more generalized for attitude.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

...
A Medieval Monk who eats a good diet, studies and exercises regularly, does not obsess with ritual abasement, thinks miracles a possible event but is skeptical about any given report, and has never persecuted a single heretic in his life.
...

The Name Of The Rose starring Sean Connery based on a book had such an analytical but pious monk.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Persecuting heretics isn't really a monk thing even in stereotype. But a Papal inquisitor who scrupulously investigates reports of assault and murder by witchcraft and only lays charges if he establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the accused really was trying to curse (or poison!) someone

Beyond reasonable doubt would be horrifically anachronistic. To a reasonable degree in common language, sure, but not quite as far as you suggest. Unless you want that, of course.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

... I remember in The Last Duel when trial-by-combat was proposed, the attitude was not,"That's a good idea" but "Got a better idea anyone?"

People in power don't like anything that threatens that power. Trial by combat would be far too unpredictable when they can just kangaroo the court in their favor/desire.
Not to mention that if "your guy" lost then you would loudly claim cheating and around everyone goes again.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Is that not the stereotype? They obey the mighty dollar, not morality. Isn't that what mercenary means?

That's the definition of mercenary, but I was thinking of the fictional stereotype. In fiction, a mercenary is one of two things: a) the guy who will stab his nominal comrades in the back for pocket change, or b) the guy who claims to be "not in this for your revolution" and takes his reward and leaves only to come back and help save the day in the finale. The subversion of the fiction trope is that he instead fits the reality trope.

[ericthered]

Historically most mercenaries have a strongly preferred side but do care about pay and for various reasons don't serve in the main military forces. I think Kaff Tagon from Schlock Mercenary actually manages to both be the stereotype (the man is obsessed with getting paid twice for the same job) and bend it (very loyal to his men, and friends, has a few sides he won't double-cross, and a well developed but non-standard sense of honor).

The unpopular but loyal vizier.

The Usurper who actually runs the kingdom better than the king