home

Author Topic: Mercantile Aristocracy  (Read 1951 times)

Offline Alexis

  • Members
  • Posts: 438
Mercantile Aristocracy
« on: September 29, 2014, 05:25:12 PM »
I would appreciate if someone could please straighten out my grasp on the relationship between nobility and merchants in the higher middle ages / Renaissance period.

I am writing the fluff for my new Empire force. To cut a long story short, I want my story to be based around a Nordland merchant who has done well out of the timber industry and has, consequently, managed to elevate himself to nobility through marriage to the daughter of a minor noble haunted by debts.

Firstly - is this viable? I presume so, but I am just checking.

Secondly - is he then still likely to continue as a merchant noble? My understanding is that nobles are not too fond of miserly merchants,  is the term interchangeable? Page 281 of the 1986 Warhammer Roleplay book has a bit on 'Mercantile Aristocracy' ruling Marienburg, is that basically the same (only with a lot more power)?

Thirdly - Would said merchant noble now have his very own coat of arms / obligations to the Elector Count? If so, I am thinking of a the Nordlandic cross on one half of a shield and a tree on the other, marking his links to timber.

Thanks for any clarity!
"Dressing a bear in fine silks does not make it civilised, though in the city of Kislev it could pass at court."

Offline S.O.F

  • Members
  • Posts: 3117
Re: Mercantile Aristocracy
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2014, 02:44:02 AM »
First you've put this in a campaign board section thus the traffic here will be quite poor, PM one (or many) of the fine moderators here and have it moved to the Electors forum.

As to your questions:

1. Yes very much so

2. Depends on how you set it up, certainly he would be looked down as an upstart regardless but it all depends on perhaps the financials of the Noble house he is marrying into, for example is it because the Lord made bad investments, perhaps gambling/was swindled while the estate itself is still healthy but debt burdened or has the hardship come from that said estate has too few tenants and/or serfs to turn a profit. If the estate is poor continuing the more profitable timber trade is the obvious answer. Noblemen can be merchants it is just generally looked down on as well it requires more work than being rich already, earning it through the sword, or at the very least incomes that come off ones estate with out much effort on the Nobleman's part.

3. Coat of Arms or else how would he look the part. As for obligations I think the Empire is at the transitional point to how this is done for their liege. Nordland is a bit more Feudal than some other provinces but payment may be enough to forgo having to show up in person for some sort of military action.
Soldier of Fortune
Crazy DOW player
Rabid Mets Fan

Offline Fidelis von Sigmaringen

  • Members
  • Posts: 9682
  • Attorney-at-RAW
Re: Mercantile Aristocracy
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2014, 09:00:04 AM »
Given that the Empire is based on the Holy Roman Empire, we may take the lead from history:

1. As SOF says, very much so. Merchants & bankers like the Fugger and Turn & Taxis even rose to become high nobility. Of course, the old Nobility continued to regard them as upstarts for a long time. The quick rise of Jakob Fugger caused a bit of a stir. In an extraordinary and murky deal, he had bought in 1507 the Reichsgrafschaft Kirchberg, while still being a commoner, and the local nobility refused to recognise him. The problem only got sorted more or less in 1514, when he was elevated to Reichsgraf.

2. These merchants and their successors continued their mercantile practices after their elevation. Indeed, this proved to be the basis for their continued rise.

3. Already in the Middle Ages, a coat of arms was not limited to nobility. Upon ennoblement, a commoner could keep his coat of arms (if he already had one). Usually, the coat of arms was altered somewhat, for instance, to incorporate the coat of arms attached to a fiefdom he might have gotten.

4. Within the HRE, ennoblement was in principle the prerogative of the emperor. The King of Bohemia, being a king, had also that right within his territory. The first example of a commoner to be ennobled was in 1360, when a Wicker Frosch received his patent of nobility from Emperor Karl IV.
 
There were, however, some others that had gained the privilege (for certain titles):
- The Archduke of Austria
- The Duke of Lorraine
- The Elector of Bavaria
- The Elector of the Palatinate
- The Archbishops of Salzburg
- The bishops of Metz and Toul

So, it would not be surprising if at least some Elector Counts would have the same privilege (but limited to certain titles).
« Last Edit: September 30, 2014, 10:18:02 AM by Fidelis von Sigmaringen »
It is not enough to have no ideas of your own; you must also be incapable of expressing them.
Sex, lies and manuscripts: The History of the Empire as Depicted in the Art of the Time (10/07/16)

Offline Uryens de Crux

  • Members
  • Posts: 3751
Re: Mercantile Aristocracy
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2014, 12:33:48 PM »
The rise of merchants is also tied to the shift from a feudal economy to a market economy - kingdoms, empires, armies and castles cost a lot of money and a feudal society can't generate that much surplus so the merchants become central to the nobles needs

A bit later than our period in England (though more because all the oldest noble families had been decimated by the cousins war) BUT many titled lords in England now started as spice merchants
We go to gain a little patch of ground that hath in it no profit but the name.
The Free Company of Solland

The Barony of Wusterburg

Offline Alexis

  • Members
  • Posts: 438
Re: Mercantile Aristocracy
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2014, 07:00:29 PM »
Thanks for the very detailed responses, that makes it a lot clearer and I am glad that my story can be fleshed out with this help.  :::cheers:::


The rise of merchants is also tied to the shift from a feudal economy to a market economy - kingdoms, empires, armies and castles cost a lot of money and a feudal society can't generate that much surplus so the merchants become central to the nobles needs

With this in mind, and while it is on topic, how then does a noble (who is not a merchant) retain his wealth in this period? I presume the move away from a feudal to a market driven economy would require a change of tact?
"Dressing a bear in fine silks does not make it civilised, though in the city of Kislev it could pass at court."

Offline Fidelis von Sigmaringen

  • Members
  • Posts: 9682
  • Attorney-at-RAW
Re: Mercantile Aristocracy
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2014, 07:19:02 PM »
Even in the proto-capitalist society, the main source of a secure income remained land ownership. Merchant ventures and banking could yield huge profits, but could also go horribly wrong and lead to swift bankruptcy. For instance, the biggest borrowers were the monarchs (like in the case of the Fuggers), and if they defaulted on their loans, there was little the lenders could do.  It is true that nobles who did not seek to capitalise on new opportunities would lose out eventually, but that was a very long and slow process. It was more a question of keeping their spending in line with their income - something that was as problematic for the nobility then, as it is for the welfare state now.
It is not enough to have no ideas of your own; you must also be incapable of expressing them.
Sex, lies and manuscripts: The History of the Empire as Depicted in the Art of the Time (10/07/16)