Icelandic Commonwealth

[Jeltz]

From the mid 10th century until mid 13th century Iceland was ruled by the Althing, the Icelandic assembly which members were the various Icelandic cheiftains. This period is often called the Icelandic Commonwealth. Some time in the mid 13th century Gissur Thorvaldsson was made Jarl of Iceland, but in the game Gissur's clan (Haukdælir) are Jarls of Iceland all the way from 1066. I think this setup in the game is weird.

Would it not make more sense if Iceland was made a republic until Gissur is made Jarl of Iceland? Is there any good reason paradox did not make them a republic?

 

[Jedrek]

Yup, one in particular. That makes Iceland one more playable country.

 

[SewrRatt]

Yup, one in particular. That makes Iceland one more playable country.

Let's make the Papacy feudal, then. One more playable country! *fist bump*

 

[Voy]

They could make it an feudal elective duchy although the chance of another family gaining the throne is rather small considering it's only two counties.

 

[Ols]

Make an event that triggers if you're not the Duke of Iceland that turns Iceland into a Republic shortly after you start playing. Sorted.

 

[Talq]

The game doesn't support government forms like Iceland's. It would be a massive stretch to describe a parliament of landowners as being a merchant republic like Venice and Genoa, which is what republics are meant to represent in game.

It would also in all probability make Iceland both wealthy and aggressive, which again is a tad unhistorical.

 

[SlackBladder]

The game simply doesn't model it. Elective monarchy would probably be the closest.

 

[Jeltz]

Make an event that triggers if you're not the Duke of Iceland that turns Iceland into a Republic shortly after you start playing. Sorted.

There is no problem for me fixing it, and additionally I am not even interested in playing Iceland. I was just curious for why they decided to make Iceland feudal. And the response about that neither a republic nor feudal is a correct fit combined with Merchant republics being too rich and aggressive makes perfect sense.

EDIT: Forgot to say the elective monarchy is in no way close to how Iceland worked. They did not elect any kings. They only elected the lawspeaker who acted chairman of the Thing.

 

[Klausewitz]

There is no problem for me fixing it, and additionally I am not even interested in playing Iceland. I was just curious for why they decided to make Iceland feudal. And the response about that neither a republic nor feudal is a correct fit combined with Merchant republics being too rich and aggressive makes perfect sense.

I would also say that Iceland, even under the commonwealth, was at least semi-feudal.
The free farmers pledged their support in the thing to one of the magnates in exchange for protection. The magnates of chieftains, in turn, mostly owed their title to inheritance though they could also be bought or sold (but then that even goes for feudal titles to a certain extent).
While that is not the full feudal code of land+protection for homage+allegiance, there are still strong traces and parallels since it is more an oligarchy of dynastic rulers (the cheiftains supported by their thingmenn) than a republic.
And 'oligarchy of dynastic rulers' is also how one could describe the Holy Roman Empire.

 

[Jeltz]

I would also say that Iceland, even under the commonwealth, was at least semi-feudal.
The free farmers pledged their support in the thing to one of the magnates in exchange for protection. The magnates of chieftains, in turn, mostly owed their title to inheritance though they could also be bought or sold (but then that even goes for feudal titles to a certain extent).
While that is not the full feudal code of land+protection for homage+allegiance, there are still strong traces and parallels since it is more an oligarchy of dynastic rulers (the cheiftains supported by their thingmenn) than a republic.
And 'oligarchy of dynastic rulers' is also how one could describe the Holy Roman Empire.

Well, it also sounds quite similar to how the republics worked. A council running the country, and the members of the council are mostly heredetary nobility but some with purchased titles. Sure landownership was feudal, but was landownership not also mostly feudal in the Novgorod Republic? Hmm, maybe it is a feudal republic.

 

[Hackworthy]

It would practically need to be a 4th type of government somewhere in between Elective Monarchy and Republic. Not really worth the effort on their part since the only similar state of note I can think of at this time is Novgorod the Great.

 

[Jeltz]

It would practically need to be a 4th type of government somewhere in between Elective Monarchy and Republic. Not really worth the effort on their part since the only similar state of note I can think of at this time is Novgorod the Great.

Maybe also Corsica under the Genoans, though here I could be totally wrong. I do not know much about Corsican history.

 

[Alexander Seil]

I'm fairly certain Iceland was a republic in CK1. I would say - if it wasn't ruled by urban patricians, it should not be a republic. Otherwise you could shoehorn half of Europe into "oligarchic republic" or some such non-sense.

 

[Bigheeed]

The current problem with republics is they make too much money.. so you would have a very rich fully fleshed out island early when i guess it should stay relatively weak all game.
Plus they would rebel a lot due to distance and even without mercs be probably hard to beat after a while.
The risk you have with elective for count/duke titles is that it might fall on a mayor and you will have the same scenario as above.

 

[Hackworthy]

Maybe also Corsica under the Genoans, though here I could be totally wrong. I do not know much about Corsican history.

The "Judges" which ruled Sardinia after the fall of Roman authority in that region in the late 10th/early 11th century were initially elected but for most of the independent period they were hereditary.

 

[Jeltz]

The "Judges" which ruled Sardinia after the fall of Roman authority in that region in the late 10th/early 11th century were initially elected but for most of the independent period they were hereditary.

Hmm, I think Corsica and Sardinia worked quite differently though. Corsica had some form of feudal anarchy with councils of nobles trying to rule the mess.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

The current problem with republics is they make too much money.. so you would have a very rich fully fleshed out island early when i guess it should stay relatively weak all game.
Plus they would rebel a lot due to distance and even without mercs be probably hard to beat after a while.
The risk you have with elective for count/duke titles is that it might fall on a mayor and you will have the same scenario as above.

Fortunately, Iceland's provinces only have one holding each from game start, and can only gain one more. By contrast, the merchant republics have max holdings to begin with.

 

[ziamatt]

Harold Godwinson was selected by the Witenagemont to succeed Edward the Confessor. Since the Witenagemont and the Athling were both basically assemblages of the leaders of their respective realms, by OP's logic England should start as a republic too.

 

[Jeltz]

Harold Godwinson was selected by the Witenagemont to succeed Edward the Confessor. Since the Witenagemont and the Athling were both basically assemblages of the leaders of their respective realms, by OP's logic England should start as a republic too.

Except the Althing did not select any leaders, the lawspeaker was basically just a chairman and had no feudal powers over the other cheiftains. This is what makes Iceland tricky. Many nations had assemblages, but in Iceland the assembly was the highest power. There is no such government type in CK2. And my thought was that a republic might represent the situation better than elevating a random Icelandic noble family to dukes.

 

[Thure]

Except the Althing did not select any leaders, the lawspeaker was basically just a chairman and had no feudal powers over the other cheiftains. This is what makes Iceland tricky. Many nations had assemblages, but in Iceland the assembly was the highest power. There is no such government type in CK2. And my thought was that a republic might represent the situation better than elevating a random Icelandic noble family to dukes.

Why not? The most lawspeakers are of one of the noble families there. In Iceland there are some nobles families, which fight for the power. The Gothis are de facto hereditary priests. There are six families. Haukdælir, Oddaverjar, Ásbirningar, Vatnsfirðingar, Svínfellingar and Sturlungar. This sound for me more like a monarchy, then a republic.

So I would vote for electiv succesion instead of a republic with a random ruler.