A question of money

Julia Minor wrote:Some side comments in the books gave me the impression that bribery is illegal in Charis. Well, it's probably illegal most places, but if those laws are actually being enforced in Charis then the Ahrmakhs could only have bribed with money no one else knew about or had oversight over -- and no one knew about Silverlode until long after bribes would have done any good.

Meanwhile, Hektor (definitely) and Nahrmahn (most likely) had tighter control over their courts, and any anti-bribery laws on the books could easily have been interpreted as "... except when the Prince is doing it".

The outcome of this would be that Charis might have a larger total income, but much less money available for paying bribes (probably only the privy purse/Haarahld's personal income), while Emerald and Corisande with lower incomes could tap as much of it as needed to bribe vicars.

Bribery? What bribery? People make anonymous donations to specific vicars to support their good works. There's no bribery involved, just focused charity.

Why take bribes when you could take the lot?

Daryl wrote:Why take bribes when you could take the lot?

Because the absolute majority of mid-level Zion bureaucrats would get literally nothing from the destruction of Charis. All benefits would be fur upper echelons. Probably they even lose a bit, because of trade disruption & loss of Charisian goods.

Dilandu wrote:

Daryl wrote:Why take bribes when you could take the lot?

Because the absolute majority of mid-level Zion bureaucrats would get literally nothing from the destruction of Charis. All benefits would be fur upper echelons. Probably they even lose a bit, because of trade disruption & loss of Charisian goods.

Since when has "common sense", courage, wisdom, standing up against murderous thugs etc ever been common, Dilandu, hm?


As folk note, supporting Charis would have severe repercussions for the political and financial power of any in the Church because it was becoming more obvious Charis was on the bad side of Clyntahn and others.

Charis' own archbishop finally realized what a moron he had been taking bribes to put a lousy pretender he knew was a fake, up for being a Duke! That event is very early in book 1 and shows how corrupt and dumb the Church is, even to the point of, as we say here:
"Cutting your own nose off to spite your face"
And Eryak got butchered by the Inquisition in the end


So, with few if anyone with clout able to apply bribes for them, Charis had a big problem with stopping the inevitable purge.
Victims are set up for a reason and it's hard to stop such because of inertia, greed and stupidity.
For example, see the second Western Gulf War:
Huge protests and warnings were ignored, and whistleblowers had mysterious "gardening accidents"

Dilandu wrote:One question that puzzled me; how exactly before the Jihad, Nahrmahn and Hektor managed to out-bribe the Charis in Council of Vicars? It was explicitly stated, that Charis is MUCH richer than Emerald, and quite richer than Corisand. So how exactly Nahrmahn and Hektor could "shovel a lot more gold in a lot more pockets in Zion" (c) than Haarahld?

Two reasons, offhand:

1. King Hahrald of Charis would be unlikely to resort to bribes. Unlike most monarchs, he was honest and honorable, and dismayed by the corruption in the Vicarate. He simply wouldn't play that game.

(And a reason for the disfavor in which Charis was held by the Vicarate was that it had grown big, rich, and powerful enough that it didn't *need* to bribe Archbishops and Vicars to get what it wanted.)

2. Who would Charis bribe, and to get what? It was already clear the Church was against Charis, and Charis was effectively trying to delay the inevitable. I can't imagine anyone in the Vicarate with real influence over policy accepting Charis's marks. They would be damaging their own position. Once Clyntahn became Grand Inquisitor, anyone in Mother church who could see lighting and hear thunder would go out of their way to avoid any *appearance* of being sympathetic to Charis.

It doesn't matter how much money you have if it can't buy what you really need.
______
Dennis

I was more interested in how gold coins ( and silver/copper/etc ) of the same weight, could be worth different amounts. Which was mentioned in the books BEFORE the church started diluting the amount of gold in their marks.

Isilith wrote:I was more interested in how gold coins ( and silver/copper/etc ) of the same weight, could be worth different amounts. Which was mentioned in the books BEFORE the church started diluting the amount of gold in their marks.

I don't recall they church actually diluting gold. The did issue promissory notes and bonds NOT backed by bullion. Gold coins traded per the weight they held. Gresham's Law states that more valuable currencies will be hoarded, while the less valuable currency will be circulated. That suggests to me that gold was hoarded and the paper was traded. It was largely that traded paper that drove the prices down compared to Charisian paper. It must have been Charisian paper rather that Charisian gold because Charis simply didn't have the ability to ship massive amounts of gold to the mainland.

It was certainly considered to dilute the Church's coinage in one of the later books.
Iirc Rhobair talked about it quietly with Magwair and it was proposed by Rhobair's staff due to the collapsing finances due to the Nihad.

And I think in TFT it mentions having to buy up and remelt all the adulterated marks as one of Rhobair's headaches and money losses?
Not sure on that though.

Trading paper currency seems logical as it was noted midway through the Jihad that Church vs Charis marks were shifting in value with more value for Charisian showing where real confidence lay financially

Isilith wrote:I was more interested in how gold coins ( and silver/copper/etc ) of the same weight, could be worth different amounts. Which was mentioned in the books BEFORE the church started diluting the amount of gold in their marks.

How much is a given amount of a precious metal worth? The answer may vary depending upon where you are. History is full of multi-national agreements attempting to specify just how much a given quantity of gold or silver was worth, in the interests of trade. The exact value wasn't important. What was critical was that everyone agreed on what it was.
______
Dennis

I don't recall talk of actually remelting the gold coins to cure the adulterations. I do recall Rhobair praying they would never break with the Writ so far as to dilute the gold in their Marks.

SilverbladeTE wrote:It was certainly considered to dilute the Church's coinage in one of the later books.
Iirc Rhobair talked about it quietly with Magwair and it was proposed by Rhobair's staff due to the collapsing finances due to the Nihad.

And I think in TFT it mentions having to buy up and remelt all the adulterated marks as one of Rhobair's headaches and money losses?
Not sure on that though.

Trading paper currency seems logical as it was noted midway through the Jihad that Church vs Charis marks were shifting in value with more value for Charisian showing where real confidence lay financially