About title inheritance of vassals/kings and about kingdom set up

[Gottskalk]

After having stumbled upon this particular article on wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erbreichsplan

Pretty interesting article showing the struggle of the emperor to make his title "king of the romans" hereditary (which was basicly king of germany at that time I think)

Anyway it got me wondering as it implies at one point that the king could at any time stop a son of a duke from inheriting the title.

I'm no specialist in medieval history so i don't know how widely this was practiced but at least i never saw the possibility in the old ck so i guess its little bit too much of a nitpicking to have it in here if it wasn't widespread.

The other thing I found interesting about this article is the methods Henry tried to secure the hereditary succession. All kinds of promises of succession. I was wondering if that was being represented in game?

One could imagine a screen where you make concessions with your vassals much like you would in a peace screen in eu3 but instead you try to get them to accept new taxes or even to accept your title being hereditary!

I checked the faq at least where a dev state they already have a good idea how they want to do it so I know there is little chance of something I'm saying here is going to be implemented but if a dev stumbles upon this thread or somebody with the right information it would be greatly appreciated if you could explain how things would work.

Oh one last thing, will the kingdoms setup be similiar to the deus vult improvement pack ? I didnt play the original game much but I seem to recall there being some differences. I cant remember if the Kingdom of lotharangia even existed and there was a republic of switzerland or something i seem to recall.
I really liked the setup in the deus vult improvement pack and It looked pretty accurate and historical , how the provinces were split between kingdom titles but of course as I stated before I'm a history novice.

Sorry if any of this has been addressed before

 

[Nick B II]

In CK1 a King had no influence over who inherited his vassal's titles.

He could ask the new heir to give up all his titles diplomatically, but the AI didn't do that because they disliked the new Duke, they did it because they needed another COunty for some reason. And human didn't do it often because it royally pissed off all the other vassals.

Changing inheritance law in CK1 was very simple. You click a biutton, the law changes, the disinherited get claims on your titles, and all your vassals get moderately annoyed. A Parlaiment of some sort to change laws would be incredibly cool, but I'm not sure it will be present in CK2. I rather doubt it, as the last DD was about laws and the devs didn't mention any Parlaiments. Inheritance law changes will probably be made more complicated because we know there can be pretenders and real Civil Wars, tho.

As for RL, remember all German and Franch Counts were orioginally governors appointed by Charlemagne. They managed to force his succesors to make the titles de facto hereditary. It would not surprise me to find out that some Kings, and/or the legal theorists employed by those Kings, thought this change was illegal and that they should go back to the old way of doing things. Or that the King technically kept some power to appoint new vasals when the old ones died, but simply never used it.

Nick

 

[RedRooster81]

At least in England, it was possible to "dispossess" a noble (in game terms, take away his claim to a title), that is take him or her out of the lineup of successors to a title, in order that the liege's favorite would inherit. I'm not sure how to do this in CK2 without naming someone a bastard, however. The same term was used for taking back hereditary titles from nobles and was one of the rights that King John of England had to agree to honor in the Magna Carta, and the same kind of thing caused problems in the HRE, or anywhere where lieges messed around with their barons' rights, especially the rights over their own succession and their household (broadly defined).

Dukedoms had traditionally been non-heritable, as Nick B II rightly pointed out, under the Romans and later the Carolingians. As they became considered family property, western Christian leaders turned to bishops as administrators (some more widely than others), for the same reason that the Chinese and Ottomans (to a lesser degree) turned to eunuchs and the Fatimids and others to slaves: you wanted someone who depended on you for legitimacy and power and who had no vested family interest in the realm. This, to be frank, was a major reason why clerical celibacy was adopted in the Catholic Church: priests, bishops, cardinals, and even Popes continued to have children but they were all bastards and could not inherit Church properties (in Spanish, these were known as "sacrilegios"--because their very existence was an abomination of the sacred), though Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia) in the XV century did his best to change this reality.