Something to bear in mind is that in ancient times monarchs were often expected to travel around a great deal. This let them oversee their local officials and governors, and impress them with the awe and majesty of the King's Army so they weren't tempted to revolt. :-) This custom also had the practical benefit of spreading the financial burden of supporting the royal household around the countryside - though that would be more important in a mostly rural nation (like mediaeval Europe) than a more urbanised one.
Being a war leader was also generally considered a primary duty of monarchs, who were expected to lead their armies personally. The other main duty was 'holding court' - and note that the modern word 'court' means both a king's household and a place where justice was dispensed. in ancient times they were the same thing. Most royal justice can probably be thought of as closer to arbitration: if two of the King' powerful subjects had a dispute, they'd turn to him to resolve it; and in turn he'd have to consider both the law, precedent, and practical politics.
Excellent, that actually makes the story go a little smoother. I won't have to find excuses for him to be in the right places... he'll just be passing through on regular business.
It spread the burden of the mess of so many people at court as well... while the monarch and rest of the court were away, a royal residence would sometimes get a more in-depth cleaning, waste like food scraps (wherever it got shoved off to) would get a chance to decay down a bit, etc.
Being a war leader was also generally considered a primary duty of monarchs, who were expected to lead their armies personally. The other main duty was 'holding court' - and note that the modern word 'court' means both a king's household and a place where justice was dispensed. in ancient times they were the same thing. Most royal justice can probably be thought of as closer to arbitration: if two of the King' powerful subjects had a dispute, they'd turn to him to resolve it; and in turn he'd have to consider both the law, precedent, and practical politics.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment