Multiple emporers in a reign, revisited

Mon Mar 13 11:16:34 PST 2006

> Did this not come up at the time?  Anyway, it's good evidence on the
> multi-emperor side, but Paarfi isn't above tossing in a little more
> info than strictly necessary.  And I still don't see any 
> clear mechanism
> for the emperor dying and his House remaining in power. 

Part of the problem is that the explicit examples we have of the Orb
changing hands nearly all involve either abdication or the forceful removal
of the emperor in question.

Jamiss is actually an interesting case because Formiss(sp?), the Issola
emperor, was killed in an accident. Jamiss made a judgement that the orb
ought to have protected him and, since it didn't, he claimed it in the name
of himself and his House. 

Of course, Paarfi tells us that the story is as likely to be folklore as to
be truth, but it illustrates the idea that there are times when the removal
of an emperor can leave questions as to the disposal of the Orb. If the Orb
had just floated over to Jamiss and started circling his head on its own,
there would have been no question as to the Cycle having turned. Jamiss had
to do some thinking about things and then exert a claim on the Orb. Given
that we're talking First Cycle, we can't really know if House Issola also
tried to exert a claim or if some other Vallista might have considered
himself a better candidate for Vallista heir.

As far as that goes, it's pretty suspicious that an emperor would be killed
by falling masonry when the Vallista heir was working in the area but that's
a different kettle of fish. 

> Hence "translator's error" seems the best explanation for the cited
> snippet - probably Paarfi was saying or meant to say that the
> construction of the palace took up the entire reign.

While I wouldn't rule that out completely, it seems like an awfully
significant error. According to the text, the original palace was completed
shortly before the end of the reign of Jamiss. Likewise, it was started
during the reign of Faarith. It's difficult to reconcile those statements
with the statement "encompassed...the entirety of the reign of the House of
the Vallista". It can't have begun before the Vallista reign and ended prior
to the change in the Cycle and still have encompassed the entire reign of
the House. I can't see any reasonable way to read it as applying to the
construction of the Palace rather than applying to the reign of Jamiss.