{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/975",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 975,
    "subject": "Pardons, Autarchy, Test",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1998-07-13T16:53:13+00:00",
    "last": "1998-07-13T16:53:13+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0016-0069@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "adam louis stephanides",
        "address": "astephan at students.uiuc.edu"
      },
      "date": "1998-07-13T16:53:13+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Pardons, Autarchy, Test",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 mantis wrote:\nA thousand pardons!  I was confused."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "The confusion was partly my fault; I should have been more explicit."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "Your initial post of 9 Jul is entirely focused on how Valeria\ncouldn't be regent and how Severian has abdicated.  There is no\npositive model asserted, just a negation of the existing model."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "My initial post asserted no positive model because, aside from believing\nthat Severian abdicated, my reconstruction of events was the same as yours\nand raster's.  And in my second post I didn't realize how I'd been\nmisunderstood.  Hopefully everything is now clear.\n\nHaving said this, I now feel obliged to again rush in where angels fear to\ntread.  I have doubts--nothing more--both about whether it is really\nimpossible for Valeria to be a legitimate Autarch, and about whether\nunmanning is the invariable penalty for failing the Test.\n\nFirst Valeria's putative Autarchy.  You and raster both say Valeria can't\nbe Autarch, but for different reasons."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "The funny thing is: you are as adamantly opposed to the apparantly\nflippant use of the term \"regent\" as I am about the flippant use of\nthe term \"autarch\" (divorcing title from Multiversal Mandate; hence\n\"pseudo-autarch,\" since Valeria cannot be genuine autarch)!...\n\nThe autarchy was created/recognized by Yesod."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "What you are saying, in essence, is that the Commonwealth is not\nfully sovereign, since the choice of its legitimate ruler does not lie\nentirely in its own hands.  The alternative view, which I lean towards, is\nthat the Commonwealth is fully sovereign, and that whoever is recognized\nby the \"political nation\" (in practice, the army) as Autarch\nis fully the Autarch, whether the Hierogrammates like it or not.\n\nAs far as I can tell, you base your view upon the facts that the Autarchy\nwas created about the same time as Urth was condemned by the\nHierogrammates (the end of Typhon's reign), that the old Autarch is said\nto be the Hierodules' puppet,  and that both Severian and the\nold Autarch rely on the Hierodules for advice, and presumably for\nweaponry.  I don't deny any of these points.  I accept that the\nHierogrammates undoubtedly played a major role in the establishment of\nthe Autarchy, and that in the politics of the Commonwealth, the Hierodules\nare the Autarch's allies.  The Autarch may even be de facto dependent upon\nthe Hierodules' support; I take this to be the implication of the claim\nthat he is the Hierodules' puppet, although I can't locate that claim in\nthe text (although this would imply that they must be continuing to help\nValeria, regardless of whether they think she's legitimate).  But I don't\nsee this as being incompatible with the de jure independence of the\nCommonwealth, in the sense I spoke of earlier.\n\nThere are a few points on my side, although I none of them are conclusive.\nThere is the term Autarch itself, which if taken literally implies that\nthere are no external restraints on the Autarch's rule, either on or off\nUrth.  There is the fact that neither the old Autarch or Malrubius are\nshown as mentioning any \"pact\" such as you describe in _Citadel_, although\nI grant that they were both pressed for time.  Finally, Famulimus tells\nSeverian \"'We would not rob your race of your own rule'\" (III, ch. 34).\nIf Famulimus is not lying, this implies to me that the Commonwealth is\nindeed fully sovereign, although again this isn't definitive.\n\nraster argued that, as long as Severian was still alive or if he'd been\nlost at sea, nobody could be a legitimate Autarch.  It's not clear to me\nwhether this is because a legitimate Autarch must eat his predecessor's\nbrains, or simply that a legitimate Autarch must be chosen by his\npredecessor.  If the former, it would seem that the Autarchy runs a\ngrave risk of being permanently lost, either through the Autarch being\ncaptured by the enemy, or killed in battle or by assassination with\nthe designated successor unable to arrive in time.  (We don't know this\nhasn't happened; Severian is unsure whether his predecessors' memories\nstretch back to Ymar (Urth, ch. 41).\n\nThe latter is less of a problem, but it's still hard to see a political\nsystem surviving a thousand years with no provision to cover the\ncontingency of a sovereign becoming insane, senile, or simply neglecting\nto name a successor until it's too late. My thinking here is also\ninfluenced by the analogy with the Byzantine Empire, which Wolfe has\nexplicitly stated the Commonwealth was based on. Byzantine history\nprovides numerous instances when the throne was not passed in an orderly\nfashion from one Emperor to his designated successor; in fact, it's\nnotorious for it.  Of course, Byzantine Emperors did not eat their\npredecessors' brains, either, so the analogy is inexact.  Again\nI'm not claiming it's definitive, just suggestive.\n\n\nNow to the Test:"
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "The prize of success is the New Sun.  The penalty for failure is a\nloss of ability to procreate"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "This is what Severian was told, but is it true?  Appian was unmanned, but\nSeverian later learns that this was done specifically so that Severian\nwould succeed to the throne.  This would not seem to apply to Ymar, so was\nhe unmanned?  I don't recall it ever being stated that he was, and, as\nmentioned above, Severian himself doesn't seem to remember.  For that\nmatter, had Severian failed the Test, would the Hierogrammates have gone\nthrough with the punishment?  It would seem pointless, especially if\nSeverian is correct that he is Urth's last chance.\n\nA couple other questions about the Test while we're on the subject.  We\nknow Appian's Test was a put-up job.  Was the same true of Ymar's?  My\nguess would be yes.  Also, was the refusal of all the Autarchs between\nYmar and Appian to take the Test in part due to advice from the\nHierodules?  It seems suspicious that the test is taken by the minimum\nnumber of Autarchs \"necessary\": Ymar, the first Autarch, to set the\nprecedent and to establish in the minds of the populace that an Autarch\nwill eventually bring the New Sun; and Appian, so that Severian will\nremember Appian's Test (though why it's important for Severian to\nbelieve his Test will be what Appian's seemed to be is something else I'm\nnot clear on)."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "(If you can find additional pointers towards\n\"abdication of autarchs taking the Test\""
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "So far all I have are Severian's statements that he \"was\" Autarch, and his\nreferences to reclaiming the Throne.  I agree that the latter group of\nreferences are not definitive."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "and/or \"success at the Test\nmeans you lose the throne which you've already abdicated anyway,\" I'd\nbe most interested in seeing them.)"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "This was an idea that came to me as I was writing my post, and I now think\nit's wrong.  I had temporarily forgotten Severian's thoughts at the start\nof ch. 34, where he thinks the New Sun will come but not in his lifetime,\nand talks about reclaiming the throne.  In the light of this, it seems\nclear that when Severian had said he would not return as Autarch if he\nsucceeded, he had been thinking that if he succeeded, then Ushas would\narrive as soon as he returned to Urth and there would be no more need for \nAutarchs. And when he spoke of being \"permitted to reclaim the Phoenix\nThrone\" he must have meant permitted by fate, or something of the sort.\n\n--Adam"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}