While creating various NPC noble and merchant-banker (mercánte) families for my Hold of the Sea Princes campaign, I recalled several intriguing tables about Social Class and Rank and Circumstances of Birth that Gary Gygax presented in Unearthed Arcana (1985), at 82–83.
Evaluating the Birth Table, on page 83, which provides for a PC’s birth order from "Only child" to "12th child," I felt that this provided for too many children both in the sense of more than I wanted to detail (or even name) and vis-à-vis Earth's medieval demography in "Europe."
Thus, after some quick online research (discussed below), I’ve constructed the following chart for generating the number of children whom an adult noblewoman NPC gives birth during her fertility.
N.B. Drawing on English history, but adapting it to Oerth, I assume that a Seolder noblewoman may marry as early as sixteen but that many wait several years, perhaps even into their early twenties, as they focus on education, other personal interests, and interacting with multiple suitors.
Number of Children Born to a Married Noblewoman Roll 2d10
2 None
3 One
4–8 Two
9–13 Three
14–16 Four
17 Five
18 Six
19 Seven
20 Seven + 1d4 more
Laumonier is an Affiliate Assistant Professor at Concordia University, and her brief online article discusses the methodologies and sources that scholars consider regarding the size of medieval families in “Western Europe” (particularly places in modern-day England, France, and Italy). I found her work insightful and useful for devising the size of the noble and mercánte families in my campaign, set in the middle of Common Year 583, some hundred and forty years after the Sea Prince's CY 444 declaration of revolt against the Kingdom of Keoland, and with naval technology similar to the Portuguese não of the “Age of Discovery” and related Islamic inventions like the quadrant.
Laumonier’s article suggests that one should consider the following factors: what are the fertility and infant mortality rates given the mother’s health, nutrition, situation (e.g., rural or urban), and wealth? To that, I also wonder about noblewomen’s access to and use of contraception, which I assume exists in various herbal and/or alchemical forms, in part because my “Alternate Oerth” is less sexist than historical Earth: with no Christian-influenced puritanism, I assume that the Flanaess in general and Seolder society in particular lack the repressed sexuality of “medieval Europe.” Other reasons for reduced sexism include Lydia being the Suel goddess of Knowledge, commoners' veneration of Beory, and possibly remnants of the Old Faith. Still, Oerth's noble families seek to control female sexuality because of its importance for preserving, or dissipating, familial landholdings and other forms of wealth.
Returning to Laumonier, she notes, “Estimates of infant and child mortality are often elusive in the Middle Ages. When they are available, they range from 30% to 50% of births, depending on the context and the socio-economic circumstances of families.”
Assuming that Oerth's nobility can generally access clerical healing magic, and prioritize it when a noblewoman is pregnant, Oerthly mortality rates for noble births, infants, and young children should be substantially less than those of Earth because if an accident, injury, or disease is not immediately fatal, clerical healing magic likely can be timely applied. (In contrast, the mortality rate for adolescents and adults may not be so substantially reduced if they are away from the family’s priest / cleric / chaplain.)
Finally, Lamonier also discusses scholars’ “use of notarial documents, such as wills.” She explains, “it is important to note that these sources only mentioned the surviving offspring of the testator at a fixed point in time, thus only providing a snapshot of these families’ cycle of development.” With those caveats in mind, she discusses scholars’ conclusions regarding “the southern French diocese of Maguelone in the late Middle Ages, where peasant families had on average two living children at the time they made their wills, while wealthy families counted an average of three” (emphasis added).
In addition to herbal and alchemical means of contraception, I would assume that there would be magical means as well, and that for the reasons you elaborate on various clergy of faiths associated with family, fertility, order, production, and planning would have charms and prayers that would aid or hinder conception.
In peasant families, children are a source of labor, so as many healthy children as possible would be generally desired, although spaced so as they could be reliably fed and to protect the health of the mother.
For noble families, numbers are a more difficult balance and largely have to do with managing inheritances and marriage alliances. I doubt more than three of whichever sex(es) are permitted to inherit land would be considered a good idea, unless the likelihood of losing them to violent conflict was great.
Cf. My answer to the Quora question "Why do the strong houses in Game of Thrones (e.g., Stark, Lannister, etc.) have so few family members, despite having been around for centuries?"
I tend to agree that the 'legal' aspects would play a significant role in how a 'noble' house managed itself, though 4th son of 2nd second is certainly a staple in fiction.
And I think that infant mortality would be skewed in favor of noble families due to their access to better care (especially magical means).
But seeing that old table does bring back memories... :)
In addition to herbal and alchemical means of contraception, I would assume that there would be magical means as well, and that for the reasons you elaborate on various clergy of faiths associated with family, fertility, order, production, and planning would have charms and prayers that would aid or hinder conception.
That's interesting and makes me think of higher-level versions of bless, ceremony, and/or pray spells.
Kirt wrote:
In peasant families, children are a source of labor, so as many healthy children as possible would be generally desired, although spaced so as they could be reliably fed and to protect the health of the mother.
I agree and tend to think of my maternal grandfather's ten children (by two wives). (He was born at the end of the 19th century in a northern Mexican state, which I assume featured superior public health and less infant mortality than late Middle Ages France.) With that in mind, Laumonier's report from “the southern French diocese of Maguelone in the late Middle Ages,” that “peasant families had on average two living children at the time they made their wills,” surprised me.
She doesn't report the standard deviation, but in the table I presented in the original post of this thread, I structured 25% chance for two children and 25% for three but only 5% for none or one on the theory that a marriage that produced no child might result in annulment and a second marriage, and that a marriage that produced one child indicated the couple's fertility and suggested that the marriage would produce at least one more child (born alive).
Kirt wrote:
For noble families, numbers are a more difficult balance and largely have to do with managing inheritances and marriage alliances. I doubt more than three of whichever sex(es) are permitted to inherit land would be considered a good idea, unless the likelihood of losing them to violent conflict was great.
Solid points. I've been toying with making primogeniture and the fee tail male (a succession of life estates that descends to the present possessor's eldest male descendant and cannot be alienated inter vivos or by will) an Oeridian (or perhaps Aerdian) custom (which eventually became the law of the Great Kingdom of Aerdy) in contrast to the Suel custom (which eventually became the law of the Kingdom of Keoland), which features primogeniture but does not limit the fee tail only to male descendants.
Kirt wrote:
Cf. My answer to the Quora question "Why do the strong houses in Game of Thrones (e.g., Stark, Lannister, etc.) have so few family members, despite having been around for centuries?"
I enjoyed what you wrote and will think more about it, particularly regarding whether the Seolder nobility is so disciplined about procreation.
Tangentially, one of the riddles that Samwise and Gary Holian gave us is whether Jeon II is a direct descendant of the original Sea Prince, Luschan Vilchar V, and if so, what happened to the original Sea Prince's heir after the Battle of Jetsom Island (CY 464). (IMC, the Council of Sea Princes recognized the Prince of Port Toli as the Hold's second leader—perhaps in part because Luschan's heir was a minor or that he died with his father, but also because the Sea Princes disfavored establishing a new dynasty.
(Relatedly, I wonder why the Council of Niole Dra recognized Tavish IV as king of Keoland after Tavish III's death during the "siege" of Westkeep in CY 453 (i.e., why the Sea Prince failed to succeed his cousin despite having led and apparently won the "loyal rebellion" against Tavish III).)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
