Mark Stefan wrote:
The titles of King, Duke, and Count can more easily get away with not being 100% like history - they aren't potentially pejorative terms. Serf, no matter how the Mercurian Empire may try to define it as something that doesn't heavily imply servitude, still carries that connotation.
Mark Stefan wrote:
There are less demeaning, more accurate, and friendlier terms that could be used in place of the rank of "serf."
Fair points, absolutely.
So I'll turn the question around, because, hey, I'm not opposed to change and this type of popular and communal groundswell is exactly our goal in creating a lasting community. What terms could potentially replace that of "Serf"?
I feel as though we can't turn back to some variation on "Freehold Lord" for a couple of reasons: it is associated with a specific and different definition from our time in the Old World and it does not quite describe the connection between newcomers and their lieges. So we'll need a new term, preferably something at least semi-familiar (i.e not a created term) and semi-accurate (describing in some form the relationship between newcomers, the land they work on, and the liege of the land).
I do quite like
Yeoman in some respects - it bears at least some historical relevance and is both distinct from the nobility while connoting a bit more agency and influence. The only issue might be the slightly awkward gender suffix.
I agree with you on the freehold lord or any theme on "free" and a noun. We should try to find something else, so that this new term is not associated with the powers that freehold lords obviously held in the old world.
Yeoman is a good term, and indeed actually is an even more specific form of freeholder in some contexts. In others it is a servant of a the nobility, and yet in another it is a member of a military force. I do believe the primary medieval meaning is for someone who owned their own land, and could even vote where applicable in the feudal system of England.