You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

DanielLC comments on Open Thread, October 13 - 19, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Coscott 14 October 2013 01:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (247)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanielLC 14 October 2013 11:55:31PM 2 points [-]

I always wondered why people didn't just buy a square inch of land if that's all it took to be noble.

Comment author: mare-of-night 15 October 2013 12:46:36AM *  3 points [-]

Yeah, at least in France, land can't make you noble, even if it's a whole noble fief with a title attached. (Then you're just a rich commoner who owns a title but can't use it.) You could become noble by holding certain jobs for a long enough time (usually three generations), though. And people did buy those. (Not through bribes - the royal government sold certain official posts to raise revenues, so it was legal.)

There was also a sort of real estate boom after the revolutionary government passed some laws to make it easier for commoners to buy land, which was sort of like what you describe - all the farmers who could afford it would buy all the land they could at higher values than it was worth, because it made them feel like they were rich landowners.