Sale of commisisons in the Themiclesian military
The sale of commissions in the Themiclesian military was a known practice since antiquity but only became common after the 15th century. It was regulated by the Regiment Act of 1850 and then abolished in the Consolidated Army in 1916, but the practice continued in other units until nationally outlawed in 1936.
History
Pre-1700s
In early Themiclesian history, few rulers maintained standing armies, and offices within them were most frequently filled by junior members of the aristocracy. The oldest standing unit in Themiclesia is the Capital Defence Force, established in 552; as Themiclesia did not distinguish between civil and military officers, it appears ordinary bureaucrats were appointed to superintend this army, which operated without a fixed officer corps in the modern sense. However, it was not unknown for some individuals to offer bribes to obtain certain military appointments, the attractiveness whereof is almost uniformly opportunity of embezzlement. Particularly during war, a great amassing of resources can occur under these officers, and embezzlement was very common even under the treat of execution.
In the campaign of 791, 6 aboriginal leaders of Columbia accepted generalcies from the imperial court in exchange for bearing gifts to Themiclesia, though the titles were honorary, with no power or benefit attached. 22 accepted vice-generalcies. At the same time, Themiclesia recognized them as patriarchs or barons, depending on their status. The titles of nobility sanctioned these leaders' right and authority in Themiclesian understanding, while the generalcies were meant to subject them to Themiclesian rule by putting them into a symbolic office.
The roots of the official sale of commissions can be found in the Colonial Army, stationed in Columbia in one form or another since 1324. Though originally a penal unit, it quickly immersed recruits from colonial outposts and the dispossessed in the metropole. Promotion in this army was based on the Honours Ladder—a hierarchy of rewards for various achievements, from killing foes at the bottom to taking enemy cities closer to the top. Offices in the army were available only to those who possessed the required honours. During warfare, this system encouraged soldiers to take extra risks in battle and officers to be focused on primary objectives. Yet during peacetime, with no means of obtaining honours, the imperial court accepted donations in lieu of battlefield accomplishments. In the mid-1300s, eight taels of gold could purchase the bottom tier, with prices doubling every tier. The Colonial Army was frequently engaged in combat, which deterred the grossly incompetent.
While the practice of the Colonial Army spread to the navy and other units, specifics varied from place to place. Appointments and promotions in the navy were based on a similar ladder tailored to the demands of naval warfare. However, purchasing honours tiers in the navy was less common than in the Colonial Army, possibly because the rewards in the navy's ladder were less attractive. In all cases, honours tiers did not automatically give the buyer an immediate appointment; units promoted those who had proven accomplishments before resorting to the list of donors. Aristocrats, the majority of whom being bureaucratic families, were not subject to this system, because firstly their titles of nobility were equivalent to the honours ladders and as they had access to the royal court, where a military appointment was easy to obtain. Aristocratic appointments may be in the field or in name; if in name, a mirror officer was appointed from existing officers in the field to discharge said office.
After the civil war of 1510 – 30 devastated the royal treasury, the new monarchy raised funds by selling military offices, while civil offices were usually not sold. The imperial court's conclusion was that military officers ultimately obeyed their superiors in the field, so personal judgment in them was less relevant than civil magistracies. This practice continued for decades even after the royal treasury was resurrected by redoubling on extractions from Columbia, both by royal officers and by selling licenses. In the late 1500s, the rights to engage in military expeditions were often sold or auctioned, if they were potentially rewarding, which was a euphemism for pillage or mineral rights. At the same time, officer responsible for collecting resources or building ships were also considered lucrative, and appointment was often bought at a tremendous donation to the crown or leading ministers.
1700s
1800s
The Lord of Gar-lang, appointed prime minister in 1798, enacted dramatic cuts to the military that had swelled to over 300,000 men by the end of Second Maverican War, discharging half of them by 1801 and then half of the remaining by 1803. Disarmament terminated tens of thousands of officers' careers. After years of conservative expenditure, the government sought to create a mechanism to inflate the military quickly when necessary, while maintaining a minimal force at other times. It is generally agreed the Army Academy was established for this purpose in 1813, to disseminate military knowledge within a peaceful outlook and to preserve the experiences of officers from the Second Maverican War. A 1815 law affirmed that recognized members of the gentry may purchase "fake ranks" (假品) in the civil service, though only to be converted into military office; real ranks were only obtained by one's peers's recommendations.
In the 1810s, ideals of the Enlightenment gained traction in Themiclesia. Influential figures pressed for the liberalization of government, opening to the "citizenry" affairs of public interest and offices formerly restricted to the aristocracy. It should be noted that the citizenry in the diction of Themiclesian authors at that time meant an group of social elites seeking social reform and political power, but not officially affiliated with the aristocracy or the administration. As a result, purchasing military offices once again became commonplace. Even if not at war, holding a military commission was considered public service, which prominent authors argued that citizens of powerful states should actively perform. The philosopher Lord of Krjet wrote that "only a people that governs itself can avoid government by a monarch." This attitude that exalts public service existed throughout the 1800s, sometimes very vocally.
The so-called Themiclesian Enlightenment peaked in its influence during the 1820s and resulted in the lifting of a number of practices deemend contrary to "advancement", such as penal slavery. At the same time, politicians generally concurred that sale of commissions promoted the integrity and accountability of officers. Some argued that high prices ensured that officers were from an appropriate social background less likely to be corrupted by minor favours, though subsequent research suggests that it was also meant to restrict social mobility and maintain the reputation of the wealthy by reserving public service to them. These quality was compared to existing practices, such relying on families who served as officers for generations, common in units like the South Army. The Reformist administration of the Lord of Ran passed the Payment Act of 1826, legalizing purchasing of commissions as long as the money was paid into the public coffers. In imitation of Casaterran practices, the purchase price was refunded when the commission was returned to the government, effectively becoming an interest-free loan to the government.
During the passage of the Payment Act, legislators from both the Government and Opposition spoke supporting the sale of commissions to redress the perceived fault of the military during the 1700s. Though the unamended position now stands discredited, it persisted throughout the early to mid-1800s. A. Gro writes that the experiences of the 18th century created a dual image in literature: the gentry purchasing commissions were usually portrayed as altruistically performing public service, freely staking their money on good behaviour, while ordinary people in the military were described as unprincipled individuals hoping to line pockets with loot, fulfill base and violent desires, or rise beyond their stations.
Purchase of commissions was considered superior to appointments based on nobility. The Lord of Ran proposed that, as no man was born more intelligent than another, birth was an inadequate measure for ability, and as in most cases nobility is unearned and cannot be lost, it also could not guarantee an officer's integrity or performance. On the other hand, an officer stood to lose the price of his commission if grossly incomptent or complicit in serious crimes. Moreover, many political figures believed that as "money did not come with the blood", those who had money must have earned it or at least kept it and thus have competence. With the increasing power the middle class had come to exert over national politics, the sale of commission was seen as a reform towards openness, fairness, and accountability, as anyone who had money would have an opportunity to prove himself in public service and remain accountable for his performance.
The Regiment Act of 1850 required all infantry and cavalry regiments to commission graduates of the Army Academy, greatly restricting the liberty of many regimental leaders in selecting officers. A degree from that institution did not automatically convert into a commission: graduates still needed to buy commissions. The Act was passed to address the fear that an incompetent but moneyed person might become an officer and lead the nation into ruin, even though few officers were actually proven incompetent.
In 1852, medical and veterinary officers were expressly forbidden from buying or selling commissions; instead, they were to be commissioned upon the recommendation of their respective professional guilds. They were the first category of officers explicitly forbidden from purchasing commissions, but this appears to be primarily driven by the guilds' concern for business rather than concern for soldiers' medical welfare. Medical officers did not pay for commissions; rather, it was argued that reputation amongst their peers and the public guaranteed good conduct. In 1857, military surveyors were likewise forbidden from selling their commissions.
In 1871, the Lord of Sng'rja called for the raising of 85 infantry companies and 15 cavalry squadrons to bolster the country's defences. A portion of them was raised from universities' student corporations, and commissions in these companies were not sold; rather, lecturers and prefects were appointed as officers, and they were promoted upon their seniority in the university's hierarchy. The seniority approach was also used for companies raised from professional groups. In 1875, as part of Lord Tl'jang-mjen's reforms, certain kinds of petty officers must pass written and oral examinations prior to appointment. This was meant to prevent officers from giving petty offices to their friends and family as a source of income or cultivating a private following. Examinations were not conducted by the regiments, but by university departments specializing in the topic of interest. While all adults could take the exams, eventually the universities designed the exams to be rigorous or prejudiced enough that only their graduates could pass. These "qualified officers" were eligible to be commissioned without purchasing one.
Abolition and vestiges
Despite reforms to "skilled" officers in departments corresponding to professional groups, who generally took commissions by recommendation or examination, infantry and cavalry units remained a stronghold for commissions by purchase. This situation was criticized fiercely in Parliament in the early 1900s, especially by members of the progressive wing of both Liberals and Conservatives arguing that good character was not equivalent to good performance, and gentle upbringing guaranteed neither. As part of the compromise between Conservatives and Liberals in 1916, the new Consolidated Army, which included most land units, was to be free of commissions by purchase. Instead, officers needed to possess an appropriate degree, pass written examinations, and respond to verbal questions posed by a commissioning committee. While this reform was designed to improve the match between officers' qualifications and their actual postings, it was not meant to eliminate discrimination against social background. An officer's social standing and reputation were valid factors in the committee's decisions.
However, units excluded from the Consolidated Army continued to offer commissions for sale; amongst them, the Royal Guards and Marines were the largest. The Royal Guards were specifically excluded because of their unique position near the physical seat of government, for which the Government wished to retain direct control. Additionally, some Royal Guards commissions were reserved for nobility, and the retention of purchases would better conserve that profile. The Marines were excluded because the Government believed their future role was primarily naval and a position under the Navy Ministry would be appropriate; however, the Admiralty also persuaded the Government that naval operations would be inconvenienced if they had no control over the Marines.
These reforms piloted through Parliament by the Lord of Mik ended the vast majority of commission purchases in the Themiclesian military. Yet the units permitted to continue the practice experienced immediate chaos as the values of commissions that could still be sold soared. For the most part, the Royal Guards functioned under the auspices of the Cabinet Office, which ensured that a degree of competence existed in commission buyers and did not simply go to the highest bidder. The Marines were already popular because their headquarters were in Kien-k'ang and thus permitted a socially-active lifestyle, and so their commissions tripled in value between 1916 and 1917. While most regiments had a share of officers who took commissions for purely social reasons, even in the Consolidated Army, such officers quickly drove out others in the Marines by encouraging them to sell their commissions, in many cases well before expected retirement. Because there was no examination, marines often ridiculed their officers as "wealthy idiots", even though technically they were all graduates as law required.
The Cabinet Office placed a moratorium on the sale of Royal Guards commissions in 1934, as its four regiments had been sent to fight in the front, and the quick changing hands of commissions was considered prejudicial to battlefield effectiveness. On Sep. 1, 1936, Parliament banned the sale of commissions across all forces citing the immediate need for officers to support the imposition of conscription.