William I

We don't need aristocrats to be clerks

Augustus

That is not their natural position

Being a clerk is counter-definition of aristocracy

Henry VII, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I

Hey, Elizabeth was great

And apart from TV shows, Henry VIII was a popular ruler

Aristoracy isn't there to manage the state, though it can occupy *leading* positions in military business and politics

Aristocracy is there to be the best part of society and produce the best possible products of culture for society

But what if the King is the king as he has the biggest army and he has the biggest army as he's the King of the Peasants?

like many medieval English kings

and Roman emperors

Social stratification of society was still strong in Imperial Rome

The Roman Emperors were populares against the aristocracy

it can be easily deduced from criminal law

where noble men were still drastically more leniently punihed than lower class people

There is social stratification but the Emperor can take wealth away at will

he can put new people in those positions

though it is true that trend was moving towards more equalitarian model, where noble people were losing their status and dignity

and give them those names

As he's the head of hte post-Marian reform army

which governs all rural life

and is the rural economy

so he is basically the economic and social bastion of the 90% of the population that lives outside of the cities

who will do whatever he says due to patron client morality

and military chain of command

My ideal models for Monarchy and an Aristocratic societies are

Imperial Russia

Imperial Japan

Victorian Britain

what era of imperial japan?

Vedic India

from 19th century onwards

there are different eras wthin the 20th century

as imperial japan started as an oligarchy

and jus was an empire on paper

It was always technically an oligarchy

but for the 19th century it was an actual oligarchy

It drifted towards militarism which was still OK

the militarism killed the empire