[Glorantha] Re: Godi - how do we define them in HQ

Jane:
> I'd be very wary of assuming a term used by Issaries
> carries the same meaning as the same term used in the
> original context, whether that be Norse or anything
> else.
> ...
> Anyway, the Orlanthi aren't Norse...

Yes Glorantha can be contrary, but if you use a word to introduce colour then it is wise not to misuse it. And without any direct contradiction I am prepared go out on the limb that the intended meaning was at least inspired by Norse practice. Besides we have few references for actual Godi in Norse society so we can't over extrapolate with this one. (Unless someone can point me to some cool detail.)

Me:

>> I also get a distinctimpression that very 
>>early tribes around the dawning had far less formal,
>>almost animistic in 
>>flavour styles of worship, and Godi are possibly a
>>remnent of this 
>>personal relationship style of theism.

Jane:
> Less formal and more personal than what? The Orlanthi
> religion as I understand it is anything but formal,
> and based very much on a personal relationship with
> one's deities.

I believe that the priesthood role has been introduced and then politically expanded during earlier times. Priesthoods by their very nature tend to interceded between people and gods, even when its not required. I am thinking subtle influences and political spin here, the kind of thing that drives good story.

My feelings are based on the flavour of write-ups like Odayla & Kolat, some of Greg's stories of earlier eras (like the early missionaries that allowed people to see the dawn) and discussions about such things at conventions. These write-ups hint at some of the ways people saw religion before it became standardised (all be it, not very standard).

There was a more localised way of seeing the gods in these times. e.g. The bear up in the cave is your storm god, I say Orlanth is greater or that they are the same, lets fight it out.

And because of the immediacy of the gods it has a very animist-like flavour (i'm not saying it was animist, or that it was somehow more primitive, just more immanent). And hey, the God-learners hadn't messed stuff up back then.

Jamie Received on Sat 10 Dec 2005 - 16:26:48 EET