Re: Hindu model for Malkionism

From: Martin Crim (MCrim@erols.com)
Date: Tue 06 Feb 1996 - 03:55:36 EET


In Glorantha Digest V2 #362, Erik the Whyning writes that he once rewrote the:

>"What my Father told me" for the Western Knight by changing all
>references of a RW European nature to Indian - talking about
>"Rajahs" instead of Lords, "Brahmins" instead of Wizards etc, but
>it failed due to my ignorance of Indian matters.

Let's look at it:

     Lords Rajahs
     Wizards Brahmins
     Knights Ksatriyas
     Peasants Vaisyas (merchants & husbandmen)

One problem, of course, is that Hinduism's 4-caste system drew its rulers
from the Ksatriya class and had a lower caste of Sudras (menial artisans,
laborers, and servants). And their caste system was a lot more complicated
than this, with innumerable jati (birth groups) as well as the 4-fold varna
(color) categorization. "Rajahs" isn't quite right, either: anybody know a
better term?

My sources note that in Vedic times there was some mobility between these
categories, and intermarriage was not unusual. Kind of the opposite of the
Malkioni, with complete rigidity early on and mobility developing later.

Of course, the bigger problem is that Hindu mythology, theology, and cultic
practice don't make a very good model for Malkionism, so these titles just
look tacked on. Hinduism is a dandy model for the theistic traidition, but
not so good for the monotheists.

I'm glad, OTOH, to see someone else who thinks Malkioni swear by the
Prophet's Beard. Now THAT's a fruitful line of thinking.

- --Martin
"Now if you'll excuse me, I have to appear on a tortilla in Mexico."

------------------------------


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:29:16 EEST