The Dari Alliance

From: Peter Metcalfe (metcalph@voyager.co.nz)
Date: Sun 15 Feb 1998 - 00:07:00 EET


Joerg Baumgartner:

>Peter Metcalfe and I keep arguing about the early West while the rest of the
>world remains silent. Shall we take this off digest, or are there people
>listening in?

Well, I've noticed Shannon, Two Davids and Nick interjecting at some
point or another.

>>You are imposing Orlanthi cultural artifacts on the Dari who were
>>not Orlanthi but Galalinae at the time.

>"At the Time" reads after about 200 years of cultural exchange with the
>Theyalans, and after learning some magic from the Council (and later the
>empire).

But they were a seperate state, learned from the Malkioni and other
people as well as the Theyalans and reckoned by most people to be
completely distinct from the Theyalans.

        'Nonetheless, it is thought that Nysalor taught:

        *The Orlanthi that stability was necessary; that obediance is
        necessaru; and that violence is not the only option.

        *The Yelmites [...]

        *The Ralians that thought is not the only reality; that their
        Laws were not Eternal Truths; and that instinct was neither
        good or evil.'
                        Fortunate Succession p78.
                        
        
>IMO the "Galaninae" of Safelster kept about as much of their
>original ancestor worship/Hykimi religion as the Orlanthi keep Daka Fal
>shamanism - it persists, and helps define their culture, but the Theyalan
>religion is stronger in forming their lives.

The people of Galin are Malkioni first and not Theyalan. To them,
the Theyalans are grubby little savages who live in the wop-wops
over in the east. Their major cultural traditions are derived
from the Malkioni, Arkat and their ancient horse-riding traditions.

They have never been conquered by the Orlanthi. So why should they
be overly influenced by Theyalan Ideals?

>>Firstly the Humakti do not have a tradition of Priests and Lords.

>Not really, no. The Humathi seem to, though, since the separation Maklamann
>incited when he made Humath Swordlord semi-apart from Lokamayadon's Storm
>Brothers - while Humath never was as important as all-encompassing cultural
>deity of the Enerali, the general idea of the Enerali at the time of Arkat's
>Crusade seems to have been "storm-worshippers".

The Dari Alliance was a seperate state from the Empire of Light. So
why would Maklaman need to make Humath semi-seperate from Lokaymadon's
Cult? Secondly the Ralians had storm gods long before they came into
contact with the World Council.

>>Secondly the 'cult defiance'
>>is written from the viewpoint of third age Humakti when Humakt is
>>a cult and not a social order. The correct analogy, methinks, would
>>have been defiance of an assembly of chiefs rather than priestly
>>command.

>Since when did any assembly of chiefs equal or even below a king have the
>power to force a king to do their will? A headstrong king may lose the
>support of his allied chiefs if he decides to go against them, but he
>doesn't have to follow their joint wishes, let alone commands.

Interesting. Methods for impeachment of an unruly king or chief
are known throughout glorantha and the real world.

>The situation is different when it comes to dealing with an inter-tribally
>connected priesthood exerting an active influence even over one's sworn
>followers. Especially when this priesthood is allied to a powerful
>organisation like the Bright Empire.

The whole state was allied to the Empire of Light. This seperate
'priesthood' is your invention following an parallel in Orlanthi
culture which I believe is unnecessary as the Galalinae are not
and never have been Orlanthi.

[Alakoring's origins snipped as I've already shown to David Dunham
that he was East Ralian]

>>and they hate hate *hate* Arkat the last time I heard.
>
>Yes. Now, let's have a look at the sources. CoT tells us that "Many tribes
>of heathens followed too, despite their dislike of Malkioni monotheism."

But it applies to the people of Vustria, not East Ralios. Because the
very _next_ sentence goes: 'One by one the strongholds fell until
the forces were concentrated in the eastern part of Ralios, especially
the City of Wolves and the fortress of Kartolin'.

So I stand by my statement that Alakoring would have hated Arkat
(and Maklamann if he even remembered him).

>Dorastor tells us that the city defenses held briefly, while the rural
>population and the hill-people rose "in rebellion". Cities = centres
>controlled by the priesthood...

Cities = centres controlled by the priesthood is your interpolation
and unjustified IMO. Modern Sartarite Cities are controlled by Kings
and chiefs and not Priests for example. Whatever the reasons for
the revolt of the countryside, I do not believe it to be a case of
cookie cutter 'priesthood bad, runelords good'.

Me>>There is no mention of Maklamann having an army. He cut himself off
>>from his cult/society and he is not Syranthir Forefront.
>
>There is a mention of many people, especially those living along the upper
>Tanier River, flocking to Arkat's banner, even despite their dislike.

Upper Tanier River? Where's this from?

- --Peter Metcalfe

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


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 23:08:24 EEST