From: Joerg Baumgartner (joe@sartar.toppoint.de)
Date: Mon 20 Jun 1994 - 21:55:17 EEST
Alex, in:
X-RQ-ID: 4670
> Just because the Hrestoli see Church and State as a single entity does
> nor mean that specialised offices cannot exist at all levels of society,
> combining temporal and spiritual powers to different degrees. There's
> probably an Archbishop (or whatever) for each part of the Kingdom, but
> in some areas he may have essentially only spiritual authority, with
> a number of "temporal" barons actually holding the land, while elsewhere,
> the Archbishop may be the ruling lord himself, and the local lords and
> bishops his direct vassals. On a smaller scale, one could imagine the
> same applying to lesser lords and clerics (of "Talar" rank, still, though).
>> Furthermore I posit that the Ecclesiarch (who nominally controls the >> entire world) is higher than the king - but the Ecclesiarch has little >> responsibility for temporal matters, while the king has much.
> I disagree with this, if only because we haven't heard of the Hrestoli
> "Ecclesiarch".
Genertela Book, p.20, Southpoint:
"Ths city is the home of the Ecclesiarch of the Hrestol sect, who handles
all theological matters relating to the Hrestoli sect, and theoretically
is Supreme Authority over all Malkioni churches. All the churches of
Fronela acknowledge his superiority."
The king (and all lesser rulers) needs to have been a wizard to be able
to be "the sacrificial hero, ready to die in the ultimate rite of his
religion." (GB p.11)
Next to the king there are the 8 princes of the provinces, assisted by
a standardized staff of noblemen. Since there is no nobility but through
meritocratic ascension, one can assume these are the ruler class of
the Hrestoli system.
> Rulership is, after all, the special duty of of "Talar"
> class, though they continue to exercise religious powers and duties. The
> King may be seen as the embodiment of Hrestol himself, if the hints about
> his Sacred Kingship are anything to go by.
Hrestol never was king. The sarificial component reminds me strongly of Tarshite earth kings, an inheritance from the Serpent King dynasty.
> I suspect the Loskalmi high council has two or three Archbishops
> on it, though.
X-RQ-ID: 4671
>> In prehistoric times it was apparently warm enough to grow wheat in Orkney. >> Now it's too cold. Oats and barley only.
> Be fair, we are still only half way out the last ice age.
My work in a paleoclimate project breaks to the surface.
Fact is that since the end of the last glacial temperatures have changed cyclically, following a plethora of (mainly astronomical) cycles, not unlike Gloranthan mythistory. Two surefire dates for a sudden drop in average temperature are 1300 BC and AD, the first of which might have initiated the Bronze Age mass migration of the "Sea People" into the Mediterranean region, and the second of which eliminated the until then successful Greenland colony of the Vikings and would have shown effects on European population numbers as well had not the black death shown much greater influence. The end of successful agriculture among the northern Vikings and their almost full dedication to fishing certainly was a result of this change in global climate.
X-RQ-ID: 4673
> Best organised for what? The only war they've fought in the last century
> was strolling in to western Junora, to (I'd estimate) zero resistance.
> cf. Austria, rather than Poland...
Best organized wrt supply, equipment, lines of command. The effective take-over of the Junoran counties was a triumph of Loskalmi organisation, not so much military action, as you yourself point out. Intelligent emloyment of military forces without actual action is the better military strategy compared to actions involving heevy losses on both sides. The Loskalmi troops can expect no plunder which could further their equipment, so their ambitions are less to kill and loot enemies but more to gain ground and strategically important positions. If the kingdom of war excels at chess, exchanging unit for unit, the Loskalmi play go and expand their teerritory by clever deployment of their forces. Note they have a head start of 30 years before their opponents.
> Provenly effective thugs, unlike Loskalm. There's a lot to be said for
> a bit of diversity in an army.
Which is why the Persians won over Alexander?
Although a bunch of plundering thugs can destroy a lot. The KoW are another example of landbound Vikings in Glorantha, this time the Great Army which harrassed western Europe for more than twenty years and which dissolved only after a plague among their ranks. Lord Death on a Horse might try to change this attitude, and he might succeed if he manage to unify their bands.
Me:
>> Honour to all men, whatever his place? This sounds more like Rokari >> doctrine to keep the serfs in their allotted places than like "let's >> suppress our pagan farmers" Jonatela.
> It amounts to the same thing, doesn't it?
No, it doesn't. The Rokari suppress co-religious serfs, the Hrestoli suppress pagans. The Rokari are more likely to kill infidels or force- convert them than the Hrestoli, who might allow their pagan subjects to qualify for their farmer caste, but won't proselytize except by example, in the 3rd Age. In Junora this creates a legal vacuum for the "Orlanthi" populace among the farmers in the occupied counties.
----aside on:
A question about the Fronelan Orlanthi:
We are told that in the late stage of the Gbaji wars, Harmast initiated the second Lightbringers' Quest which brought forth Talor, the Laughing Warrior. Talor in turn gathered a following among the Orlanthi feeling betrayed by Arkat, went to Loskalm, killed Varganthar the Unconquerable Knight and freed Akem from this threat, then reduced the Fronelan Telmori threat (using a curse as potent as Arkat's over Dorastor, or Gbaji's against the trolls), and finally came in time to witness the last duel between Arkat and Gbaji. Then Talor and his troops returned to Fronela.
Were there Orlanthi (as in met by First Council missionaries) in Fronela before Talor brought the Harmastings to Akem, or were his followers the first Orlanthi to settle Oranor, Jonatela, and Charg? aside off------
> Or are the Jonating modified Hrestoli, of some sort?
>> I can buy this for the Rokari, but hardly for the Jonatings. Somehow I >> have the impression that the Ecclesiarch in Southpoint thinks that the >> Jonating way is the right attitude towards non-believers.
> I'm lost. Whose attitude to whom are you speaking of? The Loskalmi to
> the Jonatings? Not even printable, I'd imagine. Even (especially?) if
> they are "modified Hrestoli".
Alex:
> Persumably all Princes are Talar, but I doubt all Talar are Princes...
Prince is a little defined title, mainly denoting a class membership if used in a late medieval feudal sense: male people belonging to the families of the higher nobility rulers, be they kings, dukes or princes themselves. Among the Welsh of the Crusaders' Age the princes were similar in rank and function to those of Sartar (those Sartarite rulers who didn't perform the Sacred Marriage, i.e. all except Sartar, Tarkalor and Argrath).
> I'd don't think "Prince" is a modification of "Talar", since he's variously
> referred to as both. But one or both could pertain only to the caste
> system as (however) it existed _before_ his own reforms. Or whatever.
--
-- Joerg Baumgartner joe@sartar.toppoint.de
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:35:18 EEST