Re: [WorldofGlorantha] Humakti temples

YGWV valkoharja wrote:

[Greg Stafford - in a separate thread]
>>3. MOST IMPORTANT, even if a court found the case in favor of the clan
>>of those cowardly six, the Humakti temple would very likely refuse to
>>pay voluntarily, and publicly invite the clan to come and take the
>>payment from them, by force (a very common result! There is nothing in
>>the code that says it is unjust to refuse to pay.)
>
>What is the status of such temples of Humakt? OK, let us first
differentiate between the two uses of temple: the organization, and the place.

Said organizations are rare. There just are not that many Humakti. They collect in their temples, and they serve their killer god. They will go and kill whomever their god tells them to kill. They serve their god, not the clan, not the tribe, not even Orlanth.

The Orlanthi are fortunate that they are also the bearers of truth, of honor. So they will go where their god tells them to go for honor. Now, honor is not a universal trait---it differs between the Yelmites and the Orlanthi, for instance. But Humakt doesn't give a fig about Yelmite honor, just Humakti honor. Which is the same as Orlanthi honor. Lucky for the Orlanthi!

So the Humakti work for killing and for honoring whenever their god tells them to do so. They fight when ordered, and they oversee oaths when ordered (and you know that breaking an oath sworn under a Humakti ceremony means that the power of the god descends upon the oath breaker---i.e. Death. Thus it is even likely that the Humakti who administered the oath will be the one who kills the oath-breaker.)  Though maybe not.

> Are such independent
>temples found at a chieftains stead, only in tribal areas shared by
>many clans or even only in cities?

And the temple would wish to be as available to as many people as possible. So they tend to be at central locations, which means, near to tribal centers and cities.

Note that temples, for any deity, are not just put someplace convenient. They have to be in a sacred place. The most sacred places are precisely where an original mythic occurred, like the Hill of Orlanth Victorious, where Harmast departed for his LBQ. Other sites can be places where worshippers did great acts, or even where one of them had a message from the god to put a temple. So in many ways it may SEEM like they are only where convenient, but it is the god who determines that convenience.

>Such unsheathed humakti don't belong to any clan, and only serve the
>temple... like only belonging to a warband.

Exactly. A warband without loyalty to any particular clan or tribe. Loyalty only to their god.

>What is their position in the heortling society?

So there are these organizations of people working for death and justice. They are warriors. Big question is, of course: who feeds these guys?

Answer: people who respect and work with them. Because they fulfill a need, of course. So part of their upkeep comes from the traditional payments for the Humakti taking part in, or leading the annual rites or special rites. For instance, it is better to have Humakt bless a war band going off to war than just an Orlanth priest, or to do the rites on a sacred Humakt site that might lend special magic to the band. Gifts are another source of income.

Now, though they are not precisely a part of their local Heortling society---the clan or tribe---they nonetheless work for that society on a different level, as hinted above. The mores of Humakt are the same as those of the people who woship Humakt (and everyone who participates in the religion of Ernalda and Orlanth worships him.)

In a modern sense, they are an independent corporate consulting firm.

They likely also have a traditional bond with a local king. Thus when the tribe goes to war he'll send the traditional gifts and ask for help, and the temple will send warriors. They may have always done it, and maybe always will, but they will check with their god first and make sure.

>If such a temple is established in a martial
>clans lands, is there some sort of contract that as payment for the
>land the humakti of the temple defend the clan's lands, or perhaps
>provide five swordsmen to serve chief as his weaponthanes?
In general, no. Mind you there COULD be, if the god said so. But usually they would not bind themselves into a permanent contract of that nature. Their only contracts are with the god. It seems especially dangerous for the temple to be bound to a particular clan, at the likely expense of other clans.

Finally, these strictures and guidelines do not apply to individuals who worship Humakt but have re-entered society.

Conclusion: THE NET RESULT is that the temples tend to have a historical and traditional affinity for their local sponsors, but it is based on parallel objectives, not because of a formal, contractual obligation.

As long as the local king honors Humakt, does not put any of the men into a position where they will have to dishonor themselves, and maintains traditional gifts and so on, he can probably count on their support.

--Greg Stafford

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]             Received on Fri 24 Aug 2007 - 06:40:21 EEST