Women in Esrolian militia

[Squaredeal Sten]

As I understand it the Esrolian matriarchal society prefers women in leadership positions because they are said to be less impulsive, more emotionally stable and long term thinkers.  Men do the heavy work in the Vogarth Strong Man role. and fight in the "Ernalda's protector" role, while women are the brains.  

Also, as I understand it. both sexes get the same cultural weapons skills in character generation.

This brings me to questions:  Do  Esrolian women participate in the militia system. the Irillo Hundreds?  (if not, how and why do they get trained in those weapon skills?)  If so,  are their sex role expectations in the militia different?

In my one instance of dealing with this in my own  character generation, making an Esrolian male character who rolled participation in the battle of  Pennel Ford, I decided that as a teenager he had been in a militia company whose captain was a woman.  Indeed for distinguishing himself in battle (saving his captain who had been Befuddled)  he was promoted to file leader and got the captain's recommendation, so after the war entered the Issaries cult as a caravan guard.  He was very appreciative.  The implication being that the officers are (or tend to be) women and the higher in rank you go. the closer you get to a glass ceiling, the higher proportion of women.

Does this match your own vision. of Esrolia?

[radmonger]

i think cultural weapons are supposed to be not so much explicit training as merely growing up in a society where people were carrying, sparring and talking about those kinds of weapons. Sort of how anyone who has watched american TV knows which end of a gun goes towards the enemy. But it seems like there is no modern concensus between youtube videos as to whether a spear should be used underhand or overhand.  

I guess it would perhaps work a bit better thematically if they replaced, rather than added to, the base skills.

Militia training is reflected in more the fact that most professions do get some level of weapon skills (e.g. farmer +15%, versus warrior +25).

As i understand it, the key thing about Esrolia is that only women really get to be _hereditary_ nobles; typically men would have to marry into a noble house to follow that profession.  

 

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Do  Esrolian women participate in the militia system. the Irillo Hundreds?  (if not, how and why do they get trained in those weapon skills?)  If so,  are their sex role expectations in the militia different?

Yes, they can. And, no, no particular differentiation.

As seen in the Nochet: Adventurer's Guide artwork (by Lee O'Connor) we have our Quick Arrows militiawoman.

1 hour ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

The implication being that the officers are (or tend to be) women and the higher in rank you go. the closer you get to a glass ceiling, the higher proportion of women.

That does not necessarily match/equate though. The Husband-Protectors are that: Protectors - i.e. they can/do fight and lead. One of Hendira's two husbands was the High Admiral. Samastina's field leaders during the siege and at Pennel Ford were: Broyan Volsaxi and then Argrath at the latter.

The Most Noble Aunt has theoretical command over the Noble Brothers's Regiments, but the leadership of those units would go to whoever best fits the unit's alignment/needs (not necessarily an Earth worshipper, but would be for the Axe Maidens).

[Ynneadwraith]

Yeah Esrolia is quite a nuanced take on a matriarchal society, and it could probably go either way depending on how you want your Glorantha to look.

I see Esrolia as a place where the large bulk of gender divisions of labour remain the same. Men till fields, women weave textiles. Men fill out the bulk of the army etc. However, the social construct of which of those things are more prestigious is flipped on its head. Textile-making is seen as more important than agricultural work. This naturally makes it easier for women to be found in traditionally 'male' lines of work, because there's less of a social barrier for them to do so. So you would expect to find a higher proportion of female generals in the army than other cultures.

However, there is one key gender division of labour that is flipped on its head from most patriarchal structures: women conduct business with outsiders, and men conduct domestic business (with the main caveat being childrearing).

In most patriarchal structures this is the other way around. Women's role is head of the domestic, and men's is head of how their domestic unit interacts with outsiders. Take the example of Priam (the literal King of Troy), who heads Troy's negotiations with the Achaeans, yet asks his wife permission for access to the household finances. This is portrayed without any character judgement on Priam. It's simply portrayed as an expected domestic division of authority.

So, for Esrolia, it's the Queen who decides what the foreign policy is. The matriarch of each household conducts negotiations with other households. It will be a female general who decides where the army goes, and will meet the parlay before a battle.

For leadership of the army, you could have that go either way. Either it's seen as a fully 'out-politics' effort, and thus it should be women doing it. Or there's some blend, with a military structure we don't particularly see in patriarchal martial organisation (pre-modern system ones at least). In this option you'd have female 'generals' who do all of the deciding of how the army in question deals with other armies/cities (friendly or not). Then you'd have a male 'sub-general' whose job is not to think about what the army wants to achieve, but to do the dogsbody organisation/running around/hitting people with clubs to achieve that goal. That structure of 'female decision-maker, male dogsbody' could be replicated all the way down the chain of command. That would make for some neat little politics between different officers in the army, which could produce some fun roleplaying scenarios.

Ultimately, military structures mirror civilian structures, so whatever way you characterise power in Esrolia should probably be replicated in their army.

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Ynneadwraith said:

However, there is one key gender division of labour that is flipped on its head from most patriarchal structures: women conduct business with outsiders, and men conduct domestic business (with the main caveat being childrearing).

I'd describe it more as: women control the business of the House (marriages, alliances, determination of household needs, ensuring access/control of temples, etc.). Both men and women are involved with externally focused business as directed by the House leadership. An eligible man (sage, merchant, warrior, etc.) is married out to another House to help secure alliances, while they marry in other men from other Houses for same purposes. There may be more trust in the women since they are part of the "House" whereas men married into the House may still have loyalties to their House of birth. But male or female might be merchants, sages, etc.

1 hour ago, Ynneadwraith said:

So, for Esrolia, it's the Queen who decides what the foreign policy is. The matriarch of each household conducts negotiations with other households. It will be a female general who decides where the army goes, and will meet the parlay before a battle.

The Queen... sort of. Depends on how dominant the queen is. Hendira was Queen of all Esrolia and also Belintar's governor, so she focused foreign policy on 1) Belintar's dictates while he was living, and subsequently 2) keeping the menace of Greymane contained. 

Samastina is not Queen of Esrolia, just of Nochet and North Esrolia. The Demivierge of Rhigos is recognized as Queen of Rhigos and South Esrolia as of 1625, and several other prominent queens control parts of Esrolia. So there is no central foreign policy. Nominally the Grandmothers' Council of Ezel (made up of all 200 noble Grandmothers) determines policy and direction for Esrolia and chooses a queen to implement that, but that's rather broken down at this point.

I would not assume it will be a female general deciding where the army goes. The Queen of the city/region or potentially all Esrolia if united behind one will most likely choose a Champion (Bless Champion spell applies) who will then lead the army. That could be a Wind Lord, a Light Son, even an Axe Maiden depending on circumstance and the queen's inclination.

[Ynneadwraith]

40 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

I'd describe it more as: women control the business of the House (marriages, alliances, determination of household needs, ensuring access/control of temples, etc.). Both men and women are involved with externally focused business as directed by the House leadership. An eligible man (sage, merchant, warrior, etc.) is married out to another House to help secure alliances, while they marry in other men from other Houses for same purposes. There may be more trust in the women since they are part of the "House" whereas men married into the House may still have loyalties to their House of birth. But male or female might be merchants, sages, etc.

That's not necessarily a different view (so thanks for explaining a nuance better!). It is the man that is 'being married out', just as princesses were 'married out' to secure allegiances in the real world. In terms of emancipation, it matters who decides who does the marrying.

None of this is to say that men would have no role in out-group politics (it's not as if women in the real world had no role either). It's more about the underlying social expectations of who is supposed to do what job. How strictly codified that is is a matter of culture, with some being relatively more egalitarian than others. I suppose that decision of how strict it is, is for each person to define for their Glorantha.

45 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

The Queen... sort of.

I bloody knew I should have written 'queens' 😄

I meant 'foreign policy' in the loosest of terms. Less of 'this is the written policy of the United States towards Germany', and more 'politics conducted with foreign powers generally' (again with a broad use of the terms 'foreign' and 'politics').

1 hour ago, jajagappa said:

I would not assume it will be a female general deciding where the army goes.

Perhaps not, I can see the myths of the husband-protectors going different ways depending on how they interact with the 'women are in charge of out-politics' thing. You could see it as them delegating the task of war to men (most of the time) because that's seen as their job mythically. Alternatively, you could see it as women should be making the important decisions, and the men are just there to provide dumb muscle to make those decisions happen. Or anywhere inbetween I suppose!

Also, I don't think I've articulated my point very well with the phrase 'decides where the army goes'. That should probably have read something like 'decides what the army sets out to achieve'. It's the 'Political/Grand Strategy' and 'Strategic' levels of Clauswitz' four operations of war, or perhaps even just the grand strategy level.

[Jeff]

An important feature for Greg and I was that Esrolia is an Orlanthi society. To be honest, non-Orlanthi have a lot of difficulty telling the difference between Sartarites and Esrolians.

So the Orlanthi traditionally have two main temples in their community. One is to Orlanth, the other to Ernalda. Orlanth is in charge of war, distribution of property, adjudication of disputes, and dealing with outsiders. Ernalda is in charge of the harvest, grain storage, and of family life. Orlanth has a big network of other gods to help him. In most Orlanthi societies, Orlanth is the dominant partner.

In Esrolia, these are still the two main temples. But Ernalda is the dominant partner. She remains in charge of distribution of property and of adjudication of disputes. The reasons for this are many, but that's not relevant here. Orlanth still has his network of gods to help him, but Ernalda has other husbands as well. Lodril, Argan Argar, Flamal, Yelm, and Magasta all have their place in aiding Ernalda (and not necessarily Orlanth).

So how does this play out in the Esrolian militia? Well the Orlanth cult is still the backbone of the militia, but there are also Argan Argar and Lodrili militias. And Babeester Gor plays a much bigger role. Normally whoever is Ernalda's local husband-protector leads all of this, so usually an Orlanth cultist. But sometimes that is a Lodril or Calandra & Aurelian cultist. Or sometimes an Argan Argar cultist, even a troll. More rarely it is Babeester Gor (who normally is a body guard or shock trooper). Sometimes the Orlanth protector is VInga, but more often not.

So if you look at this from the outside, it looks quite similar to what you might see in Heortland and Sartar, but becomes noticeably different only when you look more carefully at the arrangements and realise that instead of Orlanth at the center of it all, it is Ernalda.

Does that help?

[Squaredeal Sten]

20 minutes ago, Jeff said:

An important feature for Greg and I was that Esrolia is an Orlanthi society.  ...... noticeably different only when you look more carefully at the arrangements and realise that instead of Orlanth at the center of it all, it is Ernalda.

Does that help?

Somewhst. yes.  I suppose it boils down to

"What is the extent to which the Esrolian characterationn of men in comparison to women has been internalized by the men and women who are not in the noble and priestly tiers of society?".

[Jeff]

7 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Somewhst. yes.  I suppose it boils down to

"What is the extent to which the Esrolian characterationn of men in comparison to women has been internalized by the men and women who are not in the noble and priestly tiers of society?".

What is the Esrolian characterisation of men? 

[jajagappa]

19 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

"What is the extent to which the Esrolian characterationn of men in comparison to women has been internalized by the men and women who are not in the noble and priestly tiers of society?".

There was a view expressed in the old HW/HQ1 works and incorporated into the HQ Voices material presented at that time that suggested that men were always under the control of women due to flightiness, propensity to violence, or whatever. I'd recommend tossing that view out altogether.

As Jeff noted, this is still a Heortling society and I don't think you'll find any strong differentiation at any social level between genders.

[Squaredeal Sten]

23 minutes ago, Jeff said:

What is the Esrolian characterisation of men? 

As I understand it, it is that leadership by men is undesirable because men are more violent, less thoughtful vs. impulsive, and less long term thinkers.

As I read 'Esrolia the Land of Ten Thousand goddesses" I perceive that from   page 10, "What is the difference between women and men"  which begins "Women are superior to men in every way.  They are shoirt tempered and prone to violence, selfish and unable to keep promises, "... and ends ""What men are not is leaders..."

and also the second paragraph of 'What makes us great* on page 9, and the second paragraph of " How do we live" on the same page, 

Edited January 11 by Squaredeal Sten
Spelling / typing

[Squaredeal Sten]

7 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

...... I'd recommend tossing that view out altogether......

But if we take away thise views, what is left to explain the matriarchal society?

[jajagappa]

2 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

As I read 'Esrolia the Land of Ten Thousand goddesses" I perceive that from   page 10, "What is the difference between women and men"  which begins "Women are superior to men in every way.  They are shirt tempered and prone to violence, selfish and unable to keep promises, "... and ends ""What men are not is leaders..."

and also the second paragraph of 'What makes us great* on page 9, and the second paragraph of " How do we live" on the same page, 

I think you can consider that material as a view from a particular time period (e.g. when HW/HQ1 came out) that interpreted the Esrolian matriarchy in very strong gender-differentiated terms. I personally consider that view/material to be obsolete and non-canonical. (You'll note in my Nochet: Adventurer's Guide that 1) I rewrote it; and 2) it is from one specific in-world view.)

[Richard S.]

8 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

But if we take away thise views, what is left to explain the matriarchal society?

Esrolia is a matriarchy because it is ruled by the Ernalda cult, and priestesses of Ernalda are required to be mothers. The Esrolian bias is less "men are inferior" and more "Ernalda is superior" - it just happens that the cult of Ernalda is dominated by women.

[Ynneadwraith]

Double post

Edited January 11 by Ynneadwraith

[Richard S.]

As for the militia question, I don't see why there'd be any gender restrictions on either men or women. The queen probably has final authority on what the army does, but fighting people is primarily the job of the husband-protectors, regardless of whether they're currently male, female, or something else. That's why Ernalda married them, after all!

[Ynneadwraith]

 

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

Does that help?

Now isn't that interesting...

I'd probably see that as making it even more likely that any given Esrolian army would have an Ernaldan as it's head (regardless of whether Ernalda is a war deity or not). Take a read of this article from military historian Bret Devereaux (it's fun! It discusses the armies of Rohan and Isengard in the buildup to Helms Deep from a military history perspective). It argues, quite convincingly, that there are two ways to make an effective fighting force: replicate the civilian power structure in your armed forces, or expend more energy creating a de-racinated professional army with its own dedicated hierarchy.

The former works well for a number of reasons. Firstly it's a lot cheaper (you don't need to maintain a whole parallel professional military culture). Secondly everyone already knows who is giving the orders, and there's less time wasted jockying for position as you create new power structures. Thirdly it promotes cohesion as the social pressure not to abandon your peers (in front of your immediate social superiors/inferiors) is an extremely strong motivator.

As such, it has been by far the most common way of organising an army throughout history. To the point that most cultures did not see a distinction between their peacetime and wartime command structures. There was the command structure, and did peacetime or wartime activities.

So, if Ernalda is the most important god to everyone, she had better be seen leading the army (even if she doesn't actually do any of the fighting). The husband-protectors will have their roles as they are important too, but they must be seen as being subservient to Ernalda, lest they disrupt societal expectations of the power structure.

The need for this is probably best demonstrated by a quick (simplified) scenario.

Rhigosian Army A is marching to intercept a Praxian raiding force. As Esrolia is a cosmopolitan place, the army is comprised of a majority of Orlanthi militiamen (say 60%), but with a substantial proportion of Yelmite militia (20%) and Argan Argar milita (15%). The remaining 5% is made up of minor subcults. Now, the main thing that bonds these militiamen to one another is their relationship, and subservience to, Ernalda. Otherwise their gods are largely adversarial, and each individual person will be most loyal to the people they're marching right next to (their fellow cultists), because that's how these armies are structured.

Cue a contentious disagreement (of which there would be many en route). Could be a decision around tactics. Could be how to settle a dispute between two cultists. Could be an argument over which cult was chosen to be the Champion. Could be anything where tensions get fraught, and we're on the warpath so tensions are fraught a lot.

Without the presence of a strong unifying force, it would be very, very easy for this mixed army to lose cohesion. To lose the will and determination to fight and die alongside one another. Shedding portions of your fighting force to internal disagreements en route is a very poor way to win a battle.

So, it would be imperative to have an Ernaldan figurehead at the top very visibly tying the whole lot together. The leaders of the husband-protectors should be seen being subservient to the Ernaldan, to remind everyone that they have important oaths to serve Ernalda and not screw over all the other people who rub them up the wrong way. When there are disputes that fracture between cults, you need a strong mediator present to sort it out.

You might correctly point out that Ernalda isn't a war goddess, and her representative is likely to make a poor military leader. You'd be right! A lot of pre-modern generals were truly catastrophic, and very poorly prepared. That's why war councils were such an important thing. So the people who actually knew what they were doing had the chance to course-correct the person who is actually making the decisions.

11 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

As Jeff noted, this is still a Heortling society and I don't think you'll find any strong differentiation at any social level between genders.

That's a shame. I rather liked fathoming out the societal changes that would radiate into. It gives Esrolia it's own unique flavour within Heortling society.

I don't think it would be mutually exclusive with Esrolia being a Heortling society. Their cultural attitudes could well be a cultural relic of an earlier form of Esrolian civilisation (or another society that merged into the Esrolians). These things tend to ripple down through history in odd little ways, even without a literal goddess reinforcing them. Take gavelkind from my neck of the woods (a practice of partible inheritance, so inheritance is split between heirs). This is likely a holdover from earlier anglo-saxon inheritance practices. While the entire rest of England used primogeniture (picked up from the Normans), Kent carried on with gavelkind all way to 1925! The apocryphal tale is that William the Conqueror made concessions to the people of Kent to help make his beachead easier, and one of those things was preserving Kentish law.

The slightly different gavelkind in Wales and Ireland likely harks back even further to pre-Roman Celtic practices, so very nearly 1900 years of customary practice!

[Jeff]

1 minute ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

As I understand it, it is that leadership by men is undesirable because men are more violent, less thoughtful vs. impulsive, and less long term thinkers.

As I read 'Esrolia the Land of Ten Thousand goddesses" I perceive that from   page 10, "What is the difference between women and men"  which begins "Women are superior to men in every way.  They are shirt tempered and prone to violence, selfish and unable to keep promises, "... and ends ""What men are not is leaders..."

and also the second paragraph of 'What makes us great* on page 9, and the second paragraph of " How do we live" on the same page, 

First, Land of Ten Thousand goddesses is not canon and to the extent it is, it is largely set in the First Age so not really helpful. 

Second, all Orlanthi view men as emotional and reckless, and women as more practical and rational. That's also the Esrolian view. The Esrolian myth is that after the martial leaders on the Vingkotlings tore their world apart in war and kin strife, the Grandmothers took power for their own survival. The warriors and chiefs were pretty much wiped out and the Grandmothers were left to lead the survivors.

At the Dawn, Esrolia was the center of the Ernalda cult, and her priestesses retained authority. You can reassemble Orlanthi society with Ernalda at the center pretty easily, especially when you have the Only Old One provide protection. And so the Earth priestesses became the center of the networks of temples and kinship groups instead of the Wind Lords. The Wind Lords were present, but not the central node. While among the Heortlings, the Wind Lords were the center; the Earth priestesses were present but not at the center.

And so we end up with a matriarchy. The Earth Priestesses are the dominant leaders, the various cults that normally would be the ruling god compete against each other for access to the Earth Priestesses. And the whole thing is pretty stable. When the Only Old One was finally defeated, the Earth Priestesses transferred their loyalty to Belintar, who served functionally as the Husband-Protector of Esrolia. Only now, with the demise of Belintar, is the system failing and the Earth priestesses need to find a new protector.

 

[Squaredeal Sten]

4 hours ago, jajagappa said:

I think you can consider that material as a view from a particular time period (e.g. when HW/HQ1 came out) that interpreted the Esrolian matriarchy in very strong gender-differentiated terms. I personally consider that view/material to be obsolete and non-canonical. (You'll note in my Nochet: Adventurer's Guide that 1) I rewrote it; and 2) it is from one specific in-world view.)

OK, the Nochet Adventurer's guide still contains "We keep the men working hard on the land, which keeps their minds away from war and conflict: a well-worked man is a happy man." but what was deleted is only significant if pointed out. NAG still contains, under How are Women Different,   speaking of men: " What they are not is leaders: this has been proven a thousand times. They are either too warlike, too kind, or too mercurial at heart, their focus blurs, and they soon forget their charges. "

But i do see that the more denigrating phraseology has been deleted or toned down.

[Squaredeal Sten]

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

First, Land of Ten Thousand goddesses is not canon and to the extent it is, it is largely set in the First Age so not really helpful. 

Second, all Orlanthi view men as emotional and reckless, and women as more practical and rational. That's also the Esrolian view. ...

 

So in Nochet / Esrolia that view is acted upon in a more consistent way, unlike Sartar where it is just a comment.

- and the men seem to have absorbed that ideology.  Even monarchical governments often tend to operate by consent of their populace.

I don;t think there is anything wrong with that;  It gives the region a different flavor, tells the players they are not in Kansas any more.

Well back to the wonderful city of Oz  Nochet.  I am working on tomorrow night's adventure.  Where Samastina will not be caught behind a curtain, is not Oz at all.

[French Desperate WindChild]

9 hours ago, Ynneadwraith said:

The need for this is probably best demonstrated by a quick (simplified) scenario.

Rhigosian Army A is marching to intercept a Praxian raiding force. As Esrolia is a cosmopolitan place, the army is comprised of a majority of Orlanthi militiamen (say 60%), but with a substantial proportion of Yelmite militia (20%) and Argan Argar milita (15%). The remaining 5% is made up of minor subcults. Now, the main thing that bonds these militiamen to one another is their relationship, and subservience to, Ernalda. Otherwise their gods are largely adversarial, and each individual person will be most loyal to the people they're marching right next to (their fellow cultists), because that's how these armies are structured.

Cue a contentious disagreement (of which there would be many en route). Could be a decision around tactics. Could be how to settle a dispute between two cultists. Could be an argument over which cult was chosen to be the Champion. Could be anything where tensions get fraught, and we're on the warpath so tensions are fraught a lot.

Without the presence of a strong unifying force, it would be very, very easy for this mixed army to lose cohesion. To lose the will and determination to fight and die alongside one another. Shedding portions of your fighting force to internal disagreements en route is a very poor way to win a battle.

So, it would be imperative to have an Ernaldan figurehead at the top very visibly tying the whole lot together. The leaders of the husband-protectors should be seen being subservient to the Ernaldan, to remind everyone that they have important oaths to serve Ernalda and not screw over all the other people who rub them up the wrong way. When there are disputes that fracture between cults, you need a strong mediator present to sort it out.

I agree will all of that

however there is something you almost said but did not 🙂 so I don't know if I disagree on this specific point or not (you used the magic word seen 😛 )

You don't need to have an Ernaldan to lead the army. You need a good war leader. Could be Yelmalio, Argan Argar, Orlanth, Bab's, or any other god's rune lord (or equivalent) ... Doesn't matter. Probably if there are too animosity between two cults, the choice would be between build an army without one of this cult, or choose a more "consensual" war leader (Orlanth or Bab's ? Bab's as consensual, a paradox ?)

But you need some official "counter power" (or the real power) : some judges. These judges are in my opinion Ernaldan priestesses having the delegation of Grand Mothers authority. They are not here to say where to attack, who will lead the charge, or anything like that. But they are here to ensure that rules are followed. That Earth is respected, that the men will achieve the objectives without being disturbed by any passion (they are so dumb with alcohol, gold promises, or pretty natives) And of course they are the ultimate resort in case of conflicts you detailed, if the war leader is "not able" to manage it properly

 

One option I imagine 4-6 women following the war leader like his(or her) shadow. Could be a nice association where they help him(or her) or could be impediment where the war leader feels their stern looks, disdainful wispers etc... like inquisitors

Another one is based on the fact that an army is made not only of warriors but supports (heal, logistic, ...). And Ernaldan are very good to manage support. So maybe, less ceremonial, less impressive, the leaders of the support team is the counter power.

[Ynneadwraith]

Yep I think that would be a good way to organise it!

I used the word seen mainly to impress the fact that Ernaldan authority needs to be physically present with the army, but I suppose a deeper dive into that would be helpful!

Leadership, especially in the pre-modern world (but more than you think in the modern world too), isn't really something you do. It's something that you perform. Leaders need to be visibly seen acting like leaders, or they don't get to be leaders for long. What the expectation of what makes a 'good leader' varies culture-to-culture. Some examples:

• A Hittite leader is expected to be seen racing around in a chariot ahead of the army, shooting arrows and challenging the other chariot-borne champions of their enemies.
• An Anglo-saxon leader is expected to fight on foot, side-by side with his men in the shield-wall.
• A Norman leader is expected to be mounted and fight among the knights, though still in the thick of the fighting.
• A Roman leader is expected to be situated just behind the battle lines, overseeing the battle as it develops.
• A WW2 leader is expected to be situated a long way back out of artillery range, planning battle strategy.

If you put an Anglo-saxon leader behind the battle line, his bravery and commitment will be called into question. If you put a Roman leader in the shield wall, he's going to be seen as reckless and foolhardy.

I made the point quite strongly about wartime hierarchies mirroring peacetime hierarchies (to the point that pre-modern societies that didn't maintain a professional army saw no distinction between the two). However, the differing expectations of what 'performed leadership' looks like gives a little flexibility to this.

Perhaps how the Esrolians see 'performed leadership during war' is with a council of Ernaldans 'keeping the war-leaders on task'. This would be sufficient, so long as they're seen by everyone around them to be doing so. That's seen by all levels of the hierarchy as well. To a footslogger, he wants to know wise decisions are being made that won't get him killed unnecessarily. To an Argan Argar leader, he wants to know the Yelmite leader isn't going to hang him out to dry when the battle comes (replace this with any leader and any other leader, considering there will be power struggles within cults as well). To an Ernaldan, she wants everyone else to know that she's the ultimate authority (largely because if she doesn't, another Ernaldan will).

As you rightly say, there are many different levels of leadership, and who is expected to do what can vary. The important thing is that, in the pre-modern world at least, all the layers need to be visible and seen performing leadership at important times. Leading armies is definitely one of those times.

[radmonger]

I suspect  the key to the Esrolian way of war is their signature Rune spell Bless Champion. The key expectation of a war leader is that they have that cast on them. 

While it would rarely actually happen, there is an underlying power dynamic in a room that comes from 'if We Fight, I Win'. Normal war magic plus support from an earth priestess beats anyone who has only normal war magic[1]

This breaks down if the earth priestesses themselves are divided, as with Rhigos and Nochet.

This compares with:

1. classical (Manirian?) culture Orlanthi, where Lightning means anyone in the room can kill anyone else.

2. solar/pentan cultures, where Sunspear means those with legitimate authority can kill those without.

3. Malkioni society, where the Zzaburi perform a somewhat similar social role the the Esrolian earth priestesses. 

[1] hence the common expression in reference to Harrek the Berserk that he hits you so hard your Grandmother dies[2].

[2] This is  considered by military scholars to be an exaggeration. Documented cases involved only the death of the priestess actually performing the champion ritual, not the head of their house.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 12 by radmonger

[Squaredeal Sten]

6 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

......... 🙂  😛 

One option I imagine 4-6 women following the war leader like his (or her) shadow. Could be a nice association where they help him(or her) or could be impediment where the war leader feels their stern looks, disdainful wispers etc... like inquisitors...

That looks similar to commissars in early Soviet armies.

That historical example implies to me that Esrolian armies will very very strongly  emphasize following the agreed battle plan, and be less flexible when unexpected events happen. 

[I am not saying  that Real World armies in general were very flexible before radio, nor that most Gloranthan armies would be much better, despite magic such as Wind Words.]

Which makes the battle of  Pennell Ford exceptional, in that in such a composite force, Harrek provided the flexibility to counter the unexpected.   Superheroes will do that.  A yet unwritten story should include what the Ernaldans did in that campaign.

Edited January 12 by Squaredeal Sten

[jajagappa]

7 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Which makes the battle of  Pennell Ford exceptional, in that in such a composite force, Harrek provided the flexibility to counter the unexpected.   Superheroes will do that.  A yet unwritten story should include what the Ernaldans did in that campaign.

Harrek, Argrath, and Broyan, though, yes, Harrek was the exception to counter the Lunar's solar magic and Greymane's betrayal.

8 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

That historical example implies to me that Esrolian armies will emphasize following the agreed battle plan, and be less flexible when unexpected events happen. 

Also consider that for 300 years, Belintar was effectively the Husband-Protector, hence the flexibility displayed at the Building Wall battle.

But there until the Lunar military ventures and Greymane's great raids, there hasn't been a strong need for military activity in a long time. The Demivierge has cast her lot with the Warlord of Porthomeka as her champion; Samastina has used Broyan and Argrath, but with Broyan dead and Argrath off to Pavis, she has need of a new champion....