Wergild amongst Orlanthi peole

[Rodney Dangerduck]

I don't see any reason that BGs (or others) don't make mistakes and occasionally "punish" the innocent.

Leading to another cycle of revenge or weregild...

Edited June 18, 2023 by Rodney Dangerduck

[metcalph]

5 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I don't see any reason that BGs (or others) don't make mistakes and occasionally "punish" the innocent.

Leading to another cycle of revenge or weregild...

Babeester serves the temple not the clan nor tribe.  I've never heard of a temple being responsible for wergild before.  

[Rodney Dangerduck]

1 hour ago, metcalph said:

Babeester serves the temple not the clan nor tribe.  I've never heard of a temple being responsible for wergild before.  

So, if a BG incorrectly chops up my brother, what should I do?

[metcalph]

3 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

So, if a BG incorrectly chops up my brother, what should I do?

You can't attack the temple because that would be a desecration of a holy place.  So the temple could simply refuse to admit error and refuse to pay a single bolg.  What you could do is ambush the Babeester Gor worshipper responsible outside the temple and claim responsibility for it (to avoid secret murder).  Since killing a Babeester Gor worshipper is not itself defiling the earth, you only have to live with the Temple refusing to bless your crops for the next decade or two.

[soltakss]

14 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

So, if a BG incorrectly chops up my brother, what should I do?

Appeal to the Temple and see if the Axe Maidens support you. If not, appeal to the Ernalda Temple and see if her Priestesses support you, as Ernalda is Babeester Gor's mother and has some control over her. They may find in your favour and make the offending Babeester Gor cultist serve as your bodyguard for a year, as penance.

[hipsterinspace]

16 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

So, if a BG incorrectly chops up my brother, what should I do?

I'd imagine that access to divination generally prevents the biggest mistakes and provides rather clear answers when mistakes are made. Your best chance to appeal is probably to have your clan's chief or Storm Voice take the complaint to the Tribal King and the tribal-level Orlanth cult, have them ask Orlanth about it, and based on the result the temple will probably be forced to pay his wergild (there's some handy Orlanth Rex magic to make that happen) or your brother wasn't so innocent after all.

[French Desperate WindChild]

15 minutes ago, hipsterinspace said:

I'd imagine that access to divination generally prevents the biggest mistakes and provides rather clear answers when mistakes are made. Your best chance to appeal is probably to have your clan's chief or Storm Voice take the complaint to the Tribal King and the tribal-level Orlanth cult, have them ask Orlanth about it, and based on the result the temple will probably be forced to pay his wergild (there's some handy Orlanth Rex magic to make that happen) or your brother wasn't so innocent after all.

Not sure that calling air for a earth business is the most appropriate thing to not create more issue. I would say that the storm voice would propose our guy to discuss with Ernalda priestess and let Orlanth temple away from this issue

now I m not sure a lot of people would try anything. Even if they believe the poor victim is innocent, how many would try to defy a temple, with sacred warriors.. the risk is enormous

ernalda cultists will not bless the fields

bab’z warriors will be angry

probably tears will give more compensation for the bloodline than call for revenge for the brother

 

But that could create a true tragedy, this kind of situation creates hero, cursed hero as I like them!

[hipsterinspace]

9 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

Not sure that calling air for a earth business is the most appropriate thing to not create more issue. I would say that the storm voice would propose our guy to discuss with Ernalda priestess and let Orlanth temple away from this issue

Orlanth Rex is at the top of the social order and is the cult responsible for dispensing "law" in Sartar, to the degree that they have magic to compel priests and worshippers of other cults to cooperate with their rulings. Additionally, if the man killed was an Orlanth worshipper (initiated or lay, and basically all Orlanthi men qualify as one of those), it is Orlanth's business.

[Squaredeal Sten]

As I perceive it this thread has accepted an unstated assumption that all clans will seek to deny wergild unless they are at a military disadvantage.  But I disagree with that assumption.  It seems more likely that most clans value good relations with most of their neighbors.  They intermarry with neighbors.   Fighting them will involve kinstrife.

And even a "war clan* won't last long if they are at feud with all their neighbors: Those neighbors are not stupid, and will combine against them.

[French Desperate WindChild]

2 hours ago, hipsterinspace said:

Orlanth Rex is at the top of the social order and is the cult responsible for dispensing "law" in Sartar, to the degree that they have magic to compel priests and worshippers of other cults to cooperate with their rulings. Additionally, if the man killed was an Orlanth worshipper (initiated or lay, and basically all Orlanthi men qualify as one of those), it is Orlanth's business.

for sure 🙂

however who owns the land ? who bless the crops in such farmer country ? who welcome the #### and give so much joy, and heir to build the future ?

there are two perspectives:

Orlanth rex is the cult which ultimately decides everything

or

Orlanth rex is the protector of the law, the one able to organize peace between clans, the one which decides about war and other "men" business.

But even if, for a stranger the one in the Hall who seems strong and powerful , the one who tells all the decisions is the "king" (I mean Leika is the king too, that is not a gender/sex question here of the individual), the true power is behind the throne. And for some business, the "husband"  will not challenge his "queen" if it is not very very important.

Is the life of one guy so important to create an internal struggle, with maybe big consequences ? After all there is no smoke without fire *. And in all case if the guy was a good guy, now is in Orlanth all, without any issue, drinking, singing, dancing.  Of course it depends on the victim, it depends on the Orlanth hierarchy, but people are weak, and if they can avoid internal issue, peace at royal home is better... Weakness and injustice create better sagas. After all a society praising wergild (somewhere innocent people must pay for other) is not a just society, so everything may be "acceptable", that is call reason of state clan
 

 

I follow the second perspective, maybe it is not the canon, maybe it is, maybe both are non canonical because there is no canon here. I don't know

 

* How I dislike this sentence ! and of course what I propose is not what I like irl, but what it may happen, but yeah I have a dark glorantha, even if there is hope in darkness

 

[Jeff]

7 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

As I perceive it this thread has accepted an unstated assumption that all clans will seek to deny wergild unless they are at a military disadvantage.  But I disagree with that assumption.  It seems more likely that most clans value good relations with most of their neighbors.  They intermarry with neighbors.   Fighting them will involve kinstrife.

And even a "war clan* won't last long if they are at feud with all their neighbors: Those neighbors are not stupid, and will combine against them.

In general, most clans within a given tribe are going to pay wergild unless they think the demands are unreasonable or the situation is unjust. Between tribes it can be more difficult, especially if the tribes have old rivalries or other conflicts. Here's where the Sartar Prince or the city rings become very handle - they provide a way forward from that.

Now during the two decades of the Lunar Occupation this system often broke down, and now we are trying to restart it. But the framework is there and everyone is familiar with it.

If a BG or Humakt cultist killed someone, compensation gets harder, and that is where the tribe, the city, or even the Prince needs to get involved. But BG has more hooks on her - if her local Earth Temple disagrees with her acts, she might find herself kicked out, exiled, etc.

[JRE]

I suppose the big advantage of the cultists less connected to the clans doing most of the non-war killing, such as Humakt and BG, is that often the negotiated solution will be a transfer to another temple, rather than an expensive wergild, if they accidentally treat a honorable cattle raider as a brigand.

That is not an option with a carl or a thane, who have duties and family in the clan.

Another reason why serious Death cultists are rootless except for their cult, so their acts do not affect others.

[Rodney Dangerduck]

48 minutes ago, JRE said:

that often the negotiated solution will be a transfer to another temple, rather than an expensive wergild

Kind of like how we all too often handle rogue cops and priests today?  😞

[Akhôrahil]

On 6/18/2023 at 7:40 AM, metcalph said:

What you could do is ambush the Babeester Gor worshipper responsible outside the temple and claim responsibility for it (to avoid secret murder). 

With severed Humakti, this is why they need Sense Assassin. Yes, you can kill more or less freely, but you can also be killed more or less freely, and even a Humakti can get bushwhacked (or could, without the skill).

Edited June 20, 2023 by Akhôrahil

[Akhôrahil]

On 6/19/2023 at 7:42 AM, Squaredeal Sten said:

As I perceive it this thread has accepted an unstated assumption that all clans will seek to deny wergild unless they are at a military disadvantage.  But I disagree with that assumption.  It seems more likely that most clans value good relations with most of their neighbors.  They intermarry with neighbors.   Fighting them will involve kinstrife.

And even a "war clan* won't last long if they are at feud with all their neighbors: Those neighbors are not stupid, and will combine against them.

My point was rather that you don't pay wergild unless you have a good reason to. Avoiding excessive feuding, not pissing off the tribal king or the Lunars, and so on, can certainly be good reasons. But it's also credible that one clan can shrug off demands for wergild from another by just saying "you want revenge, come get it like men!" This becomes likelier yet when they don't have a joint superior, like a king (note how this lack additionally makes it trickier to resolve a feud, as seen in HQ Sartar books).

Edited June 20, 2023 by Akhôrahil

[Jeff]

3 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

My point was rather that you don't pay wergild unless you have a good reason to. Avoiding excessive feuding, not pissing off the tribal king or the Lunars, and so on, can certainly be good reasons. But it's also credible that one clan can shrug off demands for wergild from another by just saying "you want revenge, come get it like men!" This becomes likelier yet when they don't have a joint superior, like a king (note how this lack additionally makes it trickier to resolve a feud, as seen in HQ Sartar books).

You pay wergild because the consequences are well-known if you do not - the aggrieved kin will attack your kin. Paying wergild protects the farmers, women, and others. It protects your livestock. Other clans and groups may decide you all are more trouble than you are worth. Your actions put your kin at risk, so pay the life price or accept the consequences.

[Harry the Dirty Dog]

On 6/19/2023 at 11:29 PM, Jeff said:

Now during the two decades of the Lunar Occupation this system often broke down, and now we are trying to restart it. But the framework is there and everyone is familiar with it.

 

You could have a lot of fun with a traditional Orlanthi clan demanding weregild from a strongly Lunar-aligned clan, only to be told that they should the issue with the local Lunar authorities.  The authorities in turn, will investigate in due course.

[Bohemond]

On 6/16/2023 at 3:52 AM, French Desperate WindChild said:

this point is for me very weird (Not the statement, it is, but the morale reason)

 

It means that Hasshole, from clan A, decides to provoke another guy, "Innocent the third" from clan B. Insults, spits, scramble, threats, ...

And as Innocent kept calm, Hasshole "orders" a duel...

 

So what could do Innocent to stay honorable ?

Ask clan A for a wergild as offense was made ?

Go to his own ring to "cry" ?

Refuse the duel even if he knows he is better warrior than Hasshole ?

Who will not laugh ? (from an orlanthi pespective)

so there is a duel... and of course Hasshole ends up in a hole...

 

Now clan A claims for wergild ? But why ? Even if there is a loss, the only responsible is the lost ! Responsability is Orlanth's value.

Innoncent is innocent right ?  that is what I don't understand, why wergild is allowed in that case

Would clan B would claim for wergild too because clan A's guy offensed it, its guy, etc ... And at the end that is just a negociation ? Even if their is, from my irl perspective, I admit, only one bad guy in this case ?

 

Speaking as someone who studies violence in the Middle Ages and teaches the subject, I think I can shed some light on how this system emerged historically, which helps us see how it might operate in Sartar. 

Historically, feuding emerged as a mechanism in cultures that had weak central government, because it allowed for the enforcement of law by the victim of a crime without having to have recourse to a government-maintained law enforcement system. If A harms B, B or B's relatives (whose family group has been harmed) have the right to inflict a reciprocal injury on A (or on A's family group). When B harms A, however, A and his family now get a justification for inflicting violence on B and his relatives. This is because there is no central justice institute that can take a bird's eye view of the violence and decide who is responsible for starting the violence. Intention doesn't matter either; the side that is suffering the current injury is focusing on the damage done to it. This deters crime by creating the threat of reciprocal violence against the criminal and his kin,

Since this view of violence creates a cycle of constant reciprocal violence until one side is completely destroyed, feuding cultures typically developed some version of compensation (wergeld). This allows A to pay a fine for B's injury. If B accepts the compensation, he is agreeing to forego all further rights of violent vengeance. It is likely that the two sides would bargain over the amount of compensation, factoring in things like the degree of lost ability caused by the wound, the degree of humiliation the wound causes, the social value of the victim and his kin (the higher the victim's social status, the higher the compensation ought to be), the degree to which the paying side is afraid of the other side, the actual circumstances of the injury, and so on. So even if the law says the compensation for the wound is 5 shillings, that was probably a starting part for the negotiations, rather than a fixed amount both sides automatically accepted.

However, while compensation was the peaceful, socially-encouraged method of resolving the dispute, it was seen as the less honorable and less manly method. Paying compensation implied that A is afraid of B, and accepting compensation implied that B is afraid of A. So while the community might lean on A and B to agree to compensation, A was never under a legal obligation to offer compensation and B was never under a legal obligation to accept it. Either side might insist on violence instead. So if A's family are mostly shepherds and B's family are weapon thanes, A probably wants to pay compensation, while B might be reluctant to accept it and might insist on a higher payment than was strictly customary. If B is the shepherd and A the weapon thane, B might try to demand compensation and A's response would be to refuse and dare him to make good on the violence. 

Notice how much honor, masculinity, and so on are tied up in this. The side that pays is probably seen as less manly and the side that accepts might feel like its pride is still wounded. If the payment gets made, it's often because the community has pressured both sides into accepting the deal because the community doesn't want the violence to continue disrupting society, because violence has a way of spilling over and dragging more people into the conflict. 

Now this system doesn't quite make sense in Sartar for several reasons. 1) magical healing can undo a great percentage of the harms of violence, even death. So it makes sense that if a wound has been healed, the compensation would be much lower because the victim has suffered only a social injury, not a lasting physical one. 2) Sartarites have chieftains who can adjudicate disputes in their clan as an outside authority. Tribes have kings to adjudicate disputes between clans, and there is also a Prince who can adjudicate disputes that happen across tribal boundaries. These authorities function as judges, but not as law enforcement, meaning that vengeance is still being inflicted on the personal level not by a state authority. 

Because of 2, the game takes inspiration from Iceland, where there was a loose system of chieftains who had judicial authority but not police authority. In Iceland, if a chieftain issued a ruling in favor of one side, the other side was free to ignore the ruling, but that would tend to force the chieftain into giving military support to the side he ruled for, essentially turning the judge into an ally of the victorious party and making him honor-bound to support the side he ruled for. The judge is not doing it because he legally has to enforce his verdict, but rather because his honor has been insulted and he stands to lose prestige if he allows the other side to ignore his judgment. But Iceland is a weird example because it doesn't really have a government beyond a court system. Elsewhere in Early Medieval Europe, there were kings who had a wider degree of authority. So we have to sort of hand-wave the fact that the game is trying to use a system that doesn't entirely fit the cultural examples it's drawing off of. 

With all of this in mind, let's look at Desperate Wind Child's scenario. Hasshole taunts Innocent. He inflicts a social wound (the insult) but not a physical one. Social wounds on their own do not deserve compensation, so Innocent has no legal grounds to demand compensation. Instead Innocent's only culturally acceptable option is to engage in violence against Hasshole or his kin, to prove that he is actually a man. If he fails to do this, he is likely to be mocked by both Hasshole's community and his own. Chalanans will urge him to forgive the insult, but given that it will make him look unacceptably weak, he probably can't afford to do that. Ernaldans will remind him that there are always other ways to take vengeance, such as cursing Hasshole or the like, but they will still feel that Innocent has to do something. Forgiveness of the insult is not an option, because it will tell everyone that Innocent is an easy target for violence, and that's going to make him a problem for his clan. He doesn't go to the ring because this is a personal matter, not a clan matter. But he might go to his kinsmen who are good warriors and urge them to help him make good on the social injury. 

So Innocent gathers a group of his kinsmen and goes looking for Hasshole. He confronts Hasshole and demands a retraction of the insult. If Hasshole refuses, the only real option left is violence. Perhaps Innocent sends someone to negotiate a way out of the dispute. A Chalanan might try to shame Hasshole into retracting. A Lhankor Mhy might try to persuade him or warn him of the consequences of not apologizing, an Issarion might try to bargain down the apology in some way, a Humakti might seek to intimidate Hasshole with the implication that if Hasshole doesn't apologize, he will be facing Innocent AND the Humakti. An Ernaldan might appeal to shared family ties, or seek to make peace over whatever led Hasshole to make the insult. But if Hasshole doesn't back down, Innocent must either engage in violence or live with the shame of not being able to avenge the insult. 

 

 

 

[JRE]

The clan / tribe chieftains have another option, which is to declare the offender an outlaw. Killing an outlaw does not allow claiming a wergild, but I suspect the clan or tribe is not obligated to pay wergild for past offenses of the outlaw, either.

On the other hand, as Argrath takes the throne I expect many outlaws will be returning to Sartar with the new Prince, changing from outlaw to a lawful member will mean any past actions will be subject once again to wergild, so a potential source of friction, specially if the matter ends up before the Prince.

I suppose there will be a lot of politicking with the Sartar exiles and those that remained in Sartar. And unless they are welcome back, you may have some of the Prince companions being killed by enemy clansmen before they are reinstated.

[Bohemond]

38 minutes ago, JRE said:

The clan / tribe chieftains have another option, which is to declare the offender an outlaw. Killing an outlaw does not allow claiming a wergild, but I suspect the clan or tribe is not obligated to pay wergild for past offenses of the outlaw, either.

On the other hand, as Argrath takes the throne I expect many outlaws will be returning to Sartar with the new Prince, changing from outlaw to a lawful member will mean any past actions will be subject once again to wergild, so a potential source of friction, specially if the matter ends up before the Prince.

I suppose there will be a lot of politicking with the Sartar exiles and those that remained in Sartar. And unless they are welcome back, you may have some of the Prince companions being killed by enemy clansmen before they are reinstated.

Keep in mind that outlawry (in historical medieval Europe) is only something that a specific community has the power to impose--As the chieftain of the local community, I can declare you an outlaw in my community but the next community down the road has no real obligation to accept that. 

In Sartar, however, perhaps one of the powers of a chieftain/king/prince/lawstaff-holder/member of the Orlanth Rex subcult is the ability to make binding outlawry, which is observed by all clans/tribes. Perhaps there is a ritual for casting someone out of the community and giving them over to Gagarth. 
 

[Bohemond]

On 6/18/2023 at 1:52 PM, French Desperate WindChild said:

Not sure that calling air for a earth business is the most appropriate thing to not create more issue. I would say that the storm voice would propose our guy to discuss with Ernalda priestess and let Orlanth temple away from this issue

now I m not sure a lot of people would try anything. Even if they believe the poor victim is innocent, how many would try to defy a temple, with sacred warriors.. the risk is enormous

ernalda cultists will not bless the fields

bab’z warriors will be angry

probably tears will give more compensation for the bloodline than call for revenge for the brother

 

But that could create a true tragedy, this kind of situation creates hero, cursed hero as I like them!

I agree--Ernalda's law doesn't involve compensation for misdeeds. Serious offenses--desecration of temples, rape, assault of priestesses--are resolved only with bloodshed. Maran Gor is Ernalda's dark face and Babeester Gor avenges crimes against the earth. 

And yes, the conflict between different views of the law is exactly the sort of thing Germanic literature loved to explore through tragic stories. When women feature in early Germanic literature, they are often caught between the obligations of birth family and marital family. Do they avenge a dead husband by killing their brother (who killed the husband), or do they avenge a dead brother by killing their husband (who killed their brother)? Sometimes there is no good way out of a terrible situation. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Bohemond

[JRE]

Gloranthan magic changes many earth situations. Even if it is not a spell, outlawry surely is a magical status and not only a legal one, and that is why it is recognized widely.

[DrGoth]

20 hours ago, Bohemond said:

Keep in mind that outlawry (in historical medieval Europe) is only something that a specific community has the power to impose--As the chieftain of the local community, I can declare you an outlaw in my community but the next community down the road has no real obligation to accept that. 

In Sartar, however, perhaps one of the powers of a chieftain/king/prince/lawstaff-holder/member of the Orlanth Rex subcult is the ability to make binding outlawry, which is observed by all clans/tribes. Perhaps there is a ritual for casting someone out of the community and giving them over to Gagarth. 
 

I'd be a little surprised if this was possible.  Clans that were feuding forced to adhere to outlawry proclaimed by the other clan? I think this makes it all a little too organsied.

[Jeff]

6 hours ago, JRE said:

Gloranthan magic changes many earth situations. Even if it is not a spell, outlawry surely is a magical status and not only a legal one, and that is why it is recognized widely.

There is a spell called Ban. It can only be cast by Chief and High Priests of a cult. Not all outlawry results in the Ban spell, and no doubt it is carefully cast.

[Bohemond]

3 hours ago, DrGoth said:

I'd be a little surprised if this was possible.  Clans that were feuding forced to adhere to outlawry proclaimed by the other clan? I think this makes it all a little too organsied.

Perhaps not 'forced to adhere'--no one can make you do anything. But possibly it makes your outlawry visible to all Orlanthi.