In theory. Often the new chief comes from the same bloodline.
>If the chief moves, wouldn't that make the politics of chiefdom even
>more important? He could be the master of two steads (his bloodline's
>and the chief's stead), and the bloodlines that live at the chief's
>stead would not have any stead masters. That also means the chief is
>"not at home", so he is without bloodline support. At least some of his
>sons would stay at home with the herds and crops.
Yes. Some chief's will givern in the interest of their bloodline, others will probably penalize them to appeaqr fair. (For those in academia this is like getting your Head of Department promoted to Dean or Pro Vice Chancellor - you can't assume any favours; for example, does she or he plan to return to the department or get promoted again?).
>The only other thing I can think of is that there is no chief's stead.
>The bonesmith lives at stead X, the Dishthane at stead Y, the market is
>near stead Z, the weaponthanes are spread out at various steads. The
>chief happens to live at one of these steads, but that is about it.
>This is the most "decentralized" structure, and thus seems fairly
>Heortling. But it goes against the grain.
Many of the thanes already live in the Chief's stead (priests, weaponthanes and so on), and only thanes can become chief (I think). It is probably rare for a new chief to come from a different bloodline or a thane not already living in the central village.
I also think some small or poor clans have no chief's stead (the chief's stead will just "move" with the position).
Thom
Powered by hypermail