>Are you implying that in Sartar the Humakti basically make up a different
>type of clan; that Humakti are a clan, but just not based on blood kinship?
> If so, I'm afraid I disagree. And, I _do_ think ALL Humakti from Sartar
>(which is different from all Huamkti _in_ Sartar) have taken the ritual of
>kinship severance.
I think my statement was from the standpoint of the clan "losing" the Humakti, that it was as if they'd married into another clan. In other words, while they are still a member of your clan, they are not an active member any more. And just as when a woman (or man) marries into another clan, the new clan is responsible for wergild, etc. However, I don't think the Humakti are very clan-like, even if they provide their members some of the same support.
I think it's bad enough that you are effectively cut off from your family that not all Sartarite Humakti go through with the severance ritual.
>I
>think a Humakti is the only one who can get away with chastising a clan for
>the way it mistreated a kinsman
I don't. In fact, this is a perfect role for an Eurmali. Clowns are _supposed_ to mock inappropriate behavior.
However, Loren thinks
>Eurmal, however, defines outlaw for the Orlanthi
which I also disagree with. Yes, Eurmali are outlaws, but they're usually found under the protection of a chief. And they do perform useful roles in society (like being on the tribal Rings). An archetypal outlaw is completely outside society. You aren't going to have a kinslayer making decisions for the clan. Not all outlaws are Eurmali.
Powered by hypermail