Peter on Pamaltala

From: David Cake <davidc_at_cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 00:52:31 -0800


Argueing against Peter Metcalfe about the Doraddi

>> I think the young warriors (Vangono types) express some of their
>>excess aggression by attempting truly heroic feats of hunting, killing
>>titanotheres and such. When they do so, the whole tribe gets to eat for
>>days.
>
>Surely it would be the Rasoulti Hunters who attempt these feats
>of derring-do rather than the Vangono?

        I think the Rasouti mostly stick to more sensible mundane hunting, preferring a more regular flow of food in a way that doesn't risk life and limb. If the Rasouti hunt titanotheres and such occasionally, they do it using relatively safe methods like pit traps (and I think they do so only seldom, as its wasteful). But the Vangono might just go out there spear in hand, just for the boasting value and tribal gratitude.

        But understand my motivation - I am trying to find ways for the Vangono to demonstrate their ability as violent heroic types, while not grossly threatening the stability of their peaceful and non-violent society. I want to reconcile two known facts - the Doraddi are a peaceful society, with very little organised violence (at least until very recently), and the Doraddi also have a warrior class that wants to win glory by killing things. So you want there to be a fair few ways for these warrior types to win glory for themselves.

>So the Kresh are not going to war with the Arbennan Kingdom for
>looting their caravans but instead over the fate of the missing
>caravans which they don't know the cause of?

        My impression was that it was much more a case of the Arbennan going to war with the Kresh than the Kresh going to war with the Arbennan. You may scathingly dismiss this as a pedantic point if you wish. As you mention later, so far Kresh reprisals have been very limited, implying no organised response to Vangono aggression - I'm sure they will fight back once Arbennan armies are marching against them, though.

[I talk about why the Vangono are more likely to be restrained by the tribal hierarchy than in usual in Glorantha]
>Ptooey to your utopianism! If you want a sickly-saccharine-sweet
>society where the system of checks and balances between the various
>parts of society never breaks down, then that place is not in
>glorantha IMHO.

        Sure it breaks down. The Arbennan Confederacy could be considered a case of such breakdown (if you consider the war with the Kresh unjustified). Its just less likely to happen than, say, in warrior led societies like the Pelorians or the Orlanthi, where war is almost the first resort rather than the last.

        I don't think of the Pamaltelan society as utopian, by any means. But they do have less wars. The fact that the Vangono have little power within society, means that when the system breaks to allow violence it does so in a more individual fashion, rather than on a tribal basis. I think people are killed violently by other Doraddi reasonably often. But seldom does a tribe of Doraddi fight as a whole, unless against some unpleasant external threat. Its much more common for some Vangono to decide someone is using evil magic, and charge in with flaming spear, than it is for the Vangono to convince all the other Vangono to act as a group against the tribes wishes.

        There is also the Pamaltelan tendency for threats (of the chaotic variety, at least) to manifest as individuals rather than groups. I tend to try and apply this idea lightly to my thoughts about conflict in Pamaltela - - I like to think of the Vangono as tendency towards great individual enemies rather than hordes of faceless opponents. This isn't something that should be taken literally in any way, just a trend I try and apply somewhat to matters Pamaltalan, to give it a slightly different feel.

>The idea that the Council of Women is somehow in tune with the Cosmos
>and philosophically opposed to War belongs in the trashcan. The Uz
>who are more feminist and have been raided by outsiders more times
>than the Doraddi are see nothing wrong with attempting to eat outsiders
>whenever they can.

        give me some credit for having reasonable motivations for my views, Peter (or is that against the Metcalfian rules of argument?)

        I don't think the Council of Women is opposed to War out of some vague intrinsic cultural feminist feeling. The Council of Women are opposed to war for numerous reasons, many of them human universal, and largely because they fear it because they consider themselves the rightful controllers of tribal business, and they do not know how to wage war and so waging war means turning control of the important tribal business over to the Vangono, many of whom are their idiot younger husbands that they are so dismissive of normally. Admitting that War is a good idea means admitting that the womens methods have failed, and the Vangono are right, and it also means admitting that times are bad and it is a time of trouble. So they don't want to do it, because its human nature. They might not mind a few warriors going off and causing trouble on their own, returning with gifts, but only because it doesn't occur to them that there might be reprisals against the tribe.

        Cheers

                David


Powered by hypermail