Re: 2nd Age Fronelan Malkionism

From: Joerg Baumgartner <joe_at_toppoint.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 98 18:46 MET DST


I agree with Peter Metcalfe about Heortland thanes, but we still haven't reached an agreement about Fronelan theology. <pagedown alert>

A clarification first: It doesn't sound much like a Malkioni belief to cast Malkion, the central figure in the creed, in the role as the evil Lord of Matter.

This made me think whether Estrekor identified "Malkion Evil Lord of Matter" with the God Learner Malkion in his theology. Since his own, pre-God Learner Fronelan Malkionism was of course good, he may have found the dualism in Malkionism based on "our good creed vs. their evil creed".

>>>Elsewhere the God of the Fronelans (this is second age stuff)
>>>is called FroNalinko and Fron Im Malakinus.

>>These are part of a dualistic pair, FroNalakino the Evil Sorcerer and
>>Malakinus the Good Wizard. I had the impression that Estrekor addressed
>>the God Learner Malkion as FroNalakino.

>So the One Mind of the Fronelans was called Malkion. And since
>the One Mind was the Creator, we can conclude that the Fronelans
>addressed the Creator as Malkion?

Evidently not exclusively. We don't know whether the Fronelan pre-GL Malkioni addressed the Creator by a name at all.

>>I assumed that Estrekor was an anti-God Learner propagandist and theologist
>>who managed to press their different teachings as a manifestation of evil
>>into his own teachings before he departed.

>And what does this have to do with the beliefs of the Fronelans?
>He was writing their beliefs down and was showing how it was
>wrong.

Estrekor reminds me a bit of Peter and myself writing down the scripture in the way we want it understood, with our own ideas firmly and unseparably entangled into what the tradition says.

Was Estrekor addressing the mistakes in pre-GL Malkionism or GL-tainted but still recognisably Fronelan Malkionism?

>>I don't believe that the Return
>>To Rightness crusaders came before the God Learner missionaries and
>>traders... There would have been little point in fighting a religious war
>>when all which mattered was who would rule (and those Fronelan Malkioni who
>>accepted the Crusaders' message remained as lords, or why else should
>>Syranthir's wife and brother have taken their side?).

>The fact remains that there is an important religious dimension to
>Syranthir's expulsion from Fronela. It may not be apparent why there
>was one given the known facts but it was there nevertheless.

Sure. It is a bit like the RW mediaeval evergreen "shall mundane authority rule about church issues, vice versa, or neither?".

Syranthir resisted the military might which came to impress the Jrusteli creed onto Fronelan Malkionism. This made him a holy warrior, even though his reasons may have been simple power politics. At the time of the Reformation, switching the confession was so popular because the ruler got to disown the church properties and include them in the state church controlled fiscally by himself. One very good reason Henry VIII abandoned Catholicism... A similar reason against it was the cease of pilgrimages and the income thereof.

The situation in Fronela around 700 ST reminds me of Germany before the 30-year War. On one side you have these people with the new, improved creed and big swords, on the other side you have the people with the established creed and power to lose. Fronela lacked the equivalents of the kings of Denmark and Sweden, though...

</pagedown alert>


Powered by hypermail