>>But that defeats the whole point of adoption, to recognize X as being
>>the offspring of Y for _all_ intents and purposes. X would have been
>>made acceptable to the ancestors as part of the adoption ritual. Thus
>>he would be treated no better or worse than a normal offspring.
>Who says it's for "all intents and purposes"?
The very meaning of adoption is to establish new _kinship_ ties. If the ancestors don't recognize him as kin then why should the people who adopted him be required to do so?
A historical example: Augustus was the adopted son of Julius Caesar and worshipped him as an ancestor after Julis was deified.
>I think the rules the
>ancestors use (since it's really their decision) are of course up to the
>specific DM in the specific situation, but not all members of a family are
>neccesarily equal before the ancestors.
That's true, but you are seeming to do the complete opposite by claiming that adoptees are second-class kin unless otherwise stated. They should be treated as equals unless otherwise decided IMO.
>To use an extreme example, I doubt
>most ancestral houses (for lack of a better term?) would see the bastard
>son of a tribal member whose father was an escaped slave given refuge,
>conceived upon a kidnapped "bride" as "just as good" as the eldest son of
>the clan chief.
Nero. Adopted son of Claudius. Was made equal heir to his natural son Britannicus. Worshipped Claudius when the later was deified.
>>>Neither can adopted members (usually) hold clan official seats.
Me>>I don't think this is true. Wives (or husbands for matrilineal clans)
>>get accepted into the clan with all rights and responsibilities, so
>>why not adoptees? If they didn't trust him, they wouldn't have adopted
>>him in the first place.
>I don't think this is so odd - you can become a naturalized citizen of the
>USA, but you still can't be president. Your descendant could.
And most of the world are not americans. The NZ deputy PM was born in California and still retains american citizenship. There is no constitutional bar to him becoming PM.
>And I think
>the rules for subordinate spouses (in terms of lineage) are special - I
>can't think offhand of a situation (in RW cultures) where such an
>individual would be a candidate for leading offices anyway.
Catherine the Great, Czarina of Russia. Was a german princess but usurped power after the death of her husband.
William of Orange. A Dutch prince married to an english princess. Was made King despite the presence of a legitimate son to the deposed king. (of course it's all tied up with the glorious revolution and popery plus his wife was made ruling Queen as well).
Powered by hypermail