RE: What the hearthspirit saw

From: John Hughes <nysalor_at_primus.com.au>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 03:44:33 -0600


DINACOLI DO DANGERFORD Gedday Folks,

Less soap, more suds!

I'm starting to work through some of the responses to Orlanthi sex and sexuality. It may take a while, so apologies in advance if parts are a bit scrappy.

NEW LOZENGE ORDER Jose:

Thanks for your clarification on Vinga, and for your thoughts on the new orthodoxy and 'experts'.

Some days I think Glorantha is drying up because there are so few opportunities left for original first order creation. On other days I despair that I'll *ever* be able to understand even the workings and life of my own small clan.

I do believe however, that hero wars will catalyse a wondrous amount of new insight for us all to develop. And that established modes and views *will* still prevail.  

I personally don't see a great problem with the appointed experts, though I do appreciate the sentiment. There has been evidence of a new 'class structures' of late. Still the Digest being what it is, the same standards (or lack thereof) of evidence, consistency, imagination and analog apply. Try practicing the mantra, "What would you know, you only *wrote* the damned thing". :)

IDEAL TYPES Theo:

Surely Theo, you're not accusing *ME* of being an Orlanthi propagandist. :) All hail the reaching *phut* moon. etc. I did put a positive spin on most aspects, but then was probably a bit too pessimistic in my assessment of women in marriage. As usual, its my goal to question some of the complexities of the received cultural orthodoxy.

< Solar vs. Lunar views >  

> But who, precisely,

 > subscribes to each view?

Each of the typologies I presented, including the Orlanthi, are essentially sociological ideal types. I'm sure there are several more for each culture, especially (given the sexual decadence of the nobility and court) within the Lunar Way. As Nick noted, tying down manifestations to specific groups will always be difficult. Personally, I've never been further west than Furthest, and I didn't like the crimpy, so I'll leave it too others much better qualified to comment on Solar and Lunar expressions.

There's a very big problem in using ideal types, both in real world theoretical assemblies like functionalism and structuralism, and in the way we deal with Gloranthan cultures. Its the way you deal (or don't deal) with change, mixing and evolution. In terms of Glorantha, I think its one of our BIG PROBLEMOS. I've recently come up against it in dealing with mixed orlanthi/yelmalio clans.

If you'll pardon a brief digression...

About a month ago I put out some basic questions about clans where yelmalions and orlanthi lived together. Or orlanthi and 7M Lunars. While grateful for the replies (thanks Joerg, Alex, Peter, Mikael) it was obvious from those responses that the question hadn't really been addressed, officially or in campaigns, despite it being the norm! Solars and Orlanthi have been sharing clans in Tarsh etc. for centuries. By the time I reread Mike Dawson on Yelmalions in Prax, I felt I was hitting a fundamental confusion between cult and culture. (In Mike's defence though, he was reflecting MOB's work on Sun County, which has some unique characteristics).

Yelmalions and Orlanthi have different approaches to worship, authority, law, the status of women, taboo and pollution - a whole host of fundamentals. Yet in these clans, brothers and sisters of the same bloodline may be in different cults with fundamentally different value systems! The king may change from orlanthi to solar and back again. The ring might change back and forth. So what is the accommodation? What values are shared? How does the economic reality that is the clan survive the changes back and forth? Can our existing models of individual choice of cult survive? I certainly think the dominant idea of cult as culture HAS to undergo further modification.

Stay tuned. Comments invited.  

INFANTICIDE AND KINSTRIFE   Thomas McVey:

>I'd find this questionable. They've got fertility magic, they've got magic to
>cure disease, and they've got magic to control reproduction. Why'd they
have to
>have infanticide?

Thought about this, and yes, to a large extent I agree. I hereby insert 'though rare' into my original description. But I do believe we have to distinguish (as we often have to do when discussing sex, gender and morality) between NORMATIVE behaviour (what people BELIEVE is real or should happen, the mythic truth if you will) and ACTUAL behaviour.

For instance, in our culture we have the dominant, normative myth of the nuclear family and the single marriage, while the reality is closer to single-parent serial monogamy. Discussions of homosexuality have to be especially sensitive to this aspect. Whatever the 'causes' of homosexuality* (and there are several competing normative myths and ideologies currently engaged in meme warfare) the historical (and probably current) reality is that most people slip roles: many 'homosexuals' eventually take heterosexual partners and many 'heterosexuals' quietly take same sex partners, often at the end of a marriage or long-term relationship. I'll discuss historic manifestations of same sex relationships below.

My main point is, for most aspects of our sexual behaviour, what we believe to be true and what actually is are quite different.

Normatively, infanticide is not Orlanthi practise. However, if a child is deformed or sickly, if there are multiple births (so that one may live), if the mother needs all her resources to nurture an existing child, if the stead is facing famine or if warfare or chaos has recently depleted adult providers, then I believe it does happen. In desperate times, as both you and David Dunham have noted, sacrifice might also be a consideration.

>Besides, kin-slaying of this sort would bring chaos to the clan.

Disagree strongly here. Remember, ROTO makes clear that the lowest "unit" of justice/vengeance is the bloodline, not the individual. There cannot be crimes against kin of one's own bloodline (KOS 260). The child belongs to the father's bloodline, and it would be females of that bloodline who assist with the birth and with the decision. They would advise the father. If the mother wished the child dead, then it would happen quietly and 'accidentally', just as it does in our society. The mother's clan has no investment in the child, and would have no reason to intervene. Earth recognises the necessity of life and death, and has a harsh and sometimes cruel morality. Orlanthi belief indicates the spirit will one day return to be reborn. Unless the child was taken by force from the mother, I don't see it would be an issue. And people everywhere, dealing in matters of life and death, appreciate there are no easy answers, and will usually respect the decision. Infanticide is a death to preserve life.

And yes, female infanticide would be more common. This *is* where harsh economic reality intervenes. For some bizarre reason I've never been able to fathom, ROTO claims that Orlanthi marriages involve *both* brideprice and dowry (243). In my thinking, the man would be primarily responsible for his own brideprice, whereas the woman would be more dependant on her parents and bloodline. Thus, girls are a greater economic burden than boys.

Matthew Thale:

>Do any of our anthropologists out there have infanticide figures from
>RW nomadic cultures? This might shed some light on the Praxian
>infanticide question.

No hard figures on hand, but heres a quote from the MacMillan Dictionary of Anthropology that may be helpful

"The practice of killing newborn babies is generally attributed to the need for population control, especially in hunting and gathering and nomadic societies where it may be impossible for a mother to carry around more than one small child and perform the necessary tasks for the subsistence of her family. In some cases female infanticide is preferentially or exclusively practiced because of the higher value placed on male offspring, and this has lead to the formulation of hypotheses within ecological anthropology which link warfare, cults of male dominance and female infanticide to protein supply and population distribution. Infanticide may also be practised in the case of sickly or deformed infants, or for ritual or religious motives, as in the case of certain African peoples who left twin babies to die because of the supernatural significance of twin births."

HISTORIC MODELS OF HOMOSEXUALITY Historically, there is a very strong relationship between homosexuality and the sacred, and homosexuality and warrior cults. It has manifested in three main forms, none of which are typical of late C20 gay lifestyles. (Same with heterosexuality: dating, collapse of the extended family, notions of romance, access to public spaces, economic mobility, birth control and feminism all make our ways of love and marriage historically unique).

Cross-culturally, Ford and Beach's survey found that homosexual activity was considered socially acceptable and normative for certain classes of people in 64% of the 76 societies they studied. Much of it had a strong ritual dimension: i.e. it was not 'lifestyle' homosexuality. Nor did it necessarily indicate a basal sex orientation: in age-structured homosexuality for instance most participants would later marry and have children. Generally, polytheistic societies are more tolerant of homosexual practice than monotheistic ones, though there are plenty of exceptions to the rule.

The three main historical manifestations of homosexuality are:

  1. Age structured homosexuality

Relations between an older and younger male, typically before the youth is married. Associated with military societies, with the social basis provided by ritual and ceremony. The Greek model, expressed mythically by Laius and Chrysippus and Zeus and Ganymede, and historically by the Thebans and Spartans in military organisations such as The Sacred Band, where boy lovers were taught the arts of war. Plutarch reports that in Sparta this extended to noblewomen and young girls. In Greek thought, an act could be homosexual but not a person. And homosexuality was frowned on between peers.

In the European tradition, ritual pederasty has been reported for the continental Celts, the Germans and Albanians. It was common and accepted in the Near East. We can also find it in Japan (Saikaku Ihara), China, among the Azande and in Melanesia, all linked to military cults, and with a strong statistical link to polygyny.

2. Gender Reversed Homosexuality

Adoption of the gender role, dress and mannerisms of the opposite sex. Institutionalised transvestism, often associated with shamanism. North America (berdache), South America, Polynesia, SE Asia and Africa. Mythic expressions: both Wodin and Samba, the bisexual son of Krshna. Some 115 Amerindian tribes recognised the berdache, of these 35 also recognised female berdaches. The call was sometimes associated with a vision.

3. Role Specialised Homosexuality

Entitlement of a status or role not widely held in a culture. For example, Siberian shamans were entitled were entitled by divine intervention to reverse gender roles and to engage in homosexual behaviour, even though this was taboo to other members of society. NE temple prostitution often fell into this category.

Role specialised homosexuality can also be entirely economic: In C19 Canton, 'girls houses' were formed to produce silk, and they were encouraged to form close personal bonds with each other to delay marriage and the loss of income to their (patriarchal) families.

MYTHIC PRECEDENTS
>There'd also have to be a mythic precedent. Like Zeus and Ganymede in RW
myths,
>for instance. Mind you, Orlanth doesn't get as much action as Zeus. Ernalda
>seems to be the one with a wandering eye in the myths.

It's interesting to look at the three main RW analogues for Orlanth: Wodin, Indra and Zeus.

Each was sexually polymorphous. Wodin was a cross dresser, a violent rapist and he probably engaged in homosexual acts (I have only a secondary source for the latter). Indra's body was covered in vagina-shaped tattoos as punishment for his frequent seductions. Zeus was a serial seducer/rapist with a thing for Ganymede and a kink for animal sex. It makes you wonder what myths *didn't* make KOS.

BELLY SPEAR OR BOLLOCKS? Pardon for the cheeky header. I just couldn't resist.

>> Maybe I'm too
>> grounded in the RW, but the Germanic/Nordic/Celtic world doesn't seem
>> too fond of homosexual/bisexual activity.

>Beg to differ on this (at least on the Celts). In the Tain Bo Cuailgne, the
>relationship between blood-brothers Ferdia and Cuchulainn is very ambiguous.
>(Cuchulainn kills Ferdia with his gae bolga, or belly-spear - fnarr, fnarr).

Hmmm. Intriguing but definitely left-field. The gae bolga was taught to Cuchulainn by Scathach the warrior woman of Alba (my favourite proto-vingan), along with the apple feat, the thunder feat, the feats of sword edge and sloped shield, and others. The Book of Leinster version of the Tain explicitly describes the gae bolga in Cuchulainn's fight with Ferdia:

"The gae bolga had to be made ready for use on a stream and cast from the fork of the toes. It entered a man's body with a single wound, like a javelin, then opened into thirty barbs. Only by cutting away the flesh could it be taken from that man's body."

I can't comment on the word-root (despite my eight happy months doing Munster for ejjits) but the sources I've consulted explicitly excluded Ireland when discussing Celtic homosexual practice. There seems little direct evidence.

DARK SIDE OF ORLANTHI SEX Claude Manzato:

Please delurk more often! :)

I think from the myth that the sex pit that drove Ragnalar mad was clearly something beyond the everyday experience of the young gods *and* their "uncles" who abducted them. Not that I'd have any trouble with Orlanthi myths spelling out the dangers of sexual obsession.

>Sex can be bad (can drive you crazy and make you do evil things like forming
>the unholy trio and summoning chaos).
>Bad sex is to be hidden (nothing is said of what goes on in the pit while
>the others trials are described).

To balance my happy gloss, what is the dark side of Orlanthi sexuality?

Well, as with any society based on the Hobbsian notion of Warre, use of force and even violence is part of everyday life. The Orlanthi accept violence as a tool. Despite the balances and protections, sexual violence would be part of the system. Gang rape might be a ritually defiling punishment or simply human ugliness at its worse.

And there's incest of course, though it hasn't attracted much comment because it doesn't mean much to us (It refers to banned marriage classes, and normally not to domestic incest or abuse).

And yes, marriage, not sex. A manta was drummed into us in kinship seminars that 'sex isn't marriage, and marriage isn't sex'. So casual sex with a banned partner might not attract attention, but elopement, open cohabitation or *gasp* marriage might bring both affected clans howling to your door in righteous fury.

Disobeying kinship prescriptions means disobeying the natural (sacred) order of the universe. It makes you an animal. No worse than an animal, for the animal tribes have their own rules and notions of kin.

ARRANGED MARRIAGES Tom Merchant:

>Orlanthi arranged marriages. Tell me I didn't read
>that.

Sorry Tom. Its my heresy of the week.

Certainly Orlanthi marriage has many (seven) different classes, including several solely for love, and I gave this a bit of short shrift in my (somewhat rushed) essay. However, I did want to raise a few realities that are in tension to the 'perfect freedom' model.

There will be a *lot* of regional variation and tribal exceptions. However, consider the following:

Most Orlanthi would only be eligible for one or two of the available models (KOS 243). Clans are (largely) exogamous. This means women's potential partners live beyond the stead. Most women have some restrictions on travel.

Given the divided nature of public life, there is limited opportunity for a women to meet eligible strangers unless they are invited into her home. Temple worship is probably the major exception to this.

Most steads are small, and the number of people you know would be relatively small.

Kinship is a pervasive ideology, and a major instrument of clan policy and defence. (Some academic theories of kinship stress its prime function as the exchange of women by men for purposes of alliance). Your parents would have ideas and be making connections and suggestions as you grew older. The much-quoted of late Njal's saga usually has young men going to their fathers or adopted fathers and saying, "suggest a wife for me".

C20th type dating and romance just doesn't work. Alex hit the (copper) nail on the head in his statement that tribal marriage is a contract between groups, not individuals. Orlanthi love-marriage gets round this: the other models don't.

(And matrilineal succession just makes things more complicated. Marriage is a very different institution in a matrilineage, and if you follow the line of inheritance its easy to see why. A woman's prime supporters are her brothers, not her husband, and a man's prime clan investment is in his sisters' children, who are in his own bloodline, while his children belong to his wife's).

Arranged marriage is pervasive and seen as natural in the tribal world. To quote a Chinese proverb, "Why wait until the water is boiling before you put it on the fire?" Love grows with marriage, rarely before it.

Despite this, I believe that few Orlanthi marriages would proceed unless the woman gave her consent.

And having made my points, will again happily accede to prevailing orthodoxy.

ULERIA MIA Gian:

> the references to Uleria are
>so limited?!?

Somewhere on a vaguely official piece of paper I have a note that says Uleria is known to the Orlanthi but not widely worshipped by them. And somewhere else, I think I have a reference to a Sartarite local goddess in the role, whose name escapes me. Perhaps hero wars will reveal more.

BRAVE FERGUS RIDES THE BATTLE CARS Alex:

Amid much good stuff and a few bits where its obvious either he or I didn't read the original post:

>> The Orlanthi don't think much about sex.

>In the sense of Zen Mind and sports psychology, perhaps this is so. ;-)
>But in the sense of not being interested in gossiping about who's doing
>it with whom?

That's not sex, that's KINSHIP! (see kinship mantra above). A bit hard for you and I to realise the distinction, but a fundamental one nethertheless.

>I think this is overstated: few clans IMO are strictly exogamous

Yip. Local variation can rip into just about everything that's been said one way or the other.

> "How do the Varndings find their sheep in the long grass?"

Perhaps you could arrange a demonstration at Convulsions :).

THE HORROR! David, holder of the Dunham rune:

>Greg once messily wrote that about 1/6 of the Sartarite clans
>practiced matrilineal descent, but never gave details.

Thank the six directions. It would be a *nightmare*.

I go bed now.

Cheers

John


nysalor_at_primus.com.au                           John Hughes
johnp.hughes_at_dva.gov.au
Pip & John's Sacred Time Greeting:
http://home.primus.com.au/pipnjim/sacred.htm

 ... a flying arrow, a crashing wave, night old ice, a coiled snake, a bride's bed talk, a broken sword, the play of bears, a king's son.

                                           Havamal 86.

------------------------------

End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #424


Powered by hypermail