Briefly...
One of the challenges / disturbing trends in Hero Wars is that we seem to have *once again* lost the feel for subjectivity / pov and for the glorious subtleties and uncertainties of tribal and regional variation. (Except of course, if you're making up 70% of the detail from funny names and two sentence summaries, there yes, there's going to be a LOT of variation.) There is a danger that the shortform cult write-ups can obscure more than they reveal.
Heortling Humakti are a case in point. (Carmanian humakti: another planet).
None of the Heortling cults (with the possible exception of LM) seem to have any sort of centralised organisation or hierarchy. The (sadly-missed) King of Sartar or (sadly-wishing-he-could-be-missed) Prince of the Far Place would have certain trans-cultic and even cultic ritual roles, but there's no Pope of Orlanth or CEO of Issaries or SeedMistress-General of Ernalda. There's no single 'cult' as such, just lots of local cults devoted to the 'same' deity. (Same Orlanth - probably. Same Vinga - hmm...). There's trans-clan cooperation and respect certainly, active exchange yes, but no homogenising central orthodoxis or even orthopraxis beyond the minimals of sacrifice and holy days and broad ceremonial form. The town rings are probably the closest to this, and in terms of doctrine and common ritual these would be fairly minimalist in their influence.
Nor are there invariant written catechisms or bibles or rules of membership.
(Strong oral traditions yes, but their use and implementation are another
topic).
There is clan and tribal tradition, actively transmitted and preserved by summoned ancestors and cult spirits. There are clan and tribal myths. There are ceremonies and quests based on these myths: if they work then the myth must be true.
My point is that there must be variation, even tremendous variation, in
myth, ritual and cultic form between tribes. On the essentials there will be
a fairly strong consensus (mind you: we know what some Ernaldan priestesses
believe about the *real* Lightbringers quest, even as they actively
facilitate the Orlanthi quests based on the Orlanth LB myth). On the less
essential, there will be variation; perhaps seven or eight different
versions of a particular myth across Sartar, with different gods and
incidents involved, different descriptions and paths, different secrets and
slightly different outcomes. Most of these myths will be closely tied to
particular rituals (a key component of the anthropological understanding of
myth that differentiates it from the classicist/historian's conception) and
of course the rituals *work*. Therefore each version of the myth is *true*.
(A barbarian QED).
The themes and motifs and key structural relationships of the myths will be similar, the surface detail will be diverse. (There's a theory of deity and reality lurking somewhere inside here).
For this reason I've always encouraged variation: I think its a big plus that there are four or five different interpretations / implementations / emphases for Vinga and her cult say, or for Elmal, or a particular Thunder Brother, or for any of the minor/specialised/regional deities. Face readings of the HW cult write-ups can easily lose this, replacing hard-fought KOS and source documentations with a DnDish uniformity.
Another aspect of this is, given the limited utility of written *literature* in the tribes and the essentially oral nature of Heortling culture, is that most cultic learning will be passed on from a particular teacher to his or her pupils; an intense and ongoing relationship like that of guru and sanwasan. If a clan has say five sword godar of Humakt, each will have particular secrets and ceremonies learned from his or her teacher, each will have a particular emphasis and particular myths / ceremonies / secrets / / feats / skills / weapons styles not shared with all of the other godar. Initiates will associate with one tradition and learn most of their cultic knowledge from a small group or a single teacher. As the initiate progresses, one particular teacher will become central.
There will be a large degree of commonality and cooperation of course, but I
don't think the personal teacher-student 'spiritual lineage' or 'kayling'
(the cultic equivalent of bloodline and kinship) has received enough
attention in the past. There may be considerably differing emphases and
ceremonial lore even within a single clan, reflecting the different
traditions, spiritual lineages and psychological preferences of particular
godar.
So for humakti, some lineages might teach death incarnate (the 'cross me and
you're dead' school), others the death is a tool to be used with honour (the
'I did not kill him: he was not ready' school) the death is a gift school
('Kill them, kill them all') or the death is a special gift school (I could
kill you with a word; you saw Death in my face, go now and reflect on the
truth, prepare for your own death with honour'). And all will gather round
the same campfire, and share the same rituals, and defend each other in the
shield-wall.
I should note that in my own campaigns, humakti have never been killing machines; they tend to act with considerable restraint. My own understanding of the humakti philosophy is that death is a gift that humakti prepare others for.
Did I say 'briefly'? :)
John
nysalor_at_primus.com.au John Hughesjohnp.hughes_at_dva.gov.au
The heroes filled their drinking cups with wine
Sainted with water, which is best, and sipped;
And what in them was noble, grew;
And truthfulness, with many meanings, spread
Over the slopes and through the leafy spears
As Priam thrust the knife into the white lamb's throat.
Powered by hypermail