>[Rikard] can hardly have founded the Kingdom of New Malkonwal
>without [a state church].
There was no state church in Jerusalem when the Crusaders came yet they established a kingdom there. The same goes for Hernan Cortez when he conquered the Mexicans.
I don't believe there was anything like an organized church hierarchy for Heortland in Pharaonic times. For one thing, it sits oddly with the Orlanthi religion which had changed very little.
> > Secondly by declaring the Kingdom of Malkonwal, Rikard has gone
> > beyond simply being the head of existing institutions or allowing
> > his underlings free reign, he is instituting a reform from above.
>Yes. But honestly, how much of a religious reformer will a mercenary
>adventurer be?
What makes you think he was just a mercenary adventurer? Secondly I wasn't speaking of religious reforms, but rather the remaking of the kingdom into a Malkioni equivalent. Establishing a state church is a much lower priority than kicking people's heads in to make them swear obedience.
>His reform will be of a similar style as Henry VIII's
>disavowing of Roman Catholicism.
Hardly. Henry VIII was an reigning king whose regal authority was undisputed and the kingdom was fighting no wars. Even with the aid of willing accomplices within an established ecclesiastical hierarchy, it took him some years to make the break with Rome.
Whereas Rikard is a foreigner who becomes King after the Pharaoh's disappearance and has a scant three years to in which to do anything. Much of his energy is devoted to subjugating two earldoms leaving scant time for unleashing any sweeping religious reforms among the general masses.
>Details in the rites, apart from naming
>the king as head of the church, will have been left to the clergy.
What clergy?
--Peter Metcalfe
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail