> >But the trouble is Carmanians aren't really interested in making
> converts or
> >winning popularity contests.
>Not any more they aren't, but I believe that they *were* early on. In
>the beginning the only "Carmanian" was Carmanos, who could be seen as a
>later day Idomon - reinterpreting the old Pelandan religion with new
>truths and blending it with the Irensavel teachings from Fronela.
While his people subjugated the Pelandan Cities and had a vested interest in keeping distance between themselves and their conquered subjects.
>Carmanos then converted members of his own immediate circle (family,
>followers, supporters, etc). Then the religion spread out among the
>heterogeneous Ten Thousand and the (mostly Bisosae) citizens of Brinnus.
Just because he made friends and mythic connections with the Bisosae does not mean that he converted them to his religion. The two could have merely had a profitable relationship in much the same way as the Sikhs did with their British overlords after the Indian Mutiny.
>Of course this re-opens the old debate on the theistic or sorcerous
>nature of the Carmanian religion itself. My current understanding is
>that it is a little of both without misapplied worship being an issue.
>You can be fully Carmanian and worship one of the Good Gods.
I don't see the problem. It's stated in the Glorantha: Intro (p120) that the Carmanians gave up sorcery for the most part because others showed them that it was evil. Thus most Carmanians are theistic while the Viziers are sorcerous and no misapplied worship is necessary.
--Peter Metcalfe
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail