Legal Affairs of Heortling and Lunar

From: Donald R. Oddy <donald_at_grove.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:51:26 GMT


Various comments:

From: "Joerg Baumgartner" <jorganos_at_hotmail.com>

>To be specific: into Anglo-Saxon law. Most of Europe uses Roman law these
>days.

Pretty much all of Europe uses a system *based* on Roman law, I don't know of any country which actually uses it. Equally there are places like Scotland, Ireland and Scandinavia which have remnants of Viking law yet never used Anglo-Saxon law. England did but the only things I can think of which remain in the legal code are some obscure bits of land law. Most went with the Norman conquest.

>This sort of law survived - as a government - well into the 18th century in
>coastal Germany, and in the shape of the "Feme" justice (basically masked
>vigilantes in good standing inviting or abducting and dooming an offender
>that had slipped government justice) probably longer. Goethe describes a
>hard but fair Feme justice in his play "Goetz von Berlichingen", and was
>known to have researched the issue during his time as youthful rebel in
>Frankfurt - roughly at the time of the French Revolution turning into an
>autocracy.

In the case of government it still exists in the Isle of Man, their parliament first sat in 979 when the Vikings established it. The legal system was brought into line with England's not later than the 19th Century.  

[snip]

>The system is fairly strong, and includes a strong portion of "might makes
>right" compared to the idealized Roman system which carries sentiments like
>"in dubio pro reo". The catch about "might makes right" is that the
>popularity of one's opponent could outweigh the influence of the mighty.

From what you describe it would appear that the legal system had already adopted a key element from Roman law - the existence of a state which had the right to determine that certain acts hurt the state itself and should therefore be punished. As far as I can determine this idea was spread across the parts of Europe outside the Roman Empire by the church. It is a very persuasive idea to leaders - that their interests and wishes have some greater, even divine, merit due to their position.

As for "might makes right" the idea is carried to the extreme by the imperial model where the state leadership retains power simply by virtue of their control of the resources of the empire irrespective of any other sentiments.

>I doubt that the Lunars would even perceive the friction. Codified justice
>would try and get hold of the moots. The Lunars would persecute the moots
>for invoking Orlanth, and if a case was brought before their justiciars,
>they would pronounce their judgement whether or not a moot has settled the
>issue. Likewise, the moots will settle the issue whether or not Lunar
>justice has pronounced a judgement.

I don't think the Lunars have anything like enough legal resources to do this. What they have will be used to deal with cases involving Lunar citizens and a few where political advantage can be gained. I see the friction arising where the Lunars try and enforce a law against a victimless crime (e.g. importing hazir). To the Orlanthi the idea of treating this as a crime is incomprehensible while the Lunars will be frustrated by their inability to get the locals to understand the importance of obeying the law.

From: "TERRA INCOGNITA" <inarsus-ferilt-z_at_mrg.biglobe.ne.jp>

>You certainly made good explanation here, maybe I can use your statement
>somewhere.

Glad to help.

>In RW, some (most?) of each societies have experienced changes from their
>prosperity as well as declines.
>(Maybe in Glorantha magical circumstance, such change doesn't occur without
>certain wiliness or intriguing party.)
>The Conquest of Caesar and Harald certainly caused centralization and the
>reorganization, and exile movement.

I see the conquest of Sartar by the Lunars as having a very similar effect to the conquest of Gaul and Britain by the Romans. If it lasts long enough (generations) Heortling society will change, adopting Lunar practices which are retained even after the invaders are expelled.

>And FWIW, Efendi once defined the usage of cattle depends on the process of
>land fertility and productiveness....that will lessen the fertility of soil
>and plants and immigrants are sooner or later, to replace their way of life
>to the livestock and crops more suitable for settlements (it might indicates
>Orlanthi cannot live long in same place as their god Movement Rune hints.),
>even if they don't choose more Pol Joni nomad-pastoralist way. (IIRC, Efendi
>referred Fernand Braudel.) See my translation of Efendi's "Soil of
>Glorantha" later.

Overuse by any crop will destroy the fertility of the land eventually. Medieval England managed to maintain stable land use for several centuries which was ended by a combination of plague and the economic switch to sheep farming. Much of Scotland (with much poorer land) did the same right up to the 18th Century and I suspect the same was true elsewhere in Europe. I see no reason why Heortlings with all the Ernaldan magic would not have learnt how to maintain fertility of the land.

>> For a people like the Orlanthi without a centralized state or government
>> it makes far more sense than modern criminal law.
>
>I agree with you, but Lunars might claim that enlightenment can be only
>through the light of Civilization.

They would probably find the localised authority and differing laws within a few miles impossibly complex and inefficent.

>From: "Jane Williams" <janewilliams20_at_yahoo.co.uk>

>I believe the Isle of Man still retains the Viking system to some extent. At
>least, they hold a "Thing" every year, all spoken in Manx, and all adults on
>the island are expected to attend.

That's what I meant by parts being included in other systems - English legal structure has been adopted almost completely with a number of unimportant local variations. The fact that the Thing is conducted in Manx indicates that it is pretty much a ritual affair, I wonder what proportion of attendees can understand what's being said.

>Maybe the problem with the Viking system was that it just didn't scale
>up? Only guessing, though.

It was more scalable than the replacement, most decisions were made locally. Compare that with feudal systems where authoritive decisions were made on a country basis - you can't afford to travel to London? well hard luck you must accept the local authority who just happens to be your opponent in the case.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

--__--__--

Powered by hypermail