Gloranthaphiles,
=46rom: Andrew Larsen <aelarsen_at_mac.com>
asks some great questions.
> 1) A and B are both Heortlings from different clans (and to keep it
simple, let's say they're both Orlanthi). They fight, and A kills B.
Normally, this would allow B's relatives to demand compensation or start
a blood feud. But then C resurrects B.
OK, the first issue is =93who recompenses C?=94 Resurrection is difficult an=
d
time consuming, thus expensive. These are generally reserved for really
important people, and I am assuming that B is not =93really important.=94 I
assume that for simplicity=92s sake, because if he was then the whole matter
gets more complex.
> Leaving aside complications like possible Relife sickness, loss of
abilities, and whatnot, how does the resurrection affect the legal
situation that A is in? Has C's resurrection eliminated the claim of B's
family to compensation?
I don=92t think it entirely eliminates the responsibility.
> Has the damage been downgraded from death to injury?
I would guess that it probably has downgraded it somewhat. However, death and resurrection are both still painful and frightening affairs, so something is due.
> Or does C's
I presume you mean B=92s family here
> family still have a right to pursue a feud with A and his family?
Sure, absolutely. B was harmed.
> Does B himself have the right to demand compensation or start a feud?
Sure, always. Damage was done; something is due back for it.
> ) N and M are brothers, or cousins, or otherwise close relatives. N is
an Uroxi, while M is (for covenience) an Orlanthi. They fight some bad
people/things, and N frenzies during the fight. At the end of the
fight, M tries to calm M down, but N attacks and kills M. N has
committed kinslaying, and has presumably acquired significant ritual
stain. But C intervenes and resurrects M. How does the resurrection
affect N's legal and religious status?
=46irst of all =93legal status=94 has no meaning here. This is a family affa=
ir,
and legalisms are only between families, not within it. That is exactly
why kinslaying is so awful: there is no legal recourse, no way to right
the wrong.
> Is N still guilty of kinslaying, is he still stained, and is the
community still wounded by the unresolvable crime?
I would say not, since the slaying was countered.
> Or has C's action healed the situation?
I think so.
> Is this a 'near miss' for everyone involved (an incident to be learned
from but without lasting repercussions), or is there still a problem
within the family and the community?
Having an Uroxi in your family is ALWAYS a problem! But I would say that the resurrection here counters the =93sin=94 of kinslaying.
--__--__--
Message: 3
=46rom: Andrew Joelson <ajoelson_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 21:49:41 -0600
To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
Subject: Re: Glorantha digest, Vol 11 #20 - 12 msgs
Reply-To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
>> Now, on to the next question. I seem to remember some comment
>> once about Harmast (or was it someone else?) finding an
>> alternate to the Baths of Nelat (sp?) that a mortal could
>> survive, but which would still allow him to complete the LBQ.
>> Anyone got any details, suggestions, or wild speculation?
>
> KoS p168, the description of the Short Lightbringers Pilgrimage.
> Section
> 9. "The Fire of Justice, sometimes called Ehilm's Flame, is generated.
> Orlanth must pass through the fire. If he survives then he is proved to
> be just. We do not condone the substitution of the Baths of Nelat as an
> alternative. No one within living memory has survived it, no matter how
> much preparation was done."
>
> And on "living memory", it's worth noting the internal dating of the
> document: "Kallyr Starbrow.... attempted this over a century ago"
Please note that the part about substitution is backwards. Harmast substituted the Flame of Ehilm for the Baths of Nelat precisely because he could survive it.
Did anybody still remember this in the KoS timeframe?
Andrew
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail