He's more the clan's memory of law and tradition. He will have learnt all the important judgements made since the storm age. That's why it's usually an advanced occupation, it takes years to learn all that stuff. Of course the important judgements for your clan are not always the same as those for the neighbouring clan.
>- Does he actually serve the role of judge during a formal trial day?
>Accusers select a respected and articulate clansman to represent them
>and the accused selects someone respected and articulate to represent
>them and the lawspeaker listens and passes judgement?
No, the clan or tribal chief does this but will refer to his lawspeaker for guidance.
>- Does he serve the role of advocate for either the accuser or accused
>in intraclan issues?
In important cases yes, getting a lawspeaker to act as your juror (see Thunder Rebels pg. 38) will improve your chances.
>- Does it depend on the level of the grievance? That the lawspeaker
>serves as judge for intra-clan issues and as representative for tribal
>issues (which are overseen by a tribal lawspeaker)?
>
>- To what extent does a lawspeaker act as mediator for a particular
>grievance? For instance, would an accusor ask for the intervention of
>the lawspeaker to attempt to negotiate a settlement between two
>bloodlines within a given clan?
>
>- To what extent does a lawspeaker perform investigation into crimes?
Not usually at all.
>- Does a lawspeaker pronounce judgement on civil matters as well as
>religious crimes (for which the gods may inflict punishment on the clan)
All Heortling law is a civil matter, there is no state for individuals to offend against. The few things such as "kinstrife" and "consorting with chaos" are legally regarded as offenses against all the members of the clan rather than a separate entity. As such, justice can be satisfied by compensation although it is likely to be more than anyone could pay.
>Furthermore, I'm not sure I can quite get my mind around the concept of
>kinstrife. Wergild applies when one clan injures another, but the
>implication is that criminal acts WITHIN a clan are so horrific that
>they're the exception, not the rule. Is this realistic? I would imagine
>that any time people are relating very closely together that there will
>be much more opportunities for personal strife leading to violent acts.
>Husband and wives might deal with each other on a day-to-day basis, or
>siblings or friends might fancy the same pretty girl from the clan the
>next tula over, and thus have the opportunity for conflict EVERY day. A
>raid might happen only once or twice per season, however, and while
>legal proceedings might be necessary if the raiders are caught, it seems
>like there's fewer opportunities for a crime to occur.
>
>If clansman-on-clansman violence is potentially more common, then it
>seems strange that the penalties would be so very harsh. Either the
>offender is put to death or, in the simplest cases, banished for a
>minimum of one year. Given that the winters are so deadly, this in
>itself seems like a death sentence. (Certainly, other clans won't grant
>refuge to someone labelled an outlaw?!)
>
>I think the only way I can reconcile the difference in penalties is by
>reasoning that strife WITHIN the clan is punished so harshly because the
>death of even a single clan member potentially puts the survival of the
>whole clan at risk (whereas, the system of wergild between clans was
>established as a way to prevent an inter-clan event from blowing up into
>a full-blown war).
>
>But for intra-clan issues, does the clan make an effort to avoid
>outlawing its sons and daughters unnecessarily and, if so, how? Or do
>such crimes simply not occur? (The presence of laws implies that they do.)
Violence is common within bloodlines, serious injury and death are not. Anyone who deliberately kills or seriously injures within the bloodline is breaking a major taboo and no right thinking Orlanthi will want to share with them. That's why they are outlawed, not as punishment but because they've rejected social values. This leaves accidental killings - the fight where someone knocks their head and dies as a result. Here is where the flexibility of outlawry for a short period is used - if the bloodline recognise that it was an accident they will regard it as deserving some sanction but less than permanent exclusion. In practice I think Heortlings who are temporally exiled are either accepted by another related clan, set up home in the wilderness between tulas or go to a city where an individual can survive on their own. A lot will depend on the individual's relationships with other members of the bloodline and clan.
The apparent harshness is because if you injure another member of your family you're indirectly harming yourself - one less person at harvest time means less grain reaped so everyone suffers.
Between bloodlines or clans the issue is different, weregeld is a matter of compensating for a loss, not punishment for a crime and is an alternative to an escalating blood feud. In the same way it's the whole bloodline or clan that pays not the individual although the individual responsible is likely to suffer damage to their relationships with other members.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/ ------------------------------
Powered by hypermail