>>Even in modern Glorantha the nobility don't seem to have much to do with >>their traditional occupation, warfare. Nobility as a purely ruling class, >>and knights as a totally separete class seems very, very confused to me.
Peter Metcalfe:
> It's because the Caste structure is closer to the Indian Caste of
> Merchants, Priests, Warriors and Peasants than to the Medieval Model.
Indeed. While Terrestrial feudalism builds on "hill barbarian" Celtic and Germanic roots of warriors following a chief, Western feudalism appears to be based on abstract concepts.
Nobles appear to be diplomats, judges and administrators rather than defenders or warleaders. While there may be Talars administrating affairs of war, usually they don't fight in them. When they do, they take similar pains to avoid intruding into the warrior business as Bishop Odo (famous from the Bayoux tapestry) using only non-weapons.
> Secondly
> the Malkioni Nobility are not a purely ruling caste. They fight on the
> battlefield if they want to (even if they are Brithini).
Though neither as champions nor as special units.
> It is thought that in
> mythical times, the nobility were a purely ruling caste but the glory
> attached to military combat has seen the nobility turn upon on the
> battlefield from time to time.
> For the Rokari, an insight in the difference between noble and knightly
> fighters can be inferred from the Saint Gerlant keyword. The Nobles
> do not learn the spells of Burn Wound Closed, Ignite Kindling, Defend
> Superior Officer, Surprise Ghost and Sword Cutting while the Knights
> do not learn the spell of Flaming Lance.
Perhaps the Rokari with their men-at-arms ("sergeants") and knights have a fighter case closer to mediaeval yeomanry, with only the nobility including "landed knights".
>>Just the implications for population structure are staggering. If >>nobles just sit in manors and castles and rule folk, the world will start >>to get full of superfluous nobility (good food, lower child mortality, >>long lifespan because of nutrition and light workload).
> Plus bigger and better armies and more territory to rule over.
Not to mention the downward mobility that is prevalent in Rokari caste system, too - moving upcaste is hard, revoking a higher caste is fairly easy.
>>Nobility that
>>doesn't earn it's keep in war is a very strange concept.
> It works in the modern world.
If you look at early feudalism (Iceland chieftains or Germanic farmer republics, for instance), you find a (two caste) system of landholders and cottars. No warfare involved.
Powered by hypermail