Re: Re: War clan vs mixed clan

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:43:47 +0100


On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 08:39:49PM -0000, bethexton_at_... wrote:
> The war band is not exactly a standing army. A lot of these guys
> will have non-warrior professions, although many of them will be
> warriors. At the very least they function something like the army
> reserve in many modern countries, not full time warriors (i.e.
> weaponthanes) but trained, reasonably equipped, and ready on short
> notice.

I regard the war-band as more or less "weaponthanes and wannabes" (and a few special case add-ons). The former are explicitly full-time; they are recognised as doing 'useful work' by their very status as warriors and are supported by the clan, in the person of the chief as such. (Or they're a bunch of armed and dangerous loafers, but sufficiently so we have to keep feedin' 'em, if you're a begrudging carl.) The latter do some other work on the side, are informally supported by their own immediate kin ("Get a proper sub-cult!"), or are otherwise sliding by in some less formal status. "Warrior's work" would include guarding important people and places, 'riding the bounds', so as to provide those "on crossing the [blah] clan's tula, two weaponthanes ride up and cautiously Greet you" type encounters, as well as actual raiding and extorting. (Sorry, I mean 'enforcing just and proper tribute'.)

I don't have an especially clear of the typical size of the war-band; a dozen or two seems to be the likely range for numbers of weaponthanes proper -- how much bigger than that is the whole? (I'm guessing some smallish multiple, like double or triple.)

Cheers,
Alex.

Powered by hypermail