>I don't see what's gray about the situation. I don't have my lawstaff handy,
>but here's the situation as I see it...
>
>If Bob kills Doug, Bob's clan owes weregild to Doug's clan. Period. If Bob
>kills Doug, then Bob falls off a cliff or gets trampled by an earthshaker,
>that doesn't change the situation--Bob's clan still owes weregild to Doug's
>clan.
>
>If Bob joins Humakt, it's as if he died--that is, his clan still owes the
>weregild from the killing Bob did back when he was "alive". Because of that,
>they may choose to impose some penalty on Bob, or even outlaw him (which may
>encourage him to join Humakt)--but that doesn't change *their* obligation to
>Doug's clan.
To which the clan lawyer argues that Bob was already a Humakti when he killed Doug otherwise the death wouldn't have occurred. Bob was obviously re-enacting the slaying of Grandfather Mortal (intentionally or otherwise). While in a modern RW court of law this argument would be laughed at a Heortling court would take it seriously because of the importance of myth in Glorantha.
>Of course, if Bob joins Humakt, *then* kills Doug, Bob no longer has a clan,
>so there's nobody who owes weregild. That's where things get ad-hoc, I
>expect. The Dougites might go to the Humakti temple and say, "We'll kill Bob
>in revenge unless you give us money", but that's an improvised solution, not
>Heortling law--I assume.
Unless it has been Gregged, I understand Heortling law regards a Humatki's warband as the equivelent of his family. In practice I think the weregeld would be paid by the chief whose warband they were by a gift either to Bob or Doug's relatives. Bob of course, is now obligated to his chief which is why Humatki honour is so important in Heortling society - it's substitutes for family ties.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail