Re: Bestiality in Prax?

From: Andrew Larsen <aelarsen_at_orZwSzeNulV8xicZ_znUuZmWEodvtG6lp_ZvGQSkjy8h1JfC2SNXLgayZIej0F1ME1b>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:39:07 -0600

Given the harshness of Praxian life, I suspect a lot of sickly infants are simply abandoned in the steppes; caring for them until the clan reaches an oasis will take up a lot of energy and resources that most of the clans cannot spare. Premodern people do not generally have much concern for infants that seem unlikely to be healthy. In the real world, prior to about 1800, well over 50% of all children born died before their first birthday, so there wasn't much room to romanticize infants.

Andrew E. Larsen
On Feb 19, 2012, at 9:35 PM, Peter Metcalfe wrote:

> On 2/20/2012 7:19 AM, Chris Lemens wrote:
> > Peter asks a great question:
> >> Do Praxians have even have a concept of property inheritance?
> > They do when to comes to beasts. It's in CoP. I think it also said what happens to personal property (tents, weapons, etc.) but I could be misremembering. I'm pretty sure I've never seen anything saying what happens to slaves when the owner dies.
> I'm not seeing the reference. Can you be more specific?
>
> >
> >> I think that slave offspring are either raised as a true praxians or
> >> dropped off at the nearest oasis.
> > When would it be one versus the other?
> I was thinking that healthy kids are raised as praxians while kids that are sickly or obviously unsuited to life on the plaines are dropped off at the oases to work as a groundman.
>
> --Peter Metcalfe
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]