Friday, 7 April 2017

Medieval Or Modern Morality

Poul Anderson, like most members of the Society for Creative Anachronism, knew the difference between role-play and reality. SM Stirling's Change enables some adults to live the role-play and to raise their children accordingly. See here and:

"'The [Hell's] Angels rallied to the Protector first of all, and stood like solid rock amid chaos.'"
-SM Stirling, A Meeting At Corvallis (New York, 2007), Chapter Twelve, p. 318.

A kidnapper says:

"'Please forgive me, but this is war, and I am the faithful vassal of Lady Sandra...'" (p. 354).

The kidnapped boy replies:

"'I understand that, my lady... I don't hate you. You're a warrior doing your duty to your folk and chief, like Liath and Aiofe did. I know people die in wars. But...remember it's my duty to stop you doing yours.'" (ibid.)

I won't quote the bishop living/role-playing fanatical hate. Society has regressed from the rule of law to the rule of men. Post-Changers/Emberversers need to strive to restore modern values, not seize the opportunity to revive medieval values.

3 comments:

  1. Kaor, Paul!

    I really don't see that MUCH difference between "Medieval" or "modern" values. For instance, I think real soldiers of any era will think and behave almost exactly as did Tiphaine d'Ath when kidnapping Rudi. Duty and loyalty are virtues the adherents of any cause, good or bad, will agree are good.

    Your last paragraph, I don't see how anything EXCEPT a very personal "rule by men" is possible assuming a crash and collapse as drastic as that forced on mankind by the Change. The goal would be restore some kind of "rule by law." And that will take TIME.

    Sean

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sean,
      It would take time and guys like Arminger would resist it.
      Paul.

      Delete
    2. Kaor, Paul!

      I'm in haste and have to reply briefly. But, as Norman Arminger was finding out, the political system he set up was already to develop traditions he did not entirely want. E.g., his own House of Lords did not always see eye to eye with him. The Protector could crush one or two of his barons at once but not all of them at the same time. That alone would eventually make for political maneuvering, bargaining, acceptance of precedents, etc.

      Sean

      Delete