[98181] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Last X and testament?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh)
Sun Mar 16 02:11:45 2014
From: lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 02:11:26 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
In-Reply-To: <BAY179-W7498B734BEC6A7CBDF3002AA720@phx.gbl>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============4256714303608507400==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B7E0286F-6CA7-4026-9E5E-1E870CC11075"
--Apple-Mail=_B7E0286F-6CA7-4026-9E5E-1E870CC11075
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
I respect the effort you are making here, though it still seems that you =
are confusing the idea that respect and reputation somehow translate =
into a last will and testament.
1. The actions of a living person survive their death. This has to do =
with the reputation of the House. As I said earlier, we follow Kahless =
because of his deeds, not because of his lineage, and certainly not =
because he wrote his wishes, so now, we are legally required to follow =
them. We aren=92t.
2. The widow is a living person, responsible for maintaining something =
approaching continuity of leadership so that the reputation of the House =
can be maintained, even as the other half of the leadership changes. The =
widow is the only echo of the dead man remaining. If you kill the leader =
of a house, you don=92t have to deal with the dead man=92s wishes. You =
have to deal with the dead man=92s wife. You deal with HER wishes. If =
you earn her respect, perhaps your wishes shall carry more weight than =
that of the man you defeated.
3. Again, the widow is the living person who still possesses anything =
relating to the House. A victor over the former leader has no claim to =
those possessions independent of the claims of the living widow. He must =
join with her in owning those possessions. The wishes of the dead live =
on only if the living widow shares those wishes.
4. The High Counsel is dealing once again with honor and reputation. =
Their role as you describe is that of judge within a meritocracy. Do you =
think that a dishonorable leader of a household can write out a list of =
who he wants to get his things when he dies and have his wishes legally =
protected? If he does not earn the respect of the High Counsel, he can=92t=
even have his LIVING wishes fulfilled in terms of property. His =
possessions cease to be his, based upon the negative judgement of his =
merit.
5. There certainly is a legal system, though its focus is pretty clearly =
on honor and merit much more than on the protection of property beyond =
the finite boundary of life. It exists to punish criminal and =
dishonorable activity, and even to kill or imprison those who do not =
uphold the ideals of Klingon culture. That doesn=92t imply that great =
pains will be taken to pass on the full measure of wealth from one who =
has died to one who has not earned that wealth. If you serve your House =
well and your father dies, the House will provide for you. This is for =
the sustainability of the House more than for the sustainability of you. =
If your father brought wealth to the House, it is in the interest of the =
House for you to have the resources to continue serving the reputation =
of the House.
When a House loses a leader, it does not become an entity ruled by a =
spirit. It gets a new leader. If there are no members capable of filling =
that role, the House falls. Its assets are forfeit for distribution to =
houses who have leaders. A dishonorable leader is not a leader in a =
meritocracy, and so, the Counsel can declare his leadership null and =
void, and so take his property, his soldiers and wealth.
It will not do so with the mere death of a leader for any House which =
has a new leader to replace the dead.
lojmIt tI=92wI=92 nuv =91utlh
Door Repair Guy, Retired Honorably
On Mar 15, 2014, at 11:44 PM, Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com> wrote:
> ghItlhpu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh, jatlh:
> > I really think that Klingon mentality is closer to, =93Hmm. I really =
liked
> > SarIS a lot before he died next to me in battle, but the battle=92s =
over
> > now, he=92s dead, and those look like nice boots. I wonder if they =
are
> > my size=85=94 I mean, they probably wouldn=92t fit is son, right?
>=20
> I know it's tangential to your argument, but this is an instance where =
you're projecting Terran behaviour onto Klingon culture. It isn't just =
hale and hearty 20-something Klingons that are sent to be fighting =
soldiers; it is entirely possible that a Klingon who dies in battle has =
one or more adult children.
>=20
> In any case, I've put forward a number of counterarguments, which I =
have tried to be very careful in constructing based primarily on canon:
>=20
> 1) We know that for Klingons, the actions of a living person survive =
their death: {qaStaHvIS wej puq poHmey vav puqloDpu' puqloDpu'chaj je =
quvHa'moH vav quvHa'ghach} "the dishonour of the father dishonours his =
sons and their sons for three generations" (TKW p.155). This is =
explicitly supported by the (non-canon) events by which Worf and Kurn =
are held responsible for the alleged treason of Mogh some twenty years =
after Mogh's death (TNG "The Sins of the Father").
>=20
> 2) We know that even the status of a living person survives their =
death: the {bIreqtal} ritual is "the ceremony in which the killer of the =
leader of a Klingon house marries the widow and thereby becomes the head =
of the house itself" (KGT p.11), which carries the clear implication =
that the death of the House leader does not immediately terminate all =
rights of his wife to continue to be recognised as a member of that =
House.
>=20
> 3) We know that wealth and status are both matters of inheritance: =
"[T]here are clear distinctions between those with great wealth and =
influence and those with little or none. This sort of status is a matter =
of inheritance" (KGT p.36). The passage about the {bIreqtal} also =
implies this: marriage to the widow of a deceased head of House seems to =
be a prerequisite of becoming the new head, indicating that the widow =
serves as a sort of caretaker head for inheritance purposes and the =
observance of the {bIreqtal} is necessary to transfer those rights to =
the new head.
>=20
> 4) We know that the High Council is capable of exercising jurisdiction =
over House property rights: "If the High Council determines an action to =
be dishonorable, not only may it remove the leader of a house from the =
Council itself, it may also seize the house's lands, forces, and other =
holdings" (KGT p.38). This is further supported by the (non-canon) =
instance of Quark's marriage to Grilka to protect her property rights =
until such time as she could seek intervention from the High Council =
(DS9 "The House of Quark").
>=20
> 5) We know that the Klingon legal system is relatively well-developed =
based on the existence of a not insignificant lexicon of legal =
terminology (bo'DIj, chut, DIb, ghIpDIj, Hat, mab, meqba', mub, qI'...), =
and we have actually seen a Klingon legal proceeding on-screen in a film =
for which Klingon dialogue was specifically created (ST6).
>=20
> So to sum up: Klingons have a relatively well-developed legal system. =
The High Council is capable of exercising jurisdiction over House =
property rights. Presumably the High Council acts within Klingon law to =
exercise such jurisdiction. Thus, Klingon law probably has at least some =
conception of, and jurisdiction over, property rights. House holdings =
and property are a matter of inheritance, and so Klingon law probably =
has at least some conception of, and jurisdiction over, inheritance. The =
actions and status of a living person are capable of surviving their =
death, at least for some purposes. Presumably lawful and honourable =
orders given by a living person, which are actions by definition, also =
survive death. Thus, a living person should be capable of giving lawful =
and honourable orders - including with regard to the distribution of =
their property - that remain valid after the person themselves has died.
>=20
> Again, it isn't a corpse that gives the orders. It's a body in whom a =
{qa'} dwells, and in Klingon conception the {qa'} survives the death of =
its {porgh}. If a {qa'} has given orders, the death of the {porgh} which =
the {qa'} inhabits should have no bearing on the validity of the orders =
of the {qa'}.
>=20
> taH:
>=20
> > We are Klingons, not Ferengi. Accumulating wealth and passing it on
> > to generations based upon birth and not merit is not an honorable
> > path.
>=20
> To this I have two counterarguments:
>=20
> 1) Even if you are right, why does inheritance necessarily need to be =
about birth? Why can't it be about merit, even in a system whereby wills =
exist? If I were a Klingon ship's captain, why can't I choose to record =
a will leaving my entire estate to my long-serving second-in-command who =
has served me intelligently and honourably?
>=20
> 2) You say that it is not honourable to pass wealth on to generations =
based upon birth and not merit, yet the whole House system, and =
everything we know about it, runs counter to your argument. Klingon =
society is heavily stratified (KGT p.36), and such stratification =
normally arises only in societies with social institutions for =
perpetuating inequality of wealth. Although we don't know the Klingon =
term for it (and indeed Klingons may simply refer to it with a phrase =
rather than a special lexeme), I contend that one of those institutions =
in Klingon society may well be something with enough similarity to a =
will that we would recognise it as such, especially given that (as I =
argue above) what we know about Klingon law implies at least a certain =
degree of legal codification of property rights and consequently of =
rights to inherit such property.
>=20
> taH:
> > This is not our culture. Language and culture are of the same root.
>=20
> Absolutely agreed, but for the very reason that it *isn't* our =
culture, we need to be able to base our arguments on something rather =
than just make assertions. That's what I've tried to do here: to show, =
based on cultural and linguistic evidence, Klingons probably have =
legally enshrined protections for inheritance matters and one of those =
protections may involve something akin to what we call a will.
>=20
> In any event, it still wasn't my initial intention to argue Klingons =
have such things as wills - only to ask how a Klingon might describe the =
Terran concept - but never mind; spirited exchange can lead to =
unexpected places. :)
>=20
> QeS
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--Apple-Mail=_B7E0286F-6CA7-4026-9E5E-1E870CC11075
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=windows-1252
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>I =
respect the effort you are making here, though it still seems that you =
are confusing the idea that respect and reputation somehow translate =
into a last will and testament.</div><div><br></div><div>1. The actions =
of a living person survive their death. This has to do with the =
reputation of the House. As I said earlier, we follow Kahless because of =
his deeds, not because of his lineage, and certainly not because he =
wrote his wishes, so now, we are legally required to follow them. We =
aren=92t.</div><div><br></div><div>2. The widow is a living person, =
responsible for maintaining something approaching continuity of =
leadership so that the reputation of the House can be maintained, even =
as the other half of the leadership changes. The widow is the only echo =
of the dead man remaining. If you kill the leader of a house, you don=92t =
have to deal with the dead man=92s wishes. You have to deal with the =
dead man=92s wife. You deal with HER wishes. If you earn her respect, =
perhaps your wishes shall carry more weight than that of the man you =
defeated.</div><div><br></div><div>3. Again, the widow is the living =
person who still possesses anything relating to the House. A victor over =
the former leader has no claim to those possessions independent of the =
claims of the living widow. He must join with her in owning those =
possessions. The wishes of the dead live on only if the living widow =
shares those wishes.</div><div><br></div><div>4. The High Counsel is =
dealing once again with honor and reputation. Their role as you describe =
is that of judge within a meritocracy. Do you think that a dishonorable =
leader of a household can write out a list of who he wants to get his =
things when he dies and have his wishes legally protected? If he does =
not earn the respect of the High Counsel, he can=92t even have his =
LIVING wishes fulfilled in terms of property. His possessions cease to =
be his, based upon the negative judgement of his =
merit.</div><div><br></div><div>5. There certainly is a legal system, =
though its focus is pretty clearly on honor and merit much more than on =
the protection of property beyond the finite boundary of life. It exists =
to punish criminal and dishonorable activity, and even to kill or =
imprison those who do not uphold the ideals of Klingon culture. That =
doesn=92t imply that great pains will be taken to pass on the full =
measure of wealth from one who has died to one who has not earned that =
wealth. If you serve your House well and your father dies, the House =
will provide for you. This is for the sustainability of the House more =
than for the sustainability of you. If your father brought wealth to the =
House, it is in the interest of the House for you to have the resources =
to continue serving the reputation of the =
House.</div><div><br></div><div>When a House loses a leader, it does not =
become an entity ruled by a spirit. It gets a new leader. If there are =
no members capable of filling that role, the House falls. Its assets are =
forfeit for distribution to houses who have leaders. A dishonorable =
leader is not a leader in a meritocracy, and so, the Counsel can declare =
his leadership null and void, and so take his property, his soldiers and =
wealth.</div><div><br></div><div>It will not do so with the mere death =
of a leader for any House which has a new leader to replace the =
dead.</div><br><div>
<div><div>lojmIt tI=92wI=92 nuv =91utlh</div><div>Door Repair Guy, =
Retired Honorably</div></div><div><br></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br><div><div>On Mar 15, 2014, at 11:44 PM, Rohan Fenwick <<a =
href=3D"mailto:qeslagh@hotmail.com">qeslagh@hotmail.com</a>> =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"hmmessage" style=3D"font-size: 12pt; =
font-family: Calibri; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: =
none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div dir=3D"ltr">ghItlhpu' lojmIt =
tI'wI' nuv 'utlh, jatlh:<div><div>> I really think that Klingon =
mentality is closer to, =93Hmm. I really liked<br>> SarIS a lot =
before he died next to me in battle, but the battle=92s over<br>> =
now, he=92s dead, and those look like nice boots. I wonder if they =
are<br>> my size=85=94 I mean, they probably wouldn=92t fit is son, =
right?<br><br>I know it's tangential to your argument, but this is an =
instance where you're projecting Terran behaviour onto Klingon culture. =
It isn't just hale and hearty 20-something Klingons that are sent to be =
fighting soldiers; it is entirely possible that a Klingon who dies in =
battle has one or more adult children.<br></div><div><br></div><div>In =
any case, I've put forward a number of counterarguments, which I have =
tried to be very careful in constructing based primarily on =
canon:<br><br>1) We know that for Klingons, the actions of a living =
person survive their death: {qaStaHvIS wej puq poHmey vav puqloDpu' =
puqloDpu'chaj je quvHa'moH vav quvHa'ghach} "the dishonour of the father =
dishonours his sons and their sons for three generations" (TKW p.155). =
This is explicitly supported by the (non-canon) events by which Worf and =
Kurn are held responsible for the alleged treason of Mogh some twenty =
years after Mogh's death (TNG "The Sins of the Father").<br><br>2) We =
know that even the status of a living person survives their death: the =
{bIreqtal} ritual is "the ceremony in which the killer of the leader of =
a Klingon house marries the widow and thereby becomes the head of the =
house itself" (KGT p.11), which carries the clear implication that the =
death of the House leader does not immediately terminate all rights of =
his wife to continue to be recognised as a member of that =
House.<br><br>3) We know that wealth and status are both matters of =
inheritance: "[T]here are clear distinctions between those with great =
wealth and influence and those with little or none. This sort of status =
is a matter of inheritance" (KGT p.36). The passage about the {bIreqtal} =
also implies this: marriage to the widow of a deceased head of House =
seems to be a prerequisite of becoming the new head, indicating that the =
widow serves as a sort of caretaker head for inheritance purposes and =
the observance of the {bIreqtal} is necessary to transfer those rights =
to the new head.<br><br>4) We know that the High Council is capable of =
exercising jurisdiction over House property rights: "If the High Council =
determines an action to be dishonorable, not only may it remove the =
leader of a house from the Council itself, it may also seize the house's =
lands, forces, and other holdings" (KGT p.38). This is further supported =
by the (non-canon) instance of Quark's marriage to Grilka to protect her =
property rights until such time as she could seek intervention from the =
High Council (DS9 "The House of Quark").<br><br>5) We know that the =
Klingon legal system is relatively well-developed based on the existence =
of a not insignificant lexicon of legal terminology (bo'DIj, chut, DIb, =
ghIpDIj, Hat, mab, meqba', mub, qI'...), and we have actually seen a =
Klingon legal proceeding on-screen in a film for which Klingon dialogue =
was specifically created (ST6).<br><br>So to sum up: Klingons have a =
relatively well-developed legal system. The High Council is capable of =
exercising jurisdiction over House property rights. Presumably the High =
Council acts within Klingon law to exercise such jurisdiction. Thus, =
Klingon law probably has at least some conception of, and jurisdiction =
over, property rights. House holdings and property are a matter of =
inheritance, and so Klingon law probably has at least some conception =
of, and jurisdiction over, inheritance. The actions and status of a =
living person are capable of surviving their death, at least for some =
purposes. Presumably lawful and honourable orders given by a living =
person, which are actions by definition, also survive death. Thus, a =
living person should be capable of giving lawful and honourable orders - =
including with regard to the distribution of their property - that =
remain valid after the person themselves has died.<br><br>Again, it =
isn't a corpse that gives the orders. It's a body in whom a {qa'} =
dwells, and in Klingon conception the {qa'} survives the death of its =
{porgh}. If a {qa'} has given orders, the death of the {porgh} which the =
{qa'} inhabits should have no bearing on the validity of the orders of =
the {qa'}.<br><br>taH:<br><br>> We are Klingons, not Ferengi. =
Accumulating wealth and passing it on<br>> to generations based upon =
birth and not merit is not an honorable<br>> path.<br><br>To this I =
have two counterarguments:<br><br>1) Even if you are right, why does =
inheritance necessarily need to be about birth? Why can't it be about =
merit, even in a system whereby wills exist? If I were a Klingon ship's =
captain, why can't I choose to record a will leaving my entire estate to =
my long-serving second-in-command who has served me intelligently and =
honourably?<br><br>2) You say that it is not honourable to pass wealth =
on to generations based upon birth and not merit, yet the whole House =
system, and everything we know about it, runs counter to your argument. =
Klingon society is heavily stratified (KGT p.36), and such =
stratification normally arises only in societies with social =
institutions for perpetuating inequality of wealth. Although we don't =
know the Klingon term for it (and indeed Klingons may simply refer to it =
with a phrase rather than a special lexeme), I contend that one of those =
institutions in Klingon society may well be something with enough =
similarity to a will that we would recognise it as such, especially =
given that (as I argue above) what we know about Klingon law implies at =
least a certain degree of legal codification of property rights and =
consequently of rights to inherit such property.<br><br>taH:<br>> =
This is not our culture. Language and culture are of the same =
root.<br><br>Absolutely agreed, but for the very reason that it *isn't* =
our culture, we need to be able to base our arguments on something =
rather than just make assertions. That's what I've tried to do here: to =
show, based on cultural and linguistic evidence, Klingons probably have =
legally enshrined protections for inheritance matters and one of those =
protections may involve something akin to what we call a will.<br><br>In =
any event, it still wasn't my initial intention to argue Klingons have =
such things as wills - only to ask how a Klingon might describe the =
Terran concept - but never mind; spirited exchange can lead to =
unexpected places. =
:)<br><br>QeS<br></div></div></div>_______________________________________=
________<br>Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br><a =
href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br><a =
href=3D"http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol">http://mail.kli=
.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a></div></blockquote></div><br></body>=
</html>=
--Apple-Mail=_B7E0286F-6CA7-4026-9E5E-1E870CC11075--
--===============4256714303608507400==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============4256714303608507400==--
