#scioa'tael | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

wrath-ruin-reddawn · 7 years ago

Text

Radicalism in Medieval Settings and the Scioa’tael

One of the most common complaints hurled against the Scioa’tael and its members is that, “they’re terrorists”. This slight is hard to refute, because, according to the most basic definition of terrorist– i.e. “ a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims “– they are. However, as this essay will explain, calling the Scioa’tael terrorists overlooks several centuries of social, political, and martial development, making it an unfair comparison.

First, we must address the elephant in the room. We live in a post 9/11 world; many of us from the United States grew up in the atmosphere of pervasive fear that dominated the Bush era and the so-called War on Terror. Other nations have been similarly affected by their own tragedies, their own acts of terrorism, both foreign and domestic. This makes it difficult to talk about terrorism because it evokes deeply rooted emotions, for everyone, and understandably so. Even so, we must endeavor to dissociate our present connotations from the word itself, in order to better discuss terrorism both as it now exists and how it functioned in medieval societies. The main problem with terrorism in modern free societies, and why it is particularly reviled, is that it is fundamentally unnecessary. In cultures where people are guaranteed the right to vote, protest, and assemble, resorting to violence, especially violence against civilians, is abhorrent because the will of the people can be expressed through other ways. Voting out people whose political views we disagree with and protesting unjust laws with marches and rallies are just two of the ways in which citizens of a democracy can communicate and enforce their wishes.

Of course, even in a democracy, there are ways in which the will of the people can be subverted. Systemic factors like social class mean that the rich individuals and powerful companies can afford to lobby and donate money to politicians in ways that the poor cannot. Heck, I have seen politicians win the popular vote but still lose the presidential election twice in my lifetime thanks to the weird setup of the American electoral college. However, even with these issues, citizens still have important, legal rights that protect their ability to assemble and protest…. rights that were largely absent under feudal systems like the world of the Witcher. The consideration of this setting is what we will discuss in the rest of this essay, to better contextualize the Scioa’tael as a movement, and to led to a discussion of revolution under oppressive regimes.

SECTION I: FEUDAL SOCIETY

I. Contextualizing the Problem

Before we can even begin to talk about the social context of the Scioa’tael, we need to try and establish what kind of world the Witcher takes place in. Although, obviously, the setting is fictional, our best bet is to try and draw connections between the Witcher universe and our own.

One of the easiest ways to narrow our focus is to try and establish what historical time-frame the Witcher roughly corresponds to. Now, there are multiple ways to do this, but I will focus primarily on the technology, vocabulary, and historical references. Of course, this is difficult, because the fantastical elements in the Witcher use very modern terms. For example, the words “mutagen” (1946) and “gene” (1909) which both appear in the series, were only conceived in the 20th century, which clashes heavily with the Witcher’s decidedly medieval aesthetic. However, these words are derived from pre-existing French/Latin bases, so they could have hypothetically been devised earlier in the universe of the Witcher to fulfill a need. (Sorceresses, after all, are able to do some pretty incredible things, and they clearly have an advanced understanding of biology. See: the fact that they can intentionally mutate living organisms via gene therapy.)

As for historical references, we can see a few characters mentioned in the Witcher universe who have clear parallels to real life figures. For example, Dandelion mentions a revolutionary named “Joan of the Arc Coast”, whose name is obviously very close to Joan of Arc. The real life Joan of Arc lived between 1412 and 1431. Further backing up this rough estimate for the time period is the fashion. We see several men in the Witcher series wearing chaperons (Roche’s head-gear of choice), that became particularly fashionable in the 15th century. The attire of most nobles (hose, a tunic, and shoes) also fits with this time-frame.

This places the Witcher during the medieval period.

II. The Medieval Period in Europe Was Especially Shitty, and Here’s Why!

In news that probably surprises absolutely no one, the medieval period was pretty awful for anyone who wasn’t a rich male noble. The primary economic and political system was feudalism, a social structure that’s basically a pyramid. At the bottom of this structure were the peasants and serfs, who worked the land overseen by knights and vassals, who in turn reported to lords, who answered to the monarchy. Obviously, in this structure the king had absolute power, and the serfs practically none.

This imbalance of power was maintained in a multitude of ways. For starters, even though peasants comprised the majority of European populations, they lacked the resources of the upper classes. If they wanted to resist with physical force, they could find themselves up against knights: men with expensive life-saving armor who were literally trained since childhood to fight. And refusing to pay their taxes simple wasn’t an option– they didn’t even legally own the land they worked on, remember. Even free peasants still technically rented their land from their lords. If they refused to work, they could suffer terrible repercussions, and without the ability to unionize or go on strike en masse any attempts to hurt their lords by refusing to work would fail.

An additional form of control was the church. The clergy helped maintain the power structure of the feudal system by “sanctify[ing] the divine rule of the king and justify[ing] royal measures to the rest of the population” (Ishay). Under conventional European feudalism, the church was not “a free agent… but rather an intrinsic part of the apparatus of power” (Ishay).

Now, admittedly, the religious structures in the Witcher are different than that of the Catholic church in medieval Europe. For starters, Catholicism was incredibly influential precisely because of how singular and all-encompassing it was. “Religion permeated every pore of medieval life,” (Ishay). However, in the Witcher universe, there are at least several different religious organizations in the North. The cult of Melitele is “the most widespread” of all the Nordling’s religions, but even so it is a far cry from the utter domination of the Catholic church in Western Europe. (Of course, eventually this would change during the Protestant Reformation, and the Orthodox Church has always held sway in the East. But the important factor here is more that there was utter hegemony by one religious institution than what institution it was.)

Despite this difference, we do see that religious institutions do seem to prop up the monarchy in the world of the Witcher, even if their reach isn’t as lengthy. We see priests at peace talks, on battlefields, and most importantly performing coronations. Nobles still use the excuse of divine right to justify their actions and their rule. Clearly, this parallels the rhetoric used in medieval Europe. To my own interpretation, although the Cult of Melitele is no stand-in for the Catholic Church, it still bolstered the institution of feudalism.

Feudalism was a system of finance as much as a governmental one, and as such examining the economies of the Northern kingdoms can provide further insight to the political weight (or lack thereof) of the lower classes. Now, towards the end of the medieval period there was an increase in the power of merchants and traders-- essentially, the foundation of what we today call nouveau riche; people who were not from genteel families rising to prominence (think of the Medici in Florence). This correlated to the flourishing of city-states and the birth of the middle class. There was also a corresponding increase in the right to own private property; something that, while uncontroversial today, was revolutionary at the time.

"The gradual decline of feudalism and its monopolistic economy, for instance, eventually would lead to the free markets of capitalism based on the concept of the individual’s right to private property, thereby providing greater individual autonomy and opportunities for the beneficiaries to transform their newfound economic power into political power.” (Lauren)

Of course, this point would be meaningless if the Witcher did not have a similar economy to typical ones in medieval Europe. Fortunately for us, it is-- or at the very least, it appears to be. Although Geralt isn’t exactly reading newspapers with descriptions of the stock market, we can see several things that provide insight into the fiscal reality of the Nordling economy. From what we can see, there is a decent merchant class in cities like Vizima, Flotsam, and Novigrad, and there is clearly a class of people who have risen themselves up above their station. This implies that the economic situation in the North does resemble that of late medieval Europe.

However, it is important to note that greater economic mobility did not necessarily contribute to the development of better freedoms and living conditions nearly as much as other factors. “As long as the public realm was dormant, closely linked to the private realm, and subservient to religious and feudal authority, the state, however backward, was still uncontested” (Ishay). Funnily enough, the sense of community built up through religious institutions eventually lead to people having a public outlet for their frustrations... but the world of the Witcher isn’t there yet, and so that will remain a topic for another day.

SECTION II: THE ETHICS OF TERRORISM, ESPECIALLY IN A FEUDAL SOCIETY

I. There Are No Alternatives

As shitty as it is to say, there really aren’t many options for nonhumans in the North. Hell, there aren’t many options for anyone in the North, even human peasants. Like we discussed above, the feudal system was crappy all around, and particularly resistant to change, as “no significant public space permitted democratic communication between the peasantry and feudal authorities” (Ishay). In some cases, like in Russia and parts of Eastern Europe serfdom continued up until “the wars, revolutions, and upheavals of the nineteenth century br[oke] practices of the past” (Lauren).

Considering how marginalized nonhumans are, is it really surprising that the Scioa’tael formed? Although peaceful methods of resistance might be possible, it remains a fact that feudalism leaves no room “for the advancement of political and economic rights” (Ishay). Let us not forget what Dandelion says about nonhuman rights:

“It is a fact that, as the scrawlings on the wall of the University of Oxenfurt say: "Pacifying nonhumans is like wallowing in mud – everyone gets dirty, generally with blood."”

The dream of the Scioa’tael for a world in which they can self-determine, and have the same freedoms and respect that humans enjoy, is dangerous. Because “these visions of human rights possess the capacity to challenge, to generate fear, to hold out hope and inspire, and to change the world” (Lauren).

In light of these facts, I don’t think that it’s really possible to deny that open rebellion is pretty much the only way for the Scioa’tael to gain any rights. As for how bad nonhumans have it... well, that’s an essay for another day. I’ll just say that there is definitely some racial/ethnic coding going on with the nonhumans, and that we can use this to form an even more grim outlook of their prospects than the already bleak view offered by the novels and video game series.

II. Methodology and the Ethics of War

Now that we have established that nonhumans have almost no choices or ability to enact political change by peaceful means, we can now talk about the morality of terrorism, and try to come to a consensus about the Scioa’tael.

Of course, ethics are inherently subjective. Although I have described, at length, how revolution in feudal societies practically demands violence, I am sure that some of you will remain unconvinced. That’s your prerogative. I think that it’s crazy, but you do you I guess. But for the rest of us, we now have to address the muddy waters of rebellion and warfare. Namely: what makes war just? What actions are permissible in war?

These questions are not easy to answer. Some believe that, as long as the cause is just, any action is justified; others that just actions are what make the cause just. I think that the reality is probably somewhere in the middle.

This brings up another issue: namely, that the Scioa’tael don’t function as a single unit. Each unit reports to a commander, and therefore the conduct of each commando can vary wildly. For example, the unnamed leader of one Scioa’tael group abducted Ves as a young woman, keeping her as his sex slave and prisoner. Other commanders are more discerning-- although they may torch villages and kill merchants who infringe on their territories, these Scioa’tael don’t seem to take prisoners for such extended periods of time and seem to have some sense of decency. Sure, they’ll torture their enemies for information, but they draw the line at, you know, raping children.

Two of the main criteria for defining whether a cause is just or not are just cause and right intention: i.e are you fighting for a good reason? And do you have good intentions? And in the case of most Scioa’tael groups, we can assuredly say that they have just cause (they want freedom), and right intentions (that one only does actions with the goal of seeing your cause realized-- and that you intend to stop when you win).

And two of the main aspects of the waging of war itself is that of proportionality and non-combatant immunity. The ideal of proportionality essentially states that you should not use unnecessary force: or at the very least, force that is not greater than what you enemies use against you. Non-combatant immunity states that you should, you know, only attack viable military targets.

Considering that the Scioa’tael aren’t using methods more extreme than the humans, we see that the moral of proportionality is maintained. Really, the only point of contention with the Scioa’tael is the principle of non-combatant immunity. Of course, the Scioa’tael would make the argument that humans violate this principle every day, and that they are only responding in kind; or they might make the argument that all humans are part of the system of oppression and thus bear some culpability for it.

SECTION III: CONCLUSION

In the previous sections, I have laid out the social context and justification for the Scioa’tael as best I can. I can’t offer a simple, easy answer as to whether they are doing the right thing or not. Their methods are definitely questionable, but, as American Revolutionary Thomas Paine once said, “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered.” However, I do hope that this essay can help elevate the discourse from mud-slinging the term “terrorist” to an honest discussion, especially one that takes the sociopolitical setting of the Witcher into account instead of borrowing the word’s modern connotations wholesale. I think that, although difficult, the ethical questions raised about warfare and conduct are things that we must all consider, especially given the way the political climate is turning. How far can we go to defend liberty? Under what conditions are acts of violence permissible?

References

Ishay, Micheline R. The History of Human Rights: From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008

Lauren, Paul Gordon. The Evolution of International Human Rights: Visions Seen (Third Edition). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011

“Mutagen”, “Gene”. Oxford English Dictionary, www.oed.com. Retrieved 04/28/18.

Steinhoff, Uwe. On the Ethics of War and Terrorism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007

#the witcher #scioa'tael #the witcher meta #long post

11 notes · View notes