Subordination\submission rituals

[Klythe]

While reviewing one of the Short Stories, this thought resurfaced, and I thought it's discussion was long overdue.

    I think most authors who write Klingon material (Including most of those who Paramount pays to do it) have a big blind spot in Klingon Culture.   Yes, Klingons are a society of warriors and honor, so there are manyrituals and ceremonies celebrating increases in honor and displays of glory, as well as rituals that punish those who have actively dishonored themselves, their House and the Empire, and those that remind others to avoid repeating their dishonor.   But if you send some time thinking about a society that truly is based on honor, then it absolutely critical to have a ritual that communicates that while I have some honor, I acknowledge that you have more, and because of this I will follow you.  When any leader can be challenged, there must be rituals that declare that you are definitely not a threat or challenger for their position.  At least not yet...

   I can think of only a few submission rituals we have seen or read about.  In TNG's "A Matter of Honor", Riker "knowing when not to duck" was a subordination ritual designed to repair the honor of Captain Kargan.  Some of the novels were better at showing this than others.   The Final Reflection and Pawns and Symbols both had some good subordination rituals. Any others spring to mind?

[qoSagh]

I'm not sure it is a matter of who has more or less honor, but a matter trust and loyalty. It is possible to be loyal to a commander while being just as honorable. It is possible to trust a subordinate, without them being less honorable than you. As a matter of fact I would think it impossible to trust one who you did not think had as much honor as you.

As for ceremonies, possibly the best I can think of from canon is the one where palms are cut and held together when a new member is adopted into a house. For a warrior to willingly allow another to use a weapon against him, is possibly the ultimate sign of trust. That is in effect saying "I trust you to not cut off my hand, I know you will do this because you are skilled with a blade and have honor and would not lie or betray my trust".

[Klythe]

    I think you entirely  misunderstood what I meant.   I meant quv type honor, not batlh type honor.

[Abbot Nej vIt]

This is a Curious Discussion. At the End of the Episode in Question, Riker Took the Commanders Punch in Order to Re-establish a Clear Chain of Command... This was Easy Because Riker Knew that he was Leaving the Ship (And the Chain of Command)... It was a "Wise" Choice because it Ensured that the Balance of Power had Been Restored... BUT had he Been a Klingon, Who had to Serve with that Crew Indefinately How would that Have Worked Out? Would Kargan have had the Same Perspective that the 2nd Officer (I Do Not Remember his Name) had of Rikers Actions? Riker Likely Avoided being Killed, and Everything was Tied up Neatly... But I am Not Sure that Riker's Actions Were a Sign of Respect for Kargans Honor Above his own.

[Klythe]

    You really should read the script I linked to, it describes things that have been too subtle to pick up on if you aren't thinking about it when you see it.

    The Chain of Command was already established as Kargan took his seat, what was not re-established was his reputation and the notion that he was the right person to command.   By tricking Captain Kargan, he made the captain look foolish and unworthy of command.  When he returned, Riker first gave back 'his' command...  But that is not Riker's to give.  So he had to allow Kargan to 'take' it back.   It would be no different if it was Second Officer Klag.  If Klag needed to commendeer the ship in order to save it, but is loyal to his captain, he would need to do something to demonstrate his loyalty is to the captain and the ship, and not "oh, crap he's back...  Okay, you can take over until I see the next change to subvert your authority and seixe command for my own".  Performing some ritual of subordination shows that you know your place on ship and it the captains, so long as he is able to serve.   Klag would probably have to use a more powerful ritual than Riker, because the betrayal would have been deeper.

    Back to Pawns and Symbols for an example of a Klingon subordinate who betrays his superior and pursues a course of action that promotes his superior's goals, but that doesn't appear that way at the time.   At the end of the book, Arenath performs a much more dramatic subordination ritual to Kang, involving a submissive posture that provides easy access to his neck, more than enough that Kang could easily kill him with a single blow.   Few things can say "I trust you with my life" more than presenting your neck for the chopping block.

[Abbot Nej vIt]

        Back to Pawns and Symbols[/b] for an example of a Klingon subordinate who betrays his superior and pursues a course of action that promotes his superior's goals, but that doesn't appear that way at the time.   At the end of the book, Arenath performs a much more dramatic subordination ritual to Kang, involving a submissive posture that provides easy access to his neck, more than enough that Kang could easily kill him with a single blow.   Few things can say "I trust you with my life" more than presenting your neck for the chopping block.

A Bit Like a Powerful Soldier Kneeling to Be Knighted by the King... The Soldier may well have Killed more Men than the King ever Imagined, But he "Surrenders" to the Kings Will...

Not Precisely as we are Talking about Other Cultures of Course...<Chuckle>...

[Klythe]

    I didn't think about knighting ceremony...   I think that is a nice analog though.   Handing your weapon to your superior and trust him to tap you about the shoulders instead of lopping off your head or stabbing at your heart.

[qoSagh]

Of course Knighting ceremonies are something I have researched, for the qaptaQ. When looking into such things as kneeling I found a reference to the schism between the Roman and Orthodox churches. Apparently the act of Genuflecting in church comes from a Roman Imperial sign of loyalty. When one is down on one knee, it is hard to draw a sword, and thus it is a symbol that you will not take up arms against someone. The Orthodox do not use this in church because it is Roman, but instead have show respect by bowing with one arm outstretched so that the fingers almost touch the floor. So I guess different cultures have over the years developed different methods to show the same meaning.