No king

From PreparingYou
Jump to: navigation, search
Can you have a government with no king or men who rule over your house without being destroyed by other rulers of the world? Has it ever been done before? Israel functioned as a government for hundreds of years with only freewill offerings for its support, a voluntary army and no kings. What were the doing? What is the Kingdom of God and His righteousness and the perfect law of liberty?
* "In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes." Judges 17:6

What kind of government has no king or ruler, no centralized authority who exercises authority one over the other?

The answer of course is an anarchy. So Israel was an anarchy but it was also called a republic because it had leaders but they were titular in nature. They did not make laws for the people or enter into treaties on behalf of the people, nor could they tax the people without their individual consent. They had the Ten Statements of law but properly understood they were just a enumeration of elements of natural law which keep a people free from the social compacts that bin people of men like Cain, Nimrod, Saul and Caesar..

  • "In those days there was no king in Israel: and in those days the tribe of the Danites sought them an inheritance to dwell in; for unto that day all their inheritance had not fallen unto them among the tribes of Israel." Judges 18:1

God has always wanted to rule men in their hearts and minds through mutual love. The mere idea of the voice of the people electing a ruler who exercises authority one over the other is a rejection of God[1]. Yet, God allows men to choose to have rulers but warns them of what will happen if they do. God through Moses had told the people to write 5 elements in a constitution to restrict his power and read them to their rulers every day. Only one of the five were included in the constitution of the United States.

  • "And it came to pass in those days, when there was no king in Israel, that there was a certain Levite sojourning on the side of mount Ephraim, who took to him a concubine out of Bethlehemjudah." Judges 19:1

Anarchy only works with a virtuous people and the system of welfare operated through the altars of the Levites was meant to promote those social virtues. To throw off the unwarranted usurpation of rulers requires a revolution of the heart and mind which is repentance.

  • "In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes." Judges 21:25

It is the righteous reformer that rules the day rather than rule his fellowman because he repents his sloth and avarice in bring about the despots of the world, not the ruthless rebel.

1 Kings 22:47 There was then no king in Edom: a deputy was king.

See the Peaceful invasion of Canaan.


In his own eyes

Judges 17:6 "In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes."

Some believe that this was a bad thing, but it could be good too, depending on the eyes of each man.[2]

People "doing what's right in their own eyes" only produces what would be the kingdom of God when the people keep their eyes on the righteousness of God. Moses and Jesus were taking people to the same form of government, which is why we are told to seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness. You cannot have one without both. Our view of the Old Testament has been heavily biased by the teachings of people like the Pharisees who got it wrong.

Understanding what ancient Israel was doing and how it operated as a nation would be essential to understanding Israelite form of government and Christian form of government preached by Christ.

The word 'eyes' in the text of Judges 17:6 is the word ayin[3] which is also translated fountain and well and even face.

What if you were to translate eyes into well or fountain?

Judges 17:6 "In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own fountain."

What flows from a man, flows from his heart, and the Bible tells us

Proverbs 21:2 "Every way of a man [is] right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts."

It has been suggested that Israel simply invaded Canaan and conquered it, but if you Google "peaceful invasion of Canaan" you will find that there is another opinion, based on the archaeological record. In truth, the Hebrew text also reveals that Israel did not oppress the original inhabitants, but were accepted and respected there, except by the die-hard Rulers of the Canaanites.

When society has people that are tending to the weightier matters for all the inhabitants, God's way will prevail, but when men are slothful or turn away from God, and when the voice of the people elect men to rule over one another, then men with an evil eye will take control of a nation. The leaders will become rulers deciding good and evil instead of God. As lawmakers with power over the people, they will become greedy and corrupt, and the people will lean toward wantonness for their benefits at the expense of their neighbor.

  • Proverbs 23:6 Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye, neither desire thou his dainty meats:
  • Proverbs 28:22 He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye, and considereth not that poverty shall come upon him.

Poverty is mentioned in the book of Proverbs more than any other book. It is normally from a word that may appear as ReishVavShem or ReishYodShem Or ReishAlefShem.[4]

Changing letters in Hebrew changes the meaning of words. In the three Hebrew words listed above, only the middle letter is different. Alef has to do with the relationship of God and Man and the Yod can represent the revelation of God, the divine spark and a Vav can have to do with a connection or a separation from something. The word is like the Hebrew letter Reish which has to do with kingly authority or dominion. God gave every man dominion over himself, but men gather and give the right to choose to other men, making them rulers over the people, thinking it will bring benefits, but it seldom does. This rejection of God always brings a poverty of the heart and then a poverty of the soul.

Plutarch said “The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits” but is it the government that makes the offer or the wantonness heart that justifies taking the benefits?

  • Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: 23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.


Hundreds of years before John the Baptist and Jesus brought their message of the Gospel of love, Rome was already being told by the historian of historians that "The masses continue with an appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them by way of a rule of force and violence. The people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others... institute the rule of violence; [5] and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder,[6] until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch." [7] Polybius.


Proverbs 6:11 So shall thy poverty come as one that travelleth, and thy want as an armed man.


Revelation 2:9 "I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but [are] the synagogue of Satan."

How many people today call themselves Christians but are really the churches of Satan? How many claim they love the word of God but their Corban makes the word of God to none effect? Are the many claiming to be Christians true Believers, or are they just Modern Christians and actually workers of iniquity?



Ancient Israel had no taxes, no king, ten laws with no penalties. How did they come together to defeat all aggressive forces that tried to oppress them?

Moses and Jesus were supposedly in agreement.

Both said "love thy neighbor as thyself"[8] and do not oppress the stranger in your midst.[9] All capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production which was guaranteed under their system.[10]

How did they come together to defeat all aggressive forces?

What about stoning?

Were they really stoning people with rocks?

Or is that just what Israel devolved into under the Pharisees and the election of kings which they were warned against?

Were their Altars really piles of stones used to burn up sheep or was that more of the Sophistry of fools?

They understood the need for a collective system of charity to provide for social welfare.

What were they really doing?


No Kings

The Bible mentions Religion 5 times and Governments hundreds and hundreds of times. So what is the Bible really about?

From the book Thy Kingdom Comes

Elixir of Love
“In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.” Judges 17:6

Moses managed a society of about three million people by establishing captains of ten families. Who were these captains, how were they chosen and what authority did they have?

The captains were chosen by the people. They were not appointed from the top down until men sinned against God. They had no power to rule, but were respected leaders by consensus. They did not make laws nor exercise authority, but stood in service of the people and the Law of God. The people were sovereign over themselves under God, not the people sovereign over their neighbor. Individually, they were the fountainheads of justice.

There are at least two responsibilities or duties of government. The first is the duty of protecting against actual theft, injury, or invasion. The second responsibility of government is the common welfare of the people, benevolent relief from famine, failure, or fiasco.

There often arises needs of the family and community where families must work together for the common good. There also is the case where the family breaks down and widows and orphans fall upon the charity of the community for assistance.

In Israel, these powers, rights, and responsibility rested in the hands of the individual freeman. It was the individual freeman who was required to see to the common defense against crime, whether domestic or foreign. It was the individual freeman who was responsible for the funding of the common welfare and daily ministration.

The people chose the public servant to handle these duties of government. They chose the captains from amongst the princes of Israel, who were the heads of each family group, and they chose the priests from amongst the Levites as a people, those of whom came out to service first and who had no other inheritance in the land.

This system was not perfect because the people were not perfect, but it was designed to strengthen the people and the family under the authority of God the Father, not the gods of men. There were fundamentals of the law of God that were common in the function of a free society. Justice and mercy was the responsibility of every man and, therefore, remained his right.

“And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, ye shall offer it at your own will.” Leviticus 19:5

One basic rule of that system of self governance was that your offerings or contributions to the government of Israel always consisted of “freewill offerings”.

“Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.” Leviticus 19:11

No one could force the people to contribute. There was a basic rule against stealing.

“Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob [him]: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.” Leviticus 19:13

Again, we see basic guidelines about fraud, theft, and extortion. But here is one of the most basic of all laws in both the Old and New Testaments:

" “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.” Leviticus 19:18

Jesus emphasized this very concept of the law in Mark 12:31. You not only are responsible for defending your own rights, family, and property, but you are also responsible for defending your neighbor’s rights as much as your own. Everyone in the kingdom is made acutely aware of this fact. It took years to develop the skill to do this as a whole nation, but it made Israel stronger and more successful than almost everyone else.

How did Israel manage the daily ministration, which included the common welfare of the people? Not only widows and orphans but plagues, floods, storms, and earthquakes could all raise havoc with the community. How did the whole nation protect itself from such calamity through their godly government without the loss of rights?

“And some of the things that should not have been forgotten, were lost.”[11]

Judea at the time of Christ was clearly in apostasy. What was ancient Israel like in the beginning? If the Jews in the days of Herod could not see the error of their ways, then the difficulty is compounded by an additional 2000 years of obscure history through which we must gaze. To see a more modern example, we can jump to an era some 500 years after the kingdom of God was preached in Europe by the faithful ministers of God.

In the first millennium after the Apostles preached the Kingdom of Heaven the Anglo-Saxon form of government had something called a Tithingman, who oversaw ten families composed of freemen, a Hundredman (or gerefa - in Saxon language, it became reeve) who oversaw ten Tithingmen, and an Eoldorman who was overseer to a thousand families and known as a Shire. A tithing, in English Law, formerly contained ten families. The key to their success was the intimate consensus of each group.

The Tithingmen were often the center in resolving disputes. These were positions of trust that sometimes included donations of limited property to carry out the function and duties of his office. The same was true of Hundredmen and Eoldormen.

Ten Tithingmen, a Hundredsman, and a clerk of the kingdom, a clergyman of the Church, often met on the full moon at the time of the filling of the butts. The "filling of the butts" referred to target practice with their bows and arrows. The full moon, marking the time of the meeting, aided all in returning home when the meetings ran late. This intimate group derived from the Tens set a gathering of twelve men that was the foundation of the national government.

Most of the ministration of justice was through these men by the mutual consent and common aid. The prime responsibility for bringing offenders to justice still remained with the victim and their family, but, through these men and the customary law, an organized structure to assist the Hue and Cry of the people was established. In the case of more national calamities or needs, this network could immediately muster a well-regulated national army. They were the minutemen of the national militia.

The right to bear arms was a responsibility as was the ministration of justice. A twelve-man jury was also the law of custom and, again, chosen with consent of the parties in dispute through the process of Voir Dire[12]. The Tithing bound by virtue with love and charity could settle most dispute with reason and brotherhood without ever going to trial.

These ancient systems of law and justice were well understood for generations. If attended to by decent men, they formed a wall of protection for individual liberty and national security. By their nature, they cultivated the virtues of sacrifice and courage, so necessary in maintaining a free society. To retain rights in such a free association, it was essential that individuals exercise a responsibility and concern for their neighbor’s rights equal to their own.

There were as many people living in Europe in 176 AD as there were in 1776. The difference was that the former mostly lived on their own land as freeman with the latter living as subjects and serfs. There is an ancient story of some uncivilized barbarians of Germany who stood together when faced with the invasion of three Roman legions[13].

The Germans or Teutons had migrated with their own customs and culture. They were a liberty-loving people who believed that the actions and deeds of a man spoke more of his character than preached philosophies and sermonized dogmas. Their ancestral roots and customs, along with their personal family honor, sealed in their hearts the virtuous ideal that “freedom is better than slavery.”[14]

They gathered together in groups called kindreds.[15] Kinship was at the core of their society and these small groups gathered together in larger groups forming a Hundertschaften.[16]

The leaders of these groups became the tribal counsel. These princes of men were not rulers but respected leaders. As leaders, they were titular and held no power over the families, as “it was the family that wielded the power. While families were the principal enforcers of the law...”.[17] The leaders could be called on in managing the settling of disputes or coordinating large activities,[18] but could not make law nor tax the people. The families remained sacred units which were never to be violated.

“The communities are wont, of their own accord and man by man, to bestow upon their Princes a certain number of beasts, or a certain portion of grain; a contribution which passes indeed for a mark of reverence and honour, but serves also to supply their necessities.”[19]The words “of their own accord” is translated from a Latin which means “voluntarily”.

These Germanic tribes had fought many battles, but had never faced such an organized army as the Romans. When Publius Quinctilius Varus marched into Germany to keep the peace and tax the Teutons, the people needed someone to lead the whole populace if they were to be free of the imposed excise of Rome. They chose Hermann the Cheruscan as their commander-in-chief against the occupational peace keepers. In the Teutoburg Forest, he lead the people against all three legions and destroyed the invading usurpers to the last man.

The Romans knew him as Arminius the Traitor and Rebel, but the people of Germania knew him as Hermannsdenkmal, or Hermann the Hero. In fact, Hermann was a little of both. He was an officer for the Romans and was in their employ when he began to prepare for their overthrow. The Romans had come because some of the Teutons were raiding their neighbors across the Rhine in Gaul. Gaul had fallen under Roman “protection” during the exploits of Julius Caesar, who came to Gaul for much the same reason. Although most of the Teutons did not raid their neighbors, they benefited from the spoils spent and traded back home by the marauders and turned a blind eye to the robbery. Such Slothful on the part of a free citizenry inevitably brings tribute and tyranny.

“The hand of the diligent shall bear rule: but the slothful shall be under tribute.” Proverbs 12:24

Due to their own civil war and the high cost of oppression in other lands, they were forced to raise taxes in Germania. This disregard for the rights of neighbors and the desire for power and continued control led Herman, with the aid of his strongest supporters and using methods he had learned from the Romans, to compel the people to remain under his capable leadership and authority. He virtually sought to crown himself over the people. Though the people were grateful for his service, his own family judged him a dictator and executed him as a traitor and a tyrant.

The people of Germania are difficult for historians to understand from a modern or Roman point of view. As freemen they opposed all forms of tyranny, whether foreign or domestic. Their opposition to any kind of central ruler was so absolute that, when the Romans came back to reap revenge, Tacitus reported that, “Germanicus, who had torn off his helmet so as to be recognized, ordered his men to kill and kill. No prisoners were wanted. Only the total destruction of the tribe would end the war.”

Who were these people who valued freedom and family, strength and courage, kinship and honor and the essential realities of a vigorous life?[20] There were severe penalties for adultery, cities were despised, usury unheard of, and a passion for justice and liberty. They knew that freedom did not come without constant vigil in time of war or peace.

Their customs of sumbels and blóts[21] were not originally designed to appease imaginary pagan gods with superstitious sacrifices. Through their chosen ministers or priests, these blots were a practical institutions of charity, intended to bind neighbors and communities in a fellowship of love.

Tacitus says of the ancient Teutons, in Germania 15, “The communities are wont, of their own accord[22] and man by man, to bestow upon their Leaders a certain number of beasts, or a certain portion of grain; a contribution which passes indeed for a mark of reverence and honour, but serves also to supply their necessities”.

When they began to lose sight of the need to protect their neighbors’ property and their neighbors’ rights, both those near and far, their days of liberty were numbered as the world shrank about them.

The word “German” is of uncertain origins. Some say it means “one who shouts as a warrior” or perhaps “neighbors who shout”.[23] If they, as a people, had more fully remembered the wisdom and practice of the prophets and loved their neighbor's freedom as much as they loved their own, their fate would have been much different.

“Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.” Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 5:43

In 600 AD, a wealthy landowner in central Europe began to exercise authority by oppressing some of his neighbors. The news got around quickly and, soon, a host of men marched toward this tyrant’s castle. More volunteers joined their ranks until an army approached the fortified dwellings of the potential despot. He sent an ambassador to make peace with their king, hoping to bribe him to relent.

After some time, the emissary returned totally confounded with no agreement. When the ruler nervously inquired as to the reason he could not obtain a treaty, the frustrated ambassador replied that he could not make a bargain because, “They say they are all kings”.

This was the right hand of government that stood for justice in the face of criminal or tyrant, but was bound together in times of peace by the daily practice of charity. This was the result of the Testaments. There is no “King” in the Kingdom of God, for each man is possessed of God-given rights and responsibilities. Wise men knew they could not shirk obligation or covet their neighbors’ goods without bringing their rights into jeopardy. The building block of this heavenly kingdom was the autonomous family, which was independent and sovereign within each home, but bound by love and charity with faith and hope.

“And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout [all] the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” Leviticus 25:10


Other words you use?
That word | Sophistry | Relativism | Religion | Eucharist | Terms |
Worship | Deist | gods | Cult | Corban | Benefactors | Covet | Merchandise |
Baptism | Refugee | Sovereign | Temples | Levites | Breeches | Fringes |
Priests | Mammon Judge | Father | | Church | Network |

Join The Living Network
The Living Network | Join Local group | About | Purpose | Guidelines | Network Removal
Contact Minister | Fractal Network | Audacity of Hope | Network Links

Footnotes

  1. 1 Samuel 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
    1 Samuel 10:19 And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands.
    1 Samuel 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
    1 Samuel 15:26 And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.
    1 Samuel 16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.
  2. : Deuteronomy 13:18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.
    Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
    Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
    1 Kings 11:33 Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father.
    1 Kings 14:8 And rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee: and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes;
    1 Kings 15:5 Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.
    1 Kings 15:11 And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father.
    1 Kings 22:43 And he walked in all the ways of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the LORD: nevertheless the high places were not taken away; for the people offered and burnt incense yet in the high places.
    2 Kings 10:30 And the LORD said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.
    1 Chronicles 13:4 And all the congregation said that they would do so: for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people.
    2 Chronicles 14:2 And Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the LORD his God:
    Psalms 19:8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
    Proverbs 4:25 Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee.
    Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.
  3. 05869 ^ןיע^ ‘ayin \@ah’- yin\@ probably a primitive word, Greek 137 ~Αινων~; n f/m; AV-eye 495, sight 216, seem 19, colour 12, fountain 11, well 11, face 10, pleased + 03190 10, presence 8, displeased + 03415 8, before 8, pleased + 03474 4, conceit 4, think 4, misc 66; 887
    1) eye
    1a) eye
    1a1) of physical eye
    1a2) as showing mental qualities
    1a3) of mental and spiritual faculties (fig.)
    2) spring, fountain
  4. 07389 ^שׁיר^ reysh \@raysh\@ or ^שׁאר^ re’sh \@raysh\@ or ^שׁיר^ riysh \@reesh\@ from 07326; n m; AV-poverty 7; 7 1) poverty
  5. Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
  6. Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
  7. "But when a new generation arises and the democracy falls into the hands of the grandchildren of its founders, they have become so accustomed to freedom and equality that they no longer value them, and begin to aim at pre-eminence; and it is chiefly those of ample fortune who fall into this error. 6 So when they begin to lust for power and cannot attain it through themselves or their own good qualities, they ruin their estates, tempting and corrupting the people in every possible way. 7 And hence when by their foolish thirst for reputation they have created among the masses an appetite for gifts and the habit of receiving them, democracy in its turn is abolished and changes into a rule of force and violence. 8 For the people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others, as soon as they find a leader who is enterprising but is excluded from the houses of office by his penury, institute the rule of violence; 9 and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch" Polybius: The Histories (composed at Rome around 130 BC)Fragments of Book VI, p289
  8. Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD. Matthew 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
  9. Exodus 23:9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
  10. Leviticus 25:13 In the year of this jubile ye shall return every man unto his possession.
  11. Galadriel, Lord of the Rings.
  12. Voir dire. “to say the truth”. Was a process of questioning by which men were rejected or accepted as jurors by two parties. of a disputes The choosing of a jury to judge fact and law in the settlement of that dispute.
  13. The 17th, 18th, and 19th legions. Their numbers were never used again after this defeat.
  14. One of the Nine Virtues of Asatru. Asatru has a number of translations including “The Faithful”.
  15. Kindred were composed of two to ten family groups that were often related by blood or marriage. Kindred, hearths, godhords, garths, harrows, hofs or fellowships are all names attributed over centuries to small groups of families that were the building blocks of larger gatherings of people as tribes and nations.
  16. German word for hundred, comparable to the early Hundreds courts of the Anglo-Saxons and Israelites.
  17. Good, Evil and Wholeness: Enclosures and The World by Swain Wodening Canote.
  18. The men chosen to represent the Kindred could elect a leader to coordinate a militia of able bodied men against invaders or catching thieves and marauders. Those leaders also chose the leaders of the tribes or they could form a court or tribunal when called upon to settle disputes.
  19. Tacitus says of the ancient Germans, in Germania 15,
  20. The nine virtues of Asatru, part of the faith of the Teutons and Saxon peoples.
  21. Sumbles were gatherings where men set aside their differences and extolled the good qualities in each man of the community. Blot was sacrificed to the needs of the community to share the good fortunes of neighbors with those that have had losses or hard times. It was a voluntary community social security system that brought people closer together. Modern Blots and sembles are often little more than social clubs in reaction to Modern Christianity.
  22. “Of their own accord” is translated from the Latin “ultro”, which means “voluntarily”.
  23. The Schakes of La Charette
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Departments
Navigate
.
Tools