Kvöðin

Kvöðin, or “the Duty” (invariably capitalised in print), is the moral imperative in Arlatur and Siur culture to call out and act against instances of aberrant, improper or otherwise unacceptable behaviour – an extension of the exhortations by Ragna Hrafnamaður in the Principles of a Spiritual Life to 'speak the truth wherever it is to be found'. It is conventionally distinguished in philosophy from the more overarching goal of einingu, to see past vist and hemja, although these concepts are often confounded in colloquial use and many schools of thought have proposed they are essentially linked.

Politics

Although long established in Siur custom, the name as currently used emerges from a 1716 statement made by Mórvanna Stuttsöla, then the thár of Siurskeyti, in which the country declared war on the Median slave trade. The 'Duty' outlined the Siursk intention to treat those vessels found to be carrying slaves, or even to be fitted out for such carriage (under the so-called “equipment clause” of the enabling legislation), as in breach of Siur law, regardless of the flags flown by those ships. In this usage the term nowadays carries wider significance in the modern era as a large part of Siursk diplomacy, justifying interference into a variety of matters in other states and societies in the name of Arlaturi morality. The comments spill over also onto Helminthasse and other Siur or Transaphrasian polities, given these countries’ largely shared heritage.

The other side to the political invocation of kvöðin is domestic, surrounding the conformity of commonhold government with Arlaturi prescriptions, as well as the existence of distinct duties commanded by truthfulness. Most of this takes the form of debating the moral character of particular policies and laws, a favourite battleground of réttarmenn where the tensions between dogma and practicality are keenly explored, but the concept of mælishönd also describes independent political logics ostensibly for kvöðin's own sake.

Criticism

Outside the limited geographical footprint of the Siur territories, the principle of the Duty is given very short shrift indeed, playing as it does into a wider perception of Arlaturi as self-righteous and arrogant in their dealings with adherents of other systems of belief. It is often pointed out in these cases that, while Arlaturi do not attempt to proselytise for their beliefs – something which is strongly disapproved of in contemporary Arlatur – they nonetheless tend to be highly vocal in their criticism of the practices of other faiths, where these run across Arlaturi mores, and have protested vehemently – and at times violently – against restrictions on their practice of their own.

A particular bone of contention in this respect is the long-standing and widespread Outer Joriscian practice of rabtat; while rabtat does not map precisely onto Messenian practices and is a good deal more nuanced in contemporary Vaestic states, it is still seen by the Siur as being at bottom a form of institutionalised slavery, which strikes at the core of Arlaturi beliefs on the inviolability of individual liberty. Although there have been instances where this distaste has been set aside out of political pragmatism, rabtat and its wider ramifications still strongly colour Siur dealings with the nations of the east. Similar cultural prejudices against social manifestations of Divine Hierarchy in Siriash have likewise led to antipathy against many Sirian countries, even in the face of ostensible partnerships, most famously the sweeping condemnations of Siriandom in response to the Alcasian Geweld during the Long War (though considering the period as a part of the Siursk-Zepnish Straits Game has raised doubts on any claim to neutrality or a moral high ground by commentaries on both sides).