Jump to navigation Jump to search
LEX MAGICA of the MARTYR'S TREE CONSILIUM
- RECOGNIZED by SUPREMACY: Their ubiquity in ancient law speaks their truth.
- RIGHT of CROSSING: Let no borders stop an Awakened with a clear heart.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Each cadre, order, path, consilium, or other assembly of the Awakened Recognized before the Lex Magica or comprised of individuals Recognized before the Lex Magica shall make public notice of the safe and permissible path through their territory in whatever realm of being such claims are Recognized before the Lex Magica.
- SLD: (Maxim, NYC) In some consilii, Recognition is on occasion granted to beings of the Fallen World who have proven their merit. Does the convocation suggest their territorial claims respected? The will of the lawyer is not the soul of the law. We answer no.
- SLD: (Pontiff, PHL) Any limitation of the Precept of Recognition is not codified in Silver Law concordance, neither by Harmony, nor Supremacy. If you wish to limit who is Recognized by your councilors because you fear the wisdom of their Recognition, raise up wiser councilors. We have the leaders we deserve. We say yes.
- RIGHT of EMERITUS: Those who have earned respect must be treated with respect.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Those Recognized by the consilium as members thereof shall afford respect and deference to officers of the consilium according to their status therein; they shall not impede their just and sanctioned activities, nor hinder their travel or liberty, nor tamper with their minds, patterns, or souls save they violate the Right of Sanctuary. In all other matters, the unwise owe respect to the wise; the initiate to the apprentice, the apprentice to the disciple, the disciple to the adept, the adept to the master, the master to the master of the second degree, etc. Each order may create what hierarchies seem sensible to them, or enforce none if it please them to do so.
- SLC: (Djinn, BST) Respect and deference is not fealty. Gaveston was writing during a time of nascent colonialism and unbridled white supremacist western expansion. Give me no reason to do otherwise, and yes. I will respect my wise betters. Come in the name of the consilium, and enjoy my cooperation. Demand submission for unwise ends and I am obliged to resist.
- SLC: (Kairos, PTD) You will be well regarded if you treat others well regardless of your power. How much wiser are those wise who treat others as they would wish to be treated?
- RIGHT of HOSPITALITY: Those who request hospitality must be granted it.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) The Awakened Nation of the Diamond Orders are few in number. Beset on all sides by servants of the Lie, agents of the Abyss, Banishers and the Mad. If we cannot look to each other for succor in times of peril, we shall surely fall to our manifold enemies. In accordance with this, each cadre, consilium, and order shall make known the manner of their hospitality and the extent of its charity. Its observance shall be marked upon each sigil of every cadre. For in this new world, we are all travelers in need of lodgings against its perilous night.
- SLD: (Djinn, BST) Bluntly, this is not the mind we should be looking to for examples of Hospitality. He was complicit in the spilling of more awakened blood during his tenure than the sum of that which has been spilled in the centuries since in this convocation. There is no wisdom to be found in his words here, and were it permitted I would blot this entry of his in particular from the page. We are to be hospitable to our peers when they ask it of us. The form that takes is up to each individual cadre. Making your manner public is optional. Having a sigil is optional. Marking it with the great rights is optional. Had Gaveston been more interested in the spirit of this Right rather than obsessed over how it be adorned like an epaulet the whole of the world would be a far better place.
- SLD: (Kairos, PTD) The broken clock wrote at the opportune hour. Would that he had remembered what he had written. Yet there is wisdom you may glean from this: even your own wisdom is useless unless it be remembered in times of adversity. It is too precious to set aside for sake of expediency.
- SLD: (Cavalier, PHL) On behalf of the Libertine Caucus: Fuck this guy. If you need a law to remind you to be kind to your confederates, the absence of such a law isn't the problem. Be better.
- SLD: (Pontiff, PHL) Tradition demands we observe this Right, though I find myself unable to disagree with the Cavalier's Wisdom here. They were correct. It should not be necessary. But it is helpful when we know who to run to and how they will receive us. In this, sigils and publishing your interpretation of this Right is, as my colleague suggests, being better.
- RIGHT of NEMESIS: When vengeance is declared, let none stand in its way.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Let none stand in its way, certainly. But limit its scope and reach also. In this we look both to Atlantean practice and to the Fallen World and its dueling customs. First, you must declare your grievance and ensure the object of your ire is aware it exists. You must give them the opportunity to address your ire and, if possible, ameliorate it. Failing this, a circle shall be squared and the two parties then meet within it so as to ascertain who holds the might and merit and who shall bow their head, should a head remain to be bowed.
- SLC: (Kairos, PTD) Communicate constructively always and you will find your ire rising far more infrequently. Do not look to Nemesis to resolve your troubles. Look to yourself to not make nemeses of your friends and peers. Then the fault of any duel will rest on the head of the one who rebuffed your open hand.
- SLD: (Cavalier, PHL) The belief that might makes right derives from the Iron Pyramid. You sound like a Seer when you fill the air around you with such nonsense.
- SLD: (Pontiff, PHL) This is true of might of arms and other fallen concepts. One's Supernal might does not, it is needless to say, derive from the Exarchs. The Duel Arcane is a pressure valve. A place to settle your disputes without bringing the walls of the world down around you. Use it if you must.
- RIGHT of SANCTUARY: Protect your home, and let no action cause it harm.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) The various consilii and the convocations to which they hold membership through Precept of Recognition may acknowledge the claims of cadres and solitaires alike as they stake out territory within the domains of the Wise. Such claims may extend to their pupils and apprentices, affording the apprentice the protection of this Right, and the Master the protection of Emeritus and Sanctuary in enforcing it. Cadres and Solitaires alike have the responsibility of maintaining the welfare of their claimed territories and of protecting them from harm and from the enemies of the Awakened. Territorial claims from Unrecognized awakened will not be honored by the Consilium, though their individual sanctums will enjoy such protection regardless.
- SLC: (Kairos, PTD) Of all the things we may claim, that most precious thing is the Apprentice. Protect them as you would your own life, for they are the future. There is no greater wisdom than ensuring the continuation of our people.
- SLC: (Pontiff, PHL) Each cadre may and ought to publicize their interpretations of the Great Rights as Recognized within their territorial claims, bearing in mind that their interpretations may expand upon those rulings of their host consilium, but may not overrule them.
- SLC: (Cavalier, PHL) Even within the Assembly we understand that good fences make for good neighbors. That said, don't fence off more than you can protect with your immediate resources. That's hubris, and may be viewed as such if such can be shown after you fail in your duties. So don't.
- RIGHT of CROSSING: Let no borders stop an Awakened with a clear heart.
- RECOGNIZED by ARTIFACT: The artifacts of the ancients are the keys to understanding.
- RIGHT of EXECUTION: An awakened life is sacred but not inviolate.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) The mask of the Interfector, passed down to us from the time before, is a sacred tool of anonymity for the executioner. Its existence makes this truth manifest. The right and responsibility for execution belongs to the Guardians of the Veil and their chosen Interfector, the authority to issue such a sentence belongs to the council alone. When the life of an awakened is forfeit before the Lex Magica, it shall be the duty of the Interfector to end it. Executions must be witnessed by Masters of Life, Death, and Mind to ensure all three methods verify the expiration of the accused. In truly grievous matters, the soul of the accused may be destroyed along with the spark of life in the accused's body. Without the leave of the Consilium and its Council, the ending of Awakened life is forbidden, save in defense of one's life, the life of another, or one's sanctum.
- SLC: (Kairos, PTD) There is wisdom to be discovered in the role of the Interfector. While we despise it and revile the Interfector for its uncleanliness and taint, it spares us the stain on our souls. It is a sacrifice the one behind the Mask performs for all of us. Let the hate reach no deeper than the surface of the mask, than the fabric of the robes, and the stains on their hands. The one beneath and behind them is a servant to our will. They bear the weight of our expedience.
- RIGHT of EXECUTION: An awakened life is sacred but not inviolate.
- RECOGNIZED by SUPREMACY
- PRECEPT of SECRECY: Magic must be kept secret from those who do not practice it.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) The following acts shall put you at risk of violation of the Precept of Secrecy: Creating paradoxes before Sleeper witnesses, creating paradoxes before witnesses who spread the tale, leaving behind tangible evidence of magic which Sleepers may discover, teaching of the Mysteries to Sleepers, betraying the Mysteries to enemies of the Awakened. The punishments for such violations range from minor to major reprimands, minor to major penance, and in extreme cases of betrayal; death by Interfector.
- SLD: (Pontiff, PHL) Our historical association with the Sakima of Philadelphia's night walkers, and with the Crowns of the Fae Courts towards a desire for decolonizing our practices here make it clear that, at least here in the Martyr's Tree, discussion in general terms with other supernatural beings is not criminal per se. Be mindful of what you share and to whom, for you remain responsible for who learns of your lessons.
- SLD: (Cavalier, PHL) "Tell no one," writes the Hierarch before retiring to his meeting with one of the Fae to draft a treaty of understanding. Watch your leaders and hold them to your same standards.
- PRECEPT of PROTECTORATE: Every mage is entitled to security within their sanctum.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Every magus whose sanctum is Recognized by its host consilium shall enjoy protection under the Precept of Protectorate. Violations of this precept include approaching the sanctum of another mage in violation of their interpretation of their protocols, causing a Sleeper investigation near another mage’s sanctum, testing the wards or limits of another mage’s sanctum, entering another mage’s sanctum without formally granted permission, attacking another mage's sanctum without the permission of the Consilium. Penalties for violation of this precept shall include minor reprimand, minor penance, and potential incarceration.
- SLC: (Pontiff, PHL) This Precept is among those which individual cadres may undertake enforcement of upon request of the Council. They will enjoy the option of putting the petition for justice before the council or the Lictors, or keeping it to themselves through the Duel Arcane, or through the Precept of War with the leave of the council to prosecute such violence.
- PRECEPT of HUBRIS: The most precious asset of the Awakened is our Wisdom.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Violations of the Precept of Hubris include casting a curse on another, forcing an unwilling transformation on another, binding another’s soul, magical attacks on others, aiding spiritual possession of another, exiling others to the Shadow Realm, the Underworld, Twilight, or other planes of existence to which the entity is not a native, using magic for murder, and the theft of or reaving of the soul. Certain exceptions are allowed for Consilium Officers or other appointed individuals with dispensation to deal with the enemies of the Awakened, Servants of the Lie, Agents of the Abyss, and other such enemies as the Consilium may Recognize. Punishments for such offenses include minor reprimand to major reprimand when the transgression is against another Awakened. For violations against Sleepers, punishments include major reprimand, major penance, and potentially whatever censure is appropriate before the Precept of Secrecy.
- PRECEPT of WAR:
- PRECEPT of RECOGNITION: Every Consilium must have a way of deciding who falls under the auspices of their laws.
- SLC: (Gaveston, NYC) Each Convocation, Consilium, Order, Cadre, and organization of the Awakened formally Recognized before the Lex Magica of its superior or supreme authority has the right to Recognize its members, extend to them the protections and responsibilities of membership, and enforce punishments and directives upon them in accordance with its interpretation of Gold and Silver Law, its Bronze Law rulings, and Iron Law concordats, interdicts, and addenda. Each lesser body may pronounce its recognition over and above that offered by superior bodies, and interpret superior rulings for local purposes, but may not contradict them or ignore them.
- PRECEPT of SECRECY: Magic must be kept secret from those who do not practice it.
- CREATION of HALLOWS
- Cadre Questors v. Mysterium (1736) : Summary: Questors, a cadre, used Prime practices to Make a hallow within the confines of their domain. This disturbed the Ley Lines of the city in unanticipated ways, which prompted the Mysterium to challenge the Wisdom and legality of such a creation. The Lictor assigned to the matter ruled that the Cadre had not acted unlawfully, though perhaps Unwisely. They were asked to render their Hallow dormant on the condition that the Mysterium then provide advice as to where a Hallow might be created in their Territory without such disruption. The Lictor, in their decision, further suggested that henceforth such creation of Hallows be done only with the advisement of the Mysterium and the consent of the Council of the Wise.
- DUEL ARCANE
- Seedling v. Constantine II (1798) : Summary: Seedling, a Thyrsus of the Children of the Tree, was considered to have breached Right of Emeritus before Councilor Constantine II. Seedling, feeling himself justified in the comments he'd been speaking at the time, could not be made to understand his error. He declined to meet the Councilor for what would have been a very one sided duel, which prompted Constantine to seek Seedling out. This resulted in over a score of the Unnamed Nation placing themselves between Constantine and Disciple Seedling. Rather than repeat Gaveston's Hubris, Constantine brought the matter before a Lictor. In their decision, the Lictor ruled that since the Children of the Tree did not Recognize the right of Nemesis in the same way as the Diamond Orders, they had not violated Nemesis in refusing to duel or standing between Constantine and Seedling. It was further ruled that any future Duels between the Children of the Tree and the Diamond Orders not be sanctioned unless by leave of the Hierarch or a Lictor in the event the Council of the Wise is involved in the dispute. This sanction to be given if and only if the Magus seeking nemesis against a Scion have met with their Warmaker and the target of their ire. Failure of either party to consent to mediation will be viewed as a violation of the Hierarch's right of Emeritus.
- Kraken v. Agamemnon (1799) : Summary: Adept Kraken of the Mysterium and Adept Agamemnon of the Guardians of the Veil had enjoyed a rivalry for years. Kraken, an Acquisitor, found herself frequently at odds with Agamemnon the Redactor. Both magi made a habit of snatching imbued items and grimoires out from under the other's nose, with the items going to the respective repositories of their orders. This came to a head when Agamemnon destroyed an Artifact alleged to have been created by a left hand practitioner. The negotiations of the Duel Arcane that resulted had both parties wishing for a duel to the death to resolve at last their decades old dispute. The matter was brought before the Council of the Wise which ruled as follows: Under no pretext should a duel to the death occur between two magi for esoteric disputes over praxis and ideology. The only matter where a duel to the death will be entertained is in a matter which carries a capital penalty, and where such a duel may substitute for the judgment of the council; such as the murder of a member of the consilium when the challenger is a cadre member of the slain, or when an individual has destroyed a Supernal artifact belonging to a cadre, or when a Hallow belonging to a Cadre has been extinguished permanently. Duels in such cases will be considered a request for the matter to be dealt with through the Precept of War by the Cadre so offended, though the results of the duel will be treated as the binding decision of the Council of the Wise in the matter, save that the results of the duel will not establish Bronze Law precedent and pertain to that matter individually.
- Avalon v. Mysterium (1710) : Summary: Avalon, an Acanthus of the Guardians of the Veil, was accused by the Mysterium of a violation of the Precept of Hubris in causing his Nimbus to occlude a Mystery the Archivist of the Tree was attempting to study pertaining to a fruit of the Martyr's Tree. The Mysterium believed the act was malicious, intended to hide from the Mysterium a truth that Avalon had somehow already unraveled for himself. Given the politics of the day between the two orders were quite tense, and the council was becoming acrimonious in its discussion of taking on the case, Hierarch Gaveston requested a Lictor from the Magisterium adjudicate the matter. The Lictor ruled that malicious Hubris or not, the punishment should be the same. A minor reprimand, and restitution. In instances where the Mystery is derived from the Martyr's Tree, the next fruit earned by the offender, their cadre, or their order be surrendered to the wronged party. In cases of other mysteries, it is enough to offer one week's service to the wronged party, a payment of five drams of tass, or surrendering of a minor grimoire.
- RELEASING SPELLS
- Augustine v. Consilium (1701) : Summary: Augustine, a Thunderbolt Guardian of the Adamantine Arrow was accused of a violation of the Precept of Hubris when a spell he released unraveled to dramatic effect, turning a ward he had placed to detect the comings and goings of a Scelesti into a sudden explosion of flame. The fire consumed a significant portion of Port Richmond, including numerous private homes and several businesses. The presence of sleeper authorities and the fire watch prevented Redactors from being able to immediately respond, and unfortunately the situation ended after several hours with the deaths of six sleepers and the devastation of a vital part of the Port Richmond district. Augustine requested to be tried by a Lictor, but Hierarch Gaveston declined, feeling that this situation merited the direct opinion of the Council of the Wise, as it would form Bronze Law with respect to such errors in the future. Augustine was found guilty of having violated the Precept of Hubris and ordered to make restitution to the families and businesses displaced. He was issued a Major Reprimand and banished from the consilium for a period of one year for each of his victims, during which time he was to continue paying restitution to the families in secret. The resulting ruling was then added to the Bronze Law: Mages may only release spells with a minor investment of the will if the duration does not exceed one solar week, or if the released spell will exist within their sanctum or their cadre's claimed territory. Should the spell then unravel catastrophically, the damage will be contained to the ones responsible. Property damage must be somehow repaid to the victims, and loss of life will end in the banishment of the responsible party and the disbanding of the cadre from the consilium, the striking of their sigil from the consilium archives, and in severe cases, potential death of the responsible party at the hands of the Interfector. If the unraveling further violates the Precept of Secrecy in the manner of its unraveling, the banishment will be permanent and in severe cases, the execution may include death at the hands of the Interfector.
- Kali v. Guardians of the Veil (1878) : Summary: The Guardians of the Veil discovered a signature nimbus on a sleeper. Upon investigation, they were able to positively identify the nimbus as belonging to Magus Kali of the Adamantine Arrows. Through study of the Mystery, they discerned that Kali was the beneficiary of the spell, meaning the Sleeper would have to have consented to the spell in some form for this arrangement to work. Citing this as a breach of the Precept of Secrecy, they brought the matter to the council for immediate trial. Kali testified that he hung the spells there with the sleeper's consent. The Factotum for the Guardians pointed out that's the entire problem. After hearing out the arguments, the Council provided summary judgment. They found that the Sleeper was to be managed by the Guardians of the Veil and spared if by any means it may be so. It further found that subsequent abuses of hanging spells on sleepers would be punished as violations of the Precept of Secrecy, and willful violations at that, punishable by Major Reprimand and, in cases where the Veil was truly violated, death by Interfector. It was further stipulated that only Sleepwalkers Recognized by the Consilium might carry spells for Mages, as they are capable of comprehending the severity of the risk this presents to them.
- SOUL STONES
- Cherub v. Pontiff (1968) : Summary: Cherub was found to have studied the soul stone of Pontiff when the latter was under hospitality of Pontiff's cadre, the Beatification. This was done to enter Pontiff's legacy. While under Hospitality, there was little for Pontiff to do. Once the period of Hospitality had ended, Pontiff brought the matter to the Council of the Wise, citing the matter as a violation of Emeritus and right Exchange. Pontiff made it clear when he brought his suit that he did not desire the death of Cherub, merely that Cherub consent to go through the proper apprenticeship and training that other members of his Legacy and Pontiff himself had undertaken. The council declined to hear the case themselves due to the close association of Pontiff to the Council as one of its leading Lex Magica scholars and a Lictor in his own right. The Magisterium provided a Lictor from a neighboring consilium. The Lictor ruled as follows: Where legacies forbid entrance to them through the study of soul stones, the study of a soul stone without the assent of a member of that legacy shall constitute a violation of Emeritus punishable by Minor or Major Reprimand depending upon the flagrancy. Furthermore, the offender will lose their consilium status and any position they hold, reducing them merely to a member. It is further suggested that their order reciprocate and similarly strip them of status and position. The offender is then to undergo the customary training and tutelage the legacy would otherwise require, treating the student as they would any other apprentice. Should they refuse this, the only other punishment is imprisonment and the removal of the offender's soul to be bound in a jar and held by the one whose soul stone was initially studied. When the guilty party inevitably consents to the apprenticeship in return for their soul, the matter may proceed as though they had consented in the first place. If the captivity drives the offender to become Mad, they will be executed at the hands of the Interfector.
- SYMPATHETIC NAMES
- Caravaggio v. Gaveston (1685) : Summary: Caravaggio, a Mystagogue Acquisitor, took an unusual avenue in attempting to punish Gaveston for his Great Hubris. The specifics of how are unknown, but Caravaggio came to be in possession of Gaveston's sympathetic name and shared it with his detractors within the Consilium. The thinking was that, in the event Gaveston's apparent change of heart proved temporary, the plotters could then conspire to end Gaveston's life in a ritual. Word of the plot reached the Guardians of the Veil who then reported the matter to the Council as a potential breach of Emeritus. Given one of the parties was himself the Hierarch, a lictor was requested from the Magisterium itself. The Lictor found that the traditions of the Silver Ladder and Guardians of the Veil with respect to Sympathetic Names may be punished by Iron Law within their respective orders when members of those orders share sympathetic names, but that the Silver Ladder has no jurisdiction over the Mysterium who have no such law among them. Furthermore, such punishment should only rise to Minor Reprimand unless the sharing was deliberate and malicious, at which point it may rise to a Major Reprimand. Sharing a sympathetic name with a servant of the Lie or an enemy of the Supernal, however, will be met with a punishment of death by the hands of the Interfector. Where sharing of the sympathetic name belongs to a consilium officer, the sharing becomes a violation of Emeritus even if the offender is neither a Guardian nor a Silver Ladder.
- COUNCIL ARCHIVES
- Cadre Council of the Wise & Mysterium (1832) Summary: The Council of the Wise have contracted with the Mysterium Caucus to house their growing library of grimoires and imbued items in safer and more permanent housing. The price of this housing is access to the archives with permission of and oversight by the Curator.
- ASSEMBLY of the UNNAMED NATION
- Unnamed Orders (Free Council) & Children of the Tree (1911): Summary: A formal treaty between the united Unnamed Orders (Free Council) and the Children of the Martyr's Tree, detailing the creation of the Assembly of the Unnamed Nation, outlining their partnership and cooperation and the pledge of mutual respect and aid. It is the founding document of the local Assembly, and frequently cited text among the Libertine Caucuses of the world to this day.
- SLC: Silver Law Concordance: This entry is Recognized by Harmony by all member consilii of the convocation.
- SLD: Silver Law Discordance: This entry is interpreted according to the views of the council of the member consilium.
- Consilii Codes:
- BST: Boston, Mass
- NYC: New York City, NY
- PHL: Philadelphia, PA (Martyr's Tree)
- PTD: Portland, ME