triviae

From: Peter Metcalfe (P.Metcalfe@student.canterbury.ac.nz)
Date: Fri 25 Oct 1996 - 03:14:43 EEST


richardc:
=========

> In the final confrontation the following question came up: "Does
>the bite attack of a (2-legged) Telmori magically transformed by the
>effect of Wolfshead divine magic count as a magical weapon?"

Yes.

Michael Raarerova:
==================

Re the time line.

>And hopefully it will then be available for public consumption? Please?

Yes.

Oliver Bernuetz:
================

>>Nobody has ever claimed that King of Sartar and the GRoY are
>>completely and utterly accurate. [...] The question (and what we
>>debate about) is which parts are untrustworthy.

>I'll grant you this point but frankly it doesn't always look like a
>discussion about what is and what isn't trustworthy.

That's because whenever I argue something about the GRAY, I conduct
it offline to avoid boring most of the digest. But then I don't
believe Plentonius's reconstruction of what happened in the Golden
Age is true for the most part (ie the existance of continous
dynasty of Emperors from Anaxial to Manimat is a fiction IMO).

>>>There's a reason why Herodotus was known as the Father of Lies.

>>And what are the lies told by Herodotus to fit his facts?

>Obviously this whole point about Herodotus got overemphasized by me. The
>point I wanted to make was that Classical historians are not the most
>reliable lot.

Xenophon would have been a more appropiate person for the point that
you were trying to make. He wrote a History of My Time in which up
to this century, people accepted as being reliable because he was an
eye witness for some of the events that he described.

Then in this century, they dug up some fragments of papyrus in
Oxyrhynchus on which was written a history composed by an unknown
Historian which covered the same areas as Xenophon. Stylistically
this Historian was better and guess what? Xenophon actually left
out numerous events and details which would have been quite
embaressing to his political views (such as Sparta got its ass
kicked at such a battle) including those events at which he was
an eyewitness.

>I don't get that impression form
>the history of Talastor in the Dorastor book to me at least it loks like a
>pretty bald factual account of the area's history.

Note the key word _area_. It is factual for the area (ie Talastar)
it describes. However things which take place outside its area are
not necessarily factual. Like it may include a statement that Arkat
defeated Nysalor of which nobody in glorantha could know for sure.
The mere fact that the Talastari think the Tripolis was founded by
horse nomad slaves who were freed by the World Council is contradicted
by the GRAY which was written shortly _after_ the events described
and which paints are more complex picture of Horse Nomad/Wretched
Slave interaction that percieved by the World Council at the time.
The objective histories in the books are written by Gray Sages who
are ignorant on some matters.

>>The Pelorian Histories (GRoY, Entekosiad and Fortunate Succession) do
>>not contradict the rest of Genertela's history. It describes the
>>History of Peloria and that's all it does.

>I agree with you about the value of the histories and I must admit rather
>shamefacedly that I've never read any of the accounts about Peloria but
>working from what I've read in the digest it seemed to me that there were
>some contradictions or rather the Dara Happans certainly believe some pretty
>outrageous things.

The 'pretty outrageous things' like the Flood and the Roof of Manarlavus
are described as occuring in the God Time. Surely they are no more
outrageous than the notion of the Spike in the Centre of the World?

>Persoannly I'd love to see more "object" historical accounts. It makes it
>easier to put things into perspective. Yes, it's valuable to "know" what a
>people think and believe but I also like to know what actually happened.

The Fortunate Succession is closer to what you consider objective (although
it is still written as a pangyric to the glorious emperors, the critical
reader can still get parts of the real story - like did TakenEgi really
return for the third time?). This is what you would see for every history
all over glorantha (more precise the closer people are to the events that
took place and much dimmer for mythical events).

- --Peter Metcalfe

------------------------------


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:53:22 EEST