From: Jeff Richard (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun 18 May 1997 - 08:56:35 EEST
Carl the Unmovable Stone wrote:
>Sure, as long as the myths *aren't directly contradictory*. Which
>they originally (RQ2) were not. Please don't cite newer publications
>to prove me wrong, since what I'm complaining about is precisely that
>newer publications *do* diverge from this earlier, better, state.
Well that's a fine pickle isn't it. I hope this isn't ultimately your
position - that we should just ignore everything Greg has written for the
last fifteen years because it lacks the pristine, all-encompassing
character of his earlier writing? Come on - King of Sartar, Fortunate
Succession, Glorious ReAscent of Yelm and the Entekosiad are all part of
the Gloranthan canon now. Personally, I think the newer material is richer
than Greg's writings of two decades ago.
>If the myths contradict each other then SOME ARE WRONG. If you accept the
primacy of logic you
>can't get around that. If you don't, we're wasting our time discussing
Sort of like there is only one God, and he is the Trinity? Myths are not
logical proposition - indeed logic is exactly the wrong tool to use when
examining cultural and religious beliefs.
BTW, thanks for the harvesting numbers Colin. In ToDP, we generally use
bartar (or marks of silver for large items), with the cow being the premier
unit of trade for the characters. I am naturally interested in what you
pegged as the relative values of grain/animals/specie.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:59:39 EEST