From: TTrotsky@aol.com
Date: Wed 01 Jul 1998 - 01:42:44 EEST
Alex:
<<Me: One could, I suppose, define two
I agree that common initiation might well indicate that various River
> gods with separate cults as being the same if they possess the same set of
> runes and have other properties in common (e.g. both River Gods). But then
the
> argument becomes suspicously circular IMO.
I agree we get on to very dodgy ground here. One non-circular test which
is at least interesting, if hardly conclusive, is common initiation.>>
gods are in some way fundamentally the same. However, coming back to Hsunchen
again, I personally doubt that Damala and Pralor, say, have common initiation,
but I suspect their runes may be the same. And given the range of hsunchen
(although I gather that Greg has recently stated that there are far less
hsunchen than we had previously been lead to believe) I would expect there to
be other, even more clear cut examples.
Of course, none of this is proof - we don't have conclusive evidence that
Damala and Pralor are demonstrably separate, or that their runes are the same
come to that - but it does seem to indicate to me that this initially
attractive theory at least has some holes in it.
Forward the glorious Red Army!
Trotsky
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 17:14:25 EEST