Re: integration

From: David Dunham <david_at_...>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 08:11:55 -0700


Peter replies to me

> >We don't have an example (the Grazers don't
> >integrate ancestors), but it's quite conceivable that you simply are
> >"as brave as Drosox" or "as good with words as Elebel" if you've
> >integrated that aspect of them.
>
> But once you integrated them (and you can only integrate them
> once), they cease to have a separate existence and can't be
> contacted by anybody else. And it's more of "has Drosox's
> bravery" or "has Elebel's way with words" than the weaker forms
> you suggest. That's why I don't think that ancestors as a
> general rule are integrated.

As a general rule, they're not.

But in my hypothetical small band culture, you only integrate an ancestor with your own name, and no two living people would have the same name. It's eminently practical.

> I would instead prefer to channel ancestor (described in
> Heroforming) instead.

This is a tradition secret, so it's likely to be quite rare.

> spirits that the Shaman integrates are losing _their_
> identity irreversibly. If they are well-loved spirits of the
> shamans own tradition (like Ancestors), then this is going to
> be seen as a Bad Thing.

I don't think it's irreversible -- once Drosox the younger dies, his great-grandson is free to integrate the original Drosox.

Also note that to a hsunchen, it's quite likely that the totem spirits you're integrating are in fact a distant ancestor...

David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_...>
Glorantha/HW/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html> Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein

Powered by hypermail