Well, at the most micro level, things happen causally. In the myths you swing your axe, you cut off the leg of the monster, the monster falls over, the monster is on the ground. I've never seen one where monster is on the ground, you but off the monsters leg, the monster falls over, you swing your axe.
And I would say that Dara Happan's certainly have days. After all, the chronology is a central party of their mhos and DH quests would have to match, wouldn't they?
So if they count days, then there need to be days. I don't know if it gets light or dark between them, but they would have to be there for Dara Happans.
Someone objected that they day only exist because quester imposed them. But that assumes some objective default where days not exist until they are imposed. If on set of questers goes back and see days, and another doesn't, does that mean the first imposed days or the the second skipped over them? Disagreements between quests and mythos only show that quests are "malleable"(?), not that one assumption ot the other is right (except, of course, that each culture knows they are right and their foes are wrong).
So it seems to me that…
a) Time (lower case) exists within myths to allow causality (to allow some things, like hero's and god, to cause other things to happen). b) There doesn't seem to be one overarching Time that drives the world, all at the same "time". c) The time that does exist extends far enough as it needed to allow myths unfold. -----------------------------------------------------------------David Summers
(People have been fooled but I'm in California, not Massachusetts. This is the internet after all.)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Powered by hypermail