Argrath and you know who

From: Arkat_at_aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 01:12:57 -0400


In a message dated 96-06-17 18:39:14 EDT, MSmylie wrote:

> If you are willing to say that
>"Argrath and the Devil" is simply 'myth', then there's also no reason to
>privilege the recordings of the "Argrath's Saga" itself as being
>historically/factually valid (i.e., I'm not really sure you can use one text
>to trump another within KoS; indeed, there's little reason to privilege the
>musings of the "author" at all, including his suppositions that the Devil is
>coming back).

I had thought of this argument and I guess the only thing I have to say is that Argrath's Saga seems to be more credible than just the one fragment called "Argrath and the Devil". Argrath's Saga is very long and many of the facts are given footnotes and are proabably much more easily checked out for accuracy than that fragment. The enitire credibility of Argrath's Saga is at risk if the author (who went to great pains to document his facts) left out something as important as Argrath and the Devil killing all the gods.

The fragment also has much more of that epic mythical feeling to it than Argrath's Saga as well.

John Brown
Arkat_at_aol.com


Powered by hypermail