>1. Is it the case that the first we ever learn about any god is in the
>writings of its worshippers?
Most Gloranthans can't write. In fact most gloranthan languages don't even have a written form. Most cultural lore is passed down by word of mouth, and the oral traditions speak of the world as it was before humans were made. If you want truly ancient knowledge ask dragons or the giants. They know, because they were there.
Surely the most obvious and inspiring evidence gloranthans have for the existence and acts of their gods are written in the landscape in which they live. The bones and crystalized blood of their gods, the imprint of their weapons and bodies on the landscape and the shapes of the very mountains that make up their horizon are plain to see and predate any written records.
>2. Given that myths may be changed, with whatever difficulty, by
>heroquesting, do we know whether myths are "elastic" (i.e. tend to
stray
>back to their original form) or "plastic" (i.e. once changed, will tend
>to maintain their new form)?
I would say that they are plastic up to a point, but if manipulated too much have a tendency to a kind of 'backlash' effect, such as what happened to the God Learners, and the Nysalor project, and the EWF, and is apparently about to happen to the Lunar Empire.
The Orlanthi on the other hand have maintained a relatively stable mythology for a considerable period and display a commensurate resilience to the forces of history. They adapt to the world, rather than trying to force it to a shape they impose upon it. I believe this is what Arkat meant when he said 'No heroquesting without humility'.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail