From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_voyager.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 00:04:21 +1200 (NZST)

Richard Develyn:

>In particular I feel that most of you believe that myths have some sort
>of resistance to change, though you accept that they _can_ be changed
>and therefore cannot ever be considered to provide _proof_ of past
>events (Uz Lore in A-H Trollpak makes a statement to the contrary at the
>bottom of p.8 - which I'm ignoring at present 'cos I think it's a

It's not a mistake. The statement was that many species claim to have been the principle contestant in the I Fought We Won battle and their claims are correct. When they perform the ritual to enter the IFWW battle, they find that their species' claims are correct.

>I'd like to try to focus in a bit on this with an example (following on
>from one which I think was started by Nick B) "The Clan and The Lions".

>1. Clan has problem with Lions.
>6. Clan elders consulted about myth "Local Boy Beats Up Lion". Silly old
>duffers can't remember exactly what happened (What was the time of day?
>What weapons did the hero use? Was he on his own? etc).
>7. Clan settles on the best version they can, which is different to the
>original. They attempt to re-enact it.

>8. What happens next?

It succeeds based on their preparations. In trying to repeat the quest, they do not need to get all the details correct just the central one (ie beat up lion). When Harmast recreated the LBQ, he did not follow exactly the same steps as Orlanth did, nor did Argrath.

Powered by hypermail