> I do, however, heartily applaud the idea of creating a quite
>separate forum to the digest, so that newbies are not traumatised when
>their interesting myth idea is brutally cut down by Peter on the grounds
>that it is contradicted by Glorious Reascent, and in any case totally
>inconsistent with real Roman agricultural techniques.
And perhaps also for people who get tired of David 'Revisionist' Cake sprouting cheap shots from the blue...
>>> I think the Dara Happans may have recreated parts of the quest (ie
>>>the part where 'Antirius the Undeceivable is not fooled by his invisible
>>>Other'), but not known the whole story of the version where Antirius wins.
>>How can they know the story where Antirius wins when they know that
>>such a thing has never happened?
> First, did they know the story of how Antirius is the Undeceivable
>(which occurs at the Hill of Gold) before the successful quest for the Orb?
>I think they did, but I see no firm evidence either way.
Well considering that Antirius has returned from the Hill of Gold during the Great Darkness at least once, my opinion is yes. But 'not being deceived by his Other' is a completely different thing to 'winning the orb of the eye'.
> Secondly - The Orb is the source of Justice, and Antirius is the
>source of Justice.
The Orb is not the source of Justice, but Authority. It is part of the Imperial Regalia. It is demonstrably not intrinsic to Antirius because myth records it originally was held by Yelm and then Murharzarm. It passed unrecorded in myth to Antirius (aklthough Plentonius records him receiving the Cloak). Antirius then lost the Orb when the Roof was built and never held it again. It is demonstrably not necessary to his wellbeing because he came back to life (at the Dawn or at 111 ST - depending on whom you believe) without the Hill of Gold quest being successfully completed. Ergo on an examination of Dara Happan lore, the Orb and Antirius are distinct entities.
>OF Course Antirius must eventually win, even if they do not know how
Why must Antirius win at the Hill of Gold? The Prince who succeeded in the quest does not invoke him.
>Antirius never fails, but when we attempt the quest in
>his place, sometimes we imperfectly understand his suggestions, and by
>failing wound him.
I note the Fifth Wounding Error occured when Antirius displayed Justice and found it to be less than it had been. Thus to say 'Antirius never fails' is at odds with what the Dara Happans know about their religion.
>>Going up the Footstool is part of the Ten Tests. The HoG quest
>>is not part of the Ten Tests and is far more recent than the
>>Ten Tests.
>The Orb should be at the top of the Footstool, and if it isn't you have to
>resort to the Hill of Gold, a debased version for when the Orb is not where
>it should be. But the two quests are related.
Given that all the other regalia are also supposed to be found at the top of the Footstool in the Ten Tests makes this reasoning faulty considering the HoG quest was not used to retrieve any of the other missing regalia (some of which had been lost when the Ice came according to the myth).
>> What does a myth of Antirius have to do with becoming Emperor of
>> Dara Happa?
> Now, ask yourself which is the first mention of gaining the Orb? Is
>it the Hill of Gold? No. Its Yelm receiving the Orb. Then Murharzarm
>receives the Orb. The original quest for gaining the Orb of Authority is
>about ascending the Footstool, and is part of a series of quests where you
>are tested by spirits.
So why do people have to repeat the Hill of Gold quest and not the Ten Tests? And how do you reconcile this with the omission of the Orb of Authority from the modern Lunar Regalia?
> Now, suddenly the Orb is stolen by evil beings. Do you invent a
>totally new quest, unrelated to the first one? No, you try and use the one
>you have, except you know the regalia isn't at the top of the Footstool
>anymore, and you know the bad guys have it. So you adapt the quest a
>little, so that you are ascending a hill, and you face the bad guys along
>the way.
To postulate that Antirius was experimentally heroquesting in a response to the loss of the Orb is quite frankly awful. He quested for the Orb because the enemies had it on top of the Hill of Gold. Likewise I do not believe that questing at the Hill of Gold now is going to find the Orb as it is no longer there.
>The Hill of Gold quest for the Dara Happans is about trying to see the true
>path (the path Antirius would take, because Antirius is undeceivable),
But Antirius himself _tried_ that path and was unsuccessful _despite_ being undeceivable!
>The Hill of Gold proper (the one in Vanch) was never ascended by Antirius
>in a purely mythic sense
And you are wrong as a cursory examination of the GRAY shows. Antirius tried it twice and failed to attain the Orb. And in order to forestall cries of irresponsible nitpicking, I should point out the GRAY describes the worldview in which the Ten Princes would have understood the HoG quest. So rather than propose Antirius=Authority and speculate on the meaing of the HoG from there, you would be on far firmer ground if you tried to understand it the way the Ten Princes did.
>>Not all quests are meaningful on a smaller scale. Otherwise Frodo would
>>have simply melted down a gold ring in a fire whenever he was in trouble.
>Would this example be somewhat overgeneralised to make a rhetorical
>point perhaps?
No.
>Similarly, the Antirius Hill of Gold quest probably works pretty
>well if what you want to do is recover an Orb of Authority.
*An* Orb?!?
Powered by hypermail