OTOH, one might hypothesise, if one were a shameless God Learner taxonomist (of either runic or zoological sort, it amounts to the same thing), that the degree of runic overlap corresponds closely to the degree of relatedness/identity of the gods in question, and how they are "descended" from each other (or otherwise hypothetical third parties). So at the crudest level, one GLer school might suggest that Basmol and Sakkar are just different aspects of Generic Purry Furry Carnivore God.
> << -- while River Gods seem mostly interchangeable (and hence ultimately the
> same, or related?)>>
> It depends what you mean by 'the same'. One could, I suppose, define two
> gods with separate cults as being the same if they possess the same set of
> runes and have other properties in common (e.g. both River Gods). But then the
> argument becomes suspicously circular IMO.
I agree we get on to very dodgy ground here. One non-circular test which is at least interesting, if hardly conclusive, is common initiation.
(It's a bit like the "interbreeding" test for specieshood, and has the same flaw (among others, I suspect).)
Slainte,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail