> >Something did go wrong with the EWF but to claim it was the
> >result of a "moral rot" is still wrong IMO. The record only
> >shows the EWF being thrown back by numerous revolts and
> >battlefield defeats rather than any internal decay (would
> >you claim the Byzantine Empire fell because of internal
> >decay?)
>Can't speak about Byzantiumwith any confidence. The Egyptian
>Empire in the Middle Kingdon declined because Akhenaten was more
>interested in religious than political matters, though. I'm sure that
>decline was attributed to "moral failings" by some of his
>contemporaries.
Er, apart from noting that Akhenaton was New Kingdom and that the decline was temporary, how is this relevant? I am pointing out that an empire can collapse for reasons other than "moral rot" that you think must be the cause, and you respond with an example of an empire in temporary retreat with the observation that someone might have thought it was "moral rot" (an overtly subjective judgement on Akhenaton)?
> >Are we to believe that while the EWF was victorious
> >in conquering Dara Happa, it was still true to its founding aims
> >while barely a generation later, it had sunk to corruption and
> >depravity to such an extent that it was incapable of suppressing
> >revolts?
>Unless the conquest of Dara Happa was done for the sake of
>conquest and justified by appealing to grand plans. Just
>because they are quoting scripture doesn't mean they are honest
>about it.
What a odd thing to say. Is every gloranthan who acts according to scripture cynical? If not, then why must the actions of the EWF and everybody involved in it be so interpreted in that manner?
> >Considering that the EWF had instruction from Godunya, I don't
> >see how the EWF can be said to have missed the plot entirely.
> >They met their end through being stabbed in the back by their
> >supposed allies and not through an intrinsic flaw of their
> >philosophy.
>The EWF had instruction from Godunya? I thought that was
>Kralori propaganda. Since the EWF precedes Godunya by a century or
>more, he can't have been an instigator of the EWF, can he?
But I didn't say Godunya instigated the EWF, did I? I said the EWF had instruction from him. It is perfectly possible for an existing institution to receive instruction from someone well after it has been founded.
>So, if the Dragons just stabbed the EWF in the back, why did
>they do it?
The Dragons didn't stab the EWF in the back, the Dragonewts did.
Keith Nellist:
>[The EWF] missed the plot [in understanding Draconism] because they
>tried to kill [Godunya]:
>from Revealed Mythologies:
>"Once the rulers of Hemkarba learned of this, and heard what he was saying,
>they tried to kill him,..."
And then goes onto say:
"Years later, some [of Godunya's students] even returned to
confront the ruling council. A schism between the two
draconic powers grew confrontational until a true dragon
was summoned, which promptly devoured the council that had
rejected Godunya's teachings".
Which implies that Godunya's teachings eventually became orthodoxy in the EWF.
Powered by hypermail