>I'll start by repeating that I have no problem with choosing an idea
>that makes a juicy plot-point. My objection is limited to the claim
>that support for this idea is to be found in KoS
I never made such a claim and I've pointed out the examples of Fimbulwinter and the Battle of Iceland to demonstrate why I do not need explicit support in King of Sartar.
>Lets go over what Argrath's Saga DOES say about the Good Empire
I'm not interested in following closely to what Argrath's Saga says since I do not believe it to be an accurate version of events of the Hero Wars in Dragon Pass. Many of the statements that it makes are false (such as Argrath summoning Gryphons at Corflu) so it is best used as a source of ideas for what happens rather than a strict guide.
>As to your suggestion that the conquests of Tarsh at the end of Part
>3 and part 4 are the same event, both are to be found in CHDP.
No, they are not. There is no conquest of Tarsh after the battle of Dwernapple in the CHDP. The CHDP finishes with Argrath's victory at Dwernapple but leaves out any description of his domains after the event. Thus it conveys an impression that Argrath has recovered Tarsh but it does not actually say so.
>Nor do we have two formations of the Good Empire. All
>Part 5 says is that the name was in use in Tarsh at the
>time - it does not say when the name was first applied.
Why does the information have to be repeated in Part 5 when it has already been described in Part 3? If the Saga was composed based upon a known history, then the repetition simply wouldn't occur. That it does shows that the ur-Saga compiler was taking known anecdotes (Argrath and the Giants, Argrath and the Good Empire etc) and weaving them into a coherent narrative. In doing so, he fails to recognize that some anecdotes refer to the same event and so his saga creates a false impression.
--Peter Metcalfe
End of Glorantha Digest, Vol 11, Issue 246
Powered by hypermail