Re: Carmanian Humakti (was Yanafal Tarnils)

From: Light Castle <light_castle_at_...>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:17:39 -0500


On 22 Mar 2005 at 10:01, Peter Metcalfe wrote:

> Except for other Orlanthi Gods that don't have it. Are they
> dishonorable?

Of course not. But are we going to start assuming that gods have affinities for no reason, and are linked with runes willy-nilly? Of course not. So the fact that he's both Death and Honor is important in my view. Why? My suspicion is that because there is a belief that Death wielded carelessly causes problems. This seems mythologically sound in Heortling belief.  

> >Personally, I don't see why torture would be unhumakti for humakti
> >where honor wasn't important.
>
> Because torture isn't a matter of honor, it's a matter of right
> death. Torture and other slow deaths are what everybody else
> who had their hands on the first sword do, but not Humakt.

I have no problem with that being a truism across all versions of Humakt.

LC

Powered by hypermail