Re: KoS, etc, probably not revisited yet again.

From: Michael Hitchens <michaelh_at_0CQqgqWkzyYhqjw-1QsGhmH7u5f_6hFbczssFjZnDJJxxeOZlRtyyuDPPfzAGnsyqJn>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:47:15 +1000 (EST)


On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Simon Phipp wrote:

>> As I'm quite sure Simon
>> knows, but some newer readers possibly don't, so
>> confusing them is hardly fair.
>
> Now, now, that's quite an unfair statement in itself.
>
> I was merely pointing out that the only real authoritative source we
> have on the Hero Wars (KoS) makes very little reference to Kallyr and
> lots to Argrath.

Not surprisingly - it's subtitled "The Mystery of Argrath; How one man became a god". It's about Argrath. It doesn;t aim to cover all the important people except in how they relate to Argrath. How much would we know of Minaryth from it? Jar-eel? The Red emperor? It's sort of like a finished un-finished work. And full of internal contradictions.

> I was not setting out to confuse anyone and actually I resent the
> idea that I was. I try to clear things up to make Glorantha more
> playable rather than making it incomprehensible as some other people
> on this list seem to do.
>
> In any case, if the discussions took place ten years ago, shouldn't
> they be revisited so new people can take part in them?
>
>> Seriously, would any of them like a quick summary of
>> the various sources inside KoS, how and why they
>> disagree with each other, and the general conclusions
>> reached as to what really happened?
>
> Everyone will draw their own conclusions about what really happened.
>
> If you think that Kallyr had a greater part in the Hero Wars then
> that's the conclusion you will draw.
>
> If you think that there were many Argraths then that will be your
> conclusion.
>
> If you think that Argrath was by and large one person, that will be
> your conclusion.
>
> Just because a few people agree, doesn't make it right.
>
> That's why I am waiting for the Argrath Saga to be finished. It may
> open up a lot of discussions, but at least it will be another
> definitive source.

There is a "right" answer about very little. There's no "right" answer about how many Argraths. When did Kallyr die? 1627? 1630? She came back once, so who says 1630 is the final time? Maybe she lived out the rest of her days doing childcare in Swenstown. Maybe the Sartarite internal problems are a huge lovers tiff and she married Argrath in 1629. Maybe the infant queen of Holay is Kallyr reincarnated so she and Argrath can get their relationship right second time around.

One thing we aren't careful enough about is distinguishing between:

This is
This probably is
This possibly is
This is how I'd like it to be
This is how it is in my campaign

I'm no less guilty then anyone else - my last post said there must be two Argraths (Argrath of Pavis and Argrath White Bull). But that's only true if you accept the validity of the Argrath of Pavis fragment starting on p.175 of KoS. Who says it isn't someone's fevered nightmare? A deliberate falsification? Could be - accept or reject at your discretion.

In some ways we are trying to be professional historians, but with two huge disadvanatges. One, few, if any of us, are trained historians (I'm not). Secondly, we do not have access to actual Gloranthan historical documents. Even things like KoS, the unfinished works and the Jonstown records are *copies*, not the actual original documents. So we can't examine the physical properties of the documents, which historians can use to aid their analysis of the text.

I think this relates to what Jane was talking about with "core" and "GaG". If I'm to be honest though (and as I said I slip up) we have to accept that all Gloranthan documents (KoS, unfinished works, etc) have to be taken as subjective and unreliable, and can only ever be accepted as having degrees of accuracy (even though the degree can approach 100%, it will never reach it). That is, defintive information comes *only* from the works explicilty written as from a view point outside of Glorantha and with Greg's approval. Which essentially means the Issaries and Mongoose publications and those Choasium/AH ones which haven't been superceded. All else is deduction, supposition, interpolation and extrapolation. Often inspired, interesting and useful, but never definitive.

Michael



Dr. Michael Hitchens
Senior Lecturer, Department of Computing Macquarie University
michaelh_at_xTE71i7jNEKhCHkJ0lIRhDYhrf5vJBDAP1tchAqk2UF-37w3Lc1TgekM6qvskqaOsVMXdER3EHla-olytOUI.yahoo.invalid            

Powered by hypermail