> I donīt see the "son of Humakt" bit as a fact.
> Humakt is the father of Arkat in the same way that Natha is the mother of
> JarEel, or the same way that Broyan is a son of Orlanth.
Was Arkat considered a "Son of Humakt" before Harmast fetched him on his Lightbringers Quest?
This raises a couple of issues. Humakti can't be resurrected - so presunably couldn't be bought back via a Lightbringers Quest either (It's just that we don't have sufficent tests to prove this empirically!)
A resurrected person may suffer from "relife sickness" and many sufferers join the cult of Humakt - could this also affect some people bought back via the LBQ (again, we are short of test cases). Whether this is true of Arkat or not, could someone brought back from the underworld (death) who becomes a Humakti be regarded as a "Son of Humakt"?
Humakt severs his connection to his family - something Arkat makes a habit of, severing one set of connections to build up a new set, only to sever them in turn.
Simon Phipp mentions Arkat's Unbreakable sword. - Again we might ask whether Arkat wielded this sword because he was the(/a?) "Son of Humakt", or whether he was a (/the?) "Son of Humakt" because he wielded the sword. (and which ever it is, it may have been subsequetly confused, misrepresented or misreported as the other).
(Deeply heretical thought. Arkat is an agent who brings about great changes, not all of which are desirable. He cheats death, changes form and betrays those who follow him. If he is the son of any God in the Orlanthi Pantheon, he sounds more like a Trickster than anything. As Todd points out, for Humakt to father a child would be to act against his "Death" nature. But for Eurmal to father a child, and to have given a false name to the abandoned mother seems to be perfectly "in character"...)
Powered by hypermail