I'm sure I've heard the theory that "Argrath" is as much a title as a name before.
IIRC much of King of Sartar was written later, looking back. So that kind of blurring could easily have occurred in the intervening period, as with Robin Hood or King Arthur
Though what works when looking back in the Fourth Age can't work in the same way in the Third Age when the events are actually happening
Richard Hayes
From: pentallion <pentallion_at_ONDGnRoPCJHPaMAhv6H7UeWTp4-fEH-AtaQNpb_vhv1UJf1W8YcWBNvFhDoZivoQmGhKRpEC0fFreOXqP90.yahoo.invalid>
To: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, 4 June 2012, 7:20
Subject: Re: Winnowing the Argraths?
I was toying with the idea that the player characters in the campaign were all Agrath. Sort of like "I am Spartacus." They did it to throw off assassins like Gim Gim the Grim and keep the Lunars off balance. "They" didn't do it, it was that Argrath guy. So when Garrath is off with Harreck, another PC took up the Argrath mantle and was with Kallyr. Maybe even Elusu the little shit was Argrath from time to time. Just an alternative.
>
>
> When I first read King of Sartar many years ago I was convinced that "argrath" is a title, not a personal name. It can be a personal name as well however: so the Harshax era had mutiple historical argraths known to them, just as our era has mutiple "Robin Hoods" portrayed and contenders for that title, or to use another analogy, probably closer, how different Biblical Scholars reinterpret the Jesus of the Gospels. I hate to use real world analogies on the list: but that is the kind of ambiguity KoS gave to me - a compiled collection of ancient sources, subject to Literary, Textual Form and Source Criticism -- in short "The Quest for the Historical Argrath"! In game terms I found this simply wonderfully liberating - Argrath could not be whoever i chose him to be, even one of our player characters.
>
> My guess was "argrath" meant something like "liberator". There can be multiple argraths, just as in our world John Lydon that noted Biblical Scholar was perfectly correct to sing "I am an Antichrist" not the -- there are multiple antichrist, it's a title as I recall, in the Pauline Epistles at least. (Staying Biblical "lightbringer" is used as well to refer to both Satan and Jesus - because it's a title, and Cyrus the Great a pagan is referred to by the word for Messiah as I recall, because he was a liberator. I could go on. I usually do!)
>
> So yeah: and the term could also be a personal name, adding to the confusion. The Great Argrath is the one who emerges from the plethora of liberators: but you don't have to be called argrath to be the Argrath, or even an argrath.
>
> I may be totally wrong headed on this, and I realize it does not answer your question at all, but in a gaming sense of leaving the future open it works beautifully?
>
> cj x
>
> CJ's uneventful life is now blogged: http://jerome23.wordpress.com/
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]