[Glorantha] Re: Humakt, not some meaningless volume number

[Jane Williams]

--- Simon Hibbs <simon.hibbs at gmail.com> wrote:
> Note that it's because of what the other gods and
> spirits do
> with death that Humakt severs his relationship to
> his kin so
> that they do not share in his responsibility for
> what has happened.

That's one opinion among many on why he did it. 

> Why would he do that if he had no responsibility for
> what other gods did with this separate death power? 

Oh, lots of possibilities. The obvious is that the
normal reason given for separation is right: he was
pissed off with his little brother nicking his toy, so
took his marbles away and refused to be on the Storm
Team any more.

A slightly more flattering version: he was about to go
and get Death back, and once he had it back, could see
that after that the rest of the tribe wouldn't want to
share responsibility for his actions.

Variant on that: he was about to go and get it back,
knew what he'd have to do to get it back, and didn't
want them sharing responsibilty for that.

The really altrusitic honour-based one: having ties to
family and friends tempts you into dishonour, here
interpreted as not being impartial. And to deserve to
wield Death (once he'd got it back), he had to be
impartial (he thought).


> If it is separate from
> him, then how come Humakti claim that he IS death?
> 
> They're wrong? 

They're humans trying to explain the nature of a Great
God. "They're wrong" is a given, to some extent.

Or possibly once he'd retrieved Death, he managed to
"integrate" it, and "after" that, he "is" death. But
before that, he wasn't, he just wielded it.

> If he isn't death, then  what is he?

A sword. Whether or not that symbolises something else
as well is another question. Combat, perhaps. Or
separation (as invented by Umath).



		
___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger - with free PC-PC calling and photo sharing. http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com