King Gratillonius is married to nine Queens. One is old. He must consummate the marriage with the other eight. He has a mutually enjoyable sexual relationship with young Dahilis but not with all the others. There is much scope for problems between two people, let alone ten. Two people are one interaction: AB. To add one more person is to add three more interactions: BC; CA; ABC. The three together are different from any two on their own. How many interactions do ten people make? Two of the Queens have a secret same-sex relationship. How long do the Gods expect this set-up to last? It is not meant to last forever. The Three will not compete with the new God but will withdraw. The only question is when.
10 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Maybe I should reread THE KING OF YS, for now I'm puzzled. Were there hints in ROMA MATER that the Pact of the Ysan gods would not last indefinitely? I thought that "Pact" was open ended.
Ad astra! Sea
Sean: there are mentions a couple of times in the early books that the Gods foresaw a crisis.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
That would justify the sense of foreboding and menace we get.
Ad astra! Sean
ROMA MATER, p. 215: The Gods of Ys would not demean themselves by pleading for worshippers but would hold Their city apart.
p. 216: Evangelists lead men away from ancestral Gods. The Gallicenae feel that this is the end of another age. Ys draws into its shell and waits.
Though from the viewpoint of the Ysan Gods, the smart thing to do would be to back Gratillonius' plan to explore and colonize the lands across the Atlantic. Europe might have been lost, but a vast realm worshipping them would have been established.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stitling!
Paul: And the true God did not think it beneath His dignity to have the Second Person of the Trinity to become Incarnate as Man, die on the Cross, and rise from the dead to bring salvation to mankind. The humility of God rises superior to the cruel pride of the Ysan "gods."
Mr. Stirling: Yes, I recall Gratillonius speculating about what might be found on the other side of the Atlantic. I would add as well that, in his heart of hearts, Gratillonius did not LIKE the Ysan gods. He was at least half way inclined to agree with his Christian and Mithraist soldiers that they were demons.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: pagans didn't (in the case of reconstrucxtionist ones now, don't) expect Gods to be 'good' in the sense that monotheistic faiths usually do.
They're generally seen as being individual personalities writ very large.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
That clarifies why so many pagan "gods" are so ridiculous or revolting (such as the Aztec gods), they are merely "supernaturalized" human beings, with all the flaws and vices humans have.
A rare partial exception might be found in some of the Pharaohnic era gods of Egypt, such as the cult of Amon-Ra. By the time of the XIX Dynasty beliefs about and worship of Amon-Ra was becoming more advanced, even coming close to monotheism. Some of the hymns I've seen about Amon contains conceptions that Christians and Jews should regard with respect.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: Apparently early humans were animists who simply didn't draw any sharp distinction between human beings, animals, what we call inanimate objects, and spirits -- the Japanese concept of 'kami' is probably fairly close to the way they saw things.
Their term "omikami", used for Gods like Amaterasu, simply means "Big Spirit".
That's how polytheism developed from the original animism.
You can see strong signs of the same transition in Classical Greek beliefs -- dryads in trees, etc.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, humans in early cultures were, most often, animists who then transitioned to polytheism.
I even thought of how Japanese kami reminded me of the Greek dryads.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment