-Poul and Karen Anderson, Gallicenae (London, 1988), p. 18.
Looking through the King of Ys tetralogy for information about the Council of Suffetes, I meanwhile find other information, e.g., I did not recognize the word "irenic" and do not even remember noticing it during previous readings of the series.
It seems that the Ysan Gods allowed first Colconor, then Gratillonius, to become King because they were preparing to end their covenant with the city and to withdraw before the new God of the Piscean Age. Even if the Three did not control who became King, they certainly did choose which of the vestals was to be marked as the new Queen when one of the Nine died. A Christian could not have become King because Christians are monogamous. However, neither a Christian nor a Mithraist could possibly find it acceptable when his own daughter was marked. (Indeed, although I believe the incest taboo to be a social construct, not a divine prohibition, I am happy to remain bound by it.) The rejected Dahut became the instrument for the destruction of the city. But the Gods broke faith with an honest King when they marked her in the first place. Christians would say that such behavior is typical of pagan Gods whereas pagans retort that the Christian God is intolerant of ancient freedoms.
4 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And one of Gratillonius' predecessors as King of Ys lived long enough for a daughter to be marked with the sign. In horror this King tried to refuse to "marry" his daughter, but failed. The disgust he felt at the incest was so traumatizing that he fell easily to the next challenger.
Plainly, the "gods" of Ys used incest as a means of bringing to heel kings whose ideas and policies challenged them. Or might be challenging.
Sean
Re: incest taboo.
I recall reading that in Israeli kibbutzim that raised the children communally, those children almost never married within that kibbutz, even though they were encouraged to do so by parents & other members of the kibbutz, but did marry people raised in another kibbutz.
It seems that being raised with someone results in that person being perceived as 'kin' & not attractive sexually.
So the incest taboo appears to be not *just* a social construct.
Jim,
The taboo was constructed a long time ago so it has been internalized.
Paul.
Kaor, Jim!
It's reasonable to believe these "communally" raised children felt too much like siblings to feel able to marry a boy or girl from that group, even if they were not actual brothers/sisters.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment