A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Displaying 1 record.
It has been well established and I would think we all are well aquainted with the notion that Gargoyles didn't use names. Not for themselves as humans did and that the eventual use of names was influence and need of conformity from/by humans.
However you have said that gargoyles kept their myth, history and traditions alive by oral revelation from one generation to the next.
How where they able to tell sagas of things great leaders had done if they had no name of which to tell? (Try to tell your children about Napolean and all the things he did and all the people in his life without using his name)
It would be all too generic and vague for any real value. Did gargoyles never realy have great leaders? Did they consider the clan as a whole more important than the decision making of the leader?
and further note-my post on the guitar tab--well the on the outro the difference in the type size from the field box to the post page made it look wrong. so here is the outro again.
History to the gargoyles is more about the clan, about movements, than about individuals. But descriptive terms can be used to identify individuals. (Cf. Homer's Illiad.) I'm forgetting the technical term just at this moment -- where's Aris when you really need him -- but if you've got a guy named Ajax of the Broad Shoulders, for example, then do you really need the "Ajax" part of the name.
The point of NOT naming, as Hudson would say is to NOT set limits on who or what an individual is. So he might be "Of the Broad Shoulders" one minute and also be "Of the Massive Temper" the next. Both would be true, but reflect an aspect of the individual, as opposed to making an attempt to wrap the entire individual up into one word: Ajax. Over time these epithets would become as familiar as a name for an historical figure -- particularly in the context of a tale told over and over again.