meteorological phenomena

anonymous asked:

Do you guys have a member that can help me with Incan mythology/history? Well, the Inca in general.

i’m sure tripper will be delighted to help you out, but for those moments when there’s not an admin available, you should always remember that google is available and a quick search produces links like:

some of these sites may also have further resources to help you, and you can always check our resources tag or the links in the sidebar.

- alicia

I’d be delighted to help you out with the Inca! :) 

Also, libraries and history professors are your best friends when it comes to Incan, Mayan and Aztec mythology/history, or any mythology for that matter. I personally rarely use the internet for this stuff.


tacking on a quick intro to the incan empire:

the inca empire (tawantinsuyu, which means “the four parts together”) lasted from 1438-1533 and had its capital in cuzco.  it succeeded the wari empire (~500-1100AD).  

with its thatched-roofs and characteristic stone masonry, cuzco was the grandest centre of its time in south america.  it consisted mainly of temples, plazas, and housing for the elite, with satellite neighbourhoods situated nearby.  it was from the capital that the empire was able to perpetuate images of ideological power; people were made to believe most exclusive or “luxury” goods were produced and delivered straight from the capital (obviously, not necessarily true).  the incas had a complex and regimented political economy that was contingent on staple finance—that is, corvée labour: obligatory payments in kind (e.g. grains, livestock, textiles) from citizens to the state.  

major architecture within the capital include:

  • hatunkacha, the house of “chosen women” in which the most privileged women dwelt
  • amarukancha, a great hall
  • awkaypata, a central plaza which was the locus of festivals and royal ceremonies
  • qorikancha, the temple of the sun
  • saqsawaman, which is actually a bit above cuzco itself but was probably the grandest architectural complex of the empire; it was initially meant to be a sun temple, but became a combination of religious/ceremonial complex and fortress

the state religion/ideology involved worship of the sun, a line of divine kings, and sacred landmarks from the past (these narratives were, ofc, manipulated to legitimise the sovereignty of whomever happened to be ruling at the time).  incas used the term wak’a to refer to sacred ritual, the state of being after death or any sacred object.  for they believed humans shared the cosmos with the dead, the gods, and the spirits of the landscape.  inca royalty were even made to carry on in their physical bodies even after death.  several assistants were employed to make sure royal mummies ate, drank, and continued to perform official functions.  human sacrifice was a part of incan culture, but never to the extent of the neighbouring aztec empire.

some important deities of the incan panteon are:

  • wiraqocha, the creator
  • inti, the sun (a male who was often represented as a golden statue or disk); he sweated gold
  • mama-quilla, “mother moon” and the wife of the sun; she cried silver and was more important than her husband in some coastal societies
  • inti-illapa, the thunder god (and virtually all meteorological phenomena, like the rainbow); they saw him as a man in the sky who wielded a club in one hand and a sling in the other
  • pachamama, the earth mother
  • mamacocha, mother of the lakes and sea

(my reference was terence n. d’altroy’s the incas.  he is among the foremost scholars studying the incan empire, so i’d advise checking google scholar or jstor, if you can, as a starting point to learn more about the empire and state religion!)

- cristina

Maqlu Tablet 1

This is the first tablet of Maqlu, a lengthy series of Babylonian anti-witchcraft incantations that were performed together through a single night, once a year.  Most of these spells were originally used on their own.  Note that “witchcraft” here means “magic that harms me”; the counter-spells rely on the same magical principles as the “witchcraft,” so this is certainly not a denunciation of all magic use.


I call upon you, Gods of the Night;
       with you, I call upon Night, the Veiled Bride.
I call upon Twilight, Midnight, and Dawn.

For a witch has bewitched me;
       an enchantress has indicted me.
She estranged me from my god and goddess;
       I have sickened in the sight of all.
Day and night, a restlessness weighs on me;
       cobwebs clog my mouth.
My mouth receives no nourishment;
       my drinking water dwindles away.
My songs have turned to sorrow, my delight to despair.

Stand in my defense, Great Gods, and hear my plea!
       Issue judgment.  Reveal a verdict.
I have made an effigy of my warlock or my witch,
       of my sorcerer or my sorceress.
I set it at your feet and plead my case.

Keep reading

1nsomnizac-deactivated20150225  asked:

Hello, Mr Peterson, I had a question about the names used in Defiance (and GoT, I guess). In some language traditions, people's names are forms of sentences (such as many names from Hebrew), or they are based on words for things (i.e Haruhi = spring day) or the days of birth (some people name their children after the Saint they were born under, many Ibo names refer to the day of the week the child was born in). How do the defiance aliens name their children?

That’s a good question, and this post will then be the last post where you can win a hellbug! So this post is a hellbug eligible post! If you would like a plush hellbug, please reblog this post by 11 pm ET next Thursday! For more details, see below!

Naming traditions work differently in the three languages. I’ll start off with the language I usually start with: Castithan.

First, Castithan names traditionally have the last name come first. Thus, the proper way to say Datak Tarr would be:

Taro Detako

The last name takes the -u termination because it’s actually the possessor of the first name. In effect, it’s like saying “The Tarr Family’s Datak”. (Then Detak takes the -u termination just because that’s the citation form.) On Earth, this practice has fallen by the wayside—or at least for those Castithans that ended up in the West, where family names follow first names. In traditional contexts, the old ordering is still used.

Now, for the names. One popular naming convention is to name the child based on the order of their birth. Numbers take either a masculine or feminine suffix and a name is produced, e.g.:

  • Avizu “first boy”; Avilo “first girl”
  • Kamazu “second boy”; Kamalo “second girl”
  • Dunizu “third boy”; Dunilo “third girl”

Of course, this was an old practice, so now parents may choose such a name because they like the sound of it (like Jalino ”Fifth girl”, which I believe was the name of one of the Castithan handmaidens this season).

Many names are built off of verbs. For this, the suffixes -(a)k and -(i)ts are used, the first like the -ee suffix in English, and the second like the -er suffix in English. The names formed in this way aren’t inherently masculine or feminine, but many names have come to be more closely associated with either men or women. Here are some examples:

  • Male Names: Detako “loved one”, Uthiko “laughing one”, Alako “chosen one”, Melitso “discoverer”
  • Female Names: Melako “found one”, Kahiko “smiling one”, Shulako “left one”, Karétso “talkative one”

Another strategy is a reduplicative strategy. You take any word and then copy the first syllable and follow it with -n and place it after the first syllable. Such names aren’t inherently masculine or feminine, but some names may become more closely associated with men or women. Even so, this strategy proves quite useful in coming up with novel names. Parents take some characteristic of the child or its birth and create a name based on that word. Some examples are below:

  • Chadachano (type of tree)
  • Banimbano (eye)
  • Tamitano (type of ground cover)
  • Shegisheno (ear)
  • Kazhikano (blush)

Then there are names that are just based on words. These names are older and more likely be male or female:

  • Male Names: Iskato (meaning lost), Seto (meaning lost), Daigo (fire)
  • Female Names: Stamo (summer), Puráyo (spring), Swogo (star)

Now for Irathient names.

Many Irathient names are drawn from geological or meteorological phenomena, or animals. These names have been gendered. Here are some examples:

  • Male Names: Nugyekpe (mountain), Kagnazi (Irathient animal), Tigyukta (Irathient animal), Indur (rock cluster)
  • Female Names: Dinara (type of flower), Umbigyire (waterfall), Gyase (flood), Ulike (river)

These names are found in their natural noun class (i.e. ulike is the actual word for “river” if you wanted to use it in a sentence), but sometimes stems are put into Class XVII, saved for animate augmentatives, by simply adding the gy- prefix to form a name. It might not have an independent meaning outside of the name, but the idea is that the name is formed from a class that does have a special meaning. A couple examples are shown below:

  • Male Names: Gyedonla (cf. edonla ”cliff”), Gyutonygye (cf. utonygye “beach”)
  • Female Names: Gyeinnira (cf. einnira “rain storm”), Gyukombe (cf. ukombe “lake”)

Sometimes bare roots are taken as names, or they’re put into Class XVII themselves, without being a part of another class first. Rath is an example of a root that often is turned into a name on its own.

Another separate strategy is to use Class I to produce a name that means “she or he who x’s” or “she or he who x’d”. These names are unisex, if otherwise unmodified. While these names take the Class I prefix, they do not take the Class I suffix. Instead, they take the -(ei)n suffix for completed events, or optionally the -(n)ǝ suffix for incomplete events (the latter is rare, since the interpretation is an incomplete event by default). A lot of times these names are given by parents to describe what the child’s first act was, or to describe how they hope the child will be later in life. Here are some examples—at least one of which should be familiar (note: remember that e becomes ei before a nasal coda, e.g. -n):

  • Starrein “S/he who roared”
  • Zelig “S/he who was sleeping”
  • Zdrorǝ “S/he who breathes”
  • Zailonggein “S/he who screamed”
  • Zburein “S/he who cried”
  • Zungni“S/he who swims”

All the names above (not just the Class I names, but all Irathient names) can take on masculine or feminine suffixes, should the namer so decide. The names are fine with or without them; sometimes a parent may elect to go with something a little longer. The suffixes are:

  • -®úr (masculine; can’t be added to names ending in r)
  • -(n)us (masculine)
  • -(n)aila (feminine; can’t be added to names already three syllables long or longer)
  • -(l)on (feminine)
  • -(n)igya (feminine; not added to names whose last syllable is ni)
  • -(a)nya (feminine)

This is how one of my favorite Irathient names Rathus is formed.

Now for my favorite: Indojisnen names.

Indojisnen names are simple. The idea is that parents give their children names that are one syllable long. The real designation for an Indogene comes when they get their first implant. Each implant has a name, and as an Indogene gets an implant, the implant’s name becomes a part of their last name. As they get more implants, the last name grows, until it becomes insanely long—too long to be used in non-official contexts. This is why on Earth, Indogenes use a shortened form of their last name. Doc Yewll is actually:

Me Yewlundenganarizomperismoyekariyuinkochikanyirasnairon

But no one’s going to say that, so she goes by Yewll. Same with Eren Niden (though a note on her first name in a second).

In order to form a first name, one just needs to follow the rules of Indojisnen syllable structure. All monosyllable words have to end in a vowel, or the letters tk or n. Indogenes favor heavy syllables, which means that if the word ends in a vowel, it should be a diphthong (like Lev, whose Indogene name is actually Lew—changed on Earth so humans could pronounce it more easily—ditto with Eren, whose Indogene name is Ewn), or an old “compound” vowel—specifically, e or o.

The names themselves don’t mean anything at all. If they happen to sound like a real world, it’s happenstance—and, in fact, parents try to avoid names that sound like actual words. Instead, parents will do things like have names that match in some way, to indicate that they’re from the same family, e.g. LewLonLatLek, etc.—or rhyming, TowRowHowSow, etc.

Doc Yewll’s first name, Me, is actually an old compound vowel. And, of course, Ben’s name looks like a human name just by happenstance.

As for confusing one for the other (e.g. young Indogene students in a ialusmik), students with the same given name are given numbers, e.g. Lew 24 and Lew 56. These names aren’t official, and only last while they’re needed.

That’s a bit about how I came up with names for Defiance. Since I’m not the only one who comes up with names, not all names will conform all the time. But it’s a big world. I’m sure there were Irathients with Castithan names and vice versa long before the Votans ever got to Earth. Now that they’re here, names can come from all over.


And, again, if you would like to win a free hellbug, please reblog this post! You can also retweet the tweet associated with this post. You have until 11 pm ET September 4th. Again, if you win, you’ll need to give me a mailing address so I can send you the hellbug, but otherwise, that’s all there is to it! This is the LAST CHANCE to win a hellbug this season. Best of luck! And also don’t forget to say a big thank you to @TrickDempsey on Twitter (creative lead for the game Defiance) who provided me with the hellbugs to give away.

So the design bunny (plot bunny’s annoying cousin) decided to visit me, I hope you don’t mind me sharing.

So because your younger gods/demigods tend to carry some sort of message. (Hope/Chaos/Mercy respectively) I decided to go for broke and make Monster Kid the Iris parallel with the related meteorological phenomena being Sun Showers.

When not ‘sticking’ the landings Monster Kid would ride the cloud like a surfboard. (but those drawings didn’t turn out well so…)

HHHHHHH I love this idea! ;A; Tbh, monster kid’s role hasn’t been set in Reapertale, and this is a really cute concept. Thank you for sharing!

Here’s a spoiler-filled review of Into The Storm, heavily weighted towards Richard Armitage’s involvement in the project…

I’ll be frank with you: if Richard Armitage weren’t in this movie, I would have had no interest in seeing it. Because he was in this movie, I found it difficult to resist thinking about how excited I was to see it.

In short, Into The Storm met my expectations but never exceeded them. I found everyone’s performances to be as strong as they could possibly be, given the material they had to work with, but let’s face it, the basic material goes like this:

  1. A bunch of average, everyday people are living their average, everyday lives. A little bit of humor, a little bit of pathos, a little bit of everyday annoyances that everybody has to deal with.
  2. A giant, scary, natural disaster happens to them.
  3. They struggle to survive; some of them succeed, some of them don’t.
  4. Voilà, the story is over.

There’s not really enough time to start to care about any of the characters by the time that they start screaming and grabbing on to things. In terms of emotions, pretty much the only one I felt intensely was tension. I often had an urge to grip the arms of my theater seat as the characters fought gale-force winds.

But beyond that, there was nothing. If I cared about Armitage’s character, it was solely because he was the actor in the role. But for him, I would have left the movie only feeling impressed with the special effects.

That being said, it was really interesting to watch him in a role where he was not called upon to show, or the director was not interested in, Armitage’s personal charisma. At all. Because the filmmakers went out of their way to make everyone seem so average and ordinary and relatable, and he played along with that, the result is that you never get any of Richard Armitage’s signature larger-than-life moments.

For the purposes of the film, that works really well, because the story is not about his character or how compelling he is. It’s an ensemble piece that’s about a bunch of everyday people trying to survive a horrifying situation that, yes, is a little implausible, but isn’t outside the realm of believability, given the direction that global warming is taking with our meteorological phenomena. So in terms of paying tribute to the real-life survivors of tornados and other natural disasters, this film succeeded beautifully. There was no tortured love triangle or any kind of contrived drama: it’s a disaster movie where average people rise to the occasion, pure and simple. On that level it worked.

But I went in hoping for a good story, not merely a reporting piece about a natural disaster. I was looking for something more, and Into The Storm didn’t provide that.

If there was an added element for me, it was merely the opportunity to watch Armitage wandering around on the big screen for the better part of an hour and a half. It’s always a delight to see him; he makes me happy.

For all that I’ve been taking the mickey out of him for his extremely romantic take on the relationship between his character and Sarah Wayne Callies’s character—maybe I should give him the benefit of the doubt: perhaps there was an earlier version of the script with more obvious sexual tension between them?—I actually thought it was really refreshing to be able to watch these two characters interact, work together, survive a harrowing life experience together, treat each other with respect throughout, and there wasn’t the obligatory attraction between them. Certainly there was nothing to suggest that there was no possibility of a future for them, but the movie just wasn’t about their relationship, on any level.

A quasi-philosophical question that the movie raised for me, somewhat akin to the question of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, is the question of “how much can you take away from Richard Armitage and still make it an effective ‘Richard Armitage’ performance?” If (1) you keep a lid on his onscreen charisma, (2) you take away his British accent, and (3) you barely give him any sort of relational tension/personal drama to resolve, what do you have left? Did he have the opportunity to distinguish himself in any way? Not really. I think the result is entirely the product of the script and the direction and not in any way because he (or any of the other actors) did a poor job.

I started out with “Yay! A new opportunity to watch Armitage on the big screen for a full feature-length film as the male lead! The anticipation!” and then it turned into me realizing that this story just wasn’t going to have any of the emotional punches that I’ve come to expect from most of his roles. I guess I’ve been spoiled. :)

Given the relatively thin characterizations, I can understand why he would have felt compelled to go off and write an in-depth backstory/future-story for his character, just to keep his very-active-imagination interest engaged. I had been hoping that when the director praised Armitage’s unexpected and insightful backstory inventions, it would mean that some of those character details would have appeared in the movie and created interesting layers (a la Guy of Gisborne turning into the most interesting character in Robin Hood BBC), but alas it seems they did not. Or if they did, he must have written practically half the script for his character and his character’s sons, which makes you wonder how thin the script was to start with.

I’m glad I’m saw it—how could I ever regret watching Richard Armitage run around on screen for 90 minutes?—but on some level I walked out thinking, “Well, it met my expectations of a disaster flick and that was pretty much it.”

That, in sum total, is my review. If you’re an Armitage fan, of course, go see it; support him and his co-creators. I just caution you not to expect any moments of distinguishing greatness from him, the kind of moments that we’re all accustomed to seeing. Perhaps you could argue that this is a moment of distinguishing greatness for him, that he can demonstrate an ability to “turn off” his onscreen charisma when necessary and play a clear note in the midst of a symphony, be a good team player. If that’s the case, then I applaud him for it. But that’s not why I go out to see movies, to watch favorite actors bury themselves in totally forgettable parts. ::laughs::

Go see the movie (more than once!), enjoy yourselves, have fun, don’t analyze it to death, feel the bittersweet sensation of watching how good he is with the actors who play his teenage sons, cheer the wet shirts and the familiar scowls and the understated humor and the few chances he gets to smile warmly and light you up a little. Quake in terror at the storm and admire the real-life people who face these situations over and over and just stubbornly rebuild. Because it’s not a bad movie. It’s actually quite a good one.

Thanks for reading! Cheers—