the crossing of the mountains. 

The Hethantas massed above them.  They negotiated steep granite slopes, picked their way through narrow ravines, beneath cliffs of sedentary rock pocked with strange fossils.  For the most part, the trail followed a thin river hedged by spruce and stunted screw pine.

  (I.13 at 389).  We are no longer on the trackless steppe, even though CuS has been inscribed by tracklessness:

As always, Cnaiur found the change of terrain unsettling, as though the years had tattooed linear hoizons and vast bowl skies onto his heart.

(I.13 at 376.)  tracklessness therefore inscribes its own trackiness.  part of the trackiness of the steppe is that the mountains mark out the limit of religious ritual:

Cnaiur could feel the Empire on the far side, a labyrinth of luxuriant gardens, sprawling fields, and ancient, hoary cities.  In the past, the Nansurium had been the destination f his tribe's seasonal pilgrimages, a place of shouting men, burning villas, and shrieking women.  A place of retribution and worship.

  (I.13 at 373).

a significant scene, then, the crossing of the mountain is historiczed at livy XXI, regarding hannibal in the alps.  but it is more importantly mythologized in numerous places:  tolkien numerous times, RSB numerous times--but most significantly in deuteronomy:

32:48 And the LORD spake unto Moses that selfsame day, saying, 
32:49 Get thee up into this mountain Abarim, unto mount Nebo, which is in the land of Moab, that is over against Jericho; and behold the land of Canaan, which I give unto the children of Israel for a possession: 
32:50 And die in the mount whither thou goest up, and be gathered unto thy people; as Aaron thy brother died in mount Hor, and was gathered unto his people: 
32:51 Because ye trespassed against me among the children of Israel at the waters of MeribahKadesh, in the wilderness of Zin; because ye sanctified me not in the midst of the children of Israel. 
32:52 Yet thou shalt see the land before thee; but thou shalt not go thither unto the land which I give the children of Israel.

moses can't cross the mountains, but only may be permitted to see; only joshua may cross and complete the holy war.  moses must die on the mountain.

cnaiur and kellhus are both hannibal, but hannibal as he should have been.  the question remains:  who is moses, who joshua in the hethantas?  we know that kellhus is permitted a mosaic glimpse of the promised land:

Kellhus paused at the promontory's lip and looked over jumbled ravines and ancient forests.  Kuniuri had looked much the same from the roof of the Demua, he supposed, but while Kumiuri was dead, this land was alive.  The Three Seas.  The last great civilization of Men.

  (I.13 at 395).  there is the gaze, but is there death? the contention must be that there is death on the mountain, for CuS:

Heaving him up, Kellhus thrust the barbarian out over the precipice and, with one arm, held him dangling over the distant Empire.  The wind swept his jet hair across the abyss.
"Do it!" Cnaiur gasped through snot and spittle.  His feet swayed over nothingness.
So much hatred.
"But I spoke true, Cnaiur.  I do need you.
The Scylvendi's eyes rounded in horror.  Let go, his expression said.  For that way lies peace.

  (I.13 at 399).

all involved knew that this scene aforesaid was imminent:

Cnaiur shrugged, knowing this was not the case.  Though places on the Steppe could be discarded, things could not be--not by the People, at least.  Everything was needed.
Then, with unaccountable certainty, he realized that Kellhus would kill him.

(I.13 at 374).

the need is war (I.13 at 397), and "the chances of finding another with as much experience and insight as Cnaiur ur Skiotha were negligible.  They call him the most violent of all men" (I.13 at 401).

CuS is reduced on the mountain.  it is not literal death, of course, but an equivalent reification as instrumentality.  it is an extension of the process famously described by mr. marx:

There is a physical relation between physical things. But it is different with commodities. There, the existence of the things quâ commodities, and the value relation between the products of labour which stamps them as commodities, have absolutely no connection with their physical properties and with the material relations arising therefrom. There it is a definite social relation between men, that assumes, in their eyes, the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an analogy, we must have recourse to the mist-enveloped regions of the religious world. In that world the productions of the human brain appear as independent beings endowed with life, and entering into relation both with one another and the human race. So it is in the world of commodities with the products of men’s hands. This I call the Fetishism which attaches itself to the products of labour, so soon as they are produced as commodities, and which is therefore inseparable from the production of commodities.

(Capital I.1.iv).

instead of commodities masking relations between persons as mere relations between things, AK has transformed his relation with CuS from a relation with a person into a relation with a thing.  cnaiur has a use value, of course, that exceeds any exchange value--this is made very explicit from AK's perspective, whereas CuS believes that his exchange value has exceeded his use value.  the latter point makes him moses. 

the natural sequellae of this point:  what law, then, has he handed down?