8640 réponses à ce sujet

[The Elder King]

Frankly, I would have appreciated more information about the Dalish historical account of the Dales, the view of spirits (which was relegated to a single line), the dangers faced by the clans from templars, the clans being different and varied, the marginalization of the Alienage elves - it feels incredibly sparse when it comes to the perspective of the elves, and it almost comes across as intentional when the entire book is written in the perspective of a Chantry priest.
 
Gracias.

We might get more info if they'll make more books. I hope so (not only for the elven perspective, but because I'd like to have more info about the lore).

[LobselVith8]

Or it could be brought up because such rumors actually existed amongst the peasants, which isn't inconceivable. Peasants in the Middle Ages, and a few ignorant people today, believed Jews ate Christian babies. It wasn't the official stance of the Church (And it might surprise people to know that the Church hierarchy actually tried to protect the Jews from the prejudices of the population at several points, not that they were terribly successful. The Pope issued an edict trying to stop the massacre of Jews when they were being accused of spreading the Black Death, pointing out that it made no sense. Rioters killed them anyway). Either way, it certainly isn't the Chantry claiming the Dales did such things.

 

It's a historical entry that paints the elves as the villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods (with no effort to dissuade the reader from believing in those rumors, since even present day characters ask the Dalish if such rumors are actually true), and the humans as the heroes who converted the elves to the "correct" religion and took pity on them by housing them in Alienages.

[Dean_the_Young]

It would be relevant to remember there are different kinds of bias as well- bias of institutional interest and dogma is different from the bias of a cultural norm. One can reflect one without the other, and the later doesn't prevent objectivity.

 

Giviani in particular reflects the later- his codex entries reflect biases common for his time and perspective (such as calling the Dalish gods false), but they aren't dictates of Chantry dogma. His entries are replete with language that distances his account from a personal viewpoint when not explicit: qualifiers abound such as 'according to the Chantry', 'it is said', 'I was informed.' His language is clearly reflecting the current limits of modern perspective, and makes regular admissions to a lack of knowledge or what the perspective is. When he talks myths and legends of unverifiable nature, it's nicely identified as such (such as his Thedas: Myths and Legends). When he talks about his perspective of personally encountered events and cultures such as Dwarves and Dalish, he claims nothing but his own experience. And when he talks history (and I don't believe he ever talks on the Dalish), his writing is about as dry and objective in terms of facts and analysis as can be expected. I'm trying to remember of a single thing he asserts as true that has been proven otherwise, and can't think of a single thing.

[Dean_the_Young]

Frankly, I would have appreciated more information about the Dalish historical account of the Dales, the view of spirits (which was relegated to a single line), the dangers faced by the clans from templars, the clans being different and varied, the marginalization of the Alienage elves - it feels incredibly sparse when it comes to the perspective of the elves, and it almost comes across as intentional when the entire book is written in the perspective of a Chantry priest.

 

Gracias.

 

The Dalish have an oral tradition: that's about what you'll get, and fits a larger theme of the Dalish about their history and reclaimation of it being largely unverifiable. The Dalish account of the Dales is unlikely to be significantly different than what they've already expressed: they were doing their own thing, threw out missionaries, and were unfairly driven out of their due.

[Heimdall]

It's a historical entry that paints the elves as the villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods (with no effort to dissuade the reader from believing in those rumors, since even present day characters ask the Dalish if such rumors are actually true), and the humans as the heroes who converted the elves to the "correct" religion and took pity on them by housing them in Alienages.

It includes the rumors amongst a list of tension leading to the eventual conflict. It certainly shouldn't need to be said that said rumors, true or not, would have contributed to the tensions. That they existed is the relevant point, not whether or not they were true. I've read modern history text books that list rumors in similar situations without explicitly saying "These were false".

[Dean_the_Young]

It's a historical entry that paints the elves as the villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods (with no effort to dissuade the reader from believing in those rumors, since even present day characters ask the Dalish if such rumors are actually true), and the humans as the heroes who converted the elves to the "correct" religion and took pity on them by housing them in Alienages.

Correction: it's a historical entry that notes elves were painted as villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods by virtue of rumors without substantiation.

 

Saying rumors exist is not the same as implying rumors are true.

[Master Warder Z_]

Correction: it's a historical entry that notes elves were painted as villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods by virtue of rumors without substantiation.

 

Saying rumors exist is not the same as implying rumors are true.

 

Nothing to say that the rumors of them being demon worshiping savages sacrificing virgins on the equinox to not be true either though.

[LobselVith8]

The Dalish have an oral tradition: that's about what you'll get, and fits a larger theme of the Dalish about their history and reclaimation of it being largely unverifiable. The Dalish account of the Dales is unlikely to be significantly different than what they've already expressed: they were doing their own thing, threw out missionaries, and were unfairly driven out of their due.

 

The Dalish have an oral and written history. I tend to view the two historical accounts of the Dales fairly differently: the Dalish and the elven Warden blame the Chantry for invading the Dales due to the elven refusal to convert to the human religion, while the Chantry account that reads how the elves attacked the humans for no reason.

[Steelcan]

The Dalish have an oral and written history. I tend to view the two historical accounts of the Dales fairly differently: the Dalish and the elven Warden blame the Chantry for invading the Dales due to the elven refusal to convert to the human religion, while the Chantry account that reads how the elves attacked the humans for no reason.

 

No reason?  it was a power grab after Orlais was weakened by a Blight, plain and simple

[Master Warder Z_]

The Dalish have an oral and written history. I tend to view the two historical accounts of the Dales fairly differently: the Dalish and the elven Warden blame the Chantry for invading the Dales due to the elven refusal to convert to the human religion, while the Chantry account that reads how the elves attacked the humans for no reason.

 

No,Not no reason.

 

They sought Martial Conquest, They waited out the Blight, saved their strength and while the Empire was in Chaos they invaded it while it was weak.

 

My perspective on how it looks to history anyway.

[Master Warder Z_]

No reason?  it was a power grab after Orlais was weakened by a Blight, plain and simple

 

Man Steel it's odd how often we share similar views...We should form a club.

[LobselVith8]

Correction: it's a historical entry that notes elves were painted as villains of human sacrifice and forbidden gods by virtue of rumors without substantiation.

 

Saying rumors exist is not the same as implying rumors are true.

 

Those 'rumors' are also taken to be seen as literal truth by some Andrastians, since Origins and Dragon Age II provide characters who take the 'rumors' about the Dalish as though they are fact.

[Heimdall]

Those 'rumors' are also taken to be seen as literal truth by some Andrastians, since Origins and Dragon Age II provide characters who take the 'rumors' about the Dalish as though they are fact.

Some humans believed the rumors and they persist. They don't need Chantry help for that.

[Steelcan]

Man Steel it's odd how often we share similar views...We should form a club.

 

I have a group, you'd have to be approved though

[LobselVith8]

No reason?  it was a power grab after Orlais was weakened by a Blight, plain and simple

 

According to which historical account?

[Steelcan]

According to which historical account?

 

The only one that matters, the ones who won.

 

History isn't written by the sore-losers

[Master Warder Z_]

I have a group, you'd have to be approved though

 

Send me an invite boyo

[LobselVith8]

No,Not no reason.

 

They sought Martial Conquest, They waited out the Blight, saved their strength and while the Empire was in Chaos they invaded it while it was weak.

 

My perspective on how it looks to history anyway.

 

The Dales didn't help an imperialistic nation that had conquered it's neighbors; that isn't sufficient enough for me to think your theory is correct.

 

Historically speaking, Orlais was created through invading other nations in a series of Exalted Marches lead by Drakon, the Emperor wasn't able to invade the Free Marches due to their issues with the Dales, and following the occupation of the Dales, other nations were invaded, from Nevarra (after "aiding' them during the Third Blight) to Ferelden, which was supported by the Chantry (and why Loghain and Maric discussed what they would do about the Andrastian Chantry).

 

Simply put, Orlais invading a neighbor doesn't seem implausible to me.

[Master Warder Z_]

The Dales didn't help an imperialistic nation that had conquered it's neighbors; that isn't sufficient enough for me to think your theory is correct.

 

Historically speaking, Orlais was created through invading other nations in a series of Exalted Marches lead by Drakon, the Emperor wasn't able to invade the Free Marches due to their issues with the Dales, and following the occupation of the Dales, other nations were invaded, from Nevarra (after "aiding' them during the Third Blight) to Ferelden, which was supported by the Chantry (and why Loghain and Maric discussed what they would do about the Andrastian Chantry).

 

Simply put, Orlais invading a neighbor doesn't seem implausible to me.

 

And waiting out a blight to achieve martial advantage and then invading in the chaos to carve out a little empire of your own doesn't seem implausible to me.

[LobselVith8]

The only one that matters, the ones who won.

 

History isn't written by the sore-losers

 

That isn't referenced in the Chantry or Dalish version of the fall of the Dales.

[Steelcan]

Well the Dalish aren't going to own up to it, and Religious Crusade is a good way to draw support

[Heimdall]

I find it more likely that the Dales attacked Red Crossing in retaliation to border harassment by the local Orlesian border population, nothing systematically directed by the Chantry or Drakon, who, you say yourself Lobselvith8, was more interested in taking the Free Marches. Drakon wouldn't initiate a war with the Dales with his mind set on the Free Marches when such a conflict would only inconvenience that effort. And the Chantry would have declared an Exalted March on the heathens from the start or after Red Crossing if violent conversion was their aim. They wouldn't have waited until the Grand Cathedral in Val Royeaux itself was being sacked.

The Dalish may have thought the harassment was a conspiracy, but in the end they simply overstepped their capabilities.

But this is all getting rather off topic.

[Dean_the_Young]

Those 'rumors' are also taken to be seen as literal truth by some Andrastians, since Origins and Dragon Age II provide characters who take the 'rumors' about the Dalish as though they are fact.

 

Indeed- in-universe characters are gullible. Like Anders, who claims the Circle is a form of slavery. People can have factually wrong beliefs and viewpoints. Saying that rumors exist isn't the same as saying you should believe them, however.

 

(Though I will point out that the 'heathen gods' rumor is almost certainly true, so in this case those rumors weren't entirely wrong either.)

[Steelcan]

Double post

[LobselVith8]

 

Indeed- in-universe characters are gullible. Like Anders, who claims the Circle is a form of slavery. People can have factually wrong beliefs and viewpoints. Saying that rumors exist isn't the same as saying you should believe them, however.

 

(Though I will point out that the 'heathen gods' rumor is almost certainly true, so in this case those rumors weren't entirely wrong either.)

 

Anders isn't the only person who condemns the Chantry controlled Circle as slavery; even the pro-mage Champion of Kirkwall can condemn it as such.

 

As for the elves, it wasn't up for debate that the People followed the Creators; it's one of the reasons the Dalish said the Andrastian humans turned cold towards their ancestors in the Dales.