212 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

That I get, but you made it sound like the Orlesian Chantry invented the whole thing when they founded the Chantry.

 

Ah, I see. My mistake. 

 

I'm actually with Xil on that issue of Andraste being a mage. For a while I even thought the standard view was that Andraste WAS a mage. Andraste preached against the abuse of magic, not the existence of mages. Even if she was a mage, her message still is important. It is her status as the Bride of the Maker that was central to the Cult of the Maker, not her mundane status.

 

Simply being a mage does not explain any of her supposed miracles.

 

 

 

The White Chantry, at the very least, has created a very sophisticated system of belief around the idea that Andraste was not a mage. Even aside from the creation of the Circles - which was done, as I recall, centuries after the Chantry itself was established - the narrative around her existence and the supposed appeal to the masses of her existence was, supposedly, how she was different in every aspect from the Tevinter Magisters, including her magic. She was the champion of mundates against the magisters in the White Chantry narrative.

 

Suddenly elevating the Andraste to a mage changes the very theological existence of mages in the chant, from the one-sided "usurpers" of heaven and the oppressive magisters of Tevinter to, essentially, saviors and oppressors both. 

 

Symbols matter a great deal, and Andraste being a mage changes the entire character of the faith. 

 

Maybe you could make a case that it undermines the premise of the Circle System, but even that questionable. The justification for why it exists is not that every single mage will turn to domination or demons. It doesn't take every man to endanger the people. There have been many Chantry exceptions to the rules and if ever there was a case to be made for an exception it would be the woman who was the spiritual bride of the Maker himself.

 

 

 

The oppressive existence of the Circle system is justified - and was justified - based on the Otherness of the mages vis-a-vis the Chantry as a whole.

 

 

 

Why? It's already clearly recorded that mages had a significant impact on many other, more important, conflicts in history, such as the Qunari Wars or the Second Blight. Why would this one be any different?

 

We know that the period was very propaganda driven - hence the accounts of blood rituals and sacrifices in the Dales, which even modern Chantry historians reject as propaganda. We know that the Chantry erased other aspects of its history, cf. Shartan. 

 

So the idea that they would create a very propaganda driven narrative to suit their ends and simply erase the contributions of a group of people that, at the time, were not seen in a particularly positive light is not at all surprising. 

 

Beyond that, I think logic suggests that there had to be something different after the declaration of the Exalted March that led to Orlesian victory, since that's treated as a turning point as opposed to some irrelevant theological show of support. 

 

 

 

Well the Varterrals were created long before there was such a thing as a Dalish. So I don't think the legends would specify them wanting to protect anyone more specific than an elf. The ones in Dragon Age 2 and Witch Hunt clearly were not doing so, however. But the one in The Masked Empire was explicitly said to only attack elves in self defense. So it's actually the first example of a Varterral that very clearly indicates that there's truth to the legends.

 

My view has always been that it's the seeking out of, or contact with, an Eluvian that triggers the Varterrals to attack, even if one is elven. Arianne was pursuing one, and Merril was reconstructing it. But maybe this is a crackpot theory. 

 

Basically, I think the ancient elves had some reason to click the "ABORT!" button with the Eluvians, and had the Varterrals act to keep people - humans and elves alike - away from them. 

[Jedi Master of Orion]

The White Chantry, at the very least, has created a very sophisticated system of belief around the idea that Andraste was not a mage. Even aside from the creation of the Circles - which was done, as I recall, centuries after the Chantry itself was established - the narrative around her existence and the supposed appeal to the masses of her existence was, supposedly, how she was different in every aspect from the Tevinter Magisters, including her magic. She was the champion of mundates against the magisters in the White Chantry narrative.

 

Suddenly elevating the Andraste to a mage changes the very theological existence of mages in the chant, from the one-sided "usurpers" of heaven and the oppressive magisters of Tevinter to, essentially, saviors and oppressors both. 

 

Symbols matter a great deal, and Andraste being a mage changes the entire character of the faith. 

 

Not really. Andraste was not leading a rebellion against all mages or the general notion of magic. She was fighting the abuses, brutality and tyranny of the Tevinter Magisters.

 

The oppressive existence of the Circle system is justified - and was justified - based on the Otherness of the mages vis-a-vis the Chantry as a whole.

 

It is justified by the dangers of magic, which are very real and also have a historical precendent.

[Gervaise]

I think it highly likely that the Circle Mages and Templars combined made the difference in the war with the Dales.    I've already stated that I think the real objection of the Chantry missionaries to what was going on in the Dales was not simply their adoption of their elven gods but the fact that mages were at the head of affairs.   Hence the propaganda of blood sacrifices, which may or may not have been true - but was clearly pointing to blood magic, which was outlawed throughout Thedas at that time, along with the rule of mages.   

 

The Dalish would appear to have made a pre-emptive strike which, given their use of unfettered magic, was successful.   Once the Chantry became involved and released the resources they commanded, the Templars and mages, this balanced up the conflict in terms of magical power and thus the superior non-magical forces of the Chevaliers and other military units prevailed.

 

So far as the relative merits of horses and halla are concerned, it all depends on the manner in which they are employed.   For example, camels are superior to horses when travelling long distances with little food or water available.   They are also superior for straight line speed but are not very good at either braking or turning (see Lawrence of Arabia for evidence of this).    At highly trained war horse is extremely agile, able to turn on a sixpence, fast acceleration but also quick breaking. (I am thinking of the destrier here, not the later horses weighed down by armour so they could hardly raise a trot - the Chevaliers' horses are in the mould of the destrier)    The Dalish are dismissive of horses but the fact is they didn't have them available, nor did they breed them selectively or train them in the manner of Chevaliers.   So a halla might well be superior to the average horse but not the bred for purpose, highly trained war horse. 

[Roamingmachine]

It is natural for oral tradition (and lets face it, Dalish tradition is allmost completely oral) to morph to reflect the surroundings and conditions in which it currently exists. Whether or not it actually reflects the way of life in ancient Arlathan is irrelevant as there are no records of any kind from that realm.We know they built stone buildings AT SOME POINT,  but don't know when they were abandoned.  Histroy knows many cases where civilizations have, for one reason or another (usually a natural disaster is involved) abandoned cities. Not all of them rebuilt again. Was the Arlathan realm a single, homogenous whole or a confederation of people (think EU).  Without questions like these answered, claiming that the keepers are twisting the traditions any more than what is natural for oral tradition is in error.

[Wolfen09]

i take it with a grain of salt, many things in history are covered up by those in a higher position.  History may say the dales struck first, but thats the history the chantry has said, and it may be true, but until it gets brought up in the story as actual truth, im gonna keep an open mind.  as for the andraste being a mage thing.... religious fanatics tend to turn a blind eye to such things if its better in the long run... or they thought that hey shes not a mage, she just has divine powers that make her like a mage...  I would not be surprised if she was a mage, but until proven otherwise, i cant say that

[Gervaise]

Whether or not the Dalish struck first, I doubt the Chantry or Orlesian historians would make up the fact that they sacked Montsimmard and got within striking distance of Val Royeaux.   That seems too much of an admission of Orlesian weakness in the face of elven aggression.

 

The story of humans being sacrificed to elven gods may also have had a basis in fact.    In Masked Empire the Keeper wanted to find out how to take back the eluvians.   Imshael had agreed to this if he would make a choice - who to allow the demon to possesses.   The Keeper understandably didn't want to sacrifice one of his clan.    Now it may be doing him a disservice but he might have considered sacrificing one of his human prisoners.   However, he may even have rejected this, hence Imshael deciding to deal with the human prisoner instead.     Merrill was also willing to utilise the services of a demon to assist her with recovering ancient lore.    Marathari clearly suspected, may be the demon had already told her, that its ultimate price would be a soul to possess (she said this would be the result of mending the mirror but may be not in the way she thought).   

 

So it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a member of the elven community in the Dales, without the leadership being aware of it, had made a deal with a demon in order to acquire ancient knowledge and the price was the blood or soul of a person.    That particular elf did not baulk at using a human victim and so the actions of one corrupt elf was then applied to the whole, just as the actions of one or two bad mages can be used as justification for condemning them all.    When people are looking for a reason to make war, and the Chantry and Orlais most likely were, just one instance would be enough.

[Wolfen09]

i just dont see the rationality behind "hey lets attack a city of one of the strongest nations on the continent," knowing that they dont have the ability for full on war (it was a relatively new country at that point, they should know better).  Thats why i tend to just not believe it to its entirety, something provoked it.

[Gervaise]

Whatever happened on the Orlesian side of the Frostbacks, the Dalish certainly made the first move when they got to Ferelden.   By their own admission, they slaughtered the first human tribes they encountered because "humans can't be trusted".     There was no indication that these humans had actually supported what the Orlesians were doing, there was no indication that they showed an aggression towards the Dalish.   For all they knew, they might have been willing to offer them aid since they had been attacked by neighbours who were historically always at odds with Ferelden.  However, the Dalish didn't wait to find out; they just killed them anyway.   It is small wonder that human settlements in the southern part of Thedas were somewhat suspicious and afraid of the Dalish nomads after that.

 

Up in Rivain there would be no history of bad blood.   By the time the Dalish reached there, they would have learnt it was expedient not to attack humans on sight and the Rivaini would thus have no reason to mistrust them.   Hence the better relations and the semi-permanent Dalish camp with regular trade between the two races.

[Xilizhra]

Whatever happened on the Orlesian side of the Frostbacks, the Dalish certainly made the first move when they got to Ferelden.   By their own admission, they slaughtered the first human tribes they encountered because "humans can't be trusted".     There was no indication that these humans had actually supported what the Orlesians were doing, there was no indication that they showed an aggression towards the Dalish.   For all they knew, they might have been willing to offer them aid since they had been attacked by neighbours who were historically always at odds with Ferelden.  However, the Dalish didn't wait to find out; they just killed them anyway.   It is small wonder that human settlements in the southern part of Thedas were somewhat suspicious and afraid of the Dalish nomads after that.

 

Up in Rivain there would be no history of bad blood.   By the time the Dalish reached there, they would have learnt it was expedient not to attack humans on sight and the Rivaini would thus have no reason to mistrust them.   Hence the better relations and the semi-permanent Dalish camp with regular trade between the two races.

From what I recall, the Clayne had already shown a great deal of viciousness toward the other human groups in Ferelden, hence the Dalish figuring that they could never have been trusted.

But, again, if Bioware wants to turn the Dalish into the new Cerberus, they should just say so.

[Roamingmachine]

But, again, if Bioware wants to turn the Dalish into the new Cerberus, they should just say so.

........   They better bloody not. *sharpens knives*

[Mistic]

I think that the Dalish should embrace more often what makes them particularly Dalish instead of being a continuation of the Arlathan and Dales elves. Thier most recognizable feature, the Vallaslin tattoos, doesn't sound particularly 'ancient elvish'. And that's ok.

 

Talking about blood writing, I wonder if we'll see more kinds of tattoos. There was this nice theory about how each marking represented each god or goddess from the elven pantheon, and it could be proven true or not in the upcoming DA:I. If true, which could be more appropriate for a Dalish Inquisitor?

[Xilizhra]

I think that the Dalish should embrace more often what makes them particularly Dalish instead of being a continuation of the Arlathan and Dales elves. Thier most recognizable feature, the Vallaslin tattoos, doesn't sound particularly 'ancient elvish'. And that's ok.

 

Talking about blood writing, I wonder if we'll see more kinds of tattoos. There was this nice theory about how each marking represented each god or goddess from the elven pantheon, and it could be proven true or not in the upcoming DA:I. If true, which could be more appropriate for a Dalish Inquisitor?

While certainly it has value, I don't know how helpful all that would be in finding another homeland.

[Mistic]

While certainly it has value, I don't know how helpful all that would be in finding another homeland.

 

What, the blood writing or embracing more often their unique lore?

[Xilizhra]

What, the blood writing or embracing more often their unique lore?

Closer to the latter. I don't mean to devalue the current Dalish culture, but I'm sort of afraid sometimes that it's dipping too much into stagnancy and working towards simple survival.

[Mistic]

Closer to the latter. I don't mean to devalue the current Dalish culture, but I'm sort of afraid sometimes that it's dipping too much into stagnancy and working towards simple survival.

 

That's in fact why I suggested that. Getting obsessed about the past may be good to preserve the ancient elven lore, but I'm afraid that they might give more importance to preserving the past than to building new things for the future. That could also mean building new viewpoints to face the challenges in the world from a purely Dalish perspective. Less "how can we rebuild the lost glory of Arlathan?" and more "how can we improve the lives of the Dalish?".

 

I suppose we'll need to witness an Arlathvhen to know for sure the global Dalish situation. I wonder if we'll be able to do so in Inquisition. What Fenris said in MotA sounded promising...

[Xilizhra]

That's in fact why I suggested that. Getting obsessed about the past may be good to preserve the ancient elven lore, but I'm afraid that they might give more importance to preserving the past than to building new things for the future. That could also mean building new viewpoints to face the challenges in the world from a purely Dalish perspective. Less "how can we rebuild the lost glory of Arlathan?" and more "how can we improve the lives of the Dalish?".

 

I suppose we'll need to witness an Arlathvhen to know for sure the global Dalish situation. I wonder if we'll be able to do so in Inquisition. What Fenris said in MotA sounded promising...

Hopefully. Given that we have a Dalish Inquisitor now, I can't imagine they'd be cut out of any plots related to the Dalish.

[Das Tentakel]

There’s one other possibility, of course.

We are assuming that the Dalish are ‘just’ the descendants of the elite of the Elven polity in the Dales, who fled into the wilderness. And the Elves of the Dales, in turn, are the descendants of those Elven slaves that were freed by Andraste & Co, who were descended from the inhabitants of Arlathan.

This is ultimately based on the fairly meagre and, if needed, rather ‘flexible’ lore from the games and books.

 

However, think: Unless Thedas is rather small (something that can be argued, by the way) and was under the full control of Tevinter (something we know wasn’t fully the case), it’s unlikely that ALL the Elves were enslaved. Well, unless they were all of them so kind to live in just a few places with easy reach of the Tevinter empire, and not try to flee.

We are talking about an entire race, the native population of a complete continent, not a relatively small people concentrated in a modest-sized area or areas like the ancient Jews or Carthaginians.

 

There probably would have been outlying rural populations – hunter-gatherers, maybe even sizeable groups of settled farmers – some of whom may have been outside the political and cultural domination of Arlathan itself. Maybe they were even shortlived and not particularly gifted when it came to supernatural talents.

They may have been in awe of their (comparatively) sophisticated and powerful cousins in Arlathan however. Who is not to say the Dales were originally a major enclave of ‘wild Elves’? It does seem like a region in the far south that could have been on the thinly-populated edge of the empire or even completely beyond Tevinter control.

 

Following this line of thought, the Dalish may have originated predominantly as a population of ‘uncivilized’ / ‘wild’ nomadic Elves, who received refugees from the Dales and were somewhat in awe of them because of their Arlathan ‘ancestry’. In time, the refugees and the wild Elves could have merged into a single people who, while mainly ‘wild’ in terms of biological descent and most of their culture and mythology, would also have some ‘Arlathan’ ancestry and, moreover, a myth of ‘pure’ descent from the old Elven empire.

 

For a possible rough real-world parallel, see the Beta Israel (Falashas) or Ethiopian Jews.

[Gervaise]

That would make a very reasonable hypothesis except for the fact that the Dalish make no mention of anything like it.   Their history starts with Arlathan, breaks during the period of enslavement and then resumes with the Long Walk.   According to the lore keepers they are all descendants of those who persevered with the Long Walk.   They make a point of saying that many elves turned back, preferring the comforts of slavery over the hardship of the march.   Then those who kept going were "rewarded by the gods" by reaching their new homeland.   I must admit I find it amusing how the elven gods are even given credit for the successful completion of the journey and the reward of a homeland.   Again I point out that the belief is not that the gods are inaccessible/shut away unable to act but that they choose not the act unless the elves show themselves to be worthy.

 

So if the lifestyle and stories came from "wild elves" who were never enslaved, their folklore makes no mention of it.

[LobselVith8]

i take it with a grain of salt, many things in history are covered up by those in a higher position.  History may say the dales struck first, but thats the history the chantry has said, and it may be true, but until it gets brought up in the story as actual truth, im gonna keep an open mind.  as for the andraste being a mage thing.... religious fanatics tend to turn a blind eye to such things if its better in the long run... or they thought that hey shes not a mage, she just has divine powers that make her like a mage...  I would not be surprised if she was a mage, but until proven otherwise, i cant say that

 

Technically, human history claims that the elves started the war by attacking Red Crossing, while elven history reads that the humans started it because of the refusal of the elves to convert to the human religion. Hahren Sarethia of the Highever Alienage wrote, "But you already know that something went wrong. Our ancestors' worship of the old elven gods angered the human Chantry, which constantly sent missionaries to our land. The Chantry wanted to convert our people to their worship of the Maker, but the Dalish would not submit." Keeper Gisharel of the Ralaferin Tribe wrote, "But it was not to last. The Chantry first sent missionaries into the Dales, and then, when those were thrown out, templars." 

 

It's never been specified by the developers who actually struck the first blow, and even World of Thedas never specifies who actually started the war between the two. I doubt that the player will ever know with any degree of certainty, given the ambiguity of the Dragon Age setting.

 

The codex entries for the human protagonist has consistently been scholars of the Chantry, and therefore a predominantly human point of view. I would imagine the elven Inquisitor would be shaped by elven historians, so the Inquisitor may be informed based on the racial background of the main character; Trevelyan may believe the elves started the war by attacking Red Crossing, while Lavellan may think it was the result of human incursion into the Dales.

 

Since the halla were brought up earlier in the thread, I thought I'd remark that Felassan comments on the halla in "The Masked Empire", "We rode the halla. They leapt with such grace and beauty as to make your horses look like Ferelden dogs by comparison. They were smarter, too. Which often made them willful."

[Gervaise]

Well the best of Ferelden dogs are the Mabari and it is no shame to be compared to them.   I presume he meant the halla were more intelligent than horses, not the dogs.  There have been hints of different horse breeds in the codices.   In MoA there is a picture of an Andefel horse, apparently now rare but was meant to be a superior breed.   In our own world there is a clear difference between horse breeds both in their grace and beauty and their intelligence.   The Arabian is credited with all three and the belief is that it is their close association with their original nomadic masters that led to their greater intelligence.    To put it another way, the Arabs valued a smart horse and so bred them that way.  They are also said to be difficult with people who do not respect them.   The Akel Teke of the Asian steppes is another in the same mould.   The halla must have a different physique to deer in our world for them to be capable of carrying a person effectively.    Anyway, even if I am playing an elf, I'm happy to stick with a horse.

[In Exile]

Technically, human history claims that the elves started the war by attacking Red Crossing, while elven history reads that the humans started it because of the refusal of the elves to convert to the human religion. Hahren Sarethia of the Highever Alienage wrote, "But you already know that something went wrong. Our ancestors' worship of the old elven gods angered the human Chantry, which constantly sent missionaries to our land. The Chantry wanted to convert our people to their worship of the Maker, but the Dalish would not submit." Keeper Gisharel of the Ralaferin Tribe wrote, "But it was not to last. The Chantry first sent missionaries into the Dales, and then, when those were thrown out, templars." 

 

It's never been specified by the developers who actually struck the first blow, and even World of Thedas never specifies who actually started the war between the two. I doubt that the player will ever know with any degree of certainty, given the ambiguity of the Dragon Age setting.

 

The codex entries for the human protagonist has consistently been scholars of the Chantry, and therefore a predominantly human point of view. I would imagine the elven Inquisitor would be shaped by elven historians, so the Inquisitor may be informed based on the racial background of the main character; Trevelyan may believe the elves started the war by attacking Red Crossing, while Lavellan may think it was the result of human incursion into the Dales.

 

Since the halla were brought up earlier in the thread, I thought I'd remark that Felassan comments on the halla in "The Masked Empire", "We rode the halla. They leapt with such grace and beauty as to make your horses look like Ferelden dogs by comparison. They were smarter, too. Which often made them willful."

 

The debate is not about the first blow, however. It is about the sacking of Orlais. Whether or not Orlais invaded, World of Thedas doesn't contest that the Dalish won the initial bouts and pushed deep into Orlais. Debating whether or not Red Crossing was the start of the war - and it's quite plausible, IMO, that Red Crossing was the first proper military assault of the war but only came after a great deal of templar provocation in the Dales - is tangential to establishing whether or not Montsimmard, for example, was sacked.

 

For what it's worth, my own view is that:

 

1) The Chantry sent missionaries, who were expelled.

2) The Chantry sent missionaries guarded by templars, which the Dales saw as a prelude to an invasion and who were (rather forcibly) expelled. 

3) The Dales, after potentially other instances of provocation and saber rattling, came to the conclusion that war was inevitable and mobilized in a pre-emptive strike, to catch the numerically superior Orlais unaware.

[LobselVith8]

The story of humans being sacrificed to elven gods may also have had a basis in fact.    In Masked Empire the Keeper wanted to find out how to take back the eluvians.   Imshael had agreed to this if he would make a choice - who to allow the demon to possesses.   The Keeper understandably didn't want to sacrifice one of his clan.    Now it may be doing him a disservice but he might have considered sacrificing one of his human prisoners.   However, he may even have rejected this, hence Imshael deciding to deal with the human prisoner instead. 

 

I do find it puzzling in the Chantry historical account that, on one hand, the elves are vilified for isolating themselves from humanity, and the Emerald Knights turning away all humans, while on the other hand, it's also insinuated (through unsubstantiated rumor and hearsay) that humans were being sacrificed to heathen gods, despite the fact that the former contradicts the latter. It also read like a line that intended to demonize the elves of the Dales for worshiping the Creators as their gods, instead of the Maker, which fits into the Andrastian mindset of seeing people of other faiths as "heathens".

 

Also, Clan Virnehn is atypical of the Dalish. The Dalish traditionally don't deal with spirits, as it's prohibited due to the dangerous nature of spirits. It's mentioned in WoT: "Unlike other spellcasters, Dalish mages do not use any magic involving spirits, as they believe all spirits are dangerous." (page 104)

 

Merrill was also willing to utilise the services of a demon to assist her with recovering ancient lore.    Marathari clearly suspected, may be the demon had already told her, that its ultimate price would be a soul to possess (she said this would be the result of mending the mirror but may be not in the way she thought).   

 

Merrill is willing to speak to a spirit who is trapped and impotent. Marethari claims in Act III that Audacity would have escaped through the constructed Eluvian, and prior to this, she thought Merrill would bring back the taint by working with the shard she cleansed. The Keeper never claims that Merrill would have intentionally released Audacity or surrendered her soul, and Merrill even tells an aggressive Champion she won't release Audacity. If Audacity told Marethari (which would explain why Marethari changed her reasons for opposing Merrill), then wouldn't that be a case of the spirit manipulating Marethari to release it from it's prison? Why would the spirit warn Marethari and impede it's own gateway to freedom otherwise?

[Jedi Master of Orion]

But, again, if Bioware wants to turn the Dalish into the new Cerberus, they should just say so.

 

I'm a Dalish fan but this is not something I am worried about.

[LobselVith8]

The debate is not about the first blow, however. It is about the sacking of Orlais. Whether or not Orlais invaded, World of Thedas doesn't contest that the Dalish won the initial bouts and pushed deep into Orlais. Debating whether or not Red Crossing was the start of the war - and it's quite plausible, IMO, that Red Crossing was the first proper military assault of the war but only came after a great deal of templar provocation in the Dales - is tangential to establishing whether or not Montsimmard, for example, was sacked.

 

Retaliating against an enemy that wants to invade and forcibly convert you does change the situation, however. If armed and armored soldiers were sent into the Dales to force conversion to the Andrastian faith, and the elves retaliated, then it can determine how one might look at either Orlais (or, conversly, how one might look upon the Dalish if they believe the Chantry account to be true); it's possible this may be the case with the Inquisitor, depending on whether the protagonist is human or elven.

 

The context of what started the war, and why the elves were determined to defeat Orlais, colors the entire war if the elves were trying to protect their religious freedom, and their sovereign rights to govern themselves. This was also the outcome with the Orlesian victory: the elves who submitted to human rule were forced to convert, the elven religion was outlawed, and the Dales was then under Orlesian occupation (similar to Ferelden).

 

While the player will likely never know the absolute truth, it would be interesting to see the character reference either version, and to see it potentially shape how the Inquisitor reacts to either Orlais or the Dalish, depending on the background chosen.

[In Exile]

Retaliating against an enemy that wants to invade and forcibly convert you does change the situation, however. If armed and armored soldiers were sent into the Dales to force conversion to the Andrastian faith, and the elves retaliated, then it can determine how one might look at either Orlais (or, conversly, how one might look upon the Dalish if they believe the Chantry account to be true); it's possible this may be the case with the Inquisitor, depending on whether the protagonist is human or elven.

 

The context of what started the war, and why the elves were determined to defeat Orlais, colors the entire war if the elves were trying to protect their religious freedom, and their sovereign rights to govern themselves. This was also the outcome with the Orlesian victory: the elves who submitted to human rule were forced to convert, the elven religion was outlawed, and the Dales was then under Orlesian occupation (similar to Ferelden).

 

While the player will likely never know the absolute truth, it would be interesting to see the character reference either version, and to see it potentially shape how the Inquisitor reacts to either Orlais or the Dalish, depending on the background chosen.

 

While I can agree with you in the abstract, I disagree that the Dalish account as it currently exists actually supports the bolded proposition, i.e., that the Dalish were acting to preserve their sovereignty. A full-scale military invasion, culminating in the sacking of a city (and the massive rape, killing and destruction of property associated with such an event) is wholly disproportionate to missionaries being sent in. What you want to say to this, I'm sure, is that the Chantry didn't just send missionaries, they sent templars on some sort of violent mission into the Dales (e.g. forcible conversion) but that somehow wasn't an Exalted March in itself (because we know one wasn't declared). That creates a lot of problems. 

 

There's just a lot that doesn't add up behind the accounts we have of that period in time, because the Dalish account just lacks any detail of that period whatsoever. For example:

 

1) The templars obviously cannot convert anyone; they are a military force. Sending in the templars really sounds like an invasion, except that doesn't add up because

2) The Dales won the initial skirmishes of the war, and occupied a substantial portion of Orlais. How could this happen if Orlais had struck first, and prepared itself for an invasion by massing troops? The initial conflicts took place in Orlais, which wouldn't make sense if the Orlesians invaded, unless

3) The templars were sent in by the Chantry separately from Orlais proper, on some sort of raiding and or otherwise violent religous mission; but

4) That doesn't add up, because the Chantry then refused to declare an Exalted March against the Dales until the Chantry itself was threatened at Val Royeaux. If the Chantry wanted to forcibly convert the Dales from the start, why refuse to participate in the war from the onset? On the Dalish account, it was the Chantry who started the war.