Would people admit that Shartan was a follower of a different religion when he allied with Andraste? Or would they rewrite history?
What other religions? The Elves had not yet rediscovered their original religion, and the faith of the Old Gods was widely frowned upon after the First Blight.
What other religions? The Elves had not yet rediscovered their original religion, and the faith of the Old Gods was widely frowned upon after the First Blight.
They tried to rebuild their original religion. That doesn't mean they didn't still have something to believe in during their time as slaves.
Holy ****.. I was not aware that you were so delusional....
Your inability to make an argument that can hold up to scrutiny is nobody's fault but your own, nor is your decision to resort to ad hominem attacks after repeatedly failing in all your attempts to do so.
The codex which was quoted in this thread several times shows that the humans were spreading lies about the Elves, and that those lies were the reason why Siona's sister was murdered by humans, and that the actions Siona took afterward were the direct result of her sister's murder by the humans because of those lies.
In response, you kept claiming that the Elves massacred the entire settlement, and when asked for proof to back it up, you referred back to that same codex entry despite it not having anything at all that you could quote to back up your claims. So now that you've proven beyond all shadow of a doubt that you're not going to listen to anything that contradicts you, and are therefore not worth any more of my time, welcome to the ignore list.
Finally, we know what happened at the Red Crossing.
This is kinda annoying me already, cause all you'll seem to spouting this crap as fact.
Since it's the same source that establishes that Siona killed the Chantry sister - the thing you've argued makes the Elves the only bad guys where the Red Crossing is concerned - does that mean you now say the Chantry sister's death couldn't possibly have happened?
Well, when you sit it out during a Blightthat lasted almost a century just out of spite, expect people to be rather annoyed.
Makes you think what went through the elves' head for that whole time. What if humans lost?
They'd blame humans for not fighting hard enough, for sure.
Any clear source of this?
As for the recording, he clearly speaks of 'the people' and that he wishes for them to be independent in their new home, and of Andraste as the 'enemy of my enemy' - hardly endearing term, that, if he truly did convert.
It wouldn't be the first time someone "converted" out of political expedience.
keep in mind that the faith that andraste herself preached, which Sharitan would have been apart of. is not the same as modern andrastianism of either chantry. and many theories about what the faith was actually like during Andraste's day,
It wouldn't be the first time someone "converted" out of political expedience.
Shartan never saw the Dales though, and he never really talks of being an Andrastian (or is this mentioned elsewhere?). A follower of Andraste in her war against the Imperium doesn't necessarily mean said person is a religious follower. After all, Shartan's spirit said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". The Elves took advantage and rose up against Tevinter and allied with Andraste.
EDIT: never mind. MisterJB mentioned it. Something to consider, at any rate. Though one should question how much of it is truth. Who wrote that entry (as DA WoT codexes are written by in-game people)? Would people admit that Shartan was a follower of a different religion when he allied with Andraste? Or would they rewrite history?
Very valid point. How is that entry in WoT framed? Who is referred to as its author?
It would certainly be quite at odds with what we learn in DA:O's Gauntlet.
It wouldn't be the first time someone "converted" out of political expedience.
The question is whether there was any need of that in Shartan's case. He's shown to be an ally of convenience to the Andrastian cause, and the aforementioned Gauntlet shows rather clearly that he was definitely not a fervent enough adherent of Andrastianism - if he was at all - to dictate it be the faith of his people. Rather, he supported his people being 'masters of themselves', which they doubtlessly couldn't well be by subscribing and submitting to human-dominated Chantry-hierarchy.
So, he clearly did not wish to make faith in Andraste part of his agenda for independence of his people. Whether he individually converted for whatever reason is made slightly irrelevant by his early demise, as well, thinking about it.
It wouldn't be the first time someone "converted" out of political expedience.
A good point.
btw speaking of Sharitain. I had a totally crazy concept for yet another chantry branch, this time an elven one. Lets call it the Arlathan chantry. In this view it is more pro-elven, with Andraste being an elf and Sharitan being her husband instead of Maferath, though he was a trusted freind and companion till the betrayal. Here Andraste was an elf fighting to liberate the slaves and joined up with the Alamarri tribes.
sure not canon, but it is a fun idea i have in my head.
Since it's the same source that establishes that Siona killed the Chantry sister - the thing you've argued makes the Elves the only bad guys where the Red Crossing is concerned - does that mean you now say the Chantry sister's death couldn't possibly have happened?
Ok, I had left this disccusion actually, but i'll bite.
Please note that the writer of this scroll serves as both realiable and an unrealiable narrator.
In regards to Siona's sister, he was not present as the events that led to her death, and only knows she is dead and her body was bought back by by one of their fellow knights (who was about to defect).
As such any claim or allegation he makes towards the nature of said death is merely speculation borne of biased suspision, not fact, and as such cannot be considered binding as truth or reliable in any form.
In regards to the attack on Red Crossing he was in fact present to witness the event in full, thus making this an account of events entirely realiable as he witnessed and pariticipated in the murders and red crossing.
As such, despite being on the same scroll, both stories are in fact not equal.
So yeah, proof please?
Yeah, I'd like to know why Dales just (allegedly) sat and not help against the Blight that lasted so decades, centuries?
With them getting their history back maybe they knew killing the archdemon was bad? After all, that's what Sola's believed?
Still, until we get more info I can see why humans will feel distrustful over the elves
I think their reasoning was a lot simpler, and more practical. They didn't want to weaken their armies when they had Orlais as a neighbor, considering that Orlais was in full expansion mode at the time. Considering Orlais conquered the Anderfels and the Free Marches after helping them during the Second Blight, the Dales had cause for concern.
They didn't want to weaken their armies when they had Orlais as a neighbor, considering that Orlais was in full expansion mode at the time.
That's false on many levels, and while it might be understandable for the elves to not commit to aiding them through the entire war to simply sit there and watch while an entire city was about to be sacked is unforgivable.
They could have helped in that specific situation, they didn't.
Considering Orlais conquered the Anderfels and the Free Marches after helping them during the Second Blight, the Dales had cause for concern.
The Anderfels joined willingly, and left close to 30 years later, after it was saved by Drakon's armies and Orlais never conquered the Free Marches, in fact the Free Marches owe their independence from the imperium to Orlais and the Chantry who declared an exalted march to free them.
The Anderfels joined willingly after it was saved by Drakon's armies.
In the World of Thedas it says "The Anderfels convert to the Chantry and become part of the Orlesian Empire", but that doesn't necessarily mean they willingly did so. And even if they did, since they declared their independence only 30 years after, they probably weren't that happy with the decision.
Please note that the writer of this scroll serves as both realiable and an unrealiable narrator.
Which means the part of his account you kept using as the basis for arguing that the Elves are 100% to blame for everything that happened is just as reliable or unreliable as the part that talks about how the humans were spreading lies about the Elves shortly before the humans killed Siona's sister.
Which means the part of his account you kept using as the basis for arguing that the Elves are 100% to blame for everything that happened is just as reliable or unreliable as the part that talks about how the humans were spreading lies about the Elves shortly before the humans killed Siona's sister.
Nope, he's physically there in Red Crossing with rest of his Knights when they killed human civilains after illegally crossing borders with an armed hostile force.
Where he wasn't on the other hand, was being present when Siona's sister was killed.
The second does not invalidate the first, as the nature of his reliability changes.
So, again, proof please?
Nope, he's physically there in Red Crossing with rest of his Knights when they killed human civilains after illegally crossing borders with an armed hostile force.
Where he wasn't on the other hand, was being present when Siona's sister was killed.
You keep twisting the words in your attempts to avoid admitting that both sides bear blame for what happened, but that doesn't change the fact that both sides are to blame, or that the proof has already been given more than once in this thread already.
You keep twisting the words in your attempts to avoid admitting that both sides bear blame for what happened, but that doesn't change the fact that both sides are to blame, or that the proof has already been given more than once in this thread already.
Yet to twist single thing, I have infact adhered as per the codex to the letter.
You on the other hand are dodging a simple request, kindly provide proof of your assertions.
If you cannot, simply acknowledge as such.
Yet to twist single thing, I have infact adhered as per the codex to the letter.
No, you really haven't done any such thing - as your use of prejudicial phrasing like "illegally crossing borders with an armed hostile force" demonstrated.
You on the other hand are dodging a simple request, kindly provide proof of your assertions.
Here's the proof you keep trying to handwave away, which as the text clearly shows was provided to the one who wrote the letter from the one who recovered the body of the Elf the humans murdered:
"Too often had we fought with humans along our borders until the beginning was lost to memory. Rumors of an abduction stirred. As always, their Chantry was swift to spread lies. In haste and anger, they killed Siona's sister for wandering too near the hunters' path. You carried her body back to us, you mourned with us—yet your heart was distracted. Siona begged for vengeance and you turned away."
No, you really haven't done any such thing - as your use of prejudicial phrasing like "illegally crossing borders with an armed hostile force
" demonstrated.
That is exactly what happened, literally...are you messing with me or something? Cause this isn't making sense anymore.
Here's the proof you keep trying to handwave away, which as the text clearly shows was provided to the one who wrote the letter from the one who recovered the body of the Elf the humans murdered:
"Too often had we fought with humans along our borders until the beginning was lost to memory. Rumors of an abduction stirred. As always, their Chantry was swift to spread lies. In haste and anger, they killed Siona's sister for wandering too near the hunters' path. You carried her body back to us, you mourned with us—yet your heart was distracted. Siona begged for vengeance and you turned away."
...Ok, you have to be messing with me. How does that prove anything? The point of me requesting proof is for you to provide evidence that said narrator has factual backing to justify his assertion that said elf was murdered by humans in cold blood beyond his own biased suspicions.
You have yet to provide this. Try again.
Retour en haut