807 réponses à ce sujet

[The Baconer]

Nor should they.

 

Only if they are... of the bereft.

[Master Warder Z_]

They can kill elite Dalish warriors with blankets too.

Indeed.

[Deztyn]

There's also sorrow at the death of the human woman he loved, but I'm not what part of what I said is contradicted by this.

You still seem to be insisting that killing the entire village would be mentioned in their account. I believe it's wrong to assume that because it's beyond the scope of their memorial.

And I find it doubtful that they felt any real guilt over Adalene as a person. Their guilt comes from not trusting their comrade and causing his pain and death. Not from causing hers. It's telling that in their entire story they never mention her by name.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

You still seem to be insisting that killing the entire village would be mentioned in their account. I believe it's wrong to assume that because it's beyond the scope of their memorial.

And I find it doubtful that they felt any real guilt over Adalene as a person. Their guilt comes from not trusting their comrade and causing his pain and death. Not from causing hers. It's telling that in their entire story they never mention her by name.

 

Part of the memorial is a prayer for her soul and hope for it to meet with his again. The memorial seems to recognize what was important to him. The death of every person in Red Crossing would be relevant to that.

[Master Warder Z_]

Why?

The only person there for him was her.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Why?

The only person there for him was her.

 

But it was still her town and her own friends and family. That would still be meaningful to the man she loved.

[Master Warder Z_]

But it was still her town and her own friends and family. That would still be meaningful to the man she loved.

Uh...

No.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Uh...

No.

 

Incorrect.

[Master Warder Z_]

Incorrect.

Loving a person doesn't equate to giving two shits about their home, family or friends, beyond it being background to the main issue.

It's irreverent to the primary concern.

Aka the person themselves.

So no: it doesn't automatically equal loving every random person in the other parties lives.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I really shouldn't have to explain why loving someone means the other people they care about in their life become important by association. Red Crossing itself is also the place he wanted to spend if life given that he wanted to marry her. Destroying it would have been relevant to honoring Elandin's memory. 

[Ajna]

*shakes head, sighs heavily and leaves thread*

[EmperorSahlertz]

It does go into details. Far more detail than yours actually. It gives names of people who died and explains which groups of people fought in the battle and where it happened, even how it happened in some cases. I have far better reason to "preach" it than you do yours. "The Death of Elandrin" is from the Glory Age by people who were actually there. It is also critical of elven mistakes so you can't even claim yours is less biased. "The Exalted March of the Dales" is from 9:12 by a scholar who only has the Chantry version of events to analyze. And we know the Chantry has been historically biased when it comes dealing with the matter, both by claiming the elves sacrificed the people of Red Crossing in blood magic rituals to appease the Elven Gods and by removing the Canticle of Shartan from the Chant and trying to erase him from history.

 

I'm appealing to a first hand account from the same time period.

 

You're appealing to an account written by someone almost 700 years after the fact analyzing a history that was propagated by the victors of the war. In fact all the other sources you claim corroborate your account are also written centuries after the fact.

 

The information in the Knights Tomb the is obviously the more reliable of the two. The fact that you'd dismiss a first hand account written by elves as "hearsay, fabrications, and propaganda" because it contradicts established history written by humans hundreds of years later is absurd. 

 

The Knight's Tomb even has a letter written by Elandrin himself where he reveals his motives. He didn't even care about the Elven Gods or the Maker. He only claimed he converted because the humans would not trust him otherwise.

I don't how this can be so hard to fathom... The "Codex Entry: The Death of Elandrin" only says: "The men of the village suspected the girl's flight, and heard the scream. They fell upon the elves, but were no match."  That is NOT a detailed account fo what happened to Red Crossing. No matter how much you want to exonorate and white wash the Dalish. We have other accounts, which adds to what we know from this one, which clearly states that the ENTIRETY of Red Crossing was killed. The single sentence from your beloved codex entry, DOES NOT refute that. All that it does, is give us some background on what started the Red Crossing incident. That is it. No more, no less.

 

The Chantry WOULD NOT have been able to spread lies and rumors about the massacre of Red Crossing, IF THE TOWN WAS BLOODY WELL STILL THERE. It simply doesn't add up.

 

So no. Red Crossing was destroyed. The inhabitants were killed. And the Dalish did it. The end.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Part of the memorial is a prayer for her soul and hope for it to meet with his again. The memorial seems to recognize what was important to him. The death of every person in Red Crossing would be relevant to that.

Why the **** would you include a detailed account of a massacre of a civilian population in your MEMORIAL?.............

[Deztyn]

Part of the memorial is a prayer for her soul and hope for it to meet with his again. The memorial seems to recognize what was important to him. The death of every person in Red Crossing would be relevant to that.

It's not a prayer for her. It's a prayer for him. For the one they betrayed to find his happiness in the afterlife. His happiness is her. They recognize that. That does not mean they value her as anything other than the object of his affection.

Again, the fact that they never even use her name indicates that they don't see her as anything but an extension of him.

Nothing suggests that they would care about her death if it wasn't part of their betrayal. Nothing suggests they mourn the lives already lost at Red Crossing.

You are arguing that we should ignore the multiple codex entries that say the people of Red Crossing were massacred and cite a source that specifically tells us that it it's not the whole story as proof that it never happened.

"Even though it says it doesn't tell us what happens after his death, since it doesn't tell us the people were massacred after his death, they couldn't have been massacred after his death, because they would tell us if they were massacred after his death."

No.

Just no.

[Eliastion]

I don't how this can be so hard to fathom... The "Codex Entry: The Death of Elandrin" only says: "The men of the village suspected the girl's flight, and heard the scream. They fell upon the elves, but were no match."  That is NOT a detailed account fo what happened to Red Crossing. No matter how much you want to exonorate and white wash the Dalish. We have other accounts, which adds to what we know from this one, which clearly states that the ENTIRETY of Red Crossing was killed. The single sentence from your beloved codex entry, DOES NOT refute that. All that it does, is give us some background on what started the Red Crossing incident. That is it. No more, no less.

 

The Chantry WOULD NOT have been able to spread lies and rumors about the massacre of Red Crossing, IF THE TOWN WAS BLOODY WELL STILL THERE. It simply doesn't add up.

 

So no. Red Crossing was destroyed. The inhabitant were killed. And the Dalish did it. The end.

You missed the part where the elves retreated before more humans came - in the part that you're quoting Elandrin isn't even dead yet...

And then there was the part where the elves retrieved the body after it was tossed away by humans.

Also, you greatly underestimate Chantry's power where it comes to propaganda while overestimating public capability for checking the facts themselves. If the Chantry wanted to spread such lies, especially if it was supported by secular administration, it would be perfectly capable of doing just that.

Basically, you have your conclusion and you just try to buther all the additional data you might get to fit it - you do exactly what the extreme Dalish-washers do, you just come at it from the opposite side.

 

 

When I try to analyze the account, I see two possibilities: either it is false (or manipulated to an extent where the difference is of purely technical nature), or Red Crossing was NOT destroyed - at least not as an immediate aftermatch of Elandrin's death.

If it was not destroyed then, what could happen to it? Well, it could be that some villagers died and the word spread, until the skirmish just outside the settlement "grew" in retelling to the great massacre of inhabitants. Or it could be that the village was destroyed at some later point in time - it's not rare for border villages to get burned to the ground when the actual war starts. Or, as some Chantry-haters seem to speculate - it could be destroyed, but not by the elves. But that last scenario (not too likely in my opinion; really, they didn't need an actual destroyed village to say that a village got massacred) leads me to another problem surrounding the issue: the beginnings of this war seem so damn inconsistent...

 

I mean - most people (both from Chantry and Dalish side) speak about Red Crossing as if it were (at least officially) the incident that triggered Orlesian invasion - but nobody really mentions much more important settlements that were taken by the Dales. So it would generally imply that it was indeed the human side that attacked after Red Crossing. But, as we know, Orlais fought the first part of the war in defense - and later for liberation - of its own lands. Why don't people speak of elven army aggression? Especially since we know that the war has officially become an Exalted March only after initial elven victories...

Yet still Red Crossing is painted as Very Important. To the extent where people questioning the true reasons for war turn to disputing whether or not Red Crossing was an inside job. I must say the supposed importance of Red Crossing baffles me more than controversy regarding its fate. I try to rationalize it as Orlais attacking with a woefully inadequate forces, but... seriously, to this extent? 

[Master Warder Z_]

A elven general threw his axe away like a crybaby before hopping off a waterfall when his forces lost

[Cobra's_back]

"Solas pretty strongly implies it was his bad. "

 

Solas seems to cause a lot of pain and destruction for everyone. Like why would anyone give the orb to the big bad ugly dude that wants to takeover the world. ((+_+))

[andy6915]

A elven general threw his axe away like a crybaby before hopping off a waterfall when his forces lost

 

I can't figure out if you're actually trolling or you actually mean the stuff you post. Poe's law in effect.

[Master Warder Z_]

Although the elves of the Dales fought bravely against the Exalted March, defeat became obvious. The great elven general Rajmael hurled this axe at the enemy before leaping to his death over Forlorn Falls.

Truly a pathetically wretched creature.

[andy6915]

Although the elves of the Dales fought bravely against the Exalted March, defeat became obvious. The great elven general Rajmael hurled this axe at the enemy before leaping to his death over Forlorn Falls.

Truly a pathetically wretched creature.

 

Is that much different than Japanese generals who commit seppuku because they feel they dishonored their soldiers by losing? Seemed like a classic ["I have shamed my men and dishonored my family" *kills self*] reaction to me.

[Master Warder Z_]

Is that much different than Japanese generals who commit seppuku because they feel they dishonored their soldiers by losing?

As far as I am aware.

Militaristic Bushido doesn't exist among the elves

[EmissaryofLies]

Now if only the in-game narrative was anywhere near as entertaining as the thousandth elf thread.

[Master Warder Z_]

Now if only the in-game narrative was anywhere near as entertaining as the thousandth elf thread.

Ain't it so

[andy6915]

As far as I am aware.

Militaristic Bushido doesn't exist among the elves

 

It might have among ancient elves. And you don't need to grow up in a culture that teaches that to still feel you should commit suicide for failing as hard as he likely felt he did.

[Eliastion]

(...)

I'm somewhat impressed by your rational approach,  so I'll try and point a couple mistakes you make in your reiteration of the codex. I myself - as I already stated in the post above - am quite sure that IF Red Crossing has indeed been massacred, it happened after the events described in the codex, likely when the all-out war started. Though I don't really believe that too. In my opinion the most probable chain of event is: a brief small-scale fight between the elves and people of Red Crossing occured, there were casualties and as the word of incident spread, fear and distrust progressively added more and more gory details to it until it became a massacre of the town.
But that is just my interpretation, other possibilities exist: like Red Crossing getting burned down during the war or even being sacrificed for propaganda. There is also possibility that the elves mourned for their fallen comrade and then proceeded to slaughter the village. But I find it highly unlikely, seeing the general tone found in his memorial, where pretty much all the blame for Elandrin's and his lover's death is put on Siona...
 
So, with that out of the way, let me correct you on a couple things concerning this particular codex entry and its context. Not all my corrections are entirely pro-elven, though most are: I'm afraid that there is no such thing as objectivity and you do exhibit a noticeable anti-elven bias. Still, I like your approach, I wish more people would behave like you. Regardless of what they think about elves

We've had multiple codex entries about the events of Red Crossing. One contemporary. The rest not.

The ones that are not all suggest that Red Crossing was completely wiped out.

Now, the one that actually is contemporary.... doesn't actually say one way or the other.

Now, I would be careful with this classification. There are two issues - the "contemporary" account is, obviously, much closer to the times where the events took place, but it's not as close to them as it might seem. The tomb holds memorials of multiple other Emerald Knights, who obviously died during the war and not in a single battle either, after all. This is an important aspect I'll get back to.

This can also mean that the memorial itself is - even unconsciously - a manipulation, since if any amount of time passed between the events and writing them down... well. Time takes its toll on memory. And then there is the fact that it was written to preserve the truth that might otherwise be corrupted... The urge to include at least a little bit of interpretation rather than raw facts would likely be strong. How exactly and to what extent did this influence this account? Assuming it's 100% accurate is a big leap of faith. Even if it is a memorial. 

For all we know, it could be - in extreme case - some BS written with the sole purpose to whitewashing Elandrin and blaming the whole incident on Siona  

 

Siona doesn't have any specific knowledge of what Elandrin is up to. She just assumes that if he's able to have a peaceful conversation with a human woman and can look at the Village's Chantry without setting it on fire with the force of his glare, he must be a traitor who will aid in the destruction of the people he's sworn to protect. This is of course, precisely the rational sort of thought process I expect from the Elves at this point.
 
 
She obviously blames Adalene for it.

While you're mostly right, elves obviously felt threatened by Chantry's attempts at... what's the Chantry-equivalent word for Christianization? Either way, turning an elf away from elven tradition in that situation doesn't really seem to be as harmless as you portrait it. Given the apparent role of Emerald Knights - defending Dales from contamination by human influence - turning to the Chantry and converting to Maker does seem like a serious betrayal that is likely to escalate... I guess Chantry-elven relations were religiously paranoid on both ends.
 

The men of the village is also very nonspecific. It could mean a dozen. It could mean thirty. All were killed by the Emerald Knights. Unsurprising. Considering the Emerald Knights were prepared for armed conflict and the men of the village were likely armed only with makeshift weapons if they had any weapons at all. The codex does not mention any elven casualties at all.

You generally notice ambiguity in the codex, but missed it here. In fact, the only casualty mentioned so far is that one girl. Humans were no match - but could've been driven away (especially if they weren't appropriately armed). The codex doesn't really mention killing a single one of them. While I do think there probably were casualties, codex doesn't mention them not only on the elven side.
 

It was not the end.

The Death of Elandrin is not the end of the events of Red Crossing. Given that even sources that are biased toward the elves indicate Red Crossing was wiped out, I see no reason why those accounts should be discarded. It just means that Red Crossing wasn't properly massacred until after the events described here.

The events at Red Crossing led ultimately to the full-scale war - they definitely were not the end. And, as I mentioned earlier, the source material likely was created quite a bit after Elandrin's death, during the war, long after the events escalated out of proportion. Basically, while an interpretation "it was not the end of events Red Crossing" is possible, I find it more likely that what this refers to is what came later and was, at least partially, related to what was probably the first "elven attack on human settlement" - regardless of the actual death toll of said attack, regardless of how intentional the attack was. Elves fought humans at the outskirts of their town/village - that is the one unambiguous part. And it definitely could be considered a step up in hostilities from occasional skirmishes with bandits, chasing away missionaries or a couple hunters or traders who ventured into the woods never to return.

As a final note, there is one important problem with the classic "many accounts of massacre" argument - they're not really many accounts. It's one account, the Chantry history that became common knowledge. Much like every Dalish Keeper recounting old tales doesn't really count as seperate source, human scholars tend to fall back on the official history rather than their own findings. Perhaps the closest we have to an independent human source would be this song http://dragonage.wik...in_Red_Crossing
that appeared who-knows-when and changed who-knows-how... and hardly describes anything, even if it really is originally from correct place and period (and created by someone with any amount of first- or even second-hand knowledge).