The first one does not make any concrete connection between "god" and Aedra and/or Daedra. Rather, it just compares and contrasts the Aedric and Daedric beings.

For the Monomyth, this bit is relevant: No objective definitive answer. "god" seems to be a term that is imprecisely applied to various beings of higher power depending on if mortals respect said beings or not. :shrug:

Agreed. The requirements to be one seems to be A) The power to move mountains (figure of speech, with hints of being literal), B) "Immortal" or "ageless" (Quotation marks are there for a purpose), and C) having worshipers.

"The magical beings of Mythic Aurbis live for a long time and have complex narrative lives, creating the patterns of myth.... Finally, the magical beings of Mythic Aurbis told the ultimate story -- that of their own death. For some this was an artistic transfiguration into the concrete, non-magical substance of the world. For others, this was a war in which all were slain, their bodies becoming the substance of the world. For yet others, this was a romantic marriage and parenthood, with the parent spirits naturally having to die and give way to the succeeding mortal races... The magical beings, then, having died, became the et'Ada. The et'Ada are the things perceived and revered by the mortals as gods, spirits, or geniuses of Aurbis."http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/monomyth.shtml

which should be seen in the light of

"So they created the Mundus, where their own aspects might live, and became the et'Ada... As their aspects began to die off, many of the et'Ada vanished completely. Some escaped, like Magnus, and that is why there are no limitations to magic. Others, like Y'ffre, transformed themselves into the Ehlnofey, the Earthbones, so that the whole world might not die."http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/monomyth.shtml

"After these two acts, which is commonly called the Convention, the gods left the earth."http://www.imperial-library.info/obscure_text/nu-hatta_nu-mantia.shtml

So, creation is the result of the telling the ultimate narrative and creating the ultimate pattern of myth, the narrative/pattern of death (its only natural then that with death being the pattern resulting in creation that Mundus should suffer from the kalpa cycle).

The first quote equates the creation with the death of the spirits and then points out that it is after this death that they became the et'Aeda - the second says that it's after the creation of Mundus that they become the et'Ada. So, by taking these two together we can conclude that the creation-myths and the death-myths are two sides of a coin describing the same event. It is a creation with requisite death that resulted in Mundus, separating the creation from the death in myth is only done for literary coherence.

You can view the moment in different ways, death/creation/ascension, creation/death/ascension, death/creation/death, but its all still the same act. The death of the Aedra as taking place after creation is as I said done for coherency. Either way all the Aedra died simply by taking part in creation, or better said, "the act of creating was their death" and similarly "their creating and their death were the same act" - in setting death as the pattern they created life. The varieties of Aedra are similarly different ways of looking at it, of becoming earthbones, of passing away after becoming parents (creators), of becoming the literal ground or of ascending to become heavenly beings looking down from Aetherius - they're all varieties of how to die/create. Honestly, I might go far as to just say that for the Aedra ascension, death and creation should be seen as synonymous and interchangeable terms.

All of them that stayed gave their-selves completely, its the aftermath, perspective and interpretation that changes. Then through the mythopoeic forces the people brought them back in a discernible form, as we see in http://www.imperial-library.info/dfbooks/b055_lightdark.shtml



And while we're on earthbones,

"During the Dawn Era they researched the death of the Earth Bones, what we call now the laws of nature..."--Baladas Demnevani

"Death of the earthbones" could be taken as implying that the earthbones are in the process of dying/fading, much akin the way in which the moons are 'dying'...

If we're talking about the God, yes, not for a god though. Check your http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/god, the Daedra can fulfill all four of the variants listed for a god.

Nothing says a god has to create, they just have to be seen as something worthy of worship. What constitutes worth is subjective to the individual, though it usually entails power, the ability to reward or some special reason for reverence such as creation, amazing and heroic feats, or just superstition.

"...You killed the white king in the Hammerfell, after all."

"What?" Cyrus said. "The Emperor? I didn’t kill him."

"Of course you did; you were the Hoon Ding..."http://www.imperial-library.info/obscure_text/viveccyrus.shtml

The HoonDing is what you might call a reoccurring enantiomorph of the ra'gada variety.

You're just reading the wrong part:

"The Daedra were created at this time also, being spirits and Gods more attuned to Oblivion, or that realm closer to the Void of Padomay."http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/monomyth.shtml

or if you prefer:

"A God's preferred appearance (which is how I'd characterize the archetypes most associated with each Daedra and Tribunal member - the Aedra do not have physical appearances associated with them), a God's personality (which is a strange word to use for an entity which is not a person, but it's hard to find a better term), and a God's sphere each should considered on its own."http://www.imperial-library.info/book_daedra/index.shtml#daedra_evil

svck it Trebek...

I had that part in [guess] [/guess]

It's fair to say that anyone considered a god is an ass hole. And anyone considered an ass hole is a god.

lol -time t refer to the OP

Seems there are three basic uses to which the word God refers in ES - the specific = God/Aedra (with sub-categories) as opposed to Daedra (Princes being the main qualifiers with sub-categories) and the generic = Omnipotent being whose power is only matched by his peers.

However there is a qualifier to that omnipotence - hence if you refer to the Monomyth and such ancient tomes you might note that by entering the Gray Maybe the mer claim that the Great Spirits of the Void were reduced/limited in their natures due to the effect that The Grey Maybe had on them.

The sub-Categories of Aedric-related and other terrestrial Gods of the mundus also now include mortals who have though a variety of means raised themselves to the nature of Gods ...

Since the Elder Scrolls is a fictional universe, and all entities, religions, and cultures contained within, as well as the rules that govern the universe are all defined by its creators (by which I mean the real people who created that specific setting, not whatever in-universe entity(ies) is(are) supposedly responsible for its creation.)This naturally means that they are free to define what exactly constitutes a god in that universe, and likewise, they can decide which entities count as gods, and which don't. So if you make a fictional universe that was created by an omnipotent entity who has absolute power over said universe, you can still say that being is no god.

In short, if Bethesda says Daedra are not gods, they're not, even though according to what many real life cultures believe their gods to be, they should qualify (the thing to remember here is that the Elder Scrolls is not real life, nor is its theology based on any real world religion, so it should be judged according to its own rules, not those of any belief systems ever held by any real people, whether in the past or present.)

That would be like them up and saying that the Emperor isn't really an emperor despite controlling an empire and being recognized as emperor by the people. They can say that the Daedra are just aliens for all I care, but they're still gods.

Like I said, look at a dictionary. Its not about being judged according to their real-life versus Bethesda's rules. Not only are they explicitly referred to as gods all through Bethesda's lore, they also fulfill every variety of what the term means.

"1 God

A. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
B. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.

2 A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3 An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4 One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5 A very handsome man.
6 A powerful ruler or despot."

The Daedra are easily beings of supernatural powers, they are believed in and worshiped by a people and they do control some part of reality. There are idols of the daedra, they are worshiped, idealized, and followed - if they so choose they can be a very handsome man and they are powerful rulers. Now, tell me why they're not gods - not only does it go against all established lore (which isn't even my real contention, they can bring to light new parts of lore if they like) but it also goes against the very definition of the word. Sure, they can just arbitrarily say that they're not gods, but for all intents and purposes they're still gods.

Awesome, thank you for that, it clears up quite a bit of confusion for me.

So, the original Aedra, the ones Lorkahan tricked, they are totally dead? But then mortals, by retelling the ultimate story, kind of sort of somewhat "become" the new Aedra? Which in turn create/die/ascend? That would sort of jive with that snippet MK posted about that huge battle and Shor and Son of Shore and Kyne and whatnot. And maybe why the different pantheons are all so similar to the same Aedra. Maybe it isn't that they are different names for the same original Aedra, but names of different mortals who enantiomorphed (?) into Aedra....???

Well, anyway, it all really makes that TESting question's answer a bit invalid, no? Very contradictory. :wacko:

Mortals are the final sub-gradient. I think there were four
specific Et Ada that became MOrtals on NIrn, meaning they had to "reproduce justto survive" elves, Akaviri, Men, hist, and Beasts.

That's most fine Luargar2 - I had to refer back to my own post to see what I had missed - here goes:

The RL 'God/s' tend to have opposed to them 'Devil/s'. However in ES there are no devils per se since there is a sort of moratorium on the 'Good/Evil Axis

Instead we have Aedra and Daedra. And generally the interpretation is that Aedra are good and Daedra are 'likely to be involved in less than acceptable practices from a mortal point of view'. So then it might be said there are no perfectly good or perfectly evil beings - hence no Gods and Devils.

However, more usually Aedra are referred to as Gods in~game by the established authorities of The Empire which has until this point ruled the Continent and Daedra are generally only referred to as Gods by fringe 'cultists' in~game. The position of the Imperials was simply that the cultists were not part of the mainstream of their culture and what they were worshiping were not true gods - but rather untrustworthy and likely subversively adversarial beings = enemies and therefore they do not call the Daedra gods ...


Responding to earlier posts : in Oblivion a rumour says that the Precursor, a prophet, tells of the awakening of one of the Earthbones, named as Yffre, in Valenwood. This is backed up by MK's Vivec assertiion that when he 'dies' he does not go to the Greensleeve but rather sleeps and re-awakens. Same with Gods and demi-gods then. It is said the earthbones died/went to sleep to hold things together and their place was taken by the current deities. However with what is essentailly the Fall of the Empire it may be that the Imperial Gods are indeed weakened - and replacements will be required - maybe then more than one of the Earthbones will awaken and the current Gods take their places and become new Earthbones? That may be an essential reflection of the balance of things.

Whatever else happens in TESV I would not be surprised to se massive changes in the naming and nature of the 'Gods' - and in the way that magica works. Hopefully that will open up for us further fascinating insights De Rerum Natura - and a damn sight better reading than that 2k yr old Ancient Roman Tome

From the monomyth:

1.)In any case, from these two beings spring the et'Ada, or Original Spirits. To humans these et'Ada are the Gods and Demons; to the Aldmer, the Aedra/Daedra, or the 'Ancestors'.

From Aedra and Daedra:

2.)The designations of Gods, Demons, Aedra, and Daedra, are universally confusing to the layman.


as we see the aedra being called gods and the daedra are called demons this is what leads me to belive they came up with daedra are not gods. Sorry for the last post i've been out of town and had my girlfriend write it for me but wasn't able to explain it.

We don't know where the Hist fall. I believe Prowler keeps a chart showing a gradient shift down to the Ehlnofex and Hist. But even that is pretty much sheer speculation.

Not really what I was going for. I didn't elaborate on the 'bringing them back' part, mainly because it was more of an afterthought than my main point - my main point simply being that the act of creation and their deaths were the same instance, they created by telling the story of their deaths (stories which resulted in the various conceptions of Aedra from earthbone to parents dying) and that this creation/death was also the immediate form of their ascension/distinction from the other spirits. As spirits floating about the Aurbis they died, the result of which was creation, which mortals look back on as distinct events.

Anyway, the text reads:

"The gods have an unusual origin, if some of the oldest tales are true. The oldest inhabitants of this world -- no one seems to be sure what race they were -- had a system of myths that they believed in for a thousand years. The people of et'Ada believed for so long and so well, that their beliefs may, just may, have drawn upon the energies surrounding Tamriel to bring the gods themselves into being. If that is so, the conflict between the Light and the Dark provided the energy, and the et'Adans the structure, that created the gods of Tamriel."http://www.imperial-library.info/dfbooks/b055_lightdark.shtml

So its not as much retelling the story and replacing the Aedra as it is the power of belief mixing with mythopoeic forces to bring what's believed in into actuality. Myth is an essential quality of the world, afterall it was created by telling a story - mold the myths and you mold the world, this is something the Dwemer accomplished.

And a minor note, being an enantiomorph doesn't make you an Aedra.

Not quite:

"Simply put, as the Gods cannot know joy as mortals, their creation, so mortals may only understand the joy of Liberty by becoming the progenitors of the models that can make the jump past mortal death.

And so many of you give up.

Mortal Death to Z (Z being the state-gradient echo of Mundus Centerex)..."http://www.imperial-library.info/obscure_text/5th_era_loveletter.shtml

Mortals are the next to last subgradient.

I might suggest reading through the posts between your last two posts, both in this thread and the one in TES General. I've already pointed out that they are referred to as gods both in the Monomyth and in a variety of other texts, and also that even if they weren't explicitly referred to as gods (which they are) they would still fulfill the definition.

So... umm... something I've been wondering... are the gods entities? I mean, could you call them "selves"? Do they exist as minds with wills, and all that that entails? And, if the gods ARE "selves", about the synonymity of the Aedra's death/ascension/creationofMundus... is death used as in they ceased to exist? Or they ceased to exist as what they were, and became something else? And they retain an existence, just on another level? If they really are "dead," as we mean it in the real world, then how do they have any power? How does praying at their altars cleanse me of disease? How do they manifest avatars, like in the Cult quests in Morrowind? The Daedra lords... you can talk to them. You DO, in fact, like when you leave offerings at their shrines, or when Sheogorath tells you about cheese. Do the Aedra exist in such a way that they're capable of that kind of interaction (even if mortals aren't)? And, where in all of this does Tiber Septim fit?

P.S. I hate TES metaphysics.

P.P.S. I don't really hate it. I just wish we were given something more concrete than the Nu-Mantia Intercept. I wish MK were my drinking buddy.

@luagar2
I wasn't argueing against you i was just posting what i believed they got the idea that deadra are not gods and those two texts read very briefly would imply that if read the wrong way. I completely agree that the deadra are gods and i created this topic because i am shocked by how they could believe they aren't. I was just trying to find the most likely sourse of their delusion.

Oh, 'God' and 'Prince' are surely different terms.

Was Lorkhan mentoned there?

By the way, why Cyrus count as Crown? http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=1068954&view=findpost&p=15646958:
A'Tor may be Crown because he is literally wears crown and he belongs to Crowns faction.
But, as I remember, Cyrus don't have royal origins and he have no interest in political gamblings as well.

It's possible you guys are taking the trivia contest a bit too... technically. After all, if we parsed the questions down to the finest level of detail, there wouldn't be much of a contest left. And you've got to agree that once you can start including the moons as gods (which you could, if you squint at the question just right) ... you almost can't have a trivia contest without getting lawyers involved.

Remember, this was supposed to be fun. Maybe we can agree that the winners are not just the right answers, but the best right answers? (And in any case, I'm happy to note the caveat of "put together by the folks at TIL" and return to lurking on the fringe of this fascinating discussion.)

Word of God says to just give it a rest, folks. Lore pwnt.

We always take things too seriously (technically) here! But I agree. It was just a trivia question. In hindsight, in my opinion, it was a question we should have worded a little better, but let's move on. :icecream:

Nonsense! We are lore forumers, and we demand blood! Blood for the not-god!

I'm sorry for takeing it too far. and your right it is for fun and to tell the truth I think it was more fun to argue about the answer yall said was correct when we knew there was more answers. I know i'm not upset about the contest but about the question it's self and yalls one answer. But it was fun proveing our point to yall also.

It was an assumption that the answer and explanation ("Princes aren't gods") is canon - i.e. official. So, of course we need an uproar.

And a moon is just a plane[t] which is an ada, not a lump of rock, so it's not farfetched to assume a planetoid is a powerful spirit/ada.

Or bound to an ada.

I've been gone so long that I feel out of turn asking, last I was here it was called "The Elder Scrolls" forum oo: ,but where is this written at? (Cyrus as a Crown(?). Having just played Redguard a couple weeks ago, nothing led me to believe that he was politically motivated at all.

As to the question, I had always understood it as the Daedra have absolute control in their realms, but have to leave enough of themselves behind as to keep the realm going? Which is why, when they are on Nirn, they can be effected by more mundane means. Like the Moon Reiver/Saviours Hide/Protonymic/Padomic names.