I'm very confused.

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:59 pm

I was reading up on the history of Tamriel and it's emperors. I got to the part about the Wolf Queen. There is some serious conflicting dates that don't make any sense. In Morrowind, the book "The Biography of the Wolf Queen" and the book "The Wolf Queen, Book V" dates don't match up.

In "The Wolf Queen, Book V" It starts off with the date 3E 119 and says Emperor Antiochus ruled for 21 years(3E 98-119). Then it goes one year ahead to 3E 120 and starts to talk about Kintyra II becoming Empress and the Wolf Queen trying to get her son Uriel as the new emperor.

In "The Biography of the Wolf Queen" they say in 3E 114 Kintyra II was killed. Then 7 years later Uriel, The Wolf Queen's son takes the throne. Basically, the Elder Council ruled during this time. It doesn't directly say that but you can assume that.

In the Brief history of the Empire it doesn't exactly say the exact dates when all this went down.

One thing is for sure Uriel takes the throne at 3E 121 and Kinyra only ruled for 1-2 years. They both agree on that. But wtf why do they conflict? Anybody else ever notice that? Or am in the twilight zone and not seeing something?
User avatar
Robert DeLarosa
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:43 pm

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:11 pm

I was reading up on the history of Tamriel and it's emperors. I got to the part about the Wolf Queen. There is some serious conflicting dates that don't make any sense. In Morrowind, the book "The Biography of the Wolf Queen" and the book "The Wolf Queen, Book V" dates don't match up.

In "The Wolf Queen, Book V" It starts off with the date 3E 119 and says Emperor Antiochus ruled for 21 years(3E 98-119). Then it goes one year ahead to 3E 120 and starts to talk about Kintyra II becoming Empress and the Wolf Queen trying to get her son Uriel as the new emperor.

In "The Biography of the Wolf Queen" they say in 3E 114 Kintyra II was killed. Then 7 years later Uriel, The Wolf Queen's son takes the throne. Basically, the Elder Council ruled during this time. It doesn't directly say that but you can assume that.

In the Brief history of the Empire it doesn't exactly say the exact dates when all this went down.

One thing is for sure Uriel takes the throne at 3E 121 and Kinyra only ruled for 1-2 years. They both agree on that. But wtf why do they conflict? Anybody else ever notice that? Or am in the twilight zone and not seeing something?


No book in Mundas is completly true. Many show error due to that it is the same in real life. Nobody knows everything, (unless they have seen the sideways Wheel and still say I)
User avatar
Wayne W
 
Posts: 3482
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:49 am

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:05 pm

Really? I mean really? I mean something as factual as dates shouldn't be disputable. Unless it happened during the first Era or something thousands of years ago and the history is lost, but the the story of the Wolf Queen is only a couple hundread years old.
User avatar
Holli Dillon
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:54 am

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:17 pm

Really? I mean really? I mean something as factual as dates shouldn't be disputable. Unless it happened during the first Era or something thousands of years ago and the history is lost, but the the story of the Wolf Queen is only a couple hundread years old.


Hundreds of years old and told through Nordic oral hand-me-downs before an Imperial happened to be sitting around the Nord campfire one night when it was told, and put quill to paper...the dating system for tons of things in the Elder Scrolls universe is iffy at best and an outright lie at worst...

Jarth has a way of making things "his own" anyhow...
User avatar
stephanie eastwood
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:25 pm

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:52 pm

I FOUND A THING

http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=840109&st=0&p=12219494&#entry12219494
User avatar
A Boy called Marilyn
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 7:17 am

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 7:11 pm

Really? I mean really? I mean something as factual as dates shouldn't be disputable. Unless it happened during the first Era or something thousands of years ago and the history is lost, but the the story of the Wolf Queen is only a couple hundread years old.

We on Earth don't even really know what year it is. Our calendar (called the Gregorian calendar) wasn't even adopted until the mid 16th century. We on Earth don't know the exact date of every event that occured two or three centuries ago. Why should Tamriel be any different?
User avatar
Julia Schwalbe
 
Posts: 3557
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:02 pm

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:15 pm

OR, the devs [censored] up.
User avatar
Latino HeaT
 
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:21 pm

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:55 pm

We on Earth don't even really know what year it is. Our calendar (called the Gregorian calendar) wasn't even adopted until the mid 16th century. We on Earth don't know the exact date of every event that occured two or three centuries ago. Why should Tamriel be any different?


In fact, '0' A.D. isn't even an accurate startingpoint for what it was supposed to mark, considering that Jesus was born in either 2 or 4 B.C.

The point is, dates are easily confused.
User avatar
natalie mccormick
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:36 am

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:31 pm

OR, the devs [censored] up.


Pretty sure that goes without saying :rolleyes: ...anyways, I believe OP wants an in-universe reason for the mistakes(?)...
User avatar
Marine Arrègle
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:19 am

Post » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:10 pm

That link I posted above contains comments from Tedders.... yes, they messed it up a bit in the fiction, but he tries to retcon it. The timeline he posted is apparently Beth-canon at the moment.
User avatar
Stephanie I
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:28 pm


Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion