Ok, so I'm reading the Remanada (a rather short piece by the way) and I come to the part about King Hjol and how he bumped uglies with a mound of mud. Now, this seems a little odd but that's besides the point. I'm tempted to take that at face vaule, because it goes on to say how his knights found him and were ashamed by what he had done.

Alright, it then goes on to say that the mound of mud became a small hill, and after nine months (I'm assuming it means the mound of mud became pregnant), the sheperds and animals apparently started feeling something here. Then Sed-Yenna (I'm sure she is supposed to be something) climbes the hill (now known as Sancre Tor, the Golden Hill) and she finds Reman.

Ok, so here is where I need some confirmation. Is Reman literally born from the earth, his father being King Hjol and his mother being Nirn? Is Reman I supposed to be the personification of the land of Cyrodiil? That would explain his word "I AM CYRODIIL COME".

Mythic reenaction of archetypal events - Hrol reenacted mythical events, specifically, an act of creation, for example, remember Akatosh's vessel "landing" (hitting) Nirn? "The king is the land, the land is the King."
I think you pretty much nailed it. (pun intended)

Muthsera,

Nalion has answered you both wisely and correctly (for one cannot assume that an answer being one necessarily includes being the other), and I would be hesitant to add or detract. Nonetheless, I feel that the following must appear as an addendum. If I have fallen into verbose surplusage, then I humbly beg your forgiveness; if I have instead wandered into senility and obtuse circumlocution, then I await JHUNAL's silencing mercy.

That being said...


"I AM CYRODIIL COME, he said, Old Reman, born from the earth that IS Al-Esh. The Al-Esh is near! Mother of the Empire! She weeps for fallen Cyrod and all her children that call it home for truly she is the mother to us all!" (http://www.imperial-library.info/tsoo/kotn01a.shtml)

Herein we see that not only do all of Cyrodiil call the Al-Esh mother, but Reman himself does so literally. The Al-Esh/earth birthed him, infusing his body with the Dragon blood in his veins and Amulet of Kings in his forehead. Her gem, her very Oversoul, was lodged within him, fortifying the Covenant between the Dragon and Man.

Thus I remain...


Yours in the Scrolls,


___The Word Merchant of Julianos

As, Hasphat would say:

King Hrol was well known in his appetites for young girls. The Reman mythology sprouted from the initial embellishment of his transgressions with the shepherdess Sed-Yenna and his dead due to exhaustion. As such Reman is not the god that later mythistorical-revisionist make him out to be but rather a bastard Son of Skyrim.

In the preceding years, Sed-Yenna cleverly used the fabricated myth, and knowledge of Remans true origins as political leverage to attract and employ various factions in the Imperial City to support Reman as a proxy King. Hence that according to the myth, none objected when Reman was brought to the throne.

Proweler,

Fascinating. From where does such information come?


___TWM

It's a reasonable extrapolation based on Hasphats past explanations. The common rebuttal is to accuse the him of being bought, biased or working with an agenda.

Are Hasphat's musings recorded anywhere? I'd like to "take a gander" at them, as my folk 'roud here are wont to say.

___TWM

Well, then it's obvious he was bought, doesn't like the Reman dynasty, or believes he needs to discredit Reman.

Well said, sir!

Taking myths at face value is a common failing of amateur historians. Reman rose to prominence by defeating the Akaviri invasion at Pale Pass. He certainly did not rule from White-Gold Tower as a babe. He did not even call himself Emperor -- the whole notion that he was the founder of a new empire did not actually come about until the time of his grandson, Reman II. The Remanada is a clear attempt to retroactively "mythologize" the founder of this new Empire.

To the infamous Hasphat Antabolis,

I am hesitant to address you as "muthsera" as is my usual custom, for although you are well-acquainted with Dunmeri culture, you are also well-known to be a humble man, however "feisty" in his proclamations.

As a follower of the God of Knowledge, I take great honor in speaking with you, sir.

It is well known that you have traveled with the Fallen Thief, Vehk and Vehk, and have guided the Nerevarine himself while he (she?) roamed the halls of Balmora's Fighter's Guild. However, your knowledge (especially of the Dwemeri type) is sought after by those of us much less fortunate in that we were not blessed with the proximity to Fateful Actions, Events, Prophecies and/or Heroes as yourself.

Have you not recorded your works and words? Wherein shall we find and share your discoveries? Will your thoughts of the Trial go undelivered, kept hidden in the lock-mind that held even the Warrior-Poet's attention for a span?

The Works of the Chapel may or may not interest you, Historian, but surely you can part with some of your knowledge? Whether you be pious or primitive, consider it "alms for the poor".

We await you, Hasphat Antabolis, and none more so that I. Until we speak again, I remain...


Yours in the Scrolls,


___The Word Merchant of Julianos

Esteemed Antabolis,

Are we to dismiss all myths in such fashion? Do you deny the divine nature of the Paravant and her consort, the Bull? Do you contest the four thousand year reign of the Tribunal, and all the miracles that happened during it? Do you ignore the recent apotheosis of His Majesty, Martin Septim, and the appearance of our lord Akatosh in view of thousands of Imperial citizens? It is haughty to dismiss the power of myth when gods walk the earth so freely.

I, for one, believe,
Ayaan-Si

Myth and the mundane go hand in hand. In these days, there's a greater focus on the mythological aspects of history than the mundane part. It's a bit of two sides of the same coin (where have I heard that before?). I wouldn't dismiss myths, though, and this is where I agree with Hapshat, we shouldn't take them at face value. This is where I have to plead guilty, since I tend to focus much more on myths than anything else.
Another example of the duality between the mythic and the mundane would be this:
"'You have suffered for me to win this throne, and I see how you hate jungle. Let me show you the power of Talos Stormcrown, born of the North, where my breath is long winter. I breathe now, in royalty, and reshape this land which is mine. I do this for you, Red Legions, for I love you.'"
- http://www.imperial-library.info/obscure_text/many-headed_talos.shtml
Did Talos really breathe in royalty? Or did he simply have the jungle cut down? Why not both?

Say what you will of amateur historians; one would think the actual cohort at issue here is obvious - amateur mythographers.

Surely Master Antabolis is aware that the only contemporary "Hrol" outside of the Remanada mythologies is the almost unrecorded erfridder of Unsgrad, and anyone with a passable fluency of Middle Cyro-Norst knows the meaning of the name; to wit, "it was in this darkness that the north wind set out from the lands beyond lost Twil." Surely no doubts can exist as to the identity of King Hrol with this knowledge, but one will not see Master Antabolis reminding his followers of these inconveniencing facts.

It is true that the Light of Man did not call himself Emperor, but that is a dishonest argument, intended to confuse the unlettered masses. The use of the title Emperor prior to the Third Era, is anachronistic: it was invented for Tiber Septim, as even amateur historians know. Similarly, the Ever-Living Alessia was known in her time by a variety of titles ? Riverqueen, Mother of Man, Pallas-ut-Cyrod - but never was called Empress. All the same, Reman's dynastic name, the House of Cyrodiil, and his most famous coronal words, "I AM CYRODIIL COME," make clear his position in the Constellation of Lords.

Even so, professor, you display a certain academic nonchalance when you identify Reman II as the "grandson" of Reman Cyrodiil, citing, no doubt, the annals of the Versidue Library. Though you may mock his person and reject his scholarship, Ingvender of Soml has unequivocally shown these documents to be later forgeries. Your posse of stiff-necked, formally de-educated, aristocratic scribblers may refuse to accept it, but even Gwylim Press admits, in its Definitive Encyclopedia of Tamriel, that Reman II was "most commonly described as being born of an egg, a cow, a river, a dragon, or some combination of these and other things."


Tam! RUGH!

Nalion,

I do not deny that the mundane plays an overwhelming role in the history of our great Empire, I believe, as you do, that it can coexist with the mythic, a fact that Antabolis seems to object to.

It seems that I too can be classified as an amateur mythographer.

My studies continue,
Ayaan-si

Some more amateur musings... The stormwinds always come from the north and are cold, grey or both. The north winds of Hrol, Ysmir the Grey Wind, Storm of Kyne / Talos the Stormcrown, whose breath is cold winter... We should be wary when the North stirs again.

Besides that though, the words of the Temple Zero Soiety now have me wondering about where (Old) Hrol'dan would be located.

You doubt its in Cyrodiil? Forgive me, I'm not well versed in Remen history beyond the Arcturian heresey and afew other cyro-stories.

It's an interesting interpretation, but I thought we were supposed to take the Hrol myth literally? I wish we could ask some devs like MK whether we're meant to be literalists or not.

It is to my great fortune that word of this discussion was brought to my attention at its early stages. I do hope what my meagre comments can be of some benefit to others, and that this conversation proves to be a fruitful one. Several issues have come to the fore in the discussion already. These include, for one, the literal interpretion of myth; that is, what a particular mythical story is actually saying, and how it is significant. The proper understanding of a myth requires understanding the mythical symbols and motifs involved, including their meanings at the time of the event, at the time the story was first recorded, and on any occasions in which the story may have been redacted or interpolated. A second issue is the historicity of a myth. The esteemed Hasphat Antabolis has made the case, using the mythologized story of the ascension of Reman I as an example, that lurking behind myth may be a historical fact which is quite different - quite, if I may use the word, Mundane.

Naturally these two issues are conducive to a third: namely, the relation between mythical and mundane history, and which, if either, is the true story on any given occasion. This is a particularly difficult subject, not least because many of the relevant documents are not readily available to the layperson. Even so, I would like to say my piece regarding this issue. Nalion, whom I consider a friend and confidant, has suggested that myth and history may be two sides of the same coin. I suspect that the majority of amateur mythographers will concur with this sentiment, though each understanding it in a slightly different way, some altering myth to fit history, others history to coincide with myth.

Given the disparity between the various methods of investigating the past (and peering forth into the future), be they historical or mythical, it may be of use to ask whether there is really only one true story. Or rather, it may be of use to ask whether there is only one story. A coin has two sides, this is true, and so too are the mythical and the mundane woven together through the history of Mundus. Yet understand that the coin is still spinning, and consider: how many sides has a coin while it still twirls?

Esteemed fellows, scholars and aspiring initiates,

The current discussion of Reman I's origins does our unique gathering a great deal of good, not only because the instant topic deserves honest scholarly scrutiny commensurate to Reman I's impact on Tamrielic history, but also because such a gathering reverbrates with a force that can shape [Aurbilic Past and Destiny] via its collective musings.

We hold all Keys not either stolen by the Thief or used by Him as a pen-plume by which our [Lore-as-it-is] is written, hardening into a form less malleable than Dagon's single-mindedness. But enough of the esoteric, for although it has its own allure (and use) in our world of myth and magic, it will not answer our question(s) presented supra.

It is for this (and others unstated) reason that I request an end to the allusion of knowledge, saying unto any that would counter the http://www.imperial-library.info/obbooks/remanada.shtml to do so with either proof so recorded or [lead-us-by-the-hand-in-increments], searching for one who "enacts, rather than talks, as language without exertion is dead witness.". (http://www.imperial-library.info/obbooks/songofpelinal.shtml#6)

Although I cannot disagree (for I lack the evidence to claim opposition), I must request your proof, for http://www.imperial-library.info/obbooks/songofpelinal.shtml's "editor" states that "[Editor's Note: Volumes 1-6 are taken from the so-called Reman Manuscript located in the Imperial Library. It is a transcription of older fragments collected by an unknown scholar of the early Second Era. Beyond this, little is known of the original sources of these fragments, some of which appear to be from the same period (perhaps even from the same manuscript). But, as no scholarly consensus yet exists on dating these six fragments, no opinions will be offered here.]"

The Second Era was ushered in by the Akaviri Potentate, Versidue-Shaie. Why would the Potentate, http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/2920.shtml#12, allow the dissemination of a Manuscript that effectively fortifies Reman I's post mortem apotheosis? Surely it would have done little to secure his position on the throne, so it makes little sense.

I can understand why Reman II would have divinized Reman I, but the Temple Zero Society now claims that Reman II's birth was the divine one? An egg, as in another egg-universe perhaps?

I stand in awe as my formerly well-settled notion come a'crumbling amidst new interpretations. I ask those who have the scholarly inertia to propel onward, fueled by proof, not speculation. As for those scholars merely reinterpreting things well-settled, I would but ask that, should you bleed from Occam's Razor, do so in a neat and orderly fashion, preferably somewhere where baseless allegations do not leave messy corpses after undergoing the crucible of examination, both direct and cross.

Again, and with what little grace is given unto me through JHUNAL, I remain...


Yours in the Scrolls,


___The Word Merchant of Julianos

Put on your orichalcum hats, gentlemen, and keep on the lookout for Psijiics in the shrubbery. The Temple Zero Society has landed.



Circular reasoning, sir. The Remanada mythologies cannot be reliably dated prior to the mid-Second Era, and are themselves likely based on the very reference to "Hrol" you use to attempt to bolster their authenticity.



And anyone with passable fluency of Middle Cyro-Norst knows that the Tamrielic "Empress" is derived from the Cyro-Nordic title "Mother of Man"! To say she was never called "Empress" is simply to state the obvious, to wit, that no one yet spoke Tamrielic 3000 years before the language first developed.



Indeed, I may mock Ingvender, that flag-in-the-wind, sometime penny-dreadful hack, jumped-up pretender to academic regalia bought second-hand from the ragman, dupe and stalking horse of the assembled cranks of our decaying civilization -- I may and I have. "Unequivocal" only if you accept absurd leaps in logic, ignore the fact that most of his sources are his own books (themselves almost entirely based on "confidential research" in "private archives"), and believe implicitly in the deep truth of every myth and children's fable ever told at hearthside.

You also fail to quote the Encyclopedia's entry in full. I would never wish doubt to be cast on the good name of Gwylim Press, so allow me: "In tales circulated after his coronation as Emperor, Reman II was most commonly described as being born of an egg, a cow, a river, a dragon, or some combination of these and other things. However, in the one contemporary account we have of his accession to power he is more prosaically described as follows: 'in coloring and stature he takes after his mother's people, but in all other respects recalls his grandfather'." The mosaic pavements unearthed in the excavations of the Winter Palace in Rimmen depict him as tall and blonde-haired, suggesting that his mother's people are more likely to be Nords than river-dragons.

Let me be clear. The Powers that govern our world and beyond are not for me to judge or to doubt. Their handiwork is self-evident and I leave their study to the philosophers and theologians. Indeed, my long acquantaince with the Dwemer leave me no doubt that they meddled in things that were best left alone. However, it is the essential duty of the historian to separate the "true myths" (those which can be attested to the transcendent Powers) from the "created myths" (those which are created by mundane powers to bolster their own interests on the backs of the gullible). In my experience, the former are far fewer than most would prefer to believe -- people prefer a good story over prosaic reality.

They surely do. But how can one separate the 'true myths' from the 'created' in a world where myth through circular means verifies itself as real, causing the real to be shaped by the mythical, and the mythical to become real - for instance the Divines who died/departed/assimilated/abandoned the world a long time ago still making themselves known, gods make men and then the men make the gods.

Of course the Remanada can only be "reliably" dated to the Second Era, when the Imperial University refuses to open its libraries to honest scholarship, and the records of the monastery at Weynon were lost to daedra before they could be properly examined. But the evidence is there, whether Professor Hasphat accepts it or not.

As to the identity of Hrol - the Temple stands in awe that our most enlightened colleague is of such a dry character that metaphor seems beyond his comprehension.




The Society was aware that professor Antabolis had handily adjusted his linguistic judgement in the service of Sedur Norilnor, but we had no idea that he would be equally sloppy in other contexts. Historical reconstruction has shown "Emperor' and 'Empress" to have surprisingly dissimilar etymological origins. The former is based on the longer title first taken by Cuhlecain, "Emen Peror Ele" or "First Emissary of the Stars". The latter was, as you have noted, derived from the Cyrodiic "Mother of Man", Auma-Par-Eshe, or Alma-Par-Essi in its oldest Aldmeri form. Folk etymology later transformed that archaic title into a female equivalent of "Emperor", which first appeared in writing during the reign of Uriel II and was well established by the time Kintyra assumed the throne.

All the same, if you concede that the term was never used until the so-called development of what is now labelled "Tamrielic" - and here is one myth we may safely rationalize -, your argument that Reman Cyrodiil "did not even call himself Emperor" seems debunked.




Fashion and family resemblances set aside, professor, historical accounts confirm that Reman II was born three decades after his father's death.


Tam! RUGH!

A few points which I humbly offer to the discussion.

First, the issue seems clearly not to be whether Reman I referred to himself by the title Emperor. Rather, the issue would seem to be whether he claimed of himself such a station as to be relevantly similar to the later term emperor as to justify the application of that title, though anachronistically, for the purposes of informing the layperson. The Remanada would certainly suggest ascribing the modern term Emperor to Reman I is not unfounded. The Pocket Guide to the Empire, First Edition, clearly depicts Reman I as a powerful and influential political and military figure. Whether this is sufficient to bestow upon him the mythical associations of the modern title Emperor I will leave for others to decide.

Second, my sources concur that Reman II was born approximately 30 years after the death of Reman I. This might be cited as evidence for the mythical origins of Reman II. Yet I note as well that this thirty year descripancy is consistent with Reman II being, as has Hasphat has suggested, the grandson of Reman I, presuming Reman I and his immediate progeny both sired sufficiently late in life for Reman II to be born three decades after his grandfather's death. Again, I leave the debate for others.

Finally, and this may of of lesser interest to some (but of greater interest to me, personally), I believe that the mythical description of the birth of Reman II recorded in the Encyclopedia may warrant investigation. The egg and the dragon, I note, are both well-known mythical symbols. If anyone is sufficiently knowledgeable in such symbolism, that one may do us a great favor by shedding some light on the symbolic significance of the combination of mythical elements which, according to legend, sired Reman II.

Ah, it would appear that the Temple Zero Society, that persistent dark horse of the Imperial academia, has reared its head into our discussion to beat us all over the head with theories of Tower-dancing and mytho-memetic recapitulation. Still, with all due respect toward the esteemed professor from Morrowind (how goes the research, by the by?), I must concede that they bring to mind a point that has not been discussed as-yet.

Said professor Antabolis:



However, resident scholar Luagar countered:



If I may be so bold, I find that I must agree with my esteemed colleague in pointing out, Mr. Antabolis, that you do not take into account the role of mythopoeia in the alteration of the historical record -- sometimes literally, sometimes symbolically, oftentimes both in a way that has lasting magickal and metaphysical repercussions. Considering your operations in Morrowind, which you yourself have mentioned earlier in the discussion, you of all people should be aware of the cascade effect of a mythopoeic deed, as evidenced by the Tribunal's actions atop Red Mountain thousands of years ago. In this case, I believe we may be ignoring the possibility of a similar cascade event having occurred "during" (or, perhaps, after, in a recapitulation/redefinition of) the birth of Reman I.

While I can already predict your objection to what I am about to propose, I believe it may well be irrelevant whether Hrol's offspring was the product of a god-kings liaison with Alessia-mud or a mad soldier's [censored] of a child -- mythically, they seem to have achieved the same purpose. Ostensibly, this may appear a paradox, but the proof lies in the Amulet of Kings, Chim-el Abadal. As we know from the Daedric Invasion, the Amulet of Kings has such a connection to the royal line that it is able to identify one who is an heir to that line, primarily because anyone who is not of the Septim lineage cannot wear it. Yet witness reports say that Mankar Cameron, the leader of the Daedra-worshipping cult that opened up portals into Mundus in the first place, was indeed able to wear the jewel. Further, the Imperial line itself has been broken and replaced by different families several times -- not the least of which is the huge gap between the Reman Dynasty and that of the Septims, both of whom were able to wear the Amulet. Such evidence has led (most) members of this community to agree, then, that the bond between Tamriel's royalty and the Amulet of Kings is one based on meeting certain mythic prerequisites and fulfilling a particular dualistic mythic archetype (the Enantiomorph), not upon lineage.

Thus, it must be concluded that if the Remans were able to wear the Amulet of Kings, as has been historically attested to, then they (or Hrol, or the Hrol-figure, etc) must have fulfilled this preresquisites -- perhaps, as one early contributor to this discussion noted, through a re-enaction of Akatosh's role in the Creation. In short: credence must be lent to Temple Zero's claim that, at a fundamental level, the Remanada is what you would call a "true" myth -- be it through historical recapitulation of the Enantiomorphic trinity or through later mythopoeia on the part of Talos and his consorts.

Perhaps my betters in this community would be able to elaborate better than I.

With regards,

~A. Platorius