In the main quest of Oblivion, Camoran eventually tells the player that the main world is actually another plane of Oblivion, and that it belongs to Mehrunes Dagon, who lost it due to meddling on the part of the nine divines. While the player ostensibly works for the Septims and therefore is aligned against Dagon, it is never explicitly stated that Camoran is wrong. So is Camoran just lying on Dagon's behalf, or is Akatosh and co. really a bunch of usurpers? Some of the books in-game seem to indicate that other entities aside from Dagon are unhappy with the 9 and the state of the "earth".

This leads me to another questions: are the "planes" of Oblivion actually planets, and therefore is Oblivion itself outer space? This seems to make sense but I don't know if this is what the game's makers had in mind.

No, Mankar Camoran was not right. First off, he states that Lorkhan is a Daedra. Lorkhan is not a Daedra. The idea that Tamriel would belong to the Daedric Princes is also quite ridiculous, as they refused to take part in the (re)creation of Mundus, so how could it belong to them? Akatosh and the other Aedra were the ones who created Mundus.


No, the planets are the Aedra, just as the two moons are the corpse of Lorkhan. But yes, Oblivion itself is outer space; it is what surrounds Mundus.

It goes like this: Tamriel is on the planet Nirn. Nirn is the center of the universe. Nirn is located in the realm called Mundus. The planets--the Aedra--are in Mundus. Mundus is surrounded by Oblivion, Aetherius, and the Outer Realms. All of these are part of Anu. The parallel to Anu is called Padomay, or Sithis, or the Void. Both of these two together (everything and nothing) are called the Aurbis. There is nothing greater than the Aurbis, at least not anything known by mortal or god.

I wouldn't trust Mankar's rantings.

Lorkhan is not truly an Aedra either. He was aligned with Padomay as the Daedra are, rather than Anu, which the Aedra are. He certainly took part in the creation of Mundus, and he was just as certainly not in the camp of the Aedra after the fact. No elf would ever admit he is one of their ancestors, and all Aedra means is "Our Ancestors" in Elvish. While Daedra means "Not Out Ancestors". Technically he should belong to some third group that is inbetween the two (a Baedra? or Caedra?). But there is no such thing. So I would call him a Daedra before anything else, but this is indeed a matter of personal opinion.

OTOH, I quite agree that the other Daedric Princes have no claim to Mundus. According to the lore they are utterly alien beings, with no association with it whatsoever.

I was more interested why he kept attributed the wrong realms to certain daedra. Was he just nuts?

Because Mankar is crazy and nothing he says can be taken even remotely seriously?

I always felt like his speech was designed so anyone who knows about TES Lore would see right through it but people who don't would be questioning if he was right or not.

Real reason: That was MK's first draft of the speech, it wasn't actually ready to go in the game yet but it got the go-ahead before it could be polished.

Wow, that's a shame.

Yep.

Also, because it's relevant:

"Also in all fairness, there's enough evidence to support the Mankar's claims that I was happy that it went in. The idea really flips the idea of Tamriel on its head.Imagine the Oblivion realm of Attribution's Share, for example, with eight powerful daedra (one of which is Boethiah) wielding divine power over their realm, and all their subjects bound to the whims of that power; now imagine it under an ur-theology and creation myth(s) as complicated as anything on Tamriel, where the myriad mortals of Nirn were, to the denizens of the Eight Divines of Attribution's Share, in fact, "daedra".This realm would be surrounded by the Void, just like Tamriel, in turn surrounded by Aetherius, and who's to say that the big hole known as the Sun doesn't hit their shores, as well?Lorkhan the Padomaic could be exactly what the Mankar says he is: the dead Lord of a lost daedric realm whose "gods" are powerful Liars."--MK

You're basing your story off the Monomyth. Mankar claims this is a lie once told by the rebellious lieutenants of Lorkhan. He's arguing that only Lorkhan is different from the Aedra because he, that is, his essence can not be destroyed.

The trick here is to recognize that we can neither confirm nor falsify his story. Just as we can neither confirm nor falsify the Monomyth. Though we can make it credible by assuming that these myths were created independently, something which Mankar calls into question.

To settle this we may need a narrative from a third source. Though then we may also find out that these three narratives are all different and have their own mono-narrative on top. Given the fractal nature of the Aurbis, I would certainly not be surprised.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to brand him Daedra, since Aedra, Daedra, and Lorkhan are all concepts from the Altmeri scheme. It makes sense in context.

The real problem is when you try and transpose it to the Mannish view. They tend to regard the Spacegod quite highly.

Calling lorkhan a Daedra isn't wrong. Given that it means "not our ancestor" this is certainly something the elves would agree with. Man however would not call Shor a demon, he is truly a god.

Hence sometimes the Eight and One.

Problem is we're measuring with two sticks, participation in creation and alignment. So if the categories don't fit, come up with new ones.

Allignment\In Creation | Refused Creation Anu        Aedra       | MnemoliaPadomay    Lorkhan     | Daedra

So... Anuic/Padomaic + Participator/Bystander? With Magnus being a bridge between Bystander/Participator (starting as Par, but wanting so much to have been By that he tries "leaping" out), and Lorkhan as a bridge between Anuic/Padomaic ("So while they ruled their false dominions, Lorkhan filled the void with a myriad of new ideas. These ideas were legion. Soon it seemed that Lorkhan had a dominion of his own, with slaves and everlasting imperfections, and he seemed, for all the world, like an Aedra")?

The model that I've championed in the past is as follows: First, there were ada that participated in creation and those that did not. Then there were those that participated and exited Nirn at the convention and those that did not participate at first but entered at the convention. Exiting left stars and entering left unstars. However, when entering or exiting, each ada left part of themselves on the side that they came from, creating direct counterparts. So, creating a table after the fashion of proweler's,

Creation		Enter/Exit		ClassYes			None			EarthbonesYes			Exit			Aedra/Daedra pairNo			None			MnemoliNo			Enter			(?)/Ur-dra pair

There are exactly four unstars forming the Serpent constellation. The heart of the serpent corresponds to Lorkhan/Sheogorath. I believe the three attending unstars correspond to Namira, Vaernima, and Nocturnal. The support for those three come from:
Census of Daedra Lords: "Nocturnal is accorded the title Ur-dra by nearly all the Royalty of Oblivion. As the mother of night, she claims to be an aspect of the original Void itself"
Words of Clan Mother Ahnissi: "Fadomai gave birth to Lorkhaj, the last of her litter, in the Great Darkness. And the Heart of Lorkhaj was filled with the Great Darkness. And when he was born, the Great Darkness knew its name and it was Namiira"
And finally the unique relationship of Vaernima's realm to the dreamsleeve.

Note that sixteen princes, less these four, leaves 12, matching the worlds of creation. It's not hard to find some candidates to fill out the divines to 12 as well - Trinimac/Tsun, Baan Dar, Ius, Phynaster, Ebonarm, Talos, etc.

Awesome, model is proven too simple straight away.

@Seeker, I didn't account for those leaving in the model.

@Roark, not always been in agreement but the idea that the Daedra now were the Aedra after they fled creation is interesting, delightfully heretical. It resonates a bit with the TMK letters where the Daedra will take up creation on the next Kalpa.

Though saying that the Aedra became the Daedra is too simple. Rather what went in the reaction was et'Ada, what came out were other et'Ada and Mundus.

Mmh, perhaps draw this as a biological reaction?

If it was a Daedric heart we destroyed in Morrowind's main quest, wouldn't it kill Lorkhan, allowing him to be unbound and reborn in the fires of Oblivion?

I also seem to recall from a text that if the heart was destroyed, so too the world, yet here we are (unless I misremember).

Lorkhan's heart wasn't destroyed. The enchantments placed upon it were.

How do we know this?

It occurs to me: The basis for Mankar's claim that Aedra can die is from Lorkhan, right? But in the same breath he declares Lorkhan a Daedroth. Ergo, it does not follow that Lorkhan's survival is due to Daedra-hood. The logic here isn't even valid, much less sound, unless there's something I'm missing...

About Dagon and such.

Where does the whole Alduin cursing him for trying to save pieces of the world for the next Kalpa come in? I mean under those conditions since Dagon saved some of the world he has some claim to it perhaps? Then he got cursed and thrown into Oblivion. When he was the Leaper Demon King maybe Nirn was his world. Do we KNOW any different?

"The Nerevarine will not be taught the secret rituals required to perform the third step. Instead, The Nerevarine will strike the Heart with Keening for a second time, causing its tones to diverge into unstable patterns of interference. Further repeated strikes with Keening will further disrupt the tones, with the ultimate result of shattering and dispelling Kagrenac's original enchantments binding the Heart, thereby severing the Heart's links with Dagoth Ur, and with any surviving Heartwights, and with the Tribunal. Destroying Kagrenac's enchantments on the Heart will also stop the corrupt effusion of the Heart's divine power, and end the Blight on Morrowind." - The Plan to Defeat Dagoth Ur



The basis that they can die is the general understood "fact" that the Aedra "died" in the creation of the world ("As part of the divine contract of creation, the Aedra can be killed"; "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 Monomyth). The ONLY thing unique to Camoran is that Lorkhan was not one of the Eight + One, but was actually their Daedric Overlord, whom they overthrew, but could not kill.

Aedra can create, but can also be killed. Daedra can only change, but are immortal.

If we can take Chimere: "Creation is separation, it is as solemn as death and perhaps this is why we hardly discern the difference. The et'ada will learn this difference again, either by rote or through the enlightenment of Talos..." he might imply that it is only the close association between creation and death which makes mortals think the god's died, that we've yet to learn the difference and so create this 'lie'.

You could liken it to a mistranslation, where the language being translated to has no word with the same meaning as the first language.

Mankar is wrong, but not THAT wrong, and maybe right in a way. The letters between TMK and Chimere shed new light on his position.