Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

For those topics that just don't fit anywhere else
Post Reply
User avatar
Leckan
Journeyman
Journeyman
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:51 am
ES Games: Skyrim
Platform: PS3

Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Leckan »

The Dragons were seen as god-kings and were served by the ancient nords. Men eventually grew tired of the dragons' increasing barbarism and tyranny and revolted.

Then fast forward past the Dragon Wars, we have St. Alessia creating the empire and everyone swearing loyalty to her, a Dragonborn.

Then we have the Dragonguard, a group of professional dragon haters swearing their devotion to Emperor Reman, a Dragonborn.

Then fast forward again and we have everyone swearing loyalty to Emperor Tiber Septim, a Dragonborn.

Dragonborns as we know are dragons incarnated as mortal men. So not only did "dragons" continue ruling the people after the Dragon Wars, but Tiber Septim ended up ascending to godhood... making him something of a literal dragon god whom is popularly worshiped.

The only exception seems to be Miraak, this is especially surprising since at the time dragons were worshiped as god-kings, yet the ancient nords largely refused to serve him.
User avatar
Dark Spark
Undecided
Undecided
Posts: 4746
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:37 am
ES Games: Oblivion (SI); Skyrim (DB)
Platform: XBox
Status: Reality and I aren't on speaking terms right now
Other Profiles: DarkSpark135
UESPoints: 5
Location: Edge of the world and all Western civilization

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Dark Spark »

The Dragonborn are seen as the Divines' means to counter dragons, beating the dragons by turning their power against them.
Baurus: Our job is to get the Emperor out of situations like this. Though I'll admit, things aren't going exactly to plan.

Casandra: At the moment, the deadliest weapon at my disposal is a goblin's head on a stick. I'd be worried if this was the plan.
spin
Novice
Novice
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:29 am
ES Games: Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: xbox 360

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by spin »

maybe it's the lack of tyranny and barbarism in the dragonborns that make people like them more than the dragons? even if they technically are dragons born as men, if they don't have the horrible traits, people won't hate them.
User avatar
Br3admax
Grand Master
Grand Master
Posts: 3904
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:32 pm
ES Games: I-V
Platform: PS3, PC
Location: The line between radiance and shadow

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Br3admax »

Leckan wrote: Dragonborns as we know are dragons incarnated as mortal men. So not only did "dragons" continue ruling the people after the Dragon Wars, but Tiber Septim ended up ascending to godhood... making him something of a literal dragon god whom is popularly worshiped.
Not exactly. Dragonborn are not "dragons incarnated as mortal men." They are mortals born with the souls of dragons. That is, while they may have a few dragon like tendencies, special affinities for Akatosh, and a natural need to lead, they are not dragons. Being "kin to both wyrm and the races of Man," means they have a unique perspective of how to lead and the ability to. The fact that Akatosh himself has to bless them shows that they have the approval of the Divines themselves.
The only exception seems to be Miraak, this is especially surprising since at the time dragons were worshiped as god-kings, yet the ancient nords largely refused to serve him.
Also note that the Dragon Cult still existed then and was widely accepted throughout Skyrim, even with the Dragon War dawning. It's also not that the ancient Nords refused to follow him, he being able to force them all to anyway, it was that the rest of the Dragon Cult and Alduin stopped him.
Justice knight wrote:Oh and listen to Br3ad he speaks wisdom.
User avatar
Pilaf The Defiler
Imperial Legate
Imperial Legate
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:03 pm
ES Games: Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, ESO
Platform: PC, Xbox, Xbox 360
Status: Fresh
UESPoints: 20

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Pilaf The Defiler »

Alessia nor Tiber ever tried to enslave people or murder people for no good reason, though. Yes, they founded Empires and yes they had people killed, but those people were generally people who were worse people than the Dragonborn and the people the Dragonborn represented. When Alessia came on the scene, the Nedes were enslaved and brutalized by the Ayleids. When Tiber came along, Tamriel had been torn apart by centuries of plague, famine, petty wars and Daedric planemelds. Him stepping on a few toes to hammer the Empire back together is hardly an act of tyranny in and of itself, even if some questionable things happened under his command. Comparing him to Alduin and his ilk is just in poor taste.
Monsters are bred in labyrinths, labyrinths are bred from walls. There is a reason the Giants choose to remain nomadic rather than follow their shield kin the Nords in building permanent settlements. The Tower is the beginning of all walls.
User avatar
Dark Spark
Undecided
Undecided
Posts: 4746
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:37 am
ES Games: Oblivion (SI); Skyrim (DB)
Platform: XBox
Status: Reality and I aren't on speaking terms right now
Other Profiles: DarkSpark135
UESPoints: 5
Location: Edge of the world and all Western civilization

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Dark Spark »

It's not like we can say that no one who's born without a dragon's soul has ever been an [&@%!].
Baurus: Our job is to get the Emperor out of situations like this. Though I'll admit, things aren't going exactly to plan.

Casandra: At the moment, the deadliest weapon at my disposal is a goblin's head on a stick. I'd be worried if this was the plan.
User avatar
Pilaf The Defiler
Imperial Legate
Imperial Legate
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:03 pm
ES Games: Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, ESO
Platform: PC, Xbox, Xbox 360
Status: Fresh
UESPoints: 20

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Pilaf The Defiler »

Yeah. My go-to saying about Tiber Septim conquering Tamriel is that he's the worst dictator of a monarch Tamriel ever had - except for every single one who came before him.
Monsters are bred in labyrinths, labyrinths are bred from walls. There is a reason the Giants choose to remain nomadic rather than follow their shield kin the Nords in building permanent settlements. The Tower is the beginning of all walls.
MJJ
Associate
Associate
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2014 5:08 pm
ES Games: Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: PC

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by MJJ »

I can see why the Emperor would be dragonborn. It's a sign that their blessed by the divines and worthy to wear the Amulet of Kings.

Perhaps in the next TES game they'll break the cycle of dragonborns ruling and go with a regular mortal. You did have the option to kill the Emperor in Skyrim so if they make that canon the lineage of dragonborn could well be over (it isn't revealed if he had any children).
User avatar
Dark Spark
Undecided
Undecided
Posts: 4746
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:37 am
ES Games: Oblivion (SI); Skyrim (DB)
Platform: XBox
Status: Reality and I aren't on speaking terms right now
Other Profiles: DarkSpark135
UESPoints: 5
Location: Edge of the world and all Western civilization

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Dark Spark »

The line of Dragonborn Emperors was broken when Martin used the Amulet of Kings to merge with Akatosh. The Emperor during Skyrim is a common mortal schmuck descended from a line of common mortal schmucks.

My pet theory is that the reason the Amulet of Kings worked so well for Dragonborn Emperors was because Akatosh infused it with a bit of his soul. The Amulet has been regarded as some kind of uber-soul gem containing essences of previous rulers. A Dragonborn who wears the Amulet subtly taps into the power and knowledge contained within— giving them not only an overt sign of their rule, but the tools needed to actually rule Tamriel.
Baurus: Our job is to get the Emperor out of situations like this. Though I'll admit, things aren't going exactly to plan.

Casandra: At the moment, the deadliest weapon at my disposal is a goblin's head on a stick. I'd be worried if this was the plan.
User avatar
Starfang
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 12:39 pm
ES Games: Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: 360; PC; XBOX ONE
Status: Kwama Caretaker
Other Profiles: AedanStarfang
Location: Black Shalk Cornerclub

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Starfang »

I hope there's a quest in TES 6 to find/restore a new Amulet of Kings by means of an Aedric quest of some sort and get credibility for the Empire again.
Image
User avatar
Pilaf The Defiler
Imperial Legate
Imperial Legate
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:03 pm
ES Games: Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, ESO
Platform: PC, Xbox, Xbox 360
Status: Fresh
UESPoints: 20

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Pilaf The Defiler »

Leliel wrote:I hope there's a quest in TES 6 to find/restore a new Amulet of Kings by means of an Aedric quest of some sort and get credibility for the Empire again.
While it's certainly possible for such artifacts to be recreated or rediscovered, the prophecy on Alduin's Wall is quite literally set in stone.

Last Dragonborn. No more, at least during this kalpa. The whole Dragonborn thing is played out.
Monsters are bred in labyrinths, labyrinths are bred from walls. There is a reason the Giants choose to remain nomadic rather than follow their shield kin the Nords in building permanent settlements. The Tower is the beginning of all walls.
spin
Novice
Novice
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:29 am
ES Games: Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: xbox 360

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by spin »

Pilaf The Defiler wrote:
Leliel wrote:I hope there's a quest in TES 6 to find/restore a new Amulet of Kings by means of an Aedric quest of some sort and get credibility for the Empire again.
While it's certainly possible for such artifacts to be recreated or rediscovered, the prophecy on Alduin's Wall is quite literally set in stone.

Last Dragonborn. No more, at least during this kalpa. The whole Dragonborn thing is played out.
it wouldn't have to be based on Dragonborns if it is a new amulet. It could be some other power granted by the gods to create a new amulet.
As well as a new Dragonborn could be created the same way the first one was. Then the prophecy would be true, as that line of dragonborns was ended, but the prophecy didn't go far enough in the future to see the second creation of dragonborns.
User avatar
Zero_The_Dark
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:21 am
ES Games: Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: PC, Xbox 360
Status: Somewhere in the Mazes of Menace

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Zero_The_Dark »

All dragonborn were created the first one was. They were blessed by Akatosh to have the soul of a dragon. It isn't a bloodline gift or anything, there isn't really a line of dragonborn. So based off the prophesy I don't really see any reason to believe there will be anymore dragonborn.
User avatar
Leckan
Journeyman
Journeyman
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:51 am
ES Games: Skyrim
Platform: PS3

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Leckan »

Br3admax wrote:
Leckan wrote: Dragonborns as we know are dragons incarnated as mortal men. So not only did "dragons" continue ruling the people after the Dragon Wars, but Tiber Septim ended up ascending to godhood... making him something of a literal dragon god whom is popularly worshiped.
Not exactly. Dragonborn are not "dragons incarnated as mortal men." They are mortals born with the souls of dragons. That is, while they may have a few dragon like tendencies, special affinities for Akatosh, and a natural need to lead, they are not dragons. Being "kin to both wyrm and the races of Man," means they have a unique perspective of how to lead and the ability to. The fact that Akatosh himself has to bless them shows that they have the approval of the Divines themselves.
The only exception seems to be Miraak, this is especially surprising since at the time dragons were worshiped as god-kings, yet the ancient nords largely refused to serve him.
Also note that the Dragon Cult still existed then and was widely accepted throughout Skyrim, even with the Dragon War dawning. It's also not that the ancient Nords refused to follow him, he being able to force them all to anyway, it was that the rest of the Dragon Cult and Alduin stopped him.
They may not have the body of a dragon, but they are still dragons. If you were turned into a rabbit, would you not be a person in a rabbit's body? Whether they are dragons reincarnated as humans or new dragon souls entirely, they still possess the souls of dragons; not mortals. What makes gives them a connection to both worlds is that they know what it's like to be human, to be mortal. They know what it's like to fight and struggle to survive, to be helpless, etc. Yet, they still have the souls of dragons and possess that which is innate to dragons. That's the way I see it.

It's weirder still that the dragon cult wouldn't worship a variable dragon. Was it Alduin that made them turn on Miraak? Was he aware of what Miraak was? Although, it was first Vahlok that discovered Miraak's plan to ascension.
Raptor_X2000
Associate
Associate
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 3:15 am
ES Games: Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: PC, Xbox

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by Raptor_X2000 »

spin wrote: it wouldn't have to be based on Dragonborns if it is a new amulet. It could be some other power granted by the gods to create a new amulet.
MUDCRABBORN!!!

With regard to the OP though, men didn't throw off the Dragon-rule so much because they were ruled by dragons, as because the dragons were, as you said, barbaric and tyrannical. The Emperors were considerably more benevolent (for the most part), and the Third Empire was downright humanitarian, at least if Oblivion can be trusted. But even so, and even if one does consider Dragonborns as Dragons, the Emperors did not rule with absolute power like the dragons. Each Province had its own Kings or Jarls or Great Houses and the Imperial government itself has an internal division of power with the Emperor and Elder Council. Guilds with their own governing rules could and did flourish. Slavery is illegal in some provinces, and frowned upon by the Imperial government in the rest. Religions of different types are tolerated throughout the Empire (at least until the Dominion-imposed White-Gold Concordat). And with regard to Talos-worship, Talos does not continue to rule the Empire, so while he is a king who became a god, he was never a "god-king" as he was not a god while he was king. He became a god, and then was no longer king.

So I don't really see any hypocrisy here. The Dragonborn Emperors ruled in a way that was for the most part consistent with what the people hoped for and expected. And then finally, not every Emperor was a Dragonborn, and not every ruler throughout Tamriel was an Emperor.

10th Post btw. Finally got me (half) a coin!
MidbossVyers
Guardian
Guardian
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 2:36 pm
ES Games: Daggerfall, Oblivion, Skyrim
Platform: PC, PS4, Nintendo Switch

Re: Dragon rule - hypocrisies?

Post by MidbossVyers »

According to http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Dragons dragon were once benevolent before Alduin decided to conquer everything. Also, in terms of the Dragonborn Emperor... Basically, it's like this: Humans (perhaps all mortal races) are shallow. They are uncomfortable with being lorded over by a giant, fire-breathing lizard, but they have little qualms with being lorded over a humanoid-shaped figure with the soul of a giant, fire-breathing lizard, so long as that figure looks human enough. Also, not quite Elder Scrolls, but the recent anime, Chaos Dragon, shows the brutality of dragon worship, and if ES dragon worship was even half as bad, then you know.
Post Reply