Civil War in Skyrim based on History?

[Gearuvagen]

The analogy doesn't work for me is all. I see the Empire = Rome agreed, but The Thalmor are a well established Civilization with Cities and are not nomadic. Skyrim is/was unified under a High King not at all like the Germanic tribes. Skyrim has Jarls a clear indication of their Norse connection which is not synonymous with Germanic as they had their own different cultures and pantheons. (albeit very similar in some cases but different) Due to the Norse being a subset and eventual break off of early Germanic culture. All I was trying to say

 

[Xarnac]

Stormcloaks never sack the Empire though. SC dont invade Cyrodiil and destroy the Empire.

The analogy doesn't work for me is all. I see the Empire = Rome agreed, but The Thalmor are a well established Civilization with Cities and are not nomadic. Skyrim is/was unified under a High King not at all like the Germanic tribes. Skyrim has Jarls a clear indication of their Norse connection which is not synonymous with Germanic as they had their own different cultures and pantheons. (albeit very similar in some cases but different) Due to the Norse being a subset and eventual break off of early Germanic culture. All I was trying to say

You just dont understand the analogy. It has nothing to do with the culture. The Huns wanted things from the Empire, they were not given those things, they attacked, they came to peace and were given some of those things by the Empire. No other civilization can hold that same place in the analogy. Not the Gauls, Goths, Germans, Greeks, Moors, anybody.

Er, German tribes = Skyrim in this analogy. Especially since the German tribes came from the Norse, and vice verse later in history. Rome never even got into Scandinavia.

 

[deacon8]

In the final battle of the civil war, you sack Solitude... Moreover, a High King isn't named, but the leader of the Stormcloaks keeps his title. The is exactly what happened when the Visigoths sacked Rome and that is why Rome fell: He didn't name himself King of Rome, he was named King of the Goths, thus the fall of Rome. Sorry I was in a hurry. Gotta go to work!! Nice discussion, see you in about 4 hours.

 

[Xarnac]

Yet Rome/The Empire is Cyrodiil in the analogy, not Skyrim. Skyrim is part of the Empire, like Germanic lands were part of the Roman Empire. If the tribes take back their lands, they didnt sack the Empire/Rome, they just took back their lands. For Skyrim/Stormcloaks/Visigoths to sack the Empire, they would have to sack WG Tower in Cyrodiil.

The Sky civil war determining the fate of the Empire is like the destruction of the first Death Star to the Galactic Empire in SW. It's a big deal, but losing Sky doesnt equate to losing the Empire, or the fall of Rome. In my initial analogy, Rome doesnt even fall, just like how the Empire in ES never really fell. Which is why I was specific to use Huns.

 

[Gearuvagen]

I understand you analogy I'm just saying the part you want the huns to play doesn't have a player in our world. It's a "what if" by Bethesda.

Solitude doesn't equal Rome moreover I do not think Ulfric equals Alaric as we said Pre-Christian Rome, Alaric attacked Rome, attacked there land not reclaimed his in 300 something AD well into Christian Rome. (I believe)

 

[Xarnac]

I understand you analogy I'm just saying the part you want the huns to play doesn't have a player in our world. It's a "what if" by Bethesda.

Solitude doesn't equal Rome moreover I do not think Ulfric equals Alaric as we said Pre-Christian Rome, Alaric attacked Rome, attacked there land not reclaimed his in 300 something AD well into Christian Rome. (I believe)

Yet they do have a player, as can be seen by the Hun demands, the subsequent war and the "peace" that gave the Huns a lot of what they wanted in the first place. Which is what the AD did.

 

[Gearuvagen]

I understand that I'm just saying the "No more Talos" doesn't fit, that's all. It doesn't have to being a video game and whatnot . Though the other two analogies can fit in anywhere in tamrelic history whereas the Huns as Thalmor only fit the White Gold Concordant. Would the First Aldmeri Dominion also be the huns? I'm just having a problem accepting it is all.

 

[Arn Magnus]

Stormcloaks never sack the Empire though. SC dont invade Cyrodiil and destroy the Empire.

You just dont understand the analogy. It has nothing to do with the culture. The Huns wanted things from the Empire, they were not given those things, they attacked, they came to peace and were given some of those things by the Empire. No other civilization can hold that same place in the analogy. Not the Gauls, Goths, Germans, Greeks, Moors, anybody.

Er, German tribes = Skyrim in this analogy. Especially since the German tribes came from the Norse, and vice verse later in history. Rome never even got into Scandinavia.

"no other civilisation can hold that place"

Who says it has to? Not all parts of the fiction Bethesda has created has to have a historical basis. The Huns were not overly concerned with imposing their religion over the regions they conquered and were motivated more by plunder and riches whereas the thalmor banned talos worship after their victory over the imperials which shows differences in motives.

 

[Xarnac]

"no other civilisation can hold that place"

Who says it has to? Not all parts of the fiction Bethesda has created has to have a historical basis. The Huns were not overly concerned with imposing their religion over the regions they conquered and were motivated more by plunder and riches whereas the thalmor banned talos worship after their victory over the imperials which shows differences in motives.

Nobody said they did have a historical basis, and nobody said it has to, but for the analogy to make sense in this context, it does. Which is the point of the thread...

Seriously, keep up with the conversation if you're going to reply to me. It's like people will selectively quote things without even reading or knowing what is going on. Hilarious. Did you even read the post you quoted? Apparently not.

I understand that I'm just saying the "No more Talos" doesn't fit, that's all. It doesn't have to being a video game and whatnot . Though the other two analogies can fit in anywhere in tamrelic history whereas the Huns as Thalmor only fit the White Gold Concordant. Would the First Aldmeri Dominion also be the huns? I'm just having a problem accepting it is all.

None of it fits. TCs whole analogy is off, but to make it fit, you have to put it the way I said in my first post. That's the only way the analogy works in the historical Roman context. Which is the whole point. And my whole point, this whole time. Im specifically talking about the second AD and Thalmor. The first AD would not be the Huns, as the AD and Thalmor are not the Huns. They are only Hun like in regards to TCs analogy of ancient Rome. It's forced to fit the analogy. In the end, the whole analogy is wrong, but instead of telling TC he fails hard (and being a complete dick), I fixed it in a context that could relate.

Unless you can give me a Roman that was originally a "German/Goth" from Scandinavia that became a god in their polytheistic pantheon. Who's worship was then outlawed a Kalpa later by an antagonizing force, by which the Romans agreed to after a war (but was an original demand by the antagonizing force). Leaving the original "Germans/Goths" in a civil war over their avatar Man-God's worship, who has become a "god" to all men.

As you can see there is no simple historical analogy, but to force one, it would be what I posted originally.

 

[Arn Magnus]

Nobody said they did have a historical basis, and nobody said it has to, but for the analogy to make sense in this context, it does. Which is the point of the thread...

Seriously, keep up with the conversation if you're going to reply to me. It's like people will selectively quote things without even reading or knowing what is going on. Hilarious. Did you even read the post you quoted? Apparently not.

None of it fits. TCs whole analogy is off, but to make it fit, you have to put it the way I said in my first post. That's the only way the analogy works in the historical Roman context. Which is the whole point. And my whole point, this whole time. Im specifically talking about the second AD and Thalmor. The first AD would not be the Huns, as the AD and Thalmor are not the Huns. They are only Hun like in regards to TCs analogy of ancient Rome. It's forced to fit the analogy. In the end, the whole analogy is wrong, but instead of telling TC he fails hard (and being a complete dick), I fixed it in a context that could relate.

Unless you can give me a Roman that was originally a "German/Goth" from Scandinavia that became a god in their polytheistic pantheon. Who's worship was then outlawed a Kalpa later by an antagonizing force, by which the Romans agreed to after a war (but was an original demand by the antagonizing force). Leaving the original "Germans/Goths" in a civil war over their avatar Man-God's worship, who has become a "god" to all men.

As you can see there is no simple historical analogy, but to force one, it would be what I posted originally.

How am I not keeping up with the conversation? The title of the thread asks if it is based on history and yeah you suggested the huns as the thalmor to fit in with the Romans and goths. The point people are making is that the Huns don't fit as well as the Romans do to the analogy and that's all I was saying too. Of course I am entitled to say that maybe it is not based that closely on history which is the whole point of the thread which asks the question.

 

[The Phoenician]

I don't think the Skyrim civil war is based on any actual conflict or war. Other than a few vague similarities its probably just a product of the devolopers imagination.

 

[Xarnac]

How am I not keeping up with the conversation? The title of the thread asks if it is based on history and yeah you suggested the huns as the thalmor to fit in with the Romans and goths. The point people are making is that the Huns don't fit as well as the Romans do to the analogy and that's all I was saying too. Of course I am entitled to say that maybe it is not based that closely on history which is the whole point of the thread which asks the question.

It's obvious your not keeping up with the conversation just by what you first posted. The Thalmor AD are the Huns in the analogy. An analogy that had to be corrected by me. TCs analogy doesnt work because it fails to take into account what is really going on in the ES. My analogy does however, and stands. The Imperials are the Romans, the Germani states are Skyrim and the AD/Thalmor are the Huns. Unless, again:

You can give me a Roman that was originally a "German/Goth" from Scandinavia that became a god in their polytheistic pantheon. Who's worship was then outlawed a Kalpa later by an antagonizing force, by which the Romans agreed to after a war (but was an original demand by the antagonizing force). Leaving the original "Germans/Goths" in a civil war over their avatar Man-God's worship, who has become a "god" to all men.

So yeah, my analogy stands as it's the closest you're getting. Which is an analogy I didnt even create, but TC did. All I did was make it actually fit real world history and what is actually going on in the ES. Your post to me pretty much read like you didnt even read what was actually written. Reread the whole thread if you have to. If it were 1:1, then it wouldn't be an analogy.

The point people are making is that the Huns don't fit as well

And those people should learn more about history, analogies and the ES series.

 

[Arn Magnus]

Ok in my first post I stated a difference in motives between the thalmor and Huns pedantically finding fault with their place in the analogy. Obviously voicing a difference in opinion means that I havnt read the previous posts...

The Huns fit equally as badly as Carthage would or the Parthian empire. The Carthaginian armies under Hannibal defeated Rome ( the imperials) again and again and could/should of gotten to a point of forcing a whit-gold concordat type deal upon them. So the perfect example your asking for makes your own view about the Huns invalid as they are not particularly well suited to the analogy in the first place. If you had a near perfect example to offer then that would justify your request.

And those people should learn more about history, analogies and the ES series.

So people that disagree with the position the Huns hold in the analogy need to change their opinions to match whatever you say?

 

[Xarnac]

No, your first post clearly shows you didnt even read or know what was going on and just butted in and responded to me.

Who says it has to? Not all parts of the fiction Bethesda has created has to have a historical basis.

That pretty much reads like you thought I was trying to equate real life civilizations with Nirns, when all I was doing is making TCs fallacious analogy correct. The rest of what you wrote comes off as if you didnt read that I already said it has nothing to do with a cultural similarity, but prerogative.

With no AD or Thalmor representation, then there is no analogy in the first place. So they are either the Huns, or there is no analogy at all. And the thread itself is pointless. You can pick apart the similarities of Sky and Germans/Goths just as much as you can the Hun/AD comparison. So there is either no analogy at all, or the hypothetical one I initially posted. People that know ES and real world history, know my analogy is sound. Everything I've said stands, the Huns fit fine, get over it.

 

[Arn Magnus]

First of all I was referring in general to the view that the game is based on real world history and the original post as much as to you. The thread is not pointless as it is asking if it is based on real life history or not? This let's people discuss whether they think it is or isint, so me disagreeing with an analogy suggested in the thread does not render it pointless but rather feeds it and adds to it's purpose.

Basically the whole point in my posting in the first place was to ultimately disagree with the entire analogy because as you say it cannot fit while the thalmor are unaccounted for. In fact I was suggesting that possibly the thalmor don't have to be either represented by the Huns or not represented at all, they could be replaced.

I trust that you will recognise I am allowed to disagree?

Also simply stating that your analogy is sound doesn't in itself justify what you have said as truth.