Maintenance for the week of November 25:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 25, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 7:00AM EST (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 25, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 7:00AM EST (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
Are Orcs a beast race?
-
CMDR_Un1k0rn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
@PrayingSeraph If you don't have a copy already, check this out!PrayingSeraph wrote: »Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races.
an oldie but goodie from the forums, courtesy of Gidorick
I'm glad I made this thread as without it, I might never have seen this!In-game username: Un1korn | Happy member of the PCNA UESP guild (Resident Daggerfall Covenant enjoyer) | Main & basically only character: Crucian Vulpin, Imperial Dragonknight of the Daggerfall Covenant, and Undaunted Bulwark (I tank) | Mountain bike enjoyer and vulpine appreciator | If you know me from PCEU: No | To ZOS: THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME BRING MY HORSE INTO BATTLE!5 -
Marginis✭✭✭✭✭It's worth remembering at least that the stories of Orcs descending from elves are merely that - stories. They could be literally true, or they might just be made up for the sake of a creation myth and religion. It's so hard to tell because when we play the game we meet literal magical beings and demi-gods, so that creation myth is very possibly literally true. Being a beast race is a whole other thing entirely. "Beast race" is so nebulously defined it could mean that Orcs are biologically different from man and mer or just that they have a reputation for smelling bad.
That is to say both that we don't know for sure either way, and even if we did, they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive things.@Marginis on PC, Senpai Fluffy on Xbox, Founder of Magicka. Also known as Kha'jiri, The Night Mother, Ma'iq, Jane Shepard, Damia, Kintyra, Zoor Do Kest, You, and a few others.3 -
Ogou✭✭✭✭✭tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »Aldmer were the predecessor to all Elven races.
All the Elven races AND orcs.**
Evolving from elves doesn't necessarily make them elves.
In-game texts such as A Warning to the Aldmeri Dominion (quoted below) clearly separate orcs from elves:We are well aware that the Aldmeri plan nothing less than a return to the Elven domination of the other races, particularly Men and Orcs. They wish to overturn the legacies of the First and Second Empires and wipe them from history. This we shall not allow. Never again will free Men and Orcs submit to the tyranny of Elven oppression!
As in, the people of Tamriel think of orcs and elves as distinct concepts. I'd be interested in more in-game materials on the subject, especially one that refers to orcs as elves (if there is any such text).
Back to the original question, any thoughts on what "beastfolk" even means?
Beastfolk are the races that show beastial features. Argonians are pretty much just humanoid lizards, Khajiit are pretty much just humanoid cats, and Orcs are pretty much just humanoid goblins.
As for the Aldmer, all the Elven races and presumably *part of the Orcs.
Except, the Orcs don't really have any bestial features. Unless you argue that the tusks are boar-like features but that's not much. Seems to me there should be another classification for both both Orcs and goblins (and maybe the betrayed Falmer while we're at it).
Orcs are a larger version of goblins. At least, the original ones. Them having tusks is exactly what makes them beastial, or would you argue tusks are associated with elves or man?
I know I'm a bit late in this discussion but having big lower teeth doesn't exactly make a race bestial. After all, Maormer (or at least some of them) have fish skin and are still considered elves.4 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?0 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭
Orcs can trace their history back to the old Aldmers, just like the rest of the ELVES
The problem really is "Beast'Folk" is a catch all word without much HISTORICAL meaning.
Khajiits come from elves, Argonians come from the Hist, Orcs are just unpopular
Old Aldmeris then the Ayelids then they all split off into what we know now
Is that why they were already found by Topal in High Rock before the Orcish creation myth took place?
Tell me, if Orcs trace their lineage back to the Aldmer, then how come Topal could already find the Orcs before their creation myth took place?0 -
PrayingSeraph✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Edited by PrayingSeraph on 18 June 2019 20:503 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.0 -
tsaescishoeshiner✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »In-game texts such as A Warning to the Aldmeri Dominion (quoted below) clearly separate orcs from elves:We are well aware that the Aldmeri plan nothing less than a return to the Elven domination of the other races, particularly Men and Orcs. They wish to overturn the legacies of the First and Second Empires and wipe them from history. This we shall not allow. Never again will free Men and Orcs submit to the tyranny of Elven oppression!
As in, the people of Tamriel think of orcs and elves as distinct concepts. I'd be interested in more in-game materials on the subject, especially one that refers to orcs as elves (if there is any such text).
Continuing the same point that orcs aren't elves anymore in the eyes of the people of Tamriel, from Vosh Rakh (Orsinium DLC):They won't abandon the traditions that make Orcs—as they put it—"strong and powerful and better than any puny Elf."
Been slowquesting through Glenumbra and came across in-game text to perhaps the opposite point:Many Orcs believe in the origin myth in which the Elven god Trinimac was eaten by Boethiah, and when he was excreted he was transformed into Malacath, and all his followers into Orcs. Those who believe in this Elven origin of Orc-kind often call them "Orsimer."
Some Orcs therefore venerate Trinimac as their god-ancestor rather than Malacath. Orcs of the Trinimac cult insist that Trinimac fooled Boethiah into believing he was corrupted by his passage through Boethiah, when he in fact absorbed some of Boethiah's strength and passed it on to his followers. In this way the Orsimer can be seen as "improved Elves."
While I personally think that orcs descend from aldmer (but aren't elves anymore), this does suggest that there are non-elven origin stories for orcs. Anyone know of any, or any in-game texts/lore posts on the matter?
The Trinimac cultist view where orsimer have a connection to a Divine that granted them superiority sounds a lot like certain elven superiority beliefs (like many altmer believe). In On Orcs and the Afterlife, they also describe life on Nirn being a distraction from divinity like some Altmer do. (I wonder what they'd think of Lorkhan? that's a separate post lol)PC-NA
in-game: @tsaescishoeshiner0 -
PrayingSeraph✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Edited by PrayingSeraph on 18 June 2019 23:023 -
Shadow_Akula✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Save your energy mate. Stop typing up responses to him. It’s clear Bruccius can’t accept anyone’s theory but his own in this topic. No point in repeating the old thread, and probably getting a thread eventually locked over it.3 -
PrayingSeraph✭✭✭✭✭Shadow_Akula wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Save your energy mate. Stop typing up responses to him. It’s clear Bruccius can’t accept anyone’s theory but his own in this topic. No point in repeating the old thread, and probably getting a thread eventually locked over it.
Yeah I'll stop replying. It's getting more vicious and we already been down this road before. I won't contribute anymore to get this thread locked. Nothing I say will matter; I know this because nothing I said on the older thread mattered.Edited by PrayingSeraph on 18 June 2019 23:492 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.0 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »In-game texts such as A Warning to the Aldmeri Dominion (quoted below) clearly separate orcs from elves:We are well aware that the Aldmeri plan nothing less than a return to the Elven domination of the other races, particularly Men and Orcs. They wish to overturn the legacies of the First and Second Empires and wipe them from history. This we shall not allow. Never again will free Men and Orcs submit to the tyranny of Elven oppression!
As in, the people of Tamriel think of orcs and elves as distinct concepts. I'd be interested in more in-game materials on the subject, especially one that refers to orcs as elves (if there is any such text).
Continuing the same point that orcs aren't elves anymore in the eyes of the people of Tamriel, from Vosh Rakh (Orsinium DLC):They won't abandon the traditions that make Orcs—as they put it—"strong and powerful and better than any puny Elf."
Been slowquesting through Glenumbra and came across in-game text to perhaps the opposite point:Many Orcs believe in the origin myth in which the Elven god Trinimac was eaten by Boethiah, and when he was excreted he was transformed into Malacath, and all his followers into Orcs. Those who believe in this Elven origin of Orc-kind often call them "Orsimer."
Some Orcs therefore venerate Trinimac as their god-ancestor rather than Malacath. Orcs of the Trinimac cult insist that Trinimac fooled Boethiah into believing he was corrupted by his passage through Boethiah, when he in fact absorbed some of Boethiah's strength and passed it on to his followers. In this way the Orsimer can be seen as "improved Elves."
While I personally think that orcs descend from aldmer (but aren't elves anymore), this does suggest that there are non-elven origin stories for orcs. Anyone know of any, or any in-game texts/lore posts on the matter?
The Trinimac cultist view where orsimer have a connection to a Divine that granted them superiority sounds a lot like certain elven superiority beliefs (like many altmer believe). In On Orcs and the Afterlife, they also describe life on Nirn being a distraction from divinity like some Altmer do. (I wonder what they'd think of Lorkhan? that's a separate post lol)
Finally, someone open-minded enough to recognize that maybe their creation myth is wrong.
Can you tell me where you got the second quote from?0 -
Tucker3711✭✭✭no@Tucker311- PC
Tucker3711
Nord Beth Rose (EP)
Imperial Freya Var (DC)
High Elf Hestia du foyer (AD)
Wood Elf Epona Caoin (AD)
Hotstuff Queen5 -
Pheefs✭✭✭✭✭
a few possibilities...how come Topal could already find the Orcs before their creation myth took place?
the first being its not actually the same "Cursed Elves" or "Pariah Folk" but a different tribe completely that Topal meets.
& there's the delightful possibility that the "curse" went backward in time too, since time as a strictly linear construct is disproved many times in elder scrolls
& I'm not ignoring the chance of a lost tribe descended from the Old Elonhfey that is more closely related to "modern" orsimer than we understand.
Its all further complicated by the fact that they decided to re-write their own history, and what others say about them is highly biased.
{ Forums are Weird........................ Nerfy nerfing nerf nerfers, buff you b'netches!....................... Popcorn popcorn! }2 -
Lore canon wise, Orismer are Elves.
Lore character/world wise, it's how it's felt about them. Other Mer races do not consider them kin.4 -
khajiitNPC✭✭✭✭✭there is no specific date when Bo ate Trini and pooped out Mal. This could have happened in the Dawn or Merethic eras. Again it’s opened ended and could be any thing.0
-
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭
a few possibilities...how come Topal could already find the Orcs before their creation myth took place?
the first being its not actually the same "Cursed Elves" or "Pariah Folk" but a different tribe completely that Topal meets.
& there's the delightful possibility that the "curse" went backward in time too, since time as a strictly linear construct is disproved many times in elder scrolls
& I'm not ignoring the chance of a lost tribe descended from the Old Elonhfey that is more closely related to "modern" orsimer than we understand.
Its all further complicated by the fact that they decided to re-write their own history, and what others say about them is highly biased.
Yet you still deny the possibility that they are, in fact, the Orcs that we see today?0 -
kylewwefan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭On that beautiful Monomyth chart, it lists Trinimac and Malacath as one in the same; just one of many different names this particular Daedra happens to go by. Many of them do that.
It also kind of shows Khajit linked to Bosmer. And Orsimer as one of those direct lines from aldmer.
So everything is kind of Elf, Man, or Hist? There really is no Beast race at all.
Uhm, the little I recall about Daedra is you can’t kill them. They go back to Oblivion and reform. So even if a Daedric prince were to kill another daedric prince, the point is somewhat moot. They just respawn in Oblivion.
As I’ve been leveling a new character and getting Psijic and Mages Guild stuff done, I’m paying a bit more attention to the lorebooks. Trying to connect the dots, there’s still way too much to make any sense of everything yet.
0 -
LennoxPoodle✭✭✭Isn't there a book talking about Topal which speculates that the orcs he encountered were simply goblins. I also seem to remember something about the goblins faced by the Ro'Wada being larger than normal ones. It's vague memory though. Maybe there were a kind of tall goblins called orcs (hey arenas description), which got extinct and the modern orcs just inherited the name or got thrown in one category with them by others out if ignorance. This would explain a lot of the conflicting lore.1
-
LennoxPoodle✭✭✭tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »Aldmer were the predecessor to all Elven races.
All the Elven races AND orcs.**
Evolving from elves doesn't necessarily make them elves.
In-game texts such as A Warning to the Aldmeri Dominion (quoted below) clearly separate orcs from elves:We are well aware that the Aldmeri plan nothing less than a return to the Elven domination of the other races, particularly Men and Orcs. They wish to overturn the legacies of the First and Second Empires and wipe them from history. This we shall not allow. Never again will free Men and Orcs submit to the tyranny of Elven oppression!
As in, the people of Tamriel think of orcs and elves as distinct concepts. I'd be interested in more in-game materials on the subject, especially one that refers to orcs as elves (if there is any such text).
Back to the original question, any thoughts on what "beastfolk" even means?
Beastfolk are the races that show beastial features. Argonians are pretty much just humanoid lizards, Khajiit are pretty much just humanoid cats, and Orcs are pretty much just humanoid goblins.
As for the Aldmer, all the Elven races and presumably *part of the Orcs.
Except, the Orcs don't really have any bestial features. Unless you argue that the tusks are boar-like features but that's not much. Seems to me there should be another classification for both both Orcs and goblins (and maybe the betrayed Falmer while we're at it).
In previous iterations (at least oblivion) orcs had pretty hog-like noses to. So boar people doesn't seem to be a bad description. Isn't there even a racist pamphlet in ESO calling them pig-people?
IMHO they became way to aesthetically pleasing since oblivion, especially the females.0 -
khajiitNPC✭✭✭✭✭Topal has shown time and time again to be an unreliable source. He is an Aldmer , so makes sense.Edited by khajiitNPC on 20 June 2019 21:063
-
Korah_Eaglecry✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
[snip] You make a claim that is proven false and you come back with "It was translated, thats why it was not what I said it was".
No one knows what was said in the original text because its a translation. This is the only available text we have regarding the poem. You cant possibly extract that the original word was Orsimer from anything in the poem. You want to talk about blind speculation. There you have it bud. You cant separate your own personal beliefs for what is right in front of you.Edited by ZOS_RogerJ on 27 June 2019 16:05Penniless Sellsword CompanyCaptain Paramount - Jorrhaq VhentKorith Eaglecry * Enrerion Aedihle * Laerinel Rhaev * Caius Berilius * Seylina Ithvala * H'Vak the GrimjawlTenarei Rhaev * Dazsh Ro Khar * Yynril Rothvani * Bathes-In-Coin * Anaelle Faerniil * Azjani Ma'LesAban Shahid Bakr * Kheshna gra-Gharbuk * Gallisten Bondurant * Etain Maquier * Atsu Kalame * Faulpia SeverinusWhat is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort? - Paarthurnax1 -
PrayingSeraph✭✭✭✭✭Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
Jesus christ you really cant take a L can you? You make a claim that is proven false and you come back with "It was translated, thats why it was not what I said it was".
No one knows what was said in the original text because its a translation. This is the only available text we have regarding the poem. You cant possibly extract that the original word was Orsimer from anything in the poem. You want to talk about blind speculation. There you have it bud. You cant separate your own personal beliefs for what is right in front of you.
Don't bother. Unless ZOS or Bethesda come right out and yell "Orsimer are elven!!" in the mist specific blunt terms, he wont change his mind. That is his right, but he will continue to insult our intelligence although he is the one who holds the minority opinion amongst TES lore fanatics. UESP for example is definitely pro-elven orsimer.
I went far more in depth on his "sources" on the last thread, it didnt matter. People here disagreed too, but we are apparently too dumb to comprehend anything
I knew this thread was going to turn into this early on, which is why I was hesitant to join in much at first.
1 -
Korah_Eaglecry✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
Jesus christ you really cant take a L can you? You make a claim that is proven false and you come back with "It was translated, thats why it was not what I said it was".
No one knows what was said in the original text because its a translation. This is the only available text we have regarding the poem. You cant possibly extract that the original word was Orsimer from anything in the poem. You want to talk about blind speculation. There you have it bud. You cant separate your own personal beliefs for what is right in front of you.
Don't bother. Unless ZOS or Bethesda come right out and yell "Orsimer are elven!!" in the mist specific blunt terms, he wont change his mind. That is his right, but he will continue to insult our intelligence although he is the one who holds the minority opinion amongst TES lore fanatics. UESP for example is definitely pro-elven orsimer.
I went far more in depth on his "sources" on the last thread, it didnt matter. People here disagreed too, but we are apparently too dumb to comprehend anything
I knew this thread was going to turn into this early on, which is why I was hesitant to join in much at first.
Im personally of the belief that the Orcs arent completely elven or elven at all. But I cant argue against the fact that there is lore supporting the idea that they are. My problems with the elven creation myth for Orcs is less to do with the actual lore and more with the feeling that its basically leaving Argonians and Lilmothiit as the Beastfolk of the world while Khajiit and Orcs are now firmly believed to be in the Mer camp. Its just not a fun idea to me that on Nirn youre either Mer or Man and very little in between. That takes away from the fantastical elements the franchise is built on for me.
Penniless Sellsword CompanyCaptain Paramount - Jorrhaq VhentKorith Eaglecry * Enrerion Aedihle * Laerinel Rhaev * Caius Berilius * Seylina Ithvala * H'Vak the GrimjawlTenarei Rhaev * Dazsh Ro Khar * Yynril Rothvani * Bathes-In-Coin * Anaelle Faerniil * Azjani Ma'LesAban Shahid Bakr * Kheshna gra-Gharbuk * Gallisten Bondurant * Etain Maquier * Atsu Kalame * Faulpia SeverinusWhat is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort? - Paarthurnax3 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
Jesus christ you really cant take a L can you? You make a claim that is proven false and you come back with "It was translated, thats why it was not what I said it was".
No one knows what was said in the original text because its a translation. This is the only available text we have regarding the poem. You cant possibly extract that the original word was Orsimer from anything in the poem. You want to talk about blind speculation. There you have it bud. You cant separate your own personal beliefs for what is right in front of you.
Reread the bloody book, please. It takes a bit of common sense to read what is written there without coming to the absurd notion that you came to.0 -
Bruccius✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
Jesus christ you really cant take a L can you? You make a claim that is proven false and you come back with "It was translated, thats why it was not what I said it was".
No one knows what was said in the original text because its a translation. This is the only available text we have regarding the poem. You cant possibly extract that the original word was Orsimer from anything in the poem. You want to talk about blind speculation. There you have it bud. You cant separate your own personal beliefs for what is right in front of you.
Don't bother. Unless ZOS or Bethesda come right out and yell "Orsimer are elven!!" in the mist specific blunt terms, he wont change his mind. That is his right, but he will continue to insult our intelligence although he is the one who holds the minority opinion amongst TES lore fanatics. UESP for example is definitely pro-elven orsimer.
I went far more in depth on his "sources" on the last thread, it didnt matter. People here disagreed too, but we are apparently too dumb to comprehend anything
I knew this thread was going to turn into this early on, which is why I was hesitant to join in much at first.
Being the majority doesn't mean you're right. Remember that flat-earthers were the majority of the earth's population once upon a time too, would you argue that because of that, believing in flat-earth is truth, and that thus the majority of the people believing that are clearly intelligent?0 -
Pheefs✭✭✭✭✭
LMAO seriously dude, FLAT EARTH?!?Being the majority doesn't mean you're right. Remember that flat-earthers were the majority of the earth's population once upon a time too, would you argue that because of that, believing in flat-earth is truth, and that thus the majority of the people believing that are clearly intelligent?
the relevant thing there is that further research and evidence proved many times in many ways that the earth is round.
& nowadays if you believe in a Discworld you are either a disciple of T Pratchett, or globally mocked.
GLOBE-ally *hee* ...see what I did there?
also.... Ankh-Morpork forever!
I think the majority of lore enthusiasts since Oblivion, have enjoyed the expanding lore for the Orsimer, and its pretty obvious they are Elves... they can procreate with nords and bosmer anyway! boom-shakka-lakka!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuOPPL65zUQ
& Out of morbid curiosity, what's your lore 'world view' IF they were a lost tribe/stronghold of "modern" Orcs that Topal teaches his language?
The current accepted lore is that everyone is descended from the Old Aldmer, down through the Ayelids, to the tribes we have today, but it also mentions in Topal that he encounters a now lost tribe of bird-people, who could be pre-Bosmer cousins before they can only be Elves or a whole seperate thing...
MY big curiosity is for the rest of the Betmer, do the Tang-Mo have a separate or shared history with the Limlothiit and Khajiit?
& Are the Tsascei and Lamia lost tribes of the Hist?
{ Forums are Weird........................ Nerfy nerfing nerf nerfers, buff you b'netches!....................... Popcorn popcorn! }1 -
Number_51✭✭✭✭✭PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »PrayingSeraph wrote: »I am not joining in on the debate as I have done so before on s much more in depth thread
However I will point out Bruccius that Bosmer can have horns/antlers and they are still elves. Orsimer are not very beastial
And their horns/antlers are explained in the lore. Orcish tusks are not. Or actually, they are, ya know, larger version of goblins and all that.
Your dismiss the factual evidence in favor of unreliable references. Up to you, but hardly evidence.
Oh, fyi, every Orc has tusks, only some Bosmer have horn/antlers, most don't. Pretty significant difference.
Tusks are explained in the lore. They are a result of Trinimac being corrupted by Boethiah and his followers having the same done to them. Malacath was given tusks, and so his Aldmeri followers were given tusks too.
You made it very clear on the other thread that you are so deadset on this theory of yours that you will ignore anything and everything that points to the contrary. I addressed your sources and explained why I disagreed. Your sources were incredibly flawed but you will never see otherwise.
That and your attitude is why I am not bothering to debate you on this. Whats the point mate? Nothing will convince you orcs are aldmeri descent and your aggressive attitude shows this. The other thread has been linked, and people are free to see the full debate for themselves.
Daedric Lords choose their own appearance; they have no forced identity, making your argument moot.
Oh no, I already showed you that the Orcs being Aldmeri descendent is possible. The idea that they are elves is factually wrong. A fact you ignore because of biases.
Oh? If you agree that orcs are aldmeri descent or atleast strong possibility, then you must understand that at that point, calling them beast/mer/"elves" is purely semantics.
Frankly I don't care what category people choose to classify orsimer as, however I am a strong proponnent of them beimg descendents of Aldmer, through the Trinimac transformation. That they have aldmeri blood in them, like the other mer races. That Malacath IS the Orc Father like he claims
Oh no, not in the slightest. These Aldmer were warped when Malacath was created; they were warped into Beastfolk; the Orcs who had already walked Tamriel during the times of Topal.
Malacath being the Orc father doesn't magically make the Orcs elven. Malacath is also the father of Ogres and Goblins, yet you see no connection here. Do you always cherry pick what you do, and don't, see?
See, this is part of the reason I have not been bothering to debate you. You completely ignored the fact I already responded to your Topal arguement on the last thread as well as to all your other poor "sources"
Topal's description of the "orcs" was vague and not at all like we see Orsimer in TES. If anything, it sounded more like an ogre, maybe goblin.
Topal's vague description of what he saw doesn't prove your point.
Topal literally used the word Orsimer to describe what he saw, hence why the author of the book specifically pointed out the word ''Orsimer''.
The very fact that Topal used the word Orsimer, before the Orsimer even existed, and thus before the word ''Orsimer'' would exist, directly shows that the creation myth is literally just that; a myth.
'' "Orsimer" in the Aldmeris, the same word for "Orc" ''
This is the definition that our author gives.
The word Orsimer - regardless of which definition you force onto it - would only exist if the very thing it talks about - the Orsimer, existed.
If the Orsimer didn't exist, neither would the word. Topal used the word Orsimer, specifically, meaning that they existed. The problem with you is that you somehow lack the ability to see this.
"For sixty-six days and nights, he sailed, over crashing
Waves of dire intent, past whirlpools, through
Mist that burned like fire, until he reached the
Mouth of a great bay and he landed on a
Sun-kissed meadow of gentle dells.
As he and his men rested, there came a fearsome howl,
And hideous Orcs streamed forth from the murky
Glen, cannibal teeth clotted with gore"
The Epic said Orc, not Orsimer. Remember you got that wrong before you come back with another pretentious reply about my intelligence. What they describe is nothing like Orcs, but rather something truly bestial, cannibalistic and very primitive. Orcs are none of these things.
Also, word's and terms can change over time, if you don't know. Newly discovered races can be called names that existed long before discovery, hence "Indians" for native indigenous North Americans. The term "orc" could have well existed long before Orsimer came into existence after Malacath's transformation and then adopted by the new race. Your point is incredibly flawed and again, proves nothing.
Yes, there you go, you blindly quote the book without reading the very important bit at the start. The author has translated Topal's verses, he directly says so. Hence why the book quotes Topal's verses in Tamrielic instead of Aldmeris; despite the fact that Tamrielic wasn't the language used by the Aldmer. The author of the book translated the work of Topal, and when it mentioned Orcs he pulled up the word used by Topal; Orsimer.
Your argument relies on an ''if''. There is nothing to prove that the word Orsimer was used for anything other than Orcs. Your blind speculation is therefore irrelevant.
Building on that, Orsimer does not mean Orc. It means "pariah folk", and as such could be applied to any race of outcasts or of low caste (such as goblins or ogre).LennoxPoodle wrote: »Isn't there a book talking about Topal which speculates that the orcs he encountered were simply goblins. I also seem to remember something about the goblins faced by the Ro'Wada being larger than normal ones. It's vague memory though. Maybe there were a kind of tall goblins called orcs (hey arenas description), which got extinct and the modern orcs just inherited the name or got thrown in one category with them by others out if ignorance. This would explain a lot of the conflicting lore.
On top of that, there was quest in Summerset that seemed to imply goblins used to be more intelligent (or maybe more civilized is the better word) as well.Edited by Number_51 on 21 June 2019 19:390
This discussion has been closed.