[Cougar]

It's just another undead dragon which presumably escaped Hoods realm at the same time as Tulas Shorn, we did seeother barrows starting to expolde, I don't think it really has to be anyone in particular since it's just a plot device to communicate this piece of life changing information to Kallor.

[Aptorian]

Yeah but I think the point is that those dragons weren't supposed to be able to just go flying out of Hoods warren as they please. Tulas Shorn is supposedly the dragon that manages to squeze through the TGG hole before it closes. The other dragon shouldn't had been able to do the same.

The problem is of course that the two dragons doesn't sound the same.

My argument is that it would be sloppy writting by the author to let two seperate undead dragons suddenly show up on Genebackis.

[D'rek]

Aptorian, on Jan 25 2009, 01:08 PM, said:

Yeah but I think the point is that those dragons weren't supposed to be able to just go flying out of Hoods warren as they please. Tulas Shorn is supposedly the dragon that manages to squeze through the TGG hole before it closes. The other dragon shouldn't had been able to do the same.

The problem is of course that the two dragons doesn't sound the same.

My argument is that it would be sloppy writting by the author to let two seperate undead dragons suddenly show up on Genebackis.

Indeed. Furthermore, the one that speaks with Kallor seems to sort of know him, or at least know enough about him, and therefore can't have been dead for very long...

Is there a way we can reason out these differences? Could Tulas have good reason to lie about not remembering his death to Dass/Karsa/Samar? Of course it's quite possible Tulas didn't die in the Jaghut's war at all...

[Puck]

Hm, it may be picking on details but I think it's possible that the undead dragon [Tulas Shorn] told both [Kallor and later Karsa] the truth and that he, Tulas, remembers THAT he died during the Jaghut vs. Death war, but not the EXACT way he died, hence '[...] The very nature of my demise is lost to me, [...]'. He says, yes, he died, but doesn't know how. At least that's how I'd read it. Could be my English failing, though.

And I agree with Apt that it would be sloppy writing would there be two undead dragons..

[Urizen]

Puck, on Jan 25 2009, 08:36 PM, said:

Hm, it may be picking on details but I think it's possible that the undead dragon [Tulas Shorn] told both [Kallor and later Karsa] the truth and that he, Tulas, remembers THAT he died during the Jaghut vs. Death war, but not the EXACT way he died, hence '[...] The very nature of my demise is lost to me, [...]'. He says, yes, he died, but doesn't know how. At least that's how I'd read it. Could be my English failing, though.

That actually make some sense since it seems the battle against Death wasn't two armies beating eachother up in a physical battle but rather a magical battle which might make it difficult to say what actually killed him/it.

Something though: the Jaghut fought Death on Malazworld or whateveryou want to call it, right? But the Edur didn't set foot there until after Tulas death. Scabby's rule, KE's rivening and an empty Throne of Shadow all happened after Tulas demise. So how can Tulas has fallen in the Jaghut war since no Tiste at that point had left their own realm?
also, the impression I get from Tulas chat with ST and Cotillion is that his loss of the Throne of Shadow (and his life presumably) came about rather abruptly and because he got suprised, not beacuse he died in some sort of war where he fell to superior forces.

Puck, on Jan 25 2009, 08:36 PM, said:

And I agree with Apt that it would be sloppy writing would there be two undead dragons..

If the undead dragon and Tulas are supposed be the same I actually feel the sloppy writing is with regards to Tulas changing personality.

[amphibian]

D'rek, on Jan 25 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

Indeed. Furthermore, the one that speaks with Kallor seems to sort of know him, or at least know enough about him, and therefore can't have been dead for very long...

Kallor is incredibly old. There are few mortal beings that are older than he is.

[D'rek]

amphibian, on Jan 25 2009, 03:41 PM, said:

D'rek, on Jan 25 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

Indeed. Furthermore, the one that speaks with Kallor seems to sort of know him, or at least know enough about him, and therefore can't have been dead for very long...

Kallor is incredibly old. There are few mortal beings that are older than he is.

He's not *that* old. True, there are few mortal beings older than he, but since when was this series about mortal beings? If Kallor has no recollection of the Jaghut being anything more than the very few-and-far-between individuals who hole up in their towers, then he most likely wasn't around when this supposed Jaghut war-on-death came around. Kallor almost definitely rose after the Ritual of Tellann, and this Jaghut war took place before that... So yeah, he's old for a mortal, but that isn't all that relevant here. Certainly most of the Soletaken-eleint Tistes are much older than he, regardless of when they eventually came into the Malaziworld.

On that bit, certainly Draconus and Osserc had access to the Malaziworld long before the Andii and Liosan did. Though I sincerely doubt Tulas is some sort of equivalent to Osserc or Drac, it's still not unreasonable to think that some of the Edur prototypes might've gone around between the realms like those two did, while the ordinary Edur race sat on their butts in KE. Certainly Tulas would've had to do some traveling in order to become a Soletaken-eleint.

For those reasons, I would say Tulas didn't die in the war-on-death. He survived it, lived a while longer, long enough to hear about that crazy human guy named Kallor, and then died in some other way. By Scabby's hand? Perhaps.

[Cougar]

In most of the books the most logical explanation is the truth, there is no reason to beleive that either Tulas or the Undead Dragon are trying to deceive during the conversations they have about their deaths.

Since Steve doesn't use a god POV at any time or have characters that speak with absolute authority (consider some of the misinformation we get from characters spoken as truth) about anything (lots of opinions spoken as fact) you will always be able to say, 'he could be wrong' or 'he could be fibbing' etc but if you question everything then it's possible nothing in the series is true.

Apt, you are trying to second guess the authour here which is just daft, you think it would be sloppy to let 2 dragons out, well it would also be pointless to insert information that makes an obvious distinction between the two (have both of them mention the memory of the manner of their deaths or lack there of) unless this was a massive coincidental mistake, which seems unlikely. He also points to the fact that there are 2 dragons by the fact that the other barrow is begining to erupt when Gruntle leaves.

We could all say what things, might not be true but in this case you are flying in the face of pretty solid evidence, of course it could be something else or it could be a mistake but I think there is some benefit when reading SE of applying the Occams Razor type principle.

D'rek we have evidence of imprisoned or seemingly absent characters with plenty of knowledge of things that have happened in the world while they have been away, such as Silchas Ruin or K'rul although it was clear they did not know everything.

[Seguleh 1st]

i wrote it somwhere before, with that points, the only thing we can do is wait and hope that SE has his masterplan and we will be relieved int DoD. everything else is second-guessing. and wasnt there an undead dragon appearing several times before? i remember at least that there was one when gesler and co. were on the silanda, i think it appeared when they went through the fire.

[Grief]

I know, was just answering Benji.
Dragons are hard to kill. Some of them are probably more powerful than Hood. In fact, if you think about it, some of them probably have Hoods warren in their blood.
So, when you think about it, considering that True Eleint are so hard to kill, and so are powerful soletaken, its not that surprising that some of them are still powerful in Hoods realm, enough so to escape.

[amphibian]

Seguleh 1st, on Jan 25 2009, 05:00 PM, said:

i wrote it somwhere before, with that points, the only thing we can do is wait and hope that SE has his masterplan and we will be relieved int DoD. everything else is second-guessing. and wasnt there an undead dragon appearing several times before? i remember at least that there was one when gesler and co. were on the silanda, i think it appeared when they went through the fire.

That was Olar Ethil, Bonecaster to all the T'lan Imass. Her Soletaken form is a dragon and since she's undead herself, the dragon is undead too. She will probably pop up again in the series.

[Cougar]

Seguleh 1st, on Jan 25 2009, 10:00 PM, said:

. and wasnt there an undead dragon appearing several times before? i remember at least that there was one when gesler and co. were on the silanda, i think it appeared when they went through the fire.

I think that was the aforementioned Olar Ethil

[Ain't_It_Just_]

Yes, that was Olar Ethil in the warren of fire.

I remember there was a T'lan Imass in HoC named Olar Shayn...any relation I wonder?

[Cougar]

Olar is just the T'lan Imass word for Dragon, all the bonecasters have a first name which is the Imass word for their soletaken form.

[Ain't_It_Just_]

Ha...that is interesting. Monok must mean ape then.

But doesn't this mean Olar Shayn was a draconic Soletaken?

[Urizen]

Ain't_It_Just_, on Jan 26 2009, 10:45 AM, said:

Ha...that is interesting. Monok must mean ape then.

But doesn't this mean Olar Shayn was a draconic Soletaken?

I thought Olar Ethil was the only Draconic Bonecaster/Soletaken?

Where do we hear that the Bonecasters first name is the Imass word for their soletaken form?

[Cougar]

I think it is in the books somewhere but I heard it from the authour last time we saw him, it's definitley correct.

In RG Rud Ellale when listing the dragons says:

"Olar. Eleint. Draconean. Dragons. The pure dragons..." from this we know that Olar is the Imass word for Dragon, as he is not listing names and he would know the Imass word as he has been hanging out with the Imass.

Tenag Iballie:

Quote

"Olar Ethil, Kilava Onas, Monok Ochem, Hentos Ilm, Tem Benasto, Ulpan Nodost, Tenag Ilbaie, Ay Estos, Absin Tholai…the bonecasters of the Logros T’lan Imass. ... Leaving Tenag Ilbaie, whom Logros sent to the Kron, to aid in the L’aederon Wars." (HoC, UK TPB, p577-578)

"'has Logros a thought as to who the renegade bonecaster might be?'
'Tenag Ilbaie,' Monoch Ochem immediatly replied. 'It is likely that he has chosen a new name.'
'And Logros is certain?'
'All other are accounted for, barring Kilava Onass'
'Born of Ban Raile's clan, a tenag soletaken. Before he was chosen as the clan's bonecaster he was known as Haran'Alle, birthed as he was in the Summer of the Great Death among the Caribou. He was a loyal bonecaster-'
'Until he failed against the Forkrul Assail in the L'aederon Wars' Monok Ochem cut in" (HoC, UK mmpb, pg784)

This demonstrates that he changed his name to reflect his soletaken form when he became a bonecaster and is a tenag whatever that is, also there is a bonecaster called Ay Estos, we know that Ay is an Imass word for a type of wolf.

Also interestingly, although I'd never say this was evidence in itself, this would mean Kilava means Panther which seems to have a potential similar root sound to the name for the prehistoric cat killed in RG which was an Emlava (sp).

This post has been edited by Cougar: 26 January 2009 - 10:36 AM

[Urizen]

Cougar, on Jan 26 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

I think it is in the books somewhere but I heard it from the authour last time we saw him, it's definitley correct.

In RG Rud Ellale when listing the dragons says:

"Olar. Eleint. Draconean. Dragons. The pure dragons..." from this we know that Olar is the Imass word for Dragon, as he is not listing names and he would know the Imass word as he has been hanging out with the Imass.

Tenag Iballie:

Quote

"Olar Ethil, Kilava Onas, Monok Ochem, Hentos Ilm, Tem Benasto, Ulpan Nodost, Tenag Ilbaie, Ay Estos, Absin Tholai…the bonecasters of the Logros T’lan Imass. ... Leaving Tenag Ilbaie, whom Logros sent to the Kron, to aid in the L’aederon Wars." (HoC, UK TPB, p577-578)

"'has Logros a thought as to who the renegade bonecaster might be?'
'Tenag Ilbaie,' Monoch Ochem immediatly replied. 'It is likely that he has chosen a new name.'
'And Logros is certain?'
'All other are accounted for, barring Kilava Onass'
'Born of Ban Raile's clan, a tenag soletaken. Before he was chosen as the clan's bonecaster he was known as Haran'Alle, birthed as he was in the Summer of the Great Death among the Caribou. He was a loyal bonecaster-'
'Until he failed against the Forkrul Assail in the L'aederon Wars' Monok Ochem cut in" (HoC, UK mmpb, pg784)

This demonstrates that he changed his name to reflect his soletaken form when he became a bonecaster and is a tenag whatever that is, also there is a bonecaster called Ay Estos, we know that Ay is an Imass word for a type of wolf.

Also interestingly, although I'd never say this was evidence in itself, this would mean Kilava means Panther which seems to have a potential similar root sound to the name for the prehistoric cat killed in RG which was an Emlava (sp).

Ok that seems to make sense eventhough it leads to the questions as to what kind of animal an Ulpan, a Hentos etc etc. are...

Just to throw in a rench in the reasoning and be little agrumentative (or is it annoying?), in RG we see two Benetract Bonecasters that are named Til'aras Benok and
Gr' istanas Ishi'ilm yet both are large, almost identical, bears. If the above reasoning hold true shouldn't they be called Okral or whatever name the Imass has for bear?

[Cougar]

Well there could be lots of explanations for this; they could be different types of bear, I'd imagine that one dead bear looks similar to any other unless you are a zoologist.

They could have different words for the same thing; ie: in English alone the animal known as the Cougar may also be refered to as Puma, Panther, Catamount, Mountain Lion to name a few, it also has the latin name Felis Conclor. Furthermore a Black Panther is infact a melonistic leopard (just to illustrate that this is not an entirely cougar-centric argument)

The third option is it's one of Eriksons mistakes.

The fourth is I am wrong and it's only most Bonecasters who take the animal names some don't bother.

The fifth option is that, as you will see in my quote Monoch Ochem notes that at least one of the unbound has probably changed his name, it's possible that one or both of these have changed their name (were you talking about the bonecasters who attack the sisters at the end of RG?).

I think that applying my own rule; most obvious answer is the first one although if you asked Steve I'd be surprised if he even knew who you were talking about, on the relatively limited occasions I have met him I can think of a couple of instances where he has been asked about someone in the books and he's been like "Who? What? No idea"

This post has been edited by Cougar: 26 January 2009 - 12:21 PM

[D'rek]

Option six: Only the Logros Bonecasters named themselves after their animals...