Was the age of legends really egalitarian?

[Scarloc99]

The age of legends is presented as a truly peaceful egalitarian period, where people wanted for nothing, there was no crime, no war. 
 

But on re reading the series I find myself wondering if RJ is giving hints that this isn’t strictly true. I am seeing now a world with a 2 caste system, those who channel and those who don’t. 
 

It appears channelers occupy every important role in society. They make decisions, they lead, they run the schools universities medical facilities. Channelers have everything. This isn’t surprising, every channeler will live far longer and so over time would become more and more in control not needing to retire due to age, or illness. 
 

Then you have non channelers, from the books you only catch glimpses but it seems almost like they are a 2nd lesser form of humanity. They act as servants, looking after and supporting, they tend crops. 
 

If you think of humanity this makes perfect sense. People with powers slowly taking over and controlling those without. Giving the sense that “this way is better” because war and conflict has ended. There is no crime because us with powers have ended it. I wonder if the age of legends was more like a benign dictatorship. Those without always seen as something lesser. This idea of superiority then leads to the great mistake. If you feel you are better then most of humanity you will be less likely to stop and question. 
 

So thoughts, was the age of legends truly as fair as those in rand land try to believe? 

[Kalessin]

We do get hints from Rand's internal monologues, when he asks when did he ever give such-and-such a man, now one of his most vicious Forsaken opponents, less than his due? And a telling comment when he thinks this time he's nailed it because he was raised better this time round.

[KakitaOCU]

Objectively it had to be somewhat bad for some to be effective overall.  We're talking about two kinds of people.  Ones who cannot channel with a lifespan of realistically a bit over a century with advanced medicine and such.   Then a second group with world altering powers and a life expectancy over close to a millenia.

The older, more powerful beings are going to rise to the top and even if altruistic will stay there.  Things like the Aiel are clearly people alright with Servitude, how that happened is kind of left to our imaginations.

[Scarloc99]

7 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

Objectively it had to be somewhat bad for some to be effective overall.  We're talking about two kinds of people.  Ones who cannot channel with a lifespan of realistically a bit over a century with advanced medicine and such.   Then a second group with world altering powers and a life expectancy over close to a millenia.

The older, more powerful beings are going to rise to the top and even if altruistic will stay there.  Things like the Aiel are clearly people alright with Servitude, how that happened is kind of left to our imaginations.

I find this the most interesting idea. That the Aiel of Randland, in breaking the promise, have actually freed themselves from a slavery that over generations became “service”. There is no real suggestion they are mistreated, but they also don’t seem to be listened to or considered as equals. 
 

For that matter I often wonder how much did talent and knowledge actually get freedom. Aes Sedai of the age of legends seemed to work on a hierarchy of how powerful in the one power an individual is. But there is no guarantee that being powerful means that individual is intelligent, skillful or has any common sense or ability to self control. 
 

I can see the events leading to the creation of the bore involving individuals who were far more clever and wary being ignored because they were weaker in the power and so an avoidable accident becoming predictable. Again this is human nature and there are multiple cases of this throughout history. 
 

The more I think about it the more I can see the age of legends being an awful place for a muggle to live :). 

[Samt]

What does egalitarian really mean or look like in this case? Even if all channeling did was make you live 400 years and be at the height of your physical and mental abilities for most of that time, that would be enough to insure that basically all of the most influential people were channelers. Having 10 times more time to acquire skills, resources, and influence means that you can simply outcompete anyone with a normal lifespan. That’s not to say that everyone with a 400 year lifespan would be influential. Some people lack the ability or drive. But someone with extraordinary ability, drive, and lifespan will come along. And even if that is a rare occurrence, these people stay around for centuries.

 

Is that fair? Maybe not. But it’s also not fair to not give the most influential positions to the best qualified and those people are going to be old.

 

Add channeling on top of that, and it’s simply certain that channelers will control the world.

[Sabio]

I think in the last book Rand is talking about how they convinced themselves life was perfect, but he can see now there were flaws and injustices.

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

On 2/19/2023 at 11:07 PM, Sir_Charrid said:

The age of legends is presented as a truly peaceful egalitarian period, where people wanted for nothing, there was no crime, no war. 
 

But on re reading the series I find myself wondering if RJ is giving hints that this isn’t strictly true. I am seeing now a world with a 2 caste system, those who channel and those who don’t. 
 

It appears channelers occupy every important role in society. They make decisions, they lead, they run the schools universities medical facilities. Channelers have everything. This isn’t surprising, every channeler will live far longer and so over time would become more and more in control not needing to retire due to age, or illness. 
 

Then you have non channelers, from the books you only catch glimpses but it seems almost like they are a 2nd lesser form of humanity. They act as servants, looking after and supporting, they tend crops. 
 

If you think of humanity this makes perfect sense. People with powers slowly taking over and controlling those without. Giving the sense that “this way is better” because war and conflict has ended. There is no crime because us with powers have ended it. I wonder if the age of legends was more like a benign dictatorship. Those without always seen as something lesser. This idea of superiority then leads to the great mistake. If you feel you are better then most of humanity you will be less likely to stop and question. 
 

So thoughts, was the age of legends truly as fair as those in rand land try to believe? 

This is a very valid and interesting observation. It does seem clear that not necessarily all channelers, but certainly aes sedai at least (including the forsaken) have since the age of legends always operated under the assumption that they are inherently superior to the rest of the population. Depending on the circumstances and the individual and the era or age, it can be expressed in a way that appears benign and for the good of the whole or as obviously for the purpose of power, division and control.  Either way it is seems like an arrogant belief in superiority. Age of legends aes sedai kind of seem to identity themselves as natural stewards, leaders and protectors believing they obviously know better, the old “with great power comes great responsibility”idea. They do a pretty decent job of it and have the commoners buying it and almost worshipfully serving them. Modern day aes sedai clearly believe themselves superior but it’s become pathological, manipulative, deceitful with no real regard for the actual people. 

[bringbackthomsmoustache]

Also worth noting Rand's musings in Far Madding - he "remembers" the guardians were made since the people here did not want to participate in the one power fueled wonders of the age of legends - but the Aes Sedai honoured that view and made the guardians for them.  It appears to show the age of legends was much closer to the ideal of respecting peoples right to hold differing views than any real world society has managed.

[Kalessin]

There's hints in some of the Forsakens' personal histories that we get a faint glimpse of. Moghedien's pre-Forsaken life as some sort of financial expert, and her predilections for hiding like a redback spider or funnelweb. Why would a financial expert be such an expert at hiding? Herself? (and presumably financial records way off the books?)

[JyP]

On 2/20/2023 at 8:07 AM, Sir_Charrid said:

So thoughts, was the age of legends truly as fair as those in rand land try to believe? 

 

Clearly not. Remember Rand's visions through the Glass Columns ? Whenever he saw the destruction of the Collaam Daan and the creation of the Bore ?

 

We follow the vision through the eyes of an Aiel, which is jostled by another man, which is annoyed... until he recognizes an Aiel and suddenly becomes much more afraid.

[KakitaOCU]

9 hours ago, Lightfriendsocialmistress said:

They do a pretty decent job of it and have the commoners buying it and almost worshipfully serving them. Modern day aes sedai clearly believe themselves superior but it’s become pathological, manipulative, deceitful with no real regard for the actual people. 

I think it honestly comes down to missing a key component.  The reason that Channelers would steadily become the top is tied to experience and ability.  The lady with 4 centuries of experience is likely above the guy with 40 years.  

But the Oath Rod cuts that.  Sisters live at most 300 or so...  Not really enough time to fully move past the lesser lived generation.

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

On 2/22/2023 at 8:58 AM, KakitaOCU said:

I think it honestly comes down to missing a key component.  The reason that Channelers would steadily become the top is tied to experience and ability.  The lady with 4 centuries of experience is likely above the guy with 40 years.  

But the Oath Rod cuts that.  Sisters live at most 300 or so...  Not really enough time to fully move past the lesser lived generation.

Abso-freaking-lutely! Long lives, more experience, and simply more time to settle into the belief that the evidence exists to justify their belief in their inherent superiority. There was always evidence to justify why they not only believed themselves superior, but felt compelled to do something about it. The most masterful leaders are so persuasive because they truly believe they know best. Either way it depends on the belief of the whole that the fundamental idea is absolute truth. 

[Scarloc99]

9 hours ago, Lightfriendsocialmistress said:

Abso-freaking-lutely! Long lives, more experience, and simply more time to settle into the belief that the evidence exists to justify their belief in their inherent superiority. There was always evidence to justify why they not only believed themselves superior, but felt compelled to do something about it. The most masterful leaders are so persuasive because they truly believe they know best. Either way it depends on the belief of the whole that the fundamental idea is absolute truth. 

I think you then add to that the idea that sheer strength in the one power vs actual ability, knowledge, general intelligence etc is the defining aspect of who gets to lead and you have the opportunity for the brightest and best to be sidelined simply because they are not as strong. 

[SilentRoamer]

It is worth remembering that one of the key social values during the Age of Legends was Service. So much so that a third name could only be earned in service to society, so whilst the Aes Sedai may have taken the most powerful positions within society, it was only through acts of service that they could rise through the ranks of power - the service (as far as we can see) not being tied to the strength of the OP.

 

However, we then see all major positions of power taken up by those strong in the One Power. 

 

An interesting topic for sure. 

 

Nobody has raised the spectre of the DO - the lack of the DO malevolence on the world would surely act as a driving factor to further egalitarianism.

 

Very interesting topic. 

[KakitaOCU]

1 hour ago, SilentRoamer said:

Nobody has raised the spectre of the DO - the lack of the DO malevolence on the world would surely act as a driving factor to further egalitarianism.

Except it's there, just not actively being pushed by him, that's the whole point of Rand's epiphany at the end.

In general it is not a sense of service or a sense of egalitarianism that makes things better for people.  It's technology and ease of wealth.

At the risk of touching politics just a bit, the truly super rich on Earth are not good people.  Having that much wealth without spreading it is actively selfish and harmful.  But most people don't realize.  Why?  Because even those of us at the lower middle class and upper lower class have almost all basic needs met without issue.  It's a lot easier to ignore  problem or be unaware of it if it doesn't hit you.  

Look at a certain Wizard Game and all the issue that caused.  Mostly boiling down to people who WOULD care about the issue if they were faced with it being able to pretend it's not a big deal.

[Samt]

1 hour ago, KakitaOCU said:

Except it's there, just not actively being pushed by him, that's the whole point of Rand's epiphany at the end.

In general it is not a sense of service or a sense of egalitarianism that makes things better for people.  It's technology and ease of wealth.

At the risk of touching politics just a bit, the truly super rich on Earth are not good people.  Having that much wealth without spreading it is actively selfish and harmful.  But most people don't realize.  Why?  Because even those of us at the lower middle class and upper lower class have almost all basic needs met without issue.  It's a lot easier to ignore  problem or be unaware of it if it doesn't hit you.  

Look at a certain Wizard Game and all the issue that caused.  Mostly boiling down to people who WOULD care about the issue if they were faced with it being able to pretend it's not a big deal.

This definitely risks bordering on the political, but it's also central to the question asked in this thread in regards to WoT.  In the world today, current estimates are that the billionaires of the world control about 10 trillion dollars of wealth.  If they could liquidate their wealth and use it to write checks to every man, woman, and child in the world, every person would get about $1500.  That might, in fact, be life changing for some.  But in many cases the systems that lead to the poverty present in much of the world would not be overcome.  

 

And that is assuming that this could even be done.  Most of that 10 trillion in wealth is held in assets that are not easy to liquidate.  They can be sold, but mostly they would only be purchased by other billionaires.  So if all of the billionaires are trying to liquidate at once, the market would tank.  And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that passing out that much cash to people that are likely to spend it quickly on basic goods and services would lead to massive inflation on those goods and services.  

 

The wealth of the world's billionaires is just numbers on a page.  While they do consume more, generally, they don't consume that much more.  And the things they do consume extra are not things that they poor consume regularly.  In other words, the reason people starve is not because Bill Gates is holding too much Microsoft stock.  They starve because the systems and resources are not in place to get them food (or in some cases, other systems are in place to make sure food doesn't get to them).  

 

However, the incentive that wealth creates to motivate the highly capable to generate more value for the world is effective at creating systems that drive prosperity and innovation.  That doesn't mean that there aren't problems or that the system is perfect.  But taking away wealth from billionaires would do little to solve world poverty.  In fact, many billionaires are doing a great deal to try to address poverty.  

 

Back to the WoT, the same situation exists.  Like was said above, the system was created to motivate the Aes Sedai to actively serve the public good.  Inherent in that system was the fact that the most influential and celebrated individuals would be the Aes Sedai.  But that is the way the motivation works.  I wouldn't say that the Age of Legends was egalitarian so much as it was a meritocracy.  

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

12 hours ago, Samt said:

This definitely risks bordering on the political, but it's also central to the question asked in this thread in regards to WoT.  In the world today, current estimates are that the billionaires of the world control about 10 trillion dollars of wealth.  If they could liquidate their wealth and use it to write checks to every man, woman, and child in the world, every person would get about $1500.  That might, in fact, be life changing for some.  But in many cases the systems that lead to the poverty present in much of the world would not be overcome.  

 

And that is assuming that this could even be done.  Most of that 10 trillion in wealth is held in assets that are not easy to liquidate.  They can be sold, but mostly they would only be purchased by other billionaires.  So if all of the billionaires are trying to liquidate at once, the market would tank.  And that's not even taking into consideration the fact that passing out that much cash to people that are likely to spend it quickly on basic goods and services would lead to massive inflation on those goods and services.  

 

The wealth of the world's billionaires is just numbers on a page.  While they do consume more, generally, they don't consume that much more.  And the things they do consume extra are not things that they poor consume regularly.  In other words, the reason people starve is not because Bill Gates is holding too much Microsoft stock.  They starve because the systems and resources are not in place to get them food (or in some cases, other systems are in place to make sure food doesn't get to them).  

 

However, the incentive that wealth creates to motivate the highly capable to generate more value for the world is effective at creating systems that drive prosperity and innovation.  That doesn't mean that there aren't problems or that the system is perfect.  But taking away wealth from billionaires would do little to solve world poverty.  In fact, many billionaires are doing a great deal to try to address poverty.  

 

Back to the WoT, the same situation exists.  Like was said above, the system was created to motivate the Aes Sedai to actively serve the public good.  Inherent in that system was the fact that the most influential and celebrated individuals would be the Aes Sedai.  But that is the way the motivation works.  I wouldn't say that the Age of Legends was egalitarian so much as it was a meritocracy.  

Absolutely. In my opinion it comes down to the the definition of “resources”.  The belief in how wealth and worth is defined and valued. Is it truly money, power, or any other external source? Or is it the people themselves and what they are capable of creating if all are viewed as inherently and equally valuable and worthy from within, and working together for the whole?

[Elendir]

1. Fact that all leaders we know from Age of Legend are channelers is not same as all leaders of Age of Legends are channelers. Non channelers leaders could exist, but they have not stay to live and tell us about it.

2. DO was released long time before War of Power. We don't know, if forsakens sins wasn't fuelled by DO. Like every humans has vulnerabilities to sins, difference is in overcoming or succumbing.

 

3. Are talents crimes, which should be corrected?

[KakitaOCU]

1. You don't go off of lack of evidence as proof that it could exist, you go with the evidence available and make reasonable guesses.  That there is no record or knowledge of any single authority figure being a non-channeling person is telling.  

2: There's about a 100 years between the bore and the War of the Shadow, relatively speaking that is not a long time.  While it's possible the DO nudged here and there the Forsake were all several hundred years old when the bore was drilled and already had their character flaws that lead to their downfall.  

But it is an interesting question about rather or not maybe Demandred was a DO deliberate goal.

3: I'm not sure I know what you mean, elaborate?

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

12 hours ago, Elendir said:

1. Fact that all leaders we know from Age of Legend are channelers is not same as all leaders of Age of Legends are channelers. Non channelers leaders could exist, but they have not stay to live and tell us about it.

2. DO was released long time before War of Power. We don't know, if forsakens sins wasn't fuelled by DO. Like every humans has vulnerabilities to sins, difference is in overcoming or succumbing.

 

3. Are talents crimes, which should be corrected?

Interesting thoughts…but considering free will I can’t “blame” the DO for the forsaken and their choices. And talents=crimes? Only if the individual makes choices which use their talents in ways that exploit or enslave others, for personal gain. That’s my take on it. 

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

11 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

1. You don't go off of lack of evidence as proof that it could exist, you go with the evidence available and make reasonable guesses.  That there is no record or knowledge of any single authority figure being a non-channeling person is telling.  

2: There's about a 100 years between the bore and the War of the Shadow, relatively speaking that is not a long time.  While it's possible the DO nudged here and there the Forsake were all several hundred years old when the bore was drilled and already had their character flaws that lead to their downfall.  

But it is an interesting question about rather or not maybe Demandred was a DO deliberate goal.

3: I'm not sure I know what you mean, elaborate?

Good points 

[Some_random_novice]

I might be missing the point but I always thought the Age of Legends was a utopian society. And the thing with most utopian societies especially in storytelling is that they aren’t really utopian something is always wrong even if that wrong this wasn’t on the surface. So while the whole idea of AOL was Service and, from what the books tell the audience, most people value service or have their lives based around service to the greater good ie. AES Sedai or AoL Aiel. And when I was reading the books I just saw the whole inequality between channellers and non Channellers to be one of the major parts of that utopian but not really idea. It definitely took a few read throughs but that is the general idea I picked up. And I also might be completely off about this. 
 

just my unwanted .02 cents

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

3 hours ago, Some_random_novice said:

I might be missing the point but I always thought the Age of Legends was a utopian society. And the thing with most utopian societies especially in storytelling is that they aren’t really utopian something is always wrong even if that wrong this wasn’t on the surface. So while the whole idea of AOL was Service and, from what the books tell the audience, most people value service or have their lives based around service to the greater good ie. AES Sedai or AoL Aiel. And when I was reading the books I just saw the whole inequality between channellers and non Channellers to be one of the major parts of that utopian but not really idea. It definitely took a few read throughs but that is the general idea I picked up. And I also might be completely off about this. 
 

just my unwanted .02 cents

For what it’s worth, my 2 cents and your 2 cents are in alignment 

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

Just now, Lightfriendsocialmistress said:

For what it’s worth, my 2 cents and your 2 cents are in alignment 

Whether or not it equals four, we’re on the same page or close enough 

[SinisterDeath]

9 hours ago, Some_random_novice said:

I might be missing the point but I always thought the Age of Legends was a utopian society. And the thing with most utopian societies especially in storytelling is that they aren’t really utopian something is always wrong even if that wrong this wasn’t on the surface. So while the whole idea of AOL was Service and, from what the books tell the audience, most people value service or have their lives based around service to the greater good ie. AES Sedai or AoL Aiel. And when I was reading the books I just saw the whole inequality between channellers and non Channellers to be one of the major parts of that utopian but not really idea. It definitely took a few read throughs but that is the general idea I picked up. And I also might be completely off about this. 
 

just my unwanted .02 cents

I'm almost positive in the last book(s), one of the Forsaken made a comment about how the Age of Legends was not the "Utopia" they thought it was.