Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Portal Stone Age


Rufae

Recommended Posts

Anyone else notice that Portal Stones are mentioned as coming from the Age before the Age of Legends, yet the Age before the Age of Lengends was without the One Power nor of any knowledge about the Power? That would hint that the Age before the Age before the Age of Legends was also without the OP. So does that mean that the Portal Stones were created at least 4 Ages prior to the current book Age (in the 7th Age)? If you take the average age of the Ages, 5,000 years or so... 5000 years x 4 ages = 20,000 years ago.... Could this be the potential age of the Portal Stones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been told that they were made sometime before the Age of Legends.  But, we've never been told which specific Age marks their origin.

 

Since every time we've seen them used, it was via application of OP, it wouldn't be safe to say that whoever made them didn't use OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal guess is that they were made in the transition between our age (the First Age) and the Age of Legends (the Second Age).

 

We know that the first Age ended with the appearence of channelers, and it seemingly ended with some form of cataclysm (none of the cities, or religions, or ideas of our Age remain in the Age of Legends). My guess is that this involved some form of war with channelers--the fact that Aes Sedai were served by people 'dedicated to peace in battle' suggests that there was some form of war involved in that formation--especially in an age that has had no battles. In truth 'servants of all' suggests some form of attempt to repay a debt too--suggesting possibly that the channelers were the cause of the war, or felt themselves responsible.

 

My guess is that the war was so dramatic that the majority of the human race died out, and the majority of the planet was made uninhabitable. The basis for this is that the entire Age of Legends had the same culture and the same language, indicating a society born from a single source, and that society placed a massive amount of value in 'service to the society' as the method of gaining social power (the whole 'third name' thing)--thus indicating a society born from struggle (societies like that don't form except in that they need to in order to survive--its a large reason why communism failed.

 

So in any case my guess is that in this war the planet became a very uninhabitable place, and people survived in small enclaves possible sustained by the channelers--bubbles resisting the destruction done to the planet. A major thing for them would be in the attempt to find a better place to live--thus the exploration of parallel worlds. The problem being those that were strong enough to sustain life would have almost certainly suffered a similar war. But at the same time i suspect they found the realms of the finn, and set up the agreement--it makes sense for such a society which would be in great need of the talents of the finns. Also it seems likely to be the time they contacted the Ogier.

 

My guess is that with the help of the Ogier they set about healing their own world... only the Ogier were not enough. I'd say that from there it began with changing humans to have the same ability of the Ogier--probably volunteers--the beginning of the aiel, and of the Voice. They also at this time probably created the Nym. A living ter'angreal, encompassing the gift of the Ogier.

 

Thus they were able to reclaim the world--a single society dedicated to peace, and gaining prestige through social service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know that the first Age ended with the appearence of channelers, and it seemingly ended with some form of cataclysm (none of the cities, or religions, or ideas of our Age remain in the Age of Legends).

 

I think that the transition was a peaceful one. RJ nor any other sources mention that the 1st Age ended in disaster. From all accounts, the the new Age started with the totally new way of doing things with the OP.

 

My personal guess is that they were made in the transition between our age (the First Age) and the Age of Legends (the Second Age).

 

I think that the making of Portal Stones is a very "high level" activity with the OP. Since the 1st Age ended with the first use of the OP safely, then the idea that such "children with the Power" could develop the Portal Stones is rather a stretch. The information that we are given in the books (mainly via Lanfear) is that even the Age of Legend folks did not know exactly how they worked or how many worlds there were.

 

I think they had to have been created before the 1st Age, in an Age where the OP was well known and used extensively. That would mean tens of thousands of years old. Maybe they were made in the 4th Age in the last cycle?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the transition was a peaceful one. RJ nor any other sources mention that the 1st Age ended in disaster. From all accounts, the the new Age started with the totally new way of doing things with the OP.

 

I did address that. There is quite a lot of evidence for destruction--for starters the simple fact that all of our technologies, our religions, our cities, our nations are gone shows something destructive occured. Beyond that we have the fact of people 'sworn to peace in battle'....

 

I covered it much more completely in my first post. All subjective and suggestive, of course, but all of it covered.

 

I think that the making of Portal Stones is a very "high level" activity with the OP. Since the 1st Age ended with the first use of the OP safely, then the idea that such "children with the Power" could develop the Portal Stones is rather a stretch. The information that we are given in the books (mainly via Lanfear) is that even the Age of Legend folks did not know exactly how they worked or how many worlds there were.

 

Transitions between ages can last conciderable time. The Breaking lasted nearly four hundred years, and even prior to that there was a hundred and fifty year period known as the collapse, the decline of the second age, and a part of it--true, but the end of the first age began with the appearence of channelers, there is nothing to say such periods did not cross over.

 

A highly educated populace such as ours, in five hundred and fifty years, discovering something like the portal stones--no i don't see that being a stretch. And the nature of the cataclysm provides answers for the limited knowledge later on--presumably the state of the world go worse before it got better.

 

I think they had to have been created before the 1st Age, in an Age where the OP was well known and used extensively. That would mean tens of thousands of years old. Maybe they were made in the 4th Age in the last cycle?

 

I know of nothing like a 'portal stone'... do you? One would think we would, given they resist being moved, and even after the breaking are obvious enough to be commented on....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is quite a lot of evidence for destruction--for starters the simple fact that all of our technologies, our religions, our cities, our nations are gone shows something destructive occured.

 

Or perhaps they have not yet been made? Afterall, it is "The 3rd Age by some. An age long past. An age yet to come." The idea that the 1st Age IS our age is not proven. The idea that the 1st Age was an Age resembling ours in development/situation is possible.

 

Beyond that we have the fact of people 'sworn to peace in battle'....

 

This could have developed not out of a disaster but out of the lack of want and bountiful supply that the One Power brought. When everyone has everything they want or need, then there is no longer a need for war.

 

Transitions between ages can last conciderable time.

 

True. Granted. But RJ said that the 1st Age ended when Tamrylin was the first person to channel safely. He did not ever hint at a mass channler war that followed. By allof his accounts, it was a peaceful transition. Not all transitions are rent in blood and tears.

 

The Aiel were not sworn to "peace in battle" specifically. Rather, they were sworn to non-violence in general.

 

Being called "servants of all" does not require a debt from a massive channaler war. It is possible, yes, but not required. It may have resulted in an initial power grab by the first channelers which was then solved by the other channelers. The attempted political power grab would have been jarring enough to society without a mass destructive war, to warrant a name meaning "servants of all".

 

I know of nothing like a 'portal stone'... do you? One would think we would, given they resist being moved, and even after the breaking are obvious enough to be commented on....

 

Once again, they may have not been created yet. If they were around, would you know what they were? If I took your logic of the 1st Age actually being OUR age, then do you think it is possible that the standing stones arrangements around Europe could be the remanants of portal stones, only we don't have the OP to access them?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or perhaps they have not yet been made? Afterall, it is "The 3rd Age by some. An age long past. An age yet to come." The idea that the 1st Age IS our age is not proven. The idea that the 1st Age was an Age resembling ours in development/situation is possible.

 

It can be determined by inference. RJ stated that our age ended with the appearence of the first channelers, then sites the formation of the society of the Age of Legends began with the appearence of the first channeler Tamyrlin. Beyond there there references to moscow and america, to Elizabeth, and Ann Landers, to the mercedes symbol, and the satelite program (Sayla)....

 

This could have developed not out of a disaster but out of the lack of want and bountiful supply that the One Power brought. When everyone has everything they want or need, then there is no longer a need for war

 

No one would dedicate themselves to peace in battle if there were no battles. It doesn't even make sense in a world that can't even remember the word for war, yet it was such a part of what they are that they, as a people, name themselves that. That doesn't come simply because society has reach utopian clarity. Utopian clarity might come from them swearing themselve so, but in the flow.

 

True. Granted. But RJ said that the 1st Age ended when Tamrylin was the first person to channel safely. He did not ever hint at a mass channler war that followed. By allof his accounts, it was a peaceful transition. Not all transitions are rent in blood and tears.

 

Thats a misstatement. None of his accounts speak of a peaceful transition, they just don't mention battle. He has commented on the issue one way or another, and in light of that given the complete absense of any aspect of our society, language, technologies or cities, and then added to the singular culture and language base, as well as the socialist formation, and the heavy emphasis on public survice we can infer that something pretty damn cataclysmic happened. Something humanity had to claw its way out of, and had to work together setting aside all animosities to do.

 

Not all transitions have to be bloody, but sociologically speaking, without a threat people don't unify, they divide. It's called syncrinisation--and it doesn't happen without an external threat. And it certainly doesn't happen to that degree without the threat being an extinction level event.

 

The Aiel were not sworn to "peace in battle" specifically. Rather, they were sworn to non-violence in general.

 

Actually they were--their name literally means 'those dedicated (an oath written in their bones) to peace in battle'. Da'shain Aiel.

 

Being called "servants of all" does not require a debt from a massive channaler war. It is possible, yes, but not required. It may have resulted in an initial power grab by the first channelers which was then solved by the other channelers. The attempted political power grab would have been jarring enough to society without a mass destructive war, to warrant a name meaning "servants of all".

 

Certainly it's not required--but in flow with the rest of what we know of that time the name gives certain implications--certainly when added to the fact that their servents are dedicated in their bones to peace in battle.

 

Once again, they may have not been created yet. If they were around, would you know what they were? If I took your logic of the 1st Age actually being OUR age, then do you think it is possible that the standing stones arrangements around Europe could be the remanants of portal stones, only we don't have the OP to access them?

 

No, the inscriptions are clearly different.

 

As I said, this is all just my pet theory peiced together by the various hints--a unifying theory designed to explain all the changes that occured between our age and the age of legends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Da'shain weren't the only Aiel.  The Jenn helped build Rhuidean.  There were probably other sects and septs and clans as well.  Da'shain and Jenn being the only two we've got specific names for.

 

So, if Da'shain Aiel specifically means 'dedicated to peace in battle,' what does Jenn Aiel mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Da'shain weren't the only Aiel.  The Jenn helped build Rhuidean.  There were probably other sects and septs and clans as well.  Da'shain and Jenn being the only two we've got specific names for.

 

So, if Da'shain Aiel specifically means 'dedicated to peace in battle,' what does Jenn Aiel mean?

 

I am pretty sure Da'shain Aiel refers to all of the Aiel in the AoL, those who followed the Covenant, who never did violence, and served the Aes Sedai.  It's only during the Breaking when the Da'shain Aiel split up into multiple groups that that changes.  Those who do violence to protect the Aiel call themselves Aiel and end up splitting into septs and clans, and refer to the original (Da'shain, those following the Way of the Leaf) Aiel as the Jenn Aiel, the "True Dedicated."  Jenn, meaning "true", wasn't their clan or sept name, it was simply an adjective that referred to the fact that they were the only Aiel following the original Da'shain Aiel path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe.

 

It may also be naive to suppose that even in a Utopian society that there weren't divisions and differences among the Aiel as to just exactly what the Way of the Leaf meant, and exactly how they were to behave in all circumstances.

 

All of the Aiel being Da'shain Aiel just makes them all into a faceless, homogenous, monolithic lump.  No individual thought.  No individual action.  Essentially mindless automatons.  Not really people, at all.

 

I'm not at all sure that was what Jordan intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe

 

um...try YES?

 

the daishain aiel existed in the AOL.  during the breaking, they began deviating and divided into what we now know as the aiel(daishain aiel who stopped believing in the way of the leaf and took up the spear), the tinkers(daishain aiel who maintained the way of the leaf, but believed in finding the song as opposed to serving aes sedai), and the jenn aiel(true dedicated - the 'new name' for daishain aiel in the 3rd age;  that is to say, the only group of daishain aiel that did not change their beliefs - now extinct)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are clearly wrong--in tSR Rand notes that the one on chaendaer has 'made in taiwan' stamped on the side.

 

The Da'shain weren't the only Aiel.  The Jenn helped build Rhuidean.  There were probably other sects and septs and clans as well.  Da'shain and Jenn being the only two we've got specific names for.

 

Tallasee and Generic Aelfinn are correct. Da'shain Aiel was the name of all Aiel in the Age of Legends. During the Breaking there were too breaks with the Covenant--first by Aiel wanting to abandon the wagons, and find peace, thus breaking their word to the Aes Sedai. They became the tuatha'an. The second were those that took up the spear, but because they continued to insist they were still Aiel--because they didn't use a sword--the remaining Aiel who were still loyal to the Aes Sedai and the Way of the Leaf gained a new name. Jenn Aiel--which means 'the only true Aiel'.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal guess is that they were made in the transition between our age (the First Age) and the Age of Legends (the Second Age).

 

We know that the first Age ended with the appearence of channelers, and it seemingly ended with some form of cataclysm (none of the cities, or religions, or ideas of our Age remain in the Age of Legends).

 

 

In another thread somewhere recently, someone reminded me of Thom Merrilin's arrival in Emond's Field, w/ Egewene and others calling out for stories, one of which i believe was a veiled reference to John Glenn and space flight.  Also a reference to a dish w/ an antenna or something in the mtns that it was said if you go there you will die. 

 

It stands to reckon that the 3rd age IS our future future (pizza pizza)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Week 18 Question: Who were the first channelers, and how did they learn? By trial and error? Are there any Ages where channeling does not exist?

 

Robert Jordan Answers: The first people to discover the ability to channel learned through trial and error, with fairly high casualty rates until they learned enough not to kill themselves accidentally. Their appearance marked the beginning of the previous Age to that of the books, or at least the end of the Age before that one.

 

Yes, as I have set things up, there are Ages when no one has any idea of how to channel or even that the One Power exists. Our own, for one. (The Wheel of Time turns.)

 

So, to clear up some confusion that is creeping in, the appearance of channeling marked the end of the Age prior to the AoL and the beginning of the AoL.  No indication whether there was great conflict or not.

 

Also, our Age is merely one where channeling doesn't exist.  Not the only one, and no assurance that ours was the Age preceding the AoL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tallasee and Generic Aelfinn are correct. Da'shain Aiel was the name of all Aiel in the Age of Legends. During the Breaking there were too breaks with the Covenant--first by Aiel wanting to abandon the wagons, and find peace, thus breaking their word to the Aes Sedai. They became the tuatha'an. The second were those that took up the spear, but because they continued to insist they were still Aiel--because they didn't use a sword--the remaining Aiel who were still loyal to the Aes Sedai and the Way of the Leaf gained a new name. Jenn Aiel--which means 'the only true Aiel'.

 

To me this is another case of trying to generalize too much from too little data.  Rand is only one individual.  The story of his ancestors is but one Aiel story.  His ancestors came from those Aiel centered upon Paren Disen.  There's is the only story we know even a part of.  There were many other population centers.  Many other Aiel.  We don't know what those Aiel called themselves.

 

From their behavior, it seems possible that Karede's 'servant' Ajimbura may be descended from some other group of Aiel who were located somewhere other than Paren Disen during the breaking.  One of the other Seanchan generals has a 'servant' whose behavior, if not his appearance, suggests descent from yet a third line of Aiel.  We don't get enough about either of the 'servants' to say anything with any certainty about their backgrounds, but the idea of other Aiel who decided to fight rather than just die isn't out-of-the-question, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, to clear up some confusion that is creeping in, the appearance of channeling marked the end of the Age prior to the AoL and the beginning of the AoL.  No indication whether there was great conflict or not.

 

Indeed, and given the other evidence some sort of cataclysm is made clear.

 

Also, our Age is merely one where channeling doesn't exist.  Not the only one, and no assurance that ours was the Age preceding the AoL.

 

Except the stories from our age that exist in the third age. And the artifacts.

 

To me this is another case of trying to generalize too much from too little data.  Rand is only one individual.  The story of his ancestors is but one Aiel story.  His ancestors came from those Aiel centered upon Paren Disen.  There's is the only story we know even a part of.  There were many other population centers.  Many other Aiel.  We don't know what those Aiel called themselves.

 

Well... thats nice for you--in reality though its fact. The Da'shain Aiel were the only Aiel, and spread through the world serving their Aes Sedai. This is stated directly time and again. Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

From their behavior, it seems possible that Karede's 'servant' Ajimbura may be descended from some other group of Aiel who were located somewhere other than Paren Disen during the breaking.  One of the other Seanchan generals has a 'servant' whose behavior, if not his appearance, suggests descent from yet a third line of Aiel.  We don't get enough about either of the 'servants' to say anything with any certainty about their backgrounds, but the idea of other Aiel who decided to fight rather than just die isn't out-of-the-question, either.

 

Well, firstly this idea that the Da'shain were limited to Paaren Disen is wrong--Charn was in V'sain, with plans to travel to M'jinn to live with a Da'shain who already lived there. There are also stories of the deaths of Da'shain in Tzora at the hands of Jaric Mondaren. Beyond that whilst Jonai thinks it likely that the only surviving Aiel are gathered with the wagons, its not impossible that there were other Aiel elsewhere who managed to survive--frankly i see nothing to suggest Ajimbura, but meh--in any case these too were descendents of the Da'shain.

 

Secondly,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the Aiel being Da'shain Aiel just makes them all into a faceless, homogenous, monolithic lump.  No individual thought.  No individual action.  Essentially mindless automatons.  Not really people, at all.

 

There were Aiel who deviated from this... some Aiel were chosen to become Aes Sedai, and Coumin broke the covenant, taking up an old shocklance and going off to fight.  However, these were deviations.  I get the image that the "Aiel" of the AoL weren't so much a race or nation as more similar to a social class.  My guess is that Aiel were Aiel because they followed the Covenant, not that they followed the Covenant because they were Aiel.  That's just my speculation, but it's less wild than some in this thread, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's my view, as well.

 

As with any ideology, the individuals following it were not all equally 'orthodox.'

 

Now, if the definition of Da'shain Aiel were, "dedicated to the Way of the Leaf,"  then I'd buy it.  That allows for individual variation in interpretation.  But making it specifically, "dedicated to peace in war," seems excessively restrictive.  A fascist kind of, "You will do as we do and think as we think," mentality that just doesn't fit with my idea of a near Utopia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot recall the specific line, but when rand takes Loial and Hurin through the portal stone in his sleep, he notices that the stairs out of the bowl in the "other world" are patterned in the colors of the seven ajahs.  This does indicate that the stones were created sometime soon after the 3rd age, at most one maybe two ages post the last 3rd age.  so essentially the stones at an average age length of 5000 yrs, are roughly 25,000 years old.

 

 

Ill post the quote later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, if the definition of Da'shain Aiel were, "dedicated to the Way of the Leaf,"  then I'd buy it.  That allows for individual variation in interpretation.  But making it specifically, "dedicated to peace in war," seems excessively restrictive.  A fascist kind of, "You will do as we do and think as we think," mentality that just doesn't fit with my idea of a near Utopia.

 

It's actually more socialist--and the Age of Legends society was a socialist society.

 

Irrespective though, whether you buy it or not, that's what they were. And since they themselves clearly prise this, and enforce it, its clearly not 'you will do...' but 'we will do...'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...