History of the Sith

i found this on the force.net which i found quite interesting
i always wondered why there was only 2 sith at once

The book also gives a history of the Siths. And that the Siths wiped each other out and only one survived - Darth Bane. He developed the idea of only two Siths at a time to prevent internal problems. Lucas has said: "One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith Lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the Dark Side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, become the master, and so on. But there could never be more than two of them, because if there were, they woud try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which, if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies." So does this mean there CAN be more Sith than two? Cool.

I knew this alreadt, but to your question, it's the same with the eu: there weren't any Jedis left or Sith but in a lot of books there are Jedis.
I don't think there will be more than 2 Sith
"Always 2 there are, a master and an apprentice."
And you saw what happend in ROTJ so...

Yes, this has been out there fore a while now.

The same info in on the Episode-I Insides Guide.

It;s another one of those generally accepted fan things. GL tends to leave things vague- hence he just gives the concept of the Sith being reduced to two and staying like that.

Others, in the EU, develop those vague points into stories like Darth Bane.

Yep, then came Xar-Kun.

ANd if you remember, VAder wanted Luke and the Emperor wanted Luke, but neither wanted the other to still be around. Thus there would still be only two.

So far Yoda is correct.

And I think that will stay like that.
There was also a Sith-master with a Q in it and also 3 words

Actually, I don;t think that counts any more by the time of the OT< where this is no more reason for the Sith to stay low.

The conversation between Vader and the Emperor in ESB clearly shows that a third was at least a possibility, even if both were secretly planning to dump the other.

Well, wouldn't it be great when Yoda is mistaken about there being 2 Siths?

No.

Tell me more please

If in AOTC and EP3 there were more Sith then Anakin wouldn't be so important to Palpatine.

At least in Ep2..

well....

Vader to Luke: Join me and we can defeat the emperor and rule the galaxy together as father and son.

or something close to that.

Vader "If he could be turned..."
Palpy" He would be a powerful ally"

But then Palpy turns on Vader

Palpy to Luke: Good, your hate has made you powerful... Now take your fathers place at my side.

Thus Still only two. never 3.
That's just the way I see it.

Just the way I see it JW.

I meant that even Yoda can make mistakes, and this would be a big one

Well it's never going to happen so you can forget about it.

I think in ESB the Emperor and Vader just wanted Luke on their side. Maybe not as a Sith, just a Dark Jedi. He knew all about the rebels so he would have been a great ally.

But in ROTJ I think it changed and Vader and the Emperor were trying to get rid of each other.

That's not an unreasonable interpretation, KJ.

However, JW and Finti, you have to accept that the possibility of there being three of them (whether two Sith and an ally or three Sith), otherwise neither of them would have suggested it to each other.

As I already said, whetehr they later planned to betray each other or not (and they both did, of course) is irrelevant; the ESB conversation makes it clear that THE POSSIBILITY EXISTED.

What is the difference between a Dark Jedi and a Sith?

Ths always causes a bit of confusion.

Obviously no definitve definition (no pun intended) has ever been made; however, it's not too hard to come up woith the difference.

The SIth is an organisation, the aims and goals of which still have not been defined.

A Dark Jedi is simply and Jedi who has fallen to the Dark Side; this does not make you automatically a Sith.

Hence, all Sith are Dark Jedi, but not all Dark Jedi are Sith.

Maybe Ki-Adi-Mundi was correct: the Sith are extinct for over a millenia; but the Dark Jedi not