No, Goerge Lucas did not supply it. Terry Broosk did. He says he talked to GL, but so what? He might have embellished, invented, or made error.
What Geroge Lucas himself said is what I printed. And he has the ultimate authority. First hand, direct, from the most important canon source there is.
George Lucas directly says that the Sith went down to only two thousands of years ago. I have given the quote. That ends any argument stone dead.
Oh, he MAY have...well, according to Terry, Lucas spent a long time on the phone with him, describing to him the history of the Sith which is what he wrote. Sorry, Ush, your mays and what have yous aren't applying here.
And yep, GL is ultimate canon, hence his giving us the history of the Sith in the form Bane and Ruusan and the Rule of Two
No, he did NOT do that. Again, Terry Brooks did, after saying he had a convo with GL.
What GL himself directly said overrides that. That is the only direct source we have. What Terry Brooks says is just what he says, regardless of any talk with GL he may have had.
What GL himself, personally and directly, said obviously has primacy on that. And what he says contradicts your view and what Brooks says. Well, tough. His word is law, and that is directly what he said.
You don't even have proof that GL came up with a single thing in the TPM novel. You only have Brooks' word for it, and GL's word is more important than Brooks' in any case.
I DO have proof that GL said what he did.
I will not allow this pointless argument to continue for much longer, Lightsnake. You have been totally defeated by proven and posted sources. Your argument only persists due to increasingly stupid misinterpretations.
You are simply wrong on this. GL has stated the truth. And once more, it is forum policy that GL has primacy on all such matters. That had to be respected.
It seems to be if the Sith were to want to hide like they did that the rule of 2 would be a secret. Also here is some of the info on the Sith direct from starwars.com As you know there is info in several areas in the databank under movies and Expended Universe.
Movies- http://www.starwars.com/databank/organization/thesith/index.html
Explanded Universe-
http://www.starwars.com/databank/organization/thesith/?id=eu
No, sw.com is not a canon source.
Ye,s it does make it clear. Again, only your silliness changes that. This is direct word from GL that makes it very very clear indeed. The wording is not even slightly ambiguous. The Sith fought until only one was left. He took an Apprentice. From that point on, there were only ever two at a time. That went on for thousands of years. Clear, and direct, and the end of the story.
That's about that for the argument. That is the background of the Rule of Two, as given by GL himself. There can be no greater authority on the subject.
If you want to discuss implications and so on of the rule, then do so. But the origins argument is done. If people try to persit on it, I shall have to close.
at the top of the page at starwars.com if says Welcome to the Official Site. So do not say it is official. Also you would think that in order to remain in hiding like that, that it would have had to be a secret. It is possible that yoda had long suspected that the Sith may still be around and knew that the only way to do so would to be to form a rule of two. He does seem to be the most intellegent of the jedi and without a doubt he was the Wisest.
And the direct background of it was stated by GL, to terry Brooks who wrote it down, what is your point?
And nope, your interpretation's incorrect as official sources and LFL contradict it, I'll believe Terry over you any day. In NO PLACE does it say there was JUST ONE Master and JUST ONE Apprentice, it says the Apprentice killed the master and this went on since the inception of the Order, which fits in PERFECTLY with the aLREADY ESTABLISHED EU on the subject
Originally posted by Ushgarak
No, sw.com is not a canon source.Ye,s it does make it clear. Again, only your silliness changes that. This is direct word from GL that makes it very very clear indeed. The wording is not even slightly ambiguous. The Sith fought until only one was left. He took an Apprentice. From that point on, there were only ever two at a time. That went on for thousands of years. Clear, and direct, and the end of the story.
That's about that for the argument. That is the background of the Rule of Two, as given by GL himself. There can be no greater authority on the subject.
If you want to discuss implications and so on of the rule, then do so. But the origins argument is done. If people try to persit on it, I shall have to close.
You're threatening to close this thread?
That's outright ridiculous, Ushgarak. I've seen about enough of this shit for one day.
Why are you so afraid of being incorrect? Is it not possible for the almighty Ushgarak to never be wrong? Is Lightsnake challenging your opinion with valid theories and some stakes of evidence?
Awwww . . . Poor Ushgarak.
You can't even debate properly without threatening someone, can you Ushgarak?
I thought these Forums were about debating, dude.
Get real.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
I will not allow this pointless argument to continue for much longer, Lightsnake. You have been totally defeated by proven and posted sources. Your argument only persists due to increasingly stupid misinterpretations.You are simply wrong on this. GL has stated the truth. And once more, it is forum policy that GL has primacy on all such matters. That had to be respected.
Excuse me but where can I find the forum policy for the EU subforum ? The only thing I see is your own thread in the film section...is this a film section ?
And Lucas own word ?
http://www.darkhorse.com/news/interviews.php?id=667
Gilman: The Sith are a major topic of your comic work. Where did the Sith come from, creatively?Anderson: George Lucas. When I sent in the proposal for Exar Kun in my Jedi Academy Trilogy, I proposed that he'd either be the spirit of a Dark Jedi or a Dark Lord of the Sith... whichever was preferable -- Darth Vader is referred to as a Dark Lord of the Sith in Star Wars.
Lucas said to make him a Dark Lord of the Sith; so then I had to ask what a Dark Lord of the Sith is. Tom Veitch and I gave him a two-page questionnaire about what Dark Lords of the Sith can or can't do and Lucas defined all the parameters for us.
Hmm. Looks as if Lucas personally participated in the design of the Ancient Sith. I love how Kun takes several apprentices and how there are several Sith Lords in the Ancient Sith Empire.
But that's not enough because Lucas contradicts himself often enough on that topic. In ANH "Darth" is clearly a part of Vader's Name and not a title, since Obi-Wan hands him the line "Only a master of evil, Darth".
And are we taking about the same Lucas who personally stated this here: "There are two worlds here.There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe - the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time,but they do intrude in between the movies. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."
The EU does "intrude" in between the movies ! And even better: The passage about Sith history is written down in the TPM novelisation. May I quote your own thread here ?
"Canon includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers."
The TPM novelisation spins out of Lucas' original story and is considered absolute canon. And somehow this all is overwritten because Lucas give an ambigious statement in the TIME Magazine ?
So you really believe he did think about that statement more than about the TPM Novelisation (spending an hour of time explaining said topic to the writer of the book) ? I don't...
And how can the rule of two not be a secret when the existance of the Sith was ? How can the Jedi have thought that the Sith were exstinct when there were always two Sith Lords for thousands of years ? Was one of the Jedi a complete idiot who did possess an inability to count up to 2 ? "There are always two Sith. A master and an apprentice. One of them was killed. So there is...none left" ?
Jedi might act stupid sometimes but I doubt that they are that stupid...
Originally posted by Borbarad
But that's not enough because Lucas contradicts himself often enough on that topic. In ANH "Darth" is clearly a part of Vader's Name and not a title, since Obi-Wan hands him the line "Only a master of evil, Darth".
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Ye,s it does make it clear. Again, only your silliness changes that. This is direct word from GL that makes it very very clear indeed. The wording is not even slightly ambiguous. The Sith fought until only one was left. He took an Apprentice. From that point on, there were only ever two at a time. That went on for thousands of years. Clear, and direct, and the end of the story.
Originally posted by KingDubya
Which is exactly like referring to a man as "Sir" or "Mister". When I get the attention of the man standing in my path to a doorway, I say, "Excuse me, sir." Is "sir" suddenly part of his name? No, because it is a title. Just like "Darth".
No. Vaders title is "Lord" as you see all his subordinates calling him "Lord Vader". So if Obi-Wan wanted to use something like "Sir" or "Mister" he would have said "Lord" or "Mylord".
And Obi-Wan himself never calls him "Darth" out of this particular situation. He always refers to him as "Vader". And watch ANH carefully: When Luke and Obi-Wan meet for the first time and Obi-Wan tells Luke what happened to his father he tells Luke that "A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered your father."
Lucas developed the concept of "Darth" being a title for the PT movies and because of that you don't have anybody in the EU using said title before the time of TPM (Kun, Ulic, Nadd, Ragnos, Kressh, Sadow).
According to the sources I have used, Ush is right. The Sith continued fighting until only one was left (specifically, Darth Bane) and he set the Rule of Two so as to prevent any more wars between seperate factions of the Sith. This was also, supposedly, based off of the strength seen in pairs of Sith such as Exar Kun and Ulic Qel-Droma and also that of Darths Revan and Malak.
You did notice that Ush denies the story of Darth Bane by using Lucas quote that the Sith always were two for "thousands of years" (so before Bane's time) ?
Heck, even Palpatine was just 'Emperor Palpatine' until the prequels...also, though, the EU's practically confirmed Yoda's personal clash with the Sith of Bane's order, hence him being aware of the Rule of two...one of the Sith was probably definitely killed and the master or apprentice was thought to be killed
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Heck, even Palpatine was just 'Emperor Palpatine' until the prequels...also, though, the EU's practically confirmed Yoda's personal clash with the Sith of Bane's order, hence him being aware of the Rule of two...one of the Sith was probably definitely killed and the master or apprentice was thought to be killed
He was called Emperor Palpatine cause that was his official position in the Empire. He did not go around publicly declaring he was a Sith. Only those close to him knew the Truth. The rest of the empire just though Vader was the only Sith. Or perhaps just as a Jedi even. Remember when Governor Tarkin said to Vader that he was the last of his Religion in Star Wars a New Hope. That line right there tells you that they had no idea that Palpatine was a force user. They believe Vader to be the last of the force users.