Re: King Moirades' Empire

From: Paul Andrew King <paul_at_morat.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:04:17 +0100

I'll start by repeating that I have no problem with choosing an idea that makes a juicy plot-point. My objection is limited to the claim that support for this idea is to be found in KoS

Lets go over what Argrath's Saga DOES say about the Good Empire (all of these points are restricted to the paragraph where the Good Empire is explicitly named)

1. It is a new name for the Lunar Empire.
2. It sent an army to attack Fyllich Kwan (according to the maps I have this suggests an attack from the East - presumably to include the Elves). Jar-Eel is with the army which is lead by either Phargentes or the "King of Jillaro" (Jar-Eel's presence suggests that this is the Lunar Empire, rather than an independent Tarshite Lunar state, as does the uncertainty over the leadership. I also find it more plausible geographically that Sylila is part of the main Lunar Empire rather than a Tarshite state given that Holay is independent and the first target of the attack).
3. The Lunar Empire had conquered Tarsh, the inhabitants called the Empire "the Good Empire" and Phargentes was King.

None of these suggest that Phargentes is Emperor or that the "Good Empire" is anything other than a name for the Lunar Empire

Phargentes is also named as King of Dragon Pass between 1677 and 1680. However, as Moirades held that position while being subservient to the Lunar Empire it cannot be evidence that Phargentes is independent, so all this gives us is a date.

As to your suggestion that the conquests of Tarsh at the end of Part 3 and part 4 are the same event, both are to be found in CHDP. If these events are the same then CHDP is equally confused (which is unlikely if it was written for Agrath's wedding shortly after Dwernapple). So I am not sure what your point is here. I can't even find a reasonable alternative that you might have meant.

Nor do we have two formations of the Good Empire. All Part 5 says is that the name was in use in Tarsh at the time - it does not say when the name was first applied.

---