It’s a very good argument, and I can easily accept that FBG were mistaken about the earliest date that coins existed and just assumed that they’d been around for longer than they had - it’s a more obscure kind of information. But the major issue is that we’re told that “Even the First City was young when Babylon fell.” That kind of date is pretty easy to track down, and so I find it very hard to believe that a mistake was made in this area. It’s a shame, because as I said, those suggestions are excellent, and aside from these minor things, fit well.
It’s a little like (if you’ll pardon the comparison) solving a murder. You can have all the motive, the fingerprints and DNA samples. You can have a full plan of everyone’s movements, down to the exact second that everything happened, full transcripts of everything that was done and said and everything fits perfectly. Except for the minor detail that when you go to arrest the prime suspect, it turns out that he has the impeccable alibi of having been dead for a year.
So, when there are irreconcilable issues, such as dates, then no matter how good the rest of the argument, I find that I cannot accept it.
I don’t think it’s a mistake, I think it’s a false lead. A lot of the sidebar texts are. I remember one of the earliest sidebars I saw was the one saying “What is the Correspondence? They say it’s the last accounts of the last days of the Third City, strung in beads on cord in a code no-one living understands” which of course calls to mind the famous Quechua of the Incas and suggests that the Third City was Inca in origin. But every other information about the Third City hints at it being Mayan. So, we’re faced with the same dilemma: a mistake, or a deliberate false lead by the writers? As a lot of the sidebar texts contradict each other I think it’s the latter, but of course I may be totally wrong there…
Just spotted another seven: The Department of _______ at the University has seven characters in the blank. (in all the places I could find poking around in-game) Maybe there’s a true name for the Correspondence that’s seven letters long?
For what it’s worth, I’ve developed my own pet crackpot conspiracy theory regarding the Manager’s lover. In the Doubt Street interview, he says that his lover is ‘over the water’, but that he sees ‘his face in the streets every day’. Now, in Wilmot’s End, you can meet a Clay Man standing by a statue that could be his double. Putting the two together, I find myself wondering whether the Clay Men are made in the image of someone specific, someone over the water in Polythreme, and it is in them that the Manager sees his lover’s face…
Probably the ramblings of a lunatic, but I figured I’d toss it out there.
[quote=notemily]I like the theory about the Masters being mentioned in that Biblical passage. But remember this?
How many names do the Masters have?
[i]It’s hard to be certain, but some have traded under more than one name. They say Mr Apples was Mr Barley once. Certainly Mr Iron used to trade as Mr Bronze. And Mr Stones was also trading as Mr Marble quite recently. Until that trouble with the tomb-colonies.
[/i]Marble is mentioned in the passage, bronze, however, is not.[/quote]
The Hebrew word for “brass” is also that for bronze.
Aside from this Eye Temple business, I still find Jerusalem to be the best candidate for the First City.
I agree with the Jerusalem hypothesis. Speaking of which, what do people think of the previously-mentioned speculation that the phrase “Even the First City was young when Babylon fell” is a corruption of the original phrase? It would make much more sense if it was “Even Babylon was young when the First City fell.” If I recall correctly, I believe Jerusalem was dismissed only because it was very old when Babylon fell? If we flip the phrase, however, Jerusalem becomes a possibility – and one of the only ones, at that.
Oh, and also, wasn’t Judas paid 30 silver coins to betray Jesus? There’s a sack of 30 First City coins in the Museum of Mistakes… edited by Little The on 3/2/2012
I actually brought that up a while ago. In fact, not only are 30 coins found in the museum of mistakes, but it’s customary to give them in increments of 30 in either case.
Sorry, but I don’t believe the Jerusalem hypothesis for a second. The 30 coins certainly could be interpreted this way, but how do you fit in the rest? The Manager is described as an old priest-king, writing cuneiform. The First City coins have cuneiform writing on them, but that was never used in Jerusalem, certainly not around the time of Jesus. In fact, it was used in Sumer exactly around the time Nagar fell.
Also, we know that the Second City was Egyptian and had a Pharaoh. But after the crucifixion there were no longer any Pharaohs, so where between Jerusalem and the Mayans would you fit in the Second City? In fact, we know that the Second City has to be around 3000 years old as that is how old the Vake is… edited by Rupho Schartenhauer on 3/24/2015
Hypothesis: What if we’ve got the 30 silver coins bit the wrong way round?
What if it’s not that First City Coins are given in batches of 30 because of Judas?
Instead, could it not be that the infamous traitor was himself a player of the Marvellous, and his betrayal was in order to secure the coins he needed? It certainly seems to fit the facts a bit better to me. edited by T.W.O. Chandler on 3/3/2012
[quote=T.W.O. Chandler]Hypothesis: What if we’ve got the 30 silver coins bit the wrong way round?
What if it’s not that First City Coins are given in batches of 30 because of Judas?
Instead, could it not be that the infamous traitor was himself a player of the Marvellous, and his betrayal was in order to secure the coins he needed? It certainly seems to fit the facts a bit better to me. edited by T.W.O. Chandler on 3/3/2012[/quote]
I like it! What was his heart’s desire? edited by KatarinaNavane on 3/3/2012
[quote=Wieland Burandt]Sorry, but I don’t believe the Jerusalem hypothesis for a second. The 30 coins certainly could be interpreted this way, but how do you fit in the rest? The Manager is described as an old priest-king, writing cuneiform. The First City coins have cuneiform writing on them, but that was never used in Jerusalem, certainly not around the time of Jesus. In fact, it was used in Sumer exactly around the time Nagar fell.
Also, we know that the Second City was Egyptian and had a Pharaoh. But after the crucifixion there were no longer any Pharaohs, so where between Jerusalem and the Mayans would you fit in the Second City? In fact, we know that the Second City has to be around 3000 years old as that is how old the Vake is… edited by Wieland Burandt on 3/2/2012[/quote]
You object because you don’t understand what is being proposed.
a) 30 pieces of silver is the weregild of a slave given in Exodus. Many of the laws in Exodus have parallels in other Palestinian and Egyptian legal codes, so this price may have been in use even before that. Granted this doesn’t single out Jerusalem.
b) Melchizedek, king of Salem (an old name of Jerusalem) is described as a priest and a king.
c) Cuneiform was used throughout the Middle East, including ancient Jerusalem.
d) No one is arguing for a 70 A.D. Jerusalem. The latest would be Jerusalem’s fall to the Babylonians, if not even earlier.
e) Although to my knowledge Jerusalem had no native cedar trees, a great quantity of cedar was used to build the temple and Solomon’s palace, including a structure referred to as “the house of the forest of Lebanon” because of how much cedar was used in its construction. What do cedars have to do with Nagar?
f) Do we trust the source of this information on the Vake? edited by wlerin on 3/3/2012
[quote=wlerin]You object because you don’t understand what is being proposed.
a) 30 pieces of silver is the weregild of a slave given in Exodus. Many of the laws in Exodus have parallels in other Palestinian and Egyptian legal codes, so this price may have been in use even before that. Granted this doesn’t single out Jerusalem.
b) Melchizedek, king of Salem (an old name of Jerusalem) is described as a priest and a king.
c) Cuneiform was used throughout the Middle East, including ancient Jerusalem.
d) No one is arguing for a 70 A.D. Jerusalem. The latest would be Jerusalem’s fall to the Babylonians, if not even earlier.
e) Although to my knowledge Jerusalem had no native cedar trees, a great quantity of cedar was used to build the temple and Solomon’s palace, including a structure referred to as "the house of the forest of Lebanon" because of how much cedar was used in its construction. What do cedars have to do with Nagar?
f) Do we trust the source of this information on the Vake?[/quote]
Granted, I didn’t know most of these things.
a) is a particularly interesting piece of information. An "earlier" Jerusalem might indeed be a possibility.
e) If I’m not completely mistaken, cedars were once growing throughout most of the Near East, including Upper Mesopotamia.
f) Not necessarily. But that can be said of most pieces of information on the earlier cities. If we distrust them all, the discussion is going nowhere…
Still, what would you make of the "eye temple"? If you’re so knowledgeable about the matter: was there any building in ancient Jerusalem which would fit that name? And what do you think the Second City was, then? Because the "tall man" who "tore down the old gods and raised himself up" and had a new capital built for his empire fits Akhenaten and Amarna so well, I cannot think of any better solution. Unless of course, we doubt that information, too…
About the reliability of information: I think that clues found "in the game" are more reliable than those taken from the sidebars. I think we can agree that there are a lot of false leads in the sidebar texts. The saying "even the First City was young when Babylon fell" has only ever been mentioned in that one sidebar, so I find it easier to discard than information found in the game itself, however shadowy the source of that information might be. But of course, all of this is highly speculative… (which is part of the fun, isn’t it? I would be disappointed by the FBG writers if there were only one logical explanation at the current stage of the game :) ) ! edited by Rupho Schartenhauer on 3/24/2015
First time posting so might as well throw in my theories for the cities.
First City (Tel Megiddo fell 586 BC]):
Fell in the same time as the destruction of the First
Israelite Temple in Jerusalem by the Babylonians and remains uninhabited.
Even the first city was young when Babylon fell - Perhaps it is refering
to the cities age in the Neath so if Babylon fell a few decades after the
first city was taken then the first city was still young when they heard
the news from the surface.
the name, the Crossroads Shaded By Cedars - It sat at a crossroads and
ancient strategic location. Jezreel Valley which it overlooks includes
cedar trees in it’s forest. And, it has a name that remains synonymous
with the end times.
Who makes the Clay Men? - Well they hold certain similarities to Golems of
Jewish folklore.
Second City (Alexandria, fell ca. 30 BC):
The Duchess might have once been Cleopatra and her lover of
course Mark Antony. Cleopatra had two sisters Berenice IV and Arsinoe IV,
and of the Pharoah’s daughters she’s the last. Perhaps she was able to
delay the Masters claiming the city somehow until the tsunami of 365 AD
(drowning and the Death By Water dreams). Perhaps Cleopatra seduced the
information on how to do so from Mr. Eaten.
Third City (Hopelchén, fell in the 9th century AD):
Skyglass Knife - The Maya made extensive use of obsidian for weapons.
The Third City seems to have been acquired a thousand years ago. It had five
wells, they say. - the Mayan city of Hopelchen “place of five wells”.
Fourth City (Karakorum fell 1388 AD):
It’s something about the silver tree. And a battle that never happened. -
The silver tree existed in Karakorum during the reign of Ogedai Kahn.
One of his generals was due to attack an area of Egypt but was called
back when Ogedai Kahn died. So a battle that never happened.
[quote=PsiCat76]First time posting so might as well throw in my theories for the cities.
First City (Tel Megiddo fell 586 BC]):
Fell in the same time as the destruction of the First Israelite Temple in Jerusalem by the Babylonians and remains uninhabited.
Even the first city was young when Babylon fell - Perhaps it is refering to the cities age in the Neath so if Babylon fell a few decades after the first city was taken then the first city was still young when they heard the news from the surface.
The name, the Crossroads Shaded By Cedars - It sat at a crossroads and ancient strategic location. Jezreel Valley which it overlooks includes cedar trees in it’s forest. And, it has a name that remains synonymous with the end times.
Who makes the Clay Men? - Well they hold certain similarities to Golems of Jewish folklore.
Second City (Alexandria, fell ca. 30 BC):
The Duchess might have once been Cleopatra and her lover of course Mark Antony. Cleopatra had two sisters Berenice IV and Arsinoe IV, and of the Pharoah’s daughters she’s the last. Perhaps she was able to delay the Masters claiming the city somehow until the tsunami of 365 AD (drowning and the Death By Water dreams). Perhaps Cleopatra seduced the information on how to do so from Mr. Eaten.
[/quote]
Not bad, not bad at all! See, that’s what I wanted all along: someone putting forth another well-thought-out and not-easily-refutable theory. That the Clay Men are very similar to Golems could indeed be a hint at a Jewish origin for the First City. Particularly intriguing: the thought that the Second City remained on the Surface for a time! I have always wondered about Mr Eaten’s remark on the Second City’s “delightful weather”, which wouldn’t make sense for a neath-place.
[quote=PsiCat76] Fourth City (Karakorum fell 1388 AD):
It’s something about the silver tree. And a battle that never happened. -
The silver tree existed in Karakorum during the reign of Ogedai Kahn.
One of his generals was due to attack an area of Egypt but was called back when Ogedai Kahn died. So a battle that never happened. [/quote]
But Ögedei Khan died in 1241, so it is quite a stretch until 1388… I still think Xanadu more likely because when it fell in 1369 it was…
a) the capital of a grand empire. After Xanadu’s fall the Khan hid in Karakorum for another 20 years before the Chinese destroyed that as well, but the real end of the Mongol empire’s power was Xanadu’s fall.
b) the Masters wanted Xanadu all along, they’ve been courting Kublai Khan all the time since he made it the new capital.
c) we don’t know how Xanadu looked, there’s practically nothing left of it. It may have had its own silver tree, maybe even grander than the one in Karakorum. Or, they might’ve built one after the Fall, to remember the one on the surface. edited by Rupho Schartenhauer on 3/24/2015
So, everybody seems to agree on Hopelchén being the Third City. Here are two different theories for the other three cities:
Theory #1 (put forward by me) First City: Nagar, fell ca. 2200 BC Second City: Amarna, fell ca. 1335 BC Third City: Hopelchén, fell in the 9th century AD Fourth City: Xanadu, fell 1369
Problems: anachronism of silver coins at the time of the First City; the saying about Babylon doesn’t fit.
Theory #2 (put forward by PsiCat76) First City: Megiddo, fell 586 BC Second City: Alexandria, fell ca. 30 BC Third City: Hopelchén, fell in the 9th century AD Fourth City: Karakorum, fell 1388
Problems: the Vake’s age would either be wrong or it would not be from the Second City at all; what about the Eye temple?; the hints at the Duchess’ father would be false leads.
-----------------------
Something else: I just found that the Libyan city of Benghazi was originally a Greek colony named Euesperides/Hesperides… wouldn’t that be a nice explanation for the origin of the name "Hesperidean cider"? Also, the wikipedia article specifically mentions Hesperides as a place where coins were made – coins looking like this:
Coins featuring cedars aren’t mentioned though. And of course Hesperides wasn’t the capital of an empire. It wasn’t even destroyed, it was simply abandoned by its people. Still, fascinating… Is it possible the First City has no specific historic counterpart, that the writers just threw in pieces from here and there and created their own First City? edited by Rupho Schartenhauer on 3/24/2015
Dunno, I still find it a clearer explanation for the Hesperidean Cider to be called this way because it’s made with the apples of the Hesperides. As the golden apple tree grew in the Hesperides’ garden, that would also explain why the new Story quality dealing with immortality and undeath in the Neath is called Gates of the Garden, maybe? edited by streetfelineblue on 3/3/2012
All of this is very interesting…unfortunately I’m no historian or archaeologist, so I can’t really contribute much new information.
I agree that the eye temple thing does put Jerusalem into question. But still, it’s one of the most important cities in the world – it doesn’t make sense that the Masters would pass that up. (There’s also at least one crack theory going around that Mr Apples is Jesus, but…well, I’m not actually sure how that would work.) Personally, though, I prefer Burandt’s guesses for the other three.
Personally, I consider the fact that Jerusalem is one of the most important cities in the world to be a rather compelling argument as to why it wasn’t taken - if it had been, it would have ceased to exist as a relevant location. That would be the entire point of stealing it - so that it’s now in the 'Neath rather than Above.
London is also one of the most important cities in the world, and yet. Which is to say, it seems clear that the alternate history of the setting extends back beyond the Fall of London. The Surface has been aware of the Neath for some time, and fantastical creatures and the like appear in connection with real-world figures and events. Certainly, the previous four Cities all being ones which disappeared or depopulated in the real world is thematically appealing, but it’s entirely possible that, say, the EBZ-world Jerusalem never recovered from Babylonian invasion. (Put a bit of a spin on the Crusades if the Holy Land was underground and neighbour to Hell, eh?)
