hy these Oaths?
by brigitta: 2004-07-21 | Not yet rated
the Three Oaths are (the wording tends to change sometimes, which I don't like and I think indicates some possibility of individualising the Oaths slightly as long as the gist remains the same... but it also might be a blooper by RJ):
1) no lies
2) no making weapons with the OP
3) no killing with the OP, except in the last extreme of protecting your (meaning AS' own), or another Sisters' or Warders life (or against darkfriends- that's the changing part, it's in Moiraines' Oath in NS, but absent in PoD and WH when the AS Elaida put to searching BA swear the Oaths)
what I'm wondering about is why were these three picked to swear upon. the killing part is simple- the OP is very dangerous and if the Aes Sedai are known to be sworn away from killing people then those people might feel more at ease around AS.
now, the telling the truth part. it's easy to see that after the Breaking AS needed the ordinary people to trust them , not fear them and... there's no better way than to swear to tell the truth or rather "to speak no word that is not true" I think was the wording in all cases.
but the Second Oath seems useless now. it appears that in the AoL Powerwrought weapons or weapons that were enchanced with the Power were not exactly common but also not all that uncommon. it also depends on the definition of weapon. for example I might bring the time Egwene was held as damane and she thought of using a water pitcher as a weapon. in certain circumstances anything may be used as a weapon but I assume that after the Breaking weapons were ter'angreals designed to cause damage (if I remember correctly there were the kind that could be used by non-channelers also) or simpler weapons such as the Powerwrought swords. but this Oath might also indicate that after the Breaking Aes Sedai collected and destroyed weapons made with the power and that's why there are so few left. after all, it is mentioned several times that some of the most powerful ter'angreals ever made were made during the Breaking and with the purpose of destruction. I think something about wiping away whole cities with balefire was mentioned. and in order to channel enough Power to make that much balefire... I think there must have been a ter'angreal to make balefire. that might be the reason why all the Forsaken keep looking for the stasis boxes and hidden or forgotten ter'angreals- hoping that not all weapons were destroyed.
and while I'm at it... the origin of the Oaths, or rather, the real world equivalents for two of them are in the Ten Commandments "Thou shalt not lie" and "Thou shalt not kill" again, the Second Oath is not from the Ten commandments. so why did Jordan put it among the 3? why not "no stealing" or something else? but then if one had to swear "I shall not take anything that is not mine" then that might prove to be a serious predicament in too many cases. Such as picking an apple from a tree, for example. Or "confiscating" a ter'angreal, angreal or sa'angreal for the Tower. those things do not literally belong to anyone.
You cannot rate theories without first logging in. Please
log in.
1
Tamyrlin: 2004-10-22
(Frenzy for Tamyrlin)
The second Oath is symbolic. The War of Power was men fighting men in the worst way, with the worst weapons. The Red Ajah's puropose is to prevent another Breaking, and the Red Ajah are and have probably been the most numerous of Aes Sedai.
Tar Valon is the westland's peacekeeper, through diplomacy and veiled Power. The second Oath could symbolize that.
2
Callandor: 2004-10-22
**the wording tends to change sometimes, which I don't like and I think indicates some possibility of individualising the Oaths slightly as long as the gist remains the same... but it also might be a blooper by RJ**
Could you quote the differenes?
**but the Second Oath seems useless now. it appears that in the AoL Powerwrought weapons or weapons that were enchanced with the Power were not exactly common but also not all that uncommon.**
They are uncommon. They only seem uncommon, because of who we have met.
**but this Oath might also indicate that after the Breaking Aes Sedai collected and destroyed weapons made with the power and that's why there are so few left.**
I doubt it. People during/after the Breaking were just trying to survive. Not going to go and destroy things from the past Age. Plus, the Breaking itself, probably eliminated most of them.
**after all, it is mentioned several times that some of the most powerful ter'angreals ever made were made during the Breaking and with the purpose of destruction**
Quotes please.
**I think something about wiping away whole cities with balefire was mentioned. and in order to channel enough Power to make that much balefire... I think there must have been a ter'angreal to make balefire.**
Only mention of destroying a city with an object, is with Callandor, a sa'angreal not ter'angreal.
**that might be the reason why all the Forsaken keep looking for the stasis boxes and hidden or forgotten ter'angreals- hoping that not all weapons were destroyed**
They might find something like that, but it's far more likely they will find an angreal to use, like Graendal did.
3
Dorindha: 2004-10-24
In the BWB (I think) it explains pretty much why the oaths came about - the second two principally to make peace, and the first to allow people to trust AS, although it pretty much backfired.
4
Hank McCoy: 2004-10-25
Verin lectures the three girls in the TDR about using the OP on their return to the WT from Thom Head. It is durnig this lecture that she tells the girls that the oaths came about because of the Trolloc Wars (1000 AB). I don't have the book with me so I can not quote the passage but I think it is in chapter 10 or 13. Therefore, your entire connection with the Breaking is defunct because the Oaths did not exist for the first 1000 years after the breaking.
5
a dragonburned fool: 2004-10-25
Well, Yks, the collection and destroying of powerwrought weapons by AS in the time of late Breaking and after that: this makes lot of sense. In this times of havoc any mighty weapons would increase the damage caused by every wrecked idiot wanting to use the chaos for some little dirty egoistical purpose, not to say anything about the crazy men. In the time when Da'shain started their long trip, AS made their best to hide angreals and sa'angreals for to prevent crazy men having them. They do not try to have these angreals with them, because they see to much chance to die when meeting male channelers and they prefer to hide the angreals but not let the male channelers have them as trophy. It was a time relatively early of the Breaking, and Breaking continued and lot of angreals hidden were maybe found and made damage. So it is very likely that later AS decided to destroy the angreals for to be more secure (maybe it's the reason angreals are so rare now, while their name makes one to think that they were the most basic OP-device in the OP, while ter'angreals were technologically derived from it... i.e. it's to be expected angreals were more common in AoL). Powerwrought weapon are not so dangerous like male angreals, but they are still danger. AS of that time cannot rely on any organized militia, so every piece of shocklance or similar would most likely become in unreliable hands. AS themselves would not need these weapons for their own defence, for they have the channeling, and tehy would feel much more secure if they know that no mortals would use powerful weapons against them, but will be limited to primitive spears and swords. AS of these ages have lot of reasons to collect and destroy powerwrought weapons, and to act for a public opinion against these weapons in general.
A slight problem here is, that the three oaths (including the second Oath) were introduced 1000 years after the Breaking. In that time the Breaking- and post-Breaking-time considerations were already not valid, just the opposite, the Trolloc Wars would rather encourage re-discovery of ower-wrought weapons. Conservative traditions of the White Tower may be the explanation though: beginning from the time of Breaking they may strongly believe that making weapons with OP is very, but very bad thing.
I don't agree that in current time the second Oath would be unnecessary. The Tower is a political institutoin and has it's army. If AS would be able to create powerfull weapons and give it to their army, they would have military force with lot of advantage over any national army or ever over all of them unified. That would give the Tower the possibility to act military aggressive, and not only defensive like now. The Tower guard could simply weep the whitecloaks siege away in that case, but it could travel and strike alsi the Citadel of Light... Tower would be dangerous if it would able to make weapons for non-channelers.
6
brigitta: 2004-10-27
thanks for the replies. it'll take me some time to look up the quotes and answer properly...
oh, and btw, Callandor, I thought the one about very powerful OP-weapons was kinda common knowledge... anyway, as I said, this will take some time;)
7
WaterSeeker: 2004-11-09
It is possible it is politicaly motivated. When the tower was founded it was still a time of chaos and nations were just begining to form after the breaking. There would have been tales and stories about the almost constant war before the breaking. Tales can change alot in times of chaos and people would be quite afraid of the power the AS had and what they were able to create. The formation of the tower would have been seen as a threat to new nations. With out the 2nd oath those countries would have lived in fear of the Tower creating an army armed with weapons made by the Power making it the most powerful army of that time. Without the support of the other nations the Tower could not have surrived or may have had to crush them changing the face of Randland. So the Oath was needed to get the trustof the other nations. Also AS seem to be strict followers of tradtion so after centuries of saying three Oaths it would be impossable for them to change.
The Oath is more than just "no making weapons with the OP" it is more like "no making of weapons with the OP for man to use aganist man" this rules out ter'angreals being clased as weapons and these should not have been thought of as weapons any way as most need the OP to function so that Would proberly be a violiation of Oath 3 and we have yet to see a ter'angeral that anyone can use that has some function that could be classed as a weapon. The closest thing would proberly be shock lances(I think there named that) and they could be some other AOL technology not everthing in the AOL was created by AS or the One Power.
8
Callandor: 2004-11-10
From my post:
****after all, it is mentioned several times that some of the most powerful ter'angreals ever made were made during the Breaking and with the purpose of destruction**
Quotes please.**
From your post:
**oh, and btw, Callandor, I thought the one about very powerful OP-weapons was kinda common knowledge... anyway, as I said, this will take some time;)**
1. Ter'angreal's are not classified as weapons; let alone "most powerful." The ~only~ ter'angreal that is concidered a weapon that I know if, is the black rod that produces balefire.
2. It's angreal and sa'angreal that are ranked by strength (hence, "powerful").
3. I can't remember any angreal or sa'angreal being mentioned created in the Breaking; only the AoL. Some ter'angreal were made during the Breaking to hunt male channelers, though.
9
Caledoneus: 2007-10-23
well, i think in one of the earlier books (at work so can't look it up) one of the AS (possibly moraine) explains the reasons for the oaths.... after the breaking, AS needed a way that they could be trusted, since it was AS (male, but eh) who did the breaking.... oaths were a way to make people trust them again in the post breaking world... that is how i understand it anyway...
