Lore from Ghosts of Ascalon [Potential Spoilers]

[Barinthus]

The purpose of this thread is to comply all kinds of lore information from the novel Ghosts of Ascalon.

This can be used to share any new lore, confirm any known lore, or make connections between lore mentioned in the book and the known lore including disputed lore. Including old news ;)

Since the book recently came out, readers are at risk of coming across spoilers. Thread at your risk.

Off my head:

Spoiler

The Claw of Khan-ur is an ungue.

Before the Foefire occurred, King Adelbern went mad. Savione, the king's chief courtier, tried to dissuade the king from doing this but was murdered by the king himself.

Frye Fireburn and his Fireshadows were of the Flame Legion. Despite this, they were highly respected by the Charr due to their attempts to prevent the final Charr assault which led to the Foefire.

The Imperator of the Flame Legion who ignored Fireburn's warnings had his name struck from the Charr history on account of his massive neglect.

Blimm is considered to be the greatest golemancer of all times by the Asura.

Golems can be made from bones as well as other natural materials.

Ghosts created by the Foefire appears to be somewhat different from ghosts created by other means. For instance Savlone's ghost was more coherent than ghosts created by the Foefire.

Female Charrs were once considered equal of male Charrs but when the Flame Legion introduce worshipping of the titans as gods they oppressed female Charrs due to Bathea Havocbringer's refusal to submit to gods. Kalla Scorchrazor finally reversed this several centuries later.

The passage of the Crystal Dragon (Kralkatorrik) as it flew north created the Dragonbrand which is a sort of crystal-like scar throughout lands and within it are creatures transformed by the Dragonbrand. Almorra Soulkeeper was one of survivors of the creation of the Dragonbrand.

[Gmr Leon]

Off my head:

Spoiler

Ghosts created by the Foefire appears to be somewhat different from ghosts created by other means. For instance Savlone's ghost was more coherent than ghosts created by the Foefire.

Minor spelling query.

Spoiler

Is this a misspelling of Savione?

[Barinthus]

My bad, you're correct, Gmr

Spoiler

Humans don't seem to be aware of the Mursaat due to some of characters' retelling of certain histories. Perhaps they were truly unseen except to those certain few

[Guildoholic]

Mention of Blimm's legacy, last "sight"/usage of it. Gwen's title amongst the charr.

Spoiler

* The Golem's Eye, last used by Kranxx to stop the ghost of King Adelbern, is last seen and used in Ascalon.

* Gwen is known as Gwen the Goremonger amongst the Charr.

[Barinthus]

Good ones, Guildoholic

Charr perspective on King Adelbern. Ebonhawke garrison's feelings towards Kryta.

Spoiler

King Adelbern is known as Sorcerer-King among the Charr. Somewhat the history repeated (Vizier & Orr & the spell he casted versus King, Ascalon, and Foefire)

Ebon Vanguard at Ebonhawke seems to have the minimal respect for the Kryta throne

[Konig Des Todes]

Elaboration on some of the general info mentioned by Barinthus. Many spoilers, I should suspect.

Spoiler

The Claw of Khan-ur is an ungue.


Ghosts created by the Foefire appears to be somewhat different from ghosts created by other means. For instance Savlone's ghost was more coherent than ghosts created by the Foefire.


The passage of the Crystal Dragon (Kralkatorrik) as it flew north created the Dragonbrand which is a sort of crystal-like scar throughout lands and within it are creatures transformed by the Dragonbrand. Almorra Soulkeeper was one of survivors of the creation of the Dragonbrand.

In response to these:

Spoiler

The Claw of the Khan-Ur is also a symbolic weapon with 4 gems and 4 blades - the gems are of different colors (red, grey, black, and gold) to represent the four High Legions and the four first imperators of the first Khan-Ur. The weapon is needed if one wishes to become the next Khan-Ur but it is not the sole requirement, one has to convince the other 3 imperators that they are worthy of wielding the weapon and leading all four legions. Its power appears to be solely symbolic and it is very difficult to wield due to 2 blades going backwards making it easy to cut oneself with it.

The ghosts made by the Foefire are said to be stuck in time, constantly reliving the day of the Foefire and are also full with bloodlust and are quite insane. Unlike normal ghosts, when killed they will simply reform instead of moving on like we've seen before (the Primeval King in the Desolation and the king's servant both moved on when "killed"). These ghosts also view everyone they see as charr or, at best, allies of the charr.

The sole exception is Adelbern, who seems to have retained his individuality and previous persona. However, due to being insane, he believes that he pushed back the charr forces the day the Flame Legion imperator invaded the city and he believes he and his men are still alive - or seems that way at first. Likewise, all ghosts believe they're alive, though they still do not exempt themselves from being able to use their ghastly abilities - like flying and going through walls.

Adelbern also mentions that he wishes to rule all of Tyria (when he sees the golem made by the Golem's Eye, he claims that he wants the power and with it will drive out all charr out of Ascalon and take control of Tyria - which Tyria he meant is unknown).

The Dragonbrand reminds me of Glint's lair - crystals plants and everything are in the lair. The only difference is that Kralkatorrik seems far darker (and adds in the blotting out the sun with constant thunderclouds) and is always a purple color - Glint's Lair outpost however shows blue coloring.

Discussion on the charr perspective on the Krytan invasion, humanity's awareness of Mursaat. Some additional info on the Lionguard, Ebonhawke, and the human/charr conflict.

Spoiler

Humans don't seem to be aware of the Mursaat due to some of characters' retelling of certain histories. Perhaps they were truly unseen except to those certain few

Spoiler

They actually don't bring up the charr invasion of Kryta (in detail) or the white mantle in the book. The entire topic was left untouched more or less. The book focused on the human/charr conflict (mostly Ascalon issue - brief mention of Kryta and Orr in that) and the Elder Dragons alone.

Spoiler

The Lionguard seems to be an order dedicated to protecting travelers and/or trade alongside Lion's Arch now, instead of protecting Kryta, as they have set up havens for traders in the Shiverpeak Mountains.

Ebonhawke existed before the Ebon Vanguard moved in there in 1080 AE, Gwen fortified the place after Adelbern sent her and the vanguard there because he felt that would be the final bastion of Ascalon. Over the years, wall after wall was built around the place until the Hawkgates were built, and the place has survived siege after constant siege. Ebonhawke seems to control little to no land outside of the Hawkgates, which are built upon a northern river. Even in the book, Ebonhawke is said to be built at the merge of the Shiverpeaks and Blazeridge - interesting considering its location on the map (might be a displacement).

The human/charr conflict in Ascalon is referred to as the Ascalon Insurrection by charr, but the ascalonian humans refer to it as the War of Ascalon Independence.

The Ebon Vanguard is confirmed to be the Ascalon Vanguard renamed (prior to this, it was thought that they were a break-away faction by some). They were renamed due to taking in so many members who were not part of the Ascalon Army (mostly prisoners of the charr).

And there's much more.

[BrettM]

Future of Temple of the Ages.

On a minor note:

Spoiler

ToA is now sunken. (p. 51) Dougal apparently had some adventure there.

Observations on the charr attitude towards King Adelbern's usage of Magdaer.

Quibbles:

Spoiler

I find it very hard to understand the charr attitude towards the Foefire compared with their attitude towards the Cataclysm. Pyre told us the charr understood and admired the action of the Vizier in destroying Orr and its people rather than letting the charr win. Yet Ember seems disgusted by the actions of Adelbern, who did the same thing on a smaller scale. Ember's reaction seems much more human, while Pyre's reaction shows a distinct cultural difference.

Observations on the nature of the human/charr conflict, disagreements with descriptions.

Spoiler

The argument over whether the Ascalonians were fighting a war for independence or staging an insurrection seems incredibly ridiculous. The charr may have considered the lands to be theirs by right, but they were never the governors of the Ascalonian humans. Any humans they captured and used as slaves could stage an insurrection or make a bid for independence, but free Ascalonians can not meaningfully be characterized as doing either.

One can't get around this by claiming some sort of parallel with the conflict between the amerinds and the U.S. government. The amerinds were a conquered population, essentially governed by the U.S. despite the wording of treaties giving them some privileges of self-government. The Ascalonians never had any kind of treaty with the charr and never acknowledged charr rights or rule in any manner.

By the time of the Searing, each side saw the other as invaders fighting a war of conquest and each side saw themselves as defenders of their homelands.

[Art]

On a minor note:

Spoiler

By the time of the Searing, each side saw the other as invaders fighting a war of conquest and each side saw themselves as defenders of their homelands.

Like Palestine/Israel?

-Art

[Konig Des Todes]

Quibbles:

Spoiler

I find it very hard to understand the charr attitude towards the Foefire compared with their attitude towards the Cataclysm. Pyre told us the charr understood and admired the action of the Vizier in destroying Orr and its people rather than letting the charr win. Yet Ember seems disgusted by the actions of Adelbern, who did the same thing on a smaller scale. Ember's reaction seems much more human, while Pyre's reaction shows a distinct cultural difference.

Spoiler

This actually 2 very different things. Firstly, the charr care about ruling Ascalon more than Orr. Secondly, Orr is (was) no more after the Cataclysm, so there was nothing to conquer. And finally, unlike Orr, Adelbern had unkillable ghosts roam what seems to be the entire nation of Ascalon (or at least most of it) with the central point being Ascalon City. Pyre said that Khilbron destroyed his nation rather than fight the charr, Adelbern on the other hand fought the charr and in order to keep them from gaining the nation he created an eternal army. They cannot occupy all of Ascalon now, even if they were to destroy Ebonhawke.

Spoiler

The argument over whether the Ascalonians were fighting a war for independence or staging an insurrection seems incredibly ridiculous. The charr may have considered the lands to be theirs by right, but they were never the governors of the Ascalonian humans. Any humans they captured and used as slaves could stage an insurrection or make a bid for independence, but free Ascalonians can not meaningfully be characterized as doing either.

One can't get around this by claiming some sort of parallel with the conflict between the amerinds and the U.S. government. The amerinds were a conquered population, essentially governed by the U.S. despite the wording of treaties giving them some privileges of self-government. The Ascalonians never had any kind of treaty with the charr and never acknowledged charr rights or rule in any manner.

By the time of the Searing, each side saw the other as invaders fighting a war of conquest and each side saw themselves as defenders of their homelands.

Spoiler

The thing is that the charr view themselves better than humans, that they are the true rulers of all Tyria. By viewing themselves as rulers of Tyria, that means they view themselves to be rulers of humans - even if the humans don't consent - so to the charr, it is an insurrection. It might not be as a fact, or by views of other races, but to the charr - which is where the term is used by, and only then - it is an accurate term.

[Alaris]

Ok fine, I'm ordering the book.