Lore talk:Mundus

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

original research? yes and no. it's like another uesp article, but with more verbatim source text. There's no need to link to it, as there is a wealth of info on the divines out there. unless there was some specific detail you used? 24.31.156.165 21:59, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

I didn't add those TIL links, in fact I replaced one, and added a quote from our own books. If it doesn't add to the understanding, we should replace it, perhaps you can find other bits that are better? I mean B's article looks nice, but it is probably not worth setting precedence for. --BenouldTC 22:05, 5 August 2008 (EDT)
The monomyth is sufficient to justify most of the article, and there are plenty more sources to corroborate it. So the justification flag can be removed soon. However, I'm not sure what that quote has to do with anything.Temple-Zero 18:21, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

quote[edit]

The quote in this article may be important to the nature of Mundus, but not really related to the scope or topic of the article.76.179.191.245 15:46, 21 December 2008 (EST)

I agree. I think the quote would confuse more readers than it would help, especially since it never explicitly mentions Mundus. Therefore I've deleted it. --NepheleTalk 13:42, 1 January 2009 (EST)

merging[edit]

I suggest merging this article with Lore:Nirn. The terms are used interchangeably, with random choice determining the use of one or the other at any given time.76.179.191.245 15:53, 21 December 2008 (EST)

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I've only recently begun educating myself in Elder Scrolls lore (and I'm sure I'm missing something), but I was under the impression that Mundus is essentially an "abstract" term referring to the reality that the Elder Scrolls takes place in; Nirn, I thought, is the physical planet that Tamriel and the other continents are on. --GuildKnightTalk2me 21:11, 21 December 2008 (EST)
I have thought of it that way too, but is there any concrete difference between those two descriptions? A planet IS an abstract reality. It may be true that when people are talking about dirt and tectonic plates they say Nirn and when they speak of creation myths they say Mundus, but they both refer to the same collaborative creation- a world with a divinity of its own. I suspect that most people attach the same meaning to both words, and the sources do as well, but I could be wrong. It's worth finding out, anyhow.76.179.191.245 12:30, 22 December 2008 (EST)
Mundus, if I'm correct, is the reality plane created by Lorkhan, the Aedra, and the other et'Ada as part of the worlds of creation, in a limbo between Aetherius and Oblivion. Nirn is what became of the worlds of creation after the worlds of creation were destroyed by the Padomaic beings, disgusted at what Mundus was. Mundus is like the universe while Nirn is the planet hosting the continents of Tamriel, Akavir, Atmora, Yokuda (before it was sunk into the sea), Pyandonea, and Thras. Merging the two articles would be like saying the universe and planet Earth are the same entity, which they clearly are not.--penguin0719 13:36, 22 December 2008 (EST)
The Universe is the Aurbis, not the Mundus. Look up the night sky and you will see the rest of the universe- Oblivion and the light of Aetherius, and those things are outside Mundus. So then, where does Nirn end and Mundus begin? (The Anuad is allegorical and the twelve worlds refer to the collaborative efforts of twelve gods.)76.179.191.245 14:46, 22 December 2008 (EST)
There does seem to be a slight difference in meaning between Mundus and Nirn. At least based upon the current article, Mundus contains eight planets in addition to just Nirn. Presumably, the moons (Masser and Secunda) are also part of Mundus, but not part of Nirn. So Mundus might be more analogous to the solar system (minus the sun) than the universe. So I think distinct articles are appropriate -- as long as the articles are cross-referenced, which is currently the case. --NepheleTalk 13:42, 1 January 2009 (EST)
In that case the two articles should still have very similar information. Let's put the list of landmasses in Mundus and the mythic history into Nirn.74.65.142.202 14:27, 1 January 2009 (EST)
I don't really agree. You wouldn't expect details of Earth's continents to appear in an article on the Solar System. Making the articles contain more overlapping content just increases problems with redundancy. Readers who want comprehensive information are likely to read both articles no matter what: why make them read the same information twice, and why make them puzzle over whether there's some significance behind why the continents are listed in a different order (for example) on the two pages? I'm not sure what the problem is that you're trying to fix. --NepheleTalk 15:07, 4 January 2009 (EST)
Because that's really not the difference between them. They are used as to be almost completely synonymous. ES doesn't really have a solar system. Do you know why Mankar Camoran called Tamriel a Daedric Realm? Because it is a realm that floats in Oblivion. It doesn't float in a separate space called Mundus, it floats in the void. The only place we really hear of Aedric planets is in the Dwemer observatory, and even then it is uncertain whether they are located near Nirn or far away in Aetherius. Most readers will not be well informed on where the fuzzy line is, and the articles right now do not communicate how closely related the two terms are. When Mundus is used in a source, it usually means "this mortal plane in which we live." In the Mundus article we get a cosmology-minded account of creation myths and such. When a source says Nirn, 'it usually means 'this planet on which we live,' and the article lists all the landmasses. Thing is, the word is "plane(t)" and that's not a coincidence of etymology.
But I guess what I'll just propose is this: the introductory paragraph of Lore:Nirn is quite succinct and useful. It could be helpful if adapted for Lore:Mundus. Lore:Mundus, isn't really an article at all, it's a history. It should go under its former heading: Mythic History and be copied over to lore:nirn as well, as that story details the creation of both places, wherever one begins and the other ends.Temple-Zero 15:24, 4 January 2009 (EST)
I think the article should remain, Mundus is pretty much a solar system while Nirn is the world it all takes place on, and as shown in the Dwemer Orrery's, there apparently are other planets besides Nirn in relative proximity to Nirn. I wouldn't trust Mankar Camoran that much, since Tamriel isn't a plane but a landmass. And about the etymological coincidence you mentioned, it is simply just a coincidence. Plane comes from Latin's "planum" (meaning "flat") and can also be found in Scandinavian languages such my own mothertongue, in which it is rendered as "plan" with the same meaning and origin, it is essentially a synonym of "plain", except it's is used in different situations. "Planet" on the other hand comes from Greek's "planetes" (meaning "wandered") and refers to the moving tendencies of planets, who seem to migrate on the sky, as opposed to the static stars. Besides, had Nirn been floating in Oblivion, it'd been a Daedric realm, which it is not, Mundus was created to hold an order different from that of Oblivion, and Nirn on the other hand are the unified remnants of the original worlds of Mundus that (as another poster also pointed out) were destroyed by the Padomay. At least, to the best of my knowledge, this is how it works. -Nederbird 81.227.117.136 11:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
No one is talking about merging the articles right now, but switching around some of the information in them to be easier to understand. I was not aware of the different roots of plane and planet, but neither Latin nor Greek exist in ES. Their use in the source material "plane(t)" strongly suggests that they are related in meaning if not etymology. Mundus likely has the same reality and system of time as Nirn. There are hints that humans can visit the moons, after all. Nirn floats in the void because it is the center of Mundus. None of the other planets or the moons are of import except in their role to fortify Nirn. The eight planets and the moons are practically the corpses of Nirn's creators, and it is unlikely that a distinct 'Mundus' pocket of space surrounds them all. They share a reality, but there is likely Oblivion void between the earth and the moon. The bodies in the Mundus float in the sky same as the stars and orbit the physical, finite object in the center. This is why in many sources and common parlance, the difference between Nirn and Mundus is often seen as academic.74.65.142.202 15:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I still do not think that one can equate "planet" with "plane" simply because the words in English (which doesn't exists in ES either) sound alike. What about the ES games in other languages like French or Russian? Also, I'm sceptical to the use of mythology as fact. Sure, this may be fantasy, but the abilities of the peoples of Nirn to actually prove what they're claiming are limited, and so should not be regarded more than theories or speculations and the text should in my opinion be formulated accordingly. -Nederbörd 81.227.119.19 17:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
The equation of plane and planet comes from in-character source text and not fan association based on the similarity of the words. And in any case, most works in English will employ English-specific wordplay even if the language on the other side of the Fourth Wall is someone else. As for "theories and speculations," it is only speculation if there is no evidence, and of course it is all theory. Scientific knowledge is often theory, and comes with its own built-in disclaimer. We have a rather more limited capacity to judge Nirn's capacity to understand their universe, as they employ the wisdom of gods, demons, divination and ineffable racial memory.Temple-Zero 05:03, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a reply to a discussion that is a couple years old, but I came across it after trying desperately to figure out the difference between Nirn and Mundus. From jumping around the site and reading all the lore I can handle, I've came to the conclusion that indeed Mundus is seperate from Nirn."Aurbis is used to connote the imperceptible Penumbra, the Gray Center between the IS/IS NOT of Anu and Padomay. It contains the multitude realms of Aetherius and Oblivion, as well as other, less structured forms.", this is taken from[[1]]. My interpretation of this is that before there was a mortal plane of existence, the et'Ada had their respective realms(Aetherius and Oblivion) in this 'gray area' between the two prime forces, until Lorkhan conceived the idea of Mundus, "mortal plane", where aspects of Anu could give free birth, the et'Ada of padomay descent did not approve of this and wanted planes all to themselves in Oblivion, thus Mundus and it's planets were created. I look at it as an egg; The yolk is Nirn, the white of the egg is Mundus, the shell of the egg is Oblivion, Aetherius is beyond the shell, and all of it is in Aurbis. — Unsigned comment by Collectro (talkcontribs) at 10:34 on December 13, 2011

Mundus is the mortal plane. Nirn is a planet within the mortal plane. Typically, it's better to just create a new section altogether than to respond to an old discussion. Minor Edits 20:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

cosmology[edit]

We REALLY need to write about space, moth ships, battlespires, planets, etc. Create Lore:Cosmology ? SirEricTheEuphoric1 (talk) 02:15, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know what moth ships are, but I imagine anything else you're thinking of is covered already, either at Aurbis or, more likely, Planes of Existence. --Enodoc (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
No, that's different. That is talking about them as planes, but they can also be described as planets. SirEricTheEuphoric1 (talk) 16:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you provide some in-game sources? —Legoless (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes I can. http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/395552769153932231/3A036A328B10E9E10D632E99108FEB361498F58F/ SirEricTheEuphoric1 (talk) 19:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Like Enodoc said, the orbits are already covered here. There's nothing about moth ships or multiple battlespires in any of the games though. —Legoless (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
That picture is just an orrery contraption. Without a reference guide to that specific orrery, the bodies cannot be identified, so it does not work as a source. --Enodoc (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)