Lore talk:Tiber Septim

Family Crest

Does fan art really belong in that spot? Unless I am VERY mistaken, that did not come from Bethesda. It's fine where it is on the Septim family tree, but not here.Temple-Zero

With all the fan fiction you want to add (and have been adding) to our articles, I would have thought that fan art would be welcome. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 03:48, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

I've posted requests for information on Booyah boy's talk page (he originally uploaded the image) and on the image page. Unfortunately, given that Booyah boy has been inactive for nearly two years, I'm not sure that we'll be able to get any definitive answer from him on how he obtained the image. And it's a bit harder to track down image sources than factual sources (i.e., we can't just do text searches on every known source). So I don't think we can necessarily expect any prompt replies. However, if nobody has been able to provide any verification after a few weeks, then I'd say we should remove the image from all pages except Lore:Septim Dynasty and add some disclaimers to the image summary and any image captions. In its place we could perhaps use an image of just the central, diamond-shaped dragon logo (which is official; see, for example, the cover of PGE3). --Nephele^Talk 16:45, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

It's been two months, and the only new information is more evidence that it's unofficial (see here). Therefore I've removed most instances of the image, and changed the caption on the remaining article to state that the crest is unofficial. --Nephele^Talk 21:13, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Nordic?

Where does it say he was Nordic? I'm a bit confused. 98.198.83.12 20:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

He was born in Atmora. –Elliot ^talk 05:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

That's propaganda, though. No one has come from Atmora for over three thousand years. He was born in Alcaire and took on a Nordic name and aspect.Temple-Zero 05:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, you know more than me. :) Perhaps it should be mentioned in the article? –Elliot ^talk 05:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe the two versions of the story are already covered in the Orthodoxy and Heresy sections?Temple-Zero 15:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but it is rather clouded within the article. –Elliot ^talk 15:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

It's clear enough. The "official" version is that he came from Atmora, which is clearly nonsense as Temple-Zero points out. The "heresy" is that he came from High Rock. Even though that is clearly true, it is still heretical because of the official nature of the other story. Dr Jones 16:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure this confusion comes from the fact that a lot of the mythos around Talos mixes the deeds of both Hjalti Early-Beard and Ysmir Wulfharth. It is the heretic version of the story (Arcturian Heresy) but since Wulfharth is supposedly from Atmora this could explain why some sources say Tiber was from atmoran himself Daiji (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

(←) This section refers to a much earlier version of this page (2009) which mentioned his race. We have long since stopped listing his race as a fact. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 03:10, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Roman Emperor?

Anybody notice that the name Tiber Septim came from Ancient Roman Emperors? Tiberius and Septimius Severus. — Unsigned comment by 68.179.18.91 (talk) on 18 October 2009

The Roman influence on the names of the Imperials is more than obvious. --Timenn-<talk> 12:16, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The words on their own refer to a river and a wall or barrier. It's as if he was named after a dam, though the grammar doesn't hold to that theory. 216.254.164.191 18:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Serious Plot Hole

Does anyone have any more information on Tiber Septim. One big oversight that I see is, how exactly did Tiber become one of the nine divines? Is it pseudo history, or did it actually happen? Your records only indicate that he "died."

The article is incomplete. He achieved apotheosis via a mysterious, arcane process involving Numidium and its Mantella, an avatar of Lorkhan, and the related mythically significant struggle.132.162.76.105 18:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Moved from article

*He might be named after Tiber River, which is in Italy. It may give a strong proof that Cyrodilic Empire had been made after Ancient Rome.

This looks like something that needs to be discussed, I for one, don't think so.--^Corevette₇₈₉ 02:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

It's probably true, but it should go on the Lore:Etymology|Etymology page rather than here. rpeh •T•C•E• 07:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Tiber Septim's Reign

"A general of Nordic descent, Emperor Tiber Septim is regarded as one of the most famed figures in Tamriellian history, reigning from 2E 854-3E 38"

Unless I am misinterpreting the use of reigning here, wouldn't this imply he was emperor from 2E/854 - 3E/38 (which is clearly not right, considering the following quote: "He ruled for 38 years and is considered by most to be the best emperor throughout history")? Or would it imply he was a general in this time period (as mentioned in the timeline of the Common Era). But again, could he really have been a General and an Emperor at the same time (2E/897 - 3E/38)?

Maybe I am just confusing myself here, but it seemed a bit misleading to say he reigned from 2E/854 - 3E/38 (again, unless I am misinterpreting the use of reigning in the quote).

I am still fairly new to Tamriellic lore, so any corrections would be helpful.

Many thanks. --Weeman5872 12:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

It's right. He took the throne in 2E 854 and immediately declared a new era. That means he reigned for about 10s in the second era and then 38 in the third. For more information, see the notes on this article. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Possible Relation to the Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

In the first trailer " Their is one they fear... the Dragon Born", or something along those lines. Could that possibly be a reference to Tiber Septim? — Unsigned comment by 58.170.110.18 (talk) on 18 december 2010

As our General:The Future of TES Games requests, "Please keep all speculation, wishlists, etc. restricted to the forums." rpeh •T•C•E• 13:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Ruby Throne?

Anyone know where this term came from? It's mention here and on the Dragonfires page, but I can't find an actual source for it in the lore. In-game dialogue? Minor Edits 00:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I seem to recall asking this myself a long time ago, and getting no response. It's not in either MW or OB dialogue, and doesn't appear in any in-game book either. My guess is that it's an invented term. rpeh •T•C•E• 10:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

There's definitely a source now: Rising Threat, Vol. IV uses the term. Minor Edits 01:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is it coincidince.

I find that the sketch of Tiber Septim resembles Vladimir Lenin (who was anti-imperialist) with some more hair. Does anybody agree? If so, is this merely coincidence? or is it a joke? Right-Hand-Of-Sithis 08:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Rewording of opening paragraph

Alright, I am no Lore scholar -- but my first readthrough of this page was a little confusing because I didn't know 'Talos' and 'Tiber Septim' were the same person. I tweaked the opening paragraph to list the names under which Tiber Septim was also known (as I found them listed in Lore:Talos). Hopefully this makes the article clearer. I also changed "general" to "emperor" since, well, Tiber Septim was Talos' imperial name. Axxchor 21:20, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Image

A sketch of a shrine to Tiber Septim in Skyrim

Thinking about adding this to the page, creating a line of images on the right of the page (the Bruma pic, this shot, and the engraving) with text on the left. Yay, nay?Minor Edits 06:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Works for me. – Robin Hood↝talk 06:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hero or Tyrant

Most people on nirn revere Talos and worship as a god and hero who united the lands but there is a book that shows him in an unfavourable light, it claims he slit the throat of his emperor and then himself to make it look like he was attacked, he also betrayed ysmir/arctus to power the golem and continue on his power-hungry quest to conquer tamriel but which one do you reckon is true, i know that there may be no evidence either way but as in real life, people namely generals and leaders have ulterior motives and have rewritten history, someone once said that history is written by the victor. 86.179.18.163 00:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes indeed. The Arcturian Heresy shines a different light on the history of Tiber Septim as in fact a warrior from Alcaire named Hjalti. I've seen people rage on message boards about this who go to great lengths to say that The Underking is simply lying but it's never 100% clear as to how much is really true or not. Most fans like to believe in the "official" version much like the established stories of the genesis of Nirn(though I disagree with them as there is no proof besides religious texts written by those who would consider anything else heresy, much the same as your point of the victors being the ones to write history even though other possibilities exist and are hinted at. We only have this to tell us that the Aedra are actually divine as opposed to Daedra, but that's another discussion). I am now more apt to believe more of what the Underking had written about the true identity of Septim after completeing the Skyrim quest in Old Hroldan. I'm sure more will be revealed in time. FuBi0 06:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth, it's hard to rise to power - let alone the total, absolute power tiber septim had - if you're someone who just wants to be a good guy. Even the various TES heroes you play only live to save the day, and then fade away. And yeah, after the Old Hroldan quest, I'm more inclined to beleive the Actuarian Heresy.

On the upside, such rich and deep lore really affects my choices in Skyrim now. Role-playing a nord, worship of Talos is important to me. And yet finding this makes me almost indifferent to it now. Though it makes me respect the empire less - whose to say their time to end isn't due now if they were founded by just another Thu'um wielding warlord? We have another of those in Ulfric you know...ForsakenOne 06:20, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

A lot of lore has potentially two sides, especially characters. Skyrim is a good example as the two warring factions can't be considered totally good or evil as they are basically both. Stormcloaks are trying to reclaim their independence like freedom fighters but it is revealed that they are racists as they only want nords in skyrim and that ulfric may just want to become high king. Mr.Scryer. 18:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the name "Talos"

"Talos" (pronounced "Tay-loss") was the name of the bronze giant in the Ancient Greek legend of Jason and the Argonauts. Is this a coincidence or might the developers have taken the name from here, especially considering his use of the Numidium?Norowane (talk) 23:20, 5 January 2013 (GMT)

Page Protection

I've been waiting for this since we added the summaries. That was only a week ago. I think it's foreseeable that people will, in good faith or not, frequently continue to inappropriately change the race parameter on this page to Nord, Breton, Atmoran, and who knows what else, as this is a highly integrated page on the UESP which is about an important person with a controverted history. I think we should just protect the page. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 18:57, 9 May 2013 (GMT)

Yeah, it was inevitable. Personally, I think a nb note (with a small explanation) against the race "Unknown" field would help against these edits and would be helpful for such an article. --Jimeee (talk) 19:03, 9 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm against protection as of now. If this turns into a frequent occurrence, my tune will change, but I think a hidden note may work for the moment. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:50, 9 May 2013 (GMT)

3 times in 3 weeks, granted it's only two users, I agree with protection. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:24, 26 May 2013 (GMT)

I've added hidden notes in this edit. I think that this might work here without the need for protection. If we see a few more cases of this, I'll protect the article. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 00:32, 27 May 2013 (GMT)

The Brother Of A God

So, according to Brief History of the Empire, Part I — written by Stronach k'Thojj III,Tiber Septim had a brother named Agnorith. Agnorith himself had an daughter, Queen Kintyra of Silvenar, first Cousin of Emperor Pelagius I, whom later became Empress Kintyra I. Before i read that book, i thought Pelagius was Tiber Septims grandson, and i later thought that Agnorith was pure fiction. But as Agnorith's own daughter became Empress i cant scrap the idea that Talos himself had a brother. I honestly dont know what to think, and i must also ask why there are no information about Agnorith on this page ? I must mention that Tiber Septims life gets me on the nerve sometimes, as clouded in myths and legends as it is. — Unsigned comment by Hlaalu66 (talk • contribs) at 00:18 on 23 July 2013

There should be a mention of Agnorith on the page, and that will be sorted shortly. I'm not sure I understand the rest of your questions, so I'll point you to Lore:Septim Dynasty which shows a very clear family history tree of the Septim family. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 02:09, 23 July 2013 (GMT)

We seriously haven't mentioned yet that one of the most people in the series has a brother? What is this, Star Trek V? Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 02:52, 23 July 2013 (GMT)

Reign and Death

According to Lalatia Varian, Tiber 'yielded' his crown at the end of his reign. Brief History of the Empire implies, but does not state, that he died when his reign ended in 3E 38. Since the Boots of the Apostle are said to have been lost after he yielded the throne, it's possible that he took them with him if he did leave the throne before dying. Thoughts on how to best present this in the article? - Dinmenel (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Picture of Wulf

Would it not be fitting to add a picture of Wulf, the aspect of Talos, to the page? After all, that was how he looked like during his final years. --The Lost Hlaalu Heir (talk) 14:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

UOL: The Nords' Totemic Religion

I'm starting this discussion for the sake of following our UOL guidelines (UOL should only be used when it helps to explain in-game content... Using solely UOL to support definitive statements of fact should be avoided... A talk page discussion should happen before introducing new information from UOL.), because this information is entirely new and not corroborated by any in-game sources that I'm aware of. General:The Nords' Totemic Religion is what's being cited. The following passage cites the text:

In the old animal totemic religion of the Nords, Talos is a Twilight God and his totem is that of the Dragonborn. The Nords blessed a great many things with this totem as they believe of all the gods it is he who will survive into the next cycle. The Nords see the culmination of the Oblivion Crisis much differently than the heartland Imperials. They believe it was Talos as the Dragonborn god who rose up and aided Martin Septim instead of Akatosh in the defeat of Mehrunes Dagon.

I don't have an issue with UOL being used in articles, but since this is entirely new information that doesn't build off of in-game sources, I'm obligated to challenge it. -MolagBallet (talk) 02:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

This isn't new information in fact this is an example of an entirely Uol thing that has been actually used by ESO Developers intentionally and added in as actual canon. Its another example of MK's Uol stuff being made actually true canon to the series in fact. Divines and the Nords mentions all the important details about the region from the Uol as well as the fact Kyne is the leader of the pantheon. They don't mention the talos part because its ESO, but they do mention the keeping alduin asleep part in the book and this was mentioned in the Talos part of the UOL. So it verifies pretty much everything about the UOl if you look at the actual lorebook. The Song of Gods also goes into it and it further takes from the Nordic Totem religion Uol. This was actually a developer design document for what they wanted to do with the religion from what I understand. I think we should be using this UOL source and keeping it, because 99% of the Uol is already canon besides the Talo's unique role within the religion.TheVampKnight (talk) 05:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

As vamp stated, this information has been validated in elements in Skyrim itself and validated in near entirety in eso, save for the information about Talos who obviously couldn’t given he isn’t a thing yet. This isn’t one of those dubious Uol sources this is a design doc from Mk and more importantly Kurt Kuhlmann. The sooner we restore the better. Dcking20 (talk) 11:22, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Wasn't this policy repealed? We changed it to an edit summary explanation, not a talk page request. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Given the discussion Cyan just cited and the fact at this time there seems to be no real objection beyond the fact that there was Uol added with no talk page, im going to restore the information now that my reasoning has been documented here. Now that I am aware of this updated (and imo much better) policy, I will make sure to leave a talk page entry or at the least an edit summary with any future additions of Uol, but no reason to keep the information reverted for some undetermined amount of time granted there isn’t any actual concerns with the content itself. Dcking20 (talk) 22:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the willingness to leave an explanatory talk page post on future additions, but none of the arguments presented so far have actually addressed my concerns. To quote myself, "since this is entirely new information that doesn't build off of in-game sources, I'm obligated to challenge it". The guidelines may have changed to require a single post instead of consensus to add UOL, but the bolded part of my initial argument wasn't the only important part of the post: I drafted this post not just to make up for the lack of a mention on the talk page, but to challenge the addition, and nobody has provided any actual evidence to refute my claim that the addition doesn't follow our UOL guidelines. My objections from the initial post stemmed mostly from the information not being acknowledged in Skyrim. ESO using information from the rest of the document doesn't mean the bit about Talos is going to be acknowledged by Bethesda Softworks, nor does that make the Talos bit "basically canon". Furthermore, Vamp's post doesn't provide any in-game sources for the proposed bit of UOL to build off of (UOL should only be used when it helps to explain in-game content). He provides examples of works where other gods have been fleshed out using information from the same document, but all that does is support the obvious fact that information from the same document has been used in in-game sources. It doesn't tell me about any game-supported lore that supports the Talos bit, or existing in-game lore that provides information for the Talos bit to build off of (Using solely UOL to support definitive statements of fact should be avoided).

• The Nords see the culmination of the Oblivion Crisis much differently than the heartland Imperials. They believe it was Talos as the Dragonborn god who rose up and aided Martin Septim instead of Akatosh in the defeat of Mehrunes Dagon.

We need at least 1 piece of in-game evidence for this claim to build off of; this is never implied anywhere in-game during Skyrim or Oblivion, hence it being new information. In fact, it's contradicted by an in-game text in the form of Alduin is Real. The author (a Nord) may not have the best grammar, but he communicates this clearly: "...My da even told me the story of Martyn Septim, and the things what happened when the gates to Oblivion opened. Septim turned into the spirit of Akatosh and killed Mehrunes Dagon. Now I dont noe about you, but any dragon that fites the Prince of Destruction is okay by me." The claim made by the document is hurt by the contradiction, no matter how shallow of an academic the author of Alduin is Real may be. This Nord states that Akatosh helped Martin Septim break Mehrunes Dagon's shins.

• In the old animal totemic religion of the Nords, Talos is a Twilight God and his totem is that of the Dragonborn.

Nothing I remember from Skyrim supports the claim that Tiber Septim actually has an animal totem. Almost nobody in Skyrim worships the totems anymore; almost everyone you meet refers to the Divines in an Imperialized way. I would appreciate a line of dialogue or something that this piece of information could logically build off of, because the way the NPCs in the game talk about their religion contradicts the idea that Talos is worshipped as a totem. The exception to the Imperialized god thing is every time Shor is mentioned, but even he's shafted in that department.

I'll address the rest of the document while I'm on the subject of breaking down my issues with the Talos bit. In Skyrim, most of the "old gods" were given a nod in subtle ways (tomb carvings, etc), while Kyne's importance and the Nords' misgivings with the Imperial pantheon were addressed outright by Froki almost exactly as the document says. People throw Talos' name around a lot in Skyrim ("...whose power is consequently unknown, so the Nords bless nearly everything with his totem, since he might very well be the god of it now, too"), but I can't remember anything from the game itself that addresses his role in the pantheon—hence my thinking this was unsubstantiated by anything in-game. Given how important Talos is in TES V, and how important he is to both cultures involved in the civil war, the overarching conflict whose shadow looms over pretty much every bit of content you play through in Skyrim... you'd think a bit from this document regarding Talos would surface somewhere in dialogue. Especially since the World-Eater returns, and the document mentions that the newest totem is very likely to survive the end of this world. The rest of the document eventually being implemented into ESO doesn't address the crux of the issue: if there was anywhere to "canonize" the Talos bit, it would have been Skyrim, but I can't find any in-game information for the bulletpoint to support. Froki is the only one I can think of who talks about the actual totem gods, and he only mentions Kyne and Shor. As Talos is depicted, he seems less like a totem and more like "the subject of Nord hero worship-turned Imperial loan god".

I'd appreciate if people in general would have something more to say about a piece of UOL's inclusion in lore beyond "a good chunk of content in this document has made it into the games, what more reasoning do we need". That line of thinking was brought up on Lore talk:Molag Bal as well, and while I understand why people would feel that way about a document, that argument doesn't address whether or not a bit of lore derived from UOL deserves a place on a given article. "This is all but confirmed because ESO used 90% of this document already" is a weak argument because it doesn't actually address what's being added about Talos, Molag Bal, or whatever other topic that's going to have UOL added to it in the future. I've seen the same opinion used twice on UOL-related discussions in the span of five days by several different people, and that particular opinion is very unhelpful when trying to determine whether or not something deserves to be on a lore page. All I want is an in-game connection, something for the Talos bit to lean on to support it. I don't need a ten page research paper or for anyone to reinvent the wheel, I just need someone to provide an actual justification for the information instead of a claim that games on the reputation of the Talos bit's more successful older siblings. I know my response is six days late, but the notification for this got buried beneath about a thousand other watchlist-related emails.

TLDR: "90% of the information from the source was used in canon so we should add it" isn't a good argument. That argument has nothing to do with my concerns about the information. People are focusing too much on the rest of the information in the source while ignoring the information that's actually being challenged for a spot on Lore:Tiber Septim. I would like to see a justification for keeping the proposed information on the page that doesn't rely on the document's other contents. Please argue for the Talos bit, and the Talos bit alone; what makes that bit worthy of a spot on this page? Keeping within the bounds of the UOL guidelines (UOL should only be used when it helps to explain in-game content / using solely UOL to support definitive statements of fact should be avoided), what lore from the games does this bit support? -MolagBallet (talk) 23:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

This absolutely builds off established and existing lore. I specifically noted it was the old animal totemic religion in the body of the article, but you seem to be under the impression that Talos is not old enough to have existed under these times which is not the case. Talos was apotheosized in the early third era and Skyrim takes place well into the fourth era at which point the Nords have been quite imperialized. Basically if Talos is to be a mainstream pantheon god of the Nords he absolutely *must* have an animal totem like his fellow divines and this document provides us with that. Also the Nords seeing Talos as the dragon god who rose up to aid Martin is very well in line with established lore. Per oblivion dialogue, the Nords much preferred their dragon Ysmir, to the Imperials Akatosh. Ysmir being the Nordic aspect of Talos per varieties of faith and Morrowind dialogue. All in all, this document is absolutely being used in a precedented, and in line way for the wiki in that it is filling in gaps that are alluded to in official lore. Disagreement to the fact that this is absolutely a fill in to inline lore (Ysmir being viewed over Akatosh in established lore, all of the other Nordic mainline gods having animal totems in established lore, twilight god being indeed a category for Nordic gods in established lore) would merely be contrary. Dcking20 (talk) 00:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Also while we are on the subject, definitive proof that Talos was contemporary with the old Nordic religion is varieties of faith in the empire, which along with Tiber (as Ysmir) sees only the old gods of the Nords listed as Nordic deities. Jhunal, Orkey etc. The only “imperial” divines in the faith at the time are the proper Nordic ones and they are using their proper Nordic names (Kyne instead of Kynareth). So to reiterate again, Talos *must* have an animal totem to be a mainstream deity at this time in the religion and the document provides us with that information. Dcking20 (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

This is exactly the kind of response I was looking for! Thank you for providing. I don't like being the bad guy, but when it comes to UOL, we can't have nice things unless we explain why we're right. I could not in good conscience leave this discussion with a half-baked "well the rest of this source has been accepted as canon so" as the last and only word on why the information is valid. I commend you for your prompt response, and wish you a wonderful evening! -MolagBallet (talk) 04:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Summary of Changes: 7/31/2021

Making a few adjustments and patrolling the most recent edits in light of the nomination. Anything "controversial" or that could otherwise be contested will be explained here.

• Nords Arise!:

Changes: "Some theorized that the Thu'um Ulfric possessed was a gift of Talos himself." → "Stormcloak propaganda claimed that the thu'um Ulfric possessed was a gift of Talos himself."

Reason: Nords Arise! is a recruitment pamphlet, not a scholarly work; it is less reliable as a source. We shouldn't say "some people theorize X" because the author here isn't positing a theory. The passage being cited is as follows: "Only he had the courage to single out King Torygg and challenge him to trial by arms. Ulfric's thu'um, a gift from Talos himself, struck down this traitorous ruler. And by his death we are now free of our Imperial shackles and the Thalmor overlords that darken the Imperial throne."

Rather than positing a theory, the author is claiming that Ulfric's abilities are "a sign Talos favors him". His use of the thu'um is being used as a way to put forth Ulfric's legitimacy as a ruler; he can use the thu'um, Talos could use the thu'um, ergo "his abilities are a gift from Talos himself". This is a very long-winded way to say this passage lacks any semblance of scholarly (religious or otherwise) worth and is pure propaganda, therefore us claiming anyone "theorizes" Ulfric's thu'um is a gift from Talos himself is inaccurate. Saying that Stormcloak propaganda hails his abilities as gifts from Talos is more accurate because the source is propaganda; it is trying to convince people to join the Stormcloaks' cause.

• Rivercrest:

The consensus around the use of "Rivercrest" as Town's name in lorespace is to not use Rivercrest as Town's name in lorespace. All uses of the name "Rivercrest" in lorespace need to be changed because the UESP has not come to the consensus that "Rivercrest" is the town's name in lore. I am not going to start the Rivercrest v. Not Rivercrest discussion here; if any fighting is to be done on that front, it needs to happen on the Community Portal, not here. Town's name is an entirely different can of worms, and one that I refuse to open on Tiber Septim's talk page because it's not his baggage. It is completely unrelated. I am merely putting Rivercrest's point here so everyone looking at my changes knows why the change was made, and so they know not to change it back to "Rivercrest" until consensus that says otherwise is reached on the Community Portal.

Aside from these changes, I've made adjustments to wording, grammar and sentence structure to make for better flow. -MolagBallet (talk) 02:51, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I see no issue with the edits made here. I am personally for the name Rivercrest but I am more than happy for that information to be left off until something is decided either way. Overall one thing this article needed was a fine combing with sentence and paragraph structure and I thank you for being the one to implement that! Dcking20 (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

You're most welcome! I'd also like to thank you for giving this subject the care and attention it deserves. Tiber Septim was long overdue for an update! -MolagBallet (talk) 03:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

name issue

in the intro it states tiber "also known as Talos Stormcrown" however in the same paragrpah it states he was later known as talos, litterally meaning stormcrown. wouldn't this mean he was ONLY known as Talos?

otherwise his name is Stormcrown Stormcrown... i doubt the emporer was going for a moon moon situation

Despite the fact that several sources indicate that Talos translates to Stormcrown, there’s also several sources that use the two names together in a first name/last name context. Dcking20 (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Race

So I was looking through the page's edit view and noticed the hidden note on Tiber's race saying not to change it to something more definitive. However, I've found evidence that seemingly confirms Tiber's race. In The Origin of Cyrus, a comic released with TES: Redguard, a Q&A section is included wherein Michael Kirkbride, out of character, answers questions from fan mail. One of these questions asks about Tiber Septim's race, to which Michael replies that he is, in fact, an Atmoran.

Seems quite unambiguously canon to me. There's no unreliable narration happening here, as Michael isn't answering under a character, but the answer is official because of the material. "The lore has changed since then, though" is a reply I received to this on another site, which is true, but it would be original research to conclude that this definitive statement isn't accurate, no? Plus, the intentional controversy regarding Tiber's race (Alcaire/Breton origin, Imperialized Atmoran dogma, Cyrodiil King-Becomes-The-Land) is acknowledged in the answer. Mindtrait0r (talk) 18:52, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to take a jokey fake Q&A that existed to help create the aesthetic that it was part of an ongoing series and not a one-shot as something that overrides the in-universe ambiguity that exists. To also accept an out of universe answer like this flies in the practice of normal procedure everywhere else in the lorespace, and even the direct recommendations for how we should treat the lore from Bethesda, like from this quote from Todd Howard:

"If you saw it on the screen that's number one, that's the most truth. If you read it in the game, that's second truth. If you read it in an official thing outside the game, in the manual, that's the third. If you read it from a fan on the Internet that's way down there, that's like not on the list, right!" --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Every argument and source about his race has been exhausted at this point and 99% of the fandom have pretty much agreed it's best left ambiguous because that is how the writers deliberately wrote it since day one until today.--Jimeee (talk) 19:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Sure, the book would be the third priority in the ranking system, but it is the only one that is stated without the dubiousness of unreliable narration. Its 'truth', whether third-rank or not, is absolute compared to the contradictory claims of the main series second-truth books - that I once more emphasize are acknowledged in the answer. To accept the out-of-universe answer is not outside of practice, considering the exact same answer is cited here, here, and even on this page - twice! As for Jimeee's point, I never believe that long-ago consensus is a substitute for lore accuracy. I deeply oppose that notion fundamentally, but also, in this case, the developer issued, OOC but official nature of the answer makes it impossible to ignore in both existence and validity. Mindtrait0r (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Those two examples dont have contradictory sources, which is why they are fine. This isnt long-ago consensus, its today consensus becuase no other sources have been produced since that clear up the ambiguity - and they never will. This Cyrus source is ancient and was part of the original consensus Let's not forget that MK himself was on big on promotion this ambiguity so it makes less sense to use him as a way to clear it up.--Jimeee (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

The source is as ancient as the ambiguity. The frame of the question is a fan asking "What race was Tiber Septim, really?". This answer IS the 'clear up'. The question acknowledges a contradiction, asks for an answer, Michael expands to show that the contradiction goes even further, then reveals which one is true. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Mindtrait0r (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I am a major supporter for Tiber Septim being an Atmoran and have made the case to many in the community on why it’s the strongest option. That being said, this is not an infallible source. By wiki standards it isn’t because we don’t implement a ton of source analysis on our citations as that starts quickly venturing into original research and also it leaves the reader to decide what source is right or the validity of it. Thus Mk stating Tiber is an Atmoran is listed as just another source. There’s also a precedent in the setting for word of god statements being contradicted elsewhere or disputed by other word of god comments meaning it’s not wholly accurate to say just because a source is delivered in that format that it’s infallible and that’s yet another reason why we don’t treat them as infallible on our articles. Dcking20 (talk) 22:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

(←) In this case, I do support a word of god infallibility because of the way the information is presented. This is a fan-submitted question about the lore, answered out of character in an official manner. Though the ambiguity will always exist in-universe, and there will be those who believe Tiber was an Atmoran or otherwise in-universe for various respective reasons, the nature of this unique Q&A that straight up answers the question definitively shouldn't be taken with any salt grains in mind. It was designed to clear things up, designed to be 100% authoritative.

I respect the desire to keep reader interpretations in mind, but when there is an answer provided, it would be disingenuous on the wikis end not to document it. Hand of God storytelling doesn't appear often in TES, but in this instance it certainly does. Mindtrait0r (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Errr, I dont know if you're aware but this is not a real fan question. It's a mock Q and A. MK wrote the fan question himself and then answered his own question. This was his way of introducing the ambiguity of his race in respect to the orthodoxy/heresy argument that exists in-universe. He took it a step further in Morrowind with the Arcturian Heresy book. Ambiguity is his MO.--Jimeee (talk) 23:41, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I knew based on AKB's reply, hence why I said the way it's presented. While he may have later expanded upon the ambiguity in Heresy, he provided the answer to which origin is correct right there by outright confirming that he is an Atmoran. He's introducing the in-universe disagreement, yeah, but as he's writing from out-of-universe he can provide such a Word of God stamp. Mindtrait0r (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Then you have misread his intentions and style of writing massively. MK by his own admission doesnt do Word of God - he has an allergy to it. You're implying he introduced a nuanced argument on his race within the universe, then immediately gave us the answer in the same document while at the same time continuing the deliberate ambiguity in other books.--Jimeee (talk) 00:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

To piggyback off of what Jimeee said, Mk is responsible for writing alongside this Comic q and a piece, the Orthodoxy account of Tiber that speaks to Atmoran origins in PGE1, the challenge of this narrative in the very same text in the form of the footnote of the Altmer "YR", the Heresy account which is a direct counter narrative to the pge1 orthodoxy, the doodle of Talos farewelling the King of Atmora, and finally referring to him as "man-mer" in C0da. It would be pretty darn disingenuous to say that all of these explicit attempts at ambiguity by giving credence to both sides in his works like this is dismissible because one format just so happened to be presented in a more word of god like way, especially given the fact that all of these ambiguity efforts were either concurrent to, or after this comic q and a source. Dcking20 (talk) 00:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

I think it's against the point to look at character evidence for MKs disposition toward Word of God storytelling or later work in the Talos ambiguity. The way the info is presented is not from an in-universe perspective. That cannot be argued. It says that Tiber was definitively Atmoran. That cannot be argued. The info is featured within a canon tie-in comic included with the game Redguard. That cannot be argued. I hope I'm not sounding condescending, that's not my intention, I just hope that this breakdown of my logic to show why I think this is 100% canon could persuade you guys to my side. Mindtrait0r (talk) 00:53, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Its not word of god. He even admits this. MK on various comments about Tiber's race (2020-06-14):

"You’re using a heretical text that ties Hjalti to Tiber, so that proves that people in the game debate if he was Nord or not.

Oh right. A quest inspired by The Arcturian Heresy that provides no solid answer on Tiber’s ancestry just like the document it’s drawing from— that ol’ chestnut. Good joke.

Even the fictional letters page of a fictional comic about the fictional world of Tamriel disputes Tiber’s birthplace, discounting earlier Daggerfall guidebooks from the real world.

It’s not so easy to pin down the Many-Headed.--Jimeee (talk) 02:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Great piece of evidence. I cede my argument. Mindtrait0r (talk) 02:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Corrections and Queries

I've cleaned up grammar, punctuation and typos in a few places as there were way too many for a featured article. I've also changed present to past tenses in the 'Origins - Heresy' section. I know the source material is inconsistent with tenses but this is presented as a paraphrase not a direct quote so it should follow the standard conventions for a lore article. If people prefer the original wording it should be explicitly presented as a quote. I also had a few questions about the 'Tiber Wars' section:

• Elsweyr: This section is very poorly phrased. The statement that Tiber Septim 'did a great number on the cat folk' is vague and overly colloquial. The section on the attack on Senchal could do with some explanation on exactly how this relates to the Tiber Wars. The final sentence is ungrammatical nonsense. 'Much like during the time of Remen, the Khajiit rebelled' might be a better way of putting it (although this still leaves the eventual outcome unclear).
• Morrowind: Barenziah is described as an 'adolescent' during the fall of Mournhold, when in fact she was a small child. Also, the note for this section describes Barenziah 'recanting' the memory. Should that be 'recounting'?

There, that's this neophyte editor's presumptuous take on one of the weightiest articles in lorespace. Hope I haven't trodden on too many toes.--Draugluin (talk) 05:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello I was responsible for 99 percent of the text found within the body of the Tiber article and all grammar corrections are much appreciated so feel free to just take that into your own hands. As for the Elsweyr stuff, that was definitely something that was weaker all around when I wrote it and I’ll go ahead and take a second look and see what needs to be kept and what needs to be changed or even just removed. Dcking20 (talk) 06:23, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Update: I've now made the changes outlined above re Barenziah.--Draugluin (talk) 10:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC)