Archaeotania's place in lore is confusing me

As we all know, Archaeotania is a concept created by a frightened Ancient during the Final Days. It was captured and brought to Amaurot's Akadaemia Anyder to be studied and analyzed, but it broke free and wrought havoc to the city.

For all we know, Archaeotania itself is simply a FFV reference. It uses FFV's Twintania's abilities and its horns can be used to buy a Tinker's Bell minion, like the Tinklebell weapon in FFV.

Still, when looking at it through an exclusive FFXIV point of view, Archaeotania becomes really confusing. I have no reason to think the Archaeotania we fight is any different from the original Archaeotania; that Emet-Selch's power failed when he was making this part of his illusionary Amaurot.

Archaeotania is draconic. It uses Bahamut abilities like Gigaflare and Megaflare. It summons "Ancient Aevis" adds, who use Alte Roite -- in FFV called Jura Aevis -- models; both aevises and alte roites being humans who can turn into dragonlike beings.

The implications would be that the pretty innocent 1) as per Archaeotania being born of fear, at least one Ancient knew what dragons were and feared them; and the more scandalous 2) as per the presence of the Ancient Aevis adds, there were Ancients that could turn into dragonlike beings for some reason. It couldn't be that there were dragons on the Ancients' planet because there are no sundered dragons, so... why?

(Archaeotania also uses other Primal abilities like Leviathan's Tidal Wave, but as it was born millenia before primals, I don't think there's a direct link to them other than "the legend of Archaeotania influenced minds and thus this reminiscence resulted in primal abilities when they were summoned".)

I find it hard to believe the dev team would just throw something big and lore-bending like that -- featuring not only a FATE Chain for a World FATE but also the Akadaemia Anyder dungeon and a big player in the fall of Amaurot -- for it to be only a FFV reference and nothing more, being actually unrelated, "we know it makes no sense, don't pay attention to that" style. They went out of their way to make sure Seiryu, a dragon in every incarnation, not a dragon because it would mess with part of the lore that says every dragon is a descendant of Midgardsormr. Every reference like Gilgamesh or Eureka is sewn into XIV lore, never being "just a reference". Even Omega's creations are justified as being local legends or things from other shards. People could find links in lore to the smallest things like Azem's grapes and the Temple of Qarn's grapes... so what's up with Archaeotania?

If Archaeotania is truly a draconic being in a pre-Sundering time, what could that imply? With dragons being relevant again in 6.0, maybe we're in for a ride or something I guess?

Something being draconic =/= being a dragon.

We already have myriads of lifeforms present on the First like drakes, gliders, and gwibers that despite having several traits in common with actual dragons cannot be related.

It is still minor in the grand scheme of things and I don't think it's anything more then a slightly glorified FFV reference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by akita_kt

Archaeotania - How? - Why? - Lore?

---

Well, at its heart, it's a reference to Twintania from FFV. You know that, but you surely must realize that Twintania in FFV is hardly a dragon at all. It is a, "Demon of The Rift."

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-p2Qj_zfNrw/hqdefault.jpg

It's one of the monsters that was trapped in the Interdimensional Rift in FFV. They give it monstrous magicks and things we've seen before to make it dangerous and to fit in with the fight design for FFXIV. These also reference its abilities in FFV, almost to a T, and they are just a showcase of how powerful it is, as everything in the Rift is endgame levels of powerful.

Later versions of dragons reused the creature's name, because Square is bad at coming up with new names, and whenever they do, they are super proud and reuse them ad nauseum.

https://media.discordapp.net/attachm...489&height=670

As for why it's there, it's because of Emet's attention to detail for Phantom Amaurot, and there's really nothing more to it, than that. If anything it's linked directly with Ascian's sort of theme, due to originally being a, "Demon of the Rift." It is a perfect candidate for a nightmare creation as befits the Final Days.

I see, so it's nothing other than a cool reference. The Ancient Aevis things still get to me, but I'll look at it as mostly an extra with no real meaning.

Thanks for answering, guys!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by akita_kt

I see, so it's nothing other than a cool reference. The Ancient Aevis things still get to me, but I'll look at it as mostly an extra with no real meaning.

Thanks for answering, guys!

---

The Aevis are likely moreso references just to ancient flying serpents. Also FFV references as you noted, but also note that the Serpent of Ronka is identical(in both FFV and FFXIV). One of many enemies that are dragon-like, but not of Midgardsormr's brood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

The Aevis are likely moreso references just to ancient flying serpents. Also FFV references as you noted, but also note that the Serpent of Ronka is identical(in both FFV and FFXIV). One of many enemies that are dragon-like, but not of Midgardsormr's brood.

---

It was the name itself that made me knit my brows -- Aevis being different from gwibers, drakes and everything else in the sense that they're humans turned dragonlike beings via either magic (like the Alte Roite description in XIV) or dragon blood (like every Ishgardian when in contact with dragon blood). The Alte Roite model itself was just an afterthought for me because of its relationship to the name Jura Aevis in FFV.

I thought all this Archaeotania talk could imply that the Ancients were looking at the Dragonstar and knew dragons existed, which would be really cool lorewise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by akita_kt

It was the name itself that made me knit my brows -- Aevis being different from gwibers, drakes and everything else in the sense that they're humans turned dragonlike beings via either magic (like the Alte Roite description in XIV) or dragon blood (like every Ishgardian when in contact with dragon blood). The Alte Roite model itself was just an afterthought for me because of its relationship to the name Jura Aevis in FFV.

---

Alte Roite (corruption of Alte Leute, German for old people) could easily have been a corrupted legend of the Ancient who converted themself into Quetzalcoatl (feathered serpent) (as depicted in the dungeon) with the "Jura Aevis" model being Omega's recreation of the legendary Feathered Serpent form. Aevis is just the latin word for bird and the Ishgardians might have co-oped the term to describe the weirdly bird like dragons some turn into based on the legend not that Aevis are people that turn into dragons.

I wouldn't call archaeotania a dragon by any means. If anything i would look at it at the original concept of the ultima weapon. It is a dead ringer for the weapon. It also uses the same attack as the proto ultima weapon in azs la and dun scaith. Maybe it was created to be a weapon of some sorts. I don't know. We do know from arch other weapon types were created such as the ultima warrior and the origin for behemoths back in fc hard. yes yoshida hard dungeons do serve a purpose. EDIT by the way i believe the alte rolte lore mentions its a sorceror who turn themself into a a dragon much like aevis in coerthas regions.