The Dark Divinity 3.0

[Februs]

Snip.

Whereas it's true that we should be careful to not retro-apply characteristics to the Allagans by how the Garleans act or supposedly see the Allagans themselves, I was actually thinking of other evidence when I assumed those characteristics apply to the Allagans.

For example, we know with certainty that the Allagans fought Primal Bahamut, defeated him, and then set up a fancy set of devices to capture his essence and siphon his power. This is hardly the attitude of a group of people who have a healthy respect for the so-called gods of other races. We also know that the Allagans did not seem to worship any Gods themselves and sought to trespass on the plane of gods through research and accumulation of power. Xande even went so far as to try and harness the power of Darkness itself which, according to the lore, would be loosely tied to Zodiark (being the god on the dark side of the scale, opposite to Hydaelyn). It's a bit of a leap, but the Allagans had some lofty ambitions if they thought they could abuse the power of that particular god. From what we know of the Allagans, I think it's safe to assume that they saw the "Gods" as something to be eventually conquered by their Empire.

Also, Louisoix/Pheonix and Shiva were not the fist Gods to make us question the nature of Primals (well, they might have been the first to make the moronic NPC's question it, but not the players). Odin, technically, is the first, since he has been around the longest and we still don't really get how his summoning works with certainty. However, the ones that I find more interesting in regards to the difference between Eikons and Primals are the "Extreme" versions of Garuda, Titan, and Ifrit. Not many people follow that lore, but those three, supposedly average, Primals attained power far superior to their original incarnations not because of an increase in aether (though they still do require an obscene amount of it), but because of a ritual sacrifice. Similar to Odin, Phoenix, and Shiva, the Extreme versions of the original Primals required a living body to achieve their summoning at a level high above their original or Hard incarnations. This was the defining feature explaining their strength. Yet, no one has ever referred to them as Eikons, and I think that has a lot to do with the fact that these 3 Primals are bound to Eorzea. They aren't referred to as Eikons because those who used the term originally are no where to be found and the Garleans are from another country.

I agree that we certainly can't just take the Garlean's word for it, since we don't even know how much they know about the Allagans or the nature of Primals, but there seems to be more cultural and geographic evidence that explains the distinction between "Eikon" and "Primal" that there is to prove that they are somehow fundamentally different. Especially because some of those differences that people have pointed out have actually been shared with the so-called "Lesser Primals" when summoned in their stronger form. In fact, the only characteristic that we can say is unique among one confirmed Eikon, Odin, is that he is self sustaining (and even this may not be the case if the sword theory turns out to be true). Alexander and Bahamut do not share this trait, as they have confirmed summoners. So, so far, there's a lot more evidence pointing to it being a cultural/geographical/language distinction than there is to say that it is an inherent difference in nature.

[Berethos]

They aren't referred to as Eikons because those who used the term originally are no where to be found and the Garleans are from another country.

Which would be the case if the second conclusion I mentioned turns out to be the intended meaning from Unukalhai, or a meaning similar to it.


I also don't think there's that much evidence pointing to it being a cultural/geographical/language distinction - some, but not much. We have the modern use of it via the Garlean empire, and the Lore panel comment that describes it only as the name Allag used for the powerful summons without further clarification on those summons (so we don't have evidence for or against it including entities that share a fundamental basis yet differ in ways not seen yet that are removed enough from the exact process that involve Eorzean primals for them to be considered different than primals, at least not from the lore panel), and that's about it.

That Allag almost certainly didn't worship any gods and some of them actually sought godhood isn't actually terribly relevant to the Garleans using the word eikon in the exact same fashion. At most, with Garlean being the copy cat, it suggests they are at least partially correct, and that leaves room for the issue of eikons to go either way, for now.

And again, there's the apparent distinction being made by Unukalhai (the more I consider his sentence, the less I think it likely he's just referring to primals we have yet to meet):

"Ah, but I speak not of the primals, with which you are exceedingly well acquainted. It may interest you to know that the term “eikon” and the beings to which it refers precede the Garlean Empire by eras. You see, it is the name by which the Allagans called godlike beings, the Dark Divinity Odin among them."

If the difference between primal and eikon were a cultural/geographical/language distinction, why would he specifically call out that he's speaking "not of the primals" but rather something else, treating them as separate beings in those comments?

As a side note - that one part of the answer from the lore panel has certainly muddied the waters, as it seems to almost contradict what Unukalhai said.

[Februs]

If the difference between primal and eikon were a cultural/geographical/language distinction, why would he specifically call out that he's speaking "not of the primals" but rather something else, treating them as separate beings in those comments?

Simply put, because the beings that Eorzeans refer to as Primals, are spent. I think it's safe to assume that, at this point in the story, we have seen all of the Primals Eorzea has to offer. There are no other beast tribes that we know of, and we have fought and killed every Primal in Eorzea at least twice, sometimes thrice. So, when that little spawn says "I speak not of Primals, with which you are exceedingly well acquainted" he's basically saying, "oh, not Shiva, Ramuh, Ifrit, Titan, Garuda, or Leviathan. We're done with them." It's basically a declaration that the story is moving away from Eorzea, which is why Odin is such a good choice to bridge the gap.

Odin has been in Eorzea, (and even titled an "Elder Primal" in the local lingo), but he's not from Eorzea. His origins are from the Allagan Empire (and much further North, if we follow his lore). So, he is the first of a new breed of Primals that we will be dealing with as the story takes us further away from the country of Eorzea - to lands unknown, with Gods that we do not know, have never met, or, in some cases, have never even heard of. In the case of the Garlean Empire and the Allagan Empire (regardless of how different those two Empires are from one another), they both refer to "god-like" beings as Eikons, not Primals. In the Garlean's case, this has been proven by the 2.0 story line when Van Belsar refers to the Primals in Eorzea as Eikons as well. He does not distinguish between Primals and Eikons. They're one in the same to him. It's just a different word. Which means that any "Primals" we run into in the Garlean Empire (if we ever go there) would be referred to by the locals as "Eikons."

It's true that we can't make the same claim with the same certainty for the Allagan Empire, but, as of yet, it doesn't seem like it would be an outlandish assumption. Honestly, given what we know about the only "God-like" beings we've actually met that had anything to do with the Allagan Empire (Odin and Bahamut) they seem like Primals. Super strong Primals, sure, but Primals. It would seem that the Allagans just used the word Eikons, and that that spawn is using the same term to refer to Allagan related Primals that we have yet to meet.

[Berethos]

It would seem that the Allagans just used the word Eikons, and that that spawn is using the same term to refer to Allagan related Primals that we have yet to meet.

That's the thing...were he meaning to say that it's a different group of beings that are primals and just go by a different name because of their location of origin, he wouldn't be treating them as separate beings. When he says "the term 'eikon' and the beings to which it refers" he's at that point appearing to treat them like they are something different, rather than simply something with a different name. In fact, it seems to suggest, according to the little brat, that the term eikon belongs exclusively to those godlike beings the Allagans encountered...

Which comes back around to the idea posited earlier that eikons and primals are subtypes in a more general class of being, but are not the same thing (the way ahriman and succubi are both voidsent, but you wouldn't consider them to be the same).

Unless he's actually being pedantic, and the comment was supposed to be a "just so you know that I know the original meaning and origin of the word" style grandstanding, which would mean that your conclusion would be pretty much spot on and the little white-robed punk is just being a little pain.

[Februs]

That's the thing...were he meaning to say that it's a different group of beings that are primals and just go by a different name because of their location of origin, he wouldn't be treating them as separate beings. When he says "the term 'eikon' and the beings to which it refers" he's at that point appearing to treat them like they are something different, rather than simply something with a different name. In fact, it seems to suggest, according to the little brat, that the term eikon belongs exclusively to those godlike beings the Allagans encountered...

Actually, treating them as separate beings is exactly what he, and we, would do. Consider in our world's terms.

European settlers originally called this continent "The Americas," but we don't all share the same moniker. "America" encompasses North America and South America, and within those are distinct countries that would probably be insulted to be simply lumped into the same moniker as one another (Ie: Canadians and Americans would never consider each other to be the "same," despite both, technically, being on the American continent). When we travel to foreign countries, the people we meet do not simply call us all "American," or even just "human." They identify us from our country of origin and the name we gave our people in our own language (with varied degrees of pronunciation butchery). They treat us as separate beings.

Normally, I would consider this to be the same in the case of Primals vs. Eikons. There is only one little detail that makes me question it at all.

In the notes, they explicitly state that the Allagans did not have the word "Primal," but instead used the word "Toshin" (God of fighting) which they later relate to another term that seems to link Odin, in particular, to the Warring Triad in some way that we are not yet aware of. As of yet (at least not to my knowledge), we have yet to see the word "Toshin" actually be used in any in game dialogue at all; however, the notes seem to imply that it would be the word used in place of "Primal." Therefore, if the Allagans ran into Titan, they would refer to him as a "Toshin," instead of "Primal."

Here's the catch: The dev's also explicitly stated that the word "Eikon" referred to "Powerful Summons." Given that both the terms "Toshin" and "Primal" refer to "God-like" beings that have been summoned, it is pretty clear that the term simply refers to powerful "Primals" or "Toshins." Which means that Primals and Eikons are the same thing. They're not fundamentally different in any way at all. The only difference (that the dev's have currently made us aware of) is their level of strength.

Therefore:

1. Primal = Toshin

2. Elder Primal = Eikon.


They're the same. He only specifies them as different because of their country of origin, the term used in their resident language, the fact that we have not met any of these Primals yet, and, as you said, that little spawn is a pedantic prick who likes to rub his superior intellect in our faces.