About the Emperor [Major Spoilers for 4.4]

[Iscah]

Yes, that's the thing. He didn't say Solus was replaced by an Ascian or was controlled by one. He WAS an Ascian.

To be exact, he said the founding father of the Empire was an Ascian.

There's still leeway there in that phrasing for either interpretation: that Solus the man directly became a Ascian, or was merely a 'mask' for the Ascian who was the true founder.

But we've also seen that the Ascians have taken corpses that looked "fresh" I guess for lack of a better word.

Bodies seem to 'keep' remarkably well on Hydaelyn.

For a story example (no time bubble!) from the Alchemist questline...

Severian has been trying to revive his beloved W'nahja, who died in the Calamity. Five years have passed, and she looks like she's merely asleep.

Perhaps there's some sort of alchemical preservant involved, but then the Ascians would doubtless be using it too.

Also to note: Ascians were prior Echo users and/or Warriors of Light that for some reason decided to side with Zodiark upon realizing some epiphany.

I think that's still just an assumption at this point? There were hints of it with Unukalhai's nature in the Warring Triad quests, but not outright stated.

Now we know that Zenos and Varis aren't related [...]

"Now we know"? Do you mean specifically in conjunction with your "Solus never existed" theory or do you think the game actually stated that as a fact? If so, where?

[Mieck]

Clever! Though I could also see it being presented the other way around. Varis - known for enjoying strategy games - outsmarts Solus in the end, and turns his smug "game pieces" analogy back on itself.

In my researches in the Garlean section of the Lore book, I came across this little gem;

"Varis's tactical genius displays itself in 'megalith,' a traditional Garlean game of strategy. Indeed, it is said that the Eemperor has but rarely lost a match in all of his forty-six years."

Headcanon has now created a scene where Varis faces his ultimate showdown on the megalith board. It could even be like The Player of Games... now that would be something!

[Remedi]

"Now we know"? Do you mean specifically in conjunction with your "Solus never existed" theory or do you think the game actually stated that as a fact? If so, where?

In the MSQ they said that Varis choose Zenos as his heir, I interpreted it as in he adopted him into the family, adoptions of this kind were not uncommon in ancient Rome and since that is the inspiration for Garlemand I feel it is reasonable to get that conclusion

But the Lore Book explicitly talks about House Galvus being a prominent family. For an established house to be an elaborate fabrication is a massive leap - and there are too many weak links; there would be whispers of the illegitimacy of House Galvus, rumours of power behind the throne, and everything we've heard out of Garlemald prior to 4.4 doesn't back this up, in my view. The Lore book is effusive in its praise for Solus, in fact; he is credited with reshaping the military around warmachina, and this is what gives them the edge against their neighbours. "...[he] was a self made man, and history will remember his success."

I think it points to an Ascian wearing the meat suit of a well respected, up-and-coming member of the establishment from a good family, or simply that he became an Ascian, though that would imply ability to manipulate aether that pureblood Garleans (another thing stressed in his EE profile, page 178) lack. At what point that happens is open to interpretation, but my view is that Solus existed as a boy and man for a number of years, until possessed.

Yes, but aside the possible errors in the lorebook or the fact that the book narrator can be wrong, or that the dev team didn't want to drop this bomb yet, because of the revelation of Solus being an ascian, that the reason for the empire exhistance was a fabrication and the lie about the burn, I don't think we can consider that as truth anymore.
It's possible that a house Galvus existed yes, but as things stands we cannot consider beyond any forms of doubt the existence of Solus Galvus which muddies everything about his family too. This reveal frankly changes everything and we can no longer consider prior knowledge accurate

[Keever]

snip

To simply disregard all previous information, just because we receive one new revelation changing some of the context of that information, is silly. It is possible that other information presented in that section of the lore book is false, but we should not assume it outright. Mieck has just presented good reasons for why it seems highly unlikely that House Galvus itself is a historical fabrication.

[Remedi]

The first emperor of Rome was Called Gaius Iulius Caesar Octavianus Augustus, however he wasn't born a member of the gens Julia and was later adopted into it.
That might be a valid explenation for Solus too, he wasn't born a Galvus and later was adopted into the family, becoming the greatest member of it later.
I'm not saying that we should disregard what was said, but that we cannot take them as facts anymore.

[Mieck]

The first emperor of Rome was Called Gaius Iulius Caesar Octavianus Augustus, however he wasn't born a member of the gens Julia and was later adopted into it.
That might be a valid explenation for Solus too, he wasn't born a Galvus and later was adopted into the family, becoming the greatest member of it later.
I'm not saying that we should disregard what was said, but that we cannot take them as facts anymore.

Rumours of an adoption would have circulated, though. Just the way rumours that Aymeric was the Archbishop's illegitimate son were rife.
There's no mention of an adoption or anything. The lore simply states;

1489: Solus zos Galvus, first son of esteemed House Galvus, is born.

No doubts, no hedging. Just born.



Furthermore, for a good 20-30 years of Solus's life, he (and by extension, his family) are not in a position of absolute power. Servants gossip. The word would have gotten out before Solus was in any kind of position to quash rumours, or set up a counter-narrative.

[Iscah]

In the MSQ they said that Varis choose Zenos as his heir, I interpreted it as in he adopted him into the family, adoptions of this kind were not uncommon in ancient Rome and since that is the inspiration for Garlemand I feel it is reasonable to get that conclusion

Can you give the specific quote?

If I remember correctly, the context was that Varis immediately named Zenos his heir after becoming Emperor to create a sense of stability in contrast to Solus who would not name his choice out of Varis and Titus.

If that is correct, it didn't necessarily have anything to do with Zenos not being Varis-the-person's heir prior to that, rather that he is now the designated heir of the Emperor.

It's possible that a house Galvus existed yes, but as things stands we cannot consider beyond any forms of doubt the existence of Solus Galvus which muddies everything about his family too. This reveal frankly changes everything and we can no longer consider prior knowledge accurate

Solus's status may muddy his blood relationship to Varis, but it shouldn't have any direct effect on Varis's relationship to Zenos. (And Varis is presumably a normal mortal, strange-looking as he is, or Solus would probably have taunted him about that too.)

IF Solus was an Ascian from the start, and IF human-Ascians cannot have children of their own, THEN [Varis's father] and Titus were presumably adopted. They and their families are completely unrelated to Solus, so there's no reason to question their status just because of this.

[Iscah]

Looking at the lorebook profiles for Solus and Varis - no mention at all of Zenos, but it only covers up to Heavensward. Most of Varis's profile is spent on rumours about the relationship he may or may not have with his grandfather (favoured him? respects him? blames him for the country's internal strife?).

And for Solus, the last paragraph sounds to me like a 'dancing around a future reveal' type of statement.

Encyclopedia Eorzea Vol.I p.178
Galvus was a self-made individual, and history will remember his successes. However, it is difficult to characterise his life as happy: he was betrayed by those he had considered his closest friends, and lost his firstborn son to illness when the man was still young.

His son's death must have come when he was already "considered an Ascian", but the vaguely described betrayal is presumably going to be important at some point.

It could be the case that his despair at being betrayed left him open to Ascian possession, like Thancred was vulnerable to Lahabrea.

Or it could be the catalyst for the man to take the first steps down the dark path of becoming an Ascian himself. (Which might still come down to other Ascians taking advantage of his vulnerability at that point, just in a different way.)

[Remedi]

Rumours of an adoption would have circulated, though. Just the way rumours that Aymeric was the Archbishop's illegitimate son were rife.
There's no mention of an adoption or anything. The lore simply states;







No doubts, no hedging. Just born.



Furthermore, for a good 20-30 years of Solus's life, he (and by extension, his family) are not in a position of absolute power. Servants gossip. The word would have gotten out before Solus was in any kind of position to quash rumours, or set up a counter-narrative.

If Garlemand is idd modeled after ancient Rome than adoption is not something that will be cause of clamor. It was not an uncommon pratice of adopting someone into your family giving them also your name. Augustus was adopted into the gens Iulia and he was born of the gens Octavia, also Tiberius wasn't the biological son of Augustus either.
I don't understand this idea of servants rumors that ppl have, we have no idea exactly how the law in Garlemand works, but if the writers are trying to base it on Rome and not just citing names we can assume that they did some research on the practices and general law.
We might assume that the war of succession could be based on the Augustus vs Anrthony war after the failure of the second triumvirate for all we know.

@iscah as for the quote about Zenos. I'll search the cutscenes since I don't remember where it was said exactly

Edit: However we might aswell also consider the logical explanation of retcon on the lorebook, I mean there's the problem of that guy from the durendaine family whose age is not fixed in the story.

[Anonymoose]

It could be the case that his despair at being betrayed left him open to Ascian possession, like Thancred was vulnerable to Lahabrea. Or it could be the catalyst for the man to take the first steps down the dark path of becoming an Ascian himself.

I've been looking at this, as well. Even the Archon Ahldbahr story foreshadowed Ascian focus on twisting despair. (Probably to foreshadow Thancred, of course.)