The Reasoning behind The Sundering? (*6.0 Endwalker Spoilers*)

[Lyth]

Zodiark wasn't a bad idea in itself to stall for time. The escalating sacrifices were the problem, as was the mistaken belief that life in Amaurot could simply return to the way that it used to be, as if nothing had ever happened.

'But what of the lost? Do they not deserve to live again?'
'They do. In our hearts and our souls and our memories. No one likes having to say good-bye. But it's... it's a part of life. That's what makes the time we share together so precious... You can't obsess over the mistakes of the past, or you'll lose sight of the future. Of the people still with us, who need us more than ever.'

[SpectrePhantasia]

Zodiark wasn't a bad idea in itself to stall for time. The escalating sacrifices were the problem, as was the mistaken belief that life in Amaurot could simply return to the way that it used to be, as if nothing had ever happened.

'But what of the lost? Do they not deserve to live again?'
'They do. In our hearts and our souls and our memories. No one likes having to say good-bye. But it's... it's a part of life. That's what makes the time we share together so precious... You can't obsess over the mistakes of the past, or you'll lose sight of the future. Of the people still with us, who need us more than ever.'

By escalating sacrifices, I assume you're referring to the 3rd, yes? As with the 1st and 2nd, they were explicitly necessary to ensure they did not die out. Well this 3rd sacrifice of those newly fostered lives, and the morality of it, was not something that the Ancients were united on. It was the greatest divide they'd ever experienced. Venat had followers after all, and in a society that encouraged open debate, it was very clear that while the majority favored Zodiark, the Ancients were not some suicidal hivemind. Additionally, Elidibus, according to his own dying words, withdrew himself from Zodiark for the purposes of mediating the conflict, as was his role as Emissary. There is no evidence that this 3rd sacrifice would have occurred inevitably, in fact I would argue there are implications that it may not have, if Elidibus was given more time. Clearly he wouldn't have disconnected himself if he was not open to hearing alternatives. Given that Hydaelyn sundered an incomplete Zodiark, I'm inclined to believe these overtures from him went ignored, until clarified otherwise.

Platitudes from DRK's quests ring a bit hollow to me when those of Graha's timeline similarly worked to undo all of the pain of what they experienced, and no one bats an eye at them.

[Shookbeast]

By escalating sacrifices, I assume you're referring to the 3rd, yes? As with the 1st and 2nd, they were explicitly necessary to ensure they did not die out. Well this 3rd sacrifice of those newly fostered lives, and the morality of it, was not something that the Ancients were united on. It was the greatest divide they'd ever experienced. Venat had followers after all, and in a society that encouraged open debate, it was very clear that while the majority favored Zodiark, the Ancients were not some suicidal hivemind. Additionally, Elidibus, according to his own dying words, withdrew himself from Zodiark for the purposes of mediating the conflict, as was his role as Emissary. There is no evidence that this 3rd sacrifice would have occurred inevitably, in fact I would argue there are implications that it may not have, if Elidibus was given more time. Clearly he wouldn't have disconnected himself if he was not open to hearing alternatives. Given that Hydaelyn sundered an incomplete Zodiark, I'm inclined to believe these overtures from him went ignored, until clarified otherwise.

Platitudes from DRK's quests ring a bit hollow to me when those of Graha's timeline similarly worked to undo all of the pain of what they experienced, and no one bats an eye at them.

I like that we’re discussing the Ancients not as a monolith, but as different factions. It’s possible Azem represents a third option to the back and forth between Venat/Zodiark.

I’m coming around to the theory that the “new life” was basically the playable races (or their progenitors). Azem may have been a supporter of the new life, (probably hung around with them and went adventuring), but maybe Azem was also anti-sundering - thus they didn’t side with either Venat or the convocation.

I still wonder if the seeds of a third option weren’t planted by Azem and their friends (think Ancient-world Scions). Maybe we’ll pick up those pieces to both save the Ancients, and also save the reflections some day. (Or at least explore the Sundering in a more nuanced way).

[SpectrePhantasia]

I’m coming around to the theory that the “new life” was basically the playable races (or their progenitors). Azem may have been a supporter of the new life, (probably hung around with them and went adventuring), but maybe Azem was also anti-sundering - thus they didn’t side with either Venat or the convocation.

I still wonder if the seeds of a third option weren’t planted by Azem and their friends (think Ancient-world Scions). Maybe we’ll pick up those pieces to both save the Ancients, and also save the reflections some day. (Or at least explore the Sundering in a more nuanced way).

That is honestly where I was expecting the story of Endwalker to go. Both sides so caught up in their own values and priorities, that by the time they realized what they were doing, even when people like Elidibus attempted to seek peace, Hydaelyn didn't realize, it was too late, and the Sundering occurred. But that's not how it happened. I won't lie, I genuinely feel the story's justification for the Sundering to be half-baked, and didn't explore the possibilities of something like what Azem might have done. I sincerely hope they don't play things in such a way that Azem was always working under Venat's wing to fulfill some grand design. Unfortunately with Endwalker being the end of this saga, I'm not sure we'll ever get a concrete explanation.

Maybe Pandaemonium will shed some light, though.

[Lyth]

...

The Convocation was dead set on pursuing further sacrifice and weren't interested in hearing out any alternatives. We know this from the recordings contained within Anamnesis Anyder. The dissenting faction consisted of the few supporters who rallied behind Venat. Everyone else had rallied behind Zodiark and the decision of the Convocation.

'By the summoning of Zodiark have we been granted a reprieve. Yet immutable as the laws he has woven may seem, they will not serve to forestall our doom.

Nay should we continue down this path, our fate will be the same. I said as much to the Convocation, of course, but the stubborn fools turned a deaf ear to my warnings. I had hoped that the defector, at least, would side with us, but I regret to report our overtures have gone unanswered.'

It's funny that you should mention the survivors of the Eighth Umbral Calamity. They didn't work to undo the pain that they experienced. They worked to build a better future. What happens to them after G'raha alters the timeline is discussed in Tales from the Shadows: An Unpromised Tomorrow.

'And so our journey began anew. Would that G’raha Tia could see all that we will accomplish. Though we shall remain forever on different pages of history─and different books, besides─I take comfort in knowing we strive for a future of the selfsame brightness.'

These can only considered platitudes in that they are self-evident truths. Would that the Ancients known to heed them.

[Lersayil]

The Convocation was dead set on pursuing further sacrifice and weren't interested in hearing out any alternatives. We know this from the recordings contained within Anamnesis Anyder. The dissenting faction consisted of the few supporters who rallied behind Venat. Everyone else had rallied behind Zodiark and the decision of the Convocation.

'By the summoning of Zodiark have we been granted a reprieve. Yet immutable as the laws he has woven may seem, they will not serve to forestall our doom.

Nay should we continue down this path, our fate will be the same. I said as much to the Convocation, of course, but the stubborn fools turned a deaf ear to my warnings. I had hoped that the defector, at least, would side with us, but I regret to report our overtures have gone unanswered.'

It's funny that you should mention the survivors of the Eighth Umbral Calamity. They didn't work to undo the pain that they experienced. They worked to build a better future. What happens to them after G'raha alters the timeline is discussed in Tales from the Shadows: An Unpromised Tomorrow.

'And so our journey began anew. Would that G’raha Tia could see all that we will accomplish. Though we shall remain forever on different pages of history─and different books, besides─I take comfort in knowing we strive for a future of the selfsame brightness.'

These can only considered platitudes in that they are self-evident truths. Would that the Ancients known to heed them.

There is nothing self evident about Venats points. She presented a moral and philosophical argument with no solid proof or reason. She argued the ancients should move on, and accept suffering as a new way of life just because. Include the information on Meteion, and she would have had a solid argument, but without it, it just comes across as empty moralizing. Her "self-evident truths" are controversial even for us real people. I'd imagine it'd be even harder to sell them to a society with demonstrably better average quality of life.

[Kordarion]

There is nothing self evident about Venats points. She presented a moral and philosophical argument with no solid proof or reason. She argued the ancients should move on, and accept suffering as a new way of life just because. Include the information on Meteion, and she would have had a solid argument, but without it, it just comes across as empty moralizing. Her "self-evident truths" are controversial even for us real people. I'd imaginde it'd be even harder to sell them to a society with demonstrably better average quality of life.

Except suffering isn't a new way of life, it is a part of life period, sure we can have long stretches of time where we don't suffer, an in-game example is the pre-final days for the ancients, but that even when there is a reprieve it WILL eventually end, nothing good lasts forever. Even then it wasn't truly a reprieve as instead it was the life they created, modified and destroyed depending on how they wanted to curate their ecosystem that suffered. Its controversial not because it isn't true, it's controversial because people, rightfully so, don't like having to acknowledge the suffering inherent to life unless they are forced to. And even then they often, understandably so, still don't like doing so because humans prefer happiness to suffering.

[Lersayil]

Except suffering isn't a new way of life, it is a part of life period, sure we can have long stretches of time where we don't suffer, an in-game example is the pre-final days for the ancients, but that even when there is a reprieve it WILL eventually end, nothing good lasts forever. Even then it wasn't truly a reprieve as instead it was the life they created, modified and destroyed depending on how they wanted to curate their ecosystem that suffered. Its controversial not because it isn't true, it's controversial because people, rightfully so, don't like having to acknowledge the suffering inherent to life unless they are forced to. And even then they often, understandably so, still don't like doing so because humans prefer happiness to suffering.

Its a part of our lives. But not by choice. The game and some people seem to push this notion that suffering is an essential force, one that should not be eliminated. A universal truth if you will. To some degree I agree. But it should be minimized to a point where using the word 'suffering' would be inapropriate, and should be in no way aggrandized. Given a choice, no sane person would choose suffering over not, unless provided a very good reason. In Venats case there was one, but she chose not to reveal it. Platitudes and empty moral arguments in the face of a global tragedy does not a good reason make, even moreso since there already was a concrete plan in place for restoration (possibly horrible as it may have been).

[Veloran]

Except suffering isn't a new way of life, it is a part of life period, sure we can have long stretches of time where we don't suffer, an in-game example is the pre-final days for the ancients, but that even when there is a reprieve it WILL eventually end, nothing good lasts forever.

I imagine you would have quite a different perspective if your history was people living for eons in peace before potentially choosing to be reborn in an endless cycle of reincarnation. Lersayil is right. When Venat made the argument that they should accept huge amounts of suffering - That is to say 75% of their people being trapped in Zodiark - and that his solution was flawed, it could only have come off as nonsensical. She didn't even tell them about Meteion or Dynamis, so why would they believe there was some persistent threat out there gunning to kill them? She offered nothing to support her cause.

I would also argue that indeed in the 8UC timeline they were working to undo all their suffering. For all they knew they were deleting their own timeline and replacing it with one where the Calamity had never happened.