Jump to content
Jediphile

Dark Lord of the Sith??

Recommended Posts

Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :thumbsup:

Edited by DarthMethos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Original Trilogy in its original edited form is set in stone. It is pure, it is the nucleus from which everything else has evolved from, canon, eu, whatever.

 

The term ''Sith'' is outside of that nucleus, so is the status of Dark Lord and being ''a Darth'', the prequels, the novels, the comics, the games, everything else. Thats not bad at all, since it allows this universe to grow eternally.

 

Sorry, but it simply doesn't work that way. The "nucleus" as you called it, isn't the first edit of the original Star Wars movies, it never has been and never will be that way. You may think that way, but that won't make it the truth.

 

The nucleus of everything which has to do with Star Wars, is the original synopsis Lucas wrote. This synopsis has Darth Vader as the Dark Lord of the Sith, and the Sith Order as the enemy of the Jedi Order. Both the first and the final script of the first movie say that as well, and it doesn't matter one bit, whether the word Sith was spoken in the movies or not.

 

And as i am sure you know, a very large majority of everyone who has seen Star Wars Ep 4-5-6 from 1977 to 1983 had previously read GL's personal notes on his ideas about some movie taking place in space with some people in them that are twins with a father and stuff.

 

Your argument is like saying that all cars ever concceived are directly derived from the first carpart ever conceived in like the 1920s.

The first final product of Star Wars, the 1977 movie, is the nucleus from which everything else evolved from. Based on that, the word ''Sith'' is EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark Lord and Sith Lord are diffrent ranks

Lord is a Prestige Rank along with Maruder and Assassin

where as Dark Lord is the all supreme ruler over the Sith

:thumbsup: So, Dark Lord of the Sith is different from Sith Lord? They are two different ranks in the Sith Order.

 

I think that makes sense. :thumbsup:

 

I don't think they are titles for defining rank in the Sith order as Palpatine could be said to be a sith lord and also refered to in a more accurate title of "dark lord of the sith". Tyranus, Maul, Vader were all Dark Lords of the Sith, but they could be simply termed Sith Lords. Their mentor Palpatine's rank ,could further be differentiated by titling him: "the dark lord of the sith" (adding the "the" in the title changes things).

 

But remember this terming was used on Vader as well, perhaps to maintain Sidious' cover as Palpatine.

 

EDIT: What differentiates a Sith Lord really are the terms, mentor and apprentice.

Edited by Darth Blivion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :thumbsup:

 

i think someone came up with the term and George, in all his wisdom said :''Ooooh zhat ssssoundss k3wl'' and adopted it. gave him something else to put on the toy packages and fill more comic books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark Lord and Sith Lord are diffrent ranks

Lord is a Prestige Rank along with Maruder and Assassin

where as Dark Lord is the all supreme ruler over the Sith

:thumbsup: So, Dark Lord of the Sith is different from Sith Lord? They are two different ranks in the Sith Order.

 

I think that makes sense. ;)

 

I don't think they are titles for defining rank in the Sith order as Palpatine could be said to be a sith lord and also refered to in a more accurate title of "dark lord of the sith". Tyranus, Maul, Vader were all Dark Lords of the Sith, but they could be simply termed Sith Lords. Their mentor Palpatine's rank ,could further be differentiated by titling him: "the dark lord of the sith" (adding the "the" in the title chnages things).

 

But remember this terming was used on Vader as well, perhaps to maintain Sidious' cover as Palpatine.

:thumbsup: My head is spinning with Sith. :)

 

The Dark Lord of the Sith

Dark Lord of the Sith

Lord of the Sith

Sith Lord

Sith

 

I think there is more confusion than answers. <_<

 

If this is an EU thing, I think it was a cool idea. Somday we will have clearity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :thumbsup:

 

i think someone came up with the term and George, in all his wisdom said :''Ooooh zhat ssssoundss k3wl'' and adopted it. gave him something else to put on the toy packages and fill more comic books.

 

According to the prequels ("G-canon") the Sith are the enemies of the Jedi. And so what if the creator of the universe picked the term "Sith" from the EU? It's now a part of his "canon". Also, the explanation that Darth is a shortened version of Dark Lord of the Sith, fits nicely with the fact that Anakin changed his name to Vader and was titled a Sith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :thumbsup:

 

i think someone came up with the term and George, in all his wisdom said :''Ooooh zhat ssssoundss k3wl'' and adopted it. gave him something else to put on the toy packages and fill more comic books.

 

According to the prequels ("G-canon") the Sith are the enemies of the Jedi. And so what if the creator of the universe picked the term "Sith" from the EU? It's now a part of his "canon". Also, the explanation that Darth is a shortened version of Dark Lord of the Sith, fits nicely with the fact that Anakin changed his name to Vader and was titled a Sith.

 

I don't care if it's canon or revolver and after his last 3 ''movies'' I don't put much importance on what GL makes up and neither should any Star Wars fan. The fact is that there is a continuity flaw in the Star Wars universe(there are many others) and that is the term ''Sith'' and ''Darth'' being a short abreviation of Dark Lord of the Sith. Darth was a name, not a rank in the OT. Some fanboy thaught it would be cool that Darth would be a rank and GL agreed. GL also agreed that JarJar would be funny and cool for kids when the fanbase was thirty years old on average.

Anakin did not change his name, Palpatine changed his name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :thumbsup:

 

i think someone came up with the term and George, in all his wisdom said :''Ooooh zhat ssssoundss k3wl'' and adopted it. gave him something else to put on the toy packages and fill more comic books.

 

According to the prequels ("G-canon") the Sith are the enemies of the Jedi. And so what if the creator of the universe picked the term "Sith" from the EU? It's now a part of his "canon". Also, the explanation that Darth is a shortened version of Dark Lord of the Sith, fits nicely with the fact that Anakin changed his name to Vader and was titled a Sith.

 

I don't care if it's canon or revolver and after his last 3 ''movies'' I don't put much importance on what GL makes up and neither should any Star Wars fan. The fact is that there is a continuity flaw in the Star Wars universe(there are many others) and that is the term ''Sith'' and ''Darth'' being a short abreviation of Dark Lord of the Sith. Darth was a name, not a rank in the OT. Some fanboy thaught it would be cool that Darth would be a rank and GL agreed. GL also agreed that JarJar would be funny and cool for kids when the fanbase was thirty years old on average.

Anakin did not change his name, Palpatine changed his name.

 

Well! In the OT we discover that Anakin is in fact Vader. So GL decided to give meaning to the changing of Anakin's name and decided that "Darth", refer to Anakin/Vader's title as a Sith. If there is a Jedi order, what is the name given to the opposing order of dark Jedi? Sith, is it not (Lucas thoughts I assume).

 

Eps 4, 5, 6 only touched the surface as far as the mysteries of the force were cncerned. So nucleus or no, accept that things that were never explained before could be elaborated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark Lord and Sith Lord are diffrent ranks

Lord is a Prestige Rank along with Maruder and Assassin

where as Dark Lord is the all supreme ruler over the Sith

:thumbsup: So, Dark Lord of the Sith is different from Sith Lord? They are two different ranks in the Sith Order.

 

I think that makes sense. ;)

 

I don't think they are titles for defining rank in the Sith order as Palpatine could be said to be a sith lord and also refered to in a more accurate title of "dark lord of the sith". Tyranus, Maul, Vader were all Dark Lords of the Sith, but they could be simply termed Sith Lords. Their mentor Palpatine's rank ,could further be differentiated by titling him: "the dark lord of the sith" (adding the "the" in the title chnages things).

 

But remember this terming was used on Vader as well, perhaps to maintain Sidious' cover as Palpatine.

:thumbsup: My head is spinning with Sith. :)

 

The Dark Lord of the Sith

Dark Lord of the Sith

Lord of the Sith

Sith Lord

Sith

 

I think there is more confusion than answers. <_<

 

If this is an EU thing, I think it was a cool idea. Somday we will have clearity.

 

All are names referring to the same thing, no need for confusion.

 

Sith - is the general term referring to all those who are trained in the Sith order, Sith younglings and all.

 

Sith Lord - general term for a Lord of the Sith or fully trained or more accuratley, ordained member of the Sith Order.

 

Dark Lord of the Sith - refers to a fully trained member of the Sith Order or in the Post Bane era, two fully trained or ordained members of the Sith Order. Same thing as saying Sith Lord, only it's more specific.

 

The Dark Lord of the Sith - the title given to the master of the Sith Order, or in the post Bane era, the one and only mentor of the Sith Order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vader is known to be a Sith in the movies, but it is never discussed in the OT - an era where force users in general are a rare species, and their religions considered obsolete. As someone said, the term Sith doesn't mean anything to the majority of the people in the OT, as it only applies to the adherents of that ancient religion, Palpatine and Vader.

I had a conversation about this once. Vader was not mentioned as a Sith, but it was written in the original script. I don't know if that is true or not? I know in some comics he was mentioned as Lord of the Sith. I also have read a book once. I think it was called Shadows of the Empire. Vader was called Lord of the Sith in that book. Was it Goerge's idea to use the term Sith? :huh:

 

i think someone came up with the term and George, in all his wisdom said :''Ooooh zhat ssssoundss k3wl'' and adopted it. gave him something else to put on the toy packages and fill more comic books.

 

According to the prequels ("G-canon") the Sith are the enemies of the Jedi. And so what if the creator of the universe picked the term "Sith" from the EU? It's now a part of his "canon". Also, the explanation that Darth is a shortened version of Dark Lord of the Sith, fits nicely with the fact that Anakin changed his name to Vader and was titled a Sith.

 

I don't care if it's canon or revolver and after his last 3 ''movies'' I don't put much importance on what GL makes up and neither should any Star Wars fan. The fact is that there is a continuity flaw in the Star Wars universe(there are many others) and that is the term ''Sith'' and ''Darth'' being a short abreviation of Dark Lord of the Sith. Darth was a name, not a rank in the OT. Some fanboy thaught it would be cool that Darth would be a rank and GL agreed. GL also agreed that JarJar would be funny and cool for kids when the fanbase was thirty years old on average.

Anakin did not change his name, Palpatine changed his name.

 

Well! In the OT we discover that Anakin is in fact Vader. So GL decided to give meaning to the changing of Anakin's name and decided that "Darth", refer to Anakin/Vader's title as a Sith. If there is a Jedi order, what is the name given to the opposing order of dark Jedi? Sith, is it not (Lucas thoughts I assume).

 

Eps 4, 5, 6 only touched the surface as far as the mysteries of the force were cncerned. So nucleus or no, accept that things that were never explained before could be elaborated.

 

Oh I accept it. I also accept all the continuity flaws, like ObiWan not remembering R2-D2 or Leia remembering her mother being beautiful but sad when she was unable to see or remember and Luke didn't.

 

I previously said I love Star Wars. but there are so many things that don't make sense because os so many people who think they know everything about it and make up stuff because ''it would be cool''.

Unfortunately it usually is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I accept it. I also accept all the continuity flaws, like ObiWan not remembering R2-D2 or Leia remembering her mother being beautiful but sad when she was unable to see or remember and Luke didn't.

 

I previously said I love Star Wars. but there are so many things that don't make sense because os so many people who think they know everything about it and make up stuff because ''it would be cool''.

Unfortunately it usually is.

 

I know what your saying, but Obi Wan after 20 years would probably forget about the astromech droid - and that really isn't a major issue anyway. Leia remebering her mother is a continuity issue, but again how much does it affect things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh I accept it. I also accept all the continuity flaws, like ObiWan not remembering R2-D2 or Leia remembering her mother being beautiful but sad when she was unable to see or remember and Luke didn't.

 

I previously said I love Star Wars. but there are so many things that don't make sense because os so many people who think they know everything about it and make up stuff because ''it would be cool''.

Unfortunately it usually is.

 

I know what your saying, but Obi Wan after 20 years would probably forget about the astromech droid - and that really isn't a major issue anyway. Leia remebering her mother is a continuity issue, but again how much does it affect things?

 

Nitpick issues rarely affect anything :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well leia only remembers images of her mother thats it she never said anything else plus with her being strong in the force leia was close to her mither on a spritual front

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark Lord and Sith Lord are diffrent ranks

Lord is a Prestige Rank along with Maruder and Assassin

where as Dark Lord is the all supreme ruler over the Sith

:p So, Dark Lord of the Sith is different from Sith Lord? They are two different ranks in the Sith Order.

 

I think that makes sense. ;)

 

I don't think they are titles for defining rank in the Sith order as Palpatine could be said to be a sith lord and also refered to in a more accurate title of "dark lord of the sith". Tyranus, Maul, Vader were all Dark Lords of the Sith, but they could be simply termed Sith Lords. Their mentor Palpatine's rank ,could further be differentiated by titling him: "the dark lord of the sith" (adding the "the" in the title chnages things).

 

But remember this terming was used on Vader as well, perhaps to maintain Sidious' cover as Palpatine.

:blink: My head is spinning with Sith. :blink:

 

The Dark Lord of the Sith

Dark Lord of the Sith

Lord of the Sith

Sith Lord

Sith

 

I think there is more confusion than answers. <_<

 

If this is an EU thing, I think it was a cool idea. Somday we will have clearity.

 

All are names referring to the same thing, no need for confusion.

 

Sith - is the general term referring to all those who are trained in the Sith order, Sith younglings and all.

 

Sith Lord - general term for a Lord of the Sith or fully trained or more accuratley, ordained member of the Sith Order.

 

Dark Lord of the Sith - refers to a fully trained member of the Sith Order or in the Post Bane era, two fully trained or ordained members of the Sith Order. Same thing as saying Sith Lord, only it's more specific.

 

The Dark Lord of the Sith - the title given to the master of the Sith Order, or in the post Bane era, the one and only mentor of the Sith Order.

Clearity at last. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think they are titles for defining rank in the Sith order as Palpatine could be said to be a sith lord and also refered to in a more accurate title of "dark lord of the sith". Tyranus, Maul, Vader were all Dark Lords of the Sith, but they could be simply termed Sith Lords. Their mentor Palpatine's rank ,could further be differentiated by titling him: "the dark lord of the sith" (adding the "the"  in the title changes things).

 

But remember this terming was  used on Vader as well, perhaps to maintain Sidious' cover as Palpatine.

 

EDIT: What differentiates a Sith Lord really are the terms, mentor and apprentice.

 

 

Probably the best explanation out of everyone's.

 

There are only two Sith Lords, according to Darth Bane's "rule of two," and these Sith Lords have access to all sorts of Sith secrets that are not available to other dark Jedi.

 

Remember, that just because someone is a dark Jedi, does not make him a Sith, as was the case with many of the adepts that Dooku trained. None of these dark Jedi apprentices would carry tha name of "Darth," since they were not Sith.

 

In the case of use of the "Darth" name in the KOTOR timeline, there was no such rule of "only two," although the title of "Sith Lord" was still restricted to an elite handful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well this conversation has two possible explanations

 

1) it was a mistake on the writers part

 

2) many things in the star wars universe are opinions of there story teller. when episode III came out many books, comics, short storys etc. became confiltant with the moives and the moives and the ultamite star wars force because it is the vision of Mr. lucas not some 40 year old over weight guy writing star wars storys in his mothers basement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well this conversation has two possible explanations

 

1) it was a mistake on the writers part

 

2) many things in the star wars universe are opinions of there story teller. when episode III came out many books, comics, short storys etc. became confiltant with the moives and the moives and the ultamite star wars force because it is the vision of Mr. lucas not some 40 year old over weight guy writing star wars storys in his mothers basement.

 

Hey now! What do you have against my mother's basement?

 

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hehehe nuthing. but do ya c what i mean. take for example the writer who killed of chewie. he only did that because he never liked chewie and he got away with that! new books probly will be better because the old writers were stupid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hehehe nuthing. but do ya c what i mean. take for example the writer who killed of chewie. he only did that because he never liked chewie and he got away with that! new books probly will be better because the old writers were stupid

 

Killing Chewie was sacreligious. I'm surprised GL let that pass. Chewie is his favorite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more surprised that there hasn't been a Bring Back Chewwie protest. And more angry. <_<


dragon113mq.jpg

 

"Great intelligence usually goes hand in hand with great stupdity."

 

Join The Sibilati!

-Sibilati retrorsum sibilamus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...