Birth of the Republic

Post Reply

Which do you believe is the most likely?

1032 BBY
1
33%
1019 BBY
2
67%
1000 BBY
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 3
Meste17
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:45 pm

Birth of the Republic

Post by Meste17 »

So there are many different sources that explain when the Republic is formed. Which do you believe is the most likely?
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by McAvoy »

Uhhh. Maybe you can expand on these dates before you ask us that.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9615
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by Nutso »

I don't know how old the new canon Star Wars Universe is. Frankly, I know nothing of the new canon beyond the movies. For the old canon we have Obi-Wan's words, "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire." The time range for a generation in our world is 20-25 years. So based on Obi-Wan's testimony, the Old Republic is anywhere from 20,000-25,000 years old. As I have said I haven't a clue about the new canon.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Nutso wrote:I don't know how old the new canon Star Wars Universe is. Frankly, I know nothing of the new canon beyond the movies. For the old canon we have Obi-Wan's words, "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire." The time range for a generation in our world is 20-25 years. So based on Obi-Wan's testimony, the Old Republic is anywhere from 20,000-25,000 years old. As I have said I haven't a clue about the new canon.
In Attack of the Clones, Palpy says "I will not let this republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two."

And in Revenge of the Sith, Bail Organa says "We can't let a thousand years of democracy disappear without a fight!"

Seems George got his generations mixed up with his years.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
AlexMcpherson79
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:43 pm
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom.

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by AlexMcpherson79 »

I put 1019 - because it had been what, 19 years between the fall of the Old Republic and the battle of Yavin?,,, so for 1,000 years of the Old Republic to be accurate as a minimum number, you have to add that 19 already! as 1019 is Before The Battle of Yavin (between the Rebel Alliance and the EMPIRE)

That said, it stood for a Thousand Years... but could be older and went through times as troubled as the Clone Wars, which WE KNOW from the KOTOR series, and Bail's 'a thousand years of democracy' could refer to the use of political power coming from democracy, rather than the power that military commanders gain during times of war - I think there was a line about a thousand years of peace or something, so... I'm guessing the Republic is MUCH older than 1,000 years anyway... so Obi-Wan was correct, they were the guardians of peace and justice for over a thousand generations - longer than 1,000 years, though what to them a generation means could be 10 years, 20, or even 50.

So say, 25,000 years is the ballpark - the last war that the Republic faced that placed most of the power with its military instead of the Chancellor and the Senate ended roughly a thousand years before the Sith took over. So BOTH statements are correct: 25,000 years where the Jedi were guardians of peace and justice, fighting whenever war reared its head (whether the council wanted to or not), but the actual running of the republic as a government and decision making has been in the hands of (allegedly) democratically-elected officials in the Senate without interruption for a thousand years... That prior to that, during times of war many chancellors would have inherited from say, one stepping down/is killed and instead of a vote each time, they just made a succession line and so that's how some of their war-time chancellors took charge. And in war time, many decisions even got taken out of the hands of the senate, Like say, to use Stargate as an example, they had to get Senator Kinsey onboard to fund the SGC because he was head of the appropriations comitee for black projects or something. But in war time, Budgetary concerns might be passed to the military command structure that knows WHAT they NEED,. If they need to spend millions on BODY ARMOR that WORKS they WOULD... but Senators are a little 'Well, they wont need it once they've been shot so, may as well not give them any'. ... an attitude that probably resulted in real life soldiers not having gear (British Army soldiers having to ""borrow"" from US Army soldiers in afghanistan is one such case I've heard from a few army vets, the yanks took pity and said to requisitions 'oh yeah I have no idea how my body armor disappeared, why I dont have a bag, and yes, my socks do go missing, must be the sock gremlins stealing them again'. because our boys got sent there without proper gear. Or enough socks.)

So, here, Stood a Thousand Years = hasn't been divided in that time, no promise on same story for before then. Thousand years of democracy = Republic's been in the hands of politicians for a thousand years, but before then there were times when it wasn't, for 'security' , perhaps even the war against Revan had resulted in the military having political power.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by Captain Seafort »

There's also the issue that "a thousand years" is a fairly imprecise time period. The statement that "no foreign power has successfully invaded the British Isles for a thousand years" is (if you ignore the Dutch) roughly accurate, even though the precise figure is a bit over 953 years if you go by the Battle of Hastings or the Conqueror's coronation, or a bit less if you go by effective control over England. It's therefore likely, even if you ignore the question of what event is being measured from, that the period is unlikely to be precisely 1000 years.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Captain Seafort wrote:There's also the issue that "a thousand years" is a fairly imprecise time period. The statement that "no foreign power has successfully invaded the British Isles for a thousand years" is (if you ignore the Dutch) roughly accurate, even though the precise figure is a bit over 953 years if you go by the Battle of Hastings or the Conqueror's coronation, or a bit less if you go by effective control over England. It's therefore likely, even if you ignore the question of what event is being measured from, that the period is unlikely to be precisely 1000 years.
For the DITL timeline I always make the assumption that "a thousand years" is indeed exactly one thousand years - and that "over a thousand years" means literally one thousand and one years, "almost a thousand years" mean nine hundred and ninety nine years, etc.

But that's just an assumption made for consistency. Going ten or twenty percent either way is perfectly fine, IMO.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9615
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Birth of the Republic

Post by Nutso »

Graham Kennedy wrote:
Nutso wrote:I don't know how old the new canon Star Wars Universe is. Frankly, I know nothing of the new canon beyond the movies. For the old canon we have Obi-Wan's words, "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire." The time range for a generation in our world is 20-25 years. So based on Obi-Wan's testimony, the Old Republic is anywhere from 20,000-25,000 years old. As I have said I haven't a clue about the new canon.
In Attack of the Clones, Palpy says "I will not let this republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two."

And in Revenge of the Sith, Bail Organa says "We can't let a thousand years of democracy disappear without a fight!"

Seems George got his generations mixed up with his years.
The case could be made that this was deliberate on George's part since the dick-headed alien, when informed by Qui Gonn Jinn that he fought a Sith on Tatooine says, "Impossible. The Sith have been extinct for a millennium." So perhaps the Sith were such a serious threat to the Old Republic for those 1,000 years previously, that it was no Republic at all and instead existed as a Commonwealth formed to fend of Sith aggression. After the final defeat of the Sith, the Commonwealth was like, "Hey! This is nice, and safe, and prosperous. Let's keep this going but, give representation to all." All speculation of course.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
Post Reply