How was the New Republic formed?

[Kurgan]

Quote:
Is it your contention that EU material is "correct" (ie: canon, in the Star Wars official continuity) so long as it doesn't conflict with the core canon (the films, screenplays/scripts, novelisations and radio dramas.. in that order)?

Yes.

Okay, that's perfectly fine. I wanted to know how the EU explained this discrepancy, if the "fanboy theories" aren't acceptable, which is what I think you've implied.

Wrong, there isn't a contradiction, thats the whole point, the contradiction is created, by you.

It needs to be explained, or it doesn't make sense. Either Obi-Wan was spouting nonesense, Palpatine was spouting nonesense, or some other "non-obvious" explanation either from a fanboy theory or an EU explanation cooked up after AOTC came out. I'd like to hear those explanations... that's all.

Now does he? I don't see it that way, I don't see anything explicit enough to warrant a contradiction, there can be billions of reasons as to why palpy happened to use that phrase.
As for the EU authors, it'd have to have gone through LFL and Lucas at some point, if not many points, he's not ignorant of it, and it's irrelevant what they thought and did, only whats in the books is relevant.

Obi-Wan (A New Hope, to Luke): "For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic."

Palpatine (Attack of the Clones, to his advisors, including several Jedi Knights): "I will not let this Republic which has stood for a thousand years be split in two!"

So... Obi-Wan is saying that for 1,000 "generations" (what does he mean? if we say 20-25 years per generation, that means 20,000-25,000+ years) the Jedi Knights were IN the Old Republic (as opposed to some other Republic?).

Palpatine says this Republic (as opposed to some other Republic?) has stood for 1,000 years (which is only 1/25th or less of the above estimate).

So your explanation is just to say that Palpy was either mistaken (odd for one who chooses his words so carefully and is in his official capacity and should know better) or was using some sort of hyperbole (to under-estimate it) or some weird tidbit we aren't aware of that makes it make sense (like that the Old Republic was reformed into the Republic after the Sith War, or that there was a smaller Republic that grew into the one we see in the prequels and this older one was called "the Old Republic").

Perhaps your theory has merit, I'm glad to hear about it.

Now I will admit that some other quotes I use/used (or in other threads) are mere speculation on my part:

"There hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic." (Attack of the Clones)

"The Sith have been extinct for a millenia" (The Phantom Menace)

I connected these two with the EU events stating that there was the Sith War, then the formation of the Republic (out of the ashes of the Old Republic??), but they don't have to be connected, so I'm dropping that part from the discussion if you don't care.

I digress...

No, just galactic civilization, not neccesarily under central controll.

I guess I should ask what "galactic civilization" is.. I don't even know. Do you mean interstellar travel? Civilizations that aren't limited to just one planet?

Quote:
Which is it? Is the EU not contradicted... or only contradicted in only a few places?


8km Executor, only one I can think of now.

I can think of other contradictions. Surely even as we speak, EU authors are writing new books to try to explain away the discrepancies, or declaring old obsolete works "out of the continuity" (like some might be prone to do with Splinter of the Mind's Eye type of works).

I suppose a dedicated fanboy could find work arounds to explain away all the contradictions, but I gather you and I are both more interested in the "official" explanation for the apparent discrepany. In which case, I welcome anyone who's read that in the EU to bring that information forward, or at least mention the sources, so we can all see for ourselves (and be amazed). ; )

Since they've been accepted by LFL and lucas for 20 odd years now, no.

So, are you saying that if something in the EU is contradicted by the pure canon of Star Wars (from the creator of the franchise himself) the EU cannot be wrong?

I would argue, that it can be wrong, and the only way to fix it is to re-write the obsolete books, or write new ones that clarify and explain away the discrepancies.

Much in the way that we've heard rumors that Lucas will "redub the stormtrooper voices" in the classic trilogy to confirm that he intended them all to be clones...

I reccomend starwars.com jedi council for questions of this nature.

I've read them on occasion, but I have yet to find one that explains the discrepancy between the apparent age of the Republic as described in ANH vs. AOTC. Maybe its there and I just haven't seen it?

Ofcourse it matters, this incident though is hardly explicit enough to become contradictory, a million and one possible explanations and reasons can probably be found for this.

Well, its as you say.. if one character says "The Executor is 8km" and another character says "The Executor is 15km" and another character says "The Executor is 1km" what do we do?

Well, if they're all different levels of canon, we just take the one from the highest canon. Or if that doesn't work, we could say that there are several different ships of different sizes of the same name. Or we could say the same ship has gotten refits over the years and that's why. Or we could say its some kind of "transformers" type of ship that can change shape at will. ; )

But we look for those explanations... if we don't find them in the official story continuity (even if they are obvious patch-overs from mistakes continuity writers made and forgot to check with the facts) all we have left are fanboy attempts to explain it.

Or are you saying, that because its so vague, we shouldn't even speculate on it?

It's one possibility, one of many, personally I never gave it much thought, doubt Lucas did.

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. He didn't tell us a whole lot in his stories (the movies) though. But the question is... why confuse us with the quotes? Why have them be different? Did he change his mind? Or was he trying to anticipate something in the EU?

I got the impression that if indeed the "Republic rises out of the ashes of the Old Republic after the Sith War" theory is in fact now part of the EU (and not just a fanboy invention) it would have been done AFTER the fact of AOTC.

That is.. the movie created the discrepancy (with its own canon, as established in ANH, or at least with the interpretation we all had for 20+ years) and then the EU authors were left to pick up the pieces and try to explain "from a certain point of view" why Obi-Wan wasn't wrong.

I'm not saying that particular one is the one that is most likely or correct, just that it's one of them.

That's the point. If there is no factual explanation (yet) then there's nothing wrong with us speculating.. so let's speculate! ; )

http://www.theforce.net/timeline

Much obliged.. I'll check it out!


Quote:
If I were to take your point seriously, then I'd have to say that anytime the prequels contradict the EU, the EU is in fact correct, since on most points, they are consistent with each other (ie: they have all agreed on their notions of what has happened, and so the disagreeing accounts in the prequels would be outnumbered). Do you see what I'm saying?


Yes, thats what you are saying, but it's not what I am saying, I am saying that many of these contradictions are implied, not explicit and as such both movie and EU can be fitted together with some rationalization, or retconning.
[/quote]

Right, but its up to the fans or the EU to do it, I just want to see those explanations.

No, I disagree that there an explicit enough conflict now for that to be the case.

So you don't think that Palpatine's and Obi-Wan's statements about the age of the Republic are contradictory... okay. So how do you rationalize/harmonize the two...?



The movies aren't exactly explicit in this particular case either, it does require subjective interpreptation to a degree that it's only an implied contradiction, not an explicit one, hence I say that they can be fitted together and the need for contradictions are moot.

Noone overrules anyone so to speak in this case.
[/quote]

So, is the Republic "a thousand years" old, or is it "over a thousand generations" old?

Starwars.com lists many such things, the Boba Fett story is one thats retconned(and these are official, sw.com is owned by LFL).
http://starwars.com/databank/character/bobafett/eu.html

Yes, it is, but is Starwars.com canon.. and part of the official continuity? George Lucas has made interviews about his own stuff, which people have found confusing and even contradictory with what he's done later (ie: he changed his mind). I know theforce.net is fan-based, but is SW.com really canon?

Unless the movies go through the history, or explicitly says something that'll contradict the EU like "the republic is 1000 years old, before that there was no republic, of any kind"
Now thats explicit.

"For over a thousand generations...in the Old Republic" and "has stood for a thousand years" seem pretty explicit to me.

How do you take over a thousand generations and make it into a thousand years (or vice versa)?

Quote:
Translation: New books are written to try to explain away the discrepencies. RPG's are revised to include new facts.

The EU changes to be more in line to what we've learned in the films, or at least acknowledge that the films are important, rather than simply ignoring them.


Or the official site gives an explanation.

I'm looking, and I do see some discussion of it, but I don't see explanation of Palpatine's quote and why it differs from what Obi-Wan said. The site seems to buy the notion that the Republic is "thousands" of years old, but I'll keep reading... and again, that's according to the EU pretty much.

I still doubt that George thinks the Republic was a thousand years old, only.

We can only speculate on what George is thinking, but if he believes the Republic is 25,000+ years old, why have a character say its 1,000 years old?

I will grant you that Obi-Wan and Palpatine (the two characters in question) are both notorious liars... so perhaps neither of them can be trusted. ; )

Quote:
Ah, interesting. So it was just like one starsystem or a couple of them at first? I wouldn't expect them to all come together over night either.


Thats whats implied, it was implied to have begun 25k years ago, noone knows how long it took for it to become truly galactic, if the movies are an indication, one idea is that the Republic stopped being the old republic 1000 years ago and in addition to becoming what one could call galactic it might have had some political reforms or other stuff that was enough for it be thought of as separate by some.

I didn't see that in the movies (where was it implied?), sounds like fan speculation or EU material to me. Though, its been awhile since I've read the novelisations, could it be in there somewhere? I know the thing about the Sith is, but what about the Republic?

To me, it seems that the only way to "know" what you just said, would be to know that a discrepancy exists between ANH and AOTC on the point, and to then speculate a rationalization for it. But the rationalization appears nowhere in the films.

Quote:
Where can I read about this? There's too many EU books now to read them all. Some NJO book maybe?


I don't know if it ever happened, I guess the books and comics about the sith wars and ancient republic is what to look for.

Trouble is, they were all written (IIRC) BEFORE 2002 when AOTC came out, so the authors couldn't be expected to read George's mind and know what he was thinking years in advance. As many have pointed out, George seems to be making up at least half the story as he goes along, so even if he helped those authors write their books before he made his movie, that's no guarentee they match up.


Quote:
Yeah, but whatever internal consistency we had before is now trashed with Palpatine's quote


I don't think so, the details are sketchy of that era and as such anything could have happened in there without internal consistency being broken.
[/quote]

According to that Unofficial timeline you showed me, Tales of the Jedi (Knights of the Old Republic) occurs aprox 5,000 years before ANH. And since ANH only takes place about 30-40 years after TPM, and if the Republic is only 1,000 years old, as Palpy's quote makes it out to be.. then there should not have been any Old Republic for the Jedi to be Knights of in that period.

Unless, as we speculate.. there was some other government at the time that was called the "Old Republic" (and this was the same one Obi-Wan spoke nostalgically of in ANH).

And if indeed there are EU sources saying the Republic we see and hear talked about in the SW movies is not the original or only republic, then it FORCES us to reinterpret everything in light of that.

I don't think there is, it mentions neither, there are gaps thousands of years in there, that is perfect since it allows for internal consistency to be maintained, anyway, look at this from the official site:
http://starwars.com/databank/organizati ... ic/eu.html

I'll have to read that over in more depth, after I reply to this message. It sounds interesting, but it doesn't seem to address the AOTC quote, which bugs me (makes it sound like they're just ignoring it, rather than attempting to address it).

That reminds me of IMDB.com.. in their star wars sections, they have a little disclaimer in the "goofs" section saying that any apparent contradictions between the prequels and the classic trilogy won't be commented on until after Episode III is out... just in case they bother to tie up the loose ends. ; )

Twenty millennia after its founding, the Republic saw one of its most destructive conflicts in the Great Hyperspace War
Great, now we can use this as a point of reference, this is 5000 years pre-anh

Problem.... "The Republic" ? What about the "Old Republic" that supposedly stopped existing 1,000 years prior to AOTC? 5,000 years ago it should have been "The Old Republic" if it indeed was a different government. Right?

Now I'm really confused!

I'll now summarize the important events:
-4000 pre-ANH: Sith acolytes sparked what would become known as the Great Sith War.
-1000 pre-ANH: The Jedi Army of Light and the Sith Brotherhood of Darkness clashed on the planet Ruusan. That conflict saw the extermination of the Sith order. Many in the galaxy saw this battle as the last of the great wars, and the start of a new era of peace and stability in the Republic.

There you have the explanationfor palpatines 1000 years comment.
I think that firmly and solidly settles this debate.

Not quite. According to that explanation, the Republic was continuous throughout that entire 4,000 year period. The previously suggested theory said that the Old Republic (25,000+ years before a new hope) was the government in power in the galaxy, until 1,000 years before AOTC, when a new government, "the Republic" was formed. So I guess we're trashing that theory? That's okay...

Quote:
Sort of like if George makes it clear that all stormtroopers are clones (if indeed he has not already done so... depending on how much weight you give his non-canon comments)... that shakes up a huge chunk of the EU and even visual evidence from the original trilogy (different voices, different heights, imperial academy quotes, etc). Because in the EU, stormtroopers are assumed to be recruites from the human galactic populance, not embryos grown in a lab, from the dna of some bounty hunter. Even the method of cloning changes... sparti cylinders vs. the kaminoean method and different growth acceleration stuff.


Already addressed in great lenght in other threads.

From what I read, it wasn't really resolved. Some people claimed they had heard it, and many expressed disgust at what they saw as revisionism and needless mind-changing on the part of Lucas (screwing up his stories for no reason), but I didn't see anybody produce an actual SOURCE for their contention that he intended to make those changes.

The only real source that was provided was a rumor, posted on (IIRC) theforce.net from a spy reporter that claimed new "archival editions" of the SW trilogy were going to be the ones coming out on DVD in 2006, which would incorporate Prequel material in the original three movies.

So it was speculated that this bit of revisionism would also appear.. but no actual confirmation was forthcoming, unless I missed it. Some doubted the accuracy of the report (as I would to, until I see it). For all we know George does intend to do it, but he may yet change his mind in the next four years.

Supposedly all the SW films were going to come out on DVD at the same time, as a boxed set... then we got TPM, and then AOTC... ; )

Well, it's been fun discussing, I think I'll call it quits for one night, thanks for being patient with my long replies!

[Kurgan]

One last comment before I head off...

The website DOES indeed give the impression that the "Old Republic" and "the Republic" are one and the same.

Here: http://www.starwars.com/databank/organi ... ic/eu.html

(and that's listed as the "EU" view) The "movies" one says the Republic is "thousands of years" old.

[His Divine Shadow]

I don't see any reason to respond to anything else than this, since it's the only thing that matters:

It sounds interesting, but it doesn't seem to address the AOTC quote, which bugs me (makes it sound like they're just ignoring it, rather than attempting to address it)

They do address it, indirectly, they make it part of the story with that 1000 years ago was a turning point and new age and such.
"Many in the galaxy saw this battle as the last of the great wars, and the start of a new era of peace and stability in the Republic. "

Thats the point that addresses and explains Palpatines wordings beyond a doubt for me..

Problem.... "The Republic" ? What about the "Old Republic" that supposedly stopped existing 1,000 years prior to AOTC? 5,000 years ago it should have been "The Old Republic" if it indeed was a different government. Right?
Now I'm really confused!

What are you talking about?
We don't know it stopped existing, those where just theories, it might have varied in size and power though, it likely did.

From what I read, it wasn't really resolved. Some people claimed they had heard it, and many expressed disgust at what they saw as revisionism and needless mind-changing on the part of Lucas (screwing up his stories for no reason), but I didn't see anybody produce an actual SOURCE for their contention that he intended to make those changes.

It's all in the air for now, but if it ever occurs, you betcha it'll be retconned so both story lines are viable.

The website DOES indeed give the impression that the "Old Republic" and "the Republic" are one and the same.

Yeah, as it seems, it's more like a popular belief that the Republic today was really born a thousand years ago becuase thats when the new age of peace and prosperity kicked in.
Fits nicely with palpy's comments.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Just to add another log to the fire... doesn't Moff Tarkin in ANH refer to the "Old Republic" (not "the Republic") when he mentions that the Emperor has disolved the Imperial Senate?

Why refer back to a government that hadn't been in power for 1,000 years, rather than the one that they were just "evolving out of" (the Republic... which became the Empire we see now)?

IIRC, this would be another strike against the "Old Republic reforms into the Republic 1,000 years ago" theory.

They call it the "Old Republic" because it was the former government, not because the official name was "Old Republic."

The name was and always has been "Galactic Republic" with periods of prosperity and govermental reformations/constitutional adoptions not withstanding.

The United States of America has been the "United States of America" since 1776; the nation's birth.

We've seen administration under three governments: the Continental Congress, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federal Republic under the Constitution of 1789.

The fact that the people of the Galactic Republic see the beginning of the period of peace/pacifism and growth and prosperity at the end of the last war and the "Galactic Republic" 's adoption of a new government 1000 years prior as the current Republic's beginning means that's how they feel. That they don't see things the way we do is irrelevent.

The fact Palpatine refers to it as "this Republic" reinforces the theory, which is further supported by the official LFL site holonetnews.net.
Holonet News mentioned in passing once the "Ruusan Reformation" 1000 years prior to AOTC. The Ruusan Reformation must be the beginning of "this" Republic and an analog of say, the Constitutional Convention. Furthermore, we know from other Official publications that Ruusan was the location of the last Battle between the Sith and Jedi and the end of the last great war. Since this seems to fit what we here in AOTC, I see no reason not to adopt it.

"This" Republic is still the former government of the last 1000 years, and is still the old Republic. Tarkin's reference is not a mistake.

[Kurgan]

They call it the "Old Republic" because it was the former government, not because the official name was "Old Republic."

Yes, I understand that.

The name was and always has been "Galactic Republic" with periods of prosperity and govermental reformations/constitutional adoptions not withstanding.

From the EU, mostly, but sure.

The United States of America has been the "United States of America" since 1776; the nation's birth.

We've seen administration under three governments: the Continental Congress, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federal Republic under the Constitution of 1789.

The only relevant part here is that George Washington is referred to as the "First President of the United States" in most histories and popular culture, yet there were at least 8 (IIRC) presidents before him. Washington was only the first president under the latter Constitution. Is this close to what happened with the Republic? Perhaps. It's one of the better theories I've heard so far. Good work!

The fact that the people of the Galactic Republic see the beginning of the period of peace/pacifism and growth and prosperity at the end of the last war and the "Galactic Republic" 's adoption of a new government 1000 years prior as the current Republic's beginning means that's how they feel. That they don't see things the way we do is irrelevent.

That's fine. But its sort of like after the Great Depression ended, people saw a period of (relative to what came before) prosperity and growth. So would then be able to say "The United States, which has stood for 50 years" ? Makes little sense.

The fact Palpatine refers to it as "this Republic" reinforces the theory, which is further supported by the official LFL site holonetnews.net.

The various "official" (canon?? are websites canon??) websites demolish the theory that the "old republic" and "republic" are different entities... if their interpretation holds any water.

Holonet News mentioned in passing once the "Ruusan Reformation" 1000 years prior to AOTC. The Ruusan Reformation must be the beginning of "this" Republic and an analog of say, the Constitutional Convention. Furthermore, we know from other Official publications that Ruusan was the location of the last Battle between the Sith and Jedi and the end of the last great war. Since this seems to fit what we here in AOTC, I see no reason not to adopt it.

But "this" Republic and "the Old Republic" are the same thing. The only difference is a psychological change in people's minds. Again, like the Constitution of the United States (which made people re-set their president counting clocks) we didn't suddenly start saying our country was younger than it was, or saying that it was founded in 1789.

"This" Republic is still the former government of the last 1000 years, and is still the old Republic. Tarkin's reference is not a mistake.

Right. And I agree. But the question is... was Palpatine's reference a mistake?

Btw, not that it helps, but here's another thread that discusses the issue (not that they resolve it, but have some ideas):


http://www.starwarsboard.com/board/topi ... hichpage=2

[His Divine Shadow]

Right. And I agree. But the question is... was Palpatine's reference a mistake?

That depends on his intent, likely no I'd say given this information here.
Imagine this:

Palpy: "I will not let this republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two"

Jar-Jar: "Meesa wanna point out that teechnicaly de republic eeesa 25.000 years oold"

Palpy: "Shut the fuck up moron, you know what I meant"

[Kurgan]

It just seems odd, I mean why didn't he just say:


"This Republic, which has stood for thousands of years..."

or even...

"This Republic, which has stood for a thousand generations..."

Making it completely in agreement with the earlier statement by Obi-Wan?


You scenario would have been quite amusing though, I'll grant you that.
; )

[BenRG]

Here is a complete shot in the dark: Could Palpatine have been referring to the amount of time since the last time the Republic faced a war? You might be able to reconcile his impassioned statement with the implication of a 25,000-year-old Republic from ANH if he was saying: "It has been 1,000 years since the Hyperspace Wars/Sith War/whatever. I'm not letting a millennium of peace disappear without a fight."

[Kurgan]

Here is a complete shot in the dark: Could Palpatine have been referring to the amount of time since the last time the Republic faced a war? You might be able to reconcile his impassioned statement with the implication of a 25,000-year-old Republic from ANH if he was saying: "It has been 1,000 years since the Hyperspace Wars/Sith War/whatever. I'm not letting a millennium of peace disappear without a fight."

Good idea, but not likely I'm afraid.

There is the canon quote "there hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic!" (spoken by Sio Bibble? in AOTC)

Which in EU terms, would be 25,000 years ago. If it was 1,000 years ago, then it concedes that Palpy's quote was correct, and Obi-Wan's wrong.

If it wasn't referring to that "foundation" war, there is still the recent (10 years ago, in TPM) war of Naboo.

If he was just referring to a millennium of peace, why didn't he just say that? His statement implies that 1,000 years ago, there was no Republic. So either it collapsed and was replaced by a new one, or he meant something else, if that's true.

[His Divine Shadow]

There is the canon quote "there hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic!" (spoken by Sio Bibble? in AOTC)

who says the other wars where fullscale wars, they where major battles, but where they fullscale wars that included the whole republic? No.

[Kurgan]

True.

But again, if it were a fullscale war, then it would interrupt the "peace" and it would have to be a friggin' huge war to cause people to start considering it an interruption in the reign of the Republic.

The war of Naboo was insignificant, but perhaps wars like this happen frequently in a galactic Republic with as many problems as this one.

So there hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic...

[Kurgan]

I guess people say the same thing about the US sometimes... that we haven't been in a major war since WWII (excluding Afgahnistan/9-11).. they really mean since US territory was actually threatened by a direct attack.

I just don't think its very plausible. Either they haven't faced any wars period (we know they have) or they mean just a really big war.. but they haven't faced a really big war since the formation of the Republic (which was either 25,000+ years ago, or roughly 1,000 years go).

[His Divine Shadow]

Apparently so, and while there have been major conflicts they where likely regional and contained to a sector or so, so IOW, there hasn't been a truly fullscale war involving the whole republic.

The last major conflict was a 1000 years ago and from there on it's just been getting better and better ushering an apparently unprecedented age of peace and prosperity for the Republic.

Thats my take on it anyway

[Kurgan]

Somebody should double check and post when all those EU wars were supposed to have happened (ie: Hyperspace war, Sith War, etc) and see how that stacks up to the current theory.

Of course, the prequels are higher canon than any EU, but I'm just curious.

[Kurgan]

What I mean is.. if they took place AFTER the formation of the Republic, they would conflict with the other statements, unless of course we could explain them away by saying they were "small scale engagements" like the war of Naboo and therefore inconsequential enough to still be considered "peaceful" (on the galactic scale).

[His Divine Shadow]

They don't have to be small at all, they can still be major events and still not be a fullscale war, it's rather difficult to have a fullscale war when said goverment controlls a majority of the galaxy.

[Kurgan]

True. Maybe the officials are just white-washing (ie: lying) and they know it.

In which case, the entire comment is meaningless and we're still left with the "problem" of 1,000 years verses some other bigger number.

He proposed that there was 1,000 years of "peace" (Ie: since the Republic "faced war"), which is either nonesense, or they just don't count any war that isn't as big as the Clone War.

And then that leaves us to get that info on the EU conflicts that are supposed to happen within 1,000 years of the AOTC events and see if that helps or hurts the theory.

[Illuminatus Primus]

You have to remember Republic refers to both the government, and the nation.

The nation has lasted 25,000 years.

The government has lasted 1,000. From Palpatine's point-of-view, why not say the domain of the current regime, as opposed to the entity of the nation itself.

We only know the story behind the last battle of the last Sith War. It could've been very devestating for the whole galaxy and a hell of a lot more important then the Great Depression for them.

And this isn't really and EU fuck up at all. Actually, this has absolutely nothing to do w/ the EU except for the fix proposed by the EU. The fuck up is GL's from 1977 where he claims through Obi-Wan that the Old Republic is 25,000 years old because a human generation is at least that long.

Let's analyze the quotes:

Obi-Wan Kenobi: "For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic."

Easy enough. 25 years per generation--the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic--this puts a vast lower limit on the Republic's age.

Note: the Jedi Knight would think in terms of the Jedi's stewardship over the possible lines of Republics and chooses to think of them as one continuous entity, where as perhaps the average individual and even historian sees the breakage in continuity of governments but the Jedi choose to have their own interpretation because of their stewardships.

Supreme Chancellor Palpatine: "I will no allow this Republic which has stood for a thousand years be split in two."

Two possibilities: either a) he's talking about not wanting his regime which has stood for 1,000 years since the Ruusan Reformation to be split in two, or b) he says the Republic which has stood for 1,000 years--perhaps he means how the Republic has been peaceful and undisturbed for 1,000 years? That how long it has been since the Republic had a time where it nearly fell?

Sio Bibble: "There hasn't been a full-scale war since the beginning of the Republic."

Either a) he means the wars since the Republic's formation at 25,000 years ago were not "full-scale" or b) he means that the Republic of 1,000 years since the last Sith War has had no real wars.

I'm actually partial to my interpretation: the Jedi Knights alone prefer to see the series of governments as one continuous entity where as the average citizen and historian and politician does not because it gives their stewardship a more positive and long-lasting look to it that they've protected for 25,000 years, rather then 1,000.

Anyway, here's the wars....

25,000+ Years Before the Battle of Yavin

The Jedi Schism

This war was launched between the original Force adepts including the Bendu Monks who formed the first Jedi and their outcasts/renegades who were corrupt and delved into the so-called "Dark Side of the Force." After a century of fighting, the last of the renegades fled into uncolonized/mapped space w/ their ships and were not seen thousands of years.

Note on dating: based on Obi-Wan's quote we have a bare lower limit on the Jedi's stewardship on the Republic (or series of Republics) and thus a bare lower limit on the Republic's (or series of Republics') age and the Jedi's age.

5,000 Years Before the Battle of Yavin

The Great Hyperspace War

Some of the renegades over the next twenty-thousand years wandered across the galactic plane and discovered the primitive space-traveling civilization known as the Sith. Conquering and subjugating them, they formed the highest caste of the Sith civilization, with whom they interbreeded.

(Note: the Sith are very alike baseline humans and are probably a lost colonization or exploration group from a much more primitive stage of human spacetravel)

This Republic stumbles across them and war between the two previously out-of-conflict civilizations in the galaxy ignites. The Sith lose, this Republic wins. The Sith Empire is completely conquered and their civilization is crushed.

(Note: the Sith are later said to be extinct--did this Republic and the Jedi embark on a genocidal rampage? did they subject the "brutal and ruthless" Sith to concentration camps? did they BDZ many of their worlds?)

4,000 Years Before the Battle of Yavin

The Sith War

The fallen Jedi Knights Ulic Qel-Droma and Exar Kun join with Dark Side Adepts Aleema and Satal Keto all of the influenced by dead Sith Lord Freedon Nadd. They lead rogue sectors including that of the Empress Teta System into war against this Republic. One notable incident is where Aleema activates an old starbusting device built by the old Sith Empire and destroys a star cluster. The Republic learns of Kun's hideaway on Yavin IV...the Republic arrives and incinerate him in the jungles.

1,000 Years Before the Battle of Yavin

The Second Sith War

A new order of Sith established by a fallen Jedi a thousand years prior, concludes their bloody war across the galaxy in seven titanic battles w/out spacecraft or advanced technology against the Jedi Order on the planet of Ruusan. All the Jedi and all the Sith who participated in the final battles at Ruusan were killed by combat or by the Sith "thought bomb" that annhiliated all sentient life around them at the battles' conclusion. One Sith made it away to found a new order. The turmoil and events of this war sparked the formation of a new government and sparked the Jedi into deep orthodoxy and paranoia that would cause them to begin vastly restrictive rules and regulations in the Jedi Code, including celebacy and being forbidden to take on multiple apprentices.

As for after the 1,000 year mark, there was the Stark Hyperspace War, but the was really hardly a war and really quite small. It's not important, really.

[Kurgan]

And this isn't really and EU fuck up at all. Actually, this has absolutely nothing to do w/ the EU except for the fix proposed by the EU. The fuck up is GL's from 1977 where he claims through Obi-Wan that the Old Republic is 25,000 years old because a human generation is at least that long.

I'm sure that's the case. One could even theorize that Lucas himself was perfectly fine with this idea and even encouraged the EU guys to go along with (what was after all, orginally his own idea), but changed it later on.

Trouble is, now there's a continuity problem between two canon sources. The problem was introduced in AOTC, thus conflicting with everything going all the way back to ANH.


The EU took Obi-Wan at his word and wove a tapestry of history around the Jedi, the Sith, and the Republic, which the new films didn't really bother with.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I still think my theory is best.

Only the Jedi consider the two Republics continuous because it makes them look better and their stewardship more successful and gives them a brotherhood w/ the Republic, being founded at the same time as the original.

I think that the avg. citizen, politican, etc considers the Republic having lasted only 1,000 years and that it briefly collapsed during the last Sith War.

[Robert Treder]

I still think my theory is best.

I concur. The average citizen is probably aware of, but not concerned with, the previous incarnations of the Republic.

[Kurgan]

There's also a possibility that "1 generation" actually does roughly equal "1 year" by Jedi reckoning (the theory I posted, which wasn't my own about "generations" of Jedi students, in another thread).

That would theoretically resolve the two canon quotes without having to worry about measuring the degrees of wars, though it doesn't necessarily fix anything in the EU that says otherwise.

[Kurgan]

You know what, I just now realized something I had missed before, and I must look like an idiot, but the title says NEW Republic, and refers to the EU construct, not anything from the fan films.

I guess I must have been all fired up from responding to another similar debate, and I apologize to the thread-starter.

How that missed me I will never know... ; p

The New Republic forms however it says in the EU books.. out of the Rebel Alliance and the ashes of the Empire.

[Kurgan]

er.. I meant "canon" not "fan" films. Okay, two in a row, I give up!

; )

[Illuminatus Primus]

There's also a possibility that "1 generation" actually does roughly equal "1 year" by Jedi reckoning (the theory I posted, which wasn't my own about "generations" of Jedi students, in another thread).

That would theoretically resolve the two canon quotes without having to worry about measuring the degrees of wars, though it doesn't necessarily fix anything in the EU that says otherwise.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. A generation of Jedi would be no different then a generation of other humans, and why would he use such references to a backward farmboy like Luke?

You ought to be ashamed to be so stupid as to suggest a generation is not around 25 years. You know it, and I know it. Do not post such excrement on here again and be so audacious to call it a "theory."

The arrogant propogandistic Jedi opinion theory works best, not to be overly self-congratulating, but what you're suggesting is simply assinine.