PDA

View Full Version : Who I Think Is The Grand Master In Assassin's Creed: Syndicate



Abelzorus-Prime
09-09-2015, 11:33 PM
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/HerbertEdwardesByMoseley.jpg/220px-HerbertEdwardesByMoseley.jpg
Major-General Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes (1819-1868) was an English administrator, soldier, and statesman active in the Punjab, India. He is best known as the "Hero of Multan" for his pivotal role in securing the British victory in the Second Anglo-Sikh War.

Edwards' extensive work in India could suggest that he is a previous adversary of Henry Green and Arbaaz Mir, who has returned to London to secure Templar power and combine a collection of Pieces of Eden with the Koh-I-Noor. Comments from the developers insinuate that there will be "Multiple Pieces of Eden", and the Templars might possibly need the Koh-I-Noor to bind all the fates of these pieces.

This could be an applicable reason why Edwards historically travelled to India in 1841, to obtain the Koh-I-Noor while the rest of the British Templars find other POEs, such as Lucy Thorne with the Shroud, or oppress the working class through gangs, such as Bloody Nora. Edwards being a Templar could also add emotional tension to the story as Edwards and Green may have some personal resentment they didn't get over in India. This makes me think that Herbert Edwards is the Grand Master of the British Rite of the Templar Order during the events of Syndicate and could appear in, because he died in 23 December, which probably means he would be the last target in the game. It is also likely that he could be link between Assassin's Creed Syndicate and Assassin's Creed Chronicles: India, which would mean he would have a presence in both titles this year.

A paragraph from Assassin's Creed Chronicles India's Synopsis:

The game follows Arbaaz Mir in Amritsar 1841, in the midst of a war between the Sikh Empire and the East India Company, two years after the events of the graphic novel Assassin's Creed: Brahman. Arbaaz must recover the famed Koh-I-Noor artifact that used to belong to the Assassin Order from a newly arrived Master Templar, while protecting his friends and lover in the process.

D.I.D.
09-09-2015, 11:47 PM
Nice idea, I hope you're right! Could lead towards an India game, maybe?

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 07:08 AM
Nice idea, I hope you're right! Could lead towards an India game, maybe?

The fact that its heavily featured in Chronicles India and Syndicate kind of defeats the purpose for an India game. The era after that, the Independence Struggle, is not quite Assassin-y. Who knows maybe they'll go earlier like say the Mughal Era.



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/HerbertEdwardesByMoseley.jpg/220px-HerbertEdwardesByMoseley.jpg
Major-General Sir Herbert Benjamin Edwardes (1819-1868) was an English administrator, soldier, and statesman active in the Punjab, India. He is best known as the "Hero of Multan" for his pivotal role in securing the British victory in the Second Anglo-Sikh War.

Edwards' extensive work in India could suggest that he is a previous adversary of Henry Green and Arbaaz Mir, who has returned to London to secure Templar power and combine a collection of Pieces of Eden with the Koh-I-Noor. Comments from the developers insinuate that there will be "Multiple Pieces of Eden", and the Templars might possibly need the Koh-I-Noor to bind all the fates of these pieces.

Possibly. The more important question though is...who is the Sage going to be this time?

D.I.D.
09-10-2015, 10:36 AM
The fact that its heavily featured in Chronicles India and Syndicate kind of defeats the purpose for an India game. The era after that, the Independence Struggle, is not quite Assassin-y. Who knows maybe they'll go earlier like say the Mughal Era.

Absolutely, just for the location, but it could be any time period. I would hope that Chronicles games aren't seen as precluding main game locations! They ought to be tests of popularity.

When the MD has to be rationed out so sparingly, I think it would be great for the series if the ancestor story was able to chain locations like this. I'd have loved a Napoleonic Wars game after Unity, but I can see why it wouldn't happen (too close to Unity), but a follow-up about Napoleon in Egypt would have been a big enough geographic shift while maintaining a narrative connection to the game before.

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 11:07 AM
Possibly. The more important question though is...who is the Sage going to be this time?

Personally I do not care for the Sage storylne at all. They could make anyone a Sage, and if Herbert Edwardes turns out to be the Grand Master than it's possible he could be a Sage like Germain and Molay. I hope the Sage plays a small role in this game, but yet it still could be anyone. Maybe Ethan Frye was a Sage, who knows?!

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 11:28 AM
Personally I do not care for the Sage storylne at all. They could make anyone a Sage, and if Herbert Edwardes turns out to be the Grand Master than it's possible he could be a Sage like Germain and Molay. I hope the Sage plays a small role in this game, but yet it still could be anyone. Maybe Ethan Frye was a Sage, who knows?!

Traditionally, the Grand Master of the Templars is usually not a big mystery. It could be anyone, real or fictional, doesn't really matter.

But the Sages aren't necessarily Templars. In Unity they said only two Templar grandmasters have been Sages. The first Sage in Black Flag was independent, the second Sage was Templar, from this it follows that there will be an Assassin Sage somewhere down the line.

I like the Sage as a concept and idea, especially since it was done so well in Black Flag. It was poorly done in Unity but then so was everything else.


Absolutely, just for the location, but it could be any time period. I would hope that Chronicles games aren't seen as precluding main game locations! They ought to be tests of popularity.

I don't think it's tests of anything. It's just cheapjack content dispensers. Ultimately they'll decide on a new era based on their whim, what they think fans want and what they're willing to shell out. Don't think there's any logic to it.

Senningiri_GR
09-10-2015, 11:43 AM
I think the Grand master of the Knights Templar Order will be a member of the Royal Family. Firstly it is known that Queen Elizabeth had the possession of the apple of Eden 2, and it is not difficult for Queen Victoria to have inherited it. I think it will be Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, husband of Victoria, as he lived in Victorian London and died in 1861 that is close to Syndicate time (1858). For his illness it could be a poison...http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/assassinscreed/images/f/ff/Glyph_2_1.png/revision/latest?cb=20131105000434

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 11:53 AM
I think the Grand master of the Knights Templar Order will be a member of the Royal Family.

That doesn't fit with the recent games nor does it apply to the theme. In AC3, Black Flag and Unity, the Templars were anti-monarchy and proto-capitalists, and Syndicate is about the Templars using the Industrial Revolution to crush people.

Its weird but the games are generally pro-Royalty, like Richard the Lionheart and Suleiman the Magnificent come off really well as does Lorenzo de'Medici and Caterina Sforza (who are not kings but equivalent of the same). While UNITY rewrote history and presented Louis XVI as an innocent (when he was in fact guilty as sin) and likewise has this man-crush to the future Emperor Napoleon.


Firstly it is known that Queen Elizabeth had the possession of the apple of Eden 2, and it is not difficult for Queen Victoria to have inherited it. I think it will be Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, husband of Victoria, as he lived in Victorian London and died in 1861 that is close to Syndicate time (1858). For his illness it could be a poison...

The time of Syndicate is 1868, not 1858. And the developers have stated that Queen Victoria is mourning for her husband (the list of places she renamed after Prince Albert led more than one wag to note that London was fortunate it was not renamed Albertville).

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 12:03 PM
Though we do't know who the Grand Master is now so it's still a mystery. The identity of the Grand Master was a mystery in Assassin's Creed II, Assassin's Creed Revelations and Assassin's Creed Unity. I'm not saying it will be a mystery in this game though, but the Sage is most likely not gonna be too much of a mystery as thet've used it in their last two games.

I didn't say Sages are Templars! I don't know where you got that from. I even made a comment about Ethan Frye possibly being a Sage. Ultimately I don't care about the Sage storyline I would rather they appear in a side mission than be the focus again

Come to think of it I quite like the idea of Ethan Frye being a Sage, as it would be a way of implementing it into the narrative, but having the Sage dead would push them out of the way.

Farlander1991
09-10-2015, 12:57 PM
The identity of the Grand Master was a mystery in Assassin's Creed II

Except for the fact that the trailer before release says that Rodrigo Borgia is the Grand Master :p and in the game proper we learn his identity as soon as Sequence 3 when we're after Vieri (in the first sequence he's a shadowy unknown figure, granted), and that's pretty early into the game.

PS. I do like the theory regarding ACS grand master and think it's very sound :)

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 01:32 PM
I think the Grand master of the Knights Templar Order will be a member of the Royal Family. Firstly it is known that Queen Elizabeth had the possession of the apple of Eden 2, and it is not difficult for Queen Victoria to have inherited it. I think it will be Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, husband of Victoria, as he lived in Victorian London and died in 1861 that is close to Syndicate time (1858). For his illness it could be a poison...http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/assassinscreed/images/f/ff/Glyph_2_1.png/revision/latest?cb=20131105000434

I don't think the Grand Master would be in the Royal Family especially as this is the time where capitalism was on its high. Plus Assassin's Creed Syndicate isn't set in 1858, it's set in 1868, the year Herbert Benjamin Edwardes died.

@Farlander1991 Oops I was thinking of AC3, but typed AC2. Thanks for the correction anyway.

Regarding the theory, I just think there are too much details for it to be a coincidence.

Shahkulu101
09-10-2015, 01:45 PM
Great theory - can see this being the case...

On the topic of Sages, I hope there isn't one this time. It's too much of a coincidence to have our protagonists bump into sages every game.

Farlander1991
09-10-2015, 01:56 PM
On the topic of Sages, I hope there isn't one this time. It's too much of a coincidence to have our protagonists bump into sages everygame.

To be fair, Sages might be important for the resolution of the story. Like, if AC1 to 3 are Desmond's Saga/Solar Flare Saga, then AC4 to ??? are the Sages/Juno saga or something. Plus, we know from ACU that Abstergo is actively looking for sages at this moment in time.

Shahkulu101
09-10-2015, 02:08 PM
To be fair, Sages might be important for the resolution of the story. Like, if AC1 to 3 are Desmond's Saga/Solar Flare Saga, then AC4 to ??? are the Sages/Juno saga or something. Plus, we know from ACU that Abstergo is actively looking for sages at this moment in time.

Oh yeah, so the memories we're digging through in this saga are actually for the express purpose of finding/learning about Sages. Makes sense if we see one in every game then until the plotline is done, who knows when that will be.

D.I.D.
09-10-2015, 03:26 PM
To be fair, Sages might be important for the resolution of the story. Like, if AC1 to 3 are Desmond's Saga/Solar Flare Saga, then AC4 to ??? are the Sages/Juno saga or something. Plus, we know from ACU that Abstergo is actively looking for sages at this moment in time.

Yeah, I think they have to, really. The "For Internal Viewing Only" Abstergo video in Unity said that they'd sequenced John Standish's DNA and found it was only partly human, and then said "Imagine what we can accomplish if we get a complete First Civilisation genome" (or words to that effect). The video carried on to say that the expect to be able to use the First Civ DNA to get the secrets of the PoEs, presumably by studying a living First Civ subject's memories.

ze_topazio
09-10-2015, 03:39 PM
^ That makes me think Abstergo objective might be creating their own piece of eden.

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 04:02 PM
The ultimate Piece of Eden!

dxsxhxcx
09-10-2015, 04:20 PM
^ That makes me think Abstergo objective might be creating their own piece of eden.

I bet they'll create a clone with pure First Civ. DNA which Juno will use as a vessel...

after that Assassins and Templars will join forces in order to destroy Juno and her army of Sages

D.I.D.
09-10-2015, 04:29 PM
I bet they'll create a clone with pure First Civ. DNA which Juno will use as a vessel..

Yeah, I thought the same. It would fit nicely into a chain of disaster if the Assassins fail, then the Templars fail, and then humanity fails (if Abstergo is trying to resurrect a First Civ body to mine its brain with Animus technology, but then Juno arrives in their computer systems as an infection and hijacks that body), and then the next game is a fight against her.

dxsxhxcx
09-10-2015, 04:50 PM
Yeah, I thought the same. It would fit nicely into a chain of disaster if the Assassins fail, then the Templars fail, and then humanity fails (if Abstergo is trying to resurrect a First Civ body to mine its brain with Animus technology, but then Juno arrives in their computer systems as an infection and hijacks that body), and then the next game is a fight against her.

Later the Assassins will create another clone, that'll be used to store Consus' conscience (they'll find a way to transfer his conscience from the Shroud to this new vessel, most likely wrapping his body in the Shroud and putting him in the animus), Consus will help them defeat Juno and then turn against humanity, because he has his own agenda (that is resurrect the First Civ. race) and he can't allow humanity to interfere with his plans, the MD portion of the game will skip some decades to a post-apocalyptic setting where an old Shaun or Rebecca will be the only remaining character from the "old times", in this era a new war is happening between two factions of TWCB, one that helps the humans and the other who wants to enslave them (does it ring any bell?)...

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 04:58 PM
Later the Assassins will create another clone, that'll be used to store Consus' conscience (they'll find a way to transfer his conscience from the Shroud to this new vessel, most likely wrapping his body in the Shroud and putting him in the animus), Consus will help them defeat Juno and then turn against humanity, because he has his own agenda (that is ressurect the First Civ. race) and he can't allow humanity to interfere with his plans... :p

Fanfic territory! :P

dxsxhxcx
09-10-2015, 05:03 PM
Fanfic territory! :P

:p

Sushiglutton
09-10-2015, 05:04 PM
Wow, that's a great theory. I bet they are sweating at Abstergo HQ right now :)!

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 05:28 PM
Mine or dxsxhxcx's?

RVSage
09-10-2015, 05:36 PM
The fact that its heavily featured in Chronicles India and Syndicate kind of defeats the purpose for an India game. The era after that, the Independence Struggle, is not quite Assassin-y. Who knows maybe they'll go earlier like say the Mughal Era.


I believe there are multiple hints from the past that a game during british colonial period in india was in cards.

1. Corey May wanted to a game in Raj
2. Unity Sage list includes an Indian congress man
3, The Indian revolution 1857 to around 1890s(also known as sepoy mutiny) would be an extension to the revolution saga, (American, French, Indian). Adds value to narrative
4. Assets like carraiges and other vehicles, could be reused if they make a game in india. Because it would be yet another modern game.

ze_topazio
09-10-2015, 06:05 PM
The ultimate Piece of Eden!

The one piece of eden to rule them all.


I bet they'll create a clone with pure First Civ. DNA which Juno will use as a vessel...

after that Assassins and Templars will join forces in order to destroy Juno and her army of Sages

Back in 2013 when the that trailer with the blood vial came out I theorized the blood vial contained Juno and Aita blood and she would try to create clones of her and Aita bodies.


Wow, that's a great theory. I bet they are sweating at Abstergo HQ right now :)!

http://img11.deviantart.net/311b/i/2015/251/2/d/abstergo_van_by_steaveg-d98uzs1.jpg

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 06:16 PM
I believe there are multiple hints from the past that a game during british colonial period in india was in cards.

1. Corey May wanted to a game in Raj

Well it was Alex Hutchinson who mainly talked about it, and he may have scratched his itch with Far Cry 4 which is Indian orientalist kitsch on a level that makes Rudyard Kipling look like a neutral authority, its all tigers and elephants and Shangri-La (which is actually pseudo-Tibet but whatever).


2. Unity Sage list includes an Indian congress man
3, The Indian revolution 1857 to around 1890s(also known as sepoy mutiny) would be an extension to the revolution saga, (American, French, Indian). Adds value to narrative

The Sepoy Mutiny (or as they call it in India, the 1857 Uprising) lasted for half a year at most. Saying that it lasted till the 1890s is a gross ignorance of history. The Mutiny ended the rule of the East India Company since their incompetence became clear for all the world to see so the British government stepped in and took over. In either case, the Indian independence struggle was precisely that, a struggle, it was not a revolution because none of India's leaders really wanted one, they merely wanted to take over management. There's very little in common there with the American and French Revolutions.

Besides AC is losing interest in revolutions. This is pretty obvious in UNITY which is utter trash as history, and the fact that Chronicles Russia deals with Anastasia's death and whatnot (essentially code for forget about that Communist Russia game you wanted).


4. Assets like carraiges and other vehicles, could be reused if they make a game in india. Because it would be yet another modern game.

Well the main problem is the stuff people want in an AC game - cities and architecture - will be hard to apply for India. For one thing the four major cities (Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Madras) are very far away from each other. Its a day's journey by train ride today, and naturally it would have been even longer back then. A lot of India's most distinctive architecture are in smaller towns and areas, like Agra (which has the Taj Mahal and Fatehpur Sikhri) so if you want to Parkour around them then its going to be extra render for a disposable asset. Secondly, architecturally speaking aside from Delhi and Calcutta to some extent, its going to be colonial architecture of the sort you see in AC3 and Kingston in Black Flag. So not something exceptionally new and interesting.

A more interesting period would be the Mughal Era, which is the Indian Renaissance and has loads of colourful historical figures and events and stuff (and it can focus very distinctly on the North India and you can maybe go to Kashmir and the lower Himalayas). The only problem is that there's no white people. I am not saying that to be churlish but the fact is that Ubisoft generally like periods where there are interactions with Europeans and cultures familiar to their frame of reference. It's the main reason the Ancient Egypt, China and Feudal Japan games people want are waiting in line, because like most of Hollywood, its hard for them to get into a culture where there aren't any white perspectives at all. So far they have put Chronicles in a side game, and while we have had Altair and Connor, they are both heroes who come into contact with Europeans.

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 07:03 PM
Death of Afzal Khan (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Death_of_Afzal_Khan.jpg)

Shivaji as the Assassin Mentor fighting against the Templar supported Mughal Empire with Aurangzeb as ruler. It eve looks like he assassinated Afzal Khan with a hidden blade.

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 07:22 PM
Death of Afzal Khan (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Death_of_Afzal_Khan.jpg)

Shivaji as the Assassin Mentor fighting against the Templar supported Mughal Empire with Aurangzeb as ruler. It eve looks like he assassinated Afzal Khan with a hidden blade.

That certainly is a pretty colourful event, among many that happened. Although I wouldn't recommend Ubisoft show Shivaji since among some Indians he's as big a deal as the Prophet Muhammad. A couple of years back, someone wrote a book on him, rightwingers burned down a library in Pune (because that's where he did some of his research). Though for me, I was thinking of early Miughal, around the time of Akbar or Shah Jahan. Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal (among many other buildings) and the fight between his two sons Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb is pretty interesting.

Of course you can also look at the other Kingdoms, the Rajputs were pretty interesting, you can have desert gameplay and depending on the era, you can go to the famous Lake Palace of Udaipur. The Deccan was pretty interesting. One key figure of course is Tipu Sultan, a badass, a nutcase and the pioneer of rocket technology who famously built an automaton of a tiger mauling a British soldier that is now a popular attraction at the Victoria and Albert Museum. Sultan was also backed by the French and Napoleon's initial idea to invade Egypt was to link up with Tipu (though Napoleon's real plan was to d--k around Egypt and use the expedition to build his career).

Abelzorus-Prime
09-10-2015, 07:46 PM
I didn't know Shivaji was that much of a big deal, but if Ubisoft ever found the confidence I would like to see it, as it's still not as controversial as depicting the Prophet Muhammed

VestigialLlama4
09-10-2015, 09:18 PM
I didn't know Shivaji was that much of a big deal,

I am amazed you even know of Shivaji.


but if Ubisoft ever found the confidence I would like to see it, as it's still not as controversial as depicting the Prophet Muhammed

Mostly because it's contained geographically in the western part of India (though population wise its pretty big) and most people outside India don't know who he is or cares much about Indian history before the English came and plundered. But the fanaticism is the same and it's even less understandable. One of the few portraits of him is there in the British Museum.

You know I actually wonder about Ubisoft's recreation, if they were to recreate museums does that mean they recreate the exhibits, the artwork inside and the like. I wonder if they see that as too much work to do and if that's the reason why the Louvre in Unity (which opened during the Revolution) isn't explorable inside with all the Royal art collection that existed there.

Sorrosyss
09-11-2015, 12:42 AM
Interesting theory! The date of his death is very telling as well.

RVSage
09-11-2015, 06:49 AM
The Sepoy Mutiny (or as they call it in India, the 1857 Uprising) lasted for half a year at most. Saying that it lasted till the 1890s is a gross ignorance of history. The Mutiny ended the rule of the East India Company since their incompetence became clear for all the world to see so the British government stepped in and took over. In either case, the Indian independence struggle was precisely that, a struggle, it was not a revolution because none of India's leaders really wanted one, they merely wanted to take over management. There's very little in common there with the American and French Revolutions.
.
Well bro I am Indian, and in my humble opinion, text book history is far from complete. Yes according to british history records, the mutiny lasted a year(East India Company was shut down), but there was a lot of after events, that followed it . It is called the first war of Independence for a reason. But yes according to books it lasted for a year. And I do agree the mughal period or even earlier periods.. like vijayanagara, pallava, gupta,maratha empires would be great. Mughal period represents only northern India/persian influence. mostly , southern Indian history is far diverse. And it was a revolution in its own way, lesser or higher , there was bloodshed , there was massacre, it was not just a management shift. The British empire ate on Indian wealth, funded wars using it. It was not merely a management change.

VestigialLlama4
09-11-2015, 10:25 AM
Yes according to british history records, the mutiny lasted a year(East India Company was shut down), but there was a lot of after events, that followed it . It is called the first war of Independence for a reason.

That term is only used by Indian nationalists for fairly understandable reasons but it's highly controversial inside and outside India. The Sepoy Mutiny and 1857 Uprising are much more neutral and accurate descriptions. It's not exactly a war of Independence because the mutineers wanted to restore the Mughal Empire (even though the Emperor himself was fine being a British Puppet and content with Delhi becoming the Constantinople of India, a one-city empire in name only) and their choice of leadership is the main reason that they didn't get broad support. The sepoys were by themselves ex-mercenaries who earlier committed atrocities in the Anglo-Sikh wars, and it was for that reason why they were not especially well liked by other rulers who eventually sided with the English. Likewise calling it the "First War of Independence" is ridiculous because there were several wars and agitations between rulers and the English before that, and yet they aren't considered "wars of independence" because of narrow nationalist definitions. Likewise if the 1857 was the first war, then that implies a second war when in fact it was the last war fought between local rulers and the English. The Indians unlike the Americans, the French and the Russians never won their freedom by war. It was largely political agitation, boycotts, civilian protest and other activism from then till independence.


And it was a revolution in its own way, lesser or higher , there was bloodshed , there was massacre, it was not just a management shift. The British empire ate on Indian wealth, funded wars using it. It was not merely a management change.

The warring had pretty much died out when the Independence movement properly began. 1857 was the last real war, before you had Tipu Sultan in Mysore, you had the Marathas (against whom the Duke of Wellington earned his first major spurs) and the Anglo-Sikh wars. The Indian freedom fighters who came afterwards were largely London educated lawyers, including the most famous one of them all, Gandhi, and most of them largely wanted to keep and maintain the infrastructure which the English left behind.

RVSage
09-11-2015, 05:15 PM
That term is only used by Indian nationalists for fairly understandable reasons but it's highly controversial inside and outside India. The Sepoy Mutiny and 1857

The warring had pretty much died out when the Independence movement properly began. 1857 was the last real war, before you had Tipu Sultan in Mysore, you had the Marathas (against whom the Duke of Wellington earned his first major spurs) and the Anglo-Sikh wars. The Indian freedom fighters who came afterwards were largely London educated lawyers, including the most famous one of them all, Gandhi, and most of them largely wanted to keep and maintain the infrastructure which the English left behind.

Who do you think was the financial background for the british in world wars? India. Have you heard of Subash Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army. In reality it was he who forced the british out, not just Gandhiji's non-violent methods.

http://swarajyamag.com/politics/bose-not-gandhi-ended-british-rule-in-india-ambedkar/

Gandhi played his part, But it was Subash Chandra Bose, who made the british understand they can not control the land any more.

VestigialLlama4
09-11-2015, 05:36 PM
Who do you think was the financial background for the british in world wars?

You mean financial sources and yes India was the "jewel of the crown" that is well known. A lot of Indian soldiers voluntarily served the English in the First and Second War too. Indeed, Ubisoft's Valiant Hearts shows a lot of Indian soldiers fighting at the Somme in Union colours (although it skips African soldiers fighting under French colours). The Indian congress leaders encouraged Indians to enlist.


Have you heard of Subash Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army. In reality it was he who forced the british out, not just Gandhiji's non-violent methods.

Gandhi played his part, But it was Subash Chandra Bose, who made the british understand they can not control the land any more.

Going from one extreme (Gandhi) to another (Bose) is quite a stretch. The fact is that no one single person caused the British to leave when they did and transfer power to India, it was a combination of factors. The real reasons why the English left India was of course World War II, the war drained England of a lot of its savings from imperial plunder, and it also stretched its military thin so there were logistical problems at maintaining a large part of India. The idealism of the war, the conflict between Democracy and Fascism also turned the English public entirely against imperialism (it's unknown that many were ever for it anyway, most of them only started to vote by 1918 and until then England had a plutocracy masquerading as Parliamentary democracy). Likewise, Franklin Roosevelt told Churchill that America will not back England against any independence movement. He told Churchill that after the war it was his intention with the UN to end colonialism by the British and French.

So no American backing, loss of local support, military affairs stretched thin, those are macro-level reasons for Indian independence. On a smaller level, yes the Indian leaders variously did play a role, symbolic and actual. In the case of Bose, its more symbolic since he was never a significant miltiary threat since the INA, allied to the Japanese (and formerly to Hitler), were outnumbered by the British Indian Army. The Indian Army today is a descendant of the British Indian army and not Bose's. The Red Fort trial had more impact than any of their military activities ever did.

RVSage
09-11-2015, 06:30 PM
You mean financial sources and yes India was the "jewel of the crown" that is well known. A lot of Indian soldiers voluntarily served the English in the First and Second War too. Indeed, Ubisoft's Valiant Hearts shows a lot of Indian soldiers fighting at the Somme in Union colours (although it skips African soldiers fighting under French colours). The Indian congress leaders encouraged Indians to enlist.



Going from one extreme (Gandhi) to another (Bose) is quite a stretch. The fact is that no one single person caused the British to leave when they did and transfer power to India, it was a combination of factors. The real reasons why the English left India was of course World War II, the war drained England of a lot of its savings from imperial plunder, and it also stretched its military thin so there were logistical problems at maintaining a large part of India. The idealism of the war, the conflict between Democracy and Fascism also turned the English public entirely against imperialism (it's unknown that many were ever for it anyway, most of them only started to vote by 1918 and until then England had a plutocracy masquerading as Parliamentary democracy). Likewise, Franklin Roosevelt told Churchill that America will not back England against any independence movement. He told Churchill that after the war it was his intention with the UN to end colonialism by the British and French.

So no American backing, loss of local support, military affairs stretched thin, those are macro-level reasons for Indian independence. On a smaller level, yes the Indian leaders variously did play a role, symbolic and actual. In the case of Bose, its more symbolic since he was never a significant miltiary threat since the INA, allied to the Japanese (and formerly to Hitler), were outnumbered by the British Indian Army. The Indian Army today is a descendant of the British Indian army and not Bose's. The Red Fort trial had more impact than any of their military activities ever did.

Well you can say all you want, But the truth is the macro reasons always were Gandhi, Bose and lack of local support. The British were clever enough to use the War expenditure as a face lift You know It sounds good when you say "It is not because they chased us out". The western world always has projected the eastern world so, that they actually caused all the development and revolution. I would not blame you for believing the view of the western world, because that is what you read , and many indian books heap all the praise on Gandhi and forget Bose, But when investigated, you will understand, the because of INA , there was uprising within the British Indian Army, that made the British finally realize they had lost it. INA was more than a symbol, folks within the British Indian army became sympathetic to their cause, this is the truth. I never believed in either what the British records say nor what many indian history books say. Because everyone has their own agenda, and face to save. You like many many in the western world, will believe what they say about indian independence movement. And your comment on Indian facial features in the other thread, really made me understand that your view on India is guided by your media, while mine is guided by neither your media nor the Indian media.

PS: let's cut it right here, This is a game thread and let's stick to that. I respect your views, and you can keep it

VestigialLlama4
09-11-2015, 09:06 PM
...and many indian books heap all the praise on Gandhi and forget Bose,

Firstly I highly doubt Bose is as forgotten as you claim he is. It might be important for some people to want to give him undue credit over and above the actual scale of his achievements (considerable as it is) while at the same time sidelining all the reasons why he's so dubious a figure but he has always been one of the most well known figures of the independence movement. Bose was primarily important as a symbol during the Naval Ratings (a spontaneous popular strike which he obviously neither planned or anticipated). People liked the INA far more after they were defeated and locked up then when they were active in the field. The INA were militarily not a serious threat, their chief influence was in civilian agitation and protests.


You know It sounds good when you say "It is not because they chased us out".

Well the Indians did not in fact chase the English out. I understand that some nationalistic minded people find military glory more impressive and romantic than actual day to day attrition and struggle and constant hardship and sacrifice made by India's freedom fighters, but that doesn't mean you should rewrite history. I generally don't have a lot of patience for nationalist whitewashing. Whether it's people nostalgically dreaming of Constantinople and romanticizing the Byzantine Empire, whether it's people saying that the English or the Americans were treated badly in AC3, or Ubisoft rewriting the French Revolution as a right-wing fantasy in UNITY.

In the actual history of the world there are very few cases of the invaded successfully chasing the invaders out. You have America and England of course, but also Haiti and France, Afghanistan and England (more English people died in the First Afghan War than any other colonial conflict) and Vietnam and France. Empires have always crumbled in conflict with other empires (the Ottomans and Germans in World War 1, the British in World War 2) or because of internal tensions (USSR in late 80s-early 90s, the Western Roman Empire) or they have a financial crisis. The reason for this is that military resistance is supremely hard and very often a double edged sword because military men rarely make good politicians and Mr. Bose with his alliance with Hitler and imperial Japan is proof of it. If the Japanese had won, he would likely have been their puppet dictator or client, essentially trading one empire for another. If the Nazis had won, well Hitler said, and I quote, "If we took India, the Indian people would soon long for the good old days of English rule". You can't seriously argue that the British were as bad as the Nazis or that America or USSR were as bad as the Nazis. They all had blood on their hands and were fairly hypocritical and expansionist but that was the real choice that had to be made then.


PS: let's cut it right here, This is a game thread and let's stick to that. I respect your views, and you can keep it

Well bear in mind that you were the one who started digressing about Indian history. You said that the Sepoy Mutiny lasted till 1890, now later you somehow connected this to Bose and the INA. So the only one who has to cut it here is you. Don't whitewash facts with me or anyone else.

RVSage
09-11-2015, 09:40 PM
Well bear in mind that you were the one who started digressing about Indian history. You said that the Sepoy Mutiny lasted till 1890, now later you somehow connected this to Bose and the INA. So the only one who has to cut it here is you. Don't whitewash facts with me or anyone else.

For the record, I don't whitewash facts, because I do not need to. and I was not the one started who talking about how independence was achieved (by stating it was a management shift) , you did. My points on the INA was merely a response to that. And I still hold the fact that , the sepoy mutiny triggered a chain of events and these events were widespread till around 1890s, after which the next phase started in 1915s under Gandhi and Bose led INA parallely. You have not read Indian textbooks on history I have and they always Credit Gandhi/Nehru more. You may not agree with me, but do not ever question my intentions as an attempt to whitewash facts, by saying so you, sound like you are trying to assert only your view is right. I do understand the world politics played a role in the Indian movement and eventual Independence. All I have been trying to say is, There is more the movement than people outside know about, for that matter there is more to it than even people in India know about. I do not intend to dig deep further because this not the forum for that. If you still want to say that your view point is perfect , As I said so be it, I can't force you to understand what I am trying to convey.

VestigialLlama4
09-11-2015, 10:10 PM
As I said so be it, I can't force you to understand what I am trying to convey.

Nor can I. I wasn't trying to force you to say anything, I was just bringing up facts that's all. Facts don't speak for themselves nor do they allow for contigencies or roads not taken, they are just there.

Anyway, before Locopells barges in, we should get back to discussing the topic, as I said, I don't think there's a lot of Assassin-y stuff after 1857 and a pre-Colonial era I think would be more interesting.

RVSage
09-11-2015, 10:14 PM
Anyway, before Locopells barges in, we should get back to discussing the topic, as I said, I don't think there's a lot of Assassin-y stuff after 1857 and a pre-Colonial era I think would be more interesting.

Agreed there are lot more interesting time-periods than the colonial time period

Abelzorus-Prime
09-19-2015, 12:19 PM
A few other possible antagonists in Syndicate! I should have put them in the same post. (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1265343-Possible-Antagonists-in-Assassin-s-Creed-Syndicate)