PDA

View Full Version : A few questions for the historians. Spoilers. French revolution and what not..



RzaRecta357
12-12-2010, 04:08 PM
Hey!

So basically, I wiki'd the french revolution and got a bit of it but there are so many links it'd take a person forever to read. Im curious if anyone here could give off like a simple answer to what happened.

Who would be the templars, who would be the assassins and things like that.

Jupiters temple is also in france, correct?

Im also going to go google Mars. As he is the 4th god mentioned in the mnemonics sets of Project Legacy.

Awe1
12-12-2010, 05:15 PM
I'm no historian but i do know that the templars would probably be anyone led by king louis XIV and the assassins would probably be the revolutionaries

Otherwise i forget most of what i have one time known, but just out of the bits and pieces i do kind of remember this setting would be a very legit time period to have an assassin's creed game.

assassin087
12-12-2010, 07:27 PM
It was basically a time when the monarchy of france fell and the people gained control. Yeah king louis would be the templar and a few reveloutioners might be the assassins. We might be some guy who wants revenge or something.

EmperorxZurg
12-12-2010, 07:44 PM
King Louis would not be a templar. His lineage framed and destroyed the Templar order! BUt not many other historical figures of the French Ministry were known of being mean, besides him. I would actually suspect that the Templars were taking back France that had been under Assassin control. The tables have flipped and such. That way, more people known could be templars, like Jean Paul Marat, and his assassination in the bathtub and such.

Jellyfloater
12-12-2010, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by assassin087:
It was basically a time when the monarchy of france fell and the people gained control. Yeah king louis would be the templar and a few reveloutioners might be the assassins. We might be some guy who wants revenge or something.

Yes, but Napoleon then came into power only a few years after the revolution, and ACII suggests he was a Templar. So it could be that the Templars incited the revolution, so that they could ultimately bring Bonaparte to power and seize control of France.

EmperorxZurg
12-12-2010, 08:41 PM
thus confirming my theory.

ajollydevil
12-12-2010, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by d1sturbedme_468:
King Louis would not be a templar. His lineage framed and destroyed the Templar order! BUt not many other historical figures of the French Ministry were known of being mean, besides him. I would actually suspect that the Templars were taking back France that had been under Assassin control. The tables have flipped and such. That way, more people known could be templars, like Jean Paul Marat, and his assassination in the bathtub and such. Actually, Louie had given the religious figures, or third estate I believe, tons of power, and thus couldve very well been a templar. Also, I dont think he could be an assassin, considering that you get the feel that the assassins care for the people and work off the idea that the people should be equal. Louie had completely disregarded the people, gave them no rights, and let them starve ("Let Them Eat Cake")

EmperorxZurg
12-12-2010, 10:00 PM
That's why they could probably label him as a corrupt leader for the Assassins. His lineage took out the Templars,(King Henry and such) and so the Assassins ruled. Then King Louis XIV decided he didn't want to follow the Creed and such and became obnoxious like Altair at the beginning and disregarded people, then he eventually wanted to join the Templars (who were now underground) but believing it was an Assassin trick, the Templars killed him and commenced with the revolution and burning of all knowledge and henceforth. It would be a pretty cool concept imo.

obliviondoll
12-12-2010, 10:09 PM
Or they could have the assassins as the revolutionaries, but the Templars could have Bonaparte as a spy in their ranks, who ends up taking control of things later, the Assassins not wanting to put themselves into a position of power, but not realising they're giving the nation straight back into enemy hands...

Would be a neat twist.

RzaRecta357
12-12-2010, 11:01 PM
Wow im sorry but this tototally works guys.

Louis, being a corrupt leader of the assassins leads them to fall apart.

Everything Ezio rebuilt, broken and destroyed.

We see one of our new ancestors heros actually sort of lose for once.

We see the Assassin's fall to what they are in 2012.

That would be cool anyway. Im waiting for the next issue of the fall as Daniel is going to see some group of assassin's in the future, and his ancestor is probably going to see them in 1888.

Should be cool to see how the order is running in the future.

Also, france leads up to my theory the first time I seen Desmond and knew this game was Canadian. I cracked up thinking Look! A french canadian bartender actually made lead man in a game.

slaro
12-13-2010, 09:36 AM
I'm almost sure the apple will past Newton's England (you know gravity and his famous apple).

But the French Revolution could be very cool.
I think the leading figures of the revolution will be the Templars. Backing Louis was like betting on a crippled horse. Robbespierre for example could be a revolutionairy going mad, creating his own religion, his own drama before he was killed eventualy. The French Revolution was never a real revolution from the bottom. It was the bourgeouisie, the middle class, who confronted the persons who got their power from a bloodline. It's not hard to imagine that the bourgeoisie could be the Templars.

But they (speaking for the game) are planning to get in control, maybe with Robbespierre or other leading figures, the assassins won't try to stop the Revolution but they will try to stop these figures getting into control.

Did you know for example that famous Christian objects like the Holy Lance were stolen from the Bibliotheque Nationale during the French Revolution. Quite interesting indeed.

PhiIs1618033
12-13-2010, 10:27 AM
Well, I'd say Louis would be the bad guy. The destroying of the Templar order was, actually, a massive cover-up in order to get off the charts while remaining in power.
Louis would not have been an assassin, with all the partying and the wars. If not by him, then by his ancestors.
"L'état, c'est moi." (The law, that's me) Said by Louis XIV. (Grandfather (not sure) of Louis during the French revolution)

Tired-Kid363
12-13-2010, 03:16 PM
And also, the term left and right wing politics originates from the French Revolution. The Jacobins sat on the left side of parliament, while those who were against the change sat on the right. And as we saw in ACB, the assassin symbols showed up when highlighting certain left wing signs and symbols in the truth segments.

So maybe the Jacobins are a political manifestation of the assassins?

kriegerdesgottes
12-13-2010, 08:19 PM
It's a long story with a lot of assassinations/executions. but basically the people got sick of not being taken care of by a king who wasn't ready to rule. His wife was an austrian princess who loved luxury and the people revolted and tore down the bastillion and swore to meet at a "hand ball court" until they would have a constitution for the people and a guy named robspierre started a lot of the trouble while at the same time paul marrot I think that was his name made a paper called le ami de peuble (probably also spelled wrong) declaring that everyone against the revolution should be executed and he was himself later assassinated. during this time also the parachute and submarine were invented, by frenchmen. and robspierre went too far and started acting like a god and they shunned all things christian and basically france was in chaos for many years until napolean came. This is a really quick summary I can't write it all here but it's really a story of mankind. a perfect assassins creed story for sure.

EmperorxZurg
12-13-2010, 08:43 PM
just a few corrections to your statement. IT was the "Bastille" that was stormed (by fish ladies, not just everyone). and his name was Jean-Paul MArat who started le am du peuple (friend of the people). The parachute was actually invented by Leanardo Da Vinci, and the sub well...yeah, that was french.

kriegerdesgottes
12-14-2010, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by d1sturbedme_468:
just a few corrections to your statement. IT was the "Bastille" that was stormed (by fish ladies, not just everyone). and his name was Jean-Paul MArat who started le am du peuple (friend of the people). The parachute was actually invented by Leanardo Da Vinci, and the sub well...yeah, that was french. Yes you are right about the spelling errors and true the fish ladies did run into the queens bed room screaming for her body parts so thanks for the correction I was going totally off memory, however the parachute was actually officially invented in 1783 by Louis-Sébastien Lenormand. da vinci did indeed create a early version he even mentioned that it would work but he never marketed it to the public.

EmperorxZurg
12-14-2010, 12:23 AM
ooooohhhh marketed to the public. I thought you just meant a working prototype/model XD my bad! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

itsamea-mario
12-14-2010, 02:37 AM
wasn't the french revolution a bit of a shambles that never really solved any immediate problems?

EmperorxZurg
12-14-2010, 08:21 AM
yep. Just a lot of chaos in the end. More evidence that Templars could be the rebels for an AC game

PhiIs1618033
12-14-2010, 11:22 AM
The French revolution was okay and it helped a little, but then we had this *** Robspierre, who lead France into the period of terror. This was 'fixed' by Napoleon (maybe there was something in between, I can't remember), who later declared himself emperor. After Napoleon got banned to St. Helena, something resembling a democracy came to the french.

slaro
12-16-2010, 04:01 PM
There was much between Robbespierre and Napoleon, directoire and ****, but also between 14 July 1789 and Robbespierre like the Girondins and much more. For all the people, Louis wasn't a real terrorking, he wasn't a despote like some of his predessors, so he won't be a good templar either, but he was an inadequate King, he couldnt deal with changes and regression, he couldnt change himself, it's much more believeble that the templers are behind the French Revoltion to try to control France. Everyone knows that the real leaders were the new elite (who gained there riches from skill and other **** not just their blood). I still believe that the apple refers to Newton and England.

Awe1
12-16-2010, 04:47 PM
d1sturbedme_468, I like your idea better than mine

Although king louis could just be like king richard was in ac1, a bystandard who was just kind of watching everything from the outside.

ADHominem
12-16-2010, 07:20 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that Louis XVI could not have been a templar. For starters, most historians agree that he might have been midly ******ed. Along with that, he never really controlled his people like the templars would have. If you were to pick one I'd go with Robbespierre. The power that he had during the reign of terror was extreme. Napoleon might have been one (story not real life). He could have taken the apple that Robbespierre had and used it to control France, and then most of Europe.

ahate
12-16-2010, 11:22 PM
Though I agree with most of your theories I have some kind of trouble figuring Robespierre as a Templar.

The French Revolution began, as said, because the country was badly governed and because the people was suffering from famine and the taxes that were too high for them to bear. Though they started to groan, no one gave attention to them. So the people of Paris started (after hearing a speech by Camille Desmoulin, who studied law with Robespierre and soon became Danton's right man, so to speak) to somehow revolt. The 14th of July was but a misunderstanding : Parisians didn't aim for it for philosophical reasons, but only to get weapons and powder to blow up the Royal Court.
After that, news spread accross the country. And you know how news were back in the 18th century : they grow and grow, so much the emphasis changes the whole meaning of the real events.
Let's hop in time. All we need to know is that there were 3 main groups that truly were effective : the Jacobins (led by Robespierre and his pet, Saint-Just, mostly from the Bourgeoisie), the Girondins (led by Danton and his right-hand man, Camille Desmoulin, also mainly Bourgeoisie but a bit more people-centered), the Montagnards (led by Marat, mainly people). -there were also two other "categories", the Communards, mainly people, a lot more aggressive than the Montagnards, and the Royalists who obviously fought the revolutionaries to get the Royalty back-

Now to my theory.

I'd first hand go with the fact that Danton could be an infiltrated Templar. How so? Because of many decisions he's taken, especially the assassination of Marat by Charlotte Corday. Historical facts are there : the girl was somehow manipulated by the Girondins (basically, they said Marat was the cause of her brother's death), however their leader was, well, Danton. And let's admit it, even though she was the granddaughter of Corneille, documents record she wasn't the brightest star in the galaxy...
But why was Marat killed, even though the guy was so ill he couldn't even move from his bathtub? The thing is, after the revolutionaries got the power, Marie-Antoinette sent several letters to her family in Austria. Or Austria was an empire back then, and the worst possible threat the revolutionaries had to overcome. Marat was a bit too chatty with his journal, l'Ami du Peuple, wanting people to get weapons to fight the Empire and kill Marie-Antoinette. It wasn't to please Danton, who was leading negociations with the Royalists to get a sort of alliance. This wouldn't have led to nothing : he would have had a complete protection from the Empire would they have taken back the power. So bye, Marat, nice knowing you.

As for Robespierre, the man was truly stunned during Danton's trial and couldn't believe he could have been a traitor to the Revolution (there's a long story behind that but blah, too tired). Though all History books tend to discriminate him, Robespierre was a great thinker. But truly not a man of action. The insurrection, he had seen it coming. My opinion is, if we were to set him in an Assassin's Creed vision, he'd most likely be an advisor to the Assassins than either one of them or a Templar. However, Marat's paranoia and Danton's trial really took him aback, and the man really lost his mind ever since -perhaps after getting in possession of the Apple?- Somehow I can't help doing a comparision between him and Al Mualim : both of them were wise and got frantic after getting in touch with the Apple... That's a possibility.

Louis XVI? Probably not Templar. Marie-Antoinette however... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Also, really, really sorry for the TL;DR ! ^^; I tend to be very chatty when it comes to the French Revolution (I also apologize if I'm not very clear on some points, English is not my first language) !