Libertas

[Lestat]

I never said that I was right by default, I am merely asking for a meaningful discussion - with supporting evidence - from both sides. It it no good naysaying and shouting down another persons theory without any counter-evidence.

"The evidence proving your theory wrong is that is hasn't been confirmed, so is wrong until it is true." Is that not like saying guilty until proven innocent? I mean, it is only a theory which, given the evidence, is entirely plausible. As an example, how many people believe in aliens or that an omnipotent being created everything?

 

The burden of proof is on you because you made the claim and until someone with sufficient authority confirms it it cannot be true or proven.

It is you who are saying the guilty until innocent part - the evidence proving you stole that car is wrong, until it's proven it's right.

 

Tell me why I'm wrong about the Word Bearers. One of the eight might be a loyalist Word Bearer so keen on the Emperor is God thing, just like Garro is, that he persuades Malcador to preserve the memory of the original Word in the GK's symbology.

 

I'm wrong. I have to prove I'm right.

 

Faith is different, it doesn't require proof. You either believe or you don't.

Modern day aliens - until it's proven they exist then people who believe in their existence are wrong. As unlikely as it is that we are alone, we have to assume we are until we aren't. If you know what I mean.

 

So what you are esentially saying is that even though people have enough faith to believe in something, then, unless they provide substantial proof, they are wrong in thier belief - whether it's religious or any other kind of belief. Because a person believes in a God or in aliens, but cannot prove beyond all reasonable doubt that they exist, then you are saying that they are wrong.

Now, because I have made certain educated assumptions and made some links in the backstory of how the GK's and thier Chapter badge was created, you are saying that I must be wrong because GW has not said that this is factual truth. If that is the best counter-argument against why the GK symbol could be Libertas, then it fails miserably.

As Lord Lorne Walkier suggested, the Word Bearers have had two legion wide culls and so the likelyhood of there being even one loyalist WB is extremely unlikely.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Well, I guess our courts of law have it all wrong then. Someone making a claim must prove it to be true for it to be regarded as such. They aren't wrong if they don't, per se, they just haven't proved it. To put it another way, for hundreds of years, people believed the earth was flat, or the earth was at the centre of the universe. Pretty much everyone believed it, but that didn't make them right. People can believe anything they want, but belief doesn't make something true.

I don't agree with Valkyrion's insistance that you're dead wrong, because he hasn't proved you wrong either. As it stands, it's a grey area (hah! Only saw the pun as I typed that) with either side capable of being right. We just don't know enough to judge.

 

Personally, I can see the argument for it being Libertas, but so far it's just a theory. An interesting theory, and a possible one, but a theory none-the-less.

[Lord Lorne Walkier]

Well, I guess our courts of law have it all wrong then. Someone making a claim must prove it to be true for it to be regarded as such. They aren't wrong if they don't, per se, they just haven't proved it. To put it another way, for hundreds of years, people believed the earth was flat, or the earth was at the centre of the universe. Pretty much everyone believed it, but that didn't make them right. People can believe anything they want, but belief doesn't make something true.

I don't agree with Valkyrion's insistance that you're dead wrong, because he hasn't proved you wrong either. As it stands, it's a grey area (hah! Only saw the pun as I typed that) with either side capable of being right. We just don't know enough to judge.

 

Personally, I can see the argument for it being Libertas, but so far it's just a theory. An interesting theory, and a possible one, but a theory none-the-less.

 

By that line of thinking, when i was arguing all theses years that Loken was in fact alive, even though most people (including you), thought he was dead, your court of law would have ruled against me. They would have thrown my case right out the door because what, i had no official backing? I was doing the very same thing as this thread, putting two loose ends together and making a educated guess. I was accused of wishful thinking and making things up to fit my theory when i was pointing to part of the story that i felt most had overlooked.

 

The thing is this is not a court of law and the burden of proof is not beyond a shadow of doubt. This is a mystery like the game CLUE. You can wait to the end when all the evidence has been discovered, or you can do like some of us and take a stab at it when there are still pieces missing. If you want to shoot down others ideas that fine but i think the least you can do is try and come up with a few ideas of your own. And when you are wrong, don't say it was the writers caving to the wishes of those who cried the loudest.

 

I think the OP is on to something. Only time will tell but if it is the case ill be the first to give him his just due. The Sword my be Libertas, but what then is the book?

[snorkle]

Courts and the rulings that happen therein often have little to do with truth and they aren't really applicable in this situation. What you are saying is that I could go to a court today and get God disproven because no one has any evidence he's real. I really doubt it though it could be very funny :lol:

[Lord_Caerolion]

Nope, not disproven, just not proven. There's a difference.

 

Secondly, you'll notice, Walkier, that I haven't actually opposed this idea. I think it's a good idea for where the sword design comes from. While the sword would also have been chosen for its symbology, the style of sword would have been modelled after Libertas.

[Valkyrion]

You wanted someone to prove you wrong when the onus is on you to prove your theory right. Thats all I'm saying, I wasn't trying to have a go or anything, just that you wanted someone to prove something that isn't right, wrong.

 

I like the theory, but it's just a guy with a sword who happened to be involved with the creation of the Inquisition/Grey Knights. Thats honestly it, there is nothing else beyond that.

[Lord Lorne Walkier]

Nope, not disproven, just not proven. There's a difference.

 

Secondly, you'll notice, Walkier, that I haven't actually opposed this idea. I think it's a good idea for where the sword design comes from. While the sword would also have been chosen for its symbology, the style of sword would have been modelled after Libertas.

 

I hear that. I am not saying you thought he was wrong. I thought we were talking about court so i got all lawyer like. I feel that we have two sets of references with which to see some of these secrets. Old 40k Fluff, and new HH Fluff. With these two perspectives we should be able to see some of these things coming, even if the Writers/ Game creators do a good job of throwing sand in our face. The Stories of the 8 Astartes taken to the Emperor, i feel are the Center of the whole HH. Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH. We don't even know its whole story. It might have been gifted to Garro by the Emperor. It might be Nimisiss.... sure these are just my speculation but i would not put this kind of thing past Warhammer.

 

 

Edit

The more i think about this i wonder if the Book in the GK icon is the work of

The Last Remembracer. I bet Qruze disobeys Dorn, and dose not burn it. Might even be the Liber Chaotica..

 

[Lord_Caerolion]

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH.

*cough*TalonofHorus*cough*

[A D-B]

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH. We don't even know its whole story. It might have been gifted to Garro by the Emperor. It might be Nimisiss.... sure these are just my speculation but i would not put this kind of thing past Warhammer.

 

I don't really think it is, actually. It's one of the few weapons named so far, but that's about it. Even you say yourself that we know next to nothing about it, and a lot of your affection for it seems to come from your intense focus on Garro, Loken and the Grey Knights. Libertas is just a power sword, really. That's why we know next to nothing about it. We know all there is to know, because we were told in FotE. It's hardly iconic or famous in the Horus Heresy era, neither in the setting itself or the series (being mentioned, what, in 1 novel out of 15, and by one writer?)

 

There's a danger of too much stuff being tied in together for pointless reasons. The universe is huge, and we've still not even seen all of the major characters in the Heresy, let alone a lot of the major events.

[torgaddon666]

What other events are their? Aside from the Virus Bombing, Dropsite Massacre, Seige of Terra, Prospero burning and Olympia being destroyed.

[A D-B]

What other events are their? Aside from the Virus Bombing, Dropsite Massacre, Seige of Terra, Prospero burning and Olympia being destroyed.

 

That's why it's called the Age of Darkness, yo. It's the stuff we've never seen before.

[Lestat]

At last, a proper grown up discussion with valid viewpoints instead of a bunch of naysayers shouting down a new theory. Thanks guys - this was what I wanted all along!

[Texpef]

To quote my degree...

 

If something is thought to be true but it is not or cannot be proved as yet then it is classed as a theory, nothing more nothing less and just because something is a theory does not make it wrong..

 

As far as law is concerned its not bothered about right or wrong its only concern is that something can be proved either way...

 

As for the sword well you never know but as yet it is unproven whether or not Loken is even in the Grey Knights..... :rolleyes:

[Lestat]

To quote my degree...

 

If something is thought to be true but it is not or cannot be proved as yet then it is classed as a theory, nothing more nothing less and just because something is a theory does not make it wrong..

 

As far as law is concerned its not bothered about right or wrong its only concern is that something can be proved either way...

 

As for the sword well you never know but as yet it is unproven whether or not Loken is even in the Grey Knights..... :down:

 

Thanks for clearing that up Texpaf. As you, myself and others have mentioned, it is a theory and one that is plausible.

 

As for whether or not Nathaniel Garro is a member of the Grey Knights or not, I whole-heartedly suggest listening to Garro: Oath of Moment. Theres a clue or three in there :lol:

[Ju'kosian]

[

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH.

World eaters : Angron's weapons, Gorefather & Gorechild wich he uses, then there's some weapon displayed in that word bearers ship (abyss) but I can't recall the weapon's name

 

Death guard : Mortarian's pistol, I think they call it the lantern.

 

the hammer constructed by Ferrus Manus, given to Fulgrim, isn't that Forgebreaker ?

I think that the blade made by Fulgrim (not the daemon one) had a name too.

Leman russ his Axe ?? doesn't that thing have a name too..

 

Plenty of named weapons out there me thinks.. :lol:

 

@ torgaddon666 : There's the battle of tallarn, the blood angels vs the daemons on ... (forgot the systems name) they meet Khabanda the first time there, The battle for Calth, The battle for Caliban etc ..

[Lord Lorne Walkier]

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH. We don't even know its whole story. It might have been gifted to Garro by the Emperor. It might be Nimisiss.... sure these are just my speculation but i would not put this kind of thing past Warhammer.

 

I don't really think it is, actually. It's one of the few weapons named so far, but that's about it. Even you say yourself that we know next to nothing about it, and a lot of your affection for it seems to come from your intense focus on Garro, Loken and the Grey Knights. Libertas is just a power sword, really. That's why we know next to nothing about it. We know all there is to know, because we were told in FotE. It's hardly iconic or famous in the Horus Heresy era, neither in the setting itself or the series (being mentioned, what, in 1 novel out of 15, and by one writer?)

 

There's a danger of too much stuff being tied in together for pointless reasons. The universe is huge, and we've still not even seen all of the major characters in the Heresy, let alone a lot of the major events.

 

Checked GiF, as i thought the battle scene with Garro had to have a mention but nope. I would like to include the 2 audio books though. I can only hope that when/ if we hear the Stories of the others Garro hunted down to recruit to Malcoars Team it might get more mention. I'm not saying Libertas is the most powerful weapon, or known to all in the 30k verse. Only that to us readers there are not many weapons talked about more.

 

Of course you are correct that i am focused on Garro and Co. I am clearly bias. I might also be a victim of my over eagerness to read between the lines. This may cause me to see some connections were there are none. I will accept that because i don't want to be one of those who never see's anything coming and then blames the revelations on bad writing. Libertas may be just another power sword, in a universe full of special weapons, but it seems to be the one on winch the Oaths of the founding Grey Knight Grand Masters was taken on. That, in my mind at least, puts it into league of its own.

[Lord Ragnarok]

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH. We don't even know its whole story. It might have been gifted to Garro by the Emperor. It might be Nimisiss.... sure these are just my speculation but i would not put this kind of thing past Warhammer.

 

I don't really think it is, actually. It's one of the few weapons named so far, but that's about it. Even you say yourself that we know next to nothing about it, and a lot of your affection for it seems to come from your intense focus on Garro, Loken and the Grey Knights. Libertas is just a power sword, really. That's why we know next to nothing about it. We know all there is to know, because we were told in FotE. It's hardly iconic or famous in the Horus Heresy era, neither in the setting itself or the series (being mentioned, what, in 1 novel out of 15, and by one writer?)

 

There's a danger of too much stuff being tied in together for pointless reasons. The universe is huge, and we've still not even seen all of the major characters in the Heresy, let alone a lot of the major events.

 

You are probably right, but why mention it so much? If it has little meaning, other than a tool to smite traitors, xenos and heathens then why is it mentioned so much? I think it could use a little less attention.

[The emperors chosen]

Right now, I see it as a possibility that Libertas could be the sword, or it could not be. We aren't far enough into the series to make an accurate guess in my opinion.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Libertas is one of the most recognized weapon of the whole HH. We don't even know its whole story. It might have been gifted to Garro by the Emperor. It might be Nimisiss.... sure these are just my speculation but i would not put this kind of thing past Warhammer.

 

I don't really think it is, actually. It's one of the few weapons named so far, but that's about it. Even you say yourself that we know next to nothing about it, and a lot of your affection for it seems to come from your intense focus on Garro, Loken and the Grey Knights. Libertas is just a power sword, really. That's why we know next to nothing about it. We know all there is to know, because we were told in FotE. It's hardly iconic or famous in the Horus Heresy era, neither in the setting itself or the series (being mentioned, what, in 1 novel out of 15, and by one writer?)

 

There's a danger of too much stuff being tied in together for pointless reasons. The universe is huge, and we've still not even seen all of the major characters in the Heresy, let alone a lot of the major events.

 

You are probably right, but why mention it so much? If it has little meaning, other than a tool to smite traitors, xenos and heathens then why is it mentioned so much? I think it could use a little less attention.

 

It isn't mentioned that much though. It's named in a single book, and mentioned in the audio-books about Garro. To put it another way, we know in the Night Lords series that Xarl's chainblade is called Executioner. Its name is mentioned several times. Even so, that doesn't mean it's a highly important item, merely that the sword has been named.

 

Libertas is a powersword. It's used by a captain who isn't that famous. Its only claim to fame is it was used to swear in some of the founding Grey Knights, which noone outside the Grey Knights will ever know about. So, the people who know about Libertas are Garro, probably Tarvitz, probably Mortarion, some of the other Death Guard Captains, maybe some other Captains who fought alongside Garro, and 7 other Marines who swore an oath on it. Let's be generous and say 30 people could identify it, and know about it.

That hardly qualifies it for "one of the most recognised weapons of the Heresy". If you'd said the Talon of Horus was, then yes. Even the weapons of the other Primarchs don't really qualify.

Let's compare it to the Talon of Horus. This was the weapon of the Warmaster, the blades by which he would conquer the galaxy. Anyone who knew about Horus probably would have heard about his Talon. Conversely, we have Libertas. Garro isn't famous for wielding it, he didn't kill any infamous creatures with it, it isn't famous for a glamorous past. It's just a sword wielded by a Captain in the Death Guard, which was later used to swear in a small number of highly secretive special forces. It's been named in novels, yes, but that's hardly a special case. It just means it was named.

[Valkyrion]

At last, a proper grown up discussion with valid viewpoints instead of a bunch of naysayers shouting down a new theory. Thanks guys - this was what I wanted all along!

 

 

Don't be so precious. If you just wanted people to agree with you why not say so and save us all the hassle?

 

Theories are there to be shot down and questioned.

 

I put forward a valid viewpoint, that it's just a power sword.

 

You've even had one of the authors, one of the guys who will discuss this stuff with all the other writers and will have a fair idea about the direction in which things are heading, basically say that folk are trying to find imaginary links where there aren't any.

 

We are allowed to disagree.

[Lestat]

At last, a proper grown up discussion with valid viewpoints instead of a bunch of naysayers shouting down a new theory. Thanks guys - this was what I wanted all along!

 

 

Don't be so precious. If you just wanted people to agree with you why not say so and save us all the hassle?

 

Theories are there to be shot down and questioned.

 

I put forward a valid viewpoint, that it's just a power sword.

 

You've even had one of the authors, one of the guys who will discuss this stuff with all the other writers and will have a fair idea about the direction in which things are heading, basically say that folk are trying to find imaginary links where there aren't any.

 

We are allowed to disagree.

 

I agree with you that theories are there to be questioned, but not to be shot down needlessly. You say that it is just a powersword - so have others. But why in Oath of Moment, is there two examples of Libertas being held point down and an oath being made on the blade? Does the GK's badge not also have a blade point down?

For your information, I never wanted people to just agree with me, I merely put the theory out there for valid discussion. I know the theory is not GW canon and cannot be proven one way or another unless GW actually mention the link in a future publication. After all, are we not allowed to use our imaginations in what is essentially a fictional story set in a fictional universe? If I choose to believe that there is a connection between Libertas and the origin of the GK's chapter badge, what harm does that cause to anyone?

Yes we are allowed to disagree - we are not all sheep and do actually have the ability to think for ourselves. But I think. however, purposefully infammatory comments should be kept to ourselves.

[Lord_Caerolion]

But why in Oath of Moment, is there two examples of Libertas being held point down and an oath being made on the blade? Does the GK's badge not also have a blade point down?

 

Because people used to swear oaths on swords, from what I remember. They just stole the idea for the Grey Knights.

[RamrodMC]

"Stole the idea" is harsh, accusatory, melodramatic and just plain silly. It is tradition to swear an oath upon something important to you or the person you're swearing an oath to. Common sense would dictate that an important thing to Nathaniel Garro, a warrior, would be the weapon he makes war with. The fact that Libertas was chosen instead of his pistol is probably just because the imagery fits 40k's Gothic theme much more nicely.

 

It also allows us to dream up theories such as Lestat's. I don't think there's anything wrong with the theory, strictly speaking. As several people have pointed out, not everything in the contemporary fluff needs to be connected to something in the Horus Heresy, but for good or ill, this is a trend that is deeply ingrained in the HH series. A D-B's posts open up the possibility that this attitude might change, so we'll have to wait and see.

 

In the spirit of continuing the discussion, I think the attempt to justify the theory using Libertas' fame (or lack thereof) is flawed. It is simply the sword that the potential founding members of the Grey Knights swore their oaths upon. We did not see

Varren or Loken

swear their oaths, but it is possible that they also did so upon Libertas. If so, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that it might have turned into standard procedure for the Grey Knights to swear upon Libertas, and continued to be the standard way even after Garro's inevitable death. And later on, once the Chapter had grown, it could have evolved into an honoured tradition.

 

Tradition like the real-life swearing an oath upon... any sword in the first place, a tradition that quite probably stretches back to when the earliest bronze blades were wrought. If that tradition lasted approximately thirty-three thousand years, all the way to the Horus Heresy, why would the tradition of swearing upon Libertas not last another ten? Due to the much sturdier construction of things in the 31st millenium, we know that things can last at least until the 41st millenium. There's plenty of examples, like Bjorn's chassis, or the Gauntlets of Ultramar, to name but two.

 

A much loved, well-maintained and reverently cared for sword could transcend its origins as the weapon of a simple captain, and continue to be important long after "Nathaniel Garro" became just another name in a textbook.

 

The problem with Lestat's theory and my poor attempt to rationalise it is that there are a lot of ifs and maybes. Most of my post is idle speculation. More Garro fluff is needed before we can begin to nail any of this down with anything even beginning to resemble precision.

[Don the Oiler]

When i read about the "grey-armoured guy with a double-handed sword sheathed on his back" in "Last Remembrencer" i really thought it was Garro at first, because of how Libertas was described in the Audio Books.

Now that Qruze obviously has one too, i think massive Two-Handers are just the new Grey Knight "Thing", maybe because of Garro's influence.

At one point or another probably all of the "Founders" will be running around with them. Or maybe one with Falchions or a Hammer, to tie in the new codex.

Come to think of it, hammers really are a rare sight in Warhammer 40K.

You only really see them on Assault Terminators most of the time, they're rarely mentioned in novels.

Could this be because combat with a hammer is harder to describe? Oh well.