"The Serpent Beneath" Questions

[SamaNagol]

I think there is merit to the line of reasoning that Ranko had indeed impersonated the twin Primarchs many times before.... to outsiders. But never deceiving his own legion. And that is why the blood was needed. Knowing that it was a suicide mission meant that the knowledge and memories shared to Ranko would be erased.

 

It's a very well planned out story. I'm enjoying the AL stories the most so far in this HH series.

[Nineswords]

I think there is merit to the line of reasoning that Ranko had indeed impersonated the twin Primarchs many times before.... to outsiders. But never deceiving his own legion. And that is why the blood was needed. Knowing that it was a suicide mission meant that the knowledge and memories shared to Ranko would be erased.

 

Now that's an excellent point, and I think it's the main point of distinction between my analysis and Aegnor's.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Setting aside the issue of Ranko and how often he used his Omophagea, I want to talk about the implication presented here and elsewhere that the Alpha Legion is going to split in its loyalties. It's entirely implication at this point, sure, but it's there and it's been in multiple sources now.

 

I may be going out on a limb, but I think that the tale of the Battle of Eskrador is my most convincing piece of evidence. According to the Index Astartes article in which it is presented, it is clearly stated that the Ultramarines as a Chapter have never actually admitted to being present at Eskrador. Plus, look at the many ways in which "Guilliman" acted unlike himself there: abadoning his own teachings being the biggest one, since he doesn't seem like the the "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of guy. Another point is that when Alpharius and Guilliman reportedly confront each other, it's sort of implied that they're equal in stature -- which we know isn't true, since Deliverance Lost pretty much confirmed that the Twins were the shortest of the Primarchs and much closer to Astartes-size in stature. Also, do any of you seriously believe that Alpharius would actually march out to fight Guilliman one-on-one? It's so out of character for him to be ridiculous; his teachings have always been to avoid fair fights whenever and however possible.

 

To me, the obvious conclusion is that Eskrador -- if it actually took place -- wasn't Ultramarines versus Alpha Legion, and Guilliman versus Alpharius. It was Alpha Legion versus Alpha Legion, and Omegon versus Alpharius. Now which one is which would also remain open to debate, but at this point, it seems to me like it would have been Omegon and his boys staying loyal to the Emperor and Alpharius and his half of the Legion going fully renegade and remaining publicly as the Alpha Legion that we all know and love today.

[Aegnor]

But we've also seen Guilliman admitting that he is seriously considering including a clause in his writings that "what wins, wins" to reflect that there are times you have to improvise (in Know No Fear).

 

That aspect of the Eskrador story reflects the silly, 40K view of Guilliman's teachings, rather than how they were applied in 30K, in my opinion. It's a part of the story that simply doesn't make sense given what we know, and maybe reflects an unreliable narrator issue.

 

I see the distinction as being that Guilliman himself, and those who learnt directly from him, was sophisticated enough to be able to balance at times apparently contradictory guidelines and adapt them into successful practical strategies. The ideas in the Codex Astartes aren't simple, and almost any direction in it, in the hands of a true master, would come with all manners of context, caveat, etc. Learning how to balance and adapt its teachings is where the mastery came from - not in the regurgitation of isolated quotes by rote.

 

Fast forward through ten thousand years of stagnation and loss of knowledge, and not even the Ultramarines are immune to some decay in their practices. Something that was understood as an empowering, flexible, tool to make you better provided you were rigourous in its study and application, is now seen by some as a restrictive, formulaic set of holy laws that must always be applied literally without regard for context etc.

 

tl;dr - I don't think Guilliman did break his own teachings because a) they're his teachings and if his actions appear to contradict them, it's likely others misunderstand those teachings, and ;) if those teachings are the works of genius we're told they are, then they no doubt included guidance on where and how it is appropriate/beneficial to act in a manner your enemy doesn't expect.

[Kol Saresk]

Fast forward through ten thousand years of stagnation and loss of knowledge, and not even the Ultramarines are immune to some decay in their practices. Something that was understood as an empowering, flexible, tool to make you better provided you were rigourous in its study and application, is now seen by some as a restrictive, formulaic set of holy laws that must always be applied literally without regard for context etc.

 

tl;dr - I don't think Guilliman did break his own teachings because a) they're his teachings and if his actions appear to contradict them, it's likely others misunderstand those teachings, and ;) if those teachings are the works of genius we're told they are, then they no doubt included guidance on where and how it is appropriate/beneficial to act in a manner your enemy doesn't expect.

BINGO! I think the "breaking with the teachings" results from said stagnation and dogmatic indoctrination combined with everyone looking back and going "But this isn't in my copy so it must not exist with the Holy Codex." So in reality, it is much more flexible than the "modern" 40k Imperium gives it credit.

[Aegnor]

Or even if it's in their copy, over time the nuance and interaction between different parts of the Codex has been lost, especially as there will always be some who seize on literal interpretations of particular sections, in isolation of other relevant information, and vehemently insist that their view is the only legitimate way to read it.

 

Without becoming inappropriately controversial, look at the history of how different people have interpreted complex documents like the Bible over the years - interpretations of many meanings and details has varied widely over the years, and in some specific cases has resulted in views that most people who had studied the Bible would say didn't represent the essence of what the book as a whole was teaching.

[Kol Saresk]

Oh yeah I get that. As a preacher's kid, I got to learn quite a bit. Most of the time, you just hear individual verses thrown out on a whim because that verse will match just one context. But when you put it with the rest of the verses it was originally included with, you get an entirely different context. Or just a slightly different one. Quotes from Revelation are prime examples of such butchering. The same would almost have to apply to the Codex as well as many other 40k instances. To be honest, I can't think of any examples past the Codex, but I imagine they're there.

[Brother Captain Kezef]

Eskrador fluff predates the HH stuff bya fair few years.

 

We can't go by any of it really.

[Kol Saresk]

Eskrador or HH? Because neither is conflicting and both are published under the direct supervision of GW IP department.

[Brother Captain Kezef]

Eskrador or HH? Because neither is conflicting and both are published under the direct supervision of GW IP department.

 

Eskrador predates all of the HH stuff, the twin primarchs etc.

 

It would need allotof retcon to add all his stuff to it.

[Kol Saresk]

Not really. Eskrador never said there wasn't a twin Primarch. And all it says is that the Alpha Legion were beating the Ultramarines, the Ultramarines decided on an unexpected tactic. Gulliman either slew Alpharius or someone pretending to be Alpharius. From there, you get two points. One version of 40k history says that the Alpha Legion renewed their attacks and beat back the Ultramarines. The other version says that the Ultramarines executed a fighting retreat after leaving Alpharius because there was nothing left to do or something like that. "Officially", the Ultramarines have bever weighed in on which one is right, as far as I am aware. Nowhere does the HH fluff contradict it. So it's not a retcon but more like a prologue, building up to Eskrador. Unless there is Eskrador-prologue fluff that I am unaware of.

[Nineswords]

The Omegon faction vs Alpharius faction on Eskrador was certainly something that had crossed my mind. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to assume one side disguised themselves as Guilliman's sons.

 

I think the writers will have to be very creative when it comes to fleshing this out.

[2000AD]

TBH It makes absolute perfect sense that there will be a split amongst the twins..... I mean :cuss that would make a great Heresy novel! Alpharius is the face of the legion but all the time in the background.....

 

And further after reading the story thats the overiding impression that I got.

[Candleshoes]

Loving the discussion and ideas being thrown around.

 

After finnishing the novella finally, like many have already pointed out, two options for Eskrador certainly seem more likely than others.

 

The first being a civil war that involved only the Alpha Legion, and what seems to be the favorite in the thread.

 

The second, and to me what seems to have a bit more meat to it, is using the novella to parrellel Omegona and Ranko to possibley what Alpharius will ultimately ask of Omegon. Though the hows, whys and true intentions even occuring within the text we do have, it is arguably impossible to accurately speculate on what goal drives the AL, and for what benefit. That being said, it is very interesting to think that there would be a time when a Primarch asks everything of his brother to achieve a greater victory over the greatest threat amongst the loyalists, or (depending on the intentions) even to somehow "innoculate" the Ultramarines with something in the conflict that will either make them or Guillman be stronger and better able to endure what is to come.

 

Misdirection is the name of the game with the Alpha Legion and certainly with the authors who write for them, so when they begin to hint and nudge at the possibilty of an un-unified front between the only 2 primarchs who have stated openly that "trust" is the only true currency in the galaxy, I would be careful in believing that they are headed for a internal conflict. Though, to be fair, any outcome will be excellent and I can't wait to see how it plays out.

[Legatus]

look at the many ways in which "Guilliman" acted unlike himself there: abadoning his own teachings being the biggest one, since he doesn't seem like the the "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of guy.

I have said it before, and I'll keep saying it: It is completely inconceivable to me that that Guilliman's teachings would have recommended to choose a standard deployment when the opponent is known to be fully aware of the standard deployment. In the past, I have used that nonsensical bit from the Index Astartes Alpha Legion (and the other ones in it) to argue that this might be an indication that the battle account was meant to be a fake. But in all honesty, I suspect that the real reason for those nonsensical bits is simply the ignorance of the author of that Index Astartes article. He simply took the line about how the Ultramarines always adhere to their doctrine, and took that as meaning they always use the same maneuvers. That is, of course, a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Codex doctrine is. You can see that same misconception in other parts of the Alpha Legion Index Astartes, where the Codex doctrine is described as "anathema to Alpharius' ideas of flexibility and initiative". Ironic, since those very traits had been ascribed to the Codex doctrine in the Imperial Fists Index Astartes. And that it is by far the most flexible of the known doctrines was stated as far back as the Rogue Trader era.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

All the being said, Legs, I still think that the entire account of Eskrador is a fake. The vibe I got from the IA was that the entire thing was a fabrication, so it's probably a moot point and not worth arguing. You make a cogent argument there, though.

 

As for the line about flexibility and initiative, though, I think you're missing the point. The Codex, as presented in Rules of Engagement, functions like a flow-chart. "If Enemy does A, do B, C, or D to counter A." I see the Alpha Legion's concept of flexibility and initiative as allowing the commander to develop his own strategy for the situation at hand. Out of the box thinking is rewarded rather punished (a la Ventris), and the old yarn about victory needing no excuses rings especially true for me in this instance.