The Lion did not betray the DA.

[Harleqvin]

They can still continue to use the plot from AoD. No one except fallen are really alive that are from "Fallen Angels" timeline. Everything I said before still holds true. Just because it is shown in Fallen Angels that Astelan is a traitor doesn't mean he didn't say what he said in AoD. Also it has never been stated that the edict is known or not to the people of Caliban. It's eluded to that they don't know though as no one says they know and that they cut communication with the imperium and it doesn't state when they did. So it isn't stated that Israfael is disobeying the edict as they might not even know about it happening as given as evidence in Fallen Angels about communication and all that being stopped at some point after they arrive back on Caliban and as said it isn't stated exactly when they stop the communications. Because of that they may not know the edict of Nikea has been made.

 

From all aspects given Astelan had a choice of following an obvious madman using dark arcane magic who willfully said he was going against the emperor, his imperium and the primearch or a librarian of the adeptus astartes first legion who still followed the emperor, and Astelan chose The madman Luther. Israfael, on all accounts given to him, would not have done anything against the emperors wishes. As he even stated when he was asked why he had messed with Zahariels mind he said because the emperor said so, because he follows the emperor. This all happened in the same chapter in Fallen Angels in the same place Chapter 18.

 

Your argument that the events from fallen Angels do not mean anything as to Astelan being a Fallen Angel who was a traitor against the Emperor willingly because they are making a Ravenwing trilogy or a new trilogy starting off with the ravenwing using the plot from AoD is mind boggling.

At least it seems like that is what you are saying. That may be a misread by me.

[Brother Immolator]

Saying that Astelan didnt have a choice in the matter IMHO is not accurate.

He had the option of blatantly refusing both of them and die a loyalist. After all he is a frigging space marine and he is expected to sacrifice himself for the imperium and the emperor. Apparently his self-centered beliefs didnt allow him to consider this. He was a fool and hypocrite both. When you proclaim loyalty and duty you are loyal to the bitter end else shut your mouth. I seem to recall that the chaplains of the traitor legions (bar word bearers) chose to die in the hands of their former brothers than join them in betrayal.

 

Its an irony that Boreas's reply's to his statements were so true, yet the idiocy and hypocrisy of Astelan was such that even he believed him in the end. Albeit he die preforming his expected duty executing a falter companion to ensure it too. I bet after Saphon received his last message consulted Ezekiel and updated their inner circle tests.

[Harleqvin]

True. Lqtm

[Phoebus]

Caliban was a corrupted planet at the beginning. After its annexation problems appeared at once - plots, clashes etc. Also the Nikaean Edict hadn't come into effect and, violating it, psyker Izraphael claimed himself as an agent of the Emperor.

The logical presumption is that the Edict of Nikaea was not known to the Dark Angels on Caliban. Alternately, Mike Lee might not have thought about the Edict, and the editors missed this. I doubt that's the case, though. Astelan talks about how he learned a lot about the Imperium from other Fallen Angels he met since arriving in the 41st millenium. One can plausibly assume that he found out about the Emperor's Edict from them. But ultimately, you have to remember that "Angels of Darkness" doesn't perfectly mesh with other 40k fluff. Remember the part (pg 90 in the eBook version) when Astelan is surprised that psykers were allowed to become Space Marines at all? He's not talking about them becoming Space Marines again, he's acting like this is the first time.

 

When the revolt had started, there was a dialog between Luther and Izraphael. One of them is a Caliban separatist, another - the Emperor's Edict violator. Whom should Astelan have sided with?

Also it should be taken into consideration Astelan wasn't very clever.

He couldn't be neutral in such a situation.

Sorry, but that's not how that scene played out.

 

1. Zahariel, Israfael, and Astelan arrive to Luther's chambers with Sar Remiel and Sar Daviel in tow.

2. Luther greets Remiel and Daviel, though he points out that they are, technically, on opposite sides - the two have been behind the revolt against the Imperium.

3. Luther is told of the outbreak of open revolt.

4. Luther then talks about how the Lion was no innocent child when they found him, and how he he's "spilled an ocean of blood" to keep the truth about Caliban secret.

5. A back-and-forth argument erupts, where Luther accuses Jonson of suppressing the truth, potentially killing Nemiel and/or exiling all of them to die... and Israfael commanding him to cease slandering the Primarch.

6. The truth about Cypher and some information about the assassination against the Emperor is revealed.

7. Remiel denounces the Emperor, and Israfael attacks him. Daviel steps in the way and absorbs the psychic attack.

8. Luther "shouts a command", and "before he his mind registered what he'd heard," Zahariel attacks Israfael. Astelan also attacks Israfael.

9. Israfael rebufs their attacks, and launches a psychic assault on Luther. Luther's sorcerous wards block the attack; he then speaks a single word and sorcerously stuns Israfael.

10. Cypher shoots the helpless Israfael with a plasma pistol, leaving him near-dead.

11. Luther orders that his forces arrest all the Imperium leadership.

12. Astelan decides to take Luther's side.

 

None of this has to do with Astelan not being clever. He is an Astartes. I could see him being opposed to his Primarch because of his exile. But when presented with accusations against the Emperor, his loyalties should be clear. Astelan chooses to attack a fellow Astartes who lashes out against known rebels (Remiel and Daviel) and then consciously takes Luther's side as he announces Caliban's secession from the Imperium.

 

Most of Caliban plots he didn't know. After some thoughts and reflections he chose Luther. But having choosed Izraphael Astelan would than have to trust a man who violated the Emperor's Edict. Who is loyal than?

He clearly doesn't know about the Edict. Otherwise, he would have had to have voiced his opposition to the fact that Luther was knowingly employing a Librarian. And besides, he sees Luther resisting psychic powers and stunning a powerful Librarian through obviously sorcerous means.

 

The revolt moment is at the beginning of the Heresy. At this moment there're no united Imperium - there're no communications, it isn't even clear who is the ruler of Terra.

Not true. The entire discussion is centered on resistance against the Emperor. The only mention about the Heresy is at the very end, when Luther states:

 

"We've received news from the Ultima Segmentum. The Warmaster Horus has rebelled against the Emperor. Dozens of star systems are following his example and throwing off the ruoke of the Imperium ... The Emperor has much more to worry abou than Caliban at this point."

 

We know only what talking were heard by Zakhariel. That Astelan heard - isn't described in FA. Such view of things at least more or less explains disagreements in books.

Otherwise it is necessary to refuse at FA, after BL is going to continue a plot of AoD in new trilogy of Gav "Legacy of Kaliban".

No, not necessarily.

 

Gav Thorpe went on record to say that he has no opinion as to whether Astelan is right or wrong. We might find out in the rest of the "Legacy of Caliban" books, but your argument pre-supposes that Astelan is telling the truth... or that he thinks he's telling the truth. For all we know, Astelan is insane or possessess manufactured memories. Maybe it's Chaos toying with his mind, or maybe he invented what he remembers to cope with his guilt.

 

Personally, I think that's the answer. Astelan in "Angels of Darkness" fervently believes in what he's saying, but his own statements don't make much sense. Astelan thinks he did the right thing, but the person he's trying to convince the most is himself. It's why he focuses so much on his deeds during the Great Crusade and why he so fervently denies he did anything wrong on Tarsis. It's also why Librarian Samiel speaks of Astelan deluding himself, of hiding from the guilt at core of his soul.

 

This brings us to "Angels of Darkness" and Astelan's claims about the Lion:

 

"Never!" spat Astelan, ... "It is the rest of mankind who betrayed us!"

When?

 

"The first betrayal was not ours!"

Whose was it?

 

"It was not we who were the oath-breakers!"

Who was it?

 

"And I tell you that it was not we who committed the first treachery!" ... "It was the Primarchs, your thrice-accursed Lion amongst them!"

How and when? And by the way, this was one of the quotes I was referring to when you claimed Astelan did not call the Lion a traitor (pg 106 in the eBook).

 

"I did not know then that our new Primarch would betray us, would destroy everything that we had created."

Again, how?

 

"Our glorious Primarch, in his supposed wisdom, had abandoned us there."

That's not "destroying everything they had created."

 

"Horus ... had turned traitor. ... It became impossible to tell friend from foe. We heard on more than one occasion that the Dark Angels had turned on the Emperor, or that Lion El'Jonson had been killed."

So... he didn't know.

 

"But how did we know what our Primarch wanted us to do? Communication was shattered, and the intent of the Lion obscured by hundreds of light years and conflicting stories. He could have been embattled on some distant planet, or have sided with Horus, or leading the Emperor's defence, we diud not know."

He DEFINITELY did not know.

 

It soon became clear that our Primarch had returned. Luther contacted me to ask for my advice. ... I told him nothing ... I gave the order for the batteries to open fire on the approaching ships."

 

So there you have it. Astelan's argument makes zero sense. Only a deluded person could possibly bring himself to believe the above chain of thoughts justified him pre-emptively attack his Primarch.

 

And now "Fallen Angels" comes into play. Given the number of inconsistencies between Astelan's account of what happened to his Legion and Caliban, either Mike Lee simply didn't pay attention to "Angels of Darkness" or Astelan is wrong. There's no alternative.

 

Saying that Astelan didnt have a choice in the matter IMHO is not accurate.

He had the option of blatantly refusing both of them and die a loyalist. After all he is a frigging space marine and he is expected to sacrifice himself for the imperium and the emperor. Apparently his self-centered beliefs didnt allow him to consider this. He was a fool and hypocrite both. When you proclaim loyalty and duty you are loyal to the bitter end else shut your mouth. I seem to recall that the chaplains of the traitor legions (bar word bearers) chose to die in the hands of their former brothers than join them in betrayal.

 

Its an irony that Boreas's reply's to his statements were so true, yet the idiocy and hypocrisy of Astelan was such that even he believed him in the end. Albeit he die preforming his expected duty executing a falter companion to ensure it too. I bet after Saphon received his last message consulted Ezekiel and updated their inner circle tests.

I think what appeals to Boreas about Astelan's diatribes is what the Dark Angels were once... as opposed to what they are now. Granted, I think that's one part where Gav failed - to make Astelan's ramblings convincing. That having been said, what Astelan claimed about the Emperor and the Imperium of old, versus the moribund dystopia of the present, had to have resonated with the Interrogator-Chaplain.

[Brother Immolator]

I think what appeals to Boreas about Astelan's diatribes is what the Dark Angels were once... as opposed to what they are now. Granted, I think that's one part where Gav failed - to make Astelan's ramblings convincing. That having been said, what Astelan claimed about the Emperor and the Imperium of old, versus the moribund dystopia of the present, had to have resonated with the Interrogator-Chaplain.

 

I would say that his sayings indeed had a 'romantic scent' and hit on sensitive cords, but it speaks ill of an interrogator to make such thoughts no?

 

But when presented with accusations against the Emperor, his loyalties should be clear. Astelan chooses to attack a fellow Astartes who lashes out against known rebels (Remiel and Daviel) and then consciously takes Luther's side as he announces Caliban's secession from the Imperium.

 

And joins a 'Sorcerer', one who (as far as we know) he had no psychic powers in the past...

 

His scream : behind me warlock, doesnt make so much sense now does it?

[Brother-Sergeant Bohemond]

Boreas' possible transformation after listening to Astelan is part of our psychology and the like.

 

The Order and the Legion that followed was built on foundations of enlightenment, unity, trust and feudal ties. Now, we resemble something more akin to the KGB or CIA, and this is not what we desired but is the direction taken to conceal our shame. We desire, first and foremost, to be on a Crusade, to be enlighteners and bringers of the Emperors light to the reaches of the galaxy, to save humanity from the beasts. Yet, we failed in this, we failed to save Caliban, we failed to bring unity, we failed the Emperor, we failed to destroy the beast and, instead, it was unleashed in the form of Horus. This desire for a crusade is reflected in the ideal that the Lion will return to unite us for one, last, crusade.

 

The Chapter sees itself as a failure for failing to destroy the beasts. The Fallen are the physical manifestation of our failure, and thus our shame is placed upon them. they, therefore, represent our shame and because of this they are our chance for redemption. If we can destroy them all, if we can eradicate the beasts that haunt us, and if we can return them to the light, our Crusade will have succeeded.

 

Our failure has led us to believe that all others can fail, for not only did our Legion fail but so, too, did the Blood Angels, the Imperial Fists, the Ultramarines, the Space Wolves and all the others. For us, we see it compounded further, as not only did we fail the Emperor, but we failed Lion as well. We failed our liege. As a student of history, and Medieval history in particular, the emotional aspect of loyalty to a liege-lord is immense from a military vassal. There is a poem that, initially, was assumed to have been written by a women as it is practically a love poem. However, in reality, it was written by a Knight to commemorate his liege-lord, the Earl of Oxford. This same emotion is present in us, in our knightly aspect at the time of betrayal and has shaped our response to our failure to protect the one man we should have done. Lion felt the same when the Emperor was mortally wounded.

 

British civilisation was built on Germanic roots, and Tactius writes about Germanic tribes whose philosophy was that it was the greatest shame for a member of a chiefs bodyguard to survive when he had died. If he died, you were supposed to have fallen first. This carried over into the Medieval period and is what we, as Dark Angels, understand. The shame of Lions survival when the Emperor was 'slain' is the same we feel when we survuved and he did not.

 

Astelans words open a rift in Boreas, they show him what he knows to be true: we no longer follow the old ways. The ways of Lion. He wants to be a crusader, he wants to serve humanity and his liege. Yet he is torn. Doctrine, and his own beliefs, teach him that the fallen are the beasts, their defeat will cause the return of Lion and wipe the shame, not merely of betrayal (which, you understand, for us is so many times more painful due to the relationship with our liege that they broke) but also of failure. The failure of the Great Crusade and the purge of the beasts. We are idealists at heart, yet our experience has turned us into something else. Boreas is an idealist, but his duty is just as powerful.

 

Well, just some idle thoughts I had.

[Brother Immolator]

Well now, that stirred some emotions...

[Phoebus]

I think what appeals to Boreas about Astelan's diatribes is what the Dark Angels were once... as opposed to what they are now. Granted, I think that's one part where Gav failed - to make Astelan's ramblings convincing. That having been said, what Astelan claimed about the Emperor and the Imperium of old, versus the moribund dystopia of the present, had to have resonated with the Interrogator-Chaplain.

 

I would say that his sayings indeed had a 'romantic scent' and hit on sensitive cords, but it speaks ill of an interrogator to make such thoughts no?

Very true.

 

Brother-Sergeant Bohemond,

 

Well said!

[Onisuzume]

He knew nothing about the Tuchulcha.

Same goes for me, and the lexicanum doesn't mention it either.

I guess I'll just wait for it to turn up in a codex sometime.

Lexicanum it's fan-project.

"The Lion" -- the official novella.

Codex of DA? Read p. 20. - the faze v uprizing.

They described a machine similar to Tuchulcha. Or this is Tuchulcha.

Lexicanum attempts to be the wiki for warhammer, as such, even a mention of something like that should exist.

As for the Faze V uprising, I read more of the Legio Cybernetica in that than anything else, or some similar thing from the Dark Age of Technology.

Contradictions in the books of BL is quite common, but for them it is possible to think up explanations.

Exactly the reason why they weren't considered canon.

That, and reduced accessibility.

The only place I could get Angels of Darknes was at the GW HQ near Nottingham (took a vacation to do so), local stores didn't have it (not that hard, though, with only two stores in my area).

[Captain Semper]

I think what appeals to Boreas about Astelan's diatribes is what the Dark Angels were once... as opposed to what they are now. Granted, I think that's one part where Gav failed - to make Astelan's ramblings convincing. That having been said, what Astelan claimed about the Emperor and the Imperium of old, versus the moribund dystopia of the present, had to have resonated with the Interrogator-Chaplain.

 

This is what I find particularly interesting about the DAs. The discontinuity that they suffered after the Heresy. This is totally unique for any legion (loyal or traitor) and the phyche of the DAs changed forever. So although the medivial (Arthurian) knight archetype with all the nobility and higher ideals associated with it could be applicable in the pre-Heresy Legion it is irrelevant in the 40k incarnation of the Unforgiven apart from maybe some superficial visual connections... But what makes Dark Angels dark in my book is the complete lack of redeeming features in the core of the Chapter. These guys are cold blooded and self-serving, state within state, Spanish Inquisition-like organization in space. They are evil (by 2k standards) and yet loyal. And I like that! :P

 

Anyway enough of my personal takes on the DAs... I beleive that Gav has served the DAs well. By that I mean that his work ranges from good (AoD, the Lion) to harmlessly indifferent (Kadillus). This as opposed to the two HH books that were dissapointing to me on so many levels and of course Savage Weapons that was excellent overall but still cannot come to terms with the Lion losing to Curze on 1-1 combat... :)

[Brother Immolator]

They are evil (by 2k standards) and yet loyal. And I like that! :)

 

Can you name anyone in the imperium that has not that trait really? Or in the whole 40k really.

No tyranids dont count.

[WatchCaptainAzrael]

I believe what Semper means is that while the other factions commit evil deeds, they do so because they're fundamental (in their eyes) for the Imperium at large. "Our" evil deeds are a bit harder to justify to an outsider, as they revolve around, well... Thus far undisclosed logic regarding our beloved Legion's fall to damnation should the Fall become common knowledge (besides the backlash with everyone else in the IoM) and the possibility of the Lion awakening (applying another dose of alien logic) once all the Fallen are made to repent. It's certainly not very different from the others' deeds in spirit, and many factions have their own supporting pieces of alien logic to justify their own misdoings, but it centers a lot around the integrity of the Legion as opposed to the Imperium at large. Which can be interpreted as self-serving if one sees the IoM as a monolithic organization of people working towards a common goal, which IMHO is a bit naive.

 

That we have an asteroid gitmo and apply scary-looking iconography liberally doesn't help our case either. :)

[Captain Semper]

I believe what Semper means is that while the other factions commit evil deeds, they do so because they're fundamental (in their eyes) for the Imperium at large. "Our" evil deeds are a bit harder to justify to an outsider, as they revolve around, well... Thus far undisclosed logic regarding our beloved Legion's fall to damnation should the Fall become common knowledge (besides the backlash with everyone else in the IoM) and the possibility of the Lion awakening (applying another dose of alien logic) once all the Fallen are made to repent. It's certainly not very different from the others' deeds in spirit, and many factions have their own supporting pieces of alien logic to justify their own misdoings, but it centers a lot around the integrity of the Legion as opposed to the Imperium at large. Which can be interpreted as self-serving if one sees the IoM as a monolithic organization of people working towards a common goal, which IMHO is a bit naive.

 

That we have an asteroid gitmo and apply scary-looking iconography liberally doesn't help our case either. :lol:

 

 

Pretty much this ^.

 

Franky I would have a difficult time to describe the BAs, UM, SWs or even BTs as "evil". They all carry some aura of nobility even if their actions are often close to atrocities mainly because they serve an ideal that they perceive to be higher than them - namely the Imperium. Even the BA successors with their bloodthirsty behaviour cannot be fully blamed because, well, they have a genetic deficiency - it's not conscious decision that drives them. That is morally neutral. But DAs have consciously decided to pursue their own agenda and if/when it conflicts with serving the generally accepted greater ideal (i.e. the Imperium), then their own agenda takes precedence. So they have all the cruelty of any given SM chapter without the redeeming characteristic of nobility. Self serving? yes. Altruistic? only when we it suits us - which means no.

 

I guess the perspective here is that the DAs view themselves as having a personal dialogue with the Emperor. To them it's not about the Imperium or the human race, but redemption in the eyes of the Emperor -that is the greatest service they can offer. In that sense everything is justified. But that also means that they take "self-centered" to a new level! <_<

 

Of course things could be even darker if one thinks of the role of Cypher...

[Phoebus]

This is what I find particularly interesting about the DAs. The discontinuity that they suffered after the Heresy. This is totally unique for any legion (loyal or traitor) and the phyche of the DAs changed forever. So although the medivial (Arthurian) knight archetype with all the nobility and higher ideals associated with it could be applicable in the pre-Heresy Legion it is irrelevant in the 40k incarnation of the Unforgiven apart from maybe some superficial visual connections... But what makes Dark Angels dark in my book is the complete lack of redeeming features in the core of the Chapter. These guys are cold blooded and self-serving, state within state, Spanish Inquisition-like organization in space. They are evil (by 2k standards) and yet loyal. And I like that! :P

I disagree with only one part of this. I don't think the Order was "Arthurian", per se... I think they are much more like the historic monastic orders - such as the Knights Templar, Knights Hospitaler, etc. :lol:

[Marshal Rohr]

If Astelan's account is right (about his own actions) then Astelan is the reason the Dark Angels split in half. If Luthor really had no intention of fighting the Lion and Astelan forced a conflict then that would seem like the entire inter-legionary conflict stems from one paranoid (incredibly paranoid, see Call of the Lion) marine who's paranoia was more than likely entirely his own.

[Phoebus]

Thing is, the ending of "Fallen Angels" does away with any plausible chance of Luther not wanting to fight the Lion.

[AbyssKnight]

Personally, I think that's the answer. Astelan in "Angels of Darkness" fervently believes in what he's saying, but his own statements don't make much sense. Astelan thinks he did the right thing, but the person he's trying to convince the most is himself. It's why he focuses so much on his deeds during the Great Crusade and why he so fervently denies he did anything wrong on Tarsis. It's also why Librarian Samiel speaks of Astelan deluding himself, of hiding from the guilt at core of his soul.

 

This brings us to "Angels of Darkness" and Astelan's claims about the Lion:

 

"Never!" spat Astelan, ... "It is the rest of mankind who betrayed us!"

When?

 

"The first betrayal was not ours!"

Whose was it?

 

"It was not we who were the oath-breakers!"

Who was it?

 

"And I tell you that it was not we who committed the first treachery!" ... "It was the Primarchs, your thrice-accursed Lion amongst them!"

How and when? And by the way, this was one of the quotes I was referring to when you claimed Astelan did not call the Lion a traitor (pg 106 in the eBook).

 

"I did not know then that our new Primarch would betray us, would destroy everything that we had created."

Again, how?

 

"Our glorious Primarch, in his supposed wisdom, had abandoned us there."

That's not "destroying everything they had created."

 

"Horus ... had turned traitor. ... It became impossible to tell friend from foe. We heard on more than one occasion that the Dark Angels had turned on the Emperor, or that Lion El'Jonson had been killed."

So... he didn't know.

 

"But how did we know what our Primarch wanted us to do? Communication was shattered, and the intent of the Lion obscured by hundreds of light years and conflicting stories. He could have been embattled on some distant planet, or have sided with Horus, or leading the Emperor's defence, we diud not know."

He DEFINITELY did not know.

 

It soon became clear that our Primarch had returned. Luther contacted me to ask for my advice. ... I told him nothing ... I gave the order for the batteries to open fire on the approaching ships."

 

So there you have it. Astelan's argument makes zero sense. Only a deluded person could possibly bring himself to believe the above chain of thoughts justified him pre-emptively attack his Primarch.

 

And now "Fallen Angels" comes into play. Given the number of inconsistencies between Astelan's account of what happened to his Legion and Caliban, either Mike Lee simply didn't pay attention to "Angels of Darkness" or Astelan is wrong. There's no alternative.

 

There is another alternative. I haven't read Angels of Darkness in quite a while, and no longer own it, but does it specify that Astelan is Terran in that book? I know Astelan is described as Terran in Fallen Angels, but after reading your review of his "testimony" above, it seems to me this may actually be a retcon/change that happened either during the writing of Angels of Darkness or between that and the Descent of Angels/Fallen Angels.

 

Evey statement Astelan makes sounds exactly like Luther or Daviel or Remiel. So if Astelan was originally supposed to be Calabanite, those comments would make sense (from a certain perspective, he would still be a traitor but would definately feel like he had been betrayed first and to a certain extent sympathically so). The fact that he is Terran prevents this from working, but that may have been a change made as sometime in the writing process of one of the books involved that was not thought all the way through.

[Brother Immolator]

Franky I would have a difficult time to describe the BAs, UM, SWs or even BTs as "evil".

 

You are right, I mean that completely innocent civilian over there that was found with sections missing and devoid of blood is nothing. And yesterday we got a report that a guard platoon was torn apart by someone. But they must have suicided since the BA were into close proximity and noticed nothing.

And that crusade the templars undertook that they had found that witch calling demons and exterminated the entire hive down to the last man woman and child? Whats ten billion of people to get one witch right?

 

I concur space marines are saints.

 

EDIT: Sarcasm was not meant to be directed at any person, it was directed in the situation been discussed.

 

If Astelan's account is right (about his own actions) then Astelan is the reason the Dark Angels split in half. If Luthor really had no intention of fighting the Lion and Astelan forced a conflict then that would seem like the entire inter-legionary conflict stems from one paranoid (incredibly paranoid, see Call of the Lion) marine who's paranoia was more than likely entirely his own.

 

Luthor had psychic powers during the fight and was augmented by chaos else he could not have almost best a primarch. Thats something Astelan had not known or taken into account. Even if he indeed pressed the button for defense batteries he was manipulated in doing so. If anything Astelan is a tragic poor man drown in his delusions.

[Haranin]

If I recall Fallen Angels is inconsistent with Astelan- in Angels of Darkness and the short story he is terran. In Fallen Angels it is stated he is Calabanite.

 

So BL messed up.

[Phoebus]

There is another alternative. I haven't read Angels of Darkness in quite a while, and no longer own it, but does it specify that Astelan is Terran in that book? I know Astelan is described as Terran in Fallen Angels, but after reading your review of his "testimony" above, it seems to me this may actually be a retcon/change that happened either during the writing of Angels of Darkness or between that and the Descent of Angels/Fallen Angels.

 

Evey statement Astelan makes sounds exactly like Luther or Daviel or Remiel. So if Astelan was originally supposed to be Calabanite, those comments would make sense (from a certain perspective, he would still be a traitor but would definately feel like he had been betrayed first and to a certain extent sympathically so). The fact that he is Terran prevents this from working, but that may have been a change made as sometime in the writing process of one of the books involved that was not thought all the way through.

"Angels of Darkness" specifically presents Astelan as a Terran, as does the short story by the same author featuring the same character, "Call of the Lion".

[MadDoc]

It truly boogles my mind the number of people who seem to have difficulty reconciling Angels of Darkness and the events of the Heresy novels/stories. Just as its mystifying how anybody who has actually read AoD could somehow miss that Astelans stories lack even internally consistancy, let alone consistancy with what really happened (as we're now learning from the Heresy series).

 

There is another alternative. I haven't read Angels of Darkness in quite a while, and no longer own it, but does it specify that Astelan is Terran in that book? I know Astelan is described as Terran in Fallen Angels, but after reading your review of his "testimony" above, it seems to me this may actually be a retcon/change that happened either during the writing of Angels of Darkness or between that and the Descent of Angels/Fallen Angels.

He is described as Terran in both Angels of Darkness (he even claims one of the main reasons he was sent back to Caliban is because he was Terran) and Fallen Angels.

 

Evey statement Astelan makes sounds exactly like Luther or Daviel or Remiel. So if Astelan was originally supposed to be Calabanite, those comments would make sense (from a certain perspective, he would still be a traitor but would definately feel like he had been betrayed first and to a certain extent sympathically so). The fact that he is Terran prevents this from working, but that may have been a change made as sometime in the writing process of one of the books involved that was not thought all the way through.

His statements sound like the delusional self-justifications of a Traitor so far in denial that it has fractured his mind. In making patently false claims like the Lion sending only Terrans back to Caliban because he didn't trust them, and the myriad internal inconsistancies of his stories, he shows just how delusional he is.

 

If I recall Fallen Angels is inconsistent with Astelan- in Angels of Darkness and the short story he is terran. In Fallen Angels it is stated he is Calabanite.

Fallen Angels does not state that Astelan is Calibanite, in fact, it doesn't even suggest it.

 

I fear that you're falling foul of the same mistake many others have made and are ignoring everything in Fallen Angels that indicates he's Terran in favour of taking his reference to remembering the 'worms' from his youth as making him Calibanite (i.e. you're assuming that the worms are native only to Caliban, which isn't even so much as hinted to be the case, and leaping to conclusions based on that flawed assumption). In fact, due to there location at an Imperial site its entirely possible they were actually transplanted from Terra (like rats stowing away on a ship).

 

So BL messed up.

BL aren't to blame for the misconceptions above.

 

I'd be less quick to point the finger if I were you.

 

"Angels of Darkness" specifically presents Astelan as a Terran, as does the short story by the same author featuring the same character, "Call of the Lion".

As does Fallen Angels.

[Haranin]

But look at p. 211 of Fallen Angels. Astelan talks several times in the book about things the DA are keeping secret from the Terrans, as if he grew up there.

 

There are at least three other spots.

 

My money is sloppy editing and proof reading.

[Harleqvin]

If I recall Fallen Angels is inconsistent with Astelan- in Angels of Darkness and the short story he is terran. In Fallen Angels it is stated he is Calabanite.

 

So BL messed up.

 

 

In Fallen Angels it states that Astelan is a Terran.

 

Franky I would have a difficult time to describe the BAs, UM, SWs or even BTs as "evil".

 

You are right, I mean that completely innocent civilian over there that was found with sections missing and devoid of blood is nothing. And yesterday we got a report that a guard platoon was torn apart by someone. But they must have suicided since the BA were into close proximity and noticed nothing.

And that crusade the templars undertook that they had found that witch calling demons and exterminated the entire hive down to the last man woman and child? Whats ten billion of people to get one witch right?

 

I concur space marines are saints.

 

EDIT: Sarcasm was not meant to be directed at any person, it was directed in the situation been discussed.

 

If Astelan's account is right (about his own actions) then Astelan is the reason the Dark Angels split in half. If Luthor really had no intention of fighting the Lion and Astelan forced a conflict then that would seem like the entire inter-legionary conflict stems from one paranoid (incredibly paranoid, see Call of the Lion) marine who's paranoia was more than likely entirely his own.

 

Luthor had psychic powers during the fight and was augmented by chaos else he could not have almost best a primarch. Thats something Astelan had not known or taken into account. Even if he indeed pressed the button for defense batteries he was manipulated in doing so. If anything Astelan is a tragic poor man drown in his delusions.

 

Astelan was in the fight against Israfael near the end of Fallen Angels. Where Luther used Sorcery to defend against and attack Israfael. So he did know about Luther's Psyker abilities.

[Haranin]

yeah, it says he is terran. But he knows things (beasts, deamons etc) that the DA hid from the Empire, which if it knew, would kill the planet... before they rebelled.

 

Mike Lee writes him like a knight of Caliban.

[MadDoc]

yeah, it says he is terran.

In Fallen Angels it is stated he is Calabanite.

:teehee:

 

And you call BL inconsistant?

 

But he knows things (beasts, deamons etc) that the DA hid from the Empire, which if it knew, would kill the planet... before they rebelled.

The only reason he's aware of half of what you attribute to him above is that he's part of Luther's inner circle, and directly involved in the uncovering/discovery of most of that information anyway. The innate knowledge you're trying to attribute him with are things he learns as the novel progresses, they're not things he just knows. Which is beside the point anyway, as they're also things most of the Calibanites are unaware of to begin with as well.

 

Mike Lee writes him like a knight of Caliban.

I'm alittle confused as to how Astelan learning things alongside the other Legionnaires (that even the Calibanites didn't know) equates to Mike Lee portraying him as a Calibanite?

 

---------------

 

But look at p. 211 of Fallen Angels. Astelan talks several times in the book about things the DA are keeping secret from the Terrans, as if he grew up there.

I was referring to Pg. 211 when I said it appeared you were making the same mistake that others have made, and it turns out I was right on the money, thats exactly what you're doing.

 

That page says nothing about the worms being native to Caliban, all that its says is that they're known on Caliban as well, since Astelan mentions having hunted them in his youth and being a Terran that would mean they exist there as well. Nothing on Pg. 211 even remotely suggests that Reaver Worms are endemic to Caliban. If anything, all Pg. 211 does is suggest that Reaver worms are a pest that stowed away and came to Caliban with its early settlers/colonists.

 

There are at least three other spots.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble pointing out at least one or two of those other spots for us. To be blunt, I won't be holding my breath, as I don't recall a single instance where Astelan says anything that even remotely suggests he's from Caliban (even if we were to be extremely selective in interpreting his words).

 

My money is sloppy editing and proof reading.

Until you deem to provide us with proof that Astelan acts/speaks in such a way to suggest he's being portrayed as a Calibanite, thats a bet you'll lose. I'm not the only person who has pointed out that he's portrayed as Terran in Fallen Angels, the only evidence to suggest otherwise can only be found by reading more into the contents of Pg. 211 of the book than is actually there.

 

The only way you're going to reasonably convince anybody that Astelan is even so much as hinted at being a Calibanite in Fallen Angels is to provide some actual proof (of which Pg. 211 has none), or have Mike Lee come on here and state categorically that it was his intent to portray Astelan as a Calibanite (I see this as even more unlikely than actual evidence materialising).