This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Knowledge Bank page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. jSarek 08:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
For years, fans had assumed that the Dark Jedi Xendor was connected to the Sith order, and possibly the founder of it. Even now, official continuity states that Xendor’s “successors” (i.e. the Dark Jedi from the Second Great Schism) conquered the Sith species; and all articles regarding Sith history always mention Xendor and his Legions of Lettow, as if they were somehow connected to the Sith, when history would have it appear that that first group of Dark Jedi from 24,500 BBY (the Legions of Lettow) cannot possibly be connected to the second group from 7,000 BBY.
It would appear that we have a problem here, don’t we? I think not.
Let us go back to the time before the infamous retcon placing the formation of the Sith order following the Hundred Year Darkness in 6,900 BBY. Back to a time when it was assumed (and pretty much officially held) that this took place following the First Great Schism in 24,400 BBY. During this time period, two Star Wars fans were kind enough to provide us with a chronological timeline of events taking place within the Star Wars universe, which would come to be called “Time Tales,” and is still viewable at TheForce.Net. This timeline mistakenly tells us, of course, of the Dark Jedi of the First Great Schism being exiled from Republic space, in 24,400 BYY, after a hundred years of war and bloodshed, where they would stumble upon the worlds of Korriban and Ziost, encountering a primitive people known as the Sith, whom they would come to dominate and intermingle with, thus giving birth to the Sith order. Well, we have since been told by Lucas Film that this date is extremely inaccurate, and that this event happen after a second group of Fallen Jedi waged yet another century-spanning war from 7,000 to 6,900 BBY. It was these students of the dark side who were expelled from Republic space, encountered the Sith on Ziost and subjugated them, thus creating the Sith order at a much later date.
Okay. No problem. I accept that.
But—and this is a big “but”—before the inaccurate date of the expulsion of the Dark Jedi, Time Tales also tells us of another significant event that took place in 24,500 BBY, shortly after the First Great Schism: a single Dark Jedi encounters the Sith people and subjugates them to his power, becoming their ruler; sort of paving the way for the many Dark Jedi who would arrive later on. This is 100 years prior to the original assumed date of the arrival of all of the Dark Jedi, and with the retcon, 17,600 years before. The mentioning of the arrival of this lone dark-sider is listed to have been taken from the Tales of the Jedi Companion, and does not appear in any other timeline of Galactic events that I have seen, including Wookieepedia’s timeline.
Here is the text for the entry:
“The Sith retained a harmonious social structure until now, with the arrival of a single fallen Jedi who took particular interest in their techniques for drawing power from the Dark Side. This dark Jedi dominated the Sith people, turning them into unwilling thralls, stealing their knowledge of sorcery and using it against them. This Jedi proclaimed himself the Dark Lord of the Sith, making him first in a lineage that would plague the rest of the galaxy for untold millennia. The Sith developed and perfected the techniques of calling on the Dark Side, enabling them to create more and more complex powers once thought well beyond the grasp of mere sentients. The Sith simultaneously feed on and empower the Dark Side in a symbiotic relationship whose ties can never be severed. This Dark Jedi would continue to pervert Sith culture until his lineage is joined by hundreds of fallen Jedi during the Great Schism, which concludes in the total subjugation of the Sith species. "SW RPG: Tales of the Jedi Companion." [Page 79] This does not give an exact dating for the fallen Jedi who corrupts the Sith race, and claims the title of first Dark Lord of the Sith, but it has to be after the formation of the Jedi, and well before the golden age of the Sith Empire. I have placed it here to allow for the 'long lineage' of Sith Lords, and for time to allow them to gradually build up their Sith Empire.”
So apparently there is no definite date, but it definitely took place before the coming of all of the Jedi exiles, and it was definitely a member of Xendor’s group of Dark Jedi, the Legions of Lettow. It may even have very well been Xendor himself. This conqueror may have been the first Dark Lord, which would sit well since we know that the Sith were ruled by a monarch before the arrival of the Dark Jedi, and that this ruler was called the Dark Lord (since Dathka Graush is called a Dark Lord, and the dates of his life likely determine that he was of the Sith race, already in power when the Dark Jedi arrived).
Okay. So, what does this give us? Well, we have the lone Dark Jedi from the First Great Schism (I choose to believe that it was Xendor himself, but I can’t back that up) impressing the Sith with his “magic,” being deemed a god and made king of the Sith, and he likely would have taught the Sith (or at least his closest political supporters) his dark side ideals. So there we go: the true beginning of the Sith order, founded on Ziost by a single rogue Jedi of Xendor’s lineage (again, I say it was Xendor himself). When Ajunta Pall and all of the others from the second group of Dark Jedi arrive on Ziost in 6,900 BBY, they, like their lone predecessor, are treated like gods (in fact, that lone predecessor may have even foretold of their coming), and the existing Dark Lord of the time (likely Dathka Graush), who is of Xendor’s line of succession, ordains all of these Dark Jedi into the Sith order at once, making them one. So now the second group of Dark Jedi are of the same line of succession as the first, being ordained into Xendor’s lineage. And, as we know, they rose up against this Dark Lord and slew him, claiming the title for Ajunta Pall, the first human Dark Lord.
So now we have a connection. Now we know the reason why the Sith revered Xendor so much, to the point of considering him the first Dark Lord, and why they consider themselves to be his successors when they seemingly had no connection to that first group of Dark Jedi at all. Well, the connection is in that lone Dark Jedi from the First Great Schism, who ordained an entire species into his line of succession (because he knew that there was no future for the Legions of Lettow and that they would be defeated quickly); whose line of succession continued through the Sith and their leaders until the arrival of many Dark Jedi from the Second Great Schism, that line of succession being passed on to them through their ordination into the Sith and subjugation of the Sith into their own. Here is a perfect, unbroken chain, where the connection was obscure before.
So, although the Sith Empire may not have been founded until 6,900 BBY—as Lucas Film intended—the Sith order began millennia earlier than that, when a lone Dark Jedi of Xendor’s line of succession became their ruler.
Also, I strongly encourage you to consider making mention of this one Dark Jedi on Wookieepedia, both in the timeline of Galactic history and in his own article (and possibly in Xendor’s article as well, but that may be pushing it a bit). After all, the arrival of the single Dark Jedi from the First Great Schism and his subjugation of the Sith prior to the arrival of all of the Dark Jedi is taken from a fully canonical source: the Tales of the Jedi Companion. Unfortunately, this small, seemingly insignificant event is always overlooked and receives no mention anywhere. I think that needs to change. 18.104.22.168 04:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
How does Adas fit into this theory? DarthMRN 15:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you asked. I thought about throwing Adas into my post, but I could've figure out where, and I thought that throwing in too many things at once would be confusing; so I decided to wait until someone who pays attention to such obscure Star Wars lore were to ask me. Adas was of the lineage of the Sith'ari, of which Adas was the last when he was slain. (We know that Adas was of a completely different line of succession, one that was cut off with him, and that he was called the Sith'ari, which is different from Dark Lord.) The Sith would have then been without a monarch until the arrival of the lone Dark Jedi, who would then begin the lineage of the Jen'ari, or Dark Lord. In fact, Adas may have even prophesied the coming of the fallen Jedi and the beginning of the Jen'ari line of succession, since he knew that his own would be ending soon. Adas is called a Sith'ari, while Dathka Graush - who was most likely an actual Sith rather than a Dark Jedi - is called a Dark Lord. This tells me that the office of Dark Lord, or Jen'ari, was already in existence before the Dark Jedi arrived, and that it was not the same monarchy as the Sith'ari, to which Adas belonged.22.214.171.124 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Knowledge Bank rule #4: No wild fan theories. This original research is more like JCF material. - Sikon 17:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. Should I have posted this in the talk pages of the relevant articles? 126.96.36.199 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
In any case, the point of this topic was not only to illustrate my theory, but also to let Wookieepedia know of the overlooked single Dark Jedi from the First Great Schism who came upon and ruled the Sith before the other exiles arrived. It was taken from a perfectly canonical source - the Tales of the Jedi Companion - so it is Wookieepedia-worthy, I feel. I think this even should have its place on our timeline of galactic events, as well as the character having his own page. 188.8.131.52 22:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
It is not "taken" from a canonical source - it is your own original research based on that canonical source. Which is unacceptable for Wookieepedia. - Sikon 02:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Here's what needs to be done. 1) Quote canonical sources, not fan resources that hypothesise based on vague statements in old resource books. 2) Xendor didn't found any Sith Empire. He was dead even before the end of his rebellion. 3) No member of the Legion of Lettow reached Korriban, Ziost or any other Sith world. QuentinGeorge 03:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
1. I'm afraid I don't have an answer to that. 2. I'm not saying it was necessarily Xendor himself, but it could have been. The article places it at 25,000 BBY, which was soon after the conflict started. He may very well have come upon the Sith before his death. And if you were paying attention, I did say that the Sith Empire was founded by the second group of Dark Jedi in 6,900 BBY. I never said Xendor started any empire. I said that he (or one of his followers) started the true beginning of the Sith order by being the first Dark Lord. There is a difference between "order" and "empire." 3. The Time Tales entry, taken from the Tales of the Jedi Companion, says differently. (If, however, I am mistaken, then what exactly is the connection between Xendor and the Sith? Why is he always mentioned in every single document of Sith history if he and his followers were completely unconnected to the second group of Dark Jedi that conquered the Sith?) 184.108.40.206 19:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Timetales is wrong. It's not a canonical source. It's fanmade and has not been updated for the New Essential Chronology. There is no connection between Xendor and the Sith outside of fan supplements and an IU theory concerning the Dark Underlord. QuentinGeorge 20:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Dude, you're not getting it. I know that Time Tales is (mostly) wrong. Hell, I even mention that it the original post. They're wrong about the date of the founding of the Sith, and many other things that were retconned in TNEC. Never have I claimed Time Tales itself to be canonical in any way, shape or form. I am, however, calling out the Tales of the Jedi Companion as canonical. If the information they say they got the event of the lone Jedi finding and subjugating the Sith before the larger group shows up is indeed the Companion, then it is to be taken into consideration. If, however, the authors of Time Tales have misread something, then yes, they are wrong. I'll need to get my hands on the Companion to see for myself. (And you still haven't answered my question: If I am wrong, then what exactly is the connection between Xendor and the Sith? There has to be one if every single written piece of Sith chronology feels it necessary to make mention of Xendor and the First Great Schism.) 220.127.116.11 21:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see you've edited in the bit about the Dark Underlord. Yes, that's one connection, but the way in which the histories are always told, they always make mention of the First Great Schism, even though it is seemingly unconnected to the Second. Why do all of these official sources - both in-universe and out - find it necessary to mention that even when recalling Sith history? 18.104.22.168 21:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)