Lore talk:Akatosh

Akatosh IS NOT the OneEdit

The One was a religious concept invented by Alessia to supplement the worship of the Eight Divines (which INCLUDED Akatosh!) and was the faith of the Alessian Doctrines of monotheism. The One is basically an appropriation of the Nordic Allmaker, and represents a fusion of Anu and Padomay, the Godhead totality the universe sprang from. Oblivion's sloppiness in the placement of the dragonfires (not to mention the irrelevance and misleading nature of the dragonfires in the first place) is responsible for this confusion. Do not revert the article until you have made your case. — Unsigned comment by 24.31.156.165 (talk) on 27 July 2008

Matches what i've read, although a few references and maybe a note about the disparity in Oblivion would be helpful. --Benould^•T•C 20:32, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

It's not disparity since Oblivion never says anything different. Oblivion just portrays stuff that doesn't make sense and doesn't give a crap about who the One is. Details would be more helpful in the Temple of the One article. — Unsigned comment by Temple-Zero (talk • contribs) on 27 July 2008

Like it or not, Oblivion is part of Elder Scrolls lore, and to simply state that Oblivion is wrong about certain lore elements is a fallacy, because Oblivion IS part of the lore. If statements made in Oblivion are contradictory towards statements found elsewhere in the lore, this does not necessarily invalidate one or the other version of the lore. It simply means that there is a discrepency which should be discussed from both sides. There is not necessarily one and only one interpretation for what is seen in the lore, and not just because this is a fictional universe. (There are similar contradictory myths if you look at any real-world mythological source as well, or even at supposed historical events. Sometimes we just don't know what really happened.) This is why we prefer that statements made pertaining to lore be linked to in-game (or at least Bethesda-originated) sources, allowing the readers to see and decide for themselves which version of the lore they choose to believe. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 23:35, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

You don't understand. Oblivion did not present an alternate version of the One. Oblivion merely used old information presented in a confusing way. Nothing has changed with the One in TES IV. And I just gave you an entire page of sources and more. There are not two sides to this, so please don't lecture me without cause.— Unsigned comment by Temple-Zero (talk • contribs) on 27 July 2008

I thought that the one was Talos. 83.59.146.119 14:35, 20 January 2009 (EST)

The One was the god of the Alessian Order, which is like Constantine declaring Christianity the official religion of Rome, banning all other religions, music, and dancing, and then leading crusades for a while until the new church broke up and everyone went back to worshiping Saturn and Mars and the rest, but kept the old temples because the stone looked nice.Temple-Zero 15:05, 20 January 2009 (EST)

I can see why it can be confusing seeing as Oblivion doesn't mention anything about two different religions. If that's the case then I agree that all information should be in Lore section of the Temple of One. That page could use some attention anyway. (Gadianzero 18:34, 20 January 2009 (EST))

We have an Alessian Order page, though it is even more stubbish.Temple-Zero 18:47, 20 January 2009 (EST)

If the information intermingles too much with each other then I think they should be merged into one large article with one redirected into another. I can't say I know too much about this area though. (Gadianzero 01:56, 21 January 2009 (EST))

I Think you are getting to into it. If you think about it on a standpoint saying that its possible that the people of the empire worship Akatosh and not Anu or Padomay possible do to a mistake in worship that happened in some untold point of the elder scrolls universe timeline.So there is another quite possible answer. I also appreciate even if it was unplanned that there are different ways for the lore to be taken so you can keep a good conversation going.

I Think The Oblivion Lore Of Akatosh Should Be On Featured Articles And Heres Why!Edit

Well I Think Akatosh Is An Important Charecter Considering He Is The One To Save All Of tamriel in theory So i ask for a new featured ArticleDarkakaviri666 12:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The criteria for giving an article "featured" status don't include importance. To quote from UESPWiki:Featured Articles: "Featured articles are ... of the highest quality and should be held up as an example for other articles. Articles are ... review[ed] ... for content, style, completeness, and overall quality" I'm afraid this article doesn't come close. It needs more detail along with references before it can be considered. It's better than a lot of our Lore articles, but that's not saying much. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Someone less lazy than me want to add something?Edit

Should the story of Moraelyn getting his ebon blade from Akatosh or any of the other Akatosh related stuff from the Biography of King Edward be included? 209.136.161.135 16:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Auriel's BowEdit

Does Auriel's Bow and shield count as his artifact(Vvardfell 13:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC))

Akatosh/Auriel/AlduinEdit

Alduin and Auriel is the nordic and aldmeri aspects of Akatosh. I've tried to figure out which one is the "correct" one. I've come to the conclution that Auriel and Akatosh is one and the same, only worshipped in different ways, while Alduin might be a different existing god. If we look at Akatosh and Alduin, we see that they share many similarities in terms of personality, their role in the mythology, and other things. Also, as stated in "Shezarr and the Divines", Akatosh IS Auriel, chosen by Alessia as the head of the Imperial pantheon so that the needs that up untill then had worshipped the aldmeri pantheon would relate to it easier, while her nord allies could also relate to him as Alduin. But there are key differences as well; while both Akatosh and Auriel is the god of time, Auriel was an Aldmeri god-king, and only associated with a dragon, while akatosh IS a dragon, a similarity shared with the nordic Alduin. This might be explained by the possibility that Auriel might not have been a dragon while he walked the earth in the dawn era, but later prefered to appear as a dragon after his ascension. Alduin however, is the god of time in another way, he is more of a doomsday god, who destroys the old world and creates the new one. So in terms of what they are god of, which I think is the most important, we can see that all of them share similarities, but Alduin governs the aspect of "time" in a very different way. I would therefor conclude that all of these three are two different divine beings, Akatosh/Auriel, and Alduin. 2.150.139.201 16:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Alduin's relation to the other two will likely be expanded for Skyrim. Until more information comes to light, it has to be assumed that they are all one in the same. Ruptga, head of the Yokudan pantheon, is likely to be another aspect of Akatosh, yet he shares almost no similarities with the Tamrielic versions. In comparison, Alduin shares many traits with the other two. The gods seem to be purposefully mysterious and abstract, so its doubtful that Bethesda will clear up the differences between each cultural version of the God of Time. --Legoless 16:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

What I think is interesting is the fact that different religions in the elder scrolls lore contradict with each other, much like the major religions in our world. But the question remains if this is intended by Bethesda, or simply accidental, as if they forget to check their own lore before creating new material. A possible explenation of the contradiction could be that many of the religions or at least bits of them are actually fictional, but unlike in our world, there is actually evidence of divinities in the elder scrolls, like the Heart of Lorkhan and the avatar of Akatosh in Oblivion, which creates the question: Which form of the different aspects of these gods (Lorkhan, Akatosh, Auriel, Shezarr, Shor...) is the one closest to that gods actual nature? Jyggorath 14:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Isn't Alduin the Dragon God that wakes up again to destroy the world in TESV: Skyrim? If so should this be in the Akatosh article? Or is there already an Alduin article? And.. so from what I've read they are one in the same? Does this mean you actually have to defeat a God in Skyrim? --D. Gemini 03:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Wait...In Oblivion, it is specifically stated that the Nine Divines, unlike the Daedra, do not manifest themselves physically (that is why you had to retrieve the cuiras of Tiber Septim). However, Alduin very clearly has a physical manifestation, as indicated by both the record on Alduin's wall and the various refrences so far given concerning the plot of the Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. If this is true, then Alduin cannot be Akatosh. Plus, the Dovahkiin are blessed by the gods (as specifically stated by Tod Howard himself) and Akatosh is one of the gods (and in fact the most likely to be able to bless one as a Dragon Born) so it would be illogical to think that he is Alduin as that would mean he blessed the player with the ability to kill him. — Unsigned comment by 158.158.240.230 (talk) at 00:21 on 2 October 2011 (GMT)

Alduin isn't a part of the Nine Divines. In Oblivion, it's stated that the Nine don't create artifacts, not that they don't manifest themselves in an avatar. --Legoless 00:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but the importance of the artifacts in the first place was that Deadric and (in theory) Divine artifacts contained the blood of their creators. My point is that, as stated by Martin in Oblivion, the Nine Divines don't have physical forms of any kind from which to get blood. Deadra do, so you could use any deadric artifact you wished. But in order to get the blood of a Divine, you had to get the blood of Tiber Septim, because he later ascended to become Talos, thus making his blood divine. Alduin is not, as far as we can tell, an avatar (a projection of existance) like Martin became, but in fact a very real dragon. And that is where my point lies: if it is true, as stated in Oblivion, that the Nine do not manifest themselves in true physical forms, and Alduin has a true physical form (as the indications show), then Alduin cannot possibly be Akatosh. Of course, we cannot be sure of this until Skyrim comes out. — Unsigned comment by 174.252.177.125 (talk) at 21:04 on 2 October 2011 (GMT)

Stating that Alduin has a physical form has no basis. The big black dragon could be just as much an avatar as Akatosh's appearance in Oblivion, or the various members of the Nine Divines who appeared as mortals in Morrowind. Of course Alduin isn't Akatosh; Akatosh is the Imperial version of the Time Dragon, while Alduin in the Nordic version. Unless you have references to back up your claims, they're as good as speculation. --Legoless 20:10, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Now that Skyrim has been released, and that I personally have seen him crush the wall of a tower (a physical object) with his metalic, ornamental face, I find it safe to assume that Alduin is actualy physical, and therefor not Akatosh nor an aspect of him. What he is however will need research, But as of now, he has been confirmed to not be Alduin, by Bethesda through the words of Maiq the Lair, that Akatosh is not Alduin. ~ (Unsigned, due to formatting error)

Daggerfall references & PicEdit

There's some info currently on the page that only comes from Daggerfall. I couldn't figure out the best way to cite to it; don't know enough about Daggerfall. "Dialogue before the Warp in the West" or something like that might be appropriate; if anyone knows what NPC(s) actually communicate this info in Daggerfall, even better.

I moved the stained-glass image of Akatosh a little down the page because I thought it looked better than cramming the text directly between the two images. But, meh; fiddle as you see fit. Minor Edits 23:52, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

"Events of Daggerfall" is usually fine for the reference if you can't find an exact source. --Legoless 23:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Found in every pantheon?Edit

This article says that Akatosh is "one of two deities found in every Tamrielic religion" however he is not represented in the Dunmeri religion, as stated on our article on the different Pantheons of Tamriel. Should this not be revised to be brought in line with our other article, and changed to something like this: "one of two deities found in every Tamrielic religion, bar the Tribunal Temple? --OblivionDuruza 06:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

The article already notes this exception.Minor Edits 08:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, that's odd, I was given the impression that it didn't, while the others did, by a user over on the Forums. May have been referring to a different page. I'll double check. (Could also have been me brining it up on the wrong page by mistake)--OblivionDuruza 13:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

isnt auriel in dunmer religion, and auriel is akatosh, right? ("From Fear to Eternity- Eddie The Head 13:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC))

Auriel is the Aldmeri variation of Akatosh yes, but the Dunmer don't worship the Nine.--OblivionDuruza 10:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Firstborn of AkatoshEdit

This is not a line that can be taken at face value. It is loaded with implications and half truths, given that it refers to past universes.

Being a son of Akatosh in a methaphysical sense does not rule out being an aspect of Akatosh. Just look at Jesus. Furthermore, the way Alduin would have become the son of Akatosh would be by mantling in the last kalpa, which would make him a former aspect of Akatosh. Lastly, Varieties of Faith still identifies Alduin as the Nordic version of Akatosh (although this means that he is an independent being), so we can expect that this is what the citizens of Tamriel believe, while only the player character heard Alduin's shouts. This is all a little beyond the scope of the article, so let's let it be. Akatosh himself was invented by Alessia, remember.132.162.73.252 05:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

From what I've concluded through playing the game, it seems to me that Alduin and Akatosh are completely separate entities. Akatosh is, first and foremost, one of the Aedra; fundamentally "good" as far as we can use the term in context, divine, and, rightfully, a god. Alduin, however, is simply the first of Akatosh's dragon progeny; while this grants him additional powers that make him more powerful than most other dragons, this does not in any way make him a god, or even an aspect of Akatosh. In-game dialogue from Paarthurnax, who we can assume to be Alduin's immediately younger sibling, seems to show that Alduin is far more mortal than is believed by men; his reservation of the "right" to hunt in Sovngarde implies that other dragons could very well do so if Alduin did not prevent them, and the fact that the other dragons were becoming curious as to whether Alduin was strong enough to lead seems to imply that Alduin was not a God, but simply the "alpha male" of dragonkind. If Alduin was indeed a facet of Akatosh or a God in his own right, then his strength would not be questioned by his dragon siblings.

This isn't to say, however, that Alduin is a completely mortal creature. Given his unique "death" sequence in Sovngarde after being "killed" by the Dragonborn player, and the fact that his soul is not absorbed by the Dragonborn, it can be assumed that, similarly to the Daedra, he cannot be permanently killed, as opposed to other dragons, which are more or less mortal creatures.

This is, at least, what I got from playing through the storyline.

--Lee 95 04:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Long story short, this article should at least note the connection with Alduin. Basically everything Lee said is well-settled at this point. Varieties of Faith is from Morrowind, and I think it's safe to say it has been retconned. I don't mean necessarily that the "real" concept of Alduin was not already conceived at that point, but it's certain that from a lore perspective, falsehoods presented in previous times have since been rebutted by new, more reliable sources in subsequent games. Varieties of Faith pertains to the theories of the various pantheons from an Imperial perspective, like The Alduin/Akatosh Dichotomy, and we know that Imperial scholars were prone to perpetuate the misconception that Alduin and Akatosh were the same thing, despite the objections of the people who best understood their own beliefs.

The accuracy of the title "Firstborn of Akatosh" as applied to Alduin is not relevant here. Whether he is Akatosh, his Firstborn, an avatar of him, or none or all of the above at various times, the only thing that really matters is that readers would expect us to mention all the relevant facts, and the fact that Alduin is referred to as "Firstborn of Akatosh" in the game seems entirely relevant to me. Whether the implications it brings are misguided or not is best left to be ironed out on the forums. Minor Edits 06:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Warp in the WestEdit

The current line on the Warp in the West is wrong and misleading. It only refers to the Imperial cover story of the Miracle of Peace, which players and educated scholars are supposed to know is false. Akatosh did not play a benevolent role, he simply lost control of time momentarily. That's failure, not benevolence. I'm putting this here because I can't edit the article. Some sort of 'lost session data' error. If someone else could restore the edit, that would be great.Temple-Zero 22:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I changed the language; hopefully that will suffice. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 23:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Akatosh didn't create Auriel's artifactsEdit

Auriel is the Altmeri name for Akatosh, but Cyrodilic and Altmeri views on Akatosh are mutually exclusive. Akatosh is a dragon that guards creation. Auriel is a man or eagle that would like to see his followers destroy it and follow him to immortality. They are, for all intents and purposes, separate beings, although both are aspects of the God of Time. So it is wrong to say that Akatosh created Auriel's artifacts.Temple-Zero 22:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Cites?Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 23:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Citations? Elaborating this issue would require the content of a dozen articles. But I think UESP should bow to the logic of the situation. The Thalmor worship Auriel, and they loathe man's very existence. The Empire's Akatosh actively defends the interests of Cyrodiil and the Empire. They are diametrically opposed beings. See the lore on the creation of the Nine Divines Pantheon and the Marukhati Selective as well. And also, in the end, we are told that the Nine do not create artifacts. Currently a search for Auriel directs to Auriel's own separate page, rather than this article, so this is not really a change.132.162.133.58 04:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I assume this is Temple-Zero? I liked your work on the Dragon Break page. I assume by what your wrote there, that Fal Droon could not explain away all the inconsistencies, that you agree with the orthodox explanation of the Middle Dawn: the Selective tried, and presumably failed, to exorcise Elven Auriel from Imperial Akatosh and instigated a Dragon Break. Which implies that they believe the two entities are, in fact, different representations of the same entity. So even if the Thalmor and Empire both loathe the idea, the Imperials, at least, more or less acknowledge this belief. So it follows that it's not false to say that Akatosh is accredited with creating those artifacts, if that underlying assumption that they are thought to be named for their creator is true. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 04:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

So ... cites? Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 04:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Since this seems to be a topic of dispute, I have put forth a compromise, putting forth both sides of the story (with The Monomyth as my source): "In the elven tradition, Auriel is accredited with creating Auriel's Shield and Auriel's Bow, and used the latter to fire the Heart of Lorkhan into what is today Red Mountain.[1] However, the cyrodiilic traditions of man do not mention these artifacts as part of their stories of Akatosh and creation, and do not provide any explanation to their existance or origins.[1]" 78.69.121.150 19:29, 12 September 2012 (GMT)

I'm fine with that general approach, but I'm not quite sure on the best way to interpret The Monomyth. It seems like it can be construed a number of ways. "Auriel pleaded with Anu to take them back, but he had already filled their places with something else. But his soul was gentler and granted Auriel his Bow and Shield, so that he might save the Aldmer from the hordes of Men." It could be read to mean that Anu created the artifacts and gave them to Auriel, for example, thus it would be wrong to say that Auriel is accredited with creating them. It would probably be safer to go with explicit ambiguity ("It is unknown ..."), or silence. Minor Edits (talk) 22:04, 12 September 2012 (GMT)

Anuiel gave the artifacts to Auri-el to battle Lorkhan. It was in a book somewhere. — Unsigned comment by 109.102.64.10 (talk) at 18:20 on 27 October 2013

Almalexia/Akatosh connectionEdit

The main article mentions needing a Citation for the Akatosh traits in Almalexia. This is directly from Varieties of Faith in the Empire. It's worth noting that this same work implies Alduin and Akatosh are two versions of the same entity, a piece of trivia disputed by some statements in Skyrim, so its veracity and impartiality are in question but it's still a belief some people have, so it's a valid section of the article. — Unsigned comment by 64.253.223.247 (talk) on 10 August 2012

That bit of the book is just Imperial colonialist propaganda, a condescending view that surely theirs is the one true faith and that the Dunmer just have a corrupted deviation from it. Almalexia was her own deity, distinct from Akatosh. Bear in mind that just because it's in the game's lore doesn't mean it's accurate. Plenty of people are incorrect ingame.--68.230.66.230 04:40, 11 February 2013 (GMT)

Akatosh's role in SkyrimEdit

I'm new to the TES lore, so sorry, if the answer to my question is obvious. I played Skyrim fully and a bit of Oblivion. As far as I understood, Akatosh is the "(god)father" of the dragons. Then why does he take no role in Skyrim, a game that is all about dragons, especially about Akatosh's son Alduin? --91.41.140.188 08:31, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

Actually, Akatosh IS Alduin, in terms of gods in different pantheons. In the nordic pantheon, there is no Akatosh, which is why he isn't very prominent. Instead, Alduin holds the same role. Since gods in TES are real, it isn't really possible to say that they are ACTUALLY the same, but that's why Akatosh doesn't play a bigger role. Jeancey (talk) 08:41, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

So, is "Gods" and "Worship" in TES working like in Black and White, for example? If someone starts to believes in a yet unexisting god (meaning: "invent" a superior being within his imagination), this god will eventually start existing and claim a physical representation - and after it started existing this way it had existed forever already, because gods are outside of space-time? --91.41.140.188 08:50, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

They existed first. They were created first out of the void, then they, some of them more specifically than others, created everything else, including the mortal races. Jeancey (talk) 09:17, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

But how can Akatosh be Alduin, and at the same time be not him? If they exist as separate beings and in a causal, linear-time manner then, of course, Akatosh must exist in the nordic culture. Gods can be everywhere, they are gods - no matter if people know/worship him or not. So, I'm still confused how Akatosh, as being THE dragon god, doesn't play any role in Skyrim. Or is Alduin just another name for the exact same entity as Akatosh (like a "translation")? If so, then this should belong in the article. --91.41.140.188 10:46, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

Or ist it in the "nature" of Akatosh to not care for Skyrim, does he have no "power" outside Cyrodiil? And is it in the nature of Alduin to not care for non-Skyrim parts? --91.41.140.188 10:48, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

Technically, Akatosh and Alduin are separate. Both are sub gradients or shards of the father of all time gods (Alduin, Alkosh, Auri-El, Akatosh etc) who is known as Aka-Tusk. In the game, Parthy calls Akatosh "Bormah", which means father and Alduin calls himself the firstborn of Akatosh - they are actually referring to Aka-Tusk, the original time god who all dragons descend from. Akatosh (technically) came about in the First Era - after the Marukhati Selective discarded the Elven aspects of Auri-El and the result was Akatosh - a schizophrenic deity. However, being a time god, Akatosh has always existed. Its confusing. This is lore that is most based on out of game texts from the former dev/writer Michael Kirkbride. The forums might be a better place to discuss this further.--Jimeee (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2014 (GMT)

Akatosh and Satakal/AtakotaEdit

Reasoning for removal of Satakal and Atakota from Akatosh's page? Akatosh is directly called the equivalent of Satakal within the original bethesda teaser for the Monomyth prior to Morrowinds' release. and this remains so in the official release of the Monomyth in the French Translations of the text, lasting from Morrowind onto ESO.

To add, Satakal and Atakota both fulfill identical roles to Akatosh across every mythos, being the first to form, being time, and allowing other spirits to form. Anu and Padomay coming together to allow Time to start has remarkable precedent. Atakota is explicitly connected to Time being existing specifically. On top of this Satakal and Atakota has the unique connection and tie to Sep and The Shadow, Yokudan and Argonian Lorkhan. The two Dragon God and Missing God being present in every myth is a constant even acknowledged by the Monomyth.

As the old world died, Satakal began, and when things realized this pattern so did they realize what their part in it was. They began to take names, like Ruptga or Tuwhacca, [Monomyth]

Auriel bled through the Aurbis as a new force, called time. With time, various aspects of the Aurbis began to understand their natures and limitations. They took names, like Magnus or Mara or Xen. [Monomyth]

But now Atakota was not in conflict, and things had time to begin and end. [Children of the Root]

The Cosmos formed from the Aurbis [chaos, or totality] by Anu and Padomay. Akatosh (Auriel) formed and Time began. The Gods (et'Ada) formed. [Ages before man]

The direct citation stating they are one: "Satakal the Worldskin" (Anu as Satak, Padomay as Akel, Akatosh as Satakal, Lorkhan as Sep.)

Why should Satakal and Atakota possibly being alternative names to Akatosh be outright removed?

The Entity (talk) 19:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

No official source conflates Satakal with Akatosh, rather Satakal is stated to be a fusion of the concepts of Anu and Padaomay. Absolutely nothing whatsoever official or otherwise conflated Atakota with Akatosh. This speculation doesn’t belong on this page. Dcking20 (talk) 20:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I cited one UOL source, which is enough to get an addition to the page as uesp accepts UOL, and I added an official source, the French translation of the Monomyth has a directly comparison of Satakal to Akatosh. This has remained true since Monomyth's addition to Morrowind all the way to ESO. This is an official in game source.

More on Satakal, you're presuming that the combination fo Anu and Padomay isn't what Akatosh is

From the Anuad:

The first ones were brothers: Anu and Padomay. They came into the Void, and Time began.

The Entity (talk) 20:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Uol is definitely allowed however there’s precedent for not allowing cut content of this nature into main bodies of articles. Not sure what exactly the French translation of the Monomyth states although if it clearly states that Satakal and Akatosh are one and the same I see no issue with citing that on the page as an alternative name, none of this applies to Atakota however who indeed has similarities to Satakal but stating anything beyond that based on such tentative connections and weak sources would be quite dubious imo. Ultimately both Satakal and Atakota are clearly something very different to what we are commonly told Akatosh is in other myths. Dcking20 (talk) 20:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Here is what Le Monomythe says: "Anu en tant que Satak, Padomay en tant que Akel, Akatosh en tant que Satakal, Lorkhan en tant que Sep."

This translates to "Anu as Satak, Padomay as Akel, Akatosh as Satakal, Lorkhan as Sep". --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 20:44, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Satakal should definitely be kept. On the topic of Atakota, Atakota is very clearly a spin on Satakal. We have precedent of this nature with edits made on Children of the Root's page to ensure Atakota hyperlinked to Satakal. However as you say it's never explicitly stated, but is inference not enough here? After all Atak and Anu are never directly correlated, yet they are understood to hold the place of the Stasis idea Anu and is accepted. Should Atakota/Satakal/Akatosh not be afforded the same connection?

On Akatosh's similarities to Atakota specific, Atakota is directly credited with the commencing of the flow of time, and things to form. This is the universal constant of the Time Dragon; (The Dragon God is always related to Time, and is universally revered as the "First God. He is often called Akatosh, "whose perch from Eternity allowed the day."). (The first of these was Akatosh the Time Dragon, whose formation made it easier for other spirits to structure themselves.)

Alongside this, the direct mimicry to Satakal's tale, another alternative name to Akatosh. We could also simply witness the ethymologically familiar name of Atakota in comparison to others like Akatosh or Alkosh.

Is this together not enough to afford Atakota a place on Akatosh's page?

At least perhaps, a line saying "Atakota shares similarity to the common understanding of Akatosh, as well as Satakal The Entity (talk) 21:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Ultimately my views are mostly that there is a degree of nuance when dealing with gods who have "mirror aspects" such as Akatosh in this instance. For example I’m not a major fan of the recent edits that mention Auriel's artifacts on this page because the artifacts are always tied specifically to the Auriel aspect and while it is true that Auriel and Akatosh as deities are often times conflated, certain key sources go as far as to place them as leaders of opposing sides of people and principles. All this is to say I don’t mind listing off Satakal as a potential alternative name for Akatosh but doing so in a devoid of context manner makes it seem like these deities are just different names for the exact same ideals which I feel is a bit off. Ruptga arguably has more parallels with Akatosh than Satakal tbh. One instance of us applying this nuance and context on this page is not listing Alduin as an alternative name for Akatosh but rather listing him as his son, even though that’s a can of worms in its own right as this page which covers more or less the Imperial pantheon deity known as Akatosh isn’t necessarily the "Akatosh Time Dragon" who is conceptually the father of all dragons including Alduin as attested by some out of game works and the Amun Dro Khajiit books. This is a superrrrr long winded way of saying I’d prefer we put less emphasis on cross contaminating individual lore pages with information that belongs to a different culture’s interpretation of that deity and solely focus on making each page for each respective god aspect as laser focused as possible, otherwise it makes it come across like there’s a "right" and "wrong" version of these figures. Dcking20 (talk) 00:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Satakal is unique in that he's meant to be a fusion of Anu and Padomay, and Atakota is meant to be a mirror aspect of Satakal. While there is undoubtable phonetic similarity both these names with Akatosh, Atakota is not Akatosh; Atakota is a fusion of Atak and Kota, and Atak is a mirror aspect of Anu (and possibly be extension, Anui-El and Akatosh), while Kota is an aspect of Padomay/Sithis. I do think Satakal should be noted in some way, but he should not be listed as an alt name cuz this is more of a case of enantiomorph of multiple deities rather than being equivalent to just one aedra. Satakal itself is implied to be more linked to Alduin as a being that only appears at the end of time to end the kalpa and create a new one. Satakal's relationship to Akatosh should be kept to the notes or so on. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 01:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

To Dcking, I would contend however that the very idea of deities having mirror aspects is a faulty one. The vast majority of mortals agree for example, Auriel and Akatosh are the same deity, whose differences is colored by mortal bias, as we hear from numerous sources again and again. Even the Mahrukati acknowledged this internally. They attempted rituals to prove they are distinct deities and found only harder evidence that Auriel was in fact Akatosh. This is why they tried to erase the Elven aspects from the Time Dragon entirely. An action that is contended to have not worked, "don't think you solved what you accomplished by it". Because of this I would also contend that Shezarr's song is in fact an Alessian Order text, when the hatred of all things elven colored their faith and their view of the Time Dragon. I would also add it is mentioned in Imperial texts that Akatosh was outright plucked from the Elven Religion, and it has been stated Akatosh tore out Lorkhan's heart in Cyrodilic bard songs. So perhaps the idea that Akatosh had opposing views to Auriel, is not so accurate.

The Mirror brother idea is one based on some comments from MK, but largely one I find unfounded within actual lore, OOG texts or otherwise, which I imagine is why it's largely absent from uesp. From how most writers aside from MK, and thus most mortals in the world of Tamriel, treat deities, it appears that the differences between cultural interpretations of deities begin and there, as cultural interpretations, and is not reflected as actual new divinities who mirror each other. I will comment in particular though, that MK's full mirror-brother comment states that the time dragons different faces is influenced by mythopoeic forces of his mantlers, so cultural interpretation isn't a factor even there, but mantling is.

On Alduin, Alduin himself states he is the Son of Akatosh, and lore was added to supplement this within Skyrim itself. IRL wise, this is a clear retcon. This is then doubled down in the Amun Dro books, where Alkosh takes the place of Akha, and Alkhan is a demon enemy of Alkosh, Khenarthi and Lorkhaj. Alduin is not a mirror-brother aspect of Akatosh in the way MK once suggested on r/teslore, but his, adopted in this case, son.

On the topic of Ruptha vs. Satakal as the Yokudan Akatosh parallel, I lean Satakal for quite a few reasons, beyond the outright confirmation within certain versions of Monomyth. The number one constant about the Time Dragon is three, that he is the first spirit after the primal Anu and Padomay forces, that he is what allows other spirits to form, and that he is tied to Lorkhan somehow. Consider the following to extend to Atakota as well. Satakal is the first spirit, he is the First serpent, his existence is then what allows spirits to finally actualize and take names, and then Sep (Lorkhan) is born of leftovers of Satakal, as the Second serpent, giving the two a unique relationship. In Ruptga I find these fundamentals of the common theme of the Time Dragon absent, in fact the only similarity I find is the opposition to Lorkhan, sundering his heart, and being Chief of the Divinities. Opposing Lorkhan is hardly a unique position, in fact every divinity within Yokudan myth opposes him, sundering his heart is not unique to the Time Dragon, Trinimac is most known for it, and being chief of the divines goes to numerous deities across pantheons, Kyne most notably.

It's fitting for Akatosh's page to cover his alternative names, primarily because Akatosh is the most popular depiction of the Time Dragon. Essentially he functions as the hub from which you can research any interpretation of the Time Dragon further. A similar situation can be found with Lorkhan's page, which is sensible as Lorkhan is the most popular depiction of the Missing God. The Entity (talk) 02:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

To Rim of the Sky, I'd contest this, why do you assume that Akatosh himself, is not formed from Padomay's influence on Anu? Akatosh, or Time rather, has been called static change for a reason. Time is born of the combination of Anu and Padomay. As I cited above in the Anuad this is stated clearly. "The first ones were brothers: Anu and Padomay. They came into the Void, and Time began.", an elven passage, and to the elves Time is onstensibly, Auriel. Why can we not say Atakota is Akatosh when he clearly is, but then confidently declare Atak as Anu, neither is stated outright yes, but both are informed conclusions based of the common archetype the two display in the mythic. And on Enantiomorphs... where do you pull the idea that Enantiomorphs are involved in with Satakal? The Entity (talk) 02:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I’ll be honest, you did some great research into this and have made me look at this alot deeper than I ever have, for one this argument has made me notice that in the original Varieties of Faith, Akatosh or one of his aspects is listed as the first deity of each culture, the Yokudan one listing none other than Satakal. Also at the time of Morrowind Alduin was seen as an Akatosh aspect through and through so comparing Satakal to Alduin was fitting of this bill at that time. Now that said, there’s some stuff you missed with the Ruptga connections there’s a little bit more to it, one of which is Lore:Varieties of Faith in Tamriel which outright conflates the two, in the Crown mythos Zeht is the son of Ruptga, to the Forebears, the son of Akatosh. There’s also Lore:A Betrayal of Our Heritage that seems to possibly conflate both Satakal and Ruptga with Akatosh? Another matter, this original idea of Satakal being an avatar of Akatosh, who most closely resembles Alduin as an eater of the world, if Alduins origins as a mirror aspect was clearly retconned could we not say the same about Satakal? It all just feels a tad shaky to me and none of it is very explicit, I’m sort of with Rim that it might be cleaner to put all this in the notes, but if we don’t for consistency we likely need to put Alduin, the One, and possibly even Ruptga in the alternative names bit as well. Dcking20 (talk) 03:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah Alduin was soundly Akatosh prior to Skyrim's release. Honestly if Skyrim simply had left that depiction of the Time Dragon alone, it would have saved the entire lore community years of confusion. With Ruptga, those are good citations I honestly missed, so I believe we should add Ruptga in addition to Satakal as potential Yoku Akatosh parallels, since there are indications for them. Both are the father of Zeht, and in an Imperial text, both are called "Tall Papa". Maybe add a section noting their differences? While it's interesting that the Betrayal text shuffles both for Akatosh, Akatosh is never seen as a star deity by other culture, which is most of what Ruptga is.

On the other end of the comparison, Ruptga is neither a god of time nor a reptile (whereas even the Altmer, who like to think of their gods as looking like themselves, do often refer to Auriel as reptilian, or use the term "dragon" when referring to time, same with the Ayleids ). He is directly compared in some Antiquarian comments, saying that "Ruptga without stars is like Akatosh without a Dragon", and we never see either with attributes of the other. While with Satakal, he's a Serpent/Wyrm/Reptile-enough, even called the First Wyrm or First Serpent in Hammerfell, and responsible for the creation of Time in the Yoku mythos, both as the concept of duration (whereby spirits get to exist), but also as the time between universal creation and destruction, which marches onward like a serpent eating itself. There's also one obscure comment that indicates that Yokudans might understand dragons (those spirits who experience hunger and a desire for domination) as the "Spawn of Satakal" .

Alduin, I believe we can safely keep as is. Satakal hasn't been demoted in the way Alduin has (and as you said, at the time Akatosh=Satakal because Akatosh=Alduin and Alduin=Satakal was clearly the authorial intent when Morrowind released), and while his Worldskin Cycle is in some question due to Alduins' demotion, Satakal has kept his significance in the mythic (as responsible for the resurrection of the universe) where Alduin has only suffered. Perhaps a note mentioning Satakal's similarity to Alduin, and how that could be interpreted within the context at the time of writing? On "The One", he is rather soundly established as the Alessian Order's view of Akatosh as a result of their attempt at Monotheism.

What I am curious about is your current thoughts on Atakota now, though, and his addition as a parallel. To add what I have mentioned before, there is the entire line in the text where Dragons as a whole are born off of him, which we know to be a fact beyond the cultural. Dragons being related to Akatosh/Alkosh/Bormahu/The Great Dragon is a metaphysical fact that even the Dragons themselves are eager to admit. And even more than that, the event of the creation of dragons, where the synthesis, Atakota, is attacked and unmade by lesser spirits who then become dragons, is eerily similar too the overthrow of Alkosh, where the "children of Akha" (clearly dragons) scatter the Time God and another deity has to put him back together (and they collectively realize that something needs to be done about these spirits, which neatly connects into the Divines' intervention during the Dragon War in Nordic history, with the First Dragonborn, the gift of the Thu'um and Paarthurnax's change of allegiances as attempts to undermine the Dragon Cult).

I don't really understand why it'd be an issue to acknowledge a reasonable degree of comparative mythology when there are many instances of precedents of this being done on the UESP. We did not know for a fact that Khenarthi was Kynareth until the addition of the Antiquarians in the ESO:Greymoor chapter (prior there was never an actual 1:1 comparison between the two), yet this has been treated as fact since the release of Morrowind, and rightfully so, because the authorial intent was pretty transparent. I think Atakota is one such example where refusal to acknowledge the comparison becomes a statement in and off itself, whereas the authorial intent seems pretty clear that he was supposed to be the Dragon analogue, especially given that Akatosh and Lorkhan are supposed to be the gods that can most easily be found across every culture. Were we to not acknowledge Atakota in some capacity, then we'd be ignoring the one absolute established by Monomyth, as that leaves this Argonian Mythos without a Dragon and Missing God. The Entity (talk) 16:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

So here’s my ultimate train of thought here, the parallels between Atakota and Satakal are unmistakable so that is (imo) a settled matter. Satakal, and by extension Atakota *definitely* appears to have a close tether to the time dragon, but in this instance it’s specifically the Dragon God of (the end of) Time, Alduin. That Alduin is still very much established in lore to hold dominion over the end of time and being the world eater, but also retconned to be demoted to a non mirror aspect son of Akatosh makes the connection with Satakal and Atakota much more tentative here. In essence, Satakal and Atakota seem to be the Yoku and Argonian mirrors of Akatosh only insofar as Alduin is still very much the Nordic mirror of Akatosh. Because no matter how we slice it (if we are going off of the Skyrim retcon of them being two separate deities) end of time and world eating is the domain of Alduin, not Akatosh. To add more fun to the mix, some sources tie Alduin to the All-Maker of the Skaal, while other sources go in the complete opposite direction and have an Alduin mirror as an aspect of the Skaal's Adversary. That makes Alduin, Satakal, Atakota, Alkhan, All-Maker, and Thartaag who can all be wrapped up in the Alduin world eater umbrella. All of whom *should* be able to be tied into the Akatosh chief deity of time umbrella but Skyrim decided to be Skyrim and call that all into major question, now our job is to figure out how to try and explain all this on lore articles, my opinion is we need something more in depth and nuanced than just slapping alternative names in the opening bio. Dcking20 (talk) 00:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

(←) Based on the above comments, I worked on adding a section to discuss these different variants, which also had some of the content that was already present on the page moved into it. Further expansion to explore the above about the All-Maker, Alkhan, Thartaag is still necessary. Also a brief mention of Orgnum, who has some ties to Satakal. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 15:37, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I like the new additions, they're great AKB! I think settles the matter . The Entity (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Need to add Tall Papa stuff to since a few texts conflate Akatosh with this deity as well. Might not be a bad idea to take all the alternative deity names out of the opening blurb and let the in depth sections below do all the talking as these do a better job of demonstrating that there’s comparisons to be made between these different deities, but not necessarily are they 1:1 with one another. Dcking20 (talk) 00:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)