This Forum has been archivedVisit Discussions
We all know that Andraste is the great savior that was close to defeating the tervinter imperium before she was burned to death. However i've always thought she was a mage, for some reason and i know the imperium thinks so too. My reasons include the fact there is a book in the orzammar shaperate that speculates that she is indeed a mage. As well as this during the sacred ashes, one of the ghost in the temple mention the "maker" raining down fire and calling down rain to help her which sounds magicky. I really can't imagine elves and human going against an army of blood-mages with sword and steel, cmon even the qunari have trouble with the tervinter blood mages. Finally, the reason why her ashes contain such great healing power is probably because there must be traces of magic left even after she was burnt. My guess is Andraste used the maker as an excuse to unite all the free-people of thedas to fight against the Tervinters, and if she is indeed a mage, she can just say those powers are from the maker(after all she led them to believe she is the maker's bride).
But that's just merely an opinion I hold; but whether YOU agree or not, what do you think will happen to the Chantry or the entire viewpoint of mages, if it were proven that she was definitely a mage. Now, how is this proven, I myself don't know and I guess the Chantry may try to cover it up. But lets say the inquisitor miraculously found out, through someone like Flemeth, would it change your viewpoint on the mages? Will it give you further impetus to permanently destroy the chantries' hold over them?
Pretty much nothing. Not only is there no way to prove it, any attempt to do so would be dismissed as anti-Chantry propaganda. And hell, just look at the real world for a second. There have been thousands, even millions of so-called Christians throughout history that hated Jewish people but seemed to experience little to no cognitive dissonance at all in worshipping one as their God. And even if it were possible to prove Andraste was a mage, the Chantry would simply say she was an exception; immaculately free from the sin of magic.
When people are presented with an inarguable fact that contradicts their belief, they often go through a process not unlike the stages of grief. Denial, anger, fear, bargaining, acceptance. Only the really mature and open-minded progress to acceptance. Most people don't get past denial and anger, and people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo find a way to make it to bargaining but withhold outright acceptance. See the long and bloody history of the theory of evolution for a good example. 13:51, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
I think she is/was a mage also, but not in the conventional sense. The uncertainty surrounding the facts of her life, her birth-date, the events and purpose of her life, and the enormous power she wielded in conjunction with her eventual "mission" makes me think she was possibly not exactly a normal human. It was theorized here for what seemed like years that she was possibly the first Old God baby, and I've never been able to quite shake that possibility, despite no where near enough evidence existing to support it at present. If that were true the Chantry might not survive. If she was JUST a mage, then the Chantry would be weakened severely, but I think that would take a long time as most people would be reluctant to forgo the one constant their meager lives have probably offered. And because yes, the Chantry would try to cover it up. I'm not sure at this point how successful they would be though. The chaos created in my mind has more to do with "releasing the truth", and I think revealing exactly what Andraste was would be a part of that at some point. The Grey Unknown (talk) 13:56, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
Some say Andraste was a mage, others that Shartan was her lover. Other can even say Andraste liked eating frogs or Maferath was zoophilic or Hesarian was homosexual. She as a mage can be only a Tevinter version and only a propaganda. If she was a mage, why would she say "magic is to serve men, not rule over them"? Orlais interpretates it as mages should serve humans, when Tevinter says "magic should serve the greater good" instead and it means magisters are the best rulers. What evidences can be? Examining body is impossible, because that's only ashes now. From ashes DNA can't be extracted. Even in real world ashes can't be examined. The ashes could be magical only thanks to lyrium in the mountain, which made a myth about it's healing abilities real. Evidences like old scrolls can be invalid, because they could be written by her enemies or rivals or because author had imagination, everyone can write whatever wants. Victors and losers write different versions of history. Cathaire said Maker burned plants of enemies and caused rain to drown them, but when people are lucky they thank their gods, because they believe they control their fortune and weather. It's just a faith, not realistic description of an event. Testimonies of Andraste's spirit can be some kind of evidence, but even spirits can lie and some of them can change shape. Andraste was fighting against the Imperium, but magisters weren't an army, but a council, they had own army and fought personally only, when situation was critical. She is respected for her strategic and charismatic genius, which she used to cripple Tevinter. I think she was a talented startegist, not a mage. Even if Andraste was a mage, she would still a slave fighting against slavers. It wouldn't change fact that magister's lust of power lead them to becoming 1st darkspawn. It's hard to ignore that magisters lead to almost total destruction of Thedas. If Andraste was a mage, then it was one redeemed mage against dozens of corrupt magisters. What an irony, She as a mage can be compared to Amon from Avatar franchise. It still wouldn't change my mind on mages. Magisters were uncontroled and counquered whole continent and enslaved less advanced tribes, Elves did the same earlier, but on the smaller scale, when uncontrolled Andraste cripled the Imperium, it still proves uncontrolled mages cause chaos and destruction. Her supposed spirit can tell me her interpretation of "magic should serve them men, not rule over them", but words of dead people don't mean anything to me. For an atheist like me nothing is sacred.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 15:24, May 4, 2014 (UTC)