On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Erik Holmes wrote: >> The Dragaerans stories aren't military sf/fantasy (thank God!), but a >> fairly important military question hit me this morning. After 200,000 >> years of war, why have neither the Dragaerans nor the Easterners been >> able to definitively conquer the other. > >Morrolan states that the only reason Kieron the Conqueror left the >Easterners alone in the first place is so that the Dragaerans would >have someone to fight instead of each other. They get conquered every >once in a while, then throw the Dragaerans out after a few hundred or >thousand years. > I think a critical question is *how* do the Easterners throw the Dragaerans out? If the Dragaerans have a weapon that Easterners have no defense against (sorcery), how is it that that weapon stops being effective? Unless.... What if whatever blocked the power of Faerie in "Brokedown Palace" is actually something that can be repeated; and in fact *has* been repeated throughout the history of the Dragaeran Empire? Maybe the Easterners can win because somebody out there - whatever the Taltos horse really is, or the River really is, or the Tree really is - likes them? We know that Bolk has been manifesting cyclically, and for that matter, we've seen Bolk resist Sandor's use of sorcery against him. Hmm. Definitely food for thought. I don't think the Easterners could conquer the Dragaerans because whatever the sorcery-blocking thing might be, it sure doesn't seem to be permanent, and may only be implemented for the purpose of defending the East. Maybe that *is* why no one "wins", at least not permanently. Sorcery allows the Dragaerans to win temporarily, and then is blocked, allowing the Easterner's advantages to come into play until the status quo returns. And it would appear Sethra has lived through several of these cycles, so that might explain some of her attitude towards the idea of conquering them: "What, again? Yeah, whatever. For as long as it lasts, anyway."