Skyrim talk:Saadia

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

The debate continues[edit]


"Her name Iman is the only fact not disputed by either sides. Both stories are full of holes and there is no hard evidence to support either case. The major flaw in Saadia's story is that Hammerfell is now independant and anti-Dominion. The Alik'r leader Kematu's story's major flaw is that the war ended twenty years previously, and they are only now coming after her."

Kematu never mentions Saadia as Iman. He only calls her Saadia or Shazra...AND NEVER AS A PRINCESS much less Iman.


Furthermore - "She sold the city out to the Aldmeri Dominion. Were it not for her betrayal, Tanth could have held its ground in the war. The other noble houses discovered her betrayal and she fled. They want her brought back alive. The resistance against the Dominion is alive and well in Hammerfell, and they want justice." - Kematu

The Great War ended over 20 years ago...but the Thalmor are still occupying Southern Hammerfell. This is an in-game fact.

Saadia's identity is still a mystery. There is absolutely NO proof even by looking over Kematu's dialogue, that she is a princess. All that is mentioned is that she sold Tanmu (a city) out to the Aldmeri Dominion during The Great War.

FURTHERMORE, Why would the "Resistance" be harassing every Redguard woman IN SKYRIM!

Yes, that is right, if you do not complete the quest-line, you will randomly see Alak'ir badgering Redguard women ALL OVER SKYRIM. It almost appears to be a massive man-hunt...or the Alakir are spending alot of time and travel on a single woman.


So far..the Thalmor have invested alot of effort in trying to find inn keeper who thinks she has testicles. Guess who else is an inn keeper!

(I'm Pro-Paarthurnax/GreyBeard & think the Blades are annoying and overly vengeful)

Honestly...revenge is a horrible distraction when fighting an already horrible war.

However, to say Saadia isn't lying is utter bs. NOTHING backs up her story.

I support her out of shear spite.

My point is that this article and all the related articles are full of flawed information and need to be more thoroughly cited:

WHITE-GOLD CONCORDAT/RELATED DOCUMENTS + DIALOGUE/TRANSCRIPT of Alakir, Whiterun Guards, Saadia, the Alakir prisoner, Bandits, & Kematu + IN-GAME EVENTS such as finding Alakir randomly badgering redguard women throughout Skyrim.

Anything further than those bold parameters needs to be hideously ridiculed and banished from UESP....FO-EVA!

Flame on >:P

Fus Ro Fo Sho --Theindividual 12:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on this quest, but what you say seems to point out that the article contains a lot of assumptions. This article should therefore be looked at by someone who knows this quest well and amended if needed. --Manic 15:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I amended most of the details into script. AFTER the Empire signed the White-Gold Hammerfell split from the empire because control was ceded to the Thalmor which they didn't agree to, thus Hammerfell is INDEPENDANT of all. This is a very common mistake by a lot of people on this site. If you wish to change anything you are free to do so but please cite your sources because I can cite mine if need be. The Silencer 17:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
You can KILL Saadia after she is paralyzed by the Alik'r. Kematu will be be mad and say "All that effort and you just kill her? You ruined everything!". If you believe Saadia's story, the Thalmor wants her dead. If you believe Kematu, Hammerfell nobles wanted her alive. IMO Kematu's reaction only strengthens his story. - CW — Unsigned comment by (talk) at 04:25 on 19 June 2012 (UTC)
You're opinion is misinformed. Even though Saadia refers to the Alik'r as "assassins", in her initial quest dialogue with you in The Bannered Mare she explicitly states that if the Alik'r capture her they will take her to Hammerfell for execution by the Thalmor (because the developers ignored canon and lore for this quest and treat Hammerfell as if it's circa 4E 175 and still occupied by the Aldemeri Dominion in southern Hammerfell). This means (1) there is absolutely nothing inconsistent with Saadia's version of events and Kematu taking her into custody instead of killing her and (2) his reaction is completely consistent with the idea that he is upset because now he will never get paid for bringing Saadia to the Thalmor for execution. For all it's glaring flaws regarding canon and lore, the quest is designed to be morally ambiguous regarding what is the right choice for the player to make. There are no smoking guns here supporting either Kematu's or Saadia's version of events.--DagmarH (talk) 03:41, 8 September 2012 (EDT)
Which are your sources for the mistake made by the developers? —MortenOSlash (talk) 07:24, 8 September 2012 (EDT)
The Great War - A Concise Account of the Great War Between the Empire and the Aldmeri Dominion gives the basic timeline for and description of the events that happened in Hammerfell during The Great War up until the end of the Aldmeri Dominion's occupation of Hammerfell with the signing of the Second Treaty of Stros M'Kai and is arguably the definitive canon source for the lore of The Great War and the continued conflict between the Aldmeri Dominion and the Redguard resistance afterwards. It clearly states that in 4E 171 the Aldmeri Dominion armies overran the coastline of Hammerfell driving the Imperial Legions across the Alik'r Desert.
Taneth, the town which Kematu claims was taken by the Aldmeri Dominion with the assistance of Saadia, is a town on the coast of Hammerfell and would have been one of the first towns overtaken by the Dominion forces in that year. That was 30 years before the game Skyrim occurs. Saadia appears to be a Redguard woman in her twenties to early thirties which would make her an infant or a toddler at the time Kematu alleges her to have colluded with the Aldmeri Dominion if the developers were observing Elder Scrolls lore in designing this quest. This would make Kematu's allegations laughably stupid and incredulous.
Saadia, on the other hand, tells you that the Aldmeri Dominion has sent the Alik'r mercenaries after her for speaking out against the Dominion in Hammerfell. This too makes little sense if the developers were adhering to Elder Scrolls lore. The Dominion isn't going to care what a Redguard in independent free Hammerfell says about the Dominion 25 years after it has withdrawn from Hammerfell. The Aldmeri Dominion would care if it happened while it was still occupying Hammerfell though since it would view occupied Hammerfell as part of it, and any act of a resident of occupied Hammerfell speaking out against the Dominion as an act of sedition punishable by death.
Finally Kematu's statement that "the resistance against the Dominion is alive and well in Hammerfell..." makes absolutely no sense. The resistance against the Dominion hasn't existed in Hammerfell since the Dominion left Hammerfell a quarter of a century ago. It's fairly clear that the developers for this quest set up the dialogues and story as if the Hammerfell that exists in the game is not the Hammerfell of 4E 201 and is instead the Hammerfell that existed circa 4E 175. In that context, Kematu's claim is no longer ludicrous because Saadia's alleged actions would have taken place only a few years ago, and Saadia's claim that the Thalmor would have a bounty on her for speaking out against them would be plausible. While the quest story and dialogues make sense in this context, the developers for this content clearly made a mistake because the game takes place in 4E 201 not circa 4E 175. It's arguably the worst mistake regarding content in the entire game.--DagmarH (talk) 00:12, 9 September 2012 (EDT)
I follow you. Kudos for putting the jigsaw puzzle straight. —MortenOSlash (talk) 02:59, 9 September 2012 (EDT)

() Actually,Dagmar, there is still much anger and resistance in Hammerfell against the Dominion. They were harassed and slaughtered by the elven attacks, and recieved next to no help from the Imperial Legion from outside the province. Even the fact that they separated their government from the Empire's further legitimates this. So, Kematu has obviously strong evidence, based on what the guy from above said: "All that effort and you just kill her?". And for the argument that there were Thalmor trying to drag her to Hammerfell, that was not what she said first. She changes her story with time, and obviously tries to avoid the Dragonborn from asking her for her story. And for the argument of her age, she looks more like 30-40, especially because of her wrinkles and the form of her jaw. That would make her a teenager who was probably scared from the Aldmeri Army at her doorstep or wanted the favor of the invaders, which she failed to get. At any rate, I think that she is really what she seems to be... A lying bitch who sold a city and its people to the elves. Ah, and one more thing: Southern Hammerfel is not under Elven control. Hammerfell kept fighting for five years more, which ended on another treaty that stated the full retreat of the Dominion from Redguard lands.--Foacir (talk) (23:27, 2 January 2013 (GMT))

It highly unlikely that the Dominion would hire mercenaries from across the continent to track down a woman who spoke out against them. For one, many spoke out against the Dominion. Second, why would they hire the Alik'r when they have a Thalmor presence in Skyrim? Not to mention it would be easier just to hire mercenaries in Skyrim to hunt her down. The whole story just doesn't piece together. Don't know if it's worth mentioning in this article since it's not concrete, but the whole logic of her story is flawed. — Unsigned comment by (talk) at 23:20 on 4 January 2013 (GMT)
There is no resistance to the Aldmeri Dominion in Hammerfell as there are no occupying Aldmeri Dominion forces to resist. Words have meaning no matter how much one would like to pretend otherwise to support a weak argument. Hammerfell didn't separate itself from the Empire. The Empire renounced Hammerfell as a province of the Empire to maintain the White-Gold Concordat. Your claim that Kematu's statement is evidence is a complete non-sequiter from the statement that precedes it. The point of the other poster was that he wasn't going to assassinate her but Saadia already makes it clear in her version of events that he's not going to assassinate her notwithstanding how she chooses to label him. Your opinion of her age is merely that. The fact of the matter is that she looks like a young woman by the game mechanic standards of how you can age a face using the sliders, and the comparitively older looking faces of others such as Kerah (also a Redgaurd and mother of a young child) and Legate Rikke (who would be the ideal age for Saadia for Kematu's story to be plausible). Irrespective of that if she's 40 in Whiterun, she's 10 when the fall of Taneth occurs which doesn't make Kematu's claim any less incredulous. I never said that Southern Hammerfell was under Aldmeri Dominion control. I said the Aldmeri Dominion taking out a bounty on her only makes sense if it was in control of Southern Hammerfell which highlights the fact that the developers made glaring mistakes by not observing the lore in designing this quest. Thanks for proving my point. >^^< --DagmarH (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2013 (GMT)

--Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 19:54, 17 January 2013 (GMT)

This topic is (now) unrelated to the content of the article, and more suited to the forums. Please feel free to continue the discussion there.
This topic is now closed.