Staff of Law (spoiler)

[Relayer]

... once a Law is broken , can it be broken again or is the damage already done?

In the Land, I'd say once it's broken, the damage is done. SRD has talked about how you also can't "fix" it...

In our own world, just imagine... "But officer, I already got caught speeding. The Law can't be broken again!"

[Mr. Broken]

I ask because that would make Linden just as guilty as Elena of breaking the law of death.

[SGuilfoyle1966]

Again, that presupposes things are the same.
Elena broke the law of death by calling Kevin back. Sunder broke the law of life bringing Hollian back to life.
So why is what Linden did any worse? It's both in one.
Well, They were born of the land. Covernant is from the outside. He IS the white gold, so he is the wild magic, not born or bound by ANY law, the wild magic that destroys peace, etc.
We still don't know all of what that means.

[Mr. Broken]

Im not saying that what Linden did was any more or less harmful, Im saying that it is just one more similarity between her and Elena.

[wayfriend]

Breaking the Law of Death, or the Law of Life, is not the same as breaking the speed limit.

The Laws were actually damaged - they don't function perfectly any more. The speed limit doesn't get actually damaged.

Both of the Laws were damaged, but they were not completely eradicated. Things are possible now, if you know how, and if you have the power. But things still die, and things that die remain dead, for the most part.

I think of it as a wall. The wall was damaged, and now there's a crack. For the most part, the wall still works, but if you know where the crack is, and if you can push hard enough, you can squeeze something through it.

So... the question is, did Linden damage anything when she resurrected TC, or did she merely take advantage of damage already done? Did she use an existing crack in the wall, or did she make a new one?

We know that after Elena brought back Kevin, dead people were coming back left and right. Foul used the dead in the war. The dead gathered in Andelain. That hole was pretty wide open. There's no evidence that the Law of Death was further damaged by all of this. Similarly, all of the time travel that the broken Laws now allow, while risky for other reasons, don't damage those Laws any further, either.

So there's plenty of precident for here for the case that Linden did not further damage the Law of Life, merely because she took advantage of it's broken state.

Also on Linden's side, is that we know Caerroil Wildwood, uber bastion of Law, supported her effort, and even gave her aid and material in her endeavor. The task was undertaken with Wildwood's lore etched into the Staff of Law. What was all that lore for, if it wasn't for executing this resurrection as Lawfully as possible?

My opinion is that Linden didn't do anything to damage any Laws by her actions here. She may have roused the Worm, she may have interfered with the Time Warden, she may have went against Covenant's specific request. But she didn't harm the Laws any more than they were already broken.

[Ur Dead]

Wayfriend:

Similarly, all of the time travel that the broken Laws now allow, while risky for other reasons, don't damage those Laws any further, either.

That part I find ambiguous, nothing stated that there was a law of restriction of time. Nor was there an event that broke time. Time still flows in the land on those whom are in the linear path.

Time is the Arch. To break time you would have to break the Arch. The Arch isn't broken because the world exists. So there may not be a Law of Time. The Arch is slowly being degraded by Joan ceasures. The Elohim, Esmer, Roger along with the croyel travel back and forth without damaging it. The Madoubt has traveled it. (her area of study) Only actions that causes paradox along the established history may cause it to bend or break. Depending on the actions of the paradox. And then it would have to be a major change to cause a complete collaspe. It would tend to flex and develop new histories then totally snap.

The Law od Death and Law of Life were broken. Only beings constrained by those laws were affected.

I don't believe that Linden and Elena are alike. Elena never faced her flaws where Linden was forced to see hers. Elena deluded herself that dead Kvein could re-reduce Foul. His lore was greater than any Lord of his time or in the future. But the Illearth Stone proved his undoing. Linden overcame most of her past to be effective against the Ravers and heal the Land. She never fully conquered her fears and they have been laying dormant for years. She was forced to face them again when translated back the second time. She has a confidance but still doubts her abilities. So she turns to the only person she can really trust. - Covenant.

The reoccuring phrase: "Remember, I'm dead" sounds throughout Runes and FR. Linden with her doubts does the only thing she can think of. Bring back Covenant. Make him alive and that makes sure he can not be manipulated-dismissed-controlled by other beings.(Foul being one)
Since TC was dead and part of the Arch, Linden power may have cause the Arch to so call "ring". She pulled the Timewarden from his position into the mortal world. That "ring" may be a wakeup call to the worm. That was the price to pay to get Covenant back and get his free willed consul.

That may have widen the crack in the Law of Life. She may not have awoken the worm if she pulled , lets say Kevin back to life. But she ended pulling a part of the Arch into the mortal word.

[Lordsfire]

However, let me remind everyone that in order for Linden's staff to be the first Staff, then there has to be an original timeline in which Berek had no Staff at all, until someone went back in time to change events and give Berek Linden's Staff.

Such a historical change would surely destroy the Arch of Time, however. Changing the history of the Old Lords and the New Lords from one where there was no Staff of Law (and hence no recovery by Drool, no summoning of Covenant) to one where there was, is a huuuuuuge change.

I think we learned pretty clearly in FR that there is no "original" timeline; everything that had happened in the legends from the first chronicles was simply the Theomach's cover-up of their journey in FR. Linden et al are part of the original timeline. If the staffs are indeed the same, then Berek had always been given Linden's staff--it's not something that happened at a later date, it's what always happened. The only nagging question (as has been mentioned already) is that of the metal heels, but I for one don't find it all that hard to believe that the staffs are the same, given everything else that has recently happened.

...now my head hurts

[wayfriend]

I think we learned pretty clearly in FR that there is no "original" timeline;

Sure there is. If history could not be changed, then there would be no danger of destroying the Arch. And if history can be changed, there must be a first version of it, before it is changed.

The Theomach "covered up" their journey because the original timeline did not have their journey in it. He worked to merge their changes in so that they would cause no damage. This presumes that there is a version of history that he knows about, and endeavors to match. That's the original timeline.

[Lordsfire]

I disagree.

"The Theomach 'covered up' their journey because the original timeline did not have their journey in it"
This is because he created the story which became part of the legend in the original chronicles. There was no damamge to be caused because that was the way it always had happened. The "cover story" that the Theomach comes up with is the *only* story, and which got handed down through the generations. We never hear of strangers from the past journeying to Berek's camp because, as far as he was concerned, that wasn't what happened.

It's made rather clear throughout the rest of the book that the Theomach has always been able to travel through time in some manner or another, but I don't see why you think he is trying to match a pre-existing version of history. The "version of history that he knows about" is simply the history of the Land, which he created during his *only* visit to that time and place with Linden.

Please let me know if that makes sense; I can try to clarify my points if necessary.

[Seppi2112]

I see your point Lords, but I think the crucial element is the preservation of the Arch, which as WF points out would be unneccessary if there were not an initial timeline to protect.

[Ur Dead]

I can't see that the original timeline was changed at all. It just well be the specific events that did occur at the time of Berek.

The Haruchai were not around to record those events mentality.
All is known of that time before FR is:
Berek was the champoin of a Queen.
Berek lost part of his hand during a battle. Where his name - half-handed is used.
Berek summoned the Fire Lions when he cried out for help. The Earth answered his call.
Berek created the First staff of Law and set a guardian.
Berek forms the High Lords.
Berek never see Revelstone created.

That is all that has been said about that time. There were no historians to write down eveything that happened.

It's like what two Kings died in 993 BC? Who were the doctors attending them or what did they do before that?

In FR, SRD wrote a section that clairifies what happened during that time. And only for a very short time within Berek's camp. Berek was fighting a war and he didn't have a entourage of writers to record what happens next.
By the time of Kevin's RoD a thousand years had passed.
Berek's exploits were legends back then or only partially known to his decendances.

So there isn't a need for speculation on this.
Issues would occur if Linden suddenly shows up in the first chronicles where it's established of Covenant actions. Like when TC was first talking to the Lords Council and showed them his ring then Linden suddenly appears out of nowhere and berates Prothall for doubting Thomas.
Or Linden meet Hile Troy and calls him Caer Carveral before Hile become the Warmark.

Now that is paradox.

[wayfriend]

Please let me know if that makes sense; I can try to clarify my points if necessary.

It makes sense. But it contains a self-contradiction.

If the presence of Linden, Roger, and Jeremiah in Berek's camp was "the way that it always had happend", then there would be no need to disguise them. If Linden had grabbed Berek by the collar and said "I am from the future!", then that would have be "what had always happened", and the Theomach's story that he created could have included that tale. We would have learned in Lord Foul's Bane that Berek was visited by a time-traveller who grabbed his collar and yelled in his face.

There's no reason to disguise Linden's presence AT ALL, unless there was a chance that she could change something so drastically that the stories heard in later years can't be reconciled with what happened.

Or why else would the Theomach be so interested in preserving a tale of events that no one, as yet, had ever heard?

[wayfriend]

Berek's exploits were legends back then or only partially known to his decendances.

So there isn't a need for speculation on this.

This is correct, but only because the Theomach was successful!!!!

Suppose Linden had slain Berek. The even that little bit that was known in the future would change. And that would break the Arch.

Ditto if Linden had talked Berek into being a firelionherder instead of a Lord. Or if Berek ended up so grateful to Linden that he named a stowndown after her. Or if she convinced Berek that Haruchai had to be slain on site, and he made this the Lords lore. Or if she told Berek exactly where white gold came from, and promised him that white gold would always save. Or that he could use the Staff of Law to summon a hero from another world who could defeat Foul.

Or if she did ANTHING else that WOULD have changed what people had come to know years later.

It was possible she could have done these things, or others. She may have even done it accidentally. The Theomach had a true job in making sure that nothing like that happened.

Don't think that because he succeeded that there was no danger.

[Ur Dead]

WF...I thunk we're on the same page with difeernt ways of telling it.

sand even if the speeling is dif-er-raunt.

[Fuzzy_Logic]

Wayfriend -- what if what Linden does is the "wat it always happened," and the Theomach's job is to make sure that it *still* happens "the way it always happened." As you mentioned, doing anything out of the script would brek the arch -- there's only one version of events, it's just that one can deviate from it by destroying the Arch.

[wayfriend]

Wayfriend -- what if what Linden does is the "wat it always happened," and the Theomach's job is to make sure that it *still* happens "the way it always happened." As you mentioned, doing anything out of the script would brek the arch -- there's only one version of events, it's just that one can deviate from it by destroying the Arch.

"one version" and "deviate" are contradictions here. If there's only one version, how can one deviate? If one can deviate, then there is a deviated-from version and a deviated-to-version.

Also "one version" and "create a paradox" are contradictions. A paradox consists of two versions which must both be true but which can't both be true. Therefore, "one version" is also in contradiction to the idea that the Arch can be endangered by time travel. Which the author has indicated is a real danger.

[Fuzzy_Logic]

Wayfriend -- one "can" deviate, but only by breaking the Arch. Since the Arch did not break, what happened was what always happened.

[wayfriend]

Ah.

But what about small deviations that don't break the Arch?