ufotable's Fate/Stay Night

I'd actually say Gilgamesh is the worst. He was specifically sent Enkidu to humiliate him (a mere man defeating a 2/3 god) and to remind him to not be tyrannical over his subjects, but by the events of FZ and FSN he's gone right back to thinking mortals are dirt. Man just doesn't learn his lesson.

Gilgamesh was an amazing king, I don't know what you're talking about.

... in the original Epic of Gilgamesh he's a serial rapist (first night and all that) and a tyrant who lords over his people, till the gods send Enkidu to humiliate him and bring him to heel.

Does the Nasuverse change any of this then?

edited 27th Jan '18 10:22:23 AM by Sigilbreaker26

No

It’s after the epic he decides to devote himself to his job and rule over his people

He was still a rapist, sadist, tyrant in the beginning and tyrant in the end, but that end was unlimited prosperity to Uruk

Yeah, that was what I said. He cleaned up his act but apparently by FZ and FSN Aesop Amnesia has set in because he's an asshole again.

More like not forgetting but drawing a very unfortunate conclusion from living among modern humanity

What was Caster Gil's deal again?

The wise benevolent philosopher king

Yeah, that happened. And then he met Enkidu, Enkidu died, he went on his quest for the herb of immortality and came back as a wise benevolent king who was the super best and ruled over a bunch of really nice people.

And it's not that he has Aesop Amnesia, it's just that his Archer form is pre great king stage. You want Caster Gil for that.

Well that would explain a lot, but we were talking about the three guys at the table. Of those three, pre-Great King Gilgamesh is easily the worst, then Iskendar, then Saber.

Nah, he's still better than Iskandar. He was still an effective ruler who helped save his people from the tyranny of the gods.

Not yet he hadn't, first the gods had to save the people from the tyranny of Gilgamesh.

No, he was already doing that part.

I have read a theory that the reason Gilgamesh seems to suffer Aesop Amnesia is that he's disgusted at what humanity has become in modern times and that's causing him to fall back on his old ways.

Not that that excuses his attitude, but it might provide some kind of explanation.

Worth noting that his Fate/Extra incarnation (in which he doesn't interact with anyone other than the few humans in the Moon Cell) is rather more positive look at his character (though he's still impossibly self-centered).

All of that is actually true.

Reason Zero Gil did not advocate genocide despite being disgusted with modernity is because he was only an observer.

Being incarnated in his mind gives him permission to enact it because he is now again part of humanity and its only king

Alexander the Great was a complicated guy. To really understand him, we have to place ourselves in his world, the world of 2300 years ago. During this time-period, everyone was subject to the concept of arete (the highest form of excellence or the ultimate potential within people) and those who belonged to royalty - or to the elite in general - were expected to prove it over and over again.

In Alexander's case, he was bred as a warrior-king, so his business was war and conquest. If he's going to be a conqueror, he was heavily incentivized to outdo all those who came before him. Not only that, but he's been told since childhood that he's a direct descendant to both Achilles (from his mothers side) and Heracles (from his fathers). This meant that he was expected to either match or surpass the deeds of his legendary ancestors. I can barely imagine the psychological tole this has on a child.

Now, how he went about in achieving this insurmountable task is where I agree with others that what Alexander did was monstrous. Plain and simple. He raped an entire continent for personal glory.

edited 27th Jan '18 7:20:08 PM by Arachosia

That is an excessive simplification of what the conquering process involved. Alexander built a ton of cities, tried to combine the Greek and Persian cultures, and was reasonably merciful (unless you were Theban). It wasn't like this was some random war he just started for no reason; the Persians were the ones who originally tried to conquer the Greeks. That the Macedonians eventually ended up being the ones who struck back was more or less just business of the day.

edited 27th Jan '18 7:57:14 PM by Sigilbreaker26

Nice input

Conquering is never going to be nice

Look, was Alexander the equivalent of an Adolf Hitler? No. But every time someone thwarted his will, he unleashed the full fury of his Macedonian army upon the innocent populace. Like you mentioned, it happened to Thebes (after they refused to rejoin the Pan-Hellenic league, he slaughtered a good portion of the citizenry and sold the rest into slavery).

It happened to the kingdoms of Tyre and Giza (he waged two sieges on these cities, back to back, threatening mass-starvation. And when the latter obliged to open its gates, he unleashed horror on its people. He even tied the king of Giza to his chariot while he dragged his body across the city while still alive; to emulate his hero, Achilles).

And he initiated a campaign of terrorism in the eastern provinces (like Bactria) of the Persian empire (he would slaughter the entire male population of whole villages suspected of being sympathetic to Darius' cause).

edited 27th Jan '18 8:04:40 PM by Arachosia

At worst, a lot of this was standard practice at the time (except for some of the more grandiose stuff). It's not like he let his conquests go to waste, however; his empire building, even taking into account how it split into three following his death, revolutionised trade, culture, language... it's easier to name the things he didn't have a massive impact on in the area. Heck, just the city of Alexandria by itself which would create a giant outpouring of knowledge.

Alexander the Great is much like Genghis Khan in this regard. Messy conquests that paved the way for the advance of trade routes, culture networks and dare I say it, the forward march of civilisation. At worst, it's creative destruction.

I totally understand that sentiment, but at the same time, I think its easy for us to say all those deaths were necessary casualties for the betterment of civilization. I have a feeling we wouldn't be singing the same tune if we were put in their place. Also, while the consequences of empires do produce more advanced trade routes and weave wider webs of culture networks, don't ever be fooled that that was the intention. Empires have subjugated millions of people across history for their own selfish gain. It's like that famous quote: "Rome creates a wasteland and calls it peace".

Dark: That's not a theory. If Gil incarnates he goes from being a fairly passive observer to feeling that he needs to fix the problems he sees.

Gil is affected by the world he's summoned in.

A bullshit excuse to excuse Gil's actions in the original FSN.

Oh, but it's actually our faults he's such an asshole? Really?

And this is when I acknowledge that the main Fate universe is a very much a Crapsack World.

It's not like the world is actually worse than ancient Uruk, really. It's just more populated. Gil is honestly just being a prick and blaming the human world for being different now, and if we're supposed to think he's right then that's the dumbest thing to come out of Fate (and it has a lot of competition).