Untitled
I am just wondering but did the name prisoner of charum hakkor come from Cryptum or was it just a speculative type name?#@lof@n1234-Forgive My English 20:33, 12 March 2011 (EST)
- It's referred to as the "prisoner of Charum Hakkor" on at least one occasion, so it isn't an entirely speculative name. However, it is simply called "the prisoner" throughout most of the novel. --"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson 20:46, 12 March 2011 (EST)
I think it would be more accurate to say "Unknown precursor", "Unknown Precursor prisoner" or something like that. But the name itself would be a huge spoiler to anybody who has not yet read Halo: Cryptum. Vegerot (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2011 (EST)!!
Rename?
What if we renamed it to the Timeless One?#@lof@n1234-Forgive My English 21:26, 12 March 2011 (EST)
Support I think it would be a good change! Vegerot (talk) 21:55, 12 March 2011 (EST)!!!
Support name makes more sense#@lof@n1234-Forgive My English 22:17, 12 March 2011 (EST)
Support - Since it's the only title that explicitly refers to the Precursor himself. "Prisoner of Charum Hakkor" sounds a little generic, imo. / / STRYKER [ COM | LOG/M | LOG/S | AAU/HUM ] 20:36, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
Merge with Gravemind?
Since the Timeless One was revealed to be the Gravemind in Primordium, should they be merged together? Guest-10:15, 7 January 2012 (EST)
- No, since he himself was still a Precursor at one point.--Spartacus Talk • Contribs
- Also, we don't know how the Graveminds' minds work, if each one is a different "being" (best word I can think of), or if every time there's a Gravemind it's the same one coming back. If we learn for sure it's always the same, then we could merge them. Alex T Snow 18:59, 7 January 2012 (EST)
- I see what you both are getting at, yet from what it appears to be, this Gravemind is the same one from the games, due to the dialog that he/it says, mainly in Halo 3. In fact, the Proto-Gravemind page seems to support this:
- Also, we don't know how the Graveminds' minds work, if each one is a different "being" (best word I can think of), or if every time there's a Gravemind it's the same one coming back. If we learn for sure it's always the same, then we could merge them. Alex T Snow 18:59, 7 January 2012 (EST)
"Only two Graveminds are known to have ever been created; however, they seem to have the same memories, since the Gravemind present during the Human-Covenant War possessed detailed knowledge concerning the Forerunner-Flood War and even described the actions of the previous Gravemind during that time period as if they were his own. In essence, because it shares all the knowledge of the previous Gravemind and considers them both to be the same being, the Gravemind of the games is the Gravemind that fought the Forerunners, simply been reborn from another Proto-Gravemind."
But I do agree with you both that a lot about the Gravemind is still very mysterious. But from what it appears to be, these two Graveminds seem to be the same, if I'm correct. Guest-23:01, 10 January 2012 (EST)
- Support I think we should merge these pages, as now the Flood and Precursors are synonymous. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot (talk) 21:24, 14 January 2012 (EST)
- ...a novel that's coming out in another year, what more do you need to know? It already clearly states that Precursors and Flood are used interchangeably. Now it's just a matter of merging the articles and what the new name is gonna be. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot (talk) 01:19, 15 January 2012 (EST)!
- Support - I agree with Vegerot. It's already been stated. It's not like Bear is going to change that in the next bookJac0bBau3r1995 01:35, 17 January 2012 (EST)
- Give Talk:Precursor a look please.--Spartacus Talk • Contribs
Neutral - While I acknowledge that the Flood consciousness is essentially a single collective and thus there are no real individuals, this particular Gravemind has so many names and biographical information exclusive to it in particular that it's almost a character of its own by a more conventional definition. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 08:56, 3 February 2012 (EST)
- Exactly, which is why we should merge the two pages, so it can be its own character/page. (or so it says in the sacred caves) Vegerot! 10:09, 3 February 2012 (EST)!
Oppose By the way, in primordium, it is mentioned that ten graveminds have formed solely on installation 07 before didact's arrival, so there may be far more than two graveminds. however, during the timeless one and didact's conversation, although the flood and precursors were mentioned to be at least synonymous in some sense, a few points suggest otherwise. first, the precursors were once defeated by the forerunners, yet the forerunners, with even more advanced technology, lost to the flood. second, the precursors were determined to destroy forerunners only because they were decided to be unfit as inheritors of the mantle and were mentioned to be "creating elsewhere" in the conversation, not the case if the precursors were graveminds. also, no hints of precursor technology were present in the flood invasions. thus i would suggest that instead of being the same entity, the precursors gave the timeless one the ability to function also as a gravemind, controlling the flood, and to carry out the ancient precursor plans while the other precursors create elsewhere, possibly in other galaxies. thus i oppose the merging of "gravemind" and "precursor".
Original Prison Site
After finishing Primordium, I noticed a piece of easily missed but potentially important information. On pages 226 and 236, in the conversation between Forthencho and Yprin Yprikushma, there is the fact that the Primordial had not originally been on Charum Hakkor, but rather on an unspecified planetoid before it was transported to that Precursor world.
Though not described in much detail, the planetoid was described as being somewhat small, as well as damaged, as though by immolation, as well as being constructed by ancient intelligences, perhaps ancient Forerunners.
Given what is now known about the Primordial, the Precursors, and the Flood, perhaps this should be mentioned in the article.
On another note, could this planetoid be a location that plays some role in the Reclaimer Trilogy? Given that the planetoid is somewhat small and damaged, it is probably not the Forerunner facility that will be encountered in Halo 4, but could be another location that is visited.
--Exalted Obliteration 00:51, 11 January 2012 (EST)
- That sounds very interesting, could it have something to do with this? Alex T Snow 21:08, 11 January 2012 (EST)
- Doubt it, what ever was in Solitary broke out, The Primordial was is a stasis pod.ArchedThunder 15:41, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
Name
Since we know now that "The Timeless One" is the Gravemind, do you think the nickname of "Timeless" came from the fact that all the Graveminds are really the same one, in the sense that they have all of the same knowledge, etc? Meaning, even if they kill him (which they did) the same one will still come back again, making it "Timeless". Alex T Snow 21:37, 14 January 2012 (EST)
You bring up a point, plus in Halo 3, the Gravemind says that he/it is a 'Timeless chorus.' There discussing this in the "Merge with Gravemind" topic I made above. :) Guest-23:28, 15 January 2012 (EST)
Rename again.
He is never actually referred to as The Timeless One and all throughout Primordium he is called The Primordial. I think we should change the name to reflect this.ArchedThunder 23:04, 9 March 2012 (EST)
- Oppose -He was referred to as the Timeless One in the glossary that appeared on Halo Waypoint before the release of Cryptum.--Spartacus Talk • Contribs
- Support - have to agree with ArchedThunder. It's the name most often used to refer to it in Primordium, and is the closest to an "official" description of just what it is. "Timeless One" is at most a makeshift codename or nickname, like Primordial, but the latter has the advantage of being less colloquial and more recent. -- Specops306 Autocrat Qur'a 'Morhek 06:20, 10 March 2012 (EST)
Merge this article with LF.Xx.3273 Flood Super Cell
It's become apparent that the Primordial and the LF.Xx.3273 Flood Super Cell are one in the same. So it only makes sense that the articles are merged. ADinoSupremacist
- This article is talking about a specific Precursor character, not a type of Flood form.--File:Colonel Grade One.png|20px]] Col. Spartacus Talk Page Contributions Contact 16:11, 31 March 2012 (EDT)
- I agree with Spartacus. This article is clearly talking about a specific individual. The other clearly refers to a "cell type," not an individual. I'm removing the merge template.--
Rusty - 112 17:02, 31 March 2012 (EDT)
- I agree with Spartacus. This article is clearly talking about a specific individual. The other clearly refers to a "cell type," not an individual. I'm removing the merge template.--
Concept Art
In a thread on Halo Waypoint, I found some links to concept art of the Primordial.
The source is just Halo Wikia, I have no idea whether these images were leaked or not. Anyhow, the point of creating this topic is that I'm a little unfamiliar with Halopedia's leaked content policies. I was just skeptical about posting them since Halo Wikia has these images already and we don't, so I assumed there was a reason they weren't posted.
Also, discussion about the actual images anyone? I think this was a little different from my perception of the Primordial. It seems too...macho. It almost reminds me of a really beefy grunt.--File:PENGUIN4.gif|15px]]FluffyEmoPenguin(ice quack!) 13:46, 26 January 2013 (EST)
They aren't official concept art, I believe they were both done by fans. ProphetofTruth (talk) 13:52, 26 January 2013 (EST)
Once a Precursor, then a Gravemind?
Isn't it possible, maybe even probable, that the Primordial, when encountered by Ancient Humanity and the Ur-Didact, was still just a Precursor? The description in Cryptum does not match the description in Primordium (as this page makes note of). Halo Silentium tells that some Precursors went into hybernation (Silentium, pages 174, 181-182). One of these was found on the edge of the Galaxy, having been there for 9 million years (Silentium, page 173). Why would this being already be a Gravemind when the Flood was an accidental side-effect of some Precursors turning to dust? I think it is more logical to conclude that the Primordial was the last Precursor, and later merged with the Flood when brought aboard Installation 07.Toa Freak (talk) 20:25, 15 July 2013 (EDT)
- This is actually very likely. Like you said, the being's description changes significantly between Cryptum and Primordium, and it is not a stretch to assume it "upgraded" itself to become one with the Flood like the other former Precursors after its relocation on Installation 07. A quote on Silentium pages 181-182 basically spells it out that the Primordial was originally a Precursor (that is, in their pre-Flood form): "We were not then powerful enough to erase all evidence of the Precursors, to destroy their star roads and citadels and other artifacts. And so we left at least one Precursor behind, to live out dreams of vengeance and hatred, to lay down plans in cold and darkness at the heart of a lost asteroid-over millions of years." --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 01:32, 16 July 2013 (EDT)
Flood template
Since the Primordial is considered a Gravemind, should it be added to the "Flood" template? Or is it too early to categorize it as part of the Flood? Lautrec of Carim |contribs| 03:56, 20 September 2016 (EDT)