Not tyranny, just luxury, a tyrant is someone who seek happines himself at the cost of the happines of his subjects, like charles chaplin once said in the great dictator: a dictator frees himself and enslaves his people, while what he is saying is that a king should be an icon, someone that others would wish to be more like. Saber says a king should serve his kingdom, rider says he a king should inspire his kingdom.
It’s two different philosophies on leadership, Artoria believes the ruler should be an example for her men to live up to, where as Iskander believes a ruler is someone who should be admired and envied. Iskander unites people through their base emotions, a unity of hearts that never wavers, whereas artoria unites them through the idealism of the mind.
@@idiom2805 To be fair Rider didn't fail. His kingdom fell apart after he died. Since everyone wanted his kingdom. He didn't die due to betrayal but of sickness..
Arturia's main flaw is she's too... reasonable. In other words, her heart is like a sponge. She cannot just spit in the face of someone who gainsays her, like Iskander just did. In other words, all Arturia needs is some Grail-extracted "confidence". Yes, Arturia Alter. That power can harden such a heart.
Kings have different perception in life In iskandar pov it is meant to conquer For arthuria her pov is to be symbolic For gilgamesh he just does what he wants but in his caster form he leads his kingdom but he also doesn't care about his subjects unless they earned some of his respext
And none of them is completely right or wrong either. They have different perspective showing how massive of a position being a king is, be it the power, the burden, the responsibility.
@@GilangRamadhan-03 but let's face it, most pople would like a person to be king if they are the subject in their order:Caster Gil>Artoria>Iskandar> Archer Gil.
A king is not inherently any different from his people. However, he is more than them. A king should be more than anyone else, he should excel more than anyone else, he should be more human than anyone else
"And just like a normal human, the king should forget to state the terms of his obituary decently and have his men fight each other like savages to claim the ownership of his empire."
Basically: don't kill yourselfs because its going to save the world, kill the Guy whose going to end the world, don't act like a normal person even If you're a king, act like a king even If you're a normal person. Stop being stupid and think If thats ACTUALY going to help. If you do that, you are not Just a martyr, you'll be a hero
And yet IRL 95% of all kings are greedy, selfish, and lazy pigs that end up sapping away at their countries vitality and resources until they are dead. From either natural causes, or public execution
@@JamesSchulte not only king but any leader of nation (democratic , oligarchy , tyranny or monarchy) is most of the time greedy , selfish too pit themselves over the nation the govern , is that in more tyrannical nations is easier too do it
What I love about this conversation is that all three Kings are the same in that they cannot accept the world as it is. Gilgamesh believes he is still entitled to everything in the world. Iskandar died young, and wants another chance to conquer again. And Artoria wants to undo a mistake from her past. None of them can see that the world has moved beyond them. Therefore they must move on as well if they are to ever know peace. EMIYA was right. Being a Heroic Spirit isn’t some noble thing. It’s a curse....all it means is that these people that were once alive could not accept their end, and are cursed to walk the earth until they do.
And we take that curse further because they'll never be able to. Idk if it's canon, but at the end of Fate Stay/night we see artoria standing in the middle of a battle field, the bodies of friends and foe all around her while she loses herself in her grief. She whispers that she promises that she will save them. So basically, even when they lose the grail traps them in their worst fears and as such their greed for the grail will never end.
@@junesmind7325 Fun times had by all. Although, I do think I recall something about Artoria being a bit of an exception in that regard. From my understanding, and if I'm wrong I would greatly appreciate a correction, Artoria made a deal with the world as she was dying at Camlann, on that same hill covered in bodies. Technically, I think that she's supposed to actually be a "human servant" so to speak, which is why she experiences a few limitations in both Zero and Stay/Night, but still has many of the attributes of a servant. And so, every time she dies or is otherwise desummoned, she returns to that same hill, at the exact moment she made the deal. Of course, the bit about Archer returning to his Reality Marble either breaks the theory or has its own reasons, I'm not sure, so if I'm incorrect please do inform me and explain, I require the knowledges.
If you think about it Gilgamesh still owns everything in the world everything in the world is just a copy of his original and it keeps growing his down fall is his superiority complex that’s one of the reasons he lost to Shirou that’s why caster Gilgamesh is better then archer after what he experienced he had learned more
I love this take. I always argued saber and iskandar were wrong but I never noticed how they all revolve around their personal vision of what the world is. Nice comment
no iskandar doesn't want to conquer again.he want to become human and enjoy life. after he saw the knowledge from the present that earth is round .he realize he is goal is immposible. but like he said he wont regret .
Lol, you and the 81 people who liked this comment are idiots. Kiritsugu would HATE Rider even more than Artoria. Remember his talk about war being hell, and how so-called "heroes" only lead people to that hell? Rider outright caused deaths of millions of people in his conquests.
Three variants for kingship. One is selfishness--gilgamesh The second is Ambition--Iskandar And the third is duty--Artoria Kingship is the pinnacle of leadership...and in part, the pinnacle of a human; to inspire loyalty in not just a handful of people, but a whole nation. Time is the true judge of who becomes king, whether it be to grow and prosper, to expand and conquer, or defend and preserve.
Very good choice of words. None of these ideologies are inherently wrong. Even a selfish king can be a just king. He can WANT him people to prosper because that is equivalent to a prosperous nation. And to that point, time is truly the wisest answer of all. Each of these paths can lead a nation to ruin or to its glory, and it all depends on the king himself.
I vibe with both of them. A king must be an icon to their people, someone they aspire to be as Iskandar says. But they must also serve their people and country first and foremost, like Artoria did.
@@tameoregano5006 no he's humble. Archer gilgamesh is from before the death of enkidu while Caster gilgamesh is after the events of the epic of Gilgamesh.
It does a great job explaining the man he was in life. A man who would shower his people, even the most humble one’s who just joined his kingdom, with prosperity and camaraderie; greeting his freshly conquered subjects like old friends. Yet to those who resisted his rule he would leave nothing but ashes in his wake, their wives and children sold into slavery. When he visited new lands he sampled all they had to offer. Women, food, alcohol and culture without restraint (to the point where once he accidentally destroyed a beautiful temple in a drunken stupor). When he found the body of his worthy foe Darius, he leapt from Bucephalus, draped his cape over the body and carried him from the battlefield, crying as if he had lost a brother. And when he caught his foe’s murderer, he had him tied to several bent trees and released them to tear his body to pieces. He truly embodied the extreme of all things, good and evil.
Bro most quotes Shirou says are the best for proof “people die if they are killed” and “just because you are correct doesn’t mean you’re right” also “When you have a birthday you celebrate being born”
Saber: *Preaches sacrifice and selflessness* Rider: *Give a good speech about why one must be selfish for both themselves and their people* Gilgamesh: I called dips on the universe bitch
I definitely agree with him. In the sense of excess of every quality. Because a king must be the most benevolent yet also the most ruthless. For the people to love and revere him. No kingdom can be ruled with just an iron hand or a velvet glove. Either one robs the people of their spirit or the other robs the kingship of his swords. A king needs to be the most merciful and the most merciless in his rulings. This is what I got from him.
This is why people deserve the likes of Stalin, Hitler and every other dictator. Y'all will eat anything up if the one who says it is charismatic enough.
@@vicount3944 nah. Dictatorship and monarchy aren't the same. Because the age of kingship is long gone. The times have changed. The people don't recognize a king anymore. And I'm not making a case against it either. I made an observation on which ideology fits a "king" best. If the nation was under a king. No matter what these dictators do, they won't be recognized king. Because the Era of kings is gone. Therefore no charisma or ideology of a king is needed. Same way a thousand year ago, you couldn't have made a case for complete and pure equality across the board for men, women and every race. It's a change too different for the ever moving machine called society at the time. My point is, if there WAS a kings Era, that ideology wud serve a KINGDOM best. Doesn't mean I'm saying a KINGDOM is the best form of a system of structure.
@@duesx_demon nah. Alexander was lucky he died early. Or else he would've been remembered the way Nero or most roman emperors were. His way in Fate is obviously not a good way, because that's how the worst roman emperors ruled and we have plenty examples to know this. The best of them were not loud mouthed and good only for warfare the way he is.
@@vicount3944 I don't care for Alexander. I care for the ideology. And my point is that it makes sense to me. Why such an ideology may be the best one for a king. Putting it into work is a different matter. You or me can never say they implemented such ideologies down to the core. We will never know. My point was, the balance of both extremes made a good point to me.
@@duesx_demon you can't balance extremes. That literally goes against the definition. There's a reason why the best kings are those you don't have movies or famous stories about. Because a good king is boring.
One king tried to set an example to follow, but too great was it for common people to achieve. The other tried to lead a life worth envying, and aspiring to, but he created greed, jealousy, and envy. Both are the same result, the destruction of their kingdom, but different methods.
A king is wise, but cut throat. Able to protect and inspire. But willing to commit evil to save his people. But most of all, a king must look past the present to see the future
To any who would look to Alexander with admiration, remember this. He was indeed greedier than all others. He obtained much of the then known world. But despite all he claimed for his people, he failed to protect *any* of it. Once he fell, his empire scattered like ash. He never insured that his empire would remain strong after he was gone. He was a marvelous conquerer, but fundamentally failed what makes a good, governing King. The success of the country and its people. He has no right to stand above Artoria.
@@aejayamir3306 I don't mean to sound like a pseud, but most of them are idiots who are unknowingly being manipulated and would probably be the nameless, faceless, exploited underlings that these so called "conquerors" would use and throw away without a second thought in real life. Charisma really is something, don't you think?
They are literally both wrong and right, it's annoying to see most of the comments only siding with rider and belittling saber? Just because he makes a good point and the music starts in the background doesn't mean everything he says is necessarily right lmao
It’s emotional manipulation at its most naked, and the conversation they have is much more even in the LN/manga. That is, Saber is not made into a trembling child, while triumphant music blares over Rider’s every word.
@@Yomo_Kontabi perhaps it is because Artoria wants to use the Grail to change her past which is the fate of her kingdom and she deeply regret the fall of her kingdom, while Iskandar did not deeply regret the fall of his kingdom.
@@aaronlimeuchin7352 and those idiots pretend if alaya and Gaia don't exist even if Saber somehow succeeded the timeline would become a lost belt and vanish and in the case of kiritsugu he is essentially trying to brainwash alaya the grail isn't omnipotent enough to influence her in any way as is the case of EMIYA otherwise he would be trying figure out a away to make his wish without the grail corrupting it
This is why Gil commends Iskandar what makes a king? They are not gods whom we worship but ordinary people as such they must better at human empathy a king doesn't save it's nation it leads them he doesn't hide there downfall but laments it as such Iskandar and Gilgamesh are good example of kings
Gilgamesh is not "ordinary". There's a reason why he calls everyone "mongrel". Gil is above everyone, gods and men alike. That is why he is "king". Gil appreciates arguments from Saber and Alex alike, but he knows he's above both of them. That is why he throws Alex' words about "dreamers" back in his face at the end of Zero.
What it is to be a king? I am no king, I was unaware of my own blindness... Seeker of fire, coveter of the throne... What do you see in the flames?... I, too, sought fire, once. With fire, they say, a true king can harness the curse. A lie. But I knew no better... Seeker of fire, you know not the depths of Dark within you. It grows deeper still, the more flame you covet... Seeker of fire, coveter of the throne, Seeker of fire, deliverer of crowns, seek adversity... Seek strength... The rest... Will follow
He is right what man would actually aspire to be a saint, that's not a life you're supposed to choose for yourself but staying true despite what the world throws at you. After all, most of the saints died horrible deaths and most of the remainder lived hard lives of constant work rarely to be appreciated widely until after their deaths
@@hcook1023 I didn't say anything about being a saint, being a good person means sticking to what's right regardless of what happens to you, and that is absolutely an inspiration, if it's not to you, then that's probably because you're a selfish as$hole like rider is and so it seems worthless to you.
@@wiswc A saint isnt a good person. A saint is a saint. Good people are like you and me. A bit of evil but alot more good. Few saints ever existed/exist. And most are only acknowledge once they inevitably pass. In my faith its said that these people are the first to go, they are too good for this world.
This scene and the scene in the crown where Mary of Teck explains the purpose of a monarch are two different viewpoints but easily explain a King's purpose and meaning as a symbol for people to look up to and aspire towards. It's very inspirational
One of the most Gen Urobuchi writing. Making King Arthur who ruled for decades, participated in dozens of battles against fates and odds, a king who sacrificed his normalcy for his people, in a frontline with it's people, a king that even his enemies admired him, a beloved King of England got fcking shit on by a Conquerer like Iskandar like some weak and naive girl is just fcking irritating. King Arthur who is an inspirations of many rulers and what most people ought to be. A fake King who differs from Fate Stay Night, who is a strong, brave and loyal that even said to Shirou that just for obtaining the Holy Grail he will deemed anything even him as unnecessary bcus he is trying to wake her up from so called ideal, even her master can't move her about what she believed in for her nation. And someone more unnecessary to her than Shirou can makes her speechless like weak-willed kid. If you're talking about Saber's nation fall, it was fated to be destroyed but at least she prevented it from happening for a decades and bcus some betrayal from some knights made it falls.
As someone who really likes history, I found this scene really off putting by the illusion that Iskandar won the debate. In theory Iskandar, Gilgamesh and Saber are all right and wrong in their philosophies, they are the shining examples of why and how the type of ruler they are is an effective leader and where they fail. But, why, dear god, did Urobuchi have to fanboy the charismatic tyrant who had never ruled a day in his life? I get that Urobuchi needed to underline how Saber's idealism failed but he forgot one really REALLY important thing about King Arthur's lore. Rome was ruled by a bunch of bargain bin Gilgameshs and every charismatic asshole with an army had been barging in and wrecking the place long before she had been born. Saber knew these types of rulers, she debated with the types of rulers, she went to war and given the chance she killed them. So, if you want to point out Saber's currently very vulnerable to criticism because Camlann is still so fresh on her mind, knock yourself out, I agree with you. But, King Arthur was after Iskandar's time and Saber read the classics. She knew Iskandar had never ruled shit, he was a charismatic general but he had never stayed still long enough to rule a day in his life. She had an entire laundry list of the failings of each type of ruler, except her own. So, I don't think she could've won the debate but, man, couldn't Urobuchi have allowed her to go down swinging?
They are all dictators just giving their philosophies on the screen. I think he was right to call out idealism in this scene esp with a respected figure like Alexander who mind you even in today's society admire. So he did win a debate in the end
@@lakiog1938 My argument isn't against Iskandar winning the debate, it's that Urobuchi targeted Saber's weak points and pointedly crippled her position rather than let her defend herself and have a real debate.
@@PlushieBastet To be fsir from what I have seen she was standing on a sandy ground, especially since no one actively ever went against her ideal before, she clearly has good mean but when it comes to explain how or why her choice in life was better ? Her, who died bitterly snd full of regret on a hill of corpses, with an end arguably worse than most of those ruler she looked down onto as greedy fool, thinking she would be better ? She had little argument to give aside from her belief in doing the right thing, and even that she was no more as sure of her own words as before that mess Sure Iskandar's ruling was pretty garbage from other standpoints, but he did what he wanted to do, he inspired others to be king ehen he is gone, to be better than him, stronger than him, more powerful than he ever was, improving the people in the process and never leaving anyone behind, sure it's no better than having a long wheel roll down a steep road, eventually it will crash and even break, but he was aware of it more than anyone else, and he coyld have prolonged it for much longer if he bothered assigning a next king, but he didn't, staying on the wheel until the very end and dyinf In peace having enjoyed life as he wanted, leaving a strong legacy for anyone strong enough to take it
Saber is more of a hero than a king tbh which isn’t necessary a bad thing in my point of view a hero means more to me personally that’s why I fw with her character and her ideology it may not be the best king material but it’s definitely the best heroic material out of all the other servants it’s someone you just want to root for to the end
Iskandar called her for what she is a "Martyr". Hero is a role dripping with hypocrisy which is more correctly associated with Lancer Artoria who coldly massacred people with the justification of "saving the good of humanity". Martyr - Does good things for the good of others even if it means sacrificing themselves. Hero - A hypocrite who preaches good whilst not doing good themselves. But hey, you don't have to agree with me since that's just my opinion
@Chin Crimson not really a fun fact like Where did you read that she order her wife excution cause she want a relationship? And you want breaking a law or something but how the hell did you know the law back in that time (a fictional time even)? Like 2 people in the round table that want to kill her as in Lancelot and Morded.
@Chin Crimson I thought you meant Saber breaking the law which i not really know where that come from? Did you mean her wife? Agravain in the Fate version at first want to mess with Saber but later he loved his king (not in the romantic way mind you). He did exposed Lancelot scandal but that is because he think Saber's wife (don't really remember her name) does not worthy enough for his king. He was not really tried to kill or actively betrayed Artoria or anything like that. Well that what i remember anyway but i am 100% certain that the dude is very loyal to Artoria at the end of his life.
People see moments like this and while good it is also flawed, people don't envy a king for their personality or their words or their deeds, people admire a king because they admire the power. In most people the desire to be free in every way is oppressed to make room for others, in that way modern man is a slave, and a hermit is just as powerful as a king. A king like a hermit only has themselves to answer to, and can express true freedom. Yet you must awaken at a specific time and go perform a task for a set period of time to earn wages to pay for goods and services and get taxed and most of those taxes you will personally not benefit from at most stages of your life. We all wish to be free of burden, but our most precious asset, time, is burdened.
i love arturia and iskanders philosophies eqully and i love that the show fairly presents all of these differing ideologies without telling you outright what is the best. gen urobuchis finest work
I’ve never seen Fate, but it seems that Magi also poses a similar question, with Sinbad in particular taking a stance close to the dude talking in red text.
A king without greed is even worse than a figurehead! Saber, you said you would martyr yourself for your ideals. In life, you must have been a pure saint. A proud and noble figure, at least. But who can truly admire the the rought and thorny path a martyr must take? Who actually dreams of such an ending?! A king , must be greedier than any other. He must laugh more loudly and rage for much longer. and embody the very extreme of all things, good and evil. That is why his retainers envy his very existence and adore him aswell . And why the flames of aspiration, to be as the king is, can burn within his people.
Despite all the praise this scene gets, if people watch fate, they will realize that urobuchi just wanted to do his classic "break an idealistic character." if saber was what she was actually like in fate, she would not have put up with this shit.
@@ouranioszefs5931 She was very different what are you on about. Zero Saber is made to be Uro’s archetypical naive girl character, who extolls idealism so that the cast can throughly debunk her with “facts and logic.” FSN Saber was a Welsh warlord that ruled during one of Briton’s bloodiest periods of conflict. Who has seen far more, and far bloodier wars than even someone like Kiritsugu with his mere 10 years of assassination. Difference them is night and day, don’t believe me, read the fate route of the vn, or Garden of Avalon.
They're not wrong in many ways. In fact, all three, Artoria, Iskandar, and even Gilgamesh are right in their way of ruling. But even their way possess flaws. Artoria wants to serve and shoulder all the burdens of her people yes. But at the cost of sheltering them, and like what Iskandar had said, she only saved them, but not lead them. speaking of Iskandar. He wants to embody all what his people wants, to be their paragon and idol that they could look up to and try to aspire to be. But that can dangerously become arrogance, and that arrogance can make the people reach out to things that they themselves could never truly reach, and falling as a result. And Gilgamesh lives by the fact that he is the supreme ruler of all, but not just that. He wants all of his people to try and embody that same strength he has reached, or at least in a similar manner. He wants individuals to push past their limits, and be strong. But this strong ruling over the weak mindset can easily devolve into chaos and disaster without moderation All in all. Each of them are correct in their ways of being a king. But they're not totally perfect nor absolute
I know it has been a year, but Gilgamesh also states he doesn't so much have faith in humanity, but he has faith in humanity's ability to create and persevere. In his Caster form, we see him as a king who believes in the "spirit" of Uruk being with its people, not the city, he believes in them wanting to carry on their King's will
It is amazing this monologue, because he is so right and so wrong about her. It is inconceivable to him (and to her)that she was exactly that to her knights. Her purity and nobility was the envy of them all. As stalwart and unapproachable as she was, every knight, from mordred to Lancelot, aspired to be as honorable and proud as she
Well, he is right about the part of she never being able to actually guide her people and letting herself being blinded of her ideals to the point of being alone. Her whole chatacter was about realising how much she messed up with her flawed ideals and deciding to move forward. Indeed, he doesn't believe that a "noble" King is possible since he just wasn't like that. And she was literally a King in the middle ages, so ofc people would hear a Leader that follows the the values of knighthood from that era. But her people did get unsatisfied with her rule and her behaviour and she never did nothing about it cuz she believed she kept being a noble and perfect King until the end. So he is right about her not being a good example of a leader at the end. But later in the show he just accepts he can't really criticize her either cuz he also failes as a King at the end by not being able to mantain his kingdom's safety after his death despite following his own ideals of what a King was. Ironically both of their kingships had the same length.
@@gogonx7983 Not really? A big part of Saber's character is to let go of her wish (to redo the sword of selection in order to choose a more appropriate person as the King) and her regrets because she did everything to delay Britain's inevitable doom. She was one of, if not the best King Britain could have hoped for during this period. Sorry if I'm being rude but did you really watch Fate/Stay Night? Because your post is kinda wrong (about Saber at least).
@@poppiwp4193 I mean, she herself had to evaluate her own priorities in the Church basement scene, she has to remember back when she pulled the sword to remember what she actually wanted to do. That being simply protecting the people of Britain no matter how it ur ed out in the end. That's beacuse she lost that focus and instead focused on delivering a peaceful end for Britain and reject any kind of disaster. She searched for that "perfect" ending just following the sight of Merlin's prophesy (the one He showed her, in which she only saw herself being the one with a bitter and awful death). As she focused on that prophesy, she then lost herself in a self-sacrifical way in which she didn't even bithered about how the people saw her or how many were not happy with her cuz she convinced herself that as long as she kept being hated then Britain would have more chance to have a good ending. And as how GoA shows us, it turned out to be the other way, the discontent of the people turned against her and she was shocked to see that the bitter end she saw for herself was shared to the whole nation. Even her own Interlude (don't remeber which one, the one where travels to Fuyuki in fire) she herlsef states that she failed to recognize many and ignored many people. But she is still satisfies with the reason, the wish she tried to accomplish even if that didn't meant the salvation for her people. That's on point with her development in the Basement in Fate route. She realized she didn't need the grail to erase her past nor save Britain, cuz erasing those things would be erasing her own life, and that *anything she wishes to change* she has to do it in the presrnt and not the past. She accepts her past cuz at the end even if she failed to understand her peiple and she failed to save Britain, she still fulfilled her oiriginal oath, and that was protecting Britain and fighting for her people even if she loses everything. She didn't save Britain, she didn't save the people, but she at least fought to end for what she thought was right, and that's the only thing she can be proud of. That doesn't mean she didn't made any mistake nor that she cannot be criticized and it doesn't imply she was the best ever. She just lost herself in her ideals but still that's doesn't mean she have to hate herself nor erase the past. That is, in hand, what Iskandar originally was trying to tell her in this scene (this video skipped it). Heroic Spirits are the result of their life, therefore Servant should be able to accept their past. Iskandar himself admits in this scene that he is aware and accepts the fact that he didn't really govern the territories he conquered, that he was just a greedy man and that his Kingdom was destroyed after his death for his own actions, but he accepts it, he accepts all of that and doesn't have a problem with it. He can be criticized a LOT and in retrospective he may not have been a good leader at all, but he is still a true King. Saber is the same, she made mistake, she ignored many, she faild to recognize many, she lose herself in her ideals, but she is still a King. Both of them had failed kingships, but are able to be proud of something from it. For Iskandar is his bonds, for Saber is the oath she defended until the end. Just cuz they get to accept their past doesn't mean they were the best kind of leaders out there or that they didn't mess up.
But she wouldn't be able to live happily... You will have a "perfect" king that you can't relate to A king that doesn't aspire you, just makes things look harder because if how good he is A real king should be relatable not a perfect saint
If you want to see the extreme applications of Artoria’s rule, the kindgship that she leads that distances herself to her people, watch the Camelot Singularity movie
@@mohamedelhediissa289 Bitch, I don't give a shit. If I can live my life in peace, why should I care? The king is not your friend, so whether you can relate to them doesn't matter. The king doesn't need to inspire you whatsoever, again, because your life is set whether you like it or not. You people need to watch less anime and look up what a commoner's life was like back then.
She doesn't have any right to criticize him when canonly a lot of her people came to grew tired of her to the point of accepting the first chance of rebellion they had.
@@AnNguyen-es4kx Well yes, I have read the vn where every Saber flashback reminds us that she was abandoned by her own Kingdom or that a lot of her knights never really accepted her or that even inside the RT a lot of her knights had conditional loyalty wtih her. Or Zero that basically tells us that she never relly managed to inspire her people from heart, that she was never able to "conquer" their hearts and instead lost herself in the ideal of being the "lonely inhuman king" to the point that nobody wanted to follow her in that path. Or Apocrypha (ln) that show us that the discontent with Artoria's Kingship was so big that the people literally accepted Mordred as the "face" of the rebellion as long as that gave them more reason to rebell against the King. And Mordred was not exactly the embodiment of the "good and noble" knight either, even less with how detailed the ln goes about the kind of things he did, but people didn't care as long that they have a face for the rebellion. Or even in Garden of Avalon where we are told that the Knights were so discontent with her that a lot of them quit their service in Camelot and the ones that came from foreign land returned to them cuz they didn't want to server her. I don't know man, but the idea of a big part of her kingdom being dissatisfied with her or growing up tired of her behavior has been pretty clear and consistent sonce the vn. So, yeah, not only I dod watch fate, I have done a lot more than that.
@@hijojou9385 Wasn't the VN s main point is to point out how she is the ideal perfection of a king to the point where she become flawed? The knights remain loyal to her, Lancelot who grieved over his transactions and deeply desire punishment from his liege. Agravain who felt none is more fitting to lead than his king. Or Mordred, who admire her more than anything else, and was thus more devastated than the perceived betrayal via refusal of the crown. To group the RT with "conditional" loyalty is like grouping Shirou with "the end justify the means", which doesn't make sense, and Mordred's army mostly consists of foreign allies such as the Saxons and Morgan's pawn, once again doesn't mean the majority are in with it Zero is told from the viewpoint of Artoria, and how she perceive her rule, entirely subjective to the person who wish to have another king replace her. Apocrypha is told by Mordred, who is manipulated from birth by her mother and forced to endure lies after lies and promises about kingship Objectively, we can agree she isn't the best leader who inspire her people the same way Rider did, but the idea of her people getting tired of the same person who defend against their enemy and ensure peace and prosperity in their kingdom is quite unlikely and, if I may be frank, bullshit. They obviously feel distanced to their undefeatable, perfect king, but not once had they thought her undeserving of the throne, much less rebelling against her for that
@@AnNguyen-es4kx Now don't put words on my mouth or your own interpretation of things. If we go by what is the message of the vn, then the whole point for saber there was to let go, the vn basically makes her accept the fact that it doesn't matter what she did or what kind of King she was, the only thing that matters is that she fulfilled that role, it doesn't matter how flawed or how many mistakes she did, she was the King and she shouldn't erase that, At the end she herself accepts that there is no point on changing the past, and she accepts it, accepts her flawed rule, accepts her mistakes, cuz at the end she is only happy that she defended her ideals regardless of what was the result of those ideals, cuz the main reason why she became King was for others and nor herself, that her rule was not the salvation she desired nor the salvarion for her people, she is fine with it and lets go. Don't blame me for the KotRT being described as being conditionally loyal to Saber, those are Nasu's words, not mine, that most of them never really were lotal and only stayed with her as long as she produced results, of you don't like it then argue with the og author. Go read all of Saber's monologues in her route and check it yourself. Lancelot desired punishment not because he was sorry for what he did *against* Artoria, he just thought he deserved to be punished cuz he did many vile things, but in GoA itself we are told that even before doing all of that he rejected Artoria, he rejected the kind of person she was, he rejected her ideals and her behavior, he literally fears that this reject would slowly become madness, and at the end that's what it was, and the fact that she forgave him made it all worse, he didn't comprehend anything about her and rejected everything she desired, he is not sorry for his betrayal, he was sorry for the things he did after that, but the very idea of not agreeing with Saber and even comparing her with an inhuman monster like Vortigern was there, way before he killed Gawain's siblings. Agravain is a walking contradiction who despite deeply trusting the "cold and inhumane King" and his just lead, all of his loyalty crumbed the moment he learned that the King was a woman. That's why he was the most loyal to the Lion King, cuz the Lion King was the embodiment of Artoria's cold behavior but put into an extreme that even she never did, and her very presence was higher than a mere "gender", so Agravin finally found the perfect King he wanted to serve. Mordred is just Mordred, of you read Apocrypha's ln you know that he not only had an accelerated development via Morgan's magic to the point that despite looking average in stature he was basically just a mere child in mentality, and Morgan groomed him into "knowing he would defeat King Arthur ans become the next King", then she made him enter the RT where she knew Mordred would end up addoring the King instead, by the ln's words Mordred was a living contradiction, someone that both loved the king a hated him, someone that wanted to serve under the King and at the same time usurp the throne from him. Mordred is a complicated situation of someone that both was Loyal to the King and never ever was from the begining, and it wasn't Morgan's grooming alone, tbanks to fgo we know that Mordred himself had these opinions by choice, he didn't hate the ling cuz Morgan said so, he didn't love the King cuz Morgan expected so, and he didn't lead the rebellion cuz Morgan told him to, all of that were his own choices and he was aware of the consequences, but he still chose to do all of that. By the time that the rebellion happened (when Artoria was already in Rome and not in Nritian at the moment) she already solved the problem of the invaders and the saxons cuz she already defeated them, so no, Mordred's army wasn't made of saxons or foreign soldiers, ot was made from people and knights from Britain, the fsn vn literally told us the Kingdom was in civil war and Artoria had to slay the people she swore to protect and kill fellow knights who opposed her, it was a battle of Britain against Britain, so, nope, no extra people here, the narrative Fate uses makes pretty clear that the kingdom itself decided to oppose Artoria, and Mordred herself in Apocrypha said that her army was just as big as Artoria's was, and that the only reason why its passed on story for being a "small" army was cuz they were defeated and none of them survived to tell others how things really happened. Zero is not entirely told on Saber's pov, actually, and its funny cuz this same scene in the ln was actually in Irisviel's pov, it was completely on her pov, cuz she represented us, complete outsiders that doesn't belong to he category of a "King", so Saber trembling and Gil + Iskandar accusing her was narrated by Irisviel, and she herself notes that there was a moment when Artoria as much as she wished to make a comeback she could bring herself to answer Iskandar cuz she saw like "a little child that realized all the things she did wrong" in Irisviel's pov, she even offered to let Saber rest on her lap while she repressed her tears. Also, as I said, Mordred was his own, anyone could thing that everything he did was Morgan's doing, but the reality is that, no, he felt the same rage against Arthur that Morgan had cuz he decided to, he followed Arthur cuz he decided to and he ended up rebelling against the King cuz he desired to, if you say that Mordred's pov is inaccurate cuz of Morgan's influence, then you are denying one of the most important cores of Mordred's narrative, that it was all his decision, if he actually was just a puppet with no ideals of hos own and choices of hosnown he would have never become an heroic spirit to begin with. And idk why did I even took the time to say all of this when, once again, people of Britain getting tired of Artoria is canon, it has been in the vn for ages, it has been expanded a lot over time and is something that is continuously being brought up and a core part of Britain's story, so idk why you think this is a matter of conception or interpretation, when is literally there. And at the end, my original comment is not innacurate, she doesn't have any right to criticize Iskandar's way of ruling, just like how as much as she hates Gil she also has stated many times that he is indeed a true king.
@@AnNguyen-es4kx "Ideal perfection of a king to the point where she become flawed" are you even hearing yourself? Does it make sense to you? Which one is it? Was she flawed or she wasn't? You cannot just play with adjectives like that just to make Artoria sound better. A leader isolating themselves and not doing anything about it sounds like a virtue to you?
This isn't about good governance at all but about human nature , its motivation and living a fulfilling life. His empire fell SO WHAT that wasn't the point. If you want perfect governance let machines run our political system, well saber is kind of robotic. She was a tool for the people and like a tool she got discarded. The point was to live the best fulfilling life possible and through his own example of doing so he inspired others to do the same . To do something impossible together and as result not only him but his followers too grew stronger. He knew his corrupt nature but so what everyone has it, in fact , that only makes him more relatable to his followers. We are flawed and we will always be as mortal however we can also try to be better and trying is the point to be alive that's why to be the best you can be strive for the impossible. He lived a fulfilling life and his subjects did also, unlike saber and her sad bunch. Rider indeed win the argument his rule created heroes that lived a fulfilling life whilst saber's was only lived through the mirage of a false idol, false because it didn't led her to the expected result. She was an overbearing figure to them she stayed true to her ideal but what about the other aspects of humanity, people's greed and all, she can't expect that ''jesus'' standard from everybody right? Especially when they have been protected by her, they have no incentive to change because their perfect king will resolve whatever is threatening them. How can they feel self-imprtance when they can't get whatsoever close to that impossible standard whilst that standard excpect of them that they do but alsoprotects them due to their inanbility. See the dangerous dynamic and how that could result in a catastrophe but saber ignored it ''to follow her own petty ideals''. You can clearly see what Imean in their noble fantasms. One stays alone on the battlefield depraved of the very thing she dedicated herself to serve, her dead soldiers, holding the mere dreams of her people they enrusted onto her and the other is next to an army of heroes that merely used their leader as a catalyst to become their ideal selves, true heroes. This is my website if you want go see it manabook.org/
"Who can admire the rough and thorny life of a martyr? Who actually dreams of such an ending?" "-and why the flames of aspiration, to he just as the king is, can burn within his people." Rider's lines here illustrate the core of his point. Nobody wants to he a martyr. Nobody wants to live a hard life, filles with pain, void of pleasure, and then die a horrible death in hopes of the chance it would inspire others. We all want to be successful. To have wealth, or power or just plain old happiness. Everyone here came for Rider, hes the favorite character of Fate Zero, his point is made all more powerful because hes so damn likeable in his personality, hes entirely right. People dream of being happy, not of being a sacrifice. Saber may have been a legendary king, but she never lead her people. She left behind a kingdom who wanted nothing of her life in their own. Nobody wanted to take up her mantle, knowing what it held.
Neither of them are right or wrong. There must be an in-between; in helping others, you help yourselves and in helping yourselves, you can help others. An equality of both selflessness and self care. Self care is often misinterpreted as selfishness, but perhaps that is what we need: just a little to put food in our stomachs, cash in our pockets, and time for slumber. Selflessness will always be there too for when we support a friend, partake in charity/business, and being considerate of another person's struggles in life. The only thing that is unfair and inhumane is becoming a martyr; sacrificing ourselves and/or others will rob us and others of what is both wanted and needed.
Gil died of age, saber died in the battle of camlann after her people and mordred started a rebellion, and iskandar died of poison. Yeah saber is definitely the one who screwed up in her end. Riders may have Ended with its own destruction On his death but at least it didn’t cause him to die from it
@@drakonocturnesensei6945 Same with Iscander's. He drunk himself to death/got posioned after his boyfriend died, and then Macedonia fell instantly. I don't remember if they ever mention Hephaestion in Fate, but they do mention that his kingdom fell instantly.
@@brandonvalenti8401 His kingdom still fell after he died and not during his death and not because of his own people rebelling against Him personally. Saber is a good knight but she failed in connecting with her people which was her downfall and Camelot’s downfall.
Choosing to keep his name as the Persian 'Iskandar' rather than the Greek 'Alexander' was a really clever decision, since as the King of Conquerors, he likely took pride in the name his defeated enemies knew him by as he subjugated them. Even after death, he is known by his last great act of conquest - just as he would have wanted.
In context both accomplished what they needed but in completely different ways, both lived in turbulent times full of chaos and brought their people together under a single banner. But while Camelot shone during Arthur's life and fell with him, Iskandar's empire lasted for hundreds of years, even if that stability meant the suffering of countless other people. It's impossible to say which way is better as a whole but we can infer who benefits more in either.
I would not follow Iskandar. Following him condemns you to a life of excess and that kind of thing is never good. Besides, I wouldn't become a soldier to go to unnecessary wars and risk my life for nothing relevant beyond more battles and deaths. I prefer someone like Arturia as a Ruler, despite all his failures and lack of humanity, who at least has a compelling reason to fight. His ideal of protecting his people is something I can relate to because I also want to protect my family in every possible way from any danger.
Yeah, not really the point of the video, and if anything both are equally wrong. Iskandar's idiology is about inspiring men to reach their own maximum goal more than everything and the context in which he ruled allowed this to roll because it was an era of territory expansion. Being a soldier was the best most men could aspire and having one of your sons send to war was the honor of families. Since invading other countries was the main source of wealth and resources for most countries. In this sense his ideology was to create armies not by men forced to war but by men that genuinely wanted to explore, to reach other places, to be their best versions, their maximum ones. His mistake was forgetting that the dream of exploring and conquering its a very expensive one in sources. Soon or later the army would run out of food and resources and fatigue would hit, and since everyone is human they have to stop. But since everyone did their best he is happy, since he Valtrex the bonds with his men along the way, even more than the mythical sea he wanted to reach, and that's why he volres the understanding of subjects more than anything. His men didn't see him as an unreachable entity, but as someone they could become as well. But, ofc, if human nature is the basis of what he preach, then the negative things will also arise. The end of his kingdom was due to his men trying to live their maximum and reach their own goals, even if it meant to destroy Iskandar's kingdom. Artoria's idea of what a Ruler is is someone who doesn't let emotions take over and that always make every decision as correct and fast possible, and treats everyone as equally as posible. But she also believed in the inhuman nature of the role of a "king" as something almost divine than something close to a human. That's why isolation is something she seek on purpose. Nasu said Saber Alter represents the perfect King for Artoria, someone that even in life she didn't manage to become. And what are Salter's main traits? Cold emotions and full determination. Someone that is ready to risk everything and everyone for the sake of a better "place". Someone that is ready to be hated. Someone that uses their men as means to reach and end. Almost robotical. Although flawed this very same mindset was what saved Britain from the invasions, phantasmal beasts and enemies, but that's it. Since she was her own Achilles' heel for her own end. Since she isolated herself and nobody could understand the "perfect and cold king" people soon suspected her ability to govern, after all, it's only normal that human would reject someone that isn't human. Iskandar believes that a King must be as human and flawed as possible, and be an example and role of model to their men. Of course, this is both for the good and the bad things. So if greed and evilness is part of human nature, the is natural that when people live at their fullles they will crash against this negative things. On the other hand Artoria believes in the inhuman king, someone that is more akin to a God than anything else. The superhuman king that can do anything to protect the country but as a price his men will not follow him anymore, since they will fear the King. Both fail for their own weight.
why are mad tyrant leaders so damn likable erwin smith,isklander, tanya the devil, whitebeard, lelouch askelad i dont know why by these type of leaders always interest me more than the typical good ones
A king is to be the ideal which his people want to become be brave just like the king be cunning just like the king be rich just like the king conquer the world just like the king
If you play FGO and completed LB1 you can view that specific section (it’s where you get stranded in the labyrinth) in your materials list. Here’s part of his ideology: “Being called a king means you gotta think about what’ll happen after you die. Even if I’m not around, you guys can already manage something on your own now, can’t you? How to hunt, how to hide, and above all, how to live together in large numbers. I should’ve hammered all of these into you already.”
This was a discussion between a jesuit priest and a Japanese oficial in 16 th century japan - propably at Toyotomi Hideyoshi's time. - Tokugawa Ieasu never traded so many words with them. he gained their trust for help win the war, then kicked them out of the country, saying they were an insane and dangerous cult, worshiping death and pain, and cynically imposing those beliefs on others. - If you want more insight on these kinds of Shinto-Budist vs christian debates, check Martin Scorcese movie "Silence"
The funny thing is, if he went alongside Christianity, Japanese wouldn't have went isolationist, would have traded and would regularly sail to Rome, send missionaries to all neighboring islands to convert the natives. This increased naval presence would lead Japan probably to discover Australia earlier and most likely it would be a Japanese continent instead of British.
Incredible how Alexander the great would have really think that. The king of gods, Zeus, does whatever he wants by greed or lust, he is the most (evil or good). But a christian is following the path of a god who made himself flesh to suffer and sacrifice himself (or his son depending on how you interprete the trinity but the point stands) as a martyr just like Artoria. Incredible anime, I wish more people could see the philosophy behind the story, especially in the encounter between the three kings, one who take after a god of greed, one who take after a god of self sacrifice, and one who thinks he's a god himself. Again, brilliant anime
@@ontothemartin4684 She calls them out on being tyrants. They retort by calling her rule dumb and her ideals dumb. Instead of bringing up how his entire “rule” was just warring and that the second he stopped he died and his empire that his father built was fractured immediately. Or pointing out how Gilgamesh was a shit king until he literally had a exitential crisis. She doesn’t actually say anything. She doesn’t defend her position, she doesn’t argue against their means of kingship, and both Gilgamesh and Islander team up on her instead of going after each other as well. Hell there could of been an argument of chosen kings vs made kings. Because Gilgamesh and Artoria were chosen by a higher power to be rulers while Islander was born into it and had to prove it. It was written to show Saber was wrong. That’s my issue.
@@craxnor In that sense the only chose king was Gilgamesh, cuz despite Saber being "predilected" to be king, her backstory in Stay Night show us she wasn't granted her position. She was born into a time of civil wars in Britian and the main "king" among all the feudal lords was Vortigern, who terrorized Britain. That was the point of her ten years travel through Britian while she went with the alias of the "Knight Princess", she built her fame, her influence, her contacts and allies throughout 10 years before finally defeating Vortirgern, and THAT'S when she was crowned King of Britain. On the othet hand, yes, the point of this whole discussion in this scene was to make Saber be the one wrong, but it was not about government, cuz the core of the dicussion is that it actually doesn't matter who was a better king, but their ideals. Gil and Iskandar ultimately criticize her cuz she wants to redo her past, and once she tries to defend her position that's when Iskandar pulls his discourse of what is a king. The whole point of this discussion was to show that Saber had flawed ideals and not a real King mentality. The same would happen later once Gil literally throws back Iskandar's words to him when he is killed. If anything, at the end of Zero the "winner" of this discussion was Gilgamesh who ironically can brag about his inhuman views cuz he managed to change his Kingdom for the better (even if the state he is summoned into doesn't really help to show it), while Iskandar and Saber were declared as the ones with flawed ideals and flawed governments that ended up in the fall down of their own kingdoms.
@@ontothemartin4684 This scene right here, The Banquet of the Kings, is one the MANY reasons 95% of the Fate Fandom(that's not a bunch of anime only secondaries) despises Fate Zero and Gen Urobutchi. Hell, EVEN Nasu himself hent to say that Zero is not cannon to the Original VN and is just a alternate version of events, since it doesn't match the events described both by Artoria about the 4th War, and gets further buried by Garden of Avalon. Just further proof that the only thing Urobutchi managed to do right was Kamen Rider Gaim.
When you look at it that's exactly what Alexander did by serving his people in giving them the ambition to look beyond the borders of both their own aspirations as well as the geographical borders of their nations. A king should be one who inspires his people to go beyond their limits while caring for those who cannot or have fallen short before urging them on forward. Throughout human history the people have always made leaps and bounds when individuals of singular drive and character arise and make a name for themselves. The tragedy of the story is that in time the people will grow jealous and envious of these beings and what began as a desire to follow them to the lands beyond the horizon will turn to a desire to see such journeys fail when they themselves fall short of such goals and choose to pull everyone else back into the muck where they have fallen. The time of Kings has come and gone, but that does not mean the future has forgotten them.
When the guy is actually making a case for tyranny and it's inspiring as hell 😳
He radiates dad energy
@@haydencrawford8552 I always thought rider/iskandar radiated cool uncle energy tbh.
Not tyranny, just luxury, a tyrant is someone who seek happines himself at the cost of the happines of his subjects, like charles chaplin once said in the great dictator: a dictator frees himself and enslaves his people, while what he is saying is that a king should be an icon, someone that others would wish to be more like. Saber says a king should serve his kingdom, rider says he a king should inspire his kingdom.
take a glance at the opis mutiny speech by the actual alexander, it shows that his greed is for his people and not himself.
@@13basses this is iskandar not Alexander
This version is the persian interpretation of alexander called iskandar not his westerner version
It’s two different philosophies on leadership, Artoria believes the ruler should be an example for her men to live up to, where as Iskander believes a ruler is someone who should be admired and envied. Iskander unites people through their base emotions, a unity of hearts that never wavers, whereas artoria unites them through the idealism of the mind.
And both failed miserably.
Which makes this scene all the better for me.
@@idiom2805 true enough, while each had their own answer neither were totally correct
@@idiom2805 To be fair Rider didn't fail. His kingdom fell apart after he died. Since everyone wanted his kingdom. He didn't die due to betrayal but of sickness..
@@zillagrilla315 Microbial assassins.
Arturia's main flaw is she's too... reasonable. In other words, her heart is like a sponge. She cannot just spit in the face of someone who gainsays her, like Iskander just did. In other words, all Arturia needs is some Grail-extracted "confidence". Yes, Arturia Alter. That power can harden such a heart.
This scene really sparks the question "What does it mean to be a king?" making it the best scene in all of Fate
nah
What sets kings apart is the better question
Kings have different perception in life
In iskandar pov it is meant to conquer
For arthuria her pov is to be symbolic
For gilgamesh he just does what he wants but in his caster form he leads his kingdom but he also doesn't care about his subjects unless they earned some of his respext
And none of them is completely right or wrong either. They have different perspective showing how massive of a position being a king is, be it the power, the burden, the responsibility.
@@GilangRamadhan-03 but let's face it, most pople would like a person to be king if they are the subject in their order:Caster Gil>Artoria>Iskandar> Archer Gil.
A king is not inherently any different from his people. However, he is more than them. A king should be more than anyone else, he should excel more than anyone else, he should be more human than anyone else
"And just like a normal human, the king should forget to state the terms of his obituary decently and have his men fight each other like savages to claim the ownership of his empire."
Basically: don't kill yourselfs because its going to save the world, kill the Guy whose going to end the world, don't act like a normal person even If you're a king, act like a king even If you're a normal person. Stop being stupid and think If thats ACTUALY going to help. If you do that, you are not Just a martyr, you'll be a hero
He should be more human than anyone else. Agreed.
And yet IRL 95% of all kings are greedy, selfish, and lazy pigs that end up sapping away at their countries vitality and resources until they are dead. From either natural causes, or public execution
@@JamesSchulte not only king but any leader of nation (democratic , oligarchy , tyranny or monarchy) is most of the time greedy , selfish too pit themselves over the nation the govern , is that in more tyrannical nations is easier too do it
What I love about this conversation is that all three Kings are the same in that they cannot accept the world as it is. Gilgamesh believes he is still entitled to everything in the world. Iskandar died young, and wants another chance to conquer again. And Artoria wants to undo a mistake from her past. None of them can see that the world has moved beyond them. Therefore they must move on as well if they are to ever know peace. EMIYA was right. Being a Heroic Spirit isn’t some noble thing. It’s a curse....all it means is that these people that were once alive could not accept their end, and are cursed to walk the earth until they do.
And we take that curse further because they'll never be able to. Idk if it's canon, but at the end of Fate Stay/night we see artoria standing in the middle of a battle field, the bodies of friends and foe all around her while she loses herself in her grief. She whispers that she promises that she will save them. So basically, even when they lose the grail traps them in their worst fears and as such their greed for the grail will never end.
@@junesmind7325 Fun times had by all. Although, I do think I recall something about Artoria being a bit of an exception in that regard. From my understanding, and if I'm wrong I would greatly appreciate a correction, Artoria made a deal with the world as she was dying at Camlann, on that same hill covered in bodies. Technically, I think that she's supposed to actually be a "human servant" so to speak, which is why she experiences a few limitations in both Zero and Stay/Night, but still has many of the attributes of a servant. And so, every time she dies or is otherwise desummoned, she returns to that same hill, at the exact moment she made the deal. Of course, the bit about Archer returning to his Reality Marble either breaks the theory or has its own reasons, I'm not sure, so if I'm incorrect please do inform me and explain, I require the knowledges.
If you think about it Gilgamesh still owns everything in the world everything in the world is just a copy of his original and it keeps growing his down fall is his superiority complex that’s one of the reasons he lost to Shirou that’s why caster Gilgamesh is better then archer after what he experienced he had learned more
I love this take. I always argued saber and iskandar were wrong but I never noticed how they all revolve around their personal vision of what the world is. Nice comment
no iskandar doesn't want to conquer again.he want to become human and enjoy life. after he saw the knowledge from the present that earth is round .he realize he is goal is immposible. but like he said he wont regret .
"You I like."
-Kiritsugu Emiya towards Rider.
Lol, you and the 81 people who liked this comment are idiots. Kiritsugu would HATE Rider even more than Artoria. Remember his talk about war being hell, and how so-called "heroes" only lead people to that hell? Rider outright caused deaths of millions of people in his conquests.
I know that reference
@@vicount3944 woooosh
@@TheSteam02 Whatever the reference is, what Naoya said is right. You're r/wooosh the wrong person.
@@drazydark1736 the reference ua-cam.com/video/est5y27C0ms/v-deo.html where the line did happen in the parody he was actually referencing
Damn Iskanders voice sounds pretty damn similar to his subbed voice actor
Jamieson price never misses In his acting man you should take a look at more his work.
He's known for the roles of Garen from League of Legends, Bi Han or Noob Saibot in Mortal Kombat 9 and the announcer or the Zealots from Starcraft 2
Three variants for kingship.
One is selfishness--gilgamesh
The second is Ambition--Iskandar
And the third is duty--Artoria
Kingship is the pinnacle of leadership...and in part, the pinnacle of a human; to inspire loyalty in not just a handful of people, but a whole nation. Time is the true judge of who becomes king, whether it be to grow and prosper, to expand and conquer, or defend and preserve.
Very good choice of words. None of these ideologies are inherently wrong. Even a selfish king can be a just king. He can WANT him people to prosper because that is equivalent to a prosperous nation.
And to that point, time is truly the wisest answer of all. Each of these paths can lead a nation to ruin or to its glory, and it all depends on the king himself.
I vibe with both of them. A king must be an icon to their people, someone they aspire to be as Iskandar says. But they must also serve their people and country first and foremost, like Artoria did.
@Σά ββας and then we have caster gil
@@NugrohoAlif is Grand order Gil the same as this one?
@@tameoregano5006 no he's humble.
Archer gilgamesh is from before the death of enkidu while Caster gilgamesh is after the events of the epic of Gilgamesh.
@@SergioBocanegra Gil's character development is one of my favorites. He became selfless and laid back.
From all the anime i watched and all the quotes i’ve heard. This. Is. By far. The most impactful. Iskander is a man whom all men should aspire to be
Iskandar and pain both have impactful speeches. Iskandar "what is king" and pain "cycle of hatred".
It does a great job explaining the man he was in life. A man who would shower his people, even the most humble one’s who just joined his kingdom, with prosperity and camaraderie; greeting his freshly conquered subjects like old friends. Yet to those who resisted his rule he would leave nothing but ashes in his wake, their wives and children sold into slavery.
When he visited new lands he sampled all they had to offer. Women, food, alcohol and culture without restraint (to the point where once he accidentally destroyed a beautiful temple in a drunken stupor).
When he found the body of his worthy foe Darius, he leapt from Bucephalus, draped his cape over the body and carried him from the battlefield, crying as if he had lost a brother.
And when he caught his foe’s murderer, he had him tied to several bent trees and released them to tear his body to pieces.
He truly embodied the extreme of all things, good and evil.
Bro most quotes Shirou says are the best for proof “people die if they are killed” and “just because you are correct doesn’t mean you’re right” also “When you have a birthday you celebrate being born”
Greed and progression r different genius
Nah
He just represent part of what a king should be...
But he is imdeedore of a King than Saber.
Saber: *Preaches sacrifice and selflessness*
Rider: *Give a good speech about why one must be selfish for both themselves and their people*
Gilgamesh: I called dips on the universe bitch
Should Saber's be selflessness instead? She wasn't doing anything for her own benefit even knowing the tragic fate that awaited her
Basically, Gilgamesh is the diva of the three 😂😂
I definitely agree with him. In the sense of excess of every quality. Because a king must be the most benevolent yet also the most ruthless. For the people to love and revere him. No kingdom can be ruled with just an iron hand or a velvet glove. Either one robs the people of their spirit or the other robs the kingship of his swords. A king needs to be the most merciful and the most merciless in his rulings.
This is what I got from him.
This is why people deserve the likes of Stalin, Hitler and every other dictator.
Y'all will eat anything up if the one who says it is charismatic enough.
@@vicount3944 nah. Dictatorship and monarchy aren't the same. Because the age of kingship is long gone. The times have changed. The people don't recognize a king anymore. And I'm not making a case against it either. I made an observation on which ideology fits a "king" best. If the nation was under a king. No matter what these dictators do, they won't be recognized king. Because the Era of kings is gone. Therefore no charisma or ideology of a king is needed.
Same way a thousand year ago, you couldn't have made a case for complete and pure equality across the board for men, women and every race. It's a change too different for the ever moving machine called society at the time.
My point is, if there WAS a kings Era, that ideology wud serve a KINGDOM best. Doesn't mean I'm saying a KINGDOM is the best form of a system of structure.
@@duesx_demon nah. Alexander was lucky he died early. Or else he would've been remembered the way Nero or most roman emperors were.
His way in Fate is obviously not a good way, because that's how the worst roman emperors ruled and we have plenty examples to know this. The best of them were not loud mouthed and good only for warfare the way he is.
@@vicount3944 I don't care for Alexander. I care for the ideology. And my point is that it makes sense to me. Why such an ideology may be the best one for a king. Putting it into work is a different matter. You or me can never say they implemented such ideologies down to the core. We will never know. My point was, the balance of both extremes made a good point to me.
@@duesx_demon you can't balance extremes. That literally goes against the definition.
There's a reason why the best kings are those you don't have movies or famous stories about. Because a good king is boring.
"A king must be greedier than others, to laugh louder and to rage much longer."
So I guess I'm a king without land or subjects?
Same...
You are
and this.. is how i started loving iskandar.
One king tried to set an example to follow, but too great was it for common people to achieve.
The other tried to lead a life worth envying, and aspiring to, but he created greed, jealousy, and envy.
Both are the same result, the destruction of their kingdom, but different methods.
Both lacks each others strong point
A king is wise, but cut throat.
Able to protect and inspire. But willing to commit evil to save his people.
But most of all, a king must look past the present to see the future
I live by Rider’s words “embody the very extreme of all things”
"King of conquerors" the typography makes me think its conquerors king of instead though.
To any who would look to Alexander with admiration, remember this. He was indeed greedier than all others. He obtained much of the then known world. But despite all he claimed for his people, he failed to protect *any* of it. Once he fell, his empire scattered like ash. He never insured that his empire would remain strong after he was gone. He was a marvelous conquerer, but fundamentally failed what makes a good, governing King. The success of the country and its people. He has no right to stand above Artoria.
So basically to be a good king is to be a middle ground between both of them and basically be Gil post-mortem of his friend?
Conquest and governance are two very different tasks that require very different skill sets.
hes the king of conquerors not actually a king, he's called the king of conquerors because hes the best of the conquerors
@@mikedanielespeja6128 Yeah, basically.
@@symon9440 No no no, he was definitely a king. Granted, not by any traditional means, but he sure as hell ruled the world.
*America:* "They're both right, that's why I'm out."
Usa: why not become both?
Ussr and nazi germany and every other villian countries: silly usa you can't be both
USA:
@@accurategamer7085 there are no villian countries u ignorant fuck
"bro just be a fucking tyrant bro people admire it man"
A true masterpiece.
Damn, words can't describe how much I hate this scene in the anime
@@AnNguyen-es4kx right?? It feel so fucking one sided
People be saying its a great ideology clash but all I see is Artoria getting treated unfairly.
@@aejayamir3306 I don't mean to sound like a pseud, but most of them are idiots who are unknowingly being manipulated and would probably be the nameless, faceless, exploited underlings that these so called "conquerors" would use and throw away without a second thought in real life. Charisma really is something, don't you think?
Exactly it's so disgusting
"What is bravery without a dash of recklessness"
- Gough
They are literally both wrong and right, it's annoying to see most of the comments only siding with rider and belittling saber? Just because he makes a good point and the music starts in the background doesn't mean everything he says is necessarily right lmao
It’s emotional manipulation at its most naked, and the conversation they have is much more even in the LN/manga. That is, Saber is not made into a trembling child, while triumphant music blares over Rider’s every word.
@@DreamTraveller1 that's reassuring lol. I can't stand that part tbh
@@Yomo_Kontabi perhaps it is because Artoria wants to use the Grail to change her past which is the fate of her kingdom and she deeply regret the fall of her kingdom, while Iskandar did not deeply regret the fall of his kingdom.
@@aaronlimeuchin7352 and those idiots pretend if alaya and Gaia don't exist even if Saber somehow succeeded the timeline would become a lost belt and vanish and in the case of kiritsugu he is essentially trying to brainwash alaya the grail isn't omnipotent enough to influence her in any way as is the case of EMIYA otherwise he would be trying figure out a away to make his wish without the grail corrupting it
@@yashobantadash6462 they probably don’t know anything about grand order or the time locks like how should they know?
This episode was by far one of my favorite in all of anime history, the meeting and DISCUSSION of different ideologies.
This is why Gil commends Iskandar what makes a king? They are not gods whom we worship but ordinary people as such they must better at human empathy a king doesn't save it's nation it leads them he doesn't hide there downfall but laments it as such Iskandar and Gilgamesh are good example of kings
Gilgamesh is not "ordinary". There's a reason why he calls everyone "mongrel". Gil is above everyone, gods and men alike. That is why he is "king". Gil appreciates arguments from Saber and Alex alike, but he knows he's above both of them. That is why he throws Alex' words about "dreamers" back in his face at the end of Zero.
That how I see it after playing and watching the Babylonian arc of fgo
@@vicount3944 Gilgamesh is 2/3 god and 1/3 human
@@B0K0691 Yes, and? Gil is above both gods and men.
@@vicount3944 i agree
Mori Ogai: *A leader is both the head of the organization, and the organization's slave* (Bungou Stray Dogs Season 3 Ep 3)
What it is to be a king?
I am no king, I was unaware of my own blindness... Seeker of fire, coveter of the throne... What do you see in the flames?... I, too, sought fire, once. With fire, they say, a true king can harness the curse. A lie. But I knew no better... Seeker of fire, you know not the depths of Dark within you. It grows deeper still, the more flame you covet... Seeker of fire, coveter of the throne, Seeker of fire, deliverer of crowns, seek adversity... Seek strength... The rest... Will follow
He is right what man would actually aspire to be a saint, that's not a life you're supposed to choose for yourself but staying true despite what the world throws at you. After all, most of the saints died horrible deaths and most of the remainder lived hard lives of constant work rarely to be appreciated widely until after their deaths
It's called being a good person, you should try it
@@wiswc a saint is not an aspiration, having such is an automatic disqualify. You don't know you're in grace until you die
Never said good person
@@hcook1023 I didn't say anything about being a saint, being a good person means sticking to what's right regardless of what happens to you, and that is absolutely an inspiration, if it's not to you, then that's probably because you're a selfish as$hole like rider is and so it seems worthless to you.
@@wiswc A saint isnt a good person. A saint is a saint. Good people are like you and me. A bit of evil but alot more good. Few saints ever existed/exist. And most are only acknowledge once they inevitably pass.
In my faith its said that these people are the first to go, they are too good for this world.
This scene and the scene in the crown where Mary of Teck explains the purpose of a monarch are two different viewpoints but easily explain a King's purpose and meaning as a symbol for people to look up to and aspire towards. It's very inspirational
One of the most Gen Urobuchi writing. Making King Arthur who ruled for decades, participated in dozens of battles against fates and odds, a king who sacrificed his normalcy for his people, in a frontline with it's people, a king that even his enemies admired him, a beloved King of England got fcking shit on by a Conquerer like Iskandar like some weak and naive girl is just fcking irritating.
King Arthur who is an inspirations of many rulers and what most people ought to be. A fake King who differs from Fate Stay Night, who is a strong, brave and loyal that even said to Shirou that just for obtaining the Holy Grail he will deemed anything even him as unnecessary bcus he is trying to wake her up from so called ideal, even her master can't move her about what she believed in for her nation.
And someone more unnecessary to her than Shirou can makes her speechless like weak-willed kid.
If you're talking about Saber's nation fall, it was fated to be destroyed but at least she prevented it from happening for a decades and bcus some betrayal from some knights made it falls.
In the end they are both right in a way...
he became one of my favorite riders after this bro
astolfo still first
Thanks for Alexander for shut her up
It's been a few years and I come back to listen to this again.
As someone who really likes history, I found this scene really off putting by the illusion that Iskandar won the debate. In theory Iskandar, Gilgamesh and Saber are all right and wrong in their philosophies, they are the shining examples of why and how the type of ruler they are is an effective leader and where they fail. But, why, dear god, did Urobuchi have to fanboy the charismatic tyrant who had never ruled a day in his life?
I get that Urobuchi needed to underline how Saber's idealism failed but he forgot one really REALLY important thing about King Arthur's lore. Rome was ruled by a bunch of bargain bin Gilgameshs and every charismatic asshole with an army had been barging in and wrecking the place long before she had been born. Saber knew these types of rulers, she debated with the types of rulers, she went to war and given the chance she killed them.
So, if you want to point out Saber's currently very vulnerable to criticism because Camlann is still so fresh on her mind, knock yourself out, I agree with you. But, King Arthur was after Iskandar's time and Saber read the classics. She knew Iskandar had never ruled shit, he was a charismatic general but he had never stayed still long enough to rule a day in his life. She had an entire laundry list of the failings of each type of ruler, except her own. So, I don't think she could've won the debate but, man, couldn't Urobuchi have allowed her to go down swinging?
They are all dictators just giving their philosophies on the screen. I think he was right to call out idealism in this scene esp with a respected figure like Alexander who mind you even in today's society admire. So he did win a debate in the end
@@lakiog1938 My argument isn't against Iskandar winning the debate, it's that Urobuchi targeted Saber's weak points and pointedly crippled her position rather than let her defend herself and have a real debate.
@@PlushieBastet To be fsir from what I have seen she was standing on a sandy ground, especially since no one actively ever went against her ideal before, she clearly has good mean but when it comes to explain how or why her choice in life was better ? Her, who died bitterly snd full of regret on a hill of corpses, with an end arguably worse than most of those ruler she looked down onto as greedy fool, thinking she would be better ? She had little argument to give aside from her belief in doing the right thing, and even that she was no more as sure of her own words as before that mess
Sure Iskandar's ruling was pretty garbage from other standpoints, but he did what he wanted to do, he inspired others to be king ehen he is gone, to be better than him, stronger than him, more powerful than he ever was, improving the people in the process and never leaving anyone behind, sure it's no better than having a long wheel roll down a steep road, eventually it will crash and even break, but he was aware of it more than anyone else, and he coyld have prolonged it for much longer if he bothered assigning a next king, but he didn't, staying on the wheel until the very end and dyinf In peace having enjoyed life as he wanted, leaving a strong legacy for anyone strong enough to take it
I like how Richard is able to see this conversation in strange fake and essentially shoot down the notion that Artoria was 100% in the wrong
@@Wicker_at least she tries to be good, the selfish a$shole has no right to judge her
My favorite anime character ;w;
Got him np 2 in fgo with 10x roll
you would think it would be astolfo fro ur pfp
@@sanp2032 he is my second favorite
Saber is more of a hero than a king tbh which isn’t necessary a bad thing in my point of view a hero means more to me personally that’s why I fw with her character and her ideology it may not be the best king material but it’s definitely the best heroic material out of all the other servants it’s someone you just want to root for to the end
Iskandar called her for what she is a "Martyr". Hero is a role dripping with hypocrisy which is more correctly associated with Lancer Artoria who coldly massacred people with the justification of "saving the good of humanity".
Martyr - Does good things for the good of others even if it means sacrificing themselves.
Hero - A hypocrite who preaches good whilst not doing good themselves.
But hey, you don't have to agree with me since that's just my opinion
@@olsenfernandes3634 Don't cut yourself on that edge, fam. It's because of heroes like Lancer that Caster was defeated.
@Chin Crimson not really a fun fact like
Where did you read that she order her wife excution cause she want a relationship? And you want breaking a law or something but how the hell did you know the law back in that time (a fictional time even)?
Like 2 people in the round table that want to kill her as in Lancelot and Morded.
@Chin Crimson I thought you meant Saber breaking the law which i not really know where that come from? Did you mean her wife?
Agravain in the Fate version at first want to mess with Saber but later he loved his king (not in the romantic way mind you). He did exposed Lancelot scandal but that is because he think Saber's wife (don't really remember her name) does not worthy enough for his king. He was not really tried to kill or actively betrayed Artoria or anything like that. Well that what i remember anyway but i am 100% certain that the dude is very loyal to Artoria at the end of his life.
@Chin Crimson aiss, you brought a real world history?
Make more videos like this and you're channel will blow up. Absolutely beautiful video 🔥
People see moments like this and while good it is also flawed, people don't envy a king for their personality or their words or their deeds, people admire a king because they admire the power. In most people the desire to be free in every way is oppressed to make room for others, in that way modern man is a slave, and a hermit is just as powerful as a king. A king like a hermit only has themselves to answer to, and can express true freedom. Yet you must awaken at a specific time and go perform a task for a set period of time to earn wages to pay for goods and services and get taxed and most of those taxes you will personally not benefit from at most stages of your life. We all wish to be free of burden, but our most precious asset, time, is burdened.
Islander made me realise y I failed as a leader 1 year ago !!! Now I will strive to be more greedier and selfish than everyone else
yesssss
@@anti-mate407 kindness got me jack shit😂
actually i agree, unless you put your foot down and become a commanding presence, itll be really hard to lead
@@aniphoenix9474 yes being nice wont help
Rough world man
You are just doing it for survival
To not get buried I'm even ready to lose my emphathy
No one gives a shit so why do we
Thank you UA-cam algorythm.
No wonder I was sad when Alexander died. One of the best.
i love arturia and iskanders philosophies eqully and i love that the show fairly presents all of these differing ideologies without telling you outright what is the best. gen urobuchis finest work
I’ve never seen Fate, but it seems that Magi also poses a similar question, with Sinbad in particular taking a stance close to the dude talking in red text.
Bro i just want to know if this got a grade or crowd reaction what it was like lmao
This was dope !!!!
A king without greed is even worse than a figurehead! Saber, you said you would martyr yourself for your ideals. In life, you must have been a pure saint. A proud and noble figure, at least. But who can truly admire the the rought and thorny path a martyr must take? Who actually dreams of such an ending?! A king , must be greedier than any other. He must laugh more loudly and rage for much longer. and embody the very extreme of all things, good and evil. That is why his retainers envy his very existence and adore him aswell . And why the flames of aspiration, to be as the king is, can burn within his people.
Bro jist realised that this fits gilgamesh so much , especially given his full jorney
Iskandar and Itachi has some of my favorite quotes.
Despite all the praise this scene gets, if people watch fate, they will realize that urobuchi just wanted to do his classic "break an idealistic character." if saber was what she was actually like in fate, she would not have put up with this shit.
She wouldn't have at all and it sucks that this was people's first introduction to Artoria since they now have the wrong view of her character
@@whateverwhatever4476 so what would fsn saber had done in this scene?
People criticize Fate Zero Saber yet FSN Saber was equally the same.
Maybe the lore was different, but FSN Saber wasn't anything different.
@@Snow-pi7cd what she did when shirou did the same, ask if that was all he came to say and that he wasted his time.
@@ouranioszefs5931 She was very different what are you on about. Zero Saber is made to be Uro’s archetypical naive girl character, who extolls idealism so that the cast can throughly debunk her with “facts and logic.”
FSN Saber was a Welsh warlord that ruled during one of Briton’s bloodiest periods of conflict. Who has seen far more, and far bloodier wars than even someone like Kiritsugu with his mere 10 years of assassination. Difference them is night and day, don’t believe me, read the fate route of the vn, or Garden of Avalon.
saber was what we call as "the people's slave".
イスカンダルめっちゃ声合ってる
2 years and no dislike.., it’s beautiful
You jinxed it
Well it's gone now
They're not wrong in many ways. In fact, all three, Artoria, Iskandar, and even Gilgamesh are right in their way of ruling. But even their way possess flaws. Artoria wants to serve and shoulder all the burdens of her people yes. But at the cost of sheltering them, and like what Iskandar had said, she only saved them, but not lead them. speaking of Iskandar. He wants to embody all what his people wants, to be their paragon and idol that they could look up to and try to aspire to be. But that can dangerously become arrogance, and that arrogance can make the people reach out to things that they themselves could never truly reach, and falling as a result. And Gilgamesh lives by the fact that he is the supreme ruler of all, but not just that. He wants all of his people to try and embody that same strength he has reached, or at least in a similar manner. He wants individuals to push past their limits, and be strong. But this strong ruling over the weak mindset can easily devolve into chaos and disaster without moderation
All in all. Each of them are correct in their ways of being a king. But they're not totally perfect nor absolute
I know it has been a year, but Gilgamesh also states he doesn't so much have faith in humanity, but he has faith in humanity's ability to create and persevere. In his Caster form, we see him as a king who believes in the "spirit" of Uruk being with its people, not the city, he believes in them wanting to carry on their King's will
through out the times of history. every ruler or leader had there point of views and reasons for the way they rule or lead.
I just read the article and than I imaginated: What is a King to a God? And what is a God to a non-believer?!?!
This voice actor is sooo goood
This man turn waver from “ill have her home by 8pm sir” to “your daughter call me daddy too”
It is amazing this monologue, because he is so right and so wrong about her. It is inconceivable to him (and to her)that she was exactly that to her knights. Her purity and nobility was the envy of them all. As stalwart and unapproachable as she was, every knight, from mordred to Lancelot, aspired to be as honorable and proud as she
Well, he is right about the part of she never being able to actually guide her people and letting herself being blinded of her ideals to the point of being alone. Her whole chatacter was about realising how much she messed up with her flawed ideals and deciding to move forward.
Indeed, he doesn't believe that a "noble" King is possible since he just wasn't like that. And she was literally a King in the middle ages, so ofc people would hear a Leader that follows the the values of knighthood from that era. But her people did get unsatisfied with her rule and her behaviour and she never did nothing about it cuz she believed she kept being a noble and perfect King until the end. So he is right about her not being a good example of a leader at the end. But later in the show he just accepts he can't really criticize her either cuz he also failes as a King at the end by not being able to mantain his kingdom's safety after his death despite following his own ideals of what a King was. Ironically both of their kingships had the same length.
@@gogonx7983 Not really?
A big part of Saber's character is to let go of her wish (to redo the sword of selection in order to choose a more appropriate person as the King) and her regrets because she did everything to delay Britain's inevitable doom. She was one of, if not the best King Britain could have hoped for during this period.
Sorry if I'm being rude but did you really watch Fate/Stay Night? Because your post is kinda wrong (about Saber at least).
@@poppiwp4193 I mean, she herself had to evaluate her own priorities in the Church basement scene, she has to remember back when she pulled the sword to remember what she actually wanted to do. That being simply protecting the people of Britain no matter how it ur ed out in the end. That's beacuse she lost that focus and instead focused on delivering a peaceful end for Britain and reject any kind of disaster. She searched for that "perfect" ending just following the sight of Merlin's prophesy (the one He showed her, in which she only saw herself being the one with a bitter and awful death). As she focused on that prophesy, she then lost herself in a self-sacrifical way in which she didn't even bithered about how the people saw her or how many were not happy with her cuz she convinced herself that as long as she kept being hated then Britain would have more chance to have a good ending.
And as how GoA shows us, it turned out to be the other way, the discontent of the people turned against her and she was shocked to see that the bitter end she saw for herself was shared to the whole nation.
Even her own Interlude (don't remeber which one, the one where travels to Fuyuki in fire) she herlsef states that she failed to recognize many and ignored many people. But she is still satisfies with the reason, the wish she tried to accomplish even if that didn't meant the salvation for her people.
That's on point with her development in the Basement in Fate route. She realized she didn't need the grail to erase her past nor save Britain, cuz erasing those things would be erasing her own life, and that *anything she wishes to change* she has to do it in the presrnt and not the past. She accepts her past cuz at the end even if she failed to understand her peiple and she failed to save Britain, she still fulfilled her oiriginal oath, and that was protecting Britain and fighting for her people even if she loses everything. She didn't save Britain, she didn't save the people, but she at least fought to end for what she thought was right, and that's the only thing she can be proud of.
That doesn't mean she didn't made any mistake nor that she cannot be criticized and it doesn't imply she was the best ever. She just lost herself in her ideals but still that's doesn't mean she have to hate herself nor erase the past.
That is, in hand, what Iskandar originally was trying to tell her in this scene (this video skipped it). Heroic Spirits are the result of their life, therefore Servant should be able to accept their past. Iskandar himself admits in this scene that he is aware and accepts the fact that he didn't really govern the territories he conquered, that he was just a greedy man and that his Kingdom was destroyed after his death for his own actions, but he accepts it, he accepts all of that and doesn't have a problem with it. He can be criticized a LOT and in retrospective he may not have been a good leader at all, but he is still a true King.
Saber is the same, she made mistake, she ignored many, she faild to recognize many, she lose herself in her ideals, but she is still a King.
Both of them had failed kingships, but are able to be proud of something from it. For Iskandar is his bonds, for Saber is the oath she defended until the end.
Just cuz they get to accept their past doesn't mean they were the best kind of leaders out there or that they didn't mess up.
he voice like Lu Bu in Dynasty Warriors :v
In fact , saber morals is the ethics of the king that I want to rule me
But she wouldn't be able to live happily...
You will have a "perfect" king that you can't relate to
A king that doesn't aspire you, just makes things look harder because if how good he is
A real king should be relatable not a perfect saint
If you want to see the extreme applications of Artoria’s rule, the kindgship that she leads that distances herself to her people, watch the Camelot Singularity movie
@Wind Rose king Arthur's empire crumbled when he died too
@Wind Rose tf saber kingdom got destroy too
@@mohamedelhediissa289 Bitch, I don't give a shit. If I can live my life in peace, why should I care? The king is not your friend, so whether you can relate to them doesn't matter. The king doesn't need to inspire you whatsoever, again, because your life is set whether you like it or not.
You people need to watch less anime and look up what a commoner's life was like back then.
She doesn't have any right to criticize him when canonly a lot of her people came to grew tired of her to the point of accepting the first chance of rebellion they had.
"Grew tired of her"
Did you actually watch Fate? I can't remember that being a thing
@@AnNguyen-es4kx Well yes, I have read the vn where every Saber flashback reminds us that she was abandoned by her own Kingdom or that a lot of her knights never really accepted her or that even inside the RT a lot of her knights had conditional loyalty wtih her.
Or Zero that basically tells us that she never relly managed to inspire her people from heart, that she was never able to "conquer" their hearts and instead lost herself in the ideal of being the "lonely inhuman king" to the point that nobody wanted to follow her in that path.
Or Apocrypha (ln) that show us that the discontent with Artoria's Kingship was so big that the people literally accepted Mordred as the "face" of the rebellion as long as that gave them more reason to rebell against the King. And Mordred was not exactly the embodiment of the "good and noble" knight either, even less with how detailed the ln goes about the kind of things he did, but people didn't care as long that they have a face for the rebellion.
Or even in Garden of Avalon where we are told that the Knights were so discontent with her that a lot of them quit their service in Camelot and the ones that came from foreign land returned to them cuz they didn't want to server her.
I don't know man, but the idea of a big part of her kingdom being dissatisfied with her or growing up tired of her behavior has been pretty clear and consistent sonce the vn. So, yeah, not only I dod watch fate, I have done a lot more than that.
@@hijojou9385 Wasn't the VN s main point is to point out how she is the ideal perfection of a king to the point where she become flawed? The knights remain loyal to her, Lancelot who grieved over his transactions and deeply desire punishment from his liege. Agravain who felt none is more fitting to lead than his king. Or Mordred, who admire her more than anything else, and was thus more devastated than the perceived betrayal via refusal of the crown. To group the RT with "conditional" loyalty is like grouping Shirou with "the end justify the means", which doesn't make sense, and Mordred's army mostly consists of foreign allies such as the Saxons and Morgan's pawn, once again doesn't mean the majority are in with it
Zero is told from the viewpoint of Artoria, and how she perceive her rule, entirely subjective to the person who wish to have another king replace her. Apocrypha is told by Mordred, who is manipulated from birth by her mother and forced to endure lies after lies and promises about kingship
Objectively, we can agree she isn't the best leader who inspire her people the same way Rider did, but the idea of her people getting tired of the same person who defend against their enemy and ensure peace and prosperity in their kingdom is quite unlikely and, if I may be frank, bullshit. They obviously feel distanced to their undefeatable, perfect king, but not once had they thought her undeserving of the throne, much less rebelling against her for that
@@AnNguyen-es4kx Now don't put words on my mouth or your own interpretation of things.
If we go by what is the message of the vn, then the whole point for saber there was to let go, the vn basically makes her accept the fact that it doesn't matter what she did or what kind of King she was, the only thing that matters is that she fulfilled that role, it doesn't matter how flawed or how many mistakes she did, she was the King and she shouldn't erase that, At the end she herself accepts that there is no point on changing the past, and she accepts it, accepts her flawed rule, accepts her mistakes, cuz at the end she is only happy that she defended her ideals regardless of what was the result of those ideals, cuz the main reason why she became King was for others and nor herself, that her rule was not the salvation she desired nor the salvarion for her people, she is fine with it and lets go.
Don't blame me for the KotRT being described as being conditionally loyal to Saber, those are Nasu's words, not mine, that most of them never really were lotal and only stayed with her as long as she produced results, of you don't like it then argue with the og author. Go read all of Saber's monologues in her route and check it yourself.
Lancelot desired punishment not because he was sorry for what he did *against* Artoria, he just thought he deserved to be punished cuz he did many vile things, but in GoA itself we are told that even before doing all of that he rejected Artoria, he rejected the kind of person she was, he rejected her ideals and her behavior, he literally fears that this reject would slowly become madness, and at the end that's what it was, and the fact that she forgave him made it all worse, he didn't comprehend anything about her and rejected everything she desired, he is not sorry for his betrayal, he was sorry for the things he did after that, but the very idea of not agreeing with Saber and even comparing her with an inhuman monster like Vortigern was there, way before he killed Gawain's siblings.
Agravain is a walking contradiction who despite deeply trusting the "cold and inhumane King" and his just lead, all of his loyalty crumbed the moment he learned that the King was a woman. That's why he was the most loyal to the Lion King, cuz the Lion King was the embodiment of Artoria's cold behavior but put into an extreme that even she never did, and her very presence was higher than a mere "gender", so Agravin finally found the perfect King he wanted to serve.
Mordred is just Mordred, of you read Apocrypha's ln you know that he not only had an accelerated development via Morgan's magic to the point that despite looking average in stature he was basically just a mere child in mentality, and Morgan groomed him into "knowing he would defeat King Arthur ans become the next King", then she made him enter the RT where she knew Mordred would end up addoring the King instead, by the ln's words Mordred was a living contradiction, someone that both loved the king a hated him, someone that wanted to serve under the King and at the same time usurp the throne from him. Mordred is a complicated situation of someone that both was Loyal to the King and never ever was from the begining, and it wasn't Morgan's grooming alone, tbanks to fgo we know that Mordred himself had these opinions by choice, he didn't hate the ling cuz Morgan said so, he didn't love the King cuz Morgan expected so, and he didn't lead the rebellion cuz Morgan told him to, all of that were his own choices and he was aware of the consequences, but he still chose to do all of that.
By the time that the rebellion happened (when Artoria was already in Rome and not in Nritian at the moment) she already solved the problem of the invaders and the saxons cuz she already defeated them, so no, Mordred's army wasn't made of saxons or foreign soldiers, ot was made from people and knights from Britain, the fsn vn literally told us the Kingdom was in civil war and Artoria had to slay the people she swore to protect and kill fellow knights who opposed her, it was a battle of Britain against Britain, so, nope, no extra people here, the narrative Fate uses makes pretty clear that the kingdom itself decided to oppose Artoria, and Mordred herself in Apocrypha said that her army was just as big as Artoria's was, and that the only reason why its passed on story for being a "small" army was cuz they were defeated and none of them survived to tell others how things really happened.
Zero is not entirely told on Saber's pov, actually, and its funny cuz this same scene in the ln was actually in Irisviel's pov, it was completely on her pov, cuz she represented us, complete outsiders that doesn't belong to he category of a "King", so Saber trembling and Gil + Iskandar accusing her was narrated by Irisviel, and she herself notes that there was a moment when Artoria as much as she wished to make a comeback she could bring herself to answer Iskandar cuz she saw like "a little child that realized all the things she did wrong" in Irisviel's pov, she even offered to let Saber rest on her lap while she repressed her tears.
Also, as I said, Mordred was his own, anyone could thing that everything he did was Morgan's doing, but the reality is that, no, he felt the same rage against Arthur that Morgan had cuz he decided to, he followed Arthur cuz he decided to and he ended up rebelling against the King cuz he desired to, if you say that Mordred's pov is inaccurate cuz of Morgan's influence, then you are denying one of the most important cores of Mordred's narrative, that it was all his decision, if he actually was just a puppet with no ideals of hos own and choices of hosnown he would have never become an heroic spirit to begin with.
And idk why did I even took the time to say all of this when, once again, people of Britain getting tired of Artoria is canon, it has been in the vn for ages, it has been expanded a lot over time and is something that is continuously being brought up and a core part of Britain's story, so idk why you think this is a matter of conception or interpretation, when is literally there.
And at the end, my original comment is not innacurate, she doesn't have any right to criticize Iskandar's way of ruling, just like how as much as she hates Gil she also has stated many times that he is indeed a true king.
@@AnNguyen-es4kx "Ideal perfection of a king to the point where she become flawed" are you even hearing yourself? Does it make sense to you? Which one is it? Was she flawed or she wasn't? You cannot just play with adjectives like that just to make Artoria sound better. A leader isolating themselves and not doing anything about it sounds like a virtue to you?
Thank you for the video! I found Iskander to be a great character and he was right about Saber and her leadership. May Jesus Christ be with you.
This isn't about good governance at all but about human nature , its motivation and living a fulfilling life. His empire fell SO WHAT that wasn't the point. If you want perfect governance let machines run our political system, well saber is kind of robotic. She was a tool for the people and like a tool she got discarded. The point was to live the best fulfilling life possible and through his own example of doing so he inspired others to do the same . To do something impossible together and as result not only him but his followers too grew stronger. He knew his corrupt nature but so what everyone has it, in fact , that only makes him more relatable to his followers. We are flawed and we will always be as mortal however we can also try to be better and trying is the point to be alive that's why to be the best you can be strive for the impossible. He lived a fulfilling life and his subjects did also, unlike saber and her sad bunch.
Rider indeed win the argument his rule created heroes that lived a fulfilling life whilst saber's was only lived through the mirage of a false idol, false because it didn't led her to the expected result. She was an overbearing figure to them she stayed true to her ideal but what about the other aspects of humanity, people's greed and all, she can't expect that ''jesus'' standard from everybody right? Especially when they have been protected by her, they have no incentive to change because their perfect king will resolve whatever is threatening them. How can they feel self-imprtance when they can't get whatsoever close to that impossible standard whilst that standard excpect of them that they do but alsoprotects them due to their inanbility. See the dangerous dynamic and how that could result in a catastrophe but saber ignored it ''to follow her own petty ideals''.
You can clearly see what Imean in their noble fantasms. One stays alone on the battlefield depraved of the very thing she dedicated herself to serve, her dead soldiers, holding the mere dreams of her people they enrusted onto her and the other is next to an army of heroes that merely used their leader as a catalyst to become their ideal selves, true heroes.
This is my website if you want go see it
manabook.org/
A king is stronger than the rest of the people. And the people demand a strong king. The good king let's her Queen rule the world.
What is a king? A miserable pile of greed! But enough talk, have at you!
"Who can admire the rough and thorny life of a martyr? Who actually dreams of such an ending?"
"-and why the flames of aspiration, to he just as the king is, can burn within his people."
Rider's lines here illustrate the core of his point. Nobody wants to he a martyr. Nobody wants to live a hard life, filles with pain, void of pleasure, and then die a horrible death in hopes of the chance it would inspire others.
We all want to be successful. To have wealth, or power or just plain old happiness. Everyone here came for Rider, hes the favorite character of Fate Zero, his point is made all more powerful because hes so damn likeable in his personality, hes entirely right. People dream of being happy, not of being a sacrifice.
Saber may have been a legendary king, but she never lead her people. She left behind a kingdom who wanted nothing of her life in their own. Nobody wanted to take up her mantle, knowing what it held.
I never liked dubbed animes but this is really impressive
I like this
S1 E11, brilliance
Gilgamesh during this speech: a mongril spitting facts
Neither of them are right or wrong. There must be an in-between; in helping others, you help yourselves and in helping yourselves, you can help others.
An equality of both selflessness and self care. Self care is often misinterpreted as selfishness, but perhaps that is what we need: just a little to put food in our stomachs, cash in our pockets, and time for slumber. Selflessness will always be there too for when we support a friend, partake in charity/business, and being considerate of another person's struggles in life. The only thing that is unfair and inhumane is becoming a martyr; sacrificing ourselves and/or others will rob us and others of what is both wanted and needed.
King is King!
truly the right input
An anime that gives weens interest in history.
Out of the three, only Saber's people betrayed her in the end. So, yeah. How did that work out for you, sweety?
Gil died of age, saber died in the battle of camlann after her people and mordred started a rebellion, and iskandar died of poison. Yeah saber is definitely the one who screwed up in her end. Riders may have Ended with its own destruction On his death but at least it didn’t cause him to die from it
@@drakonocturnesensei6945 Iskandar being poisoned is only a theory that some historians believe but not all of them agree that he was poisoned
@@kingofgreed0737 Well either way Saber clearly is the one with a worser track record since her kingdom fell when she died immediately
@@drakonocturnesensei6945 Same with Iscander's. He drunk himself to death/got posioned after his boyfriend died, and then Macedonia fell instantly. I don't remember if they ever mention Hephaestion in Fate, but they do mention that his kingdom fell instantly.
@@brandonvalenti8401 His kingdom still fell after he died and not during his death and not because of his own people rebelling against Him personally. Saber is a good knight but she failed in connecting with her people which was her downfall and Camelot’s downfall.
Iskander: gigachad
Choosing to keep his name as the Persian 'Iskandar' rather than the Greek 'Alexander' was a really clever decision, since as the King of Conquerors, he likely took pride in the name his defeated enemies knew him by as he subjugated them. Even after death, he is known by his last great act of conquest - just as he would have wanted.
Damn almost forgot to watch this today
My fab
I don't know if that is right but it sounded cool.
In context both accomplished what they needed but in completely different ways, both lived in turbulent times full of chaos and brought their people together under a single banner. But while Camelot shone during Arthur's life and fell with him, Iskandar's empire lasted for hundreds of years, even if that stability meant the suffering of countless other people. It's impossible to say which way is better as a whole but we can infer who benefits more in either.
Ehhh to say it lasted a hundred years would be wrong. More like it broke into 3 decaying pieces
I say the man is right since his people didn’t betrayed him
>Iskandar's empire lasted for hundreds of years
This is how you know morons don't know what they're talking about. His empire didn't even last months.
@@therealboi3454 pretty sure they did.
@@anhdinhlamduc5700 they betrayed author not him
This should have been longer
Meanwhile Gil's smirking
Interesting. I never watched a Fate Stay Night and Fate Zero in English, so it is interesting to hear them in English.
I would not follow Iskandar. Following him condemns you to a life of excess and that kind of thing is never good. Besides, I wouldn't become a soldier to go to unnecessary wars and risk my life for nothing relevant beyond more battles and deaths.
I prefer someone like Arturia as a Ruler, despite all his failures and lack of humanity, who at least has a compelling reason to fight. His ideal of protecting his people is something I can relate to because I also want to protect my family in every possible way from any danger.
Yeah, not really the point of the video, and if anything both are equally wrong.
Iskandar's idiology is about inspiring men to reach their own maximum goal more than everything and the context in which he ruled allowed this to roll because it was an era of territory expansion. Being a soldier was the best most men could aspire and having one of your sons send to war was the honor of families. Since invading other countries was the main source of wealth and resources for most countries.
In this sense his ideology was to create armies not by men forced to war but by men that genuinely wanted to explore, to reach other places, to be their best versions, their maximum ones.
His mistake was forgetting that the dream of exploring and conquering its a very expensive one in sources. Soon or later the army would run out of food and resources and fatigue would hit, and since everyone is human they have to stop.
But since everyone did their best he is happy, since he Valtrex the bonds with his men along the way, even more than the mythical sea he wanted to reach, and that's why he volres the understanding of subjects more than anything. His men didn't see him as an unreachable entity, but as someone they could become as well. But, ofc, if human nature is the basis of what he preach, then the negative things will also arise. The end of his kingdom was due to his men trying to live their maximum and reach their own goals, even if it meant to destroy Iskandar's kingdom.
Artoria's idea of what a Ruler is is someone who doesn't let emotions take over and that always make every decision as correct and fast possible, and treats everyone as equally as posible. But she also believed in the inhuman nature of the role of a "king" as something almost divine than something close to a human. That's why isolation is something she seek on purpose. Nasu said Saber Alter represents the perfect King for Artoria, someone that even in life she didn't manage to become. And what are Salter's main traits? Cold emotions and full determination. Someone that is ready to risk everything and everyone for the sake of a better "place". Someone that is ready to be hated. Someone that uses their men as means to reach and end. Almost robotical.
Although flawed this very same mindset was what saved Britain from the invasions, phantasmal beasts and enemies, but that's it. Since she was her own Achilles' heel for her own end. Since she isolated herself and nobody could understand the "perfect and cold king" people soon suspected her ability to govern, after all, it's only normal that human would reject someone that isn't human.
Iskandar believes that a King must be as human and flawed as possible, and be an example and role of model to their men. Of course, this is both for the good and the bad things. So if greed and evilness is part of human nature, the is natural that when people live at their fullles they will crash against this negative things.
On the other hand Artoria believes in the inhuman king, someone that is more akin to a God than anything else. The superhuman king that can do anything to protect the country but as a price his men will not follow him anymore, since they will fear the King.
Both fail for their own weight.
With him saying that it reminds of Oden from One piece(if you're caught up with the anime or manga you know what i mean)
even his death was like oden being a great leader till the end
why are mad tyrant leaders so damn likable erwin smith,isklander, tanya the devil, whitebeard, lelouch askelad i dont know why by these type of leaders always interest me more than the typical good ones
__😤__ HoW aBoUt DOinG bOtH! 🤩
Nigga was spitting facts🔥🔥🔥
Iskandar speaks the truth
Nope. It's still subjective.
@@Phos67 u r subjective
@@Mood-xb7yv No u.
What is a king- what is a man
A king is to be the ideal which his people want to become be brave just like the king be cunning just like the king be rich just like the king conquer the world just like the king
This is cool and all but
Beowulf’s speech on what it means to be a king in LB1 was more deep than this
Really? What did he say?
Could you link it? I'm very interested
Yup
If you play FGO and completed LB1 you can view that specific section (it’s where you get stranded in the labyrinth) in your materials list. Here’s part of his ideology:
“Being called a king means you gotta think about what’ll happen after you die.
Even if I’m not around, you guys can already manage something on your own now, can’t you?
How to hunt, how to hide, and above all, how to live together in large numbers. I should’ve hammered all of these into you already.”
@@monkeman5895
Yes, Beowul's is right.
Iskander is a King, simple as
This was a discussion between a jesuit priest and a Japanese oficial in 16 th century japan - propably at Toyotomi Hideyoshi's time. - Tokugawa Ieasu never traded so many words with them. he gained their trust for help win the war, then kicked them out of the country, saying they were an insane and dangerous cult, worshiping death and pain, and cynically imposing those beliefs on others. - If you want more insight on these kinds of Shinto-Budist vs christian debates, check Martin Scorcese movie "Silence"
The funny thing is, if he went alongside Christianity, Japanese wouldn't have went isolationist, would have traded and would regularly sail to Rome, send missionaries to all neighboring islands to convert the natives. This increased naval presence would lead Japan probably to discover Australia earlier and most likely it would be a Japanese continent instead of British.
Good question. What is a king? He is more than representing his people. I liked this quote.
Incredible how Alexander the great would have really think that. The king of gods, Zeus, does whatever he wants by greed or lust, he is the most (evil or good). But a christian is following the path of a god who made himself flesh to suffer and sacrifice himself (or his son depending on how you interprete the trinity but the point stands) as a martyr just like Artoria. Incredible anime, I wish more people could see the philosophy behind the story, especially in the encounter between the three kings, one who take after a god of greed, one who take after a god of self sacrifice, and one who thinks he's a god himself.
Again, brilliant anime
What sucks is that this should have been presented as an actual argument.
Instead it was made to be a beat down of saber.
????? I mean, Artoria admits defeat, so this is an actual argument, wdym
@@ontothemartin4684 She calls them out on being tyrants. They retort by calling her rule dumb and her ideals dumb.
Instead of bringing up how his entire “rule” was just warring and that the second he stopped he died and his empire that his father built was fractured immediately. Or pointing out how Gilgamesh was a shit king until he literally had a exitential crisis. She doesn’t actually say anything.
She doesn’t defend her position, she doesn’t argue against their means of kingship, and both Gilgamesh and Islander team up on her instead of going after each other as well.
Hell there could of been an argument of chosen kings vs made kings. Because Gilgamesh and Artoria were chosen by a higher power to be rulers while Islander was born into it and had to prove it.
It was written to show Saber was wrong. That’s my issue.
@@craxnor In that sense the only chose king was Gilgamesh, cuz despite Saber being "predilected" to be king, her backstory in Stay Night show us she wasn't granted her position. She was born into a time of civil wars in Britian and the main "king" among all the feudal lords was Vortigern, who terrorized Britain. That was the point of her ten years travel through Britian while she went with the alias of the "Knight Princess", she built her fame, her influence, her contacts and allies throughout 10 years before finally defeating Vortirgern, and THAT'S when she was crowned King of Britain.
On the othet hand, yes, the point of this whole discussion in this scene was to make Saber be the one wrong, but it was not about government, cuz the core of the dicussion is that it actually doesn't matter who was a better king, but their ideals. Gil and Iskandar ultimately criticize her cuz she wants to redo her past, and once she tries to defend her position that's when Iskandar pulls his discourse of what is a king. The whole point of this discussion was to show that Saber had flawed ideals and not a real King mentality.
The same would happen later once Gil literally throws back Iskandar's words to him when he is killed.
If anything, at the end of Zero the "winner" of this discussion was Gilgamesh who ironically can brag about his inhuman views cuz he managed to change his Kingdom for the better (even if the state he is summoned into doesn't really help to show it), while Iskandar and Saber were declared as the ones with flawed ideals and flawed governments that ended up in the fall down of their own kingdoms.
Yeah, I agree...
@@ontothemartin4684 This scene right here, The Banquet of the Kings, is one the MANY reasons 95% of the Fate Fandom(that's not a bunch of anime only secondaries) despises Fate Zero and Gen Urobutchi. Hell, EVEN Nasu himself hent to say that Zero is not cannon to the Original VN and is just a alternate version of events, since it doesn't match the events described both by Artoria about the 4th War, and gets further buried by Garden of Avalon.
Just further proof that the only thing Urobutchi managed to do right was Kamen Rider Gaim.
Honestly Alexander might have been stupidly egotistical back in the day but no one can say he wasn’t a great man
When you look at it that's exactly what Alexander did by serving his people in giving them the ambition to look beyond the borders of both their own aspirations as well as the geographical borders of their nations. A king should be one who inspires his people to go beyond their limits while caring for those who cannot or have fallen short before urging them on forward. Throughout human history the people have always made leaps and bounds when individuals of singular drive and character arise and make a name for themselves. The tragedy of the story is that in time the people will grow jealous and envious of these beings and what began as a desire to follow them to the lands beyond the horizon will turn to a desire to see such journeys fail when they themselves fall short of such goals and choose to pull everyone else back into the muck where they have fallen. The time of Kings has come and gone, but that does not mean the future has forgotten them.
He is so fricking based