Implied starting date of the Empire from OT dialogue — Page 3

Darth Id said:

-50
    The Republic becomes the Empire.
        "[...] in the Old Republic. Before the dark times,
        before the Empire."

This is a non sequitur. 

Nothing Ben says necessarily means that HE was personally present for the birth of the Empire, or personally remembers it.  He is just discussing a World That Was, that he may only have heard about from his trainer, as one of the dwindling followers of the Force.  He could have been trained in the Jedi arts by a rogue Jedi long after the Jedi Knights had been ousted as official guardians. 

It could have been generations of secretive, hermit-style heretical Jedi, who were always fighting on the side of the various oppositions to the Empire.  Plus Ben could have been 120, and could have trained Anakin when he was already 60.

    The Jedi Order is disbanded by the Emperor
        "the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice
        in the Old Republic. Before the dark times, before the Empire."
    The Jedi are persecuted
        ?
    Obi-wan flees in "exile" and assumes a new identity.
        "I haven't gone by the name Obi-Wan since oh, before you were born."

Again, you're unconsciously subscribing to PT plot-points that were not necessarily part of the SW backstory.  The Jedi Order could have been deposed generations earlier--they were no longer "guardians" of the established political order, but were instead outcasts and rogues, fighting on the side of Good.  The whole Clone Wars business could very well have been (and I actually think WAS) entirely a post-Imperial course of events.

Yes Ben fought with Leia's father, and then had to go into exile at some point afterward, but that doesn't mean it all happened in one big, pat, tidy singularity as the PT would have it.

Remember, SW was supposed to be a sprawling, sweeping world of Mystery & Magic, with ancient histories and dark secrets.  Only later did Georgie-poo decide to boil it all down to one narrow, obsessively focused domino chain.

As you can see, there are some lines followed by a "?" instead of a dialogue: those are basically guesses, because there are many plot holes and, as I said, it still needs some work :D

Ben says that they once were Jedi and that they fought the Clone Wars, so I think he actually worked for some time for the Republic as a Jedi. Hard to say why they were "exiled", but being the Emperor afraid of Vader (last jedi)'s sons makes me think that it was his decision, because he saw the Jedi as a threat to his power.

Unfortunately we don't know much about the Clone Wars, but if Ben with "crusade" means these wars, it may've been something he and Anakin approved and fought for. Hard to say.

Indeed Obi-wan working with the Organas could have happened after the Clone Wars. Hard to say. Also, changing his birth year to ">-70".

Domino chains sometimes make for good plots :D (except in ROTS....)

Frey said:

This is a really neat and concise outline. I have a question about it: Did Anakin go evil, spend decades as Darth Vader, and then conceive two children with "Mrs. Vader"? That's interesting. Most interpretations of the prequel timeline that I've read about have Mrs. Skywalker discover her pregnancy while Anakin is still a good guy and a loyal Jedi. Your interpretation shakes that up a bit! It puts a very different image in my mind of who the mother was if she knew she carried the children of the Dark Lord of the Sith.

That "50" was a leftover, I'm sorry :D I just turned it into a "?" (the year the Empire was enstablished is still unknown to us, though about 40-50 years before the OT is a good guess to me).

Yep, I think it may be that Anakin had spent some time as "Vader" before having his sons. There's no concrete proof, but Obi-wan says he had to hide the twins from their father and the Emperor. Why would he do that? My only guess is that he already was "Vader". This interpretation gives enough time to people to forget about the Jedi (in the OT), to Obi-wan to be more than 70-80 years old and change his name into Ben before Luke's birth.

If that's the case, I myself wonder why this happened and HOW (which reminds me of a certain "Space Truckers" scene :D)

P.S.: I just removed every line I couldn't prove yet.

John Doom raises a very good point.

In fact, although Vader says in ESB that he is Luke's father, never once does he say "I am Anakin Skywalker."

Even Yoda is careful to refer to Vader as "Obi-Wan's apprentice."

The definite assumption that Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are one and the same person actually appears to date to the writing of ROTJ, not ESB.

After all, it's quite possible that Mother Skywalker was getting some action on the side....

A dialogue cut from ROTJ states that Luke's mother indeed was pregnant the same time his father left. Should I consider it canon and add it into the timeline? (it also states Owen is Obi-wan's brother).

BEN

When your father left, he didn't know your mother was pregnant. Your
mother and I knew he would find out eventually, but we wanted to keep
you both as safe as possible, for as long as possible.  So I took you
to live with my brother Owen on Tatooine... and your mother took Leia
to live as the daughter of Senator Organa, on Alderaan.

Depends on whether you'd consider the whole OOT to be part of your canon or not, I'd say.

If it were up to me, I might make multiple canons -- just to see how the new material from each successive film altered the overall story.

I don't think I can keep track of three different timelines at the same time :D

Think not. Do. Or do not.

Or have a donut. ;)

Donut? Is a baba still ok?

There's a pre-SE Star Wars reference book called A Guide to the Star Wars Universe. It was published in 1984 and even talks about the Clone Wars. Should we trust its content for the timeline, if necessary?

Have a Cornish pasty, if you're into that sort of thing.

John Doom said:

There's a pre-SE Star Wars reference book called A Guide to the Star Wars Universe. It was published in 1984 and even talks about the Clone Wars. Should we trust its content for the timeline, if necessary?

Well, I actually have that book (or rather the 1994 update, but 95% of the text is the same EDIT: It's actually closer to half the book, but the old entries doesn't seem to have been changed. Rather they added entries about newer novels and comics.) and it has some pretty interesting entries, especially relating to the Emperor which more or less fits with the idea that the Republic disappeared much earlier than previously assumed.

Here's the entry on Palaptine describing his life prior to the events of the films:
"The Emperor ruled the galaxy as the malevolent dictator of the Empire. As the man named Palpatine, he carved his Empire from the dying corpse of the Old Republic, using guile, fraud, astute political manipulations, and the dark side of the Force to forge his New Order.
As a Senator in the Old Republic, Palpatine was an unassuming man at a time of widespread corruption and social injustice. The massive bureaucracy of the Republic had grown twisted and sickly over the span of generations. Like an immense tree with decaying roots, the Republic appeared strong but was slowly dying from within. To appease the member worlds who saw the galactic government as nothing more than a useless burden, the Senate offered up a promising young politician who seemed perfect for keeping the union together. Senator Palpatine appeared to lack drive and ambition, for he had remained apart from the political corruption that racked the Senate. Those who needed a stable government in place to continue their plundering believed they could use Palpatine as a figurehead, teaching him to smile obediently for the holomedia. Those who genuinely wanted to save the Republic saw him as a compromise candidate who could serve as a puppet leader, following and implementing their plans to repair the system. Palpatine, however, had his own plans.
Palpatine exceeded everyone's expectations after he was elected as head of the Senatorial Council and President of the Republic. He got the wheels of government turning again after long periods of inactivity. He stepped forward as a great leader who inspired trust and commitment. During the time of jubilation, promise, and hope that followed Palpatine's election, he slowly introduced the New Order and declared himself Emperor. The brief period of hope and light quickly turned dark as tyranny spread across the galaxy. The Empire was born."
(There's a paragraph about using the Rebellion as an excuse for getting rid of the Imperial Senate, but we already know that from ANH.)
"How the Emperor achieved his mastery of the dark side of the Force remains a mystery lost in the passages of time. Through his dark will, Darth Vader was created, the Jedi Knights were destroyed, the Old Republic was swept away, the Empire was forged, and the greatest military force ever assembled was unleashed upon the galaxy."
(The rest is just stuff from the movies.)

The most obvious deviations from the PT here is the description of of a "young" Palpatine being made President of the Republic shortly before forming the Empire. This at least implies that the Empire, or rather the seeds of the Empire in the form of a political movement called the New Order was formed decades before Luke and Leia, perhaps even Anakin was born.
There's also the reference to the Republic having been corrupt for a long period of time, which again fits with Darth Id's suggestion that Obi-Wan/Ben's descriptions of the Republic as the "guardians of peace and justice" is a description of a "World That Was."
This might also suggest the possibility that the Clone Wars (emphasis on Wars) was actually between The Jedi/Republic and the New Order.

The entry on Darth Vader also has some interesting details, but is for the most part much vaguer that the Palpatine entry:
"Learning to use the Force by Kenobi's methods was too slow for the impatient Anakin. He wanted a quicker, less difficult path to the vast power he sensed all around him. Emperor Palpatine offered him just such a path-the dark side. All Anakin had to do was to give in to his anger, fear, and agression. Ambitious and headstrong, he stepped into the dark side's embrace and became Darth Vader."
(The text does actually mention Anakin/Vader falling into a molten pit like in ROTS, and also makes a vague reference to him hunting down the Jedi Knight during the "last days of the Republic and the opening moments of the Empire.
In addition the entry mentions Ben taking Luke to Tatooine and Leia being taken by her mother to Alderaan.)

These two entries could suggest that Anakin was not just turned to the dark side by Palpatine, but that he also joined the enemy side during a conflict and that he embraced both the philosophy of the dark side, as well as the politics of the New Order. 
The last line might seem like a contradiction to Palpatine's entry, but it does say the opening moment of the "Empire", e.g. The Galactic Empire, and does not exclude the existence of the New Order during these events.

This book also sticks to the idea that Owen Lars was Obi-Wan's brother.
The entry on the Clone Wars imply states that is ended 35 years prior to ANH (see timeline below) and that the "Jedi Knights and their allies battled to defend the Old Republic against its enemies." 
The book also suggests that C-3PO may never have had a memory wipe in the past, hence his odd personality and tendency to exaggerate his retelling of events. I'm not really sure how to interpret this entry, but they seem to hint at his eccentricity, and it's funny compared to how his memory was conveniently wipe in ROTS. And although the book forgot to mention it Lucas had originally (as far back as in 1977) established that C-3PO was built in a Cybot Galactica plant on the planet Affa 112 years before ANH.

Finally, there is a timeline included in the book:

25,000 + BSW4 (e.g. before ANH/Ep.4 or BBY)
The Old Republic, the first galaxy-wide government is formed; Jedi Knights appear; period of galactic peace and expansion begins.

896 BSW4
Yoda is born.

200 BSW4
Chewbacca is born on Kashyyyk.

112 BSW4
C-3PO activated.

60 BSW4
Obi-Wan Kenobi is born.

55 BSW4
Anakin Skywalker is born.

48 BSW4 
Mon Mothma is born on Chandrila.

35 BSW4
The Clone Wars end.

29 BSW4
Han Solo is born in Corellian star system.

Fall of the Republic (no date is given here for some reason)

18 BSW4
Luke and Leia born and placed into hiding. Anakin Skywalker becomes Darth Vader. Jedi Knights hunted an killed. Palpatine becomes Emperor. Empire formed.

This is very interesting: I'm going to link your post in my timeline, so that everyone can read it.

There are useful hints to build the timeline, but you still have ROTJ's rectons like Owen being Obi-wan's brother (George... :\) and so Obi-wan being only in his 60s (which contradicts Tarkin's statement).

I'm not sure it can be actually used, but it's definitely a great read. Thanks a lot!

John Doom said:

This is very interesting: I'm going to link your post in my timeline, so that everyone can read it.

There are useful hints to build the timeline, but you still have ROTJ's rectons like Owen being Obi-wan's brother (George... :\) and so Obi-wan being only in his 60s (which contradicts Tarkin's statement). I'm not sure it can be actually used, but it's definitely a great read. Thanks a lot!

Well, I don't really think Tarkin's statement can be taken too seriously. It's an off-hand remark by a military man who assumes that at this point all Jedi should have been killed in one way or another. After all the Jedi seem to have been deemed outlaws for at least 35 years or so at this point, and he was probably involved in their destruction himself. It could also be a bit of arrogance on Tarkin's part. He clearly has a lot of faith in the Emperor and his ways, (not the mention Vader; who's risky plan does end up getting Tarkin killed).

Also, I don't think you can really use ANH as some sort of SW canon bible as the entire OT was being retconned as they were being made. ANH was originally only supposed to be a stand-alone film, and Anakin and Vader were definitely intended to be two different characters. Heck they even considered making 'Splinter in the Minds Eye' a low-budget sequel to ANH at some point. 
So I personally would stick to finding a consistent post OT, pre-PT canon. That's not to say that Owen Lars being Obi-Wan's brother makes perfect sense, but the question should rather be whether the novelization fits in with pre-PT Lucas and Kasdans 'agreed" anon for the original films. I know that doesn't make this any easier, I'm just saying that the scripts from ANH and ESB aren't that reliable when it comes to a consistent pre-PT canon.

Regardless, I'll look through the book some more to see if I find any more interesting details. Regardless of how reliable they are, they do offer a pretty interesting pre-PT EU canon.

Well, the idea is to start from the OT dialogues and then expand with pre-PT EU canon stuff, as long as it fits. After all, even if Star Wars's canon changed throughout the trilogy, its dialogues present no evident retcon. But it's not an easy task :D

I just noticed that if, according to the Guide, Anakin is 55 in ANH, and the Clone Wars ended 35 years before ANH, how could he've taken part in war being him only 20? :\

Does the Guide mention why and when did Obi-wan change his name to Ben? When did he served the Organas?

John Doom said:

Well, the idea is to start from the OT dialogues and then expand with pre-PT EU canon stuff, as long as it fits. After all, even if Star Wars's canon changed throughout the trilogy, its dialogues present no evident retcon. But it's not an easy task :D

I just noticed that if, according to the Guide, Anakin is 55 in ANH, and the Clone Wars ended 35 years before ANH, how could he've taken part in war being him only 20? :\

Does the Guide mention why and when did Obi-wan change his name to Ben? When did he served the Organas?

It makes no mention of his name, but it does say;
"When the Clone Wars erupted, Kenobi became a general, fighting alongside Bail Organa of Alderaan and the young pilot Anakin Skywalker. Obi-Wan and Anakin became good friends, sharing many adventures as they battled to protect the galaxy. In fact, Kenobi recognized Anakin's natural Force talents and decided to train him to be a Jedi."
The rest is as we've already heard in the film; he wasn't an adequate teacher, Anakin was ambitious, seduced by Palpatine's power, turned evil, etc, etc.
It's interesting however that it suggests that they fought in the Clone Wars before Anakin became his apprentice. So Anakin could have been a teenage pilot whom Obi-Wan gradually took under his wing until he eventually decided to train him as a Jedi. Anakin turning to evil, choosing the easier path, could have to do with him having been targeted by Palpatine very early in his training, hence he was much more vulnerable when it happened.

I also looked up Bail Organa, but it literally says no more than that he fought alongside Obi-Wan and "the other heros of the period," beyond what we know from the films.

Mon Mothma's entry has few vaguely interesting details in it;
It says that she was a senator when Palpatine rose to power, that she was the only person suspicious of his rise to power, and that she even opposed to his election to presidency. It also says that she formed an early version of the Rebel Alliance some time before Palpatine formed the Empire, which to me supports what I mentioned earlier that Palpatine's New Order probably existed for quite a while before Palpatine eventually made himself Emperor. This would suggest that the last years of the Old Republic, not to mention the political environment during the Clone Wars involved a conflict between the more liberal, but corrupted Republic and Palpatine's fascist New Order promising peace and control. 
I kind of like the implications of that. Perhaps the story of Anakin's fall ot the dark side isn't just a matter of him turning to the dark side of the Force, but also the dark side of Politics. It kind of implies him eventually joining the New Order and eventually helping Palpatine's rise to power. This kind of makes sense when you consider his dialogue in the OT. He tries to overthrown Palpatine, and wish to "rule the galaxy" alongside Luke "like father and son." His ideals are clearly militaristic and dictatorial. So it's possible that the original ideas behind Anakin's rise and fall was a lot more blatantly political.

And if you might think that this is a bit to political for something as simple as Star Wars you should look up COMPNOR on Wookieepedia. It's one of the few articles that have very little post-PTA influence is basically taken directly form the guide book, as well as a standalone book about the Empire from the late 80's. It's quite the elaborate description of the political structure and fascist ideals of the New Order/Empire, and it bears heavily similarities to the real-life Nazi party.

Anyway, if there's another character, place, or event that you would like me to look up in the guide, just send me a message and I'll post the answer if there's anything interesting.

Anakin being a teenager when he met Obi-wan seems to fit with my timeline (which I guess is good :D)
Still, if Oragan met during the Clone Wars Obi-wan, why would Leia call him "Ben" knowing his original name? I guess she didn't want to let people know about his secret.
Mon Mothma's background seems to fit perfectly in ROTS's deleted scenes, but she was a senator during Palpatine's rise to power, so how old Palpatine really is? Senators are supposed to be at least 50 years old to be elected, not to mention that Mothma doesn't look the same age as Palpatine at all :D
Anakin's fall has always been the most confusing part: Lucas himself gave FOUR different versions of it: politics (just like you said), power (like in the original ROTS's screenplay), love (as in ROTS) and defeat (as in the 97SE commentary). I don't know :D The OT's dialogues suggest the last interpretation, though, and no doubt he tried to kill Palpatine to save the Republic.
I'll look for COMPNOR, thanks ;)

How old is Organa supposed to be in ANH?
So, no clue as to why and when the Clone Wars began?
What the hell is a Sith? :D (one of the first Star Wars screenplays says it's an order founded to kill the Jedi, is it canon?)
Out of curiosity, is Darth vader's castle ever mentioned?
And that's it: if we manage to get these informations, it should be possible to complete the timeline (except for Palpatine's election's date)!

P.S.: Speaking about fascism, a reform has just passed which abolishes our Italian Senate and gathers power in the Prime Minister (nevermind, I didn't say anything...)

John Doom said:

Anakin being a teenager when he met Obi-wan seems to fit with my timeline (which I guess is good :D)
Still, if Oragan met during the Clone Wars Obi-wan, why would Leia call him "Ben" knowing his original name? I guess she didn't want to let people know about his secret.
Mon Mothma's background seems to fit perfectly in ROTS's deleted scenes, but she was a senator during Palpatine's rise to power, so how old Palpatine really is? Senators are supposed to be at least 50 years old to be elected, not to mention that Mothma doesn't look the same age as Palpatine at all :D
Anakin's fall has always been the most confusing part: Lucas himself gave FOUR different versions of it: politics (just like you said), power (like in the original ROTS's screenplay), love (as in ROTS) and defeat (as in the 97SE commentary). I don't know :D The OT's dialogues suggest the last interpretation, though, and no doubt he tried to kill Palpatine to save the Republic.
I'll look for COMPNOR, thanks ;)

How old is Organa supposed to be in ANH?
So, no clue as to why and when the Clone Wars began?
What the hell is a Sith? :D (one of the first Star Wars screenplays says it's an order founded to kill the Jedi, is it canon?)
Out of curiosity, is Darth vader's castle ever mentioned?
And that's it: if we manage to get these informations, it should be possible to complete the timeline (except for Palpatine's election's date)!

P.S.: Speaking about fascism, a reform has just passed which abolishes our Italian Senate and gathers power in the Prime Minister (nevermind, I didn't say anything...)

I don't see why all four reasons can't apply to Anakin's fall. Politics and Power are basically the same in this situation. Love is possible, but that seems to have been added for dramatic effect in the PT, but then again we don't know what they were planning back then. But considering how Luke and Leia's mother survived Anakin's transformation for some years it seems unlikely. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "defeat"? Do you mean his battle with Obi-Wan, because that still counts in the pre-PT canon. It's described in both the novelization of ROTJ and the Guide. Also his wounding serves as a metaphor for his transformation. First of all he becomes someone else physically. The in a sense dies and sells his soul to the devil, or in this case the evil Palpatine, and is resurrected but with a catch; he's now a slave to the emperor. He actually dies when he redeems himself and kills the emperor. He has already died as a good man, and therefore can't have a second life. Also the Empire is clearly a very homogeneous environment, as fascism tends to be, as well as being quite a literal war machine. And that is what Vader is as well, a killing machine. "He's more machine than man now, twisted and evil," that line is actually a pretty good description of the Empire as a whole, or even fascism in general. 
(But enough symbolic analysis/rambling.) 

I couldn't find an age on Bail Organa, but I get the idea that he was supposed to be a lot older than he ended up being in the PT. 
It's not the greatest source, but in the 1980 radio-play of ANH there's a lot of scenes with Bail and he comes of as kind of an old king type of character. It's hard to describe, but I got a sort of Ling Theoden from LOTR vibe from the performance. That's not much to go on, but I think he was supposed to be a somewhat old man.
Mon Mothma's age is kind of weird in the timeline, but not impossible. In ROTJ she would be roughly 50 years old. However she could have been a very young senator. The Guide said that she was the youngest senator ever elected until Leia started representing Alderaan some year prior to ANH. It doesn't give a precise age though, it simply states she was elected at an "early age."
(EDIT: this last part about her age was part of the EU section of her entry. But then again, it fits with the official timeline, and Leia's unusual young age for a senator in ANH, so technically it just means that the EU had to give a logical explanation for Lucas' timeline.) 

I looked up the Sith and this is literally all it said;
"The mysterious and as-yet-revealed group called the Sith causes great fear in those who know them. They are sometimes called the Dark Lords of the Sith, and Darth Vader has been identified as one of their number."
Literally no help to unravel the mystery there. Either Lucas had no clue what they were, or he was keeping it a secret until the PT-trilogy.

Also I couldn't find any mention of Vader's Castle. Does it have a specific name? I found an entry on the Emperor Citadel, but no castle with Vader's name attached. The again I might have overlook something under a different name.

Darth Id said:

Wow, Z&B, thanks for all that.

I'm frankly astounded that the 1984 Guide dates the formation of the Empire to only 18Y BBY.  I really can't fathom a sensible reason why this would be, except that Lucasfilm figures Darth's turn must have coincided with its formation so that he could be good before and evil after.  However, it would make a lot MORE sense if he became evil while the Empire was in full swing--after all, wouldn't that be when going dark would be the "easier, quicker path," i.e., the path of least resistance?  Seems that to turn evil in a just Republic and to then go on to participate in the transformation of the Republic is more ambitious and driven than it is "quicker and easier".

Yet if the "Republic falls" some indeterminate time before the "Empire forms", I suppose that means there was some intervening period of the "New Order"?  I guess that some proto-Empire fascist order might serve as a good political milieu in which it would be personally expedient for Little Orphan Ani to break bad.   

That's kind of what I gathered from the Guide as well. That Palpatine's initial rise to power resulted in the New Order as a more militant and fascist political party which after some time eventually led to the formation of an Empire. Since Palpatine was young when he was elected president, and even resisted by Mon Mothma it is likely that this is when he started expressing his goals for a New Order. All of this alludes really well to the Nazi's in real-life. Corruption and poverty; A charismatic new leader steps in promising a "new world" or rather a "new order" to replace the old; And eventually it turns out that this guy is actually plotting to take over the world and rule it as a dictator. Palpatine's evil here is show through him being a darksider, he's literally a being of evil powers. (The novelization of ROTJ really emphasizes this to the extreme.)
Heck the Clone Wars could even be an allusion to WWII, except in this case the bad guys eventually won.

What's interesting is that if you read up on COMPNOR you'll keep seeing the name New Order pop up constantly (heck it even stands for Commission for the Preservation of the New Order) so I guess that it's the empire's official name, while the Galactic Empire is more of a description of what the New Order is/has become.

(As a side note it's interesting how the Empire remnants in TFA is called the First Order. It's an interesting throwback to the original SW canon and might even suggest a post-empire attitude where they are trying to establish themselves as the true "Order" among several other remnants, which some of the interviews have suggested that there are. I wonder is this is Abrams just being a fanboy or if it is Kasdan bringing back some of his original ideas.)

ZkinandBonez said:

I don't see why all four reasons can't apply to Anakin's fall. Politics and Power are basically the same in this situation. Love is possible, but that seems to have been added for dramatic effect in the PT, but then again we don't know what they were planning back then. But considering how Luke and Leia's mother survived Anakin's transformation for some years it seems unlikely. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "defeat"? Do you mean his battle with Obi-Wan, because that still counts in the pre-PT canon. It's described in both the novelization of ROTJ and the Guide. Also his wounding serves as a metaphor for his transformation. First of all he becomes someone else physically. The in a sense dies and sells his soul to the devil, or in this case the evil Palpatine, and is resurrected but with a catch; he's now a slave to the emperor. He actually dies when he redeems himself and kills the emperor. He has already died as a good man, and therefore can't have a second life. Also the Empire is clearly a very homogeneous environment, as fascism tends to be, as well as being quite a literal war machine. And that is what Vader is as well, a killing machine. "He's more machine than man now, twisted and evil," that line is actually a pretty good description of the Empire as a whole, or even fascism in general. 
(But enough symbolic analysis/rambling.) 

I couldn't find an age on Bail Organa, but I get the idea that he was supposed to be a lot older than he ended up being in the PT. 
It's not the greatest source, but in the 1980 radio-play of ANH there's a lot of scenes with Bail and he comes of as kind of an old king type of character. It's hard to describe, but I got a sort of Ling Theoden from LOTR vibe from the performance. That's not much to go on, but I think he was supposed to be a somewhat old man.
Mon Mothma's age is kind of weird in the timeline, but not impossible. In ROTJ she would be roughly 50 years old. However she could have been a very young senator. The Guide said that she was the youngest senator ever elected until Leia started representing Alderaan some year prior to ANH. It doesn't give a precise age though, it simply states she was elected at an "early age."

I looked up the Sith and this is literally all it said;
"The mysterious and as-yet-revealed group called the Sith causes great fear in those who know them. They are sometimes called the Dark Lords of the Sith, and Darth Vader has been identified as one of their number."
Literally no help to unravel the mystery there. Either Lucas had no clue what they were, or he was keeping it a secret until the PT-trilogy.

Also I couldn't find any mention of Vader's Castle. Does it have a specific name? I found an entry on the Emperor Citadel, but no castle with Vader's name attached. The again I might have overlook something under a different name.

Well yeah, it could be that he turned into the darkside for four reasons. By "defeat" I mean that, as Lucas suggested in the commentaries, he faced the Emperor, but was defeated, losing most of his Force (basically, Luke's path went wrong). And maybe he was then brainwashed by the Emperor (just my guess). Fact is that this interpretation makes Anakin's fall against his will. The OT's dialogues seem confirm that this was Anakin's fate.

I can't believe the word "sith", used everywhere on books and comics, was never explained! :D I'd go for the jedi-hunter order, but I can't prove it :\

I'm not sure Vader's castle had a name back then. It was mentioned in an early ESB draft, but the idea was probably rejected.

Thank you very much for the help! :)

John Doom said:

ZkinandBonez said:

I don't see why all four reasons can't apply to Anakin's fall. Politics and Power are basically the same in this situation. Love is possible, but that seems to have been added for dramatic effect in the PT, but then again we don't know what they were planning back then. But considering how Luke and Leia's mother survived Anakin's transformation for some years it seems unlikely. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "defeat"? Do you mean his battle with Obi-Wan, because that still counts in the pre-PT canon. It's described in both the novelization of ROTJ and the Guide. Also his wounding serves as a metaphor for his transformation. First of all he becomes someone else physically. The in a sense dies and sells his soul to the devil, or in this case the evil Palpatine, and is resurrected but with a catch; he's now a slave to the emperor. He actually dies when he redeems himself and kills the emperor. He has already died as a good man, and therefore can't have a second life. Also the Empire is clearly a very homogeneous environment, as fascism tends to be, as well as being quite a literal war machine. And that is what Vader is as well, a killing machine. "He's more machine than man now, twisted and evil," that line is actually a pretty good description of the Empire as a whole, or even fascism in general. 
(But enough symbolic analysis/rambling.) 

I couldn't find an age on Bail Organa, but I get the idea that he was supposed to be a lot older than he ended up being in the PT. 
It's not the greatest source, but in the 1980 radio-play of ANH there's a lot of scenes with Bail and he comes of as kind of an old king type of character. It's hard to describe, but I got a sort of Ling Theoden from LOTR vibe from the performance. That's not much to go on, but I think he was supposed to be a somewhat old man.
Mon Mothma's age is kind of weird in the timeline, but not impossible. In ROTJ she would be roughly 50 years old. However she could have been a very young senator. The Guide said that she was the youngest senator ever elected until Leia started representing Alderaan some year prior to ANH. It doesn't give a precise age though, it simply states she was elected at an "early age."

I looked up the Sith and this is literally all it said;
"The mysterious and as-yet-revealed group called the Sith causes great fear in those who know them. They are sometimes called the Dark Lords of the Sith, and Darth Vader has been identified as one of their number."
Literally no help to unravel the mystery there. Either Lucas had no clue what they were, or he was keeping it a secret until the PT-trilogy.

Also I couldn't find any mention of Vader's Castle. Does it have a specific name? I found an entry on the Emperor Citadel, but no castle with Vader's name attached. The again I might have overlook something under a different name.

Well yeah, it could be that he turned into the darkside for four reasons. By "defeat" I mean that, as Lucas suggested in the commentaries, he faced the Emperor, but was defeated, losing most of his Force (basically, Luke's path went wrong). And maybe he was then brainwashed by the Emperor (just my guess). Fact is that this interpretation makes Anakin's fall against his will. The OT's dialogues seem confirm that this was Anakin's fate.

I can't believe the word "sith", used everywhere on books and comics, was never explained! :D I'd go for the jedi-hunter order, but I can't prove it :\

I'm not sure Vader's castle had a name back then. It was mentioned in an early ESB draft, but the idea was probably rejected.

Thank you very much for the help! :)

Sure, no problem. 
Again, if you remember something important just ask and I'll look it up. Right now however I just can't think of anything specific to look up that would help any further.
I'm really enjoying this, it's such a rare thing to be able to look this up without getting the PT retcons in the way. I've tried Wookieepedia, but it's hopeless to try to siphon out of the post-1999 additions. I do feel like I should get a hold of the 1984 edition at some point so that I can figure out what they added to it in the early 90's.

As for the Anakin/Vader thing. I really feel like the "defeat" would have come after he game himself up to the Emperor ideologically (both politically and in terms of the Force.) Since the pre-PT canon seems to suggest that he was turned to the dark side for quite some time before he became half-robot, it would make more sense, to me at least, that his relationship with Palpatine only became worse and worse as time went by, and that his symbolic death kind of cemented it. Even in the OT Vader seems to believe in both the dark side and the New Order/Empire despite hating the Emperor. So it would seem that he willingly gave himself over to him as his apprentice, but that he gradually become more and more dependent on him, leading to a point were he was practically a servant to him. I agree that Vader is definitely a tragic figure, but it seems strange that all this happened through some defeat. They talk about him having been "seduced" by the dark side, and the Guide talks about Anakin's power ambitions. But of course as the OT dialogue suggest this ambition comes at a terrible price.

Also I realize that Dark Empire doesn't have any canonical authority over the pre-PT storyline, but I do like their interpretation of the Vader-Palpatine relationship. In the story Luke gives himself over to Palpatine thinking it is the best solution to his problems, and thinking that he will maintain some level of autonomy and power, but he eventually becomes consumed by his evil and turns into a reluctant servant.
In any case it is clear that Palpatine's powers of suggestion range from both the psychological to the supernatural.
Palpatine's Dark Side Compendium is a pretty interesting pre-PT concept. It doesn't hold much authority on this subject matter though, it it is in my opinion a great interpretation of the character and the implied ideology of the New Order. 
(It is mentioned in the Guide though, but it's probably an addition in the 90's edition.)

Thank you again! I'll let you know if I'll need new bios ;)

I read Dark Empire some years ago and I liked its concept of the darkside (even if it's flawed like in ROTJ). Its idea that Vader faced the Emperor but was "defeated" and/or decided to learn about the darkside to eventually overthrow him, fits very well and is supported by many OT's dialogues and pre-PT commentaries.

When talking about Star Wars's screenplays, that's literally my primary source :D

I just updated the timeline with the new fitting entries and corrections. Still no official starting date of the Empire :\

ATMachine said:

 Yeah, as I said, originally Luke and Leia definitely were not twins. The question of them not being related, however, may be another story entirely...

 So that begs the question: does it ever say that Luke and Leia are twins in the OT? I remember it saying that they're siblings, but I don't recall it ever stating that they were twins or even born near the same time. 

If in the OT they're only considered siblings, your re-write could have them be born completely separate, with Leia being with her mother and Luke being wherever you please

Obi-wan does say that Luke has a twin sister in ROTJ ("The other he spoke of is your twin sister"). If I could (gladly :D) only consider ANH and ESB, on the other hand...!

Speaking about Leia, any chance someone can do an ESB's fanedit to change "There's another" back to "We must find another one"? Then cut the whole twins' subplot in ROTJ, and that would make for my ideal OT :D

Let's see. From Brackett's script:

The man revealed is draped and hooded in cloth-of-gold, so that we cannot see his face, but the figure is instinct (sic) with power and Darth Vadar (sic) bows before it. 

DARTH VADER
Your Imperial Majesty Highness.

The voice that speaks is silken and deadly as a strangler’s cord.

EMPEROR
You are aware of the disturbance in the Force?

DARTH VADER
I am.

EMPEROR
Then you know that Skywalker is not dead.  And he is more dangerous than [unreadable] I had realized.  Remove him this time, Lord Vader…  Or I shall remove you.

Darth Vader bows.  The screen goes blank.  Vader turns away.  From his posture and the rhythm of his breathing, he is in a rage because he is afraid of the Emperor. 

CONTINUED

144 (cont.)

angry because of his fear of the emperor.

It seems like the Emperor knows about the Force, and this script was written 1978! I'm not sure if this was the original plan for ANH too, but it definitely seems like the Emperor was able to use the Force since TESB.

P.S.: there's a myth among fans that the Jedi weren't supposed to wear robes in the OT. According to TESB's screenplay...

The Emperor's dark robes and monk's hood are reminiscent of the cloak worn by Ben Kenobi.

...which seems to imply that Obi-wan's clothes aren't ordinary robes: possibly a vest, a jedi vest maybe? I'm not saying it was supposed to be the only "official" Jedi vest, though.