Conjecture
Although this is covered in the New Essential Chronology, the name of the conflict is never stated. Kuralyov 20:56, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Eh, history is written by the victors. If the Tionese won, they probably would have called it the "Core War" or the "Hutt Lovers War". -- SFH 20:59, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- "The war of coreward aggresion"--Erl 14:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Is the date correct?
According to the article for the Perlemian Trade Route, Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds is cited with the following statement:
- A millennium after the fall of Xim the Despot, Human traders claiming to hail from the center of the galaxy visited the Tion . . . Tion pirate fleets followed the new arrivals back down their so-called Perlemian Trade Route; there, they found rich planets bound in a loose, democratic union - and ill prepared for war.
According to the Xim the Despot article, Xim's empire fell c. 25,100 BBY. If the Tionese War took place about a millenium after the fall of Xim's Empire, wouldn't that place the Tionese War c. 24,100 BBY instead of 24,000 BBY? Or would c. 24,100 BBY be better consider "first contact" between the Republic and the Tion? ~ Jaywin
- They may have just been rounding down. -- SFH 23:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, that passage isn't quite correct: it goes "A millennium later, Human traders etc.", and that comes after a passage about events "a century later" than Xim. So Xim's era (25,100 BBY) + "a century later" + "a millennium later" adds up to the NEC date. - Lord Hydronium 06:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know if the syntax of that was confusing, so basically the section goes something like this: "Xim came to power, blah blah blah. A century later, stuff happened. A millennium later," and the passage continues from there. - Lord Hydronium 06:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)