Lore talk:Golem

Lurchers?

I don't think Lurchers should be in the gallery, they are a form of Spriggan and nothing suggests they are Golems. Tarponpet (talk) 17:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. Lurcher lore is inconsistent so maybe there is something describing them as a golem (Frighten the Fearsome perhaps?), but there are plenty of ESO quests where they are shown to be corrupted spriggans, i.e. living nature spirits. I've removed the image. —⁠Legoless (talk) 15:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

We have a lore source that states they are a type of Golem though, they are also called Wooden Golems, so they are canonically classified as a Golem. Its mentioned in The Improved Emperor's Guide to Tamriel/High Rock. TheVampKnight (talk) 09:44, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the source. Given the weight of evidence to the contrary, I think it would be appropriate to add a note explaining that lurchers are "sometimes considered to be wooden golems" or something to that effect. We have evidence that they are actually transformed spriggans, and in the Shadow Wood Indaenir indirectly describes them as nature spirits. They are also associated with the Hist. None of these sources match what we know about golems being non-living material animated by magic—but like I said above, the lore is very inconsistent. —⁠Legoless (talk) 11:23, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

I have made a major overhaul of the Golem page and made a distinction between non-daedric Golems and Elemental Daedra. During this, I incorporated Lurchers back in the main body because in one of their Bosmer origins, specifically in the quest Handmade Guardian, it fits the arena description of golems being fashioned from varying materials and functioning as guardians of things. I did however state that they have conflicting origins since as a wiki we should be doing that.Zebendal (talk) 01:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually explaining the contridictions took up a significant amount of space, so i left the one origin that fits in line with them being golems and put the others within the lurcher bestiary entry since that is their main lore page.Zebendal (talk) 01:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Robot vs Golem

I've made a separate page for robots for the dwemer animunculi and clockwork factotums since they are pretty distinct from the type of magical golems that make up the rest of the page. I have also changed the links in their pages to go to the robot page. I was going to remove the dwarven section here too, but since dwarven automatons (especially the Numidium) have been called golems before, I wanted to get consensus first. Should we keep the dwarven section in this article, leave it as a note, or remove it entirely? BananaKing5 (talk) 05:15, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that robot page is necessary at all, robot as a word is barely even used in the lexicon. Notice how almost none of the sources you used on that page even use the word robot. Golem is a very broad type of creature, a robot is just a golem. Animunculi and Factotums are still just animated magically. Personally I'd vote instead for deleting robot, its redundant, what separates a golem from a robot really? Especially with no in-unniverse sources describing them as distinctly different- Tarponpet (talk) 1:18 AM, 9 May 2024 (EST)

I personally see a rather distinct difference between the technology-focused, steam-powered robots of the dwarves and Sotha Sil and the animated golems that are created with necromancy/druidic magic/statue animation. This difference lies both in out-of-universe genre (almost "sci-fi" vs fantasy) as well as in-universe distinction (Sotha Sil set out to master magic and technology, hinting at the distinction between the two; terminology like "constructs" using "terminals" in "control centers" point towards something different than "atronachs/golems" "summoned" by "rituals", etc.). Even the magic that powers the animunculi and factotums are essentially just stand-ins for batteries, while the motion is due to steam-powered mechanisms. Though to be fair, while I personally think this difference between technological robots and magical golems is almost as important as differentiating between daedric atronachs and ritualistic golems, I definitely understand the view that animated objects = animated objects. As for the difference between the words, I think it comes down to connotation. For me, "golem" only connotes magical animated objects, akin to the animated fantasy statue or gargoyle. "Robot" would be technology focused, akin to the word "automaton". However, if the wiki supports a broader connotation for "golem" to include "robot", then I agree the robot page could be redundant. In that case, though, I would personally support that the difference is made a little clearer on the page between the two types of golems since the Dwemer were known to disparage magic in favor of technology.

I wrote the above before the edit about in-universe sources. I could argue about how "atronach" and "golem" are also used rather interchangeably in-universe despite the wiki differentiating atronach as specifically elemental daedra, however I think the difference there is much larger than the difference between "robot" and "golem". I'm also not well-versed in the atronach vs golem topic, so maybe there are sources stating differences that I'm not aware of. I will admit though that I created the robots page with real-world clarification in mind rather than in-universe difference, so that is my fault if that's not standard for the wiki. BananaKing5 (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

It seems to me that robot is a deprecated term that has since been supplanted by "automaton". Golem is complicated to define given its early synonymy with elemental golems (now daedra) but I believe its generally defined as any artificially made creature. Factotums are constructs/automatons. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Another thing is dwarven constructs are usually atleast partially powered by magic anyways, soul gems and such, and reality manipulation such a tonal architecture. This page indeed could be expanded to what makes them distinct. Also golem and atronach is a whole different situatuon. The difference being whether something is mortal created or a daedra. Atronach can simply be used as a term for either. Mainly only the case in older games but there is a modern use of this or two. Tarponpet (talk) 2:01 AM, 9 May 2024 (EST)

That is a good point, I did kind of forget that the synonymy of golem and atronach is mainly due to early games. And I appreciate Rim of the Sky pointing out the term "automaton". That term is used much more often it seems, even explicitly titled in the book Herbane's Bestiary: Automatons to specifically talk about animunculi.

That is true concerning the soul gems and tonal architecture, though I still think that is kind of just an in-universe explanation for batteries rather than magical animation like other golems. Regardless though, magic is magic, so that is a good point nonetheless. I have no intention to die on the hill of the Lore:Robots page if consensus doesn't favor it, so I'm just glad the distinction is being brought up in discussion lol. BananaKing5 (talk) 06:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)