Not Everyone knew Vader was a Sith?

"The Sith have been extinct for a millennium." - Ki-Adi-Mundi
A lot of people didn't even believe in the Jedi. So, why should (two) Sith who are always hidding in the shadows be known too? Furthemore Vader was never referred as a Sith in the OT. He was a fallen Jedi. The Sith thing came with the PT.

 

The Sith had been gone for a long time when Darths Sideous & Maul revealed themselves to the Jedi in TPM. How many people did they or the Jedi tell this to? Probably not a lot... The Separatist movement and the Galactic Empire was never openly recognized as a Sith conspiracy/organization, so why would anyone outside of Jedi circles know anything about them? I don't see why Tarkin would know that Vader was a Sith, unless Papatine or Vader chose to tell him (and why would they do that?).

 

Not really. The term "Sith" was actually present since 1977.
Proof below, at 0:05, in this early filming rehearsal, where Cassio Tagge is saying "I tell you it's gone too far. This Sith Lord sent by the Emperor..."

Unfortunately, that scene did not ended up in the final cut, and the term "Sith" never appeared again all the OT long.

 

Sidious is a master manipulator. I don't think it was that much of a stretch that he was able to well... mask who Vader really was or him for that matter. Now had Thrawn didn't have his incident with Ezra... things could've been different. Note: barely started Thrawn Alliance and haven't read Treason yet.

 

Great post. First time seeing this.

 

That's a great video. Always love hearing the Bristolian 'Dave' Vader (sounds like that audience enjoyed it too! ) ... nice mention of the "Cosmic Force" back then too.

On the Sith thing, I always thought 'Darth' was itself an honorific that refers to 'DARk lord of the SiTH - (isn't it?) that line where Obi-Wan says 'Only a master of evil, Darth' is so much more pointed when you think of that way, as in 'only a master of evil, 'Dark Lord of the Sith', even more so when you also think of the Revenge of the Sith line "You were supposed to destroy the Sith, not join them!" the last time they met chronologically. It becomes a criticism of his choice, his fall to the dark side implicit in the title and what it means, rather than just his name, which I guess is all it would have seemed it was if you went in cold to watch the film in 1977.

The other nice thing about Darth = Dark Lord of the Sith is it reflects how adherents of the dark side operate - in hiding, in secrecy... even the title they use conceals its full meaning.

 

Personally I always thought that truncation theory was a bit a lame. I don't think it's official is it? I just thought it was something reverse engineered from 'Darth' by fans, and isn't an in-universe meaning. As I say I never really liked it - it's like when acronyms are created by having to take the second letter of one of the words. It's a bit of a fail!

I do remember reading that Darth Vader is a (loose?) translation from one or two real-world languages of "Dark Father" (or if not a translation then at least evokes it). Not that I think that it was meant to be a clue to Luke's parentage (I think that's a fortuitous coincidence which works retrospectively once Lucas went in that direction) - but that it was just meant to mean "Father of Darkness", comparable to the phrase "lord of all evil".

In fairness, back in 1977, I think Darth WAS intended to be nothing more than just his fist name. I suspect it was only later and with the arrival of the TPM that Lucas decided to make it a title for all members of the Sith. I don't recall it being used for any of the ancient Sith in any of the 'Tales Of The Jedi' comics until after TPM was released.

 

Tarkin knew Vader was formerly a Jedi (you my friend, are all that's left of their religion).

as a child i had the trading card above. we used to imagine for ourselves what "Sith" meant.
not even sure we understood it as a sect (let alone a duo!) so much as an idea of Darkness, commensurate with "evil".

 

Agree to disagree... ?!

I can’t remember if I ever knew if it (the connection/meaning) was only a fan invention or Lucas’ intent, but if it wasn’t intentional it was a pretty coincidental one I think. The term ‘DARK LORDS OF THE SITH’ did definitely exist in Lucas’ drafts before the film was made (I just checked!). There were also ‘KNIGHTS OF THE SITH’ at one point, which is interesting now we have the Knights of Ren - it’s very much a nod back to Lucas’ work.

Anyway, I guess it’s technically a portmanteau or a contraction I suppose, not an acronym (I don’t mean I think you were saying it was). I often personally find ‘bacronyms’ a bit cringeworthy myself (though not always) so I see where you’re coming from, but I don’t usually see portmanteaus or contractions that way. But fair enough if you do.

I like that theory. But apparently Lucas went to high school with someone called Gary Vader (lol, it seems absurd now) and the name seemed right to him.

Lucas on the name:
“It sort of appeared in my head one day. I had lots of Darth this and Darth that, and Dark Lord of the Sith. The early name was actually Dark Water. Then I added lots of last names, Vaders and Wilsons and Smiths, and I just came up with the combination of Darth and Vader.”

There is also evidence of Vader’s name coming from ‘Dark / Death Invader’ too (notes by Lucas).

Interesting when you think Sidious is another truncated ‘in-word‘ Darth.

Sure, but it’s exactly the kind of connection and meaning I think Lucas loved to do, linking his ideas together with a certain fuzziness as to whether it was always a subconsciously connected idea in the first place, even if he didn’t realise it... and re-using what was already there with a twist.

Anyway, however intentional or otherwise, Darth will always be short for Dark Lord of the Sith in my mind until George says it isn’t.

 

For sure. I'm not disputing 'Dark Lords of the Sith' was never a thing early on - just the contraction you're fond of!

No that's right. I wasn't saying that. I was just comparing it to 'bad' acronyms, not saying it is one. I used the word 'truncated', but I suppose portmanteau is more accurate. However, a portmanteau is normally a word which is derived from previously existing words - eg 'brunch' is a newer word made by combining 'breakfast' and 'lunch', whereas I think with 'DARk lord of the siTH' it was the other way around and reverse engineered from the already existing 'Darth'.

The first time I ever heard of that portmanteau theory was when somebody in the old official Star Wars forum suggested that's what it meant, although I don't think they themselves had made it up.

It is this particular portmanteau I find crigeworthy

Somebody thought "wouldn't it be cool if we made 'DARTH' mean DARk lord of the siTH?". And I just think, "no, not really"

I'm certainly not going to accept that it's something the Sith themselves came up with in-universe! (I also don't accept that the Sith devised a 'rule of two' either, but that's another argument...)

Ah yes.. I remember that now. I tend to think that's maybe the in-universe meaning of his name, like, as you say, Sideous. And Tyrannus too.

I did some quick looking around and I found an article confirming what you said (perhaps it's the one you read?):

http://www.forcematerial.com/home/2016/12/01/the-origin-of-darth-vader-the-name

What's interesting though is that it's what he said at the time - so that would be before any revelations about Luke's heritage. "At the time" he might not want to have revealed too much. Of course, if he was keeping it secret, that could contradict any notion that he hadn't planned that heritage all along. Hmm...

I do like the Gary Vader thing... I've not heard that one before. But perhaps Gary Vader was of Dutch origin. As the article says, 'Vader' does mean 'father' in Dutch. Do you suppose George Lucas didn't know that? I suspect he may have...

But in a story which has character names like "Skywalker", "Solo" and "Organa" - all names which evoke some meaning and say something about those characters - I can't help thinking Lucas knew more about the meaning of 'Vader' than he initially let on at the time.

Unless it is just 'Invader' after all!

 

Yeah, I did read that article, but I believe it’s quoting from (material in) the JW Rinzler ‘Making of...’ books as one source, which I also had a quick look at too.

For me, I find it much cooler if ‘Darth’ has significance beyond ‘sounding a bit like Dark’. But it’s just personal preference I guess until such time as they ever confirm or deny it explicitly in canon. You like what you like! MTFBWY

 

It was used in the novelization though iirc. for some reason the book disapeared from my home, can't remember where it went.

 

A Sith took it.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 3, 2019, Original Post Date: Sep 3, 2019 ---

Props to the actors for not bursting out laughing..."I find your lack of faith disturbing."

 

So does that mean Tarkin doesn't know the truth about the Emperor?

Tarkin's comment seems to imply that Vader is the last of his kind in general. Sure, technically speaking Palpatine was never actually a Jedi, but no distinction between Jedi and Sith is made at this point ('Dark Jedi' was often used as a phrase at the time by people who paid the surrounding material no mind).

I suppose though it is fortuitously a convenient distinction which I guess can be applied retrospectively and with pedantry if it really needs it. But at the time I'm sure Darth (as he was called), with the exception of Obi-Wan, was meant to be the last of his kind. Well, until Empire Strikes Back, when it turned out another Jedi was hiding out as a hermit on Dagobah. Oh, and then in Return Of The Jedi of course, when it turned out the Emperor himself was force wielding 'dark Jedi' even more powerful than Vader with lightening that he could fire from his fingers.

 

Thank you so much for this! I can't believe there are still scenes from the OT that I haven't seen! I thought I had seen all of the deleted scenes and photos and everything. This is awesome!

 

I don't think anyone knows the truth about the emperor. Publicly, Palpatine was the chancellor and then the emperor and that's all. I don't believe it's canon, but the novelization of A New Hope actually gives a very brief description of the emperor as more of a puppet figurehead that came to power through making deals. This may be what he wanted as his public persona. It may be coincidence, but he dismisses his guards in Jedi before using any force powers. I haven't watched any animated Star Wars so I can't say for sure, but I've never seen the emperor use the force overtly in front of anyone other than Vader.

Tarkin says that Vader is the last of his religion because he believes all the Jedi to be dead. He even says, "Obi Wan Kenobi? Surely he's dead by now...." or something very similar, I'm doing this from memory. He doesn't know that the emperor is anyone other than the former chancellor, a politician.

 

I have always found Tarkin's deduction at odds to be honest. After reconstruction, more man than machine, Vader had to adjust his fighting skills. He no longer uses the lightsaber in the same manner as when Tarkin knew Anakin.

 

I know this is a very late comment but its also worth noting that Darth Vader was the name of another character in an earlier draft, so it probably doesn't relate to being a dark lord of the sith (whatever that meant at the time). I love reading over the old scripts and seeing the things that almost happened. For example Luke's dad's ghost visiting him on Dagobah (not yet called anakin), before Lucas decided to make them the same person

 

I thought this said that vader was a blast