: Where does it say anywhere that the TFL intro in the
: manual isn't canon...
: Released by Bungie with the game, contains a glossary
: that to the extent of my knowledge is also considered
: canon...
Perhaps I should have stated that a bit more clearly.
Presumably, the game itself=the Final Absolute Truth.
The manual introduction is somewhat contradictory on a few points with what would seem to be true otherwise.
To quote the comments made here: http://myth.bungie.org/legends/journal/prologue.html
"The passage in this document which places the time of it's writing is "the war in the North is in its seventh year." This could be possibly reconciled with the dates of the Journal by assuming that the author is referring to the latest phase of the war, which has been going on for seven years. However, the document is still greatly at odds with other sources over the year of the destruction of Muirthemne."
Canon, thusly, may have been the wrong word for what I meant: that the manual does not match up with other documents regarding the fall of Muirthemne, and thusly may not be entirely reliable as "another source of the Nameless Hero's writtings". I'm not trying to say it is entirely false because of that, but it makes me feel skeptical about any of it being "unquestionable". Is it likely to be by the same Legionary? Probably.
But not certain. It may not even be "the final draft", so to speak, even if it is meant to be the same legionary. I realize that absoltue certainity here is probably not going to happen, but we can be fairly sure on some things and this, to me if no one else, is not one of them.
Seraph
P.S. In other words, "not canon" is not how I should have put it. It is closer to the truth (or my feelings on what the truth is) that it is "not necessarily reliable".
