Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-18014300-20200504004330/@comment-28601337-20200505161005

Personally, I think Cyfiero's and Zero's proposal are correct from a certain point of view. You see, every document from the database have been treated as an IU source (written by characters from the AC universe). And this, along with the Monterigionni's Sanctuary, are still treated as canon. Those this mean we have to endure this terrible retcon made thanks to Origins. No. Before the creation of the Brotherhood there were Darius, Iltani, Wei Yu, etc. that fought for ideals that would influence the Brotherhood in the future. This CANNOT be forgotten. Every bit of history regarding those characters happend way before the creation of the Assassin's Brotherhood, so they were NOT Assassins. But since, again, all the info about the Sanctuary is canon, it seems a posthumous ceremony of induction is pretty obvious (at least, to me) at this point. From this moment, the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wei Yu were honored with the title of Assassin by the Assassins themselves and every Assassin member (until today) call them as such. In this way, every document regarding them being called Assassins would still be correct, because they ARE Assassins now (from possibly Villa Auditore's foundation to this very day in the AC universe) and those documents are being written by Modern Day Assassins. So, the logic here would be coherent, continual and cohesive without jeopardizing the lore.

Of course, we CANNOT assumed that such a ceremony happened and canonice it ourselves. But this is my way of saying that we must have in mind this two facts and mention them in their respective pages. For example, how would thes be reflected in Darius' page? I'd do something like this:

Darius, born Artabanus, was a Persian elite and the assassin of King Xerxes I of Persia.

Considered to be the person whom the origins of the values and actions that would lead to the creation of (this replace the "one of the very first Assassins" because it's confusing. 'But how Darius is considered to be the first Assassin if they were founded by Bayek and Aya centuries later?' we could argue that the Assassin values were present in Darius long before the Assassins themselves, but this doesn't explain it 100% despite being true. Objectively, if this man happened to exist before the existance of the Brotherhood that mean that he's not an Assassin, but just an assassin. You understand my point?),  the Hidden Ones. Active during the 5th century BCE, Darius fought to ensure Persia would forever remain free of tyranny. His assassination of Xerxes I was the first recorded usage of the Hidden Blade, which would later on become the iconic weapon of the Assassin Brotherhood.

After the defeat of the Tempest in Achaia, Darius decided to settle down in the region with his son Natakas, who developed a relationship with the Spartan misthios Kassandra. Darius became a grandfather to Natakas and Kassandra's son, Elpidios, and later the ancestor of one of the Hidden Ones' founders, Aya.

I propose to re-write the paragraphs of these three proto-Assassins making clear that before the Hidden Ones they were not Assassins but eventually they are declared as such by the Assassins themselves in the future. (And maybe adding that such event happened in Domenico's time, because we haven't seen another moment in the AC universe were this is regarded).

Now, about the questions: 

1. Q: Should we merge Hidden Ones with the Assassins article and OotA with the Templars article?
   1. R: Yes. We might end up having a large article in our hands, but we have more of those. (Also I understand this work is not easy so kudos to everyone who made these large articles possible!)
2. Q: Related: Is the name "Hidden Ones" limited only to the Egyptian and Roman branches?
   1. R: Possibly. Valhalla will confirm that.
3. Q: Should the pages Artabanus' group and Iltani's Order be renamed to Persian Brotherhood and Babylonian Brotherhood respectively?
   1. R: No. Artabanus' group ended up being disbanded/destroy, because most of its member were killed and some others switched sides and went full Order of Ancients, so there's no continuity with the actual Persian Brotherhood. This groups existed before the creation of the Assassins, so these shouldn't be considered as such, it's contradictory. Same with Iltani's Brotherhood. The Hidden Ones also used that word so it's not proof enough (despite Iltani being honored with the title of Assassin in the future). The difference with the Hidden Ones is that Ubi wanted them to be the very flame that would spark the Assassin Revolution in humanity's history.
4. Q: So we should be categorizing Kassandra as a proto-Assassin?
   1. R: If we just consider the fact that she fought against the Order of Ancients, yes. Otherwise, no.
5. Q: Is Zero's proposal preferable to anyone?
   1. R: I support it as long as Cyfiero's arguments are still valuable (and they can be). It's important to mention that before the Brotherhood they were not Assassins, but in the future the Assassins themselves will honor their memory by giving them the title of Assassins, making them part of the Brotherhood. The line should be drawn in the Hidden Ones' epoch (Ptolemaic Egypt).

Ubisoft never gave a good answer to this kind of problems and when in trouble trying to fit their new ideas to the lore, they read the wiki. So I think it's important for us to make this first step and they will probably follow.

This could have been avoided if only Ubi have set Odyssey's story as the origin of the Assassins instead of having them 400 years later!