Daneel wrote:
Well, given the way that the rooted empire works, I would not be at all surprised if they give a number to something that there is only one of.
Exactly.
Imagine, in our world, a man named "
Bob Plantervelt"
, who has no surviving relatives. Indeed, he is the only man who as the surname "
Plantervelt"
in the entire world. Would you argue that he can no longer call himself "
Bob"
, because he's the only Plantervelt and therefore that name is enough?
There are 256 slayers. Would you say that 256th slayer cannot call himself so because there is no 257th slayer? Or that 1st slayer cannot use that name because there is no 0th slayer? The lack of someone on one side of the progression is not enough to deny a citizen his name. Why would it matter if there is no-one in both sides?
The next sentence contains a TCB ending spoiler:
Click here to view the secret text
× In fact, by the end of TCB, there is only one slayer - he might call himself Beethro Budkin, but his proper Empire name is 1st Slayer. The lack of other slayers makes no difference.
All Empire names follow a single template: ranking + job description. There are no "
hereditary"
names, and there are no exceptions. 1st Watcher may have also been the first of the watchers, and the last of them (though I'm not sure about either), but that is irrelevant. He was a citizen of the Empire - indeed, the first one - and his name follows Empire standards.
(There's an interesting question here about whether this naming scheme started with the Empire or was already in use by the people who eventually became the Empire. I'm pretty sure this question will eventually be answered.)
____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!
