Discussion Shanks' Predecessor

[Zehahaha]

Pretty sure the main reason why the emperors exist, other than territories, is because they won't risk warring each other because it means at best, 67% chance of losing. Say Shanks beats Big Mom, but he'd most likely lose to Kaidou or the Marines because his crew is weakened immensely from the fight against Big Mom, suffering heavy losses. They're so close in strength that they can't war each other without suffering heavy losses, and if an enemy learns about that then they could sweep in to finish the winner off.

That's not how it works, WB and Shanks aren't interested into petty wars for nothing, and we know that Kaido and BM apparently used to duke it out against WB

Your logic is right, but it's just that WB and Shanks are not really the warmonger type

 

[M3J]

WB and Shanks aren't warmongers, which is probably why Kaido and Big Mom fought with WB, but they never really warred, have they?

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

Emperor = A Pirate with great influence over a section of the Grand Line.

Why wouldn't there have been such Pirates (Emperors) during Roger's era?

1. Whitebeard was the 2nd most powerful Pirate after Roger with a fleet.
2. Shiki had the biggest fleet in the world (bare in mind Oda has mentioned Shiki in the same light as Whitebeard).

Both these Pirates clearly are Pirates of great influence (if not greatest during their era), so why shouldn't they be considered as Emperors since as they fit the description by definition? The only difference between Roger's era and this era is, there are more Pirates (Age of Piracy) which resulted with more 2 more Emperors (Bigmam and Kaido who weren't mentioned alongside Roger and Whitebeard) and 1 more Admiral.

The idea that Powerful influential Pirates never existed is questionable, it's like claiming that since civilization, there's never been leadership or hierarchy; hierarchy, leadership and order are fundamentals in any sort of society.

 

[M3J]

They wouldn't need to be emperors to be considered the most powerful and influential pirates, that's just a title. Besides, wouldn't one need to have territories to be considered an emperor?

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

The title is not what's importance as it's just aesthetic, it's the act and influence (over an area) that is key here.

The word King is just a title, but it means someone who has influence over a Kingdom; why wouldn't such a figure have existed in the past? that's similar to believing any form of leadership or authority only just came into existence.

900 years have gone since the Void Century, there would certainly have been Pirates wanting to claim territory as theirs or in fact, did own territory. Even gangs or small bands of thieves, have their own territory dependant on the extent of their notoriety.

It's a natural desire for Pirates aspire to be wealthy, feared & respected, free to do as they pleased and be treated as kings; that's exactly what an Emperor is; greed and selfishness are ubiquitous tendencies to those who naturally have aspirations of grandeur.

Very odd for this to become the norm only after Roger died even though he was never an Emperor, it's more likely that these things existed even before Roger's time.

Also, there's evidence that becoming Pirate King (conquering the Grand Line) was an act attempted by Pirates before Roger became Pirate King - it was said that people believed conquering the Grand Line was impossible. For there to be a Grand Line to conquer, it'd imply that there were territories too back then. Another point to put out is, if people considered conquering the Grand Line 'impossible', it suggests that people attempted to do so; can't claim something to be impossible without first knowing what it is.

Digressing a bit, how did Blackbeard take over Whitebeard's territory? by conquering it; Becoming Pirate King and an Emperor both require conquering; what is the difference between an Emperor and Pirate King? An Emperor conquers a portion of the Grand Line and the Pirate King conquers the entire Grand Line. It'd make more sense that if people were aspiring to Conquer the Grand Line, then they'd start out with portions meaning, if people claimed Pirate King an impossible feat, the concept of Emperors must have been in existence too.

In conclusion, the question that should be asked is, why wouldn't a powerful influential Pirate not own territory? is it that out of the ordinary to harbour such desires in the 900 years until Roger's death?

 

[Zehahaha]

Emperor = A Pirate with great influence over a section of the Grand Line.

Why wouldn't there have been such Pirates (Emperors) during Roger's era?

1. Whitebeard was the 2nd most powerful Pirate after Roger with a fleet.
2. Shiki had the biggest fleet in the world (bare in mind Oda has mentioned Shiki in the same light as Whitebeard).

Both these Pirates clearly are Pirates of great influence (if not greatest during their era), so why shouldn't they be considered as Emperors since as they fit the description by definition? The only difference between Roger's era and this era is, there are more Pirates (Age of Piracy) which resulted with more 2 more Emperors (Bigmam and Kaido who weren't mentioned alongside Roger and Whitebeard) and 1 more Admiral.

The idea that Powerful influential Pirates never existed is questionable, it's like claiming that since civilization, there's never been leadership or hierarchy; hierarchy, leadership and order are fundamentals in any sort of society.

I'm debating whether the term Yonko existed before Roger
Yes influential pirates existing is a normal thing although I really doubt they achieved the same level of military power as the current Yonko

However I'm pretty sure the term " Yonko " and the level they achieved so far has only happened post Roger's death

 

[ProGoddess]

It is possible that there were fewer influential and powerful pirates in the past, or influential enough to make the World Government felt threatened. It's like if there is no crime, the police wouldn't take much action, but if a certain crime (say housebreaking) keeps happening, the police would not continue to sit back and relax. They will surely patrol the affected area/street/estate more frequently.

On a larger scale, if the twin towers were not attacked, would the government tighter their security, to the extent of extreme, thorough checking of everything the passengers bring to the airport, and even influencing and spreading that measure to all over airports of every country? Despite causing all the inconvenience, time-consuming and complaints, they continue with their stringent safety measures and regulations. That is how threatened the governments of our world are feeling.

In One Pieceverse, even though specific titles and names in the past may not be given or stated, but there will be a few powerful ones who are definitely deserved to be called a king or an emperor. The Yonko title that is used now could be given by the World Government. Titles serve as a communication, authority, rank and where the specific individuals stand. It's also a way to measure their skills, abilities and capabilities.

Since the focus is mainly on the present and progressively to the future, unless Oda decides to tell us, we wouldn't know if such titles or any kind of names were given to these "most powerful" pirates of the past, like what we have now. In fact, there seems to be only Roger (the main one) to be the most threatening pirate to the World Government during the previous era.

Right now, we have Luffy whom the WG can't let their eyes off of him. The level of threat they are feeling are definitely increasing.

 

[M3J]

The title is not what's importance as it's just aesthetic, it's the act and influence (over an area) that is key here.

The word King is just a title, but it means someone who has influence over a Kingdom; why wouldn't such a figure have existed in the past? that's similar to believing any form of leadership or authority only just came into existence.

900 years have gone since the Void Century, there would certainly have been Pirates wanting to claim territory as theirs or in fact, did own territory. Even gangs or small bands of thieves, have their own territory dependant on the extent of their notoriety.

It's a natural desire for Pirates aspire to be wealthy, feared & respected, free to do as they pleased and be treated as kings; that's exactly what an Emperor is; greed and selfishness are ubiquitous tendencies to those who naturally have aspirations of grandeur.


Very odd for this to become the norm only after Roger died even though he was never an Emperor, it's more likely that these things existed even before Roger's time.

Probably could have, or there's also a chance that no pirate was strong enough to stand against the World Government or did not want to risk their wrath. And if they owned small territories, that likely wouldn't be enough to claim themselves as dangerous emperors, though they could likely say they were stronger than your average pirates.

Debatable, as Shanks and Whitebeard did not show any hint of maliciousness, while Whitebeard has been protecting the people in his territories instead of demanding stuff from them as Big Mom did to Fishman Island, both in candy and in Sun Pirates. While it's a natural desire for pirates to want to be wealthy, feared, and respected, they would have to have the power to do that, especially given the World Government's efforts to stop piracy. We don't know much of what happened before Roger, but we could conclude that they faced good opposition.

Also, there's evidence that becoming Pirate King (conquering the Grand Line) was an act attempted by Pirates before Roger became Pirate King - it was said that people believed conquering the Grand Line was impossible. For there to be a Grand Line to conquer, it'd imply that there were territories too back then. Another point to put out is, if people considered conquering the Grand Line 'impossible', it suggests that people attempted to do so; can't claim something to be impossible without first knowing what it is.

Digressing a bit, how did Blackbeard take over Whitebeard's territory? by conquering it; Becoming Pirate King and an Emperor both require conquering; what is the difference between an Emperor and Pirate King? An Emperor conquers a portion of the Grand Line and the Pirate King conquers the entire Grand Line. It'd make more sense that if people were aspiring to Conquer the Grand Line, then they'd start out with portions meaning, if people claimed Pirate King an impossible feat, the concept of Emperors must have been in existence too.

In conclusion, the question that should be asked is, why wouldn't a powerful influential Pirate not own territory? is it that out of the ordinary to harbour such desires in the 900 years until Roger's death?

Why would you need territories for Grand Line to be conquered? You wouldn't necessarily need enemies in territories to make it impossible, especially when there are dangerous natural environment like a super storm, sea monsters, and the likes. And did anyone know the complete way to get to Raftel or have one of those log poses?

Why was it impossible? What made it impossible? Has that really been mentioned? I can't recall.

A powerful, influential pirate would still have to face enemies for their territories, which include other pirates and the Marines.

 

[Hannibal Psyche]

Probably could have, or there's also a chance that no pirate was strong enough to stand against the World Government or did not want to risk their wrath. And if they owned small territories, that likely wouldn't be enough to claim themselves as dangerous emperors, though they could likely say they were stronger than your average pirates.

Debatable, as Shanks and Whitebeard did not show any hint of maliciousness, while Whitebeard has been protecting the people in his territories instead of demanding stuff from them as Big Mom did to Fishman Island, both in candy and in Sun Pirates. While it's a natural desire for pirates to want to be wealthy, feared, and respected, they would have to have the power to do that, especially given the World Government's efforts to stop piracy. We don't know much of what happened before Roger, but we could conclude that they faced good opposition.



Why would you need territories for Grand Line to be conquered? You wouldn't necessarily need enemies in territories to make it impossible, especially when there are dangerous natural environment like a super storm, sea monsters, and the likes. And did anyone know the complete way to get to Raftel or have one of those log poses?

Why was it impossible? What made it impossible? Has that really been mentioned? I can't recall.

A powerful, influential pirate would still have to face enemies for their territories, which include other pirates and the Marines.

Wouldn't need to be malicious, but nonetheless, if you wanted to protect multiple countries or Islands, you'd need to claim those territories like Whitebeard did with Fishman Island when it was being ransacked and ravaged by Human Pirates. And if you weren't one of those Pirates who believed in being honourable, you'd belong to the other group of Pirates who were on the other end of the scale.

Out of all the Pirates, there are very few like the SHs who actually do things to help. Pirates are predominantly savages; can be seen when all the Pirates questioned Zoro for saving the man in Sabaody who got shot by a Tenryuubito, they asked since when do Pirates have hearts? This tells us, it's the usual for Pirates to be destructive, selfish, greedy and everything negative that comes with the title, it's not just a stereotype. With this nature a core part of Piracy, they must have aspired to build empires and attempted to do so. Shiki wanted to take over the world, not just the Grand Line, and I doubt this was abnormal.

And there's nothing to conquer without people to fight against, that's why it was said that Blackbeard conquered Whitebeard's territory after he had defeated Whitebeard's entire fleet. Without opposition, you couldn't say he conquered the territory, but simply moved in.

It may not have been said, but it's clearly implied. It's impossible because it requires a lot of strength and man-power. That's why all the Emperors are all trying to increase their strength with increased fleet sizes and powerful DFs. If it were not due to strength, there'd have been many Pirate Kings before Roger, but he's the first to have ever conquered the Grand Line. It's not until Blackbead absorbed the Gura Gura no Mi that he deemed himself as a contender for Pirate King.

 

[Elizabeth Thomas]

Hello, people

It seems clear (though unconfirmed) that Mam and Kaidou are from WB and Roger's generation

To me, it looks more like Roger would be about 70 today, while Kaidou and Big Mom would be about 50. Kaidou still has black hair, after all, while Rayleigh has not. We still don't have a clear picture of Big Mom’s face, but it doesn’t seem so wrinkled as Rayleigh’s, Garp’s or Whitebeard’s. Being a giant, however, her age may be hard to tell.

As for the pirate world at Roger’s age, my impression is that Roger and Whitebeard were sort of a Nikou, until the Roger pirates conquered the Grand Line and Roger was acknowledged as the true Pirate King. My reason for believing in that resides in the fact that Shiki, who was hinted to be not too far off Yonkou level, believed the next age would be Whitebeard’s. As for the term kou itself, I believe it was only used after Roger’s time. It’s hinted that things were pretty different before Roger, although, frankly, it would be hard to guess exactly how different they were. As things stand, it’s possible the term was already in use at the time.

 

[Core D. Roy]

I doubt it. Shanks seemed young when roger died and even that happened some time after the pirates disbanded IIRC. Shanks as a young, and weak, pirate could not have possibly held control over a territory as a yonko would. Even with luffy as he is right now the idea is somewhat asinine and he has the power to exchange hits with the likes of doflamingo and an actual armada. Shanks becoming a yonko is something that should have taken more time and happened as he became as a seasoned pirate. Shanks has had plenty of time for something like this after all, he has been going at it for over 20 years. More so, roger does not seem like the type to take control over territory and such things. Conquest was never his game, roger was in the game of freedom and adventure.

I guess only time will tell, since we know so little about the yonkou, when they were established, who all else was one, if there were only three/two/five/whatever at a time, etc. I'm personally betting on:

1. Roger competed actively with Whitebeard, Mom, and Kaidou in the New World and had equal territories- called 'four emperors' derogatorily by the WG (more propaganda, I imagine), the shichibukai system was instated as a counterbalance.
2. Roger took the title of Pirate King shortly after contracting an 'illness' and very shortly before turning himself in. He was ruling all the seas in that time, but once he kicks it the three remaining yonkou fight over his old territory; chaos ensues for that part of the world for quite a while.
3. All crew members go into hiding, as it was probably Roger's last wish to them when he disbanded the crew. They stay out of New World vs. WG politics. This leaves the apprentices on Roger's ship as the closest possible contenders for Roger's territory.
4. Buggy is Buggy and we don't know of any others. I'm pretty sure Shanks is some sort of Minato/Itachi-tier genius with haki that followed a similar path of reckless 'help people be free' escapades as Luffy before being able to compete with his old Captain's rivals.

I can imagine Shanks's "early life Luffy escapades" taking place in Roger's old territory as he desperately tries to liberate island after island from the hoard of rival pirates eager to get in on his Captain's treasure and territory. Maybe Whitebeard saw his potential and gave him a hand until he could stand as a yonkou himself?