The famed Mandalorian Darksaber didn't exist prior to Star Wars: The Clone Wars, though The Mandalorian has given it new life by introducing it to live-action and creating brand-new rules and lore surrounding it - though not all those changes have been made for the better. It's common in a franchise like Star Wars for lore to change and develop as it's ed on through various media channels. Unfortunately, however, that also makes it easier for these alterations to create some discrepancies, sometimes powerful enough to negatively affect the lore as a whole.

The Darksaber is a recent example of this, with the ancient weapon of the first Mandalorian Jedi going from being an incredibly interesting piece of Mandalorian culture to something of a nuisance that's reduced to smashed pieces in The Mandalorian season 3. The weapon seems as if it will play a key role in the latter, but in reality, it acts more like a barrier, all of which has to do with its intimate tie to the Mandalorian throne. This idea, however, doesn't come from The Clone Wars; it instead derives from a scene's grave misinterpretation.

The Darksaber Had Nothing To Do With Ruling Mandalore In The Clone Wars

Maul Won The Throne Through Combat, Not Because Of The Darksaber

The first time the Darksaber is exchanged onscreen in Star Wars is when Darth Maul claims the weapon after he defeats Pre Vizsla in ritualistic combat, but the weapon isn't at the heart of this duel whatsoever. It's made clear in The Clone Wars season 5, episode 15 "Shades of Reason" that, while Maul does challenge Vizsla to a duel in order to gain control of his forces and thus Mandalore itself, it has nothing to do with the blade Vizsla wields. Instead, it has everything to do with the honor code the Mandalorians abide by.

Maul comes upon this realization when speaking with Prime Minister Almec as he formulates his plan. He discovers that this code of honor could be earned by him if he challenges Vizsla to a duel and wins. Not once is the Darksaber brought up, not until Maul lays claim to the sword separately at the end of their duel, just before he uses it to behead Vizsla. Even then, no one insists that they ought to follow Maul because he wields the Darksaber specifically. It's simply because he defeated Vizsla in combat, and they're now honor-bound to follow Maul.

Even then, no one insists that they ought to follow Maul because he wields the Darksaber specifically. It's simply because he defeated Vizsla in combat, and they're now honor-bound to follow Maul.

This is why Palpatine doesn't earn the Darksaber after he clearly defeats Maul in a duel at the end of season 5, episode 16 "The Lawless." For starters, Palpatine wasn't fighting Maul in ritualistic combat for control of Mandalore and its forces. His fight was personal, because of his own motivations, and there were no witnesses to it. By Star Wars' new rules, as established in The Mandalorian, Palpatine would have earned the Darksaber and thus the right to rule Mandalore from this duel, but that makes no sense. That's why it never happened in The Clone Wars.

The Darksaber's Legacy Was Hurt By This Rule Change

It Became Little More Than A Means To An End

While this new rule certainly had the potential in The Mandalorian to lead to some incredibly rich storytelling, particularly concerning Din Djarin accidentally inheriting it, this rule change has ultimately hurt the legacy of the weapon in the long run. As mentioned briefly above, it makes the history of the weapon utterly confusing, as the necessity to win it purely in combat complicates the rules of who truly has ownership of it. By these , both Palpatine and Ahsoka Tano would have had claims to it at one point, and thus would have had claims to the Mandalorian throne.

If this truly was a long-running rule and tradition of the Mandalorian people, then Great Purge of Mandalore in the eyes of some Mandalorians.

The Mandalorian people are warriors; while weapons are a part of their religion, they are only a small part of combat in general.

All the new confusions and nuance prior to The Mandalorian aside, it makes little sense to have the Mandalorians place such value on a mere weapon as opposed to combat itself. The Mandalorian people are warriors; while weapons are a part of their religion, they are only a small part of combat in general. It's hard to imagine any Mandalorian recognizing Moff Gideon as a true ruler of Mandalore when he never even fought Bo-Katan for the Darksaber, instead tricking her into surrendering it. Having the weapon itself hardly seems like reason enough to rule.

It all goes back to this scene between Maul and Vizsla in The Clone Wars, the first duel for the Mandalorian throne. With or without the Darksaber present, the Mandalorians there still would have been honor-bound to follow Maul if he won. To have that sense of victory through combat changed from combat itself to the ancient weapon truly seems to misunderstand what the Mandalorians are all about. It's even something Din Djarin points out in The Mandalorian when he says the blade means nothing to him nor his people. Now, the weapon's legacy has been hurt forever.