Part 1, it depends on how good at keeping a secret Padame is, and how well she fains interest in other men, etc. In theory, all that the other senators know is that she was on her way to single motherhood. The whole "secret marriage thing" suggests that the Jedi are a chaste monastic society, so having a Jedi friend (which it seems many high ranking politicians on Coruscant did) necessary leads to the assumption that he's the father.

Even if you assume Bail does know who the babydaddy is, he only knows him as Anakin Skywalker, who Obi-wan killed on Mustafar. There is no particular reason to think Vader is a resurrected Anakin - him being a third secret apprentice of Palpatine is far more likely.

He wouldn't have to say she was Vader's kid; just who Vader is. The point is moot in the end though. Everyone could know who Vader is and it would ultimately wind up just being some people saying "Aaagh no please lord An----" before they die.

The leader of the trade federation (or at least their expedition to Naboo?) in Episode I wasn't very concerned about Jedi.

(His advisor was more knowledgeable.)

The only trouble with the theory that Bail Organa doesn't know who Darth Vader is... is that both Yoda and Obi-Wan know that Anakin is Darth Vader and the three of them conspired to hide the children of Anakin Skywalker.

While the Jedi have a storied history as liars, I don't think it makes much sense for them to hide that fact from a key member of their conspiracy.

Did yoda and obi-wan know that anak in was still alive when the kids we're born? Obi-wan left him burnt to a crisp and left with Padme. It's quite possible that Bail had taken Leia and that Obi-wan had already dropped off luke before they found out that Anakin had survived and was now Vader.

Did yoda and obi-wan know that anak in was still alive when the kids we're born? Obi-wan left him burnt to a crisp and left with Padme. It's quite possible that Bail had taken Leia and that Obi-wan had already dropped off luke before they found out that Anakin had survived and was now Vader.

Really good point. Obi Wan told Luke that they were split up to protect them from the Emperor. I think you're right on this one.

Darth Vader is a highly influential, and highly placed individual in the New Order. He also happens to be quite tall, dressed completely in black armor, with a black robe, and generally surrounded by Imperial officers and troopers of the Imperial Stormtrooper Corps. He's not going to be hidden for long - and just because Obi-Wan is in hiding doesn't mean he's cut off from news from the rest of the galaxy.

If Obi-Wan truly believes that Darth Vader died on Mustafar, it means he didn't lie to Luke, but spoke out of ignorance. Which is highly uncharacteristic for the Jedi: They generally lie and are not normally ignorant.

Now, it is possible that Obi-Wan has no clue that Darth Vader is still running around the galaxy because he's living the hermit life and Ahsoka learns the truth and tracks down Obi-Wan to tell him... but otherwise....

I think that for all his failings, Luke and Leia were more at risk from the Emperor than Vader, in any case. The Emperor went through quite a lot of trouble to isolate Anakin from everybody but himself: From the Jedi Order, from his Padawan, from his Master, his mother, his wife. If the Emperor knew that Anakin had children, he would use them as a weapon against Anakin - perhaps destroying them, perhaps taking them under his "protection" and threatening their well-being, or training them as replacements for Anakin and unleashing them against Vader when the Emperor has grown weary of his apprentice, revealing their origins at a crucial time for Vader that leaves him vulnerable to the "tender caresses" of his children's lightsabers.

Hell, for all we know, Obi-Wan and Yoda might have been aware that Vader was going to destroy the Emperor and simply kept lying to Luke about his needing to destroy Vader to defeat the dark side (IIRC, they never say anything about destroying the Emperor).

Just wanna add that "sithspit" is a customary curse, so, people know that there has been something like "a sith", but more in the sense of the ancient race that fought the rest of the universe millenia ago, not about the modern sith or the rule of 2 and so on.

It is pretty clear that by ANH Obi-Wan knows who Vader is, the question is did he know who Vader was at the end of ROTS? I would say yes but I could be wrong.

It is pretty clear that by ANH Obi-Wan knows who Vader is, the question is did he know who Vader was at the end of ROTS? I would say yes but I could be wrong.

Scene where Obi-Wan and Yoda is at the temple in RotS and he sees a recording of the whole "rise Lord Vader" thing.

Somebody mentioned previously in the thread that people would have no idea who the Sith were because they (as far as the galaxy at large is concerned) went extinct 1000 years ago.

That's a bit of an unusual statement, given that most people know who the vikings were - and they basically faded from history about 800 years ago (and their hey-day was about 1000 years ago). Many people are familiar with the Huns, Goths, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Etruscans, Assyrians, Carthaginians, Saxons, Picts, Celts, Franks, &c. And we're talking about a group that left an imprint on the galaxy of a scope more comparable to the ancient Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans, or Mongols - and with the exception of the Mongols, these ancient peoples all experienced the height of their power more than a thousand years ago.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

It is pretty clear that by ANH Obi-Wan knows who Vader is, the question is did he know who Vader was at the end of ROTS? I would say yes but I could be wrong.

Scene where Obi-Wan and Yoda is at the temple in RotS and he sees a recording of the whole "rise Lord Vader" thing.

I wasn't sureif he was called Vader in the recording or not. Thanks

Somebody mentioned previously in the thread that people would have no idea who the Sith were because they (as far as the galaxy at large is concerned) went extinct 1000 years ago.

That's a bit of an unusual statement, given that most people know who the vikings were - and they basically faded from history about 800 years ago (and their hey-day was about 1000 years ago). Many people are familiar with the Huns, Goths, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Etruscans, Assyrians, Carthaginians, Saxons, Picts, Celts, Franks, &c. And we're talking about a group that left an imprint on the galaxy of a scope more comparable to the ancient Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans, or Mongols - and with the exception of the Mongols, these ancient peoples all experienced the height of their power more than a thousand years ago.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

Yeah any decent historian or any military or paramilitary officer should know who the Sith are, specially anyone in the later groups who was trained during or before The Clone Wars when the Sith Wars were the last major Republic wide war available to study and you had to go back almost 4,000 years to find a full scale Republic wide war that didn't involve the Sith.

In the book "Kenobi" (I know, Legends...) wasn't there a scene where Ben is in a Cantina, sees a news report about Vader and reacts to it? I don't have the book anymore but someone out there might. How did that play out?

Do they show the recording that obi sees? I always assumed it was Anakin killing the younglings. It makes more sense for the temple security recordings to be of inside the temple. I would be shocked if the Jedi we're allowed to have security cameras and microphones in the supreme chancellor's office

I haven't seen it in a while but I think it showed Anakin talking with Palpatine over the holo-comm to let Palpatine know that the temple had fallen and Palpatine refers to him as Lord Vader.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

It's not necessarily any different than if someone had called another "Jedi" or "Padawan". Admittedly it sounds a little odd because Darth is an honorific and I've never heard Jedi used as an honorific and Padawan only sometimes, e.g. "Padawan Tano". But it can work.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

Well, yes. Very clearly he was originally Lord (title) Darth (given name) Vader (family name).

The meaning, however, has changed, as the canon has evolved.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

It's not necessarily any different than if someone had called another "Jedi" or "Padawan". Admittedly it sounds a little odd because Darth is an honorific and I've never heard Jedi used as an honorific and Padawan only sometimes, e.g. "Padawan Tano". But it can work.

I feel like somebody at some point in time referred to someone else as, "Jedi Knight So-and-so". But I do not recall who or when. Might have even been in a Legends source, now.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

Well, yes. Very clearly he was originally Lord (title) Darth (given name) Vader (family name).

The meaning, however, has changed, as the canon has evolved.

There's no reason to suspect that the title of 'Darth' would be any more or less alien to the peoples of the Galactic Empire than the titles of 'Pharaoh', 'Caesar', 'Consul', 'Archon', 'Tyrant', or 'Khan' are to us.

"Darth" is his first name. Vader's title is "Lord", right?

"Only a master of evil, Darth." - A line that works equally well between former freinds on a first-name basis (note: Vader calls Kenobi "Obi-Wan") or as Kenobi making a sarcastic remark.

http://scifi.about.com/od/starwarsglossaryandfaq/a/Star-Wars-Glossary-Darth.htm

It's not necessarily any different than if someone had called another "Jedi" or "Padawan". Admittedly it sounds a little odd because Darth is an honorific and I've never heard Jedi used as an honorific and Padawan only sometimes, e.g. "Padawan Tano". But it can work.

I feel like somebody at some point in time referred to someone else as, "Jedi Knight So-and-so". But I do not recall who or when. Might have even been in a Legends source, now.

I think so too, but I can't put my finger on any specific instance. At any rate, whilst it was probably written as Darth being a first name way back when, it's easily spun as compatible with the canon that came later. Master is a Jedi title - and I recall it was one Anakin was very cut up about finally getting put on the Jedi Council at Palpatine's insistence but not being granted the rank of master. Very cut up about, if I recall the scene correctly. Master is not just a relative term of power for Jedi, it's a rank they aspire to. So later on we get the turn about:

"Now I, am the [Jedi] Master"

"Only a 'master' of evil [denying his status], Darth [emphasizing his true status - not a Jedi title but a Sith one]"

Ultimately it could be spun many ways but this works well enough without clashing with any other canon that unless you want to create conflict, I say it's a fair interpretation to settle on.

Certainly the canon evolved.

I am just noting that the earlier versions are fun sources of "misinformation" for those players with a taste for old Star Wars lore.

As to who knows Vader was Anakin? I think that would be a very short list. The emperor, Obi-Wan, possibly Ahsoka (though I hope not - we'll find out). Yoda, of course but that's about it. As PrettyHaley said, if even Tarkin is unsure, it cannot be open knowledge.

This was old cannon, so probably doesn't count anymore, but Bail Organa knew too. I remember a book where he started freaking out when Vader showed up on Alderaan, wondering if he had figured out the Leia connection and was here on family business.

Same thing here - you might know that the Sith are the mortal enemies of the Jedi, they're part of a religious cult, and . . . . um. Details like former leaders, homeworlds, beliefs, social structure won't be part of that common knowledge.

As to who knows Vader was Anakin? I think that would be a very short list. The emperor, Obi-Wan, possibly Ahsoka (though I hope not - we'll find out). Yoda, of course but that's about it. As PrettyHaley said, if even Tarkin is unsure, it cannot be open knowledge.

This was old cannon, so probably doesn't count anymore, but Bail Organa knew too. I remember a book where he started freaking out when Vader showed up on Alderaan, wondering if he had figured out the Leia connection and was here on family business.

That's a bit of an unusual statement, given that most people know who the vikings were - and they basically faded from history about 800 years ago (and their hey-day was about 1000 years ago). Many people are familiar with the Huns, Goths, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Etruscans, Assyrians, Carthaginians, Saxons, Picts, Celts, Franks, &c. And we're talking about a group that left an imprint on the galaxy of a scope more comparable to the ancient Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans, or Mongols - and with the exception of the Mongols, these ancient peoples all experienced the height of their power more than a thousand years ago.

Fair enough - everyone knows about vikings. However if you were to press the Man on the Street for details, you'd get "Ummm . . . horned helmets, worshiped Thor, liked to fight and drink and. . . . . um. . . " Anything beyond the high level common knowledge, the finer details like hygiene levels, social structure and occupations will most likely elude people.

Same thing here - you might know that the Sith are the mortal enemies of the Jedi, they're part of a religious cult, and . . . . um. Details like former leaders, homeworlds, beliefs, social structure won't be part of that common knowledge.

I think the galaxy is a big place. It's risky to talk about it as if it were a single society. Whilst obviously Star Wars is absurdly simplistic and often paints it that way, there would probably be whole sectors where the Sith were fairly well known - planets that endured long periods under their rule for example - whilst in other areas the name probably wouldn't even be recognised.

Maybe there's a planet with a dark history and the people may not know every detail of the Sith but they'll notice that they had a series of tyrants called Darth Baddius, Darth Sinisterus, Darth Gropeus, etc. It may not be that exactly, but there will be enough history with the Sith that details like this are familiar to them.

Whilst of course there would be planets more recently settled, less involved or simply less interested where even "Sith" doesn't ring any bells. This may or may not seem obvious but my real point is about to come. It only partly matters how few people know this stuff if the exposure of its return is widespread. You know how once one person spots a continuity error in a movie or points out a flaw in some news story, everybody hears about it. Even if 99.5% of people in the galaxy don't know much more about the Sith that we do about the Pharaohs, you can bet the moment someone called Darth Vader hit the Holonews, every historian in every university and every armchair antiquarian would be leaping to their feet to talk the ears off anyone who would listen. And it's not just titles, there are other giveaways like inquisitors who use the Force but clearly are not Jedi. It's not proof of Sith - there's "a lot of strange things" in the galaxy to quote Han Solo. Dathomir witches and Bardotens, planets strong in the Force where odd things sometimes happen and all sorts of spooky little corners of the galaxy that people avoid. But still, it will make people think and even if they're few, their natural response will be to talk.

So the question then becomes not how little or how much people know, but to what degree information is contained. Just how secret are things like the inquisitors or Vader's "first name"? And as a counter-part to that, how much active suppression does the Empire do? I mean you can censor words and monitor communications but that can backfire badly, just ask the Lady of Sith Darth Streisand what happened when she tried to suppress knowledge of a minor incident. The Empire is an organization of billions of people. If you send out a message to your Ministry of Information to put "Darth" and "Sith" on the watch list you've just tipped your hand to millions of your own staff.

Suppression of events post-fact is viable. Something happened on Lothal we don't want people know about? Blacklist it from the news organizations and monitor the independents and pirate stations for mentions. It's viable because the tipping your hand (some people have to know in order to watch and suppress it) is set against something worse (uncontrolled spread). Pre-fact censorship is a lot less viable because you're tipping your hand for something that isn't actually a problem right now.

Where this leads us is that censorship on things like Inquisitors and Sith nomenclature has to be done at a local level as needed. So I think things like Vader's Sith title are for between those "in the know". Palpatine, the Inquisitors... I'm thinking there is a structure within the Empire, an inner circle - people who have official ranks within it, say an Inquisitor is officially a captain in the ISB seconded to other branches of the Imperial power structure as needed but really the ranks are bestowed as a tool to suit their position in the Sith-aware inner structure. I would have no doubt that plenty of people within the Empire know there are wheels within wheels, but it's generally a hushed voice thing kept within the organization. The ISB agent in Rebels doesn't necessarily know the Inquisitor is Force-sensitive (although he might), but he's certainly smart enough to know who he takes orders from and that it's more than just the standard hierarchy. The high-ranking officers on the Death Star aren't completely freaked when Vader who they know to be a sorcerer chokes someone with a gesture - they're all powerful men and aren't cowed by it (though it no doubt terrifies lesser officers); and they undoubtedly talk about it amongst themselves and confidants - Vader is probably surrounded by dark rumours which is how he likes it. But they wont be talking to outsiders about it much. I imagine the Empire is not an environment in which gossips find themselves popular - too much fear and distrust to like someone around who you know likes to blab.

The Emperor is sitting on a powder keg. Detailed knowledge of the Sith is unlikely to be commonplace, but it must be relatively easily obtainable by huge numbers. I'm not aware that the Star Wars universe had a Dark Ages between Sith empires and the current era (the Dark Ages are named that because so little was written during that time period that it was 'dark' to historians). So there must be innumerable sources. So I think the Emperor must be keeping the powder very damp and avoiding too many sparks. Inquisitors are dark rumours, Sith titles are for between conspirators, it's okay for the Emperor's attack dog to be a known sorcerer but it must not appear that the Emperor is.

It's not about historical knowledge, it's about making sure nobody joins the dots.

I do know of a little bit of source material regarding this.

If you've read the "rogue squadron" series, there's one part in the 2nd or 3rd book I believe, where they infiltrate coruscant to prepare for the takeover of galactic center by new republic forces, since at the time Coruscant is still held by the Imperial remnant. The characters visit the royal imperial museum, and a part of it is dedicated to the Jedi. Basically, the "official story" is that the Jedi grew too powerful, Palpatine formed the new imperial order to put a stop to their attempted takeover of the galaxy, and of the Jedi, only one saw the "truth" and assisted Palpatine in his "noble cause". That one being darth vader of course.

It's a good series. Good to read even if you aren't looking for material.

As to who knows Vader was Anakin? I think that would be a very short list. The emperor, Obi-Wan, possibly Ahsoka (though I hope not - we'll find out). Yoda, of course but that's about it. As PrettyHaley said, if even Tarkin is unsure, it cannot be open knowledge.

This was old cannon, so probably doesn't count anymore, but Bail Organa knew too. I remember a book where he started freaking out when Vader showed up on Alderaan, wondering if he had figured out the Leia connection and was here on family business.

That's a bit of an unusual statement, given that most people know who the vikings were - and they basically faded from history about 800 years ago (and their hey-day was about 1000 years ago). Many people are familiar with the Huns, Goths, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Etruscans, Assyrians, Carthaginians, Saxons, Picts, Celts, Franks, &c. And we're talking about a group that left an imprint on the galaxy of a scope more comparable to the ancient Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans, or Mongols - and with the exception of the Mongols, these ancient peoples all experienced the height of their power more than a thousand years ago.

Fair enough - everyone knows about vikings. However if you were to press the Man on the Street for details, you'd get "Ummm . . . horned helmets, worshiped Thor, liked to fight and drink and. . . . . um. . . " Anything beyond the high level common knowledge, the finer details like hygiene levels, social structure and occupations will most likely elude people.

Same thing here - you might know that the Sith are the mortal enemies of the Jedi, they're part of a religious cult, and . . . . um. Details like former leaders, homeworlds, beliefs, social structure won't be part of that common knowledge.

I think the galaxy is a big place. It's risky to talk about it as if it were a single society. Whilst obviously Star Wars is absurdly simplistic and often paints it that way, there would probably be whole sectors where the Sith were fairly well known - planets that endured long periods under their rule for example - whilst in other areas the name probably wouldn't even be recognised.

Maybe there's a planet with a dark history and the people may not know every detail of the Sith but they'll notice that they had a series of tyrants called Darth Baddius, Darth Sinisterus, Darth Gropeus, etc. It may not be that exactly, but there will be enough history with the Sith that details like this are familiar to them.

Whilst of course there would be planets more recently settled, less involved or simply less interested where even "Sith" doesn't ring any bells. This may or may not seem obvious but my real point is about to come. It only partly matters how few people know this stuff if the exposure of its return is widespread. You know how once one person spots a continuity error in a movie or points out a flaw in some news story, everybody hears about it. Even if 99.5% of people in the galaxy don't know much more about the Sith that we do about the Pharaohs, you can bet the moment someone called Darth Vader hit the Holonews, every historian in every university and every armchair antiquarian would be leaping to their feet to talk the ears off anyone who would listen. And it's not just titles, there are other giveaways like inquisitors who use the Force but clearly are not Jedi. It's not proof of Sith - there's "a lot of strange things" in the galaxy to quote Han Solo. Dathomir witches and Bardotens, planets strong in the Force where odd things sometimes happen and all sorts of spooky little corners of the galaxy that people avoid. But still, it will make people think and even if they're few, their natural response will be to talk.

So the question then becomes not how little or how much people know, but to what degree information is contained. Just how secret are things like the inquisitors or Vader's "first name"? And as a counter-part to that, how much active suppression does the Empire do? I mean you can censor words and monitor communications but that can backfire badly, just ask the Lady of Sith Darth Streisand what happened when she tried to suppress knowledge of a minor incident. The Empire is an organization of billions of people. If you send out a message to your Ministry of Information to put "Darth" and "Sith" on the watch list you've just tipped your hand to millions of your own staff.

Suppression of events post-fact is viable. Something happened on Lothal we don't want people know about? Blacklist it from the news organizations and monitor the independents and pirate stations for mentions. It's viable because the tipping your hand (some people have to know in order to watch and suppress it) is set against something worse (uncontrolled spread). Pre-fact censorship is a lot less viable because you're tipping your hand for something that isn't actually a problem right now.

Where this leads us is that censorship on things like Inquisitors and Sith nomenclature has to be done at a local level as needed. So I think things like Vader's Sith title are for between those "in the know". Palpatine, the Inquisitors... I'm thinking there is a structure within the Empire, an inner circle - people who have official ranks within it, say an Inquisitor is officially a captain in the ISB seconded to other branches of the Imperial power structure as needed but really the ranks are bestowed as a tool to suit their position in the Sith-aware inner structure. I would have no doubt that plenty of people within the Empire know there are wheels within wheels, but it's generally a hushed voice thing kept within the organization. The ISB agent in Rebels doesn't necessarily know the Inquisitor is Force-sensitive (although he might), but he's certainly smart enough to know who he takes orders from and that it's more than just the standard hierarchy. The high-ranking officers on the Death Star aren't completely freaked when Vader who they know to be a sorcerer chokes someone with a gesture - they're all powerful men and aren't cowed by it (though it no doubt terrifies lesser officers); and they undoubtedly talk about it amongst themselves and confidants - Vader is probably surrounded by dark rumours which is how he likes it. But they wont be talking to outsiders about it much. I imagine the Empire is not an environment in which gossips find themselves popular - too much fear and distrust to like someone around who you know likes to blab.

The Emperor is sitting on a powder keg. Detailed knowledge of the Sith is unlikely to be commonplace, but it must be relatively easily obtainable by huge numbers. I'm not aware that the Star Wars universe had a Dark Ages between Sith empires and the current era (the Dark Ages are named that because so little was written during that time period that it was 'dark' to historians). So there must be innumerable sources. So I think the Emperor must be keeping the powder very damp and avoiding too many sparks. Inquisitors are dark rumours, Sith titles are for between conspirators, it's okay for the Emperor's attack dog to be a known sorcerer but it must not appear that the Emperor is.

It's not about historical knowledge, it's about making sure nobody joins the dots.

This is very good but I thought I would add there is so much history in a galaxy as wide spread and old as the Star Wars one that things can just disappear into the giant hole of records. Most of the records of The Great Hyperspace War have been lost or have been corrupted by people writing things because it fits their own agenda. Look at how many misconceptions are still in general knowledge about our own history because of Victorian historians who didn't know what they are doing or forced things to fit their own viewpoints (the treatment of the Romans vs the Celts are a good example).

The Sith spent a very long time deliberately trying to hide and muddying the historical record would very much be part of this. So as a modern historian in Star Wars you would have to unpick the facts from the folklore, propaganda and deliberate falsehoods about the Sith and that would of been very difficult.

Also a lot of former titles are now actual names today. How many people have names like Duke, Monk, Priest etc? Lots so are you going to assume that Darth Vader is a member of an Force society that has been extinct for a thousand years or has just picked up the name because his parents thought it was interesting and didn't know the history?

so are you going to assume that Darth Vader is a member of an Force society that has been extinct for a thousand years or has just picked up the name because his authors thought it was interesting and didn't know the history (yet)?

fixed that for you.