Witchyseasees

Dragon Age doesn't really do "bad guys." Not in a larger ontological sense. In Dragon Age, there are no true tyrants who started out that way. The thematic lens on villainy in Dragon Age is that everyone actually started off good, with a real desire to help and protect a group of people they felt responsible to and/or for. At the very least, even if their views/beliefs were not "good," they came by them earnestly and unselfishly: Dedicated to a god or a belief or a system they saw as greater than themselves.

The idea of a secretly-corrupt-from-the-start individual is actually unrealistically rare in DA, and in its main villains/antagonists specifically:

Loghain really sucks, and I have no sympathy for any of his actions. But the game goes out of its way to show that, from his own perspective, this was never about hoarding power for himself; it was about protecting his people and his kingdom from what he saw as a legitimately larger threat.

Meredith: Also hate and do not personally forgive her. But the framing is of someone who was committed to the ideas she'd been raised with (magic is dangerous to the common people), an awareness that Kirkwall WAS uniquely dangerous in terms of blood magic and possession before her arrival or interference, a sense of frustration that no one else in the city seemed to see this as a problem to be dealt with, and then a magical macguffin whispering paranoias and sycophancies to her like her own personal ChatGPT.

Orsino: Spent all his time advocating against Meredith's mistreatment, and became possessed when he felt there was no other way to survive or resolve this conflict.

Anders: Another mage who advocated for human rights for mages, and who became so frustrated by the monstrosity and dehumanization in how mages were treated that he did an act of terrorism to bring attention to their plight and hopefully trigger a world-wide resistance.

Corypheus: Also personally unforgivable to me, but a guy who devoted himself above all others to gods that were very real to him, who actually spoke to him and gave him instructions. And who shifted his lens from following their directions and back to restoring the empire he'd abandoned and helped passively destroy by his actions following false gods.

Solas: A guy who did a lot of warcrimes for his girlfriend, but also to protect their common people, and who then turned on his fellow leaders once they began consolidating unncessary power and exploiting their subordinates. Made an executive decision that locked said tyrants away after they refused to change and then murdered said girlfriend, accidentally leading to the eventual death of every one of the people he was trying to protect. So he decided upon his return he, similar to Corypheus, would be undoing the problem he'd accidentally caused, even if it was risky and dangerous to modern commoners.

More generally, as magical elements, we have:

Demons: Demons are both literal and metaphorical echoes of this same concept as well: Incorporeal, curious beings who want to help the corporeal, who are "corrupted" by things that challenge or complicate their original purpose and perspective, and make them more interested in taking bodies and causing damage once corrupted.

The Blight: Even the Blight itself we come to realize is a living entity that as far as we know was never interested in selfishly ruling everything. But is now trying to lash out and take over/convert everything it touches as a manifestation of rage and hurt from something done to it.

Based on everything we know, the common threads rarely begin with true selfishness, greed, and self-aggrandizement. Even if the beliefs themselves are kind of fucked and the person in question was born into privilege and bad ideas (I'd argue they often are in DA)? The "villain" is portrayed as originally having gotten here from a place of earnest care and devotion. Only becoming a power-hoarding tyrant over time. As desperation and complexity make safety/success seem less and less likely.

The idea that the Evanuris would somehow break this cycle, when what we don't know about the history of the Evanuris is almost everything, compared with what we DO know about the way Dragon Age villains are framed?

Yeah, I just don't think we as long-running DA fans are supposed to take at face value that the earliest Evanuris awoke in the world and just immediately insisted everyone else fall on their knees and pledge allegiance. And then decide to go on a conquering spree to deal with anyone who didn't comply. Especially in Dragon Age, a game that relies heavily on unreliable narration, and rarely gives you direct answers when the people involved wouldn't know more than they tell us. The Evanuris always having been evil tyrants since the beginning is just... very unlikely.

Even without the contextual thematic evidence, there's a lot more actual in-universe evidence. Though again, it is subtle, and you have to look beyond the lenses of the unreliable narrators you're getting only parts of the story from.

Including but not limited to:

Ghil'anain creating the halla, beings of peace and care and help. When in her modern form she can only create fucked up science experiments and monstrosity. She tells us directly that she is a changed person since creating the halla; she "could not have created them now." Implying modern Ghila'nain knows things, has experienced things, has learned things, that long, long ago past Ghila'nain was unable to. (Obvious implication: for the worst)

Mythal being implied to be a spirit of compassion originally

Mythal's pre-Veil followers resisting the idea of blind worship or unthinkingly following a leader

Solas telling us that the Evanuris were originally mages, and only made themselves into "gods" to consolidate power

The implication that multiple (~3?) major external threats presented themselves to the Evanuris before Solas's rebellion even happened, which undoubtedly would have challenged them and forced them to change their core beliefs and leadership tactics

The fact that it took thousands and thousands of years for either Solas or Mythal to call out or confront the Evanuris, much less turn against them. Suggesting that they originally, at some point in the past, would have felt no need to do so

Mythal is heavily implied to have been romantically partnered in some way to Elgar'nan... possibly for thousands of years, and likely to some degree up and until her death. With no flare up of conflict in their basic value systems until toward the end

Mythal felt safe confronting the Evanuris with her concerns

Mythal tells us that the Evanuris are preferable to the Forgotten Ones, who are much worse (specifically uses the term "selfish" to sneeringly refer to Anaris)

It's implied Elvhenan lived in peace and prosperity (under their rulers, or maybe prior to the permanent embeddedness of said rulers) for thousands of years

There used to be "many more" of the Evanuris than we know today, suggesting periods of conflict that claimed many lives, forced the elves to tighten leadership roles and expand their unnatural experiments to make stronger soldiers, which is implied many times in the text

The fact that, once again, Solas fought alongside these people, ON their side, for thousands of years, and counted some of them as friends and people he respected

Solas mourns for what was lost when the Veil went up, and seems to have less than hateful feelings toward many of the Evanuris, not just Mythal. Even as he's shown as hating all forms of tyranny as a major factor of his personality

Elgar'nan states in-game that the world is broken, and that he is the only one who can fix it. Not setting himself up purely as a self-interested tyrant, but as a savior who can fix the world, if only everyone could just see his side, accept his role as leader, and stop resisting

The fact that the game goes out of its way to compare Solas and Elgar'nan as foils, with moral arcs that mirror each other, specifically with Solas in danger of following in Elgar'nan's footsteps. Suggesting that Elgar'nan may once have not been any more of a tyrant than Solas starts off being