|
|
Post by russilwvong on Jun 28, 2011 17:57:54 GMT -5
To me, one of the most interesting aspects of the series is its depiction of feudal politics, based very much on personal loyalties. This kind of power structure is vulnerable to decapitation attacks, as we see in the first three books-- The assassination of Renly being the most vivid example. Stannis wins the largest part of Renly's cavalry. Moreover, power is decentralized. Each lord commands his own army, while the central government is relatively weak (think of Afghanistan and its warlords). Again, an example: the Red Wedding, with Bolton and Frey changing sides. |
|
|
|
Post by Ms Harriet Vane on Jul 2, 2011 5:12:00 GMT -5
Yes, it seems like it's an inherently unstable setup. One wrong move, and you're gone, and all your property and people are handed off to someone else. As a serf, there's no politics to care for so much as you just hope your current lord/warlord isn't too much of a bastard or incompetent with money. On the upside (for us), it gives authors so much material to work with. With the power so spread out, you can have real suprises about who pops up to take charge, who is susceptible to subversion and attack, etc. I've been reading about the War of the Roses a bit on Wikipedia, but it's so confusing. It doesn't help that there seem to be about 200 years worth of population sharing the same dozen names. Or changing them at the drop of a hat. But there's those elements of decentralised power, people changing sides based on practical considerations, needing money to raise an army, etc. And if power is decentralised, then I'm not suprised everyone and their direwolf reckons they've got as much right to rule as the other fella. If you know someone only got the throne because of who they married, you might as well marry someone with a claim and have a go too. War of the Roses on Wikipedia. I don't suppose anyone's got a link to a site that explains it better? |
|
|
|
Post by russilwvong on Jul 2, 2011 22:51:13 GMT -5
L. Kip Wheeler has a pretty good overview. If you have trouble keeping everyone straight, think of Henry VI as Aerys Targaryen, Edward IV as Robert Baratheon, and Richard III as Eddard Stark. Edited to make the tenses consistent: ... The king at the time is the Lancastrian Henry VI, a pious but weak ruler prone to bouts of insanity. He is descended from Henry IV, our "hero" in Shakespeare's play Richard II. Richard, Duke of York, argues that Henry IV's descendants have no right to the throne because Henry IV usurped the position unlawfully. Richard's son Edward becomes King Edward IV in 1461 and Henry VI flees the country for nine years.
Edward IV rules for nine years without too much trouble until 1470, when Henry VI returns with an army. Henry VI briefly regains the throne in 1470, but Edward IV ultimately wrestles power away from him again.
On Edward IV's death in 1483, his son Edward V is the next Yorkist ruler slated to ascend to the throne. However, though Edward is unusually precocious and capable, he is still a child. His uncle Richard, Duke of Gloucester (the guy who later becomes King Richard III) sets himself up as regent (temporary ruler) until the boy Edward reaches adulthood. After doing this, Richard declares martial law under his "protectorate government." Richard of Gloucester sends young Edward and Edward's younger brother into the Tower of London ("for the princes' protection"). There, the two child-princes mysteriously vanish, presumably murdered. Richard then declares himself King Richard III as the next Yorkist in line for the throne. After all, he is brother to Edward IV, and all the male offspring of Edward are now out of the way. For a detailed discussion of the underlying causes of the war, see Michael D. Miller. (It doesn't appear to have been copy-edited.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Ms Harriet Vane on Jul 3, 2011 6:11:30 GMT -5
Oh that's exactly what I was after. Thanks so much!
|
|
|
|
Post by russilwvong on Jul 4, 2011 11:14:41 GMT -5
You're welcome!
Reading Miller's introduction, which discusses the importance of the Hundred Years' War with France, I just realized that Dorne is probably based on France, or at least the portions of France claimed by England--a long history of war, currently settled by marriage. (If this line of thinking is correct, the Young Dragon's conquest of Dorne would be based on Henry V, and the Dornish marriage of Daeron II would be based on Henry VI's marriage to Margaret of Anjou, intended to secure peace with France.)
|
|
