Game of Thrones on HBO

[spleen1015]

It seems out of place to me that Bran can use his abilities to touch the past in order to influence the future this late in the game with no hint of it prior to this.

We could've had some flashbacks or some sequences with Bran already that kind of made it some what of a mystery. Throwing it all at us now seems entirely out of place for me.

[Ned Doolittle]

I don't think the show wants to go down the road of changing events by going into the past. You can't spend seasons on storylines that have gone nowhere and then make it so that they never happened, otherwise there was no point to the never ending Arya saga. All the dull stuff we've suffered through has to have been worth it. If anything i could see Bran learning about the past to inform the present ("Jon, I found out how to kill the White Walkers", etc).

But the episode was Bran in a nutshell - all this stuff happening around him while he does nothing.

[PackerFanatic]

Unreal...and heartbreaking...

[Arles]

I enjoyed it as everything seems to be progressing. This was clearly a "connector" episode, but still interesting to watch and I couldn't believe it had been an hour when it ended.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I do wonder why it was necessary to go back in time for Bran to use younger Hodor as a conduit to take over older Hodor. Was it because if he took over Hodor in the current era, he would have been too freaked out to do what he did - the conduit allowing for a barrier? Because he sacrifices Hodor's life to save his own - maybe he didn't fully realize that when using younger Hodor as a conduit, which is why the greenseer puts them in the past.

I thought it was that Bran was trapped in the past. In prior versions, Max Von Sydow (I don't remember his show name) had to end the session for them to go back to the tree. My novice take on all this was that Max sensed the walkers coming and didn't end the session to focus on protecting the tree. So, in essence, Bran was trapped. He heard Max yell to him to come back at the last minute and thought to use Hodor through the past to protect everyone. I'm spit-balling, but it made sense to me at the time.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Arles

In prior versions, Max Von Sydow (I don't remember his show name) had to end the session for them to go back to the tree.

I don't know if that's the case. The vision where they see the Children of the Forest creating the first White Walker, it's Bran who abruptly ends the session.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Just taking stock of where we're at halfway through this season.

King's Landing - Nothing has changed.

Well, except that the Tyrells are gathering an army and planning an attack on the Faith Militant with the Lannisters.

The Wall - Jon & Sansa are together. And still haven't gone south.

I'd say that Sansa successfully evading Ramsey and joining with Jon is a pretty big development. As is Theon making it back to the Iron Islands with his uncle killing his dad. Having the Greyjoys enter the fray (with plans to join with Daenerys) is also a pretty big development. Not sure it will play out the way, but atleast they have a role now.

Across the Sea - Dany has an army (but bigger!). And no way to get it across the sea. Still. Nothing has changed.

She successfully got out of captivity and added a new army. Plus, Tyrion negotiated peace with the Sons of Harpy faction. We also have a new priestess of Light joining Dany's side (to setup an interesting dynamic with the one with Jon Snow).

Bran - Knows a few bombshells (except for the one we WANT to see), and is now back to where he was 2 seasons ago - in the tundra running from ice zombies.

We learned how the white walkers were created and see their advancement towards the south. We also have seen some historical holes filled through Bran's vision. I'd say that was pretty valuable.

Arya - Yep. More training. Followed by more training.

She got her site back and has her first assassin mission. Again, seems like a decent progression for 5 episodes.

Dorne - Fuck Dorne.

As a non book reader, I'd say this area is the biggest questionmark. Not much has happened to put into context Dorn's role. At this point, I'm not sure who they would even support. They obviously hate the Lannisters, and don't seem to have much interest in the Tyrell's or the north. They are the "Hotel California" of GoT - seemingly content to play defense on their turf while the world around them burns.

We're halfway through the season, 2 more wolves down, and in reality, not a lot of pieces have advanced beyond where they were to start the season.

At any point in time since season 1, I could say "nothing has changed, the Lannisters are in King's Landing, the Starks fighting for the north, Dany is out across the sea with no way to come over and Jon is at the wall". But, I think that sells this show a little short. A lot of things have progressed in five episodes and it has got me excited for the final 5. The Greyjoys, the Vale, Jon/Sansa and the Blackfish taking back the riverrun from the Frey's are all picking up steam and joining in the fight as well.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't know if that's the case. The vision where they see the Children of the Forest creating the first White Walker, it's Bran who abruptly ends the session.

OK, that's true. I was more thinking of when Bran wanted to see more (the tower and when his dad was young in the castle) and Max ended it. Made it seem to me that he didn't have as much of a say in the length of the vision.

[thesloppy]

I find the show's relatively wonky depiction of the Iron Islands to be kind of hilarious (and I don't read the books to have any basis for comparison, for better or worse). The islands appear to be about 1 mile square. There only seems to be like 20 people who live there, and they all appear to be some kind of nobles, but there doesn't appear to be any subjects (or even servants), just 20 dudes (and one woman) yelling at each other. There's like one unfurnished, barely lit room, with a bridge that possibly leads to another unfurnished room, or maybe to that lovely mossy "beach" spot we've seen a couple times. I had to laugh last night when dude was like "STRIP ALL THE TREES AND HAVE YOUR WOMEN SPIN ME ENOUGH SAIL FOR 1000 SHIPS!!"....uhhhh, I know you haven't been here for a while bud, but the only woman that's ever been shown on these tiny islands just sailed away, and Tree Island this ain't.

[Atocep]

I'm disappointed that show watchers didn't have to suffer through a full season of kingsmooting.

[bronconick]

No one deserves that punishment

[Ned Doolittle]

We also learned that if you get your penis cut off there is NO way to come back from "you have no cock" jokes. Yeesh.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I'm disappointed that show watchers didn't have to suffer through a full season of kingsmooting.

I skimmed those chapters in the books with complete disinterest, I was totally prepared to just start fastforwarding though everything at this setting for the rest of the season if I had to.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Radii

I skimmed those chapters in the books with complete disinterest, I was totally prepared to just start fastforwarding though everything at this setting for the rest of the season if I had to.

Awww boo... the Kingsmoot was pretty damned awesome in the books, with the literal buying of votes, especially with Euron dumping all sorts of treasures around the world and then using the Dragon Horn.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Radii

I skimmed those chapters in the books with complete disinterest, I was totally prepared to just start fastforwarding though everything at this setting for the rest of the season if I had to.

Some of my least favorite chapters. I think his desire to write vikings into his mostly Medieval Westeros is a bit jarring, to be honest. I think the Slaver's Bay stuff is nearly Ancient rather than medieval, but at least it's "really far away" from the knights and kings of Westeros.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Some of my least favorite chapters. I think his desire to write vikings into his mostly Medieval Westeros is a bit jarring, to be honest. I think the Slaver's Bay stuff is nearly Ancient rather than medieval, but at least it's "really far away" from the knights and kings of Westeros.

Why would Vikings not be a fair bet to be in a mostly medieval world?

[sabotai]

I thought the "They can't get in." - "They can NOW! You're marked!" was a bit too much for me. They are protected by some kind of barrier spell. You'd think Bloodraven would have told Bran about the one way the spell could be broken. You know, just on the off chance that they ran into the Night King. Or the very predictable event of Bran venturing into the "dream world" on his own.

I guess he could have known it would happen and knew it had to happen for reasons...

Also (book spoilers)

Spoiler

Why the fuck didn't Euron have the Dragon Horn? Leaving that out was fucking bullshit.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Why would Vikings not be a fair bet to be in a mostly medieval world?

'War of the Roses' is the loose era that Westeros is based on, which is a good 4 centuries after the age of the vikings. Obviously it's Fantasy so none of that really matters, but in my mind it's an era clash. Especially the motivations of the Iron Islanders and their reaving vs what's going on in Westeros. I read a lot more history books than I do fantasy though, so that's probably the big reason why it irks me where as for most others I'm sure it seems completely fine.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Also (book spoilers)

Spoiler

Why the fuck didn't Euron have the Dragon Horn? Leaving that out was fucking bullshit.

Spoiler

They've left out all the magical horns it appears

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Spoiler

Why the fuck didn't Euron have the Dragon Horn? Leaving that out was fucking bullshit.

Spoiler

The cut the kingsmoot, which took an entire book (and seemed like two or three in itself), down to a gathering down by the beach and a couple dickless jokes. I don't think they had time to explain the horn.

[ISiddiqui]

You people are strange. The Kingsmoot itself was ONE chapter, Chapter 19 in A Feast for Crows, with "The Drowned Man" POV.

[PilotMan]

The entire process to determine the next king went on forever. How many Damphair chapters did we get?

[ISiddiqui]

TWO, no seriously. TWO. The Prophet and The Drowned Man.

There was an Asha chapter, The Kraken's Daughter, and a Victarion Chapter, The Iron Captain (and The Reaver after the Kingsmoot). But that's it.

People really, unfortunately, downgrade A Feast for Crows based on things that didn't really happen in the books themselves. To be honest, so did I until I re-read it and realized it was actually quite a fantastic book (just wasn't Storm of Swords paced... but nothing is)

[Groundhog]

Welp, not sure what it says for those chapters that looking back on it, it FEELS like I read an entire book on it.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I find the show's relatively wonky depiction of the Iron Islands to be kind of hilarious (and I don't read the books to have any basis for comparison, for better or worse). The islands appear to be about 1 mile square. There only seems to be like 20 people who live there, and they all appear to be some kind of nobles, but there doesn't appear to be any subjects (or even servants), just 20 dudes (and one woman) yelling at each other. There's like one unfurnished, barely lit room, with a bridge that possibly leads to another unfurnished room, or maybe to that lovely mossy "beach" spot we've seen a couple times. I had to laugh last night when dude was like "STRIP ALL THE TREES AND HAVE YOUR WOMEN SPIN ME ENOUGH SAIL FOR 1000 SHIPS!!"....uhhhh, I know you haven't been here for a while bud, but the only woman that's ever been shown on these tiny islands just sailed away, and Tree Island this ain't.

From what I recall, the islands are definitely fleshed out more in the books, but not nearly as well as some of the other sites. In the show when Theon first arrives on the islands and meets his sister it should have shown a town of some sort. I'd need to watch that episode again.

[ISiddiqui]

I believe Theon lands on Pyke. That's the only city they show on the Iron Islands in the show. There is no talk of Harlaw or Great Wyk or any other place.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

'War of the Roses' is the loose era that Westeros is based on, which is a good 4 centuries after the age of the vikings.

And the Iron Islands haven't been Vikings, really, for over 300+ years until Balon Greyjoy decides he wants to bring back the "Old Way" when the Kingdom goes to shit. Aegon the Conqueror abolished the reaving on Westeros... after killing the last King of the Iron Islands (and the Riverlands), Harren Hoare (who building Harrenhall and died within it).

[Groundhog]

You're obviously better versed in ASoIF than me, but back when I read the books they came off as complete viking archetypes to me - a mix of 11th century (ie. organised under a king) and the more independently minded and less organised raiders of the 7th-9th centuries. They continue to raid as much as they can get away with, until they get slapped down by the rest of Westeros. I don't find them as interesting as the other major houses because they fall the closest to historical stereotypes, without any one real great character to make up for it, which I think is what separates Dorne from the Iron Islands for me.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I didn't get to watch the most recent episode until last night...

Overall, I thought it was a pretty fantastic episode. I will address the final scene, the Bran stuff, at the tend.

Some of the other scenes in that episode were combinations of great writing and acting.

The Sansa and Little Finger scene was awesome. It was the first time I recall seeing Little Finger get completely called out on his shit. He looked exposed and weak for the first time ever. A great scene for Sansa to have. Brienne's description of Jon Snow was spot on! I liked the strategy discussion about taking over the north as well.

I loved the Dany/Jorah scene as well. Very powerful. I've always liked that relationship and enjoyed that interaction.

The new red woman and Varys was another great scene. It was cool to see Varys caught off guard by her knowledge and I always like when his back story comes up.

If the Iron Isles are going to play a role, nice condensed scenes like that is what we need. I liked Yara and Theon getting the hell out of there during Euron's coronation. It was well shot.

I loved the choreography of the Arya training sequence once the Waif decided not to hold back anymore. Very cool stuff and shows just how far Arya has yet to go. The actress playing the Waif has been great.

As for the Bran stuff...

First, Hodor's death scene was great. It was moving, powerful, sad, and very well shot with the various cuts between the past and present.

Second, I am sure how the Others - their thralls or whatever - became so scrabbly and just like the LOTR orcs/goblins. I don't recall how they were portrayed exactly at Hardhome, but that was perfect. They need to stick with that.

Third, poor Summer. It wasn't a great end for the poor dire wolf. We're pretty much down to Ghost and an AWOL Nymeria. That sucks. I think it's just a matter of the dire wolves being something that's awesome and works well in the books, but just didn't work in the show. For whatever reason it seems harder to do the dire wolves well than dragons. I guess it makes sense.

Overall, a very impressive episode.

[PilotMan]

Between Arya, her wolf dreams, the rumors of massive pack of wolves roaming the riverlands, it's been one of the storylines that I've been the most excited to see the direction of. The show hasn't done it nearly the justice that the books have.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

You're obviously better versed in ASoIF than me, but back when I read the books they came off as complete viking archetypes to me - a mix of 11th century (ie. organised under a king) and the more independently minded and less organised raiders of the 7th-9th centuries. They continue to raid as much as they can get away with, until they get slapped down by the rest of Westeros. I don't find them as interesting as the other major houses because they fall the closest to historical stereotypes, without any one real great character to make up for it, which I think is what separates Dorne from the Iron Islands for me.

I can see that, but I think a lot of that is the character of Balon Greyjoy. Apparently his predecessor Quellon Greyjoy was more like the Viking descendants in the 14th C - enjoying The Faith of the Seven, bringing maesters into the fold, etc. Balon is a conscious throwback, as is Aegon (the Damphair). But yes the throwbacks are prominent.

In the books, though, I think they do have that one real great character... unfortunately it's the one they cut from the show - Victarion Greyjoy.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

The Sansa and Little Finger scene was awesome. It was the first time I recall seeing Little Finger get completely called out on his shit. He looked exposed and weak for the first time ever.

I don't know if I'm the only one, but did anyone else think that Littlefinger played Sansa a bit here. He knew that he'd get ripped apart by her, but then while she was in a position of strength, fed her info that he can use to his advantage.

[bronconick]

I think she got fed some bs about the Blackfish and when it blows up in her face, Littlefinger will be there to pick up the pieces.

[Mota]

I think we've gotten far enough down the "tear down the Starks" storyline, let's start building them back up again.

[Ned Doolittle]

Originally Posted by Mota

I think we've gotten far enough down the "tear down the Starks" storyline, let's start building them back up again.

But why? It's called GAME of thrones. In any game there will be stronger players, ppl who can manipulate the rules (or bend them) to suit them, and then there's weaker players, or those who aren't able to use all facets of the game to win. The Starks just might be the weakest players of this game. They might not be suited to playing a game against better players like the Lannisters or Littlefinger. Sometimes it goes that way. There's the misconception that the Starks "have" to win because they're the first family that was featured on the show. They can all die, nothing is promised. Whatever makes for a good story is all I'm concerned about.

[Radii]

Yeah maybe it can go either way but I'm certainly not holding my breath that things turn around for the Starks in any significant/long term way. There aren't a lot of happy endings to be had in Westeros.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ned Doolittle

But why? It's called GAME of thrones. In any game there will be stronger players, ppl who can manipulate the rules (or bend them) to suit them, and then there's weaker players, or those who aren't able to use all facets of the game to win. The Starks just might be the weakest players of this game. They might not be suited to playing a game against better players like the Lannisters or Littlefinger. Sometimes it goes that way. There's the misconception that the Starks "have" to win because they're the first family that was featured on the show. They can all die, nothing is promised. Whatever makes for a good story is all I'm concerned about.

I think those expecting a happy, fantasy ending where the Starks, Daenerys, and Tyrion come out on top are going to be very disappointed.

[Ned Doolittle]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I think those expecting a happy, fantasy ending where the Starks, Daenerys, and Tyrion come out on top are going to be very disappointed.

As much as it pains me to say it I'm sorta Team Lannister at this point. First season or two Jaime/Cersei were painted as th "villains", but over time once you've been exposed to what their motivations are (namely, preservation, and putting their kids and love for each other before all else) it becomes easy to root for them. And unlike the Starks, they are expert "game players". That is, they have a good chance of "winning". Technically they're already "winners" since their son is the King and they're the ruling family. It's more about staying on top for them. But they're different than the Starks who at every step of the way have the chips stacked against them. At this point it's clear the whole point of the show/story is Jon ascending to the top, but if I'm Sansa, Arya or Rickon - I shouldn't expect to last.

[Groundhog]

I think the hardest thing about predicting the ending is Bran and Arya's roles. Their stories figure to be pretty key to whatever ends up happening, but I have absolutely zero clue as to what it will be. I don't expect the Hollywood ending though, which I guess would be something like Jon Snow and Daenerys as King and Queen with Tyrion as Hand of the King.

[thesloppy]

Yeah. Bran seems like he could (but probably won't) remain removed from the present day storyline relatively easily, turning into a tree and steering the past towards the present, but the GoT storytelling style and Arya's training as a faceless assassin suggest that she'll play a pretty important role in the final dust-up. I'm guessing a false ending *Lannisters Win! Lannisters Win!* followed by an Arya reveal/stab, roll credits.

[Edward64]

So why do they need the Tyrell army to come into King's Landing to confront the High Sparrow troops? Why don't the Lannisters use their own army?

(I hope next week's teaser on the confrontation is a full out battle! Looking for Cersei to get her revenge)

[molson]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So why do they need the Tyrell army to come into King's Landing to confront the High Sparrow troops? Why don't the Lannisters use their own army?

(I hope next week's teaser on the confrontation is a full out battle! Looking for Cersei to get her revenge)

The Lannisters taking arms against the faith militants after swearing not to could cause a full-scale revolt among the citizens of King's Landing. So if Kevan Lannister instead just "stands aside" and lets the Tyrells and Faith militants kill each other, Cersi can see both enemies destroyed and re-gain power and control. (Perhaps that secret that High Sparrow told Tommen that Tommen then told Cersei was that Olena and the Tyrells were responsible for Joffery's death. The High Sparrow might know that through the torture of Loras)

[Edward64]

Thanks, great answer.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Ned Doolittle

But why? It's called GAME of thrones. In any game there will be stronger players, ppl who can manipulate the rules (or bend them) to suit them, and then there's weaker players, or those who aren't able to use all facets of the game to win. The Starks just might be the weakest players of this game. They might not be suited to playing a game against better players like the Lannisters or Littlefinger. Sometimes it goes that way. There's the misconception that the Starks "have" to win because they're the first family that was featured on the show. They can all die, nothing is promised. Whatever makes for a good story is all I'm concerned about.

If the first book showed anything, it showed that GRRM was going to, if not upend traditional fantasy tropes, then subject them to a heavy dose of historical-based realism.

Having written my Masters thesis on the time period from which he says he draws his inspiration (15th century England, especially the Wars of the Roses), I can tell you that pretty much every "good guy" was cut down in the end, and it was generally those who played the game the best who made out in the end.


Case in point. When Henry V died in 1422 he left only a 9-month old son as heir. It was somewhat-traditional to appoint a regent in these cases but that didn't happen here. The obvious choice would have been the older of Henry's two surviving brothers, who was John, Duke of Bedford. But Henry had been clear he wanted Bedford in France acting as Regent of his conquests there (which had been, basically, half of France - Henry V was a truly gifted military commander, but that's a story for another post).

The other surviving brother was Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Gloucester, who would later be credited with bringing Italian Humanism to England through his patronage (and founded Oxford University's Bodleian Library), did pronounce that Henry had wanted him to be Regent in England, but was not able to produce anything to that effect.

A characteristic of Henry V's time in England was the large number of prominent nobles all roughly the same age. This was probably due to generational aspects stemming from a temporary cessation of the Hundred Years War in the late 14th century following Edward III's death. The fact that Edward had 5 sons who survived infancy (4 of whom had issue) and 4 daughters who survived infancy (although only 1 of whom had issue) certainly played a part.

Henry V's force of personality (and the fact that he was well-liked) kept this large coterie of nobles focused on the same goals and fully in support of him. He would not be the first leader to use a war to create unity, and he wouldn't be the last.

His untimely death, however, opened up a significant power vacuum that Gloucester simply hadn't prepared to occupy. Into the void stepped Cardinal Beaufort (roughly 10 years Henry V's senior, but still part of this generational group, and also a descendant of Edward III). Beaufort convinced the other nobles that a Gloucester Regency would have been a disaster (a point I place doubt on in my thesis), and instead a Council was formed.

Gloucester would litigate against this in the court of public opinion for the rest of his life (he would die in 1447, ironically the same year as Beaufort). And the seeds of discontent that were sewn (and weren't helped by successive setbacks in France) were a large part of what became the Wars of the Roses itself in the 2nd half of the 15th century.

But, here's the thing. Up until his death Gloucester was convinced that Henry wanted him to be Regent in England. The other person who would know for sure, of course, was Beaufort, who had been a close confidant of Henry's for just as long, if not longer.

Well, in 1979 a researcher at Cambridge, trawling through archives, found what was later confirmed to be the very last Will and Testament for Henry V. And it explicitly names Gloucester as Regent. So, not only was Henry V's last Will & Testament successfully suppressed (almost certainly by Beaufort), but it was done so successfully that it didn't surface for 500 years.

And that, my friends, is how you play the Game of Thrones (IRL).

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If the first book showed anything, it showed that GRRM was going to, if not upend traditional fantasy tropes, then subject them to a heavy dose of historical-based realism.

Having written my Masters thesis on the time period from which he says he draws his inspiration (15th century England, especially the Wars of the Roses), I can tell you that pretty much every "good guy" was cut down in the end, and it was generally those who played the game the best who made out in the end.


Case in point. When Henry V died in 1422 he left only a 9-month old son as heir. It was somewhat-traditional to appoint a regent in these cases but that didn't happen here. The obvious choice would have been the older of Henry's two surviving brothers, who was John, Duke of Bedford. But Henry had been clear he wanted Bedford in France acting as Regent of his conquests there (which had been, basically, half of France - Henry V was a truly gifted military commander, but that's a story for another post).

The other surviving brother was Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Gloucester, who would later be credited with bringing Italian Humanism to England through his patronage (and founded Oxford University's Bodleian Library), did pronounce that Henry had wanted him to be Regent in England, but was not able to produce anything to that effect.

A characteristic of Henry V's time in England was the large number of prominent nobles all roughly the same age. This was probably due to generational aspects stemming from a temporary cessation of the Hundred Years War in the late 14th century following Edward III's death. The fact that Edward had 5 sons who survived infancy (4 of whom had issue) and 4 daughters who survived infancy (although only 1 of whom had issue) certainly played a part.

Henry V's force of personality (and the fact that he was well-liked) kept this large coterie of nobles focused on the same goals and fully in support of him. He would not be the first leader to use a war to create unity, and he wouldn't be the last.

His untimely death, however, opened up a significant power vacuum that Gloucester simply hadn't prepared to occupy. Into the void stepped Cardinal Beaufort (roughly 10 years Henry V's senior, but still part of this generational group, and also a descendant of Edward III). Beaufort convinced the other nobles that a Gloucester Regency would have been a disaster (a point I place doubt on in my thesis), and instead a Council was formed.

Gloucester would litigate against this in the court of public opinion for the rest of his life (he would die in 1447, ironically the same year as Beaufort). And the seeds of discontent that were sewn (and weren't helped by successive setbacks in France) were a large part of what became the Wars of the Roses itself in the 2nd half of the 15th century.

But, here's the thing. Up until his death Gloucester was convinced that Henry wanted him to be Regent in England. The other person who would know for sure, of course, was Beaufort, who had been a close confidant of Henry's for just as long, if not longer.

Well, in 1979 a researcher at Cambridge, trawling through archives, found what was later confirmed to be the very last Will and Testament for Henry V. And it explicitly names Gloucester as Regent. So, not only was Henry V's last Will & Testament successfully suppressed (almost certainly by Beaufort), but it was done so successfully that it didn't surface for 500 years.

And that, my friends, is how you play the Game of Thrones (IRL).

This is an awesome write-up. I haven't read any background outside of the books and the show but I always thought Tyrion was based on Alexander The Great minus the military conquests. The height, the mismatched eyes, the contentious relationship with his father, etc.

[thesloppy]

I also appreciated that write up.

[flere-imsaho]

Thanks!

There's plenty more. The "middle" part of the Middle Ages is rife with this stuff.

[thesloppy]

There's so many similarly interesting stories through history that it really makes me marvel at how poorly they teach history at a high school level. I was never engaged in history class, and I always remember history texts being particularly dense and flavorless....like 3 columns of tiny type, per page, restricted to only the briefest, most boring and flavorless reports of history that could be imagined. I'm sure plenty of folks had teachers who were able to work around those restrictions and make things engaging, but none of them were at my high school.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If the first book showed anything, it showed that GRRM was going to, if not upend traditional fantasy tropes, then subject them to a heavy dose of historical-based realism.

Having written my Masters thesis on the time period from which he says he draws his inspiration (15th century England, especially the Wars of the Roses), I can tell you that pretty much every "good guy" was cut down in the end, and it was generally those who played the game the best who made out in the end.


Case in point. When Henry V died in 1422 he left only a 9-month old son as heir. It was somewhat-traditional to appoint a regent in these cases but that didn't happen here. The obvious choice would have been the older of Henry's two surviving brothers, who was John, Duke of Bedford. But Henry had been clear he wanted Bedford in France acting as Regent of his conquests there (which had been, basically, half of France - Henry V was a truly gifted military commander, but that's a story for another post).

The other surviving brother was Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Gloucester, who would later be credited with bringing Italian Humanism to England through his patronage (and founded Oxford University's Bodleian Library), did pronounce that Henry had wanted him to be Regent in England, but was not able to produce anything to that effect.

A characteristic of Henry V's time in England was the large number of prominent nobles all roughly the same age. This was probably due to generational aspects stemming from a temporary cessation of the Hundred Years War in the late 14th century following Edward III's death. The fact that Edward had 5 sons who survived infancy (4 of whom had issue) and 4 daughters who survived infancy (although only 1 of whom had issue) certainly played a part.

Henry V's force of personality (and the fact that he was well-liked) kept this large coterie of nobles focused on the same goals and fully in support of him. He would not be the first leader to use a war to create unity, and he wouldn't be the last.

His untimely death, however, opened up a significant power vacuum that Gloucester simply hadn't prepared to occupy. Into the void stepped Cardinal Beaufort (roughly 10 years Henry V's senior, but still part of this generational group, and also a descendant of Edward III). Beaufort convinced the other nobles that a Gloucester Regency would have been a disaster (a point I place doubt on in my thesis), and instead a Council was formed.

Gloucester would litigate against this in the court of public opinion for the rest of his life (he would die in 1447, ironically the same year as Beaufort). And the seeds of discontent that were sewn (and weren't helped by successive setbacks in France) were a large part of what became the Wars of the Roses itself in the 2nd half of the 15th century.

But, here's the thing. Up until his death Gloucester was convinced that Henry wanted him to be Regent in England. The other person who would know for sure, of course, was Beaufort, who had been a close confidant of Henry's for just as long, if not longer.

Well, in 1979 a researcher at Cambridge, trawling through archives, found what was later confirmed to be the very last Will and Testament for Henry V. And it explicitly names Gloucester as Regent. So, not only was Henry V's last Will & Testament successfully suppressed (almost certainly by Beaufort), but it was done so successfully that it didn't surface for 500 years.

And that, my friends, is how you play the Game of Thrones (IRL).

This is a whole bunch of win.

(So basically Littlefinger is going to win )

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If the first book showed anything, it showed that GRRM was going to, if not upend traditional fantasy tropes, then subject them to a heavy dose of historical-based realism.

Having written my Masters thesis on the time period from which he says he draws his inspiration (15th century England, especially the Wars of the Roses), I can tell you that pretty much every "good guy" was cut down in the end, and it was generally those who played the game the best who made out in the end.


Case in point. When Henry V died in 1422 he left only a 9-month old son as heir. It was somewhat-traditional to appoint a regent in these cases but that didn't happen here. The obvious choice would have been the older of Henry's two surviving brothers, who was John, Duke of Bedford. But Henry had been clear he wanted Bedford in France acting as Regent of his conquests there (which had been, basically, half of France - Henry V was a truly gifted military commander, but that's a story for another post).

The other surviving brother was Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Gloucester, who would later be credited with bringing Italian Humanism to England through his patronage (and founded Oxford University's Bodleian Library), did pronounce that Henry had wanted him to be Regent in England, but was not able to produce anything to that effect.

A characteristic of Henry V's time in England was the large number of prominent nobles all roughly the same age. This was probably due to generational aspects stemming from a temporary cessation of the Hundred Years War in the late 14th century following Edward III's death. The fact that Edward had 5 sons who survived infancy (4 of whom had issue) and 4 daughters who survived infancy (although only 1 of whom had issue) certainly played a part.

Henry V's force of personality (and the fact that he was well-liked) kept this large coterie of nobles focused on the same goals and fully in support of him. He would not be the first leader to use a war to create unity, and he wouldn't be the last.

His untimely death, however, opened up a significant power vacuum that Gloucester simply hadn't prepared to occupy. Into the void stepped Cardinal Beaufort (roughly 10 years Henry V's senior, but still part of this generational group, and also a descendant of Edward III). Beaufort convinced the other nobles that a Gloucester Regency would have been a disaster (a point I place doubt on in my thesis), and instead a Council was formed.

Gloucester would litigate against this in the court of public opinion for the rest of his life (he would die in 1447, ironically the same year as Beaufort). And the seeds of discontent that were sewn (and weren't helped by successive setbacks in France) were a large part of what became the Wars of the Roses itself in the 2nd half of the 15th century.

But, here's the thing. Up until his death Gloucester was convinced that Henry wanted him to be Regent in England. The other person who would know for sure, of course, was Beaufort, who had been a close confidant of Henry's for just as long, if not longer.

Well, in 1979 a researcher at Cambridge, trawling through archives, found what was later confirmed to be the very last Will and Testament for Henry V. And it explicitly names Gloucester as Regent. So, not only was Henry V's last Will & Testament successfully suppressed (almost certainly by Beaufort), but it was done so successfully that it didn't surface for 500 years.

And that, my friends, is how you play the Game of Thrones (IRL).

If there was ever a post that screamed for one of your diagrams...

Diagram this shit, brother!!

[MrBug708]

Who do we think Ariya is inevitably going to kill?