After seven seasons, what parts of Westros struck you as the least logical ?

[sarahtasher]

(As a French Canadian, I refer as ''models'' for medieval kingdoms to France and England, the largest stable polities in Europe at the time)

I take for granted that ''well they had dragons'' is a very valid point for having a different power structure than on Earth medieval realms (for instance, ''I'm going to fracking burn you alive if you don't pay fealty'' presumably have more effect that asking for papal legates), but the point that struck me is how Westeros, even the shall we said more ''civilized'' realms between the North and Dorn, is not only a top down society (feudal, logical) but a very simplified pyramid.

-There are no yeomen equivalent, or communes (cities that bought municipal freedoms).
-While it seems that the seven kingdoms are much smaller than France or England (how else do you explain so fast travel, ZING), there seems to be very little intermediaries between the Great Houses and lesser houses, such as dukedoms, earldoms. For a place rife with intrigues, Westeros would have made wept in joy actual medieval kings, since it's a very tidy system, in which everyone pay featly to another, without the kind of issue that kept happening on Earth (such as the Duke of Aquitaine having to pay fealty for his duchy, while being the King of England)
-In the absence of their terror weapons for well over a century or two, the Tangaryen (let alone King Bob) does not seems to have worked out any system to keep in check their supremely unreliable grand vassals, short of bashing their heads with warhammers. On Earth, kings used burghers or the third estates, had garrisons in strongpoints, dealt with those always tricky inheritance questions (when a ruler like the ones of Pyke have 22 ''salt wives'', that kind open opportunities for backing a somewhat reliable candidate on the throne).

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

You talk like someone that's only watched the series and not read the books.

[Eldar45]

Westeros is actually quite big. I found this map for a scale comparison.

[sarahtasher]

You talk like someone that's only watched the series and not read the books.

Hence I say the TV show, the books being a bit more nuanced?

[mickybrighteyes]

Hence I say the TV show, the books being a bit more nuanced?

there's a lot of stuff that gets missed or glossed over in the tv series. some of teh characters we see in teh show are actually a fusion of multiple characters and some storylines were blended together because they're integral to the story but the characters not so much.... some were outright dropped entirely.


I mean the Tarleys got watered down to Sam and a couple guys who got charbroiled with little else going on.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Hence I say the TV show, the books being a bit more nuanced?

Well yes...but it's a TV show...they aren't going to be able to cover the intricate details of how the 7 Kingdoms are run. But many of the things you talk about are there in the books (and even in the TV show...though they might be less obvious). For example, Cersei was pretty ruthless about tracking down any of Robert's offspring and Robert sent assassins after Dany the moment he learned she was still alive. Theon Greyjoy was held as a hostage in Winterfell to ensure his father's future loyalty, The "Rains of Castamere" are a constant reminder as to what happens to people that challenge the Lannisters,

[Brubear]

Hence I say the TV show, the books being a bit more nuanced?

Yeah, comparing the books to the TV show is like comparing the Lord of the Rings Trilogy to the Silmarilion. There are a lot of things that are condensed or glossed over for simplicity sake. Outside of the big players and their medium-sized underlings, they didn't really delve all that deeply into the politics of the various Houses and their subordinates, fiefdoms, and all of that.

I mean in the show, beyond the great houses there's the Bolton's, Umber's, Karstark's, Frey's, Mormont's, Glover's, and the Tarly's. Also people know the Clegane's, Dayne's, Dondarrion's, and Tarth's though it's really easy to forget that those characters are from actual lesser houses. That's about it.

To show you just how many more there are, here's a list of all houses from the book (though it includes ones that have been wiped out as well as different versions of the same house), but it's still easy to see just how massive the list is compared to the show.

[sarahtasher]

Well yes...but it's a TV show...they aren't going to be able to cover the intricate details of how the 7 Kingdoms are run. But many of the things you talk about are there in the books (and even in the TV show...though they might be less obvious). For example, Cersei was pretty ruthless about tracking down any of Robert's offspring and Robert sent assassins after Dany the moment he learned she was still alive. Theon Greyjoy was held as a hostage in Winterfell to ensure his father's future loyalty, The "Rains of Castamere" are a constant reminder as to what happens to people that challenge the Lannisters,

''Offing violently the bastards''/''the rightful heirs'' was the kind of governance praticed in the Ottoman Empire and Byzantium, and you might notice that byzantine is a byword for failure.

In real life, both in England and France, sending the eldest son as an hostage is one thing, but generally speaking monarchs preferred to also have royal garrisons, just in case it was not enough.

As proved abundantly in GOT, ''violently offing my rival'' is an approach of commendable simplicity, but that does not work very well on the long run. It might works in the Ottoman Empire, where everyone is more a less a slave of the sultan, it does not work in a feudal system with powerful gentry that requires a minimum of mutual trust.

Let me give an example. There is a French equivalent to G.O.T, The Accursed Kings (Martin acknowledge willingly he read it and loved it). There is a noble that do the kind of stuff that is routine in GOT-conspiracies, a bit of regicide, pillaging, boning ''maids''...

When the noble, Robert d'Artois, how King Charles V, widely renowned as an imbecile, deal with him ? He get him stabbed by one of his thugs and everyone forget about it while stepping over the corpse going to the bordello for the weekly scene of naked ladies ?



(Medieval rulers loved well ordered show trials. Cersei attempts to smear her daughter-in-law with a show trial reach abysses of incompetence, even for her)

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

''Offing violently the bastards''/''the rightful heirs'' was the kind of governance praticed in the Ottoman Empire and Byzantium, and you might notice that byzantine is a byword for failure.

In real life, both in England and France, sending the eldest son as an hostage is one thing, but generally speaking monarchs preferred to also have royal garrisons, just in case it was not enough. (As proved abundantly in GOT, ''violently offing my rival'' is an approach of commendable simplicity, but that does not work very well on the long run).

Let me give an example. There is a French equivalent to G.O.T, The Accursed Kings (Martin acknowledge willingly he read it and loved it). There is a noble that do the kind of stuff that is routine in GOT-conspiracies, a bit of regicide, pillaging, boning ''maids''...

When the noble, Robert d'Artois, how King Charles V, widely renowned as an imbecile, deal with him ? He get him stabbed by one of his thugs ?

So, what's your point? That GoT, a fantasy television series based on the books written by one man over the course of a couple of decades, isn't as complex as several hundred years of European feudalism?

[sarahtasher]

Yeah, comparing the books to the TV show is like comparing the Lord of the Rings Trilogy to the Silmarilion. There are a lot of things that are condensed or glossed over for simplicity sake. Outside of the big players and their medium-sized underlings, they didn't really delve all that deeply into the politics of the various Houses and their subordinates, fiefdoms, and all of that.

I mean in the show, beyond the great houses there's the Bolton's, Umber's, Karstark's, Frey's, Mormont's, Glover's, and the Tarly's. Also people know the Clegane's, Dayne's, Dondarrion's, and Tarth's though it's really easy to forget that those characters are from actual lesser houses. That's about it.

To show you just how many more there are, here's a list of all houses from the book (though it includes ones that have been wiped out as well as different versions of the same house), but it's still easy to see just how massive the list is compared to the show.

I meant that there is a nearly hiearchic structure, in which ''small house pay fealty to big house that pay fealty to King's Landing''. That's a bit simple as feudalism go, even at the scale of a province in France.

- - - Updated - - -

So, what's your point? That GoT, a fantasy television series based on the books written by one man over the course of a couple of decades, isn't as complex as several hundred years of European feudalism?

No, I just say, per the OP, that Westerosi feudalism makes King Edward II ''oh noes, here comes the firepoker in my bum'' reign looks good.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I meant that there is a nearly hiearchic structure, in which ''small house pay fealty to big house that pay fealty to King's Landing''. That's a bit simple as feudalism go, even at the scale of a province in France.


No, I just say, per the OP, that Westerosi feudalism makes King Edward II ''oh noes, here comes the firepoker in my bum'' reign looks good.

You're just making an assumption that, because you don't see these things happening, that they don't exist. Again, it's a television show. It's not going to take you on a full season arc of a tax collector navigating his way through the kind of bureaucratic nightmares that exist in the real world. It just doesn't make for very compelling Television.

Try reading the books and you'll get a more complete picture of things...but even then...it's a fantasy series designed to entertain...not a history text book.

[PACOX]

So, what's your point? That GoT, a fantasy television series based on the books written by one man over the course of a couple of decades, isn't as complex as several hundred years of European feudalism?

Thats not really an excuse for crappy world building. I wish more content creators would create unified worlds instead of books and on-screen being similar but parallel universes. Something you usually only see in sci-fi universes.

[Linkedblade]

(As a French Canadian, I refer as ''models'' for medieval kingdoms to France and England, the largest stable polities in Europe at the time)

I take for granted that ''well they had dragons'' is a very valid point for having a different power structure than on Earth medieval realms (for instance, ''I'm going to fracking burn you alive if you don't pay fealty'' presumably have more effect that asking for papal legates), but the point that struck me is how Westeros, even the shall we said more ''civilized'' realms between the North and Dorn, is not only a top down society (feudal, logical) but a very simplified pyramid.

-There are no yeomen equivalent, or communes (cities that bought municipal freedoms).
-While it seems that the seven kingdoms are much smaller than France or England (how else do you explain so fast travel, ZING), there seems to be very little intermediaries between the Great Houses and lesser houses, such as dukedoms, earldoms. For a place rife with intrigues, Westeros would have made wept in joy actual medieval kings, since it's a very tidy system, in which everyone pay featly to another, without the kind of issue that kept happening on Earth (such as the Duke of Aquitaine having to pay fealty for his duchy, while being the King of England)
-In the absence of their terror weapons for well over a century or two, the Tangaryen (let alone King Bob) does not seems to have worked out any system to keep in check their supremely unreliable grand vassals, short of bashing their heads with warhammers. On Earth, kings used burghers or the third estates, had garrisons in strongpoints, dealt with those always tricky inheritance questions (when a ruler like the ones of Pyke have 22 ''salt wives'', that kind open opportunities for backing a somewhat reliable candidate on the throne).

Most illogical thing in the show, other than the actual magic, is:

Why the fuck are the roofs in Winterfell flat? Isn't this supposed to be the capital of the North. Shouldn't they know to build them with pitch so the snow doesn't pile up...

- - - Updated - - -

Westeros is actually quite big. I found this map for a scale comparison.

And Essos is larger than asia

[IIamaKing]

You talk like someone that's only watched the series and not read the books.

So like most people.

[Bae]

Westeros is actually quite big. I found this map for a scale comparison.

George R R Martin has said before that Westeros is roughly the same size as south america from north to south.

[Zaktar]

Thats not really an excuse for crappy world building. I wish more content creators would create unified worlds instead of books and on-screen being similar but parallel universes. Something you usually only see in sci-fi universes.

Crappy? What are some examples of significantly better world building?

[Bae]

Thats not really an excuse for crappy world building. I wish more content creators would create unified worlds instead of books and on-screen being similar but parallel universes. Something you usually only see in sci-fi universes.

Isnt really crappy world building just because it doesnt mirror the real life middle ages 100%. Its not meant to. The author has built his own world as is his right.

[Mormolyce]

I'm still waiting for an explanation of the way the seasons supposedly work.

But I'm confining myself to the books, I haven't watched the show since season 4. Maybe they have an explanation in the show.

Westeros is actually quite big. I found this map for a scale comparison.

Yeah it's actually unrealistically huge, I feel like GRRM went a bit overboard at some point and wound up with his Britain analogue being bigger than Europe.

Its history is probably too long too.

- - - Updated - - -

Isnt really crappy world building just because it doesnt mirror the real life middle ages 100%. Its not meant to. The author has built his own world as is his right.

I mean you can kind of always say that though.

Here's an example of a quibble I have with the world of ASoIAF: Martin introduced an equivalent of the right of droit du seigneur (aka prima nocta) as a real thing in his universe, but in our world it was basically an urban legend.

Sure, you can say "yeah well in this fictional universe it DOES exist", but personally I don't like the way his use of it contributes to pop culture's belief that it was a real historical thing, and also I don't think it really makes sense in the context of Westeros any more than it made sense in the context of feudal Europe.

There's other cases where he takes certain beliefs about the medieval or ancient world at face value and presents them as real in the world of ASoIAF, when in reality they were probably exaggerations or slander, for example the way he depicts a lot of Essos. Sure, it's fiction so he can write whatever he wants. But considering he mostly tries to portray the world as a realistic analogue of actual history, I wish he wouldn't do things like that.

[schwarzkopf]

Yeah it's actually unrealistically huge,

How is it unrealistically huge ?

They aren't on Earth, the planet has an unstable orbit, the planet may be a much larger one than Earth.

Even Earth at some stages had very large continents.

[Mormolyce]

How is it unrealistically huge ?

They aren't on Earth, the planet has an unstable orbit, the planet may be a much larger one than Earth.

Even Earth at some stages had very large continents.

Well for one thing, considering the distribution of temperature regions the planet would have to be like 4 times the size of Earth, so wouldn't it have much higher gravity?

You can't use the "it's fiction" get out of jail free card for everything, GRRM specifically set out to make a deconstruction of high fantasy by setting his series in a mostly realistic analogue of actual medieval Europe. So it's a fair criticism to point out things that make that premise harder to believe.