105 replies to this topic

[Chronicler]

Daena: Well, check your own posts. If you fail to see how you might be considered offensive then I can understand why you fail to see the logical mishaps in the dornish system (and I gave some examples of what couldn't work in this system unless they have some solution for it)



AppleMartini:

I understand how the dornish do things in regard of inheritance, I just don't see how it can work in the long run. And if you think it through you should realize that as well.

Edited by Chronicler, 09 April 2012 - 10:06 PM.

[Daena the Defiant]

Chronicler, on 09 April 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

Daena: Well, check your own posts. If you fail to see how you might be considered offensive then I can understand why you fail to see the logical mishaps in the dornish system (and I gave some examples of what couldn't work in this system unless they have some solution for it)

Ah, that must be it.

The faulty comprehension in this thread is mine!

lol.

[Apple Martini]

Daena the Defiant, on 09 April 2012 - 10:07 PM, said:

Ah, that must be it.

The faulty comprehension in this thread is mine!

lol.

Well obviously.

[Lizaveta Martell]

It's not like there have never ever ever been matrilineal systems before.  How is this hard?  You seem be preoccupied with the idea that everyone will be a "noble" or everyone would eventually drift to being named Martell.  We have given several reasons why this wouldn't happen.  Unless you intend to discuss these propositions, I'm going assume you are a troll.  Your lol-ing is also obnoxious.  There is very little that is funny in this thread.  As for imagining that GRRM chose this system out of political correctness, you are just grasping at straws.  There are so many more things he could add to make Westeros a less awful place for women.  Less rape for starters.

[Ramsay Gimp]

Chronicler, you seem to think that daughters of nobles aren't nobles. Why?

Edited by Ramsay Gimp, 10 April 2012 - 01:08 AM.

[Bad Wolf]

I'm just going to stick my oar in here enough to point out the British peerage is a poor example in general--it's not only not just not based on Salic law, but it's a piecemeal system, where who inherits can differ depending on when and where in the United Kingdom it was created (for instance, many Scottish peerages--titles created before the Act of Union--can pass through the female line). Yeah, most titles go only through the male line, but there are those that don't. And in the time period more directly analogous to the books, there was a lot more fuzziness due to royal whims and large armies and writs of attainder and so on. (Even as recently as the early eighteenth century, Queen Anne was leaning on Parliament to bend succession rules for the suddenly sonless Duke of Marlborough.)

Basically, there is a certain amount of fuzziness in the Westerosi system. That's how it works. The Westerosi system of inheritance has some give in it to allow for circumstances. Lordships aren't just about getting the castle and the lands; there are also people there who need to be governed, so the system has back-ups built in to attempt to prevent the land being left leaderless, if that makes sense. It never fails to bewilder me how many people I've seen on this board over the years who can't seem to bring themselves to conceive of a system where inheritance through the female line is possible.

Also, if you want to be really technical, the strictest definition of 'noble' restricts it to actual titleholders, therefore, nowhere in Westeros will be overrun with nobles. (Yes, yes, I know it can be used more generally as well.)

[Chronicler]

Lizaveta Martell, on 09 April 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

It's not like there have never ever ever been matrilineal systems before.  How is this hard?  You seem be preoccupied with the idea that everyone will be a "noble" or everyone would eventually drift to being named Martell.  We have given several reasons why this wouldn't happen.  Unless you intend to discuss these propositions, I'm going assume you are a troll.  Your lol-ing is also obnoxious.  There is very little that is funny in this thread.  As for imagining that GRRM chose this system out of political correctness, you are just grasping at straws.  There are so many more things he could add to make Westeros a less awful place for women.  Less rape for starters.

No you haven't? And logically everyone would be named Martell in the end if women also get to pass on their house name etc. And this isn't a matrilineal system it's a patri and matrilineal system.

Ramsay Gimp: No I said the children of daughters of nobles aren't noble (unless their fathers are)

Edited by Chronicler, 10 April 2012 - 06:51 AM.

[Chronicler]

Bad Wolf, on 10 April 2012 - 02:50 AM, said:

I'm just going to stick my oar in here enough to point out the British peerage is a poor example in general--it's not only not just not based on Salic law, but it's a piecemeal system, where who inherits can differ depending on when and where in the United Kingdom it was created (for instance, many Scottish peerages--titles created before the Act of Union--can pass through the female line). Yeah, most titles go only through the male line, but there are those that don't. And in the time period more directly analogous to the books, there was a lot more fuzziness due to royal whims and large armies and writs of attainder and so on. (Even as recently as the early eighteenth century, Queen Anne was leaning on Parliament to bend succession rules for the suddenly sonless Duke of Marlborough.)

Basically, there is a certain amount of fuzziness in the Westerosi system. That's how it works. The Westerosi system of inheritance has some give in it to allow for circumstances. Lordships aren't just about getting the castle and the lands; there are also people there who need to be governed, so the system has back-ups built in to attempt to prevent the land being left leaderless, if that makes sense. It never fails to bewilder me how many people I've seen on this board over the years who can't seem to bring themselves to conceive of a system where inheritance through the female line is possible.

Also, if you want to be really technical, the strictest definition of 'noble' restricts it to actual titleholders, therefore, nowhere in Westeros will be overrun with nobles. (Yes, yes, I know it can be used more generally as well.)

Ofc there has been a lot of cheating in the british peerage, that's human. Also I said, as you might have noticed that there are titles in the british peerage that can be inherited by a daughter.

[Daena the Defiant]

Chronicler, on 10 April 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

No you haven't? And logically everyone would be named Martell in the end if women also get to pass on their house name etc. And this isn't a matrilineal system it's a patri and matrilineal system.

I am really perplexed by this assertion. Can you help explain your logic?  Walk us through your syllogism.

In reality, the only way that the Dornish system differs on the practical level is that the oldest child, male or female, is treated as an automatic male. If the oldest child is a daughter, she is basically treated as a dynastic male, with her offspring passing her surname down. In effect, the husband will "marry into" her house.

Her younger brothers will pass down the surname; her sisters will marry into their husbands' houses. However, if one of the children of a daughter's line ends up falling up into the line of succession -

Lady Rowena Vartell dies childless, her younger brother Rion Vartell was Septon, and little sister Rianna Jordayne nee Vartell (who died in childbirth) had a son, Rowan Jordayne, thus is is next up, so they would just appeal to their feudal overlord and sign some papers changing his name to that of his mother's house, "adopting him" into House
Vartell -

They will use legal mechanisms to ensure the continuity of the House name (like House Stark and the tale of Bael the Bard); you are really just making it more complicated than it needs to be.


It's really only matrilineal though the primary line; collaterals end up following the same nomenclature as everyone else.

Edited by Daena the Defiant, 10 April 2012 - 08:30 PM.

[Chronicler]

Daena the Defiant, on 10 April 2012 - 08:15 AM, said:

I am really perpleexed by this assertion. Can you help explain your logic?  Walk us through your syllogism.

well, let's say Arianne inherits, and let's say Doran has 4 other living children.

Let's say those children all have children, and all of those children since the system is patri and matrilineal are noble and Martells, then those children will marry others that will take the name Martell (if both men and women can pass it on). Then it will just continue like that, no-one ever stops being a Martell, no-one ever stops being noble. This is ofc with the assumption that people choose their last name when they marry or pick the better one. Anyhow the books doesn't present a logical solution to this.

[theguyfromtheVale]

But only sons, and the heir, pass the name on.So if Arianne had a sister (let's call her Elia) who married, her children wouldn't be called Martell. Arianne's children will be Martells though, because she's the heir.

Also, nobility is connected to Lordship (and Edmure Tully, for example, isn't a Lord in much of aCoK, even though many of the bannermen already call him such). So a family member who inherited the Martell name but not the Princeship of Dorne wouldn't be noble by himself.

[Chronicler]

theguyfromtheVale, on 10 April 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

But only sons, and the heir, pass the name on.So if Arianne had a sister (let's call her Elia) who married, her children wouldn't be called Martell. Arianne's children will be Martells though, because she's the heir.

Also, nobility is connected to Lordship (and Edmure Tully, for example, isn't a Lord in much of aCoK, even though many of the bannermen already call him such). So a family member who inherited the Martell name but not the Princeship of Dorne wouldn't be noble by himself.

But you don't actually know that this is the case since it isn't in the books.

[theguyfromtheVale]

No, but your systems isn't in the books either. And your constructed system doesn't make much sense, as you point out yourself. So I'm presenting you with another system that fits the information we have from the books and that does not lead to the same nonsensical consequences.

[Inara]

I think it's best to ignore Chronicler's posts. He's either trolling or can't be bothered to read the posts.

Here is something that puzzled me in the AFFC. We know that heirs marrying heirs is a bad idea and usually discouraged. But Arianne mentions that she was invited to Riverrun to meet Edmure and that she tried to sneak away to Highgarden to meet Willas, both of whom are heirs to their respective houses. She also mentions that she tried to seduce Renly (I can't recall if it was for fun or because she considered him a marriage prospect), Renly is lord of the Stormlands (as opposed to Tommen).

Obviously nothing ever came of it, but it just seemed weird that Arianne would consider them viable candidates, given that she wanted to rule Dorne (as opposed to being the wife of a ruling lord of another house).

She also muses that the Darkstar could make a worthy consort and was highborn enough to be so (though did she mean as husband or as paramour? Because as a member of a cadet branch, isn't that lower born than from the main branch?).

Edited by Inara, 10 April 2012 - 10:31 AM.

[Ser Lepus]

Maybe we are looking at the matter from a wrong perspective.

Maybe we should ask if being of noble ancestry gives you rights to a special treatment or not. If being a poor, landless noble doesn´t give you any special right, maybe people just doesn´t keep track of it; you could be a distant relative of a noble house, (like Lothor Brune, who is related to the Brunes of Brownhollow), but, if you don´t have money or lands, you aren´t a famous knight and your close kin haven´t any of those things either, people deny you are a noble and treat you as a commoner.

Lothor Brune is descendant of a junior branch of the Brunes, but he was a poor freerider, and the Brunes denied he was a "real" Brune.
The tavern wench at Dunkensdale was a descendant of the Darklyns, but she was a commoner as can be.
Brown Ben Plumm is a descendant of Ossifer Plumm and Elaena Targayren, but he is seen as a commoner too.
Rennifer Longwater, the gaoler, is a descendant of Ser Jon Waters, the bastard son of Princess Elaena Targaryen and Alyn Velaryon; Ser Jon was considered a noble, but his descendants aren´t, and people doesn´t even take their claims of being Targayren descendants seriously.

So what makes you a noble is either having a title or being a close relative of somebody who has a title. Nobles like to think their blood is special and makes them noble, but it´s a lie: It´s the wealth and power what makes you noble, not your ancestry, and if you lack land, titles and wealth, the people who have them not only won´t consider you a noble, but will also try to deny your noble ancestry to protect their self-perception as "special because of your blood".

Edited by Ser Lepus, 10 April 2012 - 03:36 PM.

[IronSuitor]

Quote

So what makes you a noble is either having a title or being a close relative of somebody who has a title. Nobles like to think their blood is special and makes them noble, but it´s a lie: It´s the wealth and power what makes you noble, not your ancestry, and if you lack land, titles and wealth, the people who have them not only won´t consider a noble, but will also try to deny your noble ancestry to protect their self-perception as "special because of your blood".

That's a bingo.

Having "nobles" hawking ale in an inn undermines the entire concept of nobility. In the early modern era (when working for a living started to be more lucrative than owning land) the state actually subsidized nobility to keep up the illusion by giving them army and government appointments/pensions. In a world where this isn't possible, families likely support as many as they can but eventually a lot are going to fall by the wayside and lose their status. For all we know the name changes might be forced because a member of the noble branch of that house would give a peasant a beating for daring to use his name.

[Chronicler]

theguyfromtheVale, on 10 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

No, but your systems isn't in the books either. And your constructed system doesn't make much sense, as you point out yourself. So I'm presenting you with another system that fits the information we have from the books and that does not lead to the same nonsensical consequences.

Well, that's one thing. And it's not really a perfect solution either. I can think of 10 things of the top of my head that wouldn't work well or not at all in the dornish system.

[Daena the Defiant]

Well, I have said all I will say here but I must confess that I am a little sad that no one got my "easter eggs" in the Vartell family tree

Edited by Daena the Defiant, 10 April 2012 - 11:34 AM.

[Apple Martini]

Daena the Defiant, on 10 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

Well, I have said all I will say here but I must confess that I am a little sad that no one got my "easter eggs" in the Vartell family tree

Aww, what were they? I read it but I confess I was pretty tired/annoyed when I did.

[Inara]

I noticed "Latoya Jacsoyne." I'll have to go back and look for the others!