342 replies to this topic

[Narwhal]

Snow Bass, on 21 January 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

They had the ideology, but the "unified power" varied over the centuries and usually depended on particular rulers (who were often as not fighting amongst themselves as against the Christians and Mongols). It's not like the US, where you had not on the ideology, but the federal and state governments consistently dedicating a big chunk of their resources to forcibly removing the indigenous population from valuable land.

It's certainly that the Arabic empire waxed and waned in power over the centuries but they conquered nearly all the territories that are still Arab today in the first century off their existence. In the same manner that America conquered nearly all it's territory in its first century.

The fact that the Arabic empires waned afterwards yet managed to ensure that their conquered territories would still continue to the use the Arabic language and adopt their religion in spite of the absence of modern bureaucracy illustrates the degree to which the actions that lead to those results had to be deliberate.

Not even the Persians, the Hellenistic kingdoms, the Mongols, or even the Romans had such a long lasting impact on the Middle East. The Caliphates did not accomplish those things purely out of habit but consciously as a matter of strategic policy.

I would, of course, agree with the idea that the Arabic empires were equal opportunity conquerors just like everyone else and had no unique level of animosity towards the Christian kingdoms. They, after all, went after the Sassanids with the same degree of vigor.

[total1402]

OP-

I was under the impression that authors like Martin wrote "historically accurate" fantasy and made it more like the middle ages because a lot of fantasy before then applied too much real world morality. Men equal to women, female warriors, freedom to choose relationships etc etc; with the implication being that this is a bad way to write fantasy. Basiclly modern societies with swords and magic; without any real justification. I suppose the term "historically accurate" does imply a nihilistic view that historically the past was always going to be as dark and grim as it actually was. Which can be considered offensive. Perhaps part of the authors world creation should be to display how their imagined societies have developed different attitudes to these things and make this seem organic as opposed to artificial. On a related point, I felt Martins rationalle about House Martell and "things are just done differently in Dorne" to be a little weak in that regard. Plus theres definetly nothing wrong with Martin writing about a patriarchal, medieval, inherited power, elitist, religious society when he quite clearly goes out of his way to demonise those things.

Edited by total1402, 23 January 2013 - 09:02 AM.

[Memory Lane]

In Martin's case, I think he was writing the medievalesque fantasy you see in more Tolkien-like fantasy series and the King Arthur mythology, only to knock it down a notch by adding realistic elements to it. He's the earliest one I've known to do it that comprehensively in recent decades, too (A Game of Thrones came out in 1996).

total1402 said:

On a related point, I felt Martins rationalle about House Martell and "things are just done differently in Dorne" to be a little weak in that regard.

I don't think it's weak. Westerosi society has been shaped by successive waves of migrations, and the Nymerian migration was just the most recent one. It makes sense that some of that society's more pro-women rules would carry through into the resulting hybridized society that the Rhoynish formed with the Andals then living in Dorne. Moreover, none of the customs are the kind that never existed in ancient history - there were societies where women could inherit and carried the descent line.

And, of course, there were often situations where official customs were more relaxed in practice. It reminds me of how in the 18th and early 19th century US, official rules that barred anyone who wasn't a property-holding white man tended to be more relaxed in implementation. Depending on the area, you'd have any white man voting, and not infrequently some women too.

Edited by Snow Bass, 23 January 2013 - 11:05 AM.