SeanF

That’s very bad news. Race for the Iron Throne, and Laboratory of Politics, were excellent. His analysis of the Slavers Bay arc was especially good.

What I would expect to see, in the wake of the slavers’ defeat, and Volantene revolt, is an end to the vast disparity in numbers between free and slave. Meereen, Volantis, and their hinterlands would have millions of freedmen, ranging from very poor to very rich. Some of the very rich freedmen might well wish to acquire slaves as status symbols, but they can’t re-enslave the majority, and they can’t import the vast numbers needed to restore the proportion of slaves to 75-80% of the whole. So, you might see up to 5% of the population, able to afford at least one slave, although some would refuse on ethical grounds, and slaves being 10-15% of the population, but the vast majority of people being free. Most likely, the freed fieldhands would be mainly sharecroppers, or smallholders. I'm guessing the big landowners will be Dothraki nobility, Shavepates, some survivors of the Old Blood/Great Masters, freedmen who have made good, the Red Temples, and the government.

A free company isn't a company in the modern sense, with shareholders who own it. It's more a case of a captain, or captain-general if the company is big enough, who's acquired a reputation as a commander. He might be a nobleman, like Federico de Moltefeltro, or a professional soldier who rose from the ranks, like Sir John Hawkwood. Essentially, he signs a contract with a lord, or free city, to fight for a fixed term, and to bring a fixed number of cavalry and infantry. His employer makes him a down payment, and then various stage payments, during the course of the contract. The captain then enters into contracts with his lieutenants, to supply soldiers in turn. They then negotiate contracts at the individual level with the serjeants, and ordinary soldiers. Think of it as being similar to a major building contract, today. The main contractor sub-contracts.

It was outlawed in England, in the 12th century. For sure, some ex-slaves will want to start slaving. But, you’ll still have millions of freed people who have no intention of being re-enslaved. The people who were creating the Unsullied are all dead, and many of the Dothraki will have left the supply chain.

Walder was Edmure Tully's vassal. Strictly speaking, he was entitled to nothing, for fulfilling his obligation to fight on behalf of his liege lord, Hoster Tully, and alongside liege lord's ally, Robb Stark.

The destruction of the slaver coalition outside Meereen, and the revolt in Volantis, likely mean the game’s up for slavery in Western Essos (Myr, Lys, Tyrosh are not big military players, and would be quite isolated). Steppe peoples tend quite rapidly to become settled peoples, once they acquire lands. Many of the Dothraki who followed Dany, likely form a ruling caste, in parts of Essos, like the Goths and Vandals. The city states no doubt go to war with each other, and they have their own tyrants and strongmen, who clash with the more democratic elements, within those states.

Dany. What happens when she confronts Khal Jhaqo? I'd like him and his riders to get a blast of Dracarys, but without him being killed outright. Dany tells him she's leaving him for the wolves, shadowcats, vultures and other predators to finish off. When he begs for the mercy of a quick death, she tells him: "I am not a merciful woman. You, the slavers, my Sun and Stars, have cured me of that folly." Melisandre (who I think will be the first POV at the Wall). Did Jon die? If so, how is he revived? What happens to the conspirators? Are Shireen and/or Gilly's child sacrificed to revive Jon? Asha. What is the outcome at the Battle of Winterfell? Do we get to see the Freys falling through the ice on the lake? Tyrion, Barristan, Theon are POV chapters I would very much like to see, but we already have them in some form.

It turns out at the end, he was being affected by an evil wizard, but it’s a nauseating first impression.

Not during the Terror, but subsequently. Things like religious toleration, an end to antiquated feudal privilege, decriminalisation of sodomy, Jewish emancipation, legislative elections (even if the franchise was limited), the notion that government is accountable to the people, were irreversible changes - and some of these things impacted on the rest of Europe.

To my mind, both the English and French revolutions had permanent beneficial impacts, despite the bloodshed. Progress is at best, a two steps forward, one step back, affair. That’s the best one can hope for in the East, that crushing the slaver coalition, outside Meereen, and revolt in Volantis, make slavery increasingly untenable in Western Essos. But, it won’t magically end all forms of tyranny.

The population of the Western Roman empire fell sharply, with the plagues and wars of the Third Century. And, while military victories might bring the occasional influx of slaves, taken as prisoners of war, there were no great conquests any longer. That meant labour became valuable. It was no longer feasible just to work fieldhands ot death, and then replace them with fresh slaves. So, something similar to serfdom took the place of slavery. The same shortage of labour helped eliminate serfdom itself, in Western Europe, in the wake of the Black Death. Where labour is cheap, abundant, and easily replaceable, the condition of the labourers is going to be awful.

Yes, I've seen you challenging such people on Reddit. But, you'll also get people arguing that Tywin is firm but fair, and arguing that the murder of Elia and her children was justified; that Ser Kevan, Jaime and Tyrion are more or less decent people; that Cersei is a feminist; that Catelyn is a monstrous step-mother, who started the War of the Five Kings; that Arya is a psychopath who has to be put down like a rabid dog; that the Freys, Boltons, and Bowen Marsh are unsung heroes; that Janos Slynt is a martyr etc. But yes, slavery is strange hill to die on.

The Others have reasons for their actions, of that I have no doubt. But, it seems plain that they are malign towards human beings. They raise humans from the dead, as thralls.

Brett Devereaux points that there is a huge bias towards the elite, among students of history. People tend to assume that they would be senators, knights, owners of slaves (but perfectly nice towards their slaves, of course), high lords and ladies, had they lived in the past. Whereas, the statistical likelihood of this is extremely low. It makes it terribly easy to empathise with Eastern masters, while just seeing the slaves as an amorphous mass. Among some of the fandom, the crucifixion of 163 slave children is seen as nothing special. Not worth troubling about. But the crucifixion of 163 *masters* (ie real people), in retaliation, is seen as an atrocious act.

In a modern setting, imprisonment, and dishonourable discharge, would probably be Slynt's fate - but being sent to the Watch is essentially a suspended death sentence, which leaves death as the only option.

"He is, despite everything, a righteous man" according to the author.

Actually, there should be a paragraph before my last one. "Sansa pulled the trigger, and the bolt flew straight and true, burying itself in Lame Lothar's black heart. He collapsed to the floor, wheezing. "You are one goddam cowardly bitch", shrieked his father, "you just shot an unarmed man! Should've thought to arm himself, before he decorated my brother's body with his direwolf's head."

Especially, given it's the Lannisters, not the Starks, who bear the blame for what befell her and her family.

Mostly I agree. But, I think the masters’ commitment to slavery (in this world and real life), goes beyond economics (important though that is). In order to justify to oneself, treating people as chattels, one has to get into the mentality of thinking of them as subhuman. Hence you got the South Carolina master replying “slaves ain’t horses”, when asked why he beat his slaves, but never his horses. To him, they were lesser than horses. Feudalism is the economics of the Mafia. Income flows upwards (and in this world, income often means personal service), in return for protection from above. The Boss acknowledges that those below him need to wet their beaks a little. Their prosperity is in his interest. Chattel slavery is more like the economics of a labour camp. Other than a minority of overseers, and privileged household slaves, the slaves are worked to death, then replaced with fresh slaves.

Outside of Braavos (and possibly Lorath and Ibben and the Summer Islands), Westeros has more social mobility and is less violent than Western Essos and Slavers Bay. The social pyramid in Myr, Pentos, Qarth, Lys, Tyrosh, Volantis and of course, Slavers Bay, is a very steep one. 75-85% of people are chattels. The 15-25% who are free, range from poor to middling, who own a slave or two, to the super-rich, who own vast numbers of slaves. As in Rome, among the free people, the definition of poverty likely means inability to afford even a single slave. Life for many household slaves, or skilled artisans, soldiers, or overseers, may be tolerable. Their skills mean it makes sense for their masters to treat them with some humanity, as well as using them to oppress the majority. Some of them may be set free. For the majority, fieldhands, millworkers, dung collectors, miners, prostitutes, quarrymen, life will be horrendous. They’re just worked to death, and replaced with fresh stock. The free cities generally seem to have a technological edge over the West. But, Slavers Bay produces nothing culturally or technologically.

“Sansa stared coldly down at the Lord of the Crossing; “I’ve killed women and children. I’ve killed everything that walks or crawls at some point. And I’m here to kill you, Walder Frey, for what you did to Robb.”

The slavers’ deaths were much worse than Slynt’s (but so of course, were the slavers’ own actions). Dany is shown subsequently agonising over their deaths, whereas Jon does not. Dany’s tendency to beat herself up over her decisions is (a) an indicator that she is not a villain (Tywin Lannister loses no sleep over ordering killings) (b) a weakness in a leader, perhaps a fatal flaw.

I think the slavers of Astapor and Yunkai are cartoonishly degenerate and evil, like Jabba the Hutt. But there’s rather more depth to those of Meereen, and Xaro. They’re more intelligently evil.

Agreed. There is no government in real life that has done a truly good job at ending slavery. You can have the planters replaced by local tyrants - like Dessalines in Haiti. You can have the slaves freed, but their ex-masters retaining great power, as in the post-Bellum South, Jamaica, and Brazil. Ideally, masters should be required to make restitution to their slaves - but only Thaddeus Steven’s and a small number of radicals could conceive of such a thing.

Karstark murdered prisoners, and murdered Tully soldiers. He had earned death. Slynt repeatedly defied a reasonable order, given by his commander. At the Wall, that earns an execution. Mainly, Dany does not punish the Meereenese elite for slaving, or rape, prior to her arrival. She gives an amnesty for crimes committed by masters and slaves. The exception is the 163 elite, crucified in retaliation for the crucifixion of 163 children, which demonstrates that the life of a Great Master is worth the same as the life of a slave child.