Is the Northern Rebellion based off of the US Civil War?

[KarlDanski]

Is the Northern Rebellion against the Iron Throne and war for Independence based off of the Confederate States of America and the Civil War? They have similarities like their early war cavalry being very good, and the rebel troops being better than the Union troops at the start of the war with many of them being former military personnel or current. The South was also less urbanized and very rural like the North plus you have the more "tough" confederates with the hardy northmen. The war even plays out like this as the CSA did well early on before the Norths bigger population, and industry beat the Souths better troops. I know the North and WOT5K inspirations have been Germania, War of the Roses, Northumbria and Scotland but is this also true?

[Lollygag]

Granted my searching skills might be lacking, but I can't find where GRRM discusses the American Civil War much at all. He's usually discussing European history. His treatment of the slavery issue is clearly not based on American history, instead sounding more like ancient Europe.

The only 2 mentions that I found:

http://www.georgerrmartin.com/a-conversation-with-bernard-cornwell/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Month/2001/10

Vance, King, Cornwell, and More

"Jack Vance would head the list. Stephen King is up there. Bernard Cornwell, at least for his Sharpe's books. I like his new medieval series as well, but not the Civil War stuff. Whenever a new Flashman novel comes out I grab it right away. I watch for William Goldman's byline. And I confess to being addicted to Colleen McCullough's "First Man in Rome" series, despite the fact that she's an awful writer in some ways. Even so I find the books compulsively readable."

 

October 05, 2001

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Quwertzuiopp]

No, it's very roughly based on the War of Roses, the late medival/(very) early modern civil war in England between the houses of York and Lancaster for the crown of England.

[KarlDanski]

As I said, I know it's based roughly on the War of the Roses, but it also has similarities with the Civil War with the "grey" rural Southerners who start off well early on in the war with a more industrial rich neighbor who wants to keep them apart of the country. You could probably compare Stonewall Jackson to Robb Stark, despite Stonewall not having any claim to the CSA as a whole, he was respected highly by his men, was an able commander, and one of the best US commanders in history and was even killed bby his own men. 

[HoodedCrow]

KarlDanski, I think you have a good point. Martin likes to blend his histories to make a new whole. 

In a similar way Dani wants to free slaves, but finds it much more difficult than she imagined and bogged down with economic and cultural issues. While that should be a duh for anyone who is not a teenager, some fantasies are very simplistic. Some RL wars are based on bogus ideas as well, (cough liberating Iraq with people throwing flowers, smart bombs, and wars paying for themselves)

[Wolf's Bane]

On 5/21/2017 at 10:38 PM, KarlDanski said:

Is the Northern Rebellion against the Iron Throne and war for Independence based off of the Confederate States of America and the Civil War? They have similarities like their early war cavalry being very good, and the rebel troops being better than the Union troops at the start of the war with many of them being former military personnel or current. The South was also less urbanized and very rural like the North plus you have the more "tough" confederates with the hardy northmen. The war even plays out like this as the CSA did well early on before the Norths bigger population, and industry beat the Souths better troops. I know the North and WOT5K inspirations have been Germania, War of the Roses, Northumbria and Scotland but is this also true?

It was inspired by the American civil war for sure.  Even the thematic element of slavery is there.  The rulers of the north are skin changers which is a form of slavery.  The north keep to their savage practices of right of 1st night and could want the return to blood sacrifice.  The North is less developed as was the southern US. 

[The Mountain That Flies]

14 hours ago, KarlDanski said:

You could probably compare Stonewall Jackson to Robb Stark, despite Stonewall not having any claim to the CSA as a whole, he was respected highly by his men, was an able commander, and one of the best US commanders in history and was even killed bby his own men. 

Jackson was an established veteran who was killed by his own men on accident, not a green boy who botched his alliances.

As to your larger point, the causes of each war are too vastly different to equate them beyond the agrarian point you made and the fact both were civil wars. The Confederate States were fighting for independence, but not as a unified nation behind an ancient tradition of a past dynasty. Had the CSA succeeded they would have like split into a very loose assembly of states, and culturally were very different from one another. Furthermore, the issue of state's rights as regards to slavery has no direct (or even indirect) equal in the WOT5K, and was the driving force of the U.S. Civil War that had been a festering issue for decades leading up to the conflict. Finally, while there is a comparison to be made in the Confederacy's early successes compared to Robb's, the Union did not prevail through betrayals or marriage alliances. They won because the South was almost constantly playing defense in its home land and had no real strategy for victory besides attrition. 

As a side note, I will grant that failures of diplomacy is one point of comparison you could make between the two causes. The CSA was unable to get any foreign power to recognize its autonomy and offer assistance, while Robb's cause was awful at attracting support outside the North. The lack of outside help certainly made both causes harder to sustain, as foreign assistance had been critical to the American Revolution.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

The truth is, if you try hard enough, you'll find similarities with anything (as the forum proves). I, for one, thought of a first Eastern European local conflict that came to mind, and found quite a few similarities between WO5K and the Khmelnytsky Uprising. Frankly, more than between WO5K and the American civil war. Which doesn't mean that the book was "based" on that episode of the Polish/Lithuanian/Ukrainian history, I very much doubt GRRM had studied it in depth.

11 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

It was inspired by the American civil war for sure.  Even the thematic element of slavery is there.  The rulers of the north are skin changers which is a form of slavery.  The north keep to their savage practices of right of 1st night and could want the return to blood sacrifice.  The North is less developed as was the southern US. 

Don't listen to the voices in your head, they aren't your friends.

[Praetor Xyn]

Not to all, the North is basically Scottland, and it may very well be based on some war in Scottish history, but I'm far from an expert on the subject.

[The Commentator]

12 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

It was inspired by the American civil war for sure.  Even the thematic element of slavery is there.  The rulers of the north are skin changers which is a form of slavery.  The north keep to their savage practices of right of 1st night and could want the return to blood sacrifice.  The North is less developed as was the southern US. 

This is true and why the Union prevailed.  The southern economy ran on free labor.  

The issue of slavery in of itself is not parallel to ASOIAF as a precursor to the war.  While I have no doubt that Rickard Stark and Robert Baratheon were plotting treason, I do not think it is secession from the rest of the 7K was their intention.  The south clearly had that intention.  The War of the Five Kings was based on supporting family and house pride.  Tywin and Catelyn were both at fault for escalating what should have been a small matter into something that killed thousands of innocent people.  Just as Jon Arryn can be faulted for escalating what should have been a comparatively small matter of the lives of two boys from treasonous families into a rebellion that killed many innocents.  Robb should have gone to King's Landing and sworn fealty as he was commanded to do instead of calling his banners and ramping up the conflict. 

Slavery is the main factor in the War for Independence taking place at Slaver's Bay but it is not a big factor in the conflict between the lion and the direwolf.  Yes Bran is guilty of a vile form of slavery and mind control but that is not the reason for the War of the Five Kings.  Bran is actually an innocent victim of the lions when the Lannisters threw him off the tower. 

[HouseFossoway]

3 hours ago, The Mountain That Flies said:

Furthermore, the issue of state's rights as regards to slavery has no direct (or even indirect) equal in the WOT5K, and was the driving force of the U.S. Civil War that had been a festering issue for decades leading up to the conflict.

I might press against that point.

I would guess that the northern and river lords drummed up support from the smallfolk and their soldiers by talking about northern and riverlands culture, and made the war as a sort of patriotic thing (I don't have much evidence for this, but it would make sense). But the northern and river lords who declared Robb king were probably mainly worried about how the new lannister regime would affect themselves, as opposed to the fact that Ned was executed. They had every reason to suspect that the lannisters would begin raising their taxes and imposing more hardships on them.

So in both wars, the wealthy elite of the north/riverlands (for WOTFK) and the confedracy (for civil war) were primarily motivated by their own economic interests (relative independence and self-determination for the north/riverlands, slavery and states rights for the confederacy), but declared the war to be about national/cultural reasons so that they could convince all the poor people they ruled to go along with the war.

[Lion of the West]

I don't think that the WoFK was very inspired by the American Civil War due to the fact that the only really important similarity is that a weaker part rebelled against a stronger part, but things like that have happened far more often in Anglophone history, which I believe is the main well of inspiration for GRRM, than just the American Civil War. What I would propose instead is a much better fit with the Scottish War(s) of Independence compressed into a single conflict. That would get the poor North against the wealth South, the outcome and in belief the results, more in line with the North's separatist adventure in the WoFK.

EDITED: And to that GRRM seems to take a strong stand against slavery, and thus I can't see that the Northmen would be a stand in for the Confederates. Even while I think alot of negative things about Northern nobility, and the Riverlords, I don't think they are nearly as regionalistic, selfish, short-sighted, stupid and greedy as the American Southern elites, or many of the non-elites as well.

[GyantSpyder]

1 hour ago, Praetor Xyn said:

Not to all, the North is basically Scottland, and it may very well be based on some war in Scottish history, but I'm far from an expert on the subject.

One possible way of looking at it is that the culture and narrative around the Confederacy during and especially after the American Civil War is influenced by the Jacobite revolts in Scotland, with the whole "romantic, heroic failure" vibe, the half-nationalism, and the sort of pastoral imagery frequently used in mourning and remembrance.

Comparing the mournful, later versions of "Dixie" common after the war (not the upbeat minstrelsy version) and "Loch Lomond" and I think there are some superficial similarities.

Robb Stark is more of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure ("the Young Wolf" and "the Young Pretender") than a Stonewall Jackson figure, but Stonewall Jackson is himself a bit of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure. So it all might be connected.

[Dorian Martell's son]

On 5/21/2017 at 7:38 PM, KarlDanski said:

Is the Northern Rebellion against the Iron Throne and war for Independence based off of the Confederate States of America and the Civil War? 

Not at all

On 5/21/2017 at 7:38 PM, KarlDanski said:

 They have similarities like their early war cavalry being very good, and the rebel troops being better than the Union troops at the start of the war with many of them being former military personnel or current. The South was also less urbanized and very rural like the North plus you have the more "tough" confederates with the hardy northmen. The war even plays out like this as the CSA did well early on before the Norths bigger population, and industry beat the Souths better troops. 

The south didn't have better troops. They had the westpoint military elite. Until Sherman came along with his leisurely stroll to the beach. the south sucked in every conceivable way and was destined to lose. They were just too stupid to see it in the same way they could not seem to figure out the economic sinkhole that was the slave labor system. Idiots lose for a reason

19 hours ago, KarlDanski said:

As I said, I know it's based roughly on the War of the Roses, but it also has similarities with the Civil War with the "grey" rural Southerners who start off well early on in the war with a more industrial rich neighbor who wants to keep them apart of the country. 

Again, no comparison at all.  The southerners weren't grey, they were white, except for the black people that the white elites wanted to keep owning as property. 

19 hours ago, KarlDanski said:

You could probably compare Stonewall Jackson to Robb Stark, despite Stonewall not having any claim to the CSA as a whole, he was respected highly by his men, was an able commander, and one of the best US commanders in history and was even killed bby his own men. 

This is where the comparison should end. 

13 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

It was inspired by the American civil war for sure.  

Nope. Dead wrong. Like the Mance=Rhaegar theorists 

13 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

 Even the thematic element of slavery is there. 

Yes, Remember Ned was going to execute Jorah for selling poachers. Like how the American north should have done to every southern slave owner. Still the opposite of the civil war

13 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

  The rulers of the north are skin changers which is a form of slavery.  

The lack of ability to properly define slavery is why there are so many csa apologists that get extra butthurt when monuments to traitors and slavery are removed from public spaces. 

13 hours ago, Steelshanks Walton said:

The north keep to their savage practices of right of 1st night and could want the return to blood sacrifice.  The North is less developed as was the southern US. 

This is the only legit comparison. the south wanted to keep the savage practice of owning another human and the killings and beatings to keep them in line. Unlike the north in the books, the CSA was too stupid to modernize with industry as they had slaves to do it instead of paid workers. 

2 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Don't listen to the voices in your head, they aren't your friends.

Best reply in the thread 

[Byfort of Corfe]

4 hours ago, The Mountain That Flies said:

Jackson was an established veteran who was killed by his own men on accident, not a green boy who botched his alliances.

As to your larger point, the causes of each war are too vastly different to equate them beyond the agrarian point you made and the fact both were civil wars. The Confederate States were fighting for independence, but not as a unified nation behind an ancient tradition of a past dynasty. Had the CSA succeeded they would have like split into a very loose assembly of states, and culturally were very different from one another. Furthermore, the issue of state's rights as regards to slavery has no direct (or even indirect) equal in the WOT5K, and was the driving force of the U.S. Civil War that had been a festering issue for decades leading up to the conflict. Finally, while there is a comparison to be made in the Confederacy's early successes compared to Robb's, the Union did not prevail through betrayals or marriage alliances. They won because the South was almost constantly playing defense in its home land and had no real strategy for victory besides attrition. 

As a side note, I will grant that failures of diplomacy is one point of comparison you could make between the two causes. The CSA was unable to get any foreign power to recognize its autonomy and offer assistance, while Robb's cause was awful at attracting support outside the North. The lack of outside help certainly made both causes harder to sustain, as foreign assistance had been critical to the American Revolution.

And while the South had success on Eastern Battlefields a quick look at the west shows the depths of Confederate Military disaster, a list of important battles from 1861-62 reveals:

1. Wilson's Creek, Aug 1861- Confederate Victory
2. Ft Henry Feb1862-Union Victory
3. Ft Donelson Feb 1862- Union Victory
4. Valverde Feb 1862- Confederate Victory
5. Glorietta Pass Mar 1862-Confederate Tactical/Union Strategic Victory
6. Pea Ridge Mar 1862-Union Victory
7. Shiloh Apr 1862-Union Victory
8. Corinth Apr-May 1862-Union Victory
9. Island #10 Apr 1862-Union Victory
10. Iuka Sept 1862-Union Victory
11. Corinth Oct 1862-Union Victory
12. Perryville Oct 1862-Confederate Tactical/Union Strategic Victory
13. Stones River Dec 1862-Union Victory

This is not a comprehensive list of all engagements fought but it is representative of the fighting.  Note that the is almost constantly pushing deeper and deeper south.  Many people have an "Eastern-centric" notion of the Civil War.  There is also a line of thought, equally incorrect that the North only won because the weight of it's population and industrial might eventually crushed the South after the South had "taken " all the early battles.  Now I have also limited it to 1861 and 62 on purpose, rather than going through the Tullahoma and Vicksburg Campaigns and beyond. 

 

There are almost no similarities between Robb's Rebellion, fought because of what the Lannisters had done to the Stark Family, and the American Civil War.  Rather I believe that we should take GRRM at his word and accept what he has said that the inspiration for the Dynastic Struggles in Westeros is drawn primarily from the Wars of the Roses and other, similar Dynastic Wars in Medieval Europe.

[Byfort of Corfe]

30 minutes ago, GyantSpyder said:

One possible way of looking at it is that the culture and narrative around the Confederacy during and especially after the American Civil War is influenced by the Jacobite revolts in Scotland, with the whole "romantic, heroic failure" vibe, the half-nationalism, and the sort of pastoral imagery frequently used in mourning and remembrance.

Comparing the mournful, later versions of "Dixie" common after the war (not the upbeat minstrelsy version) and "Loch Lomond" and I think there are some superficial similarities.

Robb Stark is more of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure ("the Young Wolf" and "the Young Pretender") than a Stonewall Jackson figure, but Stonewall Jackson is himself a bit of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure. So it all might be connected.

Mark Twain blamed the Civil War on the fact that too many Southerners were hooked on Sir Walter Scott's fiction, it's why the burning steamboat in Huckleberry Finn is named the Sir Walter Scott.  Of course he was speaking about the "romantic notion of war" a notion that would lead to the deaths of some (this is the current estimate, higher than before) 750,000 soldiers. 

[Praetor Xyn]

41 minutes ago, GyantSpyder said:

One possible way of looking at it is that the culture and narrative around the Confederacy during and especially after the American Civil War is influenced by the Jacobite revolts in Scotland, with the whole "romantic, heroic failure" vibe, the half-nationalism, and the sort of pastoral imagery frequently used in mourning and remembrance.

Comparing the mournful, later versions of "Dixie" common after the war (not the upbeat minstrelsy version) and "Loch Lomond" and I think there are some superficial similarities.

Robb Stark is more of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure ("the Young Wolf" and "the Young Pretender") than a Stonewall Jackson figure, but Stonewall Jackson is himself a bit of a Bonnie Prince Charlie figure. So it all might be connected.

I am not familiar enough with Scottish history in general to comment on most of this, but I don't like the Bonnie Prince Charlie comparison, as Robb seemed much more competent militarily.

[GyantSpyder]

1 hour ago, Byfort of Corfe said:

Mark Twain blamed the Civil War on the fact that too many Southerners were hooked on Sir Walter Scott's fiction, it's why the burning steamboat in Huckleberry Finn is named the Sir Walter Scott.  Of course he was speaking about the "romantic notion of war" a notion that would lead to the deaths of some (this is the current estimate, higher than before) 750,000 soldiers. 

 

1 hour ago, Praetor Xyn said:

I am not familiar enough with Scottish history in general to comment on most of this, but I don't like the Bonnie Prince Charlie comparison, as Robb seemed much more competent militarily.

Ah! So now it all comes together!

Looking deeper, the Confederates, as Twain suggested, did fashion themselves as Scottish Jacobites. The first Confederate flag was the "Bonnie Blue Flag," and "Bonnie" is a epithet for several prominent Jacobites, including Bonnie Prince Charlie (like Bonnie Dundee), as well as found in the Loch Lomond refrain. And there's theme and symbolism across these various Scottish rebels that speaks to a kind of common archetypal identity. 

 

Sir Walter Scott is what pulls it all together! He wrote, among other things, _Rob Roy_, an historical novel about the Jacobite rebellion which,  according to Twain at least, help inspire the Confederacy to secede by force.

"Roi" in French is "King," and even though Rob Roy in the story isn't the king of Scotland, he is a larger than life figure similar to Robb Stark in some ways,  namely that he appears in his own book only through the eyes of others who are watching his campaign while traveling to different parts of the countryside, and he too is wounded at the high-water mark of his rebellion. There are other superficial similarities between Rob Roy and Robb Stark as well, no doubt.

And the Liam Neeson movie version of Rob Roy came out in 1995 while GRRM was writing the first books. 

So yeah, I think Rob Roy is the figure who pulls this all together. 

[Protagoras]

As have been said by others, you have a much better case for US civil war history when it comes to Daenerys and her war in the east.

[Praetor Xyn]

1 hour ago, GyantSpyder said:

 

Ah! So now it all comes together!

Looking deeper, the Confederates, as Twain suggested, did fashion themselves as Scottish Jacobites. The first Confederate flag was the "Bonnie Blue Flag," and "Bonnie" is a epithet for several prominent Jacobites, including Bonnie Prince Charlie (like Bonnie Dundee), as well as found in the Loch Lomond refrain. And there's theme and symbolism across these various Scottish rebels that speaks to a kind of common archetypal identity. 

 

Sir Walter Scott is what pulls it all together! He wrote, among other things, _Rob Roy_, an historical novel about the Jacobite rebellion which,  according to Twain at least, help inspire the Confederacy to secede by force.

"Roi" in French is "King," and even though Rob Roy in the story isn't the king of Scotland, he is a larger than life figure similar to Robb Stark in some ways,  namely that he appears in his own book only through the eyes of others who are watching his campaign while traveling to different parts of the countryside, and he too is wounded at the high-water mark of his rebellion. There are other superficial similarities between Rob Roy and Robb Stark as well, no doubt.

And the Liam Neeson movie version of Rob Roy came out in 1995 while GRRM was writing the first books. 

So yeah, I think Rob Roy is the figure who pulls this all together. 

I like this. It seems so illuminati and crackpot, that's what makes it great.