SeanF

Funnily enough, I sat next to Sophie Ambler, at dinner, after hearing her give a lecture based on that book. She’s right that warfare turned increasingly brutal c.1270. Both Edward I and Philip the Fair maximised cruelty. We also got talking about the chevauchee, which she described bluntly as “murder, rape, and arson.”

I thought the Falco series ran out of steam by about Book 10. Master and God was good. As well as McCullogh, it reminded me somewhat of Allan Massie’s Roman novels. Being an imperial freedman was a good deal. Even if you ceased working for the emperor, you were still a part of the Familia Caesaris, and could call upon food, shelter, and imperial protection, at need. The attitude to Christianity is interesting. The authorities were worried that Christians would try to rescue the Chief Vestal, after she was condemned to death. If that is authentic, it would be another indicator that Christians very much shared the same world, and world outlook, as the pagans did.

To the pure, all things are pure.

A friend who lives in Alabama told me that Moore was challenged from the left in the primary, by Charlie Craddick, whose campaign slogan was "fry 'em till their eyeballs pop out."

I've got a brown trilby, for cold weather, a flat cap for the rain, and a panama for the summer.

The problem is that I think Tyrion's world outlook is rather more typical of the aristocracy than Dany's or Arya's.

@freninDany fighting the slavers is a bit of a two-edged sword, I think. On the one hand, yes, it’s the right thing to do, and many will see it as such. On the other, many nobles would be horrified by the retribution visited by revolting slaves, upon members of their own class. Many have Essosi noble relatives, and no doubt refugees will bring dreadful tales with them (and slave revolts are always terrible for the masters).

You’d know better than I, but can you get more repellent than say, Roy Moore?

That’s a very cogent analysis. Trump’s attempted coup somewhat resembles the Kapp Putsch, a ludicrous affair, that still led to something far more serious down the line. It’s hard to describe the degree of contempt which I have for most of the Republican Party.

My view is that the Dornish will put Tommen, Myrcella, and Margaery to death, providing Dany with potential allies among the Tyrells and in the West.

I think that the whole business by which some non-Western cultures adapted very successfully to Western ways of war and others did not is fascinating. The Japanese did so very successfully. The Sikhs almost did so very successfully (and the British victory in the Sikh Wars was a very near-run thing. Had the British lost, we might now talk about the Sikh Raj). The Ottomans and Chinese acquired the technology but did not make use of it successfully. Then, you get peoples who were able effectively to combine Western technology effectively with their own ways of fighting, like American Indians and the Maori. They only lost due to facing overwhelming numbers of Europeans.

No one on the slaver side should be taking much notice of the Yunkish lords as commanders. They and their soldiers are a joke, and recognised as such by the Windblown. They show how competent they are by camping in a plague spot, and drawing water from the river, without even bothering to boil it. They've lost about a third of their men, even without fighting. Given another fortnight, and even without Barristan attacking, the Slaver army might have just died of disease. The competent soldiers on the slaver side are the citizen soldiers of New Ghis, the Windblown (who switch sides), and the Cats. The Tiger Soldiers of Volantis are, I suspect, a much more competent group. The problem is that the Volantene commanders are likely to be a bunch of overbred idiots, appointed on the basis of noble ancestry, rather than military competence. And, of course, there is a religious/social revolution about to explode.

Socially, Westeros is different to the Roman Republic and Greek City States, but what it has in common with them is that while there is no professional army, at the same time, society is heavily militarised. Any landowner who is rich enough to afford a horse and armour owes military service to his overlord. He has to train, and he has the means to do so. In the ancient world, they would be the equites or hippeis That’s a class of many thousands of people. Further down the social scale are the better-off peasants, the type who have time to train with longbows and pikes. Although the longbow was not a weapon in the ancient world, they’d be the kinds of men who served in Rome’s conscript legions as principes, triarii, and hastati. In the Greek world, they’d be hoplites. Both classes are men of substance, and would generally be favoured as recruits. But, only a minority could be conscripted at any one time, as the local economy would crash, otherwise. Almost all systems of conscription make exemptions - eg for men supporting infant children, or aged parents, or in various key occupations. Also, it makes sense to spread the burden, so you take one brother for the army, but leave another to run the family farm. Below them are the poorer peasants, who might have some training with a dagger. The lords would likely use them as camp followers, but in extremis, they’d be called on to fight. They’re likely the men that Merribald talks of. The weaknesses of the system would likely be poor logistics, and a real lack of experience of fighting outside one’s locality. And, as Catelyn notes, service is time-limited. That’s where Dany’s army would likely score, I think. The mere fact of getting them to Westeros, would mean that an effective logistical system must already be in place. They’d have lots of combat experience, be used to marching vast distances, and not be concerned about returning to the family farm.

Two very big things he got right. His record in WWII. His realisation that the Soviet Union was a major threat to Europe. He, like everyone else I mentioned, had plenty of flaws. Great leaders do.

These four writers quote each other, so no apology, I’m afraid.

American Isolationism is stupid, purely in terms of defending American interests.

Knocking Churchill is now very popular in the kinds of circles that don’t see that much difference between the Western powers and the Nazis (Geoffrey Wheatcroft, Tariq Ali, Clive Ponting, David Irving etc.) One can argue that the leaders who founded and guided NATO, and led the West, from the 50’s to the 90’s, were just one cheek of the same sordid arse as the leaders of the Eastern bloc, who provided the other cheek. But, I think that’s an argument that comes from a place of great privilege.

The same. These were all leaders who prioritised Western security interests. Which often involved doing deals with shitty people.

I think that the pool of competent leadership dried up, right across Western democracies, at some point in the 1990's. Love them or loathe them, Thatcher, Reagan, Kohl, Mitterand, Schmidt, Adenauer, Bush Senior, Attlee, Churchill, Eisenhower were all pretty clear-sighed about foreign affairs.

That is a staggering loss, for tiny gain.

I think a vast slave army would be more trouble than it was worth.

It's years since I've read it (I also enjoyed the mini-series). I do remember Lord Yabu composing a haiku, as he listened to a prisoner being boiled alive, contrasting his inner tranquility with the man's anguish.

Agreed. Back in the day, people detested silver coins that were just a veneer over base metal. A stag is likely 90-95% pure.

I'm definitely looking forward to Part 2, having just rewatched 1 on Netflix.

I can't remember the exchange rate, but if one views a stag as worth, say, a third of a day's wages, (on the basis that one stag = one English silver penny), copper coinage would still make sense.