Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hodor's Aunt

If I was Dany I would let some of Cersai's army run

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Krishtotter said:

*snip*

Fair point, but that doesn't mean the High Sparrow "revolution" would end provoking the birth of a more democratic regime in the long run... And I am not convinced that the Protestant Reform was a natural consequence of a process that started with the Gregorian Reform...

If something, Luther went in the opposite direction, stripping the Church of all temporal power and dismantling it as an autonomous organization, giving its responsabilities to the princes (which by the way, helped the Protestant Reform to succeed by making it attractive to central and northen european monarchs...).

Calvinus, yes, he aimed for a theocracy, but his version of Protestantism only succeeded in countries who were already anti-monarchical or in rebellion against a monarch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2017 at 6:16 PM, Hodor's Aunt said:

Those people have seen the power of her dragon. She can hardly have any better propaganda than first hand accounts from the battle in the camps of her enemy. I would let people slip away on all hirachy levels. Not Jamie or the Tarlys of course but enough other commoners & nobles to let everyone know what she is capable of doing.

Sure she can do that.  After they kneel and swear never to take up arms against the Mother of Dragons again.  The Tarlys got what they deserved.  They had plenty of chances and they chose to oppose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2017 at 8:11 AM, ummester said:

The people of Westeros have only been freed of Targ rule for less than 2 decades though. Sure, dragons are scary, and fighting them would take heaps of balls (like Jamie and Bronn seemed to show) but surely you would, ultimately, try to oppose them so that your children and children's children aren't ruled by the whims of people that are lucky enough to have flying, fire breathing monsters?

That is the thing. If Dany didn't make her stupid "Bend the knee or die" thing (and did not burn all the supplies - total waste of dragonpower)... The best move would have been "Bend the knee... Or leave behind your arms, armor, pick up whatever you like from the wagons and go home and speak of the goodwill of Daenerys Targaryen breaker of chains blah blah blah".

If you go home on these terms... Why would you oppose them? Baratheon/lannister whims are not that different, many of the soldiers might have had families around Lannisport and Casterly Rock (which the Lannister overlord gave up to enemy without much fight) and you know that she had you at her mercy, you defied her... And yet she let you go free. Kinda like lack of any serious resistance in Germany or Japan after WWII.

Heck, Tarly would have been useful to that even. While his honor would forbid him to bend the knee... Would it forbid him a parole? That was another usual ploy. "Sit it out, go to High Hearth, your heir will remain as a ward on Dragonstone. And tell all the men who do not bend the knee to go home as well."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/8/2017 at 0:31 AM, Runaway Penguin said:

That is the thing. If Dany didn't make her stupid "Bend the knee or die" thing (and did not burn all the supplies - total waste of dragonpower)... The best move would have been "Bend the knee... Or leave behind your arms, armor, pick up whatever you like from the wagons and go home and speak of the goodwill of Daenerys Targaryen breaker of chains blah blah blah".

If you go home on these terms... Why would you oppose them? Baratheon/lannister whims are not that different, many of the soldiers might have had families around Lannisport and Casterly Rock (which the Lannister overlord gave up to enemy without much fight) and you know that she had you at her mercy, you defied her... And yet she let you go free. Kinda like lack of any serious resistance in Germany or Japan after WWII.

Heck, Tarly would have been useful to that even. While his honor would forbid him to bend the knee... Would it forbid him a parole? That was another usual ploy. "Sit it out, go to High Hearth, your heir will remain as a ward on Dragonstone. And tell all the men who do not bend the knee to go home as well."

Soldiers could be allowed to leave, but Tarly? No way! No victor will allow such an important lord and general to go away...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2017 at 0:59 AM, ummester said:

I'm still convinced that the walkers have some kind of lesson to teach the humans of Westeros and we the readers/viewers. Jon and Dany might defeat them but, if they do, I think they will realise their victory was a mistake, or hollow, after the fact.

That's a very interesting idea that I've not heard before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, White_Winter_Raven said:

That's a very interesting idea that I've not heard before.

Well it would not be in line with the more morally complicated way this story started if it just ended with good guys beat bad guys would it? If there isn't something more to it, it will be an incredible let down.

But, the show seems to have drifted so far from the core of it's tone and narrative design at the start that anything seems possible now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/08/2017 at 10:10 PM, Krishtotter said:

 

In the real life Middle Ages, that is what actually happened. The Supreme Pontiff led a revolution to free the church from control by the state during the "Investiture Contest". Dictatus Papae, a 1075 decree by St. Pope Gregory VII, was the "first declaration of independence" in European history. 

Historians such as Norman Cantor and in particular legal scholars like Harold J Berman refer to the 'Gregorian Reform' the "Papal Revolution", the first of the great 'Western' paradigmatic shifts in thought that was succeeded by the Protestant Reformation, the English Revolution (1640s-1680s), the American and French Revolutions. See:

 

If the High Sparrow had not been quashed by Cersei, his puritanical populism may have led to a Republican regime like that of Savonarola in Italy:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girolamo_Savonarola
 

 

And Oliver Cromwell in England:

 http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200402/200402_116_ironsides.cfm

 

 

 

 

In our Western history, this "puritanical phase" - Papal Revolution, Protestant Revolution, Puritan Revolution in England - seems to have been a necessary prelude to secular democracy: which retained the advocacy for the masses, the egalitarian impulse etc. but overtime stripped it from the religious baggage, dogmatism and the stringent, enforced "moralism". Believe it or not, while it might not have been "fun" in the short-term it would have been better in the long run if the High Sparrow had succeeded in controlling or even deposing the monarchy. We know this from our own history. 

By the early sixteenth century, it had led Christian thinkers to utter statements like the following by a Spanish Jesuit intellectual of the Salamanca School:

 

 

 

See:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Francisco-Suarez#ref224029

 

 

 

Less than forty years after these words were uttered by a Jesuit priest and theologian, in 1649 the English Puritans had decapitated their king and formed a revolutionary republic on the basis of egalitarian principles derived from grassroots Protestant beliefs, holding that their monarch Charles I, who believed in divine right of kings, was:
 
 
 
 
 
And they further claimed that he had been intent only on: 
 
 
 

 

Just over a hundred years after that the American Revolution, a secular revolution, took place followed by the French Revolution and the birth of modern democracy.

It looks like the "boat might have swam" for Westeros with the death of the High Sparrow. Their potential Gregory VII/Savonarola/Cromwell moment has been snatched from them.

What they are left with is more along the lines of Byzantine or Russian-style caeseropapist absolutism now that the Sept of Baelor has been destroyed by wildfire:

 

http://www.sparknotes.com/us-government-and-politics/political-science/political-ideologies-and-styles/section2/page/2/

 

 

 

 

Caeseropapiat absolutism was unable to predominate in Europe because our version of the High Septon (the Pope) had become sufficiently strong, organised and centralized to act as an eternal alternative source of resistance to secular authority. The two spheres fought endlessly and counterbalanced each other, such that neither a theocracy nor a caeseropapist regime emerged.

They had their chance with the High Sparrow and Margaery Tyrell imho. Both were astute enough and knew how the game worked to understand what the other was doing but not to the extent of actually destroying one another like Cersei did in the show, essentially abolishing the High Septon office, thereby preventing any subsequent religiously-inspired uprisings to her rule.

Martin once said that Westeros was inspired by medieval England. But it seems to me that whereas the real-world English puritan fanatics succeeded in de-throning their monarch and forming a republic for a while that set a precedent for the future, their ASOIF equivalent - the Sparrows - ultimately failed.

To me, that can only be a bad omen for the people of Westeros unless the advance of the Night King and his army of White Walkers causes sufficient chaos for a peasant revolt to break out and last.

What an excellent history lesson - thumbs up.

I knew in simple terms that the enlightenment and democracy would not have been possible without a form of populist Christianity but I didn't know how it all fit together. Thanks for explaining in an accessible way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ummester said:

Well it would not be in line with the more morally complicated way this story started if it just ended with good guys beat bad guys would it? If there isn't something more to it, it will be an incredible let down.

But, the show seems to have drifted so far from the core of it's tone and narrative design at the start that anything seems possible now.

Yes, but I've heard that Martin himself said that final endings for all the major characters will be the same in book and show, regardless of the different paths they take to get there.  I wish not.  Since he won't get the books done until after the show, it would be great to not know the endings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, White_Winter_Raven said:

Yes, but I've heard that Martin himself said that final endings for all the major characters will be the same in book and show, regardless of the different paths they take to get there.  I wish not.  Since he won't get the books done until after the show, it would be great to not know the endings!

I'm not certain GRRM will get the books finished. I'm not even certain he knows how to get from ADWD to his original planned ending - which would explain why he seems to be having difficulty finishing.

One things seems certain though - the show ending is not going to feel fully logically cohesive with the last few seasons if it remains in line with whatever GRRM had planned at the time he sold it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2017 at 2:12 AM, Ser Lepus said:

Soldiers could be allowed to leave, but Tarly? No way! No victor will allow such an important lord and general to go away...

They might if they have his heir as "honored guest". Was fairly standard practice. Heck, even in-universe just look at Theon (or book wise at various Reach noble families whose kids were in the red Keep). While this threat holds only as long as a danger is perceived (Balon Greyjoy probably did not doubt for a second Ned would swing the sword if the Ironborn made a mess).

So yeah, granting Tarly sr. a parole would not be unusual. After all he would be suddenly the prominent person in Reach. Hold him by the heir and release all his and Lannister soldiers who do not want to join team Dany to spread the word (I mean even if they want to stay loyal to Cersei, who will volunteer to come back to her with bad news?). Heck, even do the dick move and release Tarly sr. via DrogonMail at the gates of King's Landing (which would fuel Cersei's paranoia... "How come this Tyrell, stooge is allowed to escape? Where is Jaime? Did he betray us?"). Best case you have Cersei murdering him or locking him up (in which case you have a poster for "look at how Cersei treats her allies"), or you have him retiring to his castle and sitting it ou, worst case Cersei keeps him, but not truly trusting him... And he with his obsession with fitness of his heir has still the nagging doubt about his son's survival.

There were much subtler ways for Dany. But she painted herself in the corner with the inconsistent "I am not like Cersei", "I do not hold people in shackles" and "Kneel or die". Said with Monsieur Fouché, it was worse than a crime, it was a mistake :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2017 at 2:13 AM, ummester said:

I'm not certain GRRM will get the books finished. I'm not even certain he knows how to get from ADWD to his original planned ending - which would explain why he seems to be having difficulty finishing.

One things seems certain though - the show ending is not going to feel fully logically cohesive with the last few seasons if it remains in line with whatever GRRM had planned at the time he sold it.

Agree with all of the above.  Sadly.  Seems like his publisher would sue him though.  Has there ever been an author who didn't finish an epic series before?  Not counting Robert Jordan because he died but arranged for someone else to finish his Wheel of Time series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×