Canon Claude Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to me. Mance Rayder was just as involved in the War of the Five Kings as the five kings themselves. His actions shifted the balance of the war radically, especially for Stannis and the North. So why isn’t he listed as the sixth king? It really seems necessary to list him as a sixth king. Any argument against him being credited has an equally strong counter-argument: He wasn’t a real king, he was just chosen by the rabble to be one! Same with Renly, basically. He was never going to be in line to be king but he still tried to take the throne for himself. He didn’t have enough supporters to justify being a king! He had 100,000 of them at one point, which is probably twice as more as Stannis ever had in the war. He isn’t part of the Seven Kingdoms! First off, yes he was. He grew up on the Wall, which counts as part of the Seven Kingdoms. And even after that, the wildlings are part of the realms of men, as Jon Snow points out. To say otherwise is basically Westerosi racism. He didn’t want the Iron Throne! Neither did Robb or Balon, but they still count. Balon and Mance both only ever attacked the North during their reigns as king. He wasn’t king for that long. He lasted longer than Renly did. Nobody south of the Wall knew about him! Tywin and the Small Council knew about him, and anyone who got a letter from Maester Aemon knew about the King beyond the Wall with a huge army at his beck and call. Seems to me like the only reason he wasn’t included in the king count was pure prejudice on the Westerosi’s part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular John Umber Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 He didn't engage with any of the other kings until after the war essentially ended (only Stannis was left). There were 6 kings, but only 5 were fighting each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirArthur Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 If you want to get technical ... war of the 5 kings is also wrong. Robb was neither aligned nor opposed to Stanis or Renly. We have seperate wars going on. A succession war to the Iron Throne and an independence war against the Iron Throne. And then we have Balon's war, the strangest of them all: an independence war against the Iron Throne and against seperatists. He is in a revenge war. So it should be "wars of the 5/6 kings" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Black Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, Regular John Umber said: He didn't engage with any of the other kings until after the war essentially ended (only Stannis was left). There were 6 kings, but only 5 were fighting each other. That, and also Mance's primary goal was to lead his people to safety rather than be established as a King like the other 5.. Not to say that he wouldn't challenge for lands in the North once past the Wall, but that wasn't at the top of his list I'd say.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMIFairy Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Five sounded more "cool" than Six. For similar examples look at the history of China - e.g. the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period. The distinctions between one and to other are pretty arbitrary, simply the local "maesters" decided that "Five X and Ten Y" is cool! "The Period of Five Dynasties, or at least four and possibly up to eight, and Ten Kingdoms, depending on how you count them from eight up to fifteen" does not roll off the tongue so well ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular John Umber Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 5 Kings were fighting each other. 2 were in rebellion against the crown, with 3 claiming the crown. The 2 in rebellion were actively at war as well. None were allied with the other. The War of 5 Kings. QED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canon Claude Posted October 25, 2017 Author Share Posted October 25, 2017 12 minutes ago, Regular John Umber said: 5 Kings were fighting each other. 2 were in rebellion against the crown, with 3 claiming the crown. The 2 in rebellion were actively at war as well. None were allied with the other. The War of 5 Kings. QED. That doesn’t exclude Mance Rayder as being the sixth king. He would have been at war with the King in the North and the Kraken king for control of the North if he was successful, which meant eventually whoever sat the Iron Throne would be fighting him too. And even in the timeline, he was technically at war with King Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkBastard Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Robb, Balon, Stannis and Renly were in open rebellion against Joffrey. Mance was not in rebellion, you can't rebel against a king you are not sworn to. His only purpose was to get south of the wall, he did not care who was fighting for what in any southern war. In fact, given his disdain for the southern kings and "kneelers", I bet he would be offended by the suggestion that he was part of the war. Fighting the Night's Watch (which is also not beholden to the "Kings" in Westeros) does not represent participation in the war. If his intent had been to go south and conquer Joffrey or rule over a part of Westeros south of the wall (and, if necessary, the other "kings") then I would agree. That was not his intent though. Just the fact that he was a king, and present in Westeros doesn't mean he was part of the war. Stannis chose to engage the wildlings based on calls for help from the Night's Watch, not because Mance was part of the war. If the Night's Watch hadn't requested help he would never have engaged Mance at all. The final evidence that he was not a part of the war was when Stannis attempted to draw him into the fight on his side. He refused to get involved. I'm not sure what more ironclad proof of his non-involvement in the war than that. Hypothetical: Its like saying that during WWII Switzerland and Liechtenstein (both neutral countries) were squabbling at their border, Switzerland asks all European countries (Allies and Axis) to help fight them off. If Germany came in and wiped out Liechtenstein, you can't then say Liechtenstein was "part of WWII". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkBastard Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 10 minutes ago, Canon Claude said: That doesn’t exclude Mance Rayder as being the sixth king. He would have been at war with the King in the North and the Kraken king for control of the North if he was successful, which meant eventually whoever sat the Iron Throne would be fighting him too. And even in the timeline, he was technically at war with King Stannis. Operative word in that statement is "would". If Mance had defeated the Night's Watch and came south, then engaged with Robb and Balon, then maybe you could say he was part of the War of the Five Kings. But that didn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 The maesters that gave the war of the five kings its name had no way of knowing that Mance Rayder was marching south, and in fact, when he reached the Wall the war of the five kings had essentially ended. Besides, the Watch is a neutral agent, so their fight against external invaders has nothing to do with the succession/territorial conflict that constituted the Wot5k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Fossoway Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Rayder not being a part of the Seven Kingdoms (not a "kneeler") is alone a reason to not consider him a part of the war. Can't see why is this an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
three-eyed monkey Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 It was never really a war of five kings in the first place, as Renly was dead before Balon crowned himself. But the Hairy Bear has the truth of it. The war was named by the maesters, who knew little of what was happening north of the Wall. Interestingly there was a war of six kings north of the Wall, as Mance bested five others including Tormund, the Magnar, and three others he slew, to become King beyond the Wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygett Lannister Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Shouldn't it be war of 6 kings and 1 Queen since Daenerys proclaimed herself Queen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Oh dear. No, it's not because "nobody knew about Mance Rayder". It's because "almost nobody knew about Mance Rayder, and those who knew didn't care". Mance Rayder was completely irrelevant to the struggle between Lannister and Stark, Stark and Greyjoy, or Lannister and Baratheon and Baratheon and fake Baratheon. Bottom line, Mance Rayder didn't participate. They don't call it "War of the Six Kings" for the same reason they don't talk much about the Ottoman Empire's role in the American War of Independence. Yes, it's obviously racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominusNovus Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Who cares about what goes on north of the Wall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trigger Warning Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 No one cares about the Wildlings and most people consider the war to be basically over by the time he's even relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sunland Lord Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 They didn't fight against any of the armies during the war of the five kings. Stannis is the only one alive of the five and he engaged wildlings in battle, but they are no more five kings at war even after the beginning of the second book. And Balon wasn't fighting against Joffrey. He helped him and the Lannister regime pretty much. You can say he was a rebel against the Iron Throne only if you count the North as a part of the kingdom which Joffrey at the time considered his, which wasn't. Because the North was in rebellion against the Iron Throne, and Balon attacked the North. So he wasn't in any kind of a rebellion against Joffrey, that's only on paper. Basically: Lannister regime against Stannis Baratheon, Robb Stark. Balon Greyjoy against Robb Stark. Therefore Robb Stark had two direct opponents, the Lannister regime had also two direct opponents, because Renly didn't engage them in battle so it doesn't count. Stannis had also two direct opponents, but Renly personally, not in battle, and Lannister army in battle. Mance Rayder: Aganist the Wall, which is not supported or in a fighting directly against any of the five armies above. So it might be better if it's called the War of the Four Kings, since Renly was never really in a direct battle. Or, it is called War of the Five Kings because GRRM maybe doesn't actually count Renly, but counts Mance instead, who was attacked by Stannis at some point later, so who knows. Interpret it as you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkBastard Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 You could also say that the "five kings" are the five people who declared them selves kings within the seven kingdoms. Mance became king of the wildlings beyond the wall, which is not technically part of the seven kingdoms, no matter how it is skewed by the OP (attributed to racism). "Racism" is typically the first thing many millennials blame for any perceived slight, apparently even in Epic Fantasy. When faced with facts and reality they usually have no response...other than to maybe scream "racism!" or "fascist!" louder. Mark my words, next thing we'll see is a post pushing for GRRM to adopt "Wildling Lives Matter" as the official words of House Giantsbane in The Winds of Winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorian Martell's son Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 On 10/25/2017 at 3:24 AM, Canon Claude said: Mance Rayder was just as involved in the War of the Five Kings as the five kings themselves. His actions shifted the balance of the war radically, especially for Stannis and the North. Not at all. He was beyond the wall for the war of the 5 kings. He fought no battles and his decisions had no influence on the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zandru Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 On 10/25/2017 at 0:17 PM, Tygett Lannister said: Shouldn't it be war of 6 kings and 1 Queen since Daenerys proclaimed herself Queen? Dany never got involved in the wars, nor in Westeros at all (yet). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.