The warrior vs knight

[sweetsunray]

7 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

I'm willing to bet they adopted it from someone else (the Tall Men, or the Valyrians, who themselves might have picked it up from the Ghiscari).

The evolution of writing is not something that George expands on much at all, beyond telling us that First Men left little written, but a few runes as markings and identifiers. Asshai seems to have the oldest written records, and is likely tied to the most ancient civilisations. And in Yi Ti the priests are also the scribes of ancient history.

But there's no history really about the development of writing.

[three-eyed monkey]

I think we are meant to notice this oddity that stands out like a sore thumb, as the OP puts it, because there is a point being made. This apparent discrepancy is signposted by Sam in Feast.

Quote

Those old histories are full of kings who reigned for hundreds of years, and knights riding around a thousand years before there were knights.

To me, this question is part of the theme of the true knight.

I'm happy to accept that the order of knighthood as it exists in Westeros was brought by the Andals, just as the faith of the Seven was. After all, knighthood and the faith are intrinsically connected. Knights standing vigil and being anointed with oil are part of that connection.

However, Barristan tells us that it is chivalry that makes a knight, without honor a knight is no more than a common killer. So someone like Gregor, although knighted, is not a true knight. Someone like Brienne is a true knight, although she has never been knighted. This same theme is present in the novellas, where Dunk was probably never knighted, despite being a true knight.

The point is that you don't have to be knighted or a follower of the Seven or even a man to be a true knight. True knights are honorable warriors who use their strength to protect the weak, not prey on them. Such people existed before the coming of the Andals, and these people can be described as knights in the parlance of the septons who wrote these tales down all those years later.

The old histories also speak of kings, but some of these kings may not have been actual kings. Some may have styled themselves Magnar, like the Magnar of Thenn. Magnar means lord in the Old Tongue. If a Magnar ruled a group of people or an area, then in the parlance of the septons he was a king, ruling one of the many kingdoms of the First Men.

[Craving Peaches]

23 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The point is that you don't have to be knighted or a follower of the Seven or even a man to be a true knight.

Yes. True knighthood is an ideal, not a job or a series of requirements.

[Alester Florent]

29 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I think we are meant to notice this oddity that stands out like a sore thumb, as the OP puts it, because there is a point being made. This apparent discrepancy is signposted by Sam in Feast.

To me, this question is part of the theme of the true knight.

 

I agree with what you say, although I think the main takeaway we're supposed to have is that the histories are unreliable. The chronologies are wrong. The identification of individuals is inconsistent. Where we expect there to be certainty as to e.g. number of Night's Watch Lords Commander, there are instead large gaps. There have also been repeated hints, especially in the latest two books, that the maesters - who keep these histories - are not to be fully trusted.

This will presumably have some payoff in the concluding books as it turns out that a lot of what we thought we knew was wrong.

[Aldarion]

24 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes. True knighthood is an ideal, not a job or a series of requirements.

Not really. "Knight" originally meant merely an "armored cavalryman". It was not before 11th century I think that knights became a separate class, and that is also when an ideal of knighthood developed. But a "true knight" is an armored cavalryman who sells his services in exchange for either land or money.

[Craving Peaches]

7 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

Not really. "Knight" originally meant merely an "armored cavalryman". It was not before 11th century I think that knights became a separate class, and that is also when an ideal of knighthood developed. But a "true knight" is an armored cavalryman who sells his services in exchange for either land or money.

I know that's what knight means, I was talking about the idealised 'conception of knightly virtues' which can be aspired to by anyone regardless of position...And also I am meaning specifically within the story, not the real world.

[Hugorfonics]

5 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

Not really. "Knight" originally meant merely an "armored cavalryman". It was not before 11th century I think that knights became a separate class, and that is also when an ideal of knighthood developed. But a "true knight" is an armored cavalryman who sells his services in exchange for either land or money.

Like in what language though?

For instance, tmk, in Spanish a knight is a Caballero which means Gentlemen, which sounds more chivalrous then the Germans Rider, which sounds more warrior like

[three-eyed monkey]

19 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

But a "true knight" is an armored cavalryman who sells his services in exchange for either land or money.

Not according to the themes of this series. What you describe is a knight. There are lots of knights in the series but few of them are true knights. A true knight must have honor. There is a parallel theme dealing with kings. There are lots of kings, and many of them put their rights ahead of their duty, but a true king protects his people or he is no king at all.

[Jon Fossoway]

21 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Like in what language though?

For instance, tmk, in Spanish a knight is a Caballero which means Gentlemen, which sounds more chivalrous then the Germans Rider, which sounds more warrior like

Spanish is my native tongue. 'Caballero' has more than one meaning. It literally means a dude mounted on a horse. In modern times that morphed into a 'gentleman'. Quixote is both a gentleman and a dude riding a horse (caballero). Also insane. 

For me, it's fine that George didn't delve too deep in this topics. I guess he tried to make his output able to reach as wide an audience as possible.

[sweetsunray]

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The point is that you don't have to be knighted or a follower of the Seven or even a man to be a true knight. True knights are honorable warriors who use their strength to protect the weak, not prey on them. Such people existed before the coming of the Andals, and these people can be described as knights in the parlance of the septons who wrote these tales down all those years later.

 

1 hour ago, Craving Peaches said:

Yes. True knighthood is an ideal, not a job or a series of requirements.

Which was my point all along: shouldn't the aspect of a god represent that ideal and therefore be called The Knight by the Faith of Seven, instead of the Warrior?

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, sweetsunray said:

Which was my point all along: shouldn't the aspect of a god represent that ideal and therefore be called The Knight by the Faith of Seven, instead of the Warrior?

If thinking about ideals then maybe. But on the other hand if it was called 'The Warrior' for ages they would find it harder to change than say, claiming Symeon Stareyes was a knight.

[sweetsunray]

1 minute ago, Craving Peaches said:

If thinking about ideals then maybe. But on the other hand if it was called 'The Warrior' for ages they would find it harder to change than say, claiming Symeon Stareyes was a knight.

Which thus implies that the ideal of the knight is something that they adopted, rather than invented.

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, sweetsunray said:

Which thus implies that the ideal of the knight is something that they adopted, rather than invented.

Or it could have been something they developed over time after landing in Westeros due to FM influence...

[sweetsunray]

3 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Or it could have been something they developed over time after landing in Westeros due to FM influence...

Like they "developed" stone castles and smithing?

[Craving Peaches]

2 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Like they "developed" stone castles and smithing?

I was thinking more a syncretic thing. I think you have to give the Andals some credit. It would be bad writing if everything they accomplished was just attributable to anyone else in my view.

[three-eyed monkey]

8 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Which was my point all along: shouldn't the aspect of a god represent that ideal and therefore be called The Knight by the Faith of Seven, instead of the Warrior?

The aspects of the Seven refer to aspects of people.

True knights have honor. Honor is defined as the quality of knowing and doing the right thing. This requires more than the aspect of being a warrior. It also requires the wisdom of the crone, the mother's mercy, the father's justice, etc.

[Jon Fossoway]

17 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

But the Old Gods religion served the smallfolk just as well, and far more correctly. Those trees and greenseers don't need gold, or taxes, and aren't a bank.

 

Really? Been a while since I read the books but I can't in the life of me remember passages where smallfolk expand on their relationship with the old gods and how does it serve them for anything. It was mostly nobility.

A very grim and obscure faith, if you ask me.

[sweetsunray]

6 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The aspects of the Seven refer to aspects of people.

True knights have honor. Honor is defined as the quality of knowing and doing the right thing. This requires more than the aspect of being a warrior. It also requires the wisdom of the crone, the mother's mercy, the father's justice, etc.

It's not so much honor, but being protective.

Honor is something that a crone, a mother, a father, etc must aspire just as well.

[sweetsunray]

21 minutes ago, Jon Fossoway said:

Really? Been a while since I read the books but I can't in the life of me remember passages where smallfolk expand on their relationship with the old gods and how does it serve them for anything. It was mostly nobility.

A very grim and obscure faith, if you ask me.

Most of the smallfolk we've seen in relation to religion were of the Andalized regions.

But IIRC there is a story about slaver who enslaved people and imprisoned them in the wolf's den, before shipping them off. When they were defeated, the king let the smallfolk who had been victimized decide what to do with the slavers. And that's why the slavers' entrails ended up in the weirwood tree. It shows those smallfolk sought justice with the Old Gods.

Or what about the wildlings who gathered at the grove north of the Wall hoping the old gods would protect them? They're just as much smallfolk, no?

Or the story of a young crannog boy who wasn't a lord then, nor is it certain he was a son of a lord, but he was bullied and beset on by squires, and he prayed to the trees on a distant island of the Gods Eye.

And at least in the case of the Old Gods, someone is actually listening and trying to help.

Yes, it's grim, because life is grim. It's not so much "obscure" as it is unorganized and personal, rather than organized mummery for power.

[Jon Fossoway]

4 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Most of the smallfolk we've seen in relation to religion were of the Andalized regions.

But IIRC there is a story about slaver who enslaved people and imprisoned them in the wolf's den, before shipping them off. When they were defeated, the king let the smallfolk who had been victimized decide what to do with the slavers. And that's why the slavers' entrails ended up in the weirwood tree. It shows those smallfolk sought justice with the Old Gods.

Or what about the wildlings who gathered at the grove north of the Wall hoping the old gods would protect them? They're just as much smallfolk, no?

We get full episodes on AGoT set in the north with several POVs in Winterfell and still can't really feel that influence. As far as I can remember, the old gods are more or less anecdotic. The scene with Eddard Stark cleaning his sword while Catelyn watches him and reflects about the context is the closest and more spiritual scene that depicts how the old faith works. The difference is just practicality: the faith of the Seven covers everyday life and that's about it. 

Oh, and the blood rituals on the weirwoods... Well, I don't think those are practiced in the main series.  But one never can tell.