[Book Spoilers] The Rhoynar

[Spoony]

So far Dorne has not even been mentioned in the TV series - and most disturbingly of all, the king no longer seems to have dominion over them.

It is supposed to be "King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men."

Dorne is supposed to be the love in the kingly title sandwich.

If they mean to include Dorne in the series eventually - they really should have kept the Rhoynar bit to help flesh out what they would eventually have to explain and contextualize.

Any thoughts?

[strongboar]

The Dorne is definetlly in (Tyrion speaks about Dornish girls), but they seems to have at the very least relegated the Roynars to history appendixes.

[Dragonfish]

Dorne has been mentioned, once by Tyrion in the second episode, and again in episode 6, when one of the wildlings mentions that there aren't any White Walkers in Dorne.

As for the omission of "Rhoynar" from the King's title, I don't get it. I don't think viewers are really paying that much attention when characters recite a litany of titles that they or other characters have, so I don't think that including "Rhoynar" would have confused them. This is a change that really puzzles me.

[The Anti-Targ]

I guess they decided it would be a bit much to try to explain, at some point, that the Dornish are racially distinct from the rest of Westeros. Easier to say that the Northerners are decended from the First Men (and worship the Old Gods), everyone else is Andal and worship the Seven. Then there's the conquering (then overthrown) Targs from Valyria.

I wonder if they'll ever get around to explaining that the Baratheons are an offshoot of the Targ line.

[Basileus777]

They probably deemed it unnecessary backstory. They can explain Dornish culture and differences fine without ever using the term Rhoynar.

They haven't even explained what the First Men and Andals are yet. Even the old gods vs new stuff has only been vaguely referenced.

[Titans Bastard]

The Dorne is definetlly in (Tyrion speaks about Dornish girls), but they seems to have at the very least relegated the Roynars to history appendixes.

While a non-reader wouldn't know that they are related to Dorne, they've also referenced House Martell (in Bran's lesson with Maester Luwin) and the Salt Shore, the seat of House Gargalen (in Joffrey's apology to Sansa).

I'm sure that Dorne will be fleshed out when the time comes, but right now there are so many bigger fish to fry in order to tell the story. Why needlessly complicate everything with an infodump of exposition?

[Dragonfish]

While a non-reader wouldn't know that they are related to Dorne, they've also referenced House Martell (in Bran's lesson with Maester Luwin) and the Salt Shore, the seat of House Gargalen (in Joffrey's apology to Sansa).

I'm sure that Dorne will be fleshed out when the time comes, but right now there are so many bigger fish to fry in order to tell the story. Why needlessly complicate everything with an infodump of exposition?

I don't think keeping the word "Rhoynar" counts as an infodump or exposition. It only counts as exposition if they take time to explain it, which they don't have to do until the third or fourth season when Oberyn Martell comes to King's Landing.

[Spoony]

Yeah.

I agree with Dragonfish. It seems like an unnecessary change.

Just another decision that the writers have made that doesn't seem very well thought out - and might even be somewhat harmful to the storytelling/narrative.

I am getting a bit sick of fanboys trying to shrug off criticism of the series.

Your irrational loyalty is better reserved for organized religion, rather than the production team of Game of Thrones.

They have done nothing to earn your loyalty so far, other than riding on the coattails of Martin, and occasionally making their own good independent decisions. The problem is they keep on making so many bad changes, or simply unnecessary ones.

That being said - it is still a great adaptation. Just not nearly a perfect one.

[Spoony]

King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men also has a much better flow to it.

It simply sounds better.

[Arrogant Bastard]

Yeah.

I agree with Dragonfish. It seems like an unnecessary change.

Just another decision that the writers have made that doesn't seem very well thought out - and might even be somewhat harmful to the storytelling/narrative.

I am getting a bit sick of fanboys trying to shrug off criticism of the series.

Your irrational loyalty is better reserved for organized religion, rather than the production team of Game of Thrones.

They have done nothing to earn your loyalty so far, other than riding on the coattails of Martin, and occasionally making their own good independent decisions. The problem is they keep on making so many bad changes, or simply unnecessary ones.

That being said - it is still a great adaptation. Just not nearly a perfect one.

How is leaving out one word in the king's title going to be harmful to the storytelling narrative in any way? I can see being slightly annoyed that they left it out, but honestly, I didn't even notice, and now that you've pointed it out,it doesn't bother me at all. In your case I'm not shrugging off criticism of the series, I'm shrugging off what I see as extreme nitpicking.

[Spoony]

How is leaving out one word in the king's title going to be harmful to the storytelling narrative in any way? I can see being slightly annoyed that they left it out, but honestly, I didn't even notice, and now that you've pointed it out,it doesn't bother me at all. In your case I'm not shrugging off criticism of the series, I'm shrugging off what I see as extreme nitpicking.

The way the series works is to not immediately explain people, events, places, etc. So much as it is tantalizingly brought up, described, or depicted.

The viewer would have an idea WHO the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men were, (obviously they are distinct groups of peoples), but it would leave them curious and interested, while also serving as a way to world-build a little bit.

[Dragonfish]

How is leaving out one word in the king's title going to be harmful to the storytelling narrative in any way? I can see being slightly annoyed that they left it out, but honestly, I didn't even notice, and now that you've pointed it out,it doesn't bother me at all. In your case I'm not shrugging off criticism of the series, I'm shrugging off what I see as extreme nitpicking.

Personally, I'm not annoyed by changes if they make sense. But I am annoyed by changes that don't make sense, and I think this is one of those changes.

[Phantomwriter05]

What I think is going on is having the Martells being left out because they ...

1.) Fought for the Targs

2.) Hate Robert and Cersei

3.) Still support the Targs

The reason they're not mentioned is because of the anamosity that lingers between the Dornish people and the Royal family. I think alot of people write the dornishmen off because they don't bend the knee to Robert.

[Spoony]

of course they bend the knee to Robert. They aren't an independent kingdom.

[Dragonfish]

What I think is going on is having the Martells being left out because they ...

1.) Fought for the Targs

2.) Hate Robert and Cersei

3.) Still support the Targs

This doesn't make sense:

1) The Tyrells fought for the Targs as well, much more than the Martells did. In fact, plenty of people fought for Robert, but he still pardoned anyone who bent the knee, including the Dornish.

2) Hating Robert and Cersei doesn't change the fact that Dorne is part of the Seven Kingdoms.

3) No one knows they still support the Targs.

The reason they're not mentioned is because of the anamosity that lingers between the Dornish people and the Royal family. I think alot of people write the dornishmen off because they don't bend the knee to Robert.

As Spoony above said, the Dornish did bend the knee to Robert. They are still part of the Seven Kingdoms, and thus Robert was still King of the Rhoynar.

[Phantomwriter05]

This doesn't make sense:

1) The Tyrells fought for the Targs as well, much more than the Martells did. In fact, plenty of people fought for Robert, but he still pardoned anyone who bent the knee, including the Dornish.

2) Hating Robert and Cersei doesn't change the fact that Dorne is part of the Seven Kingdoms.

3) No one knows they still support the Targs.

As Spoony above said, the Dornish did bend the knee to Robert. They are still part of the Seven Kingdoms, and thus Robert was still King of the Rhoynar.

If I remember correctly ...

The Tyrells didn't lose anything at the end of the rebellion. In fact Mace surrendered the minute they saw Ned and the Riverlords coming to fight them. So why would there be any anamosity between them and Robert?

On the other hand, The dornish lost most of their men, their beloved princess and her babies. A hero (Prince Lewyn) All in one foul swoop.

The Viper in fact was going to raise a rebellion against Robert. It was old Jon who went to Dorne, and after a long private conversation he struck a deal that if they end hostilites Robert nor anyone from his court would come to Dorne. (that's why Myrcella was completely out of left field in COK)

The mandate for procedure was that all major lords come to the capital and bend the knee to the new king. No Martell went to Kings Landing to bend the knee to Robert.

So yes they're apart of the kingdoms, but they're written off because of the truce set down by Jon Arryn.

[Dragonfish]

The Tyrells didn't lose anything at the end of the rebellion. In fact Mace surrendered the minute they saw Ned and the Riverlords coming to fight them. So why would there be any anamosity between them and Robert?

Ok...but the point I was making was that the mere fact that someone fought for the Targs doesn't mean they should be excluded, as evidenced by everyone else who fought for the Targs getting pardoned. So your first point is invalid.

On the other hand, The dornish lost most of their men, their beloved princess and her babies. A hero (Prince Lewyn) All in one foul swoop.

The Dornish only sent one contingent of troops to fight at the Trident, making their involvement in the war minimal.

Yes, they did lose Prince Lewyn and Elia, and I'm sure that was a hard blow. But that doesn't change the fact that Dorne is still part of the Seven Kingdoms, and as far as we know is still part of the Seven Kingdoms in the show. So eliminating "King of the Rhoynar" from Robert's title doesn't make sense.

The Viper in fact was going to raise a rebellion against Robert. It was old Jon who went to Dorne, and after a long private conversation he struck a deal that if they end hostilites Robert nor anyone from his court would come to Dorne. (that's why Myrcella was completely out of left field in COK)

Citation? We know that Jon Arryn went to Dorne to calm tensions, but do we know that that required terms like these?

ETA--Here's what the Citadel says:

"In Dorne, Prince Oberyn Martell plotted to raise a revolt to avenge the murders of Elia and her children, but a visit from Lord Arryn to the Red Viper’s elder brother Prince Doran put an end to that (III: 593)."

It doesn't mention anything about an agreement that Robert never come to Dorne. Maybe you could check ASoS p. 593 to see if the Citadel left something out (I would do it if I hadn't let someone borrow my copy of ASoS).

ETA2--This is from the Tyrion VI chapter in ASoS, as summarized by Tower of the Hand:

"Tyrion asks if it is true that he [Oberyn] tried to raise Dorne for Viserys at the end of Robert's Rebellion, and Tywin replies that this is true. Jon Arryn came to Sunspear personally to return the bones of Prince Lewyn and met with Doran to defuse tensions, but Robert never traveled to Dorne and Oberyn seldom left it."

It doesn't mention anything about an agreement involving Robert never coming to Dorne, just that Robert never did come to Dorne.

The mandate for procedure was that all major lords come to the capital and bend the knee to the new king. No Martell went to Kings Landing to bend the knee to Robert.

So yes they're apart of the kingdoms, but they're written off because of the truce set down by Jon Arryn.

No, if they're part of the Seven Kingdoms, then Robert is their King, making him the "King of the Rhoynar". There's no getting around this.

[The King of Ashes]

I agree that the removal of 'Rhoynar' was a wise decision. As a book reader it took me probably too long to wrap my head around all the Andal/Rhoynar/First men stuff so I can't imagine how difficult it would be for new viewers, especially since the various religions have barely been mentioned at all. I don't think the weirwood's have ever been explained and neither have the seven gods, individually.

[Dragonfish]

I agree that the removal of 'Rhoynar' was a wise decision. As a book reader it took me probably too long to wrap my head around all the Andal/Rhoynar/First men stuff so I can't imagine how difficult it would be for new viewers, especially since the various religions have barely been mentioned at all. I don't think the weirwood's have ever been explained and neither have the seven gods, individually.

But that's just it: they haven't bothered explaining what any of the ethnic groups are. So how does omitting "Rhoynar" make things easier, when they're not explaining any of it? The only way it makes things more complicated at this point in the story is that it adds two words to the King's title.

And it's not like they have to explain all the ethnic groups at once; they can always defer explaining the Rhoynar until Oberyn arrives in King's Landing, or until we meet Prince Doran. They've clearly deferred explaining the difference between Andal and First Men until they need to (and IIRC, the book doesn't do this until the end, either), so why couldn't they do the same for the Rhoynar?

[Basileus777]

They can still describe the Rhoynar later as it is now. Removing that name from Robert's title is an insignificant change that has no bearing on anything. I guess they could have left it there, but the Rhoynar won't be explained until season 4 at the earliest (if it ever is), so perhaps the writers felt it better to just leave it out.