The general young age of the characters

[Florentina]

A fever could kill. A simple wound could kill. In other words, death comes easily to people in the medieval times. So they tend to rush things up; as soon as girls flowered, they wed and reproduce, lest death snatch them untimely. Boys have to cope up with the girls. So as soon as they reach 12-13 years old, they begin to act maturely. Childhood until 7, teens until 13, then adulthood onwards till one dies.

*agree* But HBO did the right thing. In that times people worked hard, children started to help working on the fields with about 5 to 7 years, they carried things that were heavier than theirselves at a very young age. They ruined their health, and they used to age a lot faster. 200 years ago somebody at the age of 45 looked like a 60-year-old looks nowadays. (not to forget about dyed hair and so on) It seems very consequent to me to take older actors as in the case of Eddard and Caitlin. Of course the actors are older than the characters they play, but imho everything else would give a totally disorted image.

[SI Monster]

I've considered that too, but it runs into problems when you look at the older characters. If a Westeros year is roughly 1.25 times one of our years, that'd make Walder Frey around 115 years old. Very few people live that long in real life, I can't imagine anyone surviving that long in a world with only medieval medicine and technology! Then there's Maester Luwin, who'd be almost 130! As convienient a theory as it is, it just doesn't hold up.

There's always an exception to the rule, one anomoly out of hundreds. One person with a relativly low stress life, like the lord of the cossing or a maester to a rich lord, it's possible to live a richer life compared to a pesant whose malnurished or a soldier who runs risks that rang from infection to beheading. One or two people living past 80 in this world I can understand, anymore would have me running up the brown flag.

[Francis V Bendeguuze]

I don't think its that bad in many cases. Robb is made king at 15, Edward III overthrew his mother and her lover at 16 or so. Neither one are doing everything themselves, no king would.

As for the physical stuff, its not that bad, a fifteen or sixteen year old who had been trained as a knight would be far more formidable than most grown men who weren't. Speaking from experience, I was stronger than most adults at that age. An average sixteen year old knight might not be much good against one ten years his senior, but one exceptionally talented would.

That said, Arya and Dany's ages bother me the most.

[KhaleesiDany]

I've thought the characters especially the Stark children are a bit too young, too, even considering the "This is a Medieval fantasy setting" argument. Which I really, firmly believe is a great argument because back then people died much earlier, women married long before their eighteenth birthdays and often to men much older than them, and boys were trained to fight while they were still in their teens.

Also about the fighting and Arya being so good at it, also the Hound killing his first man at 12, think about the Olympics and how the gold medal winners are often in their middle teen years. The human body actually peaks physically at a very young age. Well, young to us, considering our current society, but it's actually reasonable considering that evolutionarily you just need to be alive long enough to breed. Why wouldn't a species member peak right around the time it's reached sexual maturity?

This is kind of unrelated but I saw a history on the covers of Seventeen magazine, and I was surprised to see how after 65 years or so the focus has changed dramatically. A lot of it is the same, true, but back then way more articles were about finding a man and settling down. The covers and article topics today look more teeny-bopper than ever, and IMO more suited to 11 year old sensibilities. So if that's a change of 65 years, imagine with the medieval fantasy setting we are talking about a change of HUNDREDS of years from our modern perceptions.

I think that's the biggest hurdle here--our modern perceptions.

So after that argument I will say--sometimes i feel distinctly uncomfortable or disbelief in the books during a part that I really, really want to like. I just can't get over the hurdle. When that happens I switch gears. I get the impression that these books are not set on Earth, but on a different planet (very much like Earth, but still, a different planet) that is larger than Earth. Since it's larger 1 year does not equal 365 days...and 15 year old Robb might actually have as many days under his belt as a 17 or 18 year old Earthling. I mean, how else could he grow such a full beard?

I still think the characters are very young...but maybe not that young.

[teemo]

I've noticed that although some of the children are of ridiculously young age, even people in their 20s are generally considered youthful. I remember laughing though when Sansa couldn't believe Jeyne Poole was attracted to Beric, he is so old at nearly 22....

[Hedge Lawyer]

I also thought that the ages of the characters seemed off, even allowing for the medieval setting. For example, Littlefinger is going grey and he's not even in his 30s. The only child characters who seem to be age appropriate are Tommen and Sweetrobin.

I tend to add 3 years to the child characters and 10 years to the adults. Thus, Dany marries Drogo when she'd 16, and Ned is 45. It seems to fit better than the ages used in the books. The fact that I saw the HBO series before starting the books helps me ignore the young age of the characters (the Drogo/Dany sex scenes would have been especially revolting if I was picturing her as a 13 year old). Given GRRM's heavy involvement with the series, I take the aging in the series to be semi-canon.

[Aurelian]

I never really had a problem with ages, it is certainly true that at various times throughout history people were considered adults or mature at a number of different ages. And of course its not our history, its fantasy, hard to make comparisons. It is mainly just a reflection of how we see things now in that it seems weird to some. The tv show definitely did the right thing in making the characters older (or at least look older) as it would look ridiculous. In my head I definitely picture them older, although I saw the tv show before I read the books so probably had a huge effect on how I see the characters.

[TC_Chaos]

I too am taken aback when I re-read the books and see the ages of many of the characters. It doesn't last long though as usually in my mind I just tack on three or four years so its more believeable with my modern inclinations. However, if you just look at Olympic athletes, its not so far fetched. Many compete when they are 16-17 years old and are considered the greatest athletes in the world. Many are considered old as soon as they are beyond 22.

It just comes down to a frame of reference and there is no doubt in medieval times marriages and death in battle where happening throughout the teenage years. HBO got it exactly right upping the age of the characters and I think they did a fine job at that.

This is a good point about the Olympics because whenever I'd watch gymnastics, some the athletes are as young as 13 or 14. They can do incredible stuff while they're that age than compared to kids who are passed 20.

The age aspect of the book is somewhat hard for folks to cope with but everyone got to have a mindset that this story is Medieval. I mean we still live in a world where teen girls have babies as early as 15. So I don't see how its hard to grasp the idea that kids grow up way quicker in Medieval times. I read somewhere that 1 out 5 deaths for women is due to birth complications, and we know all know teen girls have babies way too early in the past. Dany married Drogo at 13 and was pregnant right away. I mean there is no problem there. If a girl flowered, she will reproduce.

[caffeinated]

Hello all, this is my first post to this forum. I just finished all the books and this topic has bothered me from the time I realized that the way things are going, the kids will still be kids at the end of the 8th book.

One thing I wanted to ask was do any of you take into account the difference between "birthday" and "nameday"? It's clear that the wildlings don't name their babies until they are two years old. Which I assume is what they call their nameday. I've also assumed that this was common among all the people of Westeros, based on the common use of "nameday" as opposed to birthday.

This automatically adds two years to all the ages of the characters. So am I off base here? Is there some other reference in the books that contradicts this?

Thanks.

Steve

[Castel]

I've honestly never cared. Westeros is a medieval society, with all the health problems that come with that. Our concepts of adolescence may not apply. Throw in the fact that there are long fucking winters during which I can only imagine what a drought would be like, or what would happen to a lowborn unfortunate enough to catch a chill and I can see why they'd want to rush things. I read conflicting reports but it seems that adolescence is a more recent invention.

As for people being skilled at swordplay or other things, meh. It's not like today, where we spend most of our first twenty years in school, learning as broad a range of topics as possible. Their education was less scattershot, so they could focus on the "important" things, like reading, writing and of course, the art of killing people. There's no school to eat up eight hours of your life so you can probably get more done. Throw in the fact that Jaime and Loras would have the best teachers and it seems realistic.

I kind of like it, I can't forget what type of world Westeros is when I see the ages. I'm glad Martin didn't soften it to appeal to people.

The tv show did it to avoid problems with child pornography, but I would have liked if they had kept it. But that seems to go past the level of grittiness that most tv viewers are used to. Killing people in graphic way= a=okay. Thirteen year-old having sex as opposed to a sixteen year old= icky. It wouldn't have played well on TV.

[Englshredwolf]

Hello all, this is my first post to this forum. I just finished all the books and this topic has bothered me from the time I realized that the way things are going, the kids will still be kids at the end of the 8th book.

One thing I wanted to ask was do any of you take into account the difference between "birthday" and "nameday"? It's clear that the wildlings don't name their babies until they are two years old. Which I assume is what they call their nameday. I've also assumed that this was common among all the people of Westeros, based on the common use of "nameday" as opposed to birthday.

This automatically adds two years to all the ages of the characters. So am I off base here? Is there some other reference in the books that contradicts this?

Thanks.

Steve

I never had thought of that notion, now I come to think of it. I had noticed a few differences Martin uses with his descriptive wording from time to time - miles instead of leagues (and visa versa) using one - and twenty styled age starting from the second book if I recall.

For the young ages - I think he kept his own reasons. Over all it is Westeros, and there is countless differences even from our Medieval age to his series (Dondarrion ie.). Even then, I dont think the age difference is far off from what really was. Most amazing aspects of the young would not even go recorded. He even says many times that songs were the only way to be remembered (unless you were royalty). A good book is a portal in the eyes of the shocking/captivating things that you don't hear about. I'm sure the ages is one of the least of the differences from our world.

[Winter Wolf]

Hello all, this is my first post to this forum. I just finished all the books and this topic has bothered me from the time I realized that the way things are going, the kids will still be kids at the end of the 8th book.

One thing I wanted to ask was do any of you take into account the difference between "birthday" and "nameday"? It's clear that the wildlings don't name their babies until they are two years old. Which I assume is what they call their nameday. I've also assumed that this was common among all the people of Westeros, based on the common use of "nameday" as opposed to birthday.

This automatically adds two years to all the ages of the characters. So am I off base here? Is there some other reference in the books that contradicts this?

Thanks.

Steve

Glad to hear someone else had a few hang ups about the ages. I had a problem with the ages of the characters during the first few books (having never seen the TV series). But as the books have gone on I am less revolted and more intrigued to read about their maturation and their accomplishments at such young ages. To be honest I almost put AGOT down because I thought it was another CS Lewis JK Rowling book where young people do unrealistic things but GRRM is a ridiculously good story teller and has done his research. Medievel teens did more at younger ages, matured faster and were stronger and more physically fit than their modern obese video game junkie counterparts. Imagine if all we did all day was swordfight and horseback ride?

[Lyeder]

I honestly never had a problem with the ages, because I considered them fictional, more like biblic indication of ages. The notion of how many months really a year holds may vary greatly, especially in world where seasons can last years.

So, mainly it distinguishes younger from older characters, but not more than this for me.

[LordofWinter]

I don't understand why the characters are in general so young. 16 is considered 'maturity' in ASOIAF... the average male is not done maturing physically OR mentally by 16. There are many instances of impossible feats accomplished by CHILDREN in the books.

Some examples--

The Hound killed a guy when he was 12. That's one bad ass 12 year old! Come on, no man is going to lose a physical struggle to a 12 year old.

Jaime Lannister makes Kingsguard at 15. This is probably the most far fetched thing in the series in terms of age. Not to mention that he hasn't reached physical maturity, at 15 he has only had maximum 3 or 4 years of serious sword training (ie when he was strong enough to use an actual sword). Even a knight of average talent in his late 20s would easily defeat a 15 year old simply due to the fact that he 10yrs+ experience on him. The disparity is akin to turning on the television and watching NFL football and then watching high school football.

Loras Tyrell is 17. 17 at least is a little more plausible than 15, but still ridiculous.

There are more examples, but I am wondering why GRRM chose to make everyone so young? IMO 10 years should be added to each character. Robb is 26, Loras is 27, Jaime made KG at 25... it's much more reasonable.

i'm not saying you're wrong, but even in modern times we have examples of people accomplishing huge feats at young ages. to use your example of the difference between the Professional and highschool sports; you have Kobe Bryant, Shaq, Lebron, Sidney Crosby, Wayne Rooney etc all examples of kids between the ages of 17-19 playing with fully grown men. so the idea isn't so far fetched.

[LordofWinter]

Hello all, this is my first post to this forum. I just finished all the books and this topic has bothered me from the time I realized that the way things are going, the kids will still be kids at the end of the 8th book.

One thing I wanted to ask was do any of you take into account the difference between "birthday" and "nameday"? It's clear that the wildlings don't name their babies until they are two years old. Which I assume is what they call their nameday. I've also assumed that this was common among all the people of Westeros, based on the common use of "nameday" as opposed to birthday.

This automatically adds two years to all the ages of the characters. So am I off base here? Is there some other reference in the books that contradicts this?

Thanks.

Steve

the freefolk wait two years but that isn't the same for people south of the wall. so most freefolk were two years older than claimed.

[mnemosneme]

I've been readig a lot of historical literature placed in the medieval age, and I really don't find the ages of the characters strange...Plus, all the characters we would call "young" are actually thougth young or at least underqualified or special for doing what they do. The maturity is a cultural concept and it varies depending on the context (time and society).

And for the balding-beard-aging part, I know people getting grey hair at middle 20s girls with teats at 11 years old, guys with a huge beard when 14 years... and the opposite as well, This things only seem odd when using cultural prejudice as a parameter, meaning, we actually know of people aging in a similar way as in the books, but we are not able to see it when we read because it doesn't fit our cultural expectations -which not always fit reality-

[rmanoj]

Lyanna's age bothered me a bit. When she has that conversation with Ned about Robert's nature, she seems a bit too wise, resigned and worldly for (at most) a 13-14 year old girl who wouldn't have had much experience of men or of the world outside Winterfell, whereas Ned (4 or 5 years older) comes across as as naive.

Also Daemon Blackfyre winning a melée and being knighted at 12.

Loras Tyrell being a famous knight at 16 (the age of majority!), with even the Starks in the far North having heard of his prowess. How many tournaments could he have even participated in by then?

I had a slight impression that Rickon was a bit too articulate for a 3-4 year old.

[Matthew Marzolf]

To be honest I almost put AGOT down because I thought it was another CS Lewis JK Rowling book where young people do unrealistic things but GRRM is a ridiculously good story teller and has done his research. Medievel teens did more at younger ages, matured faster and were stronger and more physically fit than their modern obese video game junkie counterparts. Imagine if all we did all day was swordfight and horseback ride?

Lol...I'm pretty sure neither Tolkein or Lewis had young people get hacked up and handed to their father in a bag!

[Chaircat Meow]

The ages in the books are fine for the most part.

As other posters have said, dislike or revulsion at the ages in the books is just a modern reaction to different views on the nature of childhood and of maturity in most centuries previous to our own. Its for the most part perfectly realistic for the middle ages and its plays a very important role in giving AsoiaF the unique feel it has. I think it was brilliant of GrrM to realize that if you want to be true to your faux medieval setting you have to write coming of age stories for characters when they were supposed to come of age at that time, i.e. around 15-16. The concept of being a teenager and therefore only really taking up responsibility at 18 did not exist.

Occasionally GrrM does go a bit far but even aging the characters up by a year or so feels worse overall to me.

And adding ten years to everyone would be ridiculous. Sansa would look border line retarded if she were as naive as she is at 21! Jon Snow would be a naive virgin and have teen angst at 24. And that would just look really silly. Like on TV.

[MM22]

I think it's very important to remember that ASOIF is a medieval-esque fantasy setting, and in our medieval times - It was primarily WHO you were that dictated your life, actions and abilities, not your age. Barring ridiculous scenarios like a seven year old knight.

People in this period setting were born, and immediately trained for their station in life. This is why Robb, though fifteen makes a competent commander of the north - he would have been trained from very early on to shoulder that responsibility. Sansa similarly, though she is naive at 13, knows exactly how to behave in lady like manner because she has been trained to do so.

It's been mentioned by other posters but it is entirely true that while we may feel put off or in disbelief about the younger characters coping or engaging in more adult activities - that is purely our modern psyches putting ourselves in the scenario, where we imagine ourselves/modern people leading an army at 15 or sleeping with Khal Drogo at 13 - What we don't do (because we can't really) is put ourselves into the context of being Dany at 13 - She's been made aware that she is one of the last Targs, and that sex/marriage/childbirth is absolutely essential to securing a future.

In real life, Lady Margaret Beaufort (a descendant of Edward III) consummated her marriage legally, and have birth to the future Henry VII at the age of 13. Even then, 13 was considered a little young, however it was much like if a modern 18 year old girl were to fall pregnant today, she may feel herself too young to have a child/ or cope with the impact on her life ahead but medieval societies were not like this at all. Men were schooled or trained in what their futures would likely be from about age 4 or 5, as were girls.

Unlike us, who spend from 5-16/or 18 going through a varied ecucational system that allows us to make choices about our futures, medieval people did not have choices. Robb was never going to be anything other than Lord Stark/King in the North, so studying and training and shadowing that role from age 4 or so Does give him enough time to take role that on at 15 - just like in modern day a 25 year old man working as a deputy at fis fathers firm may well be able to successfully run it after his fathers death.

Women are a little different. Sansa, was raised to be a Queen, she knows from a young age that her only purpose in life is to smile, look pretty, marry a lord/prince and cement an alliance through marriage/children. Needless to say she would have been fine (probably) had she been engaged to a Lord (just not Joffrey/the lannisters). She is naive at KL, but at thirteen that's okay - She is still fully aware (though frightened) of her duty, hence her fear when she 'flowers' - she does not feel she is too young (becuase to her society she is not), she just fears Joffrey.

Smallfolk too - A blacksmiths son will train early, and become a competent blacksmith by 14/15, a maids daughter may learn how to be a kitchen girl or serving girl.

I think ageing the characters for the HBO adaptation is fine, good even. It allows us to better contextualise the experiences and actions of the characters without feeling alienated or disgusted. So when we see Dany (age 16/17 in the show) sleep with Drogo, we're a little taken aback but we understand that this is what is expected of her in her own time and society - Just as it was of the 13 year old Dany in the books.