A mirror of the eeesite "A Song of Ice and Fire"

This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / A Song of Ice and Fire / Is it-all- Medieval?

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 11th 10:37 PM
I was having an interesting discussion with a friend online tonight. It was her opinion that A Song of Ice and Fire is all medieval. (Well, except for the "magic" bits, since we assume there was no magic then.) It was mine that George is not writing about a 100 percent medieval place.

I am not an expert, so before expounding on this at great length and giving examples I brought up, I wanted to ask for the thoughts of others. Other than the "magic" elements, can you think of ways in which this series is different from the middle ages, or is it all medieval?

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 11th 10:42 PM
Oh, I should mention that my friend had to go before either of us could give reasons for our belief, so thats one reason I am putting the discussion here.

Street Prophet
User ID: 2107894 Jun 12th 1:06 AM
I'm sorry, what's the difference between Middle Ages and Medieval setting?

Omer
User ID: 9551723 Jun 12th 2:41 AM
The most obvious difference, for me at least, is the lack of a single strong, dominante belief in westereos the way Xianty was in the middle ages. In westereos, Religion as such has a relatively insignificent role, and there is much more religiously tolarent.

gad
User ID: 8736803 Jun 12th 7:57 AM
Omer I agree, the Faith in Westeros seems much more tolerant than the Catholic church was in the days of the crusades, inquisition, burning of withches at the stake, etc (although I confess I would rather appreciate a chapter devoted to Melisandre being consumed in flames). It's hard to imagine Westeros' knights and ruling houses getting filled with the religous enthusiasm which at least initially accomponied the call to liberate Jerusalem from the "heathens" (chris de burgh's alwful album, crusader, unfortunately is being played in my mind as I write this)

Jeff
User ID: 1536664 Jun 12th 7:57 AM
I'd agree with Omer. Other than the religious aspects, it seems to be straight medeival/middle ages in focus. Technologically speaking, at least. Arguably, maybe some of the free cities have wandered a little bit ahead in terms of trade/technology, but I'm not sure we know enough about them to make that call. Late medeival, maybe.

Omer
User ID: 9551723 Jun 12th 4:24 PM
Wow. Its fun to have all these people agreeing with me.

Nynaeve
User ID: 2345204 Jun 12th 4:57 PM
Agreed as well. Though I do see Faith pervading daily existance - at least in traces, in Tad Williams Memory, Thorn etc. series which I'm reading at the moment.

I want to say that Martin's world seems a little more sophisticated than Medeival times in terms of the women. Catelyn, Cersei, Melisandre would've had a harder time of it in our world methinks. But then again...Eleanor of Aquitaine comes to mind...

Nyn

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 12th 6:49 PM
Middle Ages is the noun and Medieval is the adjective, if I understand correctly. So, the tale was medieval, it was set in the middle ages.

I agree with those who have said that the religious aspects seem quite different, that religion does not seem very important in everyday life, that the Faith of the Seven (see, we don't have a real name for it) is not the same as the catholic faith. I also agree that women have it somewhat easier in this series than women did in the middle ages.

However, I think it goes possibly deeper than that. I think Martin, on purpose, set people with the mindset of today in a medieval setting. I know, to a certain extent people are the same through all the ages. However, other than Jon Snow, with whom most people are irritated for keeping his vows, and perhaps Ned, I don't see the majority of characters as having a mindset close to "medieval".

Ran
User ID: 0867924 Jun 12th 7:27 PM
Tywin, Stannis, Hoster Tully, Edmure Tully, Jon Arryn, Robert, Ser Amory Lorch, the Umber uncles, the Greatjon, Cersei, and so on, all exhibit or exhibited things that strike me as being properly medieval.

As far as POV characters go, I think Cat (with her strong identity based on her family and husband), Davos (with his powerful bond of vassalage to Stannis), Dany (motivated almost entirely by her imagined royal rights), and Theon (with his powerful familial-based feud against the Starks) exhibit some very strong medieval concepts.

Tyrion may, perhaps, belong slightly later -- he's rather Machiavellian, and has some rather humanist ideas (not that they didn't exist in the middle ages; they were just rare) which fit best in the Renaissance.

The kids are special cases -- Bran and Arya, at least, are too strong to have formed particularly strong mindsets that extend beyond the personal. Sansa -- well, she's rather medieval now that I think of it, since her early goal was to have babies for her supposed dear prince.

I don't think a medieval "mindset" is predicated on whether one keeps vows or not, though I don't quite think that's what you meant to suggest. Most medieval lords broke oaths willy-nilly if they thought it appropriate, but they were still medieval.

Omer
User ID: 9551723 Jun 13th 12:06 PM
I think Tyrion is very medieval in mind, but he's an outsider. He thinks ands acts like an outsider of medieval times - he has to value people by the content of their character and not their looks, but he's chauvinistic and sexist, and he does believe in the system that put him into his high position -although he thinks thoughts like 'If I were not born a Lannister' which few others in the series tend to do. Goes to show how more medieval they are.

Street Prophet
User ID: 2107894 Jun 13th 12:27 PM
Nicely put Ran.

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 13th 9:39 PM
Well, all that is true. I did think Tyrion might have been rather medieval when he said something like "he did the men of our city a favor" in response to the knowledge that Timnett killed someone for cheating at cards. However, he could have said this merely because it was necessary to keep the loyalty of the tribesmen and he wanted to impress Varys with his toughness. I am not 100 percent certain why Tyrion did that, its what makes him an interesting character.

I was reading today that the coronation of 1937 was not broadcast in England because the archbishop was afraid men in pubs would listen to it with their hats on. If that was a 20th (or perhaps holdover 19th century) attitude, imagine the great formalism and religious concerns of the middle ages. The characters still strike me mostly as acting like modern folk would if they were thrust into the "Seven Kingdoms World", which has a lot of medieval trappings. It still strikes me that GRRM did it this way on purpose.

Cat strikes me as not medieval with her independence. Davo's vassalage indeed strikes me as medieval, but we have Oliver North today, so I don't think its uniquely medieval. At any rate, my question, is is-all-medieval, admits that much of it may be.

Dany strikes me as more "based on magic" with her dragons, and I think people of any age can be motivated by what they see as their "right to rule". She is "unmedieval" in taking lead of her horde after her husband's death. Yes, I know there was Joan of Arc, but I am thinking medieval "rules" not "exceptions". I think Brienne is another "magic" type character, even though Joan existed, I doubt there were many people like Lady Mormont, Brienne, and other briefly mentioned female warriors.

Were rude songs about mating with animals sung in medieval times for ladies?

But yes Ran, your use of the word "humanism" is perfect. I am not sure I can find a character who is not a humanist, though. This tale of modern sorts of people ,in a medieval-type setting, pleases me greatly, but I do think that is mainly what it is. The mindsets, not the customs or outward trappings, that is.

I for one am not ready to put the characters in a "medieval box". They behave medievally on many occasions, but their world views are close to modern on many others. Again, I see this not as a flaw, but as a plus.

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 13th 9:50 PM
Wouldn't you know it, I finish my post, and two perfect counterexamples occur to me.

It seems to me that Stannis is a perfect example of a character who has a "mostly medieval" mindset. Also, Kahl Drogo, from what I know, would seem like a perfect nonwestern "mostly medieval" mindset character.

labor
User ID: 0798784 Jun 14th 3:48 AM
LindaElaine, concerning Cat's "independance" - IIRC except for kidnapping of Tyrion Cat mostly did what Ned told her as long as Ned was alive i.e. "She has sworn to obey". She could nag at him, but the ultimate descision was always his.
And once he was dead - female regents for their minor children etc. weren't unknown in the Middle Ages. Take for instance Blanche of Castille the mother of Saint Louis who ruled during his minority and during his absences on the crusades. A very tough lady who told her son :"I prefer to see you dead at my feet than to see you commit a mortal sin".

Or take Margot d'Artois who was the only female peer of France at the time of Phillip IV. Also a very tough, power-hungry lady.

The wife of Phillipe IV Isabelle of Castille led several campaigns in Flanders, BTW, because her husband gave her complete freedom in rule of her dowry lands. Only after her death did he himself get involved there.

And what about Mathilda, daughter of Henry I? Eleanore of Aquitane? Christine de Pisan? Etc, etc.

No, such women as Cat, Dany or Cersei did exist in the Middle Ages. Some of them did even command armies in the field, but IIRC none of them actually fought in person.

Certainly of them all Brienne is the only "fantasy" character, IMHO. All the others have fitting historical counter-parts in the Middle Ages and Renaissance.

As to the rude songs - read Chaucer's "Canterburry Tales". IIRC all the women there except for the nun tell highly improper stories.
Actually, they were far less prude in the Middle Ages than later. IIRC it was Reformation that really instilled prudishness in the masses.

labor
User ID: 0798784 Jun 14th 8:53 PM
Oh, now that I think aboput it, Scathelgeita(?), wife of Robert Guiscard, king of Lombards used to fight in the battles personally and to lead cavalry charges.

And how could I have forgotten the "She-wolf of France", Isabelle Capet? The one who overthrew her husband Edward II?

Anyway, those are from the top of my head.

Cat and Cersei fit nicely here, IMHO. Brienne is a much worse fit - I never heard of a (noble) woman being essentially a knight in someone's service... The (noble)women could command troops or castle garrisons, and in the very rare cases even fight with weapons for the cause of their families or for their towns when during the sieges things grew desperate, but that was it.

Malice
User ID: 1759784 Jun 14th 9:27 PM
I've read somewhere about a few very rare orders of "knighthood" for females, but mostly only the wives of knights were a part of them, and of course, they did not fight(!). (I'm sending this flying about in here for no particular reason, after all, I don't even remember my source, as usual.)

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 Jun 14th 9:47 PM
Perhaps I had better ask the question in a different way, then. Do we assume, that while human beings in all places and times have very much in common, that certain "mindsets" are more common to certain times? In that case, how many characters would not fit the modern mindset better than the medieval one? Only a few, or the majority?

If your answer is "the majority", do you prefer reading books where most peole have a different "mindset" than yourself? Or, do you perhaps feel your "mindset" is more medieval than modern?

labor
User ID: 0798784 Jun 15th 4:58 AM
Actually, none of the people in ASOIAF share my mindset, Linda. I just won't understand what you are driving at.

First you say that keeping oaths is medieval - but from my knowledge of history, it actually went both ways. They weren't perhaps as routinely treacherous as in Renaissance, but there were still lots of people who would kill an enemy in the church, under the parley flag, lecherous clerics, etc, etc.

Then you say that having strong, independant and powerful women is not medieval - but I have already shown, that while obviously more rare than men with corresponding qualities, they still existed, and more than 1 or 2 at a a time. And that medieval women were as a matter of fact quite saucy and weren't protected from the "facts of life" and rude jokes etc. about it.

So, what remains? Except agnostics and Brienne, I mean? I'll grant you, the women seem somewhat less opressed than in RL, but only somewhat and it is a different world after all.

Certainly, loyality to one's family and starting a big war because one's family member has been abducted/killed/executed seems properly medieval to me. Ergo, a women giving the power to her snot-nosed teenage son instead of wielding it herself. And Dany's "I am blood of the dragon".
So, perhaps you could explain what is so "modern" in ASOIAF character's mindset? I just honestly don't see it. In fact, I enjoy it that they _aren't_ modern from my POV.

LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 11th 10:37 PM I was having an interesting discussion with a friend online tonight. It was her opinion that A Song of Ice and Fire is all medieval. (Well, except for the "magic" bits, since we assume there was no magic then.) It was mine that George is not writing about a 100 percent medieval place. I am not an expert, so before expounding on this at great length and giving examples I brought up, I wanted to ask for the thoughts of others. Other than the "magic" elements, can you think of ways in which this series is different from the middle ages, or is it all medieval?
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 11th 10:42 PM Oh, I should mention that my friend had to go before either of us could give reasons for our belief, so thats one reason I am putting the discussion here.
Street Prophet User ID: 2107894	Jun 12th 1:06 AM I'm sorry, what's the difference between Middle Ages and Medieval setting?
Omer User ID: 9551723	Jun 12th 2:41 AM The most obvious difference, for me at least, is the lack of a single strong, dominante belief in westereos the way Xianty was in the middle ages. In westereos, Religion as such has a relatively insignificent role, and there is much more religiously tolarent.
gad User ID: 8736803	Jun 12th 7:57 AM Omer I agree, the Faith in Westeros seems much more tolerant than the Catholic church was in the days of the crusades, inquisition, burning of withches at the stake, etc (although I confess I would rather appreciate a chapter devoted to Melisandre being consumed in flames). It's hard to imagine Westeros' knights and ruling houses getting filled with the religous enthusiasm which at least initially accomponied the call to liberate Jerusalem from the "heathens" (chris de burgh's alwful album, crusader, unfortunately is being played in my mind as I write this)
Jeff User ID: 1536664	Jun 12th 7:57 AM I'd agree with Omer. Other than the religious aspects, it seems to be straight medeival/middle ages in focus. Technologically speaking, at least. Arguably, maybe some of the free cities have wandered a little bit ahead in terms of trade/technology, but I'm not sure we know enough about them to make that call. Late medeival, maybe.
Omer User ID: 9551723	Jun 12th 4:24 PM Wow. Its fun to have all these people agreeing with me.
Nynaeve User ID: 2345204	Jun 12th 4:57 PM Agreed as well. Though I do see Faith pervading daily existance - at least in traces, in Tad Williams Memory, Thorn etc. series which I'm reading at the moment. I want to say that Martin's world seems a little more sophisticated than Medeival times in terms of the women. Catelyn, Cersei, Melisandre would've had a harder time of it in our world methinks. But then again...Eleanor of Aquitaine comes to mind... Nyn
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 12th 6:49 PM Middle Ages is the noun and Medieval is the adjective, if I understand correctly. So, the tale was medieval, it was set in the middle ages. I agree with those who have said that the religious aspects seem quite different, that religion does not seem very important in everyday life, that the Faith of the Seven (see, we don't have a real name for it) is not the same as the catholic faith. I also agree that women have it somewhat easier in this series than women did in the middle ages. However, I think it goes possibly deeper than that. I think Martin, on purpose, set people with the mindset of today in a medieval setting. I know, to a certain extent people are the same through all the ages. However, other than Jon Snow, with whom most people are irritated for keeping his vows, and perhaps Ned, I don't see the majority of characters as having a mindset close to "medieval".
Ran User ID: 0867924	Jun 12th 7:27 PM Tywin, Stannis, Hoster Tully, Edmure Tully, Jon Arryn, Robert, Ser Amory Lorch, the Umber uncles, the Greatjon, Cersei, and so on, all exhibit or exhibited things that strike me as being properly medieval. As far as POV characters go, I think Cat (with her strong identity based on her family and husband), Davos (with his powerful bond of vassalage to Stannis), Dany (motivated almost entirely by her imagined royal rights), and Theon (with his powerful familial-based feud against the Starks) exhibit some very strong medieval concepts. Tyrion may, perhaps, belong slightly later -- he's rather Machiavellian, and has some rather humanist ideas (not that they didn't exist in the middle ages; they were just rare) which fit best in the Renaissance. The kids are special cases -- Bran and Arya, at least, are too strong to have formed particularly strong mindsets that extend beyond the personal. Sansa -- well, she's rather medieval now that I think of it, since her early goal was to have babies for her supposed dear prince. I don't think a medieval "mindset" is predicated on whether one keeps vows or not, though I don't quite think that's what you meant to suggest. Most medieval lords broke oaths willy-nilly if they thought it appropriate, but they were still medieval.
Omer User ID: 9551723	Jun 13th 12:06 PM I think Tyrion is very medieval in mind, but he's an outsider. He thinks ands acts like an outsider of medieval times - he has to value people by the content of their character and not their looks, but he's chauvinistic and sexist, and he does believe in the system that put him into his high position -although he thinks thoughts like 'If I were not born a Lannister' which few others in the series tend to do. Goes to show how more medieval they are.
Street Prophet User ID: 2107894	Jun 13th 12:27 PM Nicely put Ran.
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 13th 9:39 PM Well, all that is true. I did think Tyrion might have been rather medieval when he said something like "he did the men of our city a favor" in response to the knowledge that Timnett killed someone for cheating at cards. However, he could have said this merely because it was necessary to keep the loyalty of the tribesmen and he wanted to impress Varys with his toughness. I am not 100 percent certain why Tyrion did that, its what makes him an interesting character. I was reading today that the coronation of 1937 was not broadcast in England because the archbishop was afraid men in pubs would listen to it with their hats on. If that was a 20th (or perhaps holdover 19th century) attitude, imagine the great formalism and religious concerns of the middle ages. The characters still strike me mostly as acting like modern folk would if they were thrust into the "Seven Kingdoms World", which has a lot of medieval trappings. It still strikes me that GRRM did it this way on purpose. Cat strikes me as not medieval with her independence. Davo's vassalage indeed strikes me as medieval, but we have Oliver North today, so I don't think its uniquely medieval. At any rate, my question, is is-all-medieval, admits that much of it may be. Dany strikes me as more "based on magic" with her dragons, and I think people of any age can be motivated by what they see as their "right to rule". She is "unmedieval" in taking lead of her horde after her husband's death. Yes, I know there was Joan of Arc, but I am thinking medieval "rules" not "exceptions". I think Brienne is another "magic" type character, even though Joan existed, I doubt there were many people like Lady Mormont, Brienne, and other briefly mentioned female warriors. Were rude songs about mating with animals sung in medieval times for ladies? But yes Ran, your use of the word "humanism" is perfect. I am not sure I can find a character who is not a humanist, though. This tale of modern sorts of people ,in a medieval-type setting, pleases me greatly, but I do think that is mainly what it is. The mindsets, not the customs or outward trappings, that is. I for one am not ready to put the characters in a "medieval box". They behave medievally on many occasions, but their world views are close to modern on many others. Again, I see this not as a flaw, but as a plus.
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 13th 9:50 PM Wouldn't you know it, I finish my post, and two perfect counterexamples occur to me. It seems to me that Stannis is a perfect example of a character who has a "mostly medieval" mindset. Also, Kahl Drogo, from what I know, would seem like a perfect nonwestern "mostly medieval" mindset character.
labor User ID: 0798784	Jun 14th 3:48 AM LindaElaine, concerning Cat's "independance" - IIRC except for kidnapping of Tyrion Cat mostly did what Ned told her as long as Ned was alive i.e. "She has sworn to obey". She could nag at him, but the ultimate descision was always his. And once he was dead - female regents for their minor children etc. weren't unknown in the Middle Ages. Take for instance Blanche of Castille the mother of Saint Louis who ruled during his minority and during his absences on the crusades. A very tough lady who told her son :"I prefer to see you dead at my feet than to see you commit a mortal sin". Or take Margot d'Artois who was the only female peer of France at the time of Phillip IV. Also a very tough, power-hungry lady. The wife of Phillipe IV Isabelle of Castille led several campaigns in Flanders, BTW, because her husband gave her complete freedom in rule of her dowry lands. Only after her death did he himself get involved there. And what about Mathilda, daughter of Henry I? Eleanore of Aquitane? Christine de Pisan? Etc, etc. No, such women as Cat, Dany or Cersei did exist in the Middle Ages. Some of them did even command armies in the field, but IIRC none of them actually fought in person. Certainly of them all Brienne is the only "fantasy" character, IMHO. All the others have fitting historical counter-parts in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. As to the rude songs - read Chaucer's "Canterburry Tales". IIRC all the women there except for the nun tell highly improper stories. Actually, they were far less prude in the Middle Ages than later. IIRC it was Reformation that really instilled prudishness in the masses.
labor User ID: 0798784	Jun 14th 8:53 PM Oh, now that I think aboput it, Scathelgeita(?), wife of Robert Guiscard, king of Lombards used to fight in the battles personally and to lead cavalry charges. And how could I have forgotten the "She-wolf of France", Isabelle Capet? The one who overthrew her husband Edward II? Anyway, those are from the top of my head. Cat and Cersei fit nicely here, IMHO. Brienne is a much worse fit - I never heard of a (noble) woman being essentially a knight in someone's service... The (noble)women could command troops or castle garrisons, and in the very rare cases even fight with weapons for the cause of their families or for their towns when during the sieges things grew desperate, but that was it.
Malice User ID: 1759784	Jun 14th 9:27 PM I've read somewhere about a few very rare orders of "knighthood" for females, but mostly only the wives of knights were a part of them, and of course, they did not fight(!). (I'm sending this flying about in here for no particular reason, after all, I don't even remember my source, as usual.)
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	Jun 14th 9:47 PM Perhaps I had better ask the question in a different way, then. Do we assume, that while human beings in all places and times have very much in common, that certain "mindsets" are more common to certain times? In that case, how many characters would not fit the modern mindset better than the medieval one? Only a few, or the majority? If your answer is "the majority", do you prefer reading books where most peole have a different "mindset" than yourself? Or, do you perhaps feel your "mindset" is more medieval than modern?
labor User ID: 0798784	Jun 15th 4:58 AM Actually, none of the people in ASOIAF share my mindset, Linda. I just won't understand what you are driving at. First you say that keeping oaths is medieval - but from my knowledge of history, it actually went both ways. They weren't perhaps as routinely treacherous as in Renaissance, but there were still lots of people who would kill an enemy in the church, under the parley flag, lecherous clerics, etc, etc. Then you say that having strong, independant and powerful women is not medieval - but I have already shown, that while obviously more rare than men with corresponding qualities, they still existed, and more than 1 or 2 at a a time. And that medieval women were as a matter of fact quite saucy and weren't protected from the "facts of life" and rude jokes etc. about it. So, what remains? Except agnostics and Brienne, I mean? I'll grant you, the women seem somewhat less opressed than in RL, but only somewhat and it is a different world after all. Certainly, loyality to one's family and starting a big war because one's family member has been abducted/killed/executed seems properly medieval to me. Ergo, a women giving the power to her snot-nosed teenage son instead of wielding it herself. And Dany's "I am blood of the dragon". So, perhaps you could explain what is so "modern" in ASOIAF character's mindset? I just honestly don't see it. In fact, I enjoy it that they _aren't_ modern from my POV.