Author: stevenattewell

Do you think GRRM simply chose to ignore things like judges, sheriffs, and other components of a medieval justice system for the sake of his personal worldbuilding or is he genuinely unaware of historical institutions like the Court of Common Pleas, reeves, and assizes? Seems like a significant oversight, especially when he talks about how Jaehaerys I established a unitary legal code but we have basically no information on how a formal, technical legal system actually operates in Westeros.

Probably chose to ignore, but that’s one of those things I want to ask GRRM if I ever meet him. 

Speculation about the importance of Varys and Illyrio’s meeting in the Red Keep in AGOT in terms of the Blackfyre theory often misses that House Blackfyre wasn’t even mentioned or conceived of until The Sworn Sword. It seems mistaken to analyze their meeting and draw conclusions about the Aegon plot when that particular Aegon clearly did not exist in the story at that time (though as of ACOK the groundwork existed for a survival reveal, with the ‘mummer’s dragon’).

I hate to well actually, but the Blackfyres weren’t mentioned until A Storm of Swords, which came out three years before “Sworn Sword.” 

And Aegon is clearly set up in Dany IV of ACOK, both with the mummer’s dragon and her vision of Rhaegar and the “three heads.” 

Moreover, given that we know GRRM wrote up huge outlines of the Targ kings before he started writing the main series, I think the Blackfyres were there earlier than we think. Perhaps not filled out completely, but there was definitely a seed of an idea there. 

Lord Paramount seems to be a term used exclusively for Great Houses which had not previously ruled as kings before the Conquest (ex: Lord Paramount of the Mander/Reach/Stormlands/Trident); there is no reference to a Lord Paramount of the Vale/Westerlands/North, for example, anywhere in the series. Yet it seems to be common in meta and essays to reference the Great House as Lord Paramount even without this direct evidence. Thoughts?

Because why not embrace consistency? 

After all, the North and Westerlands and the Vale were named Wardens – as were the Lords Paramount of the Reach – so why not have them be Lords Paramount too?

could the riverlands have eliminated its massive border problem by trying to win the great game and unite its neighboors under its banner? or did it simply not have the potential might necessary to do so in any circumstance?

The Riverlands certainly tried…we know they invaded the Reach following Gyles III’s invasion of the Stormlands, for example. 

And I wouldn’t be surprised if the downfall of more than one Riverlands dynasty was in overreaching themselves trying to conquer the northern Crownlands or the northern plains area of the Reach or trying to push from Saltpans to grab Wickenden or perhaps even trying to push north past the Neck. 

What’s Jon Connington planning to do after taking Storm’s End? If the Golden Company successfully links up with the ‘friends in the Reach’ and Dorne how large will Aegon’s forces be in number and how will they compare to Danaerys’ forces (discounting the dragons) when she finally arrives in Westeros?

1. Take King’s Landing and thus the Iron Throne.

2. Don’t know, but probably close enough to make it dramatically interesting. 

I know making sense of the show is a fool’s errand but do you think it’s possible the Lannisters got surprised because the dothraki came out of the Kingswood? Looking at the map it seems like the only route that makes sense for there to be some surprise. Going right under KL would probably quicker but the whole city would be alerted. Going north of the city means crossing the Blackwater which makes surprise impossible.

There wasn’t any forest in that shot, tho. The Dothraki attacked from across a broad open plain. 

Before the invention of cannon that could be mounted on ships, did naval vessels carry any ranged weapons? Or were naval battles mainly about getting close enough to the enemy to ram or board them without them doing the same to you?

Yes! In addition to carrying soldiers with bows, javelins, etc., warships would also be outfitted with scorpions, catapults, and the like. 

However, for the most part these ranged weapons were used as anti-personnel devices, intended to soften up the enemy to make boarding that much easier, or maybe damaging the sails and rigging. Generally speaking, with the exception of Byzantine firethrowers, these ranged weapons weren’t up to the task of sinking a ship.

Thus, ramming and boarding were still the dominant tactics in naval warfare before the introduction of cannons en masse allowed for the sinking of ships with repeated broadsides.