Author: stevenattewell

Maester Steven, is it just me or does Mr William Howard Taft make an excellent visual model for King Viserys the First? (Personally Expansive: Check, Personality Genial: Double Check, Moustache: Flourishing): I have to admit that the Big Chief was quite tall as well as opulent in outline helps persuade me (I remain attached to the idea that Prince Daemon was half the size of his brother “But twice as fierce” given the other parallels between The Rogue Prince and his equally-turbulent nephew).

I wouldn’t call Viserys I moustachioed per se – especially in comparison to William Howard Taft. Even in his later, “old Viserys” portrait in WOIAF, he’s really more bearded and his moustace is rather thin and patchy, meant mostly to avoid the Amish look.

Also, if I recall correctly, wasn’t Taft rather shy and retiring rather than genial? 

A thought on Roman history… During the time of the Second Triumvirate the consensus I see in older sources on Lepidus is that he something of a flop, but seemingly the real nail in his coffin was when his legions decided to defect to Octavian after they crushed the revolt in Sicily. He seemed capable enough in politics military. Do you think this is a sort of similar treatment that Titus Labenius got? Focusing on the the supposedly bigger figures while belittling and vilifying others?

The tricky thing with evaluating Lepidus is that pretty much everyone at the time who was creating primary sources had their own reasons to bag on Lepidus, which means that later historians have a harder time trying to re-evaluate.

But I think Lepidus’ biggest problem is something he couldn’t really do anything about – the second Triumvirate was all about who was going to claim the mantle of Julius Caesar, whether that would be his military and political protege or his adopted son. Lepidus never quite had anything to match that connection, which meant that his political base didn’t go further than his army…and then he gave up his army in favor of being Consul and Pontifex Maximus. 

 And that’s what sealed his fate. 

if you were king of westeros and you wanted to completely and utterly remove the ironborns raiding, how would you go about it? is there any possible way of stopping it short of killing every man woman and child on the isles?

I think there’s a subtler and more effective way of doing this: support the New Way over the Old Way. The thing that people get wrong about the Ironborn is they think that Ironborn culture is equivalent to the Old Way, when there’s a long-running cultural conflict between the Old and New Ways. 

So what I would do is support Lords Paramount like the Hoares or Vickon or Quellon Greyjoy, and lesser Lords like the Reader, whether that’s financial support or other kinds of resources (maesters, books, septons, etc.) or royal offices and the like. Build up a popular coalition in favor of the New Way who can stand up to would-be Shrikes like Aeron and would-be Red Krakens like Euron. 

Since taking the black is basically the default penalty for most grave crimes in Westeros (as the preferable option to death), I am kind of surprised after analisys that the NW A) is yet such few members B) does not have more political convicts or politiclly disgruntled “exiles” among its ranks (we know of Ser Alliser and Bloodraven mostly) and C) has thus not attempted more often to rise against the realm in blackfyre fashion. What’s your take on this?

A. Well, keep in mind that the NW doesn’t reproduce itself. So increases in manpower aren’t self-sustaining.

B. Well, there haven’t been that many political events that would give rise to members – the Greyjoy Rebellion and Robert’s Rebellion, sure…but before that you’d have to go all the way back to the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion some seventy-odd years. 

C. Rise against it…from a defenseless and isolated penal barracks at the edge of the known world, with the wildlings on one side and the Starks on the other?