Well, it’s clearly a magical object, akin to a fetish or talisman or focus. 

My interpretation is that the heart was keeping all of them alive. 

Vastly is a strong word. Compare his technological superiority to the wildlings to that of the British (who still got their asses kicked regardless) vs. the Zulu at Islandlwana, it’s nothing. He’s got more horses and more armor and more steel, but that’s less of a radical change than you think. Also, they have mammoths and giants. 

As for poor unit cohesion – well, the flip side of that is that Stannis had very good unit cohesion and achieved the element of surprise preventing the wildlings from forming shield walls. 

warsofasoiaf:

A different interpretation? No. A focus on different aspects of it? Yes. I think you’re fundamentally misinterpreting Stannis. If anything, Stannis is one of the few monarchs who emphasizes the two-way nature of feudalism. He’s focused intently on the oaths and the law. He expects and demands that you fulfill your oaths, just as being the king binds him to protect the realm, serve justice to the people (’they have made my kingdom bleed’). Stannis sees personal desire as wholly subservient to obligation: it doesn’t matter what you think or feel, your position demands certain obligations, and by R’hllor, you will fulfill them. So this would be very bad for lords like Walder Frey, who seems to go out of his way to make excuses to skip out of any obligation he needs. So while I agree he places a far stronger emphasis on oaths and service than other kings in a relative sense, he’s far from despotic. He takes his own obligations incredibly seriously. For all his foibles and his shortcomings, he approaches his responsibilities as ironclad, and that doesn’t make him a Darth Vader “I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it any further” brand of absolutist. Stannis seems to check his power in respect to the law, and while it’s a far cry from a constitutional monarchy, he respects the power his feudal oaths have over him, and thus he is spared from the iron brand of despotism.

As for which kings follow a despotic, absolutist style. Well, Aegon IV is probably one of the better examples, since he was explicitly said to appropriate inheritances legally bound for someone else. Aerys II too, since he denied Rickard Stark the right to a fair trial that he was entitled to. Bloodraven, though only a Hand, was incredibly despotic with murdering Aenys Blackfyre by misusing royal authority and not fulfilling his oaths to protect the realm from Dagon Greyjoy. Rhaenyra (whether you think she was a queen or not) for ordering Lord Mooton to execute an innocent girl and condemning Addam of Hull without trial or evidence. Nettles might seem like it wouldn’t fall under the oath, but we see with Catelyn’s oath to Brienne that she swears to never command Brienne to commit an action that would bring her dishonor. Swearing obligation is a big thing, and it’s the duty of the overlord not to misuse that power, because that is the way of the absolutist monarch.

Most kings seemed to follow a feudal model as best they could. Jaehaerys I obviously is the great champion of this. Aegon I and Maekar I, but even less luminary kings like Aegon III was committed to bringing justice and protection, food and peace to his realm in his role as king. Baelor Breakspear was huge on this, willing to provide service for the realm just as the realm serves him as Hand.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

Agreed. Despotic is absolutely wrong. I will say, however, that Stannis thinks of Westeros as a unitary nation-state with the king having direct unmediated rights and responsibilities to the individual subject, which is unusual. He’s also much less interested in preserving the rights and liberties (read privileges) of the nobility and focuses a lot more on the King as judicial authority.

So he’s definitely a centralizer and reformer, albeit in a legalist way, but that’s not quite the same thing as being absolutist. 

It’s 1AM, and I’ve spent the last 4 hours writing up notes on the whole of the Alias comic (after reading the whole thing twice) in preparation for a podcast on the Jessica Jones show. 

Nobles would understand marrying 100,000 swords for the good of the realm, not marrying a peasant b/c of feelings. 

Yi Ti would be great. 

I’d love to know more about the Seven Kingdoms period and the Century of Blood.

Sure, practically, you should just tear down the thing, make a bunch of money selling excess dressed stone to other Riverlander houses looking to build castles and houses, rebuild it in style, and then get filthy rich building a canal linking the Godseye to the Trident. 

Isn’t it kind of weird that the Targaryen monarchs didn’t have a singular or at least uniformed set of crowns, instead we have several crowns of different variations with some kings even coming up with their own unique designs. What’s more is that this phenomenon seems to be exclusively a Targaryen trend. Kings before and after the Targaryen dynasty don’t seem to follow this trend, all of whom seem to stick to one particular design which gets reused by their successors. We had for example Robert and all his heirs (save for Stannis) donning the crown which must have been worn by the Storm Kings. We also had Robb who when declaring himself a king made sure his crown replicated the one which the Kings of Winter all used to wear.

This bugs me because it seems like the Targaryen monarchs don’t seem to place any special significance over their royal jewels and treat them like another accessory. Now I know that crowns did evolve over time and we have for example several different crowns of England and the UK but they all look essentially the same. I think this was so that people could better identify their monarchs from the iconography of what they wore, which is important especially if they recently replaced their predecessor. The fact that the Targaryens had so many crowns of different designs that get reused depending on the mood of the sitting king must have been a little confusing for some people.

Would it not have been better if the Targaryens just stuck to one particular crown instead of having several different ones to pick and choose from or just make them up as they go? Why didn’t they just keep reusing the Valyrian Steel circuit encrusted with rubies that Aegon I wore?

That’s an excellent question. I think initially the issue was that the crown was a tertiary or even quaternary symbol, after the dragons and the Iron Throne and the Valyrian swords. 

Aegon’s crown was used a lot by the earlier kings, but was probably too plain looking for someone with Aenys’ tastes. Jaehaerys’ crown seems to be emphasizing the reconciliation with the Faith, Aegon II’s crown by his personal simplicity, and Aegon IV’s was probably a bribe someone gave him. 

But the major factor in all the switching seems to be that Aegon I’s crown was lost in Dorne with Daeron I, and that was the only crown that had any symbolism at the time. 

Interesting question. I don’t think Vetinari would want to be on the Iron Throne – in the series, he’s a pretty consistent anti-monarchist, and I don’t think he’s quite suited to embodying what a king is supposed to embody.

But he’d be a hell of a Hand of the King. A genuine Machiavellian that Tywin only thinks he is, but with some sense of precision, subtlety, and proportionality, and a policy agenda (however gradual) of modernization. 

This is actually a great question. And the answer is that nations very much refers to peoples rather than states, and it seems to be there somewhat. For example, the Free Cities other than Braavos do seem to care about being descended from Valyria, although not to the extent that recreating the Valyrian Empire is something that’s popular outside of Volantis. 

Westeros seems to have a sense of Westerosi culture – although they’re usually called Andals by Essos, which is interesting – founded on a single language (which makes no sense, but w/ever) and the respect for the old gods and the new. Even before you have the monarchy, you still have pan-Westerosi customs (guest right, trial by combat, kinslaying taboos), pan-Westerosi institutions like the Night’s Watch, etc.