#asoiaf societies

[horizon-verizon]

Art and music flourished in the cities of the Rhoyne, and it is said their people had their own magic —a water magic very different from the sorceries of Valyria, which were woven of blood and fire.

A World of Ice and Fire, pg. 21

[horizon-verizon]

It’s true that the ironborn live under a massive cognitive dissonance built from marking one sort of labor as essentially different and lesser than another, which allows them to continue the practices of reaving and sexual slavery. However...

“Ironborn” were people who were not thralls.

Thralls were people captured from reaving: plundering coastal and even inland locations of precious materials and people made into thralls and saltwives. And the thralls are the ones who did the all the mining, all the farming, most of the crafting.

Reaving was the most prestigious, respected, and sought after labor/role. Fishing is next. 

And thralls weren’t really considered to be ironborn (especially considering how “ironborn” could not be reaved themselves or lose their status/identity).

Two important quotes:

The endless stoop labor of farm and field was suitable only for thralls. The same was true for mining.

and about fishing being important:

The soil of the Iron Islands is thin and stony, more suitable for the grazing of goats than the raising of crops. The ironborn would surely suffer famine every winter but for the endless bounty of the sea and the fisherfolk who reap it.

In AWoIaF, pgs 176-178

Pics:

There is no “working class” in ASoIaF or in any real-life medieval period. Peasants were not working class, but proto-working class.

Marx, Marxists and socialists define the working class as those who have nothing to sell but their labor-power and skills.

Thralls did and could not sell their labor or use it as a bargaining chip in negotiations. There was no systematic room for negotiations. 

They are quite literally only a step above slaves since the ironborn had complete and utter authority over whether they lived or died, and maintained that system through force and religious perpetuation. Their status is similar to female war prizes like Alys Rivers, and in truth, all thralls were war prizes. It defines them.

While unlike “chattel” slaves in that they could own property, could have kids, their kids were not thralls, and married however they wanted (as long as it wasn’t a noble women or some freedman’s wife, etc), they still belonged to ironborn masters and their lives were in their hands directly.

While Yandel says “rights”, a right is a thing that is either granted by the government’s laws OR, like human rights, is an unchanging human guarantee of security and dignity. Thralls had no dignities except what their masters gave them. The real-life industrial working class, though at first unprotected by legal rights, still had protections because they were not seen as possessions brought from force. So it would be far accurate more accurate to say that those described by OP are enslaved laborers with more privileges. 

While the thralls are similar to the industrial working class and it’s safe to say that they are symbolically so, in reality the two are different.

I'm afraid the Ironborn economy confuses me. They spit on those who buy things, but they don't buy, how do they get anything? They can't raid that much to support (I think) a million and a half people, they don't produce much food (Theon says the farmers have the hardest life). What, exactly, keeps these islands going?

The way to understand the Ironborn economy is to understand that it functions under massive cognitive dissonance: the vast majority of the population actually works for a living, they're fishermen and farmers and miners and merchants and craftsmen, etc. The Iron Islands aren't the richest of the Seven Kingdoms - as I've said before, they're likely the poorest - but they have industry and trade and fishing and some farming.

The issue is that they have this lunatic ruling class that insists that Ironborn absolutely should not be doing any of the productive activity that actually makes the Iron Islands' economy function, and that ruling class has this whole ideology (the Old Way) that gets into the heads of even a bunch of the people who aren't part of the ruling class, such that you have a whole bunch of fishermen who show up to the Kingsmoot and chant along with the rest, because owning a fishing boat means you're a reaver at heart and certainly not some New Way member of the working class.

[branwinged]

More than anything, Cersei wants to be respected like Jaime and the other men in her life; she does not rebel against the patriarchy so much as internalize the misogyny of it, believing that she should have been born a man so that she would be given the respect she feels she deserves. In many ways, she lives vicariously through Jaime, claiming that they are “one person in two bodies” and taking pride in his accomplishments. Lena Headey, who plays Cersei in Game of Thrones, claims that her rejection of Jaime when he returns without a hand is deeply tied to that hand being the way in which she wielded power, a power now denied her.

Shiloh Carroll, Medievalism in A Song of Ice and Fire and Game of Thrones

[franzkafkagf]

AEGON II TARGARYEN; Do you really exist if you‘re not liked?

Succession S04E02 „Rehearsal“ / House of the Dragon S01E09 „The Green Council“ / my mind (now) – Paris Paloma / Dead Poets Society / House of the Dragon S01E08 „The Lord of the Tides“ / Strangers – Ethel Cain / Xenocide – Orson Scott Card / House of the Dragon S02E01 „A Son for a Son“ / Tom Glynn-Carney / On The Odyssey by Homer – Emily Wilson

[visenyaism]

this is gonna get me put on a list somewhere but if Rhaenyra and Daenerys could have met they would not end that interaction as friends Rhaenyra would be putting Daenerys in the SJW cringe compilation

[hylialeia]

everyone who doesn't include the full quote when mocking GRRM's "what was Aragorn's tax policy" rhetorical question owes me $200

[tavina-writes]

I'm not exactly sure how I want to phrase this yet, but I think a lot of the utterly weird takes I see sometimes float by me on our cursed blue hellsite (esp when it comes to mdzscql fandom) is coming from a refusal to meet the genre where it's at.

Like, why are we trying to interrogate classism in MDZS society, MDZS is a romance, the societal worldbuilding is just enough to support some general big ideas and the provide context for the romance. We can't get ANY kind of read on general classim/sexism/anything else from. this source material. if you think you can get granular when your sample size of characters from various social and gender strata are so small and we don't know how the vast majority of people in here live you are making stuff up.

Like, meet the story where it's at: it's a romance novel.

[catofoldstones]

I love how George creates the duality of being low-born v high-born in the asoiaf world. The juxtaposition of Catelyn calling all swords and seizing Tyrion at the unsuccessful attempt to kill her son v Mycah’s father being handed his son’s chopped up body, to the point he couldn’t even recognise that it was his son and not a pig, and still not being able to do anything about it but stay quiet. Chilling.

[fromtheseventhhell]

"I've never seen such anger in a girl" and it's literally just a nine-year-old being quiet after an upsetting event, Arya really experiencing the universal girlhood experience of having your emotions policed for not responding in the "right" way

[atopvisenyashill]

i was thinking more about characters Performing Gender, but not necessarily Transgressing Gender. I wound up focusing on Ned and Sansa bc I feel like I understand them the most but-

Sansa as a hostage is imo the most obvious (bc it’s so well done) moment of someone clearly Performing Gender but not being transgressive in that performance. Which isn’t to say it’s not a complicated performance; it’s a fine line Sansa walks between weaponizing her gender to protect herself without seeming too fake. She’s trying to placate the Lannisters by playing the perfect, dedicated, air headed betrothed because it’s the only defense she has - if she outwardly rebels, she will be punished in a likely violent and/or sexual way (which isn’t even conjecture - when she says “or maybe he’ll give me yours” Joffrey has her struck with an armored hand). She’s not quite successful in being convincing but that’s because it’s a rather extreme situation; despite no one believing her, she does make herself seem meek and stupid enough that no one suspects she’s plotting to escape with Dontos until she’s well away from KL. The fact that she even has Dontos to confide in is because of Sansa’s relationship with gender! When she saves him, she covers her rebellious slip by playing up Joffrey’s intelligence & his role as King; she reaches for “tools” of her gender AND of ~proper manhood~ to save a life and herself from another beating. Her retreats into the godswood and silence are very much Sansa attempting to recharge from these draining interactions, the same way a knight would need to stop and eat and rest after a fight. She is fighting, constantly, by forcing herself to stay within the narrow confines of a specific type of gender performance as a way of shielding herself from harm.

Ned yelling at Cat is another big one, and I’ve seen the scene referred to as Ned using his patriarchal power to scare Cat, which is a great description. It feels like a Performance because Ned is putting on this terrifying Lord Stark mask in an attempt to get Catelyn to stop asking about Jon (and Lyanna). This is not how he usually acts with those he loves! When Ned is with His People, he is welcoming of questions, curiosity, emotion, even transgressive thought (to a point! the idea that Ned is a feminist because he lets Arya learn to fight is Not accurate but you can’t deny he allows significantly more flexibility wrt gender expression than most of the fathers we meet in this series. the bar is in hell tho). Yet when Cat asks him about Jon’s mother, Ned scares her so well she stops asking & still remembers the moment bitterly over a decade later. And if that snippet we see through Bran’s eyes of Ned praying that Cat will forgive him does come after she asks (like it’s suspected), it’s clear not only that this is a performance he’s putting on & weaponizing against Cat, it’s one he does not like using as a weapon against someone he is close to. After using the power his gender gives him to cause harm, he retreats to the godswood and silence to pray and rest, much like Sansa. A spiritual cleanse, the way a soldier may pray after battle, to reset and reconnect Being A Proper Man to Being A Kind Man.

I think there’s something interesting in that two of the characters most widely defined by how well they adhere to Westerosi gender norms both dislike feeling like they had to weaponize their gender. They are exhausted by the performance, because it’s a performance. This isn’t Sansa getting excited over tourneys, or Ned teaching his sons to fight; it’s toxic masculinity, it’s structural misogyny. It’s something they’re good at, excel at, and connected to something they enjoy but when it’s paired with violence, whether done by Ned or done to Sansa, it crosses over in their minds from an innate part of themselves (The Gender) to a performance necessary due to survival (The Gender Role). And that after these performances, both retreat to nature & god as a way of resting and cleansing from the experience.

[horizon-verizon]

The mightiest river in the world, the Rhoyne’s many tributaries stretched across much of western Essos. Along their banks had arisen a civilization and culture as storied and ancient as the Old Empire of Ghis. The Rhoynar had grown rich off the bounty of their river; Mother Rhoyne, they named her. Fishers, traders, teachers, scholars, workers in wood and stone and metal, they raised their elegant towns and cities from the headwaters of the Rhoyne down to her mouth, each lovelier than the last. There was Ghoyan Drohe in the Velvet Hills, with its groves and waterfalls; Ny Sar, the city of fountains, alive with song; Ar Noy on the Qhoyne, with its halls of green marble; pale Sar Mell of the flowers; sea-girt Sarhoy with its canals and saltwater gardens; and Chroyane, greatest of all, the festival city with its great Palace of Love. Art and music flourished in the cities of the Rhoyne, and it is said their people had their own magic —a water magic very different from the sorceries of Valyria, which were woven of blood and fire. Though united by blood and culture and the river that had given them birth, the Rhoynish cities were elsewise fiercely independent, each with its own prince ... or princess, for amongst these river folk, women were regarded as the equals of men. By and large a peaceful people, the Rhoynar could be formidable when roused to wroth, as many a would-be Andal conqueror learned to his sorrow. The Rhoynish warrior with his silver-scaled armor, fish-head helm, tall spear, and turtle-shell shield was esteemed and feared by all those who faced him in battle. It was said the Mother Rhoyne herself whispered to her children of every threat, that the Rhoynar princes wielded strange, uncanny powers, that Rhoynish women fought as fiercely as Rhoynish men, and that their cities were protected by “watery walls” that would rise to drown any foe. For many centuries the Rhoynar lived in peace. Though many a savage people dwelt in the hills and forests around Mother Rhoyne, all knew better than to molest the river folk. And the Rhoynar themselves showed little interest in expansion; the river was their home, their mother, and their god, and few of them wished to dwell beyond the sound of her eternal song.

A World of Ice and Fire,  pg. 21-22

[visenyaism]

need to examine how “kill the boy and let the man be born” is not inspiring or wise advice it is actually viscerally horrific and devastating and has a body count in the thousands

[throwawayasoiafaccount]

i still cannot believe that people consider having lovers outside of a political marriage as cheating

a lot can be discussed about how raging misogyny and the patriarchy in westeros has led to unequal standards for women to uphold and suffer from

as highborn women are not allowed the same sexual freedom that highborn men get to experience, and even if these women do have relationships outside of their marriages, they are usually scorned and shunned by society for daring to practice sexual autonomy

it’s unfair, i am very aware of this fact

(that’s why i’ll never understand team green stans)

but george has never ever condemned his characters for finding and experiencing love outside of doing their duty.

never.

we’re not unfeeling machines that lack emotions. we’re humans who are, more often than not, led by our hearts. and grrm does a phenomenal job when creating characters, as they truly feel human.

so yeah, it’s a bit disappointing that people dumb down what is clearly a very complex situation to “cheating” (btw george himself calls rhaegar and elias relationship complex and he’s never implied that they loved each other in a romantic sense).

to reiterate, i am well aware that highborn women and men are held to different standards, however, if you have a problem with characters working through, around, and sometimes failing to overcome the social structures that cause their suffering, then you must have a major issue with george’s exploration of the human heart in conflict with itself.

george’s characters aren’t robots and that’s what makes them interesting. they do things for very human reasons. they’re biased. they’re traumatized. they’re conflicted. but they’re still reaching for a better tomorrow and they’re still trying to find happiness.

so i’ll never consider rhaegar and lyannas relationship as cheating, or something unsightly that should be scorned. for they simply dared to find and grasp love in a society that would rather shackle them to unhappy marriages, which is very commendable.

oh… and do you know what george does criticize?

political marriages lol

he makes it clear that selling women off as broodmares and forcing men into marriages they don’t want is a recipe for disaster.

of course the eventual fallouts of these relationships is super interesting to read about, but you should never ever support the systems in place and the societies that benefit from pushing people/characters into these incredibly unhealthy relationships

so while i find it interesting to read about characters navigating these relationships, i’ll always be the first person to condemn these societies for forcing this fate onto them. i’ll also always be the first person to root for characters who do their best to find happiness outside of their political/arranged marriage

sorry that i don’t condemn a character for finding love outside of a loveless marriage

instead of getting angry at rhaegar and lyanna and being very nonsensical in the main tags about it, how about you turn that anger onto the patriarchy, which is rooted in every single institution and family in westeros, the patriarchy that refuses to allow women to have the same amount of sexual autonomy as men?

(this is why i despise team green :))

[horizon-verizon]

A “bastard” is understood a person born to parents who weren’t married to each other, yes? If Jon Snow’s parents weren’t married, he is a bastard/illegitimate. He is not supposed to be able to inherit lands, etc.

In both the canon lore/Fire and Blood (since F&B is telling the canon events even if told by many biased sources) Rhaenyra is not married to Harwin Strong, and her first 3 kids are most definitely Harwin’s biological kids, not Laenor’s. 

ANSWER: 

So yeah, her kids would be considered bastards by many in the Faith and many people of Westeros since her and Harwin never married. Because they either/both think that bastardry and illegitimacy is an inherent fact or they want to use Rhaenyra’s gender and extramarital sex for their own political gain.

But bastardry is a legal existence, not a biological one though (see below about “But because:”)

And yes, Aemond/Alicent saying they are bastards should be treated as speaking treason because they’d be going against the king’s word AND calling the heir treasonous AND denying the then-affirmed status of the heirs of the heir.

That’s the point of Rhaenyra using treason against them in episode 7/the canon scene of Aemond getting his eye put out. Rhaenyra heard Alicent say that Lucerys should get his eye taken for “justice” and Rhaenyra responded by declaring that Aemond heard this treasonous talk of bastards (because Rhaenyra would then be accused of lying to the king...which she didn’t, Viserys knows but he can’t let others know he knows) from somewhere. Knowing that treason trumps even a prince losing an eye, Rhaenyra does this to protect her son.

In Westeros a king/monarch is the only one who can legitimize someone illegitimate and they must do it through a royal decree (Corlys has to request Rhaenyra to legitimize his “grandsons” so they can officially/unobstructed-ly inherit Driftmark after he dies), then Viserys I accepting the boys -- many argue -- is him legitimizing and acknowledging them and making them his daughter’s heirs/his heirs. 

But this is regarding men fathering bastards. Not women. Why? Because women aren’t allowed to be as free to have bastards and are punished for it, for not staying faithful to their spouse. Her kid is an indication of her “looseness” and “betrayal” (while a man birthing any sort of child is “not a big deal”, even though he is the one supposed to leave behind house inheritances). The rules regard the event that man fathers a bastard because only men are openly allowed to be a bastard’s parent because men are the ones with the custom/legal power over women.

Others would argue that it doesn’t count because Viserys didn’t openly legitimize them. That Viserys is just “acknowledging” them and not “legitimizing” them since he didn’t ever make a recognized royal decree that acknowledged that rhaenyra birthed children not her husbands, that they were ever bastards in the first place:

At any point, the biological father of a bastard may acknowledge him and bring him formally into his house. [...] An acknowledged bastard might even be considered to inherit a seat when no direct heirs can be found.

Acknowledging is when the father (because he is head of house and has the male privilege) to take in, literally, a child he sired. Women don’t get to do this, even though a child by a woman is inherently the same as a child by a man.

It is a game, bastardry, of admitting what you choose and can admit or reveal depending on circumstance.

But because:

A) How can you truly expose bastardry when it is not an inborn thing and testable? It then becomes a thing of rumors, acceptance and believability, not truth.

B) Viserys, the king and head of house/grandfather, says  they are to inherit (and has kept shit under wraps), they get to inherit. The boys would absolutely, unequivocally have to be exposed as not Laenor’s kids for Alicent to officially get any “legitimate” way to prevent their inheriting the throne.

C) Succession at any level (royal and noble) is contradictory:

The bastard-born have few rights under law and custom. When it comes to rights of inheritance, there are no clear cut laws.

A bastard may inherit if the father has no other trueborn children nor any other direct heirs to follow him. For example, in 299 AC, following the deaths of Lord Halys Hornwood and his trueborn son, Daryn, Halys's natural son Larence Snow is considered as a potential heir by House Hornwoods overlords, House Stark. However, in order to inherit or be installed as an heir, the bastard-born child will first have to be legitimized by a royal decree.

I support every devastation coming for the green’s. They think their blood is superior, let it spread let us all bask in its glory.

People who stupidly claim rhaenyra should declare her sons as illegitimate then legitimise them are either dumb or don’t realise they’re watching a show set in middle ages. A man eg-corlys in the same story, can do that for a woman to do that would mean execution for her children and herself, viserys did a lot of things wrong but ignoring his daughter’s kids parentage was the right thing.

[catofoldstones]

Reading agot chapters of the stark sisters and coming to the conclusion that they hate each other in isolation from their parents’ understanding of them and society’s rigid expectations on them is idiotic as fuck. They are both classic products of their environments, both familial and social, and their feelings of each are heavily informed by these two things. Please take your Sansa and Arya hate each other because they’re antagonists, and are going to come head to head thematically in the later books, and dump it in the trash where it belongs.

[transdimensional-void]

the thing is, if the unsullied really believed they were free, she would not have an army of 8,000. like, we are talking 8,000 individual human beings with 8,000 different backstories, personalities, hopes and dreams…

especially considering how traumatic their training is, there must be a (significant) number who would gladly leave fighting behind forever—if truly given the chance.

we know their training doesn’t really strip them of all individuality. some of them choose to reclaim their original names or make up new ones. in the past, when sold in too-small groups, their training would fade and they’d assimilate to whatever group they found themselves with. they do things like overindulging in food, stopping by a tavern for a drink, seeking out intimacy with women. in short, despite their traumatic pasts, they are still humans with human desires and motivations.

if they really believed they were free, some percentage would want to return home, some to travel to places they have always wanted to see, some to settle down, find love, raise families. some may be in love already and dream of a future together. some must have family who are also enslaved—like missandei—and dream of finding and freeing them.

but we’re supposed to believe that, given a choice to do absolutely anything they wanted with the rest of their lives, every last one of them chose to *checks notes* keep doing the same thing they were doing when enslaved? all of them? really? All Of Them?

unless, of course, they didn’t actually have a choice…