|
It's probably been done here on the Boards already, and certainly on other sites, but I want to throw out my opinions on who the characters in Martin's series are historically based on -- lemme know what you guys think; where we agree and disagree.
I'll start with what I think are the more obvious ones and work my way to the less obvious ones.
.
.
.
Robert Baratheon / Henry VIII
Plus, Henry VIII grew to be amazingly unfaithful and more importantly, a fat, horrible tyrant who everyone despised. Now, though Robert doesn't go through 6 wives, he does stop sleeping with his wife. And Robert at his end is VERY much like Henry at his.
The problem, of course, with my analogy, is that it really breaks down here. Henry VIII is most known for his 6 marriages and his various children than what kind of man and king he was at the beginning as opposed to the end.
But there was always talk of Henry's kids: his illegetimate son Fitzroy who he made Prince of Wales (official title for the next king) and Duke of Richmond (his and his father's title before King), then there was Mary from his first wife (legitimate then bastard then queen), Elizabeth from his second (same fate) and finally Edward from his third. In Martin's novels, though the number of wives is different, the number of kids really isn't.
-W. E. Ray
|
|
Tyrion Lannister / King John "Lackland"
But while Tyrion and John seem perfect there’s one problem. We the readers love Tyrion. He’s brilliant and funny. He’s sympathetic. And while John does conspire with his brothers to kill his father, John never really accomplishes anything – Tyrion does kill his father. Rather poetically. Also, Tyrion loves Jaime; John tries to avoid paying his brother’s ransom when Richard’s captured in the Crusades. It’s nigh impossible to like John at all -- here’s the guy who lost the ancient English crown, Edward the Confessor’s crown, plus his own. Plus the King’s Scepter and Queen’s Orb, plus his queen mother’s (THE Eleanor of Aquitaine) crown jewels, plus tons of rich chalices and crucifixes and Relics and object d’art in the edge of the North Sea never to be found again. We’ve been looking since 1220AD. No, no one likes John.
|
|
Jaime Lannister / Richard “The Lionheart”
Think on this, Richard’s military exploits are solid but far Far overstated. Jaime is a good soldier and general but consider, he always seems to lose. He looses in a couple jousts. He looses to Rob Stark. Whenever Martin wants to show how cool someone is, that someone kicks Jaime’s ass! Richard got captured... 3 times! Richard was watching his last battle like he was watching a movie or something – dumbass took an arrow in his shoulder and tried to take it out by pulling it out! Died of medical treatment a few days later. No, this guy was not so brilliant as his propaganda leads us to believe. Still, like Jaime he was a beautiful (typical Plantagenet), powerful, talented warrior WHO HAD A SOCIALLY DEVIANT SEXUAL PREFERENCE. Just like Richard.
|
|
Rob Stark / Prince Harry
Prince Harry left England with 10,000 foot soldiers for France demanding Charles’s daughter and crown of France, plus the taxes for northern France for England, plus 2 million crowns. When he got to the heavily fortified Agincourt he had 8,000 foot soldiers. That’s all. And with them he smote the ever-lovin-sh!t out of 50,000 French with their canons, cavalry and, heh, crossbows. He was named Charles’s successor as king. He got Catherine for a wife. He got his 2 million crowns. He got the immediate taxes for northern France for England. He won it all. Only lost a few hundred men.
George Washington never did anything like that. 8K vs 50K as an away team. Nope, neither did Alexander, Charlemaign or Napoleon.
The problem I have is that Rob is a Stark. He’s almost not even in the seven kingdoms. It seems that Rob should be a Welsh, Celt, Scot, or even a Briton. But, alas, he’s as French/English as all the other Plantagenets. Oh, well, he still works.
|
|
Cersei / Isabella “the She Wolf of France”
Isabella married Edward II, a flaming [FLAMING] homosexual. (Do you remember the really badly done Mel Gibson movie, Braveheart?, yup, this is the Isabella and Edward we’re speaking of. During Eddie boy’s reign she helped the Marcher Baron, Roger Mortimer escape from the Tower (he had gotten too big for his briches) and they fled to France, after a while came back with an army and overthrew Eddie boy. Killed him by inserting boiling water in his, um, body cavities… no, not his mouth. His nether ones. This way the body would look peaceful in death – you know, no apparent wounds.
Now That’s worthy of Cersei Lannister!
If you just look at the general compass of their lives, Cersei and Isabella the She Wolf are similar. But the lives around them are radically different. Edward II is NOT Robert Baratheon. Mortimer is NOT Jaime. Isabella’s son Edward III is NOT any of Cersei’s kids.
Oh, well, everything can’t fit, I guess. Martin’s got to have an imagination, right!!!!
|
|
Tywin Lannister / Henry I “Lion of Justice” and/or Edward III
Anyway, The Lion of Justice spent the second half of his reign trying to secure the very shaky kingdom for his heir. See, his son had died (almost like Jaime being captured) and his daughter was female (surprise) and poor Matilda would not likely be able to keep the throne at all (she never did, poor lady), especially if the kingdom wasn’t amazingly consolidated.
Yeah, Henry I is probably my first choice for Tywin.
I’ll throw out a call for Edward III, too. This guy faced armies that outnumbered his like a million to one. And he always looked like he was the one with the advantage. And considering the fact that he won, it was his enemies, who, outnumbering him, were terrified.
Oh yeah, after his mom Isabella murdered his dad Edward II, he threw her in prison for life – he couldn’t kill her ‘cuz she was his claim to the French Throne. And finally, when his son and heir, the Famous Black Prince was getting overwhelmed at the legendary Battle of Crecy in 1346, dad refused to send aid saying, “Let the boy earn his spurs!” Sounds like Tywin, yes?! And, of course, since his son, like him, was a godlike Plantagenet, he fought through overwhelming odds to secure his own legend.
|
|
Eddard Stark / William Wallace
Ned’s as stupid as Sturm Brightblade – they equate rather well, hmm?
But I’ll go with William Wallace instead. The Scot who tried to stand up for his people in the vast north only to get his butt betrayed and kicked by a greedy woman (Robert the Bruce can only be referred to as feminine) and a far superior king, Edward I. Wallace was captured, imprisoned, tortured to death and hung out for the populace to see him rot.
It’s not the best analogy ever, but I’ll take it.
It's probably been done here on the Boards already, and certainly on other sites, but I want to throw out my opinions on who the characters in Martin's series are historically based on -- lemme know what you guys think; where we agree and disagree.
I'll start with what I think are the more obvious ones and work my way to the less obvious ones.
.
.
.Robert Baratheon / Henry VIII
** spoiler omitted **-W. E. Ray
GRRM has said there is a touch of Henry VIII to Robert, but the direct analogue with Henry is Aegon IV, King Aegon the Unworthy. Although Aegon only had one wife, he went through mistresses like anyone's business and had a number of children with them, sparking dynastic chaos later on. Aegon IV was also a great warrior in his youth but in his elder life he became immensely fat and bitter. Interestingly, Aegon IV stopped short of flouting the law as blatantly as Henry VIII and also had no fall-out with the Church, as by Aegon IV's time the Faith was pretty toothless.
Another analogue is with King Maegor, who did have several wives but, in the Targaryen, fashion, at the same time. The Faith had a bit of a problem with this and a massive civil war broke out that lasted more than a decade and unleashed a bloodbath of prodigious proportions, to the extent the Faith was left totally enfeebled until the events of the books.
You'll notice this a lot: there are few direct one-on-one correlations between ASoIaF and history, but there are lots of different things brought together. So the War of the Five Kings isn't the War of the Roses, but it uses some of the iconography and name similarities (Stark = York, Lannister = Lancaster, the red and white roses being replaced by the single golden rose of House Tyrell, which in this analogue may or may not be taking the role of the Tudors), whilst there are also similarities between that war and the Hundred Years War. Valyria is a weird hybrid of Rome and Greece, the Red Wedding is similar to the Black Wedding of Scottish history and the Targaryen Princesses in the Tower are clearly influenced by the real Princes in the Tower, although the princesses aren't actually killed and go on to live long and influential lives and so on.
|
|
Cool, thanks. I'm not up on my Martin too much. And I know very little about the Targaryens.
I still think that Robert fits Henry VIII rather well even if there's other, considerably less important characters that resemble Hank 8 more.
Ooh, ooh, this does, however let me comment on something you said, though, that many people mistakingly believe:
Henry VIII was NOT! unfaithful to the church. In fact, he was VERY devout.
He did marry his brother's widow, his sister-in-law, and Leviticus 20:21 says if you do that you won't have any kids. Henry was very devout (when he was young) and really was worried he pissed off god. Of course, sure, he was even more worried (or at least as worried) about his Tudor dynasty; the York v Lancaster stuff all the way up to the Richard II v Bolingbroke stuff -- not to mention olde Matilda stuff pretty much illustrates that you GOT to have a male heir.
He asked the Pope for a divorce from Catherine of Aragon in fear of angering god further as much as for getting a new wife -- that it was Anne Boleyn is a tribute to her brilliant seductive and ambitious abilities, not his.
He waited more than 6 years! after the Pope said no. Anne just accidently got pregnant.
And don't think for a moment that the Pope was doing god's will. He had JUST allowed a divorce for Henry VIII's older sister, Margaret from the King of Scotland -- a divorce the woman asked for!!! And the Pope had been the prisoner of Catherine's Spanish Royalty family only just recently!!! No, the Pope wasn't (as usual) doing god's work; he was looking out for himself.
-W. E. Ray
Interesting comparisons. I have a few thoughts:
1. I think Tywin Lannister is way more like Edward I if he's a king at all, possibly with a touch of Henry VII thrown in. He's ruthless, seems to generate wealth. Certainly he's one of the more able rulers. Tywin's error lies in desperately hoping his golden boy son will be the son who takes after him, ignoring the blatant fact that it's his younger son who does.
2. I think Cersei is very much like Isabella, right down to the poor choices of advisors when she really did have the reins of power in hand.
3. I agree with you very much about Eddard Stark. What a twit. You can tell he's being one when he sends everyone away from him who could have helped him. By the time he talks to Cersei he's pretty much fallen into her hands anyway. I might compare him though with Richard II rather than George III, who seems to have been rather more advisor led.
4. I think that Robb Stark is a lot more like Harry "Hotspur" Percy, or possibly Owen Glyndwr.
5. The comparison between Jaime Lannister and Richard Coeur de Lion is very apt in every way.
|
|
Tywin Lannister is way more like Edward I if he's a king at all, possibly with a touch of Henry VII thrown in.
Tywin is really hard; there's a few that are similar.
I do see him as inspired by a king.Unequivocally.
I have to agree with Edward I, equally with my two choices.
As for Henry Tudor, I see Tudor's penurious modern-day CEO in Tywin. And one has to view Henry Tudor as The first modern, business-like king. It also fits that Tudor never really had much a claim to the throne. He was Master of Wardrobe before he became king. He was, like, 1200th in line for the throne or something. But once he got it, like once Tywin comes to King's Landing, Tudor knew exactly what to do to not only consolidate but make a huge profit and make England financially strong.
So, this is the "touch of" Tudor thrown in. My big head shake, which, probably like yours, is Tudor's personality. When Henry I, Edward I and Edward III are so very much like Tywin in personality, it becomes difficult to nod for Henry Tudor.
And Tywin is ALL personality. Really. He is built up so much for so many hundred pages before we ever meet him in the series his force of character overwhelms the reader. We're intimidated. That's more like Henry I and Edward III than Edward I. But I certainly agree that Longshanks belongs on the list.
-W. E. Ray
|
|
I think Cersei is very much like Isabella, right down to the poor choices of advisors when she really did have the reins of power in hand.
Isabella the She Wolf of France is one of my favorite figures in English Feudal history. I really like her. I cheer for her. When she wins I smile.
Just like Cersei. The best character in the series except for Sandor Clegane (though Jaimie shows promise near the end).
Isabella gets a bum rap from most historians. "She-Wolf"? Come on you English monsters! Edward II ranks down there with Richard III, Charles I and King John as the most hated English monarchs. Justifiably.
I will say this, though, Isabella never really was given the reigns of power and because she took them they hate her. After she had Edward murdered, she and Mortimer were not chosen as Regents for the young Edward III, the Prince of Wales. They weren't even members of the Council! Sure, she and Mortimer usurped the Regency but it was only three years of "power" before Edward III, then age 17, executed Mortimer and threw Mom in prison.
Admittedly, I don't know anything about the advisors she chose in her 3 years as usurper-regent, but it doesn't seem like she had time to do much of anything. I'd be interested if you could fill in these blanks.
-W. E. Ray
As for Henry Tudor, I see Tudor's penurious modern-day CEO in Tywin. And one has to view Henry Tudor as The first modern, business-like king.
Ha. Appropriately enough, some fans want Alan Dale to play Tywin in the HBO TV series, since he does the serious CEO thing so well in UGLY BETTY and LOST.
|
|
Robb Stark is a lot more like Harry "Hotspur" Percy, or possibly Owen Glyndwr.
I hadn't thought of Hotspur at all. It's interesting, though, that Prince Harry (my choice for Robb) is the one who KICKS Hotspur's ass in battle (according to Shakespeare, anyway).
But, really, I don't like the comparison. Robb is smart and calculating. He's cool under fire. Harry Percy got his nickname for a reason. And Hotspur never really wins anything, never really accomplishes anything. His uncle and father are the ones who have the smart heads. Prince Harry, however, is the young guy who becomes king and advises his uncle and the older nobles. He's the one in charge.
How 'bout this, too. Prince Harry falls madly in love with Isabella of Valois, a girl he knows he shouldn't have. Hmmm.
-W. E. Ray
|
|
Ha. Appropriately enough, some fans want Alan Dale to play Tywin in the HBO TV series, since he does the serious CEO thing so well in UGLY BETTY and LOST.
Too funny.
I wish I knew more movies and actors to start a Thread "who should play whom" but I don't.
I've, um heard of "Ugly Betty" but I couldn't even tell you what the movie is about. I've never heard of "Lost" or Alan Dale.
My choice for Tywin would probably be Sean Connery. Amazing force of character. (Not that HBO could afford him, but who cares)
|
|
Tywin's error lies in desperately hoping his golden boy son will be the son who takes after him, ignoring the blatant fact that it's his younger son who does.
This is great. Tudor's son Arthur was going to be the next king. Tudor named him Arthur because he was trying to convince everyone that the King Arthur from the 6th century was an ancester in his lineage (he was a minor Welsh noble). Tudor has Arthur marry the powerful Spanish princess, Catherine of Aragon. But Arthur dies suddenly leaving it to the second son, Hank 8.
Sound like Tywin and his golden boy son?!!
Good work Sir Fish.
|
|
I might compare (Eddard) with Richard II rather than George III, who seems to have been rather more advisor led.
Well, I'm kidding with the George III. I just wanted to sound as vehement as possible in my opinion of Ned Stark.
But Richard II?!?
Let's see:
Came to power at age 10 and the little boy had a favorite uncle, maybe a little Starkish if I knew more about Ned's older brother, Brandon?. That he gave his favorite uncle another uncle's Title and that Thomas decided to beat the hell out of his "usurping" brother at Radcot Bridge and set up the Lords Appellant just makes sense. So Richard II as a teenager being "advisor led" is sound but once he hits age 21... Besides, I don't see Ned as being advisor led.
But Richard grew up. He put the smack-down on the Lords Appellant, executing Uncle Thomas and the second guy, imprisoning for life the third (who wisely pled guilty) and exiled Bolingbroke and Nottingham.
It's when Anne of Bohemia died that Richard II started to go a little nuts. Check the Wikipedia to make sure but I'm confident in my memory: Anne died 1394, Lords Appellant arrested 1396, "married" little Isabella 1397. But the Lords Appellant were abolished in 1388? That's 1388-1394 that Richard was a reasonably solid king. But not a Ned Stark.
I think that if one is to compare Ned to Richard II you have to begin in 1399 when John of Gaunt died. But even then, only because he left London for Ireland, not because he confiscated John of Gaunt's property (Bolingbroke's inheritance). That does not sound like Ned at all.
No, I don't see Ned like Richard II.
|
|
I SO wish I had put this one up last night next to the others.
Catelyn Tully Stark / Queen Margaret of Anjou
Henry VI was a nobody as a king. Everyone ruled except him. He was off-and-on insane; he didn't care about the crown; he was sickly and the reason he wasn't murdered until he was 50 (he came to the throne at age 1) was because EVERYONE thought he was going to die of natural causes.
Margaret didn't care too much for her husband. But when she gave birth to a baby boy -- then she had something to fight for. And fight she did. This, folks, is the birth of the Wars of the Roses, Queen Margaret fighting for the life of her child son so he can become king after his stupid father. HELLO CATELYN TULLY STARK!
And perhaps the neetest little trifle. After she is defeated and the Yorks take the throne, Shakespeare has her wonder madly around the palaces. One of the actresses that plays Queen Margaret in Shakespeare's Richard III calls her a "ghost." And in Shakespeare's play she is. Cat, after her family is defeated and dead, is a "ghost" in the series.
Interesting take on Queen Cersei. A good friend of mine interestingly LOVES Cersei, finds her a fascinating and complex character. She liked her better than anyone in the book except possibly for Tyrion.
And I do take your point about Tywin L; I really prefer to think of Edward I/Edward III for him for that sheer ruthlessness and force of personality.
In fairness to Robb Stark he is a good tactician; it's just that I can't see Harry Plantagenet walking into the Freys' trap, nor getting himself into a marriage he didn't really want. I see Henry V as being a lot more calculating than Shakespeare presents him as being.
Ned Stark...ah, where to begin. Is he George III? Perhaps he's more of a Charles I than anything else? I take your point about Richard II, but consider Charles I, who goes to his death astonished that it's happening.
Catelyn Stark is another interesting character, a woman I didn't truly like but understood and even admired, in a very difficult position that never becomes comfortable. You had to admire her. What happened to her was truly medieval and the end result creepy enough to keep Clark Ashton Smith awake at night, wondering.
Eddard Stark / William Wallace
** spoiler omitted **
William Wallace was not betrayed by a woman or Robert the Bruce. Wallace was supposedly betrayed by John de Menteith, a fellow Scotsman. Wallace in all likelihood never even met Robert The Bruce as they were fighting under two different flags.
Unless, GRRM was using the movie version of William Wallace then I can't see the connection. There was so much betrayal in the War of the Roses, the Tudor dynasty and the Hundred Years War, it's hard to know who GRRM was using as an inspiration. But, counts of high treason had it's own rules back then: beheading was usually employed for nobility executions while Hanging, Drawing and Quartering was reserved for lesser peasant stock. Not all the time, but usually. I would imagine Martin was using an inspiration from English nobility.
|
Cersei / Isabella “the She Wolf of France”
** spoiler omitted **
Cool stuff, it was informative at the very least and had inspired me to read up on some of these monarchs. Was reading the part where Edward II
|
|
It was not boiling water; your research is correct.
The first account I read of Isabella and Mortimer's murder of Edward II implied that they had his insides "boiled" by forcing a hot iron poker in his rectum. When I first read it I focused on the "boiling" part and so when I began lecturing this in class, merged my idea of what is "boiling" with what they had forced into Edward's rectum.
It was, unfortunately, a couple of years of teaching it that way before I read another account which contradicted what I thought I knew. Obviously, I reread my original source and I then realized I read it wrong. (As a result, two of my classes learned it wrong; during the third I corrected it.)