Game of Thrones: TV Series - Season 8 (Book spoilers in tags with warning)

[RedGuard]

I always imagined them as the Mongols

they're not described at all as mongols, other than the fact that they ride horses. I imagine them more as American indians, like the Apache that were famous horse riders. that and the fact they're described as such (long hair, little to no armor, described as savage rituals (at least from outsiders viewpoint)). Could be that coupled with the fact im american and horse riders conjure up images of indians as well too, whereas Europeans might see it differently.

that and the dothraki sea sounds alot like the great plains. is there deserts on the steppe? sounds more like the people from even farther east (forgot thier names) that have cone heads seem more like mongols to me, but we'll never see them on the show or books.

[Påsan]

I always imagined them as the Mongols

I dunno. They seems closer to Huns to me. Dothraki dont establish empires.

they're not described at all as mongols, other than the fact that they ride horses. I imagine them more as American indians, like the Apache that were famous horse riders. that and the fact they're described as such (long hair, little to no armor, described as savage rituals (at least from outsiders viewpoint)). Could be that coupled with the fact im american and horse riders conjure up images of indians as well too, whereas Europeans might see it differently.

Well considering that horses came from Europe I'e never seen Indians in the same category as the steppe people. But I guess that there are similarities.

Compared to us they were noobs.

[TheDarkKnight]

From GRRM himself

The Dothraki were actually fashioned as an amalgam of a number of steppe and plains cultures... Mongols and Huns, certainly, but also Alans, Sioux, Cheyenne, and various other Amerindian tribes... seasoned with a dash of pure fantasy. So any resemblance to Arabs or Turks is coincidental. Well, except to the extent that the Turks were also originally horsemen of the steppes, not unlike the Alans, Huns, and the rest

http://grrm.livejournal.com/263800.h...5240#t15365240

So basically every single significant nomadic group...ever.

[RedGuard]

I dunno. They seems closer to Huns to me. Dothraki dont establish empires.





That one animal that has been used for warfare for millennia and was instrumental in conquering the Americas from the Indians? Yeah speaking as a European the NA indians dont get the "horse people" tag.


Compared to us they were noobs.

The Western indians had horses. Your thinking of the meso-american indians. They didn't have horses or iron.

But General Chris's post lays it to rest. basically they are american indians behaving like turks and using scimitars.

These are the real huns/mongols of ASOIAF http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Jogos_Nhai

[Påsan]

The Western indians had horses. Your thinking of the meso-american indians. They didn't have horses or iron.

But General Chris's post lays it to rest. basically they are american indians behaving like turks and using scimitars.

These are the real huns/mongols of ASOIAF http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Jogos_Nhai

None of them had horses. Horses are only native to the Eurasian continent. (And africa, if you count Zebras. But they cant be tamed so yeah..)

The NA Indians got horses from the Spanish in the 16th century.

But General Chris's post lays it to rest. basically they are american indians behaving like turks and using scimitars.

Are they described as looking like Indians? I always pictured them more near eastern. Also they dont use scimitars they use for whatever reason something similar to a khopesh.

[SLN445]

There is defiantly a mix there though they give off more of a Steppe feeling then anything else.

While there was originally horses in America, they died out roughly 12,000 years ago and only returned with the Spanish explorers/Colonists.
Native American Horse Traditions developed sometime after that.

[tarvu]

There is defiantly a mix there though they give off more of a Steppe feeling then anything else.

While there was originally horses in America, they died out roughly 12,000 years ago and only returned with the Spanish explorers/Colonists.
Native American Horse Traditions developed sometime after that.

I don't know what the point is when it was still a large part of many Native American cultures. Plains tribes like the Comanche, Apache, Sioux and others became dominant regional forces primarily through their mastery of the horse.

So.... kinda like all the other horsemen empires: Mongols, Huns, etc. and I would say more than the Turks since I don't think they are as closely associated with the horse. Despite having conquered as horseman long before say the Sioux.

Steppe/plains cultures as horse riding nomadic conquerors that accurately describes a good number of Native American tribes. Whether they had horses prior to the seventeenth century or not. The Europhiles on this forum can't resist an opportunity to beat their chest over past glories like a longer history of horse mastery . That's great, really cool story there but it doesn't make the Comanche or Sioux any less Horse tribes both in terms of their reverence for horseriding or their celebrated horsemanship (even by some European accounts so you know it really happened).

[SLN445]

I don't know what the point is when it was still a large part of many Native American cultures. Plains tribes like the Comanche, Apache, Sioux and others became dominant regional forces primarily through their mastery of the horse.

So.... kinda like all the other horsemen empires: Mongols, Huns, etc. and I would say more than the Turks since I don't think they are as closely associated with the horse. Despite having conquered as horseman long before say the Sioux.

Steppe/plains cultures as horse riding nomadic conquerors that accurately describes a good number of Native American tribes. Whether they had horses prior to the seventeenth century or not. The Europhiles on this forum can't resist an opportunity to beat their chest over past glories like a longer history of horse mastery . That's great, really cool story there but it doesn't make the Comanche or Sioux any less Horse tribes both in terms of their reverence for horseriding or their celebrated horsemanship (even by some European accounts so you know it really happened).

That part was just a response to the suggestion that horses where always part of America By no means am i suggesting that Native Americans didn't develop strong cultural traditions around the horse once reintroduced, horses provide a significant improvement in transportation, hunting and warfare that most where quick to adopt.

[conon394]

(And africa, if you count Zebras. But they cant be tamed so yeah..)

Nobody would seem to have really tried.

[Halie Satanus]

''On the morning of Sunday 25 June 1876, from a vantage point called the Crow's Nest, the scouts saw something they had never seen in their lives - in the distance, maybe 20 miles away, the hills seemed to be moving. Then it dawned on the scouts. the moving landscape wasn't land at all, but thousands of horses - the biggest horse heard they had ever seen, about 20,000 animals in total.'' - Description of Custer's scouts first sight of the war party assembled prior to the battle of little big horn. 'The American Indian Wars - Howard Hughes.

The Dothraki are portrayed physically bigger than the Steppe peoples, their horses, at least in the show, are also far bigger. They don't believe in money and frown upon trading. Choosing raiding and 'gifts' to gain 'possessions,' rather than wealth. They are not conquerors, they could expand their lands but don't [at least, not yet], much like the 'Native Americans' who had no concept of boarders, only good land for hunting and poor land for hunting. In those attributes they are more akin to Native American's.

In the show, at least, they look like men who might have sailed with Sinbad.

[RedGuard]

"The Dothraki may wear rich fabrics and perfumes in the Free Cities, however among their own people men and women garb themselves in painted leather vests over bare chests, horsehair leggings cinched with belts of bronze medallions^[9] and open-toed riding sandals that lace up to the knees. They do not wear armor, considering it craven, so they often fight with no shirt on or with only vests. Dothraki women might wear robes of painted sandsilk."

-Nailed it

[Mangalore]

Well fair enough

How about using those 40,000 Dothraki to carve out a larger chunk of Essos, get a much larger manpower pool and throw that over the narrow sea on Carracks instead? keep the Dothraki in Essos where they are most effective and use Levies and Sellswords in Westeros.

The point is not to have an invasion force, the point is having an army so actually others are joining her cause because they consider it a strong claim backed by a powerful faction. In essence a far smaller force to mean business and as a loyal elite force with those 40 000 total as all assets back in Essos and the rest made up of Westerosi. One doesn't have to look far too see one or two Great houses and possibly dozens of smaller ones switching sides just to screw the Lannisters. Compared to the Baratheons Daenarys has the better claim no matter what and her being a woman means any house aligning itself with her via marriage in essence becomes the new ruling dynasty ( at least from Westeros sense of society though she might have other novelty ideas by now)

[conon394]

Compared to the Baratheons Daenarys has the better claim no matter what and her being a woman

I don't see how she has better claim - in any case Stanis is clearly a more competent ruler(*). Unless you just mean her vs Lannister incest kids.

* ie at leat he seems to have book or TV a dececent handle on the Magic he has bought into (red god), so does the North. Danny can whine about her dragons all she wants but she can't run them.

[RedGuard]

She really has no claim, and neither does Stannis really(Albiet the laws of succession says stannis, but the "right" to rule goes to the targaryans who have ruled Westeros for the longest). But irregardless they will both have to take the Iron Throne, who has the better claim to it is really irrelevant. Haven't you been paying attention? You win or you die. There is no middle ground.


The Right of Conquest is the name of the game

[Mangalore]

I don't see how she has better claim - in any case Stanis is clearly a more competent ruler(*). Unless you just mean her vs Lannister incest kids.

* ie at leat he seems to have book or TV a dececent handle on the Magic he has bought into (red god), so does the North. Danny can whine about her dragons all she wants but she can't run them.

She is a Targaryan,the entire Baratheon line only half Targaryan, that's entirely enough concerning claims.[/QUOTE]

Nope,it's not. House Baratheon is at best a quarter Targaryan. It's just enough if none else with better claims like an actual descendant of the direct successor of the last Targaryan king is around.

Stannis having an handle on his Magic? That's delusional, that's the one irrationality he constantly entertains. He has no handle on it, but just hopes it helps him. Danny's dragons are a far more potent message because of Westeros' history and how the Seven Kingdoms were united. She doesn't need their control, but just have them around and they add to her claim while Stannis' Red God is foreign or if we look at Essos Daenarys actually considered its messenger because of the dragons (an interesting question if Melisandre is lying to Stannis or has a thelogical schism with her fellow priesthood in Essos). It all makes his handle on the situation weaker.

She really has no claim, and neither does Stannis really(Albiet the laws of succession says stannis, but the "right" to rule goes to the targaryans who have ruled Westeros for the longest). But irregardless they will both have to take the Iron Throne, who has the better claim to it is really irrelevant. Haven't you been paying attention? You win or you die. There is no middle ground.

The Right of Conquest is the name of the game

Robert became king not because he won the revolt but because house Baratheon has the closest bloodline to the Targaryans so apparently Westeros minds, just as Robert was paranoid about two true Targaryans still being alive. His entire reign was built on the premise of the House of Targaryan being extinct and beyond that that there was no adult Targaryan left in Westeros. That not being the case means they will always be the ones with the greater claim to the throne. That's why he lost his hearing of Daenarys possibly having a male child that might also have an army. You shouldn't buy into the ad promotion lines. G.R.R. did built a very distinct feudal system in Westeros, probably even more defined than any actual feudal society. You can also see it with the fact that the Starks are nearly extinct and the North still insist that the house that led them for milennia be the only house to rule the North.


Sure, you need an army, hence my comment about the Drokhrati being important simply to indicate you have one, never mind if you only ship 2000 elite horsemen over the Narrow Sea. Having a claim and having an army to back it go hand in hand. Those people won't join your army if you don't have a claim and they won't join your army if you don't have one to back your claim. However Daenarys has both and actually might be a more interesting match for a Great House than a male Targaryan because by the misgynistic laws of Westeros said Great House would gain the bloodline and at the same time become the de facto ruling dynasty as it's the male line that rules. Aka, plenty of interest to backstab a weak Baratheon-Lannister dynasty and replace it.

[RedGuard]

Robert became king not because he won the revolt but because house Baratheon has the closest bloodline to the Targaryans so apparently Westeros minds, just as Robert was paranoid about two true Targaryans still being alive. His entire reign was built on the premise of the House of Targaryan being extinct and beyond that that there was no adult Targaryan left in Westeros. That not being the case means they will always be the ones with the greater claim to the throne. That's why he lost his hearing of Daenarys possibly having a male child that might also have an army. You shouldn't buy into the ad promotion lines. G.R.R. did built a very distinct feudal system in Westeros, probably even more defined than any actual feudal society. You can also see it with the fact that the Starks are nearly extinct and the North still insist that the house that led them for milennia be the only house to rule the North.

Sure the Baratheons have some targaryan blood in them, but that wasn't roberts main selling point. His main one was that he and his allies were the only ones strong enough in three hundred years to defeat the targaryans and become king, thus it was his right to sit on it. The fact that he had Targaryan blood was only relevant to some. many were utterly content to any ruler so long as it wasn't the mad king.(there were rumors that Rhaegar was plotting to overthrow him, though these are unconfirmed and probably will forever be). And of course he fears a return of the Targaryans, who wouldn't? they were in power for a while and were for most of their existence the most powerful house in westeros(with help from dragons I might add, which at the time of the rebellion were all dead). Drawing parallels with the starks is a bit more problematic though. The Starks have ruled the North for thousands of years, mostly well. Its so ingrained in the north that its almost seemingly unthinkable otherwise, whereas people forgot about the targaryans almost as soon as they lost power. If that wasn't the case do you think robert would have lasted 17 years on the throne without at least one targaryan pretender appearing somewhere?

[conon394]

She is a Targaryan,the entire Baratheon line only half Targaryan, that's entirely enough concerning claims

Claims are wind... Who had the better claim to the English Throne - Liz I or Merry Queen of Scots? I say the winner.

The base Targaryan claim is just right of conquest. Not bad really but they had Dragons really full grown ones they could control - Danny can't. So she can't offer any real uber advantage to her just I am spoiled girl who thinks its my chair claim and maybe I might be able to find the army to back that up even if I'm doing a real crap job ruling in Essos.

If the Targaryan claim can be based in conquest so can the Baratheon one and as things I would take Stanis over annoying girl any day.

But RedGuard is right if you are going to appeal to tradition than the whole place should just dissolve back to it traditional monarchies - the North and Dorne and the Iron Islands are already just barely part of the structure the Targaryan conquest created.

[TheDarkKnight]

Dany can't even control three cities. How is she supposed to control seven kingdoms?

[Killerbee]

In all fairness she really didn't pick out the best cities to conquer and rule.

[gastovski]

Dany can't even control three cities. How is she supposed to control seven kingdoms?

With Jon Snow ofcourse.