[BigBadMick]

Having finished book three of A Song of Ice and Fire, and having read in one or two reviews of the series that Martin wanted to rewrite the War of the Roses in fantasy, I've popped down to the library and got a book out about it.

It's called "The Wars of the Roses - Lancaster and York" by Alison Weir.

Has anybody else read A Song of Ice and Fire and been influenced to read up on the War of the Roses because Martin's writing has sparked an interest in this period of history in them?

Just wondering.... :)

BigBadMick
(waspdog3@yahoo.com)

[Loras Tyrell]

yup - just there myself thanks to aSoIaF (besides the fact that I'm two days away from my exam in British Civilization :p).

I was actually thinking of making a thread similar to this one myself.

With all the ruckus about Jordan, Tolkien and others ripping each other and others off and copying and stealing, you'd think some of the ones not so fond of Martin would seize the chance to accuse him of "ripping off" the english history :p.

Maybe it's because he's too up front and honest about it?

But what I would really like to know, is how faithful Martin stays to the "real" history. I mean, I realize there weren't dragons and Others (would have to be Vikings or something :)), but in terms of plot and characters.

The Wall could be either Hadrian's wall or the Antonine Wall. Either way, I guess that would make the wildlings scottish, wouldn't it? :D :D :D Are there any scots around to take offense?

And while it's pretty bloody obvious that Stark is York and Lannister is Lancaster, the other family names are more subject to speculation. Or am I wrong?

Being two days away from the aforementioned exam has left me with a remarkable lack of knowledge on the subject, so there might me more obvious parallells.

Umbers - hm... One region was called Northumbria, and another Cumbria.

Eyrie - Ayr?

I'll come back with more (preferrably after my exam).
Greetings
Artaxiad

[Jacquin]

The Stark-York and Lannister-Lancaster thing is imho not relevant.

Some other facts though.

King Edward IV was a big man, he never lost a battle and was reknowned across Europe for being a great knight. As he settled more into being king he tended to feed his appetites and grew fat, he had many mistresses and and spent a lot of time drunk. Sound familiar?

His wife was Elizabeth Woodville, a lady who was famed for her beauty, she came from a large family who during her reign as queen she managed to bring to numerous positions of power, none more so than her brother who was a great knight and successful in many tournaments across Europe, there is a theory that he poisoned Edward. Kingslayer sound familiar? The Woodvilles were hated my many, none more so than by...

The King's brother who lived in a great castle in the North of the country. He travelled south to sit on the king's council but could not fit in with the intrigues of court. On the king's death he was proclaimed protector but this was opposed by the queen. His wife had a sister who was widdowed. The commonly held theory is that her husband found out about the illegitamacy of the queen's children and so she had him killed. Ringing any bells?

I don't remember any zombies, but I've met a few scots that would pass as them... :D

Oh, I forgot, the Lancastrian claimant to the throne at this point was living in France trying to muster an army so he could come back and claim his throne.

I can't think of any other similarities off the top of my head, I'll post them if I do...

J

[ChrisW]

Maybe it's because he's too up front and honest about it?


That is so weak.

In answer to the topic, nope.:)

[kegasaurus]

So its bad when we base it on reality, but when we base it on myth and legend its okay?

All authors do it, yet some put an original spin on it. Who cares.

[ChrisW]

So its bad when we base it on reality, but when we base it on myth and legend its okay?
Who said that? oh yeah you did.:confused:

[kegasaurus]

Caldie, are you going to say anything here, or are you just going to poke and prod?:confused: (If you look at the question mark you will note I didn't say that, I asked the question)

The response was to J who is happy with Tolkien, whose influences were myth and legend, yet seems to be unhappy with Martin using historical ones (J, If you keep reading you'll note the differences between TWotR and what Martin has to say.)

(Everyone else please note how I used the word 'seems.' This means this is my take upon what I read in J's statement so if anyone is going to come in, other than J, and say how wrong I am then fine go ahead, its your perogative, but forgive me if I ignore you.)

Let's take a look at some authors here for a sec.

Tolkien was influenced by mythology

Jordan was influenced by Tolkien

Martin was influenced by TWotR

Kerr was influnced by the Celts

Brooks was influnced by Tolkien

Goodkind was influenced by Rand

blah blah blah, it goes on and on. Show me an author who doesn't use an existing experience and I'll prove you wrong.

[ChrisW]

poke and prod. I have nothing meaningful to say. You didn't ignore me:(.

http://www.sffworld.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7143

That thread would have been a better one to reply to J in imo.

I just like posting in the Martin forum. Makes me feel smarter.

[kegasaurus]

Originally posted by Caldazar
poke and prod. I have nothing meaningful to say. You didn't ignore me:(.

I'm a drunk Australian, I can't ignore anyone, but pointless bluster...

http://www.sffworld.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7143

That thread would have been a better one to reply to J in imo.

The reason I didn't use J's was as both threads are about the same thing, they will eventually be merged anyway, so...


I just like posting in the Martin forum. Makes me feel smarter.


Makes me feel dumber, Give me Jordan anyday.;)

[Jacquin]

Originally posted by kegasaurus
The response was to J who is happy with Tolkien, whose influences were myth and legend, yet seems to be unhappy with Martin using historical ones (J, If you keep reading you'll note the differences between TWotR and what Martin has to say.)

I am indeed happy with Tolkien, I suppose I am a little unhappy with Martin, but only in so much as I already knew the characters and plot twists the first book contained. That being said I am now reading the second book.

My main complaint was not that he was influenced by the wars of the roses but that he seemed to have taken a section of history and passed it off as a fantasy book by changing a couple of names. Perhaps it is simply because I have studied the period in question in some detail for years now and notice things most people wouldn't unless they were as much of an anorak as I am.

I do however find I am begining to enjoy things more now I am into the second installment. I have my suspicions as to where the plot will take me, but as we have left the WOTR behind I shall withhold judgement for the time being...

blah blah blah, it goes on and on. Show me an author who doesn't use an existing experience and I'll prove you wrong.

Now that sounds like a challenge to me! :D

J