Also, the use of “bastard names” like Snow, Waters, Rivers, etc. has some historical precedent. In England the name Fitzroy (“son of a king”) was sometimes used for the children monarchs born out of wedlock, or something more specific like Fitzcharles or Fitzclarence. The practice of using a variant coat of arms also from real life - the children of royals born out of wedlock sometimes used dad’s coat of arms with a bend or baton sinister added.
Speak of Cao Cao and he shall appear.
I’ll second this. If there is a scene in an upcoming episode where the heads of people are shot into a besieged city via catapult, I’ll know where GRRM got the idea.
One thing they got egregiously wrong (in the series, at least) is how uniform every side/family looks. Every Lannister man-at-arms wears the same light breastplate over red gambeson with the same, mass-produced weird helmet. Every Stark bloke has that same style of quilted leather with small metal shoulderpads. In the context of TV of course it makes sense - it allows the viewer to know who they’re looking at at a single glance.
In real life every professional soldier provided their own gear, every levy was given whatever surplus was available (often : none and make your own fucken spear if you wanna live) and so everybody had a unique kit. Including the nobility. Hence the importance of heraldry.
Then again, past a certain wealth-point and until fiddly plate became more common, everybody on every side looked exactly the same : a couple layers of chainmail over padded cloth, a tall kite shield and a spectacled helmet. Heraldry was even more important then of course :).
[QUOTE=Shakester]
Obviously there are plenty of differences, but Joan’s example proves that it was real-world possible for a teenage girl to lead an army in a medieval society.
[/QUOTE]
Joan never led as such. She was very much a PR puff piece, a medieval photo-op : she paraded, she inspired, she maybe even fought (though by her own account mostly she waved her banner about and defended herself) but the king’s marshals were the ones who took the strategic and tactical decisions.
And of course, she obeyed her beloved Dauphin in all things. Even when he betrayed her.
I’ve read that Portuguese uses ‘bastard names’ as well (or did, traditionally). ‘DaSilva’ (meaning something like ‘from the forest’) is one, implying euphemistically that the child was a foundling. ‘do Nascimento’ is another. I don’t know if the same holds true in Spanish.
Only Peter Jackson is crazy enough to try to be realistic on things like this. Because if time, cost, and ease if storytelling it just makes sense to dress everyone the same.
My understanding is that there is much debate among historians about how much leading Joan did or didn’t do, and that there is evidence to conclude that she did, in fact, have a say in strategy and was more than just a figurehead.
There are some lastnames which mean “foundling” and others which could come from being one, but I don’t know any “bastard names” as such. Saint’s names, for example: Santa Ana, Santo Tomás (for the day on which the first of that name was found, or the church where they were found). Expósito, which means foundling (comes from a root meaning “exposed”, as they’d be left outdoors and thus exposed to the elements).
The saint’s names can also have other origins (such as being of converso origin or toponimics; there are villages named after a saint so you can get a toponimic saint that way), Expósito will mean your g-g-g-g-dad was a foundling.
I don’t think it needs to have a source, it pretty much reflects all the Tolkien stereotypes. What makes it original though is the characters and the “anyone can die, anytime” factor.
What’s kind of annoying though is that people can come back to life. Now it’s kinda like Marvel comics.
She probably did have an advisory role, yes, one that grew as her popularity among the troops, and with it her personal power/influence as well as the respect the higher ups had for her, did. She certainly was present at the war councils and didn’t shy away from speaking her mind. That much is apparent in the minutes of her trial. Testimony from both of the captains who fought with her and were present at the trial note that she was particularly adept at siting artillery, for some reason.
But still, there’s a ways between “she had a say”, or even “she convinced generals to do *exactly *as she said on this or that occasion, about this or that matter” and “she led”, isn’t there ?
So, is Ned Stark the Uncle Ben of A Song of Ice and Fire?
There’s also a ways between that and being “just a figurehead” like you said earlier.
I thought more like Bruce Wayne’s parents.
But the entire stark clan is slowly turning into the X-Men.
This is not, strictly speaking, true. Livery was a real period thing - oftentimes, retainers would be issued cloth or clothes all made of the same bulk-bought fabric, and in consistent colours, as well as badges and other insignia.
Similarly, munitions armour was also a real thing. Both kings and higher nobles could, and did, purchase armour in job lots. The armour was, in fact, purposefully designed for mass production.
Livery, sure, but I tend to lump that in with heraldry. In fact, you could say that livery was necessary *because *everybody had a unique kit and people have to know who they’re supposed to thump on in the middle of a chaotic scrum.
Eh, I suppose, but that’s more of an early Modern, 16th-17th century development.
Which I guess depends on where you put Westeros in terms of parallel chronology. I tend to think of it in terms of a 13th-14th, Late MA, cannon-free Hundred Years War kind of fantasy dragon magic world, but YMMV of course.
[QUOTE=Shakester]
There’s also a ways between that and being “just a figurehead” like you said earlier.
[/QUOTE]
That’s not what I said. I said she was “very much” one, not “just”. Because her role as a morale booster and midwife to the idea of a nation-state/national pride is, I think, a lot more pronounced (not to mention had a more lasting impact) than her deciding where the cannon should sit.
Westerosi “bastard surname” aren’t the same thing as foundling names. Only bastards who’ve been acknowledged by their noblemen father’s get them, unacknowledged bastards don’t get a surname at all (neither do smallfolk). Which puts people like Jon Snow or Ramsay Snow in a social grey area; they’re beneath the ruling nobility & gentry, but still higher than commoners.
To be fair it was the same in Medieval Europe; most village priests came from the same stock as their parishioners, and were just literate enough to read religious texts. Higher ranking clerics came from the nobility, and the same it probably true in Westeros.
I also always imagined septas being, on average, better educated than septons since it’s basically the only alternative for educated women (men in the same situation get steered to the Maesters).
IIRC the ancient Hebrews used the name Bar Abba(son of the Father) for such children.
The Hellenized version of this was Barabbas. Ironically enough, the thief spared by Pilate was called Jesus Barabbas so Jesus called the Messiah so Jesus the son of the Father could live.
But being worn over the armour, you must admit it made for a uniform appearance…
15th C development, actually - precisely because of wars like The War of The Roses and the Burgundian War, involving the revival of standing armies.
I put it as 15-16 C Tudor-ish - they wear doublets and jerkins, rather than tunics, and the Braavosi use rapiers. But it is Fantasyland, as you say.
Somewhat, yeah, but even then not to the levels we see on the show (actually, the Wildlings are maybe more unique ? It’s all fur and patchwork to me, I have no idea how customized their stuff is).
For one thing, you’d wind up with varying levels of wear-and-tear and sun bleach between the lads who were recruited last year and the greenhorns, those who were in the field and the lucky bastards who pulled garrison duty.
For another, without automation of the dying process and considering orders were processed by different shops, I wonder how similar two batches of dyes/two rolls of the “same” cloth ended up looking.
In my mind’s eye the results were akin to what you do see at (some) renfairs and re-enactments, where even when everyone got the message on which colours to wear and their general heraldic arrangement, since people make their own costumes everybody wears slightly different shades of those colours. And there always that *one *guy who got the pattern the wrong way around 
Really ? I didn’t know that. Live and learn.
Yes, but on Star Trek, everyone on the entire planet wears the same outfit.