The Role of Kinslaying in Reinforcing Unjust Power Structures in Westeros
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 май 2024
- Kinslaying is seen as the most grievous sin in Westeros. However, this stigma is a surprisingly complicated issue within the story at large, and it plays a major role in reinforcing the unjust power structures that control this already stratified and unfair society.
Content Of This Video:
00:00 The Complex Curse Of Kinslaying
04:42 The Kinslaying Taboo Protects Abusers
09:45 An Eternal, Unfair Stigma
12:05 Outro 
Развлечения
![Jason Aldean - Should've Been A Cowboy [Toby Keith Tribute] (Live from the 59th ACM Awards)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-B4nR-CgMVA/mqdefault.jpg)
Kinslaying is taboo so that younger sons don't kill the heir. Or that heirs don't kill their father. Thats at least the idea behind it.
The queen posts again
😭💖
@@HillsAliveYT SHE is mah queen.
Thanks for putting out the "Murder is Wrong" memo at the start. It may be a controversial opinion, but we are anti-murder in this household.
LMFAO I mean you jest, but if I didn't say that then guaranteed there would be at least one person in the comments being like "OMG so you're saying that people should just MURDER their families?!?!"
@@HillsAliveYT for sure, trusting the internet with anything, is a dangerous decision.
If kin slaying weren't taboo, Tywin would still be alive and Tyrion would have died an infant.
My guys Aemond Targaryen is one of the most understood but equally misunderstood anti-villains. I would love a full video just focusing on him.
Oh it's comin
@@HillsAliveYT Yes Yes and More Yes. I can't wait.
@@HillsAliveYT yay
ONE EYE HYPE
Aemond 👑🐉
10:12 Funny how Aemond is labeled the Kinslayer but I don't know Daemon ever receives this title for arranging the murder of Aegon's son Jaehaerys. Viserys wasn't willing to execute Daemon for seducing Rhaenyra because he would have been a kinslayer, so by that standard Daemon should be one just as much as Aemond.
Yeah, for whatever reason the dudes writing the history books were obvious Daemon stans.
I’m guessing it’s because Aemond actually went after Luke and straight up killed him with his dragon.
Daemon wasn’t the one to kill Helaenas boy with his own sword or dragon. The only proof they have was a forced confession from Blood via the use of torture.
Unlike Aemond flying after Jace and seeing Arrax wash up days later, Daemon was nowhere near the crime and the only witness was Helaena who went mad with grief.
I’m not saying Daemon isn’t a kinslayer, but his scenario is more complex. I’m sure he isn’t against being a kinslayer either. He’d happily kill all the greens.
@Joshua Adams You missed the part where I said that Viserys wouldn't even have Daemon executed for fear of being a kinslayer, and that's from Fire amd Blood. You don't have to be the one committing the act to be considered a kinslayer. If anything, that would just be an easy out for anyone in Westeros.
Well the only logic I could think about it is that Aemond fired the first shot by killing Luke.
@@captainvalourous6668 Daemon would still be a kinslayer; as I pointed out in my og post, even ordering the execution of a family member and having it carried out would have made Viserys I a kinslayer, as per Fire and Blood. Daemon should be considered a kinslayer by that standard.
One of the reasons why civil wars, or better put, interhouse wars get so nasty, because if its the Dance of the Dragons or the Blackfyre rebellions, ALL of the rules go out the window because the concept of the war itself basically confirms kinslaying as a consequence.
LOL and to be fair, the Targaryens don't seem to be particularly hung up on this cultural rule.
@@HillsAliveYT it’s a westerosi custom, Valyrians always believed themselves above the laws of the land, despite everything to the contrary
@@vibechecker3168
Well, Jaehaerys and even Aegon the Conqueror himself have admitted that you'd need to at least negotiate if not straight up adopt the Customs of the lands they rule.
Isn't Daemon killing a Velaryon kinslaying, too?
@@saymyname2417they would no longer be in-laws after the wife has passed, but daemon killed him on apparent behalf of the king, and king viserys isn't exactly known to be a major stickler on traditional family laws, but its still a morally dubious action, on the kinslaying field
You're one of the few channels that does ASOIAF analysis from a historical and political perspective, I don't always agree but I really appreciate hearing your alternative takes on the universe. Subscribed!
Hell, all Dani would've had to do would be to tell the story of WHY Viserys got his molten crown. That Viserys was ready to kill her and cut out her unborn baby as a threat to Dani's DOTHRAKI KHAL husband. Even by Westeros standards, that's seriously crossing the line, he threatened a King's son.
One of the most interesting cases of kinslaying you didn't mention was when Robb Stark killed the Karstarks. It was clearly a case where the laws dictated they die, but the kinslaying code said the king shouldn't kill them. You can imagine other examples where a member of the ruling family did something that would normally be punished by death, but they could be let off because the king says he can't commit kinslaying. Just another way for those in power to not be bound by the rules others face.
Actually no. Karstarks made that claim to save his life. But we don't see that claim being respected by anyone one else
Well, seing how the Karstark are distant relatives of the Stark it would mean that no lord from a region could kill another seing how they all marry with each other.
Kinslaying seems to be understood as killing someone who share your name or a living relative of a near relative like an uncle or a aunt.
I don't think I explained my thoughts clearly. I didn't mean no lord could kill anyone distantly related to them. For one thing, they could have someone else perform the execution. But the fact that the Karstarks' distance kinship claim wasn't completely dismissed suggests that the kinslaying excuse could be used by a lord who wants to left his family member off. Like Robb (if he valued military strategy more than honor) could have said that according the laws the Karstarks ought to be executed, but since they were his kins the gods wouldn't want him to kill them. Basically using kinslaying as an excuse to not punish or at least to mitigate the punishment of a family member while pretending it is for a just/demanded by the gods reason. And obviously the lord could have someone else execute them or force them to take the black, so the the lords could still punish their relatives if they wanted to. But if they didn't want their relative to be held responsible for their action, the lord could say that they couldn't execute the family member because of kinslaying. It's basically another way for the lords and their families to only be bound by the laws when it suits them.
@@transcendentalismproject3092 no one took karstarks claims of kinslaying seriously. No one cared when Robert killed his second cousin rhaegar targaryen
@@lenski8306
Yeah, that makes sense. Robb and Lord Karstark were very very distant cousins at best
6:10 Yes, Dany tacitly consented to her brother's death. That is the exact way to describe what technically happened. We know Ariane is wrong about her assumptions, but like you said, it's understandable why she would believe that. The POV structure that GRRM uses is really a fantastic way to explore the relationship between characters and the world they live in.
Well it's interesting, because while I couldn't care less that Dany lets Viserys die, she is essentially contradicting her own internal logic by letting it happen. It's one of the most fascinating part of Viserys' death to me, because Dany's entire entitlement to the Iron Throne revolves around the notion that her father was unjustly usurped/killed despite the fact that he was straight-up evil, but she sees no problem with standing by as the "rightful king" is killed, and she is seemingly seeing herself as the heir to the Iron Throne before Viserys is even dead. So Arianne is kinda wrong in her assumptions, but she's also kinda not.
@@HillsAliveYT I don't know if I agree with that last part. We've established that characters don't have the same perspective on history and its major players. Readers definitely have a more objective idea of what is going on, even if not completely. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember Dany knowing that her father was evil at the time of Viserys' death. She never even met him.
Also, it's my understanding that Dany only starts exercising her full agency after Drogo dies, and she loses her baby. Drogo has no apparent plans of going to Weseros at first, even though that's what Viserys expects of him. It's only when an attempt is made on his child that Westeros makes an enemy of him.
And it is only when Viserys & Drogo die, that Dany starts believing that the only way she can be safe is by taking back Westeros, because even by staying in exile in Essos, people still want to kill her. I'm open to being wrong, but that's how I see it. Let me know, I always appreciate your feedback.☺
@@HillsAliveYT Aldo look back at the scene drogo looks to her before doing
@@HillsAliveYT narcissisim I think she feels she is the heir and by him dying he shows he is unworthy of such a claim
Well it's weird, because when Dany is pregnant she repeatedly envisions her son on the Iron Throne despite the fact that he wouldn't be heir as long as Viserys lived and once Viserys had children, so that seems to be kind of a latent indication that she was considering Viserys a non-entity and seeing herself or at least her bloodline as the heir before he was dead.
I love these deep dives into the systems of a fantasy world and they give me plenty to think about for my own writing
Don't forget, in the end, Tywin did not in fact shit gold.
I would very much like to forget all details about Tywin's poop.
@@HillsAliveYT It's like one of the best lines in that book!
@@TheAdrinachrome1it’s a clue that Lannister mines are fool’s gold. They sold slaves to the Targaryens’ gold mines to get their gold. Gerold Lannister was sent to reopen those mines in Valyria.
Great Video! 💚
In my eyes, killing someone under guest-rite is so much worse than kinslaying. There is something always wrong about betraying someone under your roof, but killing a relative is never so cut and dry.
My grandson killing the rebel Rhaenyra is one of those examples. He may have killed his half sister, but she was ultimately responsible for a civil war and the deaths of thousands of His Grace's subjects. So, it is a much more grey issue.
💚
Agreed, I guess there are theoretically situations where breaking guest right could be acceptable, but there are a surprising number of people who should be killed by their relatives.
Not a single one of your descendants will live, due to YOUR treachery. If Viserys knew what you were up to, you’d have been beheaded for treason.
Rhaenyra's death was more like an execution of an usurper (From the green pov). It's not some special evil on Aegon II's part and he also doesn't bear the stigma of kinslaying, it was a necessity in his situation, it was vengeance for his slaughtered family, nobody should kid themselves that Rhaenyra would not have executed Aegon, Aemond and Daeron if she had captured them. It's kind of silly to uphold the taboo of kinslaying in a war between siblings where only the victor can survive. All is fair in love and war.
@@pg1448 from that same perspective, beheading Ned was justified. The greens were all self serving traitors and usurpers, they have no claim to justice.
@@HillsAliveYT I feel the actions of kin slaying goes back to the blood betrayal I mean Grimm says he hated dark lords so
What if the bloodstone emperor was actually good but his sister the “victim “ was a Cersei mixed with Dany and Arya
My theory is that they aren't actually cursed acts it's just the classic case of someone actively getting revenge and the small folk turn it into a story about curses and the gods because they weren't there obviously, it's the classic case of adding one's own speculation and bias into a story to make it sound a bit more exciting to their children, like how the white walker story gets misconstrued over the years maybe that happened with all these stories of curses for breaking guest right and kinslaying, we do see kinslaying a lot in the series yet most of the time the people get off Scott free, it's less so a curse but more the act of revenge for that act like Arya killing walder Frey in the show will probably be seen as a curse in the future of the world
Kinslaying would seem to be viewed as much worse than child abuse, which is rampant. You make some great points as always. To be clear, I believe GRRM to be a compassionate and humane thinker, so imo he's making a point about power structures and patriarchy, kind of similar to the themes about true honor and how it doesn't often intersect with knighthood.
I believe it actually the opposite, Kinslaying is seen as a foul act because it always causes nothing but problems. The Dance of the Dragons, Maegor Reign, and the Blackfire rebellions became infamous because the act of kinslaying made all those conflicts more terrible as that meant that nothing was off the table. Chances are that the First Men probably had thousands of minor kin slaying conflicts before the Andal arrival that they made it into a taboo because of how minor conflicts of succession will into entire bloodbaths once it started.
i think it can be both. it enforces stability but also gets in the way of justice
kinslaying canonically causes no more problems than ie) having bastards running around. its just a part of the world.
A really interesting take, I hadn't thought about a lot of those power dynamics before! If you forgive me for being a bit more critical though, I did have a few objection as well.
I suppose first I wanted to bring up some of the historical parallels, since it brings in a different angle to explore. Kinslaying was an extremely hard topic in medieval laws in our own real-world history because it kind of broke the legal system: our ideas of individual accountability is surprisingly modern, and a lot of historic legal system didn’t view a crime as being an injustice of one individual against another individual, but as one family against another family, and it was perfectly acceptable for the wider kin-group to be held accountable to the actions of a specific individual of the group. Therefore, actions such as kinslaying, where the family of the victim and the family of the perpetrator are the same, it really strikes at the heart of the fabric of society, and was considered especially egregious. And I think we can see a few parallels of this in ASOIAF, notably with the Brotherhood Without Banners, who puts the Hound on trial for some of the Mountain’s crimes, but also just in general the way that people talk about houses committing actions rather than individuals, and acting in such a way as to hold members of the household responsible for the actions of others (e.g., Jaimie attacking Eddard because Cat took Tyrion). Therefore, I don’t think that it would necessarily be amiss to say that Westeros has (or at least recently had) similar ideas of familial culpability for crimes, which brings in a lot of other ways that kinslaying could be discussed. That’s not to say it has to be the only way to discuss kinslaying, and I did really enjoy your points, but I do think that its something that could be worth considering.
Also I might object to the way you talked about people abusing family members, it felt a little bit like you were almost saying that it wasn’t viewed very seriously, and while I would agree that kinslaying would be viewed as worse than kin-abusing I do think its worth pointing out that people are extremely critical of family abusers as well. If we take Viserys and Daenerys, for example, there’s at least one point where a Dothraki rider is ready to kill Viserys on the spot for his cruelty to Daenerys, and its only because Danny prevents it that Viserys lives. And while that’s the most extreme response I can recall, the other abusers you mentioned, Euron, Tywin, and Ramsay, are all viewed as being extremely cruel, even if respected. But I think the biggest issue at play in this regard is the way that kinslaying is simply more noticeable, while we in the fandom are very aware of how abusive Tywin and Euron were to their kin, it would be fairly reasonable to argue that the rest of the characters aren’t going to be aware. So if Victarion were to kill Euron, we as readers would see it as a good thing because Euron is a terrible person and definitely deserved it after everything he did to Victarion, but if you’re a random Ironborn who doesn’t know everything that Euron did to Victarion then it would look a lot more like Victarion is just kinslaying to take power from his brother. That being said, I do understand what you mean about kin-abusing being seen as less bad than kinslaying, but I think there’s also a big problem with how outwardly visible kinslaying is compared to abuse that kind of got skipped over in this discussion.
I hope those bits of criticism didn’t come out too negative, overall I really enjoyed your video, and it gave me some new points to consider, I just wanted to comment on some aspects I think you may have overlooked. But overall, it was a great video and a really nice discussion on the topic!
Oh yeah LOL no worries, you'd have to be pretty rude for me to take it negatively, and since I am definitely not a historian it's always interesting to hear the POV of people who actually have context for it.
And yeah, I guess it depends on what you mean by "seriously," but considering the horrific abuse/crimes that a lot of the aforementioned abusers engage with and get away with, that to me is not a serious reaction. And I actually think the Dany paradox you pointed out is REALLY interesting and actually jives with my overall POV on the situation because for her entire life, Viserys abuses her horribly and no one apparently does anything about it because prior to her wedding to Khal Drogo, he is perceived to be the more powerful/important family member and the one who is "in charge." The Dothraki take great offense at Viserys' treatment towards Dany, but in my view that is only because she now outranks him in terms of power in their eyes. I mean, there are plenty of people who are mistreated by the Dothraki that no one takes up any defense for, and they're almost certainly not defending Dany because what he's doing to her is morally wrong, but because she is the khaleesi and therefore Viserys doesn't have the status to treat her the way he's treating her. Obviously it doesn't apply to 100% of cases, but the reaction to abuse overall seems to be much more hierarchically driven rather than morally driven.
The taboos on kinslaying and the guest right are interesting in that they're the only behaviors treated as actual sins. For a supposedly "medieval" fantasy it never ceases to surprise me just how non religious the world of ASIOAF. Its not medieval, its highly modern
Your analysis is a good one because it shows how there's a Machiavellian logic to the taboo.
Yeah agreed, their disregard for religion or their acknowledgment that it's basically more metaphorical than literal is pretty surprising given the state of the world.
Frankly their attitudes make absolutely no sense from a world building perspective. Supernatural occurrences are simply not rare enough in westeroi history to justify the modern secular attitudes that the characters hold. Even discarding the supernatural, it is a very strange world building decision to have any premodern society be secular, as secularism is an extremely recent an ongoing process in the grand scheme of human history.
LMFAO facts, like their lack of technological and scientific advancement aside, there is very wild, very REAL shit happening around them constantly that should really stoke superstition among them.
@@garrettelgin4742 Yes, they are. And Westeros is not Secular at all. People are highly superstitious. And also highly religious, specially as of book four.
The characters that are "secular" are specific "Atheist" who had their faith crushed by things that happened in life.
also Magic is NOT that common in Westeros. You may here the typical con-man, but you will get a single Bloodraven in your lifetime if you are unlucky enough.
The White Walkers are a conspiracy theory by Big Night's Watch to get more orphans from Flea Bottom
-Average Maester
I agree that kinslaying protected lot of abusers and people who themselves weren't above it - Lord Harwin Strong suggested Daemon should be executed when he was caught with Rhaenyra, Euron also was only banished as well when he slept with Victarion's wife - who he killed with his own hands as punishment, even Aegon IV who deserved death many times over was even saved with his brother dying to protect him despite all the vile things done to all involved - that is why I personally am fan of Stannis who isn't above doing what has to be done.
I cant wait to see how things unfold in season 2 with Aemond being known as a kinslayer and how that will affect the perception of the Greens’ reputation. The Hightowers and Greens attach themselves to the Faith so heavily not just becuase they are strong believers but it helps them have a better and more legitimate political reputation through using religion. And when Westerosi nobles and small folk see that one of the Greens committed the grave crime of kinslaying, I am definitely going to be interested in how badly their public image will take a devastating hit.
I think that’s why neither amenid nor daemon are labeled kin slayers to call the opposition one is call it their own hypocrisy plus it is said that action caused the war so
i mean if they get called kinslayers they can just point right across the courtyard at daemon, who is also a kinslayer lol.
I think that Aemond being the only Targaryen specifically titled as the Kinslayer in their history says something. Maegor was one as well, but it's not as heavily tied to him to the point where anyone would call him "Maegor "The Cruel" Targaryen Kinslayer" or something.
But for Aemond, it's far more often placed as "Aemond the One-Eyed Kinslayer" or however you wish to organize it depending on the situation. And Daemon is known to have personally killed Aemond at the 'Battle Above the God's Eye', and yet... he's not labeled as a Kinslayer. Not to mention, killing Vaemond Velaryon should've also given the label of Kinslayer and yet... it still didn't.
I feel it was because of the original sin event of the bloodstone emperor
I...never thought of this...its just horrible! To be trapped not just in a familial level, but also a societal one. I sadly have some experience with that.. Uhhh really fascinating video!
Keep the Amazing Takes, comin!! :D
So basically, the real sin in kinslaying is taking advantage of an unjust political system prone to instability. Not the taking of a person's life.
LOL well obviously not it's not always cool to be killing your parents/siblings/cousins/etc., but deaths like Balon and Viserys aren't exactly a great loss.
@@HillsAliveYTI couldn't agree more great video by the way very informative keep up the good work😊
@@HillsAliveYT I wasn't criticizing you I was criticizing the characters in the story and the political system they perpetuate😅
I CAME AS SOON AS I HEARD YOU POSTED A NEW VIDEO
LOL that makes the all nighters worth it!
@@HillsAliveYT Great video as always, definitely worth it!
Ur my favorite GOT historian🥺 I am a fellow Sansa protection squad member like you huhudhh thank you for defending our girl!
I binged all of your TVD and awoiaf videos a couple of days ago so this came just in time 🙌🏼🙌🏼
LOVE you channel 💖
“…and Ramsay Snow” buuurn
I said what I said
these books are so smart and you’re so smart for picking this up so comprehensively! amazing content
Thank you! 💜
Ouroborus:
The main reason for kinslaying, baby swapping, shadowbabys (bastards), and first night being throughout ASOIAF is that everybody is everyones cousin or brother/sister or uncle/aunt or whatever. Taboo Kinslaying becomes a joke when everyone you kill is someway your relative, wether or not you know that. It’s the killing that should be taboo, not your relationship to them.
Minor points, Tyrion wasn’t protecting himself from Tywin, he could have left. The whole point of Tyrion talking to his shadow in the cell as Tywin, is to metaphorically show Tyrion was his own enemy not Tywin. Tywin didn’t want him actually dead and executed, that was Tyrion’s own doing. Tywin didn’t force Shea to confess, she did it out of jealousy for being put aside, a situation Tywin tried to avoid if Tyrion listened to him. Tyrion’s own paranoia fed outburst put him there, Tywin couldn’t have prevented that. Joffery can be controlled, but not in public, even by Tywin.
I always get excited when you drop another Ice and Fire vid 😁
Cersei fans be like:
Kin slaying ❌
Kins laying ✔️
LMFAO unfortunately Cersei is far from the only person to subscribe to this philosophy.
kingslayer slaying? yas queen.
You deserve more subscribers, you have excellent videos 👌
Your videos have challenged how I have read and analyzed ASOIAF. I really dig the new perspectives you have shown. I have a deeper appreciation for all of it now. Ty 🙏
The rules against kinslaying are proper and just. It's the lack of laws that might protect people with less power that is Westeros' problem. Lessening the stigma around kinslaying would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Westeros needs more law, not less.
I like your videos even though I sometimes disagree with your takes you always give interesting perspective. Great video
I love your videos so much! You make me think more and to reread the books
One thing to consider is that most of the people of Westeros will never know the ways in which Tywin was cruel to Tyrion or Viserys to Dany. They just know that the kinslaying was done. From their perspective if Tyrion is willing to kill his own father then there is nothing he wouldn’t do for his own gain and is therefore not to be trusted. To be clear I think Tyrion was justified personally but I’m simply talking about what an average westerosi citizen might think on the matter. Edit: posted about halfway through the video and you cover it later in video lol
If GGRM wants to challenge such a sin , I quite do not see what would be the ultimate sin instead . From what I can say this taboo looks like what we have in the real world: killing someone from your family is pretty bad and killing your parents is the ultimate taboo. After all , it is easier to be killed, mistreated by your parents than by your child for variable obvious reasons : age gap, dependance, maturity, intelligence . A child who just want to stay away from his abusive parent is often seen as a problem even today. It is worse for those who see no other solution than killing his parent because he is a abuser ( likes Tyrion).
Wealth and power. You can pretty much evade any circumstances or any consequences to your actions at the end of the day. The powerful that prey on the weak will always remain on top.
You forgot to mention the worst kinslayer of all time who had no problems in doing the act, Aegon IV
I agree with all of your points, but overall I think the chaos that would insue if kinslaying wasn't a taboo is much worse than the injustice created as a result of the taboo.
Oh LOL yeah most definitely, I mean I think there are some hidden depths to the kinslaying taboo but I also agree Westeros would be even nuttier if people were more chill with the idea of killing their family members.
I'm surprised you didn't mention Larys and Alicent's scene. It seemed to me the more straightforward demonstration of this principle.
*Larys:* So I just killed my family, demonstrating that even my most built-in allegiance can't to be trusted. And now I'm your new ally.
*Alicent:* What the fuck? I do not want an ally like that!!
One other point that makes me feel a bit more optimistic is that, as upset as I was with the shortening of season 1, it was the lead up to the dance and it makes sense that there would be concerns at HBO about getting the story going, considering the state of the franchise during production. But now that we’ve arrived at the actual war there is so much action and so many big moments that can serve as the climax for individual seasons and episodes that they will be able to go much slower. And in between battles there will be room to flesh out the new characters. So shortened seasons might actually mean more emphasis on the individual phases of the war.
I disagree that the purpose of the kinslaying taboo exists primarily for rulers to take advantage of family members. The primary reason is to maintain stability and decency in a society with a hereditary inheritance system. If it weren't for the taboo then, even without murderous younger siblings, every Stannis would have his Renly. It would divide and weaken every single house. It would propagate the idea that whoever amassed the most wealth or power is entitled to take the lordship or crown even if they are not legally entitled. We can see this through Renly and his very flawed idea of Kingship. He divided and weakened the Baratheon regime less than one generation after they won the crown pretty much because, when you really get down to the core of his character, he envied Robert and he thought being King meant being the most glamorous (While in reality he would've probably been a nothing King). This type of logic would spark large-scale civil war in every generation after the king's death.
Being conscious of the political impact of murdering an abusive family member is important and linked to intent as well I'd say. With Dany and Viserys it's easy. Viserys was an entirely deposed King so his death wouldn't really impact the political status quo in any meaningful way. With Tywin on the other hand it's completely different. He was the leading peer in the realm and basically the prime minister so his death would negatively impact most of Westeros (At least economically.) This is especially true since he literally financed the realm. Now, Tyrion could've revenge killed Cersei as her hate for him was arguably greater than Tywin's but instead he killed the head of government as one last "eff you" to the people of Westeros.
Where you from mylady? You always post in "unusual hours"
LOL I live on the west coast but am a disturbed sleeper so will often work on videos when I have insomnia because there's nothing else to do.
@@HillsAliveYT Insomnia is a creative's best and worst ally
Across the Sunset Sea
Gotta pay the algorithm god’s 👍
LOL bless
The Bael the Bard story is another good example of a Kinslayer being unfairly punished. The Stark Lord in the story who killed his wilding father was brutally punished (flayed by the Boltons) despite 1. Not knowing that Bael was his father and 2. Bael was leading an army against the North, presumably killing and looting dozens of settlements while there. What the story is basically saying is that if you decide to kill your own father to stop an invasion of your homeland, you deserved to get skinned alive. Its actually pretty fucked when you think about it.
My guess for why Aemond is called the kinslayer is because his killing of Luke was not during war/an officially sanctioned battle, but Daemon did it during the course of a battlefield duel, so it was an acceptable killing of kin as it satiated honor culture and whatnot. That or George was a little biased towards his favorite Targ, but also, during the trial by seven of Dunc vs Brightflame, Maekar is heavily implied to have killed Baelor and everyone knows/suspects it, but is never formally charged with kinslaying, which reinforces the idea that there are some places where kinslaying is not as heavily frowned upon, usually tied with battle or martial justice. Viserys might not have actually been seen as a kinslayer if we use the example of Robb executing the Karstark, where it's really only the Karstark party that sees it as a kinslaying level offense, but Robb does also point out that "Every house in the North has as much stark blood as you" so it might just be the increased distance between the Starks and Karstarks that makes it a distant enough cousin that it is perhaps frowned upon but not close enough to be a dangerous precedent. So perhaps being Daemon's brother would be enough that even a legal execution might be too much in a social sense, but it could also just be Viserys making excuses as he did not want to kill him personally and wanted to save face.....
Leaving aside the fact that Viserys abused her much of her life and essentially threatened to kill her and her unborn baby right before the murder happened, I'm not sure of how much power Dany really had in that situation to save her brother, or really even speak up for him, regardless of outcome. Khal Drogo is a grown man and what amounts to a king, whose customs and culture Dany is still learning. Meanwhile Dany is a newly fourteen year old girl and still very much an outsider to the culture of the Dothraki. Regardless of whatever affection Drogo was starting to feel for her, especially as she was carrying his child, he still had most, if not all the power in that scenario. A grown man, a leader surrounded by other men willing to uphold his every order, did Dany really have the power to save her brother in that moment, even if she wished too? Are we even sure her speaking out in that moment would have been accepted? Like you said in your video, the kinslaying stigma doesn't seem to take complexities like this situation into account but I still think a discussion of whether she actually had any power to do something in that situation is warranted when analyzing Dany's character. Not that Dany doesn't go on to do even more morally questionable things, but I'm not sure passively condoning Viserys murder at someone else's hands should count as one of her greater sins or questionable acts. That's just my thoughts though.
Yeah I think that's a fair question, but again the Arianne chapter is an interesting insight into Dany's potential reception in Westeros because regardless of whether or not she had the power to do something, Arianne seems to think she had the power to do something and didn't.
I wonder what could have possibly been done about the Luke Aemond situation. Luke is a prince in line for the throne at that point. Maybe if Aemond had taken his eye during the fight then fairs fair. But how could you possibly punish Luke afterwards for something done in a quick heated conflict? I just don’t see a way that would have worked story wise.
The way I hit play so fast on seeing the title of this video
I want to answer your question with a resounding yes, but unless someone asks GRRM, and he answers in the affirmative, I'm going to say probably. It's not a supremely confident yes. I only say this because I've read and listened to so much insightfully brilliant commentary of *_ASOIAF,_* and as much as I absolutely believe that GRRM is a storytelling genius, I do think that _some_ of the things he is praised for by wonderfully astute commentators, is not intentional. Just a _small_ part of it. That said, I do think you're right, and if you're not, it doesn't matter because as we all know the author is dead. Great work as always!
Wait which author is dead
@@whittenaw it's a methodology that says that once a author put a work in puplic he is 'dead' that is his personal opinion on his book doesn't matter
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl silly methodology
@@mcbeaty3971 I am merely the messenger
@@mcbeaty3971 Nobody who subscribes to that concept believes that the opinion of an author never matters. Of course, it does. But you interpret a story, how you receive it emotionally, can take precedence over how the author wants you to interpret it if they are different.
For eg, D&D said the sex scene between Jaime & Cersei at Joffrey's funeral was consensual. Nobody read it that way. We all interpreted it as rape. Does that mean we're wrong, and the writers are right? No. That's death of the author right there.
Moreover, when that episode aired, some commentators argued that although what happens in the show was rape, in the books it was definitely consensual. However, if you really pay attention to that passage in the novel, and understand what constitute assault or non-consensual sex, it is very clear that it is not. GRRM may say it was consensual in the books, but it doesn't read as such, even if some readers side with GRRM. That's another example of death of the author.
There are many examples of writers and actors who an interpretation of their own characters that is completely contrary to how their audiences understand them, is for them totally wrong. We've all experienced Death of the Author.
The ultimate kinslayer is Jon Snow who killed his aunt, Daenerys. Yet, he is viewed as the hero of the show. I don’t think Daenerys is a kinslayer because she had no control over Viserys’ death. He drew a sword in the Dothraki sacred city which carries an automatic death sentence. There wasn’t anything she could have done to save him.
Those rules are made for a reason. Problems come with this kinslaying taboo, but perhaps it's in place bcs there was even bigger chaos before it.
💚💚💚
7:57 we can not know is an even better comment considering she doesnt know how awful Viserys would have been to her
Is kingslaying actually in the realm of Killing kin or guests or was it just that Jamie had transgressed against his kingsguard vows?
The latter
amazing how people will commit atrocities upon the Smallfolk and only having second thoughts if it would involve the murder of a family member.
Well to be fair the subject is debated when an immoral person is killed but many of us would think of the taboo of kinslaying as a good thing if it was John considering killing the Stark boys before going to The Wall or Robert wondering if he should kill Cersei and her child before remarying with the Tyrell or a scenario when a good or innocent character would be killed.
And this is without even bringing up Maegor the Cruel, who has to be enduring by both Rhaena and Alyssa despite the risk to themselves and their kids, even as he kinslays twice, both of his nephews, although the first was on a field of battle, the propaganda against Maegor as a usurper probably removes any honor to the battlefield encounter and makes it illegitimate, and the death of his other nephew by torture in his prison is also not exactly hard to hate. And still Rhaena as his niece and forced-wife cannot afford to simply slip Darksister through his neck while he sleeps, instead he has to die either by his own hands or by a faceless man depending on your theory.
I'd imagine he's read The Oresteia at some point.
What about Egg's poor father?
I guess what the system really needs is a means of motivating people to take out each other problems. Not kinslaying if it’s not your kin.
I thought you meant kingslaying, not kinslaying. Still sometimes when you kingslay you also kinslay, so...
i may be dumb, i read kinslaying first as kingslanding so I was like "oh there is a course on kingslanding? ill check the video out" and then went "oh she means kingslaying! I'm stupid lol" and THEN I read the title like normal people do and got the context after min 1:32 and went "omg I'm not only stupid I'm mentally untrusty"
Every kinslayer in Westerosi history :
- King Maegor ( 2 kills )
- Aemond Targaryen ( 3 kills )
- Erryk Cargyll ( 1 kill )
- Arryk Cargyll ( 1 kill )
- King Aegon II ( 2 kills )
- Daemon Targaryen ( 2 kill )
- Rhaenyra Targaryen ( 1 kill )
- King Aegon IV ( 1 kill )
- Bloodraven ( 1 kill )
- King Maekar ( 1 kill )
- Maelys Blackfyre ( 1 kill )
- King Robert ( 1 kill )
- Stannis Baratheon ( 2 kills )
- Tyrion Lannister ( 2 kills )
- Sandor Clegane ( 1 kill )
- Gregor Clegane ( 1 kill )
- Aegon Targaryen ( 1 kill )
Our boy Aemond is the ultimate kinslayer !
Gregor Clegane actually gets 3; he killed his brother, father, and sister
@@michaelh13 I forgot about them . Thanks
Kinslaying
I really really REALLY hated when Captain Ron admitted to kinslaying and kingslaying out loud in his "king's moot" speech and then immediately wants to do more kinslaying the second he's elected. Thank the gods all that d&d HBO post S4 is just fan fic nothing kore
What a greater sin, Kinslaying or killing someone under guest-rights?
I don't really know? I feel like it varies, but kinslaying is interesting because even in "uncivilized" societies like the wildings it's seen as an abomination.
@Johanna Whitetwill I believe its either 'direct' family or members of the same house, but you're right they're all cousins
@Hill's Alive That's true. Kinslaying seems the universal rule that everyone can agree on regardless of social status. Is abhorrent act.
Yeah, kinslaying seems to be a bit vague and multiple characters try to use that to their advantage, like Lord Karstark claims Robb would be a kinslayer if he executed him which is a stretch to say the least.
@@HillsAliveYT I kind of wondered if, assuming it's not Karstark trying to protect his relatives, it is based more on sort of the acknowledgment of kinship than literal degrees of relation.
I think Murder is Murder and no matter if these People killed their own Families or not, they should get a Trial and be punished. That's why I hate the Ending of the Show, Jon killed Daenerys and he is punished (I don't think he will do it in the Books but that's a different Story), Tyrion killed Tywin (I know why he did it and I understand it but it is still murder) but he didn't get any punishment for it. Sure we can sympathize with him, but a Murder is a Murder and should be punished accordingly not because it is Kinslaying but because it is murder! Even if you can sympathize with someone who killed someone else, especially their Abuser, but no matter why Murder should be punished. And in the Show murder was always handled with two sorts of judgement. As we see with Jaime, he is not punished for killing Aerys although he broke his oath and killed a King, but his Father is Tywin Lannister and presented dead Elia and her Children to Robert furthermore he became the Brother in Law of the new King. But Tyrion who was just the unknowing and accidental Person who gave a Cup of poisoned Wine to his abusing Nephew, is sentenced to death because no one likes The Imp and in the Show he isn't even on trial for the Murder of his Father, which I hope will happen in the Books, maybe not with an PoV-Chapter, but I really hope Tyrion won't get away with it.
So I agree with you, GRRM did make it the way he did, to force his Reader to question that believe and institution. And I hope that Daenerys is punished for her Crimes as well. But atm I again think it is unlikely we will even get WoW 😭 So the only ending I will ever see is the Showending with their reinstallment of injustice, where Tyrion is rewarded and Jon punished because he killed Daenerys. It is not even that I am sad that Jon is punished, he killed someone so punishment is needed, what I don't like that Tyrion is still in Power, although he killed his Father and had a major Role in Varys death and Daenerys Death as well.
I completely agree I watch this anime called rurion kenshin and the main characters mentor said I killed dozens of men yes all those men were evil but they were human beings first and foremost you want to change the world through murder you’ll slaughter thousands
Yeah I am generally of the mind that GoT's end is pretty close to the books, but I also have a very hard time believing Tyrion will wind up being hand of the king again in the end, I have subscribed to the idea that he'll end up in the Night's Watch/whatever version of that is left at the end of the story.
@@HillsAliveYT most will live with a lack of power s d have to settle for just being alive for this group of prideful narcissists that is worse then death
@@HillsAliveYT I think so too, also I recently watched some Videos of a different YT who ... is a Targ-Fan. And their Videos made me Realize that they think the Plot drives around Daenerys, but the Plot in this Story is actually driven by the Society of Westeros or Essos. So when Daenerys comes to Westeros her understanding of Society will clash with the society of Westeros. And she didn't even understand the Society in Essos, only her imagination of what she thinks of how the society in Essos works. So her failure is inevitable with her and her never-changing Worldview, especially after her last ADWD chapter. That gives me hope, but on the other side , I would like it if Daenerys' End/punishment is self-induced. I mean imagine after the Great War Westeros' surviving Lords come together and get to choose a new King and Daenerys has to face the fact that they won't choose her, because she is who she is and furthermore doesn't understand their Culture nor does she want to learn how Westeros works. And in the End, someone kills her in that Room because they need to prevent that she orders Drogon to burn them all, and Jon just stands there and agrees to it by doing nothing and by that choosing the Starks over the Targaryens, similar to Viserys's Death. It would make an interesting Mirror to Daenerys and Viserys's Last Moments. And would make him complicit in her Death although he didn't actually do it.
I bet you are pretty bored by my Ramblings by now ^^
When did Lord Tywin traumatize Jaime or Cersei??? He even treated that imp way better then most would, we get everything from Tyrion's proceptive so of course he's gonna play the victim. But Tyrion does A LOT at every chance he got to provoke his Lord father
^average tywin fan
The Dance of the dragons kinslayers all of them. And Aryes and Tywin should both have been killed. Dany and Jon are also both kinslayers she might not have killed Viserys herself but she was responsible and we all know what Jon did
I gotta respectfully disagree with you on some points, while Kin slaying in self defense can be justified, with Dany and Tyrion the harm ghey did against members of their own family unnecessarily was what’s shocking to Westerosi, Viserys was a peice of shit to her, but he was the only human being at Dany’s side her entire life, he at the age of 5 became her sole guardian, parent, source of protection while having to pawn off his family’s treasures. And throughout all of this he taught her all she had to know about the history of the world and the languages of her ancestors. All while being barely older than a toddler himself. He abused her but her allowing her husband to kill him in such an excruciating way after all their years together is kinda off putting. Tyrion also intentionally detoured on an escape (after being suspected of poisoning his nephew) and shot his own father twice with a crossbow, without even giving him the dignity of getting off the toilet.
and? you're acting like viserys and tywin deserved any amount of dignity from the people they abused lol. plus i love how you just casually add "after being suspected of poisoning his nephew" like tywin didn't know damn well that tyrion had nothing to do with it, but was going to let his son die for it anyway. honestly tyrion did tywin a favour. any other way tywin was bound to die in agony at the hands of someone who had cause to really hate him lol.
Tyrion is so disgusting
Are you British?
No, just uptight.
Common Hill's Alive L. Feudalism bad > killing kings good is absolutely stupid idea. Just fucking look at Rome in 3rd century. Normalizing killing kings doesn't lead to better society, only because feudalism is bad. It could get worse.
Also, the argument "it is morally justified to kill family members who abuse you" is fucking absurd.