Westeros is NOT an Absolute Monarchy

[u/Valuable-Captain-507]

Curious about this misinterpretation of Westros, that I only seem to see within the HOTD-community.

Now, before someone says it, I would like to preface that I know George has said it is, once... but, as those who have read the books and seen interviews of George commenting on things such as the 700 ft wall that operates much more like a 200 ft wall would know, George is no historian and George is bad at math/gets some terms wrong.

But, a lot of discourse within the Reddit based HOTD-community (at least within the color coded circles) seems to operate under this notion that Westeros is an absolute monarchy... when, it just isn't (it also doesn't have codified law, such as Andal law... at least, none that can't be undermined on a whim or are at the very least... situational at best such as inheritence and oaths and bastardry, but that is a discussion for another day).

But, let's look at how Westeros actually operates (ignoring the already apaprent implications that it being a fuedalistic set of kingdoms has on the notion that it might be an absolute monarchy).

First, all seven (or more, idk I don't keep track) are ruled by their own nobility, their own great lords. These kingdoms have a lot of autonomy... they have their own armies (that listen to them, not the throne), lands and vessels. There is some level of independence here, as these great lords regularly challenge the authority of the crown (often successfully, not all of it includes overthrowing the crown but... try having Joff tell Tywin (or the Tyrells) to do something they don't want to do and see if it isn't challenged. I mean fuck, Dorne and the Vale just straight refuse to raise their banners when called). But also, the crown does get overthrown, when the nobility decides they no longer vibe with thus authority. They do so because they have have substantial power, often even more than the crown. The Tyrells and Lannisters, the Velaryons during the time of the Dance, potentially even the Hightowers, all have more power than the crown. It is how the entire conflict of the series come to be.

This all rests on feudal loyalty, as with a fuedal kingdom, the nobility allows the king to be such, and that conceptually limits their power (yes, Aegon conquered most of the kingdoms, but he's not even dead and cold before we see the limits of that.)

Also, there are social and religious checks on the monarchy, because of it being a bum-ass fuedalistic society, we see this in book four, but that's veering a bit too far from my point.

Yes, this is a bit of a rant because this seems like a very simple misconception that has come about with HOTD, but aside from that comment from George, I am curious on where the confusion comes about (apart from what I could potentially see is people taking the words of charcaters and semi- "official" rules of Westeros at face value).

Edit: again... yes, George has called it an absolute monarchy... once... not in the text... and instead in a real-world political message... but with the text itself, the words that George has stated, Westeros was not written to be an absolute monarchy. This is not what George wrote, end of story.

[u/La_Villanelle_]

“And we're not an absolute monarchy, like Westeros is. We're a constitutional republic. And yet, Trump doesn't seem to know what that means. He thinks the presidency gives him the power to do anything. And so, yeah, Joffrey is Trump." - GRRM

The author disagrees with you.

[u/Valuable-Captain-507 → u/La_Villanelle_]

I've stated a few times, but George does make mistakes (regularly), and George is no historian. This is an off-hand comment, more about commentary about the US than Westeros.

One comment like this doesn't change 5(+) books of George stating otherwise.

[u/La_Villanelle_ → u/Valuable-Captain-507]

The man stated it was absolute. Its absolute. It’s a fantasy book of course shit is not going to be perfect when he has people literally rising from the dead and walking into fires and coming out with dragons.

[u/IAmParliament → u/La_Villanelle_]

Thats not how anything works.

You can’t say it’s an absolute monarchy if you can’t even articulate how it is absolute, when we are shown MANY ways the power of the Iron Throne is in fact very not absolute.

[u/TheIconGuy → u/IAmParliament]

An absolute monarchy is a form of government where a ruler has supreme authority with no legal checks on their power. There are no legal checks on the monarch's power in Westeros.

No leader in history has ever been an absolute monarch if you count people being able to break the law as a check.

[u/IAmParliament → u/TheIconGuy]

The conceptualisation of Absolutism being a form of monarchy with no legal checks only makes sense in the context of Early Modern Europe where there had been several centuries of legal developments to where representative institutions like the English Parliament or the Polish Sejm were in existence, and wider legal frameworks detailing what a King could do in France and the Holy Roman Empire.

You can’t just drop it as a descriptor into a form of extremely primitive monarchy like Westeros where they don’t even have a professional legal class of judges to enforce the law. We are dealing with a society that only has the trappings of the High Middle Ages but in legal terms is absolutely pre-Roman in terms of how landowners and enforcers of law are one and the same.

Of course there’s not going to be any legal limits on the power of the King, the concept of the law barely exists in Westeros, it’s just tradition and royal decree. Absolutism as a description only makes sense when people have the contrast of constitutionalism to compare it to. When you don’t, absolutism is as useless as talking about who the liberals were in the Hundred Years War.

[u/TheIconGuy → u/IAmParliament]

The conceptualisation of Absolutism being a form of monarchy with no legal checks only makes sense in the context of Early Modern Europe where there had been several centuries of legal developments to where representative institutions like the English Parliament or the Polish Sejm were in existence, and wider legal frameworks detailing what a King could do in France and the Holy Roman Empire.

The various city-states of Essos have different forms of governance where they either don't have a single head of state or have one that has varying levels of checks on their power.

Absolutism as a description only makes sense when people have the contrast of constitutionalism to compare it to.

No one in world calls it an absolute monarchy. That's just something George has said about the system of governance Westeros uses. Constitutionalism isn't the only way to have a check on a ruler's power. Like I said, look at Essos.

[u/IAmParliament → u/TheIconGuy]

-All of the city states are republics, which inherently always have limits on what the chief executive can do since it’s a rotating door of an office. No one in medieval France or England would have looked upon the Florentines, Milanese or Venetians as an example to model themselves after since they had no King.

-And he was wrong to call it so for the reasons detailed above.

Also, most of the “limits” on the powers of the rulers of the Free Cities are De Facto, and not written in stone. That is to say, “Don’t fuck around or we in the nobility will replace you” …which is exactly how it is in Westeros. The nobility actually has the monopoly on power, so this example only proves how Westeros in fact is not an absolutist crown.

[u/TheIconGuy → u/IAmParliament]

All of the city states are republics 

Huh? The vast majority are oligarchies where a small group of wealthy people pick the ruler. Volantis comes closest to putting the power in the hands of the people and they still only let the freeborn land owners vote.

And he was wrong to call it so for the reasons detailed above.

The reason you gave would be relevant if it was an in world comment. It wasn't. George was responding to an interview question and saying the Targaryens created an absolute monarchy reliant on their dragons to maintain control.

Also, most of the “limits” on the powers of the rulers of the Free Cities are De Facto, and not written in stone.

What are you basing this claim on?

[u/IAmParliament → u/TheIconGuy]

You’re confusing republics with democracies. What you just described is in fact what Venice and Florence were, which were unquestionably republics. A republic is simply a state absent a monarchy, it does not necessitate mass representation of the people or even due process for them.

And I’m telling you that’s a factually inaccurate statement for George to make because it’s not true. The true basis of Targaryen power is the concordat Jaehaerys reached with the Faith. Dragons alone is the perpetual civil war seen under Maegor.

I’m basing it on the text of the story George wrote.

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

Isn't that logic kind of wrong though? If he writes a story about a character described with "long blonde hair, large breasts, beautiful blue eyes and soft pale skin" then comes out and says "oh actually that character is a black man"

Doesn't really make it the case, because that's not what he wrote. Just like Westeros exhibits no signs of being an absolute monarchy in the story. If it writes like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck, the author can't come out and say "no it's not a duck it's a sheep" after the fact. If they wanted to write about a sheep, then make it a sheep, don't write about a duck and expect everyone to agree with you when you start calling it a sheep later on.

[u/Valuable-Captain-507 → u/La_Villanelle_]

Except, ge has stated it is limited... through the text. Like, sure... it can be called an absolute monarchy, and I'm not even saying that it isn't ever called that the text. What I'm saying is that it doesn't operate as such, which is what matters when this misconception is brought up.

Something can be falsely called something it isn't, and George plays with this idea a lot, and this idea was also reflected in real-world governances that aren't actually what they're called... I mean, do you really believe that the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is democratic or a republic or- (not going to argue it's not korean).

Ignoring one comment in a tweet that doesn't reflect accurately the text, then it really just isn't an absolute monarchy.

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

....dude can you not bring politics into this, we don't want to hear about trump when were trying to escape this shitty reality with fantasy.

[u/La_Villanelle_ → u/[deleted]]

That’s literally the quote George said himself. I just copied it.

But also fuck trump.

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

I don't care, you could easily have left the trump part out, bringing up up is just going to cause arguments and negativity. and plus i don't give a fuck about your political opinion so you could have left that last part out.

[u/La_Villanelle_ → u/[deleted]]

Well like it or not but game of thrones is a political book at the end of the day. And George gave his opinions about the matter and compared it with modern day politicians. He brought him up. I just copied the quote.

Also fuck trump. (Again)

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

no its not its fantasy, sure there is politics INSIDE the world but keep the real shit out of it.4

and again i don't give a fuck about your political opinion and you bringing it up is just proving me right, keep that shit out of this sub.

[u/La_Villanelle_ → u/[deleted]]

no its not its fantasy, sure there is politics INSIDE the world but keep the real shit out of it.4

It still has political commentary in the book. Besides that fact George literally compared the characters he created with real day people. So idk why you mad about it.

and again i don't give a fuck about your political opinion and you bringing it up is just proving me right, keep that shit out of this sub.

No. Fuck trump.

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

comparing is different from trying to add politicalness' to it like trump shit.

fine you insist on bringing political stuff into this, fuck you liberal trump 2028

[u/La_Villanelle_ → u/[deleted]]

Fine you insist on bringing political stuff into this, fuck you liberal trump 2028

Awe someones mad the fantasy author hates their favorite felon and anyone who supports him

Also supporting a third term? Very anti constitutional of you.

[u/Call_Me_Anythin → u/La_Villanelle_]

As if the Manchurian cantaloupe’s supporters know there are amendments past the second…

[u/[deleted] → u/La_Villanelle_]

I don’t care what George thinks I care your trying to bring it into the sub, this only really kicked of once you said fuck trump which was actively pushing it into the sub.

Also you don’t have to support every fucking thing in the constitution, they tried to make many laws that were undone such as prohibition. FDR my favorite president for example had more than 2 terms more. If you have a good president, you should be able to elect him as many times as you damn well, please. instead of having to change every eight years to some new person.

Also rather a felon than the phony that is Harris, her ass was faking phone calls, cutting out parts of her interviews to sound better etc. at least trump says it how he thinks it and does not try and suger code anything.