Game of Thrones: A Song of Ice & Fire [OOC] -Concluded-

[Vladivostokava]

"-and between an encompassing historicity and a jurisprudence of generosity."


What I hope will be filled in is connection; connection between my psyche and the readers', between lived experience and social perception, and between an encompassing historicity and a jurisprudence of generosity.

so, those are really old words- they don't seem like modern English at all. can I have the source so I can better help you?

The Alchemy of Race and Rights by Patricia J. Williams. Its a law book.

[The Novakian Empire]

Those don't lay seem very old to me, just not used often.

[Vladivostokava]

deleted

[The Novakian Empire]

Hey, guys. In about 25ish minutes, I'm gonna disappear for about four hours, so..yeah

[Cruxa]

Those don't lay seem very old to me, just not used often.

not used often, sure, but still older. certainly not 21st century english. I'd say those words were far more common in the 19th century to early 20th.

[The Novakian Empire]

I like to use some old words, but meh.
By the way, I actually have another hour to talk, starting now.

[Vladivostokava]

I'm writing a post for Rana in Karhold.

[Warg the Immortal]

Sorry I haven posted in a while, been sick for the last couple days. Should hopefully get one up today

[Auchterland]

"-and between an encompassing historicity and a jurisprudence of generosity."


What I hope will be filled in is connection; connection between my psyche and the readers', between lived experience and social perception, and between an encompassing historicity and a jurisprudence of generosity.

so, those are really old words- they don't seem like modern English at all. can I have the source so I can better help you?

No, no, it's more modern than you imagine, it's just juridical jargon. Jurists love to use fancy words that only they use.

So, encompassing historicity must mean a record of history that is very wide ranging in the topics that it contemplates.
Jurisprudence means the total number of already resolved judicial cases. In countries of common law tradition such as the USA and UK, their interpretation on law is binding in future decisions (these must abide by them).
I'm not certain what she means by "jurisprudence of generosity"... Maybe a number of judicial cases that have been perceived as generous in their verdicts?
Finally, she means to say that she hopes the readers will see a connection between these two things, an encompassing historicity and a jurisprudence of generosity. I don't really get that connection, but from what I get here, she must explain it throughout the rest of the book.

Are you a law student, Vlad?

edit: right, I just googled Patricia's book, and since the central topic of the book is supposed to be the relationship between race/ethnicity, civil rights and law, I'd probably consider "jurisprudence of generosity" to mean those judicial cases that were fundamental in granting civil rights to ethnic groups that were perceived to be excluded from the social elite, such as african-americans.

I spoilered my answer because it got slightly large for something that is off-topic in relation to this thread.

[The Valyria Empire]

Guys, can you take this discussion to TG? It does not connect to the RP or I&F/GoT.

[Auchterland]

Guys, can you take this discussion to TG? It does not connect to the RP or I&F/GoT.

Will do. Sorry.

Now on topic, I'm a bit out of ideas until the main plot actually kicks in. I TG'd Lord Marthart's player two days ago regarding some interaction, but they've been unresponsive until now. So, just saying that I'm still here, despite my silence.

[Cruxa]

Guys, can you take this discussion to TG? It does not connect to the RP or I&F/GoT.

Will do. Sorry.

Now on topic, I'm a bit out of ideas until the main plot actually kicks in. I TG'd Lord Marthart's player two days ago regarding some interaction, but they've been unresponsive until now. So, just saying that I'm still here, despite my silence.

Yep. waiting for Forsworn.

[The Novakian Empire]

Thing I was going to go to was canceled.

[Yaana Noore]

Well I am off uni for the next three weeks which is good. With that in mind, is there any characters that do need filled? I'd rather like another so I can write some more.

[Eraus]

Well I am off uni for the next three weeks which is good. With that in mind, is there any characters that do need filled? I'd rather like another so I can write some more.

Ayyyy, I've also got a long ass break

[The Novakian Empire]

Ayyyyyy!

[Eraus]

I'll get a Bolton Trio post up later today. Rodrik learning bout the Faith of Seven cause it's night and he's bored, Roose and Ramsey on the road talking bout stuff.....

Stuff as in flaying, plotting and all kinds of shit also why the cuck shouldn't fuck with his own populance

[Castain]

Right, so to pass the time until Robert dies, I want to start a House,

Redwyne or Dayne is the question.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

Right, so to pass the time until Robert dies, I want to start a House,

Redwyne or Dayne is the question.

Redwyne is more powerful, but Dayne is more interesting imo.
It depends on if you want to be a big player or not.

[Castain]

Right, so to pass the time until Robert dies, I want to start a House,

Redwyne or Dayne is the question.

Redwyne is more powerful, but Dayne is more interesting imo.
It depends on if you want to be a big player or not.

Well, I always thought that Dayne was a big player and could raise a good amount of spears, just under Yronwood.

[Jhet]

Yeah, Gregor clegane tore through the riverlands. Also, apologies, for some reason I always mix duskendale and the green fork together, so I assumed tywin wasn't the head of that. On the other hand, the fact the opposing commander is throwing the battle kind of ruins ttywins ability to take credit for it.

Additionally, were those sieges really all tywin? I had assumed at least two were the brace companions, those charming fellows.

I have already demonstrated I am a tully fan boy, so I will spare you the rant on how the fords was one of the greatest victories of the war of the five kings, and possibly would have seen tywin run off to kings landing anyway, even without the blackwater.

By the way. My grammar may be shit, that is because I am writing this on my tablet.

There was still a battle at the Green Fork, and Word of God informs us that Bolton wasn't throwing it, rather he was risking more than he usually was in an effort to have the best of both worlds (if he won he was propelled into the King's graces, if he lost, he had kept his men from actually fighting Tywin). And even then, if the entire army thinks that they are going to try and "win", the result is still the same.

That was what I meant about generalship. Is it only the commanders "on the ground" who warrant the victory, or the guy who masterminds the event? Duskendale Randyll Tarly was the man on the ground, but the whole event was orchestrated by Tywin (telling Bolton to send them there (or being told works as well), then positioning his forces (Tarly, Gregor) into their positions to wipe out the army without having to physically be there). So is that solely Tarly's victory, a combo of Tarly and Cleganes, or can it be counted as Tywin's? What it really boils down to is at what point does the strategic side of things get overridden by the tactical?

As with the Sieges, the companions were men within Tywin's army, but if I remember it is Clegane who is the only one to be specified as the guy who takes a castle (the others are: lions/lannisters/westermen). Is a castle taken by his men obeying his orders following his plan any less his victory because he wasn't there to watch them scale the walls? Again, tactical v strategic. You can confidently argue either way.

As deluded as JonCon I see It was a battle done for the wrong reasons without the strategic foresight for the event of actually following up the battle in the event of a victory, while also giving the Freys free reign (he sends the Stark garrison out of the Twins to join Roose, going against the rule of his king who left them there to ensure that a infamously disloyal vassal kept faith). It was as much of a fight as Ashford was in Robert's Rebellion, acting only as a delay for Tywin to save the crown. Even saying that, tactically I'll admit it was sound enough, nothing innovative or fancy, but strategically and politically disastrous even excluding the Tyrell deal. All Tywin had to do was go south and the long way round to fight Robb. Conversely the battle was fought to keep Tywin inside his own lands. Nor was there any concerted effort to shadow/trail or otherwise follow up the "victory". Oh but Harrenhal was retaken. Aye, but that isn't exactly trapping him is it, when neither Bolton nor Tully have the ability to meet Tywin on the field with any real hope of victory. The Camps/Whispering Wood was a far better victory: the stakes were far higher, the opposition considerably stronger, and the objective achieved. The Fords was an emotional bid to regain face and earn some renown.

But I'll totally agree with you if its "top five greatest battle victories in the Wot5K". Seeing as there is only really five pitched battles.

[Dentali]

Yeah, Gregor clegane tore through the riverlands. Also, apologies, for some reason I always mix duskendale and the green fork together, so I assumed tywin wasn't the head of that. On the other hand, the fact the opposing commander is throwing the battle kind of ruins ttywins ability to take credit for it.

Additionally, were those sieges really all tywin? I had assumed at least two were the brace companions, those charming fellows.

I have already demonstrated I am a tully fan boy, so I will spare you the rant on how the fords was one of the greatest victories of the war of the five kings, and possibly would have seen tywin run off to kings landing anyway, even without the blackwater.

By the way. My grammar may be shit, that is because I am writing this on my tablet.

The Fords was an emotional bid to regain face and earn some renown.

But I'll totally agree with you if its "top five greatest battle victories in the Wot5K". Seeing as there is only really five pitched battles.

The Fords doomed Robb's campaign, it was an egotistical exercise that screwed over everyone else. It won renown for about 5 minutes.

[Yaana Noore]

Right, so to pass the time until Robert dies, I want to start a House,

Redwyne or Dayne is the question.

I thought you were writing Joffrey?

[Castain]

Right, so to pass the time until Robert dies, I want to start a House,

Redwyne or Dayne is the question.

I thought you were writing Joffrey?

I am indeed, but I'm pretty sure he's doomed to fail, so I mean for a backup.

[The Novakian Empire]

Eh, maybe.

Also, it was a way bigger fight than ashford. Ashford was practically a skirmish, but at the fords, it was a full on battle. The strongboar was captured, two named knights were killed, the lord of house lefford died, and overall the lannisters took heavy casualties, or so the wiki says. Plus, gregor clegane and his men were personally involved in the fighting, and were able to take one ford. However, they were promptly thrown back over the east bank of the trident by the tully knights, who edmure held in reserve.

Three day long battles tend not to be skirmishes, mate.

Also, had bolton and tully combined their forces, they could have conceivably been victorious against tywin in that hypothetical battle. Edmure is recorded as having had 11,000 men at the battle of the fords, the northerners had roughly 3000 foot at duskendale, and the boltons at the red wedding counted 1200. Add that all together, you have 15,200 troops avalible for the hypothetical battle, along with some pretty great commanders. At the battle of the fords, tywin had a little under 20,000, and since his casualties were allegedly heavy, let's say, 16-17 thousand men, perhaps less, perhaps more.

The difference in numbers is not great, and edmure has won before against tywin, with less troops!