A Look at George R. R. Martin's Game of Thrones Through the Lens of History

Just in time for the premiere this Sunday.

The author of this article is Dr. Kelly DeVries, a fantastic history professor I was lucky enough to have when I attended Loyola University (then College) in Maryland during my undergraduate years. He's a medievalist, among many things, and has recently published this great piece over at Foreign Affairs on the historical aspects of Game of Thrones. (On a somewhat personal note, I love that almost ten years after graduation I can keep up with Dr. DeVries through Facebook and simultaneously discover that we have a mutual affection for Martin's work.)

For the history geeks among us, this is a must read. DeVries gives a great overview on what is and what isn't historical, and why keeping to the history books can actually be a good thing. From the article:

Just how realistic is A Song of Ice and Fire?

The short answer is "not very." Before hordes of angry fans launch their trebuchets in my direction, however, let me hasten to add that this is a good thing, not a bad one. As a historian of the period, I can assure you that the real Middle Ages were very boring – and if Martin's epic were truly historically accurate, it would be very boring too. I'm glad Martin takes all the liberties he does, because I prefer my literature exciting. Medieval people did also, which is why their own most popular literary creations were nearly as fantastic as Martin's.

Read the full article here.