Night's Watch Doesn't Work

[Aldarion]

Night’s Watch Doesn’t Work

Night’s Watch has many problems. And the biggest one is that it shouldn’t exist in the manner it exists in right now. To put it simply, the Night’s Watch is a bastard love child o…

warfantasy.wordpress.com

Night’s Watch has many problems. And the biggest one is that it shouldn’t exist in the manner it exists in right now.

To put it simply, the Night’s Watch is a bastard love child of a monastic military order, border patrol and a prison complex.

Yet all of these have significant issues which mean that they cannot be combined.

 

[Finchbearer]

The lack of religious element does make it rather fraying at the seams, although maybe those vagabonds and low-born types could think of it as a noble profession, or a way to escape whatever poverty they grew up in, which differs from the Knights Templar being required to be of noble birth.

 

[pmmg]

I didn't know it was a problem. Something like that I might think unlikely, but go with it...so long as it was still 'in the rule' of the story world.

 

[SpecterOcelot]

I didn't know it was a problem. Something like that I might think unlikely, but go with it...so long as it was still 'in the rule' of the story world.

I don't think it's a problem for that casual reader, just there to enjoy the journey for sure. For the die hards who want to really absorb themselves in the lore to a Tolkien-esque degree, I can see why it would matter. And both perspectives are totally valid.

They mentioned in the article that even a society with devotion to honor wouldn't have such an organization because the members still wouldn't have any motivations. It could be argued that if the culture was structured in just such a way it would be possible, except for the forced conscription. A fully volunteer order as such could exist solely for the purpose of cultural honor without the need for religious influence, but it still breaks down when most of its members are criminals who assumingly already marred their honor. At that point, the only real motivation would be repentance, a hard concept to separate from any sort of religious aspects.

Definitely an interesting insight into thinking about how and why organizations exist and how to set them apart from one-dimensional guilds and orders.

 

[Prince of Spires]

There were some religous aspects to the Nightswatch as well. I think the oath they took was a religious one, made to whichever god the oath taker happened to believe in. So it wasn't just a fully secular thing.

Also, if I remember correctly most of the criminals sent to the wall were either nobles, or small-time criminals, who were half-starved to begin with. So for them, a place with regular meals and a roof over their heads might simply be an upgrade instead of a punishment.

That said, I agree that the whole situation would be less stable than Martin made it seem. On the one side, it's unlikely that through the 1.000 or so years there wouldn't have been a commander of the Nights Watch who had ambitions and realized he was in command of a vast army.

And also, especially in the time of the books, there would be a problem with old people. As in, the watch was too peaceful, and not enough of them died. Realistically, the watch would be occupied with taking care of its elderly members more than with any actual watching. After all, people get older and disabled. They could easily live another 20 years after they'd stopped being useful as actual watchmen.

 

[Aldarion]

There were some religous aspects to the Nightswatch as well. I think the oath they took was a religious one, made to whichever god the oath taker happened to believe in. So it wasn't just a fully secular thing.

Yeah, but the issue there is that a religious order can only follow one religion. Instead, Martin created a secular-religious order where members can be sworn to either the Seven or the Old Gods.

Kinda like if Templars were a combined Pagan - Christian or Christio-Muslim religious order. Ridiculous.

Also, if I remember correctly most of the criminals sent to the wall were either nobles, or small-time criminals, who were half-starved to begin with. So for them, a place with regular meals and a roof over their heads might simply be an upgrade instead of a punishment.

True, but if you send too much scum there, scum will start running the show. Which... well, it nearly did happen, but it should have happened long time ago.

That is a general problem with Martin's worldbuilding: history implies things were stable for thousands of years... only to fall apart in the present day because story requires them to.

That said, I agree that the whole situation would be less stable than Martin made it seem. On the one side, it's unlikely that through the 1.000 or so years there wouldn't have been a commander of the Nights Watch who had ambitions and realized he was in command of a vast army.

Precisely.

And also, especially in the time of the books, there would be a problem with old people. As in, the watch was too peaceful, and not enough of them died. Realistically, the watch would be occupied with taking care of its elderly members more than with any actual watching. After all, people get older and disabled. They could easily live another 20 years after they'd stopped being useful as actual watchmen.

I have to be honest, I haven't actually thought of that!

 

[Devor]

I remember wanting to have an eyeroll whenever it came up that they were recruiting criminals. If the Night's Watch was just a way for nobles to get rid of their bastards I would've been fine with it. Neglected rich kids are sketchy but still capable, and I could go with a vibe like that well enough. But trying to hold together the Night's Watch by filling it with hardened criminals was pushing it too far. It's especially annoying when people cite Martin's work as realistic because it's one of the many examples in ASOIAF where the worldbuilding is actually far too dark to be real. That's not really a criticism though. Most of the time we can employ some suspended disbelief. But I did think relying on criminals was really pushing those limits.

I don't think a secular-religious vow is ridiculous. People make similar vows when they testify in court or swear an oath of office. It seems pretty normal, if a bit modern, if you ask me. And, maybe chastity and poverty are pushing it for those conditions, but you can see in the books themselves that the oath is not well kept to, while also strictly enforced by the laws of the North.

 

[Aldarion]

I don't think a secular-religious vow is ridiculous. People make similar vows when they testify in court or swear an oath of office.

Thing is, medieval people generally believed their religion. If you secularize religious oaths, they become worthless (as with your examples) because nobody sees why they should be kept to... beyond the threat of worldly punishment, that is.

I remember wanting to have an eyeroll whenever it came up that they were recruiting criminals. If the Night's Watch was just a way for nobles to get rid of their bastards I would've been fine with it. Neglected rich kids are sketchy but still capable, and I could go with a vibe like that well enough. But trying to hold together the Night's Watch by filling it with hardened criminals was pushing it too far. It's especially annoying when people cite Martin's work as realistic because it's one of the many examples in ASOIAF where the worldbuilding is actually far too dark to be real. That's not really a criticism though. Most of the time we can employ some suspended disbelief. But I did think relying on criminals was really pushing those limits.

That I agree with.

 

[pmmg]

I don't think a secular-religious vow is ridiculous.

I think its silly. Without a greater belief that something higher requires honor, there is no reason to expect any would put any value in this. They might, but there is no cost if they don't. I suppose fear of being found out and hauled back in might motivate them, but the oath wouldn't be telling.

 

[skip.knox]

>This means that oaths sworn in said religion’s name were considered to be divinely binding.
Well, that leaves lots of room for what "religion" meant and what "binding" meant. And what "believe" meant (from the later comment).

Oaths were broken in the Middle Ages. Often. Doing so was simple. All one had to do was assert that the original oath was sworn under false pretenses, or under threat of force, or to a duplicitous other party. Beyond that, one could claim the other party had violated the oath, freeing the oath-taker from obligation. Or simply get a dispensation from the local bishop (no need to bother the pope). This was done with such regularity, we need to look at individual circumstances and not lean too heavily on divine binding. The divine, as was well understood in the Middle Ages, was a pliable (not to say fungible) resource.

I don't want to claim to know how well ol' George RR understand the Middle Ages. He is only using it for inspiration anyway, not as a set of guides. I do think the employment of criminals is less likely. When we look at the systems and practices of judicial punishment, the central point (it seems to me) was pour encourager les outres, to use the old French Foreign Legion phrase. To serve as an example to the rest of the community. So you brand. You maim. Jailing is too expensive for the ROI (and yeah, who the heck is funding the Night Watch anyway?). Banishment, it should be noted, was for the noble, not for the commoner.

Still, confess after six novels, I wasn't thinking too much about the Night Watch. The whole project had gone too far astray, and I stopped caring.