(cont.)
And that’s all for now in feedback. As for the “realism vs. fantasy”, I feel it is necessary to have a basic knowledge of history to use as a basis for fiction. As Poller mentioned, the speech of nobles was a little off, but there is some truth behind it. In Scotland throughout the early Middle Ages, the king could be addressed with simple language, even just to talk about the weather. The reputation of Scots has not died.
Going earlier, the Ancient Slavic peoples, from before the fall of the Roman Empire, were recorded to being disrespectful and disobedient even to their kings.
Bountiful gifts were received (and expected) by great nobles of all nations, so an emissary without even one gift would be treated more like an insult. The highest nobles should be of highest politeness and, as Poller said, even political. Well, I am guilty of a lack of such qualities in my own stories.
Serene End and I had a great discussion about a similar thing, though mine was, unsurprisingly, combat-orientated. It was argued that fantasy should override realism, however, if it is wrong, then it’s wrong. You can** show incorrect mathematics in a fictional story and use the excuse of fantasy, as an extreme example.
But, it’s your call. What I noticed was the empathy of your peoples; they cry for children and wives, and think of family. If they have heart, they would undoubtedly be polite to their king and never refuse anything. However, if your people are like angry Scotsmen who have a habit of attacking any foreigner that lands in the British Isles (such as Romans, Vikings, Saxons, Normans, etc.) then I suppose an aggressive people would be more open to the “treating the king like a buddy” attitude. Your choice though.
20-Jun-2013 04:05:30
- Last edited on
20-Jun-2013 04:05:50
by
Azigarath