Why No Kings In The Saga?

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by JediNdaCity, Jul 1, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JediNdaCity Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2002
    star 3
    So far we've had Queens, Emperors, Chancellors, Governor's,Senator's, Knights and a princess. But what happened to the Kings? Is that a title that seems a bit too corny for Lucas' taste. If Leia was Bail's adopted daughter, wouldn't he have been a king? Or is this just a complimentary title they use in connection with her deceased mother.
    Or is it a title too closely associated with LOTR?

    What gives?
  2. plutoneam Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 21, 2003
    star 3
    Great idae.

    For the new Super Special Edition they will make Jabba's name "Jabba the King".

    [face_plain]
  3. Jedimancer Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 16, 2004
    star 2
    You know, I never thought about that. There's no real need to actually have a king in the saga, but it is ironic to think all these medieval titles are used but probably the most famous of them all, king, is left out.
  4. Guinastasia Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 9, 2002
    star 6
    Wasn't Padme's predecessor on the Naboo throne a King?
  5. fosh-bantus88 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 27, 2003
    star 4
    i think george just wanted to prove a point; that women make capable rulers too. IMO, he went too far with it.

    afterall, why just elect queens? why cant men rule a planet? sounds like the sexist steriotype has only been reversed, not disproven.
  6. JediNdaCity Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2002
    star 3
    fosh-bantiss88
    LMAO :) Maybe he did.
    He's gotta be proving some kind of point with it.
    The sexism thing in reverse is plausible.
  7. _Derisa_Ollamhin_ Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2000
    star 4
    I think Bail Organa is "Prince" of Alderaan, actually. During Elizabethan times, all the sovereign kings and queens of Europe referred to themselves as "princes": it wasn't gender-specific in that usage, and such a usage served to equalise all the sovereigns of Europe: a tiny country like Monaco (which had a Duke as sovereign) could stand on equal footing with the Spain, England or France.

    As to why Lucas didn't include a King, my suspicion is that the Galactic Republic/Empire is a direct cognate of the Roman Republic/Empire. There was no room for kings in Rome.


    *Derisa*
  8. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    The monarch of Naboo before Padme was indeed a King. He was a man who often disagreed with Palpatine and so he mysteriously left office, from what I remember.

    Naboo commonly has a young Queen because they like the innocence of such a young girl. That their minds are not yet clouded over in greed, power and manipulation.

    So there have been Kings, that is just the only one I can think of off the top of my head.

    I do think that Bail Organa is considered a Prince.

    Don't associate a Prince with weakness. The Principality of Monaco is ruled by a Prince, and he has the power over his small nation.

    -Seldon
  9. JediNdaCity Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 14, 2002
    star 3
    Good points Derisa & Seldon. Also good history lesson. Thanks.
  10. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    The two historical events that contribute most to SW, in my opinion are the rise and fall of the Third Reich as well as the Roman Empire.

    Instead of having a King in Rome they had an Imperial lord which was later called the Emperor. Before the Third Reich there was a President and a Chancellor in Germany and later Hitler was the Fuher. So neither had a King. Russia under the Romenov's had a Tsar or a Czar. Egypt had no King but a Pharoah.
    So there are many times in history where the King had a different name.


    GFFA has Kings, we just don't usually see them in the films.

    So Monaco the small nation in Southern France is ruled by Prince Rainier III and the Grimaldi Family. The ruler is always known as a Prince. The Grimaldi family is the longest reining dynasty in Europe. If there is not a male heir then the principality will become part of France...therefore the French government would take control of the principalitys casinos. The heir to the throne of Monaco is Prince Albert, that is if he does accept the throne....just for your information. I have been to Monaco a few times, a great vacation area.

    -Seldon


  11. Guinastasia Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 9, 2002
    star 6
    No, Germany had a King, and an Emperor, and prior to the 1870s, there were what-fifty some little German kingdoms, duchies, principalities, etc. You had Dukes, Grand Dukes, Kings, Princes, etc.

    And then Germany was reunited under the Prussian monarch, who became known as the Kaiser. (Which, like the Russian Tsar, comes from Caesar)

  12. mixza Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 28, 2004
    star 4
    Naboo was ruled by King Veruna but he gave up the throne because of some scandal (I think) and Padme took over.
  13. Blackout Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 7, 2000
    star 4
    This thread rocks :D

    {||||| ?||} -----------------------------
  14. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    Guinastasia: I'm well aware that Germany had kings. My post above was saying that the Third Reich and the time right before it...had no king.

    The Weimar Republic and the Nazi Regime had no King.

    Germany did have kings, just not in the time period I was talking about.

    -Seldon
  15. darth-amedda Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 8, 2003
    star 4
    Good point. I was also wondering about it.

    "So far we've had Queens, Emperors, Chancellors, Governor's,Senator's, Knights and a princess".

    Plus:
    Viceroys, Archdukes, Counts, Lords, Prime Ministers and Administrators.

    So I'm not sure if the argument about the ancient Rome works. The parallels are obvious, but in Rome you didn't have most of these either.

    Maybe GL is trying to use titles with more specific associations and "king" sounds too general? Naboo king seem to belong to EU. From the films we can see already the third queen in row, so i guess it's their local tradition.

    By the way, who is Boss Nass among the Gungans? Just "leader"? Or "boss" maybe? ;)
  16. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
    George is the King of Star Wars and he doesn't want any competition!
  17. darth-amedda Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 8, 2003
    star 4
  18. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    Perhaps GL chooses not have a King in his movies.
  19. _Derisa_Ollamhin_ Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2000
    star 4
    darth_amedda: As MarcusAurelius mentioned in a different thread, in the AOTC commentary George Lucas himself compares the loss of democracy in the Republic to the loss of democracy in the Roman Republic. There are other inspirations for the events in the films, but the Roman connection is not to be denied.


    *Derisa*
  20. EnJee Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2004
    star 1
    Regarding Princess Leia: maybe she's a princess because her mother is the Queen of Alderaan, and not because Bail is King?
  21. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    From the Star Wars offical site

    "Senator Bail Organa was the First Chairman and Viceroy of Alderaan, a hero of the Clone Wars, and the head of the Royal Family of Alderaan. An influential politician, he was a loyal Senator who commanded the ear of Supreme Chancellor Palpatine himself."

    Bail Organa is not a King, he is a member of the royal family.

    Leia is a princess because she is a member of the family and the "daughter" of Bail. Bail is the head of the royal family so his daughter would be a princess.

    -Seldon
  22. darth-amedda Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 8, 2003
    star 4
    Derisa_Ollamhin

    Don't get me wrong. I did not deny the connection of the SW story with the ancient Rome. I'm not that stupid - there are so many (and so obvious) similarities. I totally agree with you on that.

    I was only suggesting that in my opinion the SW/Rome analogy is not the reason why we are not having kings in SW. In the same way as references to ancient Rome don't exclude starhips, although ancient Romans were not using them (as far as I know at least ;) ).

    By the way, I was recently looking through the old drafts of SW and there is one king mentioned there.
  23. Darth-Seldon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 17, 2003
    star 6
    We really cannot look as the drafts as proof of anything. If we look at drafts then Han Solo could have gills and green skin. Leia could have small part. Anniken Starkiller a chubby teenager could be the main character.

    A lot of things changed in those drafts. A lot of ideas were thrown around like having SW take place in our future. Or having the films be told by a god like narrator. There were many ideas. So many things changed.

    There could be a King in E3. You never know.

    -Seldon
  24. Lord_Fett Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2002
    star 4
    Egypt had no King but a Pharoah

    Wrong. Pharoah means Palace. It's like when we say White House instead of the President. In ancient times, the Pharoah meant all the administration of Egypt. But the ruler of Egypt was called King of Egypt.
  25. Jedi_Monk Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2004
    star 3
    The Prequels have put me under the impression that "Bail" is an Alderaanian title rather than a first name--afterall, what're the chances of having two guys with the same first name as sequencial senators from the same planet (Bail Antilles and Bail Organa)?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.