Sorry, that might be my bad, actually. I wouldn't call Wagga names, though, I promise.

Pertaining to Narnia, their government makes sense because Aslan is basically appointing a king for them, and Aslan knows which king is going to be a strong, compassionate leader. I never thought about the council aspect before, but it's definitely there. For example, when deciding what to do when they're more or less trapped in the Tisroc's palace, Susan and Edmund ask the rest of their party for advice the way friends would. As kings and queens they are given the ultimate decision, but they don't seem to make them alone. Caspian often asked Drinian for advice and when he refused to listen to everyone on the Dawn Treader, Aslan came and told him what was up.

So it seems there really wasn't a reason for Narnia to become a republic: if the ruler was good, he/she was very good, and got input from his/her people anyway. If the ruler was bad, he/she was VERY bad, and was more or less a tyrant, leaving no room for a republic to develop unless it was through rebellion. That never ended up being necessary, though, because Aslan helped to place a new and proper king in their place.

I'm just as guilty for getting carried away too much. I'm afraid my historically Freudian slips might have been showing, also. But it isn't my style to call people names. Sorry.

When the Pevensies went first to Narnia, in LWW, they fulfilled a prophecy that there were to be four thrones to fill. Pevensies at the end of the book certainly filled the prophecy and Aslan was the one who selected them. Why four - two Kings and two Queens, and all ruling? But perhaps, with four kings and queens, there is something like rule by a mini-council anyway. They can divide tasks to get more done, they can back each other up, someone can stay at home to hold the fort, and in HHB we see the four of them can deal with invasion from two different directions. There might have been other advantages to that arrangement. Like being part of a family they could not get too high and mighty with each other.

The film of PC, or rather, the film Miraz, makes the point that one king was enough. Miraz thought it was daft to have four monarchs. But though this king has advisors they don't do him much good, being out for themselves. I doubt he even listened to them properly, anyway. And having murdered his older brother, Miraz doesn't seem like the sort of person who would share power, even with an infant still to grow up - why he got himself crowned instead of remaining a regent.

But if Narnia had been a republic, what would be the point of murdering his brother, then trying to murder Caspian, if he could have just got the Telmarines to vote for him instead? It isn't as if the Narnians or Telmarines were going to vote for a baby, and an outvoted father could be safely left alive to tend to his son. I very much fear that if Narnia was a republic there simply wouldn't be any need for that story.

Jadis was even worse. As far as she was concerned only her point of view mattered. Even if Narnia was a republic at any stage, surely Jadis would still have been a tyrant, who would insist on ruling in her own right?

That's a very interesting point, Wagga. Every villainous ruler of Narnia we see in the Chronicles is a tyrannical dictator. There are only two examples - Miraz and Jadis. These two are insanely different in their methodology of leadership. What consequences do y'all think that might have over (say) a hypothetical elected Narnian ruler who was bad?

Well, regardless of whether Miraz or Jadis took the position by force or were elected, I think it would have ended in them ruling with an iron fist and the people being unable to do anything to stop them. Jadis and Miraz both had loyal followers whom they would have gotten into the government somehow. Miraz's rise to tyranny was gradual, and I think it would have been the same way if he was elected. He would need time to gradually get all of his followers in high positions so that even if the Narnians tried voting them out, they could just fake the numbers or something and say that Miraz's people had actually won. As far as Jadis goes, she has the power to turn anyone into stone who doesn't agree with her, so she could have slowly eliminated the good Narnians in office the same way Miraz disposed of Caspian IX's followers.

That's a very interesting point, Wagga. Every villainous ruler of Narnia we see in the Chronicles is a tyrannical dictator. There are only two examples - Miraz and Jadis. These two are insanely different in their methodology of leadership. What consequences do y'all think that might have over (say) a hypothetical elected Narnian ruler who was bad?

Weelll, yesss....Miraz and Jadis definitely were villainous tyrants. But were they really the only ones? On second thoughts, I still think that Viridiana, or something like that, might have been a good name for LOTGK. What about Shift the Ape? The Tisroc and his cronies? Rishda Tarkaan? Weren't they villainous tyrants as well? Were they dictators also? And would Narnia being a republic have been more of a protection than the kings involved? Or would these villains be more dangerous as elected leaders?

You can tell that Lewis thinks a lot of birth-right and royal bloodlines. I think it's all rot. ;P I don't believe there is any mystical quality in anyone's genes which allows them to be a better leader than anyone else, and I'm glad monarchy has fallen out of favour. Making someone king because their father was king is the type of tradition that leads to no ability to change the status quo without a bloody rebellion. That being said, monarchy is an enchanting and romantic idea that fits in a world of sword-fights and dragons.

The most logical reason for Narnia not being a republic was because C.S.Lewis was British by nationality and upbringing, which means that he grew up in a monarchy, not a republic, as is agreed here already. C.S.Lewis, who dedicated The horse and his boy to his two American-born stepsons, may well have been at pains to answer just this opinion of kings, birthright and leadership, frequently held by many Internet users who often claim that monarchy "has fallen out of favour". But despite the fairy-tale setting of Narnia and its fellow countries of Archenland or Calormen, I thought that making someone king because their father was king" is far too simplistic a view of monarchy, even for the Narnian fairy-tale world.

I forgot that C.S.Lewis answered this question so much better than I could. Birthright and royal bloodlines may not have made Cor automatically the future leader Archenland needed. Especially as the Archenlanders already had available a better trained and able leader to do the job in the person of Corin. But his escaping Calormen and his bringing the warning of an imminent invasion to King Lune certainly did give him a good recommendation. Strong physical resemblances, too strong for mere coincidence, at least established who Cor was. Instinct, affinity with his twin and father, and good record-keeping also might have contributed.

Cor was happy to find he had a real family after all, and delighted to have found a real home. He may have been startled to find out he did have such a high rank, though he might have wondered why he was going to be subjected to all that education whilst his three companions would be free as birds. How shocked he must have been to be told:

"Nay, lad, " said King Lune, "thou art my heir. The crown comes to thee."
"But I don't want it," said Cor...."
"'Tis no question of what thou wantest, Cor, nor I either. 'Tis in the course of law."

What a difference 20 minutes can make to these brothers! And King Lune emphasized: "The king's under the law, for it is the law which makes him a king. Has no power to start away from thy crown than any sentry from his post". Now we don't know much about Archenland, except that its monarchy was an ancient one, descended from the first Narnian kings. This country was to remain a bastion against Calormen until The Last Battle, when it was surrounded, overcome by Calormene troops and its last king slain before Tirian and friends fought the Battle of Stable Hill.

It is Cor who is credited with rescuing Archenland from "the deadliest danger it had ever faced", which also would have been a good recommendation for a leader, even a president, if Archenland had decided to be a republic. His marriage to Aravis, who, through her father, was of high enough rank to be a relative of the ruling Tisroc, also obeyed Calormene laws and customs which insisted that their rulers were "descended from Tash", which might have compelled some Tisrocs not to mess with Archenland until the end.

Miraz's rise to tyranny was gradual, and I think it would have been the same way if he was elected. He would need time to gradually get all of his followers in high positions so that even if the Narnians tried voting them out, they could just fake the numbers or something and say that Miraz's people had actually won.

I agree with you. What you say Miraz would do in a republic is just about what he did do as a king. He would have worked within the system either way. You can even see there might have been two factions in Telmarine Narnia: one, headed by Caspian IX's Queen, who seems to have wanted to bring the Old Narnians onside, and Miraz who wanted to victimise them. Certainly Miraz made an effort to get rid of Caspian's father's friends who might have protected him. And it isn't as if most people in Telmarine Narnia knew Miraz murdered his own brother to get his turn at leadership. What Miraz banked on was being seen to be legal even if he was nothing of the sort.

However, there has to be a reason why Prince Caspian would say about Jadis:
"But heaven and earth...haven't we always been told that she was the worst enemy of all? Wasn't she a tyrant ten times worse than Miraz"? Well might Prince Caspian say that. Because I don't think Jadis would even bother to consider what the laws were, regardless of whether Narnia was a monarchy or a republic. She would be the last person to share power with anyone, Law or no Law.

What about Shift the Ape? The Tisroc and his cronies? Rishda Tarkaan? Weren't they villainous tyrants as well? Were they dictators also?

I didn't count Shift because he was nothing more than a puppet, and I couldn't actually call him a ruler of Narnia. . . not while Tirian was acting King.

I didn't count the Tisroc and his cronies because they were rulers of Calormen, and we're talking about Narnia as a republic, not Calormen.

Oh, and Rishda was eaten by Tash before he could become a tyrant

I forgot that C.S.Lewis answered this question so much better than I could. Birthright and royal bloodlines may not have made Cor automatically the future leader Archenland needed. Especially as the Archenlanders already had available a better trained and able leader to do the job in the person of Corin. But his escaping Calormen and his bringing the warning of an imminent invasion to King Lune certainly did give him a good recommendation. Strong physical resemblances, too strong for mere coincidence, at least established who Cor was. Instinct, affinity with his twin and father, and good record-keeping also might have contributed.

Cor was happy to find he had a real family after all, and delighted to have found a real home. He may have been startled to find out he did have such a high rank, though he might have wondered why he was going to be subjected to all that education whilst his three companions would be free as birds. How shocked he must have been to be told:

"Nay, lad, " said King Lune, "thou art my heir. The crown comes to thee."
"But I don't want it," said Cor...."
"'Tis no question of what thou wantest, Cor, nor I either. 'Tis in the course of law."

What a difference 20 minutes can make to these brothers! And King Lune emphasized: "The king's under the law, for it is the law which makes him a king. Has no power to start away from thy crown than any sentry from his post". Now we don't know much about Archenland, except that its monarchy was an ancient one, descended from the first Narnian kings. This country was to remain a bastion against Calormen until The Last Battle, when it was surrounded, overcome by Calormene troops and its last king slain before Tirian and friends fought the Battle of Stable Hill.

It is Cor who is credited with rescuing Archenland from "the deadliest danger it had ever faced", which also would have been a good recommendation for a leader, even a president, if Archenland had decided to be a republic. His marriage to Aravis, who, through her father, was of high enough rank to be a relative of the ruling Tisroc, also obeyed Calormene laws and customs which insisted that their rulers were "descended from Tash", which might have compelled some Tisrocs not to mess with Archenland until the end.

Certainly, I think that Cor deserved to be king, but only because he showed that level of courage and determination of which you speak. If he had just showed up as the long-lost son, though, I think that Corin should have been king. Lewis wrote a happy coincidence: the boy who was born twenty minutes earlier also happened to be the saviour of Archenland. He was prophesied to do so, but what if he had not? If Cor had just wandered up to the castle one day, having grown up in a fisherman's hut, would he really have a superior claim to the throne over Corin? Something tells me the Archenlanders would have thought so, but to me it would be madness without at least setting him to some sort of task or probationary period. Corin would have had a good fourteen years or so over Cor in learning about what it means to be a leader from King Lune.

@ PhelanVelvet, Yes I agree. If Cor had arrived in some other way, he would have had to undergo the education he was expected to get, at the very least. If he was bright enough he may have caught up on Corin, though not maybe at the things Corin was really good at. But it appears that Archenland observes a strict order of succession as laid down in some statute or other, and that if Cor fell foul of his new position, eg by getting killed in battle, or by failing to 'measure up', then Corin would be ready to take over, maybe at a more mature age.

I didn't count the Tisroc and his cronies because they were rulers of Calormen, and we're talking about Narnia as a republic, not Calormen.

The Tisroc and cronies, or at least the one we saw in HHB, didn't want anything to do with Narnia whilst it was under the White Witch. He did not recognise the validity of either Aslan or the "wicked persons who called themselves Kings and Queens" (p.91 HHB), ie the Pevensie reign. But clearly the White Witch terrified the Tisroc. He grew somewhat more interested in a country that after 13 or 14 years was now fruitful and wholesome. Would the Tisroc have been any more likely to have recognised a republic, if Peter had formed one, instead of being appointed High King? And would previous Tisrocs have met the previous rulers of Narnia before the return of the White Witch?

The Calormenes had their own society which they considered better ordered and more lawful than anywhere else to their north. Yet to listen to Bree, they engaged in all sorts of warfare to curb rebellions within their domain. And though they based their laws on compliance with poetic instruction, and their God Tash, according to what C.S.Lewis has written elsewhere about Narnia, the Calormenes were descendants of Archenlandish rebels. Tash may have been the nickname of a successful leader at the beginning of Calormene history, for Aravis was the great great granddaughter of a Tisroc, himself descended "in a right line from Tash"(HHB p.36). The Calormenes placed far more emphasis on birth, rank and wealth than did either the Narnians or the Archenlanders.

Yet, Prince Caspian, when told he was descended from South Sea Pirates, was told by Aslan that he came "of the Lord Adam and the Lady Eve" (p.185 PC) and that he "might have known that you could be no true King of Narnia unless, like the Kings of old, you were a son of Adam and came from the world of Adam's Sons". (p.184 PC). So neither the White Witch, a Charn escapee, nor "descent from Tash", a god of some sort, were genuine legal claims to power and influence in Narnia, which in PC was to be ruled by humans, though it was a land inhabited by dwarves and animals.

I didn't count Shift because he was nothing more than a puppet, and I couldn't actually call him a ruler of Narnia. . . not while Tirian was acting King....
Oh, and Rishda was eaten by Tash before he could become a tyrant

Oh? At the very least, Shift was a malcontent and a rebel. Like Eustace, the only character in CON who even mentioned a republic, he wanted proper roads, plenty of oranges and bananas and access to anything else he needed. He dreamed up how he could get his own way by dressing his friend Puzzle in a lion skin. And, like the White Witch, he insisted on being recognised as a proper human. To give himself legitimacy? Those midnight bonfire meetings where 'Aslan' was shown to the animals were little more than exercises in embezzlement, extortion, intimidation, blackmail and bullying. All the tactics of tyrants and dictators.

Where Shift got unstuck was through his association with the Calormenes, in particular, their captain, Rishda Tarkaan. Tirian may have been the legitimate king, but he had been trapped into being a fugitive. What sort of regime did Shift and Rishda plan to put in place of the legitimate monarchy they planned to overturn? Was it a bad Republic so that Narnia could stay independent, with Rishda to be the tyrant at the head of it? Or would it just be an annexe of Calormen, with Rishda as governor of a province?

As for Rishda being eaten by Tash, that was the doing of Tirian, the legitimate king he wanted to kill but hadn't managed it so far. When Tirian looked through the keyhole, he saw a bonfire and the Calormenes discussing whether or not they should look for Rishda. If there was any continuation of Narnia after that point, we aren't really told, because Aslan is about to overturn the world into fire and ice.

And then there were the dwarves. If there was to be a viable home-grown republic in Narnia, they surely would have been the ones to do it, if they could. These were the dwarves who were tired of Calormenes, Aslan, Tashlan, Kings who might be real or not. What was their cry? Oh yes, "The dwarves are for the dwarves". But does this feeble attempt to assert their unity count?