As a royal watcher for years now, I am especially pleased and excited by what promises to be an exciting series which weaves byzantine political machinations with good old fashioned family drama! Perhaps this thread may be used to discuss topics associated with the Gilboa Monarchy?

Fill free to post your comments, observations, and questions! I look forward to hearing from ya!


Questions about the Gilboa Monarchy:

1. What form of monarchy is Silas Benjamin head of? Absolute or Constitutional. Is there a parliament and a government? Is there a Prime Minister or Chancellor heading the government?

2. King Silas is credited with uniting the “Three Nations” during the Unification Wars, but what are the other Three Nations? Is Silas king of each of the other nations separately in a personal union? For example, as Queen Elizabeth II is Queen of the United Kingdom, and of Canada, and Australia separately? Or are the Three Nations a unitary single kingdom? What happened to the rulers of the other Three Nations?

3. The dynasty name Benjamin hints at a significant ancestor named Benjamin, what is the history of that family? What is their association with Altar Mansion in Shiloh, and with the Vineyard on the coast? Where the Benjamin family native to Shiloh, or some other location?

4. Jack is commonly associated as a diminutive for the full name Johnathan. Is that so here, is “Jack” here used like Harry is for the UK’s Prince Harry, officially Prince Henry of Wales?

5. Prince “Jack” Benjamin is the Crown Prince and heir of King Silas. But does the succession laws prohibit women from ever becoming Queen? Is the succession law male preference primogeniture- with the women taking the back seat to the men, as in the United Kingdom today? Or does Gilboa follow absolute cognatic primogeniture, where the first born- regardless of gender, inherits the kingship. This is the more fair succession law in Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden.

* Personally I hope that it is full, equal, absolute Cognatic Primogeniture, with the first born taking precedence over any junior issue.

6. What are the ages of Prince “Jack” and Princess Michelle, and is Princess Michelle in the line of succession?

7. Does Queen Rose have significant family connections?

I think it is very significant that at the dawn of the 21st century, the most stable world democracies are those that have a hereditary constitutional monarchy.

Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Canada, Luxembourg, New Zealand, are all among the most stable democracies in the world.

Other then the United States and perhaps Switzerland, there are no republics in existence today that enjoys any measure of domestic stability to the degree that those countries do. Even in republics, you have an aristocracy of political families.

The benefits of a constitutional monarchy, indeed what monarchy represents, include stability, continuity, nostalgia, tradition, honor, pride, romance, and a mystique that presidential republics simply can never achieve. Constitutional monarchies allow for citizens to profess their loyalty to the living personification of the state, while allowing him to vote for a political party of his choice to represent him in parliament.

David Shepard wrote:
"After WW1 European Royalty became deceased, and the "Age of the Nobody"........was born. Adolf Hitler was a child of this age."

Respectfully, I would disagree. After WWI, with the rise of nationalism, autocracies as sustainable social structures failed. Only those autocracies and faciest governments have failed (in the West). Within another 100 years, I would wager you a return to monarchy among most of the world.

In terms of Kings:

David Shepard is based off of "the David", whose claim to kingship came in part from his marriage to King Saul's daughter and the fact that David himself was a decedent of kings, but through a different line. I would not be surprised if Captain David Shepard eventually marries Princess Michelle and the two become joint rulers eventually.

A meritocracy is not necessarily incomparable with a hereditary kingship in my opinion.

Why does one have to be European to see virtue in a consitutional monarchy? I may be Canadian, or Australian, Japanease, Thai, or Mayasian. All of which are also Consitutional Monarchies.

Anywho, I think you may misunderstand the role a mondern constitutional monarch plays in contemporary western democracies.

With the modern British Honors System, (and I am sure it is true in Spain and in other Constitutional Monarchies) candidates for Honors are nominated and screened by the Government, with prospective Honorees representing a wide range and cross section of society. Philanthropic, Scientific, Cultural, Military, Life-Achievements.

Remember that above I had mentioned the stabalizing influence of an Hereditary Constitutional Monarchy, that it represents stability, continuity, nostalgia, tradition, honor, pride, romance, and a mystique that presidential republics simply can never achieve. Constitutional monarchies allow for citizens to profess their loyalty to the living personification of the state, while allowing him to vote for a political party of his choice to represent him in parliament.


From Wiki:

Modern honours

As the head of state, the Sovereign remains the "fount of honour", but the system for identifying and recognising candidates to honour has changed considerably over time. Various orders of knighthood have been created (see below) as well as awards for military service, bravery, merit, and achievement which take the form of decorations or medals.

Most medals are not graded. Each one recognises specific service and as such there are normally set criteria which must be met. These criteria may include a period of time and will often delimit a particular geographic region. Medals are not normally presented by the Sovereign. A full list is printed in the "order of wear", published infrequently by the London Gazette.

Honours are split into classes ("orders") and are graded to distinguish different degrees of achievement or service. There are no criteria to determine these levels; various honours committees meet to discuss the candidates and decide which ones deserve which type of award and at what level. Since their decisions are inevitably subjective, the twice-yearly honours lists often provoke criticism from those who feel strongly about particular cases. Candidates are identified by public or private bodies, by government departments or are nominated by members of the public. Depending on their roles, those people selected by committee are submitted either to the Prime Minister, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, or Secretary of State for Defence for their approval before being sent to the Sovereign for final approval. Certain honours are awarded solely at the Sovereign's discretion, such as the Order of the Garter, the Order of the Thistle, the Order of Merit and the Royal Family Order.

A complete list of approximately 1350 names is published twice a year, at New Year and on the date of the Sovereign's (official) birthday. The awards are then presented by the Sovereign or her designated representative. The Prince of Wales and The Princess Royal have deputised for The Queen at investiture ceremonies at Buckingham Palace.

By convention, a departing Prime Minister is allowed to nominate Prime Minister's Resignation Honours, to reward political and personal service. As of 2008, Tony Blair has not taken up this privilege

Hopefully the new monarchy will have their court scribes review their works before publication so that the rest of us can understand what they're talking about....

David was NOT a descendant of kings! There were NO kings of the Hebrew Nation before Samuel anointed Saul. David's claim to kingship was derived from Samuel, who removed Saul and replaced him with David upon instructions from G-d. Please get your facts straight.

Well I can't say that there is any proof in the "facts" put forward of the efficacy of constitutional Monarchies....


First of all Canada, NZ, Australia etc... are no longer constitutional monarchies and have not been for 50 years. They are all closer to constitutional republics than anything. They use a form of republicanism and the monarch (The Queen) is no longer in any power, they in fact are only no longer actually attached to the UK... Japan had thier monarchy castrated after losing a war, there are a few remaining monarchies and for the most part they are oppressive in some way...

Sorry don't see any benefits from monarchies of any kind, absolute power corrupts absolutely...

First the reference to the Three nations and the anointing of Silas seems to tie into Augustus and Constantine both. I see three nations that split from a single mother nation. A civil war of some sort. Silas lead a faction and when God and the Good Rev backed him he became a figure that could unite the people and end the war.

Thats why the Butterflies story is such a major part of the Universe.

Silas became the heroic symbol. And his Heroism united his people. Now in the character of David their is a different kind of Heroism to unite the people

Gilboa statistics

If Gilboa was on our Earth, rather then some other planet, this is how it would compare. Stats from UNN (Unity News Network)

By area:

Gilboa has an area of 141,299 km2 This would make Gilboa the 96th largest country on Earth, just larger then Greece (131,957) but just smaller then Tajikistan (143,100) or Bangladesh (143,998).

For further comparison, Gilboa would be the exact same size as New York State at 141,299 km²

Additionally, Gilboa would be comparable to England (130,395 km2) and Wales (20,779 km2) combined (but not Scotland).

Comparison in the Middle east... Gilboa would be 40,000 km² larger then the combined nations of Isreal, Jordan, and Lebanon (121,865 km²).


By population:

Gilboa has a combined population (between the Three Nations) of 25,306,183.

This would rank Gilboa as the 47th largest population, just below Saudi Arabia at 25,721,000. Compare with the state of New York at 19,490,297 and compared to England and Wales at 54 million.

By Economy

Gilboa ranks as the 7th largest world economy, behind the United States, Japan, Germany, China, the United Kingdom, and France.... thus displacing Italy to 8th.

Dude! You are a plethora of information! Pretty cool analyses!

"Too many of us look upon Americans as dollar chasers. This is a cruel libel, even if it is reiterated thoughtlessly by the Americans themselves." -Albert Einstein

I'd love to have a cute Gilboa flag on my desk, the same size as those other small ones. They could do it, sell em for 4 or 5 bucks? I'd buy one.


What other Kings items would you like to have sold by NBC?

I wouldnt mind havin a flag either

I want one of those hats the palace gaurds wear. They pretty cool.

I would buy the flag in a heartbeat. :]

The flag would definitely be awesome, along with perhaps patches and other uniform stuff.

Heck yeah. I've been looking for one as my comp wallpaper.

I would ABSOLUTELY buy a flag!

Drachenfire suggested that I re-post my topic here (I s'pose I shoulda read the other topics more thoroughly):

I absolutely love that this show exists on several levels. I enjoy the politics. I enjoy the battle philosophy. I even enjoy the cinematography. But what I especially enjoy is the reexamination of a system of government (monarchy) which has been more prevalent than any other in organized society and one that tends to be the default when more advanced systems fail.

At this point in my life I'm not very religious, but I can still imagine what it would be like if there were a god that actually ordained people to be king. It's a powerful idea, and I get a remarkable sense of nostalgia when I suspend my disbelief long enough to fully absorb myself in a world where miracles still occur and where "God" really does directly influence the lives of man.

Before I get a large number of fundamentalist responses, I should explain that I know fanatical organized religion for the child's dream that it is, but I have nothing against finding fiction beautiful. For those long-time atheists out there: imagine if there were some central purpose to existence, and that it manifested itself through a leader. I can't say whether I myself would follow such an individual (as opposed to following the logical conclusion of my own ideals to their end), but it would be an awesome thing to see all the same.

In retrospect, my post is more about the spectacle and existence of monarchy in general and its examination in this series rather than the Gilboa monarchy specifically. Interesting thread all the same.

Another few thoughts:

1. I would like to see a Julius Caesar-like character in this series who succeeds and thrives in a separate country despite not embracing "God's" will. The power of man united vs. the power of a god or gods would be a decent 2nd season in my opinion (hopefully with mutual respect as the end result).

I would follow an imminently competent human individual any day over a non-human consciousness that refuses to show itself or explain itself thoroughly. Granted, imminently competent human individuals are few and far between, but from time to time, they do show up (whether through chance or fate I do not know).

2. If you go far enough back, the lines between human and god sometimes blur. I've read historical studies that say the Norse gods were originally based on famously capable individuals. It's an idea that I've liked for quite a while.

The greatest difference between humanity and any other creature on earth is our capacity for consciousness. If you lose an arm, a leg, or an eye, you are still you because what makes you up at heart is what you think (via reason, emotion, or random spontaneous idea). Imagine someone who can explain their own viewpoint in such a way that it is almost universally understood and accepted by their society. It could be said that any individual who comes up with such an idea or set of ideas that perpetuates beyond the memory of that individual themself has effectively become immortal...so long as the society (or at least the idea) perpetuates.

Could it not be said that you are a god if the culmination of your existence results in the permanent perpetuation of your own consciously formed ideal(s)? Could it not also be said that if another individual subsequently espouses those ideals in a vastly effective way, that they have been anointed by you (effectively a god by this point)?

Pursuit of The Ideal (caps meant to accentuate, not deify) is a vastly worthy way to spend one's life in my opinion. What form it takes seems a matter of perception and circumstance. If I saw a leader who's ideas, ideals, and actions seemed perfect, I would likely follow them regardless of what they called themself (dictator, king, emperor, Bob), but would likely work hard to destroy their progeny if they failed to live up to the title.

3. As an American law student, the idea of an actual American king irritates me. This nation was founded in exact opposition to the concept of divine rule. Unless that "king" was either truly perfect (as mentioned under idea 2) or me (my ego does several hundred push-ups per day) I would do whatever I could to destroy that individual (ah, regicide). In my opinion, our country encourages individuals to think of themselves as their own fonts of ideas and idealism. Our own declaration of independence says as much: "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal...." What birth grants an individual monarch is merely an artificial sense of duty. In a capable few it can create greatness, in others, it creates nothing more than a sad, propagandic, abomination of thought and action. Sadly, few who are free to do so in our modern society rise to a level that those sparse capable individuals would be forced into. On the other hand, that in and of itself is part of freedom; the ability to live life. Consider how unfair it is to the born "monarch" to be forced to serve unwillingly for a lifetime.

Democracy is in no way perfect, but it is the most fair system we have. Until people come up with a better idea, I will make every effort to destroy any individual who attempts to take my vote away.

But if prince Jack dies now, who will be the next in succession? Is Michelle out of the picture?

In the series so far, Silas Benjamin is head of an Absolute Monarchy. He has his group of advisers (ministers of government I assume), but he takes action unilaterally and without any consultation with a Parliament or Congress. Silas makes and breaks laws on a whim, without regard for any other fellow leader in the government.


The "Three Nations" are those of Gilboa, Carmel, and Selah(?) which were united by Gilboa in the Unification Wars. The other two nations were consumed by Gilboa, and the two kings were either killed or locked up. My assumption is that the three nations shared a common heritage, a founding nation or culture, which the three split into. It was only until the Unification Wars when Gilboa took the lead and united all three nations under the one banner. The "Three Nations" is a unitary nation without a doubt, as there is no formal mention of the other two as even still existing in any form. It isn't the Commonwealth structure of the UK->Canada/Australia


The Family Benjamin no doubt relates Silas to the "Twelve Tribes of Israel". These twelve tribes descended from Jacob and his twelve sons. Unless the writers absolutely left this out, that is the strongest indication I would have. Altar Mansion is also significant because that could be where Isaac was ordered by God to kill Jacob, on his Altar, but was turned away at the last second.

5.Seeing as this rule and kingship is new, the easiest rule of law would be for Jack to be 2nd-in-line for the Kingship, just because through the course of human history, those with the drive and aggression to become King are males, and males are made for leadership and control.


Constitutional Monarchies are either on their way out (Bhutan) or without formal powers (UK, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, etc.) Constitutional Monarchies, despite all the pomp and circumstance, aren't more or less able to make good decisions than regular parliamentary governments. Silas can take unilateral action, even if he did have a Parliament, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable for everyone. While there are those "loyal Britons" who love Queen & Country, there are those who see her as unnecessary and would like the see Royal Families done away with entirely. The stability of Denmark or Norway can't be put down to the monarchy when, simply put, they don't have big boy problems like the US.

Hey all I am new here and loved the pilot. One thing that really bothered me was the fact that Gilboa had (apparently) no tanks at the front.

There was a reference to how powerful the Goliaths were, even though it just looked like your average T-72.

Where are Gilboa's armor assets? Are they really that outclassed by Gath? They are shown with modern M-16 like weapons and have night vision capabilities. Air assets were also mentioned when it was revealed how Silas was creating the kidnapping scenario. Also Silas arrives on a modern helicopter.

Apparently Gath is a state military centered. Maybe this is an explanation.

A personal gripe of mine is the ability of Gath Scientists to be able to create such an advanced piece of technological equipment and the Gilboan nation be unable to provide an adequate response. The official information is that "Gath rolled out this new tank" through years of dedicated research but Gilboa mobilized her reserves to prevent Gath from rolling them over.

The Goliath Tank is more symbolic than literal.

Well, if the TV show is slipping in parts of the books of 1st and 2nd Samuel into the series...and so far they have, this is out of the Bible...
Israel Without Weapons
16 Saul and his son Jonathan and the men with them were staying in Gibeah [g] in Benjamin, while the Philistines camped at Micmash. 17 Raiding parties went out from the Philistine camp in three detachments. One turned toward Ophrah in the vicinity of Shual, 18 another toward Beth Horon, and the third toward the borderland overlooking the Valley of Zeboim facing the desert.
19 Not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, "Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears!" 20 So all Israel went down to the Philistines to have their plowshares, mattocks, axes and sickles [h] sharpened. 21 The price was two thirds of a shekel [i] for sharpening plowshares and mattocks, and a third of a shekel [j] for sharpening forks and axes and for repointing goads.
22 So on the day of the battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in his hand; only Saul and his son Jonathan had them.

*Maybe this is symbolized in the fact that Gilboa had no tanks!

I agree in a similar way with Newbie. The show follows the obviously follow the story of David in the Bible. In the Biblical account the Philistines (enemy) had a powerful warrior giant from Gath named Goliath. Kings use of the "goliath" tank is a parallel. It is just meant to show that Gath has some really powerful warrior/weapon that Gilboa has no solution for (like in the Bible), until David came along.

I think one of the problems is people take the show way too literally. We are living in a fictional universe where Kings rule the world. I completely agree that it doen't make sense that a successful nation like Gilboa doesn't have any tanks, but try to look past that and appreciate the symbolism as ridiculous as it may be.

Well, in truth I think the thread has become a conversation about the idea of monarchy. I would never suggest an American monarchy at all... its an abhorrent idea for me.

But I think the role of a constitutional monarchy is very appealing for many other countries. And having studdied the political systems of other countries... it seems that a constitutional monarchy does enjoy wide support.

A few others in the thread have tried to assert that the UK and Canada and Australia and New Zealand are somehow presidential republics. Well that is not entirely true. They are bonified constitutional monarchies, and only in Australia is there a significant republican movement, were about 50 to 51 percent of the country wish to abolish the monarchy. Elizabeth II is Queen of Australia by right, as she is also Queen of Canada. In Canada, because it has a written constitution, jurists point out that the Queen through the Crown of Canada has more of an influence in Canadian law then even in the UK.

Even in countries where the monarchial tradition has been absent for generations there are calls to reestablish their traditional monarchy in a constitutional sense, such as S. Korea, where as much as 55 per cent of the people wish to restore their monarchy... absent since the Japanease anexation in 1910.

Even without holding actual power, the mystique of monarchy and all that it holds a powerful sway on mankind, as I've stated earlier they represent stability, continuity, nostalgia, tradition, honor, pride, romance, and a mystique that presidential republics simply can never achieve. There are absolutely no significant republican movements in most stable democratic societies such as Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium and Spain, where their repsective monarchs maintain personal popularity of upwards of 75 and 85 %. Constitutional monarchies are in no way incompadable with democratic represenitive democracies with a government answerable to the electorate.

It depends on the succession law in use for Kings. Biblically, there is no record of a Jewish queen, or of women holding any authority at all for that matter other then Queen Sheba.

As so many other elements of the show has been reinvisioned, I would like to imagine so too has the succession law. If they practice the succession law most common in Western European monarchies today then the eldest child would be heir of the former ruler, so that after Jack would come Michelle.


However, there are some societies in which women are unequal politically. If this were so, then Michelle may not have any rights to the throne, and the leading magnets of the realm would probably sound out who would be the best candidate for kinship and possibly elect him for kingship.

If this were the case, then a connection to the prior ruler may be important... and even if she had no rights to the throne herself in this kind of system... any husband of Michelle may have a significant bid for the kingship.

I would disagree. Currently, the majority of S. Koreans favor a restoration of their monarchy, absent since 1910. The Spainish continue to suport their monarchy, reinstalled in 1979, and whose King Juan-Carlos stood down an attempted military coup that would have abolished the democratically elected congress. King Juan-Carlos and the modern Borbon dynasty have been known to be highly suportive of the democratic process. The Danish monarchy and Dutch monarchy too enjoys wide appeal because of this.

Italy lost its monarchy because of a greatly rigged referendum following WWII, and Greece lost its popular monarchy because of a simular miltary coup in which the government took over the government and installed a military dictatorship for generations.

In Nepal, which you cited, the constitutional monarchy was abolished because of the communist took over the government, following the autocratic and unpopular new king. The prior king had been killed in a palace gunning in which the crown prince... who was mentally unstable... went on a rampage and shot dead the royal family (his father and mother, amongst others) after they refused to let him marry who he chose. He then shot himself. So the events on Nepal are outside of the norm, with the Communists funded by China taking advantage after personal tradigy in the royal household.

Great Topic!!
Will you re-post here as well?
thanks!!

Based on information gathered from UNN report and the movie, this is the map I have drawn.
The map is based on the Bible map of David and Soloman from bible-history.com . As I have stated in this post, I believe the map of Kings is the upside down of Bible Map, therefor the map I draw was based on the upside down of the bible version.
Hope this map will help with Kings Wiki.

If you created this map we can use your creations on the Kings wiki.

Minor imput: I really do think that the Elysium Bay is in fact the Dead Sea. I believe it is an analogy of "The Elysian Fields", or the Elysian Plains, were the final resting place of the souls of the heroic and the virtuous. Considering that currently the Dead Sea is named the Dead Sea, it just seems to make sense. Does this make sense?

There is also this reference:

"The Arcadian River begins with Lake Orli, which flows south through the eastern part of the country."
"Gideon Park is the largest in Gilboa. It is larger than the Lydia National Park and Unity River Valley combined"

I do not know if this is true or not based off of the working hypophysis that Gilboa and environ is the Levant upside down, but it seems to me that Lake Orli may be Lake Tiberias?

And Port Prosperity probably is near the Gath border too, as it was once a Gath city until KinG Silas conqured it during the Unification Wars (Prosperity).

Also, if you could, remove the reference of the Philistines and Judea... and the "Wilderness of Judea". Those terms have not been introduced into the Kings Universe or Canon.

Great Job!!!!

D. Llewellyn

I created this map so you can use it freely.
As of the Elysium bay, I know what you mean. Although it says in UNN report - Climate and Geography that the Prosperity River flows Southwest into Elysium bay, I really think it flows North to the Dead Sea (or Elysium Bay), which make more sense than water from Dead Sea would flow upstream to river and up to the mountains. I will make change of that.



I have no idea where these landmarks are so you'll have to show me on paintings then.



I guess Port Prosperity should be by Mid-sea, not in Elysium Bay nor by Prosperity River. I can only assume that Port Prosperity can either be Jamnia Harbor, Joppa or Apolonia. My best bet is Jamnia Harbor. I'll go out a limb and add Port Prosperity at Jamnia.

As for Philistines or Judaea I can remove them no prob.

Map update version 2:

Do me a favor, with the current map... .transverse the map so that east is west and west is east. This would allow for the rivers to flow correctly.

Don't place any cities on yet.

Lake Tiberias is the smaller late that you had first listed as Elysium Bay. I think that is Lake Orli.

If you transverse the maps, then all the rivers flow in their correct geographic position according to canon. If this were the case, then one of those river systems may be the Unity River Valley.

I think it safe to assume that the Jordon River is the Prosperity River.

Lastly, Shiloh is listed within two hours of the front. If Gilboa-Carmel-Selah are about the size of New York State, how far would 2 hours be from there? The distance between New York City and say Baltimore?

Here is another great map.

edit: Also, I am thinking that Gilboa should be moved further north maybe? IDK, with Austria across the bay?

UNN Reports Map of Shiloh:

Here's the site of the Royal Kingdom of Gilboa.

http://royalkingdomofgilboa.com/

After much speculations, here is the official map of Gilboa

Fantastic!!!!

I wonder if someone could redo the image though? This was taken off of the tv yes? We need one polished off some.


And clearly this is not the whole of the map either.


That slither of land west of Gath may be Austeria yes?

I think so.

What are the three nations to the south of the Conqured Territores?

I read Gideon, Selah, but what is the third?


Additionally, I think what is named "Gideon" really is Gilboa. According to the UNN network, there are the Gideon Mountains and Gideon city, but no Gideon country is mentioned. I wonder where Carmel is located?

quoted from Micheal Green's Interview to Newsarama:



At least we know that a Listz and a Mozart had lived somewhere on the same planet...

I really like what I've seen so far and think this show has a great deal of potential. I like your discussion about Monarchy - but I should add that while the US is not run by a single Monarch - the government is still minipulated as a ruling body by a few people just like the Monarchy in this series seems to be. I think they should explore this side of things as well as other ideas that have been mentioned here - lots to think about as commentary on the present. May I suggest they remove the central bank from the king and place it under the control of the banks - as Amschel Rothchild said, "let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." With Cross minipulating the military and Ghent the media, the third estate, the economy, should come under yet another person (maybe a J.P. Morgan type, may I suggest played by Geoffrey Palmer?). Well just some silly ideas.