#so like it's fairly obvious that the hyrulian royals are symbolic/religious leadership and nothing more

[blueskittlesart]

I get the impression from your posts that you don’t think there’s a future where Zelda would end up queen of hyrule (I can see where her becoming queen would undermine her entire arc of getting freedom from the painful expectations of princess/chosen etc), but how do you think that hyrules government will work beyond that? Is the population recovered enough for that to even be something established within their lifetime?

honestly, based on what we see in other games, hyrule was never REALLY a proper monarchy. I think it's pretty likely that the hylian monarchy was functionally a symbolic one, especially by the time that botw rolls around. in most games in the franchise, hyrule is largely made up of sort of mini single-race societies that function by defaulting to whatever small tribal government they happen to have. With a kingdom technically made up of multiple different species, each with their own differing cultures, customs, and even lifespans, it makes much more sense to have small governments united in name alone. i think any genuine attempt at true united government of such widely varied and relatively isolated races would not end well for hyrule (can you imagine being a hundred-year-old zora and being told that you have to listen to laws made by hylians who have been alive for a fraction of the time you have?? no way.) But by having a technical alliance under the symbolic hyrulian royal family, all of these races reap the benefits of alliance amongst each other while maintaining their relative independance. This is why most of the villages in hyrule are race-isolated and have their own governing bodies--the zora have a king, the rito, gorons, and gerudo have chiefs, and several of the hylian/sheikah villages have mayors or other governing bodies. these are the actual, functional governments of hyrule. the royal family serves both symbolic and practical purposes as a symbol of the kingdom's allyship and as an entity that can build, maintain, and direct a widespread military force (and i think there's also definitely a religious element to their rule over hyrule, as literal descendants of god in-universe,) but other than that it isn't doing a whole lot of actual governing. (the exception to this rule is MAYBE post-wind-waker on the new continent, and maybe immediately post-sksw, specifically because in both those cases the hyrulian royals would have needed to take a more active governing role in order to rebuild the country.) so with that in mind, I think botw and totk make it pretty clear that this method of small government works pretty well for hyrule. I think the most zelda would EVER be is a sort of ambassador between villages and races, especially as hyrule becomes more intermingled in the aftermath of the calamity. small democratic government largely appears to be working for hyrule and for zelda in totk, so i think that's the road she would choose to continue down rather than attempting to reinstate a monarchy that never actually did that much in the first place.

#hyrule's government is fascinating to me bc like obviously the hylian monarchy isnt REAL bc not a single other race in the country actually #defaults to their governance. even the sheikah have their own village governments in most games #the zora literally have their own secondary monarchy despite also supposedly being under hyrulian governance #so like it's fairly obvious that the hyrulian royals are symbolic/religious leadership and nothing more #EXCEPT for when they're building an army. that's the only true power they seem to have #and i think that's probably to do with the religious aspect. i think the reason a symbolic monarchy was able to build an army like what the #did in botw is because they were functionally fighting a religious war against. the devil. lmao #anyway. yeah #asks #zelda analysis