Jump to content

Poorer region: North or Dorne?


The Frosted King

Recommended Posts

The North, for sure. Dorne has Oldtown, a rich port city with lots of trading going on. Dorne seems to have a lot of opulence with the orange gardens and palaces of Sunspear etc. The peasants are probably as poor as peasants anywhere tend to be, of course. But the North has only one small city, White Harbor, and only one other known settlement of any kind (Winterfell Town), and it's a vast wilderness of woods and hills. Even not in winter, the North is very cold and undeveloped, so its crop yields are going to be pretty marginal. Many places are noted for being rich in nothing but trees; Bear Island for one, presumably Last Hearth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The North, for sure. Dorne has Oldtown, a rich port city with lots of trading going on. Dorne seems to have a lot of opulence with the orange gardens and palaces of Sunspear etc. The peasants are probably as poor as peasants anywhere tend to be, of course. But the North has only one small city, White Harbor, and only one other known settlement of any kind (Winterfell Town), and it's a vast wilderness of woods and hills. Even not in winter, the North is very cold and undeveloped, so its crop yields are going to be pretty marginal. Many places are noted for being rich in nothing but trees; Bear Island for one, presumably Last Hearth.

Oldtown is not part of Dorne, it's part of the Reach. The Hightowers are loyal to the Tyrell's of Highgarden.

White Harbor is actually one of Westeros' largest cities, and one of the wealthiest. It's the closest port to Braavos and thus is a great source of trade. The Manderly's are quite wealthy too; White Harbor is said to rival in silver what Casterly Rock has in gold.

Doran Martell confides in Arrianne that Dorne can raise the fewest men of all Seven Kingdoms too, and that their military prowess is vastly overrated. This is to their advantage, obviously...

My money's on Dorne being the poorer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dorne. Winter or Summer, Dorne is mostly unproductive desert. The North is harsh in the Winter, but the land is productive in the summer. Dorne also doesn't have any cities or major ports (correct me if I am wrong), which hampers trade. The North at least has White Harbor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Dorne, the Stormlands, and the Iron Islands are the three poorest regions. They lack large cities and major trading hubs that most of the other regions have: Oldtown in the Reach, Lannisport in the Westerlands, Gulltown in the Vale, White Harbor in the North, and King's Landing in the Crownlands. The Riverlands doesn't seem to lack for wealth, likely thanks to being in a fertile region.

As for the North vs. Dorne, I'd say the North likely has an advantage in natural resources. Dorne seems pretty desolate, while the North has vast forests, game for meat and pelts, fishing regions, and I think I recall a mention of silver mines. It seems like the North is more of a land of haves and have nots. Umbers and Mormonts seem pretty poor, but the Manderlys are filthy rich and the others are in between.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The North has silver mines close to White Harbor as intheswamp suggests. I wouldn't call the Umbers poor as they likely have a larger, more productive fief than the Mormonts' Bear Island. The North also has access to very good fishing grounds. Stone and timber are plentiful in the North with a larger proportion of the land being arable.

The North also has a larger population providing more wealth for the region. The North is also known for its fur pelts as the Russian principalities of cities like Novgorod, fur was a major sector of their economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dorne is the poorest, they have an arid wheater, they have no huge city, just villages, so we can imagine they have a weak ecominic power, Oldtown is in The Reach, not in Dorne.

The North has White Harbor, one of the biggest cities in Westeros, the fifth and the smaller of the existent cities, as the major part of Westeros is rural, you know, formed by villages, farms etc.

Dorne has the smaller army

the good thing for me is that they are very loyal to the Targaryens, I'm a Targ loyalist so I like the Martells and Dorne itself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the North being a third of Westeros (I saw Ran's estimate in his Youtube video), that is actually a slight underestimation, caused most probably by not including the Neck, Skagos, Bear Island etc.

The North in fact covers around 1.2m square miles out of Westeros's total 3m square miles.

It therefore covers around 40% of Westeros's territory, not 33%.

As to the original question, I would say that Dorne has a higher per capita income, but the North has a greater total wealth.

As an example, if Dorne has 2.5m people, and the North has 6m, if each Dornish person produces 1.5 silver Stags per year, while each Northman produces just 1 silver Stag per year, then Dorne has a higher per capita income, but their total annual "GDP" is 3.75 million silver Stags, while the North will have a total annual "GDP" of 6 million silver Stags.

Per person Dorne is wealthier, but the North's total wealth is greater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After some pondering on the matter, I would estimate the comparitive "GDP" figures of the different regions as follows (using 1 Silver Stag for mere comparative purposes as the base line):

Dorne - 2.5m people x 1.25 stags = 3m stags per year

Stormlands - 3m people x 1.5 stags = 4.5 million stags per year

North - 6 million people x 1 stag = 6 million stags per year

Vale - 4m people x 2 stags = 8 million stags per year

Riverlands - 5m people x 2 stags = 10 million stags per year

Reach - 12m people x 2 stags = 24 million stags per year

West - 4m people x 5 stags = 20 million stags per year

A few comments:

Note that a richer region will not necessarily have a higher per capita GDP than a poorer region. Unlike today's advanced economies, increased food output will probably have a more direct link to population growth, meaning your population density may increase in proportion to your production increases, thus retaining a stable per capita GDP.

For example, the Reach may be richer than the Stormlands by far, but the increased food output probably immediately translates into a higher population growth, thus diluting the per capita GDP until it stabilizes back at the Stormlands level. The net result, however, is a far greater total economic output, due to the Reach being 4 times as populous as the Stormlands, and thus having 4 times its economic output.

The one I grapple with is the Reach/West comparison. I cannot really see the West having a total economy larger than that of the Reach. Per capita it is much higher, which translates into massive reserves for the ruling House Lannister, but if you add the Hightowers to the Redwynnes to the Tyrells and all the other Reach lords, I reckon the Reach's combined wealth is greater than that of the much smaller West.

So in terms of wealth I'd have Dorne at the bottom, the Reach at the top, with the North somewhere in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reach - 12m people x 2 stags = 24 million stags per year

West - 4m people x 5 stags = 20 million stags per year

The one I grapple with is the Reach/West comparison. I cannot really see the West having a total economy larger than that of the Reach. Per capita it is much higher, which translates into massive reserves for the ruling House Lannister, but if you add the Hightowers to the Redwynnes to the Tyrells and all the other Reach lords, I reckon the Reach's combined wealth is greater than that of the much smaller West.

This strays into being woefully off topic...

I have to disagree with your assessment of the Westerlands being less wealthy overall than the Reach.

As readers, and those who pay attention to SSMs and do extracurricular reading, we know that the region of the West is by far "the richest of the Seven Kingdoms." While we know that House Lannister is, also, by far the wealthiest family in Westeros, Martin also stresses several times that the region itself of the West is the richest region, as well. I suggest that the GDP per capita (if such a figure truly matters in a feudal society) and the overal GDP of this region to be the highest.

Also, keep in mind that while a higher population tends to increase productivity, it does not necessarily have to increase monetary productivity in a feudal society. Most people only bring their labor to the table. A larger population means more labor - which is a valuable good in such a society - and labor is not always paid in money, like it is in a modern economy. So while the overall labor pool (and thus potential value) might be considerably higher in The Reach, the actual height of monetary wealth (not land or labor) simply must lie in The West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...