Jump to content

Landless younger sons


rmanoj

Recommended Posts

The cousins of the Lannisters of Casterly Rocks all seem to have incomes of their own. The Tyrells, too, by the way. Lazy Leo has quite a lot of coin. But they don't have lordships of their own. But they certainly could hold lands (even if Kevan doesn't), own ships, goldmines, be granted certain tax revenues, etc.

The lords controlling the big cities and harbors most certainly have a much more incomes on a variety of fields than those lords who effectively feed on the food their levies and vassals give them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, devilish said:

Does he need that? Lets say Tarallen is Devilish Lannister's younger brother. Dad is not 100% sure that I will treat you fair so he had given you enough money to support yourself and your future family  if needed (not an estate because if I am an Ahole I'll strip that away from you, so he gave you money to flee if necessary).

Now assuming we've got a decent relationship then I'll probably give you a position of trust. Why shouldn't I? You well educated, fiercely loyal to the family and you're basically taught since birth to treat the Lord Paramount with respect. Also friction between us will be interpreted as weakness by our bannermen and instability to our realm. That's not good for the business. Therefore its only fair that I'll give you a position of trust (possibly that of a castellan or advisor). That means free accommodation in the castle for you and your future family on top of a huge salary. Your position makes you in constant contact with me. Your future wife will become my wife's friend, you will mingle with me everyday and our future children will live together. Hence loads of noblemen and merchants would court your hand to have their daughter marrying you and hence have a permanent indirect link to me. That means a huge dowry to you (which may include lands) and your new step dad/brother in law will make sure to be extremely friendly with you else his advantage may easily turn into a huge disadvantage (imagine if your step dad decides not to treat you fair, you could easily whisper nasty stuff to me and guess whom I would believe?)

A Lord Paramount second son doesn't need an estate. Its given to him because he's who he is

Your using lannisters as examples. They probley have the most cash in westeros. While with the other great house it would be easier to give an estate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tarellen said:

Your using lannisters as examples. They probley have the most cash in westeros. While with the other great house it would be easier to give an estate

Its not about money but power. May I remind you that the Lord Paramount second son is still his father son. In an era were favours were granted to family with total disregard to accountability and bribes were a regular thing, the Lord Paramount second son was a great matchup for any nobleman or rich merchant's daughter especially since it would guarantee the gratitude and respect of possibly three generations (father, brother and nephew). Also in an era were ignorance reigned supreme and loyalty ran low it was in the Lord Paramount interest to keep his brother close by appointing him in a position of trust. That would in turn earn him huge sums of money which no estate would ever be able to generate.

 

Actually by giving his brother an estate the Lord Paramount wouldn't only strip him from having direct and constant contact to the real power in the region but would also mean having him away of home, therefore easy prey to ambitious bannermen who may convince him to rebel against his own brother. Not to forget that the middle ages was an era characterised by plagues and wars. The slightest of things such as a flu would probably be enough for the second or even the third son to find himself the direct heir. Even if the Lord Paramount had enough male children to secure his lineage there was absolutely no guarantee that he would live long enough to make sure his sons were old enough to reign wisely. That second or third brother may well turn into the protector of the realm with huge influence on who will be granted titles and lands for the next couple of years. That would bring loads of cash to people 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, devilish said:

Its not about money but power. May I remind you that the Lord Paramount second son is still his father son. In an era were favours were granted to family with total disregard to accountability and bribes were a regular thing, the Lord Paramount second son was a great matchup for any nobleman or rich merchant's daughter especially since it would guarantee the gratitude and respect of possibly three generations (father, brother and nephew). Also in an era were ignorance reigned supreme and loyalty ran low it was in the Lord Paramount interest to keep his brother close by appointing him in a position of trust. That would in turn earn him huge sums of money which no estate would ever be able to generate.

 

Actually by giving his brother an estate the Lord Paramount wouldn't only strip him from having direct and constant contact to the real power in the region but would also mean having him away of home, therefore easy prey to ambitious bannermen who may convince him to rebel against his own brother. Not to forget that the middle ages was an era characterised by plagues and wars. The slightest of things such as a flu would probably be enough for the second or even the third son to find himself the direct heir. Even if the Lord Paramount had enough male children to secure his lineage there was absolutely no guarantee that he would live long enough to make sure his sons were old enough to reign wisely. That second or third brother may well turn into the protector of the realm with huge influence on who will be granted titles and lands for the next couple of years. That would bring loads of cash to people 

 

Couldn't they just split there time between there estate and the family court? Most younger sons of royalty did that. Also why did the royalty of real life give estates to  there younger sons when they could just kept them at court? Also this is a medival socity its land that gurrentes power

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could but it would be very unwise to financially weaken the main branch and give cadet houses too much independence unless of course the land is so big that there is need of good administrators around (ex Starks and Karstarks). Instead it would be better for other houses to give their own estates instead in a bid to seal an enduring alliance with Lord Paramounts by having their own daughters marrying of to the Lord Paramount second/third sons. That would weaken these bannermen while strengthening the main house. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Perhaps there is something similar to that then and that is what Kevan is alluding to when he tells Cersei he can look after himself.

"I hold no lands, that is true. But I have certain incomes, and chests of coin set aside. My own father forgot none of his children when he died, and Tywin knew how to reward good service. I feed two hundred knights and can double that number if need be."

It is also implied that Stafford would be due some kind of inheritance as well

Two of the captives were Lannisters of Lannisport, distant kin to the Lannisters of Casterly Rock, but the third was a young squire, Stafford Lannister, the eldest son and heir of Lord Tytos's late brother, Ser Jason.

So perhaps something was set aside for the sons of the Lords of the Rock (and their children).

Yes, it would make sense for Ser Kevan to receive a life interest in various estates as well as properties in Lannisport, rather than owning them outright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The cousins of the Lannisters of Casterly Rocks all seem to have incomes of their own. The Tyrells, too, by the way. Lazy Leo has quite a lot of coin. But they don't have lordships of their own. But they certainly could hold lands (even if Kevan doesn't), own ships, goldmines, be granted certain tax revenues, etc.

The lords controlling the big cities and harbors most certainly have a much more incomes on a variety of fields than those lords who effectively feed on the food their levies and vassals give them.

I think Lazy Leo and his father would be comfortably off.  But, the fact that the former is at the Citadel, and the latter is serving Mace Tyrell's     vassal (albeit, the Hightowers are very distinguished vassals) suggests that neither of them got much of the family wealth.

My guess is that once you get to more distant Tyrell and Lannister cousins, they probably have to look out for themselves.  Having the Tyrell or Lannister surname would probably open some doors to you, and the head of the family would probably feel an obligation to assist your career, but you'd have to get ahead on your own merits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tarellen said:

Couldn't they just split there time between there estate and the family court? Most younger sons of royalty did that. Also why did the royalty of real life give estates to  there younger sons when they could just kept them at court? Also this is a medival socity its land that gurrentes power

Lords Paramount aren't royalty.  There would always be estates that reverted to the Crown, either because they were just granted for life, or     because a family died out without heirs, or because lords were attainted, or suffered confiscation of lands.  So, royal younger sons could be     provided for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SeanF said:

I think Lazy Leo and his father would be comfortably off.  But, the fact that the former is at the Citadel, and the latter is serving Mace Tyrell's     vassal (albeit, the Hightowers are very distinguished vassals) suggests that neither of them got much of the family wealth.

My guess is that once you get to more distant Tyrell and Lannister cousins, they probably have to look out for themselves.  Having the Tyrell or Lannister surname would probably open some doors to you, and the head of the family would probably feel an obligation to assist your career, but you'd have to get ahead on your own merits.

Not necessarily. The Tyrells effectively are a very well-oiled power machine. They put their cousins and kin in crucial positions in the entire Reach. Moryn Tyrell commanding the City Watch of Oldtown isn't a comfortable post to provide for him but a means to put an eye on the Hightowers and to ensure that nothing happens in Oldtown without the knowledge of Highgarden.

And the same should be the reason why Leo and Gormon joined the Citadel in the first place - somehow I doubt that a Tyrell (or a Hightower) maester usually ends up serving some minor lord at the far end of the world. They would be the first candidates for the high offices of the Citadel and/or the office of the Grand Maester.

Pate tells us pretty straightforward that Lazy Leo can afford to be lazy in his studies and that he can easily get away with murder. The Tyrell name has a magical sound in the Reach, that much is clear, but he also has a lot of coin he spends carelessly. He certainly isn't a 'poor cousin' of Mace's.

The idea that people like Stafford effectively do not own anything doesn't make much sense. They may not hold any lordly lands and bear no lordly titles, but that doesn't mean they have no incomes. The Lannister wealth is so huge that the lords really can share it. If the Lord of Casterly Rock kept everything for himself and forced his huge brood of kinsmen to come begging to him to buy themselves clothes, horses, or shoes, the house would either have long ripped itself apart or the lord would have been forced to get rid of his family members, throwing them out of Casterly Rock. Hell, if George is smart he'll reveal that there are distant cousins of the Casterly Rock branch of the family who have been given the right to live in this or that part of the cavernous halls until such time as their line dies out. The dimensions of that castle are insanely huge, and considering that CR is a castle, a mine, and a harbor all at the same time the lords are in need of every help they can get. 

The richer houses really seem to be able to keep their younger sons, brothers, uncles, and cousins happy and loyal by providing for them without necessarily granting them any lordship (although that happens, too, Garlan being the most prominent example). However, it seems as if only the king can grant lands and titles, not a mere lord paramount. That in itself could explain why there are no lordly cadet branches of the major houses (the Targaryens did not permit something like that). We know that Tytos Lannister left incomes to all his children, suggesting that a lord can grant certain incomes to his younger children without making them lords in their own right. But he certainly could make them landed knights just by giving them lands (if they are knights already) or simply noblemen with some land. There must be people who aren't knights or lords but who own a decent piece of land, live in a keep, keep servants and live off the crops of their tenants. Those have yet to be mentioned, but one assumes that many distant cousins of the lordly lines live such a life, being sort of on the brink between a commoner and a nobleman (could be true for the Gulltown Arryns, for example).

And there are, of course, many really rich merchants and craftsmen. A man like Tobho Mott most certainly is richer than many a lord considering his trade and the sums he charges for his wares. You don't have to live in a castle to be able to actually afford a castle. If the back story of the Butterwells is true they have only been recently ennobled and only become lords because they made a fortune in cows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Lazy Leo and his father would be comfortably off. But, the fact that the former is at the Citadel, and the latter is serving Mace Tyrell's vassal (albeit, the Hightowers are very distinguished vassals) suggests that neither of them got much of the family wealth.

My guess is that once you get to more distant Tyrell and Lannister cousins, they probably have to look out for themselves. Having the Tyrell or Lannister surname would probably open some doors to you, and the head of the family would probably feel an obligation to assist your career, but you'd have to get ahead on your own merits.

Not necessarily. The Tyrells effectively are a very well oiled power machine. They put their cousins and kin in crucial positions in the entire Reach. Moryn Tyrell commanding the City Watch of Oldtown isn't a comfortable post to provide for him but a means to put an eye on the Hightowers and to ensure that nothing happens in Oldtown without the knowledge of Highgarden.

And the same should be the reason why Leo and Gormon joined the Citadel in the first place - somehow I doubt that a Tyrell (or a Hightower) maester usually ends up serving some minor lord at the far end of the world. They would be the first candidates for the high offices of the Citadel and/or the office of the Grand Maester.

Pate tells us pretty straightforward that Lazy Leo can afford to be lazy in his studies and that he can easily get away with murder. The Tyrell name has a magical sound in the Reach, that much is clear, but he also has a lot of coin he spends carelessly. The certainly isn't a 'poor cousin' of Mace's.

The idea that people like Stafford effectively do not own anything doesn't make much sense. They may not hold any lordly lands and bear no lordly titles, but that doesn't mean they have no incomes. The Lannister wealth is so huge that the lords really can share it. If the Lord of Casterly Rock kept everything for himself and forced his huge brood of kinsmen to come begging for him to buy themselves clothes, horses, or shoes, the houses would either have long ripped itself apart or the lord would have been forced to get rid of his family members, throwing them out of Casterly Rock. Hell, if George is smart he'll reveal that there are distant cousins of the Casterly Rock branch of the family who has been given the right to live in this or that part of the cavernous until such time as their line dies out. The dimensions of that castles are insanely huge, and considering that CR is a castle, a mine, and a harbor all at the same time the lords are in need of every help they can get.

The richer houses really seem to be able to keep their younger sons, brothers, uncles, and cousins happy and loyal by providing for them without necessarily granting them any lordship (although that happens, too, Garlan being the most prominent example). However, it seems as if only the king can grant lands and titles, not a mere lord paramount. That in itself could explain why there are no lordly cadet branches of the major houses (the Targaryens did not permit something like that). We know that Tytos Lannister left incomes to all his children, suggesting that a lord can grant certain incomes to his younger children without making them lords in their own right. But he certainly could make them landed knights just by giving them lands (if they are knights already) or simply noblemen with some land. There must be people who aren't knights or lords but who own a decent piece of land, live in a keep, keep servants and live off the crops of their tenants. Those have yet to be mentioned, but one assumes that many distant cousins of the lordly lines live such a life, being sort of on the brink between a commoner and a nobleman (could be true for the Gulltown Arryns, for example).

And there are, of course, many really rich merchants and craftsmen. Men like Tobho Mott most certainly are richer than many lords considering his trade and the sums he charges for his servants. You don't have to live in a castle to be able to actually afford a castle. If the back story of the Butterwells is true they have only been recently ennobled and only become lords because they made a fortune in cows.

Thanks. That's very interesting.

One of the great careers for younger sons and daughters, in medieval Europe, was of course, the Church. Some Bishops, Abbots, and Prioresses enjoyed incomes equivalent to the highest lords.

I don't get the sense that the Faith enjoys equivalent wealth and prestige in Westeros. The Most Devout are doubtless well off younger sons and daughters of the elite, but we don't read about the Faith controlling vast estates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SeanF said:

Lords Paramount aren't royalty.  There would always be estates that reverted to the Crown, either because they were just granted for life, or     because a family died out without heirs, or because lords were attainted, or suffered confiscation of lands.  So, royal younger sons could be     provided for.

Really the crown could do that in westeros? Then how come most targayan younger sons weren't provided for? Also I thought the lord paromounts didn't lose most of there power basicly making them royalty in there regions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Thanks. That's very interesting.

One of the great careers for younger sons and daughters, in medieval Europe, was of course, the Church. Some Bishops, Abbots, and Prioresses enjoyed incomes equivalent to the highest lords.

I don't get the sense that the Faith enjoys equivalent wealth and prestige in Westeros. The Most Devout are doubtless well off younger sons and daughters of the elite, but we don't read about the Faith controlling vast estates.

I'm pretty sure the last High Septons came all from the greater or middle tier noble houses. And we know that there is a least one Frey among the Most Devout, and we know that there were two Targaryen septas (Maegelle and Rhaena).

The Faith had little real power since the reign of Jaehaerys I but it still seems to be it is still insanely rich. The Faith lent Robert and Joffrey about a million golden dragons, not exactly a small sum. And it doesn't look the Faith has become impoverished over that. Quite the contrary, actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. That's very interesting.

One of the great careers for younger sons and daughters, in medieval Europe, was of course, the Church. Some Bishops, Abbots, and Prioresses enjoyed incomes equivalent to the highest lords.

I don't get the sense that the Faith enjoys equivalent wealth and prestige in Westeros. The Most Devout are doubtless well off younger sons and daughters of the elite, but we don't read about the Faith controlling vast estates.

I'm pretty sure the last High Septons came all from the greater or middle tier noble houses. And we know that there is a least one Frey among the Most Devout, and we know that there were two Targaryen septas (Maegelle and Rhaena).

The Faith had little real power since the reign of Jaehaerys I but it still seems to be it is still insanely rich. The Faith lent Robert and Joffrey about a million golden dragons, not exactly a small sum. And it doesn't look the Faith has become impoverished over that. Quite the contrary, actually.

That's true, but where does the money come from? We encounter lots of rich nobles, but no rich clergy running their estates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lords Paramount aren't royalty. There would always be estates that reverted to the Crown, either because they were just granted for life, or because a family died out without heirs, or because lords were attainted, or suffered confiscation of lands. So, royal younger sons could be provided for.

Really the crown could do that in westeros? Then how come most targayan younger sons weren't provided for? Also I thought the lord paromounts didn't lose most of there power basicly making them royalty in there regions?

Once the Kings were downgraded to Lords Paramount, they lost power, even if they didn't lose lands and wealth. So, they can't create lordships, or make treaties, or attaint lesser lords, any more.

I see no reason to believe that younger Targaryen princes weren't well-provided for. But, they had a massive rate of mortality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SeanF said:

That's true, but where does the money come from? We encounter lots of rich nobles, but no rich clergy running their estates.

There are septries and motherhouses and such all over the place. We never see them, but they seem to be there. Or have been there, at least in the Riverlands. Presumably quite a few of them controlled vast holdings having their own smallfolk working as their tenants, just like medieval monasteries did. Else the Faith simply couldn't be very rich. But the richest septons/orders most likely are based in the big cities - KL, Oldtown, Lannisport, Gulltown, and White Harbor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I'm pretty sure the last High Septons came all from the greater or middle tier noble houses. And we know that there is a least one Frey among the Most Devout, and we know that there were two Targaryen septas (Maegelle and Rhaena).

The Faith had little real power since the reign of Jaehaerys I but it still seems to be it is still insanely rich. The Faith lent Robert and Joffrey about a million golden dragons, not exactly a small sum. And it doesn't look the Faith has become impoverished over that. Quite the contrary, actually.

 

That's true, but where does the money come from? We encounter lots of rich nobles, but no rich clergy running their estates.

I suspect "gifts" (or bribes, in some cases) contributed a lot to the Fath's wealth. Remember that Tywin commissioned a lavish new crown for the HS after the riots. And the Great Sept was, iirc, built for them gratuitously by Baelor. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that gifts to the Faith were fairly common.

I wonder if there are also taxes paid directly to the church. Given their vast wealth it almost seems inevitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Tarellen said:

Really the crown could do that in westeros? Then how come most targayan younger sons weren't provided for? Also I thought the lord paromounts didn't lose most of there power basicly making them royalty in there regions?

All the Targaryen younger sons are very well provided for. The Targaryens just have a huge mortality rate with their house being nearly perpetually on the brink of extinction.

Daemon Targaryen got his brother to support him into gaining an independent kingdom, Maekar got Summerhall (though it is unclear if he could pass the title to his children or not, him gaining the Iron Throne rendered the problem moot), even Daemon Blackfyre got a lordship. Other younger sons got titles at court, often gaining the title of Hand. Considering the power and wealth any member of the Small Council has it isn't surprising that some would pick that over becoming a small lord. Between Maegor the Cruel and the Dance of the Dragons the Targaryens didn't have the people to establish a cadet branch.

8 hours ago, SeanF said:

I think Lazy Leo and his father would be comfortably off.  But, the fact that the former is at the Citadel, and the latter is serving Mace Tyrell's     vassal (albeit, the Hightowers are very distinguished vassals) suggests that neither of them got much of the family wealth.

My guess is that once you get to more distant Tyrell and Lannister cousins, they probably have to look out for themselves.  Having the Tyrell or Lannister surname would probably open some doors to you, and the head of the family would probably feel an obligation to assist your career, but you'd have to get ahead on your own merits.

Being the head of a major city watch is way more than comfortably well off. He's the commander of one of the largest permanent force in Westeros and one of the most important people in the second largest city on the continent which means he can liberally skim off bribes to supplement his already massive salary. The Hightowers are related to him, he basically can't get fired so why would Moryn Tyrell prefer to have a small castle in a small lordship when he can be in what's probably Westeros' finest city having a cushy job and dining with Lord Hightower every other day?

Why wouldn't Lazy Leo want to be a Maester with a fast track to Archmaester or a position at the court of a major lord? He lives in luxury his entire life, has plenty of money and gets to skip both arranged marriage part and the swing a sword or be called a wimp part that most nobles have to go through. He's not going to get sent to some out of the way, poor lordship, he can't fail his training, he has no worries and obligations a lord or landed knight would have, etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prince Daeron is 'heir to Summerhall' in the coat of arms made by George for THK comic. Summerhall was Maekar's hereditary seat in 209 AC.

And we also know that Daeron eventually becomes Prince of Summerhall himself, most likely after Aerys I names Maekar Prince of Dragonstone in the wake of Prince Aelor's death. Daeron later becomes Prince of Dragonstone after Maekar ascends the throne, but prefers to be styled Prince of Summerhall because Dragonstone is such a gloomy place. Whether Summerhall then passes to Prince Aerion isn't clear yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...