History of Westeros feels "wrong" and changes

[Drunkpeasant]

For a long time I have this feeling when I read about the history of the world and westeros that something is quite not right. I can't put my finger on it but just some dates feels like they are wrong to me. For example GRRM says Brandon the Builder, the founder of House Stark had lived in a time that is so past to the novels that it's like how we think about Noah or Gilgamesh in our world. So the Stark family is around for like at least 3500 years. These dynasties outlast thousands of years, have heirs, continue their lines against plagues, wars, invasions and magical monsters etc. And it's not just the House Stark, there are many families like this.

And the development of the land is just stagnant. Nothing really changes or happens. How can a land with such stable families ruling it not develop?

I think it all comes down to Winter. Because of the catastrophic winter cycle many, many people die, the population almost comes to an end....and then they recover, hence no development. Yet let's look at this with some similar events from our world. I think the Black Death in Europe would have similar effects to the Winter in Westeros.

Quote

The great population loss brought favourable results to the surviving peasants in England and Western Europe. There was increased social mobility, as depopulation further eroded the peasants' already weakened obligations to remain on their traditional holdings. Feudalism never recovered. Land was plentiful, wages high, and serfdom had all but disappeared. It was possible to move about and rise higher in life.

Quote

In Eastern Europe, by contrast, renewed stringency of laws tied the remaining peasant population more tightly to the land than ever before through serfdom.

Okay so the first quote, more populated Western Europe fits more to the Southern Westeros. I know in terms of effects the South was better than the North yet in terms of population this fits. So with a high populated land suddenly getting depopulated the feudal power of the Southern Lords should diminish. While the North, already having a small population and being ruled by a single house I think will consolidate around their feudal lords.

Quote

By 1200, virtually all of the Mediterranean basin and most of northern Germany had been deforested and cultivated. Indigenous flora and fauna were replaced by domestic grasses and animals and domestic woodlands were lost. With depopulation, this process was reversed. Much of the primeval vegetation returned, and abandoned fields and pastures were reforested.

Now for this effect, we also have the negative effects of the Winter in Westeros. The domestic woodlands will be also lost in Westeros but also most of the animals should die. Especially the big ones. The farms should be completely destroyed. In Europe this lead to innovations for labor savings. I think this should also happen in Westeros. There is very small amount of people left to take back the wilderness and create farmlands again. So with also the horses and bulls and cows etc big labor animals dying, you need some inventions to help you.

There are also other aspects like religion and stuff but I think just with this information it looks like very weird that Westeros stays almost exactly the same for thousands of years.

There are also other things that bug me, for example the date of the Aegon's Conquest. It was just 300 years ago. Yet when I am reading the books I always had the impression that it's way more earlier than that. I mean in 300 years the world forgots the magic and dragons and such. How is this possible when we have almost perfect records from 1700 even for trivial matters? I will put more detail in this post later when I have the time and clarify more how I feel something is up with the dates. In the meantime what do you think?

[house of dayne]

you have touched upon a flaw in the books most of us have chosen to willfully ignore ...i find it baffling that a language can survive the millenia, never mind a single house or family..but we suspend our disbelief for the sake of grrms narrative..if we question too closely or apply the knowledge of our own world the details of a fantasy novel, it is inevitable that the story will unravel..

[iggymcfly]

One thing to remember is that in the day and age of the books, a lot of the information we get isn't that reliable. Sure we have great information about the 1700s today, but how great was the information about the 900s in the year 1200? If the Starks say their lineage goes back 3000 years, does that mean that it really does? Or does it just mean that they use big numbers to make their house seem more powerful and prevent the smallfolk from rising up? There's records in the bible of people living for 1000 years written down all meticulously. Does that mean it actually happened? Any oral history passed along in a family from generation to generation is the ultimate in unreliable narration.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

It's not the history of Westeros, that's in any way wrong. It's the very limited knowledge the average Westerosi has of it. There are no history classes in non-existant schools, there are no museums, no history channel on tv, nothing.

Apart from two dozen Maesters and half a dozen hobbyists, nobody knows or cares about the "true" history, but everybody projects their surroundings backwards. Just like Renaissance painters depicting roman legionnaires as contemporary landsknechts or their predecessors putting King David in European Middle Ages chainmail.

 

There is the odd guy or gal pinpointing a very narrow spot of development. Like Jaime pinpointing upgrades in castle architecture (square to round towers) or Cersei's rebuilt, upgraded fleet. And some very, very few, highly educated guys with uncommon interests (Rodrik Harlaw, Sam Tarly, Lazy Leo Tyrell) outright stating that the known history is mostly bullshit. Three. Three out of how many people we met in the books?

 

We are limited to the knowledge of the PoVs. But the PoVs are neither educated nor interested.

[Drunkpeasant]

Good points. In this case I see that there are two options. Option 1 is that most of the history and background of the world is either fake and false or just half truth and this is the most likely option. And the Option 2 is that something is wrong with the history. Not in terms of the writer's mistake, because I do not want to include that into the discussion, the falsehood of the history comes from another source. I am a believer in the Maester's conspiracy theories and I think there is something going on with the real history records and maesters.

But if we say the option 1 is correct and that the timelines are not really that long or real. Then what about the Night's Watch having almost 1000 commanders? Do you remember anything from the part where Sam was researching the history of the Watch? Did he make any remarks about the history at that time?

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Please check this thread, it may answer most of your questions (and we lack information to answer the rest).

[MinotaurWarrior]

I don't think the lineage thing is that strange, because it's all legendary. Like the Arab descent through Abraham. Of course house stark is going to to "be descended" from "Bran the Builder". 

But I agree that the history makes no sense, mostly for the same reasons the whole contemporary society makes no sense. GRRM has a poor sense of scale, is neither an economist nor an agronomist nor a climatologist, et cetera. I think if if you just focus on the parts of world history that deal with the stories of named characters, it's great, but the rest needs to be ignored to be enjoyed. 

[TheSunspearKid]

3 hours ago, iggymcfly said:

One thing to remember is that in the day and age of the books, a lot of the information we get isn't that reliable. Sure we have great information about the 1700s today, but how great was the information about the 900s in the year 1200? If the Starks say their lineage goes back 3000 years, does that mean that it really does? Or does it just mean that they use big numbers to make their house seem more powerful and prevent the smallfolk from rising up? There's records in the bible of people living for 1000 years written down all meticulously. Does that mean it actually happened? Any oral history passed along in a family from generation to generation is the ultimate in unreliable narration.

Agreed. Too many people take characters at their words. Even the maesters can have agendas in how history is told.

[The Frosted King]

In my honest opinion, the World Book did more harm than good. I say this even as a pristine copy sits on the display table in my living room.

It kinda reminds me of the Star Wars midchorlians(sp?) reveal.

At least, thats how i feel about it. Going by the histories of the world book, i can't see how the Stark lineage has lasted as long as it did. Going by their defeats and losses, they should've went the way of the Ghiscari or Valyria long ago.

I say this as an avowed Stark supporter who even participates in a board taboo because i love the Starks so much.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Do you refer tonly o the "father-son"-mainline Starks - or do you include third cousins and conquerors raping female Starks and taking the name for their offspring?

[The Frosted King]

51 minutes ago, Bright Blue Eyes said:

Do you refer tonly o the "father-son"-mainline Starks - or do you include third cousins and conquerors raping female Starks and taking the name for their offspring?

I just refer to the losses that House Stark had suffered over millennia. 

Winterfell burned two or three times and taken once i believe. 

You know me breh, i love the direwolves.

I just don't think the world book presents them well at all.

 

 

 

[Raisin' Bran]

1 hour ago, Bright Blue Eyes said:

Do you refer tonly o the "father-son"-mainline Starks - or do you include third cousins and conquerors raping female Starks and taking the name for their offspring?

Do you include Bael the Bard in that count?

[Bright Blue Eyes]

8 hours ago, Raisin(g) Bran 2 Greenseer said:

Do you include Bael the Bard in that count?

Not exactly. While he fits the "unplanned takeover", he was neither conqueror nor rapist. At least as far as we know.

Tyrion is the one I'd have included.

[Lord Vance II]

18 hours ago, Drunkpeasant said:

And the development of the land is just stagnant. Nothing really changes or happens. How can a land with such stable families ruling it not develop?

This is what's always bugged me. The last major step seems to have been the Andals bringing steel 4,000-2000 years ago. I guess crossbows  and some of their seige weapons are kind of advanced. I hate comparing their world to ours in such a sense, but we discovered steel about 2,000 years ago ourselves...

I've seen people say that the existence of magic hampered normal technological advancement, but I kind of think that answer is bogus. I think if anything it would spur technology to try to close the gap. And it's not like magic is wide spread in the world, it's very concentrated in a comparative few and doesn't really affect the common man. 

19 hours ago, Drunkpeasant said:

I know in terms of effects the South was better than the North yet in terms of population this fits. So with a high populated land suddenly getting depopulated the feudal power of the Southern Lords should diminish.

I don't think an average winter caused mass deaths in the south. The North of course gets screwed, and a bad one would probably hit the Vale and upper Riverlands hard, but it's not like everywhere sees the same conditions as the North. As long as southern lords kept their supplies stocked they should be prepared for your average winter. Maybe if there was a particularly short summer between two winters there would be problems. But everyone knows sooner or later winter will come. 

Winter south of The Neck definitely wasn't fun, but I don't think it was repetitive mass kill-off it could be for the North. The very old, the sick, the weak, the young, poorest of the poor. But I think the average peasant would make it fine. Every once in a while it could cause mass casualties, like the Long Night or a short summer that doesn't allow for stockpiles to be replenished. 

[Shireen Purratheon]

46 minutes ago, Lord Vance II said:

This is what's always bugged me. The last major step seems to have been the Andals bringing steel 4,000-2000 years ago. I guess crossbows  and some of their seige weapons are kind of advanced. I hate comparing their world to ours in such a sense, but we discovered steel about 2,000 years ago ourselves...

I've seen people say that the existence of magic hampered normal technological advancement, but I kind of think that answer is bogus. I think if anything it would spur technology to try to close the gap. And it's not like magic is wide spread in the world, it's very concentrated in a comparative few and doesn't really affect the common man. 

The thing is, there has been progression and development since the Doom of Valyria. 

In that time, the seven kingdoms were unified, and there was even reform and sociopolitical developments during the reigns of Targaryen kings. 

The languages of Slaver's Bay and the Free Cities have developed from High Valyrian into the barely mutually intelligible dialects now. This is very similar to how the Romance languages each evolved from Classical Latin. Each region had its own dialect of Vulgar Latin like each city has its own dialect of Bastard Valyrian. 

Westerosi languages probably should have developed in a similar way, but that's probably a plot device to keep everything streamlined more than anything. 

There has been development in siege weaponry, scorpions and ballistae, as well as crossbows. The Myrish lenses seem to be a fairly recent technological development, as does the glass garden. Braavos has developed a complex banking system, and there are insurance salesmen there, too. Aurane Water's dromonds are made out to be some kind of development. 

The problem isn't the past four hundred years. The past four hundred years have been sort of realistic, if a little slow. The problem comes from before the Doom.

Quoting myself from this thread that I think OP would be interested in:

 

[Lord Vance II]

12 minutes ago, Shireen Purratheon said:

Each region had its own dialect of Vulgar Latin like each city has its own dialect of Bastard Valyrian. 

I think this should have happened more in Westeros. The Dornish are the only ones who are said to have any real distinct accent. 

Over thousands of years of virtual isolation, you'd think the North would have a very distinct dialect, if not a completely different language. 

And for that matter, where did the Common Tongue come from? Is it Valyrian derived too? Or is it just the latest edition of an author explaining how everyone knows English/whatever language it's printed in. 

15 minutes ago, Shireen Purratheon said:

Braavos has developed a complex banking system,

We have no idea how the Iron Bank actually works. Basic banking is very old. Insurance is fairly advanced though, I think it started with ship insurance during the Age of Exploration. 

[Bright Blue Eyes]

3 hours ago, Lord Vance II said:

And for that matter, where did the Common Tongue come from? Is it Valyrian derived too? Or is it just the latest edition of an author explaining how everyone knows English/whatever language it's printed in.

It's the language of Septons and Maesters. And in opposition to the Catholic Church, the Faith and the Citadel had an interest in spreading it beyond the upper crust.

 

Apart from that, there is just the natural progress of technological evolution you seem to be missing. About once every five hundred pages it is even referred to on page - but ASOIAF is not a scientific treatise on technological evolution. Most PoVs don't care one whiff, never even thinking about the (technological) circumstances their own grandparents grew up in.