How is it possible that houses in Westeros last for so long?

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

With so many houses existing in the brinks of extinction during the last events in the books how is that possible that houses like the Boltons managed to survive thousands of years? Now House Bolton is elevated to a position greater that it ever had before but there are no lesser branches to carry out their name if Roose, Walda and Ramsay die, which is very likely. I know the War of the Five Kings and its aftermath represent a conflict of great magnitude but at the same time the period after the Conquest consists of years of relative calmness and fewer wars compared to the constant squabbling we had before. How is that possible that such belligerent houses managed to maintain their legacies while in the present some of them are in such a poor state?

[Lord Corlys Velaryon]

Firstly, there's a number of Houses that are in perilous situations with the main-line like the Boltons simply because that's how GRRM wanted it for the series, because tension. The show of course just takes this to ridiculous levels instead though. We don't know for certain whether there isn't lesser Bolton branches in the North, perhaps even in small keep/s of their own on land sworn to the Dreadfort. After all, GRRM has said that there is likely lesser Stark branches elsewhere in the North besides Winterfell. Even if not, there would be Bolton descendants in the female-line that would have a blood claim to the Dreadfort if all of the current Boltons (unless she has a child by Roose/the Frey forces somehow manage to take it & back her up by force, Walda has no claim on the Dreadfort) died. It's just we don't how far back that is & into which House/s, though perhaps a couple of generations & into neighbours like the Hornwoods, Karstarks or Umbers. Like Tywin-Joanna & Rickard-Lyarra, I'm guessing there has likely been a cousin marriage within the House in the past few generations for the main-line to only be Roose during the series before Ramsay is legitimised.

Staying with House Bolton, historically they were arguably even more powerful than they are now. Atm among the Northerners, Roose can really only rely on the Dustins & Ryswells besides his own men & even then, I think Barbrey & her family will eventually desert him anyway. Perhaps as recently as 1000 years ago, they controlled what is now the Karstark lands (roughly the size of their own) down to the Sheepshead Hills in what is now Hornwood land. In centuries before that, they may have controlled even more land. The Dreadfort is also notoriously strong - IIRC, never known to have been taken by storm. Indeed, the last time the Boltons rebelled some centuries ago (after the c.700BC rebellion where they lost the Karstark lands at least), King Harlon Stark had to starve them out for two years before the Dreadfort surrendered. A king who would've been able to call up the strength of most of the North & it was easier (even if with the greater agricultural production of summer, it's still the poor production level of the North) for him to pull a Mace Tyrell (though likely with only a say Mathis Rowan token force at the most) than just throw men at storming the castle.

Besides the rebellion during Harlon Stark's reign, it seems the Boltons have been loyal vassals to Winterfell over the last thousand years & indeed have been sworn to Winterfell since around the Andal invasion sometime before c.2000BC. It's mainly before the Andal invasion & during the Age of Heroes that the Starks & Boltons were really at each other, so it's not like the Boltons have been especially belligerent in more recent times. As to more recent history to help explain why the main-line of House Bolton is so small, well; Bolton/s could easily have died in conflicts like the Wot9pK (Rickard led Northern forces during), the Third Blackfyre Rebellion (the North is absent from the 1st, lackluster 2nd & wouldn't have been there in time for the brief 4th, but this one is a possibility), the wildling invasion under Raymun Redbeard in 226AC when Stark & Umber forces at least were present (quickly marshaled Bolton cavalry may have played a part), the Skagosi rebellion c.200AC (most likely given Skagos' somewhat proximity to the Bolton lands & that the Skagosi were raiding) &/or Daeron I's conquest of Dorne (the Northerners participated in this & even the heir to Winterfell at the time, Rickon, was killed at Sunspear). Some younger son/s may have joined the NW as the flayed men is among the sigils in the Shieldhall. Some surely died due the harshness of the Northern climate, especially winter. Mother/s possibly dying in childbirth. At sea ...

[The Marquis de Leech]

Martin prefers drama over logic. Same thing with the 700 foot-high Wall.

[StoneColdJorahMormont]

Possibly that the North kept to themselves... Southerners to themselves.... etc... so any disputes were dealt with by sending ravens... no direct contact... less chance to take hostages or do something drastic therefor avoiding all out war usually coming to some sort of quick agreement.

It's only when they start mingling and getting each others backs up... that things get out of hand till there is no coming back from it... kidnapping/murder of important family member/lord...... etc.

 

 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

It's an epic fantasy story, where everything is older, stronger, more powerful, taller, longer, thicker than it realistically would have any right to be.

Just as with Aragorn's 3500-year-old claim to the throne of Gondor.

[Ser Tristan Flowers]

Besides the obvious fantasy elements I also believe Westerosi nobles do a lot of work to keep prominent families in power. Lords taking on the name of their mother didn´t happen much at all in reality, in Westeros it must´ve happened all the time. Making sure great houses stay in charge by name establishes tradition and a status quo that might benifit your own house one day.

 

[Drekinn]

It's a fantasy story and it's possible time is measured differently. The legends are said to date like 8000 years, from a real life perspective that's insane. So it's more likely the legends involving the ancient kings date a few thousand years less. Maybe 2500-3000.

Martin also said he regrets setting up such high dates and small ages to certain characters, but it was the first book in the series, he definitely didn't think it'd be dissected so much.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

11 hours ago, Belthasar said:

With so many houses existing in the brinks of extinction during the last events in the books how is that possible that houses like the Boltons managed to survive thousands of years?

Which Houses are on the brink of extinction? There are other people named Stark and Arryn running around the North and Vale, those Houses are not going to go extinct.

Now I imagine the reason, the most logical reason, that so many Houses have lasted so long is that when the next in the line of succession is an heir from a female line then they simply change their name to the Lordship they inherit.

And there may even be the odd example of someone without the blood of the House they take over changing their name to maintain power.

 

 

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

1 hour ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Which Houses are on the brink of extinction? There are other people named Stark and Arryn running around the North and Vale, those Houses are not going to go extinct.

Now I imagine the reason, the most logical reason, that so many Houses have lasted so long is that when the next in the line of succession is an heir from a female line then they simply change their name to the Lordship they inherit.

And there may even be the odd example of someone without the blood of the House they take over changing their name to maintain power.

 

 

I imagine that is possible. Are there any passages in the books though indicating there are other nobles with last name Stark in The North besides Martin's word on it? We know they have closer kin in the Vale so the other Stark might be very scattered and unknown. Nevertheless I find it odd that we have such a vast family tree in recent history for houses like the Lannisters and the Tyrells and just a main line for the Starks and Baratheons for example. Rickard and Steffon had no brothers and no uncles? If they did why didn't we hear something about them yet?

[thelittledragonthatcould]

3 minutes ago, Belthasar said:

I imagine that is possible. Is there any passages in the books though indicating there are other nobles with last name Stark in The North besides Martin's word on it?

Surely GRRM's word on the matter should be good enough.

Rickard, an only child and/or Ned, who grew up in the Vale, were clearly not close with them so they have not been relevant to the story. They'd be minor nobles at best only being able to summon a small amount of men. There is no reason why Robb should have been in contact with them even if they were with him in the South.

There are suggestions that around a hundred years of ago, during the time of Dunk and Egg, there was some succession squabbles amongst the Starks. It could well be the reason why Rickard married a cousin and the lack of other Starks at Winterfell.

 

3 minutes ago, Belthasar said:

We know they have closer kin in the Vale so the other Stark might be very scattered and unknown. Nevertheless I find it odd that we have such a vast family tree in recent history for houses like the Lannisters and the Tyrells and just a main line for the Starks and Baratheons for example.

The Stark family tree is as detailed as the Tyrell and Lannister one.

The Baratheon one is not, however there has been little need to reveal other Baratheons as they would still be behind the living Tommen, Myrcella, Stannis and Shireen in the pecking order.

3 minutes ago, Belthasar said:

 

Rickard and Steffon had no brothers and no uncles? If they did why didn't we hear something about them yet?

Rickard definitely had no brothers, we are told that in the series. 

Steffon may or may not have had brothers or sisters. We know of a possible uncle of his; "One day our great-uncle Ser Harbert told me to try a different bird. I was making a fool of myself with Proudwing, he said, and he was right." Stannis Baratheon turned away from the window"

It is more than possible that there are other Baratheons, they have not just been relevant to the series.

Castles are only so big, while second and third brothers can live at Winterfell/Storm's End/etc. there comes a time when their sons and grandsons (the other Starks and Baratheons) have to make their own way in the world and leave in less grand circumstances which in turn means less contact with the main branch of their House as they are more likely to socialize with other high rankings Houses, some of whom might be related to them through the female side.

To stay relevant in Westeros a noble needs lands other wise they dwindle in influence. There might not be a lot separating Ned's great grandfather and his brothers on the social ladder but there is a quite a lot separating their great grandchildren.

[dornishdragon]

It is not difficult for Houses in ASOIAF universe to last so long. Just as it happened in medieval times one of the major objectives of their family members is to ensure the continuity of those houses by having a lot of children. Even with wars some of those sons should be able to survive, if not from the main branch atleast from some other branches. 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

On 23/07/2016 at 7:18 PM, Belthasar said:

Nevertheless I find it odd that we have such a vast family tree in recent history for houses like the Lannisters and the Tyrells and just a main line for the Starks and Baratheons for example. Rickard and Steffon had no brothers and no uncles? If they did why didn't we hear something about them yet?

That doesn’t seem too far-fetched to me. I think it’s quite plausible that some houses have several branches, while others have dwindled in recent history.  Some are luckier, have less deaths (it makes sense that a Northern house has less members reaching adulthood compared to the more comfortable Tyrells or Lannisters). Others may have just had recent batches of male issue. Tywin had a number of male cousins and three brothers, one of which had 3(?) sons himself. In a generation or two, if it hadn’t been for the war/Jon joining the NW at least, the Starks looked set to have three major male branches through Rob, Bran and Rickon, two female and an illegitimate branch. These things tend to go up and down drastically generation to generation. The Targaryens at the time of the Hedge Knight were awash with male lines, in just a couple of generations they dwindled almost completely.

In terms of the length of time certain houses have ruled, it does seem by our own world’s standards completely implausible that one house has existed and been prominent for something like 8,000 years, but this fits with the distorted timeline of Planetos. It seems like throughout that period the world has existed with very few changes, either technological or social. This may just be written off as “because it’s a fantasy novel”, or it may be that it’s somehow linked to the length of the seasons and the existence of magic in the world. Time does seem to be different there.

[Trajan117AD]

I find this a bit troubling myself, especially considering he does a good job keeping the narrative so nuanced with so much specific back story. I'm not really satisfied with the "lesser houses" idea, mostly because when we read about them it's usually in the context of them attempting to raise themselves above or to the same level of the main houses (I'm thinking of the story of the Starks specifically, who at one point wiped out oneof their lesser Stark houses, and on another splintered off into a new house: the Karstarks).

It becomes even more unlikely when viewed under the lens of history. During the ancient Roman republic, the Romans, a famously law-based society, a man could be legally adopted into a family where upon he was granted essentially the same rights and claims as natural born family members. You have cases of Clodius, a Patrician, who wanted to become a Tribune, an office open only to plebeians. He had himself adopted by a plebian (who was actually younger than him) and from that point on he was a plebian and that man's legal son. In spite of this, large powerful Roman families still ended up disappearing. The Julii most notably.

In Westeros, the only thing that comes remotely close to adoption is the legitimizing of bastards. The reality of these houses staying together even a fraction of the time that some of them are supposed to is only second in unlikeliness to their erratic seasons. And while yes, it's a fantasy series, everything else is analyzed, debated and sifted through with a fine tooth comb so much, that to dismiss this as just fantasy is... Unsatisfying at best. 

In the case of the Starks; we're talking about 8,000 years! The fact of the matter is that it's just impossible.

I have no idea how long a year is, but you'd think if we try to compare it ours, it would be longer. If you have single seasons lasting years, you'd think it'd be longer.

If we're talking about families it gets EVEN MORE difficult to maintain a family line, with the same name, when illegitimate children are given completely different last names.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Projection: I can't imagine the world being any different from how I, my mother, and her mother before her have known it; ergo, it has always been like that since the beggining of time.

(That's if you want a "logical" explanation, because fantasy's bigger, shinier attributes works well enough for me.)

[Lord_Ravenstone]

2 hours ago, Trajan117AD said:

I find this a bit troubling myself, especially considering he does a good job keeping the narrative so nuanced with so much specific back story. I'm not really satisfied with the "lesser houses" idea, mostly because when we read about them it's usually in the context of them attempting to raise themselves above or to the same level of the main houses (I'm thinking of the story of the Starks specifically, who at one point wiped out oneof their lesser Stark houses, and on another splintered off into a new house: the Karstarks).

It becomes even more unlikely when viewed under the lens of history. During the ancient Roman republic, the Romans, a famously law-based society, a man could be legally adopted into a family where upon he was granted essentially the same rights and claims as natural born family members. You have cases of Clodius, a Patrician, who wanted to become a Tribune, an office open only to plebeians. He had himself adopted by a plebian (who was actually younger than him) and from that point on he was a plebian and that man's legal son. In spite of this, large powerful Roman families still ended up disappearing. The Julii most notably.

In Westeros, the only thing that comes remotely close to adoption is the legitimizing of bastards. The reality of these houses staying together even a fraction of the time that some of them are supposed to is only second in unlikeliness to their erratic seasons. And while yes, it's a fantasy series, everything else is analyzed, debated and sifted through with a fine tooth comb so much, that to dismiss this as just fantasy is... Unsatisfying at best. 

In the case of the Starks; we're talking about 8,000 years! The fact of the matter is that it's just impossible.

I have no idea how long a year is, but you'd think if we try to compare it ours, it would be longer. If you have single seasons lasting years, you'd think it'd be longer.

If we're talking about families it gets EVEN MORE difficult to maintain a family line, with the same name, when illegitimate children are given completely different last names.

A year is the same as ours. Also 8 thousand years in an exagerrated number. 

And the Stark male line has probably died out numerous times. Female descendants just take the Stark name.

Bael the Bard's son for example 

[Magnar of Skagos]

A big portion of it is just the fact that it is epic fantasy. Everything is more mystical, bigger, more crazy, etc. It is however, kind of weird that all these houses have reigned for 8000 some-odd years and now they're ALL on the verge of extinction all right at the same time.

[Trajan117AD]

5 hours ago, ShadowCat Rivers said:

Projection: I can't imagine the world being any different from how I, my mother, and her mother before her have known it; ergo, it has always been like that since the beggining of time.

(That's if you want a "logical" explanation, because fantasy's bigger, shinier attributes works well enough for me.)

Not for me.

If that's the case, why bother trying to figure out what really happened during the Long Night? Who was A'zor A. really, and was the sword he forged really a sword, or is it symbolic for something else? Who was the last hero? Is he the same person as AA? etc. If we just should accept things as part of the fantasy genre then there's no reason to have these forums or countless podcasts trying to figure out what's happening between the lines. 

GRRM is a great author there's no doubt, but he's not infallible. He's just as deserving to have plot holes pointed out as any other writer.

[BalerionTheCat]

Some are questioning why the scientific knowledge has not evolved, why the Night Watch has survived. Basically, GRRM has made stable over 10,000 years what could be stable for no more than 300 in our reality. But it is fantasy, no worse than dragons and zombies.