Why did the Tully's betray the Tagaryen?

62 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

8 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Whether you remembered or not, you're questioning someone who does.  If you don't remember, don't comment and accept that someone who does remember, remembers correctly.  Or go look up the relevant text  https://asearchoficeandfire.com/

Utter bs. I am not questioning anyone because basically I don't care, I am saying that I don't remember, which is neutral.

8 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Well, actually, yeah, in terms of army sizes, we can be pretty sure.  It's extraordinarily rare for entire potential to be levies to be raised during the Targaryen conquest.  For example, during the Dance, only 2,000 Northerners participate.  The Butchers Ball involved approximately 9,000 total troops, inclusive of those Northmen.  The point being, when you speak of "all of Westeros" you also have to point out that in these continental wars, full levies are rarely raised.  When the Kingdoms are fighting independently, they raise vastly larger forces.  55,000 men come from the Reach and the Westerlands for the Field of Fire, which is the largest battle we know of until Redgrass Field.

So your "whole of Westeros" bloodbaths rarely actually include the whole of Westeros.  At the Trident, the Dornish commit about 40% of their strength.  The rebels field an army significantly under strength at the Trident (or significantly under potential strength).   As we've seen, the North rarely commits its whole strength - even Robb only takes about half his possible strength with him.  The War of the Ninepenny Kings is fought mostly with troops from the Westerlands - a whopping 25% of their potential levies.

I am really bored at this point and since you can't prove that in all the other wars between two or more regions it was only one family that caused chaos in the whole Westeros you can't prove me wrong. Again the Targs single handedly caused bloodbaths in the whole of Westeros in less than 300 because of they felt like it. That is not the same with smaller conflicts between two regions in thousands of years.

Edited by Jon's Queen Consort

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thought regarding when Aegon I conquered the seven kingdoms...

When Aegon came through initially to conquer the seven kingdoms, he raised house Tully up into his service after they supported him.  That was a brilliant move on his part since The Riverlands also act as a chokepoint for most of the land routes to King's Landing when you take into account that several borders are rivers.  It was also a great political move for the Tully's at the time.  They took a gamble and were raised to high lords while Aegon also showed that he rewarded those who decided not to be fried to a crisp.  During Aegon's reign and that of his smarter descendants, there were tours throughout the kingdoms to show that they were there for the realm and not just ruling from KL.  Some went as far as to visit the Night's Watch, and doing cross country tours to mingle with the lords and smallfolk is a strategy that a lot of politicians still use today to great benefit.

There was mention of Dany at one point and what she'll do once she gets to KL/the seven kingdoms.  If she's wise, she'll "conquer" and then let Tyrion rule as Tywin did for her father.  I'd actually love to see Tyrion as king whether Dany retires to Dragonstone or spends a lot of time on grand tour to drum up support and keep her throne.

Politically, Dany, if she wins out, would be smart to let Tyrion be her hand because he's good at it.  He also knows the the seven kingdoms better than she does.  She'd also be really wise to grant boons and enlist help from the stronger houses in the various kingdoms.  I also hope that the movement started by Thoros and Beric amounts to something and gives the smallfolk some sort of governance multilevel governance and courts, switching away from the old liege lord scheme which is really a hindrance to peace.  If you give the smallfolk and towns the ability to rule themselves and some sort of ability to govern themselves, they don't have to rely on their lords, liege lords, etc... for all dispensation of rules/laws.  Also, given their track record of insane king, okay king, good king that dies young, etc... doing so might give the seven kingdoms more stability than they have had recently.  I always thought that Beric's little band, or their remainders, may turn out to be the instigators of a Magna Carta like document that holds lords and the king/queen accountable for their actions...or a reaffirmation of such because we don't know if the existing law codes include due process.  Even if they do, they aren't usually carried out well/have been forgotten.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now