Oldtown is weird

[Sigella]

47 minutes ago, TheSeason said:

I noticed you didn't bother to actually answer any of my questions, or proffer a valid argument in favor of your own stance (only attempting to dismiss me out of hand and roll your eyes like you think no debate is necessary, the points I made are so absurd) so yeah, we're at an impasse. I'm satisfied I answered your question three times over, and since you refuse to engage, all I can do is wash my hands. It's evident to me you're not interested in a debate or a serious answer to your question, but in reaffirmation of your supposition. 

Since you brought up those "flaws" (my rebuttal, for anyone else who might deign to read this exchange): 

1. I never said "change" was avoidable (and your supposition isn't about "change" at all; it's about a refusal to accept the good reasons why Duskendale is a mere port town and Oldtown is a flourishing metropolitan city).  I said change (that is, your trade empire) can't be forced (overnight, without immense effort or funding) simply because you wish it to be. Change also includes decline, which is the kind of change that happened in Duskendale. Sometimes places like Duskendale do bounce back, but natives to other cities, regions, nations, and kingdoms rarely pay for it (and it's only in the last three hundred years that Oldtown and Duskendale were in the same kingdom). Oldtown is flourishing, Duskendale is declining. The Defiance of Duskendale (about seeking royal support for a city charter--so they could compete with King's Landing, which is why the king, based at King's Landing, smacked it down) is actually proof of its increasingly rapid decline and demise. Randyll Tarly (and traitorous Roose Bolton) bringing war to the area, might have given its economy a small boost (it depends upon the damages done to its infrastructure), but definitely not on the scale you're talking about, and scale matters. As I mentioned before, Oldtown is already trading with the people of Duskendale, just not in the way you think they should. 

2. I never said "shipping stuff is impossible and...require modern day logistics." You take my words out of context to try to make them sound absurd and your argument more logical. What I argued is that the trade empire you want Oldtown-Duskendale to build (because Duskendale is "closer" to the Narrow Sea, so that automatically equals "more money"--it doesn't) requires modern day infrastructure and a globalized community. The Romans had excellent infrastructure, and even they had difficultly controlling the far reaches of their empire, and had to use extreme brutality in an effort to keep it afloat. The Caliphate, the Ottomon Turks, the Byzantines, the Chinese, the Egyptians, etc., all cared about their infrastructure. The Valyrians cared about their infrastructure so much that their roads seem almost indestructible to the peoples that survived to use them to this day (like the Roman roads appeared after their empire collapsed). I'm sure Old and New Ghis, Slaver's Bay, and others cared about their infrastructure too. Infrastructure does promote exchange and trade, cultural and economic and scientific, but if it isn't there to trade like an empire, you can't trade like an empire. Infrastructure, logistics, and empires (of one sort or another) do go hand-in-hand, but the Westerosi are still using dirt tracks and hugging the coast for most of their seafaring. You can't trade like an empire if you can't build like an empire. 

3. Fair enough. It's not like I find any of your scant rebuttals convincing either. Since you asked the question, you ought to do some research and answer it yourself. I'm sure there's a scholar out there who's argued more convincingly that you can't store 10,000 apples in a vat built to hold 1,000. Citations and all.

4. It's also a fact of life, fyi. Castles don't rise up over night. Neither do harbors or silos or shipyards or roads or ships or warehouses, or any other infrastructure. And when they do rise up (especially rise up en masse), someone has got to pay for them. Someone had to pay to build and expand Rome (very many someones). Someone will have to pay to build and expand Duskendale. There are modern day developed nations that can't afford to rebuild their crumbling infrastructure--especially when it was built mostly all at once in one massive initiative to get people back to work and out of poverty, as well as to unify the nation for ease of travel for armed forces, like in the US (interstates built wide and sturdy enough to transport intercontinental missiles, not mere cars or trucks; cars and trucks take advantage of the ease of travel, and the government lets them because it kicks back cash and makes the people think it was actually built for their use and convenience, so they'll be happy to shell out for its upkeep. The interstate infrastructure was the US's largest engineering project, and is technically still ongoing; roads in the US are like ancient Egypt's great pyramids or ancient China's Great Wall)--and have resorted to "patch and pray" techniques, so I really would like to know where you think Duskendale (described as a large port town) is getting the money and material to overhaul theirs in a single go. 

And please, please, please show me where I said, quote, "no person would look for new ways to make money EVER," because I don't remember saying that (and isn't that a logical fallacy too?). You can try to twist my words all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that your suggestion (I've yet to see an actual argument in favor of it) is bust. I've made a valid argument (claiming that I haven't is insulting to my intelligence and yours), but if you don't want to examine it with an open mind, then we are most definitely at an impasse. Adios. Good luck researching your question. 

1. I highly doubt that Defiance of Duskendale/Roose Bolton/Radyll Tarly has ANY bearing on what should/could have happened 2500 years ago...

2. You said:

On 2017-10-04 at 2:00 AM, TheSeason said:

you are talking about a trade empire that requires the modern-day infrastructure and globalization to support! 

So. Yeah you did

3. Perhaps you should research medieval trade?

4. A period of +/- 2500 years isnt to be considered "overnight" you know... And it doesn't all have to be done at once either. Hence absurdity-claims on my part.

[TheSeason]

5 hours ago, Sigella said:

1. I highly doubt that Defiance of Duskendale/Roose Bolton/Radyll Tarly has ANY bearing on what should/could have happened 2500 years ago...

2. You said:

So. Yeah you did

3. Perhaps you should research medieval trade?

4. A period of +/- 2500 years isnt to be considered "overnight" you know... And it doesn't all have to be done at once either. Hence absurdity-claims on my part.

You really do enjoy moving goal posts, don't you, but I don't play such childish games. 

I said

Quote

you are talking about a trade empire that requires the modern-day infrastructure and globalization to support!

which is absolutely not, as you claim:

Quote

"shipping stuff is impossible and...requires modern day logistics"

Any reasonable person will see the difference. Nor did I ever say, again as you pulled from betwixt: 

Quote

"no person would look for new ways to make money EVER,"

as you are unable to produce that quote also. No one puts words in my mouth. I've already got enough of my own. 

You are the one who puts forth reductive, manipulated, and absurd arguments. You are also the one who needs to do a bit of research on medieval trade--your entire premise

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 5:12 AM, Sigella said:

Firstly the Arm broke 12 000 years ago, I'm thinking of the period of time after it broke.

Picture this:

Gardener-King: "Hey you have a port that lies much closer to Essos, wanna make a deal and sell our produce there and share the profits?"

Duskendale-merchant: "Sounds awesome, start shipping!"

How is this such an unthinkable scenario? I don't get the problem.

is based upon modern day capitalism and free trade treaties, increased ease of transport and logistics, and globalized community. In a feudal society a random baseborn merchant (most of them are commoners, technically peasantry) from one kingdom does not have the authority to make such a deal on behalf of his king, nor apply for a new or rewrite his town charter (making it a city charter) bypassing his overlord, nor overhaul his town infrastructure, including the harbor itself, to accommodate this deal (nor would he have the funds to pay for it anyway, nor could he get that kind of credit from the IBB to account for the lack, having no worthwhile collateral), and the Gardner King might well take offense that this baseborn merchant has grown too big for his britches to dare try to negotiate and treat with him as an equal, with no authorization from his king and overlords. In a society stalling in the middle ages for approximately ten thousand years, anything that takes less than a thousand to accomplish seems like a significant (and sometimes scary) change (e.g., six centuries later, the Freys still feel like "new money" and take offense to any perceived slight), nor is it easy to accomplish such change in a society that can't manage to cobble their most important interstate system despite almost two hundred years (give-or-take, depending upon when in his reign he built it, or if it took his entire reign) passing since its completion (there are still places where the kingsroad is just two narrow dirt tracks!), so whilst "overnight" is hyperbolic, it aptly describes the rapid speed at which you think "change" (that is, with positive change only qualifying in your books, building a new infrastructure) should happen for Duskendale. 

Besides, you're the one who asked the question, pleading ignorance. It seems to me, you learned in pre-k how to ask a question, but you didn't learn how to let someone else answer you, so blood, sweat, and tears become your only option. But that's fair enough. People better remember the answers to questions they looked up themselves, than the answers to questions someone else told them, so there's no shame in putting in the hard work. If you're interested enough in your inquiry to do so. 

I doubt I'll be replying to you again, so you can have the last word. I bet you'll like that. 

 

 

[Reekazoid]

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 3:17 PM, TMIFairy said:

OTL examples:

- Angles came to Britain -> England

- the Bojuvari came to Noricum - > Bavaria

- the Magyars came to Panonia -> Magyarország

- Goths came to North Iberia -> Catalonia

- Longobards came to Galia Cisalipjna -> Lombardy

- Bulgars came to Thrace - > Bulgaria

The list just goes on and on ...

 You're right of course , so allow me to clarify what I meant  by an argument using the reverse logic.   The initial claim I was disputing was that the  Mander  River region in the  south took it's name from House Manderly.  

 My argument is that it's far more likely that the refugees arrived under the leadership of  Someguy   So-and-so , King of the Mander, took up residence  in the north, and were called Manderly, cuz that's where they came from.

 

 Your examples all show that place names can  beget from the cultures that immigrate to or conquer them . I had stated that many of the names of the cultures that do the immigrating or conquering come from the region they came from.    I accept that both are equally likely, but neither example supports a region being named after a single family.

 

 

[direpupy]

On 10/7/2017 at 7:01 PM, Reekazoid said:

 You're right of course , so allow me to clarify what I meant  by an argument using the reverse logic.   The initial claim I was disputing was that the  Mander  River region in the  south took it's name from House Manderly.  

 My argument is that it's far more likely that the refugees arrived under the leadership of  Someguy   So-and-so , King of the Mander, took up residence  in the north, and were called Manderly, cuz that's where they came from.

 

 Your examples all show that place names can  beget from the cultures that immigrate to or conquer them . I had stated that many of the names of the cultures that do the immigrating or conquering come from the region they came from.    I accept that both are equally likely, but neither example supports a region being named after a single family.

 

 

In tWoIaF the house Manderly is already mentioned as using that name long before they went to the North (there feud with house Peake was quite famous) So while it is still possible they named themselves for the river it would have to have happened before they were driven from the Reach to the North.