UFT

Northern Independence vs Bend the Knee

42 posts in this topic

so should the north be its own separate kingdom like pre conquest days?

and then others follow suit somehow, for example stannis can be a storm king, edmure is a river king. and mace is king of the reach

Edited by UFT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Stannis is in no position to offer the North independence. If he did he would lose one of the only Kingdoms that are sworn to him. That's all presuming he'll be able to defeat the Boltons and Freys and unite the North under Stark rule who he desperately needs to support his claim as their King. The people ruling in Tommen's name would see no reason to grant the North anything more then they already have, which is giving the Bolton's the position of Wardens of the North sworn to the Crown held by Tommen. (f)Aegon and Jon Con have their hands full in the South and will continue to for the immediate future.

Further more the North is currently fractured and fighting a civil war. If the Bolton's win they won't want independence from King Tommen as a big part of their claim as Wardens and ruling Lords of the North was giving to them by King Tommen. If Stannis and the Northerners who support him defeat the Boltons they still will have no Stark to crown as their king even if they wanted too. If they did have Rickon Stark he will most likely be in Davos's hands. Rickon Stark will owe Stannis for defeating the Boltons and Freys and retaking his home for him. I don't see him turning around and asking for independence after Stannis and his followers just gave him back Winterfell and restored' the Starks position as the ruling Lords of Winterfell and the North.

Edited by Ralphis Baratheon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not talking about current wartime. 

i meant in general, should there be seven kingdoms or one kingdom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're talking about the near term, then no, they definitely should not be independent. Being part of the Seven Kingdoms is why they've got Stannis, and the southern men on the Wall, and it could bring them Dany and her dragons, Harry the Heir with the Vale armies, or just generally people wanting to fight the Others at the Wall or Winterfell instead of the Neck. Changing that right now would be stupid.

In the long term, once the Others and the Boltons are gone and they've gotten through the winter and everyone who's going to starve has already starved, I don't think it makes much difference either way.

The North's biggest problem is that feudalism sucks, and Westerosi-style feudalism especially sucks. Since they had the same feudal structure when they were independent before Aegon, and it's the same old lords that proclaimed Robb their King, and they all seemed big into their oaths and duties and privileges, I don't see that changing because of independence. Maybe if the Manderlys gets King Rickon on the throne as their puppet, they'd push for some progress toward proto-mercantilism, closer ties with Braavos, urbanization, etc. But really, I think it's more likely for political or economic change to come to the Seven Kingdoms as a whole from the current crises than to the North separately.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if there were 7 separate kingdoms I would think at least 2 or 3 of them would be at war with each other at all times. I know there is a civil war (WOT5K) taking place right now but this seems to be a rarity, where as if there were 7 sovereign states it would be the norm. 

 

That being said, to have a strong centralized government you need the power to back it up. Without the Targs and their dragons I don't know if it is possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s no precedent for either Edmure or Mance to be kings, besides the Riverlands is part of Robb’s Northern kingdom whilst the Reach have allied with the Baratheons of Kingslanding. Additionally the Vale is most likely going to join the Northern kingdom through Sansa’s potential marriage to Harry. 

As for the rest…

Greyjoys: I don’t think they’ll last, would love George so much if he just killed off the Iron Born entirely. 

Baratheons: unless they legitimise one of Robert’s bastards (most likely Edric because he’s highborn) that dynasty is going to end with either Stannis or Shireen, who I don’t think will live that long. 

Lannisters: they’re part of the original kingdom 

Martells: If crowning Aegon doesn’t work I can see them going independent, they’re the only kingdom who never bent the knee so why not 

Edited by Pikachu101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Northern independence?

Meh!

The North is like Scotland - constantly whining about "Sassenach opporession" but actually leeching off English taxpayer largess.

Defends the Seven Kingdoms from the Wildlings (Others)? Yeah - a country with 3M-5M people fails to maintain the Night's Watch.

Even at the lower end of the usual population guesstimates - 3M, i.e. about 1,5M males, sending ONE man in a THOUSAND (0,1%) means 1500 (saying - fifteen hundred) men. Under Ned The Incompetent Wolf the Watch is down to 1200 men -and that's with men from the Lower Six.

The three hundred years of Westertos unity has turned the North into a bunch of handout seekers.

If the North breaks off then - unless it is blessed with a competent Ruler (preferably several in a row) - the Wildlings (Others) will have the North for breakfast.

And a new Wall will be built below the Neck to keep the Savages out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, UFT said:

im not talking about current wartime. 

i meant in general, should there be seven kingdoms or one kingdom

They should be separate Kingdoms all 9 of them: Westerlands, Crownlands, Stormlands, Dorne, Vale, The North, The Reach, Iron Islands, Riverlands. As the only thing we have seen so far in the books is that you cannot control such wast Kingdom without dragons, because you lack technology to do so. It is logistically impossible to keep 9 kingdom together. I think it is kind of a miracle that Targs managed to stay on the throne for 150 years without dragons. For example if North or the Vale decide to demand independence no-one can pass Moat Cailin/Bloody Gates. If you somehow get around Moat Cailin and invade North it is so large you will never be able to hold it, especially if you have winters that last 3 years. Also Dorne has a lot of natural defenses, with deserts and mountains, remember Dorne was never actually conquered. Westerlands have a lot of mountains and forest for natural defenses. Stormlands also have mountains and Storm's end. Only parts of Kingdoms that can be taken and controlled are the Reach, Riverlands, Iron Islands and Crownladns.

Take this scenario North demands independence and holds the North. With big army at Moat Cailin and rest in castles. You have rest of the 8 kingdoms. You cannot pass Moat Cailin and also Reeds are fucking you with guerrilla warefare. You can decide for naval invasion but land is wast and you have no supplies unless you take some castles (Northerners hid most of the food in their castles). Let say you somehow manage to take Winterfell. What do you do now? Best would be granting the North to Boltons, but after you leave the North he can declare independence. Will your vassals follow you again in such a bloody war or will they decide to be independent as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

Northern independence?

Meh!

The North is like Scotland - constantly whining about "Sassenach opporession" but actually leeching off English taxpayer largess.

Defends the Seven Kingdoms from the Wildlings (Others)? Yeah - a country with 3M-5M people fails to maintain the Night's Watch.

Even at the lower end of the usual population guesstimates - 3M, i.e. about 1,5M males, sending ONE man in a THOUSAND (0,1%) means 1500 (saying - fifteen hundred) men. Under Ned The Incompetent Wolf the Watch is down to 1200 men -and that's with men from the Lower Six.

The three hundred years of Westertos unity has turned the North into a bunch of handout seekers.

If the North breaks off then - unless it is blessed with a competent Ruler (preferably several in a row) - the Wildlings (Others) will have the North for breakfast.

And a new Wall will be built below the Neck to keep the Savages out.

 

TWOIAF—The Wall and Beyond: The Night’s Watch

The vast expense in sustaining the Wall and the men who man it has become increasingly intolerable. Only three of the castles of the Night's Watch are now manned, and the order is a tenth of the size that it was when Aegon and his sisters landed, yet even at this size, the Watch remains a burden.

Some argue that the Wall serves as a useful way of ridding the realm of murderers, rapers, poachers, and their ilk, whilst others question the wisdom of putting weapons in the hands of such and training them in the arts of war. Wildling raids may rightly be considered more of a nuisance than a menace; many wise men suggest that they might be better dealt with by allowing the lords of the North to extend their rule beyond the Wall so that they can drive the wildlings back.

Only the fact that the Northmen themselves greatly honor the Watch has kept it functioning, and a great part of the food that keeps the black brothers of Castle Black, the Shadow Tower, and Eastwatch-by-the-Sea from starving comes not from the Gift but from the yearly gifts these Northern lords deliver to the Wall in token of their support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

TWOIAF—The Wall and Beyond: The Night’s Watch

 

The vast expense in sustaining the Wall and the men who man it has become increasingly intolerable. Only three of the castles of the Night's Watch are now manned, and the order is a tenth of the size that it was when Aegon and his sisters landed, yet even at this size, the Watch remains a burden.

 

Some argue that the Wall serves as a useful way of ridding the realm of murderers, rapers, poachers, and their ilk, whilst others question the wisdom of putting weapons in the hands of such and training them in the arts of war. Wildling raids may rightly be considered more of a nuisance than a menace; many wise men suggest that they might be better dealt with by allowing the lords of the North to extend their rule beyond the Wall so that they can drive the wildlings back.

 

Only the fact that the Northmen themselves greatly honor the Watch has kept it functioning, and a great part of the food that keeps the black brothers of Castle Black, the Shadow Tower, and Eastwatch-by-the-Sea from starving comes not from the Gift but from the yearly gifts these Northern lords deliver to the Wall in token of their support.

 

 

 

Great quote.

What I was going to say is that the Watch was actually much stronger BEFORE the Iron Throne existed. It numbered 10,000 men, in fact, when Aegon burned Harrenhal. The North in general appears to have been more prosperous and powerful before the existence of the Iron Throne. They did just fine for 7700 years, in fact.

All those  taxes  paid to Royal tax collectors in White Harbor - Manderly kept it for a year and built a fleet of 50 ships with it. The North has no need of the South. It didn't for 7700 years of Winters, long and short, mild and harsh. Why would that have changed in the last 300?

Edited by Free Northman Reborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 The North has no need of the South. It didn't for 7700 years of Winters, long and short, mild and harsh. Why would that have changed in the last 300?

The North went soft :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

The North went soft :)

There may actually be some truth in that yes. Ned is nothing like the hard faced men Bran sees in the crypts.

Edited by Free Northman Reborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

There may actually be some truth in that yes. Ned is nothing like the hard faced men Bran sees in the crypts.

Ned is far cry from Theon the Hungry Wolf or Brandon Ice Eyes ...

I'm going by memory so it could be Brandon the Hungry Wolf and Theon Ice Eyes :D.

For me one of the things I'd like to see GRRM expound on more is the impact of having Vale-raised Ned (with Southron and Sevener wife to boot) as Lord of the North.

If this even makes a difference, thus telling us whether there is - or not - some sort of cultural divide at the Neck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The North should have declared Independence, as the others should have, after the Mad King had been overthrown, Rhaegar's children were already murdered by Tywin's order. Viserys and his pregnant mom, exiled former Queen Rhaella had fled to Dragonstone. That was the perfect opportunity. Dorne would have been for it after what they lost. The Northeners would have loved it etc. Robert could have lived without it and probably would have been happier for it. The problem is that the Iron Throne is like the Ring of Power in The Lord of the Rings books. The Iron Throne is seductive for the power it dangles as well as the prestige but it is in fact cursed.

Edited by A Ghost of Someone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be an independent Kingdom, at least for a while, again. 

By the way, I say that If Stannis loses, Roose will become a king.

If you ask me we need to see a tough northern king like the legendary kings, Theon Stark for example. If only Rickon survives and all his traumas make a beast of him. I'd like to see a badass Stark ruler/king, not another Ned or Robb. Tough luck for that wish, I predict. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

It should be an independent Kingdom, at least for a while, again. 

By the way, I say that If Stannis loses, Roose will become a king.

If you ask me we need to see a tough northern king like the legendary kings, Theon Stark for example. If only Rickon survives and all his traumas make a beast of him. I'd like to see a badass Stark ruler/king, not another Ned or Robb. Tough luck for that wish, I predict. 

Roose will never become a king, needs crowns support in order to rule the North. 

Same I hope all the traumas make him a monster like Joffrey and Ramsey were good times friend. No but seriously he seems like a very rowdy child might grow up into a warrior Lord. Though he will probably have mommy issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Roose is dead and probably off page. Mancy, Ramsay or someone loyal to them. Probably Ramsay, the writing is on the wall, pregnant wife with legit kid etc. No one likes Ramsay, he is unreasonable and cruel. Ramsay thinks this strengthens his position but in fact it weakens it completely. The only reason all of the Northern Houses are not slaughtering the Boltons and Freys is because of the hostages at the Twins. Those hostages are about to be moved... Ramsay thinks fear of him is keeping him alive. He is in for a rude and scary awakening.

Edited by A Ghost of Someone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Tygett Greenshield said:

Roose will never become a king, needs crowns support in order to rule the North. 

Same I hope all the traumas make him a monster like Joffrey and Ramsey were good times friend. No but seriously he seems like a very rowdy child might grow up into a warrior Lord. Though he will probably have mommy issues.

Many notable people had some sort of mommy or daddy issues. This might be useful. I also see a potential in him. Shame GRRM seems to want all Stark male kids unable to continue the line. But we shall see.

Don't be so sure about Roose. If he beats Stannis (a big "if"), his biggest threat will be gone. No southern army has went north of Moat Cailin, he'd wager. And winter is coming, so they won't bother with the new king in the North. Roose is not afraid of the crown.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

The North should have declared Independence, as the others should have, after the Mad King had been overthrown, Rhaegar's children were already murdered by Tywin's order. Viserys and his pregnant mom, exiled former Queen Rhaella had fled to Dragonstone. That was the perfect opportunity. Dorne would have been for it after what they lost. The Northeners would have loved it etc. Robert could have lived without it and probably would have been happier for it. The problem is that the Iron Throne is like the Ring of Power in The Lord of the Rings books. The Iron Throne is seductive for the power it dangles as well as the prestige but it is in fact cursed.

Yes. Especially since it seems the the mad king probably was the one who broke a peace treaty that Aegon the Conqueror and Torrhen Stark came to with all of their back and forth negotiations. Torrhen agreed to bow in order to not be burnt, but then Aerys went ahead and burned the blood of the north anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The Sunland Lord said:

Roose is not afraid of the crown.  

He doesn't have the loyalty of the Northerners so he's reliant on the Lannisters and Freys to back him, he can't crown himself king because no one will declare for him

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