Jump to content

The ASOIAF wiki thread


Onion Knight
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 5-12-2016 at 0:50 AM, All-Seeing Aye said:

Other points that come to mind in terms of current pages:

-http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Aegon_Targaryen_(son_of_Baelon) :should it be noted that he presumably died young, since this note appears in the page for Alysanne ( "Another son of Baelon and Alyssa, Prince Aegon, presumably died young.[5]"; http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Alysanne_Targaryen)?

-http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Mariah_Martell: " the betrothal of Mariah to Baelor's nephew, Prince Daeron Targaryen" should be changed to 'Baelor's young cousin' or something similar (technically first cousin once removed, though I believe 'young cousin' is the language used in TWOIAF).

-http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Daemon_I_Blackfyre: "was killed upon the Stepstones around 260 AC.[9] " should be changed to 'was killed upon the Stepstones in 260 AC' since TWOIAF gave us the exact date.  It looks like the language also needs to be changed for http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Aegon_III_Targaryen.

-For the House Blackfyre family tree template should it be modified to include at least one other (unnamed) son for Haegon I Blackfyre?  Since Daemon III is explicitly noted as being the 'eldest' son (usually meaning at least two sons) of Haegon I (currently in http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Blackfyre_Pretenders, http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Haegon_I_Blackfyre, http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Third_Blackfyre_Rebellion, http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Fourth_Blackfyre_Rebellion, and http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Daemon_III_Blackfyre) this modification would follow the template for Daemon I's children ('Two other sons' and 'Daughter(s)').

 

All done! Thank you for pointing them out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As the template-box for the chapter summaries in the "chapter chronology" part navigates from the last chapter of a book, to the appendix, to the prologue of the next book (e.g. AGOT-Daenerys X -> AGOT-Appendix -> ACOK-Prologue), would it be an idea to do the same for the POV navigation?

So, for example on the page of Daenerys X from AGOT, (Daenerys's last chapter from AGOT), instead of only having the option to go back one chapter (to AGOT-Daenerys  IX), also give the option to go forward to the first Daenerys POV chapter from ACOK (to ACOK-Daenerys I)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Perhaps a minor point, but with the publication of TWOIAF this family tree image on the House Targaryen wiki page is significantly out-of-date in terms of showing known names, individuals, and relationships: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/images/c/c6/House_Targaryen_Family_tree.jpg.  It seems to be focused primarily on Amok's images but perhaps it could be updated (not sure who created it)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Age of the Hundred Kingdoms" article begins with, "The Age of the Hundred Kingdoms was the broad period of Westerosi history set between the Andal Invasion and the Targaryen Conquest."

TWOIAF's chapter on "The Conquest" states:

Quote

In the days of the Hundred Kingdoms, many petty kings had claimed dominion over the river mouth, amongst them the Darklyn kings of Duskendale, the Masseys of Stonedance, and the river kings of old, be they Mudds, Fishers, Brackens, Blackwoods, or Hooks.

The Mudds, the last First Men dynasty to rule the riverlands, were conquered by Andals. The other mentioned dynasties ruled earlier, so the "Hundred Kingdoms" era would have begun before the Andals arrived. TWOIAF chapter on "The Stormlands" explains that Massey kings also lived before Andals conquered the stormlands.

Edited by Nittanian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nittanian said:

The "Age of the Hundred Kingdoms" article begins with, "The Age of the Hundred Kingdoms was the broad period of Westerosi history set between the Andal Invasion and the Targaryen Conquest."

TWOIAF's chapter on "The Conquest" states:

The Mudds, the last First Men dynasty to rule the riverlands, were conquered by Andals. The other mentioned dynasties ruled earlier, so the "Hundred Kingdoms" era would have begun before the Andals arrived. TWOIAF chapter on "The Stormlands" explains that Massey kings also lived before Andals conquered the stormlands.

This quote from AGOT, Bran IV, though a story of Old Nan, also supports that the "Age of the Hundred Kingdoms" began before the Andals:

"Now these were the days before the Andals came, and long before the women fled across the narrow sea from the cities of the Rhoyne, and the hundred kingdoms of those times were the kingdoms of the First Men, who had taken these lands from the children of the forest. Yet here and there in the fastness of the woods the children still lived in their wooden cities and hollow hills, and the faces in the trees kept watch. So as cold and death filled the earth, the last hero determined to seek out the children, in the hopes that their ancient magics could win back what the armies of men had lost. He set out into the dead lands with a sword, a horse, a dog, and a dozen companions. For years he searched, until he despaired of ever finding the children of the forest in their secret cities. One by one his friends died, and his horse, and finally even his dog, and his sword froze so hard the blade snapped when he tried to use it. And the Others smelled the hot blood in him, and came silent on his trail, stalking him with packs of pale white spiders big as hounds—"

 

19 hours ago, All-Seeing Aye said:

Perhaps a minor point, but with the publication of TWOIAF this family tree image on the House Targaryen wiki page is significantly out-of-date in terms of showing known names, individuals, and relationships: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/images/c/c6/House_Targaryen_Family_tree.jpg.  It seems to be focused primarily on Amok's images but perhaps it could be updated (not sure who created it)?

I'm not sure whether this image can be changed (copyright etc), but it is very much out of date. We can add a tag on the top of the image page, if that's possible, stating such, or simply remove the image all together, if it can't be fixed. It was used on only one page, and due to the fact that it is so very much out-of-date, as well as because I spotted a few smaller errors on it, I've removed it from that page for now in any case.

Creating a completely new image (without portraits, considerig we don't have any portraits for quite a lot of the Targaryens on that tree) would be an additional option.

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2017 at 10:57 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

This quote from AGOT, Bran IV, though a story of Old Nan, also supports that the "Age of the Hundred Kingdoms" began before the Andals:

I added that with some other excerpts to the article's discussion page.

Edited by Nittanian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9-1-2017 at 9:51 PM, All-Seeing Aye said:

Perhaps a minor point, but with the publication of TWOIAF this family tree image on the House Targaryen wiki page is significantly out-of-date in terms of showing known names, individuals, and relationships: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/images/c/c6/House_Targaryen_Family_tree.jpg.  It seems to be focused primarily on Amok's images but perhaps it could be updated (not sure who created it)?

 

On 10-1-2017 at 4:57 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I'm not sure whether this image can be changed (copyright etc), but it is very much out of date. We can add a tag on the top of the image page, if that's possible, stating such, or simply remove the image all together, if it can't be fixed. It was used on only one page, and due to the fact that it is so very much out-of-date, as well as because I spotted a few smaller errors on it, I've removed it from that page for now in any case.

Creating a completely new image (without portraits, considerig we don't have any portraits for quite a lot of the Targaryens on that tree) would be an additional option.

Unless the image was created by Amok to whom the portrets used belong copyright should not be an isseu, so if you can change it i would go ahead and do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article on the Moon of the Three Kings should be reworded for clarity and accuracy: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Moon_of_the_Three_Kings.  It seems pretty clear that Aegon II was not one of these three kings.  It's Gaemon Palehair, Trystane Truefyre, and the Shepherd (who admittedly was not a 'king', but ruled part of the city in the absence of Aegon II and Rhaenyra: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Shepherd).  Aegon II is explicitly not in King's Landing during the Moon; he's recuperating on Dragonstone and doesn't leave until after Sunfyre dies in the 12th month of the year 130.  Rhaenyra dies in the 10th month after wandering desperately for several months after abandoning the city in the 5th month.  So technically the 'month' is bookended by Rhaenyra's flight and the arrival of Borros Baratheon to restore the greens' authority (in the name of Aegon II, but without his presence), as I read it.  So it may not even be a literal month, as clearly there is some time between Rhaenyra's flight and the restoration of green authority.  Or perhaps the three power bases in the city only coincide for a month?  Hopefully the excised content from Fire and Blood will eventually create a more definitive timeline.

 

Was the House of Kisses on Rhaenys's Hill or Visenya's Hill?  The article for the Shepherd says Gaemon Palehair ruled from the former while the Moon of the Three Kings article says the latter.

 

This image on the Years after Aegon's Conquest page includes a year 0: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/File:Chronology.png.  Unless there is some evidence somewhere for a year 0 that I've missed, I think that year should be removed since no mention of the AC/BC system in TWOIAF or any other source includes a year 0.  Our own system of BC/AD and BCE/CE lacks a year 0, so in the absence of something saying otherwise the default should be that there's no year 0.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, All-Seeing Aye said:

Was the House of Kisses on Rhaenys's Hill or Visenya's Hill?  The article for the Shepherd says Gaemon Palehair ruled from the former while the Moon of the Three Kings article says the latter.

The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Aegon II

The other king was curiouser still—a child who became known as Gaemon Palehair. The son of a whore, this four-year-old boy was claimed to be a bastard of Aegon II (which was not improbable, given the king's bawdy ways in his youth). From his seat in the House of Kisses atop Visenya's Hill, he gathered followers by the thousands and issued a series of edicts. His mother later was hanged, having confessed he was the son of a silverhaired oarsman from Lys, but Gaemon was spared and taken into the king's household. In time he befriended Aegon III, becoming his constant companion and food taster for some years, before dying of poison that might have been intended for the king himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This image titled "Reek ADWD", and depicts a man in chains. Based on the title of the image (specifically the "ADWD" part) and the fact that the Reek in the image in chained to a wall, I suspect that this image is depicting Theon as Reek during his captivity. If it is not Theon as Reek, then Ramsay disguised as Reek is imo the likeliest option, as Ramsay was imprisoned within Winterfell when pretending to be Reek. As far as we know, the original Reek has never been imprisoned.

Does anyone have more information about this image? Because it is used as a picture in the infobox for the first Reek, and if we cannot be certain that the image is depicting the first Reek, it should not be used as it is being used currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2017 at 4:28 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

This image titled "Reek ADWD", and depicts a man in chains. Based on the title of the image (specifically the "ADWD" part) and the fact that the Reek in the image in chained to a wall, I suspect that this image is depicting Theon as Reek during his captivity. If it is not Theon as Reek, then Ramsay disguised as Reek is imo the likeliest option, as Ramsay was imprisoned within Winterfell when pretending to be Reek. As far as we know, the original Reek has never been imprisoned.

Does anyone have more information about this image? Because it is used as a picture in the infobox for the first Reek, and if we cannot be certain that the image is depicting the first Reek, it should not be used as it is being used currently.

I agree that the image is meant to depict Theon as Reek, and it should therefore probably be removed as you say from the first Reek's article (not sure why it was put there in the first place).

 

On 1/12/2017 at 6:19 PM, All-Seeing Aye said:

The article on the Moon of the Three Kings should be reworded for clarity and accuracy: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Moon_of_the_Three_Kings.  It seems pretty clear that Aegon II was not one of these three kings.  It's Gaemon Palehair, Trystane Truefyre, and the Shepherd (who admittedly was not a 'king', but ruled part of the city in the absence of Aegon II and Rhaenyra: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Shepherd).  Aegon II is explicitly not in King's Landing during the Moon; he's recuperating on Dragonstone and doesn't leave until after Sunfyre dies in the 12th month of the year 130.  Rhaenyra dies in the 10th month after wandering desperately for several months after abandoning the city in the 5th month.  So technically the 'month' is bookended by Rhaenyra's flight and the arrival of Borros Baratheon to restore the greens' authority (in the name of Aegon II, but without his presence), as I read it.  So it may not even be a literal month, as clearly there is some time between Rhaenyra's flight and the restoration of green authority.  Or perhaps the three power bases in the city only coincide for a month?  Hopefully the excised content from Fire and Blood will eventually create a more definitive timeline.

 

Was the House of Kisses on Rhaenys's Hill or Visenya's Hill?  The article for the Shepherd says Gaemon Palehair ruled from the former while the Moon of the Three Kings article says the latter.

 

This image on the Years after Aegon's Conquest page includes a year 0: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/File:Chronology.png.  Unless there is some evidence somewhere for a year 0 that I've missed, I think that year should be removed since no mention of the AC/BC system in TWOIAF or any other source includes a year 0.  Our own system of BC/AD and BCE/CE lacks a year 0, so in the absence of something saying otherwise the default should be that there's no year 0.

 

Following up on the above (TWOIAF says Visenya's Hill for the House of Kisses), the article for the Iron Throne also has an image that uses a year 0, which ideally should be removed.  The image also uses the outdated AL system instead of the authoritative AC system from TWOIAF.

 

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Master_of_whisperers: "He later became Aerys I Targaryen's master of whisperers as well as Hand of the King.[6]" The sources already cited note that Bloodraven was never titled master of whisperers, so the quoted text should be revised (doesn't actually make a lot of sense that he wasn't, though the app update about being 'spymaster' said otherwise).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the "master of whisperers" page reads:

Brynden Rivers, known as Lord Bloodraven, was a spymaster[4] with a network of spies while serving on Daeron II Targaryen's small council.[5]Brynden later served Aerys I Targaryen as master of whisperers as well as Hand of the King.[6]

The last statement comes from TWOIAF, 

On 23-1-2017 at 0:00 AM, All-Seeing Aye said:

I agree that the image is meant to depict Theon as Reek, and it should therefore probably be removed as you say from the first Reek's article (not sure why it was put there in the first place).

Will do.

 

On 23-1-2017 at 0:00 AM, All-Seeing Aye said:

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Master_of_whisperers: "He later became Aerys I Targaryen's master of whisperers as well as Hand of the King.[6]" The sources already cited note that Bloodraven was never titled master of whisperers, so the quoted text should be revised (doesn't actually make a lot of sense that he wasn't, though the app update about being 'spymaster' said otherwise).

He wasn't called the "master of whisperers" during the Dunk and Egg stories that we have, but TWOIAF, The Targaryen Kigns: Aerys I states that he did become master of whisperers during Aerys's reign. 

Bloodraven proved to be a capable Hand, but also a master of whisperers who rivaled Lady Misery, and there were those who thought he and his half sister and paramour, Shiera Seastar, used sorcery to ferret out secrets.

There are only two mentions of Bloodraven being called a spymaster that I can find. The first comes from this SSM, but it doesn't state a timeframe. The second comes from the app, the entry of Aerys I Targaryen, in which it states that Aerys I appointed Bloodraven as his Hand and spymaster.

It seems like the posts that belong with the referenced post (stating that Bloodraven was never called master of whisperers in the Dunk & Egg tales) have been emptied (I recall they were about the translations for the German version of the app), but it sounds to me like they are discussing Bloodraven's role during the reign of Daeron II. Though he served at court (mentioned in TMK, IIRC), he is not mentioned to have held an official office at the time. So I conclude that what is meant there is that Bloodraven served as spymaster to Daeron II, though perhaps unofficially. That post, as well as him becoming Hand and master of whisperers, then became official after Aerys I ascended the throne.

It's worth noting that Varys is also described as both "spymaster" (upon his arrival in Westeros) and "master of whisperers" (during the false spring and beyond). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2017 at 7:36 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

So the "master of whisperers" page reads:

Brynden Rivers, known as Lord Bloodraven, was a spymaster[4] with a network of spies while serving on Daeron II Targaryen's small council.[5]Brynden later served Aerys I Targaryen as master of whisperers as well as Hand of the King.[6]

The last statement comes from TWOIAF, 

Will do.

 

He wasn't called the "master of whisperers" during the Dunk and Egg stories that we have, but TWOIAF, The Targaryen Kigns: Aerys I states that he did become master of whisperers during Aerys's reign. 

Bloodraven proved to be a capable Hand, but also a master of whisperers who rivaled Lady Misery, and there were those who thought he and his half sister and paramour, Shiera Seastar, used sorcery to ferret out secrets.

There are only two mentions of Bloodraven being called a spymaster that I can find. The first comes from this SSM, but it doesn't state a timeframe. The second comes from the app, the entry of Aerys I Targaryen, in which it states that Aerys I appointed Bloodraven as his Hand and spymaster.

It seems like the posts that belong with the referenced post (stating that Bloodraven was never called master of whisperers in the Dunk & Egg tales) have been emptied (I recall they were about the translations for the German version of the app), but it sounds to me like they are discussing Bloodraven's role during the reign of Daeron II. Though he served at court (mentioned in TMK, IIRC), he is not mentioned to have held an official office at the time. So I conclude that what is meant there is that Bloodraven served as spymaster to Daeron II, though perhaps unofficially. That post, as well as him becoming Hand and master of whisperers, then became official after Aerys I ascended the throne.

It's worth noting that Varys is also described as both "spymaster" (upon his arrival in Westeros) and "master of whisperers" (during the false spring and beyond). 

Thanks for pointing out that TWOIAF quote, your explanation makes a lot of sense.  So with that in mind should he be added to the category page for master of whisperers (http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Category:Masters_of_whisperers) and have it added to the infobox on his own page?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, All-Seeing Aye said:

Thanks for pointing out that TWOIAF quote, your explanation makes a lot of sense.  So with that in mind should he be added to the category page for master of whisperers (http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Category:Masters_of_whisperers) and have it added to the infobox on his own page?

Good points! I've added the category, and completed the info in the infobox

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Good points! I've added the category, and completed the info in the infobox

Wanted to see if you have any thoughts on my Moon of the Three Kings post from several weeks ago.  I'm less certain now about the Shepherd really being a 'king', but he and his supporters did rule part of the city after Rhaenyra fled (so possibly in a metaphorical sense?).  Still uncertain about whether the timeline we currently have is accurate/fully fleshed out.

On 1/12/2017 at 6:19 PM, All-Seeing Aye said:

The article on the Moon of the Three Kings should be reworded for clarity and accuracy: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Moon_of_the_Three_Kings.  It seems pretty clear that Aegon II was not one of these three kings.  It's Gaemon Palehair, Trystane Truefyre, and the Shepherd (who admittedly was not a 'king', but ruled part of the city in the absence of Aegon II and Rhaenyra: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Shepherd).  Aegon II is explicitly not in King's Landing during the Moon; he's recuperating on Dragonstone and doesn't leave until after Sunfyre dies in the 12th month of the year 130.  Rhaenyra dies in the 10th month after wandering desperately for several months after abandoning the city in the 5th month.  So technically the 'month' is bookended by Rhaenyra's flight and the arrival of Borros Baratheon to restore the greens' authority (in the name of Aegon II, but without his presence), as I read it.  So it may not even be a literal month, as clearly there is some time between Rhaenyra's flight and the restoration of green authority.  Or perhaps the three power bases in the city only coincide for a month?  Hopefully the excised content from Fire and Blood will eventually create a more definitive timeline.

 

Edited by All-Seeing Aye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How certain are the numbers of the Lannister forces on the Reyne-Tarbeck revolt wiki page? Both sources say "3000 men-at-arms & crossbowmen", not "3000 men-at-arms AND 3000 crossbowmen", for the original host from Casterly Rock. Bowmen of any sort are generally in the minority of infantrymen (& to an even lesser extent among men on horses, which I think Tywin's initial host all may have been, helping to explain the sheer mobility advantages they had against their foes) in Westeros, let alone crossbowmen specifically, particularly for a host that was on the attack & not defending a castle or city. Among ~6500 men total, ~3000 crossbowmen seems quite impractical, tbh:

  • The garrison of Dragonstone is traditionally ~30 knights, ~100 crossbowmen, & ~300 men-at-arms.
  • The Golden Company only has ~1000 bowmen among ~10000 men, & only ~333 crossbowmen specifically.
  • The escort of Tywin's body back to the Westerlands only had ~100 crossbowmen, with ~300 additional men-at-arms, & ~lords of the west (sidenote: are the men that would be sworn to those lords, escorting & defending them, among those ~400?)
  • In the Second Siege of Meereen, the Yunkai-led alliance only has ~300 crossbowmen (from Elyria) mentioned specifically. The New Ghis legions are Unsullied-lite (although the war elephants would certainly have crossbowmen upon them), I think the Qartheen camelry are meant to be more like heavy Westerosi cavalry than say Dothraki archers, I don't see even the "Wise" Masters giving their slave "soldiers" ranged weapons (besides perhaps spears) besides possibly a very low number of bowmen, & the Long Lances (completely?) & Windblown at least have high percentages of cavalry. Among a pre-Volantene fleet inclusion (which'll be the Targaryen alliance's before it even gets to Meereen, anyway) Yunkai host1 of ~20000 absolute minimum, perhaps ~30-35000, I'd be very surprised if more than 20% are crossbowmen (I'd guess perhaps 10%, 15% max); let alone +25% ...

1 I'm rather skeptical that New Ghis, even though it would surely flog Astapor at least in prosperity (particularly per citizen), could field an invasion force anywhere near ~36000 being smaller than even Astapor. It just doesn't have the lands to draw from like the other Ghiscari cities do, which we know they all have extensive hinterlands, indeed being the only plausible explanation for how the hell the Yunkish were able to have so many slave soldiers so fast (being from their hinterland estates that Dany neglected). I think Qarth could, certainly with the inclusion of its fleets, as it could draw from its vassal towns/cities & I'd be very surprised if it didn't control a good deal of northern Great Moraq (if not, even more of the island to that vast forest in the south). And it sits on an even more prosperous naval trade route, anyway. We don't even know if New Ghis bothers to exercise great control over Ghaen - it doesn't look particularly fertile - & we know Ghiscar isn't exactly a foodbowl & population centre.

Two of the Ghiscari legions are north of the city & Skahazadhan, I'm guessing the ones that arrived later by ship. It makes more sense imo if the ~6000 legionnaires that Barristan notes at the Harridan are at least two of the legions that marched to Meereen combined, if not all four. The two legions across the river could certainly be larger than those that marched, particularly coming by ship (if the New Ghis ships were large enough, which they certainly could be for such a comparatively prosperous port city). New Ghis' six legions totaling roughly ~9000 men, ~12500 maximum, sounds more apt I think.

As a sidenote, I'd have to imagine that the various cities of Slaver's Bay fought over the Isle of Cedars after the Doom - there has to be a treaty in place to explain why it's basically uninhabited & untouched during ASoIaF (& presumably for decades at least before). It should be riddled with pirates, reavers & corsairs; unless the various fleets work in unison to prevent such & really crack down hard on their own who set-up as such, in stark contrast to say the Three Daughters (where even state-sanctioned piracy is rampant at times).

Back to the actual topic at hand ... Although Tywin marshaled his men before ("with all his preparations complete" plus he would've needed to have taken control of the household & maester/s so say Tytos couldn't interfere - he had overrode him eventually just ~1 year before, after all) sending the treason bait summons to the Reynes & Tarbecks, 6500 men just from Casterly Rock & Lannisport is really a long stretch, whilst keeping sufficient defenses in place, & in haste (there's only so long Tywin could control & hold his advantage). He only called the banners after receiving the "defiance" of both Castamere & Tarbeck Hall, even an already tyrant like Tywin would know he needed to "legitimise" his imminent brutality against them. And he very likely left within a day of sending out the ravens to other vassals - Tywin couldn't afford for Roger to be able to marshal up to ~8000 men with himself (though I think this includes not only his vassals, but the Tarbecks also, & certain other allies), or even half that. I think it would've taken Kenning, Prester, whoever else lives on that peninsula (if Tywin could trust), & Sarsfield levies at the very to make up the ~6500 quota, perhaps even the Leffords &/or Marbrands too - & it'd be quite the stretch I think that the Tarbecks or the Reynes wouldn't learn of their neighbours marshaling their forces. And even with the Lann's Point (?) vassals, Ellyn was able to send her own knights down there to seize Stafford & the other two Lannisters, rather no worries considering they got back to Tarbeck Hall fine (afawk).

Assuming that Tywin only left the Rock with ~3500 men, he'd possibly be down to ~3000 after the battle against Walderan & his ~500 knights/cavalry (I wonder how many squires counted among/also with them) & the Storming of Tarbeck Hall. Though of course by the time the Red Lion attacked the Lannister encampment, they'd been augmented by the forces of the Marbrands & Presters, along with "a dozen lesser lords"; to have ~3 times the men he did. If Tywin had ~6500 men when he left the Rock, it completely clashes with the ~6000 he's only meant to have against Roger's ~2000. That is unless the rumours that Tywin had Roger outnumbered 5:1 are actually true (though I'm inclined to believe that was just one among many of the pro-Lannister manipulations of the historical record). Even with the addition of the forces of two middling lords & a dozen lesser, ~3000 men between them combined (~200 men each, many/all mounted) seems apt to me:

  • Out of ~11000 Westermen, there would've been a couple/several thousand casualties (battles, non-combat deaths, serious injury, missing/deserters), just the year before with the Wot9pK in the Stepstones. All Houses in the Westerlands would've been affected by that, Lannister loyalists perhaps even more so by fronting higher percentages.
  • The Westerlands had been rather chaotic & bloody for 10-15 years before that, for what was technically peacetime. That's going to have an extra negative influence on gathering men.
  • The Lannister supporters probably only had say a week to get there, from Tywin calling the banners, before the Reynes. And if Tywin's initial force was fully mounted, it could've been as little as say four days.
  • Even the Westerlings could only join the Lannister host after the Reynes had retreated into Castamere. The Lannister supporters would've been vassals of the Rock rather close to the Tarbecks or the Reynes/the line of march, with some (certainly the Marbrands at least, & not among the "14", I'd guess the Westerlings) having been preyed upon in various ways by Ellyn, Roger, & Reynard.

So, the ~13000 Lannister men at Castamere comes from the additions of Banefort, Plumm, Stackspear, & Westerling men ("swollen to twice its original size"); but I personally find two middling & two minor lords at best, fielding 750-1000 men (Tywin likely having ~9500 men, give or take ~500, after Roger's attack in this scenario) each with only a couple of days extra at most, a bit hard to believe. Perhaps even more than 1000 men each ("the battle that ensued was a closer thing than might have been expected"), though I very much doubt the Reynes were able to cause casualties of more than half their own number, most like not even a quarter. If Tywin had ~6000 men at the "battle of the camp", then I'd imagine he only had ~7000 at Castamere (double original). Furthermore, a host of ~13000 men is probably going to have even more difficulty keeping itself fed (Castamere's food stores were seemingly vast majority/all, underground) within a few days (which it took to make it Reyne) & marshaled so fast, without some serious foraging &/or importation. Unless of course Tywin had Tarbeck Hall's stores cleared out before putting it to the torch, but I'm leaning towards he didn't.

Admittedly, I only questioned this after reading Race for the Iron Throne's latest (historical) essay (& "commandeered" the alternative figures from there). I'd looked over the figures on the wiki many moons ago & agreed (without digging deeper into it as the former caused me to).

TL;DR: Original Lannister host = ~3500 men, instead of ~6500? The latter is too high, has far too many crossbowmen, & so ~13000 men at Castamere is also too many - ~7000 there seems more like - all (sort of) imo, of course. Oh, wiki New Ghis is OP as fuck, & Slaver's Bay & surrounds needs far more world-building in future ASoIaF/world books.

Edited by Lord Corlys Velaryon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Corlys Velaryon said:

How certain are the numbers of the Lannister forces on the Reyne-Tarbeck revolt wiki page? Both sources say "3000 men-at-arms & crossbowmen", not "3000 men-at-arms AND 3000 crossbowmen", for the original host from Casterly Rock. Bowmen of any sort are generally in the minority of infantrymen (& to an even lesser extent among men on horses, which I think Tywin's initial host all may have been, helping to explain the sheer mobility advantages they had against their foes) in Westeros, let alone crossbowmen specifically, particularly for a host that was on the attack & not defending a castle or city. Among ~6500 men total, ~3000 crossbowmen seems quite impractical, tbh:

  • The garrison of Dragonstone is traditionally ~30 knights, ~100 crossbowmen, & ~300 men-at-arms.
  • The Golden Company only has ~1000 bowmen among ~10000 men, & only ~333 crossbowmen specifically.
  • The escort of Tywin's body back to the Westerlands only had ~100 crossbowmen, with ~300 additional men-at-arms, & ~lords of the west (sidenote: are the men that would be sworn to those lords, escorting & defending them, among those ~400?)
  • In the Second Siege of Meereen, the Yunkai-led alliance only has ~300 crossbowmen (from Elyria) mentioned specifically. The New Ghis legions are Unsullied-lite (although the war elephants would certainly have crossbowmen upon them), I think the Qartheen camelry are meant to be more like heavy Westerosi cavalry than say Dothraki archers, I don't see even the "Wise" Masters giving their slave "soldiers" ranged weapons (besides perhaps spears) besides possibly a very low number of bowmen, & the Long Lances (completely?) & Windblown at least have high percentages of cavalry. Among a pre-Volantene fleet inclusion (which'll be the Targaryen alliance's before it even gets to Meereen, anyway) Yunkai host1 of ~20000 absolute minimum, perhaps ~30-35000, I'd be very surprised if more than 20% are crossbowmen (I'd guess perhaps 10%, 15% max); let alone +25% ...

1 I'm rather skeptical that New Ghis, even though it would surely flog Astapor at least in prosperity (particularly per citizen), could field an invasion force anywhere near ~36000 being smaller than even Astapor. It just doesn't have the lands to draw from like the other Ghiscari cities do, which we know they all have extensive hinterlands, indeed being the only plausible explanation for how the hell the Yunkish were able to have so many slave soldiers so fast (being from their hinterland estates that Dany neglected). I think Qarth could, certainly with the inclusion of its fleets, as it could draw from its vassal towns/cities & I'd be very surprised if it didn't control a good deal of northern Great Moraq (if not, even more of the island to that vast forest in the south). And it sits on an even more prosperous naval trade route, anyway. We don't even know if New Ghis bothers to exercise great control over Ghaen - it doesn't look particularly fertile - & we know Ghiscar isn't exactly a foodbowl & population centre.

Two of the Ghiscari legions are north of the city & Skahazadhan, I'm guessing the ones that arrived later by ship. It makes more sense imo if the ~6000 legionnaires that Barristan notes at the Harridan are at least two of the legions that marched to Meereen combined, if not all four. The two legions across the river could certainly be larger than those that marched, particularly coming by ship (if the New Ghis ships were large enough, which they certainly could be for such a comparatively prosperous port city). New Ghis' six legions totaling roughly ~9000 men, ~12500 maximum, sounds more apt I think.

As a sidenote, I'd have to imagine that the various cities of Slaver's Bay fought over the Isle of Cedars after the Doom - there has to be a treaty in place to explain why it's basically uninhabited & untouched during ASoIaF (& presumably for decades at least before). It should be riddled with pirates, reavers & corsairs; unless the various fleets work in unison to prevent such & really crack down hard on their own who set-up as such, in stark contrast to say the Three Daughters (where even state-sanctioned piracy is rampant at times).

Back to the actual topic at hand ... Although Tywin marshaled his men before ("with all his preparations complete" plus he would've needed to have taken control of the household & maester/s so say Tytos couldn't interfere - he had overrode him eventually just ~1 year before, after all) sending the treason bait summons to the Reynes & Tarbecks, 6500 men just from Casterly Rock & Lannisport is really a long stretch, whilst keeping sufficient defenses in place, & in haste (there's only so long Tywin could control & hold his advantage). He only called the banners after receiving the "defiance" of both Castamere & Tarbeck Hall, even an already tyrant like Tywin would know he needed to "legitimise" his imminent brutality against them. And he very likely left within a day of sending out the ravens to other vassals - Tywin couldn't afford for Roger to be able to marshal up to ~8000 men with himself (though I think this includes not only his vassals, but the Tarbecks also, & certain other allies), or even half that. I think it would've taken Kenning, Prester, whoever else lives on that peninsula (if Tywin could trust), & Sarsfield levies at the very to make up the ~6500 quota, perhaps even the Leffords &/or Marbrands too - & it'd be quite the stretch I think that the Tarbecks or the Reynes wouldn't learn of their neighbours marshaling their forces. And even with the Lann's Point (?) vassals, Ellyn was able to send her own knights down there to seize Stafford & the other two Lannisters, rather no worries considering they got back to Tarbeck Hall fine (afawk).

Assuming that Tywin only left the Rock with ~3500 men, he'd possibly be down to ~3000 after the battle against Walderan & his ~500 knights/cavalry (I wonder how many squires counted among/also with them) & the Storming of Tarbeck Hall. Though of course by the time the Red Lion attacked the Lannister encampment, they'd been augmented by the forces of the Marbrands & Presters, along with "a dozen lesser lords"; to have ~3 times the men he did. If Tywin had ~6500 men when he left the Rock, it completely clashes with the ~6000 he's only meant to have against Roger's ~2000. That is unless the rumours that Tywin had Roger outnumbered 5:1 are actually true (though I'm inclined to believe that was just one among many of the pro-Lannister manipulations of the historical record). Even with the addition of the forces of two middling lords & a dozen lesser, ~3000 men between them combined (~200 men each, many/all mounted) seems apt to me:

  • Out of ~11000 Westermen, there would've been a couple/several thousand casualties (battles, non-combat deaths, serious injury, missing/deserters), just the year before with the Wot9pK in the Stepstones. All Houses in the Westerlands would've been affected by that, Lannister loyalists perhaps even more so by fronting higher percentages.
  • The Westerlands had been rather chaotic & bloody for 10-15 years before that, for what was technically peacetime. That's going to have an extra negative influence on gathering men.
  • The Lannister supporters probably only had say a week to get there, from Tywin calling the banners, before the Reynes. And if Tywin's initial force was fully mounted, it could've been as little as say four days.
  • Even the Westerlings could only join the Lannister host after the Reynes had retreated into Castamere. The Lannister supporters would've been vassals of the Rock rather close to the Tarbecks or the Reynes/the line of march, with some (certainly the Marbrands at least, & not among the "14", I'd guess the Westerlings) having been preyed upon in various ways by Ellyn, Roger, & Reynard.

So, the ~13000 Lannister men at Castamere comes from the additions of Banefort, Plumm, Stackspear, & Westerling men ("swollen to twice its original size"); but I personally find two middling & two minor lords at best, fielding 750-1000 men (Tywin likely having ~9500 men, give or take ~500, after Roger's attack in this scenario) each with only a couple of days extra at most, a bit hard to believe. Perhaps even more than 1000 men each ("the battle that ensued was a closer thing than might have been expected"), though I very much doubt the Reynes were able to cause casualties of more than half their own number, most like not even a quarter. If Tywin had ~6000 men at the "battle of the camp", then I'd imagine he only had ~7000 at Castamere (double original). Furthermore, a host of ~13000 men is probably going to have even more difficulty keeping itself fed (Castamere's food stores were seemingly vast majority/all, underground) within a few days (which it took to make it Reyne) & marshaled so fast, without some serious foraging &/or importation. Unless of course Tywin had Tarbeck Hall's stores cleared out before putting it to the torch, but I'm leaning towards he didn't.

Admittedly, I only questioned this after reading Race for the Iron Throne's latest (historical) essay (& "commandeered" the alternative figures from there). I'd looked over the figures on the wiki many moons ago & agreed (without digging deeper into it as the former caused me to).

TL;DR: Original Lannister host = ~3500 men, instead of ~6500? The latter is too high, has far too many crossbowmen, & so ~13000 men at Castamere is also too many - ~7000 there seems more like - all (sort of) imo, of course. Oh, wiki New Ghis is OP as fuck, & Slaver's Bay & surrounds needs far more world-building in future ASoIaF/world books.

If i remember correctly in the unedited version that was leaked/read i don't remember wich one it was, Tywin was joined by vassal houses there troops on the march to Tarbeck hall. As far as i know he had 3500 men when he left Casterly Rock and the vassal troops pushed it to about 6000.

As to your sidenote on New Ghis, a legion is 6000 men as far as i know this is a confirmed number, so 6 legions is 36000 men there is just no two ways about it. there have been discussions about this number before since it does not seem to make sence in light of the size of the island New Ghis is on and most of these ended with the conclusion that they also must control the land around the ruined city of Old Ghis aswell to get these numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...