Would an absolute monarchy work in Westeros?

[Arthur Lannister]

It is possible for some form of absolute monarchy to work in Westeros if the Targaryens/Baratheons were able to create a perfectly functioning proffesional army and navy operating in both the sunset and narrow seas. However, in order for them to do so, they need to have an income as big or even bigger than the incomes of House Lannister and House Tyrell plus they need to establish some sort of central bank like the Iron Bank of Braavos. The best way that this could have happened is if the Dance of Dragons never happened and the Targaryens had created a proffesional army, navy and airforce with their 19 dragons, and pass some laws preventing local lords and ladies from organizing their own forces. They would also need to remove every highborn except themselves from power and replace them with governors either appointed by the crown or elected by the people that the governor will govern. The only problem would be the loyalty of the troops and possibility of a war of succession. The threat of dragonfire and the cunning and unity of house Targaryen would be able to create a common Westerosi identity if they played their cards right.

[Ser Lepus]

A bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of Empire could rule a continent like Westeros, but

1.-It would require massive social changes...how do you disarm all those tens of thousands of lands and lordlings who currently hog most of the power, land and wealth in Westeros? How do you prevent the generals of your army from acting as if they were lords?

2.-Education is very restricted in Westeros, and a bureaucratic Chinese-like regime requires a huge pool of educated people.

3.-The Westerosi know no other form of government than feudal monarchy; even the educated ones have trouble understanding the Volantene Triarchy, the Dothraki Khals and the Kings-Beyond-the Wall and assume that they are just like their own princes and kings: Robert thought that Khal Drogo would care about a thing like inherited rights, and that he wouldn't invade if Dany and her son were assassinated; Stannis and Selyse believe that Kings-Beyond-the-Wall are like westerosi kings; Tyrion thought that a government of three people would be a mess.

[Jaak]

A bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of Empire could rule a continent like Westeros, but

1.-It would require massive social changes...how do you disarm all those tens of thousands of lands and lordlings who currently hog most of the power, land and wealth in Westeros?

How did Castile? The mass of hidalgos were not "disarmed" - they were recruited into the tercios.

How do you prevent the generals of your army from acting as if they were lords?

How did Spain? Gonzalo Pizarro lost his head for fighting the royal viceroy... Columbus and Cortez got away with being recalled to Spain and humiliated, though I think Cortez was not even arrested like Columbus was.

2.-Education is very restricted in Westeros, and a bureaucratic Chinese-like regime requires a huge pool of educated people.

Spain did not have a problem with not enough educated people, Spain had a problem with not enough high level bureaucratic posts to satisfy the students. Mainland Castile, with 7 million people, had roughly speaking life tenure posts for judges of 5 regional audiencias, and 40 life tenure posts for the members of central administrative councils.

[Sapphire Isle]

A bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of Empire could rule a continent like Westeros, but

curious: what's a bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of empire................

(this coming from a Chinese person)

---

in response to title of post, I think a continuation of the current system is the only future of Westeros possible. Can't see the smallfolk making revolution or demanding a more democratic form of government any time soon.

Although... who knows, with the long winter...

[Panos Targaryen]

curious: what's a bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of empire................

(this coming from a Chinese person)

---

in response to title of post, I think a continuation of the current system is the only future of Westeros possible. Can't see the smallfolk making revolution or demanding a more democratic form of government any time soon.

Although... who knows, with the long winter...

Absolutism doesn't make a monarchy more democratic. It's about centralizing all power to the Crown, and replacing the nobility with a more modern-like bureaucracy.

Although IMO absolute monarchies tend to be more civilized than feudal monarchies, since they resemble modern nation-states more, and aside from the king, everyone is technically equal under the law.

[Drake Heath]

Absolutism doesn't make a monarchy more democratic. It's about centralizing all power to the Crown, and replacing the nobility with a more modern-like bureaucracy.

Although IMO absolute monarchies tend to be more civilized than feudal monarchies, since they resemble modern nation-states more, and aside from the king, everyone is technically equal under the law.

England was feudal (even under the absolutist Stuarts), and said feudalism lead to the foundation of the constitutional monarchy, which managed to survive and even thrive at a time when monarchs were losing their crowns to radicals left and right while keeping all the old traditions and customs intact.

[Panos Targaryen]

England was feudal (even under the absolutist Stuarts), and said feudalism lead to the foundation of the constitutional monarchy, which managed to survive and even thrive at a time when monarchs were losing their crowns to radicals left and right while keeping all the old traditions and customs intact.

England is an exception, because there was already a precedent with the king having his powers limited by the Magna Carta. The monarchy was losing its power in England since the Middle Ages, something that I don't think happened in any other European kingdom. The opposite, in fact.

[Ser Lepus]

curious: what's a bureaucratic Chinese-like kind of empire................

(this coming from a Chinese person)

---

in response to title of post, I think a continuation of the current system is the only future of Westeros possible. Can't see the smallfolk making revolution or demanding a more democratic form of government any time soon.

Although... who knows, with the long winter...

An absolutist system in which al power emanates from the Emperor, with a system of public examinations that allows to recruit a huge pool of bureocrats, and in which all the governors, generals, and holders of the important administrative posts are designated from the capital.

How did Castile? The mass of hidalgos were not "disarmed" - they were recruited into the tercios.

Spain is way smaller than Westeros. Plus it didn't become an abslute monarchy. The high nobility retained a lot of power, and the Assemblies from the kingdoms (particularly those of the Aragonese Crown) retained quite a bit of power, limiting the ability of the king to make new laws and new taxes.

It could be argued that Spain didn't become an absolute monarchy until the War of Sucession at the beginning of the XVIII century.

How did Spain? Gonzalo Pizarro lost his head for fighting the royal viceroy... Columbus and Cortez got away with being recalled to Spain and humiliated, though I think Cortez was not even arrested like Columbus was.

Cortez wasn't arrested. He was rewarded and his family became high nobility.

Cortez,Pizarro, Columbus...etc., didn't have real power. Their troops were tiny warbands of adventurers that had zero hope to make a stand against the power of the royal spanish troops.

The criollos didn't rebel against Spain for a long time because they were a tiny minority who had to focus their efforts on preserving their economic power, keeping subjugated the native (and African) masses and on keeping other European powers at bay. The Spanish government, on the other hand, tried to limit the politic and military power of the local elites to prevent a rebellion.

And eventually, when they became strong enough, they rebelled against Spain.

Spain did not have a problem with not enough educated people, Spain had a problem with not enough high level bureaucratic posts to satisfy the students. Mainland Castile, with 7 million people, had roughly speaking life tenure posts for judges of 5 regional audiencias, and 40 life tenure posts for the members of central administrative councils.

The Spanish Crown made a huge effort to raise the number of educated people, replacing nobles with College-educated bureocrats (the "Nobility of Ink")in their administrative and judicial system. And even before that, they had a vastly greater pool of educated people than Westeros. Westeros is closer to the Europe from the X century than to the Renaissance.

England is an exception, because there was already a precedent with the king having his powers limited by the Magna Carta. The monarchy was losing its power in England since the Middle Ages, something that I don't think happened in any other European kingdom. The opposite, in fact.

Some countries had similar charts. For example, el Privilegio General de Aragón. The difference came during the Modern Age, when almost all European countries gradually became Absolute Monarchies while the English resisted it and had several successful revolutions that empowered their Parlament and weakened their kings more and more.

[Ser Lepus]

Sorry, double post

[Jasta11]

Absolutism doesn't make a monarchy more democratic. It's about centralizing all power to the Crown, and replacing the nobility with a more modern-like bureaucracy.

Although IMO absolute monarchies tend to be more civilized than feudal monarchies, since they resemble modern nation-states more, and aside from the king, everyone is technically equal under the law.

That is, until the king(s) fuck up and the people have one guy to blame for their trouble, instead of a thousand lordlings, and nothing but a demoralized army to keep them in line. Hello guillotine!

It's especially telling, I think, that the period of absolute monarchs (which started in, what, the 16th century at the earliest?) lasted less long than the feudal period. Even in Japan. Absolute monarchies suffered less internal strife, but revolutions

As for Westeros, yeah I don't think it's possible in a continent that big. Maybe if the IT was 2-3 regions instead of 9. But Westeros almost twice as big as Europe and has almost as many different cultures to boot. And no empire in history held all of Europe for more than, what, 10 years if you count Napoleon?

[Jaak]

An absolutist system in which al power emanates from the Emperor, with a system of public examinations that allows to recruit a huge pool of bureocrats, and in which all the governors, generals, and holders of the important administrative posts are designated from the capital.

Nobody else than China had public examinations. Not Rome, not Ottoman Turkey, not Mughals, not Spain. Designating all governors and generals from the capital did apply in Spain, and several others.

Cortez,Pizarro, Columbus...etc., didn't have real power. Their troops were tiny warbands of adventurers that had zero hope to make a stand against the power of the royal spanish troops.

They had very distinctly nonzero hope. Gonzalo Pizarro made a stand and crushed the viceroy Blasco Nunez Vela. Gasca was sent to Peru with no troops and no money. It was thanks to successful bluff that he was able to win over many Pizarro´s supporters - thanks to the military commitments in Europe, Carlos I was in fact unable to send armies that could have been sure of conquering Peru.

The Spanish Crown made a huge effort to raise the number of educated people, replacing nobles with College-educated bureocrats (the "Nobility of Ink")in their administrative and judicial system.

These college-educated bureaucrats were mainly (minor) nobles to begin with. And the Crown was not active in founding or funding school - this was done mainly by clergy. What Crown did was offer profitable employment to the educated people.

Some countries had similar charts. For example, el Privilegio General de Aragón. The difference came during the Modern Age, when almost all European countries gradually became Absolute Monarchies while the English resisted it and had several successful revolutions that empowered their Parlament and weakened their kings more and more.

And Poland also resisted absolute monarchy.

[Ser Lepus]

These college-educated bureaucrats were mainly (minor) nobles to begin with. And the Crown was not active in founding or funding school - this was done mainly by clergy. What Crown did was offer profitable employment to the educated people.

The church was encouraged, supported and to extent, directed by the crown, that had a lot of control over the organization and direction of the church. For example, Cardinal Cisneros, who had an important part on those changes was both a Cardinal AND viceroy. And the reason the crown supported the church in that endavour was that they needed a pool of educated people.

Not all those bureaucrats were minor nobles. Many commoners were able to study and start a career in service of the government.

[Winnief]

I think even apart from the sheer land mass there are a couple of other issues that would make absolute monarchy difficult to implement….the Seven Kingdoms differ greatly in issues of culture, tradition, and even in religion which would make it very difficult to impose uniform standards on all of them.

[Queen Sansa Stark]

I don't think it will. Westeros is roughly the size of South-America and that to be ruled by one person? Again, don't see it happening.

[Jaak]

I think even apart from the sheer land mass there are a couple of other issues that would make absolute monarchy difficult to implement….the Seven Kingdoms differ greatly in issues of culture, tradition, and even in religion which would make it very difficult to impose uniform standards on all of them.

Not that big a problem. Spain was an assembly of different realms - Castile, Aragon, Naples, Flanders, Portugal, the two viceroyalties of Indies... Habsburg monarchy respected the laws of Aragon, Italy, Netherlands and also tried to rule each realm mainly by local officials (in Europe... Columbus discovered America for Castile and Leon, and peninsulars kept being sent there). What was important is that these officials were appointed by King in Madrid.

France also had different laws in many provinces.

[juanml82]

Not that big a problem. Spain was an assembly of different realms - Castile, Aragon, Naples, Flanders, Portugal, the two viceroyalties of Indies... Habsburg monarchy respected the laws of Aragon, Italy, Netherlands and also tried to rule each realm mainly by local officials (in Europe... Columbus discovered America for Castile and Leon, and peninsulars kept being sent there). What was important is that these officials were appointed by King in Madrid.

France also had different laws in many provinces.

Yes, but how absolutist was it when it encompassed all that territory, and how long did it last? OTOJ, a unified Westeros wouldn't be facing the amount of external enemies Spain faced but, then again, most of the empire was lost to internal rebellion: the Eighty Years Wars and the Spanish-American Wars of Independence are the prime examples.

[Jaak]

Yes, but how absolutist was it when it encompassed all that territory, and how long did it last? OTOJ, a unified Westeros wouldn't be facing the amount of external enemies Spain faced but, then again, most of the empire was lost to internal rebellion: the Eighty Years Wars and the Spanish-American Wars of Independence are the prime examples.

It lasted a long time. Spanish-American wars of independence broke out... 250 years after the revolutions of Peru had been suppressed, and at a time when mainland Spain was conquered by enemy. Americas did not rise during 1700...1714.

[Lord Damian]

Absolute monarchies work for any length of time, for better or worse and eventually they all end, usually in bloodshed and chaos. Would an absolute monarch be BEST for Westeros? No, they are never the best for anyone except the Absolut monarch themselves. until it ends.

[Lord Reaver]

Spain is a terrible example, because they had an income source the likes of which Westeros isn't likely to see, unless they discover new lands with gold mines as rich as the Lannisters'.

Suffice to say, without that huge influx of funds, the Spanish crown could never have pulled off the stuff it did in it's heyday. Which showed when that income source eventually started to drop off, with the inevitable result that the entire thing collapsed rather quickly.

An absolute monarchy in Westeros is extremely unlikely, due to the factors already pointed out: Huge landmass, low level of infrastructure/organization, entrenched feudal mindset and cultural differences. Not to mention several VERY defendable natural points, which lend themselves to those regions being very capable of defending should they rebel (the neck, the desert of Dorne, shipbreaker bay).

[Jaak]

Spain is a terrible example, because they had an income source the likes of which Westeros isn't likely to see, unless they discover new lands with gold mines as rich as the Lannisters'.

Isabella did not have such lands. And Carlos I got these lands only near the end of his reign.

How about the next Iron Throne occupant successfully forfeiting Casterly Rock to Iron Throne and keeping the gold mine incomes to keep Golden Company standing army and a network of appointed royal governors?