Question about the battle of bells

[corbon]

14 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, never in my experience. If there are vernacular differences, so be it, but Google it: the correct definition of "close to" is almost, or very nearly. You can say something is close to the color blue, but that's an undefinable quantity, so it could be a little more or a little less blue. But in time, distances, weights and other quantifiable measures, "close to" by definition is less than the full amount.

Rubbish. "Close to" is by definition close to. It can be either side. It is usually used to mean on the wrong side of the target (not necessarily less - close to a 10s 100m would be more likely 10.01s rather than 9.99s) only because there are other ways of saying the same thing if there is a 'target' to be achieved. So if the year-length of the siege was a big deal to a person, a significant milestone of siege resistance, then that person would not say 'close to' if the siege was more than a year because they would use their words to emphasize that the milestone had been reached. But if the person using the term was just mentioning an approximate amount they could use 'close to' just meaning 'approximately' or 'about'. It will vary from person to person and even usage to usage by the same person.

14 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Besides, we have Ned stating unambiguously that the war lasted less than a year. So unless you think that Robert could flee the Vale, fight in Gulltown, flee to Storm's End, raise an army, fight at Summerhall, fight at Ashford and then have Mace march from Ashford to Storm's End in less or equal time it takes Ned to march his existing army down the Kingsroad to Storm's End, then the siege could not have lasted a year either -- not even close to it.

I suspect that the first few months of the war (all the way up to and including BoBs) are probably fought with small armies that are the household troops of Lords, the knights and the like whose position is based on military prowess (eg land for military service and train regularly) and very few of the 'peasant draft' (maybe some of those very close to the lords castles, or on the way etc). Basically just those who can muster within days and join along the way. Notice how in all case where we have numbers there are relatively small battles.
Think about the 'muster' Dunk helped form in the Sworn Sword, and how he despaired of having them of any use at all without several weeks training. Add training time to time to be called up, time to muster, time to march to the battle areas...

This also helps account for some of the apparently substantial time break between BoBs and Trident. The Rebels can't push on to KL with any hope of success because they don't actually have their full armies yet. They must clear up their rear areas of loyalists and firm up their supply chains and then wait for their main drafts to arrive

[John Suburbs]

9 hours ago, corbon said:

Rubbish. "Close to" is by definition close to. It can be either side. It is usually used to mean on the wrong side of the target (not necessarily less - close to a 10s 100m would be more likely 10.01s rather than 9.99s) only because there are other ways of saying the same thing if there is a 'target' to be achieved. So if the year-length of the siege was a big deal to a person, a significant milestone of siege resistance, then that person would not say 'close to' if the siege was more than a year because they would use their words to emphasize that the milestone had been reached. But if the person using the term was just mentioning an approximate amount they could use 'close to' just meaning 'approximately' or 'about'. It will vary from person to person and even usage to usage by the same person.

 

It may vary from person to person, but anyone who uses the term "close to" to mean "more than" is deceiving their listener. Your example of the target is accurate, but it's not the same thing as when talking about time or distance. If you are shooting arrows at a target and some go a little high and some go a little low, then sure, they are all "close to" the mark. But if you can throw a ball 52 yards, you don't say "I can throw it close to 50 yards." If you are 52, you don't say "I am close to 50" (unless you intend to deceive).

9 hours ago, corbon said:

I suspect that the first few months of the war (all the way up to and including BoBs) are probably fought with small armies that are the household troops of Lords, the knights and the like whose position is based on military prowess (eg land for military service and train regularly) and very few of the 'peasant draft' (maybe some of those very close to the lords castles, or on the way etc). Basically just those who can muster within days and join along the way. Notice how in all case where we have numbers there are relatively small battles.
Think about the 'muster' Dunk helped form in the Sworn Sword, and how he despaired of having them of any use at all without several weeks training. Add training time to time to be called up, time to muster, time to march to the battle areas...

This also helps account for some of the apparently substantial time break between BoBs and Trident. The Rebels can't push on to KL with any hope of success because they don't actually have their full armies yet. They must clear up their rear areas of loyalists and firm up their supply chains and then wait for their main drafts to arrive

Not sure what you're getting at here, other than to say that the entire timeline of the war is screwball because there is no way all of these armies could have gathered, mustered, trained and then marched across thousands of leagues in anywhere close to a year, which is what I've been saying all along: the timeline is not to be trusted, so using it to either prove or disprove anything is a waste of time.

Yandel puts Ashford after the wedding. Either accept that or reject it, but don't say it's impossible because of the timeline.

[Universal Sword Donor]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

It may vary from person to person, but anyone who uses the term "close to" to mean "more than" is deceiving their listener. Your example of the target is accurate, but it's not the same thing as when talking about time or distance. If you are shooting arrows at a target and some go a little high and some go a little low, then sure, they are all "close to" the mark. But if you can throw a ball 52 yards, you don't say "I can throw it close to 50 yards." If you are 52, you don't say "I am close to 50" (unless you intend to deceive).

What do they get out of deceiving the person? They are ball parking a distance (or time in the book). 

What would you say if you shot and hit at 52 yards? 

[purple-eyes]

I think this "one year" thing only meant to give enough time to make jon. Just like bael also hid for one year. 

grrm probably was not clear about this himself. 

[sciteacher]

39 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

What do they get out of deceiving the person? They are ball parking a distance (or time in the book). 

What would you say if you shot and hit at 52 yards? 

I'd say it went a little farther than 50 yards, or I hit it 52 yards, or a bit more than 50 yards.

I don't think it's necessarily wrong to say "close to a year" when talking about an amount of time just barely over a year, but it's not best usage and it is a bit misleading. Close to implies you got near that amount of time but didn't reach it.

If the time is less than a year, I'd use "less than a year" or "close to a year" or "almost a year" --even "just shy of a year"

If the time is over a year, I'd say "a bit more than a year" "a little over a year" "a year or so"

If it was exactly 365 days I'd say "one year"--If I wasn't sure if it was exactly 365 days I'd say "about a year" or "around a year" or "a year give or take a few days/weeks"

[corbon]

7 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

It may vary from person to person, but anyone who uses the term "close to" to mean "more than" is deceiving their listener.

 Bullshit again. You are just imposing your personal usage on everyone in the world. If it is close to, its close to. That is all the information contained in the words. I've given examples and explanations already.

Quote

Not sure what you're getting at here, other than to say that the entire timeline of the war is screwball because there is no way all of these armies could have gathered, mustered, trained and then marched across thousands of leagues in anywhere close to a year, which is what I've been saying all along: the timeline is not to be trusted, so using it to either prove or disprove anything is a waste of time.

I disagree completely. It doesn't take much effort to get a perfectly reasonable timeline - reasonable given GRRM's deliberate vagueness in times and distances and in particular reasonable by using travel times based roughly on known travel times from GRRM (ie, the speed of plot, not necessarily x miles at y miles/hr = z days).

Remember all of the below is not 'this is what happened' but 'this could work'.

The first action after JA calls his banners is Gulltown. Ned has already set off through the Fingers because of Gulltown being blocked, but JA and Robert clean out Marc Grafton and loyalists that gathered to him without any mention of a siege or multiple assaults. This could easily happen in a week, or two, with relatively small armies comprised of Lord's Households and men-at-arms. Marc Grafton and his allies probably don't have more than a few hundred men and JA and his allies possibly 500-1000 say. Lets call that 2 weeks. Now Robert can leave by sea and return to Storms End quickly, within another week or so.
Meanwhile the first draft is still being levied at the foot of the Eyrie, and both Robert and Ned have already sent ravens home to start the process of raising their banners.

Robert is then back in Storm's End by 3-4 weeks, and at Storms End the process of raising banners has already been underway for nearly all of that time.
Lets give Ned another month to get home, through the Sisters, fisherman's daughter and all. So Ned gets home by 6 weeks, and by the time he gets home most of the northern lords (or their heirs/reps) are already at Winterfell with their household troops etc, while all across the north the drafts have been mobilising for 5-6 weeks already - a few of the closer ones will already be at Winterfell in all likelihood and more will be assembling to join a movement south along the way rather than coming to Winterfell first.

Back to Storms End and 0+3weeks when Robert arrives. Robert learns of the loyalist lord's plans to join at Summerhall and takes his Household and those of his loyal Stormlords who are already at SE with their own Households, and quickly marches to Summerhall himself. Robert is famous for moving fast and this is within his local territory probably with an all mounted force call it three weeks to get there, fight the three battles in a day and get back and party (SE to Summerhall seems to be a bit less than KL to SE and Robert is famous for fast moving and probably with all mounted forces here). Robert is now at +6 weeks. We know these battles are small because there are three in one day, all at the same place and each was with a single Lord and his troops/muster.

In the North, Ned is now moving down to the riverlands with the Household troops etc of the north while the main levies continue to muster and train. Give him a month, maybe 6 weeks to get to Riverrun, communicating with Hoster Tully by Raven from Winterfell and along the way (eg at Barrowtown etc). Ned gets to Riverrun with the North's Household troops etc by +12weeks. This is fast, but not unreasonable given he's only taking the more or less 'professional' troops and probably mostly mounted ones. Particularly when you consider the time-length of other, similar such journeys (Cersei and the wheelhouse, Catelyn from Winterfell to White Harbour and then by boat to KL etc etc).

In the Vale JA takes his household and perhaps some early muster and links up with Ned so at around +12 we have Ned and JA with their 'household' armies, but not most of their draft, at Riverrun.

Back to Robert again, and we gets word that the Reach is coming, so again takes the (larger now, both more Lords arrived and the former loyalists 'turned') bulk of the Stormlands Household troops off to Ashford, call it 2-3 more weeks so +8-9 weeks, but Tarley and the Reach's van defeat him and he is forced to retreat north. The fact that Tarly was able to defeat Robert with just the Reach's van again suggests that Robert's forces were not the full muster of the Stormlands, but again perhaps just the household troops of the closer lords (I suspect that most of the Marcher lords would hold their households close while completing their muster because they are the first line of defence against the Dornish and the Reach).

Robert retreats north for a week or three, JC finding and chasing him, and gets caught at Stoney Sept at around +12-13weeks. At BoBells Ned, Hoster and JA link up with him to win the battle and we are at around +12-+13 weeks.

Now after approximately three months of the war we have:
Stark, Arryn and some Baratheon Household troops at Riverrun, but limited or no draft troops. Tully will have household troops and most of his draft.
Some Baratheon Household troops and draft holding Storms End and probably quite a few other locations around the Stormlands. The Stormlands have loyalists on three sides, so must hold a larger proportion of their men in defence compared to the North, the Vale and even much of the Riverlands.
The Reach forces sieging Storms End. (Siege to last 'close to a year', so 9 1/2-10 months plus another month or so before dipping their banners to Ned...)
JCs scattered loyalist household forces.
Loyalist forces mustering at KL. Plus the gold cloaks, some more household and an invincible keep, never taken.
Dornish forces unknown, and much of the Reach's troops probably also unknown (see Battle of the Mander later).
The Westerland's forces mustering on ye sideline with no one sure which may they will go.

The rebels don't have the forces to take Kings Landing by storm or even a decent siege. For that they will need their proper musters. Any attempt would leave them wide open to Tywin Lannister coming in behind them as well. And they don;t have a fleet to  blockade KL either, so a siege attempt is doomed.

So they clear the Riverlands and their supply lines - Tully's muster will be enough peasants and diggers and camp followers etc for sieging and assaulting smaller castles and holdfasts etc, but not enough for King's Landing, especially not if they need to hold the Riverland's against the Westlands at the same time - while they wait for their main drafts to muster, train and be brought forward to Riverrun. Those forces could take an extra 4-6 months to arrive, easily.

In the mean time, the Targaryen forces aren't in any better position. They need to regroup JC's scattered forces, await musters from the Reach and the slowly arriving Dornish (crownlands are small and probably not a large muster),and find Rhaegar to come back and take command.
The only force really in any position to act is the Tyrells sieging Stroms End, but the sluggard Mace has decided he wants Storm's End and Stannis won't give it to him.

So we have 6-8 months where not a lot of note happens. Neither main force is ready to move strategically and both have significant internal issues to sort out first regarding getting their full armies into order, sorting out alliances, making overtures to the Lannisters, shoring up supply lines etc etc.

Then things kick back into gear again - Rhaegar leads the loyalist army out of Kings Landing to the Trident and after his defeat there within 2 weeks (by Rossart's length of Handship - appointment to death) Ned and the rebel van arrive in KL to find Tywin sacking it.

Quote

Yandel puts Ashford after the wedding. Either accept that or reject it, but don't say it's impossible because of the timeline.

Except he doesn't put it after except by a single narrow-minded interpretation. A more reasonable interpretation makes it fit with every other piece of data we have.

 

PS These threads might help to consider the forces involved, particularly the early ones and how quickly they could be formed and how well trained and equipped they might be.

[John Suburbs]

17 hours ago, corbon said:

 Bullshit again. You are just imposing your personal usage on everyone in the world. If it is close to, its close to. That is all the information contained in the words. I've given examples and explanations already.

I disagree completely. It doesn't take much effort to get a perfectly reasonable timeline - reasonable given GRRM's deliberate vagueness in times and distances and in particular reasonable by using travel times based roughly on known travel times from GRRM (ie, the speed of plot, not necessarily x miles at y miles/hr = z days).

Remember all of the below is not 'this is what happened' but 'this could work'.

The first action after JA calls his banners is Gulltown. Ned has already set off through the Fingers because of Gulltown being blocked, but JA and Robert clean out Marc Grafton and loyalists that gathered to him without any mention of a siege or multiple assaults. This could easily happen in a week, or two, with relatively small armies comprised of Lord's Households and men-at-arms. Marc Grafton and his allies probably don't have more than a few hundred men and JA and his allies possibly 500-1000 say. Lets call that 2 weeks. Now Robert can leave by sea and return to Storms End quickly, within another week or so.
Meanwhile the first draft is still being levied at the foot of the Eyrie, and both Robert and Ned have already sent ravens home to start the process of raising their banners.

Robert is then back in Storm's End by 3-4 weeks, and at Storms End the process of raising banners has already been underway for nearly all of that time.
Lets give Ned another month to get home, through the Sisters, fisherman's daughter and all. So Ned gets home by 6 weeks, and by the time he gets home most of the northern lords (or their heirs/reps) are already at Winterfell with their household troops etc, while all across the north the drafts have been mobilising for 5-6 weeks already - a few of the closer ones will already be at Winterfell in all likelihood and more will be assembling to join a movement south along the way rather than coming to Winterfell first.

Back to Storms End and 0+3weeks when Robert arrives. Robert learns of the loyalist lord's plans to join at Summerhall and takes his Household and those of his loyal Stormlords who are already at SE with their own Households, and quickly marches to Summerhall himself. Robert is famous for moving fast and this is within his local territory probably with an all mounted force call it three weeks to get there, fight the three battles in a day and get back and party (SE to Summerhall seems to be a bit less than KL to SE and Robert is famous for fast moving and probably with all mounted forces here). Robert is now at +6 weeks. We know these battles are small because there are three in one day, all at the same place and each was with a single Lord and his troops/muster.

In the North, Ned is now moving down to the riverlands with the Household troops etc of the north while the main levies continue to muster and train. Give him a month, maybe 6 weeks to get to Riverrun, communicating with Hoster Tully by Raven from Winterfell and along the way (eg at Barrowtown etc). Ned gets to Riverrun with the North's Household troops etc by +12weeks. This is fast, but not unreasonable given he's only taking the more or less 'professional' troops and probably mostly mounted ones. Particularly when you consider the time-length of other, similar such journeys (Cersei and the wheelhouse, Catelyn from Winterfell to White Harbour and then by boat to KL etc etc).

In the Vale JA takes his household and perhaps some early muster and links up with Ned so at around +12 we have Ned and JA with their 'household' armies, but not most of their draft, at Riverrun.

Back to Robert again, and we gets word that the Reach is coming, so again takes the (larger now, both more Lords arrived and the former loyalists 'turned') bulk of the Stormlands Household troops off to Ashford, call it 2-3 more weeks so +8-9 weeks, but Tarley and the Reach's van defeat him and he is forced to retreat north. The fact that Tarly was able to defeat Robert with just the Reach's van again suggests that Robert's forces were not the full muster of the Stormlands, but again perhaps just the household troops of the closer lords (I suspect that most of the Marcher lords would hold their households close while completing their muster because they are the first line of defence against the Dornish and the Reach).

Robert retreats north for a week or three, JC finding and chasing him, and gets caught at Stoney Sept at around +12-13weeks. At BoBells Ned, Hoster and JA link up with him to win the battle and we are at around +12-+13 weeks.

Now after approximately three months of the war we have:
Stark, Arryn and some Baratheon Household troops at Riverrun, but limited or no draft troops. Tully will have household troops and most of his draft.
Some Baratheon Household troops and draft holding Storms End and probably quite a few other locations around the Stormlands. The Stormlands have loyalists on three sides, so must hold a larger proportion of their men in defence compared to the North, the Vale and even much of the Riverlands.
The Reach forces sieging Storms End. (Siege to last 'close to a year', so 9 1/2-10 months plus another month or so before dipping their banners to Ned...)
JCs scattered loyalist household forces.
Loyalist forces mustering at KL. Plus the gold cloaks, some more household and an invincible keep, never taken.
Dornish forces unknown, and much of the Reach's troops probably also unknown (see Battle of the Mander later).
The Westerland's forces mustering on ye sideline with no one sure which may they will go.

The rebels don't have the forces to take Kings Landing by storm or even a decent siege. For that they will need their proper musters. Any attempt would leave them wide open to Tywin Lannister coming in behind them as well. And they don;t have a fleet to  blockade KL either, so a siege attempt is doomed.

So they clear the Riverlands and their supply lines - Tully's muster will be enough peasants and diggers and camp followers etc for sieging and assaulting smaller castles and holdfasts etc, but not enough for King's Landing, especially not if they need to hold the Riverland's against the Westlands at the same time - while they wait for their main drafts to muster, train and be brought forward to Riverrun. Those forces could take an extra 4-6 months to arrive, easily.

In the mean time, the Targaryen forces aren't in any better position. They need to regroup JC's scattered forces, await musters from the Reach and the slowly arriving Dornish (crownlands are small and probably not a large muster),and find Rhaegar to come back and take command.
The only force really in any position to act is the Tyrells sieging Stroms End, but the sluggard Mace has decided he wants Storm's End and Stannis won't give it to him.

So we have 6-8 months where not a lot of note happens. Neither main force is ready to move strategically and both have significant internal issues to sort out first regarding getting their full armies into order, sorting out alliances, making overtures to the Lannisters, shoring up supply lines etc etc.

Then things kick back into gear again - Rhaegar leads the loyalist army out of Kings Landing to the Trident and after his defeat there within 2 weeks (by Rossart's length of Handship - appointment to death) Ned and the rebel van arrive in KL to find Tywin sacking it.

Except he doesn't put it after except by a single narrow-minded interpretation. A more reasonable interpretation makes it fit with every other piece of data we have.

 

PS These threads might help to consider the forces involved, particularly the early ones and how quickly they could be formed and how well trained and equipped they might be.

Yes, all very impressive. But in the end it merely reinforces my original point. If the war actually took longer than a year, not less, then that leaves plenty of time for the BotB to happen after the wedding and still leave a good year for the entire siege. Remember, we need a minimum of nine months between the wedding the and the sack in order for Robb to be older than Jon, but if that timespan alone is 10 or 12 months, then the BotB could have happened a month after the wedding, and then we have another year to get Mace to SE and dig in before Ned shows up.

And sorry, it's not my personal standard. It is the proper use of the term "close to" in relation to time or distance. People can see a bear and call it a duck, but you know, if it has feathers and quacks...

[Clegane'sPup]

Spoiler

A Game of Thrones - Catelyn I

Ned had fostered at the Eyrie, and the childless Lord Arryn had become a second father to him and his fellow ward, Robert Baratheon. When the Mad King Aerys II Targaryen had demanded their heads, the Lord of the Eyrie had raised his moon-and-falcon banners in revolt rather than give up those he had pledged to protect.

And one day fifteen years ago, this second father had become a brother as well, as he and Ned stood together in the sept at Riverrun to wed two sisters, the daughters of Lord Hoster Tully.

 A Game of Thrones - Eddard I

 Fifteen years past, when they had ridden forth to win a throne,

A Game of Thrones - Catelyn II

He [Eddard] looked somehow smaller and more vulnerable, like the youth she had wed in the sept at Riverrun, fifteen long years gone.

A Game of Thrones - Catelyn II

It came as no surprise to her, in the first year of her marriage, to learn that Ned had fathered a child on some girl chance met on campaign. He had a man's needs, after all, and they had spent that year apart, Ned off at war in the south while she remained safe in her father's castle at Riverrun. Her thoughts were more of Robb, the infant at her breast, than of the husband she scarcely knew.

A Game of Thrones - Eddard II

The war had raged for close to a year.

A Game of Thrones - Eddard II

Troubled sleep was no stranger to him. He had lived his lies for fourteen years, yet they still haunted him at night.

A Game of Thrones - Eddard IV

“A fool I may be, Stark … yet I'm still here, while your brother has been moldering in his frozen grave for some fourteen years now.

 A Game of Thrones - Eddard VIII

 Suddenly, uncomfortably, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen. Fifteen years dead, yet Robert hates him as much as ever

A Game of Thrones - Eddard XIII

By the time you receive this letter, your brother Robert, our King these past fifteen years, will be dead.

A Game of Thrones - Eddard XV

It was the year of false spring, and he was eighteen again, down from the Eyrie to the tourney at Harrenhal.

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn VII

"They strangled Brandon while his father watched, and then killed Lord Rickard as well." An ugly tale, and sixteen years old. Why was he asking about it now?

Above are the quotes I am using as the premise of this post. I’m under the impression AGOT (not the prologue) opens in the year  298.

Cat says one day fifteen years ago, this second father [JA] had become a brother as well, as he and Ned stood together in the sept at Riverrun

15 years ago Ned marries Cat, translates to they married sometime during 283.  She also says they spent a year apart. I take that to mean that after they wed in 283, the next time Cat saw Ned was sometime in 284. Therefore I cannot come up with a definite year for the Battle of the Bells at the Stoney Sept. Meaning the BotB could have happened in 282 or 283 depending upon what month Eddard & Cat married.

15 years ago Eddard & Robert rode forth to win a throne. Using the year 289, that translates to  283. This is also ambiguous. Is Eddard implying 15 years ago when he left the Eyrie to go to WF and JA & Bob went wherever they went.

The war had raged close to a year Eddard remembers. Again what point of reference is Eddard basing this statement on? Is it when JA defied the king and called his banners or is it when Eddard arrived at WF and called his banners to join Robert’s?

Eddard had lived with his lies for 14 years.  Using 298 as a base, infers to me that his lies started sometime in  284.

This is where it starts to get trickier. When did the year change from 298 to 299? Eddard supposedly dies in 299. There is no, nada, zilch way to pin these dates down.

LF tells Eddard Brandon has been dead some 14 years.Still using 298 as a base that means Brandon died in  284 and something is not adding up. If LF made a mistake or lied, evidently Eddard did not see the need to correct him.

Eddard says Rhaegar has been dead 15 years, implying Rhaegar died sometime in  283.

Eddard sends Stannis a letter saying the king of the past 15 years will be dead. Implying Robert was crowned sometime in 283.

At the Harrenhal tourney Eddard says he was 18.  If Eddard died in 299, the tourney at Harrenhal would have taken place sometime in 281.

Cat tells Jaime it has been 16 years since the death of Lord Rickard & Brandon. When Cat says this to Jaime the year must be 299, which would make LR & Brandon dead in 283.

Mental masturbation. So I conclude that the Battle of the Bells at the Stoney Sept happened sometime either in 282 or 283. Answers nothing.