How rich are the Starks pre series

[Bright Ancalagon]

30 minutes ago, John Doe said:

And are, in turn, controlled by the Iron Throne. So basically all their wealth belongs to King's Landing.

But we know for sure that the IT didnt intervene much in the North or in Dorne. So its possible that their share was lower than on the others regions. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

8 minutes ago, Bright Ancalagon said:

But we know for sure that the IT didnt intervene much in the North or in Dorne. So its possible that their share was lower than on the others regions. 

Well, I would add that I am not at all convinced that the Iron Throne - since the death of the last Dragons - exercises similar control over the Lords Paramount as the Lords Paramount exercise over their own vassals.

I have not seen the Starks needing to sign a loan agreement with a vassal for the provision of goods or services, yet that is exactly what the Crown had to do with Tywin Lannister to get some gold from him.

The Starks seem to just issue commands, and their vassals have to cough up the goods. Again, see the Lord Stout example, the example of the Manderlys bringing boatloads of food to supply Roose's host at Winterfell, the ships they built, etc.

Maybe the North operates on a more ancient version of vassalage, where the Lords of Winterfell have more absolute command of their vassals, or else the Iron Throne is simply not as powerful in practical terms in the Westerosi context as Lords Paramount are in their respective "kingdoms".

[Shireen Purratheon]

The Lannisters(including the of Lannisport Lannisters) and Tyrells are the indisputably wealthiest families. I'd put the crown after them. The crown is obviously hurting, at the beginning of the series, it is completely reliant on Tywin, then later on the Lannister/Tyrell alliance, but it could still outmaneuver almost anybody else. Then I'd put the Hightowers next, by virtue of Oldtown, then round out the top five with the Redwynes who've got a huge island with tons of ships and the best grapes around.

I'd put the Tullys next by virtue of all the medium towns in their domain. Then I'd place the Starks next. The sheer size means something. I put the Arryns after them. Even if the Vale is more fertile than the North, and Gulltown gets more business, there's so much more North to grow and do business in, add in that the Mountains of the Moon take up a higher proportion of the Vale than the Northern Mountains of the North. I guess I'll throw Martell in next by virtue of them being a nearly autonomous region and thus, by my understanding, keep most revenues in Sunspear. Add in the special produces that seem to only be grown here.

I'm going to put the Manderlys in the tenth place. They have lordship over all of White Harbor, a bunch of the river, and a lot of the surrounding area. Even if Gulltown is busier, the administration of that city is fractured. I'd put Manderly as easily the third most powerful secondary house.

I'm going to put the Freys above the Greyjoys and then Baratheons of Storm's End. It is drilled into us endlessly how poor the Stormlands are.

[Bright Ancalagon]

12 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well, I would add that I am not at all convinced that the Iron Throne - since the death of the last Dragons - exercises similar control over the Lords Paramount as the Lords Paramount exercise over their own vassals.

I have not seen the Starks needing to sign a loan agreement with a vassal for the provision of goods or services, yet that is exactly what the Crown had to do with Tywin Lannister to get some gold from him.

The Starks seem to just issue commands, and their vassals have to cough up the goods. Again, see the Lord Stout example, the example of the Manderlys bringing boatloads of food to supply Roose's host at Winterfell, the ships they built, etc.

Maybe the North operates on a more ancient version of vassalage, where the Lords of Winterfell have more absolute command of their vassals, or else the Iron Throne is simply not as powerful in practical terms in the Westerosi context as Lords Paramount are in their respective "kingdoms".

Sir, the agreement might be needed when they loan gold. Otherwise the liege lord,  or king just took it. But i agree with you. 

[Clegane'sPup]

11 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well, I would add that I am not at all convinced that the Iron Throne - since the death of the last Dragons - exercises similar control over the Lords Paramount as the Lords Paramount exercise over their own vassals.

I'm curious. I have read the "Lord Paramount' term in numerous posts lately. Stark was Warden of the North. The only Lord Paramount I read about in the five books was when Joffrey named Baelish Lord Paramount of the Trident.

[John Doe]

28 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I'm saying your argument is nonsensical.

The fact that the Iron Throne is liege lord to both the Starks and the Lannisters makes no difference to how the Starks and Lannisters compare to one another in terms of assets under their control. Similarly, the fact that the Starks can command the assets of both the Manderlys and Boltons does not change the fact that the Manderlys are wealthier than the Boltons.

So you agree with my statement that the Lannisters are richer than the Starks? What are you trying to proove, then?

[Free Northman Reborn]

Just now, John Doe said:

So you agree with my statement that the Lannisters are richer than the Starks? What are you trying to proove, then?

Who in their right mind would disagree with that statement?

 

[Nevets]

2 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

I'm curious. I have read the "Lord Paramount' term in numerous posts lately. Stark was Warden of the North. The only Lord Paramount I read about in the five books was when Joffrey named Baelish Lord Paramount of the Trident.

There are four wardens, one for each point of the compass (East, North, South, and West)  They are essentially for military purposes.

Each region has a Lord Paramount.  These include the North, Westerlands, Riverlands (Trident), etc.  This position is almost invariably hereditary.  The Stark family is the Lord Paramount of the North.  Lannister, Tully, Greyjoy, etc. are other Lords Paramount.

[The Wolves]

1 hour ago, John Doe said:

 

Yes, the Starks had to rely on Manderly to build their fleet, elsewise they wouldn't have asked him and would have done it themselves instead. And if you count 100% of a vassal's wealth as their liege's, you should also say that the Starks have no money because their wealth then belongs to the Iron Throne.

The Starks didn't have to rely on Manderly to build a fleet. Manderly came to the Starks asking for gold to build one. Rodrik saw a way to build a fleet without loosing money so he had the Manderlys and Umbers work together building a fleet without loosing gold. 

The Starks control the largest forest in the realm if they wanted to build a fleet it would have easily been done. 

[Bright Ancalagon]

1 minute ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Who in their right mind would disagree with that statement?

 

I agree that the LP had more control over their vassals than the King over the LP,  or the Faith. 

About being rich,  i saw a post showing that the Tyrells are richer than the Lannisters. So,  excluding the metals i could but wont say that the Starks are richer 'cause they controll more fertile land.

[Clegane'sPup]

2 minutes ago, Nevets said:

There are four wardens, one for each point of the compass (East, North, South, and West)  They are essentially for military purposes.

Each region has a Lord Paramount.  These include the North, Westerlands, Riverlands (Trident), etc.  This position is almost invariably hereditary.  The Stark family is the Lord Paramount of the North.  Lannister, Tully, Greyjoy, etc. are other Lords Paramount.

Could you give me a bit more information as to where you read that? Did it come from the coffee history table book? I haven't read it. Only thing I read about it in the five books is:

Be it known that Lord Baelish is granted the castle of Harrenhal with all its attendant lands and incomes, there to make his seat and rule henceforth as Lord Paramount of the Trident. Petyr Baelish and his sons and grandsons shall hold and enjoy these honors until the end of time, and all the lords of the Trident shall do him homage as their rightful liege. The King's Hand and the small council consent."

[redtree]

8 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Could you give me a bit more information as to where you read that? Did it come from the coffee history table book? I haven't read it. Only thing I read about it in the five books is:

Be it known that Lord Baelish is granted the castle of Harrenhal with all its attendant lands and incomes, there to make his seat and rule henceforth as Lord Paramount of the Trident. Petyr Baelish and his sons and grandsons shall hold and enjoy these honors until the end of time, and all the lords of the Trident shall do him homage as their rightful liege. The King's Hand and the small council consent."

Warden is for military purpose but Lord Paramount is the typical highlord title, usually belongs to the previous king who bowed to Aegon 1 . One can be both Lord paramount and Warden

Tyrell= Warden of South, threat=Dornish 
Lannister=Warden of West, threat=Ironborn
Stark=Warden of North, threat=Wildling etc
Arryn=Warden of East, threat=Foreign 
It's just mostly ceremonial title

[Clegane'sPup]

2 minutes ago, redtree said:

Warden is for military purpose but Lord Paramount is the typical highlord title, usually belongs to the previous king who bowed to Aegon 1 . One can be both Lord paramount and Warden

Yeah, but where is that stated?

[Lord Varys]

The Starks should be the poorest great lords by far, and many smaller houses should actually be much more wealthier than they are, especially those who control, say, gold mines (i.e. most of the lords of the West).

There are many hints that the Starks are short in coin, and that's the crucial thing when we are discussing wealth. All lords do own lands, and the amount of land you control means nothing if nobody wants to buy it. And essentially nobody wants to buy anything or settle in the North, that much is clear. Even Rickard Stark looked south for his marriages and alliances.

The hints I'm speaking about are the following:

- It is mentioned in AGoT and ACoK that Starks have silver in their coffers, but there is no mention of gold as far as I recall. Their silver would the Starks get from the Manderlys who have silver mines on their lands - there is no mention of any other mines of precious things (gold, platinum, gemstones, etc.) anywhere in the North.

- The royal visit of Robert Baratheon and his family and entourage apparently was a problem for the Stark budget - considering the poor entertainment (no singers, no balls, no tourneys, no mummers, no pretty much anything aside from some hunts and a feast) the royals got at Winterfell the Starks don't seem to have the coin or the other resources to entertain anyone on a high level. Just compare that to the tourney Lord Whent threw at Harrenhal in the False Spring or the tourney at Lannisport Tywin threw to celebrate the birth of Prince Viserys. Does anybody think they cared about the wealth and splendor they showed off to Aerys and the Realm back then? I don't think so.

- The Broken Tower broke some time ago and was never rebuilt, renewed, or torn down. This can be seen as the Starks lacking the resources to repair the castle or keep it in top shape (Castle Tarbeck also was in decay because the Tarbecks were impoverished - that only changed after Ellyn Reyne married into the house).

- Sansa considers Jory to look somewhat like a beggar in his plan and unadorned armor, and not in comparison to Loras, Renly, or Jaime but in comparison to second-tier lords like Beric Dondarrion. That is a pretty big hint that the North doesn't exactly have much coin to spare.

In light of any of that - especially the tokens and sign of true wealth like the Lannisters, the Tyrells, and the people at court often depict - I see no reason why we should assume the Stark are very rich.

Their lands also aren't very fertile. They can't be due the climatic region they are in, not to mention the fact that nobody lives up there. Just remember how dismissive Mace and Paxter are of the Starks in ASoS. The lands north of the Neck might be vast but they are empty and insignificant compared to theirs. And they should know that because the Reach is bread basket of the Realm. They produce huge amounts of food and the surplus they make seem to be enough to feed half the Realm or more. The Starks may have more land, but the Tyrells certainly get more crops and meat off the lands they hold.

The Crown is a special issue it seems to depend on the king whether he throws the tax money out or whether he keeps it. But it is quite clear that there were Targaryen kings who were insanely rich, most notably Jaehaerys I and Viserys I. The Crown collects the most taxes so in good years they should be riches. And there are hints that the Crown collects taxes from everyone, not just the great houses. There are royal tax collectors in Gulltown and White Harbor, after all. But we don't know any details about that. In any case, it is clearly the case that vassals can be richer than their lieges (the Lannisters are richer than the Crown) so presumably the lion's share in gold from mines or coin from trade might go into the coffers of the local lord rather than his liege. But that is just a guess. 

One has also to consider the amount of money the Crown makes off the trade in KL. It is the biggest city in Westeros and the Crown should essentially take a share off every business transaction done in the city. And, of course, they also collect taxes from Duskendale.

If I'd have to make a list it would look something like that:

1. The Lannisters (not just because of their gold but also because of the the taxes and money they make off Lannisport)

2. The Tyrells (taxes from all over the Reach should award them greater incomes than the Hightowers; but it might be a close thing)

3. The Hightowers (due to the wealth of their city and the riches they amassed throughout the centuries)

4. The other richer houses in the West (I'm not sure how many, certainly four or five, I'd think); we know they have a lot of gold but also very fertile lands. Once the Reynes would have been the top dogs after the Lannisters, perhaps on the same level as the Hightowers.

5. Here could come some of the other great houses. I'd consider the Arryns and Tullys to come before the Baratheons and Martells (Lysa had Jon Arryn made that rather costly armor and sword - Renly as the king's brother might have more incomes that just what he gets as Lord of the Stormlands). The Martells should make some decent profits from trade with the near by Free Cities, whereas the Greyjoys would certainly be poorer than the Starks in the present scenario (but historically the Ironborn often might have been richer). Not sure whether the Starks are richer than the Manderlys. We just don't know how high their incomes are, and how much coin they have to spend to maintain the North, especially in winter.

6. The houses controlling important cities (Graftons, Manderlys) might actually be richer than some of the greater houses and houses controlling important trade routes like the Freys would also play in the top league. There were short-lived houses like the Butterwells who certainly were wealthier than many of the great houses (Ambrose Butterwell used an insane amount of money to built Whitewalls), and we should consider the major houses holding Harrenhal (Qoherys, Strong, Lothston, Whent, and Baelish) to be among the most wealthiest houses in Westeros simply because nobody in his right mind would take or aspire to be the Lord of Harrenhal if he or she didn't have the coin to maintain this castle (or at least a good portion thereof).

[redtree]

1 minute ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Yeah, but where is that stated?

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Social_Structure_Moat_Cailin_and_More

[Clegane'sPup]

2 minutes ago, redtree said:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Social_Structure_Moat_Cailin_and_More

Okay name me dense but I didn't read anything about Stark being a Lord Paramount. thanks.

[Iona]

Hmm, does anyone remember if the Ironborn found like a huge pile of gold in a vault or sumthing like that when they sacked Winterfell? Because I can't, which makes me think Starks didn't really have that much hard cash lying around. Of course Ned might have had an overseas account in a tax haven...

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

- Sansa considers Jory to look somewhat like a beggar in his plan and unadorned armor, and not in comparison to Loras, Renly, or Jaime but in comparison to second-tier lords like Beric Dondarrion. That is a pretty big hint that the North doesn't exactly have much coin to spare.
 

You've convinced me with your post. But - I'd like to counter-argue this particular point by saying that all that chivalry nonsense was not all that hot in the North, they were always a practical kind of folk, so unadorned armor might just be a sign of their mentality, not so much an indication of their wealth.

[Knight of the Red Tree]

There are two kinds of power.

Monetary power, which is symbolic power; and martial power, which is true power.

Note for instance that Tywin's great wealth wasn't helping him in winning any battles against Robb Stark.

If you still have any doubt, just think if you'd rather have a handful of bills or a dagger, right next to an enemy which would have the one you didn't pick.

[Bright Ancalagon]

 

 

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Starks should be the poorest great lords by far, and many smaller houses should actually be much more wealthier than they are, especially those who control, say, gold mines (i.e. most of the lords of the West).

There are many hints that the Starks are short in coin, and that's the crucial thing when we are discussing wealth. All lords do own lands, and the amount of land you control means nothing if nobody wants to buy it. And essentially nobody wants to buy anything or settle in the North, that much is clear. Even Rickard Stark looked south for his marriages and alliances.

The hints I'm speaking about are the following:

- It is mentioned in AGoT and ACoK that Starks have silver in their coffers, but there is no mention of gold as far as I recall. Their silver would the Starks get from the Manderlys who have silver mines on their lands - there is no mention of any other mines of precious things (gold, platinum, gemstones, etc. anywhere in the North).

- The royal visit of Robert Baratheon and his family and entourage apparently was a problem for the Stark budget - considering the poor entertainment (no singers, no balls, no tourneys, no mummers, no pretty much anything aside from some hunts and a feast) the royals got at Winterfell the Starks don't seem to have the coin or the other resources to entertain anyone on a high level. Just compare that to the tourney Lord Whent threw at Harrenhal in the False Spring or the tourney at Lannisport Tywin threw to celebrate the birth of Prince Viserys. Does anybody thing they cared about the wealth and splendor he showed off to Aerys and the Realm back then? I don't think so. (((You cant compare that. Those were possibly the most expensive tourneys ever held. Besides that they were meant to be a display of power prestigious and wealth.))) 

- The Broken Tower broke some time ago and was never rebuilt, renewed, or torn down. This can be seen as the Starks lacking the resources to repair the castle or keep it in top shape (Castle Tarbeck also was in decay because the Tarbecks were impoverished - that only changed after Ellyn Reyne married into the house). (((Summerhall and the Dragon pits are ruins. Does it mean the Targs were poor?))) 

- Sansa considers Jory to look somewhat like a beggar in his plan and unadorned armor, and not in comparison to Loras, Renly, or Jaime but in comparison to second-tier lords like Beric Dondarrion. That is a pretty big hint that the North doesn't exactly have much coin to spare.

In light of any of that - especially the tokens and sign of true wealth like the Lannisters, the Tyrells, and the people at court often depict - I see no reason why we should assume the Stark are very rich.

Their lands also aren't very fertile. They can't be due the climatic region they are in, not to mention the fact that nobody lives up there. Just remember how dismissive Mace and Paxter are of the Starks in ASoS. The lands north of the Neck might be vast but they are empty and insignificant compared to theirs. And they should know that because the Reach is bread basket of the Realm. They produce huge amounts of food and the surplus they make seem to be enough to feed half the Realm or more. The Starks may have more land, but the Tyrells certainly get more crops and meat off the lands they hold.

The Crown is a special issue it seems to depend on the king whether he throws the tax money out or whether he keeps it. But it is quite clear that there were Targaryen kings who were insanely rich, most notably Jaehaerys I and Viserys I. The Crown collects the most taxes so in good years they should be riches. And there are hints that the Crown collects taxes from everyone, not just the great houses. There are royal tax collectors in Gulltown and White Harbor, after all. But we don't know any details about that. In any case, it is clearly the case that vassals can be richer than their lieges (the Lannisters are richer than the Crown) so presumably the lion's share in gold from mines or coin from trade might go into the coffers of the local lord rather than his liege. But that is just a guess. 

One has also to consider the amount of money the Crown makes off the trade in KL. It is the biggest city in Westeros and the Crown should essentially take a share off every business transaction done in the city. And, of course, they also collect taxes from Duskendale.

If I'd have to make a list it would look something like that:

1. The Lannisters (not just because of their gold but also because of the the taxes and money they make off Lannisport)

2. The Tyrells (taxes from all over the Reach should award them greater incomes than the Hightowers; but it might be a close thing)

3. The Hightowers (due to the wealth of their city and the riches they amassed throughout the centuries)

4. The other richer houses in the West (I'm not sure how many, certainly four or five, I'd think); we know they have a lot of gold but also very fertile lands. Once the Reynes would have been the top dogs after the Lannisters, perhaps on the same level as the Hightowers.

5. Here could come some of the other great houses. I'd consider the Arryns and Tullys to come before the Baratheons and Martells (Lysa had Jon Arryn made that rather costly armor and sword - Renly as the king's brother might have more incomes that just what he gets as Lord of the Stormlands). The Martells should make some decent profits from trade with the near by Free Cities, whereas the Greyjoys would certainly be poorer than the Starks in the present scenario (but historically the Ironborn often might have been richer). Not sure whether the Starks are richer than the Manderlys. We just don't know how high their incomes are, and how much coin they have to spend to maintain the North, especially in winter.

6. The houses controlling important cities (Graftons, Manderlys) might actually be richer than some of the greater houses and houses controlling important trade routes like the Freys would also play in the top league. There were short-lived houses like the Butterwells who certainly were wealthier than many of the great houses (Ambrose Butterwell used an insane amount of money to built Whitewalls), and we should consider the major houses holding Harrenhal (Qoherys, Strong, Lothston, Whent, and Baelish) to be among the most wealthiest houses in Westeros simply because nobody in his right mind would take or aspire to be the Lord of Harrenhal if he or she didn't have the coin to maintain this castle (or at least a good portion thereof).(( The Strongs were rich. The others ones we just don't know. Damn,  one of those lords was just a captainguard who fought well. 

 

[The Wolves]

3 minutes ago, Iona said:

 

You've convinced me with your post. But - I'd like to counter-argue this particular point by saying that all that chivalry nonsense was not all that hot in the North, they were always a practical kind of folk, so unadorned armor might just be a sign of their mentality, not so much an indication of their wealth.

Basically the Northernmen don't care about flashy things like decorated armor, throwing vast splendid looking balls, or showing off their wealth. 

Sansa and Arya are said to own multiple gowns of silk even Theon had silk clothes. Plus they have fur. The Starks do have money they just aren't showy with it. 

And about the broken tower I doubt that they can't repair it it's more like why should we.