How rich are the Starks pre series

[thelittledragonthatcould]

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Wait, what?

Consider what you are saying. You are arguing that the numbers of the host sizes during the Conquest must mean one thing for the South and the opposite for the North. How about we apply our minds even handedly instead?

Does it not mean that (it is possible) the Reach and West have grown in population while the North has decreased considering the clear changes in the military forces that were able to summon 300 years ago and what that summon during the series?

Some realms have flourished under Targaryen/Baratheon rule and some have not. This is pretty consistent with world life economics.

 

6 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

On a serious note, I would consider that as much as 90% of the North's foreign trade goes through White Harbor.

Clearly there is trade through the Kingsroad, as much as you and BE might not want to admit it. This is pretty confirmed in a Jon Snow chapter.

"It's past time. In winters past, food could be brought up the kingsroad from the south, but with the war … it is still autumn, I know, but I would advise we go on winter rations nonetheless, if it please my lord."

Whether GRRM's world of Dragons or Icemen is realistic or not, the Kings road is used for trade between the South and the North. Even the Stark children were taught just how poor the Crannogmen lands are, of course they would be envious of better lands. I imagine he would even be jealous of the thinly populated Sea Dragon Point or the lands of he Mountain Clans.

 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Interesting.

Not sure which quote of Martin's you are accusing me of twisting to my purposes in your first reference above.

All of them. Don't just say GRRM says or Jon Snow says or the text says, actually provide the quote.

It is OK for your opinion to be something, a lot of my arguments are based on opinion as well, but if you are claiming that your opinion is based on the authors words then it is a good idea to use a quote backing that up.

You have said that both Jon Snow and GRRM have claimed that the Mountain Clans are the poorest in the North, provide the quotes. You have claimed that the Ne Gift is good farmland, provide the quotes and you have also said that GRRM stated that Robb did not raise his full host because of the harvest then provide the quotes.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 

The one about the Starks having lost more men in wars over the last 100 years I presume?

I or anyone else did not actually say that. We were backing up GRRM's quote that the North and the Starks has had a pretty hard time in the last hundred years, certainly worse than the Lannisters and the Starks who have seen their fair share of hardship in the last century.

The fact that the Lannisters, who had seen action from the Ironborn against Dagon Greyjoy, the revolts in the time of Tytos, the Nine Penny wars (Jason Lannister dies), the Peake Rebellion ( Tywald Lannister dies) the fourth Blackfyre Rebellion ( Tion Lannister dies) as well as Robert's Rebellion and the Greyjoy Rebellion have had an easier time than the Starls this last century is quite telling.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 

If so, I said exactly that. My point is, wars such as that do not reduce the population size of a region by any meaningful number. Losing a significant number of Starks has no bearing on losing significant population numbers. I cannot really be clearer on that.

lol are you really under the impression that it was only Starks who died in these frequent battles many of which took place in the North?

Maybe fewer smallfolk and soldiers died as a percentage of the population than Stark members did, but clearly they too would have suffered and the harsh Northern winters would make it harder than their Southern counterparts to bounce back to their status quo.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Next, so you say you don't believe the North has declined in the last 300 years.

Well no, I said that they stagnated. Losing the Ne Gift would have meant they may well have declined, but my point is that even if they had not or even made (slight) gains they would not have matched many of their Southern peers in the increases they made effectively making them a weaker realm in 298 than they were in 0.

 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Regarding House Florent. Stannis says they can offer him 2000 swords at best.

And Stannis barely knew about the strnegth of the Mountain Clans, who were only able to raise such numbers after it was Winter and there was no more harvest to bring in.

Either Stannis is an authority on military numbers or he is not, you can not have it both ways.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I question the intentions of some of your remaining questions. Why pretend that you don't know about the quote referring to the nature of the land in the Gift?

I do know the nature of the quote. I imagine I know it a great deal better than you and the other Stark fans who regularly use it out of context. Literally every time you and other Stark fans mention the New Gift you all call it good farmland.

Actual times the phrase good farmland is used in the series https://asearchoficeandfire.com/?q=good+farmland

What we actually see is Jojen, a boy who grew up in a swamp having to hunt frogs, think that the land was good.

"This is good land." Jojen picked up a handful of dirt, rubbing it between his fingers. "A village, an inn, a stout holdfast in the lake, all these apple trees . . . but where are the people, Bran? Why would they leave such a place?"

Which it most certainly is in contrast to the lands he grew up in, though probably not in contrast to the lands outside of the North that he likely, has never seen.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 

 

Next, the bit about the comparative poverty of the Mountain Clansmen must be the most disingenuous part of your entire post. Jon says they are poor. Martin confirms the nature of their small and rude holdfasts.

Provide the quotes, don't tell us what GRRM and Jon says, supply the evidence.

"Only with feasts. Each will try to outdo the others with his hospitality. My lord father said he never ate half so well as when visiting the clans." -Jon Snow

That might be appropriate. They do have lands and holdfasts, so at the least they would *** houses and not ** houses. Some may have fastnesses big enough to be called castles, even, though they would be small and rude by comparison to the great castles of the south.- GRRM

Neither of which says they are poorer than the Reeds, Skagosi, Mormonts, Umbers etc. Provide the quote stating they are the poorest like you originally claimed.

 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The fact that the lands of the Flints and Norreys are warmer and fairer than the Gift comes directly from old Flint and Norrey themselves. And their lands are the northernmost of the Mountain Clan lands, by the way. I already provided that quote upthread. Go and read it if you're really interested, and not just looking for reasons not to believe it, as I suspect you are.

Provide it again.

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 

Even Ran's 35k provides for 15k Northmen remaining in the North at this point in time.

Sure. 15K in the North, what kick started this conversation was me claiming that the North is unlikely to be able to raise another large host to go South.

10k in the North is clearly doable, especially now that it is Winter and men have to sacrifice themselves, but a 10k campaign South is highly unlikely.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Wait, what?

Consider what you are saying. You are arguing that the numbers of the host sizes during the Conquest must mean one thing for the South and the opposite for the North. How about we apply our minds even handedly instead?

No, considering what you are saying. You laid out to me that in the case of the North George's intention would have been to show us via Torrhen's army size that the Starks under Robb had the same potential. But the same thing does not go for the West and the Reach because 55,000 is nowhere near the maximum of the combined strength of the Reach and the West during the series.

The cases are different. If you want to explain what's going on you have to use the same criteria for every scenario.

[Lord Varys]

46 minutes ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

10k in the North is clearly doable, especially now that it is Winter and men have to sacrifice themselves, but a 10k campaign South is highly unlikely.

As I've said above to FNR one could imagine that Torrhen could have assembled an army of 30,000 men even if he had just the Northmen under Robb at his disposal. But that then would have meant that he had pushed a pike in the hands of literally ever Northman he could find, from the greenest boy to the oldest greybeard. And I don't find that particularly likely. That man cannot have been as stupid as to leave his entire kingdom completely defenseless.

We have to keep in mind that Robb didn't get all that many men from the Boltons and Dustins (and possibly the Ryswells as well) and even the Manderlys held some men in reserve. There were only very few clansmen with Robb, and the crannogmen and Skagosi didn't send any troops at all. There are also no people from Sea Dragon Point or Cape Kraken mentioned to be with Robb (not that this matters all that much).

Torrhen had enough time to raise troops even from those remote locations and may have had the authority to force all his lords, even the more unruly ones to fully support his campaign. Robb had neither the time nor the authority to do that.

But the idea that whatever troops remain in the North right nor and survive whatever battles are about to begin will become relevant military powers in the future story is just not plausible. A few thousand half-trained boys and old men aren't a threat to anyone.

[The Fallen]

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, considering what you are saying. You laid out to me that in the case of the North George's intention would have been to show us via Torrhen's army size that the Starks under Robb had the same potential. But the same thing does not go for the West and the Reach because 55,000 is nowhere near the maximum of the combined strength of the Reach and the West during the series.

The cases are different. If you want to explain what's going on you have to use the same criteria for every scenario.

In the story Tywin raises two armies initially. When Robb defeats Jaime Tywin then raises another host. And it clearly states in the story that the last host included the sweepings of Lannisport. There's the evidence of what the west can raise. So add up the numbers and that's what the west was able to raise.

There's no similar statements regarding the north. Instead you have Rodrick telling Bran that they can raise more men. The Riswells state that they held back men. Roose left a decent garrison behind. The clans raise several thousand men. Manderly has men at his disposal.

Those are clearly different scenarios. We don't necessarily have numbers, but Free Northman is trying to extrapolate from that.

[Free Northman Reborn]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, considering what you are saying. You laid out to me that in the case of the North George's intention would have been to show us via Torrhen's army size that the Starks under Robb had the same potential. But the same thing does not go for the West and the Reach because 55,000 is nowhere near the maximum of the combined strength of the Reach and the West during the series.

The cases are different. If you want to explain what's going on you have to use the same criteria for every scenario.

Apologies. That is not what I am saying, but I can see why you might interpret my statement that way. Let me be more clear:

I view Torhenn Stark's 30k host in the same way that I view the Reach's 35k and the West's 20k during the time of the Conquest. Which is that in all three cases, this understates what these regions are capable of today. Whether that is because they all grew in population since then, or whether they all raised only a part of their full strengths against Aegon, that we cannot say.

But I do not treat these host sizes differently from one another.

I simply refer to the 30k as a clear example of the minimum size that the North should be able to raise for a southron campaign. I do not mean to suggest that this is the full strength of the North.

[Free Northman Reborn]

10 minutes ago, The Fallen said:

In the story Tywin raises two armies initially. When Robb defeats Jaime Tywin then raises another host. And it clearly states in the story that the last host included the sweepings of Lannisport. There's the evidence of what the west can raise. So add up the numbers and that's what the west was able to raise.

There's no similar statements regarding the north. Instead you have Rodrick telling Bran that they can raise more men. The Riswells state that they held back men. Roose left a decent garrison behind. The clans raise several thousand men. Manderly has men at his disposal.

Those are clearly different scenarios. We don't necessarily have numbers, but Free Northman is trying to extrapolate from that.

And it is noteworthy that Tywin's host already included sellswords to get to that number.

[Lord Varys]

46 minutes ago, The Fallen said:

In the story Tywin raises two armies initially. When Robb defeats Jaime Tywin then raises another host. And it clearly states in the story that the last host included the sweepings of Lannisport. There's the evidence of what the west can raise. So add up the numbers and that's what the west was able to raise.

We have a semi-canon source stating that the West can raise about 50,000 men, and we do know its population is the second largest in Westeros. That is both quite clear. Stafford was raising his army rather quickly and may have thought he did not have enough time to call upon the support of the remaining levies of the Lords of the West farther away from Lannisport.

There are plenty of untapped resources in the West, most importantly the people of Fair Isle under Lord Sebaston Farman. There are hints that the Farmans are among the most powerful Lords of the West.

46 minutes ago, The Fallen said:

There's no similar statements regarding the north. Instead you have Rodrick telling Bran that they can raise more men. The Riswells state that they held back men. Roose left a decent garrison behind. The clans raise several thousand men. Manderly has men at his disposal.

Yeah, but there is no reason to believe that this is not the case for all the other lords answering the calls of their lieges. Nobody is likely to send all their strength to fight and die in battle. Not unless they have to. The idea that Tywin felt the need to do this or that the Lords of the West thought the Riverlords was so great a threat isn't very likely.

The important point in regards to the difference Torrhen-Robb is that King Torrhen had about eighteen months to gather his troops, meaning that he could have had clansmen, Skagosi, crannogmen, New Gift men, and the full strength of his lords at his disposal. Keep in mind that Torrhen Stark was still the King in the North at this point, and House Stark was numerous and possibly controlling multiple keeps directly at this point. By comparison Robb was still a green boy who had yet to prove his mettle in battle and in council. You do not necessarily really commit most of his forces to such a leader - some lords did, of course, especially the Karstarks and Umbers, but that was apparently part of their plan to dominate the rule of their new boy lord. One assumes that nobody really assumed that Ned Stark would return to them.

Torrhen would have had no such problems.

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I simply refer to the 30k as a clear example of the minimum size that the North should be able to raise for a southron campaign. I do not mean to suggest that this is the full strength of the North.

That doesn't make much sense because Torrhen Stark had the time to gather his full strength. It wouldn't have been his minimum strength, it would have been pretty close to his maximum strength (i.e. the amount of men a lord can realistically gather without causing serious damage to his domains).

In Robb's case we have to keep in mind that travel time and all wasn't so much the problem. We see that the clansmen can be mobilized pretty quickly in ADwD, and Robb apparently didn't send word to Skagos or the Neck to demand troops from there. Lady Dustin can assemble a small force pretty quickly in ADwD, as can the Manderlys at White Harbor (who did not exactly send many men with Robb, either).

It is not so much that many lords/people didn't hear the call, it is that many lords just chose not to send as many men as they could have - but that doesn't mean there are large hidden armies in the North. It means there are some men left, most of them not exactly good soldiers.

[Free Northman Reborn]

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We have a semi-canon source stating that the West can raise about 50,000 men, and we do know its population is the second largest in Westeros. That is both quite clear. Stafford was raising his army rather quickly and may have thought he did not have enough time to call upon the support of the remaining levies of the Lords of the West farther away from Lannisport.

There are plenty of untapped resources in the West, most importantly the people of Fair Isle under Lord Sebaston Farman. There are hints that the Farmans are among the most powerful Lords of the West.

Yeah, but there is no reason to believe that this is not the case for all the other lords answering the calls of their lieges. Nobody is likely to send all their strength to fight and die in battle. Not unless they have to. The idea that Tywin felt the need to do this or that the Lords of the West thought the Riverlords was so great a threat isn't very likely.

The important point in regards to the difference Torrhen-Robb is that King Torrhen had about eighteen months to gather his troops, meaning that he could have had clansmen, Skagosi, crannogmen, New Gift men, and the full strength of his lords at his disposal. Keep in mind that Torrhen Stark was still the King in the North at this point, and House Stark was numerous and possibly controlling multiple keeps directly at this point. By comparison Robb was still a green boy who had yet to prove his mettle in battle and in council. You do not necessarily really commit most of his forces to such a leader - some lords did, of course, especially the Karstarks and Umbers, but that was apparently part of their plan to dominate the rule of their new boy lord. One assumes that nobody really assumed that Ned Stark would return to them.

Torrhen would have had no such problems.

That doesn't make much sense because Torrhen Stark had the time to gather his full strength. It wouldn't have been his minimum strength, it would have been pretty close to his maximum strength (i.e. the amount of men a lord can realistically gather without causing serious damage to his domains).

In Robb's case we have to keep in mind that travel time and all wasn't so much the problem. We see that the clansmen can be mobilized pretty quickly in ADwD, and Robb apparently didn't send word to Skagos or the Neck to demand troops from there. Lady Dustin can assemble a small force pretty quickly in ADwD, as can the Manderlys at White Harbor (who did not exactly send many men with Robb, either).

It is not so much that many lords/people didn't hear the call, it is that many lords just chose not to send as many men as they could have - but that doesn't mean there are large hidden armies in the North. It means there are some men left, most of them not exactly good soldiers.

Well see, this is where interpretation comes into the equation. Because as soon as we start considering various additional factors, they can be argued from all sides of the debate.

You refer to the semi-canon source giving the West 50k men. Well, that same semi-canon source gives the North 45k men. Meaning another 25k above what Robb took south.

As for the Westerlands. It is not confirmed to have the 2nd highest population in Westeros. It seems to have the 2nd highest population density though.

If we consider that the largest host we have ever seen Dorne march beyond their borders is 10k,  are we to assume that Dorne can only raise 10k men? No. But they may well only be able to project around 10k men a significant distance beyond Dorne itself. By contrast then Torhenn Stark's 30k is three times that number, and gathered over a much greater distance.

More later. I have to run, but will be back to continue this interesting debate.

[Lord Giggles]

22 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We have a semi-canon source stating that the West can raise about 50,000 men, and we do know its population is the second largest in Westeros. That is both quite clear. Stafford was raising his army rather quickly and may have thought he did not have enough time to call upon the support of the remaining levies of the Lords of the West farther away from Lannisport.

There are plenty of untapped resources in the West, most importantly the people of Fair Isle under Lord Sebaston Farman. There are hints that the Farmans are among the most powerful Lords of the West.

Yeah, but there is no reason to believe that this is not the case for all the other lords answering the calls of their lieges. Nobody is likely to send all their strength to fight and die in battle. Not unless they have to. The idea that Tywin felt the need to do this or that the Lords of the West thought the Riverlords was so great a threat isn't very likely.

The important point in regards to the difference Torrhen-Robb is that King Torrhen had about eighteen months to gather his troops, meaning that he could have had clansmen, Skagosi, crannogmen, New Gift men, and the full strength of his lords at his disposal. Keep in mind that Torrhen Stark was still the King in the North at this point, and House Stark was numerous and possibly controlling multiple keeps directly at this point. By comparison Robb was still a green boy who had yet to prove his mettle in battle and in council. You do not necessarily really commit most of his forces to such a leader - some lords did, of course, especially the Karstarks and Umbers, but that was apparently part of their plan to dominate the rule of their new boy lord. One assumes that nobody really assumed that Ned Stark would return to them.

Torrhen would have had no such problems.

That doesn't make much sense because Torrhen Stark had the time to gather his full strength. It wouldn't have been his minimum strength, it would have been pretty close to his maximum strength (i.e. the amount of men a lord can realistically gather without causing serious damage to his domains).

In Robb's case we have to keep in mind that travel time and all wasn't so much the problem. We see that the clansmen can be mobilized pretty quickly in ADwD, and Robb apparently didn't send word to Skagos or the Neck to demand troops from there. Lady Dustin can assemble a small force pretty quickly in ADwD, as can the Manderlys at White Harbor (who did not exactly send many men with Robb, either).

It is not so much that many lords/people didn't hear the call, it is that many lords just chose not to send as many men as they could have - but that doesn't mean there are large hidden armies in the North. It means there are some men left, most of them not exactly good soldiers.

Agreed on not all houses wanting to commit a lot of men to Robb's command. However, it could also be that he doesn't command the same amount of respect as a more long standing lord or an older heir would. Either way it comes to the same result. 

However, we know that the Bolton's still have significant reserves left, as do the Dustins, Ryswells, Manderlies, Mountain Clans. And even once Robb marched south, we see Rodrik Cassel pull together 600 Stark men and some 300 Cerywns to fight off Dagmer Cleftjaw relatively quickly. While neither of these is massively impressive figures, they do indicate(given the speed with which they were raised) that the Starks and Cerwyns still had men left who they could call up quickly. If a House is scraping the barrel then they're unlikely to have men who they can quickly call up. 

And for Torrhen, 30k would have been maximum number that he can field abroad. However, the number of men he could have fielded on home ground was likely much higher and given that a lot of fighting done by the North in the next few books is(in my opinion) likely to be done on Northern ground they are likely to be able to deploy a large number more men, particularly given the arrival of winter and the Northern tradition of sparing your family the trouble of feeding you by going off and dying either in battle or of exposure.

On the matter of time with the Mountain Clans, we see with Stannis that while they don't take a long time to muster their men once they've decided to the lord who wishes them to muster their men is obliged to go an ask them in person rather than just sending a raven. So no, Robb didn't have enough time to secure the Mountain Clan's men. 

For the Umbers I may be wrong but I seem to recall it only being said the Greatjon took all the best men south? If that's true then I'd be inclined to believe that that doesn't mean he took all of the retainers that the Umbers can muster but rather most of the heavy horse and most of the retainers who had battle experience(so had seen action in Robert's Rebellion or against Wildlings) who were still relatively young. I'd imagine that this is what most of the houses of the North did as they'd want to appear powerful and not be remembered by their new lord as "oh yeah those are the guys who brought nothing but old men when I called the banners". That would mean the North can still call on the men at the other ends of the spectrum, the younger retainers who've yet to see large scale action and the older retainers who, while they are likely not as physically capable as younger men, will have a lot of experience. While these kinds of men are obviously not as good as the type of retainers who went south they'd still be nothing to sniff at.

[Maia]

28 minutes ago, Lord Giggles said:

And for Torrhen, 30k would have been maximum number that he can field abroad.

IMHO, given the isolated nature of the North, Torrhen could take all his troops south to confront the Targaryen siblings, whereas the kings of Rock and Reach had to leave enough men home to defend against the Dornish and the Ironborn respectively, as well as make sure that their ally wasn't tempted to take advantage of them.

I also think that Tywin left behind enough men to defend the coastline, since the Ironborn attack was very much expected, what with Theon being a hostage of the Starks and general opportunism of the Ironborn.

 

28 minutes ago, Lord Giggles said:

 

However, the number of men he could have fielded on home ground was likely much higher and given that a lot of fighting done by the North in the next few books is(in my opinion) likely to be done on Northern ground they are likely to be able to deploy a large number more men, particularly given the arrival of winter and the Northern tradition of sparing your family the trouble of feeding you by going off and dying either in battle or of exposure.

 

I don't see how the North can afford to supply greater number of men than are in the field currently. Even feeding that many is hurting the winter stores of lords obliged to provision them rather badly and will result in lots of civilian deaths from starvation. Soldiers and animals in the field need to eat considerably more to remain functional than civilians, who can remain largely inactive and warm once the snows lock them in. And a lot of the North's population is scattered, so it isn't practical to requisition food from them - it will have to be taken, repeatedly, from where it is concentrated - the accessible villages, the winter towns, the castle stores - with the logical consequenses for populations reliant on it down the road.

[Free Northman Reborn]

3 minutes ago, Maia said:

IMHO, given the isolated nature of the North, Torrhen could take all his troops south to confront the Targaryen siblings, whereas the kings of Rock and Reach had to leave enough men home to defend against the Dornish and the Ironborn respectively, as well as make sure that their ally wasn't tempted to take advantage of them.

I also think that Tywin left behind enough men to defend the coastline, since the Ironborn attack was very much expected, what with Theon being a hostage of the Starks and general opportunism of the Ironborn.

 

 

I don't see how the North can afford to supply greater number of men than are in the field currently. Even feeding that many is hurting the winter stores of lords obliged to provision them rather badly and will result in lots of civilian deaths from starvation. Soldiers and animals in the field need to eat considerably more to remain functional than civilians, who can remain largely inactive and warm once the snows lock them in. And a lot of the North's population is scattered, so it isn't practical to requisition food from them - it will have to be taken, repeatedly, from where it is concentrated - the accessible villages, the winter towns, the castle stores - with the logical consequenses for populations reliant on it down the road.

All of the above merely states why the North cannot gather and project a host of more than 30k men at a time. None of it suggests that there are no more men. Merely that more men cannot be supported in the field at any one time. That doesn't mean that once the first 30k is lost that a new host cannot be raised and projected to follow the first.

As I have said before. Consider how Robb had to depart from Winterfell with 12k men there, else the countryside would be eaten bare. He could not wait any longer. Now imagine Torhenn sitting at Moat Cailin with 30k men. No matter how much time you gave him, he could not wait in one spot much longer else his host would starve.

So even if the North can raise 60k men, I would argue that 30k is pretty much the maximum they can gather and project at once. That does not mean that they cannot raise a second host to replace it once it is lost, however.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

However, we know that the Bolton's still have significant reserves left, as do the Dustins, Ryswells, Manderlies, Mountain Clans. And even once Robb marched south, we see Rodrik Cassel pull together 600 Stark men and some 300 Cerywns to fight off Dagmer Cleftjaw relatively quickly. While neither of these is massively impressive figures, they do indicate(given the speed with which they were raised) that the Starks and Cerwyns still had men left who they could call up quickly. If a House is scraping the barrel then they're unlikely to have men who they can quickly call up.

That is hardly surprising because Ser Rodrik actually begins training new guardsmen as soon as Robb has left. He didn't take all the people, just as no other lord did. But a lot of people were gone, anyway.

I'd say the same thing goes for any other noble house in Westeros, with exponentially larger numbers in the South where there are much more people.

2 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

And for Torrhen, 30k would have been maximum number that he can field abroad. However, the number of men he could have fielded on home ground was likely much higher and given that a lot of fighting done by the North in the next few books is(in my opinion) likely to be done on Northern ground they are likely to be able to deploy a large number more men, particularly given the arrival of winter and the Northern tradition of sparing your family the trouble of feeding you by going off and dying either in battle or of exposure.

We have no reason to make such distinction. Torrhen's army crossed a much larger distance in the North than in the Riverlands. The man got scarcely to the Trident, after all.

The Northmen might be able to defend their homes rather well, but not so much because of numerical advantages but because they know the terrain and the land (we see that in the Riverlands now). But no outsiders but the Others should attack the Northmen in the next few books so that question doesn't matter all that much.

The idea that the North could unite or field form armies in its own land is also pretty far-fetched. After Ser Rodrik was slain the cause of House Stark was nowhere deader than in the North itself. It needed Roose's return and Stannis' arrival for the lords to marshal some men. 

2 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

On the matter of time with the Mountain Clans, we see with Stannis that while they don't take a long time to muster their men once they've decided to the lord who wishes them to muster their men is obliged to go an ask them in person rather than just sending a raven. So no, Robb didn't have enough time to secure the Mountain Clan's men.

That was because they didn't know Stannis and because no king had ever personally visited them before or cared for their support. That was a huge honor, one they most likely never expected. But they owe their allegiance to House Stark - why the should Robb have to visit them and not command them to come?

2 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

For the Umbers I may be wrong but I seem to recall it only being said the Greatjon took all the best men south? If that's true then I'd be inclined to believe that that doesn't mean he took all of the retainers that the Umbers can muster but rather most of the heavy horse and most of the retainers who had battle experience(so had seen action in Robert's Rebellion or against Wildlings) who were still relatively young. I'd imagine that this is what most of the houses of the North did as they'd want to appear powerful and not be remembered by their new lord as "oh yeah those are the guys who brought nothing but old men when I called the banners". That would mean the North can still call on the men at the other ends of the spectrum, the younger retainers who've yet to see large scale action and the older retainers who, while they are likely not as physically capable as younger men, will have a lot of experience. While these kinds of men are obviously not as good as the type of retainers who went south they'd still be nothing to sniff at.

Lord Hornwood also seems to have taken most of his strength with him. Else Ramsay wouldn't have been able to abduct Lady Hornwood or take her castle.

We know what the Umbers have. Green boys and old men. Arnolf Karstark's host looks pretty much the same (not to mention that he doesn't have all that many men) and those truly are the remainder of the Karstark because we actually do know that Cregan Karstark went to Castle Black with literally two guardsmen. If he had some men-at-arms left he would have gone with twenty or thirty men to ensure that Jon Snow cannot pull off a stunt of the sort he did.

1 hour ago, Maia said:

I also think that Tywin left behind enough men to defend the coastline, since the Ironborn attack was very much expected, what with Theon being a hostage of the Starks and general opportunism of the Ironborn.

A reasonable assumption. I comparison with that in regards to the North

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

All of the above merely states why the North cannot gather and project a host of more than 30k men at a time. None of it suggests that there are no more men. Merely that more men cannot be supported in the field at any one time. That doesn't mean that once the first 30k is lost that a new host cannot be raised and projected to follow the first.

we can easily assume that the Lannisters can raise another 40,000 men. Because, you know, numbers don't matter all that much. Whatever additions we can make to the troops of the North we can also add to the troops of the southern kingdoms.

[Free Northman Reborn]

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is hardly surprising because Ser Rodrik actually begins training new guardsmen as soon as Robb has left. He didn't take all the people, just as no other lord did. But a lot of people were gone, anyway.

I'd say the same thing goes for any other noble house in Westeros, with exponentially larger numbers in the South where there are much more people.

We have no reason to make such distinction. Torrhen's army crossed a much larger distance in the North than in the Riverlands. The man got scarcely to the Trident, after all.

The Northmen might be able to defend their homes rather well, but not so much because of numerical advantages but because they know the terrain and the land (we see that in the Riverlands now). But no outsiders but the Others should attack the Northmen in the next few books so that question doesn't matter all that much.

The idea that the North could unite or field form armies in its own land is also pretty far-fetched. After Ser Rodrik was slain the cause of House Stark was nowhere deader than in the North itself. It needed Roose's return and Stannis' arrival for the lords to marshal some men. 

That was because they didn't know Stannis and because no king had ever personally visited them before or cared for their support. That was a huge honor, one they most likely never expected. But they owe their allegiance to House Stark - why the should Robb have to visit them and not command them to come?

Lord Hornwood also seems to have taken most of his strength with him. Else Ramsay wouldn't have been able to abduct Lady Hornwood or take her castle.

We know what the Umbers have. Green boys and old men. Arnolf Karstark's host looks pretty much the same (not to mention that he doesn't have all that many men) and those truly are the remainder of the Karstark because we actually do know that Cregan Karstark went to Castle Black with literally two guardsmen. If he had some men-at-arms left he would have gone with twenty or thirty men to ensure that Jon Snow cannot pull off a stunt of the sort he did.

A reasonable assumption. I comparison with that in regards to the North

we can easily assume that the Lannisters can raise another 40,000 men. Because, you know, numbers don't matter all that much. Whatever additions we can make to the troops of the North we can also add to the troops of the southern kingdoms.

Perhaps.

Except that the West does not have to feed their troops for as long, nor march them as far, as the North has to, so can gather a larger portion of their total strength for a first muster than the North can.

If we go with the semi canon-source you referred to, then the West indeed had another 15k men left after Tywin's first 35k. Just like the North had another 25k left after Robb's first 20k. This would fit with the relative ease that a small, densely populated region like the West would have in marshalling more of their total potential for an initial campaign than a large, sparsely populated region like the North could. Using these figures, Tywin was able to raise 70% of his full strength initially, while Robb was only able to raise around 45%.

Matching exactly with Martin's comment that it takes far longer to gather the North's strength, coupled with his comment about the added reluctance of many northern lords to send men during Harvest time.

[The Fallen]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

We have a semi-canon source stating that the West can raise about 50,000 men, and we do know its population is the second largest in Westeros. That is both quite clear. Stafford was raising his army rather quickly and may have thought he did not have enough time to call upon the support of the remaining levies of the Lords of the West farther away from Lannisport.

There are plenty of untapped resources in the West, most importantly the people of Fair Isle under Lord Sebaston Farman. There are hints that the Farmans are among the most powerful Lords of the West.

Yeah, but there is no reason to believe that this is not the case for all the other lords answering the calls of their lieges. Nobody is likely to send all their strength to fight and die in battle. Not unless they have to. The idea that Tywin felt the need to do this or that the Lords of the West thought the Riverlords was so great a threat isn't very likely.

What you say about the west may be true, but if I remember correctly, Tywin had around 45k men in the field. That's close to the 50k maximum. I will say that a host of 5k men isn't outright laughable, especially if they're playing defense at home.

But Robb being able to devastate the west and take castle after castle, forcing Tywin to have to return west to confront him, leads me to believe that the west was pretty much tapped of any more fighting men.

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 minutes ago, The Fallen said:

What you say about the west may be true, but if I remember correctly, Tywin had around 45k men in the field. That's close to the 50k maximum. I will say that a host of 5k men isn't outright laughable, especially if they're playing defense at home.

But Robb being able to devastate the west and take castle after castle, forcing Tywin to have to return west to confront him, leads me to believe that the west was pretty much tapped of any more fighting men.

Tywin had 35k men in the field. 4000 of the 35k retreated from Riverrun back to the Golden Tooth and served as the basis for Stafford's new host. Given that 10k is the generally assumed size of that new host (although we have no fixed numbers for it), it would mean that about 6000 new men were added to the original 35k, brining the total raised by the West to 41k.

But this 41k included possibly thousands of mercenaries, and the sweepings of Lannisport. And as you say, after this new host was slain at Oxcross the Starks had the freedom of the Westerlands, to pillage, raid and loot at their pleasure, despite only having a fairly small host under Robb in the West.

So it doesn't seem like the West had much more to offer in the way of resistance after Oxcross.

[Lord Giggles]

38 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is hardly surprising because Ser Rodrik actually begins training new guardsmen as soon as Robb has left. He didn't take all the people, just as no other lord did. But a lot of people were gone, anyway.

I'd say the same thing goes for any other noble house in Westeros, with exponentially larger numbers in the South where there are much more people.

We have no reason to make such distinction. Torrhen's army crossed a much larger distance in the North than in the Riverlands. The man got scarcely to the Trident, after all.

The Northmen might be able to defend their homes rather well, but not so much because of numerical advantages but because they know the terrain and the land (we see that in the Riverlands now). But no outsiders but the Others should attack the Northmen in the next few books so that question doesn't matter all that much.

The idea that the North could unite or field form armies in its own land is also pretty far-fetched. After Ser Rodrik was slain the cause of House Stark was nowhere deader than in the North itself. It needed Roose's return and Stannis' arrival for the lords to marshal some men. 

That was because they didn't know Stannis and because no king had ever personally visited them before or cared for their support. That was a huge honor, one they most likely never expected. But they owe their allegiance to House Stark - why the should Robb have to visit them and not command them to come?

Lord Hornwood also seems to have taken most of his strength with him. Else Ramsay wouldn't have been able to abduct Lady Hornwood or take her castle.

We know what the Umbers have. Green boys and old men. Arnolf Karstark's host looks pretty much the same (not to mention that he doesn't have all that many men) and those truly are the remainder of the Karstark because we actually do know that Cregan Karstark went to Castle Black with literally two guardsmen. If he had some men-at-arms left he would have gone with twenty or thirty men to ensure that Jon Snow cannot pull off a stunt of the sort he did.

A reasonable assumption. I comparison with that in regards to the North

we can easily assume that the Lannisters can raise another 40,000 men. Because, you know, numbers don't matter all that much. Whatever additions we can make to the troops of the North we can also add to the troops of the southern kingdoms.

The numbers in the South aren't necessarily larger bearing in mind that generally the southern lords had more time to muster their troops and so are likely to have taken more of them with them in the first instance than the Northern lords who were in more of a rush although they could well be given the higher population of the south. 

And that's precisely why Torrhen was unable to muster the entirety of his fighting force to head south, the distances involved both in the North and outside of it. Keeping his large army fed for that entire time was going to be a challenge and a costly one. He's going to have to leave a lot troops at home in order to make the amount of food his army will need manageable. 

I'd be tempted to put down the lack of raising troops in the North to a lack of leadership rather than manpower. Winterfell was deserted and most of the heads of major houses were in the south as were their heirs and the leadership there was left in the North seems to have been killed outside Winterfell by Ramsey.

Any quote indicating that the Mountain clans attitude was due to not knowing Stannis?

As to Lady Hornwood it could be that she wasn't expecting to get ambushed by Ramsey on her way back to Winterfell. Big Bucket Wull tells us that the Stark rule is judged as being just enough and harsh enough on transgressors that "a maid could walk up the Kingsroad in her nameday gown". 

[thelittledragonthatcould]

5 hours ago, The Fallen said:

What you say about the west may be true, but if I remember correctly, Tywin had around 45k men in the field.

We probably have seen a little less than that. There was 15k with Jaime, 20k with Tywin when Tyrion accidentally stumbles upon him at the Crossroads and an unknown amount elsewhere int 3he Riverlands holding other castles (such as Harrenhal) and terrorizing the Riverlands. Let us call that 37k

The there is the battle of Oxcross, the green levies from Lannisport mixed in with some sellswords and a portion of the 4k from Jaime's army stationed at the Golden Tooth with Forley Prester. Maybe 4k new (mostly untrained) soldiers, possibly less

Of course that is just what we have seen, then there is the forces that we have not seen and for some reason never get counted.

There is the Garrisons of Casterly Rock and, Lannisport (best trained pikemen out of any city), none of which were with Stafford at Oxcross. Considering the wealth of Lannisport and Casterly Rock I'd say their combined garrisons (in war time no less) would probably, at least, match what Kings Landing would have in peace time. 2k seems a fair amount

Then there is the Lannister/Westerlands Navy, which is always overlooked. YMMV on this one, as outside of the Ironborn I don't really associate sailors as dedicated soldiers. Be wary though that if you are going to include, the still yet not ocean ready navy of the North as soldiers then you should be doing the same with the actual Navy of the Westerlands.

Then we come to the unaccounted numbers of the other settlements. The Westerlings, a broke House with no working mines and a settlement more ruin than castle was still able to bring 50 men to Robb's cause, some may have opted to stay and some would have been killed by the Robb's forces when they stormed the castle. Call it 75

Now other settlements, either closer to the borders (Banefort, Crakehall) or richer than the Westerlings (Golden Tooth, Silver Den, many others) or towns are going to have larger reserves of men than the pitiful amount the Westerlings would be able to raise. Giving the abundance of Lordships in the Westerlands, I'm going to call it 5k Though like the reserves of the North, I don't think these men will ever be called to leave the West. It would be foolhardy.

5 hours ago, The Fallen said:

 

But Robb being able to devastate the west

He didn't devastate the West. He did some damage between a route marked from near the Golden Tooth (though he was careful not to atttck that) through to Ashemark to the Crag.

5 hours ago, The Fallen said:

 

and take castle after castle,

Two castles. One of which is more ruin than castle.

Ashemark is interesting though, we hear of zero Marbrand prisoners which means they were elsewhere, maybe with their Lannister kin at the Rock.

Ashemark is too far away from the coast to be a threat from the Ironborn and safely behind the Golden Tooth to be seen as a threat from the Riverlands so may have been weakly garrisoned for that reason.

Personally I don't think Ashemark is a particularly strong holding, that they are traditionally not a powerful House but because of their relation to Tywin took control of some of the previous Tarbeck and Reyne lands in their fall.

5 hours ago, The Fallen said:

 

forcing Tywin to have to return west to confront him, leads me to believe that the west was pretty much tapped of any more fighting men.

Well not really. Tywin was returning West because he had a window when he (and Tyrion and even Stannis) presumed that a siege would last around 6 months. Tywin had the time to deal with Robb.

The important settlements of the West were secure. Despite Robb still being in the West after the Blackwater Tywin is in no hurry to go West and defend his realm which strong suggests that Robb there is more of a inconvenience than real threat.

12 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And it is noteworthy that Tywin's host already included sellswords to get to that number.

As did Robb's.

[tugela]

On ‎6‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 11:32 AM, Tarellen said:

Okay so the stark are the rulers of the north but there not the richest family that honor going to the mandrelys. They have a big castle but it has a derelict tower. There personal land holdings seem to be small with there not being many outright Stark men. They have only one known castle. There land is concentrated around winter fell. So how rich are the Starks?

Not very. I expect that even some of their bannermen (such as the Manderlys) are wealthier. Wealth in that era would have derived from agricultural productivity and trade. The Starks have neither.

[Lord Varys]

Damn it, guys, the talk about the West was supposed to be a reductio ad absurdum. Considering that we only have vague information on events there we could always invent men in places where we have no news about. But that isn't really necessary. Unlike the North the Westerlanders didn't really lose all that many men in the War of the Five Kings. Most of their soldiers returned back home.

6 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

The numbers in the South aren't necessarily larger bearing in mind that generally the southern lords had more time to muster their troops and so are likely to have taken more of them with them in the first instance than the Northern lords who were in more of a rush although they could well be given the higher population of the south. 

They did not, especially not in Renly's case. Tywin/Jaime also seemed to prepare for war pretty quickly after the Tyrion incident. We get reports about Tywin marshaling armies so he presumably began doing that at a certain point rather than having an army doing nothing for a rather long time.

One can make a case that Renly is effectively still marshaling his troops from the moment he began marching from Highgarden but the troops that assembled there would have been there very fast.

6 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

And that's precisely why Torrhen was unable to muster the entirety of his fighting force to head south, the distances involved both in the North and outside of it. Keeping his large army fed for that entire time was going to be a challenge and a costly one. He's going to have to leave a lot troops at home in order to make the amount of food his army will need manageable.

That is just an assumption. Torrhen had about eighteen months for this whole thing, from the very moment Aegon's letter reached him, and it was summer. He had no harvests to see to and the time and resources to move his troops in a cost effective way if that was necessary.

6 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

I'd be tempted to put down the lack of raising troops in the North to a lack of leadership rather than manpower. Winterfell was deserted and most of the heads of major houses were in the south as were their heirs and the leadership there was left in the North seems to have been killed outside Winterfell by Ramsey.

There were a lot of lords left in the North who were untouched by the fighting and who could have dealt with the Ironborn - the Ryswells and Lady Dustin, the Flints, the mountain clans, and so on. Yet they all do nothing until Roose and Stannis takes things in their hands.

6 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

Any quote indicating that the Mountain clans attitude was due to not knowing Stannis?

Jon is telling Stannis how best win the loyalty of the mountain clans. He tells him that they have seen no king for centuries and would gladly outdo each other with their hospitality. It is a shame that we don't see Stannis' visit to the holdfasts of the clansmen and see him interact with them neither in flashback nor in a chapter. I still don't understand what he did to win their trust and support. But whatever he did obviously worked.

6 hours ago, Lord Giggles said:

As to Lady Hornwood it could be that she wasn't expecting to get ambushed by Ramsey on her way back to Winterfell. Big Bucket Wull tells us that the Stark rule is judged as being just enough and harsh enough on transgressors that "a maid could walk up the Kingsroad in her nameday gown". 

Sure, but it means she had only a small guard and Ramsay did not fear any repercussions, etc.

1 hour ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

We probably have seen a little less than that. There was 15k with Jaime, 20k with Tywin when Tyrion accidentally stumbles upon him at the Crossroads and an unknown amount elsewhere int 3he Riverlands holding other castles (such as Harrenhal) and terrorizing the Riverlands. Let us call that 37k

 

There were about 200 men with the Brave Companions when they took and garrisoned Harrenhal, if I'm not mistaken. Tywin didn't have that many sellswords. There would have been some casualties during the war but not all that many up to this point.

1 hour ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

There is the Garrisons of Casterly Rock and, Lannisport (best trained pikemen out of any city), none of which were with Stafford at Oxcross. Considering the wealth of Lannisport and Casterly Rock I'd say their combined garrisons (in war time no less) would probably, at least, match what Kings Landing would have in peace time. 2k seems a fair amount

 

The City Watch of KL numbers 4,400 men after the Blackwater. They hired a lot of men prior to the Blackwater but many of them died so about 4,000-5,000 should be the average strength for the Goldcloaks. The City Watch of Oldtown should not be much smaller, making it likely that the Lannisport City Watch is about 3,000 or so rather than 2,000 combined with the garrison of Casterly Rock.

The Rock could easily house and feed a garrison of 1,000 people, perhaps even more. It is huge castle and most likely houses a huge court with a lot of officials and servants, not to mention many branches of the Lannister family.

1 hour ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Then we come to the unaccounted numbers of the other settlements. The Westerlings, a broke House with no working mines and a settlement more ruin than castle was still able to bring 50 men to Robb's cause, some may have opted to stay and some would have been killed by the Robb's forces when they stormed the castle. Call it 75

 

Combined with Gawen Westerling's levies with Tywin the Westerlings should control more people. But you already know that, of course.

1 hour ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Now other settlements, either closer to the borders (Banefort, Crakehall) or richer than the Westerlings (Golden Tooth, Silver Den, many others) or towns are going to have larger reserves of men than the pitiful amount the Westerlings would be able to raise. Giving the abundance of Lordships in the Westerlands, I'm going to call it 5k Though like the reserves of the North, I don't think these men will ever be called to leave the West. It would be foolhardy.

Again, the absence of Farman levies in the Lannister hosts is important. They might also have their own considerable navy as they did in the past. Considering the might of Redwynes (an island scarcely larger than Fair Isle) I'd not be surprised if they could at least field 5,000 men of their own.

 

[Tarellen]

On July 10, 2016 at 4:27 PM, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Did I claim that many did? I pointed out that the Starks are weaker now than they were 300 years ago thanks to the loss of a significant amount of land.

 Letters from Lord Stark's brother to the Citadel, asking the maesters to provide precedents against the forced donation of property, made it plain that the Starks were not eager to do as King Jaehaerys bid. It may be that the Starks feared that, under the control of the Castle Black, the New Gift would inevitably decline—for the Night's Watch would always look northward and never give much thought to their new tenants to the south. And as it happens, that soon came to pass, and the New Gift is now said to be largely unpopulated thanks to the decline of the Watch and the rising toll taken by raiders from beyond the Wall.

 

eh? The last time the Umbers and Mountain Clans were independent was thousands of years ago. They have been ruled by the Starks for some time.

Really? Based on what?

No, that was the Reeds who grew up in swamp. Though I'm not sure your point, I am not arguing that it was any more populated than any other region of the North just that a significant piece of land was given away which means the North is in a weaker position than they were 300 years ago.  How is this even a debate? The Stormlands too lost lands to the Targaryens and they too (more so than even the Starks) are in a weaker position today than they were 300 years ago.

The 'rest of the Northmen'. That is a pretty big claim, care to back that up? The Mormonts, Skagosi, Umbers, Reeds, Glovers and Karstarks (all whose lands are in similar position to the Mountain Clans) think the Mountain Clans lands are inhospitable?

Evidence please. I don't even think the person you are parroting has even made that claim.

 

Again, reread what I said. I said weaker, I didnt say by what degree. You are trying to argue a point that was never made, classic strawman 101.

Sure, just as it will have in other richer nations. Or do you think the growth of White Harbor had superseded the growth of Kings Landing, Oldtown, Gulltown or Lannisport?

Well prove it with text.

We know that they lost a considerable amount of land, we also know that Torrhen was able to raise more than 10,000 more soldiers to travel South with than Robb Stark was able to do after one of the longest summers in Westeros history.

As I have repeatedly said, the Norths growth (if there was any) would have not been as great as most of the other realms. If you think the opposite is true then use examples from the book.

lol that is your argument 'I dunno'. 

Notice the lands of the Crownlands have dramatically increased in the last 300 years, so obviously there has been room.

We can also look at the much larger armies raised by Tywin and Mace in the present series than the combined 55k their predecessors raised 300 years ago.

Together the two kings commanded the mightiest host ever seen in Westeros: an army fifty-five thousand

How do you explain this then?

Of course it does. If it remains stagnant while its peers grow stronger than in effect it has became weaker.

Quickly? Nope. According to the timeline it took Rodrik Cassel two months to gather that host. A host that was so poorly trained that, despite greatly outnumbering, was easily beaten by Ramsay.

And once again you are ignoring what I asked, the evidence that the North had more reserves to fight a campaign in the South. I didnt claim that there was zero men left in the North just like Torrhen would have left some kind of reserves in the North when he went South

600 Boltons, it seems unlikely that the Dreadfort has a 600 man garrison.

ugh, yeah they did.

Two-thirds of my strength was on the north side when the Lannisters attacked those still waiting to cross. Norrey, Locke, and Burley men chiefly, with Ser Wylis Manderly and his White Harbor knights as rear guard.

Thousands? Evidence please.

Also evidence for this? One of the Ryswells is named after Roose. Now their allegiance may change in the future but so far there has been nothing half hearted about their support of Roose.

Yup. They are down to the bare bones.

Alys sighed. "My father took so many of our men south with him that only the women and young boys were left to bring the harvest in. Them, and the men too old or crippled to go off to war. Crops withered in the fields or were pounded into the mud by autumn rains. And now the snows are come. This winter will be hard. Few of the old people will survive it, and many children will perish as well."

Yup, similar position to the Karstarks

Tell me, Theon, how many men did Mors Umber have with him at Winterfell?"

"None. No men." He grinned at his own wit. "He had boys. I saw them." Aside from a handful of half-crippled serjeants, the warriors that Crowfood had brought down from Last Hearth were hardly old enough to shave. "Their spears and axes were older than the hands that clutched them. It was Whoresbane Umber who had the men, inside the castle. I saw them too. Old men, every one." Theon tittered. "Mors took the green boys and Hother took the greybeards. All the real men went with the Greatjon and died at the Red Wedding. Is that what you wanted to know, Your Grace?"

 

Do you think that Torrhen stripped the land of all the green boys and greybeards?

Yup, 300.

The new fleet that has yet to set sail? Possibly.

Did the current army of the North not have men with similar weapons?

And if you read the full description it certainly sounds like the Northmen were bett er equipped than many of the Riverland soldiers they were fighting with

"three thousand archers, three thousand ragged rivermen with spears, hundreds of northmen brandishing axes, mauls, spiked maces, and ancient iron swords."

 

and started fighting earlier as well.

And absolutely nothing prevented Robb from doing the same. He too could have called upon reinforcement from the North. He does not, the thought never seems to enter his mind despite needing more men. Either Robb is an idiot or there simply is not 10k more who can travel South.

 

As did Tywin, Renly and Edmure. All had similar time frames to raise their hosts.

Rodrik, Wyman or Marlon Manderly, Arnolf Karstark, one of the Umber uncles or even send one of his generals North by boat to raise the host rather than abandon the the Riverlands with his Northern and Frey army.

And he needed Frey troops to do this as well as his own. There was contact between the Dreadfort and Harrenhal/Riverrun/The Twins. Why did Robb not send word to organize a host so he could have left some of his numbers in the Riverlands where they are needed.

Once again, either Robb is an idiot or the numbers were simply not available in the North.

How could it have been done much quicker? Robb was at Riverrun. Even if successful he could be gone from the Riverlands for the best part of a year.

He was sacrificing the Riverlands by taking his army from there (and taking the Freys too was bizarre).

Of course he left his wife and mother in the Riverlands, he was facing battle at Moat Cailin. Defeat was a real possibility.

And there is absolutely no evidence that he was intending to recruit again. Pure speculation.

Exactly, he was expecting the Vale and Riverlands to feed his army. And yet we are too believe that the Starks are as wealthy as the Arryns and Tullys?

Yeah, I presume there are Bolton cousins in existence.

As for Hornwood, there are other branches out there. The problem was not the lack of Hornwoods but clarity on who was next in line.

Maester Luwin answered. "With no direct heir, there are sure to be many claimants contending for the Hornwood lands. The Tallharts, Flints, and Karstarks all have ties to House Hornwood through the female line

We know that Lord Hornwoods sister was still alive, I'm guessing that he had two more sisters married to a Flint and Karstark but Berena was not the oldest but had sons while the older sister had no sons making the line of succession a little muddied.

Honestly, GRRM's description of the North the past century sounds pretty bleak.

It's also true that there are many more Lannisters. It also has to be taken into consideration that the North has had frequent revolts and other such problems, that there have been rebel lords in the past, that they've dealt with the Kings-beyond-the-Wall, and the revolt of Skagos, and everything else that's occured in the last hundred years. All of these things are a reason for why there aren't so many Starks in the present as there were in the past.

I'd hate to think that every century was as bad for the Starks and the North than the last one has been.

while yes all the armies of the war of the five kings were raised hastily the reason the stark army was so small was because they were under a time crunch and the north is really damm big. It takes forever to gather all of the levies.