The Northern Puzzle

[Veryns]

After a long time lurking and reviewing theories on the forums, I thought I would try to post my own topic and see if I can't get help solving what I have come to refer to as the Northern Puzzle. 

That is: What is up with the Starks and the North? Now before we start, let me say I am not starting a hate thread. In fact I am a Stark fan. I just can not  figure out their mindsets and that of the North in general. For instance; Ned Stark acts less like the feudal warlord he is supposed to be and more like  a bureaucratic administrator. And a somewhat incompetent one at that. This is reflected in how the North is presented and his decisions as Hand of the King. There are other issues with the Starks that I will address later. 

 

First point: The North seems way more underdeveloped than it should be. A lot of people seem to reference the fact that it is because of the extreme climate. But I would say that it is due more to mismanagement.  Ned seems to ignore opportunities to improve on the use of the land and as a result increase his tax revenue. The best example of this is when he is contemplating the wildling problem. His plan is to settle them on the Gift, a move he knows will be unpopular for several reasons. My question is... But why? To settle the Gift he needs to get the king's permission, appease the bannermen who suffered from wildling raids and negotiate with the Night's Watch the amount of support the wildlings give as tax to the watch. Not forgetting the the fact that the watch keeps are undefended from the south and the wildlings hate the "crows".  Why not settle the wildlings on some of the empty tracts of land that are under his control? Two come immediately to mind, Sea Dragon Point and Cape Kraken. At the kingsmoot Asha desribes the point as well timbered, having plenty of game  and being deserted. No explanation is ever given as to why it is deserted. Settling the wildlings here has major advantages for the Starks. It is close to Winterfell so they are on hand to resolve disputes, wildlings are used to constant raiding so they act as a defense against the ironborn and finally it is Stark land so it generates tax revenue. Not much is mentioned about the cape in the books. In fact both Stark and Greyjoy completely ignore the cape, but it is within the North so the same points apply. The main thing is the Starks have the chance to develop the North, but seem lazy in this regard.

 

Second point: The lack of a Northern fleet. I know there have been topics on this before, but it ties into my main point. It seems ridiculous that kingdom or province of a kingdom with two long coastlines and several navigable rivers would have zero naval power. Add to that the fact it is stated that farming is hard in the North then a large fishing fleet becomes essential. Especially when to the north there are wildlings, east there are pirates and slavers and to the west an entire culture based on raiding. The biggest issue the topic threads mention against the Northern fleet is the cost to benefit ratio. That is; it is to expensive to maintain a navy for too little gain. I do not see that as a problem. There are two naval models that be used for the North, Ironborn and Arbor. The Ironborn model uses longships and would be very easy for the North to use. Longships are economical, used for both commerce and warfare. During peace they could be used both as a fishing fleet and a trading fleet, moving around the North, Vale and Trident easily. During war they function as troop transports and supply ships. The Iron Island together are less than half the size of the wolfswood and the ironborn have two to three hundred longships, so the North should manage four to five hundred easy. The second method is the one used by the Arbor. It is smaller than Skagos yet has twelve hundred ships. It accomplishes this by having a thousand merchant ships to support the two hundred warships. The mistake most often made in regards to merchant ships is that you need large amounts of exports to support it. You don't. It helps, but you don't. The only thing the Arbor exports is wine and that does not pay for a thousand ships. The mistake is believing that the ship makes a back and forth journey. For example, say wool is a Northern export. The wool goes from White Harbor to Braavos. If the ship goes from Braavos right back to White Harbor then the trip is a waste. Instead the ship goes to Pentos then Tyrosh, then back, getting paid for hauling cargo. This is how merchant ships make money. Using the five to one ratio, the fifty galley fleet from ADWD should be easy to maintain.

 

Third Point: The Starks are bad at military decisions. Both Ned and Robb make choices that are against what would be in their best interest. Ned shows this when he sends a hundred men against an army. Again when he warns Cersei then refuses Renly's help. His choices might have been honorable, but very stupid. Robb's mistakes can largely be blamed on inexperience. His choice to release Theon is based on the fact he sees him as a brother not a hostage. Also his choice not to trade Jaime is based on his fear of his lords' reaction. Even though that would have ended the war. However, the biggest failure was with the Freys. The Frey marriage problem could have been avoided with foresight and planning. The Freys are a problem because they have a bridge guarded by a castle, but why did you need that bridge? To the north in the Neck are the crannogmen. A crannog is an artificial island floating on the surface. Meera later tells Bran Greywater Watch moves. If you can do that, then a pontoon bridge is easy. Since the Freys are known to be untrustworthy, you should know you are going to need it.

 

These are just my main points on the Starks and the North. While I like them and root for them, they have a lot of problems. I guess the Northern Puzzle is how did they conquer the North and hold it for eight thousand years with this level of ability?

 

Also, why do the Starks not even act like they are hereditary rulers in a feudal society?

 

 

 

[Nocturne]

1 hour ago, Veryns said:

...

These are just my main points on the Starks and the North. While I like them and root for them, they have a lot of problems. I guess the Northern Puzzle is how did they conquer the North and hold it for eight thousand years with this level of ability?

 

 

 

Well the simple answer is not all Starks have been as weak as the current lot. In fact the Stark Kings of old, the ones that carved the North for their own kingdom, are described as ruthless warlords the complete opposite of what Ned and Robb are.

Ned grew up in the The Eyrie, a place known for breeding the best knights. He learned to be this ideal knight there, but he didn't learn how to be a ruthless leader, something that was always required for holding the North. Ned is simply to idealistic, and Robb was his father son, almost the spitting image of him.

My biggest problem with the Starks, is their inconsistent history. While they are described as ruthless kings of Old, the fact that they left House Bolton alive after numerous attempts to get them overthrown is simply just stupid.

I have a feeling this will all change once Jon will be in charge. I don't believe he will learn his Targ identity, or even if he does i highly doubt that he will sit on the throne in the end.

 

 

[kissdbyfire]

7 minutes ago, Nocturne said:

Well the simple answer is not all Starks have been as weak as the current lot. In fact the Stark Kings of old, the ones that carved the North for their own kingdom, are described as ruthless warlords the complete opposite of what Ned and Robb are.

Ned grew up in the The Eyrie, a place known for breeding the best knights. He learned to be this ideal knight there, but he didn't learn how to be a ruthless leader, something that was always required for holding the North. Ned is simply to idealistic, and Robb was his father son, almost the spitting image of him.

My biggest problem with the Starks, is their inconsistent history. While they are described as ruthless kings of Old, the fact that they left House Bolton alive after numerous attempts to get them overthrown is simply just stupid.

I have a feeling this will all change once Jon will be in charge. I don't believe he will learn his Targ identity, or even if he does i highly doubt that he will sit on the throne in the end.

I don't have the link handy and I'm out the door... but Martin has said in the past that Jon will learn who his parents are.

 

[Luddagain]

I think because GRRM was largely drawing from ACTUAL history.  The North is Scotland. Clansmen are the Highlanders - even their names are Scottish and the fact they call themselves the Nott etc

 

Scotland remains sparsely populated and underdeveloped.  They had a fishing industry but I do not think I know of a Scottish navy  - even when they were a separate nation.  I guess there was such a thing but it has not left much of a record.

 

 

[The Hoare]

1. The Idea of moving them to the Gift is to help the Night's Watch, not the North in general. Some lords may not like the Idea of having wildlings in their lands.

2. This troubled me too. At least White Harbor should have a significant fleet, like the lannister have a fleet at lannisport.

The only answer I found was that the North doesn't have qualified shipbuilders nor the crew to sail these ships. It's not hard to compensate though, during Quellon Greyjoy the Iron Islands would be happy to help the Starks in that.

Perharps they thought that the Royal fleet is enough to keep them safe from potential threats and that building a fleet of their own wasn't worthy.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Firstly, as has been said, Ned is atypical for a Stark. That said, the fleet issue is one that goes back centuries, and seems simply to be an idea that Martin liked, rather than something that really makes sense. On top of everything else, the WOAIF states that the Shivering Sea has the richest fishing grounds in all the world. I mean, what more can one say before the lack of a Northern fleet becomes totally ridiculous.

To correct someone upthread, though, the North is not Scotland. It is Northern England, and maybe a bit of southern Scotland, with the Mountain Clans representing the Highlanders. Winterfell is more or less York. The Wall is Hadrian's Wall, and the Free Folk are the ancient Picts.

Anyway, back on topic. I would just say that the main reason for a lot of the issues raised, is that Martin did not recognize the size of the world he created, originally. The North is managed like a country estate, with Winterfell kind of the manor House, with a little town outside of it. Instead, is is a million square mile kingdom, inhabited by millions of people. Martin just hasn't adapted the ruling style and required bureaucracy to this reality. The idea that you can rule a kingdom of that size and complexity with essentially Maester Luwin as your entire administration is absurd, as I have highlighted before. He is Minister of Finance, Minister of Agriculture, Minister of Trade and Industry, Minister of Health, Minister of Transport, Minister of Intelligence, Minister of Communication and a whole bunch of other titles all wrapped in one. Quite a talented fellow, I would say.

And then lastly, Martin had to depict the Starks as making stupid decisions early on, because he had to bring them low, to go through a time of tribulation, so that we would care about their return to triumph in the latter part of the series.

[Philokles]

You are conflating Ned's proposal to settle the Gift with Northerners and Jon's plan to settle the wildlings south of the wall. In fact in Jon's recollection of this plan it was intended to dissuade wildling raids:

Quote

His lord father had once talked about raising new lords and settling them in the abandoned holdfasts as a shield against wildlings. The plan would have required the Watch to yield back a large part of the Gift, but his uncle Benjen believed the Lord Commander could be won around, so long as the new lordlings paid taxes to Castle Black rather than Winterfell. "It is a dream for spring, though," Lord Eddard had said. "Even the promise of land will not lure men north with a winter coming on." (ASOS, Jon V)

 

[direpupy]

Cape Kraken actually does have people in it so while i agree on Sea Dragon Point being a better choise for setteling people, Cape Kraken is already setteled and ruled by an other house so it is not direct Stark land the house Flint of Flints Finger rules Cape Kraken.

Now the Stony Shore would be my second choise after Sea Dragon Point, there are people there but not many so there is room for settelers.

[Free Northman Reborn]

10 minutes ago, Horse of Kent said:

You are conflating Ned's proposal to settle the Gift with Northerners and Jon's plan to settle the wildlings south of the wall. In fact in Jon's recollection of this plan it was intended to dissuade wildling raids:

 

Yes. I was going to add that bit. Ned never considered settling wildlings in the Gift. He wanted to raise new petty lords (lordlings) on a similar level to House Stout in the Barrowlands, to repopulate the Gift. I think that was a great idea, and a step in the direction of recovering from the disaster that was the forced ceding of the New Gift to the Watch, that was imposed on the North by the Targaryens.

[jthurman14]

There is a fleet in White harbor. Warships, Merchant galleys, fishing boats and even river boats are mentioned in Davos's chapter. While it was mentioned that the fleet was being kept a secret I did not take that to mean they were all just built after the war started. I give Ned a pass for some of the block headed things he did. Everyone else is just shit.

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

43 minutes ago, jthurman14 said:

There is a fleet in White harbor. Warships, Merchant galleys, fishing boats and even river boats are mentioned in Davos's chapter. While it was mentioned that the fleet was being kept a secret I did not take that to mean they were all just built after the war started. I give Ned a pass for some of the block headed things he did. Everyone else is just shit.

 

In Book 2 Lord Manderly says to Bran that the North has had no fleet since Brandon the Burner burned his father's ships, but that he could build King Robb a mighty fleet if Bran just gave him the go ahead. Around the same time the Umbers complain about a lack of ships to repel the wildlings raiders across the Bay of Seals. Rodrik then instructs the Manderlys to join with the Umbers and build ships to protect the North's coasts.

Fast forward to Dance, and Manderly tells Davos he has been building ships for over a year. Davos himself saw 23 warships in Manderly's inner, hidden harbor. Manderly tells him he has as many more hidden up the White Knife. So 46 ships at that time, and he didn't say he had stopped the building process yet.

So the implication is that they had virtually zero at the time that Manderly spoke to Bran in Book 2, and have almost 50 ships now, after a year and a half of building. So in short, they DID build that fleet in the last 18 months or so, and had very little before that point.

[The Bastards Giant Friend]

I agree that there should have been a small northern military fleet, but not with much else from the OP.

 

1 - It's been pointed out that they wanted to raise new lords, not wildlings, to occupy parts of the gift. Even if he did allow wildlings through (imagine if Jon or Jeor came to him and told him the situation, I think he would support it) it would make sense to keep them as far north and away from other towns as possible. Putting them on the point would put them in a more centralized location to do mischief.

2 - The lack of a military fleet bothers me, and I always wonder about why there isn't a more major city on the west coast. It could be a helpful defense against IB. But I think it is a fair assumption that fishing is a major part of the coastal economy (hence why White Harbor is so prosperous). Also, with the rather direct route to Bravos, you would think that timber could be a major trade. Floating it down the white knife and then off to Bravos.

3 - Ned does not send 100 men against an army. He sends 100 men against a group of brigands in a time of peace. You can argue that he didn't read the political situation well but I do not think he made a poor military decision based off the facts he had. As for Robb, he should have sent someone else to the Iron islands. The Jaime trade would not end the war unless you think Robb would then bend the knee and go home. But then, what was the point? Building a bridge could have worked, but it sets a bad precedent. You then have a hard to hold (and easy to sabotage) bridge as your only way home and have made enemies with the large and powerful Frey house. They could easily side with the crown against the rebels and do little more than hide in their castle and raid/sabotage any makeshift bridges that the Northmen try to build. Safe and easy how Walder likes it. Now, why Robb should have to negotiate passing with a banner man sworn to a lord sworn to him (Robb) makes little sense and is an outrage. I like to imagine that after the war Robb would have assisted the Tullys in relieving the Freys of their lands and title.

[Chris Mormont]

To knock the Starks for the North being underdeveloped is a bit unfair.  The North is huge, larger than the rest of the 7 Kingdoms, so there is going to be a lot of undeveloped areas.  The winters are harsh and can last for years.  I am sure they have a lot of people who migrate south during these winters rather than starve or freeze.  In addition, due to that harsh weather many people die.  Furthermore, as Ned said, when the cold winds blow the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives, so there isn't much incentive for people to settle new areas.

With regards to a navy, while you make a good point that Longships could serve multiple purposes, there may not be too many areas which would make for a good port to serve galleys and traders other than White Harbor.  There is nothing one could do if all they have are miles and miles of beaches with sand and rock rather than a deep port.  Also the North touches both the east and west, where does a fleet sit, in the narrow sea, where the autumn storms may ravish it, or on the west where you would be in constant threat by the Ironborn?  There is a reason why no one settles by the western sea, fear of reevers.

[Maester of Valyria]

While I in general agree with the OP's point that the North is underdeveloped, I think we're forgetting a very important factor. The North is huge, and the level of technology available means that effective administration over such distances isn't that feasible. This problem is compounded by the sparse population.

I'm reminded of medieval Russia: the majority of Russia's population did (and does) live in the western portion; most of the Northerners live in the south (Barrowton, White Harbour, etc). Despite some of the Tsars trying to develop the country progress never really took off until the end of the feudal structure of society, which conspicuously hasn't happened in Westeros.

The navy thing is, I agree, an oversight/inconsistency necessary for the plot. It makes zero economic or military sense for the North to not have a navy on both coasts (although you could argue that since the Conquest there's been less need for them) and a sizeable merchant fleet at least on the eastern coast. I mean Braavos is willing to pay through the nose for timber right?

As for not settling lords in the Gift, I'm pointing to Russia again. There's a reason that Siberia has always been thinly populated: it's cold, it's isolated, and nobody really wants to live there in large numbers.

 

[Makk]

As has been pointed out, Ned had no intention of settling freefolk anywhere.

Maintaining a genuine navy, warships, sailors etc, is expensive. Others said it makes no economic sense, that is completely incorrect. The North only really has a single trading port, White Harbour and the Manderlys are charged with defending that. In times of peace, the only thing a Navy would do is to try and combat piracy, and it definitely doesn't do a cost effective job of that. It gives additional military strength but from an economic point of view it is much more cost effective to use the navy of allies if the need arises. Obviously in the case of a civil war this is a military weakness, but there is an economic point to it.

The military errors you pointed out were not what I would classify as military, at least not in terms of logistics or tactics. Ned seemed to serve very capably as the leader of Roberts Vanguard in the rebellion without ever losing a battle. Robb also proved, from a military point of view, to be exceptional. Unfortunately in both of their cases they seemed very naive and their honor was exploited.

[Veryns]

6 hours ago, The Bastards Giant Friend said:

I agree that there should have been a small northern military fleet, but not with much else from the OP.

 

1 - It's been pointed out that they wanted to raise new lords, not wildlings, to occupy parts of the gift. Even if he did allow wildlings through (imagine if Jon or Jeor came to him and told him the situation, I think he would support it) it would make sense to keep them as far north and away from other towns as possible. Putting them on the point would put them in a more centralized location to do mischief.

 

I apologize for the confusion. I did mistake who wanted to settle wildlings on the Gift. I do think Ned would agree to the wildlings if Jeor explains the problem. However the main point I was trying to make is that whoever the settlers are, lords or wildlings, putting them on the Gift benefits the Night's Watch and not the North in general. An organization that is penal colony/old age home/dumping ground for second or third sons.  Settling them on Sea Dragon Point gives the taxes to Winterfell, which a normal feudal lord should want. As to your point about Sea Dragon being less secure, I disagree. Putting them there surrounds them with bannermen, Mormonts, Glovers, Tallharts and the mountain clans. This would also encourage intermarriage for a less "us against them" mentality.

 

 

Quote

2 - The lack of a military fleet bothers me, and I always wonder about why there isn't a more major city on the west coast. It could be a helpful defense against IB. But I think it is a fair assumption that fishing is a major part of the coastal economy (hence why White Harbor is so prosperous). Also, with the rather direct route to Bravos, you would think that timber could be a major trade. Floating it down the white knife and then off to Bravos.

 

I mainly agree with this part of your post. 

 

 

Quote

3 - Ned does not send 100 men against an army. He sends 100 men against a group of brigands in a time of peace. You can argue that he didn't read the political situation well but I do not think he made a poor military decision based off the facts he had. As for Robb, he should have sent someone else to the Iron islands. The Jaime trade would not end the war unless you think Robb would then bend the knee and go home. But then, what was the point? Building a bridge could have worked, but it sets a bad precedent. You then have a hard to hold (and easy to sabotage) bridge as your only way home and have made enemies with the large and powerful Frey house. They could easily side with the crown against the rebels and do little more than hide in their castle and raid/sabotage any makeshift bridges that the Northmen try to build. Safe and easy how Walder likes it. Now, why Robb should have to negotiate passing with a banner man sworn to a lord sworn to him (Robb) makes little sense and is an outrage. I like to imagine that after the war Robb would have assisted the Tullys in relieving the Freys of their lands and title.

 

He sends 100 men against "brigands" who are being sent  by Tywin after Catelyn seizes Tyrion.  This after telling Catelyn that Tywin is merciless in the face of weakness. Instead of taking his own advice and raising the whole realm against him he sends a small party. As Hand he could send ravens to the northern Reach, crownlands and Vale to raise forces to surround him.  As for Robb and the bridge. I did not mean to use it permanently, but as a one time tactic. For example, at the start of the war the Lannisters divided into 2 armies, one for Riverrun and one for the kingsroad. Robb divides his own army in response. With the bridge he crosses the Green Fork above the Freylands, liberates Riverrun and does not lose thousands in a diversion. Even though the Freys might be hostile, it does not matter. Robb has the bulk of his army and with the riverlands forces he might be able to fight Tywin and win, which reopens the kingsroad. And since he is not betrothed to a Frey, a betrothal can be offered to a powerful Valelord or northern Reacherlord to contribute their forces to flank Tywin or threaten KL. In regards to the Jaime trade "ending the war" to me it is subjective. What did Robb consider victory? If it is saving his sisters, trading removes his need to continue the war. He can retreat behind the Moat and negotiate from a safe position with whoever wins the Iron Throne.

 

 

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

Just on the issue of Northern ports or lack thereof.

The North has a thousand mile coastline on each shore. It has multiple navigable rivers flowing into the ocean on each shore.  The Mountain Clans fish the Bay of Ice, the Mormonts too. I'm sure the Umbers conduct some fishing in the Bay of Seals. And they speak of wanting ships to patrol that Bay for wildling raiders.

Skagos had a fleet for millennia until the Starks forbade them one. Argos Sevenstar landed the greatest ever Andal invasion force of the North  up the Weeping Water.

Brandon the Shipwright sailed an entire fleet into the Sunset Sea. The North engaged in a thousand year naval war with the Vale, before White Harbor existed. It is quite obvious that there are plenty of locations up and down every coastline which can serve as ports if need be. White Harbor is by no means the only such sheltered Bay. In fact, it is pretty certain that any one of Oldcastle, Ramsgate, Widow's Watch, and almost certainly some unnamed towns in the Bolton, Umber and Karstark lands can serve as access ports to the Narrow Sea.

The idea that White Harbor is the only safe port on that entire coastline is incorrect.

[The Bastards Giant Friend]

This might need it's own thread, especially because I would expect the north to be least effected, but wasn't there a plague or something (GRRMs Black Death) like 80 years ago? In real life, the Black Death hindered growth and advancement for centuries. Although I think individual wealth increased because of the lower population.

When I search the wiki for plague it doesn't bring anything up but I swear I read about it in one of the books.

Again, it would be very unlikely that the North would suffer the most from a plague. But the recovery might take longer.

[Philokles]

23 minutes ago, The Bastards Giant Friend said:

This might need it's own thread, especially because I would expect the north to be least effected, but wasn't there a plague or something (GRRMs Black Death) like 80 years ago? In real life, the Black Death hindered growth and advancement for centuries. Although I think individual wealth increased because of the lower population.

When I search the wiki for plague it doesn't bring anything up but I swear I read about it in one of the books.

Again, it would be very unlikely that the North would suffer the most from a plague. But the recovery might take longer.

The Great Spring Sickness.

Certainly didn't help I guess, but as you say the sparse population is also for reasons beyond that and it only lasted a couple of years.

[Maester of Valyria]

3 hours ago, The Bastards Giant Friend said:

This might need it's own thread, especially because I would expect the north to be least effected, but wasn't there a plague or something (GRRMs Black Death) like 80 years ago? In real life, the Black Death hindered growth and advancement for centuries. Although I think individual wealth increased because of the lower population.

When I search the wiki for plague it doesn't bring anything up but I swear I read about it in one of the books.

Again, it would be very unlikely that the North would suffer the most from a plague. But the recovery might take longer.

That's a good idea: you should absolutely start a new thread about that because I've never seen it before.

However the North has always been relatively sparsely populated, thanks to its climate and isolation. The Great Spring Sickness wouldn't have helped, but I doubt that its effects are still very significant today, especially as (although the Worldbook tells us that the North was not spared the plague) I would expect the North to be the third least-affected kingdom given its isolation and sparse population.