Geopolitical discussion about Westeros

[Prosaft]

This thread is about the geopolitical analysis of westeros.

Let's consider the continent of westeros minus the existing population. Judging merely from existing ressources and structures that predate the current society, how would you evaluate the different strategic locations?

Where would you expect rich trading cities to arise? Which regions would you consider infuential based on the available ressources?

Does your evaluation reaffirm or contradict the situation that we are presented with in the asoiaf novels?

[HouseFossoway]

The Iron Islands seem overpopulated in my opinion. According to the wiki:

"The islands are sparse and rocky with a thin, stony soil that makes it hard for the smallfolk to farm, often having to do without the animals that might make their job easier, such as oxen or horses. While their mines do not produce the precious metals of the westerlands, iron is abundant on the isles. Lead and tin can also be obtained."

They don't even have enough trees to make the boats they travel on, let alone to build fire.

I suppose if they are the major source of iron, then they have would have a trading advantage. But iron would have to be pretty scarce on the mainland to make it more cost effective to trade with the ironborn, since the cost of living is probably much higher on the islands, due to the lack of food and wood, and the distance to the iron islands. It does make sense that once a larger population got there, that they felt the need to turn to reaving. But why did such a large population come about there. There would be many more smallfolk trying to leave the iron islands for the mainland, due to the awful conditions there, since food would be so expensive, and would cheaper elsewhere.

Also they're much, much smaller in terms of landmass than all the other kingdoms, they don't have any cities, and again their land doesn't produce much food. But based on the amount of military strength each kingdom has, their population should be about half the population of the vale, and a fifth of the population of the reach.

They're based off the vikings, but Scandinavia was not this desolate a place.

I guess the one solution is that the drowned god religion inspires very devout followers (from what we've seen this is true). Maybe there is actually something to that religion.

[Lucius Lovejoy]

The natural harbor of King's Landing makes it seem like a natural spot for a large city given the proximity to Essos and ability to easily trade.

People would naturally gravitate to the Westerlands and the Gold of Casterly Rock assuming again that trade opportunity with an established population in Essos exists.

[Free Northman Reborn]

The lack of mineral wealth in the North seems out of place. In our world the likes of Alaska, Canada, Russia and so forth are all lands with rich mining activities. And apart from that, the sheer size of the Northern landmass would suggest that a significant part of Westerosi minerals should occur there. I guess one can argue that a lot of undiscovered mineral wealth lies beneath undeveloped regions like the Wolfswood or the Mountain Clan lands and that these will be discovered over time.

Another issue is that the World of Ice and Fire states that the Shivering Sea has the richest fishing grounds in all the known world. The Ibbenese certainly make use of this. One would expect the entire east coast of the North to be the base for a highly developed fishing and whaling industry. The North with its massive coastline should be a major naval power, exploiting the wealth of the Shivering Sea to supplement food production and economic development in a major way.

A more interesting North, in my view, would have been one with a major whaling and fishing port at the mouth of the Last River, say at least Duskendale sized, with a huge whale oil production industry feeding both the interior of the North with much needed oil, as well as exporting it to the South. And secondly, a major "frontier type" mining town located in the northern foothills of the Mountain Clan lands would have added a lot of depth to the Northern setting. This would have provided an interesting counterpoint to the otherwise rugged wilderness surrounding these centres.

A large fishing town at the rivermouth south of Karhold would also make sense, given the wealth of the fishing grounds offshore.

[HouseFossoway]

22 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Another issue is that the World of Ice and Fire states that the Shivering Sea has the richest fishing grounds in all the known world. The Ibbenese certainly make use of this. One would expect the entire east coast of the North to be the base for a highly developed fishing and whaling industry. The North with its massive coastline should be a major naval power, exploiting the wealth of the Shivering Sea to supplement food production and economic development in a major way.

According to the wiki, most of the coast relies on fishing (like the stony shore), especially during the winter. But it is weird that fishing isn't more of a major part of the economy. As for not being a naval power, supposedly King Brandon the Burner burnt the entire northern fleet because his father died at sea, but that does seem like a weird reason that the north hasn't built up their navy again to this day.

 

28 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The lack of mineral wealth in the North seems out of place. In our world the likes of Alaska, Canada, Russia and so forth are all lands with rich mining activities. And apart from that, the sheer size of the Northern landmass would suggest that a significant part of Westerosi minerals should occur there.

I think there must be some mining and minerals in the north, considering that the Thenns (who don't have access to trade) have bronze weapons. But in order for a major industry like mining (at least one that isn't directly related to survival) to develop in area, there needs to be uninterrupted periods of development so that trade can grow, and skills can be maintained. Perhaps the long hard winters in the north would prevent mining from developing in the north, whereas the winters are not as hard further south like in the westerlands.

[theblackdragonI]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

A more interesting North, in my view, would have been one with a major whaling and fishing port at the mouth of the Last River, say at least Duskendale sized, with a huge whale oil production industry feeding both the interior of the North with much needed oil, as well as exporting it to the South. And secondly, a major "frontier type" mining town located in the northern foothills of the Mountain Clan lands would have added a lot of depth to the Northern setting. This would have provided an interesting counterpoint to the otherwise rugged wilderness surrounding these centres.

A large fishing town at the rivermouth south of Karhold would also make sense, given the wealth of the fishing grounds offshore.

I agree it doesn't make sense. I suppose it is supposed to be a contrast to the mineral rich and trading centres of the Westerlands. 

I've always felt that there should be more major trading cities in Dorne or the Stormlands. They both have access to the Stepstones and logically Sunspear should have a large navy and trading fleet to rival the Redwynes or Hightowers. Sunspear should be the size of Oldtown at least with great control of the Narrow Sea trade. The Stepstones pirates cannot be that powerful.

It seems out of place that almost no major mining town exists on the Iron Isles. Surely over such a long period of time one ruler would have tried to pursue trade over reaving. If they are the principal source of iron and have massive amounts of ships a trading empire should have been established. Especially with the North, i.e. wood for iron. 

 

[Lord Varys]

With the North being introduced as a really empty land there is no reason to complain that it is underdeveloped. It could be pretty rich in metals and other resources but if you don't have the men to mine those nobody is going to do that.

It is much less realistic that the large cities are where they are. There should even have been a city at the mouth of the Blackwater before the coming of the Targaryens. And why is there no second Oldtown at the mouth of the Mander? The Mander is the largest river and the major waterway in the Reach, not the Honeywine.

The Lannisters do have a lot of gold but how did it happen that such a large city as Lannisport developed basically in the middle of nowhere. It is a really long way from Essos to the western coast of Westeros, and there are no other harbors of significance between Oldtown and Lannisport.

The same is even more irritating in relation to Saltpans. Why is there no large city at the mouth of the Trident, the main waterway of the Riverlands?

Rivers are natural trade routes in medieval societies, so the wealth should naturally be concentrated around the river mouths and even alongside the rivers.

[Free Northman Reborn]

46 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

With the North being introduced as a really empty land there is no reason to complain that it is underdeveloped. It could be pretty rich in metals and other resources but if you don't have the men to mine those nobody is going to do that.

It is much less realistic that the large cities are where they are. There should even have been a city at the mouth of the Blackwater before the coming of the Targaryens. And why is there no second Oldtown at the mouth of the Mander? The Mander is the largest river and the major waterway in the Reach, not the Honeywine.

The Lannisters do have a lot of gold but how did it happen that such a large city as Lannisport developed basically in the middle of nowhere. It is a really long way from Essos to the western coast of Westeros, and there are no other harbors of significance between Oldtown and Lannisport.

The same is even more irritating in relation to Saltpans. Why is there no large city at the mouth of the Trident, the main waterway of the Riverlands?

Rivers are natural trade routes in medieval societies, so the wealth should naturally be concentrated around the river mouths and even alongside the rivers.

This idea that the North was introduced as "really empty" is an impression you cling to. It is really just Robert who comments on the lack of people on his trek throug the Neck and the Barrowlands, if compared to the South. But as I have said before, give the North one quarter the population density of the South and it would explain his observations, while still giving the North the same population or greater than most southron kingdoms.

Asha doesn't say the North is empty. She says it is too full of Northmen for their taste. If any land should be described as empty, it should be Dorne, which actually was given that name by the original inhabitants of the continent.

Stannis also doesn't believe the North to be an empty land. Even after Robb's host had been lost in the South, he still felt that if he could raise the power of the North it could relaunch his bid for the Throne. Since he supposedly knows the strength of every noble House in the realm, he would have a fair estimate of the strength of the North, and how many soldiers it would have left after losing Robb's 20k. And this is before he even knows of the existence of the Mountain Clans.

As for fishing and whaling towns on the east coast of the North. That is simply a logical extrapolation of the setting. Just like you rightly point out the lack of a city at the mouth of the Mander, and the oversized nature of Lannisport.

But, there may be other reasons for these locations that Martin has not shared with us yet.

The lack of a Northern fleet seems inexplicable though. And the Brandon the Burner cover story seems kind of a plot device to make us stop thinking about it. So be it. Martin seems to have decided that a Northern fleet would not fit into his plot until later in the series. And he is now rectifying that via Lord Manderly's ship building activities.

[Lord Varys]

The North is empty when compared to any other region. It is obvious. Robert and I do judge the North not by the North's standards by standards that actually allow a comparison.

18 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Stannis also doesn't believe the North to be an empty land. Even after Robb's host had been lost in the South, he still felt that if he could raise the power of the North it could relaunch his bid for the Throne. Since he supposedly knows the strength of every noble House in the realm, he would have a fair estimate of the strength of the North, and how many soldiers it would have left after losing Robb's 20k. And this is before he even knows of the existence of the Mountain Clans.

Sure, because the North is one of the Seven Kingdoms. If Stannis had the allegiance of the North he could try to win the allegiance and support of other regions as well. He would not be seen as a doomed pretender. But the idea that he actually thinks he could conquer the Iron Throne with the North alone is ridiculous.

Tywin feared that Stannis intended to sail to Dorne when they learned he had left Dragonstone. He also knew that this would most likely not enable him to win the war, but it sure as hell would have made things very difficult. 

18 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As for fishing and whaling towns on the east coast of the North. That is simply a logical extrapolation of the setting. Just like you rightly point out the lack of a city at the mouth of the Mander, and the oversized nature of Lannisport.

How so? We have no reason to believe that many people live at the east coast of the North. But we do know that there is a lot trade going on the Reach and the Riverlands.

It would only make sense to assume that there would be a great whaling industry in the North if we assume there are people enough build up such an industry. But if they can feed them and are content with humble fishing then that's how it is.

[Free Northman Reborn]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The North is empty when compared to any other region. It is obvious. Robert and I do judge the North not by the North's standards by standards that actually allow a comparison.

Sure, because the North is one of the Seven Kingdoms. If Stannis had the allegiance of the North he could try to win the allegiance and support of other regions as well. He would not be seen as a doomed pretender. But the idea that he actually thinks he could conquer the Iron Throne with the North alone is ridiculous.

Tywin feared that Stannis intended to sail to Dorne when they learned he had left Dragonstone. He also knew that this would most likely not enable him to win the war, but it sure as hell would have made things very difficult. 

How so? We have no reason to believe that many people live at the east coast of the North. But we do know that there is a lot trade going on the Reach and the Riverlands.

It would only make sense to assume that there would be a great whaling industry in the North if we assume there are people enough build up such an industry. But if they can feed them and are content with humble fishing then that's how it is.

You have this the wrong way around. The industry would bring the people. The people don't bring the industry.

And I can only repeat. The North is the least densely populated kingdom. That does not speak to their total population. Just their population density. They could well have the second highest total population after the Reach, for all we know.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

You have this the wrong way around. The industry would bring the people. The people don't bring the industry.

No. Because people have to be at a place to build a proper industry. There have to resources and food enough there to feed people who could then spend all their days in some mines or cut down wood, etc. We have no reason to believe that enough resources to feed such people exists up in the North.

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And I can only repeat. The North is the least densely populated kingdom. That does not speak to their total population. Just their population density. They could well have the second highest total population after the Reach, for all we know.

Sure it is. If the North was as populous as the West or even the Riverlands the Northmen should be able to marshal as many men as these regions if they have the time to do so. But they don't. No Stark ever led 40,000 men to war, not in a single army nor in multiple armies.

The fact that the North is not on equal footing with either the Reach or the WEst insofar as army strength is concerned is a strong how empty the North must be simply because both the West and the Reach are much smaller than the North yet they can field much more men.

We don't know how many people live in any of the Seven Kingdoms. But we have good data on the amount of men they can field and the size of those kingdoms.

[Free Northman Reborn]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

No. Because people have to be at a place to build a proper industry. There have to resources and food enough there to feed people who could then spend all their days in some mines or cut down wood, etc. We have no reason to believe that enough resources to feed such people exists up in the North.

Sure it is. If the North was as populous as the West or even the Riverlands the Northmen should be able to marshal as many men as these regions if they have the time to do so. But they don't. No Stark ever led 40,000 men to war, not in a single army nor in multiple armies.

The fact that the North is not on equal footing with either the Reach or the WEst insofar as army strength is concerned is a strong how empty the North must be simply because both the West and the Reach are much smaller than the North yet they can field much more men.

We don't know how many people live in any of the Seven Kingdoms. But we have good data on the amount of men they can field and the size of those kingdoms.

Hang on. You contradict yourself now. You are first to proclaim how greater wealth allows for greater army sizes. Wealthier regions can raise larger percentages of their population to arms than poorer regions.

Secondly, the more densely populated a region is, the easier it is to mobilize your men. Not just in terms of time required, but in terms of the logistics required to support those armies in the field. So even if the North and West were equally wealthy, the smaller size of the West would still allow them to mobilize more men, because they have to transport the men for shorter distances, can communicate with their vassals more easily, and require less food and beasts of burden to assemble them.

And thirdly, the lower productive yield of the North means larger land areas are required to support each human being. Meaning more land needs to be cultivated for the same volumes of food to be produced. So more peasants are needed per soldier raised.

All three of these factors together means that the North, if it has the same size population as the West, will be lucky to raise half their army size. So even if the West can raise twice the North's army size - which it cannot - their populations are most likely still equal.

The same goes for the Vale. The Vale can  raise a similar sized army to the North. But their army assembles easily, does not have to travel long distances and spends less time marching - meaning less food and resources required to mobilize them. They also need fewer peasants to produce each food unit, given the higher yield of the Vale of Arryn.

Therefore they can raise that same sized army that the North can, from a smaller population base.

To summarize all of the above we can confidently state that the mobilization ratio for the southron kingdoms is significantly higher than for the North.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Hang on. You contradict yourself now. You are first to proclaim how greater wealth allows for greater army sizes. Wealthier regions can raise larger percentages of their population to arms than poorer regions.

I never said that. I'm just of the opinion that wealthier regions have better equipment and usually also more people than poorer regions. Because fertile ground and good harvests are also part of what decides the wealth of a region. The West has both gold and other precious metals and fertile valleys. That's why they are both rich and powerful.

And a peasant in the Reach may easily enough feed ten children while a peasant with the same land in the North may struggle to feed three or four children.

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Secondly, the more densely populated a region is, the easier it is to mobilize your men. Not just in terms of time required, but in terms of the logistics required to support those armies in the field. So even if the North and West were equally wealthy, the smaller size of the West would still allow them to mobilize more men, because they have to transport the men for shorter distances, can communicate with their vassals more easily, and require less food and beasts of burden to assemble them.

But the North and the West are not equally wealthy and we are not talking about time here. We are talking about how many men the North and the West can and did field. And the North never assembled an army as strong as the West did. And we have no reason to believe they could if they had more time. Torrhen Stark had the time. Yet he only came up with 30,000 men.

He had about a year to come up with the army he had, perhaps even more. That means he had all the time in the world, much more than Robb ever had (who raised about 20,000 men in weeks, or at best 1-2 months).

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And thirdly, the lower productive yield of the North means larger land areas are required to support each human being. Meaning more land needs to be cultivated for the same volumes of food to be produced. So more peasants are needed per soldier raised.

What? Why can't a larger amount of land not be worked by the same amount of people. Work and life could be just much harder in the North than in the Reach. It is not unlikely that a peasant in the Reach works only six hours a day on his fields while a peasant in the North has the work ten hours a day.

To argue about fantasy numbers and how things might be under this or that hypothetical scenarios doesn't make any sense. This series doesn't care how many people live in the North or how many men the North could field if the logistics worked better. We will never get an answer to those questions.

And I honestly don't understand why you care so much about that. Numbers don't win battles, people do.

[khal drogon]

Doesn't the North has silver mines around White Harbor? Or am I remembering it wrong?

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

I never said that. I'm just of the opinion that wealthier regions have better equipment and usually also more people than poorer regions. Because fertile ground and good harvests are also part of what decides the wealth of a region. The West has both gold and other precious metals and fertile valleys. That's why they are both rich and powerful.

And a peasant in the Reach may easily enough feed ten children while a peasant with the same land in the North may struggle to feed three or four children.

But the North and the West are not equally wealthy and we are not talking about time here. We are talking about how many men the North and the West can and did field. And the North never assembled an army as strong as the West did. And we have no reason to believe they could if they had more time. Torrhen Stark had the time. Yet he only came up with 30,000 men.

He had about a year to come up with the army he had, perhaps even more. That means he had all the time in the world, much more than Robb ever had (who raised about 20,000 men in weeks, or at best 1-2 months).

What? Why can't a larger amount of land not be worked by the same amount of people. Work and life could be just much harder in the North than in the Reach. It is not unlikely that a peasant in the Reach works only six hours a day on his fields while a peasant in the North has the work ten hours a day.

To argue about fantasy numbers and how things might be under this or that hypothetical scenarios doesn't make any sense. This series doesn't care how many people live in the North or how many men the North could field if the logistics worked better. We will never get an answer to those questions.

And I honestly don't understand why you care so much about that. Numbers don't win battles, people do.

Sorry, this did not respond to the points I raised. It talked around them.

But, to address your concluding question. I think it comes down to the fundamental disagreement you and I have about the direction of the rest of the series. You spend every post trying to boost the future power of Daenerys compared to the North. From the North being a devastated wasteland to every Dothraki wielding a Dragonbone bow.

We both know that your vision of the future storyline and my view of future events are not compatible.

[Chris Mormont]

The North has the great size, half of the 7 Kingdoms, but because of the weather and other harsh conditions, it is not a place where people would have migrated to.  They must deal with snow during the summer, imagine the cold in the winter.  Many of its people probably move South during the winters, for food and better climate and then fail to go home in the summer.   They probably contend with food shortages, and higher infant mortality in the winter.  And don't forget, there have been 2 wars, Rob and Balon's rebellions during the past few years, which also reduces the population

[Lord Varys]

8 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Sorry, this did not respond to the points I raised. It talked around them.

The points you are raised are irrelevant. There is no reason to assume the North has just a lower population density. We have every reason to believe there are very few people up there.

8 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

But, to address your concluding question. I think it comes down to the fundamental disagreement you and I have about the direction of the rest of the series. You spend every post trying to boost the future power of Daenerys compared to the North. From the North being a devastated wasteland to every Dothraki wielding a Dragonbone bow.

I didn't say that every Dothraki wields a dragonbone bow. But considering that Illyrio Mopatis actually deals in dragonbone it doesn't seem to be as rare as one might seem it is.

I don't have to boost the future power of Daenerys, either. George is doing that for me.

8 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

We both know that your vision of the future storyline and my view of future events are not compatible.

Your speculations about the future of the story have nothing to do with the facts at hand, though. And we judge things on the basis of those facts which are that the North's power was broken at Duskendale and the Red Wedding. They are done as a military power. The North didn't even have the strength to deal with an Ironborn invasion while Robb's 20,000 men were in the South. And the meager men the Karstarks and Umbers raise make it very clear that there are no hidden reserves up there. If there were they would be at Winterfell or with Stannis right now.

The entire North must know by now that they are at war for over a year or so, that their lord and king was cruelly butchered at the Twins, etc. yet they are doing nothing. The common people in the Riverlands are doing something about the Lannister and Stark invaders (meaning the Karstark outlaws) in their lands. But the Northmen do nothing on their own. Not even the clansmen, nor the Dustins and Ryswells. They, too, waited until Victarion and the bulk of the Iron Fleet was gone and Roose was coming back before they moved against Moat Cailin.

If the North had still significant reserves left then the situation there would be as they is in the Reach right now. They are fighting at multiple fronts at the same time. It is a tense situation but nothing they cannot handle if they don't make mistakes. They are not desperate. Ser Rodrik was already pretty desperate when Theon took Winterfell.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Doesn't the North has silver mines around White Harbor? Or am I remembering it wrong?

Sure, nobody contests that. If there is a population center in the North it is White Harbor and the lands around it.