Jump to content

Crownlands Makes No Sense


Corvo the Crow

Recommended Posts

His main problem to me is when he wants something and Daenerys wants something else entirely, until there he is safe, i don't think he will do bad, so the new dance with dragons get a bittersweet more ambíguos felling.

Daenerys doesn't look like anyone looking for a partners after mereen fiasco and even less a co-ruler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The size of the Crownlands is reasonable by medieval standards, of what a king would own directly. This is a map of 12 century France, and the crown domains seem to be proportional to the Westerosi crownlands. There's a limit to the amount of land that you can rule directly.

There's also the matter of the geographical barriers and historical ties. You don't to carve out nonsensical borders, disrupt established trade routes or break relationships that have been working for centuries.

The border between the Reach and the Crownlands is established at the sources of the Mander and the Blueburn. Grabbing land from the Reach would have to divide their valleys in two parts, which may shatter the local economy.

Not only that, but probably communications of those annexed areas with King's Landing would not be easy.  There must be a reason why the crownlands were held from Storm's End and from the Iron Islands, but not from the Reach. And the easier explanation would be that natural barriers determine a natural border (most likely the mountain chains providing the sources for the Mander and the Blueburn)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also a matter of Aegon having to actually rule the Crownlands - in addition to ruling other former Kingdoms and try to conquer Dorne. Which means meeting with them, ruling over their disputes, distributing favor and such. This is a huge time sink - and Aegon spend his days in royal procession across the continent.

So smaller Crownlands make sense in terms of time management for a feudal monarchy that has no reserve of qualified bureaucrats to fill in the void between one King and OVER 9000 Lords distributed all over the continent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2018 at 1:49 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

As in title. Why did Aegon only took some small portion of the Riverlands and a small portion of the already small Stormlands but took no lands from the gigantic reach which already borders his domains? This move would not only increase his domains with very fertile and populous land, but it would also take some strength away from the mightiest kingdom in the south, and make it a less overmighty bannermen.

Aegon I selected the sight of King's Landing for strategic reasons and used it a landing point for his Drangonstone navy and a toehold on the Westeros continent to base his land operations from.  It is right at the mouth of the Blackwater Rush at the tip of Blackwater Bay which cradles Dragonstone.  I don't think he was trying to increase his domains because all of Westeros is his.  His strategy wasn't to take strength away from any of his vassal seven kingdoms it was to reward them for supporting him during his Conquest.  He was trying to instill loyalty by giving trust and resources to the regional high lords and wardens but don't forget that he had weapons of mass destruction (dragons) to remind everyone that they should cooperate with their new and powerful king.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2018 at 6:34 PM, Morgana Lannister said:

because his birds may be listening... and reporting back to Illyrio, whose wealth Varys still needs (okay, I part from the assumption that Aegon is Illyrio's son, to be fair).

My understanding was that the birds had their tongues removed in order to protect Vary's secrets, but I suppose Illyrio would be better able to communicate with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2018 at 4:49 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

As in title. Why did Aegon only took some small portion of the Riverlands and a small portion of the already small Stormlands but took no lands from the gigantic reach which already borders his domains? This move would not only increase his domains with very fertile and populous land, but it would also take some strength away from the mightiest kingdom in the south, and make it a less overmighty bannermen.

Many reasons come to mind but imo he didn't want to seem like a tyrant and seize more historical land from thousand year old houses. (see Blackwood&Bracken feud about a wind mill and a barn house)

 

And he was counting on the other kingdoms, as he was the King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2018 at 12:10 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

Yes and he carved his land from Tully/Baratheon lands and not the much better Tyrell lands.

He could have also increased the land of his cadet house; Stormlands already own a portion of the Dornish Marches, he could've transferred the rest to Baratheons as well. Instead he carves out a portion of the second weakest kingdom that he granted to the cadet branch and the most decentralized kingdom but leaves the biggest kingdom intact.

He should've divided the Westerlands and Reach into at least two paramaountcys to weaken them.

The Baratheons are not a cadet branch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2018 at 1:49 AM, FictionIsntReal said:

My understanding was that the birds had their tongues removed in order to protect Vary's secrets, but I suppose Illyrio would be better able to communicate with them.

That is something that has been put forward but do we have proof?  seems a little extreme, and if he relies (Varys) on his "birds" reading messages that would indicate at least some can read and write.   Not saying I am correct, just that I would like to know.  It seems a bit too much for Varys to have tongues remove, a la Euron, but I could be very wrong here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that naval considerations might have influenced Aegon's choice of establishment on the mainland.  King's Landing has a sheltered harbour big enough to float the biggest navy you can build, and still have room for trade. It is probably the best harbour in Westeros outside of Dorne (which was not part of Westeros at the time.) The Lord of Dragonstone would be aware of the importance of a safe harbour, being obliged to live on an island, and one where a sudden storm could destroy every ship in it's harbour.

Locating his Crownlands so they cover the whole coastline of Blackwater Bay, means that he can better defend Dragonstone, if he should be obliged to fall back to it. It also means he can defend his Crownlands from Dragonstone. As he and his sisters own all the dragons in Westeros, they can zip across the water, and do aerial reconnaissance of Naval forces, and while it is far from impossible to take the Crownlands in a land-based war, moving a large army over land is slow, and the larger the army the harder it is to take your enemy by surprise, and the easier it is for the Targareyens to burn them all.

The Crownlands of Aegon's day (like the Reach and the Stormlands) might not have been as well populated as they became. I'm basing this on the Kingswood, that is preserved now because it is the Kingswood, but which was then very probably forest lands on the further reaches of the Riverlands,  Vale, and Dornish Marshes.

Storms End is a fortress a bit like Dragonstone, but unlike Dragonstone, located on Shipbreaker bay, and easily cut off from the Stormlands (indeed, any lands)  by siege (it's history since being built being an endless succession of storms and sieges). Also, ideal for attack by dragon. I'd say the Stormlords have the hardest lands to defend, and had always been hard pressed between their powerful and unfriendly neighbours, the Gardener Kings and Dorne, probably never the most peaceable folk. 

No wonder Orys Baratheon was bitter - rule of the Stormlands is a vexing reward for his successful battle command, poor compensation for his hand. Although he got a good wife from it. Anyway, once Storm's End was loyal to the Targaryens, most of the difficulties of keeping Royal control of the Crownlands really became Orys's problems with keeping Baratheon control of the Stormlands. As long as he was able to protect his lands, the Targareyens were pretty well covered from that direction.

The King keep a noble forest on that side of Kings Landing, built a fortress that overlooked his harbour. The Rose road, or some equivalent, might have existed, but the King's Road did not, and the Baratheons were in a position to interpose between the Reach and the Crownlands. I'm thinking that at least part of the reason the Crownlands did not extend into the Reach is because the Targaryens knew better than to take more lands than they could defend on their dragons from Dragonstone.

Of course their big problem was Harrenhal. Solving it was a moral lesson for them, too. Haleck had held the title of King of the Isles and Rivers that his father had won by staying close to the water with a high tower on the Blue Fork at Fairmarket, always ready to take a step back to the Iron Isles, or to bring men from the Iron Isles in to take a step forward, when opportune.

Harren had decided to settle in the middle of the richest lands in the kingdom, going big to supplement for the isolation that change brought, and unifying the Riverlands under his sole rule. I take it that this is what the histories mean when they call him a tyrant.

It was an idiotic decision when you consider his Grandfather only won the Riverlands with the assistance of the Brackens, Paeges, Vyprens Charltons and Goodbrooks who objected to the comparitively weak rule of the Stormkings (and possibly hoped to gain lands from their neigbouring petty lords.) His father had spent his days warring against his lieges in order to hold the territory. Perhaps Harren felt that he was too weak, and that being strong and hard like his Grandfather was the real solution. 

Anyway, Harren made it easy for the Dragon Lords. Consolidating his power by suppressing his banner lords made them keen to turn on him for any reason, and jostle each other to swear loyalty to the Targaryens conquerer in exchange for the freedom of their own lands (and their neighbours?). Building his fortress so far from the Iron Isles, and concentrating his forces in it, worked well for the Targareyns with their dragons.

They made use of what they had learnt prior to their conquest of Harrenhal by giving that poisoned chalice to the Master of Arms from Dragonstone, but rewarding the first Riverlord to come to their cause, the well-connected Tully,  with the title of Lord Paramount of the Riverlands.

The Tullys were not only better able to keep their hands full with the internecine stresses of the Riverlands, they were also located very far from the Crownlands, with the Targaryen's own master of arms between them and the Crownlands, carefully overlooking the Riverlords lest they rise against himself. Also, not so far from the Iron Isles and the Westerlands, that they could ignore the protection of Aegon's dragons.

Then there are the Duskendale contingent. The Darklyns, the Mootons, the Crabs, Bar Emmons etc. These were the biggest direct competition for the Crownlands. The Darklyns were in fact the rulers of the Crownlands before Aegon's first test. Like Harren, the Darklyns had concentrated power in their sphere of influence.

The Darklyns needed their Stokeworths and their Mootons to keep their consolidated power over what became the crownlands. Visenya 'subdued' the Stokeworths, Aegon killed the Darklyn King and Mooton. Darklyn's son yeilded, and Visenya took over the rule of the territory from there, solving the most difficult problem in defending the Crownlands first up, securing the biggest port in Westoros at the time for them, and the harbour they had staked  for themselves to build the biggest and safest harbour in Westeros. Once the Crownlands were theirs, the Aegonfort could be defended, so they put a King on it.

They did not have the same luck when they went in arms against the Arryns in the naval battle of Gulltown, though. I'm thinking Visenya was remarkably effective at 'subduing' without violence. The Darklyns and the Stokeworths became the Targaryen's most staunchly loyal supporters. The Arryns, if not loyal, proved trustworthy. It seems odd because Visenya's character as sketched in the canon (and out of it) is not consistent with a master diplomat, and somewhat sinister. But fear does not produce the kind of loyalty the subjects she brought to Aegon and ruled over showed the Targaryen cause.

TL;DR: Look at the coastline not the land. Targaryens were naval aviators. There were no roads. Ports concentration points for wealth. They wanted the biggest and best harbour in Westeros, defending and defended by Dragonstone.  They got it, then they built it, then they called it King's Landing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2018 at 11:56 AM, The hairy bear said:

The size of the Crownlands is reasonable by medieval standards, of what a king would own directly. This is a map of 12 century France, and the crown domains seem to be proportional to the Westerosi crownlands. There's a limit to the amount of land that you can rule directly.

There's also the matter of the geographical barriers and historical ties. You don't to carve out nonsensical borders, disrupt established trade routes or break relationships that have been working for centuries.

The border between the Reach and the Crownlands is established at the sources of the Mander and the Blueburn. Grabbing land from the Reach would have to divide their valleys in two parts, which may shatter the local economy.

Yes, but Reach is bigger than Crownlands, and WAS held together for millennia. Size of land or population was not THAT limiting.

Stormlands and Riverlands combined was comparable size to Reach, and had just been held together for three centuries. Aegon might have reassembled the Durrandon kingdom without splitting away most of it to Tully and Baratheon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jaak said:

Yes, but Reach is bigger than Crownlands, and WAS held together for millennia. Size of land or population was not THAT limiting.

The Reach, as the name and maps suggest, is mainly a plain land. There are no mountain passes to cross and no deserts to by pass, and the navigable rivers would also make communications much easier. In consequences, travel distances in days would be much shorter than in any other kingdoms. Tumbleton, for instance, is more easily controlled from Highgarden than from King's Landing in spite it's geographically closer to the later.

In any case, my point is not that Aegon the Conqueror could not have ruled a much greater piece of land. Of course he could have. It would be a dumb move, though. Great rulers never get involved in micromanagement, and Aegon was not in the business of arbitrating feuds between Brackens and Blackwoods or giving audiences to Grassy Vale's farmers with grievances with their lords.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

The Reach, as the name and maps suggest, is mainly a plain land. There are no mountain passes to cross and no deserts to by pass, and the navigable rivers would also make communications much easier. In consequences, travel distances in days would be much shorter than in any other kingdoms.

Riverlands also has navigable rivers - Trident with its forks. The question is how to connect Trident basin with Blackwater basin.

14 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

In any case, my point is not that Aegon the Conqueror could not have ruled a much greater piece of land. Of course he could have. It would be a dumb move, though. Great rulers never get involved in micromanagement, and Aegon was not in the business of arbitrating feuds between Brackens and Blackwoods or giving audiences to Grassy Vale's farmers with grievances with their lords.

Yes - but he had a Hand. Which the pre-Conquest Kings are not mentioned as having.

Actually, the Gardeners of Reach, rulers of the biggest single realm (apart from Stormlands-plus-Riverlands of Durrandons) did not have Hands, but did have Stewards. Is that a coincidence?

How did the division of business between King Mern and Steward Harlan compare with the division of business between King Aegon and Hand Orys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2018 at 1:08 AM, Morgana Lannister said:

My personal prediction is that he is going to be drunk on glory from his taking of KL, which I am sure will happen, probably due to support of the small folk who are desperate and some equally desperate Lords, and that Jon Connington will fuel him more towards that sense of glory and make him a kinder version of Joffrey... just marginally.

To me there are too many references, with little characterisation (if any) to say that he is the "perfect prince" and this just rings bells within me... not good ones.  I don't expect him to be anything beyong what an average, inexperienced but very entitled teenager would be but I think he is likely to bloody his hands, just like the Lannisters did, with innocents.

Okay, probably wrong, only time will tell, but I think Varys has got it "under control" for his own ends of course (my suspicion is Varys is a Targ bastard and was cut for the king's blood... but could be far fetched).  In any event this kid is not going to end on the IT at the end of the series.  Hey, against people like Jon Snow, Dany, Tyrion, even Varys or LF, who we have loved or loved to hate from the beginning???  Would burn the books!   Why, because hey I have invested in interesting characters from the onset to have this bland piece of what??? I am sure he is a red herring that advances the plot but at snail pace...

I never thought about it that way before but yes, I see what you mean. Even though I think Joffrey was a straightforward psychopath there is something about Varys’s speech that makes me think, “When are we supposed to have seen these glowing qualities?” Because the Young Griff/Young Griff I’ve seen is a bit of a useless lump, a green boy, an entitled and spoiled moody teenager who is at risk of falling in love with his own propaganda. In other words, much like Joffrey was, Aegon is a new foil for the likes of Jon and Daenerys (and possibly Bran if we are talking about what makes a prince).

Even if Aegon is a perfectly nice lad with a “sense of duty” (again I’ve yet to see anything special) he’s nothing remotely special as far as I can see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 4:49 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

As in title. Why did Aegon only took some small portion of the Riverlands and a small portion of the already small Stormlands but took no lands from the gigantic reach which already borders his domains? This move would not only increase his domains with very fertile and populous land, but it would also take some strength away from the mightiest kingdom in the south, and make it a less overmighty bannermen.

I think you're crossing wires that shouldn't be crossed.

Feudalism says that the Crown has vassals. The Crown owns the crown (obviously) and its own lands (usually just a small portion of the country). So, it needs to be able to support itself while managing and overseeing their vassals; the vassals of the Crown have their own people to manage and be supported by. The king is either a lord that ranks above the other high lords or a glorified peer of the high lords.

Despotism says that the Crown has subjects. The Crown owns the entire country: it manages the entire country from top to bottom and the entire country supports and answers to the Crown regardless of whatever obligations and responsibilities that they have in their own neighborhood. The king is in a completely different class than the high lords of the land.

Usually, in feudalism, the powers of the Crown are 100% hard (hard=authoritarian) only in their own lands and waxes and wanes everywhere else in the nation. In despotism, the power of the king is hard everywhere, all of the time.

Since Westeros is still solidly feudal, the Crownlands are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, the Lord of the Seven Kingdoms would be an empty title and the man himself would be little more than a homeless beggar … like Viserys.

Aegon would have been an idiot to try and take all seven kingdoms and put it directly  under his reign. It's too much ground to cover, too many people to manage...even with dragons. Case in point: if it still takes over a month to travel ~1,000 miles, then despotism won't work.

That's why democracy tends to fail in, for lack of a better word, third- and even second-world countries. The technology isn't there, the infrastructure is too weak and the people aren't educated enough (if at all).

As to why Aegon only took a small portion of the Riverlands and the Stormlands and not large swathes of the Reach? It was a wise strategic and tactical move. The seat of his power is at Dragonstone which is an island fortress. He needs trees for ships and tools (Stormlands) and land for logistical, martial and financial means (Riverlands). Plus, they both are closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Feudalism says that the Crown has vassals. The Crown owns the crown (obviously) and its own lands (usually just a small portion of the country). So, it needs to be able to support itself while managing and overseeing their vassals; the vassals of the Crown have their own people to manage and be supported by. The king is either a lord that ranks above the other high lords or a glorified peer of the high lords.

Despotism says that the Crown has subjects. The Crown owns the entire country: it manages the entire country from top to bottom and the entire country supports and answers to the Crown regardless of whatever obligations and responsibilities that they have in their own neighborhood. The king is in a completely different class than the high lords of the land.

Usually, in feudalism, the powers of the Crown are 100% hard (hard=authoritarian) only in their own lands and waxes and wanes everywhere else in the nation. In despotism, the power of the king is hard everywhere, all of the time.

Since Westeros is still solidly feudal, the Crownlands are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, the Lord of the Seven Kingdoms would be an empty title and the man himself would be little more than a homeless beggar … like Viserys.

But Iron Throne does not "own" Crownlands either. Darklyn of Duskendale, Stokeworth, Rosby or Velaryon are as much owners of their lands as Arryns, Tullys, Tyrells or Baratheons are.

5 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

Aegon would have been an idiot to try and take all seven kingdoms and put it directly  under his reign. It's too much ground to cover, too many people to manage...even with dragons. Case in point: if it still takes over a month to travel ~1,000 miles, then despotism won't work.

It worked for Philip II.

And dragons made a difference.

Say King of Reach is in Oldtown when trouble, like a foreign war, starts 1200 miles away near Tumbleton.

What could a dragonless Gardener do?

Get news by raven mail. Say 400 miles per day. So 3 days.

Then what?

If the Reach forces near at hand are confused as to what to do or who to be led by, then the King can reply by raven. That´s 3 days in return. So the raven is back on day D+6... but that´s just raven.

The King might take command himself or send a trusted commander to take command.

Assuming that it is a few men riding hard and taking changes of horses... Napoleon, in December 1812, sustained average 100 miles per day for 13 days. But he was using coaches, too. A big difference. He could nap while being driven. If Reach had roads, coaches and relay stations then Gardener King might be in Tumbleton on D+15... again, to take command of just the forces that are already there.

A force of infantry, or of cavalry that has to feed the horses and let them graze, is limited to perhaps 15 miles per day,

The real full forces of Gardeners would be in Tumbleton by D+83.

And now compare dragonrider.

News still travel at raven speed, so reach the King at D+3.

But the King on dragonback will sustain the same speed as a raven. So on D+6, Tumbleton gets answer by dragon, not raven.

The King is at Tumbleton on D+6, not D+15.

And that´s not a lone man in command of forces already there.

The infantry does still take till D+83 to arrive.

But the King´s dragon is a significant force balance in ways that King´s person is not.

So... the difference is between having a rebellion forcefully answered on D+83 or on D+6.

A significant deterrent, that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jaak said:

But Iron Throne does not "own" Crownlands either. Darklyn of Duskendale, Stokeworth, Rosby or Velaryon are as much owners of their lands as Arryns, Tullys, Tyrells or Baratheons are.

Yes, they do.

Don't the upper-level bannermen of the Tyrells (the Hightowers, the Redwynes, the Tarlys, etc.) pay taxes to the Tyrells? How else did the Tyrells get rich enough to rival the Lannisters? There's no minerals to mine and no seas or lakes to fish out of in the Highgarden area and they can't possibly produce that much food to make that much money.

What about before the Targaryen dynasty united the kingdoms? Didn't the Gardeners rule as kings over the Reach. They may not have owned it in the 18th century sense of the word but they owned it like a 12th century lord would have...

The Arryns, the Baratheons, the Tullys, etc. are both the overlords of the entire region and the lords of their own lands at the Eyrie, Riverrun and Storm's End.

The king on the Iron Throne presides over the immediate King's Landing area as lord, the entire Crownlands as a warden/lord paramount and the realm as whole as king.

10 minutes ago, Jaak said:

It worked for Philip II.

LOL

No it didn't.

Because if you knew the history of Phillip II's reign, you know that it was rife with bankruptcies, (embarrassing) military failures and stalemates, successful revolts, religious insurrections, etc.

Basically, the only thing that held the Spanish Empire together during Phillip II's reign was the memory father's memory. Because the Empire was on a sharp decline a generation later and was in very big two generations later.

Aegon was starting from absolute scratch. Need I also remind you that NOT A SINGLE RULER OF THE SEVEN KINGDOMS wanted to cast off their crown and swear fealty to Aegon. If Aegon tried to take all seven kingdoms and put them all under his direct rule instead of allowing them to keep their beloved kings as mere overlords and governors who would in turn answer to him, then you would've had an epic continental version of Dornish-style resistance.

As a matter of fact, it would've been worse because, at that point, everyone from Sunspear to Bear Island would've found a way to work together - or play off of each other - in their revolt.

And remember: Phillip II ruled in the second half of 16th century (i.e. right in the middle of the Renaissance). The ASoIaF world seems to be stuck in some High Middle Ages derivative of the 14th century.

That's a huge difference in technology we're talking about.

26 minutes ago, Jaak said:

And dragons made a difference.

News still travel at raven speed, so reach the King at D+3.

But the King on dragonback will sustain the same speed as a raven.

Dragons won't make a difference.

I'm not going to even go into the rest of what you posted because your belief that dragons will fly at the same speed as ravens invalidates any point that you would make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Faera said:

I never thought about it that way before but yes, I see what you mean. Even though I think Joffrey was a straightforward psychopath there is something about Varys’s speech that makes me think, “When are we supposed to have seen these glowing qualities?” Because the Young Griff/Young Griff I’ve seen is a bit of a useless lump, a green boy, an entitled and spoiled moody teenager who is at risk of falling in love with his own propaganda. In other words, much like Joffrey was, Aegon is a new foil for the likes of Jon and Daenerys (and possibly Bran if we are talking about what makes a prince).

Even if Aegon is a perfectly nice lad with a “sense of duty” (again I’ve yet to see anything special) he’s nothing remotely special as far as I can see.

Thank you, okay, being fair, this character bores me to tears so imagining him as overall ruller OMG!!!  He serves a purpose of some sort in the books, must do... but blunder teenager, im my own concited mind lol, I cannot fathom....  To me the guys is amongst the most boring in the entire series, including Victarion and Quentin... which to me is saying something. But okay, each to their own for people who love the ones I find most boring lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

Yes, they do.

Don't the upper-level bannermen of the Tyrells (the Hightowers, the Redwynes, the Tarlys, etc.) pay taxes to the Tyrells? How else did the Tyrells get rich enough to rival the Lannisters? There's no minerals to mine and no seas or lakes to fish out of in the Highgarden area and they can't possibly produce that much food to make that much money.

How would Tarlys get the money to pay taxes to Tyrells? No minerals either.

We quite simply do not have the breakdown of Tyrell revenues - how much is demesne incomes, how much is taxes from bannermen. And that includes both ends of range as options - it is possible that Tyrells "live on their own" and bannermen are purely military allies, or that Tyrells are landless and every stag comes from some bannerman.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

What about before the Targaryen dynasty united the kingdoms? Didn't the Gardeners rule as kings over the Reach. They may not have owned it in the 18th century sense of the word but they owned it like a 12th century lord would have...

The Arryns, the Baratheons, the Tullys, etc. are both the overlords of the entire region and the lords of their own lands at the Eyrie, Riverrun and Storm's End.

We don´t actually hear it.

The only overlord we hear of specifically having had a demesne was Starks.

Because when Alysanne made Alysanne´s Gift to Watch, we do not hear of any lords dispossessed from Gift, nor of any lords becoming bannermen of Watch. Therefore the whole New Gift was previously Stark demesne with no lord but Stark in the distant Winterfell.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

LOL

No it didn't.

Because if you knew the history of Phillip II's reign, you know that it was rife with bankruptcies, (embarrassing) military failures and stalemates, successful revolts,

Only one.

Signally the other revolts failed or never happened.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

religious insurrections, etc.

Basically, the only thing that held the Spanish Empire together during Phillip II's reign was the memory father's memory. Because the Empire was on a sharp decline a generation later and was in very big two generations later.

Um?

The Empire held together. And easily weathered even Spanish Succession. Lasted till about 1821.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

Aegon was starting from absolute scratch. Need I also remind you that NOT A SINGLE RULER OF THE SEVEN KINGDOMS wanted to cast off their crown and swear fealty to Aegon. If Aegon tried to take all seven kingdoms and put them all under his direct rule instead of allowing them to keep their beloved kings as mere overlords and governors who would in turn answer to him, then you would've had an epic continental version of Dornish-style resistance.

As a matter of fact, it would've been worse because, at that point, everyone from Sunspear to Bear Island would've found a way to work together - or play off of each other - in their revolt.

Need I also remind you that NOT A SINGLE RULER OF THE INDIES wanted to cast off their crown and swear fealty to Carlos either?

And it is not only the Indians like Montezuma and Atahuallpa who did not get to keep hereditary rule over their realms as vassals of Carlos.

Henry IV had been enfeoffing various Crown incomes and privileges to Castilian nobles on hereditary basis.

Cortez, Pizarro and their followers hoped to become hereditary lords of the lands they conquered for Christianity and Carlos.

Did not happen. Gonzalo Pizarro lost his head for trying. Cortez got to keep his head, but his son was packed off to Spain with some pension from his marquessate of Oaxaca, on condition that he never show up in Indies. Ditto about Duke of Montezuma (heir of, well, Montezuma) and Duke of Veragua (heir of Columbus).

By the time of Philip II, and two and a half centuries thereafter, the governors of Spanish possessions, from Puerto Rico to Philippines and from New Mexico to Chiloe, were nonhereditary appointees serving for a few years at one post, appointed by a stroke of pen in Madrid. Even though the letter travelled at the speed of a sailing ship at a suitable season, no raven, and took over a year from Madrid to Philippines.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

And remember: Phillip II ruled in the second half of 16th century (i.e. right in the middle of the Renaissance). The ASoIaF world seems to be stuck in some High Middle Ages derivative of the 14th century.

That's a huge difference in technology we're talking about.

Modest one. Riders with letters were not much faster in 16th, or indeed 19th, century than in 12th.

Look at the tremendous difference in the political environment of Castile of 1460s of Henry IV, vs. Spain of 1530s of Carlos I.

Or England of 1450s of War of Roses vs. England of 1540s, Henry VIII-s Reformation Parliament and Disillusion of Monasteries.

But this is not even a Renaissance issue. William the Bastard could dispossess almost all landowners of England, and that with 11th century technology. He did provoke resistance, but this he successfully harried.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:58 AM, Jabar of House Titan said:

Dragons won't make a difference.

I'm not going to even go into the rest of what you posted because your belief that dragons will fly at the same speed as ravens invalidates any point that you would make.

Then specify what you think dragon speed is.

Rhaenyra racing Daemon King´s Landing to Dragonstone and back supports speeds comparable to ravens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2018 at 1:49 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

As in title. Why did Aegon only took some small portion of the Riverlands and a small portion of the already small Stormlands but took no lands from the gigantic reach which already borders his domains? This move would not only increase his domains with very fertile and populous land, but it would also take some strength away from the mightiest kingdom in the south, and make it a less overmighty bannermen.

Personally, I would have copied William the conqueror and parcel out land in lots of small discontinuous pieces.  I guess since the seven kingdoms were already in existence that wasn't really an option though.  The big problem the Holy Roman Empire had was there were lots of Dukes and Princes who all had large contiguous holdings they could use as power bases from which they could challenge the Emperor.  To compare the English (and later British) high lords might still own a lot of land but it was spread out in little pieces throughout the kingdom instead of all in one big piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Oerdin said:

Personally, I would have copied William the conqueror and parcel out land in lots of small discontinuous pieces.  I guess since the seven kingdoms were already in existence that wasn't really an option though. 

And to a degree, the problem must have been that the kingdoms were somewhat institutional communities.

But only to a degree. We do not see much of those institutions 300 years later, other than paramount lords, their castles and families.

Only Dorne has much in the way of national officials (justiciars, treasurer and bailiffs). At Winterfell and Eyrie, these officials are pretty obviously missing.

Yet one option could have been to build up and take control of Kingdom-level institutions.

Aegon managed to recruit a number of appointed, non-hereditary servants from Westeros - and these even at the cost of celibacy!

The seven Kingsguard were celibate, yet Aegon´s ones earned a reputation (though Maegor´s Owen Bush would draw some criticism).

Aegon also used to go on progresses with 6 maesters - also celibate.

After Aegon, Kings of Iron Throne are no longer attested as employing multiple maesters. Just the lone Grand Maester - first attested when Aenys died.

Submission of Kingdoms tied Aegon´s hands somewhat. He was honour bound to allow some autonomy to those who bent the knee. But by luck or design, he destroyed Harren, Argilac and also Gardeners. It is odd that Mern did not have some three year old grandson or niece safe at Highgarden.

Why create paramount lords so equal to the former kings?

Instead, the logical move would have been recruit teams of nonhereditary, appointed officials and build up royal castles as bases for them.

One obvious spot could have been some port on Ironman´s Bay. Create a Warden of West, a royal Sunset Navy with a separate Master of Ships for the Sunset Sea (a long sail around Dorne...) and authorize the team of admirals and household knights based there to deal with trouble arising on either Iron Islands or Westerlands, and mobilize the lords as necessary. And maesters for medical care and raven network. If trouble arises, King or some queen are likely to show up on dragonback soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...