Military Strengths-2 and More!

[wendelsnatch]

Just some thoughts about Winter and the North.  The 7 kingdoms being at peace would pay dividends for all Kingdoms.  During Summers they all likely would experience population booms more significant than pre-conquest growth.  I agree with Lord Varys that any gains the North would see could potentially be wiped away more readily than the Kingdoms in the South.  Problem in the North is that come Winter any population boom is essentially dead weight, unproductive children age 1-6.  A short 2-3 year winter book ended by long 6+ year summers (not unheard of) absolutely could result in a net gain in North population.  When you get those 5+ year winters however, the temporary population boom you saw in the summer becomes a liability come winter (unless you are a cannibal or Craster).

The flip  side of the coin however is the other benefit of peace is the opportunity for free trade between the Kingdoms.  The North has the ability to take some of the burden of Winter off through food imports.

[Lord Varys]

10 minutes ago, wendelsnatch said:

The flip  side of the coin however is the other benefit of peace is the opportunity for free trade between the Kingdoms.  The North has the ability to take some of the burden of Winter off through food imports.

That is certainly true. 

However, the crippling effect of winter is not the fact that it comes, but that a string of mild winters in a row, resulting in only one long and cruel winter only once in 1-2 generations. That may lure the people in a false sense of security, causing them to be not as prepared as they should when a real winter hits.

And then there is the tendency that winters grew longer and crueler after the death of the last dragon. That means the long/cruel winters after 153 AC should have crueler effects in the North and beyond the Wall than the winters in more ancient times.

All that doesn't make it unlikely the North's population didn't grow all that much - or even lost some people in more recent years after gaining some during the reign of Jaehaerys I and Viserys I.

The winter after the Dance and the Winter Fever could have had enormous impact on the population of the North, undoing much of the growth from the previous decades. And the same goes for Egg's cruel six-year-winter.

Also, two cruel winters in a row could have even more devastating effects. The young children born in another 5-8-year-summer could be culled yet again by another six-year-winter during which - thanks to the losses suffered in the previous winter - the people would have even less winter provisions than in the previous winter.

This whole thing can (and likely was) a very ugly destructive circle in certain periods.

[wendelsnatch]

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The winter after the Dance and the Winter Fever could have had enormous impact on the population of the North, undoing much of the growth from the previous decades. And the same goes for Egg's cruel six-year-winter.

A small point of contention, the Winter Fever should actually be beneficial during a a brutal winter leaving more food reserves overall.  A summer plague followed by a long winter on the flip side would be worst case scenario.  

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, wendelsnatch said:

A small point of contention, the Winter Fever should actually be beneficial during a a brutal winter leaving more food reserves overall.  A summer plague followed by a long winter on the flip side would be worst case scenario.  

Well, that depends when the plague hit and how many men it killed which would have survived otherwise. Corpses don't need food. Also, people already weakened by hunger and cold are more likely to succumb to a plague (or other illnesses), increasing overall winter mortality. It also goes vice versa - if you are hit by a severe illness early in winter you might be too weak to live through it, even if you don't get food issues.

The Winter Fever hit the land mid-winter if we go by the people succumbing to it, meaning that some regions of the war-torn Realm might already have had food issues by then. Winter began in 130 AC, after all.

Winter in Westeros must by a truly horrible thing. People never know how long it is going to last, and depression, fear, and desperation must be the largest enemy of people.

[wendelsnatch]

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, that depends when the plague hit and how many men it killed which would have survived otherwise. Corpses don't need food. Also, people already weakened by hunger and cold are more likely to succumb to a plague (or other illnesses), increasing overall winter mortality. It also goes vice versa - if you are hit by a severe illness early in winter you might be too weak to live through it, even if you don't get food issues.

The Winter Fever hit the land mid-winter if we go by the people succumbing to it, meaning that some regions of the war-torn Realm might already have had food issues by then. Winter began in 130 AC, after all.

Winter in Westeros must by a truly horrible thing. People never know how long it is going to last, and depression, fear, and desperation must be the largest enemy of people.

Another saving grace of a winter epidemic would be much less disease transmission between the population as people are more sedentary and less prone to travel to other settlements.

I agree whole heatedly that Winter, specifically in the North (and more so North of the Wall) is a terrible thing.  Perhaps a topic for another time, but one has to wonder if there are other survival strategies, aspects of the environment, etc. that contribute to making even long winters survivable, granted with high levels of attrition.  You would think that some of the longer winters would be extinction level event for people above a certain latitude.  Are there micro "summers"; a period of time that is just warm enough to plant one hardy crop and harvest it before the next bout of cold?  Is there more local forage even in winter that can augment their diet.  Much more hunting would take place, and likewise the flora and fauna would have to adapt to the variable length seasons.

[direpupy]

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But we do know that the Conquest ended the continuous wars. And we do know that the North greatly suffers from long winters while other regions essentially don't feel it. This must have had effects. There is no way to get around that.

The one thing that bothers me in this discussion is they idea that the south is not affected by winter at all, even if they feel less of it a years long winter would still be devastating even in the south.

Now that there population growth would be higher/faster then the North's i do not contest, but i do not think there was the boom in the South you are talking about in this tread.

sure there is Kings Landing as you point out as your example of growth, but 100000 people on the millions that live in westeros is not much of a growth and before you start that there should then also be growth in the surrounding area to feed them, the books clearly show that feeding kings landing is actually not done by the surrounding area, but by getting it imported from the reach that was already famed for exporting food before the conquest.

This is why food was scares and expensive during the war because it was no longer coming in from the Reach, this is evidenced by Tyrion hearing of they exorbitant prices in the city.

As to the much given example of the 55000 men army of the Reach and Westerlands combined and there greater strength in the books, i doubt that was there full strength Loren would have to make sure he was not outflanked from the Riverlands and leave strength behind, and the last Gardener king would have to leave troops to guard against the possibility that either the Stormlands or Dorne would try to take advantage of the situation, that combined with the Hightowers not marching at all means he may have had half or less of his strength with him at the Field of Fire.

So in short i agree that growth in the North would be slower, but i do not think there was the boom in the South that you and some others are proposing.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, direpupy said:

The one thing that bothers me in this discussion is they idea that the south is not affected by winter at all, even if they feel less of it a years long winter would still be devastating even in the south.

Not necessarily. We have it from George that it rarely snows as far south as Highgarden (which would also include the Rainwood and Cape Wrath) and 'almost never' in Oldtown and Dorne.

Winter isn't an issue if it doesn't get cold enough that it snows or that snow remains on the ground. It might even be that the Oldtowners and the Dornishmen can continue to plant and harvest grow in (the milder periods of) winter.

4 hours ago, direpupy said:

Now that there population growth would be higher/faster then the North's i do not contest, but i do not think there was the boom in the South you are talking about in this tread.

sure there is Kings Landing as you point out as your example of growth, but 100000 people on the millions that live in westeros is not much of a growth and before you start that there should then also be growth in the surrounding area to feed them, the books clearly show that feeding kings landing is actually not done by the surrounding area, but by getting it imported from the reach that was already famed for exporting food before the conquest.

KL is more an example for the economic boom in the Targaryen territory after the Conquest. Obviously many people making the city as large as it became so quickly migrated there - and there would have been a reason why people thought they should go there.

The feeding thing might have to do more with economic complexities as well. The British could grow more food on their island, too, yet they like to import a lot of food from 'the continent'. If there is a hard Brexit, the UK will be in a similar situation as KL during the War of the Five Kings ;-). Both should have the resources to resolve the import problem otherwise, but it will take time to implement them.

And it is not that there is no food in KL after the Reach and the Riverlands are lost to KL. The food that's there just gets much more expensive - which is what happens always whenever there is a our shortage in goods that everybody wants/needs. If the Crownlands were accustomed to produce food only for KL and sent all their surplus food to the city, things may have been different.

But people in the capital of the Seven Kingdoms apparently like to eat food from all corners of the Seven Kingdoms, not just what the Crownlands have to offer.

4 hours ago, direpupy said:

As to the much given example of the 55000 men army of the Reach and Westerlands combined and there greater strength in the books, i doubt that was there full strength Loren would have to make sure he was not outflanked from the Riverlands and leave strength behind, and the last Gardener king would have to leave troops to guard against the possibility that either the Stormlands or Dorne would try to take advantage of the situation, that combined with the Hightowers not marching at all means he may have had half or less of his strength with him at the Field of Fire.

I already pointed out that the Hightowers did not march with King Mern, so it is clear that not all the strength of the Reach was on the Field of Fire. But aside from that pretty much everyone from the mainland seems to be there.

When Mace marshals a similar host - as he does in ACoK in a matter of mere months - it numbers (without Houses Redwyne and Hightower!) in the 80,000-90.000s, not around 35,000 (as Mern seems to have had if we consider the amount of men he had in comparison to King Loren). 

This is an obvious discrepancy, and one very likely to be explained by ways of a population growth. The idea that Mern felt the need to protect his borders against imagined enemies is simply not in the text. The impression we get there is that the man really gathered as many men as he could. And he had much more time for that than Mace Tyrell in ACoK.

4 hours ago, direpupy said:

So in short i agree that growth in the North would be slower, but i do not think there was the boom in the South that you and some others are proposing.

We already know that the continuous warfare stopped and that places like KL prospered greatly. If there was a population growth it would have been mostly down in the south and, perhaps, in other trading hubs as well (the five cities, some towns near major trade routes, etc.).

If the North prospered in a major fashion then not in regions we know at this point. Barrowton didn't become a city, and the Kingsroad is more or less a joke north of Winterfell. Unless, of course, we imagine that they were even worse of in that places before the Conquest. Could very well be.

White Harbor, one assumes, did prosper from more trade, etc. after the Conquest.

[Bernie Mac]

21 hours ago, Werthead said:

On that basis, the Westerlands and Reach being able to increase their military potential by almost 300% since the Conquest whilst the North has not - which is what a 30,000 figure suggests - is unconvincing.

Not really. The territories that most benefit from an extended level of peace are the ones close to the borders, the lands that are frequently attacked by invading armies and exposed to dangers which curbs the advancement of trade and artisans. 

The regions of the North that should have seen the most benefit from peace is the Neck and the Western coast. Neither seem to have grown, the Crannogmen are a trading black hole while we are told that the coast has become sparse due to people moving in land rather than be attacked by the Ironborn. On top of that there has been the loss of the new Gift.

The Starks conquered the North a thousand years ago and due to their location will have been less bothered by war with the other realms. It may well have been close to the peak population (the technology) their society could support during the time of Tohren. 

 

[Lord Varys]

31 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not really. The territories that most benefit from an extended level of peace are the ones close to the borders, the lands that are frequently attacked by invading armies and exposed to dangers which curbs the advancement of trade and artisans. 

The regions of the North that should have seen the most benefit from peace is the Neck and the Western coast. Neither seem to have grown, the Crannogmen are a trading black hole while we are told that the coast has become sparse due to people moving in land rather than be attacked by the Ironborn. On top of that there has been the loss of the new Gift.

The Starks conquered the North a thousand years ago and due to their location will have been less bothered by war with the other realms. It may well have been close to the peak population (the technology) their society could support during the time of Tohren. 

That would be true for attacks from the outside, but not uprisings, rebellions, local warfare, private wars, etc.

How stable/peaceful the North was before the Conquest is unclear. The Osgrey-Webber conflict shows us that people can die and lands and crops be destroyed without any king declaring war on another king. You can fight 'wars' within the boundaries of a kingdom, too.

But, sure, there is a chance that there was a string of mild winters before the Conquest and perhaps the North stayed out of major wars throughout the entire Century of Blood. That could have put them into a better position than the Riverlands, the Stormlands, and other southern kingdoms.

[Bernie Mac]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That would be true for attacks from the outside, but not uprisings, rebellions, local warfare, private wars, etc.

How stable/peaceful the North was before the Conquest is unclear. The Osgrey-Webber conflict shows us that people can die and lands and crops be destroyed without any king declaring war on another king. You can fight 'wars' within the boundaries of a kingdom, too.

Which have continued even after the creation of a united Westeros. In fact the author makes it clear that the North suffers more than the Westerlands in this regard. 

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

 

 

[direpupy]

53 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Not necessarily. We have it from George that it rarely snows as far south as Highgarden (which would also include the Rainwood and Cape Wrath) and 'almost never' in Oldtown and Dorne.

I do not remember this do you have a source?

54 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

KL is more an example for the economic boom in the Targaryen territory after the Conquest. Obviously many people making the city as large as it became so quickly migrated there - and there would have been a reason why people thought they should go there.

Not really, people folk to a place of power but that does not mean they prosper nor is it an indication of a growing economy, in fact it can be the opposite, the poor leaving for the city that is the seat of power in the hopes for a better life without ever finding it.

London and Paris are prime examples of this during the late middle ages, and with they extent of flea bottom in Kings Landing it is clear there are a lot of poor people in Kings Landing.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The feeding thing might have to do more with economic complexities as well. The British could grow more food on their island, too, yet they like to import a lot of food from 'the continent'. If there is a hard Brexit, the UK will be in a similar situation as KL during the War of the Five Kings ;-). Both should have the resources to resolve the import problem otherwise, but it will take time to implement them.

And it is not that there is no food in KL after the Reach and the Riverlands are lost to KL. The food that's there just gets much more expensive - which is what happens always whenever there is a our shortage in goods that everybody wants/needs. If the Crownlands were accustomed to produce food only for KL and sent all their surplus food to the city, things may have been different.

Actually if you reread the Tyrion chapters in ACoK you will see that all the food from the Crownlands is earmarked for the Red keep and the Goldcloak garrison because the Crownlands can't provide enough for the whole city showing the dependence on imported food. I also do not see how bringing in modern Britain with its modern farming techniques is relevant to a medieval story.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But people in the capital of the Seven Kingdoms apparently like to eat food from all corners of the Seven Kingdoms, not just what the Crownlands have to offer.

Because the Crownlands can not feed them even if they tried.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

I already pointed out that the Hightowers did not march with King Mern, so it is clear that not all the strength of the Reach was on the Field of Fire. But aside from that pretty much everyone from the mainland seems to be there.

We never hear which lords where there and which where not so you can not be certain of this, and it would from a military standpoint be utter stupidity to not leave troops to guard the borders with the Stormlands and Dorne so i seriously doubt the lords of these border regions came full strength. Hell we know from the story's of Eustace Osgrey about his ancestor the Little Lion calling upon the reserves of the Northmarch that the Kings of the reach left reserves when going to war, why would this time be different.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

When Mace marshals a similar host - as he does in ACoK in a matter of mere months - it numbers (without Houses Redwyne and Hightower!) in the 80,000-90.000s, not around 35,000 (as Mern seems to have had if we consider the amount of men he had in comparison to King Loren). 

A the classical mistake of thinking that the whole 80000 men of Renly's army are from the Reach, he had Stormlanders with him and Catelyn sees quite a lot of banners of powerful Stormlords so that takes a big chunk out of the 80000 men. So even with the 10000 men reserve at Highgarden i would put the reach numbers at between 60k and 70k then ad the 10k of the Hightowers and at most 3 k of Redwyne because The Hightowers are said to field thrice the numbers of any other Reach lord and your absolute top is 85k men maybe 90 becouse of the men of the Shield Islands.

As i said in my previeus post Mern probably had only about half of his strength with him because of the reserves he had to leave at the borders of Dorne and the Stormlands and the Hightowers not marching, so that is the 35 k at the field of fire times two for the troops not there, makes a total strenght of 70k. Only 20k below the top of the Reach today.

So i really am still not seeing that big boom in the South you are proposing

[Bernie Mac]

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

I do not remember this do you have a source?

 

Yes, some times, in some places. The Mountains of the Moon get quite a lot of snow, the Vale and the riverlands and the west rather less, but some. King's Landing gets snow infrequently, the Storm Lands and the Reach rarely, Oldtown and Dorne almost never.

[Lord Varys]

18 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Which have continued even after the creation of a united Westeros. In fact the author makes it clear that the North suffers more than the Westerlands in this regard. 

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

One assumes there were more such rebellions and revolts before the Conquest. The North is vast, and the Starks never had dragons to keep their provinces in line. It is no surprise that the Skagosi only rebel when the Targaryen dragons are dead, no? Just as Dagon Greyjoy started his raids at a time when the Iron Throne was occupied with the Blackfyres and dragonless.

Just think how a dotard king like Edrick Snowbeard would have been seen in a pre-Conquest North. The Umbers and Boltons and Dustins and other powerful lords wouldn't care one bit about the decrees of the senile king. And that means they would do and take what they want, as powerful lords do.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

I do not remember this do you have a source?

See above. The quote proves that winter is mostly a northern problem. Even in the Riverlands, the West, and the Vale snow isn't that much of a problem, nor in KL. Snow like the snow we get in the Epilogue or hear about the Year of the False Spring (Blackwater frozen) seems to be not that common during winter in KL.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Not really, people folk to a place of power but that does not mean they prosper nor is it an indication of a growing economy, in fact it can be the opposite, the poor leaving for the city that is the seat of power in the hopes for a better life without ever finding it.

That is simply not the case for KL. This is the largest and most prosperous city in Westeros. There are poor people there, too, like in every city, but it is a thriving city. Just reread everything there is to read about KL in TWoIaF and TSotD. Even in the main series we see that with men like Tobho Mott (who seems to be Qohorik by birth) and people from basically the entire known world calling in the port of KL.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Actually if you reread the Tyrion chapters in ACoK you will see that all the food from the Crownlands is earmarked for the Red keep and the Goldcloak garrison because the Crownlands can't provide enough for the whole city showing the dependence on imported food. I also do not see how bringing in modern Britain with its modern farming techniques is relevant to a medieval story.

It was an analogy. KL is surrounded by enemies from all sides. Stannis cuts them off from the Narrow Sea (like Rhaenyra did during the Dance), the Riverlands and Reach and Stormlands are lost.

The idea that one could in a feudal setting suddenly put major resources on feeding KL when the farms and fields of the Crownlanders outside the city cannot really feel safe is not very convincing - especially since the people in power want to win the war and stay in power. Feeding Kingslanders is nobody's priority - and if it were, the Iron Throne has pretty much no leeway to force the lords of the Crownlands to suddenly hand all their food over to them.

It might even be that a significant portion of the peasants in the Crownlands prepared themselves for war - by hoarding their food and/or searching for refuge in KL (which is why Littlefinger's tax is as effective as it is) or the seats of their local lords.

And it is also quite clear that food prices go up and up if there are many refugees in a city, and one expects a siege, no?

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Because the Crownlands can not feed them even if they tried.

That is not established as a fact. All we know is that there was a food shortage and nobody made an attempt to better the situation of the poor. The Red Keep only cares that it continues to get the food the rich and powerful are accustomed to. There is no indication that Cersei or Tyrion tried to convince the Rosbys or Stokeworths and others to also send food to the commoners.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

We never hear which lords where there and which where not so you can not be certain of this, and it would from a military standpoint be utter stupidity to not leave troops to guard the borders with the Stormlands and Dorne so i seriously doubt the lords of these border regions came full strength. Hell we know from the story's of Eustace Osgrey about his ancestor the Little Lion calling upon the reserves of the Northmarch that the Kings of the reach left reserves when going to war, why would this time be different.

Again, the Stormlands were defeated. No need to guard those borders. And we do know that people in this world actually are stupid. Just look at Robb. And a king raising the largest army Westeros has seen until Renly's days should be rather, well, threatening never mind where he is. After the Targaryens are dealt with such an army could (and likely would) have subdued to the Riverlands afterwards, splitting them up between them, and Mern would have later taken possession of the Stormlands, too. Provoking Mern by attacking defenseless regions could backfire spectacularly.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

A the classical mistake of thinking that the whole 80000 men of Renly's army are from the Reach, he had Stormlanders with him and Catelyn sees quite a lot of banners of powerful Stormlords so that takes a big chunk out of the 80000 men. So even with the 10000 men reserve at Highgarden i would put the reach numbers at between 60k and 70k then ad the 10k of the Hightowers and at most 3 k of Redwyne because The Hightowers are said to field thrice the numbers of any other Reach lord and your absolute top is 85k men maybe 90 becouse of the men of the Shield Islands.

The Shield Islanders were also not with Renly, so you would have to add those to Mern's men. There certainly are Stormlanders with Renly, but not that much, as far as we know. The islands have sent only few men, the Marchers, too, it seems, which doesn't leave all that many men.

And you do know that the Tyrells are still not at their limits even with Renly's Reach men all at KL. Willas and Garlan do raise new men in addition to those Garlan brought back to Highgarden.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

As i said in my previeus post Mern probably had only about half of his strength with him because of the reserves he had to leave at the borders of Dorne and the Stormlands and the Hightowers not marching, so that is the 35 k at the field of fire times two for the troops not there, makes a total strenght of 70k. Only 20k below the top of the Reach today.

You have no evidence for that. Mern had more time to raise his troops, and he had an 'iron fist' of armored lords and knights at the Field of Fire that indicates that the full strength of the Reach (minus the Hightowers) were indeed with King Mern.

8 minutes ago, direpupy said:

So i really am still not seeing that big boom in the South you are proposing

Then you have to look harder. Again, winter is not really that much of an issue down there, and continuous warfare stopped. It makes no sense to assume that this didn't have a massive effects on population growth, especially during the golden age of Jaehaerys I and Viserys I - which, in combination with Aegon's 25 years of peace after the First Dornish War - give Westeros nearly a century of peace and prosperity.

After all, it is ridiculous to assume that Jaehaerys' roads did not have any effect on the trade conducted in the Realm.

[direpupy]

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Yes, some times, in some places. The Mountains of the Moon get quite a lot of snow, the Vale and the riverlands and the west rather less, but some. King's Landing gets snow infrequently, the Storm Lands and the Reach rarely, Oldtown and Dorne almost never.

Thanks

[Lord Varys]

The entire SSM really underlines how fucked the North usually is, and how, well, shitty agriculture is up there in comparison to a land with proper temperatures.

People really try to jump through the hoops at times, but summer snows are summer snows. And they are shit.

It is also quite clear that winter really isn't that much of an issue in relation to snow and cold in KL or the Stormlands considering that Stannis' Stormlanders really have great problems with an 'autumn storm' in the North. If an autumn storm in the North was, more or less, equivalent or comparable to a really cruel winter down in the south, then Stannis' guys shouldn't have had that many issues.

That means that winter in the North really has a completely different quality than winter in the south. And we cannot even say the autumn storm had been worse than a normal autumn storm due to the Others and all that since the clansmen are the ones dismissing that as an 'autumn storm'.

The whole 'winter armies' thing Ran talked about a while back is also already in that SSM in the whole reference that people have to move south or die in winter. That also indicates that wildling attacks and raids become a major issue for the North in winter - just as the clansmen raids become an issue for the Vale (and the Riverlands).

[direpupy]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is simply not the case for KL. This is the largest and most prosperous city in Westeros. There are poor people there, too, like in every city, but it is a thriving city. Just reread everything there is to read about KL in TWoIaF and TSotD. Even in the main series we see that with men like Tobho Mott (who seems to be Qohorik by birth) and people from basically the entire known world calling in the port of KL.

Wrong this is absolutely the case for kings landing the few rich life on top of the hills and the craftsmen live on the slopes going down the rest are the poor that flock to the city, i urge you to reread yourself because every pov we get comments on what a shitty city Kings landing actually is in comparison to they other city's of the realm. Furthermore we hear that Oldtown makes the Hightowers as rich as the Lannisters yet the crown is debt even do they control Kings Landing. This is because even do it is the premier port of Blackwater bay its port is still not on par with Oldtown, it is the premier city of westeros because the King, his small council and the High Septon reside there but that does nothing for it economically. So it may be the greatest city in westeros but economically it is a piss poor city.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It was an analogy. KL is surrounded by enemies from all sides. Stannis cuts them off from the Narrow Sea (like Rhaenyra did during the Dance), the Riverlands and Reach and Stormlands are lost.

No its not, this is typical for you, you know your beat so suddenly the text should not be taken literally. Bullshit my friend.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea that one could in a feudal setting suddenly put major resources on feeding KL when the farms and fields of the Crownlanders outside the city cannot really feel safe is not very convincing - especially since the people in power want to win the war and stay in power. Feeding Kingslanders is nobody's priority - and if it were, the Iron Throne has pretty much no leeway to force the lords of the Crownlands to suddenly hand all their food over to them.

 Hahaha been a while since you read the books i see, almost all the Lords of the Crownlands are in Kings Landing at the time of the war and Cersie refuses to let them go the Iron Throne is in the perfect position to force them to send there food. And it would be a priority to feed Kings Landing to prevent riots like the one on the day Myrcella leaves for Dorne. So again bullshit on your part.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It might even be that a significant portion of the peasants in the Crownlands prepared themselves for war - by hoarding their food and/or searching for refuge in KL (which is why Littlefinger's tax is as effective as it is) or the seats of their local lords.

Peasants may try to hoard but that lasts until there Lords men come riding into the village to take it, so not bloody likely.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And it is also quite clear that food prices go up and up if there are many refugees in a city, and one expects a siege, no?

Sure that contributes but is not the sole cause.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is not established as a fact. All we know is that there was a food shortage and nobody made an attempt to better the situation of the poor. The Red Keep only cares that it continues to get the food the rich and powerful are accustomed to. There is no indication that Cersei or Tyrion tried to convince the Rosbys or Stokeworths and others to also send food to the commoners.

Yes it is the Lords of the Crownlands are basically hostages so there food is going to go to Kings Landing because they need it there and it is obviously not enough so this is as established a fact as you are going to get from someone like GRRM who likes to keep vague on these matters.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Again, the Stormlands were defeated. No need to guard those borders. And we do know that people in this world actually are stupid. Just look at Robb. And a king raising the largest army Westeros has seen until Renly's days should be rather, well, threatening never mind where he is. After the Targaryens are dealt with such an army could (and likely would) have subdued to the Riverlands afterwards, splitting them up between them, and Mern would have later taken possession of the Stormlands, too. Provoking Mern by attacking defenseless regions could backfire spectacularly.

Mern would not have heard about the Stormlander defeat until after gathering his forces and since he and Loren had 5 times Aegon's number he would have no need to call upon the men he left to guard against incursion from the Stormlands, the bolded part is just wishfull thinking, come on you really think Dorne and the Westerlands want the Reach to grow even more in power, not going to happen Loren would stab Mern in the Back to keep him from becoming as great a treat as Aegon.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Shield Islanders were also not with Renly, so you would have to add those to Mern's men. 

Dude read before you comment, i added the Shield Island to the total as extra on top of the forces with Renly because they where not with him. And why would i have to add them to Mern's troops? I would like to because that would mean that Merns number is closer to todays and that would mean the population growth is even smaller then before.

6 hours ago, direpupy said:

A the classical mistake of thinking that the whole 80000 men of Renly's army are from the Reach, he had Stormlanders with him and Catelyn sees quite a lot of banners of powerful Stormlords so that takes a big chunk out of the 80000 men. So even with the 10000 men reserve at Highgarden i would put the reach numbers at between 60k and 70k then ad the 10k of the Hightowers and at most 3 k of Redwyne because The Hightowers are said to field thrice the numbers of any other Reach lord and your absolute top is 85k men maybe 90 becouse of the men of the Shield Islands.

 

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There certainly are Stormlanders with Renly, but not that much, as far as we know. The islands have sent only few men, the Marchers, too, it seems, which doesn't leave all that many men.

Reread the Catelyn chapter where she sees Renly's armie most of the important nobles of the Stormlands are there, only Tarth, Swann and Dondarion are confirmed to not be there, where talking at least two thirds of there total forces and they are generally put at 30k so my calculations are spot one here.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And you do know that the Tyrells are still not at their limits even with Renly's Reach men all at KL. Willas and Garlan do raise new men in addition to those Garlan brought back to Highgarden.

Willas says his brother is can raise 10k in a fortnight but these include the troops he takes with him back to the reach which are thousands so at best half of these are "new" troops, big whoop now its 95k still only 25k above Mern's number.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

You have no evidence for that. Mern had more time to raise his troops, and he had an 'iron fist' of armored lords and knights at the Field of Fire that indicates that the full strength of the Reach (minus the Hightowers) were indeed with King Mern.

More time my ass,Renly moved purposely slow there where several battles in the Riverlands during his slow ride down towards Kings Landing so his troops had all the time in the world to join him, so this idea of Mern having more time is just plain wrong.

And the thing with iron fist is just a king who knows he outnumbers his enemy 5 to 1 boasting, it say absolutely nothing about his full strength. So i am Calling bullshit on this too.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Then you have to look harder. Again, winter is not really that much of an issue down there, and continuous warfare stopped. It makes no sense to assume that this didn't have a massive effects on population growth, especially during the golden age of Jaehaerys I and Viserys I - which, in combination with Aegon's 25 years of peace after the First Dornish War - give Westeros nearly a century of peace and prosperity..

Look smarter not harder, there is absolutely no evidence for a boom, now there is growth and ample evidence for it but not for the boom you so desperately want.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

After all, it is ridiculous to assume that Jaehaerys' roads did not have any effect on the trade conducted in the Realm.

Trade most certainly gained from it but more goods being transported does not mean that the population is going to grow, it just means that your goods are going to get to there destination faster and you can get more of it there.

[Lord Varys]

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Wrong this is absolutely the case for kings landing the few rich life on top of the hills and the craftsmen live on the slopes going down the rest are the poor that flock to the city, i urge you to reread yourself because every pov we get comments on what a shitty city Kings landing actually is in comparison to they other city's of the realm. Furthermore we hear that Oldtown makes the Hightowers as rich as the Lannisters yet the crown is debt even do they control Kings Landing. This is because even do it is the premier port of Blackwater bay its port is still not on par with Oldtown, it is the premier city of westeros because the King, his small council and the High Septon reside there but that does nothing for it economically. So it may be the greatest city in westeros but economically it is a piss poor city.

LOL. The people of KL built the Red Keep, the Dragonpit, and the Great Sept. They do have resources and wealth. They build large and thick city walls in a few years, and thousands of houses in a mere years.

It stinks in KL and there are no cobblestones, but that doesn't mean there is no money and wealth there. Far to the contrary, actually.

And LOL again - if a king throws away money left and right - like tens of thousands of gold dragons as price money during a fucking tourney! - it is quite clear why the Crown is in debt. But this doesn't mean he doesn't have an enormous income. It is just money. You can spend it. It is not that hard.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Hahaha been a while since you read the books i see, almost all the Lords of the Crownlands are in Kings Landing at the time of the war and Cersie refuses to let them go the Iron Throne is in the perfect position to force them to send there food. And it would be a priority to feed Kings Landing to prevent riots like the one on the day Myrcella leaves for Dorne. So again bullshit on your part.

LOL, what makes you think Cersei gives a shit about the Kingslanders? Or Tyrion? Neither of them care much about their situation before the food riots start. And why should they? They have more important things to deal with - or so they assume.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Peasants may try to hoard but that lasts until there Lords men come riding into the village to take it, so not bloody likely.

Lords can hoard it to, you know. You feed the Red Keep and ignore the commoners. Nobody important is likely to complain.

And in a situation where the enemy is awaited to basically come from anywhere - north, east, and south - men-at-arms would have better things to do than to ensure food is transported to the city, or have the time to investigate why this or that farm or village doesn't send as much food as they used to.

But again - it is not that no food is there. It is just expensive. If you have to pay 100,- $ for a pound of beef you still have beef. It is just somewhat overpriced.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Yes it is the Lords of the Crownlands are basically hostages so there food is going to go to Kings Landing because they need it there and it is obviously not enough so this is as established a fact as you are going to get from someone like GRRM who likes to keep vague on these matters.

We don't know that they are effectively hostages or cannot leave KL. Rosby later leaves the city with Tommen, if I'm not mistaken.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Mern would not have heard about the Stormlander defeat until after gathering his forces and since he and Loren had 5 times Aegon's number he would have no need to call upon the men he left to guard against incursion from the Stormlands, the bolded part is just wishfull thinking, come on you really think Dorne and the Westerlands want the Reach to grow even more in power, not going to happen Loren would stab Mern in the Back to keep him from becoming as great a treat as Aegon.

You do recall that Argilac was crushed rather early during the war, right? And that this is a world where ravens do fly from castle to castle? Mern, Loren, and Torrhen had a year or more to raise their levies.

Mern and Loren made a pact. Could very well be they decided to share split up the lands Aegon the Moron freed from Harren and the threat of Harren. That's what I would have done with that massive army. Dorne is worth nothing, the Vale has very good natural defenses, and the North is also worth nothing. But the Riverlands are a ripe fruit, and the Stormlands not that bad, either.

The idea that Mern must have been afraid of the beaten Stormlanders - or see them as an enemy while they were also Aegon's targets - isn't very plausible. Especially since Mern doesn't come across like a very cautious or timid king. Else he wouldn't have commanded his iron fist himself - nor allowed all his male kin to ride with the iron fist, too.

In addition, the Storm Kings were in decline. Argilac was old, and he had just a daughter as heir. Nothing to fear from them. The Gardeners were slowly but surely conquering the Stormlands, piece by piece.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Reread the Catelyn chapter where she sees Renly's armie most of the important nobles of the Stormlands are there, only Tarth, Swann and Dondarion are confirmed to not be there, where talking at least two thirds of there total forces and they are generally put at 30k so my calculations are spot one here.

Those are banners. There are also Hightower banners with Renly. Where there any actual Hightowers with him? No. There were some of their bannermen with him, men we cannot connect to the ruling lines of House Cuy and Beesbury. How many actual Stormlanders were with Renly is completely unclear at this point. We might get more information on that when the Marchers bestir themselves and we get numbers on the Stormlanders declaring or opposing Aegon. Or when we learn how many Stormlanders are among the Tyrell army marching against Storm's End.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Willas says his brother is can raise 10k in a fortnight but these include the troops he takes with him back to the reach which are thousands so at best half of these are "new" troops, big whoop now its 95k still only 25k above Mern's number.

That doesn't make sense. The men Garlan brings back are not sent back home but were supposed to help Garlan take Brightwater. Has Garlan already taken Brightwater? No. They don't have to be raised since they have not been dismissed yet.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

More time my ass,Renly moved purposely slow there where several battles in the Riverlands during his slow ride down towards Kings Landing so his troops had all the time in the world to join him, so this idea of Mern having more time is just plain wrong.

LOL, so 1+ year passed between Renly's coronation and Cat's visit in his camp at Bitterbridge? Like it did between Aegon's landing and the Field of Fire?

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

And the thing with iron fist is just a king who knows he outnumbers his enemy 5 to 1 boasting, it say absolutely nothing about his full strength. So i am Calling bullshit on this too.

LOL, Gyldayn actually gives us numbers about the armored lords and knights there. It is pretty impressive.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Look smarter not harder, there is absolutely no evidence for a boom, now there is growth and ample evidence for it but not for the boom you so desperately want.

I don't want it, I know it is there.

5 minutes ago, direpupy said:

Trade most certainly gained from it but more goods being transported does not mean that the population is going to grow, it just means that your goods are going to get to there destination faster and you can get more of it there.

LOL, trade cannot grow if the population remains stagnant, especially not in a medieval setting with no machinery or industrial production. People have to do the work. There have to be more workers, craftsmen, sailors, and peasants, or else trade is not going to grow. That is why KL grew as fast as it did.

[Ran]

Stay polite, folks. 

[Lord Varys]

Yeah, sorry, the whole 'bullshit' got me somewhat worked up.

@direpupy I do like you ;-).

[Nittanian]

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It stinks in KL and there are no cobblestones

FYI, cobblestones are observed in AGOT Arya V and ADWD Cersei II, and cobblestones were used to bludgeon Luthor Largent (TPATQ) and Aron Santagar (ACOK Tyrion IX).