Jump to content

Military Strengths-2 and More!


Corvo the Crow

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Just to address your other point directly, we have zero evidence how many men the Glovers had in Robb’s host. Seeing banners is meaningless for purpose of counting number of men. That entire line of argument is baseless.

All we know is that the Glovers - like the Tallharts and any other Northern lord - can raise at least 1000 men.

And that - like the Tallharts - they are a Masterly House, not lords.

And  lastly, that they appear to have a relatively unimpressive castle compared to many other Stark bannermen. But whether they can raise 1000 or 2000 men, I honestly don’t know.

If I had to guess - and that really is all we can do at this point - I would estimate around 1500, as I don’t think they are at the very bottom of the Stark bannermen strength, which is 1000. But I also don’t think they are particularly powerful.

1500-2000 as their full strength feels about right. But as I admitted above, it is based on very flimsy evidence.

They seem to have around a thousand men with Stannis alone, and that is a minimum, and you place them at 1500? And you place Ryswells at what, 2500? Based on what?

Having a weaker castle really is a non argument and if you are implying they are weaker because they are a masterly house, well, Mormonts are a lordly one for in-region comparison. Templetons who can raise 1000 men are also same as a masterly house while Baelish with a single village of 20 people. 

And what do the banners mean if they don’t mean strength? Each banner has a number of men under it, as the number of banners increase, so does the number of men. And I really want to believe you’ll agree this, but really am not sure if you’d do; if there are more banners of a house, you are  more likely to take notice of it, right? I Really can’t see it being any other way so explain your logic on why not; how come a house whose banners are so numerous to take notice of can have fewer men than a house whose banners are not enough to take notice of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17 January 2019 at 6:47 PM, Corvo the Crow said:

Arya sees the CAMPS, plural, not a camp, and there are thousands of men and hundreds of horse when in fact, for Robb’s host, horses should outnumber the troops(every men with two horse, see Karstarks) 

Now that you mention it, it is kinda unbelievable that when Bolton returns to the North he has so few horses. I mean, did they slaughter all the Robb's horses or what? Even if Roose shared the loot with the Freys, more than half of his men should have been mounted after the Red Wedding.

Re: Glovers, wasn't mentioned somewhere that they used to be kings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Banners only mean that some guy is having a banner. They tell us nothing about how many men follow that banner. Nor do banners being seen in an army tell us anything about how many men from that house (or any at all) are with the army. Just think of the Hightower banner among Renly's army. Lord Leyton basically sent no men to Renly yet the banners are there all the same.

Also, whenever some guy recognizes a banner we cannot conclude that said banner is particularly important or prominent in said army. It only says that the guy who recognized it recognized it for some reason. We need additional information about the banner, the house, and the number of men from that house that are in the army to actually make any sort of educated guess.

Men and houses given prominence by the story doesn't mean they are particularly powerful or there with many men. It just means that the characters from those houses are important for the story for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Banners only mean that some guy is having a banner. They tell us nothing about how many men follow that banner. Nor do banners being seen in an army tell us anything about how many men from that house (or any at all) are with the army. Just think of the Hightower banner among Renly's army. Lord Leyton basically sent no men to Renly yet the banners are there all the same.

Also, whenever some guy recognizes a banner we cannot conclude that said banner is particularly important or prominent in said army. It only says that the guy who recognized it recognized it for some reason. We need additional information about the banner, the house, and the number of men from that house that are in the army to actually make any sort of educated guess.

Men and houses given prominence by the story doesn't mean they are particularly powerful or there with many men. It just means that the characters from those houses are important for the story for some reason.

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Maia said:

Now that you mention it, it is kinda unbelievable that when Bolton returns to the North he has so few horses. I mean, did they slaughter all the Robb's horses or what? Even if Roose shared the loot with the Freys, more than half of his men should have been mounted after the Red Wedding.

Re: Glovers, wasn't mentioned somewhere that they used to be kings?

Good point. Another fine example of GRRM being inconsistent with numbers.

 

@Lord Varys

Do you see a thousand men following a single banner? Do you see a hundred men each carrying a banner to make it hundred banners for hundred men?

Banners are there for a reason, and I have given a source before, stating a banner usually had at least 25 men under it. Numbers would fluctuate, obviously, and Westerosi standarts may be different but I believe it would be more or less consistent. 

As for banners seen being important for story purposes and other factors for seing a banner, well, Are Manderlies not important to the story? Yet they were not spotted by Tyrion despite having 1300 men(~1250  foot and some horsemen).

Again, Roose has 10000 northmen after serious losses at greenfork, so even with those serious losses, Karstark, Hornwood, Cerwyn and Glover put together make near 4000 men and with a thousand Karstarks prowling after Jaime, this gives near a thousand men to each of these houses, despite their grievous losses, at the very least and this is with Karstark losses taken at a minimum.

 

The math of it is really not that hard. You can always say George is bad with his numbers and guess what, you’ll be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Good point. Another fine example of GRRM being inconsistent with numbers.

 

@Lord Varys

Do you see a thousand men following a single banner? Do you see a hundred men each carrying a banner to make it hundred banners for hundred men?

Banners are there for a reason, and I have given a source before, stating a banner usually had at least 25 men under it. Numbers would fluctuate, obviously, and Westerosi standarts may be different but I believe it would be more or less consistent. 

As for banners seen being important for story purposes and other factors for seing a banner, well, Are Manderlies not important to the story? Yet they were not spotted by Tyrion despite having 1300 men(~1250  foot and some horsemen).

Again, Roose has 10000 northmen after serious losses at greenfork, so even with those serious losses, Karstark, Hornwood, Cerwyn and Glover put together make near 4000 men and with a thousand Karstarks prowling after Jaime, this gives near a thousand men to each of these houses, despite their grievous losses, at the very least and this is with Karstark losses taken at a minimum.

 

The math of it is really not that hard. You can always say George is bad with his numbers and guess what, you’ll be right.

So forgive me if I don't recall the details off the quote, but on what basis do you say that the norhtern host consisted of only Cerwyn, Glover, Karstark and Hornwood men?

What about the foot belonging to the Tallharts, Mormonts, Umbers, Flints of Widow's Watch, Flints of Flint's Finger, Dustins, Ryswells, Slates, and Manderlys, to name but a few? Martin has said before that he isn't going to name every lord in a host, and unless Tyrion states that the banners he briefly mentioned were the ONLY ones in the host, there is no way that this is evidence that these other Houses did not also contribute to the host.

4000 divided by 12 houses gives a very different distribution than 4000 divided by just 4 houses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

So forgive me if I don't recall the details off the quote, but on what basis do you say that the norhtern host consisted of only Cerwyn, Glover, Karstark and Hornwood men?

What about the foot belonging to the Tallharts, Mormonts, Umbers, Flints of Widow's Watch, Flints of Flint's Finger, Dustins, Ryswells, Slates, and Manderlys, to name but a few? Martin has said before that he isn't going to name every lord in a host, and unless Tyrion states that the banners he briefly mentioned were the ONLY ones in the host, there is no way that this is evidence that these other Houses did not also contribute to the host.

4000 divided by 12 houses gives a very different distribution than 4000 divided by just 4 houses.

Your post is confusing, do you mean Roose’s entire host, or just the Duskendale bound force? I have never said or implied these houses aren’t part of the host Tyrion sees, where do you even get that I honestly have no idea.

As for the Duskendale bound force, aftermath of it is pretty explanatory, unless all the Flint shields and Dustin surcoats and etc. were sold off when Brienne came, they were not with that army.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Corvo the Crow

My point was more in general. Sure, one assumes that most men following a banner are not following some poor dude with no castle, but since pretty much anyone has a banner (i.e. even hedge knights) this fact in and of itself makes it clear that we cannot really know how many men follow a banner on average.

Your idea about how many men follow a banner is drawn from the real world, not George's works, and so we cannot really pretend to transfer that - especially not without knowing that such rules do apply there.

A very crucial point in my opinion here is that banners do not necessarily disappear when people die or desert, meaning that an army which has seen a couple of battles, faced some rough times, etc. can still carry certain banners without its composition actually reflecting the situation a look at the most prominent banners might imply. For instance, during the Dance we can be reasonably sure that the army of the Westermen continue to depict the lion of Lannister even after Lord Jason Lannister had died and command of the army had passed to non-Lannister commanders. Similarly, the Lads raise Rhaenyra's quartered banners, ignoring the fact that she is neither there nor alive.

In a more general manner this implies that an army could have lost, say, the lion's share of Hightower men and still continue to prominently carry and depict some great Hightower banners they happen to carry.

@Free Northman Reborn has the right of it in the sense that an army full of Northmen from, more or less, the entire North aside from Skagos and, perhaps, some other very remote regions we have yet to hear something about should contain men from houses from all those regions, and subsequently also their banners.

This is also a point where George basically not caring to be consistent kicks in. We have it repeatedly said that there are many Frey men in Frey colors and the like, but in light of the feudal hierarchy this is either wrong or exceptional in comparison to other houses (due to enormous Frey wealth allowing them to feed and clothe and equip hundreds or thousands of men-at-arms without actually doing that through their own vassals) who are not doing as well as the Freys.

As for the horses thing @Maia has brought up - that's where George regularly drops the ball. First Renly's horse all disappear - both the horses and the knights riding them - and then even Stannis' Florent men seem to disappear in-between ASoS and ADwD.

The tidbit I usually complain about the loudest is the fact that Stannis' strength in cavalry is simply not used after Renly's death. Him having the bulk of Renly's horse would have allowed him to actually crush the army at Bitterbridge. They may have had 60,000+ men there, but Stannis had over 10,000+ horse, a huge chunk of the chivalry of the Reach and the Stormlands. Had he marched those men down south he could have had all his late brother's men, not just the bigger part of the horse.

Also, if pretty much all your men are horse you can move much faster. There was no need for Stannis to attack KL with ships or to cross the Blackwater close to the city. He could have taken his army farther North to cross the Blackwater a dozen of miles or leagues further inland, so that he could attack and besiege KL without having to cross the river in a vulnerable position.

Not to mention that there is no indication that Stannis has the advantage in horse during the Battle of the Blackwater. His army should have been nearly completely horse whereas the Tyrells would have brought comparatively little horse with only Tywin bringing a proper contingent of cavalry.

Robb's part of the Northern army was entirely horse. Only a tenth of the Northern horse went with Roose when they split up at the Twins. Robb may have gained some more foot later at Riverrun and in the Riverlands in general, but the bulk of the army he raised and took to Riverrun and then the West and back all the way to the Twins was horse.

And those horse then disappear into nothingness. Even if Roose and Walder had split the horses up between them Roose would still return back home with a literal army of horses. Northern horses he could later use in his war. But they are not there. That just doesn't make any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lord Varys

No, not everyone has a banner and especially not Hedge Knights. I’m not even sure if some of the smaller ‘lords’ who contribute a few men would carry a banner; If your liege has 500 men but brought 200 himself with the rest coming from thirty others, that’s at least 30 banners if everyone carriesn his own banner and another 8 with the 25 number, as opposed to  minimum of 20 with the same number, you’ve lost another 18 fighting men in the first one. A hedge knight carrying a “his banner” is even worse, does the employer pay him to carry his banner or to fight?

What you say is a sigil or coat of arms and people have their personal CoA’s but don’t carry a banner with that CoA everywhere.

 

Quote

Gods be damned, look at them all, Tyrion thought, though he knew his father had more men on the field. Their captains led them on armored warhorses, standard-bearers riding alongside with their banners. 

Does this look like something a hedge knight would have?

 

As for banners being/not being there, Manderlies were in GF, their lord’s son even got captured there, so I am not saying lack of banners seen is a lack of banners and therefore that house, I am saying if we see one banner while not the other, well the second house would have fewer banners and therefore fewer men.

Quote

Theon studied their banners through Maester Luwin's Myrish lens tube. The Cerwyn battle-axe flapped bravely wherever he looked, and there were Tallhart trees as well, and mermen from White Harbor. Less common were the sigils of Flint and Karstark. Here and there he even saw the bull moose of the Hornwoods. But no Glovers, Asha saw to them, no Boltons from the Dreadfort, no Umbers come down from the shadow of the Wall. 

Notice how Hornwood banners are barely noticable? This is with an army less than 2000 strong, We have seen Tallharts having some nobility under them, Cerwyns have Condons at the very least, Manderly has 100 landed knights and 12 lesser lords, pretty sure some of their vassals have contributed men to this host and some may even carry their bannerd yet we don’t see those, why? Because even Hornwoods with a few banners are barely noticed, if some guy, has a banner or two, It would get lost among all those other banners.

 

Duskendale is a whole different story though;

Quote

She knew many of the badges. The mailed fist, the moose, the white sun, the double-bladed axe, all those were northern sigils. Tarly men had perished here as well, though, and many from the stormlands. She saw red and green apples, a shield that bore the three thunderbolts of Leygood, horse trappings patterned with the ants of Ambrose. Lord Tarly's own striding huntsman appeared on many a badge and brooch and doublet

And even here Tallharts  who we know were there are not noticed. Obviously because they had fewer men and therefore fewer pieces with their coa’s left after battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some more info and thoughts on horse-foot ratios.

First, a small info; Baratheon force that went to KL during Dance had 600 knights and 4000 foot, so a ratio of 3 to 20. Reminder we see many 1 to 10s or 1 to 9s, especially during this time.

 

Now, here are some thoughts, Tywin had 500 knights to 3000 foot during Reyne-Tarbeck; 1 to 6.

Hightower had 1000 knight to 5000, 1 to 5.

Manderly had ~50 in knights and squires but had 200 other horsemen besides, described not as heavy lancers but still as heavy horse(they were armored). to ~1250 foot.

Could we say that cities (and perhaps towns) maintain a ratio of roughly 1 to 5 in heavy horse to foot/rest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2019 at 7:46 AM, Corvo the Crow said:

@Lord Varys

No, not everyone has a banner and especially not Hedge Knights. I’m not even sure if some of the smaller ‘lords’ who contribute a few men would carry a banner; If your liege has 500 men but brought 200 himself with the rest coming from thirty others, that’s at least 30 banners if everyone carriesn his own banner and another 8 with the 25 number, as opposed to  minimum of 20 with the same number, you’ve lost another 18 fighting men in the first one. A hedge knight carrying a “his banner” is even worse, does the employer pay him to carry his banner or to fight?

Yeah, I conflated heraldry and an actual banner there, but this doesn't tell us anything about what kind of guy can have a banner. I'm sure Eustace Osgrey might have a banner, and he could not possibly contribute much in the condition he is in TSS.

And the idea that people describing a couple of banners means we get an impression how many there are in a given group or army is simply a stretch.

On 2/18/2019 at 7:46 AM, Corvo the Crow said:

As for banners being/not being there, Manderlies were in GF, their lord’s son even got captured there, so I am not saying lack of banners seen is a lack of banners and therefore that house, I am saying if we see one banner while not the other, well the second house would have fewer banners and therefore fewer men.

That might be - or not. It actually only means that the POV describing things only sees/focuses on the banners he mentions, it does not mean that he or she has a complete and accurate overview over the army he or she approaches.

10 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Some more info and thoughts on horse-foot ratios.

First, a small info; Baratheon force that went to KL during Dance had 600 knights and 4000 foot, so a ratio of 3 to 20. Reminder we see many 1 to 10s or 1 to 9s, especially during this time.

Borros is not exactly in a great position during the Dance. We have two confirmed Black Stormlords, and the Swanns possibly as well. He would have only taken men (horse and foot) who were firm in the Green/Baratheon camp, not so much men from Black houses or men suspected of leaning towards them. And he would have likely left some men at home to keep the peace there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And the idea that people describing a couple of banners means we get an impression how many there are in a given group or army is simply a stretch.

I'll give this quote again;

 

On ‎2‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 9:46 AM, Corvo the Crow said:

The Cerwyn battle-axe flapped bravely wherever he looked, and there were Tallhart trees as well, and mermen from White Harbor. Less common were the sigils of Flint and Karstark. Here and there he even saw the bull moose of the Hornwoods. But no Glovers, Asha saw to them, no Boltons from the Dreadfort, no Umbers come down from the shadow of the Wall. 

Now, can you say that we can't clearly tell that Hornwoods number way fewer than Cerwyns?

 

Also a reminder, Tallhart had 400 men under his command when Edmure sent him to

 

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That might be - or not. It actually only means that the POV describing things only sees/focuses on the banners he mentions, it does not mean that he or she has a complete and accurate overview over the army he or she approaches.

And why would he be focusing on those banners?
 

Quote

 

He had no time to think about it. The drums were so near that the beat crept under his skin and set his hands to twitching. Bronn drew his longsword, and suddenly the enemy was there before them, boiling over the tops of the hills, advancing with measured tread behind a wall of shields and pikes.

Gods be damned, look at them all, Tyrion thought, though he knew his father had more men on the field. Their captains led them on armored warhorses, standard-bearers riding alongside with their banners. He glimpsed the bull moose of the Hornwoods, the Karstark sunburst, Lord Cerwyn's battle-axe, and the mailed fist of the Glovers … and the twin towers of Frey, blue on grey. So much for his father's certainty that Lord Walder would not bestir himself. The white of House Stark was seen everywhere, the grey direwolves seeming to run and leap as the banners swirled and streamed from the high staffs. Where is the boy? Tyrion wondered.

 

He focuses on them because these are the banners he saw the men boiling over the hills carry.

 

Quote

In the dawn light, the army of Lord Tywin Lannister unfolded like an iron rose, thorns gleaming.

His uncle would lead the center. Ser Kevan had raised his standards above the kingsroad. Quivers hanging from their belts, the foot archers arrayed themselves into three long lines, to east and west of the road, and stood calmly stringing their bows. Between them, pikemen formed squares; behind were rank on rank of men-at-arms with spear and sword and axe. Three hundred heavy horse surrounded Ser Kevan and the lords bannermen Lefford, Lydden, and Serrett with all their sworn retainers.

The right wing was all cavalry, some four thousand men, heavy with the weight of their armor. More than three quarters of the knights were there, massed together like a great steel fist. Ser Addam Marbrand had the command. Tyrion saw his banner unfurl as his standard-bearer shook it out; a burning tree, orange and smoke. Behind him flew Ser Flement's purple unicorn, the brindled boar of Crakehall, the bantam rooster of Swyft, and more.

From his position, Tyrion can see the banner of Addam Marbrand, carried by a standard-bearer. Being carried by a standard-bearer means the banner is only as big as a person on a horse could carry. If he can see Marbrand's standard on the far right, he could easily see the enemy standards ahead of him as well, especially with them "boiling over" the hills. 

Now, there are  only  two reason I can think of Tyrion, a learned men by the standards of Westeros by the way, missing out the standarts of a house of such importance like the Manderlies, the second or third most powerful house in the North, the first being Starks and second being Dustins if not Manderlies themselves;

- The First is Manderlies not being there, which is not the case as evident with Wylis getting captured, if he weren't on the frontlines, he could easily have avoided getting captured.

- And the second is their banners, colored with a more noticable color compared to some many other northern lords we see were simply not noticed among the other ones because there were fewer of them. House Cerwyn even has the same background color as the Starks and yet their banners are discerned from them.

 

If you have any other ideas that why he may not have seen/noticed the brightly colored banners of the great house of Manderly which fought on the frontlines during the Green Fork and is also a very powerful house in the North and has also been influential in the history of 7K, such as during the great council and the Dance, please do tell, because with all we have at hand, I really can't see any other reason.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

I'll give this quote again;

 

Now, can you say that we can't clearly tell that Hornwoods number way fewer than Cerwyns?

 

Also a reminder, Tallhart had 400 men under his command when Edmure sent him to

 

And why would he be focusing on those banners?
 

He focuses on them because these are the banners he saw the men boiling over the hills carry.

 

From his position, Tyrion can see the banner of Addam Marbrand, carried by a standard-bearer. Being carried by a standard-bearer means the banner is only as big as a person on a horse could carry. If he can see Marbrand's standard on the far right, he could easily see the enemy standards ahead of him as well, especially with them "boiling over" the hills. 

Now, there are  only  two reason I can think of Tyrion, a learned men by the standards of Westeros by the way, missing out the standarts of a house of such importance like the Manderlies, the second or third most powerful house in the North, the first being Starks and second being Dustins if not Manderlies themselves;

- The First is Manderlies not being there, which is not the case as evident with Wylis getting captured, if he weren't on the frontlines, he could easily have avoided getting captured.

- And the second is their banners, colored with a more noticable color compared to some many other northern lords we see were simply not noticed among the other ones because there were fewer of them. House Cerwyn even has the same background color as the Starks and yet their banners are discerned from them.

 

If you have any other ideas that why he may not have seen/noticed the brightly colored banners of the great house of Manderly which fought on the frontlines during the Green Fork and is also a very powerful house in the North and has also been influential in the history of 7K, such as during the great council and the Dance, please do tell, because with all we have at hand, I really can't see any other reason.

 

 

 

Hang on. The first quote is from Rodrik’s host gathered before Winterfell’s walls, right? In that one the comparative prevalence of the mentioned banners is clearly stated.

The other quotes are from a totally different host at a totally different battle. In that one no mention is made of the comparative numbers of the various banners. Other than the Stark banner, which is naturally everywhere.

You conflate the two in order to reach a conclusion from Tyrion’s quote which is not actually implied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Hang on. The first quote is from Rodrik’s host gathered before Winterfell’s walls, right? In that one the comparative prevalence of the mentioned banners is clearly stated.

The other quotes are from a totally different host at a totally different battle. In that one no mention is made of the comparative numbers of the various banners. Other than the Stark banner, which is naturally everywhere.

You conflate the two in order to reach a conclusion from Tyrion’s quote which is not actually implied.

And? I am using logic and using Theon’s quote as an example. 

If you have another explanation besides “we don’t/can’t know”, I’d be glad to hear it.

In Theon’s quote it’s spelled out for us that the house with more soldiers would have their banners “everywhere” and the one with few ones would only have their banners “here and there”, which would be harder to notice, as you’ll agree. Our observer, Tyrion, is able to see the right flank of his father’s army, Not only Tywin’s army has more men than Roose does but it’s also arrayed in a more open position as well, archers streching in long lines on either side with a depth of just three man and pike squares between those. If he sees Marbrand’s standard in such a case, he’d see the Manderly standard as well, even if they were located on the far left of the Northerner’s(or right of Westerners) and yet he doesn’t mention them.

Again I’m sure you’ll agree, Manderlies are a more prominent house than Glovers or Hornwoods and such. A lack of Manderly’s mention but not  these could mean a) Manderly’s aren’t there, which is not true with Wylisa’ capture as evidence and b) he fails to notice them.

Now again, how could Tyrion fail to notice them unless if they have fewer banners and therefore, fewer men.

If you’ve noticed, I’m not making the same case for say Umbers or Boltons or Lockes since we can’t know if they are on the front or not, we don’t see their flags but neither do we have anything to suggest they were on the front. Manderlies on the other hand are obviously on the front or their commander would have avoided capture.

 

Now another tidbit, Brienne failing to see Tallharts may just be because she can’t identify them as she hasn’t seen their heraldry, this could be because they are a house not known outside the North while the rest are known or she has seen the rest in Riverrun but not Tallharts, so my earlier assumption on their 400 men in Duskendale being fewer than Hornwood etc may or may not be true.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

And? I am using logic and using Theon’s quote as an example. 

If you have another explanation besides “we don’t/can’t know”, I’d be glad to hear it.

In Theon’s quote it’s spelled out for us that the house with more soldiers would have their banners “everywhere” and the one with few ones would only have their banners “here and there”, which would be harder to notice, as you’ll agree. Our observer, Tyrion, is able to see the right flank of his father’s army, Not only Tywin’s army has more men than Roose does but it’s also arrayed in a more open position as well, archers streching in long lines on either side with a depth of just three man and pike squares between those. If he sees Marbrand’s standard in such a case, he’d see the Manderly standard as well, even if they were located on the far left of the Northerner’s(or right of Westerners) and yet he doesn’t mention them.

Again I’m sure you’ll agree, Manderlies are a more prominent house than Glovers or Hornwoods and such. A lack of Manderly’s mention but not  these could mean a) Manderly’s aren’t there, which is not true with Wylisa’ capture as evidence and b) he fails to notice them.

Now again, how could Tyrion fail to notice them unless if they have fewer banners and therefore, fewer men.

If you’ve noticed, I’m not making the same case for say Umbers or Boltons or Lockes since we can’t know if they are on the front or not, we don’t see their flags but neither do we have anything to suggest they were on the front. Manderlies on the other hand are obviously on the front or their commander would have avoided capture.

 

Now another tidbit, Brienne failing to see Tallharts may just be because she can’t identify them as she hasn’t seen their heraldry, this could be because they are a house not known outside the North while the rest are known or she has seen the rest in Riverrun but not Tallharts, so my earlier assumption on their 400 men in Duskendale being fewer than Hornwood etc may or may not be true.

 

Tyrion doesn’t see Manderlys. We know there are 1300 Manderly foot in that host plus some Manderly horse.

Conclusion: Tyrion clearly didn’t see all the banners present. His list is not exhaustive, nor indicative of the relative numbers of the banners he mentions. 

Unlike the description of Rodrik’s host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Tyrion doesn’t see Manderlys. We know there are 1300 Manderly foot in that host plus some Manderly horse.

Conclusion: Tyrion clearly didn’t see all the banners present. His list is not exhaustive, nor indicative of the relative numbers of the banners he mentions. 

Unlike the description of Rodrik’s host.

Way to conclude.

Theon doesn’t mention the Stark banners in Rodrik’s host, despite a third of the entire force being raised from Starks’ lands. He doesn’t need to because no matter what, Stark banners will be there, instead he gives us a list of bannermen present there and also makea a comparison while doing so. Tyrion also gives us a list of the houses he takes notice of.

Frey and Karstark alone make a quarter of that force since a thousand Karstarks roam the land and Green Fork was so bloody, Duskendale can’t have too many Karstarks so with Cerwyn, Hornwood and Glover added on top of that makes half or more that host. So Tyrion is able to see half the host but not the other half?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Something I’ve just noticed; From Fire and Blood, we know that Tullys have vassals that are more powerful than them, including Blackwood and Bracken. However, According to the World book, Tullies were the most powerful of Rivermen during the conquest and while it doesn’t give out the reason for Vances, it mentions Blackwater and Bracken battled it out again a decade before the conquest. So their feud left them weaker than Tullies even a decade later.

The above is a very good explanation why North barely reaches the 30000 of the conquest era or the Riverlands only have some 20000 men despite being a very fertile region.

Robert’s Rebellion took a heavier toll on the Riverlands and Stormlands than other regions with all the infighting, especially on RL since it was also the region most of the important battles  took place. While Vale had it’s loyalist vassals as well, they were crushed very quickly, as opposed to the former two regions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Something I’ve just noticed; From Fire and Blood, we know that Tullys have vassals that are more powerful than them, including Blackwood and Bracken. However, According to the World book, Tullies were the most powerful of Rivermen during the conquest and while it doesn’t give out the reason for Vances, it mentions Blackwater and Bracken battled it out again a decade before the conquest. So their feud left them weaker than Tullies even a decade later.

The above is a very good explanation why North barely reaches the 30000 of the conquest era or the Riverlands only have some 20000 men despite being a very fertile region.

Robert’s Rebellion took a heavier toll on the Riverlands and Stormlands than other regions with all the infighting, especially on RL since it was also the region most of the important battles  took place. While Vale had it’s loyalist vassals as well, they were crushed very quickly, as opposed to the former two regions.

 

How do we know that House Tully is weaker than those houses as of Robert's reign? I was more under the impression that they just did not have the strength to impose their will over the entire region (but were the strongest individual house). 297 years is a bit of time to gather some strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

However, According to the World book, Tullies were the most powerful of Rivermen during the conquest and while it doesn’t give out the reason for Vances, it mentions Blackwater and Bracken battled it out again a decade before the conquest. So their feud left them weaker than Tullies even a decade later.

The precise wording is:

Quote

A decade before Aegon’s Conquest, the Blackwoods and Brackens had entered into a new private war in their ancient feud. Previously their ironborn overlords had largely ignored such conflicts amongst their vassals—indeed, if the Iron Chronicle can be believed, Harwyn Hardhand oft seemed to pit his bannermen against one another to keep them weak.
But this time the feuding disrupted the construction of Harrenhal, and that was enough reason for Harren the Black to deal with them harshly. So it was that, when Aegon the Conqueror marched upon Harrenhal, the Tullys of Riverrun were the most powerful of riverlords still remaining.

In my opinion, this implies only that Edmyn Tully was the most powerful Riverlord at the time of the Conquest because Harren took measures to temporarily weaken the Blackwoods and Brackens (and others, in the past), but those measures did apparently not include granting the Tullys more lands and incomes or taking away lands and inccomes from the Brackens and Blackwoods.

Instead, I'd assume, we should imagine that Harren dealing with them harshly means the Ironborn ravaged the Bracken and Blackwood lands severely, destroying their crops, villages, holdfasts, castles, culling their smallfolk and cattle, and, perhaps, also killing their lords and adult heirs, handing the lordships to boy lords, women, or feeble old men.

All that would have essentially greatly weakened the Blackwoods/Brackens without actually changing the political landscape of the Riverlands - and made Edmyn Tully the most powerful Riverlord because he was both a charismatic/competent leader of men whose lands and retainers and men-at-arms and levies were in top shape.

If Harren had effectively made the Tullys the most powerful house in the Riverlands on a feudal or financial level Glydayn's claim that the Tullys were effectively still dwarfed by many of their bannermen insofar as power and wealth are concerned would be a contradiction. Because both Aegon the Conqueror and his successors are actually more likely to have granted the Tullys (who were Targaryen sycophants from the start) more privileges and favors than to take them away. Which means it would be a very odd thing that Edmyn Tully prior to the Conquest would have been more powerful than Edmyn Tully after the Conquest when he was made lord paramount (and even more powerful than his successors in that position).

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

The above is a very good explanation why North barely reaches the 30000 of the conquest era or the Riverlands only have some 20000 men despite being a very fertile region.

I don't think that flies. The North did not only fight in the Rebellion but also against the Ironborn - and lost men in both wars.

The reason why the Riverlands don't marshal as many men as they can seems to have to do with the fact that they never made a really concentrated effort to do so. Which, in my opinion, goes in part back to the fact that the Riverlands were split during the Rebellion between the dragon and the stag. The former Targaryen loyalists had little to no internal motivation to defend the Tullys, and the Lannisters never actually wanted to conquer the Riverlands or anything of that sort (at least not until Robb was proclaimed king).

We also have no reports about there being a lot of raiding and petty destruction of crops and fields and villages during the Rebellion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

but those measures did apparently not include granting the Tullys more lands and incomes

Of course. Otherwise they would still be the most powerful during Dance, especially after Aegon. 

I couldn’t remember the bit about Harren punishing them at the time but their private war alone should be more than enough to leave them weaker than before. 

My point was war can left you weakened even after a decade has past.

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

don't think that flies. The North did not only fight in the Rebellion but also against the Ironborn - and lost men in both wars.

And? Now you made me unsure on whether if my post was clear enough.

Greyjoy Rebellion was much smaller in scale compared with the Robert’s Rebellion but surely it took it’s own toll as well, however small. 

My whole point was some regions were still yet to fully recover from the effects of the previous 15 years, while others aren’t. North takes part in both wars and we can see it’s effects with reduced numbers compared to 300 years ago.

RL seems to as well. Dorne and Vale don’t join this time so we can’t really know and while SL and Reach do fight, we can’t compare them seperately. 

The West had sat out the first of these wars and the second was a minor affair, it destroyed their navy but men power would still be intact.

As for Iron Islands, I think it may very well be the one region that got the worst of it; Theon seeing that one of the most powerful Lord’s crews have many beardless boys is proof enough. “Green boys” are not good for fighting, all the lords that make a comment on them agree.

 

 

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

We also have no reports about there being a lot of raiding and petty destruction of crops and fields and villages during the Rebellion.

We see a village, Lord Goodbrook’s, still in ruins and told that it was Hoster’s handiwork. Couple it with the fact we don’t get much detailed information on the whole thing, and I think it’s safe to say there were. But even if no villages were torched, losing fighting men from two generations would be hard to replace if the casualties were high.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...