Jump to content
The Wolves

Pros and Cons of 9 Kingdoms

Recommended Posts

I am in favor of Westeros breaking back into smaller kingdoms. I know there were many wars fought during the time of separation but I think I would like it better as separate. I also wouldn’t mind the great houses keeping their power. The Iron Throne is too much and should be burned to the ground. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the 300 years of unification, very few wars were fought. I don’t mean fighting a large outlaw group, but major/prolonged fighting between kingdoms. 
 

Let’s see starting after the Conquest(I know I’ll probably miss one)

-Dance of Dragons

-First BF Rebellion  

-Nine Penny Kings (though this was not kingdom against kingdom and it was won fairly easy)

-Roberts Rebellion

-War of Five Kings and other related conflicts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why exactly?? A unified ruling is the best scenario  for Westeros, the Country spent like 8k years or so in rather constant  war. The Great Houses being royals again does not benefit quite literally no one  but them and in the North you can bet that laws  like the First Night  would start to get ignored.

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, frenin said:

in the North you can bet that laws  like the First Night  would start to get ignored

Given the fact Ramsay s a thing and how autonomous many northern lords (especially the hill clansmen) are, it's probably already ignored. Though yeah in the case of independence it would become commonplace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory a unified Westeros would be best for the people. A strong monarch would keep the lords from making war on each other, having the same currency would help with trade and if one area was suffering from famine, resources could be pulled from another. 

But that's with a strong monarch. 

Edited by EvanSol919

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Given the fact Ramsay s a thing and how autonomous many northern lords (especially the hill clansmen) are, it's probably already ignored. Though yeah in the case of independence it would become commonplace.

Not the same tho, Roose had to be careful for Ned to ever find out, else he was losing his head. An independent North becomes a shitshow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, frenin said:

Not the same tho, Roose had to be careful for Ned to ever find out, else he was losing his head. An independent North becomes a shitshow.

Depends on the ruler. No one Kingdom would be anymore or anyless of a clusterfuck with independence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adam Yozza said:

Depends on the ruler. No one Kingdom would be anymore or anyless of a clusterfuck with independence.

I'm talking about longterm but 9 Kings is a huge problem, i'm kinda  confuse people see  it as a improvement. Of what exactly?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who actually believes this would be a good idea besides Robb fans? Like just think what the Ironborn would do if they were allowed to be independent, or what the Reach and Dorne would do to each other. Also think the Riverlands have it bad? War torn hell hole is the best option for them in such a case, the worst being Harren the Black 2.0., due to the fact that they would be at the crossroads of every kingdom besides Dorne and The Stormlands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about the 5 kings is that its the bloodiest affair in westeros history. I mean, im sure the long night was bad, but damn. Mass amounts of soldiers, hailing from the North, West, Iron Islands, Riverlands and Storm Lands have been killed within a few years. Riverlands itself is a war zone, total war to completion, and talk of life of the smallfolk in the North and West are dreary as well.

2nd and 3rd bloodiest in Westeros' like 10,000 year old history or whatever, gotta be the dance or blackfyre. 

Like Im sure the Sisters was a nasty business where some people had to tread water and some didnt, but thats incomparable to the price of the IT. More comparable to the pissing contests that the savages of the Sunset Kingdoms are known for. 

Im not really in favor of one over the other, neither are great but I see the pros and cons. 

For a while the Targs had working rules, dont marry outside the family and keep your dragon close. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kingdom that benefit the most of the unification (and probably the only one) was the Reach.

This Idea that 9 kingdoms would cause more wars is not really true. During the unification under the Targs there has been one major civil war or rebellion at each 15 years, and since it involves all the kingdoms, thinks only got more bloody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

The kingdom that benefit the most of the unification (and probably the only one) was the Reach.

Well every one benefited from the trade that started to flow as well as from the enforcement of a set of laws for the first time in Westerosi history (just take the abolition of the First Night as an example). So every kingdom benefited from no longer having to worry about food in the winter as more food could just be imported from the Reach.

6 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

This Idea that 9 kingdoms would cause more wars is not really true. During the unification under the Targs there has been one major civil war or rebellion at each 15 years, and since it involves all the kingdoms, thinks only got more bloody.

Ah, not really. If we take the major wars (ie not talking about petty stuff like foreign raids or the ironborn looting a castle) we have:

Pretty much all of Maegor's reign

The Dance

The Backfyre Rebellion (I'm not putting the others as they were just small skirmishes with the Golden Company basically)

Robert's Rebellion

The War of the 5 Kings

That's 5 major wars during a period of 300 years, or one war every 60 years. Given that pre conquest Westeros was probably very similar to Western and Central Europe in the middle ages, trust me a war every 60 years is very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

This Idea that 9 kingdoms would cause more wars is not really true. During the unification under the Targs there has been one major civil war or rebellion at each 15 years, and since it involves all the kingdoms, thinks only got more bloody.

As said above, there were  only 7 major wars, @Alyn Oakenfist is not counting the 2 Dornish wars that in fairness have been the most brutal wars we've been talked about so far. Pre conquest Westeros was a shitshow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Well every one benefited from the trade that started to flow as well as from the enforcement of a set of laws for the first time in Westerosi history (just take the abolition of the First Night as an example). So every kingdom benefited from no longer having to worry about food in the winter as more food could just be imported from the Reach.

9 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

Trade already was there. The Freys grew rich for taking advantages of the trade route that passed through their lands..

The First night is awful, but the unification didn't stop it as Roose show us, the umber aparent do it too, and I would not be surprise if other houses in the south kept doing it. The Targs made laws but never enforced them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, frenin said:

As said above, there were  only 7 major wars, @Alyn Oakenfist is not counting the 2 Dornish wars that in fairness have been the most brutal wars we've been talked about so far. Pre conquest Westeros was a shitshow.

Pos conquest still a shitshow, but now involves more people and therefore more bloodly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

Pos conquest still a shitshow, but now involves more people and therefore more bloodly.

Wars every 50 years, is far better than the alternative. That without counting that the roads would be more secure, the trade, blah blah blah. Ap separated Westeros only serves to inflate the ego of the highlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, frenin said:

Wars every 50 years, is far better than the alternative. That without counting that the roads would be more secure, the trade, blah blah blah. Ap separated Westeros only serves to inflate the ego of the highlords.

more like every 15 years...

300 years of unification and we have:

War of Conquest, Sisterman rebellion, 3 Dornish wars, Faith militant uprising, Maegor vs Aegon, Maegor vs Jahearys, Dance of Dragons, Conquest of Dorne, Four Blackfyres Rebellion, War of the sucession of lady Jeyne Arryn, Peak uprising, Dalton Greyjoy Rebellion, Robert's Rebellion, Greyjoy Rebellion, War of the Five Kings. Defiance of Duskendale.

Edited by Arthur Peres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

more like every 15 years...

300 years of unification and we have:

War of Conquest, Sisterman rebellion, 3 Dornish wars, Faith militant uprising, Maegor vs Aegon, Maegor vs Jahearys, Dance of Dragons, Conquest of Dorne, Four Blackfyres Rebellion, War of the sucession of lady Jeyne Arryn, Peak uprising, Dalton Greyjoy Rebellion, Robert's Rebellion, Greyjoy Rebellion, War of the Five Kings. Defiance of Duskendale.

Come on now, we're talking about major conflicts, as in major conflicts. 1st Dornish War,  Maegor's wars, Dance of the Dragon, Conquest of Dorne, 3 Blackfyre Rebellions, Robellion, Greyjoy Rebellion and the Wot5k.

 

And of them, only the Dornish wars, Robellion, Maegor's Wars, Dance and Blackfyre wars were really noteworthy. Sistermen rebellion was a war fought during the conquest. Defiance of Duskendale and Peake uprising weren't wars. And the Jeyne Arryn thing and the Greyjoy' shenaningans is a testament of why a unified Realm is better.

 

We have 2 examples of what a  unified Kingdom  can entail.

 

Aegon’s chief concern was peace. Before the Conquest, wars between the realms of Westeros were common. Hardly a year passed without someone fighting someone somewhere. Even in those kingdoms said to be at peace, neighboring lords oft settled their disputes at swordpoint. Aegon’s accession put an end to much of that. Petty lords and landed knights were now expected to take their disputes to their liege lords and abide by their judgments. Arguments between the great houses of the realm were adjudicated by the Crown. “The first law of the land shall be the King’s Peace,” King Aegon decreed, “and any lord who goes to war without my leave shall be considered a rebel and an enemy of the Iron Throne.” King Aegon also issued decrees regularizing customs, duties, and taxes throughout the realm, whereas previously every port and every petty lord had been free to exact however much they could from tenants, smallfolk, and merchants.

Archmaesters can and do quibble about the numbers, but most agree that the population of Westeros north of Dorne doubled during the Conciliator’s reign, whilst the population of King’s Landing increased fourfold. Lannisport, Gulltown, Duskendale, and White Harbor grew as well, though not to the same extent. With fewer men marching off to war, more remained to work the land. Grain prices fell steadily throughout his reign, as more acres came under the plough. Fish became notably cheaper, even for common men, as the fishing villages along the coasts grew more prosperous and more boats put to sea. New orchards were planted everywhere from the Reach to the Neck. Lamb and mutton became more plentiful and wool finer as shepherds increased the size of their flocks. Trade increased tenfold, despite the vicissitudes of wind, weather, and wars and the disruptions they caused from time to time. The crafts flourished as well; farriers and blacksmiths, stonemasons, carpenters, millers, tanners, weavers, felters, dyers, brewers, vintners, goldsmiths and silversmiths, bakers, butchers, and cheesemakers all enjoyed a prosperity hitherto unknown west of the narrow sea.

 

 

 

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, frenin said:

And of them, only the Dornish wars, Robellion, Maegor's Wars, Dance and Blackfyre wars were really noteworthy. Sistermen rebellion was a war fought during the conquest. Defiance of Duskendale and Peake uprising weren't wars. And the Jeyne Arryn thing and the Greyjoy' shenaningans is a testament of why a unified Realm is better.

 

Don't know what you call noteworthy...

Some mess that ends with the King dying (like the Peake uprising) or hostage ( Duskendale) seems very noteworthy to me.

Dalton was a bother to at least two other kingdoms, he caused the death of lord Stark and a troublesome sucession. This is not irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×