Why is the North weird?

[Alden Rothack]

10 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Frankly, a part of me feels like the North (and especially Dorne) should have a higher population. Yes, the winters are unimaginably brutal, and a lot of people die each winter due to famine and disease; that should keep the population relatively low in the northernmost parts of the North. BUT there should still be more people living on the west coast, particularly at Sea Dragon Point where there's an abundance of otters and fish for food and clothing and trees for homes and tools. And Bear Island alone does not suffice as a west coast trading hub.

The North unlike Dorne has people across about ninety percent of it, not very many perhaps compared to the Reach or the Vale of Arryn but some. Dorne on the other hand is mostly sand or mountains, its extremely impressive that Dorne exists at all given its climate and location

I am of the opinion that the North has far more people than is commonly accepted, Dorne not so much

 

[House Cambodia]

28 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Right but the problem is that Torrhen and his lords bannermen were anticipating a loss of life. The North could've fought a guerilla war against the Targaryens just as successfully as Dorne did...if not better. Torrhen was just hoping to strike a major blow against the Targaryen forces before they could attempt to mount a proper invasion and attack on the North.

This is true

Frankly, a part of me feels like the North (and especially Dorne) should have a higher population. Yes, the winters are unimaginably brutal, and a lot of people die each winter due to famine and disease; that should keep the population relatively low in the northernmost parts of the North. BUT there should still be more people living on the west coast, particularly at Sea Dragon Point where there's an abundance of otters and fish for food and clothing and trees for homes and tools. And Bear Island alone does not suffice as a west coast trading hub.

I'm from the Scottish highlands (specifically, west coast islands) which The North is somewhat based on. If it wasn't for tourism, there'd be too little to support much of a population (and try visiting in the winter). The barren soil and remoteness can only sustain a modest population, and fishing doesn't increase it all that much.

Dorne is also severely limited by the mountains and deserts, and a dearth of both rivers and coastline that can have a harbour. I think GRRM has the populations of both regions about right. But you're right, like Dorne, the North should have been very difficult to subdue, even with dragons. However, it seems we're about to learn in the first episode or two of Season 2 of HotD that the reason Torrhen bent the knee was not for military reasons.

[Universal Sword Donor]

23 hours ago, House Cambodia said:

I conceded the point about Torrhen Stark - maybe I should focus on it being a brief jaunt that resulted in no loss of life. But regarding the Stoney Shore, Balon Greyjoy explicitly and opportunistically declared independence and reaved along the west coast in response to the north being depopulated by Robb. Had Deepwood Motte and Torrhen's Square had their usual garrisons, the IB would not have attacked. In normal times, the North had decent natural defences (and a 700' wall) north, south, east and west. It never had any need to open itself up to Southron enculturation.

He had pirates reave there as a distraction because the Iron Fleet was going to block the route north at Moat Cailin. 

You are to harry the Stony Shore, raiding the fishing villages and sinking any ships you chance to meet. It may be that you will draw some of the northern lords out from behind their stone walls.

Lord Balon had let no word of the hosting escape the Iron Islands, and Theon's bloody work along the Stony Shore would be put down to sea raiders out for plunder. The northmen would not realize their true peril, not until the hammers fell on Deepwood Motte and Moat Cailin.

Which reinforces he wasn't attacking Stoney Shore to conquer. He was doing it to weaken the northern forces left because the IB generally don't do siege warfare (effectively). He *did* send Asha to conquer Deepwood Motte, so we know that has a population center and the ability to resist. Deepwood Motte with it's normal garrison wouldn't have held out against 1000 IB who besiege the castle in a surprise march. Torrhen's square can and did hold out against IB siege only to lose after Rodrik brilliantly strips the castle of its war time, theoretically diminished, to retake Winterfell, where he left a doughty force to fend off 20 guys with gappling hooks*.

This doesn't even begin to address the historical nature of the IB occupation of large parts of the north which were under WF's protection in times of peace.

I can't and won't argue the point the west coast of The North is vastly underpopulated. That's always been a bit of an outlier; however the war and its levies marching are not why those particular parts of the north are vulnerable to a large attacking army.

*Ser Rodrik is an *awful* commander and an even worse choice as castellan of WF.

[House Cambodia]

My point is that if Robb hadn't taken so many northern forces south of the Neck, including the garrisons of Torrhen's Square and Deepwood Motte, Balon would never have considered attacking the western shore or Moat Cailin. The main garrisons could have been assaulted, but they'd have been quickly relieved by troops Robb at Winterfell would have called on. Balon saw an opportunity which before the start of the Clash of Five Kings wasn't there.

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, House Cambodia said:

My point is that if Robb hadn't taken so many northern forces south of the Neck, including the garrisons of Torrhen's Square and Deepwood Motte, Balon would never have considered attacking the western shore or Moat Cailin. The main garrisons could have been assaulted, but they'd have been quickly relieved by troops Robb at Winterfell would have called on. Balon saw an opportunity which before the start of the Clash of Five Kings wasn't there.

He didn't, the issue isn't that they lacked men, they still had way more than IB, the issue is that Ser Rodric is nearly as stupid as Balon is

[House Cambodia]

2 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

He didn't, the issue isn't that they lacked men, they still had way more than IB, the issue is that Ser Rodric is nearly as stupid as Balon is

Roderik is irrelevant. He's merely the castellan of Winterfell. If the Lord of Winterfell (Robb) with his full garrison is present along with full garrisons of other holdfasts, they have the military nous to take on those iron seadogs.

[Alden Rothack]

1 minute ago, House Cambodia said:

Roderik is irrelevant. He's merely the castellan of Winterfell. If the Lord of Winterfell (Robb) with his full garrison is present along with full garrisons of other holdfasts, they have the military nous to take on those iron seadogs.

No he isn't because lack of men isn't the problem.

Ser Rodric still had more than enough men to solve the problem.

the difference Robb would have wouldn't have been to the taking of Deepwood Motte and the various village, it would have been Winterfell itself

[House Cambodia]

For the last time, Roderick would not be leading troops if Robb was at Winterfell. I'm out.

[Alden Rothack]

13 minutes ago, House Cambodia said:

For the last time, Roderick would not be leading troops if Robb was at Winterfell. I'm out.

Robb can't be leading them and be in charge at Winterfell, besides which you just said that it didn't matter and it was the lack of men not the lack of quality leadership that made the different, which is the point i'm arguing against

so which is it?

[House Cambodia]

11 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

Robb can't be leading them and be in charge at Winterfell, besides which you just said that it didn't matter and it was the lack of men not the lack of quality leadership that made the different, which is the point i'm arguing against

so which is it?

No I didn't say that.

There's no confusion in being in charge of a place and leading the troops of said place. Roose Bolton can leave the Dreadfort with his army, Stannis Dragonstone with his.

[Alden Rothack]

3 minutes ago, House Cambodia said:

No I didn't say that.

There's no confusion in being in charge of a place and leading the troops of said place. Roose Bolton can leave the Dreadfort with his army, Stannis Dragonstone with his.

And they give up effective control when they do so, generally to the castellan

Which Robb isn't going to be doing if hes there, theres no reason for him to go fight the raid

Even with Robb gone there were more than enough men to fight the IB, with him they have even more

[BlackLightning]

On 4/3/2024 at 3:54 PM, House Cambodia said:

I'm from the Scottish highlands (specifically, west coast islands) which The North is somewhat based on. If it wasn't for tourism, there'd be too little to support much of a population (and try visiting in the winter). The barren soil and remoteness can only sustain a modest population, and fishing doesn't increase it all that much.

Ahhh okay

On 4/3/2024 at 3:54 PM, House Cambodia said:

Dorne is also severely limited by the mountains and deserts, and a dearth of both rivers and coastline that can have a harbour. I think GRRM has the populations of both regions about right. But you're right, like Dorne, the North should have been very difficult to subdue, even with dragons. However, it seems we're about to learn in the first episode or two of Season 2 of HotD that the reason Torrhen bent the knee was not for military reasons.

I don't know. Iraq, Egypt and the Levant are all very hot and arid lands. However, millions have always lived in those areas.

Why? The floodplains of major rivers.

The floodplains of the Greenblood, the Vaith and the Scourge are more than enough to sustain a large population. Sunspear itself should be a very large city on par with White Harbor and Gulltown.

[Universal Sword Donor]

On 4/4/2024 at 12:40 PM, House Cambodia said:

My point is that if Robb hadn't taken so many northern forces south of the Neck, including the garrisons of Torrhen's Square and Deepwood Motte, Balon would never have considered attacking the western shore or Moat Cailin. The main garrisons could have been assaulted, but they'd have been quickly relieved by troops Robb at Winterfell would have called on. Balon saw an opportunity which before the start of the Clash of Five Kings wasn't there.

I mean, yeah, that's explicitly laid out in ACoK. Balon has been waiting since RR and rebuilding the Iron Fleet

[Club-foot cleft-lips]

On 4/3/2024 at 1:47 AM, KingoftheRiversandtheHills said:

Horses are expensive! I agree that if such a breed of horse exists in Asoiaf it would be awesome, but only for the nobles. What about the serfs? 

Just to clarify, the smallfolk in asoiaf are more akin to peasants than serfs. given the large migrations of smallfolk we have seen in the series, and their ability to own land and property, we can probably conclude that they are not legally bound to the land they work in the same way serfs were.

as to the question of ownership of animals, we should note their are many types of horse breeds and similar beasts of burden that may provide the same job. one small folk will own one and another, another. We can assume some do probably have or make sleds, but with such a long summer, who south of the wall would be making them, or breeding dogs for pulling them, lately? most dogs in the north are probably currently used for hunting, or guarding livestock. some northman, especially the mountain clans, might still be using sled dogs, but again, not so much in war. Regular smallfolk might still use sled dogs in the north, but they have not so much have been a focal point, so the extent, especially since winter is just starting, is hard to determine. most small folk probably own neither, and so do their best not to travel in the winter, having stocked up in the summer. a dog might be good for hunting in the winter, but too many can be too many mouths to feed, especially because they need meat, where horses only need grain/grass.

[Alden Rothack]

10 hours ago, Club-foot cleft-lips said:

Just to clarify, the smallfolk in asoiaf are more akin to peasants than serfs. given the large migrations of smallfolk we have seen in the series, and their ability to own land and property, we can probably conclude that they are not legally bound to the land they work in the same way serfs were.

 

its worth noting that the difference between different ypes of smallfolk if they exist are only meaningful to other smallfolk

to someone like Tyrion there is no difference between a crofter and a franklin but there sure as hell is to the franklin

[Club-foot cleft-lips]

47 minutes ago, Alden Rothack said:

its worth noting that the difference between different ypes of smallfolk if they exist are only meaningful to other smallfolk

to someone like Tyrion there is no difference between a crofter and a franklin but there sure as hell is to the franklin

that's a good point, Franklins were land owners with a good deal of autonomy, and usually relatively more wealthy, though not noble, while crofters were land renters with more restrictions placed on them. Franklins were more common in England, and forging me if i'm wrong, but crofters are traditionally associated with Scotland. the concept does beg the question to how nuances might develop between kingdom territories in Westeros in regards to types of small folk, especially between the north and south of the neck. we have the distinction of thralls in the iron island, so to generalize all small folk like Tyrion, or in this case, I did, can create some narrow conceptions of financial capabilities.

more wealthy small folk will have the means to maintain dog teams, and in the north, might use this methods  without as much risk, but would still be just as if not more likely to own work horses or donkeys that could then wear snowshoes. the number of small folk in the north is hard to conjecture accurately, just due to vastness, climate, and irregular season, so the relative wealth of small folk, and the relative number of wealthy small folk, north vs south is tricky to pin down.

[Alden Rothack]

39 minutes ago, Club-foot cleft-lips said:

that's a good point, Franklins were land owners with a good deal of autonomy, and usually relatively more wealthy, though not noble, while crofters were land renters with more restrictions placed on them. Franklins were more common in England, and forging me if i'm wrong, but crofters are traditionally associated with Scotland. the concept does beg the question to how nuances might develop between kingdom territories in Westeros in regards to types of small folk, especially between the north and south of the neck. we have the distinction of thralls in the iron island, so to generalize all small folk like Tyrion, or in this case, I did, can create some narrow conceptions of financial capabilities.

more wealthy small folk will have the means to maintain dog teams, and in the north, might use this methods  without as much risk, but would still be just as if not more likely to own work horses or donkeys that could then wear snowshoes. the number of small folk in the north is hard to conjecture accurately, just due to vastness, climate, and irregular season, so the relative wealth of small folk, and the relative number of wealthy small folk, north vs south is tricky to pin down.

yup, in fact the number of smallfolk itself requires certain assumptions, particularly when your comparing urban vs rural

the number of people in cities for example tended to be the actual number counted whereas the number of rural people tended to be the number of households and/or number of people who owned or rented land, the counts in city also tended to be more accurate because city dwellers mostly paid their taxes in cash.

smallfolk could run all the way from someone who farmed half an acre up to the guy who owned twenty villages, as many ships and a fish market, hes still a commoner because he has no right to hand out his own justice.

[The Hoare]

On 4/3/2024 at 2:33 AM, KingoftheRiversandtheHills said:

Yes they have, but I’m not interested in the fighting aspect of the knights. I’m more interested in the hierarchical uses of it. As a way to reward some people, rewarding someone without disgruntling someone else too much. Also as a way of making cadet branches or as a way of populating and managing the huge ass territories of the North.

Because knighthood is a andal tradition and deeply tied to the Seven

[Universal Sword Donor]

12 hours ago, The Hoare said:

Because knighthood is a andal tradition and deeply tied to the Seven

Paraphrasing Luwin, a mounted man-at-arms is interchangeable with knight as far as the north is concerned. More importantly Lord Karstark and his men are looped into this discussion, so we assume it applies to both the fighting and governance aspect. Otherwise they would not be lords.

the rest honor the old gods, and name no knights ... but those lords and their sons and sworn swords are no less fierce or loyal or honorable.

 

Maester Luwin sighed. "Three hundred, perhaps four … among three thousand armored lances who are not knights."

"Lord Karstark is the last," Bran said thoughtfully. "Robb will feast him tonight."

 

And given what we know of Manderly's holdings -- a dozen petty lords and a hundred landed knights -- it would defy common sense to not take that into consideration when looking at the hierarchy of titles in the north, including the principal bannermen, masterly houses, landed knights, and petty lords.

[Vaegon the dragonless]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:33 AM, KingoftheRiversandtheHills said:

Yes they have, but I’m not interested in the fighting aspect of the knights. I’m more interested in the hierarchical uses of it. As a way to reward some people, rewarding someone without disgruntling someone else too much. Also as a way of making cadet branches or as a way of populating and managing the huge ass territories of the North.

Well the North does have few knights mainly under the Manderly's, but interestingly the North also has "Masters", the Glovers and Tallhart notably, and will it is not clear if they are equivalent to landed knights but they could be, making them the hierarchical equivalent to a big landed knight like Templeton's.

 

On 4/3/2024 at 9:54 PM, House Cambodia said:

I'm from the Scottish highlands (specifically, west coast islands) which The North is somewhat based on. If it wasn't for tourism, there'd be too little to support much of a population (and try visiting in the winter). The barren soil and remoteness can only sustain a modest population, and fishing doesn't increase it all that much.

Well in this particular case the Clearances did not help, while it is true that the Highlands cant maintain a huge population they still had a greater share of the population they have today, in fact in 1851 the population of the Highlands was roughly equivalent to today population of the Highlands but the rest of Scotland double in population.