The battle of the green fork

[Gurkhal]

If Robb defeats Tywin, Tywin is captured.

In a rage, Jaime attacks, and is captured.

The lands are swarming with Northmen, and Tyrion is captured.

The Lannister family are forced to submit in order to save the hostages.

King Robb Stark sits the Iron Throne and rules the Seven Kingdoms.

Dream on. Robb Stark never wanted the Iron Throne and would find as little support for it and would play the Game of Thrones as bad as King on the Iron Throne as he did as King in the North. He's a military but like Robert and Eddard he's not politician that can survive the peace.

That's the rub, right there. Essentially, in being crowned King in the North and King of the Trident, he's adopting the least defensible region of Westeros as the southern border of his independent kingdom. Even if he survived the War of the Five Kings, it seems evident that none of the other potential survivors would have tolerated Robb's independence permanently. Even if there is no one winner south of the Trident, his grandfather Hoster's domains directly border the Lannisters'.

Even if an independent Greyjoy confined himself to reaving (rather than Euron's supervillain scheming), the River is ripe for reavers. Ask Harren the Black. So maybe if Asha, who seemed to favor peace over the "old way" at her queensmoot, sat the Seastone chair their could be peace on that front. Maybe.

This leaves out the fact that, as King in the North he's about to have to turn around and deal with Mance Rayder's host - and what they're running from.

I kind of agree with this. And even if the South is presently divided sooner or later it will be united again and then the North-Riverlands kingdoms is screwed, as Robb can't/won't just submitt and the new war will be the other losers' chance to gain royal favor after their previous defeat.

[Gurkhal]

HIs kingdom could work if the south is under two or more kings, no one would start aggresions for fear of the other kingdom attacking them.

Problem is that no one south of the Neck and outside the Iron Islands really want to split the realm into pieces. Hence its all Northern dreaming that the South would split into numerous kingdoms for their sake.

[E-Ro]

Problem is that no one south of the Neck and outside the Iron Islands really want to split the realm into pieces. Hence its all Northern dreaming that the South would split into numerous kingdoms for their sake.

You dont think Doran Martell or Mace would love to be kings? This is odd, why doesnt mace just crown himself king of the reach when renly dies? No one could stop him with his mighty host of 100,000 witch he somehow controlls (100,000 men during mediavel times is ridiculous i dont care how populated the reach is.)

[Frey Pie]

Problem is that no one south of the Neck and outside the Iron Islands really want to split the realm into pieces. Hence its all Northern dreaming that the South would split into numerous kingdoms for their sake.

Other then the riverlanders. And the Dornish who married the dragons and not lesser beasts

[Victor227]

No matter what, Robb was in command. I don't think he wanted his first battle to be a pitched army-vs-army encounter with everything on the line. Tywin knew his numbers and location, and was confident he could take him. The Lannisters had a very solid armored cavalry core, along with a good advantage in terrain.

The weak left flank was a good move when you consider he had the river right next to him. No matter what, Robb wasn't going to fold his army. It would have been a slugging match, and with Tywin commanding the reserves he could have made a quick escape with his mounted forces if the northmen wound up with an edge he just couldn't match.

The situation at Riverrun wasn't ideal for Robb either. Edmure was a hostage, Hoster was slowly dying and losing his mind, and the Riverlords were scattered to the winds. Even if he beat Tywin flat out and pushed on to King's Landing, he'd be stuck in siege-mode with Jaime's host behind him. If there's one thing Jaime's good at, it's charging right at someone. And being parked in a siege would give him ample opportunity to smash Robb's host like he did Edmure's.

All in all, too much risk in going after Tywin, too little reward. By saving Riverrun he trapped Tywin in the east, broke half the Lannister forces, and brought the Riverlands to his side in full. The better question is asking why Robb didn't besiege Harrenhal immediately after the Battle of the Camps. Edmure demonstrates later on that he's fully capable of preventing a crossing, so he could easily keep Stafford's host from getting passed Riverrun from the other direction (the man was no Tywin, Jaime, or Clegane), and the Lannisters were fully dependent on feeding off the Riverlands. If he did that, he'd have denied Tywin the chance to move south against either of the Baratheons, starved him, and eventually forced him into an encounter on -Robb's- terms.

[Trebuchet Penguin]

Victory is never assured really until it is won and the battle is over

Even after that, you may never know whether the red will run or not. heh.

[Chaircat Meow]

No matter what, Robb was in command. I don't think he wanted his first battle to be a pitched army-vs-army encounter with everything on the line. Tywin knew his numbers and location, and was confident he could take him. The Lannisters had a very solid armored cavalry core, along with a good advantage in terrain.

The weak left flank was a good move when you consider he had the river right next to him. No matter what, Robb wasn't going to fold his army. It would have been a slugging match, and with Tywin commanding the reserves he could have made a quick escape with his mounted forces if the northmen wound up with an edge he just couldn't match.

The situation at Riverrun wasn't ideal for Robb either. Edmure was a hostage, Hoster was slowly dying and losing his mind, and the Riverlords were scattered to the winds. Even if he beat Tywin flat out and pushed on to King's Landing, he'd be stuck in siege-mode with Jaime's host behind him. If there's one thing Jaime's good at, it's charging right at someone. And being parked in a siege would give him ample opportunity to smash Robb's host like he did Edmure's.

All in all, too much risk in going after Tywin, too little reward. By saving Riverrun he trapped Tywin in the east, broke half the Lannister forces, and brought the Riverlands to his side in full. The better question is asking why Robb didn't besiege Harrenhal immediately after the Battle of the Camps. Edmure demonstrates later on that he's fully capable of preventing a crossing, so he could easily keep Stafford's host from getting passed Riverrun from the other direction (the man was no Tywin, Jaime, or Clegane), and the Lannisters were fully dependent on feeding off the Riverlands. If he did that, he'd have denied Tywin the chance to move south against either of the Baratheons, starved him, and eventually forced him into an encounter on -Robb's- terms.

I don't think Robb could move on KL after a victory at the GF without doing something to break the siege of RR.

It would still the case that he would have opened the way to KL for further use though.

And Stannis being smashed outside the capital was due to some very good timing by Tywin and the Tyrells and the difficulties of mounting an amphibious attack. Robb can attack KL from the north side, doesn't need to cross a river and can scatter outriders behind him if he did march on the city with Jaime still in the field minimizing the chances of being caught unprepared for battle.

[Victor227]

The road to King's Landing was open the instant Tywin retreated to Harrenhal. He just had the problem of being hit from behind if he went down toward King's Landing. And that still would have been the case. To deny Tywin the chance to retreat south to Harrenhal he would have needed to absolutely crush his host and capture/kill Tywin and his officers. Engaging in a straight-forward battle meant that not only would he have a far worse chance of victory, but it's also unlikely he'd be able to prevent that retreat.

[Lord Damian]

it is unknown but Robb with infantry and cavalry and Grey wind at his side, I would like to think for an epic battle they could have won. I still wish we could have seen a personal battle between the GreatJohn and the Mountain.

[E-Ro]

Even if Tywin isnt captured the morale blow to lannisters everywere would be devestating, it would show that lord tywin is not invincible.Thus prompting more lords to stand against them. Also the lannister top commanders are with tywin. Also if tywins army is broken and he escapes with his reserve they will be pursued and most likely captured, I have said this before but it would also prevent tyrion from reigning as hand. If Robb wins on the gf the victory is far greater then ww and the battle of the camps combined, yes he would take more casualties but it would be well worth it. When jaime hears of the gf he would be forced to lift the siege and make for kings landing or attempt to give robb battle. with the lannisters down and out all he has to worry about is the Tyrells and the jeoffry marriage might not even happen in this case, even if it does without tywin/kevan/tyrion the alliance falls apart extremely quickly.

[bloodymime]

I don't think a victory for Robb was impossible. Lots of battles have been won by forces which were deficient in horse compared to their foes. Bannockburn, Agincourt, Crecy etc.

I've no idea what this holding back business is. I've said this on another thread but Bolton is not buying Robb time by actually fighting a battle but only by looking like he is going to. Honestly, the battle itself keeps up the deception for a morning and then the cover is blown as Tywin has northern prisoners. Roose would have fooled him longer if he did not advance so fast but he actually tries a surprise attack!

Also, why the Fuck would you hold back during a battle if you could win. As Roose later tells Robb, the GF cost him one third of his men. Those are massive casualties.

So, the GF might prove Bolton could not have beaten Tywin, but it certainly doesn't prove he didn't beat him because he was holding back. That is pure daftness.

If Robb won the GF he might have Tywin, lots of westerlings lords and a clear march to KL. Jaime would probably have had to lift the siege of RR to threaten Robb elsewhere had this occurred.

Nice, I started a topic about what Bolton was really up to at the Green Fork a while back and nobody ever agreed with me instead insisting a force of three thousand cavalry would be completely easy to miss on an open battlefield. Losing third of your army isn't a feint, it's a disaster. Unless you profit from it, but I have since come to learn Bolton is a ninja so it's no surprise everyone congratulates him on his steady decimation of the Northern army.

After reading some of your posts in the thread about Tywin I'd say we disagree on Roose's purpose. I don't think he had any expectation of winning at the Green Fork. Just whittling away at his Northern competition. Which he accomplishes with both Hornwood and Cerwyn dead and captured respectively with Cerwyn dying of his wounds as well later on. A happy coincidence for Bolton as both just happened to be the lords enjoining his own lands and strong for the Starks.

[Ser Hippie]

Roose tells Robb about losing one-third of his foot at Duskendale, not the Green Fork (blaming it on the subordinates he in fact ordered there).

[Gurkhal]

You dont think Doran Martell or Mace would love to be kings? This is odd, why doesnt mace just crown himself king of the reach when renly dies? No one could stop him with his mighty host of 100,000 witch he somehow controlls (100,000 men during mediavel times is ridiculous i dont care how populated the reach is.)

No, I don't think they want to be kings and their actions shows that they dont' want it. They want their Houses to be the most influential ones with a daughter married to the King on the Iron Throne and a favored place at court for the rest of their Houses. None of them have any thought about attempting the kind of separatism that the Northmen and Ironborn seems so inloved with. Doran wants to get a new Targaryen married to a Martell on the Iron Throne while Mace tries to keep a king married to his daughter on the Iron Throne.

Other then the riverlanders. And the Dornish who married the dragons and not lesser beasts

The Riverlords were kind of pressganged into supporting the war when their allies decided to go separatists and perhaps leave them to fend for themselves if they didn't go along. The Martells accepted Robert as their new king and wait for a chance to put a new Targaryen on the throne rather than attempt any split.

[bloodymime]

Roose tells Robb about losing one-third of his foot at Duskendale, not the Green Fork (blaming it on the subordinates he in fact ordered there).

You're right on this. The wiki does say a third of the army at the Green Fork but when Roose talks to Robb at the Red Wedding he says they got it worse at Duskendale.

“Your Grace is too kind. I suffered grievous losses on the Green Fork, and Glover and Tallhart worse at Duskendale.”

Still doesn't change the fact grievious losses weren't what Robb was looking for from his cold and cunning commander but I'm fairly sure you're one of the people that kept insisting Roose did a great job charging straight at Lannister so I've likely argued enough with you over it and neither one us is going to change their mind.

[Kernest]

Roose tells Robb about losing one-third of his foot at Duskendale, not the Green Fork (blaming it on the subordinates he in fact ordered there).

I can't remember the exact words Bolton said, but "grievous" losses on Green Fork, which I thought to be 1/3rd (starts with 18000 and is left with 12000), then another third (propably intentionally) at Duskendale and yet another third when retreating across the Trident before the Red Wedding (perhaps also intentionally).

[bloodymime]

I can't remember the exact words Bolton said, but "grievous" losses on Green Fork, which I thought to be 1/3rd (starts with 18000 and is left with 12000), then another third (propably intentionally) at Duskendale and yet another third when retreating across the Trident before the Red Wedding (perhaps also intentionally).

It is intentional, look at the men left on the wrong side of the river and the men left to guard the fords, all strong Stark loyalists.

[E-Ro]

Nice, I started a topic about what Bolton was really up to at the Green Fork a while back and nobody ever agreed with me instead insisting a force of three thousand cavalry would be completely easy to miss on an open battlefield. Losing third of your army isn't a feint, it's a disaster. Unless you profit from it, but I have since come to learn Bolton is a ninja so it's no surprise everyone congratulates him on his steady decimation of the Northern army.

After reading some of your posts in the thread about Tywin I'd say we disagree on Roose's purpose. I don't think he had any expectation of winning at the Green Fork. Just whittling away at his Northern competition. Which he accomplishes with both Hornwood and Cerwyn dead and captured respectively with Cerwyn dying of his wounds as well later on. A happy coincidence for Bolton as both just happened to be the lords enjoining his own lands and strong for the Starks.

I dont agree with this, at the start of the war robb is in the best position his aunt is in complet control of the vale, and he holds balons only son hostage as well the riverlords are his. This puts four great houses against one, it was extrordinary that his aunt sent no aid and balon didnt side with him a plot device in my opinion. Why would Bolton turncloak with all this power on the stark side? I do beleive he was fighting to win, Furthermore how does losing northern men strengthen his position? If anthing it weakens him. If he wants control of the north and alliance with the lannisters he would want more men for the bargaining power.

[Chaircat Meow]

Nice, I started a topic about what Bolton was really up to at the Green Fork a while back and nobody ever agreed with me instead insisting a force of three thousand cavalry would be completely easy to miss on an open battlefield. Losing third of your army isn't a feint, it's a disaster. Unless you profit from it, but I have since come to learn Bolton is a ninja so it's no surprise everyone congratulates him on his steady decimation of the Northern army.

After reading some of your posts in the thread about Tywin I'd say we disagree on Roose's purpose. I don't think he had any expectation of winning at the Green Fork. Just whittling away at his Northern competition. Which he accomplishes with both Hornwood and Cerwyn dead and captured respectively with Cerwyn dying of his wounds as well later on. A happy coincidence for Bolton as both just happened to be the lords enjoining his own lands and strong for the Starks.

Well, we're definitely in full agreement the battle of the GF was not part of the diversion.

Tywin would be on the look out for Robb's horse during the encounter and it's actually implausible he didn't smell more of a rat during the battle itself. You don't make decisions such as when and where to commit your own reserve without an awareness of where the enemy's own reserve, usually mounted, is.

As for your theory on Roose's motivations I can't think of any obvious knockdown response. It does make a lot of sense. Roose may think its pretty much 50-50 whether Robb wins at RR or suffers a major disaster, but he doesn't care about the Stark cause anyway. Either way, if some of his rivals get bumped off and his own men form his reserve he is home and dry. Tyrion does comment, I think (I'm sure you'll have the quote), that Roose's attempt to steal a march is something to be expected from a green boy. Not, I suppose, what we ought to expect from Roose cunning Bolton.

Importantly it is also perfectly in harmony with all of Bolton's later strategies, which recommends it is a theory.

The counter arguments:

1) It backdates the time when Bolton really started working against the Starks. Granted, its not like Bolton is obviously betraying Robb, he is just making things easier for himself if the war goes badly for the Starks overall. Still, though, if we think of the later sequences of events, loss of WF, battle of BW, Robb's actions towards the Freys, these could all constitute the causes for Roose to winnow the northern army as he does, so he doesn't need to have been working against Robb from the beginning.

2) Roose's two other disposals of northern troops come at less cost to himself. He is actually at the GF though and he is, as far as we know, NOT in contact with Tywin at this point. By the time of DD and the defeat of his rear at the Trident Bolton had a clear plan and had been in contact with Tywin. Very different from the situation at the GF. Roose could even have suffered worse casualties at the GF and he doesn't even have much, if any, horse to cover a retreat. If Tywin had pursued further, Roose could have even been in real personal trouble. I doubt he could absent himself from the battle before it started without his other bannermen realizing what was afoot and he didn't get rid of all the Stark loyalists until later, so his actions might have been reported to Robb. This is not Roose cunning Bolton either.

Overall I'd say both theories have something to recommend them.

The best support for your theory is how bad Tyrion thinks Roose's plan is, which suggests Roose really wasn't trying to win and had other motives.

For the other theory, well, we just have to assume Roose was uncharacteristically daring with his attempt at surprise. After all, forcing a battle with a superior force, just to chuck away a lot of your own troops, with the expectation you will come out scott-free, is not exactly cautious either. As I argued, the two later 'betrayals' of part of the Stark army were a lot 'safer' and this is when Roose's treachery was more advanced.

Edited for spelling.

[bloodymime]

Well, we're definitely in full agreement the battle of the GF was not part of the diversion.

Tywin would be on the look out for Robb's horse during the encounter and it's actually implausible he didn't smell more of a rat during the battle itself. You don't make decisions such as when and where to commit your own reserve without an awareness of where the enemy's own reserve, usually mounted, is.

As for your theory on Roose's motivations I can't think of any obvious knockdown response. It does make a lot of sense. Roose may think its pretty much 50-50 whether Robb wins at RR or suffers a major disaster, but he doesn't care about the Stark cause anyway. Either way, if some of his rivals get bumped off and his own men form his reserve he is home and dry. Tyrion does comment, I think (I'm sure you'll have the quote), that Roose's attempt to steal a march is something to be expected from a green boy. Not, I suppose, what we ought to expect from Roose cunning Bolton.

Importantly it is also perfectly in harmony with all of Bolton's later strategies, which recommends it is a theory.

The counter arguments:

1) It backdates the time when Bolton really started working against the Starks. Granted, its not like Bolton is obviously betraying Robb, he is just making things easier for himself if the war goes badly for the Starks overall. Still, though, if we think of the later sequences of events, loss of WF, battle of BW, Robb's actions towards the Freys, these could all constitute the causes for Roose to winnow the northern army as he does, so he doesn't need to have been working against Robb from the beginning.

2) Roose's two other disposals of northern troops come at less cost to himself. He is actually at the GF though and he is, as far as we know, NOT in contact with Tywin at this point. By the time of DD and the defeat of his rear at the Trident Bolton had a clear plan and had been in contact with Tywin. Very different from the situation at the GF. Roose could even have suffered worse casualties at the GF and he doesn't even have much, if any, horse to cover a retreat. If Tywin had pursued further, Roose could have even been in real personal trouble. I doubt he could absent himself from the battle before it started without his other bannermen realizing what was afoot and he didn't get rid of all the Stark loyalists until later, so his actions might have been reported to Robb. This is not Roose cunning Bolton either.

Overall I'd say both theories have something to recommend them.

The best support for your theory is how bad Tyrion thinks Roose's plan is, which suggests Roose really wasn't trying to win and had other motives.

For the other theory, well, we just have to assume Roose was uncharacteristically daring with his attempt at surprise. After all, forcing a battle with a superior force, just to chuck away a lot of your own troops, with the expectation you will come out scott-free, is not exactly cautious either. As I argued, the two later 'betrayals' of part of the Stark army were a lot 'safer' and this is when Roose's treachery was more advanced.

Edited for spelling.

I've already put a lot of writing into all the things I think about the Green Fork and what risk Bolton actually takes there with quotes from the books so I'll just put the link here.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/65618-when-does-bolton-show-his-true-colors/

[bloodymime]

I dont agree with this, at the start of the war robb is in the best position his aunt is in complet control of the vale, and he holds balons only son hostage as well the riverlords are his. This puts four great houses against one, it was extrordinary that his aunt sent no aid and balon didnt side with him a plot device in my opinion. Why would Bolton turncloak with all this power on the stark side? I do beleive he was fighting to win, Furthermore how does losing northern men strengthen his position? If anthing it weakens him. If he wants control of the north and alliance with the lannisters he would want more men for the bargaining power.

The Roose has no use for children playing lords. Not sure where you get this idea that the Arryns not supporting him is an extraordinary surpise considering Cat comes to them with the news that Lysa will not help them. The only person dumb enough to trust the ironborn is Robb so far in the books. The north is made up almost entirely of people fanatically loyal to the Starks that will never rest easy under Bolton rule. The only way Bolton strengthens his place in the north is for as many of these men to die as possible. I'm sure I know don't need to go into Stark and Bolton history up to the present day with Ned never trusting Roose. It's more surprising people think Bolton's eyes wouldn't have lit... well grown less cold at the first sign of Stark weakness.