ASOIAF/GOT The 'Realism' of the World of ASOIAF/GOT

[Aldarion]

The books are entirely what I've based my opinions off of aside from one episode and a clip here and there in the show. And I got a very different impression from ya'll. You can say the books imply X but I disagree, because I'm looking more at the narrative impact than numbers written in some chart and then ignored. The fact is that when it was time to pick a queen, Robert went with a Lannister (he didn't even like) rather than a Tyrell. When it was time for his son to pick a queen, he went to get a Stark rather than a Tyrell and eventually Tyrell got their turn only as a silver medal when a Stark wasn't available. In the War of the Five Kings

Narratively it also makes no sense. If Tyrell had as many soldiers as any two other groups in the War of the Five Kings, why were they acting as backup and support to Lannister rather than the other way around? Well, because you've mistated their power. I had to dig my old books out to get the quotes but here we go:

And logistically, that makes no sense. Reach is the most fertile and populous of kingdoms. That can be seen from map alone, but is also stated in the books IIRC.

Renly's army joined Stannis after Renly's death. Which is really, really weird if his army was on loan from Mace. But if his army wasn't but was his personal dudes, then that makes sense and my position is correct. Which is the case?

Except it didn't. Portion of cavalry joined Stannis, portion went with Loras. And you clearly missed the part where Stannis' loyalists at Bitterbridge were massacred by the rest of the army. That would be impossible if majority of troops there were Renly's, because as you said, Renly's army joined Stannis after Renly's death.

The only issue is that only minority of cavalry went with Loras, suggesting that majority of Renly's cavalry were Stormlanders.

Also, many Stormlanders stayed neutral, and some joined Stannis, even at the outset. If what you say is correct, that would mean that Stormlands can raise lot more troops than Reach can. Which, again, doesn't make sense.

Which means that, yes, claims that Renly's massive army was all from House Tyrell due to their massive superiority is all BS, a significant chunk of Renly's personal dudes, at least half going off the names* and possibly far more, were from places other than Reach in the first place. This wasn't an army on loan from Mace but Renly's own personal retinue of retinues, with a few Reach Lords following him who also turned against Reach itself.

And I didn't say it was all from Reach, just that 3/4 of it were.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Except it didn't. Portion of cavalry joined Stannis, portion went with Loras. And you clearly missed the part where Stannis' loyalists at Bitterbridge were massacred by the rest of the army. That would be impossible if majority of troops there were Renly's, because as you said, Renly's army joined Stannis after Renly's death.

Now you're moving the goalposts. You alleged that Renly's personal army was on loan from Mace Tyrell in the Reach, I proved this wasn't so because a significant chunk of his lords were from the Stormlands, hence they were Renly's personal dudes, not Reach's army on loan to Renly from Mace. That can't be denied anymore.

Martin has specifically stated that the loyalists killed at Bitterbridge were Renly's low-class foot who he left behind, and that calling what happened there a battle was hugely overstating it, and a lot of the foot at Bitterbridge just decided to go home, a lot were killed in fighting that was not battle (somehow), and the remainder mostly joined back up with Tyrell though some went and found their way to Stannis. Most of those killed at Reach were specifically noted to be Florents who actually were from Reach so the Stormlanders of Renly's retinue are the ones who probably went home/joined Stannis.

Ultimately the events at Bitterbridge support my original position. Renly's army joins with Stannis, and a bunch of them were killed or deserted, but even so Stannis moved on, what was lost was a big chunk of Renly's former army, not the Tyrell's army because they were Renly's personal dudes, not all of Tyrell's forces on loan from Mace as you claimed earlier. House Tyrell went on to keep fighting for a long time afterwards despite Renly's army being lost to a large degree. That shows that their armies are extremely vast and Renly was effectively a bit player in the story despite having a personal army as large or larger than most European nations.

And logistically, that makes no sense.
...
Which, again, doesn't make sense.

Looks at thread title. No kidding, that's kinda the point of the thread. Martin's numbers make no sense.

My biggest complaints throughout this thread have been how Martin's understanding of logistics is about on par with a Starcraft player's and he treats logistics as if his armies had modern-day support with a medieval paint job instead of what should be possible at their technology level.

 

[Aldarion]

Now you're moving the goalposts. You alleged that Renly's personal army was on loan from Mace Tyrell in the Reach, I proved this wasn't so because a significant chunk of his lords were from the Stormlands, hence they were Renly's personal dudes, not Reach's army on loan to Renly from Mace. That can't be denied anymore.

Martin has specifically stated that the loyalists killed at Bitterbridge were Renly's low-class foot who he left behind, and that calling what happened there a battle was hugely overstating it, and a lot of the foot at Bitterbridge just decided to go home, a lot were killed in fighting that was not battle (somehow), and the remainder mostly joined back up with Tyrell though some went and found their way to Stannis. Most of those killed at Reach were specifically noted to be Florents who actually were from Reach so the Stormlanders of Renly's retinue are the ones who probably went home/joined Stannis.

Ultimately the events at Bitterbridge support my original position. Renly's army joins with Stannis, and a bunch of them were killed or deserted, but even so Stannis moved on, what was lost was a big chunk of Renly's former army, not the Tyrell's army because they were Renly's personal dudes, not all of Tyrell's forces on loan from Mace as you claimed earlier. House Tyrell went on to keep fighting for a long time afterwards despite Renly's army being lost to a large degree. That shows that their armies are extremely vast and Renly was effectively a bit player in the story despite having a personal army as large or larger than most European nations.

I am not moving goalposts, I am showing that majority of army at Bitterbridge must have been Tyrell. Also, you missed from your own link that Renly's cavalry was both Storm's End and Reach cavalry. So at best, we cannot know which portion was of what size. But it makes no sense for Stormlands to be anywhere near Reach in power, let alone more powerful.

Also, look at what your claim makes for a balance of power. If what you write is correct, then Stormlands have an army of cca 60 000, and Reach must be well over 120 000. But we already know Westerlands have some 45 000 (Tywin + Jamie was basically entirety of their strength), and North cca 30 000 - 45 000. Riverlands are about the same. Crownlands have a lot less. So basically, Reach should have conquered all its neighbours.

And there is this as well:

Looks at thread title. No kidding, that's kinda the point of the thread. Martin's numbers make no sense.

My biggest complaints throughout this thread have been how Martin's understanding of logistics is about on par with a Starcraft player's and he treats logistics as if his armies had modern-day support with a medieval paint job instead of what should be possible at their technology level.

Problem is that this would mean Martin has understanding of logistics even worse than a pre-schooler. I mean, even back when I was worldbuilding for fun in the primary school, I understood that "larger country with equal climate = more resources = larger army; same country with better climate = more resources = larger army". I am far from being someone who would defend Martin's ability with numbers (or Martin's common sense), but the level of not-thinking you are implying here is not something I can easily wrap my head around.

 

[Bear Ribs]

I am not moving goalposts, I am showing that majority of army at Bitterbridge must have been Tyrell.

Well the losses certainly were since we're told they were mostly Florents, ie. Tyrell. The actual army makeup isn't perfectly specified but I've already proven that at least half the lords following Renly were from the Stormlands. The percentage of individual foot soldiers on the ground isn't something we can easily prove either way.

Also, you missed from your own link that Renly's cavalry was both Storm's End and Reach cavalry. So at best, we cannot know which portion was of what size. But it makes no sense for Stormlands to be anywhere near Reach in power, let alone more powerful.

Also, look at what your claim makes for a balance of power. If what you write is correct, then Stormlands have an army of cca 60 000, and Reach must be well over 120 000. But we already know Westerlands have some 45 000 (Tywin + Jamie was basically entirety of their strength), and North cca 30 000 - 45 000. Riverlands are about the same. Crownlands have a lot less. So basically, Reach should have conquered all its neighbours.

Well no, you're the one who's taken the position that Reach is as powerful as any two other states by itself, which would imply that it should win everything forever. I'm taking the position that Renly had a surprisingly large army of personal dudes at his disposal who weren't just on loan from Reach, that this indicates that that armies are amazingly large by real life standards, and European IRL countries would have trouble matching or even approaching their numbers with anything less than Roman or early modern levels of logistics and efficiency.

And there is this as well:
Snipped

I have some difficulty taking figures from a Role-Playing book that has "conditional approval" from Martin as being solid evidence, especially when the opening paragraphs include that the numbers given in the Role-Playing book have been proven wrong in the books.

Problem is that this would mean Martin has understanding of logistics even worse than a pre-schooler. I mean, even back when I was worldbuilding for fun in the primary school, I understood that "larger country with equal climate = more resources = larger army; same country with better climate = more resources = larger army". I am far from being someone who would defend Martin's ability with numbers (or Martin's common sense), but the level of not-thinking you are implying here is not something I can easily wrap my head around.

And yet the story doesn't involve Reach's massive and well-equipped armies steamrolling the other groups who are a fraction of their size. Instead Reach is reduced to mere supporters of Lannister. Why is that, then?

 

[Aldarion]

Well no, you're the one who's taken the position that Reach is as powerful as any two other states by itself, which would imply that it should win everything forever. I'm taking the position that Renly had a surprisingly large army of personal dudes at his disposal who weren't just on loan from Reach, that this indicates that that armies are amazingly large by real life standards, and European IRL countries would have trouble matching or even approaching their numbers with anything less than Roman or early modern levels of logistics and efficiency.

But that does not make any sense, strategically. Look at the map:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c9/7c/a1/c97ca1807d68f005ca9049d9a891c1bb.png

Reach borders five kingdoms, and has no natural defences. It is also much larger than any single kingdom except for North, and appears to be more fertile than any other kingdom. If anything, Reach should have as much heavy cavalry as any other kingdom has soldiers, not be weaker than Stormlands - which are half the size, and also noted to be much poorer.

I have some difficulty taking figures from a Role-Playing book that has "conditional approval" from Martin as being solid evidence, especially when the opening paragraphs include that the numbers given in the Role-Playing book have been proven wrong in the books.

Numbers, no. But it does give idea of what Martin thought of relative strengths (except for Dorne, which Martin did note was overpowered in book).

And yet the story doesn't involve Reach's massive and well-equipped armies steamrolling the other groups who are a fraction of their size. Instead Reach is reduced to mere supporters of Lannister. Why is that, then?

Because army size is not everything. Look at the position Reach is in:
1) Politically, they cannot declare a king as they have no legitimacy. Tyrells are not original kings of Reach, so they cannot declare independence a la North that easily, and their only option to gain entrance to royal family is through marriage. So they went to Renly, and once he kicked it, to Lannisters. Goal is to gain the throne, not the territory.
2) Strategically, they have the largest single army. But that is not as awesome as it sounds, because of the same reason why I think it is reasonable (and only logical) outcome for Reach to be the single strongest kingdom: geography. Look at the map, again: Reach is sandwiched between five other kingdoms. No kingdom except for Riverlands has it that bad, and terrain of Reach is hardly much more defensible. Yet Reach is still counted as a major player. The only possible explanation is the size of its army.

 

[Bear Ribs]

But that does not make any sense, strategically. Look at the map:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c9/7c/a1/c97ca1807d68f005ca9049d9a891c1bb.png

Reach borders five kingdoms, and has no natural defences. It is also much larger than any single kingdom except for North, and appears to be more fertile than any other kingdom. If anything, Reach should have as much heavy cavalry as any other kingdom has soldiers, not be weaker than Stormlands - which are half the size, and also noted to be much poorer.

Numbers, no. But it does give idea of what Martin thought of relative strengths (except for Dorne, which Martin did note was overpowered in book).

Because army size is not everything. Look at the position Reach is in:
1) Politically, they cannot declare a king as they have no legitimacy. Tyrells are not original kings of Reach, so they cannot declare independence a la North that easily, and their only option to gain entrance to royal family is through marriage. So they went to Renly, and once he kicked it, to Lannisters. Goal is to gain the throne, not the territory.
2) Strategically, they have the largest single army. But that is not as awesome as it sounds, because of the same reason why I think it is reasonable (and only logical) outcome for Reach to be the single strongest kingdom: geography. Look at the map, again: Reach is sandwiched between five other kingdoms. No kingdom except for Riverlands has it that bad, and terrain of Reach is hardly much more defensible. Yet Reach is still counted as a major player. The only possible explanation is the size of its army.

Okay but you're moving the goalposts again. My point has always been that Renly had an obscenely large army, enough to challenge most pre-modern European Nations by himself, and that his army wasn't all from Reach nor all of Reach's forces but people loyal to him, Renly. What you're arguing now about terrain is so far away from the actual point we were debating I need binoculars to see it. If anything you've managed to pretzel your way around to arguing my own point, which is that ASOIAF armies are huge since you're talking now about how huge they are. Which was what started this, my saying their extremely large armies would be a problem for any European RL conqueror.

As far as your other points they make little sense. Legitimacy of the throne? It doesn't exist. The last king got his position by hitting the previous king in the head with a hammer*. The next king will quite obviously get his Kingship in the same way given that we're in the War of Five Kings and everybody's busily getting their head-busting tool of choice at the ready. Balon Greyjoy put himself forward as claiming the Kingship in the War of Five Kings, are you saying he has more legitimacy than anybody in Reach?

Note that you're also mis-stating what the RPG said as well, it did not show what Martin thought their forces were (and were explicitly wrong about that). It was awhat a Maester might think the forces were and the Maesters were spelled out as being wrong in some cases anyway. Martin thought a Maester might think this numbers were in the right ballpark. You're making an argument based on three degrees of hearsay at this point.

*Yes, yes, technically Jaime stabbed the previous king before Robert got there with his hammer, but Robert hitting him with a hammer was the plan.

 

[Aldarion]

Okay but you're moving the goalposts again. My point has always been that Renly had an obscenely large army, enough to challenge most pre-modern European Nations by himself, and that his army wasn't all from Reach nor all of Reach's forces but people loyal to him, Renly. What you're arguing now about terrain is so far away from the actual point we were debating I need binoculars to see it. If anything you've managed to pretzel your way around to arguing my own point, which is that ASOIAF armies are huge since you're talking now about how huge they are. Which was what started this, my saying their extremely large armies would be a problem for any European RL conqueror.

As far as your other points they make little sense. Legitimacy of the throne? It doesn't exist. The last king got his position by hitting the previous king in the head with a hammer*. The next king will quite obviously get his Kingship in the same way given that we're in the War of Five Kings and everybody's busily getting their head-busting tool of choice at the ready. Balon Greyjoy put himself forward as claiming the Kingship in the War of Five Kings, are you saying he has more legitimacy than anybody in Reach?

Note that you're also mis-stating what the RPG said as well, it did not show what Martin thought their forces were (and were explicitly wrong about that). It was awhat a Maester might think the forces were and the Maesters were spelled out as being wrong in some cases anyway. Martin thought a Maester might think this numbers were in the right ballpark. You're making an argument based on three degrees of hearsay at this point.

*Yes, yes, technically Jaime stabbed the previous king before Robert got there with his hammer, but Robert hitting him with a hammer was the plan.

It wasn't all from Reach, but there is no way majority of it was from Stormlands. Or anywhere other than Reach. That is what I was saying with my point about terrain, so I don't see how that is "moving the goalposts" (you were the one who said that even with Reach, Renly was a minor player (which is wrong), that Tyrell army is not large (which is wrong)). And I never said that Westerosi armies aren't huge, so what is your point? The only thing I argued was that such field armies were not out of reach for 15th century Europe, especially if Ottomans are included. And they are not.

Largest field army we see is indeed Renly's, which is some 80 000 men. That is about the size of largest Ottoman armies in the 15th century, but it was never deployed into battle - unlike Ottomans, who could and did bring such forces to battle (even if it was mostly sieges). Largest forces we see actually deployed are at Trident (40 000 each), Blackwater (Stannis: 20 000, Tywin ~80 000), and Green Fork (20 000 each). Point is, we never see army larger than 40 000 deployed into hostile territory, and never any army larger than 80 000, at all. And due to very low proportion of cavalry in Westerosi armies (only around 25%), typical Westerosi army would not actually be any more logistically difficult to support than your typical, say, Hungarian field army of 15th century. Hungarians managed to field army of 50 000 for the Long Campaign, 20 000 at Varna, 32 000 at Kosovo by Hunyadi; Matthias Corvinus fielded armies of 20 000 - 25 000 in Bosnia, and apparently 60 000 in 1475. and 1480. both. And these were mostly cavalry, which means that in combat power and logistical requirements both, larger of Hungarian armies are actually not far off (or even inferior) compared to largest Westerosi armies. So while Westeros is impressive, it is nowhere as impressive as what you might get from looking at numbers alone.

Now, it is true that most 15th century European states would not be able to match that, but it is not accurate to say that even the larger, let alone typical, Westerosi army would be an out-of-context problem for 15th century Europe.

What Maester would think is hardly a hearsay, especially since a guy like Stannis is spelled out to know every house's armed strength at the time - so information is available. At worst, maester's numbers should be in the ballpark.

RE: Legitimacy, Robert claimed legitimacy due to a) broad support and b) his blood relation to Targaryens. As for Balon, he never claimed the Iron Throne - he claimed the Iron Islands, which he is indeed a ruler of by birthright.

 

[Bear Ribs]

It wasn't all from Reach, but there is no way majority of it was from Stormlands. Or anywhere other than Reach. That is what I was saying with my point about terrain, so I don't see how that is "moving the goalposts" (you were the one who said that even with Reach, Renly was a minor player (which is wrong), that Tyrell army is not large (which is wrong)). And I never said that Westerosi armies aren't huge, so what is your point? The only thing I argued was that such field armies were not out of reach for 15th century Europe, especially if Ottomans are included. And they are not.

Your arguments that Reach was bigger than any two other players combined are based on a Roleplaying game that was explicitly wrong, and saying "It make sense" (You're right about that) in a setting where things rarely make sense. Mine are based on the fact that they are treated as second banana in the actual text rather than being the 800 pound gorilla in the room everybody else tiptoed around.

Largest field army we see is indeed Renly's, which is some 80 000 men. That is about the size of largest Ottoman armies in the 15th century, but it was never deployed into battle - unlike Ottomans, who could and did bring such forces to battle (even if it was mostly sieges). Largest forces we see actually deployed are at Trident (40 000 each), Blackwater (Stannis: 20 000, Tywin ~80 000), and Green Fork (20 000 each). Point is, we never see army larger than 40 000 deployed into hostile territory, and never any army larger than 80 000, at all. And due to very low proportion of cavalry in Westerosi armies (only around 25%), typical

Drogo also had something like 100,000 though it's not clear to me if that include the women and children in his retinue, in which case he was probably closer to 25,000 and was one Khal among hundreds. Considering they're basically hunter-gatherer nomads who don't even have any herds of livestock that's outrageous numbers and really shows how vast armies get with no logistics to speak of.

At least in the show I've read Daenerys wound up with something like half a million soldiers though I don't think the books ever got to that point.

Also it seems I was lowballing Renly, when I checked the actual text I discovered his 100,000 men wasn't his whole army, just his foot soldiers. A Clash of Kings Chapter 17, Catelyn Perspective:

All the chivalry of the south rides with me, and that is the least part of my power. My foot is coming behind, a hundred thousand swords and spears and pikes.

So Renly had well in excess of 100,000, as those were just his foot that he left behind, not the forces he had with him. I'm not quite sure what "the south" was since Dorne obviously didn't have his back, the next most southern province is Reach and that would indicate Renly considered Reach's forces the least part of his power which was roughly what I recalled.

Westerosi army would not actually be any more logistically difficult to support than your typical, say, Hungarian field army of 15th century. Hungarians managed to field army of 50 000 for the Long Campaign, 20 000 at Varna, 32 000 at Kosovo by Hunyadi; Matthias Corvinus fielded armies of 20 000 - 25 000 in Bosnia, and apparently 60 000 in 1475. and 1480. both. And these were mostly cavalry, which means that in combat power and logistical requirements both, larger of Hungarian armies are actually not far off (or even inferior) compared to largest Westerosi armies. So while Westeros is impressive, it is nowhere as impressive as what you might get from looking at numbers alone.

Now, it is true that most 15th century European states would not be able to match that, but it is not accurate to say that even the larger, let alone typical, Westerosi army would be an out-of-context problem for 15th century Europe.

Not Seen on your list: Any army remotely as large as Renly's 100,000+ personal dudes, much less anything that could match a combined army that would come from foreigners trying to conquer Westeros.

What Maester would think is hardly a hearsay, especially since a guy like Stannis is spelled out to know every house's armed strength at the time - so information is available. At worst, maester's numbers should be in the ballpark.

But the books directly contradicted those numbers, which is spelled out in your own source. You're literally taking a source with known false information and saying we should still trust the parts that haven't been proven false.

RE: Legitimacy, Robert claimed legitimacy due to a) broad support and b) his blood relation to Targaryens. As for Balon, he never claimed the Iron Throne - he claimed the Iron Islands, which he is indeed a ruler of by birthright.

Cersei literally tears up the King's last will and testament in front of everybody and says it's just paper. And you're arguing that the Tyrell's thought supporting her side was the way of legitimacy. Seriously?

 

[Aldarion]

Your arguments that Reach was bigger than any two other players combined are based on a Roleplaying game that was explicitly wrong, and saying "It make sense" (You're right about that) in a setting where things rarely make sense. Mine are based on the fact that they are treated as second banana in the actual text rather than being the 800 pound gorilla in the room everybody else tiptoed around.

I have never seen any evidence they are treated like second banana in the text. The only thing they don't have is link to the throne, but they have taken many important positions after their alliance with Lannisters:

“The Faith,” her uncle said, “unless you insist on a trial by battle. In which case you must be championed by a knight of the Kingsguard. Whatever the outcome, your rule is at an end. I will serve as Tommen’s regent until he comes of age. Mace Tyrell has been named King’s Hand. Grand Maester Pycelle and Ser Harys Swyft will continue as before, but Paxter Redwyne is now lord admiral and Randyll Tarly has assumed the duties of justiciar.”

****

“Yes, but... if the Lannisters should prevail and Lord Tywin decides that we betrayed the king by aiding Stannis, it could mean the end of the Night’s Watch. He has the Tyrells behind him, with all the strength of Highgarden. And he did defeat Lord Stannis on the Blackwater.” The sight of blood might make Sam faint, but he knew how wars were won. His own father had seen to that.

------

Her nostrils flared. “Never.” Cersei pushed a lock of hair off her brow. “The Tyrells overreach themselves.”
“You would be a fool to make Mace Tyrell your Hand,” Ser Kevan admitted, “but a bigger fool to make him your foe. I’ve heard what happened in the Hall of Lamps. Mace should have known better than to broach such matters in public, but even so, you were unwise to shame him in front of half the court.”

--------

Lord Tywin went on. “Oberyn Martell might suit, but the Tyrells would take that very ill. So we must look to the sons. I assume you do not object to wedding a man younger than yourself?”

--------

“I should have traded the Kingslayer for Sansa when you first urged it,” Robb said as they walked the gallery. “If I’d offered to wed her to the Knight of Flowers, the Tyrells might be ours instead of Joffrey’s. I should have thought of that.”

--------

Ser Kevan did not visit him that night. He was probably with Lord Tywin, trying to placate the Tyrells.

And so on, and so forth. If they are a banana, then they are an 800 pound sentient bananarilla nobody can afford to anger. Balon can just be ignored; Doran may be dangerous, but Tyrells are in another league.

Drogo also had something like 100,000 though it's not clear to me if that include the women and children in his retinue, in which case he was probably closer to 25,000 and was one Khal among hundreds. Considering they're basically hunter-gatherer nomads who don't even have any herds of livestock that's outrageous numbers and really shows how vast armies get with no logistics to speak of.

At least in the show I've read Daenerys wound up with something like half a million soldiers though I don't think the books ever got to that point.

Look at estimates that are not from a self-aggrandizing peacock in the middle of negotiations where he is trying to intimidate a stubborn older brother. This is what he says to Catelyn:

“I’m told your son crossed the Neck with twenty thousand swords at his back,” Renly went on.
“Now that the lords of the Trident are with him, perhaps he commands forty thousand.”
No, she thought, not near so many, we have lost men in battle, and others to the harvest.
“I have twice that number here,” Renly said, “and this is only part of my strength. Mace Tyrell
remains at Highgarden with another ten thousand, I have a strong garrison holding Storm’s End,
and soon enough the Dornishmen will join me with all their power. And never forget my brother
Stannis, who holds Dragonstone and commands the lords of the narrow sea.”

And later, Catelyn's estimate:

Their camp was well sited atop a low stony ridge that ran from north to south. It was far more
orderly than the sprawling encampment on the Mander, though only a quarter as large. When
he’d learned of his brother’s assault on Storm’s End, Renly had split his forces, much as Robb
had done at the Twins. His great mass of foot he had left behind at Bitterbridge with his young
queen, his wagons, carts, draft animals, and all his cumbersome siege machinery, while Renly
himself led his knights and freeriders in a swift dash east.

Now look at what Stannis says:

"And Highgarden is far from spent. My brother left the greater part of his power at Bitterbridge, near sixty
thousand foot. I sent my wife’s brother Ser Errol with Ser Parmen Crane to take them under my
command, but they have not returned. I fear that Ser Loras Tyrell reached Bitterbridge before my
envoys, and took that host for his own.”

Between the two, Stannis is the one who has no reason to lie: his statement is given in the private, to a trusted advisor. And even discounting that, he is a more reliable source:
“House Florent can field two thousand swords at best.” It was said that Stannis knew the strength of every house in the Seven Kingdoms. “And you have a deal more faith in your brothers and uncles than I do, my lady. The Florent lands lie too close to Highgarden for your lord uncle to risk Mace Tyrell’s wrath.”

So, let's look at the facts:
1) Renly says in private that he has "twice" Robb's number with him. That could mean anywhere from 1,5 - 2,5 times as much, so 60 000 - 100 000. No more.
2) Renly left 60 000 foot at Bitterbridge.
3) Cavalry which he took to Storm's End is 20 000 men.
4) Mace Tyrell is at Highgarden with 10 000 men, and there is small garrison at Storm's End.

No other forces are mentioned - at all. So the forces we are aware of number a total of 90 000 men. Of this, 80 000 is in Renly's army. And those are a combination of Stormlanders and Tyrells.

Also it seems I was lowballing Renly, when I checked the actual text I discovered his 100,000 men wasn't his whole army, just his foot soldiers. A Clash of Kings Chapter 17, Catelyn Perspective:

All the chivalry of the south rides with me, and that is the least part of my power. My foot is coming behind, a hundred thousand swords and spears and pikes.

So Renly had well in excess of 100,000, as those were just his foot that he left behind, not the forces he had with him. I'm not quite sure what "the south" was since Dorne obviously didn't have his back, the next most southern province is Reach and that would indicate Renly considered Reach's forces the least part of his power which was roughly what I recalled.

You never were lowballing him, but now you have gone beyond highballing and into pure fantasy. Chivalry means heavy cavalry. So "all the chivalry of the south rides with me" is referring to the 20 000 that are with him. Note the next part: my foot is coming behind. Foot is noted separate from "chivalry", so again: chivalry = cavalry = 20 000 men. Those 20 000 men are the "least part of Renly's power", with remaining parts being the infantry coming up behind. There is absolutely no way the text can be read in a manner which would support the idea that "Renly considered Reach's forces the least part of his power".

 

[Bear Ribs]

“I’m told your son crossed the Neck with twenty thousand swords at his back,” Renly went on.
“Now that the lords of the Trident are with him, perhaps he commands forty thousand.”
No, she thought, not near so many, we have lost men in battle, and others to the harvest.
“I have twice that number here,” Renly said, “and this is only part of my strength. Mace Tyrell
remains at Highgarden with another ten thousand, I have a strong garrison holding Storm’s End,
and soon enough the Dornishmen will join me with all their power. And never forget my brother
Stannis, who holds Dragonstone and commands the lords of the narrow sea.”

1) Renly says in private that he has "twice" Robb's number with him. That could mean anywhere from 1,5 - 2,5 times as much, so 60 000 - 100 000. No more.

I think we're about done with this discussion then. You're literally so bent on trying to prove whatever point you've moved to at this point that you're actively contradicting your own quotes. He says he has twice forty thousand and that's only part of his strength, and when we get to your interpretation the "part of his strength" is silent and you suggest that "twice" might only be 1.5 times on top of it.

Frankly if you're willing to actively contradict your own citations that hard there's not much point to continuing. You need to stop making up facts as suits your current position and look at what's actually in the setting.

But that does not make any sense, strategically. Look at the map:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c9/7c/a1/c97ca1807d68f005ca9049d9a891c1bb.png

Reach borders five kingdoms, and has no natural defences. It is also much larger than any single kingdom except for North, and appears to be more fertile than any other kingdom.

I want to go back to this one to make my point here. I originally ignored your goalpost shift about geography because it was just a goalpost shift, but I'm headed back to make a point about your nasty habit of making your facts up. You use a silly fan political map and make the bold claim that Reach has no natural defenses. Let's take a look at a map that shows geography instead of mapping them to IRL nations, shall we?

Reach has a massive mountain range to the south, a improbably-starfish shaped massive mountain range to the north (with a dense forest covering the only gap), two hundred miles of dense forest to the east, the shield islands provide naval protection from the west, and a massive river is to the northeast. They literally have solid natural defenses on every side that isn't ocean. And this is what you defined as "no natural defenses" when it suited your argument. This isn't good debating.

 

[Aldarion]

I think we're about done with this discussion then. You're literally so bent on trying to prove whatever point you've moved to at this point that you're actively contradicting your own quotes. He says he has twice forty thousand and that's only part of his strength, and when we get to your interpretation the "part of his strength" is silent and you suggest that "twice" might only be 1.5 times on top of it.

I am actively contradicting nothing. Rently literally lists all his forces:
- twice number with him
- ten thousand with Mace Tyrell
- Storm's End garrison
- Dornishmen who he hopes will join him

That is 80 000 + 10 000 + 200-300. Add perhaps some other smaller garrisons, and Renly has a total of maybe 100 000, and this includes both Stormlands and Reach. Littlefinger later says that Margaery brings 50 000 swords with her, meaning Reach infantry. Dornishmen you cannot count as they are not part of the Reach, but he is counting them anyway, so that is another 25 000 troops. In total, Renly is counting on some 125 000 troops (115 000 if we go strictly counting), but only around half are from Reach.

The only reason I provided a range for the "twice" estimate is because it is 1) clearly off the cuff, and 2) actually favourable to your argument. You cannot use a range of estimates around a number which only goes above it.

Frankly if you're willing to actively contradict your own citations that hard there's not much point to continuing. You need to stop making up facts as suits your current position and look at what's actually in the setting.

I am doing precisely that, but you are so incapable of seeing anything other than what you think is true that you are unknowingly warping everything to suit your argument. At least I hope it is unknowingly.

Reach has a massive mountain range to the south, a improbably-starfish shaped massive mountain range to the north (with a dense forest covering the only gap), two hundred miles of dense forest to the east, the shield islands provide naval protection from the west, and a massive river is to the northeast. They literally have solid natural defenses on every side that isn't ocean. And this is what you defined as "no natural defenses" when it suited your argument. This isn't good debating.

Look at Ottoman wars. Mountains are literally no protection against raiders unless they are exceptionally tall or difficult to pass, and the only rivers there are are leading straight into Reach. I did forget about that forest.

And yes, I made a mistake. But you are last person who should be lecturing others about "good debating".

 

[Navarro]

He also gets into it's bizarre population distribution with outright massive cities (relative to local technology levels) and rather unpopulated countryside (90% of the population should be farmers), almost as if it's actually a modern setting where most of the population is urban, and somebody put a coat of medieval paint on it.

Essos takes this to the max, with city-states controlling vast stretches of uninhabited wasteland between them which basically only exist as an arena for mercenary armies to fight in, when historical ones generally only had the immediate area around the cities themselves. And ofc. these cities are way bigger than Westeros' (I mean, Asshai is forgiveable because all kinds of freaky dark magic shit is implied about it, but the others ...).

Especially considering their society's been around for 10,000 years and the last two dynasties have spanned 300 years, a little more than half of which was spent without dragons around.

Funny thing is, if you play the CK2 mod, the canon ruling families typically die out within a century of the start date once you begin the game.

 

[Navarro]

Also none of the FOT7 followers care that their holy land is in the control of religious enemies, at all. Not even the Targ king who was obsessively religious cared.

Never mind a crusade (which given his pop-history take I've no idea why Martin didn't include), there are no Westerosi pilgrims going to Andalos and apparently nobody lives there any more, despite the fact it's obviously capable of sustaining a decent-sized population given it was the launching point for the Andal invasions. After they conquered Westeros, the Andals apparently changed their religion to be completely Westeros-centric ...

 

[Aldarion]

Also none of the FOT7 followers care that their holy land is in the control of religious enemies, at all. Not even the Targ king who was obsessively religious cared.

Never mind a crusade (which given his pop-history take I've no idea why Martin didn't include), there are no Westerosi pilgrims going to Andalos and apparently nobody lives there any more, despite the fact it's obviously capable of sustaining a decent-sized population given it was the launching point for the Andal invasions. After they conquered Westeros, the Andals apparently changed their religion to be completely Westeros-centric ...

Martin apparently subscribes to the "nobody believes in their religion" postmodernist BS and projects it to the medieval fantasy world.

 

[Bear Ribs]

I think the funniest bits are that Martin likes to take potshots at Tolkien and claim to be on that level. At the same time not only does he never answer the questions he belittles Tolkien for not answering, he comes up with ludicrously silly things as well.

Martin: "But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy?"
Martinomics: "We do not sow!"
FASAnomics: "Hey thanks, we don't look so bad now."
Never Martin: "What was the Stark's tax policy?"

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

I think the funniest bits are that Martin likes to take potshots at Tolkien and claim to be on that level. At the same time not only does he never answer the questions he belittles Tolkien for not answering, he comes up with ludicrously silly things as well.

Martin: "But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy?"
Martinomics: "We do not sow!"
FASAnomics: "Hey thanks, we don't look so bad now."
Never Martin: "What was the Stark's tax policy?"

Who gives a shit about tax-policies anyway? LotR was supposed to be a fantasy about good fighting evil and winning.
No one that matters cares about this nitpicky crap.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Who gives a shit about tax-policies anyway? LotR was supposed to be a fantasy about good fighting evil and winning.
No one that matters cares about this nitpicky crap.

I could see a decent story coming from it if the author did a careful job writing it but it would take effort to make a fantasy tax policy story interesting. Certainly it's an odd nitpick, especially since Aragorn shouldn't really have a tax policy, Gondor was clearly operating well already and there would be no reason for him to mess with the existing system. Martin's other criticisms of Tolkien were similarly sad:

Did he maintain a standing army?
Yes, duh. Of course Aragorn had a retinue, what King doesn't? There were still bands of orcs all over the place!

What did he do in times of flood and famine?
Break food out of the storage granaries, that's what Kings do.

And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles?
This one's especially sad. Tolkien actually wrote on what happened to the Orcs. Aragorn made peace with them and gave them the lands around Lake Núrnen for their territory. It's literally all there in the chapter titled
The Steward and the King. I mean, dang, he's criticizing Tolkien for not covering stuff Tolkien wrote about.

Also how come everybody worries about Orc babies but nobody asks questions about what happened to the baby Mirkwood Spiders? Buncha biped supremacists, I tell you. Nobody ever looks out for the sentient man-eating spider's interests.

 

[Aldarion]

I think the funniest bits are that Martin likes to take potshots at Tolkien and claim to be on that level. At the same time not only does he never answer the questions he belittles Tolkien for not answering, he comes up with ludicrously silly things as well.

Martin: "But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy?"
Martinomics: "We do not sow!"
FASAnomics: "Hey thanks, we don't look so bad now."
Never Martin: "What was the Stark's tax policy?"

Worst part is that, by understanding Tolkien's inspirations and some history, you can actually fill in a lot of blanks:

Military Organization of Gondor (Expanded)

Geography and organization For mobilizing its armies, Gondor uses a beacon system. This system is similar to that of Byzantine Empire, which had a line of beacons stretching from eastern Anatolia t…

military-fantasy.com

Military Organization of Rohan

Organization Riders of Rohan are organized into eoreds, and are professional soldiers: “had no precisely fixed number, but in Rohan it was only applied to Riders, fully trained for war: men s…

military-fantasy.com

Military Organization of Mordor

Armies of Mordor Issue of free will and discipline Orcs are sometimes believed to not have free will, but this appears to be incorrect. Witch-King commands with fear, which would be unnecessary if …

military-fantasy.com

Strategy of Sauron

Overview Second Age Sauron’s strategy was logistically and tactically sound, but he made a very basic mistake. Essentially, he failed to understand his enemies, whereas his enemies understood…

military-fantasy.com

Meanwhile, by understanding Martin's inspirations and some history, the only thing you end up with are more question marks.

Did he maintain a standing army?
Yes, duh. Of course Aragorn had a retinue, what King doesn't? There were still bands of orcs all over the place!

Technically, it wouldn't have been a retinue since Gondor doesn't operate on the system of retinues, but that is just a nitpick.

 

[Navarro]

Essos takes this to the max, with city-states controlling vast stretches of uninhabited wasteland between them which basically only exist as an arena for mercenary armies to fight in, when historical ones generally only had the immediate area around the cities themselves. And ofc. these cities are way bigger than Westeros' (I mean, Asshai is forgiveable because all kinds of freaky dark magic shit is implied about it, but the others ...).

Essos is particularly hilarious, because its geography is perfectly set up for kingdoms and empires (pro-tip, city-states pop up in places like Italy and Greece where the terrain is rugged and there are lots of natural barriers, making it hard to expand). Instead we have city-states surrounded by "disputed lands" which, as I pointed out, are essentially just empty arenas for mercenary armies to fight in. Oh, and the river that should be the breadbasket of the continent has nothing but picturesque ruins (Chroyane has some dark magic stuff to justify this, but all the other Rhoynar ruins are perfectly inhabitable) by its banks.

Realistically, south-western and north-eastern western Essos is ruled by a Valyrian successor empire, capital Volantis, which plays a Byzantine/Saracen role in comparison to Westeros' "Christendom". Its eastern borders are the hills that separate western Essos and central Essos, and the Valyrian magical disaster zone. Norvos, Lorath and Braavos are independent of it because of their geography; they hate each other but put up a united front against the Empire.

Oh, and the Ghiscari region is also united, ruled from Ghis (because seriously, Martin has way too many ruins completely uninhabited for thousands of years. It makes sense when he implies dark magic behind it, but not with the more mundanely ruined areas. That there are even ruins there in the first place is because people found it a good place to live).

Epic, realistic worldbuilding.

 

[Aldarion]

Essos is particularly hilarious, because its geography is perfectly set up for kingdoms and empires (pro-tip, city-states pop up in places like Italy and Greece where the terrain is rugged and there are lots of natural barriers, making it hard to expand). Instead we have city-states surrounded by "disputed lands" which, as I pointed out, are essentially just empty arenas for mercenary armies to fight in. Oh, and the river that should be the breadbasket of the continent has nothing but picturesque ruins (Chroyane has some dark magic stuff to justify this, but all the other Rhoynar ruins are perfectly inhabitable) by its banks.

Realistically, south-western and north-eastern western Essos is ruled by a Valyrian successor empire, capital Volantis, which plays a Byzantine/Saracen role in comparison to Westeros' "Christendom". Its eastern borders are the hills that separate western Essos and central Essos, and the Valyrian magical disaster zone. Norvos, Lorath and Braavos are independent of it because of their geography; they hate each other but put up a united front against the Empire.

Oh, and the Ghiscari region is also united, ruled from Ghis (because seriously, Martin has way too many ruins completely uninhabited for thousands of years. It makes sense when he implies dark magic behind it, but not with the more mundanely ruined areas. That there are even ruins there in the first place is because people found it a good place to live).

Epic, realistic worldbuilding.

I just remembered I wrote about some of the worldbuilding problems of Westeros before:

Worldbuilding problems – Westeros

POPULATION DENSITY Technology depends a lot on population density. Without enough people, there will not be enough concentration of resources for certain societal and thus technological development…

military-fantasy.com

Not sure whether I already posted link here, but whatever. Important thing is, it relates to what you wrote about states. Basically, unified states have always depended on rivers: United States managed to stay united states thanks to the massive Missouri river basin, whereas Europe's fragmentation was also significantly related to geography - both in relation to ocean shores and to rivers and river basins.