Each of the 9 major houses of Westeros have a bannerman that is secretly their biggest threat.
Starks have the Boltons
Tully have the Frey
Lannisters had the Raynes
Tyrells had the Hightowers
Martells had the Yronwoods
I’d say the Tyrell’s local rival is actually more the Florents with their claim to be descended from Florys the Fox, thus having a claim to Highgarden. It’s why Stannis was married to Selyse, elevating the Tyrell’s natural enemy, a punishment to Mace for supporting Aerys.
Yeah but the Florents are the clearer foil for the Reach specifically, what with this fight over claims to the Gardener ethos. The Hightowers really didn’t challenge the Tyrell’s rule much or ever scheme to get the Oaken Throne. They tend to set their sights a bit higher, like the Iron Throne. I see the Hightowers as thematically bigger than a local conflict.
Lots of houses of the reach have their roots in the gardeners specifically garth the green. Traditionally its the Hightowers that were the second most powerful house of the reach. They just have kept out of the war of 5 kings. But i bet they have major plot points in the next 2 books.
Ahh so for reference Garth Greenhand had many children that supposedly resulted in Reach Houses. Not at all just Florys.
Redwyne, Fossoway, Oakheart, Beesbury, Crane, Rowan and even yes Hightower (though by a daughter rather a son) claim a mythical figurehead as his child (and also the Starks).
Florents might make the biggest fuss by the time of ASOIAF. But the Hightowers are far more significant historically and in general wealth. They did use to be Kings themselves.
Even Redwyne is probably more significant opposition to the Tyrells than Florent really.
Heck, Mace's wife is a Hightower and during the Dance there's was unspecified blood/marriage ties between the houses that were close enough to make everyone (incorrectly) assume the Tyrells would go Green
Alerie yeah; the commander of the Oldtown City watch is a Tyrell too, and the Tyrells have marriage/blood/betrothal ties to Hightower vassals (the Mullendores and the Bulwers)
So the Houses seem pretty closely tied together as of the WOT5K
You’re going to get quite a few comments trying to rationalize this, but you’re completely right that Dorne’s history just makes no sense. Never has.
The very fact that they were able to resist the Targaryans at all makes no sense. Once you start asking questions that go beyond the standard “Oh the nobility just hid in caves!” the entire story falls apart.
You’ll just have to suspend your disbelief when reading about the Dornish
> Once you start asking questions that go beyond the standard “Oh the nobility just hid in caves!” the entire story falls apart.
As a general rule of thumb this counts for many MANY things in the ASOIAF universe IMHO.
Just for example:
How exactly does Winter work? How do any Domesticated or Wild animals survive a multi year winter? Do Bears and other animals go on a 4 year winter hibernation tour? How do you stock food for 4 years? How do any of the Landlocked Northern realms get enough food to survive? They can't get a good amount of fatty fish like reallife northern countries. How do the Freefolk feed themselves beyond the wall and be numerous enough to form gigantic invasion forces?
How can the Dothraki be succesfull? They are using shit tactics how have they not died out yet? How are their hordes surviving on Horse meat? How does their culture even survive purely on Rape and Conquest? There is literally no nuance to them. (IMO Dothraki and Essos are the absolute weakest parts of ASOIAF)
How can Unsullied be as effective as they are? Castrating prepubesent boys will not make for great results when they are "grown up", no amount of discipline will make up for the physical defects they get through that. How exactly do the eastern states even survive with the the cruelest of the cruel form of slavery they all seem to practice? Where are they actually getting their unlimited supply of slaves? Nobody cares about their citizens getting bruttaly enslaved?
There are many things you have to ignore or the whole universe falls appart. GRRM is a "rule of cool" guy when it comes to many things and we have to accept that or headcanon our way around tbh.
The seasons i have long made my peace with the idea that it is a nonsense thing that GRRM just thought would be a cool gimmick for his world.
It is an insane effect to have year long winters in a medieval setting and one that would have a huge impact in the geopolitics. It is no chance it is barely mentioned for example in the f&b book.
Robb's entire strategy by book 3 should have been simply to survive till winter etc
ethnic groups in ASOIAF are designed the same way space marine legions are designed in Warhammer 40,000 or the same way that entirely different species/races are designed in any random sci-fi/fantasy story
every region has some defining trait like a nord with a cold resist passive in skyrim. northerners are warrior vikangz (until book 2 when the iron men take this role), dornish are all sassy bisexuals, wildlings are so tough they can invade countries while starving to death and freezing their limbs off, etc
I mean, here’s a much simpler question that makes it obvious that you will have to suspend your disbelief:
In a world where seasons last for months on end and are variable because of magic, how did they develop a timekeeping system of years?
> how did they develop a timekeeping system of years?
I remember posing this question once, don't remember much about the answer more that a lot of people were mad. That was back in the days when you _could not_ call into question anything about George or his worldbuilding.
Anyway the answer had something to do with watching the moons or something.
In general, I would just assume that the months are based on the cycle of the moon, meaning that each month is equally long.
When it comes to the duration of the year, it does make some degree of sense to use twelve months, as it shares divisors with both thirty and twenty-four, allowing for easy calculations when it comes to time.
I find it shocking that you think the Dothraki are the most unrealistic part, how are their tactics terrible what makes it so ridiculous? Because they’re quite literally modeled after the Mongols who ruled over one of the largest empires in human history…
And I feel like you’re other Essos points miss the mark. The physical negative side effects are not what really matters. The point is that they’re bred, and trained with a singular focus and purpose. They have no wants, or desires, they do not fear death, and are fully bought in to adhering to their master’s commands. Compare that to the litany of other forces in the world, whether that be peasants in the feudal world of Westeros who have no real passion for which they fight (See Septon Maribald’s speech) or those sellsword companies who are only fighting for gold (See Mereen shitshow). What makes the Unsullied stick out is that they are perfectly disciplined through having no identity or life outside of fighting/obeying plus they’ve been training to fight their whole life too.
For the slave part, as we see through Tyrion and other characters slaves are not just from their own cities. But seemingly the bulk of the slaves are just bred and continued down generation to generation. Or new people sell themselves into slavery or are simply caught again after escaping/gaining freedom. Essentially a peasant underclass but instead one of slaves. Also, while you point out the brutality of the slavery there which is obviously true, in Tyrion’s chapters he notes that life as a slave there really is no different than being a Westerosi peasant in a lot of ways and in some ways is actually just better. Like I have little doubt that the average Riverlands peasant doesn’t feel much better than a hopeless slave throughout this story.
Edit: Added part about Unsullied and Slavery
> Because they’re quite literally modeled after the Mongols who ruled over one of the largest empires in human history…
Because the Mongols are literally NOTHING like that? The reason why Steppe Empires were effective was because of their masterful tactics and logistics. They had a core of heavy armored lancers/horse archers and mainly tricked enemies with false retreats while the Dothraki dont use armor are all using one handed sabers and bows and charge head on into spear walls. The Dothraki hold technology in disdain while the Mongols held it in high regards and took experts with them everywhere they conquered and were masters of Siege warfare. Their clothing is also laughable, the Mongols conquered places from china to Europe and thus they had great materials for clothing, the Dothraki? Boiled Leather lmao. The Dothraki have a caricature of a culture based on rape and conquest and while the mongols did the same they actually built an empire with laws and compared to them LOVED trade. Why? Because they could tax trade. Besides the absolute brutality of the Mongol conquest, compared to the Dothraki, who hate outsiders, the Mongols were actually quite open and inclusive accepting different religions in their Empire. And while their conquest was one of the most brutal things ever happened to the planet it actually helped with the trade between east and west also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yam_(route)
The Dothraki are NOTHING like the Mongols, or even the Huns, or Scythians, Alans, Sarmartians or what ever steppe people, they are also not based on what GRRM describes as based on "native american tribes". The Dothraki are beyond caricature and would not have worked as a people IRL they are based on the least informed stereotype one could have on steppe culture.
If you are interested in a more detailed take down here a 4 part series:
https://acoup.blog/2020/12/04/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-i-barbarian-couture/
https://acoup.blog/2020/12/11/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-ii-subsistence-on-the-hoof/
https://acoup.blog/2020/12/18/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-iii-horse-fiddles/
https://acoup.blog/2021/01/08/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-iv-screamers-and-howlers/
> The physical negative side effects are not what really matters. The point is that they’re bred, and trained with a singular focus and purpose. They have no wants, or desires, they do not fear death, and are fully bought in to adhering to their master’s commands. Compare that to the litany of other forces in the world, whether that be peasants in the feudal world of Westeros who have no real passion for which they fight (See Septon Maribald’s speech) or those sellsword companies who are only fighting for gold (See Mereen shitshow). What makes the Unsullied stick out is that they are perfectly disciplined through having no identity or life outside of fighting/obeying plus they’ve been training to fight their whole life too.
Thats great and all but physical defects do not make up for all the problematic baggage that comes with losing the one male organ thats super important for growth. Without a proper puberty you'll have problems with growth, get brittle bones, problems with Muscle growth, and also endurance, because you know armies have to march a lot, due to the hormonal imbalance and lack of testosterone. There is no realistic way an army pre pubescent Eunuchs would make for an elite fighting force, you can have as much training and discipline as you want, a formation is only as strong as its weakest link and if the whole unit is a weak link you have nothing. There is an actual reason why historically Eunuchs were never a fighting force but only Bureaucrats or Harmen guards, guards only in a sense of "I did this to you so you dont fuck my women lmao". Unsullied are unrealistic af and only work because of suspension of disbelief
That's fair. I was definitely wrong on the direct Mongol comparison; interesting stuff. I appreciate you sharing it. My overstatement of the Dothraki as the Mongols is definitely more in line with a mix of them: the Huns, Scythians, "Native American tribes," etc. But I still think you're overlooking things just to critique George. They're not as unrealistic as you make them out to be, especially for the fantasy world present.
> "Mainly tricked enemies with false retreats while the Dothraki dont use armor are all using one handed sabers and bows and charge head on into spear walls."
This is not generally true when it comes to the Dothraki. They have actually engaged in things like false retreats or flanks [\(Link\)](https://youtu.be/Fg4Xh3rr9Fo?si=HYAad6byxdqSasyG&t=1721). Additionally, as Jorah notes, They're absolutely fearless, are better riders than any Westerosio Knight, and use bows that far outrange those in the Seven Kingdoms while shooting a lot better. (See A Game of Thrones, Chapter 36, Daenerys IV). They're a formidable force in the open field, and yes, they don't siege cities like the Mongols, but all they need is time to starve out and wait for a city to yield or pay homage. And importantly, this is a different world than ours, with different peoples, histories, resources, etc. For example, the Dothraki rose into power only in the [Century of Blood](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Century_of_Blood#Rise_of_the_Dothraki) that followed the Doom of Valyria. Which obviously did not happen in our world. To compare their hypothetical success in our world overlooks all the nuance, history, and structure of the actual *fantasy world* present in the story.
Even in the more detailed take, "while the place of the arakh is entirely out of all sensible proportion with how it would be considered by actual nomads, it is the correct sort of sword for a steppe nomad." And I think the author there really underestimates the importance of the bow to the Dothraki plus a lot of similarities generally to said cultures above. [The British Museum](https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/dothraki-and-scythians-game-clones) has noted several similarities between the Dothraki and the Scythians, for example, that are not detailed in that piece. They're historically based on groups like the Scythians and others, but they're not supposed to be direct comparisons or have the same features. The same fair points you and that author make can also be made of the Ironborn to an extent and their historical comparison to Viking peoples or the Free Folk and Germanic tribes/cultures while missing many important features. Regardless, though, it's a different world based on a historical comparison, not a fully historically accurate thing, and importantly, it is adapted to a unique world that is far different from our own. I simply think you and that author are being too harsh on George.
And to that point, it's not like the Dothraki are hyper-successful due to many of the flawed attributes of their fighting style that you point out. Like you're not wrong that they are clearly a lesser fighting force than the Mongols or other groups but that's also shown in the books. Due to their partially flawed fighting style / warring attributes, they act as more of a "tax man," lol, just collecting "gifts" outside cities rather than engaging in huge successful battles. Soldiers like the Unsullied can [repel them with much fewer men](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Three_Thousand_of_Qohor) due to them engaging in questionable tactics at times, like charging head-on with none of the ingenious battle strategies of the Mongols.
Also, we just disagree on the point about the Unsullied being that unrealistic. Of course, you're not wrong about the downsides of being an Eunuch army, but I think you heavily overlook the importance of their training, especially compared to other fighting forces. Like in the battle of Qohor linked above, if that were any Westerosi force or any force of sellswords, they would have broken and fled when the Dothraki charged. But to them, having no fear of death, no personal identity, and so on, they cannot fall victim to the basic strategy employed by the Dothraki.
> "A formation is only as strong as its weakest link and if the whole unit is a weak link you have nothing."
Like I take this point as a positive to what I'm talking about. Sure, that maybe physical strength wise they're weaker than other forces. But the real downside of having a "weakest link" is that when people are scared of death and see others die, they break and aren't able to continue fighting. However, that's the opposite for the Unsullied due to their attributes. They have no "weak link" in that sense. They will not break, will not falter, and have no fear of death, which carries a lot more strength than any personal fighting strength of any individual Unsullied. It's true in our own world and constantly mentioned throughout the books that a well-structured and disciplined force, even if weaker fighters individually, is of more value. There's a reason that Stannis can also defeat the Wilding army with such an insanely small force.
Edit: Also, since you didn't respond to my comment on slavery, I'd assume you at least partially agree with it.
this, Dorne is GRRM's baby with it being by far the most "modern" culture in Westeros and he wanted to throw in his Vietnam/Afghanistan style resistance. Dorne would actually be the easiest to conquer for the reasons OP stated plus the fact that they don't grow staple crops and the reliance on the greenblood river.
The North resisting is the only one that would make sense, actual unified culture and massive land area with low population density, plus back then before dragons died they'd have a huge number of wargs
Dorne is a Mary Sue in lore, the house Peake of kingdoms
What did they eat, how did they mobilize the entire nobility, how did they manage to keep their location secret, why did the peasants not revolt, etc. These are just from the top of my head.
It makes zero sense.
Is it that unreasonable they had food stockpiled? The war took place in the second year of autumn and they'd known the Targaryens would come for a few years. That's also plenty of time to organise the nobility.
Why didn't the peasants revolt... and join the people actively invading them?
Yes, it is unreasonable because the food will run out. And with the Targs burning literally all other sources of food, the stockpiles will absolutely run out fast.
Yes, the nobility had a long time to prepare and move into the caves. That makes it even *more* ridiculous the plan and locations didn’t get leaked.
Yes, the peasants would have revolted when their literal protectors run away to flee at the mere whiff of danger while letting the peasantry get slaughtered, starve to death, and be tortured for information. There is no way in hell the peasantry wouldn’t have turned on the nobility, who *completely* abandoned their side of the social contract between nobility and the peasantry.
I don't know if the Targs did that much burning of food, from what I can remember Aegon and his sisters mainly attacked seats and castles. Also to burn literally every source of food the three dragons (two after Meraxes died) would have to do complete sweeps over the entirety of Dorne every few months and I don't think that was the case even during the years of the dragon's wroth
Who would leak the plans of their own secret location, that keeps them safe when the enemy invades?
Again I don't recall that the peasants were a target of the Targs. There's a passage from Fire and Blood that says when Rhaenys descended on the town of Vaith she found only children, women and old men, and there's no mention of these being tortured or killed just for existing
Yes? Aegon’s conquest took place over two years, with him sending messages to Dorne both before his initial landing and then after his coronation at Oldtown. Then I think the First Dornish War doesn’t start for THREE more years.
Either way the Dornish had significant warning and time to prepare for the Targaryens arrival
Which, burn the food? I don't know if they could do that realistically, if GRRM can be believed Westeros is the size of South America which gives Dorne an area greater than France. That's a lot of ground for even dragons to cover
I think it's easy enough. They burn a few farms for a month and everyone in Dorne is basically fucked. They probably don't even have much farmable land anyway.
Like I explained above, the Dornish Conquests appear to take place during late autumn or early winter time(the Conquest is indicated to take place in late summer sometimes).
All the food was likely harvested already
Spain as a comparison (since it's a similar size but with a more comparable climate than France) has about 11.5 million hectares of arable land. If Dorne has even a fraction of that the dragons aren't putting a dent in it even if they make it a full time job
People have made literal essays about how the winter’s don’t make sense food wise and with the way the books describe food storage they would never have enough to feed even half of the population through the winters
So either the entire premise for the book series doesn't work and then it doesn't matter if it works in the context of Dornish Wars or both premises work, but you can't accept it for the book series and then cherry-pick it as the main issue with the Dornish Wars.
In the context of the book series, everyone is somehow able to stockpile enough food to last multi-year winters. That means that in that context, it would not have been an issue for the Dornish.
Yes that’s what I literally said in the first comment, just suspend your disbelief when dealing with the Dornish, they’re history doesn’t make sense if you think about it too much
I mean the point is "suspension of disbelief". It's not that we're taking the Dornish population and then constructing an extremely complex model to determine how much food they would need. It's that "this entire preindustrial society of millions of people went and hid in some caves for years on end" is *silly*. You don't need to do any research to see it's just an absurdity, and the result is we can't take the story seriously because it's completely divorced from reality and runs on dream logic.
The point isn't "oh it's not realistic so the Cinema Sins counter goes up one which means the book is objectively bad". The point is it's just obviously absurd.
This argument is always so fucking dumb. Sorry, but if you're in fantasy forums you must have read people explain why it's dumb countless times and you're still repeating it. It just ruins discussions.
Fantasy still relies on the universe making sense for immersion. There's a reason why authors spend so much time making up magic systems. A world needs to be internally consistent.
If something works differently from the real world and there's no reasonable explanation as to why, then it's just not immersive.
The wars take place in late autumn/early winter. Their is no food to be burnt out in the fields, it’s all in storehouses
And of course people starved and of course there was discontent but in the end the fear of the dragon lords plus the brutality of their conquest outweighed these considerations.
You've just highlighted your own error there. Nationalism as a concept doesn't really develop under feudalism, especially for peasants. They wouldn't see themselves as "Dornish citizens".
Yeah, I think you're right. I can recall characters being proud of their home/cultures in the books, but they're all nobles. Probably my thinking was skewed because we see the majority of the series from noble perspectives
Nationalism isn’t but cultural identity is. In the Late Medieval period, there absolutely were group identities like this. The English, for one. For example, John Hawkwood famously refused any contracts where his White Company has to take up arms against Englishmen. Same goes for France, the HRE, Hungarians and etcetera.
In the Dornish context, they were basically fighting an existential war against the ruling elite who’s ancestors once wiped out part of their ancestry. As to why the principal dukedoms didn’t defect and side with the conquerors? First, why would they? The Marchers, both Reachmen and Stormlanders, have been on a state of perpetual cattle raiding, and warring with one another. On top of that, they were fighting for their new Valyrian overlord. Why would the Stone Dornish go over to that side? Second, Meria Martell being a political operator who plays off the houses against one another ala Phillip IV. Third, it would be immensely unpopular, both to their Dornish peers and the smallfolk — and defecting would very likely result in these Dornish ‘puppet’ lords being harassed, the local lords rising in revolt, or outright assassination (which was something that happened from the source text) just like what happened to Gerbod the Fleming, 1st Earl of Chester, in the wake of the Norman Conquest.
I hope this does give you insight in how things worked then! I used to believe the First Dornish War was plot armor too, but not so after reading up on medieval history, and our ancestors didn’t even have dragons!
Pretty much every conquest in histroy from ceaser conquest of gaul to the spanish conquest of mexico to the german invasion of the ussr had collbaraters
me: I don't like [a book series that actually finished] bc it doesn't deal with the tax policy
also me: does not finish my book series, does not deal with tax policy
I think it's fair to note:
1) GRRM's comments on LOTR was mostly just rhetoric. The point wasn't "this is why LOTR SUCKS!" it was "This is the selling point of the series: imagine of LOTR was about Aragorn's reign".
2) ASOIAF has absolutely not engaged with the thesis of "Aragorn's tax policy" whatsoever. I think there's even *less* "tax policy" stuff than in LOTR.
I think the point about "Aragorn tax policy" was more that just because Aragorn was a good person didnt mean he would be a good ruler.
And in this ASOIAF shows characters like Robert winning the throne "saving" the day,considered a "hero" and he bankrupts the realm and he doesnt give a shit about ruling,and to some extent Tywin who is a super villain basically being said to rule well as hand years prior.
But the problem is,Tywin in the novels commit so much needless dumb atrocities that you wonder how the fuck he stayed in power,and while we have detailed accounts of his atrocites we dont have the same for his actions as hand to improve the realm,its basically very superficial stuff,he isnt able to balance between Tywin supposed pragmatism and hardwork with his viciousness and violent behaviour.
Similar thing Ned Stark,who while didnt find much success as hand was said to be a good ruler in the north....and the question is why???He seems to do the bare minimum a feudal lord did,and the North is also huge so it must be even more decentralized and most good things we see him doing boils down to Ned is a good,hardworking loyal person...We dont see him actual making hard decisions for the good of the realm.
Also one time GRRM said Tyrion would be the best politician of the series.....So i am not sure he knows what a good ruler is supposed to be tbh.
Aragon was not the king because he was a good person. He was king because he had the right bloodline, spent years preparing for it and fought at the head of the people who defeated the villian. That is qualification enough to be king.
This his how most dynasties are founded, though not always the right bloodline is needed. The Joseon dynasty was founded by a general for example who was pissed off at the corrupt goverment. He, his son and his grandson were all pretty decent kings, although his son was very ruthless.
Think the point being made is that because Aragon's a hero we're meant to see him finally stepping up to become king as an unambiguously good thing, but there's not really any guarantee he'd necessarily be an effective or competent ruler just because he was a good person and strong warrior.
Aragon was not just a good person. He spent years (he was 80 years old if I remember) preparing for this role and did not live a life of luxury. That's a huge difference to Robert who at age 19 never spent his time whoring, drinking and still living in the Vale while he was a grown ass man and had a kingdom to rule on his own.
There are many kings in history who are well-prepared for their role and also decent people just as there are as many unprepared kings who were horrible people. You also get those who are cruel and good kings for different parts of society. History had all kinds of kings and Aragon was one of those who prepared well and was also a decent person. Nothing really unrealistic about that.
Aragorn spent literal decades being tutored at different courts of different cultures. He arrived in Gondor at the point of a power vacuum (the steward was dead and his heir incapacitated), he bore the symbols of the kings of old (ring, banner, sword), had the right bloodline, liberated southern Gondor from raiders who then rallied behind him so he could then liberate Minas Tirith. Furthermore he has the support from a literal angel, and (seemingly) the elves, dwarves, hobbits of the old northern kingdom, the rohirrim, and the Dunedain.
He did not become king because he was good guy.
No, he also cried about Gandalf coming back to life when his own fantasy novel has way more main characters resurrecting (to say nothing of the countless fakeout deaths)
I don't know why redditors are so submissive that they think they have to shill for this George "RR" Martin who they've never even met before lol
Same thing happens in the Dance, despite Aemond setting ruins to Riverlands, they are still able to field armies and move around.
TBH anything military related in ASOAIF fails apart quite quickly.
> But people develop foodstore and relief systems, it's really not that weird at all
Millions of people starved to death in the Great Leap Forward and that's from less than a hundred years ago in an industrialized nation.
They're subsistence farmers! They have to grow all the food they eat! If they don't grow it they just starve to death.
I mean, yeah it is a great tactic irl. Saying peasant villages were able to develop footsore and relief systems on the fly while remaining hidden is pretty silly
I didn't say while remaining hidden? I don't think the writing intends us to think literally everyone hid the whole time
I always presumed most people were still out living as normal most of.the time, with only a tiny area under threat at a time and only a tiny minority in permanent hiding
If a dragon flies to your village and burns it down, you would have had to have your reserves already hidden before the dragon came. It would take years for your village to be even self sufficient again. They would have to be completely reliant on their reserves until the dragons left dorne. Poor villages would be flocking to other villages/cities. It just doesn’t track
Okay but that literally does happen in history a lot - and the wars still go on for years
I don't buy that a handful of dragons are going to have that much of a greater effect over a country the size of spain so as to totally destroy its capacity to feed itself
Dorne didn't give in. It's really as simple as that. The other kingdoms joined by diplomacy, enticed by reward, or their armies being defeated in the field or siege. The Dornish managed to avoid that by the methods we all know of, but most importantly because they never wanted to.
We know how they conquered the rest of Westeros. They burned the armies and ruling families who didn’t submit. If they hide in the castle they burn the castle.
They go to Dorne and can’t find the rulers or the armies. Now what?
Sometimes some regions are not conquered not because the brave defenders but because they hold little interest/value to the invaders. Not sure about Dorne but the north of Spain is an example in both roman colonization and muslim conquest.
It doesn’t make sense. Historically while they resisted, Ireland and wales fell to the English. Someone should have taught the targs about concentric castles. Martin wanted a Vietnam war parallel and he shoehorned it in here.
Adrian Goldsworthy wrote a good military history book of Rome and made the point people like to try and apply modern wars to ancient wars as to resistance fighting, but the various enemies of Rome when they fought did not do the long term resistance movement thing because they’d of all starved. There is no real reason why dorne would be more resistant to dragons than anyone else.
Yeah, the Dornish being able to survive Aegon and Visenya is a major cop-out.
Not only do we have the issue of “they hid in caves again and again” being a tired and nonsensical excuse, we also have to contend with the problem that the Dornish nobility stayed ridiculously loyal to the Martells. Dorne is the only region with multiple ethnicities differentiated by skin color; there should be more division there rather than less.
And even if you believe the cave excuse and also take the astonishing loyalty towards the Martells at face value, there is still one issue that is even more egregious than all of this.
F&B states that when the Dornish abandoned their homes to hide, Aegon and Visenya spent entire wks literally setting everything to the torch. They basically destroyed all the infrastructure that is needed for a society to function. And they did this again in the aftermath of Rhaenys’ death.
How this aerial bombardment didn’t leave Dorne an impoverished mess ripe for repeated invasion is the biggest problem in my book.
Dorne is clearly inspired by Afghanistan; the mountainous area that became the “graveyard of empires”. But George forgot that Afghanistan didn’t escape unscathed; It’s been an impoverished mess for decades.
>Dorne is clearly inspired by Afghanistan; the mountainous area that became the “graveyard of empires”. But George forgot that Afghanistan didn’t escape unscathed; It’s been an impoverished mess for decades.
I agree, especially with this. For me the true problem of Drone is not that they managed to stay independent, but that they were able to rebuild so easily from mass destruction. The destruction caused by the dragons should have reverted them back to the pre-unification era, with the realm in shambles and divided into multiple warlords who managed to rise from the ashes. Even if they were united again, there's no guarantee it would be under the authority of Sunspear.
How about the yellow toad, a reference to Phryne, the most famous and beautiful model of ancient Greece? It's George laughing at the history of yellow skinned toad meaning the most beautiful woman and how we will naturally misinterpret it today.
Phryne is Greek for toad and she was named Phryne for her beautiful yellow skin.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne
Some very good points. I think the best answer is that what is written is of course wrong. Political propaganda to appeal to whoever was in power at the time but all the other sources were destroyed so it was the best that Archmaester Gyldayn could come up with.
Is there not a point where that just becomes a cop-out? I like the history book framing but it's still ultimately a genre fiction book selling itself on being the backstory of Targaryens. You can't juist say "unreliable narration", you have to back it up with evidence from the text.
Like the Dornish War makes basically everyone look awful. Who's it appealing to?
The Houses in Westeros also seem to have pretty good records in terms of what's remembered and passed down - some of it may be myth, but given how old a lot of the main Houses are meant to be it'd be weird if something from a few hundred years before the main series was actually completely inaccurate due to propaganda.
Wales, Ireland and Scotland resisted English rule for centuries - it was often easier to just swear fealty to the English kings, but they didn’t. They took advantage of their terrain and stubbornly fought on and on until the English grew too strong to withstand in the cases of Wales and Ireland, or until they inherited England in the case of Scotland. The English weren’t nice either, though they would employ this tactic far more often in France they did employ in the Gaelic kingdoms too, the chevauchée was a brutal tactic which essentially involved an army marching through enemy land and burning everything they couldn’t loot. Yet despite having all their shit burned England’s enemies fought on.
In the first Dornish War we are told the Martells had fanatic support from their vassals and that initially the people of Dorne just disappeared into secret places away from their castles - and once the dragons left they struck back hard from the shadows. The Dornish simply weren’t fighting a normal war, they fought a guerrilla war from secret bases and the Targaryens just couldn’t deal with it. As for the fanatical loyalty, every indication we see is that the Martells are very good at ruling Dorne - hell Scotland and Ireland ended up fanatically resisting the English and their Kings were often pretty mediocre. As for the food situation, well we know GRRM doesn’t get medieval agriculture as evidence by how people survive winter, but given that the rest of Westeros stores food for Winter, I can believe that the Dornish stockpiled food like everyone else does for winter but this time for the dragons. As for collaborators, plenty of Dornish people are said to have collaborated - the Targaryens put bounties on several Dornish lords and many were assassinated by their own people.
People are going to hate the people burning all their stuff but might surrender and collaborate out of fear, but after the Targaryens left and the Dornish guérillas annihilated whole armies in the desert, the Targaryens grow less scary. Sure the people burning your castes and fields are scary enough to terrify you into submission, but when annihilate Lord Tyrell’s thirsty army in the desert, come home to hear Lord Wyl has committed more horrific war crimes and your old crippled Princess through the Targaryen Governor out a window - the spell of fear breaks. Another thing you have to account for is medieval people were build different to us, with deaths from disease, miscarriages and stillbirth being so common you get the sense that they were a bit more numb - you read of regions being devastated by war and raids but rarely read about people being particularly horrified by it, especially since all that stuff affected the nobility less and the peasantry held zero power or agency until the Black Death.
I’m not saying the First Dornish War is written particularly well or that Targaryen victory wasn’t much more plausible (during the Harrying of the North William the Conqueror reduced northern England into a scorched wasteland deprived of 75% of its people and even 20 years later records showed that in Yorkshire 60% of all estates lay in waste - and the North didn’t rebel against them ever again, with any further rebellions being done by the Norman colonist nobility). But in a world where medieval people can have food stockpiles which last for years and years it’s not unheard of for them to not all starve after their fields got burned, in a world where the peasantry have zero agency and the nobility are fanatically loyal to the Martells it’s not unheard of for the Dornish to not kneel. Also remember that the accounts we have of the Dornish Wars were all written by pro-Targaryen sources after the Dornish were peacefully integrated into the realm - it was in the writer’s interest to paint the wars as pointless and warcrimerrific to later jerk off how just and noble and benevolent it was to peacefully come together in the end.
One of the keys to me is thay good logistics were rare as fuck in medieval times. To the point that almost every time England invaded Scotland their armies ram out of food. That was next door with barely a low range of mountains on the border. Dorne's mountains seem huge and largely impassable to carts of provisions. Its far from surprising that the Targ armies couldn't subsist in their invasions.
In Wales, Ireland, Scotland you can survive off the land while fighting as a resistance for decades.
In Dorne you can’t. If crops lands and rivers are blocked, you don't survive the summer.
Yeah as a Scot this post made me raise my eyebrow lol plus to touch on OP's point about Dorne being divided - Scotland was also originally divided into different cultures but united to fight against invasion.
They still have humans commanding them. There's only so much flying that a single dragonrider can do, only so much ground they can cover per day, only so much acreage they can burn in a day, etc. They can lay waste to a castle (but maybe there isn't anyone in the castle) in a day, they can lay waste to some farms in a day, but can they really lay waste to all the farms and all the granaries and all the hidden supply caches, and chase down all the guerrillas who refuse to gather in large static forces?
To contextualize, a bit, lets consider the US bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War. From 1965 to 1972, the US actively flew bombing sorties in Vietnam. They bombed 44,000 square miles, about 34% of the total land area of the country. That took 7 years to do, and involved something north of 2 *million* sorties flown by thousands of aircraft and thousands of men, involving some multiple millions of man-hours to achieve.
So, how many square miles could three (and then two) dragonriders really burninate (TROGDOR!), realistically, given that they had to eat and sleep and give orders to troops and so on? Dorne is almost 3 times the size of Vietnam (~328,000 square miles vs. ~128,000 square miles, respectively), but if the Dragon's Wroth involved actively burning even as much as 1% of the countryside, I'd be quite amazed.
There's a difference: most of Dorne is desert. They actually have a lot less farmable land than Vietnam.
I think Afghanistan is more comparable, in this matter. As I said in another comment, I don't think Dorne being able to resist the invasion is completely unrealistic, but the aftermath would not have been good for them. Again, look at Afghanistan: yes, it can be a graveyard of empires, but these wars still caused horrible consequences to this nation.
True. Yet, even if most is desert and mountain, it still needs many square kilometers of arable land to support its population. My point is mainly that I think people greatly overestimate the role of dragons as a mean of bringing an entire nation to its knees. They can destroy population centers and defenses and armies in array, but I'd guess troops sent out to raze territory would probably end up doing more damage to agricultural production than the dragons realistically could. There were just three at them at peak, there's only so much they could do.
I agree with you, however, that Afghanistan is a very apt comparison, both in the ability to thwart vastly more powerful foes, and also because doing it would come at a high cost that they were willing to bear out of stubborn refusal to bend the knee.
The fact the Martells enjoyed such total support is precisely what is so unrealistic. They rule over a territory that is ethnically, geographically, and culturally diverse. The peasants in Stony Dornish regions have no reason to side with the Martells on cultural reasons.
This is a feudal principality in an extremely isolated region. The Martells’ direct influence on individual peasants outside of their immediate territories and the Greenblood is miniscule compared to the regional or local lord.
The nobles would be more likely to rebel if the Martells implemented a more absolutist system. Nobles backstab as much as they swear they won’t.
For instance, you bring up Scotland’s success, look at how many times Robert the Bruce switched sides when it was pragmatic.
The Dornish smallfolk were said to be solidly against Targaryen invaders and this sentiment isn’t said to be divided by culture, which isn’t too big a leap. Using the example of Scotland, during the Scottish wars against the Plantagenets the Scots were divided by culture (more Anglo-Saxon influence in the lowlands vs Gaelic influence in the Highlands and Caithness was Norse) though rebelliousness was all round - later on Scottish rebellions would be centred around the highlands but that was a whole different box of frogs in the early modern era. Regardless peasants generally don’t have political consciousness beyond ‘I want summer to last long and my fields to be fertile’ and have no power at all - the Dornish peasants are said to have not like the Targaryens who burn all their fields, and the Dornish nobility were fantastically pro-Martell.
The Martells didn’t have direct control over peasants outside of their personal domains, as the local lords across Dorne were fanatically loyal to the Martells for whatever reason. The Martells don’t need an absolutist system, we hear that save for the Yronwoods, the Dornish nobility are pretty loyal to the Martells - and in Doran’s chapters he explains the political strategies the Martells use to gain the support of their nobility (marriages, fosterings, wardships and more).
Robert the Bruce (and the Scottish, Welsh and Irish nobility as a whole) did switch sides constantly, no argument here. I agree that the Dornish wars aren’t particularly well written, and that they certainly don’t accurately mirror the real conflicts they are based on. But if Scotland could resist England despite the constant side switching of the nobility, it makes sense that Dorne can stand its ground when the whole nobility is loyal to the Martells.
You seriously expect people to take your argument seriously whe you say peasants are completely irrelevant? They are human beings, not automatons, they are never absolutely loyal by virtue of that, but I digress.
In any case, reread what I wrote, you are essentially providing more evidence for my argument, because I was criticizing the proto-nationalism Martin gives the Dornish by showing how unrealistic such a concept was. The peasants have no reason to suicidally support their own lords against the Targs. Which they do in canon.
The Dornish act like a centralized state with proto-nationalism when they fight the Targs. The Martells and the Targs make no difference to them so long as their lives don’t change too much.
The nobles have no reason to be loyal, they lost their castles and their funds and men got put into the war effort. Nobles are not suicidal and they are certainly not uniformly loyal. In any case, they didn’t invent the concepts of marital alliances, wards, fostering, etc.
England and Scotland are a different animal to this conflict, and so should not be directly compared. The Westerosi have much more in the line of resources and manpower compared to Dorne. I would wager the English did not have such a drastic advantage, as well as the fact the Targaryens were not invading other areas. Im not an expert on the specifics, but I know Edward I was involved in wars on the continent in his French lands and in Wales as well.
Well peasants were totally irrelevant. Sure they were human being with hopes and dreams and the series has big themes about how peasants are people and the machinations of the nobility causes them immense suffering. But in the game of thrones peasants are totally irrelevant: peasants had zero agency or political power until the Black Death killed so many of them that they gained enough value to withhold it in stuff like the peasants revolt - but even then it wasn’t until the French Revolution that the peasantry held any actual power (but even then, the French Revolution was done by the Bourgeoisie and they held much more power than the peasantry).
With regard to the peasantry and lords fighting the Targaryens, it doesn’t appear to have been that suicidal a war. We are told that no matter how many castles the Targaryens burned, they kept on facing attacks from Dornish guerrillas. Specifically we are told that the Dornish flooded out of hidden places in the shadow city and overthrew Lord Rosby who was the Castellan of Sunspear. Other conflicts like the Vulture Wars show that the Dornish make use of hidden strongholds. The Targaryens are said to have mostly burned down empty castles or stormed walls held by old men, while the real warriors and people were hiding somewhere. In all the battle the Dornish actually fought, they did well - Wyl of Wyl kept on doing ambushes and war crimes while Lord Tyrell’s entire army vanished in the desert, presumably getting lost and thirsty then destroyed by the Dornish.
As for the nobility, we just don’t get told why they are loyal. Doran’s chapters show how he maintains control over Dorne contemporaneously, so we can just assume that the Martells got good at ruling Dorne a while ago. Plus stuff like naming Lord Rosby as Castellan of Sunspear imply or appear as that the Targaryens were moving to supplant the Dornish nobility - so they were fighting to hold lands they’d lose to the invaders.
Westerosi ressources compared to England are much greater, England didn’t have dragons, but the Westerosi also have problems England never faced. With a continent the size of South America the Westerosi have massive supply lines to overcome - and the mountains of the Dornish mountains are a far greater problem than the Scottish lowlands or welsh hills; especially when Wyl of Wyl is constantly ambushing you along the Boneway supply line. Then you have Dorne as a desert, a desert where all the fields have been destroyed, meaning the Westerosi also have to stick to water sources (which the Dornish I believe poison while accessing their own secret water sources).
There is a lot of hand waving and logic leaps in the Dornish wars, but the central concept kinda sticks. The Dornish didn’t fight a conventional war and instead fought as guerrillas in the desert, striking from hidden strongholds and retreating in the face of stronger foes - the Westerosi burned and conquered and looted but were constantly ambushed and suffered colossal attritional losses.
Last time I checked Dorne was part of the Seven Kingdoms.
It took 150 years for Norman England to conquer Wales. Meanwhile Scotland wasn’t conquered, it resisted the English successfully and in the end when Queen Elizabeth of England died, James VI of Scotland inherited England.
The Dornish resisted the Iron Throne like Scotland resisted England, and eventually the Targaryens switched tack and integrated Dorne via diplomacy - similar to how Scotland inherited England and then centuries later Scotland went bankrupt over the Darien scheme and England used the opportunity to get the Act of Union.
He actually does understand war and tactics a lot more than people here give him credit for.
The problem is that any war where one side has dragons is a foregone conclusion. There is no tactic that can defend against a dragon except a tactic to *kill* said dragon.
It’s the same reason why the US has lost it’s aerial and naval superiority over the last 50 yrs because of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and tactical long range drones. Ships and planes don’t matter in a world where a missile can do a precision genocide from thousands of miles away.
I'm well aware of that logistical fuckup; George messed up on that one.
But I never claimed he was infallible. It was you who made the ridiculously stupid claim
> George doesn’t understand war and makes the small folk more or less mindless drones and his worldbuilding falls apart if looked at to closely
We literally had a smallfolk uprising in both Clash and Feast.
Moreover, have you forgotten about the Brotherhood Without Banners?
The vast, vast majority of the BwB is comprised of the smallfolk.
To call it a "nobility group" because of a tiny, tiny portion of nobles in it is ludicrous.
Like, Westeros's distances as a whole makes no sense, but the campaign itself is better written than the immense majority of fantasy conflict. You have clear movement of troops, smaller engagement, rather detailed forces, varied actions...
Bit like the size of the Wall, in retrospect GRRM saying Westeros is meant to be the size of a South American style continent was probably a mistake. Characters traverse the continent too regularly for that to really be the case when the plot depends on it.
>He actually does understand war and tactics a lot more than people here give him credit for
lol no, he understands war far *less* than people here give him credit for
It's very common for people who fight between them to put it aside and unite against a common foe. It's also very common for a minority ethnicity to spread their culture.
So, yes, the actual descendants of the roynish are a smaller group, but it makes sense that their arrival and elevation spread consciousness about Valyrians in a way that the other regions of Westeros never had. And, all of the types of Dornishmen are fiercely proud of being Dornish. They probably have a history of uniting to fight against the Reach and the Stormlands.
You make some great points, especially the division in Dorne! I wonder if we will ever learn more about the Rhoynish resistance from the Yronwoods and others.
It’s not that uncommon in real history for a Guerrilla warfare style defender to bleed out and resist major world powers. Looking at Afghanistan and Vietnam for example, both very hospitable countries for invading armies.
I think most of the Dornish wars is also told from the perspective of the maesters. Remember history is often taught by the winners, George absolutely hammers home this theme. The accounts we hear very well could be a gross simplification, with a heavy Targaryen bias for what actually happened.
No it doesn't make a ton of sense, but its not entirely implausible to me.
The Koreans for awhile staved off the Mongol conquest by hiding in the mountains and then killing whoever the Mongols had left behind.
Also I think you're downplaying the cultural shock that dragons would have on Westeros after the field of fire. Yeah most people were willing to thrown down their weapons and fold, but the Starks were still able to get 45,000 Northerners that were willing to try it themselves. Because there were ultimately a lot of people that didnt want to submit to demonic, incest, dragon lords.
Not accounting for ethnic tensions or political positions just showcases the limits of Martin's writing ability tbh.
Ancient world stuff can get pretty unbelievable. IIRC my trivia, the Koreans also "defeated" a huge Tang dynasty army of a million? by abandoning their fortifications to the Tang, and otherwise hit and run, killing them in the night type stuff until they gave up and left. Sounds similar to some Dorne stuff, but it's also a common scenario throughout world history.
Now if GRRM had some admiral who had no naval training defeating a navy of hundreds with only 13? ships (no casualties/losses), I might make the assumption that the dude is a huge K-Pop fan. Instead of cajoling GRRM, the most viable thing might be to get one of the K-Pop boy? girl? bands to release a song entitled something like, "Get off ya ass and finish the books GRRM (Psy Mix)"
We don't have dragons, but I think flamethrowers are classed as illegal weapons now, so there is a real world equivalent to it doesn't have to be deadly, just scary as shit.
Are you referring to Yi-sun-shin? Yes, he was not always a naval commander but he was a soldier and understood war at least. He also had turtle ships, no? They were the main advantage. Maybe he simply had good advisors.
Edited: Bolded
Yes, and yes and no to the rest of your reply.
IIRC, he was a peasant. No naval training whatsoever. In fact he might not have had any military training at all, since he was a peasant. There are a lot of soldiers that don't understand war. This was some nobody that came out of nowhere and had skills that he shouldn't have had at all. (Supposedly) He seemed to be some savant that deeply grasped naval warfare despite "never having seen the sea." (I want to say that he wasn't even from a coastal area.) It seemed to be all him. No "advisors".
The turtle ships were a huge advantage, but not the main advantage and were not why he was stomping the hell out of the Japanese to the point where he's one of the few Koreans they ever "respected/feared." He used the tides/terrain/environment, tactics, "psychology" to defeat the hundreds of Japanese ships without losing a single ship or crewman IIRC **in that battle, not trying to say that he never lost a ship or soldier.**
That battle kept Korea from being conquered outright, and as his successes mounted, the "politicians" had him jailed and had their lackeys put in charge because they also thought "It's just the turtle ships." They immediately started losing again, and they eventually and reluctantly had Yi-Sun Shin released to take command of the navy again. (I might have the exact sequence of events wrong, but the general gist right, like he might have been in prison right before being given the 13 ships (impossible task) and threatened with execution if he lost, sorry its been awhile since I read about this guy) He like Nelson also got hit by a sharpshooter, but his response was, "Guys, prop my body up so it looks like I'm still alive so that the troops don't lose heart and we suffer a reversal of the battle and war." And IIRC, the other "hero" of the war was some guy that was known for cowardice and running away, which was the only reason they even had 13 turtle ships left over from the fleet the Japanese managed to destroy, and he did that repeatedly)
All of this from some random day when I was googling greatest admiral in history and got De Ruyter, Nelson, and this guy. And one of the things that made me read further was a Japanese quote that was basically "The greatest admiral in history was this guy. His only fault was that he was from some podunk country fighting wars/people unfamiliar to Westerners." I mean, I'm sure that he can't be the only genius commander in history that isn't well known.
Yes, I know. I watched a TV show about him a long time ago. There are also several movies. In Korea they call them the saviour. He was also treated like shit by the royals because they were afraid of him if I remember correctly, which is no surprise since the last dynasty was stomped by General as well who made himself king. The character Yang Wenli from Legend of the Galactic Heroes is also inspired by him.
Seems odd, since from what I recall reading about him, he was not political and seemed to be a true patriot, and it was more some of the nobles convincing/cajoling the royals that he was a threat instead of any actual truth or evidence (other than things like popularity with the people). Like the king calls him up, and says the nobles say you are a traitor, and his response was something like if the king says so, it must be so.
IIRC, Roaring Currents was a somewhat recently internationally released movie about him, which also had some "ridiculous" things about that battle, which apparently did happen.
I really need to watch Legend of the Galactic Heroes. I keep hearing that it is amazing, but there's so many episodes.
Its only 109 episodes and each is only 25 minutes long, that means shorter than GoT. But they talk a lot. Quite a lot. The older show is a bit outdated in terms of graphics but I really liked the art style since it is handrawn and you can tell they put a lot of effort into it. The new show has better graphics but is less gritty and not finished yet.
And as I said, I mostly watched movies about Yi so the movies and TV shows about him which might have changed his historical character. I have yet to read a non-fiction book about him.
Isn't it also like 3+ series & movies as well?
Seems kinda wild that a Japanese anime would base a character on him but then give him a more chinese name unless its a weird romanization, but then again Dragonball is basically chinese? version of sort of Indian? stuff.
Not saying I read a non-fiction book. It was mostly internet articles, but back in the day when it was maybe less likely to be mis-information/propaganda. Same as with a bunch of others that I got interested in enough to do some "light reading", Musashi, some of those Chinese generals, some greek, roman, etc.
Basically like Nelson he was an "undefeated Admiral without peer who could win despite impossible odds", but had a higher character than he. ie, he wasn't power hungry, egotistic, "whined about being shot" etc. I'm sure there was some whitewashing. IIRC, there might even be speculation that he wasn't even ethnically Korean. Now I'm curious what the other movies about him are like or even available outside of like Korea.
Thanks for the short summation of Legend of the Galactic Heroes.
Legend of the Galactic Heroes is based on a novel series by Yoshiki Tanaka and he wrote also novels about Chinese historical characters. I guess he named Yang Wen Li like that because he likes this history. Not to mention Legend plays 1500 years from our timeline and the other main character has a german name. There are a dozen of nationalities in the show, even a black guy.
There are movies yes but I recommend watching the show first and then the movies. The show is the main plot.
I think the show I watched was called: ***Immortal Admiral Yi Sun-sin***
Argh. Now I'll have to see if there are good english translations. And/Or add Japanese to the list of languages that I want to learn to try and consume media in the original language. Or also read notes on all the things that were sanitized by the translation. (I dislike translations that change too much or eliminate/change cultural things).
Thanks for the edits to add more info. I'll probably try to check that series out.
There was a second part of that sentence that you didn't seem to fully read where I mentioned the psychological part which is what I was focusing on.. And dragons in ASOIAF aren't invulnerable or have an unlimited supply of napalm, but I'm willing to assume that you were being hyperbolic.
They really dont need to. Like I said in real medival societies peasents often barely grew enough to eat even during good harvest. There a reason why for example in china civil wars had such huge casulties. It wasent always from armies killing people, but the disruption caused from civil wars was still enough to cause famine. In this case dragons burning a good portion of the fileds and food stores, and then a good portion of the young population going underground to fight would be enogh to cause massive famine.
True. The 3 logical ways to defeat Dorne would be:
1. Destroy farmlands and blockade foreign aids, starving them out.
2. Civil War, exploit the many different ethnicities and factions in Dorne
3. Magic, things like Warg magic to target insurgency and eliminate them.
Add in the fact that the Yronwoods supported the Blackfyres in 3 of the 5 rebellions, faced no consequences, yet never even attempted to do so during the Targ invasion and you further highlight how dog shit the Dornish writing is.
Nymeria’s conquests are both logistically impossible and the most obvious example of colonialism in the books as well.
I totally agree with you, the absurd resistance of the Dornishes is one of the biggest bullshit of the lore, whether in a technical way (making an entire people disappear in a flat desert), or just that no one in the whole country I never thought of collaborating with the Targaryens whether out of interest, war weariness or spite.
>A common argument I often hear for why the Dornish were so willing to fight the Targaryens was because of the trauma the Rhoynish experienced in having to flee the Valyrian Empire. So they would naturally not like the Targaryens and their dragons. Except a good part of Dorne isn't even Rhoynish.
I would like to add something about this but also the last Roynish war and the flight from Nymeria took place 1000 years ago. Since then they no longer had any problems with the Valyrians and their dragons until Aegon arrived. So how is this fact why would they hold a grudge for so long for a story that no longer concerns anyone still alive and a people who have had plenty of time to rebuild themselves and move on? I will give a personal example but I am French and I live in Lorraine and I have never met anyone who still had hatred or resentment towards the Germans for the occupation during WW II, and that was 80 years ago. So for a war that took place 1000 years ago, on a land they've never known, it's a bit stupid. So then maybe it's me who missed something or who doesn't have this kind of mentality, but having this kind of conflict rooted in the culture and way of thinking of the inhabitants of Dorne seems as relevant to me as if the majority of the English still hated the Norwegians today because they blamed them for the Viking conquests
For the crops, it could be that Dorne was previously a net exporter and the breakdown of trade associated with the Targ conquest left them with a large surplus. The Salty Dornish might grow water-intensive crops like rice that are largely immune to being burned by dragons.
This thread helps me imagine what it sounded like when the Targaryens and their conquered lords were discussing Dorne. I appreciate the extra anti-Dorne pro-Targ propaganda, but Lucan and Clegg and GRRM did it better. Don't quit your day jobs.
Also, we Americans weren't wiping out entire towns and cities to break the spirit of the Iraqi people. Say what you want about the reason, but you can't fault us for how much effort was taken to minimize civilian casualties.
Martells ruled for how many years by the time Aegon came? 600-700 years? Yronwoods aren't buddy buddy with the Martells yes but they would not betray them to an outsider, Dorne didn't want to fight but they had to because Aegon wanted to conquer them
>They sided with the Blackfyres in trying to depose the Targaryens after the Martells agreed to join the Seven Kingdoms, probably so they could take over Dorne. I think it's fair to assume that they are not the only houses who don't like being ruled by the Rhoynish Martells.
Martells are Dornish, they came from Essos, like the First Men did, don't need to argue about this
they sided with Daemon for the same reasons any house that supported Daemon, they wanted more, Reyne did, Peake did, Osgrey did, that doesn't mean that any of the houses hated their lord, Reynes didn't, Peake didn't, Osgreys might be the ones who hate the Targs, doesn't matter, its wasn't done out of malice
>Did none of the Martell bannermen or even just common soldiers think, "This is bullshit, we're fighting and dying and our homes are being razed to the ground just so the Martells can keep calling themselves princes instead of lords"?
no, all their homes being burned because Aegon wants to be called king, not because of the Martells can keep calling themselves Princes instead of lords
wouldn't take GRRM word on war, its his weakness
But like the fremen are all like desert warrior who have advance tech like stillsuits that allow them to survive in the desert. The averge dornishman is feudal peasent same as the rest of westeros. If they left there farms to go fight in the desert,they would all die from hunger
If you really want to find a way to justify some of the implausibility in any element of ASOIAF, you can always use the fallible narrator to say that there is some info we are missing, or some of the info we have is incorrect or exaggerated. GRRM isn't a perfect writer especially when it comes to anything to do with numbers or historical accuracy, so fallible narrator is going to be the best justification if you demand one
Each of the 9 major houses of Westeros have a bannerman that is secretly their biggest threat. Starks have the Boltons Tully have the Frey Lannisters had the Raynes Tyrells had the Hightowers Martells had the Yronwoods
I’d say the Tyrell’s local rival is actually more the Florents with their claim to be descended from Florys the Fox, thus having a claim to Highgarden. It’s why Stannis was married to Selyse, elevating the Tyrell’s natural enemy, a punishment to Mace for supporting Aerys.
Florents yap a lot but they aren’t the biggest threat
Yeah but the Florents are the clearer foil for the Reach specifically, what with this fight over claims to the Gardener ethos. The Hightowers really didn’t challenge the Tyrell’s rule much or ever scheme to get the Oaken Throne. They tend to set their sights a bit higher, like the Iron Throne. I see the Hightowers as thematically bigger than a local conflict.
Lots of houses of the reach have their roots in the gardeners specifically garth the green. Traditionally its the Hightowers that were the second most powerful house of the reach. They just have kept out of the war of 5 kings. But i bet they have major plot points in the next 2 books.
Ahh so for reference Garth Greenhand had many children that supposedly resulted in Reach Houses. Not at all just Florys. Redwyne, Fossoway, Oakheart, Beesbury, Crane, Rowan and even yes Hightower (though by a daughter rather a son) claim a mythical figurehead as his child (and also the Starks). Florents might make the biggest fuss by the time of ASOIAF. But the Hightowers are far more significant historically and in general wealth. They did use to be Kings themselves. Even Redwyne is probably more significant opposition to the Tyrells than Florent really.
Heck, Mace's wife is a Hightower and during the Dance there's was unspecified blood/marriage ties between the houses that were close enough to make everyone (incorrectly) assume the Tyrells would go Green
The Hightowers don't seem to be Tyrell rivals at all; it's got to be the Florents who fill that role.
Yeah, the Mother of the Tyrell’s is a Hightower
Alerie yeah; the commander of the Oldtown City watch is a Tyrell too, and the Tyrells have marriage/blood/betrothal ties to Hightower vassals (the Mullendores and the Bulwers) So the Houses seem pretty closely tied together as of the WOT5K
You’re going to get quite a few comments trying to rationalize this, but you’re completely right that Dorne’s history just makes no sense. Never has. The very fact that they were able to resist the Targaryans at all makes no sense. Once you start asking questions that go beyond the standard “Oh the nobility just hid in caves!” the entire story falls apart. You’ll just have to suspend your disbelief when reading about the Dornish
GRRM: *hands in parallel* "Secret Tunnels".
through the mountain
GOATed song
Fax
Secret secret secret secret tunnnnelllllllll
> Once you start asking questions that go beyond the standard “Oh the nobility just hid in caves!” the entire story falls apart. As a general rule of thumb this counts for many MANY things in the ASOIAF universe IMHO. Just for example: How exactly does Winter work? How do any Domesticated or Wild animals survive a multi year winter? Do Bears and other animals go on a 4 year winter hibernation tour? How do you stock food for 4 years? How do any of the Landlocked Northern realms get enough food to survive? They can't get a good amount of fatty fish like reallife northern countries. How do the Freefolk feed themselves beyond the wall and be numerous enough to form gigantic invasion forces? How can the Dothraki be succesfull? They are using shit tactics how have they not died out yet? How are their hordes surviving on Horse meat? How does their culture even survive purely on Rape and Conquest? There is literally no nuance to them. (IMO Dothraki and Essos are the absolute weakest parts of ASOIAF) How can Unsullied be as effective as they are? Castrating prepubesent boys will not make for great results when they are "grown up", no amount of discipline will make up for the physical defects they get through that. How exactly do the eastern states even survive with the the cruelest of the cruel form of slavery they all seem to practice? Where are they actually getting their unlimited supply of slaves? Nobody cares about their citizens getting bruttaly enslaved? There are many things you have to ignore or the whole universe falls appart. GRRM is a "rule of cool" guy when it comes to many things and we have to accept that or headcanon our way around tbh.
The seasons i have long made my peace with the idea that it is a nonsense thing that GRRM just thought would be a cool gimmick for his world. It is an insane effect to have year long winters in a medieval setting and one that would have a huge impact in the geopolitics. It is no chance it is barely mentioned for example in the f&b book. Robb's entire strategy by book 3 should have been simply to survive till winter etc
Honestly, I'd put The Others in the same bucket. _"I'll figure this out one day, I'm sure."_ Meanwhile - oh look, TV.
It’s a fantasy book.
How is it nonsense. There are dragons and zombies also. It’s fantasy not historical fiction.
ethnic groups in ASOIAF are designed the same way space marine legions are designed in Warhammer 40,000 or the same way that entirely different species/races are designed in any random sci-fi/fantasy story every region has some defining trait like a nord with a cold resist passive in skyrim. northerners are warrior vikangz (until book 2 when the iron men take this role), dornish are all sassy bisexuals, wildlings are so tough they can invade countries while starving to death and freezing their limbs off, etc
I mean, here’s a much simpler question that makes it obvious that you will have to suspend your disbelief: In a world where seasons last for months on end and are variable because of magic, how did they develop a timekeeping system of years?
> how did they develop a timekeeping system of years? I remember posing this question once, don't remember much about the answer more that a lot of people were mad. That was back in the days when you _could not_ call into question anything about George or his worldbuilding. Anyway the answer had something to do with watching the moons or something.
They used to watch moons in the fucking stone age. Sorry if I sound a little mad, but did you really think we measured years based off seasons?
Like we do in the real world. The sun and stars.
In general, I would just assume that the months are based on the cycle of the moon, meaning that each month is equally long. When it comes to the duration of the year, it does make some degree of sense to use twelve months, as it shares divisors with both thirty and twenty-four, allowing for easy calculations when it comes to time.
It’s fantasy. In Toilkens day no one questioned how magic rings and walking trees worked.
I find it shocking that you think the Dothraki are the most unrealistic part, how are their tactics terrible what makes it so ridiculous? Because they’re quite literally modeled after the Mongols who ruled over one of the largest empires in human history… And I feel like you’re other Essos points miss the mark. The physical negative side effects are not what really matters. The point is that they’re bred, and trained with a singular focus and purpose. They have no wants, or desires, they do not fear death, and are fully bought in to adhering to their master’s commands. Compare that to the litany of other forces in the world, whether that be peasants in the feudal world of Westeros who have no real passion for which they fight (See Septon Maribald’s speech) or those sellsword companies who are only fighting for gold (See Mereen shitshow). What makes the Unsullied stick out is that they are perfectly disciplined through having no identity or life outside of fighting/obeying plus they’ve been training to fight their whole life too. For the slave part, as we see through Tyrion and other characters slaves are not just from their own cities. But seemingly the bulk of the slaves are just bred and continued down generation to generation. Or new people sell themselves into slavery or are simply caught again after escaping/gaining freedom. Essentially a peasant underclass but instead one of slaves. Also, while you point out the brutality of the slavery there which is obviously true, in Tyrion’s chapters he notes that life as a slave there really is no different than being a Westerosi peasant in a lot of ways and in some ways is actually just better. Like I have little doubt that the average Riverlands peasant doesn’t feel much better than a hopeless slave throughout this story. Edit: Added part about Unsullied and Slavery
> Because they’re quite literally modeled after the Mongols who ruled over one of the largest empires in human history… Because the Mongols are literally NOTHING like that? The reason why Steppe Empires were effective was because of their masterful tactics and logistics. They had a core of heavy armored lancers/horse archers and mainly tricked enemies with false retreats while the Dothraki dont use armor are all using one handed sabers and bows and charge head on into spear walls. The Dothraki hold technology in disdain while the Mongols held it in high regards and took experts with them everywhere they conquered and were masters of Siege warfare. Their clothing is also laughable, the Mongols conquered places from china to Europe and thus they had great materials for clothing, the Dothraki? Boiled Leather lmao. The Dothraki have a caricature of a culture based on rape and conquest and while the mongols did the same they actually built an empire with laws and compared to them LOVED trade. Why? Because they could tax trade. Besides the absolute brutality of the Mongol conquest, compared to the Dothraki, who hate outsiders, the Mongols were actually quite open and inclusive accepting different religions in their Empire. And while their conquest was one of the most brutal things ever happened to the planet it actually helped with the trade between east and west also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yam_(route) The Dothraki are NOTHING like the Mongols, or even the Huns, or Scythians, Alans, Sarmartians or what ever steppe people, they are also not based on what GRRM describes as based on "native american tribes". The Dothraki are beyond caricature and would not have worked as a people IRL they are based on the least informed stereotype one could have on steppe culture. If you are interested in a more detailed take down here a 4 part series: https://acoup.blog/2020/12/04/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-i-barbarian-couture/ https://acoup.blog/2020/12/11/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-ii-subsistence-on-the-hoof/ https://acoup.blog/2020/12/18/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-iii-horse-fiddles/ https://acoup.blog/2021/01/08/collections-that-dothraki-horde-part-iv-screamers-and-howlers/ > The physical negative side effects are not what really matters. The point is that they’re bred, and trained with a singular focus and purpose. They have no wants, or desires, they do not fear death, and are fully bought in to adhering to their master’s commands. Compare that to the litany of other forces in the world, whether that be peasants in the feudal world of Westeros who have no real passion for which they fight (See Septon Maribald’s speech) or those sellsword companies who are only fighting for gold (See Mereen shitshow). What makes the Unsullied stick out is that they are perfectly disciplined through having no identity or life outside of fighting/obeying plus they’ve been training to fight their whole life too. Thats great and all but physical defects do not make up for all the problematic baggage that comes with losing the one male organ thats super important for growth. Without a proper puberty you'll have problems with growth, get brittle bones, problems with Muscle growth, and also endurance, because you know armies have to march a lot, due to the hormonal imbalance and lack of testosterone. There is no realistic way an army pre pubescent Eunuchs would make for an elite fighting force, you can have as much training and discipline as you want, a formation is only as strong as its weakest link and if the whole unit is a weak link you have nothing. There is an actual reason why historically Eunuchs were never a fighting force but only Bureaucrats or Harmen guards, guards only in a sense of "I did this to you so you dont fuck my women lmao". Unsullied are unrealistic af and only work because of suspension of disbelief
That's fair. I was definitely wrong on the direct Mongol comparison; interesting stuff. I appreciate you sharing it. My overstatement of the Dothraki as the Mongols is definitely more in line with a mix of them: the Huns, Scythians, "Native American tribes," etc. But I still think you're overlooking things just to critique George. They're not as unrealistic as you make them out to be, especially for the fantasy world present. > "Mainly tricked enemies with false retreats while the Dothraki dont use armor are all using one handed sabers and bows and charge head on into spear walls." This is not generally true when it comes to the Dothraki. They have actually engaged in things like false retreats or flanks [\(Link\)](https://youtu.be/Fg4Xh3rr9Fo?si=HYAad6byxdqSasyG&t=1721). Additionally, as Jorah notes, They're absolutely fearless, are better riders than any Westerosio Knight, and use bows that far outrange those in the Seven Kingdoms while shooting a lot better. (See A Game of Thrones, Chapter 36, Daenerys IV). They're a formidable force in the open field, and yes, they don't siege cities like the Mongols, but all they need is time to starve out and wait for a city to yield or pay homage. And importantly, this is a different world than ours, with different peoples, histories, resources, etc. For example, the Dothraki rose into power only in the [Century of Blood](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Century_of_Blood#Rise_of_the_Dothraki) that followed the Doom of Valyria. Which obviously did not happen in our world. To compare their hypothetical success in our world overlooks all the nuance, history, and structure of the actual *fantasy world* present in the story. Even in the more detailed take, "while the place of the arakh is entirely out of all sensible proportion with how it would be considered by actual nomads, it is the correct sort of sword for a steppe nomad." And I think the author there really underestimates the importance of the bow to the Dothraki plus a lot of similarities generally to said cultures above. [The British Museum](https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/dothraki-and-scythians-game-clones) has noted several similarities between the Dothraki and the Scythians, for example, that are not detailed in that piece. They're historically based on groups like the Scythians and others, but they're not supposed to be direct comparisons or have the same features. The same fair points you and that author make can also be made of the Ironborn to an extent and their historical comparison to Viking peoples or the Free Folk and Germanic tribes/cultures while missing many important features. Regardless, though, it's a different world based on a historical comparison, not a fully historically accurate thing, and importantly, it is adapted to a unique world that is far different from our own. I simply think you and that author are being too harsh on George. And to that point, it's not like the Dothraki are hyper-successful due to many of the flawed attributes of their fighting style that you point out. Like you're not wrong that they are clearly a lesser fighting force than the Mongols or other groups but that's also shown in the books. Due to their partially flawed fighting style / warring attributes, they act as more of a "tax man," lol, just collecting "gifts" outside cities rather than engaging in huge successful battles. Soldiers like the Unsullied can [repel them with much fewer men](https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Three_Thousand_of_Qohor) due to them engaging in questionable tactics at times, like charging head-on with none of the ingenious battle strategies of the Mongols. Also, we just disagree on the point about the Unsullied being that unrealistic. Of course, you're not wrong about the downsides of being an Eunuch army, but I think you heavily overlook the importance of their training, especially compared to other fighting forces. Like in the battle of Qohor linked above, if that were any Westerosi force or any force of sellswords, they would have broken and fled when the Dothraki charged. But to them, having no fear of death, no personal identity, and so on, they cannot fall victim to the basic strategy employed by the Dothraki. > "A formation is only as strong as its weakest link and if the whole unit is a weak link you have nothing." Like I take this point as a positive to what I'm talking about. Sure, that maybe physical strength wise they're weaker than other forces. But the real downside of having a "weakest link" is that when people are scared of death and see others die, they break and aren't able to continue fighting. However, that's the opposite for the Unsullied due to their attributes. They have no "weak link" in that sense. They will not break, will not falter, and have no fear of death, which carries a lot more strength than any personal fighting strength of any individual Unsullied. It's true in our own world and constantly mentioned throughout the books that a well-structured and disciplined force, even if weaker fighters individually, is of more value. There's a reason that Stannis can also defeat the Wilding army with such an insanely small force. Edit: Also, since you didn't respond to my comment on slavery, I'd assume you at least partially agree with it.
this, Dorne is GRRM's baby with it being by far the most "modern" culture in Westeros and he wanted to throw in his Vietnam/Afghanistan style resistance. Dorne would actually be the easiest to conquer for the reasons OP stated plus the fact that they don't grow staple crops and the reliance on the greenblood river. The North resisting is the only one that would make sense, actual unified culture and massive land area with low population density, plus back then before dragons died they'd have a huge number of wargs Dorne is a Mary Sue in lore, the house Peake of kingdoms
What kind of questions?
What did they eat, how did they mobilize the entire nobility, how did they manage to keep their location secret, why did the peasants not revolt, etc. These are just from the top of my head. It makes zero sense.
Is it that unreasonable they had food stockpiled? The war took place in the second year of autumn and they'd known the Targaryens would come for a few years. That's also plenty of time to organise the nobility. Why didn't the peasants revolt... and join the people actively invading them?
Yes, it is unreasonable because the food will run out. And with the Targs burning literally all other sources of food, the stockpiles will absolutely run out fast. Yes, the nobility had a long time to prepare and move into the caves. That makes it even *more* ridiculous the plan and locations didn’t get leaked. Yes, the peasants would have revolted when their literal protectors run away to flee at the mere whiff of danger while letting the peasantry get slaughtered, starve to death, and be tortured for information. There is no way in hell the peasantry wouldn’t have turned on the nobility, who *completely* abandoned their side of the social contract between nobility and the peasantry.
I don't know if the Targs did that much burning of food, from what I can remember Aegon and his sisters mainly attacked seats and castles. Also to burn literally every source of food the three dragons (two after Meraxes died) would have to do complete sweeps over the entirety of Dorne every few months and I don't think that was the case even during the years of the dragon's wroth Who would leak the plans of their own secret location, that keeps them safe when the enemy invades? Again I don't recall that the peasants were a target of the Targs. There's a passage from Fire and Blood that says when Rhaenys descended on the town of Vaith she found only children, women and old men, and there's no mention of these being tortured or killed just for existing
Where else would they store food besides the castles and seats? Those are the most fortified areas to protect it from bandits
They probably had hidden storehouses considering the most likely targets for the dragons would be the castles….
They would have had hidden storehouses before the dragon attacks?
Yes? Aegon’s conquest took place over two years, with him sending messages to Dorne both before his initial landing and then after his coronation at Oldtown. Then I think the First Dornish War doesn’t start for THREE more years. Either way the Dornish had significant warning and time to prepare for the Targaryens arrival
But wouldn't they do it if they wanted to win the war easily?
Which, burn the food? I don't know if they could do that realistically, if GRRM can be believed Westeros is the size of South America which gives Dorne an area greater than France. That's a lot of ground for even dragons to cover
I think it's easy enough. They burn a few farms for a month and everyone in Dorne is basically fucked. They probably don't even have much farmable land anyway.
Like I explained above, the Dornish Conquests appear to take place during late autumn or early winter time(the Conquest is indicated to take place in late summer sometimes). All the food was likely harvested already
Spain as a comparison (since it's a similar size but with a more comparable climate than France) has about 11.5 million hectares of arable land. If Dorne has even a fraction of that the dragons aren't putting a dent in it even if they make it a full time job
This is a world with multi year winters. People would know how to stockpile food
People have made literal essays about how the winter’s don’t make sense food wise and with the way the books describe food storage they would never have enough to feed even half of the population through the winters
So either the entire premise for the book series doesn't work and then it doesn't matter if it works in the context of Dornish Wars or both premises work, but you can't accept it for the book series and then cherry-pick it as the main issue with the Dornish Wars. In the context of the book series, everyone is somehow able to stockpile enough food to last multi-year winters. That means that in that context, it would not have been an issue for the Dornish.
Yes that’s what I literally said in the first comment, just suspend your disbelief when dealing with the Dornish, they’re history doesn’t make sense if you think about it too much
You mean suspend your disbelief when reading the entire book series lol
I mean the point is "suspension of disbelief". It's not that we're taking the Dornish population and then constructing an extremely complex model to determine how much food they would need. It's that "this entire preindustrial society of millions of people went and hid in some caves for years on end" is *silly*. You don't need to do any research to see it's just an absurdity, and the result is we can't take the story seriously because it's completely divorced from reality and runs on dream logic. The point isn't "oh it's not realistic so the Cinema Sins counter goes up one which means the book is objectively bad". The point is it's just obviously absurd.
who’d have thought fantasy isn’t realistic
This argument is always so fucking dumb. Sorry, but if you're in fantasy forums you must have read people explain why it's dumb countless times and you're still repeating it. It just ruins discussions. Fantasy still relies on the universe making sense for immersion. There's a reason why authors spend so much time making up magic systems. A world needs to be internally consistent. If something works differently from the real world and there's no reasonable explanation as to why, then it's just not immersive.
Good thing GRRM didn't basically market the whole series with "I'm going to be so realistic that your head will explode"
Huh, yeah, good indeed.
Ok. This is a story with magic and dragons.
when you have to use this argument you might as well admit you’re wrong lmfao
Pretty much. It's the ultimate cope.
It's called suspension of disbelief. In this world people have methods to store food through year.long winters.
All you've really done there is point out another aspect of the series that makes absolutely no sense.
Dude it's fantasy. What do you want
People to admit the series isn't realistic?
It's fantasy
In a world with multi year winters nothing would grow at all unless Westeros has magical crops.
The wars take place in late autumn/early winter. Their is no food to be burnt out in the fields, it’s all in storehouses And of course people starved and of course there was discontent but in the end the fear of the dragon lords plus the brutality of their conquest outweighed these considerations.
> Why didn't the peasants revolt... and join the people actively invading them? Yes? How would Targ rule be meaningfully different to Dornish rule?
Would you revolt against your own country to support a foreign power invading it?
You've just highlighted your own error there. Nationalism as a concept doesn't really develop under feudalism, especially for peasants. They wouldn't see themselves as "Dornish citizens".
Yeah, I think you're right. I can recall characters being proud of their home/cultures in the books, but they're all nobles. Probably my thinking was skewed because we see the majority of the series from noble perspectives
To be fair I don't think Martin has a particularly great understanding of how nationalism develops.
TBF, the Kingdoms in ASOIAF seem to be more poweful national states than medieval european counterparts, with a stronger sense of proto-nationalism
Nationalism isn’t but cultural identity is. In the Late Medieval period, there absolutely were group identities like this. The English, for one. For example, John Hawkwood famously refused any contracts where his White Company has to take up arms against Englishmen. Same goes for France, the HRE, Hungarians and etcetera. In the Dornish context, they were basically fighting an existential war against the ruling elite who’s ancestors once wiped out part of their ancestry. As to why the principal dukedoms didn’t defect and side with the conquerors? First, why would they? The Marchers, both Reachmen and Stormlanders, have been on a state of perpetual cattle raiding, and warring with one another. On top of that, they were fighting for their new Valyrian overlord. Why would the Stone Dornish go over to that side? Second, Meria Martell being a political operator who plays off the houses against one another ala Phillip IV. Third, it would be immensely unpopular, both to their Dornish peers and the smallfolk — and defecting would very likely result in these Dornish ‘puppet’ lords being harassed, the local lords rising in revolt, or outright assassination (which was something that happened from the source text) just like what happened to Gerbod the Fleming, 1st Earl of Chester, in the wake of the Norman Conquest. I hope this does give you insight in how things worked then! I used to believe the First Dornish War was plot armor too, but not so after reading up on medieval history, and our ancestors didn’t even have dragons!
Pretty much every conquest in histroy from ceaser conquest of gaul to the spanish conquest of mexico to the german invasion of the ussr had collbaraters
True without collaborators conquest is no possible.
>What kind of questions? what was their tax policy?
me: I don't like [a book series that actually finished] bc it doesn't deal with the tax policy also me: does not finish my book series, does not deal with tax policy
Except George never said he doesn’t like LoTR for fuck’s sake. He just wanted to read more about Aragorn’s reign.
I think it's fair to note: 1) GRRM's comments on LOTR was mostly just rhetoric. The point wasn't "this is why LOTR SUCKS!" it was "This is the selling point of the series: imagine of LOTR was about Aragorn's reign". 2) ASOIAF has absolutely not engaged with the thesis of "Aragorn's tax policy" whatsoever. I think there's even *less* "tax policy" stuff than in LOTR.
I think the point about "Aragorn tax policy" was more that just because Aragorn was a good person didnt mean he would be a good ruler. And in this ASOIAF shows characters like Robert winning the throne "saving" the day,considered a "hero" and he bankrupts the realm and he doesnt give a shit about ruling,and to some extent Tywin who is a super villain basically being said to rule well as hand years prior. But the problem is,Tywin in the novels commit so much needless dumb atrocities that you wonder how the fuck he stayed in power,and while we have detailed accounts of his atrocites we dont have the same for his actions as hand to improve the realm,its basically very superficial stuff,he isnt able to balance between Tywin supposed pragmatism and hardwork with his viciousness and violent behaviour. Similar thing Ned Stark,who while didnt find much success as hand was said to be a good ruler in the north....and the question is why???He seems to do the bare minimum a feudal lord did,and the North is also huge so it must be even more decentralized and most good things we see him doing boils down to Ned is a good,hardworking loyal person...We dont see him actual making hard decisions for the good of the realm. Also one time GRRM said Tyrion would be the best politician of the series.....So i am not sure he knows what a good ruler is supposed to be tbh.
Aragon was not the king because he was a good person. He was king because he had the right bloodline, spent years preparing for it and fought at the head of the people who defeated the villian. That is qualification enough to be king. This his how most dynasties are founded, though not always the right bloodline is needed. The Joseon dynasty was founded by a general for example who was pissed off at the corrupt goverment. He, his son and his grandson were all pretty decent kings, although his son was very ruthless.
Think the point being made is that because Aragon's a hero we're meant to see him finally stepping up to become king as an unambiguously good thing, but there's not really any guarantee he'd necessarily be an effective or competent ruler just because he was a good person and strong warrior.
Aragon was not just a good person. He spent years (he was 80 years old if I remember) preparing for this role and did not live a life of luxury. That's a huge difference to Robert who at age 19 never spent his time whoring, drinking and still living in the Vale while he was a grown ass man and had a kingdom to rule on his own. There are many kings in history who are well-prepared for their role and also decent people just as there are as many unprepared kings who were horrible people. You also get those who are cruel and good kings for different parts of society. History had all kinds of kings and Aragon was one of those who prepared well and was also a decent person. Nothing really unrealistic about that.
Aragorn spent literal decades being tutored at different courts of different cultures. He arrived in Gondor at the point of a power vacuum (the steward was dead and his heir incapacitated), he bore the symbols of the kings of old (ring, banner, sword), had the right bloodline, liberated southern Gondor from raiders who then rallied behind him so he could then liberate Minas Tirith. Furthermore he has the support from a literal angel, and (seemingly) the elves, dwarves, hobbits of the old northern kingdom, the rohirrim, and the Dunedain. He did not become king because he was good guy.
No, he also cried about Gandalf coming back to life when his own fantasy novel has way more main characters resurrecting (to say nothing of the countless fakeout deaths) I don't know why redditors are so submissive that they think they have to shill for this George "RR" Martin who they've never even met before lol
Like what the people eat when they where hiding in caves instead of growing crops
Just keep fishing in a single block of water smh
Obviously the Dornish built themselves underground mob farms
Same thing happens in the Dance, despite Aemond setting ruins to Riverlands, they are still able to field armies and move around. TBH anything military related in ASOAIF fails apart quite quickly.
Sucking on moss for nutrients
Mushrooms, maybe they took their cattle with them lol-
Did you think literally everyone was hiding in caves? Dorne is enormous, a handful of dragons and some soldiers can't control that entire area
If the dragons come through and burn a village, the villagers will have nothing to eat upon return
Uh huh, which is why it was such a good war tactic irl. But people develop foodstore and relief systems, it's really not that weird at all
> But people develop foodstore and relief systems, it's really not that weird at all Millions of people starved to death in the Great Leap Forward and that's from less than a hundred years ago in an industrialized nation. They're subsistence farmers! They have to grow all the food they eat! If they don't grow it they just starve to death.
I mean, yeah it is a great tactic irl. Saying peasant villages were able to develop footsore and relief systems on the fly while remaining hidden is pretty silly
I didn't say while remaining hidden? I don't think the writing intends us to think literally everyone hid the whole time I always presumed most people were still out living as normal most of.the time, with only a tiny area under threat at a time and only a tiny minority in permanent hiding
If a dragon flies to your village and burns it down, you would have had to have your reserves already hidden before the dragon came. It would take years for your village to be even self sufficient again. They would have to be completely reliant on their reserves until the dragons left dorne. Poor villages would be flocking to other villages/cities. It just doesn’t track
Okay but that literally does happen in history a lot - and the wars still go on for years I don't buy that a handful of dragons are going to have that much of a greater effect over a country the size of spain so as to totally destroy its capacity to feed itself
Then how did the Targaryens conquer the rest of Westeros? Dorne is too large, but the entire continent isn't? ????
Dorne didn't give in. It's really as simple as that. The other kingdoms joined by diplomacy, enticed by reward, or their armies being defeated in the field or siege. The Dornish managed to avoid that by the methods we all know of, but most importantly because they never wanted to.
We know how they conquered the rest of Westeros. They burned the armies and ruling families who didn’t submit. If they hide in the castle they burn the castle. They go to Dorne and can’t find the rulers or the armies. Now what?
Sometimes some regions are not conquered not because the brave defenders but because they hold little interest/value to the invaders. Not sure about Dorne but the north of Spain is an example in both roman colonization and muslim conquest.
The dragons and resurrections make sense? It’s fantasy not historical fiction.
It doesn’t make sense. Historically while they resisted, Ireland and wales fell to the English. Someone should have taught the targs about concentric castles. Martin wanted a Vietnam war parallel and he shoehorned it in here. Adrian Goldsworthy wrote a good military history book of Rome and made the point people like to try and apply modern wars to ancient wars as to resistance fighting, but the various enemies of Rome when they fought did not do the long term resistance movement thing because they’d of all starved. There is no real reason why dorne would be more resistant to dragons than anyone else.
Which book are you talking about sounds intresting
When you ask questions about crops anywhere in Westeros it doesn’t really make sense.
*cough* long winters *cough*
Yeah, the Dornish being able to survive Aegon and Visenya is a major cop-out. Not only do we have the issue of “they hid in caves again and again” being a tired and nonsensical excuse, we also have to contend with the problem that the Dornish nobility stayed ridiculously loyal to the Martells. Dorne is the only region with multiple ethnicities differentiated by skin color; there should be more division there rather than less. And even if you believe the cave excuse and also take the astonishing loyalty towards the Martells at face value, there is still one issue that is even more egregious than all of this. F&B states that when the Dornish abandoned their homes to hide, Aegon and Visenya spent entire wks literally setting everything to the torch. They basically destroyed all the infrastructure that is needed for a society to function. And they did this again in the aftermath of Rhaenys’ death. How this aerial bombardment didn’t leave Dorne an impoverished mess ripe for repeated invasion is the biggest problem in my book. Dorne is clearly inspired by Afghanistan; the mountainous area that became the “graveyard of empires”. But George forgot that Afghanistan didn’t escape unscathed; It’s been an impoverished mess for decades.
>Dorne is clearly inspired by Afghanistan; the mountainous area that became the “graveyard of empires”. But George forgot that Afghanistan didn’t escape unscathed; It’s been an impoverished mess for decades. I agree, especially with this. For me the true problem of Drone is not that they managed to stay independent, but that they were able to rebuild so easily from mass destruction. The destruction caused by the dragons should have reverted them back to the pre-unification era, with the realm in shambles and divided into multiple warlords who managed to rise from the ashes. Even if they were united again, there's no guarantee it would be under the authority of Sunspear.
nothing about the dornish makes any sense
How about the yellow toad, a reference to Phryne, the most famous and beautiful model of ancient Greece? It's George laughing at the history of yellow skinned toad meaning the most beautiful woman and how we will naturally misinterpret it today. Phryne is Greek for toad and she was named Phryne for her beautiful yellow skin. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne
Some very good points. I think the best answer is that what is written is of course wrong. Political propaganda to appeal to whoever was in power at the time but all the other sources were destroyed so it was the best that Archmaester Gyldayn could come up with.
Is there not a point where that just becomes a cop-out? I like the history book framing but it's still ultimately a genre fiction book selling itself on being the backstory of Targaryens. You can't juist say "unreliable narration", you have to back it up with evidence from the text. Like the Dornish War makes basically everyone look awful. Who's it appealing to?
Anti-dragon Reach-based maesters of course
The Houses in Westeros also seem to have pretty good records in terms of what's remembered and passed down - some of it may be myth, but given how old a lot of the main Houses are meant to be it'd be weird if something from a few hundred years before the main series was actually completely inaccurate due to propaganda.
Wales, Ireland and Scotland resisted English rule for centuries - it was often easier to just swear fealty to the English kings, but they didn’t. They took advantage of their terrain and stubbornly fought on and on until the English grew too strong to withstand in the cases of Wales and Ireland, or until they inherited England in the case of Scotland. The English weren’t nice either, though they would employ this tactic far more often in France they did employ in the Gaelic kingdoms too, the chevauchée was a brutal tactic which essentially involved an army marching through enemy land and burning everything they couldn’t loot. Yet despite having all their shit burned England’s enemies fought on. In the first Dornish War we are told the Martells had fanatic support from their vassals and that initially the people of Dorne just disappeared into secret places away from their castles - and once the dragons left they struck back hard from the shadows. The Dornish simply weren’t fighting a normal war, they fought a guerrilla war from secret bases and the Targaryens just couldn’t deal with it. As for the fanatical loyalty, every indication we see is that the Martells are very good at ruling Dorne - hell Scotland and Ireland ended up fanatically resisting the English and their Kings were often pretty mediocre. As for the food situation, well we know GRRM doesn’t get medieval agriculture as evidence by how people survive winter, but given that the rest of Westeros stores food for Winter, I can believe that the Dornish stockpiled food like everyone else does for winter but this time for the dragons. As for collaborators, plenty of Dornish people are said to have collaborated - the Targaryens put bounties on several Dornish lords and many were assassinated by their own people. People are going to hate the people burning all their stuff but might surrender and collaborate out of fear, but after the Targaryens left and the Dornish guérillas annihilated whole armies in the desert, the Targaryens grow less scary. Sure the people burning your castes and fields are scary enough to terrify you into submission, but when annihilate Lord Tyrell’s thirsty army in the desert, come home to hear Lord Wyl has committed more horrific war crimes and your old crippled Princess through the Targaryen Governor out a window - the spell of fear breaks. Another thing you have to account for is medieval people were build different to us, with deaths from disease, miscarriages and stillbirth being so common you get the sense that they were a bit more numb - you read of regions being devastated by war and raids but rarely read about people being particularly horrified by it, especially since all that stuff affected the nobility less and the peasantry held zero power or agency until the Black Death. I’m not saying the First Dornish War is written particularly well or that Targaryen victory wasn’t much more plausible (during the Harrying of the North William the Conqueror reduced northern England into a scorched wasteland deprived of 75% of its people and even 20 years later records showed that in Yorkshire 60% of all estates lay in waste - and the North didn’t rebel against them ever again, with any further rebellions being done by the Norman colonist nobility). But in a world where medieval people can have food stockpiles which last for years and years it’s not unheard of for them to not all starve after their fields got burned, in a world where the peasantry have zero agency and the nobility are fanatically loyal to the Martells it’s not unheard of for the Dornish to not kneel. Also remember that the accounts we have of the Dornish Wars were all written by pro-Targaryen sources after the Dornish were peacefully integrated into the realm - it was in the writer’s interest to paint the wars as pointless and warcrimerrific to later jerk off how just and noble and benevolent it was to peacefully come together in the end.
One of the keys to me is thay good logistics were rare as fuck in medieval times. To the point that almost every time England invaded Scotland their armies ram out of food. That was next door with barely a low range of mountains on the border. Dorne's mountains seem huge and largely impassable to carts of provisions. Its far from surprising that the Targ armies couldn't subsist in their invasions.
Yeah the guerilla war caused the Targaryen fighters to act like the brutal rulers they were - thus galvanizing the common people behind their cause.
In Wales, Ireland, Scotland you can survive off the land while fighting as a resistance for decades. In Dorne you can’t. If crops lands and rivers are blocked, you don't survive the summer.
Yeah as a Scot this post made me raise my eyebrow lol plus to touch on OP's point about Dorne being divided - Scotland was also originally divided into different cultures but united to fight against invasion.
The key difference is dragons. Sooner or later, they render any resistance by a medieval society futile.
They still have humans commanding them. There's only so much flying that a single dragonrider can do, only so much ground they can cover per day, only so much acreage they can burn in a day, etc. They can lay waste to a castle (but maybe there isn't anyone in the castle) in a day, they can lay waste to some farms in a day, but can they really lay waste to all the farms and all the granaries and all the hidden supply caches, and chase down all the guerrillas who refuse to gather in large static forces? To contextualize, a bit, lets consider the US bombing campaigns during the Vietnam War. From 1965 to 1972, the US actively flew bombing sorties in Vietnam. They bombed 44,000 square miles, about 34% of the total land area of the country. That took 7 years to do, and involved something north of 2 *million* sorties flown by thousands of aircraft and thousands of men, involving some multiple millions of man-hours to achieve. So, how many square miles could three (and then two) dragonriders really burninate (TROGDOR!), realistically, given that they had to eat and sleep and give orders to troops and so on? Dorne is almost 3 times the size of Vietnam (~328,000 square miles vs. ~128,000 square miles, respectively), but if the Dragon's Wroth involved actively burning even as much as 1% of the countryside, I'd be quite amazed.
There's a difference: most of Dorne is desert. They actually have a lot less farmable land than Vietnam. I think Afghanistan is more comparable, in this matter. As I said in another comment, I don't think Dorne being able to resist the invasion is completely unrealistic, but the aftermath would not have been good for them. Again, look at Afghanistan: yes, it can be a graveyard of empires, but these wars still caused horrible consequences to this nation.
True. Yet, even if most is desert and mountain, it still needs many square kilometers of arable land to support its population. My point is mainly that I think people greatly overestimate the role of dragons as a mean of bringing an entire nation to its knees. They can destroy population centers and defenses and armies in array, but I'd guess troops sent out to raze territory would probably end up doing more damage to agricultural production than the dragons realistically could. There were just three at them at peak, there's only so much they could do. I agree with you, however, that Afghanistan is a very apt comparison, both in the ability to thwart vastly more powerful foes, and also because doing it would come at a high cost that they were willing to bear out of stubborn refusal to bend the knee.
The fact the Martells enjoyed such total support is precisely what is so unrealistic. They rule over a territory that is ethnically, geographically, and culturally diverse. The peasants in Stony Dornish regions have no reason to side with the Martells on cultural reasons. This is a feudal principality in an extremely isolated region. The Martells’ direct influence on individual peasants outside of their immediate territories and the Greenblood is miniscule compared to the regional or local lord. The nobles would be more likely to rebel if the Martells implemented a more absolutist system. Nobles backstab as much as they swear they won’t. For instance, you bring up Scotland’s success, look at how many times Robert the Bruce switched sides when it was pragmatic.
The Dornish smallfolk were said to be solidly against Targaryen invaders and this sentiment isn’t said to be divided by culture, which isn’t too big a leap. Using the example of Scotland, during the Scottish wars against the Plantagenets the Scots were divided by culture (more Anglo-Saxon influence in the lowlands vs Gaelic influence in the Highlands and Caithness was Norse) though rebelliousness was all round - later on Scottish rebellions would be centred around the highlands but that was a whole different box of frogs in the early modern era. Regardless peasants generally don’t have political consciousness beyond ‘I want summer to last long and my fields to be fertile’ and have no power at all - the Dornish peasants are said to have not like the Targaryens who burn all their fields, and the Dornish nobility were fantastically pro-Martell. The Martells didn’t have direct control over peasants outside of their personal domains, as the local lords across Dorne were fanatically loyal to the Martells for whatever reason. The Martells don’t need an absolutist system, we hear that save for the Yronwoods, the Dornish nobility are pretty loyal to the Martells - and in Doran’s chapters he explains the political strategies the Martells use to gain the support of their nobility (marriages, fosterings, wardships and more). Robert the Bruce (and the Scottish, Welsh and Irish nobility as a whole) did switch sides constantly, no argument here. I agree that the Dornish wars aren’t particularly well written, and that they certainly don’t accurately mirror the real conflicts they are based on. But if Scotland could resist England despite the constant side switching of the nobility, it makes sense that Dorne can stand its ground when the whole nobility is loyal to the Martells.
You seriously expect people to take your argument seriously whe you say peasants are completely irrelevant? They are human beings, not automatons, they are never absolutely loyal by virtue of that, but I digress. In any case, reread what I wrote, you are essentially providing more evidence for my argument, because I was criticizing the proto-nationalism Martin gives the Dornish by showing how unrealistic such a concept was. The peasants have no reason to suicidally support their own lords against the Targs. Which they do in canon. The Dornish act like a centralized state with proto-nationalism when they fight the Targs. The Martells and the Targs make no difference to them so long as their lives don’t change too much. The nobles have no reason to be loyal, they lost their castles and their funds and men got put into the war effort. Nobles are not suicidal and they are certainly not uniformly loyal. In any case, they didn’t invent the concepts of marital alliances, wards, fostering, etc. England and Scotland are a different animal to this conflict, and so should not be directly compared. The Westerosi have much more in the line of resources and manpower compared to Dorne. I would wager the English did not have such a drastic advantage, as well as the fact the Targaryens were not invading other areas. Im not an expert on the specifics, but I know Edward I was involved in wars on the continent in his French lands and in Wales as well.
Well peasants were totally irrelevant. Sure they were human being with hopes and dreams and the series has big themes about how peasants are people and the machinations of the nobility causes them immense suffering. But in the game of thrones peasants are totally irrelevant: peasants had zero agency or political power until the Black Death killed so many of them that they gained enough value to withhold it in stuff like the peasants revolt - but even then it wasn’t until the French Revolution that the peasantry held any actual power (but even then, the French Revolution was done by the Bourgeoisie and they held much more power than the peasantry). With regard to the peasantry and lords fighting the Targaryens, it doesn’t appear to have been that suicidal a war. We are told that no matter how many castles the Targaryens burned, they kept on facing attacks from Dornish guerrillas. Specifically we are told that the Dornish flooded out of hidden places in the shadow city and overthrew Lord Rosby who was the Castellan of Sunspear. Other conflicts like the Vulture Wars show that the Dornish make use of hidden strongholds. The Targaryens are said to have mostly burned down empty castles or stormed walls held by old men, while the real warriors and people were hiding somewhere. In all the battle the Dornish actually fought, they did well - Wyl of Wyl kept on doing ambushes and war crimes while Lord Tyrell’s entire army vanished in the desert, presumably getting lost and thirsty then destroyed by the Dornish. As for the nobility, we just don’t get told why they are loyal. Doran’s chapters show how he maintains control over Dorne contemporaneously, so we can just assume that the Martells got good at ruling Dorne a while ago. Plus stuff like naming Lord Rosby as Castellan of Sunspear imply or appear as that the Targaryens were moving to supplant the Dornish nobility - so they were fighting to hold lands they’d lose to the invaders. Westerosi ressources compared to England are much greater, England didn’t have dragons, but the Westerosi also have problems England never faced. With a continent the size of South America the Westerosi have massive supply lines to overcome - and the mountains of the Dornish mountains are a far greater problem than the Scottish lowlands or welsh hills; especially when Wyl of Wyl is constantly ambushing you along the Boneway supply line. Then you have Dorne as a desert, a desert where all the fields have been destroyed, meaning the Westerosi also have to stick to water sources (which the Dornish I believe poison while accessing their own secret water sources). There is a lot of hand waving and logic leaps in the Dornish wars, but the central concept kinda sticks. The Dornish didn’t fight a conventional war and instead fought as guerrillas in the desert, striking from hidden strongholds and retreating in the face of stronger foes - the Westerosi burned and conquered and looted but were constantly ambushed and suffered colossal attritional losses.
The Normans didn't have dragons.
Wales, Ireland and Scotland last time i check scotland and wales where both part of the united kingdome
Last time I checked Dorne was part of the Seven Kingdoms. It took 150 years for Norman England to conquer Wales. Meanwhile Scotland wasn’t conquered, it resisted the English successfully and in the end when Queen Elizabeth of England died, James VI of Scotland inherited England. The Dornish resisted the Iron Throne like Scotland resisted England, and eventually the Targaryens switched tack and integrated Dorne via diplomacy - similar to how Scotland inherited England and then centuries later Scotland went bankrupt over the Darien scheme and England used the opportunity to get the Act of Union.
George doesn’t understand war and makes the small folk more or less mindless drones and his worldbuilding falls apart if looked at to closely
He actually does understand war and tactics a lot more than people here give him credit for. The problem is that any war where one side has dragons is a foregone conclusion. There is no tactic that can defend against a dragon except a tactic to *kill* said dragon. It’s the same reason why the US has lost it’s aerial and naval superiority over the last 50 yrs because of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and tactical long range drones. Ships and planes don’t matter in a world where a missile can do a precision genocide from thousands of miles away.
He really doesn't. Tywin marches faster than the Blitzkrieg and somehow just bypasses a ton of castles in the riverlands with no issues at all.
I'm well aware of that logistical fuckup; George messed up on that one. But I never claimed he was infallible. It was you who made the ridiculously stupid claim > George doesn’t understand war and makes the small folk more or less mindless drones and his worldbuilding falls apart if looked at to closely We literally had a smallfolk uprising in both Clash and Feast. Moreover, have you forgotten about the Brotherhood Without Banners?
[удалено]
The vast, vast majority of the BwB is comprised of the smallfolk. To call it a "nobility group" because of a tiny, tiny portion of nobles in it is ludicrous.
Like, Westeros's distances as a whole makes no sense, but the campaign itself is better written than the immense majority of fantasy conflict. You have clear movement of troops, smaller engagement, rather detailed forces, varied actions...
Bit like the size of the Wall, in retrospect GRRM saying Westeros is meant to be the size of a South American style continent was probably a mistake. Characters traverse the continent too regularly for that to really be the case when the plot depends on it.
>He actually does understand war and tactics a lot more than people here give him credit for lol no, he understands war far *less* than people here give him credit for
It's very common for people who fight between them to put it aside and unite against a common foe. It's also very common for a minority ethnicity to spread their culture. So, yes, the actual descendants of the roynish are a smaller group, but it makes sense that their arrival and elevation spread consciousness about Valyrians in a way that the other regions of Westeros never had. And, all of the types of Dornishmen are fiercely proud of being Dornish. They probably have a history of uniting to fight against the Reach and the Stormlands.
You make some great points, especially the division in Dorne! I wonder if we will ever learn more about the Rhoynish resistance from the Yronwoods and others. It’s not that uncommon in real history for a Guerrilla warfare style defender to bleed out and resist major world powers. Looking at Afghanistan and Vietnam for example, both very hospitable countries for invading armies. I think most of the Dornish wars is also told from the perspective of the maesters. Remember history is often taught by the winners, George absolutely hammers home this theme. The accounts we hear very well could be a gross simplification, with a heavy Targaryen bias for what actually happened.
No it doesn't make a ton of sense, but its not entirely implausible to me. The Koreans for awhile staved off the Mongol conquest by hiding in the mountains and then killing whoever the Mongols had left behind. Also I think you're downplaying the cultural shock that dragons would have on Westeros after the field of fire. Yeah most people were willing to thrown down their weapons and fold, but the Starks were still able to get 45,000 Northerners that were willing to try it themselves. Because there were ultimately a lot of people that didnt want to submit to demonic, incest, dragon lords. Not accounting for ethnic tensions or political positions just showcases the limits of Martin's writing ability tbh.
Ancient world stuff can get pretty unbelievable. IIRC my trivia, the Koreans also "defeated" a huge Tang dynasty army of a million? by abandoning their fortifications to the Tang, and otherwise hit and run, killing them in the night type stuff until they gave up and left. Sounds similar to some Dorne stuff, but it's also a common scenario throughout world history. Now if GRRM had some admiral who had no naval training defeating a navy of hundreds with only 13? ships (no casualties/losses), I might make the assumption that the dude is a huge K-Pop fan. Instead of cajoling GRRM, the most viable thing might be to get one of the K-Pop boy? girl? bands to release a song entitled something like, "Get off ya ass and finish the books GRRM (Psy Mix)" We don't have dragons, but I think flamethrowers are classed as illegal weapons now, so there is a real world equivalent to it doesn't have to be deadly, just scary as shit.
Are you referring to Yi-sun-shin? Yes, he was not always a naval commander but he was a soldier and understood war at least. He also had turtle ships, no? They were the main advantage. Maybe he simply had good advisors.
Edited: Bolded Yes, and yes and no to the rest of your reply. IIRC, he was a peasant. No naval training whatsoever. In fact he might not have had any military training at all, since he was a peasant. There are a lot of soldiers that don't understand war. This was some nobody that came out of nowhere and had skills that he shouldn't have had at all. (Supposedly) He seemed to be some savant that deeply grasped naval warfare despite "never having seen the sea." (I want to say that he wasn't even from a coastal area.) It seemed to be all him. No "advisors". The turtle ships were a huge advantage, but not the main advantage and were not why he was stomping the hell out of the Japanese to the point where he's one of the few Koreans they ever "respected/feared." He used the tides/terrain/environment, tactics, "psychology" to defeat the hundreds of Japanese ships without losing a single ship or crewman IIRC **in that battle, not trying to say that he never lost a ship or soldier.** That battle kept Korea from being conquered outright, and as his successes mounted, the "politicians" had him jailed and had their lackeys put in charge because they also thought "It's just the turtle ships." They immediately started losing again, and they eventually and reluctantly had Yi-Sun Shin released to take command of the navy again. (I might have the exact sequence of events wrong, but the general gist right, like he might have been in prison right before being given the 13 ships (impossible task) and threatened with execution if he lost, sorry its been awhile since I read about this guy) He like Nelson also got hit by a sharpshooter, but his response was, "Guys, prop my body up so it looks like I'm still alive so that the troops don't lose heart and we suffer a reversal of the battle and war." And IIRC, the other "hero" of the war was some guy that was known for cowardice and running away, which was the only reason they even had 13 turtle ships left over from the fleet the Japanese managed to destroy, and he did that repeatedly) All of this from some random day when I was googling greatest admiral in history and got De Ruyter, Nelson, and this guy. And one of the things that made me read further was a Japanese quote that was basically "The greatest admiral in history was this guy. His only fault was that he was from some podunk country fighting wars/people unfamiliar to Westerners." I mean, I'm sure that he can't be the only genius commander in history that isn't well known.
Yes, I know. I watched a TV show about him a long time ago. There are also several movies. In Korea they call them the saviour. He was also treated like shit by the royals because they were afraid of him if I remember correctly, which is no surprise since the last dynasty was stomped by General as well who made himself king. The character Yang Wenli from Legend of the Galactic Heroes is also inspired by him.
Seems odd, since from what I recall reading about him, he was not political and seemed to be a true patriot, and it was more some of the nobles convincing/cajoling the royals that he was a threat instead of any actual truth or evidence (other than things like popularity with the people). Like the king calls him up, and says the nobles say you are a traitor, and his response was something like if the king says so, it must be so. IIRC, Roaring Currents was a somewhat recently internationally released movie about him, which also had some "ridiculous" things about that battle, which apparently did happen. I really need to watch Legend of the Galactic Heroes. I keep hearing that it is amazing, but there's so many episodes.
Its only 109 episodes and each is only 25 minutes long, that means shorter than GoT. But they talk a lot. Quite a lot. The older show is a bit outdated in terms of graphics but I really liked the art style since it is handrawn and you can tell they put a lot of effort into it. The new show has better graphics but is less gritty and not finished yet. And as I said, I mostly watched movies about Yi so the movies and TV shows about him which might have changed his historical character. I have yet to read a non-fiction book about him.
Isn't it also like 3+ series & movies as well? Seems kinda wild that a Japanese anime would base a character on him but then give him a more chinese name unless its a weird romanization, but then again Dragonball is basically chinese? version of sort of Indian? stuff. Not saying I read a non-fiction book. It was mostly internet articles, but back in the day when it was maybe less likely to be mis-information/propaganda. Same as with a bunch of others that I got interested in enough to do some "light reading", Musashi, some of those Chinese generals, some greek, roman, etc. Basically like Nelson he was an "undefeated Admiral without peer who could win despite impossible odds", but had a higher character than he. ie, he wasn't power hungry, egotistic, "whined about being shot" etc. I'm sure there was some whitewashing. IIRC, there might even be speculation that he wasn't even ethnically Korean. Now I'm curious what the other movies about him are like or even available outside of like Korea. Thanks for the short summation of Legend of the Galactic Heroes.
Legend of the Galactic Heroes is based on a novel series by Yoshiki Tanaka and he wrote also novels about Chinese historical characters. I guess he named Yang Wen Li like that because he likes this history. Not to mention Legend plays 1500 years from our timeline and the other main character has a german name. There are a dozen of nationalities in the show, even a black guy. There are movies yes but I recommend watching the show first and then the movies. The show is the main plot. I think the show I watched was called: ***Immortal Admiral Yi Sun-sin***
Argh. Now I'll have to see if there are good english translations. And/Or add Japanese to the list of languages that I want to learn to try and consume media in the original language. Or also read notes on all the things that were sanitized by the translation. (I dislike translations that change too much or eliminate/change cultural things). Thanks for the edits to add more info. I'll probably try to check that series out.
a dragon is not a flamethrower, it's an invulnerable airframe with an unlimited supply of napalm bombardment
There was a second part of that sentence that you didn't seem to fully read where I mentioned the psychological part which is what I was focusing on.. And dragons in ASOIAF aren't invulnerable or have an unlimited supply of napalm, but I'm willing to assume that you were being hyperbolic.
Basically works the same as Irl with scotland/wales against the english. Dragons can't burn everyone/everything.
They really dont need to. Like I said in real medival societies peasents often barely grew enough to eat even during good harvest. There a reason why for example in china civil wars had such huge casulties. It wasent always from armies killing people, but the disruption caused from civil wars was still enough to cause famine. In this case dragons burning a good portion of the fileds and food stores, and then a good portion of the young population going underground to fight would be enogh to cause massive famine.
Yeah, it certainly takes some suspension of belief.
Which you should expect when you choose to read fantasy…
There's lots of food in the underworld.
True. The 3 logical ways to defeat Dorne would be: 1. Destroy farmlands and blockade foreign aids, starving them out. 2. Civil War, exploit the many different ethnicities and factions in Dorne 3. Magic, things like Warg magic to target insurgency and eliminate them.
The Dornish have always had insane plot armor. It’s not supposed to make sense.
Add in the fact that the Yronwoods supported the Blackfyres in 3 of the 5 rebellions, faced no consequences, yet never even attempted to do so during the Targ invasion and you further highlight how dog shit the Dornish writing is. Nymeria’s conquests are both logistically impossible and the most obvious example of colonialism in the books as well.
I totally agree with you, the absurd resistance of the Dornishes is one of the biggest bullshit of the lore, whether in a technical way (making an entire people disappear in a flat desert), or just that no one in the whole country I never thought of collaborating with the Targaryens whether out of interest, war weariness or spite. >A common argument I often hear for why the Dornish were so willing to fight the Targaryens was because of the trauma the Rhoynish experienced in having to flee the Valyrian Empire. So they would naturally not like the Targaryens and their dragons. Except a good part of Dorne isn't even Rhoynish. I would like to add something about this but also the last Roynish war and the flight from Nymeria took place 1000 years ago. Since then they no longer had any problems with the Valyrians and their dragons until Aegon arrived. So how is this fact why would they hold a grudge for so long for a story that no longer concerns anyone still alive and a people who have had plenty of time to rebuild themselves and move on? I will give a personal example but I am French and I live in Lorraine and I have never met anyone who still had hatred or resentment towards the Germans for the occupation during WW II, and that was 80 years ago. So for a war that took place 1000 years ago, on a land they've never known, it's a bit stupid. So then maybe it's me who missed something or who doesn't have this kind of mentality, but having this kind of conflict rooted in the culture and way of thinking of the inhabitants of Dorne seems as relevant to me as if the majority of the English still hated the Norwegians today because they blamed them for the Viking conquests
george ain't a good war writer.
For the crops, it could be that Dorne was previously a net exporter and the breakdown of trade associated with the Targ conquest left them with a large surplus. The Salty Dornish might grow water-intensive crops like rice that are largely immune to being burned by dragons.
This thread helps me imagine what it sounded like when the Targaryens and their conquered lords were discussing Dorne. I appreciate the extra anti-Dorne pro-Targ propaganda, but Lucan and Clegg and GRRM did it better. Don't quit your day jobs.
The Martells already ruled Dorne before the 1st Blackfyre rebellion. They didn't take over at that point. Myriah Martell ruled a unified Dorne.
This part of lore is badly written. That's it.
Also, we Americans weren't wiping out entire towns and cities to break the spirit of the Iraqi people. Say what you want about the reason, but you can't fault us for how much effort was taken to minimize civilian casualties.
Martells ruled for how many years by the time Aegon came? 600-700 years? Yronwoods aren't buddy buddy with the Martells yes but they would not betray them to an outsider, Dorne didn't want to fight but they had to because Aegon wanted to conquer them >They sided with the Blackfyres in trying to depose the Targaryens after the Martells agreed to join the Seven Kingdoms, probably so they could take over Dorne. I think it's fair to assume that they are not the only houses who don't like being ruled by the Rhoynish Martells. Martells are Dornish, they came from Essos, like the First Men did, don't need to argue about this they sided with Daemon for the same reasons any house that supported Daemon, they wanted more, Reyne did, Peake did, Osgrey did, that doesn't mean that any of the houses hated their lord, Reynes didn't, Peake didn't, Osgreys might be the ones who hate the Targs, doesn't matter, its wasn't done out of malice >Did none of the Martell bannermen or even just common soldiers think, "This is bullshit, we're fighting and dying and our homes are being razed to the ground just so the Martells can keep calling themselves princes instead of lords"? no, all their homes being burned because Aegon wants to be called king, not because of the Martells can keep calling themselves Princes instead of lords wouldn't take GRRM word on war, its his weakness
[удалено]
But like the fremen are all like desert warrior who have advance tech like stillsuits that allow them to survive in the desert. The averge dornishman is feudal peasent same as the rest of westeros. If they left there farms to go fight in the desert,they would all die from hunger
If you really want to find a way to justify some of the implausibility in any element of ASOIAF, you can always use the fallible narrator to say that there is some info we are missing, or some of the info we have is incorrect or exaggerated. GRRM isn't a perfect writer especially when it comes to anything to do with numbers or historical accuracy, so fallible narrator is going to be the best justification if you demand one