It's the case of a broken clock being right twice a day. Joffrey was awful but he was right about the royal army and he was also right about the threat Danaerys and her dragons. And he was ignored both times lol
No he wasn't right, and anyone who thinks a standing professional army in medieval times is a good idea is an idiot. That's a good way to bankrupt your kingdom, it's bloody expensive to maintain a force of man at arms let alone and entire royal army. There's a reason it was never done in real history or in asoiaf history. The few "standing" armies were just a couple thousand professional soldiers, which in that case are just man at arms.
@@KROGANLovesKittensAndPuppiesright but him and his “father” were both at least gonna do something abt her. If Robert was still king he prolly would’ve kept sending assassins and using his influence to slow her down in Essos. If they’d listened to Joffrey and realized Robert was right abt her and the dorthraki they prolly could’ve suggested some similar covert attack. Robert was the only one who ever really saw daenerys becoming a threat, even Ned wanted them to leave her alone
Joffrey started sounding real, real close to Louis XIV there for a real hot second. Started making a lot of sense. Made me realize that if they could find a never-ending supply of women who enjoyed getting shot by crossbows that Joffrey's post-nut clarity might have brought about a golden age of centralized authority.
His points about having a professional army loyal directly to The Crown is a good idea. The fact that he brings it up only as part of how to punish separatist notions in The North by DOUBLING THEIR TAXES(the dumbest way to fight disloyalty) and conscripting their men into said Royal Army(which brings the risk of conscripting potential traitors into your army on mass)
@@RipOffProductionsLLC The reason taxes were typically increased was to annoy the aristocratic elite. Obviously they would try to extract more wealth from the peasantry to make up the difference but they wouldn't get much more than they already were out of their people. Hard to finance a war when you're paying reparations, and the standing army would then enforce the crowns demands because it's basically their pay they would be seizing.
@@RipOffProductionsLLC See, that's where you're wrong. A soldier who is paid to be loyal is not a loyal soldier. A soldier who is paid to be loyal and who is told he is better than those losers he is paid to oppress is a very loyal soldier.
@@shade.cinema He was a c**t. And as the wisest character on the show pointed out, there's no cure for being a c**t. (In more modern terms, he was a psychopath, and there's no cure for that either.)
He was born just in time to change it! His excessive srbitrariety is the kind of thing it is seen as romantic or just forgotten if one manages to cling to power through the reforms. Cute even
@@shade.cinema The Story tells that Daenery Targaryen is a Mad Queen but she is not 😂 Daenery Targaryen is very kind Queen she alwalysly crying when one of her closes armies died, Daenery Targaryen is Friendly Queen, the only reason why some houses hates her is because she is a Targaryen, but Houses Fooled by Cersei Lannister, the real enemy is Cersei Lannister, Jon Snow killed Daenery Targaryen not because he hate Daenery Targaryen this is to saved all the people in the Kings Landing and making a peace in all houses. this is also why Jon Snow choosing to not claimed the Kings Landing even he had a Claimed since he is a Targaryen because if he claimed the iron throne the war was not end since he is also a Targaryen so Jon Snow Choosing to be a Warden of the Wall for the safety of Westeros.
@@Raymund38TVM lots of yap. we dont know if any of that will happen in the books. until winds is released its all speculation. We can still reasonably guess Dany will burn down kings landing or do some other "mad" thing. It would probably have some deeper motive or purpose
@@Raymund38TVM There was no more Wall and there was no more threat to Westeros from the North - everyone on the show except the Night's Watch treats the Night's Watch as a joke because they know how little threat the Wildlings actually pose, they've just forgotten why there was a NW to begin with.
That's why you need a dragon to hold the kingdoms. Aegon I declared any lord who went to war without the crowns authority was a rebel to all of the kingdoms. So technically under that rule arresting Tyrion and then having Gregor Clegane attack the Riverlands would've made the stark/tullys and the lannisters rebels to the crown
Quite probably the idea came from Bobby and Joffrey was just parroting. He doesn't strike me as beoing able to come to that idea by himself. Robert on the other hand had more vision and smart than he is credited for.
@@jeremyscungio16 Targaryens used the dragons to rule but they never instigated deep cultural changes, 300 years later, the 7 crowns still work based on a feudal system. Hence why, once you remove the dragons, they couldn't have one king not being challenged by a rebellion, first from the blackfyre, then Robert's. And then Robert had the greyjoy rebellion and finally the war of five kings which will probably lead to either a new strong moarch supported by dragons (Danny, Aegon or Jon) or entering societal modernit and moving to a more centralised system with some sort of system to regulate the power of the king (magna carta of some sorts).
Joffrey did have one other good idea. In one scene tywin talks to joffrey in the throne room and at one point the topic of danaerys comes up. Tywin makes a bunch of excuses to not do anything whereas joffrey wants to do something. Of course as he does, tywin carries the conversation and makes his idea seem like the smart one, but anyone thinking critically will realise joffrey was right.
I don't think anyone in Westeros really believed she had dragons, and if she didn't have dragons Tywin would have been 100% correct. Dragons are the nuclear weapons of the GoT world, with the difference being that only one great power even had dragons or had any hope of having dragons.
To be fair, the situation they were in was the equivalent of 5G poisoning. All specialists claim 5G is harmless, all data shows 5G is harmless, world experience tells you 5G is harmless, but some people still believe it's harmful. Well, Daenerys actually having big ass dragons and an army and ships and making the cross at the worst possible time is essentially we finding out that indeed 5G was harmful. Also, do keep in mind, she was only a threat because she caught Westeros with their pants down. If Tywin didn't die and the kingdoms held together, Daenerys wouldn't make it to shore.
Since morals are not really in the question... I wonder about idea of being raised inside the army. Imagine that. Crown takes orphans from all of kingdoms, feeds them, keeps them, ensures love for the king, and from them creates army. Granted, it would be long before children would grow up, but you can bend their minds into fanatic lovers of the crown, create image of caring king-father etc.
You know what... as sinister as that sounds... you might be onto something. Though it would have to be a completely separate unit, as you can't have them mingling with other people (in order to not break the brainwashing)
@@shade.cinema Sure. Crown may build big complex as orphanage and training ground. It would be seen by many as something noble to do, building place for those children. And they don't even need to make them all soldiers. Army needs armourers, other essential workers, so they could make ilusion of choice, though every choice after reaching adulthood would end up as part of royal army. That way Crown would need only to ensure that those children feel in debt to it, love their king like a father, and their only dream is to serve the king. And that would boost King's opinion around his kingdom, after all he takes care of orphans and ensures that they are well.
Janissaries. Worked great until the Janissaries just stopped listening to the Sultan and started looking out for themselves. That's always been the problem with standing armies - who protects the kingdom from its own army?
The theoretical ideal time would be under a successful Tommen rule. With Cersei’s eventual death and Stannis already broken Tommen could add the Westerlands and Stormlands to the Crownlands. All this power combined with the Tyrell alliance would basically make the crown invincible to anything but dragons.
That's such a good idea but also it's hard to manage many small lords both big lord paramounts and small diverese lords are hard to govern in reality. for a medival society governing Westeros efectivly is impossibpe well if Iron Throne was smaller and more imperial and burocratic like china
The best time would have been at the start of Robert's reign. The crown is in massive debt by Joffery's coronation. I believe it's something like 20 million gold dragons which 50 silver stags were considered enough for men to face certain death for. As for the westerlands that couldn't be brought into royal possession without a fight. The Westerlands were ruled by Kevan after Tywin's death, Kevan wouldn't give his land and wealth to the crown considering he fought alongside tywin in the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion over some insults and loans. Tommen despite being Jamie's son still styles himself as a Baratheon because their claim to the throne is through being Robert's kids.
The thing is in GOT Aegon the comqueror basically changes nothing after the invasion. His real life counterpart William the conqueror dissolved the seven Anglo-Saxon earldoms and divided them into smaller earldoms all of which were too small to offer an individual threat to the crown and all of which were technically owned by the crown with his lords being called ‘tenants’, he then replaced English nobles with Norman’s who were loyal to him and he then had all knights and sheriff’s, who were important to the running of an earldom, swear loyalty to him and not the lord ruling the land. He then created a military system where Lords and bishops had to provide a certain amount of knights for a certain amount of time. He also used the church to spread pro Norman propaganda and he crushed any significant rebellions and threats. By 1075 during the revolt of the earls, two Normans earls and one Saxon earl rebelled against the crown. The Anglo Saxons supported William instead of the rebels. He also built castles all over England and all of which were a days march from each other. He also created the Domesday book, a list of all lands and holdings in England which he could then implement a tax for all of it. The thing is all of these things happened in the decades following the conquest, where he destroyed all significant military resistance. Any king in Westeros without a significant edge such as dragons, or an army loyal to him and with no links to Westeros, would be unable to do it as none of the lords would willingly make themselves poorer or give up power in return to make the king stronger.
Another point is William had access to a large number of Norman resources from Normandy. Whereas the targaryens are basically the last remnant of valyria. Sure the velaryons and celtigars exist, and there are valyrian nobles in volantis, and valyrian bastards in lys, but in effect the resources of valyria that would make restructuring the whole society of westeros feasible are gone.
The Japanese shogunate works in a similar way. Samurai were loyal to their lords, however the Shogun required all lords to come live in the capital every alternate years. Furthermore, the vassal lords were required to send their families to the capital on the off year that they went back to their home provinces. This mitigates the risk of rebellion.
Yes it takes 50 days from kings landing to winterfell until the invention of teleportation around season 5. But it was not until the great minds of Westeros perfected the technology in season 7 that teleportation really took off.
The Nights Watch system already proves that men from different regions could form a cohesive fighting force. They would just need to adjust some details to entice people to enlist. Good pay plus a pension at the end of their service (say 20 years, similar to the Roman Legion) could be enough to encourage the peasantry. Officer positions with command opportunity and prestige could encourage the lower nobility and hedge knights. A well drilled, professional army would quickly prove far superior to any lords current peasant levies.
I literally said "They would just need to adjust some details to entice people to enlist." The Nights Watch is a prison colony. The Royal Army would be a career. It wouldn't be a lifelong commitment, they could have families, and could be an opportunity to improve their lot in life. My point was that men from different Westerosi cultures can work together.
@@mr_clean91 Hey, get a load of this guy. He thinks training and arming the peasantry then releasing them back into the peasant life is a smart idea hahaha. Wait until these educated and military proficient peasants decide they don't want to be serfs anymore.
Why did that stop working for Rome, and why didn't anyone in the Middle Age succeed in doing it? Hint: it wasn't because they were stupid or didn't see the value of a professional, standing national army.
@@brucetucker4847 My point was inspired by the Hungarian Black Army, built in 1458, which was itself based on the Roman Legions. They were one of the first standing armies in Europe after the Romans that included heavy infantry. There are earlier examples with professional cavalry and archers, but levied infantry. TL/DR The Roman socioeconomic-political-military system was an unsustainable ponzi scheme that imploded. Early Medieval lords didn't maintain standing armies because they couldn't afford them. Since no one could afford them, no one needed them. As kings consolidated power, standing armies started to make a comeback in the 1400's. Kings have always wanted them, but needed capital to get their lords to cooperate and fund them. Long answer is complicated, but fundamentally because the Roman Legions, and by extension their entire economy, was funded by conquest. Roman soldiers were paid out of their General's pocket and victory spoils were distributed to the entire army. Therefor, Generals needed to find someone to fight so they could pay their army, and soldiers had a vested interest in making sure their General won, because that made them all rich. This incentivized Roman soldiers to be loyal to their commander ahead of the Senate or Emperor. If that meant fighting other Romans, so be it. This is what drove their conquests and is the reason why they expanded so much, but it eventually became counterproductive when there was no one left nearby to beat up and their frontier was too large to support logistically. The Senate became increasingly paranoid of good generals, because there was nothing stopping them from taking power themselves, which they regularly tried to do. This resulted in frequent civil wars that decimated the late Roman legions and made them even more hesitant to give generals powerful armies. As the regular Roman military withered they were forced to rely more heavily on German Mercenaries. As Rome became weaker and payments stopped coming in, these Germans decided they were in charge and became feudal lords. With the former empire fractured into thousands of small independent fiefdoms, no individual lord's holdings could support large standing armies. However, they did continue to maintain small garrisons of professional specialists such as cavalry and archers.
This was probably Robert’s idea. Children often repeat what their parents (especially the one they respect more) say. It is obvious that he respects Robert more than Cersy because at some point he lashes out on the Lannisters hiding in their castles, while his father won the real war.
Alright, so I previously thought of this before, a royal westerosi army based on the model of the Roman army, and here are some things you should consider. The elephant in the room is that, unlike the Roman empire, which theoretically was geographically blessed by the fact that it could expand in all four directions, Westeros is pretty much the opposite of that. The entire continent is already united, and the only possible expansion would be in the inhospitable far North. A standing army would simply have nothing to do if some lord or some region didn't decide to rebel. This could be temporarily supplanted by the building and maintaining of roads (which wouldn't make as much sense as the Romans HAD to build roads as they didn't have the luxury of horse+saddles so their main mode of transportation, the carriage, required well built and maintained roads), but there's only so many roads you can maintain until someone figures out you don't need an army for that. Imagine if there's a 50 year period with no military conflict in Westeros, and the realm was in financial trouble. Why would they continue to pay for a full time army when nobody alive remembers a time when an army was needed. And while we're on the topic of the far North, you run into the problem that Trajan ran into - an empire spread further than its natural borders is an unsustainable money sink. The wall is the best example of a natural border that is easily defendable and a smart ruler wouldn't try to expand past it. So now that we got geography out of the way, let's talk about the social reasons why this wouldn't work. The Roman army was able to recruit so much from so many different cultures (and become stronger for it) because there was power in the status of roman citizenship. It offered a very real path of social mobility for peoples that would otherwise spend their entire lives eating roots in some forest somewhere. Westeros' system has no social mobility, except for the rare cases of knighthood. In fact, you could argue that Essos is a much better place for someone of low birth to live, especially in the free cities. There you could join a mercenary company, become a trader or merchant, and move up from there. There would simply be no reason why someone from Essos would want to join the Westerosi army, since after serving they wouldn't be in a more privileged position than the lowest peasant in Westeros, which is objectively a lower class than the lowest peasant in Essos. Except if maybe there's a deal between the Westerosi crown and the slave masters that would grant freedom to slaves after 25 years of service, like the Romans granted citizenship.
@@jamesquinn6662 they had horses, since they also had carriages. I specified they didn't have horse+saddles, and Westeros does. A single horse does not need a good road, it can take you basically anywhere. A carriage requires a well-maintained road to function and not break down.
@@jamesquinn6662 even a simple Google search tells you that, while early saddles existed in concept, they were very rudimentary, impractical and not widely used. Early practical saddles started from 300 CE onwards, when Romans already lost their military prowess and most of the Roman power moved to Byzantium.
This video isn't about whether or not it's practical to build an army. It's just a thought experiment as to how Joffrey would go about in doing it. I do agree with your comment for the most part.
Professional armies and nationalism came from a fierce process that saw the end of feudal relations in Europe to proto capitalist relations with monarchs and nobles on the losing end of this transition. The crucial step missing is the expropriation of peasant lands to the proto state and to the burgeoning middle class merchants and smaller nobles that makes professional, standing armies a necessity. There isnt a state without the expropriation of commoners and turning them into wage workers.
Yes, by turning the commoners into wagies, the crown has a bigger base to tax and then fund their various projects, including armies. You're right on this point.
The crucial things missing in Westeros are (a) a sophisticated professional bureaucracy to make the whole thing work and (b) massive piles of cash to pay for it all. Westeros is more like Medieval Europe than Renaissance Europe in both respects. The cash in Europe didn't come from the nation-state expropriating the peasants, peasants don't generate any money. It came from a rising middle class and the return of trade on the scale of the Roman Empire at its height, trade that could be taxed. Or in Spain's case, the cash came from looting the fantastically wealthy but militarily backwards (compared to Europe or Asia) civilizations it conquered in the Americas.
In order to establish a professional army, the crown would have to modernise its taxation system, something the lords would never allow. Secondly the economy would need to change from a largely agrarian economy to a more productive one, a cash rich one to make it able to pay these taxes. The Roman Empire struggled to pay its soldiers, that’s why is was expansionary by nature. When it maintained its borders, it was largely unable to support its massive army. The size of Westeros is similar to that of Europe, no one has yet established a professional, pan-European army in two thousand years. You could argue that the Roman army managed this. But most of the army came from Italy and Spain.
I actually believe that if Tywin wasn't so dismissive of Jof, they would be unstoppable combo. I know Tywin would manage to get him under control and guide him.
My man Shade Cinema is back and stronger than ever! This was indeed a great audiovisual essay! I too thought like Joffrey for a unified national army but like you pointed out: it's closer to a dream than reality!
For a centralised army, you need a unifying enemy. Maybe if there was a large Essos army that could pose a threat to Westeros, unification would be necessary
In other words, unless you have Wardens in all your area's as Loyal as Ned, then the kingdom always risks the chance of Rebellion from any territory that doesn't agree.
The King’s Army could also be used for great vocational education. It’s a fantastic opportunity to train significant portions of each generation to be competent in all sorts of fields that would benefit the economy and employment in general, even if it’s high turnover like every Westerosi male for two years of their life. You could easily swing that into a propaganda machine, too, since there is no Westerosi K-12 common core. The continent would benefit from counterinvasion doctrines, too, which would be very germane given fAegon, Dany, and the Crown’s OUTSTANDING debt to the Iron Bank of Braavos.
Joffrey Lannister swindling the world’s largest bank repeatedly out of half the world’s gold would have been SO fitting given Lann the Clever founded their house through swindling.
Joffrey wanting a Royal army totally made sense. After watching this video and seeing all the things that have to go in it is brilliant. His talk with Tywin about doing something about Dany and her dragons was a smart choice as well. Tywin choosing to do nothing and making Joffrey ignore it was wrong in that situation.
Book Joff is somewhat more sympathetic than show Joff. Book Joffrey is incompetent, show Joffrey was a sadistic c.u.n.t. Joff was absolutely right about the standing army, especially knowing winter is coming.
No need to reply with a comment, just wanted to leave a positive comment to boost the algorithm. I'm glad the UA-cam God brought me to your channel. This was a fun video. Looking forward to seeing more.
King Robert had the same idea ... but that idea is easier said than done. I'm sure every King of Westeros had the same idea, but none were able to achieve this standing army. Gold and loyalty are commodities that are hard to come by.
I’m sure many Kings of Westeros would have wanted an army for the Crown but they would have been opposed by their own Hands (who were usually powerful lords with their own armies) and probably faced opposition from their Small council (also full of powererful lords). I’m sure Tywin would have sabotaged any attempt by the Mad King or Joffrey to build a Royal Army that would weaken Lannister power. Even Jon Arryn would have opposed any attempt by Robert to build his own army.
Beautiful work, my friend. Great quality content and your scripts are very well written and tight, making the exposition of information very organic and interesting. You'll be one of the greats. Big hugs!
An interesting topic for sure. Something to consider though is that while most of Westeros is administered by local Lords (Starks, Tyrells and so on) the Crown does rule directly in the Crownlands. Lords of the Crownlands are under direct oversight of Kings Landing. So a first step for the Crown to consolidate military power could be establishing a standing army of the King in the Crownlands. For now the only force directly under the Kings control is the city watch of Kings Landing that is only 2000 men strong but creating a standing force for the Crownlands would greatly strengthen the royal government. And in the case of emergency you would have a highly trained force available to protect the capitol in the time it takes the other great houses to raise their armies.
You'd still have the problem that any two of the great houses combined would be more powerful than the royal army. In Westeros, as in feudal Europe, power is based on land, and the size of the army you can raise is dictated by how many knights/professional soldiers can be supported by the amount of land you have to give them in return for the obligation for military service. And by amount I also mean agricultural richness - the North has a LOT of land but it doesn't support as many people as the Reach does.
The establishment of a professional royal standing westerosi army was perhaps most possible during the height of house tagaryen with all of their dragons still alive. Yes i know there are good reasons why they didnt. Why spend enormous amounts of royal tax money on thousands of professional soldier that need to be paid, trained, armed, and fed when you have dragons that are substantially cheaper? Im sure house tagaryen never saw the need to establish their army since their dragons were more than enough and arguably more powerful. However, with those dragons, apart from Dorne you could quite literally force whatever system or taxes you want on the realm and nobility through the force and threat of the dragons. Thats why i always personally never undestood why House Tagaryen at the height of their power, never attempted to end the feudal system of governance and attempted to centralize power like an imperial system with a buarcracy and centrally appointed governors and adminstrators than feudal lords. If the local nobles refuse to cooperate, pay higher taxes for the army, or rebel? Well, you have dragons, and you can easily force the issue through or annihilate the rebelling nobles and factions. I mean, this was seen during the Dance of Dragons, where the Blacks and Greens had an incredible amount of trouble raising the men needed to fight the war, cause House Tagaryen literally barely had its own personal army, they needed to suck up and politically negotiate with the houses for ther armies. Without the dragons, the task is not impossible but it is a significantly much more difficult task because it would take centuries of work to consoldiate central power over the houses. This is something that Joffery has 0 ability to do. Even Tywin Lannister would find this task next to impossible. Lastly, I really dont think resources is that much an issue. Even in the backwards feudal systems, westeros could marshall approx 250,000 men in levies. Heck in the show, depsite being levies, all of the houses personal army looks like a professional army with traning. So, a centralized westeros could with the right reforms could maintian a royal standing army of substantial size.
I just started looking at this video and agree with your points. As a book reader I have never thought of it from that prespective and why banner men and citizens are always more loyal to their lord than the king himself. Very good break down.
I think that you’d have to be careful with garrisons. If the North is garrisoned by a bunch of soldiers from kings landing or the wester lands than they may see the garrisons as an occupation. Look to the American revolution when Britain sent troops to occupy Boston. I think a way to solve this may be by using Northern troops, however the people may still be unrestful.
I think you're understanding the sheer cost of this. You offhandedly mentioned restoring Harrenhall when building it bled the Riverlands completely dry. You'd also have to completely relinquish control of the North and Dorne, as Dorne is pretty much unconquerable and the North is even worse. Dorne fought off Aegon the conqueror and Balerion the black dread. Even Daeron the Young Dragon who was inspired by Alexander the great failed to conquer it. There's also no persuading Dorne. If you refuse to give up after your country has been through so much devastation that your sand's turned to glass from dragonfire, you're not giving up. And even if you could conquer either Dorne or the North, you couldn't hold it. Aegon the Conqueror's lords were assassinated on mass both inside and outside of Dorne and almost every single lord of the North is conspiring against the Boltons. Maegor the Cruel barely managed to hold onto places like the Riverlands when the faith rose up and he rode Balerion. The only reason Jaehaerys could be the beloved reformer he ended up becoming was the sheer devastation wreaked by Maegor. Aegon the Unlikely was probably the most powerful king since the Dance and he decided that he couldn't push reforms to help the peasantry without the power of dragons much less subdue the entire continent to create one united military.
This video is really just a thought experiment more than anything, but here are some counterpoints. First of all, Harrenhal would be rebuilt with the resources of all of Westeros, not just the Riverlands. Second, the conquest of both Dorne and the North would be difficult, but the sheer number of soldiers would make that effort a lot easier. Also, although I didn't mention this in the video, after conquering the kingdoms, the crown can carve up the land into smaller duchies so that the kingdom as a whole can never unite against the crown. I never said it was going to be easy. All I said was that it's possible.
@@shade.cinema Built at the expense of Westeros, precisely how? And who dispossesses the great houses? It's a chicken and egg problem. The crown can never get rid of the great houses as long as they add up to more military force that it can muster, but it will never be able to muster more force than the great houses as long as they still exist. You might say the problem is that Martin never establishes Robert's or Joffrey's or even Aegon's tax policy.
I forget who pointed this out, but now I see it I can't unsee it. The GoT Iron Throne, all the swords melted together... why haven't the non-steel parts burned or melted away? the swords should not still have grips and pommels
The way I see it the best way to assert control over the lords of Westeros would be to find some force or thing that presented a large military threat and could move exceptionally quickly around the realm perhaps even by air. If one were to somehow lose that the crown would wind up relying almost solely on tradition and the inherent risk of upsetting the status quo scaring lords to protect them from being quickly dethroned.
@@shade.cinema Yes he did terrible things but it was not entirely his fault, his reasons are the same as every villain wanting love and attention even joker who is a grown man by height atleast wants love and attention to himself but the difference he would never love back(except to The Batman) and joker did got loved from the start till when he was child and from his wife as well, Joffrey never did, it was not entirely his fault in the books he was way more younger child and was never given any love or attention from whom he believed was his father or anyone else Even the person who ever was with his mother only seen him from what she wants to she never tried to understand him as she and everyone else always instilled thr idea that he's gonna be a king and value of a king but he was never taught about what Everyone means to the king, his actions and everything he does it to maintain that what he was taught, to protect the value of the king he taught while doing so would give him the love and he knew he wasn't getting it that's why his actions became way strict and cruel till Margaery pretended to show him she cares rather fears him even when he taught he was weak she told him he was strong and brave pretended to be impressed, Sansa and her mother could have been the one Joffrey could have shown care specially at start point Sansa was the most close but comparatively vice versa his mother tried to say he could his actions later on or Sansa tried to show sympathy he neither wanted that as he knew that already and didn't wanted to look weak and That's why Joffrey listened and shown cared To Margaery as she she pretended to show that she believes he isn't weak and love him for himself and than show that in a fear state if she did say it in fear Joffrey wouldn't have cared about her but since she made him she truly loves him, Joffrey cared and loved her back and started to treat poor people as good too all Joffrey needed was to be treated as Ned treated Jon Snow just One person would have been enough to have love and cared about Joffrey as he would have shown care like that!
@@2301WAYNE To love your children is important, but Joffrey is still his own person. He still chose to be cruel. He still chose to torture people. Your upbringing is not an excuse for cruelty.
@@shade.cinema Yes Exactly that's the point All Villains are their own person and All Villains choose to be Villains by themselves each and every one of them that's why Villains Are Villains And Heroes Are Heroes, Villains give the pain to everyone that they received while The Heroes make sure everyone doesn't, and that's also the reason in the end all Villains are the same noone is better than the other at all!
You are right in saying that villains give the pain that they've felt to others, and I guess in a way, heroes give love to others for the pain that they have felt.
I'd take all the bastards, criminals, and folks who were desperate for a second chance to join and build a culture of espirit de corp towards service to the crown. Raise families into the service, women and men would be free to join. Enshrine a meritocratic structure, trained to be elite shock troops (like the Fremen or Sardaukar), able to hold much larger forces through brutal gorrella warfare. There would be a true intelligence department associated with the Royal army. Furthermore, have secret supplies around each area of operations for quick deployment.(like the Blades in Skyrim) Nearly all members should be in plain cloths like the marines at a bar. Constantly listening and mingling with the locals till they're indistinguishable from them. No more than "500" men and women to garrison each of the forts. This is to give the illusion that the crown is merely there to support the lords not keep them in line. These men should be actively seeking to assist the lords in missions to uphold that mirage. The added effect being that they would be able to study there possible enemies and even learn from them. Thats all i got for now
Alternate plan: what if rather than starting a war that could devastate the continent, and risk overthrow, the crown was to form a new brotherhood of sworn warriors similar to The King's Guard or the Night's Watch? This Brotherhood could have a recruitment philosophy similar to that of the Night's Watch. Opening membership to all men of the seven kingdoms regardless of birth or past deeds, including condemned criminals who could earn clemency by joining. The brotherhood could be divided into sub orders like the Night's Watch, with some of the sub orders devoted to combat adjacent disciplines. The Brotherhood could also entice more prospective members with the option of finite terms of service for volunteers. 7 years seems appropriate for Westeros. Of course volunteers would have the option of serving longer, and could be incentivized to do so through the promise of tax breaks that scale with length of service, and loans to help long term veterans establish themselves in the trades they learned in service to the brotherhood after separating from service. (These incentives for long-term veterans could also have a side benefit of stimulating westeros's economy, thus creating more taxable revenue for the crown) To address the issues of mobility, one of the brotherhood's sub orders could be dedicated to building and maintaining a larger network of roads throughout Westeros. However, as this would be a very long-term project, that could span decades if not generations, a more immediate solution to the mobility problem could be to build a fleet of long ships, capable of navigating the seas and the rivers. And training the Brotherhood as an amphibious fighting force. As it happens there are more rivers that span the regions of Westeros than there are major roads. Such as the Blackwater, the Trident, the Mander, and the Green Blood, in the south. As well as the White Knife, the Broken Branch, and the Last River, in the North. Not to mention all the smaller rivers in each region. The king could endear the Brotherhood to the nobility and the small folk, by tasking them with patrolling the most dangerous and remote stretches of the King's Road, such as the High Road, and the northernmost stretch of the Kings Road. And building up infrastructure along the rivers to facilitate more waterborne trade. In order to lessen the potential provocation to lords who might feel threatened by Royal garrisons on their land, the brotherhoods initial Garrison's could be established in ruined castles that do not see regular use. Such as Moat Cailin, Old Stones, Queenscrown, Summerhall, and The Whispers. Or along the less developed shores of the waterways. Once established the Brotherhood could generate additional revenue through tariffs on trade along the roadways and waterways that they've built up and secured. Finally, the Brotherhood could be given cultural resonance and legitimacy by tying them to one of the crowns pre-existing assets or institutions. Such as the Kings road, the royal fleet, or the treasury.
An interesting alternative viewpoint. My big concern is that it makes the Night's Watch redundant with the whole clemency thing. I would get rid of that personally.
@@shade.cinema Oh I'm well aware that using clemency to recruit men to the Royal army would negatively impact The Night's Watch. But I'm also aware that very few southron kings have been very concerned with the welfare of The Watch, and that's the perspective from which I imagined this standing army scheme. I don't necessarily think it would be the right way to go, but I do believe that a southron king determined to consolidate power might consider it a viable tactic.
one thing about expenses, usually in feudalism most of taxes went to local lord, overlord usually gets only 20 percent, it get ever worse if there are multiple tiers like small houses>great houses>crown except crownlands, this means crown gets only 4 percent except from crownlands where they gets 20 percent. Without feudalism crown income would be increased 20 times , that would be more than enough for standing armies and bureaucracy, as Roman empire and Chinese empire testify
The real problem with having a standing army in Westeros is the fact that you have such long winters, when you're expected to feed these people through 2 years of summer without producing food is an even worse drain on resources with an even longer winter especially seeing as how these people would eat well and quite a lot. One way that this might be feasible is with a slave class like the Spartans had, but to be honest if you made them a working class sort of engineer class like the Romans had it might pay itself off pretty quickly. The Night's Watch could be seen as a standing army in and of itself and has autonomy over itself in a land that produces the least amount of food.
Of course! Harrenhal would be a fortress not a garrison (fortress would man more soldiers). I would have 1 or 2 garrisons per kingdom, depending on their needs. In the North, I would put them in places such as Last Hearth, Torrhen's Square, and Moat Cailin for example, while in the South, places like Golden Tooth, Tumbleton and Summerhall would be good spots
@shade.cinema May I ask one more question? You mentioned in the video that the Kingsroad and the other major highways were insufficient in connecting Westeros. Where would you build new roads?
I enjoyed this content. What I would like is to know if you would you be willing to expand on the world of ice and fire? What would be required to more closely resemble the modern world and what in the ice and fire world would be likely to influence them going in that direction. All characters remain relatively the same but what ideas or incidents would cause certain characters to technologically and socially advance😊
Orginally when Aegon founded Westerous Kingdom, Targayren have a royal army, they are just called Dragons. You do not need men as an army when you command a squad of flying nukes. So they do have centralised control and there is no rebellion by a lord, it will be the 2nd Harrenhal. They fall only by Civil war with themselves.
The best way that I can see to build a army would be having people join in a six year term taking anyone who volunteers. The first two years should be spent at the wall training and learning how to fight. this wold bolster the nights watch. The next two years in essos as a mercenary army to get practicable experience that would also help pay for the Army as a whole. and the last two years stationed around the realm.
I’m not gonna lie. A state sponsored mercenary army to ensure your soldiers have experience even in peacetime while also making profit off of your troops is absolutely a unique take id love to see.
The problem would be political ramifications of the army’s actions. Not to mention the possibility of losing large chunks of your army overseas for no gain.
@@kylekavan7822 following his model, I would assume most of the army is actually stationed in Westeros, as even under this framework that’s where the highest manpower requirement would be. Those first four years are practically just a training program. You only need a couple hundred men to run a mercenary company. Most mercenary armies in Essos around that size. So assuming they picked the wrong side and get wiped, it shouldn’t harm the greater army. As for political ramifications, Westeros, as a state is already heavily isolationist. Individual nobles have relations with certain groups, but the crown seems to not interact across the narrow sea, except in moments of high tension. I don’t think Westeros really cares what Essos thinks about them
Its a super unique idea but the long period of service and the notion of fighting for someone else's interests in essos (with the possibility of death) might discourage a large number of people from joining the army thus lowering the number of enlistments. A massive propaganda machine is basically necessary that encourages people to take pride in these assignments (similar to what the nights watch originally did to recruit even noblemen)
I think that The North could pull this idea off on a smaller scale. Make Moat Cailin an army base. Farm the lands around it to feed them. They could have land appointed to them like the gift. Barrowton and/or Widows Watch could be Naval bases with the same idea. Both or sll three bases could support each other and protect against invasions, reavers, and generally be used to keep law and order. They could also be called up to support the watch. Leadeship roles could go to second sons or even future lords to gain experience. It would also serve to build bonds and relationships across the north. Maybe even have mandatory service time for young men before they marry and start families. Greybeards would probably join too.
This is like the politics of dune and their landraat, and the way the regions should supply the royal army would be a percentage, cuz 10.000 men from the north would be 20% of their army but for the reach it would be 10%
There's one thing that isn't being discussed here-the fact that the absolutism has its roots in the Roman era of Empire, specifically the Principate and the Dominate. Most absolute monarchies modeled themselves on the Roman example, and the enthusiasm people had for Roman culture during the Renaissance gave monarchs an edge to justify centralization; Roman culture was becoming popular, so having a king who acts like a Roman Emperor wasn't seen as such a bad idea, especially after centuries of feudal warfare between lords; many peasants rich and poor saw a more powerful king as a better alternative to the aristocracy, to ensure peace and defeat foreign threats. Westeros has no equivalent to the Roman Empire outside of the Ghiscari, and the people of Westeros have no love or enthusiasm in replicating the Ghiscari example from Essos. So imposing an absolute monarchy on Westeros is even harder than in Europe, especially since the high lords who ruled the seven kingdoms have been in charge for so long. The best chance for a centralized, Renaissance-style monarchy would be during the rule of the Targaryens BEFORE the Dance of Dragons, since you can just force the highest-ranking lords off their perch, replace them with loyal toadies, and threaten people with dragonfire if they say no. But after the Dance, any chance of that died with the Targaryen dragons.
What if instead he let the lords keep their armies and had them police their lands like always. But he still made a royal military that was at least the size of two normal armies. This way if there were a rebellion the crown would immediately have a great number of men to deal with it and it would not make the lords lose power and rebel. He could also have the army stay near kings landing so there is less logistic issues when it comes to food and pay.
It would be like Romes Praetorian Army which basically owned the Emperor. However, that's what was happening already anyways, the largest army that is CLOSEST to you, is what owns the real power. No matter if its various small armies or a single centralized army. A standing Army that's loyal to the King and/or the Nation (since they are different depending on who you ask) would be a good solution that creates it's own different set of problems. And not only does a standing army need to be paid, a standing army needs to be USED or else it gets restless and starts its own wars. If you pay them to stand around and do nothing, they will keep 9n demanding increasingly high paychecks every new decade. That's exactly why Rome was destroyed by the Praetorian. Having multiple smaller armies loyal to their lords isn't primitive or simplistic, it's a deliberate calculated move to neuter ambitious men's ability to revolt. It's basically creating a skill ceiling that no one can surpass because gathering an army is a sign of mutiny and the standing king can go run you down. But if a standing army exists as is the largest army, aka Joffrey's idea, the crown will be held hostage by that army. A standing army can only work long term when you constantly have enemies to conquer. It can NOT exist in peacetime. Even today, the army of USA the largest army in the world, constantly sparks wars overseas so they can come in, otherwise they get told the army is a waste of spending. The president is a puppet, the army really owns America. And the CIA owns them.
Maybe he could build something like the Tagmata of the Byzantine empire. A professional heavy infantry and cavalry to be the core of an army largely made up of conscripts from local forces.
One thing that is the case is that Joffrey would make the total troop numbers of Westeros much smaller. Joffrey said the North needs to only supply 10,000 men to the Crown. For context, the North can field a total of up to 45,000 troops. Abolishing regional armies would take away 35,000 troops from the North alone. For further context, all the regions of Westeros can field a total of 450,000 troops. So if we're going by the same fraction of 10,000 over 45,000 (2/9ths) for the North, we're reaching 100,000 troops for the whole Royal Army recruited from all regions. Joffrey wants 350,000 troops gone. Now this is still the medieval age. Numbers in the medieval age more often than not does play a huge factor in winning battles. Historically, kings who had the bigger armies won with the only major exception of maybe Agincourt or some others. But majorly, whoever had the bigger army won. Plus this is a continent the size of South America. That size area would be hard to properly garrison today with modern soldiers and technology. Back then when you could only communicate with birds would be a logistical nightmare. However trained your soldiers are, they can't teleport.
Joffrey the Conciliator was doing his best to get Westeros ready for the threat of the White Walkers. What a great king.
Joffrey "the Realms Delight".
Joffrey "the Merciful"
Joffrey the gentle
The magnanimous lol 😂
Joffrey the Joy
It's the case of a broken clock being right twice a day. Joffrey was awful but he was right about the royal army and he was also right about the threat Danaerys and her dragons. And he was ignored both times lol
Because he was awful most of the time. People won't listen to you if you're wrong 90% of the time, even if you're right on the money on something.
No he wasn't right, and anyone who thinks a standing professional army in medieval times is a good idea is an idiot. That's a good way to bankrupt your kingdom, it's bloody expensive to maintain a force of man at arms let alone and entire royal army. There's a reason it was never done in real history or in asoiaf history. The few "standing" armies were just a couple thousand professional soldiers, which in that case are just man at arms.
He was right about the threat but would have been mistaken to engage her.
@@KROGANLovesKittensAndPuppiesright but him and his “father” were both at least gonna do something abt her. If Robert was still king he prolly would’ve kept sending assassins and using his influence to slow her down in Essos. If they’d listened to Joffrey and realized Robert was right abt her and the dorthraki they prolly could’ve suggested some similar covert attack. Robert was the only one who ever really saw daenerys becoming a threat, even Ned wanted them to leave her alone
Most people are ignored when they are right making suggestions that change institutions. Usually it takes someone controlling that change to cause it.
Joffrey started sounding real, real close to Louis XIV there for a real hot second. Started making a lot of sense. Made me realize that if they could find a never-ending supply of women who enjoyed getting shot by crossbows that Joffrey's post-nut clarity might have brought about a golden age of centralized authority.
His points about having a professional army loyal directly to The Crown is a good idea.
The fact that he brings it up only as part of how to punish separatist notions in The North by DOUBLING THEIR TAXES(the dumbest way to fight disloyalty) and conscripting their men into said Royal Army(which brings the risk of conscripting potential traitors into your army on mass)
yeah centralized authority is definitely a good thing that benefits us greatly today!
@@RipOffProductionsLLC The reason taxes were typically increased was to annoy the aristocratic elite. Obviously they would try to extract more wealth from the peasantry to make up the difference but they wouldn't get much more than they already were out of their people. Hard to finance a war when you're paying reparations, and the standing army would then enforce the crowns demands because it's basically their pay they would be seizing.
@@RipOffProductionsLLC
See, that's where you're wrong.
A soldier who is paid to be loyal is not a loyal soldier.
A soldier who is paid to be loyal and who is told he is better than those losers he is paid to oppress is a very loyal soldier.
@@lordhandsomeswag1854 I mean, Joffrey is the king... There wasn't supposed to be an "Us". LOL
Joffrey was an awful king but he was sharp at finding his enemies worst fears which made him terrifying
He was too hotheaded. The problems with a teenager king not raised correctly
He was a coward, so of course he understood fear
@@shade.cinema He was a c**t. And as the wisest character on the show pointed out, there's no cure for being a c**t. (In more modern terms, he was a psychopath, and there's no cure for that either.)
@@SA2004YGhe was a protected child. Given time he could of been more
His sadism couldn't be fixed especially since he will become the most powerful person in Westeros.@@Pacbandit13
Joffrey was born too soon for Westeros' renaissance era.
The era of all powerful absolute monarchs
He was born just in time to change it! His excessive srbitrariety is the kind of thing it is seen as romantic or just forgotten if one manages to cling to power through the reforms. Cute even
@@shade.cinema The Story tells that Daenery Targaryen is a Mad Queen but she is not 😂 Daenery Targaryen is very kind Queen she alwalysly crying when one of her closes armies died, Daenery Targaryen is Friendly Queen, the only reason why some houses hates her is because she is a Targaryen, but Houses Fooled by Cersei Lannister, the real enemy is Cersei Lannister, Jon Snow killed Daenery Targaryen not because he hate Daenery Targaryen this is to saved all the people in the Kings Landing and making a peace in all houses. this is also why Jon Snow choosing to not claimed the Kings Landing even he had a Claimed since he is a Targaryen because if he claimed the iron throne the war was not end since he is also a Targaryen so Jon Snow Choosing to be a Warden of the Wall for the safety of Westeros.
@@Raymund38TVM lots of yap. we dont know if any of that will happen in the books. until winds is released its all speculation. We can still reasonably guess Dany will burn down kings landing or do some other "mad" thing. It would probably have some deeper motive or purpose
@@Raymund38TVM There was no more Wall and there was no more threat to Westeros from the North - everyone on the show except the Night's Watch treats the Night's Watch as a joke because they know how little threat the Wildlings actually pose, they've just forgotten why there was a NW to begin with.
When Stannis walks in the room, we all become professional soldiers.
#StannistheMenace
Stannis is no better than any other kinslayer. Boo Stannis. Booo.
@@ngarcia2116 Not sure why Stannis is so well liked by so many viewers. I don't think he was meant to be charismatic.
@@0816M3RC not the viewers but the readers.
@@ngarcia2116Renly would have killed him tbf
"travel from king's landing to winterfell is estimated to last 50 days on horseback"
Well... not in season 8
Season 8 of what?
or season 1, Cersei says in the 1st episode that they are traveling for
1 month (A.K.A. 30 days).
@@7dragons7swords and she says that in exasperation, so she is more likely to overstate than understate.
@@7dragons7swords 50 days includes stops and delays.
😂😂😂❤
Harrenhall should have become a permanent military base. Capable of deploying troops to almost any important location.
Absolutely!
But all the soldiers gonna have weirwood PTSD lol
@DeMar0805 may or may only affect specific people. The garrison commander is going to have a hard time, though.
@@DeMar0805A+
Harrenhall should have been the capital
Something you missed, is that very next episode Bobby B talks about how the 7 kingdoms are weaken by having everyone have a personal army
That's why you need a dragon to hold the kingdoms. Aegon I declared any lord who went to war without the crowns authority was a rebel to all of the kingdoms. So technically under that rule arresting Tyrion and then having Gregor Clegane attack the Riverlands would've made the stark/tullys and the lannisters rebels to the crown
I forgot about that scene! Thank you for the reminder! 💪
The 7 kingdoms aren’t weaker by everyone having a personal army usurpers are weakened by everyone having a personal army
Quite probably the idea came from Bobby and Joffrey was just parroting. He doesn't strike me as beoing able to come to that idea by himself. Robert on the other hand had more vision and smart than he is credited for.
@@jeremyscungio16 Targaryens used the dragons to rule but they never instigated deep cultural changes, 300 years later, the 7 crowns still work based on a feudal system. Hence why, once you remove the dragons, they couldn't have one king not being challenged by a rebellion, first from the blackfyre, then Robert's. And then Robert had the greyjoy rebellion and finally the war of five kings which will probably lead to either a new strong moarch supported by dragons (Danny, Aegon or Jon) or entering societal modernit and moving to a more centralised system with some sort of system to regulate the power of the king (magna carta of some sorts).
Joffrey did have one other good idea. In one scene tywin talks to joffrey in the throne room and at one point the topic of danaerys comes up. Tywin makes a bunch of excuses to not do anything whereas joffrey wants to do something. Of course as he does, tywin carries the conversation and makes his idea seem like the smart one, but anyone thinking critically will realise joffrey was right.
Joffrey was right about that
I don't think anyone in Westeros really believed she had dragons, and if she didn't have dragons Tywin would have been 100% correct.
Dragons are the nuclear weapons of the GoT world, with the difference being that only one great power even had dragons or had any hope of having dragons.
To be fair, the situation they were in was the equivalent of 5G poisoning. All specialists claim 5G is harmless, all data shows 5G is harmless, world experience tells you 5G is harmless, but some people still believe it's harmful. Well, Daenerys actually having big ass dragons and an army and ships and making the cross at the worst possible time is essentially we finding out that indeed 5G was harmful.
Also, do keep in mind, she was only a threat because she caught Westeros with their pants down. If Tywin didn't die and the kingdoms held together, Daenerys wouldn't make it to shore.
Since morals are not really in the question... I wonder about idea of being raised inside the army. Imagine that. Crown takes orphans from all of kingdoms, feeds them, keeps them, ensures love for the king, and from them creates army. Granted, it would be long before children would grow up, but you can bend their minds into fanatic lovers of the crown, create image of caring king-father etc.
You know what... as sinister as that sounds... you might be onto something. Though it would have to be a completely separate unit, as you can't have them mingling with other people (in order to not break the brainwashing)
@@shade.cinema Sure. Crown may build big complex as orphanage and training ground. It would be seen by many as something noble to do, building place for those children.
And they don't even need to make them all soldiers. Army needs armourers, other essential workers, so they could make ilusion of choice, though every choice after reaching adulthood would end up as part of royal army.
That way Crown would need only to ensure that those children feel in debt to it, love their king like a father, and their only dream is to serve the king. And that would boost King's opinion around his kingdom, after all he takes care of orphans and ensures that they are well.
@@yourgodemperorofeverything1354 That's actually really smart...
So, similar to the Ottoman Janissary system? 🤔 That sounds interesting.
Janissaries. Worked great until the Janissaries just stopped listening to the Sultan and started looking out for themselves. That's always been the problem with standing armies - who protects the kingdom from its own army?
The theoretical ideal time would be under a successful Tommen rule. With Cersei’s eventual death and Stannis already broken Tommen could add the Westerlands and Stormlands to the Crownlands. All this power combined with the Tyrell alliance would basically make the crown invincible to anything but dragons.
That's such a good idea but also it's hard to manage many small lords both big lord paramounts and small diverese lords are hard to govern in reality. for a medival society governing Westeros efectivly is impossibpe well if Iron Throne was smaller and more imperial and burocratic like china
The best time would have been at the start of Robert's reign. The crown is in massive debt by Joffery's coronation. I believe it's something like 20 million gold dragons which 50 silver stags were considered enough for men to face certain death for.
As for the westerlands that couldn't be brought into royal possession without a fight. The Westerlands were ruled by Kevan after Tywin's death, Kevan wouldn't give his land and wealth to the crown considering he fought alongside tywin in the Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion over some insults and loans. Tommen despite being Jamie's son still styles himself as a Baratheon because their claim to the throne is through being Robert's kids.
The thing is in GOT Aegon the comqueror basically changes nothing after the invasion. His real life counterpart William the conqueror dissolved the seven Anglo-Saxon earldoms and divided them into smaller earldoms all of which were too small to offer an individual threat to the crown and all of which were technically owned by the crown with his lords being called ‘tenants’, he then replaced English nobles with Norman’s who were loyal to him and he then had all knights and sheriff’s, who were important to the running of an earldom, swear loyalty to him and not the lord ruling the land. He then created a military system where Lords and bishops had to provide a certain amount of knights for a certain amount of time. He also used the church to spread pro Norman propaganda and he crushed any significant rebellions and threats. By 1075 during the revolt of the earls, two Normans earls and one Saxon earl rebelled against the crown. The Anglo Saxons supported William instead of the rebels. He also built castles all over England and all of which were a days march from each other. He also created the Domesday book, a list of all lands and holdings in England which he could then implement a tax for all of it. The thing is all of these things happened in the decades following the conquest, where he destroyed all significant military resistance. Any king in Westeros without a significant edge such as dragons, or an army loyal to him and with no links to Westeros, would be unable to do it as none of the lords would willingly make themselves poorer or give up power in return to make the king stronger.
1000% agree with this take 👌
Ah. Yes. A tenancy structure. William thought of that? Shit, that was my idea too. - G
Another point is William had access to a large number of Norman resources from Normandy. Whereas the targaryens are basically the last remnant of valyria. Sure the velaryons and celtigars exist, and there are valyrian nobles in volantis, and valyrian bastards in lys, but in effect the resources of valyria that would make restructuring the whole society of westeros feasible are gone.
William the Conqueror didn’t have dragons. 😂 So he had to consolidate his gains. Aegon the Conqueror just roasts any army that musters against him.
The Japanese shogunate works in a similar way. Samurai were loyal to their lords, however the Shogun required all lords to come live in the capital every alternate years. Furthermore, the vassal lords were required to send their families to the capital on the off year that they went back to their home provinces. This mitigates the risk of rebellion.
Joffrey always made the carriages run on time.
"King Joffrey was a fair and wise leader!" Barney Stinson.
Yes it takes 50 days from kings landing to winterfell until the invention of teleportation around season 5. But it was not until the great minds of Westeros perfected the technology in season 7 that teleportation really took off.
The Nights Watch system already proves that men from different regions could form a cohesive fighting force. They would just need to adjust some details to entice people to enlist. Good pay plus a pension at the end of their service (say 20 years, similar to the Roman Legion) could be enough to encourage the peasantry. Officer positions with command opportunity and prestige could encourage the lower nobility and hedge knights. A well drilled, professional army would quickly prove far superior to any lords current peasant levies.
you forgot that they were force to recruit from criminals because nobody was voluntary (only a few north nobles)
I literally said "They would just need to adjust some details to entice people to enlist." The Nights Watch is a prison colony. The Royal Army would be a career. It wouldn't be a lifelong commitment, they could have families, and could be an opportunity to improve their lot in life. My point was that men from different Westerosi cultures can work together.
@@mr_clean91 Hey, get a load of this guy. He thinks training and arming the peasantry then releasing them back into the peasant life is a smart idea hahaha. Wait until these educated and military proficient peasants decide they don't want to be serfs anymore.
Why did that stop working for Rome, and why didn't anyone in the Middle Age succeed in doing it?
Hint: it wasn't because they were stupid or didn't see the value of a professional, standing national army.
@@brucetucker4847
My point was inspired by the Hungarian Black Army, built in 1458, which was itself based on the Roman Legions. They were one of the first standing armies in Europe after the Romans that included heavy infantry. There are earlier examples with professional cavalry and archers, but levied infantry.
TL/DR The Roman socioeconomic-political-military system was an unsustainable ponzi scheme that imploded. Early Medieval lords didn't maintain standing armies because they couldn't afford them. Since no one could afford them, no one needed them. As kings consolidated power, standing armies started to make a comeback in the 1400's. Kings have always wanted them, but needed capital to get their lords to cooperate and fund them.
Long answer is complicated, but fundamentally because the Roman Legions, and by extension their entire economy, was funded by conquest. Roman soldiers were paid out of their General's pocket and victory spoils were distributed to the entire army. Therefor, Generals needed to find someone to fight so they could pay their army, and soldiers had a vested interest in making sure their General won, because that made them all rich. This incentivized Roman soldiers to be loyal to their commander ahead of the Senate or Emperor. If that meant fighting other Romans, so be it. This is what drove their conquests and is the reason why they expanded so much, but it eventually became counterproductive when there was no one left nearby to beat up and their frontier was too large to support logistically. The Senate became increasingly paranoid of good generals, because there was nothing stopping them from taking power themselves, which they regularly tried to do. This resulted in frequent civil wars that decimated the late Roman legions and made them even more hesitant to give generals powerful armies. As the regular Roman military withered they were forced to rely more heavily on German Mercenaries. As Rome became weaker and payments stopped coming in, these Germans decided they were in charge and became feudal lords. With the former empire fractured into thousands of small independent fiefdoms, no individual lord's holdings could support large standing armies. However, they did continue to maintain small garrisons of professional specialists such as cavalry and archers.
This was probably Robert’s idea. Children often repeat what their parents (especially the one they respect more) say. It is obvious that he respects Robert more than Cersy because at some point he lashes out on the Lannisters hiding in their castles, while his father won the real war.
Well, you know what they say about a Broken clock...
Alright, so I previously thought of this before, a royal westerosi army based on the model of the Roman army, and here are some things you should consider.
The elephant in the room is that, unlike the Roman empire, which theoretically was geographically blessed by the fact that it could expand in all four directions, Westeros is pretty much the opposite of that. The entire continent is already united, and the only possible expansion would be in the inhospitable far North.
A standing army would simply have nothing to do if some lord or some region didn't decide to rebel.
This could be temporarily supplanted by the building and maintaining of roads (which wouldn't make as much sense as the Romans HAD to build roads as they didn't have the luxury of horse+saddles so their main mode of transportation, the carriage, required well built and maintained roads), but there's only so many roads you can maintain until someone figures out you don't need an army for that. Imagine if there's a 50 year period with no military conflict in Westeros, and the realm was in financial trouble. Why would they continue to pay for a full time army when nobody alive remembers a time when an army was needed.
And while we're on the topic of the far North, you run into the problem that Trajan ran into - an empire spread further than its natural borders is an unsustainable money sink. The wall is the best example of a natural border that is easily defendable and a smart ruler wouldn't try to expand past it.
So now that we got geography out of the way, let's talk about the social reasons why this wouldn't work. The Roman army was able to recruit so much from so many different cultures (and become stronger for it) because there was power in the status of roman citizenship. It offered a very real path of social mobility for peoples that would otherwise spend their entire lives eating roots in some forest somewhere.
Westeros' system has no social mobility, except for the rare cases of knighthood. In fact, you could argue that Essos is a much better place for someone of low birth to live, especially in the free cities. There you could join a mercenary company, become a trader or merchant, and move up from there.
There would simply be no reason why someone from Essos would want to join the Westerosi army, since after serving they wouldn't be in a more privileged position than the lowest peasant in Westeros, which is objectively a lower class than the lowest peasant in Essos. Except if maybe there's a deal between the Westerosi crown and the slave masters that would grant freedom to slaves after 25 years of service, like the Romans granted citizenship.
It's news to me that romans didn't have horses lmfao
@@jamesquinn6662 they had horses, since they also had carriages. I specified they didn't have horse+saddles, and Westeros does. A single horse does not need a good road, it can take you basically anywhere. A carriage requires a well-maintained road to function and not break down.
@@RaduOprina romans had 4 horn saddles from the 1st century bc onwards
@@jamesquinn6662 even a simple Google search tells you that, while early saddles existed in concept, they were very rudimentary, impractical and not widely used. Early practical saddles started from 300 CE onwards, when Romans already lost their military prowess and most of the Roman power moved to Byzantium.
This video isn't about whether or not it's practical to build an army. It's just a thought experiment as to how Joffrey would go about in doing it. I do agree with your comment for the most part.
Professional armies and nationalism came from a fierce process that saw the end of feudal relations in Europe to proto capitalist relations with monarchs and nobles on the losing end of this transition. The crucial step missing is the expropriation of peasant lands to the proto state and to the burgeoning middle class merchants and smaller nobles that makes professional, standing armies a necessity. There isnt a state without the expropriation of commoners and turning them into wage workers.
Yes, by turning the commoners into wagies, the crown has a bigger base to tax and then fund their various projects, including armies. You're right on this point.
The crucial things missing in Westeros are (a) a sophisticated professional bureaucracy to make the whole thing work and (b) massive piles of cash to pay for it all. Westeros is more like Medieval Europe than Renaissance Europe in both respects. The cash in Europe didn't come from the nation-state expropriating the peasants, peasants don't generate any money. It came from a rising middle class and the return of trade on the scale of the Roman Empire at its height, trade that could be taxed. Or in Spain's case, the cash came from looting the fantastically wealthy but militarily backwards (compared to Europe or Asia) civilizations it conquered in the Americas.
0:35 How dare you
Oh I dare sir
Alright,
You guys remember when you were kid and you fire the lord commander of your Kings guard?
@@VHDeathyes I remember it well
In order to establish a professional army, the crown would have to modernise its taxation system, something the lords would never allow. Secondly the economy would need to change from a largely agrarian economy to a more productive one, a cash rich one to make it able to pay these taxes. The Roman Empire struggled to pay its soldiers, that’s why is was expansionary by nature. When it maintained its borders, it was largely unable to support its massive army. The size of Westeros is similar to that of Europe, no one has yet established a professional, pan-European army in two thousand years. You could argue that the Roman army managed this. But most of the army came from Italy and Spain.
I actually believe that if Tywin wasn't so dismissive of Jof, they would be unstoppable combo. I know Tywin would manage to get him under control and guide him.
Tywin treated him like a child, so he acted like one
My man Shade Cinema is back and stronger than ever! This was indeed a great audiovisual essay! I too thought like Joffrey for a unified national army but like you pointed out: it's closer to a dream than reality!
I think it's still very much possible, but the amount of time, money, and effort it would take would be massive.
For a centralised army, you need a unifying enemy.
Maybe if there was a large Essos army that could pose a threat to Westeros, unification would be necessary
Yeah the only way they could do this is after the WW attacks since most of the old guard is dead.
In other words, unless you have Wardens in all your area's as Loyal as Ned, then the kingdom always risks the chance of Rebellion from any territory that doesn't agree.
Joffrey the Gentle. The realm's delight. Long may he reign.
Joffrey the Lad
Great video dude. I loved when out of nowhere we got Stannis!!!
Stannis is the f'ing man. Glad you enjoyed the video 💪💪
The King’s Army could also be used for great vocational education. It’s a fantastic opportunity to train significant portions of each generation to be competent in all sorts of fields that would benefit the economy and employment in general, even if it’s high turnover like every Westerosi male for two years of their life. You could easily swing that into a propaganda machine, too, since there is no Westerosi K-12 common core. The continent would benefit from counterinvasion doctrines, too, which would be very germane given fAegon, Dany, and the Crown’s OUTSTANDING debt to the Iron Bank of Braavos.
Joffrey Lannister swindling the world’s largest bank repeatedly out of half the world’s gold would have been SO fitting given Lann the Clever founded their house through swindling.
I didn't know that Lann the Clever was the name of the founder. You learn new things every day ✨️
Joffrey wanting a Royal army totally made sense.
After watching this video and seeing all the things that have to go in it is brilliant.
His talk with Tywin about doing something about Dany and her dragons was a smart choice as well.
Tywin choosing to do nothing and making Joffrey ignore it was wrong in that situation.
I'm convinced. If I ever end up king of the seven kingdoms, you shall be named hand of the king
Thank you, your Grace 👑
Of course, even Bobby b agreed that the realm needs unity.
my glorious king joffrey has graced my screen once again!😍😍😍
Wot
Book Joff is somewhat more sympathetic than show Joff. Book Joffrey is incompetent, show Joffrey was a sadistic c.u.n.t.
Joff was absolutely right about the standing army, especially knowing winter is coming.
Did he know that winter is coming?
"There's no cure for bein' a c**t."
5:37 I'm at work rn, my hand snapped to the pause button so fast it was like second nature.
Dyin laughing at work rn
love how you're basically describing the transition period that lead to age of absloutism in our own history.
Like it or not, Joffrey would have to consolidate his power in order to create such a force. Glad you enjoyed the video brother 🙏
No need to reply with a comment, just wanted to leave a positive comment to boost the algorithm. I'm glad the UA-cam God brought me to your channel. This was a fun video. Looking forward to seeing more.
Gonna reply anyways. Thank you brother 🙏
Combining many of my favorite things in one video? Subscribed.
Welcome aboard!
14:45 if i learned anything from the final episode of GoT, sir Bronn of the blackwater recommends brothels. Lots of them... theres your money :)
🍑 makes money, even to this day. But the societal impact that a ton of brothels would have (mainly degeneracy) can cause big issues in the long run
@@shade.cinema Ser Bronn Master of Coin would disagree
@@tofphuu5781 Lord Bronn at that point.
Dude, this was entertaining AF - I love the novel take here on our boy King Joff, lol.
Glad you enjoyed it!
King Robert had the same idea ... but that idea is easier said than done. I'm sure every King of Westeros had the same idea, but none were able to achieve this standing army. Gold and loyalty are commodities that are hard to come by.
I’m sure many Kings of Westeros would have wanted an army for the Crown but they would have been opposed by their own Hands (who were usually powerful lords with their own armies) and probably faced opposition from their Small council (also full of powererful lords). I’m sure Tywin would have sabotaged any attempt by the Mad King or Joffrey to build a Royal Army that would weaken Lannister power. Even Jon Arryn would have opposed any attempt by Robert to build his own army.
It would have helped if Robert hadn't bankrupted the realm. Aerys was hoarding a treasury full of gold.
Professionalism is just as hard to come by.
Beautiful work, my friend. Great quality content and your scripts are very well written and tight, making the exposition of information very organic and interesting. You'll be one of the greats. Big hugs!
Thank you so much!
Joffrey was an absolute king in a feudal era 😞
Truly ahead of his time
It’s also why his demise was inevitable. Along with the madness and cruelty without the gravitas and charisma to build necessary alliances.
the sponge bob meme caught me off guard lol
An interesting topic for sure. Something to consider though is that while most of Westeros is administered by local Lords (Starks, Tyrells and so on) the Crown does rule directly in the Crownlands. Lords of the Crownlands are under direct oversight of Kings Landing. So a first step for the Crown to consolidate military power could be establishing a standing army of the King in the Crownlands. For now the only force directly under the Kings control is the city watch of Kings Landing that is only 2000 men strong but creating a standing force for the Crownlands would greatly strengthen the royal government. And in the case of emergency you would have a highly trained force available to protect the capitol in the time it takes the other great houses to raise their armies.
Interesting. I never thought of that! Establishing the army in the crownlands would be a great way to begin the ascendency of the crown 👑
You'd still have the problem that any two of the great houses combined would be more powerful than the royal army. In Westeros, as in feudal Europe, power is based on land, and the size of the army you can raise is dictated by how many knights/professional soldiers can be supported by the amount of land you have to give them in return for the obligation for military service. And by amount I also mean agricultural richness - the North has a LOT of land but it doesn't support as many people as the Reach does.
The establishment of a professional royal standing westerosi army was perhaps most possible during the height of house tagaryen with all of their dragons still alive. Yes i know there are good reasons why they didnt. Why spend enormous amounts of royal tax money on thousands of professional soldier that need to be paid, trained, armed, and fed when you have dragons that are substantially cheaper? Im sure house tagaryen never saw the need to establish their army since their dragons were more than enough and arguably more powerful. However, with those dragons, apart from Dorne you could quite literally force whatever system or taxes you want on the realm and nobility through the force and threat of the dragons. Thats why i always personally never undestood why House Tagaryen at the height of their power, never attempted to end the feudal system of governance and attempted to centralize power like an imperial system with a buarcracy and centrally appointed governors and adminstrators than feudal lords. If the local nobles refuse to cooperate, pay higher taxes for the army, or rebel?
Well, you have dragons, and you can easily force the issue through or annihilate the rebelling nobles and factions. I mean, this was seen during the Dance of Dragons, where the Blacks and Greens had an incredible amount of trouble raising the men needed to fight the war, cause House Tagaryen literally barely had its own personal army, they needed to suck up and politically negotiate with the houses for ther armies.
Without the dragons, the task is not impossible but it is a significantly much more difficult task because it would take centuries of work to consoldiate central power over the houses. This is something that Joffery has 0 ability to do. Even Tywin Lannister would find this task next to impossible. Lastly, I really dont think resources is that much an issue. Even in the backwards feudal systems, westeros could marshall approx 250,000 men in levies. Heck in the show, depsite being levies, all of the houses personal army looks like a professional army with traning. So, a centralized westeros could with the right reforms could maintian a royal standing army of substantial size.
Cus they were like their kind entitled brats
The beginning music from the first minute and a half comes from Fable 1, the video game! I knew it right away!
Amazing game. Honestly, any game that allows you to fart in people's faces and kick chickens is an instant classic
Such an excellent video for such a small channel, which is rare. I hope you grow exponentially and cross 100k (and then a million) soon!
Thank you so much! It means a lot to hear that 💪💪
I just started looking at this video and agree with your points. As a book reader I have never thought of it from that prespective and why banner men and citizens are always more loyal to their lord than the king himself. Very good break down.
Thank you so much!
I think that you’d have to be careful with garrisons. If the North is garrisoned by a bunch of soldiers from kings landing or the wester lands than they may see the garrisons as an occupation. Look to the American revolution when Britain sent troops to occupy Boston. I think a way to solve this may be by using Northern troops, however the people may still be unrestful.
Joffrey the Just
😢 glorious king
Joffrey. The kind and gentle truth speaker.
Margarey was low key perfect for Joffery, she was the best PR team for him and could potentially curb his worst impulses. Doubtful but still
Mance Rayder as a roman emperor is priceless 6:18
And rightly so. He united the small warring tribes into a 100k army.
I'm so glad you got a "viral" video, congratz!!
Thank you!
Dude you figured out the secret of gaining attention!! Good job!
Thank you!
I think you're understanding the sheer cost of this. You offhandedly mentioned restoring Harrenhall when building it bled the Riverlands completely dry. You'd also have to completely relinquish control of the North and Dorne, as Dorne is pretty much unconquerable and the North is even worse. Dorne fought off Aegon the conqueror and Balerion the black dread. Even Daeron the Young Dragon who was inspired by Alexander the great failed to conquer it. There's also no persuading Dorne. If you refuse to give up after your country has been through so much devastation that your sand's turned to glass from dragonfire, you're not giving up. And even if you could conquer either Dorne or the North, you couldn't hold it. Aegon the Conqueror's lords were assassinated on mass both inside and outside of Dorne and almost every single lord of the North is conspiring against the Boltons. Maegor the Cruel barely managed to hold onto places like the Riverlands when the faith rose up and he rode Balerion. The only reason Jaehaerys could be the beloved reformer he ended up becoming was the sheer devastation wreaked by Maegor. Aegon the Unlikely was probably the most powerful king since the Dance and he decided that he couldn't push reforms to help the peasantry without the power of dragons much less subdue the entire continent to create one united military.
This video is really just a thought experiment more than anything, but here are some counterpoints. First of all, Harrenhal would be rebuilt with the resources of all of Westeros, not just the Riverlands. Second, the conquest of both Dorne and the North would be difficult, but the sheer number of soldiers would make that effort a lot easier. Also, although I didn't mention this in the video, after conquering the kingdoms, the crown can carve up the land into smaller duchies so that the kingdom as a whole can never unite against the crown. I never said it was going to be easy. All I said was that it's possible.
@@shade.cinema Built at the expense of Westeros, precisely how?
And who dispossesses the great houses? It's a chicken and egg problem. The crown can never get rid of the great houses as long as they add up to more military force that it can muster, but it will never be able to muster more force than the great houses as long as they still exist.
You might say the problem is that Martin never establishes Robert's or Joffrey's or even Aegon's tax policy.
Royal garrisons is something I was thinking as well! I was hoping you mentioned that, and you did!
Love this!
Very well thought out & great presentation. Thanks ❤
Thank you so much!
Thank you so much!
The fable music was a great touch, maybe you thought no body would notice, but I have.
I thought it fit the ASOIAF universe well. Will definitely implement it more in future videos 📹
Absolutely. Most people ignored this cause they just love to hate him. But he was actually a future Tywin of sorts
I forget who pointed this out, but now I see it I can't unsee it. The GoT Iron Throne, all the swords melted together... why haven't the non-steel parts burned or melted away? the swords should not still have grips and pommels
Even Robert said something similar as Joffrey to Cersei. “What’s the bigger number, five or one?”
Didn’t even watch the whole video jus the opening clip but yeah he was right about that
Hope you watched the rest 🙏
Amazing. This being at 2k is a fucking crime, justice will be enacted soon enough
Thank you good sir. Have a wonderful day 💪
The way I see it the best way to assert control over the lords of Westeros would be to find some force or thing that presented a large military threat and could move exceptionally quickly around the realm perhaps even by air.
If one were to somehow lose that the crown would wind up relying almost solely on tradition and the inherent risk of upsetting the status quo scaring lords to protect them from being quickly dethroned.
Joffrey was right many countless times but everytime Everyone either ignored him or mainly told that he was wrong about it in a clever way!
You can be right about things and still be a d!ck
@@shade.cinema Yes he did terrible things but it was not entirely his fault, his reasons are the same as every villain wanting love and attention even joker who is a grown man by height atleast wants love and attention to himself but the difference he would never love back(except to The Batman) and joker did got loved from the start till when he was child and from his wife as well, Joffrey never did, it was not entirely his fault in the books he was way more younger child and was never given any love or attention from whom he believed was his father or anyone else Even the person who ever was with his mother only seen him from what she wants to she never tried to understand him as she and everyone else always instilled thr idea that he's gonna be a king and value of a king but he was never taught about what Everyone means to the king, his actions and everything he does it to maintain that what he was taught, to protect the value of the king he taught while doing so would give him the love and he knew he wasn't getting it that's why his actions became way strict and cruel till Margaery pretended to show him she cares rather fears him even when he taught he was weak she told him he was strong and brave pretended to be impressed, Sansa and her mother could have been the one Joffrey could have shown care specially at start point Sansa was the most close but comparatively vice versa his mother tried to say he could his actions later on or Sansa tried to show sympathy he neither wanted that as he knew that already and didn't wanted to look weak and That's why Joffrey listened and shown cared To Margaery as she she pretended to show that she believes he isn't weak and love him for himself and than show that in a fear state if she did say it in fear Joffrey wouldn't have cared about her but since she made him she truly loves him, Joffrey cared and loved her back and started to treat poor people as good too all Joffrey needed was to be treated as Ned treated Jon Snow just One person would have been enough to have love and cared about Joffrey as he would have shown care like that!
@@2301WAYNE To love your children is important, but Joffrey is still his own person. He still chose to be cruel. He still chose to torture people. Your upbringing is not an excuse for cruelty.
@@shade.cinema Yes Exactly that's the point All Villains are their own person and All Villains choose to be Villains by themselves each and every one of them that's why Villains Are Villains And Heroes Are Heroes, Villains give the pain to everyone that they received while The Heroes make sure everyone doesn't, and that's also the reason in the end all Villains are the same noone is better than the other at all!
You are right in saying that villains give the pain that they've felt to others, and I guess in a way, heroes give love to others for the pain that they have felt.
I'd take all the bastards, criminals, and folks who were desperate for a second chance to join and build a culture of espirit de corp towards service to the crown. Raise families into the service, women and men would be free to join. Enshrine a meritocratic structure, trained to be elite shock troops (like the Fremen or Sardaukar), able to hold much larger forces through brutal gorrella warfare.
There would be a true intelligence department associated with the Royal army. Furthermore, have secret supplies around each area of operations for quick deployment.(like the Blades in Skyrim) Nearly all members should be in plain cloths like the marines at a bar. Constantly listening and mingling with the locals till they're indistinguishable from them.
No more than "500" men and women to garrison each of the forts. This is to give the illusion that the crown is merely there to support the lords not keep them in line. These men should be actively seeking to assist the lords in missions to uphold that mirage. The added effect being that they would be able to study there possible enemies and even learn from them.
Thats all i got for now
Ahh the nostalgia from that Fable music at the start was strong. Man that game had beautiful music 🎶 😮
Finally someone's saying this. Jeoffery talking about a professional army was super high IQ.
Alternate plan: what if rather than starting a war that could devastate the continent, and risk overthrow, the crown was to form a new brotherhood of sworn warriors similar to The King's Guard or the Night's Watch?
This Brotherhood could have a recruitment philosophy similar to that of the Night's Watch. Opening membership to all men of the seven kingdoms regardless of birth or past deeds, including condemned criminals who could earn clemency by joining.
The brotherhood could be divided into sub orders like the Night's Watch, with some of the sub orders devoted to combat adjacent disciplines. The Brotherhood could also entice more prospective members with the option of finite terms of service for volunteers. 7 years seems appropriate for Westeros.
Of course volunteers would have the option of serving longer, and could be incentivized to do so through the promise of tax breaks that scale with length of service, and loans to help long term veterans establish themselves in the trades they learned in service to the brotherhood after separating from service. (These incentives for long-term veterans could also have a side benefit of stimulating westeros's economy, thus creating more taxable revenue for the crown)
To address the issues of mobility, one of the brotherhood's sub orders could be dedicated to building and maintaining a larger network of roads throughout Westeros.
However, as this would be a very long-term project, that could span decades if not generations, a more immediate solution to the mobility problem could be to build a fleet of long ships, capable of navigating the seas and the rivers. And training the Brotherhood as an amphibious fighting force.
As it happens there are more rivers that span the regions of Westeros than there are major roads. Such as the Blackwater, the Trident, the Mander, and the Green Blood, in the south. As well as the White Knife, the Broken Branch, and the Last River, in the North. Not to mention all the smaller rivers in each region.
The king could endear the Brotherhood to the nobility and the small folk, by tasking them with patrolling the most dangerous and remote stretches of the King's Road, such as the High Road, and the northernmost stretch of the Kings Road. And building up infrastructure along the rivers to facilitate more waterborne trade.
In order to lessen the potential provocation to lords who might feel threatened by Royal garrisons on their land, the brotherhoods initial Garrison's could be established in ruined castles that do not see regular use. Such as Moat Cailin, Old Stones, Queenscrown, Summerhall, and The Whispers. Or along the less developed shores of the waterways.
Once established the Brotherhood could generate additional revenue through tariffs on trade along the roadways and waterways that they've built up and secured.
Finally, the Brotherhood could be given cultural resonance and legitimacy by tying them to one of the crowns pre-existing assets or institutions. Such as the Kings road, the royal fleet, or the treasury.
An interesting alternative viewpoint. My big concern is that it makes the Night's Watch redundant with the whole clemency thing. I would get rid of that personally.
@@shade.cinema Oh I'm well aware that using clemency to recruit men to the Royal army would negatively impact The Night's Watch. But I'm also aware that very few southron kings have been very concerned with the welfare of The Watch, and that's the perspective from which I imagined this standing army scheme. I don't necessarily think it would be the right way to go, but I do believe that a southron king determined to consolidate power might consider it a viable tactic.
6:18 The wilding army looks a lot more organized and professional than I remember
That's after they found a bunch of red dye too
Legit, this was the only scene that Joffrey scared me.
one thing about expenses, usually in feudalism most of taxes went to local lord, overlord usually gets only 20 percent, it get ever worse if there are multiple tiers like small houses>great houses>crown except crownlands, this means crown gets only 4 percent except from crownlands where they gets 20 percent. Without feudalism crown income would be increased 20 times , that would be more than enough for standing armies and bureaucracy, as Roman empire and Chinese empire testify
Joffrey immediately doubling the taxes of the north would cause a rebellion in and of itself.
The only house that at its peak had the power to create a central army was house targaryen
But they had their dragons and so kept the status quo. They didn't need an army until their dragons died.
The real problem with having a standing army in Westeros is the fact that you have such long winters, when you're expected to feed these people through 2 years of summer without producing food is an even worse drain on resources with an even longer winter especially seeing as how these people would eat well and quite a lot. One way that this might be feasible is with a slave class like the Spartans had, but to be honest if you made them a working class sort of engineer class like the Romans had it might pay itself off pretty quickly. The Night's Watch could be seen as a standing army in and of itself and has autonomy over itself in a land that produces the least amount of food.
wait in the opening it is said that "Joffrey" caused a continent wide war. But did he though? What actions did he take for that?
He's probably blaming the execution of ned stark, but realistically the war was guaranteed
Nice fable music choice as soon as I heard it i knew it
I remember that episode and was like "wait...he's actually making sense."..then he killed my fav whorah😂😂
So, aside from Harrenhal, do you have any other specific locations in mind for building garrisons?
Of course! Harrenhal would be a fortress not a garrison (fortress would man more soldiers). I would have 1 or 2 garrisons per kingdom, depending on their needs. In the North, I would put them in places such as Last Hearth, Torrhen's Square, and Moat Cailin for example, while in the South, places like Golden Tooth, Tumbleton and Summerhall would be good spots
@shade.cinema May I ask one more question? You mentioned in the video that the Kingsroad and the other major highways were insufficient in connecting Westeros. Where would you build new roads?
1:38 WOAH!!! I did not know that Westeros was that big... I thought it was the same size as Great Britain
Joffrey I Baratheon Prince That Was Promised😭🙏
This quote haunt me for to this day. I even read books to learn more, but he never say anything like this in books, he was just vile and spoil brat.
If you can have a Nights Watch, you can have a centralized army
I enjoyed this content. What I would like is to know if you would you be willing to expand on the world of ice and fire? What would be required to more closely resemble the modern world and what in the ice and fire world would be likely to influence them going in that direction. All characters remain relatively the same but what ideas or incidents would cause certain characters to technologically and socially advance😊
So more what if scenarios?
A strong king acts boldly.
Orginally when Aegon founded Westerous Kingdom, Targayren have a royal army, they are just called Dragons. You do not need men as an army when you command a squad of flying nukes.
So they do have centralised control and there is no rebellion by a lord, it will be the 2nd Harrenhal. They fall only by Civil war with themselves.
ALL HAIL THE ONE TRUE KING!!! ❤🔥🗣
Yo you’re the first person to use fable music for game of thrones. It fits so well what the heck.
The best way that I can see to build a army would be having people join in a six year term taking anyone who volunteers. The first two years should be spent at the wall training and learning how to fight. this wold bolster the nights watch. The next two years in essos as a mercenary army to get practicable experience that would also help pay for the Army as a whole. and the last two years stationed around the realm.
A very interesting take, sir. Have a seat at my small council 🪑
I’m not gonna lie. A state sponsored mercenary army to ensure your soldiers have experience even in peacetime while also making profit off of your troops is absolutely a unique take id love to see.
The problem would be political ramifications of the army’s actions. Not to mention the possibility of losing large chunks of your army overseas for no gain.
@@kylekavan7822 following his model, I would assume most of the army is actually stationed in Westeros, as even under this framework that’s where the highest manpower requirement would be. Those first four years are practically just a training program. You only need a couple hundred men to run a mercenary company. Most mercenary armies in Essos around that size. So assuming they picked the wrong side and get wiped, it shouldn’t harm the greater army.
As for political ramifications, Westeros, as a state is already heavily isolationist. Individual nobles have relations with certain groups, but the crown seems to not interact across the narrow sea, except in moments of high tension. I don’t think Westeros really cares what Essos thinks about them
Its a super unique idea but the long period of service and the notion of fighting for someone else's interests in essos (with the possibility of death) might discourage a large number of people from joining the army thus lowering the number of enlistments. A massive propaganda machine is basically necessary that encourages people to take pride in these assignments (similar to what the nights watch originally did to recruit even noblemen)
I think that The North could pull this idea off on a smaller scale. Make Moat Cailin an army base. Farm the lands around it to feed them. They could have land appointed to them like the gift.
Barrowton and/or Widows Watch could be Naval bases with the same idea.
Both or sll three bases could support each other and protect against invasions, reavers, and generally be used to keep law and order. They could also be called up to support the watch.
Leadeship roles could go to second sons or even future lords to gain experience. It would also serve to build bonds and relationships across the north. Maybe even have mandatory service time for young men before they marry and start families.
Greybeards would probably join too.
This is like the politics of dune and their landraat, and the way the regions should supply the royal army would be a percentage, cuz 10.000 men from the north would be 20% of their army but for the reach it would be 10%
So you're suggesting amounts based on percentages?
There's one thing that isn't being discussed here-the fact that the absolutism has its roots in the Roman era of Empire, specifically the Principate and the Dominate. Most absolute monarchies modeled themselves on the Roman example, and the enthusiasm people had for Roman culture during the Renaissance gave monarchs an edge to justify centralization; Roman culture was becoming popular, so having a king who acts like a Roman Emperor wasn't seen as such a bad idea, especially after centuries of feudal warfare between lords; many peasants rich and poor saw a more powerful king as a better alternative to the aristocracy, to ensure peace and defeat foreign threats.
Westeros has no equivalent to the Roman Empire outside of the Ghiscari, and the people of Westeros have no love or enthusiasm in replicating the Ghiscari example from Essos. So imposing an absolute monarchy on Westeros is even harder than in Europe, especially since the high lords who ruled the seven kingdoms have been in charge for so long. The best chance for a centralized, Renaissance-style monarchy would be during the rule of the Targaryens BEFORE the Dance of Dragons, since you can just force the highest-ranking lords off their perch, replace them with loyal toadies, and threaten people with dragonfire if they say no. But after the Dance, any chance of that died with the Targaryen dragons.
Tasteful decision to use that Fable 1 song at the beginning
What if instead he let the lords keep their armies and had them police their lands like always. But he still made a royal military that was at least the size of two normal armies. This way if there were a rebellion the crown would immediately have a great number of men to deal with it and it would not make the lords lose power and rebel. He could also have the army stay near kings landing so there is less logistic issues when it comes to food and pay.
That would probably be the first step
It would be like Romes Praetorian Army which basically owned the Emperor. However, that's what was happening already anyways, the largest army that is CLOSEST to you, is what owns the real power. No matter if its various small armies or a single centralized army. A standing Army that's loyal to the King and/or the Nation (since they are different depending on who you ask) would be a good solution that creates it's own different set of problems.
And not only does a standing army need to be paid, a standing army needs to be USED or else it gets restless and starts its own wars. If you pay them to stand around and do nothing, they will keep 9n demanding increasingly high paychecks every new decade. That's exactly why Rome was destroyed by the Praetorian. Having multiple smaller armies loyal to their lords isn't primitive or simplistic, it's a deliberate calculated move to neuter ambitious men's ability to revolt. It's basically creating a skill ceiling that no one can surpass because gathering an army is a sign of mutiny and the standing king can go run you down. But if a standing army exists as is the largest army, aka Joffrey's idea, the crown will be held hostage by that army. A standing army can only work long term when you constantly have enemies to conquer. It can NOT exist in peacetime. Even today, the army of USA the largest army in the world, constantly sparks wars overseas so they can come in, otherwise they get told the army is a waste of spending. The president is a puppet, the army really owns America. And the CIA owns them.
You would think that the targaryens would have done this already after losing their dragons.
Once they lost them with what extra force could they have? And when they had them why would they have built such a force?
Maybe he could build something like the Tagmata of the Byzantine empire. A professional heavy infantry and cavalry to be the core of an army largely made up of conscripts from local forces.
One thing that is the case is that Joffrey would make the total troop numbers of Westeros much smaller.
Joffrey said the North needs to only supply 10,000 men to the Crown. For context, the North can field a total of up to 45,000 troops. Abolishing regional armies would take away 35,000 troops from the North alone.
For further context, all the regions of Westeros can field a total of 450,000 troops.
So if we're going by the same fraction of 10,000 over 45,000 (2/9ths) for the North, we're reaching 100,000 troops for the whole Royal Army recruited from all regions. Joffrey wants 350,000 troops gone.
Now this is still the medieval age. Numbers in the medieval age more often than not does play a huge factor in winning battles. Historically, kings who had the bigger armies won with the only major exception of maybe Agincourt or some others. But majorly, whoever had the bigger army won.
Plus this is a continent the size of South America. That size area would be hard to properly garrison today with modern soldiers and technology. Back then when you could only communicate with birds would be a logistical nightmare. However trained your soldiers are, they can't teleport.
Oooh, Fable music. Interesting choice!
Thought it would fit well