Viceroys in AGOT ?

[Calantyr]

Afaik that's the Wardens, not the actual physical titles.

And theoretically, the queen of England is the absolute monarch of England in most things.

De facto situations and legal ones differ greatly. The Byzantine up to its end had vested theoretical absolute powers to the emperor, even though in practice the strategoi controlled everything.

While in theory the king could give the kingdoms to anyone, he would never (aka doesn't have the de-facto power to do so) without being seen as a terrible tyrant, unless he had a good reason to. That, as someone else said, is accurately portrayed by revocation,

I wish some people would actually read the thread. I already conceded this point as an incorrect confusion between Lord Paramount's and Wardens.

 

[stratigo]

I wish some people would actually read the thread. I already conceded this point as an incorrect confusion between Lord Paramount's and Wardens.

Hey, did you know that wardens were the title handed out and not lords paramount?

 

[Calantyr]

Hey, did you know that wardens were the title handed out and not lords paramount?

Do tell!

 

[AirOutlaw7]

If it can be used for Counts and dukes, viceroys could be used for the Glovers and Talharts (they administer Stark land, it isn't there own) as well as the Bloody Gate and Moat Cailin.

Source? I've never seen anything that suggests that the Glovers or Tallharts are any different from the Umbers, Manderlys, Boltons, etc in this regard.

 

[CJMoore]

They're Masterly Houses, with their rulers named as Masters. They are the only two and due to dialogue in the books its implied the land they have is Stark owned yet Masterly administrated. They follow the inheritance laws of Lordly Houses however.

A landed knight or Master is bound more tightly to their liege. The Glovers and Tallharts are directly sworn to House Stark and administrate (not rule!) vast lands allowing them to field as many men as major Lords. That gives them influence. But they are not Lords in their own right, with all the political and jurisdicial power that would give them.

Remember how Lord Umber refused to ride into battle under Glover command? Or that Ned Stark sent the Tallharts to garrison Moat Cailin instead of Lord Reed, Lord Manderly, Lord Rhyswell or Lady Dustin, all far closer? That's because those are actual lordships with a greater degree of autonomy. It also suggests that the men of the Glovers and Tallharts follow them as leader but not as rulers, the Starks rulers/lords.