That goes back to Orys, who even if not The Conqueror's bastard half-brother, is still the very first Hand of the King, and how the office got its name.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
It'd be pretty hard to rule peacefully as Stark on the iron throne. The smallfolk doesn't really like followers of the old gods, and about 80-90% of the realms people are followers of the seven.
Long winter -> pagans are quilty
bad harvest -> pagans are guilty
etc.
Greetings
Long winter -> pagans are quilty
bad harvest -> pagans are guilty
etc.
Greetings
Indeed, for all Robert's problems, he at least initially seemed reasonably popular (for people not named Cersei or surnamed Targaryen, Martell and Greyjoy, anyway). He was never deposed, and only faced one serious rebellion in his entire reign (unless you count the Stark-Lannister feud afterwards). He was diplomatic and generous (helping bankrupt the realm, but that's for the future), but he also had some legitimacy. If Aerys and his descendants were attainted, then Robert would be the closest living relative in the Targaryen line. That counts for a lot to smooth a transition (as Renly would have found out if he had taken the throne). Royal blood may be an illusion, but people believe in it, which makes it something real, as Varys would probably say. Don't mistake Renly's self-serving speech (where he emphasizes Robert's claim as conqueror in order to denigrate his claim of blood) as cold fact, rather than Renly's attempt to justify his own blatant power-grab.
The Starks (even if they have somehow have Targ blood which has conveniently never been mentioned, even when there are plenty of instances it would have made sense to bring up if it existed) would have a much more distant connection, at which point you might as well throw in the Blackfyres and Aeron Brightflame's kids and the Martells and everyone else with a drop of Targ blood. It would be a recipe for another civil war, as both Tywin (who also had a chance to try to forcefully seize the throne, at least in Pycelle's opinion) and Ned both realized.
Ned would have had the support of the Stormlands, Riverlands, Vale & The North however and possibly even Dorne if he gave them justice as his honour would most likely have dictated and required. He isn't the sort to get sucked into dept like Robert either although that said his religion and his honour not to mention his inflexibility and unwillingness to get involved in... the game so to speak would have caused problems it seems. Of that I have no doubt even though I'm a big fan of the Starks and the North in general.
From what I understood Robert was actually a very capable and charismatic man. But he was completely broken by the death of his beloved, and drowned his sorrows until he became not even a shell of what he was before.
There is a theory that Jon is not Ned's bastard, but the son of his sister and Rheagar, making him half Tygaryan and giving him a fairly good claim to the throne. Afaik Ned never stated that Jon was his son, he just brought him back, and let people assume.
There is a theory that Jon is not Ned's bastard, but the son of his sister and Rheagar, making him half Tygaryan and giving him a fairly good claim to the throne. Afaik Ned never stated that Jon was his son, he just brought him back, and let people assume.
I think that the point is that Lyanna was never Robert's beloved. Robert barely even knew Lyanna, I think that he was more in love with the idea of her. She was the smart, sexy, highborn Lady that he was betrothed to and she was his best friends sister to boot. It was that idea that Rhaegar stole from him, not the woman he loved.
Robert wasn't pissed off that Rhaegar took Lyanna, he didn't march into King's Landing with Brandon demanding answers. No, Robert only acted after his own head had been called for.
Even after the war, Robert admits to Ned that he can't even remember Lyanna's face, but he dreams of killing Rhaegar every night. He even goes as far as to say that Rhaegar is "now with Lyanna" while he is stuck with the stress of ruling. practically acknowledging what Ned already knows, that Lyanna never loved him.
The truth is that Robert never cared for the Throne in the slightest, but circumstances conspired to put him on it. Robert himself was the loudest voice in the "Robert Baratheon would make a shit king" camp, so there's no need for "he was devastated by losing his beloved" excuses. The dude was not king material and he made a terrible king.
As Ned mentioned, Robert never knew the iron that is underneath Lyanna's beauty. Lyanna herself knew that Robert was a womaniser and concluded that marriage would not change that.
I would reckon that while Robert would not make a good king under the best circumstances, Lyanna's death made it even worse. Even if we just speak in game terms, look at his small council at the Crowned Stag bookmark. I don't know about you, but leaving Tywin entirely out and Jon Arryn as Hand are not the worst decisions he made in his reign. (The very fact that he made worse choices is appalling.)
I would reckon that while Robert would not make a good king under the best circumstances, Lyanna's death made it even worse. Even if we just speak in game terms, look at his small council at the Crowned Stag bookmark. I don't know about you, but leaving Tywin entirely out and Jon Arryn as Hand are not the worst decisions he made in his reign. (The very fact that he made worse choices is appalling.)
Last edited:
Jon Arryn as Hand was perfectly reasonable (he seems to have been the driving force behind the whole Rebellion, which indicates at least some level of competence, and as a Lord Paramount he certainly has the rank and popular respect, plus he was close to 3 other Lords Paramount).
It's true Tywin wasn't on the council, but the Lannisters were hardly marginalized in the new government (starting with the Queen and working down). Dorne would probably have been massively offended if Tywin had gotten that slot. I expect the general expectation was that he would be a figurehead while Jon Arryn was the effective leader. Remember that in the immediate aftermath of the Rebellion (and really, the decision to proclaim Robert as king was made even before Tywin entered the war, and confirmed after the Sack, before the Reach and Dorne had surrendered) there must have been concern about possible further rebellions, either by Targaryen loyalists (compare the various Blackfyre Rebellions) or by Balon-style separatists (and remember that unlike the rebels, Mace still basically had his entire army left, a factor that is still significant during the books themselves). In those circumstances, maintaining the alliance which had won the war and encouraging general reconciliation seems like a key cornerstone of any successful regime.
I think there should be an event though for Eddard to be able to find out the truth about the children and then press stannis' claim or renly's after Robert's death, or a claim for himself if he picks up certain traits while acting as hand. As for Robert being king, he was awesome, man fought his way through army after army and almost ended a legendary dynasty. It's the council's fault, if they spent more time advising instead of acting and plotting against each other, maybe the realm would have been left in a better state.
You forget Stannis's role in holding Storm's End and tying up the Reach's armies so that Robert could do his stuff. And just because Stannis failed to get the Targaryen kids, ol' Rob gave the Stormlands to Renly. Well done.
The way I understood it, Robert made Jon Arryn de-facto ruler, while he resigned himself to whoring and drinking and somewhat consciously became a figurehead (unless military might was required, e.g. during the Greyjoy rebellion) as someone with a legitimate claim had to sit on the throne.
The only scenario I see is Robert naming Ned Stark instead of Jon Arryn Hand of the King - that I can definitely see, but for the Mod to account for the potential power of the Hand, that role would have to be massively expanded.
The only scenario I see is Robert naming Ned Stark instead of Jon Arryn Hand of the King - that I can definitely see, but for the Mod to account for the potential power of the Hand, that role would have to be massively expanded.
That Robert did, but he also undermined Jon's position by refusing to curb his spending. That single move brought so many troubles, I don't even know where to start the catalogue. But, here goes:
1) The Lannisters grew their power exponentially. With a lady of the house as Queen of the Iron Throne, it was already bad enough. Now, the Lannisters have the Crown by the balls due to the debts.
2) Littlefinger as Master of Coin. Oh boy...
3) The Iron Bank gets involved as well, which is never a good thing.
1) The Lannisters grew their power exponentially. With a lady of the house as Queen of the Iron Throne, it was already bad enough. Now, the Lannisters have the Crown by the balls due to the debts.
2) Littlefinger as Master of Coin. Oh boy...
3) The Iron Bank gets involved as well, which is never a good thing.
I always assumed Littlefinger (who was a Jon Arryn appointment remember, originally recommended by his completely unbiased wife) was the main culprit behind the massive debts, if only because it seems effectively impossible for feasting and tourneys to actually cost that much. Well, him and the cost of the Rebellion itself (plus presumably left over debt from Aerys' reign; those pyromancy ingredients can't have been cheap).
But yes, Robert was an excellent war leader but a mediocre king. I just don't see any realistic alternative (he was the only one with any legitimacy, which actually does matter in these cases; power resides where people believe it resides, but legitimacy is one of the things people believe in). Really, if Cersei had been less...Cersei, the Crown would have been in much better shape.
For that matter, if Lyanna hadn't died (and had actually been reasonably supportive of her husband Robert), Robert probably would have been a better king (both because the Lannisters would have been less powerful, and because she probably would have at least tried to curb some of Robert's self-destructive tendencies). That was probably the assumption the rebels were working under (remember that "Robert for king" was decided on not just before the Tower of Joy, but before the Sack). It's not clear exactly when Ned learned the full details of the Tower of Joy and Lyanna's situation, but it was probably during or shortly after the Sack, if only because I can't imagine him not having done something about it ahead of time otherwise. So as far as they were concerned, Lyanna was still alive and imprisoned by Rhaegar. By the time Ned gets to the Tower of Joy and everything that happened there, Robert was already king. Under the circumstances, Cersei is really the only feasible unmarried woman of age, and no one knows about her wackiness. Under the original scenario, Robert would have married Lyanna, who, while maybe not in love with him, would have at least put up with him and used her influence to keep him under control (she might not have been happy about that role, but when did medieval rulers, even Ned, care about what women thought?). It might very well have worked, as Lyanna doesn't strike me as the enabling type. Now, with hindsight that was a doomed plan, but at the time of the Battle of the Trident, it made perfect sense.
Instead, we got Cersei cuckolding, undermining and eventually murdering him, while Robert suffers serious mental problems (the fact that he keeps dreaming about killing Rhaegar every night is not a healthy sign), Ned isolating himself from the new regime (which is another place where Lyanna would probably have been useful, to promote closer contact and an earlier reconciliation), and Jon Arryn bringing in his wunderkid Littlefinger to help sort out the royal finances.
At the very least Lyanna wouldn't have had kids by her brother, and probably wouldn't have raised the eldest son while willfully ignoring his budding psychopathy. Plus she probably wouldn't have Robert killed. So at least the succession would have been cleaner; Stannis (and probably Renly) won't rebel in their nephews are actually their nephews, and you don't get independence movements going when beloved Lords Paramount get executed on false charges. Still have to deal with Dany and her lizards though...
It was mentioned that Aerys left a full treasury, rather than debts. Tourneys can bankrupt the realm via the reward money. Did you see the reward money for the Tourney of the Hand?
I always though that was just Robert been excessive with the rewards in order to motivate people to compete or something. The rest of the debt quite likely comes from lots of feasting and such and Littlefinger pocketing some of it...
I googled "Financial problems of the Iron Throne" and found a blog (racefortheironthrone@Wordpress) which makes the case that it was Littlefinger who misappropriated the treasury and used it as his personal bank. Using Robert's excesses to hide his crimes, he cooks the books, borrows money from the various sources, and used the money to enrich himself and anyone who asked questions. He speculated, bribed and lent money to cement his position in King's Landing.
Last edited:
I think that Jamie did not know himself well on the genealogy and history, and thought like men who respects only strength and is not too honorable
In fact, Jamie is probably one of the most honorable men in the realm (except in battle). The poor lad us just stuck with way too many oath to follow.
Concerning Littlefinger, he increased the realm revenue by ten investing it rather than keeping all the gold dormante in the royal coffer. He also used his power to appoint loyals mans in all keys sectors of Westeros economy indirectly controlling about 9/10 of the realm economic structure. Of course, he also increase the debt by ten.
Overall, Littlefinger is probably responsible for most of the chaos in Westeros...
Last edited:
Jaime is a Knight in Sour Armour, cos too many people had judged him on the kingslaying without knowing the full context of the event and refusing to listen to any explanation. Also, he IS the son of a man who is... not very well-liked in the Seven Kingdoms to begin with.
However, I will add that Jaime is quite screwed up in the head. When the kids were still kids, Joanna separated the twins to different ends of the castle and he distinctively disliked his mother because of it.
However, I will add that Jaime is quite screwed up in the head. When the kids were still kids, Joanna separated the twins to different ends of the castle and he distinctively disliked his mother because of it.
Considering the new info that Jaehaerys and Alysanne had nine children :O, then their tip to the north may have been more than just a stroll to the wall. One of their daughters marrying a Stark would cement GreatJon's "we married the dragons" and Neds "you had the better claim" quote to Robert. Which gives us some indication that the Starks too, have a tenuous claim. Along with the Arryns.
Rhaenrya had more Targaryen blood than Aegon II through her Arryn mother, (who's Targaryen ancestor was either her mother, through Jaehaerys or great-grandmother through one of Aegon I's three daughters).
Then the Martell's (and through them the Tolands), Velaryons (through Laenor and the Hull bastards), Plumms and finally the Baratheons.
Pretty much everyone in Westeros has Aegon the Conqueror somewhere on their family tree.
Rhaenrya had more Targaryen blood than Aegon II through her Arryn mother, (who's Targaryen ancestor was either her mother, through Jaehaerys or great-grandmother through one of Aegon I's three daughters).
Then the Martell's (and through them the Tolands), Velaryons (through Laenor and the Hull bastards), Plumms and finally the Baratheons.
Pretty much everyone in Westeros has Aegon the Conqueror somewhere on their family tree.