The Snow Who Would Be King

[Antler's Fury]

The ultimate fate of Jon Snow is perhaps one of the most debated and discussed topics among the ASOIAF fandom. Opinions differ over what exactly is going to happen to him in the coming books; some say he will become King in the North due to his Stark heritage, others that he will become King on the Iron Throne due to his supposed Targaryen heritage. One thing is for certain though: the consensus is that after possibly being resurrected, Jon will eventually leave the Night's Watch to assume some position of government power.

I take issue with these theories, which I see as little more than Jon-centric delusions of grandeur, because they seem to contradict Jon's story arc so far. Jon's supporters, both in universe and among the fandom, can eagerly dream up all sorts of scenarios where he becomes Supreme Potentate of the Universe, but the one thing they don't seem to count on is the possibility that he may refuse. From what I see of Jon's character, not only is it very unlikely that he would take power if it was offered to him, but it is in fact necessary for his character development to remain consistent with what we have already seen.

Consistently, Jon has faced temptation to break or wriggle out of his Night's Watch vows and time and time again he has resisted that temptation. He wanted to leave the Wall to help avenge Ned, but Jeor Mormont's gruff words of wisdom and Maester Aemon's surprisingly frank confession of his own bitter internal war brought Jon back to his senses. He became friendly towards the wildlings and cared deeply for Ygritte, but eventually chose to do his duty to the Watch and betray the wildlings for the good of the realm. The most recent temptation was Stannis' offer to make him Lord of Winterfell, but Jon turned that down all that power and fame to serve the Watch even when he faced possible execution at the hands of Lord Commander presumptive Janos Slynt. So even if the Northmen rebuilt Winterfell and offered up Stannis and Rickon's heads on a plate along with Val wet and willing, why does anyone think that Jon would actually take their offer? Similarly, even if Howland Reed sauntered into King's Landing with DNA evidence that Jon was Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, Dany, Stannis, Aegon, and Tommen all spontaneously combusted, and all the Lords of the Seven Kingdoms agreed to bend the knee to King Jon Targaryen, am I really the only one who thinks Jon would turn them down? And is it really so outlandish an assumption?

What makes Jon admirable in my eyes is that he understands that he is one of the few characters genuinely committed to serving the greater good of Westeros at the expense of his own comfort. What is particularly unusual is his humanistic perspective, which is notably absent in a Westeros run by scheming families, and even in the Night's Watch itself. When Bowen Marsh, a veteran of the Watch, protests against his arming the wildlings, Jon simply replies "I am the shield that guards the realms of men. Those are the words. So tell me my lord---what are the wildlings if not men?" This interpretation of the age-old and well known Watch vows is as novel as it is simple. The Lannisters want to grab more power at the expense of the Starks and Baratheons, and vice versa. The Targaryens were particularly self-absorbed, viewing themselves racially superior beings that even the gods could not hold accountable, with the right to rule lesser, meaner peoples, an attitude that they probably imported from the Valyrian Freehold. The Andals are disgusted by the sexual promiscuity of the Rhoynar and contemptuous of the animism of the First Men, while the First Men see Southern culture as decadent, soft, and revoltingly corrupt. The Free Cities are constantly squabbling amongst themselves to not only expand their power but also their way of life, whether it is Volantis, which wanted to rebuild the old slaveholding Valyrian Freehold, or Braavos, which imposed abolitionism upon Pentos. They also have fingers in the pie that is Westeros. And the people of Slaver's Bay are ruthlessly pragmatic enough to build an empire upon the sale of human flesh. Apart from Jon, almost no one is willing to step back and acknowledge that all these parties, despite their different ethnicities, languages, cultures, and myopic political infighting, are above all else people who deserve protection simply for that reason.

One of the many problems with Jon becoming king of anything, or indeed any kind of lower political actor away from the Wall, is that it requires him to voluntarily give up this way of seeing things. Everyone in Westeros takes sides, kings most of all. He'd have to sacrifice humanism on the altar of political expediency, and be willing to fight and punish people simply for being on the wrong side of an argument. The fact that they are simply men like him would no longer be important. As a king, it would matter to Jon what symbol they had sewn on their banner, where they lived, who their leader was, what gods they worshipped, etc because all of this would determine the nature of Jon's relationship to them. The bigger humanistic picture would be lost among the host of petty concerns that define the Westerosi political stage, concerns that Jon's Watch vows largely exempt him from caring about.

One of the reasons I think that Jon cannot and should not become king of anything is because this way of looking at the world is unique to Jon among POV characters, and to lose it to politics would reduce Jon to just another cog in the Westerosi political machine. We have so many of those, especially Starks, that Jon would not add anything new to the narrative from this position. Put Jon at the Wall and he's a visionary leader who looks beyond Westeros' political myopia and even the internal politics of the Watch to the greater threat beyond the Wall. Remove him and he becomes yet another Doomed Stark Idealist, whose stories of tragic failure in the cutthroat Westerosi political minefield have already been rearranged and recycled ad nauseum. Jon's purpose thus far as a character is to take the readers as far away as possible from the political cesspit of intrigue, blood, and lies to show again and again that it is all ultimately meaningless. The Others are coming, and Westeros is simply not ready for them. Unless they get their heads out of their asses, they will all die whether they are the "good guys" the "bad guys" or the "grey" characters. No one is ready because almost everyone cares about some petty concern or another, save for Jon and his Watch mentors. They share his humanistic vision for Westeros because they understand that the only way to combat the Others' omnicide is through humanism, for all humans to stand together and fight as one species. This is a vision that King Jon cannot afford and to strip him of it is to strip him of his unique perspective as a character.

Speaking of Jon's mentors, one of the biggest concerns I have over Jon's becoming king of something is that it means he'll be taking a big, steaming dump on the Watch and its greatest leaders, people who trusted him to carry on their work. Take Lord Commander Mormont, for instance, who slices through hundreds of pages of political bullshit with his characteristic bluntness, saying "Gods save us, boy, you're not blind and you're not stupid. When dead men come hunting in the night do you think it matters who sits the Iron Throne?" Jon's response is telling: "Forgive me, Father. Robb, Arya, Bran ... forgive me, I cannot help you. He has the truth of it. This is my place. "I am . . . yours, my lord. Your man. I swear it. I will not run again." Aemon's testimony is even more poignant: "Have you heard nothing I've told you, Jon? Do you think you are the first?...Three times the gods saw fit to test my vows. Once when I was a boy, once in the fullness of my manhood, and once when I had grown old. By then my strength was fled, my eyes grown dim, yet that last choice was as cruel as the first. My ravens would bring the news from the south, words darker than their wings, the ruin of my House, the death of my kin, disgrace and desolation. What could I have done, old, blind, frail? I was helpless as a suckling babe, yet still it grieved me to sit forgotten as they cut down my brother's poor grandson, and his son, and even the little children..." Though Jon later wonders whether Aemon was "strong and true" or "weak and craven" for staying at the Wall, the truth is clear: Aemon Targaryen is perhaps the strongest and most noble Targaryen in the House's history. It is very easy for someone born in a house of narcicisstic egomaniacs to enjoy the privileges of power by divine right, to have every bowel movement praised by a gang of sycophantic rent seekers. It's even easier to lose sight of the interests of the realm and fly into a rage, especially when one's entire House has been exterminated. What is difficult, however, is setting all that aside, painful as it is, and recognizing that you serve all people, both the Dragon Kings and the Usurpers Dogs. Jon is one of the few who can stomach that bitter pill.

Mormont and Aemon pinned their hopes on Jon to resurrect a degenerate Watch populated by criminals and restore the ideals upon which it was founded. Yet, to become king, Jon must "run again." He must prove to Mormont that he is indeed "blind and stupid", that he "heard nothing" Aemon told him, and admit that Mormont did not have "the truth of it." He must become "weak and craven" something that Aemon, who was similarly tested, never was. He must prove himself unworthy of Aemon and Mormont's trust. Jon's becoming king means that his character regresses to the petulant, self-absorbed child he was in AGOT, with none of the larger humanistic vision he displayed in ADWD. It means that he did not kill the Egg, and let the Man be born. It means that he sees his vows, not as a commitment to the realm's safety and security, but as a burden or fetters to be dropped or wriggled out of at the slightest opportunity, whether through death and resurrection or some other method. The biggest reason I think that Jon should not and will not become a king is because it means he'll be pissing on Mormont and Aemon's graves, something that I cannot see him doing while staying true to himself. Jon Snow is indeed the sword in the darkness, the watcher on the walls, the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, and the shield that guards the realms of men. An unsung hero yet perhaps the noblest of them all. That is all he was ever meant to be, and if he truly has matured, that is all he'll want to be.

TLDR Jon should not and will not become a king of anything because it would be regressive character development for him to take power after having gone through the internal struggle and refused it on multiple previous occasions, it would remove his uniquely humanistic and visionary perspective in a Westeros caught up in petty, myopic struggles, and it would mean he learned nothing at all from the noble careers and sacrifices of Lord Commander Mormont and Maester Aemon.

[Free Northman Reborn]

He will be living up to Quorin Halfhand's greatest teaching : Our honour means nothing compared to the good of the realm.

And if the realm can only be unified and saved by him becoming King, then he will fully be living up to Quorin's legacy.

[Kienn]

One thing is for certain though: the consensus is that after possibly being resurrected, Jon will eventually leave the Night's Watch to assume some position of government power.

Sorry, that's not certain and definitely not a consensus.

[Nic.]

Is it really so out of character that he would be king of the north while remaining at the wall to fight the others though? You're talking about Jon who has been in a desperate need of man power at the wall to fight that great fight. By becoming king of the north he can call all of his bannermen to defend the realm. Doesn't that also go in line with his dream where he's pushing back the others while claiming himself lord of winterfell?

I think it's far more likely that he honors Robb's will and remains at the wall at the same time where his army would be needed. I agree that any ideas that he would march south in the face of the threat the realm faces though to be ludicrous.

[Free Northman Reborn]

I no longer think Jon will be King in the North, sadly. Primarily because it would mean that the Starks would then no longer trace an unbroken male line back to Bran the Builder.

Therefore I now think Rickon will be King in the North.

But I do think Jon will be the last King on the Iron Throne, before dying in the final battle and allowing Westeros to become Seven Kingdoms again, as it is meant to be.

[Kienn]

Primarily because it would mean that the Starks would then no longer trace an unbroken male line back to Bran the Builder.

That ship sailed thousands of years ago sorry, multiple times most likely.

[Nic.]

Except he was automatically made king the moment robb died he's just unaware of the will.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Kien.

No proof of that. And Martin has stated that there has never been a ruling lady of Winterfell or Queen in the North, in 8000 years.

[Disputatious]

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon 'em"

Twelfth Night

I quote this with some glee, since it comes from the "Gulling of Malvolio" in the play; not that I mean to make the comparison of course (that would have Jon enthusiasts down on me like a ton of bricks). But the OP has left out the third possibility. Jon may not jump; he may be pushed (onto the Iron Throne).

He will of course try to keep his oath: that has been said and properly so many times, but he may not succeed.

[Nic.]

Kien.

No proof of that. And Martin has stated that there has never been a ruling lady of Winterfell or Queen in the North, in 8000 years.

that's funny because Lyanna is dead and the last time i checked, Jon wasn't a woman.

[Kienn]

Kien.

No proof of that. And Martin has stated that there has never been a ruling lady of Winterfell or Queen in the North, in 8000 years.

Bael the bard. If you think it's a false story then just do the math. It's very unlikely there is an unbroken male line and no proof for it either.

No ruling lady or queen doesn't mean that the son of a daughter never ruled after the father died which would mean a break in the male line. Also I haven't seen where Martin stated that so I have trouble believing it considering we know about the period of the She-Wolves...

[Lyse Stark]

The ultimate fate of Jon Snow is perhaps one of the most debated and discussed topics among the ASOIAF fandom. Opinions differ over what exactly is going to happen to him in the coming books; some say he will become King in the North due to his Stark heritage, others that he will become King on the Iron Throne due to his supposed Targaryen heritage. One thing is for certain though: the consensus is that after possibly being resurrected, Jon will eventually leave the Night's Watch to assume some position of government power.

I take issue with these theories, which I see as little more than Jon-centric delusions of grandeur, because they seem to contradict Jon's story arc so far. Jon's supporters, both in universe and among the fandom, can eagerly dream up all sorts of scenarios where he becomes Supreme Potentate of the Universe, but the one thing they don't seem to count on is the possibility that he may refuse. From what I see of Jon's character, not only is it very unlikely that he would take power if it was offered to him, but it is in fact necessary for his character development to remain consistent with what we have already seen.

Consistently, Jon has faced temptation to break or wriggle out of his Night's Watch vows and time and time again he has resisted that temptation. He wanted to leave the Wall to help avenge Ned, but Jeor Mormont's gruff words of wisdom and Maester Aemon's surprisingly frank confession of his own bitter internal war brought Jon back to his senses. He became friendly towards the wildlings and cared deeply for Ygritte, but eventually chose to do his duty to the Watch and betray the wildlings for the good of the realm. The most recent temptation was Stannis' offer to make him Lord of Winterfell, but Jon turned that down all that power and fame to serve the Watch even when he faced possible execution at the hands of Lord Commander presumptive Janos Slynt. So even if the Northmen rebuilt Winterfell and offered up Stannis and Rickon's heads on a plate along with Val wet and willing, why does anyone think that Jon would actually take their offer? Similarly, even if Howland Reed sauntered into King's Landing with DNA evidence that Jon was Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, Dany, Stannis, Aegon, and Tommen all spontaneously combusted, and all the Lords of the Seven Kingdoms agreed to bend the knee to King Jon Targaryen, am I really the only one who thinks Jon would turn them down? And is it really so outlandish an assumption?

What makes Jon admirable in my eyes is that he understands that he is one of the few characters genuinely committed to serving the greater good of Westeros at the expense of his own comfort. What is particularly unusual is his humanistic perspective, which is notably absent in a Westeros run by scheming families, and even in the Night's Watch itself. When Bowen Marsh, a veteran of the Watch, protests against his arming the wildlings, Jon simply replies "I am the shield that guards the realms of men. Those are the words. So tell me my lord---what are the wildlings if not men?" This interpretation of the age-old and well known Watch vows is as novel as it is simple. The Lannisters want to grab more power at the expense of the Starks and Baratheons, and vice versa. The Targaryens were particularly self-absorbed, viewing themselves racially superior beings that even the gods could not hold accountable, with the right to rule lesser, meaner peoples, an attitude that they probably imported from the Valyrian Freehold. The Andals are disgusted by the sexual promiscuity of the Rhoynar and contemptuous of the animism of the First Men, while the First Men see Southern culture as decadent, soft, and revoltingly corrupt. The Free Cities are constantly squabbling amongst themselves to not only expand their power but also their way of life, whether it is Volantis, which wanted to rebuild the old slaveholding Valyrian Freehold, or Braavos, which imposed abolitionism upon Pentos. They also have fingers in the pie that is Westeros. And the people of Slaver's Bay are ruthlessly pragmatic enough to build an empire upon the sale of human flesh. Apart from Jon, almost no one is willing to step back and acknowledge that all these parties, despite their different ethnicities, languages, cultures, and myopic political infighting, are above all else people who deserve protection simply for that reason.

One of the many problems with Jon becoming king of anything, or indeed any kind of lower political actor away from the Wall, is that it requires him to voluntarily give up this way of seeing things. Everyone in Westeros takes sides, kings most of all. He'd have to sacrifice humanism on the altar of political expediency, and be willing to fight and punish people simply for being on the wrong side of an argument. The fact that they are simply men like him would no longer be important. As a king, it would matter to Jon what symbol they had sewn on their banner, where they lived, who their leader was, what gods they worshipped, etc because all of this would determine the nature of Jon's relationship to them. The bigger humanistic picture would be lost among the host of petty concerns that define the Westerosi political stage, concerns that Jon's Watch vows largely exempt him from caring about.

One of the reasons I think that Jon cannot and should not become king of anything is because this way of looking at the world is unique to Jon among POV characters, and to lose it to politics would reduce Jon to just another cog in the Westerosi political machine. We have so many of those, especially Starks, that Jon would not add anything new to the narrative from this position. Put Jon at the Wall and he's a visionary leader who looks beyond Westeros' political myopia and even the internal politics of the Watch to the greater threat beyond the Wall. Remove him and he becomes yet another Doomed Stark Idealist, whose stories of tragic failure in the cutthroat Westerosi political minefield have already been rearranged and recycled ad nauseum. Jon's purpose thus far as a character is to take the readers as far away as possible from the political cesspit of intrigue, blood, and lies to show again and again that it is all ultimately meaningless. The Others are coming, and Westeros is simply not ready for them. Unless they get their heads out of their asses, they will all die whether they are the "good guys" the "bad guys" or the "grey" characters. No one is ready because almost everyone cares about some petty concern or another, save for Jon and his Watch mentors. They share his humanistic vision for Westeros because they understand that the only way to combat the Others' omnicide is through humanism, for all humans to stand together and fight as one species. This is a vision that King Jon cannot afford and to strip him of it is to strip him of his unique perspective as a character.

Speaking of Jon's mentors, one of the biggest concerns I have over Jon's becoming king of something is that it means he'll be taking a big, steaming dump on the Watch and its greatest leaders, people who trusted him to carry on their work. Take Lord Commander Mormont, for instance, who slices through hundreds of pages of political bullshit with his characteristic bluntness, saying "Gods save us, boy, you're not blind and you're not stupid. When dead men come hunting in the night do you think it matters who sits the Iron Throne?" Jon's response is telling: "Forgive me, Father. Robb, Arya, Bran ... forgive me, I cannot help you. He has the truth of it. This is my place. "I am . . . yours, my lord. Your man. I swear it. I will not run again." Aemon's testimony is even more poignant: "Have you heard nothing I've told you, Jon? Do you think you are the first?...Three times the gods saw fit to test my vows. Once when I was a boy, once in the fullness of my manhood, and once when I had grown old. By then my strength was fled, my eyes grown dim, yet that last choice was as cruel as the first. My ravens would bring the news from the south, words darker than their wings, the ruin of my House, the death of my kin, disgrace and desolation. What could I have done, old, blind, frail? I was helpless as a suckling babe, yet still it grieved me to sit forgotten as they cut down my brother's poor grandson, and his son, and even the little children..." Though Jon later wonders whether Aemon was "strong and true" or "weak and craven" for staying at the Wall, the truth is clear: Aemon Targaryen is perhaps the strongest and most noble Targaryen in the House's history. It is very easy for someone born in a house of narcicisstic egomaniacs to enjoy the privileges of power by divine right, to have every bowel movement praised by a gang of sycophantic rent seekers. It's even easier to lose sight of the interests of the realm and fly into a rage, especially when one's entire House has been exterminated. What is difficult, however, is setting all that aside, painful as it is, and recognizing that you serve all people, both the Dragon Kings and the Usurpers Dogs. Jon is one of the few who can stomach that bitter pill.

Mormont and Aemon pinned their hopes on Jon to resurrect a degenerate Watch populated by criminals and restore the ideals upon which it was founded. Yet, to become king, Jon must "run again." He must prove to Mormont that he is indeed "blind and stupid", that he "heard nothing" Aemon told him, and admit that Mormont did not have "the truth of it." He must become "weak and craven" something that Aemon, who was similarly tested, never was. He must prove himself unworthy of Aemon and Mormont's trust. Jon's becoming king means that his character regresses to the petulant, self-absorbed child he was in AGOT, with none of the larger humanistic vision he displayed in ADWD. It means that he did not kill the Egg, and let the Man be born. It means that he sees his vows, not as a commitment to the realm's safety and security, but as a burden or fetters to be dropped or wriggled out of at the slightest opportunity, whether through death and resurrection or some other method. The biggest reason I think that Jon should not and will not become a king is because it means he'll be pissing on Mormont and Aemon's graves, something that I cannot see him doing while staying true to himself. Jon Snow is indeed the sword in the darkness, the watcher on the walls, the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, and the shield that guards the realms of men. An unsung hero yet perhaps the noblest of them all. That is all he was ever meant to be, and if he truly has matured, that is all he'll want to be.

TLDR Jon should not and will not become a king of anything because it would be regressive character development for him to take power after having gone through the internal struggle and refused it on multiple previous occasions, it would remove his uniquely humanistic and visionary perspective in a Westeros caught up in petty, myopic struggles, and it would mean he learned nothing at all from the noble careers and sacrifices of Lord Commander Mormont and Maester Aemon.

Maybe you should stop WHINING and read these:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/79816-a-king-in-hiding-adding-it-all-up/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/86094-a-king-in-hiding-adding-it-all-up-part-2/

[Free Northman Reborn]

Bael the bard. If you think it's a false story then just do the math. It's very unlikely there is an unbroken male line and no proof for it either.

No ruling lady or queen doesn't mean that the son of a daughter never ruled after the father died which would mean a break in the male line. Also I haven't seen where Martin stated that so I have trouble believing it considering we know about the period of the She-Wolves...

The point is that the "no ruling lady" statement from Martin reduces the probability significantly, leaving us with only the "sons of Stark daughters" option to address.

Anyway, the Bael the Bard story is utterly improbable. Besides, one of the key facts making the Starks superior to the likes of the Lannisters and Tyrells in my eyes is that those two Houses only claim connections to Lann the Clever and Garth Greenhand through the female line, while the Starks have an unbroken line of Stone Kings in the crypts below Winterfell going back to Bran the Builder's statue in the very deepest level of the crypts.

I like that image, and until there is evidence to the contrary - which there will of course never be - I will continue to hold that view.

[Lyse Stark]

The point is that the "no ruling lady" statement from Martin reduces the probability significantly, leaving us with only the "sons of Stark daughters" option to address.

Anyway, the Bael the Bard story is utterly improbable. Besides, one of the key facts making the Starks superior to the likes of the Lannisters and Tyrells in my eyes is that those two Houses only claim connections to Lann the Clever and Garth Greenhand through the female line, while the Starks have an unbroken line of Stone Kings in the crypts below Winterfell going back to Bran the Builder's statue in the very deepest level of the crypts.

I like that image, and until there is evidence to the contrary - which there will of course never be - I will continue to hold that view.

Pfffft. If it is confirmed that the Starks had female rulers, I'll be laughing at your expense.

[Arya kiddin']

*applauds loudly for Antler's Fury*

Very nice post. Nothing more to say. Couldn't agree more.

[The Holy Goat]

Snip.

I agree with you that it would be out of character for Jon to accept the Iron Throne, and that the ideals he has developed over the series, particularily in ADWD, is not only loyalty to the NIght's Watch and a rather humanistic viewpoint, which clashes with the views of the rest of the world. However, I also feel that another part of his development in ADWD was the use of pragmatism in order to further this humanism. And that's why I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Jon attempting to use the politics of Westeros to his advantage, should he view it as a necessity to combat the others and protect the realm. Wether this would be as King in the North, King on the Iron Throne, advisor, councilor, general, Lord, hired sword or simply Lord Commander of the NIght's Watch I don't know, but the possibility is still there.

Also, I think that the only thing Jon might value more than the NIght's Watch and his duty to it is his family.

[David Selig]

He will be living up to Quorin Halfhand's greatest teaching : Our honour means nothing compared to the good of the realm.

And if the realm can only be unified and saved by him becoming King, then he will fully be living up to Quorin's legacy.

Even most hack fantasy writers these days balk at the terribly cliched plot "Only the Chosen One can save the realm by becoming the King". Let's hope Martin won't go below their level.

How would that work anyway? The very last thing the realm needs in order to be better prepared for the Others is yet another claimant for the throne and an expansion of the civil war.

[joluoto2]

Why would Jon go off to become king and politicking, when the Realm need him at the frontline against the Others. The whole Jon become king thing has always confused me. On what legitimacy? Jon has no claim on any throne. He is a bastard of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, and the entire Realm think he's Ned Stark's bastard. Also, Jon is not interested in taking any throne or other seat. Stannis offered him Winterfel, he refused.

[Sordelor]

Why would Jon go off to become king and politicking, when the Realm need him at the frontline against the Others. The whole Jon become king thing has always confused me. On what legitimacy? Jon has no claim on any throne. He is a bastard of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, and the entire Realm think he's Ned Stark's bastard. Also, Jon is not interested in taking any throne or other seat. Stannis offered him Winterfel, he refused.

A lot of people believe R and L married, and that Jon's going to be king because that would be the best for the realm.

[David Selig]

A lot of people believe R and L married, and that Jon's going to be king because that would be the best for the realm.

Since when anyone in Westeros cares what's best for the realm when choosing a King? When has that ever happened?