Let's say GRRM's plan is still for Jaime to take the throne? How?

[Lord Varys]

Hippocras really doesn't seem to understand how monarchies and dynasties work. The idea that the majority of Westeros would not think that, say, Viserys III was 'the rightful king' and Robert 'a usurper' during the hypothetical scenario of a Targaryen restoration attempt during the reign of Robert is just nonsense. Not all of them might decide to support Viserys but even Eddard, Hoster, Jon, and Robert himself would have known that he was a usurper and Viserys the true king.

That certainly would be a huge problem for Robert's campaign against a Targaryen king who isn't Aerys II because, you know, young Viserys hasn't done anything to anyone in Westeros, and doesn't deserve to ousted just because his father was mad.

The topic at hand is just a very outlandish scenario.

- Jaime doesn't want to be king.

- No one has any interest in wanting Jaime to be king if we think of the people involved as rational and/or ambitious.

- There is no chance that 'King Jaime' can gather any support among outside camp Lannister. Not even the Tyrells have any reason to support that traitorous cripple. Jaime isn't even scary anymore.

- Jaime's present situation makes it more likely that he becomes Catelyn eunuch fool than ends up ever in a position from which he can make a bid for the throne.

'Evil Jaime' may have been the gestation point for many characters. Not just Cersei but also Littlefinger, and possibly even Tywin and Varys (who all aren't mentioned in the original outline). George clearly had not flashed out the court at KL when he wrote that outline. One assumes that the court grew during the writing process of the book when George began to write about KL.

[purple-eyes]

I feel hard to see where is Jaime's claim as king.

But to be honest, GRRM indeed put some hints for him as "king". he sat on the throne, he is kingly, etc.

If we accept Brienne as young and more beautiful "queen", then this is even a higher chance.

Maybe he will become king of CR and westerlands for a while?

 

[Hippocras]

51 minutes ago, SeethemFly said:

Somebody may have already said this (I haven't had time to read the whole thread), but I thought that the "Jaime" from the outline actually split into two characters - Jaime and Cersei - with Cersei taking much of the original "Jaime's" storyline. In world, I could see Cersei trying to make a grab for the throne, or at the very least for power in Kings Landing (if she manages to get out of her current fix). This could lead to an eventual showdown between Cersei and our Jaime, who will kill her when she tries to burn Kings Landing down. Therefore, how will Cersei seize the throne is perhaps a more apt question.

I think you can see traces of the original "Jaime" still in Cersei, for example, her blaming Tyrion for Joffrey's death mirrors the original "Jaime" blaming the murder of the rivals to the throne on Tyrion.

Interesting. But I really would like to discuss Jaime's paths to Kingship, not Cersei's here...so maybe a different thread?

I think Cersei would do anything to hold on to power, maybe even marry Euron or Littlefinger (Lord Paramount of Riverlands, Vale, possibly in future the North even) thinking she can control them. But really there are so many scenarios for her..most as lunatic as she is.

[Hippocras]

57 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Hippocras really doesn't seem to understand how monarchies and dynasties work. The idea that the majority of Westeros would not think that, say, Viserys III was 'the rightful king' and Robert 'a usurper' during the hypothetical scenario of a Targaryen restoration attempt during the reign of Robert is just nonsense. Not all of them might decide to support Viserys but even Eddard, Hoster, Jon, and Robert himself would have known that he was a usurper and Viserys the true king.

That certainly would be a huge problem for Robert's campaign against a Targaryen king who isn't Aerys II because, you know, young Viserys hasn't done anything to anyone in Westeros, and doesn't deserve to ousted just because his father was mad.

The topic at hand is just a very outlandish scenario.

- Jaime doesn't want to be king.

- No one has any interest in wanting Jaime to be king if we think of the people involved as rational and/or ambitious.

- There is no chance that 'King Jaime' can gather any support among outside camp Lannister. Not even the Tyrells have any reason to support that traitorous cripple. Jaime isn't even scary anymore.

- Jaime's present situation makes it more likely that he becomes Catelyn eunuch fool than ends up ever in a position from which he can make a bid for the throne.

'Evil Jaime' may have been the gestation point for many characters. Not just Cersei but also Littlefinger, and possibly even Tywin and Varys (who all aren't mentioned in the original outline). George clearly had not flashed out the court at KL when he wrote that outline. One assumes that the court grew during the writing process of the book when George began to write about KL.

I understand very well how they work.

They are held up by an illusion, just as much as our current financial system is. Have you studied economics at all? Maybe that would help you understand.

Yes, there is a whole system of conventions in place to stabilize power because otherwise there would be chaos. But in the end all they are is conventions, and all it takes is for people to stop believing in them and suddenly any power they have is shown to be what it is: backed by substance, or not.

In the case of the Targaryens, they were overthrown. They do not control the throne. They do not, other than Dany, Aegon and Jon have armies backing them. They do not have dragons. They do not have gold. The convention that used to say they have a right to the throne is nothing more than paper. 

[Veloknight]

11 minutes ago, Hippocras said:

I understand very well how they work.

They are held up by an illusion, just as much as our current financial system is. Have you studied economics at all? Maybe that would help you understand.

Yes, there is a whole system of conventions in place to stabilize power because otherwise there would be chaos. But in the end all they are is conventions, and all it takes is for people to stop believing in them and suddenly any power they have is shown to be what it is: backed by substance, or not.

In the case of the Targaryens, they were overthrown. They do not control the throne. They do not, other than Dany, Aegon and Jon have armies backing them. They do not have dragons. They do not have gold. The convention that used to say they have a right to the throne is nothing more than paper. 

And not unlike fiat currencies, they continue to have staying power due to being better than the alternatives.

 

Again, in real history, this happened all the time. The Lancastrians in England were thoroughly defeated, nearly every possible claimant dead - but that did not stop Henry Tudor from using his claim (which is no farther back than the most recent Targ descendants) to seize the throne. And like these would-be Targ claimants, Henry Tudor was actively courted and handled by his mother, his uncle, and Elizabeth Woodville, the wife of the previous Yorkist king. Due to this, a coalition appeared around him that was strong enough to claim the throne.

[Hippocras]

4 minutes ago, Veloknight said:

And not unlike fiat currencies, they continue to have staying power due to being better than the alternatives.

 

Again, in real history, this happened all the time. The Lancastrians in England were thoroughly defeated, nearly every possible claimant dead - but that did not stop Henry Tudor from using his claim (which is no farther back than the most recent Targ descendants) to seize the throne. And like these would-be Targ claimants, Henry Tudor was actively courted and handled by his mother, his uncle, and Elizabeth Woodville, the wife of the previous Yorkist king. Due to this, a coalition appeared around him that was strong enough to claim the throne.

But they have to actually BE better than the alternatives. 

As far as the Lannisters and Tyrells are concerned, along with all of their vassals and those who are dependent on them to maintain their positions, Targaryens are NOT better than the alternative.

[Veloknight]

1 minute ago, Hippocras said:

But they have to actually BE better than the alternatives. 

As far as the Lannisters and Tyrells are concerned, along with all of their vassals and those who are dependent on them to maintain their positions, Targaryens are NOT better than the alternative.

But Targaryen descendants are, since they are much more likely to gain acceptance and support, and, if they are like Lord Tarth (without an overly strong power-base), reasonably controlled and influenced.

They want to win. Their necks are literally on the line, as are the necks of anyone they want to support them. For that reason, it's in their own best interest to back the claimant with the best chances as their standard-bearer, even if the individual in question is weak.

[Hippocras]

4 minutes ago, Veloknight said:

But Targaryen descendants are, since they are much more likely to gain acceptance and support, and, if they are like Lord Tarth (without an overly strong power-base), reasonably controlled and influenced.

They want to win. Their necks are literally on the line, as are the necks of anyone they want to support them. For that reason, it's in their own best interest to back the claimant with the best chances as their standard-bearer, even if the individual in question is weak.

No they are not more likely to gain support for this reason:

Anyone who MIGHT support them is already at this point leaning to one or the other rival contender: Dany, Aegon, Jon. They are already lost to the power block we are talking about here. It is not their support that the Tyrells and Lannisters need to secure because their support is already lost. 

[Veloknight]

5 minutes ago, Hippocras said:

No they are not more likely to gain support for this reason:

Anyone who MIGHT support them is already at this point leaning to one or the other rival contender: Dany, Aegon, Jon. They are already lost to the power block we are talking about here. It is not their support that the Tyrells and Lannisters need to secure because their support is already lost. 

Dany isn't on Westeros, and Jon is an unknown (the true Henry Tudor parallel, really). Very few people are leaning towards either of them. If Aegon lands and has the kind of initial success he's already having, and the Lannisters pick just some random claimant without a drop of royal blood, they'd be doomed, literally better off just capitulating to Aegon.

[Hippocras]

31 minutes ago, Veloknight said:

Dany isn't on Westeros, and Jon is an unknown (the true Henry Tudor parallel, really). Very few people are leaning towards either of them. If Aegon lands and has the kind of initial success he's already having, and the Lannisters pick just some random claimant without a drop of royal blood, they'd be doomed, literally better off just capitulating to Aegon.

We are talking about when both Tommen and Myrcella are dead. Neither one is dead yet, so Dany's current position is also not really what we are talking about. She might be headed to Westeros by the time they are both dead. Or not. And Aegon may be dead by then for that matter too. Jon may even be dead for good for all we really know. What we do know is that by the time that Tommen and Myrcella are both dead, the situation for the Lannisters and Tyrells will be quite dire, with enemies all around.

They will need to secure their power base. Their power base is not rooted in Targaryen blood, but in the extensive marriages their families have made to establish a power block. If they are strong enough, anyone looking to escape Euron in the South will be happy enough to support them as well and will not give a damn about Targ blood because Targ blood will not be what saves them from Euron; armies will. Those armies will fight for anyone who seems to hold power well enough, who has family ties to them personally, and who is a better alternative than Euron.

[White Ravens]

4 hours ago, Neds Secret said:

How does Jaime legitimise himself?

Same way Robert did it.  Right of conquest.  Robert was a young charismatic warrior when he took the throne.  Jaime has quite an uphill battle to get to the same place and there will need to be a groundswell shift in public opinion about him if he is to gain the throne and the support he would need to keep it.  Right now just being the son of the legendarily ruthless Tywin Lannister makes that hard enough but there are other complications involving his kinslaying dwarf brother and his psycho twin sister that most nobles know has been banging him, the Kettleblack clan and Moonboy for all they know.  I think it would take something like playing an instrumental role in saving Westeros from the Others and that is going to be a difficult thing to accomplish because his sword hand was amputated by a goat.

[Hippocras]

17 minutes ago, White Ravens said:

Same way Robert did it.  Right of conquest.  Robert was a young charismatic warrior when he took the throne.  Jaime has quite an uphill battle to get to the same place and there will need to be a groundswell shift in public opinion about him if he is to gain the throne and the support he would need to keep it.  Right now just being the son of the legendarily ruthless Tywin Lannister makes that hard enough but there are other complications involving his kinslaying dwarf brother and his psycho twin sister that most nobles know has been banging him, the Kettleblack clan and Moonboy for all they know.  I think it would take something like playing an instrumental role in saving Westeros from the Others and that is going to be a difficult thing to accomplish because his sword hand was amputated by a goat.

haha, an uphill battle indeed. But there ARE paths.

I don't imagine King Jamie as the scenario at the end of the books. I see it as a possible interim measure born of desperation.

[White Ravens]

2 minutes ago, Hippocras said:

haha, an uphill battle indeed. But there ARE paths.

I don't imagine King Jamie as the scenario at the end of the books. I see it as a possible interim measure born of desperation.

His twin sister has legitimately(?) been sitting the Iron Throne as regent so maybe if Cersei were to die and he were to be in Kings Landing he could similarly rule Westeros on behalf of Tommen or Myrcella.  Sounds like a long shot though.

[Little Lark]

Regardless of what was in the original outline, it would be completely out of character for the Jaime we know now to make a bid for the IT.

He's easily one of the least ambitious characters in the series. Jaime has given up his claim to the Rock once as a teen and again as a grown man. He's the kind of person that steps up to the plate when a leadership position is thrust upon him but he doesn't fight tooth and nail for power the way that Cersei does. 

Furthermore, I don't actually remember Jaime having any covetous thoughts about the throne. I think sitting on the throne after killing Aerys might be a relic from the original outline but since it would appeal to the character's appreciation for irony and black sense of humor, it still works. 

[Hippocras]

14 hours ago, Little Lark said:

Regardless of what was in the original outline, it would be completely out of character for the Jaime we know now to make a bid for the IT.

He's easily one of the least ambitious characters in the series. Jaime has given up his claim to the Rock once as a teen and again as a grown man. He's the kind of person that steps up to the plate when a leadership position is thrust upon him but he doesn't fight tooth and nail for power the way that Cersei does. 

Furthermore, I don't actually remember Jaime having any covetous thoughts about the throne. I think sitting on the throne after killing Aerys might be a relic from the original outline but since it would appeal to the character's appreciation for irony and black sense of humor, it still works. 

It really puzzles me why people would dismiss Jaime as a candidate because he doesn't have the ambition to be King (I agree, he doesn't) while simultaneously being convinced Jon will one day be King. Jon also has no desire to be King. He is not driven by ambition, but if Jon does happen to be revived and make a bid for the throne it will happen because of a sense of duty and NOT desire for power.

Why is that so easy to understand in Jon's case but not in Jaime's? Jaime, after all, is the guy who killed a King to save a city. He would ABSOLUTELY act in a way that could be perceived as a power grab without being worried about perceptions if he felt it was necessary to save a significant number of lives.

We are talking about those sorts of scenarios. We are not suggesting that Jaime would suddenly become an entirely different person.

 

I see three basic paths to Kingship coming from this thread:

1. He does it to heal the fractured alliance with the Tyrells in the face of very serious threats to both families and their bannermen from the likes of Euron. Marge is his queen and this is why the Tyrells stick around instead of finding a new contender to back.

2. By some arcane legal logic, after Myrcella and Tommen die everyone decides to give the throne to a guy they know pretty much nothing about who is a captive of Aegon: Selwyn Tarth. His heir is Brienne. Brienne and Jamie get married while hanging with the BWB in the Riverlands and come out of hiding to find out they are King and Queen now (yeah, not convinced).

3. Cersei convinces Tommen to write a will making Jaime his heir, as he has no children. Her not so subtle plan would be to marry Jaime and stay queen. The in-world precedent of course would be Robb's will which came from similar circumstances. Then Tommen dies. Jaime perceives the situation is quite desperate for his extended family if he does not so he reluctantly takes the throne. But he rejects Cersei and marries someone else who can actually help him secure his Kingdom. Maybe Marge, maybe Sansa, etc.

[Neds Secret]

16 hours ago, White Ravens said:

Same way Robert did it.  Right of conquest.  Robert was a young charismatic warrior when he took the throne.  Jaime has quite an uphill battle to get to the same place and there will need to be a groundswell shift in public opinion about him if he is to gain the throne and the support he would need to keep it.  Right now just being the son of the legendarily ruthless Tywin Lannister makes that hard enough but there are other complications involving his kinslaying dwarf brother and his psycho twin sister that most nobles know has been banging him, the Kettleblack clan and Moonboy for all they know.  I think it would take something like playing an instrumental role in saving Westeros from the Others and that is going to be a difficult thing to accomplish because his sword hand was amputated by a goat.

Hey, that may be how Jaime attempts to crown himself but I am intrigued as to how Jaime legitimises himself?? 

[Joy Hill]

In AFFC, Jaime muses about casting Cersei aside and choosing a new council for Tommen. Wouldn't he need to become regent to make such a move? So even though he has no desire for power, I think at this point in the story he would be willing to become king if he felt it was necessary.

Also, Tyrion makes a comment about Jaime having run from every chance he's had to rule. Maybe the next step of Jaime's arc will be him finally accepting a position of power (that being said, I personally don't see him becoming king).

[Joy Hill]

double post

[A spoon of knife and fork]

3 hours ago, Hippocras said:

It really puzzles me why people would dismiss Jaime as a candidate because he doesn't have the ambition to be King (I agree, he doesn't) while simultaneously being convinced Jon will one day be King. Jon also has no desire to be King. He is not driven by ambition, but if Jon does happen to be revived and make a bid for the throne it will happen because of a sense of duty and NOT desire for power.

Why is that so easy to understand in Jon's case but not in Jaime's? Jaime, after all, is the guy who killed a King to save a city. He would ABSOLUTELY act in a way that could be perceived as a power grab without being worried about perceptions if he felt it was necessary to save a significant number of lives.

We are talking about those sorts of scenarios. We are not suggesting that Jaime would suddenly become an entirely different person.

 

I see three basic paths to Kingship coming from this thread:

1. He does it to heal the fractured alliance with the Tyrells in the face of very serious threats to both families and their bannermen from the likes of Euron. Marge is his queen and this is why the Tyrells stick around instead of finding a new contender to back.

2. By some arcane legal logic, after Myrcella and Tommen die everyone decides to give the throne to a guy they know pretty much nothing about who is a captive of Aegon: Selwyn Tarth. His heir is Brienne. Brienne and Jamie get married while hanging with the BWB in the Riverlands and come out of hiding to find out they are King and Queen now (yeah, not convinced).

3. Cersei convinces Tommen to write a will making Jaime his heir, as he has no children. Her not so subtle plan would be to marry Jaime and stay queen. The in-world precedent of course would be Robb's will which came from similar circumstances. Then Tommen dies. Jaime perceives the situation is quite desperate for his extended family if he does not so he reluctantly takes the throne. But he rejects Cersei and marries someone else who can actually help him secure his Kingdom. Maybe Marge, maybe Sansa, etc.

Actually, Jon is ambitious.  He WANTS Winterfell, he is forced to admit to himself.  Much like Tyrion, this longing comes from the fact he's denied it all his life and is known as a bastard with no claim to anything.  I don't know if he would also want the IT, but it's possible given the winterfell thing.   Jaime on the other hand has consistently and repeatedly denied any interest in CR.  Part of that is probably a rebellious streak but part is just having no desire for that kind of power.

1. Margarey has no claim unless she's pregnant with Tommens kid and he's too young to do that so... A stretch.  I suppose Jaime could knock her up and then pretend it's Tommens.

2. This is conceivable.  Or Selwyn dies and Brienne herself has the claim.

3. I really can't see this working, or even Cersei being crazy enough to think it would stand.  He'd probably rather name Ser Pounce anyway.

[Hippocras]

16 minutes ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

Actually, Jon is ambitious.  He WANTS Winterfell, he is forced to admit to himself.  Much like Tyrion, this longing comes from the fact he's denied it all his life and is known as a bastard with no claim to anything.  I don't know if he would also want the IT, but it's possible given the winterfell thing.   Jaime on the other hand has consistently and repeatedly denied any interest in CR.  Part of that is probably a rebellious streak but part is just having no desire for that kind of power.

1. Margarey has no claim unless she's pregnant with Tommens kid and he's too young to do that so... A stretch.  I suppose Jaime could knock her up and then pretend it's Tommens.

2. This is conceivable.  Or Selwyn dies and Brienne herself has the claim.

3. I really can't see this working, or even Cersei being crazy enough to think it would stand.  He'd probably rather name Ser Pounce anyway.

Again, as already discussed above, people are overstating the value of lineage when it comes to the circumstances that would be at play.

The Kingdoms are not at peace. This is not a question of a peaceful Kingdom thst loses a figurehead and needs a smooth transition of power. THOSE are the circumstances where "rightful claim" holds significant sway. The entire principle of line of succession is meant to ease transitions of power and maintain the peace.

But in times of war against very serious threats, this is absolutely not what governs people's decisions on who should hold power. When threatenned, it comes down to looking after one's interests and choosing a leader who does not threaten those interests.

If the Tyrells do not flip sides to Aegon, Dany, Jon or Euron (which they might well do, but that is not what this thread is about) then they will absolutely not be looking to Selwyn Tarth to save the day. Sorry, but people are being really silly and blind about this. We are not talking rules on paper circumstances, we are talking assault on all sides with two major families in danger of annihilation, and needing a new reason to cooperate. It would not matter in the slightest under those circumstances that Margaery has no claim based in the Targaryen dynasty and neither does Jaime (the Targs were thrown out and have not the slightest means to enforce their dynastic line of succession). Selwyn Tarth is not in King's Landing, and is in fact a prisonner of Aegon most likely. He owes nothing and is owed nothing by either of the families people are proposing would simply hand him the throne. Yeah right. Sure. Give one solid reason why, in a time of war, under siege from several side, two families who have both been acting from pure ambition for a generation would hold the throne and send a messenger to some guy they barely know who is a prisonner of an enemy to please come sit on his throne.