Who would be King?

[gregg22]

Folks, Robert wasn't selected, he decided he would be King. According to GRRM in 2005:

When did Robert proclaim his intention to take the throne? At the outset of the war, or was it a relatively late development?

"Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne ... around the time of the Trident. [GRRM] Would not elaborate any further. Mentioned Robert's claim being stronger than Eddard Stark's and Jon Arryn's, the leaders of the two other great houses that spearheaded the revolution, due to blood ties to the Targaryen's."

-SSM, 2005

I also think Renley may have said something to Catelyn about the Targ blood ties being something the Masters referred to after to justify Roberts claim.

[Anton Martell]

26 minutes ago, gregg22 said:

Folks, Robert wasn't selected, he decided he would be King. According to GRRM in 2005:

When did Robert proclaim his intention to take the throne? At the outset of the war, or was it a relatively late development?

"Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne ... around the time of the Trident. [GRRM] Would not elaborate any further. Mentioned Robert's claim being stronger than Eddard Stark's and Jon Arryn's, the leaders of the two other great houses that spearheaded the revolution, due to blood ties to the Targaryen's."

-SSM, 2005

I also think Renley may have said something to Catelyn about the Targ blood ties being something the Masters referred to after to justify Roberts claim.

This quote gives us the timeline, but the fact that he decided to take it can still be the result of a talk with Ned/Jon, and since GRRM doesn't want to elaborate more according to the quote, something or someone might have helped him make his mind about that. Especially since the world "proclaimed" is used, which imply something public, so in private some stuff might have happened. Robert's rebellion was not at first about him being king, but it became so, that is sure. 

[Khal BlackfyreO]

5 hours ago, gregg22 said:

Folks, Robert wasn't selected, he decided he would be King. According to GRRM in 2005:

When did Robert proclaim his intention to take the throne? At the outset of the war, or was it a relatively late development?

"Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne ... around the time of the Trident. [GRRM] Would not elaborate any further. Mentioned Robert's claim being stronger than Eddard Stark's and Jon Arryn's, the leaders of the two other great houses that spearheaded the revolution, due to blood ties to the Targaryen's."

-SSM, 2005

I also think Renley may have said something to Catelyn about the Targ blood ties being something the Masters referred to after to justify Roberts claim.

Interesting.  I hadn´t heard about that SSM. As Anton says above though, still a lot that could have been going on behind the scenes, and even so that is pretty late into the game to be making that decision.  I wonder if it was before or after the battle? 

 

I do remember the Renly comment now, though I still can't believe that such a thing was more than lip service to Targ Loyalists, no matter how much truth was in it.  It seem hypocritical to base one´s claim on the blood of the house you are against and in the business of removing.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

8 hours ago, gregg22 said:

Folks, Robert wasn't selected, he decided he would be King. According to GRRM in 2005:

When did Robert proclaim his intention to take the throne? At the outset of the war, or was it a relatively late development?

"Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne ... around the time of the Trident. [GRRM] Would not elaborate any further. Mentioned Robert's claim being stronger than Eddard Stark's and Jon Arryn's, the leaders of the two other great houses that spearheaded the revolution, due to blood ties to the Targaryen's."

-SSM, 2005

I also think Renley may have said something to Catelyn about the Targ blood ties being something the Masters referred to after to justify Roberts claim.

I don't think that this means what you think that it means. After all don't forget what we know;

Quote

 

Robert sat down again. “Damn you, Ned Stark. You and Jon Arryn, I love you both. What have you done to me? You were the one should have been king, you or Jon” “You had the better claim, Your Grace”

 

Ned never said anything about Robert wanted to be King. So it seems to me that is more possible that Jon and Ned talked him into declare his interest in taking the Throne.

[devilish]

Robert was chosen because

a- he was at his peak. Jon Arryn was relatively old and he struggled to have children
b- he actually wanted the crown
c- he believed in the faith of the seven. Eddard would have struggled to keep the faith happy
d- he was strong, fierce and charismatic.

I still believe that the best option would have been Hoster Tully.

a- he's not directly linked to any of the Targ's deaths. That creates an opening with the loyalists and the Targs safe return as long as they accept the change in management (Lordship of Dragonstone and possible marriage between Edmure first born and Danny?)

b- he's a shrewd negotiator whose well versed in the game of thrones

c- he's got great connections with the Vale and the North.

d- he's cut for the job and would allow Eddard to return to his igloo and Robert to his whoring

Of course he would have to renounce to Riverrun which will be inherited by the Black Fish as long as he accepts to marry someone. Jana Tyrell or Mina Tyrell would bring the Reach back to the fold. Edmure would of course marry Cersei and Hoster could consider marrying Ashara Dayne, consolidating links between Dorne and KL.

Hand of the King -  Tywin

Grand Maester - Pycelle

Master of coin - Mace

Master of laws - Jon

Master of ships - Stannis

Master of whisperers - Viserys

Lord Commander of the Kingsguard - Selmy

[TheDemonicStark]

58 minutes ago, devilish said:

Robert was chosen because

a- he was at his peak. Jon Arryn was relatively old and he struggled to have children
b- he actually wanted the crown
c- he believed in the faith of the seven. Eddard would have struggled to keep the faith happy
d- he was strong, fierce and charismatic.

I still believe that the best option would have been Hoster Tully.

a- he's not directly linked to any of the Targ's deaths. That creates an opening with the loyalists and the Targs safe return as long as they accept the change in management (Lordship of Dragonstone and possible marriage between Edmure first born and Danny?)

b- he's a shrewd negotiator whose well versed in the game of thrones

c- he's got great connections with the Vale and the North.

d- he's cut for the job and would allow Eddard to return to his igloo and Robert to his whoring

Of course he would have to renounce to Riverrun which will be inherited by the Black Fish as long as he accepts to marry someone. Jana Tyrell or Mina Tyrell would bring the Reach back to the fold. Edmure would of course marry Cersei and Hoster could consider marrying Ashara Dayne, consolidating links between Dorne and KL.

Hand of the King -  Tywin

Grand Maester - Pycelle

Master of coin - Mace

Master of laws - Jon

Master of ships - Stannis

Master of whisperers - Viserys

Lord Commander of the Kingsguard - Selmy

Sadly, Hoster Tully had no claim to the throne at all.

Also, Viserys as Master of Whispers? Dude, get your spelling right. It's Varys!

[devilish]

34 minutes ago, TheDemonicStark said:

Sadly, Hoster Tully had no claim to the throne at all.

Also, Viserys as Master of Whispers? Dude, get your spelling right. It's Varys!

Did that matter at one point? No one had more legitimacy then Viserys and Danny so if they ignored them they might as well ignore everybody and start from scratch. I still think that the Targs are needed to give legitimacy to the crown family. Until a Targ is still alive then there's always a chance that some power hungry lord would use them. Hence why the new rulers must make sure that the Targs returned and they accept the new circumstances and having someone who hasn't been directly hurt by the Targs as king can help.

The loyalists may consider bending the knee if they are given

a- a pardon which include the full restitution of their lands
b- Lordship of Dragonstone to Viserys
c- Danny's marriage to the Edmure's first born

Its a much better deal then relying on a Dothraki warlord

[gregg22]

4 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I don't think that this means what you think that it means. After all don't forget what we know;

Ned never said anything about Robert wanted to be King. So it seems to me that is more possible that Jon and Ned talked him into declare his interest in taking the Throne.

I don't disagree, though I don't think it would take much conversation for them to all realize somebody had to do it and Robert was the guy. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

3 hours ago, devilish said:

c- Danny's marriage to the Edmure's first born

Why not Dany for Edmure?

3 hours ago, devilish said:

The loyalists may consider bending the knee if they are given

I don't agree. They had gone too far to bend the knee at the end.

I don't disagree, though I don't think it would take much conversation for them to all realize somebody had to do it and Robert was the guy. 

My point was that it wasn't Robert who claimed the Throne, the Rebels decided who among them will be the King.

[House Beaudreau]

On 7/28/2016 at 7:48 AM, Khal BlackfyreO said:

So Aerys has called for the heads of Eddard Stark, now the head of his house, and Robert Baratheon, already the head of his.  Jon Arryn realizes he cannot consent to handing over his wards to a certain death at the hands of a madman and calls his banners. 

The scene is set for Rebellion. 

But what comes after?  What happens when and if we win? 

Where and when do these questions arise, how are they answered, and who does the answering?  Why is Robert chosen to be the new king?  Why not Ned?  Why not Jon?  Why not somebody else? 

At what point does this happen and why do they come to the conclusions they came to?

This is one of the most interesting questions in the rebellion, I feel like they could have literally put a number of candidates on the Throne.

During the rebellion, the Targaryens and their loyalist seem to think that killing Robert would end the rebellion. Who knows? If Robert would have been killed at Ashmark or the battle of the Bells, or at the Trident, the rebellion would probably have ended soon after. Which kind of implies that Robert was going to take the Kingdom from the Targaryens. But......

When Tywin marched on King's Landing he could have raced into the throne room and Seated himself on the Iron Throne and waited to see who would challenge the Lannisters... But he didn't and I wonder why? he clearly wants the Lannister to create a new Dynasty, why is he content to marrying Cersi into the Baratheon name. 

Jamie could have stayed on the Iron Throne after he killed Aerys. Ned finds him on the Iron Throne and Jamie concedes the seat to Ned but Ned doesn't take it either. Which tells me that Ned planned on Robert being King after the rebellion. 

Ned could have taken the Iron Throne for himself, would Robert have challenged him? would Tywin?

 

 

 

[Khal BlackfyreO]

4 hours ago, House Beaudreau said:

This is one of the most interesting questions in the rebellion, I feel like they could have literally put a number of candidates on the Throne.

During the rebellion, the Targaryens and their loyalist seem to think that killing Robert would end the rebellion. Who knows? If Robert would have been killed at Ashmark or the battle of the Bells, or at the Trident, the rebellion would probably have ended soon after. Which kind of implies that Robert was going to take the Kingdom from the Targaryens. But......

When Tywin marched on King's Landing he could have raced into the throne room and Seated himself on the Iron Throne and waited to see who would challenge the Lannisters... But he didn't and I wonder why? he clearly wants the Lannister to create a new Dynasty, why is he content to marrying Cersi into the Baratheon name. 

Jamie could have stayed on the Iron Throne after he killed Aerys. Ned finds him on the Iron Throne and Jamie concedes the seat to Ned but Ned doesn't take it either. Which tells me that Ned planned on Robert being King after the rebellion. 

Ned could have taken the Iron Throne for himself, would Robert have challenged him? would Tywin?

 

 

 

Your first point is an important one... The loyalist forces do seem to target Robert, but that could be for two reasons.

1. He is most accessible target for one thing, Robert has to raise the Stormlands to have a chance and he is surrounded by the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands, all Loyalist kingdoms.  He is an easy target, especially when Ned, Jon, and Hoster are far to the North with their forces consolidated in a united block.

2. Partly because of the first reason, Robert is the most successful of the rebel forces.  They start throwing their forces at him, and he starts winning, battle after battle.  That kind of success draws them after him after that, as he is the biggest threat to them and the brightest light in the rebellion.

 

Tywin could have kept King's Landing for himself, but that would have been all he had.  If he turns against the rebels, chances are the loyalists, who just lost their king due to his actions, would not be supporting him either.  Because he came late, he didn't come in full strength, and King's Landing would be tough to defend, with the Westerlands on the other side of Westeros, and no support from the other 6 kingdoms.

 

Jaimie had no interest in ruling, and I think he was still reeling from his actions and the repercussions to be deciding anything along those lines right then anyway.

[devilish]

19 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Why not Dany for Edmure?

I don't agree. They had gone too far to bend the knee at the end.

My point was that it wasn't Robert who claimed the Throne, the Rebels decided who among them will be the King.

a- I don't understand

b- Actually they didn't. After Aerys went mad and ordered the death of everyone (Eddard, Rickard, Brandon, Robert) it was only fair for the three Lords to rebel. I mean, surely, you cant expect Eddard and Robert to willingly remove their heads with a smile on their face can't they? At that point a war occurred and Rhaegar died during that war. People do die in wars as they die in duels. No one took it too much at heart when a Crown Prince died during Duncan the tall trial of the seven. Ironically the biggest crime was made not by the rebels but by the Lannisters who betrayed the King without having any reason at all and murdered the royal family in the most gruesome of ways. That could be ratified by banishing Jaime from the KG in disgrace and executing Gregor Clegane. That's a small price to pay for the Lannisters considering that Cersei would marry the crown prince and Jamie will return as heir of CR

c- I think that appointing Robert was a mistake. They needed someone who was as detached from the rebel's cause as much as possible, someone who can mend bridges and he is knowledgeable in the game of thrones .

[Anton Martell]

About Hoster: I don't remember where but recently someone destroyed him as possible choice, and it proved that he might not be a good choice. Secondly, Edmure would inherit Riverrun, not Brynden. And last: if you just killed the king and replace him, you don't keep his kids at your court. That's begging for conspiracies. You either exile them or kill them...

 

As for Tywin, he didn't take the throne for reasons mentionned above, but also I think because he planned on marrying Cersei to Robert already, and that is much more efficient, since your family is bound to the kingdom, and the kids were all raised as half Lannisters (which shock some people when they see all the Lannisters colors on their clothes). Doing so allows Tywin to not be too exposed and not seem to be too greedy I believe

[Lord Varys]

The Rebellion wasn't fought to end the line of House Targaryen and depose the entire dynasty. It was fought to put an end to the Mad King.

Eventually Robert's role as one of the leaders and the figurehead of the rebels enabled him to proclaim himself a pretender to the throne as a great-grandson of King Aegon V Targaryen.

The Rebellion was no movement to establish a new dynasty as Eddard Stark himself states when he mentions that Robert had the better claim.

George took his time establishing the exact relations between House Baratheon and Targaryen. But since AFfC we know that Robert's grandmother was Egg's daughter Princess Rhaelle, and since ADwD we also know that the legal claim of House Baratheon goes through Rhaelle. It is even stated in the appendix on House Baratheon in said book.

The idea that Robert conquered his throne is thus pretty far from the truth. He was the great-grandson, grandnephew, and first cousin once removed of a king, making him the natural and only claimant to the Iron Throne should Aerys II and his family ever be dethroned (or die).

There would have been no question who should take the throne in Aerys' place. It would always have been Robert. Nobody else had such good a claim - assuming Jon Arryn and Ned Stark had a claim at all. Hoster may have had Targaryen blood through some Lothston marriage, but that wouldn't have been legitimate royal blood. Ned doesn't seem to be related to the Targaryens at all, and if Jon Arryn has any Targaryen blood it doesn't come from Princess Daella but passed through some other house.

The Great Council of 101 AC didn't get through with the rigid interpretation that no males through the female line can claim the throne. Both Aegon III and Robert Baratheon are proof of that. 

[Khal BlackfyreO]

The Rebellion wasn't fought to end the line of House Targaryen and depose the entire dynasty. It was fought to put an end to the Mad King.

That sounds good, and is quite possibly true, but a few things don't add up.  Why does Rhaegar even fight at the Trident for his father?  If he was already thinking about deposing his father and knows that is all the other side wants, then why doesn't he inform them that he wants the same thing they do?

Probably because his actions sparked the whole thing and they want to remove him just as well...

  And why does Tywin think it is necessary to kill Elia and Aegon and Rhaella? (because we can be fairly sure he ordered it). 

On 7/30/2016 at 10:32 PM, Lord Varys said:

 

Eventually Robert's role as one of the leaders and the figurehead of the rebels enabled him to proclaim himself a pretender to the throne as a great-grandson of King Aegon V Targaryen.

The Rebellion was no movement to establish a new dynasty as Eddard Stark himself states when he mentions that Robert had the better claim.

The idea that Robert conquered his throne is thus pretty far from the truth. He was the great-grandson, grandnephew, and first cousin once removed of a king, making him the natural and only claimant to the Iron Throne should Aerys II and his family ever be dethroned (or die).

It really amounts to the same thing doesn't it?  Even if Robert is related to the Targs, the Baratheon name is now that of the king of Westeros, and that is a new dynasty by hook or by crook. There were few houses in medieval europe that weren't already related to each other some way, so it could be hard to find a house to rule that didn't  have Targaryen blood, even if Robert was pretty closely related. 

And Robert conquered the throne as the undisputed military leader, the winner of the head to head between him and Rhaegar, and by winning the general popularity contest of the Rebels.  If it were all about claims and not ending the rule of the Targs, Viserys would be sitting the Iron Throne.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

On 30/7/2016 at 3:23 PM, devilish said:

a- I don't understand

Why not marry Danny with Edmure instead of Edmure's first born, which could had been a girl or he may not had a child at all. 

 

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

Doran Martell . He has dragon's blood .

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

That sounds good, and is quite possibly true, but a few things don't add up.  Why does Rhaegar even fight at the Trident for his father?  If he was already thinking about deposing his father and knows that is all the other side wants, then why doesn't he inform them that he wants the same thing they do?

We don't know as of yet why the hell Rhaegar led his father's armies against the rebels. That is an interesting question.

1 hour ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

Probably because his actions sparked the whole thing and they want to remove him just as well...

Yes, it is rather likely that neither Robert nor Ned were willing to make a peace with Rhaegar. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the rebels were fighting a war to depose the entire Targaryen dynasty. We know that Robert proclaimed himself king around the time of the Trident, but by that time the war was nearing its end. Prior to that there is no talk whatsoever to depose the Targaryen dynasty.

But Robert was effectively just another Targaryen. Through the female, true, but still a descendant of the Targaryen kings. He could even have called himself Targaryen if he had wanted to (if Joffrey Lydden could take the Lannister name and Harrold Hardyng is likely to take the Arryn name eventually there is no reason to believe that Robert could have called himself Targaryen). The point is that he wanted to distance himself from the previous dynasty despite the fact he was closely related to them.

1 hour ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

And why does Tywin think it is necessary to kill Elia and Aegon and Rhaella? (because we can be fairly sure he ordered it).

That is part of Tywin's strategy to win the trust of Robert. He actually states that he had to prove that House Lannister had forsaken House Targaryen forever. Not to mention that Tywin also wanted to get even with Elia and her mother in the whole Rhaegar-Cersei affair.

1 hour ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

It really amounts to the same thing doesn't it?  Even if Robert is related to the Targs, the Baratheon name is now that of the king of Westeros, and that is a new dynasty by hook or by crook. There were few houses in medieval europe that weren't already related to each other some way, so it could be hard to find a house to rule that didn't  have Targaryen blood, even if Robert was pretty closely related.

Well, the Targaryen blood wasn't spread across Westeros or Essos the same way medieval European royalty married each other. There were only very few legitimate female branches of House Targaryen, and we actually don't know whether any such branches aside from Stannis-Shireen, Selwyn-Brienne, and Doran-Arianne-Trystane still exist. The name of the dynasty changed, but that was Robert's decision. He could have taken the Targaryen name, presumably. But names don't really matter. Robert is still Aegon V's great-grandson and Jaehaerys II's grandnephew.

1 hour ago, Khal BlackfyreO said:

And Robert conquered the throne as the undisputed military leader, the winner of the head to head between him and Rhaegar, and by winning the general popularity contest of the Rebels.  If it were all about claims and not ending the rule of the Targs, Viserys would be sitting the Iron Throne.

We actually don't know whether Robert was 'the undisputed military leader' of the rebels. He was a major figurehead and the guy Jon and Ned later made king, but that doesn't mean he actually led the main armies of the rebels. In fact, what we do know about the war suggests that he contributed the smallest contingent of men to the rebel cause and later had to be saved by Ned and Hoster at Stoney Sept.

He still was the main hero of the Rebellion and all, but he wasn't necessarily the guy in charge nor the man who made the decisions.

There was still a pretty big chance that Viserys III would be proclaimed king by Jaime and Tywin Lannister. Jaime considered that. Had he done it Robert might not have become king unless the rebels would have been prepared to continue the war against Tywin and possibly also the Tyrells.

But the point in Robert's case is that he had a legal claim as Aegon V's great-grandson. His claim wasn't as good as Viserys III's, of course, but not all that bad, either. Robert was just a successful usurper whose success at usurping was based not so much on his military prowess and strength of arms but on his royal ancestry.

House Baratheon would only have been a 'new dynasty' if Robert hadn't been related to Aerys II and Rhaegar at all. But the political landscape of Westeros wasn't ready back then (and still isn't right now) for some dude with no royal blood whatsoever (or the appearance thereof) to claim dominion over the entire Realm. No great lord in the Realm would support a man without royal blood. It is royal blood that makes you special and sets you apart from the other great lords of the Realm. If just some guy can sit the Iron Throne then there is no reason why any of them should have accepted Robert as their king. And Balon Greyjoy did not, anyway.

If Robert hadn't had the advantage of his royal ancestry the likes of Tywin and Mace would have been very tempted to just murder Robert, too, and seize the throne from themselves over his dead body. But nothing of this sort ever happens, not even after Robert's death.

[devilish]

10 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Why not marry Danny with Edmure instead of Edmure's first born, which could had been a girl or he may not had a child at all. 

 

As we both know, both Loyalists and Rebels ended up heavily weakened during the war. The war (like any other war) would have left Westeros in a financial ruin, with most of the infrastructure destroyed and grain left to rot because the peasants were sent to war.

Irrespective of whose king he would have a big job in rebuilding the kingdom and the Westerlands is surely the first target to get money and assurances from. The Westerlands are ridiculously rich and since they remained neutral throughout all the war, their infrastructure and armies are largely intact. Three Westerlanders (specifically Tywin, Gregor and Jamie) committed hideous crimes either directly or indirectly so they need assurances that  at least the Lannisters won't be punished for it. The last thing a king in those circumstances would want is having to declare war against the richest,  most fortified and probably most powerful regions in the kingdom. 

A marriage between Crown Prince Edmure and Cersei Lannister would provide the necessary assurances. Danny is still newborn at that point so if Edmure and Cersei can deliver a boy as soon as possible, it wouldn't be that tragic to marry him to Danny who would be 5-6 years older then him. By the time someone with Targ blood would be sitting on the iron throne as a ruler, all those guilty of the crimes made against the Targs would be dead and the king himself would have both Lannister and rebel blood in him. 

The Westernlands would of course foot most of the bill in rebuilding the kingdom + they will suffer some consequences. Jamie will be kicked out of the KG in disgrace and Gregor would be executed for his hideous crime and for disobeying Tywin's 'orders' in keeping Elia and her children safe. Hopefully that would be enough to keep the Martells happy and convince the defeated Targs to negotiate their return. 

 

 

 

[Lion of the West]

1 hour ago, devilish said:

The Westernlands would of course foot most of the bill in rebuilding the kingdom + they will suffer some consequences. Jamie will be kicked out of the KG in disgrace and Gregor would be executed for his hideous crime and for disobeying Tywin's 'orders' in keeping Elia and her children safe. Hopefully that would be enough to keep the Martells happy and convince the defeated Targs to negotiate their return. 

 

 

 

You do realize that getting Gregor's head will change nothing in regards the Martells? They want Tywin and all his brood dead, and Lorch to that, and giving them crumbles will not satisfy them as can be seen when Tyrion tries that very, foolish, trick.

A better deal would be to establish Baratheon rule and ensure the Targaryens never set foot again on Westerosi soil. Give them the Blackfyre treatment.

But on another line, Robert's Rebellion was indeed never anything but a deposement of the Targaryens, all Targaryens, from the Iron Throne and the notion that it was actually some internal Targaryen thing makes no sense. I can't see how even the most convoluted arguments can land with that Robert should inherit the throne after Aerys. And its a rather strong argument that Robert didn't take the name Targaryen but kept the name Baratheon with all its associations when sitting on the throne.