Is House Florent too weak to make sense?

[Floki of the Ironborn]

27 minutes ago, Stormking902 said:

I cant remember honestly but I do remember that originally house Florent has 2000 calvary which as I stated before is quite powerful considering other lords calvary strength. 

I thought that Stannis said House Florent can only summon 2,000 swords total. Many of them were killed at Bitterbridge while their cavalry consists of over half of Stannis' remaining 1500 men.

[The Grey Wolf]

Floki

That's what I remember as well.

[Bironic]

1 hour ago, Stormking902 said:

I cant remember honestly but I do remember that originally house Florent has 2000 calvary which as I stated before is quite powerful considering other lords calvary strength. 

“House Florent can field two thousand swords at best.” It was said that Stannis knew the strength of every house in the Seven Kingdoms.

Stannis baratheon in ACOK prologue.

Two thousand swords isn't the same as 2000 cavalrymen.

Maybe the Florents lost some of their strength during the last 300 years. They might have supported the greens during the Dance and later the Blackfyres, and could have suffered for their poor choice of alliances.

[Nyrhex]

8 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

You make a good argument for why House Florent isn't stronger. However, I have to disagree about Stannis's marriage. There were plenty of other higher-ranking noblewomen he could marry. Not Lord Paramount-level but certainly above the Florents. Again, Stannis was the second in line after Joffrey for the throne (at the time of his marriage), the king's oldest younger brother, the Lord of Dragonstone (quite prestigious), Master of Ships, and a hero of the Rebellion. That makes him quite the catch and honestly even with his prickly nature there should have been noblemen fighting for his hand for their daughters. If the Florents were deemed a worthy (or necessary) match though why the hell did Robert or Jon Arryn make him marry Selyse? Why not Delena? She's nicer to look at, younger, and more fertile (not that they would have had any way of knowing the last point at the time).

Name those higher-ranking noblewomen please. The only Higher-Ranking noblewoman I can think of is Lynesse Hightower, who is 7-8 years younger than Stannis, and would have been about 15 years old when Stannis wed Selyse. That was a marrage that could have still happened, that would have been a threat to the Tyrells. The entire argument that the Florents, with thier 2,000 swords at best, and thier claim which is shared by literally anyone else, fits far better with the Hightowers than with the bloody Florents. 

Delena being nicer to look at is exactly why I think Robert made the match with Selyse, "The Bearded Lady" as Val puts it. He probably thought it would be funny. She is already the lord's niece, what does it matter of which brother? Why not take the pretty one? Because Robert was a dick, he was not making stratigic plans and making threats to the Tyrells. You know what is a threat to the Tyrells? Loras being taken as a page and later squire to Renly Baratheon. There, done deal, the same as Robert would later do with the Greyjoys by taking Theon and giving him to Ned Stark. A hostage by any other name is still a hostage. Better conditions than Theon's, better treatment and he could go home every once and a while for a visit, but he was still in the hands of the Baratheons for most of his life.

 

 

[AureliusAmbrosius]

Stannis might be excluding minor houses sworn to the Florents, in his count of their swords.

Even assuming a just few modest but fertile holdings of varying dignity in the orbit of Brightwater keep, we could be talking about a full levy of ~5,000 men. Since the Florents fielded a large proportion of those 2K in cavalry, it seems like we're not necessarily including every peasant working to feed those horses in the count.

Stannis might deliberately ignore that levy, since feudal ties in the Reach were obviously breaking down anyway, as clash went on.

Just my two cents. Personally, I'd assume the strength of the reach is in a myriad of small holdings for landed knights, since its fertility could support the sort of subdivision of noble lands into tiny little pieces. Like, Ancient Regime France had a pretty silly proportion of the population ennobled at points. Utter crap for their tax structure, but kind of helpful in have more gendarmes than Spain or the HRE. In that set up, no one noble house would actually have many men-at-arms directly under their control. Power would flow from the aggregation of those little noble contingents toward the top of the feudal pyramid.

[Nyrhex]

7 minutes ago, AureliusAmbrosius said:

Stannis might be excluding minor houses sworn to the Florents, in his count of their swords.

Even assuming a just few modest but fertile holdings of varying dignity in the orbit of Brightwater keep, we could be talking about a full levy of ~5,000 men. Since the Florents fielded a large proportion of those 2K in cavalry, it seems like we're not necessarily including every peasant working to feed those horses in the count.

Stannis might deliberately ignore that levy, since feudal ties in the Reach were obviously breaking down anyway, as clash went on.

Just my two cents. Personally, I'd assume the strength of the reach is in a myriad of small holdings for landed knights, since its fertility could support the sort of subdivision of noble lands into tiny little pieces. Like, Ancient Regime France had a pretty silly proportion of the population ennobled at points. Utter crap for their tax structure, but kind of helpful in have more gendarmes than Spain or the HRE. In that set up, no one noble house would actually have many men-at-arms directly under their control. Power would flow from the aggregation of those little noble contingents toward the top of the feudal pyramid.

 

1. There is absolutely no reason for Stannis not to count any sworn houses when he handwaved the Florents as 2,000 swords at best. He was giving a claim why the Florents can't help him - They are a minor house with not enough troops, and are not likely to defy the Tyrells.

2. The 5,000 men figure is made up. 2,000 swords is including sworn houses, the same as with any other house who's numbers are given.

3. There is nothing that tells us that they had a larger proportion of thier men mounted than is common in the Reach and elsewhere in Westeros (~25%). Out of ~2,000 swords they would have ~500 mounted, which sits perfectly fine with everything we hear of Florent troops in the books. 

 

Face it people, the Florents are a minor house, trying to make them into a major house just to fit into a factoid itself born of unwillingness to accept thier depiction in the books is circular logic.

The theory that the Florents must be a major factor is derived from the inability to understand why Robert would choose to marry Stannis to Selyse. The theory that the Florents must have more than the books tell us comes from the earlier theory that the Florents need to justify why they are a threat to the Tyrells. Sometimes a Cigar Is Just a Cigar. You don't need to look for some contrived scenario where Stannis marries Selyse for her house's claim on Highgarden and never mention it, why he downplays the Florents as having 2,000 swords at best, or why Stannis had to marry the ugly Florent when there was another option. 

The simple explanation is that Robert was, again, a dick. He picked a woman from Stannis' social standing with little further thought, and probably found it funny to pick the ugly one of the Florent girls available. It's literally that simple. The go to option for the "Tyrell replacement" theory would have been Hightower, which is the strongest house after the Tyrells and had a daughter without a major age difference available for marriage. Could have gone with that and finish, but Robert went for the Florents. Not because they are stronger than the Hightowers, not because they have a better claim than anyone else in the Reach, and not because Selyse was a great beauty. Most likely he either did not care what she looks like, or picked her exactly because she was not pretty.

 

[GallowsKnight]

All these people scoffing at only 2,000 bannermen. How many bannermen do you have?

In any civil war/rebellion, subtracting 2000 men from your enemy and adding it to your actually means a difference of 4000 men. And the Florents might bring some other houses along for the ride. Like the guys we saw jump over to Stannis, Meadows, Mullendores, Fossoways etc.

[Lion of the West]

I'd like to say that its a bit simple to think that the only thing that the Florents can bring to the table is 2000 men for it ignores the dynastic parts of it and the threat to the Tyrells.

That the main thing that the Florents have going on is their connection with the old House Gardener and that really is worth alot in a feudal society. This effectively means that the Baratheons have a candiate in the wings, waiting and ready, to whom House Baratheon has a link so that in case of problems with the Tyrells Robert could either put the Florents in Highgarden or even Stannis in Highgarden since Stannis through his wife has a claim for his children to the Reach, and be sure its a new lord that has loyalty to House Baratheon. That's a very serious thing as the Tyrells know that the Baratheon standing plan is not to pardon them and everything goes back to normal if the Tyrells would lose. The standard plan would seem to be that the Tyrells are thrown out, in case of a Tyrell defeat. This would, in my eyes, be a major deterent.

[Free Northman Reborn]

People overestimate the average strength of a noble House in Westeros. And they do this largely because of the flawed assumption that Southron Houses should be stronger than Northern Houses.

In truth, 2000 swords is a lot for the average noble House in the South. In the North strength appears to have been consolidated into fewer, but stronger, Houses, whereas in the South you have far more Houses, but most are weaker than the likes of the Karstarks or Umbers.

The Florents' 2000 makes them an above average strength House in the South. Note that House Templeton is considered a strong House because they can raise more than a thousand men, for example.

This while the least of Robb's bannermen can raise that number.

[Nyrhex]

3 hours ago, GallowsKnight said:

All these people scoffing at only 2,000 bannermen. How many bannermen do you have?

In any civil war/rebellion, subtracting 2000 men from your enemy and adding it to your actually means a difference of 4000 men. And the Florents might bring some other houses along for the ride. Like the guys we saw jump over to Stannis, Meadows, Mullendores, Fossoways etc.

2,000 men is nothing to scoff at. Then again 2,000 men and a claim shared by literally all other noble houses from the Reach makes for a laughably weak case that the marriage to the Florents was meant to be seen as a threat to the Tyrells. 

Aside of that, Robert simply put does not act like that. He gave Jaime the title of Warden of the East and didn't give a shit what the Vale lords thought of it. Before that he allowed Balon to keep his lands and titles. The Florents are nothing to scoff at, they are a house on the same level as Stannis - a great house a rank below a Lord Paramount with about equal level of strength (i.e. wealth). That's about all there is to it. 

Could they bring others over? Sure, but I trust that the Hightowers could have done far more. 

2 hours ago, LionoftheWest said:

I'd like to say that its a bit simple to think that the only thing that the Florents can bring to the table is 2000 men for it ignores the dynastic parts of it and the threat to the Tyrells.

That the main thing that the Florents have going on is their connection with the old House Gardener and that really is worth alot in a feudal society. This effectively means that the Baratheons have a candiate in the wings, waiting and ready, to whom House Baratheon has a link so that in case of problems with the Tyrells Robert could either put the Florents in Highgarden or even Stannis in Highgarden since Stannis through his wife has a claim for his children to the Reach, and be sure its a new lord that has loyalty to House Baratheon. That's a very serious thing as the Tyrells know that the Baratheon standing plan is not to pardon them and everything goes back to normal if the Tyrells would lose. The standard plan would seem to be that the Tyrells are thrown out, in case of a Tyrell defeat. This would, in my eyes, be a major deterent.

The main thing that the Florents have? A connection to the Gardeners is repeatedly stated to be shared by all Reach houses. The Florents are by no means the only ones, nor the strongest.

And this point is not ignoring this issue, this is debunking the fandom-created factoid that the marriage to the Florents is keeping a blood claim on Highgarden in reserves. That is flat out not how Robert works, and he has shown it repeatedly. There is no "standard" plan to replace lords, because the "Standard plan" in Robert's case is to bring foes back into the fold, and at worst reduce thier power, but never outright replace them. And even reducing power was only done in extreme cases, for loyalists who betrayed thier lords and supported the Targs.

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

People overestimate the average strength of a noble House in Westeros. And they do this largely because of the flawed assumption that Southron Houses should be stronger than Northern Houses.

In truth, 2000 swords is a lot for the average noble House in the South. In the North strength appears to have been consolidated into fewer, but stronger, Houses, whereas in the South you have far more Houses, but most are weaker than the likes of the Karstarks or Umbers.

The Florents' 2000 makes them an above average strength House in the South. Note that House Templeton is considered a strong House because they can raise more than a thousand men, for example.

This while the least of Robb's bannermen can raise that number.

Frey - 4,000 men. Rest of the Riverlords, even after suffering two major defeats and thier country ravaged, could still manage to raise 11,000 men within 3 days.

Lords Declarant - Each of the 6 brought 1,000 men, and Littlefinger later adds that they can gather 20,000 between them. ~3,333 men on average. That is what is considered a strong house, and the Templetons are landed knights, not one of the great lords like the Florents.

The Westerlands raised 35,000 men for the initial invasion of the Riverlands, and that was far from the total recruitment potential. Even including house Lannister for a total of 21 houses, an average of over 1,666 men for the initial invasion force alone, not including reserves.

The Reach has Over 60 houses, including the small ones that fall under larger ones. Let's go with a minimalist calculation for the host at Bitterbridge - 60,000 from the Reach and 30,000 from the Stormlands. An average of 1,000 men per house, regardless of it being major or minor, great lords or landed knights. That host was not including all lords, and of course not including the forces left at home, which greatly increase the average strength of Reach lords. Redwyne should have 2,000 marines on his fleet alone, Hightower has over three times as many men as the next strongest lord, and both were absent.

No, 2,000 is not alot in the south. Unless you count petty lords and landed knights, it is an average figure for a great house.

Compare that to the North, and the Florents are one of the bigger lords. The Karstarks had 2,300 men for Robb's host in Winterfell, Roose Bolton had between 3,200 and 3,700 men (has 3,500 men for the Red Wedding, nearly all his own men, plus 200 cavalry escorting Jaime to King's Landing at the same time. That is not counting another 600 men that Ramsay can raise later on for plot needs), and the rest of the Stark forces including the strength of Winterfell, Glover, Mormont, Hornwood, Cerwyn, Tallhart and Umber added at best another 6,500 men, or about ~928 men on average. We know from later on that the different houses have left little behind, meaning that thier total manpower was not much more. Bolton and Stark are at the top with 600 men left behind, the others with 400 or fewer. Tallhart has so few that not even 200 Ironborn could lay siege to the castle and the garrison is helpless. 

Bolton and Karstark and Mandrly are the stronger lords after the Starks, the rest have little over 1,000 men in total. Stronger than the NW, but not much more.

 

[GallowsKnight]

2 hours ago, Nyrhex said:

Could they bring others over? Sure, but I trust that the Hightowers could have done far more. 

I don't disagree with you that the fandom enflates their importance. I think it was as you say an appropriate level match, BUT that might also have some use if in the future there was Reach trouble. Robert was a slacker but that didn't mean Jon Arryn was. 

As for the above house Hightower is directly tied to Tyrell through Mace's wife. Less likely to turncoat. 

[Nyrhex]

7 minutes ago, GallowsKnight said:

I don't disagree with you that the fandom enflates their importance. I think it was as you say an appropriate level match, BUT that might also have some use if in the future there was Reach trouble. Robert was a slacker but that didn't mean Jon Arryn was. 

As for the above house Hightower is directly tied to Tyrell through Mace's wife. Less likely to turncoat. 

I don't think Jon Arryn has anything to do with Stannis' marriage.

Robert can order Stannis to marry as the head of the house, Jon Arryn can only advise Robert. And we know that this is not something that Robert, even with Jon Arryn as advisor, does. He did not think of a need for a stratigic alliance when he came to Ned with the proposition of a marriage between Joffrey and Sansa. It was his best friend and he always felt Ned more a family than his own. Literally his own words. He wanted to make it official and that's the sum total of any long-term planning he was going to make. 

Now by the same metric that Jon Arryn might have thought it a nice political move, we can say that Jon Arryn would have likely made any attempt to convince Robert to show the realm that actions lead to outcomes, and strip Balon of the Iron Islands.

Sure, one can claim that only that was the point where Jon Arryn learned that Robert simply did not act like that, and the marriage to Selyse was pointless because Robert is not removing even lowlifes like Balon from thier seats. But then we need to also remember that Jon Arryn himself was never one to replace traitors. House Grafton still controls Gulltown, and there is no hint that they were even weakened after betraying Jon Arryn during the war. The war which started when Aerys murdered his nephew and demanded the Jon murder innocent boys entrusted with him and which he raised like his own sons. 

And house Florent is also married into the Hightowers, and into the Tarlys, and the Cranes etc etc. Each Reach house is connected by blood to the rest a hundred times over. It's the main reason why any blood claim to the Gardeners is pointless, and why it makes no difference who is married into the Tyrells. Did a marriage to the Florents stop Tarly from murdering thier men at Bitterbridge? Did a marriage to Stannis stop the Florents from joining Renly? Is Mace's mother being Redwyne's aunt a reason for him to declare for Renly when his sons were hostages? Did Frey's marriage alliance with the Lannisters stop him from making one with the Starks? Did his marriage alliance with the Carons mean he should have joined Renly? Did Robin Arryn's mother being a Tully mean the knights of the Vale rushed to aid his kin in war? Was it the honor of thier daughter Jeyne that pushed the Westerlings to Robb's side, or was it the fact that thier lord was already his captive and a certain letter from Tywin arrived with an offer too good to refuse?

Marriage alliances are all nice and well in theory, in practice it is a bit more complicated. If the Hightowers were chosen, the Redwynes would have to choose who to side with because they are married into both the Hightowers and into the Tyrells. The Rowans and Tarlys and Florents would all be in the same boat, my liege or my marriage alliance. In contrast to the Florents, the Hightowers bring a hell of alot to the table all on thier own, and they make a credible threat to the Tyrells because it is actually a house with power that one can see replacing the existing Tyrells without too much resistance. Even if we ignore the fact that the Tyrells are only here for being stewards, barely nobility and simply for the king's say so, the Hightower would be a far better alternative to make a threat on the Tyrells recent marriages or no. 

[Bironic]

7 hours ago, Nyrhex said:

I don't think Jon Arryn has anything to do with Stannis' marriage.

Robert can order Stannis to marry as the head of the house, Jon Arryn can only advise Robert. And we know that this is not something that Robert, even with Jon Arryn as advisor, does. He did not think of a need for a stratigic alliance when he came to Ned with the proposition of a marriage between Joffrey and Sansa. It was his best friend and he always felt Ned more a family than his own. Literally his own words. He wanted to make it official and that's the sum total of any long-term planning he was going to make. 

Now by the same metric that Jon Arryn might have thought it a nice political move, we can say that Jon Arryn would have likely made any attempt to convince Robert to show the realm that actions lead to outcomes, and strip Balon of the Iron Islands.

Sure, one can claim that only that was the point where Jon Arryn learned that Robert simply did not act like that, and the marriage to Selyse was pointless because Robert is not removing even lowlifes like Balon from thier seats. But then we need to also remember that Jon Arryn himself was never one to replace traitors. House Grafton still controls Gulltown, and there is no hint that they were even weakened after betraying Jon Arryn during the war. The war which started when Aerys murdered his nephew and demanded the Jon murder innocent boys entrusted with him and which he raised like his own sons. 

And house Florent is also married into the Hightowers, and into the Tarlys, and the Cranes etc etc. Each Reach house is connected by blood to the rest a hundred times over. It's the main reason why any blood claim to the Gardeners is pointless, and why it makes no difference who is married into the Tyrells. Did a marriage to the Florents stop Tarly from murdering thier men at Bitterbridge? Did a marriage to Stannis stop the Florents from joining Renly? Is Mace's mother being Redwyne's aunt a reason for him to declare for Renly when his sons were hostages? Did Frey's marriage alliance with the Lannisters stop him from making one with the Starks? Did his marriage alliance with the Carons mean he should have joined Renly? Did Robin Arryn's mother being a Tully mean the knights of the Vale rushed to aid his kin in war? Was it the honor of thier daughter Jeyne that pushed the Westerlings to Robb's side, or was it the fact that thier lord was already his captive and a certain letter from Tywin arrived with an offer too good to refuse?

Marriage alliances are all nice and well in theory, in practice it is a bit more complicated. If the Hightowers were chosen, the Redwynes would have to choose who to side with because they are married into both the Hightowers and into the Tyrells. The Rowans and Tarlys and Florents would all be in the same boat, my liege or my marriage alliance. In contrast to the Florents, the Hightowers bring a hell of alot to the table all on thier own, and they make a credible threat to the Tyrells because it is actually a house with power that one can see replacing the existing Tyrells without too much resistance. Even if we ignore the fact that the Tyrells are only here for being stewards, barely nobility and simply for the king's say so, the Hightower would be a far better alternative to make a threat on the Tyrells recent marriages or no. 

You are raising some interesting points, but I have a couple of questions.

Robert was certainly able to command Stannis to marry, but is there a mention in the books that Robert did that? Stannis could have married on his own accord, or Robert could have just agreed to the marriage after Stannis made the proposal. AFAIK robert never commanded Renly to marry either.

I wouldn't discount the Florents claim to Highgarden so easily. Of course they lack the strength to make a claim on their own. But with the backing of the Baratheons, probably the Lannisters, Arryns, Starks and Tullys (Robert's coalition), they could very well be a danger. In a scenario when for example the Tyrells chose to back an attack on Westeros by Viserys Targaryen. Or in another fictitious scenario redwyne or Hightower take over Highgarden, this would make their respective houses superpowerful and a threat to any king on the IT, with the Florents taking over Highgarden this would not be the case.

When Stannis arrives in the North his first choices as Lords of Winterfell are a bastard son of the late Lord Eddard and a Karstark, one of the reasons he gives is, that those two have better claims than most other houses, despite the fact that half the houses in the north have some sort of claim to Winterfell. So the Florent claim is probably the best in the reach, from a genealogical standpoint, but of course not the only one. Karstark and Florent seem also similar in strength, Florent has 2000men, Karstark ~2500 men, while both Redwyne and Hightower in the Reach and Bolton and Manderly in the North seem to overpower them by a far margin.

[Lion of the West]

22 hours ago, Nyrhex said:

.The main thing that the Florents have? A connection to the Gardeners is repeatedly stated to be shared by all Reach houses. The Florents are by no means the only ones, nor the strongest.

Yet all of these Reach Houses have by all accounts already given up their claims to Highgarden and accepted the Tyrells while the Florents remain engaged to the issue. As such they are the only ones who by all accounts have not yet abandoned their claim and as such would be interested and not see it as a betrayal of their Tyrell lieges.

22 hours ago, Nyrhex said:

And this point is not ignoring this issue, this is debunking the fandom-created factoid that the marriage to the Florents is keeping a blood claim on Highgarden in reserves. That is flat out not how Robert works, and he has shown it repeatedly. There is no "standard" plan to replace lords, because the "Standard plan" in Robert's case is to bring foes back into the fold, and at worst reduce thier power, but never outright replace them. And even reducing power was only done in extreme cases, for loyalists who betrayed thier lords and supported the Targs.

In a way yes, but not necessarily because until GRRM can give final reasons for the match we are free to discuss and reason about it. Do you for example remember before the World of Ice and Fire when we debated if the Boltons had been kings before submitting to the Starks? Untill we learn the reason from GRRM to what end Stannis' marriage with a lady of House Florent was for, we are entirely free to speculate to why it happened with in-universe explaintions. If people start to conflict this with the canon word of GRRM that's a problem, but unless that happens its not a problem and if it would happen, then the confusion would be the problem.

Also you seem to think that Robert did everything himself and came up with everything on his own. The impression I have gained is that Jon Arryn did most of the work to keep the kingdom running under Robert's reign. I see no reason as to why Jon Arryn could not have been the architect behind the Baratheon-Florent alliance as apparently he was also the one who pressed Robert to marry Cersei. And while Robert was happy to pardon his foes, we don't know how he would have dealt with someone once pardoned but now rising against him. Odds are that our passionate Robert would have been rather happy to drop a hammer on them with a solution pre-arranged by Jon Arryn.

[Coolbeard the Exile]

Florent is one of the Strongest Houses in the Reach.

They have a big Castle and vast fertile lands. They can field 2000 soldiers a large proportion of whom are cavalry. They are very rich so probably have as well equipped soldiers as one can have. They probably also left troops at home.

They have a stronger claim to Highgarden then the Tyrells.

Eveyone strong want's to marry them. 

After Tarly, Fossoway, Redwyne, Hightower and Tyrell they are probably the strongest house in the Reach.

I would certainly say they are very powerful.

[Nyrhex]

13 hours ago, Bironic said:

You are raising some interesting points, but I have a couple of questions.

Robert was certainly able to command Stannis to marry, but is there a mention in the books that Robert did that? Stannis could have married on his own accord, or Robert could have just agreed to the marriage after Stannis made the proposal. AFAIK robert never commanded Renly to marry either.

I wouldn't discount the Florents claim to Highgarden so easily. Of course they lack the strength to make a claim on their own. But with the backing of the Baratheons, probably the Lannisters, Arryns, Starks and Tullys (Robert's coalition), they could very well be a danger. In a scenario when for example the Tyrells chose to back an attack on Westeros by Viserys Targaryen. Or in another fictitious scenario redwyne or Hightower take over Highgarden, this would make their respective houses superpowerful and a threat to any king on the IT, with the Florents taking over Highgarden this would not be the case.

When Stannis arrives in the North his first choices as Lords of Winterfell are a bastard son of the late Lord Eddard and a Karstark, one of the reasons he gives is, that those two have better claims than most other houses, despite the fact that half the houses in the north have some sort of claim to Winterfell. So the Florent claim is probably the best in the reach, from a genealogical standpoint, but of course not the only one. Karstark and Florent seem also similar in strength, Florent has 2000men, Karstark ~2500 men, while both Redwyne and Hightower in the Reach and Bolton and Manderly in the North seem to overpower them by a far margin.

1. No mention of Robert arranging the marriage, but Stannis was not yet given Dragonstone and was still a member of Robert's household, which implies that Robert was involved. There is also nothing in the text to suggest that Stannis wanted to marry, let alone into the Florents, and no particular interest in Selyse. Of course it could be said that at that point he was informed that Robert was planning to give him Dragonstone and that he was expected to form a cadet house and would need a wife. Stannis would then look for an available noblewoman of age, and settle for Selyse. But again, this is not Robert looking for a threat to the Tyrells, this is Stannis looking for a wife because he is now a lord and needs one.

2. Again, the Florent claim is shared by any other Reach lord. Robert does not need a claim either, as the Tyrells themselves were petty nobles who were raised to the rank of Lord Paramount on the order of a king (Aegon I). 300 years later they still hold Highgarden and are married into all great houses of the Reach a hunded times over. Why would Robert, even assuming that he considered replacing the Tyrells, even care for a claim? If it is Baratheon swords that place the Florents in Highgarden, what is the difference with placing Stannis even if he is married to a non-Reach house? The argument that the Florents can be a danger if they come with a coalition can be made for literally anyone else. Robert could have placed Mya Stone, a bastard girl from the Vale, in Highgarden with all the swords he commanded and the Reach would have to accept it for the exact same reasons.

3. The Tyrells were stewards. The Florents or the Hightowers taking over is meaningless in terms of threat to the realm. The Tyrells themselves are already kingmakers. If the new rulers personally hold more troops makes little difference, anyone who controls the Reach controls the largest army in the land.

4. There is a massive difference with Stannis offering Jon Winterfell. It is during a massive war where the North is war torn and where Stannis' forces are barely 1,200 men. The propaganda value is the only thing Stannis has left at that point, and even that is a longshot that barely produces more men. Were he headed North with an army comprised of the armies of several regions, he could have placed the Smiler or the Slayer in Winterfell and be done with it. 

5. The Florent claim is not the best in the Reach. If anything those would be the Hightowers, who have a dual link to the Gardeners since Garland III. 

6. The difference, as I explained, between Karstark and Florent, is that while the Karstarks were a large Northern house with 2,300 men, the Florents would only be an average sized house in the Reach. It's not that there are a couple of giant houses that dwarf all others and then the Florents would have the next largest force, it's that the Florents would have about as much as most other houses in the Reach. If they have more than the average lord, then that means that aside of Hightower and Redwyne there are several others who also dwarf the Florents to keep everyone else well below 2,000 swords. This would push down the Florents' imporance even further. 

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

Yet all of these Reach Houses have by all accounts already given up their claims to Highgarden and accepted the Tyrells while the Florents remain engaged to the issue. As such they are the only ones who by all accounts have not yet abandoned their claim and as such would be interested and not see it as a betrayal of their Tyrell lieges.

In a way yes, but not necessarily because until GRRM can give final reasons for the match we are free to discuss and reason about it. Do you for example remember before the World of Ice and Fire when we debated if the Boltons had been kings before submitting to the Starks? Untill we learn the reason from GRRM to what end Stannis' marriage with a lady of House Florent was for, we are entirely free to speculate to why it happened with in-universe explaintions. If people start to conflict this with the canon word of GRRM that's a problem, but unless that happens its not a problem and if it would happen, then the confusion would be the problem.

Also you seem to think that Robert did everything himself and came up with everything on his own. The impression I have gained is that Jon Arryn did most of the work to keep the kingdom running under Robert's reign. I see no reason as to why Jon Arryn could not have been the architect behind the Baratheon-Florent alliance as apparently he was also the one who pressed Robert to marry Cersei. And while Robert was happy to pardon his foes, we don't know how he would have dealt with someone once pardoned but now rising against him. Odds are that our passionate Robert would have been rather happy to drop a hammer on them with a solution pre-arranged by Jon Arryn.

1. Citation needed. No Reach house gave up thier claim, and none have pressed it because Aegon I placed the Tyrells in place of the Gardeners and all houses had to swear fealty. They all share blood with the Gardeners, and the singular comment anywhere in the books where the Florents are complaining about the Tyrell claim is in Sansa I, ASOS, when the Florents are already siding with Stannis and have been stripped of land and title by the Iron Throne and had it given to Garlan. That is literally it, the only hint the books have that he Florents are said to whine about the Tyrell claim "being a bit dodgy" is given after the Florents have been marked as traitors by the crown and are now in exile. There is not a hint of it in any other place in the books, no other place in the short stories in a 300 year history where the Florents have ever shown more interest in claiming Highgarden than any other lord in the Reach. No quote that gives thier claim anymore weight than that of others. It is simply one quote taken by the fandom and blown way out of proportion and context. There is no "by all accounts", there is one single account that is mis-interpreted by the fandom and ignores all other context and information we are given in the books.

2. Yes, we can speculated on why Stannis married a Florent. But notice how one theory, entirely based on a single offhand remark from ASOS, and which ignores Robert's character and past actions, Jon Arryn's, and the obvious option for the porposed threat at the Tyrells (Hightower) is repeatedly given the rank of practically fact in this thread and in this fandom. I keep suggesting the simplest option, one which works with everything we know of Robert's character, his relationship with Stannis, and with the information that the books give us about he Florents. The simplest suggestion which requires no additional hypotheticals like the "threat to the Tyrells" theory requires, no additional mental gymnastics to excuse out of character behavior or discrepancy between what the books tell us and what logic would dictate would have had to happen in order for the theory to make sense. And yet the factoid remains strongly embeded into the fandom. Posters insist that the Florents are stronger than the books portray them even after being proven wrong. They insist that Robert or Jon Arryn must have thought about using a claim to replace the Tyrells when both have shown an unwillingness to replace a rebel in worse cirumstances. Robert even shows us later how he does not care for tradition and claim when he names Jaime as Warden of the East, or when he named Renly lord of Storm's End and gave Dragonstone to Stannis - the same way Aegon I did not care for any claim and simply named the Tyrells and for 300 years everyone was just fine with it. Posters insist that the Florents have a better claim to Highgarden despite the books repeatedly disporving that and treating all Reach lords as equally able to claim Highgarden before the Tyrells. 

Why? Whty is this thoery so hard to uproot? Why is one fan-made theory which leans on so much additional work that goes against the books sound better than the simplest option? I'm all for someone coming up with a better theory, but at least back it up with something that holds against basic scrutiny.

3. I did not ignore Jon Arryn, I have already adressed the claim that Jon Arryn likely advised Robert for such a match and debunked it. Jon Arryn kept in place a lord who rebeled in favor of a king who murdered Arryn's nephew and heir and had to have his seat taken by force. I highly doubt you can find a more worthy cause to strip a house of it's lands and titles, especially when the Arryns of Gulltown would have been more than happy to take over the city and strengthen an Arryn cadet branch. There is nothing in both Robert's past, and in Jon Arryn's past, to indicate that they would make such a match purely to make a threat to the Tyrells, or in anticipation of actually replacing them with a cadet Baratheon branch. Jon Arryn was keen to arrange the marriage to Cersei not to topple the Lannisters, but to strngthen the alliance with them and bring a key player to thier side at a time when Robert's rule was just forming. It was a good match, and Cersei was the last available female of the great houses. Jon Arryn is also the one who went to Dorne and convinced them to back down from the talk of restarting the war, when he could have just as easily played on the Reach's shared hatred with the Stormlands of the Dornish to have a short war in Dorne to replace the Martells. 

And "we don't know how he would have dealt with someone once pardoned but now rising against him" is just moving the goal posts now. Robert could have done the same thing again and go "I hope you understand me the second time", he could have killed Mace and given Willas the same speech, he could have taken Mace's children as wards like he did with Theon. He could have done a bunch of things, but he has never outright replaced a bloodline with another. And the jump from "well he might have" to "he likely planned it so he arranged the marriage to the Florents" is a considerable one. Again, why not go for the simplest reasoning? Why are people so locked on "Robert wanted the marriage to the Florents to threaten the Tyrells"? 

[Lion of the West]

1 hour ago, Nyrhex said:

1. Citation needed. No Reach house gave up thier claim, and none have pressed it because Aegon I placed the Tyrells in place of the Gardeners and all houses had to swear fealty. They all share blood with the Gardeners, and the singular comment anywhere in the books where the Florents are complaining about the Tyrell claim is in Sansa I, ASOS, when the Florents are already siding with Stannis and have been stripped of land and title by the Iron Throne and had it given to Garlan. That is literally it, the only hint the books have that he Florents are said to whine about the Tyrell claim "being a bit dodgy" is given after the Florents have been marked as traitors by the crown and are now in exile. There is not a hint of it in any other place in the books, no other place in the short stories in a 300 year history where the Florents have ever shown more interest in claiming Highgarden than any other lord in the Reach. No quote that gives thier claim anymore weight than that of others. It is simply one quote taken by the fandom and blown way out of proportion and context. There is no "by all accounts", there is one single account that is mis-interpreted by the fandom and ignores all other context and information we are given in the books.

I don't have a good quote for a one-line.I base the idea on that they gav upp their claims on the fact that people single out the Florents as having a better claim than the Tyrells and don't mention anyone else. And I haven't claimed that it was a fundamental part on GRRM's world building without which everything should collapse. In fact I think that its a minor detail which probably won't have any greater impact on the story. But even so, a single remark is infinitly more than the remarks for the Oakheart, Peake or Tarly claims to Highgarden for which there are none.

1 hour ago, Nyrhex said:

2. Yes, we can speculated on why Stannis married a Florent. But notice how one theory, entirely based on a single offhand remark from ASOS, and which ignores Robert's character and past actions, Jon Arryn's, and the obvious option for the porposed threat at the Tyrells (Hightower) is repeatedly given the rank of practically fact in this thread and in this fandom. I keep suggesting the simplest option, one which works with everything we know of Robert's character, his relationship with Stannis, and with the information that the books give us about he Florents. The simplest suggestion which requires no additional hypotheticals like the "threat to the Tyrells" theory requires, no additional mental gymnastics to excuse out of character behavior or discrepancy between what the books tell us and what logic would dictate would have had to happen in order for the theory to make sense. And yet the factoid remains strongly embeded into the fandom. Posters insist that the Florents are stronger than the books portray them even after being proven wrong. They insist that Robert or Jon Arryn must have thought about using a claim to replace the Tyrells when both have shown an unwillingness to replace a rebel in worse cirumstances. Robert even shows us later how he does not care for tradition and claim when he names Jaime as Warden of the East, or when he named Renly lord of Storm's End and gave Dragonstone to Stannis - the same way Aegon I did not care for any claim and simply named the Tyrells and for 300 years everyone was just fine with it. Posters insist that the Florents have a better claim to Highgarden despite the books repeatedly disporving that and treating all Reach lords as equally able to claim Highgarden before the Tyrells. 

Why? Whty is this thoery so hard to uproot? Why is one fan-made theory which leans on so much additional work that goes against the books sound better than the simplest option? I'm all for someone coming up with a better theory, but at least back it up with something that holds against basic scrutiny.

I am happy we can agree on that its ok to speculate on things in the books. As for why this theory is so popular I would imagine its because it adds importance, gives meaning and is logically sound to many readers, including myself, and fits rather well with other remarks and Westerosi politics. If you don't like it or think the basis is to poor, you are free to think so, but other points have proven to be correct with as little or much basis to it in the text untill the great reveal was at hand. I am mostly thinking of the Boltons as kings here.

1 hour ago, Nyrhex said:

3. I did not ignore Jon Arryn, I have already adressed the claim that Jon Arryn likely advised Robert for such a match and debunked it. Jon Arryn kept in place a lord who rebeled in favor of a king who murdered Arryn's nephew and heir and had to have his seat taken by force. I highly doubt you can find a more worthy cause to strip a house of it's lands and titles, especially when the Arryns of Gulltown would have been more than happy to take over the city and strengthen an Arryn cadet branch. There is nothing in both Robert's past, and in Jon Arryn's past, to indicate that they would make such a match purely to make a threat to the Tyrells, or in anticipation of actually replacing them with a cadet Baratheon branch. Jon Arryn was keen to arrange the marriage to Cersei not to topple the Lannisters, but to strngthen the alliance with them and bring a key player to thier side at a time when Robert's rule was just forming. It was a good match, and Cersei was the last available female of the great houses. Jon Arryn is also the one who went to Dorne and convinced them to back down from the talk of restarting the war, when he could have just as easily played on the Reach's shared hatred with the Stormlands of the Dornish to have a short war in Dorne to replace the Martells. 

You haven't debunked it at all. You have provided an example for how Jon Arryn, High as Honor, dealt with his own bannermen who never managed to cause much harm. Rebel bannermen who did cause the rebels harm had not much clemancy given. I am thinking here of JonCon who wasn't recalled from Aerys' exile and the Connington lands were mostly not restored after the war. So its definitelty not all kisses and roses for Robert's old enemies.

And to this note that the Arryns of Gulltown would be "tainted" by marriage with merchants, so Jon might be hesitant to give them a major lordship when as far as we know, they haven't done anything significant in service to the main branch.

The fact that Jon Arryn was prudent to arrange a marriage between Robert and Cersei and that he could settle the issue with Dorne in a peaceful mind speaks that he could well have been on a mind skilled enough to put a dagger at the Tyrells by an alliance with the Florents. It really isn't so that Jon don't have a political mind as many kings before have married wives from lesser noble Houses and thus a marriage to a Great House wasn't really necessary, unless they wanted the political price of tying the Lannisters to the new dynasty.

And note that since the Dornish don't seem to take kindly to outside rule, there really wasn't a reason to do the Conquest of Dorne v.2 instead of just talking with them to stand down.

1 hour ago, Nyrhex said:

And "we don't know how he would have dealt with someone once pardoned but now rising against him" is just moving the goal posts now. Robert could have done the same thing again and go "I hope you understand me the second time", he could have killed Mace and given Willas the same speech, he could have taken Mace's children as wards like he did with Theon. He could have done a bunch of things, but he has never outright replaced a bloodline with another. And the jump from "well he might have" to "he likely planned it so he arranged the marriage to the Florents" is a considerable one. Again, why not go for the simplest reasoning? Why are people so locked on "Robert wanted the marriage to the Florents to threaten the Tyrells"? 

I like the idea of the alliance with the Florents because like I said it makes sense and don't make the marriage a chaotic fluke.

Also note that in Westeros there are to my knowledge only a single time when we know that men once pardoned took up arms again, and that was in the Blackfyre rebellions. Note here how Gormon Peake got away from the first rebellion with the loss of two castles while after the second, he lost his dead despite surrendering peacefully. Same with the mark from "The Mystery Knight" how those who were once pardoned were likely to be judged much harsher than those who had never conspired or taken up arms against the king before.

[Lost Umber]

House Florent is essentially a House in exile and they still have 2000 knights. That's pretty damn strong. Compare that with anyone else who has been or is in exile and they are one of the strongest houses ever. 

[James Steller]

49 minutes ago, Lost Umber said:

House Florent is essentially a House in exile and they still have 2000 knights. That's pretty damn strong. Compare that with anyone else who has been or is in exile and they are one of the strongest houses ever. 

Except they don't. Between those fighting in the north with Stannis and the garrison at Brightwater Keep, they have less than 1,000 men left. And the only reason they still have possession of the keep is because Garlan has bigger fish to fry.

[Nyrhex]

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

1. I don't have a good quote for a one-line.I base the idea on that they gav upp their claims on the fact that people single out the Florents as having a better claim than the Tyrells and don't mention anyone else. And I haven't claimed that it was a fundamental part on GRRM's world building without which everything should collapse. In fact I think that its a minor detail which probably won't have any greater impact on the story. But even so, a single remark is infinitly more than the remarks for the Oakheart, Peake or Tarly claims to Highgarden for which there are none.

2. I am happy we can agree on that its ok to speculate on things in the books. As for why this theory is so popular I would imagine its because it adds importance, gives meaning and is logically sound to many readers, including myself, and fits rather well with other remarks and Westerosi politics. If you don't like it or think the basis is to poor, you are free to think so, but other points have proven to be correct with as little or much basis to it in the text untill the great reveal was at hand. I am mostly thinking of the Boltons as kings here.

3. You haven't debunked it at all. You have provided an example for how Jon Arryn, High as Honor, dealt with his own bannermen who never managed to cause much harm. Rebel bannermen who did cause the rebels harm had not much clemancy given. I am thinking here of JonCon who wasn't recalled from Aerys' exile and the Connington lands were mostly not restored after the war. So its definitelty not all kisses and roses for Robert's old enemies.

And to this note that the Arryns of Gulltown would be "tainted" by marriage with merchants, so Jon might be hesitant to give them a major lordship when as far as we know, they haven't done anything significant in service to the main branch.

The fact that Jon Arryn was prudent to arrange a marriage between Robert and Cersei and that he could settle the issue with Dorne in a peaceful mind speaks that he could well have been on a mind skilled enough to put a dagger at the Tyrells by an alliance with the Florents. It really isn't so that Jon don't have a political mind as many kings before have married wives from lesser noble Houses and thus a marriage to a Great House wasn't really necessary, unless they wanted the political price of tying the Lannisters to the new dynasty.

And note that since the Dornish don't seem to take kindly to outside rule, there really wasn't a reason to do the Conquest of Dorne v.2 instead of just talking with them to stand down.

4. I like the idea of the alliance with the Florents because like I said it makes sense and don't make the marriage a chaotic fluke.

Also note that in Westeros there are to my knowledge only a single time when we know that men once pardoned took up arms again, and that was in the Blackfyre rebellions. Note here how Gormon Peake got away from the first rebellion with the loss of two castles while after the second, he lost his dead despite surrendering peacefully. Same with the mark from "The Mystery Knight" how those who were once pardoned were likely to be judged much harsher than those who had never conspired or taken up arms against the king before.

1. There is no "people" that single out the Florents as having a better claim than the Tyrells. There is one single quote from ASOS where Olenna admits that the Tyrell claim is "a bit dodgy" and that the dreadfull Florents used to whine about it.

"She might think we have some wits about us. One of us, at any rate." The old woman turned back to Sansa. "It's treason, I warned them, Robert has two sons, and Renly has an older brother, how can he possibly have any claim to that ugly iron chair? Tut-tut, says my son, don't you want your sweetling to be queen? You Starks were kings once, the Arryns and the Lannisters as well, and even the Baratheons through the female line, but the Tyrells were no more than stewards until Aegon the Dragon came along and cooked the rightful King of the Reach on the Field of Fire. If truth be told, even our claim to Highgarden is a bit dodgy, just as those dreadful Florents are always whining. 'What does it matter?' you ask, and of course it doesn't, except to oafs like my son. The thought that one day he may see his grandson with his arse on the Iron Throne makes Mace puff up like . . . now, what do you call it? Margaery, you're clever, be a dear and tell your poor old half-daft grandmother the name of that queer fish from the Summer Isles that puffs up to ten times its own size when you poke it."

This is said in ASOS, Sansa I, a book after the Florents were stripped of thier lands and titles and were branded an enemy of the realm. It is not the Florents saying that they have a better claim, it is not other people saying that they have a better claim. It is one single line in ASOS where Olenna agrees that the Tyrell claim to Highgarden is "a bit dodgy". 

You don't have a good quote because there is none. That is literally it. One line from ASOS about the Tyrell's claim being dodgy. We know that most houses in the Reach have a blood claim because Olenna herself later on says that in the same book, and in the same chapter:

Sansa's mouth opened and closed. She felt very like a puff fish herself. "The Tyrells can trace their descent back to Garth Greenhand," was the best she could manage at short notice.

The Queen of Thorns snorted. "So can the Florents, the Rowans, the Oakhearts, and half the other noble houses of the south. Garth liked to plant his seed in fertile ground, they say. I shouldn't wonder that more than his hands were green."

Now my claim is not resting purely on the Florents' blood claim, but it is a major part of the theory that Stannis married Selyse for her claim. There is nothing in the text that grants the Florents more claim than anyone else. Quite the contrary, they are grouped as one of the many houses that have every bit of claim as the Tyrells have. That is what the text gives us, and yet your comment would imply that there is somewhere else in the books where the Florents are given as having a better claim. Please provide the quote or accept that the claim is false.

And you know why the Tyrell claim is "a bit dodgy"? Because while most of the houses of the Reach can trace thier founding fathers to the sons of the original, mythical king of the Reach from the Dawn Age, the Tyrells are the decendents of an Andal knight. Thier lineage would only start thousands of years later, and so they cannot trace the same length in the male line, they married into the royal bloodline. By the same right that the Florents can claim that the Tyrells are only "newcomers" from Ser Alester Tyrell, and they themselves are the children of Florys the Fox, so could houses Ball and Peake. House Redwyne can claim that they are children of Gilbert of the Vines, etc. The Oakhearts, Hightowers, Fossoways, Rowan and others can trace themselves to the sons of Garth Greenhand. Even Brandon the friggin Builder can trace himself to that old bloodline via Brandon of the Bloody Blade. 

2. Here's the thing. This is not a question of lacking information, this is a question of ignoring and manipulating information to fit into a theory which has been proven wrong. Sure, Martin could come out later and say that it was the plan all along. But it would be just bad storytelling. It adds importance to the marriage, but at the cost of being out of character behavior for both Robert and Jon Arryn. It gives meaning, but at the cost of working in the face of the text given, not based on it. It would be logical only if you misread the evidence and harp on non-existing text to support the theory. You are free to beleive it, but I see no reason why it is so strongly supported still despite having little to support it from the text and overwhelming evidence pointin to it being false.

3. Jon Connington was a Stormlord who rebelled against Robert. He and Darry were examples I gave earleir of those who did face Robert's wrath. And that was not displacing the house, it was suffering lose of power and lands. Even personal insult like that was not answered with replacing the Conningtons. Balon Greyjoy did not face replacement. What else does Robert need to do, appear in a dream chapter shouting "I don't fucking replace lords!"?

And the Gulltown Arryns is just weak. Jon Arryn can choose anyone he like, forget the Gulltown Arryns. He still did not replaec a lord who supported Aerys right after he sent Jon a letter telling him that he murdered his nephew and heir and now demands that he murders two innocents he raised as his own children. 

By arranging the marriage to Cersei and convincing Dorne to return to the fold Jon Arryn shows that he is a smooth diplomat. By arranging the marriage to the Florents he would be doing nothing that brings him added benefit. There is already a large alliance of the North-Riverlands-Vale-Stormlands-Westerlands to counter any stupid move by Mace, and Robert does not need anyone with a claim, he is king and can name who he wants to a traitor's lands and titles.

4. And the Yronwood rose three times with the Blackfyres and have suffered fuck all for it. The Boltons burned Winterfell to the ground twice and yet still control thier historical borders. For every example you'll find of repeated traitors being judged harshly I'll find examples of those who suffered little if at all.

Now just to be perfectly honest, Gormon Peake was executed with everyone else who took part of a rebel's retinue. House Peake lost two castles in the first rebellion, then still kept it's third after Gormon Peake was beheaded. They rose 22 years later in rebellion and managed to kill a king. 

And you know what happened to thier last castle after being part of 3 failed rebellions and killing a king? Nothing. There is still a Lord Peake during the course of the books at the end of the third century AL. They have not even lost their rank as lords.

 

Oh and those who took pardons after the Redgrass Field were indeed judged harsher, but Mace was not the rebel last time. He has done nothing to be pardoned for and simply accepted Robert as king at the end of the war.