The Problem with a King Stannis

[snow is the man]

4 hours ago, UnFit Finlay said:

Surely that depends on exactly how he'd rule?

I mean, sure, if he burned the Great Sept of Balor and demanded that all must convert to the Lord of Light then, yes, they'll rebel but if he rules fairly and makes sure that everyone has enough to eat then surely only the biggest zealots would actually care? Most would go "Well, he's better than Tommen, that abomination".

The Old Gods and the Seven seem to have been able to co-exist for centuries. The Riverlords and House Manderly had no problem accepting Robb as their King, despite their religious beliefs. Besides, Stannis doesn't even believe in the Lord of Light. He believes in Melisandre's power and wants to use it to do what needs to be done. If he was going to force people to convert then he wouldn't have made Davos his Hand.

That's another thing actually. I realise he did it because he values honest counsel more than high birth but making Davos the Hand of The King should surely do a lot to win the smallfolk over? How can they hate someone who has taken one of their own, a common smuggler from Flea Bottom, recognised his worth and raised him to the highest position that he could?

well he would have to get rid of a bunch of his loyal soldiers that he already has then. Also the seven and the old gods have been able to coexist so well because they are for the most part seperate. The north is the only place that really believes in the old gods in any real number and the manderlys owe their existence to the starks and while they worship the seven I think they don't bring it up alot.

As for the riverlands well I think you have to remember the situation which was that rob saved riverrun and fought for them when noone else did. And remember he was at war the whole time with the lannisters so he never really ruled. Once things setteled down and the fighting stopped their might have been problems from the septons eventually. And consider this the old gods have been in the seven kingdoms before the seven were so they have had time to work it out so to speak. Plus the followers of the old gods aren't really the type to go around forcing others to convert. It's more of a "don't bother me and I won't bother you" thing. Now the red god is essentially "every other religion is worshipping demons and must be destroyed" so it isn't really made to coexist with other things. Look at most of the "queens men" they are fanatics and they are stannis's most loyal supporters. And I don't think he would abandon mel after she helps him win the throne. So he would have a red priestess with him all the time which would cause a f*ck ton of problems.

[UnFit Finlay]

9 hours ago, snow is the man said:

well he would have to get rid of a bunch of his loyal soldiers that he already has then. Also the seven and the old gods have been able to coexist so well because they are for the most part seperate. The north is the only place that really believes in the old gods in any real number and the manderlys owe their existence to the starks and while they worship the seven I think they don't bring it up alot.

As for the riverlands well I think you have to remember the situation which was that rob saved riverrun and fought for them when noone else did. And remember he was at war the whole time with the lannisters so he never really ruled. Once things setteled down and the fighting stopped their might have been problems from the septons eventually. And consider this the old gods have been in the seven kingdoms before the seven were so they have had time to work it out so to speak. Plus the followers of the old gods aren't really the type to go around forcing others to convert. It's more of a "don't bother me and I won't bother you" thing. Now the red god is essentially "every other religion is worshipping demons and must be destroyed" so it isn't really made to coexist with other things. Look at most of the "queens men" they are fanatics and they are stannis's most loyal supporters. And I don't think he would abandon mel after she helps him win the throne. So he would have a red priestess with him all the time which would cause a f*ck ton of problems.

Again though, it depends on the circumstances. Had he taken the Throne by winning the Battle of the Blackwater then, yes, I totally agree that everything you said would've happened. Not just because of religion either. Stannis would've been an awful King back then.

Now though? If he frees the North from the Boltons and restores the Starks to Winterfell, will the Northerners care about his religion? Will the Riverlords care if he then goes South and restores the Tullys to Riverrun? As you said, the swore allegiance to Robb because he fought for them when no one else did, why wouldn't they do the same for Stannis?

As I said - He isn't actually a follower of the Lord of Light. He said himself that he doesn't believe in Gods. He's been following Melisandre's advice because he believes in her power. That's it. He's gone from asking Jon to convert to fighting alongside the Mountain tribes and Northmen without an issue. They are even chanting his name and that's despite him leading them into a very very bad situation.

He's also smart enough to realise that the Queen's Men aren't loyal to him at all. It's why he made Davos his Hand over Axell Florent, and why they are the "Queen's Men" rather than the King's. When Davos was worried that Stannis' Lords wouldn't listen to him or respect him as Hand, Stannis just said "Then we'll make new Lords". I think that shows just how much

I'm not saying that there won't be grumblings but ultimately it comes down to the King Bread thing. As long as he's feeding them, they'll accept him. Besides the guy has a crazy sense of right and wrong. He burned Alester Florent because Melisandre said it would help their journey North, but also because he committed treason. He burned the cannibals in his army but has refused to burn Asha, even though she's an enemy, has "King's Blood" and is almost worthless as a hostage. If he's willing to protect her, at a time when she's just a waste of food, then why would his rule be any different?

[snow is the man]

7 hours ago, UnFit Finlay said:

Again though, it depends on the circumstances. Had he taken the Throne by winning the Battle of the Blackwater then, yes, I totally agree that everything you said would've happened. Not just because of religion either. Stannis would've been an awful King back then.

Now though? If he frees the North from the Boltons and restores the Starks to Winterfell, will the Northerners care about his religion? Will the Riverlords care if he then goes South and restores the Tullys to Riverrun? As you said, the swore allegiance to Robb because he fought for them when no one else did, why wouldn't they do the same for Stannis?

As I said - He isn't actually a follower of the Lord of Light. He said himself that he doesn't believe in Gods. He's been following Melisandre's advice because he believes in her power. That's it. He's gone from asking Jon to convert to fighting alongside the Mountain tribes and Northmen without an issue. They are even chanting his name and that's despite him leading them into a very very bad situation.

He's also smart enough to realise that the Queen's Men aren't loyal to him at all. It's why he made Davos his Hand over Axell Florent, and why they are the "Queen's Men" rather than the King's. When Davos was worried that Stannis' Lords wouldn't listen to him or respect him as Hand, Stannis just said "Then we'll make new Lords". I think that shows just how much

I'm not saying that there won't be grumblings but ultimately it comes down to the King Bread thing. As long as he's feeding them, they'll accept him. Besides the guy has a crazy sense of right and wrong. He burned Alester Florent because Melisandre said it would help their journey North, but also because he committed treason. He burned the cannibals in his army but has refused to burn Asha, even though she's an enemy, has "King's Blood" and is almost worthless as a hostage. If he's willing to protect her, at a time when she's just a waste of food, then why would his rule be any different?

I would agree with this but if the whole "church" goes against him it would be very hard to rule. I think that while he is willing to toss all the queens men aside I think mel is a different story. He has grown close to her (well as much as stannis can) so him throwing her to the side would be hard. If he was willing to renounce the "red god" I think that it wouldn't be a big deal.

[falcotron]

24 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

I would agree with this but if the whole "church" goes against him it would be very hard to rule. I think that while he is willing to toss all the queens men aside I think mel is a different story. He has grown close to her (well as much as stannis can) so him throwing her to the side would be hard. If he was willing to renounce the "red god" I think that it wouldn't be a big deal.

He won't toss Mel aside as long as she's useful. But he also won't tear down the Sept of Baelor and turn it into a Red Temple for her. He already gave up on the idea of burning godswoods because he needed to if he wanted the North on his side, and he won't treat septs any differently when he needs to get the rest of the country on his side.

He's a pragmatist. Mel is useful because of her magic. The High Septon is also useful, because of the sway he holds over so many nobles and smallfolk. So he'll use them both. You go out there and take care of the people's souls or whatever, I'll worry about defending and feeding them and stay out of your way, and everyone will be happy. Most High Septons in history seem like they'd be fine with being used that way.

And he'll use the traditional forms for any oaths of office, readings of verdicts, etc. He doesn't believe they have any real meaning, so why change them? Unless Mel can give him a good reason to believe that invoking R'hllor's name when he appoints his Kingsguard will have some magical benefit, he won't see any reason to push it on them. (In fact, most of the oaths and formulas talk about "the old gods and the new", which is just perfect. Let Melisandre tell her followers that the old gods are the Seven and the new is R'hllor. Stannis won't mind if they believe that.)

Also, remember that his Hand is a pretty faithful Sevenist, at least compared to Tywin, Ned, JonConn, Bloodraven, Mace, etc.

[elder brother jonothor dar]

11 hours ago, UnFit Finlay said:

When Davos was worried that Stannis' Lords wouldn't listen to him or respect him as Hand, Stannis just said "Then we'll make new Lords". I think that shows just how much

This is why Stannis would be a bad king, Davos gives wise council and a capable hand, but he is looked down upon by the other nobles.  In isolation a fine choice and if that is all Stannis did to upset the status quo he could get away with it, but Stannis would put his nobles noses out of joint time and time again.

Best case senario he would find himself in Eggs shoes with the nobles resisting him at every turn, worse case he would be the mad king burning every traitor

[the trees have eyes]

On 20/09/2017 at 10:08 PM, Nihlus said:

The Faith seems to have close to zero power, nothing equivalent to the Catholic Church, and the people don't seem to give two shits about religion in general to the point where peasants killed and ate the not-Pope because they were hungry and the Riverlords accepted an Old God worshipping pagan as their king. It's one of the most unrealistic aspects of the setting, but it's there.

Stannis is also an atheist. If Melisandre ceases to have use to him and/or becomes a liability, he'll get rid of her and then publicly convert to something else.

 

On 20/09/2017 at 10:30 PM, Nihlus said:

Well, my point on Robb and the High Septon is that your comparison to a Muslim king conquering France breaks down because the people of France would be just as unwilling, if not more unwilling, to have a pagan as their king. At least the Muslims (and R'hllor's followers) are monotheists; a 12th-15th century French king following the religion of e.g. the guys targeted in the Northern Crusades (from eastern and northeastern Europe) would be unthinkable, even if he also had Catholic relatives. But in Westeros no one bats an eye at the direct equivalent of the Northern pagans (that direct equivalent being literal Northern pagans) ruling over a kingdom of mostly Seven adherents. Heck, the Targaryens wanted those pagans to be part of the royal family that ruled the continent.

It just doesn't work. Religion has little to no power in GRRM's setting. Even the Faith's revival in the current setting which was directly catalyzed by extraordinary circumstance after extraordinary circumstance (like Cersei directly empowering them) is underwhelming. They have a couple hundred knights and a few thousand untrained poorly armed peasants in the capital. That's pretty much it.

He left her behind both during Blackwater and the battle of Winterfell because he didn't want to be seen as being dependent on her power. So I disagree. He'd probably stop listening to her if he actually won.

Does religion have to follow a real world pattern though?  There are zealots indeed and saints and religious orders of warrior knights but the fact that by and large people don't go out looking to burn out or kill anyone of a different religious persuasion is a good thing and not one that necessarily lacks realism.  Religious pogroms swept Europe periodically but weren't the norm of day to day life.  When Elizabeth I reached the settlement of the Elizabethan Church - a moderte form of protestantism - she famously said she "would not make windows into men's souls", i.e. what she required from her subjects was their obedience not that they should abandon the Catholic faith many of them held dear.

Robb is not going to force the Riverlands to convert to the Old Gods and destroy septs throughout the Riverlands and hang every septon or septa he can find.  The River Lords took him for their King because he is a close family connection of their liege lord and in speech, dress, values and rearing he is identical to them.  They did not take his Gods as part of the deal.

I'd say GRRM is more interested in politics than religion and in introducing magic into his story rather than religious dogma.  Maybe that says something about his preferences and beliefs, maybe not, but personally I'm grateful for it. 

And it's worth remembering that the Faith had powerful military orders, the stars and sparrows, that even the Targaryens stepped carefully around until they could dissolve them.  That's actually profoundly realistic as it echoes the power of the medieval religious orders in general and the knights Templar in particular, who were an extremely powerful organisation before their suppression by Phillip IV of France.  The High Septon is clearly modeled on the Pope - Westeros was Seven Kingdoms before the Targaryen Conquest but there was only ever one Supreme Religious Authority in the person of the High Septon for the Faith of the Seven - and the power struggle between the Crown and the Faith reflects the struggle between the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor or powerful medieval kings.  Cersei's humbling and walk of shame, though prurient, echoes the humbling of medieval kings before the Church, like Henry IV going barefoot in the snow at Canossa to beg for his excommunication to be rescinced.

In short GRRM has taken as much from medieval European Christendom as he wants for his story: Baelor the Blessed falling into a pit of vipers who miraculously refused to bite him, the piety and superstition of the smallfolk who pray for an easier life, the seemingly monastic institutions like Elder Brother's on The Quiet Isle, the shifting power dynamic between church and state, the faith's military orders, the zealotry of the likes of Bonnifer or Lancel MKII and The High Sparrow - and the brutality of the latter's inquisitions and humbling of royals.  It's just he wants this to be a part of his story and not the main driving force of it.  All our POVs are religious to some extent but that doesn't define their character or their humanity or pose an obstacle to Ned and Catelyn marrying.  It's part of his world that these two faiths coexist and are not mutually antagonistic to each other.  That's fine by me.

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Does religion have to follow a real world pattern though?  There are zealots indeed and saints and religious orders of warrior knights but the fact that by and large people don't go out looking to burn out or kill anyone of a different religious persuasion is a good thing and not one that necessarily lacks realism.

I don't think anyone is complaining that the Faith is unrealistic, or bad for the story.

People are only pointing out that they're different from the Catholic Church, and therefore you have to be careful when drawing conclusions from medieval European culture to Westerosi. A Zoroastrian inheriting France would lead to rebellion, but that doesn't mean a R'hllorist inheriting Westeros would.

In fact, what I think is unrealistic and bad for the story is the usual fantasy setup, where a bizarre fantasy religion somehow has exactly the same effects on society as the Catholic Church did in medieval Europe. It's much more interesting to make a religion that's like Christianity in some ways but different in others, and then explore how it has some of the same effects on society and some very different ones.

[the trees have eyes]

13 hours ago, falcotron said:

I don't think anyone is complaining that the Faith is unrealistic, or bad for the story.

People are only pointing out that they're different from the Catholic Church, and therefore you have to be careful when drawing conclusions from medieval European culture to Westerosi. A Zoroastrian inheriting France would lead to rebellion, but that doesn't mean a R'hllorist inheriting Westeros would.

In fact, what I think is unrealistic and bad for the story is the usual fantasy setup, where a bizarre fantasy religion somehow has exactly the same effects on society as the Catholic Church did in medieval Europe. It's much more interesting to make a religion that's like Christianity in some ways but different in others, and then explore how it has some of the same effects on society and some very different ones.

That's quite a big ask in terms of world building and would push his characters and story in different directions than he really wants.  I think GRRM manages to keep his story moving along and does enough world building to give a rich and broad tapestry of Westeros/Planetos history, myth and cultrure.  Threads like this which touch on how "realistic / unreliastic" certain aspects are expecting a bit much imo of what a story can and should deliver.  Could he do this?  Yes, but likely at the price of other aspects of his story he cares more to write about.

For whatever reason the Old Gods and the New have been accepted as part of Westeros for thousands of years with a clear regional divide, exceptions like the Blackwoods and Manderlys aside.  Point is those houses follow their liege lords regardless of their god so Robb Stark becoming king in the Riverlands is not an issue, those two religions not being mutually antagonistic.

Mel and the Faith of R'hollor is a different matter as it is an alien faith with no following in Westoers and Mel is determined to both burn down the Godswood at Storm's End and the statues of the Seven at Dragonstone.  Mel and Stannis setting up the Red God by suppressing the existing faiths is a big no-no and to the OP's point, yes, it's a major obstacle for Stannis's claim.  The Targs didn't follow the Seven - at least initially, Baelor the Blessed? - but they didn't burn the septs and icons of the Faith, they made an alliance with them.  Targ monarchs were crowned by the High Septon.  Stannis has yet to show that sense of compromise and with his character and Mel on his shoulder it looks unlikely.

[falcotron]

2 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

That's quite a big ask in terms of world building and would push his characters and story in different directions than he really wants. 

I'm not saying he should do more of this, I'm saying he already has done a little of it, and that's part of what makes his work interesting. With a pretty light touch, he's managed to show us how the Faith being different from Christianity has led to a different society in some ways, and how the Conqueror using dragons instead of castle strategy has led to a different society, and so on. He hasn't explored it in huge depth, but he's explored it just deeply enough that it feels like the differences are real and believable (and that also licenses him to throw in any other differences that he wants without explaining them all, because we'd seen how enough differences are motivated that we assume any other ones are just as well motivated).

In a lot of other pseudo-medieval fantasies, there's none of this—either things are exactly like Europe even where that's completely implausible, or things are different for no obvious reason.

2 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Mel and the Faith of R'hollor is a different matter as it is an alien faith with no following in Westoers and Mel is determined to both burn down the Godswood at Storm's End and the statues of the Seven at Dragonstone.  Mel and Stannis setting up the Red God by suppressing the existing faiths is a big no-no and to the OP's point, yes, it's a major obstacle for Stannis's claim.  The Targs didn't follow the Seven - at least initially, Baelor the Blessed? - but they didn't burn the septs and icons of the Faith, they made an alliance with them.  Targ monarchs were crowned by the High Septon.  Stannis has yet to show that sense of compromise and with his character and Mel on his shoulder it looks unlikely.

Mel may be determined to set up the Red God by suppressing other faiths, but Stannis is definitely not. And after reaching the North, he's no longer lets her get what she wants. When he needs her magic, he'll use her—but when he thinks he can take Winterfell without her, he leaves her at the Wall. And he doesn't give the R'hllorists in his army their way, either; the only concession he makes to them is using fire instead of hanging for some of his executions. By the end of the march on Winterfell, the Old Gods-worshipping mountain clans are cheering Stannis on, and it's the R'hllor converts who are a discipline problem. Isn't that exactly the kind of flexibility you're arguing he could never show?

As another poster suggested earlier, it might have been different if Stannis had won at the Blackwater. That would have been before he'd made the realization that the best way to win the throne was to do the king's duty, and before he'd come to trust Davos so deeply, and before he'd won a victory without Mel, and before he'd gathered any new followers who weren't converts. All of those things have changed him, which proves that he can change.

[DominusNovus]

Of course, if he won at the Blackwater, it would have been without Mel, as well. 

 

[falcotron]

42 minutes ago, DominusNovus said:

Of course, if he won at the Blackwater, it would have been without Mel, as well. 

Good point. I still think Stannis that early in his story would have been a lot more dangerously tied to Mel than he is later, but you're right, winning the main battle of the war solo would have at least been a first step away from her.

[DominusNovus]

57 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Good point. I still think Stannis that early in his story would have been a lot more dangerously tied to Mel than he is later, but you're right, winning the main battle of the war solo would have at least been a first step away from her.

It all depends on just how much growth Stannis undergoes throughout the series, and how much is just his personality showing through all the caricatures of him.