Jump to content

Quick question about Robbs will


Stormking902

Recommended Posts

If an entire region names you King and you are treated as the top governing offical with no one above you, then (in my eyes) you ARE King.

Like Tywin said when asked "by what right does Balon call himself king  

"By right of conquest," Lord Tywin said. "King Balon has strangler's fingers round the Neck. Robb Stark's heirs are dead, Winterfell is fallen, and the ironmen hold Moat Cailin, Deepwood Motte, and most of the Stony Shore."

At least to him, Balon was a King until the IT or someone else could prove otherwise (with force of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shall set aside the question of validity and talk about how one becomes king.  I have already given an opinion on what I think of Robb Stark's will many months ago and there is no need to repeat it here.

  1. Through Force, Conquest, Coercion, Victory.  Examples:  Aegon, Robert, Daenerys, the Valyrians.
  2. Independence.  Example:  Craster carved out his own kingdom on no-man's land and claimed it his own kindgom.  Nobody owned it so he took it.
  3. Inherited.  Example:  Viserys and the Targaryens from Aegon. 
  4. Marriage.  Example:  Hizdahr married his ruler.

One last path is appointment by election.  This one will depend upon whether the people making the decision have the authority to do so.  For example, I don't think the results of the Kingsmoot is binding  because the Iron Islands are still part of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros and those ironmen had no right to choose their own king.  Euron's right to rule is not recognized by the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros.  He's not really a king.  There is another side to this argument, however.  The ironmen doesn't give a damn.  They don't follow Euron because he's a king, they follow Euron because he's their leader.  King is just their word for He-who-leads-the-ironborn.  Euron is not a king in the classic sense but he has power over the iron people.  They will do his bidding for as long as they can resist the king in King's Landing and they don't care about breaking the laws.  They're already breaking the law when they held the Kingsmoot so in effect they operate in violation of the laws of the Seven Kingdoms.  They will all hang if they lose the rebellion.

The only elected king that stands on firm foundation in my opinion is Mance Rayder.  He united the wildlings and they made him king.  They lived on the other side of the wall where there are no laws and the rule of the Iron Throne has no reach.  Nobody owned the lands beyond the wall and any man who can make a claim can do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Stormking902 said:

But Robb doesn't want to be king of the 7k just the North and Riverlands which he WAS.......

I agree with what you are saying. Robb didn’t want the Iron Throne. I’m thinking he wanted someone to pay for the death of his father and to have Sansa released. His Kingship is only relevant to the North not the Seven Kingdoms.

This is what Robb requested:

 

A Clash of Kings - Catelyn I

"First, the queen must release my sisters and provide them with transport by sea from King's Landing to White Harbor. It is to be understood that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey Baratheon is at an end. When I receive word from my castellan that my sisters have returned unharmed to Winterfell, I will release the queen's cousins, the squire Willem Lannister and your brother Tion Frey, and give them safe escort to Casterly Rock or wheresoever she desires them delivered."/

"Secondly, my lord father's bones will be returned to us, so he may rest beside his brother and sister in the crypts beneath Winterfell, as he would have wished. The remains of the men of his household guard who died in his service at King's Landing must also be returned."/

"Third, my father's greatsword Ice will be delivered to my hand, here at Riverrun."/

"Fourth, the queen will command her father Lord Tywin to release those knights and lords bannermen of mine that he took captive in the battle on the Green Fork of the Trident. Once he does so, I shall release my own captives taken in the Whispering Wood and the Battle of the Camps, save Jaime Lannister alone, who will remain my hostage for his father's good behavior."/

"Lastly, King Joffrey and the Queen Regent must renounce all claims to dominion over the north. Henceforth we are no part of their realm, but a free and independent kingdom, as of old. Our domain shall include all the Stark lands north of the Neck, and in addition the lands watered by the River Trident and its vassal streams, bounded by the Golden Tooth to the west and the Mountains of the Moon in the east."       "THE KING IN THE NORTH!" boomed Greatjon Umber, a ham-sized fist hammering at the air as he shouted. "Stark! Stark! The King in the North!"/

 

That is all well and good. The Queen tore up King Robert’s will that was witnessed by other people. Put the Hand in prison. She is not going to give in to Robb’s request. To her he is a rebel. A nothing. A nobody.

Don’t get me wrong, I am a Starkie. It’s just that in the eyes of the ruling party Robb’s Kingship means nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stormking902 said:

For those who think Robb wasn't a king you are completely WRONG, Robb was made king by his bannerman or at least all the important ones 

Not really. Lord Bolton, Manderly, and Lady Dustin were all not present, they are three of the most powerful rulers in the North. On top of that no lord Hornwood, Cerwyen,Locke, Reed, Ryswell and both Flints. As well as Ser Tallhart. though as a Masterly House I doubt he would have had much say. 

Robb was crowned by part of his army, the majority of the important Lords of the North were not consulted about it. 

 

4 hours ago, The Sunland Lord said:

Joffrey was a bastard born of incest. 

 

He was also the legal and acknowledged heir of the Throne. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not really. Lord Bolton, Manderly, and Lady Dustin were all not present, they are three of the most powerful rulers in the North. On top of that no lord Hornwood, Cerwyen,Locke, Reed, Ryswell and both Flints. As well as Ser Tallhart. though as a Masterly House I doubt he would have had much say. 

Robb was crowned by part of his army, the majority of the important Lords of the North were not consulted about it. 

This is true...

5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

He was also the legal and acknowledged heir of the Throne. 

This is very debatable...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not really. Lord Bolton, Manderly, and Lady Dustin were all not present, they are three of the most powerful rulers in the North. On top of that no lord Hornwood, Cerwyen,Locke, Reed, Ryswell and both Flints. As well as Ser Tallhart. though as a Masterly House I doubt he would have had much say. 

Robb was crowned by part of his army, the majority of the important Lords of the North were not consulted about it. 

 

He was also the legal and acknowledged heir of the Throne. 

Most if not all bannermen and nobles you mention were at the Harvest feast in Winterfell, and all referred to Bran as prince. I would imagine that's because they have taken Robb for their king too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Most if not all bannermen and nobles you mention were at the Harvest feast in Winterfell, and all referred to Bran as prince. I would imagine that's because they have taken Robb for their king too. 

Of course. They don't have a lot of choice in the matter at that point, unless they are in secret talks with every single other vassal to determine who agree on this. 

Lady Dustin does not like the Starks, does not want to send men but the Starks, like any other Overlord, are feared and subjects obey fearing for the consequences.

12 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

 

This is very debatable...

It is actually not. Laws are not infallible, but legally speaking Joffrey and Tommen are Robert's sons. They have lived their whole lives as this and the only person with the legal authority to say they were not was Robert. The High Septon even crowned both of them. 

Until the crown is usurped and a new King or Grand Council says otherwise they will remain legally Robert's sons.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not really. Lord Bolton, Manderly, and Lady Dustin were all not present, they are three of the most powerful rulers in the North. On top of that no lord Hornwood, Cerwyen,Locke, Reed, Ryswell and both Flints. As well as Ser Tallhart. though as a Masterly House I doubt he would have had much say. 

Robb was crowned by part of his army, the majority of the important Lords of the North were not consulted about it. 

 

He was also the legal and acknowledged heir of the Throne. 

I agree that these lords weren't present but once Robb was crowned and the Boltons, Manderly, etc arrived they all called Robb there king which means they consented to it beyond a doubt. All of the Northern lords had a choice to sit the war out if they didnt agree with becoming independant OR hell join the Lannisters to take down the rebels but NO they didnt do that did they? 

When Robert took up arms against Aerys the lords that didnt agree with Robert said so immediatly by raising an army against Robert, those who didnt agree with Hoster and Jon Arryn did the same. In the Wo5k house Dondarrion and house Swann the two most powerful houses besides Baratheon in the Stormlands sat out, House Hightower in the Reach sat out, the Freys didnt join there liege in supporting Robb untill they secured a mariage with the KITN etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Of course. They don't have a lot of choice in the matter at that point, unless they are in secret talks with every single other vassal to determine who agree on this. 

Lady Dustin does not like the Starks, does not want to send men but the Starks, like any other Overlord, are feared and subjects obey fearing for the consequences.

Well, the point being debated was that because they weren't present when the GJ and then the others  bent the knee to Robb, it meant they didn't accept Robb as king and that's absolutely not true.  

3 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

It is actually not. Laws are not infallible, but legally speaking Joffrey and Tommen are Robert's sons. They have lived their whole lives as this and the only person with the legal authority to say they were not was Robert. The High Septon even crowned both of them. 

Until the crown is usurped and a new King or Grand Council says otherwise they will remain legally Robert's sons.  

Erhm... there's the fact that Cersei tore up Robert's will, right? The one where Robert appointed Ned as regent. So, yeah, the Lannister kids who people believe to be Robert's trueborn children and heirs are all illegally usurping... Edric Storm or someone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

 

It is actually not. Laws are not infallible, but legally speaking Joffrey and Tommen are Robert's sons. They have lived their whole lives as this and the only person with the legal authority to say they were not was Robert. The High Septon even crowned both of them. 

Until the crown is usurped and a new King or Grand Council says otherwise they will remain legally Robert's sons.  

Actually, no... with no written constitution or common law system they are not de facto robert’s sons because they grew up that way... I would argue that using the term “legally” at all isnt applicable. They are claiming to be sons of a usurper anyway... so legally? Really?

also, “legally” what about Ned, who was named regent by Robert? What about his actions?

you can state that they sat/sit the iron throne, but the rest is debatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Stormking902 said:

I agree that these lords weren't present but once Robb was crowned and the Boltons, Manderly, etc arrived they all called Robb there king which means they consented to it beyond a doubt.

It is not consented beyond a doubt. It had already been decided and without knowing how many Lords supported this decision anyone refusing to go along with this could get the Greatjon threat

And when Lord Umber, who was called the Greatjon by his men and stood as tall as Hodor and twice as wide, threatened to take his forces home if he was placed behind the Hornwoods or the Cerwyns in the order of march, Robb told him he was welcome to do so. "And when we are done with the Lannisters," he promised, scratching Grey Wind behind the ear, "we will march back north, root you out of your keep, and hang you for an oathbreaker."

Some of you romanticise this period too much, when feudal politics was all about strength and no right thinking Lord would paint a target on himself like that without knowing how much support he would have. That is why many resort to more underhanded methods to overthrow the more powerful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
On 12/29/2017 at 7:18 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

But the right ones did and that's good enough!  I have to say given Jon was never released from his vows by NW up to his death he legally couldn't be considered Robb's heir whether you'd even give Rob the authority.

The only legit way for those men to pick a king?  Leave Westeros, find an uninhabited island and vote.  You know what else is illegal?  The Kingsmoot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...