Jump to content

Rhaenyra's Fool

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

556 profile views

Rhaenyra's Fool's Achievements

Commoner

Commoner (1/8)

  1. I just copied most of this from another post I made elsewhere: I've never believed the theory that Bran will sit the Iron Throne. My opposition is grounded in the practical realities of succession. George tries to be as realistic as possible with regards to real world historical politics, and the Starks do not have ANY claim to the throne, at all. No Targaryen princess has ever married into House Stark, nor has the non-Targaryen descendant of any Targaryen prince or princess. Certainly, power is power (Varys) and Robert's blood-based claim was a justification pasted over his military victories over the Targaryen armies (Renly), but a claim to rights through descent from Aegon the Conquerer is a necessary prerequisite to sitting the Iron Throne. The Starks are neither well known enough nor militarily strong enough to put one of their own on the throne to rule all of Westeros. Without a blood link to the Targaryens there's no way the other noble houses would accept a Stark royal dynasty. In medieval politics the only ways to assume control over a territory were through military force (conquest) or a claim seen as legitimate by the other power players in the region. Westeros is grounded in real world type medieval politics and the North is NOT strong enough to conquer the other six kingdoms and the Starks have the same claim to the throne (i.e. none) that other noble houses like the Tyrells, the Lannisters, or the Hightowers have. It would be more likely for a Martell, a Velaryon, or even a Plumm to sit the Iron Throne, as those three houses all had Targaryen princesses marry into them over the close to 300 years of Targaryen rule. Personally I see three possible scenarios for the endgame, in terms of politics: The Seven Kingdoms split into two or more independent kingdoms - probably not the same kingdoms from before the conquest, for example a Stark becomes monarch of the North and the Riverlands (uniting Ned's claim to Winterfell and the North and Catelyn's claim to Riverun and the Riverlands and maybe also Harrenhal (through Catelyn's mother Minisa Whent)). If this monarch is Sansa the kingdom might also the Vale of Arryn, through marriage to Harry the Heir. A Targaryen claimant (Dany, fAegon, Stannis, Jon as Rhaegar's son, someone else, or a combination of (married) claimants) takes the Iron Throne and restores Targaryen rule over the Seven Kingdoms. A Targaryen claimant takes the Iron Throne and reigns over a portion of the Seven Kingdoms, with one or more regions (e.g. Dorne or the Iron Islands) becoming independent nations. I personally think that scenario 1 or 3 is more likely than scenario 2, but I don't consider Bran (or any Stark) ruling the Seven Kingdoms from King's Landing to be at all possible or plausible. Even if Bran saves the world from the Others and the threat of winter and enough Westerosi are sufficiently aware of what happened to be super grateful to him, the realities of medieval power politics and aristocratic desire to advance a family's interests aren't just going to disappear. I believe David and Dan chose Bran as king for the same reason Arya slew the Night King: he is "the most obvious choice provided we aren't thinking about [him] in that moment." In regards to what the show gets right...Dany will probably turn tyrant, though not the way she did in the show, Westeros will splinter politically, aaaand I think that's about it.
×
×
  • Create New...