Jump to content

The Merling King

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About The Merling King

  • Rank
    Freerider

Recent Profile Visitors

318 profile views
  1. Which medieval ruler had more power, resources and influence, Henry II of England / Angevin Empire, Manuel Komnenos of Byzantine Empire or Frederick Barbarossa of Italy / Holy Roman Empire?
  2. And risk being besieged by both Rob and Renly? I think his options would vary depending on how things played out, for example if the plot to free Jaime was successful and he was able to rescue Tommen from Rosby, I think he would have more determination to carry on the war if he had both a potential heir to Casterlyrock and the Iron Throne safe in the West. Any peace offer would be severely one sided for the Lannisters and the best case scenario would be Tywin abdicating and taking the black and hoping Kevin/sons or Daven can inherit the Rock. Jaime remaining a hostage or taking the black. If Cersie survives, she will be a permanent hostage and maybe eventually given to the faith as in OTL. Tommen and Mycella, if captured would grow up a wardens of the crown. If Tywin makes it back to the Rock and Renly takes Kingslanding / spikes Joffery's head is it possible Rob goes North to deal with Iron-born, while working out terms with Renly for Northern independence/surrender and the return of Sansa? This could give Tywin some time to regroup as Renly might have his hands full bringing peace to Kindslanding and the Riverlands before invading the Westerlands. Plus if Stannis is alive on Dragonstone he might be reluctant to leave the capital. What if Rob still breaks off the Frey marriage and undermines Roose or faills to retake Moat Callin... .The Florents are never going to be happy with a Tyrell queen... I dont think Tywin could defeat the Renly/Tyrell alliance even if Rob goes North but he might have some options to work with to extend the war.
  3. What would Tywin do if Renly defeated Stannis at Stormsends or Stannis doesn’t have Melisandre and stays on Dragonstone. Renly would theoretically besiege and capture Kingslanding if they just don’t open the gates for him and his food train. Tywin would know Jaime, Cersei, Tyrion and Joffrey were all in enemy hands, what would be his options? I can’t see him bending the knee, could he try to get Tommen from Rosby to the Rock and declare him king of the East/Rock (if Joffrey is killed/executed) or sue for some sort of peace?
  4. If we are taking about Sansa and Harry/Robert Arryn then they could potentially control Winterfell, The Eyrie and Riverrun. The could rebuild/regarrison Oldstone and Harrenhall but assuming the southern Kingdoms are still united and ruled from the iron throne Harenhall is probably too close to KL for a royal seat if the north and better used as a border fortress. The Norman/Angevins/Plantagenets kings of England and Capetian kings of France had a traveling court to control there large domains. In feudalism the local lords would bend the knee when the king was visiting or near but otherwise ruled there estates as independent sovereigns and that is why it was important for the king to make his rounds. It’s funny that the early Targaryens put an emphasis on the royal progress when they had dragons but post dragons they don’t seem to travel out of Kingslanding that much with the exception of maybe Daeron II and his court. Maybe that’s why the lord let them stay in power so long.
  5. Rebuild Oldstone for the kingdom of North, Vale & Riverlands? If we are just talking about the kingdom of North and Vale I think the Wolfsdem/Whiteharbor is the best spot but obviously the Manderleys are already there.
  6. Could this be possible and sustainable under either Rob Stark or Sansa Stark and Harold Hardying? I don’t think the Vale would bend the knee for Rob (KITN), even if Lysa and Little-finger are killed off prior to clash unless he takes the iron throne. The Vale could declare support for Rob or independence until the right candidate takes the iron throne. Sansa and Harry/Sweetrobin is a little more realistic in my opinion, assuming they both have clear paths to inheriting Winterfell and the Eyrie. Dragons and Daenerys are a game changer but could this Triarchy kingdom be sustainable with Stannis or Faegon sitting on the throne? The Riverlands is the least defendable out of the three kingdoms and shares borders with every kingdom except Dorne. It would be tough to defend the Riverlands from any two kingdom alliance or coalition even if you had the support of the fractious Riverlords and controlled Riverrun and Harenhall. Would the Riverlords bend the knee to a Stark/Arryn even if the had Tully blood? I think the claim to the Riverlands would only last a few generations and then it would rejoin the iron throne and southern Westeros. So that leaves the North and the Vale with no land border and only ocean access to each other. How does this work militarily or administratively? I would suggest looking at historical examples of the kings of England who were also Dukes of Normandy/Gascony and Scottish Kings who were also Earls of Northumbria/Huntington. Could a child of Sansa and Harry be the independent king of the North and the lord paramount of the Vale paying homage to the iron throne?
  7. It’s not very common but a historical example would be the founder of the Ptolemaic dynasty and one of Alexander the greats generals who took over the Egyptian part of his empire. They share the conquering foreign lands and incest thing with the Targaryens. Ptolemy I Soter wanted his youngest son Ptolemy Philadelphus to succeed him, so he crowned him co-king and basically abdicated for the last two years of his life. He also exiled most of his older sons with financial support and married off all his daughters to foreign royalty to guarantee a smooth transition.
  8. I agree but I don’t think the Seasnake would.... Until he wanted a better match, all 3 of Daemon’s marriages show his ambition for vertical progress and guaranteed he stayed a contender for the crown if the right circumstances ever happened to present themselves to him. Daemon rebelling against Viserys would be suicide and also Aemond never tried to usurp the throne from his catatonic brother but that doesn’t make him a good guy...
  9. If we are talking about right after the death of Viserys I and no way to change the past for example, Viserys not remarrying and siring additional children, making Aegon II his heir, dismissing Otto Hightower for a second time, limiting the family members that can ride dragons or bringing Rhaenyra to court/naming her hand. Then I think the only way would be for the greens to try to call a great council or for either side to accept the others peace terms. Didn't the greens actually offer better terms, didn't Rhaenyra/Jace get dragonstone as a hereditary seat for the Targaryen/Valeryons and Luc would be confirmed as lord of Driftmark. Didnt the black just offer to make the Targeryen/Hightowers glorified hostages in Kingslanding and maybe execute Otto and Alicent? I still cant wrap my head around how it all started in the first place besides to get rid of the dragons. Viserys I names Rhaenyra his heir, completely contradicting the great councils decision that made him king and the prior precedent that made Jaehaerys king, that the iron throne can not pass through the female line, He did this primarily because he had no living sons and also so that his scheming/immoral brother Daemon could not inherit the throne. He then remarries and has living/legitimate sons, why doesn't he change his will? He had opportunities, his designated heir created a scandal and her designated heirs might or might not be bastards. Then his designated heir married said uncle, guaranteeing he will be heavily involved in the government. Viserys does nothing, he is as lazy as the greens are incompetent at war but he supposedly ran peaceful and prosperous kingdom for 3 decades? I could understand if Viserys did not have any sons, like if Aegon II was his nephew (either a son of Daemon or a new younger brother) then Rhaenyra would have precedent and legal right but no place in Westeros skipped sons for daughters except the separate and hated (at the time) Dorne. Can anyone provide a Westerosi or historical example? Yes, Viserys had a shit ton of dragons but its hard for me to believe that know one in the Westerosi warrior aristocracy had an issue with this decision or could not see the powder kegs waiting to explode? I know Rhaenyra has a ton of support in the fandom and this opinion has nothing to do with gender, I have no issue with Rhaenys and Laenor Valeryon succeeding and I personally think historically the empress Matilda and her children had a better right to the throne of England then her usurping cousin Stephen but this story line just doesn't make sense to me.
  10. The Baratheon dynasty is one king deep, do they have a clear succession plan written in law? Obviously the Lannisters lean towards Salic law, primogeniture because its in there favor and the Targaryens did set some precedents, but they also showed that the succession of the the iron throne can differ from Westerosi traditions and there were some instances when the Targaryen king basically chose his own heir (even under the cover of a great council) and they did skip over females and male minors when convenient. For historical example, the Anglo-Saxon kings didn't practice primogeniture and anyone with immediate royal blood (the dead kings sons had to potentially deal with uncles, cousins, nephews) had a claim and the Norman Dynasty also didn't practice strict primogeniture for the first 150 years. Henry 1 usurped the throne from his older brother and nephew and that turned out pretty well for England (excluding the succession, which was much more out of his control to avoid then the dance was for Viserys I) not every historical usurper is as evil as Richard III or Andronicus Konmenus or worse then the king they usurped. Also how come no one removed Maegor or Aegon II from the kings list or put an asterix next to there name, they were usurpers but had the power to take Kings landing and the iron throne and are now legally recognized. Renly was best king available at the time, Stannis did not have the power or personalty to hold the realm together and Joffrey was Maegor junior.
  11. I agree Renly and the Tyrels might have been a little rash and could have waited to see how the pieces landed but if he supported Stannis would Renly lose the Tyrell support? Would the Tyrells sit and wait or play the long game? If Renly and the Stormlords stayed neutral would Stannis even leave Dragonstone with 5K men? If he gave Stannis the "Hightower bare minimum support" and the Tyrells stayed neutral, best case scenario would be Stannis shadow babies Joff and Stannis dies on the Blackwater. Then Renly would be the rightful heir (twincest) and not have to usurp Stannis and maybe get some better PR on this forum. Otherwise if Stannis and the Florents take KL, the Tyrells are not going to want to stay neutral for long. Renly would have much more momentum and good will taking KL from Joffrey them Stannis in the first place.
  12. I agree with the common consensus, Renly was the best of the Baratheons and probably the best choice for the Realm. Its refreshing because he gets a lot of heat in most of the other threads. If the toxic Lannister / Tyrell alliance can bring a temporary peace then so could Renly and the Tyrells. Yes, I know Renly and Mace are not Tywin but I believe they would do a better job then most people want to admit and with the combination of Rowan/Redwyne/Tarley I think they would be just fine until Dany/Faegon/The Others show up. Don't get me wrong I like Stannis but I have read people legitimately argue, not that Stannis should but that he would/could win at Stormsend if he fought Renly's Army..... Renly's plan was sound and Kingslanding would have opened up the red carpet for him and his supplies if it wasn't for that shadow baby / deus ex machina. Also people always argue that the story would end in 2 books if Renly lived but it would only replace the hated Joffery / Lannister regime with the more likable Renly / Tyrell regime. Stannis, Tywin, Rob, Euron Dany, Faegon and the others to name a few would still be in the field for king Renly to deal with.
  13. Anything attacking Rhaenyra / blacks or defending Aegon II / greens
  14. Mace is married to the daughter of lord Hightower and the sister of Lyness. The crown probably thought the Hightowers and Redwyne would not be as eager to overthrow there overlords as the Florents.
  15. I think its widely speculated that Jon Arryn and Robert arranged the marriage with Selyse Florent to send a message to the remaining loyalists specifically the Tyrells, that if they don't get with the new regime they can be replaced. I have read previous posts arguing how powerful the Florents are within the Reach with there claim to Highgarden and the 2k men they gave Stannis, but most Reacher houses have a claim to Highgarden and they are not as powerful as the Hightowers or Redwynes and probably beneath the Rowans and Tarly's at least in the current political scene. As mentioned this was probably a little aggressive and the Baratheon regime seems to have fully accepted the Tyrells into the fold by the start of GOT, Robert talks to Ned about Highgarden on the way to Kingslanding and Littlefinger confirms the Tyrells are among the crowns lenders. I have heard other people claim that Jon Arryn killed two birds by marrying the kings brother to the biggest rival of the most powerful lord in the realm(when they have full Reach support, which they seem to have at start of the first book) and also preventing that said kings brother from rebelling as the Tyrells would not want a Florent as queen. With that said, Stannis had several better options especially if the crown wanted a Reach marriage, I'm sure that one of Leyton Hightowers daughters was single and of marrying age and we don't know when Jana Tyrell married Jon Fossaway. I would have picked at Hightower and it would have sent a less aggressive message by making the Baratheons, Hightowers, Tyrells and subsequently the Redwynes all tied through marriage and eliminating any Targaryen support from the Reach's big 3. This would put Stannis in a much better position as he would no longer be the overshadowed, underdog of the kings fighting for the throne. It could potentially also have eliminated Renly's powerbase in the Reach and even if the Stormlords stayed loyal to him, would Renly or the Stormlords rebel if they knew Stannis had the largest fleet and land army in Westeros? A hightower wife might give Stannis a son who could be a potential match for his cousin Margery but even if Stannis only has Shireen with a Hightower or Tyrell wife, he would have much more support then the Florents could provide. One alternative would be a Narrow Sea woman from his own domain, The crown made Stannis lord of Dragonstone for two reasons, he was Roberts direct heir at the start of his reign and they needed someone to control the Targaryen loyalist Narrow Sea lords. The Valeryons might have been a good match for symobolic reasons, bringing the two Targaryen"cadet" branches together, if they had someone available , we only know of Monford, Monterys and Aurane but Monford could have had a sister around the age of Stannis .
×
×
  • Create New...