Winnief Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 I suspect that the Crown would insist on different children being named as heirs, to prevent power from being consolidated. Exactly. One child would get Dorne, the other Winterfell. For say an Arianne/Robb match, the eldest son would get Winterfell, but the second son-or eldest daughter depending on birth order would get Dorne. Whereas for a Shireen/Willas match, the eldest boy would get dad's territory the Reach, and second son would get the mother's land-The Stormlands. Everybody wins. In fact this also works out to the benefit of the kids since you have more territory to split between multiple heirs and don't have everyone fighting for the same territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Fun Fact: There are no Lords paramount except Littlefinger. He's given the title Lord Paramount of the Trident, which Hoster Tully isn't even listed as holding in the appendix of the first book. No other Lord is ever referred to as "Lord Paramount." I'll go now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blugenes Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I concur that usually matters like this are resolved by a strong central authority to ensure that no one family can pull a Hapsburg and unite much of Westeros that way. Without anyone strong enough to do that though, Littlefinger seems poised to use Sansa and Harold as a means to unite the Riverlands, Vale, and North under one house. Essentially everything north of the mouth of the Trident would come under one rule. The Vale and North are relatively unscathed and with food available in the Vale the Riverlands would probably follow whoever feeds them. Harold might suffer a tragic "accident" of some sort and that leaves Sansa in charge of everything with Littlefinger able and eager to plant a successor in her that would give said child control of three of the great lordships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 They would be teased by the other kingdoms for having two daddies and no mommy. But they would do it very quietly and with genuine humor so as not to get a warning for being intolerant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crow's Third Eye Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 They would be teased by the other kingdoms for having two daddies and no mommy. But they would do it very quietly and with genuine humor so as not to get a warning for being intolerant. You win. Why do i never notice these discrepancies in thread titles :lmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daena the Defiant Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Fun Fact: There are no Lords paramount except Littlefinger. He's given the title Lord Paramount of the Trident, which Hoster Tully isn't even listed as holding in the appendix of the first book. No other Lord is ever referred to as "Lord Paramount." I'll go now. That's not really so. The Lord of Riverrun was by tradition/history/precedent the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands, just as the Lord of Winterfell was the Lord Paramount of the North, etc. It was so ingrained that no one really thinks about it. When Aegon granted the Tullys dominion over the Riveralnds he made them Lords Paramount, which is a legal status. Everyone's attention is specifically called to the elevation of Littlefinger to the Lordship Paramount is because the decree granting him Harrenhal along with the Lordship Paramount was a break from precedent. Even poor, simple Emmon Frey presumed that when he was granted Riverrun that the Lordship Paramount was also bestowed upon him. It basically goes without saying that the magnates holding Riverrun, Highgarden, Winterfell, Sunspear Casterly Rock, the Eyrie and Storms End are 'lords paramount' since they are at the apex of the feudal structure in their respective kingdoms, subinfeudated (there's a word for ya!) only to the Iron Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daena the Defiant Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Wait a second, so if Edmure dies and his kid does not make it then Robert Arryn is heir to Riverrun from what I read here. Arryn is unlikely to make adulthood and his current heir is the proposed groom of Sansa Stark. If he marries Sansa Stark and "somehow" dies in the Vale with her still alive, and assuming Bran and Rickon are still thought dead, then whoever married her might control the Riverlands, the Vale, and the North by rights? The Tully line of succession to Riverrun runs as follows (presuming the attainder of the Tully family is lifted, or we just ignore it for fun) Hoster Edmure (only son of Hoster) Edmure's child, (male or female by Roslin Frey) Catelyn (deceased), older daughter of Hoster Robb Stark (deceased), oldest son of Catelyn Brandon Stark, second son of Catelyn Rickon Stark, third son of Catelyn Sansa Lannister nee Stark, elder daughter of Catelyn Arya Stark, young daughter of Catelyn Lysa, (deceased) younger daughter of Hoster Robert Arryn, only son of Lysa Brynden, younger brother of Hoster and also son of a previous Lord Tully. Presuming that Bran and Rickon stay hidden, and the Tully attainder is lifted and for that matter the Stark attainder, which was lifted to allow "Lady Arya" to inherit her father's position (it's unknown if it was specifically for her, or conversely, the offspring of Ned minus Arya [and maybe Sansa] were included [because you leave the girls in, so someone can grab them, marry them and make a claim through them... looking at you, Roose and Tywin] but the line of Robb Stark was attainted [and probably the other sons too]), then by rights Sansa is Lady of Winterfell. She is second in line to Riverrun (after Edmure's child). If something was to befall Edmure and his child, then Sansa is by rights Lady of Riverrun. It is unlikely that one person, let alone a young woman, would be allowed to conglomerate such power by the Powers that Be (the Iron Throne, plus the vassal houses might grouse at one person accruing so much authority). If she married Harry Hardying, he is the heir to the Eyrie, by rights. Presuming, by some scenario, that Robert Arryn doesn't die and he remains Lord of the Vale, but Sansa ends up as either Lady of Riverrun or Lady of Winterfell, her husband most likely becomes 'Lord Protector' of Riverrun or Winterfell (Tyrion presumes he would be Lord Protector of Winterfell) through his marriage), which is basically that he would assume the necessary military aspect of feudal governance. Cersei, as Lady of the Rock by rights, has no husband, so she has appointed cousins to be both castellan, military governor (essentially) of the Casterly Rock fief, and as Warden of the West, military commander and overlord over the whole region. If she was married, her husband would probably have assumed those roles. Now, if Sansa and Harry the Heir Hardyng/Arryn were to marry and have children, those children would by rights have blood claims on the Vale, the Riverlands and the North. If you add in the wrinkle that Catelyn's mother Minisa was a Whent and probably a sister of Lady Shella Whent, then Lady Minisa's great-grandchildren (Minisa-->Catelyn-->Sansa-->Baby) have a blood claim on Harrenhal too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 That's not really so. The Lord of Riverrun was by tradition/history/precedent the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands, just as the Lord of Winterfell was the Lord Paramount of the North, etc. It was so ingrained that no one really thinks about it. When Aegon granted the Tullys dominion over the Riveralnds he made them Lords Paramount, which is a legal status. Everyone's attention is specifically called to the elevation of Littlefinger to the Lordship Paramount is because the decree granting him Harrenhal along with the Lordship Paramount was a break from precedent. Even poor, simple Emmon Frey presumed that when he was granted Riverrun that the Lordship Paramount was also bestowed upon him. It basically goes without saying that the magnates holding Riverrun, Highgarden, Winterfell, Sunspear Casterly Rock, the Eyrie and Storms End are 'lords paramount' since they are at the apex of the feudal structure in their respective kingdoms, subinfeudated (there's a word for ya!) only to the Iron Throne. Can you point me to anywhere in the books or a so spake Martin where anyone other than Littlefinger is referred to as a Lord Paramount? Roose Bolton is in a similar situation to Littlefinger, being Warden of the North and not ruling from Winterfell. He's never called "Lord Paramount of The North." What sells if for me is the appendixes. Everyone gets all their titles, and not one of them are called Lord Paramount but Littlefinger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daena the Defiant Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Can you point me to anywhere in the books or a so spake Martin where anyone other than Littlefinger is referred to as a Lord Paramount? Roose Bolton is in a similar situation to Littlefinger, being Warden of the North and not ruling from Winterfell. He's never called "Lord Paramount of The North." What sells if for me is the appendixes. Everyone gets all their titles, and not one of them are called Lord Paramount but Littlefinger. No one is called a vassal either, nor is Dorne referred to a principality palatine, but that's what they are. No one is referred to as an overlord, or liege, nor does GRRM get into whether the 'bannerhouses' hold their estates in mesne, or whether they provide scutage. It's like having to spell out that Robb Stark is the 'offspring' of Catelyn and Eddard. Catelyn was Lady Regent of the North, but it was never actually stated in the text becsause it was obvious. It goes without saying until it has to be said. When they removed House Tully and the Lord of Riverrun from the top of the feudal pyramid, it means that the lesser lords and vassals and ahem, bannerhouses, no longer owe the Lord of Riverrun homage. That homage is now directed at House Baelish of Harrenhal. The Lord of Harrenhal, in the personage of Petyr Baelish, now received fealty and homage from Lord Hoster's former subjects. That makes him Lord Paramount. It's not a specific title like Lady of Highgarden, it's a generic office. It's just that it's new. It was a given fact that the Lord of Riverrrun was the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. That changed recently, so attention is being called to it specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 No one is called a vassal either, nor is Dorne referred to a principality palatine, but that's what they are. No one is referred to as an overlord, or liege, nor does GRRM get into whether the 'bannerhouses' hold their estates in mesne, or whether they provide scutage. It's like having to spell out that Robb Stark is the 'offspring' of Catelyn and Eddard. Catelyn was Lady Regent of the North, but it was never actually stated in the text becsause it was obvious. It goes without saying until it has to be said. When they removed House Tully and the Lord of Riverrun from the top of the feudal pyramid, it means that the lesser lords and vassals and ahem, bannerhouses, no longer owe the Lord of Riverrun homage. That homage is now directed at House Baelish of Harrenhal. The Lord of Harrenhal, in the personage of Petyr Baelish, now received fealty and homage from Lord Hoster's former subjects. That makes him Lord Paramount. It's not a specific title like Lady of Highgarden, it's a generic office. It's just that it's new. It was a given fact that the Lord of Riverrrun was the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. That changed recently, so attention is being called to it specifically. So then why isn't Roose Bolton Listed as Lord Paramount of the North in the appendix? I'm not arguing that they aren't the paramount lords of the regions they rule. Just that people throw around Lord Paramount like it's an office or title like Warden of the North. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnief Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Wow, Daena, way to put Sansa's claims down all so cogently. This makes me wonder if LF might be plotting to arrange mishaps for Edmure and Roslin's kid, as a way of ensuring Sansa's the rightful heir to Riverrun. And if she does marry Harry as well, (presuming SR dies) then their children have rights to 3 of the 7 realms...and suddenly Sansa having a a claim to the IT doesn't seem so crazy after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Greg of House House Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I suppose there's no rule. There are options. But I agree that the Crown's approval would be needed and they would probably favor something that kept the power balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daena the Defiant Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 So then why isn't Roose Bolton Listed as Lord Paramount of the North in the appendix? I'm not arguing that they aren't the paramount lords of the regions they rule. Just that people throw around Lord Paramount like it's an office or title like Warden of the North. Enh. I guess we are in 'agreeance' (heh) that Lord Bolton is now the 'Lord Paramount of the North' but since it wasn't expressly stated in the appendix by omission, you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Light a wight tonight Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Two Lords Paramount? They have same-sex marriage in Westeros? Really, a Lord and Lady Paramount wouldn't marry. It would be politically ridiculous. Those are appointed positions and the King would appoint a replacement for one or the other before the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daena the Defiant Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Two Lords Paramount? They have same-sex marriage in Westeros? Really, a Lord and Lady Paramount wouldn't marry. It would be politically ridiculous. Those are appointed positions and the King would appoint a replacement for one or the other before the fact. Politically ridiculous you say, but suppose that wasn't the original plan. What happens when... ....let's turn now to a happier, idyllic time when young, hotheaded Brandon Stark, the Heir to Winterfell, was to marry Catelyn Tully, not the Heiress to Riverrun, because she had a baby brother alive and well. Lyanna Stark never ran away with.....H^H^H^abducted by Rhaegar Targaryen, and the Stark/Tully match happens on schedule. No Robellion. Lyanna Stark finds herself ensconced (and slightly damp) as the Lady of Storm's End, amused by her bawdy, randy husband Lord Robert Baratheon, although she certainly resents the way he keeps shagging her attendants and handmaidens. Brandon Stark's grim younger brother Ned marries, I dunno, the fair Lady Latoya of House Flint, and sets up house in a redoubt on the Stark lands, ummm, Whitefang Fallows. Lady Catelyn's slutty, flighty little sister married Ser Niall, a nice Royce boy or something, although she keeps calling him Petyr when they make love. Time passes and so does Lord Rickard Stark. Voila, we now have Lord Brandon Stark, his lady-wife Catelyn and their children, daughters Eddara, Minisa and a boy, Bryan. Things move on forward. Lady Catelyn's father Hoster dies of his "fire crabs in his belly" (his actual textual ailment). Her younger brother Edmure is now Lord of Riverrun. He and his new wife, Lady Melinda... errr Bracken have no children. Edmure being Edmure (even in this alternative timeline, this is Edmure we are talking about) dies in a spectacularly silly boating accident. Now we have the Lord of Winterfell actually married to the Lady of Riverrun, although that was never anyone's intent. What happens now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingAlanI Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Yeah, I understand it's law or strong custom here that someone can't get two separate inheritances. This thread has good historical examples of the balance of power issues. Male-preference vs gender-neutral might make it a moot point by creating separate heirs anyway. For example, if Arianne and her future husband have a daughter first, that kid would be heir to Dorne while their first son (or second daughter if no sons) would be the father's heir. While both are alive, they're each ruling somewhere in their own right and happen to be married to each other. It only gets messy when determining who's the heir of each. Whatever it is could be specified in law or as terms of the marriage pact. If you don't want to combine the inheritances: An only child gets the best/first one, and another relation of the other parent gets that one. If the inheritances are of different prestige, the first in line would get the good one and the second in line would get the lesser one. If the inheritances are equal, the first in line gets the inheritance of the parent who dies first and the second in line eventually gets the other one. No, Catelyn is older than Lysa, so her children come before Lysa's in the Riverlands succession order. So I guess it is Bran, then Rickon, then Sansa, then Arya, THEN Sweetrobin. Yeah, I don't know why the wiki page for House Tully lists Sweetrobin as the heir. Maybe Bran's considered busy with three eyed crow stuff, and Rickon is the heir of House Stark instead, but Sansa and Arya are both ahead of Sweetrobin. Also, as usual, children are ahead of collateral relations, so any kids of Sansa's would be ahead of Arya and Sweetrobin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blugenes Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Again, for extra fun, Sansa (Winterfell + Riverrun) could marry Harold (Vale), and if Harold manages to consummate the marriage but dies suddenly afterwards, whoever might be able to impregnate Sansa would have a child that could inherit over a third of the continent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnief Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Again, for extra fun, Sansa (Winterfell + Riverrun) could marry Harold (Vale), and if Harold manages to consummate the marriage but dies suddenly afterwards, whoever might be able to impregnate Sansa would have a child that could inherit over a third of the continent... This is looking increasingly like LF's master plan. Now we have the Lord of Winterfell actually married to the Lady of Riverrun, although that was never anyone's intent. What happens now? Well, a castellan would be appointed to guard over Riverrun-probably the Blackfish. Bryan could get Riverrun, and Ned's son could get WF. Alternatively, Bryan takes WF, and his elder sister gets Riverrun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gneisenau Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Robert and Tommen were both King (LP equivalent) of the Crownlands and LP-equiv of the Stormlands Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingAlanI Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 This thead is getting confusing. Robert and Tommen were both King (LP equivalent) of the Crownlands and LP-equiv of the Stormlands Well, weren't Stannis or Renly defacto LP's in the Stormlands? As in line after Robert, they got some of Robert's secondary things, which is one of the kinds of solutions proposed in this thread. I agree there's not much of anyone left after Tommen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.