Why did the Tullys join the Riverlands with the North?

[Lewyn Martell]

I've never understood why the Tullys agreed not only to fight with Robb and the North but also to bring the Riverlands into a kingdom with the North under Robb as King.

First, the societies of the Riverlands and the North don't have any particular closeness. The North and Dorne are different from the other five kingdoms to a significantly greater degree than the five kingdoms are from each other. 

Secondly, why should Edmure Tully accept Robb as his liege lord? Robb, his nephew, is significantly younger than him. The Tullys could have done as the North did and declare independence under a Tully king which would have been allied with the King in the North. Yes, there is an element of gratitude to the Northmen for coming south, raising the siege of Riverrun, etc. However, the only reason that Riverrun is under siege is because of Cat's and Ned's actions, not because of anything Hoster or Edmure have done. 

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, unlike the North which is both geographically defined and geographically defensive, the Riverlands is completely wide open. It's probably the least defensible of all of the seven kingdoms. It's very difficult to see how the Riverlands could sustain itself as an independent kingdom, something it has never been in the past.

The right approach for Robb and the North would have been to ally with Renly and/or Stannis to overthrow Joffrey, Cersei, Tywin and the Lannisters generally and put either Stannis or Renly on the throne in King's Landing, after the Lannisters are defeated, make Kevan Lannister head of the house and allow him to retain Casterly Rock, and maybe make Addam Marbrand, or someone else from a non-Lannister Westerlands house, Warden of the West.

After Stannis lost the Battle of the Blackwater the writing was on the wall for Robb but, more significantly, for the Tullys. 

The only good argument I have seen for what the Riverlands lords did is that they thought Edmure useless and that it is better to have as king a competent leader such as Robb. However, it was perfectly possible for the Riverlander lords to accept Robb as war leader of the combined North/Riverlands force without acknowledging him as king. 

In my view, the Riverlander lords proclaiming Robb as their king is a case where the realism and credibility of the Song of Ice and Fire falls down.

[Trigger Warning]

I'd basically say they were drunk on victory and got caught up in the moment especially with the anti Lannister sentiment boiling in the Riverlands but it always still struck me as a bit dumb that they'd all unanimously swear themselves to a new overlord from an entirely different region on the fly so I pretty much agree with you. 

[Romaine3]

I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that the Tully's did the wrong thing in this situation. Renly/Stannis have armies that are too far south to be of any help to them when the war erupts. The Lannister armies are systematically annihilating the Riverlands. Young Robb and his host arrive just in the nick of time. Add to that, he is a direct blood relative.

You play the cards you are dealt in situations like this, and Young Robb is holding some aces. So rather than allowing themselves, their bannermen, and their lands to be eradicated, the Tully's chose to go all in with the savvy young King in the North Robb Stark.

[Curled Finger]

All above and with my new friend @Romaine3, I'm not entirely sure the union was a bad idea.  Remember the discussion that found Robb King in the North?    I think it was GreatJon and Maege who bemoaned the Southron Kings, citing the north knelt to the dragons and there were no more dragons.   Then there is the curious relocation of the Blackwoods from the North to the Riverlands, Stark tainted blood and all.  The marriages of Cat and Ned/Lysa & Jon forged a strong alliance between the 3 regions.   The heart of those alliances being in The Riverlands, where both wives hailed from.   It did not hurt in the least that The Blackfish left the Vale for home when his niece, Lysa, would not.    If nothing else, The Blackfish was an influential old warrior.  He probably really dug the concept of not having his home repossessed and his homeland being able to fight back against the Mountain.   The Starks and their northern army were a veritable godsend to the Riverlands.   Well after the WOT5K, when Edmure was captive and a new siege was set upon River Run, Jamie had to tell Tytos Blackwood to take down his direwolf banners.    The Riverlands were gutted by the Mountain and his men.   I honestly think Robb saved the Riverlands, even if only for a short time and the Riverlands were grateful.   Given that the current king or his grandpa rather, is the one who set the Mountain upon them, I would be ready for a new king too were I in their situation.   

[DominusNovus]

Well, Robbis half Tully, so there's something.  Plus, if Robb were to win, and his kingdom remains just those two realms, the Riverlands would be in a very strong position.  The tail that wags the dog, so to speak.  Far more populated and economically productive, with a natural infrastructure system, and united under one Lord Paramount.  As long as the Tullys remain the Lords Paramount of the Riverlands, they're actually more powerful than their new kings.  The Stark Kings would have to keep making dynastic alliances with Riverlanders in order to keep the region loyal.

[Fishb20]

another question is, if southron ambitions is true, did edmure know about it?

Perhaps Edmure views swearing fealty to Robb as an extension of Southron Ambitions

[Romaine3]

If anything, the Tully's failed Robb. As grown men, they should have protected their young King from himself/teenage hormones. As wardens of the Riverlands, they know their bannermen, and they failed to be adamantly demonstrative to Robb about the serious repercussions involved in breaking a sacred marriage pact with the Frey's.

Lord Frey more than anything wants to be connected with the great houses of Westeros through marriage and bloodlines. Almost every house he has tried to connect House Frey with through marriage has snubbed their noses at his offers. A lot of his bitterness and moral bankruptcy stems from this issue. The only major house to connect themselves to the Frey's through marriage (it was looked down upon with the utmost disdain when it happened, but proved a major windfall in this case) were the equally slimey Lannisters.

I'm sure that if a Tully were on his way north to visit the Dreadfort, even baby Rickon would advise them not to visit the Bolton family man cave!

[The Sunland Lord]

3 hours ago, Lewyn Martell said:

I've never understood why the Tullys agreed not only to fight with Robb and the North but also to bring the Riverlands into a kingdom with the North under Robb as King.

It was more of a must thing than a choice thing. They were attacked by the Lannister forces, so who was their natural ally?

3 hours ago, Lewyn Martell said:

First, the societies of the Riverlands and the North don't have any particular closeness. The North and Dorne are different from the other five kingdoms to a significantly greater degree than the five kingdoms are from each other. 

You're ignoring the Stark & Tully family ties, which was the reason the Riverlands were attacked in the first place. 

3 hours ago, Lewyn Martell said:

Secondly, why should Edmure Tully accept Robb as his liege lord? Robb, his nephew, is significantly younger than him. The Tullys could have done as the North did and declare independence under a Tully king which would have been allied with the King in the North. Yes, there is an element of gratitude to the Northmen for coming south, raising the siege of Riverrun, etc. However, the only reason that Riverrun is under siege is because of Cat's and Ned's actions, not because of anything Hoster or Edmure have done. 

Why would anyone accept Robb as his liege lord from the North if the age was a problem? Why would they go further and proclaim him their king? The age thing doesn't stand. He was the late liege lord's heir, his age didn't matter. 

It's not that strange they accepted him as king. What is, for example, Geoffrey to the Tyrells after Renly died? Did they care to accept him as king until the offer came? No. They found a political ally to defeat Stannis, their sworn enemy. Geoffrey sat on the Iron Throne and yet they didn't care about him for the mere fact he sits on it. So for the Tullys, having their own king at this point is unnecessary. Chasing the Lannisters from their lands was more important. 

3 hours ago, Lewyn Martell said:

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, unlike the North which is both geographically defined and geographically defensive, the Riverlands is completely wide open. It's probably the least defensible of all of the seven kingdoms. It's very difficult to see how the Riverlands could sustain itself as an independent kingdom, something it has never been in the past.

Which is why they sided with Robb. Not a choice, but a must.

 

[Lewyn Martell]

Romaine3: Robb needs to take responsibility for his own decision to marry Jeyne Westerling. He was well aware of House Frey and he had Catelyn there to tell him. It certainly wasn't for Edmure to explain it to him. Edmure even agreed to marry a Frey himself to try to retrieve the situation.

[Ser Duncan of Flea Bottom]

There are a few reasons:

- The Lannisters were attacking places in the Riverlands

- Robb is Hoster Tully's grandson and Edmure's nephew

- The alliance between House Stark and House Frey

- Catelyn was Robb's mum

[Romaine3]

@Lewyn Martell One of your most important duties that you need to do for anyone you love is protect them from themselves if you see them setting themselves up for disaster. Young Robb might be wise beyond his years on the battlefield, but still a boy between the sheets.

Those men knew he was making a mistake and did nothing to warn him or stop him from going all the way through with his mistake. That decision cost the Stark/Tully alliance the entire war. It could have all been avoided if someone had just had the wherewithal to make sure his nurse was ugly or something. 

[the trees have eyes]

10 hours ago, Lewyn Martell said:

I've never understood why the Tullys agreed not only to fight with Robb and the North but also to bring the Riverlands into a kingdom with the North under Robb as King.

First, the societies of the Riverlands and the North don't have any particular closeness. The North and Dorne are different from the other five kingdoms to a significantly greater degree than the five kingdoms are from each other. 

Secondly, why should Edmure Tully accept Robb as his liege lord? Robb, his nephew, is significantly younger than him. The Tullys could have done as the North did and declare independence under a Tully king which would have been allied with the King in the North. Yes, there is an element of gratitude to the Northmen for coming south, raising the siege of Riverrun, etc. However, the only reason that Riverrun is under siege is because of Cat's and Ned's actions, not because of anything Hoster or Edmure have done. 

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, unlike the North which is both geographically defined and geographically defensive, the Riverlands is completely wide open. It's probably the least defensible of all of the seven kingdoms. It's very difficult to see how the Riverlands could sustain itself as an independent kingdom, something it has never been in the past.

The right approach for Robb and the North would have been to ally with Renly and/or Stannis to overthrow Joffrey, Cersei, Tywin and the Lannisters generally and put either Stannis or Renly on the throne in King's Landing, after the Lannisters are defeated, make Kevan Lannister head of the house and allow him to retain Casterly Rock, and maybe make Addam Marbrand, or someone else from a non-Lannister Westerlands house, Warden of the West.

After Stannis lost the Battle of the Blackwater the writing was on the wall for Robb but, more significantly, for the Tullys. 

The only good argument I have seen for what the Riverlands lords did is that they thought Edmure useless and that it is better to have as king a competent leader such as Robb. However, it was perfectly possible for the Riverlander lords to accept Robb as war leader of the combined North/Riverlands force without acknowledging him as king. 

In my view, the Riverlander lords proclaiming Robb as their king is a case where the realism and credibility of the Song of Ice and Fire falls down.

They do talk over courses of action before the King in the North and Riverlands becomes a thing.

Joffrey is on the Throne and The Riverlands are caught between Lannister forces to the East and Lannister power to the West.  They badly need to attach themselves to someone or you can advance the deposition of the Tullys and the taking of the children of the river Lords as hostages by the Crown by a year or so.

Bear in mind how bad the position looked for the Lannisters with Renly and Stannis in revolt as well as Robb and the Arryns at worst neutral, at best expected to come in on their side.  Secession looks a real possibility (at least till the Blackwater) and with the kingdom in chaos forging a new one looked feasible.  Briefly at any rate.

Don't underestimate the family connection either.  Blood or family is of paramount importance and Robb Stark is Hoster Tully's grandson.  If he played it smart he might well have adopted a personal sigil that quartered the Stark direwolf and the Tully fish to remind them that he embodies their two Houses and lands.

[Ser Petyr Parker]

18 hours ago, Romaine3 said:

The Lannister armies are systematically annihilating the Riverlands.

This. The Lannisters, and then essentially the Iron Throne, betrayed the Riverlands by attacking them in order to cause trouble for the Starks. It's understandable that they'd ask "What the hell are we doing pledged to the Iron Throne if our own king and his council are attacking us to protect themselves?" Both Robb and later Stannis were able to offer an alternative where the throne remembered its responsibilities as well as its rights.

[Free Northman Reborn]

There is also the fact that King Robb is the son of Lord Hoster's oldest child, so it's not like they are swearing to a complete foreigner.

[devilish]

The Riverlands army was annihilated by Tywin. That made them a dead weight to anyone from Robb to the Baratheon brothers right to the Lannisters. Robb was bound by blood to protect the Tullys but that could have been achieved by taking Edmure North and then negotiate the exchange between Sansa/Arya and the kingslayer. Hence the Riverlanders needed something to pin him down South...

[Lion of the West]

1 hour ago, Ser Petyr Parker said:

This. The Lannisters, and then essentially the Iron Throne, betrayed the Riverlands by attacking them in order to cause trouble for the Starks. It's understandable that they'd ask "What the hell are we doing pledged to the Iron Throne if our own king and his council are attacking us to protect themselves?" Both Robb and later Stannis were able to offer an alternative where the throne remembered its responsibilities as well as its rights.

Very much so, I would also think. The rift between the Lannisters and Tullys-Starks had become between Crown and Tullys-Starks and there was thus little incentive for them to keep faith with King Joffrey. What one can think to be boggling is why none of the other Baratheons didn't become a choice but I would think that like others have noted, the men were kind of swept up in the victory and general hostility to the Lannisters.

[UnFit Finlay]

The Starks have ruled the North for centuries and royalty is in their blood. It was completely logical for the Northmen to say, "Well, we swore allegiance the Targaryens and they are gone, and the Baratheons broke faith with us, so lets go back to how things were".

Plus Robb was a King in every measurable way. I can totally understand why the Northmen decided to get behind the brave Young Wolf, who took up arms to avenge the murder of his father, their liege lord, who had always treated them well.

The Tullys though? They were never royalty and if any Tully was going to convince the Riverlords to crown them, it wasn't going to be Hoster, a sickly, dying old man, or Edmure, who had totally failed to protect them and had to be bailed out by his nephew. I think the very suggestion would be met with calls of "Well why shouldn't *I* be King?"

So, yeah, ultimately, I think the reason the Riverlands chose to swear allegiance to Robb is because he was the best option they had.