Jump to content

Robert was the best king Westeros ever had


Nihlus

Recommended Posts

A lot of people seem to take the POVs at face value when they say Robert was a terrible king for his spendthrift habits and massively increasing the crown's debts. This is an unfair assessment in my view. I don't think Robert was bad for the kingdom's economy. On the contrary, Robert Baratheon was the best king period when it came to the economy, finances, and infrastructure of his kingdom. It all has to do with his predecessors being comically terrible:

Quote
"What treasury is that?" Littlefinger replied with a twist of his mouth. "Spare me the foolishness, Maester. You know as well as I that the treasury has been empty for years. I shall have to borrow the money. No doubt the Lannisters will be accommodating. We owe Lord Tywin some three million dragons at present, what matter another hundred thousand?"
 
Ned was stunned. "Are you claiming that the Crown is three million gold pieces in debt?"
 
"The Crown is more than six million gold pieces in debt, Lord Stark. The Lannisters are the biggest part of it, but we have also borrowed from Lord Tyrell, the Iron Bank of Braavos, and several Tyroshi trading cartels. Of late I've had to turn to the Faith. The High Septon haggles worse than a Dornish fishmonger."
 
Ned was aghast. "Aerys Targaryen left a treasury flowing with gold. How could you let this happen?"

It seems most fans just accept Ned is right here; after all, he's the hero, how can he be wrong? Simple. Ned couldn't pass Economics 101.

1. Aerys's vaults being full to bursting with gold at the end of a massive civil war is actually a damning indictment of Targaryen rule, not a positive sign. From what we see, despite having undisputed rule of the continent via magic WMDs for hundreds of years, the net contribution of the Targaryens to their kingdom's infrastructure and economic development was effectively zero. The one achievement their dynasty can wave around is slightly extending a poorly maintained dirt road built by the Storm Kings, and renaming it "the Kingsroad." That's it. Aerys's vaults being full at the end of RR instead of being spent immediately to arm and train new levies or hire more mercenaries (we know Stannis expects to get 20,000 from Essos in ADWD in a reasonable time frame, clearly there's a lot available) is essentially proof that the Targaryens were exactly what they appeared to be: gold hoarders who took their dragon larping just a bit too far.

2. Ned (and many fans) falls into the common trap of thinking more debt = bad. This couldn't be further from the truth. At the most basic level, you need to spend money to make money, and the best way of spending money you don't have on hand at the moment is to borrow it. That Robert chose to do this with the Iron Bank, the largest bank in the world, is a good move; if the crown can consistently make its payments (and it can, see below) then Robert not only increases his kingdom's income, but increases its credit as well. Loaning money to the Westerosi crown would be seen as a safe route by bankers in the continent and beyond, encouraging investment and financial activity. Of course this is all assuming Robert actually used that money on something worthwhile instead of the equivalent of just setting fire it (e.g. waging a pointless war). So did he? Yes, in fact, he did:

Quote

A man like Petyr Baelish, who had a gift for rubbing two golden dragons together to breed a third, was invaluable to his Hand. Littlefinger’s rise had been arrow-swift. Within three years of his coming to court, he was master of coin and a member of the small council, and today the crown’s revenues were ten times what they had been under his beleaguered predecessor . . . though the crown’s debts had grown vast as well. A master juggler was Petyr Baelish.

Oh, he was clever. He did not simply collect the gold and lock it in a treasure vault, no. He paid the king’s debts in promises, and put the king’s gold to work. He bought wagons, shops, ships, houses. He bought grain when it was plentiful and sold bread when it was scarce. He bought wool from the north and linen from the south and lace from Lys, stored it, moved it, dyed it, sold it.

Basically: Robert decides his kingdom needs a stimulus after decades to centuries of stasis under the Targaryens. He borrows money so that he can have starting capital and appoints a competent economist (Littlefinger had a proven history and Jon Arryn's recommendation) to start investing it in the kingdom's infrastructure and businesses.This goes magnificently and ends up increasing the income of the crown tenfold, partly by creating businesses that belong to the crown and catalyzing the creation of others with financial ties to the crown. The whole point of a government taking out a loan is that it's meant to be repaid in the long term. If we assume the crown had a yearly income of a million gold dragons (it was very likely much higher than this), that means Robert's government brought in 9.5 million extra gold dragons a year by now with the capital it had. In 10 years that's 95 million gold dragons, many times the current debt of the crown.

That Robert is still spending enough money despite this increase in income that his kingdom maintains a modest debt is a great sign of how well the economy is doing. He is throwing an obscene amount of money into the economy, more so than any of his predecessors by far. That the Iron Bank also has no problem loaning out so much money is proof of how great the crown's credit is. Finally, Robert has a plethora of methods to pay his debts on a dime in an emergency, and more importantly that money isn't just disappearing into the aether...

3. All that money Robert "wasted"? Loaned or funneled directly into the economy. We know that Robert loaned out a lot of the crown's cash- the Antler Men for example owed a lot of money to the crown. This is how economy works. All kingdoms in the medieval period were like that, constantly loaning and borrowing money to stay afloat. It's a sign of good economic policy and encourages spending and entrepreneurship from the people.

Quote

He went back to work after she left, trying to track some golden dragons through the labyrinth of Littlefinger's ledgers. Petyr Baelish had not believed in letting gold sit about and grow dusty, that was for certain, but the more Tyrion tried to make sense of his accounts the more his head hurt. It was all very well to talk of breeding dragons instead of locking them up in the treasury, but some of these ventures smelled worse than week-old fish. I wouldn't have been so quick to let Joffrey fling the Antler Men over the walls if I'd known how many of the bloody bastards had taken loans from the crown

Quote

The golden dragons bred and multiplied, and Littlefinger lent them out and brought them home with hatchlings.

His tourneys and other public events are also big boosters to the local economies of the regions they're held in. He's creating thousands of new jobs while also providing a public spectacle for the people. The workers who build everything, the bakers and cooks who make the food, the innkeepers who have guests from out of town, the stableboys who have more work from knights coming to the tournament, etc, all are getting work that otherwise wouldn't exist. His tournaments and such have the additional tangible benefit of increasing the morale of his people. There's a reason that the large empires of history were willing to bear these costs to similar degrees as Robert- the Roman games at just the two capitals during Constantine's time costed ~150,000 solidi, which would have been about 1.5% of the Roman Empire's GDP.

4. We know that at the end of Robert's Rebellion the Royal Fleet was destroyed by a freak storm, and that King's Landing was sacked very brutally by Tywin Lannister on top of being the site of a bloody battle in its streets:

Quote

She had been born on Dragonstone nine moons after their flight, while a raging summer storm threatened to rip the island fastness apart. They said that storm was terrible. The Targaryen fleet was smashed while it lay at anchor, and huge stone blocks were ripped from the parapets and sent hurtling into the wild waters of the narrow sea. Her mother had died birthing her, and for that her brother Viserys had never forgiven her. She did not remember Dragonstone either. They had run again, just before the Usurper's brother set sail with his new-built fleet.

Quote

"Your Grace," said Jorah Mormont, "I saw King's Landing after the Sack. Babes were butchered that day as well, and old men, and children at play. More women were raped than you can count. There is a savage beast in every man, and when you hand that man a sword or spear and send him forth to war, the beast stirs. The scent of blood is all it takes to wake him

These twin blows should have significantly set back the Crownlands. Instead? Robert throws so much money into the Crownlands' economy that the Royal Fleet is rebuilt to full strength in no time and the capital is back to being as prosperous as ever barely more than a decade after Tywin sacked it. Even with those no doubt significant expenditures, Robert's kingdom still manages to prosper in the years after, massively increasing its incomes. Meanwhile, his brother and appointed Master of Ships and Lord of Dragonstone uses the newly built fleet and his levies to not only crush the Grejoy Rebellion at minimal cost (making the seas safe for trade), but conduct anti-piracy campaigns when necessary and slowly turn the most hardcore Targ loyalists into the most hardcore Baratheon loyalists, further solidifying Robert's excellent rule of the Crownlands. When Stannis starts seizing ships at Dragonstone he easily gets a hundred merchant vessels before people stop sailing there because war is breaking out, indicating that maritime trade under Robert was booming.

5. The idea that Robert's debt was in any way unsustainable is pure nonsense. Even in the middle of a brutal civil war, it was specifically stated that interest payments were being made on time until Cersei stopped them to build a new fleet after the original Royal Fleet got destroyed by Tyrion and Stannis at Blackwater:

Quote

"Accordingly, I have decided to defer our repayment of the sums owed the Holy Faith and the Iron Bank of Braavos until war's end." The new High Septon would doubtless wring his holy hands, and the Braavosi would squeak and squawk at her, but what of it? "The monies saved will be used for the building of our new fleet."

Which shouldn't come as a surprise; we know the debt is only ~6 million gold dragons, less than 2 million of which are owed to the Iron Bank. If things out of the blue reached an improbable worst case scenario, Robert had plenty of assets to liquidize to lower expenses and get payments back on track. After all, the debt to the Lannisters was larger than the one to the Iron Bank, and Tywin still considered the crown able to repay him (since he made it clear for Joffrey's wedding that he isn't giving out money for free) while cut off from half its incomes and needing to expend massive amounts of money to keep the peace during the aforementioned continent-wide civil war.

tl;dr: Robert's rule was a massive economy engine, continent wide, unprecedented by anything the Targaryens ever did. His rule was the most prosperous period Westeros ever had, and more kings should take notes from him and his appointees on economics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are huge differences between early feudal economies and modern capitalist economies.

Westeros has an early feudal manorial economy. The foundations of mercantilism (or the prehistory of capitalism, if you prefer Marxism) aren't visible at all. No exploration and colonization, no technology boom, no agrarian contracts… Even post-feudal manorialism isn't in sight. Maybe the Long Night 2.0 could produce the equivalent of the crisis of the 14th century, and the resolution of that Long Night could simultaneously provide new lands to conquer—but that would still put them two centuries out from the transition.

Until then, their wealth is almost entirely based on arable land, natural resource extraction, and gold reserves. Production capacity is a tiny, tiny percentage of their wealth, rather than the main component of it, so money spent attempting to increase production capacity is not an investment, it's just money thrown away. Meanwhile, the money supply is fixed (there's nowhere to create more gold from, except maybe a tiny amount by providing access to previously-remote mines). And increased money wouldn't mean increased power anyway, because power is based on how many men your vassals can raise, which is based on how much arable land they have, so there's no incentive to raise money even if it were possible.

This also means loans are completely different. You aren't issuing bonds that people (and banks) buy for the interest payments, you're borrowing gold from powerful people (like Tywin Lannister) who lend it to you in exchange for influence and favors. And the only way you can pay them off is by levying a tax on your vassals, which basically uses up your political capital as a king—try that repeatedly, and you'll spend the rest of your reign putting down revolts.

So, it's not a question of borrowing as much as you can as long as you can keep increasing GDP enough to afford the debt service. None of those terms even have any meaning in a feudal economy. Borrowing money means giving away your power for nothing.

Robert's rule was not a massive economy engine, because the only thing that can be an economy engine in a feudal system is conquest or colonization of new lands, and Robert didn't do any of that.

Trying to run a feudal economy as if it were a capitalist economy would be just as misguided as doing the reverse. Everyone in-story is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, falcotron said:

Until then, their wealth is almost entirely based on arable land, natural resource extraction, and gold reserves. Production capacity is a tiny, tiny percentage of their wealth, rather than the main component of it, so money spent attempting to increase production capacity is not an investment, it's just money thrown away.

Incorrect. While small, their production capacity still exists and is worth expanding. And Robert clearly was not throwing money away given that the crown's incomes increased tenfold even while Robert was throwing boatloads of money into the economy of the Crownlands.

Quote

Meanwhile, the money supply is fixed (there's nowhere to create more gold from, except maybe a tiny amount by providing access to previously-remote mines).

Wrong. The money supply isn't fixed due to overseas trade and trade with the Lannisters (whose own extraction of gold really should have devalued it by now a la 17th century Spain's silver mining, but whatever).
 

Quote

This also means loans are completely different. You aren't issuing bonds that people (and banks) buy for the interest payments, you're borrowing gold from powerful people (like Tywin Lannister) who lend it to you in exchange for influence and favors. And the only way you can pay them off is by levying a tax on your vassals, which basically uses up your political capital as a king—try that repeatedly, and you'll spend the rest of your reign putting down revolts.

Incorrect. Robert's government pays for their loans primarily through businesses it owns (businesses established with said loans) and presumably interest payments from the money it loans out (to Westeros's small merchant class who use it to establish their own businesses, massively benefiting the local economy) not via levying higher taxes. Higher taxes were never noted as a feature of Robert's reign. You are further incorrect when you say medieval economies didn't issue loans bought for interest payments; they very much did and there were many banking cartels that survived off of doing so. If Tywin's not charging interest, that just makes him dumb, though I assume he is.

Quote

So, it's not a question of borrowing as much as you can as long as you can keep increasing GDP enough to afford the debt service. None of those terms even have any meaning in a feudal economy. Borrowing money means giving away your power for nothing.

Wrong. Borrowing money got Robert loads of returns- the crown's income increased tenfold and all that money, rather than being hoarded, was pumped right into the kingdom's economy, to the point where public entertainment was held at much greater frequency and the Crownlands (particularly King's Landing) are as well-off as ever a mere decade after being in the thick of a brutal civil war that destroyed a lot of the capital. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think that the Targaryens weren't doing what Robert was doing? They just also had a vault full of gold to fall back on, in case their debts didn't work in their favour. I don't think there's anything to indicate that the Targaryens refused to do anything with their gold, and merely zealously hoarded it like morons. You make a point that tourneys bring in more money than they cost (which is very true), but we know that there was a tourney at Harrenhal, during Aerys's reign (and I see no reason to believe that this was some rare occurrence).

The title is incredibly misleading, however. Robert was a rubbish king, and none of the good parts of his reign can be attributed to him. He was the most absent king of Westerosi history, and perhaps leaving the ruling of his kingdom to those better suited puts him at a better level than some. Nothing about the economy was due to Robert, anyway. He hated "counting coppers", as he called it. That he lucked out and had someone half competent as his Master of Coin has nothing to do with Robert. Jon Arryn appointed Baelish anyway, so even less to do with Robert.

Easily among the worst kings Westeros ever had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

What makes you think that the Targaryens weren't doing what Robert was doing? They just also had a vault full of gold to fall back on, in case their debts didn't work in their favour. I don't think there's anything to indicate that the Targaryens refused to do anything with their gold, and merely zealously hoarded it like morons. You make a point that tourneys bring in more money than they cost (which is very true), but we know that there was a tourney at Harrenhal, during Aerys's reign (and I see no reason to believe that this was some rare occurrence).

I stated why: the Targaryens had more or less undisputed rule over the continent for 300 years. Despite this, their dynasty left zero impact on the continent's economy or infrastructure, or any of its major institutions. Literally nothing outside of KL itself, unless you count renaming a dirt road built by the Storm Kings. They should have been a lesser Rome. Instead they were basically the equivalent of the Golden Horde, demanding tribute and burning some stuff every now and then, but otherwise doing nothing.

We have no reason to assume the Tourney at Harrenhal wasn't rare either; the fact that the Targaryen dynasty's vaults were full of gold even after the end of a massive civil war, however, very much suggests that little money was being put into the kingdom in general. 

Quote

The title is incredibly misleading, however. Robert was a rubbish king, and none of the good parts of his reign can be attributed to him. He was the most absent king of Westerosi history, and perhaps leaving the ruling of his kingdom to those better suited puts him at a better level than some. Nothing about the economy was due to Robert, anyway. He hated "counting coppers", as he called it. That he lucked out and had someone half competent as his Master of Coin has nothing to do with Robert. Jon Arryn appointed Baelish anyway, so even less to do with Robert.

The huge amount of spending on tourneys and such is directly attributed to Robert. He's also indicated to be directly responsible for the huge amount of money thrown into the Crownlands' economy. Yes, he personally did not generate massive new incomes for the kingdom- because that's not his job. His job is to appoint people who can do that for him, and sign off on whatever they need while vetoing whatever is obviously wrong. And in this, he did his job fine; he trusted Jon Arryn's recommendation of Baelish based on his proven skills despite his low birth and let him do his thing without getting in the way or mindlessly hoarding gold like a Targaryen. Appointing competent economists and keeping them on if they get solid results (which Baelish did) is what a head of state is supposed to do, they're not supposed to run the finances personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your ideas about the financial side of things are very interesting, but I'm still not sure about Robert being the best King. I would probably put him top five in terms of public happiness, as well as giving him extra points for his highly skilled, yet overtly disloyal small council.

His term sowed so much discontent that the Iron Throne was plunged into a state of instability and war upon his death. Viserys I left the realm in a similiar state of turmoil upon his passing, though apparently more through indecisiveness and people pleasing than sheer neglect, and this usually acts as a major black mark against his Kingly reign, as it should Bob's.

The fact that Robert's wife managed to keep up an affair with her brother, number two in Bob's Kingsguard and known as "Kingslayer", for years on end should be proof of his incompetence. I understand the Spider's spy network was working against the Throne, but if Robert was truley reliant on one source of whispers then shame on him.

While none of Cersei's children share the Storm blood, Robert was still present for most of their lives, and wasn't exactly a doting father. That Robert I Baratheon allowed his heir, DNA or no, to develop into not only a sadistic prick, but also an unimpressive Prince with a cowards spirit should also go against he of the war hammer. Talk about not preparing for the future.

That being said, Robert in his early reign was a tremendous figurehead for the small folk, and in many ways was "the people's champ". One of the greatest warriors in the country, a charismatic freedom fighter who helped smash the tyranny of the Mad King, and a handsome son of a gun to boot. Blood of The Dragon, as well as the Storm Kings of old, Robert's reign had the potential for utter greatness, but alas, things went another way.

Ol' Blue Eyes become notorious for his inability to rule himself, and all his natural gifts seemed to go down the swanny. Knowing how fickle the small folk of King's Landing can be, what kind of confidence does it inspire from one's subjects when one goes from "Mega muscled warrior" to "Obese drunken adulterer"?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

Despite this, their dynasty left zero impact on the continent's economy or infrastructure, or any of its major institutions. Literally nothing outside of KL itself, unless you count renaming a dirt road built by the Storm Kings.

Was Robert's reign so different? He had 14 years, he didn't change much outside of King's Landing. Sure, he rebuilt the city and the fleet, but he hardly changed the King's Road, now did he?

Regardless, if the crown was bringing in more than they were putting out, they'd have something in the treasury. That means one of two things; either every copper they brought in was immediately sent back out, or they don't have enough to cover their expenses. In the first case, any sudden expense has to be made at the cost of not paying for something else. The second case is far worse. However, in the first case, net profit and net loss is at zero. In that case, the treasury should be full. Obviously, this (the profit and the loss being even) wasn't the case from the very beginning (some of the money was obviously put towards the fleet and the city, so net loss), but the treasury was quite full, and now all of that is gone, and no money is coming in. That means the crown is down millions from Aerys's reign. It may be good for the economy, but it's not good for the crown.

Some of the money should have been stored away, in case it was needed. Say, for instance, if the fleet needs to be rebuilt, but the Iron Bank still wants it's payments. If there was money in the treasury, Cersei would've used that first. Or for any other crisis. 

1 hour ago, Nihlus said:

Appointing competent economists and keeping them on if they get solid results (which Baelish did) is what a head of state is supposed to do, they're not supposed to run the finances personally.

I agree, Robert shouldn't have been in charge of finances, that's obvious. But he chose to not be in charge of anything. He didn't appoint a competent economist, nor anything else. He appointed someone to appoint competent people. The Hand was not supposed to do everything for the king; the Hand is for smaller duties that need to be dealt with, but that the King doesn't have time for; Jon Arryn dealt with everything. Robert was a rubbish king, but he had a decent Hand, that's all. This is all a bit of a pedantic point about your title, however, not really anything about the content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nihlus said:

Incorrect. While small, their production capacity still exists and is worth expanding. And Robert clearly was not throwing money away given that the crown's incomes increased tenfold even while Robert was throwing boatloads of money into the economy of the Crownlands.

Littlefinger is the one who increased the crown's incomes under Robert. And go back and read the chapters where Tyrion learns exactly how he did that:

  • Creative accounting. Much of that money wasn't even real.
  • Creating artificial shortages—buy up as much wheat as possible, then, when there are food shortages, sell bread. Which is what directly led to the food riots in KL.
  • Selling government positions. Mostly to people who he gave government loans to buy those positions, which tied them to him as his agents. Most of those people were the same "antler men" who plotted to overthrow Joffrey and install Stannis.

And so on.

Calling this wealth creation is like calling Bernie Madoff a financier.

(Also, I'm pretty sure Petyr didn't increase the crown's income tenfold. You're probably thinking of his first position as a local customs officer, where he increased customs income for Gulltown tenfold. But I could be wrong about that part.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Littlefinger is the one who increased the crown's incomes under Robert. And go back and read the chapters where Tyrion learns exactly how he did that:

  • Creative accounting. Much of that money wasn't even real.

Were it not real, it would be very easy to notice. That other characters claim Littlefinger drastically increased incomes puts to bed the claim that the money in question never existed.

Quote
  • Creating artificial shortages—buy up as much wheat as possible, then, when there are food shortages, sell bread. Which is what directly led to the food riots in KL.

This is not creating an artificial shortage, this is simply applying very basic economic principles. And no, that didn't lead to the food riots in KL; Renly closing the Rose Road did. The Crownlands are like ancient Attica in that they're not self-sufficient in food.

Quote
  • Selling government positions. Mostly to people who he gave government loans to buy those positions, which tied them to him as his agents. Most of those people were the same "antler men" who plotted to overthrow Joffrey and install Stannis.

Selling minor political positions is not a relevant revenue stream on the scale we're discussing.

Quote

And so on.Calling this wealth creation is like calling Bernie Madoff a financier.

Bernie Madoff's money was not then used for public works, like LF's.

Quote

(Also, I'm pretty sure Petyr didn't increase the crown's income tenfold. You're probably thinking of his first position as a local customs officer, where he increased customs income for Gulltown tenfold. But I could be wrong about that part.)

Nope.

"Within three years of his coming to court, he was master of coin and a member of the small council, and today the crown’s revenues were ten times what they had been under his beleaguered predecessor."

26 minutes ago, cyberdirectorfreedom said:

Was Robert's reign so different? He had 14 years, he didn't change much outside of King's Landing. Sure, he rebuilt the city and the fleet, but he hardly changed the King's Road, now did he?

Exactly, he had 14 years. In those 14 years we see a lot of measurable progress; nothing major yet, but the kingdom certainly recovered from that continent-wide civil war pretty quickly, and this on top of him explicitly sinking over ten times as much cash into the local economy as his predecessor (because his revenues are ten times higher, yet Robert's government retains a healthy debt while Aerys had vaults full of gold doing nothing). Fifteen generations of Roberts would have a different result going by the base established and what he did with his limited means so far. Robert also must have spent a lot of cash on the Greyjoy Rebellion, where the Crownlands forces played a large role (wars are extremely expensive); not much of a problem for the first half of the Targaryen dynasty given their magical WMDs.

But apparently fifteen generations of Targaryens resulted in no major change to the kingdom's infrastructure or economy whatsoever.

Quote

Regardless, if the crown was bringing in more than they were putting out, they'd have something in the treasury. That means one of two things; either every copper they brought in was immediately sent back out, or they don't have enough to cover their expenses. In the first case, any sudden expense has to be made at the cost of not paying for something else. The second case is far worse. However, in the first case, net profit and net loss is at zero. In that case, the treasury should be full. Obviously, this (the profit and the loss being even) wasn't the case from the very beginning (some of the money was obviously put towards the fleet and the city, so net loss), but the treasury was quite full, and now all of that is gone, and no money is coming in. That means the crown is down millions from Aerys's reign. It may be good for the economy, but it's not good for the crown.

But partly as a result of the economy being stronger, the crown's revenues are many times higher as well. In less than a year they could easily repay the debt just by cutting some expenses if they really needed to (which would mean temporarily cutting back on the lavish funds thrown into the economy, hardly the end of the world considering that was business as usual under the Targs).  If there was an emergency and the crown needed funds to pay for an expense immediately, Robert had plenty of assets to liquidize to lower expenses and get payments back on track. This was not an option for Cersei because: A. she's dumb,  B. there was another continent-wide civil war, and C. the crown should at least have some financial contribution to the upkeep of the armies currently occupying parts of Westeros; armies are basically the most expensive thing in a medieval kingdom.

Quote

I agree, Robert shouldn't have been in charge of finances, that's obvious. But he chose to not be in charge of anything. He didn't appoint a competent economist, nor anything else. He appointed someone to appoint competent people. The Hand was not supposed to do everything for the king; the Hand is for smaller duties that need to be dealt with, but that the King doesn't have time for; Jon Arryn dealt with everything. Robert was a rubbish king, but he had a decent Hand, that's all. This is all a bit of a pedantic point about your title, however, not really anything about the content.

That's fair, but I think Robert deserves credit for appointing Jon and letting him run things. Additionally, even if Robert didn't personally track down and appoint Baelish, he still presumably had to approve Arryn's pick, and then authorize use of the crown's funds for his tasks. 

33 minutes ago, Leo of House Cartel said:

His term sowed so much discontent that the Iron Throne was plunged into a state of instability and war upon his death. Viserys I left the realm in a similiar state of turmoil upon his passing, though apparently more through indecisiveness and people pleasing than sheer neglect, and this usually acts as a major black mark against his Kingly reign, as it should Bob's.

The fact that Robert's wife managed to keep up an affair with her brother, number two in Bob's Kingsguard and known as "Kingslayer", for years on end should be proof of his incompetence. I understand the Spider's spy network was working against the Throne, but if Robert was truley reliant on one source of whispers then shame on him.

While none of Cersei's children share the Storm blood, Robert was still present for most of their lives, and wasn't exactly a doting father. That Robert I Baratheon allowed his heir, DNA or no, to develop into not only a sadistic prick, but also an unimpressive Prince with a cowards spirit should also go against he of the war hammer. Talk about not preparing for the future.

That being said, Robert in his early reign was a tremendous figurehead for the small folk, and in many ways was "the people's champ". One of the greatest warriors in the country, a charismatic freedom fighter who helped smash the tyranny of the Mad King, and a handsome son of a gun to boot. Blood of The Dragon, as well as the Storm Kings of old, Robert's reign had the potential for utter greatness, but alas, things went another way.

Ol' Blue Eyes become notorious for his inability to rule himself, and all his natural gifts seemed to go down the swanny. Knowing how fickle the small folk of King's Landing can be, what kind of confidence does it inspire from one's subjects when one goes from "Mega muscled warrior" to "Obese drunken adulterer"?

Eh, the civil war really wouldn't have happened in 99 out of 100 scenarios; the Lannisters got extremely lucky. Also, to be fair to Robert, Joffrey was only 12 (hardly a lost cause at that point) and his ability to actually discipline the boy was severely limited by his Queen, who he couldn't simply ignore because her family was powerful. His two other heirs also turned out fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

Were it not real, it would be very easy to notice. That other characters claim Littlefinger drastically increased incomes puts to bed the claim that the money in question never existed.

No, it wouldn't be easy to notice. Tyrion couldn't figure it out until he studied the books until he had a headache.

8 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

This is not creating an artificial shortage, this is simply applying very basic economic principles.

Yes, it really is creating an artificial shortage. When you have huge amounts of money available and use it to buy up so much grain that you have to find offshore warehouses to store it in, that's why there isn't enough bread later.

And sure, cornering the market to make a profit is a pretty basic economic principle, but it's not a sound principle for a government. A government's job is not to make money by profiteering off its own people.

8 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

Bernie Madoff's money was not then used for public works, like LF's.

What public works? You complained about the crappy state of the Kingsroad, but our description of that crappy state comes at the end of Robert's reign. Ephemeral spending on bread and circuses is not public works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

That other characters claim Littlefinger drastically increased incomes puts to bed the claim that the money in question never existed.

Oh?

"Why? I have seen Littlefinger's accounts. Crown incomes are ten times higher than they were under Aerys."

That's the only time I can recall that anyone claims the incomes are actually higher, and that information was gained from Littlefinger's accounts. Basically meaningless, really.

10 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

But apparently fifteen generations of Targaryens resulted in no major change to the kingdom's infrastructure or economy whatsoever.

Pretty sure the Targaryens completely altered the economic structure of all Westeros to be around a city that didn't exist before. This was early on in their reign. Everything had been stagnant for years, under Robert's Westeros. He had no plans to change anything, and clearly wasn't interested in making any; what future generations would do is impossible to tell, but Robert clearly didn't care about that either, considering how much effort he put into raising his heir.

14 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

But partly as a result of the economy being stronger, the crown's revenues are many times higher as well. In less than a year they could easily repay the debt just by cutting some expenses if they really needed to (which would mean temporarily cutting back on the lavish funds thrown into the economy, hardly the end of the world considering that was business as usual under the Targs).

I'm not so sure that anything lavish was happening, when everything was business as usual. The Hand's Tourney was only possible by borrowing (additional) money from the Lannisters:

"What treasury is that?" Littlefinger replied with a twist of his mouth. "Spare me the foolishness, Maester. You know as well as I that the treasury has been empty for years. I shall have to borrow the money. No doubt the Lannisters will be accommodating. We owe Lord Tywin some three million dragons at present, what matter another hundred thousand?"

Is that a special case? Certainly, but we know there can't be any "tourney fund", for example, kept in reserve, as that'd be kept in the treasury, which we all know is empty. As far as I can tell, all (well, most) expenses outgoing are needed in order to continue bringing money in.

20 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

If there was an emergency and the crown needed funds to pay for an expense immediately, Robert had plenty of assets to liquidize to lower expenses and get payments back on track. This was not an option for Cersei because: A. she's dumb,  B. there was another continent-wide civil war, and C. the crown should at least have some financial contribution to the upkeep of the armies currently occupying parts of Westeros; armies are basically the most expensive thing in a medieval kingdom.

I dread to learn what you would consider an emergency, if a continent-wide civil war doesn't rate. Regardless of your opinion on Cersei's intelligence, I doubt you'd think she's continuing with needless lavish expenses in the middle of her war. If she could make do removing meaningless expenses, do you really think she'd stop her payments to the Iron Bank?

It wasn't an option for Cersei because it wasn't an option. Yet it wouldn't have been a problem if the treasury wasn't empty. The crown is teetering on the edge of financial ruin, so much so that a single crisis might well be the final push. Mind, this is entirely by Littlefinger's design, but he certainly didn't have the crown's best interests at heart, and the crown is certainly not in a good position.

28 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

That's fair, but I think Robert deserves credit for appointing Jon and letting him run things. Additionally, even if Robert didn't personally track down and appoint Baelish, he still presumably had to approve Arryn's pick, and then authorize use of the crown's funds for his tasks.

I wouldn't say that. It's good that he didn't belligerently decide to push himself into doing things he was unsuited for, but I hardly think he should be lauded for it. He literally did nothing. He did nothing overtly bad, sure, but nothing at all good. The vast majority of people don't murder people every day. Hardly worthy of celebration.

I think that Jon Arryn could have chosen a blind, financially illiterate leper to be the Master of Coin, and Robert would've accepted it without caring. Jon Arryn wouldn't, which I'm sure is partly the reason for Robert's lack of interest, but the fact remains that he doesn't care.

33 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

his ability to actually discipline the boy was severely limited by his Queen, who he couldn't simply ignore because her family was powerful.

The only time I know that Robert ever "disciplined" Joffrey was when he killed that cat; Robert punched him in the face, I think. Robert's quite strong, you may recall. He clearly isn't able to discipline a child properly, regardless of what Cersei wants, and he's also a terrible role model. Joffrey was much the way he was because he saw Robert, the king, doing whatever he chose. As Joffrey would be king too, he could do whatever he chose.

36 minutes ago, Nihlus said:

His two other heirs also turned out fine.

His other children haven't "turned out" at all, still being quite young. Regardless, they aren't his heirs, and ideally weren't ever going to be. He should've done much better with Joffrey, if he wanted his line to have any chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nihlus said:

 

Eh, the civil war really wouldn't have happened in 99 out of 100 scenarios; the Lannisters got extremely lucky. Also, to be fair to Robert, Joffrey was only 12 (hardly a lost cause at that point) and his ability to actually discipline the boy was severely limited by his Queen, who he couldn't simply ignore because her family was powerful. His two other heirs also turned out fine.

Fair points, but the 1/100 scenario did indeed happen, thousands died in the eventual war that followed the King's demise. I dare say this will be a big talking point for future generations when discussing Robert's memory, as it was Viserys I.

Robert's inability to properly raise and discipline the future King of Westeros can perhaps be chalked up to his wifes powerful family, but it is a weak excuse for the man who opposed the Mad King. Does such neglect, and even perhaps cowardice, really make for an all time great monarch? Don't get me wrong, if all King's were judged by the actions of their heirs then the likes of Aegon I might not be looked upon to favourably, but ensuring the next in line is "worthy", whoever raises them, should surley be one of the King's most important tasks, and Robert didn't seem to give a damn.

12 year old Joff almost certainly was a "lost cause" - to many examples of sadistic violence and twisted petulance. As you said, the boy was mainly being raised by his mother, who I can't see changing her methods of parenthood any time soon. Also, who would have stopped King Joffrey's behaviour? Especially as he got older and began to establish his own hangers on. The Tyrells might be able to curb his nature but even then, I can't imagine relations between Joff and Olenna ending up anything but hostile. There's always the chance the Knight of Flowers would have killed him had he abused his Queen as he did Sansa.

Under Robert's rule, long established orders such as the KG, Night's Watch and Gold Cloaks seemed to fall into disrepute. The realm was left in debt to The Iron Bank, as well as the Lannisters and whoever else.

He was horned in the eyes of many small folk by the twincest allegations, as well as being looked at as a bit of a drunken oath by wise people like Tyrion, Olenna, Tywin and even Ned. His own small council seemed to be playing him from the start, with the likes of Varys and Littlefinger weaving all sorts of shady webs. He beat and cheated on Cersei, most of which was public knowledge, aswell as fathered a bastard on a distinguished Lord's daughter. 

Even Robert's boozy behaviour during the Hand's Tourney was not befitting a King; absolutley out his fucking box roaring about "I've still got it! Let me in the melee!" - even if no one would have touched him, this is fools behaviour, any contract killer could have been present and in Robert's physical condition he could have been either killed or humiliated in front of the full court.

Robert's overindulgence in various treats and subsequent physical decline should serve as a good parallel to his time on The Iron Throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert loved his Wine and he loved his whores and he loved his tourneys all in which cost MONEY so yes Robert blew a lot of the crowns money on BS ........ BUT I believe Robert was only a partial drain of the crowns money probably only as small as 25% I believe LF was involved in spending the rest Or not spending it at all rather relocating it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, Robert revives the notion of 'The King's Justice'. He sits on the Iron throne listening to petitions from high and small folk, until his bum is numb. Then he hands the job to Ned, who he knows will do his best to be fair and honourable, and who he knows has no vested interests in the affairs of the southerners. 

Even in the 'trial' of Arya and Joffrey, he made a point of having a hearing and considering the schooling the children in this notion of the King's Justice

Quote

“Liar!” Arya yelled.
“Shut up!” the prince yelled back.
“Enough!” the king roared, rising from his seat, his voice thick with irritation. Silence fell. He glowered at Arya through his thick beard. “Now, child, you will tell me what happened. Tell it all, and tell it true. It is a great crime to lie to a king.” Then he looked over at his son. “When she is done, you will have your turn. Until then, hold your tongue.”

(AGoT, Ch.16 Eddard III)

Aerys cowered out of sight of his people. He did not listen to petitions, he cut out tongues, he attempted to destroy Duskendale for it's defiance, he had people drink wildfire, and finally he had the most ancient families of the highborn summoned to King's Landing, the reigning lord and his heir, to be murdered in a sadistic mockery of the King's justice. While there were Targaryen kings that were not as bad as he was, there were plenty that were just as bad, or worse. And justice in Westeros is whatever the reigning monarch says it is. 

Robert attempted to be genuinely just. Robert could be guided by counsel. He sought balance (which is why he sought out Ned, rather than Tywin) but he did not rely on any one counsellor (and was certainly not so foolish as to ignore Tywin, however little Eddard liked the Lannisters, nor would he remove Jaime from his Kingsguard, whatever Eddard felt about Jaime sitting on the throne to await the man who came to take it from him).

Militarily, too, Robert was canny. As a solider and a general, he proved himself in the Rebellion,  of course, but peace and plenty never rid him of his ability to identify threats and protect the realm against them. Eddard (wrongly) writes the Targaryens in Essos off as 'the shadow of a shadow' while Robert keeps an eye on them and looks for the opportunity to assassinate them both before they aquire an army of Dothraki and come heading his way.  After he puts down Balon's pretensions to rule as King of the Iron Isles, he does not demolish Balon's fleet, but he takes care to build his own. And his way works, until Stannis and Cersei destroy his fleet, and Balon decides to take advantage of the new weakness of the crown.

I do think Robert's success was aided by the longest summer in memory, and by short, mild winters from the start of his reign, and also that, in a feudal society, the local community and the local lord are much more relevant and powerful than any central authority, but it is not just Robert's very good luck that he has a prosperous and peaceful land for the fifteen years of his rule so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nihlus

I think you are giving Robert credit for things he never did on purpose. Robert "hated counting coppers". He certainly wasn't some sort of economic genius. In fact, due to his unwillingness to pay attention to his spending, he directly enabled Littlefinger to embezzle millions of gold dragons from the crown. It only takes about 2 seconds to do the math:

The Hand's tourney cost about 100,000 gold dragons total. This was 90,000 for the champions and 10,000 for the accompanying feast. Robert was king for about 15 years and started out with a surplus. Even if we assume that Robert held a tourney that size every 6 months for his entire reign (which he probably did not), that would be 30 x 100,000 = 3 million, which is less than half of the purported debt. And this in a period when, according to Tywin, "Crown incomes are ten times higher than they were under Aerys." Presumably this giant increase in income should offset that 3 million by a lot. So at a minimum, there is over 3 million gold dragons just missing that LF probably stole for himself. And really, it was probably much, much higher than that, like closer to 10 million. And if LF stole the money, then it mostly did not recirculate into the Westerosi economy. LF was hoarding it for his plans later, like when he started paying off people's debts to buy allies. Robert relinquished all of his duties to the small council, who even he considered to be mostly flatterers and fools. He was a terrible king because he didn't care about doing his job at all. And the realm suffered as a consequence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert never wanted to the king and politics gave him headaches.  However in my opinion he was a decent king


a-    He survived Cersei for many many years. That’s quite significant considering that whoever had contact with Cersei ended up badly. Jamie lost his inheritance, Robert ended up being cuckolded, a decision that lead to the war of 5 kings and her irrational hatred towards Tyrion lead to the loss of two of the most brilliant minds the Lannisters had at its disposal. By the end of the books the relationship between Tyrell and Lannister had been strained, the Faith Militants are on the loose, Lancel had lost his mind while Joffrey and Kevan had lost their lives. Kudos for Bob for being able to contain this force of nature for such a long period of time.

b-    He left a huge amount of debt behind but the man had a plan. With Tywin stripped from his heir, the old lion had little choice but to appoint Tommen BARATHEON as his heir. Surely he couldn’t let Lancel  become Lord of CR. Meanwhile Stannis held Dragonstone, Renly held the Stormlands and was set to marry Margaery Tyrell and Joffrey was soon going to marry Sansa who was Ned’s daughter, Hoster’s granddaughter and Sweet Robin’s cousin. In 1 generation the Baratheons became the ruling family, with one of their brethren set to rule CR and whose family was married off to the majority of all powerful families in Westeros.

Bob’s two biggest mistakes were


a-    Not to micromanage Cersei.
b-    To bring Ned to KL. The guy might have been a loyal friend and decent general but he had absolutely no idea of how politics work
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...