bloodsteel bitterraven Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 Robert could have destroyed the Iron Throne, and claimed that with the dragons gone, there is no reason to have a King ruling the entire continent. He could then annex the Crownlands to the Stormlands, and become King of the Stormlands. Tywin would probably object, given that it was him who actually sacked the city, but he wouldn't have a strong claim on the Crownlands since they don't neighbor the Westerlands. The other 6 kingdoms+the Riverlands, would also be reinstated. He probably would have been ok as a ruler. Living the life, not getting married, no real enemies. He would probably give King's Landing to Renly and rename it Lyannatown or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 7 hours ago, nyser1 said: Having a wife who did not sleep with her brother and despise you....and did not want to ultimately murder you may have changed things. King or Lord. Just saying. I doubt Cersei being a horrible person is the reason Robert was a horrible King and would have been just as horrible as a Lord. Robert was never suited to rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyser1 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 15 hours ago, The Wolves said: I doubt Cersei being a horrible person is the reason Robert was a horrible King and would have been just as horrible as a Lord. Robert was never suited to rule. In terms of his actual ability to rule well perhaps but.... He was charismatic and had the support of the common folk. Jon Arryn was able to maintain the peace. In the instance where the Greyjoys rebelled, the rebellion was crushed. Had Jon's successor been equally or more successful on this front and others (i.e. economics) it would lead to a better rule. It is possible that were there a better relationship between the King and his wife, the children (particularly the eldest in OTL) would be less messed up. A lack of a succession crisis in the aftermath of his reign would make the reign look better and the regime more stable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 On 5/14/2019 at 2:35 PM, nyser1 said: In terms of his actual ability to rule well perhaps but.... He was charismatic and had the support of the common folk. Jon Arryn was able to maintain the peace. In the instance where the Greyjoys rebelled, the rebellion was crushed. Had Jon's successor been equally or more successful on this front and others (i.e. economics) it would lead to a better rule. It is possible that were there a better relationship between the King and his wife, the children (particularly the eldest in OTL) would be less messed up. A lack of a succession crisis in the aftermath of his reign would make the reign look better and the regime more stable. Robert still had no business being king. He KNEW he wasn’t fit for it and I’ll even go further and say Ned and Arryn knew also but overlooked it. They all should have done better for the people of Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingMudd Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 On 5/13/2019 at 3:12 AM, StagOfCincy said: Robert failed Westeros as a King. He let the realm become heavily indebted to the Iron Bank and Tywin Lannister. He whored and drank his life away after Lyanna's death and refused to involve himself in the matters of the Kingdom he was King of. I think letting Jon Arryn run the Kingdom was his best decision. He didn't want it and didn't want to rule so he let someone more capable do it. Like it or not Robert's reign brought in peace and was probably one of Westeros' most peaceful times after the Greyjoy rebellion. Remember that most Targaryen King's reigns were rife with external and internal wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyser1 Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 17 hours ago, The Wolves said: Robert still had no business being king. He KNEW he wasn’t fit for it and I’ll even go further and say Ned and Arryn knew also but overlooked it. They all should have done better for the people of Westeros. The realm would have still been in a better place... Also this is feudal society not a centralized federal democracy, how the people are doing varies greatly by who their lord(s) is/are. The great majority nobles are not as concerned about the peasants as they are for other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demetri Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 On 5/12/2019 at 10:40 PM, Syl of Syl said: We don't know a ton about previous Lords of Storm's End, but the ones we have seen don't seem too far off from Robert in demeanor and management style. He would likely have been par for the course there. We actually know a lot because of the early relationship between Baratheons and Targaryens. From those readings it seems that Baratheons did a lot better in the Stormlands than they did as King's Hand or in KL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.