Should the Andal vs First Men conflict be more bitter?

[Tyrion1991]

I know it’s used to justify Northern Independence. We are a separate people and Joffreys attacks on us are in a vein to historical Andal attacks and atrocities; we should rule ourselves.

However I never got the impression that George cast any judgement on Rob pulling the nationalism card. Generally, if one group wants to break away on grounds of race and religion this tends to create bitterness, hatred and violence. It’s depicted as a romantic and just reversal of an ancient wrong. You might question the wisdom of going against the Baratheons in a civil war, but not the sentiment itself which is put on a pedestal.

Yet the conflict remains almost entirely framed as a personal feud between the noble houses. The Riverland and Vale Lords, despite being Andals and worshipping the 7 don’t have a problem siding with or being sympathetic towards a bunch of nationalists calling themselves “The First Men”. Which, if you think about it is kinda presumptuous thing to call yourselves. We proud and mighty Northerners with our bond to the land and old blood.

Especially on the Andal side you don’t get an escalation of hatred towards the First Men. Tywin is able to broker peace with Roose Bolton without demands for retribution on the North itself. Even though Robs men ravaged the Westerlands.

You don’t see, that I can recall, Weirwood trees being deliberately burned out of religious hatred. I suspect George did this purely because he wanted the differentiate it from what Stannis was doing. However Iam not sure why it wouldn’t go there. I also don’t recall any explicit anti First Men rhetoric like you would expect.

Plus, Northern soldiers also commit atrocities against the Riverlands and are arguably attempting to annex it into a realm dominated by the First Men. Who again, believe themselves to be superior, keep different Gods and are a different ethnicity.

You also don’t see the First Men begin to identify the Andals and Faith of the Seven specifically as their enemy. Again, probably to differentiate the Lord of Lights behaviour from other faiths. George relies very heavily on the argument that since they’re helping House Tully everyone remains objective and rational. 

I just don’t think a war could get that violent and bitter without there being major fallout between the Andals and the First Men. George basically keeps that genie in the bottle.

[Ser Hedge]

2 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

You also don’t see the First Men begin to identify the Andals and Faith of the Seven specifically as their enemy. Again, probably to differentiate the Lord of Lights behaviour from other faiths. George relies very heavily on the argument that since they’re helping House Tully everyone remains objective and rational. 

I just don’t think a war could get that violent and bitter without there being major fallout between the Andals and the First Men. George basically keeps that genie in the bottle.

Good point. Also, the Manderleys keep the faith of the seven and Ned is married to a Tully and his children have been brought up with both faiths. As you say they were riding to the Riverlands to help the Tullys and in the 300+ years since Aegon's conquest a lot of the northern nobility (at least the 'southern' less wilder northern nobility - Dustins, Rhyswells, Hornwoods, Cerwyns, Tallharts) have probably been used to being part of a larger realm.

There is no reason for Robb to indulge in any anti-Andal or anti-First Men rhetoric, so we don't see any of that in Cat's POV.

The northern identity is brought up by a 'wilder' lord from the upmost North, and since the assembly had reached a deadlock over Joffrey-Stannis-Renly they go with it for want of better options and with individual lords not wanting to be seen less loyal to Robb the others. It's politically a very bad decision of course, Cat is in shock right away, many Riverlords probably are as well, and it seems to have happened by accident. An older, wiser Robb should have stopped this at the time and waited for at least the Stannis-Renly tussle to resolve, but we obviously wouldn't have had a story otherwise. 

However, you explore a very good topic. In Arya's POV we see that the Karstarks let loose upon the Riverlands to recapture Jamie defile the statues of the seven, so clearly those sentiments easily come to the fore. Other broken (non-Manderley) Northmen roaming the Riverlands are likely doing the same. I guess since the story is already complex enough, GRRM gives us a bit of a hint with the Karstark behaviour, without pursuing it much further.

[Corvo the Crow]

Many of the houses “south of the North” are First Men houses, some even bring this up proudly. Even in the Vale where Andal invasions hit the First Men the worst there are many and powerful FM houses.

Read the books.

[Faera]

There's certainly no reason at this point for the First Men or Andals to be prejudice against one another simply because the Andals settled in Westeros around 4,000 years ago and while they never managed to conquer the Neck there have been intermarriages between First Men and Andal families over those thousand years.

Even religious differences don't seem to have been a major issue either -- the Faith of the Seven, while rare, is free to practice in the North and there are Southron families who still keep the old gods. Culturally also pretty much every lord keeps a godswood even if they do not keep the old ways. Intermarriage between the faiths is not unheard of (Stark/Tully being a more recent example). There are also First Men families who follow the Faith of the Seven (The Manderlys who originally came from the Reach are First Men ethnically); contrary to popular belief the Lannister name and heritage is heavily tied to the First Men even though they ultimately mixed with an Andal family who took on the name; and the Dornish have a mix of all the ethnicities of Westeros as well as the religions though chiefly, it seems, the Faith. So, no. I don't think this could realistically ever be about Andals vs First Men really.

It ultimately is more about the fact that the North is big, vast and more isolated from the other kingdoms thanks to the Neck. Most kings have always been perfectly happy to leave the North to its own doings - but Joffrey's idiocy in executing Ned was a final straw in the discontent felt in the North that whenever they are called upon as "one of the seven kingdoms" they aren't respected. Robert's Rebellion is still within living memory for these people and they remember King Aerys II's treatment of the Northern lords who went the KL with Brandon and then Rickard. That's what it feels more about. Recently history, which is far more believable than millennia old blood feuds between the ethnicities which are all but moot because everyone's intermarriage and interbred anyway.

[Tyrion1991]

21 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Many of the houses “south of the North” are First Men houses, some even bring this up proudly. Even in the Vale where Andal invasions hit the First Men the worst there are many and powerful FM houses.

Read the books.

 

I recall there being some First Men in Dorne, the Mountain Clans, I think it’s implied that the Royce’s were as well.

Ive read them a few times. But if you read a book about the breakup of Yugoslavia it shouldn’t require a thorough read between the lines to get that vibe. 

How come they don’t side with their Kinsmen in the North? Why does Rob not seek to draw them into the war? Why aren’t they seen as a Fifth Column? Why don’t rival Andal Lords and Peasants use their different ethnicity to get rid of them? Similar to what happens in Spain during the Inquisition between the Christians (including converts), Jews and Muslims.

What George depicts is basically a peaceful coexistence between the different religions which historically didn’t happen in most of medieval Europe. Certainly not as neatly or without one side gaining primacy. In the case of Spain it imploded spectacularly. Which eventually gets you to the wars of the reformation. Never mind the ethnic element.

I don’t see why the Andals wouldn’t use that war as a pretext to wipe out the First Men and their religion. Clearly, the Northern FM identity is the cause of this rebellion. Destroy them and replace them with loyal andals who worship the 7 and the realm would be made whole. George depicts a highly idealistic scenario where everyone stays rational and refrains from this line of thinking.

[Free Northman Reborn]

The reality is that the Andals were vastly outnumbered by the First Men. The World Book confirms this. So genetically even the southroners are likely around 80% of First Men blood. With the Northerners maybe 95% First Men blood.

So they’re hardly of different races, when it comes down to it. 

[The Lord of the Crossing]

There is the complexity of the story.  It's people who are justified somewhat for feeling the way they do and then they act on it.  The Lannisters crippled Bran and it got out of control because of what Jaime, Catelyn, Tywin, Eddard, and Robb chose to do.  The peasants are the losers because they died and it's not even their fault.  George is judging.  He's saying the Starks have a right to be angry and to seek justice, but is it right to spark a war that would kill hundreds of thousands, destroy the economy, and split up the kingdom to get that justice?  King Robert was so ineffectual to the extent that the Starks felt they had no choice but to take justice into their own hands.  Tywin retaliates.  Renly sees his chance for promotion.  The founding cause is the bad choices made by Jaime and Cersei to have sex in that tower.  It was stupid.  But Cat, Tywin, and Robb made the problem a whole lot worse.  Eddard was thinking family instead of his duties to the people when he chose to support his wife.  

[Ser Hedge]

3 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Ive read them a few times. But if you read a book about the breakup of Yugoslavia it shouldn’t require a thorough read between the lines to get that vibe. 

The time elapsed between the Andal invasion and the current timeline is much more than between most of the religious conflicts in the Balkans and the modern day. Also, given that many First Men houses converted to and inter-married into Andal houses separates religion from ethnicity in most parts of Westeros. Sure an illiterate Karstark, Umber or mountain clan peasant levy may have his prejudices about "southrons and their strange gods" and riverlands smallfolk will have their suspicions about "tree worshiping northeners", but that doesn't mean you have synchronised religious wars breaking out everywhere automatically because Robb was crowned King in the North and the Trident.

Yugoslavia is one situation, but you have many across history in Europe and the near-East involving successive waves of migration and not all had the same outcome.

 

[Tyrion1991]

1 hour ago, Ser Hedge said:

The time elapsed between the Andal invasion and the current timeline is much more than between most of the religious conflicts in the Balkans and the modern day. Also, given that many First Men houses converted to and inter-married into Andal houses separates religion from ethnicity in most parts of Westeros. Sure an illiterate Karstark, Umber or mountain clan peasant levy may have his prejudices about "southrons and their strange gods" and riverlands smallfolk will have their suspicions about "tree worshiping northeners", but that doesn't mean you have synchronised religious wars breaking out everywhere automatically because Robb was crowned King in the North and the Trident.

Yugoslavia is one situation, but you have many across history in Europe and the near-East involving successive waves of migration and not all had the same outcome.

 

 

But if the Faith is analogue to Christianity and Old Gods to paganism you would expect a similar outcome of forced conversion and violence like in the Baltic Crusade.

[Corvo the Crow]

6 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

I recall there being some First Men in Dorne, the Mountain Clans, I think it’s implied that the Royce’s were as well.

Ive read them a few times. But if you read a book about the breakup of Yugoslavia it shouldn’t require a thorough read between the lines to get that vibe. 

How come they don’t side with their Kinsmen in the North? Why does Rob not seek to draw them into the war? Why aren’t they seen as a Fifth Column? Why don’t rival Andal Lords and Peasants use their different ethnicity to get rid of them? Similar to what happens in Spain during the Inquisition between the Christians (including converts), Jews and Muslims.

What George depicts is basically a peaceful coexistence between the different religions which historically didn’t happen in most of medieval Europe. Certainly not as neatly or without one side gaining primacy. In the case of Spain it imploded spectacularly. Which eventually gets you to the wars of the reformation. Never mind the ethnic element.

I don’t see why the Andals wouldn’t use that war as a pretext to wipe out the First Men and their religion. Clearly, the Northern FM identity is the cause of this rebellion. Destroy them and replace them with loyal andals who worship the 7 and the realm would be made whole. George depicts a highly idealistic scenario where everyone stays rational and refrains from this line of thinking.

Lannisters, Royces, Hightowers, Tullys and Yronwoods, to just name the top FM house in each region. SL is full of FM houses as well, though we don’t know who is the most powerful, likely Swanns.

Yugoslavia, as the name says, is the country of the Southern Slavs so a would be FM-Andal conflict has nothing to do with Yugoslavians who are all “slavs” but with different religious beliefs and different history, culture whatever. Conflicts south of the Neck would be more akin to the Yugoslavian ones; though they all (almost all) have the same religion and “race”, they are of different ethnicities.

[Ser Hedge]

2 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

 

But if the Faith is analogue to Christianity and Old Gods to paganism you would expect a similar outcome of forced conversion and violence like in the Baltic Crusade.

It's a fantasy world with elements borrowed from our world, so the exact interaction between the different elements and the resulting outcome does not have to be the same. If it were then ASOIAF becomes an allegory for the real world which it is not.

[El Diego]

Many of the southern houses do trace their roots back to First Men. But the North clearly identify more as First Men than say the Lannisters who descend from Lann the Clever. Why/how?

1. They keep the Old Gods

2. They intermarried with Andals less (don't have obvious proof of this off the top of my head, but think it's clear)

3. Don't have knights

4. Were never "conquered" by the Andals

I often see people imply that everything south of the Neck is Andal (I did this myself in the show forum recently) which is patently untrue, but let's not swing too far the other way. The North clearly feels and acts different from the "South", and much of that is tied to their identity as First Men versus the Southron identity as Andal.

[Darth Sidious]

The conflict, or the feelings rather, were kept in check by the Targaryen ruler.  The southerners are more reasonable, in my opinion.  Sure they worship the Seven but most of them give it lip service and do not really get worked up about it until some idiot like the High Sparrow and what have you stirs them up.  The Ironborn never changed their culture nor their religion but they behaved out of fear for what the Targaryen ruler might do to them.  The northern primitives are the same.   Sure they would love to rape their small folk and bleed people for their trees but the Targaryen power kept them in check.  Robert and the Baratheons could not keep these feelings in check.  That's why a minor feud between two butthole families grew into the war of the 5 kings.  

The conflict should be worse but there was a strong power keeping things contained.  The War of the 5 kings is what happened when that strong power was removed.  And all that just to protect the lives of two comparatively worthless lads in Ned and Robert.  Shame on Jon Arryn.  

 

[Tyrion1991]

2 hours ago, Ser Hedge said:

It's a fantasy world with elements borrowed from our world, so the exact interaction between the different elements and the resulting outcome does not have to be the same. If it were then ASOIAF becomes an allegory for the real world which it is not.

 

I don’t think the mechanics make sense and I question his reasoning.

Westeros is a vibrant multi cultural, ethnic and religious realm where all faiths are tolerated and deemed equally valid? Where there has been no violence between the disparate ethnicities for centuries. This is a utopian situation that George is presenting. That might be a pass in Elder Scrolls (even that has wars of religion and ethnic conflict) but considering that the series professes to be grounded I don’t buy it. Usually you only had begrudging (to put it mildly in many cases) toleration and they were usually reduced to second class citizens by various penalties and levies. 

Really the Faith shouldn’t just consider it a bit quaint that the FM worship trees. They should consider it blasphemous since it means they are denying the divine truth of the real Gods.

Consider Cat. When Christian women married the likes of Clovis they went out of their way to convert them to Christianity and abandon paganism. Because they truly believed their husbands soul was at risk if he did not. But Cat just thinks of them as “your Gods” and hers are just the ones with the rules. People talk like this in the modern world but it goes utterly against it. Societies only went in this direction because of the Enlightenment, the printing press and the spread of secular education; none of which exists in George’s fictional world. Yet they all act as if religion isn’t a big deal worth killing people over. The show Vikings and the Last Kingdom does a good job of depicting this conflict between Paganism and Christianity.

I think GRRM did this because he didn’t want the conflict to be tainted by becoming a religious war. He wanted to make these conflicts entirely personal and familial in nature. When, in reality, it really was just butchering people over what copy of the bible they had. 

Its so ironic because he depicts the Rhollor religion as the aberration when in fact it’s the closest to a real world representation of an actual faith from this time period. They actually believe God is real and you should do what he tells you. Which means all those idols are false Gods and you’re going to hell unless we make you change.

Yet even this doesn’t get the attention it should. Stannis isn’t seen as an apostate who wants to forcibly convert the Seven Kingdoms, burn their Weirwoods and tear their cathedrals down. That’s barely talked about seriously and few consequences spring from it. Jon’s basically like “oh, some of the lads up North won’t like that”. When if he actually believed in any of this none sense he would be incensed that he would even consider it. George likes to mention offhand that a few crazy people care about these things but almost every character is agnostic or atheist. Which is not believable in a pre enlightenment civilisation.

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

Yep. George has made religion play a much smaller role than it did in the real Middle Ages.

Unrealistically so, in my opinion, but it appears to have been a deliberate choice.

[Ser Hedge]

7 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Really the Faith shouldn’t just consider it a bit quaint that the FM worship trees. They should consider it blasphemous since it means they are denying the divine truth of the real Gods.

When the Andals first crossed over, they seem to have thought exactly that and cut the trees down. Does it make sense that they stop feeling that strongly about it thousands of years later? I think yes. Coptic Christians (between 6 and 20% of the population, exact numbers not available since religion not asked about in the census - Wikipedia) have continued to live in Egypt for the last ~1300 years.

 

7 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

The show Vikings and the Last Kingdom does a good job of depicting this conflict between Paganism and Christianity.

In S1E1 young Uthred around the time of his second baptism asks Father Beoca if their Saxon ancestors did not basically have the same religion as the Vikings. "We called him Woden, they call him Odin" or something to that effect. This is probably key, the pagans reminded the Christians of Europe of where they came from, reinforcing their zeal for their still new-ish religion. The Andals, on the other hand, brought their religion with them. They were zealots in the beginning, yes, but it's not unreasonable that after thousands of years, an equilibrium exists (except for the flare-ups caused by Targaryen practices), until the R'hllorists turn up.

Also, might be worth mentioning that in FaB we learn of Northmen marrying Riverlands widows after Aemond's ravaging. This is supposed to have reintroduced the Old Gods religion back to some extent. We don't see much evidence of OG religion in the current series (Blackwoods are different, they always held on to their belief), but perhaps George dropped that in to explain why the Riverlands were generally more tolerant at the start of Clash?

7 hours ago, Tyrion1991 said:

Yet even this doesn’t get the attention it should. Stannis isn’t seen as an apostate who wants to forcibly convert the Seven Kingdoms, burn their Weirwoods and tear their cathedrals down

Joffrey's small council constantly invoke this threat in their anti-Stannis propaganda. This could be one reason support for his claim remained lukewarm.

Stannis seems smart enough to keep the Queen's men under control. Leaving his clansmen aside, his own army is not made up of only R'hllorists. That might seem a bit odd, but if you are able to work with that, the rest becomes more realistic IMO.

I wouldn't want to read a fantasy series that is purely about religious conflict, we have had enough of that already in the real world.

[The Hoare]

Peacefull cohexistence between different religions is entirely possible. In Scandinavia/Iceland there were some pagan kings that tolerated christianity in their lands. Really, religious wars are rare, unless some side decide to use religion as a excuse to gain some kind of personal benefit(see protestants, the orthodox-catholic split, the sunni-shia conflict, etc.). Most "religious" people don't actualy believe in what they preach

I don't remember Robb pulling the "nationalism casrd" either, it was only one bannerman that mentioned it. Keep in mind that Robb was declared King of the Trident too.

[TheThreeEyedCow]

14 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Yep. George has made religion play a much smaller role than it did in the real Middle Ages.

Unrealistically so, in my opinion, but it appears to have been a deliberate choice.

Yes, I agree with this. I think Geroge chose to make the religious feud a thing of the past. Instead focusing on their conflicting cultures. George didn't want to write about religious wars and I'm glad he didn't. It's all just very depressing. So instead, we focus on the customs of the two religions. A promise made to a tree seems to have more weight to it than one made to any of the seven. But that's because George wanted to bury things in the past, beneath a new religion that did not truly understand the land they were conquering. We know that the cotf exist. We know the WWs are more than just trees. The Andals don't. And there are consequences to this. The 'pact' seems to of been forgotten. The words, 'winter is coming' seems to of lost it's meaning. Northeners are becoming more akin to their southern counter-parts and it will (and already has) cost them dearly. 
 

[RYShh]

On 6/2/2019 at 1:32 PM, Ser Hedge said:

Good point. Also, the Manderleys keep the faith of the seven and Ned is married to a Tully and his children have been brought up with both faiths. As you say they were riding to the Riverlands to help the Tullys and in the 300+ years since Aegon's conquest a lot of the northern nobility (at least the 'southern' less wilder northern nobility - Dustins, Rhyswells, Hornwoods, Cerwyns, Tallharts) have probably been used to being part of a larger realm.

There is no reason for Robb to indulge in any anti-Andal or anti-First Men rhetoric, so we don't see any of that in Cat's POV.

The northern identity is brought up by a 'wilder' lord from the upmost North, and since the assembly had reached a deadlock over Joffrey-Stannis-Renly they go with it for want of better options and with individual lords not wanting to be seen less loyal to Robb the others. It's politically a very bad decision of course, Cat is in shock right away, many Riverlords probably are as well, and it seems to have happened by accident. An older, wiser Robb should have stopped this at the time and waited for at least the Stannis-Renly tussle to resolve, but we obviously wouldn't have had a story otherwise. 

However, you explore a very good topic. In Arya's POV we see that the Karstarks let loose upon the Riverlands to recapture Jamie defile the statues of the seven, so clearly those sentiments easily come to the fore. Other broken (non-Manderley) Northmen roaming the Riverlands are likely doing the same. I guess since the story is already complex enough, GRRM gives us a bit of a hint with the Karstark behaviour, without pursuing it much further.

I disagree, politically they were not wrong at all, they bend the knee to Targaryens, and Targaryens had Dragons, they couldn't fight against the Dragons with their current scorpion-less technology, and the Northeners fight with honor at the field not with militant hit, hide and run tactics like Dorne did, so they had to bend the knee to Aegon 280 years ago.

There is no way a Southern army could take the North or invade the North if Robb stayed at the North with his main army, no southern army could pass moat cailin before, and they defended it from the southern armies for 10.000 years,

Robb's only fatal mistake was trusting in Theon and letting him go, when he did that and when Theon captured the capital of the North, Winterfell (thanks to Theon's inside knowledge), and killed Robb's heirs Bran and Rickon, the northerners lost their faith in their cause, and they called Robb ''King who lost the North'', 

Even then Robb was going to return to North after Balon's death in the books, he was going to carry some part of his army to the North with the help of crannogmen and Howland Reed, and they were going to hit moat cailin from the south, north and the west, But before they could re-take the moat cailin , Red Wedding happens. So basically, if he never let Theon go, I doubt even Red Wedding would happen since killing Robb wasn't enough, they had to take Winterfell and kill the princes.

Even with the Ironborn invasion to the North when the Northern army was fighting at the south and at the west against the Lannisters, they could still defend the North if they didn't lose Winterfell, the North is really hard to hold and it's really hard to seize it due to it's very large and harsh area, they could easily keep the independence of the North in the normal circumstances, but the normal circumstances didn't happen due to Guest Right violation of the Freys in a frigging wedding and Theon's a.k.a Reek's backstabbing.

 

[Ser Hedge]

56 minutes ago, RYShh said:

I disagree, politically they were not wrong at all, they bend the knee to Targaryens, and Targaryens had Dragons, they couldn't fight against the Dragons with their current scorpion-less technology, and the Northeners fight with honor at the field not with militant hit, hide and run tactics like Dorne did, so they had to bend the knee to Aegon 280 years ago.

There is no way a Southern army could take the North or invade the North if Robb stayed at the North with his main army, no southern army could pass moat cailin before, and they defended it from the southern armies for 10.000 years,

Robb's only fatal mistake was trusting in Theon and letting him go, when he did that and when Theon captured the capital of the North, Winterfell (thanks to Theon's inside knowledge), and killed Robb's heirs Bran and Rickon, the northerners lost their faith in their cause, and they called Robb ''King who lost the North'', 

Even then Robb was going to return to North after Balon's death in the books, he was going to carry some part of his army to the North with the help of crannogmen and Howland Reed, and they were going to hit moat cailin from the south, north and the west, But before they could re-take the moat cailin , Red Wedding happens. So basically, if he never let Theon go, I doubt even Red Wedding would happen since killing Robb wasn't enough, they had to take Winterfell and kill the princes.

Even with the Ironborn invasion to the North when the Northern army was fighting at the south and at the west against the Lannisters, they could still defend the North if they didn't lose Winterfell, the North is really hard to hold and it's really hard to seize it due to it's very large and harsh area, they could easily keep the independence of the North in the normal circumstances, but the normal circumstances didn't happen due to Guest Right violation of the Freys in a frigging wedding and Theon's a.k.a Reek's backstabbing.

 

1. By declaring himself King, Robb lost the option of gaining the support of the winner of the Stannis-Renly semi-final. When Cat goes to negotiate with the two brothers, they are cool with her since Robb has 'stolen' part of their Kingdom.

2. As you say, the North can be held by holding Moat Cailin (and obviously making sure your home castle doesn't fall to a commando raid by seaborne invaders), but Robb was crowned King in the North and the Trident. 

The Riverlands has no natural boundaries and cannot be defended against a numerous Reach army, a wealthy Westerlands army or against a Stormland/Crownland army with an experienced commander.

3. Finally, winter was coming. It was August and the harvest was starting to rot without enough men to bring it in.

Hence capturing Jamie was the perfect point to (temporarily) end the war and start negotiating (as Lord not King) after returning his men to the harvest.

He would have left the Riverlands to their own devices, but that's realpolitik. He helped them as much as he could, but without Aunt Lysa's help, nothing further was achievable at that point. He could have left the Tullys the other Lannister hostages as some kind of safeguard.

Being crowned King doomed him, as it was too early. Theon's betrayal, the Karstarks and the Jeyne Westerland situation hastened the process.