The Robert Baratheon Hate thread

[Alexia]

But the point that he would have slept around if he had married Lyanna is not a fair point. The way I understand it he sleeps around because he is not with Lyanna and tries to forget it.

This of course, would be the reason for the orgy in the Peach while he believes that Lyanna had been kidnapped and raped, I suppose? And he was already sleeping around and fathering bastards during his betrothal; I don't see any sign that would have changed.

[Antonius Pius]

Although interestingly, Lyanna herself says upon finding herself betrothed to him (and therefore she's quite alive at this point) that Robert would never keep to one bed, and that seems to cause her quite a bit of dismay. Love is sweet, but it cannot change a man's nature.

Unless I've got my quotes wrong, you forgot "dearest Ned". ;)

I do think you're right by the way. Robert was unlikely to be completely faithful to Lyanne. He might be in the beginning, but after a while... The man had huge appetites.

About Cersie and Jaime having sex in castle Darry with Robert knocked out drunk on the floor: I think Cersei's line "I want him horned" is just a clever one-liner. I don't think it means that Cersei and Jaime hadn't had sex since the war and the wedding. They obviously enjoyed it enormously, and especially for Cersei it was also a power-trip, or an ego-trip she desperately needed. Jaime wanted to have sex with Cersei, but Cersei wanted to have sex with the closest substitute for herself. Or the closest thing to her male self.

Also, that they'd think nothing of Jaime perpetually breaking his vows with her (which was the intention when they connived to get Jaime in the white), suggest they'd respect the proprieties. With Cersei married to Robert it merely meant they had to be more careful.

[A wilding]

About Cersie and Jaime having sex in castle Darry with Robert knocked out drunk on the floor: I think Cersei's line "I want him horned" is just a clever one-liner. I don't think it means that Cersei and Jaime hadn't had sex since the war and the wedding. They obviously enjoyed it enormously, and especially for Cersei it was also a power-trip, or an ego-trip she desperately needed.

But also it was said immediately after Jaime offered to kill Robert for being unfaithful to Cersei.

Somehow I don't see him offering to do that if he and Cersei were already making the beast with the two backs themselves. I would expect his attitude to be more along the lines of it being fair enough for Robert to play away too, and how it might allow him (Jaime) more time with Cersei.

(Incidentally, Castle Darry with Robert drunk on the floor was another occasion.)

[mormont]

Robert, as I see it, is a guy who was pushed into a position he absolutely didn't want to be in, a job he knew he couldn't and wouldn't want to do, yet he tried to deal with it.

But who pushed him into it?

Aerys, of course, had to be dealt with. But that didn't mean Robert absolutely had to be King. He took the throne because he didn't want another Targaryen on it. That was his decision, nobody else's. And if he took it believing he was unsuited to the job, that makes it worse, not better.

Although, his constant spendings none-withstanding, piling his duties, which he knew he couldn't do to others who were better at dealing with them, did show that he at least was not one of those who didn't acknowledge their limitations.

His constant spending wasn't the real problem, although it was symptomatic of it. The real problem was that Robert would delegate tasks, not because he recognised his limitations, but because he didn't want to do them: but he would then interfere with or ignore the decisions of those he'd delegated to whenever he felt like it. If Robert wanted to spend, he would spend. If he wanted a tourney, he'd have it. If he took it into his head to make an appointment, it was made. If any of these things screwed his advisers' plans, tough. He's the king.

If he had allowed wiser men to run the Seven Kingdoms and followed their advice, then yes, he would be able to defend himself on the grounds of 'acknowledging his limitations'. But that's not what happened.

Hitting your wife is most certainly not a good thing but if there is one wife who deserved a beating, it's Cersei.

There isn't.

Also they say that people can somewhat, instinctively sense if they are dealing with their natural children or not

Who are 'they', and why are you bringing up 'their' opinion as if it weren't absolute nonsense?

But the point that he would have slept around if he had married Lyanna is not a fair point.

As others have said, I'm afraid it's not. This was a pattern of behaviour well established both before and during his betrothal to Lyanna. It has nothing to do with his grief, and everything to do with his general character, which is impulsive, self-indulgent and thoughtless.

I don't hate the man either: I pity the man he became, who is (as you say) a great character and a great piece of writing. But let's not make excuses for him. He spent far too much time doing that for himself.

[Lady Dark Sister]

But also it was said immediately after Jaime offered to kill Robert for being unfaithful to Cersei.

I do not recall Jaime offering to kill Robert for being unfaithful to Cersei, when was that? The way I recall it, he said he'd kill Robert if he woke up in Darry's castle. On the other occasions Jaime expressed (in thought and to Cersei) intention of another Kingslaying, it was because how Robert treated Cersei (i.e. hit her, raped her (and she had to keep the worst from Jaime, for fear he would slay Robert regardless what she said)).

Somehow I don't see him offering to do that if he and Cersei were already making the beast with the two backs themselves. I would expect his attitude to be more along the lines of it being fair enough for Robert to play away too, and how it might allow him (Jaime) more time with Cersei.

I think it's fairly safe to assume that Jaime and Cersei didn't interrupt their sexual relationsship when she married Robert. Neither of them are especially keen on the oathkeeping, and neither had any love for Robert, so why would they stop? In Winterfall, Jaime stays with Cersei instead of going hunting because he was horny and they hadn't had sex since Darry's Castle. Which I interpret that they usually have sex more often.

[Alexia]

I do not recall Jaime offering to kill Robert for being unfaithful to Cersei, when was that?

When he tailed Robert during their visit of state and came back to tell her Robert was cheating, he asked her if she wanted him dead. She said no, she wanted him horned.

And they hadn't had a sexual relationship at least three years, since Jaime joined the KG and Tywin renounced the Handship. And it seems they only actually had intercourse once before then.

[Nemrut]

But who pushed him into it?

Aerys, of course, had to be dealt with. But that didn't mean Robert absolutely had to be King. He took the throne because he didn't want another Targaryen on it. That was his decision, nobody else's. And if he took it believing he was unsuited to the job, that makes it worse, not better.

He had the best claim as I understood it and as such the others "gave" the the throne to him. Or did I understand that wrong? Robert was the one who more or less started the war and had pretty much the biggest army and was the eldest of the family with the largest army. If I am wrong, please correct me but the way I understood was that it all of those earned him the title of the king by default sort of.

His constant spending wasn't the real problem, although it was symptomatic of it. The real problem was that Robert would delegate tasks, not because he recognised his limitations, but because he didn't want to do them: but he would then interfere with or ignore the decisions of those he'd delegated to whenever he felt like it. If Robert wanted to spend, he would spend. If he wanted a tourney, he'd have it. If he took it into his head to make an appointment, it was made. If any of these things screwed his advisers' plans, tough. He's the king.

If he had allowed wiser men to run the Seven Kingdoms and followed their advice, then yes, he would be able to defend himself on the grounds of 'acknowledging his limitations'. But that's not what happened.

True enough but at the same time, if he did nothing and didn't decide anything he wouldn't have been King for that long. A King who only does as his advisors tell him would be seen as a puppet king. And one of the reasons Robert was unfit to be king was that he did not fell the best decisions. He was simple with his desires and did not focus much thought on the larger consequences, so you are mostly right on that.

But I still think he did acknowledge his limitations but he didn't really gave a damn about them. I know that this makes it worse but meh, I somehow didn't mind that much.

There isn't.

I love reading about Cersei but believe me, I would punch her myself for all the shit she pulled off :D So, just because the person who slugged her was her husband does not make that action, in this single incident, bad for me. She has that and much more coming as the books continue and something tells me that she was not an angel to that point.

Who are 'they', and why are you bringing up 'their' opinion as if it weren't absolute nonsense?

Of course it is nonsense and absolutely non-scientific but it is like those old woman tellings. It just stuck to me as odd that Robert, seeing that all of his bastards look like him does not see that his children do not resemble him one bit. Maybe he distanced himself from them subconsciously. Weak argument and no excuse whatsoever, I know, he was a bad father, there is no denying that. I mean he had to have a reason for not caring about his children.

As others have said, I'm afraid it's not. This was a pattern of behaviour well established both before and during his betrothal to Lyanna. It has nothing to do with his grief, and everything to do with his general character, which is impulsive, self-indulgent and thoughtless.

Ok, I forgot that.

I don't hate the man either: I pity the man he became, who is (as you say) a great character and a great piece of writing. But let's not make excuses for him. He spent far too much time doing that for himself.

True enough, it was sad to realize that Robert had become this terrible guy compared to his former self. I am just arguing that back then, he was not a bad man, he had his faults, true enough but he was not bad.

[3idcrow]

4. Robert was really just an unhappy, foolish drunk. Unsuited to his situational requirements, incapable of facing reality and miserably knowing it, so 'escaping' whenever possible.

Frankly, 4. is the summary and its sad and pitiable, even (especially?) when the escapism (drinking and whoring) just aggravates everything else.

Hating him? ... betrays more about the hater than the hated.

That is exactly what I think about Robert, only you phrase it much better than I ever would. :thumbsup:

Robert is a foolish drunk, pretty likable and very much capable of destoying everybody's life including his own without any intention to actually harm anyone.

[mormont]

He had the best claim as I understood it and as such the others "gave" the the throne to him. Or did I understand that wrong? Robert was the one who more or less started the war and had pretty much the biggest army and was the eldest of the family with the largest army. If I am wrong, please correct me but the way I understood was that it all of those earned him the title of the king by default sort of.

None of that suggests that Robert was forced to take the throne against his will, or even that he didn't make a positive decision to take it on his own. So he can't be absolved of blame for being a bad king on the grounds that he was forced into doing the job. On the contrary: he took the job on voluntarily.

True enough but at the same time, if he did nothing and didn't decide anything he wouldn't have been King for that long. A King who only does as his advisors tell him would be seen as a puppet king.

Again, though, this just won't wash in Robert's case. He wasn't asserting his independence for political reasons, he was sticking his oar in whenever he felt like it, without considering the consequences. (Which were disastrous both financially and politically, by the way.)

But I still think he did acknowledge his limitations but he didn't really gave a damn about them. I know that this makes it worse but meh, I somehow didn't mind that much.

Not giving a damn about your limitations is meh if you're a farm worker. If you're king, it's reprehensible. You're letting down people you swore an oath to.

I love reading about Cersei but believe me, I would punch her myself for all the shit she pulled off So, just because the person who slugged her was her husband does not make that action, in this single incident, bad for me. She has that and much more coming as the books continue and something tells me that she was not an angel to that point.

Be that as it may, there is never an excuse for domestic violence. It really is that simple. Nobody 'has it coming' and nothing Cersei did can make it OK for Robert to have behaved as he did. (Nor was it a 'single incident'.)

I mean he had to have a reason for not caring about his children.

I think it was the usual Robert reason, i.e. he wasn't very responsible.

True enough, it was sad to realize that Robert had become this terrible guy compared to his former self. I am just arguing that back then, he was not a bad man, he had his faults, true enough but he was not bad.

I have to say, I think Robert's flaws are much more serious than that. 'He had his faults' sounds as if he was inclined to forget people's birthdays. ;)

[Jaime L]

None of that suggests that Robert was forced to take the throne against his will, or even that he didn't make a positive decision to take it on his own. So he can't be absolved of blame for being a bad king on the grounds that he was forced into doing the job. On the contrary: he took the job on voluntarily.

I'm curious who else you think could've taken it? Once they were in active rebellion against the Targs, it's not like they could've just made Rhaegar or Viserys king. They couldn't unwind it once pandora's box was open.

I think it's pretty clear from the books that Robert wasn't rebelling to make himself king. He was rebelling because he, and Ned and the Arryns and Tullys believed it was the only reasonable course of action considering Aerys' actions. But who else could they make king at that point except he who had the best claim?

[Alexia]

But who else could they make king at that point except he who had the best claim?

1. He didn't have the best claim. Viserys and Danaerys had the best claim.

2. He didn't start the rebellion; Jon Arryn did.

[mormont]

I'm curious who else you think could've taken it? Once they were in active rebellion against the Targs, it's not like they could've just made Rhaegar or Viserys king. They couldn't unwind it once pandora's box was open.

I think it's pretty clear from the books that Robert wasn't rebelling to make himself king. He was rebelling because he, and Ned and the Arryns and Tullys believed it was the only reasonable course of action considering Aerys' actions. But who else could they make king at that point except he who had the best claim?

This has been discussed many times, but it's clear that up to and including the Sack, Jaime still thinks it would be possible for a Targ to sit the throne, albeit as a puppet king. From what we know, the main obstacle to that idea was Robert himself, who wouldn't contemplate any Targaryen on the throne. So to the extent that he was 'pushed into it', he pushed himself into it.

Certainly, there's no evidence to suggest that Ned, or Jon Arryn, or Hoster Tully, pushed Robert to take the throne against his will, nor that Robert viewed the idea with any real reluctance at the time. The idea that he's not to blame for being a bad king, because he knew he'd be crap but was forced into it, lacks any support at all.

[Jaime L]

1. He didn't have the best claim. Viserys and Danaerys had the best claim.

2. He didn't start the rebellion; Jon Arryn did.

1. So kill the father and install his children? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't look so kindly on the Baratheons, Arryns and Starks afterwards for such an "honor". Besides, from the Targ perspective, none of those houses have the right to make Kings. Once they were in rebellion against Aerys, they were in rebellion against the Targs as rulers as a whole.

2. By refusing to give up Ned and Robert. Not sure how it matters regardless.

[Datepalm]

I'm curious who else you think could've taken it? Once they were in active rebellion against the Targs, it's not like they could've just made Rhaegar or Viserys king. They couldn't unwind it once pandora's box was open.

I think it's pretty clear from the books that Robert wasn't rebelling to make himself king. He was rebelling because he, and Ned and the Arryns and Tullys believed it was the only reasonable course of action considering Aerys' actions. But who else could they make king at that point except he who had the best claim?

If he was really dead set against the idea they could have called a council or given it to Arryn or something. I think he was pushed into into it by Arryn, (he was young and popular and available to make the marriage alliance) but not a great deal of character displayed either way.

[Jaime L]

This has been discussed many times, but it's clear that up to and including the Sack, Jaime still thinks it would be possible for a Targ to sit the throne, albeit as a puppet king. From what we know, the main obstacle to that idea was Robert himself, who wouldn't contemplate any Targaryen on the throne. So to the extent that he was 'pushed into it', he pushed himself into it.

Certainly, there's no evidence to suggest that Ned, or Jon Arryn, or Hoster Tully, pushed Robert to take the throne against his will, nor that Robert viewed the idea with any real reluctance at the time. The idea that he's not to blame for being a bad king, because he knew he'd be crap but was forced into it, lacks any support at all.

The evidence is the conversation Ned and Robert had years after where Robert said a ) Ned would've made the better king and B ) He never wanted the throne, only Lyanna. Are we somehow to suspect this wasn't the case at the time of rebellion?

Also why accede to Jaime's viewpoint years after the fact in the first paragraph but not Robert's in the second? Is Jaime somehow more reliable in his rememberance of the rebellion? If we're going to take Jaime at his word that a Targ could've been placed on the throne after foricbly removing Aerys (which, BTW, I don't think is a reasonable perspective), why do not take Robert's on his that he never wanted the throne.

I think it takes more of a leap to argue that Robert did want the throne rather than didn't.

ETA: We need to find a way to make B ) not turn into B)

[Jaime L]

If he was really dead set against the idea they could have called a council or given it to Arryn or something. I think he was pushed into into it by Arryn, (he was young and popular and available to make the marriage alliance) but not a great deal of character displayed either way.

I agree Robert didn't show a lot of character by accepting. I don't think he was deadset against it, just he would've preferred not to take it.

I do think installing someone else, like Arryn, would've open a can of worms. If you overthrow the Targs and then install someone who doesn't have the best claim, it makes it seem still more like a naked power grab. Think their hold on Westeros was too tenuous for that.

[Alexia]

I do think installing someone else, like Arryn, would've open a can of worms. If you overthrow the Targs and then install someone who doesn't have the best claim, it makes it seem still more like a naked power grab. Think their hold on Westeros was too tenuous for that.

Robert didn't have the best claim. It was entirely a naked power grab, considering other claimnants were brutally massacred and children forced into exile with murderers at their heels.

The gods gave their verdict on the legitimacy of his claim anyway, by decreeing he would never have a legitimate child to assure his dynasty. :smoking:

[Lady Blackfish]

Unless I've got my quotes wrong, you forgot "dearest Ned". ;)

It just didn't come off as catchily in the context :smug:

I don't think it means that Cersei and Jaime hadn't had sex since the war and the wedding.

I am inclined to interpret things as A wilding did on this one, but let's put that aside. Robert doesn't know, even on the day he dies, that Cersei is cheating on him with Jaime and bearing Jaime's children and Jaime's alone. He's totally ignorant, so I don't think it has any relevance on the flaws he's accused of within his marriage: being a cheater and being a beater. That Cersei cheats too might make it seem like karmic justice to us as readers, but that doesn't have any bearing on the assessment of Robert's character, IMO. And the beating, well I'm with mormont on that.

If he was really dead set against the idea they could have called a council or given it to Arryn or something. I think he was pushed into into it by Arryn, (he was young and popular and available to make the marriage alliance) but not a great deal of character displayed either way.

That's my inclination too, however he did have fifteen years to realize that he sucked at the job and might have at least been invested enough in finding the right person to do his dirty work for him. Jon Arryn, I'm not sure how great he was as a hand, but picking Ned over Stannis ... why, Robert, why?

[Jaime L]

Robert didn't have the best claim. It was entirely a naked power grab, considering other claimnants were brutally massacred and children forced into exile with murderers at their heels.

The best claim of the houses that were going to make the next king. The other claimants were all Targs. Think it's naive to assume that they could install the next Targ in the succession and assume everything will be peachy and forgotten about how they forcibly removed Aerys despite his divine right ro rule.

[Alexia]

The best claim of the houses that were going to make the next king. The other claimants were all Targs. Think it's naive to assume that they could install the next Targ in the succession and assume everything will be peachy and forgotten about how they forcibly removed Aerys despite his divine right ro rule.

Actually, I do think that a Targaryen heir fostered by Jon Arryn (or one of the others) and married to the daughter of one of the rebels would not have gone against them. Aegon could have been married to a daughter of Robert or Stannis. Rhaenys could have been married to Robb and Danaerys to Renly. Viserys could have been married to Sansa or some other daughter. Ensure complete control of the children, marry them off before they reach the age of majority and you can easily control the crown with a minimal level of danger to oneself. Rhaegar and Aerys were the only two that had to die.

Danaerys and Viserys are much more dangerous gathering allies and armies in the Free Cities than they would be living in their father-in-law/foster father's home, surrounded by his soldiers and bannermen.