KitN = Lord of the Seven Kingdoms

[Ribupr]

I haven't seen this idea mentioned on the board as of yet (not that I looked too hard), and I was wondering what people think on this idea. Because I don't even know what I think.

I'm gonna guess and say that most people believe that, after all is said and done, one of three scenarios will play out in regards to the ruling of Westeros.

1.) The Seven Kingdoms will be ruled similar to how it began...from Kings Landing, with a united realm.

2.) There will be a King in the North, and a King in the South.

3.) The kingdoms will be split again and ruled separately.

I recently had an idea about a fourth option I haven't seen mentioned. First, let me lay out a few things. GRRM said something along the lines that the story began at Winterfell with all the characters, and they will all collide in the same place at the end. The Others are going to cross the wall at some point IMO. Not to do so would be somewhat anticlimactic. Now, I don't see the TV series as canon, but in the HotU, the Red Keep was messed up, and it gave the sense that Kings Landing would be fucked up by the end. How it happens, I don't know. Also, my personal belief is that Jon will be king (I know it is somewhat cliche, but I strongly believe it). But I don't believe he will ever go south, as do many posters.

Now here is my thought. If Kings Landing is wiped out, could the seven kingdoms be ruled by Jon (or whoever) from Winterfell, rather than from somewhere in the south?

The North could more than likely get the Riverlands and the Vale, if certain things pan out. And I am sure there are dozens of scenarios that could play out to get the other kingdoms to join, be it by force or choice. Whether Jon proving himself in battle, or the realm learning R+L=J, or whatever, all I am saying is that it isn't unreasonable that the realm could be ruled from the North.

So does anyone else think this could happen? Would that make some of you doubters take another look at Jon eventually becoming king? Because whenever the "Jon will be king" theories emerge, there are many saying "No, his story is in the North." Or "If he will be king, it will be King in the North." Because this scenario would kill both of those arguments.

[Corvo Attano]

The south would never accept a king ruling them from Winterfell.

If Kings Landing is wiped out, the 7K will cease to exist, because it is literally the heart of the 7K. The only other place that the realm could be ruled from would be Dragonstone.

[The Mountain That Flies]

The south would never accept a king ruling them from Winterfell.

If Kings Landing is wiped out, the 7K will cease to exist, because it is literally the heart of the 7K. The only other place that the realm could be ruled from would be Dragonstone.

Harrenhall could work, if it was refurbished and garrisoned properly, but I agree. Maybe the Riverlands and the Iron Islands could be ruled from Winterfell, but no one else would accept it.

[Ribupr]

The south would never accept a king ruling them from Winterfell.

Why not? If the right leader was in place that everyone could get behind, why does it matter where he sits?

I can give a scenario where it could happen just fine. Im not saying it's likely, but it is definitely possible.

[The Mountain That Flies]

Why not? If the right leader was in place that everyone could get behind, why does it matter where he sits?

I can give a scenario where it could happen just fine. Im not saying it's likely, but it is definitely possible.

Because after the threat (the Others, Dany, or whatever) is over, there wouldn't be a great need to stay unified. Enough lords would decide with King's Landing gone, the old Westeros should be restored.

The simple fact is, the North is extremely different culturally from the South, and the Southron lords wouldn't accept being ruled by an alien culture hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away when they know full well from history they can rule themselves. Unless the North has all the dragons, they wouldn't have the resources to deal with rebellious lords south of Riverrun.

[Corvo Attano]

Why not? If the right leader was in place that everyone could get behind, why does it matter where he sits?

I can give a scenario where it could happen just fine. Im not saying it's likely, but it is definitely possible.

Pretty much what TMTF said. Dorne, Highgarden, etc, are too culturally and geographically different from The North for them to accept a northern king ruling from a seat in the North. Winterfell is too far removed from the south for a king at actually be able to successfully rule from there.

[Ribupr]

Because after the threat (the Others, Dany, or whatever) is over, there wouldn't be a great need to stay unified. Enough lords would decide with King's Landing gone, the old Westeros should be restored.

The simple fact is, the North is extremely different culturally from the South, and the Southron lords wouldn't accept being ruled by an alien culture hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away when they know full well from history they can rule themselves. Unless the North has all the dragons, they wouldn't have the resources to deal with rebellious lords south of Riverrun.

I'm just saying it COULD happen given the right circumstances. I'm not sure if it will, and in all seriousness probably not, but it could work something like this...

North: Done

Riverlands: If Edmure and/or Blackfish regain control...Done

Vale: If Sansa backstabs LF and takes control, or she marries Harry the Heir and convinces him to join the North, it could work...Done

Stormlands: I feel that Stannis regrets his choice of not obeying his king in the rebellion, and if he found out who Jon is, he may get in line (doubtful though). Or if Stannis dies, and his bannermen choose to follow him rather than risk Shireen's life, they may join him to add to the numbers, seeing how the south is already pissed at them...Done

Iron Islands: If Asha or Theon are ruling (Euron and Victarion won't make it to the end) then they could support them. Theon for redemption, and Asha because that was what she was going to do anyways before she lost the kings moot...Done

Dorne: If Dorne gets behind fAegon and Dany kills him, Dorne would not be too happy with her, especially after Quentyn. With a marriage (Jon and Arianne, which makes sense based on personalities) they could form and alliance, especially if Doran knows about R=L...Done

The Westerlands are tricky, because it's up in the air who will be running shit, so I won't count them. The Reach is another one, but the Reach was loyal to the Targs in the past, so maybe they will be again. And if the Reach has a lot of soldiers, maybe a marriage between Jon and Margaey instead of with Dorne. Regardless, it could be 6 kingdoms vs 2 kingdoms, and those numbers favor the North I would think.

Again, I don't think this will happen, all I am saying is that it could. And Im sure there are a bunch more scenarios that could play out that lead to the same conclusion.

[Fire Eater]

If Jon ruled from WF it would only be temporary until a royal castle at KL is built.

[Leif]

If Jon ruled from WF it would only be temporary until a royal castle at KL is built.

And then he gets shanked before he can sit on the throne. FIN.

[JonNonRegis]

This is very hard to answer without knowing the rest of the plot.

I could easily imagine scenarios that would lead to all three of your outcomes and others besides.

Objections that they could never work -- for instance "Southron lords would never accept rule from Winterfell" -- are dependent on Westeros remaining the same.

But if there's one thing we can be damn sure of, it won't remain the same.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

It would depend on the Liege Lords. Tyrion would be alright with it.

[Fire Eater]

And then he gets shanked before he can sit on the throne. FIN.

Not with the threat of dragons, and the known devastation they can cause. He would also have most of the forces of Westeros under his control. He might even insist upon hostages.

[TargaryenFanatic]

Harrenhall could work, if it was refurbished and garrisoned properly, but I agree. Maybe the Riverlands and the Iron Islands could be ruled from Winterfell, but no one else would accept it.

I'm going to have to concur. And maybe the Vale. But to seriously pose that Winterfell-a castle with no location on the sea, three-fourths up the kingdoms, and in a barren tundra-could control places like the Arbor and Horn Hill...is to pose that Rome could control places like India, and Mongolia, after open rebellion from several different factions, and invasion from another.

[Ghost's Shadow]

Hmm, people didn't *not* form plans to further their own Houses and put on the throne who they wanted to be on it when Kings were ruling from King's Landing, so the perhaps more central location didn't matter much for them.

If we're thinking that (some of) the Wildlings, or even (some of) the Lands beyond the Wall will belong to a new, united kingdom then it could make sense for the King's seat to move upward. I don't know where, though, but if it's someone of Stark blood it would make sense for me if they stayed where their trees and their Gods are.