A Parcel of Rogues in a Nation: the Great Councils of Westeros (Part I)
credit to Marc Simonetti The “game of thrones” has become such a powerful symbol in the broader ASOIAF fandom that our perceptions of how Westerosi politics function have been distorted by it, resulting in an imaginary that is far too authoritarian and top-down. The King of Westeros is not an absolute monarch, nor is it normal for liege lords to wipe out entire houses for disloyalty. Rather,…An excellent take on the Great Council as an institution in general Westerosi politics and look at the First Great Council. I really appreciated the historical comparison between the Westerosi Great Councils and similar real-world institutions (I certainly never noticed the fact that Westerosi problems were almost always focused on succession and the quality of the ruler, and pretty much never on taxation).
Two scattered thoughts. One, the other reason I agree with @racefortheironthrone that the Vale threw in its lot for Viserys is because of the individual voting for House Arryn (and, presumably, House Royce of Runestone as well): Yorbert Royce, Lord Protector of the Vale and regent for little Lady Jeyne Arryn. With his daughter (? at the very least his successor in the seat of Runestone), Lady Rhea Royce, married to Viserys’ brother Daemon, and Viserys and Aemma having only a daughter despite nearly a decade of marriage, Lord Yorbert might have figured that Daemon stood a good chance of being his brother’s heir, and that a son of Lady Royce could very well become king someday. As regent to the future queen’s (possible) sister and perhaps father-in-law to the future king, Lord Yorbert had everything to gain from backing Viserys over young Laenor.
Two, it’s interesting to compare young Laenor in 101 AC to another underage candidate in another Great Council: Prince Maegor. Laenor was only seven – a fact Yandel points out when explaining why Laenor ultimately lost – but still managed to get a dynastically, if not numerically, impressive set of lords to back him, knowing that if the Old King died the next day there would be a nearly decade long regency until Laenor became king in fact as well as name. Comparatively, “few” lords acclaimed Maegor king in 233 AC, as “an infant king would have meant a long, contentious regency”. No doubt that this reaction owes a great deal to the trying years of Aegon III’s regency, when 13 different individuals shared power uneasily over a period of about six years – a period still some decades (and a civil war) away from Harrenhal in 101 AC and a monarchy which had at that point had only seen the much pleasanter regency of Lord Robar Royce and Dowager Queen Alyssa.
I think it also helped Laenor that he had a powerful and wealthy house backing his play for the Iron Throne and helping to organize potential supporters behind him.
Poor Maegor didn’t have any sponsor like Corlys Velaryon.
RFTIT Tumblr Backup 