What changes is that it’s not Jeyne Poole at Winterfell, and Ramsay Snow dies of a slit throat on his wedding night.
Author: stevenattewell
Precisely how much of the Red Keep would you have to demolish to get the Iron Throne out the front door, do you think?
Bold of you to assume any of it would still be standing.
Would it be practical to take the Iron Throne North? The TV version wouldn’t be too hard, but isn’t the book version supposed to be enormous?
You don’t take the throne of your enemies back home because it’s practical.
You do it because it’s badass.
If Robb had used Theon the way Ned was planning to as ransom for the Iron Fleet, do you think Balon would have still gone ahead an invaded the North?
Yes. He was already planning to attack the North before Theon landed at Pyke.
Did Jaime have to apprehend Chelsted when he confronted Aerys about the wildfire and perhaps even participate in his execution by restraining him or something? And if so, why has he repressed it when he has revealed a deal more in his POV and even those of others?
I don’t think so. I think that would be in Jaime V when he describe’s Chelsted’s death.
Lets say Robb Stark for whatever reason in his strategey ends up taking out Tywin/occupying King’s Landing….what would he do with the defeated capital? Just leave it empty and go north, declare it for Stannis, or something else entirely?
Taking out Tywin and occupying KL are two different things.
Taking out Tywin is more of an immediate military accomplishment – it would involve the elimination of the Lannister host in the Riverlands, and essentially removing the Lannisters as combatants in the War of Five Kings, especially since the death of the liege lord of the Westerlands would be a huge morale/political loss on top of the military defeat.
Taking King’s Landing is more of a political accomplishment – it wouldn’t end the Lannisters as military combatants, Tywin would still have his army in the field, but without the Iron Throne (and presumably a king to put on it), political legitimacy would become an issue for him.
As to what Robb would do with it? I think there would be quite a bit of debate about that, similar to when he was acclaimed King in the North. I imagine the Riverlanders, being more proximate (and thus more exposed) to King’s Landing, would be pushing for Robb to sit the Iron Throne by right of conquest, whereas the Northerners would see that as demonstrating too much of a “Southron” inclination to Robb’s reign and would be more likely to want the Iron Throne left vacant (or take it home, in a reverse Stone of Scone, maybe). And the more politically calculating would probably want Robb to use it as a bargaining chip with Stannis or Renly or whoever.
You’ve cited Edward of Lancaster before as a proto-Joffrey. May I ask why? Yes, he’s described as having been enthusiastic about war (the ‘lalks of nothing but making war’ thing), but that’s a far cry from Joffrey’s brand of indiscriminate sadism, isn’t it?
Here are the similarities:
- Disputed paternity: Yorkists alleged for a long time that the combination of Henry VI’s notorious piety on matters of the flesh and his repeated mental breakdowns meant that Marguerite d’Anjou had slept with one of her court favorites (either the Duke of Somerset or the Earl of Ormonde) to conceive an heir after eight years with no issue.
- Violent tendencies: Edward was more than a bit enthusiastic about war; in addition to talking about war, he also “talks of nothing but of cutting off heads,” and “delighted in attacking and assaulting the young companions attending him,” although it’s a bit ambiguous whether that was referring to military training. What’s not ambiguous is that, after the Second Battle of St. Albans, Edward ordered that the two Yorkist knights who had been guarding his father be decapitated, despite the fact that they had voluntarily stayed on the field to protect his father and had honorably surrendered. He was also reportedly a big fan of the decapitation and spiking of the Duke of York, his son the Earl of Rutland, and the Earl of Salisbury after Wakefield, so the beheading thing was a bit of a common thread.
- Engaged to the enemy: Edward of Lancaster was married to Anne Neville, the younger daughter of the Earl of Warwick, who had been one of the chief supporters of the Yorkist cause and the opposing general at the Second Battle of Albans, for example.
- Similar rival: Just as Joffrey was enraged at the victories of Robb Stark the Young Wolf, Edward of Lancaster’s main opponent was the young Edward IV, who similar to Robb Stark was always victorious when he was commanding but who was undone when he broke his betrothal and made an impulsive marriage.
Logistically, how does one get a kidnapped bride back over a 700 foot ice wall?
I would guess that raiders trying to transport humans back over the Wall would probably opt for the gorge or the boat route instead of trying to make the climb, but it’s not impossible.
RFTIT Tumblr Weeklyish Roundup
RFTIT Tumblr Weeklyish Roundup
Hey everyone! Now that Jon IV is done, time to catch up on some Tumblr stuff:
ASOIAF:
I’ve read all your essays on Stannis, now I have questions. It could still fit his character that he would sacrifice Shireen to take back WF because he believes to do that he has to rally the north to defeat the Others. It’s just inserting an extra step into his goals. Also, would Jon and Sansa really be “some weird combination of Northmen”? Doesnt it make for better storytelling if the Starks have to fight for their home? What’s satisfying about Stannis just handing it over to them?
Hi.
I thoroughly disagree. If Stannis wasn’t willing to burn strangers to help his army deal with the snows at the Crofter’s Village, I don’t think an ordinary obstacle is going to motivate him to do the thing he would most abhor. Second, as I’ve stated, Shireen doesn’t come south from the Wall unless there’s somewhere sage for his heir to be, like Winterfell. So I don’t think it can happen before he retakes Winterfell.
The “weird combination” I was referring to we see at work in the purely random decisions by the various Houses of the North leading up to the Battle of the Bastards: why do the Glovers refuse to aid the Starks against the Boltons, when they’re marching in Stannis’ armies in the books? Why do the Manderlys stay neutral until the conflict’s over, given their intense motivation to revenge themselves against the Freys? Why does Smalljon Umber fight for the Boltons, when the Umbers are ancient enemies of the Boltons and Umber himself died in the Red Wedding in the books?
And I don’t think Stannis is simply going to “hand over” Winterfell – there’s going to be a lot of political conflict over what Stark is going to inherit, not the instant switch of loyalties we see in Season 6.
RFTIT Tumblr Backup 