A mirror of the eeesite "A Song of Ice and Fire"

This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / A Clash of Kings II / Joffrey

Next 20 Messages

Emily
User ID: 3153024 Oct 22nd 9:33 AM
Well, here's the topic we've all (not) been waiting for, concerning a pile of slime...er...I mean Joffrey of the Houses Baratheon and Lannister, the First of his Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and First Men, and lord of the Seven Kingdoms (what's left of them).

Emily
User ID: 3153024 Oct 22nd 9:36 AM
What most puzzles me about the scumbag is why he has so much power. You wouldn't catch a 13-year-old King in medieval England being able to execute a powerful lord, especially against the orders of his Regent. Edward V was deposed by his Regent, Edward III had to forcibly overthrow his mother and her lover to gain power, and Richard II was 22 by the time he won the right to rule. So why has Joffrey got this power? How much of it is legal? And what will happen when he clashes with his new Hand?

Min
User ID: 1446254 Oct 22nd 9:48 AM
Well, I am not sure if he has real power. Right now he is ruled by his mummy, who herself is ruled by her daddy... Lannister's Dynasty. :-) Poor piece of sh** Joffrey is just a puppet on a string, I think. Though a cruel and dangerous puppet, whose mother and grandfather grant him too much time to play his cruel games in order to keep him well leashed.

I suppose Tywin might try to off him sooner or later. Either that happens - or the 13-years old puppet comes to his senses and survives. If that happens, he will grow to be a very dangerous man.

KAH
User ID: 9209903 Oct 22nd 11:21 AM
Emily;

I think the answer is simple - Joffrey has power because;

1) Cersei is letting him have it. She has tossed away all chances of giving the little snot a bit of discipline, and thus there are only two ways to rule Joff - either by force or by wits. Cersei won't use the former, and probably don't think the latter is proper, either (or she isn't clever enough).

2) Cersei has made Joffrey full of himself (or he has always been that way, and Cersei have done nothing to remedy it) - he believes that all power is rightfully his, and that he should do whatever is his want. Had you substituted Tommen for Joff, Cersei would have much less trouble of controlling the King.

Joff has only ruled a few weeks/months, and now that Tywin is in town, the power probably is (at least for the time being) gone.

Ned was killed when Tywin was not there, and all the other stupid actions of Joffrey was also allowed in this period. Cersei would not do anything herself, and no one else would have the guts to speak up - Cersei would pound on them like a hawk, seeing it as an attempt to undermine Joffrey's power.

KAH
User ID: 9209903 Oct 22nd 11:32 AM
As for legality...it's unknown.

Supposedly the King has absolute power, but in practice this power probably is quite a bit limited by custom (i.e. when the King oversteps too harshly, the nobles rebel - this probably draws up some informal limits on the King's power).

Exactly to what extent it is limited, is hard to say.
The borderlines probably is somewhat muddled by the ever-existent dimension of politics - when there's something to gain from it, many will see through their fingers on the King overstepping himself.

Uh...I'm just realizing that you might have asked this question in relation to Cersei's (former) position as Regent, and I have to say that I'm unsure.
I guess strictly legal, Cersei could overrule her son until he was of age, but she chose not to do so. Tywin will have less compunctions in that respect.

labor
User ID: 8479113 Oct 22nd 1:23 PM

Well, according to Tyrion the Regent and the Hand can order the king around all they wish until he is of age. I agree that Joff having that much real power during AGOT/ACOK is due to Cersei's unwillingness to overrule him and her pouncing on everyone who tries (i.e. Tyrion who has no compunction to overrule Joff's orders and was always obeyed so far).

I have no doubt that Cersei could have stopped Ned's execution, but either she didn't react quickly enough, or like Cat she wasn't ready to overrule her son in public, because it might endanger his future independant rule and whatever respect (?!) and fear people might have of him.

Ran
User ID: 0283314 Oct 22nd 2:31 PM
Hrm ... well, she did make the attempt, speaking to him, but he refused. So, she was quick enough. But ... yeah, I don't think she was able to publically stop him. Though, on the other hand, she gives the impression that if Slynt and Payne had actually looked to her first, she could have stopped it.

She complained to Tyrion that they did what they did damnably quickly and without a word from her, eager to fulfill Joff's command.

Padraig
User ID: 2929904 Oct 23rd 4:37 PM
I have suspected that Cersei likes to put the blame on others for any stupid mistake she is involved in. She blames Slynt and Payne for the death of Ned when the only people she could blame is Joff or herself. If they really went against her then why didn't she try to remove them from their positions?

Otherwise I agree with what everyone says. The crowds blood fever and refusing to publicly overrule her son comspired to get Ned killed.

And regarding Joff's future. Rather than seeing Tywin killing him if he is a threat I see Tywin trying to break him. And if that happens I see him suceeding.

Emily
User ID: 9851073 Oct 26th 7:22 AM
I can understand Joff getting away with Ned's death because Cersei didn't feel able to overrule him in public, and because Payne acted so fast. But I don't understand why it was considered so natural for Joff to sit in judgement mutilating minstrels etc as if he was an adult. Any medieval king who tried to even sit in on a Council session would be told to run along and play with his toys. But I suppose it's a result of the Seven Kingdom's sad failure to develop any constraints on the King, whether minor or not. Why haven't they got the makings of a Parliament yet? Where's the Magna Carta, Simon de Montford, etc?

Robert certainly seemed to think he was giving Ned rule over the Kingdom by making him Regent, and Ser Lancel the Twit thought that 'The Regent rules until the King is of age'. So why didn't anyone explain this to Joffrey?

labor
User ID: 8785553 Oct 26th 7:57 AM

But that's really obvious Emily: because Joff's Regent is Cersei. It is she who lets him run rampant. No normal Regent would allow the minor King such power.Tyrion wasn't a Regent, but he immediately set out to curb Joff's power and didn't completely succeed only because of Cersei's resistance. According to Tyrion, law was on his (and Regent's) side in the matter. And wasn't there some nifty phrase about Tywin assuming governance of the Realm until Joff comes of age, during the grand reception after the battle for KL?

It is however, quite interesting that Catelyn does a similar thing with Robb. In the beginning everyone thinks that she should be giving orders with Ned gone South/emprisoned, but she continuously shoves a 14-15 -year old Robb into position of power/ decision, i.e.: " So long as Lord Eddard is away, my son is the master of Winterfell", "You named yourself battle commander. Command".
I really wonder if they have such thing as guardians or whatever in Westeros, who manage the affairs until a lord comes of age. There seem to be lots of 14-year-old lords running around and giving orders, i.e. Bar Emmon, Cley Cerwyn, Benfred Tallhart, etc.

BTW, was there a single Regency under Targaryen rule and if yes, then for whom? Aegon Dragonsbane?

Ran
User ID: 0283314 Oct 26th 11:35 AM
Benfred Tallhart appears to have been at least of an age with Robb, if not Theon, so he's 16-18 (for some reason I think I recall 18.)

But, in any case, Leobald Tallhart was castellan. Cley Cerwyn left Cerwyn Castle ... so one imagines some steward or castellan managed affairs there, too.

I suspect it's the case with all the very-young-lords. Not guardians, but older and more experienced men who probably run the important affairs while the younger men (or boys, as the case may be) represent their House with their presence.

No regencies mentioned for the Targaryens at all.

Audrey
User ID: 8005213 Oct 26th 3:13 PM
If I'm not mistaken young monarchs with regents rarely survive to adulthood. Usually the regent has ended up as the reigning monarch (after having disposed of the irritating child). In fact, the only one I can think of from real life history was King James I of England and Scotland. Quite a miracle really since he was the son of Mary, Queen of Scots and wasn't named heir to Elizabeth, Queen of England until she lay on her deathbed.

It seems very like to me that Joffery is to die very soon with perhaps his grandfather taking the crown.

labor
User ID: 8785553 Oct 26th 5:11 PM

Well, it depends on what lands you take into account, Audrey. For late mideival and early modern France and England you are mistaken. Most monarchs who came to the throne as the minors did survive to adulthood there. It helped that in many cases (in most cases in France) Queen Mother was the Regent (i.e. in cases of Saint Louis, Edward III, Francois II, Charles IX of France, Louis XIII, Louis XIV, Mary Queen of Scots, etc). IIRC nothing untoward ever happened in such cases as long as the mother remained in power. It was a bit more dangerous for the young king if someone else was the Regent, especially an ambitious uncle, but Richard II, Henry VI of England, Edward VI (Regency Council), James VI of Scottland, Louis XVI, and doubtless some others whom I don't recall managed to survive even so.
I don't know about the other European countries and time periods, but in the East being a minor monarch was indeed almost tantamount to the death sentence.

However, in Tywin's case, there is little reason for him to kill both Joff and Tommen and to claim the crown. Killing one's own descendants is never a smart move (which is why various Queen Regents never(?) went for it), especially if one is as old as Tywin.

Steve
User ID: 9084913 Oct 27th 3:09 PM
Tywin won't kill Joffrey. There are plenty of others who would be glad too, and its only a matter of time until they succeed.

Tywin will rule in Joffrey's name though. Tyrion the twisted dwarf managed to make Joff knuckle under and I have no doubt that Tywin will be able to do the same.

More importantly, Cersie may feel able to challenge Tyrion. She knows, or will quickly learn, that the same rules don't apply to Tywin.

Emily
User ID: 0471064 Oct 28th 4:50 AM
Labor, there was the Empress Irene of Constantinople sometime in the Middle Ages, who overthrew her son and usurped his throne. Of course, being a loving mother she didn't kill him - just blinded him instead.

Chris Greenway
User ID: 9510053 Oct 28th 5:53 AM
Tywin won't kill Joffrey, he will attempt to break him and rule through him. Was it just me or did others seem to feel that there were times even Cersei seemed a little scared by what a little psychopath she'd unleashed on Westeros? And Emily was it Irene of Constantinople or Agrippina that blinded her son?

Malice
User ID: 0826264 Oct 28th 6:21 PM
It was Irene who blinded her son. Which Agrippina do you mean? ; ) The one I know of was *killed* by her son.

LIndaElane
User ID: 7733333 Oct 28th 10:01 PM
Why does he have so much power? Here is my theory. You must add five to the ages of all characters in the book to get the age which they act and which they are treated as if they have attained. Well, I am speaking of the age in this "universe". In the ASOIAF universe, characters simply act older than their age and are treated older than their age.

Yes, I know there are mitigating factors to that theory. Joan of Arc was 14 and look how much power she had. However, these things seem the exception and not the rule in the medieval world. Therefore I am sticking with my "add five" theory. An 18 year old king might have plenty of power, and Joffery seems to have about as much power as a king of that age might.

Ran
User ID: 0283314 Oct 29th 6:47 AM
I'd definently have to disagree on that "add 5." Joffrey has as much power as his regent Cersei has. If Cersei didn't dote on him so much, he'd be seriously curbed.

When Tyrion arrives, one sees that Joffrey has almost no hand whatsoever in serious events. He's a figurehead and the only thing he can do is screw up relations with the public when, unfortunately, he's brought before the public.

Robb has shown in _A Game of Thrones_ that he's not experienced enough to be 16+5. He shows self-doubt. Yes, he's grown more sure of himself, but his on-camera time (so to speak) in _A Clash of Kings_ was all of 5-6 pages.

LindaElane
User ID: 7733333 Oct 29th 10:05 PM
I sort of think Robb acts 21. Then again, maybe I know some honesst 21 years olds who have their doubts about things. I think the Stark daughters definitely act "plus five". Really, I think everyone in the book under 21 acts "plus five" witht he exception of Rickon. I am not saying Joffery was particularly "mature". He was as evil and powerful at 13 as we might expect from an 18 year old. I will admit that Joffery is not the major exemplor of the "plus five" theory, but I think he does fit with it.

Next 20 Messages

Emily User ID: 3153024	Oct 22nd 9:33 AM Well, here's the topic we've all (not) been waiting for, concerning a pile of slime...er...I mean Joffrey of the Houses Baratheon and Lannister, the First of his Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and First Men, and lord of the Seven Kingdoms (what's left of them).
Emily User ID: 3153024	Oct 22nd 9:36 AM What most puzzles me about the scumbag is why he has so much power. You wouldn't catch a 13-year-old King in medieval England being able to execute a powerful lord, especially against the orders of his Regent. Edward V was deposed by his Regent, Edward III had to forcibly overthrow his mother and her lover to gain power, and Richard II was 22 by the time he won the right to rule. So why has Joffrey got this power? How much of it is legal? And what will happen when he clashes with his new Hand?
Min User ID: 1446254	Oct 22nd 9:48 AM Well, I am not sure if he has real power. Right now he is ruled by his mummy, who herself is ruled by her daddy... Lannister's Dynasty. :-) Poor piece of sh** Joffrey is just a puppet on a string, I think. Though a cruel and dangerous puppet, whose mother and grandfather grant him too much time to play his cruel games in order to keep him well leashed. I suppose Tywin might try to off him sooner or later. Either that happens - or the 13-years old puppet comes to his senses and survives. If that happens, he will grow to be a very dangerous man.
KAH User ID: 9209903	Oct 22nd 11:21 AM Emily; I think the answer is simple - Joffrey has power because; 1) Cersei is letting him have it. She has tossed away all chances of giving the little snot a bit of discipline, and thus there are only two ways to rule Joff - either by force or by wits. Cersei won't use the former, and probably don't think the latter is proper, either (or she isn't clever enough). 2) Cersei has made Joffrey full of himself (or he has always been that way, and Cersei have done nothing to remedy it) - he believes that all power is rightfully his, and that he should do whatever is his want. Had you substituted Tommen for Joff, Cersei would have much less trouble of controlling the King. Joff has only ruled a few weeks/months, and now that Tywin is in town, the power probably is (at least for the time being) gone. Ned was killed when Tywin was not there, and all the other stupid actions of Joffrey was also allowed in this period. Cersei would not do anything herself, and no one else would have the guts to speak up - Cersei would pound on them like a hawk, seeing it as an attempt to undermine Joffrey's power.
KAH User ID: 9209903	Oct 22nd 11:32 AM As for legality...it's unknown. Supposedly the King has absolute power, but in practice this power probably is quite a bit limited by custom (i.e. when the King oversteps too harshly, the nobles rebel - this probably draws up some informal limits on the King's power). Exactly to what extent it is limited, is hard to say. The borderlines probably is somewhat muddled by the ever-existent dimension of politics - when there's something to gain from it, many will see through their fingers on the King overstepping himself. Uh...I'm just realizing that you might have asked this question in relation to Cersei's (former) position as Regent, and I have to say that I'm unsure. I guess strictly legal, Cersei could overrule her son until he was of age, but she chose not to do so. Tywin will have less compunctions in that respect.
labor User ID: 8479113	Oct 22nd 1:23 PM Well, according to Tyrion the Regent and the Hand can order the king around all they wish until he is of age. I agree that Joff having that much real power during AGOT/ACOK is due to Cersei's unwillingness to overrule him and her pouncing on everyone who tries (i.e. Tyrion who has no compunction to overrule Joff's orders and was always obeyed so far). I have no doubt that Cersei could have stopped Ned's execution, but either she didn't react quickly enough, or like Cat she wasn't ready to overrule her son in public, because it might endanger his future independant rule and whatever respect (?!) and fear people might have of him.
Ran User ID: 0283314	Oct 22nd 2:31 PM Hrm ... well, she did make the attempt, speaking to him, but he refused. So, she was quick enough. But ... yeah, I don't think she was able to publically stop him. Though, on the other hand, she gives the impression that if Slynt and Payne had actually looked to her first, she could have stopped it. She complained to Tyrion that they did what they did damnably quickly and without a word from her, eager to fulfill Joff's command.
Padraig User ID: 2929904	Oct 23rd 4:37 PM I have suspected that Cersei likes to put the blame on others for any stupid mistake she is involved in. She blames Slynt and Payne for the death of Ned when the only people she could blame is Joff or herself. If they really went against her then why didn't she try to remove them from their positions? Otherwise I agree with what everyone says. The crowds blood fever and refusing to publicly overrule her son comspired to get Ned killed. And regarding Joff's future. Rather than seeing Tywin killing him if he is a threat I see Tywin trying to break him. And if that happens I see him suceeding.
Emily User ID: 9851073	Oct 26th 7:22 AM I can understand Joff getting away with Ned's death because Cersei didn't feel able to overrule him in public, and because Payne acted so fast. But I don't understand why it was considered so natural for Joff to sit in judgement mutilating minstrels etc as if he was an adult. Any medieval king who tried to even sit in on a Council session would be told to run along and play with his toys. But I suppose it's a result of the Seven Kingdom's sad failure to develop any constraints on the King, whether minor or not. Why haven't they got the makings of a Parliament yet? Where's the Magna Carta, Simon de Montford, etc? Robert certainly seemed to think he was giving Ned rule over the Kingdom by making him Regent, and Ser Lancel the Twit thought that 'The Regent rules until the King is of age'. So why didn't anyone explain this to Joffrey?
labor User ID: 8785553	Oct 26th 7:57 AM But that's really obvious Emily: because Joff's Regent is Cersei. It is she who lets him run rampant. No normal Regent would allow the minor King such power.Tyrion wasn't a Regent, but he immediately set out to curb Joff's power and didn't completely succeed only because of Cersei's resistance. According to Tyrion, law was on his (and Regent's) side in the matter. And wasn't there some nifty phrase about Tywin assuming governance of the Realm until Joff comes of age, during the grand reception after the battle for KL? It is however, quite interesting that Catelyn does a similar thing with Robb. In the beginning everyone thinks that she should be giving orders with Ned gone South/emprisoned, but she continuously shoves a 14-15 -year old Robb into position of power/ decision, i.e.: " So long as Lord Eddard is away, my son is the master of Winterfell", "You named yourself battle commander. Command". I really wonder if they have such thing as guardians or whatever in Westeros, who manage the affairs until a lord comes of age. There seem to be lots of 14-year-old lords running around and giving orders, i.e. Bar Emmon, Cley Cerwyn, Benfred Tallhart, etc. BTW, was there a single Regency under Targaryen rule and if yes, then for whom? Aegon Dragonsbane?
Ran User ID: 0283314	Oct 26th 11:35 AM Benfred Tallhart appears to have been at least of an age with Robb, if not Theon, so he's 16-18 (for some reason I think I recall 18.) But, in any case, Leobald Tallhart was castellan. Cley Cerwyn left Cerwyn Castle ... so one imagines some steward or castellan managed affairs there, too. I suspect it's the case with all the very-young-lords. Not guardians, but older and more experienced men who probably run the important affairs while the younger men (or boys, as the case may be) represent their House with their presence. No regencies mentioned for the Targaryens at all.
Audrey User ID: 8005213	Oct 26th 3:13 PM If I'm not mistaken young monarchs with regents rarely survive to adulthood. Usually the regent has ended up as the reigning monarch (after having disposed of the irritating child). In fact, the only one I can think of from real life history was King James I of England and Scotland. Quite a miracle really since he was the son of Mary, Queen of Scots and wasn't named heir to Elizabeth, Queen of England until she lay on her deathbed. It seems very like to me that Joffery is to die very soon with perhaps his grandfather taking the crown.
labor User ID: 8785553	Oct 26th 5:11 PM Well, it depends on what lands you take into account, Audrey. For late mideival and early modern France and England you are mistaken. Most monarchs who came to the throne as the minors did survive to adulthood there. It helped that in many cases (in most cases in France) Queen Mother was the Regent (i.e. in cases of Saint Louis, Edward III, Francois II, Charles IX of France, Louis XIII, Louis XIV, Mary Queen of Scots, etc). IIRC nothing untoward ever happened in such cases as long as the mother remained in power. It was a bit more dangerous for the young king if someone else was the Regent, especially an ambitious uncle, but Richard II, Henry VI of England, Edward VI (Regency Council), James VI of Scottland, Louis XVI, and doubtless some others whom I don't recall managed to survive even so. I don't know about the other European countries and time periods, but in the East being a minor monarch was indeed almost tantamount to the death sentence. However, in Tywin's case, there is little reason for him to kill both Joff and Tommen and to claim the crown. Killing one's own descendants is never a smart move (which is why various Queen Regents never(?) went for it), especially if one is as old as Tywin.
Steve User ID: 9084913	Oct 27th 3:09 PM Tywin won't kill Joffrey. There are plenty of others who would be glad too, and its only a matter of time until they succeed. Tywin will rule in Joffrey's name though. Tyrion the twisted dwarf managed to make Joff knuckle under and I have no doubt that Tywin will be able to do the same. More importantly, Cersie may feel able to challenge Tyrion. She knows, or will quickly learn, that the same rules don't apply to Tywin.
Emily User ID: 0471064	Oct 28th 4:50 AM Labor, there was the Empress Irene of Constantinople sometime in the Middle Ages, who overthrew her son and usurped his throne. Of course, being a loving mother she didn't kill him - just blinded him instead.
Chris Greenway User ID: 9510053	Oct 28th 5:53 AM Tywin won't kill Joffrey, he will attempt to break him and rule through him. Was it just me or did others seem to feel that there were times even Cersei seemed a little scared by what a little psychopath she'd unleashed on Westeros? And Emily was it Irene of Constantinople or Agrippina that blinded her son?
Malice User ID: 0826264	Oct 28th 6:21 PM *It was Irene who blinded her son. Which Agrippina do you mean? ; ) The one I know of was killed* by her son.**
LIndaElane User ID: 7733333	Oct 28th 10:01 PM Why does he have so much power? Here is my theory. You must add five to the ages of all characters in the book to get the age which they act and which they are treated as if they have attained. Well, I am speaking of the age in this "universe". In the ASOIAF universe, characters simply act older than their age and are treated older than their age. Yes, I know there are mitigating factors to that theory. Joan of Arc was 14 and look how much power she had. However, these things seem the exception and not the rule in the medieval world. Therefore I am sticking with my "add five" theory. An 18 year old king might have plenty of power, and Joffery seems to have about as much power as a king of that age might.
Ran User ID: 0283314	Oct 29th 6:47 AM I'd definently have to disagree on that "add 5." Joffrey has as much power as his regent Cersei has. If Cersei didn't dote on him so much, he'd be seriously curbed. When Tyrion arrives, one sees that Joffrey has almost no hand whatsoever in serious events. He's a figurehead and the only thing he can do is screw up relations with the public when, unfortunately, he's brought before the public. Robb has shown in _A Game of Thrones_ that he's not experienced enough to be 16+5. He shows self-doubt. Yes, he's grown more sure of himself, but his on-camera time (so to speak) in _A Clash of Kings_ was all of 5-6 pages.
LindaElane User ID: 7733333	Oct 29th 10:05 PM I sort of think Robb acts 21. Then again, maybe I know some honesst 21 years olds who have their doubts about things. I think the Stark daughters definitely act "plus five". Really, I think everyone in the book under 21 acts "plus five" witht he exception of Rickon. I am not saying Joffery was particularly "mature". He was as evil and powerful at 13 as we might expect from an 18 year old. I will admit that Joffery is not the major exemplor of the "plus five" theory, but I think he does fit with it.