Game Of Thrones: Who Claimed The Iron Throne?

Hey guys! Let's dive into one of the most debated and anticipated conclusions in television history: the ending of Game of Thrones. Specifically, who ended up ruling Westeros after all the battles, betrayals, and dragon fire? Buckle up, because it’s a bit of a complicated answer!

The Burning Question: Who Ascended the Throne?

The final season of Game of Thrones was, to put it mildly, divisive. After eight seasons of intense power struggles, character development, and intricate plotlines, the ultimate question was: who would sit on the Iron Throne? Well, the twist is… no one! The Iron Throne was actually destroyed by Drogon, Daenerys Targaryen’s last dragon, after Jon Snow killed Daenerys. It was a symbolic end to the ruthless ambition that had driven so many characters throughout the series. The pursuit of the Iron Throne had led to so much destruction and suffering that its destruction represented a new path for Westeros. This act underscored the idea that perhaps the very concept of a single ruler sitting on a throne was flawed and needed to be replaced with something more equitable and sustainable. The destruction of the Iron Throne forced the characters and the audience to confront the idea that power could be distributed differently, that decisions could be made collectively, and that the future of Westeros might lie in a more democratic approach. It was a bold statement about the corrupting influence of absolute power and the need for a more just and balanced society.

Bran the Broken: The Unlikely Ruler

So, if no one sat on the Iron Throne, who ruled Westeros? The answer is Bran Stark, also known as the Three-Eyed Raven. After a series of dramatic events, including the death of Daenerys Targaryen, a council of lords and ladies from the remaining Great Houses of Westeros convened to decide the future of the realm. Tyrion Lannister, ever the pragmatist, proposed Bran as the best choice. His reasoning? Bran, as the Three-Eyed Raven, held the collective memory of Westeros and therefore could rule with unparalleled wisdom and impartiality. Bran's unique ability to see the past, present, and potential futures made him an ideal candidate to guide Westeros through its rebuilding phase. He was not driven by personal ambition or the desire for power, but rather by a deep understanding of the interconnectedness of all things. This perspective allowed him to make decisions that were in the best interests of the realm as a whole, rather than being swayed by the petty squabbles and personal vendettas that had plagued Westeros for centuries. Moreover, Bran's detachment from worldly desires made him incorruptible, ensuring that his reign would be just and fair.

Why Bran? Understanding the Choice

Many fans were surprised by the choice of Bran as king. He wasn't a warrior, a charismatic leader, or even particularly interested in ruling. However, the showrunners presented a few key reasons for this decision:

• Neutrality: Bran’s role as the Three-Eyed Raven meant he was detached from the political games and personal vendettas that plagued Westeros. He could offer unbiased judgment.
• Knowledge: With access to the history of Westeros, Bran could learn from past mistakes and guide the realm toward a better future.
• A New Kind of Ruler: The idea was to move away from the traditional model of a monarch and embrace a leader who could offer wisdom and guidance rather than dominance.

The selection of Bran as king also signified a move away from the traditional, hereditary forms of governance that had long defined Westeros. Instead of inheriting the throne through bloodlines or military conquest, Bran was chosen for his unique abilities and his capacity to serve the realm with wisdom and impartiality. This represented a significant shift in the political landscape of Westeros, suggesting that the future would be shaped by merit and knowledge rather than by birthright. Furthermore, Bran's reign symbolized the importance of learning from the past and using that knowledge to build a better future. As the Three-Eyed Raven, he possessed a comprehensive understanding of the events that had shaped Westeros, allowing him to make informed decisions and avoid repeating the mistakes of previous rulers. This emphasis on historical awareness underscored the idea that true leadership requires a deep understanding of the past, as well as a vision for the future.

The Small Council: Who Else Played a Role?

Of course, Bran didn't rule alone. He had a Small Council to help him govern. Key members included:

• Tyrion Lannister: Hand to the King (again!). His experience and political savvy were invaluable.
• Sansa Stark: Queen in the North. The North remained an independent kingdom.
• Bronn: Master of Coin. Surprisingly, the sellsword was in charge of the realm's finances.
• Davos Seaworth: Master of Ships. The Onion Knight continued to serve with honor.

This new Small Council reflected a shift in the power dynamics of Westeros, with representatives from different regions and backgrounds coming together to govern the realm. Sansa's role as Queen in the North acknowledged the importance of regional autonomy and the need to respect the unique identities and interests of the different parts of Westeros. Tyrion's continued service as Hand to the King provided continuity and stability, while Bronn's appointment as Master of Coin added a touch of unpredictability and humor to the proceedings. Davos's presence as Master of Ships underscored the importance of integrity and loyalty in public service. Together, these individuals formed a diverse and capable team that was well-equipped to tackle the challenges facing Westeros.

Fan Reactions: A Mixed Bag

Unsurprisingly, the ending of Game of Thrones and the selection of Bran as king sparked a lot of debate among fans. Some felt it was a fitting conclusion, highlighting the importance of wisdom and knowledge in leadership. Others were disappointed, arguing that Bran's character arc hadn't earned him the throne and that other characters were more deserving. The mixed reactions underscored the complexity of the series and the high expectations of its dedicated fanbase. Some viewers felt that Bran's ascent to the throne was anticlimactic, given his relatively passive role in the events leading up to the finale. Others argued that it was a subversive twist that challenged traditional notions of power and leadership. Regardless of their individual opinions, fans engaged in lively discussions and debates about the merits and flaws of the ending, demonstrating the enduring impact of Game of Thrones on popular culture.

Legacy of the Throne

Regardless of how you feel about the ending, the choice of Bran as king and the destruction of the Iron Throne sent a powerful message. It suggested that true leadership isn't about conquest or inheritance but about wisdom, knowledge, and serving the greater good. It was a bittersweet conclusion to a monumental series, leaving fans to ponder the meaning of power and the future of Westeros. The legacy of the throne in Game of Thrones is one of ambition, betrayal, and ultimately, the need for a new kind of leadership. The series challenged viewers to question the very nature of power and to consider what it truly means to rule a kingdom. In the end, the throne was not about sitting on a physical object but about the responsibility of guiding and protecting the realm. And while the ending may have been controversial, it undoubtedly left a lasting impact on the way we think about power, politics, and the future of society.