My stance on various ASOIAF conspiracy theories, Part 31

Thursday is theory day.

This is the thirty-first article of the series. Since there are a lot of theories floating out there and I'm asked often enough what I think of them, I thought I write it down. You can then laugh about me when I am totally proven wrong by "The Winds of Winter" or something like that. Rules are as follows: you put a question about any theory or plot element (really, let's stress "theory" a bit for the sake of interesting questions) either in the comments of any theory post or by mail (stefan_sasse@gmx.de) and I will answer them in an upcoming post. And if you now ask "Stefan, isn't this a shameless rip-off of Sean T. Collin's "Ask me anything"?", I would tell you to shut up, because you are right.

Prepare for part 31. Spoilers for "A Song of Ice and Fire", obviously. 

Why don't the Tyrells desert the Lannisters?

Ah, interesting one. I guess the question asks about the "endgame" of FeastDance. They could join Aegon, they could join Stannis, or simply depose the Lannisters and rule themselves through Margaery and pet king Tommen. I guess that last one's what the question is really about, since neither of the other two makes particular sense for them. Let me first pose a counter-question: what would the Tyrells gain from deserting the Lannisters? They are already on the verge of ruling the realm, making up half of the Small Council and having the queen in charge. With Cersei disposed, they are equals in power. Currently, the Lannister army is not only a shadow of its former self but also occupied in the Riverlands. The Tyrell army is more or less intact, and the coffers are full. Power shifts towards them naturally. The only thing the Lannisters have speaking for them is that the king is of their blood, but with Cersei disposed, he's become a commodity. Whether Kevan or anyone else is the Regent doesn't matter at all. So, the Tyrells would gain nothing they don't already have from betraying the Lannisters. Plus, their marriage makes it unlikely that they will join Aegon who will naturally see them as enemy, and the Tyrells have invested too much into their claim to back away easily.

Is the kingsguard mandatory when you're ordered?

Yes, it is. But that being said, you don't simply order people into the kingsguard that don't want to be in the kingsguard, for two reasons. First, you don't want people to serve as your closest and most trusted bodyguards that hate your guts for putting you in there (look how that turned out for Jaime, and he initially wanted it), and especially not in a position where you need to respect them in many ways for the sake of tradition. Second, if you simply order whom you like to spite someone else (Loras Tyrell in the HBO show, for example), you alienate the people he belongs to. And that's something that you really want to think through. Tywin Lannister quit as Hand when Jaime was ordered into the kingsguard and stayed neutral throughout the war, only to deliver the killing blow later because, you know, a Lannister always pays his debts.

Who ends up the heir to Winterfell?
Sansa. Before "A Dance with Dragons", I would have opted for Bran because he's the natural heir, but I don't see him ever leaving that cave again. Instead, I'm pretty sure he will become Tree the Second. That leaves only Rickon, who has still to be confirmed to be alive, and who will be used by the Manderlys if they can get their hands on him in their rebellion against the Boltons. Such a position tends to come with a short live expectancy, and even so, Rickon probably is too wild and feral to make anything resembling a lord by then. It might be he is simply passed over. In the wake of Dany's conquest, there will be lots of rule breaking and rule bending, and if Sansa would do something of value - deliver Littlefinger and the Vale, for example - she might just be rewarded with her father's seat by someone who doesn't seem too tight with all these "only males" rules that make up Westerosi society. Plus, I obviously ship Sansa as the Queen in the North, because she would make heck of a good one. See Rickon or Sansa - the only available choices for the ominous self-fulfilling prophecy of "there must always be a Stark at Winterfell" - as two paths at a crossroads: Rickon would lead back into the savage history of Winterfell and the Starks that Bran saw through the tree, and Sansa would lead into a kinder, more civilized future. I know what I'd take.