nmrch Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I know this might have been discussed before but i never understood why Renly and Stannis weren't considered to be princes? Bran and Rickon were princes and as was Theon. Does it have something to do with the King already having children and an heir? If so why is Oberyn a Prince when he was number 4 in the line of succession for Dorne behind Arianne, Quentyn and Trystane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trigger Warning Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Probably because they were the lords of Storm's End and Dragonstone, titles which carry more weight than being a landless prince. Oberyn's will be a courtesy title, the children of Lords are referred to as lords and ladies despite holding no landed titles and in this way the title of Prince in Dorne is essentially the equivalent of lord since it is not an independent principality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curled Finger Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Dorne is part of the realm but left to their own laws. The rest of westeros adheres to the same inheritance and succession laws wherein only the ruling royals have royal titles. Read some of the history of Dorne to see how set apart they really are from the rest of the realm. They really are badass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curled Finger Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Dorne is part of the realm but left to their own laws. The rest of westeros adheres to the same inheritance and succession laws wherein only the ruling royals have royal titles. Read some of the history of Dorne to see how set apart they really are from the rest of the realm. They really are badass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Wraith Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Dornish royalty is based on the Rhonyar who styled themselves Prince and Princess, instead of King and Queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byfort of Corfe Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Renly and Stannis weren't the sons of a King or Queen. By normal Medieval usage Bran and Rickon wouldn't be Princes although Theon would be as he is the son of a "King" (although his right to the title would probably be open to dispute). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ravenstark Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Renly and Stannis weren't the sons of a King or Queen. By normal Medieval usage Bran and Rickon wouldn't be Princes although Theon would be as he is the son of a "King" (although his right to the title would probably be open to dispute). Bran and Rickon were princes, as Bran was heir presumptive of Robb and Rickon right next. If Robb had children, his heir apparent would be called Prince, and it's siblings. Bran and Rickon would then be called Lord Bran and Lord Rickon, with or without landed titles. (Or so it seems.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcotron Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I know this might have been discussed before but i never understood why Renly and Stannis weren't considered to be princes?We definitely can't turn to real-life European monarchies here, because the title clearly doesn't work at all the same way it did in medieval England, France, Germany (either Prinz or Fürst), Spain, etc. (And besides, we know that the titles and styles of nobility have to be pretty different from any real-life European monarchy just from the fact that everyone from the head of a Great House down to a vassal of a vassal of a vassal all share the title and style "Lord", which isn't even remotely close to any feudal society--and GRRM has said that was intentional.)Dorne can be ignored, as the same title has a different and presumably completely irrelevant meaning there.My best guess, which seems to cover all the cases I can think of as simple as possible, is that in Westeros (not counting Dorne), the King's current heir (presumptive or apparent) and any of that heir's siblings are called Prince(ss), and nobody else is. However, in cases where the heir presumptive is almost certain to be displaced soon, the title may not get used.That covers all the cases I can think of:Theon is the heir apparent to Balon when Balon is crowned, so he's a Prince, and his sister is a Princess.Stannis was the heir presumptive to Robert when Robert was crowned, so he was a Prince, and his younger brother as well--but it was pretty obvious Robert would have kids soon, so they may not have used the title. At any rate, once Joffrey was born, they ceased to be Princes.Joffrey was heir apparent the moment he was born, so he was a Prince from birth until being crowned. Tommen and Myrcella were younger siblings of the heir apparent, so they were Princes. When Joffrey was crowned, Tommen became his heir presumptive, so he and Myrcella were still Princes. When Tommen was crowned, Myrcella became heir presumptive, so she's still Princess. (And, even though Tommen is married, he's still likely a few years from producing an heir, so it would make sense to keep calling her Princess.)Bran is the heir presumptive to Robb when Robb is crowned, and Rickon is his younger brother, so they're Princes (and their sisters are Princesses). Since Bran hasn't been crowned yet, it's not clear whether he's still a Prince. And it's probably no more clear to a Maester in-universe with full knowledge; this probably isn't a situation that comes up often enough to set precedent. And it's hardly likely to make a difference even in this case. Rickon is of course a Prince either way--either as the younger brother of Prince Bran, or as the heir presumptive of not-yet-crowned King Bran--and the same for their sisters.Skimming back through the history, I don't see the brothers of Kings (both Targaryen, and pre-Conquest petty) usually being called Prince, but there may be exceptions. If you really want to test the theory, that's what you need to look for: a brother of a King who's called a Prince even though the King has children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcotron Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Renly and Stannis weren't the sons of a King or Queen. By normal Medieval usage Bran and Rickon wouldn't be Princes although Theon would be as he is the son of a "King" (although his right to the title would probably be open to dispute).What do you mean by "normal Medieval usage"? Which medieval country do you think had such laws or customs? Certainly not England.11 Since Edward I, the eldest son of the King was usually Prince of Wales, but that was an actual noble title, explicitly granted, not a dynastic title of heirdom. And his younger brothers would never be called Prince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmrch Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Renly and Stannis weren't the sons of a King or Queen. By normal Medieval usage Bran and Rickon wouldn't be Princes although Theon would be as he is the son of a "King" (although his right to the title would probably be open to dispute). Bran was consistently called a Prince after Robb got crowned and until his death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Wraith Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Also something to consider Stannis and Renly weren't Roberts heirs his kids were which is my Joffrey etc are Princes. Robb is king in the North but Bran is his heir because Robb has no kids to inherit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Drunkard Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Maybe they were, initially, but after fifteen or w/e years of not being Robert's direct heirs, and being powerful lords in their own right, the prince title became less meaningful than 'lord of X'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.