why does everyone blame Renly for Stannis's mistake

[Lord Wraith]

15 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Westerosi history have proved that a good ruler doesn't need to be popular, he needs to be able to think, think about his people and had been proved himself. Renly had nothing. 

Nothing except the biggest army...

9 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Laughed at Stannis thinking about people. I thought half the time he thought about his rights and how everyone wronged him. He thinks about people but in a way that gives him the throne. Stannis is a good war commander but I can't think of him as a good ruler.

I think he would have been a just ruler and good in the modern sense. Might have been too rigid for the game however.

7 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Well he garnered allies. That helps. His bannermen actually followed him without threatening to revolt. That helps. He let his enemies beat each other up before he would mop them up. That helps. He knew to deal with a weak threat before it could be come strong (Stannis). That helps.

He also knew that brutal pragmatism and strength instead of weak propaganda -- though we know his letter was true -- is a better platform for ruling/conquering. That helps. Pretty much everything.

Stannis is the rightful heir by law, but he is not able to prove it. Kind of a big deal. Without proving it, most will just note him as another pretender to the throne.

Excellent points.

7 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Rushed satire is bad satire. Don't rush. Leave that to Canadians.

Eh?

[Minsc]

3 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Well shunning his older brother in favor of his younger brother by giving Renly the family seat in Storms End, and shipping Stannis out to a meager seat out in the middle of nowhere, off of the mainland goes against custom, and was a serious dick move.

It wasn't generous, it was an insult.

Goes against what custom?  Custom would have been Stannis receiving nothing as what was entitled to him.

 

Yet, Martin refers to the acts as part of Robert's careless generosity while mentioning how Robert could kept them all for himself and his sons.

edit: Also Stannis isn't older than Robert.

[Trigger Warning]

Let's be real for a minute as much as Renly getting Storm's End might be a slap to the face the idea that Dragonstone is "meagre" is just ridiculous, he was a second son and through his brother's rebellion became master of ships and a lord in his own right of a formidable castle, with strong vassals, he got more than (pre rebellion) he could ever hope for, Robert could have kept both castles for Joffrey and Tommen or just Joffrey if he chose to.

Not being a lord paramount =/= getting a shitty reward. 

If Renly got Dragonstone Stannis would probably be moaning about it being his by rights, being the heir apparent and all. 

Robert can invest those castles in whomever he likes, Stannis had a claim to Storm's End not a right, no more than Renly did. Those castles were Robert's to give away, it wasn't inheritance it was generosity, Robert didn't die.

[Darkstream]

4 hours ago, Minsc said:

Goes against what custom?  Custom would have been Stannis receiving nothing as what was entitled to him.

First off let me make it clear that my argument here is not that this is entitled, a rule, a law or anything like that. Also, this is somewhat of an unconventional circumstance, having a regime change disrupting the normal customs of inheritance, so...

Having said that; Under normal circumstances, it is customary for the next eldest brother to inherit the family seat - If the current Lord is without issue. Prior to Robert's Rebellion, if Bobby were to vacate his seat as Lord of Storm's End, it would not only be customary, but also by the laws of succession, that the lordship be awarded to Stannis.

So sure, you can deny the customs because of the circumstances if you want. And as King, Robert had every right to do as he pleased. But still, it was esentially going against custom, and a derisive, dick move by Bobby B, to give Storm's End to Renly - Even more so considering the unrelenting loyalty and resolve that Stannis displayed, in what must have been a horrific ordeal in the holding of Storm's End while it was under siege.

Quote

edit: Also Stannis isn't older than Robert.

Come on, is that really what you thought I meant? Out of Robert's younger brothers, Stannis and Renly, Stannis is Robert's older brother.

[Darkstream]

2 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:

Let's be real for a minute as much as Renly getting Storm's End might be a slap to the face the idea that Dragonstone is "meagre" is just ridiculous,

Yes, I must admit, I was being somewhat hyperbolical with that statement. However, in Stannis' view - whether rational or justified - Dragonstone is an insulting reward. And quite honestly, not in of itself, but in comparison to Storm's End, it is kind of meagre.

Quote

If Renly got Dragonstone Stannis would probably be moaning about it being his by rights, being the heir apparent and all. 

 This, I have no doubt aboot.

Quote

Robert can invest those castles in whomever he likes, Stannis had a claim to Storm's End not a right, no more than Renly did. Those castles were Robert's to give away, it wasn't inheritance it was generosity, Robert didn't die.

Sure, except I don't believe Robert gave Stannis Dragonstone out of generosity, so much as out of a sense of obligation to at least give him something, seeing as he was still family and all. But it was still meant as a slight, or why not just give Renly Dragonstone?

[devilish]

On 19/04/2017 at 7:57 PM, John Doe said:

The Targaryens had arguably abused their rights and broken the feudal contract, so they lost their right to the throne. Stannis didn't do such a thing. 

That is kind of ridiculous considering that Robert used his Targeryan lineage as a pretext to sit on the iron throne. He certainly didn't had the troops (his force was probably the smallest in the rebel group), the name (Starks and Arryns have  a more prestigeous and long history) or the expertise to be king. If the Targs had no right on the land, then Robert's claim is just dust in the wind.

On the basis of pure claim, Aegon had to be king. He is a victim just like Robert was (his father betrayed his mother and Rhaegar abandoned them to Aerys madness) and since he was a child then he was blameless. But there again, claim means nothing. Friendship among powerful lords do and Robert had more friends at his side then Aegon did.

Which leads us to Stannis. The man had little to no support whatsoever. Even if by some miracle he defeated Renly winning the Stormlands in the process, he would simply not have enough troops to conquer the IT. The blackwater's bay battle was a desperate attempt to win. Even if he captured the darn place, killing Joffrey in the process it would have meant nothing. Tommen and Myrcella were not in KL and the war would have continued. Quite the contrary, he would have angered the Lannisters and further pissed off the Tyrells both of whom having enough troops to wipe him out easily.

The only way a stag could sit on the iron throne was through Renly. Stannis could either accept him as king or else he could send the entire Baratheon dynasty into ashes. Any rational general in his situation would have secured a good deal for his family (the Stormlands and a possible marriage for Shireen?). There again, Stannis wasnt thinking rationally. The red priestess was whispering in his ears telling him that he's some sort of god born out of smoke and fire. Its ironic how the God of light who spent ages fighting the great other would do his very best to add more corpses for the great other to resurrect. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

7 hours ago, Lord Wraith said:

Nothing except the biggest army...

That doesn't prove that he was a better ruler than Stannis. Mace had a bigger army than Stannis and he still lost against him.

15 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Well he garnered allies. That helps. His bannermen actually followed him without threatening to revolt. That helps. He let his enemies beat each other up before he would mop them up. That helps. He knew to deal with a weak threat before it could be come strong (Stannis). That helps.

He also knew that brutal pragmatism and strength instead of weak propaganda -- though we know his letter was true -- is a better platform for ruling/conquering. That helps. Pretty much everything.

He also have never fight or gain anything, everything was given to him. Much like how he married the sister of his lover. Stannis on the other hand had proved himself and he wasn't able to have a new wife.

[Universal Sword Donor]

6 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Yes, I must admit, I was being somewhat hyperbolical with that statement. However, in Stannis' view - whether rational or justified - Dragonstone is an insulting reward. And quite honestly, not in of itself, but in comparison to Storm's End, it is kind of meagre.

 This, I have no doubt aboot.

Sure, except I don't believe Robert gave Stannis Dragonstone out of generosity, so much as out of a sense of obligation to at least give him something, seeing as he was still family and all. But it was still meant as a slight, or why not just give Renly Dragonstone?

Then believe GRRM:

Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity.

When I think of intentional slight, I think of great generosity too. Glad I'm not the only one.

[Traverys]

Have nothing to add to the OP, but thought I could share some thoughts on the idea of custom and if Stannis should or shouldn't have been given Storm's End, etc.

While Stannis saw being given Dragonstone as a slight (as he does most things), he was Robert's heir when he won/ascended to the throne. Dragonstone was the traditional seat of the heir presumptive, much like holding the title Prince of Wales in England. However, this is a tradition that has obviously died with Rhaegar and Aerys II.

It becomes a murky ground because Targaryens never really had lordships (minus Dragonstone, their original home, of course) to juggle, and they set all the precedence for the customs of kingship. They tended to marry within family, so new titles never really came into play. So how a King's former titles, such as Lord Paramount of the Stormlands and Lord of Storm's End, should be handled would have been Robert's own invention.

In real life, King's would typically keep the titles for themselves, including Dukedoms, Counties, and Baronies as they could continue to claim revenue and levies from these to fund/support their reign. They really only had an obligation (for prestige's sake) to grant land/titles to their own children, especially an heir so that they could get some experience ruling (ideally). However, giving brothers a spare holding or two of little power/significance (like Dragonstone) kept them out of your hair. Realistically speaking, giving a branch of family members a title/holdfast that came with a large army and income (especially, in Westeros, any Lord Paramount title) means that any ambitious members could one day press a claim to your throne/titles. In a sense, this is exactly what Renly did to Robert's "children." 

So, if I were in King Robert's shoes, the smartest move would have been to reserve Storm's End for Joffrey and just give Renly a position at court. It would have been the most successful way of protecting what he presumed to be his branch of the family. Then again, we all know Robert was more suited to be a war councilor than a king.

[Sullen]

19 hours ago, Darkstream said:

And why shouldn't he abandon the brothers who have shunned him, and essentially abanded him from the time that they were young children?

Stannis fled to DS because he knew that he would have been ignored and ridiculed by Robert if he brought his concerns to him without proof.

Because it's his duty.

To abandon your brother and rightful King when his life is in danger is downright treasonous, even if you believe that your warnings would go unheard. Stannis' wait-and-see approach to the Lannisters cuckolding and murdering their way to the Throne paints him as a complete hypocrite when the topic of brotherly duty comes up.

You simply can't bring up self-preservation as a valid reason for Stannis shirking his duty and committing treason and then blame Renly for doing the same, it's completely contradictory.

[Darkstream]

2 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Then believe GRRM:

Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity.

When I think of intentional slight, I think of great generosity too. Glad I'm not the only one.

Well, it's seems that GRRM is being his usual coy self, as he qualifies his stament with "not necessarily" when referring to whether or not awarding Storm's End to Renly was a slight. He is neither confirming nor denying this.
 
Also, he's referring to both Stannis and Renly, and the giving of these seats in general as being generous, as I conceded above. Sure, he could have kept both for himself, or his future heirs, but generously decided to give them to his brothers. The slight was not awarding Stannis Dragonstone, it was awarding Storm's End to Renly over Stannis.

Why do you think he said this was Robert's  "careless" generosity? Perhaps you have a different take, but I interpret this as him alluding to the animosity and bad blood that was created by him deciding to go against the normal customs of awarding the head seat of the family to the younger brother over the elder.

Again I'll ask; If this wasn't meant as a slight, why didn't Robert just give Renly Dragonstone, and award Storm's End to Stannis? This would have curtailed the sour feelings between the brothers, and possibly would have prevented the conflict between Stannis and Renly, as Renly would not have been able to garner the support that he did, as the Lord of the isolated and meagre Dragonstone.

[ravenous reader]

15 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Well dying is a pretty shitty thing to do when you have the responsibility of running a kingdom, as well is going on vacation in some exotic foreign land.

I guess Stannis was the only one intelligent enough to surround himself with the sage council of a Red witch of Rahloo.

Well shunning his older brother in favor of his younger brother by giving Renly the family seat in Storms End, and shipping Stannis out to a meager seat out in the middle of nowhere, off of the mainland goes against custom, and was a serious dick move.

It wasn't generous, it was an insult.

Robert was a 'dick'.  Renly was a 'dick'.  But at least they were talented and charismatic dicks, unlike Stannis who is one of those unfortunate dicks one would rather have nothing to do with.   Isn't that what we're debating here -- whether it's OK to be a dick and disloyal as long as you're attractive, popular and successful at your job (oh, and know how to throw a good party)?

5 minutes ago, Sullen said:

You simply can't bring up self-preservation as a valid reason for Stannis shirking his duty and committing treason and then blame Renly for doing the same, it's completely contradictory.

If you think it's contradictory, you've missed the whole 'moral of the story' behind the tragic and paltry affair of the Baratheon brothers.  They're all equally backstabbing and take turns at playing the 'blue falcon' in their 'hawking' contests to see who can fly higher (even if Stannis does use a 'red hawk' in order to qualify as a 'blue falcon'!).  I also don't think Stannis is going to live for long, given that GRRM has a habit of brutally punishing brotherly backstabbing.

9 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Sure, except I don't believe Robert gave Stannis Dragonstone out of generosity, so much as out of a sense of obligation to at least give him something, seeing as he was still family and all. But it was still meant as a slight, or why not just give Renly Dragonstone?

If Robert had had any balls, he'd have made Stannis his Hand instead of Ned.  A lot of things would've been different.

[Sullen]

1 minute ago, ravenous reader said:

If you think it's contradictory, you've missed the whole 'moral of the story' behind the tragic and paltry affair of the Baratheon brothers.  They're all equally backstabbing and take turns at playing the 'blue falcon' in their 'hawking' contests to see who can fly higher (even if Stannis does use a 'red hawk' in order to qualify as a 'blue falcon'!).  I also don't think Stannis is going to live for long, given that GRRM has a habit of brutally punishing brotherly backstabbing.

I think it's contradictory of Stannis-supporting zealots to complain about Renly doing it (even though he's got far better reasons for his "treasons") while describing Stannis as "dutiful" when he actually shirked his duties to his House and his King in an even more mind-boggling manner.

I agree all of the Baratheon brothers are dicks and bullies, but only Stannis stands out as a blatant hypocrite between the three of them. They're great characters though, probably the most entertaining characters of the first two books.

[Universal Sword Donor]

6 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Well, it's seems that GRRM is being his usual coy self, as he qualifies his stament with "not necessarily" when referring to whether or not awarding Storm's End to Renly was a slight. He is neither confirming nor denying this.
 
Also, he's referring to both Stannis and Renly, and the giving of these seats in general as being generous, as I conceded above. Sure, he could have kept both for himself, or his future heirs, but generously decided to give them to his brothers. The slight was not awarding Stannis Dragonstone, it was awarding Storm's End to Renly over Stannis.

Why do you think he said this was Robert's  "careless" generosity? Perhaps you have a different take, but I interpret this as him alluding to the animosity and bad blood that was created by him deciding to go against the normal customs of awarding the head seat of the family to the younger brother over the elder.

Again I'll ask; If this wasn't meant as a slight, why didn't Robert just give Renly Dragonstone, and award Storm's End to Stannis? This would have curtailed the sour feelings between the brothers, and possibly would have prevented the conflict between Stannis and Renly, as Renly would not have been able to garner the support that he did, as the Lord of the isolated and meagre Dragonstone.

Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity.

And I'll post the quote again because it says 90% of why I believe it wasn't a slight. The latter 10% was Cressen's (?) opinion that the DS Lord needed to be a strong man to quell the Targ supporters. Then Robert never bothered thinking about it again after he had kids, which fits perfectly in line with Ned's quote about Robert promising women the world and forgetting it all the next day and Cersei's comment to ned about Robert always forgetting what they do in bed. The former is more contextual and the latter is more explicitly named but it's within his normal behavior.

[ravenous reader]

8 minutes ago, Sullen said:

even though he's got far better reasons for his "treasons"

This is the part I don't agree with!  Once one starts rationalizing that the ends justify the means, it's a slippery slope, especially when it involves hurting ones own family:

Quote

A Storm of Swords - Davos V

"Your Grace," said Davos, "the cost . . ."

"I know the cost! Last night, gazing into that hearth, I saw things in the flames as well. I saw a king, a crown of fire on his brows, burning . . . burning, Davos. His own crown consumed his flesh and turned him into ash. Do you think I need Melisandre to tell me what that means? Or you?" The king moved, so his shadow fell upon King's Landing. "If Joffrey should die . . . what is the life of one bastard boy against a kingdom?"

"Everything," said Davos, softly.

I have a feeling Bran is going to have to ask himself this question too -- and how he answers it is going to make all the difference.

[Sullen]

2 minutes ago, ravenous reader said:

This is the part I don't agree with!  Once one starts rationalizing that the means justify the ends, it's a slippery slope, especially when it involves hurting ones own family:

But Stannis is the one who rationalizes hurting family members above any other character.

He rationalizes leave Robert behind to die, he rationalizes murdering Renly before even bothering to crown himself, he rationalizes burning Edric, and he might very well eventually rationalize burning his own daughter.

The only two family members whose harm we know Renly rationalized were Joffrey's (but he's motivated by self-preservation here) and Stannis (same). I don't think he would have had to go down that slippery slope, because I think he'd have brought stability to the Realm rather easily, especially when compared to the other pretenders.

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

the DS Lord needed to be a strong man to quell the Targ supporters. 

And yet Renly, who is being argued as more qualified to be the King, and rule the entire Seven Kingdoms is not able to rule Dragonstone, and quell any Targaryen supporters?

And what is the immenint threat coming from Dragonstone? One would think that Dorne - which borders with the Reach, and just had members of their family brutely murdered by the Baratheon regime - poses a more serious threat to Robert. By this reasoning, it would make a heck of a lot more sense for Robert to name Stannis Lord of Storm's End, where he would be in a better position to oppose any thoughts of rebellion or retaliation by Dorne.

And if we are going to give credit to Cressen's thoughts on the matter, why not to his thoughts regarding Renly as well?

ETA:

Quote

And I'll post the quote again because it says 90% of why I believe it wasn't a slight.

And thats fine, I'm not going to argue that my interpretation is any more valid than yours. Like I said, I don't believe this is confirmation either way.

[Sullen]

18 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

And yet Renly, who is being argued as more qualified to be the King, and rule the entire Seven Kingdoms is not able to rule Dragonstone, and quell any Targaryen supporters?

Renly was barely a boy when Robert generously gave Storm's End away to Stannis for safekeeping, expecting him to be able to suppress what would likely be of the main rebel hotspots at that age is simply absurd.

[Darkstream]

27 minutes ago, Sullen said:

Renly was barely a boy when Robert generously gave Storm's End away to Stannis for safekeeping, expecting him to be able to suppress what would likely be of the main rebel hotspots at that age is simply absurd.

But not too young to for Storm's End, and the threat faced by Dorne?

And again, what is this huge threat coming out of Dragonstone? I mean, even Aegon, with his three dragons relocated to the mainland in order to commence his assault on Westeros. Dragonstone is a resourceless rock out in the middle of a bay.

[Traverys]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Well, it's seems that GRRM is being his usual coy self, as he qualifies his stament with "not necessarily" when referring to whether or not awarding Storm's End to Renly was a slight. He is neither confirming nor denying this.
 
Also, he's referring to both Stannis and Renly, and the giving of these seats in general as being generous, as I conceded above. Sure, he could have kept both for himself, or his future heirs, but generously decided to give them to his brothers. The slight was not awarding Stannis Dragonstone, it was awarding Storm's End to Renly over Stannis.

Why do you think he said this was Robert's  "careless" generosity? Perhaps you have a different take, but I interpret this as him alluding to the animosity and bad blood that was created by him deciding to go against the normal customs of awarding the head seat of the family to the younger brother over the elder.

Again I'll ask; If this wasn't meant as a slight, why didn't Robert just give Renly Dragonstone, and award Storm's End to Stannis? This would have curtailed the sour feelings between the brothers, and possibly would have prevented the conflict between Stannis and Renly, as Renly would not have been able to garner the support that he did, as the Lord of the isolated and meagre Dragonstone.

As I mentioned above, the "careless generosity" in my opinion refers to Robert not keeping the revenue/levies provided by holding the titles for himself. Stannis and Renly were never situated to inherit anything at any time until Robert won a war and claimed a kingship and Dragonstone. Robert could have easily (and justly) held onto them to supplement his extravagant spending, but was more generous than that (for good or bad). Careless generosity, in my opinion, is synonymous to his noted distaste for what he called "counting coppers."