How can Daenerys make her claim stronger than Jon's

[darmody]

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

I don't think you can be legitimized into kingship when the dynasty you ostensibly belong to has ended.

Has it? Robert's widow sits the Iron Throne. 

[ShadowKitteh]

1 minute ago, darmody said:

Has it? Robert's widow sits the Iron Throne. 

Great point. 

The last thing I want is for Gendry & Jon to recreate the battle of their fathers. The need to be the biggest allies to tie it all up. I honestly don't see Gendry even being considered, but things surprise me all the time. 

[Styl7]

I created this thread because I just wanted to say my opinion and read some of yours.

in my opinion if Daenerys want to make her claim look stronger than Jon (without obviously kill him) is to support that she is the heir of King Viserys, who was the heir of King Aerys.

If Rhaenyra had any right to take the throne then Daenerys has the same right.

[Mikkel]

12 minutes ago, darmody said:

Has it? Robert's widow sits the Iron Throne. 

Did you read the rest of my post? I address that exact point elsewhere, but Cersei's situation is unique in general, and has literally nothing to do with Gendry's.

[darmody]

4 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Did you read the rest of my post?

Yes, but I thought I'd cut through the "theoretically" and "sort-of"s. 

But I admit Cersei's rule is so unlikely and frankly ridiculous that it's not worth thinking much about. 

[Mikkel]

5 minutes ago, darmody said:

Yes, but I thought I'd cut through the "theoretically" and "sort-of"s. 

But I admit Cersei's rule is so unlikely and frankly ridiculous that it's not worth thinking much about. 

Fair enough, I think we mostly agree since that's what I'm saying, too - her only theoretical claim is through Robert (and Tommen, obviously, but officially the Baratheon line in any case) though in practice it's obviously through the simple combination of "there no-one else left", "she's not Dany" and she has (had?) a sizable army left. As well as simple inertia: she physically sits on the Iron Throne. It's not like Cersei controls much more than King's Landing itself any more, even if she claims ownership of the full Seven Kingdoms.

[falcotron]

16 minutes ago, Styl7 said:

If Rhaenyra had any right to take the throne then Daenerys has the same right.

Rhaenyra lost that war and was executed for treason.

Her son Aegon III did end up on the throne, but only as part of a peace settlement that explicitly stated that she was never Queen, and made Aegon III the heir-by-will of his uncle (Rhaenyra's opponent) Aegon II.

And her loss was cited as the precedent for strict male-preference primogeniture for the crown in later years.

So… that's not much of a claim.

[Styl7]

2 hours ago, falcotron said:

Rhaenyra lost that war and was executed for treason.

Her son Aegon III did end up on the throne, but only as part of a peace settlement that explicitly stated that she was never Queen, and made Aegon III the heir-by-will of his uncle (Rhaenyra's opponent) Aegon II.

And her loss was cited as the precedent for strict male-preference primogeniture for the crown in later years.

So… that's not much of a claim.

You are right.. You miss one point. Many people supported her claim.. Th choice of her father had divided Westeros.

The Starks, the Arryns, the Tullys, the Velaryons, the Greyjoys, some people from the Reach... all of them supported her claim even if Aegon II's claim was stronger according to the tradition of Westeros.

[watcher of the night]

1 minute ago, Styl7 said:

You are right.. You miss one point. Many people supported her claim.. Th choice of her father had divided Westeros.

The Starks, the Arryns, the Tullys, the Velaryons, the Greyjoys, some people from the Reach... all of them supported her claim even if Aegon II's claim was stronger according to the tradition of Westeros.

So what? Name the big houses supporting Dany's claim ... and Jon's claim is not even revelaed.

[falcotron]

8 minutes ago, Styl7 said:

You are right.. You miss one point. Many people supported her claim.. Th choice of her father had divided Westeros.

The Starks, the Arryns, the Tullys, the Velaryons, the Greyjoys, some people from the Reach... all of them supported her claim even if Aegon II's claim was stronger according to the tradition of Westeros.

Sure, which makes her claim as good as, say, Renly's.

But nobody would argue that it's a good claim because it's as good as Rhaenyra's. That's just arguing that it's a bad claim. Rhaenyra's claim set the precedent that people in her situation don't get to inherit.

And, since I brought up Renly: He didn't justify his claim by finding some younger brother who'd contested for the throne, lost, and been executed for it. He justified his claim by the fact that he was able to raise as many men as all of the other contenders put together, and by the fact that he'd be a better king than any of them. Sure, he lost anyway because shadow babies, but he was right. (And Stannis, who actually did have the best claim, didn't ultimately do any better.)

That logic applies to Dany even better than to Renly, but Dany hasn't gotten that yet. She still thinks that her claim is justified by the fact that she's the best heir by the traditional rules of inheritance—but she actually isn't. Once she learns that, nothing she can do (short of killing Jon) will change that.

She's still right that she should be Queen, but she's always been wrong about the reasons, and she shouldn't be Queen until she figures that out. When she stops talking about her birthright and starts talking only about her plan for the people and about her dragons, that's when she'll win.

[Styl7]

10 minutes ago, watcher of the night said:

So what? Name the big houses supporting Dany's claim ... and Jon's claim is not even revelaed.

Martells, Tyrells and Greyjoys.. But who is alive from them? No one..

I never said that there will be another Dance of Dragons between Jon and Dany. The topic of this thread is how Daenerys would support that she has the best claim(excluding the claim of conquest). Daenerys won't sit on the iron throne and Jon won't claim the throne.. The point of this thread is fun..

And also which big houses (would) support Jon's claim? North the Vale? Probably.. But these are the same houses who rebelled against the Iron Throne and created the King in the North. The same people who believe that a Targaryen cannot be trusted..

[Styl7]

10 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Sure, which makes her claim as good as, say, Renly's.

But nobody would argue that it's a good claim because it's as good as Rhaenyra's. That's just arguing that it's a bad claim. Rhaenyra's claim set the precedent that people in her situation don't get to inherit.

And, since I brought up Renly: He didn't justify his claim by finding some younger brother who'd contested for the throne, lost, and been executed for it. He justified his claim by the fact that he was able to raise as many men as all of the other contenders put together, and by the fact that he'd be a better king than any of them. Sure, he lost anyway because shadow babies, but he was right. (And Stannis, who actually did have the best claim, didn't ultimately do any better.)

That logic applies to Dany even better than to Renly, but Dany hasn't gotten that yet. She still thinks that her claim is justified by the fact that she's the best heir by the traditional rules of inheritance—but she actually isn't. Once she learns that, nothing she can do (short of killing Jon) will change that.

She's still right that she should be Queen, but she's always been wrong about the reasons, and she shouldn't be Queen until she figures that out. When she stops talking about her birthright and starts talking only about her plan for the people and about her dragons, that's when she'll win.

I can't really disagree with what you said

[falcotron]

1 minute ago, Styl7 said:

And also which big houses (would) support Jon's claim? North the Vale? Probably.. But these are the same houses who rebelled against the Iron Throne and created the King in the North. The same people who believe that a Targaryen cannot be trusted..

It's pretty hard for anyone to get support when most of the regions are lying leaderless—for a few years now, in some cases.

Well, I suppose there's one contender who might be able to get Stannis Baratheon, Walder Frey, Randyll Tarly, and Doran Martell on his side, but I don't think the Night King needs vassals to help him raise the troops.

Anyway, getting back on topic of this thread: there is no way Dany can make her inheritance claim better than Jon's. She could kill him, she could marry him and unite the claims, he could officially abdicate in her favor, she could take the throne by right of conquest or by acclamation of the people instead of by inheritance, they could hold a Great Council or a Kingsmoot or even an mail-in election. But if they're going by inheritance, he has the better claim and that's that. (And it doesn't matter, but we're just doing this for fun.)

Really, I think her best option is to declare herself some kind of overqueen, a la Cyrus or Charlemagne. Instead of being queen of the seven-ish united kingdoms, she'll be empress over all of those separate kingdoms, plus Dragon's Bay and whatever else she wants to throw in. That solves everything. It makes the old crown everyone's fighting over defunct and irrelevant, so conflicting claims no longer matter. It means she can have kings and queens like Jon and Yara as subjects. It puts Dragon's Bay officially under her protection.* And it's a pretty impressive title for Missandei to rattle off—as far as I know, there hasn't been an Emperor west of the Bone Mountains since the Valyrians defeated the Ghiscari.

 

* I'm assuming they're willing to be a constitutional monarchy with a democratic self-government a la England, rather than a republic or an anarchist commune or whatever, but who knows what kind of utopia they're building there?

[Mikkel]

27 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Really, I think her best option is to declare herself some kind of overqueen, a la Cyrus or Charlemagne. Instead of being queen of the seven-ish united kingdoms, she'll be empress over all of those separate kingdoms, plus Dragon's Bay and whatever else she wants to throw in. That solves everything.

Actually that's exactly what was already there, just with different titles: subject Kings rather than Lords Paramount, Emperor instead of King of the Seven Kingdoms (substitute Queen/Empress as applicable).

29 minutes ago, falcotron said:

That solves everything. It makes the old crown everyone's fighting over defunct and irrelevant, so conflicting claims no longer matter.

Well it would not be much of a change, but it might be all that is needed to get it to "go down easy" in some cases.

31 minutes ago, falcotron said:

And it's a pretty impressive title for Missandei to rattle off—as far as I know, there hasn't been an Emperor west of the Bone Mountains since the Valyrians defeated the Ghiscari.

Yes, just what she needs, more titles, urgh!

[falcotron]

28 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Actually that's exactly what was already there, just with different titles: subject Kings rather than Lords Paramount, Emperor instead of King of the Seven Kingdoms (substitute Queen/Empress as applicable).

Sure, but it does make a difference to people. As you say, it's about making it go down easy. (There's also usually some differences in inheritance traditions and international relations and whatever, but not that much, and it's not the important part.)

That's exactly why Cyrus declared himself King of Kings—so conquered Kings could bend the knee to him but still be Kings. And it's not really that different from the deal Daeron gave to the Martells—they still get to be a Royal House (although their Princes don't become Kings on accession), but it's not practically much different from the Lords Paramount of the other realms—and yet that was enough to make Dorne happy for a couple centuries.

There is also the bonus that she'd be taking a new crown, instead of the one with a messy succession to work out. Historically, people usually have taken that as clearing the slate for future claimants (although, to be fair, you get the same things from cases like William the Conqueror—nobody after the first couple years tried to claim inheritance from Edward or any other pre-Norman kings).

28 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Yes, just what she needs, more titles, urgh!

Yeah, that was a bit facetious.

Victoria once said the worst thing about becoming Empress instead of Queen was that it took twice as long to announce her when she entered a room, but I don't know if she really meant that—and I know Dany wouldn't…

[Mikkel]

11 minutes ago, falcotron said:

There is also the bonus that she'd be taking a new crown, instead of the one with a messy succession to work out. Historically, people usually have taken that as clearing the slate for future claimants (although, to be fair, you get the same things from cases like William the Conqueror—nobody after the first couple years tried to claim inheritance from Edward or any other pre-Norman kings).

If Dany was pressing a claim (or rather, leading an invasion) in the name of herself, rather than in the name of House Targaryen, that could work - but for better or worse, she's doing the whole thing in the name of being the last descendant of the Targaryens. This seems to be a mostly theoretical difference as long as she is the last scion, but with Jon around... her reaction to which is one of the more interesting facets of Jon's apparent legitimacy.

[Erkan12]

The thing though, if Rhaegar had no right to the throne how did he ordered 3 of Kingsguards to protect his son in the Tower of Joy, and not only 3 random of the Kingsguards, sir Arthur Dayne, the strongest and most trustrable of the guards choosed side with Rhaegar not with Aerys. It's also debatable that Rhaegar already took the charge after some point and he was going to overthrow his father if not for his defeat in the Battle of the Trident. People actually fought for Rhaegar in the rebellion, not for Aerys. Rhaegar is the only reason why the war lasted this long. And no one could argue if Rhaegar would take the charge and put Aerys aside. I think that's the only legitimate claim for Jon.

 

Also his kinship, being cousins with KitN Robb and chosen by the northern + night watch + vale alliance is just making it better for him to the throne, since Dany has never raised in Westeros, just as Randyll Tarly says she can't be a queen to the people of westeros, Jon is from the westeros not Dany.

 

Plus he is a male. The reason why the war of the Dragons between Rhaenyra and Aegon II happened because of this. People backed Aegon II just because he was a male, even when Rhaenyra was a crowned queen. In the end, Aegon II usurped Rhaenyra's throne, simply because of being a male. That's another reason why Jon's claim to the throne is stronger than Dany's.

[Mikkel]

Just now, Erkan12 said:

The thing though, if Rhaegar had no right to the throne how did he ordered 3 of Kingsguards to protect his son in the Tower of Joy, and not only 3 of the Kingsguard, sir Arthur Dayne, the strongest and most trustrable of the guards choosed side with Rhaegar not with Aerys. It's also debatable that Rhaegar already took the charge after some point and he was going to overthrow his father if not for his defeat in the Battle of the Trident. People actually fought for Rhaegar in the rebellion, not for Aerys. Rhaegar is the only reason why the war lasted this long. And no one could argue if Rhaegar would take the charge and put Aerys aside. I think that's the only legimate claim for Jon, also his kinship with KitN and northern alliance is just making better for the throne. And he is a male.

I think it's very likely that, had Rhaegar won at the Trident, he would've become de-facto ruler, if not King, immediately after - he certainly intended something along those lines, and if Robert and the majority of his forces had been defeated, he might have managed it, too. Most Loyalists probably would have followed him rather than Aerys. If the rebel leadership were given satisfactory assurances that Aerys was no longer in the picture, it's also possible that peace could have been achieved (probably not with Robert, but this is all a giant nearly pointless what-if in which Robert lost). Unfortunately for Rhaegar, he misjudged a few crucial things, and well then we have King Bob.

[Tianzi]

On ‎15‎.‎08‎.‎2017 at 1:55 PM, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Undermine the marriage of his parents. After all, there was no legitimate reason for an annulment. 

+ point out that Jon should be still a NW brother (unless we legally recognize that he died)

+ point out that Jon himself was taking titles that he had no legal claim to (the King of the North, the ruler of Winterfell)

+ win the war. That usually helps.

[falcotron]

10 hours ago, Mikkel said:

If Dany was pressing a claim (or rather, leading an invasion) in the name of herself, rather than in the name of House Targaryen, that could work - but for better or worse, she's doing the whole thing in the name of being the last descendant of the Targaryens. This seems to be a mostly theoretical difference as long as she is the last scion, but with Jon around... her reaction to which is one of the more interesting facets of Jon's apparent legitimacy.

That's my point: she shouldn't be pressing her claim as the last of the Targaryens, but as the best choice for the people and as the one who can win because she has dragons. And I'm hoping she'll make that realization (and I think GRRM and D&D are planning it, which is the main reason that Jon turns out to be legitimate and will be revealed, instead of just keeping R+L=J as something that only affects the prophecy and all the history it caused).

But if she just takes Aegon's crown, it doesn't matter that she's changed her mind on why she should be Queen, many will still take it as a straightforward Targaryen restoration, which could lead to problems a generation down the line. Declaring herself Empress with an all-new crown that has nothing to do with being Aegon's heir would be an end-run around that problem.

It's not a huge point—especially since I expect Jon will die without issue if he doesn't marry her, and since if you're looking for a succession problem to worry about, the fact that she's barren (or at least believes herself to be) ought to bother her and everyone else a lot more than whether someone in the future might challenge her grandkids. But it still counts as a minor side benefit of the Empress plan.