DarkBastard Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 A wise man once said: "You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." That is the most apt explanation for who the people of the Seven Kingdoms saw as their rightful king. Looking at it from our partially omnipotent point of view as readers...Stannis. Not Viserys, the Faith and the Maesters legitimized Robert Baratheon's rule. The Targaryens were deposed by conquest, the only way to gain rule back is through conquest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Ghost of Someone Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 Beyond question, Stannis was the rightful King on the Iron throne but has not sat it. However, it would seem that this time and age of the story is perhaps the most compelling and justifiable time to have the Kingdoms and Principality of Dorne resume their independent States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 de jure, Viserys, as he was the heir of the previous rightful king. de facto Joffrey, as he was legally recognised as the first born of Robert, who usurped the crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunfyreTheGolden Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said: I always laugh at these "legal" comments. Legal according to which court of law? Who judges what is legal in Westeros? There essentially is no law. Just a bunch of customs supported by a combination of the Faith, the lords and the beliefs of the common folk (although the latter seems pretty meaningless in the bigger scheme of things). And of course, the first (the Faith) is meaningless in the North, and likely in the Iron Isles too. It is simply monarchy. Laws are usually based on the king that sits on the Iron Throne. You are right btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunfyreTheGolden Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 17 hours ago, Yucef Menaerys said: That depends, to the readers? Probably Stannis since we as readers have the benefit of knowing that Robert's children by Cersei are bastards and after them obviously the next person in line is Stannis. To most people in Westeros? Joffrey. They couldn't know that he wasn't Robert's son for sure, no DNA test available and everyone rightfully assumes that he is Robert's trueborn son, so that makes Joffrey the rightful king in their eyes. Ned Stark knew that. That is why he is dead now. For the people that know Joffrey is a bastard, the rightful king was Stannis (except Renly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf of the Steppes Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 4 hours ago, DarkBastard said: A wise man once said: "You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." That is the most apt explanation for who the people of the Seven Kingdoms saw as their rightful king. Looking at it from our partially omnipotent point of view as readers...Stannis. Not Viserys, the Faith and the Maesters legitimized Robert Baratheon's rule. The Targaryens were deposed by conquest, the only way to gain rule back is through conquest. Yes, from our POV Stannis. From the POV of people of Westeros, Joffrey. If not for Melissandre, it would have been Renly by conquest (he had the largest army by far and would likely have smashed everyone). No one can actually claim Viserys, because he was dead before tWoFK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 4 hours ago, Dood said: de jure, Viserys, as he was the heir of the previous rightful king. Aerys lost the throne and the Targaryens were deposed, Viserys has no legal claim over the throne so he'd have to fight for it back, which Aegon is doing right now. The only legal heir is Stannis Baratheon, but technically Robb and Balon are also rightful kings because their kingdoms declared independence from Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 15 minutes ago, Pikachu101 said: Aerys lost the throne and the Targaryens were deposed, Viserys has no legal claim over the throne so he'd have to fight for it back, which Aegon is doing right now. The only legal heir is Stannis Baratheon, but technically Robb and Balon are also rightful kings because their kingdoms declared independence from Westeros. The legal heir is Joffrey, the biological heir is Stannis. Laws are not always right, they are not infallible and Joffrey was the recognised heir to the previous King. Stannis' options to revoke this was tell the previous King and let him make the judgement or call a Grand Council and put forth his case. He did neither and, like Renly, tried to usurp the Throne through force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 46 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said: The legal heir is Joffrey, the biological heir is Stannis. I get your point and you're right, at the same time however as readers we know Joffrey's illegitimate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 56 minutes ago, Pikachu101 said: Aerys lost the throne and the Targaryens were deposed, Viserys has no legal claim over the throne so he'd have to fight for it back, which Aegon is doing right now. The only legal heir is Stannis Baratheon, but technically Robb and Balon are also rightful kings because their kingdoms declared independence from Westeros. When Aerys died, the crown passed on to the next pretendant in line. Legally speaking Viserys was the pretendant to the Iron Throne. Robert took the power by a coup d'état, and was an usurper, the "Crown" was never his to take - at least not while Viserys was alive. But as someone said above, Viserys died just before the War of the five kings, so I guess Stannis would be the next in line due to his Targaryens ascendants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 46 minutes ago, Dood said: Legally speaking Viserys was the pretendant to the Iron Throne Legally speaking Viserys lost all rights to the throne when House Targaryen fell, Aegon I took the throne by force and Robert Baratheon did the exact same thing a good 200 years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCK Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 In truth, Stannis. General public perception, Joffrey, not many knew of the incest at that time and still don't. Commoners like Gendry (who actually is a son of Robert) believe Joffrey and Tommen are his sons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkBastard Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 18 hours ago, Wolf of the Steppes said: No one can actually claim Viserys, because he was dead before tWoFK That is a moot point because the Targaryens were deposed through conquest. The Targaryen line has no claim to the throne, living or dead, unless it is retaken through conquest...as Dany is building toward now. She can't just walk in and say "Hi, I'm...like...a Targaryen, I'm like totally in charge here because my daddy was a king so...can I like...have my chair and stuff?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 17 hours ago, Pikachu101 said: Legally speaking Viserys lost all rights to the throne when House Targaryen fell, Aegon I took the throne by force and Robert Baratheon did the exact same thing a good 200 years later. I disagree : Aegon created the iron throne and the office of "Lord of the seven Kingdoms" by forcing 6 out of 7 kingdoms into fealty. The crown Aegon created, was taken by force by someone who did not have the right to take it (He was not the next in line). This is a coup, and why he is known as "the Usurper". Viserys was legally the heir, until his death or until he surrendered the crown (And even then, some would argue that the crown is not his to surrender). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 52 minutes ago, Dood said: I disagree : Aegon created the iron throne and the office of "Lord of the seven Kingdoms" by forcing 6 out of 7 kingdoms into fealty. And these lords then pledged themselves to Robert thus giving him legitimacy as king 53 minutes ago, Dood said: The crown Aegon created, was taken by force by someone who did not have the right to take it (He was not the next in line). This is a coup, and why he is known as "the Usurper" What Robert did was the same as Henry IV seizing power from his cousin Richard II through the backing of nobles, he usurped Richard but that doesn't make his reign any less legitimate. Besides so many kings have taken the throne by force e.g. William I, Edward IV, Henry VII. 57 minutes ago, Dood said: Viserys was legally the heir He was the heir to a dynasty that was overthrown and no longer in power, he has no legitimate claim to the Iron Throne because Robert seized it in a rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgrav Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Well rightful =\= factual, therefore Jon Snow. The concept of legality is at best an abstraction in feudal "politics". In that paradigm, this is all essentially private litigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Quote And these lords then pledged themselves to Robert thus giving him legitimacy as king This gives him some legitimacy to rule them, not to get the crown. Quote What Robert did was the same as Henry IV seizing power from his cousin Richard II through the backing of nobles, he usurped Richard but that doesn't make his reign any less legitimate. Besides so many kings have taken the throne by force e.g. William I, Edward IV, Henry VII. Yes, but generally speaking, when someone takes the throne by force, he will try to add as much legitimacy as possible to his claim, often by marrying someone close to the line of succession (Elizabeth of York in the case of Henry VII). Taking the power by force does not make your claim legitimate, it just makes you the de-facto ruler. Quote He was the heir to a dynasty that was overthrown and no longer in power, he has no legitimate claim to the Iron Throne because Robert seized it in a rebellion. Even then, he was still legally the person who could legally claim the crown for himself. We have an example in French History : The french king Charles VI signed the treaty of Troyes declaring that his heir would be Henry V (of England), instead of his estranged son, Charles VII. Long story short, Charles VII ended up winning the war and getting the crown back - his father had no right to choose another heir, as he already had a son. The crown can only go to the next in the line of succession. Sure, you can raise an army, win a war, send the pretender in exile and become de-facto ruler, but that does not make you de-jure King. To become the King you would have to kill every person in the line of succession, and/or marry someone high enough in the line of succession. Robert didn't spend money and time tracking the last Targaryens, trying to assassinate them for shit and giggles : he knew his claim was weak, and loyalists would turn against him if they were to come back with an army. Anyway, just my opinion, this is an interesting subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 On 10/26/2017 at 6:42 AM, Regular John Umber said: This has always felt like a misconception to me. The monarchy was deposed, but Robert was chosen as king because he had Targaryen blood, not because he won. Viserys and then the throne passed to Daenerys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 3 hours ago, Pikachu101 said: He was the heir to a dynasty that was overthrown and no longer in power, he has no legitimate claim to the Iron Throne because Robert seized it in a rebellion. Would you agree that the Boltons are now the rightful and legal governors of the north? After all, they rebelled against the Starks, who themselves were outlaws because they were rebelling against their king, and beat the Starks for control of the north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkBastard Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Amazing that someone can think that any King who ever conquers other areas en-masse is then somehow permanently the rightful rulers of said realm. If that were in any way accurate, the Queen of England would still be in control of a majority of the United States. The British, French, and Dutch would be the rightful rulers of most of Africa by that logic. Besides the fact that the Seven and the Citadel both confirmed Robert's legitimacy as king...I guess that just doesn't apply, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.