Silmarien Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I think the thing that made him an idiot was the fact that, had he supported Stannis, he would've ended up being his heir anyway. And if he really, really wanted to be a King, he then would've have him assassinated, it's not as if he cared much about his brother dying.But I must say I agree in not understanding why people like him so much, he's a minor character with like five lines and only one really good scene. He had no motivations, no arc, barely any characterization.Well, Renly would also have to kill Shireen to become Stannis' heir. Killing children is frowned upon generally at least in the nobility (ie killing members of the noble classes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingerly Grumkin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Yes, he was an idiot. "Look at me i'm king" The only thing that Relny had for him was charisma and good looks. Granted the charisma and good looks got him the power of the Tyrell army and if it were not for Mel he would have killed Stannis' army, and Cersei is an idiot and powerful as hell (not as stupid as Renly) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Well, Renly would also have to kill Shireen to become Stannis' heir. Killing children is frowned upon generally at least in the nobility (ie killing members of the noble classes).I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingerly Grumkin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong.your wrong, at least in Greyjoy law, which doesnt follow Westeros law...eta. Maybe Renly should have called a kingsmoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Walda Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Renly's attempt at the throne was not as innocent as it may seem. I imagine The Queen of Thorns and her son had a lot to do with it. Renly was just a pretty figure head.Yeah, agree agree agree. Queen of Thorns egging him on, giving him delusions of grandeur. I don't know if he would have went for it in earnest otherwise. Definitely would have considered it, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noimporta Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Well, Renly would also have to kill Shireen to become Stannis' heir. Killing children is frowned upon generally at least in the nobility (ie killing members of the noble classes). I believe that wasn't the case for the crown since the Dance of Dragons, I might be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 IIRC The Queen of Thorns were against the Tyrells supporting Renly's claim, at least that's what she told Sansa. But Mace really wanted his grandson to be a King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Really old griff Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong.Historically it depended on the country, some allowed daughters to inherit (if they had no brothers), whereas others were not counted in the line of sucession at all.In Asoiaf the only law I can remember is that dorne has equal rights to inheritance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Baratheon Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Renly as king of westeros would have been a disaster..im glad stan did him in,even if it was Deux Ex Machina.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Blue Eyes Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong.Depends on the law you uses.Dornish: children by age, regardless of gender, siblings (and offspring) by age, regardless of genderAndal: sons by age, daughters by age, brothers (and offspring) by age, sisters (and offsprin) by ageTargaryen: sons by age, male grandchildren through daughters by age of the daughters, brothers (and male offspring) by age,... females lastThe Baratheons used Andal law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuisDantas Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 BTW, even if Renly had supported Stannis, most people in Westeros would still see him as someone who broke the succession rules. How many really believed Stannis's twincest claims? They certainly sounded like something he made up to justify his usurpation.I don't see how the brothers could realistically be expected to support each other. It is plain that they don't like each other nearly enough.You bring a good point that escapes many a Stannis admirer: while we readers know (or think we know - it is not like there is true proof, only really convincing evidence) that by current succession laws Stannis ought to be considered the lawful successor, there is no true proof for him to show; he may be very sincere in his claim, but he has no DNA tests or anything comparable to show.Both Stannis' claim and Renly's (and also, in fact, Joffrey's) are based not on the law (which actually supported Ned by way of Robert's deathbed will) but on some combination of political support and military might. Neither Joffrey nor Stannis can prove that their interpretation of the law is correct, and technically not even the readers can quite know for sure.Truth be told, neither Joffrey nor Stannis are the kind of people who wants to "settle on a consensus" before claiming to be the lawful king - and realistically, people with such a personality rarely get the chance. Particularly when they can't do more than have and sell an opinion on how significant it is that all known Baratheons and their bastards are dark-haired while Joffrey and his siblings aren't.Ultimately, succession laws are basically silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordBloodraven Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 One thing we have to give Renly is that he has political skill that both of his brothers sorely lack. He brought together the largest army in Westeros and was the favorite to win the Iron Throne if not for that pesky shadow. He looks like he might have made a decent King too. I also like him because he tried to knock some sense into Ned Stark. Alas, he failed...What political skill? Renly had only the Stormlands (because he was Lord Paramount) and the Reach, because he was married to Margaery Tyrell. Nothing exceptional: he would probably have been Margaery`s paw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordBloodraven Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong.With the way Renly was mocking Shireen for her greyscale, I don't doubt that he's capable to kill him to be king Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raksha the Demon Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I think Renly was foolish in proclaiming himself king with very little chance of obtaining that rank. He broke the most important law of succession in Westeros, that of primogeniture; and would have had to kill his brother (and possibly his brother's daughter) to seat himself on the Iron Throne, not to mention destroy the Lannister forces; an uphill battle all the way, even with the Tyrells' help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Very little chance to become the King? He had the biggest army by far, and that's what counts the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sunset King Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 If the realm was capable of handling doing what Catelyn suggested (the convening of a Westeros wide council to address all factors pertaining to the succession) that would have been one of the better ways to sort out the kingship issue that arose. The powermongering among the Houses and nobility would likely have wrecked it but it would be a more logical course than a civil war from the point of view of the population as a whole.The Tyrells supported Renly due to a mixture of liking his charisma and having amibitions to have a major role in ruling the continent. Mace Tyrell's primary concerns are definitely not how well the realm would be governed but power, wealth, and glory. They have proven themselves so untrustworthy that Aegon would probably look elsewhere for a political alliance through marriage, should the Tyrells ever try to offer him one. It is difficult to tell what kind of king Renly would have turned out to be. Both Baratheons are superior to the Lannisters though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 What political skill? Renly had only the Stormlands (because he was Lord Paramount) and the Reach, because he was married to Margaery Tyrell. Nothing exceptional: he would probably have been Margaery`s pawIt is made abundantly clear that Renly is popular at court in KL and has a lot of friends. You can say he has the Reach only because he 'was married to Margaery Tyrell,' but he is the guy that was bright enough to make a marriage alliance with the Tyrells once he sees the conflict that is on the way. If you recall, Renly and Loras have been playing an anti-Lannister game since before the War of Five Kings begins. They plan on marrying Robert to Margaery to get Cersei/Lannister power out of KL and become the power behind the Throne themselves instead. Renly has been playing the Game of Thrones for a long time, and he has won a lot of friends. It's not 'only' because he has the Tyrells and the Stormlands, he is a skilled enough player to get both of these groups firmly behind him (worth mentioning that when Jon Arryn rebelled against Aerys he had to fight his own bannermen first while Renly had all of his bannermen behind him out of love). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBallin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not at all clear on the rules of succession, but I think brother comes before daughter in line of succession? Correct me if I'm wrong.You're wrong. Alys Karstark came before her uncle Arnolf, and this is in the North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Well, Renly would also have to kill Shireen to become Stannis' heir. Killing children is frowned upon generally at least in the nobility (ie killing members of the noble classes).No he would not. Renly would inherit before Shireen, being a male.You're wrong. Alys Karstark came before her uncle Arnolf, and this is in the NorthWe're talking about the Iron Throne's succession. Since the Dance of the Dragons, females can only inherit after all possible male claimants are dead. The succession for the crown follows Salic law on steroids. It doesn't work the same way in Dorne (where older girls inherit no matter what) or in noble houses in general (where daughters come before brothers).Renly only looks like an idiot because of how soon he died. But when you figure that he was killed by a literal act of god that no one in his right mind could have foreseen, it doesn't look so idiotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate Poem Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Regardless of the answer, how would that make him an idiot?Considering that he was right, and that ultimately he was proven right by Stannis' decision to kill him, I don't see why one would hold that against him.Hmm, because he is a practical man, with the sense to seek understanding and to admit that he was ambitious, while Stannis is a self-righteous hypocrite with no respect for the lives of those who disagree with him?I don't think Renly was idiot. From his own selfish point of view he was wonderful king. He had big army, he had support of Tyrells, no one did'nt like Stannis (who in this moment DID'NT burn people alive and he was'nt R'hllor's believer) because his personality and behaviour were'nt nice and charming, Robert's children were practically Lannisters and three of them were in their Mom's hands etc. etc.No, he was'nt idiot. He was... I tell that: I could'nt have him in the family. Never.If my older brother would care for me in my childhood in the best way he could, lived with me, when my oldest brother did other things and leaved me - us - with old maester, I should have great respect and love for my brother, I think.(Sorry for my English)He was shallow, self-centered and un-loving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.