Jump to content

Robert was never the rightful King?


Cersai's Son

Recommended Posts

He defeated the Targaryens, killed or exiled all of their (known) members and received fealty (the sticking point) from every major lord as the new king, with House Baratheon recognized as the new royal house. So yes, he was very much the rightful king.

Dany being butthurt about her psychotic freakshow family losing doesn't change any of that.

Ms. Martini B)

:cheers:

I instantly thought Mr. Martini because of that fellow from It's A Wonderful Life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, but the point is (imo) that Robert did not consider Danaerys to be a part of the succession at all because of the nature of Targ succession, as described in the article I linked.

I disagree. Robert was not worried one bit about Viserys being alive all those years. Targaryen succession is irrelevant, he only became nervous when Khal Drogo and his massive khalasar became involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look into medieval law, a vassal's duty and loyalty are null and void if the feudal lord tries to kill him without legal cause. Robert was justified in rebelling, and he took the Iron Throne by force of arms. Out of the leaders of the rebellion, he was chosen because the others did not want it, and he had some relation to the previouse dynasty, which helped some of the more die-hard loyalists to swallow the fact that he is now king.

Yes, Robert was the rightful king, and the Baratheon dynasty had replaced the Targs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, might doesn't automatically make right. This is why so few people supported Renly, even though he was by some distance the most powerful of the Five Kings in military terms. The blood claims of both Stannis and Joffrey were held to be superior in most parts, and three regions chose to secede rather than get involved in the dispute. In order for Renly to become the rightful king the claims of Stannis and Robert's children would need to be nullified, either through death, submission or disinheriting. Renly's "claim" was based on a combination of military application and a quasi-elective nomination without precedent in Westeros, and it wasn't widely accepted.

However people move toward the path of least resistance, if you conquer the seven kingdoms and wipe out or subjugate your opposition making lords bend the knee, you will be king. Some Nobles might not like that, and they may plot but that does'nt make you any less of a king the day you sit that throne. For instance Robert B. was a terrible king but he sat the IT for a short 12-15 years and guess what he's the king, off a rebellion 1/2 of westeros didn't want. Aegon, and Haren the Black did the same thing and people realized they were kings along with a long line of other characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not a dynasty yet. It has been less than 20 years. A dynasty is a sequence of rulers of the same family (which Joff and Tom aren't), not one king.

Yes it is. They were a dynasty in the Stormlands, being lord's paramount for ~300 years, and after king Robert's death Stannis is king. Saying that you need to be 20 years on the throne is arbitrary and I have no idea where that just came from. If a ruling family is inflicted with monarchs who died due to wars/murder/family ilness and had 19 monarchs during the first 19 years of thier reign, are they not a dynasty? Of course they are.

Joffrey and Tommen were only considered legitimate rulers out of the fact that people believed them to be the rightful monarchs, not out of right of conquest from the Baratheons. In everyone's (almost) minds, they are Baratheons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is. They were a dynasty in the Stormlands, being lord's paramount for ~300 years, and after king Robert's death Stannis is king. Saying that you need to be 20 years on the throne is arbitrary and I have no idea where that just came from. If a ruling family is inflicted with monarchs who died due to wars/murder/family ilness and had 19 monarchs during the first 19 years of thier reign, are they not a dynasty? Of course they are.

Joffrey and Tommen were only considered legitimate rulers out of the fact that people believed them to be the rightful monarchs, not out of right of conquest from the Baratheons. In everyone's (almost) minds, they are Baratheons

I was pointing out how short the reign has been, 20 years in meaningless. It could have been 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pointing out how short the reign has been, 20 years in meaningless. It could have been 10 years.

What does the leangh of the reign have to do with the question of legitimacy? The Targs ruled for less then 300 years, while most houses of the realm were ruling their own holdings for thousends of years. They came to power through force of arms, and lost thier power the same way. Robert broke fielty, as was his right after Aerys wanted to kill him, and won the throne by force of arms. He was the rightful monarch until he died, and as a result of him not providing legal hiers, Stannis is currently the rightful king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we consider the laws of westeros or atleast our understanding of it, the Baratheons are the royal family and the claimants for the Iron throne are form that house, the Lannisters are currently holding the IT but they are doing so in Baratheon name as well as support of powerful lords, if people in westeros were not playing the game of thrones then Stannis is the rightful heir and the rightful king, Dany's house was defeated and exiled, if anyone wants the IT they will have to do what Robert did, take the IT by force of arms and gain the fealty an loyalty of the lords and people of westeros. Rights do not matter because the whole realm is at war and no one gives a damm, everyone wants to survive or gain power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does the leangh of the reign have to do with the question of legitimacy?

Nothing. My point is it is too soon to call the Baratheon's a dynasty. That has to be a sequence of rulers. Not one. I don't count that they were kings of the Storm Lands 300 years ago. We are talking about a dynasty of over the entire realm.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does the leangh of the reign have to do with the question of legitimacy? The Targs ruled for less then 300 years, while most houses of the realm were ruling their own holdings for thousends of years. They came to power through force of arms, and lost thier power the same way. Robert broke fielty, as was his right after Aerys wanted to kill him, and won the throne by force of arms. He was the rightful monarch until he died, and as a result of him not providing legal hiers, Stannis is currently the rightful king.

If we consider the laws of westeros or atleast our understanding of it, the Baratheons are the royal family and the claimants for the Iron throne are form that house, the Lannisters are currently holding the IT but they are doing so in Baratheon name as well as support of powerful lords, if people in westeros were not playing the game of thrones then Stannis is the rightful heir and the rightful king, Dany's house was defeated and exiled, if anyone wants the IT they will have to do what Robert did, take the IT by force of arms and gain the fealty an loyalty of the lords and people of westeros. Rights do not matter because the whole realm is at war and no one gives a damm, everyone wants to survive or gain power.

by same right of conquest Stannis lost the throne in battle at blackwater, so he is no longer the rightful king
Link to comment
Share on other sites

by same right of conquest Stannis lost the throne in battle at blackwater, so he is no longer the rightful king

How so, has stannis given up fighting for the IT? has he been exiled, Stannis is still very much in the fight, he has lost a battle but not the war, Stannis is still in open rebellion against the IT as acknowledged by council in KL and other lords, and loosing one battle doesn't mean he has lost the right to conquest. Robert lost a battle in his rebellion so he should have lost his right to conquest or force of arms?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so, has stannis given up fighting for the IT? has he been exiled, Stannis is still very much in the fight, he has lost a battle but not the war, Stannis is still in open rebellion against the IT as acknowledged by council in KL and other lords, and loosing one battle doesn't mean he has lost the right to conquest. Robert lost a battle in his rebellion so he should have lost his right to conquest or force of arms?

Stannis lost the battle and until he wins the war he doesn't have the right to call himself king. By your logic Viserys/Dany were the rightful king since they never stopped claiming the IT for their own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lords and kings of Westeros swore fealty to Aegon I, making him the ruler of the kingdoms. The lords of Westeros swore fealty to Robert, making his line the current royal family. Joffrey and Tommen aren't Baratheons, but most lords do not know that. Really, there's no such thing as a rightful king. If Robert had been a decent king, it wouldn't have been such a big deal. But he went on to become a worse king than Baelor Blessed.

Depending on who your favorite family is, you'd probably say that they have a stronger claim.

Also, the lords of Westeros have no real loyalty to the ruling families and will probably side with whoever would present them with an opportunity to gain more power.

Examples-

Martells: Trying to use Dany as a device to carry out their vengeance. They'll go straight to Aegon's side once they meet him.

Tyrells: Sticking with Tommen because they are opportunistand will side with whoever has the best chance at winning.

Arryn: Completely Neutral. Many lords wanted to side with Robb.

Tully: Sided with Robb because of family ties.

Lannisters: Follow with the Joffrey/Tommen because of family ties and because they're pretty much in the greatest position if power. Alteast for now.

Stark: Rebelled against the Iron Throne. Historical wise, they don't get involved with most sounthern affairs.

Greyjoy: Reblled against the throne. Have attempted to do so many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stannis lost the battle and until he wins the war he doesn't have the right to call himself king. By your logic Viserys/Dany were the rightful king since they never stopped claiming the IT for their own.

The first part about Stannis isn't king in westeros until he wins the IT by force of arms is true because everyone in westeros considers him a rebel, and I did say no one gives a damm about rights, Viserys is not the rightful king because he went into exile and is not fighting any wars from Essos, moreover all the lords of westeros bent their knee and promised fealty and loyalty to House Baratheon and not Targaryen, so their line of succession was broken and they are not the royal house anymore according to the laws of westeros no matter how many years they ruled westeros or how many years Baratheons are ruling westeros, if the tragryens want the IT they will have to take the IT by force of arms just like Stannis and anyone else who wants the IT. And I did mention that if no one was paying the game of thrones and everyone followed the law then Stannis would be the rightful king, so Stannis being the rightful king is not wrong because he is a Baratheon and Robert's heir, knowing what we know about Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella being Lannisters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by same right of conquest Stannis lost the throne in battle at blackwater, so he is no longer the rightful king

Not the same thing. Battle of the Blackwater is one battle, not the entire war. Robert losing in Ashford does not mean he lost the entire war. Robb won every battle, yet lost his war. In the Blackwater it's even less clear, as both sides claimed to be Baratheons. Joffrey's claim is that he was Robert's heir, not right of conquest. Technically, the throne is still held by the Baratheon family, and everyone sees them as the ruling dynasty. The fact that Joffrey and Tommen are bastards born to Lannisters on boths sides is unknown by many, or at least not recognised as such. Thier rule is illegitimate, and stems from the fact that they, like everyone else in Westeros, consider the Baratheons the rightful rulers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...