Archived

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

Rhaegarsjoy

Restoration Rights?

369 posts in this topic

Well Cersei's plan wasn't genius either; she was completely dependent on a 15 year old kid and a boar whilst Barristan Selmy was with the king. Her plan succeeding was just good luck rather than actual intelligence.

But in the end did Ned's action really cause long term problems for the Starks the way Aerys will do for Dany?

Sansa or Rickon would be the children of Noble Ned, who died a hero

Dany on the hand is the Mad King's daughter

The Stark children are called children of a traitor. And yes Ned's actions greatly impacted his children. I loved Ned, but he should have worried more about hid own children, more than Cersei's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it was said Tywin did a great job as Hand under Aerys.

True,But Tywin wasn't hand during the Defiance.

Robert acted like he was lord of SE rather than the king of the seven kingdoms, even selmy who served Aerys said he was a terrible king.

Yes,But he didn't burn people for fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True,But Tywin wasn't hand during the Defiance.

Yes,But he didn't burn people for fun.

Yes, he was

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True,But Tywin wasn't hand during the Defiance.

Yes he was, and he waited to long to have Aerys rescued out of spite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stark children are called children of a traitor. And yes Ned's actions greatly impacted his children.

The Stark kids have the North, the Riverlands and the Vale; all three would be willing to support the child of Ned Stark. So I wouldn't hold the Lannisters calling him a traitor as a big affect.

Compare that to Dany who no one wants or cares about because her father was the Mad King.

That's why you can't compare Sansa and Rickon to Dany; they have people who are willing to back and support them because of who their father is. Dany doesn't have this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dany burns people alive for fun?

I thought we were Talking about Aerys here where did Dany come in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my general opinion as well. I think when Aerys killed Rickard and Brandon and called for Robert and Ned's heads, the lords paramount were justified in rebelling. There are implicit terms in a "contract" between a liege lord and his banners, and Aerys broke that "contract."

What was entirely unjustified is murdering two innocent children in the most heinous manner conceivable. Gregor smashed the boy's head against a wall and raped Elia for fuck sake. Rhaenys was dragged and stabbed over and over again. King Bob didn't do anything about this, and Gregor and Tywin went unpunished.

The Targaryens were usurped, like it or not.I think Dany is perfectly justified in trying to avenge that.

And the whole idea that the Targaryens, as a dynasty, deserved to be removed is unfounded in my opinion. They had bad kings but they also had great ones. Removing Aerys was justified. But the lords of Westeros swore an oath the the Targaryen kings and their heirs. Smashing the infant king, Aegon VI's head against a wall, and raping his mother is entirely unjustified.

yesss thank you! well said! :agree:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people don't want Stannis on the throne, So he should've given up already and should really shut up about his "rightful" claim, right?

LOL I knew someone was going to take a shot at Stannis...

We are talking about restoration. As far as the common folk know, Tommen IS a Baratheon, and Robert's heir. They give Robet and his dynasty legitimacy. Stannis is technically heir, as Robert had no trueborn children. Stannis is Robert's heir, the Lannisters are trying to place one of thier own on the throne while using the Baratheon's legitimacy, Renly tried to rebel and userp the throne by force, Robb and Balon declared independence and tried to annex another region (Robb the Riverlands, Balon the North). Dany and Aegon are the only two who want restoration to the Iron Throne. Both of thier claims are "my family used to rule, so I should be king/queen", while disregarding the fact that thier house is deposed, and Westeros bent the knee to the Baratheons. The support they get determins if Westeros wants them back or not. Apparently, they get Dorne, which is only doing so because Doran wants to marry his house to the ruling monarch, and maybe some petty lords. Not exactly grounds for restoration, or likely to succeed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhaegar and his crazy father broke the bonds of faith between overlords and vassals.

They lost their right to rule.

And why continue with a poisonous line when cause is given to change the guard?

Had Ned taken the city, he could've held the kids, sent Elia home n installed the remaining Targs on Dragonstone.

Robert is king, his first son marries Rhaenys, his best friend can marry his heir Robb to the newly born Daenerys, and Viserys can inherit Dragonstone, while Aegon goes to the citadel or sept.

Neatly done, n everyone is happy, but the Targs, but they're alive n hold their traditional seat so they can have a nice glass of shut the hell up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Stark kids have the North, the Riverlands and the Vale; all three would be willing to support the child of Ned Stark. So I wouldn't hold the Lannisters calling him a traitor as a big affect.

Compare that to Dany who no one wants or cares about because her father was the Mad King.

That's why you can't compare Sansa and Rickon to Dany; they have people who are willing to back and support them because of who their father is. Dany doesn't have this

Dany had Dorne, she probably doesn't anymore, but there were people who still supported the Targs. And the Starks didn't have the Vale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my general opinion as well. I think when Aerys killed Rickard and Brandon and called for Robert and Ned's heads, the lords paramount were justified in rebelling. There are implicit terms in a "contract" between a liege lord and his banners, and Aerys broke that "contract."

What was entirely unjustified is murdering two innocent children in the most heinous manner conceivable. Gregor smashed the boy's head against a wall and raped Elia for fuck sake. Rhaenys was dragged and stabbed over and over again. King Bob didn't do anything about this, and Gregor and Tywin went unpunished.

The Targaryens were usurped, like it or not.I think Dany is perfectly justified in trying to avenge that.

And the whole idea that the Targaryens, as a dynasty, deserved to be removed is unfounded in my opinion. They had bad kings but they also had great ones. Removing Aerys was justified. But the lords of Westeros swore an oath the the Targaryen kings and their heirs. Smashing the infant king, Aegon VI's head against a wall, and raping his mother is entirely unjustified.

I fail to understand why you would put a quotation mark around the word "contract", as if it's some fabled part of ASOIAF that we have no idea about. Worse, I fail to see anywhere in the Westerosi feudal system a single mentioning of the words: "heir", "heirs", "offsprings" or "children".

Stannis elevates Davos to Lord, and Hand of the king:

King Stannis turned from the table. “On your knees, Onion Knight.”

“Your Grace?”

“For your onions and fish, I made you a knight once. For this, I am of a mind to raise you to lord.”

This? Davos was lost. “I am content to be your knight, Your Grace. I would not know how to begin being lordly.”

“Good. To be lordly is to be false. I have learned that lesson hard. Now, kneel. Your king commands.”

Davos knelt, and Stannis drew his longsword. Lightbringer, Melisandre had named it; the red sword of heroes, drawn from the fires where

the seven gods were consumed. The room seemed to grow brighter as the blade slid from its scabbard. The steel had a glow to it; now

orange, now yellow, now red. The air shimmered around it, and no jewel had ever sparkled so brilliantly. But when Stannis touched it to

Davos’s shoulder, it felt no different than any other longsword. “Ser Davos of House Seaworth,” the king said, “are you my true and honest

liege man, now and forever?”

“I am, Your Grace.”

“And do you swear to serve me loyally all your days, to give me honest counsel and swift obedience, to defend my rights and my realm

against all foes in battles great and small, to protect my people and punish my enemies?”

“I do, Your Grace.”

“Then rise again, Davos Seaworth, and rise as Lord of the Rainwood, Admiral of the Narrow Sea, and Hand of the King.”

For a moment Davos was too stunned to move. I woke this morning in his dungeon. “Your Grace, you cannot . . . I am no fit man to be a

King’s Hand.”

“There is no man fitter.” Stannis sheathed Lightbringer, gave Davos his hand, and pulled him to his feet.

“I am lowborn,” Davos reminded him. “An upjumped smuggler. Your lords will never obey me.”

“Then we will make new lords.”

“But . . . I cannot read . . . nor write . . .”

“Maester Pylos can read for you. As to writing, my last Hand wrote the head off his shoulders. All I ask of you are the things you’ve always

given me. Honesty. Loyalty. Service.”

The lord declares that he is a true and honest leige man. Note: This oath is sworn by a man who is already bound by the feudal contract, and is a contract that exchanges greater responsibility for greater reward.

The lord swears to serve loyally all his days, to give honest council and swift obedience, to defend the king's rights and the realm, against all foes, to protect the king's people and punish his enemies.

The oath is done without mentioning of gods. It is a pact, that the lord will be granted his lordship/royal office, in return for: Honesty, Loyalty, Service. Honesty and Loyalty are to the king, service includes the people, defending them and the realm fropm any enemy.

The Reeds Renew thier Feudal Oath to Winterfell:

“My lords of Stark,” the girl said. “The years have passed in their hundreds and their thousands since my folk first swore their fealty to the

King in the North. My lord father has sent us here to say the words again, for all our people.”

She is looking at me, Bran realized. He had to make some answer. “My brother Robb is fighting in the south,” he said, “but you can say

your words to me, if you like.”

“To Winterfell we pledge the faith of Greywater,” they said together. “Hearth and heart and harvest we yield up to you, my lord. Our swords

and spears and arrows are yours to command. Grant mercy to our weak, help to our helpless, and justice to all, and we shall never fail you.”

“I swear it by earth and water,” said the boy in green.

“I swear it by bronze and iron,” his sister said.

“We swear it by ice and fire,” they finished together.

Bran groped for words. Was he supposed to swear something back to them? Their oath was not one he had been taught. “May your winters

be short and your summers bountiful,” he said. That was usually a good thing to say. “Rise. I’m Brandon Stark.”

The girl, Meera, got to her feet and helped her brother up. The boy stared at Bran all the while. “We bring you gifts of fish and frog and

fowl,” he said.

“I thank you.” Bran wondered if he would have to eat a frog to be polite. “I offer you the meat and mead of Winterfell.”

The feudal vassal pledges service, harvest, military service, in return for the feudal lord's help to it's weak, to it's helpless, and justice to all. This specific oath predates both the old gods and the new, and likely one can replace the source of legitimacy form the natural elements with the modern old gods and the new for the modern feudal oaths.

Beric Knights Gendry:

“I could shoe him for you,” said Gendry, all of a sudden. “I was only a ’prentice, but my master said my hand was made to hold a hammer.

I can shoe horses, close up rents in mail, and beat the dents from plate. I bet I could make swords too.”

“What are you saying, lad?” asked Harwin.

“I’ll smith for you.” Gendry went to one knee before Lord Beric. “If you’ll have me, m’lord, I could be of use. I’ve made tools and knives and

once I made a helmet that wasn’t so bad. One of the Mountain’s men stole it from me when we was taken.”

Arya bit her lip. He means to leave me too.

“You would do better serving Lord Tully at Riverrun,” said Lord Beric. “I cannot pay for your work.”

“No one ever did. I want a forge, and food to eat, some place I can sleep. That’s enough, m’lord.”

“A smith can find a welcome most anywhere. A skilled armorer even more so. Why would you choose to stay with us?”

Arya watched Gendry screw up his stupid face, thinking. “At the hollow hill, what you said about being King Robert’s men, and brothers, I

liked that. I liked that you gave the Hound a trial. Lord Bolton just hanged folk or took off their heads, and Lord Tywin and Ser Amory were

the same. I’d sooner smith for you.”

“We got plenty of mail needs mending, m’lord,” Jack reminded Lord Beric. “Most we took off the dead, and there’s holes where the death

came through.”

“You must be a lackwit, boy,” said Lem. “We’re outlaws. Lowborn scum, most of us, excepting his lordship. Don’t think it’ll be like Tom’s

fool songs neither. You won’t be stealing no kisses from a princess, nor riding in no tourneys in stolen armor. You join us, you’ll end with

your neck in a noose, or your head mounted up above some castle gate.”

“It’s no more than they’d do for you,” said Gendry.

“Aye, that’s so,” said Jack-Be-Lucky cheerfully. “The crows await us all. M’lord, the boy seems brave enough, and we do have need of what

he brings us. Take him, says Jack.”

“And quick,” suggested Harwin, chuckling, “before the fever passes and he comes back to his senses.”

A wan smile crossed Lord Beric’s lips. “Thoros, my sword.”

This time the lightning lord did not set the blade afire, but merely laid it light on Gendry’s shoulder. “Gendry, do you swear before the eyes

of gods and men to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to protect all women and children, to obey your captains, your liege lord,

and your king, to fight bravely when needed and do such other tasks as are laid upon you, however hard or humble or dangerous they may

be?”

“I do, m’lord.”

The marcher lord moved the sword from the right shoulder to the left, and said, “Arise Ser Gendry, knight of the hollow hill, and be

welcome to our brotherhood.”

The Knight's oath gains it's legitimacy from the gods and from mortal men, and from the crown. He swears to defend the people, to obey his captains, his lord and his king, and to fight for these goals despite possible danger to himself.

Catelyn accepts Brienne as her Sworn Sword:

The tall girl knelt awkwardly, unsheathed Renly’s longsword, and laid it at her feet. “Then I am yours, my lady. Your liege man, or . . .

whatever you would have me be. I will shield your back and keep your counsel and give my life for yours, if need be. I swear it by the old

gods and the new.”

“And I vow that you shall always have a place by my hearth and meat and mead at my table, and pledge to ask no service of you that might

bring you into dishonor. I swear it by the old gods and the new. Arise.” As she clasped the other woman’s hands between her own, Catelyn

could not help but smile. How many times did I watch Ned accept a man’s oath of service? She wondered what he would think if he could see

her now.

The Sworn Sword will defend his liege lord, even at the cost of his own life, and will accept his liege lord's council.

The lord will provide his sworn sword with food and protection, and will not ask him to provide service that would dishonour him.

The oath is done in front of the sworn sword's laid weapon, gains it's legitimacy from the old gods and the new, and sealed with the holding of hands.

To summerise:

The basic oath of fealty is that of the sworn sword. The oath is a personal pact between two people, exchanging one form of protection for another, and gains it's legitimacy from the gods.

The oath of the knight is an institutionalized one, and it's source of legitimacy is both from the gods, and from the earthly authorities. The knight's duties are also not only for the person he swore to, but also to his lord, and to his king, and to the general population.

The Feudal contract is between a vassal and his lord, it trades service, both military and other, and tax, in exchange for protection and justice.

The duties of a lord, or a person holding a royal office, are to his king, but now also to the realm and it's people. It is both military service and other. This oath is a pact that exchanges a lordship/high office, for added duties, beyond the ones that were declared at the time of the creation of the feudal contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dany's family deserved to be removed. The Starks are believed dead, that is why the Boltons slipped in as "wardens" .The Starks were betrayed by "sellouts" who cared nothing about oaths and honor and duty. Dany is carrying a banner that half of the realm despised due to injustices done to them by said house. the other half that supported the Targs simply had not yet received their injustice from them by the time the Rebellion started.

this. the difference between them is that no one wanted the Targs (who btw always claim that they are Valyrians so they never saw themselves as Westerosi) but the Starks (the oldest family in Westeros) were betrayed by one family (ok 3 if you count the southorns too)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this. the difference between them is that no one wanted the Targs (who btw always claim that they are Valyrians so they never saw themselves as Westerosi) but the Starks (the oldest family in Westeros) were betrayed by one family (ok 3 if you count the southorns too)

Why edit things to suit one but not the other? People were scared of tywin specially with the tyrell forces but no one wants the tyrells or a lannister bastards as their kings and certainly not stannis. I think people underestimate the Targaryen loyalists just because they bend the knee doesn't mean there aren't Targ loyalists. So far we only have POV from everyone involved in this war, which are made up of those that rebelled against the Targs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why edit things to suit one but not the other? People were scared of tywin specially with the tyrell forces but no one wants the tyrells or a lannister bastards as their kings and certainly not stannis. I think people underestimate the Targaryen loyalists just because they bend the knee doesn't mean there aren't Targ loyalists. So far we only have POV from everyone involved in this war, which are made up of those that rebelled against the Targs.

who are the Targ loyalists? Darry (traitors against their liege lord)? Mooton(traitors against their liege lord)?

Tyrells are not reliable so I don't include them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dany had Dorne, she probably doesn't anymore, but there were people who still supported the Targs. And the Starks didn't have the Vale.

Dorne is risky, especially if they blame Quentyn's death on her. But even then that's one kingdom and it's one of the smallest.

The Starks on the other hand have 3/7 of Westeros behind them. The Vale wanted to fight for Robb and one family (think it was the Royces) almost rebelled because Lysa refused. Now that she's dead, there's nothing stopping them from helping Ned's little girl

So Dany and The Starks can't be compared for various reasons:

1. The Starks were wrongfully usurped

2. They have actual enemies; Dany's just fighting ghosts

3. There's three kingdoms who will support their claim. No one actually wants Dany, the Martells just want her for revenge

4. They're fighting for their home, Dany on the other hand is fighting for a kingdom she's never even set foot in

5. They have a legitimate claim, Dany lost hers the minute Robert put his butt on the IT

You just can't compare them, it doesn't work :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to understand why you would put a quotation mark around the word "contract", as if it's some fabled part of ASOIAF that we have no idea about. Worse, I fail to see anywhere in the Westerosi feudal system a single mentioning of the words: "heir", "heirs", "offsprings" or "children".

I put quotation marks because the contract between liege and vassal is often implicit and customary. The word contract today has connotations of an institutionalized legally binding document. I was making a distinction.

As to the oaths being sworn, if the heirs are not explicitly mentioned, it is certainly implied. Notice Davos is Stannis' vassal now and forever, not now until Stannis dies, then you are free to do or serve as you damn well please. Davos equally swears to defend Stannis' rights, does that not include protecting his heirs?

Look there's no point digging for technicalities, it's pretty obvious that the oaths sworn to the Aegon Targaryen were not personal oaths, but oaths of fealty to house Targaryen. Aegon most certainly didn't say "okay so I'm uniting the kingdoms, forging an iron throne, building a great capital, and you all must swear fealty to me, but only to me. Once I'm gone ya'll don't need to obey or extend the oath to my heirs, you're basically free to do whatever."

There are of course illustrations of this point. The Manderlys swore an oath to always be "wolf men." In other words they would always be loyal to the sitting Stark king and all of his heirs, forever.

Greatjon also reminds us that "it was the dragons we married, and now the dragons are dead." It wasn't just the first Aegon to whom they swore fealty, it was house Targaryen as a whole.

I've conceded that Aerys lost his legitimacy to rule and that he was rightfully removed from power. But this idea that house Targaryen was not wronged in the aftermath is honestly absurd. What happened to the Targaryens may have been more heinous that the red wedding and I don't understand how people sometimes just brush this away. At least Robb and Cat were killed quickly. Cat's throat was slit and Robb stabbed in the heart. Rhaenys was a four year old girl, and she was dragged from under her father's bed and stabbed 50 damn times. SHE WAS FOUR YEARS OLD, how would people react if that happened to Arya? Then Aegon, a freaking newborn kid, gets his brains smashed against a wall. Then with his brains still on his hands, Gregor rapes the prince's wife, and murders her as well.

These actions were ordered by a lord paramount who went unpunished. In fact, his daughter was made queen, and his grandson currently sits the throne created by the first Targaryen.

You can call that right of conquest or whatever, but the idea that Dany has zero moral justification in what she's doing is absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dorne is risky, especially if they blame Quentyn's death on her. But even then that's one kingdom and it's one of the smallest.

The Starks on the other hand have 3/7 of Westeros behind them. The Vale wanted to fight for Robb and one family (think it was the Royces) almost rebelled because Lysa refused. Now that she's dead, there's nothing stopping them from helping Ned's little girl

So Dany and The Starks can't be compared for various reasons:

1. The Starks were wrongfully usurped

2. They have actual enemies; Dany's just fighting ghosts

3. There's three kingdoms who will support their claim. No one actually wants Dany, the Martells just want her for revenge

4. They're fighting for their home, Dany on the other hand is fighting for a kingdom she's never even set foot in

5. They have a legitimate claim, Dany lost hers the minute Robert put his butt on the IT

You just can't compare them, it doesn't work :dunno:

She can make allies the same way Aegon the conqueror did, with dragons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the oaths being sworn, if the heirs are not explicitly mentioned, it is certainly implied. Notice Davos is Stannis' vassal now and forever, not now until Stannis dies, then you are free to do or serve as you damn well please. Davos equally swears to defend Stannis' rights, does that not include protecting his heirs?

Look there's no point digging for technicalities, it's pretty obvious that the oaths sworn to the Aegon Targaryen were not personal oaths, but oaths of fealty to house Targaryen. Aegon most certainly didn't say "okay so I'm uniting the kingdoms, forging an iron throne, building a great capital, and you all must swear fealty to me, but only to me. Once I'm gone ya'll don't need to obey or extend the oath to my heirs, you're basically free to do whatever."

There are of course illustrations of this point. The Manderlys swore an oath to always be "wolf men." In other words they would always be loyal to the sitting Stark king and all of his heirs, forever.

Greatjon also reminds us that "it was the dragons we married, and now the dragons are dead." It wasn't just the first Aegon to whom they swore fealty, it was house Targaryen as a whole.

Davos is not swearing fielty, he had in the past, but the quote I brought was to show as many examples of the feudal contracts in Westeros as I could. Davos is already sworn to Stannis, and now swears a new oath that adds certain responsibilities and benefits to the older one (the one which tades service for justice, help and protection). Aerys broke the feudal contract, and so the larger responsibility and larger benefit of being a lord paramount goes away with it. At no point do we see someone swear fielty to the heir of his feudal lord. This is exactly the reason one needs to renew his oath of fielty when one lord dies. You don't start out sworn to thier entire line for ever and ever. While the king lives, his family is royalty. If that king is deposed, you don't need to look for a reason to break your conrtact with every single member of his family, that is absurd. You depose a king in favor of someone. If you wish it was someone of the royal family, so be it. If you depose and claim right of conquest - so be it. Aerys broke his feudal contract with three lords paramount. and jeopardized all the other lords. Once Aerys was deposed all the lords bent the knee and swore to Robert.

The "Promise" of the Manderlys is something else. The Greatjon said the dragons - as in real dragons. No dragons alive - no power to force this foriegn leige arbitrarily. The whole point of the field of fire and the king who knelt was that Westeros did not choose the Targs, but it was taken by right of conquest. Once the Targs could no longer hold the realm by force of arms - no reason to keep swearing fielty.

I've conceded that Aerys lost his legitimacy to rule and that he was rightfully removed from power. But this idea that house Targaryen was not wronged in the aftermath is honestly absurd. What happened to the Targaryens may have been more heinous that the red wedding and I don't understand how people sometimes just brush this away. At least Robb and Cat were killed quickly. Cat's throat was slit and Robb stabbed in the heart. Rhaenys was a four year old girl, and she was dragged from under her father's bed and stabbed 50 damn times. SHE WAS FOUR YEARS OLD, how would people react if that happened to Arya? Then Aegon, a freaking newborn kid, gets his brains smashed against a wall. Then with his brains still on his hands, Gregor rapes the prince's wife, and murders her as well.

These actions were ordered by a lord paramount who went unpunished. In fact, his daughter was made queen, and his grandson currently sits the throne created by the first Targaryen.

You can call that right of conquest or whatever, but the idea that Dany has zero moral justification in what she's doing is absurd.

Who cares what happened to the royal family? I don't care if it was worse then the red wedding or not, the principle remains the same - The Targs lost legitimacy when Aerys was deposed, and there is zero legitimacy for Dany or Aegon (Blackfyre or no) to lay claim to the Iron Throne. They want it - they need to take it by right of conquest, not by right of birth. The field of fire and the burning of Harenhall were a hell of a lot worse then either Elia and her children or the RW combined. Saying Targaryens and moral justification in the same sentence is an oximoron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're completely wrong, neither bran nor rickon sat on their fathers seat does that mean they shouldn't take back their home. And the Targ after the conquest didn't lord "fire and blood" over the rest of westeros. Aerys was 'mad' if the lords wanted to change him they should have supported rhaegar to replace him, they didnt do that because that's not how you deal with your king like a common criminal but all the Targaryens didn't deserve what was done to them anymore than the Starks did. If you look at this logically the reaction to what happened at the RW if cat was raped after they smashed Robb's head against the wall and dragged Arya from outside and stabbed her a dozen times would that have made them deserve it if Ned was Mad?

I dont think I said the Targaryens deserved the sacking of KL. They did deserve to be usurped, because of the way they treated their citizens. They believed (or at least Aerys, Viserys, and sometimes Dany) that since they are Targaryens, they can do whatever they wanted to. This is what I meant by the "fire and blood" thing, I wasn't referring to conquest. It doesn't matter if they are mad, or the rightful kings. When you are in a leadership position and you fail, you need to fall. Yes, supporting Rhaegar would be logical, and probably a better decision than letting Ned or Robert take the throne. But how could the rebels take the chance of meeting with Rhaegar, when they knew they would probably be executed? The logistics of finding Rhaegar and communicating with him without any loyalists knowing was simply too hard, especially with Robert leading a lot of the war. Rickon should have the right to go back to his seat, and dany should have a home in westeros. They both have been usurped, but I don't think either of them deserve free rides. If the Stark bannermen flock to Rickon, then obviously, in ruling, the Starks did a good job and Rickon will get Winterfell. If the lords don't flock to Dany because of the horrendous way her father treated them, then she needs to find another way onto the IT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites