Jon's Queen Consort Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 You know very well that Ned doesn't explicitly spell it out, but you're being deliberately obtuse by refusing to admit what he clearly meant. It's okay. There aren't any reliable quotes about Robert taking the Throne by conquest either, just Renly trying to justify stealing the IT. So you have nothing. I see. Sorry, but it's you that is being obtuse. Why is it a Baratheon dynasty? Why did they not put Viserys on the throne? Why do they call Robert 'The Usurper'? All of these questions have the same answer. It's because Robert won the throne by conquest. The only person who even mentions Robert's 'claim' is Ned, who explicitly stated he never wanted the throne and is an unreliable source, even if there was a direct quote, which there isn't. :agree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victarion Chainbreaker Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Sorry, but it's you that is being obtuse. (1) Why is it a Baratheon dynasty? (2) Why did they not put Viserys on the throne? (3) Why do they call Robert 'The Usurper'? All of these questions have the same answer. (4) It's because Robert won the throne by conquest. The only person who even mentions Robert's 'claim' is Ned, who explicitly stated he never wanted the throne and is an unreliable source, even if there was a direct quote, which there isn't. (1) There was never a Baratheon 'dynasty.' There was one frickin' guy whose queen usurped the throne from him for her illegitimate offspring. One guy is not a dynasty. And the one Baratheon is on the throne because... (2) Aerys was so crazy that his descendants were assumed to be crazy as well. At the time of Robert's Rebellion, Viserys, Aegon, and Rhaella were toddlers and Dany was a twinkle in her daddy's eyes (shudder.) The only descendant of Aerys grown enough to show his full mental capabilities was Rhaegar. Rhaegar had just fomented war with the North and the Stormlands by kidnapping Lyanna, because he had to impregnate her to stop the world from being destroyed by the Others, a fairytale to the vast majority of the Seven Kingdoms. Is it any wonder nobody wanted to try the next one of Aerys' offspring? Aerys and his line were cut off and the next in line to the throne (through their Targaryan blood) were the Baratheons. (3) Because Robert usurped the throne. (4) For Christ's sake, if you're going to comment on a thread then read the thread first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 The only person Stannis would knell to is Robert, if he comes back to life. Don't know why there are all of these threads about Stannis bending the knee. This is one topic I have seen way too much of, that can be answered with one word, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thormund Stark Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Stannis would never bow to Dany he'd sooner be roasted alive by her Dragons, and the throne belongs to Stannis not Dany, Aegon, Jon, etc. The Targaryen dynasty ended with Aerys none of the current Targs actually have legitimate claim to the throne because it belongs to house Baratheon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 (2) Aerys was so crazy that his descendants were assumed to be crazy as well. At the time of Robert's Rebellion, Viserys, Aegon, and Rhaella were toddlers and Dany was a twinkle in her daddy's eyes (shudder.) The only descendant of Aerys grown enough to show his full mental capabilities was Rhaegar. Rhaegar had just fomented war with the North and the Stormlands by kidnapping Lyanna, because he had to impregnate her to stop the world from being destroyed by the Others, a fairytale to the vast majority of the Seven Kingdoms. Is it any wonder nobody wanted to try the next one of Aerys' offspring? Aerys and his line were cut off and the next in line to the throne (through their Targaryan blood) were the Baratheons. You have any proof of that? ERoERo where art thou? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilrob6 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 All this talk about Stannis being iron and breaking before he'll bend is old news. Davos taught Stannis to bend. Saving the kingdom to win the throne instead of the other way around is Stannis bending. Defeating the Wildings and then welcoming them south of the Wall is bending. Ridding the North of Ironborn and Boltons while Northmen defiantly proclaim their only king is STARK is bending. Stannis has learned how to bend, and his knees will do so when faced with the rightful queen. Stannis has bent, but only changing his approach to win the throne. Giving up his claim is a whole different matter. Stannis has learned that simply having a claim is not enough to gain support from Westerosi Lords. He has to earn their support and is busy doing that in the North. Dany will have to learn the same and do the same, People will not stand in line to welcome her, regardless of ther claim. She'll just bring more war to a realm that longs for peace (just like Young Griff). She will not just be supported because of her name, except probably for a small amount of remaining Targ supporters. Most lord will choose in self interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victarion Chainbreaker Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 You have any proof of that? Just 'logic' and 'common sense,' I understand they're not as good as SSM, but they certainly beat 'willfully misconstruing the text' and 'taking quotes from unreliable sources as gospel.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Just 'logic' and 'common sense,' I understand they're not as good as SSM, but they certainly beat 'willfully misconstruing the text' and 'taking quotes from unreliable sources as gospel.' In this series only text evidence matter. "Logic" and "common sense" no. The right to revolution is the logic thing, btw if you think that RR was unlawful=Robert is an usurper, is against the common sense. The married crown prince disappearing with a teen is against the common sense, yet it happened. So you have nothing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shk12344 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 So Stannis is willing to kill his own brother for Iron Throne, but think he will bend the knee for Dany?? What the hell is wrong with you people?? If Stannis felt either Viserys or Dany had the legal right to the Throne, then he would have offered it to them, but obviously he doesn't. As he stated many times in the book, he believe he has the sole legal claim to the throne. And just as important he has proven to be kind of person who would rather starve and die before surrendering to his enemies, so he would be a type of character who would prefer to die in a battle against Dany rather than surrender. As others posters have stated, I don't understand why this type of post keeps coming. It's plain childish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victarion Chainbreaker Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 In this series only text evidence matter. "Logic" and "common sense" no. The right to revolution is the logic thing, btw if you think that RR was unlawful=Robert is an usurper, is against the common sense. The married crown prince disappearing with a teen is against the common sense, yet it happened. So you have nothing at all. Actually text is always unreliable, being told from points of view. SSM is the only truly reliable source. If you think that this series is being written without logic or common sense, well, I pity you. It is clear now that you're not here to discuss the series, but to force your views on others. Good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Actually text is always unreliable, being told from points of view. SSM is the only truly reliable source. If you think that this series is being written without logic or common sense, well, I pity you. It is clear now that you're not here to discuss the series, but to force your views on others. Good luck with that. So what you say it's common sense that people don't have the right to revolution? It's common sense that a married man will disappear with a teen? In which universe those are common sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 (1) There was never a Baratheon 'dynasty.' There was one frickin' guy whose queen usurped the throne from him for her illegitimate offspring. One guy is not a dynasty. And the one Baratheon is on the throne because... (2) Aerys was so crazy that his descendants were assumed to be crazy as well. At the time of Robert's Rebellion, Viserys, Aegon, and Rhaella were toddlers and Dany was a twinkle in her daddy's eyes (shudder.) The only descendant of Aerys grown enough to show his full mental capabilities was Rhaegar. Rhaegar had just fomented war with the North and the Stormlands by kidnapping Lyanna, because he had to impregnate her to stop the world from being destroyed by the Others, a fairytale to the vast majority of the Seven Kingdoms. Is it any wonder nobody wanted to try the next one of Aerys' offspring? Aerys and his line were cut off and the next in line to the throne (through their Targaryan blood) were the Baratheons. (3) Because Robert usurped the throne. (4) For Christ's sake, if you're going to comment on a thread then read the thread first. (1) Semantics, the point is that the Targaryan dynasty is over and commoners believe Joff and Tommen to be Baratheons. (2) What? Site one single example that says Aerys and his line were cut off due to his madness and the throne went to Robert because of it. (3) Through conquest. (4) I read the thread, and you're wrong as to why Robert was declared king. Sorry, you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn of House Patrick Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 :bang: :bang: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat King Robert Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 No. I don't think Stannis would bend knee for Dany. I don't think, however, that it's not possible. Stannis is influenced by his red whore Melisandre. What if Melisandre sees the errors of her visions? Perhaps she sees that Dany is Azor Ahai reborn, would Stannis listen to Mel then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Idiots Lantern Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I don't think it will come down to Stannis vs. Dany over who has the better claim.I think Stannis's whole job in the next book will be to hold back the Others after the collapse of the Night's Watch. It's not an enviable job, and thanks to his wife, he cannot expect the wildlings to help. Jon, living or dead, is at the very least deposed and won't be very helpful either. And the South will be much too distracted by the return of the dragons to notice anything that's going on north of the riverlands.There are hints that Westeros will have frozen over by the time Dany even sets foot on the continent, and the Others will be moving south. Since Stannis will fight to his last breath defending his people, I think this means his fate will be decided, one way or another, before he ever lays eyes on Dany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 No. I don't think Stannis would bend knee for Dany. I don't think, however, that it's not possible. Stannis is influenced by his red whore Melisandre. What if Melisandre sees the errors of her visions? Perhaps she sees that Dany is Azor Ahai reborn, would Stannis listen to Mel then? This is actually an interesting question. Stannis claims that the only reason he's doing this is because it's his duty to do so, it's his duty to be king because he is Robert's heir, he has a duty to protect his people because of the visions by Mel, he has a duty to die doing so by his very own visions. Luckily all of those duty's line up pretty nicely for Stannis, but what if his visions change, or Mel tells him he is not AAR, what would he do if his duty to be Robert's heir and his duty to protect his people from the great Other collide. What does Stannis do if he has conflicting duty's? It's a strong theme in Jaime's arc, so I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to have it also show up in Stannis'. Could be very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat King Robert Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 This is actually an interesting question. Stannis claims that the only reason he's doing this is because it's his duty to do so, it's his duty to be king because he is Robert's heir, he has a duty to protect his people because of the visions by Mel, he has a duty to die doing so by his very own visions. Luckily all of those duty's line up pretty nicely for Stannis, but what if his visions change, or Mel tells him he is not AAR, what would he do if his duty to be Robert's heir and his duty to protect his people from the great Other collide. What does Stannis do if he has conflicting duty's? It's a strong theme in Jaime's arc, so I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to have it also show up in Stannis'. Could be very cool. Cool yes. But.....I like Stannis as he is. A man who breaks before he bends, and I think he'll die. Except he won't die. Because Stannis will always be in every just man's heart. :bowdown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shk12344 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 This is actually an interesting question. Stannis claims that the only reason he's doing this is because it's his duty to do so, it's his duty to be king because he is Robert's heir, he has a duty to protect his people because of the visions by Mel, he has a duty to die doing so by his very own visions. Luckily all of those duty's line up pretty nicely for Stannis, but what if his visions change, or Mel tells him he is not AAR, what would he do if his duty to be Robert's heir and his duty to protect his people from the great Other collide. What does Stannis do if he has conflicting duty's? It's a strong theme in Jaime's arc, so I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to have it also show up in Stannis'. Could be very cool. Stannis being AAR and his claim to Iron Throne is 2 completely different thing. Regardless of his belief as AAR, he would still be fighting the Others invasion to protect the realm. I mean, one of the "legal" requirement as the King of Westoros is to protect the realm so who ever is invading the land, the Others, Wildlings etc.... the King would be required to fight the invaders. AAR is simply a prophesy of an individual who would defeat the Others. So the question isn't whether Stannis would fight the Others, rather it's a question of if he is going to be the LEADER who DEFEATS the Others. Again, regardless of whether Stannis is AAR or he becomes the rightful King of Westoros, he would have to fight the Others for survival of the realm and of himself and the family. Fighting the Others is not an optional choice. It's fight for survival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Greg of House House Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I feel stupid. Victarion the Awesome is clearly a troll. I should've known, specially since he keeps using the word "Targaryan". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Witch King of Braavos Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Putting it simply, Stannis does not bend, not even to a crazy teenager with dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.