Succession question, as of ADWD

[Thrice Drowned Veteran]

What are the possible succession scenarios as of ADWD?

If House Baratheon is a cadet branch of the Targaryens, wouldn't they fall in one another's succession? i.e. Stannis' heir after Shireen would technically be Daenerys (or Aegon if you prescribe to his legitimacy).

Conversely, if Targaryens were to accede to the throne, then would Stannis be the Targ heir?

[Jacob Feybrad]

The Targaryen Dynasty lost the Throne by Right of Conquest (the same Way they established their Line, mind you). Stannis currently is the "rightful King" (since the Baratheon Dynasty was never conquered and stripped of their Right to the Throne), but if Daenerys manages to reconquer the Throne for the Targaryen Dynasty, then the Line of Succession would start with her. A legitime Aegon would be her prime Heir, but if he wasn't legitime, then, yes, Stannis would be her Heir. But, that is obsolete. The Targaryens lost their Right to the Throne by Right of Conquest to the Baratheons and can only hope to conquer it back.

[Maester Pedant]

A Targaryen loyalist would say that the Targaryens forged the Iron Throne, and actually made the Seven Kingdoms into a unified political unity. Therefore, they have an intrinsic and unalienable right to the Iron Throne. And this means that Robert Baratheon was a usurper, and all his heirs are usurpers as well, including Stannis Baratheon - if he is indeed Robert Baratheon's heir. Who the rightful heir to the so-called Baratheon dynasty after Stannis and Shireen might be is irrelevant. It would be like asking a member of the Bourbon dynasty who the rightful heir to Napoleon was. They are all usurpers. The Iron Throne belongs to the Targaryens. Period.

Now, if you follow the bloodlines, and if Stannis is not attainted for being a usurper, then yes, he is Daenerys' heir (assuming that Aegon is a fake).

A Baratheon supporter would obviously have a different opinion. Who the Baratheon heir would be in this case is doubtful, and would depend on interpretation. If the principle is Right of Conquest tout court, then this would mean that a completely new dynasty emerged. This would be a dynasty whose legitimacy emerged from force and the acclaim of its vassals. In this case, the kinship with the Targaryens would be irrelevant. With the extinction of the Baratheon line, if Stannis and Shireen were to die, you would be in big trouble. You would have to search for collateral branches of House Baratheon or female line descendants, and it is doubtful that such a distant cousin of any reigning King would be acceptable.

Now, I do not believe that Robert Baratheon became King simply by Right of Conquest. His Targaryen blood was also used as an argument to make him King. So it would make sense to go back the Targaryen bloodline in search for a suitable heir.

In any case, I doubt this will have any relevance. At this moment, the Iron Throne is up for grabs. The situation is too chaotic and the person who will occupy it will have to fight for it. Although I doubt that anyone who isn't either a Baratheon (even just a nominal Baratheon like Tommen) or a Targaryen will be able to hold it.

[TheCrannogDweller]

A Targaryen loyalist would say that the Targaryens forged the Iron Throne, and actually made the Seven Kingdoms into a unified political unity.

An objective observer would say the same.

That being said, I agree with your entire post.

[danm_999]

What are the possible succession scenarios as of ADWD?

If House Baratheon is a cadet branch of the Targaryens, wouldn't they fall in one another's succession? i.e. Stannis' heir after Shireen would technically be Daenerys (or Aegon if you prescribe to his legitimacy).

Conversely, if Targaryens were to accede to the throne, then would Stannis be the Targ heir?

Robert's Rebellion was about removing the Jaeherys II descended line of Aegon the Unlikely's (Egg from Dunk and Egg) descendents from the Throne. So they wouldn't revert back to them once after Shireen. They're out of that line of succession completely.

I'm guessing similarly that Aerys disinherited all the Baratheons once Robert's Rebellion started, meaning Stannis wouldn't be Daenerys heir either.

[Mourneblade]

The Targaryen Dynasty lost the Throne by Right of Conquest (the same Way they established their Line, mind you). Stannis currently is the "rightful King" (since the Baratheon Dynasty was never conquered and stripped of their Right to the Throne), but if Daenerys manages to reconquer the Throne for the Targaryen Dynasty, then the Line of Succession would start with her. A legitime Aegon would be her prime Heir, but if he wasn't legitime, then, yes, Stannis would be her Heir. But, that is obsolete. The Targaryens lost their Right to the Throne by Right of Conquest to the Baratheons and can only hope to conquer it back.

This was made incorrect after the fact.

This rebellion turned into a war of succession when the rebels chose Robert as their leader because of his claim. When they won, they attainted the Jaeherys II line legally making Robert King.

Anyone with enough force can seize the throne, but only someone with a serious claim could legally justify it the way Robert did it.

Now Stannis has been attainted because of treason, so currently it's Tommen then Myrcella.

Now here is where it gets interesting. If Stannis takes the IT through force he will legally justify it through his claim by naming Cersei's children bastards of incest and attainting them, thus legal reinstating his rightful claim.

If Dany or Aegon take the throne by force they will legally justify it through their claim by declaring the Baratheons rebels and attainting them, thus legally reinstating their own rightful claim.

Only someone with a serious claim could go about it this way. Where as a conqueror could never do this and makes their own claim through force, and creates a completely new power structure.