Would Daenerys Make the Starks bend the knee if they help defeat the Others?

[kimim]

She's anti slavery, not anti autocracy. She'd make them.

She's the only one among the would-be queens and kings who is an idealist. She is unpredictable. I was thinking that Westeros doesn't have much to offer her by way of a cause. However, she might find a cause in Westeros other than taking the throne. I can see her burning the IT as easily as sitting on it. I can see her splitting the kingdoms as easily as ruling over them. I can see her learning from the wildlings.

She might not make the Starks bend the knee at all. She might decide that no one should bend the knee to anyone else, ever again. She's a loose cannon, which is kind of cool.

[OldGimletEye]

No region really "owes" anything to any monarch. What did Dorne owe the Baratheons? In fact the Baratheons owed them quite a bit for the disgusting treatment of Elia that was a result of the rebellion and yet Doran bent the knee regardless because he is wise enough to see the benefit in it

And Doran would have been within his rights to have refused submitting to Robert. If Doran felt he needed to submit because he didn't have the means to resist, then perhaps that was an appropriate policy decison on his part. But, I do feel Jon will be in position to play hard ball with Dany.

And I don't get why you see Dany as an inherent aggressor; if the North and Dany work together (which is the premise of the thread) how is she aggressive to the North?

No the premise of the thread was whether Dany would help the North without requiring the North's submission. Many people feel that the answer to that question is "no". If Dany merely decides to help the North then she wouldn't be an aggressor. But, the moment she conditions her help on submission, then she potentially becomes an aggressor. And by the way, if Dany helps the North, she is acting in her own interest as she might not be able to defeat the Others by herself.

What would be the problem with bending the knee then?

Perhaps, nothing, But this depends a great deal upon Dany's attitude about RR. If I were Jon I would demand that Dany formally acknowledge that her family was at fault for RR. I would further demand that she formally acknowledge that no punitive action may be taken against the Starks or their allies during RR by Dany or her progeny. I also would demand that Dany agree that any future breaches of the feudal contract by House Targaryen provides legitimate grounds for rebellion and would immediately terminate any fealty owed to the Targaryens. Finally, if I were Jon I would want to make sure that Dany is a capable ruler. I would want all this before swearing fealty. The North had to go to a lot of trouble to remove her crazy father.

Comparing that situation to Dorne and Aegon is completely inaccurate, Aegon wasn't helping Dorne in any way. If Ned were still around he would have bent the knee to Dany in this scenario, no doubt in my mind. And currently, if Stannis delivers on what he is setting out to do. the North should bend the knee to him as well.

By fighting against the Others, Dany would be acting in her own interest. Her fighting alongside the Northerners wouldn't be an act of pure charity. Ned would have been smart enough to know this. If the North falls, then Dany's realm might fall next. The bottom line is the North has some "juice" here. They can be tough negotiators with Dany here. If Dany doesn't like it, then tough shit. I wouldn't count on Ned immediately submitting the North to Dany. Not after all the trouble he had to go through to get rid of her father.

[Tiliana]

"Helping" them does not make her their savior. Nor would her help be altruistic- if the Others aren't defeated, all life on earth is in trouble. Her "helping" wouldn't make people so grateful that they would say "Be our queen!" That's not how it works. People want autonomy, not rulers. They don't kneel out of gratitude.

Saving people from danger is the definition of the word savior lol. And no it wouldn't make her altruistic but she would be their savior definitely. And yeah, saving people from undeath is something that would be a great arguement as to why someone should be their queen but you're right that it wouldn't necessarily make people grateful enough to bend the knee. And if they don't bend the knee then, they would have to fight Dany and likely lose which is something they would weigh against independence and probably come around to the idea.

And no, other than wildlings and a likely drunk Greatjon + select few lords at that one meeting at Riverrun, people do not want autonomy. No where else save historical Dorne do we see this clamoring for independence and inherent hatred of being ruled. And currently Dorne isn't going towards independence either. And if autonomy only brings people suffering they definitely wouldn't want it then, like it has over the past year or so in the North. I think the narrative is showing, with Stannis coming and being the "King who Cared" and not some Northerner doing that, that Northern independence was illogical and counter productive and people will or likely already have come to see that. Which fits in with them bending the knee to a monarch later down the line

[A spoon of knife and fork]

I don't understand where people get this from.

Dany fears the usurpers dogs who are Ned, Jaime, Tywin, and Jon Arryn. She has zero I'll will towards "the Starks".

Go on, find me a passage where any stark but Ned (who totally was Roberts man) is disparaged in her eyes.

Also there's strong evidence from dance that she does not pass sins of fathers onto their children (the slaver children hostages are considered blameless for their parents crimes).

[OldGimletEye]

I don't understand where people get this from.

Dany fears the usurpers dogs who are Ned, Jaime, Tywin, and Jon Arryn. She has zero I'll will towards "the Starks".

This is hardly clear.

Go on, find me a passage where any stark but Ned (who totally was Roberts man) is disparaged in her eyes.

Probably because she doesn't know about any of them. She isn't the most knowledgeable person when it comes to Westeros.

Also there's strong evidence from dance that she does not pass sins of fathers onto their children (the slaver children hostages are considered blameless for their parents crimes).

Ask the 13 year old boys of Astapor about that. And Dany does seem to have an issue with collective punishment.

[OldGimletEye]

And if they don't bend the knee then, they would have to fight Dany and likely lose which is something they would weigh against independence and probably come around to the idea.

I wouldn't bet on Dany's victory here. If she invades during Winter, there is a good chance she will lose.

[RoamingRonin]

"Helping" them does not make her their savior. Nor would her help be altruistic- if the Others aren't defeated, all life on earth is in trouble. Her "helping" wouldn't make people so grateful that they would say "Be our queen!" That's not how it works. People want autonomy, not rulers. They don't kneel out of gratitude.

Helping them would make her their savior because that's the definition of the word. It won't make her the ASOIAF equivalent of Jesus Christ though, if that's what you mean.

Helping people against an enemy might make them more inclined to kneel. If Jon is king in the end, it will be because he helped (among other reasons) and didn't just demand people kneel to him first. That's where Stannis messed up. Dany - like Jon - invites people to follow her. It's how she became khaleesi.

[sj4iy]

Saving people from danger is the definition of the word savior lol. And no it wouldn't make her altruistic but she would be their savior definitely. And yeah, saving people from undeath is something that would be a great arguement as to why someone should be their queen but you're right that it wouldn't necessarily make people grateful enough to bend the knee. And if they don't bend the knee then, they would have to fight Dany and likely lose which is something they would weigh against independence and probably come around to the idea.

And no, other than wildlings and a likely drunk Greatjon + select few lords at that one meeting at Riverrun, people do not want autonomy. No where else save historical Dorne do we see this clamoring for independence and inherent hatred of being ruled. And currently Dorne isn't going towards independence either. And if autonomy only brings people suffering they definitely wouldn't want it then, like it has over the past year or so in the North. I think the narrative is showing, with Stannis coming and being the "King who Cared" and not some Northerner doing that, that Northern independence was illogical and counter productive and people will or likely already have come to see that. Which fits in with them bending the knee to a monarch later down the line

No, you said "help", not "save everyone herself"...the latter is not going to happen. The former is likely, but she won't be the only one. She won't even be the only one with a dragon. The idea that people will be like "oh, you saved us! Let's swear fealty to you!" is ridiculously over-simplistic. There's absolutely no way she does this alone- in fact, we have a Stark who is probably going to be just as important in this fight as Dany- and that's Jon. Why would he kneel to her?

[Arya Stark Rules]

Ok, then. Just substitute Jon and the North.

Eh?

Jon is a man of the NW and the last time I checked he whether he will remain totally human after he wakes up is unknown.

To the OP:

This is a complex question, I am one of those who believe the others are not bad and have a connection to the Starks so I might not be able to answer your question well.

[OldGimletEye]

Eh?

Jon is a man of the NW and the last time I checked he whether he will remain totally human after he wakes up is unknown.

And I am willing to bet the NW will not exist as we know it by the time Jon and Dany encounter each other. While Dany fights her wars in the South, the Others will probably become a Northern problem, not just a NW problem. If the North is to have any political unity, it will likely be under Jon. He has many things working in his favor. The NW is outdated, inefficient, and incapable of carrying out it's mission.

And Jon will likely come back into the story.

[Dany's Golden Fleece]

No, you said "help", not "save everyone herself"...the latter is not going to happen. The former is likely, but she won't be the only one. She won't even be the only one with a dragon. The idea that people will be like "oh, you saved us! Let's swear fealty to you!" is ridiculously over-simplistic. There's absolutely no way she does this alone- in fact, we have a Stark who is probably going to be just as important in this fight as Dany- and that's Jon. Why would he kneel to her?

Interestingly Ser Barristan was more important to the Ninepenny Kings war than Jaearhys. But Ser Barristan always bent the knee. Its all relative. People here are applying modern world to ASOIAF's medieval world.

But I agree Dany will not be the "only one".

[Tiliana]

And Doran would have been within his rights to have refused submitting to Robert. If Doran felt he needed to submit because he didn't have the means to resist, then perhaps that was an appropriate policy decison on his part. But, I do feel Jon will be in position to play hard ball with Dany.

Doran would have been "within his rights" if you assume the defeated have any rights, which they really don't. And I really don't think Jon will ever be in the position to play hardball with anyone. He can barely do that with Stannis, why could he suddenly be able to do that with Dany?

No the premise of the thread was whether Dany would help the North without requiring the North's submission. Many people feel that the answer to that question is "no". If Dany merely decides to help the North then she wouldn't be an aggressor. But, the moment she conditions her help on submission, then she potentially becomes an aggressor. And by the way, if Dany helps the North, she is acting in her own interest as she might not be able to defeat the Others by herself.

No I believe the premise was if she would require submission after allying with the Starks to defeat the Others which assumes she will initially work together with the North without requiring submission. And yes she does potentially become an aggressor if she requires servitude, but that would be the same for anyone who would help the North. Is Stannis doing what he's doing because he loves the Starks? No. Is he a potential aggressor? By this reasoning, yes. But he shouldn't reasonably be an aggressor because logic would dictate that bending the knee to Stannis after all he has done is the best thing to do, and not to fight him for no good purpose

Perhaps, nothing, But this depends a great deal upon Dany's attitude about RR. If I were Jon I would demand that Dany formally acknowledge that her family was at fault for RR. I would further demand that she formally acknowledge that no punitive action may be taken against the Starks or their allies during RR by Dany or her progeny. I also would demand that Dany agree that any future breaches of the feudal contract by House Targaryen provides legitimate grounds for rebellion and would immediately terminate any fealty owed to the Targaryens. Finally, if I were Jon I would want to make sure that Dany is a capable ruler. I would want all this before swearing fealty. The North had to go to a lot of trouble to remove her crazy father.

So you want Dany to grovel and apologize for something she had nothing to do with and make these ridiculous concessions? Then I guess Jon should apologize for what happened to Elia's and her children. And all this stuff just seems like meta Dany hating nonsense that no character would in their right mind actually do. It's like if the North would make sure that Rickon would not marry anyone randomly like his brother before he could be lord of Winterfell.

By fighting against the Others, Dany would be acting in her own interest. Her fighting alongside the Northerners wouldn't be an act of pure charity. Ned would have been smart enough to know this. If the North falls, then Dany's realm might fall next. The bottom line is the North has some "juice" here. They can be tough negotiators with Dany here. If Dany doesn't like it, then tough shit. I wouldn't count on Ned immediately submitting the North to Dany. Not after all the trouble he had to go through to get rid of her father.

Yeah she would be acting in her own self-interest, it would also be extremely beneficial for the North. Just like what Stannis is doing, and so the North shouldn't be grateful to him either? The North has less juice than a slab of concrete atm, I don't get this tough negotiating stuff. They will be near finished after this Bolton Frey stuff is sorted out, unless they generate a fighting force from magic. And yeah Ned would submit, he doesn't care about pointless things like indepence and isn't overly proud like some Northerners. He always sees what is important, or else he could have just asked his best friend Robert for independence, and would have easily gotten it most likely

[Tiliana]

No, you said "help", not "save everyone herself"...the latter is not going to happen. The former is likely, but she won't be the only one. She won't even be the only one with a dragon. The idea that people will be like "oh, you saved us! Let's swear fealty to you!" is ridiculously over-simplistic. There's absolutely no way she does this alone- in fact, we have a Stark who is probably going to be just as important in this fight as Dany- and that's Jon. Why would he kneel to her?

Actually, helping people against the zombie apocalypse such that your contributions were vital would make Dany one of the saviors, I never said she would be the savior. So her + whoever else helps would all be saviors, except she is the one whose savior status is relevant because she is the one who is the monarch not Jon, or Bran or whoever

Jon isn't a Stark, and he would kneel because he doesn't want to rule. He has no interest in it like Dany does.

[Arya Stark Rules]

And I am willing to bet the NW will not exist as we know it by the time Jon and Dany encounter each other. While Dany fights her wars in the South, the Others will probably become a Northern problem, not just a NW problem. If the North is to have any political unity, it will likely be under Jon. He has many things working in his favor. The NW is outdated, inefficient, and incapable of carrying out it's mission.

And Jon will likely come back into the story.

I disagree, the NW might be inefficient currently but there is too much word building, themes and hints of a supernatural origin for GRRM to just toss it away. The key to the NW working well IMO is to find the true meaning of what it was made for originally.

Jon himself has no interest in becoming King, he was made LC for a reason

[OldGimletEye]

Double Post. Sorry

[sj4iy]

Actually, helping people against the zombie apocalypse such that your contributions were vital would make Dany one of the saviors, I never said she would be the savior. So her + whoever else helps would all be saviors, except she is the one whose savior status is relevant because she is the one who is the monarch not Jon, or Bran or whoever

Jon isn't a Stark, and he would kneel because he doesn't want to rule. He has no interest in it like Dany does.

Dany has no interest in ruling. She hates it, only rules out of obligation.

Jon wouldn't want to rule, either. But he would also rule if he felt an obligation to do so.

Jon is half Stark, and the only known living son of Winterfell. The Northmen would follow him- but anyway, the title if this thread is "Would the Starks bend the knee?" Well, I don't see any Starks at Winterfell right now, and even if Rickon returns, he won't be old enough. If Jon fights in this war and is a large part of it, of course any Stark at Winterfell would take Jon's advice. He won't bend the knee to Dany simply because she helped. He would only bend the knee to someone who he truly believed would be a good ruler for Westeros.

[OldGimletEye]

Doran would have been "within his rights" if you assume the defeated have any rights, which they really don't. And I really don't think Jon will ever be in the position to play hardball with anyone. He can barely do that with Stannis, why could he suddenly be able to do that with Dany?

You're conflating the "right to resist" with the "rights of the defeated". Doran always had the right to resist Robert, even though he chose not to do so. Also, I think Jon will become the defacto leader of the North for various reasons and not just the NW.

No I believe the premise was if she would require submission after allying with the Starks to defeat the Others which assumes she will initially work together with the North without requiring submission. And yes she does potentially become an aggressor if she requires servitude, but that would be the same for anyone who would help the North. Is Stannis doing what he's doing because he loves the Starks? No. Is he a potential aggressor? By this reasoning, yes. But he shouldn't reasonably be an aggressor because logic would dictate that bending the knee to Stannis after all he has done is the best thing to do, and not to fight him for no good purpose

Nice try bringing up Stannis. The short answer is that Stannis is the lawful king. The Starks did swear fealty to House Baratheon. And Stannis has never wronged the Starks. When Aerys fucked the Starks over, their obligations to the Targs were terminated. Also, it doesn't really matter when Dany would require submission of the North. The point is whether she would require submission if she allied with the North to fight the Others.

So you want Dany to grovel and apologize for something she had nothing to do with and make these ridiculous concessions? Then I guess Jon should apologize for what happened to Elia's and her children. And all this stuff just seems like meta Dany hating nonsense that no character would in their right mind actually do. It's like if the North would make sure that Rickon would not marry anyone randomly like his brother before he could be lord of Winterfell.

And what are your comments exactly? Is it mindless meta Dany worship? Anyways, I want Dany to acknowledge the true nature of the Rebellion. It was primarily her families fault. If she can't come to terms with that, then the North shouldn't submit to her. And it isn't about humiliating Dany. It's about her acknowledging the legality of the rebellion and establishing the legality of future rebellions should a future Targaryen king break the feudal contract. It's what a prudent leader of a state would do.

Also, Dany acknowledging her family's fault in starting RR doesn't require Dany to acknowledge any personal wrongdoing. You're analogy with Elia's children is a bunch of balony because Ned had nothing to do with that.

Yeah she would be acting in her own self-interest, it would also be extremely beneficial for the North. Just like what Stannis is doing, and so the North shouldn't be grateful to him either? The North has less juice than a slab of concrete atm, I don't get this tough negotiating stuff. They will be near finished after this Bolton Frey stuff is sorted out, unless they generate a fighting force from magic. And yeah Ned would submit, he doesn't care about pointless things like indepence and isn't overly proud like some Northerners. He always sees what is important, or else he could have just asked his best friend Robert for independence, and would have easily gotten it most likely

Ok, again, bring up Stannis. Just because the North might be grateful to Stannis doesn't mean the North ought to submit to Stannis, other than the reasons I've indicated. Stannis didn't go to the wall for altruistic purposes either. Also, I think you way underestimate the potential fighting forces that the North has. They actually have a good number of men for the type of war you'd wage against the Others or Dany should she invade. And, again, I doubt Ned would just submit to Dany without any reservations or conditions. I think that is just wishful thinking on your part.

Also, if Stannis tried to tell the Northerners to abandon the Old Gods, then the Northerners should tell Stannis to piss off.

[OldGimletEye]

He would only bend the knee to someone who he truly believed would be a good ruler for Westeros.

And this will be the key question for Jon. If he believes that Dany would do a good job, then fine he should submit. But if he doesn't, then he should tell her to go piss off.

[teej6]

Doran would have been "within his rights" if you assume the defeated have any rights, which they really don't. And I really don't think Jon will ever be in the position to play hardball with anyone. He can barely do that with Stannis, why could he suddenly be able to do that with Dany?

No I believe the premise was if she would require submission after allying with the Starks to defeat the Others which assumes she will initially work together with the North without requiring submission. And yes she does potentially become an aggressor if she requires servitude, but that would be the same for anyone who would help the North. Is Stannis doing what he's doing because he loves the Starks? No. Is he a potential aggressor? By this reasoning, yes. But he shouldn't reasonably be an aggressor because logic would dictate that bending the knee to Stannis after all he has done is the best thing to do, and not to fight him for no good purpose

So you want Dany to grovel and apologize for something she had nothing to do with and make these ridiculous concessions? Then I guess Jon should apologize for what happened to Elia's and her children. And all this stuff just seems like meta Dany hating nonsense that no character would in their right mind actually do. It's like if the North would make sure that Rickon would not marry anyone randomly like his brother before he could be lord of Winterfell.

Yeah she would be acting in her own self-interest, it would also be extremely beneficial for the North. Just like what Stannis is doing, and so the North shouldn't be grateful to him either? The North has less juice than a slab of concrete atm, I don't get this tough negotiating stuff. They will be near finished after this Bolton Frey stuff is sorted out, unless they generate a fighting force from magic. And yeah Ned would submit, he doesn't care about pointless things like indepence and isn't overly proud like some Northerners. He always sees what is important, or else he could have just asked his best friend Robert for independence, and would have easily gotten it most likely

What gives you the notion that Ned would have submitted to Dany? the same Ned who fought a rebellion to dethrone her crazy father and the Targs. You seem to be speculating and treating it like fact. And what makes you so sure that Dany will be a savior figure. Yes, she has 3 dragons but it's not established beyond doubt that she'll manage to control all 3 dragons or even if the dragons will be instrumental in defeating the Others. And OldGimletEye's point of Dany acknowledging her father/family's role in RR is not in anyway comparable to Jon apologizing for the deaths of Elia and her kids. The Lannisters and not the Starks were responsible for the deaths of Elia and her kids. Not the same as Dany admitting that her dad was batshit crazy and was rightly deposed. And to state that Dany will be the monarch of Westeros when all is said and done is just a huge assumption. For all we know Dany may lose half her army and her dragons in the second DwD.

[ummester]

...not seeing Dany on the IT, myself.

I'm not seeing an IT after Dany gets to it :D