Jump to content
BigBoss1

Renly winning would have been a disaster.

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Loose Bolt said:

Actually normally prince(ss) of Dragonstone was title of heir(ess). So in a way Stannis could claim that he was the heir. Naturally Robert did not really wanted Stannis as his heir, but after his death his opinions became irrelevant.

Prince of Dragonstone is a title of the heir to House Targaryen, not Baratheon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not really. Kings choosing their heirs is the exception rather than the rule. 

Kings are stuck with their oldest son unless they can have enough political support to remove them.

Joffrey was his legal heir from birth. Robert was not pleased about it, but was stuck with him.

"Let me tell you a secret, Ned. More than once, I have dreamed of giving up the crown. Take ship for the Free Cities with my horse and my hammer, spend my time warring and whoring, that's what I was made for. The sellsword king, how the singers would love me. You know what stops me? The thought of Joffrey on the throne, with Cersei standing behind him whispering in his ear. My son. How could I have made a son like that, Ned?"

 

The entire realm understands this, that the oldest son is automatically the heir.

"Gods, Catelyn, Sansa is only eleven," Ned said. "And Joffrey … Joffrey is …"
She finished for him. "… crown prince, and heir to the Iron Throne.

 

No, it does not, not when it comes to inheriting the Throne.  He's got a claim but his claim is weaker than Roberts legitimate children and Stannis.

Im not making a legal argument here man, LOL

 

This is purely about status.

 

Holding Storm's End is better than holding Dragonstone, which is far better than simply being a crown prince in the eyes of all the lords in the Stormlands and Reach.

 

Joffery's only supporters were the Houses of the Westerlands and maybe a few crownlanders.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

We have evidence that he wanted children, we have zero evidence that he did not want children. 

Now you may well be right, but until further evidence comes to light it is canon that Renly wanted children. You believing otherwise does not trump Renly's own words.

No, we have evidence that Renly said he would have a son before the end of the year. That doesn't tell us anything about whether he wanted children or not. Nor does it say anything about who would have fathered that son.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Come on, there is no need to be disingenuous. 

'praying' pretty much each night   is what you said, what the text says is Renly laughed. "Loras, stay and help me pray. It's been so long I've quite forgotten how. 

Those two phrases are not the same, they contradict each other. 

Not exactly. For once, we don't buy that Renly and Loras are actually going to pray, no? So the talk of praying here is code for 'having sex' or at least 'being intimate in a romantic way'.

We can all buy that it has been long that Renly has actually prayed, but do we really think the last time Renly and Loras fucked was so long ago that Renly had forgotten how? I don't think so.

The overall way in which Margaery-Renly-Loras are described and observed by Catelyn implies that Renly did not exactly spend his nights with her. This is later confirmed when Margaery and the Tyrells insist Margaery is still a maiden - something I actually buy. I don't see any reason to believe Renly ever deflowered her.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It is not my idea, it is a direct quote from the character. Renly claiming he wanted a son within the year is not an 'idea' of mine.

See above. He claimed he would have such a son. Just as he claimed Dorne would join him.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Yes. Just look at the damage done with them not being his 'seed'. 

Tywin and the entire realm are much weaker as a result of Cersei not producing genuine heirs.

Give me a quote where Tywin or any Lannister chides Cersei for not producing trueborn Baratheon heirs. Nobody blames her for any of that - not Tywin, not Kevan, not Tyrion, no one.

It is your opinion that this was a stupid move - and to a point I can agree with that. But you do know that Stannis has no proof about the true parentage of Cersei's children, right? If Cersei's children had been Robert's seed but had still had blond hair for some freak reason then Stannis would have still tried to steal the throne, and Renly would have gone to war, too. Renly does not claim the throne because he thinks Cersei's children have no right to the throne.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Strongly disagree. 

They wanted legitimate heirs above all else, the taint of bastardry caused the three biggest civil wars in the history of Westeros. 

The taint of bastardy can be arbitrarily invented, too. Like Aegon IV and the Blackfyre cronies did in the case of Daeron II. Or like Stannis did in the case of Cersei's children - that he happened to have guessed correctly doesn't mean he was justified to arbitrarily declare his brother's sons to be bastards. 

But, again - give us quotes where Tywin and Mace care about the legitimacy of royal children. The Tyrells believe that Joffrey and Tommen are not Robert's children - yet they still marry Margaery to each of them to make her queen.

A King Renly and Queen Margaery would have needed heirs, yes, but it is not necessary that such heirs be fathered by King Renly. If Renly had had the same problem as Aegon the Conqueror (who was very likely sterile) they would have found a solution, too.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It causes trouble. 

The Strongs caused conflict which started the Dance of the Dragons, Daeron II was accused of being a bastard which helped cause the Blackfyre wars. 

It is not worth the risk, especially for a new king and dynasty.

The Strongs had pretty much nothing to do with the outbreak of the Dance. This was about Rhaenyra's succession - the succession of her children was just a minor detail muddying the water some more. Alicent and Otto would have acted exactly the same way they did if her children by Laenor had all had purple eyes and silver-gold hair.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It's the same precedent, it already existed and was not a disaster for the realm like OP suggested. This is what the thread is about.

No, it was another precedent of the same type. Prior Renly's hypothetical successful rebellion and usurpation the only precedent people could point to was Robert's ascension. Now they would have two such precedents - the first one set by Robert, the second one set by Renly.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Renly repeating a what other's had done before him was not going to bring the realm into disaster. 

How do you know that?

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

And Maegor, Aegon and probably many, many other kings and lords in the history of Westeros. 

Taking power through force is not something that is new in Westeros, painting the discussion as Renly doing what many, many people have done before him as being a disaster for the realm is a sorry excuse for an argument. 

Robert's victory was already a disaster. It invited Balon Greyjoy to crown himself and rebel, something no Ironborn lord had down since the Conquest. It basically caused the entire War of the Five Kings because both the king's brothers and many lords of the Realm care more about brute strength than the rule of law.

After Robert's death four lords emulate Robert - Renly, Stannis, Balon (yet again), and Robb. They all follow Robert's example, something that didn't happen before Robert.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It actually does. He, unlike Robert and Stannis, attends the Small council. he understands about compromise and keeping people happy.

Making your followers happy and being popular is not the same as being a good king. Robert was popular and a people person, too, yet he was one of the worst kings Westeros ever had. I'm not saying Renly would have been as worse as Robert, but I really don't see many qualities in him that make it likely he would have been more than average as a king.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

There is zero that he didn't. 

If there is no evidence that he was I've no reason to believe that he was. The time to think that a guy is great is when you have reason to believe he is great, not when you cannot prove that he is not great.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Context is key, Cersei's methods of getting rid of people does not involve them surviving.

Without evidence that she wanted to murder Renly and Stannis you cannot pretend that this is a given. Cersei was sincerely offering Ned to join her or to go back home to Winterfell. There are other ways to deal with people than just killing them - she even wanted him to go to the Wall after he was arrested. She did not want to see him executed.

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

That is certainly valid reason for Renly to rebel. His life or his lands, titles and status being at risk are all excellent excuses to remove Cersei from power.

And what right does Renly have to hold Storm's End? It should have gone to one of Robert's children or Stannis, not the youngest brother. What the king gives the king can take again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 Loras was Renly's closest confidant, the Lord Commander of his Rainbow Guard, the guy he was spending all his time with, not Margaery.

 

IMHO, Renly saying that "it has been so long, I have forgotten how" hints that he has been sleeping with Margaery, rather than Loras, while they made their slow way towards KL with the large army. She is not there with the cavalry at SE during this scene, BTW, but back at Bitterbridge with the foot and the other non-combatants, as was only logical and as any sensible heterosexual leader would have arranged as well. And her looking so much like Loras and being his sister would have surely helped Renly do his duty, unless he was one of those relatively rare homosexuals, who are just completely unable to perform with a woman - as Laenor Velaryon might have been. Additionally, there would have been time enough to impregnate her after Renly won - and it would have been more conducive to having healthy children to have waited at least a year or so - as educated Westerosi know quite well.

 

Quote

 Stannis, too, is never going to have a son by Selyse because it has been years since he has been sleeping with Selyse.

 

Pretty sure that Cressen or somebody else in the know mentioned that Stannis kept sleeping with Selyse once or twice a year all throughout their marriage. Not frequently enough in their case, obviously, but he might have gotten lucky. It wasn't like with Aerys I and Queen Aelinor.

 

Quote

 Do you think Tywin cared whether Cersei's children were Robert's seed? The important thing is that the daughter is the queen, not that the king is the actual biological father of the children.

 

As he had no PoV, we can't know, sadly. I had been hoping pre-DwD that Kevan would provide some insight, but well... He  would have cared about all the trouble that it caused, however.

 

Quote

And Renly's personality does not imply he cared much about being a good king. He liked to shine. He wanted the glory that came with being king, and her certainly had the ruthlessness and the charisma to get there. But there is no indication he had the talent or the ability to be a good ruler.

He was also diligent in his duties as the member of the Small Council and helped rule the realm while Robert drank and whored and gallivanated around. That already puts him ahead of Robert. He was also self-deprecating on occasion, could take criticism and look outside the box, as seen in his interactions with Catelyn and Brienne. IMHO, he was a more promising material for a king than all the alternatives. Better than Robert, too.

 

Quote

Oh, I know that quote - but 'dealing' with somebody does not necessarily entail killing them, does it? It may have been enough had Cersei been able to disgrace Stannis and Renly, causing them to lose Dragonstone and Storm's End. Without a power base of their own they wouldn't have been that much of a threat to her children.

 

Oh, please. We know Cersei's preferred methods of "dealing" with things. Also, their very physical appearance - Renly's especially, was a threat to her children. Didn't Tywin also mention something about "dealing" with Robert's brothers at some point? Even before the Whispering Wood, possibly? IIRC, he, too intended to make sure of them.

 

Just now, Lord Varys said:

Give me a quote where Tywin or any Lannister chides Cersei for not producing trueborn Baratheon heirs. Nobody blames her for any of that - not Tywin, not Kevan, not Tyrion, no one.

Tyrion does, very harshly, in his PoV - he goes even so far as to think that the whole crisis could have been entirely prevented by Cersei having at least one child by Robert - "but then she wouldn't have been Cersei". Tywin didn't have a PoV and didn't believe in speaking such dangerous things out aloud, but his insistence on marrying Cersei off may have had a lot to do with him blaming her. Kevan didn't have time to think about a lot of intriguing things that he was bound to know or guess at in his one epilogue PoV.

 

Quote

If Cersei's children had been Robert's seed but had still had blond hair for some freak reason then Stannis would have still tried to steal the throne, and Renly would have gone to war, too.

 

I have always thought that it would have been a much more interesting and "grey" scenario if nobody could have really been sure - as would have only been realistic, IMHO. If Cersei didn't even idiotically "confirm" (even though even she couldn't have possibly been completely certain, at least not with Joff) things for Ned and for the narrative. Joffrey as possibly truly Robert's kid and Ned making a leap of faith about his parentage would have been much more interesting - as would have been Robert himself as Bran's assassin's employer, acting out of misplaced "mercy" for his dearest friend and his family. But GRRM seems to have gone out of his way in FaB to show that they couldn't have been, sigh. Sometimes, ASoIaF doesn't fulfill it's claim of not being black and white.

 

Quote

Renly does not claim the throne because he thinks Cersei's children have no right to the throne.

No, he did so because he reasonably believed that Cersei killed Robert and was going to kill him next. And that Joffrey entirely shared her murderous inclinations. In a way, this was a lot like Richard III's situation - I am no Ricardian, but I do agree that given all the then-recent precedents he was right to believe that the Woodvilles and his nephew most likely would have had him killed, unless he pre-empted them or went abroad.  No matter what he did, he was a clear and present danger to the throne and it would have been safest for them to dispose of him ASAP.

 

Quote

The Strongs had pretty much nothing to do with the outbreak of the Dance. This was about Rhaenyra's succession - the succession of her children was just a minor detail muddying the water some more.

 

Yes and no. Her elder sons appearance and accusations of their bastardy and her own licentiousness certainly contributed the gristle to the mill of anti-Rhaenyra propaganda and helped promote the view of her unworthiness. It also enabled the dissension among the ranks of Velaryons. Sure, Otto and Alicent would have still acted the same if the boys had Valyrian looks, but they would have had somewhat less material to work with, which just might have tilted the things enough that Rhaenyra could have actually won.

Physical appearances have sometimes been historically important - having classical Valyrian looks, while (almost?) equally martial Prince Baelor Breakspear looked "common" helped Daemon Blackfyre's popularity, too.

If Robert's legal children had his look, would Stannis have risen against them? Likely not, unless he is even more of a hypocrite than I consider him to be. And Ned certainly wouldn't have tried to dethrone Joffrey, no matter how much of a little shit he proved himself to be.

 

Quote

Making your followers happy and being popular is not the same as being a good king. Robert was popular and a people person, too, yet he was one of the worst kings Westeros ever had.

Was he, though? I find it striking that none of the "fast friendships" that he allegedly won during the Rebellion endured into the beginning of AGoT. Robert was quite lonely and a butt of jokes among the commoners by then, even if still feared for his military prowess. Robert hadn't been capable of winning lasting allegiance of people he didn't grow up with, it seems, despite being able to win them over and inspire them in the short term, while he was young. Renly  might have proven himself better in that respect - and having better in-laws, some of whom were themselves reasonably popular, could have only helped.

 

Quote

And what right does Renly have to hold Storm's End? It should have gone to one of Robert's children or Stannis, not the youngest brother. What the king gives the king can take again.

There is zero difference between Robert giving SE to Stannis or Renly. As you say, "by rights" it should have gone to Robert's children, _not_ either of his brothers. Stannis's ridiculous sense of thwarted entitlement is irrational and misplaced, IMHO.

Edited by Maia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Im not making a legal argument here man, LOL

Just pointing out the flaws in your post. 

9 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

This is purely about status.

No, it really is not. The line of succession is very clear, Renly is behind his nephews and older brother. 

9 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Holding Storm's End is better than holding Dragonstone, which is far better than simply being a crown prince in the eyes of all the lords in the Stormlands and Reach.

This has nothing to do with the line of succession. 

Renly does not have the support of all the Houses of the Stormlands, some have remained neutral. 

Renly's support in the Reach is not down to being the Lord of Storm's End. 

9 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Joffery's only supporters were the Houses of the Westerlands and maybe a few crownlanders.  

What does this have to do with my post? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maia said:

He was also diligent in his duties as the member of the Small Council and helped rule the realm while Robert drank and whored and gallivanated around. That already puts him ahead of Robert. He was also self-deprecating on occasion, could take criticism and look outside the box, as seen in his interactions with Catelyn and Brienne. IMHO, he was a more promising material for a king than all the alternatives. Better than Robert, too.

Renly lost gold cloaks to Littlefinger. GC should have been under master of laws command but they took their orders from lord Baelish even when king Robert was still alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Just pointing out the flaws in your post. 

No, it really is not. The line of succession is very clear, Renly is behind his nephews and older brother. 

This has nothing to do with the line of succession. 

Renly does not have the support of all the Houses of the Stormlands, some have remained neutral. 

Renly's support in the Reach is not down to being the Lord of Storm's End. 

 

You didnt point out a flaw, you are arguing from a different perspective . Thats not the same thing. Thats like me saying my favorite color is blue and you saying " it should be yellow".

 

We arent debating the legal line of succession.  The legal line of succession is clear. 

Joffery > Tommen >Stannis> Renly 

My post is basically why people even chose to follow who they did in the first place.  Clearly there was a thought process for those who chose Renly.  Im simply stating why. Lord of Storms End, most powerful Baratheon. 

 

Quote

What does this have to do with my post? 

You responded to me, it has to do with my original argument which is why individuals chose to support who they did. 

Joffery, with the best legal claim, had little support outside his own mothers house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, we have evidence that Renly said he would have a son before the end of the year. That doesn't tell us anything about whether he wanted children or not. Nor does it say anything about who would have fathered that son.

"Oh, I expect I'll get a son on her within the year."

Not to be rude but you are being ridiculous, utterly ridiculous. 

To have a son he has to impregnate Margaery. That is the accepted meaning of that phrase. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Not exactly. For once, we don't buy that Renly and Loras are actually going to pray, no? So the talk of praying here is code for 'having sex' or at least 'being intimate in a romantic way'.

No one has denied this. You made a point that they were 'praying' pretty much each night   which the text disproves Renly laughed. "Loras, stay and help me pray. It's been so long I've quite forgotten how. 

You were proven wrong, accept the L. 

LV your methods on this board are not subtle, someone points out when you are wrong and instead of accepting it you keep on tweeking the argument, insinuating the other person was saying something else. I'm not going down that path. 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The overall way in which Margaery-Renly-Loras are described and observed by Catelyn implies that Renly did not exactly spend his nights with her. 

It's an arranged marriage, Renly's at war and Cat spends a few hours (at most) in their presence. 

Which quotes from Cat insinuate Renly was not going to have children with his wife? 

Use quotes by Cat to back your claims up. Let us judge for ourselves. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Give me a quote where Tywin or any Lannister chides Cersei for not producing trueborn Baratheon heirs. Nobody blames her for any of that - not Tywin, not Kevan, not Tyrion, no one.

Kevan actually does. 

"Tommen has his mother." Ser Kevan's green eyes met her own, unblinking. A last drop of wine trembled wet and red beneath his chin, and finally fell. "Aye," he added softly, after a pause, "and his father too, I think."

But before that the presumption was the senior Lannisters did not truly believe it. 

"Speak softly." Her voice sounded strange . . . breathless, almost frightened. "Jaime, Kevan has refused me. He will not serve as Hand, he . . . he knows about us. He said as much."

"Refused?" That surprised him. "How could he know? He will have read what Stannis wrote, but there is no . . ."

But obviously Tywin recognizes the importance of legitimate heirs

"So long as you remain unwed, you allow Stannis to spread his disgusting slander," Lord Tywin told his daughter. "You must have a new husband in your bed, to father children on you."

And its the same with Tyrion and Sansa, he wants Tyrion to impregnate her, not for someone else to do it. 

The norm is to want legitimate heirs, that is an accepted truth of our own middle ages and the universe GRRM has created. He does not have to explain to the reader that water is wet. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is your opinion that this was a stupid move - and to a point I can agree with that. But you do know that Stannis has no proof about the true parentage of Cersei's children, right?

And it has still caused a huge civil war, lost Joffrey the support of the North. 

There is no reason Tywin, or any pragmatic person, would take a risk. Not when the two biggest civil wars in the history of Westeros had their beginnings in heirs being labelled bastards. 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

But, again - give us quotes where Tywin and Mace care about the legitimacy of royal children. The Tyrells believe that Joffrey and Tommen are not Robert's children - yet they still marry Margaery to each of them to make her queen.

First give a quote where Mace claims that? 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

A King Renly and Queen Margaery would have needed heirs, yes, but it is not necessary that such heirs be fathered by King Renly. If Renly had had the same problem as Aegon the Conqueror (who was very likely sterile) they would have found a solution, too.

How was he very likely sterile? He had two sons. 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Strongs had pretty much nothing to do with the outbreak of the Dance. 

Yeah, they did. 

Aemond losing his eye was down to calling them bastards, the bad blood that existed was, in large part, down to that event. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No, it was another precedent of the same type. Prior Renly's hypothetical successful rebellion and usurpation the only precedent people could point to was Robert's ascension. Now they would have two such precedents - the first one set by Robert, the second one set by Renly.

Aegon conquered the realm through force, doing so was nothing new.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

How do you know that?

Do  I know it for certain? Of course not, its a fictional universe controlled by GRRM.

But Renly's not doing anything original here and his predecessors, both real and Westerosi, did not bring their worlds to disaster. 

Is your argument that disaster is more likely than not disaster?  

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Robert's victory was already a disaster.

lol no, it was not. One minor civil war in 15 years is pretty chill by Westeros standards.

Most of the warfare was on the seas, few innocents (comparatively speaking) lost their lives. 

Calling it a disaster is hyperbolic. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

After Robert's death four lords emulate Robert - Renly, Stannis, Balon (yet again), and Robb. They all follow Robert's example, something that didn't happen before Robert.

Two of those Lords, Stannis (directly) and Robb (indirectly) went to war due to Cersei not producing legitimate heirs. 

Renly gets to rebel because the North and West is at war. 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Making your followers happy and being popular is not the same as being a good king.

That was not what you asked. Enough of this shady shit, others may fall for it. I may have done so in the past, but no more.

You claimed Renly did not care about being king and I pointed out that keeping your followers/subjects happy actually proves he did want to be a good king.

Neither of us know if he would have been, but he wanted to be a good king. Are you really arguing that he wanted to be a bad king? 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Robert was popular and a people person, too, yet he was one of the worst kings Westeros ever had

Worse than Maegor?  Aenys II? Aerys?  Baelor? Aegon II? Aegon IV? Joffrey? Aerys I? 

Robert's been mediocre, but it is hyperbolic to call him one of the worst. 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If there is no evidence that he was I've no reason to believe that he was. 

That is not what you asked. I'm so tired of this bait and switch bullshit you constantly pull in this forum.

You said: And Renly's personality does not imply he cared much about being a good king.

My reply was to that. Your methods to try and win arguments grow more and more transparent.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Without evidence that she wanted to murder Renly and Stannis you cannot pretend that this is a given.

I did not. I was responding to you claiming; We don't see any indication Cersei or the Lannisters wanted to kill him.

Cersei's quote does indicate this. It might not be conclusive (no one claimed it was) but its certainly an indicator. 

Once again you ask a question, it gets answered and you imply the other person said something else. Please stop!

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

Cersei was sincerely offering Ned to join her or to go back home to Winterfell. There are other ways to deal with people than just killing them - she even wanted him to go to the Wall after he was arrested. She did not want to see him executed.

No, she never claims she wanted rid of Ned. Robert, Stannis and Renly however...

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And what right does Renly have to hold Storm's End? It should have gone to one of Robert's children or Stannis, not the youngest brother. What the king gives the king can take again.

Sure, that does not stop it being a valid reason to rebel. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dsjj251 said:

You didnt point out a flaw, you are arguing from a different perspective . Thats not the same thing. Thats like me saying my favorite color is blue and you saying " it should be yellow".

No, I pointed out a flaw. If the laws of the realm support something which you don't your perspective matters very little.

You made a claim about kings getting to choose their heirs, that is not the norm in Westeros. We've actually never seen it successfully done. 

Now your 'perspective' might not like it, and I sympathize I really do, but your original 'perspective' was a flawed one.

1 hour ago, dsjj251 said:

We arent debating the legal line of succession.  The legal line of succession is clear. 

No, I was debating your point that Robert can pick his own heir. 

1 hour ago, dsjj251 said:

My post is basically why people even chose to follow who they did in the first place.  Clearly there was a thought process for those who chose Renly.  Im simply stating why. Lord of Storms End, most powerful Baratheon. 

Robert was the most powerful Baratheon.

 

1 hour ago, dsjj251 said:

Joffery, with the best legal claim, had little support outside his own mothers house. 

Well yeah, he murdered the Lord of the North and made the man attacking the Riverlands, his Hand. 

His actions had a huge hand in limiting his support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, I pointed out a flaw. If the laws of the realm support something which you don't your perspective matters very little.

You made a claim about kings getting to choose their heirs, that is not the norm in Westeros. We've actually never seen it successfully done. 

Now your 'perspective' might not like it, and I sympathize I really do, but your original 'perspective' was a flawed one.

No, I was debating your point that Robert can pick his own heir. 

Robert was the most powerful Baratheon.

 

Well yeah, he murdered the Lord of the North and made the man attacking the Riverlands, his Hand. 

His actions had a huge hand in limiting his support.

1.You didn't point out a flaw. Your argument is "how much your prospective matters ". I never argues the degree in which my prospective matters .

 

But seeing how large Renly's support is.....

 

2. King's have successful chosen their own heirs multiple times, or allowed a great council to do it for them . The only time it didn't work was Rhaenyra , and she technically had more support than Aegon II did.  ( She had the North, The Vale, Most of the Crownlands and most of the Riverlands)

 

When Jaehery l took the crown, he chose his eldest niece as his heir, not either of his sister's. 

Jaeherys heir wasn't Aemon's kids, Vaegon,  or his own younger daughters . It was the first born son of Baelon . 

 

And in the great council of 233,  the Crown was given to Egg, even though he had 3 family members ahead of him in the line of succession. 

 

3. Robert can pick his own heir. 

 

4. Robert is dead, he can't be the most powerful Baratheon lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

1.You didn't point out a flaw. Your argument is "how much your prospective matters ". I never argues the degree in which my prospective matters .

I did, you have just ignored it. I'm happy to go over your original post

Kings don't get to choose their own heirs, if they did there

  • would have been no Dance of the Dragons
  • no Grand Council of 101
  • would have been a Queen Aerea instead of Jaehaerys

So your original premise that kings can choose their own heirs is flawed, Kings are forced to play by the rules, they can use those rules to disqualify an heir but they are still stuck with the line of succession. 

Your second point, that Robert never truly named an heir is also flawed. The day he acknowledge Joffrey as his son was the day Robert's heir was chosen. 

Robert's not happy about it, dreads the idea of Joffrey ruling. If he had an option to name another he would have taken it. 

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

2. King's have successful chosen their own heirs multiple times,

No, they have not. List all these successfully chosen heirs of Westeros. 

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

 

or allowed a great council to do it for them .

Yes. A great council can. 

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

When Jaehery l took the crown, he chose his eldest niece as his heir, not either of his sister's. 

His eldest niece was the chosen heir of Maegor, she did not succeed him. 

 

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Jaeherys heir wasn't Aemon's kids, Vaegon,  or his own younger daughters . It was the first born son of Baelon . 

We are talking about success here, that means an heir not first in line being picked by the king and successfully inheriting the Throne. It does not happen. 

You claimed kings do that, I pointed out it was a flawed argument as we have never seen it successfully done.

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

And in the great council of 233,  the Crown was given to Egg, even though he had 3 family members ahead of him in the line of succession. 

Yes, the realm, not the King, once again picked the heir. 

 

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

3. Robert can pick his own heir. 

Why didn't he? 

"Let me tell you a secret, Ned. More than once, I have dreamed of giving up the crown. Take ship for the Free Cities with my horse and my hammer, spend my time warring and whoring, that's what I was made for. The sellsword king, how the singers would love me. You know what stops me? The thought of Joffrey on the throne, with Cersei standing behind him whispering in his ear. My son. How could I have made a son like that, Ned?"

He hates the thought of Joffrey being king, if he can easily pick another why didn't he?

Robert sat down again. "Damn you, Ned Stark. You and Jon Arryn, I loved you both. What have you done to me? You were the one should have been king, you or Jon."

Why does Robert not make Ned or one of his brothers his heir? Or Tommen? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

I did, you have just ignored it. I'm happy to go over your original post

Kings don't get to choose their own heirs, if they did there

  • would have been no Dance of the Dragons
  • no Grand Council of 101
  • would have been a Queen Aerea instead of Jaehaerys

So your original premise that kings can choose their own heirs is flawed, Kings are forced to play by the rules, they can use those rules to disqualify an heir but they are still stuck with the line of succession. 

Your second point, that Robert never truly named an heir is also flawed. The day he acknowledge Joffrey as his son was the day Robert's heir was chosen. 

Robert's not happy about it, dreads the idea of Joffrey ruling. If he had an option to name another he would have taken it. 

No, they have not. List all these successfully chosen heirs of Westeros. 

Yes. A great council can. 

His eldest niece was the chosen heir of Maegor, she did not succeed him. 

 

We are talking about success here, that means an heir not first in line being picked by the king and successfully inheriting the Throne. It does not happen. 

You claimed kings do that, I pointed out it was a flawed argument as we have never seen it successfully done.

Yes, the realm, not the King, once again picked the heir. 

 

Why didn't he? 

"Let me tell you a secret, Ned. More than once, I have dreamed of giving up the crown. Take ship for the Free Cities with my horse and my hammer, spend my time warring and whoring, that's what I was made for. The sellsword king, how the singers would love me. You know what stops me? The thought of Joffrey on the throne, with Cersei standing behind him whispering in his ear. My son. How could I have made a son like that, Ned?"

He hates the thought of Joffrey being king, if he can easily pick another why didn't he?

Robert sat down again. "Damn you, Ned Stark. You and Jon Arryn, I loved you both. What have you done to me? You were the one should have been king, you or Jon."

Why does Robert not make Ned or one of his brothers his heir? Or Tommen? 

 

Again, you are arguing your perspective .

 

1. All those Kings agreed to abide by their great council , they didn't have to and they chose to allow them to happen.  

 

2. In Fire and Blood Jaeharys names Aerea his heir, then his daughter Daenarys , then his son then Aemon while Dany is still alive . 

 

3. Rhaenyra was betrayed , no one told her father no to his face, negating your point that a King  "can't " do it, because he clearly can. It's a matter of follow up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Again, you are arguing your perspective .

Nope. You made a flawed argument. 

12 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

1. All those Kings agreed to abide by their great council , they didn't have to and they chose to allow them to happen.  

That is not them picking their own heirs. A Great Council did. 

12 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

 

2. In Fire and Blood Jaeharys names Aerea his heir, then his daughter Daenarys , then his son then Aemon while Dany is still alive . 

Maegor also picked Aerea as his heir, it was not successful. 

For it to be successful the chosen heir actually has to inherit and be recognized as the new monarch. That is the difference between picking an heir and successfully  picking an heir. 

12 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

 

3. Rhaenyra was betrayed , no one told her father no to his face, negating your point that a King  "can't " do it, because he clearly can. It's a matter of follow up. 

lol the king picked his heir and she was never legally recognized as Queen. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Nope. You made a flawed argument. 

That is not them picking their own heirs. A Great Council did. 

Maegor also picked Aerea as his heir, it was not successful. 

For it to be successful the chosen heir actually has to inherit and be recognized as the new monarch. That is the difference between picking an heir and successfully  picking an heir. 

lol the king picked his heir and she was never legally recognized as Queen. 

 

My argument is fine. Your response is flawed. 

 

1. The King chose to abide by the decision of the council each time , so he chose as he could have easily said no. 

 

2. Aerea's pick wasn't successful because because her own mother didn't support her claim and she was like 10 months old and couldn't support her own claim. 

3. Being an heir has to do with right of succession, not the actual act. Plenty of crown princes died before becoming Kings. We're they not heirs ??? Your logic is flawed. 

4. Rhaenyra controlled the North, the Vale, Iron Islands , most of the Riverlands and most of the Crownlands  and part of the Reach( house Rowen, Tarly and others ). She was more "Queen" than Aegon II ever was "King" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dsjj251 said:

My argument is fine. Your response is flawed. 

lol, sure. 

1 minute ago, dsjj251 said:

1. The King chose to abide by the decision of the council each time , so he chose as he could have easily said no. 

The King choosing to abide by other people's decision is not the king choosing his own heir. That was your claim. 

1 minute ago, dsjj251 said:

2. Aerea's pick wasn't successful because because her own mother didn't support her claim and she was like 10 months old and couldn't support her own claim. 

She was 6 when Maegor died. 

The fact that everyone ignored Maegor's pick for a chosen heir highlights my point.

1 minute ago, dsjj251 said:

3. Being an heir has to do with right of succession, not the actual act. Plenty of crown princes died before becoming Kings. We're they not heirs ??? Your logic is flawed. 

lol no, I was very clear. 

Kings picking their heirs is rare and the few times it has happened it has never been a success.

1 minute ago, dsjj251 said:

4. Rhaenyra controlled the North, the Vale, Iron Islands , most of the Riverlands and most of the Crownlands  and part of the Reach( house Rowen, Tarly and others ). She was more "Queen" than Aegon II ever was "King" 

Except she was never legally Queen, in the history of Westeros she is regarded as a pretender. 

traitors have always paid with their lives . . . even Rhaenyra Targaryen. She was daughter to one king and mother to two more, yet she died a traitor's death for trying to usurp her brother's crown. It is law. Law, Davos. Not cruelty."

Viserys was not successful in choosing his own heir. 

 

Quote

3. Robert can pick his own heir. 

Why didn't he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

lol, sure. 

The King choosing to abide by other people's decision is not the king choosing his own heir. That was your claim. 

She was 6 when Maegor died. 

The fact that everyone ignored Maegor's pick for a chosen heir highlights my point.

lol no, I was very clear. 

Kings picking their heirs is rare and the few times it has happened it has never been a success.

Except she was never legally Queen, in the history of Westeros she is regarded as a pretender. 

traitors have always paid with their lives . . . even Rhaenyra Targaryen. She was daughter to one king and mother to two more, yet she died a traitor's death for trying to usurp her brother's crown. It is law. Law, Davos. Not cruelty."

Viserys was not successful in choosing his own heir. 

 

Why didn't he?

1.The King choosing to abide by a council he called is his pick.

2. My mistake on Aerea age. Still, her mother chose her own brother over her child. Aerea had no on to press her claim, but Rogar was willing to later on. And there was the fact that Meagor wasn't liked and was deemed a usurper by Jaehaerys' Court , so who he picked didn't matter . 

My point there was that Jaehaerys' then named her his heir even though technically Rhaeyna had the  best claim  even over Jaeherys in some eyes. Everyone was fine with it either way . His daughter then replaced her, and his 2 sons after that . 

 

3. It was successful every time except one , but even that was a success as history sees the blacks as the victors. 

 

4.Rhaenyera sat the iron throne and ruled all or most of  6 of the 9 regions . Again she was more Queen than Aegon ever was King.

 

5. he didn't because he needed Tywin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 3:55 PM, BigBoss1 said:

One general attribute of feudal societies is that they respect laws or at least try to interpret them in one own favour.

Succession laws are one if not the most important laws in a kingdom, not respecting them meant low legitimacy and that led to rebellion.  Blood right was so important to Westerosi society that Robert was to be king just because he was the closer to the succesion after the targaryens. Robert took the throne because he had the army, the claim (being that the current dynasty was being deposed) and the charisma.

Here's an example how really unsaint and readily broken are those succession laws:

Renly Baratheon has claimed his brother's crown."

"Renly?" she said, shocked. "I had thought, surely it would be Lord Stannis …"

"So did we all, my lady," Galbart Glover said.

The whole North had no reason to see Joffrey as anything but Bob's rightful son and heir (at that point - we're still in the AGOT), and yet apparently the whole North had expected Stannis to try and grab the crown, despite him being way behind in the line of succession. Yes, Stannis' claim was stronger than Renly's, but only marginally so.

On 1/18/2019 at 3:55 PM, BigBoss1 said:

Renly on the other hand may have the army and the charisma but he certainly lacks claim. He claims the throne by right of conquest but has no dragons to enforce it. He doesn't even believe Cersei's children to be illegitimate (like most of Westeros) He is taking the throne because he can, completely skipping over his brother.

He could have definitely won the throne but the precedent of someone with a weak to no claim taking the throne just because he has a bigger army is set. Imagine the bloodshed as various warlords fight for the throne just because they can. Renly was irresponsible and obviously did not care for the consequences of his actions.

English is not my first language, but I've always thought (mayhaps erroneously) that "precedent" is something quite different from "a thing that's inherently built into the system and had happened countless times over before". Even a perfunctory search reveals several historic examples. Both for the Iron Throne, and for the Seven Kingdoms of old. That's the essence of feudalism. Or at least it is so in the eyes of the creator himself.

"The penultimate king's brother" can't be, reasonably, described as "someone with a weak to no claim". From the entire realm's point of view (because Stannis couldn't be bothered to reveal the twincest until it was way too late... and even then he waited some more), Renly's claim was minimally weaker than Stannis': it was, in the public eye, Joff - Tommen - arguably Myrcella - Stannis - Shireen's situation equal to Myrcella's - Renly. So, sixth versus fourth, more or less, or possibly fourth versus third.

There was no excuse, other than "my army big and hammer strong", for Bob to jump over Viserys. If it was OK for Bob to do it to Viserys, then it was just as OK for Renly to do it to Stannis. Conversely, if Renly's position was not kosher, then neither was Robert's, and as a corollary Stannis' precious birthright is invalid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dsjj251 said:

1.The King choosing to abide by a council he called is his pick.

No, it is the Council's pick. 

If he could pick his own heir he'd have no need of a Great Council. 

 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

 

2. My mistake on Aerea age.  Still, her mother chose her own brother over her child. Aerea had no on to press her claim,

Exactly. The king picked an heir and it was not successful. 

No king has successfully picked an heir. 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

 

but Rogar was willing to later on.

Yes, nothing to do with Maegor though. 

How does Rogar wanting to marry her off to his brother and then make her queen validate your claim? 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

And there was the fact that Meagor wasn't liked and was deemed a usurper by Jaehaerys' Court , so who he picked didn't matter . 

Ah, so only popular kings can pick an heir? Are you now changing your argument? 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

My point there was that Jaehaerys' then named her his heir even though technically Rhaeyna had the  best claim  even over Jaeherys in some eyes.

And in the eyes of others she didn't. It's a moot point. 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

 

Everyone was fine with it either way .

Everyone? You asked them? 

 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

His daughter then replaced her, and his 2 sons after that . 

Yup. It's called the line of succession. 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

3. It was successful every time except one , but even that was a success as history sees the blacks as the victors. 

Name the times it was successful? 

When a king picked his replacement rather than the line of succession picked it? 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

4.Rhaenyera sat the iron throne and ruled all or most of  6 of the 9 regions . Again she was more Queen than Aegon ever was King.

Except she was not. She was never recognized as Queen.

Both Fire and Blood and TWOIAF lists all the monarchs of Westeros, she's not included in it. GRRM is more than clear on it. Aegon II was a recognized monarch, Rhaenyera was not. 

Just now, dsjj251 said:

5. he didn't because he needed Tywin

Why not name Tommen his heir instead of the son he hates? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, it is the Council's pick. 

If he could pick his own heir he'd have no need of a Great Council. 

 

Thats not even close to true since atleast 5 Targaryen kings  picked multiple heirs after their first born sons died. 

 

Quote

Exactly. The king picked an heir and it was not successful. 

No king has successfully picked an heir. 

Maegor was by definition a usurper, again his claim to Aerea was never my point, it was Jaeherys, Why are you pretending you dont understand ?

Quote

Yes, nothing to do with Maegor though. 

How does Rogar wanting to marry her off to his brother and then make her queen validate your claim? 

Ah, so only popular kings can pick an heir? Are you now changing your argument? 

You are talking yourself into circles here trying to avoid my point , LOL

 

Quote

 

And in the eyes of others she didn't. It's a moot point. 

Everyone? You asked them? 

 

 
Not moot at all. If the line is as concrete as you claim, then there should be no debate, thats your entire point. 

And yes, I asked all of them. 

Quote

 

Name the times it was successful? 

When a king picked his replacement rather than the line of succession picked it? 

I have named at least 4 already. 

 

Quote

 

Except she was not. She was never recognized as Queen.

6 of the 9 regions recognized her as Queen.  She was queen. 

 

Quote

Both Fire and Blood and TWOIAF lists all the monarchs of Westeros, she's not included in it. GRRM is more than clear on it. Aegon II was a recognized monarch, Rhaenyera was not. 

 

GRRM states his characters are biased and are wrong a lot. His own fictional histories stating that positive accounts of some characters were wiped from history by later monarchs for some reason or another, Rhaenyra being one of the key figures that happened to. Multple groups also being against women in power. 

 

so. legitimate heir, controlled majority of the kingdom, ruled dragonstone. 

 

Your Stannis quote is laughable. It was never Aegon's crown. so she is no usurper or traitor. 

Edited by dsjj251

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Thats not even close to true since atleast 5 Targaryen kings  picked multiple heirs after their first born sons died. 

Name them and name these heirs who successfully claimed their inheritance. 

Quote

Maegor was by definition a usurper,

As was Robert. This whole discussion is down to you claiming Robert can pick his own heir. 

Are you now backtracking and saying 'usurpers' can not? 

Quote

 

again his claim to Aerea was never my point, it was Jaeherys, Why are you pretending you dont understand ?

In our conversation I have repeatedly stressed successful heir, we will never know if Aerea would have been. 

Though its never mentioned that the 15 year old Jaehaerys picked her.  She was chosen due to the male line having seniority over the female line, as a daughter of a son she was next in line. 

Quote

You are talking yourself into circles here trying to avoid my point , LOL

Can you not answer any of the questions? It seems pretty obvious why you continue to deflect rather than back up your claims. 

How does Rogar wanting to marry her off to his brother and then make her queen validate your claim? 

Ah, so only popular kings can pick an heir? Are you now changing your argument? 

Please answer. 

 

Quote

Not moot at all. If the line is as concrete as you claim, then there should be no debate, thats your entire point. 

Nope, that is not my entire point.

You claimed "Rhaeyna had the  best claim  even over Jaeherys in some eyes."

I've just reread  Prince into King—The Ascension of Jaehaerys I and no one mentions she had the better claim. Westeros is not Dorne, a son comes before a daughter. 

It's a moot point due to you not backing your claim up. 

This we know. In the aftermath of the wedding, Maegor declared Rhaena’s daughter Aerea his lawful heir “until such time as the gods grant me a son,” whilst sending her twin, Rhaella, to Oldtown to be raised as a septa. His nephew Jaehaerys, the rightful heir by all the laws of the Seven Kingdoms, was expressly disinherited in the same decree.

Rhaena is behind her brother and daughter in the succession line, no one considered her the true heir. 

Remember when you were mistaken about Aerea being months old, you are mistaken again. 

 

Quote

And yes, I asked all of them. 

About as believable as most of your other claims. 

Quote

I have named at least 4 already. 

You just claimed at least five, name them.

Name the times it was successful? 

When a king picked his replacement rather than the line of succession picked it? 

It's a little odd that you are refusing to answer and back up the claims you made up. 

 

Quote

6 of the 9 regions recognized her as Queen.  She was queen. 

Not according to GRRM

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Targaryen_Kings

Look at the Targaryen succession page in Fire and Blood, she is left out.  Look at the contents page of a World of Ice and Fire, every ruler has their own chapter, Rhaenyera does not. 

 
Quote

 

GRRM states his characters are biased and are wrong a lot. His own fictional histories stating that positive accounts of some characters were wiped from history by later monarchs for some reason or another, Rhaenyra being one of the key figures that happened to. Multple groups also being against women in power. 

GRRM himself does not consider her a legal queen. She was never recognized as one. One of the major parts of the series is Dany becoming the first female ruler of Westeros.

Quote

 

so. legitimate heir, controlled majority of the kingdom, ruled dragonstone. 

But not recognized as Queen. 

Quote

 

Your Stannis quote is laughable. It was never Aegon's crown. so she is no usurper or traitor. 

How is it laughable, Westeros recognizes Aegon II as a monarch, they don't see Rhaenyera as one

Edited by Bernie Mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×