Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RYShh

Daenerys tried to steal Jon's right like Renly tried to Stannis's

Recommended Posts

According to Red Woman;

Quote

''Stannis had been a younger son living in the shadow of his elder brother, just as Jon Snow, bastard-born, had always been eclipsed by his trueborn sibling, the fallen hero men had called the Young Wolf. Both men were unbelievers by nature, mistrustful, suspicious. The only gods they truly worshiped were honor and duty.''

Stannis and Jon were similar on that regard,

Jon was living in the shadow of Robb, and Stannis was living in the shadow of Robert, and both Jon and Stannis gave their lives for duty and honor,

But I think this is not the only similarity, Renly tried to steal Stannis's right to the Iron Throne, even though Renly knew he had no right for the Iron Throne while Stannis was alive, he just had the power of the South (the Reach) and he just took it without any showing logical reason.

Dany did the same to Jon, after learning that Jon is the son of Rhaegar Targaryen, she knew Jon had the better claim, and she knew she should've followed Jon as he had a better claim , but she had the power of the 3 Dragons, Unsullied, Dothraki and which is why she believed the Iron Throne was her right, not Jon's.

Imagine, Bran is stealing Robb's right to Winterfell when Robb was alive, or Kevan stealing Tywin's right to the Casterly Rock,

Not only this, both Jon and Stannis killed Renly and Dany by using tricks, Stannis used black magic and stabbed Renly, Jon used Dany's love to deceive her and then stabbed her.

In the end, both Jon and Stannis committed crimes for duty and honor, but if both Renly and Dany didn't try to usurp their family members rights and instead if they followed the succession law of Westeros, then they would be both alive. Stannis would destroy the Lannisters as the true ruler, or if Dany followed Jon after learning he is the son of Rhaegar, then she would be alive and Jon would rule the 7 kingdoms peacefully.

Maybe Renly couldn't convince the Tyrells to join Stannis without giving a king to marry with Margery, but he could at least stop them join with the Lannisters, and they would take the KL in any case,

But Dany didn't need to convince anyone, her Dragons were obeying her will only, as well as the Unsullied and Dothraki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention; another similarity between Renly and Dany is that they both can't produce an heir, Renly wasn't interested on women and Dany was infertile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

But, Jon didn't want the Iron Throne.  So, who else should have claimed it?

In real life, Jon and Dany's advisors would simply have  pressed them to marry, to avoid any potential dispute (avuncular marriages were not unusual among European royalty).  Varys' opposition is very contrived. 

Or alternatively, Jon could simply have given her a formal oath of allegiance in front of witnesses, as people with better claims to the Throne did to Henry Tudor, after Bosworth.

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, SeanF said:

But, Jon didn't want the Iron Throne.  So, who else should have claimed it?

In real life, Jon and Dany's advisors would simply have  pressed them to marry, to avoid any potential dispute (avuncular marriages were not unusual among European royalty).  Varys' opposition is very contrived. 

Or alternatively, Jon could simply have given her a formal oath of allegiance in front of witnesses, as people with better claims to the Throne did to Henry Tudor, after Bosworth.

Jon didn't want to be the KitN as well, he accepted it after people wanted him to be. He would do the same with the IT. It wasn't like ''Oh Jon you don't want it, then I can take it'', Dany was in denial from the beginning and we both know even if Jon wanted she would never accept Jon. I think that's one of the reasons why Jon told Dany, to see her real intent, was she fighting for the Targaryens or just for her personal interest? Jon has seen that it was the latter.

Then people learned and they tried to make him king, but then she executed those people (Varys).

Edited by RYShh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RYShh said:

Jon didn't want to be the KitN as well, he accepted it after people wanted him to be. He would do the same with the IT. It wasn't like ''Oh Jon you don't want it, then I can take it'', Dany was in denial from the beginning and we both know even if Jon wanted she would never accept Jon. I think that's one of the reasons why Jon told Dany, to see her real intent, was she fighting for the Targaryens or just for her personal interest? Jon has seen that it was the latter.

Well, I think a (longer) Season would certainly have played out better if Jon either had pressed his claim, or been forced by Sansa and the Northern lords to press his claim, to the point where Jon and Daenerys are left with no choice but to strike the other down, if one of them wants to survive.  A much better plot line than have Daenerys turn into the madwoman in the attic, who has to be put down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Jon didn't want the throne, and Dany is actually taking the throne by right of conquest. Her bloodline's claim is just PR spin. You can't steal something that people surrender to you.

Edited by Daemos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Daemos said:

Jon didn't want the throne, and Dany is actually taking the throne by right of conquest. Her bloodline's claim is just PR spin. You can't steal something that people surrender to you.

People wanted Jon, but she would never let them make Jon king as we know she burned Varys for it. Jon didn't want to be the KitN but he had to accept it in the end, it would be the same if Dany didn't threaten people by burning them.

Yeah, it's right of conquest, because she had no right without conquering it.

 

Edited by RYShh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Of course she had a right. the Targs forged the Iron Throne and everything that revolved around it. It was her right to bring it all back under her family. She just didn't have THE right. Jon would need to be formally recognized as a Targ, and then formally abdicate for her to have THE right. But since everything relating to this happened behind closed doors, him saying in private that he doesn't want it is as formal an abdication as we were going to get given the circumstances.

This is all irrelevant though. Once Robert took the Iron Throne by conquest from the Targs, the line was broken forever. Therefore unless you were a Baratheon, the only right anyone had to the throne after that was by Conquest or marriage into Robert's line. 

Edited by Daemos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Daemos said:

Of course she had a right. the Targs forged the Iron Throne and everything that revolved around it. It was her right to bring it all back under her family. She just didn't have THE right. Jon would need to be formally recognized as a Targ, and then formally abdicate for her to have THE right. But since everything relating to this happened behind closed doors, him saying in private that he doesn't want it is as formal an abdication as we were going to get given the circumstances.

This is all irrelevant though. Once Robert took the Iron Throne by conquest from the Targs, the line was broken forever. Therefore unless you were a Baratheon, the only right anyone had to the throne after that was by Conquest or marriage into Robert's line. 

They used Robert's Targaryen ancestor as an excuse to the IT though, the line wasn't broken actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, RYShh said:

I forgot to mention; another similarity between Renly and Dany is that they both can't produce an heir, Renly wasn't interested on women and Dany was infertile.

I was going to say gay men can still have children then I remembered the awful gay stereotype they made Renly so nevermind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Minsc said:

I was going to say gay men can still have children then I remembered the awful gay stereotype they made Renly so nevermind. 

In fact, any man who favoured other men would know that if he wanted to be king, he needed to produce an heir PDQ.  That was another contrivance in Season 2.  Edward II had four living children, after all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yes. Dany effectively stole Jon's throne although he was the rightful heir. And it does not matter if he wants it or not. He didn't want to be Lord Commander of NW or KitN either and look what happened. He never publicly abdicated or something, he just kept on saying "I don't want it".

Edited by Nerevanin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 4:00 AM, SeanF said:

But, Jon didn't want the Iron Throne.  So, who else should have claimed it?

In real life, Jon and Dany's advisors would simply have  pressed them to marry, to avoid any potential dispute (avuncular marriages were not unusual among European royalty).  Varys' opposition is very contrived. 

Or alternatively, Jon could simply have given her a formal oath of allegiance in front of witnesses, as people with better claims to the Throne did to Henry Tudor, after Bosworth.

It still bothers me that no one pressed them to marry or even bought up the  idea to either of them.  Instead we got Tyrion and Varys talking about it and Varys bs to why it wouldn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

It still bothers me that no one pressed them to marry or even bought up the  idea to either of them.  Instead we got Tyrion and Varys talking about it and Varys bs to why it wouldn't work.

yep that was the convienient 'out' for the showrunners - jon could have been convinced if  the knew the future of the realm was at stake, and more wars, and perhaps dany sanity? not even super smart littlefinger 2.0 picked up on on it! the end has still left a bitter taste for me and I'm a jon/stark fan..ffs I just wanted more dialogue - this was one of the conversations I was looking forward to - dany/jon and marriage and davos trying to help jon with his ID. No one spoke to him and about his change in behaviour towards dany after sam spilled the beans. flatter than a pancake sigh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nerevanin said:

Yes. Dany effectively stole Jon's throne although he was the rightful heir. And it does not matter if he wants it or not. He didn't want to be Lord Commander of NW or KitN either and look what happened. He never publicly abdicated or something, he just kept on saying "I don't want it".

I think the show was very poorly trying to convey that Jon may have the better claim, but Dany deserved it more and was more qualified, etc. Which is why they spent 7 seasons treating her as the protagonist, ignoring her flaws. And then they wanted to subvert expectations and shock the audience with 'oh, she's mad now like her father, hence dead'.

As a side note, I think would ve made a good monarch, but he just seemed too reluctant to take the job. It worked the first two times, but a third time, he should've shown a little more interest in the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I completely disagree with OP: 1 Dany never knew about Jon until she came to Westeros and 2 after she met him she didn't know they were related until Jon told her. She was on a mission to claim the IT and he was not so there is none of this "she is trying to steal Jon's right to the throne" nonsense. 

 

Oh, and the history of the Targayens as far as who sit on the throne was one of who had the most power (Dany) and fighting among themselves for the throne.

Edited by Areisius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renly was a third son who watched both his elder brothers marry and have children.  He knows his whole life that there are inheritors before him in the line of succession but chooses to ignore it.

Dany spends her whole life believing Viserys is the rightful Targaryen monarch and that she is his heiress and, after his death, the rightful queen.  Until, enter stage left a claimant she has known nothing about and who could turn her whole life upside down.  It's a lot to wrestle with and I wonder how many of us, mid-glorious return to secure our birthright and save the world, would promptly bend the knee, pack up our banners and our dragons and quietly explain to out hordes of followers that she's not the real deal.

It's possible, but it's not likely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, the trees have eyes said:

Renly was a third son who watched both his elder brothers marry and have children.  He knows his whole life that there are inheritors before him in the line of succession but chooses to ignore it.

Dany spends her whole life believing Viserys is the rightful Targaryen monarch and that she is his heiress and, after his death, the rightful queen.  Until, enter stage left a claimant she has known nothing about and who could turn her whole life upside down.  It's a lot to wrestle with and I wonder how many of us, mid-glorious return to secure our birthright and save the world, would promptly bend the knee, pack up our banners and our dragons and quietly explain to out hordes of followers that she's not the real deal.

It's possible, but it's not likely. 

But that's the point.

In a fantasy/fairy tale content, you're conditioned to moralize the characters into good/bad. 

For the finale to have that 'punch' you need to have a clear villain. 

If the story had not been set up that way, the moral pathos of the 'hero' killing the 'heroine' would be less clear cut.

It's easier to cut down the possible avenue from the emotional resistance of Daenerys loosing everything she has believed she was meant for if you simply reduce the character's emotional depth to 'self involved bitch'.

In practical terms of sucession, once the documents were made  known, a male descendant from a male line would have a better claim.

In no way does this translate into an immediate reaction of 'ok, then'.

This is was not supposed to be a Disney scenario where there's 'good for goodness sake' and zero return.

Every character has their own plans and feelings and ambitions. Believing Daenerys would simply give up after all her journey?

We're talking about someone who regularly flies around on a nuke. She's earned her delusion of destiny and 'mission' fair and square.

It sounds more than naive, it sounds cruel when some say she should have simply said 'everything I gained is yours'.

If her 'bendtheknee' repetitions are tiresome and over done, claiming she should then surrender her claim just because of a new contender, better claim or no?

There is no possible comparison with Renly on those terms.

On the surface of being a lesser claim? Agreed.

Saying 'just like'?

Also, it repulsed me to have Renly all buddy buddy with the Reach. I guess his familial connection to Stannis was really shit or he was too young to remember the Tarlys, vassals of Highgarden, sieged them until the household nearly starved to death?

Share this post


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

But that's the point.

In a fantasy/fairy tale content, you're conditioned to moralize the characters into good/bad. 

For the finale to have that 'punch' you need to have a clear villain. 

If the story had not been set up that way, the moral pathos of the 'hero' killing the 'heroine' would be less clear cut.

It's easier to cut down the possible avenue from the emotional resistance of Daenerys loosing everything she has believed she was meant for if you simply reduce the character's emotional depth to 'self involved bitch'.

In practical terms of sucession, once the documents were made  known, a male descendant from a male line would have a better claim.

In no way does this translate into an immediate reaction of 'ok, then'.

This is was not supposed to be a Disney scenario where there's 'good for goodness sake' and zero return.

Every character has their own plans and feelings and ambitions. Believing Daenerys would simply give up after all her journey?

We're talking about someone who regularly flies around on a nuke. She's earned her delusion of destiny and 'mission' fair and square.

It sounds more than naive, it sounds cruel when some say she should have simply said 'everything I gained is yours'.

If her 'bendtheknee' repetitions are tiresome and over done, claiming she should then surrender her claim just because of a new contender, better claim or no?

There is no possible comparison with Renly on those terms.

On the surface of being a lesser claim? Agreed.

Saying 'just like'?

Also, it repulsed me to have Renly all buddy buddy with the Reach. I guess his familial connection to Stannis was really shit or he was too young to remember the Tarlys, vassals of Highgarden, sieged them until the household nearly starved to death?

Let me ask you this,

Why illyrio mopatis gave 3 stone dragon eggs to Daenerys? Because Daenerys was the member of House Targaryen right? Yes no one expected them to return to life, but they were still valuable and precious objects. Why do they find a Khal to marry her? Because she was a member of House Targaryen right? Why Ser Jorrah, later Ser Barristan joined Daenerys? Because she was a member of House Targaryen right? Why Tyrion and Varys joined her too? The answer is the same.

Yes, she accomplished things, like reviving those dragon eggs, and leading a Khalasar, and she fought for it.

But we can't say she didn't use the things that come to her because she was a member of House Targaryen. 

If she wasn't a Targaryen, she couldn't accomplish anything, so people could expect from her to honor her own House and honor the line of succession, especially when she knew that and proven that she had no love in Westeros, and only fear, and even her own adviser betrayed her for choosing Rhaegar's son, and sincerely believed that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, RYShh said:

Let me ask you this,

Why illyrio mopatis gave 3 stone dragon eggs to Daenerys? Because Daenerys was the member of House Targaryen right? Yes no one expected them to return to life, but they were still valuable and precious objects. Why do they find a Khal to marry her? Because she was a member of House Targaryen right? Why Ser Jorrah, later Ser Barristan joined Daenerys? Because she was a member of House Targaryen right? Why Tyrion and Varys joined her too? The answer is the same.

Yes, she accomplished things, like reviving those dragon eggs, and leading a Khalasar, and she fought for it.

But we can't say she didn't use the things that come to her because she was a member of House Targaryen. 

If she wasn't a Targaryen, she couldn't accomplish anything, so people could expect from her to honor her own House and honor the line of succession, especially when she knew that and proven that she had no love in Westeros, and only fear, and even her own adviser betrayed her for choosing Rhaegar's son, and sincerely believed that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys. 

I'm not denying this.

Varys uses his information network and experience to come to the conclusion that Rhaegar's son is a more conciliatory choice.

He has the better claim. Nothing can change the facts.

Dany's journey, as a Targaryen, as a Queen by the happenstance of those eggs coming to her and hatching as you've pointed out?

She should negate it on the immediate?

With no emotional involvement?

Just dispassionatedly throw away all her life's experience and suffering?

That would imply some level of sainthood not even Maester Aemon could lay claim to. He never had any intention to rule, so he stepped aside for a better king.

In her experience, I guess that's not a good place to be?

Should she? Yes.

Could she? I very much doubt it. And as we're shown, she couldn't.

All I'm saying is: on a purely emotional, repeat, emotional level, after all the time they spent calling her 'special' and her own delusion of 'destiny', styling herself a conquering Khal, can you blame her? 

The comparison with Renly seems leading, somehow.

Now if Stannis had been presumed dead or lost at sea and suddenly returned? Would Renly step aside? Him and his Reach allies?

Or are we considering that somehow Jon's situation, where no one even knew he existed, is the same as 'people don't like Stannis'?

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
Sign in to follow this  

×