Jump to content

Why Robert Didn't Offer a Lordship for Viserys and Daenerys?


Corvo the Crow
 Share

Recommended Posts

As the title says. Lordships can be granted at a whim, even Varys is a lord and Lands and titles are aplenty, especially after wars. Why Robert(or rather, his council) didn't offer a lordship for Dany and Viserys, dead or alive? Why he didn't use diplomatic channels with Braavosi etc. are also different matters that begs questioning. You aid and abed the number one pretender to my realm? Ok, no trade with you. Plain and simple. It's not like any of these free cities can break the embargo through force at arms either. Sure Braavosi are the most powerful naval power but they barely forced Pentos into the antislavery treaty, if Braavos attacks the Iron Throne, not only is it bad for the trade but also weakens them against the slaving free cities and the rest of the cities stand even less of a chance against IT than Braavos does. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

As the title says. Lordships can be granted at a whim, even Varys is a lord and Lands and titles are aplenty, especially after wars. Why Robert(or rather, his council) didn't offer a lordship for Dany and Viserys, dead or alive? Why he didn't use diplomatic channels with Braavosi etc. are also different matters that begs questioning. You aid and abed the number one pretender to my realm? Ok, no trade with you. Plain and simple. It's not like any of these free cities can break the embargo through force at arms either. Sure Braavosi are the most powerful naval power but they barely forced Pentos into the antislavery treaty, if Braavos attacks the Iron Throne, not only is it bad for the trade but also weakens them against the slaving free cities and the rest of the cities stand even less of a chance against IT than Braavos does. 

For what he spent on turneys and shit he could hire enough sellswords to besiege the entire city and burn out the Targs

Offering say 100,000 dragons and the Darry lands should have had them lining up for the chance to claim it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Braavos is not easily cowered. The Sealord would resist Robert’s request. Sending an assassin to murder the Targaryen children while they are in Braavos is an act of war.  Westeros has no legal right to pursue the Targaryens in the Free Cities.  And who can say the Faceless Men would even accept such a contract. Viserys and Daenerys are scions of the rulers of the Valyrian Empire. It is a very dark sin to harm them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Westeros has no legal right to pursue the Targaryens in the Free Cities.

And the Targaryens had no legal right to invade Westeros, but they did anyway.

2 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

And who can say the Faceless Men would even accept such a contract. Viserys and Daenerys are scions of the rulers of the Valyrian Empire. It is a very dark sin to harm them.

:rofl:

Them being heirs to the proto-fascist Valyrian slavers would make it more likely that the Faceless Men and Braavos would want them dead.

Also, if someone killed them, all the Braavosi would do at most is arrest the killer for murder. They aren't going to start a war with Westeros over it. Daenerys and Viserys aren't Braavosi citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

And the Targaryens had no legal right to invade Westeros, but they did anyway.

:rofl:

Them being heirs to the proto-fascist Valyrian slavers would make it more likely that the Faceless Men and Braavos would want them dead.

Also, if someone killed them, all the Braavosi would do at most is arrest the killer for murder. They aren't going to start a war with Westeros over it. Daenerys and Viserys aren't Braavosi citizens.

Bravoos hates the dragonlords

also since they are citizens of westeros not braavos Robert as their closest living relative and their king has the legal right to ask the sealord to send them back particularly as both are children until well after Robert would have done so

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Braavos is not easily cowered. The Sealord would resist Robert’s request. Sending an assassin to murder the Targaryen children while they are in Braavos is an act of war.  Westeros has no legal right to pursue the Targaryens in the Free Cities.  And who can say the Faceless Men would even accept such a contract. Viserys and Daenerys are scions of the rulers of the Valyrian Empire. It is a very dark sin to harm them.  

But Braavosi have a right to send off their knock off Tleilaxu face dancers to operate in Westeros, going as far as killing promising Maester candidates? I'm all for Braavos when they attack slavers and kill dragonlords like Dany but these kinds of acts are unaccaptable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Corvo the Crow said:

But Braavosi have a right to send off their knock off Tleilaxu face dancers to operate in Westeros, going as far as killing promising Maester candidates? I'm all for Braavos when they attack slavers and kill dragonlords like Dany but these kinds of acts are unaccaptable. 

here here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

And the Targaryens had no legal right to invade Westeros, but they did anyway.

:rofl:

Them being heirs to the proto-fascist Valyrian slavers would make it more likely that the Faceless Men and Braavos would want them dead.

Also, if someone killed them, all the Braavosi would do at most is arrest the killer for murder. They aren't going to start a war with Westeros over it. Daenerys and Viserys aren't Braavosi citizens.

Those brother diddling, sister loving slaving racist Valyrian supremacist scum! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The king's mouth twisted in a bitter grimace. "No, gods be cursed. Some pox-ridden Pentoshi cheesemonger had her brother and her walled up on his estate with pointy-hatted eunuchs all around them, and now he's handed them over to the Dothraki. I should have had them both killed years ago, when it was easy to get at them, but Jon was as bad as you. More fool I, I listened to him."
"Jon Arryn was a wise man and a good Hand."

 

Quote

Varys gave the king an unctuous smile and laid a soft hand on Ned's sleeve. "I understand your qualms, Lord Eddard, truly I do. It gave me no joy to bring this grievous news to council. It is a terrible thing we contemplate, a vile thing. Yet we who presume to rule must do vile things for the good of the realm, howevermuch it pains us."
Lord Renly shrugged. "The matter seems simple enough to me. We ought to have had Viserys and his sister killed years ago, but His Grace my brother made the mistake of listening to Jon Arryn."
"Mercy is never a mistake, Lord Renly," Ned replied. "On the Trident, Ser Barristan here cut down a dozen good men, Robert's friends and mine. When they brought him to us, grievously wounded and near death, Roose Bolton urged us to cut his throat, but your brother said, 'I will not kill a man for loyalty, nor for fighting well,' and sent his own maester to tend Ser Barristan's wounds." He gave the king a long cool look. "Would that man were here today.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Ned but comparing mercy for Ser Barristan to sparing Viserys was a mistake on his part, Ser Barristan swore an oath to fight loyally and well for his king and he held to it with one unworthy king then another, it would have been three had the vicious idiot not broke three centuries of law and tradition by freeing him from his oath

a better point would be not executing children for the crimes of their parents or kin, since doing that is exactly why They rebelled against Aerys

Personally I think Jon Arryn was wrong to oppose it and Ned even more so, if Jon had suggested capturing them if possible and killing them only if neccessary, Robert would have agreed to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, frenin said:

Varys gave the king an unctuous smile and laid a soft hand on Ned's sleeve. "I understand your qualms, Lord Eddard, truly I do. It gave me no joy to bring this grievous news to council. It is a terrible thing we contemplate, a vile thing. Yet we who presume to rule must do vile things for the good of the realm, howevermuch it pains us."
Lord Renly shrugged. "The matter seems simple enough to me. We ought to have had Viserys and his sister killed years ago, but His Grace my brother made the mistake of listening to Jon Arryn."
"Mercy is never a mistake, Lord Renly," Ned replied. "On the Trident, Ser Barristan here cut down a dozen good men, Robert's friends and mine. When they brought him to us, grievously wounded and near death, Roose Bolton urged us to cut his throat, but your brother said, 'I will not kill a man for loyalty, nor for fighting well,' and sent his own maester to tend Ser Barristan's wounds." He gave the king a long cool look. "Would that man were here today.

 

Cressen powerful Maegi confirmed.

Quote

Maester Cressen remembered the day Davos had been knighted, after the siege of Storm's End. Lord Stannis and a small garrison had held the castle for close to a year, against the great host of the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne. Even the sea was closed against them, watched day and night by Redwyne galleys flying the burgundy banners of the Arbor. Within Storm's End, the horses had long since been eaten, the dogs and cats were gone, and the garrison was down to roots and rats. Then came a night when the moon was new and black clouds hid the stars. Cloaked in that darkness, Davos the smuggler had dared the Redwyne cordon and the rocks of Shipbreaker Bay alike. His little ship had a black hull, black sails, black oars, and a hold crammed with onions and salt fish. Little enough, yet it had kept the garrison alive long enough for Eddard Stark to reach Storm's End and break the siege.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ring3r said:

Well, their claim to the throne was far better than his.  Offering them positions of authority would practically guarantee a future civil war...just like the Blackfyres.

Robert's claim was based on having Targaryen blood and being related to them.  Robert would have brought the wrath of the gods down on his reign.  King Viserys III and his little sister and heir, Princess Daenerys are the rightful rulers of Westeros.  Many across the Narrow Sea consider them the monarchs of Westeros and Robert is the Usurper.  Robert, his curs from the north, and Tywin's henchmen can murder Elia, Aerys' Kingsguards, and her half-Targaryen children.  Those were bad enough. But it would have been a very sinful taboo and very unpopular to murder the true king of Westeros (Viserys Targaryen) and his heir, Princess Daenerys Targaryen.  If there is/are Gods, they would have cursed Robert and all of his family if he had committed something like having Viserys and Daenerys killed.  Just look back and remember what happened to Robert after he sent an assassin for Princess Daenerys.  A wild pig opened up Robert as if he had a built in zipper. His innards got a suntan. Robert committed a very, very evil act by sending that assassin and he was punished for it.  At least he showed some remorse in the end and he will receive mercy if there is such a thing as an afterlife.  I would not begrudge mercy to Robert if he might have done something, had he lived longer, to stop the assassin when he finally realized he was committing a crime of pure evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skahaz mo Kandaq said:

Robert's claim was based on having Targaryen blood and being related to them.  Robert would have brought the wrath of the gods down on his reign.  King Viserys III and his little sister and heir, Princess Daenerys are the rightful rulers of Westeros.  Many across the Narrow Sea consider them the monarchs of Westeros and Robert is the Usurper.  Robert, his curs from the north, and Tywin's henchmen can murder Elia, Aerys' Kingsguards, and her half-Targaryen children.  Those were bad enough. But it would have been a very sinful taboo and very unpopular to murder the true king of Westeros (Viserys Targaryen) and his heir, Princess Daenerys Targaryen.  If there is/are Gods, they would have cursed Robert and all of his family if he had committed something like having Viserys and Daenerys killed.  Just look back and remember what happened to Robert after he sent an assassin for Princess Daenerys.  A wild pig opened up Robert as if he had a built in zipper. His innards got a suntan. Robert committed a very, very evil act by sending that assassin and he was punished for it.  At least he showed some remorse in the end and he will receive mercy if there is such a thing as an afterlife.  I would not begrudge mercy to Robert if he might have done something, had he lived longer, to stop the assassin when he finally realized he was committing a crime of pure evil.

waffle

murdering the children was far worse by any measure than killing viserys and danerys would have been and roberts death had nothing to do with either

westeros doesn't believe in the divine right of kings they believe in conquest by force.

even the people did help viserys and they were few enough did it because him factored into their plans not a belief in targ eceptionism, viserys believed it and he was a sadistic idiot

the gods if they exist and cared at all about mortal matters would have rejoiced at the death of the sadistic idiot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Viserys and Daenerys are scions of the rulers of the Valyrian Empire. It is a very dark sin to harm them.

Yes, it is a very dark sin to murder children, but not because they are of Valyrian descent.

Braavos hated the mass-murdering slavers of Valyria.  Their city was founded to escape the tyranny of the Valyrian dragon-riders.  Braavos has no loyalty to "rulers of the Valyrian Empire"

2 hours ago, Skahaz mo Kandaq said:

Robert's claim was based on having Targaryen blood and being related to them.  Robert would have brought the wrath of the gods down on his reign.

Well then the entire Targaryen reign was doomed, because the Targaryen legacy is Targaryens murdering other Targaryens... and not distant cousins either.  By your logic, it was the will of the gods that the Targaryen reign came to an end.

2 hours ago, Skahaz mo Kandaq said:

Robert, his curs from the north, and Tywin's henchmen can murder Elia, Aerys' Kingsguards, and her half-Targaryen children. 

Anyone who read the books knows that the "curs from the north" had nothing to do with the murder of Elia and her children.  The kingsguards deaths were not "murder".  They attacked Ned and his men while they were holding Ned's sister captive in the tower.  If Lyanna's infant son in that tower was not the "true Targaryen heir", what were the kingsguards doing there?

I see no need for you to add "half-Targaryen" in there.  Were you implying that Rhaegar's children are lesser because they aren't inbred?  A child of incest is not at fault for their parents' actions, but fans thinking they are superior is bizarre to me, to say the least.  Regardless, I hope you know that Daenerys is a lot less than half-Targaryen.  Her parents were siblings, and their parents before that were siblings too, but their parents were not.  That would make Daenerys half-Targaryen... except her great-grandfather's father was also half-Targaryen.  Keep going back, and Daenerys is less than 10% Valyrian.  Daenerys is not inbred enough to be considered "pure-blooded" anything, which is great, because the Targaryen affinity for incest is disgusting and their notion of "pure blood" is born of racist supremacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Skahaz mo Kandaq said:

Robert's claim was based on having Targaryen blood and being related to them.  Robert would have brought the wrath of the gods down on his reign.  King Viserys III and his little sister and heir, Princess Daenerys are the rightful rulers of Westeros.  Many across the Narrow Sea consider them the monarchs of Westeros and Robert is the Usurper.  Robert, his curs from the north, and Tywin's henchmen can murder Elia, Aerys' Kingsguards, and her half-Targaryen children.  Those were bad enough. But it would have been a very sinful taboo and very unpopular to murder the true king of Westeros (Viserys Targaryen) and his heir, Princess Daenerys Targaryen.  If there is/are Gods, they would have cursed Robert and all of his family if he had committed something like having Viserys and Daenerys killed.  Just look back and remember what happened to Robert after he sent an assassin for Princess Daenerys.  A wild pig opened up Robert as if he had a built in zipper. His innards got a suntan. Robert committed a very, very evil act by sending that assassin and he was punished for it.  At least he showed some remorse in the end and he will receive mercy if there is such a thing as an afterlife.  I would not begrudge mercy to Robert if he might have done something, had he lived longer, to stop the assassin when he finally realized he was committing a crime of pure evil.

Robert's death was justice for sending the assassin.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Rondo said:

Robert's death was justice for sending the assassin.  

Robert was killed by cersei because he was a danger to her and her children, not as godly justice for sending an assassin, the gods if they existed would cheered the death of Viserys because hes a sadistic idiot who threatened to murder his sister and nephew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...