kingDaemonI Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 2 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: And how was he able to do this? He either eliminated completely or gained the allegiance of all the defeated kings. Robert did not do either for house targaryen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 Just now, kingDaemonI said: He either eliminated completely or gained the allegiance of all the defeated kings. Yes, but how was he able to do this? What enabled him to eliminate the kings or gain their allegiance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingDaemonI Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 2 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: Yes, but how was he able to do this? What enabled him to eliminate the kings or gain their allegiance? Military force of course, but that doesn't change the fact that his "conquest" was incomplete and the fact that he unlike Aegon didn't actually lead the rebellion and cited royal blood. One could argue that Robert's closest real world counterpart Edward IV got the crown by "right of conquest" but we'd be fools to say that his royal blood didn't matter. Like Robert, Edward won his throne in battle, but he cited the fact that he was the great grandson of a previous king (great-great grandson in the case of Edward). Without royal blood, Edward would not be king, nor would Robert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 4 minutes ago, kingDaemonI said: Military force of course, but that doesn't change the fact that his "conquest" was incomplete and the fact that he unlike Aegon didn't actually lead the rebellion and cited royal blood. One could argue that Robert's closest real world counterpart Edward IV got the crown by "right of conquest" but we'd be fools to say that his royal blood didn't matter. Like Robert, Edward won his throne in battle, but he cited the fact that he was the great grandson of a previous king (great-great grandson in the case of Edward). Without royal blood, Edward would not be king, nor would Robert. In my opinion, Aegon's 'right' to the Throne ultimately stems from military force, and since Viserys' right ultimately stems from Aegon it ultimately stems from military force. With Robert it is a combination of both military force and a blood claim in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angel Eyes Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 11 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: In my opinion, Aegon's 'right' to the Throne ultimately stems from military force, and since Viserys' right ultimately stems from Aegon it ultimately stems from military force. With Robert it is a combination of both military force and a blood claim in my view. Well in Robert's case he just so happened to be the closest living relation to Aerys outside of the minors (Aegon and Rhaenys (both killed in the Sack), Viserys). Aerys and Rhaella had no other siblings. Of Aegon's children Duncan's children were excluded from the line of succession (and that's if he had any), Daeron was a bachelor, leaving only Rhaelle who married to Ormund Baratheon and bore Steffon... who sired Robert, Stannis, and Renly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said: Well in Robert's case he just so happened to be the closest living relation to Aerys outside of the minors (Aegon and Rhaenys (both killed in the Sack), Viserys). Aerys and Rhaella had no other siblings. Of Aegon's children Duncan's children were excluded from the line of succession (and that's if he had any), Daeron was a bachelor, leaving only Rhaelle who married to Ormund Baratheon and bore Steffon... who sired Robert, Stannis, and Renly. I think it was a combination of this and him being the 'figurehead' for the rebellion, in addition to him being relatively well regarded by everyone except the Martells (and the Tyrells?). It's a big risk to put any of the infant Targaryens on the throne, because they won't forget who killed their father (even though it was justified) and you could end up in the situation Mortimer was with Edward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd Posted January 17, 2023 Author Share Posted January 17, 2023 The natural right of Kingship is dependent entirely on the ability of the King to keep hold of it. Robert was King until he died. Robb was king, until he died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingDaemonI Posted January 18, 2023 Share Posted January 18, 2023 On 1/17/2023 at 2:02 PM, Craving Peaches said: In my opinion, Aegon's 'right' to the Throne ultimately stems from military force, and since Viserys' right ultimately stems from Aegon it ultimately stems from military force. With Robert it is a combination of both military force and a blood claim in my view. Aegon's right stems from military force in the same way all monarchs and feudal lords do. The problem is, the right of military force could technically be exercised by any of the rebel leaders I previously mentioned (Ned, Tywin, etc). It was not as they clearly knew for the long term good of the realm, they needed someone of royal blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 18, 2023 Share Posted January 18, 2023 20 minutes ago, kingDaemonI said: Aegon's right stems from military force in the same way all monarchs and feudal lords do. The problem is, the right of military force could technically be exercised by any of the rebel leaders I previously mentioned (Ned, Tywin, etc). It was not as they clearly knew for the long term good of True enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.