The Lawful Ruler of Westeros (Spoilers)

[Masonity]

The

Baratheon claim is simply "The old Targ king is dead. His kids are dead, other than a little kid and a fetus that might be born soon. If they show up again they will be dead. Therefore the best claim to the crown is us, because of Granny Targ."

If a Grandson in the firstborn line (Aegon if real) shows up, he's de facto a better claim. At that point, the "we'll kill them" comes into play. If he can resist the strength of whoever holds the throne, he is it's rightful holder.

Failing that, if an unknown but legitimate grandson, second born son to the first born son, happens to show up and not be killed / manage to gain hold of the throne/crown, he is the rightful holder.

Failing that, a daughter of the mad king is still next in line, as long as she can come back to claim the throne, survive any attempts to kill her and actually gain the crown and throne.

The right to the throne is both in bloodlines and the ability to hold said throne. Aegon, Jon, Dany and Stannis all have claims via bloodlines. Stannis's is weakest if all are true, and Aegon's is strongest. However it all comes down to who could gain and hold the Iron Throne. If the Targs across the sea unite, it'll be under Aegon's claim because it comes first. If they don't unite, whoever wins in battle will be the Targ across the sea's claimant.

The best thing in Jon's favour is that if he is shown to be Azor Ahai / The Prince who was Promised, Mel might be able to convince Stannis to support his Targaryen claim over Stannis's own through both his grandma and the precedent of big brother holding the throne.

Of course, there's the very strong point that the Tyrels have a great claim too.

They currently hold the Capital. They hold the love of the people. And they could claim to be fighting invading forces, one from across the narrow sea, the other from a disgraced former LC of the Nightswatch who had forswore his oath and was leading an army of wildling south to take the throne. At that point bloodlines mean very little in the face of pragmatism. They are Westeros, a noble family, have fed the people, and won the war. Mace would be king not because of a grandmother with the surname "Targaryen", but because he is the best choice in the eyes of the common folk, the nobility and the faith.

[Val the Wildling Princess]

According to Daenerys thinking, she doesnt have any claim anymore, she lost it when she fled from Westeros. If you remember, there was a woman in Meereen that had to flee during the taking of the city when her house was invaded, in order to save her life, Daenerys herself said the house wasnt hers anymore, how is that different from the Iron throne? She can go and conquer it if she wants, but she should stop talking about damn rightful claims, cause hers isnt valid anymore.

[etu]

According to Daenerys thinking, she doesnt have any claim anymore, she lost it when she fled from Westeros. If you remember, there was a woman in Meereen that had to flee during the taking of the city when her house was invaded, in order to save her life, Daenerys herself said the house wasnt hers anymore, how is that different from the Iron throne? She can go and conquer it if she wants, but she should stop talking about damn rightful claims, cause hers isnt valid anymore.

Hah! I like that.

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

Recently, I have seen many posts claiming that the Targaryens are still the LAWFUL heirs/rulers of Westeros, however I don't see how this is true. Robert assumed the Iron Throne and overthrew the Targaryen dynasty, creating a new era of rulers (Baratheons). Why would the Targaryen conquest hold weight, but not the Baratheon conquest? There is thousands of years of history, pre-Targaryen conquest, that bred it's own heirs, why do these heirs not come into question, but post-Targaryen heirs do? My opinion is that it is related to the large amount of Dany fans, compared to the small percentage of Robert fans. Let's take a look at the War of the Five Kings: Renly Baratheon - The youngest brother of Robert Baratheon. (Invalid Claim) Balon Greyjoy - The lord of a house that was formerly led by kings. (Semi Valid Claim---Not to the Iron Throne) Robb Stark - The lord of a house formerly led by kings. (Semi Valid Claim---Not to the Iron Throne) Joffrey/Tommen Lannister/Hill - The bastards of Jaime and Cersei Lannister. (Invalid Claim) Stannis Baratheon - The younger of the king Robert Baratheon, who had no children. (Valid Claim) Daenerys/Aegon Targaryen - The last of the overthrown Targaryens. (Invalid Claim) The only people who have a current (semi)valid claim are: Stannis Baratheon, Balon Greyjoy, and Robb Stark. Stannis having the only claim to the Iron Throne. While there are some semi valid claims, Stannis' current claim (younger brother to the last king) trumps those claims, making him the only true lawful ruler. Joffrey/Tommen have not successfully won the War of the Five Kings, so they are not yet the lawful rulers.

Petyr Baelish, Right of Conquest

[FuzzyJAM]

:bang: I am not speaking of who has the most ships/swords/knights/dragons, ONLY who has the legal right, using the succession law used in six of the seven kingdoms (Not Dorne), which is a Primogeniture Agnatic-Cognatic.

Thing is, you're arguing that being the "lawful" ruler can be achieved in two ways: (1) conquest or (2) inheritance.

Well, given the position of Dany and "Aegon" and (maybe later) Jon, it's easy to argue that the Targs have not been fully conquered and thus their claim is still "legal". What makes Stannis's claim matter when Dany's, Aegon's and (most likely, if he chooses to care) Jon's does not? Dany has far more power than Stannis and Aegon is a strong force too - why is the Targ claimants retreating and being deposed for 16 (?) years any worse than Stannis retreating and being deposed for two? Is there a statute of limitations on when you can claim inheritance? In history, people have been hailed as legal heirs three generations after their great-grandparents lost the throne; 16 years is nothing.

As for how things work in the kingdoms individually, that's irrelevant anyway. The Targs created the country and flaunted all other rules. They aren't bound by what their subjects do and never have been.

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

According to Daenerys thinking, she doesnt have any claim anymore, she lost it when she fled from Westeros. If you remember, there was a woman in Meereen that had to flee during the taking of the city when her house was invaded, in order to save her life, Daenerys herself said the house wasnt hers anymore, how is that different from the Iron throne? She can go and conquer it if she wants, but she should stop talking about damn rightful claims, cause hers isnt valid anymore.

Also conquerors try to justify their claim as being a lawful claim. Everyone needs a fig leaf. Robert Baratheon had his.

Renly shrugged. “Tell me, what right did my brother Robert ever have to the Iron Throne?” He did not wait for an answer. “Oh, there was talk of the blood ties between Baratheon and Targaryen, of weddings a hundred years past, of second sons and elder daughters. No one but the maesters care about any of it. Robert won the throne with his warhammer.”

[LuisDantas]

Lawful rights are established, unsurprisingly enough, by laws.

Laws are statement of policy, and as such must be arbitrated by some sort of judge or jury.

I am not really up to date with the concept of "natural law", nor do I know that I would see any sense in it, but it doesn't appear to be talked about in Westeros anyway.

Much as in the real world same-sex marriage can literally be lawful in a given day and unlawful in the next day (and vice-versa), so too in Westeros what is lawful is quite literally established by the letter of the law and, mainly, by the decrees of the arbiters in rule. In Westeros, those are said in no uncertain terms to derive from the King. That of course creates a very confused situation when it is the validity of the King's claim that is in question.

Immediately after Robert's death, the only meaningful challenge to Joffrey's claim was actually Robert's letter, which ironically was also the only false one due to Ned's adulteration of its specific words. The problem with Stannis' claim is that it could only ever be lawful if it actually got support from the law - and Stannis has neither actual proof nor the favor of any arbiter that we know of.

I don't think the evidence suggests that the Faith of Seven has enough power to decide who is the rightful King either. It is influential, but not quite enough for that.

The best analysis of the matter is still Renly's in ACOK, right before he found out about Stannis arriving at Storm's End.

Failing that, one is forced to rely on the actual acceptance by society. Going by that, I suppose Stannis is the lawful King now, at least according to the Lords that support him. T

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

Thing is, you're arguing that being the "lawful" ruler can be achieved in two ways: (1) conquest or (2) inheritance. Well, given the position of Dany and "Aegon" and (maybe later) Jon, it's easy to argue that the Targs have not been fully conquered and thus their claim is still "legal". What makes Stannis's claim matter when Dany's, Aegon's and (most likely, if he chooses to care) Jon's does not? Dany has far more power than Stannis and Aegon is a strong force too - why is the Targ claimants retreating and being deposed for 16 (?) years any worse than Stannis retreating and being deposed for two? Is there a statute of limitations on when you can claim inheritance? In history, people have been hailed as legal heirs three generations after their great-grandparents lost the throne; 16 years is nothing. As for how things work in the kingdoms individually, that's irrelevant anyway. The Targs created the country and flaunted all other rules. They aren't bound by what their subjects do and never have been.

eeee..... I dunno about that. So far she's got 3 untamed dragons, some unsullied and no fleet.

[FuzzyJAM]

eeee..... I dunno about that. So far she's got 3 untamed dragons, some unsullied and no fleet.

Don't forget Dorne.

Really though, I'd take her position over freezing to death with Stannis.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Don't forget Dorne.

Dornish support has been burned, literally.

The reason why Stannis has a claim but Dany doesn't is acknowledgement. Every single Lord Paramount has officially acknowledged Robert Baratheon as the rightful King on the Iron Throne. Yes, even Dorne. They can't go back on that. That seals the Baratheons claim on the Iron Throne.

On the other hand, the Greyjoys, the Baratheons and the Starks remain in open rebellion against Tommen. That means half the Lords Paramount dispute his claim, and until every last one is either fully replaced, accepted in the same way by their bannermen, or they support Tommen, the war isn't over and Stannis still has a claim.

[Dessimay]

Does anyone else feel that Dany cannot end up being queen of westeros because

she can no longer have children after sacrificing her son to save drogo correct? i can't possibly see her taking over westeros only to be queen for 40 years with no heir, she has some other purpose imo

[BlueHighwind]

The only valid king is the one who can defeat all the others. Targaryen, Baratheon, it doesn't matter. Yeah, Stannis has the best legal claim, maybe. But I don't think anybody is going to care much about law with Lannister swords in their face.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Does anyone else feel that Dany cannot end up being queen of westeros because

she can no longer have children after sacrificing her son to save drogo correct? i can't possibly see her taking over westeros only to be queen for 40 years with no heir, she has some other purpose imo

Why should that stop her? The girl is three quarters mad, sacrificing hundreds of thousands or even millions for nothing isn't beyond her.

[ShadowRaven]

Stop hating on the Targs, they are awesome! :D

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Stop hating on the Targs, they are awesome! :D

I don't hate the Targs, only the crazy Targs. Admittedly, most of them are :box:

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

Don't forget Dorne. Really though, I'd take her position over freezing to death with Stannis.

Don't forget about Dorne? All they've got is 1 extra tasty crispy heir. We've had three major Dornish characters with three major plans, each ending in utter disaster. Arrianne, Oberyn and Quentyn. Unless we want to count the plan for Arriane to marry Viserys, which could have only been more disastrous by being succcessful. These guys make House Stark look damn near competent.

[DarkSnow]

You make your own claim in westeros, usually you are born in the royal family and the claim is passed to you and the lords and Bannermen pledge their fealty and the throne can be held by that power. Or like the Blackfyre rebellion you make your claim by Force and Right because you are a man who inspires others to take you as a leader. As for Robert he made his claim by pure Force overthrowing the King that men hated, and destroying those who followed the other king. The Lords and there soldiers that follow you make your claim and it is yours as long as you can hold it. All five KIngs and Daenarys have a Vaild claim, either by Power or Blood because men follow both into battle.

[Howlin' Howland Reed]

Does anyone else feel that Dany cannot end up being queen of westeros because

she can no longer have children after sacrificing her son to save drogo correct? i can't possibly see her taking over westeros only to be queen for 40 years with no heir, she has some other purpose imo

Many believe that Dany's last chapter included a part about her suffering a miscarriage --- meaning that she can at least conceieve. Quentyn could have been the sun that sets in the East, the Dothraki sea is turning dry, the pyramids in Meereen are the mountains blowing in the wind. That, or something else, or Mirri Maz Duur wasn't making a prophecy, but basically just saying "he's never coming back" to Dany (believing her to be barren due to the difficult birth).

By the way, you don't have to spoiler that stuff. In this forum you only need to use the spoiler tags if you write about stuff from sample chapters, or public readings, of the Winds of Winter. And possibly Dunk and Egg, but no one seems to care about that... Also, welcome to the forum!

[Tony Soprano]

The lawful ruler of Westeros is Stannis. He's Robert's true and only heir. Robert won the Iron Throne through conquest. He overthrew the Targeryens, and was proclaimed King by lords who fought on the Targ side as well.

He was a usurper and rebel during the war. After Aerys died and Robert sat on the throne, took oaths of fealty from all the lords he became King.

So, after his death, Stannis is the only rightful ruler. Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella are all bastards, they have no claim on the Iron Throne at all. Neither does Daenerys.

If she can cross the Narrow Sea, defeat both Tommen and Stannis, and secure fealty from all the lords, then she can become Queen. But, I don't think that's ever gonna happen. I wish she would just die in Slaver's Bay...

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

According to Daenerys thinking, she doesnt have any claim anymore, she lost it when she fled from Westeros. If you remember, there was a woman in Meereen that had to flee during the taking of the city when her house was invaded, in order to save her life, Daenerys herself said the house wasnt hers anymore, how is that different from the Iron throne? She can go and conquer it if she wants, but she should stop talking about damn rightful claims, cause hers isnt valid anymore.

Oh my God how dare you it is not the same thing at all. Don't you know that just because something doesn't belong to you anymore, that doesn't mean you don't still have a right to it?!?! Why just last month I sold my car to the guy down the street and I went back over a few days ago and took it on a drive downtown. I got back and my neighbor was all, "Apple wtf were you doing with my car!" I explained to him — calmly — that just because the car belonged to him now didn't mean that I still didn't have a right to drive it. He was not impressed.

Hahaha no you're totally right, Dany's a hypocrite. And yes I think that little event was a deliberate insertion to demonstrate how out of touch she is.