Stannis is the One True King

[Fearsome Fred]

CrypticWeirwood wrote:

I don’t see how merely doing your appointed duty can be considered a virtue.

Roughly for the same reason that NOT doing your appointed duty is considered a vice.

[mcb]

Aegon the Conqueror United the Seven Kingdoms and won the right of ruling and fealty for himself and that of his HEIRS. Robert did the same m, and everyone swore their fealty for him and his HEIRS.

Isn't it the same everyone, who already owe fealty to Aegon I's HEIRS? Looks like fealty to someone's HEIRS isn't eternal. But if it is, then Stannis is just as much of an usurper as Joffrey and Renly.

Renly the YOUNGER brother of Stannis declares himself a pretender king which silently means the other Kings have to die as there can be one king.

Nope, it'll be enough if other kings just bend their knees.

As of that moment Stannis isn't a brother so Renlys fair game. Alls fair in love and war right.

Then let Stannis admit the fratricide to the whole realm. Let him write ravens to all the castles in Westeros and proudly announce: "I cut the little brat's throat, in his tent, when he had his back turned to me and was unarmed, and I'm proud of it". No? Why?

[bbqq]

Then let Stannis admit the fratricide to the whole realm. Let him write ravens to all the castles in Westeros and proudly announce: "I cut the little brat's throat, in his tent, when he had his back turned to me and was unarmed, and I'm proud of it". No? Why?

Well, for starters - White ravens are only used especially by the Citadel to signify the change of seasons, and that would be an undoubtedly bad political move whilst he's still fighting a war (you may have forgotten the world didn't stop when Renly died).

[mcb]

Well, for starters - White ravens are only used especially by the Citadel to signify the change of seasons, and that would be an undoubtedly bad political move whilst he's still fighting a war (you may have forgotten the world didn't stop when Renly died).

What do you mean "bad political move"? Either Renly had it coming, Stannis was in the right and he not only can, but should broadcast what happens to traitors... or Stannis is a kinslayer and he's right to be ashamed of it (well, actually in deep denial).

And I didn't say anything about white ravens.

[bbqq]

What do you mean "bad political move"? Either Renly had it coming, Stannis was in the right and he not only can, but should broadcast what happens to traitors... or Stannis is a kinslayer and he's right to be ashamed of it (well, actually in deep denial). And I didn't say anything about white ravens.

Well, I meant that there's little political advantage for him broadcasting the fact he killed his brother. He seems to be in denial about it, which means he probably is ashamed of what he did, but he only did it as a move to help him win the war, so it would be dishonorable and pointless to him to lose the war because his enemies use that fact against him. Not saying any of this is a morally right course of action, but that's what I thought the rationale behind his actions were.

(oops, you wrote 'write ravens', and I read a 'white' in there. my bad)

[Frey Pork Products]

_{I would almost agree, but he lost me with the murders. They are in direct opposition to the appealing aspects of his character. As for his official claim, Robert pretty much established that if you can take the throne, you do. Might makes right, Stannis now knows his claim is only an argument, not a fact.}

[dsontag]

If only Davos could become king. A man can dream can't he.

[Hamilton]

If Stannis has the right to have power passed down from a usurper, so that give anyone else the right to rise against Srannis?

[Lord Stannis Baratheon]

_{I would almost agree, but he lost me with the murders. They are in direct opposition to the appealing aspects of his character. As for his official claim, Robert pretty much established that if you can take the throne, you do. Might makes right, Stannis now knows his claim is only an argument, not a fact.}

Stannis did what he did just to survive...If he didn't kill renly would kill him on the battlefield..

[shinytoyrobots]

There's a lot of words used like "true", when I think GRRM has been pretty clear that there are very few absolute truths.

From a purely legalistic standpoint, the true king is the accepted heir of the acknowledged monarch. That means the "true" king is Tommen. As readers we know that the legitimacy of Tommen is based on a lie, but that's unproven within Westerosi society right now. If it were proven, then Stannis would be the "true" king.

The legalistic aspect of the Targaryen claim is really a justification or persuasion for others to join their cause; i.e. "they stole the crown, so assist us in taking it back militarily".

In truth, though, the only thing that really matters is the ability to militarily take the crown, eliminate rival claimants, and gain an active or tacit consent from aristocratic society. The last person who did that was Robert; there was no serious rival claim while he was alive.

The actions the different claimants take are essentially irrelevant. Whether Stannis/Dany etc "does the right thing" has absolutely no bearing on whether they are the rightful monarch, at least based on feudal customs. That's why Robb's answer to calls to ally himself with Renly lead him to say something along the lines of "...that makes Joffrey evil. I do not know that it makes Renly king.". At that point Robb actually acknowledges that Joffrey is, to his mind, the legal monarch; he's just decided that he's going to kill him.

[masterhasanofbolu]

Is there anyone who thinks stannis never left the wall?

Maybe it was someone else "glamoured" by mel to look like stannis?

I remember asha thinking to herself that stannis got even skinnier as they march to winterfell.

It's obviously bcz they were nearly starving ok, but maybe it was also a hint saying the glamour spell was loosing its effect.

Besides, after so much time denying the help of mel, stannis was finally becoming more acceptable to use what mel can do.

This time he wouldn't go to war without a little trick at least. Why wouldn't he?

So bolton killed the wrong stannis

[Tini]

If only Davos could become king. A man can dream can't he.

I think Davos would be quite aghast at that suggestion. He is no king, and he doesn't want to be king. He is content with what he has achieved. And tries to achieve more for the king he serves. Not for himself, as he has risen way beyond his own station in life. No king could hope for a better Hand, though, even if it is missing some digits.

As for "the one true king", there is no such thing. Once there were hundreds of "true kings" in their petty kingdoms. And their kingdoms were defeated and merged into larger kingdoms, mostly forgotten. Now people only remember the 7 kingdoms Aegon the Conqueror united under the Iron Throne. Even the Targaryens were never of one mind who was the true king - starting with Aegon's daughter who was dispossessed by her own brother. The Iron Throne was always contested by people who had blood ties to its previous holder, and determined and strong enough to claim it.

Stannis has the blood ties as well as the determination. We'll see if he is strong enough, and can win enough allies, to claim and hold the Throne against the competition.

[Where Boars Glow]

The Targaryens came to Westeros and conquered the kingdoms and turned it into one big realm. Ok. But after three hundred plus years of incest to keep bloodlines pure, and horrible kings like Maegor the Cruel, Baelor the Befuddled, Aegon the Unworthy, and of course the Mad King, the people of Westeros finally had enough. And when the dragon prince kidnapped Lyanna and father and son Stark were murdered before the Iron Throne, that was the tipping point.

"

I think kidnapped may be wishful Baratheon thinking. Robert had his feelings hurt and strikes me very much as that guy waiting around the bar at the end of the night waiting for someone to look at his girl so he has an excuse to fight them.

The people rebelled and went to war against the throne, they overthrew the Mad King, and they put a new king on the Iron Throne. That hilarious party drinking carouser Robert Baratheon. He may not have been a great king, but there was peace under him and Jon Arryn, even Ned Stark said the realm had 17 years, 17 good years under them."

"The people" The people don't care much for the game of thrones. I think houses Baratheon and Stark had pretty good reasons for standing against Targ judgement. House Arryn backed them. As major houses go though I think the realm was fairly evenly split...otherwise it wouldn't have been much of a war.

To make a long point short, the people rebelled, they made Robert their new king, he dies, his "children" are really Jaime's bastards, so the throne belongs to Stannis. In my mind Dany has no claim. Dragons yes, but no claim to the throne. She may be chosen to fight the others yes, but by the rights of Westeros the throne isn't hers. "

Robert also derived his claim from his Targ blood. Thats why he was chosen for King of the rebels because of his maternal link to the Targs. Lets also look from the standpoint of the idea of Kingship. Saying your blood gives you a right to rule over others not an election or strength at arms then you are going by the premise that your very blood gives you some special ability to govern. As far as i have read three houses have shown some kind of mystical significance given by their blood. Targ/Stark/Dayne

[Tytos Blackwood]

Stannis has nothing for the realm but death. His is the line of the usurper

[LuisDantas]

I couldn't care less for the bloodlines Stannis represents. But I have decided to call him Bloodbringer, because bringing blood to the realm is his main activity.

[MtnLion]

Stannis has nothing for the realm but death. His is the line of the usurper

Truly, unless Aegon is the real thing or Jon claims, then Stannis is the heir. Daenerys has no rights to the throne until all of her male relatives are dead, which includes Baratheons.

[mcb]

Truly, unless Aegon is the real thing or Jon claims, then Stannis is the heir. Daenerys has no rights to the throne until all of her male relatives are dead, which includes Baratheons.

Which would be relevant, if she planned to lawyer the Baratheons out of the throne. But I don't recall anyone suggesting that the issue was going to be settled by a debate. When Kevan said "the girl is of the blood of Aegon the Conqueror, and I do not think she will be content to remain in Meereen forever", nobody pointed out "dude, but she's a girl".

[MtnLion]

Which would be relevant, if she planned to lawyer the Baratheons out of the throne. But I don't recall anyone suggesting that the issue was going to be settled by a debate. When Kevan said "the girl is of the blood of Aegon the Conqueror, and I do not think she will be content to remain in Meereen forever", nobody pointed out "dude, but she's a girl".

So, you're are suggesting that Daenerys can really subdue Westeros and keep control of it with the little resources that she has? I think not, she needs to at least appear legitimate or she will just hasten the day she must give up the throne. Everyone in Westeros will know that females are excluded from Targaryen inheritance laws, and if Daenerys bypasses that, they will seek their own justice. (Even unborn children ... as Renly says.)

[Tytos Blackwood]

Since when have targaryens ever gone by the status quo. They set the standard for succession I.e. the dance of dragons.

[mcb]

So, you're are suggesting that Daenerys can really subdue Westeros and keep control of it with the little resources that she has? I think not, she needs to at least appear legitimate or she will just hasten the day she must give up the throne. Everyone in Westeros will know that females are excluded from Targaryen inheritance laws,

Everyone will know? Doran Martell apparently hasn't heard of that.

So far, every rule of inheritance had been openly shat upon at least once in the few recent years. Robert, Joffrey, Renly, every single one of them managed to gather an army to support his claim to the throne, despite being king's humble cousin, or a bastard (yeah, people know; certainly House Tyrell, his most powerful vassal), or a youngest brother. But "no girls!" is supposed to be the one saint and ironclad rule that everyone will respect? How come this one rule is not going to be bent or broken, unlike all other rules that come to mind?

Those for whom Targaryen laws of inheritance (as for the end of third century After Landing, since they changed at least once) were sacred and carved in stone, have already fled Westeros to offer their swords to King Viserys. The name of those people is Ser Willem Darry. Everyone else apparently was more flexible.

By the way, Ser Barristan Selmy might not be a great thinker, but I'll bet everything that he has already noticed that Daenerys was a woman (there is evidence in the text, I'm certain of it). Somehow he pondered on the issue, and decided that Daenerys, not, for example, Stannis, was his rightful monarch. How do you explain that, since Daenerys "obviously" doesn't inherit the throne?