Dany and Stannis: a Comparative Look

[PatrickStormborn]

She told Viserys to stop, she never asked Drogo for mercy.

Mind you, I don't blame her that she chose for her husband and not for her brother.

But the fact is like it is: she chose to stand by and watch her brother be killed by her husband.

As I said earlier, there was nothing Dany could do about it -- Viserys had broken the sacred law of Vaes Dothrak and would be killed. Even if she had persuaded Drogo to not kill him, one of the other khals would have done so, and it would have put Dany and Rhaego in danger.

[FanTasy]

Exactly, yet her fans bring this up as an example of tactical brilliance on her part while calling Stannis a murderer. I guess killing thousands before the appointed time is genius, but kill one person and you're cursed. Stannis killing Renly — one person — also stopped thousands of men from dying in a fight the next morning. Dany's actions didn't necessarily mitigate losses, it was just slaughter earlier rather than later.

Yep. I guess a moral issue could be raised here though.

What is worse, killing thousands of people you don't know and are not related to you, or killing one person that is your brother, in doing so saving the lives of thousands of people you don;t know and who are not related to you.

This is exactly why I like this novels: they raise these questions and make you think :drunk:

[ARYa_Nym]

Well, parricide (kinslaying) has the connotation of murder. Typically, acts of war and capital punishment are not considered "murder."

Not in Westeros though. Even Bloodraven got called a kinslayer and there was less reason for him to get called that.

Lord Bloodraven, Hand of the King to King Aerys I, has ordered them to return to their lands, but few do. Many blame the king and his hand for the drought, for Bloodraven is a kinslayer and the kinslayer is accursed.

[Garlan Marius]

Not in Westeros though. Even Bloodraven got called a kinslayer and there was less reason for him to get called that.

Bloodraven is a false accusation.

If not, then Robert Baratheon is a kinslayer for killing Rhaegar.

[ARYa_Nym]

Bloodraven is a false accusation.

But based on the info they have he was deemed a kinslayer despite supposedly killing his kin in wartime.

His Raven's Teeth ultimately gained the Weeping Ridge, and rained arrows down on Daemon Blackfyre from 300 yards away.^[10] Daemon and his twin sons were killed. For this, people would name him a kinslayer.^[8][11]

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

She didn't ask but she didn't have the power to stop him from dying. Viserys did it in front of everyone. Drogo couldn't let that slide. Even if he did which is unlikely because that would make him look weak as a khal and like he didn't value their laws or the Vaes Dothrak as Patrick said some other khal would have done it.

"He (Axell Florent) was an uncle to Queen Selyse and have been among the first to follow her in accepting Melisandre's red god. If he is not a kinslayer, he is the next best thing. Axell Florent's brother had been burned by Melisandre, Maester Aemon had informed him, yet Ser Axell had done little and less to stop it. What sort of man can stand idly by and watch his own brother being burned alive?"

[ARYa_Nym]

"He (Axell Florent) was an uncle to Queen Selyse and have been among the first to follow her in accepting Melisandre's red god. If he is not a kinslayer, he is the next best thing. Axell Florent's brother had been burned by Melisandre, Maester Aemon had informed him, yet Ser Axell had done little and less to stop it. What sort of man can stand idly by and watch his own brother being burned alive?"

The next best thing is not the same thing as a kinslayer.

But anyways, I already said that Dany tried to stop Viserys from doing it. She had no power to stop Drogo from killing him.

[Garlan Marius]

"Would name him" does not connote "found him guilty of."

Robert Baratheon should be a kinslayer, as stated, then.

[LuisDantas]

Bloodraven is a false accusation.

Partial, yes. False, not. Unless you have reason to doubt the story told in "The Sworn Sword" about how his arrows killed his half-brother and nephews.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

The next best thing is not the same thing as a kinslayer.

Do you think it's a coincidence that Jon has that thought process about someone who was in, strictly speaking, quite a similar position to Dany?

[Garlan Marius]

Partial, yes. False, not. Unless you have reason to doubt the story told in "The Sworn Sword" about how his arrows killed his half-brother and nephews.

Why is Robert not called a kinslayer, then? Why is Robb Stark called a kinslayer?

[ARYa_Nym]

Do you think it's a coincidence that Jon has that thought process about someone who was in, strictly speaking, quite a similar position to Dany?

Hmm, no but it's funny that he likes Stannis who was prepared to kill his brother and allows his witch to burn people alive. He dislikes Mel but who allows Melisandre to do what she does?

[LuisDantas]

Yep. I guess a moral issue could be raised here though.

What is worse, killing thousands of people you don't know and are not related to you, or killing one person that is your brother, in doing so saving the lives of thousands of people you don't know and who are not related to you.

This is exactly why I like this novels: they raise these questions and make you think :drunk:

It doesn't really apply as a defense for Stannis killing Renly, however. Not when it was Stannis who made a point of confronting Renly instead of the other way around. And certainly not when Stannis knew full well that by stealing Renly's bannermen he would be prolonging the conflict, since a sizeable portion (perhaps the majority? It is not very clear) would still refuse to side with him and support the Lannisters instead.

Had Stannis opted to ally with Renly, the Lannisters would hardly ever have a chance at Blackwater. So by killing Renly Stannis caused hundreds if not thousands of otherwise avoidable deaths, and the best that can be said in his defense on the matter is that perhaps he couldn't have foreseen that.

[Garlan Marius]

I can answer my own question, for there are two options:

1- GRRM has made a mistake with his definition of kinslaying.

2- Kinslaying is not an objective crime.

I prefer to go with the second one. People are free to accuse whomever they wish of kinslaying as long as there is some relation, but war seems to be a justifiable killing in one of the most recent kinslayings: Robert Baratheon/ Rhaegar Targaryen.

[Raerin]

I just don't get why people call Renly a traitor (of what?) while at the same time failing to see how little honor remains in Stannis.

Traitor of the family, of course. See my post #126.

Considering Stannis, the assassination definitely was not an honourable act, but keeping blindly to the code of honour would be even worse. That was the mistake Eddard Stark has made: he assumed that his enemies would behave honourably as he did, and that was what made him such an easy target. He missed the lesson that sometimes the enemies are not worthy of being treated with honour, because they know no rules themselves.

Renly violated the bonds of blood and the loyalty to the house. He clearly showed his indifference toward those values. Thus he did not deserve to be treated honourably.

[LuisDantas]

Why is Robert not called a kinslayer, then? Why is Robb Stark called a kinslayer?

Robert did not really have a whole lot of choice, once Aerys basically ordered him to come to King's Landing to be immolated. Besides, Rhaegar was, what? A cousin once removed? As family goes, that is fairly removed.

Robb, as I understand it, is not called a kinslayer, except by a Rickard Karstark that is desperate to find some way of hurting him. He did not expect it to fly, and it does not. Unless I missed something, which is quite possible.

[ARYa_Nym]

Robert did not really have a whole lot of choice, once Aerys basically ordered him to come to King's Landing to be immolated. Besides, Rhaegar was, what? A cousin once removed? As family goes, that is fairly removed.

Robb, as I understand it, is not called a kinslayer, except by a Rickard Karstark that is desperate to find some way of hurting him. He did not expect it to fly, and it does not. Unless I missed something, which is quite possible.

Yes. He was only called that by Rickard and Cregan called Jon that but then Jon said that since he's a Snow so it doesn't matter. I think the masses only start calling someone a kinslayer for close/immediate family.

[LuisDantas]

Traitor of the family, of course. See my post #126.

That makes no sense. Duty to the family falls way short as a justification for failing to present his own claim for the Throne.

Considering Stannis, the assassination definitely was not an honourable act, but keeping blindly to the code of honour would be even worse.

If I had any idea of what you mean by that, maybe I could at least disagree.

When did Stannis have such an unlikely choice?

That was the mistake Eddard Stark has made: he assumed that his enemies would behave honourably as he did, and that was what made him such an easy target. He missed the lesson that sometimes the enemies are not worthy of being treated with honour, because they know no rules themselves.

Renly violated the bonds of blood and the loyalty to the house.

No, he never did.

He clearly showed his indifference toward those values. Thus he did not deserve to be treated honourably.

Preposterous.

[Winter's Knight]

Bloodraven is a false accusation.

If not, then Robert Baratheon is a kinslayer for killing Rhaegar.

Bloodraven killed his half-brother and nephews-he had a direct blood-tie.

Robert and Rhaegar were cousins several times removed.

Kinslaying seems to require an immediate blood tie-hence why Cersei is not called kinslayer for having killed Robert. despite being cousins.

[LuisDantas]

2- Kinslaying is not an objective crime.

It isn't. There is not objective boundary to tell who is and who should not be considered "kin".

The actual criteria are very arbitrary. I fully expect Tyrion, for instance, to eventually conclude that he is not a kinslayer. I sure don't see him as such.