Stanaerys Taratheon: Cracking the Pot

[E-Ro]

Of course, if a female with enough support and power came along I doubt it would matter much and she would be queen regnant. But if we follow the laws to the letter then yes stannis is the targ heir as well.

[E-Ro]

Oh here is the wiki link to the relevant pg: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Dance_of_the_Dragons

[TheCrannogDweller]

Of course, if a female with enough support and power came along I doubt it would matter much and she would be queen regnant. But if we follow the laws to the letter then yes stannis is the targ heir as well.

Which actually makes the whole argument moot. If you take a look in the history of Westeros, it's "might makes right" all the way...

[E-Ro]

Which actually makes the whole argument moot. If you take a look in the history of Westeros, it's "might makes right" all the way...

Yes, but its still interesting to think about and discuss. What robert did by killing all the male targs was make himself and his brothers the rightful heirs to the it. Of course he never did get to viserys but that problem fixed itself.

[Pliskin]

Of course, if a female with enough support and power came along I doubt it would matter much and she would be queen regnant. But if we follow the laws to the letter then yes stannis is the targ heir as well.

That doesn't make sense...

An uncle may inherit before a girl, but not an aunt...

Same for granduncles... etc.

[TheCrannogDweller]

Yes, but its still interesting to think about and discuss. What robert did by killing all the male targs was make himself and his brothers the rightful heirs to the it. Of course he never did get to viserys but that problem fixed itself.

I don't agree. Up until the moment Viserys died, he was the rightful king and Robert was a usurper. From that point on, Robert would be the rightful heir, if Viserys had pardoned him for rebelling and killing Rhaegar.

[E-Ro]

That doesn't make sense...

An uncle may inherit before a girl, but not an aunt...

Same for granduncles... etc.

What doesnt make sense about it? It is kind of confusing, but according to GRRM every possible male comes before females in targ succesion(not andal or first men or rhoynar succession) I wonder if it includes male basterds, or not.

[E-Ro]

I don't agree. Up until the moment Viserys died, he was the rightful king and Robert was a usurper. From that point on, Robert would be the rightful heir, if Viserys had pardoned him for rebelling and killing Rhaegar.

Viserys claim was a good one true. But robert became king when the lords of westeros swore him fealty. So yes robert was a usurpur but still the rightful king. Usurpur is just an insult made by losers and has no real meaning. And robert did not require pardon from viserys if you notice he had the support of the whole realm after the rebellion.

[TheCrannogDweller]

Viserys claim was a good one true. But robert became king when the lords of westeros swore him fealty. So yes robert was a usurpur but still the rightful king. Usurpur is just an insult made by losers and has no real meaning. And robert did not require pardon from viserys if you notice he had the support of the whole realm after the rebellion.

In order to be Viserys' heir, he did need a pardon. I don't think anyone else but the king can acquit you of murdering the Crown Prince.

ETA: We are, after all, arguing the legal side of it all, right?

[E-Ro]

In order to be Viserys' heir, he did need a pardon. I don't think anyone else but the king can acquit you of murdering the Crown Prince.

ETA: We are, after all, agruing the legal side of it all, right?

You would be correct if house targ had won the war, fortunately they lost. Therefore robert needs no pardon from anyone as the lords had legally accepted him as king.

[TheCrannogDweller]

You would be correct if house targ had won the war, fortunately they lost. Therefore robert needs no pardon from anyone as the lords had legally accepted him as king.

This argument is based on the premise that Robert, by killing Rhaegar and after the deaths of Aerys and Aegon, became the heir to the Targaryen dynasty. Let me remind you your original post on the matter:

What robert did by killing all the male targs was make himself and his brothers the rightful heirs to the it. Of course he never did get to viserys but that problem fixed itself.

So the lords' legal acceptance of him is irrelevant to this discussion.

[E-Ro]

This argument is based on the premise that Robert, by killing Rhaegar and after the deaths of Aerys and Aegon, became the heir to the Targaryen dynasty. Let me remind you your original post on the matter:

So the lords' legal acceptance of him is irrelevant to this discussion.

No my earlier post was in regards to robert having to worry about a targ resurgence, as viserys is the last hope the targs have of retaking the throne. And the lords legal acceptence could not be more relevant to this disscussion. Without dragons or some superweapon the kings power comes from the lords, without the lords you have no power. When robert gathered lords to his cause and fought the targ loyalists and won the targ loyalists swore him fealty. Thus making him the king, and house baratheon the ruling house of westeros. So targ inheritance no longer matters as the targs are no longer ruling. Of course if robert would have killed viserys as well then he would be the targ heir as well. But as I said the targs became irrelevant.

[TheCrannogDweller]

No my earlier post was in regards to robert having to worry about a targ resurgence, as viserys is the last hope the targs have of retaking the throne. And the lords legal acceptence could not be more relevant to this disscussion. Without dragons or some superweapon the kings power comes from the lords, without the lords you have no power. When robert gathered lords to his cause and fought the targ loyalists and won the targ loyalists swore him fealty. Thus making him the king, and house baratheon the ruling house of westeros. So targ inheritance no longer matters as the targs are no longer ruling. Of course if robert would have killed viserys as well then he would be the targ heir as well. But as I said the targs became irrelevant.

So irrelevant, that Robert had to use his Targaryen ancestry to lay claim to the throne.

And am I to understand that a rational argument is out of the question here?

[E-Ro]

So irrelevant, that Robert had to use his Targaryen ancestry to lay claim to the throne.

And am I to understand that a rational argument is out of the question here?

But roberts targ heritage just makes it easier for the lords to swallow. Robert claimed the throne with his hammer as renly said.

If in the next book mace tyrell decides to declare himself king with his 100k men no one could stop him, and he would be king. He would have to kill anyone who fought him but with 100 thousand men he is pretty much unstoppable, right of conquest. Its all about dejure and defacto rule. Dejure cannot exist without defacto. And defacto has to come first, once everyone accepts you as king you have dejure rule.

[E-Ro]

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.”

And there is no need to get upset, if you cant understand something that is fine, there is no need to throw personal insults around.

[TheCrannogDweller]

But roberts targ heritage just makes it easier for the lords to swallow. Robert claimed the throne with his hammer as renly said.

If in the next book mace tyrell decides to declare himself king with his 100k men no one could stop him, and he would be king. He would have to kill anyone who fought him but with 100 thousand men he is pretty much unstoppable, right of conquest. Its all about dejure and defacto rule. Dejure cannot exist without defacto. And defacto has to come first, once everyone accepts you as king you have dejure rule.

Yes, we covered "might makes right" in the beginning and you said that it would be interesting to discuss the other side. You did that with the claim that Robert "by killing all the male targs" , made "himself and his brothers the rightful heirs to the it."

[E-Ro]

Yes, we covered "might makes right" in the beginning and you said that it would be interesting to discuss the other side. You did that with the claim that Robert "by killing all the male targs" , made "himself and his brothers the rightful heirs to the it."

If all the male targs died house baratheon would be the rightful targ heirs, but with viserys alive HE is the rightful targ heir, not robert. But when robert took the throne it started following baratheon succesion, in witch no targ has any right to it. Unless they gather enough support to take it back. With all male targs dead and robert having no kids stannis would get the throne, followed by dany.

[TheCrannogDweller]

If all the male targs died house baratheon would be the rightful targ heirs, but with viserys alive HE is the rightful targ heir, not robert. But when robert took the throne it started following baratheon succesion, in witch no targ has any right to it. Unless they gather enough support to take it back. With all male targs dead and robert having no kids stannis would get the throne, followed by dany.

Shireen is Stannis' heir, not Dany. Then there is Edric Storm, who can be legitimized if need be.

[E-Ro]

Shireen is Stannis' heir, not Dany. Then there is Edric Storm, who can be legitimized if need be.

But its tricky, if you follow baratheon succesion, then yes it would be shireen followed by edric. But if you follow targ succesion then it would be dany as all possible males are dead and all you are left with is females. Unless even basterds come before girls but grrm does not say. Its very confusing, what I was trying to say before is that even with dany alive stannis is the targ heir, if the realm still followed targ succesion. I hope this makes sense.

[E-Ro]

I just had a thought, if stannis and dany marry none of this matters at all because the two bloodlines would be joined again. That is what this thread is about, so forget my previous posts. Sorry.