[BOOK SPOILERS] Was Stannis sent to kill Daenerys and Viserys?

[total1402]

In the blu-ray extras for season 2 Stannis, in his own words, says that he was sent to "deal with the Targaryen children" by Robert; very much in a tone that suggests killing them. Incidently in season 1 they did something similar with Robert where he recalls that at the time he believed the Targ children needed to be put to death for being vile dragonspawn and its pretty clear he would have done it himself. However, this is the TV show, and I know some people would argue the show is a lot less nuanced; especially over Stannis.

In the books, however, I remember it being very ambiguous on this point. So is there any evidence in the text to support that Stannis was sent to kill them and that Robert would have killed the targ children?

I felt, IMO, this ambiguity exhonorated the Baratheons from any serious wrong doing. Essentially, Tywin did his dirty work for him and it ended with the only thing Robert did that was in the wrong fighting against the mad king and the man who stole his beloved. In other words, he got the throne and left Dany little just reason to hate him because the Lannister (randomly, hostages could have satisfied Tywins aims) butcher the Targ children for Robert. This also feels like a less gray situation because Robert was rebelling against a Mad King everyone wanted rid of; but the dirty consequences of that rebellion were resolved for him by Tywin. Thus leaving Dany without a good reason to dislike him and making her out as the villain for wanting to get rid of the Baratheons. It would have been more gray if Robert had done the deed himself but the rebellion had still been legit to a point in going against the Mad King.

Heres links to the TV show vids BTW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxisA7dN-H0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVJQW1Ugvys start at 2:50

[Mladen]

Wow, tough question.

My opinion is that Robert never thought of Viserys, Daenerys and Rhaegar`s children until he saw Rhaenys` and Aegon`s dead bodies. He was going after Aerys and Rhaegar, but when Tywin offered him children on platter, he was more than relieved that it was done without his interference. I doubt Stannis was sent to kill the children. Seize them yes, perhaps make them hostages or captives, but to kill them. No. I doubt something like that would ever cross Robert`s mind. Ned would have known for it, and he would be against it, and Tywin recalled how surprised he was to see Targaryen babes dead. Also, Tywin recalled how Robert had been glad it was done, and he still could have kept the mask of ideal warrior. So, IMO, Robert was never for killing children, until he was presented with dead Princes.

[Winterz]

Robert seemed more than okay with the butchering of Rhaegar's children. And having the Targ children as hostages seems nonsense so I'm pretty sure he sent Stannis there to kill them and any other claim to the throne. And ofc Stannis 'Robot' Baratheon would follow his King's orders without blinking.

[Colonel Green]

Robert seemed more than okay with the butchering of Rhaegar's children.

When they were already dead. Tywin noted that Robert thought of himself as a hero and "heroes don't kill children", which I think is a pretty decent assessment.

He never bothered to try to have Dany and Viserys killed when they were overseas until the entire Khal Drogo thing got started and they were much older, despite the fact that he always knew where they were.

[Lion of Judah]

If I remember correctly Stannis felt as though Viserys escaping him at Dragonstone was the reason Robert gave Renly Storm's End as a slight. He never mentions the intention when he pursued them at Dragonstone and he is never specific on Robert's commands either. I doubt Stannis wanted to kill them, but Robert is another question.

[Winterz]

When they were already dead. Tywin noted that Robert thought of himself as a hero and "heroes don't kill children", which I think is a pretty decent assessment.

He never bothered to try to have Dany and Viserys killed when they were overseas until the entire Khal Drogo thing got started and they were much older, despite the fact that he always knew where they were.

Do I need to remind you of "They are not children. They're dragonspawn" which is basically allegory for "vile creatures that deserved to die"?

There was no reason to bother with Viserys in Essos. In Westeros, the Targaryen heirs presented a lot of danger to his claim but in Essos, Viserys was but a joke, a beggar and was always moving around alledgely under the claim "to escape Robert's assassins". Why should Robert bother?

[Colonel Green]

Do I need to remind you of "They are not children. They're dragonspawn" which is basically allegory for "vile creatures that deserved to die"?

Which, as I noted, was something he said after they were already dead, and thus he didn't actually have to order them killed, he just had to not punish the people who killed them. There's a big difference there.

There was no reason to bother with Viserys in Essos. In Westeros, the Targaryen heirs presented a lot of danger to his claim but in Essos, Viserys was but a joke, a beggar and was always moving around alledgely under the claim "to escape Robert's assassins". Why should Robert bother?

So why bother sending Stannis to stop them from escaping at all?

The point is that after they escaped, Robert took no further action, despite the fact that it would have been easy to do so.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I felt, IMO, this ambiguity exhonorated the Baratheons from any serious wrong doing. Essentially, Tywin did his dirty work for him and it ended with the only thing Robert did that was in the wrong fighting against the mad king and the man who stole his beloved. In other words, he got the throne and left Dany little just reason to hate him because the Lannister (randomly, hostages could have satisfied Tywins aims) butcher the Targ children for Robert. This also feels like a less gray situation because Robert was rebelling against a Mad King everyone wanted rid of; but the dirty consequences of that rebellion were resolved for him by Tywin. Thus leaving Dany without a good reason to dislike him and making her out as the villain for wanting to get rid of the Baratheons. It would have been more gray if Robert had done the deed himself but the rebellion had still been legit to a point in going against the Mad King.

Your attempt to (once again) criticize Martin's writing for bias against Dany falls absurdly flat. You say Robert was made insufficiently grey due to ambiguity over whether he ordered Stannis to kill Dany and Viserys, when we know unambiguously that Robert does order Dany murdered in GoT when he learns she is pregnant.

[total1402]

Your attempt to (once again) criticize Martin's writing for bias against Dany falls absurdly flat. You say Robert was made insufficiently grey due to ambiguity over whether he ordered Stannis to kill Dany and Viserys, when we know unambiguously that Robert does order Dany murdered in GoT when he learns she is pregnant.

After the rebellion where the biggest atrocity took place. Which he ultimately isn't able to carry out and which isn't connected to Stannis who is the only living baratheon currently. Never mind that he changes his mind on his deathbed and accepts Neds opinion; which creates this big sympathetic moment for him n his family. So ultimately the baratheons are still exonerated of any real blame.

[Ser Duncan of Flea Bottom]

Stannis was not meant to kill them at that moment

he was merely there, in Dragonstone, because of the truth they learnt about Robert bastard's and Cersei and Jaime's incestuous relationship, he was gathering his bannermen

I don't believe he was meant to kill them

Robert authorized his coucilors to send killers to kill them, so I can't see a reason to send Stannis

Stannis had Dragonstone because he was heir to Robert before Joffrey was born, as probably Joffrey was too young to have a Castle, he stayed in KL all the time, so that's why it was still Stannis' castle at that moment

about Storm's End, it is not a castle for the crown's heir, so at that time, Stannis received Dragonstone, and Renly kept Storm's End

I don't know why Stannis was so offended, Robert made Stannis his heir

[Winterz]

Which, as I noted, was something he said after they were already dead, and thus he didn't actually have to order them killed, he just had to not punish the people who killed them. There's a big difference there.

So why bother sending Stannis to stop them from escaping at all?

The point is that after they escaped, Robert took no further action, despite the fact that it would have been easy to do so.

Read my post again, you've missed half of it.

As for saying that Robert would not harm them is just speculation on your part. As far as we know he welcomed the children's butchering by doing nothing to the responsible ones and still making a sly comment.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

After the rebellion. Which he ultimately isn't able to carry out and which isn't connected to Stannis who is the only living baratheon currently.

Now you're moving the goalposts. Is Martin trying to exonerate 'the Baratheons' in order to make Dany out to be a villain or is he trying to exonerate Stannis? And what does Robert's attempt to kill Dany occurring after the Rebellion or his lack of success in the attempt have to do with anything? That Robert's attempt on her life should occur in reader's view in the novel rather than in the backstory can only make him more villainous in our eyes, certainly not less; and he would, of course, have been unsuccessful if he had ordered Stannis to do it since Dany escaped Dragonstone.

[Ser Duncan of Flea Bottom]

Robert wanted them dead

He let his ''friends'' in the council to arrange killers

but he just wanted Daenerys dead because of her pregnancy, Jorah informed a spy from Varys

and Varys had to say or Robert would discovered it lated and would probably dismiss Varys, beheading him as a traitor

[devilrob6]

Robert seemed more than okay with the butchering of Rhaegar's children. And having the Targ children as hostages seems nonsense so I'm pretty sure he sent Stannis there to kill them and any other claim to the throne. And ofc Stannis 'Robot' Baratheon would follow his King's orders without blinking.

Stannis is anything but a robot, it was even a hard decision for him to choose for Robert in the rebellion. He was sent there to take Dragonstone. Given the importance that Stannis gives to justice, he would not have punished the Targ children for the crimes of their family. Only for their own crimes, which were none. He'd probably have held them as hostages.

[Colonel Green]

Read my post again, you've missed half of it.

Do I need to remind you of "They are not children. They're dragonspawn" which is basically allegory for "vile creatures that deserved to die"?

There was no reason to bother with Viserys in Essos. In Westeros, the Targaryen heirs presented a lot of danger to his claim but in Essos, Viserys was but a joke, a beggar and was always moving around alledgely under the claim "to escape Robert's assassins". Why should Robert bother?

What did I miss, exactly?

As for saying that Robert would not harm them is just speculation on your part. As far as we know he welcomed the children's butchering by doing nothing to the responsible ones and still making a sly comment.

Er, yes, it's speculation, but it's based on the events. He was fine with not punishing the people who did kill them. As Tywin notes though, there's a big difference between tolerating other people's actions and ordering it yourself. And if he was so set on Dany and Viserys being killed, there was no reason not to order their deaths overseas, which he didn't, even though he knew where they were.

[total1402]

Not a villain but it does mean she can't exactly call the Baratheons Usurpers Dogs, get all vengeful and not be cast in a hugely negative light. Largely because the Baratheons haven't actually done anything aside from an attempted murder of Dany which Robert later decided against in a big show of mercy n regret. Trying to kill Dany is the only thing bad they've done. Aside from that they rebelled against a Mad King and a "rapist" abducter. The Lannisters did all the dirty work for the baratheons and this means its hard to pin any blame or crime against them.

Yes, I think theres enough gray just by giving them a legit reason to rebel but carrying that to its final conclusion involved that. This still leaves Dany wanting to get rid of rebels who had just reasons for what they were doing. Instead the Lannisters swoop in and do all of Roberts dirty work for him.

[Winterz]

What did I miss, exactly?

There was no reason to bother with Viserys in Essos. In Westeros, the Targaryen heirs presented a lot of danger to his claim but in Essos, Viserys was but a joke, a beggar and was always moving around alledgely under the claim "to escape Robert's assassins". Why should Robert bother?

Er, yes, it's speculation, but it's based on the events. He was fine with not punishing the people who did kill them. As Tywin notes though, there's a big difference between tolerating other people's actions and ordering it yourself. And if he was so set on Dany and Viserys being killed, there was no reason not to order their deaths overseas, which he didn't, even though he knew where they were.

Here's facts. Robert accepted the brutality of the children's deaths, was okay with their killers, and still made sly comments.

Another fact. Robert had no problem in assigning an assassin to end Dany (14 years old) and her baby when she started presenting danger so why exactly is it so hard for you to believe that he'd do the same when they presented a danger to his claim while still on Dragonstone/Westeros.

His best friend himself started questioning this.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

Stannis had Dragonstone because he was heir to Robert before Joffrey was born, as probably Joffrey was too young to have a Castle, he stayed in KL all the time, so that's why it was still Stannis' castle at that moment

about Storm's End, it is not a castle for the crown's heir, so at that time, Stannis received Dragonstone, and Renly kept Storm's End

I don't know why Stannis was so offended, Robert made Stannis his heir

Storm's End is a much more prestigious seat than Dragonstone. The crown's heir business was a Targaryen tradition because Dragonstone had been the original Targaryen stronghold. To the Baratheon dynasty, it was just a rock in the sea.

[Colonel Green]

Here's facts. Robert accepted the brutality of the children's deaths, was okay with their killers, and still made sly comments.

Yes, and there's a difference between ordering an atrocity and tolerating it as done by others.

Another fact. Robert had no problem in assigning an assassin to end Dany (14 years old) and her baby when she started presenting danger so why exactly is it so hard for you to believe that he'd do the same when they presented a danger to his claim while still on Dragonstone/Westeros.

Since he sent Stannis to stop them from escaping, them fleeing to Essos was predicted. If he was dead-set on killing them, his desire should have followed them there. Instead, he left them alone, until the prospect of a serious military challenge emerged. Your assertion that their mere presence on Dragonstone constituted such a serious threat that he had to kill them, which was immediately removed when they left Dragonstone to the point that he no longer saw the need, doesn't really hold up.

[Winterz]

Storm's End is a much more prestigious seat than Dragonstone. The crown's heir business was a Targaryen tradition because Dragonstone had been the original Targaryen stronghold. To the Baratheon dynasty, it was just a rock in the sea.

^ Yeah someone already mentioned that with Storm's End comes the whole Stormlands base power. With Dragonstone you have ... a few cute Dragon statues and half a dozen vassales.

And besides, Stannis ate rats instead of yielding Storm's End to the royalists. That was quite the freakin' sacrifice and evidence to its importance.