Why Targaryen?

[Lord Nightstalker]

The timeline as I understand is puts the weddings, and therefore decision, after all the battles except the Trident.

As far as I remember robert was declared king just before the Trident.

[LordStoneheart]

I don't understand why people say Targaryens have

no

right to the throne. Robert had no right to the throne. He took it, and then people accepted it. There could be a specific reference to it, but I don't remember anything concrete about Targaryen rule being completely nulified after RR. Once a Targ takes the throne by force again and builds a strong rule, they'll have every right to it. But as of now, not

no

right whatsoever.

[Ludd]

I think the whole Targaryen thing is really just a wars of the roses Plantagenet thing. The Targs (right down to their personality and a LOT of their story) is just English History circa 1100-1400

So for those of us with vaguely British heritage this still seems about right because Plantagenet heirs supposedly still rule the UK (although a DNA analysis would be VERY interesting

[Ludd]

There are two elements to the power game and conquest. One is actual strenght ie the army, the other is legitimacy which is a subtle term bu basically implies that the people grant you the RIGHT to hold power because of the legitimacy of the claim.

The people grant "legitimacy" for many reasons, but probably stability is the key one. The reason that the feudal system opted for s a stict Father eldest son rule of inheritance was simply to stop endless civil wars. By codifying the succession many (not all) the civil strife is avoided.

However when there is a BAD ruler eg Aerys gone mad or when there is an economic crisis or an invader, the existing legitimacy starts to fall apart and people lookk for a new order and a new source of legitmacy which can resotre order and prosperity.

Hence the Targ arrived with POWER in their dragons, a good source of legitimacy and I assume stopped the many petty wars between the 7 Kingdoms. Harren the Black who seemed to rule large swathes of the Riverlands and the iron Islands seemed a pretty icky sort of guy so he was not going to get much support.

By and large it seems the Targs ruled wisley and consolidated their hold, by marriages etc and it proved successful.

However with signs of insanity showing in Aerys and others, the Targ rule starts to weaken and people search for a new legitimacy.

Now clearly this was already building (the Stark, Vale, Riverlands. Stormlands marriages) were clearly a threat to the Targs which makes me think that the whole Lyanna kidnap thing had many other motives.

So why did the powers (in this case Jon Arryn anbd Tywin Lannister)m settle on Robert as the king not some other person.

Well I guess

1. he had Targ blood so claim one for legitimacy

2. He was a bvery good warrior - claim 2 for legitimacy

3. Jon Arryn and Tywin both probably presumed (correctly) that he was easily manged and manipulated

4. Lannister gets to marry his daughter to her so he gains

5. Ned is Robert's friend so the North is not a threat. Had Brandon LIVED perhaps Robert would NOT have been chosen. Ned was not pushy, although had he been a different personality I suspect he may have had the IT

6. Other claimants eg Viserys were children and I suspect there was evidence already of Viserys being unstable (he was eight)

So it is all about legitimacy which is essentially a pact made between the rulers and the ruled - based on strength and ability to provide stable government.

Nothing much has changed in our modern era. We use elections to give "legitimacy" but if the government does not deliver it goes pear shaped eg Egypt.

[TheCrannogDweller]

1. he had Targ blood so claim one for legitimacy

Correct. And this is the main factor.

2. He was a bvery good warrior - claim 2 for legitimacy

Correct.

3. Jon Arryn and Tywin both probably presumed (correctly) that he was easily manged and manipulated

Probably correct, although Tywin Lannister had nothing to do with that decision.

4. Lannister gets to marry his daughter to her so he gains

Wrong. When Tywin sacked KL, Lyanna was still alive - or at least nobody had any reasons to believe otherwise. So Cersei marrying Robert was a bonus for Tywin, not a reason to join the Rebels.

5. Ned is Robert's friend so the North is not a threat. Had Brandon LIVED perhaps Robert would NOT have been chosen. Ned was not pushy, although had he been a different personality I suspect he may have had the IT

Probably wrong. The North doesn't really care who sits on the IT, as long as he/she doesn't bother them. They sat still through the entire reign of the Targs and that included a few horrible kings.

6. Other claimants eg Viserys were children and I suspect there was evidence already of Viserys being unstable (he was eight)

Most likely wrong. Viserys got bitter while growing up and having to take care of his sister. He might very well have been a nice kid at this point.

[Lord Nightstalker]

A simple question-

If Targ blood is so important and Robert was chosen mainly because of it, why did the rebels not crown viserys?

[TheCrannogDweller]

A simple question-

If Targ blood is so important and Robert was chosen mainly because of it, why did the rebels not crown viserys?

Because Viserys was not one of Rebels.

Because Viserys was in the hands of the Loyalists.

Because Viserys would've beheaded them all for treason.

Because Viserys was not the next in line.

We're discussing why Robert was chosen from among the Rebel lords (Hoster, Jon, Ned, Robert) and you're just throwing a random name in the mix?

[Lord Nightstalker]

Because Viserys was not one of Rebels.

Because Viserys was in the hands of the Loyalists.

Because Viserys would've beheaded them all for treason.

Because Viserys was not the next in line.

We're discussing why Robert was chosen from among the Rebel lords (Hoster, Jon, Ned, Robert) and you're just throwing a random name in the mix?

They chose a non-Targaryen and did not follow the targ line of succession. So obviously the Westerosi don't agree that only Targs have a right to the Iron throne. Dynasties have been dethroned both in westeros and the real world. no dynasty has any right to rule in perpetuity.

[TheCrannogDweller]

They chose a non-Targaryen and did not follow the targ line of succession. So obviously the Westerosi don't agree that only Targs have a right to the Iron throne. Dynasties have been dethroned both in westeros and the real world. no dynasty has any right to rule in perpetuity.

"The Westerosi" don't agree about anything and that particular decision was probably made by no more than 5 people - who apparently did think that the Targs have the right to the IT, since they did choose Robert.

Also, they actually sorta did follow the Targ succession rules, in a very perverse way - Robert was pretty much next in line after Aerys' brood. And the fact that he used his Grandma to (officially) claim the throne makes him a usurper of Viserys' crown (or Aegon's, if he is really alive).