Who is the one true king (or queen) of Westeros? SPOILERS!!!

username123

I'm confused about this.

If we accept that you can take the throne through defeat in battle (ie, Robert Baratheon was a legitimate king), then I think the current true king is Tommen. I say this because if defeat in battle is legitimate, then Joffrey beat Stannis in battle, thus legitimising his own claim, and his next in line is Tommen.

Alternatively if we don't accept that defeat in battle is legitimate, then the current true king is Aegon Targaryen, if of course he really is who he says he is.

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

Alternatively if we don't accept that defeat in battle is legitimate, then the current true king is Aegon Targaryen, if of course he really is who he says he is.

That reasoning is flawed, if you decide you can't claim a throne by force then the Targaryen's were never the legitimate kings of the North, Reach, Rock etc. after Aegon's conquest.

Aegon claimed them all by right of conquest..except Dorne obviously.

username123

Blay wrote: »

That reasoning is flawed, if you decide you can't claim a throne by force then the Targaryen's were never the legitimate kings of the North, Reach, Rock etc. after Aegon's conquest.

Aegon claimed them all by right of conquest..except Dorne obviously.

Yes, I guess I was accepting longevity there. 300 years of being the royal family.

In that case then, it's Tommen, right?

Mickeroo

The Lannister children can't be legitimate heirs no matter what happens because they're all bastards born of incest.

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

The Lannister children can't be legitimate heirs no matter what happens because they're all bastards born of incest.

But if we are accepting conquest by battle then Joffrey legitimised his claim by defeating Stannis, no matter whose son he is.

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

Yes, I guess I was accepting longevity there. 300 years of being the royal family.

In that case then, it's Tommen, right?

Tommen can't be the king no matter who he defeats because he's a bastard born of incest. Kevan even insists that Cersei must win her trial by combat or people will question the parentage of her kids and then they're all fcuked.

In truth really there is no true king. I lay my support with whoever is trying to restore order and see wrongs rightef etc. in Westeros. The only one doing that is Stannis..defending the Wall when nobody else gave a sh1t, returning castles in the North to their righful owners and attempting to punish Roose Bolton for his actions.

The rest of them are just pissing about..Tommen's playing with his cats, Dany's trying and failing to change the economic and social system of a land on the other side of the planet and Aegon is a child who thinks he can lead an army with no experience whatsoever. At least Robb had competent peoplr around him..Aegon has Jon Connington who Randyll Tarly correctly notes failed in the only battle he commanded. Robb also had a good bit of training growing up...Aegon had a hedge knight teaching him. He's not as humble as Varys thinks he is.

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

But if we are accepting conquest by battle then Joffrey legitimised his claim by defeating Stannis, no matter whose son he is.

Maybe if he was a regular bastard like Jon or Ramsey but I think the whole incest thing would rule out any legitimate claim to the throne if it ever came to light.

December2012

I take it the OP means regardless of Joffreys parentage whether he legitimately held the crown or not, when he defeated Stannis (who would've been Roberts heir) at that point Joffrey won by conquest. Therefore it's now Tommen.

Witcher

December2012 wrote: »

I take it the OP means regardless of Joffreys parentage whether he legitimately held the crown or not, when he defeated Stannis (who would've been Roberts heir) at that point Joffrey won by conquest. Therefore it's now Tommen.

He can't be because of his parentage...the Lannisters know that themselves. They're desperate for the kids to maintain the link to Robert because if they don't have that they have no claim even by conquest.

Robert's worked because he was a highborn Lord Paramount with a familial link to the Targaryens...Cersei's kids by comparison are bastards...incest bastards at that which means the Faith will never allow it.

username123

If we are not accepting children born of incest as legitimate heirs to the throne surely that immediately discounts pretty much the entire Targaryen line?

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

If we are not accepting children born of incest as legitimate heirs to the throne surely that immediately discounts pretty much the entire Targaryen line?

The Targaryen's got away with a lot of things..the incest, polygamy etc. because they had dragons.

When they were gone the polygamy stopped but the incest continued largely by tradition..it had become an established trait of their dynasty. The Targaryens had a lot of support across Westeros before the whole Rhaegar fiasco, if people support you then you can do as you like for the most part. In the case of the Lannisters...nobody likes them so if there is a reason to depose them then most will take it.

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

If we are not accepting children born of incest as legitimate heirs to the throne surely that immediately discounts pretty much the entire Targaryen line?

But it's not acceptable in "present" day Westeros so that point is moot. Sure if you bring stuff that the Targs got away with in the past into it then you may aswell just go back to saying whoever they over threw are the legitimate kings, would that make the Starks the only one's with a claim since they share a bloodline with the first men?

username123

Blay wrote: »

The Targaryen's got away with a lot of things..the incest, polygamy etc. because they had dragons.

This suggests the most physically powerful should be king (or queen). Then it's got to be Daenarys.

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

But it's not acceptable in "present" day Westeros so that point is moot. Sure if you bring stuff that the Targs got away with in the past into it then you may aswell just go back to saying whoever they over threw are the legitimate kings, would that make the Starks the only one's with a claim since they share a bloodline with the first men?

But Targaryens marrying brother to sister is acceptable in modern day Westeros, Daenarys always assumed she would marry Viserys.

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

But Targaryens marrying brother to sister is acceptable in modern day Westeros, Daenarys always assumed she would marry Viserys.

Dany doesn't live in modern day Westeros nor has she any experience of it.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

whoever sits in the throne and has the support of most of the powerful families

that's usually how monarchy works

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

Dany doesn't live in modern day Westeros nor has she any experience of it.

Only because of Robert Baratheon. Her father was married to his sister. That's hardly back in the misty past.

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

This suggests the most physically powerful should be king (or queen). Then it's got to be Daenarys.

Except she's the other side of the planet and is useless as a ruler. All she does is rant about fire and blood but yet she won't take action when it's needed and kill the hostages she took from the slave master's families. Hasn't got the stomach to rule imo. She wants her enemies to die but innocents to be magically untouched...if she arrives with dragons a lot of people are going to die and not just her enemies.

She's also unwilling to accept the faults of her family and why what happened to them was their own making.

Give her a house in Braavos and a lemon tree and let her feck off:pac

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

Only because of Robert Baratheon. Her father was married to his sister. That's hardly back in the misty past.

If Dany flattened everyone with her dragons then she can marry her horse if she wanted and still be queen tbh :pac:

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

If Dany flattened everyone with her dragons then she can marry her horse if she wanted and still be queen tbh :pac:

Yes. It is known.

If the Red Womans magic was powerful enough to defeat dragons then I guess Stannis does have a chance (besides he seems to be the only one who deserves the throne).

Course Danys dragons are a known quantity, kill the 3 of them and she's just another fading Targaryen.

Oranage2

QUOTE=username123;90004024]Yes. It is known.

If the Red Womans magic was powerful enough to defeat dragons then I guess Stannis does have a chance (besides he seems to be the only one who deserves the throne).

Course Danys dragons are a known quantity, kill the 3 of them and she's just another fading Targaryen.[/QUOTE]

She also has a massive army too

Though I hope stannis gets the throne too.

Washington Irving

Stannis has the best claim imo. Robert won the throne by right of conquest, he had no trueborn heirs so the throne passes to his eldest brother.

Joffrey and Tommen cannot be kings as they are bastards born of incest. (Would repelling Stannis' attempted sack of KL even count if he was not officially recognised as king and did not hold the throne?)

The Targaryans lost the throne to Robert so Daenarys has no hereditary claim.


Not sure if we can discuss the books in this thread so I'll leave it there.


Stannis is the one true king. All those who oppose him are traitors.

Paddy Cow

Oranage2 wrote: »

Though I hope stannis gets the throne too.

I don't. He would make an even worse ruler than Robert. Plus he has no legitimate male heir. Shirleen has the greyscale so they keep her locked away. Even if Stannis did somehow manage to take the throne, his lack of ability to play the long term political game would see to it that he alienated himself from all the powerful houses. If he managed to hold onto his rule until his death, it would be another mad scramble between the houses to seize the throne, possible leading to another war.

Da Shins Kelly

Technically Stannis has the strongest claim, from what I can gather. Robert won the throne, but none of the children sitting on it thereafter are his, so the Lannisters have no real business being there. Joffrey didn't 'win' the throne because Stannis wasn't sitting on it at the time. Stannis was coming to take what was his, and the Lannisters just defended their imaginary right to be there.

That said, of what I've seen of the show so far, I'm kinda glad that Stannis didn't get the throne. A man who invests so much time in religious fanaticism and human sacrifice wouldn't be my first choice for king.

Daenarys could well win it back by conquest. She seems to have some natural leadership qualities, least of all gaining the admiration of her people rather than frightening them into submission. I'd regard her as much fitter to lead than Stannis.

With regards to the power of the dragons, is it possible that Bran, what with his ability to inhabit the minds of animals, could potentially control the dragons? I mean, if he really learns how to harness and properly utilize that power, could it become a very potent power indeed? He got into the mind of Hodor once, didn't he? He isn't even an animal. In other words, could the Starks potentially make a glorious comeback? (or is this just wishful thinking?!)

Kunkka

[QUOTE=Washington Irving;90004933

Stannis is the one true king. All those who oppose him are traitors.[/QUOTE]

Sleepy

I think you're misinterpreting "right by conquest" somewhat. Stannis lost a battle to Joffrey but his war is ongoing whilst Joffrey's corpse rots in the ground. He was neither killed nor forced to bed the knee.

Stannis is the only surviving monarch of the "War of the Five Kings" and always had the only legitimate claim to the Iron Throne after Robert's death. Danaerys may well take his throne by right of conquest but as of the end of ADWD, Stannis Barratheon is the "rightful" King.

username123

Sleepy wrote: »

I think you're misinterpreting "right by conquest" somewhat. Stannis lost a battle to Joffrey but his war is ongoing whilst Joffrey's corpse rots in the ground. He was neither killed nor forced to bed the knee.

Stannis is the only surviving monarch of the "War of the Five Kings" and always had the only legitimate claim to the Iron Throne after Robert's death. Danaerys may well take his throne by right of conquest but as of the end of ADWD, Stannis Barratheon is the "rightful" King.

But when Joffrey defeated Stannis he claimed the throne as his own, so surely that leaves Tommen the "rightful" king now?

Sleepy

Using the same logic, Mace Tyrell is the "rightful king" for having bested Robert once during his rebellion...

Joffrey won a battle against Stannis. While in a weaker position than he was, Stannis Baratheon is still "in the field" while Joffrey lies dead (and I'm sure Lady Melissandre would argue her Fire God played a part in his death on Stannis's behalf). To my mind, unless Stannis had been killed on the Blackwater, had bent the knee afterwards or had been chased into exile "conquest" hasn't been achieved.

username123

Sleepy wrote: »

Using the same logic, Mace Tyrell is the "rightful king" for having bested Robert once during his rebellion...

Joffrey won a battle against Stannis. While in a weaker position than he was, Stannis Baratheon is still "in the field" while Joffrey lies dead (and I'm sure Lady Melissandre would argue her Fire God played a part in his death on Stannis's behalf). To my mind, unless Stannis had been killed on the Blackwater, had bent the knee afterwards or had been chased into exile "conquest" hasn't been achieved.

He was chased back to Dragonstone.

Sleepy

Which is still in Westeros so therefore not "exile".

Peregrine

Joffrey hardly won the Iron Throne by conquest over Stannis through just one battle. And Joffrey won the battle while sitting on Stannis' Iron Throne.

If Stannis was crowned after Robert and then Joffrey arrived with an army, defeated Stannis' army and killed Stannis - that's right of conquest.

He repelled an effort by Stannis to claim his rightful throne. I don't see how that's right of conquest.