Official Game of Thrones Season 4 Thread *The North Remembers*(NO SPOILERS!!)

[satam55]

Nice map, 3 headed dragon there doe? What land is that? I only know dragonstone.

That region is called The Crownlands. It's the same region that King's Landing, Dragonstone, & Blackwater Bay is in.

Dragonstone was the original seat of House Targaryen. After the Targaryen conquest of the Seven Kingdoms, the island served as the seat of their heir apparent, known as the Prince of Dragonstone. After Robert Baratheon overthrew the Targaryens, he gave the island to his brother Stannis, creating House Baratheon of Dragonstone.

 

[Francis White]

The true father figure for a fatherless generation. My hero and the coli version of what most guys in this thread see themselves as . Rich with endless dimes to sleep with.

Littlefinger the gawd.

 

[Francis White]

Get down or lay down you the rules. There is space for you off brand houses to jump on when your wack ass houses take some losses. I bring you a house with a father figure. . A moral man who does his best for you. An honest man running an honest house . Jump aboard .

 

[obarth]

But now you are just circling the wagon back to the argument I already conceded to you



So which claim are you going to make, that the throne belongs to Dany because Robert didn't kill her, or that Robert used Targaryen lineage to lay claim to the throne which didn't follow the order of succession?

Because if you wanna argue #1 have at it, I already conceded it is a worthwhile argument despite my objections due to Viserys and Dany fleeing to Essos and living on another continent their whole lives. But if you wanna argue #2, you are wrong because Robert was recognized as the king before all gods and men, blessed by the High Septon, lived unchallenged on the throne for 14 years, and claimed the 7 kingdoms by conquering it just like Aegon Targaryen did. I could just as easily say that Aegon Targaryen had no legal right to rule the kingdoms in the first place, nor did any of the kings that came before him, and the true rightful rulers are the Children of the Forest and those with the blood of the First Men who forged a pact on the Isle of Faces which gave dominion of the forest lands to the Children, and the rest of Westeros to the First Men. So guess what breh....I can flip your argument on you and make it known that the Starks and the Crannogmen are the true rightful kings


Andals think they own Westeros like Europeans think they own America . Only one group made a pact with the Children, and they didn't come from Andal or Valyria

Well there wasn't a united Seven Kingdoms until Aegon formed them so you couldn't really say that

As for the rest of your point:

2 things make right in my opinion

Again, I'm not having an argument based on personal opinion, or a personal set of qualifictions. I'm stating canon. In your opinion those two things make right, cool. In the book, which is all that matters factually, Robert Baratheon based his claim on his Targaryen lineage, but by the laws of male-preference cognatic primogeniture(what actually legally dictates right) the throne was not his by rights. It's a pretty black and white thing. Where the rightful king/queen was for however long and however long Robert sat on the throne and ruled doesn't matter: Dany is still the "rightful" Queen. Blessings and recognitions can be revoked/unrecognized. Robert ruled as king, Joffrey rules as king those are both facts. The throne is Dany's by "rights" based on the laws of Westeros

 

[Adam3000]

Is it just my browser or are none of these Littlefinger pictures loading

Another stain on House Baelish of the Fingers, rulers of cobblestone and goat herds

 

[Jax]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/hbogameofthrones/how-would-you-die-in-game-of-thrones

How Would You Die In “Game Of Thrones?”

1. You got: You’d die by dragon fire!
   
   
   Via HBO
   You’re a true Machiavellian — cunning, manipulative, and power-hungry. Friends would say you’re the most outgoing of the group, and you consider yourself the leader. Unluckily for you, most people despise your manipulative nature. And doubly unluckily for you, a dragon will burn you to a crisp.

They'd do the fam like this?

 

[beanz]

Before aegon, there was no iron throne or a realm of 7 kingdoms, each Kingdom was on its own with its own king. If he had never conquered, each Kingdom would still be on its own ruling their own lands and still fighting each other like before. So the throne, by rights and all laws, belong to the targaryens unless all the targaryens get completely wiped out. Robert knew this which is why he was always chasing viserys and Danarys. The only reason stannis is so sure it belongs to him is because as far as he knows, the targs are never coming back. So in his mind he was Roberts rightful heir. If Danarys comes back on some dragons, not a single person in westeros would say stannis is the rightful king unless they are in his army and even then, some of those houses would abandon him for Danarys. Exiled or no, as long as they are alive they have a claim. If they didn't just because they were Exiled, then Robert would have not even bothered trying to kill them.

 

[Adam3000]

Well there wasn't a united Seven Kingdoms until Aegon formed them so you couldn't really say that

As for the rest of your point:

Again, I'm not having an argument based on personal opinion, or a personal set of qualifictions. I'm stating canon. In your opinion those two things make right, cool. In the book, which is all that matters factually, Robert Baratheon based his claim on his Targaryen lineage, but by the laws of male-preference cognatic primogeniture(what actually legally dictates right) the throne was not his by rights. It's a pretty black and white thing. Where the rightful king/queen was for however long and however long Robert sat on the throne and ruled doesn't matter: Dany is still the "rightful" Queen. Blessings and recognitions can be revoked/unrecognized. Robert ruled as king, Joffrey rules as king those are both facts. The throne is Dany's by "rights" based on the laws of Westeros

I used the word 'opinion' but that was a poor word choice. I don't believe that anywhere in the books are the specific laws of governance laid out, they are just spoken of. My 'opinion' was more an interpretation of the source material I can recall.

I guarantee the words male-preference cognatic primogeniture are not in the books, but even if they were it is nothing more than a fancy way to restate the point I have already conceded which is that Viserys was not killed therefore the throne was still legally his

My follow up, and the point we differ on, is that Viserys then lost his claim for the throne when he left Westeros and Robert legally assumed kingship. A new kingdom was established, irrelevant to whether Robert used his Targaryen lineage to make that claim. He is Robert Baratheon, first of his name, ruler of the Andals, the Rhoyner, and the First Men. He has been anointed king by the people and by the faith. Viserys no longer has the throne by right, he would have to rebel and claim victory in the same manner as Robert did to reclaim that throne.

 

[Adam3000]

Before aegon, there was no iron throne or a realm of 7 kingdoms.

Yah, thats might point. Aegon became a ruler of this by conquering and uniting. The exact same thing Robert Baratheon did. If you want to use Aegon as a reason for a Targ dynasty, I'm just going to keep regressing the argument until we arrive at the time when Westeros was nothing but Weirwoods, giants, and the Children of the Forest. NO family has Westeros by right, only by conquering. This includes the Targaryens.

The closest we have to 'birth rights' over Westeros would be those with blood of the First Men, who too were initially invaders but did forge a pact of ownership with the Children of the Forest. I don't recall the Andals forging a pact, I recall them burning down all the Weirwoods and conquering land that wasn't theirs.

This is why I don't care about the Iron Throne, only the North. Its like siding with Christopher Columbus. Yall can have those bloodstains on your hands, I'm not gonna (not you @beanz, I know you only care about the North too)

 

[obarth]

I used the word 'opinion' but that was a poor word choice. I don't believe that anywhere in the books are the specific laws of governance laid out, they are just spoken of. My 'opinion' was more an interpretation of the source material I can recall.

I guarantee the words male-preference cognatic primogeniture are not in the books, but even if they were it is nothing more than a fancy way to restate the point I have already conceded which is that Viserys was not killed therefore the throne was still legally his

My follow up, and the point we differ on, is that Viserys then lost his claim for the throne when he left Westeros and Robert legally assumed kingship. A new kingdom was established, irrelevant to whether Robert used his Targaryen lineage to make that claim. He is Robert Baratheon, first of his name, ruler of the Andals, the Rhoyner, and the First Men. He has been anointed king by the people and by the faith. Viserys no longer has the throne by right, he would have to rebel and claim victory in the same manner as Robert did to reclaim that throne.

Leaving Westeros doesn't effect Viserys claim in the slightest. Why did you italicize "First of his name"? All that means is that there wasn't a Robert Baratheon in his line before him, it has nothing to do with starting a new line. Male-preference cognatic primogeniture doesn't have to be printed in the books; that is the succession law used in the 7 Kingdoms apart from Dorne and the Targaryens. It's the only thing that dictates the throne being anyone's "by rights". Robert was appointed king. Dany or whoever will have to fight to get the throne. But when it comes to rights, that is dictated by male-preference cognatic primogeniture and the throne is Dany's by "rights".

@Jax

 

[Francis White]

Is it just my browser or are none of these Littlefinger pictures loading

Another stain on House Baelish of the Fingers, rulers of cobblestone and goat herds

You and @obarth can laugh now , but you will cry later. Don't worry we got space on the bandwagon .

 

[beanz]

Yah, thats might point. Aegon became a ruler of this by conquering and uniting. The exact same thing Robert Baratheon did. If you want to use Aegon as a reason for a Targ dynasty, I'm just going to keep regressing the argument until we arrive at the time when Westeros was nothing but Weirwoods, giants, and the Children of the Forest. NO family has Westeros by right, only by conquering. This includes the Targaryens.

The thing is u can't go back before aegon because there was no realm as we know it. U can say the children of the forest because they were United as far as we know and were all over westeros, but even they, for all we know, could have had their own little sets and factions. After them it was the first men and the first men and children fought but then made an alliance to fight the others and after beating the others, a bunch of kingdoms set up all over and the age of heroes began. So there was never a set ruler of all of westeros until aegon so legally there is no way to take it back before him.

Even the time lineage starts with him. It's all 300 bl or 300 al. Aegons landing is as significant as Christ to them lol. He was the first ruler of the whole continent. Even Robert said it "there are still those who call me usurper". He won it by rebellion and even tho he ran it for years and became a loved king, even he knew his hold was not as strong as he liked, which again is why he was so hellbent on killing Danarys and viserys.

 

[obarth]

Before aegon, there was no iron throne or a realm of 7 kingdoms, each Kingdom was on its own with its own king. If he had never conquered, each Kingdom would still be on its own ruling their own lands and still fighting each other like before. So the throne, by rights and all laws, belong to the targaryens unless all the targaryens get completely wiped out. Robert knew this which is why he was always chasing viserys and Danarys. The only reason stannis is so sure it belongs to him is because as far as he knows, the targs are never coming back. So in his mind he was Roberts rightful heir. If Danarys comes back on some dragons, not a single person in westeros would say stannis is the rightful king unless they are in his army and even then, some of those houses would abandon him for Danarys. Exiled or no, as long as they are alive they have a claim. If they didn't just because they were Exiled, then Robert would have not even bothered trying to kill them.

I'm not sure what's hard to understand about this. George RR Martin patterned these books and the Westerosi form of governance and succession laws on European monarchy laws. "Rights" is bound in law. We established that might is what matters and what gets you on the throne, but if you want to say something is yours by "rights" there are laws dictating that.

 

[Adam3000]

I'm not sure what's hard to understand about this. George RR Marting patterned these books and the Westerosi form of governance and succession laws on European monarchy laws. "Rights" is bound in law. We established that might is what matters and what gets you on the throne, but if you want to say something is yours by "rights" there are laws dictating that.

So you acknowledge Robert had the throne? He wasn't a false king? If so, the laws then pass it on to Stannis.

If you claim Robert was a false king, then you are being contradictory and ignoring might makes right. In which case, Aegon also had no rights as the creator.

You can't have both arguments.

 

[Francis White]

By rights this man will sit on the iron throne and rule it justly and wise. How can you people be against a real good guy? This is the most honest man in the seven kingdoms and you off brand houses hate him.