Says the man who is a page in several other people’s history books… Still at least he will be remembered - as the man who murdered his own brother in cold blood and then handed the Seven Kingdoms to the Lannisters.
"My brother is a rebel terrorist who illegally overthrew the government, and I was the right-hand man of his illegitimate criminal faction, making me the rightful KING!!!" Stannis "wtf is this old man talking about" Mannis
@@final_animal *who illegally overthrow the government only so he could get p*ssy, damn the baratheon dynasty is pathetic, orys must be turning in his grave
@@final_animal In the Setting, Right of Conquest (like the Aegon the Conqueror, who is repeatedly mentioned) is a legal standard by which someone becomes King And in Male Primogeniture, the right is given to the nearest trueborn (not a bastard) male Which means when Rightful King Robert, who earned his throne through conquest and as cousin to the Royal family died with no trueborn son, Stannis Baratheon became the King de jure
I loved Stannis and Jon's interactions at the wall. Both frustrated at each other for following their own sense of duty, but also respecting each other for it.
An even more interesting aspect of the tragedy that plays out, is that Renly could possibly have changed it all and still ended up king - had he decided to back his older brother instead of going against tradition, with the promise that Stannis would name him heir unless he got a legitimate son. It's highly unlikely the latter would happen, and his daughter could not have been named Queen in her own right under the current laws. With Reny being heir-apparent he could probably have formed a marriage-alliance with the Tyrells. Their combined forces with Stannis' would probably have triumphed at King's Landing and what's more Rob Stark might even have sided with them, if there had been less confusion about who was in line to the throne. So two major turning points that led to the utter chaos of civil war was Cat deciding to kidnap Tyrion, and Renly deciding to proclaim himself king.
I'm not sure if you meant to refer to this, but those terms were exactly what Stannis offered Renly when they parleyed at Storm's End. By that point, though, Renly had already proclaimed himself king and rallied his allies with the express goal of putting him on the throne, so it would have been much harder for him to back down as opposed to if Renly had declared support for Stannis from the start. Plus, by the time they met at Storm's End, Renly had overwhelming military superiority, so he thought Stannis couldn't possibly threaten him. Another interesting hypothetical is what if someone like Renly had proposed that Stannis take the black. That would have allowed Stannis to directly fight against the threat of the Others, relieved him of the duties of ruling which he never really wanted, and would have clearly made Renly the rightful king in the eyes of anyone who believed (or chose to believe) the Twincest story. Then Stannis' supporters would likely have joined Renly, and that combined force (including the Tyrells) would almost certainly have overwhelmed the Lannisters and induced Robb Stark to submit.
Only if Stannis was a good king. Otherwise people would have rebelled before Renly even got the chance to take over. Rhaegar Targaryen was by all accounts a good man and would have made a good king, but his father was so unpopular that he was overthrown before Rhaegar got the chance to take over.
Reclaiming the North would've been easy. Send Rob home with his father's bones, his sister's life and a story about how the north declared independence under the false assumption that Joffrey was legitimate and Stannis had ignoble ambitions. Not making that offer to Cat was Stannis' mistake, just as not accepting Stannis' offer was Renly's. But I don't know that the Tyrells would've taken their side so easily. Stannis would've done a lot of damage to the great houses with his foreign god and inflexible attitude towards law and morality.
@@SirBrasstion he probably could have let them keep the title king in the north, The dornish got to keep their ruling title for marrying into the family and ceasing the border raids, Ned uncovering this plot he did is enough to warrant the title.
I love Stannis' speech to get the troops ready to take Kings Landing: "Come with me and take this city!" That's it. That's all. Perfect for his character, no fluff no BS. Just the facts.
That's the thing about Stannis. There are great and charismatic leaders throughout history that, right or wrong, deliberately or not, inspire zealotry in their followers. Men follow Stannis because they know exactly where they stand with him. Stannis is blunt, but he is unapologetically powerful and principled, and so he inspires respect and true loyalty.
@@I_am_a_cat_ Imagine him writing the most fucking grey story with all these tragic things happening just to end it with a happy ending. It would be fucking hilarious! It wouldn't even necessarily feel like a cop out because even though the story has a positive ending there is still all this death all this tragedy that has happened through the story that's tainting the supposedly happy ending somewhat.
Is it weird that i like reading Stannis more than anyone else? He's done a lot of things "right" held the fort during the war to the bitter end, gave up on the throne to help the people, tried not to execute the innocent and hand out the laws fairly. But he always gets snubbed and screwed over. I have given up thinking we'll ever get the full story from George but i hope we get the battle of winterfell to wash the tv shows ending for him out of our collective mouths.
Stannis gets snubbed and screwed over because he's a stickler, because he's petty, bitter, vindictive, entitled, and utterly uncompromising. His idea of diplomacy in almost all cases is to say "Give me everything I want and swear loyalty to me, right now, no strings attached, or die".
@@Mckadow To start, he declared himself as king and entered the war of the five kings despite his lack of political power, when he could have easily just declared for another king. Then he refused to make peace with Renly or Robb Stark despite both presenting the possibility of powerful and willing allies. Even after killing Renly, he considers executing the lords who declared for him for treason, only reconsidering because he needs the men. Then he demands not merely the cooperation, but the fealty of the wildlings and the Night's Watch on pain of death despite neither owing him any loyalty, and only backs down because of Jon Snow. Stannis' idea of "compromise" is usually to not kill people for disobeying him if they swear loyalty to him immediately.
@@dragonslair951167 I think you misunderstand his perspective. He never aimed to be king, he was snubbed by his brother for positions he should have been given purely because robert didn't like him very much. He has always obeyed the laws. By the laws of the seven kingdoms he is King he only aimed for the throne after confirmation Robert's heirs were not his (even though he probably already knew since they look nothing like Robert) but only did something when Ned sent him proof. The laws say keep the wildings out allowing them lands to settle in exchange for helping him take winterfell is an extremely generous offer. Almost every other person aiming for the throne right now would have them left on the other side of the wall or killed. Renly was ignoring the laws about the line of succession again Stannis is a law driven man. In terms of fairness Stannis is probably the most easy to read. Don't break the law he's usually fine. Think of him like a D&D character who is lawful neutral. I find him to be the most interesting and down to earth one going for the throne right now because by the laws he is the king.
9:12 - There's only one quote that needs to be said about it: 'He could hear the birds quorking in the rookery, so he put the papers away and climbed the steps to feed them. Three more ravens had come in, he saw with pleasure. "Snow," they cried at him. "Snow, snow, snow." He had taught them that. Even with the newcomers, the ravenry seemed dismally empty. Few of the birds that Aemon had sent off had returned as yet. One reached Stannis, though. One found Dragonstone, and a king who still cared.' - Sam IV in A Storm of Swords: I tear up a bit whenever I read that line.
The boar is the rightful king of the Andals and the Rhoynar, and the First Men Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm BY RIGHT OF CONQUEST!!! he took down the usurper! sementing his bloodline
Growing up means that we begin to appreciate Stannis. I hated him when I was a teen, but now I find his method of ruling the lesser evil to the Seven Kingdoms.
@@jarogniewtheconqueror2804 You are right. I should have noted that. It was an early sign that the show runners were going off the rails. Indicative of what was to come.
@@miguelservetus9534 the witchcraft was seen as a necessary evil. It was that or a battle where 1000s/10000s die. And he was bamboozled by the lord of light and the promises. And he does not kill his daughter. That was the showrunners butchering Stannis.
By what right? Because his brother illegally overthrew the government? He's literally part of a rebel faction of criminals who attacked the government, there is absolutely zero legitimacy to his claim. That doesn't mean he doesn't kick ass lol. You could argue that nobody has a "legal" right to the crown as it has often been taken by force, but if anybody did have a claim, Stannis would be among the candidates waaaay down at the very, very bottom of the list. That's just a fact whether you like his character or not (and I do).@@samhobbs9116
In this universe the "true king" is who can take and keep it in the end. Any monarch is potentially vulnerable in this universe / construct. In the petty king era we saw kings wipe out competing monarchs / royal lines and take their lands. Aegon I had no claim but he took the realm by overwhelming force. As did Maegor again to an extent not long after him and Jaehaerys take it back and the Dance fought over who each thought was the rightful heir. Blackfyres as well, whether or not they even believed their claims were legitimate if they got the support , won the throne that would be the end of it. Bobby B was not born expecting to be king of anything and yet he , Ned / their forces overthrew a three century familial dynasty and Robert ended up being king of the realm for almost 20 years. Thats what it comes down to , any monarch can be challenged if one believes their claim , gains enough support / forces and actually pushes the issue. Keeping the throne can be just as challenging as gaining it in the first place. If you can take the throne its yours. Stannis if he wins the throne it will be his. Perhaps more the important question is would be be a good king ? i personally suppose he would. Probably more so before Mel / R'hllorist corruption. But he is a "do the right thing" type , seems quite fair and just. Not the most charismatic or popular , certainly wouldn't have masses clamoring to install him. But compared to Robert's disinterest and neglect and Renly's lack of seriousness or suitability , Stannis would be more the king you need compared to the other two who might be the king many might want / have wanted. Let alone compared to the awful Lannisters. Plus SB's current overall approach , feeling it is his right and duty to be king (rather than simply wanting it) and trying to save the realm to facilitate that is much more honorable and noble than most other claimants we've seen thus far.
Yet the final season of the TV fully justified the other characters not giving a damn because the "long" night lasted one night and the the WW were defeated in a single battle. 6/7 Kingdoms didn't even realise anything out of the ordinary had happened. There was no existential doomsday battle between the living and the dead.
@Nick-zp8wk Season 7 and 8 were bad fan fictions as far as I'm concerned. They discarded everything that had been built up and replaced it with simple idiocy.
@@Klongu_Da_Bongu I can not say for sure if Stannis was or wasn't above, child sacrifice. For him to simply be killed off by the Boltons seems anti climactic, but many deaths in this series often are.
When I saw the title, I thought to myself, this is medieval society, true kind is one with the biggest army to claim the crown. I love that you at least recognized that, because a lot of people miss this.
Yes, but armies don’t just follow anyone as King. You almost always need some sort of claim. There have been Chinese peasants who became warlords and Emperor, but that type of thing is pretty rare. Armies almost always follow some lineaged elite or other. Even Tamerlane was minor nobility. And because he wasn’t actually of Genghis’ lineage, he had to rule as Emir instead, despite his military dominance. People have always taken bloodlines extremely seriously until quite recently in history. And while the video claims the Lannisters have the right of conquest now, that isn’t quite true. They are claiming Tommen is a *Baratheon*. And there’s a number of King’s Landing insiders who know or suspect that this isn’t true. This means that despite the Lannisters winning the war up to this point. Their situation is still quite vulnerable. Especially as a lot of their strength depended on Tywin’s intimidating reputation. So the “rightful” King question is still of relevance. This is why when, as I presume, Young Griff will take Storm’s End. A castle that has never fallen. This will be a very big deal, and win him tons of support. The young, handsome son of Rhaeghar (supposedly) heroically winning a victory like that out of nowhere, and so early and young? And with Rhaeghar’s close friend, and the Golden Company, behind him? Suddenly I bet a lot more people will start noticing, hey, that Tommen is nothing like Robert. I’m going to follow the “rightful” King! That Tommen is a boy playing with cats, and YG will already have won a battle, will also matter. Now, if the Tyrells were 100% behind Tommen, he’d still be the favorite I think. But we know Cersei’s well on her way to burning bridges there. Not to mention the Faith. And the Iron Bank. Also, the video talks about “whoever ends up in the winning side”. But a lot of the time, that isn’t at war. It’s in the Small Council and court insider politics. In court social machinations. This is how Renly got his large army in the first place. And Stannis still has backers, including the Iron Bank. I think if not for the currently publicly unknown claims of YG and Jon, Stannis would still have a decent chance of winning the Iron Throne. Because of the Iron Bank, Manderly silver, Cersei burning bridges, and Tommen being too young. Oof, that ended up a lot longer than I was intending ☺️ TLDR, it’s not just about the biggest army. It’s about the mechanics of where that army comes from. Which includes “rightful” claims, as well as social alliances and vested religious and financial interests, etc. Which means the Lannisters are quite vulnerable, even if we as readers didn’t already “know” they wouldn’t win.
I think the narrator brings out 2 important points. 1. Robert became the legit ruler when he overthrew the Targs. Conquest makes him legit. 2. Stannis is Robert's legit heir, but the Lanninsters, theoretically under King Joffrey, establish their legitimacy by denying Stannis at the Battle of the Blackwater and holding King's Landing. Stannis's claim dies in that defeat.
The boar is the rightful king of the Andals and the Rhoynar, and the First Men Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm BY RIGHT OF CONQUEST!!! he took down the usurper! sementing his bloodline
In the Middle Ages people actually cared a lot about things like oaths or bloodlines. They had societal rules and they took them seriously. They gave their own lives or took others based upon those rules. Society wasn't some nihilistic free-for-all like GRRM portrays it as. One of the most ridiculous things in ASOIAF is when people support Renly as king despite him being the younger brother just because 'they like him more' than Stannis. GRR portrays whole armies just changing their loyalties at the drop of the hat, which is also ridiculous. GRRM claims his series is an accurate reflection of how medieval people thought and behaved, and also claims it is a realistic portrayal of human nature. It is neither. Honestly, after hearing his claims and reading his series, I begin to question how much he actually knows about history.
@@Konoronn I suggest you study England's Wars of the Roses. 1. Henry Bolingbroke (Henry IV) deposes his cousin Richard II, starting the Wars. 2. Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, known as the "Kingmaker", switched sides 3 times. 3. Richard III of England had his older brother's (Edward IV) marriage declared invalid and his children including Edward V, for whom he was Lord Protector, declared bastards. Soon after Edward V and his brother disappeared from the Royal Apartments in the Tower. Immediately, Richard was suspected on foul play though he engineers his ascension through a petition of some lords and commoners to assume the throne. Richard was king for 2 years when Henry Tudor landed in Wales. Tudor's rebellion was successful through the efforts of his mother, Margaret Beaufort, wife of Thomas Stanley, who held Richard's flank at Bosworth Field but took no part in the battle. Thus, Richard died at that battle because a trusted commander switched sides. Also, His older brother George, Duke of Clarence, with whom Richard did get along, had already been executed for treason, but there is little doubt that Richard would have jumped his older brother's claim just as Renly did to Stannis. While the parallels are not exact, it's similar enough to acknowledge that Renly's actions were not unprecedented. I think Martin draws heavily from these historical events.
Robert gave Dragonstone to Stannis, following precedent that the Targaryen dynasty did in appointing the heir to the throne there. Stannis always saw not having Storm's End as a slight and was almost blinded by that, missing that Robert, in an unwieldy show of affection gave him Dragonstone instead as a recognition of Stannis' efforts in the war and subsequently being his heir.
This is honestly very debatable. When Tyrion and Cersei talk about it, she tells him Robert *meant* it as a slight. There's no way to know for sure what Robert's intentions were (or if he even gave it any real thought), though I'm inclined to believe Robert either meant it as a slight, or didn't care how Stannis took it.
I disagree. Dragonstone was the seat of the heir to the Iron Throne because it was the Targaryen ancestral seat. The significance came from the head of the family giving up their ancestral seat to the heir for the Iron Throne, not necessarily Dragonstone in and of itself. When Robert gave up Storm’s End to instead rule from the Iron Throne in King’s Landing, the vacancy by right should have been given up to his next of kin, Stannis. The act of giving Dragonstone to Stannis meant nothing to him because Dragonstone meant nothing to him. Storm’s End was the Baratheon ancestral home and it was where Stannis grew up. Passing Stannis over for Renly can definitely be seen as an insult, as Storm’s End’s legal line of succession was ignored. Practically speaking, snubbing a skilled battlefield commander that nearly gave his life defending the castle for an actual child would piss off anyone. Doesn’t help the fact that the “reward” (Robert probably meant it as an insult imo) Stannis got was a sparsely populated rock with low tax income and an unruly population he had to babysit.
@@jackmcgarry3201exactly right, Stannis was incredibly loyal to Robert and unlike Ned, actually wanted to help. Robert was a bit of a fool for not trusting him more after all the times Stannis proved himself.
@@jackmcgarry3201You may disagree but George himself said that Robert didn't mean it as a slight. This is a direct quote from George on sept 11th 1999 "Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity." He gave it to Stannis because he was technically the heir at the time and it was also full of Targaryen sympathizers and Robert wanted someone strong to hold it during his rein. Robert being raised in the Vale also probably made it so he had less or an emotional attachment to storms end than Stannis did growing up there and all the suffering he endured to hold it.
@@Vidar93While it might not necessarily have been a slight, I dont think GRRM was definitively saying it was or wasnt a slight, as he tends to leave things more open ended. I think its a combination of factors with the pragmatic reason of having a competent, and loyal Lord holding Dragonstonse likely being the most influential on his decision. However I also firmly disagree with the notion that Robert gave Dragonstone to Stannis as some sort of indirect way of Robert showing his appreciation for his brother, because thats just plainly out of character when there are so many examples that indicate Robert either basically didn't care at all about his brother, or actively disliked him in spite of his loyal service. I could definitely see Robert at the very least finding some humour in sticking Stannis with Dragonstone, considering Stannis failed to capture Daenerys, and Viserys when he laid siege to the island; something Robert was openly displeased about, and critical of.
I always liked Stannis and thought he would have made a great king, particularly for the fact he was the only one to take the threat from Beyond the Wall seriously.
I think he’ll die heroically defending Winterfell from the Others. He will realise at the final minute that he is not Azor Ahai, but is merely buying time for him (for Jon Snow and Daenerys and Aegon)
I think stannis will become part of the legend and his story will get conflated with.others'. it's pretty likely the original azor ahai was a composite character as well.
Didn’t Melisandre at one point say that she saw a vision of him sitting the Iron Throne? Maybe I’m just mis remembering and this never happened. But if so, maybe Jon becomes King. And Stannis becomes his Hand. I could see that, as they seem to like each other. And both are about saving Westeros from the Whitewalkers. Plus Stannis is actually Jon’s distant uncle. I think technically it would be cousin X times removed. Since Stannis has Targaryen ancestry.
Yeah I think Stannis' defining characteristic is that he will do his duty, which will have him prioritizing defense against the Others over more selfish interest of obtaining a hollow crown. It would actually make him that much more eminently suited to be king in the grand scheme.
man ive seen this channel grow so much over the past year or two. im so glad. you put in so much work, have such interesting takes, keep such an open mind, and you read as though youre an english professor but not a pretentious one. i hope 2024 sees you double your numbers!!
Would you consider making a video on why Illyrio gave Dany the eggs, not fAgon? A video explaining how the eggs hatching affected Illyrio's plan would also be cool.
A theory I heard was that his plan was: 1- Eggs are sold to buy ships 2- Ships get Dothraki from Essos to Westeros 3- Chaos 4- Our Lord and Savior Aegon VI saves Westeros in his glorious return
It's hard to say because we don't know where the eggs came from. It could be they were Targaryen eggs being held by the Iron Bank and they transferred to Dany when she married. Or they could've been eggs from Ashaii that Illryio purchased as a wedding gift.
I very much believe that George himself has no answer to that! His "gardner" style as a writer leads to interesting dynamics, but if the story is too complex it loses cohesiveness. He has too much loose ends to untie and i think that the one about the acrual Illirio's plan is one of them. He just forgot what he intended to do about that character 20+ years ago! Also, i think he has no clear idea about Benjen Stark, where he is and why apparently he wanted Jon at the wall.
Varys' riddle is deeply flawed. It's an idealistic view on power, not a materialist. Cersei is closer to the truth when she threatens Littlefinger and proclaims "power is power". To elaborate within the framework of Varys' riddle: let's say the religious leader, the monarch and the rich man all agree that the monarch is their rightful ruler and tell them man with the weapon to protect him. Even if the man with the weapon doesn't agree, more people believe power resides with the king, so he has power... right? Except, when the man with the weapon disagrees and murders the king, he is the only one who actually counts in this riddle. He holds the power. Only where HE believes power resides matters, because he holds the material base of power in this riddle, the weapon. "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" as Mao phrased it.
@@olenickel6013but rarely does one guy has the ability to wield power with the barrel of his own gun. He needs other people with guns, and if those people don't believe in his power, the guns will turn on him.
@@olenickel6013But one guy with a sword is just one guy. And he has to go to sleep sometime. So he can’t just ignore everyone. And the larger the numbers, the more the illusion, the shadow on the wall, matters. In the end physical might always makes right, simply because you must live in physical reality. But with large numbers, advanced technology, and complex economics. Power becomes super complex and nuanced. And the idea of belief, some shared mass belief in “legitimacy”, becomes important.
Another great video. Stannis was a great character. Great as in unique. Great stories are not completely comprised of all the main characters being successful
I mean, it is. What determines who’s king? Is it blood? If so Viserys should have been crowned. But he dead. Is it context? If so, Jon is currently. He’s been legitimized by Robb. He’s Rhaegars heir. Is it by who’s technically on the throne? It’s Tommen. So yeah. There’s a lot of answers
@@Nanobot1989viserys and jon were no longer part of the royal succession since the throne was usurped. The line belongs to robert. Since he had no trueborn heirs it goes to stannis. Of course its the fun of debating and all but in my mind roberts rebellion and the fall of house targaryen settled the debate as far as jon, viserys and danaerys are concerned
@@HenryWJonesJr The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.
@@TheGoodCrusader Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to wield supreme power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!”
Aegon I Targaryen, also known as Aegon the Conqueror and Aegon the Dragon, won the iron throne by conquering the six kingdoms. So Robert's claim to the iron throne is based on Aegon's initial claim: by right of conquest. Given the history of Westeros, whoever sits on the iron throne is the king or queen. Nothing else matters.
Robert can’t claim right of conquest he was a rebel and a traitor who won he used family ties to legitimize his reign if he the rightful king then tommen is now because stannis lost
@@carlrood4457 Indeed. Which is exactly why in real history, I’m not really familiar with anyone who ruled by 100% right of conquest. Because then someone else could just go, “Oh so that’s how it is? Well I’m next then!” Instead warlords always had other claims. Ancestry, religion, marriage, violation of some treaty, and so on. It’s not really practical to claim rule just by right of conquest, because then it becomes a free for all.
*5:51* It doesn't matter whether Robert would have "stuck with Stannis as his heir". It matters that Robert died without true-born children and so Stannis was next in line.
Being king is sort of like being a champion fighter, you're only really one if you've defended your title. Abtaining it through inheiritence is like becoming champion by the prior one retiring.
Legitimacy is a bit of sham in Westeros. All kings in this story have a rule based on violence. A throne made entirely of swords if one wanted to use such a metaphor.
6:36 I think Viserys II was the one who solidified it and they went with it. He got sick and tired of all the ridiculousness, and made it clear that Male Primogeniture is the way of succession for the Iron Throne. 2:52 As far as House Baratheon goes, yes he is the heir. Robert had no trueborn children, and so it goes to his brother, Stannis, then Renly. If Robert had his succession in line with Edric Storm (legitimized) then yes he's got the higher claim. And so, with that said: Robb didn't want the Throne, just wanted to rebel against what Joffrey had done to his father. Renly wanted the Throne because... well, he's just a fool. He's kinda just doing his own thing 😅 The Ironborn are... always looking to rebel so, I dunno, they're just there to be a problem. Joanna Lannisters after the Dance was right, she wanted them dead and gone and I agree (maybe not with the Genocide but...) As for 5:00 The Targaryens are the ones who created the Iron Throne, and were the royals of the entire continent. Not a Westeros of 6 or 7 King's, but a Westeros with one King. The Iron Throne is a Targaryen-placed position of power, and so I'd argue that until all the Targaryens are dead, then it belongs to any member of their family remaining. But then again, this is my own interpretation of how it works I'm sure plenty will agree/disagree, and I'm all for it 😅
3:02 And when deciding who would get Storm's End after he became King (effectively 'inheriting' his former status as Lord of Storm's End) Robert chose Renly over Stannis.
Robert was King by right of conquest. Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella were all bastard born. Therefore, Stannis is the rightful heir. It's not that complicated. Stannis has not been conquered (yet) when he is, his claim will die with him, but until then, All Hail Stannis Baratheon, The First of His Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm.
He used family ties to legitimize his reign he was a rebel who won a Targaryen banner man who swore an oath he the definition of a usurper anyway stannis lost so Joffrey was the rightful king now tommen right he won just like Robert
If succession follows "right of conquest" then there are no rightful heirs. Stannis would need to conquer all the Seven Kingdoms in order to be legitimate, and his legitimacy would die with him. Any successor would need to complete a new conquest. This is broadly what we see with Assyria. Every Assyrian king (and the Akkadians before them) went on campaign against all the same peoples. The conquering warlord is the rightful ruler, but their successor has yet to conquer anything and has no right to rule.
Stannis was indeed the true heir to the Iron throne however George RR Martin is the writer so we basically see why he invented the Lannisters and Cercei. And Cercei becomes a central theme of the show and probably the novels for every opportunity to expose her illegitimate actions and remove her from power are basically told to her like videogame cheat code so she's able to just order her minions and cronies and those she corrupted so everything falls apart. Meanwhile Stannis comes off as a very hard working man who gets some unfortunate things happening his way and unfortunately he also made the alliance to Allisandre and gave her too much credibility and power.
@@matthewsteele99 By law, until House Targaryen is extinct, they are the rightful rulers. Right of conquest only ever applied to land in the Middle Ages unless the previous ruling house was completely destroyed root and stem. The House of Lancaster claimed the throne by right of conquest and the choice of Richard II, but the House of York contested by right of inheritance. The Wars of the Roses were the result and neither side actually won.
@@DavidbarZeus1 Can the Baratheons not make a claim due to being married into the Targaryens? I'm pretty sure they hold some distant relationship to the Targs.
The case is pretty clear, from a purely legal standpoint: Westeros, like every other, real life or fictionnal state, works with laws, and those laws are clear and well established, especially when it comes to the transmission of power in a monarchy. The basic principles we can find in real life history are here the same in Westeros, and they are as follow: the power is hereditary, meaning the descendants of the current ruler will inherit their rank and status once said current ruler dies (or much more rarer, when he abdicates, note that actually, in most monarchies in history, the monarch was not allowed to abdicate because it was considered to be not a right, but a duty, a sacred burden he had to carry until his death); then, comes the "who exactly will inherit among the descendants?" and there comes the second part: in most real life cases, it is the principle of primogeniture of the male heir that applies, a French term that means that it is specifically the eldest child who will inherit the power, and specifically the male heir, in short, it means women cannot inherit and cannot become the ruler, if the eldest son dies before becoming the ruler, then it passes to the second eldest, and so on; if no son remains, then the succession line goes back to the brothers of the current ruler, first, the second eldest brother after the current ruler, who then begins his own dynasty, and power will be transmitted to his own descendants following the same rules, and so on and on. In Westeros, it seems women can inherit power, and only the principle of primogeniture apparently applies. Now, that means that after Robert's demise, his eldest son Joffrey should become the King, and in case of Joffrey's death, his sister Myrcella should become Queen, and so on until Tomen. Note that in all real life monarchic system, as the entire system was built around religious beliefs, the law of succession and transmission of power was specifically something that the sitting King did NOT have the power to change, it was beyond his control and he had no say in the matter, and, since Westeros' system is also heavily influenced by religion, it stands to assume that the rules here also have this permanence attached to them, as the fundamental laws of the kingdom, that not even the ruling King can modify, so it is most likely that Robert, even if he had wanted, would not have been able to not recognize Joffrey as his successor anyway since it was something that was set in stone by the laws of the kingdom regardless of his opinion on the matter. Now, of course, we know Joffrey is not actually the son of Robert, and in that case, not being the legitimate blood son of Robert would instantly disqualify Joffrey and his siblings from any claim to the throne (said siblings being not the kids of Robert either, they are disualified under their own merit), but of course, such thing would need to be proven before a special court of law who would pronounce for or against it. Admitting it is publicly proven that Joffrey and his siblings are not Robert's children, then, according to the laws of succession, Stannis, as the second eldest son and brother of Robert, would legally be the rightful King, and his children after him would succeed him and found their own dynasty. Now, comes the dispute about whever Stannis or Daenerys should be the rightful ruler, based on the opinion about whenever Robert's Kingship was legitimate or not, since he effectively rebelled against his then King and overthrew him. Legally speaking, Robert committed a Coup, aka he illegally seized power from the current legally reigning King, and as such, all his actions ever since as sitting Monarch could be ruled as null and void in a court of law, and Daenerys should be instated as the rightful sovereign of the land according to said laws, as she is the eldest known child of the late King who is currently alive, so in this interpretation, Daenerys is in all intents and purpose THE only legitimate Queen of Westeros, and Stannis' claim is invalid because it is based on his late brother's reign which was illegal, and as I said, null and void. However, that was the legalese interpretation, now, let's look at the facts, let's take the example of the French Revolution: the revolutionaries overthrew King Louis XVI and declared the end of Monarchy, legally speaking, it was obviously illegal, in reality, a whole new set of laws was drafted to make it legal in the first place, the Monarchy was legally dismantled, and the Republic was instated, with a Constitution, and all that comes with it; and in the case of Robert's reign, it can be argued of the same fact: the fall of the Targaryen dynasty and the sitting of Robert on the Iron Throne has effectively brought for a new legal order, where while the fundamental laws of the kingdom remained (the succession laws among other things), the legal legitimacy of Robert to be King of Westeros has become de facto the new legal standard, backed by the power of the State, just as with any other regime change: the current ruler, who commands the military might of the State, is the one who has the physical power to make the laws or back his claims, therebery making it the new legal standard, just as with the French Revolutionaries who took down Monarchy by force and then used said force to back their newly made legal claims: a new legal order simply replaces the old one. So, at the end, from a purely legal standpoint: Stannis Baratheon is the legitimate claimant to the Iron Throne, but, since Daenerys Targaryen obviously doesn't accept this claim and believes the old legal order where her father was the KIng still applies, she evidently needs to win this war to then back up her claim and make it the new legal state of affairs, also by necessary extension, making Robert's previous reign null and void so as to also deny any of his surviving family members the legal claim to the throne.
Only problem with the purely legal side of it, is that Right of Conquest is very explicitly a legal way that one becomes King Robert Baratheon rebelled, deposed the King and was recognised from Winterfell to Sunspear as having took the Throne. So by Right of Conquest he is a conqueror and therefore legally King. The Targaryens rule by that exact same claim, Aegon conquered or earned the submission of six Kingdoms and by that right became King over them all.
@@candlelighter1588Sorry, but in real history, right of conquest has only successfully applied to land, not a crown. Only one dynasty ever used right of conquest to support their claim to the throne: House Lancaster of England. And even then, the legal heirs, the Yorks, rebelled against literally every Lancastrian king who ruled, even claiming the throne for a time until the houses were united by Henry Tudor marrying a daughter of York.
The setting does a good job of depicting the absurdity of rule. By blood, the line was likely broken in some form a long time ago. Aegon I was also king via force, and humans themselves won the land through conquest. All of the rule of any King has always extended through whoever ends up on the throne by any means. If that means is war, incest, murder, political bargaining or magic - no one cares. So, in the moment of Stannis' own life, I'd say no, because 1) he hasn't won the throne and 2) barely anyone seems to recognize him as a real threat or claimant. "Right" only matters if the people (more accurately, the people holding the spears/dragons) think it matters, no matter the argument. Morality and systems of government are things we all made up for ourselves, after all. None of it is real or governed by natural forces.
I personally think its a pretty fun exercise to go over all the potential claiments: - Stannis (Via Blood and Conquest) - Dani (Via Blood) - Aegon (Via Blood) - Potentially (and probably) Jon (Through Blood AND potential Legitimaization through Robb's Will) - BloodRaven (Via being Legitimaized by his dad) - Bran (If BloodRaven chooses him and House Stark to be the Targ Heirs, as heir by monarch's choice occurs alot in House Targ.) - The Others and/or The Forest Children (if they manage to win via Conquest... though if that is the case, I doubt there is going to be a need to argue it lol)
Jon is not an actual bastard. He is legitimate, but no one knows...yet. In reality, Jon is the heir with the strongest claim. Plus he is also the King of the North.
Stannis could try to claim the throne by the divine right of prophecy, being proclaimed Azor Ahai by Melisandre. The king, chosen by R'hllor to defend the Seven Kingdoms in the Long Night against The Great Other
@@carlrood4457 I am just talking about it being possible in principle. Keep in mind that this is why Stannis is legitimate in the eyes of a lot of his followers. They were persuaded by this prophecy and convertet to the faith of the Lord of Light. Also there are a few things mentioned in the prophecy that might even persuade skeptics to rally behind Stannis, like the Long Night or if people learn that White Walkers are real. I wonder if the Westerosi would start reconsidering their faith as soon as the White Walkers breach the Wall.
@@ErikDayne Never heard of the Divine Right of Kings? Or ruling by the Grace of God? This was the foundation for the rule of most absolute monarchs. They claimed to have been directly appointed by God, and therefore only answered to Him and were not subject to any earthly powers/institutions. A notable example from British history (which heavily inspired A Song of Ice and Fire) was King James VI of Scotland, who later became James I of England. A few rulers who claimed legitimacy because of prophecy would have been: 1. Alexander the Great. He had a few prophecies, most notable the one by the Oracle of Amun at Siwa Oasis 2. Roman Emperor Constantine the Great. He claimed to have had a divine vision on the eve of the battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 AD, prophesying his victory and therefore his ascension to the throne. 3. Henry IV of France (Henry of Navarre) was said to have fulfilled one of the Nostradamus prophecies.
He's not the King we wanted, but he's without a doubt the King that Acted. Actions speak louder than words, and while the other Kings spoke of birthright, he acted on the Kingdom's best interest. Because of this, he is the rightful King in my books.
“Robert, Jon thought for one mad moment, but when the trumpets blew again and the knights charged, the name they cried was “Stannis! Stannis! STANNIS!” Sounds like one hell of an introduction for the hero and the rightful king of the seven kingdoms.
There is no "right of conquest", Robert was Aerys' nearest relative who was neither disinherited (Rhaegar, Maegor Brightflame) nor illegitimate. If the rebels had staked their rebellion on "right of conquest" then Jon Arryn would have become king, but they needed a legal backing. The "right of conquest" argument is only ever used by people with somehow less understanding of medieval procedure than the average GOT fan.
Important detail, well said. Conquest was definitely a part- but it was a conquest predicated on the insane behavior of Aerys for one thing and then supported by electing the person who could be considered part of that royal family and therefore legitimate, since the concept of a bloodline is clearly important to this society.
But the whole royal family is bullshit anyways since Aegons only right to it was his dragons lol. Aegon claimed it via right of conquest, as did Robert. Right of conquest is respected, Tywin believes Balon to be king of the north and the iron islands after he conquors them. However, disregarding right of conquest and focusing on who the throne should pass to, ignoring those who have no right, Stannis is the rightful heir.
LOL. This is fantasy, not actual medieval procedure, which only maintained that procedure because everyone was related anyway. Easier to just marry someone in and give them something if they could fight you, than to fight them.
@@CheeseCrumbs00 Aegon didn't conquer the Seven Kingdoms, he conquered seven kingdoms and united then into one, new entity. He wasn't a vassal of Harren or Argilac or Mern or any of the other kings, he was an outsider who forged a new realm, that's a lot different to what Robert did.
Robert definitely did consider Stannis his heir aside from Joffrey because Stannis received dragonstone which was in theory a more prestigious title granted only to the heir of the king.
I disagree. He never allows either of his brothers to style themselves princes even though they are up until he has his own kids. The Prince of Dragonstone is the heir but not the Lord of Dragonstone.
I think there's something to be said about Bobby B naming Stannis to Dragonstone as well. Stannis saw it as a slight, but Dragonstone IS where, historically speaking, King's shoves their heirs.
I feel like Robert would have left the throne to Ned. Just like he did until his "son" came of age. Robert considered Ned his true brother and shared his childhood and went to war with Ned.
True that. Robert had far more affection for Ned than he ever had for either Renly, or Stannis. The only time they had a falling out was when Robert refused to punish Jamie Lannister for "regicide" against the Mad King, because in Robert's twisted head, that was the right thing to do (the ends justified the means). But Ned couldn't tolerate that, and left in a huff. The two only made up after Ned returned from the Tower of Joy, and told Robert of Lyanna's passing. I feel like an entire chapter of a book could have been written on that scene alone!
@@jacob4920Robert did do the right thing offing the Targaryen babies, and the only time he got it “twisted” is when he let Ned talk him out of finishing off Viserys and Dany. Would have saved 10s of thousands of lives if he would have finished that job correctly.
I was going to push back on this one, but no, actually it fits doesn't it? Robert wouldn't give a shit about custom or law or politics, he would have just tried to do what he did when he appointed Ned as Hand - 'You're the bloke I trust most, you're the person I feel is most like a brother to me, now get on with it'. Unlike when he was appointed Hand though, I feel like Ned would have 100% refused. He'd have taken the same position in canon - Stannis is the rightful king. The politics of the downfall of the Lannisters could really be fascinating.
Sorry I’ve missed some live streams, I finally started reading the books (listening to the audio books) because of your videos and it’s very time consuming. Just returned Storm of Swords to the library today! I’d love for you to do a video about your thoughts on the audio book narrator and his pronunciation lol
The way I look at it, Robert got to establish a new dynasty by right of force because he lead a just rebellion against an oppressive ruler, but once the new dynasty was established the righfull kings should be in accordance with the line of succession, which given what we know as readers makes Stanis the rightful king.
Basically yeah, legally Stannis is King. The Mad King was a cruel tyrant and he got usurped in a rebellion. At this point Robert became King - and since Robert's children are illegitimate, Stannis is the next in line. Of course, since Robert was a usurper, this would also give a legal claim to fAegon, and if he turns out not to really be Aegon, Daenerys would have a legal claim. Succession is a messy business but I'd say Stannis should be King, with fAegon and Daenerys having claims.
I defeated your uncle Victarion and his Iron Fleet off Fair Isle, the first time your father crowned himself. I held Storm's End against the power of the Reach for a year, and took Dragonstone from the Targaryens. I smashed Mance Rayder at the Wall, though he had twenty times my numbers. Tell me, turncloak, what battles has the Bastard of Bolton ever won that I should fear him? My knees are bending instantly
"He certainly thinks so." Yeah and so did Ned, Robb, Cat, Bran, Arya, Balon, Oleana, etc. Outside of the Lannisters, almost all of the main characters acknowledge that Stannis is the next in line for the throne, just that they don't LIKE him. He's a Targaryen as well as a Baratheon. He's the rightful king in a multitude of ways. And these aren't debatable "perspective" things, as WE, the audience, DO know he's the rightful king. And, spoiler: the Targaryen's themselves are NOT entitled to Westeros. They're not from that continent. They've been on Westeros for under 300 years. They're not owed anything. They're foreign invaders.
It broke my heart when let them burn that little girl. Because, he clearly was a potential King who cared. The Smallfolk would have had a better life while he ruled, because he cared. But, then he burned his little girl.....
I think the point of the story is to show you that no one is rightfully owed rulership by virtue of blood. Stannis himself seems to only fight for the throne because he believes he is obligated to by the letter of the law. In his mind the throne has been burdened on him.
Dany starting a new empire made the most sense. She had the best claim and the state of the kingdom was such that it would have been better off unified into an empire. She would have been mad though and it makes sense for her to be mad, every other person in her family is mad, it's baked into their DNA.
Targaryen Madness is massively overblown though, its not even the 50/50 we see in the in-universe coin flip superstition and its most definitely not every member of the family. The mad ones are who? Maegor, Rhaegal, Aerion, Aerys 2nd are the easy picks. Some would argue Viserys 3rd though I think that's unfair. So we have like half a dozen out of the entire dynasty which includes over a 100 known members.
With the victory in Roberts Rebellion and the fall of House Targaryen, the royal succession belongs to Robert and his heirs. Jon, Dany, and Viserys are no longer a part of it as far as i am concerned. Since Robert had no trueborn heirs, it must go to Stannis.
One of the main themes, and I dare say the point of the story, is that divine right to rule is a stupid concept. Technically you can skew the logic of Westeros succession to make patchface the true king.
GRRM: all kings are tyrants, all monarchies are inherently broken & a martial society ruins everyone in it ASOIAF community: yeah but is Stannis' claim better than Dany's ? GRRM: you don't deserve another book No, Stannis is not the "rightful king". There is nothing "rightful" about being a king, or a queen. The author could not possibly be clearer about this.
Very childish way of looking at things. Hereditary rulers have existed for 10000s if not 100000s of years. "Democracy" etc is only a fraction of that and even "elections", "republics" and "democracies" have an issue with elitism and heridary rule. See the Bush/Kennedy dynasty in the USA.
@@mrfreeman2911 I don't know what you think your asinine comment proves but I can assure that it is neither insightful, nor relevant to the discussion. Please google the "Dunning-Kruger effect" and have a nice day.
The man despised his own (or at least who he belived to be) son i m pretty sure he'd name his stern and stiff brother as his heir paticularly since Ned would aggressively insist
Can we all agree though that the actor who played Stannis is frigging great?
He is literally Stannis irl to the point that he found playing the role tedious
For everyone that isn’t Euron Greyjoy their casting was super on point it’s awesome
He's better in The Tunnel series.
Agreed
Stephen Dillane rules
"I'll not become a page in someone else's history book" - Stannin the Mannis
Written on page 3 of the book of Bran the broken 😂
Says the man who is a page in several other people’s history books…
Still at least he will be remembered - as the man who murdered his own brother in cold blood and then handed the Seven Kingdoms to the Lannisters.
"My brother is a rebel terrorist who illegally overthrew the government, and I was the right-hand man of his illegitimate criminal faction, making me the rightful KING!!!"
Stannis "wtf is this old man talking about" Mannis
@@final_animal *who illegally overthrow the government only so he could get p*ssy, damn the baratheon dynasty is pathetic, orys must be turning in his grave
@@final_animal In the Setting, Right of Conquest (like the Aegon the Conqueror, who is repeatedly mentioned) is a legal standard by which someone becomes King
And in Male Primogeniture, the right is given to the nearest trueborn (not a bastard) male
Which means when Rightful King Robert, who earned his throne through conquest and as cousin to the Royal family died with no trueborn son, Stannis Baratheon became the King de jure
I loved Stannis and Jon's interactions at the wall. Both frustrated at each other for following their own sense of duty, but also respecting each other for it.
An even more interesting aspect of the tragedy that plays out, is that Renly could possibly have changed it all and still ended up king - had he decided to back his older brother instead of going against tradition, with the promise that Stannis would name him heir unless he got a legitimate son. It's highly unlikely the latter would happen, and his daughter could not have been named Queen in her own right under the current laws. With Reny being heir-apparent he could probably have formed a marriage-alliance with the Tyrells. Their combined forces with Stannis' would probably have triumphed at King's Landing and what's more Rob Stark might even have sided with them, if there had been less confusion about who was in line to the throne. So two major turning points that led to the utter chaos of civil war was Cat deciding to kidnap Tyrion, and Renly deciding to proclaim himself king.
I'm not sure if you meant to refer to this, but those terms were exactly what Stannis offered Renly when they parleyed at Storm's End. By that point, though, Renly had already proclaimed himself king and rallied his allies with the express goal of putting him on the throne, so it would have been much harder for him to back down as opposed to if Renly had declared support for Stannis from the start. Plus, by the time they met at Storm's End, Renly had overwhelming military superiority, so he thought Stannis couldn't possibly threaten him.
Another interesting hypothetical is what if someone like Renly had proposed that Stannis take the black. That would have allowed Stannis to directly fight against the threat of the Others, relieved him of the duties of ruling which he never really wanted, and would have clearly made Renly the rightful king in the eyes of anyone who believed (or chose to believe) the Twincest story. Then Stannis' supporters would likely have joined Renly, and that combined force (including the Tyrells) would almost certainly have overwhelmed the Lannisters and induced Robb Stark to submit.
Renly was called bronze for a reason. Total idiot.
Only if Stannis was a good king. Otherwise people would have rebelled before Renly even got the chance to take over. Rhaegar Targaryen was by all accounts a good man and would have made a good king, but his father was so unpopular that he was overthrown before Rhaegar got the chance to take over.
Reclaiming the North would've been easy. Send Rob home with his father's bones, his sister's life and a story about how the north declared independence under the false assumption that Joffrey was legitimate and Stannis had ignoble ambitions. Not making that offer to Cat was Stannis' mistake, just as not accepting Stannis' offer was Renly's. But I don't know that the Tyrells would've taken their side so easily. Stannis would've done a lot of damage to the great houses with his foreign god and inflexible attitude towards law and morality.
@@SirBrasstion he probably could have let them keep the title king in the north, The dornish got to keep their ruling title for marrying into the family and ceasing the border raids, Ned uncovering this plot he did is enough to warrant the title.
I love Stannis' speech to get the troops ready to take Kings Landing:
"Come with me and take this city!"
That's it. That's all. Perfect for his character, no fluff no BS. Just the facts.
That's the thing about Stannis. There are great and charismatic leaders throughout history that, right or wrong, deliberately or not, inspire zealotry in their followers.
Men follow Stannis because they know exactly where they stand with him. Stannis is blunt, but he is unapologetically powerful and principled, and so he inspires respect and true loyalty.
@@Azraiel213
Stannis reminds me a lot of Basil II in some ways.
If we’re going off East Romans, Nikephoros II or Constantine V are also ones I think fit Stannis
@@aegonthedragon7303 >Uses Rome instead of cuckzantium
I salute you random internet stranger.
And he's the first man in the lead landing boat, first on the beach and seems to be last to withdraw
By Right Of Conquest, All Hail King That Big Boar That Gutted Robert!
Except it died
@@ajteer So to the guy killing it?
@@ajteer well, take your pick: King Boar's Eldest Piglet or King Joffrey
Piglet.
By Right of Conquest, All Hail King Lancel Lannister for Assassinating Robert via wine and boar
Best line....
The hound: 'whilst im standing on it, its my land.'
Stannis Baratheon is my favorite character (after the Hound). And what the TV show did to his character and arc is a CRIME.
In our hearts? Always.
STANNIS THE GOD DAMN MANNIS, I hope he wins the Game of Thrones!
Didnt have to scroll far for this comment, thank you ser!
Never in a million years would GRRM end the story with stannis on the throne
@@I_am_a_cat_ Unfortunately this is the correct answer.
I was gonna make this post
@@I_am_a_cat_ Imagine him writing the most fucking grey story with all these tragic things happening just to end it with a happy ending. It would be fucking hilarious! It wouldn't even necessarily feel like a cop out because even though the story has a positive ending there is still all this death all this tragedy that has happened through the story that's tainting the supposedly happy ending somewhat.
Is it weird that i like reading Stannis more than anyone else? He's done a lot of things "right" held the fort during the war to the bitter end, gave up on the throne to help the people, tried not to execute the innocent and hand out the laws fairly. But he always gets snubbed and screwed over. I have given up thinking we'll ever get the full story from George but i hope we get the battle of winterfell to wash the tv shows ending for him out of our collective mouths.
3:40 3:42 3:42
Stannis gets snubbed and screwed over because he's a stickler, because he's petty, bitter, vindictive, entitled, and utterly uncompromising. His idea of diplomacy in almost all cases is to say "Give me everything I want and swear loyalty to me, right now, no strings attached, or die".
@@dragonslair951167 Can you give me a few examples of that? Because from what i remember he has been very compromising.
@@Mckadow To start, he declared himself as king and entered the war of the five kings despite his lack of political power, when he could have easily just declared for another king. Then he refused to make peace with Renly or Robb Stark despite both presenting the possibility of powerful and willing allies.
Even after killing Renly, he considers executing the lords who declared for him for treason, only reconsidering because he needs the men.
Then he demands not merely the cooperation, but the fealty of the wildlings and the Night's Watch on pain of death despite neither owing him any loyalty, and only backs down because of Jon Snow.
Stannis' idea of "compromise" is usually to not kill people for disobeying him if they swear loyalty to him immediately.
@@dragonslair951167 I think you misunderstand his perspective. He never aimed to be king, he was snubbed by his brother for positions he should have been given purely because robert didn't like him very much. He has always obeyed the laws. By the laws of the seven kingdoms he is King he only aimed for the throne after confirmation Robert's heirs were not his (even though he probably already knew since they look nothing like Robert) but only did something when Ned sent him proof. The laws say keep the wildings out allowing them lands to settle in exchange for helping him take winterfell is an extremely generous offer. Almost every other person aiming for the throne right now would have them left on the other side of the wall or killed. Renly was ignoring the laws about the line of succession again Stannis is a law driven man. In terms of fairness Stannis is probably the most easy to read. Don't break the law he's usually fine. Think of him like a D&D character who is lawful neutral. I find him to be the most interesting and down to earth one going for the throne right now because by the laws he is the king.
9:12 - There's only one quote that needs to be said about it:
'He could hear the birds quorking in the rookery, so he put the papers away and climbed the steps to feed them. Three more ravens had come in, he saw with pleasure. "Snow," they cried at him. "Snow, snow, snow." He had taught them that. Even with the newcomers, the ravenry seemed dismally empty. Few of the birds that Aemon had sent off had returned as yet. One reached Stannis, though. One found Dragonstone, and a king who still cared.' - Sam IV in A Storm of Swords:
I tear up a bit whenever I read that line.
Also at the battle beneath the wall.
In the final jon chapter in SoS.
Stannis!Stannis!Stannis!
Not only is he the true and rightful king, he's The Mannis
He was our Mannis, until what he did...
He has no right to the throne whatsoever, his brother is a criminal usurper. He is indeed the Mannis though and still badass.
@@final_animal even his sword is fake
The boar is the rightful king of the Andals and the Rhoynar, and the First Men Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm BY RIGHT OF CONQUEST!!! he took down the usurper! sementing his bloodline
@@deenman23 Semen?!
Growing up means that we begin to appreciate Stannis. I hated him when I was a teen, but now I find his method of ruling the lesser evil to the Seven Kingdoms.
With all due respect to your opinion, which method, witchcraft to kill his brother, or burning his daughter to death?
He comes over as a psychopath.
@@miguelservetus9534Burning of his daughter is not canon. It has not happened in the books
@@jarogniewtheconqueror2804
You are right. I should have noted that.
It was an early sign that the show runners were going off the rails. Indicative of what was to come.
@@miguelservetus9534 the witchcraft was seen as a necessary evil. It was that or a battle where 1000s/10000s die. And he was bamboozled by the lord of light and the promises.
And he does not kill his daughter. That was the showrunners butchering Stannis.
Just commenting to also highly recommend IDG Live! - this guy is a pleasure!
I love the fact that Stannis loyalists are still going strong ♥️
Mannis is our King 👑
One king,one realm one god!
THE ONE TRUE KING
Man, 11 Minutes, that's a long yes
He has no legal right to the throne though, cool as the character is.
@@final_animalHe is the only legitimate heir wtf you talking about.
By what right? Because his brother illegally overthrew the government? He's literally part of a rebel faction of criminals who attacked the government, there is absolutely zero legitimacy to his claim. That doesn't mean he doesn't kick ass lol.
You could argue that nobody has a "legal" right to the crown as it has often been taken by force, but if anybody did have a claim, Stannis would be among the candidates waaaay down at the very, very bottom of the list. That's just a fact whether you like his character or not (and I do).@@samhobbs9116
@@final_animalAre you on Warlock's Wine?
literally the ONLY one with a legitimate claim LMAO@@final_animal
In this universe the "true king" is who can take and keep it in the end. Any monarch is potentially vulnerable in this universe / construct. In the petty king era we saw kings wipe out competing monarchs / royal lines and take their lands. Aegon I had no claim but he took the realm by overwhelming force. As did Maegor again to an extent not long after him and Jaehaerys take it back and the Dance fought over who each thought was the rightful heir. Blackfyres as well, whether or not they even believed their claims were legitimate if they got the support , won the throne that would be the end of it. Bobby B was not born expecting to be king of anything and yet he , Ned / their forces overthrew a three century familial dynasty and Robert ended up being king of the realm for almost 20 years. Thats what it comes down to , any monarch can be challenged if one believes their claim , gains enough support / forces and actually pushes the issue. Keeping the throne can be just as challenging as gaining it in the first place. If you can take the throne its yours.
Stannis if he wins the throne it will be his. Perhaps more the important question is would be be a good king ? i personally suppose he would. Probably more so before Mel / R'hllorist corruption. But he is a "do the right thing" type , seems quite fair and just. Not the most charismatic or popular , certainly wouldn't have masses clamoring to install him. But compared to Robert's disinterest and neglect and Renly's lack of seriousness or suitability , Stannis would be more the king you need compared to the other two who might be the king many might want / have wanted. Let alone compared to the awful Lannisters. Plus SB's current overall approach , feeling it is his right and duty to be king (rather than simply wanting it) and trying to save the realm to facilitate that is much more honorable and noble than most other claimants we've seen thus far.
0:01 Yes. Video over.
Credit where it's due.
Stannis and Jon Snow were the only ones who tried to do anything about the white walkers.
Yet the final season of the TV fully justified the other characters not giving a damn because the "long" night lasted one night and the the WW were defeated in a single battle. 6/7 Kingdoms didn't even realise anything out of the ordinary had happened. There was no existential doomsday battle between the living and the dead.
@Nick-zp8wk
Season 7 and 8 were bad fan fictions as far as I'm concerned.
They discarded everything that had been built up and replaced it with simple idiocy.
@@infidelheretic923 Legend has it D&D hired a 14 YO as writer
@@infidelheretic923 5 is fanfiction also. Remember what Stannis did to his daughter? I wish I could forget.
@@Klongu_Da_Bongu
I can not say for sure if Stannis was or wasn't above, child sacrifice. For him to simply be killed off by the Boltons seems anti climactic, but many deaths in this series often are.
"Fewer." --Stannis the Mannis
I love that one-word line. Such a subtle way to point out someone is an idiot while they are acting all intelligent and grandiose.
wHaT?
@@WilsonianGarveyite Someone said something else when they meant "fewer" and Stannis corrected them.
@@WilsonianGarveyite _Nothing_
When I saw the title, I thought to myself, this is medieval society, true kind is one with the biggest army to claim the crown.
I love that you at least recognized that, because a lot of people miss this.
Yes, but armies don’t just follow anyone as King. You almost always need some sort of claim.
There have been Chinese peasants who became warlords and Emperor, but that type of thing is pretty rare. Armies almost always follow some lineaged elite or other.
Even Tamerlane was minor nobility. And because he wasn’t actually of Genghis’ lineage, he had to rule as Emir instead, despite his military dominance.
People have always taken bloodlines extremely seriously until quite recently in history.
And while the video claims the Lannisters have the right of conquest now, that isn’t quite true. They are claiming Tommen is a *Baratheon*.
And there’s a number of King’s Landing insiders who know or suspect that this isn’t true.
This means that despite the Lannisters winning the war up to this point. Their situation is still quite vulnerable.
Especially as a lot of their strength depended on Tywin’s intimidating reputation.
So the “rightful” King question is still of relevance.
This is why when, as I presume, Young Griff will take Storm’s End. A castle that has never fallen. This will be a very big deal, and win him tons of support.
The young, handsome son of Rhaeghar (supposedly) heroically winning a victory like that out of nowhere, and so early and young? And with Rhaeghar’s close friend, and the Golden Company, behind him?
Suddenly I bet a lot more people will start noticing, hey, that Tommen is nothing like Robert. I’m going to follow the “rightful” King!
That Tommen is a boy playing with cats, and YG will already have won a battle, will also matter.
Now, if the Tyrells were 100% behind Tommen, he’d still be the favorite I think. But we know Cersei’s well on her way to burning bridges there. Not to mention the Faith. And the Iron Bank.
Also, the video talks about “whoever ends up in the winning side”. But a lot of the time, that isn’t at war. It’s in the Small Council and court insider politics. In court social machinations. This is how Renly got his large army in the first place.
And Stannis still has backers, including the Iron Bank. I think if not for the currently publicly unknown claims of YG and Jon, Stannis would still have a decent chance of winning the Iron Throne.
Because of the Iron Bank, Manderly silver, Cersei burning bridges, and Tommen being too young.
Oof, that ended up a lot longer than I was intending ☺️ TLDR, it’s not just about the biggest army. It’s about the mechanics of where that army comes from. Which includes “rightful” claims, as well as social alliances and vested religious and financial interests, etc.
Which means the Lannisters are quite vulnerable, even if we as readers didn’t already “know” they wouldn’t win.
I think the narrator brings out 2 important points.
1. Robert became the legit ruler when he overthrew the Targs. Conquest makes him legit.
2. Stannis is Robert's legit heir, but the Lanninsters, theoretically under King Joffrey, establish their legitimacy by denying Stannis at the Battle of the Blackwater and holding King's Landing. Stannis's claim dies in that defeat.
The boar is the rightful king of the Andals and the Rhoynar, and the First Men Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm BY RIGHT OF CONQUEST!!! he took down the usurper! sementing his bloodline
In the Middle Ages people actually cared a lot about things like oaths or bloodlines. They had societal rules and they took them seriously. They gave their own lives or took others based upon those rules. Society wasn't some nihilistic free-for-all like GRRM portrays it as. One of the most ridiculous things in ASOIAF is when people support Renly as king despite him being the younger brother just because 'they like him more' than Stannis. GRR portrays whole armies just changing their loyalties at the drop of the hat, which is also ridiculous.
GRRM claims his series is an accurate reflection of how medieval people thought and behaved, and also claims it is a realistic portrayal of human nature. It is neither. Honestly, after hearing his claims and reading his series, I begin to question how much he actually knows about history.
@@Konoronn I suggest you study England's Wars of the Roses.
1. Henry Bolingbroke (Henry IV) deposes his cousin Richard II, starting the Wars.
2. Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, known as the "Kingmaker", switched sides 3 times.
3. Richard III of England had his older brother's (Edward IV) marriage declared invalid and his children including Edward V, for whom he was Lord Protector, declared bastards. Soon after Edward V and his brother disappeared from the Royal Apartments in the Tower. Immediately, Richard was suspected on foul play though he engineers his ascension through a petition of some lords and commoners to assume the throne. Richard was king for 2 years when Henry Tudor landed in Wales. Tudor's rebellion was successful through the efforts of his mother, Margaret Beaufort, wife of Thomas Stanley, who held Richard's flank at Bosworth Field but took no part in the battle. Thus, Richard died at that battle because a trusted commander switched sides. Also, His older brother George, Duke of Clarence, with whom Richard did get along, had already been executed for treason, but there is little doubt that Richard would have jumped his older brother's claim just as Renly did to Stannis. While the parallels are not exact, it's similar enough to acknowledge that Renly's actions were not unprecedented.
I think Martin draws heavily from these historical events.
Robert gave Dragonstone to Stannis, following precedent that the Targaryen dynasty did in appointing the heir to the throne there.
Stannis always saw not having Storm's End as a slight and was almost blinded by that, missing that Robert, in an unwieldy show of affection gave him Dragonstone instead as a recognition of Stannis' efforts in the war and subsequently being his heir.
This is honestly very debatable. When Tyrion and Cersei talk about it, she tells him Robert *meant* it as a slight. There's no way to know for sure what Robert's intentions were (or if he even gave it any real thought), though I'm inclined to believe Robert either meant it as a slight, or didn't care how Stannis took it.
I disagree. Dragonstone was the seat of the heir to the Iron Throne because it was the Targaryen ancestral seat. The significance came from the head of the family giving up their ancestral seat to the heir for the Iron Throne, not necessarily Dragonstone in and of itself.
When Robert gave up Storm’s End to instead rule from the Iron Throne in King’s Landing, the vacancy by right should have been given up to his next of kin, Stannis. The act of giving Dragonstone to Stannis meant nothing to him because Dragonstone meant nothing to him. Storm’s End was the Baratheon ancestral home and it was where Stannis grew up.
Passing Stannis over for Renly can definitely be seen as an insult, as Storm’s End’s legal line of succession was ignored. Practically speaking, snubbing a skilled battlefield commander that nearly gave his life defending the castle for an actual child would piss off anyone. Doesn’t help the fact that the “reward” (Robert probably meant it as an insult imo) Stannis got was a sparsely populated rock with low tax income and an unruly population he had to babysit.
@@jackmcgarry3201exactly right, Stannis was incredibly loyal to Robert and unlike Ned, actually wanted to help. Robert was a bit of a fool for not trusting him more after all the times Stannis proved himself.
@@jackmcgarry3201You may disagree but George himself said that Robert didn't mean it as a slight.
This is a direct quote from George on sept 11th 1999
"Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity."
He gave it to Stannis because he was technically the heir at the time and it was also full of Targaryen sympathizers and Robert wanted someone strong to hold it during his rein. Robert being raised in the Vale also probably made it so he had less or an emotional attachment to storms end than Stannis did growing up there and all the suffering he endured to hold it.
@@Vidar93While it might not necessarily have been a slight, I dont think GRRM was definitively saying it was or wasnt a slight, as he tends to leave things more open ended.
I think its a combination of factors with the pragmatic reason of having a competent, and loyal Lord holding Dragonstonse likely being the most influential on his decision.
However I also firmly disagree with the notion that Robert gave Dragonstone to Stannis as some sort of indirect way of Robert showing his appreciation for his brother, because thats just plainly out of character when there are so many examples that indicate Robert either basically didn't care at all about his brother, or actively disliked him in spite of his loyal service.
I could definitely see Robert at the very least finding some humour in sticking Stannis with Dragonstone, considering Stannis failed to capture Daenerys, and Viserys when he laid siege to the island; something Robert was openly displeased about, and critical of.
Wow, that wasn't what I expected! It was much better! Well done Robert! A thinkpiece, if you will ...
This topic never gets old.
Let’s go stannis the king
I always liked Stannis and thought he would have made a great king, particularly for the fact he was the only one to take the threat from Beyond the Wall seriously.
I think he’ll die heroically defending Winterfell from the Others. He will realise at the final minute that he is not Azor Ahai, but is merely buying time for him (for Jon Snow and Daenerys and Aegon)
I don’t think Stannis believes he’s azor ahai but still he believes he has a role to play in the coming wars
I think stannis will become part of the legend and his story will get conflated with.others'. it's pretty likely the original azor ahai was a composite character as well.
I’m thinking he may sacrifice himself (blood of kings) if a fire ritual to save the kingdom (and maybe cure his daughter).
Didn’t Melisandre at one point say that she saw a vision of him sitting the Iron Throne? Maybe I’m just mis remembering and this never happened.
But if so, maybe Jon becomes King. And Stannis becomes his Hand.
I could see that, as they seem to like each other. And both are about saving Westeros from the Whitewalkers.
Plus Stannis is actually Jon’s distant uncle. I think technically it would be cousin X times removed. Since Stannis has Targaryen ancestry.
Yeah I think Stannis' defining characteristic is that he will do his duty, which will have him prioritizing defense against the Others over more selfish interest of obtaining a hollow crown. It would actually make him that much more eminently suited to be king in the grand scheme.
Yes he is
man ive seen this channel grow so much over the past year or two. im so glad. you put in so much work, have such interesting takes, keep such an open mind, and you read as though youre an english professor but not a pretentious one. i hope 2024 sees you double your numbers!!
Robert if he had to choose his own successor. “Trial by Combat single elimination tournament!!!”
How do you do a double elimination trial by combat tournament??
@T.GLongstaff ask the white walkers 😂
@@vaiyt drum drum cymbal
@@Baelor-Breakspear well… it is Game of Thrones, lol
?? Robert is never shown being involved in any trial by combat. This is something Joffrey would do, not Robert.
Would you consider making a video on why Illyrio gave Dany the eggs, not fAgon? A video explaining how the eggs hatching affected Illyrio's plan would also be cool.
A theory I heard was that his plan was:
1- Eggs are sold to buy ships
2- Ships get Dothraki from Essos to Westeros
3- Chaos
4- Our Lord and Savior Aegon VI saves Westeros in his glorious return
It's hard to say because we don't know where the eggs came from. It could be they were Targaryen eggs being held by the Iron Bank and they transferred to Dany when she married. Or they could've been eggs from Ashaii that Illryio purchased as a wedding gift.
@@mikedeck8381 There is also the possibility that Varys stole the eggs from Dragonstone
To be fair, I doubt Mopatis foresaw the eggs hatching. They were likely intended as a financial bargaining chip
I very much believe that George himself has no answer to that! His "gardner" style as a writer leads to interesting dynamics, but if the story is too complex it loses cohesiveness. He has too much loose ends to untie and i think that the one about the acrual Illirio's plan is one of them. He just forgot what he intended to do about that character 20+ years ago! Also, i think he has no clear idea about Benjen Stark, where he is and why apparently he wanted Jon at the wall.
Power resides with those that men believe it resides. It’s a trick a shadow on the wall.
Power resides from a mandate from the mases.
@@carlost856 Power usually goes to the man with the biggest armies!
Varys' riddle is deeply flawed. It's an idealistic view on power, not a materialist. Cersei is closer to the truth when she threatens Littlefinger and proclaims "power is power". To elaborate within the framework of Varys' riddle: let's say the religious leader, the monarch and the rich man all agree that the monarch is their rightful ruler and tell them man with the weapon to protect him. Even if the man with the weapon doesn't agree, more people believe power resides with the king, so he has power... right? Except, when the man with the weapon disagrees and murders the king, he is the only one who actually counts in this riddle. He holds the power. Only where HE believes power resides matters, because he holds the material base of power in this riddle, the weapon. "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" as Mao phrased it.
@@olenickel6013but rarely does one guy has the ability to wield power with the barrel of his own gun. He needs other people with guns, and if those people don't believe in his power, the guns will turn on him.
@@olenickel6013But one guy with a sword is just one guy. And he has to go to sleep sometime.
So he can’t just ignore everyone.
And the larger the numbers, the more the illusion, the shadow on the wall, matters.
In the end physical might always makes right, simply because you must live in physical reality.
But with large numbers, advanced technology, and complex economics. Power becomes super complex and nuanced.
And the idea of belief, some shared mass belief in “legitimacy”, becomes important.
Haven’t hit play yet, but the answer is yes and will always be. Stannis will always be my rightful true king. ❤😎
Stannis will always be my mannis
Another great video. Stannis was a great character. Great as in unique. Great stories are not completely comprised of all the main characters being successful
Stannis truly is "The Mannis!" It's just a pity we will never see his destiny fulfilled, in the books that shall never be written.
"STANNIS, STANNIS, STANNIS!"
It all revolves around oold Nans kidney pie. With the peas
The secret is in the gravy.
"Few of the birds that Aemon had sent off had returned as yet.
One reached STANNIS, though.
One found Dragonstone,
AND A KING WHO STILL CARED"
In Varys's wise words: "Power resides where men believe it resides"
A nice and simple yes or no question to which the answer is YES. Long live the one true king! 👑
Yes, he is. It's not even a question.
Standards are such funny snowflakes.
Dude wasn’t even his own Brother’s choice 😂
I mean, it is. What determines who’s king? Is it blood? If so Viserys should have been crowned. But he dead.
Is it context? If so, Jon is currently. He’s been legitimized by Robb. He’s Rhaegars heir.
Is it by who’s technically on the throne? It’s Tommen.
So yeah. There’s a lot of answers
@@Nanobot1989viserys and jon were no longer part of the royal succession since the throne was usurped. The line belongs to robert. Since he had no trueborn heirs it goes to stannis.
Of course its the fun of debating and all but in my mind roberts rebellion and the fall of house targaryen settled the debate as far as jon, viserys and danaerys are concerned
@@chrisg4305but then, is it not true that whoever sits the throne usurps stannis’ claim?
so, why stannis over joffrey/tommen?
@@Zveebo so? Bobby B didn't like his own "son", he chose him because that was the law. Joff isn't a Baratheon.
Stannis is so hugely underrated
Stannis the Mannis will always be king in our hearts
Stannis is the true king because he is the Mannis
Your voice is so good! You really get your point across by using the lanuage and your voice. Good stuff!
King:
I am Arthur. King of the Britons. I am your king!
Peasant: well I didn't vote for em.
How did you become king then?
@@HenryWJonesJr The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.
@@TheGoodCrusader Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
You can't expect to wield supreme power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!”
Stannis isn't the king we all want, but he's the king we all need. He just needs to settle down with the burning children thing.
Never did it in the books
Aegon I Targaryen, also known as Aegon the Conqueror and Aegon the Dragon, won the iron throne by conquering the six kingdoms. So Robert's claim to the iron throne is based on Aegon's initial claim: by right of conquest.
Given the history of Westeros, whoever sits on the iron throne is the king or queen. Nothing else matters.
Robert can’t claim right of conquest he was a rebel and a traitor who won he used family ties to legitimize his reign if he the rightful king then tommen is now because stannis lost
At least until the next guy comes and takes it.
@@kap2652 does it matter you are a traitor when the alternative is a madman ?
@@blitzkrieg2928 bad position to be in no doubt but doesn’t change the fact he was a rebel and a traitor he the definition of an usurper he
@@carlrood4457 Indeed.
Which is exactly why in real history, I’m not really familiar with anyone who ruled by 100% right of conquest.
Because then someone else could just go, “Oh so that’s how it is? Well I’m next then!”
Instead warlords always had other claims. Ancestry, religion, marriage, violation of some treaty, and so on.
It’s not really practical to claim rule just by right of conquest, because then it becomes a free for all.
*5:51* It doesn't matter whether Robert would have "stuck with Stannis as his heir". It matters that Robert died without true-born children and so Stannis was next in line.
Yes. Bend your knees or lose your heads.
If grrm didn’t mention the shock of the burning of his daughter we would be reading a dream of spring by now 😅
Being king is sort of like being a champion fighter, you're only really one if you've defended your title. Abtaining it through inheiritence is like becoming champion by the prior one retiring.
Legitimacy is a bit of sham in Westeros. All kings in this story have a rule based on violence. A throne made entirely of swords if one wanted to use such a metaphor.
6:36 I think Viserys II was the one who solidified it and they went with it. He got sick and tired of all the ridiculousness, and made it clear that Male Primogeniture is the way of succession for the Iron Throne.
2:52 As far as House Baratheon goes, yes he is the heir. Robert had no trueborn children, and so it goes to his brother, Stannis, then Renly. If Robert had his succession in line with Edric Storm (legitimized) then yes he's got the higher claim.
And so, with that said:
Robb didn't want the Throne, just wanted to rebel against what Joffrey had done to his father.
Renly wanted the Throne because... well, he's just a fool. He's kinda just doing his own thing 😅
The Ironborn are... always looking to rebel so, I dunno, they're just there to be a problem. Joanna Lannisters after the Dance was right, she wanted them dead and gone and I agree (maybe not with the Genocide but...)
As for 5:00
The Targaryens are the ones who created the Iron Throne, and were the royals of the entire continent. Not a Westeros of 6 or 7 King's, but a Westeros with one King. The Iron Throne is a Targaryen-placed position of power, and so I'd argue that until all the Targaryens are dead, then it belongs to any member of their family remaining.
But then again, this is my own interpretation of how it works I'm sure plenty will agree/disagree, and I'm all for it 😅
3:02 And when deciding who would get Storm's End after he became King (effectively 'inheriting' his former status as Lord of Storm's End) Robert chose Renly over Stannis.
But Dragonstone is the historical seat of heirs to the throne, so again, not clear cut.
Didn't need the whole video to say "Yes," but it was a good watch anyway.
Robert was King by right of conquest. Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella were all bastard born. Therefore, Stannis is the rightful heir. It's not that complicated. Stannis has not been conquered (yet) when he is, his claim will die with him, but until then, All Hail Stannis Baratheon, The First of His Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm.
He used family ties to legitimize his reign he was a rebel who won a Targaryen banner man who swore an oath he the definition of a usurper anyway stannis lost so Joffrey was the rightful king now tommen right he won just like Robert
@@kap2652 for the love of god, please use punctuation
@@iMajoraGaming nah
If succession follows "right of conquest" then there are no rightful heirs. Stannis would need to conquer all the Seven Kingdoms in order to be legitimate, and his legitimacy would die with him. Any successor would need to complete a new conquest. This is broadly what we see with Assyria. Every Assyrian king (and the Akkadians before them) went on campaign against all the same peoples. The conquering warlord is the rightful ruler, but their successor has yet to conquer anything and has no right to rule.
WOO! LETS GO DEEP!
Stannis was indeed the true heir to the Iron throne however George RR Martin is the writer so we basically see why he invented the Lannisters and Cercei.
And Cercei becomes a central theme of the show and probably the novels for every opportunity to expose her illegitimate actions and remove her from power are basically told to her like videogame cheat code so she's able to just order her minions and cronies and those she corrupted so everything falls apart.
Meanwhile Stannis comes off as a very hard working man who gets some unfortunate things happening his way and unfortunately he also made the alliance to Allisandre and gave her too much credibility and power.
If her cronies are working against her how can u be biased especially in a fantasy fandom 😂😅
Ah, but are the Baratheon’s rightful rulers in the first place? The English House of York would say no.
@@DavidbarZeus1Then who is?
@@matthewsteele99 By law, until House Targaryen is extinct, they are the rightful rulers. Right of conquest only ever applied to land in the Middle Ages unless the previous ruling house was completely destroyed root and stem. The House of Lancaster claimed the throne by right of conquest and the choice of Richard II, but the House of York contested by right of inheritance. The Wars of the Roses were the result and neither side actually won.
@@DavidbarZeus1 Can the Baratheons not make a claim due to being married into the Targaryens? I'm pretty sure they hold some distant relationship to the Targs.
One of my favourite characters AND favourite actors in the TV series, obviously related 😊
The case is pretty clear, from a purely legal standpoint: Westeros, like every other, real life or fictionnal state, works with laws, and those laws are clear and well established, especially when it comes to the transmission of power in a monarchy.
The basic principles we can find in real life history are here the same in Westeros, and they are as follow: the power is hereditary, meaning the descendants of the current ruler will inherit their rank and status once said current ruler dies (or much more rarer, when he abdicates, note that actually, in most monarchies in history, the monarch was not allowed to abdicate because it was considered to be not a right, but a duty, a sacred burden he had to carry until his death); then, comes the "who exactly will inherit among the descendants?" and there comes the second part: in most real life cases, it is the principle of primogeniture of the male heir that applies, a French term that means that it is specifically the eldest child who will inherit the power, and specifically the male heir, in short, it means women cannot inherit and cannot become the ruler, if the eldest son dies before becoming the ruler, then it passes to the second eldest, and so on; if no son remains, then the succession line goes back to the brothers of the current ruler, first, the second eldest brother after the current ruler, who then begins his own dynasty, and power will be transmitted to his own descendants following the same rules, and so on and on.
In Westeros, it seems women can inherit power, and only the principle of primogeniture apparently applies. Now, that means that after Robert's demise, his eldest son Joffrey should become the King, and in case of Joffrey's death, his sister Myrcella should become Queen, and so on until Tomen.
Note that in all real life monarchic system, as the entire system was built around religious beliefs, the law of succession and transmission of power was specifically something that the sitting King did NOT have the power to change, it was beyond his control and he had no say in the matter, and, since Westeros' system is also heavily influenced by religion, it stands to assume that the rules here also have this permanence attached to them, as the fundamental laws of the kingdom, that not even the ruling King can modify, so it is most likely that Robert, even if he had wanted, would not have been able to not recognize Joffrey as his successor anyway since it was something that was set in stone by the laws of the kingdom regardless of his opinion on the matter.
Now, of course, we know Joffrey is not actually the son of Robert, and in that case, not being the legitimate blood son of Robert would instantly disqualify Joffrey and his siblings from any claim to the throne (said siblings being not the kids of Robert either, they are disualified under their own merit), but of course, such thing would need to be proven before a special court of law who would pronounce for or against it.
Admitting it is publicly proven that Joffrey and his siblings are not Robert's children, then, according to the laws of succession, Stannis, as the second eldest son and brother of Robert, would legally be the rightful King, and his children after him would succeed him and found their own dynasty.
Now, comes the dispute about whever Stannis or Daenerys should be the rightful ruler, based on the opinion about whenever Robert's Kingship was legitimate or not, since he effectively rebelled against his then King and overthrew him.
Legally speaking, Robert committed a Coup, aka he illegally seized power from the current legally reigning King, and as such, all his actions ever since as sitting Monarch could be ruled as null and void in a court of law, and Daenerys should be instated as the rightful sovereign of the land according to said laws, as she is the eldest known child of the late King who is currently alive, so in this interpretation, Daenerys is in all intents and purpose THE only legitimate Queen of Westeros, and Stannis' claim is invalid because it is based on his late brother's reign which was illegal, and as I said, null and void.
However, that was the legalese interpretation, now, let's look at the facts, let's take the example of the French Revolution: the revolutionaries overthrew King Louis XVI and declared the end of Monarchy, legally speaking, it was obviously illegal, in reality, a whole new set of laws was drafted to make it legal in the first place, the Monarchy was legally dismantled, and the Republic was instated, with a Constitution, and all that comes with it; and in the case of Robert's reign, it can be argued of the same fact: the fall of the Targaryen dynasty and the sitting of Robert on the Iron Throne has effectively brought for a new legal order, where while the fundamental laws of the kingdom remained (the succession laws among other things), the legal legitimacy of Robert to be King of Westeros has become de facto the new legal standard, backed by the power of the State, just as with any other regime change: the current ruler, who commands the military might of the State, is the one who has the physical power to make the laws or back his claims, therebery making it the new legal standard, just as with the French Revolutionaries who took down Monarchy by force and then used said force to back their newly made legal claims: a new legal order simply replaces the old one.
So, at the end, from a purely legal standpoint: Stannis Baratheon is the legitimate claimant to the Iron Throne, but, since Daenerys Targaryen obviously doesn't accept this claim and believes the old legal order where her father was the KIng still applies, she evidently needs to win this war to then back up her claim and make it the new legal state of affairs, also by necessary extension, making Robert's previous reign null and void so as to also deny any of his surviving family members the legal claim to the throne.
Perfect. Couldn’t have said it better myself, though I tried.
Only problem with the purely legal side of it, is that Right of Conquest is very explicitly a legal way that one becomes King
Robert Baratheon rebelled, deposed the King and was recognised from Winterfell to Sunspear as having took the Throne. So by Right of Conquest he is a conqueror and therefore legally King.
The Targaryens rule by that exact same claim, Aegon conquered or earned the submission of six Kingdoms and by that right became King over them all.
@@candlelighter1588Sorry, but in real history, right of conquest has only successfully applied to land, not a crown. Only one dynasty ever used right of conquest to support their claim to the throne: House Lancaster of England. And even then, the legal heirs, the Yorks, rebelled against literally every Lancastrian king who ruled, even claiming the throne for a time until the houses were united by Henry Tudor marrying a daughter of York.
The setting does a good job of depicting the absurdity of rule. By blood, the line was likely broken in some form a long time ago. Aegon I was also king via force, and humans themselves won the land through conquest. All of the rule of any King has always extended through whoever ends up on the throne by any means. If that means is war, incest, murder, political bargaining or magic - no one cares. So, in the moment of Stannis' own life, I'd say no, because 1) he hasn't won the throne and 2) barely anyone seems to recognize him as a real threat or claimant. "Right" only matters if the people (more accurately, the people holding the spears/dragons) think it matters, no matter the argument. Morality and systems of government are things we all made up for ourselves, after all. None of it is real or governed by natural forces.
I personally think its a pretty fun exercise to go over all the potential claiments:
- Stannis (Via Blood and Conquest)
- Dani (Via Blood)
- Aegon (Via Blood)
- Potentially (and probably) Jon (Through Blood AND potential Legitimaization through Robb's Will)
- BloodRaven (Via being Legitimaized by his dad)
- Bran (If BloodRaven chooses him and House Stark to be the Targ Heirs, as heir by monarch's choice occurs alot in House Targ.)
- The Others and/or The Forest Children (if they manage to win via Conquest... though if that is the case, I doubt there is going to be a need to argue it lol)
I'm legit amaized.
Yeah I think the point is they all kinda have a claim some more legit than others but a claim all the same
Jon is not an actual bastard. He is legitimate, but no one knows...yet.
In reality, Jon is the heir with the strongest claim. Plus he is also the King of the North.
Great video!
Stannis could try to claim the throne by the divine right of prophecy, being proclaimed Azor Ahai by Melisandre. The king, chosen by R'hllor to defend the Seven Kingdoms in the Long Night against The Great Other
Except that's a very distant third when it comes to religions in Westeros. In fact, it would be more likely to disqualify him in most people's minds.
@@carlrood4457 I am just talking about it being possible in principle. Keep in mind that this is why Stannis is legitimate in the eyes of a lot of his followers. They were persuaded by this prophecy and convertet to the faith of the Lord of Light. Also there are a few things mentioned in the prophecy that might even persuade skeptics to rally behind Stannis, like the Long Night or if people learn that White Walkers are real. I wonder if the Westerosi would start reconsidering their faith as soon as the White Walkers breach the Wall.
It is more of a distant 4th. I think the Drowngod would be more excepted.@@carlrood4457
Yeah I’ve never heard of the right of prophecy, only the right of conquest or blood rights.
@@ErikDayne Never heard of the Divine Right of Kings? Or ruling by the Grace of God? This was the foundation for the rule of most absolute monarchs. They claimed to have been directly appointed by God, and therefore only answered to Him and were not subject to any earthly powers/institutions. A notable example from British history (which heavily inspired A Song of Ice and Fire) was King James VI of Scotland, who later became James I of England.
A few rulers who claimed legitimacy because of prophecy would have been:
1. Alexander the Great. He had a few prophecies, most notable the one by the Oracle of Amun at Siwa Oasis
2. Roman Emperor Constantine the Great. He claimed to have had a divine vision on the eve of the battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 AD, prophesying his victory and therefore his ascension to the throne.
3. Henry IV of France (Henry of Navarre) was said to have fulfilled one of the Nostradamus prophecies.
He's not the King we wanted, but he's without a doubt the King that Acted. Actions speak louder than words, and while the other Kings spoke of birthright, he acted on the Kingdom's best interest. Because of this, he is the rightful King in my books.
If Stannis wasn't the rightful king, he wouldn't say he was the rightful king.
As Stannis said: "they'll bend the knee or I'll destroy them" and that goes for everyone
So keep my kings name out of your effin mouth
@@MoeZsyslak Make me.
@@juliancain3872 I can't since even your parents don't care about you or your opinion, so what chance do I have
@@MoeZsyslak Cool story Selyse, but even Stannis struggles to stand the sight of you.
“Robert, Jon thought for one mad moment, but when the trumpets blew again and the knights charged, the name they cried was “Stannis! Stannis! STANNIS!”
Sounds like one hell of an introduction for the hero and the rightful king of the seven kingdoms.
There is no "right of conquest", Robert was Aerys' nearest relative who was neither disinherited (Rhaegar, Maegor Brightflame) nor illegitimate. If the rebels had staked their rebellion on "right of conquest" then Jon Arryn would have become king, but they needed a legal backing. The "right of conquest" argument is only ever used by people with somehow less understanding of medieval procedure than the average GOT fan.
Important detail, well said. Conquest was definitely a part- but it was a conquest predicated on the insane behavior of Aerys for one thing and then supported by electing the person who could be considered part of that royal family and therefore legitimate, since the concept of a bloodline is clearly important to this society.
But the whole royal family is bullshit anyways since Aegons only right to it was his dragons lol. Aegon claimed it via right of conquest, as did Robert. Right of conquest is respected, Tywin believes Balon to be king of the north and the iron islands after he conquors them. However, disregarding right of conquest and focusing on who the throne should pass to, ignoring those who have no right, Stannis is the rightful heir.
LOL. This is fantasy, not actual medieval procedure, which only maintained that procedure because everyone was related anyway. Easier to just marry someone in and give them something if they could fight you, than to fight them.
Jaime of all people offered ned the iron throne (idk why) you can claim the right of conquest
@@CheeseCrumbs00 Aegon didn't conquer the Seven Kingdoms, he conquered seven kingdoms and united then into one, new entity. He wasn't a vassal of Harren or Argilac or Mern or any of the other kings, he was an outsider who forged a new realm, that's a lot different to what Robert did.
Robert definitely did consider Stannis his heir aside from Joffrey because Stannis received dragonstone which was in theory a more prestigious title granted only to the heir of the king.
I disagree. He never allows either of his brothers to style themselves princes even though they are up until he has his own kids. The Prince of Dragonstone is the heir but not the Lord of Dragonstone.
Excellent, as always❤thank you IDG
I think there's something to be said about Bobby B naming Stannis to Dragonstone as well. Stannis saw it as a slight, but Dragonstone IS where, historically speaking, King's shoves their heirs.
I feel like Robert would have left the throne to Ned. Just like he did until his "son" came of age. Robert considered Ned his true brother and shared his childhood and went to war with Ned.
True that. Robert had far more affection for Ned than he ever had for either Renly, or Stannis. The only time they had a falling out was when Robert refused to punish Jamie Lannister for "regicide" against the Mad King, because in Robert's twisted head, that was the right thing to do (the ends justified the means). But Ned couldn't tolerate that, and left in a huff. The two only made up after Ned returned from the Tower of Joy, and told Robert of Lyanna's passing. I feel like an entire chapter of a book could have been written on that scene alone!
@@jacob4920Robert did do the right thing offing the Targaryen babies, and the only time he got it “twisted” is when he let Ned talk him out of finishing off Viserys and Dany. Would have saved 10s of thousands of lives if he would have finished that job correctly.
The king isn't apointed, the westeros monarchy is blood guided, so if Robert had no sons, Stannis is rightful heir, no matter what Robert thank about.
I was going to push back on this one, but no, actually it fits doesn't it? Robert wouldn't give a shit about custom or law or politics, he would have just tried to do what he did when he appointed Ned as Hand - 'You're the bloke I trust most, you're the person I feel is most like a brother to me, now get on with it'.
Unlike when he was appointed Hand though, I feel like Ned would have 100% refused. He'd have taken the same position in canon - Stannis is the rightful king.
The politics of the downfall of the Lannisters could really be fascinating.
@@anthroposmetron4475 The hand is appointed, the king doesn't. If Robert could choosr the king he never would choose Joffrey
Sorry I’ve missed some live streams, I finally started reading the books (listening to the audio books) because of your videos and it’s very time consuming. Just returned Storm of Swords to the library today! I’d love for you to do a video about your thoughts on the audio book narrator and his pronunciation lol
The way I look at it, Robert got to establish a new dynasty by right of force because he lead a just rebellion against an oppressive ruler, but once the new dynasty was established the righfull kings should be in accordance with the line of succession, which given what we know as readers makes Stanis the rightful king.
But, as pointed out, he was defeated by the Lannisters, so they get to pick.
@@carlrood4457 The Lannisters only maintain their power by hiding that the King isn’t actually a Baratheon which IS their official line
Basically yeah, legally Stannis is King. The Mad King was a cruel tyrant and he got usurped in a rebellion. At this point Robert became King - and since Robert's children are illegitimate, Stannis is the next in line. Of course, since Robert was a usurper, this would also give a legal claim to fAegon, and if he turns out not to really be Aegon, Daenerys would have a legal claim. Succession is a messy business but I'd say Stannis should be King, with fAegon and Daenerys having claims.
@@JudeLind Yeah it's wild to claim that the Lannister's have proved their claim through might when it's actually just based on total deception.
The day has finally come
I defeated your uncle Victarion and his Iron Fleet off Fair Isle, the first time your father crowned himself. I held Storm's End against the power of the Reach for a year, and took Dragonstone from the Targaryens. I smashed Mance Rayder at the Wall, though he had twenty times my numbers. Tell me, turncloak, what battles has the Bastard of Bolton ever won that I should fear him?
My knees are bending instantly
Stannis has one weakness and it is his impatience.
It is what gets him killed in the end.
"He certainly thinks so." Yeah and so did Ned, Robb, Cat, Bran, Arya, Balon, Oleana, etc. Outside of the Lannisters, almost all of the main characters acknowledge that Stannis is the next in line for the throne, just that they don't LIKE him. He's a Targaryen as well as a Baratheon. He's the rightful king in a multitude of ways. And these aren't debatable "perspective" things, as WE, the audience, DO know he's the rightful king. And, spoiler: the Targaryen's themselves are NOT entitled to Westeros. They're not from that continent. They've been on Westeros for under 300 years. They're not owed anything. They're foreign invaders.
One Realm! One God! One King!
Stannis! Stannis!! STANNIS!!!
I remember when me and the boys were always rooting for stannis while watching got. Good times gone forever:(
Yes, and Rickon is king in the north. The north remebers and oaths were sworn before the old gods and the news.
Rickon? Bran is older than Rickon, he'd be in the line of succession before Rickon. And Robb's Will likely says that Jon is King in the North.
Northern independence is lame. Stannis is right in insisting on the unity of the realm.
@@wanderingshade8383 Bran is AFK though.
It broke my heart when let them burn that little girl.
Because, he clearly was a potential King who cared. The Smallfolk would have had a better life while he ruled, because he cared.
But, then he burned his little girl.....
I think the point of the story is to show you that no one is rightfully owed rulership by virtue of blood. Stannis himself seems to only fight for the throne because he believes he is obligated to by the letter of the law. In his mind the throne has been burdened on him.
Stannis is the one true king but we will never know if GRRM will confirm this because we will never see those books.
One realm. One God. One King!
Dany starting a new empire made the most sense. She had the best claim and the state of the kingdom was such that it would have been better off unified into an empire. She would have been mad though and it makes sense for her to be mad, every other person in her family is mad, it's baked into their DNA.
Targaryen Madness is massively overblown though, its not even the 50/50 we see in the in-universe coin flip superstition and its most definitely not every member of the family.
The mad ones are who? Maegor, Rhaegal, Aerion, Aerys 2nd are the easy picks. Some would argue Viserys 3rd though I think that's unfair.
So we have like half a dozen out of the entire dynasty which includes over a 100 known members.
With the victory in Roberts Rebellion and the fall of House Targaryen, the royal succession belongs to Robert and his heirs. Jon, Dany, and Viserys are no longer a part of it as far as i am concerned. Since Robert had no trueborn heirs, it must go to Stannis.
The rightful king, is whoever can take power and keep it
One of the main themes, and I dare say the point of the story, is that divine right to rule is a stupid concept. Technically you can skew the logic of Westeros succession to make patchface the true king.
I would wanna see that 😂
There is some precedent that who the king wants to name successor doesn’t matter as much as primogeniture and support
Man you were the one who asked 😂 7:06
Stannis, the king who cared.
GRRM: all kings are tyrants, all monarchies are inherently broken & a martial society ruins everyone in it
ASOIAF community: yeah but is Stannis' claim better than Dany's ?
GRRM: you don't deserve another book
No, Stannis is not the "rightful king". There is nothing "rightful" about being a king, or a queen. The author could not possibly be clearer about this.
Very childish way of looking at things.
Hereditary rulers have existed for 10000s if not 100000s of years.
"Democracy" etc is only a fraction of that and even "elections", "republics" and "democracies" have an issue with elitism and heridary rule. See the Bush/Kennedy dynasty in the USA.
@@mrfreeman2911 I don't know what you think your asinine comment proves but I can assure that it is neither insightful, nor relevant to the discussion. Please google the "Dunning-Kruger effect" and have a nice day.
He's my king til this day until my last day!!!
I'm a republican, yet Stannis is my king
lol
2:23 If only Eddard knew that Robert knew all along.
I'm pretty sure had Robert known he would have named Ned his heir..
The man despised his own (or at least who he belived to be) son i m pretty sure he'd name his stern and stiff brother as his heir paticularly since Ned would aggressively insist
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Absolutely Effing Yes
Elvis is king.