Poll: Stannis vs. Daenerys - Better claim?

[IOwnTheSpire]

This is of course for those who read A Song of Ice and Fire and/or watch Game of Thrones.

Stannis and Daenerys both constantly talk about their right to the Iron Throne, but the question is, who has the better claim? Myself, I'm going to have to say Stannis.

Here's the thing: Dany claims that the throne belongs to her because the throne belongs to the Targaryens, and that Robert was a usurper who stole what belongs to her family. However, the problem is that the Targaryens themselves invaded Westeros and conquered it, claiming it for their own, so for someone to look down on Robert for taking a crown by force while claiming it belongs to a family that did the same thing is ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned, the Baratheons had every right to take the throne, especially given how far the Mad King had fallen, which means the throne does rightfully belong to Stannis, who in his mind IS the king; it's not a matter of wanting to be the king, he IS the king.

If anyone has any counter arguments or supporting arguments, feel free to share. I'd like to know what others think.

 

[senordesol]

Whoever's ass can sit in it has claim.

If you can't defend your throne from invaders or usurpers, then it really didn't belong to you; did it?

I'd say Stannis has the best chance to secure it. Dany still seems too naive to handle governing the East and the West.

 

[Asclepion]

The whole idea of a "claim to the throne" is meaningless, as Varys illustrates with his riddle, and so conveys one of the main themes of the series.

 

[FalloutJack]

Vote Tyrion Lannister - The only SANE person to rule.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Disclaimer, I do not know the entire lore of their universe so I would like to ask- were the Targaryens the original ruler or did they took it from another House? Also was the Mad King always been said mad since birth?

If they were not the original ruler and the Mad King was mad since growing up then I denounce Daenery claim (but it's an upvote is they were ruler since the very starter and the former king was once sane at some point in his life).

Before you mention Stannis to me, Robert was a lousy ruler spending his time with the whores and hunting than actually ruling it. Sure Stannis would probably run it better just as long he keep away from burning people alived.

 

[Hades]

I don't find that Danny has a very strong claim. House Targaryen no longer exist in Westeros. Losing the war is a legitimate reason for losing your kingdom. The other house's validated Roberts reign after the defeat of the Targaryens so that would place him above a mere usurper.

Stannis still has a strong house which, in theory still rules in Westeros at this point in the series.

 

[IOwnTheSpire]

Disclaimer, I do not know the entire lore of their universe so I would like to ask- were the Targaryens were the original ruler or did they took it from another House? Also was the Mad King been said mad since birth?

The Targaryens came from across the Narrow Sea to conquer Westeros, which originally belonged to the First Men and the Children of the Forest.

 

[Halla Burrica]

Dany does have a lot of charisma with her and has earned goodwill from many, but she's very young and while she is generally nice, there is undoubtedly Targaryen blood in her (the narcissistic and sometimes maniacal kind) which I think could end up being her bane. It also doesn't help that she hasn't set foot in Westeros, ever.
Stannis however, has a lot of experience and is knowledgeable in how Westeros works. He is a very strict, by-the-book kind of guy, which means he honors and follows the codes and laws so many others fail to follow, but also isn't fun at parties. He could certainly be a better king than his brother managed to be, at the very least. Not a lot of people who like him, though, which could be a problem. Even so, my vote goes to Stannis the Mannis, since he knows how to lead an army, which is undoubtedly very useful.

 

[Recusant]

Disclaimer, I do not know the entire lore of their universe so I would like to ask- were the Targaryens the original ruler or did they took it from another House?

Before the Targaryens arrived, the seven kingdoms of Westeros were separate; each was ruled independently. The Targaryens, by hook and by crook, brought all the others to heel; the iron throne is really more the seat of an emperor than a king.

Anyway, my vote is for neither; Danerys has no experience, no one to guide her and teach her the ropes, and her only claim is because of her descent from a lunatic. Plus, she's already demonstrated she can't even hold a city together, let alone seven powerful-in-their-own-right nations. Stannis has years of practical experience, if in admittedly smaller-scale leadership, and a claim to the throne that the people of Westeros would be much more likely to accept- but few would follow him if an alternative were available. He comes across as more sympathetic in the books, but the underlying problem remains.

Clearly, to my mind, the smart course of action is to dissolve Westeros as a political entity and return to having seven separate kingdoms. The past three centuries have changed things; likely you'd need a major administrative overhaul to pull it off, and a year-or-decade long winter arriving isn't going to make things easier, but I think it's the best option.

 

[Zhukov]

Here's the thing: Dany claims that the throne belongs to her because the throne belongs to the Targaryens, and that Robert was a usurper who stole what belongs to her family. However, the problem is that the Targaryens themselves invaded Westeros and conquered it, claiming it for their own, so for someone to look down on Robert for taking a crown by force while claiming it belongs to a family that did the same thing is ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned, the Baratheons had every right to take the throne, especially given how far the Mad King had fallen, which means the throne does rightfully belong to Stannis, who in his mind IS the king; it's not a matter of wanting to be the king, he IS the king.

Except that just puts them on equal footing. In that their claims both rest on their blood connection to people who took the throne by force.

As for Stannis being king, well, he currently rules precisely jack shit. Some islands off the coast and the ground on which his army stands in the north. If he is king, he is king in name only.

Having a "better" claim doesn't really count for much. All that matters is that one has a claim and the power to enforce it.

 

[irishda]

Going a little further with who SHOULD have it, I'm firmly in the neither camp. Stannis is a proven leader, but not necessarily from a civilian standpoint. He might be an honorable man, maybe even a just one at times, but he's still power-mad, willing to do the wrong thing to achieve the right goal. Dany is even worse. She's still young, but her head's still been filled with the "right to rule" nonsense that affects Stannis. She believes cruelty and justice are the same thing, and despite all her time as a poor beggar, she still has learned almost nothing about the real world. Even in the show, they're more concerned with making her look bad-ass than they are making her seem competent ("I'm going to break the wheel." Cool story, so does that mean Westeros is going commie than?).

That's why I'm team Aegon, even if he's just a pretender. Varys is right. He's learned how to survive on his own. He's learned how to do things and lived as just a person. Dany's alive for the sole reason that a bunch of guys want to have sex with her and she lucked into some dragons. He's headstrong too and brash, just like all Targaryens, especially young ones. But if Varys is pushing him, I think he can be a great ruler.

 

[JayRPG]

It matters not, the one true king will sit on the iron throne soon enough.

Petyr Baelish will be named Warden of the North, and all the chaos caused by the white walkers will only help him achieve his goals, because as we all know, chaos is a ladder, and Baelish is the only one who can climb it.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

If we're talking medieval law, Dany has the stronger claim, from a tradition standpoint. Direct, via blood, no rebellions invloved.

However, Stannis' claim is strong enough that he has every right to fight for it too. Medieval title claims are more about determining who is in the fight than who has the best claim.

 

[Terminal Blue]

If we're going by medieval law, then neither has a particularly strong claim.

There's a lot of modern stereotypes regarding the medieval period, and one of them is that kings rule by divine right. Like many fantasy tropes which purport to be medieval, that's actually a much more renaissance and early modern way of thinking about monarchy. A medieval king derives his legitimacy primarily from the backing of the high nobility. They are the true power in the realm, and although that power is technically derived from the king in practice it's the other way around. This means that anything which is important to the high nobility is an important "legal" consideration.

 

[samgdawg]

Speaking as someone who has read the first book, owns the rest, and intends to read them and has watched the first three seasons of the show, Stannis is a bumbling fool with great military skill who puts too much stake in his "right" quelling the inevitable shitstorm of the brother of the different bumbling fool sitting the Throne by force. His tactics and his blind devotion to his belief in results above all else, using blood magic to try to secure victory because it definitively killed Renly, simply won't get him there either. Best exemplified by his siege of King's Landing. He went in attempting a straight forward siege where everything factors down to troops. Tyrion, wildfire, and tunnels destroyed him. The same "by-the-books" mindset Burrica mentioned left him open to some actually very simple trickery.

Daenerys on the other hand has a much stronger "claim" both in terms of personality and in potential to bring force. She has a very strong sense of justice, whether that justice is right or wrong needs to be tested against people that aren't employing slaves as that is a very black and white issue, and has garnered immense idolization from her followers. She is capable of bringing to bear a lot of power. If I'm remembering the conversation properly, The Conqueror brought the Seven Kingdoms to heel through his one dragon. Daenerys has three dragons in addition to 8,000-10,000 properly trained devoted soldiers that won't fear the Westorosi plus her 200,000 followers from Yunkai which are more in line with the common Westoros soldier.

In Westoros you hear a lot of talk of how the lords need to keep their bannermen focused and targeted, otherwise they start wanting to return home and/or turn to infighting. These bannermen aren't trained either. They're basically commoners being drafted into the fight. This is not an effective army, no matter how many bannermen you call you're just multiplying your problems. For all his ridiculous posturing and his anger issues, Joffrey had the right idea all the way back in the first season, a standing army. It's pretty much exactly what's used today.

If I've left anything out or am hilariously misinformed, correct me. I'd love to see this conversation develop more.

 

[gigastar]

Robert was the last king, by law of inheritence the throne goes to Stannis.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Vote Tyrion Lannister - The only SANE person to rule.

Which is exactly why he'll never ever get himself on the throne. The real power is behind it, and that's where he does his work.

 

[Tilly]

Stannis seems to know what he's doing a bit more, I think he could do the job better. Danaerys really seems like she's bumbling along and just about managing by scaring the crap out of people randomly.

 

[Dalisclock]

As much as I like Dany, her sole claim is that she's the last remaining Targaryen. Which counts for exactly Jack Squat at this point. Nobody misses the Targaryens in Westros, so her claim will be backed by the Unsullied and her Dragons. Which might....might get her the throne, but she'll have a hard time keeping it with little support among the populace and none among the nobility. And we've already seen what happens when the most of the nobility see no merit in your claim. Hell, Joffery barely took the throne before the war of Five Kings started....and that's BEFORE everyone know what a nasy little shit he was.

There are other problems. One is the fact that Dany has no line and likely never will. Presumably her miscarriage in GoT made her unable to bear any more childern...and when you're the last remaining member of your family, you're pretty much begging for a succession crisis at some point. My second point, I'm not so sure about due to my lack of knowledge of succession rules in Westros but I'm going to assume that male preference primogeniture is the model. AKA, unless there are no males who can inherit power, a male will always take the throne. Which pretty much puts Dany out of the running compared to Stannis, as far as "legitimate heir" is concerned. Again, she has the unsullied and her dragons to force the issue if need be, but now we come back to the "Usurper on the throne" issue that her asshat of a brother so hot and bothered about all the time.