Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 20, 2017 18:39:48 GMT
That's not why the war started though, but I agree that Joffrey's personality was not part of Ned's decision. Joffrey in Season One wasn't the monster he'd become by Season Three and Ned's reason for denying him the crown wasn't based upon that anyway, that was Renly's argument and it got nowhere with Ned. The war started because Tywin Lannister sent the Mountain into the Riverlands … This is a different war, the "War for the Imp". It was a local thing both parties could stop at will after some sort of agreement, not a "win or die" shot at the throne which split the realm into opposite allegiances. Robb Stark started the "War of the Five Kings" when he took his banners south to topple the king and free his father but had Ned's coup succeeded, he knew Stannis would have to fight his way to the throne against a Lannister family he had set aside and captured. Ned's attempted coup in the throne room was the first act of war for the throne. It was the equivalent of Richard III locking the princes in the tower and having them declared illegitimate. The "Imp" situation resolved itself, never was it necessary to start an open war in the Riverlands to get him released. Also we know from the books that particular ploy by Tywin had other designs outside just getting Tyrion released--it was supposed to be Ned Stark who was ambushed at the Mummer's Ford, not Beric Dondarrion. Robb Stark called in his bannermen and marched south because Ned Stark's presentation of King Robert's final command was torn up by Cersei Lannister who had Ned taken prisoner and his men massacred while she placed her illegitimate son on the throne. However let's go back to when the hostilities actually started. I'll repeat what Ned Stark was presented with and you tell me what you think he should have done about this:'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' In any Kingdom, Nation, Realm etc that sort of thing requires a response. What do you think Ned should have done?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 20, 2017 19:17:34 GMT
This is a different war, the "War for the Imp". It was a local thing both parties could stop at will after some sort of agreement, not a "win or die" shot at the throne which split the realm into opposite allegiances. Robb Stark started the "War of the Five Kings" when he took his banners south to topple the king and free his father but had Ned's coup succeeded, he knew Stannis would have to fight his way to the throne against a Lannister family he had set aside and captured. Ned's attempted coup in the throne room was the first act of war for the throne. It was the equivalent of Richard III locking the princes in the tower and having them declared illegitimate. The "Imp" situation resolved itself, never was it necessary to start an open war in the Riverlands to get him released. Also we know from the books that particular ploy by Tywin had other designs outside just getting Tyrion released--it was supposed to be Ned Stark who was ambushed at the Mummer's Ford, not Beric Dondarrion. Robb Stark called in his bannermen and marched south because Ned Stark's presentation of King Robert's final command was torn up by Cersei Lannister who had Ned taken prisoner and his men massacred while she placed her illegitimate son on the throne. However let's go back to when the hostilities actually started. I'll repeat what Ned Stark was presented with and you tell me what you think he should have done about this:'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' In any Kingdom, Nation, Realm, nation etc that sort of thing requires a response. What do you think Ned should have done? Well, Ned could have simply stopped his wife's actions instead of championing them by taking them as his own despite the fact he knew it was foolish of her to do.
The situation resolved itself only because Tyrion was smart enough to get out of it. Otherwise he would have been dead and the war would have waged on once Robert croaked.
Also, Robert's final declaration was a fraud itself since Ned changed the clear intent of it which was that Joffrey would be king. The only thing that changed was Ned was no longer going to be the one to train Joffrey to be king. This is the point at which Cersei outfoxed Ned.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 20, 2017 22:06:24 GMT
The "Imp" situation resolved itself, never was it necessary to start an open war in the Riverlands to get him released. Also we know from the books that particular ploy by Tywin had other designs outside just getting Tyrion released--it was supposed to be Ned Stark who was ambushed at the Mummer's Ford, not Beric Dondarrion. Robb Stark called in his bannermen and marched south because Ned Stark's presentation of King Robert's final command was torn up by Cersei Lannister who had Ned taken prisoner and his men massacred while she placed her illegitimate son on the throne. However let's go back to when the hostilities actually started. I'll repeat what Ned Stark was presented with and you tell me what you think he should have done about this:'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' In any Kingdom, Nation, Realm, nation etc that sort of thing requires a response. What do you think Ned should have done? Well, Ned could have simply stopped his wife's actions instead of championing them by taking them as his own despite the fact he knew it was foolish of her to do.
The situation resolved itself only because Tyrion was smart enough to get out of it. Otherwise he would have been dead and the war would have waged on once Robert croaked.
Also, Robert's final declaration was a fraud itself since Ned changed the clear intent of it which was that Joffrey would be king. The only thing that changed was Ned was no longer going to be the one to train Joffrey to be king. This is the point at which Cersei outfoxed Ned.
That doesn't address the question, what was Ned Stark to do when receiving the reports of the deprivations in the Riverlands? That's what brought the Realm to open warfare. Tyrion was released after a trial in the Vale. At no point was it necessary to start a war in the Riverlands whether Ned Stark backed his wife's actions or not. Ned chose not to let his friend find out his wife had cuckholded him in his final moments, he had no doubt in his mind that Robert's final instructions would include the deaths of Joffrey, Cersei, Tommen and Myrcella if he had told him. That was not something Ned wanted to see happen, thus he demurred.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 21, 2017 4:19:55 GMT
This is a different war, the "War for the Imp". It was a local thing both parties could stop at will after some sort of agreement, not a "win or die" shot at the throne which split the realm into opposite allegiances. Robb Stark started the "War of the Five Kings" when he took his banners south to topple the king and free his father but had Ned's coup succeeded, he knew Stannis would have to fight his way to the throne against a Lannister family he had set aside and captured. Ned's attempted coup in the throne room was the first act of war for the throne. It was the equivalent of Richard III locking the princes in the tower and having them declared illegitimate. The "Imp" situation resolved itself, never was it necessary to start an open war in the Riverlands to get him released. Also we know from the books that particular ploy by Tywin had other designs outside just getting Tyrion released--it was supposed to be Ned Stark who was ambushed at the Mummer's Ford, not Beric Dondarrion. Robb Stark called in his bannermen and marched south because Ned Stark's presentation of King Robert's final command was torn up by Cersei Lannister who had Ned taken prisoner and his men massacred while she placed her illegitimate son on the throne. However let's go back to when the hostilities actually started. I'll repeat what Ned Stark was presented with and you tell me what you think he should have done about this:'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' In any Kingdom, Nation, Realm etc that sort of thing requires a response. What do you think Ned should have done? "Catelyn will release Tyrion and you'll make your peace with Jaime." "So tell your wife to return that little shit of an Imp to King's Landing. She's had her fun, now put an end to it. You hear me? Send a raven and put an end to it." "What about Jaime? I'm half a Kingdom in debt to his bloody father. I don't know what happened between you and those yellow-haired shits. I don't want to know. This is what matters: I can't rule the Kingdoms if the Starks and the Lannisters are at each other's throats. So enough." Robert was more of a king than Ned.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 21, 2017 11:39:48 GMT
Well, Ned could have simply stopped his wife's actions instead of championing them by taking them as his own despite the fact he knew it was foolish of her to do.
The situation resolved itself only because Tyrion was smart enough to get out of it. Otherwise he would have been dead and the war would have waged on once Robert croaked.
Also, Robert's final declaration was a fraud itself since Ned changed the clear intent of it which was that Joffrey would be king. The only thing that changed was Ned was no longer going to be the one to train Joffrey to be king. This is the point at which Cersei outfoxed Ned.
That doesn't address the question, what was Ned Stark to do when receiving the reports of the deprivations in the Riverlands? That's what brought the Realm to open warfare. Tyrion was released after a trial in the Vale. At no point was it necessary to start a war in the Riverlands whether Ned Stark backed his wife's actions or not. Ned chose not to let his friend find out his wife had cuckholded him in his final moments, he had no doubt in his mind that Robert's final instructions would include the deaths of Joffrey, Cersei, Tommen and Myrcella if he had told him. That was not something Ned wanted to see happen, thus he demurred. The invasion started when Cat called on her bannermen in the Riverlands to take Tyrion captive. No one knew Tyrion was released until he entered the Lannister camp. The trail was a combat one so Tyrion survived on a gamble rather than justice. The bottom line is he should have never been taken to the Vale (Or the more logical pick of Riverrun or Winterefell) in the first place. I already addressed what Ned should have done and it was mirrored by Robert. Don't double down and instead give Tyrion back to the Lannisters. Accept the responsibility that your wife indirectly caused the deaths of many and move on from it with troops sent to defend the remaining Riverlands if the Lannisters did not back off. Of course, Tywin exaggerated the threat and his stupidity ultimately led to the greater conflicts. The dude killed an entire house in his own kingdom. That doesn't change the fact that Ned dealt with it wrong. It wasn;t a stupid decision necessarily, just the wrong one. If he had told Robert the truth, & he totally should have done that the moment Robert mentioned Joffrey as king since the kingdom is more important than a good death, it would have been Stannis to make the decision. I have no issue with him changing the decree, but I do acknowledge that changing the document was his downfall. If he didn't tell Robert the truth, then all he could do is bend the knee and wait for someone else to start something, likely Stannis or Renley. Regardless of the tactic Ned chose, he chose the one that set him up as a traitor and to be dismissed by the Lannisters by banishment or death.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 21, 2017 17:20:04 GMT
That doesn't address the question, what was Ned Stark to do when receiving the reports of the deprivations in the Riverlands? That's what brought the Realm to open warfare. Tyrion was released after a trial in the Vale. At no point was it necessary to start a war in the Riverlands whether Ned Stark backed his wife's actions or not. Ned chose not to let his friend find out his wife had cuckholded him in his final moments, he had no doubt in his mind that Robert's final instructions would include the deaths of Joffrey, Cersei, Tommen and Myrcella if he had told him. That was not something Ned wanted to see happen, thus he demurred. The invasion started when Cat called on her bannermen in the Riverlands to take Tyrion captive. No one knew Tyrion was released until he entered the Lannister camp. The trail was a combat one so Tyrion survived on a gamble rather than justice. The bottom line is he should have never been taken to the Vale (Or the more logical pick of Riverrun or Winterefell) in the first place. I already addressed what Ned should have done and it was mirrored by Robert. Don't double down and instead give Tyrion back to the Lannisters. Accept the responsibility that your wife indirectly caused the deaths of many and move on from it with troops sent to defend the remaining Riverlands if the Lannisters did not back off. Of course, Tywin exaggerated the threat and his stupidity ultimately led to the greater conflicts. The dude killed an entire house in his own kingdom. That doesn't change the fact that Ned dealt with it wrong. It wasn;t a stupid decision necessarily, just the wrong one. If he had told Robert the truth, & he totally should have done that the moment Robert mentioned Joffrey as king since the kingdom is more important than a good death, it would have been Stannis to make the decision. I have no issue with him changing the decree, but I do acknowledge that changing the document was his downfall. If he didn't tell Robert the truth, then all he could do is bend the knee and wait for someone else to start something, likely Stannis or Renley. Regardless of the tactic Ned chose, he chose the one that set him up as a traitor and to be dismissed by the Lannisters by banishment or death.No, the invasion started when Ser Gregor Clegane crossed into the Riverlands into Sherrer and did this: 'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' Pretending that the arrest of Tyrion justifies that response simply reveals your moral compass is broken and you are dearly in need of guidance in these matters. The Lady of Winterfell and the Hand's wife has the prerogative to call for the arrest of someone suspected of murder, at that juncture Cat had what she believed was evidence suggesting Tyrion's involvement. Just because he is a Lannister, doesn't mean he's above the law. Tyrion was tried and released following the legal customs of the Realm. Had Ned Stark told Robert Baratheon about Cersei and Jaime's treason then a war was guaranteed. All Robert had to do was call for Ser Barristan Selmy and Renly to effect the capture and execution of Cersei and her children; Renly wanted to do the former without even knowing of her treason. Changing the declaration was ultimately of no import whatsoever, no one ever even knew. What Ned did ultimately left it in Stannis' hands, but it gave Cersei a chance to flee with her children and save their lives. Instead she had Ned arrested for treason and eventually Joffrey ensured the war would continue by having Ned executed instead of being sent to the Wall.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 21, 2017 18:16:03 GMT
MarendilDon't twist it. I quite clearly stated that Tywin overreacted. He's a ruthless dude and Kat knew all the same stories that we do. It's what he does, so there was no justification to killing innocent people, but innocent people always die in comflicts. At the end of the day, you are going to have to stop ignoring the timeline: Why did the Mountain cross the road? Why was Tyrion kidnapped? No one but you and possibly other Ned supporters thinks she had the right. Tyrion was not suspected of anything except in the mind of Kat. No one but Kat knew why he was being "arrested" and there was no proof at all of his guilt. And yet they trek him to the hardest place to get to answer for a crime he wasn't even aware he committed and done in a way that would have sealed his fate if not for being smarter than the rest of the room. The realm allows for wars to be fought between houses too where innocent people routinely die. What's your point? A war was guaranteed no matter what. Robert wasn't an idiot anyway. He knew who was bankrolling him. I would argue that the greatest way to prevent a war was to tell Robert. Nothing else was going to work unless Ned bent the knee. You are more than welcome to create you own fan fiction regarding the what ifs of that too. And here it is, yet another example of justifying the dishonesty that defines Ned's entire adult life. It matters because Ned did it. It matters because if he had not done it, he would not be guilty of treason. It matters because even though no one saw it, he still thought it meant leverage and got outplayed as a result.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 21, 2017 20:27:14 GMT
Don't twist it. I quite clearly stated that Tywin overreacted. He's a ruthless dude and Kat knew all the same stories that we do. It's what he does, so there was no justification to killing innocent people, but innocent people always die in conflicts. At the end of the day, you are going to have to stop ignoring the timeline: Why did the Mountain cross the road? Why was Tyrion kidnapped? Tyrion wasn't kidnapped, he was arrested. An arrest is not an invasion and does not justify one. Lady Caitlyn is not responsible for Tywin Lannister's response, Tywin Lannister is. Perhaps you'd do better if you kept better company then, or at least learn to think for yourself and notice that the characters in the story sure as hell did, from all the Whent, Bracken and Frey Men-at-Arms who arrested him, to Ned Stark who backed her and even Tyrion himself who said in the books: 'If Lady Stark believes I have some crime to answer for, I will go with her and answer for it.' Tyrion was suspected of attempting to murder Brandon Stark. Her evidence was a dagger left at the scene of the second attempt that a Lord of the Realm and a member of the Small Council claimed was Tyrion Lannister's. Everyone involved knew what Tyrion was arrested for, Caitlyn Stark made that clear when she called for his arrest: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cyEM57UJksActually the very best way to solve the problems of the Realm would have been to kill all the Lannisters for treason and take their lands and wealth and use it to pay off the Iron Bank, not unlike what Cersei and Jaime did to the Tyrells later on. That's not what Ned wanted to do though, he didn't think that way. Robert did though, ask the Targaryens. Hardly, you pick out white lies designed to save the lives of children and think that 'defines his entire adult life' when he was known by all, including Cersei Lannister of all people, for being an honorable and trustworthy man. It appears you can't see the forest for the trees. You're forgetting that the words Ned used on that declaration Robert signed meant the exact same thing as what Robert said--as long as Cersei and Jaime weren't guilty of treason. The crime is theirs, not Ned Stark's.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 21, 2017 20:39:26 GMT
The "Imp" situation resolved itself, never was it necessary to start an open war in the Riverlands to get him released. Also we know from the books that particular ploy by Tywin had other designs outside just getting Tyrion released--it was supposed to be Ned Stark who was ambushed at the Mummer's Ford, not Beric Dondarrion. Robb Stark called in his bannermen and marched south because Ned Stark's presentation of King Robert's final command was torn up by Cersei Lannister who had Ned taken prisoner and his men massacred while she placed her illegitimate son on the throne. However let's go back to when the hostilities actually started. I'll repeat what Ned Stark was presented with and you tell me what you think he should have done about this:'They burned most everything in the Riverlands, our fields, our granaries, our homes. They took our women, then they took them again, and when they were done they butchered them as if they were animals. They covered our children in pitch and then lit them on fire.' In any Kingdom, Nation, Realm etc that sort of thing requires a response. What do you think Ned should have done? "Catelyn will release Tyrion and you'll make your peace with Jaime." "So tell your wife to return that little shit of an Imp to King's Landing. She's had her fun, now put an end to it. You hear me? Send a raven and put an end to it." "What about Jaime? I'm half a Kingdom in debt to his bloody father. I don't know what happened between you and those yellow-haired shits. I don't want to know. This is what matters: I can't rule the Kingdoms if the Starks and the Lannisters are at each other's throats. So enough." Robert was more of a king than Ned. Had Robert found out this, he'd have given the Lannisters the Targaryen treatment. At least that's what Ned Stark and Cersei figured--and they knew him best.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 21, 2017 21:23:55 GMT
Marendil When you are taken without any basis except for the gut of the one arresting you, you are kidnapped. It is beyond ridiculous to think that Tyrion or his family would be OK with their kin standing trial without any information. Would you do that as a sucky relative? This is not LA Law and just like Kat had to draw swords on Tyrion, it is not even remotely unsual that Tywin would use the same tactics. You conveniently forgot the next sentence: "It was the only possible course" Did you actually read that chapter btw? in any event, bannermen will do a lot of stuff for their house. So just to be clear, you are thinking that if a cop walked into the Ihop you're eating at and announces you are under arrest for the murder of someone because a witness said you owned the thing that killed the victim, you would happily forgo your pancakes and head off to jail for a swift trial? If so, you are correct. I have no argument against such logic. Ned forgave Robert soon enough for his righteous indignation to be moot. However, are you assuming that Ned would have prevented a war with the Lannisters? What part of the story were you reading that would indicate that Ned was not going to make the Lannisters pay for their attack on Riverlands? What part of the story did I miss that would indicate that Stannis wasn't going to have to fight his way to the throne or Ned wouldn't end up fighting to make sure Renley wasn't king? White lies? You are delusional if you think Ned wouldn't take up arms against the Lannisters against Robert's wishes. He was literally trying to usurp the throne until Stannis could get to it. Why exactly does that make him different than the Lannisters exactly? I say its because you like him better. Cersei had already refused the offer to leave and Ned was already going to tell Robert, so it's not even a case of Ned saving Cersei and the kids. He was going to tell him the moment he got back from the hunt. Again, Ned played the game so well that he knew that the most important thing would be t make sure Joffrey wasn't king, not that Joffrey & Cersei was saved from Robert's wrath. It did not mean the exact same thing because those words did not mean Joffrey. Cersei wasn't killing bastard children everywhere for depopulation purposes.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 21, 2017 22:55:36 GMT
White lies? You are delusional if you think Ned wouldn't take up arms against the Lannisters against Robert's wishes. He was literally trying to usurp the throne until Stannis could get to it. Why exactly does that make him different than the Lannisters exactly? I say its because you like him better. I agreed with some of what you said, but had to challenge this statement. Cersei's children were all fathered by Jaime, which makes them not Robert's children. This means Stannis was next in line for the throne after Robert. Ned had historical documentation proving as much. Ned wasn't trying to usurp anything. Robert personally put Ned in charge of ruling until his heir was ready. There isn't much I can agree with in terms of Ned's actions but he was right in supporting Stannis' claim. He was the rightful king. On a side note, it's always bothered me that Brienne supported Renly. If she were so "honorable", she would have backed Stannis as he was the next in line. Renly was the little brother. He had no right trying to usurp the throne from Stannis! Even Renly admitted Stannis was next in line during the body shaving scene with Loras. Brienne is a hypocrite.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Sept 21, 2017 23:29:45 GMT
When you are taken without any basis except for the gut of the one arresting you, you are kidnapped. No, you're arrested and are due a trial, those who are kidnapped don't get trials and then released. Are you forgetting Tywin did indeed stand by and let Tyrion be arrested when Cersei falsely accused Tyrion of murdering Joffrey? A wise decision which doesn't support your point as it also precludes 'reminding Lady Stark that her actions were unlawful and King Robert would be forced to behead her for false arrest.' That's how the legal system works, just about anywhere. They don't even have to tell you what the evidence is, they just arrest you. Be careful, when the cops come to arrest you don't protest overmuch or you will be also charged with resisting arrest. Ned intended that Gregor Clegane pay for his crimes in the Riverlands and that Tywin come to King's Landing to answer for them, what he did not want to see happen was Cersei, Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella massacred in the process. Cersei and Jaime Lannister committed treason and put their blood in the line of succession, effectively usurping the future throne. Neither Ned Stark nor the legitimate heir, Stannis Baratheon, attempted to usurp anything. Remember: Ned's wording means the same as Robert's wording unless Cersei and Jaime are guilty of treason. After having given Cersei the opportunity to vacate, and note that he didn't tell Robert when he returned, he again gave Cersei and her children a chance to escape. Ned didn't play the game particularly well, but didn't want to see frightened children pulled from their bed and potentially slaughtered.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 22, 2017 0:31:25 GMT
@shinnikneth
This would have been a great fact IF Ned had told Robert the truth prior to his dying.
I love this scene based upon what we know about Ned now because Robert, even as he was dying, was all business. He doesn't even like Joffrey but he knows how important it is to lock that stuff down.
Ned, genius level game player that he is (He is not nor has he ever been naive), makes the calculated move to remove Joffrey by starting a coup and deliberately ending Robert's lineage, but just waiting until Robert died to do it so he could skulk out of telling Robert the truth despite the obvious fact that Robert needed to know the truth regardless of his condition. Nothing is ever a good time for Ned.
So back to the original point. Ned certainly had a point that Joffrey was not a legitimate heir. However, he lost that point the moment he kept that knowledge to himself. I don't really believe in the significance of ascension rights. The only ones who followed it were Targaryens and even they fought for power.
Robert didn;t even follow that rule with his own family, giving the Stormlands to Renley.
It's all well and good that Ned wanted Stannis, it just means that he also wanted a fight with the Lannisters.
Brienne isn't so much honorable as she is loyal.
She is the better representation of what people claim Ned is.
She would always want Renley to be anything because that is who she was in love with.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 22, 2017 6:19:34 GMT
I love this scene based upon what we know about Ned now because Robert, even as he was dying, was all business. He doesn't even like Joffrey but he knows how important it is to lock that stuff down. … I don't really believe in the significance of ascension rights. The only ones who followed it were Targaryens and even they fought for power. This is a feudal state. There are no enforceable laws for those at the top of it. Most of real medieval history is about the struggles coming from this. Much of English history since the Norman conquest is about getting kings to accept laws at all. The "rightful" king is not the one some established law tells you, it is the one power holders will accept. This is why Robert thought he had to write down Joffrey's claim and ask his best friend to secure it so he would have a chance of keeping the throne.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 22, 2017 6:27:56 GMT
On a side note, it's always bothered me that Brienne supported Renly. If she were so "honorable", she would have backed Stannis as he was the next in line. Renly was the little brother. He had no right trying to usurp the throne from Stannis! Even Renly admitted Stannis was next in line during the body shaving scene with Loras. Brienne is a hypocrite. There are no "succession laws", only personal opinions in people's mind. Brienne followed Renly because she had sworn an oath to him, as her father did. There was more honour in that than in following a personal opinion.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 22, 2017 16:09:04 GMT
There are no "succession laws", only personal opinions in people's mind. Brienne followed Renly because she had sworn an oath to him, as her father did. There was more honour in that than in following a personal opinion. I didn't say there's any succession laws, but just like with anything else, there's ways that things work. I was explaining how succession works. Every time Brienne calls Renly the "rightful king", I cringe because he never was the rightful king. If Renly was still alive after season 5, then he would be the rightful king because both Stannis and Shireen had died. It has nothing to do with oaths. Just because someone swears an oath, doesn't mean it's truth/fact. A character can swear an oath that Jon is Ned's biological son, it doesn't make it true. The truth is, Brienne should have given her sword to Stannis. He was the rightful king.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 22, 2017 16:23:22 GMT
There are no "succession laws", only personal opinions in people's mind. Brienne followed Renly because she had sworn an oath to him, as her father did. There was more honour in that than in following a personal opinion. It has nothing to do with oaths. Just because someone swears an oath, doesn't mean it's truth/fact. A character can swear an oath that Jon is Ned's biological son, it doesn't make it true. The truth is, Brienne should have given her sword to Stannis. He was the rightful king. When you swear to do something, honour commands that you do it. Truth has nothing to do with it. Brienne had sworn to serve Renly, so she did.
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 22, 2017 16:25:12 GMT
@shinnikneth This would have been a great fact IF Ned had told Robert the truth prior to his dying.I love this scene based upon what we know about Ned now because Robert, even as he was dying, was all business. He doesn't even like Joffrey but he knows how important it is to lock that stuff down. Ned, genius level game player that he is (He is not nor has he ever been naive), makes the calculated move to remove Joffrey by starting a coup and deliberately ending Robert's lineage, but just waiting until Robert died to do it so he could skulk out of telling Robert the truth despite the obvious fact that Robert needed to know the truth regardless of his condition. Nothing is ever a good time for Ned. So back to the original point. Ned certainly had a point that Joffrey was not a legitimate heir. However, he lost that point the moment he kept that knowledge to himself. When you do that, it doesn't notify me you responded to me. Ned definitely lost in the end. However, Stannis still received the letter Ned sent him (Ned has sent a messenger back in season 1 instructing the man he was to only put the letter into the hands of Stannis himself). During Stannis' first episode in the series, he receives the letter and says he wouldn't make the same mistake as Ned. Stannis has the news of Cersei's children sent every direction from Dragonstone. So in one small minute way, Ned did at least do that right (but not much else ).
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 22, 2017 17:06:46 GMT
I don't really believe in the significance of ascension rights. The only ones who followed it were Targaryens and even they fought for power. Robert didn;t even follow that rule with his own family, giving the Stormlands to Renley.It's all well and good that Ned wanted Stannis, it just means that he also wanted a fight with the Lannisters. Brienne isn't so much honorable as she is loyal.She is the better representation of what people claim Ned is. She would always want Renley to be anything because that is who she was in love with. That's too bad because the story is deep in it. It isn't just with business to do with the Iron Throne either. We hear time in again how the first born son or a daughter of a character will carry on as the Lord or Lady of a castle after the parent is dead. i.e. Sam is forced to give up his title so he won't inherit lands/titles, sweet little Robin will be in charge when he comes of age, Sansa will be queen when she weds Joffrey (under the lie that he's Robert's true son), blah, blah, blah. Sure, backstabbing happens but the line of how things are meant to go is clear at least...that's all I'm saying. Yeah...well, Robert was king and he didn't give a damn haha. He was going to do what he wanted. I believe he says in several episodes, "I'm the King! I get what I want!" Robert never cared or liked Stannis, which plays heavily into his decision to overlook Stannis and give to Renly instead. Robert never liked Renly very much either but Stannis he almost detested. No one loved Stannis. i.e. Even peasants mock him calling him "The Crab King" in the books. Stannis never got credit for anything from the other characters - not before the show's setting or during. I think that's one of the reasons why I always liked him so much. He goes on doing his duty without any recognition for his bravery that many of the other characters get lavished with (even if they only get it temporarily). He doesn't get anything. Not gold. Not lands. Not titles. For a world that sets the illusion of tradition, most people even steal away his rightful place as king just because they don't like him. Hell, I didn't even like Stannis when I first started reading the books. The tipping point for me was when I read the part where Stannis turns away from King's Landing and goes to save the Night's Watch instead. Had Stannis went to King's Landing instead, he would have won. He had the numbers and the Lannister forces were scattered around trying to fight all their enemies at the time. It was the perfect opportunity, but Stannis put duty first and went for the Wall instead. This leads to his forces getting stuck in the snow and his eventual demise (in the show at least for he's alive in the books). It makes him such an unappreciated, tragic character. I can't but feel for him. As Stannis says about saving the Nights' Watch: The act made me realize what a brilliant character Stannis is. He really follows through with what he says. It isn't just bullshit words with him, like it is with so many other characters in the story. Yes, loyal is a better word for Brienne. I detest how the show always makes a point of trying to portray her as honorable though. They have all these characters describe her as such and give her dialogue going on about it, but she isn't honorable for she doesn't support the one man she should be supporting by right. It irks me. Call the sword, Loyalkeeper goddammit!
|
|
shinnickneth
Junior Member
@shinnickneth
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 1,798
|
Post by shinnickneth on Sept 22, 2017 17:36:45 GMT
When you swear to do something, honour commands that you do it. Truth has nothing to do with it. Brienne had sworn to serve Renly, so she did. I understand how oaths work, thanks. My problem is with her going around proclaiming Renly the "rightful king" of the seven kingdoms. Renly never was that. Stannis was.
|
|