14

In Game of Thrones Robert Baratheon rebelled against the Mad King and took the Throne of the Seven Kingdoms.

Doesn't this legally set the heir to the throne to the Baratheon family by right of conquest? Both Stannis and Renly claimed to be the legal heirs to the throne.

Since Gendry is the only son of Robert alive, this makes him the rightful heir of throne instead of

Daenerys or Jon Snow

However, this seems to be forgotten in the series.

33

It depends on who you ask.

Rebellion supporters would make the claim it is Gendry. Targaryen's would say Dany and some might support Jon. The North, Vale and Riverlands would probably say Jon. Lannisters would say Cersei. And by your logic Cersei should be the Queen as she rightfully usurped the throne from the Baratheons.

The true heir is really whoever wins the game of thrones and ends up sitting on the Iron Throne. Most people simply don't care about the right of succession.

  • 1
    agreed ! also if Robert Baratheon had the ultimate claim to the throne, he wouldn't be hunting Targaryen kids and trying to kill them off (which is why Aegon/Jon was kept a secret & Dany had an assassination attempt done on her in the beginning). Which indicates, they could always come claim the throne – Anu7 Apr 17 at 6:43
  • Not quite. It's not about what people want. "King's blood" has significance in the reality of the show. So whoever has a legitimate claim to the Throne, has blood with magic "King's blood" properties. – grovkin Apr 24 at 12:26
9

One of the key points of Jon's heritage, which was the final piece of the puzzle that Bran and Sam discovered last season, is that Jon is not a bastard. Rhaegar and Lyanna officially married before he was born. If Jon had been born out of wedlock, even if you can prove that he's Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, he still doesn't stand to inherit Rhaegar's throne.

This isn't just a "legitimate children before bastards" rule, but rather a "bastards get nothing" rule.

Gendry is Robert's son, but he is still a bastard and therefore doesn't stand to inherit anything.

But I do agree with TheLethalCarrot that in the end, it's all about who can argue the best point. As Varys said, power resides where men believe it resides.

  • 2
    Cersei wasn't in the line of succession at all. Consorts don't get to inherit their regnant spouse's titles. She just took the throne because she could, not because she had any right. You don't become a Baratheon by giving birth to a Baratheon, you can become a Baratheon only by right of descent or marriage to a Baratheon maid. And Gendry is not just a bastard, he's an unacknowledged bastard. He's no different than a crofter's bastard. Had Robert acknowledged him like his half brother Edric Storm, then things would have been different. – Aegon Apr 17 at 7:36
  • 1
    @Aegon: The throne defaulted to Cersei as the closest living relative of the last ruler (Tommen) in absence of any other Baratheon. Regardless of whether that is stipulated, there seems to be a consensus that Cersei legitimately holds the throne, as we have not seen any arguments about her being an unrightful queen (compare this to how Renly/Stannis very much contested Joffrey's claim to the throne). As TheLethatCarrot suggested too; it's all about what people believe to bo correct, and the lack of people contesting Cersei is showing that people believe she is the one to rule after Tommen. – Flater Apr 17 at 7:40
  • @Aegon: [..] That is not to say that people like Cersei ruling, but no one seems to be arguing that she's unlawfully on the throne. Also, I agree that any born Baratheon would outrank Cersei as she is indeed not a Baratheon. But as the Baratheon lineage has died out (Gendry may genetically be a Baratheon but he isn't one as far as lineage is concerned), that's a moot point. – Flater Apr 17 at 7:41
  • 1
    No one objecting to Cersei's takeover says more about poor writing than laws. Do recall, no Northern Lord seemed to object to Jon Snow coming down from the Wall with an Army behind his back despite being sworn to the NW. – Aegon Apr 17 at 7:52
  • 1
    @Aegon: The point remains that it is not pedantic scripture, but rather the belief in pedantic scripture that defines who is considered to be the rightful heir. There is a common sense argument that Cersei is the closest inheritor of the throne, in absence of any descendants, siblings or other lineage of the last ruler. A grand council of the Realm seems impossible to do when the realm is dealing with civil war, as the North is once again attempting secession from the South. It's unclear as to whether this council has been excluded by Cersei, or merely suspended due to an active rebellion. – Flater Apr 17 at 7:58
0

If Robert's legal right to the throne was based on him being the next in line after Viserys and Dany fled, then after Shireen and Stannis die the right passes to Dany as an adult Targaryen claimant. Dany, while the rightful queen on the basis that Jon is not claiming the throne, legitimises Gendry, which in my view legally makes him her direct heir after Jon under Westerosi primogeniture succession law.

Once Dany is dead and Jon removed from a possible claim by being in prison for her murder, it's my opinion that Gendry is legally the rightful king from the moment Jon's arrest until the moment Bran accepts the vote for him, which represents a change in the law.

New contributor
rtozier2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .