28

In S8E4 of Game of Thrones,

Gendry was made a Baratheon by Daenerys.

Doesn't that indirectly mean that outside of having the best claim for Storm's End, he also has right now the best claim for the Iron Throne since he is now the legitimate heir of Robert who was the last king, and could create a lot more problems than solve, so in the future he could push his claim which technically should be stronger?

  • 6
    Robert was the "first usurper" as far as Targ-loyalists are concerned (And evidently, Gendry is one now). The last rightful King was Aerys II. So no, Gendry doesn't have any claim in the eyes of the Targ loyalists – Aegon May 6 at 14:21
  • 5
    @Aegon Eh, Robert Baratheon was a rightful king for sure, even though he usurped the throne. Right by conquest is an established mechanism for ascending the throne in both RL and Game of Thrones. On top of that, each of the seven kingdoms bent the knee to Robert Baratheon, acknowledging him as the legitimate King. – TylerH May 6 at 14:30
  • 3
    @TylerH We are talking about perspective of Targaryen loyalists here. Or those who're indifferent about the Rebels. Gendry took his legitimisation from Daenerys, doubt he disagrees with her that his father had been anything more than a usurper. If he did, Dany won't legitimise him and given Stormlands to someone more loyal to her. The Seven Kingdoms had no choice, Dorne and High Garden fought till the bitter end, but with Rhaegar and Aerys dead, Viserys and Daenerys fled, who were they supposed to fight for? – Aegon May 6 at 14:42
  • 1
    Robert himself had no delusions about where their true loyalties lay despite their oaths. As he said, "If Viserys Targaryen lands with a Dothraki army, the scum will join him and murder me and my son in our beds". And he knew people still called him a usurper. – Aegon May 6 at 14:44
  • 12
    @TylerH, for Daenerys to be able to call herself the Queen she must call Robert Baratheon usurper, otherwise she can't claim throne at all. And if she's not the Queen she can't legitimise Baratheon bastard too. So only way for him to not be bastard is to refuse his father's right for the Throne. – user28434 May 6 at 15:38
34

He is the third in the line of succession

In the point of view of Daenerys, Robert Baratheon usurped the throne. The last legitime king was Aerys II, and his descendants are the legitimate successors.

Only two descendants seem to be alive:

Jon Snow/Aegon, son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, and Daenerys, daughter of Aerys II and Rhaella.

The succession follows male primogeniture law. This means the first son is the heir, then his brothers, and then sisters. If the prince had children, they have a better claim than his siblings.

By these laws,

Jon/Aegon has a better claim than Daenerys, but Daenerys is still the rightful ruler while Jon is still Jon Snow and not Aegon Targaryen.

What about Gendry's claim?

Rhaelle Targaryen, the grandmother of Robert Baratheon, was the sister of Jaehaerys II. If he or all the descendants of Jaehaerys II die, Rhaelle Targaryen or her descendants become the heir to the crown.

Gendry, being the legitimate son of Robert Baratheon, is also the legitimate great-grandson of Rhaelle Targaryen, and therefore the third in succession line.

What does that imply?

As long as Jon is still officially Jon Snow and not Aegon Targaryen, Daenerys is the one with the better claim, and until she gets a child, Gendry is her heir.

However, as the other answers said, he still has a lower claim and is legitimate only thanks to the rightful queen, it wouldn't make much sense for him to claim the throne while she is still alive.

  • 1
    Re: Jon's status as a Snow or a Targ, Show canon is that he was born a legitimate son of Lyanna and Rhaegar, therefore he's the rightful King. Dany is his heir and as you said, Gendry is second in line after her. – Aegon May 6 at 15:34
  • 4
    @user1129682 Robert's obsession with killing the targaryens was because of his feud with Rhaegar. Although Tywin Lannister testifies he was relieved when Tywin presented him bodies of Prince Aegon and Princess Rhaenys which implies he understood that Targs had to die. Yet, he never ordered murder of Daenerys and Viserys until Viserys married Daenerys off to Drogo. As for LoS, Robert was in the line regardless, that's why he became the leader of Rebels. the Line was Rhaegar~Aegon~Viserys~Robert~Stannis~Renly in days of King Aerys II. – Aegon May 6 at 16:03
  • 3
    @NuclearWang Robert usurped the throne in the sense that Aerys II was still alive, and there was several people between Aerys and Robert in the succession line, but that dosn't exclude Robert from the succession line – Kepotx May 6 at 16:16
  • 6
    @NuclearWang There's a difference. In first scenario, Gendry's trying to claim the throne by virtue of his descent from the usurper. The second scenario, he's claiming the throne legally as heir to the legitimate Dragonkings. If a guy third in line usurps the throne, that still makes him a usurper. If the first two guys die somehow and the third guy inherits it, then he's the legitimate King. – Aegon May 6 at 16:22
  • 10
    "May" is not a synonym for "if". – Acccumulation May 6 at 16:30
14

By legitimizing Gendry,

Dany has made an ally, not an enemy. It would undermine yourself to usurp the person who legitimized you - it would require that you accept the legitimate rule of your queen to become a proper lord, but then reject her rule to take the throne for yourself. If you don't accept Dany as queen, then you're just still a bastard. If you do accept her, then you're a lord who has recognized Dany as queen - you can't really have it both ways.

9

No.

Keep in mind the now oft-repeated phrase from the show:

Power resides where men believe it resides

Consider that

Gendry was legitimized as a Baratheon by a Targaryen queen.

Putting aside how nonsensical it would be for such a person to try and usurp said ruler, a ruler who legitimized a bastard could ostensibly revoke their legitimization if they wanted to. And given the claim of a queen vs the claim of a noble (at best) with no actual house or bannermen (well, we don't actually know how many Baratheon bannermen still exist)... the noble is not in a good position to take the throne.

Aside from that, keep in mind that Robert Baratheon also took the throne from the Targaryens to begin with, while there were still Targaryen heirs. By your own logic, the Targaryen heirs (in order of introduction to the audience as the rightful heir)

Viserys, and then Dany after Viserys' death, then Jon/Aegon after Bran and Sam piece history together

have a stronger claim to the throne, because they each were, at one point or another in the show (and to our knowledge), the rightful heirs of the "last king" before Robert Baratheon took the throne.

Also keep in mind that one of the arguments Robert Baratheon made for claiming the throne to begin with was that he had some Targaryen blood in him due to his Baratheon lineage.

  • 2
    Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, Jon came before Viserys because he's the son of Viserys' older brother. – Azor Ahai May 6 at 16:59
  • A bastard, once legitimised can never be made a bastard again. JAegon comes before Viserys and Dany because son of an elder son comes before a younger son and daughter. Also all Baratheons are just a cadet branch of House Targaryen anyways. Orys Baratheon, founder of the house, was a bastard born half brother to Aegon the Conqueror, sired by Lord Aerion Targaryen. It just happened that Baratheons in 280 AC had the closest claim in all the Houses due to their descent from Aegon V. @AzorAhai Your understanding is correct. – Aegon May 6 at 17:11
  • 3
    In some senses I think you're missing an underlying paradox. If Gendry's legitimization is "legitimate", it can only be because Daenerys is, in fact, the rightful queen. This in turn means that the Baratheon line has no claim on the throne - if it did, Daenarys would have no power to confer legitimacy. – WhatRoughBeast May 6 at 17:47
  • 1
    @AzorAhai You're misunderstanding my point; I listed them in order that we learned about on the show. I'll adjust the wording to make it more clear. – TylerH May 6 at 18:31
  • 3
    @Aegon A king (or queen) can do whatever a king wants. That includes re-bastardizing a previously legitimized bastard. Just because there's a lack of precedent, or precedent otherwise, does not mean it's not possible. – TylerH May 6 at 18:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.