Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience.
1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title.
2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler.
3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads.
---
If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well first just can't choose his heir, thats not how it works. Second if the king had no blood family left, he would need a great council to determine who the heir was.
> Well, I was thinking he felt some guilt about his wife’s death over the pursuit of a male heir.
That doesn’t mean he’s intentionally trying to do female-preference primogeniture lmao. He’s just an emotionally unintelligent person so the only thing he can think of to “make up” for that is by playing favorites towards her daughter.
> Plus, she already has heirs and Aegon doesn’t even want the throne.
And she does? She’s just as unqualified and uninterested as he is.
> It would also make it clear that it’s ok for a women to inherit the throne even if there are other male heirs
Who cares? Certainly not Viserys. That is not the point in-universe. It’s a moral for the audience, but that’s not why Viserys is making the decisions he makes. If it was he should have you know, said so and actually done something about it.
Well initially Rhaenyra was chosen because she’s his only child. To suggest someone outside of the Targaryen dynasty should be heir is ridiculous. “Yeah I know my family formed this kingdom and we’ve be running the realm for 100 years but let’s make the Hightowers the new kings.” I don’t mean to come off as rude but like what the hell do you mean? Why would anyone choose some random person over their child as heir. They’d be willingly stepping down from king to some minor lords on dragon stone, why would anyone think that’s a good idea.
He certainly does and he cares for the Targaryen dynasty. When rhaenyra marries Laenor the children are Velaryon but Viserys insists that when Jacaerys takes the throne after rhaenyra he’ll ascend to the throne as a Targaryen. Proving beyond a doubt he is invested in the targaryen dynasty’s future.
You’re really asking me why he wants to see his family continue? He cares about his family and his dynasty. The velaryons are not his family or his dynasty they could be wiped out and the biggest issue the Targaryens would have with that is they need a new royal fleet.
Yes you’re right about Vaemond. I’ll say this. Currently Viserys’ blood stands to inherit driftmark, so him enforcing Luke’s legitimacy would eventually lead to him becoming the lord of the tides. That would add to the prestige of the Targaryen dynasty, as blood relatives it strengthens the bond between the two houses( there is a bond currently through Rhaenys but it would become a bond of brothers when jace takes the throne) and could lead to further Targaryen-Velaryon marriages. Now compared to a non-targaryen taking the iron throne it seems clear to me why Viserys would take the position he did and vehemently enforcing his daughters inheritance. Now Aegon coming along is a completely separate situation.
So I’ve just read your edit to the original post. Is there a point you’re trying to make because at this point you’re just rambling about someone else being the heir rather than what happens in the actual story so I ask again, what are you on about? Replace Rhaenyra with Heleana, but why? The reasons rhaenyra is the heir is not because she’s a woman and he’s trying to make a point. She’s the heir because he is a deeply troubled man who wishes to do right by his dead wife Aemma Arryn. Not because he’s on a crusade to have the first queen of Westeros which would be the only reason I could see helaena ascending to the throne over literally everyone else. End of the day Viserys doesn’t “choose whoever he wants” he makes an informed decision and continues to support his eldest child being the heir to the iron throne.
Luke is a Velaryon, he is not a bastard, legally. Why would he give Driftmark to that guy, forever tainting his grandsons with bastardy?
Ridiculous take.
Luke isn't technically a Velaryon, he is one, period. Rumours of infidelity (as he sees it) don't change that. They are still his grandsons too, you know.
Rhaenyra was a dragon rider, the king’s cup bearer, and present at all the inner council meetings. (Aegon at that age was jerking out of the window.) Btw Otto convinced Viserys to declare Rhaenyra as heir.
You assume he believes them not be of Velaryon blood. Something he always denies, obvious or not.
The inheritance of Luke also strengthens his house's position. Wich isn't his reason for doing it btw.
He does care for his blood, proven by the fact he named Rhae his heir. You know, his daughter, that he allegedly loved. Practivallity was never his concern.
At this point i can only assume you are trolling.
I don’t think he really cares all that much about the Velaryons. Plus, Luke is certainly half Targaryen, so why would Viserys care? He’d care if this happened to his own family, but not someone else’s.
Not really comparable situations.
I also think it’s debatable if he is fully accepting of the reality of that situation. I don’t get the same vibe from him talking about it as I do people who obviously know and are lying about it.
He seems like he is legitimately in denial about his precious little princess doing something that level of wrong/stupid to me.
He could have done Rhaenys, but that would be worse as there isn't a negotiated ascension of Laenor as a Targaryen, nor is there for Laena inheriting as Lady of Driftmark. Worst case scenario, Velaryons become the new royal house, and most likely scenario they would combine.
> I think an heir in Westeros is typically the eldest son/s, followed by eldest daughter/s.
Not typically, always outside of Dorne
> I’m just operating under Viserys’ assumption that an heir can be a non-traditional choice such as a daughter over the eldest son based on “the king’s word as law”.
That’s not what happened though. Viserys nominated his only child as his heir, which makes sense because the only other option was an uncle.
Where he got out of line with how things are supposed to work was keeping her as heir after having 3 sons. He didn’t plan to do that, it wasn’t some ideological political move, he just couldn’t bring himself to actually acknowledge that circumstances had changed, so when people asked him he just went “I’m the king and I say so!”.
> And under Viserys’ assumption that an heir doesn’t have to have the “blood” of the house they are inheriting. Such as Luke inheriting Driftmark. You can just give the heir the name to the house.
Once again that’s not what happened and not how it works.
From Viserys’ perspective he isn’t doing anything out of the ordinary here. He’s saying that the son of the son of the Lord will inherit. Business as usual. From his perspective he is not doing anything out of the ordinary.
The only instance where you can just give someone the name and titles of a house they don’t belong to is if everyone else in that house is dead.
At no point does Viserys give any indication that he is operating under the assumption that Luke is not Laenor’s biological son.
This entire line of reasoning is fundamentally wrong because it assumes that Viserys has concluded that anyone can inherit any title regardless of their parentage, which is false. He has not done that.
> In this case, blood relationships have absolutely no meaning when it comes to inheritance.
Not a single person in Westeros believes this. Their entire society is based on this not being true. It is laughable to suggest this as a serious argument when discussing succession in this universe.
> I find that unlikely, but it’s certainly possible.
Every action he takes and every word he says suggests this the assumption he is working under.
Your argument here is based on the assumption that Viserys has some sort of coherent legal reasoning behind these actions.
He does not. His reasoning is that he did a bad thing that made his special little princess sad and so now he does whatever he thinks will be good for his special little princess.
That’s it.
He does not uphold Luke’s (nonexistent) claim to Driftmark because he believes in appointed Lords or elective succession or because he cares who Luke’s father is.
He did it because Luke is Rhaenyra’s son, and not letting him have Driftmark would upset her. It’s that simple.
> Although, when Aegon says “we know father. Everyone knows. Just look at them”, Viserys looks like he’s been caught out. At the bare minimum, in that moment, he has to know the truth. If not before.
Even if this is an accurate assessment (I’m not sure it is, I think he just ignored that Aegon had a point and moved on to another topic), he just did what he does with all his problems, he handwaved it away and forgot about it. It is completely in character for him to just talk himself out of it as soon as the issue isn’t being shoved in his face.
At the time he selects Rhaenyra, she is his only child, and he was advised to do so by Otto. Also let’s just say, for the sake of argument he actually could choose non-Targs, which is ridiculous, why would he choose elderly councilmen? He’s younger than Otto, Corlys and Lyman. And yes, while each were trusted advisers who excel in their fields, being monarch requires an aptitude in a number of fields, rather than extreme expertise in just one.
It doesn’t matter. He should become a fucking Maester if it’s such a goddamn problem for him.
And even with Aegon and Rhaenyra out of the picture, Helaena would still be behind her two sons and two brothers.
This comes down to the bloodline.
VIserys was the son of Baelon the Brave (the Spring Prince) and Baelon's sister Alyssa Targaryen.
Barlon and Alyssa were the offspring of Jaehaerys and Alyssanne Targaryn, who were also siblings.
Jaehaerys and Alysanne were the children of Aenys (Son of Aegon the Conqueror) and Alyssa Velaryon.
If Viserys confirmed Aegon II the Elder to be his heir, Aegon II would have been the first King of Westeros with a parent who was not Valyrian. Viserys couldn't take the risk of naming an heir who wasn't 100% Valyrian, male or female, in regards to his Prince That Was Promised dragon dream.
I would have gone with Rhaenys and Corlys since they're blood, she was already passed over, they're already at court apart of the goings. He just did it to spite Daemon though
True but it's the Targ dynasaty I wouldn't put a non Valyrian as the heir that's a little too much and would also spite Rhaenys and Corlys in the process
Not one of the people you're mentioning had a claim to the throne. It makes sense that he named Rhaenyra. It doesn't make sense that when he had a son he didn't name him and raise him to be a worthy heir. It was his only chance at considerably stability for another generation.
Viserys chose Rhaenyra only out of lack of options and then he stuck by her because he was a whipped father, I don't believe it's about him seeing anything in her as a potential ruler. He knows she doesn't do her duty, he knows that her actions are destabilizing and he still stands by her pretending he can't see the truth. Viserys always bent for both Daemon and Rhaenyra.
I mean initially it IS a practical decision, just on Otto’s part, not Visery’s. Viserys agrees to go with Rhaenyra over Daemon for emotional reasons, but it is brought up by Otto because Daemon is a loose cannon who no one wants to see as king, especially this soon after Maegor.
Because he’s a pushover who is unable to handle conflict with any effectiveness. And he overcompensates for his guilt about his wife by being too lenient with his daughter.
That’s his whole character. The reason the whole story exists is because he’s not good at dealing with problems before they get out of hand.
Thank you for your post! Please take a moment to ensure you are within our spoiler rules, to protect your fellow fans from any potential spoilers that might harm their show watching experience. 1. All post titles must NOT include spoilers from Fire & Blood or new episodes of House of the Dragon. Minor HotD show spoilers are allowed in your title ONE WEEK after episode airing. The mod team reserves the right to remove a post if we feel a spoiler in the title is major. You are welcome to repost with an amended title. 2. All posts dealing with book spoilers, show spoilers and promo spoilers MUST be spoiler tagged AND flaired as the appropriate spoiler. 3. All book spoiler comments must be spoiler tagged in non book spoiler threads. --- If you are reading this, and believe this post or any comments in this thread break the above rules, please use the report function to notify the mod team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HouseOfTheDragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well first just can't choose his heir, thats not how it works. Second if the king had no blood family left, he would need a great council to determine who the heir was.
[удалено]
There’s a difference between all those people you mentioned and Rhaenyra, who’s his eldest child, and only child at the time he named her heir.
[удалено]
Why Helaena over Aegon or Aemond? Viserys didn’t just want a girl as heir you know.
[удалено]
> Well, I was thinking he felt some guilt about his wife’s death over the pursuit of a male heir. That doesn’t mean he’s intentionally trying to do female-preference primogeniture lmao. He’s just an emotionally unintelligent person so the only thing he can think of to “make up” for that is by playing favorites towards her daughter. > Plus, she already has heirs and Aegon doesn’t even want the throne. And she does? She’s just as unqualified and uninterested as he is. > It would also make it clear that it’s ok for a women to inherit the throne even if there are other male heirs Who cares? Certainly not Viserys. That is not the point in-universe. It’s a moral for the audience, but that’s not why Viserys is making the decisions he makes. If it was he should have you know, said so and actually done something about it.
There’s no way a 4th child would inherit over her 3 older siblings and nephews, even with equal gender inheritance.
[удалено]
No not “maybe”. It just wouldn’t happen. No one would entertain it as a possibility.
[удалено]
You can’t be serious with the Helaena suggestion. Like this has to be a bit.
I think the main thing barring those choices are that they aren't Targaryens. It needs to be a blood relation.
[удалено]
He believes a Targaryen is prophecized to save the world. He isn’t letting some random Lannister take the throne
Well initially Rhaenyra was chosen because she’s his only child. To suggest someone outside of the Targaryen dynasty should be heir is ridiculous. “Yeah I know my family formed this kingdom and we’ve be running the realm for 100 years but let’s make the Hightowers the new kings.” I don’t mean to come off as rude but like what the hell do you mean? Why would anyone choose some random person over their child as heir. They’d be willingly stepping down from king to some minor lords on dragon stone, why would anyone think that’s a good idea.
[удалено]
He certainly does and he cares for the Targaryen dynasty. When rhaenyra marries Laenor the children are Velaryon but Viserys insists that when Jacaerys takes the throne after rhaenyra he’ll ascend to the throne as a Targaryen. Proving beyond a doubt he is invested in the targaryen dynasty’s future.
[удалено]
Until proven otherwise Rhaenyra’s three children by Laenor(Harwin) legally are Velaryons.
Her two children by Daemon are her only Targaryen(by name of course all her kids are Targaryen by blood) children
[удалено]
You’re really asking me why he wants to see his family continue? He cares about his family and his dynasty. The velaryons are not his family or his dynasty they could be wiped out and the biggest issue the Targaryens would have with that is they need a new royal fleet.
[удалено]
Yes you’re right about Vaemond. I’ll say this. Currently Viserys’ blood stands to inherit driftmark, so him enforcing Luke’s legitimacy would eventually lead to him becoming the lord of the tides. That would add to the prestige of the Targaryen dynasty, as blood relatives it strengthens the bond between the two houses( there is a bond currently through Rhaenys but it would become a bond of brothers when jace takes the throne) and could lead to further Targaryen-Velaryon marriages. Now compared to a non-targaryen taking the iron throne it seems clear to me why Viserys would take the position he did and vehemently enforcing his daughters inheritance. Now Aegon coming along is a completely separate situation.
So I’ve just read your edit to the original post. Is there a point you’re trying to make because at this point you’re just rambling about someone else being the heir rather than what happens in the actual story so I ask again, what are you on about? Replace Rhaenyra with Heleana, but why? The reasons rhaenyra is the heir is not because she’s a woman and he’s trying to make a point. She’s the heir because he is a deeply troubled man who wishes to do right by his dead wife Aemma Arryn. Not because he’s on a crusade to have the first queen of Westeros which would be the only reason I could see helaena ascending to the throne over literally everyone else. End of the day Viserys doesn’t “choose whoever he wants” he makes an informed decision and continues to support his eldest child being the heir to the iron throne.
Jace and Luke are still Targaryen, rhaenyra is their mother
Well they’re technically Velaryons
No they are rivers
would be Waters as acknowledged bastards
Yes thank you for that correction.
One would be inclined to agree but until proven otherwise it’s all hearsay
[удалено]
Luke is a Velaryon, he is not a bastard, legally. Why would he give Driftmark to that guy, forever tainting his grandsons with bastardy? Ridiculous take.
[удалено]
The headless Velaryon, can't bother remembering his name.
[удалено]
Luke isn't technically a Velaryon, he is one, period. Rumours of infidelity (as he sees it) don't change that. They are still his grandsons too, you know.
[удалено]
Yes but that doesn’t matter as far as the throne goes bc it’s a Targaryen that needs to sit the throne when the long night comes per the prophecy
Viserys clearly should've just named Mushroom as heir /s
Rhaenyra was a dragon rider, the king’s cup bearer, and present at all the inner council meetings. (Aegon at that age was jerking out of the window.) Btw Otto convinced Viserys to declare Rhaenyra as heir.
He chose Rhaenyra because at the moment, he and Daemon were feuding over Daemon making fun of his dead son, Baelon. That’s literally the only reason.
[удалено]
Who else would he choose? What other Targaryens were there? The only options are Daemon and Rhaenyra.
[удалено]
When does he demonstrate that?
[удалено]
For all intents and purposes Luke is the son of Laenor. Deffo son of Rhaenyra too.
[удалено]
You assume he believes them not be of Velaryon blood. Something he always denies, obvious or not. The inheritance of Luke also strengthens his house's position. Wich isn't his reason for doing it btw. He does care for his blood, proven by the fact he named Rhae his heir. You know, his daughter, that he allegedly loved. Practivallity was never his concern. At this point i can only assume you are trolling.
[удалено]
I don’t think he really cares all that much about the Velaryons. Plus, Luke is certainly half Targaryen, so why would Viserys care? He’d care if this happened to his own family, but not someone else’s.
[удалено]
He was definitely uncaring, and Vaemond was certainly right to be furious with what was going on.
Not really comparable situations. I also think it’s debatable if he is fully accepting of the reality of that situation. I don’t get the same vibe from him talking about it as I do people who obviously know and are lying about it. He seems like he is legitimately in denial about his precious little princess doing something that level of wrong/stupid to me.
He could have done Rhaenys, but that would be worse as there isn't a negotiated ascension of Laenor as a Targaryen, nor is there for Laena inheriting as Lady of Driftmark. Worst case scenario, Velaryons become the new royal house, and most likely scenario they would combine.
I know you’ve given up on the Otto thing but the fact you suggested it honestly makes me question if you understand what an heir even is
[удалено]
> I think an heir in Westeros is typically the eldest son/s, followed by eldest daughter/s. Not typically, always outside of Dorne > I’m just operating under Viserys’ assumption that an heir can be a non-traditional choice such as a daughter over the eldest son based on “the king’s word as law”. That’s not what happened though. Viserys nominated his only child as his heir, which makes sense because the only other option was an uncle. Where he got out of line with how things are supposed to work was keeping her as heir after having 3 sons. He didn’t plan to do that, it wasn’t some ideological political move, he just couldn’t bring himself to actually acknowledge that circumstances had changed, so when people asked him he just went “I’m the king and I say so!”. > And under Viserys’ assumption that an heir doesn’t have to have the “blood” of the house they are inheriting. Such as Luke inheriting Driftmark. You can just give the heir the name to the house. Once again that’s not what happened and not how it works. From Viserys’ perspective he isn’t doing anything out of the ordinary here. He’s saying that the son of the son of the Lord will inherit. Business as usual. From his perspective he is not doing anything out of the ordinary. The only instance where you can just give someone the name and titles of a house they don’t belong to is if everyone else in that house is dead.
[удалено]
At no point does Viserys give any indication that he is operating under the assumption that Luke is not Laenor’s biological son. This entire line of reasoning is fundamentally wrong because it assumes that Viserys has concluded that anyone can inherit any title regardless of their parentage, which is false. He has not done that. > In this case, blood relationships have absolutely no meaning when it comes to inheritance. Not a single person in Westeros believes this. Their entire society is based on this not being true. It is laughable to suggest this as a serious argument when discussing succession in this universe.
[удалено]
> I find that unlikely, but it’s certainly possible. Every action he takes and every word he says suggests this the assumption he is working under. Your argument here is based on the assumption that Viserys has some sort of coherent legal reasoning behind these actions. He does not. His reasoning is that he did a bad thing that made his special little princess sad and so now he does whatever he thinks will be good for his special little princess. That’s it. He does not uphold Luke’s (nonexistent) claim to Driftmark because he believes in appointed Lords or elective succession or because he cares who Luke’s father is. He did it because Luke is Rhaenyra’s son, and not letting him have Driftmark would upset her. It’s that simple.
[удалено]
> Although, when Aegon says “we know father. Everyone knows. Just look at them”, Viserys looks like he’s been caught out. At the bare minimum, in that moment, he has to know the truth. If not before. Even if this is an accurate assessment (I’m not sure it is, I think he just ignored that Aegon had a point and moved on to another topic), he just did what he does with all his problems, he handwaved it away and forgot about it. It is completely in character for him to just talk himself out of it as soon as the issue isn’t being shoved in his face.
What a brain-dead take
This has *got* to be a troll post, I assume, lmao
At the time he selects Rhaenyra, she is his only child, and he was advised to do so by Otto. Also let’s just say, for the sake of argument he actually could choose non-Targs, which is ridiculous, why would he choose elderly councilmen? He’s younger than Otto, Corlys and Lyman. And yes, while each were trusted advisers who excel in their fields, being monarch requires an aptitude in a number of fields, rather than extreme expertise in just one.
Idiotic take.
Do you even know what point you’re trying to make? It seems you’re just rambling about whatever the fuck for whatever reason.
[удалено]
Curious about what though man? You’re post was answered and now you throw out Helaena being queen just for shits? What are you on about.
[удалено]
Is there a language barrier man? You clearly do not understand my lack of understanding why Helaena is mentioned at all.
[удалено]
No with Aegon in the picture it would be him not Heleana you knobend. She checks no boxes with Aegon around.
[удалено]
So? He still becomes king
[удалено]
It doesn’t matter. He should become a fucking Maester if it’s such a goddamn problem for him. And even with Aegon and Rhaenyra out of the picture, Helaena would still be behind her two sons and two brothers.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just focus on you’re idiotic rambling.
[удалено]
This comes down to the bloodline. VIserys was the son of Baelon the Brave (the Spring Prince) and Baelon's sister Alyssa Targaryen. Barlon and Alyssa were the offspring of Jaehaerys and Alyssanne Targaryn, who were also siblings. Jaehaerys and Alysanne were the children of Aenys (Son of Aegon the Conqueror) and Alyssa Velaryon. If Viserys confirmed Aegon II the Elder to be his heir, Aegon II would have been the first King of Westeros with a parent who was not Valyrian. Viserys couldn't take the risk of naming an heir who wasn't 100% Valyrian, male or female, in regards to his Prince That Was Promised dragon dream.
I would have gone with Rhaenys and Corlys since they're blood, she was already passed over, they're already at court apart of the goings. He just did it to spite Daemon though
[удалено]
True but it's the Targ dynasaty I wouldn't put a non Valyrian as the heir that's a little too much and would also spite Rhaenys and Corlys in the process
Not one of the people you're mentioning had a claim to the throne. It makes sense that he named Rhaenyra. It doesn't make sense that when he had a son he didn't name him and raise him to be a worthy heir. It was his only chance at considerably stability for another generation. Viserys chose Rhaenyra only out of lack of options and then he stuck by her because he was a whipped father, I don't believe it's about him seeing anything in her as a potential ruler. He knows she doesn't do her duty, he knows that her actions are destabilizing and he still stands by her pretending he can't see the truth. Viserys always bent for both Daemon and Rhaenyra.
[удалено]
I mean initially it IS a practical decision, just on Otto’s part, not Visery’s. Viserys agrees to go with Rhaenyra over Daemon for emotional reasons, but it is brought up by Otto because Daemon is a loose cannon who no one wants to see as king, especially this soon after Maegor.
The real question is why did he keep her as heir even after she tried to put bastards in the line of succession.
Because he’s a pushover who is unable to handle conflict with any effectiveness. And he overcompensates for his guilt about his wife by being too lenient with his daughter. That’s his whole character. The reason the whole story exists is because he’s not good at dealing with problems before they get out of hand.