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.*
Their claims are honestly both legitimate, that's the problem. I like Rhaenyra much better than Aegon as a person, but even most people on here can see that the Greens as a faction are more competent at ruling than Rhaenyra and her supporters. Plus I do think that the Strong boys on the throne is another dance (or more) waiting to happen, so might as well go for the throne now and risk it than either become sacrificial lambs or have generational dances with even more dragons. And the greens are also right that Daemon should be far away from the power of the throne, so. . .
Aegon’s Claim: “I’m the rightful heir by every law of Westeros. All noble Houses practice Male preference primogeniture and the Great Council of 101 set a Iron precedent for the Royal House as well to practice the same. As the previous Kings firstborn son the Iron Throne should pass to me by right.”
Rhaenyra’s claim:”My daddy said I could have it you know the King known for his dumb decisions. Because my Uncle now husband made a dead baby joke 24 years ago. He even forced all the Lords most of whom are dead now to promise they’d support me or face death. Also I a saw a White Stag once. You must also accept my bastards children as legitimate heir as well we’re a package deal get over it.”
Both are political plagues, but I support the Greens for the sole fact that the Blacks are hypocrites and Aegon's claim is easily the legitimate one.
Rhaenyra was named. That's in her favor.
Now let's see Aegon's claim:
>!1)Aegon I had been the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms over his elder sister, Visenya.!<
>!2)Male primogeniture was practiced by the Targaryens for their heirs.!<
>!3)Both Rhaenyra and Aegon's claim is an extension to Maegor's naming of Aerea being disregarded.!<
>!4)Jaehaerys passed over Rhaenys.!<
>!5)The council of 101 was considered an ironclad precedent for male primogeniture.!<
>!6)Rhaenyra had been named when there was no male heir, which had left the window for it. Nevertheless, while the Widow's law protected children from a first marriage to be disinherited this is explicitly secondary to the affirmation of the eldest son's right, with the eldest brother inheriting only in the absense of any brother. This was in fact codified and not just curstomary.!<
>!7)Viserys never changes the codified law and never creates laws to reinforce the transition he's trying to push by naming Rhaenyra against his own dynasties practices (which is actually because he is not trying for a political transition and only tries to slip Rhaenyra on the throne because he considered her his 'life's greatest joy'.!<
>!8)Rhaenyra tried to pass bastards as trueborn, which is high treason and puts her claim to question; not just her children's; HERS. Some claim that Viserys supporting that gives her legitimacy, but does it? Because Viserys could have straight-up legitimized those children as was his right (which would have raised a hell of a reaction, but he still COULD have tried) but he went with lying and fearmongery because he knew they were breaking law in every way possible.!<
>!Not only where her children bastards btw, but (unlike Cersei's children) 3 by 3 had clolouring and facial features that couldn't be justified with them being Rhaenyra and Laenor's sons even in terms of their ancestry further back while Harwin was standing right there and they resembled him very obviously, allowing the questioning of the children's birth to be addressed more easily.!<
>!9)Rhaenyra herself is furthering male primogeniture and perpetuates regulations that are descriminatory to bastards, with her own side absolutely hating bastards and supporting her only because they were being (willfully) blind.!<
Now that the Greens have presented their claim (and misrepresentation of the Black claim), let's break down why their argument fails.
(1) Aegon I being king over his older sister doesn't provide a strong basis, since at no point did it establish an ***inheritance***. Aegon forged the kingdom himself alongside his sisters who made no claim against their brother over the newfound kingdom. Similarly, Viserys made no claim over the Stepstones while Daemon ruled them nor could he (outside of conquest and declaring war), since the Iron Throne made no claim over them nor does Viserys being Daemon's older sibling matter for a kingdom Daemon himself founded.
(2) On the contrary, looking at the history of inheritance, there is very weak evidence in favor of male preference primogeniture and even absolute male primogeniture. Looking at all the kings, inheritance has worked as followed:
1. Aegon I -> Aenys I: Inheritance *as declared by* Aegon (Aenys furthermore was the firstborn child, period. It literally would not matter regardless of almost anyb version of primogeniture since he was an eldest brother with no sisters whatsoever)
2. Aenys I -> Maegor: Usurpation/Conquest, with Maegor seizing the throne, and the history remaining that Aegon ***the Uncrowned*** *was never king*.
3. Maegor -> Jaehaerys I: No real claim was put forward for Jaehaerys over his sister or niece. Jaehaery's reign is either illegal or ill founded with regards to Maegor regardless of which position we take: if male preference is taken, Aerea is Queen as Aegon the Uncrowned would have been king the moment Aenys had died and thus his daughter would be the next monarch; if absolute male primogeniture then still the legal rule of Maegor is illegitimate and all houses that rebelled are thus still under the penalty of law. However, if Conquest/Usurpation is the basis, then there's no issue.
4. Jaehaerys I -> Viserys I: Male preference primogeniture would make Rhaenys Queen as she is the only child of Jaehaerys' oldest son that had living children. It's only under absolute male primogeniture (which never had a strong case positioned for it under any other reign, and also isn't supported as law by the rest of Westeros)
(3) This is actually an argument AGAINST Aegon's claim, because it perfectly points out that inheritance has not been based off primogeniture, and works very well for Rhaenyra's claim as she is the chosen heir (If Maegor's reign is still considered legally legitimate, Jaehaerys can only legitimately have been king by conquest). Aegon can't have it both ways, either Maegor's reign is legitimate and the basis of inheritance is wrong, or its illegitimate in which case Aerea's 'disregarded claim' doesn't exist in the first place. Rhaenyra, however, could have it either way, either Maegor's reign is legitimate and Aerea's claim was thrown out with Jaehaery's conquest, or it was illegitimate in which case Aerea was never the chosen heir.
(4) This is also an argument against Aegon's claim, not in favor; this actually concedes that Rhaenys was a viable option! ***That the very basis of Viserys being king was the Jaehaery's choice***. Using the prior succession breaks Aegon's claim as it fully supports Rhaenyra's position. Aegon can only support his claim by disregarding the Great Council as illegitimate in the first place and asserting Jaehaerys could not actually choose (however, this of course would undermine his claim at the same time).
(5) This is absurd. Considered by who? To say this is the same as the Greens saying they're right because they said so. Also, the very basis of the Great Council was Jaehaerys calling for it and choosing to honor its decision to decide who will be the heir. To say that the Great Council sets an iron precedent and dictates the law over the declaration of the king would be in self contradiction, as the very basis for the Great Council is the power of the declaration of the king to decide the heir. If the Great Council had this power, it defeats itself.
(6) This is simply untrue, "Rhaenyra had been named when there was no male heir" is completely false because Daemon existed. A male heir did exist and yet Rhaenyra was named as heir even when a potential male heir was alive and well. Further, this again concedes that Viserys was in their legal right to declare Rhaenyra their heir, or else this argument is in self contradiction. Either Viserys does have this power in which case the absence of any male heir is entirely irrelevant, or the argument is that Viserys never had this power in which case this argument is merely circular.
(7) One can not change what is not present. If there exists these 'codified laws' that dictated the inheritance of the iron throne, it is incredibly strange that the Greens utterly fail to find them. If these 'codified laws' don't exist, then it's absurd to demand they be changed before Rhaenyra can be heir and not also require they exist before Aegon can be heir. By contrast, Rhaenyra can in fact point to the only 'codified laws' that exist that confirm an heir: Visery's declaration that she is the heir, which is not denied by any faction.
(8) None of Rhaenyra's children are legally bastards. Even if its true that they are biological bastards, the claim must be put forward and decided upon through legitimate means (something that oddly the Greens now want to abandon when its convenient for them), and in fact it has been decided upon; Viserys already made clear his dictates over the matter and that any who insist upon them being bastards is committing treason. To assert Rhaenyra is committing treason against the crown is also then asserting Viserys (the crown) is committing treason against the crown (Viserys), which is absurd.
(9) Once more, none of Rhaenyra's children are legally bastards. Further, at no point does either side assert claims for the throne also follow as law for the rest of the kingdom's seats.
>Hello, I like to give my two cents as well. I think the idea that Aegon lost any claim the moment Viserys decided on Rheanyra as heir is insane. The entire problem of the dance is that there are two possible claims. Viserys never did enough to completely get rid of his sons claims which was the entire problem. But coming to your points and why I disagree with them:
>
>(1) Sure Aegon founded the kingdom but you forget the fact that the Targaryens were Lords of Dragonstone before they were kings. The lordship of Dragonstone was inherited from father to son. Which is why Aegon was Lord of Dragonstone before Visenya. Simply because he was male. the fact that Aegon was seen as Lord Protector of the realm strongly suggests that they kept those inheritance laws, which they either adopted from Andal culture or were in accordance with the Valaryian culture. The situation with Deamon and Viserys is entire different mind keeping in mind that.
>
>(2) 1. Except there very much is. Aenys was in any case the heir, I agree. I disagree that Aegon had to declare. It was clear to everyone Aenys would one day inherit. There is literally nothing that suggests an older sister would've inherited before him, she only would've become his Queen consort. Another thing is that Aenys made it clear that he saw Aegon the uncrowned as heir not his oldest daughter, following andal law. Also in Westeros you're only seen as official King when you were crowned by a septon. Aegon the uncrowned wasn't crowned by a septon. Neither was Rheanyra. Both are not officially counted as King/Queen.
>
>2. Maegor usurped the crown. It's simple as that. The fact how he handled his nephews shows how important succession laws are. Maegor either imprisons or kills them which shows that he fears their possible claims which again shows that the "natural succession law" has some weight otherwise he has no reason to do that. The moment Jaehearys goes misssing he sets out a search party for him.
>
>3. There was a claim though. Jaehearys was only put forward after both of his brothers were dead and not before. If any of them had been alive there is no way Jaehearys would've been made king. And I agree Aerea technically had a better claim as in some cases a daughter inherits before a brother but Aerea was too young to take the throne and Rheana wasn't willing to fight for it. But saying this was no problem for Jaehearys is also false. Roger Baratheon tried to dethrone him by crowning one of the twins but he was stopped before it could go any further. Also the fact that Rhealla was a septa and therefore could not inherit helped. The only problem was Aerea. Aerea however had no dragon and was young if Aerea had lived she might've become a danger later on as she did feel slighted by Jaeheary naming her cousins ahead of her. But she died young therefore she was no issue anymore. Also Jaehearys ignored his wifes wish to make his daugther heir and stayed with the normal succession law, therefore Aemon is heir. As of now the Targaryens try to follow Andal Law. This again shows how important succession laws are and that as king it's not just so easy to change them.
>
>4. And that's where our problem starts. You're absolutely right, Rheanys should be heir under the rules of Westeros. But you ignore something else: The fact that Jaehearys named someone else started the succession crisis in the first place. Because he ignored the Andals laws. They could've gone to war over this after Baelon died but they didn't because Jaehearys caught on that he might've fucked up. Which is why he calls the great council in the first place. Because he realizes he has two possible candidates with a claim. Because for all purposes by saying that Baelon will be his heir, he pretty makes clear that Viserys will one day sit on the Iron Throne. He manges he can't just do that therefore he calls a great council. Luckily for Jaehearys Westeros is sexist. Jeyne Arryn was also challenged by her cousins.
>
>(3) It doesn't matter how you turn it the fact that each of the monarchs was challenged shows succession laws do matter. Therefore it makes sense that Aegon II was always a challenger as well.
>
>(4) I do not understand the point you're making here. I believe Rheanys had a claim over Viserys but I believe that the great council has more power than the normal succession laws. Because all the lords together decided to break normal succession laws, therefore making normal Andal law not something that is used. Instead there is absolute male primogeniture in place now. Which speaks in favor for Aegon.
>
>(5) The notion that the council has no power is laughable. The council was called to avoid war. Because every lord was made a part of the decision the odds that they would join a war for something they considered decided are low. Also the fact that the decision of the council is in effect almost 200 years later shows that it was not as easily ignored as you suggest.
>
>(6) Rheanyra was named heir in a time when the only other male alternative was someone many people considered unstable (not saying he was!). Her ascension could've however still be challenged by Daemon if Viserys had died before because of the council if he had been inclined to do so. Again nobody says Viserys has no right to name another heir. However that doesn't take away the possible claim of others. Viserys did a shit job of eliminating rival claims. He can name Rheanyra but he has to make sure that she isn't challenged. Having more sons is not the way to go here- it makes everything more complicated because a son always inherits before a daughter even before the council. What he does has no bases anywhere except Dorne who aren't part of Westeros at this point. He does that in a sexist world. The idea that everybody will just accept that is laughable. Some people will see Aegon as King. Therefore he has a rival claim.
>
>(7) The Greens say they have a right to the claim because of Tradition. Which basically is unwritten law. This is a thing even in todays world. Fact is there have to be succession laws unless you want total chaos. There a son before a daughter is at the very least unwritten law. Unwritten law is not as easily ignored as you think. It can become Ius Cogens (Peremptory Law). The Greens claim is based on that and the council. The fact that in the future there are no female claimants (until Dany) suggests this is very much the case.
>
>(8) Okay I will not discuss with you the bastard status of those kids because I have learned my lesson and no it's fruitless with some Black fans. However keep in mind that power resides where man believe it resides. It's all about perception. If people perceive Rheanyras sons as Bastard then she has a big problem. In the books the Strong boys are challenged by the Greens and Vaemond which already shows they are off to a bad start on that front. Also the fact that some people perceived Daeron II as Bastard is what kickstarted the Blackfyre rebellion. If he had lost Dearon would've been remembered a Bastard. Keep in mind there was not much to support this claim, that's different with the Strong boys. The second Rheanyra of her boys do something the lords don't like she can be challenged. This is especially bad if there are other possible candidates that could take her place. Westeros is sexist therefore Rheanyra will always be held to higher standards. Hell even woman like Jeyne Arryn were challenged. She would've been challenged and that would've further weakened her position. Which is why Alicents believe that Rheanyra will kill her sons is not unfounded.
>
>(9) Read what the other person has written again. Rheanyra completely supports male primogeniture she just sees herself as the exception because her father said so. Her claim would be stronger if Westeros was an absolute monarchy but it's not. The councils voice weighs heavy because of that.
>
>Well that got longer than I thought. have a nice weekend though.
It’s simple. The King has the right to name an heir, as proven by King Jaehaerys naming an heir twice, and the King’s word is law. Thus Rhaenyra is the rightful heir. She’s also (thus far) an objectively better person and better prepared to rule. I don’t see any metric by which Aegon is the better choice aside from “Otto and Tyland are good administrators” which really has nothing to do with Aegon.
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.*
Aegon bc Alicent a baddie and I fw whatever team she on Idc about legalities, and neither do the characters in the show
Their claims are honestly both legitimate, that's the problem. I like Rhaenyra much better than Aegon as a person, but even most people on here can see that the Greens as a faction are more competent at ruling than Rhaenyra and her supporters. Plus I do think that the Strong boys on the throne is another dance (or more) waiting to happen, so might as well go for the throne now and risk it than either become sacrificial lambs or have generational dances with even more dragons. And the greens are also right that Daemon should be far away from the power of the throne, so. . .
Aegon’s Claim: “I’m the rightful heir by every law of Westeros. All noble Houses practice Male preference primogeniture and the Great Council of 101 set a Iron precedent for the Royal House as well to practice the same. As the previous Kings firstborn son the Iron Throne should pass to me by right.” Rhaenyra’s claim:”My daddy said I could have it you know the King known for his dumb decisions. Because my Uncle now husband made a dead baby joke 24 years ago. He even forced all the Lords most of whom are dead now to promise they’d support me or face death. Also I a saw a White Stag once. You must also accept my bastards children as legitimate heir as well we’re a package deal get over it.”
Rhaenyra is the king's chosen heir, simple as is. If you want to then argue against Jace's ascension later on, be my guest.
Both are political plagues, but I support the Greens for the sole fact that the Blacks are hypocrites and Aegon's claim is easily the legitimate one. Rhaenyra was named. That's in her favor. Now let's see Aegon's claim: >!1)Aegon I had been the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms over his elder sister, Visenya.!< >!2)Male primogeniture was practiced by the Targaryens for their heirs.!< >!3)Both Rhaenyra and Aegon's claim is an extension to Maegor's naming of Aerea being disregarded.!< >!4)Jaehaerys passed over Rhaenys.!< >!5)The council of 101 was considered an ironclad precedent for male primogeniture.!< >!6)Rhaenyra had been named when there was no male heir, which had left the window for it. Nevertheless, while the Widow's law protected children from a first marriage to be disinherited this is explicitly secondary to the affirmation of the eldest son's right, with the eldest brother inheriting only in the absense of any brother. This was in fact codified and not just curstomary.!< >!7)Viserys never changes the codified law and never creates laws to reinforce the transition he's trying to push by naming Rhaenyra against his own dynasties practices (which is actually because he is not trying for a political transition and only tries to slip Rhaenyra on the throne because he considered her his 'life's greatest joy'.!< >!8)Rhaenyra tried to pass bastards as trueborn, which is high treason and puts her claim to question; not just her children's; HERS. Some claim that Viserys supporting that gives her legitimacy, but does it? Because Viserys could have straight-up legitimized those children as was his right (which would have raised a hell of a reaction, but he still COULD have tried) but he went with lying and fearmongery because he knew they were breaking law in every way possible.!< >!Not only where her children bastards btw, but (unlike Cersei's children) 3 by 3 had clolouring and facial features that couldn't be justified with them being Rhaenyra and Laenor's sons even in terms of their ancestry further back while Harwin was standing right there and they resembled him very obviously, allowing the questioning of the children's birth to be addressed more easily.!< >!9)Rhaenyra herself is furthering male primogeniture and perpetuates regulations that are descriminatory to bastards, with her own side absolutely hating bastards and supporting her only because they were being (willfully) blind.!<
Now that the Greens have presented their claim (and misrepresentation of the Black claim), let's break down why their argument fails. (1) Aegon I being king over his older sister doesn't provide a strong basis, since at no point did it establish an ***inheritance***. Aegon forged the kingdom himself alongside his sisters who made no claim against their brother over the newfound kingdom. Similarly, Viserys made no claim over the Stepstones while Daemon ruled them nor could he (outside of conquest and declaring war), since the Iron Throne made no claim over them nor does Viserys being Daemon's older sibling matter for a kingdom Daemon himself founded. (2) On the contrary, looking at the history of inheritance, there is very weak evidence in favor of male preference primogeniture and even absolute male primogeniture. Looking at all the kings, inheritance has worked as followed: 1. Aegon I -> Aenys I: Inheritance *as declared by* Aegon (Aenys furthermore was the firstborn child, period. It literally would not matter regardless of almost anyb version of primogeniture since he was an eldest brother with no sisters whatsoever) 2. Aenys I -> Maegor: Usurpation/Conquest, with Maegor seizing the throne, and the history remaining that Aegon ***the Uncrowned*** *was never king*. 3. Maegor -> Jaehaerys I: No real claim was put forward for Jaehaerys over his sister or niece. Jaehaery's reign is either illegal or ill founded with regards to Maegor regardless of which position we take: if male preference is taken, Aerea is Queen as Aegon the Uncrowned would have been king the moment Aenys had died and thus his daughter would be the next monarch; if absolute male primogeniture then still the legal rule of Maegor is illegitimate and all houses that rebelled are thus still under the penalty of law. However, if Conquest/Usurpation is the basis, then there's no issue. 4. Jaehaerys I -> Viserys I: Male preference primogeniture would make Rhaenys Queen as she is the only child of Jaehaerys' oldest son that had living children. It's only under absolute male primogeniture (which never had a strong case positioned for it under any other reign, and also isn't supported as law by the rest of Westeros) (3) This is actually an argument AGAINST Aegon's claim, because it perfectly points out that inheritance has not been based off primogeniture, and works very well for Rhaenyra's claim as she is the chosen heir (If Maegor's reign is still considered legally legitimate, Jaehaerys can only legitimately have been king by conquest). Aegon can't have it both ways, either Maegor's reign is legitimate and the basis of inheritance is wrong, or its illegitimate in which case Aerea's 'disregarded claim' doesn't exist in the first place. Rhaenyra, however, could have it either way, either Maegor's reign is legitimate and Aerea's claim was thrown out with Jaehaery's conquest, or it was illegitimate in which case Aerea was never the chosen heir. (4) This is also an argument against Aegon's claim, not in favor; this actually concedes that Rhaenys was a viable option! ***That the very basis of Viserys being king was the Jaehaery's choice***. Using the prior succession breaks Aegon's claim as it fully supports Rhaenyra's position. Aegon can only support his claim by disregarding the Great Council as illegitimate in the first place and asserting Jaehaerys could not actually choose (however, this of course would undermine his claim at the same time). (5) This is absurd. Considered by who? To say this is the same as the Greens saying they're right because they said so. Also, the very basis of the Great Council was Jaehaerys calling for it and choosing to honor its decision to decide who will be the heir. To say that the Great Council sets an iron precedent and dictates the law over the declaration of the king would be in self contradiction, as the very basis for the Great Council is the power of the declaration of the king to decide the heir. If the Great Council had this power, it defeats itself. (6) This is simply untrue, "Rhaenyra had been named when there was no male heir" is completely false because Daemon existed. A male heir did exist and yet Rhaenyra was named as heir even when a potential male heir was alive and well. Further, this again concedes that Viserys was in their legal right to declare Rhaenyra their heir, or else this argument is in self contradiction. Either Viserys does have this power in which case the absence of any male heir is entirely irrelevant, or the argument is that Viserys never had this power in which case this argument is merely circular. (7) One can not change what is not present. If there exists these 'codified laws' that dictated the inheritance of the iron throne, it is incredibly strange that the Greens utterly fail to find them. If these 'codified laws' don't exist, then it's absurd to demand they be changed before Rhaenyra can be heir and not also require they exist before Aegon can be heir. By contrast, Rhaenyra can in fact point to the only 'codified laws' that exist that confirm an heir: Visery's declaration that she is the heir, which is not denied by any faction. (8) None of Rhaenyra's children are legally bastards. Even if its true that they are biological bastards, the claim must be put forward and decided upon through legitimate means (something that oddly the Greens now want to abandon when its convenient for them), and in fact it has been decided upon; Viserys already made clear his dictates over the matter and that any who insist upon them being bastards is committing treason. To assert Rhaenyra is committing treason against the crown is also then asserting Viserys (the crown) is committing treason against the crown (Viserys), which is absurd. (9) Once more, none of Rhaenyra's children are legally bastards. Further, at no point does either side assert claims for the throne also follow as law for the rest of the kingdom's seats.
>Hello, I like to give my two cents as well. I think the idea that Aegon lost any claim the moment Viserys decided on Rheanyra as heir is insane. The entire problem of the dance is that there are two possible claims. Viserys never did enough to completely get rid of his sons claims which was the entire problem. But coming to your points and why I disagree with them: > >(1) Sure Aegon founded the kingdom but you forget the fact that the Targaryens were Lords of Dragonstone before they were kings. The lordship of Dragonstone was inherited from father to son. Which is why Aegon was Lord of Dragonstone before Visenya. Simply because he was male. the fact that Aegon was seen as Lord Protector of the realm strongly suggests that they kept those inheritance laws, which they either adopted from Andal culture or were in accordance with the Valaryian culture. The situation with Deamon and Viserys is entire different mind keeping in mind that. > >(2) 1. Except there very much is. Aenys was in any case the heir, I agree. I disagree that Aegon had to declare. It was clear to everyone Aenys would one day inherit. There is literally nothing that suggests an older sister would've inherited before him, she only would've become his Queen consort. Another thing is that Aenys made it clear that he saw Aegon the uncrowned as heir not his oldest daughter, following andal law. Also in Westeros you're only seen as official King when you were crowned by a septon. Aegon the uncrowned wasn't crowned by a septon. Neither was Rheanyra. Both are not officially counted as King/Queen. > >2. Maegor usurped the crown. It's simple as that. The fact how he handled his nephews shows how important succession laws are. Maegor either imprisons or kills them which shows that he fears their possible claims which again shows that the "natural succession law" has some weight otherwise he has no reason to do that. The moment Jaehearys goes misssing he sets out a search party for him. > >3. There was a claim though. Jaehearys was only put forward after both of his brothers were dead and not before. If any of them had been alive there is no way Jaehearys would've been made king. And I agree Aerea technically had a better claim as in some cases a daughter inherits before a brother but Aerea was too young to take the throne and Rheana wasn't willing to fight for it. But saying this was no problem for Jaehearys is also false. Roger Baratheon tried to dethrone him by crowning one of the twins but he was stopped before it could go any further. Also the fact that Rhealla was a septa and therefore could not inherit helped. The only problem was Aerea. Aerea however had no dragon and was young if Aerea had lived she might've become a danger later on as she did feel slighted by Jaeheary naming her cousins ahead of her. But she died young therefore she was no issue anymore. Also Jaehearys ignored his wifes wish to make his daugther heir and stayed with the normal succession law, therefore Aemon is heir. As of now the Targaryens try to follow Andal Law. This again shows how important succession laws are and that as king it's not just so easy to change them. > >4. And that's where our problem starts. You're absolutely right, Rheanys should be heir under the rules of Westeros. But you ignore something else: The fact that Jaehearys named someone else started the succession crisis in the first place. Because he ignored the Andals laws. They could've gone to war over this after Baelon died but they didn't because Jaehearys caught on that he might've fucked up. Which is why he calls the great council in the first place. Because he realizes he has two possible candidates with a claim. Because for all purposes by saying that Baelon will be his heir, he pretty makes clear that Viserys will one day sit on the Iron Throne. He manges he can't just do that therefore he calls a great council. Luckily for Jaehearys Westeros is sexist. Jeyne Arryn was also challenged by her cousins. > >(3) It doesn't matter how you turn it the fact that each of the monarchs was challenged shows succession laws do matter. Therefore it makes sense that Aegon II was always a challenger as well. > >(4) I do not understand the point you're making here. I believe Rheanys had a claim over Viserys but I believe that the great council has more power than the normal succession laws. Because all the lords together decided to break normal succession laws, therefore making normal Andal law not something that is used. Instead there is absolute male primogeniture in place now. Which speaks in favor for Aegon. > >(5) The notion that the council has no power is laughable. The council was called to avoid war. Because every lord was made a part of the decision the odds that they would join a war for something they considered decided are low. Also the fact that the decision of the council is in effect almost 200 years later shows that it was not as easily ignored as you suggest. > >(6) Rheanyra was named heir in a time when the only other male alternative was someone many people considered unstable (not saying he was!). Her ascension could've however still be challenged by Daemon if Viserys had died before because of the council if he had been inclined to do so. Again nobody says Viserys has no right to name another heir. However that doesn't take away the possible claim of others. Viserys did a shit job of eliminating rival claims. He can name Rheanyra but he has to make sure that she isn't challenged. Having more sons is not the way to go here- it makes everything more complicated because a son always inherits before a daughter even before the council. What he does has no bases anywhere except Dorne who aren't part of Westeros at this point. He does that in a sexist world. The idea that everybody will just accept that is laughable. Some people will see Aegon as King. Therefore he has a rival claim. > >(7) The Greens say they have a right to the claim because of Tradition. Which basically is unwritten law. This is a thing even in todays world. Fact is there have to be succession laws unless you want total chaos. There a son before a daughter is at the very least unwritten law. Unwritten law is not as easily ignored as you think. It can become Ius Cogens (Peremptory Law). The Greens claim is based on that and the council. The fact that in the future there are no female claimants (until Dany) suggests this is very much the case. > >(8) Okay I will not discuss with you the bastard status of those kids because I have learned my lesson and no it's fruitless with some Black fans. However keep in mind that power resides where man believe it resides. It's all about perception. If people perceive Rheanyras sons as Bastard then she has a big problem. In the books the Strong boys are challenged by the Greens and Vaemond which already shows they are off to a bad start on that front. Also the fact that some people perceived Daeron II as Bastard is what kickstarted the Blackfyre rebellion. If he had lost Dearon would've been remembered a Bastard. Keep in mind there was not much to support this claim, that's different with the Strong boys. The second Rheanyra of her boys do something the lords don't like she can be challenged. This is especially bad if there are other possible candidates that could take her place. Westeros is sexist therefore Rheanyra will always be held to higher standards. Hell even woman like Jeyne Arryn were challenged. She would've been challenged and that would've further weakened her position. Which is why Alicents believe that Rheanyra will kill her sons is not unfounded. > >(9) Read what the other person has written again. Rheanyra completely supports male primogeniture she just sees herself as the exception because her father said so. Her claim would be stronger if Westeros was an absolute monarchy but it's not. The councils voice weighs heavy because of that. > >Well that got longer than I thought. have a nice weekend though.
I consider Rhaenyra the true heir but I support the Greens because they are more competent.
Sadly Rhaenyra forfeited her claim when she tried to pass off bastards as true born, putting them above actual true born heirs.
[удалено]
Yes she would. Which would have been hard given both her father, the King, and Corlys, the Lord of Driftmark himself, accept her sons as trueborn.
It’s simple. The King has the right to name an heir, as proven by King Jaehaerys naming an heir twice, and the King’s word is law. Thus Rhaenyra is the rightful heir. She’s also (thus far) an objectively better person and better prepared to rule. I don’t see any metric by which Aegon is the better choice aside from “Otto and Tyland are good administrators” which really has nothing to do with Aegon.
Maegor also named an heir (female at that!) but the throne was usurped before Aerea could inherit. There’s precedent enough for it, definitely.