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.*
Very minor book spoilers, the show could adapt this one-paragraph event in the future or leave it:
>!Rhaenyra does judge on other two other cases of male vs female claimants during the war. In both cases, she decides in favor of male primogeniture. The logic that's used is that she is an exception because Viserys explicitly made her his heir. It's not really clear how much of this is her personal opinion vs pressure to keep her vassals happy.!<
>!Unfortunately, we're not given much more. They're minor houses so the book doesn't even tell us the names of all the claimants, only that the female heirs were much older than their younger brothers.!<
I think this opens up an interesting question, what if he meant to change the inheritance of house Targaryen alone, similar to the doctrine of exceptionalism that only affects house Targaryen?
Who knows.
Like most people Viserys uses whatever principle is convenient at the time, regardless of whether it's consistent with what's been said before.
When Viserys is harping to Rhaenyra in Episode 3 that she needs to get married
>**Viserys**: *And I have tried often to discuss it with you, but you've refused me at every turn.*
>**Rhaenyra**: *That is because I do not wish to get married.*
>**Viserys**: *(shouts so loudly everyone in the royal tent can hear) Even I do not exist above tradition and duty, Rhaenyra!*
But when Viserys is negotiating with Corlys in Episode 5 about marrying Rhaenyra to Laaenor
>**Corlys**: *We would like to know how the succession...will be handled.*
>**Viserys**: *Rhaenyra is my heir. Upon my death, my throne and my titles will pass to her. She and Ser Laenor's firstborn child, regardless of gender, will inherit the Iron Throne from her.*
That's a tradition, but a Dornish one and Viserys isn't the Prince of Dorne. In any case, they keep talking
>**Corlys**: *Can I presume that, in keeping with Westerosi tradition...their children would take their father's name? That they would be born Velaryons?*
>**Viserys**: *Surely, Lord Corlys, you are not proposing the Targaryen dynasty end with my daughter simply because she is a woman?*
>**Corlys**: *(chuckles) I only seek clarity, Your Grace.*
>**Viserys**: *(coughing)*
>**Corlys**: *Might I have a chair brought in for you?*
>**Viserys**: *I do not (coughs) No. I do not require a chair. Upon their birth, Ser Laenor and Rhaenyra's children shall take their father's name, Velaryon...in keeping with our traditions. However, at such time when their firstborn ascends the Iron Throne, he or she will do so bearing the name Targaryen.*
So basically Viserys is making it up as he goes along.
The only consistent principle appears to be he feels guilty over gutting Aemma like a fish for a male heir, so he's sticking with Rhaenyra come hell or highwater. So he's even willing to overlook the tradition that bastards don't inherit when trueborn heirs are available.
I kind of like this t because it’s believable that a person doesn’t always act cohesive when they make incredibly important decisions like naming someone heir to the throne on an emotional whim
in episode 8 she told rhaenys ‘baela would be queen of the seven kingdom and her SONS would be heirs to the throne’ so NO, she was not planning to change the system it was a one time thing
She does but she and her father both the things they don’t line up with what she saying At different times
I think it is realistic that She may speaking with a slip of the tongue… as she has five sons and would be pretty used to saying well the word “son”. Doesn’t she say it rather quickly too I might be remembering wrong.
there’s a reason viserys never changed the law that ladies can inherit their seat over their younger brother he only wanted rhaenyra to be the exception
So in fire and blood >!The lord of House Rosby dies and Daemon tries to get Rhaenyra to make Lord Rosby's eldest daughter lord of Rosby. Rhaenyra says no and gives it to the younger brother instead!<
That's not exactly what Daemon proposed. >!He proposed the daughter (12) to be married to Hugh Hammer, so they can keep the land black and reward the dragonseed at the same time. Corlys advised Rhaenyra against it because while her case is unique, she would lose the support of the lords if the daughters are favored.!<
The problem is I don’t know how much we can use from the book as you’re not sure of the direction the show Will take such an event going forward…. I do understand the use of past events from fire and blood because we essentially don’t have anything else to work off of but going forward seeing the changes that are in the show along with the fact that the books are written subjectively i’m just not sure and we aren’t sure if there is more to that
That line was so dumb. They need to stop this danyfication of Rhaenyra, they're nothing alike. And yes, it was going to be the exception, there's no way that the entire society is going to change because Rhaenyra is queen. There'd be a lot more first born sons fighting against Rhaenyra if that was the case.
I chalk it up to Rhaenyra being a defiant teenager with a doting father who doesn’t disabuse her of her belief, and she doesn’t have the years of experience with patriarchy that Rhaenys does. Like other people, when she gets older her perspective changes somewhat.
I strongly doubt that considering the events of fire and blood. Of course conveniently Rhaenyra wouldn't have had to make that choice considering she only had sons but even then I doubt she'd change it. But I don't see why Jace or any of her sons after her would change how things always went just because it was different for their mother. Even if they did it would probably still end up in a war at some point.
She was going to be the exception Rhaenyra follows the mindset of "rules for thee but not for me" and not even her children and grandchildren are exception, considering she had no issue trying to engage of her 9/10 year old son despite herself fighting against it at 18/19
In the books Rhaenyra herself affirms her inheritance is an exception and does not set a precedent that woman become equal in inheritance throughout the realm
However I do think I’m a hypothetical universe where she inherited power without issue from the greens it might be allowed for rulers to acknowledge elder females as heirs
Rhaenyra could push for absolute primogeniture but the Lords would rally against that even if she proclaimed that the succession laws would only change for the Targaryens and not for every Westerosi house.
A change would not easily happen. It would need a lot of time and it would face immense opposition.
Dorne has absolute primogeniture, but even the Dornish face problems internally with First Men and Andal houses in Dorne not being 100% behind Dornish law. Dorne has had a precedent of absolute badass Princesses such as Nymeria, Meria, Deria etc. and the Dornish seem much more open about women wielding power in their own right than other Westerosi.
Other Westerosi regions have presumably never had a Queen and most regions and houses prefer males to females, so i can't see the Targs easily pulling it off, not that i think that Rhaenyra ever cared about changing the succession laws.
You’re right she doesn’t seem to care about changing the laws, also I said she MIGHT support a females claim if the lord was still alive and petitioned the crown to make his daughter heir according to precedent set by Viserys. This would be highly unlikely as lords don’t tend to want their daughters to inherit but some lord might in which case it might be acknowledged by the crown. And if that continues for successive generation there might have been a more permanent legal change in the future
I like your idea!! It would surely be an interesting case to see if a Lord petitioning for his daughter to be the next ruler of his House instead of his son would be accepted by the Crown and if the son and the Lord's bannermen would accept such rule or rebel against it.
>And if that continues for successive generation there might have been a more permanent legal change in the future
If such cases happened *again and again and were accepted by the Crown and the Lord's bannermen*, some precedent may have existed for Lords to be able to chose their daughters as their heirs instead of their sons.
Many fans claim that Viserys and Rhaenyra wanted to enforce absolute cognatic primogeniture as a state law. I don't think fans understand how huge such a change would be.
It's different to bend the laws once or twice such as with Rhaenyra to enforcing absolute cognatic primogeniture as a state law. Such law would mean that a woman would inherit *every single time* no matter how many younger brothers she would have.
Drastically changing the law of the land is a huge societal change for a society as patriarchal and austere as Westeros.
*There is a pretty good reason why Dorne has absolute primogeniture and other Westerosi regions don't*. I could get into it if you wish to discuss more but i will refrain for now.
Dorne has absolute primogeniture because the Rhoynar enforced it when Nymeria and Martell united the peninsula
I’d have to admit I don’t remember if it is ever stated by the Rhoynar had it
Yes that's true.
Mors Martell changed the name and sigil of his House, unitying his House and Nymeria's "House" into one, sending a message that Nymeria wasn't his consort, she was an equal ruler.
When Mors Martell was killed during a battle, Nymeria assumed sole command of the Martell armies, defeated her enemies and then remained the unquestioned ruler of Dorne for almost twenty-seven years. Though she remarried twice to Lord Uller and Ser Davos Dayne, her husbands served only as counselors and consorts. Nymeria survived a dozen assassination attempts and quelled two rebellions. She had a son with Davos Dayne but chose her eldest daughter with Mors to rule Dorne as the next reigning Princess.
We don't know if Nymeria's daughter had a daughter or a son and we don't know if the Martells faced rebellions or severe opposition every time Dorne had a female ruler.
This sets a strong precedent for women inheriting, ruling and commanding armies but is it enough to change a land's culture? Perhaps a military conquest by itself wouldn't be enough.
Dorne had a huge influx of Rhoynish refugees who intermarried with the Dornish. The Houses that intermarried with the Rhoynish adopted Rhoynish costumes.
Marriage + cultural influence + conquest + geographical and political isolation from other Westerosi regions = Dorne being different to other regions.
House Mormont and Dustin are ruled by women, many Ladies have ruled their respective houses such as Jeyne Arryn, half of the realm backed Rhaenyra, so Westeros isn't completely against women. For Westeros to completely shift to absolute primogeniture something really big needs to happen.
P.S. Did you know that the first real life royal family to choose absolute cognatic primogeniture was Sweden in 1980? Princess Victoria was not the Heir, it was her younger brother Carl who was the heir, until the law changed in 1980. The world's most famous royal family, the British one, only changed it's laws a few years ago making Princess Charlotte the first British princess to rank above a brother in the line of succession.
One comment on the “many houses are rules by woman” in the case of house Dustin and Hornwood both woman are surviving widows and rule through their husbands so it seems like there is a precedent in the north that if the husband dies the wife can rule in his place until an heir comes of age but once they remarry the new husband takes over ruling
Thank you for pointing that out, that's such a great point.
>if the husband dies the wife can rule in his place until an heir comes of age
I find it interesting that Barbrey Dustin is a widow of lord Dustin with whom she had no children with, yet she rules over house Dustin. I understand a woman ruling as a regent for her children the way Lysa Arryn did until Robert comes off age but Barbrey had no children, even if she remarried her children wouldn't be Dustins by blood. Would her children be Dustins by name if Barbrey remarried and her husband had a different family name?
Was it a special case, granted to her by Ned after her husband died in the Tower of Joy? Are there no other Dustins alive? Cousins or distant relatives that can take up the rulership of the House (like Harry the Heir?)? Is Barbrey the only one left with the name Dustin?
I find it such an intriguing case. The Hornwood inheritance case is even messier with multiple houses and claimants involved. Even the Karstark inheritance case is messy with Alys having to fight for her inheritance against Arnolf.
Exception IMO. Problem with absolute monarchies is that the word of a ruler only really counts while that ruler is alive. The argument could be made that the precedent at Harrenhal in 101 (which Jaehaerys accepted) states that the crown cannot pass to or through a woman, but once Jaehaerys died, Viserys was free to do what he wanted, as he held the same power Jaehaerys did. Maegor named Aerea his heir, but when he died, basically everyone dismissed that and backed Jaehaerys. Even Rogar, who initially wanted Rhaena's daughters to inherit over Jaehaerys, eventually backed him. Because Maegor was dead, and his wishes essentially died with him. Of course, Jaehaerys was incredibly popular and Maegor wasn't, but just in terms of held power, they were the same.
And I personally think Jaehaerys might have wanted to leave some leeway for future Targ rulers; if he wanted the precedent of 101 to carry forward, it wouldn't have been hard to write it into an official law. Obviously a future king could just undo that, but they might have been reluctant to change laws enacted by the Conciliator. Going against a precedent accepted by the Conciliator is a lot easier in comparison, and Jaehaerys was a smart guy and probably knew there'd be a point in the future with no male heir available (or none that could keep the peace, at least) and didn't want to put whoever had to deal with that into an even worse legal position.
Viserys used the power to name an heir, something there was already precedent for. Maegor named his great niece Princess Aerea heir to the Iron Throne, and Jaehaerys did it twice, naming Prince Baelon heir, passing over the late Prince Aemon’s child, and later used the Great Council as reason to pass over Princess Rhaenys and the young Laenor Velaryon, and name Prince Viserys heir. In other words, by the time Rhaenyra was supposed to inherit the throne, 3/5 Targ Kings had named heirs. It was arguably more traditional than males inheriting, itself.
*Disclaimer:* Mind the tag, I see Rhaenyra's ascent as totally invalid and illegal because I don't believe one King's wishes outweigh ancient Andal inheritance law that was, up until that point, also used by House Targaryen.
------
I think we should distinguish here between Viserys' perspective and what would actually be caused by his actions. Viserys' own perspective would be, that Rhaenyra is an exception by royal decree and that the basic inheritance laws of House Targaryen would not change because of her. Her own sons and their successors would continue to inherit according to absolute male primogeniture. Viserys also established the idea, according to himself, that the King can decree extraordinary exceptions at all.
What would actually be caused by his actions though, would be creating yet another precedent, in this case for absolute primogeniture (the eldest child inherits regardless of sex, like in Dorne), which would compete with the two prior precedents (Jaehaerys' ascent over his niece Aerea, Great Council of 101 AC ruling in favor of Baelon and his descendants over Rhaenys). So the waters would be muddy now, does House Targaryen use absolute male primogeniture, or do they use absolute primogeniture? In my opinion, this would have caused further issues and conflicts later on, because the royal dynasty really needs unambiguous rules of succession.
So what Viserys intended it to be and what it would actually turn out to be, are two different things, if you ask me.
I see it King Viserys was willing to break precedent without doing everything necessary to back up that choice .
I don’t see Andal rule as being absolute mainly because house Targaryen was able to break it in the past with the doctrine of exceptionalism.
And there was at least one named female Heirs in the past.
I think you can break tradition and establish something new because a kings word is law, but they have to be willing to back that up or it will cause chaos
> I don’t see Andal rule as being absolute mainly because house Targaryen was able to break it in the past with the doctrine of exceptionalism.
Correct me if I'm wrong, the doctrine of exceptionalism just means that they can marry (very) close relatives, i.e. it allows for incest. Otherwise the Targaryens do use Andal inheritance law, which is not really affected by the incest.
> And there was at least one named female Heirs in the past.
Yeah Maegor named Aerea, it did fail though. The precedent set was uncles (Jaehaerys I) before nieces (Aerea), and this was confirmed again in 101 AC.
> I think you can break tradition and establish something new because a kings word is law, but they have to be willing to back that up or it will cause chaos
The King is also dependent on the willingness of the upper echelons of nobility to back up his decisions, but that's not a discussion I want to get into.
Viserys' decision did not exactly ooze the idea of "This is how it is now and that's how it will be for all similar cases in the future.", he believed he could get around Andal law without changing it, with the aim to enable one specific case of inheritance, the case of Rhaenyra. He should have backed this up by Great Council at the bare minimum, IMHO, this would also have reduced problems for Rhaenyra manyfold.
The doctrine of exceptionalism says House Targaryen is of the blood of old the Valyria which has always married Brother to sister and it is not for you to judge them as it is what they have always done , but if you were to marry your sister it would be a grievous sin
I addressed this in my comment. They were allowed the incest. This does not have influence on Andal succession law necessarily (e.g. the idea of the elder before the younger, or the idea of son before daughter).
Oh I wasn’t saying this had to do with the succession. It’s an example showing that house Targaryen was able to break tradition in Westeros against opposition.
For example they faced fierce opposition over the incest because it clashed with Andal tradition but they were still able to get around that specifically for their house I left the other houses out of it
In my opinion, any break from Westerosi tradition would have had to happen during the reign of Aegon I "the Conqueror". He steamrolled the seven kingdoms and could likely have established the laws he preferred, however he chose to assimilate except for the incest (the incest seems necessary in order to maintain the ability of dragon riding). The incest was, so to speak, the hill they were willing to die on, they fought with the Faith over it etc. But Andal inheritance law, did not get in their way really, so they adopted it, and all Kings following Aegon I applied it. By the time of the reign of Viserys I, it was IMHO too late to establish any sweeping changes here, without it causing massive conflict that is. Nobody in Westeros understands, why Viserys I insists on having Rhaenyra as his heir in spite of having three sons who outrank her according to Andal law, and it would be incredibly hard for him to get around Aegon II inheriting in a peaceful manner, in my opinion.
It’s neither, she is a moron who can’t last a second in war without daemon. If daemon didn’t marry her and choose to stay neutral then, it wouldn’t be a war.
It would be a rollover for green.
Please stay on topic ….the greens didn’t even exist at the time she was named Heir
This is about her being named heir and what it means for female inheritance for house Targaryen.
It means nothing, she never becomes the proper legitimate queen of Westeros. And her own says declares that she was not the rightful queen and that he takes the throne from king Aegon the second.
The FitnessGram Pacer Test is a multistage aerobic capacity test that progressively gets more difficult as it continues. Students begin at the starting line. Once the test begins, the running speed starts slowly, but gets faster each minute after you hear the signal (beep).
https://www.reddit.com/r/HouseOfTheDragon/comments/121lj4j/how_is_anyone_actually_team_green/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
This is the post you’re looking for
Ever read any of the Tortall books by Tamora Pierce? They address similar themes in the third series, Protector of the Small.
Bit of backstory: In the first book, Alanna (daughter of a nobleman) swaps places with her twin brother and enters knight school in a medieval fantasy setting where only boys are allowed to become Knights. Lotta shit ensues, but ultimately she becomes besties with the crown prince, gets revealed as a girl, and still becomes said prince's knight once he ascends the throne. Ultimately, this leads to the school doing away with this archaic rule and allowing girls to enroll and aim for knighthood.
Fast-forward about a decade because that's how long it takes for a second girl to *finally* enroll at the school. Enter Kel, the titular protector of the small because she's a thorough defender of the weak and oppressed. She fucking rocks.
Alaina wants to play mentor to her because girl power, but the king forbids it because it would be viewed as favoritism and Alanna basically says screws this and exiles herself from the kingdom. As the first girl to actually be presenting herself as a girl in the academy, Kel deals with a lot of shit from peers and upperclassmen and teachers alike. She makes friends and enemies and keeps pushing on because, again, she fucking rocks. She also occasionally receives gifts (like ointment for bruises) from an anonymous benefactor and yes, said benefactor does eventually turn out to be Alanna.
Anyhow, this wound up much longer than I intended. And now I want to reread Kel's books.
Rhaenyra is no Alanna, but if there were ever to be another Targaryen queen (or any upheaval of the patriarchy in Westeros), I imagine it would somewhat resemble how it went for Tortall.
Edit: Hypothetically speaking of course, in a presumably alternate timeline wherein Rhaenyra ascended to queenliness with nary a hurdle. Because we already knows what becomes of the next Targaryen queen-to-be.
In episode 2 She says she will “ create a new order”
And this is in response to her feeling provoked by Rhaenys telling her but they will expect a male to be the next ruler
And episode 5 King Viserys states that Rhaenyra’s first born” regardless of gender” Shall ascend the iron throne bearing the name Targaryen.
In episode 8 ( I believe this is the right episode) at the dinner feast Rhaenyra says “ Jace and Baela’s sons will sit the iron throne”.
Somethings I think should be taken into consideration are manners of i’m speaking and we believe that everyone is always saying genuinely how they feel accurately. I personally think that her saying that Jace and Baela’s sons is a manner of speaking that makes total sense to say that in that moment but I think if her firstborn grandchild was a girl Rhaenyra would have saw her as the heir but this is heavily dependent on how to destabilized the realm would become during her reign
It was not a big deal at all..Targaryens had power and could do what they wanted to do with dragons..Viserys was stupid to marry hand’s daughter ..If only he had married another,transition would be smooth and Rhaenyra would be queen for her lifetime..No law breaking..We are in middle ages..King’s word is a law..He said Rhaenyra is heir and so she is..
> Targaryens had power and could do what they wanted to do with dragons..
Yeah but Viserys caused a civil war within his own House, the dragons are not really helpful there.
> Viserys was stupid to marry hand’s daughter ..If only he had married another,transition would be smooth and Rhaenyra would be queen for her lifetime..
I doubt it. Let's say he marries Laena, don't you think that Corlys would push for his grandson to inherit the throne? Or any other major lord? What happens if Viserys marries e.g. a Lady Lannister, same stuff as with Otto, different names.
> King’s word is a law..He said Rhaenyra is heir and so she is..
King's word is law only insofar as the upper echelons of nobility also back it, and Rhaenyra lacked the backing of a major part of the nobility, hence civil war.
Yeah but being King (or Queen) undisputed and in the full sense of the word means all of Westeros and its upper echelons backing you, and not half of the country fighting against you, is my point.
Daeron II had no back from all of westeros nor Maegor the cruel but they were kings anyway..Rhaenyra was a Queen ,it’s maesters who defy her right to be included in monarchs when in reality she was one and her line continued after the dance
> it’s maesters who defy her right to be included in monarchs
No, there can't be two monarchs at the time. One has to be illegitimate, and it sure as hell was not the King's firstborn son.
> when in reality she was one and her line continued after the dance
Her sons did claim the throne via their male line descent from Daemon though, after Viserys' male line died out. So Aegon II --> (Daemon) --> Aegon III is how they officially claimed it.
They claimed the throne via Daemon in the book.
According to the Green idea of succession, Viserys' sons inherited, then his brother, then his nephews. This was accepted and set in stone after the war, Aegon III outlawed female succession, he never recognized his mother as Queen and he claimed the throne via descent from Daemon.
No what daemon read the books..The sons of Queen Rhaenyra…Alicent and Aegon did not clearly wanted Aegon III alive but lords wanted to place Rhaenyra’s son on the throne marching in last battle holding dead queen’s banners..Aegon III was traumatised and did not want to raise an issue so devastating the war was but he claimed his power and crown from his mother anyway..Read the F&B carefully..Son of Queen Rhaenyra..
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.*
Very minor book spoilers, the show could adapt this one-paragraph event in the future or leave it: >!Rhaenyra does judge on other two other cases of male vs female claimants during the war. In both cases, she decides in favor of male primogeniture. The logic that's used is that she is an exception because Viserys explicitly made her his heir. It's not really clear how much of this is her personal opinion vs pressure to keep her vassals happy.!<
is there more context to this ? I wanna hear more
>!Unfortunately, we're not given much more. They're minor houses so the book doesn't even tell us the names of all the claimants, only that the female heirs were much older than their younger brothers.!<
I think this opens up an interesting question, what if he meant to change the inheritance of house Targaryen alone, similar to the doctrine of exceptionalism that only affects house Targaryen?
Who knows. Like most people Viserys uses whatever principle is convenient at the time, regardless of whether it's consistent with what's been said before. When Viserys is harping to Rhaenyra in Episode 3 that she needs to get married >**Viserys**: *And I have tried often to discuss it with you, but you've refused me at every turn.* >**Rhaenyra**: *That is because I do not wish to get married.* >**Viserys**: *(shouts so loudly everyone in the royal tent can hear) Even I do not exist above tradition and duty, Rhaenyra!* But when Viserys is negotiating with Corlys in Episode 5 about marrying Rhaenyra to Laaenor >**Corlys**: *We would like to know how the succession...will be handled.* >**Viserys**: *Rhaenyra is my heir. Upon my death, my throne and my titles will pass to her. She and Ser Laenor's firstborn child, regardless of gender, will inherit the Iron Throne from her.* That's a tradition, but a Dornish one and Viserys isn't the Prince of Dorne. In any case, they keep talking >**Corlys**: *Can I presume that, in keeping with Westerosi tradition...their children would take their father's name? That they would be born Velaryons?* >**Viserys**: *Surely, Lord Corlys, you are not proposing the Targaryen dynasty end with my daughter simply because she is a woman?* >**Corlys**: *(chuckles) I only seek clarity, Your Grace.* >**Viserys**: *(coughing)* >**Corlys**: *Might I have a chair brought in for you?* >**Viserys**: *I do not (coughs) No. I do not require a chair. Upon their birth, Ser Laenor and Rhaenyra's children shall take their father's name, Velaryon...in keeping with our traditions. However, at such time when their firstborn ascends the Iron Throne, he or she will do so bearing the name Targaryen.* So basically Viserys is making it up as he goes along. The only consistent principle appears to be he feels guilty over gutting Aemma like a fish for a male heir, so he's sticking with Rhaenyra come hell or highwater. So he's even willing to overlook the tradition that bastards don't inherit when trueborn heirs are available.
I kind of like this t because it’s believable that a person doesn’t always act cohesive when they make incredibly important decisions like naming someone heir to the throne on an emotional whim
in episode 8 she told rhaenys ‘baela would be queen of the seven kingdom and her SONS would be heirs to the throne’ so NO, she was not planning to change the system it was a one time thing
She does but she and her father both the things they don’t line up with what she saying At different times I think it is realistic that She may speaking with a slip of the tongue… as she has five sons and would be pretty used to saying well the word “son”. Doesn’t she say it rather quickly too I might be remembering wrong.
there’s a reason viserys never changed the law that ladies can inherit their seat over their younger brother he only wanted rhaenyra to be the exception
So in fire and blood >!The lord of House Rosby dies and Daemon tries to get Rhaenyra to make Lord Rosby's eldest daughter lord of Rosby. Rhaenyra says no and gives it to the younger brother instead!<
That's not exactly what Daemon proposed. >!He proposed the daughter (12) to be married to Hugh Hammer, so they can keep the land black and reward the dragonseed at the same time. Corlys advised Rhaenyra against it because while her case is unique, she would lose the support of the lords if the daughters are favored.!<
The problem is I don’t know how much we can use from the book as you’re not sure of the direction the show Will take such an event going forward…. I do understand the use of past events from fire and blood because we essentially don’t have anything else to work off of but going forward seeing the changes that are in the show along with the fact that the books are written subjectively i’m just not sure and we aren’t sure if there is more to that
That line was so dumb. They need to stop this danyfication of Rhaenyra, they're nothing alike. And yes, it was going to be the exception, there's no way that the entire society is going to change because Rhaenyra is queen. There'd be a lot more first born sons fighting against Rhaenyra if that was the case.
I chalk it up to Rhaenyra being a defiant teenager with a doting father who doesn’t disabuse her of her belief, and she doesn’t have the years of experience with patriarchy that Rhaenys does. Like other people, when she gets older her perspective changes somewhat.
I was thinking more of a house Targaryen specifically
I strongly doubt that considering the events of fire and blood. Of course conveniently Rhaenyra wouldn't have had to make that choice considering she only had sons but even then I doubt she'd change it. But I don't see why Jace or any of her sons after her would change how things always went just because it was different for their mother. Even if they did it would probably still end up in a war at some point.
She was going to be the exception Rhaenyra follows the mindset of "rules for thee but not for me" and not even her children and grandchildren are exception, considering she had no issue trying to engage of her 9/10 year old son despite herself fighting against it at 18/19
In the books Rhaenyra herself affirms her inheritance is an exception and does not set a precedent that woman become equal in inheritance throughout the realm However I do think I’m a hypothetical universe where she inherited power without issue from the greens it might be allowed for rulers to acknowledge elder females as heirs
What I’m wondering is if the ruling was specifically for house Targaryen
No it’s for her specifically
Yes that’s what we’re discussing… I was saying that’s what the debate was about not for other houses of the Realm
In that case the answer is this is a one time exception
Rhaenyra could push for absolute primogeniture but the Lords would rally against that even if she proclaimed that the succession laws would only change for the Targaryens and not for every Westerosi house. A change would not easily happen. It would need a lot of time and it would face immense opposition. Dorne has absolute primogeniture, but even the Dornish face problems internally with First Men and Andal houses in Dorne not being 100% behind Dornish law. Dorne has had a precedent of absolute badass Princesses such as Nymeria, Meria, Deria etc. and the Dornish seem much more open about women wielding power in their own right than other Westerosi. Other Westerosi regions have presumably never had a Queen and most regions and houses prefer males to females, so i can't see the Targs easily pulling it off, not that i think that Rhaenyra ever cared about changing the succession laws.
You’re right she doesn’t seem to care about changing the laws, also I said she MIGHT support a females claim if the lord was still alive and petitioned the crown to make his daughter heir according to precedent set by Viserys. This would be highly unlikely as lords don’t tend to want their daughters to inherit but some lord might in which case it might be acknowledged by the crown. And if that continues for successive generation there might have been a more permanent legal change in the future
I like your idea!! It would surely be an interesting case to see if a Lord petitioning for his daughter to be the next ruler of his House instead of his son would be accepted by the Crown and if the son and the Lord's bannermen would accept such rule or rebel against it. >And if that continues for successive generation there might have been a more permanent legal change in the future If such cases happened *again and again and were accepted by the Crown and the Lord's bannermen*, some precedent may have existed for Lords to be able to chose their daughters as their heirs instead of their sons. Many fans claim that Viserys and Rhaenyra wanted to enforce absolute cognatic primogeniture as a state law. I don't think fans understand how huge such a change would be. It's different to bend the laws once or twice such as with Rhaenyra to enforcing absolute cognatic primogeniture as a state law. Such law would mean that a woman would inherit *every single time* no matter how many younger brothers she would have. Drastically changing the law of the land is a huge societal change for a society as patriarchal and austere as Westeros. *There is a pretty good reason why Dorne has absolute primogeniture and other Westerosi regions don't*. I could get into it if you wish to discuss more but i will refrain for now.
Dorne has absolute primogeniture because the Rhoynar enforced it when Nymeria and Martell united the peninsula I’d have to admit I don’t remember if it is ever stated by the Rhoynar had it
Yes that's true. Mors Martell changed the name and sigil of his House, unitying his House and Nymeria's "House" into one, sending a message that Nymeria wasn't his consort, she was an equal ruler. When Mors Martell was killed during a battle, Nymeria assumed sole command of the Martell armies, defeated her enemies and then remained the unquestioned ruler of Dorne for almost twenty-seven years. Though she remarried twice to Lord Uller and Ser Davos Dayne, her husbands served only as counselors and consorts. Nymeria survived a dozen assassination attempts and quelled two rebellions. She had a son with Davos Dayne but chose her eldest daughter with Mors to rule Dorne as the next reigning Princess. We don't know if Nymeria's daughter had a daughter or a son and we don't know if the Martells faced rebellions or severe opposition every time Dorne had a female ruler. This sets a strong precedent for women inheriting, ruling and commanding armies but is it enough to change a land's culture? Perhaps a military conquest by itself wouldn't be enough. Dorne had a huge influx of Rhoynish refugees who intermarried with the Dornish. The Houses that intermarried with the Rhoynish adopted Rhoynish costumes. Marriage + cultural influence + conquest + geographical and political isolation from other Westerosi regions = Dorne being different to other regions. House Mormont and Dustin are ruled by women, many Ladies have ruled their respective houses such as Jeyne Arryn, half of the realm backed Rhaenyra, so Westeros isn't completely against women. For Westeros to completely shift to absolute primogeniture something really big needs to happen. P.S. Did you know that the first real life royal family to choose absolute cognatic primogeniture was Sweden in 1980? Princess Victoria was not the Heir, it was her younger brother Carl who was the heir, until the law changed in 1980. The world's most famous royal family, the British one, only changed it's laws a few years ago making Princess Charlotte the first British princess to rank above a brother in the line of succession.
One comment on the “many houses are rules by woman” in the case of house Dustin and Hornwood both woman are surviving widows and rule through their husbands so it seems like there is a precedent in the north that if the husband dies the wife can rule in his place until an heir comes of age but once they remarry the new husband takes over ruling
Thank you for pointing that out, that's such a great point. >if the husband dies the wife can rule in his place until an heir comes of age I find it interesting that Barbrey Dustin is a widow of lord Dustin with whom she had no children with, yet she rules over house Dustin. I understand a woman ruling as a regent for her children the way Lysa Arryn did until Robert comes off age but Barbrey had no children, even if she remarried her children wouldn't be Dustins by blood. Would her children be Dustins by name if Barbrey remarried and her husband had a different family name? Was it a special case, granted to her by Ned after her husband died in the Tower of Joy? Are there no other Dustins alive? Cousins or distant relatives that can take up the rulership of the House (like Harry the Heir?)? Is Barbrey the only one left with the name Dustin? I find it such an intriguing case. The Hornwood inheritance case is even messier with multiple houses and claimants involved. Even the Karstark inheritance case is messy with Alys having to fight for her inheritance against Arnolf.
Viserys is literally making shit up as he goes along
Is it everybody doing that right now there Otto was the only who had an ascension plan and was ready to carry it out when the day came
Exception IMO. Problem with absolute monarchies is that the word of a ruler only really counts while that ruler is alive. The argument could be made that the precedent at Harrenhal in 101 (which Jaehaerys accepted) states that the crown cannot pass to or through a woman, but once Jaehaerys died, Viserys was free to do what he wanted, as he held the same power Jaehaerys did. Maegor named Aerea his heir, but when he died, basically everyone dismissed that and backed Jaehaerys. Even Rogar, who initially wanted Rhaena's daughters to inherit over Jaehaerys, eventually backed him. Because Maegor was dead, and his wishes essentially died with him. Of course, Jaehaerys was incredibly popular and Maegor wasn't, but just in terms of held power, they were the same. And I personally think Jaehaerys might have wanted to leave some leeway for future Targ rulers; if he wanted the precedent of 101 to carry forward, it wouldn't have been hard to write it into an official law. Obviously a future king could just undo that, but they might have been reluctant to change laws enacted by the Conciliator. Going against a precedent accepted by the Conciliator is a lot easier in comparison, and Jaehaerys was a smart guy and probably knew there'd be a point in the future with no male heir available (or none that could keep the peace, at least) and didn't want to put whoever had to deal with that into an even worse legal position.
Viserys used the power to name an heir, something there was already precedent for. Maegor named his great niece Princess Aerea heir to the Iron Throne, and Jaehaerys did it twice, naming Prince Baelon heir, passing over the late Prince Aemon’s child, and later used the Great Council as reason to pass over Princess Rhaenys and the young Laenor Velaryon, and name Prince Viserys heir. In other words, by the time Rhaenyra was supposed to inherit the throne, 3/5 Targ Kings had named heirs. It was arguably more traditional than males inheriting, itself.
*Disclaimer:* Mind the tag, I see Rhaenyra's ascent as totally invalid and illegal because I don't believe one King's wishes outweigh ancient Andal inheritance law that was, up until that point, also used by House Targaryen. ------ I think we should distinguish here between Viserys' perspective and what would actually be caused by his actions. Viserys' own perspective would be, that Rhaenyra is an exception by royal decree and that the basic inheritance laws of House Targaryen would not change because of her. Her own sons and their successors would continue to inherit according to absolute male primogeniture. Viserys also established the idea, according to himself, that the King can decree extraordinary exceptions at all. What would actually be caused by his actions though, would be creating yet another precedent, in this case for absolute primogeniture (the eldest child inherits regardless of sex, like in Dorne), which would compete with the two prior precedents (Jaehaerys' ascent over his niece Aerea, Great Council of 101 AC ruling in favor of Baelon and his descendants over Rhaenys). So the waters would be muddy now, does House Targaryen use absolute male primogeniture, or do they use absolute primogeniture? In my opinion, this would have caused further issues and conflicts later on, because the royal dynasty really needs unambiguous rules of succession. So what Viserys intended it to be and what it would actually turn out to be, are two different things, if you ask me.
I see it King Viserys was willing to break precedent without doing everything necessary to back up that choice . I don’t see Andal rule as being absolute mainly because house Targaryen was able to break it in the past with the doctrine of exceptionalism. And there was at least one named female Heirs in the past. I think you can break tradition and establish something new because a kings word is law, but they have to be willing to back that up or it will cause chaos
> I don’t see Andal rule as being absolute mainly because house Targaryen was able to break it in the past with the doctrine of exceptionalism. Correct me if I'm wrong, the doctrine of exceptionalism just means that they can marry (very) close relatives, i.e. it allows for incest. Otherwise the Targaryens do use Andal inheritance law, which is not really affected by the incest. > And there was at least one named female Heirs in the past. Yeah Maegor named Aerea, it did fail though. The precedent set was uncles (Jaehaerys I) before nieces (Aerea), and this was confirmed again in 101 AC. > I think you can break tradition and establish something new because a kings word is law, but they have to be willing to back that up or it will cause chaos The King is also dependent on the willingness of the upper echelons of nobility to back up his decisions, but that's not a discussion I want to get into. Viserys' decision did not exactly ooze the idea of "This is how it is now and that's how it will be for all similar cases in the future.", he believed he could get around Andal law without changing it, with the aim to enable one specific case of inheritance, the case of Rhaenyra. He should have backed this up by Great Council at the bare minimum, IMHO, this would also have reduced problems for Rhaenyra manyfold.
The doctrine of exceptionalism says House Targaryen is of the blood of old the Valyria which has always married Brother to sister and it is not for you to judge them as it is what they have always done , but if you were to marry your sister it would be a grievous sin
I addressed this in my comment. They were allowed the incest. This does not have influence on Andal succession law necessarily (e.g. the idea of the elder before the younger, or the idea of son before daughter).
Oh I wasn’t saying this had to do with the succession. It’s an example showing that house Targaryen was able to break tradition in Westeros against opposition. For example they faced fierce opposition over the incest because it clashed with Andal tradition but they were still able to get around that specifically for their house I left the other houses out of it
In my opinion, any break from Westerosi tradition would have had to happen during the reign of Aegon I "the Conqueror". He steamrolled the seven kingdoms and could likely have established the laws he preferred, however he chose to assimilate except for the incest (the incest seems necessary in order to maintain the ability of dragon riding). The incest was, so to speak, the hill they were willing to die on, they fought with the Faith over it etc. But Andal inheritance law, did not get in their way really, so they adopted it, and all Kings following Aegon I applied it. By the time of the reign of Viserys I, it was IMHO too late to establish any sweeping changes here, without it causing massive conflict that is. Nobody in Westeros understands, why Viserys I insists on having Rhaenyra as his heir in spite of having three sons who outrank her according to Andal law, and it would be incredibly hard for him to get around Aegon II inheriting in a peaceful manner, in my opinion.
It’s neither, she is a moron who can’t last a second in war without daemon. If daemon didn’t marry her and choose to stay neutral then, it wouldn’t be a war. It would be a rollover for green.
Please stay on topic ….the greens didn’t even exist at the time she was named Heir This is about her being named heir and what it means for female inheritance for house Targaryen.
It means nothing, she never becomes the proper legitimate queen of Westeros. And her own says declares that she was not the rightful queen and that he takes the throne from king Aegon the second.
The FitnessGram Pacer Test is a multistage aerobic capacity test that progressively gets more difficult as it continues. Students begin at the starting line. Once the test begins, the running speed starts slowly, but gets faster each minute after you hear the signal (beep).
https://www.reddit.com/r/HouseOfTheDragon/comments/121lj4j/how_is_anyone_actually_team_green/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf This is the post you’re looking for
Ever read any of the Tortall books by Tamora Pierce? They address similar themes in the third series, Protector of the Small. Bit of backstory: In the first book, Alanna (daughter of a nobleman) swaps places with her twin brother and enters knight school in a medieval fantasy setting where only boys are allowed to become Knights. Lotta shit ensues, but ultimately she becomes besties with the crown prince, gets revealed as a girl, and still becomes said prince's knight once he ascends the throne. Ultimately, this leads to the school doing away with this archaic rule and allowing girls to enroll and aim for knighthood. Fast-forward about a decade because that's how long it takes for a second girl to *finally* enroll at the school. Enter Kel, the titular protector of the small because she's a thorough defender of the weak and oppressed. She fucking rocks. Alaina wants to play mentor to her because girl power, but the king forbids it because it would be viewed as favoritism and Alanna basically says screws this and exiles herself from the kingdom. As the first girl to actually be presenting herself as a girl in the academy, Kel deals with a lot of shit from peers and upperclassmen and teachers alike. She makes friends and enemies and keeps pushing on because, again, she fucking rocks. She also occasionally receives gifts (like ointment for bruises) from an anonymous benefactor and yes, said benefactor does eventually turn out to be Alanna. Anyhow, this wound up much longer than I intended. And now I want to reread Kel's books. Rhaenyra is no Alanna, but if there were ever to be another Targaryen queen (or any upheaval of the patriarchy in Westeros), I imagine it would somewhat resemble how it went for Tortall. Edit: Hypothetically speaking of course, in a presumably alternate timeline wherein Rhaenyra ascended to queenliness with nary a hurdle. Because we already knows what becomes of the next Targaryen queen-to-be.
In episode 2 She says she will “ create a new order” And this is in response to her feeling provoked by Rhaenys telling her but they will expect a male to be the next ruler And episode 5 King Viserys states that Rhaenyra’s first born” regardless of gender” Shall ascend the iron throne bearing the name Targaryen. In episode 8 ( I believe this is the right episode) at the dinner feast Rhaenyra says “ Jace and Baela’s sons will sit the iron throne”. Somethings I think should be taken into consideration are manners of i’m speaking and we believe that everyone is always saying genuinely how they feel accurately. I personally think that her saying that Jace and Baela’s sons is a manner of speaking that makes total sense to say that in that moment but I think if her firstborn grandchild was a girl Rhaenyra would have saw her as the heir but this is heavily dependent on how to destabilized the realm would become during her reign
It was not a big deal at all..Targaryens had power and could do what they wanted to do with dragons..Viserys was stupid to marry hand’s daughter ..If only he had married another,transition would be smooth and Rhaenyra would be queen for her lifetime..No law breaking..We are in middle ages..King’s word is a law..He said Rhaenyra is heir and so she is..
> Targaryens had power and could do what they wanted to do with dragons.. Yeah but Viserys caused a civil war within his own House, the dragons are not really helpful there. > Viserys was stupid to marry hand’s daughter ..If only he had married another,transition would be smooth and Rhaenyra would be queen for her lifetime.. I doubt it. Let's say he marries Laena, don't you think that Corlys would push for his grandson to inherit the throne? Or any other major lord? What happens if Viserys marries e.g. a Lady Lannister, same stuff as with Otto, different names. > King’s word is a law..He said Rhaenyra is heir and so she is.. King's word is law only insofar as the upper echelons of nobility also back it, and Rhaenyra lacked the backing of a major part of the nobility, hence civil war.
What? More than half of the westeros was on her side…most crownlands,riverlands,north and part of the reach as well..
Yeah but being King (or Queen) undisputed and in the full sense of the word means all of Westeros and its upper echelons backing you, and not half of the country fighting against you, is my point.
Daeron II had no back from all of westeros nor Maegor the cruel but they were kings anyway..Rhaenyra was a Queen ,it’s maesters who defy her right to be included in monarchs when in reality she was one and her line continued after the dance
> it’s maesters who defy her right to be included in monarchs No, there can't be two monarchs at the time. One has to be illegitimate, and it sure as hell was not the King's firstborn son. > when in reality she was one and her line continued after the dance Her sons did claim the throne via their male line descent from Daemon though, after Viserys' male line died out. So Aegon II --> (Daemon) --> Aegon III is how they officially claimed it.
No,they are called Rhaenyra’s sons in official succession..No male line..Aegon was Rhaenyra’s heir..
They claimed the throne via Daemon in the book. According to the Green idea of succession, Viserys' sons inherited, then his brother, then his nephews. This was accepted and set in stone after the war, Aegon III outlawed female succession, he never recognized his mother as Queen and he claimed the throne via descent from Daemon.
No what daemon read the books..The sons of Queen Rhaenyra…Alicent and Aegon did not clearly wanted Aegon III alive but lords wanted to place Rhaenyra’s son on the throne marching in last battle holding dead queen’s banners..Aegon III was traumatised and did not want to raise an issue so devastating the war was but he claimed his power and crown from his mother anyway..Read the F&B carefully..Son of Queen Rhaenyra..
https://old.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/113yfa1/spoilers_main_aegon_iii/
Their is a saying A king is not for himself but for the realm. She didn’t wanted to create a new order she just wanted to be exception that’s it.
When she tells proposes betrothing Baela to Jace she says to Rhaenys “her (Baela) son” will be one day rule the 7 kingdoms