The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones Stick Em With the Pointy End Mug
Game of Thrones Stick Em With the Pointy End Mug
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

Was Viserys Really The True Heir?


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#1 Dragonreaver

Dragonreaver

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 09:59 PM

He talks a lot about being the true heir to the Targaryen dynasty, but is it, in truth? Dany almost goes as far as to state at his 'coronation' that he's not, but she can't possibly know for sure. The whole fire thing is what I'm on about... According to Daenerys, a true Targaryen can't be killed by fire (this might be an exaggeration, but we do see several times in the show that fire - and heat, more to the point - doesn't hurt Dany).

However, Viserys has the trademark silver hair and violet eyes of a Targaryen. Though due to the incestuous nature of the family, it's just as likely they came from Rhaella as Aerys. Thought it has to be said, that same incest makes it just as unlikely for him to be a bastard.

Do we ever find out what's up with that?

#2 Euphail

Euphail

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 10:27 PM

This has been talked about multiple times on the forums and in the books. Martin has said explicitely that the Targaryen relationship with fire is complicated. Daeny being unhurt by fire when the dragon's hatched is a one time thing.

#3 Corvinus

Corvinus

    battle war master supreme commander

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,217 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 11:42 PM

there were instances in Targaryen history when some of them were killed by fire.

#4 PatrickStormborn

PatrickStormborn

    Slayer of Dany Haters

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,271 posts

Posted 25 February 2012 - 04:12 AM

He talks a lot about being the true heir to the Targaryen dynasty, but is it, in truth? Dany almost goes as far as to state at his 'coronation' that he's not, but she can't possibly know for sure. The whole fire thing is what I'm on about... According to Daenerys, a true Targaryen can't be killed by fire (this might be an exaggeration, but we do see several times in the show that fire - and heat, more to the point - doesn't hurt Dany).

However, Viserys has the trademark silver hair and violet eyes of a Targaryen. Though due to the incestuous nature of the family, it's just as likely they came from Rhaella as Aerys. Thought it has to be said, that same incest makes it just as unlikely for him to be a bastard.

Do we ever find out what's up with that?


"Fire cannot kill a dragon" does not mean "Fire cannot kill real Targaryens". It just means that, when it came down to it, Viserys was as scared as death as anyone else, despite him calling himself a dragon.

Edited by PatrickStormborn, 25 February 2012 - 04:13 AM.


#5 Snow Ghost

Snow Ghost

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 02 March 2012 - 07:13 PM

She never says he's not the rightful heir, at least I don't remember it, all she ever said was that he was not the dragon he was always claiming to be, and not all the Targaryens are unhurt by fire, there's lots of others instances where Targaryens were even killed by fire

#6 Aenerys

Aenerys

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:45 AM

This has been talked about multiple times on the forums and in the books. Martin has said explicitely that the Targaryen relationship with fire is complicated. Daeny being unhurt by fire when the dragon's hatched is a one time thing.


So should Dany find herself consumed by fire again, she would this time perish?

Edited by Aenerys, 14 March 2012 - 08:45 AM.


#7 Arya Nymeria Stark

Arya Nymeria Stark

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 21 March 2012 - 10:55 PM

1. Dany was unhurt in the fire that consumed Khal Drogo's body.
2. Her three dragon eggs hatched and the babies clung to her body.
3. Viserys dies when Drogo poured the molten gold onto his head.

In my mind, the most likely explanation is that Dany is a "true" Targaryen and the rightful heir to the Iron Throne, and Viserys only wanted to believe he was the rightful heir because he was older than Dany.

#8 DirePenguin

DirePenguin

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 411 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 06:31 AM

I tend to believe simply that not all childs are born with the same gift.

#9 TheDrawback

TheDrawback

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 06:50 AM

In my opinion after Rheagar died and his family was killed off Viserys became the heir to the iron throne. But he would have made a Mad King reborn so in order for Dany to become queen and rightfull heir to the iron throne they had to 'give Viserys his crown' else she would go against the laws of inheriting. So yeah Viserys was the true heir but now Dany is.

#10 Lady Lilac

Lady Lilac

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 05:31 PM

Going by laws of succession, yes Viserys was the Targaryen heir. Rhaegar and all his children were killed, so his heir was his brother. Dany was technically last in the line of succession.
He is Targaryen there's no doubt about it. Dany herself is a rarity (or even unique?) in her family, since no, Targaryens weren't all immune to fire.

#11 Special Agent Punk

Special Agent Punk

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:11 AM

Didn't reach that part of the book - Assuming 'magic' was used to prevent Dany from being scorched? Or maybe the just hatched dragons fought fire with fire - rare but actual firefighter technique?

#12 Ser Malthred Storm

Ser Malthred Storm

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 237 posts

Posted 18 April 2012 - 11:14 AM

Yes and no. For the Targaryen dynasty, he would be considered the heir; however the Targaryens were dethroned, thus no longer legally inheirit the Seven Kingdoms. Seeing as though, they conquered the kings of the old Westeros and their heirs, and were conquered themselves by The Baratheons, I don't see how they have anymore legal right to the throne. We can claim that Robert unjustly won the throne; what about the pre-targaryen heirs then?

#13 Arya Nymeria Stark

Arya Nymeria Stark

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 09:22 AM

After I discovered the whole supernatural theme in the series, I've come to believe that the Gods (I haven't decided yet which set I trust more, the old or the new) intended for Dany to be the true heir of the Targaryen line. I think it's in some way possible that someone (or something) decided that Dany should be the Targaryen queen, should she win back the Iron Throne.

#14 bede

bede

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 27 May 2012 - 10:11 AM

I agree with the posters in regards to Dany and the fire. That was a singular event where she invoked powerful magic. There are of course instances where past Targaryens are killed by fire, so I do not think it has much to do with whether or not Viserys was a "true" heir. His disposition, however, had much more to do with this, IMO.

#15 Sweet Summer Child

Sweet Summer Child

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 27 May 2012 - 11:55 PM

Viserys was most definitely the heir to the targ dynasty. He was the eldest living child and as far as most rules of succession are concerned, that would have given him the throne if not for the usurper. However, he would have been a horrible king, and represented what the targ line had become. He was much more similar to the mad king than to Aegon the Conqueror, and was much weaker than earlier targs and therefore might have been more susceptible to fire.

#16 insertname

insertname

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts

Posted 29 May 2012 - 07:11 AM

The show muddles up a few things with regards to the fire as well. For example, in the show, Dany takes out the hot egg from the coals, unhurt, this does not happen in the books. Dany is not immune to fire, the only instance of this was at the birth of her dragons, because of their magic.

So yes, Viserys was the heir until he died.

#17 Mephesto

Mephesto

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 04:21 PM

Jon Snow is the rightful Targaryen heir!

Being a "Dragon" isn't synonomous with being a Targaryen. In terms of the line of succession Viserys was the rightful heir, but he didn't possess the strength to lead. Dany a true Dragon. Viserys would have been exactly like Joffrey or even worse.(The Mad King part 2)

#18 Winter's Lion

Winter's Lion

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 07 June 2012 - 01:52 PM

As others have stated, Viserys was the lawful Targaryen heir because he was the oldest living male child. Magically/spiritually, Dany is the heir to the "dragon" stuff.

#19 JessicaCC

JessicaCC

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 08 June 2012 - 09:47 AM

The show muddles up a few things with regards to the fire as well. For example, in the show, Dany takes out the hot egg from the coals, unhurt, this does not happen in the books.



I think it does, actually. I remember her asking, one of the handmaids to bring her the eggs, but she didn't want them to know what she was doing with them.
Not that this is important... Just wanted to clear it up.

#20 your grace

your grace

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 June 2012 - 01:16 PM

I tend to believe simply that not all childs are born with the same gift.

we know viserys has the same "mad" gene that made aerys crazy, maybe it makes you weak and frail too.