Angel Eyes

Blackfyre claim...

75 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Makes no sense. Since there was no marriage between Aegon IV and Daena, Daemon's still a bastard, no matter of the rumors that Naerys and Aemon the Dragonknight were having an affair and Daeron II is a bastard. 

Edited by Angel Eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Makes no sense. Since there was no marriage between Aegon IV and Daena, Daemon's still a bastard, no matter of the rumors that Naerys and Aemon the Dragonknight were having an affair and Daeron II is a bastard. 

Aegon the unworthy legitimized all his bastards before has death. Being legitimized and claiming Daeron was the bastard of Naerys and the Dragonknight, gave Daemon Blackfyre has claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

Aegon the unworthy legitimized all his bastards before has death. Being legitimized and claiming Daeron was the bastard of Naerys and the Dragonknight, gave Daemon Blackfyre has claim.

Also since Aegon III's and Viserys II's claim from Rhaenyra, Aegon's daughters should had came before Viserys' son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

49 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Also since Aegon III's and Viserys II's claim from Rhaenyra, Aegon's daughters should had came before Viserys' son.

Then Aegon IV shouldn't be on the throne. I thought one of the laws after the Dance of Dragons was that a monarch couldn't inherit from their mother, so that would also disqualify Daemon Blackfyre.

Edited by Angel Eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Angel Eyes said:

Then Aegon IV shouldn't be on the throne. I thought one of the laws after the Dance of Dragons was that a monarch couldn't inherit from their mother, so that would also disqualify Daemon Blackfyre.

Of course Aegon shouldn't be on the Throne. But Daemon's claim would came from his mother so he would had a claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Of course Aegon shouldn't be on the Throne. But Daemon's claim would came from his mother so he would had a claim.

I thought you couldn't inherit from the female line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Angel Eyes said:

I thought you couldn't inherit from the female line.

You would had been right but since Aegon's and Viserys' claim came from Rhaenyra there is no reason why Daena couldn't do the same. Of course it is possible that Aegon's and Viserys' claim could come from Daemon and only Rhaenyra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Then Aegon IV shouldn't be on the throne. I thought one of the laws after the Dance of Dragons was that a monarch couldn't inherit from their mother, so that would also disqualify Daemon Blackfyre.

Aegon ll died without a heir, Aegon III inherited the throne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muscles and being a great knight was his claim.

Having the Blackfyre and being the preferred son of the King also helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

Makes no sense. Since there was no marriage between Aegon IV and Daena, Daemon's still a bastard, no matter of the rumors that Naerys and Aemon the Dragonknight were having an affair and Daeron II is a bastard. 

Its kind of written to be weak and I think that GRRM almost went over the top with how we're supposed to see the Blackfyre claim as really, really bad.

But I think that you miss some important parts in that Daemon was legitimized by Aegon IV and given the sword of kings, Blackfyre, which makes it so that if Daeron is a bastard, then Daemon is the oldest son of Aegon IV and now a legitimized son of that king. Its a lot of make-believe but there are two points that could be used for making a claim to the throne.

One can see that Daemon has a primogenture claim through his mother Daena and that there really are no formal ways to designate an heir given Westeros' absolutistic monarchy. So in effect there's nothing to say that given Daemon the sword was not a way to designate him as the heir as the king is not bound by a rulebook in how something should be done. Dragonstone or a sword, an absolute king can designate an heir pretty much in whatever way that he likes. It really comes down to perspective and how one wants to interpret a royal action that isn't given a text message to explain it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/6/2017 at 11:28 PM, The Doctor's Consort said:

You would had been right but since Aegon's and Viserys' claim came from Rhaenyra there is no reason why Daena couldn't do the same. Of course it is possible that Aegon's and Viserys' claim could come from Daemon and only Rhaenyra.

Female line was banished from succesion. When Aegon II died, Viserys I male line died and the claim passed to his brother's male line. That's how Rhaenyra's sons became kings. 

Daemon could become king only if Aegon IV named him his heir or if he won the war against Daeron II.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Endymion I Targaryen said:

Female line was banished from succesion. When Aegon II died, Viserys I male line died and the claim passed to his brother's male line. That's how Rhaenyra's sons became kings. 

Daemon could become king only if Aegon IV named him his heir or if he won the war against Daeron II.

And then there were people who said that Daemon was heir because he had Blackfyre, hence why he was called the "King who bore the Sword." That one at least was the flimsiest of all the reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2017 at 1:21 AM, Endymion I Targaryen said:

Female line was banished from succesion.

I agree with you but that was after the Great Council of 101. Before that in the whole Westeros the daughters would come before the brother.

On 5/7/2017 at 1:21 AM, Endymion I Targaryen said:

When Aegon II died, Viserys I male line died and the claim passed to his brother's male line. That's how Rhaenyra's sons became kings. 

It isn't explicit how Aegon III and Viserys II had the claim to the Throne. After all what we do know is that the war ended when the Blacks won and the Blacks were following Rhaenyra’s claim.

On 5/7/2017 at 1:21 AM, Endymion I Targaryen said:

Daemon could become king only if Aegon IV named him his heir or if he won the war against Daeron II.

I think that it depends on how Aegon III and Viserys II took the Throne. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 9:42 PM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I agree with you but that was after the Great Council of 101. Before that in the whole Westeros the daughters would come before the brother.

It isn't explicit how Aegon III and Viserys II had the claim to the Throne. After all what we do know is that the war ended when the Blacks won and the Blacks were following Rhaenyra’s claim.

I think that it depends on how Aegon III and Viserys II took the Throne. 

The dance ended with Aegon + Jaehaera on the Throne. It was not a clear victory for the blacks as their leader Rhaenyra was killed. Daemon's rebellion was in 196,after the Great Council of 101 and the Dance with Dragons. Nearly for a century, women and their lines were banished from succesion. Daena and her sisters were passed because of that. Daeron II would support the idea that his claim came from Daemon and not Rhaenyra. Otherwise, Viserys II, Aegon IV and Daeron II usurped Daena's throne. In this case Daemon's legitimisation in not valid as Aegon is the one who did it.

What I am trying to say is that according to the law, his claim is not solid. Aegon IV did not disinherit Daeron publicly so Daemon cannot claim the throne as a legitimised son. Female line is banished so he can't claim it as Daena's heir. The only way to support his claim is having Blackfyre or if he won the war as Robert did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't fully agree that the female line is banished in general after Rhaenyra. Daena's claim was still considered after Baelor the Blessed's death, and in 233 AC after Maekar I, the Great Council still considers Vaella's claim. They are dismissed as claimaints citing the Dance and the 101 GC, but not banished from inheritance so much that their possible claims are not even considered.

The rebels first declared Daeron II illigitemate - that is, not Aegon IV's son. (see also Cersei and her sons). And then declared Daemon I Blackfyre the legiitimate king, because he is the eldest legitimatized Great Bastard son on Aegon IV (with a Targaryen mother) carrying the ancestral sword Blackfyre. But this is not a claim under consideration during a Great Council. Daeron II was already crowned and sitting king. So, it could only ever work by winning the war.

Instead of a comparison to Robert, Daemon Blackfyre is a close parallel to Stannis Baratheon. He too claims to be a king with a sword "Lightbringer" + declaration that Cersei's children are not Robert's sons and being Robert's eldest brother. Robert's bastard sons can't inherit as none of them are legitimized (unlike Daemon I Blackfyre). Stannis still has to conquer the throne to make it stick.

Personally I think Aegon IV gave Daemon the sword, because he did not want his grandson Baelor (half Dornish) ending up inheriting it. And I also think that Daemon I Blackfyre came into a witness or information that convinced him that Daeron II was Aemon's son instead of Aegon IV's, finally prompting him to rebel when he was reluctant to do so for years before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all precedent-based. Back in the days of the Conqueror women still had a pretty solid claim in the line of succession, although even then it wasn't clear whether Aenys' daughters came before or after Maegor in the informal line of succession. Maegor is the first one to set a precedence for a planned female inheritance by disinheriting his nephew Jaehaerys and naming his grand-niece Aerea instead (although that suggests that Jaehaerys' claim was considered to be stronger than the claim of the daughters of Aegon and Rhaena).

Jaehaerys I's decision for Baelon in 92 AC and the Great Council of 101 AC were a huge blow for female and female line inheritance. Viserys I ignored that but the Dance was later interpreted as a precedent against female inheritance, so things certainly added up by the time of Baelor's death. Aerys I also added to the precedents by ignoring the claims of his nieces Aelora and Daenora and naming Maekar his heir instead.

But no law ever said that females or male descendants through the female line were in general barred from the succession. Some people saw the first Great Council as setting an 'iron precedent' in that direction but that was just an opinion.

Daemon Blackfyre's claim is very weak and very hypocritically justified. For one, there is no proof that Daeron II is truly falseborn. Rumors and personal opinions are not fact. Daeron II was made Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne and Prince of Dragonstone by his father. He was crowned and anointed king, and all the great bastards did him homage and acknowledged him as their king for ten years. If Daeron II had truly tried to kill Daemon unjustly there might have been a good reason to rebel but not necessarily to declare Daemon king.

Even more so in light of the fact that there is no proof that Daemon was truly the firstborn living son of Aegon IV. He seems to be the eldest bastard son of a noblewoman he acknowledged but he legitimized all his bastards on his deathbed, which means that the true heir to the Iron Throne - if we assume Daeron II was not Aegon's son and unjustly king despite the fact that Aegon IV himself had named his his heir and never disinherited him - would then be the eldest male bastard of Aegon IV. And that could very well be the son of some whore Aegon had sex with in his early teens. The idea that this men did not produce a literal army of sons older than Daemon Blackfyre with all the women he slept with before he got to Daena is very unlikely.

I once asked George whether the Daena thing meant a lot to the Blackfyre loyalists but apparently it did not. It was Aegon IV recognizing him as his son and the whole Blackfyre thing that really made Daemon stand out symbolically.

And this really shows an important thing - people don't really care that much about primogeniture and proper pedigree if it suits them. If there is a great guy - or a person you think is a great guy - and the king favors him then you can see him as the king, too, even if he is a bastard.

That shows that kings and lords certainly can decide who is going to succeed them if they play it right. Tywin not showing any favors to Tyrion whatsoever shows the opposite. He wouldn't have gotten Casterly Rock no matter 'the law'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2017 at 2:31 PM, LionoftheWest said:

Its kind of written to be weak and I think that GRRM almost went over the top with how we're supposed to see the Blackfyre claim as really, really bad.

More likely the readers are supposed to realize how stupid the laws of succession are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Damon_Tor said:

More likely the readers are supposed to realize how stupid the laws of succession are.

Except I don't think that's the case. If it was so then reasonably Blackfyre would have the laws of succession on his side rather than having to totally bend over and be willfully blind to lots of things to make his claim work, against the rather simple claim of Daeron II who have the law of succession on his side.

Now of course given that the king is aboslute Daemon can claim that recieving Blackfyre was indeed becoming heir of the king, by whatever way the king decides to do it. But that's about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LionoftheWest said:

Except I don't think that's the case. If it was so then reasonably Blackfyre would have the laws of succession on his side rather than having to totally bend over and be willfully blind to lots of things to make his claim work, against the rather simple claim of Daeron II who have the law of succession on his side.

Wasn't Daemon older than Daeron? What am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Damon_Tor said:

Wasn't Daemon older than Daeron? What am I missing?

Daemon wasn't older than Daeron, in fact Daemon was on age with Daeron's sons. Daemon was born in 170 AC and Daeron was born in 153 AC. So age was never a thing, it was that Daemon was a bastard that was legitimized and had alot of popular support, while Daeron II took efforts that made him many enemies who saw their position deteriorate regardless of that Daeron II also tried to be fair and just to his bannermen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now