Can a woman even sit on the Iron Throne?

[Saci Targaryen]

I could be wrong, but historically I can't recall of any targ woman becoming King of Westeroos. I was taking a look at medieval european succession laws, and it seems that the one that most closely resembles Westeroosi law is something called "Agnatic Primogeniture":

Agnatic primogeniture

"Agnatic primogeniture" or "patrilineal primogeniture" is inheritance according to seniority of birth among the sons of a monarch or head of family, with sons and their male issue inheriting before brothers and their issue. Thus, inheritance could be traced to the male line^[8] only, to the complete exclusion of females. This is commonly referred to as the Salic law (see Terra salica).

Most British and French titles of nobility descend to the senior male by primogeniture, to the exclusion of females, and agnatic cadets may bear courtesy titles.

A variation on Salic primogeniture allows the sons of women to inherit, but not women themselves, an example being succession to the throne of Spain from 1947–1978. This is the law in Liechtenstein and was in the formerArchduchy of Austria. Another variation is the so-called Semi-Salic Law, which allows women to succeed only at the extinction of all the male descendants. Such were the cases of Bourbon Spain until 1833 and the dominions ofAustria-Hungary, as well as the former Kingdom of Württemberg. This was the law of Luxembourg until equal primogeniture was introduced on 20 June 2011.

This would mean that Dany can't sit on the Iron Throne, only her kids could argue for a legitimate claim. This law caused the succession crisis that would later become known as the 100 years war. Basically the last "Capetian" king of France, Phillip IV, had 7 kids, but with the exception of his daughter, Isabella, who was married to King Edward II of England, had no surviving grandchildren. This was the Casus Belli for Edward III invading France and claiming the french crown, however the French regarded that Edward had no claim to the french crown, as he was matrilineally related to his grandfather King Phillip IV, and therefore removed from succession.

[edit]

[RedBean]

Historically, I don't believe any woman has sit on the Iron Throne. At this point, however, Dany is the last surviving Targaryen (who also is known to be a Targaryen). That does put her first in line, unless Aegon or Jon can prove their identities.

[Saci Targaryen]

Jon is a bastard, he can't claim the Iron Throne. But Aegon's claim is undoubtedly stronger than Dany, no matter from what angle you analyze it.

[RhaenysBee]

Hmmm.... Physically, I'm sure a woman is also capable of sitting the Iron Throne... Seriously, we saw what happens when a woman tries to rule in Westeros: A) Welcome to Meereen B ) Queen Regent Cersei Is Dangerous C) Thanks for coming to my Queensmoot, Nuncle D) Handless and noseless are the Lannister boys, earless is the Lannister girl.

[Sandor's Hound]

Cersei sat there literally.

[RedBean]

Jon is a bastard, he can't claim the Iron Throne. But Aegon's claim is undoubtedly stronger than Dany, no matter from what angle you analyze it.

Depends on whether he can prove his identity. You must have heard the theory about Fake Aegon. Or have you?

[Roboginger]

i thinks its possible not from any of the woman that have already introduced already though.

[7V3N]

Jon may not be a bastard, since Rhaegar possibly married Lyanna before Jon's birth. Remember Aegon the Conqueror married both of his sisters, Visenya and Rhaenys (IIRC).

Also, see the story of Criston Cole, the Kingmaker. He set a precedent in the Dance of Dragons that men take precedent over women heirs.

ETA: Also, there is no need to prove that a claim is legitimate if the people support you. The North may rally behind Jon, but who else? The South has no reason to believe R+L=J, unless there is more evidence. Aegon may be a Blackfyre (my belief, not yet proven) but if Westeros rallies behind him as a Targaryen, it matters not. The claims are only ways for Westerosi to justify supporting a king. The lords of Westeros hold the keys to the kingdom, not (directly) the better claim.

[Saci Targaryen]

Depends on whether he can prove his identity. You must have heard the theory about Fake Aegon. Or have you?

I have, but I quite disagree with it.

[Winter's Knight]

What,are Westrosi women's posteriors allergic to iron?

Seriously, at the end of all this after the battles, the Others, the backstabbing,the dragons and the death tolls, I don't think may maestars will quibble over the gender of the ruler.

[Darth Rivers]

Historically, I don't believe any woman has sit on the Iron Throne. At this point, however, Dany is the last surviving Targaryen (who also is known to be a Targaryen). That does put her first in line, unless Aegon or Jon can prove their identities.

That doesn't put her anywhere, and neither Aegon nor Jon have any claim either. The Iron Throne has legally passed to the Baratheons, and succession is derived from Robert. They have no legal claim whatsoever, but if they invade and force the realm to acknowledge them, they become legit. It's all really about whom the nobility acknowledges as king, not about how many kings they trace their lineage to. Inheritance based claims are intended to prevent bloodshed in the first place, they don't matter once it has started.

[7V3N]

That doesn't put her anywhere, and neither Aegon nor Jon have any claim either. The Iron Throne has legally passed to the Baratheons, and succession is derived from Robert. They have no legal claim whatsoever, but if they invade and force the realm to acknowledge them, they become legit.

Legally is quite a specific and tricky word. By conquest, yes Robert won the throne. But by line of succession, he needed to eliminate Dany and Vis (and Aegon and Jon, possibly) for the throne to truly pass to the Baratheon line. Legally depends on who you would ask. But if you say whoever wins the throne has the throne, then yes the Baratheon family adopts the throne and the right of succession, but it opens the door for anybody to come and conquer to be king by right of conquest. So if you call the Baratheon's the royal family, you must also allow that the line of succession if moot when another faction conquers. So if Aegon wins the war, he wins the throne and the right to sit the Iron Throne.

[RedBean]

That doesn't put her anywhere, and neither Aegon nor Jon have any claim either. The Iron Throne has legally passed to the Baratheons, and succession is derived from Robert. They have no legal claim whatsoever, but if they invade and force the realm to acknowledge them, they become legit. It's all really about whom the nobility acknowledges as king, not about how many kings they trace their lineage to. Inheritance based claims are intended to prevent bloodshed in the first place, they don't matter once it has started.

I was talking about the Targaryen mode of succession, not about the Baratheons. We all know that the only person who can sit on the Iron Throne is the one who can win the kingdom over, but the poster asked about Targ women ruling Westeros, and that's what most of the replies here are about. If we start arguing about who's REALLY the king/queen of Westeros, it will be an endless argument.

I have, but I quite disagree with it.

That's your opinion. But you said in a previous post that Aegon is the rightful heir "no matter from what angle you analyze it". But many people believe he is fake, and if you analyze his claim from that angle, then he surely has no right to be king.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Yes, legally speaking Dany can't sit the Iron Throne, whether you consider Bob the lawful king or not.

- If he was, then the claim passes to his oldest trueborn son/oldest brother, namely Stannis Baratheon

- If he wasn't, then the claim passes to the oldest male relative of Aerys through the closest line, meaning the next oldest line of Aegon V, Rhaelle Targaryen and her grandchild Stannis Baratheon

But in the end, a legal claim may help you garner support, but swords decide that matter, nothing else.

[Fat Mac]

All hail Queen Selyse, the first of her name.

But seriously I think with kingship all male claimants have to be dead for a female to inherit it. As for capability, it's possible for a woman to rule. I dont think any present women (Dany, Cersei) are fit to rule but everyone has their opinions.

[Darth Rivers]

Legally is quite a specific and tricky word. By conquest, yes Robert won the throne. But by line of succession, he needed to eliminate Dany and Vis (and Aegon and Jon, possibly) for the throne to truly pass to the Baratheon line. Legally depends on who you would ask. But if you say whoever wins the throne has the throne, then yes the Baratheon family adopts the throne and the right of succession, but it opens the door for anybody to come and conquer to be king by right of conquest. So if you call the Baratheon's the royal family, you must also allow that the line of succession if moot when another faction conquers. So if Aegon wins the war, he wins the throne and the right to sit the Iron Throne.

Wrong. His was a rebel UNTIL THE NOBILITY SWORE ALLEGIANCE TO HIM. If the realm confirms him as king, he is king. Suggesting otherwise is Targaryen loyalist BS, which has come from Dany only. Have you seen anyone complain about Robert's illegitimacy? No. Just like when Henry of Lancaster seized the throne, it's about whom the nobles bend the knee to. Your king is whom you or your lords have sworn an oath to.

By your logic there can ultimately be no legitimacy at all, because then the allegiance of the lords doesn't matter - when it's actually what defines a king.

[Saci Targaryen]

Legally is quite a specific and tricky word. By conquest, yes Robert won the throne. But by line of succession, he needed to eliminate Dany and Vis (and Aegon and Jon, possibly) for the throne to truly pass to the Baratheon line. Legally depends on who you would ask. But if you say whoever wins the throne has the throne, then yes the Baratheon family adopts the throne and the right of succession, but it opens the door for anybody to come and conquer to be king by right of conquest. So if you call the Baratheon's the royal family, you must also allow that the line of succession if moot when another faction conquers. So if Aegon wins the war, he wins the throne and the right to sit the Iron Throne.

Good point, in the end the right of conquest counts for more than the right of blood. In France for instance, the first kings were the Merovingians, who were later usurped by the Carolingians... then came the Capet, the Valois, the Bourbon etc...

But yea, I think Aegon and Stannis have perhaps an equally strong claim to the Iron Throne. Dany is behind the two of them, but if she ever tames Drogon I doubt anyone would dare to object to her claim.

[Third World King]

Yes, legally speaking Dany can't sit the Iron Throne, whether you consider Bob the lawful king or not.

- If he was, then the claim passes to his oldest trueborn son/oldest brother, namely Stannis Baratheon

- If he wasn't, then the claim passes to the oldest male relative of Aerys through the closest line, meaning the next oldest line of Aegon V, Rhaelle Targaryen and her grandchild Stannis Baratheon

But in the end, a legal claim may help you garner support, but swords decide that matter, nothing else.

How does that part [bold] work exactly?

[E-Ro]

Stannis is the lawful king by all the laws of westeros. Nothing except him dying can change that.

[shinytoyrobots]

There is no objective legal heir. All of the claimants have some legitimacy, strong or weak. It's a vital part of what persuades other nobles to support them. There needs to be at least some tenuous link to a "legal" claim to throne, even if only on a technicality. Otherwise we'd simply see the nobles who commanded the most powerful armies place themselves as monarch.

On the Dany claim, I don't think there's anything in the book that suggests Dany, or any other woman, can't sit on the Iron Throne. Westerosi inheritance seems relatively clear. The eldest son inherits. In the absence of a son, the eldest daughter inherits. Being male only take precedence within the direct line (so a son trumps a daughter, but a daughter trumps, say, a cousin).