Jump to content

Can a woman even sit on the Iron Throne?


Saci Targaryen

Recommended Posts

Only if Tommen has the power to appoint Lords Paramount, for which he needs to be the lawful King, for which he needs Lords Paramount to bend the knee, for which he needs to appoint new Lords Paramount, a really nice circle.

As long as not everybody has sworn to him, he can't be lawful king.

True, but that means it's at best 4:4 instead of 4:2:2 against Tommen.

Tommen has Highgarden. Casterly Rock doesn't exist as a military power anymore. Stormlands are split, and flocking to Aegon, Riverlands exhausted and very, very wolfish. Roose has 4,000 men and faces 40,000 Northmen hellbent on revenge and feeding him his in-laws.

Have you actually sat down and thought about how many houses have backed Tommen? I think you need to go back and look at that and realize that Tommen is in the majority in terms of Westerosi houses backing him. The Houses who have stayed out of the fighting don't really count towards anything, as they technically back Tommen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it was pointed out before and will be again a miliion times these Latin terms dont apply to any situation of inheritance in our world. They do resemble some of course but Martin has it right. It has always been a system of competing claims. And our favorite Brutal warlords.

Finding a link in your family to a Ruling king is good start. Both Stannis and Dany claim through Robert and Aerys respectively. Young Griff will claim Rhaegar is his father. but his claim to the throne is from Aerys.

A link even through mothers side to someone like Charlemagne is super handy, Stannis has 2 claims like this Storm King and Aegon the conquerer. Dany has Aegon only. Making this link up is a good way to go too.

Being a bastard has never held anyone ever back from making a claim. But who legitimizes you. no one you won. its yours thats it no one else gets a say. Like Hell i let someone call me Bastard if im a King.

And making and Denying claims doesnt mean a war. people have accidents , a lifetime involuntary stay at a convent is a good way to do it. im sure their are many more clever ways.

Can women rule. Cleopatra and The mormonts think so.

From roberts rebellion till now everyone alive Iron throne succession

1. mad king

2. Rhaegar

3 Aegon

4. Viserys

5. Rhaegars daughter

6. Dany

7. Mad kings wife through their father

8. Robert B closest relative known

9. Joff

10. Tommen

11 Stannis

12. Renly

13. Myrcella

14. Shireen

Why is robert after Dany cause they are both female line claims

Edric or Jon could throw their claim in at various points. or multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let´s count all the irregular successions to Iron Throne

(0) Aegon-Aenys - regular under all laws, because Aenys was the elder son

1) Aenys-Maegor - under both Dornish and Targaryen law, sons if any come before brethren. Aenys had Jaehaerys, yet Maegor seized throne for his own. Maegor was an usurper under these succession laws... but did not kill off Jaehaerys (or Alysanne). A possibility exists that Aenys (or Aegon) expressly named Maegor heir ahead of Jaehaerys - but that goes to the matter of the right of kings to make wills.

(0) Maegor-Jaehaerys - if Maegor was childless (he was) then his nephew was the legal heir... unless disqualified by changing of succession laws, for a crime, or by oaths of Night Watch, septon or maester.

(0) Jaehaerys-Viserys - note that Viserys was a grandson, not son of Jaehaerys - his parent presumably died in grandfather´s lifetime.

2) Dance of Dragons

Rhaenyra was expressly named heir by Viserys. She was NOT legitimate under Andal law - younger brothers go before elder sisters. She WAS legitimate under Dornish law - elder sisters go before younger brothers. And apart from Viserys´ will, there does not seem to have precedent, or indeed perhaps express enactment, as to whether Targaryen inheritance law was the Andal or Dornish one.

Aegon II, on the other hand, as the eldest son, was legitimate under Andal law. So Stannis could, under Andal law, call Rhaenyra traitor for rebelling.

3) Again Dance of Dragons

Aegon II left a baby daughter. Under Andal law, the baby daughter should have been the Queen by the same logic that Rhaenyra shouldn´t.

Instead, the girl was passed over and Aegon III proclaimed King. This could have been the occasion to expressly decide that Iron Throne was subject not to Andal law, but to a different law.

(0) Aegon III to elder son Daeron I

(0) Childless Daeron I to his brother Baelor I

4) Baelor to Viserys

The 3 maidens of Maidenvault were the legitimate heiresses in Andal law. But if the law was expressly changed to allow Aegon II-s daughter to be bypassed in favour of Aegon III, that also preferred Viserys II over his nieces.

(0) Viserys to elder son Aegon

(0) Aegon to elder son Daeron

(0) Daeron to eldest living son Aerys

(0) Aerys to eldest living brother Maekar

5) Maekar to Egg

Passing over Daeron the Drunk´s lackwit daughter was justified enough by her gender (Elaena had been passed over, and she was no lackwit). But passing over Aerion´s baby son was blatantly illegal

(0) Egg to eldest surviving son Jaehaerys

(0) Jaehaerys to elder son Aerys

(6) Aerys to Robert the Usurper. Robert did have female line claim - but this was blatantly behind Aerys´ eldest surviving legitimate son Viserys.

After Viserys... If the law proclaimed after Dance of Dragons expressly preserved the rights of Targaryen girls to inherit behind all males (not implausible thing to do - at that point, the Targaryens were 2 boys and 1 girl, so the possibility of both boys dying and the girl surviving was not too remote) then which female line exactly? Closest was Daenerys (and Rhaego). Then the Baratheons. And then the other female line cadets of Targaryens - first the descendants (if any) of Daeron´s lackwit daughter, then the descendants of Daenerys in Dorne - and then the descendants of the Maidenvault maidens. Blackfyres might be disqualified from inheriting even in female line for illegitimacy and for crimes, but at least some of Elaena´s seven children were legitimate. Maybe a child of Ossifer Plumm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Plumms are in the line of succession. i just think there has to be more houses related to egg through his daughters. but no evidence so far has been shown. If they married for love who did they marry? Does Robert have the best Claim? Or just the best of the candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And from that point on.."The Targaryens were the only family to ever exclude direct daughters from succession and follow a purely male order" like I said. In fact regardless of the fact that they came to it after the conquest, they are still the only family that we know of to ever employ that inheritance practice even if it wasn't for the whole time they were in power...so "The Targaryens were the only family to ever exclude direct daughters from succession and follow a purely male order" holds true regardless.

Indeed, from that point on it was in the interest of the progeny of Aegon III (the victor of the Dance of the Dragons) to ensure and enforce the idea that rthe female line is always deemed to be the last resort because Queen Rhaenyra (the loser) had four sons and there were probably scads of cousins descended from her line who were probably always quietly grousing about being the proper heirs.An acknowledgement of women in the line would be a tacit admission that Aegon III's line might be seen as usurpers.

The Poles [or Pooles, or de la Poles] were always batting around the courts of English monarchs insisting (quietly) that they were were the true English royals, being Plantagenets (essentially) and the successive families (Tudors, etc.) were all usurpers - until Henry VIII decided to just kill them off, all of them. For all we know, there were "Rhaenrist" heirs that were either shunted back into the family via marriage or quietly removed from the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let´s count all the irregular successions to Iron Throne

[...]

The other thing that makes tracking Targaryen succession impossible is the brother-sister, uncle-niece, aunt-nephew marriage practices. It is impossible to make normal lines of agnatic-cognatic primogeniture with a family tree like that. When you have a prince who is the oldest grandson of an earlier king VIA TWO LINES of that king's progeny (his son and his daughter- the prince's parents) is that boy more highly placed in the line than his older half-sister who is the granddaughter of that same king but also his daughter? (in the case of an aunt-nephew marriage). It could get insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, from that point on it was in the interest of the progeny of Aegon III (the victor of the Dance of the Dragons) to ensure and enforce the idea that rthe female line is always deemed to be the last resort because Queen Rhaenyra (the loser) had four sons and there were probably scads of cousins descended from her line who were probably always quietly grousing about being the proper heirs.An acknowledgement of women in the line would be a tacit admission that Aegon III's line might be seen as usurpers.

The Poles [or Pooles, or de la Poles] were always batting around the courts of English monarchs insisting (quietly) that they were were the true English royals, being Plantagenets (essentially) and the successive families (Tudors, etc.) were all usurpers - until Henry VIII decided to just kill them off, all of them. For all we know, there were "Rhaenrist" heirs that were either shunted back into the family via marriage or quietly removed from the table.

The current Targayren line (Daenerys, Rhaegar, Aerys the Mad...etc.) are descended from Rhaenyra, not from Aegon II (who had no sons), so they are both the "Rhaenrist" and "Aegonist" heirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current Targayren line (Daenerys, Rhaegar, Aerys the Mad...etc.) are descended from Rhaenyra, not from Aegon II (who had no sons), so they are both the "Rhaenrist" and "Aegonist" heirs.

Oh, you're right - Aegon III was Rhaenyra's son... ugh. But Aegon II's daughter was Aegon III's queen. See! This is why Targaryen Succession is so kooky.

(the whole Dance with the Dragons is a mash-up between the way between Queen Maude and King Stephen, sealed with a marital pact that resembled the marriage of Henry VII to Elizabeth of York that closed the War of the Roses).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you're right - Aegon III was Rhaenyra's son... ugh. But Aegon II's daughter was Aegon III's queen. See! This is why Targaryen Succession is so kooky.

Just follow the main line and forget the rest: The oldest son of the king inherits, and if there isn't a son, the oldest brother of the king, and if the king's brother is dead, his son. If the king has not sons or brothers, the oldest brother of his father is the heir.

Have you actually sat down and thought about how many houses have backed Tommen? I think you need to go back and look at that and realize that Tommen is in the majority in terms of Westerosi houses backing him. The Houses who have stayed out of the fighting don't really count towards anything, as they technically back Tommen.

Well, truth to be told almost all the current westerosi lords have changed sides at least once, save the Lannister's bannermen, the Greyjoy's bannermen and most Stark's bannermen.

The Crownlords have supported the Targayren and afterwards didn't help the Lannisters at all.

The Stormlords have supported Renly and Stannis before bending the knee.

The Reach lords have supported the Targayrens and Renly before allying with the Lannisters.

The Dragonstone lords have supported the Targayren and later Stannis before bending the knee.

The Vale lords wanted to join Robb.

The Riverlords support the Lannisters only because they have Edmure as hostage.

The Dornish want to fight the Lannisters.

The northen lords hate the guts of the Lannisters.

The ironborn want to take the throne.

Nobody in his right mind would trust the Freys and Boltons.

The Lannisters can trust only their own bannermen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just remembered another SSM which kind of confirms it.

[Did Daena complaining about how she might have been Queen if it weren't for the Dance of the Dragons determining that a Targaryen queen would never rule in her own right lead to Daemon Blackfyre's rebellion?]

Certainly possible, but it was Aegon's very public gift of Blackfyre to his bastard son that first started widespread talk that perhaps he should be king.

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Targaryen_History/

The succession law is right but it's not the motivating factor for the Blackfyre rebellion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really thought that ADWD would show us a second "dwd", with a targ girl (dany) and a targ guy (aegon) claiming the throne

little did i know that dany hardly left meereen

btw, why us ADWD called that anyway? because of that scene where dany "tames" drogon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...