C.T. Phipps

You'll have to explain how being the Great Grandson of a King and grandson of a Targaryen helps the argument that lineage doesn't matter and that force of arms is the sole determinator for who should be king or not, @Lord Varys. I mean, the argument Renly is making is an appeal to "might makes right." He's making an insult to the concept of rulership by lineage because he's making a completely illegal and utterly unsupported usurpation. It feels like you're ignoring the context of Renly's argument and are in fact acting like he should have the exact opposite point of it. This despite the fact that arguing the opposite would make him not the ruler of Westeros but third in line after Joffrey, Stannis, and Tommen or even sixth in line.

Not to my experience. https://i.imgur.com/wAyqkVb.jpg Re: Daenerys versus Rhanerya I think there's some huge differences in the ending. If Daenerys had been killed fighting the Night King, no one would have been happy about it but it would have been considered to be a bold choice like killing Ned Stark and Rob Stark. It's the indignity of the belief that Daenerys had to be killed for the greater good that makes it such an awful ending and the vilification of the co-star of the show. Which is, "What if Princess Leia was the Emperor?"

Yes, it is a tragedy that is properly set up, though. However, they should also know it'll be a bad ending by the fact that Westeros is a hellhole in Robert's era.

Like the romantic Red Wedding.

Oh, I've seen just about every female non-book reviewer going, "Oh yes, they're getting together." Sadly, I see them probably climaxing their relationship (rimshot) next episode.

I love watching these "George Answers" on Youtube. They're always so fun and whimsical. Thanks for sharing.

While true, there's an even bigger element at play that Renly is claiming to be King of Westeros when his OLDER BROTHER is about twenty yards away. (He also doesn't know that Robert's children are all bastards and, in his mind, is Maegoring the process) Renly knows his only appeal is to force and mockery of succession rules.

I feel like it's a fault of fantasy readers that they take every character as speaking literal fact when we know that people don't do that in real life (and shouldn't in fiction). Especially when Renly is making explicit that he's mocking the idea of Robert claiming the throne based on his relationship to the house he just overthrew. This is a bit like Henry Bollingbrook claiming the throne of England based on his relationship to John of Gaunt when he overthrew Richard II. It happened but even during the time period, people thought it was ridiculous.

They could crown a Velaryon King, though that would certainly make Corlys look like a fool. The Blacks, unlike the Greens, absolutely accept the maternal lineage after all.

I feel like a lot of people are attributing it to Martin's error when he's always clear that Rhaenyra gets a ridiculous amount of slander and libel in the histories. Frankly, I reject any claims that Martin didn't know what he was doing. The story is how Martin wanted it to be.

Aegon III is a valuable hostage and I'm honestly surprised you don't see the benefit. It's the same benefit that Bloodraven gets for the fact that he has Daemon II as a prisoner. Aegon II keeping Aegon III as a prisoner means that the Blacks can't crown another king in his place and they have an immensely valuable hostage to negotiate with. Its just when Alicent suggests cutting him up and Aegon II agrees that his surviving allies turn on him because they realize he's insane. Frankly, the fact Cregan Stark continued to march despite his king being a hostage is shocking.

How is it a stretch? That's like saying Sansa's life being spared is a stretch. I think the killing of prisoners, especially of royal blood, is something that Westeros hasn't normalized. It was a huge shocking act when the Mountain did it. Mind you, I'm not going to dispute this any further. You either believe the Maesters can write down Rhaenyra as a usurper sometime after the death of the monarch or you don't. I never underestimate the ability of Westeros' people to learn the wrong lesson.

Hell, it doesn't even matter because he is the closest male relative of Aegon II, which is part of why Aegon II was assassinated. His own followers viewed Aegon III as his heir over his own daughter. It's why Aegon II threatening to send Aegon III in pieces to the "rebels" was so horrifying to them. It's also why, I suspect, Corys knew he had to act because his own children were on the block as well. As I explained it to a friend of mine, the Dance of the Dragon ends on a horrific irony: "The Blacks win because they have the only male heir remaining while the Greens lose because they have a female heir to rally behind."

1. I mean we have the fact that Rhaenyra's gender clearly played a not-inconsiderable role in the usurpation of Aegon II having any success whatsoever. Even if the show is exaggerating for dramatic effect, the fact remains that the primary reason there was a revolt in the first place is because half of them revolted against their rightful sovereign over issues of male over female inheritance. 2. I think George, even then, knew what he was doing. Part of what is clear in the various interpretations of the Dance is that it remains an incredibly controversial period of Westeros history. However, while the "Blacks win" that doesn't detract from the fact it was a Pyrrhic victory for everyone involved. As we know from Stannis (even if he's exaggerating), Rhaenyra's reputation was horrifically blackened post-Dance and no one would ever write of their legitimate queen they did in the books as they do of her. 3. I should point out that Master Glyndan's histories are written for Robert Baratheon and his immediate heirs. Whether or not they won in the immediate era, we have the reign as it stands the test of time to measure it against. Certainly, the establishment has a vested interest in considering her a usurper.

The problem is multifold with this: * The Citadel is an institution that lasts centuries and absolutely writes down the version of history they want to. * It implies that Aegon III, literally a man suffering periods of clinical depression, will care enough to intervene. * That anyone will bring it to his attention. * That the forgiving view of Rhaenyra would be carried on by her descendants given the disaster it was for the Dance of the Dragons. This history could be what is told centuries later after reinterpretation. * That we're not reading the history as told in the Baratheon Era. But I think the best way to rebut your position @Lord Varys is the fact that we know FOR A FACT that Rhaenyra's defenders are not going to be the kind of people who eventually write the history books. Why? Because there's no way in Hell if they did get to write the history books that they would be filled with the absolute monumental amount of salacious gossip, slander, and trash talking about her that they were. We also know that at least one of her descendants, Baelor the Blessed, DID try to defend his family lineage from Mushroom's writings but that has since gone on to be semi-accepted historicla accounts in the official histories. Frankly, I think Rhaenyra's descendants would be less concerned about whether she's considered legitimate queen of Westeros than the massive amount of sexual induendo and slander against her.

It's a meaningless distinction since it's purely how the misogynist inaccurate historians of Westeros choose to record her.

I think the take on the show is that Laenor is a loving husband and good friend of Rhaenyra who loves his children. It's just a sexless marriage because he's a 5 on the Kinsey Scale. What they have works for them just fine.

It seems like an answer looking for a question. Rhaenyra won the war but the sexism of the Westeros culture marks her as a usurper. They thus pretend that Aegon III became king because he was the next male relative of Aegon II even though it was because Cregan Stark took the country.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next episode is any indication that Viserys KNOWS that Otto attempted to blacken Rhaenyra's reputation and this will be what results in him being fired as Hand.

https://deadline.com/2022/09/house-of-the-dragon-week-3-ratings-hbo-16-million-plus-viewers-1235110494/ Episode 3 brought in SIXTEEN million viewers. Thankfully, our previous error has been corrected, but they are definitely still releasing numbers.

I'm hoping Season 3 allows the show to breathe and organic relationships to emerge between the actors on srceen. The show is trying so hard to go through the timeline that we don't have time to do any casual worldbuilding or humor. Which can be written in next season and the seasons after that.

The first time they wrote an anti-Green book, would be the first time the Hightowers of Oldtown would dump them in a bag of rats in the bay. The Hightowers remain the rulers of Oldtown at the end of the Dance.

Ironically, the Dance of the Dragons will include many many uses of the Smallfolk and all of them will show them as utter scum.

Like I said, it'd be very strange if the Maesters of Oldtown wrote anything positive about the Blacks. Edit: Actually, Fire and Blood seems a LOT more favorable to Rhaenyra than The World of Ice and Fire and BOTH seem a lot more favorable than Stannis' take on history.

Sadly, I'm blanking on this one.