Canon Claude

Honestly, I think this was one of the most glaring problems when it came to the Dance. It makes no sense to me that the bloodiest day of the war killed 2,000 men, half of which were apparently Northmen.

Going back to the original question, I always thought it was strange too that none of the lords considered that Aegon would be a man full grown and might enjoy finally getting a taste of power. Steller was right, I just re-read that part of the book and it really seems like the only people who weren't being short-sighted were Thaddeus Rowan, Torrhen Manderly, and Tyland Lannister. There's no stories of any of the regents trying to have a one-on-one with the boy, no mention of Unwin Peake even bothering to ingratiate himself to the boy and deciding that Aegon's a pushover, nothing like that at all. Especially after he got Viserys back, you'd think there would be some kind of incentive to try and get on Aegon's good side before he came of age, because if you want to stay in King's Landing, you'll need the king's approval.

I agree, she probably knew nothing. It’s the Tower of Joy, not the Tower of Living-with-my-baby-daddy-in-isolation-while-trying-to-repress-memories-of-my-deceased-family-and-friends-who-are-all-dying-to-save-me-except-the-one-I’ll-emotionally-blackmail-to-ruin-his-reputation-for-my-sake.

Targaryen= Rhaenyra Baratheon= Rogar Arryn= Jon Stark= Cregan Lannister= Jaime Tully= Brynden Tyrell= Loras Martell= Oberyn Greyjoy= Euron

Honestly, I buy most of what he says. GRRM has long established that just because he writes things doesn’t make them true, since his world’s history is being retold by biased and subjective characters. Yandel is kissing the butt of the Baratheons and even Gyldayn is a biased character, given how he offers his own opinions on the conflicting sources. So sure, Mushroom is probably a salacious liar, but he is also playing a role similar to Tyrion in the main story. He’s present for all these big events and isn’t fettered by courtly manners or a private agenda. He was regarded as a harmless fool, and therefore he heard and saw a lot that others wouldn’t have access to. That said, I don’t buy all that he says. I don’t believe that Princess Rhaenyra and Daemon used him as a guinea pig to teach Rhaenyra how to be good at sex. But I do believe that Aegon II was a sexual deviant who became a voyeur after he couldn’t get it up anymore. I also buy his view that Cregan Stark was half mad when planning a new stage of the war and was thwarted by the widows and Black Aly. The idea that Rhaenyra pimped our Alicent and Helaena is less likely, meanwhile.

Sorry, but Viserys can't be worse than Maegor, Aenys, Aerys II, or Aerys I.

Misogyny or no, she definitely relied on dark magic (which actually exists in this world). Maegor's recovery from his coma is implied to have been done with magic, since he seems cursed after he wakes up with demon children and an even bloodier streak than he once had before his coma. Plus, Visenya manages to keep Aenys alive when nobody else can? In a world where half the characters know magic of some kind, it's not misogynist to suggest that Visenya was a sorceress. It's an equal opportunity situation with people like Thoros of Myr, Moqorro, the sorcerer who castrated Varys, etc.

To quote Ned Stark, "You're speaking of murdering a child..."

Goddamn, you really hate Aegon III don't you? And it's not like a typical rant from an obvious douchebag, I've interacted with you loads of times on this site, and you're not a troll or a shock jock. This just really seems to anger you. It's kind of baffling.

The Starks have shorter lifespans than other Great Houses (apart from the Baratheons, methinks). They have many more reasons to die than, say, the Tyrells or the Lannisters.

Why would Daemon and Corlys war against the Iron Throne? Corlys was literally the only person in Westeros who counted Daemon as a friend, any attempt to fight would have led to disaster. And besides, who would they be trying to put on the Iron Throne? Daemon? Rhaenys? Would House Velaryon take over? Nobody would support that. This isn't like the Dance of the Dragons, it's two rogue dragons and a substantial fleet against the multiple united dragons of House Targaryen's main branch. The fighting wouldn't touch most of Westeros in that scenario.

Not that I wanted Aegon the Younger to die (far from it, I've always been a supporter of the blacks) but from the greens' perspective, why the hell did they keep him alive? Even if they don't have the heart to execute a child, why not geld him send him in chains to the Wall? Sure, the North is pro-black, but what are they going to do with a boy who's lost the ability to produce heirs? Sure, Cregan Stark would have gone to any length to avenge the insult, but it would be a futile gesture resulting in a lot of Northmen dying for no reason. And before people argue that Aegon II needed an heir, he had one; Jaehaera. And we have no proof whether Aegon would have been able to produce more heirs, he was certainly planning to do so before he was killed. Even before Larys Strong and Corlys Velaryon began the conspiracy against him, Aegon II had every opportunity to feed Aegon to Sunfyre along with his mother. Granted, you'd have to do the same to Baela and Rhaella, and that would have resulted in the Velaryons taking revenge, but what are they going to do? Depose Aegon? This wasn't Robert's Rebellion, nobody wanted the Targaryen kings to be overthrown. With the death of Aegon the Younger, Aegon III would have won his war the instant that the blacks' family line ends. There is, of course, the matter of Viserys, but we can assume that if Aegon II won, the Rogare family would have executed Viserys for a price. Given how unpopular they became, I can only imagine that any attempt to back an invasion of Westeros with Viserys at its head would have resulted in Westeros uniting against a foreign power and claim that Viserys was an imposter.

I've been giving this idea some thought, and frankly, the only solution I can think of which solves the issue of succession without any bloodshed is if Rhaenyra and Aegon II got married like Alicent suggested and crowned joint rulers a la Mary and William III of England. Rhaenyra would have to deal with a pretty bad husband, given what we know about him, but as long as they were marked equal rulers, there'd be no need for the Dance of Dragons to occur. The second-closest situation I can think of is that Rhaenyra and her family happen to be in King's Landing when Viserys dies, but I figure that would devolve into violence too, since Rhaenyra would be in the grips of childbirth, so plotters might still try to capture her or perform a brutal coup which wipes out her family in one fell swoop. Nobody would be able to fight the greens if Rhaenyra's whole branch dies.

Personally, I think the Brothel Queens story is calumny but Rhaenyra was definitely vindictive. Her reign on the Iron Throne was filled with beheadings and accusations of treason. If she'd had the chance, she would have definitely done something cruel to Alicent. I can only assume that she kept Alicent alive as a hostage for leverage (for all the good that did her anyway), or else she wanted Alicent to live long enough to see her enemy rule as Queen.

It's clear that House Peake fell into deep disfavour with the Iron Throne after Unwin. The Peakes supported the Blackfyres at least twice, they rebelled against King Maekar. Really, it's a miracle that they're still around in the SOIAF books. They should have been attainted and replaced a long time ago.