Green Stag

2. Agree that Rhaena’s daughter is a possibility, and she would be “second best” to unite Aegon III and Aegon IV lines. There “has to be” more to the Jena marriage then just being from a Stormland house. (I believe you and I discussed this elsewhere) 4. With the number of daughters Rhaena Hightower had, a Redwyne marriage is definitely possible, particularly given their proximity to each other. Seems a very reasonable explanation

1. The reason given for Genna Lannister and Emmon Frey is that her father was weak and easily swayed. Everyone, except maybe the Freys, appear to believe this a bad match 2. Jena Dondarrion is a strange choice on the surface, some speculate she is a cousin somehow, maybe a descendant of Rhaena Targaryen. No evidence at all, but my thought is she may be the daughter of Daena Targaryen. 3. Daemon Blackfyre was still a bastard when Aegon IV arranged the marriage to Rohanne of Tyrosh, is doesn't appear to have been a love / lust match. No idea on this one. 4. Daeron Targaryen and Olenna Redwyne: The Redwynes seem to be fairly powerful and prestigious; however I would think with betrothals to Baratheon, Tyrell and Tully that a North or Vale marriage would be more advantageous, but I could be wrong.

I agree, it seems there has to be something more to Jena Dondarrion's background to make her a good match for Baelor, more powerful houses exist in both the Reach and stormlands. The simplest explanation is that she has Targaryen blood, but from whom? I think some of the "blanks" may be a mixture of not being sure what he wants to do, as you say, and not wanting to give away a likely plot twist - the Frey family tree is almost fully complete, for example, with Stevron's oldest son Ryman's wife being a glaring exception that I think may come into play.

Agreed, on both counts, an infant would almost certainly have been passed over for Baelor, however some 10 years later might have been considered. My thought is if the hypothetical child existed (and I don’t think any did), it seems there would have been mention of a claim, the same way Daena’s rights were mentioned

Bottom line up front: 1. Yes, an official successor for Baelor should have been named. 2. No, I don't think Baelor necessarily wanted any of his sisters to take the throne after him. 3. I think that it is possible, given Baelor's questionable mental status Viserys may have tried to avoid having him name an heir; and it may have been for selfish reasons to become king himself. 4. I don't think Daeron I had any children; and I think if he did they would have been mentioned as possible candidates for succession, the same way Daena was. Again I think a clear heir SHOULD have been appointed given the trouble with succession only a generation before, I stated this earlier, and again I also stated the Viserys was the obvious choice for successor. I don't see how saying Baelor being insane is a cop - out (locking up your sisters so you aren't "tempted" isn't in any way normal behavior) and I'm not trying to state that he wished Daena to succeed him; if he did for some reason want her to be his successor, a very poor job was done of preparing her, and he certainly would have withdrawn any support after she was found to be with child. I DO think that with some of Baelor's odd behavior, Viserys and the rest of the small council may have not wanted him to officially appoint an heir, for fear that the chosen successor may have been completely inappropriate and perhaps without any Targaryen blood, thus potentially creating a crisis where none needed to occur (as you say, Baelor seems to have been fairly popular, at least in some circles, so even a completely terrible named heir may have received some support). I also believe that unless Baelor otherwise attempted to appoint someone else, if he remained childless (which seems certain, given his behaviors (I think we agree on this)), the throne would go to Viserys. Again from the Wiki: According to Archmaester Gyldayn, in the eyes of many, the council of 101 AC established an iron precedent on matters of succession: that the Iron Throne could not pass to a woman, or to a male descendant of a woman. (The above is referenced from The World of Ice and Fire) Also note that Aegon III succeeded Aegon II over Jaeheara, again supporting the idea that a male successor was preferred. As you say, this is not binding, however a declaration by the king of an heir may not be binding either, if it was then the Dance never would have occurred. And again, Viserys may have guided him away from naming an heir, be it for selfish reasons so that he could try and become king, or concerns over Baelor's sanity and the choices he might make if he officially appointed someone. Now, back to the original question: Is it definitely true that Daeron I had no issue?: Again, we cannot say for certain. However my original argument was that after Baelor's death, Daena was considered by some to be a candidate for the throne and the rightful heir - it seems reasonable (to me), that if Daeron I had legitimate offspring (that was still living), they would likely have been mentioned as potential candidates for the IT. That they already had been passed over might not have mattered - Rhaenys Targaryen was considered a viable candidate at the Council of 101, as were her two children, in spite of her being passed over previously. Lack of evidence is in no way proof, however if Daeron had a child (that was living at least), I think the mention of Daena's claim vs that of Viserys would have been another likely place to mention it. It is very early here, I apologize for any rambling. Do have a good day.

And my point is he isn't exactly mentally stable from the beginning of his reign. And the imprisonment of his sisters had to do with him controlling his lust and avoiding sin, there is nothing to indicate he thought they may or may not be fit to rule. Again, Maekar did not name an heir, and obviously should have. Nor did he apparently prepare anyone / have an heir apparent. Daena being queen has nothing to do with her claim to the throne, and she was set aside and did not serve / act as queen in any case. Rightly or wrongly after Viserys I being named heir it seems that only male heirs were considered (unless specifically named otherwise), so if no other action was taken the throne would likely go to Viserys II after Baelor. If Baelor named and prepared Aegon IV or Daeron II, I don't think there would have been much or any resistance. I kind of like Renly, but agree with that statement. If he was just a little smarter (and perhaps a little less arrogant) he probably could have taken the Iron Throne fairly easily. I think that the Estermonts are cousins from Lyonel Baratheon's daughter, but that is a totally separate issue. That is all true, but I assume most of those people aren't feudal monarchs nor heads/owners of international companies. Such people do have to name heirs, the very system they live in demands that. It is all a matter degree. If you own a house and 5 acres of land, you still have property to switch to someone else, etc. Even if you don't have that, decisions about things like life support, tube feedings, etc may need to be talked about as well. In my experience, about half of people will remain in denial and not want to talk about these things until they absolutely half to, and sometimes not even then. No, they are prominent because while most of the nobility of Westeros lost all their money with the collapse of the Rogare Bank, they did not. Furthermore, they founded their own Bank, putting them in a position to either be very helpful or a big pain in the ass, depending on how they felt about various other families. The ones who did the squandering were gone by then. Sam Tarly was in change and she knew what she was doing. Agreed. They Hightowers took a big hit after the Dance, but they were probably the de facto rulers / power in the Reach both before and after the Dance, even without Otto and Alicent. They kept their fortune after the collapse of the Rogare bank, and then established the Bank of Oldtown. They made peace / friends with Alyn Velaryon. They seem to have done well at holding on to their power in spite of being hurt by events of the Dance. While they were Lord Paramount, I believe the Tyrell's strength is relatively recently recent, occurring after the failed Peake uprising and the marriage to the Redwynes.

We may have to agree to disagree. Again, Baelor SHOULD have named an heir, but this is a man who locked all three of his sisters away (near the beginning of his reign) so that he and other men wouldn't be tempted by them, a more rational / practical king would never had done such a thing, and would have made marriage alliances to strengthen the Iron Throne. And yes, Renly had yet to take the throne, however he was marching off to war, the idea that he was in no danger of being killed would have been foolish. Additionally, he still needs to be concerned with the stormlands and Storm's End. While it may be that he has no other kin with Baratheon blood, we have no proof of that - it is plausible that Lyonel Baratheon's daughter wed and had children, possibly second cousins to Renly. Now if Renly is unsuccessful there is no guarantee that his appointed heir to Storm's End will get it, but it is worth the effort. It could also have been a bargaining chip as he was building alliances / support for his bid for the throne. Edmure Tully is at war as well, and while he is only newly a lord before the Red Wedding, it is fairly obvious early on that Lord Hoster Tully is dying. Yes, Caitlin would be heir presumptive, and Rob would then inherit from her, however Rob is now King as well as Lord of Winterfell, Bran and Rickon are allegedly dead and Sansa and Arya allegedly prisoners of the Joffrey Baratheon - there should be some of the same concerns about Riverrun as there are about Robb's heir and preventing the Lannisters from seizing it through Sansa. And if it is alright for Edmure not to name an heir because Caitlin is heir presumptive, why is it any different for Baelor when Viserys would be heir presumptive by convention at that time? I work in hospital medicine, people put off discussions about death / dying all of the time, some are very religious, some not. But believe me, some people will just not talk about it or make necessary decisions even when death is right in front of them.

I don't disagree that Baelor SHOULD have appointed an heir, and perhaps he did, but a number of Kings / Lords out there were not as responsible as those you mention: Renly never named an heir. Edmure Tully either. Tywin tells Tyrion he cannot have Casterly Rock, but never bothers to appoint someone else heir (or otherwise ready someone to take over, it seems), nor does he bother to outright disinherit him. On the Targaryen side Maekar should have named an heir given the death of his two oldest sons (nor did they seem fit to rule in any case), a simple granddaughter and an infant grandson named for a tyrant. My point is largely that while Baelor was popular in many ways, it also seems clear that he was (or gradually became) crazy, and often seems to left the majority of duties to Viserys. The Court and Viserys himself may have wished to avoid him officially appointing an heir as he may picked a stable boy, based on his choices for High Septon. Was Viserys the obvious choice to become king? Yes.

I agree, it was very helpful in the healing process, additionally, IIRC the Hightowers weren’t hit by the Rogare banking collapse and kept their wealth, making them an even more useful ally. I think one of her children ended up as Lady Hightower, marrying her cousin, as the Hightowers later seem to have Targaryen traits; so she still made out pretty well - She also was unconcerned about her first husband being a second son, so might not have thought anything about Garmund being a younger son.

Per the Wiki (which I acknowledge isn't necessarily cannon), Daena was considered for the throne - she had few supporters at court because she was locked away in the Maiden Vault. She was Aegon III's oldest living offspring after all, and had a legitimate claim However, if Daeron had a daughter (that was still alive), she would have been about 9 years old, her family could have (and probably would have) pushed for some of her rights / recognition, and would like-wise try and form an alliance to maybe get her on the throne. Baelor also raised a stone mason, then a street urchin to the position of High Septon (again, per the Wiki), if he HAD ruled on his succession and appointed an heir, it seems it may have been an equally outrageous choice, and not necessarily been Viserys

Don't forget that it wasn't that long after Daeron's death there was another brief succession crisis - Baelor had no offspring, and Daena and Viserys were both candidates for the throne. IF Daeron I had any legitimate offspring, they would have been brought forth as a candidate as well. Illegitimate offspring might have been brought forth as well.

I hadn't thought of a family connection between the Redforts and Boltons, but it makes sense. I had assumed that it was perhaps a move by Roose Bolton to maybe counter some of the Stark influence in Vale, and the Stark relationship with House Royce and Arryn. Possible family connection works better, but I wonder when it would have occurred.

I believe that in part the Hightowers may have been trying to climb the new social hierarchy. Jorah should have a relatively direct line to Ned, who would have pretty direct access to both King Robert and Jon, the hand. The Hightowers are also pretty well connected in Reach: Tyrell, Rowan, Redwyne, Abrose, Florent - looking outside the Reach may have been thought to be a good idea, at least at the time

I think it is safe to say he wouldn't have been thinking that clearly by the time he started the poisoning, however he may wanted to make sure she suffered in a way he felt similar to how he was suffering - being isolated and alone. He was smart enough, however, to off the Maester, who would have been the person most likely to discover him.

Re-reading his entry in the Wiki, he kind of reminded me a bit of Samwell Tarly, the only real differences that Androw couldn't read and wasn't fat. Jon's friendship and later Maester Aemon's guidance seemed to have helped Sam, I wonder if the same could have been done for Androw at some point? As stated above, Androw did challenge his brother to duel, so he was no coward. He also tried to be there for Rhaena after the eggs were stolen and her mother became ill. The guy did try, if he had been treated with some amount of respect by Rhaena while on Dragonstone things may have been different - maybe he could have even become something of a hero like Sam did? While I don't disagree with Rhaena's PTSD; much of Androw's treatment by everyone rested on her, if her handmaidens and others felt she had some respect for him, they likely would have as well (even if a small amount), instead it appears to have become a game for them, leading him to become increasingly isolated and likely feeling hopeless.