Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 What did I mention wrong? Aegon was his heir by his law. See how never mentioned he chse him personally? Tell how was she involve, I am waiting. Because thi isn't a game of who should feel worse, Rhaenyra's son killer was not affected at all. You keep saying that Aegon III was Aegon's heir something that isn't in the books and you seem to not seeing what it is in the books; that Aegon felt and Aegon III became the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 You keep saying that Aegon III was Aegon's heir something that isn't in the books and you seem to not seeing what it is in the books; that Aegon felt and Aegon III became the King. By act of his law. You don't deem to get if Aegon inherited from his mother, she would count as a queen and Awgon 'a law would not stand, Daena would have been queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 By act of his law. You don't deem to get if Aegon inherited from his mother, she would count as a queen and Awgon 'a law would not stand, Daena would have been queen. Yet again where in the books it was mentioned? Because from all we know Aegon III could had made the law in order to prevent Jaehaera from ever claiming the Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Yet again where in the books it was mentioned? Because from all we know Aegon III could had made the law in order to prevent Jaehaera from ever claiming the Throne. Jaehaera is his wife, why would he need to do that? And again, this still BS, that is why Rhaenyra is no queen in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Jaehaera is his wife, why would he need to do that? And again, this still BS, that is why Rhaenyra is no queen in history. Jaehaera wasn't his wife immediately. So unless they got married in 131 he had to stop her by law from ever claiming the Throne. Funny how there is no clue from the text that Aegon III was Aegon's heir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Jaehaera wasn't his wife immediately. So unless they got married in 131 he had to stop her by law from ever claiming the Throne. Funny how there is no clue from the text that Aegon III was Aegon's heir. Funny how Rhaenyra remained not a queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Funny how Rhaenyra remained not a queen. Do you have any text proof that Aegon III was Aegon's heir. I don't think so. That said, since there are no textual proofs there is no reason to continue it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Do you have any text proof that Aegon III was Aegon's heir. I don't think so. That said, since there are no textual proofs there is no reason to continue it. By his goddamn law, he was the heir, Aegon the Young was the closest malle in the family. And if wasn't, why is it Aegon's will to remove Rhaenyra as a queen in history remained after his death? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 By his goddamn law, he was the heir, Aegon the Young was the closest malle in the family. And if wasn't, why is it Aegon's will to remove Rhaenyra as a queen in history remained after his death? I think that in order to continue we have to have some textual proofs. Do you happen to have any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I think that in order to continue we have to have some textual proofs. Do you happen to have any? I do, his law and the fact he had no male heirs at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I do, his law and the fact he had no male heirs at the end. I don't think so, if you do could you please give the quote because I seem to have missed it. I also have missed the part were the law it is clearly mentioned and which King wrote it. But please if you have the quote could you please show me where it is mentioned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I don't think so, if you do could you please give the quote because I seem to have missed it. I also have missed the part were the law it is clearly mentioned and which King wrote it. But please if you have the quote could you please show me where it is mentioned? There aren't really firmly established succession laws that we know of (GRRM has said before that he leaves them purposely vague/unclear, to mirror medieval succession.) There does seem to have been a male preference on several occasions: Rhaena was wed to her younger brother, Aegon "1.5" (as we are calling him on the forum) to settle any difficulty there Jaehaerys chose Baelon over Aemon's daughter Rhaenys, and later, Viserys was chose over Rhaenys and her children too. So there are examples of a male preference, but we have no confirmed law, nor do I think there is one because of a certain SSM (which I will edit in, if I can find it. Wish me luck searching for that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 There aren't really firmly established succession laws that we know of (GRRM has said before that he leaves them purposely vague/unclear, to mirror medieval succession.) There does seem to have been a male preference on several occasions: Rhaena was wed to her younger brother, Aegon "1.5" (as we are calling him on the forum) to settle any difficulty there Jaehaerys chose Baelon over Aemon's daughter Rhaenys, and later, Viserys was chose over Rhaenys and her children too. So there are examples of a male preference, but we have no confirmed law, nor do I think there is one because of a certain SSM (which I will edit in, if I can find it. Wish me luck searching for that) I know that. But WMarshal seems to know something more, like what the law exactly say , who made it and the fact that Aegon II chose Aegon III as his heir. Because the way I see it Aegon III could had easily created the law himself before marrying Jaehaera in order to stop her from ever claiming the throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I know that. But WMarshal seems to know something more, like what the law exactly say and who made it and the fact that Aegon II chose Aegon III as his heir. Because the way I see it Aegon III could had easily created the law himself before marrying Jaehaera in order to stop her from ever claiming the throne. It was stated in earlier description of Aegon II that he created the law, I will find the SSM, do not doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Aegon II did not name Aegon the Younger his heir, nor did Aegon II fight for an abstract concept like 'Andal law' or something like that. He wanted to regain/stay on the Iron Throne, and if all his children but Jaehaera died, she would be his heir according to Andal law. According to Andal law, a son comes before a daughter, and thus Jaehaera would technically always come before Prince Aegon the Younger - even if he had not been attainted, disinherited, and used as a hostage against the Black armies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Aegon II did not name Aegon the Younger his heir, nor did Aegon II fight for an abstract concept like 'Andal law' or something like that. He wanted to regain/stay on the Iron Throne, and if all his children but Jaehaera died, she would be his heir according to Andal law. According to Andal law, a son comes before a daughter, and thus Jaehaera would technically always come before Prince Aegon the Younger - even if he had not been attainted, disinherited, and used as a hostage against the Black armies. Tell me then, if Aegon III was the one who created the law, why is it his mother remains a traitor not a queen in history? Yes I could not find the text stating he created the law, it was his earlier discriptions that named him maker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 I know that. But WMarshal seems to know something more, like what the law exactly say , who made it and the fact that Aegon II chose Aegon III as his heir. Because the way I see it Aegon III could had easily created the law himself before marrying Jaehaera in order to stop her from ever claiming the throne. So the fact his mother remained traitor means nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Aegon II did decree that Rhaenyra never was a true queen, and this could stand because Aegon II was crowned and anointed first, and because he outlived and killed his sister, and was restored to the Iron Throne.This has nothing to do with Andal Law, really. If Stannis had taken KL for a year or so, but Joff was restored to the Iron Throne eventually, he and his historians would also consider Joff the only rightful king throughout the whole war.But this has nothing to do with his own heir, and there is no chance whatsoever that he chose Aegon the Younger. We don't know if he decreed that Jaehaera was his Heir Presumptive until he had another son, but it's very likely that he either remarried, or intended to choose another bride - perhaps another daughter of Borros Baratheon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 So the fact his mother remained traitor means nothing? No textual proof yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.