*SPOILERS* The Rogue Prince, or, a King's Brother Discussion

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Raymun invaded in 226AC, according to the officially released pages of the World Book.

Can´t totally take credit for this, but:

The girls became handmaids to Princess Rhaenyra, whilst their elder brother, Ser Harwin Strong, called Breakbones, was made a captain in the gold cloaks.

And I look at the next page and see:

The boy (named Baelon, after the king’s father) survived her only by a day, leaving king and court bereft … save perhaps for Prince Daemon, who was observed in a brothel on the Street of Silk, making drunken japes with his highborn cronies about the “heir for a day.” When word of this got back to the king (legend says that it was the whore sitting in Daemon’s lap who informed on him, but evidence suggests it was actually one of his drinking companions, a captain in the gold cloaks eager for advancement), Viserys became livid.

Coincidence?? Or somethings else, which might have been connected with a certain, terrible "accident" that occured at Harrenhal a few years later (though absolutely not the leading cause)?

[J. Stargaryen]

Of interest to the R+L=J crowd...

Depending on which source you believe, either Princess Rhaenyra or Prince Daemon (or possibly both?) asked King Viserys for permission to marry. According to Eustace, it was the former, and Viserys reminded his daughter that Daemon already had a wife.

This, of course, would provide a lesson, and motive, for Prince Rhaegar to run off and marry Lyanna Stark in secret. When you ask for something, you can be refused. But, if you just do the thing, it is done. Afterwards, if someone wants to take issue with it, the onus is on them to undo it.

“As a young boy, the Prince of Dragonstone was bookish to a fault. He was reading so early that men said Queen Rhaella must have swallowed some books and a candle whilst he was in her womb.”

- ASoS, Daenerys I (Arstan)

[Frey family reunion]

I found this bit interesting because, while at first it seems like the addled ravings of a dying man, in a Clash of Kings we learn this:

Raymun was supposed to be King Beyond the Wall approximately 150 years ago, so I suppose that could fit with Jaehaerys going to the North with half of the Court? And if it should be earlier than this was, Bael the Bard could fit that description, as the quote seems to imply that he was the King beyond the wall prior to Raymun who led the Free Folk South.

Also, interesting to see that Maester Gerardys was so highly regarded as a Maester. He seems to be particularly skilled, and that Viserys began to recover somewhat upon his arrival and appointment as Grand Maester is rather suspect. Viserys' death coinciding with Rhaenyra's labour seems rather suspicious to me, and I do believe the Greens were involved to some extent in that.

ETA: I always thought Aegon II seemed quite a poor choice for King in tPatQ. Interesting to learn that he had 2 bastard children too. Also, I thought GRRM adding in that not all Targaryens are these otherworldly beauties was nice

Or we could be dealing with an extremely embellished story told to little Targaryen kids to impress them over how brave their grandfather was. It doesn't really jive with the accounts that Maester Luwin and Old Nan give to Bran and Jon.

[The Snark of Winterfell]

I was a bit disappointed in this because I really like the Princess and the Queen.

Daemon was hardly as badass as I expected and I thought that was going to be the focus of the book. Also, there was really no action in the book.

I did find some things interesting.

The most interesting thing was that Viserys had every opportunity to change his successor from Rhaenyra after he had male children from Alicent. It is just so obvious that this would become a situation upon his death. That mistake led to the death of most the dragons in Westeros.

Also thought it was cool that dragons hatch pretty damn easily back then, you pretty much just have to put them in a crib. However, modern Westeros, it's not easy, the tragedy at Summerhall did nothing and we don't really know the cause that hatched Dany's dragons.

Also curious as to what really happened between Criston Cole and Rhaenya, but I'm pretty sure that will remain a mystery.

[Winterfell is Burning]

Also, some thoughts:

• The Greens looked like the "villains" earlier, but this makes them look a lot more sympathetic; they had the law (the Great Council) on their side, plus Rhaenyra was trying to sneak her bastards as heirs of the Iron Throne;
  
• Also, it's understandable why they wouldn't want Daemon as King and likely defacto ruler;
  
• Meanwhile, while she was in a hard situation,Rhaenyra was an idiot. Have three bastards with a guy that looks nothing like your husband or you, what could possibly go wrong? Even Cersei had the sense of having sex with a man that looks like her;
  
• For someone known as the Old King, Jaehaerys...wasn't that old.
  

I think that's a bit unfair. It seems like the actual realm was well-governed during his reign, an extension of his grandfather's 55 years of peace and prosperity. Really, a man born the day Jaehaerys I took the throne could live to 80 and see his great-grandchildren raised in a time of peace, from what we've seen; that's probably the single-best period in the history of the Seven Kingdoms.

Not really. It's like saying Robert had nothing to do with the War of the Five Kings. Plus, he seemingly took even less interest in actually ruling the realm as Robert. The peace clearly had a lot more to do with dragons than anything he actually did.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Also, some thoughts:

• The Greens looked like the "villains" earlier, but this makes them look a lot more sympathetic; they had the law (the Great Council) on their side, plus Rhaenyra was trying to sneak her bastards as heirs of the Iron Throne;

• Also, it's understandable why they wouldn't want Daemon as King and likely defacto ruler;

Meanwhile, while she was in a hard situation,Rhaenyra was an idiot. Have three bastards with a guy that looks nothing like your husband or you, what could possibly go wrong? Even Cersei had the sense of having sex with a man that looks like her;

For someone known as the Old King, Jaehaerys...wasn't that old.

Not really. It's like saying Robert had nothing to do with the War of the Five Kings. Plus, he seemingly took even less interest in actually ruling the realm as Robert. The peace clearly had a lot more to do with dragons than anything he actually did.

How could Rhaenyra have known that none of her three Strong children would look like her? :p

The Greens did not have the law on their side. What one king does, another king can undo. Viserys specifically made Rhaenyra his heir, and kept her his heir after the birth of three healthy sons. He acknowledged Rhaenyra's three sons, and openly told Jace that he'd one day sit the throne. The final will of Viserys is the law here, and the final will states that Rhaenyra is the heir, not Aegon II.

[stunningsteve]

Laena Velaryon is 22 in 115, 27 at her death in 120, and 12 when Viserys's Council discusses her as a candidate for Queen. Laenor is 20 in 114, and GRRM has said that Laena was a year older than Laenor. All of this puts Laena's birth in 93 (and Laenor's birth in 94). For the math to work out correctly, Laena must have had a very early birthday---she died at the very beginning of (three days into) 120 AC, and was already 27 years old. (For her to have been 27 going on 28 in 120, she would have been 12 years old in 104, which makes no sense.)

I point this out because Laena's birth year could shed some light on a number of relevant political developments. Rhaenys was passed over for Baelon in 92 AC. For Laena to have an early birthday in 93 AC, her conception must have occurred in 92 AC. We're told that Viserys and Aemma "had been married for a decade" upon his ascension to the throne in 103 AC, which puts their marriage in or around 93 AC. We've never been told why Jaehaerys passed over Rhaenys for Baelon, but the timing issues here could indicate that the answer lies in Rhaenys's marriage to Lord Corlys. If King Jaehaerys wanted Baelon (and Baelon's line) to succeed him, Rhaenys's senior-line claim was politically problematic. The obvious answer to that would have been to have Rhaenys marry Baelon's heir, Viserys. Given the tight timetable of Rhaenys's disinheriting/Laena's conception and birth/Viserys's marriage, my guess is that Jaehaerys ordered Rhaenys and Viserys to become engaged, but in 92 AC, Rhaenys ran off to marry the dashing Lord Corlys instead, and that's what precipitated King Jaehaerys to pass over Rhaenys for Baelon. Aemma Arryn would have been Plan B for Viserys once Rhaenys was out of the picture.

Also, this means that the marriage discussions after Aemma's death were taking place in 105, not 106 (given Laena's stated age during those discussions). That means Alicent was 18 in 105 and 15 in 102. Since Alicent was 15 when reading to the senile King Jaehaerys, that means he was losing his wits by 102. The Great Council was in 101. So either Jaehaerys's senility came on extremely quickly, or Jaehaerys probably wasn't the primary driving force behind the calling of the Great Council (in the sense that it was done under his authority, but probably at the instigation of others.)

Aemma died late in 105 and Laena just turned twelve when the marriage discussions took place (propably very early 106 because some time of mourning is mentioned) therefore she was born late in 93 and consequently Laenor late in 94. That eases your timetable and I agree that the best solution in 92 would have been to wed Rhaenys to Viserys if neither of them was already betrothed. Aemon propably was at least in his mid- or late-thirties and had not fathered a male heir so there must have been some kind of back-up plan.

[Winterfell is Burning]

How could Rhaenyra have known that none of her three Strong children would look like her? :P

The Greens did not have the law on their side. What one king does, another king can undo. Viserys specifically made Rhaenyra his heir, and kept her his heir after the birth of three healthy sons. He acknowledged Rhaenyra's three sons, and openly told Jace that he'd one day sit the throne. The final will of Viserys is the law here, and the final will states that Rhaenyra is the heir, not Aegon II.

Common sense indicates that could have happened. Specially after she had one, and then had two, and they didn't look like her. Just stupid.

But the Grand Council says otherwise, Viserys was deliberately ignoring it. If the King can just ignore it entirely, then what's the point?

[Colonel Green]

Or we could be dealing with an extremely embellished story told to little Targaryen kids to impress them over how brave their grandfather was.

Except that Gyldayn makes no comment on this, suggesting that this story corresponds with the historical record.

Coincidence??

I think so. If the captain was Harwin, Gyldayn would have said as much.

But the Grand Council says otherwise, Viserys was deliberately ignoring it. If the King can just ignore it entirely, then what's the point?

The Grand Council was a consultative process to choose Jaehaerys' heir (seemingly at a time when the king was in poor health). They chose Viserys. Once Viserys became king, he was free to do whatever he wanted in choosing his own heir. The king decides succession law. Moreover, it's not stated anywhere that the Council actually made a grand pronouncement on men vs. women, merely that they chose a man over a woman. Even if they had, the current king makes the rules.

If you want to ask anyone, ask Ser Otto Hightower himself, who demanded that Rhaenyra be named heir in the first place, when Daemon should, if you believe the Grand Council was the immoveable law on the matter, have been the heir to the throne.

[Barty]

Yes but unlike Cersei's bastards, these children still had claims to the royal bloodline through their mother who was the rightful Queen. As soon as she sat the throne, it would have been possible to legitimise them, or continue the pretext that they were legitimate - unless one or both parents declared otherwise its unlikely that it could be argued otherwise. What's more, she also had legitimate children by Daemon with even greater ties to the Royal Bloodline. The Green's Rebellion had nothing at all to do with the illegitimacy of her children the way I have read it, and everything to do with a power grab by Alicent and a (somewhat understandable) desire to prevent Daemon from gaining the Throne. Do you truly believe that if Rhaenyra's sons were legitimate the Greens would not have tried to claim the Throne?

On another note, someone mentioned Mushroom possibly dying during the Dance. It appears otherwise, as during the Princess and the Queen he is seen making a comment (something about rats and a bull in Flea Bottom) on the dreadful night when the Dragonpit is stormed by the commons. So he remained at court during the control of both the Greens and the Blacks...interesting. From a comment made in a Clash of Kings by Ser Dontos (..."I believe Moon Boy has been his [Varys] for years") I am now inclined to believe that Mushroom could have passed on information to one side or the other. Afterall, a fool is just a fool, who cares what they hear right? And we also have Bloodraven's dwarves in the Mystery Knight as another nod

The Greens probably would still have tried to take the throne but my comment was more from my own POV. I now support the Greens because a Black victory means that a bastard would soon sit the IT

[Ran]

Remember that Gyldayne's history covers the reigns of many Targaryen kings, and that his narrative of Viserys's last days would have come after his already having written about Jaehaerys's reign. The lack of comment on that detail can mean he's just reporting a detail that conforms to the historical record that he already recounted... or it's a colorful detail about Viserys that's colorful precisely because it shows him telling tall tales to his grandkids.

Barty,

The kids aren't bastards. Their father Laenor acknowledged them, their mother acknowledges them, their grandfather acknowledges. The only people who deny their legitimacy are people who have no actual evidence to the contrary. There's not even any absolute evidence in that text to let us know otherwise. We have an extremely strong suspicion, yes, but that's hardly proof. :)

They're legitimate heirs to the Iron Throne.

[Anath]

Remember that Gyldayne's history covers the reigns of many Targaryen kings, and that his narrative of Viserys's last days would have come after his already having written about Jaehaerys's reign. The lack of comment on that detail can mean he's just reporting a detail that conforms to the historical record that he already recounted... or it's a colorful detail about Viserys that's colorful precisely because it shows him telling tall tales to his grandkids.

Barty,

The kids aren't bastards. Their father Laenor acknowledged them, their mother acknowledges them, their grandfather acknowledges. The only people who deny their legitimacy are people who have no actual evidence to the contrary. There's not even any absolute evidence in that text to let us know otherwise. We have an extremely strong suspicion, yes, but that's hardly proof. :)

They're legitimate heirs to the Iron Throne.

This. Plus, I don't see the Greens actually pressing for the undoubtedly trueborn children of Viserys' chosen heir - Rhaenyra's younger sons. They only cared for their own ambitions.

Plus, who it was that they wanted to make heirs? Aegon's own oldest children. The malformed one and the lackwit, remember?

I was one of the first posters who suggested that Jaehaera had developmental delays. This story only seems to confirm it.

Between the able-bodied and able-minded "bastards" (who were not such in the legitimate sense of the word since Laenor wasn't a cuckold who had no idea what was going on) and the defected children Aegon and Helaena had, I don't think it's such a bad thing to root for the "bastards".

Lord Varys, I did get the impression that Viserys treated Alicent and her children as second-class citizens. In fact, it quite annoyed me. He wanted to have his cake and eat it, too, it seems. The fact that he proclaimed Rhaenyra his heir (when her mother was already dead and he was expected to remarry and produce a son) and then married Alicent makes it seem like she was only treated like a glorious concubine, with her future sons excluded from the succession for a girl doesn't make me think he saw her as esteemed queen. More like a lovely plaything he was attached to but it'd better know it wasn't entitled to any expectations!

Alicent doesn't look as stupid here as she did in tPatQ. I do believe she seduced Daemon when she and her father believed he was her ticket to power. Viserys might not have ever thought of putting his wife aside (in fact, it looked quite said to me when he claimed he believed she'd give him an heir), but I don't think anyone else believed there would be a male child from this marriage.

[AzureOwl]

Not really. It's like saying Robert had nothing to do with the War of the Five Kings. Plus, he seemingly took even less interest in actually ruling the realm as Robert. The peace clearly had a lot more to do with dragons than anything he actually did.

As far as the smallfolk (and everyone in Westeros who isn't a student of history) are concerned that will be the case.

We know that Robert was a shitty king that left all the work to Jon Arryn, but that smallfolk won't know or care. They'll just remember that back when King Robert ruled, the realm only had one war and the summers were long. They won't know about the debt until the Crown runs out of credit and starts raising the taxes to pay the debts, and then they'll blame whoever is sitting on the Iron Throne at the time, or they'll blame the War of the Five Kings.

Viserys I was remembered as a good king for the same reason that Robert will... the same reason Presidents today get blamed when the economy goes to shit during their terms even if the fiscal or economic mess was their predecessor's doing... because people always blame the guys who is holding the bag when the fecal matter hits the fan, not the guy who threw it.

[Barty]

Remember that Gyldayne's history covers the reigns of many Targaryen kings, and that his narrative of Viserys's last days would have come after his already having written about Jaehaerys's reign. The lack of comment on that detail can mean he's just reporting a detail that conforms to the historical record that he already recounted... or it's a colorful detail about Viserys that's colorful precisely because it shows him telling tall tales to his grandkids.

Barty,

The kids aren't bastards. Their father Laenor acknowledged them, their mother acknowledges them, their grandfather acknowledges. The only people who deny their legitimacy are people who have no actual evidence to the contrary. There's not even any absolute evidence in that text to let us know otherwise. We have an extremely strong suspicion, yes, but that's hardly proof. :)

They're legitimate heirs to the Iron Throne.

IMO a bastard is not someone who is acknowledged as one(or who can be proved as one) but rather someone who's father and mother were not married. Its strongly hinted that this is the case for Jace, Luke and Joff. Can I prove it - no. Does that mean they are not bastards?? Maybe in the eyes of the law they aren't but in the eyes of the reader they most definitely are.

[HexMachina]

The Greens probably would still have tried to take the throne but my comment was more from my own POV. I now support the Greens because a Black victory means that a bastard would soon sit the IT

But are they really bastards that aren't entitled to sit the Throne? They were acknowledged as the children of Laenor and Rhaenyra by both parents AND King Viserys I despite rumours to the contrary. If neither parent accepts they are illegitimate, then the father has not been cuckolded. Whats more, Viserys continued to treat them as the heirs of his own heir Rhaenyra, and it appears he fully expected (and indeed wanted) Jacerys to sit the Iron Throne. They therefore had a legitimate claim to the Throne because of the King at the time, who made his will clear by his refusal to change the line of succession

Also, somebody said that the Old King wasn't old...I tend to think of over 90 as pretty old, especially when he had ruled since age 14

[Barty]

Except that Gyldayn makes no comment on this, suggesting that this story corresponds with the historical record.

I think so. If the captain was Harwin, Gyldayn would have said as much.

The Grand Council was a consultative process to choose Jaehaerys' heir (seemingly at a time when the king was in poor health). They chose Viserys. Once Viserys became king, he was free to do whatever he wanted in choosing his own heir. The king decides succession law. Moreover, it's not stated anywhere that the Council actually made a grand pronouncement on men vs. women, merely that they chose a man over a woman. Even if they had, the current king makes the rules.

If you want to ask anyone, ask Ser Otto Hightower himself, who demanded that Rhaenyra be named heir in the first place, when Daemon should, if you believe the Grand Council was the immoveable law on the matter, have been the heir to the throne.

The Grand council didnt just choose the new King, they also made a law to prevent future succession crisis. Its ironic that the very King they chose ignored their law and it led to a huge succession crisis.

[Barty]

But are they really bastards that aren't entitled to sit the Throne? They were acknowledged as the children of Laenor and Rhaenyra by both parents AND King Viserys I despite rumours to the contrary. If neither parent accepts they are illegitimate, then the father has not been cuckolded. Whats more, Viserys continued to treat them as the heirs of his own heir Rhaenyra, and it appears he fully expected (and indeed wanted) Jacerys to sit the Iron Throne. They therefore had a legitimate claim to the Throne because of the King at the time, who made his will clear by his refusal to change the line of succession

Also, somebody said that the Old King wasn't old...I tend to think of over 90 as pretty old, especially when he had ruled since age 14

Like I said. Legally it cannot be proven they are bastards - hence they are legit. However as readers we know(seriously - its pretty obvious) that their father is not Laenor. So from the reader's POV the Greens are justified.

[Colonel Green]

Also, somebody said that the Old King wasn't old...I tend to think of over 90 as pretty old, especially when he had ruled since age 14

He wasn't over 90, he was 69. Though that's pretty old by Medieval standards. For a comparison, among the English monarchs of the Middle Ages it was unusual to live past your mid-50s. The longest-lived in that period was Edward I (the Longshanks), who lived to be 68.

they also made a law to prevent future succession crisis.

No, it was a "precedent", as the story terms it, and the king has his choice of whether to follow it or not. Again, ask Ser Otto, who encouraged Viserys to revise it and name Rhaenyra heir over Daemon.

[Barty]

@Ran - can you confirm which wildling invasion Viserys was talking about??

[HexMachina]

He wasn't over 90, he was 69. Though that's pretty old by Medieval standards. For a comparison, among the English monarchs of the Middle Ages it was unusual to live past your mid-50s. The longest-lived in that period was Edward I (the Longshanks), who lived to be 68.

My bad, anyone would think I had read this book months ago, not hours :lol: Its still an old.age by those standards, and an exceptionally long rule