Does a blackfyre have more claim to the IT than Daenerys ?

[RumHam]

I agree (but I am not sure the worldbook will answer this particular question). The issue of when a female comes in line under Targ inheritance remains somewhat unclear. I think we know that after DoD 1.0, potential female heirs come after potential male heirs. But there has to be some limit, I would imagine. How far back would one have to go in the analysis? Would descendants all the way back from Aegon I be necessary before a female could inherit? I don't think DoD 1.0 answered that question. I think a new Grand Council would have to meet if such a situation arose and two people had competing claims--presumably Dany, as the last surviving Targ, and some male who inherited through a male line, for example, the son of the son of the son of the son of Aerion Brightflame. I don't know who the GC would pick, but it might be Dany on the theory that a female can inherit if no male within a certain number of generations exists to inherit, and the other claimant is just too far removed. We simply don't know the answer to this question.

Well the worldbook will presumably tell us more about the end of the Dance, and if they changed the laws of inheritance then it should probably warrant a mention. Since that would be the one of the lasting effects of the Dance.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Stannis never had the throne, so no Joffrey did not take it from him. According to the laws of Westeros both Joffrey and Tommen are the right born sons of Robert Baratheon.

Have you seen the Westeros law books to prove this statement true? I think that if it were somehow "proven" that Joffrey and Tommen were not the biological children of Robert Baratheon, they would not be accepted as king. Perhaps under modern law, you are the legal child of your mother's husband (even if not biological child). In Westeros, in terms of becoming king, I doubt that rule would apply. No one questions that if Joffrey and Tommen are not the bio-sons of Robert, that Stannis would be the rightful king. They simply refuse to accept the accusation as true.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Well the worldbook will presumably tell us more about the end of the Dance, and if they changed the laws of inheritance then it should probably warrant a mention. Since that would be the one of the lasting effects of the Dance.

It might mention that the laws were changed so that male heirs come before female heirs, but it is unlikely to go into enough detail to answer the more difficult question of how far up the chain to go to look for unbroken male lines.

[Rorey Targaryen]

At this point in time, Hodor has as much claim as Daenerys.

The Targaryens lost all legal claim to the throne when Robert Baratheon won the war of his rebellion.

Stannis was Robert's heir and some (not me) might even argue that he lost that claim by right of conquest when his forces were defeated at the Battle of Blackwater Bay (Joffrey would have been accepted as the rightful king in that instance).

If Daenerys, Stannis, Aegon or anybody else want to sit on the Iron Throne, they're going to have to claim it by right of conquest; and right now, the only one who's actively trying to do that is Aegon.

[El Guapo]

Have you seen the Westeros law books to prove this statement true? I think that if it were somehow "proven" that Joffrey and Tommen were not the biological children of Robert Baratheon, they would not be accepted as king. Perhaps under modern law, you are the legal child of your mother's husband (even if not biological child). In Westeros, in terms of becoming king, I doubt that rule would apply. No one questions that if Joffrey and Tommen are not the bio-sons of Robert, that Stannis would be the rightful king. They simply refuse to accept the accusation as true.

The very fact that they are still known as Joffrey Baratheon and Tommen Baratheon means that legally speaking they are considered Robert's true born heirs. It is really as simple as that.

[UnmaskedLurker]

The very fact that they are still known as Joffrey Baratheon and Tommen Baratheon means that legally speaking they are considered Robert's true born heirs. It is really as simple as that.

Yes, because the claims that they were not really Robert's bio-sons has not been accepted. If that fact became known and accepted, their names would change and the legitimacy of their claims to the throne would change. So you are correct that under the current circumstances in which they are accepted as the biological sons of Robert Baratheon, they are recognized as the true born heirs. But that was never really a question or matter of debate. The question is what happens if the truth becomes known. Or more to the point, given that the reader knows the truth, and taking that truth into account, how should the various claims be analyzed?

[Lord Varys]

On the succession:

Females (Rhaenys) - and males through the female line (Laenor) seem to have been already discarded by Jaehaerys I and the Great Council in 101 AC. Andal Law was already superseded by Jaehaerys when he decided that an uncle should come before a daughter (Prince Baelon over Princess Rhaenys).

Viserys I disregarded this, and named Rhaenyra his heir (because his court did not want to see Daemon on the Iron Throne).

The Dance did not change anything of that, it seems, since Rhaenyra vs. Aegon II was essentially a war if a variation of Dornish Law (firstborn child, regardless of gender) or the older Andal law (a daughter comes after a son) should stand.

The Dance was not about 'a daughter becomes before an uncle'. That was never an issue, and thus I'd be very surprised if the Dance did in fact change the laws of succession. The SSM on that is from a time long before GRRM had imagined the Jaehaerys' reign and his children in detail.

We know that the Great Council of 233 considered (and then dismissed) the claim of Daeron's lackwit daughter, so females were not formally excluded from the succession. I'd be surprised if Daena's claim was considered after the death of Baelor I. Andal law would have demanded her rise to the Iron Throne, but the fact that she had (and her sisters) had spent the last ten years is captivity would have left her without powerful followers or a party of her own. And her uncle Viserys had been Hand of the King for decades.

[joluoto2]

On the succession:

Females (Rhaenys) - and males through the female line (Laenor) seem to have been already discarded by Jaehaerys I and the Great Council in 101 AC. Andal Law was already superseded by Jaehaerys when he decided that an uncle should come before a daughter (Prince Baelon over Princess Rhaenys).

Viserys I disregarded this, and named Rhaenyra his heir (because his court did not want to see Daemon on the Iron Throne).

The Dance did not change anything of that, it seems, since Rhaenyra vs. Aegon II was essentially a war if a variation of Dornish Law (firstborn child, regardless of gender) or the older Andal law (a daughter comes after a son) should stand.

The Dance was not about 'a daughter becomes before an uncle'. That was never an issue, and thus I'd be very surprised if the Dance did in fact change the laws of succession. The SSM on that is from a time long before GRRM had imagined the Jaehaerys' reign and his children in detail.

We know that the Great Council of 233 considered (and then dismissed) the claim of Daeron's lackwit daughter, so females were not formally excluded from the succession. I'd be surprised if Daena's claim was considered after the death of Baelor I. Andal law would have demanded her rise to the Iron Throne, but the fact that she had (and her sisters) had spent the last ten years is captivity would have left her without powerful followers or a party of her own. And her uncle Viserys had been Hand of the King for decades.

I think the Dance codified some laws, since the pre- Dance succession law doesn't actually seem to exist. We know Great Councils solved the succession issues of Jahaerys I, and we know Viserys I favored his daughter to succeed him even though the Great Councils earlier had backed male claimants over females. We also have Maegor I being king, althoug Aenys had at least one son (Jahaerys I). All this indicates the Valyrian tradition had no clear law of succession, and after the Dance they decided to make the decisions of the Great Councils to actually become law.

[RumHam]

I think the Dance codified some laws, since the pre- Dance succession law doesn't actually seem to exist. We know Great Councils solved the succession issues of Jahaerys I, and we know Viserys I favored his daughter to succeed him even though the Great Councils earlier had backed male claimants over females. We also have Maegor I being king, althoug Aenys had at least one son (Jahaerys I). All this indicates the Valyrian tradition had no clear law of succession, and after the Dance they decided to make the decisions of the Great Councils to actually become law.

I think what all that indicates is that a legal right to inherit will only take you so far. It's possible that after the Dance some laws were changed or codified, but that hasn't been indicated in the books yet. Just that SSM.

[David Selig]

For the trillionth time, a right is completely different from a claim. Daenerys has a claim to the Iron Throne as she is the only (confirmed) heir of the previous ruling House. She does not have a right to the throne, and arguably, no one else does either.

This should be stated in a sticky thread on this board.

[The Bittersteel]

No, they both have good claims although is anything Daenerys' is superior. Succession laws do change with circumstance they're not set in stone.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

The Blackfyres were disinherited as traitors so no. If however there is a male heir with Blackfyre and Targaryen blood then yes.

After all from what we have seen it is possible that Dany has no claim at all.

[Wmarshal]

How where they disherited? According to them, the laws of the falseborn is un true, so no matter who's ass sits on the throne they our usurpers

[Jon's Queen Consort]

How where they disherited? According to them, the laws of the falseborn is own true, so no matter who's ass sits on the throne they our usurpers

Good point.

[Mal Malenkirk]

Frankly, neither Daenerys nor any Blackfyre/Aegon has 'rights' to the throne. Wars were fought and lost, new statu quos were established and that's that.

The current king is Tommen. You don't agree? Kill him and get yourself crowned. Manufacture whatever half-assed claim you want afterward. Aegon conquered the seven kingdoms because he was strong enough to do it, not because it was owed to him. Centuries later, a coalition of nobles did the same to Aerys and crowned Robert. Now somebody else will likely do it to Tommen. It's all the same.

[Nictarion]

How where they disherited?

Because they lost. Twice.

[Wmarshal]

So by your logic, Dany is claimless.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Frankly, neither Daenerys nor any Blackfyre/Aegon has 'rights' to the throne. Wars were fought and lost, new statu quos were established and that's that.

True. The Targs lost the throne so basically none of them have any claim and they will have to take the throne by conquest.

[Foibles]

At this point, as screwed up as Westeros has become, I doubt claim has very much to do with who would get the throne. Ultimately it's in the hands of the other lords to decide who they feel best to follow and if it came down to a 3 or 4 way war between the Lannisters, AEgon, Dany, and possibly Stannis the one iwth the best "claim" to support will be the one with the best army... or dragons.

[Wmarshal]

I agree with conquest is needed, but if a claim is to be for anyone, blackfyres have rights.