Rheanyra I?

[Lord Annaly]

Aegon II enacted "salic law" that is "no girls allowed".

By doing so Rhaenyra had no claim, so didn't her "Velaryon" brood, Aegon and Viserys had because of Daemon. If Jace was alive when Aegon II died, the greens wouldn't recognize him as heir, but Aegon the Younger.

As the Greens would recon it, the line of succession went like this before the Dance broke out...

- Viscerys I

- Aegon II (Viscerys' eldest son)

- Jaehaerys (Aegon II's eldest son)

- Maelor (Aegon II's younger son)

- Aemond (Viscerys' next eldest son)

- Daeron (Viscerys' youngest son)

- Daemon (Viscerys I's younger brother)

- Aegon III (Daemon's eldest son)

- Viscerys II (Daemon's younger son)

While Aegon III and Viscerys II are in the line of succession, their mother is not. It is only by virtue of their father Prince Daemon that they are in-line for the throne. Not only could Rhaenyra not inherit the throne herself, the line of succession didn't continue through her directly, and thus did not include the Jacaerys, Lucerys, and Joffrey Velaryon - even if they were trueborn (which they probably weren't based on their physical description).

This does not appear to be the norm for lordly succession in the non-Dornish Kingdoms, where a daughter of a dead lord is favored before that lord's younger brother (though not before the younger sons of the dead lord). But the precedents set before the Dance to determine Old King Jaehaerys successor determined to adhere to a strict "no ladies, and no going through ladies" rule, at least as long as there were ANY trueborn male + male-line claimants.

The Blacks didn't necessarily favor a different system of succession, only that the decree of the king (and the resulting oaths of fealty) superceeded the default.

And so both of you are maintaining that Daenerys Targaryen has no claim and is an illegal claimant based on her Targaryen blood? She can only claim the Throne by conquest and not by blood rights.

And yet everyone seems to see her as having the right to it, even Robert saw her being in the Line of Succession because it was her potential son who would have a strong claim despite being from the female line.

Post-Dance when it came to the succession after Maekar it would seem that Princess Vaella was one of four claimants fully considered by the Great Council was discounted only because of mental deficiencies and not due to being a female (who could pass the crown to her son).

I don't think that it was strict Salic Law that was observed but like most inheritance issues it was only in that current climate. If anything it is a "semi-salic" succession...females cannot rule but their line maintains her place in the succession.

So Aegon III had a stronger claim via his mother than via his father.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I think you are thinking of Joffrey (Rhaenyra's youngest by her first husband... or not) who died at the Dragon Pit. Maelor does appear to have died, but there's no reference to when or how.

Joffrey fell to his death. Maelor was torn apart by a mob. That's only in the World Book, not in TPATQ. The section on the reign of Aegon II.

[glamourweaver]

And so both of you are maintaining that Daenerys Targaryen has no claim and is an illegal claimant based on her Targaryen blood? She can only claim the Throne by conquest and not by blood rights.

I was stating the position taken by the Greens and the Council of 101, not some objective truth. Bringing Dragons into the world makes Dany a truer Targaryen heir than centuries old patriarchal legalese bs ever could. That said, they might recognize her claim on the grounds that there were no known male-line Targaryen claimants (as of the conclusion of Game of Thrones).

The history of the succession of the throne has been more salic than Andal norms, just look at Viscerys II inheriting the throne from Baelor over any of Aegon III's daughters.

But the reality of ruling-succession is that all this legalese is always a performance. Royal inheritance law is generally defined retroactively in order to justify whoever was able to build the political coalition (or armed force) necessary to take it.

[SeanF]

But the reality of ruling-succession is that all this legalese is always a performance. Royal inheritance law is generally defined retroactively in order to justify whoever was able to build the political coalition (or armed force) necessary to take it.

That's the nub of it. Aegon VI (if genuine) has a claim to the Iron Throne. Daenerys has a claim to the Iron Throne. Stannis has a claim to the Iron Throne. Jon, if he is who we think he is, has a claim to the Iron Throne.

But, it comes down to cold steel and dragonfire in the end.

[Lord Annaly]

That's the nub of it. Aegon VI (if genuine) has a claim to the Iron Throne. Daenerys has a claim to the Iron Throne. Stannis has a claim to the Iron Throne. Jon, if he is who we think he is, has a claim to the Iron Throne.

But, it comes down to cold steel and dragonfire in the end.

Might Makes Right...always has and always will.

Talk of succession whether a royal crown, a lordly seat or a miller's mill is often moot if someone can cow or bribe others into supporting him.

As I said in another thread, once you have to look beyond the sons and their sons you are starting to get into trouble as everyone has their own beliefs on what makes the best claim, a daughter (or her line), an uncle (or his line) or an aunt's line. Each has their own merit depending on what the PTB decide is the "right" of it...usually whichever lines their own pocket best!!

Academically we can debate who is the next in line but on the ground there are so many variables it means nothing.

We can talk about who is the Head of House Targaryen but for the moment it is a complete waste of time since a female (aunt) has the dragons. If either or both of the other claimants get a dragon then it changes but does not mean that the eldest son with a dragon gets to be the Lord of that House because either of the two remaining claimants may have more support, bigger armies and again you may have a different result of who actually ends up as Lord or House Targaryen.

[drhenry]

I think the best answer is that the Dance of the Dragons is regarded as the worst war in the history of the seven kingdoms and to avoid another dispute over succession and another horrible ware placed female claimants behind all other possible male ones. Aegon III and Viserys II understanding that for this rule to take affect their mother had to be removed from the succession. If I remember correctly in a DwD Jon tells a Karstark that a daughter comes before an Uncle which is no doubt the law every where else but because many lords will feel it dishonorable to serve beneath a woman as their Queen to avoid war they placed uncles before daughters as seen with Daena the defiant and Viserys II.

[Pod The Rod]

It's something I've never understood either.

The closest thing to an explanation I can think of is that Rhaenyra was the first to die, and therefore Aegon II ruled undisputed for a short time at least.

[Lord Varys]

It should essentially be two things:

1. Aegon II was crowned and anointed first, and sat the Iron Throne from the very day Viserys I was proclaimed to be dead.

2. Aegon II outlived Rhaenyra and was restored to the Iron Throne after her demise.

Princes Aegon and Viserys - the elder sons of Aenys I who would have come before Maegor - aren't considered to be 'true kings' either (despite that at least Prince Aegon put forth his claim), nor does Jaehaerys I count his reign from the moment his brother Viserys died in 44 AC.

If we would compare Aegon II/Rhaenyra to Joffrey/Stannis in a scenario in which Stannis takes KL, and Joff successfully evades capture and is restored later after Stannis' death, I'd say the historians would also not consider Stannis a true king, as he would simply have usurped the throne for a time while the true king still lived.

Had Rhaenyra captured and executed Aegon II - only to be killed later in the war - she would have been considered a true Queen Regnant, I think. Even if another Green pretender had succeeded her before the rise of Aegon III.

[Bironic]

It should essentially be two things:

1. Aegon II was crowned and anointed first, and sat the Iron Throne from the very day Viserys I was proclaimed to be dead.

2. Aegon II outlived Rhaenyra and was restored to the Iron Throne after her demise.

This