R + L = J v. 126

[Ygrain]

While I agree with your reasoning why Aerys would have wanted Viserys his heir (plus also, an emotional part, Viserys being the favourite son), I don't think that the part about considering alternatives is fully valid - by murdering Aerys, Jaime basically turned over the board and knocked down all the pieces, making the normal rules void. Hence, for lack of a better word, "the right of conquest" to name a new king. Thinking of Viserys first may indicate that Viserys was a new heir, but it might also indicate that in a situation without rules, his age makes him a better candidate than a baby.

[Kingmonkey]

Jaime is known as (the) Kingslayer because he was Aerys's sworn shield, hence the taboo. For example, take this passage from TWoIaF:

Aegon could hardly be considered a cruel and unjust king, unless you're the servant who changes him perhaps. Gregor's action certainly counts as foul murder too.

Stepping out of my devil's advocate boots for a moment, I agree it's not the strongest point (don't tell anyone!) but it would have made a powerful insult for Oberyn to hurl at Gregor.

[Mithras]

This quote makes the "Usurper's Dogs" BS of Dany look even more pathetic.

[J. Stargaryen]

This quote makes the "Usurper's Dogs" BS of Dany look even more pathetic.

That's what happens when you're taught everything you know by Viserys.

[Kingmonkey]

While I agree with your reasoning why Aerys would have wanted Viserys his heir (plus also, an emotional part, Viserys being the favourite son), I don't think that the part about considering alternatives is fully valid - by murdering Aerys, Jaime basically turned over the board and knocked down all the pieces, making the normal rules void. Hence, for lack of a better word, "the right of conquest" to name a new king. Thinking of Viserys first may indicate that Viserys was a new heir, but it might also indicate that in a situation without rules, his age makes him a better candidate than a baby.

I can't claim it's conclusive, but it's certainly valid. Look at it step by step:

He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar's infant son Aegon, still in Maegor's with his mother.

His first thought is of the boy Viserys, secondly his mind turns to Aegon. The natural course would be to think of the heir before the alternatives - right of conquest is why the alternatives can even be considered.

A new Targaryen king, and my father as Hand. How the wolves will howl, and the storm lord choke with rage.

Whether that new Targaryen king is 1 or 7, Tywin as hand will effectively rule the Seven Kingdoms. From the Lannister viewpoint, Aegon's age makes him the better candidate. At seven, Viserys is totally inappropriate to rule, but he's already been shaped by his father, while Aegon is yet to be shaped. A younger heir means a longer regency, and more control for the Lannisters. From the Lannister viewpoint, Aegon is the better choice, yet the one Jaime considers second.

For a moment he was tempted, until he glanced down again at the body on the floor, in its spreading pool of blood. His blood is in both of them, he thought.

"Both of them". Aegon's no son of Aerys, but he still has Aerys' blood. Aegon might seem the better choice, but Jaime's then reminded that like Viserys, Aegon is also Aerys' blood. Again, this implies Jaime's thought had moved on from the obvious but inferior to the less obvious but superior choice, before seeing a reason to dismiss both.

It's not the only possible reading of this passage, but it certainly works very well.

[Ygrain]

Re: Gregor not being called kingslayer: that would require knowing who died first. I doubt that people kept track, or were particularly interested to know, which atrocity of the Sack preceded which.

Also, as JS pointed out, Jaime killed the king to whom he was sworn, that's still different.

[Ygrain]

I can't claim it's conclusive, but it's certainly valid. Look at it step by step:

He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar's infant son Aegon, still in Maegor's with his mother.

His first thought is of the boy Viserys, secondly his mind turns to Aegon. The natural course would be to think of the heir before the alternatives - right of conquest is why the alternatives can even be considered.

A new Targaryen king, and my father as Hand. How the wolves will howl, and the storm lord choke with rage.

Whether that new Targaryen king is 1 or 7, Tywin as hand will effectively rule the Seven Kingdoms. From the Lannister viewpoint, Aegon's age makes him the better candidate. At seven, Viserys is totally inappropriate to rule, but he's already been shaped by his father, while Aegon is yet to be shaped. A younger heir means a longer regency, and more control for the Lannisters. From the Lannister viewpoint, Aegon is the better choice, yet the one Jaime considers second.

For a moment he was tempted, until he glanced down again at the body on the floor, in its spreading pool of blood. His blood is in both of them, he thought.

"Both of them". Aegon's no son of Aerys, but he still has Aerys' blood. Aegon might seem the better choice, but Jaime's then reminded that like Viserys, Aegon is also Aerys' blood. Again, this implies Jaime's thought had moved on from the obvious but inferior to the less obvious but superior choice, before seeing a reason to dismiss both.

It's not the only possible reading of this passage, but it certainly works very well.

I'm not saying the reasoning doesn't work, I'm just pointing out a different line of thinking.

Also, while a baby king means longer regency, there is a huge risk of the baby dying of some children's disease. In this respect, Viserys is a safer option.

[Mithras]

That's what happens when you're taught everything you know by Viserys.

True but Dany is also in a position to know better than that. She saw what a waste of a man Viserys was. Barristan tried to break the ice but Dany shut him down every time. I think by now it should be clear that Dany does not have a taste for the bitter truth.

[J. Stargaryen]

True but Dany is also in a position to know better than that. She saw what a waste of a man Viserys was. Barristan tried to break the ice but Dany shut him down every time. I think by now it should be clear that Dany does not have a taste for the bitter truth.

She would not like to hear that, because it's true. ;)

[Kingmonkey]

I'm not saying the reasoning doesn't work, I'm just pointing out a different line of thinking.

Ah fair enough, and entirely agreed -- after all, what I'm putting forwards here is the one that counts as the different line of thinking really, it's quite intentionally going against the grain. Even playing devil's advocate, I wouldn't claim any of it is conclusive. My aim is to see if it can be at least as valid an explanation of what have we as the current no-Viserys alternative, rather than trying to overturn anything definitively. That's GRRM's job. ;)

[Sanset]

True but Dany is also in a position to know better than that. She saw what a waste of a man Viserys was. Barristan tried to break the ice but Dany shut him down every time. I think by now it should be clear that Dany does not have a taste for the bitter truth.

Someone could say to Dany: You know nothing Daenerys Targaryen! These two sweet soulmates are not only a perfect parallel: They may have a lesson to learn together. The Undying Ones dixit.

[Ygrain]

Ah fair enough, and entirely agreed -- after all, what I'm putting forwards here is the one that counts as the different line of thinking really, it's quite intentionally going against the grain. Even playing devil's advocate, I wouldn't claim any of it is conclusive. My aim is to see if it can be at least as valid an explanation of what have we as the current no-Viserys alternative, rather than trying to overturn anything definitively. That's GRRM's job. ;)

Yes, I acknowledge that it is plausible. I just think that whether Viserys was proclaimed heir or not, it bears little consequence on the ToJ showdown if the KG didn't know about it, and even if they did, Jon still wasn't out of the equation because Aerys was unaware of his existence and claim when he jumped Aegon's claim and it would be perfectly legit for the KG to perceive Jon as the rightful heir.

[Mithras]

Someone could say to Dany: You know nothing Daenerys Targaryen! These two sweet soulmates are not only a perfect parallel: They may have a lesson to learn together. The Undying Ones dixit.

Dany already has an answer to that:

“I am the blood of the dragon. Do not presume to teach me lessons.”

[Kingmonkey]

Yes, I acknowledge that it is plausible. I just think that whether Viserys was proclaimed heir or not, it bears little consequence on the ToJ showdown if the KG didn't know about it, and even if they did, Jon still wasn't out of the equation because Aerys was unaware of his existence and claim when he jumped Aegon's claim and it would be perfectly legit for the KG to perceive Jon as the rightful heir.

I think that's a really good way to look at it. I suspect that a lot of the protect vs. obey differences rather fade away when you consider the idea that under any circumstances the succession simply isn't transparently clear, and the 3KG aren't necessarily Aerys' besties.

However for the sake of the Viserys-as-heir exercise I've got something written up for part 3 which covers the ToJ with Viserys as heir, which I'll post some time later on in the thread. I'll be very interested to know what you think of it, because I suspect you'll either loathe it with a passion or find it curiously acceptable, and I have no idea which. :D

[Ygrain]

I think that's a really good way to look at it. I suspect that a lot of the protect vs. obey differences rather fade away when you consider the idea that under any circumstances the succession simply isn't transparently clear, and the 3KG aren't necessarily Aerys' besties.

However for the sake of the Viserys-as-heir exercise I've got something written up for part 3 which covers the ToJ with Viserys as heir, which I'll post some time later on in the thread. I'll be very interested to know what you think of it, because I suspect you'll either loathe it with a passion or find it curiously acceptable, and I have no idea which. :D

Alright, I'm game :D

Something to chew on meanwhile:

The streets of King’s Landing were dark and deserted. The rain had driven everyone under their roofs. It beat down on Ned’s head, warm as blood and relentless as old guilts. Fat drops of water ran down his face.

Now, what old guilts are those?

The paragraph that immediately follows is the one where Lyanna is expressing her doubts about Robert and Ned defends him:

“Robert will never keep to one bed,” Lyanna had told him at Winterfell, on the night long ago when their father had promised her hand to the young Lord of Storm’s End. “I hear he has gotten a child on some girl in the Vale.” Ned had held the babe in his arms; he could scarcely deny her, nor would he lie to his sister, but he had assured her that what Robert did before their betrothal was of no matter, that he was a good man and true who would love her with all his heart. Lyanna had only smiled. “Love is sweet, dearest Ned, but it cannot change a man’s nature.”

He goes on thinking about the visit to the brothel and musing about Robert, coming back to Lyanna and the promises:

“Tell him that when you see him, milord, as it … as it please you. Tell him how beautiful she is.”

“I will,” Ned had promised her. That was his curse. Robert would swear undying love and forget them before evenfall, but Ned Stark kept his vows. He thought of the promises he’d made Lyanna as she lay dying, and the price he’d paid to keep them.

Then he talks with LF about Robert's bastards and the final thought is:

For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not.

IMHO, this whole bit, the visit to the brothel, the talk about bastards and the reminiscences of Lyanna, is Ned finally acknowledging that Lyanna was right about Robert and he was wrong, and the guilt(s) pertain to pressuring Lyanna into the marriage with Robert and thus indirectly being responsible for her rebelling and choosing Rhaegar, who, in terms of marital fidelity, would have been a better husband to her than Robert.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Aerys died before Aegon.

Doesn't the World Book state that Aerys was the last to die?

[Consigliere]

<snip>

<snip>

Nice work.

The world book suggests (or my interpretation at least) that Viserys only became the new heir post Trident. In ASoS, Jaime mentions that Aerys was convinced that Lewyn and the Dornish betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident and this idea is further reinforced in the world book. So I think it very likely that Aerys adopted a "screw these Dornishmen" attitude and named Viserys heir.

I still remain unconvinced that this decision was widely disseminated and therefore common knowledge. The way I see it is that the decision was taken at the small council (Jaime may have been present as well being the only KG in KL at the time) and thereafter Viserys and Rhaella were sent to DS for their own protection. I find it highly unlikely that priority was given to sending Ravens to all corners of Westeros with this proclamation in the middle of a war and after the loyalists have just suffered a huge defeat on the Trident.

Attending to the defences of KL at that point was more important. The loyalists would still be in a decent position if they could successfully reorganise the remnants of the army from the Trident and importantly they still had The Reach on their side. I think that Aerys would still believe that he could put down the Rebellion and thereafter make it 'official' that Viserys was his new heir. The Sack of KL was not something could have been predicted.

Therefore it is my belief that this was not known outside of the small council and as such does not change anything when it comes to the ToJ.

[Consigliere]

Doesn't the World Book state that Aerys was the last to die?

There is this line in Storm after Jaime kills Aerys:

"Targaryen loyalists were still dying on the serpentine steps and in the armory, Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch were scaling the walls of Maegor's Holdfast, and Ned Stark was leading his northmen through the King's Gate even then, but Crakehall could not have known that."

This suggests that Aerys died first. Since Jaime cannot be in two places at once there is reason to doubt whether this can be taken as fact or merely Jaime's assumption. As you say, this is contradicted in the world book. The only thing we can say for certain is that Aerys, Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon's deaths where in close proximity.

[BearQueen87]

Any chance the RLJ threads could not turn into a place to bash Dany? Just on the off chance that some of the regulars here like her (hi) and don't want to get dragged into that muck? There are plenty of places on the Gen Forum for that.

There is this line in Storm after Jaime kills Aerys:

"Targaryen loyalists were still dying on the serpentine steps and in the armory, Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch were scaling the walls of Maegor's Holdfast, and Ned Stark was leading his northmen through the King's Gate even then, but Crakehall could not have known that."

This suggests that Aerys died first. Since Jaime cannot be in two places at once there is reason to doubt whether this can be taken as fact or merely Jaime's assumption. As you say, this is contradicted in the world book. The only thing we can say for certain is that Aerys, Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon's deaths where in close proximity.

Very close proximity, I'd say. Tywin probably dispatched Lorch as soon as they were inside the castle.

[Jon Weirgaryen]

Any chance the RLJ threads could not turn into a place to bash Dany? Just on the off chance that some of the regulars here like her (hi) and don't want to get dragged into that muck? There are plenty of places on the Gen Forum for that.

Most regulars here do not bash on Dany, nor do I. Why in the world...