Why does history refer to Rhaenyra Targaryen as a "traitor" and "usurper"?

[Emie]

One of the things that always saddened me was that Rhaenyra could have been the first true female monarch of Westeros, but of course that never came to be. And also, I was always annoyed with how her brother and and step-mother and everyone in the greens called her a "traitor" even though they knew she was the rightful heir! But what also bothers me is that even in the present day series, people like Stannis Baratheon call her a "usurper" of her time, but again that makes no sense. King Viserys I officially made her his heir and he never had that changed. So why did these people call her these things when she was just fighting for what was rightfully hers? She was her father's heir! She was SUPPOSE to be the next ruler but people still treat her like a treasonous monster. The Greens were the real traitors and usurpers and I've always find it funny when Aegon II sentences her to death for being a traitor to him without realizing that was exactly what HE was doing! 

[Aedam Targaryen]

History is always written by the winners. She is called a traitor and usurper because she lost. That's really all there is to it. 

[Lurid Jester]

5 minutes ago, Aedam Targaryen said:

History is always written by the winners. She is called a traitor and usurper because she lost. That's really all there is to it. 

Definitely wouldn't be a good idea for actual usurper King to call themselves that.  

"Now rise for His Grace, the Usurper King who killed the Rightful Queen and claimed Her Throne!"

[Ser Endipitous]

Well, lets start with the fact that she was a pretty abysmal person (about as bad as Aegon II). She supported murdering her rival's children, she ordered the assassination of some of her most loyal subjects without any good reason and her half year rule over King's Landing was utter tyranny. She was called Maegor with teats for a reason! She also failed to do a very good job of maintaining a royal persona considering her first three sons are obviously bastards.

I wouldn't say she was the rightful heir. Sure Viserys wanted her to follow him, but the outcome of the Great Council of 101 (which made him king!) directly contradicted him. The lords made vows to acknowledge Rhaenyra as heir BEFORE Aegon was born, which would invalidate her claim according to traditional Westerosi succession.

 

[Aedam Targaryen]

41 minutes ago, Lurid Jester said:

"Now rise for His Grace, the Usurper King who killed the Rightful Queen and claimed Her Throne!"

Ha! Good point! 

Although, now that I'm seeing it written out, it sounds kind of badass. Haha!

[Lurid Jester]

1 minute ago, Aedam Targaryen said:

Ha! Good point! 

Although, now that I'm seeing it written out, it sounds kind of badass. Haha!

Would definitely have to be someone who wasn't concerned about the grudges of her loyalists. 

His reign would still probably end with a dagger in the dark. 

[NanoScream]

1 hour ago, Ser Endipitous said:

Well, lets start with the fact that she was a pretty abysmal person (about as bad as Aegon II). She supported murdering her rival's children, she ordered the assassination of some of her most loyal subjects without any good reason and her half year rule over King's Landing was utter tyranny. She was called Maegor with teats for a reason! She also failed to do a very good job of maintaining a royal persona considering her first three sons are obviously bastards.

I wouldn't say she was the rightful heir. Sure Viserys wanted her to follow him, but the outcome of the Great Council of 101 (which made him king!) directly contradicted him. The lords made vows to acknowledge Rhaenyra as heir BEFORE Aegon was born, which would invalidate her claim according to traditional Westerosi succession.

 

The traditional Westerosi Succession didn't involve the Targaryens though. It was after the Dance of Dragons that the Targaryens and Lords of Westeros decided that Targaryen heirs to the throne will no longer be women, but before that Targaryen women were allowed to be heirs to the throne. And if Viserys I wanted Aegon II to be his heir he would have changed it as he was still alive but no matter what he wanted Rhaenyra to be his heir. And it was Aegon's mother and the small council who decided to appoint Aegon II.

And namely Prince Daemon was the one who demanded the death of one of Queen Heleana's children, which was Prince Jaehaerys, not Queen Rhaenyra. And not to mention that the deaths Rhaenyra ordered were people who betrayed her and her father's order. I would honestly have done the same.

You can't say they were "obviously bastards" mainly because you are the reader and in terms of the story they are seen as Ser Laenor's true children. And unlike the War of the Five Kings the parentage of Rhaenyra's children were not called into question like Robert's children.

 

Edit:

I also forgot to mention that after Aegon II's death Rhaenyra's Aegon, Aegon III, was proclaimed King. So technically Rhaenyra's side won so then why is she still considered a traitor?

[Trigger Warning]

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason"  

[RagnarokKing]

52 minutes ago, NanoScream said:

The traditional Westerosi Succession didn't involve the Targaryens though. It was after the Dance of Dragons that the Targaryens and Lords of Westeros decided that Targaryen heirs to the throne will no longer be women, but before that Targaryen women were allowed to be heirs to the throne. And if Viserys I wanted Aegon II to be his heir he would have changed it as he was still alive but no matter what he wanted Rhaenyra to be his heir. And it was Aegon's mother and the small council who decided to appoint Aegon II.

And namely Prince Daemon was the one who demanded the death of one of Queen Heleana's children, which was Prince Jaehaerys, not Queen Rhaenyra. And not to mention that the deaths Rhaenyra ordered were people who betrayed her and her father's order. I would honestly have done the same.

You can't say they were "obviously bastards" mainly because you are the reader and in terms of the story they are seen as Ser Laenor's true children. And unlike the War of the Five Kings the parentage of Rhaenyra's children were not called into question like Robert's children.

 

Edit:

I also forgot to mention that after Aegon II's death Rhaenyra's Aegon, Aegon III, was proclaimed King. So technically Rhaenyra's side won so then why is she still considered a traitor?

I'm sorry but your wrong. The precedent that the Iron Throne was to pass to males only was establish from the Great Council of 101 AC.

FROM THE HISTORY OF ARCHMAESTER GYLDAYN In the eyes of many, the Great Council of 101 AC thereby established an iron precedent on matters of succession: regardless of seniority, the Iron Throne of Westeros could not pass to a woman, nor through a woman to her male descendents. -The World of Ice & Fire

It was this council that put Viserys on the throne and the very precedent he was flouting when he kept Rhaenyra as his heir after he continued to have sons.

As to the bastardy of Rhaenyra's sons, I do not recall that as one of the justifications for defying Viserys' will. However, it seems that it was something that was obvious to just about everyone considering they looked like Strongs, and people kept pointing that out until Viserys threatened to have the tongue out of anyone who brought it up.

As to Aegon III, he was in the unique position of being the heir of either side.  The oldest living child of his mother, and the nearest male-line Targaryen from Aegon II, because he was the son of Daemon.  Make no mistake neither side won the Dance of the Dragon's, house Targaryen just lost.

As to why Rhaenyra was considered a traitor, its simply because it flouted the convention of male-preference of Westeros and the precedent of male-only as established at the Great Council of 101 AD. However, I can only recall Stannis referring to Rhaenyra as a traitor, and considering he is a stickler for laws and conventions, he might not be the best person on which* to base general preception of the people of Westeros.

[Protagoras]

Also remember that the dance basically ended with a compromize and a peace - after Aegon IIs death, Aegon III drew his claim from both sides (but was seen as the "black" candidate). I think it would have been hard for the greens to accept a denouncement of Aegon II too. And if he was king, Rhaenyra wasn´t.

[Maxxine]

2 hours ago, Ser Endipitous said:

Well, lets start with the fact that she was a pretty abysmal person (about as bad as Aegon II). She supported murdering her rival's children, she ordered the assassination of some of her most loyal subjects without any good reason and her half year rule over King's Landing was utter tyranny. She was called Maegor with teats for a reason! She also failed to do a very good job of maintaining a royal persona considering her first three sons are obviously bastards.

I wouldn't say she was the rightful heir. Sure Viserys wanted her to follow him, but the outcome of the Great Council of 101 (which made him king!) directly contradicted him. The lords made vows to acknowledge Rhaenyra as heir BEFORE Aegon was born, which would invalidate her claim according to traditional Westerosi succession.

 

 

 

In her defense it seems like she was decent before her father died and the Greens tried to usurp her. By the end she was just so paranoid she went crazy (think Cersei).

And the Great Council doesn't mean anything. Viserys was king and can change the law and that's what he did when he named Rhaenyra heir. The fact that Aegon was born later doesn't change anything especially considering the fact that Viserys went out of his way to maintain Rhaenyra was heir after Aegon was born. Even Aegon didn't really think he should have been King. His mom and Criston Cole had to talk him into it iirc.

 

 

To the OP It's really just a product of Rhaenyra losing the war. The winner writes history. True at the end there was a compromise where technically the Blacks got the throne but Aegon II decreed she be a traitor first and Aegon III apparently didn't go out of his way to change the history, which is odd considering how short of a period there was between the two

 

 

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

She was the Realm's Delight and she was meant to sit the throne her whole life. She and Daemon would have really done an amazing job imo

You can't judge her leadership of KL during the dance of dragons like yeah KL was a complete shit hole. It's not her fault... I'm not saying you can't judge her leadership in general bc obviously that's the time to judge ones leadership but the city was in shambles and had no routine or system in place way before the realm's delight got took KL

[Emie]

Exactly Maxxine, the king has the final say, not the council. And I agree with the others, it's wrong to judge her when the war was a shitty thing to start in her first place. If she had just been allowed to rule in the first place without anyone being an asshole to her and try to stop her, she could have been a great ruler. We will sadly never know since as others have said, the world of Ice and Fire is deeply misoygynist, and the idea of women ruling, is not something they like. It's like they still can't get it through their heads that women are human beings too. However, I do like the idea that her son became Aegon III. So in a way, the blacks won in the end. 

[Eden-Mackenzie]

4 hours ago, Maxxine said:

To the OP It's really just a product of Rhaenyra losing the war. The winner writes history. True at the end there was a compromise where technically the Blacks got the throne but Aegon II decreed she be a traitor first and Aegon III apparently didn't go out of his way to change the history, which is odd considering how short of a period there was between the two

I think part of the issue with Aegon III was because he didn't really win the war, he didnt come into the throne as the victor. He also had a pretty terrible war experience, and didn't really seem to ever bounce back from it. If I remember correctly, he was pretty despondent/listless as a ruler, he probably didn't have it in him to pick a fight, even if it was over his mother's honor. 

Also, because he succeeded as Aegon II's heir, maybe he didn't want to cause any doubts regarding II's legitimacy? Yes, he also would have been his mother's heir, but she was never the anointed ruler, so if Aegon II was declared to be not the king, there was a possibility of another Great Council to determine who should ascend, and after the issues caused by Rhaenyra and Aegon, the council could have decided to go with another branch of the family altogether. 

[PCK]

Because Aegon II won and to him, she was a traitor.

[shockwave]

she was only a traitor according to some maesters, who write the history books.

also women were never officially removed from the succession. Baelor's sisters were passed over because the small council wanted to + sexism.

[Duranaparthur]

The biggest reason to ignore all the stuff that really should justify her time as Queen is that it was too much of a hassle to keep disputing a question that seemed to have arrived at compromise regardless; thousands have died so that male-only inheritance is practiced for the Iron Throne, and thousands have died to see Rhaenyra's line take it. Both arguments have been settled by the will of the gods, so that's that.

Though I'd say the reasons that sealed the deal against recognizing her Queenship are political and geographical. The three main regions that backed the Greens and fed the "Male-Only" argument are the three around the Crownlands, and traditionally contain the most money (Westerlands), the most people (The Reach), and the strongest tradition of arts and communication (the Reach again). All those major powers are right on the doorstep of the Crownlands and they spent so much time trumpeting a misogynistic clause to remove females almost entirely from the line of succession for the Iron Throne, even beyond the Andal traditions. 

And Rhaenyra lost the propaganda war among the common folk. The maesters seem aware that Aegon II seemed less competent, motivated, and skilled than his sister, but he's not the one automatically compared to Maegor, and people seem hesitant to point out in-universe his place a kinslayer several times over. Ironically, this all kind of paints Rhaenyra as being everything Cersei believes herself to be; a woman raised to be her father's heir, forced to bring forth bastard children for a "good" cause, and beset on all sides by antagonists external and internal, all while struggling with the misogynistic nature of Westeros and having to fight for her children. But comparing the two demonstrates that Rhaenyra appears to have been a better daughter, better wife, better mother, and better leader than Cersei could ever hope to be.

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

2 hours ago, Duranaparthur said:

The biggest reason to ignore all the stuff that really should justify her time as Queen is that it was too much of a hassle to keep disputing a question that seemed to have arrived at compromise regardless; thousands have died so that male-only inheritance is practiced for the Iron Throne, and thousands have died to see Rhaenyra's line take it. Both arguments have been settled by the will of the gods, so that's that.

Though I'd say the reasons that sealed the deal against recognizing her Queenship are political and geographical. The three main regions that backed the Greens and fed the "Male-Only" argument are the three around the Crownlands, and traditionally contain the most money (Westerlands), the most people (The Reach), and the strongest tradition of arts and communication (the Reach again). All those major powers are right on the doorstep of the Crownlands and they spent so much time trumpeting a misogynistic clause to remove females almost entirely from the line of succession for the Iron Throne, even beyond the Andal traditions. 

And Rhaenyra lost the propaganda war among the common folk. The maesters seem aware that Aegon II seemed less competent, motivated, and skilled than his sister, but he's not the one automatically compared to Maegor, and people seem hesitant to point out in-universe his place a kinslayer several times over. Ironically, this all kind of paints Rhaenyra as being everything Cersei believes herself to be; a woman raised to be her father's heir, forced to bring forth bastard children for a "good" cause, and beset on all sides by antagonists external and internal, all while struggling with the misogynistic nature of Westeros and having to fight for her children. But comparing the two demonstrates that Rhaenyra appears to have been a better daughter, better wife, better mother, and better leader than Cersei could ever hope to be.

I don't think so. Daemon had many friends high and low and the Realms Delight..... Come on the greens were lame. Screw Aemond  

[SerBronnsMullet]

I never really understood this because the Blacks actually won the war as a result of the Battle of the Kingsroad. You figure Aegon III would recognize his mom as the legitimate heir. It's true that he was also Aegon II's heir by Green succession logic but recognizing him as the legitimate king would highlight the fact that Aegon III only got the throne through dastardly murder.

[Thuckey]

Why does history refer to Eddard Stark as a treasonous traitor - Even though it's because of him the damn Lannisters and Baratheons even rule in the first place?