Jump to content
Hiigara129

Would Rhaenyra's Velaryon sons rule as Targaryens or Velaryons?

Recommended Posts

Well, from what I see is that they would've been Targaryens because Rhaenyra Targaryen would be the Queen basically so they would be Targs the only difference is that Aegon III and Viserys II would not be included in the succession.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2018 at 7:50 PM, King Jon Targaryen I said:

Well, from what I see is that they would've been Targaryens because Rhaenyra Targaryen would be the Queen basically so they would be Targs the only difference is that Aegon III and Viserys II would not be included in the succession.  

Why not ? The claim is through their mother's Targaryen linage , not who their fathers were. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is likely that whichever son had ascended to the throne would have done so as a Targaryen, as their claim to the throne came from their Targaryen mother, and the Targaryen ancestry of their legal father's mother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting question. Haven't thought a lot about this. But perhaps they rule as Targaryen's because what if her heirs from Daemon die out and then House Targaryen is gone? But given some houses have had their female lines rename their children to reflect their original family to keep the name around I can see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were born as Velaryons and they died as Velaryons. I don't doubt they would have also ruled as Velaryons. The name of the mother is fine and good, but there is a reason why you take the name of your father in this world. And it is not that the Velaryons were not worthy to sit the Iron Throne. Since Corlys Velaryon they are as famous as the Targaryens themselves, and they do have their blood. 

If they were born Strongs or Plumms or Penroses they might have seriously considered changing their names, but there was nothing wrong with the name Velaryon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I’d say Targaryen as it is through her claim they (most likely Jacaerys) are getting the throne. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most likely the Velaryons would have kept their name. And if Rhaenyra's brood had not been decimated by the war, I'm kind of wondering how long it would be before a new war erupted? This time between dragon-riding Velaryons and Targaryens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LionoftheWest said:

Most likely the Velaryons would have kept their name. And if Rhaenyra's brood had not been decimated by the war, I'm kind of wondering how long it would be before a new war erupted? This time between dragon-riding Velaryons and Targaryens.

From what we know about them, they got along very well.

But then, five sons many, and could have given Rhaenyra a lot of grandchildren. The incest and kin marriages would have tied many branches together but not necessarily all of them.

And the youngest sons usually do not expect or aspire to rule. That makes it increasingly unlikely that Joffrey, Aegon, or Viserys had made any attempt to challenge their brothers.

Whether Daemon had wanted Aegon to succeed Rhaenyra or one of Laenor's sons is an interesting question - but there is no indication that he wished Jace, Luke, or Joff any harm. Especially not since Baela and Rhaena, his own daughters, were betrothed to Jace and Luke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

From what we know about them, they got along very well.

But then, five sons many, and could have given Rhaenyra a lot of grandchildren. The incest and kin marriages would have tied many branches together but not necessarily all of them.

And the youngest sons usually do not expect or aspire to rule. That makes it increasingly unlikely that Joffrey, Aegon, or Viserys had made any attempt to challenge their brothers.

Whether Daemon had wanted Aegon to succeed Rhaenyra or one of Laenor's sons is an interesting question - but there is no indication that he wished Jace, Luke, or Joff any harm. Especially not since Baela and Rhaena, his own daughters, were betrothed to Jace and Luke.

Well, I'm not talking about the generation of the Dance of the Dragons but rather that there would have been alot of potential dragon riders around and alot of dragons for the following generations. The more people there are around the more likely there will be bad blood somewhere and not all kings are so wise that they can avoid setting up a war *cough* Viserys *cough* and like Maekar said "To many dragons are as dangerous as to few".

So essentially I think that unless there was a convient pruning of the House of the Dragon, there is more likely than not there would haev been a nasty situation in a generation or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LionoftheWest said:

Well, I'm not talking about the generation of the Dance of the Dragons but rather that there would have been alot of potential dragon riders around and alot of dragons for the following generations. The more people there are around the more likely there will be bad blood somewhere and not all kings are so wise that they can avoid setting up a war *cough* Viserys *cough* and like Maekar said "To many dragons are as dangerous as to few".

So essentially I think that unless there was a convient pruning of the House of the Dragon, there is more likely than not there would haev been a nasty situation in a generation or so.

That is certainly possible, although we have to keep in mind that not all grandchildren of Rhaenyra would have necessarily been given dragon eggs or allowed to become dragonriders - it seems hat of Jaehaerys I's children at least Vaegon the Dragonless never became a dragonrider, and Maegelle and Saera are not likely to have been dragonriders, too.

Once the blood of the dragon had split up in too many branches they may also have been more conscious of the fact that they could not have too many dragonriding branches...

Or not, difficult to say.

Thinking about that - it might even be that they had sent Prince Viserys to the Citadel considering he seems to have been the smartest of their children.

They were conscious of a succession war even before the Dance, considering that one threatened when Jaehaerys I convened the Great Council. Both Corlys and Daemon had been willing to use violence to defend the rights of the claimants they supported, and if Jaehaerys I had died before the Great Council the Dance could have begun in 101 AC rather than in 129 AC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 8:06 PM, Hiigara129 said:

I hope the title makes sense. Let's say one of Rhaenyra Targaryen's Velaryon sons survives the Dance and becomes King. Would he rule as a Targaryen or a Velaryon? As far as I can tell this never came up in any of the sources. On the one hand they were born Velaryons and logic would dictate they would reign as Velaryons; but on the other hand it would mean the end of the Targaryens as the ruling house, something that's likely to cause concern at court and among the Lords of the Realm. Plus there is an example of the ruling House name passing through the female line in House Martell. So would anyone care to speculate?

If Robert Arryn dies without children then Harrold Hardyng becomes the Ruler of the Vale, in which case he takes the name Harrold Arryn. If that applies to a lower House like House Arryn then I imagine it also apples to House Targaryen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EloImFizzy said:

If Robert Arryn dies without children then Harrold Hardyng becomes the Ruler of the Vale, in which case he takes the name Harrold Arryn. If that applies to a lower House like House Arryn then I imagine it also apples to House Targaryen. 

We don't know that for certainty as of yet. He might do it - or not.

However, the difference there is that Hardyng is really a no-name house of landed knights. During Rhaenyra's days the Velaryons were not only the second house in the Realm, having dragonriders of their own, but also the richest house in the Realm. There would scarcely be a difference between a Targaryen king and a Velaryon king insofar as prestige is concerned.

And then Rhaenyra's sons have also to stress the facts that they are Laenor's sons, trueborn Velaryons, so they would have an incentive to go by their birth names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lord Varys

Corlys may have been wealthy and famous, and the Velaryons may have been worthy to give birth to Targaryen kings and queens, and even to be queens to Targaryen kings, but they were no kings themselves, and I don't think there is any basis to say that there would be no difference between ascending as a Targaryen or a Velaryon.

The Iron Throne and the dragons were perceived as Targaryen, no matter how close the Velaryons were to House Targaryen. As Lucerys is reported to have said: "Only Targaryens ride dragons." Those handful of Velaryons that rode dragons (Laena, Laenor, Jacaerys, Lucerys, Joffrey, Addam) would've been seen as doing so on account of their recent Targaryen ancestry.

I see no chance Rhaenyra or her side would have let the Targaryen name pass from the Iron Throne with her Velaryon sons had the war never happened, or if they had survived the war, especially with her other sons (not to mention Alicent's sons) carrying and passing on the Targaryen name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. If Jacaerys had come to the throne, he would have called himself Jacaerys Targaryen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ran said:

Agreed. If Jacaerys had come to the throne, he would have called himself Jacaerys Targaryen.

And what about Laenor Velaryon? I mean, if the boy who should have been king had changed his name to 'Targaryen' around the time he married Rhaenyra, then his sons wouldn't have been Velaryons - and there wouldn't have been a problem with the name.

But would Laenor have ruled as King Laenor I Velaryon or King Laenor I Targaryen?

I admit that Rhaenyra's sons had problems with their male line Targaryen uncles, but if King Aemon I had ruled, and his grandson Laenor after him, say, then Baelon's sons would have been obscure cousins, dragonriders or not.

We are still talking about a hundred years after the Conquest. There were two great and two (very) shitty Targaryen kings. It is the foundation of a legendary dynasty, but not a legendary dynasty yet (or at least not as the royal dynasty of Westeros - a Valyrian dragonlords they might be legendary - or not).

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Corlys may have been wealthy and famous, and the Velaryons may have been worthy to give birth to Targaryen kings and queens, and even to be queens to Targaryen kings, but they were no kings themselves, and I don't think there is any basis to say that there would be no difference between ascending as a Targaryen or a Velaryon.

In principle, in this world the father gives the name to a family and a dynasty, just as they do in real world European royal dynasties. And as Prince Philip will tell you, it is a very emasculating feeling if you cannot do that ;-).

The name is not the ability nor the degree of kinship to royal bloodline or the strength of the claim. It is just a name.

Quote

The Iron Throne and the dragons were perceived as Targaryen, no matter how close the Velaryons were to House Targaryen. As Lucerys is reported to have said: "Only Targaryens ride dragons." Those handful of Velaryons that rode dragons (Laena, Laenor, Jacaerys, Lucerys, Joffrey, Addam) would've been seen as doing so on account of their recent Targaryen ancestry.

Sure, but if Laena and Laenor and Rhaenyra's sons are seen as Targaryens because they are dragonriders they can keep their name. Because they are all the Targaryens are, without bearing the name.

Quote

I see no chance Rhaenyra or her side would have let the Targaryen name pass from the Iron Throne with her Velaryon sons had the war never happened, or if they had survived the war, especially with her other sons (not to mention Alicent's sons) carrying and passing on the Targaryen name.

That - and the fact that the boys saw themselves as Targaryens rather than Velaryons - is a strong sign that they Jace may have chosen that name.

But what about Laenor or Laena on the throne? Would they have felt the need to change their names?

Edited by Lord Varys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But what about Laenor or Laena or the throne? Would they have felt the need to change their names?

I doubt it. Both strike me as people who simply want to enjoy the life their station affords them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And what about Laenor Velaryon? I mean, if the boy who should have been king had changed his name to 'Targaryen' around the time he married Rhaenyra, then his sons wouldn't have been Velaryons - and there wouldn't have been a problem with the name.

But would Laenor have ruled as King Laenor I Velaryon or King Laenor I Targaryen?

I admit that Rhaenyra's sons had problems with their male line Targaryen uncles, but if King Aemon I had ruled, and his grandson Laenor after him, say, then Baelon's sons would have been obscure cousins, dragonriders or not.

Had Laenor been chosen by the Great Council in 101 AC, I think it is very likely he would have ascended the Iron Throne in 103 AC as Laenor I Targaryen.

But by the time Laenor wed Rhaenyra in 114 AC, he was doing so as the heir to Driftmark wedding the heir to the Iron Throne, having long ago been passed over for Viserys I (in 101 AC), and Viserys I having long ago chosen Rhaenyra as his heir (in 105 AC).

It wasn't necessary for Laenor to change his name at that time. He wasn't going to ascend the Iron Throne in his own right, a son of his with Rhaenyra could take the Targaryen name upon his own accession, and a subsequent son could inherit Driftmark as a Velaryon.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

We are still talking about a hundred years after the Conquest. There were two great and two (very) shitty Targaryen kings. It is the foundation of a legendary dynasty, but not a legendary dynasty yet (or at least not as the royal dynasty of Westeros - a Valyrian dragonlords they might be legendary - or not).

Those two great Targaryen kings ruled for almost that whole century by themselves. House Targaryen might have been on shaky ground before the reign of Jaehaerys I, but after, it was just a matter of which Targaryen.

Legendary or not, it was the Targaryen Iron Throne that those Targaryen and Targaryen descendants were vying for., and I don't think any of them would have ascended as anything other than Targaryens.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Sure, but if Laena and Laenor and Rhaenyra's sons are seen as Targaryens because they are dragonriders they can keep their name. Because they are all the Targaryens are, without bearing the name.

I think bearing the name is more important than you give credit for. Targaryens sat the Iron Throne. Velaryons didn't.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But what about Laenor or Laena or the throne? Would they have felt the need to change their names?

Had he been chosen in 101 AC, I think there is a good chance Laenor would have taken the Targaryen name when he ascended in 103 AC. I think there is little chance Laena would have been chosen in her own right in 101 AC, as there would be no reason to pass over an adult Rhaenys just to choose her child daughter.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2018 at 9:24 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

Had Laenor been chosen by the Great Council in 101 AC, I think it is very likely he would have ascended the Iron Throne in 103 AC as Laenor I Targaryen.

I don't think we have any evidence indicating this. If Laenor Velaryon had been chosen, Laenor Velaryon would have been chosen - the lords would have known that the boy they made their king was a Velaryon. And we have no indication that Laenor Velaryon preferred the name Targaryen.

Quote

But by the time Laenor wed Rhaenyra in 114 AC, he was doing so as the heir to Driftmark wedding the heir to the Iron Throne, having long ago been passed over for Viserys I (in 101 AC), and Viserys I having long ago chosen Rhaenyra as his heir (in 105 AC).

But as Rhaenyra's husband he would become the prince/king consort of the monarch and if he had changed his name then Rhaenyra's children by him would have also born as Targaryens, preventing Jace and his brothers from changing their names to Targaryen later in life.

The reason why Jace taking the Targaryen name would be problematic is that this would again cast doubt on his parentage. Isn't he proud of his Velaryon father? Is he so uncertain of his birth that he has to take the name of his mother rather than that of his father? And this could then also cast doubt on the parentage of his brother(s) laying claim to Driftmark in Jace's place.

Quote

It wasn't necessary for Laenor to change his name at that time. He wasn't going to ascend the Iron Throne in his own right, a son of his with Rhaenyra could take the Targaryen name upon his own accession, and a subsequent son could inherit Driftmark as a Velaryon.

A Targaryen son could also changed his name to Velaryon - or, better still, claim Driftmark as a Targaryen. Why not?

Quote

Those two great Targaryen kings ruled for almost that whole century by themselves. House Targaryen might have been on shaky ground before the reign of Jaehaerys I, but after, it was just a matter of which Targaryen.

The Velaryons and Baratheons would always have been the presumptive heirs of the Targaryens - while Aegon didn't have Aenys and Maegor, Aethan Velaryon and Orys Baratheon would have been his presumptive heirs, just as Daemon Velaryon and Robar Baratheon after Maegor's death if we assume there hadn't been any other Targaryen heirs left.

Robert and Stannis and Renly later also keep the Baratheon name. While we can argue that it makes sense for Robert to do that because of his issues with his royal cousins, Stannis and Renly don't share Robert's sentiment.

Quote

I think there is little chance Laena would have been chosen in her own right in 101 AC, as there would be no reason to pass over an adult Rhaenys just to choose her child daughter.

We do know people spoke for her instead of Laenor or her mother. No idea why, but it means that people thought she had a viable claim.

Edited by Lord Varys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Targaryen name has an association of power and majesty and royalty to it that the Velaryon name never did. Simple as that. There's no evidence Laenor cared so much about the Velaryon name that he wouldn't abandon it if it was politically expedient to succeed to the Iron Throne as Laenor Targaryen. There certainly is ample evidence that such behavior is common throughout the history of the Seven Kingdoms, not least in that it is one of George's explanations for why families are so long-lived in Westeros: collateral descendants who inherit will take up the name of the ruling family to maintain their association with them.

 

Ultimately, it's up for speculation, but my speculation is that Laenor would be Laenor Targaryen. YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ran said:

The Targaryen name has an association of power and majesty and royalty to it that the Velaryon name never did. Simple as that.

I'd definitely agree with that if we are talking about the Targaryens at the end of the third century (which is why it is somewhat odd but explainable due to his specific situation that Robert went with the Baratheon name) but certainly not in the first century.

Or take Daemon Blackfyre as an example - he went around with a weird family name (the name of a sword) yet the men following had no issue with the Blackfyre name (as a token Blackfyre certainly had symbolic value, and perhaps even as an epithet, like Bittersteel or Bloodraven, but as a family name the Targaryen name would have had more power and prestige than some new name).

And now compare the prestige and power that come from being Corlys Velaryon's son to being the son of a Targaryen prince. Aemon and Baelon might have been great men in their own right, but they were not playing in the Sea Snake's league. Jaehaerys I and Alysanne certainly. I mean, people speculate a lot as to why Rhaenys didn't marry Viserys instead of Corlys, but it is pretty clear that Viserys wasn't even remotely in the same league as Corlys Velaryon.

It doesn't mean that Laenor or Rhaenyra's sons would not have liked been Targaryens, but they might not have fell the need to change their name just to feel worthy of the Iron Throne. A Velaryon in that era doesn't strike me as a being necessarily modest.

And if people thought it was important that the the heirs to the throne should always be Targaryens then Viserys I certainly would have granted his grandsons the name 'Targaryen', no? Or he would have permitted or commanded his son-in-law to take the Targaryen name so that Rhaenyra's sons would be born Targaryens rather than Velaryons.

3 hours ago, Ran said:

There certainly is ample evidence that such behavior is common throughout the history of the Seven Kingdoms, not least in that it is one of George's explanations for why families are so long-lived in Westeros: collateral descendants who inherit will take up the name of the ruling family to maintain their association with them.

That is certainly the case. And I don't doubt that some third cousin through the female line or some bastard who was never legitimized yet still successfully seized a crown would have taken the tradition royal name. But one assumes that a king lacking an heir of his own body and recognizing a distant kinsman as his heir before his death would have already granted such a name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×