Jump to content
Alyn Oakenfist

(Spoilers Fire&Blood) Legitimacy at the beginning of the Dance

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

Yep, and their never became queen...

 

Rhaenyra did

 

Quote

Sure, it's not my opinion that count, but the ones of the lords that will abide by the results of said decision. Maegor was ignored, so was Viserys in the end.

 

 

Viserys was not ignored.

 

And the entire North, entire Vale, most of the Crownlands, Riverlands, the Iron Islands, Stormland,and the Reach supported Rhaenyra. 

If you want to break it down more easily. Rhaenyra had the support of 4 great Lords, Aegon never had more than 3. And always controlled more territory. 

She was far more Queen than he ever was King. My point here being you cant pretend she never ruled like Aegon the uncrowned. 

Quote

Their children would take the name of the spouse, and would not be present on the Stark family, we do not even have their names. Assuming they died is your opinion and not a fact. Arthos Stark also had sons but their are never presented and that branch was ignored in the Stark family tree.

When children are mentioned, but not named,Or women are married and the child has a different last name,  they are usually defined as "issue". So,  while it is entirely possible that they all lived to adult got married and had children, the fact that none of those factors are ever mentioned means it more likely than not that they died young.

And if you mean Artos Stark, his children are mentioned and each is defined as having "issue".
Jocelyn stark married a Royce, and its shows the line continued into House Royce. 

Aregelle Stark married a Cerwyn, and it shows the line continued into House Cerwyn

Arrana Stark married an Umber, and it shows the line continued into House Umber


More to my point. It shows the line continued, where as none of Cregan's daughters show the same. 

 

This could all be Retconned in Fire & Blood Part 2.  Just as some marriages and parentage and entire children  have been. But as of now, they clearly had no children,  and are all likely to have died young. 

 

 

Edited by dsjj251

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Rhaenyra did

 

The list of kings go by  Viserys I > Aegon II > Aegon III

36 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Viserys was not ignored.

 

And the entire North, entire Vale, most of the Crownlands, Riverlands, the Iron Islands, Stormland,and the Reach supported Rhaenyra. 



Sure he was.

Aegon II was crowed and is the presented and reconized as the monarch of the period, Rhaenyra is considered a "traitor that died a traitor's death for trying to usurp the crow of her brother." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

Aegon II was crowed and is the presented and reconized as the monarch of the period, Rhaenyra is considered a "traitor that died a traitor's death for trying to usurp the crow of her brother." 

That is the view of a man who is a traitor himself and who may already have died a traitor's death at Winterfell and whose ancestor was a traitor and coward who backed the usurper Aegon II.

The idea that the fact that Aegon II killed Rhaenyra means he is somehow the rightful king is nonsense. He remains a usurper who is counted as a king because he ended up ruling - just as history and House Targaryen count Maegor the Cruel as a king despite the fact that he was a bloody usurper with no right to the throne. Just as history will count Robert and Joffrey and Tommen as kings, not Viserys II or Stannis or Renly or Robb because they were the ones who sat the Iron Throne.

As for Andal customs:

There are none such. Prior to the Conquest, there were seven independent kingdoms with their own laws and customs, including their own succession laws. Things were not the same in the Vale and the Reach and the North, etc. The best way to illustrate this is to point to Marla Sunderland who was Queen of the Three Sisters (and likely Lady of the Three Sisters prior to that) despite the fact that she had either an older or younger brother who, if they were following male primogeniture up there, should have been lord and king in her place (but wasn't).

'A daughter comes before an uncle' was not universally practiced in the Seven Kingdoms prior to the unification of the laws.

And this idea that the First Men were more tolerant of female rule is laughable and completely without basis. The only kingdom which had a queen regnant was the Reach - in Andal, not First Men days! - whereas the First Men run North had never a queen regnant nor a ruling lady of Winterfell.

But this has no bearing on the Targaryen succession - which is ruled upon and decided by House Targaryens and its kings.

Comparing the situation of Aerea-Jaehaerys and Rhaenyra makes no sense whatsoever. Aerea was merely Maegor's presumptive heir - until such a time as a son was born to him - she was never his heir apparent like Rhaenyra. Not to mention that King Aenys' branch of House Targaryen - the rightful heirs to the Iron Throne - didn't care shit about Maegor's decrees, anyway. Especially not where the succession was concerned (Maegor did disinherit Jaehaerys, after all).

Nothing indicates that a king lost the right/power to arbitrarily choose an heir after the Dance. Aegon IV and Aerys II knew they were not bound by any law to keep the heirs they had named, the concept of disinheriting an heir and picking an heir from your children is well-known and accepted in Westeros. Jeyne Arryn names a very distant cousin her heir rather than her closest male relation, Walder Frey indicates he could, if he wanted to, make his youngest son his heir, Tyrion is never acknowledged or considered Tywin's heir (that's Jaime), during the Conquest and when the marriage of Jaehaerys I is discussed adoption and the naming of unrelated people as heirs (Ronnel Arryn) is discussed as a realistic possibility.

Things are not as easy as some readers want to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frenin said:

Where is said that?? Rebellions are treason

Such assumption would make Jaehaerys a dirty rebel, a traitor and a usurper - and I don't think that's how he is presented to us or how he is meant to be presented to us.

Basically, we hit inherent contradiction in Maegor's status once again. On one hand, he is a usurper, is called as such in the book and by Jaehaerys himself. Fighting against a usurper is perfectly kosher and legal. On the other hand, he is still accepted as King. Jaehaerys punishes Maegor's guards for deserting a King. Fighting against King is treason. By leaving Maegor as Schrödiger's King, Jaehaerys created an ambiguity in the matter. Theoretically, Jaehaerys could say - Maegor was a dirty usurper who temporarily occupied Iron Throne. Cut him out of the rolls, re-issue all of his useful decrees in Jaehaerys' name, render everything else illegal, problem solved. That's essentially what was done with Rhaenyra after the war - worked like a charm.

6 hours ago, frenin said:

Is Bolton and all the lords who ignored said law acting according the law, since by all laws of the lands and customs that was theur godgiven right??

Well, that's another clash of interpretations between Crown and nobility. Now this one is less violent - the Crown simply can't do anything about First Night - but the results are quite similar. Nobility enforces its vision of the issue.

That's kinda the problem with issuing any laws or decrees  without having a single traveling judge in the realm. There is this bizarre void between King and nobility in Westeros. In Middle Ages there were all sorts of people representing the King in various regions; monarchies that failed to maintain such presence usually disappeared rather quickly, replaced by more structured rivals. In Westeros the King is often left in some suspended state instead - he is kinda there, but he has no reach to force people to pay taxes (that's my favorite part of F&B - Master of Coin hastily institutes new taxes and nobody outside KL gives a shit and just ignore him), obey his laws (see Dunk and Egg) and generally stop acting like asshats (older Egg).

 

6 hours ago, frenin said:

If you see the Houses that  supported Rhaenrya and the Houses that supported  Aegon, i'm countig the Tullys here, Rhaenrya still wins.

Weren't we talking about hypothetical Great Council and influence of vow of 105? Because Elmo did not care about the vow and was perfectly content to sit home. Yes, he ended up joining Rhaenyra when Black dragon landed at his home, but I don't think this wartime decision can be carried over into hypothetical Great Council. After all, if there is a Great Council, the concern about being burned by dragons is probably much less pressing, so there goes Elmo's motivation to join the Blacks.

6 hours ago, frenin said:

So, the movers and shakers in the Reach were about to be defeated by those handful of irrelevant figures here and there

No, the movers and shakers in the Reach were defeated by movers and shakers in the Riverlands, and neither side cared about the vow. Green Reachers' motives were never explored in detail; but George did provide explanation for Elmo who led Black Riverlords - see above.

6 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

1. The fact that the Hightowers and their allies couldnt take control of the Reach should tell you that it wasnt a comfortable advantage for Aegon. 

But the Greens did take control of the Reach. I know, the Greens actually winning something in F&B, shocking. Rowan got chased north, his submission was "enforced", so were the Grimms, Costayne got shanked, Tarly and Beesbury got captured... Green army of the Reach was like a sword of Damocles throughout the entire war, always hanging above Black court's heads.

6 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

2. Cregan had to gather his forces and march south, it took a while, the token force he sent at first did indeed fight, and his larger army was ready to do the same. 

It took Robb what - two months to muster a good army and start hitting people? Daemon's objections cling hollow since we know for a fact he is wrong. The excuse is just ridiculous. Cregan spent two years on the fence. Robb wanted to fight for his dad, so he gathered an army on time. Cregan didn't want to fight for Rhaenyra, so he sat with his thumbs up his bum. It's that simple.

6 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

3. Lady Jeyne's fleet participated in atleast 2 battles. 

It did? Which ones?

Because the only thing I remember about her participation are her increasingly hilarious excuses answering Rhaenyra's increasingly desperate bids for help.

6 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

4. Elmo Tully was a black, but his father Grover , who was lord at the start of the war ,was a green. That is why the Tullys themselves didnt fight at the beginning of the war. 

Grover was indeed Green. Elmo on the other hand...

“I would sooner the rest of us did not die with him,” declared Ser Elmo Tully, his grandson. Riverrun had no defense against dragonfire, he pointed out to his own sons, and both sides in this fight rode dragons. And so whilst Lord Grover thundered and fulminated from his deathbed, Riverrun barred its gates, manned its walls, and held its silence.

Elmo had no shits to give about either side. Elmo was looking out for number one. When he joined the Black side, he did not do so out of commitment to Black cause, but rather more practical concerns:

Most notably of all, House Tully had joined the war. Seasmoke’s descent upon Riverrun had at last persuaded that reluctant warrior, Ser Elmo Tully, to call his banners for the queen, in defiance of the wishes of his bedridden grandsire, Lord Grover. “A dragon in one’s courtyard does wonders to resolve one’s doubts,” Ser Elmo is reported to have said.

Edited by Myrish Lace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

Can you show me where is presented that the north still kept the Firstnight? as far as I know Roose killed the guy and ripped the tongue of the other to not let the story reach Ned.

 

Roose and the Umbers do it.

 

5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

If Daemon outlive her, yes. This is the law.

 

Then it's a rather stupid course of action given that you don't want Daemon near the throne. 

 

5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

That's how it works, Laws that cause more trouble than solutions usually get revoked.

Point in case, no one ever tried to push a BS like Viserys did. But Jaeharys decision, one that was made to avoid trouble and be sensible in a case of a blurred sucession still had weight and was repeated like happened when Aegon V became king.

Yeah those laws get revoked by those with the legislative power to do so, The King, even in democracy. the people can't change laws even if they don't like them, that's only the power of the Parlament.

No one tried to push Baelor's laws once the man was dead and Aegon 5 were quickly overruled once he was dead too, that's a very fallace argument, no one in KL likes the Dwarf's penny law but until the crown don't change it that's the law. The factthat people don'tlike a law don't make said law illegal, it can make the law stupid, inmoral or unethic but not illegal.

 

 

5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

Everybody with half a brain would know that it would cause a major civil war. Viserys didn't hold a council to resolve this bloody mess, he just pushed the issue away and ignored the glaring incidents that happened on his face.

The rivalry between Daemon and Otto, the rivalry between Rhaenyra and Alicent, the fight over dragons, the bastard allegations, Daemon mocking Aegon and Aemond, Criston Cole and Rhaenyra, that were so much incidents happening on his court that Patchface would take notice and reacted better.

Unless everybody with half a brain would think that brothers and cousins and uncles and nephews would kill each other right away i think that no, it wasn't forseeable, even the Greens hoped that there would be no war and were horrified of Aemond's actions. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

The Velaryons couldn't pull the same BS, because unlike Viserys Jaeharys called a council and resolved the matter, he just didn't brushed off and called quits and ignored every red flag for years. 

 

Sure they could, they could ignore the ruling of the council and strike knowing that they have the dragon advantage and once they won, they could said hte Great Council was illegal and no one could do a damn thing.

 

 

5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

 In once case we have a reasonable and responsible King (Jaeharys) that faced a real trouble (blurred sucession) and acted acordling with the issue and resolved the matter without bloodshed. In the other we have a moron for king (Viserys) with no real problem, creating one (blurring the sucession law) based only on hiw whim, creating a massive factionalism on his court that ended up with a major civil war that cripled his dynasty forever.

Just like Jaeharys when he named Baelon his heir right?? He didn't create a problem, the greens did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, frenin said:

Roose and the Umbers do it.

 

And they have to hide it. It's not legal.

about the rest it's going on circles. You and I will never agree on the issue.

Share this post


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

Such assumption would make Jaehaerys a dirty rebel, a traitor and a usurper - and I don't think that's how he is presented to us or how he is meant to be presented to us.

 

I very queer notion, in the TWOIAF Robert is not presented to us as a traitor anda usurper, not the man think of him like that, yet there a few people who think otherwise, Daemon Blackfyre and his blacks, Robb and his kingdoms, Renly and the South, they don't see themselves as usurpers, rebels and traitors and i grant you that had they prevailed, 200 hundreds years from now, history wouldn't remember them as dirty rebels, traitors and usurpers, because had they prevailed, they would'v written the history. The fact hewas overthrowing a crazy tyrant also helped.

 

1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

 Basically, we hit inherent contradiction in Maegor's status once again. On one hand, he is a usurper, is called as such in the book and by Jaehaerys himself. Fighting against a usurper is perfectly kosher and legal. On the other hand, he is still accepted as King. Jaehaerys punishes Maegor's guards for deserting a King. Fighting against King is treason. By leaving Maegor as Schrödiger's King, Jaehaerys created an ambiguity in the matter. Theoretically, Jaehaerys could say - Maegor was a dirty usurper who temporarily occupied Iron Throne. Cut him out of the rolls, re-issue all of his useful decrees in Jaehaerys' name, render everything else illegal, problem solved. That's essentially what was done with Rhaenyra after the war - worked like a charm.

7 hours ago, frenin said:

The idea that usurpers can't hold the throne is a very strange idea, Cregan Stark thinks Aegon 2 rebel and a usurper who killed his rightful queen and the man had no problem by saying he was still king.

1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

Well, that's another clash of interpretations between Crown and nobility. Now this one is less violent - the Crown simply can't do anything about First Night - but the results are quite similar. Nobility enforces its vision of the issue.

That's kinda the problem with issuing any laws or decrees  without having a single traveling judge in the realm. There is this bizarre void between King and nobility in Westeros. In Middle Ages there were all sorts of people representing the King in various regions; monarchies that failed to maintain such presence usually disappeared rather quickly, replaced by more structured rivals. In Westeros the King is often left in some suspended state instead - he is kinda there, but he has no reach to force people to pay taxes (that's my favorite part of F&B - Master of Coin hastily institutes new taxes and nobody outside KL gives a shit and just ignore him), obey his laws (see Dunk and Egg) and generally stop acting like asshats (older Egg).

 

But the nobility make damn sure the crown didn't hear about it right and you're acting as if not obeying a law and the police not finding out make said law illegal and not me a criminal, the fact that the nobility broke the law don't make said laws illegals.

Which is again a rather strange view.

 

 

1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

Weren't we talking about hypothetical Great Council and influence of vow of 105? Because Elmo did not care about the vow and was perfectly content to sit home. Yes, he ended up joining Rhaenyra when Black dragon landed at his home, but I don't think this wartime decision can be carried over into hypothetical Great Council. After all, if there is a Great Council, the concern about being burned by dragons is probably much less pressing, so there goes Elmo's motivation to join the Blacks.

8 hours ago, frenin said:

That's why i'm counting the Tullys as greens, if you're saying that people could and did ignore their oaths ofc they could and did, Otto Hightower the very first of them.

But Rhaernrya was supported by far more Houses than Aegon 2 so many of them would indeed be influenced by said vow, other who might died before the the war and other would ignore the vows.

 

 

1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

No, the movers and shakers in the Reach were defeated by movers and shakers in the Riverlands, and neither side cared about the vow. Green Reachers' motives were never explored in detail; but George did provide explanation for Elmo who led Black Riverlords - see above.

7 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

The only reason why the greens made it to Tumbleton was because of Tessarion, the Hightowers and his allies were about to get killed in their very first battles if not for the dragon.

 

 

1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

It took Robb what - two months to muster a good army and start hitting people? Daemon's objections cling hollow since we know for a fact he is wrong. The excuse is just ridiculous. Cregan spent two years on the fence. Robb wanted to fight for his dad, so he gathered an army on time. Cregan didn't want to fight for Rhaenyra, so he sat with his thumbs up his bum. It's that simple.

7 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Robb had more pressing urgent, saving his family and ignored everything else, Cregan was concerned about preparing the North for the Winter and still the Winter made havoc in the North anyways, only after that he marched.

 

16 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

And they have to hide it. It's not legal.

 

Just as the Greens make a coup, because what they were doing was not legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, frenin said:

Just as the Greens make a coup, because what they were doing was not legal.

there are very little things more public than crowing cerimony :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

The list of kings go by  Viserys I > Aegon II > Aegon III

 

 

As other have stated, this isnt really true. 

Quote

Sure he was.

Aegon II was crowed and is the presented and recognized as the monarch of the period, Rhaenyra is considered a "traitor that died a traitor's death for trying to usurp the crow of her brother." 

Fire & Blood put this argument to rest 1 year ago this month. 

1. Rhaenyra was crowned on Dragonstone as well

2. Fire & Blood states plainly that the Blacks won, and crowned Aegon III as Rhaenyra's heir, not Aegon II's

3. Blacks regard Aegon as the traitor and usurper, the Maesters simply dont like women as rulers and they are the ones who define what is "official", but again, what does that matter ?  Rhaenyra had more territory and technically ruled the Iron Throne longer. If you define him as a king, you have to define her as Queen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

there are very little things more public than crowing cerimony :) 

Before the crowning they had to seize power first and that was made in hte middle of the night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2019 at 1:53 AM, frenin said:

The idea that usurpers can't hold the throne is a very strange idea, Cregan Stark thinks Aegon 2 rebel and a usurper who killed his rightful queen and the man had no problem by saying he was still king

Cregan Stark attempted to usurp power in the capital before being pushed out by his rivals. His paper-thin justifications were born out of insane troll logic that could only hold as long as Cregan could intimidate everyone around  into doing his bidding. Once Valemen have arrived and Cregan lost numerical superiority, everyone banded against him and Cregan was sent on his merry way.

Cutting out usurpers is well within established practice. Rhaenyra is not counted a Queen, Daemon Blackfyre is not counted King. Had Stannis prevailed, Joffrey would not be counted as King either.

On 11/15/2019 at 1:53 AM, frenin said:

But the nobility make damn sure the crown didn't hear about it right and you're acting as if not obeying a law and the police not finding out make said law illegal and not me a criminal, the fact that the nobility broke the law don't make said laws illegals.

First, if we take Roose as an example, nothing in his tale points to him being fearful of retribution or need to hide anything from the Crown. The only thing Roose is worried about is the fact that he might look bad in his overlord's eyes. Nothing more.

Second, you try to compare the situation with police and criminals, yet the comparison does not fit. There is no police in Westeros. There is no law enforcement agency overseeing the lords in King's name. In fact, the person responsible for the law in the area is Roose himself. Given the fact that the continent at large is ruled by nobles and the King has very limited ability to oversee, intervene or enforce his laws. it's not criminals vs police - it's two legal systems coexisting. Traditional "older laws" (like younger brother stands older brother, first night, freedoms in appointing heirs) vs newer Crown's laws (younger brother is expected to fight for the King against the older one, first night is forbidden, Widow's law strictly regulating inheritance).

On 11/15/2019 at 1:53 AM, frenin said:

But Rhaernrya was supported by far more Houses than Aegon 2

Was she? Did you count? Aegon II had no problems with numbers. It's the warlords he lacked.

Reallistically, in case of the Great Council we have:

- Green Westerlands (supported Aegon II without much prompting)

- Greener Reach (again, Green majority without much prompting)

- Black Vale (Valemen sat the war out, but I don't see them refusing to vote for Rhaenyra. Much less dangerous, voting is.)

- divided Riverlands (as discussed above)

- Stormlands, Iron Islands, North are explicitly up for grabs. Local Lords Paramount seem to have a good handle on their vassals and wait for good offers.

On 11/15/2019 at 12:32 PM, frenin said:

Before the crowning they had to seize power first and that was made in hte middle of the night.

Jaehaerys and his supporters had to flee, hide and eventually cut Maegor to shreds in the middle of the night. Stannis was forced to run away, hide on Dragonstone and assassinate usurper brother with magic.

Tactics do not reflect legitimacy.

Edited by Myrish Lace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

Cregan Stark attempted to usurp power in the capital before being pushed out by his rivals. His paper-thin justifications were born out of insane troll logic that could only hold as long as Cregan could intimidate everyone around  into doing his bidding. Once Valemen have arrived and Cregan lost numerical superiority, everyone banded against him and Cregan was sent on his merry way.

This is a very weird strawman and a false one, Cregan wanted to continue the war, both because he wanted to get rid to those unneeded mouths and both because he was very much right in his notion that the war wasn't over, there is nothing troll or false in his words which is why i was so dissapointed when he just let Corlys go in exchange of... 

Cregan was forced to back down on his warmongering ideas, he forced those who banded against him to execute Aegon 2 muderderers and after that he gladly gave up his position as a Hand and rejected the position of regent. When you talk about Cregan it may seem you're meaning Unwin Peake. Cregan left gladly the South because per his words, his place was in the north with his people.

Btw this is still being a straw man, Cregan saw Aegon 2 as usurper, tyrant and all the shit you want to guess but he still saw the man as King,  there is no incompatibility. Nor Jorah or Barri B see an oximoron in calling Robert King and usurper.

 

2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

Cutting out usurpers is well within established practice. Rhaenyra is not counted a Queen, Daemon Blackfyre is not counted King. Had Stannis prevailed, Joffrey would not be counted as King either.

On 11/15/2019 at 1:53 AM, frenin said:

Maegor is counted as King and so does Robert and his children and i very much doubt that the Black Dragon was ever counted as a usurper, since the man didn't have a chance to usurp nothing nor did he ever sit on the Throne, Daemon was a pretender just as Aegon the Uncrowned is never counted as King. This no established practice, if you're using an order of misogynist as appeal of authority, you're free to do so,  a better question would be why Aegon 3 didn't try to change that, i don't doubt that Viserys line benefited from that.

Aegon 3 is crowned by the Blacks as Rhaenrya's last heir, not because he's Aegon 2 heir, not because he's Daemon's heir.

 

2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

First, if we take Roose as an example, nothing in his tale points to him being fearful of retribution or need to hide anything from the Crown. The only thing Roose is worried about is the fact that he might look bad in his overlord's eyes. Nothing more.

 

You're right, had Ned ever found out there would no need for Robert to hear about it, Roose is worried that those with much power than him might punish him, those who had more power than him are Ned and Robert.

 

 

2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

 Second, you try to compare the situation with police and criminals, yet the comparison does not fit. There is no police in Westeros. There is no law enforcement agency overseeing the lords in King's name. In fact, the person responsible for the law in the area is Roose himself. Given the fact that the continent at large is ruled by nobles and the King has very limited ability to oversee, intervene or enforce his laws. it's not criminals vs police - it's two legal systems coexisting. Traditional "older laws" (like younger brother stands older brother, first night, freedoms in appointing heirs) vs newer Crown's laws (younger brother is expected to fight for the King against the older one, first night is forbidden, Widow's law strictly regulating inheritance).

On 11/15/2019 at 1:53 AM, frenin said:

It fits perfectly, if a judge is corrupt and he manage to influence his area, there are not "two legal systems coexisting", one is directly subordinated to  the other, just as no lesser law can overrule the constitution.

Roose Bolton being corrupt without no one noticing doesn't change the fact that what he's doing is illegal and he perfectly knows that what he's doing is illegal,  he, just as a today judge, thinks that he can get away with it, that's all, it happened  two thousand years ago and it will keep happening a thousand years from now.

 

 

2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

Was she? Did you count? Aegon II had no problems with numbers. It's the warlords he lacked.

Reallistically, in case of the Great Council we have:

- Green Westerlands (supported Aegon II without much prompting)

- Greener Reach (again, Green majority without much prompting)

- Black Vale (Valemen sat the war out, but I don't see them refusing to vote for Rhaenyra. Much less dangerous, voting is.)

- divided Riverlands (as discussed above)

- Stormlands, Iron Islands, North are explicitly up for grabs. Local Lords Paramount seem to have a good handle on their vassals and wait for good offers.

Yes i counted.

Rhaenrya had the support of the Vale, the great majority of the Riverlands, where the only ones who didn't suppoorted her were the Vance of Atranta, Tullys and Brackens and the support of half the Reach and the support of the Crownlands and  Houses in the Stormlands as the Fells and Bucklers. If Rhaenrya secured the North as Jacaerys did, but without stopping in White Harbor Luke would've never been killed had Joffrey been single, she wins clearly.

But even then we don't really know why the Lannisters supported Aegon 2 , Jason Lannister was in love with Rhaenrya and unlike those Kingdoms that are explicitly up for grabs or those who didn't agree on a woman sitting on the Throne, we're not given no explantion whatsoever.

 

2 hours ago, Myrish Lace said:

Jaehaerys and his supporters had to flee, hide and eventually cut Maegor to shreds in the middle of the night. Stannis was forced to run away, hide on Dragonstone and assassinate usurper brother with magic.

Tactics do not reflect legitimacy.

When you made a coup Unwin Peake style for crowning a usurper, you don't have any legitimacy whatsoever, that's why they made a coup.

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 10:20 PM, frenin said:

Aegon 3 is crowned by the Blacks as Rhaenrya's last heir, not because he's Aegon 2 heir, not because he's Daemon's heir.

 

Aegon the Younger is proclaimed as heir by Aegon II together with Princess Jaehaera who he would marry as part of the joint deal to pacify Velaryon and their fleet.

Quote

 

Lord Corlys responded, before setting forth terms of his own. He wanted pardons not only for himself, but for all those who had fought for Queen Rhaenyra, and demanded further that Aegon the Younger be given Princess Jaehaera’s hand in marriage, so the two of them might jointly be proclaimed King Aegon’s heirs. “The realm has been split asunder,” he said. “We must needs join it back together.” Lord Baratheon’s daughters did not interest him, but he wanted Lady Baela freed at once.

...

My ships can keep the Arryns from our door, but who will stop the northmen and the lords of the Trident? They are already on the march. We must make terms. His Grace should absolve them of all their crimes and treasons, proclaim Rhaenyra’s Aegon his heir, and marry him at once to Princess Jaehaera. It is the only way.”

 

...

Later we hear of Larys Strong convincing King and council to grant betrothal to Corlys and later to remove him and then going to Lord Velaryon revealing their intentions to convince him in plot against the King.

After the murder of Aegon II and Hour of the Wolf it is Sea Snakes diplomacy and policy of pardons who manage to soothe situation. Continuing to remind of Rhaenyras claim would turn to be pointless and counterproductive when Blacks had Aegon II's agreement.

Also isn't Dance of Dragons based on Civil conflict in England between Stephen of Blois and Matilda? Which ended similarly with Peace Treaty: Stephen remains king, but with Matilda's son Henry Plantagenet as designated heir.

Edited by Eltharion21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

Aegon the Younger is proclaimed as heir by Aegon II together with Princess Jaehaera who he would marry as part of the joint deal to pacify Velaryon and their fleet.

...

Later we hear of Larys Strong convincing King and council to grant betrothal to Corlys and later to remove him and then going to Lord Velaryon revealing their intentions to convince him in plot against the King.

After the murder of Aegon II and Hour of the Wolf it is Sea Snakes diplomacy and policy of pardons who manage to soothe situation. Continuing to remind of Rhaenyras claim would turn to be pointless and counterproductive when Blacks had Aegon II's agreement.

Also isn't Dance of Dragons based on Civil conflict in England between Stephen of Blois and Matilda? Which ended similarly with Peace Treaty: Stephen remains king, but with Matilda's son Henry Plantagenet as designated heir.

It is not that simple. Yes, Corlys makes Aegon II, Alicent, and the Greens accept Aegon the Younger as Aegon II's heir for the time being - but Aegon III is only crowned king because the Greens lose the war and Aegon II is murdered.

If the Greens had won the war and Aegon II had, say, died around the same time as he did by natural causes then chances are pretty high that Jaehaera would have been crowned queen regnant as the last living child and rightful heir of Aegon II with Aegon the Younger either only being the prince consort at her side - or the betrothal being dissolved and the boy being killed.

Because in such a scenario there would be no need to spare the lives of Rhaenyra's son.

The Lads, Cregan Stark, and Jeyne Arryn didn't care about the coronation of a King Aegon III because of something the usurper on the Iron Throne they wanted to put down had decreed. And they had the upper hand. It was convenient that Corlys and Larys got the king they were setting up to be poisoned to accept his half-sister's son as heir, considering that helped them to make a peace with the remaining Greens, but Aegon III's kingship was not dependent on Green agreement. They ensured he would sit the Iron Throne when they killed Aegon II and invited the Lads into the city.

Nobody at all ever even brings up the claim Aegon III inherited from his father Daemon. In fact, it is quite correctly said that Jaehaera still had the best claim at her father's death being the last child of the last king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eltharion21 said:

 

Aegon the Younger is proclaimed as heir by Aegon II together with Princess Jaehaera who he would marry as part of the joint deal to pacify Velaryon and their fleet.

...

Later we hear of Larys Strong convincing King and council to grant betrothal to Corlys and later to remove him and then going to Lord Velaryon revealing their intentions to convince him in plot against the King.

After the murder of Aegon II and Hour of the Wolf it is Sea Snakes diplomacy and policy of pardons who manage to soothe situation. Continuing to remind of Rhaenyras claim would turn to be pointless and counterproductive when Blacks had Aegon II's agreement.

Also isn't Dance of Dragons based on Civil conflict in England between Stephen of Blois and Matilda? Which ended similarly with Peace Treaty: Stephen remains king, but with Matilda's son Henry Plantagenet as designated heir.

That was explicitely said it was irrelevant, the Blacks won  the war and  they were fighting for Rhaenrya, or do you think that had Rhaenrya's kids had died, the Blacks would have crowned Jaehara??

Corlys just offered pardons, nothing else, he didn't say Rhaenrya was an usurper, why would he?? The Blacks had just won  the war in Rhaenrya's name, they considered Aegon 2 a traitor and  they certainly didn't give a flying fuck about his decrees, the maestres certainly did tho, as They need a reason why Aegon 3 was a King  while Rhaenrya was an usurper.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, frenin said:

That was explicitely said it was irrelevant, the Blacks won  the war and  they were fighting for Rhaenrya, or do you think that had Rhaenrya's kids had died, the Blacks would have crowned Jaehara??

Corlys just offered pardons, nothing else, he didn't say Rhaenrya was an usurper, why would he?? The Blacks had just won  the war in Rhaenrya's name, they considered Aegon 2 a traitor and  they certainly didn't give a flying fuck about his decrees, the maestres certainly did tho, as They need a reason why Aegon 3 was a King  while Rhaenrya was an usurper.

Blacks did won the war but it was Pyrrhic victory for them and total loss for Targaryen dynasty. Realm would fall apart without diplomacy, since dragons that kept it together was mostly gone, now alliances and political maneuvering would be needed much more. 

Corlys mentions Aegon II as king in his conversation with Lord Stark and even Cregan considered Aegon II king, he after all tried many people for regicide. Those are among most prominent Blacks.

Quote

“You may slither this way and that way but, oh, your fangs are venomous. Aegon was an oathbreaker, a kinslayer, and a usurper, yet still a king. When he would not heed your craven’s counsel, you removed him as a craven would, dishonorably, with poison…and now you shall answer for it.”

Westeros is society heavily influenced with blood, heritage and tradition, and there is important element of continuity in political succession, be it as it may peace agreement named Aegon III as successor of Aegon II not Rhaenyra.

Edited by Eltharion21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

Blacks did won the war but it was Pyrrhic victory for them and total loss for Targaryen dynasty. Realm would fall apart without diplomacy, since dragons that kept it together was mostly gone, now alliances and political maneuvering would be needed much more. 

Corlys mentions Aegon II as king in his conversation with Lord Stark and even Cregan considered Aegon II king, he after all tried many people for regicide. Those are among most prominent Blacks.

Westeros is society heavily influenced with blood, heritage and tradition, and there is important element of continuity in political succession, be it as it may peace agreement named Aegon III as successor of Aegon II not Rhaenyra.

You are twisting things. There is not just one view. There is the view of the Greens-turned-Black who murdered Aegon II, and there is the view of the actual victors of the war - who won the war in the name and under the banner of Rhaenyra.

And the victorious Blacks had no issue continuing the war, in fact Cregan Stark wanted to destroy all the traitors who had fought for Aegon II. It is also quite apparent that he only turns against Corlys because the man insists on making a peace he, Cregan, does not want - not to mention that he is pissed that he couldn't kill Aegon II himself.

And again - the decision to make Aegon III king was made long before anyone agreed to Corlys's peace proposals. It was agreed when the entire court of Aegon II decided to kill him - because that was necessary to save themselves.

If there had been loyal so-called Greens left - or anyone in the Realm had still cared about the cripple on the throne - they would have continued the war after the murder of Aegon II because his murder was treachery and betrayal of the worst kind.

But the entire Realm welcomed his death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eltharion21 said:

Blacks did won the war but it was Pyrrhic victory for them and total loss for Targaryen dynasty. Realm would fall apart without diplomacy, since dragons that kept it together was mostly gone, now alliances and political maneuvering would be needed much more. 

Was it?? Both the Vale and  the North had manpower left to carry on the war and  while the Riverlands lacked on manpower, their army was the most battle hardened of the field, the only opposition the Blacks might face was Oldtown and  the Tyrells weren't about to leave Lyonel having his way.

The Blacks won and  they had power  enough to impose  whatever they wanted as in fact only the Citadel cared to say Aegon didn't ascended through his mother, yet in the Battle of the Kingsroad it was Rhaenrya's 

quartered banners the Lads  carried on.

 

You're arguing your own strawman, no one says that they didn't consider Aegon 2 a King, but the Blacks had zero reasons to hear and oblige the decrees of someone they considered an usurper, the Blacks were there to kill said  King and crowning  Rhaenrya's heir.

 

 

Quote

Westeros is society heavily influenced with blood, heritage and tradition, and there is important element of continuity in political succession, be it as it may peace agreement named Aegon III as successor of Aegon II not Rhaenyra.

Care to show the quotes of Blacks forsaking Rhaenrya's cause?? Care to show the quotes where Corlys made clear that Aegon the young was only crowned because of his uncle's decree?? The fact of the decree just happened to be in concordance with what happened helped a great deal the maesters writing whatever they want half a century later.

But that's not to say Cregan cared about anything that came out of Aegon the elder's mouth, nor the Lads and certainly not Jeyne Arryn.

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, frenin said:

Was it?? Both the Vale and  the North had manpower left to carry on the war and  while the Riverlands lacked on manpower, their army was the most battle hardened of the field, the only opposition the Blacks might face was Oldtown and  the Tyrells weren't about to leave Lyonel having his way.

The Blacks won and  they had power  enough to impose  whatever they wanted as in fact only the Citadel cared to say Aegon didn't ascended through his mother, yet in the Battle of the Kingsroad it was Rhaenrya's 

quartered banners the Lads  carried on.

Rhaenyra won the war at Duskendale, basically. She wrote letters and the armies came. She just died before she could celebrate her victory. Aegon II never had a chance. Even if he hadn't acted as stupidly as he did when rejection the idea of making peace (which could, perhaps, have dissuaded some Riverlords from joining the Lads - but not all of them considering Cregan's army was crossing the Riverlands on their way to KL) they wouldn't have had the manpower to stop both the Vale forces and the Northmen.

Share this post


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

You are twisting things. There is not just one view. There is the view of the Greens-turned-Black who murdered Aegon II, and there is the view of the actual victors of the war - who won the war in the name and under the banner of Rhaenyra.

And the victorious Blacks had no issue continuing the war, in fact Cregan Stark wanted to destroy all the traitors who had fought for Aegon II. It is also quite apparent that he only turns against Corlys because the man insists on making a peace he, Cregan, does not want - not to mention that he is pissed that he couldn't kill Aegon II himself.

That is the view of two major supporters of the Blacks, House Stark and House Velaryon, what specific "victors of the war" are you talking about: the Lads? They go with the flow being cozened by clubfoot and Seasnake and later Cregan riles them up and they readily accept to besiege Storm's End,  Muppets as they are.

Winning battles isn't always leading to winning the war, if you even recall Robb Stark.

Corlys won the war for Blacks through diplomacy (letters).

Cregan has his own understanding of honor and justice,  some might feel it flawed or arbitrary (like I do for reasons of letting Seasnake and Velaryons of the hook), but both him and Corlys state Aegon as the king. He was ready to continue fighting, since his forces weren't spent at all since he came late. Despite his warmongering he reiterates similar goals as False dawn council ultimately, and eventually returns his authority when answer to generous terms sent by Corlys arrive.

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If there had been loyal so-called Greens left - or anyone in the Realm had still cared about the cripple on the throne - they would have continued the war after the murder of Aegon II because his murder was treachery and betrayal of the worst kind.

But the entire Realm welcomed his death.

People are mostly tend to govern through their own self-interest whatever high ideals they try to claim. Aegon II never did claim to have or pursued his claim in large part through popularity or "love" of his subjects as his rival did, but on traditions, laws and decision of Great Council.

Legacy of both main contenders marks one as Usurper and other as Maegor's Teats.

We don't see realm weeping over either of them, in comparison person who wen't most to avenge Rhaenyra after her death, hadn't even chance to meet her once, but had his own agenda as you claim yourself.

Greens still had manpower, funds but they lacked leadership and will to continue fighting the war. Generous terms and wise decision of current head of houses, mostly female nudged them in direction toward peace, with Cregan's direction war could have lasted for more years eventually leading to fragmented Westeros . Hightowers were last to accept peace, but when they saw they were alone pragmatism prevailed.

Quote

Rhaenyra won the war at Duskendale, basically. She wrote letters and the armies came. She just died before she could celebrate her victory. Aegon II never had a chance. Even if he hadn't acted as stupidly as he did when rejection the idea of making peace (which could, perhaps, have dissuaded some Riverlords from joining the Lads - but not all of them considering Cregan's army was crossing the Riverlands on their way to KL) they wouldn't have had the manpower to stop both the Vale forces and the Northmen.

Rhaenyra absolutely didn't win war at Duskendale, she would likely suffer similar fate as Aegon II ( or tv Daenerys) did if she insisted on repercussions , vengeance and  more bloodshed.

8000- 20.000 Northmen and 10.000 Vale forces aren't unsurmountable odds, especially if Aegon II accepted pardon policy before battle of Kingsroad, it would cause division certainly in ranks of approaching armies. Having Velaryon fleet to stop Vale from coming by sea and Baratheons , Crownlands, Sellswords funded by royal treasury and Hightower who still wielded lot of power  all would be enough to tip scale of conflict. 

Corlys mentions same during Hour of the Wolf in talk with Cregan:

Quote

Lord Velaryon would not be moved. “King Aegon said the same and died for it. Had he heeded our counsel and offered peace and pardon to his foes, he might be sitting with us here today.”

 

Edited by Eltharion21

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

×