Jump to content
LordSeaSnake

Rhea Royce and Succession

Recommended Posts

The family tree of House Royce during the 90s to the 130s doesn't make much sense. When Yorbert Royce is Lord of Runestone, Rhea was his heir. This makes sense for Rhea to be his daughter or granddaughter. However, when she dies, she is succeeded by a nephew. If Rhea's nephew was the son of her brother, why didn't this nephew succeed Yorbert in the first place? If the nephew was the son of Rhea's sister, why would he continue the family over an uncle?

While daughters typically inherit before an uncle, would their children inherit their mother's lands if they are already taking their father's name and their maternal family is not facing extinction? If this was normal in Westeros, I would assume this would lead to more power grabs from lords trying to claim their wives' lands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daughters come before anyone that isn't a son. So Rhea would come before any male relatives that weren't her brothers.

After she died Runestone passed to a nephew or cousin. I don't see the complication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhea coming before an uncle makes sense. But does a daughter's son come before an uncle if that daughter wasn't intended to inherit? In this case, Rhea's nephew comes before any uncles or cousins, even though he likely would have taken his father's surname and only descends from House Royce maternally.

If Edmure Tully died childless, would Riverrun go to a Stark, or to Ser Brynden? I suppose a lot depends on the circumstances, and obviously inheritance isn't clearcut.

Share this post


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

If Edmure Tully died childless, would Riverrun go to a Stark, or to Ser Brynden? I suppose a lot depends on the circumstances, and obviously inheritance isn't clearcut.

Assuming the Freys don't get Riverrun and Edmure dies chidless, the line of succession would be: Edmure > Catelyn > Robb > Bran > Rickon > Sansa > Arya > Lysa > Robert > Brynden.

For the Royces, it probably went like this: Yorbert > Rhea (Yorbert's daughter ?) > Rhea's younger sister > Rhea's nephew > Gunthor (Yorbert's younger brother ?).

(Note: Strikethrough = The characters were already dead by the time they could have inherit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhea's nephew was either the son of her sister or brother - and if the latter is the case then it is quite clear what happened: The Old King declared Rhea Royce the heir to Runestone when he arranged the marriage between his grandson Prince Daemon and Rhea Royce, to ensure that this royal prince would one day rule a plump lordship and not be stuck with a landless wife.

And to be sure, Gunthor Royce could have been the nephew who succeeded Lady Rhea. We have no idea how old Rhea was in relation to Daemon Targaryen. He was sixteen in 97 AC, but Rhea could have been 26 or even 36 for all we know. If she was considerably older than her young princely husband then her nephew would have already been pretty old in the 130s.

Considering that Lady Jeyne Arryn also inherited the Vale in 97 AC - the year of Daemon's marriage - those things might be linked. Aemma Arryn had been married to Prince Viserys for four years at the time, meaning the Targaryens were pretty invested in House Arryn at the time. The decision to allow Jeyne to inherit the Vale rather than to give in to the reasonable demands of her male cousins (who would have been much more suited to rule than a three-year-old girl) may be connected to the Daemon-Rhea match. One can see Yorbert Royce acknowledge a daughter or granddaughter as his heir rather than a son or grandson if said daughter is married to a royal prince with a dragon (assuming Daemon was already riding Caraxes) and he, Yorbert Royce, is allowed to rule the Vale of Arryn as Lord Protector during Lady Jeyne's minority. After all, Yorbert is possibly an odd choice for that considering there were male Arryns around. Although it is also not that unlikely Aemma's elder half-sister Amanda Arryn may have married into House Royce, making her a close relation of Yorbert's - either his wife or daughter-in-law. This could explain why Yorbert Royce was able to rule the Vale during Jeyne's minority.

One could also assume that Gunthor (if he were the nephew) was a Royce on both sides, meaning his mother, a sister of Lady Rhea, married some Royce cousin from a lesser branch. But that would be the usual way to explain away a thing like that.

Share this post


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

Rhea's nephew was either the son of her sister or brother - and if the latter is the case then it is quite clear what happened: The Old King declared Rhea Royce the heir to Runestone when he arranged the marriage between his grandson Prince Daemon and Rhea Royce, to ensure that this royal prince would one day rule a plump lordship and not be stuck with a landless wife.

Highly unlikely that Jaehaerys would pass a son in favour of a daughter. You could be right about the events in 97 AC though. Yorbert could have been married to Elys or Amanda and Jaehaerys agreed he would be lord protector if he named his daughter heir ahead of a brother.

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And to be sure, Gunthor Royce could have been the nephew who succeeded Lady Rhea. We have no idea how old Rhea was in relation to Daemon Targaryen. He was sixteen in 97 AC, but Rhea could have been 26 or even 36 for all we know. If she was considerably older than her young princely husband then her nephew would have already been pretty old in the 130s.

While Rhea might have been a bit older than Daemon, it does not seem likely to me that the eldest daughter of the second most powerful lord in the Vale would be still unwed in her mid 20ies. More likely she was born around 80 AC and Gunthor was her uncle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Highly unlikely that Jaehaerys would pass a son in favour of a daughter.

We know nothing about Jaehaerys I's view on highborn women outside his family ... and there he wanted his sister-wife to rule beside him. He favored his own sons over his granddaughter and great-grandchildren but that's hardly surprising. I expect him to have intended to make Daemon the Lord of Runestone by this match, anyway. Rhea would have just 'helped to rule', one imagines.

The succession of Jeyne Arryn shows that if things are unclear for one reason or another the Iron Throne rules on a succession. And back before the Dance one would not expect much opposition in such a case.

3 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

While Rhea might have been a bit older than Daemon, it does not seem likely to me that the eldest daughter of the second most powerful lord in the Vale would be still unwed in her mid 20ies. More likely she was born around 80 AC and Gunthor was her uncle.

We should not necessarily assume Yorbert was the father of Rhea. Could be, but he could also be her grandfather. All we know is that Rhea was the heir to the Vale in 97 AC. And if Gunthor was not her nephew there is no need to assume he was her uncle - he could just as well be a distant cousin of her since Rhea's line of Royce could have died out with her nephew - who could then indeed have a son of a sister rather than a son of a nonexisting brother.

There is also no need to assume that Daemon Targaryen was the first husband of Rhea Royce. Perhaps she was a widow twice over? We don't know. If close male kin (and her last husband) died in the same campaign that got Jeyne's father killed then she may have become heir to Runestone in that same year ... which would then have caused the interest of the Targaryens to resolve the Daemon issue. One can see how the king's eye looked towards Runestone in that case with one of his granddaughters being an Arryn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We know nothing about Jaehaerys I's view on highborn women outside his family

We know Jaehaerys was a conservative guy. Anyway, no lord would pass a son or grandson ahead in line in favour of a daughter or granddaughter just to become lord protector for some time. Does not make any sense to me. Since there were male Royces around at that point, it would not even make sense to let some Targaryens inherit your seat. The Royces are really proud of their origins and history and suddenly one of them decides to handle their seat over to another family? Would make much more sense if it was clear that any heir of Rhea and Daemon would carry on the Royce name.

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We should not necessarily assume Yorbert was the father of Rhea. Could be, but he could also be her grandfather. All we know is that Rhea was the heir to the Vale in 97 AC. And if Gunthor was not her nephew there is no need to assume he was her uncle - he could just as well be a distant cousin of her since Rhea's line of Royce could have died out with her nephew - who could then indeed have a son of a sister rather than a son of a nonexisting brother.

Sure, but my approach is to keep it simple. If it is way more complicated than that (as you propose), we do not have any chance to figure it out, anyway. The simplest solution so far is: Rhea was the daughter of Yorbert or daughter of his eldest son, Yorbert confirmed she would inherit ahead of any male relatives (but not ahead any male who would have come ahead of her), when Rhea died Jeyne Arryn spoke in favour of a son of Rhea's sister or a son of Rhea's cousin, Viserys did not care and agreed, when the nephew died, succession went through an elder generation, Gunthor could have been an uncle of Rhea (simple) or more distant relation (more complicated). In my opinion this makes sense. Your approach might make a more interesting story, but is way too convoluted in regard that it is never addressed in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

We know Jaehaerys was a conservative guy. Anyway, no lord would pass a son or grandson ahead in line in favour of a daughter or granddaughter just to become lord protector for some time. Does not make any sense to me. Since there were male Royces around at that point, it would not even make sense to let some Targaryens inherit your seat. The Royces are really proud of their origins and history and suddenly one of them decides to handle their seat over to another family? Would make much more sense if it was clear that any heir of Rhea and Daemon would carry on the Royce name.

I don't think we can say Jaehaerys I was conservative. He effectively co-ruled the Seven Kingdoms with his sister-wife and he had her and another woman sit on his council. He may not have been as progressive as Alysanne, but I don't think 'conservative' is the right way to describe him. I'd say his preference for his sons (Vaegon included) should be seen as that - not as a principle objection to the prospect of female rule.

But even if this were the case - we are talking about a power grab here. Daemon Targaryen was given the hand of an heiress to ensure he and his children would have a proper lordship of their own. In such a case principles and convictions matter much less than the objective at hand - which would have been to get Daemon out of the way and/or to give him a proper seat for himself.

Thus the question here is not so much what the Royces wanted but what the Old King, Baelon the Brave, and Daemon Targaryen wanted.

The issue of the name never arose but I'm pretty sure Daemon Targaryen would have never suffered it if any of his sons would have been named 'Royce'.

But in the end such an issue only arises if we assume Rhea had a brother. If her nephew was the son of her younger sister (and said sister was married to some distant Royce cousin) then everything is fine the way it is.

1 hour ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Sure, but my approach is to keep it simple. If it is way more complicated than that (as you propose), we do not have any chance to figure it out, anyway. The simplest solution so far is: Rhea was the daughter of Yorbert or daughter of his eldest son, Yorbert confirmed she would inherit ahead of any male relatives (but not ahead any male who would have come ahead of her), when Rhea died Jeyne Arryn spoke in favour of a son of Rhea's sister or a son of Rhea's cousin, Viserys did not care and agreed, when the nephew died, succession went through an elder generation, Gunthor could have been an uncle of Rhea (simple) or more distant relation (more complicated). In my opinion this makes sense. Your approach might make a more interesting story, but is way too convoluted in regard that it is never addressed in the books.

Well, the idea here is just that I'm not convinced we have to imagine Gunthor as not being Rhea's nephew. Could be, or not. Impossible to say, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What about the fact that Daemon T was a dragon rider and so his potential children would have chances of being one?

Or would Royces be allowed to become another dragonlord house?

What plans J I had to stop that happening?

Edited by Loose Bolt
Rhea was a Royce not an Arryn :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2020 at 7:42 AM, Loose Bolt said:

What about the fact that Daemon T was a dragon rider and so his potential children would have chances of being one?

Or would Royces be allowed to become another dragonlord house?

What plans J I had to stop that happening?

That's a great question. I'm guessing that if Daemon and Rhea had children, they would have taken the Targaryen name. I'm not sure what would have become of Runestone then, if whichever child inherited it assumed the name Royce, or if it would have essentially become another Targaryen castle. I'm guessing the latter, judging by how the Targs like to consolidate power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

That's a great question. I'm guessing that if Daemon and Rhea had children, they would have taken the Targaryen name. I'm not sure what would have become of Runestone then, if whichever child inherited it assumed the name Royce, or if it would have essentially become another Targaryen castle. I'm guessing the latter, judging by how the Targs like to consolidate power.

I'm pretty sure any child of Daemon Targaryen's would have been named Targaryen. Anything else is pretty much inconceivable. Meaning that Rhea's heirs would have been no longer the Royces of Runestone but the Targaryens of Runestone.

And that would have been clear when this marriage was made.

Share this post


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

I'm pretty sure any child of Daemon Targaryen's would have been named Targaryen. Anything else is pretty much inconceivable. Meaning that Rhea's heirs would have been no longer the Royces of Runestone but the Targaryens of Runestone.

And that would have been clear when this marriage was made.

There goes Daemon, ruining Grandpa's real estate plan.

It's a shame that we know so little about Rhea. I feel like if GRRM wrote The Rogue Prince today, we would have learned at least a bit more about her character. The parts of Fire and Blood that were written more recently were much more detailed, and I think you can say the same about AFFC and ADWD. Maybe Rhea was a wretched person herself, but it seems more likely that Daemon was just a terrible husband. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

There goes Daemon, ruining Grandpa's real estate plan.

Well, to be sure, it might have been part real estate plan and part 'rid the court for this Maegor wannabe grandson'. And it was pretty good trap - Daemon couldn't possibly refuse a plump heiress for a bride, and if he had raised a family there he would also have a vested interest in securing their future there.

8 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

It's a shame that we know so little about Rhea. I feel like if GRRM wrote The Rogue Prince today, we would have learned at least a bit more about her character. The parts of Fire and Blood that were written more recently were much more detailed, and I think you can say the same about AFFC and ADWD. Maybe Rhea was a wretched person herself, but it seems more likely that Daemon was just a terrible husband. 

That is one of my biggest problems with FaB. It is an unbalanced history. It is also kind of bad that we have so little detail on the Conqueror and his sisters, but that's the beginning of the book, and the furthest in the past. One can pretend that the source material isn't that good back then (although that doesn't make any sense considering Aegon the Conqueror would be the most famous Targaryen of all time, meaning that both during his lifetime and in the centuries thereafter a ton of books must have been written about his reign).

But as things get more detailed in TSotD and especially in all the Jaehaerys material it is really very off-putting how the narrative reverts back to the very superficial and cursory narrative in HotD.

If you go by time of writing things get more and more detailed starting with TSoD, HotD and then the Dance material - the most detailed first batch material are the Regency chapters. There we have the most detailed accounts coming close to the bulk of the Jaehaerys material.

The problem is that HotD wasn't thoroughly rewritten/expanded to make it fit better with the Dance material and that George didn't bother to write a detailed account on Jaehaerys I's grandchildren.

The Dance is missing a lot of depth because we really don't know Daemon very well - there are those opaque references that Viserys I remembered their youth fondly and stuff - but we have no clue what this means, no idea what kind of bond was between them. Meaning we cannot really decipher the character or presume to understand him - unlike with a character like Queen Rhaena - who in my opinion is the most complex and female character in all of George's ASoIaF writing. It would be great if he had done a similar thing for Jaehaerys I's grandchildren, too.

If any of that were done we would have gotten a better image of Rhea, too, of course.

Jocelyn Baratheon, Septa Rhaella, and Archmaester Vaegon aside, I find Aemma Arryn is the character fared the worst in FaB. We don't even know he she looked like, much less why she was married to Viserys at that early age after her mother had already died in childbirth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Jocelyn Baratheon, Septa Rhaella, and Archmaester Vaegon aside, I find Aemma Arryn is the character fared the worst in FaB. We don't even know he she looked like, much less why she was married to Viserys at that early age after her mother had already died in childbirth.

Yeah it's a shame. We can add the sovereigns of the Conquest who survived to the list: Torrhen Stark, Ronnel Arryn, Loren Lannister, Argella Durrandon, Meria Martell. We get a bit more of Meria because of the First Dornish War, but not much..

 

To go back to the Royces. I'd like your opinions on Ser Willum Willam Royce.

After the visit of Prince Jacaerys Velaryon at the Eyrie, Lady Jeyne Arryn sends men from the Vale by sea by way of Gulltown to join Rhaenyra at King's Landing. I'm guessing Willam came with them. The fact that we wielded Lamentation, the Royce's Valyrian steel sword, is interesting. You don't give the family Valyrian steel sword to your distant cousin, you keep it in the main line. If old Gunthor was already the Lord of Runestone during the Dance, then given his advanced age, it would make sense for him to give it to a son or a grandson. Do you guys see Ser Willam as Gunthor's heir ?

Also I might have simply forgot, but do we know where these Valemen (so not the ones who came later with Lady Jeyne and the Corbray brothers) fought during the Dance ? Were they among the men Ser Addam Velaryon assembled for the Second Tumbleton (in my memory those guys were rivermen only but I can be wrong) ?

Edited by Thomaerys Velaryon

Share this post


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

That is one of my biggest problems with FaB. It is an unbalanced history.

Agreed, I found that some of the great houses got ignored too. I get the Iron Islands are aloof from the rest of the Seven Kingdoms, but we go nearly one hundred years between Lord Goren and Lord Dalton without any details on them. The Tyrells too are hardly mentioned, aside from token references to Lords Bertrand and Martyn, we get basically nothing about them between 5 AC until the Dance of the Dragons. Even the Tullys, which are mentioned to be closely aligned to the Targaryens, but Lord Prentys is the only Tully mentioned between the Conquest and the Dance.

The book seems to skim past certain decades, such as the later decades of the Conqueror's reign, the later years of Jaehaerys's, and the bulk of Viserys'. Otherwise, certain characters just drop off the face of Westeros, including several members of the royal family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2020 at 4:34 AM, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

Yeah it's a shame. We can add the sovereigns of the Conquest who survived to the list: Torrhen Stark, Ronnel Arryn, Loren Lannister, Argella Durrandon, Meria Martell. We get a bit more of Meria because of the First Dornish War, but not much..

I think we would have gotten more about many of them if there had been more on Aegon's reign. The biggest problem there I think are really the Baratheons. George even failed to give us Rogar's parents or his first wife.

On 3/26/2020 at 4:34 AM, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

To go back to the Royces. I'd like your opinions on Ser Willum Willam Royce.

After the visit of Prince Jacaerys Velaryon at the Eyrie, Lady Jeyne Arryn sends men from the Vale by sea by way of Gulltown to join Rhaenyra at King's Landing. I'm guessing Willam came with them. The fact that we wielded Lamentation, the Royce's Valyrian steel sword, is interesting. You don't give the family Valyrian steel sword to your distant cousin, you keep it in the main line. If old Gunthor was already the Lord of Runestone during the Dance, then given his advanced age, it would make sense for him to give it to a son or a grandson. Do you guys see Ser Willam as Gunthor's heir ?

One would imagine something like that. Although we don't really know since when House Royce has those many branches. Could be that Willam was a younger branch of the house and happened to have Lamentation because it was the property of that line, not the Runestone branch.

If he was a Runestone Royce I'd expect him to have been either the heir or a least a son of the ruling lord.

On 3/26/2020 at 4:34 AM, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

Also I might have simply forgot, but do we know where these Valemen (so not the ones who came later with Lady Jeyne and the Corbray brothers) fought during the Dance ? Were they among the men Ser Addam Velaryon assembled for the Second Tumbleton (in my memory those guys were rivermen only but I can be wrong) ?

Those seem to have been indeed only Riverlanders since Addam assembled a new host by calling on various castles in the Riverlands. He fled from KL on dragonback, and couldn't exactly take anyone with him that way.

One imagines that there were some original Vale men among the army Rhaenyra used to take KL. Only half her forces in that army were Velaryon men, and one assumes that the lesser houses sworn to Dragonstone didn't contribute that much.

But what happened to the Northmen and Valemen who joined her at KL after her ascension is completely unclear. Some of them would have been sent down to Tumbleton to die there in First Tumbleton (the Riverlanders and Winter Wolves went there directly after the Butcher's Ball, but Rhaenyra also sent down defenders from KL).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2020 at 12:51 AM, Lord Varys said:

I'm pretty sure any child of Daemon Targaryen's would have been named Targaryen. Anything else is pretty much inconceivable. Meaning that Rhea's heirs would have been no longer the Royces of Runestone but the Targaryens of Runestone.

And that would have been clear when this marriage was made.

Why?? Jaeharys would be interested in giving lands to his blood, not taking the name. Btw, why any Royce would agree to such deal??

Share this post


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

Why?? Jaeharys would be interested in giving lands to his blood, not taking the name. Btw, why any Royce would agree to such deal??

For one, because children do bear the names of their fathers and not their mothers outside of Dorne. That was even clear for Rhaenyra Targaryen's sons - both the ones by Laenor Velaryon (who were named after him) and those by Daemon Targaryen (who were named after him, not their mother). If that's the case for the Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne then we have no reason to assume lesser people get special treatment.

But also because of Daemon Targaryen's personality. It is inconceivable that he would not pass on his name to his children. He is Daemon Targaryen, not emasculated Philip Mountbatten. And no child or daughter of a Targaryen prince would ever want to go by his mother's name (unless it was Targaryen, too).

And the Royces really are in no position to demand anything from the king or Daemon. They are a minor house and they were honored by dragonrider marrying their heiress. They would have kissed Daemon's feet, not made ridiculous demands. The Targaryens of Runestones could and likely would have become dragonriders, too, and who knows - perhaps Rhea's grandchildren would have ended up ruling the Vale in their own right, with the Arryns being a thing of the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

For one, because children do bear the names of their fathers and not their mothers outside of Dorne. That was even clear for Rhaenyra Targaryen's sons - both the ones by Laenor Velaryon (who were named after him) and those by Daemon Targaryen (who were named after him, not their mother). If that's the case for the Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne then we have no reason to assume lesser people get special treatment.

Do they?? I find it curious how female line had persisted to this day then. We know nothing about what happens if the husband is just the consort. Rhaenrya was princess when she married so it was quite obvious that Laenor's would take preference, besides that it was almost a given that Jace would simply change his name. If Queen Rhaenrya's sons had other last names than Targs, then you may have a point.

Nor do i understand Daemon's relevance here, we're discussing last names, not firsts.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 But also because of Daemon Targaryen's personality. It is inconceivable that he would not pass on his name to his children. He is Daemon Targaryen, not emasculated Philip Mountbatten. And no child or daughter of a Targaryen prince would ever want to go by his mother's name (unless it was Targaryen, too).

Emasculated or fuel of testorone, his opinion does not matter, he is the consort. What would a child of a Targ prince want to do we should discuss it when we know about said child and the context surrounding him. What would matter and prevail would be whatever arrangement the Royces and Alysanne made, since i don't think Jaeharys had anything to do with it.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 And the Royces really are in no position to demand anything from the king or Daemon. They are a minor house and they were honored by dragonrider marrying their heiress. They would have kissed Daemon's feet, not made ridiculous demands. The Targaryens of Runestones could and likely would have become dragonriders, too, and who knows - perhaps Rhea's grandchildren would have ended up ruling the Vale in their own right, with the Arryns being a thing of the past.

 The Royces are one of the most powerful and prideful Houses in the entire Realm, them being forced to change their name in exchange of marrying a Targ is a shit deal. In a world were the names last for a millenia, people don't give it up so easily. The Royce don't need Daemon, not even marrying themselves into the Targs, nor Jaeharys can force them into marriage, they can perfectly say we don't want this.

Unless all the Arryns die suddenly in a chill, is unlikely that there would ever going to be a Targ of the Eyrie, 

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

×