Targaryen Line of Succession at the earliest stages of writing

[Mithras]

From the 1993 outline:

Quote

Jaime Lannister will follow Joffrey on the throne of the Seven Kingdoms, by the simple expedient of killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession and blaming his brother Tyrion for the murders.

How could Jaime Lannister possibly be in the line of succession?

From AGoT:

Quote

 

Robert sat down again. “Damn you, Ned Stark. You and Jon Arryn, I loved you both. What have you done to me? You were the one should have been king, you or Jon.”

“You had the better claim, Your Grace.”

 

What claim did Jon Arryn and Ned Stark have to the Iron Throne and what was Robert’s claim that was better than the two? Don’t talk about his Targaryen grandmother because she did not exist when AGoT was written.

From AGoT:

Quote

 

Many of the lords bannermen wanted to march on Harrenhal at once, to meet Lord Tywin and end Lannister power for all time. Young, hot-tempered Marq Piper urged a strike west at Casterly Rock instead. Still others counseled patience. Riverrun sat athwart the Lannister supply lines, Jason Mallister pointed out; let them bide their time, denying Lord Tywin fresh levies and provisions while they strengthened their defenses and rested their weary troops. Lord Blackwood would have none of it. They should finish the work they began in the Whispering Wood. March to Harrenhal and bring Roose Bolton’s army down as well. What Blackwood urged, Bracken opposed, as ever; Lord Jonos Bracken rose to insist they ought pledge their fealty to King Renly, and move south to join their might to his.

“Renly is not the king,” Robb said. It was the first time her son had spoken. Like his father, he knew how to listen.

“You cannot mean to hold to Joffrey, my lord,” Galbart Glover said. “He put your father to death.”

“That makes him evil,” Robb replied. “I do not know that it makes Renly king. Joffrey is still Robert’s eldest trueborn son, so the throne is rightfully his by all the laws of the realm. Were he to die, and I mean to see that he does, he has a younger brother. Tommen is next in line after Joffrey.”

“Tommen is no less a Lannister,” Ser Marq Piper snapped.

“As you say,” said Robb, troubled. “Yet if neither one is king, still, how could it be Lord Renly? He’s Robert’s younger brother. Bran can’t be Lord of Winterfell before me, and Renly can’t be king before Lord Stannis.”

Lady Mormont agreed. “Lord Stannis has the better claim.”

“Renly is crowned,” said Marq Piper. “Highgarden and Storm’s End support his claim, and the Dornishmen will not be laggardly. If Winterfell and Riverrun add their strength to his, he will have five of the seven great houses behind him. Six, if the Arryns bestir themselves! Six against the Rock! My lords, within the year, we will have all their heads on pikes, the queen and the boy king, Lord Tywin, the Imp, the Kingslayer, Ser Kevan, all of them! That is what we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?”

“The right,” said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.

“So you mean us to declare for Stannis?” asked Edmure.

“I don’t know,” said Robb. “I prayed to know what to do, but the gods did not answer. The Lannisters killed my father for a traitor, and we know that was a lie, but if Joffrey is the lawful king and we fight against him, we will be traitors.”

 

Recall that the letter of Stannis did not exist in AGoT and no one knew about the twincest while this council took place. Apparently, GRRM was going to have “Robb’s Rebellion” as a replicate of Robert’s Rebellion. It was supposed to be a rebellion against an evil, yet still lawful king, just like it was against Aerys.

Even if Robb’s argument was right and Joffrey ceased to be the lawful king for being a tyrant just like Aerys, what about Joffrey’s siblings? What about Viserys and Dany for that matter?

From AGoT:

Quote

“MY LORDS!” he shouted, his voice booming off the rafters. “Here is what I say to these two kings!” He spat. “Renly Baratheon is nothing to me, nor Stannis neither. Why should they rule over me and mine, from some flowery seat in Highgarden or Dorne? What do they know of the Wall or the wolfswood or the barrows of the First Men? Even their gods are wrong. The Others take the Lannisters too, I’ve had a bellyful of them.” He reached back over his shoulder and drew his immense two-handed greatsword. “Why shouldn’t we rule ourselves again? It was the dragons we married, and the dragons are all dead!” He pointed at Robb with the blade. “There sits the only king I mean to bow my knee to, m’lords,” he thundered. “The King in the North!”

I don’t believe Greatjon was talking figuratively when he mentioned marrying dragons. There is another similar argument from AGoT. There is an instance where Dany boasts of being the blood of Maegor. This was literally true when AGoT was written because the Targaryen family at the time being had Alysanne as the daughter of Maegor.

Was Greatjon talking about some sort of Targaryen-Stark marriage back in the day, which would also explain how Ned could have a claim to the Iron Throne as implied in the same book?

From ACoK:

Quote

Renly shrugged. “Tell me, what right did my brother Robert ever have to the Iron Throne?” He did not wait for an answer. “Oh, there was talk of the blood ties between Baratheon and Targaryen, of weddings a hundred years past, of second sons and elder daughters. No one but the maesters care about any of it. Robert won the throne with his warhammer.”

ACoK is the first time GRRM mentioned marriage ties between Baratheons and Targaryens which proved the legal part of Robert’s claim. Note that this happens after a massive expansion of the saga. But still, the text reads like GRRM has not figured out the details of how exactly Robert had Targaryen ancestry. That would have to wait for AFfC.

My speculation is that there was indeed past Targaryen marriages for Baratheons, Starks, Arryns and even Lannisters at the earliest conception of the story, which would all give them varying degrees of claims to the Targaryen seat. There is no other way to explain all the clues from the 1993 outline and AGoT. As a matter of fact, considering the War of the Roses as a template for ASOIAF, it is rather curious that the high nobility of Westeros does not have Targaryen blood like the Yorks and Lancasters had Plantagenet ancestry.

And guess what? After the world expanded, GRRM still retained some of these marriages in various forms, although changing his mind about which characters should have Targaryen blood.

1. Baratheons were given a very recent Targaryen ancestry because GRRM felt that it was essential to explain Robert’s coronation.
2. Lannisters seem to have lost any possible Targaryen ancestry; unless GRRM has plans to provide them through Viserys Plumm’s daughter.
3. Arryns had three marriages with the Targaryens but none of them ended up providing Targaryen ancestry to Jon Arryn.
4. Starks were also explicitly forbidden by GRRM from Targaryen ancestry for some reason. Interestingly, GRRM played with the idea of the “Pact of Ice and Fire” and the rumor of a northern type marriage/bedding between a Targaryen prince and the bastard daughter of Lord Stark.

Conclusion

According to the earliest plans of GRRM, the Starks had distant but definitive Targaryen ancestry and thus a claim to a unified Westeros, which might have provided enough groundwork to make one of Ned’s children to ascend to the throne. But that ship has sailed long time ago.

 

[Lord Varys]

The original outline and Evil Jaime seem to be remnants of a completely abandoned much simpler plot where the brother of the queen eventually usurps the throne. Hardly something special since that would just take Robert's usurpation to the next logical step. We sort of got a variation of that plot, anyway, with Renly's attempted usurpation.

All you need for a successful usurpation is the muscle. If all rightful heirs are dead, somebody still has to wear the crown. And that would have been Jaime in the outline.

[Mithras]

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The original outline and Evil Jaime seem to be remnants of a completely abandoned much simpler plot where the brother of the queen eventually usurps the throne. Hardly something special since that would just take Robert's usurpation to the next logical step. We sort of got a variation of that plot, anyway, with Renly's attempted usurpation.

All you need for a successful usurpation is the muscle. If all rightful heirs are dead, somebody still has to wear the crown. And that would have been Jaime in the outline.

The wording is clear. "killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession" means Jaime was in that succession line as well.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Mithras said:

The wording is clear. "killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession" means Jaime was in that succession line as well.

Only if you assume George had a clear concept of a line of succession in that piece.

And, frankly, we do know that widows do have a weak claim to the lands of their husband. A childless widow can take over the seat of her husband as seen with Lady Dustin or Donella Hornwood. And if Ramsay can lay claim to Hornwood by means of the claim of his late wife, then Cersei's brother could also lay claim to the Iron Throne as her brother - just as Barbrey's brothers likely could claim Barrowton after her death by means of being the brothers of the last lady.

[Mithras]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Only if you assume George had a clear concept of a line of succession in that piece.

Well, if you think that GRRM was clueless enough to not know the first thing about the line of succession (despite having history minor), yeah.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And, frankly, we do know that widows do have a weak claim to the lands of their husband. A childless widow can take over the seat of her husband as seen with Lady Dustin or Donella Hornwood. And if Ramsay can lay claim to Hornwood by means of the claim of his late wife, then Cersei's brother could also lay claim to the Iron Throne as her brother - just as Barbrey's brothers likely could claim Barrowton after her death by means of being the brothers of the last lady.

Are you also claiming that Lady Dustin has no Dustin ancestry or Lady Hornwood (and even the Boltons) have no Hornwood ancestry?

[Vaith]

18 minutes ago, Mithras said:

Well, if you think that GRRM was clueless enough to not know the first thing about the line of succession (despite having history minor), yeah.

There is no reason why Westeros's line of succession would have to mirror those common to medieval Europe in our world. Why couldn't spousal inheritance simply be a feature of Westeros's society in GRRM's initial draft?

20 minutes ago, Mithras said:

Are you also claiming that Lady Dustin has no Dustin ancestry or Lady Hornwood (and even the Boltons) have no Hornwood ancestry?

With the houses of the north existing for millennia, every noble in the north will have some degree of ancestry from a specific house. Barbrey Dustin, Donella Hornwood and Ramsay Snow are not claiming their seats through their ancestry, but through their late spouses.

[Lord Varys]

45 minutes ago, Vaith said:

There is no reason why Westeros's line of succession would have to mirror those common to medieval Europe in our world. Why couldn't spousal inheritance simply be a feature of Westeros's society in GRRM's initial draft?

It is also rather daring to treat a prelimary draft never intended for publication or even wide circulation as document revealing or drawing on world-building details of an unwritten novel.

I think it is perfectly fine to interpret the draft there as Jaime killing everybody who stood between him and the throne ... or who could challenge 'his claim' to the throne.

45 minutes ago, Vaith said:

With the houses of the north existing for millennia, every noble in the north will have some degree of ancestry from a specific house. Barbrey Dustin, Donella Hornwood and Ramsay Snow are not claiming their seats through their ancestry, but through their late spouses.

Exactly. And the show also used that plot device for Cersei. I don't think that will happen in the books, but if Tommen and Myrcella were dead (or Shireen and Stannis) somebody would have to claim the throne in their stead. And if no other claimants were around, somebody still would take the throne. A widowed queen or the new husband of a widowed queen makes sense in such a scenario.

That is also the reason why I think Euron and Cersei will hook up - she will give him a claim to the Iron Throne, however weak it might be.

[Vaith]

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Exactly. And the show also used that plot device for Cersei. I don't think that will happen in the books, but if Tommen and Myrcella were dead (or Shireen and Stannis) somebody would have to claim the throne in their stead. And if no other claimants were around, somebody still would take the throne. A widowed queen or the new husband of a widowed queen makes sense in such a scenario.

That is also the reason why I think Euron and Cersei will hook up - she will give him a claim to the Iron Throne, however weak it might be.

Books only please on this side of the forum, as some consider these things from the later seasons to be spoilers.  

If that situation did occur with no claimants around, I think a Great Council would be likely be the best scenario as the throne is much more important than Hornwood or Barrowton. More specifically because at this point in the series Cersei is not in a situation where all the court thinks very highly of her rather than it being legally unthinkable though.

In any case, spousal inheritance is not that unheard of in the real world. Catherine the Great, anyone? And Margaret of Denmark became ruling queen of Norway and Sweden through a husband and son who predeceased her.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Vaith said:

If that situation did occur with no claimants around, I think a Great Council would be likely be the best scenario as the throne is much more important than Hornwood or Barrowton. More specifically because at this point in the series Cersei is not in a situation where all the court thinks very highly of her rather than it being legally unthinkable though.

In a peaceful situation no doubt. We can, for instance, expect a Great Council to be convened if the Targaryens and Baratheons had all gone down with Steffon Baratheon and his wife.

But in the middle of a war or uncertain times like right now one certainly could see an ambitious man to make Margaery or Cersei a ruling queen without consulting anyone first - or use their claims as a pretext to make oneself king.

That this kind of thing could work in Westeros is also indicate with Rogar Baratheon's veiled ambitions for the Iron Throne. It is no coincidence that Gyldayn reports how people asked themselves what the consort of a queen is if not a king... This shows us that in Westeros, too, the way to kingship can go through the marriage to a queen. I had thought it might turn out that Trystane Truefyre's goons forced Queen Alicent to marry him, to strengthen his claim. That could have worked, too.

And we see George doing exactly that in Meereen with Hizdahr who becomes king by means of marrying Daenerys.

Cersei would be pretty much soiled goods for something like that after her walk, but she will always remain a queen dowager, and since she is also the Lady of Casterly Rock she certainly could ally with, say, Euron (or another powerful man) and add some legitimacy to his cause.

When they reach the level where the ultimate price is essentially up for the highest bidder/the guy with the biggest stick whoever that is will at least try to gain some semblance of legitimacy and legality. And that's what such widowed queens could provide. How much support some distant Targaryen cousins would be able to muster in such a scenario is very difficult to say, but a marriage with such people certainly could also help.