Lord Varys Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 7 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said: I don't think anyone has to point out the reasons why Robert Baratheon didn't take up the Targaryen name. He and his buddies still justified him becoming king with his Targaryen ancestry. Which means Robert is pretty much a Targaryen in the same way as Laenor is. Even more so, if Orys Baratheon was actually Aerion's son, because that would mean the Baratheons as a whole are an illegitimate male branch of House Targaryen. Quote I wonder why he couldn't elect his wife/children as Jaehaerys' heir. Not even with bribing anyone he could. Because folks apparently preferred male line succession. And because Laenor was a young boy and Viserys a grown man. Quote The Velaryons on the other hand weren't oneat all, which isn't better. Everyone would've been more satisfied with Jace calling himself Jacaerys Targaryen, except for Corlys, maybe. It's not like he wouldn't have won 'the game' anyway. Corlys might have known by the time of their birth that the children aren't Laenor's. Rumours started to spread immediately. If not anything else, everyone knew by the time of Lucerys' birth that neither is he the son of Laenor. Yet Corlys wanted to give them the somewhat most popular Velaryon names. If he weren't siding with Rhaenyra, none of the 3 would've inherited Driftmark. That could be a reason. As I said - the issue is not so much with Rhaenyra's sons but also with Laena and Laenor. If Corlys' children had been called 'Targaryen' since their birth to reinforce the fact that they were the true heirs to the Iron Throne then Laenor Targaryen would have challenged Viserys Targaryen in 101 AC, Laena Targaryen would have been spurned by Viserys I in 106 AC, and Laenor Targaryen would have married Rhaenyra Targaryen in 113 AC ... and subsequently Laenor Targaryen's children would have been named Targaryen, just as Daemon Targaryen's children Laena Velaryon and by Rhaenyra Targaryen later were. That Lucerys or Joffrey might later go with the name Velaryon if they succeed to Driftmark makes sense. But then they could just change their name to Velaryon, no? In fact, it actually makes no sense that Laena and Laenor don't go by their mother's name. Rhaenys and Corlys want the Iron Throne for themselves or their children. That's their agenda from 92 AC onwards. The Targaryen name could have helped with that, and while Corlys was still around his heirs would not have to call themselves Velaryon if they actually were after a much bigger price. Quote And it's not like the factions weren't drawn out already, as you sometimes say. Corlys' actual (and only) grandchildren were Baela and Rhaena, Daemon's daughters. They were bethroted to his alleged grandchildren, Jacaerys and Lucerys, whom he defended when the Silent Five's incident happened. Daemon and Otto hated each other since the 100's, and he hated his nephews for pushing him further away on the line. On the other hand, he was friends with Corlys, and his ex son-in-law. Yes, yes, the betrothals could have played a role. But in the text as given this is not mentioned. Rhaenyra is more than fond of Laena and that leads to the betrothals. Nobody mentions that Rhaenyra wants or has to suck up to Corlys and Rhaenys because of the rumors about the parentage of her sons and feels the need to marry the boys to Laena's daughters for that reason. If you think about it - Corlys Velaryon wasn't even in any need to name or keep Laenor as his heir. When Daeron married Myriah Martell, she was disinherited as heiress of Dorne in favor of her younger brother, just as Doran Martell intended to give Dorne to Quentyn when he betrothed Arianne to Viserys since that would make her the queen consort of Westeros one day. As Rhaenyra's husband, Laenor Velaryon would be the prince consort or king consort at her side. It may no longer be suitable for him to also succeed his father as Lord of Driftmark. Meaning Corlys could have made Laena and her descendants his heirs - after all, the Prince of Dorne did apparently also not view Myriah's sons by Daeron II as his heirs, no? The point why the Velaryons are kind of weirdly underdeveloped is that we don't really know how they felt about the issue of Rhaenyra/Laenor's children, Rhaenyra as a future queen, and Daemon's alleged involvement in the murder of Laenor. George didn't really properly describe this. I mean, would Ned support, say, Stannis, if there were rumors floating around Selyse had paid a guy to murder Bran? The very suspicion that the Lannisters tried to murder Bran and did murder Jon Arryn plays a huge role in the war between the Lannisters and Starks. But Corlys Velaryon is very close with the wife of the man who may have orchestrated the murder of his own son? That's certainly not completely impossible, but it is one of those things that should actually be addressed. The author should offer an explanation for something like that. 8 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said: This really seems to depend on what's the most beneficiary. As you said, a son (or daughter) of Daemon Targaryen and Rhea Royce would be a male-line descendant of the most powerful dynasty, the Targaryens. Which would allow them to have dragons, whereas remaining Royces would not benefit them this much. The reason people may seem to do this may be that the name gives influence, credibility, stability and legitimacy, but being a Targaryen would still be more beneficial. This kind of thing just shows that George didn't really bother thinking things through. He gives us a very patriarchal world on so many levels ... and then he wants us to buy the idea that the names of dynasties and noble houses do not follow patriarchal norms? That just doesn't make much sense. Children take the names of their fathers in this world, and that would also be the case when a man marries an heiress. Her children would go by the name of her husband, because men give their names to their children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.