What could Viserys I have done differently?

[Willam Stark]

Or else, marry Rhaenyra to Daemon directly then marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter.

Since they ended up together in the canon, no need to waste time and push her to sire bastards who will then pretend to be legitimate heirs.

[Jaenara Belarys]

20 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

Another thing he could have done is make allicent and rhaenyra spend more time with each other. Make them both like mother and daughter

They tried that with the children and look how well that turned out. Here: 

Quote

The sins of the fathers are oft visited on the sons, wise men have said; and so it is for the sins of mothers as well. The enmity between Queen Alicent and Princess Rhaenyra was passed on to their sons, and the queen’s three boys, the Princes Aegon, Aemond, and Daeron, grew to be bitter rivals of their Velaryon nephews, resentful of them for having stolen what they regarded as their birthright: the Iron Throne itself. Though all six boys attended the same feasts, balls, and revels, and sometimes trained together in the yard under the same master-at-arms and studied under the same maesters, this enforced closeness only served to feed their mutual mislike rather than binding them together as brothers.

I highly doubt that that would do anything about their feud, just make it even worse. 

[frenin]

58 minutes ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

So the betrothal seems to have been Rhaenyra’s idea, not the Velaryons. Their names aren’t mentioned at all when it’s discussed:

And yet... They had to have given their consent.

 

 

1 hour ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

As for the Alyn/Addam thing: Westeros is, at the end of the day, a patriarchy. The Velaryons seemed to believe this from the offset, arguing for the rights of Rhaenys’ son, rather than for Rhaenys, at the great council, and then later preferring Laenor as heir to Driftmark (and his son) over Laena’s claim. There is some weirdness there, sure, but Laena’s eldest daughter was destined to be queen and both of them were Targaryens, not Velaryons. 

Those were bastard kids however and that was changed for the sole reason of naming them heirs.

 

 

45 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

But once they both died he obviously wanted a male heir. Jaeharys was smart, he was aware of the possibility of a civil war if he didnt choose wisely

Had he been smart, he wouldn't have opened that can of worms.

 

 

47 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

Jaeharys had it much easier than viserys. The problem here is that viserys had an abundance of sons to inherit his throne, but by bypassing them and naming his daughter heir he stoked the fires for war.

That and the fact that Alicent and Cole existed. Civil war wasn't a given because of the male children, the bad blood made it inevitable.

 

48 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

But doing it when you literally had 3 healthy sons is absolute suicide.

It wasn't actually. How he went about it was. He allowed factions in his own court.

 

 

50 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

I still dont see a scenario where they dont attempt to usurp the throne.

They had far lesser support, albeit they controlled the richest cities, and less dragons.

Had Rhaenrya ascended peacefully, they would have had it practically impossible. 

 

 

[StarksInTheNorth]

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

And yet... They had to have given their consent.

The Velaryon consent is a moot point because Viserys consented. King trumps lord and princess, no matter the relation to the bride and bridegroom. There’s no evidence that they consented or felt any which way about the match.

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

Those were bastard kids however and that was changed for the sole reason of naming them heirs.

Your point here is unclear and unrelated to anything I said. 

[frenin]

12 minutes ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

The Velaryon consent is a moot point because Viserys consented. King trumps lord and princess, no matter the relation to the bride and bridegroom. There’s no evidence that they consented or felt any which way about the match.

That's not how it works tho. Otherwise we'd see Kings doing and undoing betrothals much more often.

 

It's obviously that they had to consent, in fact if they didn't, they would actually be pissed about it.

 

 

13 minutes ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

Your point here is unclear and unrelated to anything I said. 

Women and female line inherit before bastards, who don't inherit at all. This is not controversial in Westeros.

 

Adam and Alyn were made legal precisely so Joffrey couldn't inherit. 

Bear in mind that Jace was alive at that point and he was the heir to the Throne, 

Joffrey, Laenor's "son" was actively passed over the succession for Driftmark.

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, Willam Stark said:

Or else, marry Rhaenyra to Daemon directly then marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter.

Since they ended up together in the canon, no need to waste time and push her to sire bastards who will then pretend to be legitimate heirs.

He couldn’t. Daemon was already married, and had been since before Baelon’s death. By the time Rhea Royce died, Rhaenyra was married to Laenor.

[The Young Maester]

40 minutes ago, frenin said:

Had he been smart, he wouldn't have opened that can of worms.

And he still prevented a war or some sort of succession crisis. The old king died and his heir inherited the throne through a peaceful transition. He was one of the only kings that actually cared about the future of his successors. Had he named Rhaenys heir (which more than half the realm opposed), all it takes is Viserys saying he wants to be King and youll have thousands of knights and lords paying him homage and sharpening their blades for war.

45 minutes ago, frenin said:

That and the fact that Alicent and Cole existed. Civil war wasn't a given because of the male children, the bad blood made it inevitable.

Even if the bad blood wasnt present, you cant stop future descendants of alicent from claiming the throne whenever they want. By having an unbroken male line directly from Jaeherys and the conqueror, they could use this stronger claim to rally many lords in order to usurp the throne.

The Dance was good for the future of westeros because it eradicated the line of Alicent, which stops future descendants from claiming the throne.

49 minutes ago, frenin said:

It wasn't actually. How he went about it was. He allowed factions in his own court.

Yes and why do these factions even exist? Because he bred sons on an ambitious women who has followers who believe the son comes before the daughter.

50 minutes ago, frenin said:

They had far lesser support, albeit they controlled the richest cities, and less dragons.

Had Rhaenrya ascended peacefully, they would have had it practically impossible. 

This is wish thinking. Nobleman in the middle ages rarely thought about the consequences of their action (theirs a reason its called the dark ages). All it takes is for Rhaenyra to become unpopular and you will have the greens raising their banners. As long as the sons of Viserys live, Rhaenyra cant sit on the throne comfortably. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Willam Stark said:

Or else, marry Rhaenyra to Daemon directly then marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter.

Since they ended up together in the canon, no need to waste time and push her to sire bastards who will then pretend to be legitimate heirs.

That would make no sense since Viserys I was actually sort of in agreement with Otto that Daemon shouldn't be king, at least after the 'heir for a day' line. He also seems to have not been of the opinion that his changeable brother was a good husband for his daughter. Viserys I never wanted Rhaenyra to marry Daemon.

5 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

The Dance was good for the future of westeros because it eradicated the line of Alicent, which stops future descendants from claiming the throne.

That isn't really true since Aemond seems to have had a son with Alys Rivers who likely did end up trying to claim the Iron Throne at one point during the reign of Aegon III. Only after his death would Alicent's line have died out completely ... assuming he didn't live to have children of his own.

5 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

This is wish thinking. Nobleman in the middle ages rarely thought about the consequences of their action (theirs a reason its called the dark ages). All it takes is for Rhaenyra to become unpopular and you will have the greens raising their banners. As long as the sons of Viserys live, Rhaenyra cant sit on the throne comfortably. 

That isn't really true. Even Maegor didn't feel the need to murder all of Aenys' sons after his usurpation. Alicent's sons could make trouble for Rhaenyra ... but they would not have to.

[BlackLightning]

What could he have done differently?

The #1 reason is that he could've rule his household and discipline his children better. He was soooo soft. For all of the flack that he gave Daemon, Aegon and Aemond are absolutely terrible people. Hypocrite much?

Other things he could've done.

• Make the Hand of the King a temporary position by appointing a new Hand every so years. Otto Hightower had way too much power for too long and clearly had no love for his proclaimed heir. He should've seen that.
• Fully support Daemon's conquest and rule of the Stepstones so as to keep Daemon far away (and thus, unable to scare any would-be Greens)
• Keep Rhaenyra close in King's Landing (replace Otto as Hand of the King or Master of Laws) and make Aegon and all his children and grandchildren the Princes of Dragonstone. As much as I hate Aegon and think that he would not be a good overlord, this is the best option.
• Marry Aemond off to the Baratheon heiress, a daughter of House Stark or Lannister or the daughter of the Prince of Dorne. Why wasn't he married by this point anyway..?! Since this is Aemond, we're talking about giving him (or build him a castle of his own). A proto-Summerhall or a Queenscrown would do. In any case, Aemond needs to be kept busy far away from Dragonstone and King's Landing 
• Marry Helaena or one of his grandchildren (Jaehaera, Jaehaerys) to one of Rhaenyra's children

 

[Willam Stark]

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

He couldn’t. Daemon was already married, and had been since before Baelon’s death. By the time Rhea Royce died, Rhaenyra was married to Laenor.

This is precisely the marriage he shouldn't have arranged, he should have directly marry her to Daemon and marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter, that's what I wanted to say.

45 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That would make no sense since Viserys I was actually sort of in agreement with Otto that Daemon shouldn't be king, at least after the 'heir for a day' line. He also seems to have not been of the opinion that his changeable brother was a good husband for his daughter. Viserys I never wanted Rhaenyra to marry Daemon.

I know he didn't want Daemon to be king, but if he had accepted to make him the consort of his daughter, he wouldn't have caused so many problems and the succession would have been more peaceful.

[EggBlue]

8 minutes ago, Willam Stark said:

This is precisely the marriage he shouldn't have arranged, he should have directly marry her to Daemon and marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter, that's what I wanted to say.

the only problem with that marriage was the fact that Leanor was gay , something that doesn't seem to be much of a problem in Westerosi mindset . politically if Viserys wanted Rhaenera to be the heir , Laenor was the perfect choice since otherwise Valeryons might have objected to Rhaenera's claim comparing it with Rhaenys's . BUT Viserys must have given his daughter his full support after she married Daemon . after all he couldn't undo the marriage so better support them to prevent any future opposition from his heir's enemies. 

[Lord Varys]

16 minutes ago, Willam Stark said:

This is precisely the marriage he shouldn't have arranged, he should have directly marry her to Daemon and marry their heir to Laena's eldest daughter, that's what I wanted to say.

Viserys I didn't arrange the first marriage of Daemon. That happened in 97 AC and was either arranged by Jaehaerys/Alysanne and/or Prince Baelon. Viserys had nothing to do with that, although his marriage to Aemma Arryn may have played a role there. I'd expect that Rhea's mother was one of the half-sisters of Aemma Arryn, explaining why Yorbert Royce was made Lord Protector when Jeyne Arryn rose to the Eyrie.

16 minutes ago, Willam Stark said:

I know he didn't want Daemon to be king, but if he had accepted to make him the consort of his daughter, he wouldn't have caused so many problems and the succession would have been more peaceful.

The idea seems to have been that Viserys I feared that his brother as Rhaenyra's husband would dominate her rule if she became queen. At least that's the reason I assume he sent him into exile in 111-112 AC after he had seduced Rhaenyra rather than allowing them to marry as they wished.

He was still not happy with their marriage later in 120 AC even after Daemon had settled down somewhat. In fact, it seems that part of the reason why neither Rhaenyra nor Daemon were made Hand after Lyonel's death is because Viserys I didn't really believe that Daemon could rule. And he was right there. He may have never wavered in his desire to hand the throne to Rhaenyra but he may no longer have believed Rhaenyra would be a great ruler after she had married Daemon.

But as I said earlier - the fact that Rhaenyra/Daemon were happy with being stuck on Dragonstone and having no share in the king's power and playing no role in the government of the Realm makes little sense.

It would have made much more sense narrative-wise if the Greens had to arrest or murder very influential members of the Black faction, among them even members of the royal family. But as George wrote it Rhaenyra's staunchest supporter was an old guy on the council who could have easily enough predeceased Viserys I.

[frenin]

56 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

And he still prevented a war or some sort of succession crisis. The old king died and his heir inherited the throne through a peaceful transition. He was one of the only kings that actually cared about the future of his successors. Had he named Rhaenys heir (which more than half the realm opposed), all it takes is Viserys saying he wants to be King and youll have thousands of knights and lords paying him homage and sharpening their blades for war.

His crisis. His decision was the start of the nightmare.

Few would actually supported Viserys actually, Rhaenys is the actual normal continuation line. 

You're playing the slippery slope card

 

 

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Even if the bad blood wasnt present, you cant stop future descendants of alicent from claiming the throne whenever they want. By having an unbroken male line directly from Jaeherys and the conqueror, they could use this stronger claim to rally many lords in order to usurp the throne.

The Dance was good for the future of westeros because it eradicated the line of Alicent, which stops future descendants from claiming the throne.

It wouldn't matter in the next generation and it would matter even less in the subsequents.

Regardless, war is always possible, so this argument is pretty moot.

 

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Yes and why do these factions even exist? Because he bred sons on an ambitious women who has followers who believe the son comes before the daughter.

And just because of this it can't be curtailed?? That's pretty catastrophist don't you think?

[The Young Maester]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That isn't really true since Aemond seems to have had a son with Alys Rivers who likely did end up trying to claim the Iron Throne at one point during the reign of Aegon III. Only after his death would Alicent's line have died out completely ... assuming he didn't live to have children of his own.

Eh a bastard whos claim is allot weaker than daemon blackfyre. But nonetheless bastards can still be problematic. Look at the tudors they actually got their claim through a bastard line of john of guant.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That isn't really true. Even Maegor didn't feel the need to murder all of Aenys' sons after his usurpation. Alicent's sons could make trouble for Rhaenyra ... but they would not have to.

Obviously Maegors reign didnt last long enough for his nephews to spread their line, but these future princes wouldve caused real problems for him. Same is for the greens.

38 minutes ago, frenin said:

His crisis. His decision was the start of the nightmare.

Few would actually supported Viserys actually, Rhaenys is the actual normal continuation line. 

You're playing the slippery slope card

So im playing slippery slope card but i told you why jaeharys pulled off a good political maneuver, and you response is he started it?

Few would actually support Viserys? despite the fact he absolutely trashed Rhaenys at the great council.

43 minutes ago, frenin said:

It wouldn't matter in the next generation and it would matter even less in the subsequents.

Regardless, war is always possible, so this argument is pretty moot.

So this thread is about stopping a succession war and ensuring Viserys's line dont kill eachother, but any wars that his grandsons might start is irrelevant? 

44 minutes ago, frenin said:

And just because of this it can't be curtailed?? That's pretty catastrophist don't you think?

Im responding to this

3 hours ago, frenin said:

It wasn't actually. How he went about it was. He allowed factions in his own court.

which i replied with

2 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Yes and why do these factions even exist? Because he bred sons on an ambitious women who has followers who believe the son comes before the daughter.

and now you say this

46 minutes ago, frenin said:

And just because of this it can't be curtailed?? That's pretty catastrophist don't you think?

So your putting words in my mouth and your changing the topic.

As I said causing drastic changes in a situation where they werent needed is political suicide. The best time to introduce these queen friendly successions were when Aemon died. Not when you had clear male heirs that according to unwritten tradition, would inherit the throne.

Simple either Viserys shouldnt have remarried or shouldve just let his firstborn son inherit. This is the best outcome, and the safest, everyone can argue about being more firm and maybe banishing his green family from court etc. But no matter what he does, having trueborn sons behind the succession would never lead to stability. Even if it does, the risks are just to high.

[Willam Stark]

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

the only problem with that marriage was the fact that Leanor was gay

This is a huge problem, because he was not only gay but also not interested by women, he preferred his lovers and Rhaenyra had no other choices but to sire bastards and said they were Laenor's children. The purpose of marriages in Westeros is to merge the lineages of the spouses which wouldn't (and didn't in canon) happened with Laenor. This is a good reason to dismiss him in favor of Daemon, in doing so Viserys would have avoided putting bastards on the Iron Throne. For Rhaenys, as I said her eldest granddaughter would marry the eldest grandson of Viserys I, this way Rhaenys' bloodline would still inherit the Iron Throne.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Viserys I didn't arrange the first marriage of Daemon.

I was talking about Rhaenyra's marriage to Laenor, he should have married her to Daemon directly.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea seems to have been that Viserys I feared that his brother as Rhaenyra's husband would dominate her rule if she became queen. At least that's the reason I assume he sent him into exile in 111-112 AC after he had seduced Rhaenyra rather than allowing them to marry as they wished.

Not unlikely, but at least the Dance wouldn't happened.

[frenin]

48 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

So im playing slippery slope card but i told you why jaeharys pulled off a good political maneuver, and you response is he started it?

Few would actually support Viserys? despite the fact he absolutely trashed Rhaenys at the great council.

Well yeah?? Jaeharys chose to mess with the succession even when he didn't have to. This, even in the books, is marked as the beginning of the troubles.

I was arguing that few would actually try to become rebels, but you do have a point there my bad.

 

 

51 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

So this thread is about stopping a succession war and ensuring Viserys's line dont kill eachother, but any wars that his grandsons might start is irrelevant? 

There's no way to ensure that his grandsons don't kill each other. Succession disputes happen. If not for this, for that.

Can his grandsons kill each other?? Yeah, they also may not.

 

 

54 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

So your putting words in my mouth and your changing the topic

I'm neither putting words in your mouth nor I'm changing the topic.

I'm telling you that he could have done more to curtail that.

Even if he allowed his sons to succeed him, nothing prevents Rhaenrya from doing exactly what her brothers did.

 

[EggBlue]

48 minutes ago, Willam Stark said:

This is a huge problem, because he was not only gay but also not interested by women, he preferred his lovers and Rhaenyra had no other choices but to sire bastards and said they were Laenor's children. The purpose of marriages in Westeros is to merge the lineages of the spouses which wouldn't (and didn't in canon) happened with Laenor. This is a good reason to dismiss him in favor of Daemon, in doing so Viserys would have avoided putting bastards on the Iron Throne.

that is indeed a huge problem... but not in Westeros. 

in Westeros people see sex and marriage as a means of producing heirs . whether people are happy in the marriage or that they like their spouse is nothing to be concerned about. Laenor was simply expected to close his eyes and think of the realm ,so was any man or woman who was disgusted by their spouse for any reason. 

as for how gay people are seen in Westeros, it seems that they view this as a choice of "hobby" or "lifestyle" . they don't seem to get that gay men could be repulsed by women to the point that they can't even consummate their marriage. you can see that in the way people talk about Loras or Lyn Corbray and especially in Cersei's thoughts regarding how she doesn't believe Renly didn't have sex with Margery.

it didn't really matter that their children were bastards as long as Rhaenera had enough power that no one dared to gossip about it. she could always relate her children's brown hair to their Aryn ancestry. the issue there was that Viserys let his queen so openly stir up the rumors and let his daughter and her husband live in two different castles! of course people would gossip about princess's children in this situation.

and still even if we rule Laenor out, Daemon would not be the best choice for Rhaenera . rather it would be prince of Dorne to have a good enough reason to spur Laenor.

48 minutes ago, Willam Stark said:

For Rhaenys, as I said her eldest granddaughter would marry the eldest grandson of Viserys I, this way Rhaenys' bloodline would still inherit the Iron Throne.

Valeryons were once denied the throne when Baelon and then Viserys were named heir . then again their daughter was denied the queenship in favor of a Hightower with no drop of Targaryen blood. and let's not forget they had a fleet and three dragons. so Viserys had to take them seriously ... which you obviously agree with.

I think it's fair to assume that Valeryons wouldn't leave their only son to be single on the regards of not being attracted to women . not to mention bringing that to their face would have been counted as an insult. Valeryons surely expected advantageous marriages for both their kids . for Laena the best option in Westeros was Viserys who spurred her. after that it would have been Aegon but he was way too young. the next best thing for Laena was Daemon.

now imagine Viserys says this to Rhaenys: " I really wanna join our bloodlines considering you are the queen who would be. but.. no... I won't marry my heir to your son since he seems interested in guys and as much as you deny it I won't believe you.... and your daughter? yeah I'm gonna go ahead and marry my brother to my own heir so he won't be available too... but hear this out , you marry your daughter to someone... some landless knight for all I care... then when both our daughters have children we marry them to each other! just be patient .. we only need at least like 15 years for this plan to work out:)" 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Willam Stark said:

This is a huge problem, because he was not only gay but also not interested by women, he preferred his lovers and Rhaenyra had no other choices but to sire bastards and said they were Laenor's children. The purpose of marriages in Westeros is to merge the lineages of the spouses which wouldn't (and didn't in canon) happened with Laenor. This is a good reason to dismiss him in favor of Daemon, in doing so Viserys would have avoided putting bastards on the Iron Throne. For Rhaenys, as I said her eldest granddaughter would marry the eldest grandson of Viserys I, this way Rhaenys' bloodline would still inherit the Iron Throne.

That is not really a problem, I think, since the benefit of a Velaryon at Rhaenyra's side was arguably much larger than to continue to alienate the elder branch of the royal family who controlled large dragons. If we imagine a scenario where Laena and Laenor outlive Viserys I while not being included into the matches within the royal family we create basically another Dance-like scenario. Up until the Rhaenyra-Laenor match there was the real possibility that the Velaryons would make a third attempt to seize the Iron Throne at a later point - at Viserys' death or during another moment of perceived weakness.

If Laenor hadn't died prematurely he would have sat at Rhaenyra's side as her prince or king consort and nobody would have had issues with their sons - even less so if Laenor had outlived his wife to live well into the reign of King Jacaerys I.

As a rival faction of note the Greens only become truly important after 120 AC when Aemond acquires Vhagar and the younger Velaryons are dead.

Prior to that, there was even a real danger that Laena and Daemon might try to seize the throne after Viserys' death. They controlled Vhagar then, and if Daemon had had a son by Laena he could have claimed the throne should go to male heir from the elder branch rather than to Rhaenyra who was a woman.

2 hours ago, Willam Stark said:

I was talking about Rhaenyra's marriage to Laenor, he should have married her to Daemon directly.

That wouldn't have happened since Daemon was married at that time.

2 hours ago, Willam Stark said:

Not unlikely, but at least the Dance wouldn't happened.

Not really, since in such a scenario the Velaryons could have made a bid for the throne, eventually. Not to mention that the Greens didn't really care all that much - or at all - about Rhaenyra's sons but rather herself sitting on the throne instead of Alicent's sons. That was the big issue, the parentage of her sons was just secondary issue ... a piece of ugly gossip, basically.

If this had been a real problem then we would have gotten quite a few lords declaring for Aegon II or opposing Rhaenyra because they believed her elder sons were not Laenor's. But not a single lord is motivated by that. It only comes up as a point among the die-hard Greens when they stage the coup. When Jace and Luke make their visits none has to defend against the accusation of being a bastard (given by one of the people they visit).

[The Bard of Banefort]

How progressive a culture is doesn’t always translate to who becomes their leaders. Catholic countries are famously patriarchal, but didn’t Poland have a child queen back in the 1300s? It’s like how conservative Wyoming was electing women to federal office long before the rest of the USA. You could say the same thing about the Andal-ized Vale, where women nevertheless appear to have a record of leading their houses (Theon also mentioned women inheriting in the Iron Islands in ACOK, although he didn’t specify who). 
 

The one thing Rhaenyra has that separates her from previous Targs is that she was the only child from a first marriage, whereas Rhaena/Visenya/Rhaenys were all the products of the same marriages. The inclusion of Jaehaerys’ Widow’s Law in FaB lends some credence to this.

[Lord Lannister]

This may be an unpopular answer, but even if Viserys averted the crisis that caused the Dance by making better choices, I think something like it was inevitable. When you consider the personalities, level of entitlement and the fact many of them had brutally destructive dragons, something like this was inevitable.