[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion

[BlackLightning]

On 11/8/2022 at 4:31 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

Somewhat comparable to Athaliah, who ruled Judah for 7 years after death of her son King Ahaziah & was otherthrown by the High Priest Jehoiada & his wife the daughter of Athaliah, who placed Athaliah's surviving grandson of 7 or 8 on the throne. Obviously differences, but ultimately her reign wasn't recognized as legitimate by the biblical authors even though she literally ruled & had power for 7 years.

Athaliah was a usurper though. She was never in line for the throne. Even if you would make the argument that she was a part of the succession, she murdered everyone before her in the line of succession...which makes her unfit and unworthy.

I know you said that there were differences but it's apples and oranges. If anyone would be parallel to Athaliah in this case, it'd be to Aegon II or TV Cersei

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, BlackLightning said:

Athaliah was a usurper though. She was never in line for the throne. Even if you would make the argument that she was a part of the succession, she murdered everyone before her in the line of succession...which makes her unfit and unworthy.

I know you said that there were differences but it's apples and oranges. If anyone would be parallel to Athaliah in this case, it'd be to Aegon II or TV Cersei

That comparison is way off in general, since the Biblical writers were clearly writing history from a priestly perspective, downplaying and erasing whatever female element existed in their culture/government.

In Westeros the rule of House Targaryen is supreme. Whatever scholars and scribes and priests write history and legal commentaries in Westeros do so under the thumb of the dragons and, presumably, with the intention to gain the favor and patronage of the dragons.

The way the Dance ended in such a way that the majority opinion would have been that Rhaenyra was a martyred queen and Aegon II clearly the villain of the piece, threatening the life of the boy who is the anointed king now.

We could also see a majority of the establishment eventually reaching the conclusion that one shouldn't name female heirs if one could help it - but that, too, would only be a conclusion folks would reach and spread if the Iron Throne was taking the lead there.

I mean, if Viserys I can gain the throne over Rhaenys and her children and then name his daughter the heir, Aegon III and Viserys II could also honor and cherish the memory and queenship of their mother ... while at the same pushing other women (even their own daughters/nieces) aside.

This is not mutually exclusive.

The weird thing is the idea that Westeros would actually conclude that Rhaenyra never was a legitimate queen. Aegon II did not rule long enough after his restoration to establish this, and the death of Aegon II and the rise of Aegon III also made it pretty much impossible that the Green view would prevail.

[The Bard of Banefort]

I kind of wish they made Larys less of an outright psycho and more someone with a genuine, if creepy, devotion to Alicent. Like have the foot fetish thing be his weird idea of courtship rather than him exerting power over her. Then both Larys and Criston would have a bizarre kind of loyalty to Alicent, which I think would be more interesting.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

Kinda random but someone on the freefolk reddit that just like in F&B the show

Spoiler

Is going to have Aegon and Rhaenyra only have 1 conversation with each other throughout this whole and it’s when Aegon kills her

and looking back it does seem to be a miss opportunity by the show to actually give these two some type of relationship prior to the conflict.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I kind of wish they made Larys less of an outright psycho and more someone with a genuine, if creepy, devotion to Alicent. Like have the foot fetish thing be his weird idea of courtship rather than him exerting power over her. Then both Larys and Criston would have a bizarre kind of loyalty to Alicent, which I think would be more interesting.

Yeah, that's why I said it would have been better as some kind of D/s relationship, with Larys craving to be Alicent's (foot) slave. She could have seen where he was looking at, that he wanted to ingratiate himself with her because he wanted to serve her, etc., and she would then decide to exploit that (and possibly even enjoy it). Not to mention that this kind of weird devotion on Larys' part could also have helped to better explain why he would murder his father and brother.

That way she would have had both agency and power in that relationship - now we have to believe some creep could actually turn the Queen of the Seven Kingdoms into his personal foot whore ... which just makes little sense.

I guess they could give the relationship this spin in a later scene ... but so far Alicent just seemed to be annoyed and creeped out by Larys.

1 hour ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

Kinda random but someone on the freefolk reddit that just like in F&B the show

  Hide contents

Is going to have Aegon and Rhaenyra only have 1 conversation with each other throughout this whole and it’s when Aegon kills her

and looking back it does seem to be a miss opportunity by the show to actually give these two some type of relationship prior to the conflict.

I mentioned that earlier. They should have had at least one scene establishing Rhaenyra and Aegon's relationship, better still one when they were still very young and then later when they were both adults (or Aegon a youth).

Especially Aegon should have gotten a kind of arc showing how he deals with his mother's expectancy - have Alicent and Otto feed the young boy the notion of his future king, only to then have Aegon privately approach Viserys for him to shut it down. This could be framed by Aegon's earlier (perhaps somewhat cocky) and later (more demure) attitude towards his elder half-sister. Remember, in the show Rhaenyra is much older than Aegon and his siblings, something that would have considerable impact on the way they treat her. She would be more of a parent or aunt to them than a sibling.

Of course, the show could - and might - change things so Aegon and Rhaenyra interact prior to Rhaenyra's death. A good first scene could be a kind of negotation/talk at Rook's Rest if the show changes things and has Rhaenyra there on Syrax.

There could be other meetings on dragonback on rocks in the Blackwater, etc. in the wake of Blood and Cheese, with Rhaenyra trying to make amends for this thing, etc., or other meetings in the field.

[The Bard of Banefort]

4 hours ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

Kinda random but someone on the freefolk reddit that just like in F&B the show

  Hide contents

Is going to have Aegon and Rhaenyra only have 1 conversation with each other throughout this whole and it’s when Aegon kills her

and looking back it does seem to be a miss opportunity by the show to actually give these two some type of relationship prior to the conflict.

Could you provide the link?

[The hairy bear]

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

How is this relevant when we discuss whether she ruled as queen or not?

I don't think anyone is discussing whether Rhaenyra ruled as queen or not. We all know she did (although briefly, and never over the entire realm).

We are discussing about the plausibility of her being considered an illegitimate monarch and an usurper by the time of asoiaf.

And I felt that stressing the bad impression that Rhaenyra had left behind was relevant because you were mentioning that her sons would want to vindicate the memory of their "martyred mother". I claim that it would be bad press for them to be associated with her too much.

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

And in general - who the hell cares about the feelings of lesser lords? We talk about the king's mother here.

A king whose hold on power is fragile and needs any support he can get? A king who is sincerely committed to heal the realm and work on reconciliation? A king so traumatized that he doesn't want to reopen fresh wounds by fueling more conflicts?

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

Rhaenyra's memory was so strong, apparently, that the Lads, the Northmen, and the Vale marshaled their troops to destroy Aegon II ... who himself was so 'popular' that his leal followers had to offer nothing but excuses before and after he was murdered.

From the brand new Rise of the Dragon:

With his half-sister slain and her only surviving son a captive at his own court, King Aegon II might reasonably have expected the remaining opposition to his rule to melt away—and it might have done so if His Grace had heeded Lord Velaryon’s counsel and issued a general pardon for all those lords and knights who had espoused the queen’s cause. But alas, the king was not of a forgiving mind. Urged on by his mother, the Dowager Queen Alicent, Aegon II was determined to exact vengeance upon those who had betrayed and deposed him.

They were not fighting for "Rhaenyra's memory". They were fighting for themselves.

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

They would think along those lines, though, since Rhaenyra's and Daemon's branch of the family was their own branch as well. If your great-grandparents were Rhaenyra and Daemon then your preferred side in the struggle they had with your long dead cousins would be theirs ... because they are your ancestors, the people who had to exist so you could come to be.

You realize that Stannis is descended from Rhaenyra, do you?

He still claims that "she died a traitor’s death for trying to usurp her brother’s crown."

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

There is no chance that any serious in-universe historian would claim that Aegon II reigned from 129-131 AC without interruption.

 

Lists of kings (and regnal numbers) rarely include monarchs who are considered illegitimate. When someone says that Aegon II was king from 129 to 131 they would only mean that he was rightful king during that period.

Those kind of lists are mostly not about actual power, but about legitimacy. Jaehaerys I and Aegon III did not "reign" during their regencies, and yet they are considered as the kings. Should a "serious in-universe historian" say that their reigns were interrupted during their exile at Dragonstone or the secret siege, respectively?

There are also many real world examples. The War of the Spanish Succession confronted Charles of Habsburg and Philip of Bourbon. Charles' bid was eventually unsuccessful, but during the 13 years that the war lasted, he managed to conquer Madrid not once but twice. You won't find him in any list of Spanish monarchs.

On 11/15/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lord Varys said:

It is not just the ritual of the coronation (or an earlier proclamation) it is, in the end, success.

I'd agree with that. But what counts is not only the actual success in present time, but the success of your legacy. The confrontation between Rhaenyra and Aegon II ended in some kind of tie (one won by some counts, the other won by other counts). But if in terms of how their respective causes and historical figures were seen by future generations, Aegon II was the winner.

Edited November 17, 2022 by The hairy bear

[ShadowKitteh]

On 11/15/2022 at 2:31 AM, Ran said:

ASoIaF is based on the Wars of the Roses, the Dance is based on the Anarchy.

ASOIAF is more Dune + Dune Messiah (especially structure but also story), put in a blender with the wars of the roses as seasoning. HOTD is far more WOTR with Jaehaerys standing in for Edward III, Viserys for John of Gaunt, then on down to Aegon III and Jaehaera standing in for Henry VII and Elizabeth of York uniting the warring branches of the family that George then tweaked completely for plot purposes. And rightly so considering HOTD takes place before ASOIAF and is foundational for everything that comes after.

George is such a master at crafting characters and repositioning them into different and exciting situations in the exceptionally fun and amazing world he established, that it’s all new and wonderful.

[frenin]

17 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I kind of wish they made Larys less of an outright psycho and more someone with a genuine, if creepy, devotion to Alicent. Like have the foot fetish thing be his weird idea of courtship rather than him exerting power over her. Then both Larys and Criston would have a bizarre kind of loyalty to Alicent, which I think would be more interesting.

Agree, i mean, he was always going to be kinda insane to kill his brother and father, war against his own nephews and keep on supporting the Greens even after Aemond offed his house but they could have toned it down a bit.

 

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

A king whose hold on power is fragile and needs any support he can get? A king who is sincerely committed to heal the realm and work on reconciliation? A king so traumatized that he doesn't want to reopen fresh wounds by fueling more conflicts?

We know he's not going to do all that.

 

Quote

  With his death and the defeat of his stormlanders, the Dance of the Dragons was all but over. House Baratheon had gambled greatly in supporting King Aegon II, and it was a choice that brought them nothing but ill during the reign of King Aegon III (the Dragonbane) and the regency preceding it.

  As the years passed, and king followed king upon the Iron Throne, these old rifts were forgotten, and the Baratheons came to serve the crown faithfully once more… until the Targaryens themselves put that loyalty to the test.

If he and his brother are going to politically punish and alienate the Baratheons for theiir allegiances during the war, bear in mind that Olyver Baratheon is born when the war ends, how can we take it seriously that he did not want to reopen fresh wounds and fueling more conflicts? Or that he cared so much about lesser lords?

The Targaryen's do not tolerate anything that is not active bashing of the Blackfyres, Robert curses the Targaryen publicly and anyone who is fond of them must keep it quiet... Yet Aegon the younger was tied by hands...

 

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

They were not fighting for "Rhaenyra's memory". They were fighting for themselves.

The Riverlords did, the Northmen and the Valemen not so much.

 

Quote

The queen had better fortune elsewhere. From Winterfell, Cregan Stark wrote to say that he would bring a host south as soon as he could, but warned that it would take some time to gather his men “for my realms are large, and with winter upon us, we must needs bring in our last harvest, or starve when the snows come to stay.” The northman promised the queen ten thousand men, “younger and fiercer than my Winter Wolves.” The Maiden of the Vale promised aid as well, when she replied from her winter castle, the Gates of the Moon…but with the mountain passes closed by snow, her knights would need to come by sea. If House Velaryon would send its ships to Gulltown, Lady Jeyne wrote, she would dispatch an army to Duskendale at once. If not, she must needs hire ships from Braavos and Pentos, and for that she would need coin.

Cregan was waiting for the harvest to be done and Jeyne was waiting for ships for her troops, once they had it they both were on the march.

Edited November 17, 2022 by frenin

[The Bard of Banefort]

4 minutes ago, frenin said:

Agree, i mean, he was always going to be kinda insane to kill his brother and father, war against his own nephews and keep on supporting the Greens even after Aemond offed his house but they could have toned it down a bit.

 

We know he's not going to do all that.

 

If he and his brother are going to politically punish and alienate the Baratheons for theiir allegiances during the war, bear in mind that Olyver Baratheon is born when the war ends, how can we take it seriously that he did not want to reopen fresh wounds and fueling more conflicts? Or that he cared so much about lesser lords?

 

The Riverlords did, the Northmen and the Valemen not so much.

 

Cregan was waiting for the harvest to be done and Jeyne was waiting for ships for her troops, once they had it they both were on the march.

Yeah, having him be driven by a weird obsession with Alicent rather than simply being a psychopath would have made for a more interesting subplot. Especially since this show seems willing to lean into the soapiness. 

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

I don't think anyone is discussing whether Rhaenyra ruled as queen or not. We all know she did (although briefly, and never over the entire realm).

If we are going there, I don't understand why Aegon II would be seen as a proper king. He always ruled only over a fraction of the Targaryen domain.

This is why I think George actually wants to go more with the idea that neither Rhaenyra nor Aegon were 'proper monarchs' rather than the notion that Aegon II was. Legitimacy was a complete mess during the Dance era (hence the whole symbolic stuff with individual banners, the High Septon anointing no pretender, Aegon II not actually being restored to the Iron Throne in the end).

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

We are discussing about the plausibility of her being considered an illegitimate monarch and an usurper by the time of asoiaf.

There is little chance that the view of Rhaenyra changed overtime considering her descendants sat the throne. That in and of itself should have protected her reputation. Hell, what we should expect is Rhaenyra being turned into a martyred saint by the singers, just as they turned Aegon the Conqueror into a hero king.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

And I felt that stressing the bad impression that Rhaenyra had left behind was relevant because you were mentioning that her sons would want to vindicate the memory of their "martyred mother". I claim that it would be bad press for them to be associated with her too much.

Not sure why. Especially not in comparison to Aegon II, who used hundreds of Kingslanders as living torches. This guy was a monster. Rhaenyra wasn't. Nobody would care that she wanted to execute some ill-begotten bastard girl. The only place where Rhaenyra was kind of loathed by KL, anyway. And the Kingslanders are clearly fickle, slaying dragons today and sucking up to Rhaena and Morning tomorrow.

Rhaenyra was popular enough that the later enemies of Aegon II continued to fight under the banner of the dead queen.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

A king whose hold on power is fragile and needs any support he can get? A king who is sincerely committed to heal the realm and work on reconciliation? A king so traumatized that he doesn't want to reopen fresh wounds by fueling more conflicts?

A king who spat in the face of Torrhen Manderly, turning a Black loyalist into an enemy? What little we know about the adult Aegon III is that he didn't mince his words, didn't hide his true feelings once he was king, didn't suck up to anybody.

The idea that this man had anything but contempt for the thugs and traitors who fought against his mother, his brothers, and him, personally, is very unlikely.

There might be people who healed the Realm during the reign of Aegon III. But I don't see the Dragonbane himself doing much of that. He also spat into the face of his people when he cancelled that progress, no?

And again - treating the remaining Greens kind of fairly isn't the same as acknowledging Aegon II as 'rightful king'. His line and family were eradicated, so very few people should have stood up to defend him or his legacy.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

From the brand new Rise of the Dragon:

With his half-sister slain and her only surviving son a captive at his own court, King Aegon II might reasonably have expected the remaining opposition to his rule to melt away—and it might have done so if His Grace had heeded Lord Velaryon’s counsel and issued a general pardon for all those lords and knights who had espoused the queen’s cause. But alas, the king was not of a forgiving mind. Urged on by his mother, the Dowager Queen Alicent, Aegon II was determined to exact vengeance upon those who had betrayed and deposed him.

They were not fighting for "Rhaenyra's memory". They were fighting for themselves.

That goes for the Riverlords, Cregan Stark and Jeyne Arryn had received letters from Rhaenyra from Duskendale and had been raising more troops the entire time. Cregan was so eager for war that he wanted to continue it even after Aegon II was dead. It seems clear that he would have never accepted any terms of Aegon's considering a big part of his campaign was to rid the North of useless mouths.

There is a chance that some of the lords might have accepted generous terms from Aegon II, I guess, but that's just speculation since no such terms were offered. The lords who took up arms yet again against the king were the Lads in the wake of the punishment of the Black Crownlanders.

In context one is actually flabbergasted what that paragraph you quoted - and the section from FaB it is derived - actually means? Aegon II was down to support from a couple of thousand Stormlanders who were so 'loyal' to his cause that they only ever fought for him once they learned that Rhaenyra herself was dead.

There is no chance that Aegon II or his government could ever believe they would prevail if they were not offering terms of any kind to the really powerful Black lords who had, so far, not lost many men in the fighting (meaning the Starks and the Arryns). How had they hoped to deal with them? The West was in chaos, the Hightower army had disbanded, and the Tyrells had never bestirred themselves. What raises the ire of the Lads is the fact that Aegon II is capricious as to punish the Black Crownlanders yet again.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

You realize that Stannis is descended from Rhaenyra, do you?

He still claims that "she died a traitor’s death for trying to usurp her brother’s crown."

Stannis is a traitor and pretender himself. I mean, sure enough, some people in the books view Rhaenyra as a traitor and usurper ... but so far nobody ever told us that Aegon II wasn't a traitor and usurper, too. Nobody calls him 'the rightful king' or anything of that sort.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Lists of kings (and regnal numbers) rarely include monarchs who are considered illegitimate. When someone says that Aegon II was king from 129 to 131 they would only mean that he was rightful king during that period.

That is not how the reigns of kings are measured properly. Proper lists include the actual reigns, duly noting interruptions of the reign if they occurred.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Those kind of lists are mostly not about actual power, but about legitimacy. Jaehaerys I and Aegon III did not "reign" during their regencies, and yet they are considered as the kings. Should a "serious in-universe historian" say that their reigns were interrupted during their exile at Dragonstone or the secret siege, respectively?

Actually, they did reign then. That's the difference between reign/reigning and rule/ruling. A monarch's reign begins with him taking the throne/being made king, whereas his rule is dependent on him being able and capable of ruling. When there is a regency government a king continues to reign but he doesn't rule - others do that in his name.

Aegon II continued to reign when Aemond ruled in his name as Prince Regent, but Aegon's reign ended when he was deposed and replaced by Queen Rhaenyra. His government ended then. All that was left thereafter were brigands and warlords in the field. Until he was restored to the throne later.

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

There are also many real world examples. The War of the Spanish Succession confronted Charles of Habsburg and Philip of Bourbon. Charles' bid was eventually unsuccessful, but during the 13 years that the war lasted, he managed to conquer Madrid not once but twice. You won't find him in any list of Spanish monarchs.

Because he eventually gave up his claim ... and the Bourbons became the new royal house of Spain. Whose descendants sat on the Iron Throne after Aegon II?

6 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

I'd agree with that. But what counts is not only the actual success in present time, but the success of your legacy. The confrontation between Rhaenyra and Aegon II ended in some kind of tie (one won by some counts, the other won by other counts). But if in terms of how their respective causes and historical figures were seen by future generations, Aegon II was the winner.

And the problem is that in context of how events played out that narrative makes little sense.

[EggBlue]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:19 PM, The hairy bear said:

I don't see any in-universe problem with Rhaenyra not being considered a legitimate queen by the end of the third century.

During Aegon III's reign, why would anyone want to get involved in the discussion of who had actually been the rightful king?! He was the heir of both Rhaenyra and Aegon II, so it was a moot point, but at the same time concluding that either of them had been an usurper would have the ugly implication that half the lords of the realm had been traitors. There was even one of the regents who had declared for both claimants!

And a few decades later... the Targaryen kings would much prefer to paint Aegon II as the rightful king: the idea that a woman could inherit the throne would immediately make the Blackfyre line (through Daenna) as the legitimate one. Even the idea that a king could decide unilaterally over the succession could be seen as dangerous, given that Aegon IV's favoritism towards Daemon.

exactly . obviously , Aegon III didn't need to get into that , especially with two sons as his first and second born children . and later on , it came to Viserys and Daena and if Viserys wished to be legitimate and over his niece at that, it would have been more than foolish to push for Rhaenyra's legitimacy as a ruling queen .

I wonder what Aegon III might have done if his first born was Daena (probably his favorite?) , considering he addressed his mother as queen in the council were he dismissed Manderly and his closeness to his mother ...

[EggBlue]

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There is little chance that the view of Rhaenyra changed overtime considering her descendants sat the throne. That in and of itself should have protected her reputation. Hell, what we should expect is Rhaenyra being turned into a martyred saint by the singers, just as they turned Aegon the Conqueror into a hero king.

I think Rhaenyra never turned into the martyr hero of the songs because neither of her sons cared enough about popularity and perception. unlike queen Rhaenys who knew how to turn herself and her siblings from foreigner tyrants into dragon-god heros through songs .

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

I think Rhaenyra never turned into the martyr hero of the songs because neither of her sons cared enough about popularity and perception. unlike queen Rhaenys who knew how to turn herself and her siblings from foreigner tyrants into dragon-god heros through songs .

It’s mentioned in TWOIAF that Viserys wanted Aegon to do more PR but he refused.

[EggBlue]

7 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

It’s mentioned in TWOIAF that Viserys wanted Aegon to do more PR but he refused.

yeah , but Viserys also lost that part of himself when Larra left , when he was 16-17 I guess ! so, most of his life he wasn't the charming prince who cared about publicity.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

As someone else pointed out, couldn't Rhaenyra have offered Joffrey, Aegon, or Viserys as marriage partners for Borros Baratheon's daughters?

[frenin]

6 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

As someone else pointed out, couldn't Rhaenyra have offered Joffrey, Aegon, or Viserys as marriage partners for Borros Baratheon's daughters?

Lucerys did not get the memo and then it was obviously too late.

 

4 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Yeah, having him be driven by a weird obsession with Alicent rather than simply being a psychopath would have made for a more interesting subplot. Especially since this show seems willing to lean into the soapiness. 

I'm still hoping for him to get toned down as time goes on.

Hell, if Aegon and Aemond can be toned down... Btw,  Sara Snow is obviously going to be introduced right? I mean, it's the only way to add some spice in Jace's trip but i do not know how are  they going to keep him likeable after he cheats on his bride.

[EggBlue]

1 hour ago, frenin said:

Lucerys did not get the memo and then it was obviously too late.

 

I'm still hoping for him to get toned down as time goes on.

Hell, if Aegon and Aemond can be toned down... Btw,  Sara Snow is obviously going to be introduced right? I mean, it's the only way to add some spice in Jace's trip but i do not know how are  they going to keep him likeable after he cheats on his bride.

I hope not. at least not as his lover/wife . that's a very very stupid move especially without the excuse of grief that Robb Stark had . not to mention , it'll be out of character . but I think it'll be a good idea for Jace to befriend another bastard and come to terms with that part of himself . he seems troubled about that  (= with the little of him we've seen , they can go that route) 

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, EggBlue said:

I think Rhaenyra never turned into the martyr hero of the songs because neither of her sons cared enough about popularity and perception. unlike queen Rhaenys who knew how to turn herself and her siblings from foreigner tyrants into dragon-god heros through songs .

You can and would suck up to the royals even if they are not that famous as great patrons of the arts. Rhaenys apparently pushed a propaganda angle with her singers, but keep in mind how Stannis is presented as the evil usurping uncle as early as Joffrey's wedding. What kind of songs would be sung at the wedding of, say, Aegon and Naerys?

If they touch upon the Dance it would be with a favorable take on the Blacks, vilifying all the Greens. Daemon taking out Aemond would be a great feat, Rhaenys would be a tragic hero making Aegon II look as ugly on the outside as he was on the inside, the murder of Luke would be a monstrosity, Jace's and Joff's deaths great tragedies (the latter apparently is a popular topic for the singers), etc.

4 hours ago, EggBlue said:

exactly . obviously , Aegon III didn't need to get into that , especially with two sons as his first and second born children . and later on , it came to Viserys and Daena and if Viserys wished to be legitimate and over his niece at that, it would have been more than foolish to push for Rhaenyra's legitimacy as a ruling queen .

I wonder what Aegon III might have done if his first born was Daena (probably his favorite?) , considering he addressed his mother as queen in the council were he dismissed Manderly and his closeness to his mother ...

Rhaenyra's sons didn't foresee that Aegon III's sons wouldn't have any issue to continue the royal line. They would view their mother as the rightful queen ... and then Baelor and Viserys would still decide that Viserys should be king rather than slutty Daena. Just as Viserys I could be made king by the Great Council only to then name his daughter his heir. That kind of thing is not mutually exclusive. Rhaenyra could easily enough be a special case.

[The Bard of Banefort]

2 hours ago, frenin said:

Lucerys did not get the memo and then it was obviously too late.

 

I'm still hoping for him to get toned down as time goes on.

Hell, if Aegon and Aemond can be toned down... Btw,  Sara Snow is obviously going to be introduced right? I mean, it's the only way to add some spice in Jace's trip but i do not know how are  they going to keep him likeable after he cheats on his bride.

They’ll probably instantly fall in love, with him sadly telling her that he’s promised to another, and they’ll have sex before he says goodbye forever.

There’s a theory that I find likely, which posits that Sara will die while secretly giving birth to his bastard daughter, which Cregan will cover up somehow and probably betroth to his own son, thus fulfilling the pact and making Arya and Bran descendants of the Targaryens. 

As I’ve said before, I expect this show to get really weird. 

Edited November 17, 2022 by The Bard of Banefort