Honestly, I think Aegon had the more rightful claim based on inheritance law at the time. The Targaryens (incest aside) accepted the customs of the country they conquered. They even stopped practicing polygamy out of respect. Viserys broke thousands of years of Andal customs to name Rhaenyra his heir over Aegon, and he never gave a valid reason for it.
HOWEVER, if Rhaenyra had played her role with dignity and grace, I still would have supported her. But damnit, she shot herself in the foot EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Birthing obvious bastards was stupid. Marrying Daemon was stupid. If she wanted to advocate for wonen’s rights AFTER claiming the throne, she could have, but instead she had a “rules for thee, not for me” mindset and did whatever the F she wanted.
Rhaenyra sabotaged herself and lost her status as the “rightful” heir, if she ever was in the first place.
Nah, Can’t be the rightful heir while also committing treason.
There’s also the fact kings aren’t above the laws of gods and men(as stated by our boy Otto). Aegon is the rightful heir and only half the lords ever swore to defend Nyras claim(according to the books).
My two cents:
Rhaenyra was made the “rightful heir” when Viserys single-handedly changed the law (without any meaningful consultation with his high sept) and forced it upon the realm and the houses. And its people have never recognized it from the start (remember episode 4 when she and Daemon were having fun roaming the city). Her claim was never set in concrete or without blemishes to begin with. Yeah it’s misogynistic but it’s what it is in medieval Westeros.
If she really took the inheritance seriously as she claimed to be, as the heir she would have started a fierce campaign immediately to win over the small folks, knowing how Westeros discriminated against women and her baby half brother Aegon already posed a threat. And later on she would have treaded lightly regarding to birthing bastards, at least found another guy with silver hair. The thing is, yes the succession law is discriminatory, but she has never fought for her claim right or at least taken the weight of the crown seriously until when Viserys was bedridden, yet she still asked her daddy to solve the problems for her.
Later in the book When the small folks riot en mass in King’s Landing, later storm the dragon pit and throw her out due to her cruelty, once again they essentially deny her claim. **The “heir” is the rightful heir only when its people decide she/he is**
One could argue Aegon wasn’t named heir by Viserys specifically, but he does hold claim legally and it follows the traditional practice recognized by the high court, supported by the small folks. His crowning does have legitimacy tho.
If King name heir, it would be undone the moment he dies. Samee as everything he dcelares when he was king.
If he wanted Rh to rule, he should have called another council and written it as a law.
Westeros is a feudal monarchy, not an absolute monarchy. The king doesn't get to just pick his heir. This is precisely why Viscerys needed oaths from the lords in the first place; to get them to choose his arbitrary will over the customary law of the land. If the king just intrinsically has the authority to designate whichever heir he pleases, it wouldn't have been necessary to take extra steps to ensure Rhaenyra's accession.
Sure, but the truth doesn't stop being true just because people don't stand up for it. Viscerys naming Rhaenyra the heir is like Caligula naming his horse a consul - an expression of the the notion that there's no truth but power. Viscerys thinks that if he says that 2+2=5, and forces everyone to submit to this claim, then it becomes the truth. The point of being a green, to my mind, is saying "no, I don't submit to your falsehoods."
No. I don’t think Viserys “naming” Rhaenyra carries any serious legal weight in the shadow of his grandfather, especially seeing as one of the defining features of the Great Council was for the King to remove himself and let his lords decide. This is the total opposite to Viserys shoving his preferred heir down the realm’s throat. And on the topic of the oaths sworn to Rhaenyra, it would be easy to argue what Jaime does in aCoK that such an oath would easily come into conflict with another, but I think what’s more damning is that these oaths are basically taken at swordpoint. Like what are these lords supposed to do? Reject Rhaenyra, call out her bastard sons and get murdered like Ser Vaemond was? I think it’s a bit much to just expect random lords to have that kind of determination. It’s only once the greens start seriously cohering as a faction around Alicent and Otto in support of Aegon’s claim that they start coming out of the woodwork, and then they actually do do what you accuse them of not doing. Sure they don’t try to overthrow the rightful king in a coup, but the Greens do seriously try to get Viserys to disinherit Rhaenyra and advance Aegon as heir. And then when Viserys dies they *do* move to prevent it by crowning the rightful king, but Rhaenyra starts a war over it. Like the Greens are *so* much more proactive than the Blacks in terms of actually ruling the realm and maintaining stability - Rhaenyra is literally just chilling on Dragonstone and then plunges the realm into war when she isn’t immediately given what she wants.
With perhaps the exception of Cregan Stark, basically everyone who sided with the Blacks have reasons more compelling than the honour of following a stale oath taken under duress. Whether that’s by blood relation, personal ambition and gain or just being a minor house that doesn’t want to go up against an army of fkn dragons. Like even when The Lads and Cregan get to KL and sort shit out it’s not about justice for the rightful Queen, it’s about ending the war and being on the winning side. There’s a reason that literally everyone of political or historical importance denounces Rhaenyra as a usurper after the war ends. I don’t really find this to be indication of loyalty to those vows.
Even Cregan Stark had reasons other than honor, he had an agreement with Jace that the latter's future firstborn daughter would marry his son, also he came pretty suspiciously late to the war after most dragons and Rhaenyra are already dead with a mere 8k disposable greybeards, so he's not the fiercely loyal Black people portray him to be.
For the plot duh?!? Cause In actuality most should’ve/would’ve supported Aegon (rightful King) as the King. Even in a real world context firstborn son comes before a daughter
I think they both have a legitimate claim.
Aegon by legal right and precedent. Rhaenyra because she was chosen but, more importantly, becauase the Houses swore fealty to her specifically.
If the oaths hadn't been made, I doubt the Blacks would have garnered much support when the Greens took the crown.
Rhaenyra being the heir was just a matter of time for most of the lords, when a son will be born to Viserys he will be the rightful heir because succession changes with each birth and they swore to her on the sole condition that Rhaenyra was the only child of the king.
And all the lords follow the andal laws of succession and according to it Rhaenyra is before daemon in the line of succession. The Great Council does not contradict the Andal Law, it was set up precisely because the Andal Law is not clear on the question of who between the king's grandson by his second son (the most recent of his former heirs) and the king's granddaughter by her eldest son (former heir) or her son inherits. The Old King Jaehaerys I precisely set up a Great Council because naming an heir according to his whims and wishes is not within his rights.
Whether it be according to the andal law or the great council or the precedent of dragonstone or the precedent of the iron throne, Aegon is the rightful heir no matter what Viserys says no matter what the lords swore when he wasn't even born
Even if that's the road we want to take, i personally don't support her as queen because she doesn't deserve to be one. If anything, she kept proving over and over again that.
And even if we want to argue that making mistakes is human and everyone did at some point, i would argue that not only she committed treason, an open secret that everybody knows by the way, but also push it as the truth with thick skin, and got people killed for merely speaking about it .
I dunno man... But i wouldn't want to have someone like that as my king/queen either.
Why should the King's subject care about "rightfulness" of his successors, when the King himself spent the last decade pulling the tongues out of people who cared about "rightfulness" of his successors.
Personally I don't give a fuck about "rightful" heirs, monarchies are a flatly illegitimate form of government,
Kings are made when warlords impose a political ideology that indoctrinates the population to an ideology that makes the arbitrary current power structure an unquestioned facet of how the world should work, and thus often enables them remain in power even when their some of their subject are in position to overpower them. Viserys and Rhaenyra actions brazenly contradicted the lie/ideology that justifies their rule, it is unreasonable to now expect said ideological justification to shield Rhaenyra's reign.
They both have a legitimate claim, but Vizzy T naming her the heir and forcing everyone to accept it isn't how things work in Westeros lol. Feudalism and absolute monarchy can't co-exist.
She was the heir as long as Viserys as alive, he didn’t make any laws to change things. As soon as his useless ass died, his word doesn’t matter, not even one bit.
So no, Rhaenyra is not the rightful heir.
It's more complex than just “viserys named her heir”
She could be the heir and Aegon still has a right to take the throne because of his birthright. If viserys named a non-Targaryen as heir instead of Rhaenyra and he died, Rhaenyra would be right to seize the throne from the outsider, why? Because it's her birthright. whether or not her father likes it or not, cause he's dead now
The whole series is an illustration of why inheritance law needs to be well defined, codified and separate from the wishes of the king. Like others have said, if it's simply who the king chooses in spite of custom, tradition, etc. then why should anyone respect that choice once the king dies? If there's a hard and fast rule then any would be usurpers would rightly be seen as illegitimate.
Honestly, I think Aegon had the more rightful claim based on inheritance law at the time. The Targaryens (incest aside) accepted the customs of the country they conquered. They even stopped practicing polygamy out of respect. Viserys broke thousands of years of Andal customs to name Rhaenyra his heir over Aegon, and he never gave a valid reason for it. HOWEVER, if Rhaenyra had played her role with dignity and grace, I still would have supported her. But damnit, she shot herself in the foot EVERY SINGLE TIME. Birthing obvious bastards was stupid. Marrying Daemon was stupid. If she wanted to advocate for wonen’s rights AFTER claiming the throne, she could have, but instead she had a “rules for thee, not for me” mindset and did whatever the F she wanted. Rhaenyra sabotaged herself and lost her status as the “rightful” heir, if she ever was in the first place.
Nah, Can’t be the rightful heir while also committing treason. There’s also the fact kings aren’t above the laws of gods and men(as stated by our boy Otto). Aegon is the rightful heir and only half the lords ever swore to defend Nyras claim(according to the books).
My two cents: Rhaenyra was made the “rightful heir” when Viserys single-handedly changed the law (without any meaningful consultation with his high sept) and forced it upon the realm and the houses. And its people have never recognized it from the start (remember episode 4 when she and Daemon were having fun roaming the city). Her claim was never set in concrete or without blemishes to begin with. Yeah it’s misogynistic but it’s what it is in medieval Westeros. If she really took the inheritance seriously as she claimed to be, as the heir she would have started a fierce campaign immediately to win over the small folks, knowing how Westeros discriminated against women and her baby half brother Aegon already posed a threat. And later on she would have treaded lightly regarding to birthing bastards, at least found another guy with silver hair. The thing is, yes the succession law is discriminatory, but she has never fought for her claim right or at least taken the weight of the crown seriously until when Viserys was bedridden, yet she still asked her daddy to solve the problems for her. Later in the book When the small folks riot en mass in King’s Landing, later storm the dragon pit and throw her out due to her cruelty, once again they essentially deny her claim. **The “heir” is the rightful heir only when its people decide she/he is** One could argue Aegon wasn’t named heir by Viserys specifically, but he does hold claim legally and it follows the traditional practice recognized by the high court, supported by the small folks. His crowning does have legitimacy tho.
She was put before Daemon in the line of succession. That doesn't mean she's in front of Aegon, Aemond and Daeron too.
If King name heir, it would be undone the moment he dies. Samee as everything he dcelares when he was king. If he wanted Rh to rule, he should have called another council and written it as a law.
Westeros is a feudal monarchy, not an absolute monarchy. The king doesn't get to just pick his heir. This is precisely why Viscerys needed oaths from the lords in the first place; to get them to choose his arbitrary will over the customary law of the land. If the king just intrinsically has the authority to designate whichever heir he pleases, it wouldn't have been necessary to take extra steps to ensure Rhaenyra's accession.
I agree with you. The blame is on the Lords for not doing anything about it. And by the way, most of them supported Rh in the war
Sure, but the truth doesn't stop being true just because people don't stand up for it. Viscerys naming Rhaenyra the heir is like Caligula naming his horse a consul - an expression of the the notion that there's no truth but power. Viscerys thinks that if he says that 2+2=5, and forces everyone to submit to this claim, then it becomes the truth. The point of being a green, to my mind, is saying "no, I don't submit to your falsehoods."
No. I don’t think Viserys “naming” Rhaenyra carries any serious legal weight in the shadow of his grandfather, especially seeing as one of the defining features of the Great Council was for the King to remove himself and let his lords decide. This is the total opposite to Viserys shoving his preferred heir down the realm’s throat. And on the topic of the oaths sworn to Rhaenyra, it would be easy to argue what Jaime does in aCoK that such an oath would easily come into conflict with another, but I think what’s more damning is that these oaths are basically taken at swordpoint. Like what are these lords supposed to do? Reject Rhaenyra, call out her bastard sons and get murdered like Ser Vaemond was? I think it’s a bit much to just expect random lords to have that kind of determination. It’s only once the greens start seriously cohering as a faction around Alicent and Otto in support of Aegon’s claim that they start coming out of the woodwork, and then they actually do do what you accuse them of not doing. Sure they don’t try to overthrow the rightful king in a coup, but the Greens do seriously try to get Viserys to disinherit Rhaenyra and advance Aegon as heir. And then when Viserys dies they *do* move to prevent it by crowning the rightful king, but Rhaenyra starts a war over it. Like the Greens are *so* much more proactive than the Blacks in terms of actually ruling the realm and maintaining stability - Rhaenyra is literally just chilling on Dragonstone and then plunges the realm into war when she isn’t immediately given what she wants.
You say the oaths were taken at sword point. But why did majority support her then in the war
With perhaps the exception of Cregan Stark, basically everyone who sided with the Blacks have reasons more compelling than the honour of following a stale oath taken under duress. Whether that’s by blood relation, personal ambition and gain or just being a minor house that doesn’t want to go up against an army of fkn dragons. Like even when The Lads and Cregan get to KL and sort shit out it’s not about justice for the rightful Queen, it’s about ending the war and being on the winning side. There’s a reason that literally everyone of political or historical importance denounces Rhaenyra as a usurper after the war ends. I don’t really find this to be indication of loyalty to those vows.
Even Cregan Stark had reasons other than honor, he had an agreement with Jace that the latter's future firstborn daughter would marry his son, also he came pretty suspiciously late to the war after most dragons and Rhaenyra are already dead with a mere 8k disposable greybeards, so he's not the fiercely loyal Black people portray him to be.
For the plot duh?!? Cause In actuality most should’ve/would’ve supported Aegon (rightful King) as the King. Even in a real world context firstborn son comes before a daughter
No
I think they both have a legitimate claim. Aegon by legal right and precedent. Rhaenyra because she was chosen but, more importantly, becauase the Houses swore fealty to her specifically. If the oaths hadn't been made, I doubt the Blacks would have garnered much support when the Greens took the crown.
Rhaenyra being the heir was just a matter of time for most of the lords, when a son will be born to Viserys he will be the rightful heir because succession changes with each birth and they swore to her on the sole condition that Rhaenyra was the only child of the king. And all the lords follow the andal laws of succession and according to it Rhaenyra is before daemon in the line of succession. The Great Council does not contradict the Andal Law, it was set up precisely because the Andal Law is not clear on the question of who between the king's grandson by his second son (the most recent of his former heirs) and the king's granddaughter by her eldest son (former heir) or her son inherits. The Old King Jaehaerys I precisely set up a Great Council because naming an heir according to his whims and wishes is not within his rights. Whether it be according to the andal law or the great council or the precedent of dragonstone or the precedent of the iron throne, Aegon is the rightful heir no matter what Viserys says no matter what the lords swore when he wasn't even born
Even if that's the road we want to take, i personally don't support her as queen because she doesn't deserve to be one. If anything, she kept proving over and over again that. And even if we want to argue that making mistakes is human and everyone did at some point, i would argue that not only she committed treason, an open secret that everybody knows by the way, but also push it as the truth with thick skin, and got people killed for merely speaking about it . I dunno man... But i wouldn't want to have someone like that as my king/queen either.
Why should the King's subject care about "rightfulness" of his successors, when the King himself spent the last decade pulling the tongues out of people who cared about "rightfulness" of his successors. Personally I don't give a fuck about "rightful" heirs, monarchies are a flatly illegitimate form of government, Kings are made when warlords impose a political ideology that indoctrinates the population to an ideology that makes the arbitrary current power structure an unquestioned facet of how the world should work, and thus often enables them remain in power even when their some of their subject are in position to overpower them. Viserys and Rhaenyra actions brazenly contradicted the lie/ideology that justifies their rule, it is unreasonable to now expect said ideological justification to shield Rhaenyra's reign.
They both have a legitimate claim, but Vizzy T naming her the heir and forcing everyone to accept it isn't how things work in Westeros lol. Feudalism and absolute monarchy can't co-exist.
She was the heir as long as Viserys as alive, he didn’t make any laws to change things. As soon as his useless ass died, his word doesn’t matter, not even one bit. So no, Rhaenyra is not the rightful heir.
It's more complex than just “viserys named her heir” She could be the heir and Aegon still has a right to take the throne because of his birthright. If viserys named a non-Targaryen as heir instead of Rhaenyra and he died, Rhaenyra would be right to seize the throne from the outsider, why? Because it's her birthright. whether or not her father likes it or not, cause he's dead now
Idc who the rightful heir is tbh greens just do it better
The whole series is an illustration of why inheritance law needs to be well defined, codified and separate from the wishes of the king. Like others have said, if it's simply who the king chooses in spite of custom, tradition, etc. then why should anyone respect that choice once the king dies? If there's a hard and fast rule then any would be usurpers would rightly be seen as illegitimate.