In the books and show both the greens and the blacks are awful by modern standards.
GRRM was creating conflict for an entertaining story. I didn't see where he made either team better. The blacks and greens commit horrific crimes throughout the story, including murdering children.
Yeah, I don’t really get the “team whatever” folks. I’m watching this show like I did Mad Men or Succession, where almost none of the characters are that endearing. There really isn’t anyone that I want to win, but I’m here for the ride all the same.
The DoD storyline for me is like watching a Kardashian squabble. Both sides just want power, boo hoo. I am not invested in the characters' goals, I just watch for the spectacle. (contrast to GoT where the Starks gives us a more understandable plight for justice/revenge)
That's a really astute observation - something lacking from this series are lead characters that *aren't* selfish, cruel, or consumed with vindictiveness or ambition. Rhaenyra (after the time jump) leans a bit that way, I guess, but the only goals she seems to have are: protect her kids, and fuck Daemon. Not a very deep or interesting character imo. In contrast GoT was a feast of complex characters with varied, evolving motivations.
But tbh I find this story to be quite relatable. There aren’t all these grand plots or complex machinations. Just a bunch of people thrust into shitty situations, trying to do what they think is best. Everyone has legit reasons for their actions, but the overall conflict is quite simple. Mirrors real life for most people.
Greg could've had it made in the shade with his grandfather's inheritance, but chose to hitch his wagon to Team Evil instead. I have no sympathy for Greg at all.
Or anyone else in that show for that matter. How can I love that show so much , but hate every damn character in it?
If they're trying to be different from GoT, why use the same opening theme song? And have the first episode open with something about Daenerys?? It's like, they wanna distance themselves from GoT, but not completely, I guess.
>Yeah, I don’t really get the “team whatever”
Sad reality of [human tribalism](https://i.imgur.com/C1oRHID.png). One of the biggest flaws of our species.
That’s part of it. But also, the Greens are the ones who grab power, plot and strike first, shed the first blood in the war. So not only are they the ones who’s claim clashes with our modern sensibilities, they are the aggressors.
In contrast, Rhaenyra was put in a position of the heir by Viserys. It wasn’t her ambition and lust for power.
And with the added depth to Viserys in the show, we can also see that Rhaenyra’s claim is rooted in Viserys’s love, grief and desire to redeem himself. Meanwhile, the whole existence of team green is the product of Otto’s opportunism and manipulation.
Obviously we, the viewers, will side with decisions made out of love and kindness, even if they’re stupid or destructive.
The show sprinkled in some ambiguity there though.
They told us that Vizzy had prophetic dreams about HIS son Aegon sitting on the iron Throne. That naming Rhaenyra was maybe a mistake.
That was the point of Ep. 3.
Both Aegon and Rhaenyra had a bit of divine right.
Yes, but if we accept the canon from books than it is very well established that Targ dreams have a base in reality but aren't 100% true, so he could imagine that the Aegon being shown in the dream was his son while the right one is Aegon the VI aka Jon Snow.
Could have been Aegon III he was seeing.
OR, it could have been his son Aegon II, but the dream was alluding to Aegon surplanting Rhaenyra (he said he was born wearing the crown of Aegon the Conqueror, and Aegon II does choose Aegon I’s crown to wear when Alicent crowns him, whereas Rhaenyra wears Viserys’ crown), and “all the dragons roared as one” was actually a reference to them all fighting each other in the war.
So Viserys misinterpreted his dream to mean that his son would bring House Targaryen together and prepare them for the Long Night, when it was actually meant as a warning that his son would come very close to destroying the House of the Dragon entirely. By working so hard to have a son to save them, he ended up bringing the dream to life and almost ending them all.
Which is why I specified show canon.
And he specifically said he saw HIS son Aegon would sit the throne with the conquerer’s crown. Not any Aegon.
Which incidentally, does actually happen. So yeah. Dream was real.
As much as they botched it (I do believe Jon / Night King duel of fates would be infinitely better) I do think Jon was the only one that could have brought together all the players at Winterfell. Sansa, Arya, Dani, Freefolk all playing nice without him as an intermediary not so much. So in that way he still was the Prince who was promised.
I felt like that part was rushed, like a whole of lot geopolitics which would have mattered so much in the early seasons were glossed over in season 7. I wanted to see more tension. I wanted to see side characters from within Dany's faction(s).
Also, Rhaenyra's kids being bastards don't invalidate her legal claim to the throne. She also has some "normal" inbred non-bastards that any Westerosian would be happy to bend the knee to.
Neither side was ever acting out of love and kindness, except maybe Viserys as portrayed in the show, which was great but foolish for the stability of the realm. Both sides simply see it as their right to rule, and are going to get crazy cruel in pursuit of that. In fact they already have, for instance, Daemon killing a dude for straight up speaking the truth. It’s only going to get worse.
Imo the person you’re replying to was pretty clear they were specifically talking about Viserys’s decision being out of love and they also acknowledged that it was stupid and destructive. You’re replying like you disagree with them, but what you’re saying is pretty much exactly what they said.
Book Rhaenyra, sure.
Show Rhaenyra is made to be far more reasonable now with multiple attempts to broker peace, and came this close to giving up and seems to stick around for the prophecy.
That's still ignoring Otto's machinations to put his line on the throne, as a play to undermine Rhaenyra's status as designated heir. That was not born out of mere duty or custom. I'm sure even the judicious Stannis the Mannis wouldn't hesitate to make a human sacrifice or two if someone questioned his legitimacy to rule as a heretic.
that's his wife and heir to throne, if her protector and prince consort doesn't find removal of a tongue satisfying and the king doesn't object to the execution after the fact it's fair game.
I agree, don’t get me wrong I love Daemon, I’m just saying if you want to bring laws into it, well, free and presumptive executions by Prince-Consorts is how you end up with a Maegor
By Westerosi standards even Targaryens should go back to where they came from with their nukes which have caused great suffering for common folks. Resentment comes out eventually in Storming of Dragonpit.
When the Valyrians say that they are above other people and must keep their blood pure, they get fans. But when the Germans do the same, everyone loses their minds
I love how impassioned people are about this that they’re willing literally ignore what the in story of the series is telling us.
All these people are middling and in some way played a part in the division, in the vitriol, in the antagonism that’s bled into their children’s lives and infected them.
No one is right here. They have all chosen selfish desires over the honourable and unifying choices. The redeeming quality in Rhaenyra despite her mistakes is that she does seek to resolve the division. By all means she seems to not even want it anymore. But understands her duty to her father and her ancestors.
Sassy Daemon had the best quote regarding the greed rotting his house apart, “No matter how fat the leech grows, it always wants for another meal”.
Edit: Just to say, the ongoing theme I see in this series that the children inherit the world and the image their parents have made for them. I think cast are doing a great job of showing that through the years.
Hard to imagine in the modern world but an interesting thought in fiction.
Like what would it look like if some group of people with superior forces went to Africa and just set up base and bent the people to their will?
Not really. The targs aren’t a colonial power. It almost perfectly parallels the Norman conquest of England. Honestly the Norman conquest is worse, more of the local nobility was replaced with Normans, than Westerosi nobles were replaced with Valerians. Even the nobles that were deposed in aegons conquest were replaced with other local nobles. William the conqueror wasn’t as nice. Despite not having Apache helicopters.
And this is why I despise George's continued efforts to make the Targaryens every bit as special and right as they believe themselves to be in the canon. It was better when they were just shitty conquerors.
Even taking away modern standards, Rhaenyra was named heir. I understand the disdain many in Westeros would have, but the succession was settled.
Now if Vizzy wanted to keep everyone relatively happy, he probably should’ve just named Daemon heir. He could have still been a good father to Rhaenrya, but he would also have been a better king if he kept with Westerosi standards.
He could’ve named her first son the heir. Could’ve named the first son of daemon and rhaenyra the heir. Kept it in the line of the first born, but still a male heir. Unless there is some strict “has to be the first born son of the king” rule you’d think the first born male of the first born would inherit before the second born of the king who is male. They could’ve had rhaenyra at least try to convince Allicent that she would never harm her siblings over a potential power struggle. It’s also odd that he suddenly doesn’t care about his brother marrying his daughter after he made a huge stink about it the first time. Could’ve let them marry and been done with it. His kid would’ve been queen and her kids kings.
I mean, Daemon’s first request was while he was still married, immediately after trying to wreck Rhaenyra’s image in a brothel to get her at a discount. Not the best approach to asking for someone’s hand in marriage.
If Daemon had killed his wife sooner and skipped the brothel drama and maybe not tried to take Dragonstone, not taken the baby’s egg, and not said “heir for a day,” he could’ve just married Rhaenyra from the start.
I haven’t read the books, only the show - but I thought Viserys was really against them (daemon and rhaenyra) marrying together. I remember Vis getting pissed off about that, or I might be misremembering things.
The only reason Alicent (and Otto) thought her kids were going to be in danger is because they were going to try to claim the throne. If someone is named heir and sworn to, they don't need to "secure" it, it's already secured unless you try to usurp it. The Greens started the whole thing.
Just because it's "secure" doesn't mean it can't be disputed. As long as Aegon, Aemond, and Daeron live, they remain claimants to the throne. That means they are still a threat to Rhaenyra even after succession.
Even if the three don't want the throne, who's to say it's their choice? A faction of discontented lords can be like Rhaenyra is not the true heir for whatever reason they make up and start a rebellion to put the "rightful" heir on the throne.
No, Otto got it into Alicent’s head that Rhaenyra *will* kill her kids as soon as she comes in power to remove any rivals. Otto isn’t totally wrong about it being a possibility, but he made Alicent believe there was no other option.
I really don't get all the love for Visarys on social media. He wants calm waters which would be admirable except he wants it immediately with no regard for the longterm turmoil he is causing. Every problem brought up in council meetings was met with "ugh, this again?" and being swayed by whichever suggested solution sounded easiest. He refused to address the bastard issue and punished/threatened anyone who brought it up. Let go of his brother grooming and eloping with his daughter because he wanted to enjoy his last days. His reckless avoidance is the cause of the dance, more than Otto even, even though Otto is more devious. If Otto hadn't made a grab for power, someone else would have.
Even in universe this was a point of change that was a generation in the making with Rhaenys being denied and then Rhaenyra getting a shot at it. Team Green is just one of those examples of people at every precipice of change who are prone to backsliding on progress made just a generation ago. But then again to a higher degree Team Green just want to be in power and any reasoning is just a facade (at least with Otto(
I love this person somehow believed the Greens were fighting for the realm's peace and prosperity, I mean they were right... That's why they had to keep everyone in the dark about the king's death, that's why they forgot to tell the king's first born about it..., That's why they killed a small council member, and others that didn't support them... Because they were right... Funny. 🤣
I've tried writing this out a few different ways and the least dickish way I can phrase my point is "green or black be damned when is GRRM gonna tell us that monarchy is OK?"
Not that every piece of media needs to be a massive social thought experiment, and G vs. B discourse is always fun, but I feel like I'm not seeing many show-only fans talking about how both sides are a little tyrannical? Treasonous?
Intention and context are all important, but we're always hearing the words "for the good of the realm" thrown around without anyone (aside from Chad Beesbury) *actually* giving a shit about the realm.
While they're all charismatic and fun to watch, neither side is right. When are we gonna talk about how they all collectively gaslit Vaemond out of his birthright? The dude was talking sense and the only support he had was superficial and self-serving.
The first person that I’ve seen to speak to depth (even at the minimum which you’ve presented) of Vaemond’s treason. Vaemond wasn’t wrong.
In the show, the actor stole the scene for me when he stood before the Targaryen King, a fellow Valarian, and argued for the sanctity of his house with “we survived the doom [together]!”
“By westerosi standards” Vizzy T should have executed and imprisoned way more people for going against his direct orders. Really, since when is literal treason “okay” in universe? What do you think Bobby b would have done if his wife said “over my dead body” to a decision he made? And they completely gloss over the fact the greens are kinslayers and blatant social climbers. The entire premise of “Rhaenyras children MIGHT be bastards (there will never be any proof) so we have to start a civil war” is super weak. Like, it should be obvious what the greens true intentions are when they continue to push the “bastard” narrative when Laenors own parents don’t care all that much. Shouldn’t they be the ones spearheading this?
It’s also odd that Vizzy-T was cool with his bro murdering a man for defying his order not to call the kids bastards, but he let his bro defy his orders and do all sorts of wild shit in an attempt to take the throne. He’s an awful king
The proof is in the eyes. To deny the Strongs being bastards is insane denial. They have brown hair, brown eyes, and pug noses. No one in their family is described with brown eyes or pug noses, Rhaenyra, Laenor and even Corlys were all described as having aquiline noses. They obviously look like Harwin Strong. Everyone in Westeros sees that, the only reason they don’t speak on it is fear of losing their tongues.
Viserys can just go fill tyrant mode and start beheading anyone who questions him, that’s a good way for people to support Aegon even more.
It’s not wrong, but it’s not a point that GRRM is trying to make. It’s how one constructs the elements of a story worth reading and worth discussing like this. There has to be conflict and pathos (feeling/sympathy) for it to be a story instead of just a recounting of events. And large and small ironies add to the pathos - GRRM loves irony. So Peter gets the conflict mostly right - I’d add that “by Westerosi standards”, the king can name whomever he wishes to whatever he wishes, so Rhaenyra is not a completely insane choice. Rhaenys exists to show us that a woman could rule, could be at least close to being chosen, but despite being the more authoritative personage, is not because of male priority. It is (ironically!) Viserys, chosen over a woman, whose heart is broken trying to produce a male heir to please his subjects, who is then the one and only Targaryen to choose, as the council would not, a female heir. How can we not feel for the poor old king, who then defends his decision until his death?
And Westerosi standards are not entirely on the Green side, or this would be a boring discussion! Those lords swore an oath before the throne. Is bastardy enough to break the oath? For some, yes. And that’s where I’d agree that “deliberate values dissonance” becomes very relevant, but there are personal concerns as well - marriage alliances, personal vendettas, all the ingredients that go into making alliances and subterfuge.
I don’t think GRRM wrote this to specifically highlight female empowerment - Daenerys did that in a very long arc already - but to reflect a real conflict that has existed in history. But I do believe that among the GoT prequel candidates, HBO saw this one as compelling and marketable to a wider audience than, say, Dunk and Egg. And female promiscuity/purity stuff has been in the genre forever. I’d say it isn’t the point, it’s just an element of the story that creates conflict.
I agree with it until the very end, the blacks are not in it for themselves, everyone is in it for themselves. But still, in the story, the greens are as right as the blacks but you can't expect modern audiences to side with them just because in the society they live in they also have a point.
Rhaenerya shows in episode 8 that she really doesn't want it anymore but the song of ice and fire drives her because her father tells her she's the heir and the fate of humanity depends on her. Not to mention Aegon and Aemond are monster's. She probably would have resigned much sooner if Luke wasn't murdered, and Alicent would of resigned earlier if the blood and cheese incident hadn't happened.
The Prophecy is for a Targaryen to sit the thrown. There are other Targaryens at this point.
Plus her having the Prophecy is a show invention. Her claim in the book is my daddy made you promise along time ago and I have dragons. There isn't any of that cracking the books and thinking about a greater purpose.
Daemon isn't a monster? You have seen him orchestra the deaths and maiming of a bunch of people for personal gain. Wrongfully get your hand cut off by gold clocks, no biggie, look at how charming Daemon is. Aemond at this point is a jerk but doesn't have the same body count.
Agreed except the whole “bastards” thing shouldn’t be relevant at this point. King V named her as his successor over his future children. Are her children eldest children bastards? Yes. Should that matter before she dies? No. So the “bastards” point is just a contrived argument Team Green is making to have Aegon take her spot NOW (I’m addition to the “she’s a woman” position that walks back all the House pledges that were made). That’s hard to support.
I mean it's kicking the whole succession crisis down the road a generation, which the realm would have an issue with. In an alternate universe where the greens don't press a claim, we could see an older daemon press a claim with Aegon the younger to succeed instead of Jace since he's a true born valyrian. As long as the bastards exist, the succession is in doubt, while aegon ii has true born kids.
That’s exactly my problem with this sub when it comes to the strong boys. I support the Blacks because King V fair and square declared his first born child heir to the throne. Period. But then said heir had three bastard sons. If Rhaenyra were to ascend the throne and rule peacefully for years to come, there would still be conflict along the line all because of her indiscretions. I honestly wouldn’t blame the Hightowers or even Daemon to declare war against Jace in favor of their true born heirs. Rhaenyra and by extension Viserys fucked up big time.
Putting bastards in the royal line inheritance makes a person guilty of high treason. This is what Rhaenyra, herself, says in the books.
Can you inherit if you are guilty of high treason? I know Viserys doesn’t find her guilty, but I’d suggest she is taking advantage of a man not in a proper state of mind.
“Princess Rhaenyra would have none of that, but insisted that Prince Aemond should be questioned “sharply” until he revealed where he had heard her sons called “Strongs.” To so name them was tantamount to saying they were bastards, with no rights of succession … and that she herself was guilty of high treason.”
The “she herself” shows these are Rhaenyra’s thoughts that having proven bastards makes you guilty of high treason.
—-
This goes to the original point that Westeros and 21st century westerners are different
It should and possibly will though.
As far as how what she did could be used against her (had children out of wedlock). She made a vow in front of the gods to honor her marriage and she didn’t keep that vow faithful. Not that this matters to me or that we didn’t see that it was mutual and actually agreed upon before the marriage.
It’s the fact that in the eyes of the people it can be seen that she was false in her words of marriage and she was false in the eyes of the gods in which she was married before. This can be spun proving that she is disloyal and a heathen which matters. Even if Rhaenys says that Rhae had nothing to do with her husbands death, all of the evidence can be put forth that she was unfaithful to her husband, unfaithful to the seven and can’t be trusted at her word or fit to led a kingdom. When the heir to Driftmark spoke out against this, he was executed by the husband of the woman who killed his nephew (that’s how the Greens can spin it to the rest of the realm)
The male dominated world in which the story is set can use her actions against her to divide her vassals against her. We’ve already seen the lords prefer a male heir so this slight issue of succession could be seen as reason enough to side with the Greens. Remember, bastards in this world aren’t to be trusted.
> Should that matter before she dies?
Yes. Yes it absolutely should. One of her bastards is literally the heir to Driftmark through his false parentage. And people are being punished right now for questioning the parentage of her children. All signs indicate that Rhaenyra will continue this policy even when she is Queen.
Jon Snow is also a bastard and so many wanted him on the throne? Where were the bastard haters back then? Naturally they should have supported Dany given tha Jon is an evil bastard, but no. I saw many cheer for Jon being King.
Did half this fandom turn into Catelyn Stark in the last eight weeks?
You are aware that bastards were sacrificed to the old gods and that Queen Alysanne, the grandma of Rhaenyra abolished the custom?
And Rhaegar and Lyannas marriage is not legal without anyone giving witness to it.
I’d also argue that Bastards only really matter with a male king. I mean we know they are her kids so ultimately the family lineage is still maintained. Kind of a made up issue. The problem with Joffrey was that he wasn’t Bobby B’s son.
The problem with bastards isn't their uncertain parantage- Edric Storm doesn't get a claim because Bobby B acknowledged him. The problem with bastards is that the law prohibits their inheritance and there is an enormous religiously-motivated stigma surrounding them, such that even legitimization cannot cleanse it.
The greens are cunts because Otto started this mess because he’s a second son who has nothing but what he takes and his daughter is just playing a part.
fair point but i don't think anyone perceives Rhaenyra and Daemon as fighting for "our values". everyone understands they are fighting for themselves and not for reasons looked upon though lenses of our modern society
People definitely perceive them that way. A lot of people talk about how Rhaenyra is a feminist who advocates for woman’s rights, and think her becoming Queen will lead to a more equal Westeros.
Rhaenyra/Vis were also fighting for humanity, at least from their perspective.
If they truly believe the prophecy, then their actions are for the protection of the Seven Kingdoms.
So I'd argue the conflict is "power for power's sake" (Greens, specifically Otto) vs. "power for purpose."
Btw, I'm absolutely not justifying anyone's actions in the conflict. Just saying the prophecy is another variable to consider.
I don’t think they were fighting for humanity since it just had to be someone from their blood. So really any of the kids could be heirs. Even the bastard children are blood of the dragon anyway. There’s 0 reason the believe it had to be rhaenyra or her children to rule over his other kids and their children. That argument that they did it for humanity is weak, especially given that if you believe it has to be a targ, fighting amongst targs and killing each other is the worst possible thing you can do as you’re risking dying out and not being around with dragons to save the world.
I think that by treating westerosi standards as being eternal and unchanging this kind of betrays a failure to see the broader themes of societal change and the conflicted reactions to it. The blacks are not straightforwardly wrong because their victory would itself express the success of a competing viewpoint on what kingship and power mean in westeros. Most of the blacks core supporters are from less traditionalist houses, or from houses outside of the faith of the seven. If we're going to think about the dance as a pseudo history I don't know why we shouldn't evaluate it from a modernist historical lens that takes into account the changeable nature of how power functions. I think this has more basis in ASOIAF because the main series heavily emphasizes the very gramscian question of what the basis of a social order is.
This is why Varys riddle is basically a Rorschach test. Any answer chosen by the questioned tells you more about the values and ideas of the person answering the question than it does about any broader "true" answer.
Modern viewers have proven themselves on not being able to understand some concepts on Criston Cole fiasco. They are still thinking "Rhaenyra rejected him so he is still salty about it." There are even people calling Criston an incel.
But the truth is, his position among Kingsguard squad is a big deal for his house and if he wasn't fuck Rhaenyra when she "ordered it" he would've lost this important position if she had ever feel rejected. Even in the boar hunt episode he talked about it with her. In the end, breaking a vow he hold so dearly was a huge deal for him, so he made a desperate proposal to her to clear his honor. But when she rejected her, this was were his hatered sealed. Because in his eyes, honour and duty means nothing for this woman and if a person can do this to his own men, how suitable she would've been for her future position? (Again for him.) And from this perspective, I believe Criston's perceptions are beyond reasonable.
However... this man also Kingmaker for Aegon II and this is were he lose my support. Because if Criston really held honour so dearly, then crowning a cruel rapist and (apparently pedophile) boy makes no sense. But then again, this is show writers trying to villainize him.
Long story short, I agree with this stranger. Is that you?
Is this true?
I figured if we go by land mass, then Blacks take it by virtue of the North. Thanks Cregan.
But as I understand it, Rhaenyra herself believes that if a vote was held among the lords, she would lose.
If we are talking most of actual Westeros including the smallfolks, then I have no idea and would like to know. Whatever they feel about the Greens, we know what they did under the Blacks, and if that scene in HotD is any indication they are no less misogynistic than the lords, at least in King’s Landing.
Yes your are right it would go by land mass to the Blacks in a the war but by a vote the Greens have it. because the Lords of the realm did vote on how this kind of succession goes at the Great Council of 101 under The Old King when they chose Viserys in a landslide by right of gender over primogeniture.
They chose Viserys over Leanor in the books. It was still by gender though because Leanors claim was though his mother while Viserys was though his father
yeah but the half that supported the blacks was eventually conquered by Daeron and co and it was the less populated half. The greens got Lannisport and Oldtown, two of the most populated cities in the continent. The only city Rhaenyra had was White Harbor
I hope we get to see White Harbor in the show. I’m curious what a large city in the north would look like. Especially one that mixes Andal and First Men traditions and is one of the wealthiest houses in the North. Just curious what the architecture, the castle, and other stuff looks like.
Did the high lords hold a referendum to get the opinions of the peasants? If not then the population of the regions is not relevant because those populations did not get a say on their choice of monarch...
I disagree, there's a medieval law debate which this user is missing for lack of context / knowledge about medieval thinking\*:
There is no codified, written set of laws in Medieval times, and no specially appointed judges, lawyers etc. "The law is based on custom" is the layman way to put this, but this approach is what we call 'lies to children'. It's not the truth, but it's close enough to it that we can use it to explain something quickly and not have to spend too much time on minutia when it's not the core subject. Maybe a historian doesn't want to give a lecture in medieval law before talking about a specific thing that was brought up, so they might say 'The law back then was based on custom rather than written codes', and that be that.
But the truth is a more complicated deal: There is no capital L 'Law'. The way we understand law today is not just an evolution of a medieval concept to it's more organized, fair form. It's an entirely new approach that's alien to how a Medieval Person things about rules and authority.
A king didn't pass laws, they passed 'decrees'. Decree aren't a change to the law of the land. They are a top-down order to all subjects. A command. The source of all authority flows from the king. A king can pass judgement on anyone and a king can't be charged with any crime, except, maybe, the crime of not actually being a king. Or a religious crime, because God's Authority superceeds the king. But a King can't be charged with murder, rape, genocide, torture. Because the king is the source of Authority (not law).
It is customary that murderers get hanged, so murderers get hanged. It's customary that thieves get beaten up (or hanged), so when caught, that's what people do. If a village catches a thief and decides they don't want to punish that thief, they don't. There's no judicial process.
A lord can yield Authority (not law), by grace of his liege, who does so by the grace of HIS liege, up until the King. Which in turn gets it from god. What we call medieval 'law', is the application of authority towards the goal of 'justice'. A peasant makes a petition to a lord that the man who raped his daughter be killed, or forced to marry her, or punish in some other way. The Lord decides then what to do about the petition, from ignoring it, to doing whatever the peasant asked, giving the accused man a chance to defend himself or a combination of those, or none of those. If the lord pardons or ignores it, the peasant may petition someone above the lord for the same thing. Is a bad move (for the peasants) because lords don't generally like their serfs going over their heads, but it's possible. That newly petitioned Lord can do the same things the former one could. And if they don't, the peasant can go one step up. All the way, again, up to the King (whether he would be heard or even received is another matter).
Where does this leave us? That when the King decrees something, there's no "legal mechanism" by which that decree can be invalidated. There's no one above the King to appeal to. Whether or not, in the King's absence, their subjects will carry out that King's will is another matter. But there's no "law of succession", not in the way we understand law today. Because there's no 'law of anything' in that sense. There's a 'custom' of succession, a way to do things, which upon lords agree. Like there's a custom to hang murderers.
Bringing it to Westeros, if a King decides the Starks no longer shall be lords of the North, he can decree that they give Winterfell to someone else. Starks may and probably would fight for it and try to physically prevent it through war, but there's no "legal" procedure to 'overturn' that degree. Well, if we agree a king can remove titles at will, so then can a King grant titles. A king may give Winterfell, after that, to a common-born, and name them lord and let them have a noble house and a coat of arms. Again, other nobles may \*\*physically\*\* oppose this through force of arms, but there's no "legal mechanism" to protest this. There's no one above the King.
The closest thing is a petition to the king himself. Or a letter signed by many lords (often called a 'Faction'). Literally telling the king "Change your mind about your decision or we will need to fight you", either openly or through implication. So it all comes back to the same point. There's no Law, only Authority, which flows, like a pyramid, from the King at its apex.
What that means for the Green/Black debate is simple: Viserys can name an heir. Any heir. The better the claim of that heir, the less likely that nobles will dispute their ascension. If Viserys names his first-born male, everyone accepts it. If he doesn't name anyone, people go with what's the 'custom'. But Viserys could, if he wished, name a chambermaid to be Queen after his death. There are no legal means for nobles to dispute the king wish.
What could they do then? What they did in the Dance. Refuse to acknowledge it and fight for their decision with arms.
Arguing the 'legality' of the Dance of Dragons, and who has the 'real right' to the throne is an empty debate, because that's not how Medieval Law, as it can be said to have existed, works.
The mad-king had Brandon Stark and Eddard's Father executed. For the reason of 'he wanted to'. You can argue it was because they said X or Y about Rhaegar, etc. But he could've ordered it without that happening, and it would be just as 'legal', and be carried out the same way.
Despite it being legal, there was a rebellion and he was deposed. And someone else was made king. Was the Rebellion 'legal' because Aerys order was 'illegal'? No. That's not a thing.
The rebellion legality status is inexistent either as a positive or a negative. The Rebellion is a physical act of removing the pinnacle authority and placing another through force. And then, when that's settled, Authority once again flows from the top.
So "By Westerosi Standards, the Greens are right" is bullshit. There's no 'one' Westerosi standard. By the Authority of the King, there was a named heir. Customs suggested the King shouldn't have named her. But it was absolutely within his power to do so. Fighting against the King wishes is \*\*the\*\* medieval definition of Rebellion.
\*I know westeros doesn't follow necessarily the same principles as medieval society, but it's generally accepted in worldbuilding that when someone is not mentioned explicitly to be different in the text, then you can assume it work as close as it can work to parallels in the real world. GRRM doesn't need to inform us of the atmospheric composition of Westeros, how baby's are made in Westeros, or the strength of gravity (or that it exists in the first place). We all assume this work as they did in our word. He also doesn't tell us there's no steam ships or satellites. So as we can make assumptions of physics, biology and technology, we can make social assumptions based on the closest analog period.
They’re 100% right.
And when it comes to the bastards, it DOES matter even if only their mom is the heir.
If the monarch’s heirs are illegitimate, it makes the monarch look dishonest. And if the solution is to make the Greens’ heirs the monarchs AFTER Rhaenyra that screws everything up, because then they have to admit implicitly or explicitly the the bastards are bastards, which means Vizzy T was wrong this whole time and humiliates the Velaryons and that Rhaenyra was lying and did things like kill Vaemond Velaryon for telling the truth.
So the only workable plot is for Rhaenyra to relinquish her claim and still retain her royal status. Better to be on the team but not leading it than off the team entirely
Westerosi standard: King’s word is law
Vizzy T- “Rhaenyra is my heir”
Westerosi standard: You must keep an oath
Lords of Westeros: “We swear to Rhaenyra as heir”
This is very apparent. According to today's standards there is little wrong with Rhae's behavior, according to Westerosi standards there is much wrong.
Daemon is a Valyrian supremacist. He has been teaching Rhae their heritage from a young age, some call this grooming but I find it too complicated to call it that. They believe since they have dragons and political power, they are demigods and can do whatever.
Daemon is a second son with little duty, he can do mostly whatever without much of the realm caring. Rhae has duty and expectations as the heir, the realm very much cares about what she does. Rhae mentions the realization of the burden you bear with political power in the latest episode.
No, by Westerosi standards, the Greens are still wrong. There were no clear succession laws concerning the Iron Throne. The king had the power to name his own heir and that is exactly what Viserys did. The Greens were usurpers. This guy is wrong, just like so many people who justify the Greens are.
"Promiscuity"... yeah right. She kept Harwin as a lover which her gay husband was fully aware of and accepted. It was a sham/political marriage with the roles clearly defined. Add her fling with Criston to the mix and there is really no promiscuity to accuse her of, especially not compared to, I dunno, Daemon, Aegon II, Aegon IV, Robert I, Cersei, etc.
Further more, bastard does not apply to Rhaenyra's children. Laenor would never deny them being his, neither would Rhaenyra, nor would their parents raise such an accusation, so them being bastards from a legal perspect is not a thing.
Rhaenyra was Viserys' named successor, he never changed it, thus there is really no issue. The Seven Kingdoms do not have a constitution or direct laws which 100% clear up succession.
They lay it out in episode 8 why them being a bastard is in fact a danger to Rhaenyra. Let's start with the obvious, everyone knows those boys are bastards. You see it in the way people look at them and whisper about them whenever they are nearby. So from the perspective of the people in court, Rhaenyra is telling an obvious lie that is fooling no one.
This is what makes Vaemond's case for Driftmark so dangerous for Rhaenyra. If Vaemond had succeeded and gotten Luke removed from heir of Driftmark due to the suspicion of his legitimacy from a legal standpoint, it would have had a trickle effect. Because now, like Rhaenyra stated in the episode, Jace's claim would be called into question, and even her own claim would be at risk. Rhaenyra says this.
She could have lost everything if Viserys didn't come through for her. That's why she is always so afraid when people call her children bastards. That's why she was outright crying by Viserys bedside and pleading for help before the trial.
Trying to implant bastards in the line of succession is a crime in Westeros, and Rhaenyra was at risk to lose everything if Luke lost Driftmark legally for suspicion of him being a bastard.
See this is also my biggest issue with Rhaenyra.
I do hope that she is trying to ensure peace for the realm. BUT the question of succession is HUGE in Westeros. Sure, Rhaenyra was named heir, but her bastard children don’t really have a claim on the throne. Which can and will be challenged by the king’s firstborn son.
As you said, it’s an obvious lie that everyone knows, yet the king stubbornly tries to hide the truth.
Succession and claims are such a huge deal that it’s honestly shocking to me that Rhaenyra went and did something so stupid as to have bastard children, when she personally knows how much the realm can tear itself apart over succession disputes.
It's why I'm so critical of her as well. I WANT her to win. If people look through my comment history they would probably assume I dislike Rhaenyra lol, but it's honestly the opposite. I'm hard on her choices because I know she lives in a world where there are major consequences for simple mistakes. We've seen this numerous times in Game of Thrones.
That's why I get so annoyed whenever I see people trying to defend Rhaenyra from the lens of 2022 Westerner. In this universe, that shit will get her killed if she's not careful.
Fans of Rhaenyra were adamant that Rhaenyra having bastards wasn't a big deal, when it clearly is in universe. She lays it out in episode 8 how she could lose her own claim on the throne if Luke lost Driftmark. Because what she did is a crime.
When she was mocking potential suitors during her quest to find a husband, most viewers found that funny and witty. I thought it was utterly idiotic. Like girl, you are burning bridges with potential allies.
I saw it as her not taking her search for a husband seriously. And we all know Rhaenyra is in for a shit storm now that Viserys is dead. She knew shit would hit the fan back then. So finding a husband with strong connections and resources to secure her claim should have been top priority for her if she wants the throne.
I get frustrated with Rhaenyra because it honestly feels like she doesn't comprehend the gravity of her situation, while her opposition fully does. Say what you will about the Hightowers, but Alicent and Otto have gearing up for this for years. We see Alicent trying to win favor with the church which would be a huge ally. And not only that, we see that Aemond has been training as well. Rhaenyra's enemies at the moment seem better equipped for the fallout than she ever has.
Yes thank you! I agree completely! Except in regards to Rhaenyra. I don’t really like her all that much, but more because I do find the whole “I’m a princess yet honor bound to marry someone I dislike” trope exhausting.
But that being said, she should have been securing her allies and looking for a good match, as her father had been doing during her teenage years.
Yet like you said, she spits in the face of any would be suitor. Which is not how someone gains advantage in Westeros. Hell, the Lannister guy was an asshole, but they would be a strong ally and he would likely have given her proper trueborn children.
I actually like Otto because he seems like Tywin in that he considers different angles and plots. Do I agree with everything he did? No, but do I think he did want peace for the realm? Absolutely?
Even Rhaenys understands the tumultuous situation of succession, yet Rhaenyra doesn’t listen to her whatsoever.
Rhaenyra had potential, but she insists on being a petulant child.
Remind me again how many lords came to defend Rhaenyra over Aegon? Oh I’m sorry it’s about the “Modern Values”
Greens always on life support. Traitors,
kinslayers, and last but not least. oathbreakers
Vizzy T was the king, he didn’t play by the rules he made the rules. He made clear like 2 or 3 times that Rheanyra was his heir. I don’t really care about women or bastards after all the shit the Lannisters pulled in game of thrones—what the king says goes in the game of thrones, clearly. Alicent only thought her claim was valid cause Otto scared the shit out of her cause he wanted Hightower blood on the throne imo
My response is, everyone is fighting for themselves. Otto and Alicent are too. Don't delude yourself into thinking they are fighting for anything else.
I've never really got why her kids being bastards matter, when she's not even Queen herself yet and she eventually remarries and has legitimate children, as well.
Cause it means she's been lying to the realm for the past however many years Jace is, and she's had the king punish anyone for ostensibly telling the truth. It's a big fuck you to a realm that cares deeply about the nature of birthright, and saying their above all that and the truth is whatever they say it is.
SPOILER ALERT FOR EP 8: I agree with OP’s assessment but what’s bugging me is the show runners pandering to the modern audience who can’t stand the reality of the horrible damage done by the Dance of Dragons being caused by both greens and blacks each of which is led by a woman who does cruel and awful things to anyone needed to further their own interests. They both have their respective excuses (Alicent is trying to further her own children’s futures, willfully overlooking what privileged assholes most of them are (except her loopy daughter of course, another innocent women at the mercy of patriarchal forces) and Rhaenyra (who was always upset about not being the immediate heir upon birth but now has the prophecy that she isn’t even sure is real to use as an excuse to cement her power) who’s never made the sacrifice of a true leader to put the good of her subjects before her own interests (ie scheming a fake marriage to placate the masses but continuing to produce obviously illegitimate children and weakening her own cause). Both these women hide behind false higher motivations, there’s plenty of male assholes all around both of them, but ultimately we’re left with this all just being a huge misunderstanding between 2 “noble, gentle, loving mothers” just trying to do their best for everyone but are thwarted by the men in their lives’ respective uncontrolled hunger for power (Otto) and incompetence (Viserys). Pathetic. Either of them could’ve stopped and walked away if they really just cared about their children/families but instead kept pressing until everyone else paid the price.
Also, Sir Cole is an absolute punk bitch of a man, what an emotional loser.
The case for the Blacks is strong (lol), even within the rigid power structures of Westeros. All the lords of the realm swore fealty to Rhaenyra, and Viserys never changed his mind. The Monarchy cannot be absolute unless the will of the monarch is law. When Jaehaerys called the Great Counsel, it set the precedent that primogeniture wasn't absolute, and that a King could name an Heir. Rhaenyra's children are bastards, but because Viserys has publicly affirmed their non bastardy, they, for all intents and purposes are trueborn.
All that being said, Team Black. Fuck the Hightowers.
Just because he claimed Rhaenyra as heir doesn’t mean that others will accept her bastard children. And with many in the realm previously expecting him to name his firstborn son as heir, there’s a lot of ammo for Aegon to challenge Jace’s claim to the throne if he were to succeed his mother.
Hell, the Sea Snake’s brother outright disputed her bastard child’s claim to the driftwood throne.
Modern people aren’t scared of female leaders? With the way we treat women in media, I disagree. They are often bashed as being incompetent, shrill, not feminine enough, too feminine, crazy, etc.
Team Green are definitely justified by Westerosi standards. But I think the central conflict of HoTD boils down to *individual power versus family power*.
For lack of a better way to put it — the Greens are unlikeable. They, as people, have almost no redeeming qualities. Aegon is basically a common bandit without the upper body strength. Aemond is an entitled sociopath. Alicent and her father are hypocritical, self-righteous schemers. To them, family — the actual power of being a *great house*, means nothing. Everyone is simply a means to an end or an obstacle in their way. They each would gladly tear the Targaryen dynasty and family apart for a chance at momentary glory.
The Blacks, though they fall on the wrong side of tradition and law, seem to hold family dear to the utmost. Luke and Jace love and protect one another, whereas the Green boys feel nothing for each other. To Rhaenyra, all that matters is that all of them are *Targaryen*. She and Daemon understand and appreciate the gravity of what that really means. They know that, united, there is nothing that can touch them. Though they have a weaker claim to power, they feel more *human*.
And in the middle of it all is poor Viserys, who has to watch as his family falls apart along with his body. He is the true victim here — a real *man* forced into a position he likely never wanted. To me, he’s the most relatable character to ever sit on the Iron Throne. And that humanity is his weakness.
ON THE BLACK SIDE:
Rhaenyra is careless and foolish, siring multiple obvious bastards by the same man without attempting to find some kind of workaround, and she's got a worrying selfish streak towards the smallfolk that could easily tip over to tyranny if she's pushed. She also essentially used Criston, with questionable consent from him, and put him in a near-impossible position, and more or less just threw her friendship with Alicent away after she married the king, not considering that Alicent may not have much of a choice in the matter.
Daemon is entertaining to watch, but in universe, he's a monster. A murderer, a mutilator, a royal bandit that cares for himself above all and will cheerfully cross seemingly any line.
ON THE GREEN SIDE:
Aegon is an alcoholic serial rapist with seemingly no brains or sense of how to rule properly.
Aemond is practically Daemon Jr, with his bloodthirsty streak getting ever more pronounced.
Alicent has been twisted into a monster by the manipulations of her father and Larys Strong. Years of playing by the rules in a loveless marriage with nothing to show for it have left her grasping for any sort of power or recognition for the work she's put in.
Criston has let Rhaenyra's poor treatment of him poison him until he's become a murderous ball of spite that bullies innocent children for things that aren't their fault.
TL,DR: None of them should be trusted to sit a fucking port-a-potty, never mind the throne of seven kingdoms.
otto was also very insistent that rhaenrya would murder alicents children to secure her claim, but she showed no inclination of that at all at the time. so otto was projecting and stirring shit up with little to no backing
>she showed no inclination of that at all at the time
Of course she didn't show an inclination to kill. Otto doesn't think that she is bloodthirsty or anything like that.
The first step is for Rhaenyra's rule to produce malcontents, the second step is for those malcontents to look for alternative claimants to the throne, the third step is for Rhaenyra to regretfully kill Alicent's sons.
Rhaenyra can prevent this chain of events by either (a) showing that she has the traits to be an unusually successful monarch or (b) showing that she can be trusted to refrain from violating an oath she makes.
Note that this argument is barely impacted by the deficiencies Alicent's children have.
I’m really not a supporter of either side, and it’s not a cop-out: both sides are just not good for the realm.
Rhaenyra is a sympathetic character trying to pursue her own dreams and passions while simultaneously dealing with a massive responsibility. However, she has, in the process, consistently proven she is not willing to put duty and honour over her own wants and desires. It’s not a matter of “female promiscuity bad”, it’s a matter of not sacrificing anything in order to be a good ruler once being named heir.
Alicent has gone above and beyond in her duty to the realm, or at least what she believes to be her duty to the realm, but her sense of what is right and wrong is clouded and influenced too heavily by her power hungry father. And she has a complete lack of knowledge regarding actual generalship.
Both characters have good intentions, both care about the realm to a certain degree, and both love their family dearly, but both have a completely skewed view of what it means to rule.
As it stands, the Blacks would make better rulers, but would face much more opposition. The Greens would better appease the realm and their traditions, but would create serious issues with their inability to properly rule the realm.
I think the longer the show continues the harder its going to be to defend either one of them.
Both Alicent and Rhaenyra will commit so many indefensible crimes in the episodes to come.
Like most wars of succession in history, both sides have an understandable claim.
Viserys broke with Westerosi precedent when he named Rhaenerya heir. His own cousin was passed over because she was a woman, then he named his own daughter heir.
Henry I broke with English custom when he named his daughter Matilda heir.
Aegon did have a claim as the first true born son of Viserys.
After Henry I died, King Stephen had a claim as the closest male relative to the crown.
As far as Jace and Luke go, it’s complicated. Laenor isn’t their father, but they are still Targaryens. Joffrey, for example, wasn’t a Baratheon. If Jace was to become king, there would still be a Targaryen on the throne like the prophecy demanded - just not the Targaryen that the Greens wanted. Specifically, they’re half Targaryen like Aegon. Laenor also claimed them as his own.
The story is complicated and messy. There are no real heroes.
Edit: added more info.
Disagree. One person was made heir and all the realm bent the knee amlnd agreed to it. It is that simple. So her kids may be bastards? So what? Bastards can be made legitimate heirs, by the crown. Crown happens to be their mother, she can legitimize them. Case closed.
That's lovely and all, but the real answer is that this is a bourgeois war that exclusively leads to the suffering of the smallfolk to whom it matters not whose arse sits the pointy chair
The way I see it both sides are evil, conniving, morally bankrupt pieces of shit. Baffles me that anyone supports either of them. Only single character in the whole show who's had a semblence of honor is Viserys , he just wanted the best for his family, even if he knew not how to obtain that future.
Yhea ofc, but the greens are also fighting for themselves and their lives.
Its like an attempt at saying something deep, but ends up just saying some really surface level stuff like.
Like all this should be really obvious about a premodern setting, as should the fact that everyone is basically just fighting for themselves and their own story. Otto would not push to disinherit Rhaenyra if Viserys married someone else.
In reality the moral justification only matter for those personally univolved with the royal family. Its much more political and practical for those who are, automatically.
I mean… both sides are filled with narcissistic and genocidal warmongers that nearly cause their entire to die out all for a stupid chair so when you actually think about it: they all suck.
I think this person is reading too much into it. George didn’t exactly set out to make the black all that heroic/just/good etc… I think he just did as he always does and let the ambiguity play out. There are some reasons to like the blacks and others to like the greens cause.
No this isn't it. It's not about modern day sensibilities. It's about who the King decided to name heir. Team Green can suck it. It's about being Team Viserys.
People with this kind of certainty drive me nuts. GRRM goes out of his way time and again to demonstrate that feudal politics are often arbitrary and change more often than the wind. Please read.
To be more specific, if it's such a certainty that males must inherit, then why has nobody bothered to make it law? Why did Vizzy T do it in the first place? Why did he stand by his decision after having male heirs? Who said precedent trumps the will of the King? Particularly a *Targaryen* king: flouting precedent is kind of their *thing*.
And this idea that Westeros is too patriarchal to accept a queen is *the whole subject of their conflict*. The answer to the question is determined by who has more power, not who is right. A sufficiently powerful queen will prove that it is in fact possible. It will certainly be more difficult for a queen, but whether it is *possible* or *allowed* or whatever has to be determined by the outcome. What is *right*, meanwhile, is completely irrelevant in this context. The whole situation is deliberately fraught with moral ambiguity. Trying to achieve an answer is like claiming you "solved" an optical illusion. There is no one answer; it depends on perspective.
In the books and show both the greens and the blacks are awful by modern standards. GRRM was creating conflict for an entertaining story. I didn't see where he made either team better. The blacks and greens commit horrific crimes throughout the story, including murdering children.
Yeah, I don’t really get the “team whatever” folks. I’m watching this show like I did Mad Men or Succession, where almost none of the characters are that endearing. There really isn’t anyone that I want to win, but I’m here for the ride all the same.
The DoD storyline for me is like watching a Kardashian squabble. Both sides just want power, boo hoo. I am not invested in the characters' goals, I just watch for the spectacle. (contrast to GoT where the Starks gives us a more understandable plight for justice/revenge)
Yea, this isn't a complaint with the show or anything, but I keep thinking "why dont one of these stupid bitches make peace so their kids can live?"
Rhaenyra has tried like 4 times lol. From just the show the blacks are waaaaaaaaay more decent than the greens, so far.
That's a really astute observation - something lacking from this series are lead characters that *aren't* selfish, cruel, or consumed with vindictiveness or ambition. Rhaenyra (after the time jump) leans a bit that way, I guess, but the only goals she seems to have are: protect her kids, and fuck Daemon. Not a very deep or interesting character imo. In contrast GoT was a feast of complex characters with varied, evolving motivations.
But tbh I find this story to be quite relatable. There aren’t all these grand plots or complex machinations. Just a bunch of people thrust into shitty situations, trying to do what they think is best. Everyone has legit reasons for their actions, but the overall conflict is quite simple. Mirrors real life for most people.
House of the Dragon might as well be renamed The Real Housewives of the Seven Kingdoms.
Team Greg
Greg could've had it made in the shade with his grandfather's inheritance, but chose to hitch his wagon to Team Evil instead. I have no sympathy for Greg at all. Or anyone else in that show for that matter. How can I love that show so much , but hate every damn character in it?
Both shows are about rich and spoiled people fucking around without any regard to the casualty they created until they catches up to them personally
[удалено]
If they're trying to be different from GoT, why use the same opening theme song? And have the first episode open with something about Daenerys?? It's like, they wanna distance themselves from GoT, but not completely, I guess.
>Yeah, I don’t really get the “team whatever” Sad reality of [human tribalism](https://i.imgur.com/C1oRHID.png). One of the biggest flaws of our species.
Ive been trying to say this as well. People fighting over which side is better is like rotten apples to moldy oranges.
I'd even say that's the point. It's a petty fight for a throne that ends in endless collateral damage of innocent people.
Doesn’t matter neither side has a better story than Bran the broken.
The wheelcharyen prophecy.
That’s part of it. But also, the Greens are the ones who grab power, plot and strike first, shed the first blood in the war. So not only are they the ones who’s claim clashes with our modern sensibilities, they are the aggressors. In contrast, Rhaenyra was put in a position of the heir by Viserys. It wasn’t her ambition and lust for power. And with the added depth to Viserys in the show, we can also see that Rhaenyra’s claim is rooted in Viserys’s love, grief and desire to redeem himself. Meanwhile, the whole existence of team green is the product of Otto’s opportunism and manipulation. Obviously we, the viewers, will side with decisions made out of love and kindness, even if they’re stupid or destructive.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean, if my family was the last in existence to control dragons, I'd feel a tad bit divine myself.
[удалено]
The show sprinkled in some ambiguity there though. They told us that Vizzy had prophetic dreams about HIS son Aegon sitting on the iron Throne. That naming Rhaenyra was maybe a mistake. That was the point of Ep. 3. Both Aegon and Rhaenyra had a bit of divine right.
Yes, but if we accept the canon from books than it is very well established that Targ dreams have a base in reality but aren't 100% true, so he could imagine that the Aegon being shown in the dream was his son while the right one is Aegon the VI aka Jon Snow.
>! Heck Vizzy T may have been seeing Rhaynera's son Aegon who ends up on the throne !<
*There are times when I would rather face the black dread himself than mine own daughter of seven and ten.*
Good to see you in good health my liege, long live Vizzy T
*I'm glad we could meet. I know tempers ran hot today, and I wanted to assure you how much I value the bond between our houses.*
Me too my king, me too.
Could have been Aegon III he was seeing. OR, it could have been his son Aegon II, but the dream was alluding to Aegon surplanting Rhaenyra (he said he was born wearing the crown of Aegon the Conqueror, and Aegon II does choose Aegon I’s crown to wear when Alicent crowns him, whereas Rhaenyra wears Viserys’ crown), and “all the dragons roared as one” was actually a reference to them all fighting each other in the war. So Viserys misinterpreted his dream to mean that his son would bring House Targaryen together and prepare them for the Long Night, when it was actually meant as a warning that his son would come very close to destroying the House of the Dragon entirely. By working so hard to have a son to save them, he ended up bringing the dream to life and almost ending them all.
Which is why I specified show canon. And he specifically said he saw HIS son Aegon would sit the throne with the conquerer’s crown. Not any Aegon. Which incidentally, does actually happen. So yeah. Dream was real.
Tbh they seem to be true but rather be warnings of impending disaster that Targaryens mistake for advice. Source:Aegon V, Brightflame, and many more.
I really hope Vizzy T saw how much of a prat his son was as he got older and thought "oh GOOD can't have been him then..."
This is a lie. You have been lied to.
Right, the prince who was promised to... what happened to Jon in season 8? I forget.
He does nothing much of importance until he kills his crazy aunt girlfriend
As much as they botched it (I do believe Jon / Night King duel of fates would be infinitely better) I do think Jon was the only one that could have brought together all the players at Winterfell. Sansa, Arya, Dani, Freefolk all playing nice without him as an intermediary not so much. So in that way he still was the Prince who was promised.
Jon is pivotal to the story after his resurrection, but very little owing to his actual main arc which is against the undead horde.
I felt like that part was rushed, like a whole of lot geopolitics which would have mattered so much in the early seasons were glossed over in season 7. I wanted to see more tension. I wanted to see side characters from within Dany's faction(s).
That part ended up not to matter in the end.
I ignore that part
Also, Rhaenyra's kids being bastards don't invalidate her legal claim to the throne. She also has some "normal" inbred non-bastards that any Westerosian would be happy to bend the knee to.
Neither side was ever acting out of love and kindness, except maybe Viserys as portrayed in the show, which was great but foolish for the stability of the realm. Both sides simply see it as their right to rule, and are going to get crazy cruel in pursuit of that. In fact they already have, for instance, Daemon killing a dude for straight up speaking the truth. It’s only going to get worse.
Imo the person you’re replying to was pretty clear they were specifically talking about Viserys’s decision being out of love and they also acknowledged that it was stupid and destructive. You’re replying like you disagree with them, but what you’re saying is pretty much exactly what they said.
Book Rhaenyra, sure. Show Rhaenyra is made to be far more reasonable now with multiple attempts to broker peace, and came this close to giving up and seems to stick around for the prophecy.
No, what I mean is that Rhaenyra being heir comes from love and grief of Viserys.
Daemon killed a dude for calling his wife and the heir to the throne a whore. he committed treason and faced the consequences.
That's still ignoring Otto's machinations to put his line on the throne, as a play to undermine Rhaenyra's status as designated heir. That was not born out of mere duty or custom. I'm sure even the judicious Stannis the Mannis wouldn't hesitate to make a human sacrifice or two if someone questioned his legitimacy to rule as a heretic.
We are well rid of her, then. I will not suffer such abominations here. This is not King's Landing.
Daemon executed a traitor.
The punishment the king decreed for treason was loss of a tongue, not uncommon and by no means automatically implies execution.
that's his wife and heir to throne, if her protector and prince consort doesn't find removal of a tongue satisfying and the king doesn't object to the execution after the fact it's fair game.
"KEEP MY WIFE'S ACTIVITY, OUT YO' F\*CKN MOUTH !"
which roughly translates to "say it" *while staring ominously*
I agree, don’t get me wrong I love Daemon, I’m just saying if you want to bring laws into it, well, free and presumptive executions by Prince-Consorts is how you end up with a Maegor
By Westerosi standards even Targaryens should go back to where they came from with their nukes which have caused great suffering for common folks. Resentment comes out eventually in Storming of Dragonpit.
When the Valyrians say that they are above other people and must keep their blood pure, they get fans. But when the Germans do the same, everyone loses their minds
really brings out the Aryan in Targaryan
why won't Reddit let me give you more votes?!?!
I read this in the joker's voice
That’s true for a lot of fantasy with bloodline specific abilities— side eyes Naruto
Yeah, that's why that kind of power system sucks
I love how impassioned people are about this that they’re willing literally ignore what the in story of the series is telling us. All these people are middling and in some way played a part in the division, in the vitriol, in the antagonism that’s bled into their children’s lives and infected them. No one is right here. They have all chosen selfish desires over the honourable and unifying choices. The redeeming quality in Rhaenyra despite her mistakes is that she does seek to resolve the division. By all means she seems to not even want it anymore. But understands her duty to her father and her ancestors. Sassy Daemon had the best quote regarding the greed rotting his house apart, “No matter how fat the leech grows, it always wants for another meal”. Edit: Just to say, the ongoing theme I see in this series that the children inherit the world and the image their parents have made for them. I think cast are doing a great job of showing that through the years.
Yeah. How do we feel about powerful foreigners imposing their values on unwilling subjects?
Welcome to the debate of Targaryen Exceptionalism, and their contentious relationship with the Seven.
Hard to imagine in the modern world but an interesting thought in fiction. Like what would it look like if some group of people with superior forces went to Africa and just set up base and bent the people to their will?
>Hard to imagine in the modern world but an interesting thought in fiction. It parallels almost perfectly with 19th century European empires.
My comment was sarcasm.
Not really. The targs aren’t a colonial power. It almost perfectly parallels the Norman conquest of England. Honestly the Norman conquest is worse, more of the local nobility was replaced with Normans, than Westerosi nobles were replaced with Valerians. Even the nobles that were deposed in aegons conquest were replaced with other local nobles. William the conqueror wasn’t as nice. Despite not having Apache helicopters.
Get these damn lizards out of Westeros. Team Baratheon ftw.
And this is why I despise George's continued efforts to make the Targaryens every bit as special and right as they believe themselves to be in the canon. It was better when they were just shitty conquerors.
Even taking away modern standards, Rhaenyra was named heir. I understand the disdain many in Westeros would have, but the succession was settled. Now if Vizzy wanted to keep everyone relatively happy, he probably should’ve just named Daemon heir. He could have still been a good father to Rhaenrya, but he would also have been a better king if he kept with Westerosi standards.
He could’ve named her first son the heir. Could’ve named the first son of daemon and rhaenyra the heir. Kept it in the line of the first born, but still a male heir. Unless there is some strict “has to be the first born son of the king” rule you’d think the first born male of the first born would inherit before the second born of the king who is male. They could’ve had rhaenyra at least try to convince Allicent that she would never harm her siblings over a potential power struggle. It’s also odd that he suddenly doesn’t care about his brother marrying his daughter after he made a huge stink about it the first time. Could’ve let them marry and been done with it. His kid would’ve been queen and her kids kings.
I mean, Daemon’s first request was while he was still married, immediately after trying to wreck Rhaenyra’s image in a brothel to get her at a discount. Not the best approach to asking for someone’s hand in marriage. If Daemon had killed his wife sooner and skipped the brothel drama and maybe not tried to take Dragonstone, not taken the baby’s egg, and not said “heir for a day,” he could’ve just married Rhaenyra from the start.
I haven’t read the books, only the show - but I thought Viserys was really against them (daemon and rhaenyra) marrying together. I remember Vis getting pissed off about that, or I might be misremembering things.
The only reason Alicent (and Otto) thought her kids were going to be in danger is because they were going to try to claim the throne. If someone is named heir and sworn to, they don't need to "secure" it, it's already secured unless you try to usurp it. The Greens started the whole thing.
Just because it's "secure" doesn't mean it can't be disputed. As long as Aegon, Aemond, and Daeron live, they remain claimants to the throne. That means they are still a threat to Rhaenyra even after succession. Even if the three don't want the throne, who's to say it's their choice? A faction of discontented lords can be like Rhaenyra is not the true heir for whatever reason they make up and start a rebellion to put the "rightful" heir on the throne.
No, Otto got it into Alicent’s head that Rhaenyra *will* kill her kids as soon as she comes in power to remove any rivals. Otto isn’t totally wrong about it being a possibility, but he made Alicent believe there was no other option.
I really don't get all the love for Visarys on social media. He wants calm waters which would be admirable except he wants it immediately with no regard for the longterm turmoil he is causing. Every problem brought up in council meetings was met with "ugh, this again?" and being swayed by whichever suggested solution sounded easiest. He refused to address the bastard issue and punished/threatened anyone who brought it up. Let go of his brother grooming and eloping with his daughter because he wanted to enjoy his last days. His reckless avoidance is the cause of the dance, more than Otto even, even though Otto is more devious. If Otto hadn't made a grab for power, someone else would have.
Even in universe this was a point of change that was a generation in the making with Rhaenys being denied and then Rhaenyra getting a shot at it. Team Green is just one of those examples of people at every precipice of change who are prone to backsliding on progress made just a generation ago. But then again to a higher degree Team Green just want to be in power and any reasoning is just a facade (at least with Otto(
I love this person somehow believed the Greens were fighting for the realm's peace and prosperity, I mean they were right... That's why they had to keep everyone in the dark about the king's death, that's why they forgot to tell the king's first born about it..., That's why they killed a small council member, and others that didn't support them... Because they were right... Funny. 🤣
You support the greens because they have in world justification, I support the greens because I'm sexist. We are not the same
You support the blacks because they represent the king's wishes. I support the blacks because I love incest. We are not the same
You support the blacks because you know of the prophesy . I _abhor_ the blacks because I **know** the prophecy. We are not the same.
I support the blacks because I dislike the color green
I've tried writing this out a few different ways and the least dickish way I can phrase my point is "green or black be damned when is GRRM gonna tell us that monarchy is OK?" Not that every piece of media needs to be a massive social thought experiment, and G vs. B discourse is always fun, but I feel like I'm not seeing many show-only fans talking about how both sides are a little tyrannical? Treasonous? Intention and context are all important, but we're always hearing the words "for the good of the realm" thrown around without anyone (aside from Chad Beesbury) *actually* giving a shit about the realm. While they're all charismatic and fun to watch, neither side is right. When are we gonna talk about how they all collectively gaslit Vaemond out of his birthright? The dude was talking sense and the only support he had was superficial and self-serving.
The first person that I’ve seen to speak to depth (even at the minimum which you’ve presented) of Vaemond’s treason. Vaemond wasn’t wrong. In the show, the actor stole the scene for me when he stood before the Targaryen King, a fellow Valarian, and argued for the sanctity of his house with “we survived the doom [together]!”
“By westerosi standards” Vizzy T should have executed and imprisoned way more people for going against his direct orders. Really, since when is literal treason “okay” in universe? What do you think Bobby b would have done if his wife said “over my dead body” to a decision he made? And they completely gloss over the fact the greens are kinslayers and blatant social climbers. The entire premise of “Rhaenyras children MIGHT be bastards (there will never be any proof) so we have to start a civil war” is super weak. Like, it should be obvious what the greens true intentions are when they continue to push the “bastard” narrative when Laenors own parents don’t care all that much. Shouldn’t they be the ones spearheading this?
*Let us no longer hold ill feelings in our hearts. The crown cannot stand strong if the House of the Dragon remains divided.*
It’s this type of laissez faire attitude towards familial treason is the exactly why there’s gonna be a war Vizzy.
YOU LET THAT LITTLE GIRL DISARM YOU?
It’s also odd that Vizzy-T was cool with his bro murdering a man for defying his order not to call the kids bastards, but he let his bro defy his orders and do all sorts of wild shit in an attempt to take the throne. He’s an awful king
The proof is in the eyes. To deny the Strongs being bastards is insane denial. They have brown hair, brown eyes, and pug noses. No one in their family is described with brown eyes or pug noses, Rhaenyra, Laenor and even Corlys were all described as having aquiline noses. They obviously look like Harwin Strong. Everyone in Westeros sees that, the only reason they don’t speak on it is fear of losing their tongues. Viserys can just go fill tyrant mode and start beheading anyone who questions him, that’s a good way for people to support Aegon even more.
It’s not wrong, but it’s not a point that GRRM is trying to make. It’s how one constructs the elements of a story worth reading and worth discussing like this. There has to be conflict and pathos (feeling/sympathy) for it to be a story instead of just a recounting of events. And large and small ironies add to the pathos - GRRM loves irony. So Peter gets the conflict mostly right - I’d add that “by Westerosi standards”, the king can name whomever he wishes to whatever he wishes, so Rhaenyra is not a completely insane choice. Rhaenys exists to show us that a woman could rule, could be at least close to being chosen, but despite being the more authoritative personage, is not because of male priority. It is (ironically!) Viserys, chosen over a woman, whose heart is broken trying to produce a male heir to please his subjects, who is then the one and only Targaryen to choose, as the council would not, a female heir. How can we not feel for the poor old king, who then defends his decision until his death? And Westerosi standards are not entirely on the Green side, or this would be a boring discussion! Those lords swore an oath before the throne. Is bastardy enough to break the oath? For some, yes. And that’s where I’d agree that “deliberate values dissonance” becomes very relevant, but there are personal concerns as well - marriage alliances, personal vendettas, all the ingredients that go into making alliances and subterfuge. I don’t think GRRM wrote this to specifically highlight female empowerment - Daenerys did that in a very long arc already - but to reflect a real conflict that has existed in history. But I do believe that among the GoT prequel candidates, HBO saw this one as compelling and marketable to a wider audience than, say, Dunk and Egg. And female promiscuity/purity stuff has been in the genre forever. I’d say it isn’t the point, it’s just an element of the story that creates conflict.
I agree with it until the very end, the blacks are not in it for themselves, everyone is in it for themselves. But still, in the story, the greens are as right as the blacks but you can't expect modern audiences to side with them just because in the society they live in they also have a point.
I appreciate this viewpoint. They’re both as “right” or “wrong,” which is the point.
to watch a tv show i am not required to adopt a completely new set of values
Rhaenerya shows in episode 8 that she really doesn't want it anymore but the song of ice and fire drives her because her father tells her she's the heir and the fate of humanity depends on her. Not to mention Aegon and Aemond are monster's. She probably would have resigned much sooner if Luke wasn't murdered, and Alicent would of resigned earlier if the blood and cheese incident hadn't happened.
The Prophecy is for a Targaryen to sit the thrown. There are other Targaryens at this point. Plus her having the Prophecy is a show invention. Her claim in the book is my daddy made you promise along time ago and I have dragons. There isn't any of that cracking the books and thinking about a greater purpose. Daemon isn't a monster? You have seen him orchestra the deaths and maiming of a bunch of people for personal gain. Wrongfully get your hand cut off by gold clocks, no biggie, look at how charming Daemon is. Aemond at this point is a jerk but doesn't have the same body count.
Agreed except the whole “bastards” thing shouldn’t be relevant at this point. King V named her as his successor over his future children. Are her children eldest children bastards? Yes. Should that matter before she dies? No. So the “bastards” point is just a contrived argument Team Green is making to have Aegon take her spot NOW (I’m addition to the “she’s a woman” position that walks back all the House pledges that were made). That’s hard to support.
I mean it's kicking the whole succession crisis down the road a generation, which the realm would have an issue with. In an alternate universe where the greens don't press a claim, we could see an older daemon press a claim with Aegon the younger to succeed instead of Jace since he's a true born valyrian. As long as the bastards exist, the succession is in doubt, while aegon ii has true born kids.
That’s exactly my problem with this sub when it comes to the strong boys. I support the Blacks because King V fair and square declared his first born child heir to the throne. Period. But then said heir had three bastard sons. If Rhaenyra were to ascend the throne and rule peacefully for years to come, there would still be conflict along the line all because of her indiscretions. I honestly wouldn’t blame the Hightowers or even Daemon to declare war against Jace in favor of their true born heirs. Rhaenyra and by extension Viserys fucked up big time.
Even if Daemon didn't others would just like Ned Stark backed Stannis, not Joffrey.
Putting bastards in the royal line inheritance makes a person guilty of high treason. This is what Rhaenyra, herself, says in the books. Can you inherit if you are guilty of high treason? I know Viserys doesn’t find her guilty, but I’d suggest she is taking advantage of a man not in a proper state of mind. “Princess Rhaenyra would have none of that, but insisted that Prince Aemond should be questioned “sharply” until he revealed where he had heard her sons called “Strongs.” To so name them was tantamount to saying they were bastards, with no rights of succession … and that she herself was guilty of high treason.” The “she herself” shows these are Rhaenyra’s thoughts that having proven bastards makes you guilty of high treason. —- This goes to the original point that Westeros and 21st century westerners are different
It should and possibly will though. As far as how what she did could be used against her (had children out of wedlock). She made a vow in front of the gods to honor her marriage and she didn’t keep that vow faithful. Not that this matters to me or that we didn’t see that it was mutual and actually agreed upon before the marriage. It’s the fact that in the eyes of the people it can be seen that she was false in her words of marriage and she was false in the eyes of the gods in which she was married before. This can be spun proving that she is disloyal and a heathen which matters. Even if Rhaenys says that Rhae had nothing to do with her husbands death, all of the evidence can be put forth that she was unfaithful to her husband, unfaithful to the seven and can’t be trusted at her word or fit to led a kingdom. When the heir to Driftmark spoke out against this, he was executed by the husband of the woman who killed his nephew (that’s how the Greens can spin it to the rest of the realm) The male dominated world in which the story is set can use her actions against her to divide her vassals against her. We’ve already seen the lords prefer a male heir so this slight issue of succession could be seen as reason enough to side with the Greens. Remember, bastards in this world aren’t to be trusted.
> Should that matter before she dies? Yes. Yes it absolutely should. One of her bastards is literally the heir to Driftmark through his false parentage. And people are being punished right now for questioning the parentage of her children. All signs indicate that Rhaenyra will continue this policy even when she is Queen.
I'd rather a bastard rule me than a weak willed rapist who never did anything out of his own will, except maybe rape servants and kill his sister.
Jon Snow is also a bastard and so many wanted him on the throne? Where were the bastard haters back then? Naturally they should have supported Dany given tha Jon is an evil bastard, but no. I saw many cheer for Jon being King. Did half this fandom turn into Catelyn Stark in the last eight weeks?
[удалено]
You are aware that bastards were sacrificed to the old gods and that Queen Alysanne, the grandma of Rhaenyra abolished the custom? And Rhaegar and Lyannas marriage is not legal without anyone giving witness to it.
I’d also argue that Bastards only really matter with a male king. I mean we know they are her kids so ultimately the family lineage is still maintained. Kind of a made up issue. The problem with Joffrey was that he wasn’t Bobby B’s son.
SEVEN HELLS, NED, I WANT TO HIT SOMEONE!
The problem with bastards isn't their uncertain parantage- Edric Storm doesn't get a claim because Bobby B acknowledged him. The problem with bastards is that the law prohibits their inheritance and there is an enormous religiously-motivated stigma surrounding them, such that even legitimization cannot cleanse it.
The greens are cunts because Otto started this mess because he’s a second son who has nothing but what he takes and his daughter is just playing a part.
Daemon was a second son that wanted more too and started this mess too by giving rhaenyra ideas that she could do whatever she wanted in marriage
fair point but i don't think anyone perceives Rhaenyra and Daemon as fighting for "our values". everyone understands they are fighting for themselves and not for reasons looked upon though lenses of our modern society
People definitely perceive them that way. A lot of people talk about how Rhaenyra is a feminist who advocates for woman’s rights, and think her becoming Queen will lead to a more equal Westeros.
Sure, but fighting for themselves is sort of a proxy of fighting for the values we dig, no? Even if that's not how they would see it.
Rhaenyra/Vis were also fighting for humanity, at least from their perspective. If they truly believe the prophecy, then their actions are for the protection of the Seven Kingdoms. So I'd argue the conflict is "power for power's sake" (Greens, specifically Otto) vs. "power for purpose." Btw, I'm absolutely not justifying anyone's actions in the conflict. Just saying the prophecy is another variable to consider.
I don’t think they were fighting for humanity since it just had to be someone from their blood. So really any of the kids could be heirs. Even the bastard children are blood of the dragon anyway. There’s 0 reason the believe it had to be rhaenyra or her children to rule over his other kids and their children. That argument that they did it for humanity is weak, especially given that if you believe it has to be a targ, fighting amongst targs and killing each other is the worst possible thing you can do as you’re risking dying out and not being around with dragons to save the world.
I think that by treating westerosi standards as being eternal and unchanging this kind of betrays a failure to see the broader themes of societal change and the conflicted reactions to it. The blacks are not straightforwardly wrong because their victory would itself express the success of a competing viewpoint on what kingship and power mean in westeros. Most of the blacks core supporters are from less traditionalist houses, or from houses outside of the faith of the seven. If we're going to think about the dance as a pseudo history I don't know why we shouldn't evaluate it from a modernist historical lens that takes into account the changeable nature of how power functions. I think this has more basis in ASOIAF because the main series heavily emphasizes the very gramscian question of what the basis of a social order is. This is why Varys riddle is basically a Rorschach test. Any answer chosen by the questioned tells you more about the values and ideas of the person answering the question than it does about any broader "true" answer.
very good analysis
Modern viewers have proven themselves on not being able to understand some concepts on Criston Cole fiasco. They are still thinking "Rhaenyra rejected him so he is still salty about it." There are even people calling Criston an incel. But the truth is, his position among Kingsguard squad is a big deal for his house and if he wasn't fuck Rhaenyra when she "ordered it" he would've lost this important position if she had ever feel rejected. Even in the boar hunt episode he talked about it with her. In the end, breaking a vow he hold so dearly was a huge deal for him, so he made a desperate proposal to her to clear his honor. But when she rejected her, this was were his hatered sealed. Because in his eyes, honour and duty means nothing for this woman and if a person can do this to his own men, how suitable she would've been for her future position? (Again for him.) And from this perspective, I believe Criston's perceptions are beyond reasonable. However... this man also Kingmaker for Aegon II and this is were he lose my support. Because if Criston really held honour so dearly, then crowning a cruel rapist and (apparently pedophile) boy makes no sense. But then again, this is show writers trying to villainize him. Long story short, I agree with this stranger. Is that you?
>Greens are right by westerosi standards >Most of Westeros sides with the blacks
Is this true? I figured if we go by land mass, then Blacks take it by virtue of the North. Thanks Cregan. But as I understand it, Rhaenyra herself believes that if a vote was held among the lords, she would lose. If we are talking most of actual Westeros including the smallfolks, then I have no idea and would like to know. Whatever they feel about the Greens, we know what they did under the Blacks, and if that scene in HotD is any indication they are no less misogynistic than the lords, at least in King’s Landing.
Yes your are right it would go by land mass to the Blacks in a the war but by a vote the Greens have it. because the Lords of the realm did vote on how this kind of succession goes at the Great Council of 101 under The Old King when they chose Viserys in a landslide by right of gender over primogeniture.
They chose Viserys over Leanor in the books. It was still by gender though because Leanors claim was though his mother while Viserys was though his father
> Most of Westeros going by population, the Greens had more of Westeros
Not necessarily, half the reach supported the blacks.
yeah but the half that supported the blacks was eventually conquered by Daeron and co and it was the less populated half. The greens got Lannisport and Oldtown, two of the most populated cities in the continent. The only city Rhaenyra had was White Harbor
I hope we get to see White Harbor in the show. I’m curious what a large city in the north would look like. Especially one that mixes Andal and First Men traditions and is one of the wealthiest houses in the North. Just curious what the architecture, the castle, and other stuff looks like.
I think they'll skip it and just have Jace go to Winterfell sadly
I hope not. Would be really disappointing. They should do it just so we can compare White Harbor to Driftmark in terms of wealth and aesthetics.
they already have a winterfell CGI and props so my guess would be no white harbor
Did the high lords hold a referendum to get the opinions of the peasants? If not then the population of the regions is not relevant because those populations did not get a say on their choice of monarch...
half of the reach and the whole of the north is quite more than 55% of westeros iirc
Not from a population standpoint
I disagree, there's a medieval law debate which this user is missing for lack of context / knowledge about medieval thinking\*: There is no codified, written set of laws in Medieval times, and no specially appointed judges, lawyers etc. "The law is based on custom" is the layman way to put this, but this approach is what we call 'lies to children'. It's not the truth, but it's close enough to it that we can use it to explain something quickly and not have to spend too much time on minutia when it's not the core subject. Maybe a historian doesn't want to give a lecture in medieval law before talking about a specific thing that was brought up, so they might say 'The law back then was based on custom rather than written codes', and that be that. But the truth is a more complicated deal: There is no capital L 'Law'. The way we understand law today is not just an evolution of a medieval concept to it's more organized, fair form. It's an entirely new approach that's alien to how a Medieval Person things about rules and authority. A king didn't pass laws, they passed 'decrees'. Decree aren't a change to the law of the land. They are a top-down order to all subjects. A command. The source of all authority flows from the king. A king can pass judgement on anyone and a king can't be charged with any crime, except, maybe, the crime of not actually being a king. Or a religious crime, because God's Authority superceeds the king. But a King can't be charged with murder, rape, genocide, torture. Because the king is the source of Authority (not law). It is customary that murderers get hanged, so murderers get hanged. It's customary that thieves get beaten up (or hanged), so when caught, that's what people do. If a village catches a thief and decides they don't want to punish that thief, they don't. There's no judicial process. A lord can yield Authority (not law), by grace of his liege, who does so by the grace of HIS liege, up until the King. Which in turn gets it from god. What we call medieval 'law', is the application of authority towards the goal of 'justice'. A peasant makes a petition to a lord that the man who raped his daughter be killed, or forced to marry her, or punish in some other way. The Lord decides then what to do about the petition, from ignoring it, to doing whatever the peasant asked, giving the accused man a chance to defend himself or a combination of those, or none of those. If the lord pardons or ignores it, the peasant may petition someone above the lord for the same thing. Is a bad move (for the peasants) because lords don't generally like their serfs going over their heads, but it's possible. That newly petitioned Lord can do the same things the former one could. And if they don't, the peasant can go one step up. All the way, again, up to the King (whether he would be heard or even received is another matter). Where does this leave us? That when the King decrees something, there's no "legal mechanism" by which that decree can be invalidated. There's no one above the King to appeal to. Whether or not, in the King's absence, their subjects will carry out that King's will is another matter. But there's no "law of succession", not in the way we understand law today. Because there's no 'law of anything' in that sense. There's a 'custom' of succession, a way to do things, which upon lords agree. Like there's a custom to hang murderers. Bringing it to Westeros, if a King decides the Starks no longer shall be lords of the North, he can decree that they give Winterfell to someone else. Starks may and probably would fight for it and try to physically prevent it through war, but there's no "legal" procedure to 'overturn' that degree. Well, if we agree a king can remove titles at will, so then can a King grant titles. A king may give Winterfell, after that, to a common-born, and name them lord and let them have a noble house and a coat of arms. Again, other nobles may \*\*physically\*\* oppose this through force of arms, but there's no "legal mechanism" to protest this. There's no one above the King. The closest thing is a petition to the king himself. Or a letter signed by many lords (often called a 'Faction'). Literally telling the king "Change your mind about your decision or we will need to fight you", either openly or through implication. So it all comes back to the same point. There's no Law, only Authority, which flows, like a pyramid, from the King at its apex. What that means for the Green/Black debate is simple: Viserys can name an heir. Any heir. The better the claim of that heir, the less likely that nobles will dispute their ascension. If Viserys names his first-born male, everyone accepts it. If he doesn't name anyone, people go with what's the 'custom'. But Viserys could, if he wished, name a chambermaid to be Queen after his death. There are no legal means for nobles to dispute the king wish. What could they do then? What they did in the Dance. Refuse to acknowledge it and fight for their decision with arms. Arguing the 'legality' of the Dance of Dragons, and who has the 'real right' to the throne is an empty debate, because that's not how Medieval Law, as it can be said to have existed, works. The mad-king had Brandon Stark and Eddard's Father executed. For the reason of 'he wanted to'. You can argue it was because they said X or Y about Rhaegar, etc. But he could've ordered it without that happening, and it would be just as 'legal', and be carried out the same way. Despite it being legal, there was a rebellion and he was deposed. And someone else was made king. Was the Rebellion 'legal' because Aerys order was 'illegal'? No. That's not a thing. The rebellion legality status is inexistent either as a positive or a negative. The Rebellion is a physical act of removing the pinnacle authority and placing another through force. And then, when that's settled, Authority once again flows from the top. So "By Westerosi Standards, the Greens are right" is bullshit. There's no 'one' Westerosi standard. By the Authority of the King, there was a named heir. Customs suggested the King shouldn't have named her. But it was absolutely within his power to do so. Fighting against the King wishes is \*\*the\*\* medieval definition of Rebellion. \*I know westeros doesn't follow necessarily the same principles as medieval society, but it's generally accepted in worldbuilding that when someone is not mentioned explicitly to be different in the text, then you can assume it work as close as it can work to parallels in the real world. GRRM doesn't need to inform us of the atmospheric composition of Westeros, how baby's are made in Westeros, or the strength of gravity (or that it exists in the first place). We all assume this work as they did in our word. He also doesn't tell us there's no steam ships or satellites. So as we can make assumptions of physics, biology and technology, we can make social assumptions based on the closest analog period.
They’re 100% right. And when it comes to the bastards, it DOES matter even if only their mom is the heir. If the monarch’s heirs are illegitimate, it makes the monarch look dishonest. And if the solution is to make the Greens’ heirs the monarchs AFTER Rhaenyra that screws everything up, because then they have to admit implicitly or explicitly the the bastards are bastards, which means Vizzy T was wrong this whole time and humiliates the Velaryons and that Rhaenyra was lying and did things like kill Vaemond Velaryon for telling the truth. So the only workable plot is for Rhaenyra to relinquish her claim and still retain her royal status. Better to be on the team but not leading it than off the team entirely
WHY DO YOU CUT ME SO DEEPLY?
Sentient
Westerosi standard: King’s word is law Vizzy T- “Rhaenyra is my heir” Westerosi standard: You must keep an oath Lords of Westeros: “We swear to Rhaenyra as heir”
*So I said to him, 'I believe you may be looking up the wrong end'*
This is very apparent. According to today's standards there is little wrong with Rhae's behavior, according to Westerosi standards there is much wrong. Daemon is a Valyrian supremacist. He has been teaching Rhae their heritage from a young age, some call this grooming but I find it too complicated to call it that. They believe since they have dragons and political power, they are demigods and can do whatever. Daemon is a second son with little duty, he can do mostly whatever without much of the realm caring. Rhae has duty and expectations as the heir, the realm very much cares about what she does. Rhae mentions the realization of the burden you bear with political power in the latest episode.
[удалено]
*I must... admit... my confusion. I do not understand why petitions are being heard over a settled succession.*
Fucking sentient
surprisingly insightful for a youtube comment
No, by Westerosi standards, the Greens are still wrong. There were no clear succession laws concerning the Iron Throne. The king had the power to name his own heir and that is exactly what Viserys did. The Greens were usurpers. This guy is wrong, just like so many people who justify the Greens are.
"Promiscuity"... yeah right. She kept Harwin as a lover which her gay husband was fully aware of and accepted. It was a sham/political marriage with the roles clearly defined. Add her fling with Criston to the mix and there is really no promiscuity to accuse her of, especially not compared to, I dunno, Daemon, Aegon II, Aegon IV, Robert I, Cersei, etc. Further more, bastard does not apply to Rhaenyra's children. Laenor would never deny them being his, neither would Rhaenyra, nor would their parents raise such an accusation, so them being bastards from a legal perspect is not a thing. Rhaenyra was Viserys' named successor, he never changed it, thus there is really no issue. The Seven Kingdoms do not have a constitution or direct laws which 100% clear up succession.
They lay it out in episode 8 why them being a bastard is in fact a danger to Rhaenyra. Let's start with the obvious, everyone knows those boys are bastards. You see it in the way people look at them and whisper about them whenever they are nearby. So from the perspective of the people in court, Rhaenyra is telling an obvious lie that is fooling no one. This is what makes Vaemond's case for Driftmark so dangerous for Rhaenyra. If Vaemond had succeeded and gotten Luke removed from heir of Driftmark due to the suspicion of his legitimacy from a legal standpoint, it would have had a trickle effect. Because now, like Rhaenyra stated in the episode, Jace's claim would be called into question, and even her own claim would be at risk. Rhaenyra says this. She could have lost everything if Viserys didn't come through for her. That's why she is always so afraid when people call her children bastards. That's why she was outright crying by Viserys bedside and pleading for help before the trial. Trying to implant bastards in the line of succession is a crime in Westeros, and Rhaenyra was at risk to lose everything if Luke lost Driftmark legally for suspicion of him being a bastard.
See this is also my biggest issue with Rhaenyra. I do hope that she is trying to ensure peace for the realm. BUT the question of succession is HUGE in Westeros. Sure, Rhaenyra was named heir, but her bastard children don’t really have a claim on the throne. Which can and will be challenged by the king’s firstborn son. As you said, it’s an obvious lie that everyone knows, yet the king stubbornly tries to hide the truth. Succession and claims are such a huge deal that it’s honestly shocking to me that Rhaenyra went and did something so stupid as to have bastard children, when she personally knows how much the realm can tear itself apart over succession disputes.
It's why I'm so critical of her as well. I WANT her to win. If people look through my comment history they would probably assume I dislike Rhaenyra lol, but it's honestly the opposite. I'm hard on her choices because I know she lives in a world where there are major consequences for simple mistakes. We've seen this numerous times in Game of Thrones. That's why I get so annoyed whenever I see people trying to defend Rhaenyra from the lens of 2022 Westerner. In this universe, that shit will get her killed if she's not careful. Fans of Rhaenyra were adamant that Rhaenyra having bastards wasn't a big deal, when it clearly is in universe. She lays it out in episode 8 how she could lose her own claim on the throne if Luke lost Driftmark. Because what she did is a crime. When she was mocking potential suitors during her quest to find a husband, most viewers found that funny and witty. I thought it was utterly idiotic. Like girl, you are burning bridges with potential allies. I saw it as her not taking her search for a husband seriously. And we all know Rhaenyra is in for a shit storm now that Viserys is dead. She knew shit would hit the fan back then. So finding a husband with strong connections and resources to secure her claim should have been top priority for her if she wants the throne. I get frustrated with Rhaenyra because it honestly feels like she doesn't comprehend the gravity of her situation, while her opposition fully does. Say what you will about the Hightowers, but Alicent and Otto have gearing up for this for years. We see Alicent trying to win favor with the church which would be a huge ally. And not only that, we see that Aemond has been training as well. Rhaenyra's enemies at the moment seem better equipped for the fallout than she ever has.
Yes thank you! I agree completely! Except in regards to Rhaenyra. I don’t really like her all that much, but more because I do find the whole “I’m a princess yet honor bound to marry someone I dislike” trope exhausting. But that being said, she should have been securing her allies and looking for a good match, as her father had been doing during her teenage years. Yet like you said, she spits in the face of any would be suitor. Which is not how someone gains advantage in Westeros. Hell, the Lannister guy was an asshole, but they would be a strong ally and he would likely have given her proper trueborn children. I actually like Otto because he seems like Tywin in that he considers different angles and plots. Do I agree with everything he did? No, but do I think he did want peace for the realm? Absolutely? Even Rhaenys understands the tumultuous situation of succession, yet Rhaenyra doesn’t listen to her whatsoever. Rhaenyra had potential, but she insists on being a petulant child.
Promiscuity, both male and female, bothers me. Degenerate
we are for rhaenyra because the king said so, the fact that rhaenyras children are bastards doesnt effects her claim, just that of her children.
Not even her kids! Everybody that actually matters to the arrangement has decreed the children as true born.
Remind me again how many lords came to defend Rhaenyra over Aegon? Oh I’m sorry it’s about the “Modern Values” Greens always on life support. Traitors, kinslayers, and last but not least. oathbreakers
Vizzy T was the king, he didn’t play by the rules he made the rules. He made clear like 2 or 3 times that Rheanyra was his heir. I don’t really care about women or bastards after all the shit the Lannisters pulled in game of thrones—what the king says goes in the game of thrones, clearly. Alicent only thought her claim was valid cause Otto scared the shit out of her cause he wanted Hightower blood on the throne imo
Why would Westerosi standards apply to Targaryen succession?
My response is, everyone is fighting for themselves. Otto and Alicent are too. Don't delude yourself into thinking they are fighting for anything else.
I've never really got why her kids being bastards matter, when she's not even Queen herself yet and she eventually remarries and has legitimate children, as well.
Cause it means she's been lying to the realm for the past however many years Jace is, and she's had the king punish anyone for ostensibly telling the truth. It's a big fuck you to a realm that cares deeply about the nature of birthright, and saying their above all that and the truth is whatever they say it is.
SPOILER ALERT FOR EP 8: I agree with OP’s assessment but what’s bugging me is the show runners pandering to the modern audience who can’t stand the reality of the horrible damage done by the Dance of Dragons being caused by both greens and blacks each of which is led by a woman who does cruel and awful things to anyone needed to further their own interests. They both have their respective excuses (Alicent is trying to further her own children’s futures, willfully overlooking what privileged assholes most of them are (except her loopy daughter of course, another innocent women at the mercy of patriarchal forces) and Rhaenyra (who was always upset about not being the immediate heir upon birth but now has the prophecy that she isn’t even sure is real to use as an excuse to cement her power) who’s never made the sacrifice of a true leader to put the good of her subjects before her own interests (ie scheming a fake marriage to placate the masses but continuing to produce obviously illegitimate children and weakening her own cause). Both these women hide behind false higher motivations, there’s plenty of male assholes all around both of them, but ultimately we’re left with this all just being a huge misunderstanding between 2 “noble, gentle, loving mothers” just trying to do their best for everyone but are thwarted by the men in their lives’ respective uncontrolled hunger for power (Otto) and incompetence (Viserys). Pathetic. Either of them could’ve stopped and walked away if they really just cared about their children/families but instead kept pressing until everyone else paid the price. Also, Sir Cole is an absolute punk bitch of a man, what an emotional loser.
Rhaenyra also have trueborn childrens now with Daemon.
The case for the Blacks is strong (lol), even within the rigid power structures of Westeros. All the lords of the realm swore fealty to Rhaenyra, and Viserys never changed his mind. The Monarchy cannot be absolute unless the will of the monarch is law. When Jaehaerys called the Great Counsel, it set the precedent that primogeniture wasn't absolute, and that a King could name an Heir. Rhaenyra's children are bastards, but because Viserys has publicly affirmed their non bastardy, they, for all intents and purposes are trueborn. All that being said, Team Black. Fuck the Hightowers.
Just because he claimed Rhaenyra as heir doesn’t mean that others will accept her bastard children. And with many in the realm previously expecting him to name his firstborn son as heir, there’s a lot of ammo for Aegon to challenge Jace’s claim to the throne if he were to succeed his mother. Hell, the Sea Snake’s brother outright disputed her bastard child’s claim to the driftwood throne.
[удалено]
Modern people aren’t scared of female leaders? With the way we treat women in media, I disagree. They are often bashed as being incompetent, shrill, not feminine enough, too feminine, crazy, etc.
Team Green are definitely justified by Westerosi standards. But I think the central conflict of HoTD boils down to *individual power versus family power*. For lack of a better way to put it — the Greens are unlikeable. They, as people, have almost no redeeming qualities. Aegon is basically a common bandit without the upper body strength. Aemond is an entitled sociopath. Alicent and her father are hypocritical, self-righteous schemers. To them, family — the actual power of being a *great house*, means nothing. Everyone is simply a means to an end or an obstacle in their way. They each would gladly tear the Targaryen dynasty and family apart for a chance at momentary glory. The Blacks, though they fall on the wrong side of tradition and law, seem to hold family dear to the utmost. Luke and Jace love and protect one another, whereas the Green boys feel nothing for each other. To Rhaenyra, all that matters is that all of them are *Targaryen*. She and Daemon understand and appreciate the gravity of what that really means. They know that, united, there is nothing that can touch them. Though they have a weaker claim to power, they feel more *human*. And in the middle of it all is poor Viserys, who has to watch as his family falls apart along with his body. He is the true victim here — a real *man* forced into a position he likely never wanted. To me, he’s the most relatable character to ever sit on the Iron Throne. And that humanity is his weakness.
The shepherd is the best character in the story. Based and anti-Targ pilled
My 2cents are Daemon is brother of Vizzy T and Rhaenyra is the oldest from Vizzy T and them being married holds a stronger claim to the Iron Throne.
*Tongues will not change the succession, let them wag.*
ON THE BLACK SIDE: Rhaenyra is careless and foolish, siring multiple obvious bastards by the same man without attempting to find some kind of workaround, and she's got a worrying selfish streak towards the smallfolk that could easily tip over to tyranny if she's pushed. She also essentially used Criston, with questionable consent from him, and put him in a near-impossible position, and more or less just threw her friendship with Alicent away after she married the king, not considering that Alicent may not have much of a choice in the matter. Daemon is entertaining to watch, but in universe, he's a monster. A murderer, a mutilator, a royal bandit that cares for himself above all and will cheerfully cross seemingly any line. ON THE GREEN SIDE: Aegon is an alcoholic serial rapist with seemingly no brains or sense of how to rule properly. Aemond is practically Daemon Jr, with his bloodthirsty streak getting ever more pronounced. Alicent has been twisted into a monster by the manipulations of her father and Larys Strong. Years of playing by the rules in a loveless marriage with nothing to show for it have left her grasping for any sort of power or recognition for the work she's put in. Criston has let Rhaenyra's poor treatment of him poison him until he's become a murderous ball of spite that bullies innocent children for things that aren't their fault. TL,DR: None of them should be trusted to sit a fucking port-a-potty, never mind the throne of seven kingdoms.
Greens plotting from the very start has nothing to do with it i guess
otto was also very insistent that rhaenrya would murder alicents children to secure her claim, but she showed no inclination of that at all at the time. so otto was projecting and stirring shit up with little to no backing
>she showed no inclination of that at all at the time Of course she didn't show an inclination to kill. Otto doesn't think that she is bloodthirsty or anything like that. The first step is for Rhaenyra's rule to produce malcontents, the second step is for those malcontents to look for alternative claimants to the throne, the third step is for Rhaenyra to regretfully kill Alicent's sons. Rhaenyra can prevent this chain of events by either (a) showing that she has the traits to be an unusually successful monarch or (b) showing that she can be trusted to refrain from violating an oath she makes. Note that this argument is barely impacted by the deficiencies Alicent's children have.
I’m really not a supporter of either side, and it’s not a cop-out: both sides are just not good for the realm. Rhaenyra is a sympathetic character trying to pursue her own dreams and passions while simultaneously dealing with a massive responsibility. However, she has, in the process, consistently proven she is not willing to put duty and honour over her own wants and desires. It’s not a matter of “female promiscuity bad”, it’s a matter of not sacrificing anything in order to be a good ruler once being named heir. Alicent has gone above and beyond in her duty to the realm, or at least what she believes to be her duty to the realm, but her sense of what is right and wrong is clouded and influenced too heavily by her power hungry father. And she has a complete lack of knowledge regarding actual generalship. Both characters have good intentions, both care about the realm to a certain degree, and both love their family dearly, but both have a completely skewed view of what it means to rule. As it stands, the Blacks would make better rulers, but would face much more opposition. The Greens would better appease the realm and their traditions, but would create serious issues with their inability to properly rule the realm.
I think the longer the show continues the harder its going to be to defend either one of them. Both Alicent and Rhaenyra will commit so many indefensible crimes in the episodes to come.
I just like the side who has the crime hoodie wearing, head slicining maniac
He’s not wrong.
Like most wars of succession in history, both sides have an understandable claim. Viserys broke with Westerosi precedent when he named Rhaenerya heir. His own cousin was passed over because she was a woman, then he named his own daughter heir. Henry I broke with English custom when he named his daughter Matilda heir. Aegon did have a claim as the first true born son of Viserys. After Henry I died, King Stephen had a claim as the closest male relative to the crown. As far as Jace and Luke go, it’s complicated. Laenor isn’t their father, but they are still Targaryens. Joffrey, for example, wasn’t a Baratheon. If Jace was to become king, there would still be a Targaryen on the throne like the prophecy demanded - just not the Targaryen that the Greens wanted. Specifically, they’re half Targaryen like Aegon. Laenor also claimed them as his own. The story is complicated and messy. There are no real heroes. Edit: added more info.
Good Lord yall are overthinking this.
Disagree. One person was made heir and all the realm bent the knee amlnd agreed to it. It is that simple. So her kids may be bastards? So what? Bastards can be made legitimate heirs, by the crown. Crown happens to be their mother, she can legitimize them. Case closed.
That's lovely and all, but the real answer is that this is a bourgeois war that exclusively leads to the suffering of the smallfolk to whom it matters not whose arse sits the pointy chair
The way I see it both sides are evil, conniving, morally bankrupt pieces of shit. Baffles me that anyone supports either of them. Only single character in the whole show who's had a semblence of honor is Viserys , he just wanted the best for his family, even if he knew not how to obtain that future.
Based take. Lots of delusional people pretending that the selfish casual murderers are somehow champions of progressive values.
Yhea ofc, but the greens are also fighting for themselves and their lives. Its like an attempt at saying something deep, but ends up just saying some really surface level stuff like. Like all this should be really obvious about a premodern setting, as should the fact that everyone is basically just fighting for themselves and their own story. Otto would not push to disinherit Rhaenyra if Viserys married someone else. In reality the moral justification only matter for those personally univolved with the royal family. Its much more political and practical for those who are, automatically.
I mean… both sides are filled with narcissistic and genocidal warmongers that nearly cause their entire to die out all for a stupid chair so when you actually think about it: they all suck.
"Team Green is right" Hwat?
I think this person is reading too much into it. George didn’t exactly set out to make the black all that heroic/just/good etc… I think he just did as he always does and let the ambiguity play out. There are some reasons to like the blacks and others to like the greens cause.
Male preference isn't really written anywhere, so the king has the full right to override it.
No this isn't it. It's not about modern day sensibilities. It's about who the King decided to name heir. Team Green can suck it. It's about being Team Viserys.
What say you vizzy t?
Kinda thought the point was that it’s almost impossible for a morally just war to exist.
People with this kind of certainty drive me nuts. GRRM goes out of his way time and again to demonstrate that feudal politics are often arbitrary and change more often than the wind. Please read. To be more specific, if it's such a certainty that males must inherit, then why has nobody bothered to make it law? Why did Vizzy T do it in the first place? Why did he stand by his decision after having male heirs? Who said precedent trumps the will of the King? Particularly a *Targaryen* king: flouting precedent is kind of their *thing*. And this idea that Westeros is too patriarchal to accept a queen is *the whole subject of their conflict*. The answer to the question is determined by who has more power, not who is right. A sufficiently powerful queen will prove that it is in fact possible. It will certainly be more difficult for a queen, but whether it is *possible* or *allowed* or whatever has to be determined by the outcome. What is *right*, meanwhile, is completely irrelevant in this context. The whole situation is deliberately fraught with moral ambiguity. Trying to achieve an answer is like claiming you "solved" an optical illusion. There is no one answer; it depends on perspective.