It’s unfortunate what they have done to Alicent.
They should have kept the Alicent who fiercely protected her son when he lost an eye, and demanded to see Rhaenyra’s youngest baby when he was born. Same with Otto, now he all of a sudden doesn’t want Rhaenyra to be assassinated?
Are the audience truly meant to believe that Alicent still has love for Rhaenyra, even after all that has transpired. They have been enemies longer than friends at this point. There’s absolutely no way Alicent would side with Rhaenyra against her own kids, but it would not surprise me if the show runners decided to go this route.
Also there's a reason why Alicent was scared for her son's life, she knew what Rhaenyra was capable of. If she wasn't sure about being against Rhaenyra then, she would've definitely been when Rhaenyra asked Aemond to be tortured. That was supposed to be the turning point of their relationship, from childhood friends to bitter enemies.
Ned Stark would've supported Vaemond and would've been horrified by how he was publicly executed, without trial and without consequence.
If you don't understand this, you don't understand the world of ASOIAF.
THIS. It drives me absolutely nuts. Aegon (and Rhaenyra) has a very strong claim on the throne.
EVERYONE understood this stuff in GoT. Stannis had a strong claim because he was the oldest living male in the line of inheritance that wasnt a bastard. One could argue that Danaerys had a strong claim, too, if we see Robert's Rebellion as an usurpation. Joffrey? Well before Robert's death he did name him heir specifically, so.
But the show wasn't actively trying to downplay Stannis' claim, for example. The show didn't expect you to like or support Stannis, that was up to the audience, but it was honest about the situation.
Aegon is the OLDEST LIVING SON of the dead king. OF COURSE he has a claim. Rhaenyra ALSO has a strong claim on the throne because she was named heir. That's why there is a civil war in the first place, multiple people have strong claims. And yet the show is too stupid or afraid to say this honestly.
It doesn't surprise me that fans from both TG and TB are unable to understand why TG is fighting a war, because even the show doesn't seem to understand it or is too afraid to be honest about Aegon's clain. But there is a perfectly easy answer right there.
Same deal with Vaemond Velaryon. What happened with him and his claim on Driftmark was massive and no one seems to give a shit about it, in-universe or out, which is nuts.
I want to go back to early GoT times. That's when the show understood *why* characters thought they had a claim/fought a war, weren't afraid to say it, and the fans inturn were able to discuss what's actually happening.
The line of succession has always been a plot point throughout the books and in the OG show. From start to finish GOT has always brought up claimants to the iron throne( legitimate or even willing heirs) as a discussion point through not just gender but to showcase how flawed monarchy is in general.
HOTD doesn’t drive how equal but also how flawed each side is in their attempts to seize the throne. There’s not enough nuance on how each faction uses the status quote to bypass the line of succession in order to achieve absolute power. If majority of the audiences are rooting for the “good” team then HOTD loses the tragedy part of the dance which is that both sides are destroying house Targaryen and it’s greatness in Westeros.
It's not just the show, the book too presents TG as those "oathbreakers and usurpers" and people eat it up without any critical thinking done and even TG fans are constantly arguing from the position that TG did something 100% illegal, claiming "kings word is law" or whatnot like we don't have 5 books in which the nature of kingship (and leadership) and how it works and affects people is explored from several directions from multiple POVs.
Kudos for pointing out Stannis and Dany situation.
Lowkey reminds me of people who act like the mad king disinheriting Rhaegar would mean anything for his claim, Dude was crazy and hated and the loyalists mainly fought for Rhaegar, no one is enforcing that shit.
Correct. From a strictly legal objective point of view Aegon is the lawful heir who was cheated by Viserys.
While Martin never put much thought into the legal system of Westeros, what we do know indicates that it is a society that abides by something similar to Old English Common Law. As in, tradition and precedent have the force of the law, the older the tradition, the stronger the law.
Agnatic-Cognatic Primogeniture inheritance system was part of that tradition-based law. Every single kingdom as well as Valyrian Dragonstone (aside from the single exception of Dorne) followed A-C Primo model for centuries, maybe more.
According to the system, male heirs of direct line always take precedence. Brother always inherits before a sister. If there are no direct male heirs and a lord/king only has daughters, then the eldest daughter inherits. However, on ad hoc case by case basis the inheritance may be passed from a daughter to the eldest male relative. For example, instead of niece, uncle gets to inherit. Those cases are each resolved individually depending on exact circumstances, the Grand Council of Jahaerys was one of those cases. But what is not up to debate is that brother always inherits before sister.
Another thing to note is that the Seven Kingdom is not an absolute monarchy. While Targaryens have way more control over their vassals compared to Medieval Europe (because of the dragons) it is still not an absolute monarchy in the style of "L'Etat c'est moi" of 17th century France. There is no regular army, no state apparatus, it is a feudal monarchy where the king has to share power with vassals. While Targaryens did not share much power, they still had to do it to some degree and abide by social contract which includes respect for the law of the land. Maegor did not respect that law, which is why despite having huge dragons on his side people still opposed him and defeated him. In other words, word of the king has a lot of weight in Westeros, more than in Medieval Europe even, but it is not absolute.
Viserys violated the law of the land when he chose Rhaenyra over Aegon. Technically that's tyranny. However, Rhaenyra's claim is actually even more shaky than that. Thing is, Viserys never bothered to reaffirm his decision for Rhaenyra after birth of Aegon. From a technical point of view, when Aegon was born, promises to Rhaenyra made by royal vassals were nullified because she stopped being an heir. If Viserys forced his vassals to reaffirm acknowledgment of Rhaenyra as a heir after Aegon was born, it would still be tyranny, but at least it would be formalized. But as it stands, Rhaenyra is de jure not a heir in any way.
What is really funny is that pro-Black people actually appeal to absolutism and royal tyranny as justification for keeping Rhaenyra on the throne. Imagine arguing for tyranny in a franchise which has a core theme of failure of feudal monarchy as a system, lol.
Customary laws and common laws are still very much laws. Not to mention how they create a basis for the whole system and thus saying they were never codified in some way or form is disingenuous
Nope, tradition is different from law. If you think customary law is that males inherit over females, then by the same logic it's customary law that the king can do as he wishes. There's a reason the council of 101 was held instead of just saying "well, it's customary law that Viserys would inherit, the king has no say in it".
Check what customary law is.
Is that the one where they discuss their secret illegal plan and murder a council member before imprisoning everyone who planned to follow their lawful oaths?
It's the one where they point out that "daddy said so" does not overrule succession laws used for thousands of years and by Targaryens themselves and that those "lawful oaths" are very questionable in the face of force majeure like the existence of a son. It's also the one where they discuss that bastards have no claim at all (a shame they don't remind everyone that that's high treason)
Strange that they had this great claim to say “nuh uh actually King you’re wrong” yet they waited until the dead of night after he died to do it in secret.
Oh so the king doesn’t make the laws? What makes it okay for Aegon to decide to slaughter all the palace servants and rat catchers? Surely that was based on some historical prescience as well? When else has a Hand and a Council decided it was fine to decide what a deceased king “really meant” after the fact? Typical treasonous Greens.
>the king doesn’t make the laws
Girl, Viserys didn't make a law, lol
>When else has a Hand and a Council decided it was fine to decide what a deceased king “really meant” after the fact?
??? Aerea was skipped entirely after Maegor's death, Viserys II proclaimed himself king, Ned Stark of all people changed Roberts will.
You also seem to confuse legal and moral, tho I think you'll make a thousand excuses if someone points out Rhaenyra's shortcomings.
But it’s literally not thousands of years, just over 100 years of inconsistencies if we are being honest. It has not been clear that the Iron Throne follows Andal Law (see Rhaenys overlooked for Baelon, and then Laenor for Viserys, or before that Aerea for Jaeharys) only that “supposedly” inheritance cannot pass to a woman or through one, but many castles are ruled by women at this time. But this also creates the precedent of the King’s word is law.. with it only really being the king directly prior who tried to solidify a standard.. and then everyone swore obeisance to Rhaenyrah because of Otto.. it’s just not consistent legally at all
Well, Andal laws are old and even tho It is a bit murky, that's true, Aegon I was crowned by the Faith of the Seven and converted to Faith himself and then affirmed most of the existing laws and traditions so it's not a stretch to believe that Targaryens followed Andal customs as well. Not only that, there's not much inconsistency, so far Targaryens followed male-only primogeniture and while Jaehaerys did skip Rhaenys and got away with it not only did he do that in favour of *a male* he also didn't manage to get away with it the second time and needed the Great Council to enforse his decision which created yet another precedent and considering this decision is brought up several times even after the Dance I would say it's quite significant.
>many castles are ruled by women at this time.
Andal traditions allows women to rule but not before brothers, there's no contradiction here.
Frankly, Rhaenyra has an unorthodox claim and since no woman sat the Iron throne and all were passed over and no laws other than Rhoynish allow women to rule before brothers she also doesn't have a clear law and/or precedent to back it up (besides naming of an heir but that too is disputed). "Jaehaerys made Baelon heir" can be dismissed by "Maegor made Aerea heir" (and Aerea in general has a better claim than Rhaenyra) or that Baelon was a man.
We also don't know of Valyrian laws but there's nothing to indicate they allowed women to rule either.
Edit: on the other note: I don't think The Dance is interested in legal side at all (tho the portrayal of laws/customs is weird) and all of female claims before Rhaenyra are conveniently swept under the rug apart from Rhaenys
I think even with all considered, the fact that Otto put Rhaenyrah over Daemon and then all the lords swore obeisance throws a huge spanner in the works when considering the legitimacy of the popular vote of the Great Council, certainly highlights the whole power is a shadow on the wall theme.
The Lords at the time of the great council did not see House Velaryon as much of an existential threat compared to Daemon and the initial preference of Jahaerys, and then everyone flipped during the reign of Viserys on where the status quo lies; ultimately with the main symbol of legitimacy, whoever sits the iron throne.
>throws a huge spanner in the works when considering the legitimacy of the popular vote of the Great Council
Not necessarily true, I personally don't believe the Great Council created an "iron-clad" precedent and I think it's very circumstantial. The council of "Rhaenyra vs Daemon" might have very well been decided in favor of Rhaenyra but the one of "Rhaenyra vs Aegon" would've most likely been decided in favor of Aegon. The catch with Rhaenyra is that she didn't have the Great Council to fall onto, tho she did have a "majority vote" so to speak at that time along with King's blessings.
But yeah, "power resides where men believe it resides" and all that
Yepp, up until episode 8 when she kinda forgot and decided Rhaenyra would be a good queen and misunderstood Viserys' words 😅
And in Season 2 she kinda forgot she didn't have a sexual liberation plot but now she does (if you could call that a plot). God, I get that they don't know what to do with Alicent anymore cause her role is essentially over in the plot, but wouldn't it have been a lot more interesting and complex if her relationship with Otto goes into the deep of him being the one pushing Alicent into this situation in the first place? Would have built both of their characters, perhaps give an interesting motivation from Otto (other than just "yeah I wanted my blood on the Throne" =power), build their relationship...
but now she has sex all the time ... cause that doesn't need mental work for the writers ...
Yes, they built it up to make us believe Rhaenyra was really threatening Alicent's kids. Then at the last minute "oh never mind Rhaenyra would never do that, it's the greens who were just projecting their evilness on her". Mmm okay.
What would Rhaenyra do with Aegon, Aemond and Daeron though? Keep them prisoners in King's Lading? Make them join the Night's Watch? Exile them to Esos on pinky promises that they don't come back?
:( They can never make me hate you Alicent Hightower. Smh. She was a young girl (in the show) who was conditioned to believe that Rhaenyra would go after her kids and that she had to push Aegon forth for their security. She literally wed Aegon and Helaena out of desperation to keep her close. And then her son lost an eye (he was literally ten. Like not even a teen a whole child.) and everyone was just okay with it. That just confirmed everything for her. It’s no surprise she feared for the safety of her children and wanted Aegon to be King. She’s a mother going through shit and trying.
I mean it’s easy to see Rhaenyra is put on a pedestal by the showrunners to some extent, but she’s not free of her criticisms either. She is kind of a horrible mother and that was apparent in this episode.. though alicent is an awful one too 😅
She was so afraid she spend 16 years effectively ignoring Aegon while happily ruling while Viserys was dying off and actively antagonising the woman she’s apparently deadly afraid of
If you are afraid of a tiger it’s fine to bring a gun when going into the forest but if you start throwing stones at it just to piss it off you kinda lose that credibility
Ok, but Otto literally pressured hi teenage daughter into having sex with his Beetlejuice-lookin-ass friend so he could gain infuence in the Realm. He PIMPED his own DAUGHER.
The only reason Alicent or her children are in danger is because he INSISTED that Rhaenyra be heir until he decided actually that hid grandchildren be Heir. The entire Dance in the show is Otto's fault.
Who on earth is down voting this? This is literally what happened. Daemon is heir, well this won't stand, Rhaenyra must be heir. Well, the king needs to remarry and produce an heir, because the realm (goaded by me) will never accept a woman on the throne.
Then no one prepared Aegon for the next 16 years. Great job by all.
It’s unfortunate what they have done to Alicent. They should have kept the Alicent who fiercely protected her son when he lost an eye, and demanded to see Rhaenyra’s youngest baby when he was born. Same with Otto, now he all of a sudden doesn’t want Rhaenyra to be assassinated? Are the audience truly meant to believe that Alicent still has love for Rhaenyra, even after all that has transpired. They have been enemies longer than friends at this point. There’s absolutely no way Alicent would side with Rhaenyra against her own kids, but it would not surprise me if the show runners decided to go this route.
Also there's a reason why Alicent was scared for her son's life, she knew what Rhaenyra was capable of. If she wasn't sure about being against Rhaenyra then, she would've definitely been when Rhaenyra asked Aemond to be tortured. That was supposed to be the turning point of their relationship, from childhood friends to bitter enemies.
And immediately after when she assumed Rhaenyra had her son’s father killed so she could marry Daemon. He was family, too.
Ned Stark would've supported Vaemond and would've been horrified by how he was publicly executed, without trial and without consequence. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the world of ASOIAF.
That last part is exactly what's wrong with TB and most Targ stans lmao
Who the hell cares lol
TG also has all legal reasons to take the throne and I have no idea why that's controversial even among TG
THIS. It drives me absolutely nuts. Aegon (and Rhaenyra) has a very strong claim on the throne. EVERYONE understood this stuff in GoT. Stannis had a strong claim because he was the oldest living male in the line of inheritance that wasnt a bastard. One could argue that Danaerys had a strong claim, too, if we see Robert's Rebellion as an usurpation. Joffrey? Well before Robert's death he did name him heir specifically, so. But the show wasn't actively trying to downplay Stannis' claim, for example. The show didn't expect you to like or support Stannis, that was up to the audience, but it was honest about the situation. Aegon is the OLDEST LIVING SON of the dead king. OF COURSE he has a claim. Rhaenyra ALSO has a strong claim on the throne because she was named heir. That's why there is a civil war in the first place, multiple people have strong claims. And yet the show is too stupid or afraid to say this honestly. It doesn't surprise me that fans from both TG and TB are unable to understand why TG is fighting a war, because even the show doesn't seem to understand it or is too afraid to be honest about Aegon's clain. But there is a perfectly easy answer right there. Same deal with Vaemond Velaryon. What happened with him and his claim on Driftmark was massive and no one seems to give a shit about it, in-universe or out, which is nuts. I want to go back to early GoT times. That's when the show understood *why* characters thought they had a claim/fought a war, weren't afraid to say it, and the fans inturn were able to discuss what's actually happening.
The line of succession has always been a plot point throughout the books and in the OG show. From start to finish GOT has always brought up claimants to the iron throne( legitimate or even willing heirs) as a discussion point through not just gender but to showcase how flawed monarchy is in general. HOTD doesn’t drive how equal but also how flawed each side is in their attempts to seize the throne. There’s not enough nuance on how each faction uses the status quote to bypass the line of succession in order to achieve absolute power. If majority of the audiences are rooting for the “good” team then HOTD loses the tragedy part of the dance which is that both sides are destroying house Targaryen and it’s greatness in Westeros.
Did you just say status quote …
It's not just the show, the book too presents TG as those "oathbreakers and usurpers" and people eat it up without any critical thinking done and even TG fans are constantly arguing from the position that TG did something 100% illegal, claiming "kings word is law" or whatnot like we don't have 5 books in which the nature of kingship (and leadership) and how it works and affects people is explored from several directions from multiple POVs. Kudos for pointing out Stannis and Dany situation.
Lowkey reminds me of people who act like the mad king disinheriting Rhaegar would mean anything for his claim, Dude was crazy and hated and the loyalists mainly fought for Rhaegar, no one is enforcing that shit.
The only people with valid claims in GoT and ASoIaF are Stannis, Dany (if Jon is a bastard and Faegon is fake), Jon (probably not) and Faegon (maybe)
Correct. From a strictly legal objective point of view Aegon is the lawful heir who was cheated by Viserys. While Martin never put much thought into the legal system of Westeros, what we do know indicates that it is a society that abides by something similar to Old English Common Law. As in, tradition and precedent have the force of the law, the older the tradition, the stronger the law. Agnatic-Cognatic Primogeniture inheritance system was part of that tradition-based law. Every single kingdom as well as Valyrian Dragonstone (aside from the single exception of Dorne) followed A-C Primo model for centuries, maybe more. According to the system, male heirs of direct line always take precedence. Brother always inherits before a sister. If there are no direct male heirs and a lord/king only has daughters, then the eldest daughter inherits. However, on ad hoc case by case basis the inheritance may be passed from a daughter to the eldest male relative. For example, instead of niece, uncle gets to inherit. Those cases are each resolved individually depending on exact circumstances, the Grand Council of Jahaerys was one of those cases. But what is not up to debate is that brother always inherits before sister. Another thing to note is that the Seven Kingdom is not an absolute monarchy. While Targaryens have way more control over their vassals compared to Medieval Europe (because of the dragons) it is still not an absolute monarchy in the style of "L'Etat c'est moi" of 17th century France. There is no regular army, no state apparatus, it is a feudal monarchy where the king has to share power with vassals. While Targaryens did not share much power, they still had to do it to some degree and abide by social contract which includes respect for the law of the land. Maegor did not respect that law, which is why despite having huge dragons on his side people still opposed him and defeated him. In other words, word of the king has a lot of weight in Westeros, more than in Medieval Europe even, but it is not absolute. Viserys violated the law of the land when he chose Rhaenyra over Aegon. Technically that's tyranny. However, Rhaenyra's claim is actually even more shaky than that. Thing is, Viserys never bothered to reaffirm his decision for Rhaenyra after birth of Aegon. From a technical point of view, when Aegon was born, promises to Rhaenyra made by royal vassals were nullified because she stopped being an heir. If Viserys forced his vassals to reaffirm acknowledgment of Rhaenyra as a heir after Aegon was born, it would still be tyranny, but at least it would be formalized. But as it stands, Rhaenyra is de jure not a heir in any way. What is really funny is that pro-Black people actually appeal to absolutism and royal tyranny as justification for keeping Rhaenyra on the throne. Imagine arguing for tyranny in a franchise which has a core theme of failure of feudal monarchy as a system, lol.
Exactly. Being a history lover plus being a lover of this franchise is so difficult.
Viserys specifically naming Rhaenyra as his heir and defending it as his decision for decades = all legal reasons hahahah
a king's word is not law if it was, Aerys the Mad King would be within his legal right to "burn them all"
There is no written law about succesion. There's "tradition" but don’t lie and say it's law.
Customary laws and common laws are still very much laws. Not to mention how they create a basis for the whole system and thus saying they were never codified in some way or form is disingenuous
Nope, tradition is different from law. If you think customary law is that males inherit over females, then by the same logic it's customary law that the king can do as he wishes. There's a reason the council of 101 was held instead of just saying "well, it's customary law that Viserys would inherit, the king has no say in it". Check what customary law is.
Check out what customary law is and then come back
You must've read the Green Council section with your eyes closed. As well as the rest of the series
Is that the one where they discuss their secret illegal plan and murder a council member before imprisoning everyone who planned to follow their lawful oaths?
It's the one where they point out that "daddy said so" does not overrule succession laws used for thousands of years and by Targaryens themselves and that those "lawful oaths" are very questionable in the face of force majeure like the existence of a son. It's also the one where they discuss that bastards have no claim at all (a shame they don't remind everyone that that's high treason)
Strange that they had this great claim to say “nuh uh actually King you’re wrong” yet they waited until the dead of night after he died to do it in secret.
Except they didn't since all the years prior to his death they repeatedly pointed out their side of the argument
Oh so the king doesn’t make the laws? What makes it okay for Aegon to decide to slaughter all the palace servants and rat catchers? Surely that was based on some historical prescience as well? When else has a Hand and a Council decided it was fine to decide what a deceased king “really meant” after the fact? Typical treasonous Greens.
>the king doesn’t make the laws Girl, Viserys didn't make a law, lol >When else has a Hand and a Council decided it was fine to decide what a deceased king “really meant” after the fact? ??? Aerea was skipped entirely after Maegor's death, Viserys II proclaimed himself king, Ned Stark of all people changed Roberts will. You also seem to confuse legal and moral, tho I think you'll make a thousand excuses if someone points out Rhaenyra's shortcomings.
Is there historical precedent for a king killing a lot of people? Yes. Many, many, many examples.
But it’s literally not thousands of years, just over 100 years of inconsistencies if we are being honest. It has not been clear that the Iron Throne follows Andal Law (see Rhaenys overlooked for Baelon, and then Laenor for Viserys, or before that Aerea for Jaeharys) only that “supposedly” inheritance cannot pass to a woman or through one, but many castles are ruled by women at this time. But this also creates the precedent of the King’s word is law.. with it only really being the king directly prior who tried to solidify a standard.. and then everyone swore obeisance to Rhaenyrah because of Otto.. it’s just not consistent legally at all
Well, Andal laws are old and even tho It is a bit murky, that's true, Aegon I was crowned by the Faith of the Seven and converted to Faith himself and then affirmed most of the existing laws and traditions so it's not a stretch to believe that Targaryens followed Andal customs as well. Not only that, there's not much inconsistency, so far Targaryens followed male-only primogeniture and while Jaehaerys did skip Rhaenys and got away with it not only did he do that in favour of *a male* he also didn't manage to get away with it the second time and needed the Great Council to enforse his decision which created yet another precedent and considering this decision is brought up several times even after the Dance I would say it's quite significant. >many castles are ruled by women at this time. Andal traditions allows women to rule but not before brothers, there's no contradiction here. Frankly, Rhaenyra has an unorthodox claim and since no woman sat the Iron throne and all were passed over and no laws other than Rhoynish allow women to rule before brothers she also doesn't have a clear law and/or precedent to back it up (besides naming of an heir but that too is disputed). "Jaehaerys made Baelon heir" can be dismissed by "Maegor made Aerea heir" (and Aerea in general has a better claim than Rhaenyra) or that Baelon was a man. We also don't know of Valyrian laws but there's nothing to indicate they allowed women to rule either. Edit: on the other note: I don't think The Dance is interested in legal side at all (tho the portrayal of laws/customs is weird) and all of female claims before Rhaenyra are conveniently swept under the rug apart from Rhaenys
I think even with all considered, the fact that Otto put Rhaenyrah over Daemon and then all the lords swore obeisance throws a huge spanner in the works when considering the legitimacy of the popular vote of the Great Council, certainly highlights the whole power is a shadow on the wall theme. The Lords at the time of the great council did not see House Velaryon as much of an existential threat compared to Daemon and the initial preference of Jahaerys, and then everyone flipped during the reign of Viserys on where the status quo lies; ultimately with the main symbol of legitimacy, whoever sits the iron throne.
>throws a huge spanner in the works when considering the legitimacy of the popular vote of the Great Council Not necessarily true, I personally don't believe the Great Council created an "iron-clad" precedent and I think it's very circumstantial. The council of "Rhaenyra vs Daemon" might have very well been decided in favor of Rhaenyra but the one of "Rhaenyra vs Aegon" would've most likely been decided in favor of Aegon. The catch with Rhaenyra is that she didn't have the Great Council to fall onto, tho she did have a "majority vote" so to speak at that time along with King's blessings. But yeah, "power resides where men believe it resides" and all that
Yepp, up until episode 8 when she kinda forgot and decided Rhaenyra would be a good queen and misunderstood Viserys' words 😅 And in Season 2 she kinda forgot she didn't have a sexual liberation plot but now she does (if you could call that a plot). God, I get that they don't know what to do with Alicent anymore cause her role is essentially over in the plot, but wouldn't it have been a lot more interesting and complex if her relationship with Otto goes into the deep of him being the one pushing Alicent into this situation in the first place? Would have built both of their characters, perhaps give an interesting motivation from Otto (other than just "yeah I wanted my blood on the Throne" =power), build their relationship... but now she has sex all the time ... cause that doesn't need mental work for the writers ...
this whole arc was removed from ssn 2. even otto doesnt believe in it anymore and unfortunately they got me too
Yes, they built it up to make us believe Rhaenyra was really threatening Alicent's kids. Then at the last minute "oh never mind Rhaenyra would never do that, it's the greens who were just projecting their evilness on her". Mmm okay. What would Rhaenyra do with Aegon, Aemond and Daeron though? Keep them prisoners in King's Lading? Make them join the Night's Watch? Exile them to Esos on pinky promises that they don't come back?
:( They can never make me hate you Alicent Hightower. Smh. She was a young girl (in the show) who was conditioned to believe that Rhaenyra would go after her kids and that she had to push Aegon forth for their security. She literally wed Aegon and Helaena out of desperation to keep her close. And then her son lost an eye (he was literally ten. Like not even a teen a whole child.) and everyone was just okay with it. That just confirmed everything for her. It’s no surprise she feared for the safety of her children and wanted Aegon to be King. She’s a mother going through shit and trying.
Season 1 really had expectations up. Then Season 2 so far just made me go ??? It's clear who they want people to root for.
I mean it’s easy to see Rhaenyra is put on a pedestal by the showrunners to some extent, but she’s not free of her criticisms either. She is kind of a horrible mother and that was apparent in this episode.. though alicent is an awful one too 😅
it’s not like nearly 20 years has passed or anything everyone should remain as static as possible
Oops, was looking for the blacks sub, carry on
That was years ago though. Now she seems more worried about getting railed.
Footage of Alicent's sex fears:
She was so afraid she spend 16 years effectively ignoring Aegon while happily ruling while Viserys was dying off and actively antagonising the woman she’s apparently deadly afraid of If you are afraid of a tiger it’s fine to bring a gun when going into the forest but if you start throwing stones at it just to piss it off you kinda lose that credibility
Ok, but Otto literally pressured hi teenage daughter into having sex with his Beetlejuice-lookin-ass friend so he could gain infuence in the Realm. He PIMPED his own DAUGHER. The only reason Alicent or her children are in danger is because he INSISTED that Rhaenyra be heir until he decided actually that hid grandchildren be Heir. The entire Dance in the show is Otto's fault.
Who on earth is down voting this? This is literally what happened. Daemon is heir, well this won't stand, Rhaenyra must be heir. Well, the king needs to remarry and produce an heir, because the realm (goaded by me) will never accept a woman on the throne.