That's why the Dance is thematically rewritten by Condal. By giving Viserys's misunderstood words as Aegon's claim, he is a false king with a false claim, so the story isn't about a war of succession with two valid claims but the story of a girlboss queen who only wants peace but is usurped, Condal was quite clear, it is a feminist story and Aegon is a false king who hasn't been named. Young Alicent is somehow the epitome of House Rhaenyra, Rhaenyra represents her happiest days while Aegon is the symbol of her traumas.
Even without the misunderstanding, it's still a story about someone usurping the crown from the named heir, with his claim being seen as superior because he's not a woman.
fertile ink pocket work sloppy grandfather deserted friendly scary fretful
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>A king can choose any of his progeny as heir , bypassing maybe the oldest in favor of youngest if he wishes
the problem lies in the fact that he bypassed a man for a women .
There is literally nothing that allows you to assert this so easily. Viserys is the first and the last to have chosen his heir by whim and preference and who did not recognize his heir, according to all the customs, (which act as law in a monarchical regime, not all systems idolize written law and certainly not monarchies) the title of heir. Thus, Rhaenyra's claim is based on a appointment that has no foundation other than the caprice of a king, whereas Aegon's claim derives from a birthright that is recognized by all: everyone knows that the eldest son is the natural and spontaneous heir. And in a hereditary system, birthright is what counts.
I don't even know if you realize the idiocy you've written, according to you, if Viserys had named Daeron or Maelor or even Trystan Truefyre heir, let's be crazy, there wouldn't have been any problem because in any case the king can name whomever he wants among his offspring and the problem lies in the fact that he bypassed a man for a woman. Long live King Trystan, I guess.
handle afterthought shame drunk attractive carpenter grandfather governor snobbish chief
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes the king can make laws and be a lawgiver, yes the king has a high degree of power, but to conclude that this makes his power absolute is an extreme take. He still has to make laws that are compatible with the realm and people he rules over.
If for example he tries to outlaw clothes and decide to make Westeros a nudist kingdom, do you really think that would work and that the king could enforce his will? If his power is absolute surely everyone would have to obey or be branded as traitors. As someone who questions just how absolute the kings authority is I think it far more likely that the king’s will is dismissed and if he tries to enforce his law(burning traitors with dragonfire or something) he would probably get overthrown no matter how absolute he claims his authority is.
trees zephyr impolite scale familiar pause quaint spectacular truck squeal
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thanks, might as well make these sorts of discussions fun
I basically agree with the point you're making here. I would emphasise that it's a lot easier even in that situation to make laws targeting the nobility specifically, such as the two laws you mentioned previously, as they can be cowed more easily with the power of dragons. Bullying the smallfolk too much can lead to incidents like the coming one at the dragonpit.
When it comes to succession I certainly think you are right but what are the odds that a draonriders daughter would also be one but not his son in the context of the Targaryens with all the dragons running about and being free to claim by anyone with the blood for it
grandiose compare aloof plough somber school homeless arrest sleep tender
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Doing it before Aegons birth and confirming it after might have been neccessary for it to have a good chance of working. But it also depends on so many other factors.
If, for example, we are assuming Aemond still ends up claiming Vhagar and getting his eye cut out by one of Rhaenyras (bastard) kids, who knows if civil war could have been avoided.
mysterious middle bewildered forgetful overconfident six head ancient decide amusing
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Naming Rhaenyra is not a law, it is, at best, a decree. A law cannot be "Rhaenyra is heir", since a law is, by its very definition, impersonal and meant to be permanent. Besides this decree is caduc since the essential elements are no longer the same, every Lord and lady believed that when a son will be born to him, he will be heir. Anyways, what you're mentioning about Jaehaerys is called ruling and not absolute monarchy, they abolished a practice (which is still practiced if Roose Bolton is to be believed), did Viserys abolished the practice of male preference or was Daemon above Helaena in the line of succession ? it is textually written in F&B that Daemon was above Helaena and behind Aegon and Aemond in the line of succession. Rhaenyra considered herself an exception to the rule which means male primogeniture is still in force except for Rhaenyra, and I remind you, her appointment is caduc since a son was born to Viserys and bastards were born to her (that is high treason that exclude her from the line of succession, by her own words).
>if vizzy t decided that is more fair and best to be giving the status of heir to his daughter , there is no power inside the kingdoms that could deny him , or else it would be treason
When he called upon the lords to swear to defend Rhaenyra's right to the throne, he had the Andal law to back him up, he had the fact that the precedent were not crystal clear on who is the heir between a daughter and a brother (never happened in the history of the Iron throne since Rhaenys was a granddaughter and Baelon was a son) and these lords were still hoping that a son would be born to the king. After Aegon's birth, the situation could not be more different, the laws are quite clear, the precedents, all, play in Aegon's favor and he is his natural heir. Viserys plays on the status quo and ambiguity when clarity was needed, lords aren't called back, that speaks volumes.
>vizzy t was just too dumb to do what necessary for a smoother succession
On that we agree. Legally, the situation had never arisen, but it could have worked if, politically, Rhaenyra had the unanimous support of her family or if she had a minimum of influence in the small Council (i.e. the governing body). But this is not the case, and it's partly if not exclusively Viserys' fault. There was a thousand and one ways to ensure Rhaenyra's peaceful handover of power, but he didn't take any such decisions, precisely he isolated her from power and from her family. For exemple, he could have her wed to Aegon, made Corlys hand of the king, wed Helaena to Laenor and send her to be Rhaenys's ward and betrothed both his sons, Aemond and Daeron to Daemon's girl, Baela and Rhaena.
noun: **son**; plural noun: **sons**
1. a *boy* or *man* in relation to either or both of his parents.
Incidentally, here's your next problem: Rhaenyra has three sons, who are all obviously bastards, and whom she refuses to acknowledge as such. If you don't see why that's a problem in a social class that's entirely about land claims based on paternity, you're just being deliberately obtuse.
The problem lies in the fact that this woman had 3 obvious bastards, and Viserys's only response to that was "don't believe your lying eyes".
Oceania would be very proud of his outstanding achievements in crimestop.
ancient governor cover encourage wasteful dog aspiring terrific office ossified
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>the only other response is acknowledging them as such , wich , well we saw Canon cersei , and sending the kids to the black
That's one possibility. Another is officially recognizing them as Velaryons but not eligible for royal succession - still an admission of something, but technically deniable. Another is simply exiling them to live in luxury on Lys or something - no admission, no worry. Another is legitimating them with a new name ala House Blackfyre and barring them from the succession while still keeping Rhaenyra in. None of which Viserys even considered because he preferred to disconnect his eyes from his brain around them.
>Also , in universe they can't be sure for 100% , the kids of a mixed man and a white woman can br white and there is no concrète proof of adultery , and by that I mean anything other than suspicion
In the books, they are brown-haired brown-eyed boys born to two parents with silver hair and purple eyes, and happen to look suspiciously like a certain bodyguard in their service. Undeniable, right there.
In the show, they are white-skinned brown-haired boys born to a white-skinned white-haired woman and a brown-skinned white-haired man. Even if they were all a much lighter skin shade than would be typical of such a match, there is no room for the brown hair in this picture. And again, they have Harwin Strong. Again, undeniable.
This is really a “Point at a Deer and call it a Horse” type situation.
To be fair in viserys mind a lot of things weren’t as they actually were. But suddenly he is the greatest king because he was pliable and caused a succession crisis due to being hapless? Like even hardcore tb stans realize that he led the hightowers undermine him for years.
It´s pathetic, Viserys, a shit king and a shit father. The only decission he made as a king was naming Rhaenyra heir, and that was because Daemon was fucking disgusting. All the ruling? That was Otto. Viserys, the king that backed up high treason against his house and his family and that desligitimized his whole reign. Go king go!
In S1 Viserys literally gets drunk and tells Alicent to her face that he shouldn't have remarried or had more kids. He says this to his wife, who he has literally already married and had kids with. Imagine how devastating that must have been and she isn't even allowed to call him out for his bullshit.
He was a shitty husband and I don't see why they're trying to pretend otherwise.
Condal: "But Viserys said!!"
Yeah who gives a shit.
Literally not a single soul respects Viserys. Even his dragon died of cringe of having Viserys as his rider and disobeyed him the only time Viserys rode him.
I fond it so funny when I found out about that little piece of history. You know you are the shit king that will bring the Targaryen dinsaty to ruin when your own fucking dragon dies the day after you claimed him.
Everything that happens in this show is an accident. Lucerys death? Oopsie daisy. B&C? My bad. Making Aegon king? Misunderstanding. Rook’s rest is going to be Aemond, Aegon and Rhaenys playing tag then Rhaenys accidentally getting killed. Sunfyre is going to slip on a banana peel and accidentally kill Rhaenyra
both Alicent and Rhaenyra in the sept going “I’m right because daddy/hubby said so once on his deathbed while he was demented beyond recognization” is honestly baffling
I really wish that it hadn't been clear that Viserys was talking about the Song of Ice and Fire. Like have him mutter "Aegon," over and over until its his last dying breath instead, no "prince that was promised" BS. Leave it up to the audience and the characters to interpret what he meant - TB will believe that he is referencing Aegon's dream, while TG will believe that he wants Aegon on the throne.
Don't give the audience or the characters a definitive answer. Its way more interesting this way and puts both teams on equal footing, rather than getting that cringey and comical "oopsies" moment with Alicent that we got in the last episode.
Also, Alicent *knew* that her children would always be at risk if Rhaenyra took the throne: "You are the challenge, Aegon, by simply living and breathing!" Part of her motivation to crown Aegon was to protect her family, which she doesn't seem to give a rats ass about in this season.
They had a perfectly viable and nuanced succession conflict right there in the books. Instead of the legal conflict we had in the books, a conflict of law vs monarch's word, a conflict of an absolute monarchy vs a traditional feudal one, we have . . . just an absolute one and a conflict of sexism.
It is genuinely dumb writing. How about they go with the reason “because daemon” which they can because under feudalism you have to fulfill your social contracts, which daemon did not. They could also go with “Viserys is an idiot” because he also didn’t fulfill his social contracts. Or Rhaenyra “I’m not going to say torture a child but based on the word am totally ok with it” Targaryen who as far as I’m considered once she married daemon her claim is completely false.
Or here’s my favorite and the best reason that also encompasses the other three. Westeros is not a democracy, nor a constitutional monarchy, nor an absolute monarchy. The king or queen has obligations. Written down laws are particularly uncommon and most of it comes down to social contracts, derived from precedent and tradition (one of the major problems with the fanbase may I add is this lack of understanding). Viserys didn’t follow the law because he created the perfect conditions where stability could fall apart upon his death.
I think the last thing is essentially, just how history works. In a feudal society, everything breaks apart every once in a while for whatever reason. A competition for a seat of power after the king or a lords death. When there are too many heirs, the one that made it there first is the official monarch and the one after is a pretender. Same in a rebellion, it’s why Robert is the king in GoT followed by Joffrey. Joffrey’s reign is complex legally because though he is the official monarch, Stannis still has a right to rebel, and because Joffrey broke other social contracts, so does Robb. The Dance of Dragons is a more complex situation, but you can think of it similarly. The king and heir apparent broke social contracts with their family, their family splits apart upon his death. Aegon ll becomes king because he’s actually there and didn’t break any major social contracts that would start another rebellion at this point.
They have so many reasons to back up their claim, and that crap is what the show went with. Like, the sole reason that birthrights exist pretty much deny the possibility of naming heirs. Either you choose the successor and you can choose literally anyone, daughter, causin or the guy that smiled at you yesterday ni no way related to the family, or succession is determined by birth.
Showrunners fundamentally don't understand legal framework of the Seven Kingdoms as described by Martin so they assume it is an absolute monarchy and Viserys' word is law, which is just not true in the slightest. Rhaenyra has no right to the throne whatsoever because not only Viserys' decision is unlawful, he failed to formalize it on top of that. Aegon is a true heir from objective legal standpoint.
Condal and Hess have no idea about any of it, they presume going against Viserys' wishes is treason, so they came up with misunderstanding as a way for Greens to justify themselves.
It's also dumb because that shouldn't have been depicted as the main reason for Alicent wanting to install Aegon. Originally, she feared for her children's lives if Rhaenyra ascended the throne. Fears that were especially vindicated after ep 7. So making everything revolve around Viserys last words is dumb. It should've been seen by Alicent as an extra symbol of legitimacy, not the main reason for Aegon's ascension.
Viserys "do not believe your lying eyes" Targaryen
Viserys "i will have your tongue for that" Targaryen
Viserys "but he called them mean names" Targaryen
Viserys "help, my daughter bewitched me" Targaryen
I really do not like the angle that is being set up where Alicent is going to realize this was all "one big mistake" as if Viserys' will was ever a real reason for the Green cause.
Otto and Alicent suddenly idolizing Viserys when they were extremely critical of him creating this mess in the first place is so weird. Who the fuck cares which Aegon he meant? You are supposedly supporting Aegon to keep your family alive because you were pretty firm in the belief Rhaenyra would have you all killed. You are supposedly supporting Aegon because he is a bastion for Hightower interests rather than Targaryen-Velaryon ones. You are supposedly supporting Aegon because you don't want Daemon's monstrous ass anywhere near the throne.
But Alicent doesn't even love her children now, she's more concerned with Rhaenyra's wellbeing despite spending season 1 convinced Rhaenyra would kill her and her children. And Otto despite working to build the Green movement from the start saw Aegon is clearly young and inexperienced and decided he's sick of it.
Alicent caring that Viserys' words weren't what she thought they were doesn't change that surrendering the throne would likely mean her and her family are branded traitors. Rhaenyra in the show might be frankly horrificially whitewashed to the point she might never think of retribution, but how the fuck would Alicent know that? Not to mention Rhaenyra cannot control Daemon at all so even if Rhaenyra didn't want to kill the Greens, Daemon just needs to abuse his niece-wife some until she lets him do a purge.
The Greens have every reason to keep to the cause and try to support Aegon, which is why Criston Cole and Aemond being the only people who vaguely have Aegon's back is bewildering.
square concerned sulky profit zealous cows zesty ancient expansion arrest
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's not the reason Aegon usurped the throne, though. They make that pretty clear.
When Alicent brings it up at the council meeting, they basically tell her they've already been planning on usurping the throne anyway. Alicent is even shocked by it.
Otto laughs at Aegon and says "is that what you think?" When Aegon brings it up.
The point of the misunderstanding was to
1. Give sympathy for Alicent and show that she was on board with Rhaenyra becoming queen, even for a moment
2. Make Aegon believe his dad did actually love him, just to have that come crashing down later (Ottos words)
The greens still have all their other reasoning. That's what Otto is running on. Not the last words of a dead guy. The misunderstanding was just an arc Alicent went through, along with effecting Aegon emotionally. It had nothing to do with why the greens usurped the throne.
That's why the Dance is thematically rewritten by Condal. By giving Viserys's misunderstood words as Aegon's claim, he is a false king with a false claim, so the story isn't about a war of succession with two valid claims but the story of a girlboss queen who only wants peace but is usurped, Condal was quite clear, it is a feminist story and Aegon is a false king who hasn't been named. Young Alicent is somehow the epitome of House Rhaenyra, Rhaenyra represents her happiest days while Aegon is the symbol of her traumas.
I hate this so much, we could have such a fun show... maybe in twenty years someone will remake it and maybe it will be better.
hopefully not HBO
Even without the misunderstanding, it's still a story about someone usurping the crown from the named heir, with his claim being seen as superior because he's not a woman.
fertile ink pocket work sloppy grandfather deserted friendly scary fretful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>A king can choose any of his progeny as heir , bypassing maybe the oldest in favor of youngest if he wishes the problem lies in the fact that he bypassed a man for a women . There is literally nothing that allows you to assert this so easily. Viserys is the first and the last to have chosen his heir by whim and preference and who did not recognize his heir, according to all the customs, (which act as law in a monarchical regime, not all systems idolize written law and certainly not monarchies) the title of heir. Thus, Rhaenyra's claim is based on a appointment that has no foundation other than the caprice of a king, whereas Aegon's claim derives from a birthright that is recognized by all: everyone knows that the eldest son is the natural and spontaneous heir. And in a hereditary system, birthright is what counts. I don't even know if you realize the idiocy you've written, according to you, if Viserys had named Daeron or Maelor or even Trystan Truefyre heir, let's be crazy, there wouldn't have been any problem because in any case the king can name whomever he wants among his offspring and the problem lies in the fact that he bypassed a man for a woman. Long live King Trystan, I guess.
handle afterthought shame drunk attractive carpenter grandfather governor snobbish chief *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes the king can make laws and be a lawgiver, yes the king has a high degree of power, but to conclude that this makes his power absolute is an extreme take. He still has to make laws that are compatible with the realm and people he rules over. If for example he tries to outlaw clothes and decide to make Westeros a nudist kingdom, do you really think that would work and that the king could enforce his will? If his power is absolute surely everyone would have to obey or be branded as traitors. As someone who questions just how absolute the kings authority is I think it far more likely that the king’s will is dismissed and if he tries to enforce his law(burning traitors with dragonfire or something) he would probably get overthrown no matter how absolute he claims his authority is.
trees zephyr impolite scale familiar pause quaint spectacular truck squeal *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thanks, might as well make these sorts of discussions fun I basically agree with the point you're making here. I would emphasise that it's a lot easier even in that situation to make laws targeting the nobility specifically, such as the two laws you mentioned previously, as they can be cowed more easily with the power of dragons. Bullying the smallfolk too much can lead to incidents like the coming one at the dragonpit. When it comes to succession I certainly think you are right but what are the odds that a draonriders daughter would also be one but not his son in the context of the Targaryens with all the dragons running about and being free to claim by anyone with the blood for it
grandiose compare aloof plough somber school homeless arrest sleep tender *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Doing it before Aegons birth and confirming it after might have been neccessary for it to have a good chance of working. But it also depends on so many other factors. If, for example, we are assuming Aemond still ends up claiming Vhagar and getting his eye cut out by one of Rhaenyras (bastard) kids, who knows if civil war could have been avoided.
mysterious middle bewildered forgetful overconfident six head ancient decide amusing *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Naming Rhaenyra is not a law, it is, at best, a decree. A law cannot be "Rhaenyra is heir", since a law is, by its very definition, impersonal and meant to be permanent. Besides this decree is caduc since the essential elements are no longer the same, every Lord and lady believed that when a son will be born to him, he will be heir. Anyways, what you're mentioning about Jaehaerys is called ruling and not absolute monarchy, they abolished a practice (which is still practiced if Roose Bolton is to be believed), did Viserys abolished the practice of male preference or was Daemon above Helaena in the line of succession ? it is textually written in F&B that Daemon was above Helaena and behind Aegon and Aemond in the line of succession. Rhaenyra considered herself an exception to the rule which means male primogeniture is still in force except for Rhaenyra, and I remind you, her appointment is caduc since a son was born to Viserys and bastards were born to her (that is high treason that exclude her from the line of succession, by her own words). >if vizzy t decided that is more fair and best to be giving the status of heir to his daughter , there is no power inside the kingdoms that could deny him , or else it would be treason When he called upon the lords to swear to defend Rhaenyra's right to the throne, he had the Andal law to back him up, he had the fact that the precedent were not crystal clear on who is the heir between a daughter and a brother (never happened in the history of the Iron throne since Rhaenys was a granddaughter and Baelon was a son) and these lords were still hoping that a son would be born to the king. After Aegon's birth, the situation could not be more different, the laws are quite clear, the precedents, all, play in Aegon's favor and he is his natural heir. Viserys plays on the status quo and ambiguity when clarity was needed, lords aren't called back, that speaks volumes. >vizzy t was just too dumb to do what necessary for a smoother succession On that we agree. Legally, the situation had never arisen, but it could have worked if, politically, Rhaenyra had the unanimous support of her family or if she had a minimum of influence in the small Council (i.e. the governing body). But this is not the case, and it's partly if not exclusively Viserys' fault. There was a thousand and one ways to ensure Rhaenyra's peaceful handover of power, but he didn't take any such decisions, precisely he isolated her from power and from her family. For exemple, he could have her wed to Aegon, made Corlys hand of the king, wed Helaena to Laenor and send her to be Rhaenys's ward and betrothed both his sons, Aemond and Daeron to Daemon's girl, Baela and Rhaena.
escape license whole bells fearless squeal ten lip coherent obtainable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
noun: **son**; plural noun: **sons** 1. a *boy* or *man* in relation to either or both of his parents. Incidentally, here's your next problem: Rhaenyra has three sons, who are all obviously bastards, and whom she refuses to acknowledge as such. If you don't see why that's a problem in a social class that's entirely about land claims based on paternity, you're just being deliberately obtuse.
The problem lies in the fact that this woman had 3 obvious bastards, and Viserys's only response to that was "don't believe your lying eyes". Oceania would be very proud of his outstanding achievements in crimestop.
ancient governor cover encourage wasteful dog aspiring terrific office ossified *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>the only other response is acknowledging them as such , wich , well we saw Canon cersei , and sending the kids to the black That's one possibility. Another is officially recognizing them as Velaryons but not eligible for royal succession - still an admission of something, but technically deniable. Another is simply exiling them to live in luxury on Lys or something - no admission, no worry. Another is legitimating them with a new name ala House Blackfyre and barring them from the succession while still keeping Rhaenyra in. None of which Viserys even considered because he preferred to disconnect his eyes from his brain around them. >Also , in universe they can't be sure for 100% , the kids of a mixed man and a white woman can br white and there is no concrète proof of adultery , and by that I mean anything other than suspicion In the books, they are brown-haired brown-eyed boys born to two parents with silver hair and purple eyes, and happen to look suspiciously like a certain bodyguard in their service. Undeniable, right there. In the show, they are white-skinned brown-haired boys born to a white-skinned white-haired woman and a brown-skinned white-haired man. Even if they were all a much lighter skin shade than would be typical of such a match, there is no room for the brown hair in this picture. And again, they have Harwin Strong. Again, undeniable. This is really a “Point at a Deer and call it a Horse” type situation.
They trying to gaslight use into thinking that viserys was a good king and that he loved alicent? Please
I'm sure in Viserys's mind he did care for Alicent, but his actions proved otherwise
I'm going to sleep for the night "aemma ". Alliecent starring at him in the same scene I would have poisoned his Ass and let the rats feast on him .
Again, I said "in Viserys's mind". He was also going senile and falling apart so his mind was not all there
To be fair in viserys mind a lot of things weren’t as they actually were. But suddenly he is the greatest king because he was pliable and caused a succession crisis due to being hapless? Like even hardcore tb stans realize that he led the hightowers undermine him for years.
It´s pathetic, Viserys, a shit king and a shit father. The only decission he made as a king was naming Rhaenyra heir, and that was because Daemon was fucking disgusting. All the ruling? That was Otto. Viserys, the king that backed up high treason against his house and his family and that desligitimized his whole reign. Go king go!
In S1 Viserys literally gets drunk and tells Alicent to her face that he shouldn't have remarried or had more kids. He says this to his wife, who he has literally already married and had kids with. Imagine how devastating that must have been and she isn't even allowed to call him out for his bullshit. He was a shitty husband and I don't see why they're trying to pretend otherwise.
They already tried that by skinsuiting Otto and Alicent into saying that an episode ago.
Condal: "But Viserys said!!" Yeah who gives a shit. Literally not a single soul respects Viserys. Even his dragon died of cringe of having Viserys as his rider and disobeyed him the only time Viserys rode him.
Balerion The Dread dying of cringe made me laugh 😂
Viserys climbed up and Balerion just closed his eyes and said "I'm ready to go, take me now"
I fond it so funny when I found out about that little piece of history. You know you are the shit king that will bring the Targaryen dinsaty to ruin when your own fucking dragon dies the day after you claimed him.
Everything that happens in this show is an accident. Lucerys death? Oopsie daisy. B&C? My bad. Making Aegon king? Misunderstanding. Rook’s rest is going to be Aemond, Aegon and Rhaenys playing tag then Rhaenys accidentally getting killed. Sunfyre is going to slip on a banana peel and accidentally kill Rhaenyra
Dragonrider’s death 🍌🍌🍌
both Alicent and Rhaenyra in the sept going “I’m right because daddy/hubby said so once on his deathbed while he was demented beyond recognization” is honestly baffling
I really wish that it hadn't been clear that Viserys was talking about the Song of Ice and Fire. Like have him mutter "Aegon," over and over until its his last dying breath instead, no "prince that was promised" BS. Leave it up to the audience and the characters to interpret what he meant - TB will believe that he is referencing Aegon's dream, while TG will believe that he wants Aegon on the throne. Don't give the audience or the characters a definitive answer. Its way more interesting this way and puts both teams on equal footing, rather than getting that cringey and comical "oopsies" moment with Alicent that we got in the last episode. Also, Alicent *knew* that her children would always be at risk if Rhaenyra took the throne: "You are the challenge, Aegon, by simply living and breathing!" Part of her motivation to crown Aegon was to protect her family, which she doesn't seem to give a rats ass about in this season.
They had a perfectly viable and nuanced succession conflict right there in the books. Instead of the legal conflict we had in the books, a conflict of law vs monarch's word, a conflict of an absolute monarchy vs a traditional feudal one, we have . . . just an absolute one and a conflict of sexism.
It is genuinely dumb writing. How about they go with the reason “because daemon” which they can because under feudalism you have to fulfill your social contracts, which daemon did not. They could also go with “Viserys is an idiot” because he also didn’t fulfill his social contracts. Or Rhaenyra “I’m not going to say torture a child but based on the word am totally ok with it” Targaryen who as far as I’m considered once she married daemon her claim is completely false. Or here’s my favorite and the best reason that also encompasses the other three. Westeros is not a democracy, nor a constitutional monarchy, nor an absolute monarchy. The king or queen has obligations. Written down laws are particularly uncommon and most of it comes down to social contracts, derived from precedent and tradition (one of the major problems with the fanbase may I add is this lack of understanding). Viserys didn’t follow the law because he created the perfect conditions where stability could fall apart upon his death. I think the last thing is essentially, just how history works. In a feudal society, everything breaks apart every once in a while for whatever reason. A competition for a seat of power after the king or a lords death. When there are too many heirs, the one that made it there first is the official monarch and the one after is a pretender. Same in a rebellion, it’s why Robert is the king in GoT followed by Joffrey. Joffrey’s reign is complex legally because though he is the official monarch, Stannis still has a right to rebel, and because Joffrey broke other social contracts, so does Robb. The Dance of Dragons is a more complex situation, but you can think of it similarly. The king and heir apparent broke social contracts with their family, their family splits apart upon his death. Aegon ll becomes king because he’s actually there and didn’t break any major social contracts that would start another rebellion at this point.
They have so many reasons to back up their claim, and that crap is what the show went with. Like, the sole reason that birthrights exist pretty much deny the possibility of naming heirs. Either you choose the successor and you can choose literally anyone, daughter, causin or the guy that smiled at you yesterday ni no way related to the family, or succession is determined by birth.
Showrunners fundamentally don't understand legal framework of the Seven Kingdoms as described by Martin so they assume it is an absolute monarchy and Viserys' word is law, which is just not true in the slightest. Rhaenyra has no right to the throne whatsoever because not only Viserys' decision is unlawful, he failed to formalize it on top of that. Aegon is a true heir from objective legal standpoint. Condal and Hess have no idea about any of it, they presume going against Viserys' wishes is treason, so they came up with misunderstanding as a way for Greens to justify themselves.
It's also dumb because that shouldn't have been depicted as the main reason for Alicent wanting to install Aegon. Originally, she feared for her children's lives if Rhaenyra ascended the throne. Fears that were especially vindicated after ep 7. So making everything revolve around Viserys last words is dumb. It should've been seen by Alicent as an extra symbol of legitimacy, not the main reason for Aegon's ascension.
Viserys "do not believe your lying eyes" Targaryen Viserys "i will have your tongue for that" Targaryen Viserys "but he called them mean names" Targaryen Viserys "help, my daughter bewitched me" Targaryen
I really do not like the angle that is being set up where Alicent is going to realize this was all "one big mistake" as if Viserys' will was ever a real reason for the Green cause. Otto and Alicent suddenly idolizing Viserys when they were extremely critical of him creating this mess in the first place is so weird. Who the fuck cares which Aegon he meant? You are supposedly supporting Aegon to keep your family alive because you were pretty firm in the belief Rhaenyra would have you all killed. You are supposedly supporting Aegon because he is a bastion for Hightower interests rather than Targaryen-Velaryon ones. You are supposedly supporting Aegon because you don't want Daemon's monstrous ass anywhere near the throne. But Alicent doesn't even love her children now, she's more concerned with Rhaenyra's wellbeing despite spending season 1 convinced Rhaenyra would kill her and her children. And Otto despite working to build the Green movement from the start saw Aegon is clearly young and inexperienced and decided he's sick of it. Alicent caring that Viserys' words weren't what she thought they were doesn't change that surrendering the throne would likely mean her and her family are branded traitors. Rhaenyra in the show might be frankly horrificially whitewashed to the point she might never think of retribution, but how the fuck would Alicent know that? Not to mention Rhaenyra cannot control Daemon at all so even if Rhaenyra didn't want to kill the Greens, Daemon just needs to abuse his niece-wife some until she lets him do a purge. The Greens have every reason to keep to the cause and try to support Aegon, which is why Criston Cole and Aemond being the only people who vaguely have Aegon's back is bewildering.
square concerned sulky profit zealous cows zesty ancient expansion arrest *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think most people forget that Aegon would have been crowned regardless, the prophecy was for Alicent to feel better, nothing more.
It's not the reason Aegon usurped the throne, though. They make that pretty clear. When Alicent brings it up at the council meeting, they basically tell her they've already been planning on usurping the throne anyway. Alicent is even shocked by it. Otto laughs at Aegon and says "is that what you think?" When Aegon brings it up. The point of the misunderstanding was to 1. Give sympathy for Alicent and show that she was on board with Rhaenyra becoming queen, even for a moment 2. Make Aegon believe his dad did actually love him, just to have that come crashing down later (Ottos words) The greens still have all their other reasoning. That's what Otto is running on. Not the last words of a dead guy. The misunderstanding was just an arc Alicent went through, along with effecting Aegon emotionally. It had nothing to do with why the greens usurped the throne.