I would not have included Loras. He was just a good Tourney knight, didn’t really get the chance to show himself in battle
Game of Thrones - "House Of The Dragon" Official Threads (NO SPOILERS....ZERO)
- Thread starter jay211
- Start date
That's not how a line of succession works. Inheritance goes through the first born child. This is why the series is always stressing how "second sons" are really ambitious because they are not entitled to inheritance unless the first born AND the first born's children and grandchildren die. Daemon, Vaemond, Otto, Tyland Lannister, Larys, etc are all second sons and have to scratch and claw and scheme to get power because they do not inherit it unless there are untimely deaths that take the first borns out of the picture.
If it's still not clicking, remember Game of Thrones.
Ned Stark was the Lord of Winterfell. The next in line to inherit Winterfell after Ned died was Ned's first (true)born son Robb. It wouldn't go to Ned's younger brother Benjen. And from Robb, it would go to Robb's first born child. And then it would pass to that first born child's first born. Etc. All of Ned's children would have to die before it would go to Benjen.
So back to your question about the greens.
Aegon II was officially crowned King in the last episode.
His heir is his first born son Jaehaerys (we see him and his twin sister briefly playing in the episode). So Aegon's son, still only a child, is officially next in line. All of Aegon's male children would come before Aemond. Just like all of Rhaenyra's male children would come before her siblings if she were Queen.
If we threw out gender and went by Visery I's decree that Rhaenyra is his rightful heir, this is what the line of succession would look like under Andal law
1. Rhaenyra
2. Jace (if Jace and Baela had a son, that child would be third in line)
3. Luke
4. Joffrey
5. Aegon the younger (her child with Daemon)
6. Viserys the younger (her child with Daemon)
7. Aegon II (Alicent's son)
8. Jaehaerys (Aegon's first born son)
9. Aemond or Jaehaera (read below)
Where there would be conflict is if Aegon II and all of his sons died.
Would Aegon II's daughter Jaehaera be next in line or would it go to Aemond?
That question is precisely what the Great Council of 101 in episode 1 attempted to answer. If we use the Great Countil of 101 vote as precedent, then it would go to Aemond. But if we were using Andal law, it would go to Jaehaera as she is the last child of the King. So the two competing claims would either be solved by one side dropping their claim, another council, or war if Jaehaera got enough lords to back her claim.
Succession is messy. Here is what GRRM had to say about how it works in his world.
Well, the short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modelled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpertations, and often contradictory.
A man's eldest son was his heir. After that the next eldest son. Then the next, etc. Daughters were not considered while there was a living son, except in Dorne, where females had equal right of inheritance according to age.
After the sons, most would say that the eldest daughter is next in line. But there might be an argument from the dead man's brothers, say. Does a male sibling or a female child take precedence? Each side has a "claim."
What if there are no childen, only grandchildren and great grandchildren. Is precedence or proximity the more important principle? Do b*stards have any rights? What about b*stards who have been legitimized, do they go in at the end after the trueborn kids, or according to birth order? What about widows? And what about the will of the deceased? Can a lord disinherit one son, and name a younger son as heir? Or even a b*stard?
There are no clear cut answers, either in Westeros or in real medieval history. Things were often decided on a case by case basis. A case might set a precedent for later cases... but as often as not, the precedents conflicted as much as the claims.
In fact, if you look at medieval history, conflicting claims were the cause of three quarters of the wars. The Hundred Years War grew out of a dispute about whether a nephew or a grandson of Philip the Fair had a better claim to the throne of France. The nephew got the decision, because the grandson's claim passed through a daughter (and because he was the king of England too).
And that mess was complicated by one of the precedents (the Salic Law) that had been invented a short time before to resolve the dispute after the death of Philip's eldest son, where the claimants were (1) the daughter of Philip's eldest son, who may or may not have been a b*stard, her mother having been an adulteress, (2) the unborn child of the eldest son that his secon wife was carrying, sex unknown, and (3) Philip's second son, another Philip. Lawyers for (3) dug up the Salic Law to exclude (1) and possibly (2) if she was a girl, but (2) was a boy so he became king, only he died a week later, and (3) got the throne after all.
But then when he died, his own children, all daughters, were excluded on the basis of the law he's dug up, and the throne went to the youngest son instead... and meanwhile (1) had kids, one of whom eventually was the king of Navarre, Charles the Bad, who was such a scumbag in the Hundred Years War in part because he felt =his= claim was better than that of either Philip of Valois or Edward Plantagenet. And you know, it was. Only Navarre did not have an army as big as France or England, so no one took him seriously.
The Wars of the Roses were fought over the issue of whether the Lancastrian claim (deriving from the third son of Edward III in direct male line) or the Yorkist claim (deriving from a combination of Edward's second son, but through a female line, wed to descendants of his fourth son, through the male) was superior. And a whole family of legitimized b*stard stock, the Beauforts, played a huge role.
And when Alexander III, King of Scots, rode over a cliff, and Margaret the Maid of Norway died en route back home, and the Scottish lords called on Edward I of England to decide who had the best claim to the throne, something like fourteen or fifteen (I'd need to look up the exact number) "competitors" came forward to present their pedigrees and documents to the court. The decision eventually boiled down to precedence (John Balliol) versus proximity (Bruce) and went to Balliol, but those other thirteen guys all had claims as well. King of Eric of Norway, for instance, based his claim to the throne on his =daughter=, the aforementioned Maid of Norway, who had been the queen however briefly. He seemed to believe that inheritance should run backwards. And hell, if he had been the king of France instead of the king of Norway, maybe it would have.
The medieval world was governed by men, not by laws. You could even make a case that the lords preferred the laws to be vague and contradictory, since that gave them more power. In a tangle like the Hornwood case, ultimately the lord would decide... and if some of the more powerful claimants did not like the decision, it might come down to force of arms.
The bottom line, I suppose, is that inheritance was decided as much by politics as by laws. In Westeros and in medieval Europe both.
www.westeros.org
A man's eldest son was his heir. After that the next eldest son. Then the next, etc. Daughters were not considered while there was a living son, except in Dorne, where females had equal right of inheritance according to age.
After the sons, most would say that the eldest daughter is next in line. But there might be an argument from the dead man's brothers, say. Does a male sibling or a female child take precedence? Each side has a "claim."
What if there are no childen, only grandchildren and great grandchildren. Is precedence or proximity the more important principle? Do b*stards have any rights? What about b*stards who have been legitimized, do they go in at the end after the trueborn kids, or according to birth order? What about widows? And what about the will of the deceased? Can a lord disinherit one son, and name a younger son as heir? Or even a b*stard?
There are no clear cut answers, either in Westeros or in real medieval history. Things were often decided on a case by case basis. A case might set a precedent for later cases... but as often as not, the precedents conflicted as much as the claims.
In fact, if you look at medieval history, conflicting claims were the cause of three quarters of the wars. The Hundred Years War grew out of a dispute about whether a nephew or a grandson of Philip the Fair had a better claim to the throne of France. The nephew got the decision, because the grandson's claim passed through a daughter (and because he was the king of England too).
And that mess was complicated by one of the precedents (the Salic Law) that had been invented a short time before to resolve the dispute after the death of Philip's eldest son, where the claimants were (1) the daughter of Philip's eldest son, who may or may not have been a b*stard, her mother having been an adulteress, (2) the unborn child of the eldest son that his secon wife was carrying, sex unknown, and (3) Philip's second son, another Philip. Lawyers for (3) dug up the Salic Law to exclude (1) and possibly (2) if she was a girl, but (2) was a boy so he became king, only he died a week later, and (3) got the throne after all.
But then when he died, his own children, all daughters, were excluded on the basis of the law he's dug up, and the throne went to the youngest son instead... and meanwhile (1) had kids, one of whom eventually was the king of Navarre, Charles the Bad, who was such a scumbag in the Hundred Years War in part because he felt =his= claim was better than that of either Philip of Valois or Edward Plantagenet. And you know, it was. Only Navarre did not have an army as big as France or England, so no one took him seriously.
The Wars of the Roses were fought over the issue of whether the Lancastrian claim (deriving from the third son of Edward III in direct male line) or the Yorkist claim (deriving from a combination of Edward's second son, but through a female line, wed to descendants of his fourth son, through the male) was superior. And a whole family of legitimized b*stard stock, the Beauforts, played a huge role.
And when Alexander III, King of Scots, rode over a cliff, and Margaret the Maid of Norway died en route back home, and the Scottish lords called on Edward I of England to decide who had the best claim to the throne, something like fourteen or fifteen (I'd need to look up the exact number) "competitors" came forward to present their pedigrees and documents to the court. The decision eventually boiled down to precedence (John Balliol) versus proximity (Bruce) and went to Balliol, but those other thirteen guys all had claims as well. King of Eric of Norway, for instance, based his claim to the throne on his =daughter=, the aforementioned Maid of Norway, who had been the queen however briefly. He seemed to believe that inheritance should run backwards. And hell, if he had been the king of France instead of the king of Norway, maybe it would have.
The medieval world was governed by men, not by laws. You could even make a case that the lords preferred the laws to be vague and contradictory, since that gave them more power. In a tangle like the Hornwood case, ultimately the lord would decide... and if some of the more powerful claimants did not like the decision, it might come down to force of arms.
The bottom line, I suppose, is that inheritance was decided as much by politics as by laws. In Westeros and in medieval Europe both.
The Citadel: So Spake Martin - Correspondence with Fans
Last edited:
The axe murderer
For I am death and I ride on a pale horse
Right. Jaime thought he had potential but that was never realised. shyt I wanted to see his brother stunt on the show. Sparring 3 guys at once is a flex
“Do you remember the Trident, Your Grace?” “I won my crown there. How should I forget it?” “You took a wound from Rhaegar,” Ned reminded him. “So when the Targaryen host broke and ran, you gave the pursuit into my hands.
Robert was not injured BEFORE his duel as clearly stated directly from the text, Rhaegar gave him the grave blow. Which left him unable to continue his campaign. Again, by a slightly above average fighter with a common longsword. Dayne without Dawn clearly stomps him. You just making shyt up atp. I shutdown all the points you made, now you’re making up scenarios
Gotta be a Baratheon stan bordering on delusional. Not entertaining this any longer. The author is wrong and the text is wrong… okay 
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
Eternally Jaded
Superstar
“Do you remember the Trident, Your Grace?” “I won my crown there. How should I forget it?” “You took a wound from Rhaegar,” Ned reminded him. “So when the Targaryen host broke and ran, you gave the pursuit into my hands.
Robert was not injured BEFORE his duel as clearly stated directly from the text, Rhaegar gave him the grave blow. Which left him unable to continue his campaign. Again, by a slightly above average fighter with a common longsword. Dayne without Dawn clearly stomps him. You just making shyt up atp. I shutdown all the points you made, now you’re making up scenarios
Prelude
After being defeated by Lord Randyll Tarly in the Battle of Ashford,[1] near the border between the stormlands and the Reach, Lord Robert Baratheon turned north to rejoin his friend, Lord Eddard Stark. Robert's wounds were tended to by friends in Stoney Sept.[2]That's literally the prelude to the Battle of the Bells.
After which came the battle of the Trident.
You haven't refuted anything breh.
The facts are that Robert spent damn near a year on campaign, being the first on the walls at Gulltown and killing Lord Mark Grafton, then going by ship to his ancestral seat and raising an army, with which he fought three battles in a day until the battle of Ashford, where he fought the Reach vanguard under Randyl Tarly who gave him his only defeat in the field.
While all this is going on, Rhaegar who trained with the most lauded knights in the realm was chilling and smashing on his young tender.
So yes, a fresh trained warrior hewned by the best knights money/prestige/honor could buy, is capable of wounding a man who's fought a long-term campaign over the course of months.
Like, you're not hurting Robert's case here at all the way you think you are.
You think Dayne is a wizard with a sword, that's cool.
We've seen Robert smash all kinds of warriors and he died undefeated.
Dayne got taken out by a self admitted mid kinda sword fighter in Ned and a guy no bigger than Kat Williams in Howland Reed.
All that rep n he got washed by a c grade swordsman and a child.
The Stag washes him, then humps his pretty sister over his corpse.
Eternally Jaded
Superstar
Nah, if the greens win and Aegon dies it goes to his first son with his wife the weird chick.
The inheritance goes down the line until there's no one(males normally) to take it, then it goes to Aemond and his line.
In the first season of GOT, if something happened to Robb before he had a son, it'd go to Bran next because he was the next son.
Eternally Jaded
Superstar
Nah, Loras is definitely nice in the canon, just probably not top ten all time nice.
Same way Daemon Targaryen would probably be seen. A killer and tough but all time? Probably not.
Speaking of the line of succession, this is what the Driftmark line would have looked like in episode 6, prior to the death of Laena. Jace was presumed to take the Iron Throne as Jacaerys Targaryen so was not in line to inherit Driftmark.
1. Corlys Velaryon
2, Laenor Velaryon
3. Luke Velaryon
4. Joffrey Velaryon
5. Laena Velaryon
6. Baela Targaryen
7. Rhaena Targaryen
8. Vaemond Velaryon
And by episode 7 when Rhaenys asked Corlys to disinherit Laenor's line, but he was adamant about the name carrying on. This is what that would have looked like.
1. Corlys Velaryon
2, Laenor Velaryon
3. Luke Velaryon
4. Joffrey Velaryon
5. Laena Velaryon
6. Baela Targaryen
7. Rhaena Targaryen
8. Vaemond Velaryon
1. Corlys Velaryon
2, Laenor Velaryon
3. Luke Velaryon
4. Joffrey Velaryon
5. Laena Velaryon
6. Baela Targaryen
7. Rhaena Targaryen
8. Vaemond Velaryon
And by episode 7 when Rhaenys asked Corlys to disinherit Laenor's line, but he was adamant about the name carrying on. This is what that would have looked like.
1. Corlys Velaryon
3. Luke Velaryon
4. Joffrey Velaryon
5. Laena Velaryon
6. Baela Targaryen
7. Rhaena Targaryen
8. Vaemond Velaryon
Last edited:
I fell back & let breh cook since he clearly on a different type of time.“Do you remember the Trident, Your Grace?” “I won my crown there. How should I forget it?” “You took a wound from Rhaegar,” Ned reminded him. “So when the Targaryen host broke and ran, you gave the pursuit into my hands.
Robert was not injured BEFORE his duel as clearly stated directly from the text, Rhaegar gave him the grave blow. Which left him unable to continue his campaign. Again, by a slightly above average fighter with a common longsword. Dayne without Dawn clearly stomps him. You just making shyt up atp. I shutdown all the points you made, now you’re making up scenarios
This thread has to be THE WORST TV show thread on the coli 
The Devil's Advocate
Call me Dad
I'll ask again to everyone...definitely on her bran shyt, maybe even more advanced since she verbally can speak on shyt even if its vague where bran was just a useless weak ass bytch
I said many pages ago, take whatever she say serious, she slow, but she got a gift
Is she in the books? Or the show people just decided to have this "what does this mean" every episode going on?
The Devil's Advocate
Call me Dad
You're not paying enough attention. When she flew to King's Landing, the Hightowers were trying to not only hijack the throne, but trying to do it by giving HER land away. So it made all the sense that she would 1. Ride her dragon there 2. Ride over with her armor.
When dragons land at the castle, they go to the dragon pit. Doesn't matter what Lambo you pull up in, it's going in the garage.. And you don't come around smelling like dragon, as we saw in the first ep, so you'd probably take your armor off and leave it there with your dragon...
So all she did was run downstairs to the garage and get her armor out the coat room and her dragon out of level 4, section D.
What's really stupid is putting a pit full of dragons underneath a stadium. That's like putting 10 T-Rex's under Yankee Stadium in 1918
gldnone913
Integrity and Consistency
brehs mentioning characters that haven't even shown up on the show yet smh
itsyoung!!
Veteran
Ive never read the books so no clue
