editorialized torpedo

A really self-important one.

I talk abt the marriage tour HERE, where I say that it wasn't really the sort of marriage tour that you see in the show where the men line up to present their suits of marriage so directly...rather it was a silent hope underneath the purpose of Rhaenyra being more acquainted with some subjects for support similar to how Aegon I, Aenys I, Rhaena & Aegon (his kids), and Jaehaerys I/Alysanne all made progresses to make themselves "available".

In their minds, I think that they are creating obstacles & fallbacks she will eventually go over so she doesn't present as having things go too easy for her and risk people lose interest and or even accuse her of being some sort of Mary Sue, even as some also say she is terribly incompetent. That's what I'm getting, that this female protagonist must have more stacks against her for the payoff that will later swing again back away from her.

Thanks, anon!

Answer to Question #1

1)

I have many, many posts about bastardry and the boys' illegitimacy vs legitimacy: HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, & HERE. Basically, Jace is not really illegtimate bc illegtimacy must be "proven" and he was never proven to be. People have to argue/prove for it more than people having to argue whether or not one's hair is red or not. And

2)

Jace was actually respected outside of his family (A Son for a Son"):

3)

Several of those greens stans are not reading the damn text and refuse to see that Jacaerys was actually pretty admired by one of Rhaenyra's biggest supporters, Cregan Stark ("A Son for a Son"):

Also, Alicent had been, FOR YEARS, trying to get more people on her side and denounce or pressure either Viserys into removing Rhaenyra and her sons from the line of succession (both bk and show) or just get MOST of the lords at court and beyond to denounce Rhaenyra and her sons...and yet she had to resort to a usurpation, imprisoning courtiers and servants to withhold news of Viserys' death, pressured the council to crown Aegon after many lines of persuasion buttressed by Cole & Otto's input and wild accusations and assertions about Rhaenyra's sons, Daemon, and Rhaenyra not being actually the Queen...

I'd say that Alicent failed to convince anyone to really go against Rhaenyra by depending on the boys illegitimacy.

Answer to Question #2

Do you mean if Rhaenyra had ascended peacefully (no war at all, no usurpation) or had won the war with Jacaerys still alive when she did? Yes, he is her heir and the lords fought for her...they were a package deal. If you didn't want to have Jace as the next ruler, you would not fight for the person who names him as heir. Rhaenyra would have consolidated her reign and ensured her line's future better.

Now if we're talking about DURING THE WAR, Jace somehow survived but Rhaenyra did not/lost, I think there would have been a bit more difficulty without Cregan Stark, Jeyne Arryn, the Blackwoods, Vyprens, other lords who respected that their vows applying to Rhaenyra applied to her heir as well (bc again, they came as a package deal politically) and without as many dragons as the blacks had. Since most of the lords didn't swear to him but just to Rhaenyra, maybe some lords would use this as an excuse to defect or leave the war altogether because it stil costs them resources, some still will use this to justify how a male line goes before a woman's line, and/or they are just greedy AND cowardly and see this as they way to flagrantly ally themselves with the greens.

in the beginning. Bc the actual named heir/undoubtedly trueborn person is no longer there to enforce/support Jace's claim.

And once again, Cregan Stark made his Pact with Jace [2nd pictured quote above]...Cregan was a beast after the war and northerners are mad about their vow-taking, arguably more than "southern" folk. Cregan also liked Jacaerys very much from what's written about them--some fans theorize romantically, but whatever. He also had a higher emotional stake in it, which is an amplifying motive to the primary one about the Pact.

As for Jeyne Arryn, she was steadfastly loyal to Rhaenyra's cause because she was blood through Aemma, she would be helping to make sure her own position was securer from male relatives who already tried to oust her, and because Rhaenyra was a woman--like her. Women in a man's world an all that ("A Son for a Son"):

(Cregan also was interested bc he was having trouble with an uncle trying to oust him...succession things). Thus it could get easier for Jace to default back to him having been Rhaenyra's heir, he's never been "found out" to not be Laenor's , and he's a male dragonrider. again, this is if he loses most of Rhaenyra's supporters, bc it's still possible that he'd reatin the bigger and important ones.

Also, if Daemon somehow by some miracle managed to dispatch Aemond and come back...they'd likely fight with and for Jace anyway because Daemon is just loyal &--by reputation and action--brutal like that. Jace--less likely...key words--loses that many supporters of Rhaenyra's.

Fire and Blood, by George R.R. Martin, pg 404

I would say that there is a male candidate under her reign who would keep those who wish to destabilize or usurp her hopeful, but the line between hopeful and actually plotting/active in this case is thicker than this person thinks. Yes, with Rhaenyra being female there are always people who will prefer any of her maniac brothers. And yes, Jeyne Arryn had trouble getting her seta having to imprison her own relatives who later stopped her chosen heir from ruling after her death. However, as I and others have already said--several times, really!--how many people actually would do something against her or try versus those who supported her and fought for her and therefore--if she had ruled--would stay behind her? Especially if greens stans and some "neutral" fans realized that it's so much less likely for dragon-less Andal lords to actually seriously harm them with their dragons outnumbering the original 3 conquerors' dragons by more than 10 if the green characters (and I mean Alicent and her kids and father) had left well enough alone.

As for Jeyne Arryn, is it not strange how it is after Rhaenyra dies and loses that another woman-ruler's wishes/authority declines after her death? What would have happened if Rhaenyra had survived and ruled without as much as she went through, how would she have responded to her Arryn cousin's will ignored? The same cousin who--unlike the Rosby and Stokeworth girls who were not blood-related--actively and personally supported her in the war? A woman who ruled her dead mother's homeland, the same house whose' sigil she added to her own wartime banner? And it's important to note that Jeyne Arryn, like Viserys, expressly vocalized/declared who her heir was while Rosby & Stokeworth's fathers did not as far as anyone knows. Finally, it's a lot easier for Rhaenyra to support Jeyne's heir or avenge them because unlike here, w/Rosby & Stokeworth she had the pressure of choosing what would make her immediate supporters happy for her immediate needs. If she had won, that pressure would have been much lighter. So if one argues that Rhaenyra would treat Jeyne Arryn exactly as she did Rosby and Stokeworth, they're not reading through the text. And if this makes Rhaenyra sound self-interested, I never said that she wasn't. In other posts, I explain who I think Rhaenyra was as a person and how she became that (pre-KL and marriages) into her becoming her later paranoid self. But I am speaking not of an individual's morality but of one very important effect of her fall on the politics of greater Westeros. Once again, Rhaenyra's loss and inability to stay as a queen affected noblewomen's ability to justify their places as rulers in their own right, which has implications for what women are able to do versus men's. To downplay that is to ignore the implications for even Daenerys, how Arianne Martell vs Stannis Baratheon use precedents and customs to explain or promote their decisions and bids for positions, etc. It is to ignore how Targ women get weaker and farther from the central seat of royal power until we have Rhaella and Dany--both literally sexually and physically abused by their own brothers. A long way from Alysanne, Visenya, and Rhaenys. It is to say, "patriarchy and thinking women shouldn't politically participate and decide for themselves how they navigate life and get any sort of support from their families/government/etc is actually good, or 'not as bad as you'd think'". Using Rhaenyra's self-centeredness and then exaggerating its quality or effect to make her pre-KL personality into something evil is making a victim a perpetrator before they actually become said perpetrator. As well as a lie. Which ironically tends to actually make perpetrators, pushes them into darker places.

Because textually there is nothing to indicate she performed any truly distinctive or evil act before or after her marriages nor her time at Dragonstone ruling it by herself. The reasons why some at Dragonstone turned against her were because some believed a man should come before a woman, because they thought that they'd gain some benefits or just survive the greens, because they wished to see the person who allowed their relatives to either try to claim a dragon or died during the Battle of the Gullet, or they were like Alfred Broome who felt that she didn't give them as many privileges as another person and for personal greed ("Rhaenyra Overthrown"):

The greed and envy part aligns with the greens' own reasons for usurping Rhaenyra. As for the Sowing by itself, those people chose of their own free will to try to ride a dragon, that's not on Rhaenyra. In the Battle, you could argue that disobeying an overlord would be enough to hate any lord and this is correct and valid except as a way to vilify Rhaenyra out of all the lords and ladies who, for centuries, have also used commonborn people for their wars. Yes, Rhaenyra is a typical aristocrat in that sense, so why should she be singled out for this specific thing? (This is not to those commonborn, but to those readers and in-story green supporters who would try to say Rhaenyra deserved punishment for this. The commonborn, just like with other lords and vassalages, can and often do, resent lords for lost or disabled relatives from war).

We already saw/see how many came out and fought for her, how they outnumbered those who didn't. (Links to a list of her supporters versus him and what he did--EXCEL SHEET; QUOTE#1 /QUOTE#2; A TUMBLR POST). Don't believe me? Check out this wiki page of the official wiki: The Greens vs the Blacks by the end of the war.

To clarify: going by how many supported Rhaenyra in the actual war, we can surmise that she had way more support than she did without. And I mean "support" by those willing to fight for her whether by the value of oath, to help their own claims, belief in her herself, or all of the above. All the while, you have to also realize that Alicent had to have tried spreading the rumors of Rhaenyra's sons' "bastardy" and Rhaenyra's own "licentiousness"--Borros' comments about her being a bitch and Lucerys her "whelp"--as to ruin her and their reputation and get others to turn against her. Didn't work for most people, evidently.

The reason why the Lannisters and Hightowers (the two main and biggest green supporters aside from Borros/the Baratheons) ever thought to rebel and participate in usurping Rhaenyra was that Viserys allowed an in to the Hightowers by marrying one of their most Faithful, conservative members and having 3 male children with her. And the Lannisters (namely Jason and Tyland), while they definitely thought males were better were not as invested in supporting the greens as far as they could capitalize on their win (and for Tyland, safety, as he was in the castle when it all went down). Rhaenyra had already rejected Jason Lannister in the show while Viserys ignored Jason as a potential husband for her in the book/original lore, so the Lannisters chose a different avenue to influence in the royal family and power. They were all so emboldened partially because they had dragonriders on their side: Aemond, Aegon, and even Helaena if they ever made the excuse to put her out there (though I seriously doubt they would) plus the hightowers' resources and influence.

Finally, when we asses why people would not "respect" Rhaenyra's rule or her heirs' vs why sometimes men and their male heirs' are not "respected" throughout "Westerosi" history, there is a clear difference. If we went back to TWoIaF, there are many examples of men and their male heirs usurped or not "respected" and killed because they were physically weak, too young, weakminded, outmatched, unlucky, etc. They were generally never killed because they turned down an offer of marriage that would benefit their spouse more or just because they were women and seen as unfit based on that alone (the first one is a society woman's plight). Meanwhile, women receive more socially sanctioned sexual or turned-up regular violence, or simply those surrounding them decided they'd rather be led by an invited male--even those men who were a past-enemy/conqueror--than have a woman/girl from the past male ruler's direct relation rule in her own right: Agnes Blackwood; Argella Durrandon; those women that Ronard the Bastard "claimed" from those he conquered; Gerold III Lannister's unnamed daughter who married Joffrey Lydden, the first Andal to rule the Rock and like Orys took his wife's name as to continue that lineage but still would overrule her; Arlan III the Storm King offered to have Roderick Blackwwod's daughter/his own good-daughter Shiera to rule with him jointly after his conquest of that part of the Riverlands, but the lords protested and said they'd rather have him than a girl so that he just added these lands to his own Duurandon domains and it ceased to be "Riverland" for a time. One can check out why this happens more often HERE, by mononijikayu. You can't choose when and where history matters and when cultural/societal ideologies matter in how they shape the present.

"Love" is not that accurate, but they would feel happy that the threat against them was gone, yeah.

Daemon was admired by more people in or around King's Landing than anywhere else, where he has a less than illustrious reputation and has many people fear him the farther you go, because they wouldn't have actually seen or met him before then. At the same time, I also think many young boys out of the Crownlands also wanted to be Daemon from that same reputation of military prowess and ruthlessness, to have that fame and nortierity.

So "love" must be defined.

*EDIT (5/31/24):

Doyistically

Rhaenyra suffers from really bad sexist writing on GRRM's, not just the maesters', part and it undermines his own point.* And no, she doesn't need to be necessarily "moral" like Dany to be a deserving ruler.

The point of her story was to highlight how no matter how good or evil or morally ambiguous a person you are, if you are female, you are subject to losing a power men are just granted. Or usurped. And this is inherently wrong. Rhaenyra chose to go to war rather than give up. This is valuable. Visenya was not thinking "for the realm" or for the benefit of smallfolk or outside of her family, yet she as so many fans bc she was not passive or restricted by "madness". She has less sexist writing. So it makes sesne for people to dislike a character who doesn't even "make up" for her lack of focus on innocents or smallfolk with being strategic, or something, but there are also still critiques I have.

...................................................................

Watsonianly

Anon, must you be this way? (They are responding to this post, definitely.)

Whether it is the show or the book, the central conflict remains the same: Rhaenyra, the named heir, is usurped, whether by Otto or by her stepmother Alicent. And her gender is used.

A)

You: "there ARe already factors against her: her gender and rumors about her children. Her tyranny and inability to strategize just add to a pile of arguments why she shouldn't have been an ruler."

So you think that because Rhaenyra is a woman, she already should not have ascended, even before her last days of tyranny-brought-on-by-paranoia/grief/percieved-loss-of-control? Reminder, you then say: "Her tyranny and inability to strategize just add to a pile of arguments why she shouldn't have been an ruler."

Meaning that for you, the prime reason why she should not have ruled and was opposed was that she was not only a woman, but a woman who did not obey the societal gendered principle of female chastity. To you, she did not deserve to rule because she had a vagina and because she didn't use it well or let it be used as Viserys and Corlys wanted to use it, is that it? She was "loose", "unruly", & a "disobedient"?

B)

You: "Aegon had a claim, he had some strength of will and support of wealthy houses. Yes, he was a shitty person but his benefits counterbalance them. Rhaenyra had ONLY minuses. She was a shitty person and a bad ruler."

I find it funny how you totally discount Alicent and the greens' misogyny or think it is their right to have their mindset as it existed: misogynist--internalized or not. But of course, by what you already wrote above, you share their beliefs, so of course Rhaenyra is the true evil in this story to you.

1.

Aegon was a rapist since his early teens. He "fondled" servants, and before you go "but that was it!", no it definitely wasn't. That's not how people with political power over others sexually invade others' spaces act, they do not restrain themselves from going further. Aegon the Elder is a prince and the eldest male. His victims were all nonnoble women and girls. At the time before his coronation when he was, he was with a 12-13-year-old (even by Westerosi conceptions of adulthood vs childhood, this girl would be considered a minor), which Septon Eustace doesn't deny whatsoever.

He also would have mutilated a child (his nephew Aegon III) to force Rhaenyra's many supporters who still opposed him, even after her death. (Links to a list of her supporters versus him and what he did--EXCEL SHEET; QUOTE#1 /QUOTE#2; Twitter thread). The 10-year-old boy, who he in no way saw as his family, kin, etc. He, along with Aemond, bullied the V boys since their childhood because Alicent taught them that the V boys were, in comparison to themselves and any child born from a marriage, inherently lesser. Aegon's belief in his own claim stems from the fact that he has a penis, his mom imparted such all his life, and that the larger society around him is already sexist to keep women from positions of power.

Is all this not evil, or do you think it "natural", anon? As how you already wrote, yes you think it's natural, and it's natural because it is a man doing it. Men are "naturally" more entitled to perform violence against those perceived or actually weaker than them, because men are always right and they are "naturally" aggressive, huh?

And where and when did he display actual political acumen? Where did he ever perform true leadership that benefited anyone other than himself? Why are you so forgiving of him and push the onus and obligation of "being a good ruler" onto Rhaenyra alone?

Meanwhile, he would later die by his own men poisoning him, and why? Because he would not leave well enough alone and insisted on killing every single house/person that sided with Rhaenyra instead of treating, as Corlys advised. And because he threatened Baela (his cousin)'s life against Corlys...the same guy whose ships surrounded KL and did much damage to the greens by the said blockade.

So if you try to argue that he only would have mutilated his nephew because he was hurt and aggrieved, no, he had a long disdain and lack of care for any of Rhaenyra's side/family and anything to do with her. the ease with which he accepted Alicent's suggestion to mutilate Aegon III doesn't just come from cowardly fear, but real and true hate for him. We need to remember that he forced the kid to watch as Rhaenyra, the boy's mother, was set aflame and maybe eaten by Sunfyre. He didn't have to, but he did, with pleasure.

And what about Daemon and B&C, you may counter. I wrote many times (POST#1 - POST#2) how this was also wrong as well as prompted by the long antagonism and teachings of Alicent, which prompted Aemond to justly kill Lucerys during the officially peaceful negotiation. Lucerys did not bait or provoke Aemond; Aemond was the one to do that and fail, thus choosing to run after him and kill him. Daemon is not a good person by any means; but with how the green side preemptively attacked Rhaenyra and her people/children without provocation, it's not that the black side were angels but that they were not the oppressors nor the prime/first attackers. again, why do you express that the standard of good behavior be on the side of the female claimant, and not on the male claimant when the male side is the ones to attack the other preemptively even before the male claimant was old enough to really form a confidently discernable personality?

In fact, I already wrote much of what you say about Aegon HERE. I argue against the idea that his councilors would have had and had control over him in that post, so if that's what you're getting at, you're dead wrong.

If none of what I say about Aegon the Elder raping and freely willing to murder his own sister BEFORE her official surrender, having to be held back by his mother and wife--just barely--and threatening to lock up or kill his councilors, even yelling at Otto (his grandfather and the person who was actually helping him out before he himself dismissed him for Criston Cole of all people!) constitutes as him being an uncontrollable menace to not only broader Westeros but his own family, I don't know what else to tell you but that you have eyes but you can't see.

2.

I speak on this part here, "Aegon had a claim".

So did Rhaenyra. Apart from Viserys publicly naming her as his heir and never wavering at all from it and despite what you say about Rhaenyra not deserving the throne (even before she marries or has Daemon) due to her having a vagina and gendered "woman", even in Westeros, there are precedents and past/present examples of accepted female leaders, inheritors, and rulers--nonroyal. The difference is that more often these women were either not official leaders/inheritors of power because they were mother-"regents". And some were women given to rule semi-autonomously after no other male close relative was available: Rohanne Webber inherited the house seat, but she would have lost official rights to it if she had not married a "suitable" man as stated by her father's will. Then there are those women with no hanging testament placing conditions on their autonomous rule, like Jeyne Arryn and Lyanna Mormont and Rhea Royce.

Women/girls in Westeros, ABSOLUTELY have had and continue to claim power and inheritances. It seems you prefer it to go the traditional route: them having power only on the condition of no other males AND/OR by their father's/predecessor's permission and terms.

Here is a link to a post I did about Rhaenyra vs Alicent in the show alone. Scroll down to Section F's #5, where I talk about the Widow's Law and how that also supports Rhaenyra's claim--which she absolutely does have. And here is another post/reblog explaining, even more, the context and details of the Widow's Law, and how it relates to Rhaenyra and her claim.

C)

You: "All Black strength was in her allies, not hers. Why would an average reader root for Rhaenyra?"

As with many kings and princes and lords, one doesn't have to be physically strong or even mentally sane to be bestowed or gain power in a feudal context. If you hate that, take it up with human history and the human desire for power to abuse.

If we continue to explore the world of ASoIaF and see that there is literally no way out of this medieval/feudal setting but a total raze of the system itself or gradual economic/sociopolitical change, then we must consider how the world itself creates/allows contemptible or incompetent people of any measure into power over much. If this world allows people like Aegon IV, Maegor I, Robert Baratheon, Aenys II, etc--all men--to rule because of lineage and/or conquest, then why the sudden hate for when a woman maybe does/is these things?

The "average reader" roots for Rhaenyra:

Misogyny wins and the realm loses its asset against the Long Night because the male Targs disempowered its own female members several times that the dragons died. Rhaenyra's reign would set another precedent for female leadership AND the realm would have had its dragons against the Long Night at least for another generation. brideoffires explains in detail why Rhaenyra's rule is so important HERE.

Even without knowledge of ASoIaF, you shouldn't look at how misogyny undid Rhaenyra and go, "Of course it is the woman's fault that she lost more than anything else!"

D)

You: "Inagine that Creagn had arrived earlier, would have KG citizens accepted her back?""

1.

Did they actually accept Aegon the Elder, or was his coronation a hasty affair that they also accepted because all they wanted was a ruler? Where was it said that the common folk actually loved Aegon, this boy they never saw or interacted with all their lives except if they are a sex worker or a servant girl, or a "rich merchant's daughter"?

And weren't there common people who also defied Aegon the Elder when he finally entered KL because the Shepherd incited them to? Aegon personally burned some in public, anon, you think the common-borns loved him, and if so universally? Where does this idea of contemporary people liking Aegon come from?

Where do you think all those servant girls and that 12-year-old merchant's daughter came from anon? They didn't spring up out of nowhere, they are also commoners. Would they or any woman/girl "accept" Aegon? And they also have families and communities who would not look at Aegon favorably for his raping or proximity to their daughters. Would they "accept" Aegon if they had choice and had all the info?

But of course, women don't count as people, much less as part of a class or group or community, so I guess we'll have to think just like you, anon.

2.

In a feudal monarchial state, the subjects-- can hate and even rebel or riot against their monarch, but that's usually when they were organized enough to do so AND are convinced/learn and believe through some sort of education or persuasion that is the correct course. The common-borns of KL were not a truly organized party or group.

For Rhaenyra, you're forgetting/ignoring that the rioters rioted because the Shepherd and Larys incited them with rumors and by blaming dragons as evil creatures. Each party had its agenda against Rhaenyra, and the rioters had been afraid that Aegon or Aemond would come back and roast them all to retake KL, as well as hating the new taxes.

I rhetorically ask you, imagine if there had been no Shepherd, or Larys really left KL or died. Would the commonborn of KL have rioted against Rhaenyra or even think to try to tear down the Dragonpit without these two?

The greens depleted the treasury intentionally to make the very problem she had in KL AND Aemond burned down one of the major suppliers of food in Westeros' "south" regions: the riverlands and esp their farmer's villages and fields. And the Tyrells remained neutral in the bulk of the war because their lord was a child (the Reach seems the number one supplier of grains, vegetables, and especially fruits) and the Hightowers were their "neighbors", who probably would have also tried to block their hypothetical efforts to send food and supplies to Rhaenyra in KL.

The common-born would "accept" any ruler that made sure they were fed and all, but they also wouldn't necessarily rebel because of the forces any noble/royal has. That's feudalism.

Again, why is it that Rhaenyra has such an eye on her, a censure against her?

*EDIT* (8/21/23):

THIS is a great post by @mononijikayu about medieval queens, female rulers, the history of how women in leadership positions were made and seen as threats to the very structure of social “order”, and contextualizing Rhaenyra thru Empress Matilda. I didn’t even know about Matilda’s husband being comparable to Rhaneyra’s Daemon! PLZ READ!!!!

Excerpt:

Fire and Blood, by GRRM, pg 555-557

[Aegon II after Rhaenyra’s Death and her Supporters]

Fire and Blood, by George R.R. Martin, pg 430-431