Rhaenyra-Aegon II are different not only because Rhaenyra was crowned, but also because Aegon II was actually deposed and replaced by Rhaenyra for a time. Nobody could force the public or history to count Matilda as an English queen when she was neither properly crowned nor ever properly ruled. but neither he nor his supporters could actually claim that Matilda was ever crowned or ever properly ruled over England. Hence, Henry II could certainly view his mother as the rightful monarch, the queen who should have been, the queen from who he himself drew his claim. After all, Queen Jaehaera is long gone, so Aegon III cannot use her claim to strengthen his own.Īs has been repeatedly said here, the difference here is that King Stephen was never formally deposed, just as Empress Matilda was never properly crowned Queen of England/the English. Daeron the Daring and Aemond's son would both have much stronger claims compared to that. If Aegon III's government would want to defend his claim by highlighting that he is Daemon's son or Aegon II's 'chosen heir' then everything should go down the toilet.

It makes no sense that the Broken King and his followers are not going the strengthen his claim by pointing out that he is the son of Queen Rhaenyra to counter the stronger claims (if you go by male line) of the Daerons and Aemond's son. Those fake Daerons are likely to rebel during his reign, just as his reign is going to see the end of Alys Rivers and Aemond's son - who most likely will be more severe challengers to his rule, especially if they have a dragon of their own. In what way convenient? Aegon III must have hated his evil uncle, he defended his late mother to the last, and he ascended the throne over the dead body of his uncle, after that uncle had suffered a crushing defeat in the field and was left with effectively no supporters whatsoever.Įverybody would have fallen over themselves to forget 'the reign' of Aegon the Dead, and for Aegon III and Viserys it would have been more than just inconvenient to forget the queenship of their martyred mother.Īnd as I said - it seems the sleeping dogs will be wide awake during Aegon III's reign. In that sense, official chronicles should duly mention Aegon II as successor to Viserys I (through usurpation), Rhaenyra as successor of Aegon II after she deposed him, Aegon II as successor of Rhaenyra after he was restored to the throne after her death, and Aegon III as successor of Aegon II after Aegon II was murdered in the wake of his final defeat in the field. Rather they should (and likely would) have put Rhaenyra at his side as a queen whose claim was equally strong, so that the question who 'the true monarch' was couldn't be answered conclusively.Īlthough they would all be of the opinion that Rhaenyra was the rightful queen since she was named heir by King Viserys I and she was the person from whom they all inherited their claim. the issue is not so much that Aegon III and his successors should have erased Aegon II's kingship.

Chances that the Black houses will turn against him during his own reign are pretty slim, too, nor will the Lannisters or Hightowers turn against him now that (1) Alyn Velaryon's fleet has helped Johanna Lannister enact her vengeance against the Ironborn, and (2) Rhaena Targaryen is going to marry Garmund Hightower (not to mention that Alyn Velaryon and Lyonel Hightower are already close friends).īut as has been pointed out repeatedly. But that's the thing - he didn't need any Greens nor did he get much from them throughout the Regency era (or they from him - Tyland even refused the Lannisters aid against the Ironborn).

Lord varys wake the dragon