#marriage in westeros

[death-of-cats]

okay I know Westerosi marriage customs are fucked seven ways but

surely this HAS to be Stannis's personal misogyny, and not general Westerosi opinion, right? Asha's "marriage" just can't be accepted as real by the rest of society, right?

like i get that mutual consent is not a requirement, that's been established in the books by precedent. But a marriage that lacks consent AND the bride never said the vows AND was never consummated AND lacks religious legitimation (both among the ironborn and the rest of Westeros) AND lacks secular legitimation (again, who outside of the Iron Islands is gonna think Euron is a legitimate ruler? surely not Stannis) wouldn't be accepted by the rest of the noble houses, right? otherwise just, what are we doing. a clown car version of a social institution.

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

Hi, I was wondering if you could answer a question I had about how much authority a lord has over his extended family members. Like if a lord wants to marry off one of his brother’s daughters, can he do so even if his brother refuses to agree? Who holds the most authority in a situation like that? Does it change depending on the status of the lord in question- like if he was a king, lord paramount or someone from a great house rather than a more typical lord?

Again re feudalism, a lord has as much authority as his vassals allow him, and vassals include family members. (And "allow" includes what they feel they must do per traditions and societal pressures.) Look at how Hoster Tully tried to marry off his brother Brynden to Bethany Redwyne. Brynden refused, and though this pissed off Hoster and strained his relationship with his brother, that's how he left it. A more cruel lord, who loved his brother less and his status more, might use more pressure to get his way. Lords are not bound by any law or custom to support their family members, so in the case you mention, that lord might then tell his brother "fine, then, you and your daughters have to leave". And faced with having to make his own way in the world while supporting his girls, the brother might bow his head and submit. Or maybe he would decide to be a hedge knight after all, or maybe he'd have in-laws he could look to for support, it all depends.

Though again re feudalism (because the feudal contract goes both ways), theoretically this brother could try to go over his lord brother's head and appeal to their overlord. See for example Lord Wyman Webber, who when faced with a daughter, Rohanne, who refused to marry per his command, instead wrote a will that said she had to marry within two years of his death or the lordship and the castle of Coldmoat would go to her cousin instead. It was asked within the story, couldn't Lady Rohanne appeal to her overlord, Lord Rowan, and have him override the will? Well, she tried, but that Webber cousin just happened to be married to Lord Rowan's sister, and so he upheld the will. But maybe in a different situation something could be done -- perhaps the overlord is known to be particularly noble, or perhaps this pressured brother has a connection to the overlord (maybe via his wife, maybe they were companions in battle or as squires). But still, the brother would have to take his daughter with him during this appeal, or he might return to find out she's been married off in his absence.

And as for the girl herself, could she not refuse? Even if she's underage, isn't it true, as Sansa thinks, "Not even the High Septon himself could declare a woman married if she refused to say the vows"? Well, we have Sansa's own example, where when she was faced with marrying Tyrion, Cersei told her she could be dragged to the altar and make a spectacle to be laughed at but they'd still make her do it anyway... and so Sansa submitted and said the vows. See also how Randyll Tarly forced his son Sam to join the Night's Watch. Sam didn't have to submit, there is no law saying he had to obey, but his father threatened to kill him if he didn't, and due to Sam's experience with his father's abuse (and what that abuse did to his personality), he fully believed him. Someone once asked me if an overlord could help there (though weirdly they mentioned Stannis, who wouldn't be able to do anything even if he wanted to), and the point I had to explain was that Sam was so beaten down by the abuse he never would have even considered going over his father's head, even if he could have somehow escaped his father's guards on the way north.

So with these examples, you can see where the status of the lord in question may change things -- a king, for example, has no overlords to appeal to. A lord paramount's brother could only appeal to the king. This status also changes what pressure the lord can bring to bear -- a very small lord may only have a sworn sword to threaten his brother with, a bigger lord could have a whole garrison, and the king would have not just the Kingsguard and the castle guard and the city guard but theoretically every lord and soldier in the country to use as pressure. Again, feudalism works both ways.

And generally none of this is even stated aloud. Everybody just knows the answer to "you and what army?" and so even family members understand what their lord pressuring them means. (Girls particularly innately understand this, along with patriarchal pressure; like Roslin Frey had no real choice at the Red Wedding but to obey her father, brothers, uncles, and cousins.) So, like so many things in ASOIAF's medieval-inspired era, the personal is the political. Only the personalities of the people involved, and their means of pressure or access routes to escape, are what truly defines what can happen in cases like this.

[throwawayasoiafaccount]

comparing elia martell to princess diana is kinda insane

cause the real princess diana of westeros was rhaegar

[asongofstarkandtargaryen]

I know most in this fandom consider Ned x Cat boring, however Catelyn thinking Ned as the rock her life was built on and also her final thought being about Ned really slap so hard!

[atopvisenyashill]

my hot take of the day is that clearly the people who swallow the in universe targ & valyrian exceptionalism are being completely taken in by the exact system that george is trying to critique but also i think the people who over correct into this idea that not a single targaryen is worthy of like, our empathy or sorrow or are rightfully chafing against the structures put in place by valyrians, first men, and andals alike are also being incredibly 2d in their analysis. i feel like this happens most often when people try to make the case that andals are somehow oppressed in westerosi society on a cultural level simply bc valyrian supremacy trumps andal culture. i think this is incredibly silly to say or posit as the truth in universe because there is in fact some oppression of culture in westeros but it’s not the andals lol!!! it’s the first men, the dornish, the rhoynar/greenblood orphans, and the ironborn. there Is some level of,,,, idk bigotry/xenophobia towards valyrians but only valyrians who don’t worship the faith - people like larra rogare, who still follow valyrian gods, do face this bigotry because they’re Too Foreign, the same way someone like thoros, melisandre, taena, etc who are essosi but not from a still heavy valyrian-based society like volantis and lys, and that’s definitely important to the conversation, because it shows the Dominant Culture is in fact the Andal culture when it comes to westeros and that’s like,,, fine, and even more interesting to me to see how andals, who have been the dominant force on westeros for thousands of years, interact with valyrians, who clearly want to keep ideas of valyrian supremacy alive somehow and essentially try to get the other dominant force in westeros to buy in (which they do!). like, are these two at odds sometimes? yes! but i don’t think it’s correct to say that the andals face ~prejudice for being andals or followers of the faith either!

[asoiaf-bambii]

𝔐arriage 𝔦n 𝔚esteros

MARRIAGE:

A marriage is a legally or formally recognised union, typically between two people. In most cases, it is a religious ceremony between one man and one woman who should not be more closely related than first cousins. The union involves the exchange of vows in the presence of sacred witnesses, such as a septon (for the Faith of the Seven), a heart tree (for the old gods), or a priest or priestess (for the Drowned God). The ceremony is followed by a feast where the bride and groom celebrate with their guests. The event concludes with the bedding, during which the marriage is consummated.

WEDDING CEREMONIES:

In Westeros, the wedding ceremony is a religious affair. The bride's father, or someone standing in for him, escorts the bride to her future husband and those officiating the marriage.

⋆ ─ Faith of the Seven: A septon presides over the ceremony, which includes prayers, vows, and singing, and takes place in a sept. The bride wears a maiden’s cloak in her house’s colours. The bride's father, or his representative, removes her cloak, allowing her husband to drape a cloak in his own house colours over her shoulders. This act symbolizes the bride’s transition from her father’s protection to her husband’s. The bride and groom then exchange vows, with the septon declaring them man and wife, proclaiming they are "one flesh, one heart, one soul, now and forever."

⋆ ─ Old Gods: The ceremonies are much shorter and involve no priests. The bride is escorted to her groom, who waits in front of the weirwood tree in the godswood. A ceremonial exchange follows, confirming the identities of the bride, the groom, and the person giving the bride away. The bride is asked to accept her husband, and upon her agreement ("I take this man"), the couple joins hands, kneels before the heart tree, and bows their heads as a sign of submission. After a moment of silent prayer, the couple rises, and the groom removes the maiden's cloak, placing his own cloak around the bride's shoulders. He then carries her to the feast in his arms. Some northmen believe that snow on a wedding day foretells a cold marriage.

CONSUMMATION:

In Westeros, the bedding occurs after the feast. The bride is escorted to her bedroom, often by the male guests, who undress her along the way while making crude jokes. The women at the feast perform the same for the groom. Once the bride and groom are in the bedchamber, they are typically left alone, though guests may gather outside the door, shouting suggestions. In some cases, witnesses may be present for the bedding, but the extent of their involvement remains unclear.

Women, especially noblewomen, are generally expected to be virgins on their wedding night. After some weddings, the bedsheets are displayed to show blood, proving the bride's virginity.

Although it is rare for a marriage to take place before the bride has had her first flowering, it does occasionally happen. However, bedding a bride so young is considered perverse.

Lords in Westeros once held the right to the first night, allowing them to bed newly-wed women before their husbands. Queen Alysanne persuaded King Jaehaerys I to abolish this practice, but it continues illegally in some parts of the North.

DIVORCE:

Vows spoken at swordpoint are not considered valid, and in theory, a marriage can not be declared if either person refuses to say the vows. However, issues of consent can still arise even when the vows are willingly spoken. In cases where lands are at stake, a lord might still claim the marriage as legal, even if it occurred under duress.

In the religion of the Drowned God, it is possible for someone to be married by proxy, without their consent, or personally saying the vows. However, if the marriage has not been consummated, it can easily be annulled.

In the Seven Kingdoms, marriages can be ended in various ways. A king has the authority to set aside his queen, even if she has borne him children, in favour of marrying another.

Under the Faith of the Seven, a marriage that has not been consummated can be annulled by the High Septon or a Council of Faith. Even if the marriage has been consummated, it can still be annulled, regardless of its length or whether children are involved. An annulment can be granted in the absence of either spouse, though it must be requested by at least one of them. The exact procedures of a Council of Faith remain undefined.

Another way to end a marriage is for the bride to join the Silent Sisters. Similarly, when a man takes the vows of the Night's Watch, his marriage is considered null and void.

POLYGAMY:

Before the Andals arrived in Westeros, Garland II Gardener, a King of the Reach known as the Bridegroom, had multiple wives. To marry the daughter of Lord Lymond Hightower, he set aside his other wives. According to the songs, Ronard Storm, a Storm King, had twenty-three wives.

Followers of the Drowned God may have only one rock wife, with whom they have trueborn children, but they are permitted to take multiple salt wives. Children born of salt wives are not considered bastards and can inherit if there are no heirs from the rock wife.

⋆ ─ All my information comes from the A Wiki of Ice and Fire page!

[fromstormsend]

Both Garlan and Gendry are Renly's ghosts and both of them have apple symbols in their love affairs. Garlan's wife Leonette is from House Fossoway which has an apple on its sigil and Arya threw crabapple to Gendry's head.

[therealslimshakespeare]

Ok ok, plot and fic tangles are plentiful in my mind but the ending episode did suggest Prince Aemond got himself engaged to a Baratheon, yes? If that had worked out sans-Alys: I’ve got thots. Anyone written this? I’ve most particularly got thots about a member of House Baratheon finally mounting a damn dragon

…no not like that. Not just like that. Only partly like that…

[is-lu-for-everyone]

Thinking about Catelyn and Cersei and names. Thinking about Catelyn Tully and Catelyn Stark and both of them, and thinking about Cersei Lannister , only Lannister.

Thinking about Lady Stark and Hoster Tully's daughter. Thinking about Queen Cersei and Tywin Lannister's daughter.

I don't remember ever reading Cersei Baratheon the way I remember reading Catelyn Stark.

And probably is a thing about queens not taking their husband's names. Is about Cersei Lannister and Alicent Hightower and Margaery Tyrell.

Maybe is just that, the queen doesn't take the King's name. The Queen is the queen and part of the King but not quite.

But my brain thinks about Catelyn Tully and Catelyn Stark and thinks about Cersei Lannister, just Lannister.

I think about Catelyn Tully mother of wolves and Catelyn Stark daughter of the riverlands. I think about Cersei Lannister daughter of lions and mother of lions, Cersei Lannister who was never a Baratheon, not like Catelyn became a Stark.

Thinking about Olenna Tyrell, who once was Olenna Redwyne but she is mostly Tyrell now, because she made it that way, because that is her family, and she made the best out of the name. Thinking about Alicent Hightower, another Queen, one had taken back the green colors of her house, whose children were Targaryen in name but she never was, too much of an outsider to be one . Thinking about Lysa Arryn, more Arryn than Tully, confined, betrayed, as she was, alone all the way up in the Eyrie..

Thinking about many things i cant put words on, about Cersei Lannister, never a Baratheon, who could have been Cersei Baratheon if things were kinder, better, if Robert was better and she was too.

Thinking about Catelyn who was a Tully and was a Stark and had family in both names. Thinking about the Sept and the septa for her daughters, thinking about her in the Godswood even when she doesn't quite like it but does so for her husband.

Thinking about Cersei Lannister and just Lannister, who has just one family that is not quite family. Thinking about how she was not a Baratheon and didn't want to be one, and so she turned the Red Keep into another lion's den.

I haven't read the books in a while, but maybe is just my mind who can't think of Cersei as a Baratheon the way I can think of Catelyn as a Stark.

Either way, I'm thinking about Catelyn and Cersei and names.

[fruitageoforanges]

aemond & aegon's valyrian wedding, with helaena officiating, from my fic.

(please zoom in for more detail! there are a lot of details, for example, the handfasting binding is embroidered with vhagar and sunfyre!)

[horizon-verizon]

Alicent provided House Targaryen with four healthy dragonriding Targaryens when the Targaryen bloodline was most vulnerable. In return, the least the Targaryens could do is allow her son to ascend the throne to allow House Hightower to have more power in exchange for them helping to create four healthy Targaryens. It’s really weird how Viserys referred to Aegon as Otto’s blood and Rhaenyra as his own blood when Aegon is also his child and therefore his blood.

The Hightowers behaved like any other family married into the royal family would, so I don’t get why they’re so hated. If Viserys didn’t want the Hightowers gaining more influence then he shouldn’t have married Alicent in the first place. It was stupid of him to expect one of the most powerful noble houses in Westeros to accept Targaryens of their blood just being spares instead of kings.

Disclaimer:

The parts about explaining feudalism is supposed to recontextualize how the hierarchy is not itself based on a good ethics system or fair/good morals, not to justify said hierarchy.

The system (unjustly) does not enforces nor expects the King to be equally sociopolitically or emotionally accountable to his Queen Consort.

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

A)

You make the mistake of thinking that in a feudal society/Westerosi/Andal culture, the King and his house are obligated to do anything for the Queen Consort except to:

not publicly humiliate her (and "humiliate" can look different according to the thing done) -- with Aegon IV, it was an exceptional situation since he targeted Naerys and Aemon simultaneously out of jealousy. As long as the King doesn't disinherit her children (if they are OLDER than his mistress' kids AND those mistress' kids ARE NOT legitimized) he is, by custom, not seen to be doing anything wrong

not deny her access to the appropriate clothing, shelter befitting her station, and food

take care of any child she brings forth

In feudal societies, the Queen Consort’s “job” is to provide heirs and like everyone else in the kingdom, she has to obey her husband’s orders. She is subject to him, she has no privileges or rights over him. 

The King/Monarch is always the legal/official/customary authority over literally everyone else. This is not a democracy nor an oligarchy. 

Therefore, it is actually Alicent who customarily should obey Viserys’ commands and declarations. That is her place in this hierarchy. *EDIT 12/16/24* The "law of the land" is not as solid over a monarch's head/word of law, and she knows that or no one would be pursuing kingship! *END OF EDIT*

You may think this is unfair (it obviously is), but:

Alicent was definitely a victim of her father & Viserys, but she blames the wrong person for it (Rhaenyra) bc the answer is to totally buy into the sexist and authoritarian ideals against female sexual and other sorts of autonomy--as Alicent fails into & chooses to perpetuate.

That is feudalism (the economic-socio-political system) AND absolute monarchy (the form of government). Again, she's fallen, then chooses, to sincerely buy into this system partially bc she has no choice but she also is much too inflexible to reflect on how she's essentially hurting herself and those around her or performing a sort of self fulfilling prophecy. That was the entire point! Alicen tis not unique, too, in how the patriarchal feudal system uses her up! Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, etc, too!

@rhaenyragendereuphoria states it quite simply HERE:

Feudalism is a system of servitude based on giving up your freedom in exchange of protection by a higher lord. It binds serfs to their lords, and lords to other lords all the way to the king. Yes, the whole “Protector of the Realm” is propaganda, but it’s what they believe the job of the king to be. They will give it to the strongest who can protect them from foreign invasions: and it’s hard to think of stronger than “family that literally owns dragons”. This fandom has feudal mentality completely upside down, thinking they loathe their subjugation because subjugation is an affront to freedom. Feudalism IS subjugation. What they loathe is to submit to a weakling. They despise (and hunt, and murder) the Free Folk, calling them “wildlings”, because they’d rather be free than be bound by feudal oaths of subjugation. Feudalism is the rule of “might makes right”. At its roots, it’s a military hierarchy of warlords who bind each others with feeble and fickle treaties until one of them decides to break them and attempt to conquer the others, and either wins or fails.

And in this POST:

However, no one is given rights in these societies, not even men - not the way we would define rights. Their idea of “right” is just as arbitrary as their idea of “freedom”. They are societies based on privileges, and privileges are always revocable, unlike rights.

Alicent has no independent “rights” apart from what I already listed above. At all. Especially since she isn't blood-related to Viserys. Rhaenyra has a birthright, but only once Viserys bestows it upon her. 

Alysanne was a Queen Consort, not a Queen Regnant. Visenya & Rhaenys had more law-changing power than Alysanne did while being Consorts and not Regnant Queens, but Aegon’s word was final and he was the Monarch.

And all these women were the sisters of the then-Kings as well as their wives. You’d think that they would have more say, but no. They were (publicly) defer to their husband-kings' final words by Andal/feudal/monarchial custom and law.

There is no contract where it says that Viserys owes Alicent or the Hightowers -- all of them his subjects -- anything except military protection. This is feudalist absolute monarchy as GRRM sets it up and models after the common set up of real life feudal monarchies.

B)

You:

Alicent provided House Targaryen with four healthy dragonriding Targaryens when the Targaryen bloodline was most vulnerable.

Already addressed what a Consort’s repeated purpose is. 

a.

And when was this dynasty “most vulnerable”? By all accounts, Viserys’ court and reign was prosperous and peaceful (expect with the Stepstones and towards the end of his reign with Rhaenyra, Alicent, and their kids of course -- but the Stepstones war didn’t affect the actual subjects [peasant or nobles] of Westeros too much to make huge differences in and the stuff with his personal family happened insularly):

Many consider the reign of King Viserys I to represent the apex of Targaryen power in Westeros. Beyond a doubt, there were more lords and princes claiming the blood of the dragon than at any period before or since. Though the Targaryens had continued their traditional practice of marrying brother to sister, uncle to niece, and cousin to cousin wherever possible, there had also been important matches outside the royal family, the fruit of which would play important roles in the war to come. There were more dragons than ever before as well, and several of the she-dragons were regularly producing clutches of eggs.

[...]

The reign of the Young King, as the commons called him upon his ascent, was peaceful and prosperous. His Grace’s open-handedness was legendary, and the Red Keep became a place of song and splendor. King Viserys and Queen Aemma hosted many a feast and tourney, and lavished gold, offices, and honors on their favorites.

(“A Question of Succession”)

b.

If you mean Viserys having a girl as his only scion, I must remind you that:

the Targs had dragons (more dragons than ever and Aegon I/Visenya/Rhaenys, conquered Westeros with only 3)

there were no mentioned, burgeoning signs of rebellion against Rhaenyra until Alicent and Otto started to make waves (post by @theblackqveen)

While this is in the text:

Though Princess Rhaenyra had been proclaimed her father’s successor, there were many in the realm, at court and beyond it, who still hoped that Viserys might father a male heir, for the Young King was not yet thirty.

After Viserys makes it clear that he won’t change his mind, it gets more settled, and again, we hear absolutely no mention of any real attempt to prepare against Rhaenyra except from the greens, or Rhaenyra's brothers, Alicent, and Otto and whatever nameless lackeys at court they used.

I wrote a 2 posts on HotD Alicent and Book!Alicent’s foolishness and narcissism.

c.

THIS is what GRRM says about laws of succession:

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 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.

Still, if Alicent really is all about just following the rules and being “good” and sticks to her conservative background, then she would follow her husband’s order and not antagonize or contradict Rhaenyra. Because part of her Westerosi/Andal customs is that the King/Monarch is paramount and their word is law. *EDIT 12/16/24* But this is a critique of the argument of how Alicent tries to justify herself against Rhaenyra, and I do recognize her position as a woman who lived her entire life thinking that the woman who births boys "wins", that she'd feel affronted at being blocked from getting the one win women don't really get or one of the few granted to them....that's no excuse for child mutilation, "beefing" with another child, covering for rapist-sons, covering for kin-slaying sons, sending her disabled 8-19 yr old granddaughter out to kill another child, etc. Like, Rhaenyra is not an angel and she also def leverages her power as a queen against a child; while her losing several children is not an excuse for that plus she herself has never been as smallfolk-forward or politically radical, we do know that if she had ruled, there would not have been a war like the one we got nor any war most likely AND there would have been some good in her setting a political precedent for female rulers exisitng as worthier rulers. What happens w/Alicent bein Queen Consort and er son bein Kin? More of the exact same phenonmenon. So it's difficult to feel much sympathy on my end, esp when she didn't and wouldn't have lost much if Rhaenyra ruled but Rhaenyra more liekly would have had to fear moves from the greens bc the greens would be creating the enemies they'd have to kill off later as they were and always had been the usurping entities.*END OF EDIT*

She hypocritically doesn’t follow the law to such a particular "degree" or whatever that she ends up going against the authoritarian regime's ideals of King's rule and all that for her own stake...mostly unconciously.

So really, she’s really about power and misogyny at a unique level since she chooses to still make her rapist son King and reap the rewards from his ascendance (who’d follow along for her and her house’s interests more than Rhaenyra would). In the show, she goes after Rhaenyra for presumably sleeping with a man not her husband....while she gives up her feet to fulfill Larys' sexual titillation in exchange for information. So Rhaenyra's sleeping with another man in a consensual setting is wrong, but somehow Alicent allowing herself to be used (she is Queen Consort, she can definitely order Larys around) and silencing one of her son's victims is okay? Both of these things that support sexual abuse?

In the book, she turns against Rhaenyra when Rhaenyra is 10, and we can see the implication that they began to actually fight ever since then, so Alicent antagonizes a 10 year old. At the tourney where Daemon comes back in the book, there were Essosi people who witnessed the tension between the two.

And why does she do all that? Because she wants to empower herself, her son, and disempower Rhaenyra. At the same time, Alicent fosters an environment where this is justified.

This is why she is hated. Book!her tries to use Rhaenyra having extramarital sex as pretext for deposing her, yet she is the one going against the King’s word when it is obvious he doesn’t give three shits.

@theroguewyrm answers this ASK where the asker breaks down more of Alicent’s hypocrisy:

[...] Alicent as she has constantly held Rhaenyra accountable for having illegitimate relations with men but when it comes to her she can do it as she cloaks it under the hood of duty. The hypocrisy was also shown when Alicent tolerates every single sexual crime committed by her son in the premises of the Red Keep and outside. If it is benefitting her then she’ll permit them, she’ll stay quiet, but will simultaneously use Rhaenyra’s affair with Harwin to vilify her.

C)

You: 

It’s really weird how Viserys referred to Aegon as Otto’s blood and Rhaenyra as his own blood when Aegon is also his child and therefore his blood.

That’s because he distrusts Otto and knows Otto wants his grandkids/these green boys to inherit the throne. Otto went so far as to continue to demand/suggest Viserys change the order of succession several times until Viserys dismissed him:

The amity between Her Grace and her stepdaughter had proved short- lived, for both Rhaenyra and Alicent aspired to be the first lady of the realm...and though the queen had given the king not one but two male heirs, Viserys had done nothing to change the order of succession. The Princess of Dragonstone remained his acknowledged heir, with half the lords of Westeros sworn to defend her rights.

[...]

The matter had been decided, so far as King Viserys was concerned; it was not an issue His Grace cared to revisit. Still, questions persisted, not the least from Queen Alicent herself. Loudest amongst her supporters was her father, Ser Otto Hightower, Hand of the King. Pushed too far on the matter, in 109 AC Viserys stripped Ser Otto of his chain of office and named in his place the taciturn Lord of Harrenhal, Lyonel Strong. “This Hand will not hector me,” His Grace proclaimed.

(“A Question of Succession”)

Viserys was being a bad dad here, I agre (unless this is about Aegon deserving to be named King, in which case, no, this is exactly how Viserys should act). Otto was also stupid as fuck for this. Both him and Alicent. And when it comes to feudalism --and most political systems tbh--the personal and the political are one and the same often. Viserys never learned, I think, to separate himself from kingship because the position and society doesn’t allow for this metaphysical existence, or for it to be practiced seriously and without consequences.

And these are the details of Rhaenyra’s naming-as-heir:

Disregarding the precedents set by King Jaehaerys in 92 and the Great Council in 101, Viserys declared his daughter, Rhaenyra, to be his rightful heir, and named her Princess of Dragonstone. In a lavish ceremony at King’s Landing, hundreds of lords did obeisance to the Realm’s Delight as she sat at her father’s feet at the base of the Iron Throne, swearing to honor and defend her right of succession.

(“A Question of Succession”)

Now from a more "pragmatic" standpoint, these lords already gave their oaths to Rhaenyra. To go back on it, while maybe welcome to some lords and others have canonically doen so in canon, would also diminish Viserys’ monarchial word’s value because of how huge the chnages are, and how he seems (publicly) to value oaths in general. 

While Tyland Lannister says that he never took oaths, oaths are still very seriously taken and regarded generally in this society (or like to think of themselves as doing so).

Viserys was not the best dad all the time to all his kids. Doesn't make what Alicent did excusable.

D)

a.

You:

The Hightowers behaved like any other family married into the royal family would, so I don’t get why they’re so hated.

We’re talking about the greens, here, not the Hightowers. Two, though related, separate entities for now.

The greens (Alicent, Otto, Aegon, Aemond, Daeron [Helaena is not a real active player], and any court people who sided with Alicent even if they didn't participate or couldn't during the war) are hated because they are misogynists turned up 11, with an over-inflated sense of their own male privilege. It causes them to maim, rape, cause genocide, attempt assassination against Rhaenyra, even disregard and turn against each other. And at last, make a 10 year old watch as his mother is eaten alive by a dragon. 

*EDIT 12/16/24* Incorrect Statement *END OF EDIT*

BTW, you slipped. Aegon, Aemond, Helaena, and Daeron and the kids from Aegon/Helaena are all Targs. Not Hightowers.

b.

You:

If Viserys didn’t want the Hightowers gaining more influence then he shouldn’t have married Alicent in the first place. It was stupid of him to expect one of the most powerful noble houses in Westeros to accept Targaryens of their blood just being spares instead of kings.  

Here’s the text:

Though Princess Rhaenyra had been proclaimed her father’s successor, there were many in the realm, at court and beyond it, who still hoped that Viserys might father a male heir, for the Young King was not yet thirty. Grand Maester Runciter was the first to urge His Grace to remarry, even suggesting a suitable choice: the Lady Laena Velaryon, who had just turned twelve.

(“A Question of Succession”)

We understand through this and through real life feudal politics that a king/Monarch was expected to have as many kids as possible so that in the event one or some die, the others could take their place.

The moment that Otto allowed Alicent to marry Viserys after Rhaenyra had been heir for 2 years, all of Alicent’s kids would have been “spares”. This would be true if Rhaenyra was male. 

Alicent and Otto both signed up for this, or really they pretended bc they depended on misogyny (them, tradition) toeventually send them to the top. So, I, in better conscience, can never stan if they depend on misogyny to send them forward, similar to when Rhaenyra uses classim and misogynoir against Nettles way later.

However, Rhaenyra is female, so Otto got greedy. It is only the thought that Viserys would automatically change heirs that Otto even contemplated it would be an easy thing to have Alicent’s kids as Viserys’ heirs because he thought Viserys would pass her over.

Take a look at the sociopolitical patterns. This is always the deal/sociopolitical expectation for second wives/Queen Consorts. If the monarch had kids from a first marriage , those kids are always before the ones in the second because they came first/are older.

Viserys makes Rhaenyra continue to be his heir and kinda treats her like he would his male heir in that her siblings remain the “spares” they would be if she were male. Thereby putting into practice equal primogentiure.

Otto has been with Viserys as his hand for years.....why did he not anticipate something like this?

[alaynestcnes]

delulu jonsas living their best life interpreting the text as grrm intended free of any abuser/abused dynamics, child/adult age gaps or eugenic blood purity bs

[throwawayasoiafaccount]

if westeros was created to reflect our modern society instead of being loosely based off of western medieval society, then i think people would understand that these political marriages are for alliances, not love, and would agree that the modern lower class sentiments towards marriage are simply not applicable to these arrangements and both bride and groom cannot and should not expect love from their partner.

if our story occurred in a modern westeros very similar to our own modern society, then a lot of the obstacles our characters face would not happen because, simply put, modern society benefits from equality.

as an example, i am quite (100%) certain that the introduction of gender equality and other modern values and advancements to westeros would only be beneficial to rhaegar and elia, which means that this ideology benefits westerosi society on an individual level.

so, in this modern westeros au, if rhaegar and elia still married for a political alliance, and then had two children like they did in asoiaf, they could then peacefully divorce and write out a contract that secures both rhaenys and aegons inheritances. if lyanna and rhaegar met and fell in love while rhaegar and elia were married then the misunderstanding that sparked a war would never have happened. why? because lyanna would have a say in who she marries in this modern au. also, elia would have possibly been seeing others as well. why? because this was a political marriage and love shouldn’t be expected, so why would anyone be concerned about either party finding love outside of their marriage? plus modern westeros would have dna testing so there’s no reason to question the paternity of their children.

also, if elia had a child with someone else (in this hypothetical scenario, perhaps her lover died) and rhaegar decided to claim that child as his own while knowing that he’s not the real father in order to give this child a better life, then this wouldn’t be a problem either. why? because rhaegar’s in the know. (i’m only bringing this up bc of the rhaenyra and laenor situation. guys… laenor is perfectly aware that biologically those kids aren’t his, yet he still claimed them and loved them bc he and rhaenyra had an agreement. i do not understand why real ppl are even concerned about jace, luke, and joffs parentage. in the eyes of the law those boys are legally laenors.)

however, since asoiaf isn’t based off of our modern society and is instead a society riddled with misogyny, xenophobia and other social issues without the progress and advancements that we in the 21st century have benefited from, i will concede one thing to these antis who harp on and on about how selfish rhaenyra and rhaegar were for loving someone who wasn’t their spouse and for having a child(ren) out of wedlock.

because yes, rhaegar and lyanna’s love can be considered an act of selfishness, and rhaenyra loving harwin and having children with him can also be considered selfish.

but guess what? love in general is a very selfish state of being. you are prioritizing your partner and your desires over everything and everyone else in your life.

one of the greatest love stories of all time, romeo and juliet, is a tale of two selfish lovers who seek to be together despite the immense hatred between their families. selfless and dutiful children would never love an enemy. and yet, despite romeo and juliet’s love story ending in tragedy, no one would ever argue that these two lovers were in the wrong for simply trying to be together even though their love caused their families great grief. why? because the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets was stupid. and the story ends with the characters agreeing that this feud went on for long enough and acknowledging the fact that this petty feud between the families was the cause of their misery and the tragedy that befell them.

though the circumstances of all three love stories are different, it’s undeniable that these lovers were selfish for prioritizing their own desires over their duties to their houses.

to end this little spiel, i’d like to mention that the reason i first brought up a modern au was to remind people that the only reason rhaelya and rhaenyra’s relationship with harwin can be so decisively called selfish is because these characters live in westeros. and westeros is a fucked up society rooted in systematic oppression, violence, and abuse and other forms of exploitation in order to further the agenda of the powerful despite the harm it causes. any modern comforts and progressive ideas hinder the control the patriarchs have over their families and put a name to the bigotry expressed against these unconventional relationships. so yes, their love is selfish because being unconventional in such a backwards society is a recipe for disaster, especially since both of these relationships hinge on a woman deciding to take control of her sexual autonomy, which is a big no no in westeros since a woman’s body only belongs to her father and husband. so yes, these love stories are selfish because these characters are prioritizing themselves in a society that benefits from them losing their autonomy and harms them and their loved ones when they try to take back their autonomy.

to finish off, the reason i brought up the tragic love story of romeo and juliet is to remind people that even though rhaegar and lyanna’s love was selfish, other characters still need to be held accountable for their actions that helped to escalate this misunderstanding into a tragedy that consumed all of westeros.

[unamedica]

Valar Morgulis - Caitvi Westeros AU

Caitlyn couldn’t handle it anymore. “Stay here.” She ordered her handmaidens and she marched out of the great hall. ‘Betrothed to a northerner. How dare she sell me short! I belong to someone of equal plains.’ Even High Garden…a westerling… the Lannisters. Wardens of the west. But to marry someone from the north meant… the lady Cassandra of House Kiramman is offering her armies to them. To stand against King’s Landing and the Targaryen hold.

…but,

An arranged marriage? Had her mother gone mad like the Targaryen King? She would’ve been queen regent of Piltover “The Plains of Westeros” had Aegon the Conqueror not united Westeros. Why can’t Caitlyn choose for herself? In this maddening world where women hardly have a voice of their own. Caitlyn was fortunate to be born from a matrilineal crown. And yet, her family name remains noble (as still stripped of its ancestral royalty).

Her tears chilled on her face when she forcibly pushed the doors open and she stepped outside. Caitlyn nearly ran towards the edge of the wall. Looked out at her castle and untouched lands… before letting out the most blood curdling scream.

“Arrrrrrrgh!” She gripped the battlement wall… tempted. And allowed herself to cry. She was standing next to a wooden crate and quickly stepped onto it. Feeling the stronger winds from being this high up strike her face from the gaps. The walls that kept dragons away, but not the northmen. 

Caitlyn closed her eyes and leaned forward.

“High wall.”

Caitlyn flinched from the stranger’s voice—gripping the brick A woman. Off the side, leaning against the same wall as though she owned this very castle. “Who are you?!” she demanded.

The woman shrugged, wearing an easy smile. She wore commoner-like clothing. A rugged leather garment over a simple cotton tunic. Rugged pants and rider’s boots that looked too worn to be crafted for this woman. A hand-me-down wardrobe? Short cropped hair, with a hack job was swept to the side. But Caitlyn could still see her face. It was young, yet appearing withered from the weather. Northerner. Her eyes matched the winter born on a stormy day. Paralyzing Caitlyn in her place.

“Who are you?” asked the princess, in a much quieter tone. Heir to the golden keys of Braavos, first councilors to the Andals,  and yet she felt as though she should answer to this stranger.

The woman smirked and looked over the wall. She whistled at the great heights. “High wall with an even higher fall if your body makes it past the dragon’s glass ledge.” She held out her hand for the princess to take. “How about you come down from there, and I’ll tell you whatever you want to know.”

Caitlyn balked. “I wasn’t going to jump.” 

“Then step down.” the stranger’s expression was careful. 

“Are you making demands of me?” Caitlyn simply didn’t like the way this stranger was watching her. “Do you know who I am?”

The stranger risked a step closer. “Right now, all I see is an emotional girl standing close to the edge of a 50 meter wall. Higher, if the cliffs count.” She kept her hand out for Caitlyn to grab onto. “I’ve seen men jump from higher for lesser sins. Whatever you’ve done… it’s not worth it. Now, Your Grace, if you will.”

“I’m not a queen.” Caitlyn’s jaw clenched as she glared at the stranger. “We don’t have sovereignty in these lands.” Not until after I marry.

The woman said nothing. And kept her hand outstretched in silence. Caitlyn sighed loudly and accepted the hand. Noting the warmth underneath the roughness. Once on even ground the woman appeared to relax greatly. “Who are you? And how did you get up here? Worthless queensguard. How did you get past them? Are you with Stark bannermen? Does the warden know his commoners sneak off where they’re not wanted?”

“You have a lot of questions, don’t you?” 

Caitlyn wanted to smack off the woman’s smirk. “Who are—” she froze when the woman did a proper bow. 

The stranger’s demeanor immediately shifted into an adopted arrogance. But she made it look… appealing. Handsome. Well practiced, yet well-hidden. She grabbed Caitlyn’s dominant hand and kissed the air above her knuckles. Smiling as though she held the secret to all of Westeros.

“I’m your betrothed, princess.” She straightened, still holding Caitlyn’s hand. “My name is Vi Stark, legitimized in the Light of the Seven, acting warden of the north, and your future wife.”

Caitlyn slowly pulled her hand away and held it against her chest. Seeing a ghost in the eyes of the Northerner, the princess felt… her faith was restored.

[celtigaar]

my base canon for cerys post-dance is she does find viserys, is the one who looks after him, and eventually returns with him to westeros. obv this is a divergence from canon in re to the rogares. while cerys would never, ever knowingly permit the marriage between child viserys and larra, i do think there's room with my version of events for the rogares to still have found some means of ingratiating themselves if the rogare conspiracies are important for anyone's portrayals.

[ladysnows]

me a bigger fan of starks than targs: why haven't these families married into each other yet????