#zaltys

The thing is that whether one thinks they were justified or not… the greens broke their own oaths first -- those made when Rhaenyra was named heir. By doing so they opened Oathbreaking Season for everyone else, and now they will hardly be able to trust other Houses' oaths, even less so any made by the blacks. Otto says the oaths made to Rhaenyra were "stale" from the moment Aegon was born, but the thing is that pulling this sort of stuff may give a veneer of pseudo-legality to putting your grandson on the throne*, but it opens the door to the very people you fucked over pulling a "well you broke oaths first, and what are oaths made to known oathbreakers worth?" and other plays on legalese. More generally it also opens the door to everyone wondering what your oaths are even worth. Which is not an insignificant problem, because the feudalism contract is a two-ways street: your vassals swear obeisance, and in return you are meant to protect them**. If you go around breaking oaths, however cleverly you justify it, on the long term people simply won't be able to trust you'll hold to the oaths you have with them, and down the line that is veeery likely to come back and bite you on the ass at some point or another.

*ftr "does male primogeniture outweigh the official naming of an heir that is not the first son?" actually a bullshit debate and no one's position in it is truly informed by their respect for law, custom, or tradition, only by who they want to see on the throne.

**Applies to the nobility: lords, knights, etc, not really to the peasants.

(5) [T]he King in his good grace will pardon any knight or lord who conspired against his ascent.

This is something the greens kind of had to put on the table, because the last Targ to have had a "no pardons" policy was Maegor, and no one wants to be Maegor (if only because shit didn't end well for him)*.

But also they had to because in the framework of the feudal contract Rhaenyra is meant to extend protection to the people who are sworn to her**, so while technically the greens could have gone with the "no pardons for the blacks' supporters" option, it still would have made for pretty shitty PR, and more to the point: it would have meant handing them even more justification than Rhaenyra getting schrödinger-usurped to let things devolve into open war. Because then the blacks could have said "well we simply can't meet your terms because how could we in good conscience let you punish our supporters while we get off scott-free." The blacks would have reaped all the good PR on top of being handed a reason to call the terms "Maegor-levels of bad" -- and while a no pardons policy might have dissuaded some people to declare for the blacks, it also might have convinced others to do just that.

On the other hand, framing support of the blacks as conspiring against the true rightful king Aegon II (which comes rather close to a charge of treason, so not small potatoes) and offer pardons anyway is much more likely to get the greens some good PR and it keeps the blacks from playing the "protecting our supporters" card -- while allowing the greens to play the "well if they cared about their supporters Rhaenyra & co would kneel to our gracious king, he who pardons" card.

*Worth pointing out that pardoning people has historically served the Targs well enough (see: Aegon the First, Jaehaerys). For some reason people generally tend to like you more if you dole out pardons than if you cut heads by the dozens. Go figure!

**Technically covers Everyone (since everyone swore to follow her when Viserys named her heir), but in the current juncture really only applies to those that chose to keep to their stale oaths and support her rather than Aegon II. Which doesn't cover a lot of Houses yet, admittedly.

(4) Your sons by Prince Daemon will also be given places of high honor at court: Aegon the Younger as the King's squire, Viserys as his cupbearer.

That's polite language for "Aegon the Younger and Viserys will be our hostages to ensure good behavior on your part." It's done all the time in Medievish Fun Time Land so it's not especially shocking: of course the greens would want actual guarantees that the blacks won't come back on their word if they accept the terms (it is after all Oathbreaking Season). But also it must be said that having hostages is kind of a two-way street: you have to treat your hostages well, else you're giving their families reason to rebel. When you're taking hostages you're not just saying "fuck up and it's their heads on the chopping block"; you're also saying "see we do mean to treat yall fairly, starting with the hostages."

While the demand for hostages is standard stuff, what's noteworthy here is that the terms expressly demand Daemon's sons, and both are in fact way too fucking young to credibly fill either of the offered positions, which makes the whole thing rather gauche because it strips away the polite "high honors" veneer -- ie what allows everyone to pretend what's going on is more akin to a fostering situation, because appearances matter, even if everyone knows what's going on. Aegon the Younger isn't even six, ie not yet in the age range to become a page, and several years too young for squiring. Viserys… he doesn't even look old enough to walk. Maybe stumble a bit?? The point is: no fucking way could he be a cupbearer. And it's not like Joffrey, who would be around an age at which he could reasonably be made a page or a cupbearer, doesn't exist. And while Jacaerys and Lucerys are to be heirs, asking for them until the younger kids are old enough to replace them as hostages wouldn't be that shocking either.

But the greens specifically want Daemon's sons, which for once is most likely not a potshot at the other kids being illegitimate, but rather just because the greens figure not only is Daemon the bellicose one in comparison to Rhaenyra*, or the dangerous one, or the one that can't be trusted, or the one that really wants the throne, etc etc, but also that he'd be more likely to care more about not getting his own sons ending up on the chopping block than his stepson(s)**.

*Ironically enough they are right about that but mostly wrong about the why, because they don't fucking know about the Aegon Prophecy of Doom Winter.

**The greens will soon be hit by Blood & Cheese so possibly they uuuh kind of miscalculated on that one. Whether he cares more for his sons than his stepsons doesn't actually matter quite as much as whether Rhaenyra cares for all her kids (she does).

The Concessions

And now on to the good stuff, ie the actual concessions being made, and oh man are they Something. While (3) may seem generous it's another thing the greens had to put on the table if they wanted Rhaenyra to consider the terms to start with; in combination with provision (2), however… it’s. uh. It’s all very short-sighted, let’s just say.

(2) His Grace will confirm your possession of Dragonstone.

This is really fucking funny in light of Otto's speech about Aegon II having all the symbols of Targ Legitimacy, because Dragonstone (like Dark Sister, also in the hands of the blacks, and like dragons, which the blacks technically have more of) is a symbol of Targ Legitimacy, what with how it's not only the most Targ Place in all of the 7K (it's Westeros’ Little Valyria, if you will) but also it's the traditional seat of the heir to the throne. On top of the symbolism, it's where the unclaimed dragons* dwell, and it’s not that far from King's Landing for someone on dragonback. So making Dragonstone the seat of Rhaenyra's fam is not a small concession, both because of the historical and symbolic weight of the island, but also because it’s kind of like telling Rhaenyra "okay what you're getting of the divorce is the Ancestral Home Island of Pet Nukes, which is situated in our metaphorical backyard."

It's a well-intentioned concession: ceding her home of six years or so to Rhaenyra, like "see we aren't evicting you on top of stealing your throne <3," but it's also a really fucking bad idea because the ruling family simply cannot afford to have another Targ faction with its own bunch of dragons and a throne-sized grudge just hanging out in King’s Landing metaphorical backyard — a backyard that is nothing less than the Ancestral Home Island of Pet Nukes and whose ownership is one of those oh so important symbols of Targ Legitimacy. That's kinda like looking at the proto-Blackfyres and asking "hey would you guys be satisfied with the summer house?" but worse.

*Including both those that never had a rider and those that currently don’t have one, that’s six of them. There are also at least three dragon eggs iirc.

(3) [Dragonstone] will pass to your trueborn son, Jacaerys, upon your death. Lucerys will confirmed as the legitimate heir to Driftmark and all the lands and holdings of House Velaryon.

This does three things: first it confirms that Dragonstone isn't a temporary loan to be reabsorbed into the Crown's holdings when Rhaenyra dies, which in turns confirms the greens are creating a 'Targaryens of Dragonstone' line. Secondly, it says that in the matter of Driftmark, the greens will uphold Viserys' will.

Thirdly, it is a polite way to say "we will stop arguing so loudly that your three eldest kids are bastards and maintain the established official policy that they totes are your and Laenor's legitimate children." At first glance it may look like another generous concession… but in fact it's another one the greens kind of had to make, because they aren't terminally stupid, and they know that Rhaenyra would never accept terms that officially make her kids bastards. They could have gone about it differently --no Dragonstone on offer, or Dragonstone at the cost of Driftmark-- but they had to put that on the table.

And sure, later in the episode Aemond will be calling Lucerys "my Lord Strong" & "bastard," so clearly not everyone in the green faction is quite yet on the same page, but the important thing is that in the official terms, Jacaerys is described as Rhaenyra's "trueborn son", confirmed as the heir of the 'Targaryens of Dragonstone' line, and similarly Lucerys is called "legitimate", his own inheritance of Driftmark also confirmed.

Of course, it comes after more than a decade of the greens taking the side of "they absofuckinglutely are bastards" in the issue of Jacaerys, Lucerys & Joffrey's legitimacy status, which goes to show that beyond the personal resentment aspect (Alicent & Criston), as a faction the greens only ever pushed the "bastard kids" argument because it was convenient and it fit their religious-lawful aesthetic of choice. You can't say "I want MY grandkids on the throne" but you can make a not-outright* argument over the legitimacy of the chosen heir's kids.

Once again, because I guess this is the hill I will die on: the kids not being Laenor's never had shit to do with the greens not wanting Rhaenyra to park her ass on the throne. If the kids had been legitimate they'd have been accusing Rhaenyra of something else or defaulting to the good ole "well she doesn't have the most important thing for a ruler to have (a dick)". lbr even if Rhaenyra had been born with a dick, it's more likely than not that if the Alicent & Viserys marriage had somehow happened and Alicent had had a boy**, Otto still would have done all he could to get Rhaenyra disinherited (like he did Daemon, which was also never actually about his faults***). Because there never was a problem with anything Rhaenyra did or didn't do, there only ever was the fact that the Hightower patriarchs were thirsty for power.

Hence the greens ultimately being fine letting the legitimacy issue go after more than a decade of waving it around, and turn to calling Rhaenyra a whore and the kids bastards mostly only in private****.

*Not-outright because they couldn't just come out and say it: technically it'd have been both treason and accusing the heir of treason, and Viserys never wanted to hear it. But they could imply it. Loudly and repeatedly.

**This is an extremely hypothetical scenario, go with it I'm just making A Point.

***Which, to be clear, does not mean Daemon doesn't have faults nor that he would have made a decent ruler, because 1) he does and 2) he wouldn't have. But Otto doing his very best to get him yeeted out of the line of succession was more about the fact that had he somehow come to sit the throne, the very first thing Daemon would have done would have been sending Otto back to Oldtown with a "and never fucking come back" -- or he'd just have killed him, and then he'd have thrown a party to celebrate.

****"Mostly only in private" because making it Official Policy that the kids are legitimate doesn't actually mean the greens would never make a public dig about it again nor that they would stop encouraging the rumors, because it wouldn't do to let people forget about any of the arguments against Rhaenyra becoming queen.

It’s all very short-sighted

I said about provision (2) that it was a really fucking bad idea to hand out Dragonstone to the blacks, but that doesn't even cover half of it:

Repeating myself because it's such an insane move, but by handing out Dragonstone, the green are straight up establishing a rival family branch with no less valid a claim to the throne than they themselve have (this shit doesn't just get forgotten) and a grudge to nurse, giving them ownership of the Ancestral Home Island of Pet Nukes (an island that is also a symbol of Targ Legitimacy) and all the pet nukes on it, letting them keep the other family sword (has everyone forgotten about Dark Sister) -- none of which is a good idea if you want the legitimacy of your own line to go unquestioned.

The greens lose dragonriding exclusivity for the ruling Targ House -- and there is a reason beyond Targ exceptionalism and blood purity fuckery why the Targs historically intermarried, and that reason is keeping dragonrider abilities* in-House. Because once you start letting the other Houses have dragons you're not in a dracocracy anymore. You're kissing goodbye to the most important of all the symbols of Targ Legitimacy, which isn't a sword or a sept anointment or any of the stuff Otto lists, but exclusive ownership of the pet nukes**.

The fact that Lucerys would still inherit Driftmark means depriving the green side of the Targ fam of Velaryon support, to the benefit of the blacks. At least Dragonstone is a tiny place that comes with only a few lords to boss around, and its main riches is like, dragonglass, and it can't levy a lot of troops because it's too sparsely populated, so minus the dragons and the symbolism it's not exactly screaming Powerful House Seat. But Driftmark? While it's also tiny, at this point the Velaryons just so happen to be super rich (like, richer than any other House including the Lannisters, who live in a gold mine). The Velaryons also have the biggest fleet in Westeros, and Corlys just got done reconquering the Stepstones, which means they now have control of the Narrow Sea***, and at this juncture they are rather unlikely to cede that control to the greens.

The thing is that had the blacks accepted the terms, maybe it would have kept things from devolving into open war for a while (say, as long as Aegon the Younger and Viserys Junior remained hostages), but the terms also set up a situation in which the Dragonstone-Driftmark alliance is a powerhouse that, as long as it's around, would keep open the question of whether the greens are truly the legitimate throne-sitters, could economically fuck over the greens (them Narrow Sea shipping lanes matter), and could also just fucking point to their several dragons whenever the Crown would try to make them do anything -- or whenever they'd want to make the Crown do anything.

And that would end up biting, if not Aegon II, then his descendants on the ass -- especially since (unbeknownst to the greens, it's not like they could have accounted for that) it's the blacks side of the family that knows about the Aegon Prophecy of Doom Winter and, if shit doesn't blow before, two or three generations down the line it'd be very easy for them to turn it into "it's our branch of the family that must sit the throne and keep the realm united to avoid the end of the world," ie the ultimate self-justification to start a civil war.

*I know there is debate on that issue but technically it doesn't matter if dragonrider abilities are tied to Valyrian ancestry or not as long as people believe they are.

**Yes, the Velaryons exist and their having dragonriders via Rhaenys is an exception to the rule, but that can always be absorbed back a generation or two down the line, and historically they're The Allies and so enmeshed with the Targs it was kinda bound to happen. But there is only room for one (1) exception, and there is only room for it because there is trust.

***In fairness, the greens may not have had access to the latest intel on that when they threw their terms together.

The Terms That Are Missing

Yeah I'm gonna talk about what isn't in the terms because that too says a lot and there are two things that are glaringly Not Included in the terms that I can think of: first, a Small Council seat offer, and second, a betrothal proposition.

Small Council Seat

The fact that no Small Council seat is offered to Rhaenyra isn't especially surprising -- the greens want to sideline her completely when it comes to ruling the 7K, they don't want to have to listen to whatever it is she thinks about what they're doing with her father's legacy or the Red Keep's decor or literally anything at all. Nor do they want to give her the occasion to look competent in comparison to Aegon II, or that of hanging out at court where she could play the game and build support for her side of the family (and considering how much power the Dragonstone+Driftmark alliance would have under the terms, and how much of a wanker Aegon II is, even Rhaenyra would have built up support for the blacks). And lbr at the risk of oversimplifying, the greens are the side of the patriarchy: they just don't want to have to listen to a woman -- they already have their exception in the person of Alicent (and even then, it's debatable how much they do listen to her when the circumstances don't force them to do so), so they're not about to add another one to the Small Council.

And yet!! If the greens wanted to make a public show of how it's all fine, the two sides of the family are totes over their little "who should sit the throne" spat and everyone on all sides is satisfied with the end result and working together, etc etc… well, having the other claimant to the throne sitting on Aegon II's Small Council would do a lot as far as public perception goes.

Betrothal(s)

When it comes the lack of betrothal proposition… marriage is how you shake hands on these kinds of agreement in Medievish Fun Time Land, it's how you make peace and renew ties and all that jazz. Rhaenyra's old proposition of betrothing Jacaerys & Helaena was a desperate move, yes, but it was a reasonable peacemaking offer as well, one that would have seen both side of the family getting their descendants on the throne -- but for the greens, accepting it would have meant they couldn't have kept using the "her kids are bastards" card and, more importantly, that power would have stayed on the blacks side of the family.

But now there is still a match that can be made, and one that is politically more advantageous to the greens than the blacks: Aegon the Younger and Jaehaera (Aegon the Elder & Helaena's daughter). They're not that far off in age, but more importantly for those sort of considerations: no one's ever called Aegon the Younger a bastard, Jaehaera isn't the heir so it wouldn't even put one of Rhaenyra's children on the throne, and the greens already asked for Aegon the Younger as a hostage so they can even bring him up to follow the Seven and everything.

The current plan is probably to wed Jaehaera to her twin Jaehaerys, do it à la Targaryen*, but again: if the greens wanted to make a public show of reconciliation with the blacks, a betrothal between Aegon the Younger and Jaehaera would go an even longer way than a Small Council seat. It would leave Jaehaerys without a Targ bride, but also if the greens could have stopped being little bitches about bastardy for five fucking seconds they'd just have waited for Jacaerys and Baela or Lucerys and Rhaena to have a daughter and Jaehaerys could still have had a bride that'd be more Targ than not. There: all branches of the family, including the Velaryons, reunited in one big circle of a family tree, and the greens' side still is is the one in power.

*Optics-wise the greens would want to look as Targ as possible to cut down on any kind of "Hightower usurpers" sort of talk -- they're already cutting down on dragons-themed decor to go with seven-pointed stars, but that at least gets them support from the Faith.

Does it matter that it wasn't in the terms?

I'm not saying a Small Council seat for Rhaenyra and/or at least one betrothal would have solved everything and everyone could have made nice*; the point here is that the terms Otto brought are about avoiding open war with Rhaenyra in the short term, but were made without giving much thought to the middle and long term, and they are lacking anything that would lead to at least a public show of even a small amount of ccoperation between greens and blacks. If anything the terms as they are given are divorce papers: here's what your side gets, here's what our side gets, now let's just all do our own thing, and for the sake of the love that once existed between us don't look too hard at the fact that you get the summer home while i keep the family business <3**

Which may work for a divorce but isn't really how you banish the specter of open war in Medievish Fun Time Land. Overall it kinda looks like the terms as they are given are a product of wishful thinking, like they've been written with the hope is that it's possible for things to remain more or less as they have been for the last six years: the greens ruling in King's Landing, and the blacks doing their own thing on the side, letting themselves be forgotten on their lil' island(s). But realistically, if the blacks had taken the terms for the sake of avoiding open war***, they still would have been rather pissy about getting fucked over, and it's rather unlikely they'd have opted to live their best lives on their islands instead of endeavoring to be a thorn in the greens' side while waiting for a chance at getting the throne back.

*Which at this point isn't even remotely in the realm of possibility.

**I talked a lot about how the terms leave a non-insignificant amount of power to the blacks, but obviously it still does not compare to what they'd have if Rhaenyra was on the throne.

***Let's pretend for five seconds Aemond's isn't gonna do an oopsie-whoopsie about 24 hours later anyway, and that Daemon could have been convinced war was avoidable.

In lieu of conclusion: Alicent vs. Otto

So far I've mostly talked about "the greens" versus "the blacks" but of course both factions are made up of people, and on both sides not everyone agrees on everything. By the end of the season, however, the blacks are more or less on the same page (a page that can be summed up as "fuck the Aegon Prophecy of Doom Winter time to burn shit down war crimes era is go"), while the last we saw of the greens… I think it's fair to say they're doing a good job of presenting a united front to outsiders, but when it comes to intra-faction politics? Well, Aemond couldn’t put down his desire to give mommy en eye to the side for five seconds*, so there’s that, but more relevant to the question of the terms: there is, ahem, an itsy-bitsy rift between Alicent and Otto.

And by itsy-bitsy rift, I mean, of course, a fucking major difference of opinions re: what to do with The Rhaenyra Problem and how to avoid open war -- which is kind of a big concern. No one on the greens side wants shit to devolve into open war, they want to enjoy their rule and keep spending outrageous amounts of money on erecting statues of the Mother (very blink and miss it but that was in ep8, Beesbury was not happy about it) and pretend there aren't literal children being made to do battle royales in their city for entertainment and all that good stuff**.

The problem is that if the greens are in agreement re: let's not let this turn into open war, they are not in agreement at all over how to avoid it, which is really a disagreement over how to solve The Rhaenyra Problem, and the two schools of thought on that are incompatible -- one of them boils down to murder and the other is anti-murder.

Otto's solution is what it has always been, what he has always planned to do, ie solve The Rhaenyra Problem simply by killing Rhaenyra & her fam right out of the bat -- and minus Alicent, the greens are fine with it. He spent most of the season gaslighting Alicent with “Rhaenyra will kill your kids (The Challenge) to shore up her claim***”, so it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that his own way to shore up Aegon II’s claim is to do exactly what he repeatedly said Rhaenyra would (getting rid of The Challenge).

Alicent, on the other hand, wants to believe there is a peaceful resolution that does not involve murder, and is okay with doing some concessions to make it happen. She currently has the upper hand within the green faction, but since everyone else is fine with solving The Rhaenyra Problem via murder, her focus is very much in the short term: avoid murder and immediate open war with the blacks by offering them fair terms. Which is why imo the terms offered are mostly hers, and why they were made without giving much thought to the middle and long term. It is also why they kinda read like divorce papers from Lesbian Denial Land. Alicent really, really wants to believe Rhaenyra will accept the terms and stay on her island and not make herself a problem because otherwise it’s back to square one: murder on one side and open war on the other.

And while Alicent has the upper hand for now, it’s Otto that is the greens' consummate long-term player, and imo he is unlikely to truly be on board with her "make peace" plan, or a fan of the terms themselves. Like, he’s going to deliver these terms and do his best to keep things from devolving into open war, but unlike Alicent, he does not live in Lesbian Denial Land and his solution of choice to The Rhaenyra Problem hasn’t changed just because his daughter is having a sentimentalism relapse.

And the thing is, he is not wrong when it comes to the fact that as long as Rhaenyra & her fam live, there will never not be doubt about whether Aegon II is the legitimate king. There will be people to say "well she was Viserys' chosen heir, *she* should be sitting on the chair" even if Rhaenyra herself doesn't encourage these people (and he knows Daemon would****). There will be some who do believe oaths actually are worth something, and there will be some who just don't like the Hightowers, and there will be all the malcontents. As long as Rhaenyra & fam live, they will be a rallying point to those that'd oppose Aegon II's rule. She would be The Queen Who Never Was 2.0. -- but Otto is not Viserys, who was fine having people calling Rhaenys by that nickname under his nose*****. Otto is the dude who means to clean the board, however long it takes.

*Technically I guess it is better to maim an envoy rather than kill them, but it’d still have been a bit of a crime and mommy would most likely not have been pleased.

**The point here is they possibly are not that great at the ruling thing.

***ftr she would not have had her step-siblings killed just to take them out of the board as soon as she ascended the throne. She'd have done it if she was given a really good reason to.

****Daemon and Otto very much have each other’s number. Like, they hate each other's gut like crazy, but back in ep1 when Otto said “unpredictable and violent” he was right, and when Daemon said “ambitious second son that stands to inherit nothing but what he seizes for himself,” he was also right.