The Grey Wolf Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Honestly, after reading the stormlands section I have to feel bad for the Durrandons. Judging by Yandel's writing it seems that the stormlands were doomed no matter what because if Aegon hadn't decided to conquer the Seven Kingdoms the stormlands would eventually have fallen to one of the other kingdoms and ceased to be. Does anyone think that would have actually happened and if it did what would the ramifications be in the event that the conquest doesn't take place or that it takes place later in Aegon I's life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Mac Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Well, Harren was conquering a lot of Argilac's territory, and Argilac was too old to properly respond to the threat. It didn't really help that he only had a daughter as his heir. However, I doubt the Storm Kingdom would cease to exist. It's more that I think they'd lose all their territory in what's now the Crownlands, including Massey's Hook and a lot of the Kingswood. But I doubt Harren could fully conquer the Stormlands. But they could have lost a lot of territory. Then again, they could gain it back a generation later, depending on who was in charge. The borders seemed to change that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I feel Argella could have been a queen of legend. This is a woman who in the face of doom, declared herself queen and sat tight ready to weather dragonfire. And I dont doubt Storms End would have taken it. I really hope she got her vengeance, if not at least her great x grandsons brought the dragons down.The Durrandons seemed to ebb and flow. We see a few times they decline, then one member turns the tide. Argillac was one of them at a bad time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lowborn Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I really doubt they were about to be wiped out. All the different kingdoms had ups and downs, and the Stormlands were in a bit of a slump at the time. They would probably have lost more territory, and then returned in force a few generations later. If nothing else, I think the Stormlands and Westerlands would sooner or later have banded together to contain the Ironborn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joluoto2 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 The Stormland had the problem with the expansionist Hoare kingdom of Harrenhal alrady swallowed much of their lands, wars with the Reach gone badly, and the always lurking Dornish threat in the South. They really were besieged on all fronts. Also, some of their bannermen was already the facto Dragonstone vassals, even though they de jure still swore fealty to Storm's End. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozentree Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I feel Argella could have been a queen of legend. This is a woman who in the face of doom, declared herself queen and sat tight ready to weather dragonfire. And I dont doubt Storms End would have taken it. I really hope she got her vengeance, if not at least her great x grandsons brought the dragons down.The Durrandons seemed to ebb and flow. We see a few times they decline, then one member turns the tide. Argillac was one of them at a bad time.The fact we haven't heard of her since the conquest does not suggest so. She was reduced from queen to a lady, but that position is still high enough to give her space to realize herself. If she couldn't even warrant a note in history as a lady, she could hardly become a legend as a queen. Unless you mean that sort of legend Harren has become, but that isn't exactly compliment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 The fact we haven't heard of her since the conquest does not suggest so. She was reduced from queen to a lady, but that position is still high enough to give her space to realize herself. If she couldn't even warrant a note in history as a lady, she could hardly become a legend as a queen. Unless you mean that sort of legend Harren has become, but that isn't exactly compliment. She was Lady who could trust absolutely no one. She was braver than her bannermen who stripped her, chained her up and dragged her out to the enemy. She didn't get a chance to rule and I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them. Any power she would have had as queen disappeared, she was not even a lady in her own right. After the conquest all she had was herself. Your entire concept that a lady is more likely to be noted in history than a queen is ridiculous. So yes, I do believe she had the stuff to have been the one to continue that resurgence her father started, she had brains and balls. But after the conquest she had no power to do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozentree Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 She was Lady who could trust absolutely no one. She was braver than her bannermen who stripped her, chained her up and dragged her out to the enemy. She didn't get a chance to rule and I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them. Any power she would have had as queen disappeared, she was not even a lady in her own right. After the conquest all she had was herself. Your entire concept that a lady is more likely to be noted in history than a queen is ridiculous. So yes, I do believe she had the stuff to have been the one to continue that resurgence her father started, she had brains and balls. But after the conquest she had no power to do anything. To bolded part: yes, that is indeed ridiculous, but I never made such claims. If she needs to rely on the nominal power of position as queen to do her great things, what exactly makes her legendary? She couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her lords to treat her with dignity. Being of certain opinion, no matter how right or great the opinion is, does not make one a legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 People need great power to do great things. Napoleon wouldn't have made history as a grocer. Similarly, being demoted to the role of babymaker in a city full of her enemies who were her forced husbands BFFs with no allies of her own is not the greatest position to strike out from. What was she meant to do, smother Aegon in his sleep? Her nobles were busy wetting themselves at the thought of roasting to death, where she wasn't. They secured their own defeat, not her. Had she inherited normally, without the evil empire starting an unjustified war against her father she would have had the freedom and power to work with. As it was, she was basically under house arrest with Orys as her jailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSovereignGrave Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 To bolded part: yes, that is indeed ridiculous, but I never made such claims. If she needs to rely on the nominal power of position as queen to do her great things, what exactly makes her legendary? She couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her lords to treat her with dignity. Being of certain opinion, no matter how right or great the opinion is, does not make one a legend. I feel like it wasn't that she couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her Lords to treat her with dignity overall, more that she couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her Lords to treat her with dignity when they're terrified of being burnt alive by Aegon's dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozentree Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Napoleon is not a good example for you. He was a very minor nobility and rose in power through hard work and cunning, not a prince who used his inherited power wisely. Agrella never won a renown, not even as princess. She was the crown princess of a kingdom slowly devoured by Ironmen and constantly harrased by Dorne and Reach. She had plenty of enemies to fight long before Aegon, why did she not? Did she need crown for that? Tywin Lannister didn't need his seat to do his deeds, not even his father's consent, in fact.Good plans are only part of good rule. A great leader needs much more than that. The Gardeners and Lannisters lead their huge armies against Aegon, after Harrehall, and none chained them and brought them before the enemy. Nobody did the same to the Dornish Princess either. She should have known whom she can trust, and even flee SE if she knew it was full of cowards, but she did not know that. She didn't know her own lords and inspired less loyalty than her neighbors. Sure, you can blame it all on the lords, the truth is that none supported her, and none defied the 3 other rulers I named. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSovereignGrave Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Napoleon is not a good example for you. He was a very minor nobility and rose in power through hard work and cunning, not a prince who used his inherited power wisely. Agrella never won a renown, not even as princess. She was the crown princess of a kingdom slowly devoured by Ironmen and constantly harrased by Dorne and Reach. She had plenty of enemies to fight long before Aegon, why did she not? Did she need crown for that? Tywin Lannister didn't need his seat to do his deeds, not even his father's consent, in fact. Good plans are only part of good rule. A great leader needs much more than that. The Gardeners and Lannisters lead their huge armies against Aegon, after Harrehall, and none chained them and brought them before the enemy. Nobody did the same to the Dornish Princess either. She should have known whom she can trust, and even flee SE if she knew it was full of cowards, but she did not know that. She didn't know her own lords and inspired less loyalty than her neighbors. Sure, you can blame it all on the lords, the truth is that none supported her, and none defied the 3 other rulers I named. From what I know, the situations with the Stormlands and the other Kingdoms aren't exactly comparable. With the Stormlands and the Reach/Rock you both had major battles that ended in victories for Aegon, the Last Storm and the Field of Fire, respectively. Now, after the Field of Fire the Gardener line was extinguished and the Stewards of Highgarden Tyrells surrendered to Aegon while King Loren of the Rock bent the knee. Neither tried to continue the fight afterwards. On the other hand, after the Last Storm Argella became Storm Queen and she still refused to bend the knee to Aegon (unlike Loren Lannister and Harlen Tyrell). It's entirely possible that if one of the Gardener sons had survived and refused to bend the knee that his Lords would've betrayed him to Aegon, and likewise if Loren still refused to bend the knee. And as for Dorne, that's a completely different situation. They didn't fight pitched battles with Aegons armies and their guerilla tactics didn't result in any major defeats for the Dornishmen. They had no reason to betray their Princess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Napoleon is not a good example for you. He was a very minor nobility and rose in power through hard work and cunning, not a prince who used his inherited power wisely. Agrella never won a renown, not even as princess. She was the crown princess of a kingdom slowly devoured by Ironmen and constantly harrased by Dorne and Reach. She had plenty of enemies to fight long before Aegon, why did she not? Did she need crown for that? Tywin Lannister didn't need his seat to do his deeds, not even his father's consent, in fact. Good plans are only part of good rule. A great leader needs much more than that. The Gardeners and Lannisters lead their huge armies against Aegon, after Harrehall, and none chained them and brought them before the enemy. Nobody did the same to the Dornish Princess either. She should have known whom she can trust, and even flee SE if she knew it was full of cowards, but she did not know that. She didn't know her own lords and inspired less loyalty than her neighbors. Sure, you can blame it all on the lords, the truth is that none supported her, and none defied the 3 other rulers I named. Napoleon also benefited from having a penis 500 years after the era this series is inspired by, that wasn't my comparison! But if you want to be like that, what did Elizabeth I do before ascending to the throne? She was under house arrest in a country castle while her sister decided if she wanted her dead! Argella's father was a great warrior and the Stormlands were pretty stable in his era. The losses you talk about happened before him. He stayed the tide of decline. I wouldn't compare her to Tywin, I'd compare her to Dany. Dany did nothing but get sold off until Viserys died. Her only renown was marrying a savage and being a Targ. Look at what she did with autonomous power! This is coming from someone who doesn't think Dany is the sharpest pencil in the draw. You can't argue she has grabbed it and is making a path she never could with Viserys around or with her father and brother alive. I also think the Princess of Dorne was an amazing woman. Rhaeny's superior! But her people had hope of victory, they weren't cowering in a single castle with an army and a dragon outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaak Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I feel like it wasn't that she couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her Lords to treat her with dignity overall, more that she couldn't inspire enough loyalty for her Lords to treat her with dignity when they're terrified of being burnt alive by Aegon's dragons. They could easily have evaded being burnt alive. By walking out of the gates of Storm´s End to bend their own knees, and leaving the gates open and their Queen in her dress and crown on her throne. Would it have kept her dignity if she could honestly say she fought to "last man", being a woman left alone when all men deserted her? Arresting her AND stripping her naked was not the only decision they could have made to save their skins. Yet it was the decision they did carry out. Oh, and other equally relevant women vanish from record. We never hear what became of Sharra Arryn, or Rhaena the Black Bride, or Princess Aerea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I don't think its a coincidence that the Stormlands fought against the female claimant in the Dance. They don't seem kind to female rulers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Mac Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I don't think its a coincidence that the Stormlands fought against the female claimant in the Dance. They don't seem kind to female rulers. That could make sense, given their martial nature and women in Westeros not being very martial as a whole. Perhaps they prefer the Argilac/Orys/Lyonel types Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boarsbane Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 I got the feeling if the Hoares hadn't been wiped out by Aegon that they would of wiped out the Storm king's line. It took a man with 3 dragons for the Riverlands to rise up against them despite being extremely vicious and cruel kings who forced many into slavery. Argilac should of looked for allies in the other kingdoms, the Gardeners probably aren't an option but the Lannister kings had just as much reason to hate and fear the Hoares, probably more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbulas B. Harding Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 I've always seen major connections between Ice and Fire and Ragnorok and the Baratheon's, as hammer weilding Storm Kings to be the stories Thor types (with Stannis ultimately being the stories principle Thor type) But this book convinced me to reconsider who might be the rightful Storm Kings. If Beric still lived he'd be my obvious choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaak Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 I got the feeling if the Hoares hadn't been wiped out by Aegon that they would of wiped out the Storm king's line. Hoares were surrounded by 5 kingdoms, all of which had reason to fear. Starks, Arryns, Durrandons, Gardeners, Lannisters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joluoto2 Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Hoares were surrounded by 5 kingdoms, all of which had reason to fear. Starks, Arryns, Durrandons, Gardeners, Lannisters. But when would they have banded together against the Hoares? Lately the Ironborn had only pestered the Riverlords and the Durrandons, and since the Durrandons were the Great Power in Westeros before the Hoares, there were very little love for the Stormlands. My guess would be that if the Durrandons had been attacked again By the Hoares, the Reach would have attacked the Stormlands too just to get their share of the cake, and Dorne would have attacked the Marchers out of spite. I think an alliance against the Ironborn would require something even more drastic, like them wiping out the Durrandons altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.