Tristan989 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I was reading A Song of Ice and Fire books for the second time now, and while reading Jon's 9th POV chapter in A Dance with Dragons, I stumbled upon a part that I've read before, but just now realized it may have significance to Aegon. I know that there are several theories and clues about Aegon being a fake or a Blackfyre. In my opinion, I'm not sure what he exactly is. He may be a Targaryen or a Blackfyre, there's just so much mystery about this guy. Anyway, here's the part that got me thinking: A long hard winter will leave the Watch so deep in debt that we will never climb out, Jon reminded himself, but when the choice is debt or death, best borrow. He did not have to like it, though. And come spring, when the time came to repay all that gold, he would like it even less. Tycho Nestoris had impressed him as cultured and courteous, but the Iron Bank of Braavos had a fearsome reputation when collecting debts. Each of the Nine Free Cities had its bank, and some had more than one, fighting over every coin like dogs over a bone, but the Iron Bank was richer and more powerful than all the rest combined. When princes defaulted on their debts to lesser banks, ruined bankers sold their wives and children into slavery and opened their own veins. When princes failed to repay the Iron Bank, new princes sprang up from nowhere and took their thrones. It is known that the Iron Throne is in debt for years, and now we have a lost Targaryen prince invading Westeros to reclaim his crown. I'm not saying or concluding that this quote is a definite proof of that. Nor I'm saying I dislike or hate Aegon. But given the fact about GRRM writing style and his foreshadowing of events, I think that there may be some truth in it. I want to know what do you fellow book readers think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aryagonnakill#2 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Ya that is 1 of the things I picked up on my first read that got me anticipating a fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConfusedCounselor Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Sorry, do not think so. -Stannis is that 'new prince that sprang up to take their thrones'. They are already backing him so that he can repay them when he wins the crown. Backing two different claimants to the throne seems iffy. What if they start fighting each other? -Also, the backing of the Iron Bank doesn't necessarily subtract from someones claims. They just back someone they think can win and then repay the debt. Whether he is real or not does not really matter for their purpose. They might back him, they might not. Unless (f)Aegon is entirely an operation on the initiative of the IB, it tells us nothing. -JonCon has been with (f)Aegon way too long for (f)Aegon to be said IB initiative. Ten years ago there was no evidence that the Iron Throne would forfeit on its debts. -It does not appear (f)Aegon actually has IB support. He does not seem to have enormous funds, he does not even need to pay the GC, I think. I have seen nothing that indicates financial backing beyond what Illyrio could easily provide. So I do not think that quote says anything about the validity of (f)Aegon. Plenty of others do though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Blizzardborn Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Nice potential catch there. But since the Iron Throne is backing Stannis, that would have to be an extra-subtle hint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Blizzardborn Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Ya that is 1 of the things I picked up on my first read that got me anticipating a fake. New princes does not indicate fake ones necessarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Nice potential catch there. But since the Iron Throne Bank is backing Stannis, that would have to be an extra-subtle hint. Fixed that for you. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcotron Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Fixed that for you. ;)It was pretty funny the way it was. Maybe the Iron Throne really is backing Stannis."I hate sitting on this pointy chair all day and listening to people tell me boring stuff. The stamping part is fun, but the rest is boring. Can't Unca Stannis come do this instead of me so I can go play with my cats?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Wraith Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Anyone else think that the Iron Bank is just backing Stannis to continue the War of Five Kings? They could be working with other players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarah.jenice Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I agree that the IB has already committed a lot of resources to backing Stannis so it wouldn't make much sense for them to switch support from him unless he dies. However, even if Stannis dies, I don't see the IB supporting Aegon considering the extreme adverse reaction Tycho Nestoris had to the mention of dragons. Even if Aegon doesn't have dragons now, he wants them via alliance with Dany so there's no way the anti-dragon Braavosi would join his cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcotron Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 On the IB backing both Stannis and Aegon: It's not impossible that they'd back two pretenders. Obviously they'd only do it if it increases the chance of taking down the Lannisters. And if the benefits (both the direct benefit of getting the loan repaid, and the indirect benefit or deterring any future non-paying sovereigns) still outweigh the costs of supporting two pretenders instead of one (including possibly supporting the winner against the loser, once the Lannisters are out of the way). Neither of those seems impossible here.The fact that the Aegon plan seems to be much older than the Lannister-IB strife, which others have already pointed out in more detail, seems like a bigger problem.Meanwhile, there's another way to take this as a hint: New princes springing up from nowhere is how the truly powerful deal with recalcitrant princes. The Iron Bank is the only bank that's truly powerful, but not the only such power full stop. In our world, Venetian traders, archbishops, and other power brokers replaced multiple princes, kings, and emperors in similar ways for a few centuries before any bank had that kind of power. But maybe that's too much of a stretch to mean anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Wraith Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I agree that the IB has already committed a lot of resources to backing Stannis so it wouldn't make much sense for them to switch support from him unless he dies. However, even if Stannis dies, I don't see the IB supporting Aegon considering the extreme adverse reaction Tycho Nestoris had to the mention of dragons. Even if Aegon doesn't have dragons now, he wants them via alliance with Dany so there's no way the anti-dragon Braavosi would join his cause. Considering the amount of resources the IB has I'm not sure if backing Stannis counts more than a drop in the bucket for them. You bring up a good point about Braavos being anti-dragon which is true. Dragons in the ages past were the symbols of Valryian might and slavery. The Braavosi hate slavery more than anything. Now Dany has awoken three dragons, but is using them to free slaves instead of enslave them. It is quite a quandry for Braavos and all its entities. On the IB backing both Stannis and Aegon: It's not impossible that they'd back two pretenders. Obviously they'd only do it if it increases the chance of taking down the Lannisters. And if the benefits (both the direct benefit of getting the loan repaid, and the indirect benefit or deterring any future non-paying sovereigns) still outweigh the costs of supporting two pretenders instead of one (including possibly supporting the winner against the loser, once the Lannisters are out of the way). Neither of those seems impossible here. The fact that the Aegon plan seems to be much older than the Lannister-IB strife, which others have already pointed out in more detail, seems like a bigger problem. Meanwhile, there's another way to take this as a hint: New princes springing up from nowhere is how the truly powerful deal with recalcitrant princes. The Iron Bank is the only bank that's truly powerful, but not the only such power full stop. In our world, Venetian traders, archbishops, and other power brokers replaced multiple princes, kings, and emperors in similar ways for a few centuries before any bank had that kind of power. But maybe that's too much of a stretch to mean anything? Back everyone, get everyone more in debt and the winner still have to repay you for everything. I just have this nagging feeling that Baelish is working for the Iron Bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcotron Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Back everyone, get everyone more in debt and the winner still have to repay you for everything.I didn't even think about that extra benefit, but yeah, that does seem to be a banker-ish way of thinking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bent branch Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Anyone else think that the Iron Bank is just backing Stannis to continue the War of Five Kings? They could be working with other players. I disagree. The longer the conflict goes on, the longer it will be until the IB is paid. I think it makes much more sense for them to choose the pretender who they feel has the most potential AND the most likely to pay their debts and then just back that one person. That way, hopefully, Westeros can settle down and get back to business and start paying the IB back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Wraith Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I disagree. The longer the conflict goes on, the longer it will be until the IB is paid. I think it makes much more sense for them to choose the pretender who they feel has the most potential AND the most likely to pay their debts and then just back that one person. That way, hopefully, Westeros can settle down and get back to business and start paying the IB back. That is implying that being paid is the most important thing to them. What if they are supporting princes till the one they want arrives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bent branch Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 That is implying that being paid is the most important thing to them. What if they are supporting princes till the one they want arrives? True, I am supposing that getting paid is the most important thing to the IB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConfusedCounselor Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 True, I am supposing that getting paid is the most important thing to the IB. Which seems quite plausible to me. The Iron Bank only got involved after the Iron Throne defaulted. If they just wanted X on the throne, they could just support X, regardless. Unless they really felt they needed some plausible excuse to get involved, but that doesn't convince me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trigger Warning Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The Iron Bank are backing Stannis because Cersei denied them, they have no other option. They didn't get involved until this happened, getting the payments for the debt on the roll is the bottom line and to do that they need a willing monarch on the Iron Throne. If Aegon had declared and landed when this happened they'd have probably approached him instead of Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spoon89 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The Iron Bank's support of Stannis seems to be more than strictly financial, in nature. Tycho appears to give Stannis Intelligence gathered in his travels and game "pieces" gathered that are useful in the long term for Stannis' campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isobel Harper Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I disagree. The longer the conflict goes on, the longer it will be until the IB is paid. I think it makes much more sense for them to choose the pretender who they feel has the most potential AND the most likely to pay their debts and then just back that one person. That way, hopefully, Westeros can settle down and get back to business and start paying the IB back. If Illyrio is willing, he could pay the debt off himself. If he did so, I assume the IB would be more than willing to switch sides from Stannis to Aegon. The IB and Braavos purportedly have a bias against dragons, but Aegon doesn't have any. (At least not yet.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sage of Westeros Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You have an interesting theory, one that actually makes some sense. But I can't see Aegon needing the IB when he has Illyrio who is rich beyond measure and potentially (f)Aegon's father. I think the IB put all their resources on Stannis but if Stannis should chance die they will back a different candidate, one with reliability, sort of why they sought out Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.