Lord Varys

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lord Varys

  1. Aerys II named Viserys his heir after the death of Rhaegar. He disinherited/passed over Aegon and Rhaenys in favor of Viserys already. Daenerys will already have to deal with this question when she faces Aegon. She won't have the magical proof to prove without the shadow of a doubt that Aegon isn't Rhaegar's son - and we can be reasonably sure that claiming he is a fake would be at least part of her strategy to discredit him. If Dany doesn't buy the Aegon story he she sure as hell is not going to buy the Jon story unless she gets really good evidence. And even then - this is not going to make her back down. Even if she wanted to she most likely wouldn't be able to do it since she is going to head a vast movement at that point. Her Dothraki, Unsullied, sellswords, freendmen, etc. are not likely to care about Jon Snow. They will obey and follow her, not Jon Snow. And Jon is never going to get in a position to challenge the power of Dany's vast armies. That would only make sense if George wanted to give us a story of Dany having a rivalry for the Iron Throne with both Aegon and Jon. And I doubt that he is going to repeat this story with two (alleged) sons of Rhaegar. The entire plot wouldn't make much sense if he intends to set them up for some sort of romance. The past is the past. It can be cited or ignored. I daresay half or even all of Westerosi nobility would have had some bastard ancestors that weren't legitimized - the Durrandon-Baratheons certainly have at least one of those. And the Conqueror was a king who may have married his two sister-wives following rites, customs, and laws that aren't followed in Westeros. Polygamy was scarce even in Valyria but it was done, but it was never a popular thing in Westeros. But it should be incredible easy to just deny the fact that Jon Snow is Rhaegar's son. Even if it came out (or was known) that Rhaegar Targaryen did marry Lyanna Stark this still doesn't prove that Jon Snow is their son. A majority of (Dany's) people would have to believe it for it become relevant, and that's not all that likely to happen. Especially not in the wake of the Aegon story. I mean, two secret sons of Rhaegar? Seriously? Even the peasants and lords of Westeros are not that gullible... And depending how Aegon's reign turns out claiming to be a son of Rhaegar or associating yourself with him may actually make Jon (or anyone) increasingly unpopular.
  2. Why not? Varys' more important agents most likely do not travel with the royal navy or something of that sort. And chances are that he went to Duskendale to catch a ship there to carry him to Gulltown due to the fact that the harbor in KL wasn't working normally at that point. There is no longer a Lannister-Tyrell alliance. That ended with Cersei/Mace had Ser Kevan Lannister murdered. And Aegon is only going to take the Iron Throne if he beats the Tyrell army marching against Storm's End. If does that the Reach is not going to march against him a second time. At least not while they are still sworn to Tommen. Reach Lords joining Euron might march against him eventually but not those sworn to Tommen. Tommen is a joke and also greatly angered the Reach when he did not send them immediate aid against the Ironborn. This isn't the topic here, but it is pretty obvious that Varys manipulated/expected both Jaime and Tyrion to do what they did, and he most certainly would have killed Tywin himself if Tyrion hadn't done - to blame this murder on Tyrion, too.
  3. @UnmaskedLurker What we definitely can say on the basis of book knowledge is that Viserion and Rhaegal will be claimed by riders very soon. The candidates - Tyrion, Brown Ben, Victarion - are already in place. George's dragons won't go to Westeros without riders. They are already wild dragons, effectively. If somebody imprisoned a dragon in a ship against its will said ship would most likely burn and never reach its destination. How the dragons and their riders play into the endgame isn't clear yet for the books. But it is quite clear that there will be an important and intricate dragonrider plot in the books - something that is clearly not the case for the show.
  4. If the three heads of the dragon are not going to ride the dragons it the book we'll get weirdo symbolic interpretations of that part of the prophecy - which would be basically crap because you'd need a manual to understand the plot.
  5. I don't know. It would depend on the sizes of the ships, I guess. And George has yet to give us a description of a war galley in his books, or comment on the capacity of those ships as troop transporters. We don't even know how large crews of such ships have to be to keep them functioning. For instance, it would be very interesting to know how large the Redwyne fleet actually is and how many men are with Paxter right now. A hint how this goes has been given with the Golden Company getting to Westeros. 10,000 sellswords were shipped from Volantis to the Stormlands only by the private traders present in Volantis at that time. They didn't use the Volantene navy for this. And Volantis was planning its own campaign against Daenerys at the same time. We should also keep in mind that George isn't exactly the covering the tiniest details of troop movements and recruiting. I mean, if you take the size of the North and the Reach/Stormlands is it truly realistic that the armies in those regions were raised as quickly as they were in AGoT/ACoK? I don't think so. Castles can be reached by raven but towns, villages, settlements, farms, etc. have to be reached by rider/messenger. And how long is that going to take? How quickly can even a castle like Winterfell sent word to the people in the remoter lands around the castle? And how quickly can the infantry march to the castle?
  6. Dany's fleet has the potential to be enormous. She will have the Ironborn and the Volatene armada. And she is potentially going to capture Qartheen and Ghiscari ships. In addition, the Ironborn are most likely going to continue to capture additional traders. On the way to Westeros she may capture even more ships once she frees the slaves in Volantis, Lys, and Tyrosh. At the same time the Dothraki should capture Pentos and Myr on the mainland, making the potential effectively insane. She could be deploying Dothraki from two harbors on the coast of the Narrow Sea - Myr and Pentos - while the other part of her army continues with the armada that has set out from Slaver's Bay, growing ever larger on the slow crawl to Westeros. Once she secures a landing site in Westeros there are no limits as to how many men she will be able to ferry over since the distance isn't that large and ships can be reused again and again to ferry men over. How many men she is going to bring to Westeros is completely unclear in light of all that. It could be only tens of thousands but it could also be hundreds of thousands.
  7. Cregan essentially brought his men down south to die heroically in battle, basically. He wanted to rid the North of some men so that his people could survive winter. That should indicate that most of the men that remained in the South were men Cregan did not want in the North - that would be mostly younger sons and grizzled old warriors that wouldn't survive winter, anyway. Noblemen most likely could get back home anyway - after all, they were nobles and could count on the support of their families to various degrees. But a peasant cannot afford to feed a string of younger sons and brothers. So we can say that this is most likely information on the common men in Cregan's army, indicating that those men ended up marrying widowed smallfolk in the Riverlands and/or replacing men-at-arms and sworn swords there. The Riverlands took the bulk of the fighting during the Dance, most likely resulting in much more casualties there than they suffered in the main series to this day. Well, Kermit Tully was apparently a knight before he became a lord so he should have been at least 14-16 when his father died considering that Maegor and Daemon were both the youngest knights of all time at the age of sixteen. But the Dance certainly could have resulted in some battlefield knighthoods being granted to minors, etc. TWoIaF states that the Tullys were never as powerful as they were after the Dance, so this is really somewhat odd. But we also have to keep in mind that official power is not the same as informal power. Corlys Velaryon and Jeyne Arryn should have been the most powerful regents while they were on the council, considering their standing and rank. Men like Cregan and Kermit may have been smart enough to stay out of the tedious business of day-to-day ruling while still retaining a lot of real but unofficial power for decades to come. We do know that Cregan reaped a lot of rewards for his service to Rhaenyra and Aegon III during the Dance. Vice versa, we do know that the Baratheons had to pay for their support of Aegon II. It took them a long time to get back into good graces with the Iron Throne. The Lannisters were needed in the whole rebuilding thing but the Baratheons were not. And while the Hightowers got Rhaena (we don't know why, though) they never really played as prominently a role in the politics of the Realm, especially not after the High Septon moved to KL. The only short exception is the short stint of Lord Jon Hightower as Hand of the King in the last years of Aegon IV. But one assumes he was one of the very corrupt courtiers, being shipped back to Oldtown as soon as Daeron II took power. I guess the Lads may have decided to send the bulk of their men home soon after the coronation of Aegon III. Perhaps even before Lord Cregan arrived. They must have wanted peace as much as Lord Corlys or else there wouldn't have been any peace but an execution of Green traitors under a regime led by the Lads, even before Lord Cregan arrived. And after his arrival the war would have continued, with Lord Stark laying siege to Storm's End first, and continuing with the sack of Oldtown in the middle of winter. Cregan's men likely stayed at or around KL at first when their lord left, not knowing what to do. Some might have tried to join the service of the king but that's where the shortage of money and the unclear chain of command comes in. It should have taken quite some time until the regency was set up the way it was and until people were found to fill the positions. Things may have gotten better after Tyland returned considering that this should have been the moment when things really got better with the Lannisters. Tyland would have been the one who would arranged things with Johanna to really help them with their rebuilding efforts. But by that time those men might already have been forced to look for service elsewhere.
  8. Well, I'm always open to new sources and I've changed my mind on a lot of issues as new things are revealed. I'm not saying my stuff is gospel. I'm just saying that as things stand right it seems pretty likely that Aegon III's descent from Daemon played a role in him being made Aegon II's heir or in him becoming king. I know that, what you don't seem to realize is that men in the service of some lords are no longer an army. And an army is a group of people following a (single) leader to war. But war was over, and those men didn't end serving the Crown, It is interesting to note there that none of the Lads ended up on the regency council, never mind the strong position they were in at the end of the Dance, possibly indicating that the war left the Riverlands in such a bad shape that they couldn't afford to spend time at court. Technically Lord Kermit Tully should have been nearly as powerful and influential as Cregan Stark. But perhaps the youth of the Lads precluded them from actually serving as regents for a minor king. Benjicot Blackwood was only a year older than Aegon III, after all. And we don't know how old Kermit Tully was. He could also have been technically still a minor at that point.
  9. Since we now know that we are going to get that book after all - or rather the first half of the material that was mostly written years ago, stretching from the reign of the Conqueror to the Regency of the Dragonbane - and much sooner than we thought, the question is what you are looking forward the most in that book. For me it would be the newly written account of the reign of the Old King that has to be in there for the book to actually qualify as a history book. And then there is the complete history of the Dance, of course, and the Regency of Aegon III, a period about which no pretty much nothing but which is supposed to be very interesting and very detailed. Perhaps the reference to Valyria in the enigmatic blog post indicates that we'll learn more about the Freehold of Valyria and the Targaryens back then, either through some brief prelude or opaque references to more ancient Targaryens in the text. Nobody would complain about that. The most interesting new aspects of the book should be the detailed stories of the children of the Old King, the whereabouts of the twin daughters of Aegon and Rhaena, and the ultimate fate of their mother. And then there are, of course, the dragons, and details about the reign of Jaehaerys and Alysanne - the First Quarrel, Alyssa Velaryon and the Baratheons, and the Great Council. This should be a great read indeed.
  10. Well, I never said they had siege equipment and the like. But surrounding a city and preventing you from leaving it through the gates - which they certainly would have been able to do - also qualifies as a siege. And, no, if there was a wider spread conspiracy to murder Aegon II - which is sort of likely since Corlys or whoever spearheaded the murder would then have been arrested and executed by the still loyal Greens - then it is very unlikely that those men still had any hope of winning the war and saving their lives. Even Yandel indicates that, stating that Borros Baratheon had had the chance to turned the tide when he marched against the Lads. But he failed, and that was the end of it. No, since there is no reason to believe anyone but Lord Cregan Stark could control this army. Those men were Northmen and seems quite clear that the Crown did not exactly have the money to feed and pay them all. Not in the middle of winter. You get the same example with the Hightower army in the wake of the deaths of Lord Ormund and his cousin. That robs them of a clear leader/chain of command which results in factionalism which leads to defeat and chaos. There is a Targaryen prince there, the younger brother of their king, but even that doesn't help. It is not necessary to mention that there because the army was already pretty much disarray even before Second Tumbleton. There was no clear supreme commander, factionalism, and cowardice. They had the advantage there, but the men only cared about plunder and were afraid to face dragons in battle at KL. We know that the Caltrops actually had to plot to rid themselves of the Two Betrayers. That army wasn't under the command of Lord Peake, he just was one of the higher ranking lords who survived the two battles and the mayhem involved. But there is no reason to believe that the men who had chosen to follow Hugh or Ulf or even other Reach lords felt obliged to follow his orders. He would have marched back home a chunk of the army, but not all of them. Tyland Lannister was still a Lannister. And the Crown needed the gold of Casterly Rock to rebuild. Them offering the Lannisters a boon doesn't mean they had to do that. The Lannisters, Hightowers, and Baratheons - the major Green powers - were all pretty much done militarily whereas the Lads, the Starks, and the Lords of the Vale were not exactly beaten. He was chosen because he had played a significant part in two battles of the war. It is quite clear that the people setting up the regency council wanted the Greens to share power so that peace could better be established. The question is whether they did that because they had to or because they wanted to. And everything indicates that they wanted to. Especially Corlys wanted peace, and he seems to have been the major guy who set up the regency in the wake of Cregan's departure, so this was a conciliatory approach to the former enemies, an attempt to leave the war behind them. The Dance didn't end with two equally strong parties meeting and agreeing to a truce and then a peace treaty. It ended with the Blacks having the upper hand. Sure, but mostly because we have no other major suspect. After all, we don't even know who else sat on the Small Council or had a position of power at court aside from Larys Strong. Well, presumably Aegon III was crowned because Aegon II had named him his heir, no? The men doing that knew it was the will of both the late king (sort of, at least) as well as the victorious Blacks outside their gates and the Starks behind them. The idea that those men gave anything about claims at this point doesn't make a lot of sense - those involved in the murder of the king did so in an attempt to save their own life. They all basically defected from the Green to the Black side, if those terms still meant anything at this point. We also shouldn't forget that Alicent ended up being imprisoned for life despite the fact that some Greens eventually ended up on the regency council. One wonders why that was. I mean, she wasn't really guilty of any real crime if Aegon II was truly the rightful king, right?
  11. It is from the same source as all the other stuff that turned out to be true. At least as far as I know. But we'll learn the truth soon enough.
  12. Still, I really have trouble seeing an Ironborn house ruled by a woman. Informally, perhaps, and perhaps also since the Conquest, but in the old days of the Hoares and further back I doubt they would have suffered that kind of rule. Their entire warrior-culture is based on the exploitation of the weak and women are property there, more so among the elite than among the common people (who most likely never could afford a harem of salt wives). What kind of captain/king would bow to a woman? Especially in the days of the driftwood crown kings? Even slaves have rights in a slaver society. Not that much, though. Salt wives and thralls aren't exactly slaves but they are all things you take by paying 'the iron price'. One assumes beautiful young woman can make 'a career' as a salt wife if they end winning 'the love' of the man who captures them, and there is certainly a good chance that there lived many Danys on the Iron Islands who never got around to hatch their dragon eggs. But it seems to me that the only ones profiting from this kind of arrangement were the children of such unions. What makes the whole thing better than slavery is that the children of salt wives aren't bastards nor born as thralls, just as the children of thralls are born free. And if a man has just a (couple of) salt wives then the eldest son of those also can inherit stuff if things go well and they are not pushed aside by some brother or cousin. But I honestly doubt that it was pleasant for one or multiple salt wives to live alongside a rock wife and true Ironborn children. We don't hear anything about our Greyjoys being descended from salt wives, do we? Perhaps they have some such ancestors far down the family tree but if so then this has yet to be mentioned. George really had the chance to give us some Ironborn women in AFfC. There is no Goodbrother woman, nor Drowned Woman as far as I recall, no talk about the Drowned God having priestesses, the Reader's two sisters - one of which is married to Balon Greyjoy - essentially don't exist as characters, and there are no women at the Kingsmoot aside from Asha.
  13. Well, I watch that crap but at this point it is not really spoilery in any meaningful sense. It is not the same characters, not the same setting, not even the same story. And quite frankly, it is actually painful to watch. People who don't should have more fun.
  14. I don't think we have gotten a good picture how it is to be a woman in any region of Westeros, at least not outside the noble class. We don't know how the life of the average peasant woman is like, anywhere. There are some hints that the Ironborn women are somewhat resembling their men in the sense that they are blunt and outspoken (there is the example of Three-Tooth, the female steward of Ten Towers. And I think Balon has also some female servants in ACoK, has he not? But we don't see any noblewomen with power on the Iron Islands aside from Asha. Alannys Harlaw Greyjoy and her sister Gwynesse are both jokes as characters. If that's so then we have no precedent for that. And we have it confirmed that this never happened for the Starks. It seems to have happened with some of the Northern and could also have happened with a couple of smaller more Andalized houses on Great Wyk but it clearly has never happened for the Greyjoys. And thus the idea that a woman could sit the Seastone Chair is just theory. As Asha's defeat then hammers home. Despite the fact that she was Balon's chosen and groomed heir she pretty much had no chance. I never said they couldn't do that kind of thing. That's pretty obvious. But if there is a culture where women were basically pretty obvious property and chattel it is the Iron Islands. It is the place where it is okay to 'steal' women and then 'marry' them. Or make them into their servants. There is a chance that there is the occasional Black Swan among the salt wives but the overwhelming majority of them would simply have been sex slaves, baby machines, and servants, served to live in an environment they would not have chosen to live in if they had had a choice. Well, you can also mention your preferences in your postings, can't you? Well, I doubt Dany's or Sansa's or Arya's story would be all that interesting if they had ended up living out their lives as sex slaves/servants of Drogo, Joffrey, or Weese, right? Just as the lives of the older wives of Craster up to their deaths wouldn't be all that interesting. The interesting point about the stories of the main characters is that those things are just episodes in their larger stories. But for the average salt wife or servant woman they are pretty much the entire story, right?
  15. There is no reason for weirdo ice mysticism there. Jon's spirit will be in Ghost, not destroyed/in the afterlife. He is not going to be restored by the fire kiss, only his body will be. Which means his body is going to be imbued by fire magic, giving him the same magical gimmicks as Beric's body and blood had without being losing as much of memory and personality. However, fire consumes, and it will take its toll. Jon doesn't need a lot of his personality and character to finish the mission. He could very well become a dead man walking, completely focused on the mission up until his inevitable death in the end. The Dany-Jon romance will come in the books but it is not going to be the beginning of their future but rather a passionate short time between two people who won't have much time together. With the Second Dance and the Aegon issue to be resolved or at least be partially resolved Dany might also suffer more than a few losses and personal tragedies by this point. I don't think she will die and be resurrected, too, but she could be disfigured or severely injured in some fashion.
  16. That is pretty much impossible to guess at this point. If Aegon plays his cards right and actually takes the Iron Throne the entire South (and perhaps even the North, after Stannis' death) aside from Euron's people (whoever they might be) might acknowledge him as their king. How many men he can recruit when Dany arrives will depend on how strong those regions still are at that point, and how many people are going to die in the fights against Euron and Aegon. Dany is likely to lose a lot of people along the way, especially Unsullied and sellswords, since those are the guys who are fighting her battles right now. Quite a few Ironborn should die, too. She should have all the Dothraki which means hundreds of thousands, at least potentially. And the entirety of the Volantene army should also come close to 100,000 in total, I guess.
  17. LOL, guys, read the spoilers. We do know that The idea that a childish moron like TV Arya could play anyone is just ridiculous. All Arya can do is make herself some Frey pies in the kitchen. And there is no way that this ridiculous scene between Arya and Sansa this episode was played on her part. What would be the point of that? Sansa and Arya are not enemies. And if Arya wanted to play Littlefinger and/or Sansa she would have laid a trap for them, not the other way around. But then - TV Arya is as moronic as keeping her faces in some bag in her room. That is ridiculous. Jaqen didn't his second face in his non-existent saddle bag, did he? He just changed faces using his hand/magic. Do you know what the real Arya would do if she wanted to investigate things in Winterfell? She would wear her faces, explore things, investigate people, and kill them without confronting her sister first. In fact, she most likely wouldn't enter Winterfell as Arya Stark in the first place. She would check out the place first, using a different identity.
  18. Oh, I meant that Viserys was of the same generation as Rhaenys and Aegon in the sense that he was much younger than his brother Rhaegar and much closer in age to Rhaenys and Aegon. I know he was technically their uncle but had they all grown up together he, Daenerys, Rhaenys, and Aegon could essentially have been all raised as siblings while Rhaegar would have been as much a father figure to them as Aerys. Never mind, it is basically my point, too. Rhaegar apparently wanted sons, and they believed that the promise prince had to be male. And there is no hint that they ever cared about women there or thought that the three dragon heads must all be the children of Rhaegar's. So Viserys could also have been a candidate.
  19. Well, the history of the Ironborn in TWoIaF is very thorough and the only mentioned therein are the ones who suffer at the hands of their Ironborn husbands. We never meet any female Hoare, Greyjoy, Harlaw, etc. raider captains or princesses, not to mention queens. There are also no female captains mentioned as being present at the Kingsmoot, neither in AFfC nor in any of the historical kingsmoots. I do not doubt that the Ironborn women can own and captain ships, but I doubt those are very big or important ships. And nothing indicates that those women are allowed to go raiding on a regular basis. They most likely are forced to do all the fishing while the men are away. Keep in mind that there is apparently no female martial culture on the Iron Islands while there is one such on Bear Island. The women there had to defend themselves. The Ironborn women did not because the Ironborn are the wolves of the sea. They attack others, they are not attacked themselves (unless the Lannisters send a huge armada over to beat them in the dirt), and that's why their women most likely were little more than property and chattel. Especially those salt wives. I assume that Euron took a huge portion of the male population of the islands which means that right now the women are the ones doing the fishing to feed those feeble and ailing men who stayed behind. The concept of a daughter coming before an uncle seems to be imported to the islands by the Targaryens/Andals. And just as with the Iron Throne it may refer to some lordship but it clearly doesn't refer to the Seastone Chair or the Iron Throne. It is Jaehaerys I's granddaughter who is passed over in favor of his second son, not one his daughters. I'm pretty sure one of his daughters would have gotten the throne had all his sons and grandsons predeceased him. Well, I don't really want to read anything about Ironborn harems. I also don't care to know how Ygon Oldfeather's wives get along. Well, once the Starks secured their rule in the North they apparently only needed mothers for their sons, not so much marriage alliances to gain a lot. And the same should basically go for most of the other kingdoms. I mean, marrying the daughter of your own vassal may get you some dowry and all but not likely a stronger political hold over guy whose family has long since bent the knee. Marriage alliances can become important in crises and wartime but when everything is peaceful and quiet it shouldn't matter all that much whether your father-in-law has a big or only a mediocre army. We don't know that they were ignored all that long. And I'm sure there are as many Stark-Bolton marriages as there are Bracken-Blackwood marriages, but it is not all that likely that those did occur all that often. And there would have to be a pretty good reason for any of those. I'm actually more inclined that the Starks were reluctant to take Boltons brides because they might have thought that could taint their bloodline somehow. Those Boltons aren't really nice creatures. Especially not the important ones. But when George puts his mind on a house he gives them some more interesting and positive guys. Just look at Forrest Frey, for instance. That seemed to have been a very fine man indeed. For all we know Roose and Robb could be rather close cousins through the female line. I mean, perhaps Roose's mother was a Locke, the sister or niece of Marna Locke, the mother of Lord Rickard? That is not unlikely at all. The Boltons must get their brides from the same gene pool as the Starks. They are not going to marry peasants. That is technically true but the Dustins claim descent from the Barrow King who, in turn, claim they are the Kings of the First Men. That is a very prestigious and ancient lineage and thus quite likely to have had more than a few issues with Winterfell since the Starks presumed to rule the entire North. From their point of view the Starks would be upstarts and usurpers. In addition, we see how the Greatjon treats Robb before he falls in love with him. The Umbers are a proud and ancient former royal line, too, somewhat more uncouth and savage than the more powerful Dustins. But when the Lord of Last Hearth and the Lord of the Dreadfort are as dangerous and chilly as Robb and Bran perceive them in AGoT one can only guess how an ambitious and ruthless Lord of Barrowton would have behaved towards them had there been one. There are certain houses in the North who are Stark fans and followers. But the truly powerful and ancient ones are not. Or at least their loyalty is very conditional and fickle. We see that with the Karstarks. Well, if Lady Barbrey was a Dustin cousin I guess it would have been mentioned. She seems to be ruling Barrowton by right of her late husband, which is not completely unheard of. Either there are no known Dustin heirs (unlikely) or Lord Eddard and King Robert decided to allow her to keep the castle and title until her death in exchange for the losses she suffered. Ned can be a pretty nice guy if he wans to, after all. People age differently, and Barbrey suffered a lot of losses at an early age, and then reinvented herself as the 'lonely widow'. Not to mention that managing vast estates like the Barrowlands all by yourself should be quite a stressful task. As long as those vampires and ghosts don't show up I'm not impressed. There is something odd going on in the Barrowlands, sure, but the Stark graves thing just sounds like superstition to me. At least as long no real ghost shows up in Winterfell. There may be some twisted allusion to the wights there. Perhaps the ancient Starks had obsidian blades to keep their dead in their graves? Iron or bronze swords shouldn't help with that at all. Could be, but doesn't have to. Say, Cregan's father was indebted to the Norrey due to saving him or young Cregan while they visited the clansmen at one point? There could have been a wildling attack or young Cregan fell into a cave in the mountains, or something. Or Lord Stark was nearly killed by some wolves or bears during a hunt, with the Norrey saving him, etc. The possibilities there are endless. And there is the fact that the Starks might occasionally want to marry the daughters of the lower houses to keep the bond between them strong. But we conveniently also don't know whether Cregan's hypothetical grandaunt ended up marrying into House Norrey for some reason, making Arra and Cregan second cousins. That could very well be. Cregan really seemed to have a thing for cousins as his third marriage to Lynara Stark confirms. Lynara could be the granddaughter of an unknown granduncle of Cregan's, by the way. They are now but they are also a former royal line and have been presumably not been all that unimportant since they control lands rather close to Winterfell. No idea. But we actually don't know from which branch the Royce wives of the Starks were, either, so that's not necessarily a mystery. I guess that match was made due to more interaction between North and South during the reign of Aegon V. Betha is also not unlikely to be the one between the Willam-Melantha match. Branda and Harrold Rogers most likely got together due to some acquaintances the Wandering Wolf made during his travels. I guess she might even have traveled with him for a time. The Rogers are a very obscure house from the Stormlands, after all. But then, they could also have met at court if Rodrik spent some time there with his family. Perhaps. Or he has chosen them to not make the Starks closely related to any of the known houses? With the Lannisters there is a similar tendency. The Braxes and Farmans are powerful houses of the West, but the Kyndalls are very obscure. And then George decided to make Tytos' mother Lady Rohanne. Tywin's mother being a Marbrand also doesn't come as a surprise considering Jaime's closeness to Ser Addam and him serving as page at Casterly Rock.
  20. It means that it still sounds like something they most likely would do.
  21. It still doesn't sound like something the show wouldn't do. Quite the contrary, actually.
  22. Aegon is likely going to be a very good king since he is not going to get any such temptations. He might fail anyway because he is going to be defeated by Daenerys. It may even turn out to be a shithead when the negotiations begin after Dany arrives but I'm not sure I will be able to blame him for that. I mean, if he sits the Iron Throne then because he earned the throne by winning quite a few decisive battles, most likely, and in this world no king can back down after that and save face or retain his own self-image. That would be like the Conqueror deciding to grant the conquered kingdoms independence again, or the Young Dragon deciding he doesn't want Dorne after all, now that he has conquered it. I guess there is a chance that we'll see a deterioration there with Aegon crossing more than a few lines in his fight against Daenerys, but I don't think that's going to be necessary during his campaign for the Iron Throne. If we ignore Daenerys for a moment, Aegon most definitely is the best pretender we have right now. Tommen is a joke, Stannis is mediocre at best, and Euron is a sadistic madman. Aegon is smart, charming, has the proper dynastic background and the royal looks, and is surrounded by pretty competent and reasonable people. If he wasn't going to face any supernatural threats (dragons or Others) in the future he would be the ideal king to rebuild Westeros once he has taken over.
  23. Him being pissed is understandable. Him throwing around the board game is childish. But my point was actually that I don't buy for a moment that this establishes (or is supposed to establish) Aegon as a 'bad guy' or an irrational evil hothead, or or another Maegor the Cruel or Aerion Brightflame. Overall Aegon is a nice guy. And with very little Targaryen blood if he is not Rhaegar's son.
  24. LOL, the ridiculous talk about Dany's succession was in there to create false tension. With Dany being barren Jon might actually be the better alternative to her and perhaps they can't be together because they would not be able to have children. Which is not going to happen. There will be a miracle child.
  25. I expected you to say that but it is somewhat childish even for a youth of that age. George has a strange way of portraying children at times, some knew and act very mature before they are ten years old and do stuff no children of that ages would do (just look at Rhaenyra's sons and Aemond) and then you have adolescents like Aegon.