the conquering bastard 25

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About the conquering bastard 25

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

707 profile views
  1. It's complex and simple at the sametime. I believe that Brandon and Rickon along with those that went with them to KL were in on the kidnapping plot. Think about it why would Brandon think that Rheagar went to KL when he was known to keep court at Dragon Stone and there was known bad blood between the king and his son? This makes no sense. Then there is the position of Lyanna on the Trident. Why was she not either in Winterfell coming down with Brandon for his wedding? Or with the Tullys learning the ways of a southern court? Im of the mind that she was being held either at castle Darry or Harrenhal. Both of which are sworn loyalty to house Targ but primarly to the Prince as it was House Whent via his kinguard brother that set up the tourney in the first place and house Darry has provided 7 knights to the kinguard. Not to mention Jamie Lannisters talks of Darry was that of a man of duty. Then take into account Dany's vision of her brother with Elia. Elia asked Rheagar whether he was going to make a song for the prince. When he reply no he already has a song of fire and ice. I think this is Elia's way of asking where he was going. As stated by Barristan he would go to Summerhall and compose sangs and such but he would do so alone. I believe that Brandon's part of the plan was to purposely get arrested. Protocol would demand that Rickon and his northern's would come to answer for Brandon's crimes. But if one was trying to get enough lords together to summon a great council and displace the king this could and would have been a brilliant opening move. Lyanna's kidnapping was the signal for the lords beholden to Rheagar to come to KL and overthrow Aerys in a bloodless coup. It would have worked if Rheagar had left someone in place to stay his crazy ass father's hand. Yet even that's suspect. Remove the Stark, it's supporters along with those of Riverlands and Vale. There can be no coup as no Rheagar doesn't have the military or political backing to make his move. He needs the major heads from every region to throw their support behind him to remove the king. He's got the Lannister's support if it removes Jamie from the KG. Stark Lyanna becomes queen and her children are in the line of succession. It's in Dorne's best interest as Aegon can still become king even if Elia herself doesn't become queen. The Tully's are tied to the Starks via marriage with Brandon and Cat. Rheagar has the crownlands as their high lord. Nobody cares about the Greyjoys. Now the Tyrells are the tricky point as they could throw their support behind that of Aerys' but then think about it Marg might not have been born but her older brother would have been and a marrigae between Rheanys and Willis would have been a boon and set right the marriage under Aegon V's reign. The only house that he would have to be wary of is that of the Stormlands but Cersei in Roberts bed would go a long way to soothe Robert's wounded pride and he can direct his hate at the crowned Prince but what can he do when he would be without allies and outnumbered. I could even see Rheagar asking Arryn to become Hand as Rheagar doesn't seem to trust Tywin Lannister. Those are my thoughts and That's how I feel
  2. There is a passage where Tyrion looks at the moon and it reminds him of an eye following them. I would propose that this is a referenece to Bloodraven. He seems intrested in Jon the stark children and Tyrion but not Dany....also this passage was when they were on the shy maid. So he's keeping an eye on Aegon Blackfyre as well...
  3. I love and hate this piece of history. The Beautforts were bastards even legal bastards. However they barred from the throne by 2 kings and a Pope. Sry the Tudor dynasty were usurpers of the first order. I love the Tudor dynasty but they were what they were a bastard branch of house Plantagenet who used murder and slew of other sins to win hold and keep the throne
  4. I dont know about that started the series because of the show but i do know this Kit Harrington is if hes book Jon's counterpart book Jon's a stud as well
  5. Exactly. Wouldnt the ships from Volantas have to refresh water and isnt Lys and the Stepstones generally where they refuel. Not to mention the ships were dropping them off on any bit of land they could find. If im not mistaken i think Lys and the Stepstones were places that were mentioned where the gold company were being dropped off. Then there is Jons own mention of important hostages. Given that if they picked the boy up in Lys this would have given Jon plently of time to come up with a scheme to use the boy. Its not foolproof but it does have possibilities
  6. I wouls think that Edric Storm might play a part in the felling of Storms End
  7. It's simple maybe not simple but this is what I have come to find that there's some kind of battle between fire elements and Ice elements. what I mean by the struggle is being triggered bu ice events and then fire events. 600 years ago at hardhome there was some kind of a volcanic event and hardhome burn to the ground, a hundred years later the Targaryen moved to Dragonstone 100 hundred years after that the Doom of valyria happens, 100 years after that you've got the Targaryen is coming to Westeros and then the timetable just spit up after this has landed in Westeros. So it's like a ice event than a fire event another fire event fire event. With the Targw in Westeros and the Starks bending the knee its a fire event dominating a ice event. Then its the reign of fire i.e the Targs rule. The world is out of balance. I can al.ost see the others as an equalizer. Coming in to reset the world allowing it to heal.
  8. There's no way that you can possibly compare Henry the second and aegon III. Henry II was a warrior was his kingdom Stefan tan and then created one of the biggest Empires that Europe ever seen. Now compare tthat to Aegon the 3rd who couldn't couldn't stand to be touched. Who would consider to be weak who contributed nothing to the laws of the Kingdom where Henry created an entirely new Justice code. They are nothing like.
  9. I listed warmonger kings as you call them because going by the time period and what was important to project as a great king making war and defending your people was one of if not the key component to being a good king. John when he decided to play at war got lost all of his ancestral lands in France. Look at his war actions in Ireland. While John overall was just incompetent one of the major flaws with his rule was that he was not seen as a strong king that could influence his will. Not like Henry II or Richard I. John ruled through scare aND fear tactics. HENRY III, is generally forgotten about because really what major contributions did he ? Failed to regain control of French territories, failure to conto the barons twice, had to rule mainly through charters. Royal authority continued to flounder until the reign of his son Edward Longshanks. History certainly remembers this Edward as a great king and he's a throw back to his ancestors Henry II and Richard. The kings that I mentioned being a warmonger was only one part of their appeal. They were strong and effective enought that their actions have been written large across the landscape of history. YET IT STILL STANDS THAT IT'S ONLY THOUGH HINDSIGHT AND A VERY DIFFERENT MIND SET THAT WE ARE ABLE TO CRITICIZE THESE MEN AND THEIR ACTIONS. THE 21 HAS MADE MAN MORE POLITICALLY CORRECT AND HAS LOST THE STOMACH TO GO THE DISTANCE . THESE MEN HAD THE STOMACH BUT ALSO THE BRAINS TO IMPLEMENT THEIR WILL AND SHOULD THE NEED TO WERE WILLING THAT SEE HEADS ROLL, ALL THE WHILE GIVING THEIR PEOPLE A KING OR LEADER THEY COULD BE PROUD OF.
  10. Or she's the white witch. Can't think of her exact name but seeing as BR went north and lived why not her as well. This woman who wears a weir wood mask tells Jon she would be his woman or man whichever he preferred. I like to think Shira went north and has been planted in the story to help support JS via BR when the time comes, maybe be a teacher of magic or help in his resurrection. Not to mention if she is linked to Jon by blood as well.
  11. Youth is not a determination of making goI'd or bad decisions. RL, these ppl are taught to rule from the crib and while Dany herself lack a proper education those around her have had such an education and experience ruling. Think boy kings and rulers. William the conqueror came to his duchy young had to have a minority Henry III, Edward III, Richard II, Edward V, Edward VI. all boy kings all had some sort of minority. By the time Dany reaches Slavers Bay she could be counted as a grown ass adult and has to take the weight.. Henry II became the figurehead of his mother's war at 15 and king at 18. Youth maybe a hindrance to wisdom, but it's not a crutch to be used expecially when you make yourself Queen. I personally have issues with Dany because she doesn't think and rules with her heart and not her brain. makes snap decisions with no idea of how her plays affect not only herself but her future plans. Not to mention she doesn't stick with her plans. Ends slavery but marries a slave and then it's okay for slavery so long as she doesn't have to see it and of course as long as she can wet her beak on the profits. Not taking her hostages heads all bark no bite. But their children That didn't stop her from issuing the order to kill anyone over the age of 13 who wears a tokar. I can't stand a hypercrite.
  12. Unless of course those stipulation were put into place to buy the Lord's Declared sometime. Also Waynwood knows who Sansa is and who she's we'd too, so this gives both parties time to neutralize Tyrion. Thank you, thought I was the only one who noticed that.
  13. Yes, they left civil unrest however they were popular with the people. while Edward III may have started the English on the path of a national identity it was Henry V that cemeted it with the annexation of France. I tend to think if either man had lived to see their heir live to majority history would have turned differently. Had Henry survived Henry VI wouldn't have inherited a throne at 9 months but after he came of age. Had Henry survived there would have been more children, Katherine Valois has 3 or 4 kids by Tudor. When Henry had his mental breakdowns no need to turn to York but another prince of the blood and completely cut Margaret out of the picture. Cuts down on a lot of that later civil unrest as York and Edward out of the immediate line of succession. Yet one can't rewrite history. With that being said the question was why? If one was to base them upon their strengths and doings in their own time period and not those of the standards of our PC times one gets a different perspective. The English seals depect the king doing two different but very interwinned activities, defending their people ( leading armies), and justice. Henry excuted an old friend to stop an uprising before it happened. now am I saying his motives were altristic? Hell no, but to save the many he was willing to sacrifice the few. Because of his popularity and partial because of the shortness of his reign he only had 2 minor disputes domestically. Compared to other kings that's a really good track record. John, Henry III, Edward II, Richard II. 1417, Marks the start of English being the language of government in England. Good enough statesman that the Holy Roman Emperor started off trying to make peace between France and England and yet left England having signed a treaty supporting the Englishs claim. To make peace and save more lives in the war in France he wed Katherine. It was the dauphin and later the mad maid of Orleans that continued the war. As for Edward was more of an idiot in his private life than in hia judgement. Edward suffers from an impulse contol. women, wine and war. Granted a lot of his earlier works could be contributed to the Kingmaker. Yet a wise king knows how to spot and cultivate talent. Edward was again poplular, do not discount the love of the common people. Henry the 8 at the height of his unpopularity never had to fear the people they loved him and would forgive him his wrong doings. Agree or not Henry the 8 is another great English king not just the most notorious. Edwards royal motto: method and order. the laws and justice hat ad been sorely lacking in Henry VIS reign were greatly restored. so by the merits of a medieval standard both men promoted the ideals of a good king. it's only under the eye of a 21 century witness of history are we able to pick apart their actions. However but comma if we are going to be real here if Motimer and Isabella hadn't taken it upon themselves to kill the king history again wouldn't have turned out as such. They set a nasty precedent and in the next hundred yrs 3 kings dying bloody. This precedent also led to the deaths of Mary Queen of Scots and later Charles I. Because history doesn't happen in a vacum. the ones before inform the next gemeration. so does one knock point off Edward IIIs record because of the actions of his mother and her lover. William I yes unpopular... so was Aegon after the conquest. I would imagine that those lords and ladies that lost their status weren't happy with the new status quo. Yet I have to give the man props for having his inheritance snatched from him and then promptly snatching a bone out of the usurper ass for the aggrivation. I am very familiar with whose a Lancaster and whose a York. Most historians classify Richard III as the last Platagenet king as both houses stymied from house Platagent.Can't have a York without Lancaster blood and can't have a Lancaster without York blood and both are grandchildren of Edward III. To strenghen his claim to the dynasty Richard York, went by the name Richard Plantagent. The same cannot be said about the usurpering Tudors. Richard II and Henry IV claimed the Beaufort clan as legitimate but both kings and pope via patent letters that they had no claim to the throne. Also it's a good thing in my original post I said nothing about Henry IV or VI, nor did I mention Richard III with his murky actions. yet if one was to use logic he had no motivation to kill Edward V and Henry didn't have the means, but the dukes of Buckingham descended from the last son of Edward III had both. My point was and still is that these men based upon their times were good decent even great kings.
  14. I'd like to add to this list William Henry I ( yes even if he did possibly probably kill his older brother) Henry V Edward IV (much better politician and his personal exploits eclipse this fact)
  15. No the gold company fought in 4 of the rebellions. 1(as the loses went on to form said company), 3,4 ( which wasn't even a war as Blood raven killed the claimant) and 5 under Maelys. Here I'll even name said claimants Daemon I, Heagon I, Aenys Blackfyre I and Maelys The GC wouldnt even exist if not for the follies of dumb Daemon I. So yeah plausible maybe,if one squints an eye and cocks one head to the side and don't pay too much to the details