Rhaenys_Targaryen

Small Questions v. 10105

2,464 posts in this topic

On 10/23/2017 at 6:27 PM, Lizard Princess said:

Things I've wondered about:

Did Walder Frey keep Roslin (presumably his best looking daughter) out of Catelyn's sight when discussing a marriage between a Frey girl and Robb? If so, why?

Why did he give Roslin to Edmure for marriage?

Catelyn never actually sees any of the Frey girls when she treats with Walder Frey. When she returns to Robb, she tells him that he can pick whichever girl meets his fancy.

Quote

“And you are to wed one of his daughters, once the fighting is done,” she finished. “His lordship has graciously consented to allow you to choose whichever girl you prefer. He has a number he thinks might be suitable.”

After that, she doesn't return to the Twins until the Red Wedding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the books specify which king Dalbridge squired for? I've read online it was Jaehaerys, just don't know if it's confirmed somewhere and I've missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KingMance said:

Do the books specify which king Dalbridge squired for? I've read online it was Jaehaerys, just don't know if it's confirmed somewhere and I've missed it.

The app says Jaehaerys II. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In The Hedgeknight Baelor states regarding the tourney where he unhorsed Ser Arlan: "It was nine years past, at Storm's End." Now there are two ways to read that. Some people (and the wiki) use the statement to place said tourney in 200 AC, nine years earlier. But I think there is a second, more accurate way to read it. Baelor answers Maekar's question: "How can you possibly remember some insignificant hedge knight who chanced to unhorse Damon Lannister sixteen years ago?" So in my opinion Baelor's time specification refers to the date of the Lannisport tourney and means "nine years later". Since Dunk does not seem to have been present at the Storm's End tourney despite already being Arlan's squire, 200 AC does not really fit the timeline anyway. So what is the proper way to read Baelor's statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

In The Hedgeknight Baelor states regarding the tourney where he unhorsed Ser Arlan: "It was nine years past, at Storm's End." Now there are two ways to read that. Some people (and the wiki) use the statement to place said tourney in 200 AC, nine years earlier. But I think there is a second, more accurate way to read it. Baelor answers Maekar's question: "How can you possibly remember some insignificant hedge knight who chanced to unhorse Damon Lannister sixteen years ago?" So in my opinion Baelor's time specification refers to the date of the Lannisport tourney and means "nine years later". Since Dunk does not seem to have been present at the Storm's End tourney despite already being Arlan's squire, 200 AC does not really fit the timeline anyway. So what is the proper way to read Baelor's statement?

Baelor states that the Storm's End tourney was "nine years past". That means nine years ago, not nine years later.

Also, Baelor's comment on "it was nine years past" was not in answer to "[...] hedge knight who chanced to unhorse Damon Lannisters sixteen years ago", but to the question "why would you deign to joust with a hedge knight?".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Baelor states that the Storm's End tourney was "nine years past". That means nine years ago, not nine years later.

Also, Baelor's comment on "it was nine years past" was not in answer to "[...] hedge knight who chanced to unhorse Damon Lannisters sixteen years ago", but to the question "why would you deign to joust with a hedge knight?".

Alright, then the German translation got it wrong, as well.

But is that not an inconsistency? I think we can deduce from the text that Dunk was not present, although he already was Arlan's squire.

Edited by The Wondering Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Alright, then the German translation got it wrong, as well.

But is that not an inconsistency? I think we can deduce from the text that Dunk was not present, although he already was Arlan's squire.

Possibly, but not necessarily.

Duncan was five or six when he began to serve Arlan, and "no more than three or four" at the time of the Redgrass Field in late 196 AC, placing about 2 years between the two events. As such, Duncan became Arlan's squire in (late) 198 AC, or perhaps even 199 AC.

Chronologically, Dunk and Arlan serving at Highgarden is the first job we know of that Arlan held with Dunk as his squire.

“I knew that,” said Dunk, irritated. “The old man and I served at Highgarden before you were ever born.” He hardly remembered that year himself, but Ser Arlan had often spoken of Leo Longthorn, as he was sometimes called; a peerless jouster, for all the silver in his hair. “That must be Lord Leo beside the tent, the slender greybeard in green and gold.”

At that moment, Dunk believes that Aegon is no older than eight or nine (The lad looked to be no more than eight or nine, a pasty-faced skinny thing, his bare feet caked in mud up to the ankle.) That would place Dunk being at Highgarden around the same year at the tourney at Storm's End, or slightly before. No later than 201 AC, at the very least.

Duncan had not yet been serving Arlan for that long, as we can see. A few years at most. And we can see that he hardly remembers that year, and although he had been at Highgarden himself, all he knows about Leo Tyrell comes from Arlan's stories.

So would it be an inconsistency to say that Duncan cannot remember something that occurred in 200 AC? I'd say not necessarily. First of all, we do not know if Arlan brought Duncan with him to the tourney grounds, or deemed the young boy ready to squire for him in a tourney where he was to face royalty. Or perhaps Duncan had been present, but just as his time at Highgarden, was too young to remember a decade later.

Or, perhaps, it is indeed an inconsistency. :) That possibility certainly exists as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course we can try to make it fit, but in my opinion it does not really work. If Dunk had started sqiring for Arlan in 200 AC, Arlan would not have had a squire for around three years. That does not really make sense to me, since there must have been a lot of boys who could have replaced his former squire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Of course we can try to make it fit, but in my opinion it does not really work. If Dunk had started sqiring for Arlan in 200 AC, Arlan would not have had a squire for around three years. That does not really make sense to me, since there must have been a lot of boys who could have replaced his former squire. 

By his own account, Dunk was 3 or 4 years old at the time of the Redgrass Field (Roger's death), and 5 or 6 when Arlan took him on. So no matter how you turn it, Arlan did not have a squire for ~2 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2017 at 0:01 AM, Lommy's Shade said:

Catelyn never actually sees any of the Frey girls when she treats with Walder Frey. When she returns to Robb, she tells him that he can pick whichever girl meets his fancy.

After that, she doesn't return to the Twins until the Red Wedding.

 

Okay, thanks! I mixed some details up in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick question as I am catching up with the numerous Grand Northern Conspiracy threads and something related to Robb's will is bugging me.

Assuming that Robb did legitimize Jon as a Stark, and assuming Jon will ultimately know about his parentage (I consider at this point R+L=J canon) : will Jon be a Stark or a Targaryen ? There was no priest around his birth and likely no legal paper to prove it. And even if there was, does king Robb's will top it ? Or perhaps is it up to Jon to choose between the two ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Serafina said:

A quick question as I am catching up with the numerous Grand Northern Conspiracy threads and something related to Robb's will is bugging me.

Assuming that Robb did legitimize Jon as a Stark, and assuming Jon will ultimately know about his parentage (I consider at this point R+L=J canon) : will Jon be a Stark or a Targaryen ? There was no priest around his birth and likely no legal paper to prove it. And even if there was, does king Robb's will top it ? Or perhaps is it up to Jon to choose between the two ?

That's not a small question. Ask that in the latest R+L=J thread, and you are likely to generate several pages of debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

That's not a small question. Ask that in the latest R+L=J thread, and you are likely to generate several pages of debate. 

Haha okay :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the Mummer's Ford on the Red Fork? And have we got much idea about whereabouts it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/11/2017 at 3:00 PM, Serafina said:

A quick question as I am catching up with the numerous Grand Northern Conspiracy threads and something related to Robb's will is bugging me.

Assuming that Robb did legitimize Jon as a Stark, and assuming Jon will ultimately know about his parentage (I consider at this point R+L=J canon) : will Jon be a Stark or a Targaryen ? There was no priest around his birth and likely no legal paper to prove it. And even if there was, does king Robb's will top it ? Or perhaps is it up to Jon to choose between the two ?

What @Lost Melnibonean said, but also, Martin has said that Jon will learn about his parentage so you can cross that one off your 'if' list. :)

And to the issue of surname, there's a third option... I think when he finds himself caught between being a Stark, what he always wanted, and a Targaryen, he might decide to remin Jon Snow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the current status of House Dondarrion? If its head was outlawed, shouldn't Blackhaven be declared an enemy of the Crown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi. While out  today wearing a GoT shirt I was stopped by another fan and ended up in a ASOIAF convo with a complete stranger for about an hour, as you do.  Two things we disagreed about was he was insistent that the Starks are originally wildlings and that the targaryens and starks have married before. He used a family tree in some official book he has that I don't. I was like nuh...

does anyone know if there is truth in what he is saying. as far as I am aware the starks from wildings  I can only relate to the tale of bael the bard. and the only targ stark alliance would be the planned wedding in the act that never happened, they're probably related from other houses that have married into both. Is there a book with some giant family tree that says house strak was founded by wildlings and the targ/starks have married before? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2017 at 0:16 PM, Springwatch said:

Is the Mummer's Ford on the Red Fork? And have we got much idea about whereabouts it is?

Yep.

Quote

"Father must have known that, because he sent out some men to oppose them, under the king's own banner. He gave the command to some southron lordling, Lord Erik or Derik or something like that, but Ser Raymun Darry rode with him, and the letter said there were other knights as well, and a force of Father's own guardsmen. Only it was a trap. Lord Derik had no sooner crossed the Red Fork than the Lannisters fell upon him, the king's banner be damned, and Gregor Clegane took them in the rear as they tried to pull back across the Mummer's Ford. (AGOT Catelyn VIII)

In the app, the map pin for the Mummer's Ford is placed north of Pinkmaiden and west of Acorn Hall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ser Micaelys said:

hi. While out  today wearing a GoT shirt I was stopped by another fan and ended up in a ASOIAF convo with a complete stranger for about an hour, as you do.  Two things we disagreed about was he was insistent that the Starks are originally wildlings and that the targaryens and starks have married before. He used a family tree in some official book he has that I don't. I was like nuh...

does anyone know if there is truth in what he is saying. as far as I am aware the starks from wildings  I can only relate to the tale of bael the bard. and the only targ stark alliance would be the planned wedding in the act that never happened, they're probably related from other houses that have married into both. Is there a book with some giant family tree that says house strak was founded by wildlings and the targ/starks have married before? 

The Starks descent from the First Men, as do the wildlings. And there's the Stark lord who was supposedly fathered by Bael, the King-beyond-the-Wall.

The Targaryens and Stark have not, as far as we know, intermarried. During the Dance of the Dragons, Prince Jacaerys and Lord Cregan Stark agreed upon the Pact of Ice and Fire, an alliance between the two houses which included the promise of a marriage of a Targaryen princess to House Stark. As far as we know, no such marriage took place (Cregan himself married a Backwood shortly after wars end).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nittanian said:

In the app, the map pin for the Mummer's Ford is placed north of Pinkmaiden and west of Acorn Hall. 

Ah thanks, I need to get the app.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now