Rhaenys_Targaryen

Small Questions v. 10105

1,986 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Exactly. Barbrey is likely to be allowed to suggest her own heir, but her liege can overrule that decision. Whether in this case (ADWD onwards) that means the Iron Thorne (the king) or House Bolton (Wardens of the North) is not clear, but when Robb was the King in the North, it was Robb who would have ultimately decided who Lady Hornwood's heir would have been, likely in in agreement with Lady Hornwood.

When the ruling lord/lady dies and there is no clear heir, parties can present their claims to the King, as we see in ADWD regarding the Rosby lands.

Or we can have another war of succession :thumbsup:...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2017 at 9:35 AM, Lost Melnibonean said:

"They're all racists anyway." :o

Heh, well is there a nice thing a Frey has ever said about a Crannogman? Or anyone else ever... then again no one ever says nice things about the Frey's so maybe I can understand why they are so angry.

5 hours ago, Raisin' Bran said:

Or we can have another war of succession :thumbsup:...

When in doubt... war of succession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something has bugged me for the longest time. How has the Wall and the Night's Watch fallen so far?? Also is it due to Targaryen influence?

I mean at the time of Aegon's arrival Lord Commander Hoare (who stayed loyal, also an Ironborn LC?) there were 10,000 men on the wall and presumbly all 18 castles were manned. The 19th castle was commissioned by the Targs and removed them from the Nightfort which had been the main castle for thousands of years. The new land grant might have had a role in taking focus off defending the Wall.

So 300 years ago the Watch was strong and now its down to 3 castles and maybe 1000 men. All honor and glory is gone form the watch and it is more a penal colony for the worse of Westerosi society.

So what else could have had a effect on the Watch in the past 300 years other than the ascendant of House Targaryen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Wraith said:

Something has bugged me for the longest time. How has the Wall and the Night's Watch fallen so far?? Also is it due to Targaryen influence?

I mean at the time of Aegon's arrival Lord Commander Hoare (who stayed loyal, also an Ironborn LC?) there were 10,000 men on the wall and presumbly all 18 castles were manned. The 19th castle was commissioned by the Targs and removed them from the Nightfort which had been the main castle for thousands of years. The new land grant might have had a role in taking focus off defending the Wall.

So 300 years ago the Watch was strong and now its down to 3 castles and maybe 1000 men. All honor and glory is gone form the watch and it is more a penal colony for the worse of Westerosi society.

So what else could have had a effect on the Watch in the past 300 years other than the ascendant of House Targaryen?

I would look to the maester's conspiracy as a factor, and the death of the dragons. If you don't believe in magic or the Others, then the Night's Watch is just some old relic of bygone days with no real use but to fight wilding raiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Personally, I find the alleged strength of the NW in the days of Aegon I and Harren to be more unbelievable and in need of explanation than I do the sad state it is in today. I suspect that the 10,000 number is either highly exaggerated, or that it was an unusually high peak amidst centuries or millennia of decline. Perhaps House Hoare  swelled the NW with riverlanders in the decades before the conquest, or maybe the NW just had a huge influx of bastard sons of rangers and women free folk, lol.

Southroners sending criminals or defeated enemy warriors to the Wall might make sense, but it makes no sense for Andals and Andlicized descendants of First Men to have kept sending large numbers of their valuable sons to the Wall for centuries or millennia. Not when they could be used to forge or strengthen alliances, or when they could just send them to become maesters, or septons, or join the Faith Militant, or whatever other southron orders existed and would prevent them from having sons of their own.

I do think the Targaryen conquest has contributed, though not intentionally. For some reason I have the impression that the conquest opened the southron regions up to each other, and made it more lucrative for younger sons to remain in the south as knights. I also think major wars like the Dance of Dragons and one or two of the Blackfyre Rebellions, as well as epidemics like the Winter Fever and Great Spring Sickness may have significantly reduced the population, and made southroners even more stingy with where they send their sons.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any good Mallister theories or crackpots out there? I have some good ideas brewing in my keg that need to be tapped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2017 at 1:48 AM, SFDanny said:

I would look to the maester's conspiracy as a factor, and the death of the dragons. If you don't believe in magic or the Others, then the Night's Watch is just some old relic of bygone days with no real use but to fight wilding raiders.

Why would the Maester's want to weaken it? Also the why would the perception of the people of Westeros change so drastically in the last few centuries? I mean the Others haven't been seen for thousands of years (supposedly) what are a few more centuries?

On 4/11/2017 at 4:40 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

Personally, I find the alleged strength of the NW in the days of Aegon I and Harren to be more unbelievable and in need of explanation than I do the sad state it is in today. I suspect that the 10,000 number is either highly exaggerated, or that it was an unusually high peak amidst centuries or millennia of decline. Perhaps House Hoare  swelled the NW with riverlanders in the decades before the conquest, or maybe the NW just had a huge influx of bastard sons of rangers and women free folk, lol.

Southroners sending criminals or defeated enemy warriors to the Wall might make sense, but it makes no sense for Andals and Andlicized descendants of First Men to have kept sending large numbers of their valuable sons to the Wall for centuries or millennia. Not when they could be used to forge or strengthen alliances, or when they could just send them to become maesters, or septons, or join the Faith Militant, or whatever other southron orders existed and would prevent them from having sons of their own.

I do think the Targaryen conquest has contributed, though not intentionally. For some reason I have the impression that the conquest opened the southron regions up to each other, and made it more lucrative for younger sons to remain in the south as knights. I also think major wars like the Dance of Dragons and one or two of the Blackfyre Rebellions, as well as epidemics like the Winter Fever and Great Spring Sickness may have significantly reduced the population, and made southroners even more stingy with where they send their sons.

Well the Night's Watch always seemed to keep good records, as we learn from Sam. So why would they be lying about their strength. Interesting take on the Ironborn possibly filling it up but you think House Hoare would need every man for the wars in the Riverlands.

The Andals invasions would still make a great deal of sense. Less First Men around probably leads to less men on the Wall. Although certain houses even to this day seem to see it as a worthy institution, House Royce for example is a Andalized First Men House.

My guess would have been all the various wars of the Targaryens that lead to less men being available. The epidemics as well make a good deal of sense.

On 4/12/2017 at 8:15 PM, The Fattest Leech said:

Any good Mallister theories or crackpots out there? I have some good ideas brewing in my keg that need to be tapped.

PJ thinks Jason Mallister was part of the conspiracy that took out Balon Greyjoy. Nothing else immediately springs to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Lord Wraith thanks for the info. I have a little bit of a like-hate with PJ (depending on his subject) but will definitely check that out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Lord Wraith said:

My guess would have been all the various wars of the Targaryens that lead to less men being available.

Stefan Sasse attributes the decline to the king's peace in this essay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a male bastard takes a wife, what surname does she take? And what about the children? 

I'm pretty Walder Frey mentions having Grandbastards...

It's totally plausible to imagine a man with a Bastard's name who can count several generations of parents, grandparents, etc.. All having sired offspring born of the marriage bed. It seems odd that that man would still carry the shame of his bastard surname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the son of the royal Targaryen bastard Jon Waters added "Long" to become Longwaters, which Rennifer Longwaters tells Jaime is "so men might know he was not basely born himself".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

@Lord Wraith thanks for the info. I have a little bit of a like-hate with PJ (depending on his subject) but will definitely check that out. 

PJ must be a targ since there is both some genius and madness to his stuff. Personally I love the connects he makes but often loses me on the conclusion.

13 hours ago, Nittanian said:

Stefan Sasse attributes the decline to the king's peace in this essay.

Thank you should be an interesting read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Wraith said:

PJ must be a targ since there is both some genius and madness to his stuff. Personally I love the connects he makes but often loses me on the conclusion.

Thank you should be an interesting read.

Yeah, it seems this happens with many of his watchers as well. He finds great connections, but loses people in the wrap up. I know that is how I feel about many of the (few) videos of his I have seen. It's all good... until it is not anymore :dunno:

Thanks for the info either way :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 4/13/2017 at 8:26 PM, Lord Wraith said:

Why would the Maester's want to weaken it? Also the why would the perception of the people of Westeros change so drastically in the last few centuries? I mean the Others haven't been seen for thousands of years (supposedly) what are a few more centuries?

I didn't say the maester's aim was to weaken the Night's Watch. Rather it is a by-product of their campaign against magic. What use is the Watch, other than as a penal colony and a force against the Wildling raiders, if there is no magic in the world? The Watch was formed, as you know, to unite the many kingdoms of Westeros against the seemingly mythical threat of the Others, so what use is it in a world constructed by the maesters who believe the Others never really existed?

Why the last few centuries? Because those last few centuries coincide with the death of the dragons and the loss of magic in the world. Maester Luwin can kindly lecture Bran about there being no magic in the world all he wants. The gentle soul can tell Bran the children of the forest are long gone, or let him know the Others are things of fable, but the reality of what he is doing is spreading a certain world view that excludes magic, prophecy, dragons, and the Others from being real.

Think on that a moment. The maester of the Lord of Winterfell, the heir to the Kings in the North, is teaching Stark children the threat of the Others is false. No, matter how kindly it is done, it is shockingly disconnected to the truth - as Gared could have told them if anyone would listen. Even the Starks are beginning to believe the core mission of the Night's Watch is a fable. Is it a wonder then that support for the Night's Watch has diminished with the ascendancy of the maester's conspiracy's views on the world, and the decline of magic and the death of dragons? I don't think so.

Edited by SFDanny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BricksAndSparrows said:

When a male bastard takes a wife, what surname does she take? And what about the children? 

I'm pretty Walder Frey mentions having Grandbastards...

It's totally plausible to imagine a man with a Bastard's name who can count several generations of parents, grandparents, etc.. All having sired offspring born of the marriage bed. It seems odd that that man would still carry the shame of his bastard surname.

When a bastard marries, his wife either keeps  her own surname (if she is of higher birth) or takes the name of her husband. When two bastards marry, the woman takes the surname of her husband, most likely. Children born in wedlock inherit the surname of their bastard-born father, but can decide to change his surname (like the son of Jon Waters did). But it can also be the case that they keep the surname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyrion hasn't questioned the matter of Joffrey's death, right?  Or am I mis-remembering.  Me and a friend were talking about it, and we found it curious that Tyrion never once has thought of the real culprit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Tyrion hasn't questioned the matter of Joffrey's death, right?  Or am I mis-remembering.  Me and a friend were talking about it, and we found it curious that Tyrion never once has thought of the real culprit.  

Tyrion thinks that Sansa had the best motive, although he isn't sure how she could have carried out the deed

Assuming Joffrey had not simply choked to death on a bit of food, which even Tyrion found hard to swallow, Sansa must have poisoned him. Joff practically put his cup down in her lap, and he’d given her ample reason. Any doubts Tyrion might have had vanished when his wife did. One flesh, one heart, one soul. His mouth twisted. She wasted no time proving how much those vows meant to her, did she? Well, what did you expect, dwarf?
And yet... where would Sansa have gotten poison? He could not believe the girl had acted alone in this. Do I really want to find her? Would the judges believe that Tyrion’s child bride had poisoned a king without her husband’s knowledge? I wouldn’t. Cersei would insist that they had done the deed together.

I suspect that, once Tyrion learns of Littlefinger's association with Sansa in the Vale, he'll start to consider that LF might have played a role in Joffrey's death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone recall the source for Aethon Velaryon (the father of Alyssa Velaryon and a master of ships to Aegon I) being the son of Daemon Velaryon, Aegon I's first admiral of the fleet who died at Gulltown during the Conquest?

@Lord Varys perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Can anyone recall the source for Aethon Velaryon (the father of Alyssa Velaryon and a master of ships to Aegon I) being the son of Daemon Velaryon, Aegon I's first admiral of the fleet who died at Gulltown during the Conquest?

@Lord Varys perhaps?

Lord Varys' notes on Son's of the Dragon reading. Don't know if there is another source.

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