Jump to content

R+L=J v.162


Ygrain

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

I do, but I will keep it to myself for the time being.  Yandel may not be outright lying, but misinformed.  It certainly seems that there is much more than one question mark hanging over his recent history accounts.

Until we found a good reason for Yandel/Elio/GRRM lying about this minor detail, then I would assume to be correct information.

30 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Do you have a citation for this assertion?  As far as I recall, we do not know when Rhaegar assumed command of the forces, except that it was before the Trident.  In fact Jonothor Darry was included in those forces, and Chelsted had been roasted when Jaime and he were standing guard at the queen's chambers.  But, I will not say the Hand was or was not needed without some indication either way.

A few quotes from the novels and world book that show that Rhaegar returned to KL sometime after the Battle of the Bells and spent some time raising the army and that he was in command.

The Kingsguard were dispatched to recover the remnant of Lord Connington's force, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south to take command of the new levies being raised in the crownlands

From Dorne, in defense of Princess Elia, ten thousand spears came over the Boneway and marched to King's Landing to bolster the host that Rhaegar was raising

Barristan Selmy rode to Stoney Sept to rally what they could of griffins' men, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south

The queen's eyes had been closed for years, and Rhaegar was busy marshaling an army

So it was basically Rhaegar who raised the army with the help of the KG and Dorne.

A few pages ago, Lord Varys convinced me that several months passed between the Battle of the Bells and the Trident.

30 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Interestingly, Rossart was a member of the Small Council when Chelsted was roasted.  I don't see any issue with Aerys making him Hand the same day that Chelsted roasted.  There is a war going on.  Again, Aerys is paranoid.  That to me indicates that Aerys is not likely to delay appointing a new Hand, especially when he hated sitting the Iron Throne.  He was always getting cut when he did sit on it. 

Check the previous posts between me/Lord Varys/Rhaenys_Targaryen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Until we found a good reason for Yandel/Elio/GRRM lying about this minor detail, then I would assume to be correct information.

When there is a slough of misinformation, I suspect all of the information unless it is verified from an alternate source.  I believe that is a reasonable approach.

40 minutes ago, Tucu said:

A couple of quotes from the novels and world book that show that Rhaegar returned to KL sometime after the Battle of the Bells and spent some time raising the army and that he was in command.

After the Battle of the Bells Aerys sent the Kingsguard (except Jaime and Hightower) to gather the scattered forces.  At some point Aerys asked for and received a pledge for Dorne spears to add to the mustered forces.  Likely, although not specified, additional levies were brought in and trained.  The Kingsguard (Lewyn, Barristan, Jonothor) assigned to those forces were fully capable of commanding and training those forces.  Hightower was assigned to find Rhaegar and return him to King's Landing.  We have no timeline for Hightower's search, Rhaegar's return, or when Rhaegar assumed command of the armies, except that it was before the Trident. 

40 minutes ago, Tucu said:

A few pages ago, Lord Varys convinced me that several months passed between the Battle of the Bells and the Trident.

Let me open your eyes, fully, then.  Jon is younger than Robb.  Robb was born a little over nine months after the Battle of the Bells.  Robb was a babe when Catelyn took him to Winterfell, after the war, after Jon and his wetnurse were installed at Winterfell. 

Just because not a lot happened that was noted in the story does not indicate that Ned and Robert were on vacation for those nine months.  There were scattered remnants of the crown's army to have encounters with, scattered all over the kingdom. 

ETA:  I don't want to mislead you.  I do believe that Rhaegar was present for Chelsted's roasting, leading to his dialog with Jaime.  We just don't have a firm timeline that would tell us when Hightower found Rhaegar, when Rhaegar arrived at King's Landing, and when he could have sent Whent and Dayne back to the tower. 

It is important to note why Chelsted was roasted.  He protested Rossart's preparations with the wildfire, finally resigning.  Aerys didn't take that kindly, and roasted him for his efforts on behalf of the residents of King's Landing.  Being paranoid, and considering that Rossart was the cause for Aerys to be Hand-less, it makes sense for Aerys to have raised him to Hand immediately.  It does not make sense for Aerys to delay appointing a new Hand, because he is taking applications and conducting interviews . . .  Aerys wants one thing, to win, either on the field (Rhaegar) or in the city (Rossart). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MtnLion said:

Let me open your eyes, fully, then.  Jon is younger than Robb.  Robb was born a little over nine months after the Battle of the Bells.  Robb was a babe when Catelyn took him to Winterfell, after the war, after Jon and his wetnurse were installed at Winterfell. 

Just because not a lot happened that was noted in the story does not indicate that Ned and Robert were on vacation for those nine months.  There were scattered remnants of the crown's army to have encounters with, scattered all over the kingdom. 

I don't follow you. Robb and Jon are around the same age; the age difference would depend on who Jon's parents are. If he is the son of a fisherman's daugther, he would be older than Robb; if he is the son of some woman Ned met after his marriage, he would be younger. If he is Lyanna's son...we just don't know who is older. Among the Starks only Ned knows the truth and he is dead.

16 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

After the Battle of the Bells Aerys sent the Kingsguard (except Jaime and Hightower) to gather the scattered forces.  At some point Aerys asked for and received a pledge for Dorne spears to add to the mustered forces.  Likely, although not specified, additional levies were brought in and trained.  The Kingsguard (Lewyn, Barristan, Jonothor) assigned to those forces were fully capable of commanding and training those forces.  Hightower was assigned to find Rhaegar and return him to King's Landing.  We have no timeline for Hightower's search, Rhaegar's return, or when Rhaegar assumed command of the armies, except that it was before the Trident.

We only know that Rhaegar came back some time after the Bells and then spent sometime marshalling an army before leaving for the Trident. How long was this? No idea...but does the exact length of this period matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

When there is a slough of misinformation, I suspect all of the information unless it is verified from an alternate source.  I believe that is a reasonable approach.

This is the best information we have. Do you have any way to confirm your hypothesis that the time between Rhaegar's departure and the Sack of KL was just 2 weeks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tucu said:

I don't follow you. Robb and Jon are around the same age; the age difference would depend on who Jon's parents are. If he is the son of a fisherman's daugther, he would be older than Robb; if he is the son of some woman Ned met after his marriage, he would be younger. If he is Lyanna's son...we just don't know who is older. Among the Starks only Ned knows the truth and he is dead.

Oh, are you one of those that will say that Catelyn couldn't tell the ages of newborns?  Why would she think that Ned had fathered Jon after her wedding?  It seems that Jon's nameday is about a fortnight after Robb's.  But, even if you want to protest this, it should be abundantly clear that between the Battle of the Bells and the fall of King's Landing there is at least nine months.  The Battle of the Bells was the first battle in the new year of 283. 

7 minutes ago, Tucu said:

We only know that Rhaegar came back some time after the Bells and then spent sometime marshalling an army before leaving for the Trident. How long was this? No idea...but does the exact length of this period matter?

It does matter, based upon what Whent and Dayne do to get back to the tower.  There is nothing that tells us for certain that Rhaegar spent more than a few hours at King's Landing before heading off to the Trident.  Rhaegar could have been said to have taken command, if he was corresponding with the Kingsguard who were leading the effort.  That could have been by raven, while enroute to King's Landing.  It would not make sense for Rhaegar to travel through enemy territory unescorted, making it clear the Whent and Dayne likely accompanied him.  In my opinion, it took Hightower several months to sleuth out the location of the tower. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

 Best bet is a deus exmachina worm hole spell for Rhaegar that Ned accidentally used.  ;) 

Lol, I like the idea. Kinda like Farscape :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Oh, are you one of those that will say that Catelyn couldn't tell the ages of newborns?  Why would she think that Ned had fathered Jon after her wedding?  It seems that Jon's nameday is about a fortnight after Robb's.  But, even if you want to protest this, it should be abundantly clear that between the Battle of the Bells and the fall of King's Landing there is at least nine months.  The Battle of the Bells was the first battle in the new year of 283. 

Are you telling me that you can always accurately tell the age difference between a 6 months baby and an 8 month baby? Or a 10 months vs a 14 month? Difference in birth condition, genetics, feeding can easily mask several months. Do you know how old was Robb when Catelyn brought him to Winterfell?

9 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Oh, are you one of those that will say that Catelyn couldn't tell the ages of newborns?  Why would she think that Ned had fathered Jon after her wedding?  It seems that Jon's nameday is about a fortnight after Robb's.  But, even if you want to protest this, it should be abundantly clear that between the Battle of the Bells and the fall of King's Landing there is at least nine months.  The Battle of the Bells was the first battle in the new year of 283. 

It does matter, based upon what Whent and Dayne do to get back to the tower.  There is nothing that tells us for certain that Rhaegar spent more than a few hours at King's Landing before heading off to the Trident. 

But with what precision? Does it matter if Rhaegar spent 5 months raising the army or if he spent 3 months? I don't see how it changes the story so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tucu said:

Tyrion was an educated person that has been involved in running Casterly Rock and he received instructions from Tywin to stop Cerse/Joffrey from destroying the kingdom and to review KL defense. As an experienced adminsitrator Tywin probably knew that Tyrion was capable enough. Can you say the same from the Mad King?

I think Aerys decided to make Rossart his Hand because the man could organize stuff and needed as much royal authority as he could possibly get to implement the wildfire plan as quickly as possible.

Tywin sent Tyrion to KL because he thought Tyrion was smarter than Joff and Cersei and better suited to deal with traitors in the capital. But that doesn't mean he thought he was a capable commander or a great administrator. All Tyrion was supposed to do was to ensure that things did not get worse in KL. Tyrion was never supposed to (out-)shine (Tywin) as Hand.

5 hours ago, Tucu said:

I didnt mean it as Acting Hand (the position) but as someone actually performing the administrative tasks. You said it yourself, the position of the Hand of the King can be vacant for long periods of time and the Hand can be away on other business without KL falling apart.

Rossart could finish his preparations without being Hand of the King.

But Rossart was the Hand. And the only reason why Aerys would give him this office was because of the wildfire plan.

Now, lets look at the history. Often enough a new Hand is picked from among the capable men that are already at court or even part of the king's own government. Lord Lyonel Strong was Master of Laws before he became Hand of the King. Princes Maegor and Viserys were the king's own (half-)brothers, Baelor Breakspear the king's son. Owen Merryweather was already a courtier or a member of the Small Council before he was named Hand. Connington was also at court when he became Hand. The same goes for Harys Swyft, Orton Merryweather, and Tywin Lannister.

The office of the Hand can remain vacant for some time but usually a king knows pretty soon who the hell he wants to name. Robert knew that Ned would be Hand the moment Jon Arryn died. It just took a while because he decided to go to Winterfell to ask Ned in person. Had Ned been at court he would have been named immediately.

4 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

And how much time passed between firing Merryweather and naming Connington? We don't know, but if Aerys truly had wanted to name Rhaegar Hand, and only decided not to do so after being unable to find him, that would suggest the possibility of Aerys leaving the office open for a little while (whilst searching for Rhaegar) here, too.

You are operating under the assumption that Aerys didn't have people searching for Rhaegar since his disappearance. The idea that he just had people searching for him around the time he dismissed and exiled Merryweather doesn't make much sense.

4 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

If Aerys and Rhaegar had come to an understanding, where the compromised by Aerys promising Rhaegar that he'd be named Hand after defeating Robert and the other rebels, Aerys could hardly name a new Hand for the weeks where Rhaegar was off fighting the war. It would send the wrong message ("I'm promising you the office, but naming this other guy anyway"), whereas leaving the office open for Rhaegar would be a sign to Rhaegar that his father indeed intended to keep his promise.

But there is no reason why the hell Aerys could not have dismissed Chelsted to name Rhaegar his new Hand, no? Nor is there any reason to believe he offered Rhaegar the position of Hand as a reward in the first place.

4 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I'm not saying it necessarily happened this way, but there definitly is text in the book supporting the scenario where Aerys waited about a fortnight before naming a new Hand following Chelsted's death, and there are possible scenario's to explain why he would wait.

Nothing that is truly convincing. Rossart burned Chelsted himself. Everything suggests that Aerys had given the man the chain of office even before Chelsted was dead.

After all, there are mistakes in those books that can't be explained away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lord Varys We have plenty of precedents of gaps between Hand of the Kings and GRRM/Elio are telling us that there was a gap between Chelsted and Rossart. I don't see why this would be misinformation; in the end it only affects some versions of RLJ that depends on Ned moving at superhuman speeds through the Riverlands, the Crownlands, the Stormlands and Dorne. More conservative versions of RLJ are still valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tucu said:

Are you telling me that you can always accurately tell the age difference between a 6 months baby and an 8 month baby? Or a 10 months vs a 14 month? Difference in birth condition, genetics, feeding can easily mask several months. Do you know how old was Robb when Catelyn brought him to Winterfell?

Cripes, how long did the war last?  Think about how you are trying to compare apples and oranges, to make your point.  I think that you will join the others on my ignore list.  I am telling you that a mother of a newborn can tell the difference in ages of newborns that are within weeks of each other, and only a  month or two old. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Cripes, how long did the war last?  Think about how you are trying to compare apples and oranges, to make your point.  I think that you will join the others on my ignore list.  I am telling you that a mother of a newborn can tell the difference in ages of newborns that are within weeks of each other, and only a  month or two old. 

Don't know, do you have more information that the rest of us? Around a year between the first battle and the Sack of KL...the rest is an unknown.

As far as we know, neither Jon or Robb were newborns by the time they reached WF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Don't know, do you have more information that the rest of us? Around a year between the first battle and the Sack of KL...the rest is an unknown.

Here.  After the Battle of the Bells, Ned and Jon Arryn married the Tully girls.  They spent long enough together for Ned to see Catelyn pregnant before returning to the war.  Robb is a newborn when Catelyn leaves Riverrun for Winterfell (after the war).  Jon is at Winterfell with his wetnurse when Catelyn arrives.  Early in GoT it is implied that Robb is older by about a fortnight than Jon.  That agrees with Catelyn's view that Jon was conceived after her wedding Ned, and Ned's admission (lie). 

Now, look at the ages of the children:  Rhaenys is near her third birthday and Aegon was about a year old when slain.  (Or, maybe even Jaime being sworn in at Harrenhal at fifteen, and killing Aerys when he was seventeen.) 

(Mike drops)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But there is no reason why the hell Aerys could not have dismissed Chelsted to name Rhaegar his new Hand, no? Nor is there any reason to believe he offered Rhaegar the position of Hand as a reward in the first place.

Nothing that is truly convincing. Rossart burned Chelsted himself. Everything suggests that Aerys had given the man the chain of office even before Chelsted was dead.

Dismissing a Hand a fortnight after naming said Hand does not raise a lot of credibility to naming someone new to the office, in my opinion.

The suggestion that Aerys might have waited to name a new Hand because he might have promised the office to Rhaegar is just that.. a suggestion, a possibility.. And one that, if I recall correctly, you made a year ago yourself, as well.

I'm not 100% sold on the idea. But, as I said before, it is a possible explanation.

30 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But Rossart was the Hand. And the only reason why Aerys would give him this office was because of the wildfire plan.

But that's the thing. Rossart was already capable of creating the wildfire plot without being Hand. If the King had ordered his men to allow Rossart to go and stand wherever he wanted (for example to place the wildfire at the gates and such), the loyalists still remaining would have allowed Rossart to do just that. He didn't needed to be Hand for that.

It is simple. According to Yandel, Rossart was named after the Trident. According to Jaime, Rossart was Hand for a fortnight. Nothing suggests that one of them is wrong, and we have some indirect evidence supporting Rossart's fortnight from the Trident onwards. So if that means that Aerys spent some two weeks deciding on who to name Hand, or waiting on purpose before naming someone, that shouldn't be a problem. Whatever his reasons for doing so were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Here.  After the Battle of the Bells, Ned and Jon Arryn married the Tully girls.  They spent long enough together for Ned to see Catelyn pregnant before returning to the war.  Robb is a newborn when Catelyn leaves Riverrun for Winterfell (after the war).  Jon is at Winterfell with his wetnurse when Catelyn arrives.  Early in GoT it is implied that Robb is older by about a fortnight than Jon.  That agrees with Catelyn's view that Jon was conceived after her wedding Ned, and Ned's admission (lie). 

Now, look at the ages of the children:  Rhaenys is near her third birthday and Aegon was about a year old when slain.  (Or, maybe even Jaime being sworn in at Harrenhal at fifteen, and killing Aerys when he was seventeen.) 

(Mike drops)

You are not narrowing the timelines at all. We only know that the war "raged for a year" by the time of the Sack and that the Siege of Storm's end lasted "the better part of a year" and started some time after Ashford (that the wb says it was after the Bells). The length of Ned's campaign in the Stormlands and Dorne is unknown.

Rhaenys' birth is in 280 doesn't narrow down the timeline either; Aegon was born in 282 or 283

I really don't know were are you going with this. Do you think that you can rebuild a precise and accurate timeline of events?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tucu said:

Rhaenys' birth is in 280

Rhaegar and Elia married in 280, so there is nine months of 280 gone.  Come on.

1 hour ago, Tucu said:

Aegon was born in 282 or 283

And you were quoting the World Book earlier.  Aegon was born near the new year of 282. (This does agree with my pre-World Book calculations.)  Early in 281 the Harrenhal Tourney is held.  Winter returns shortly afterwards.  Elia was bedridden for half a year after delivering Rhaenys, yet she attends the tourney.  It puts a pretty strict window on the time between Harrnehal and the sack of King's Landing.  Jaime's age confirms it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tucu said:

@Lord Varys We have plenty of precedents of gaps between Hand of the Kings and GRRM/Elio are telling us that there was a gap between Chelsted and Rossart. I don't see why this would be misinformation; in the end it only affects some versions of RLJ that depends on Ned moving at superhuman speeds through the Riverlands, the Crownlands, the Stormlands and Dorne. More conservative versions of RLJ are still valid.

George doesn't tell us that. There is just the problem of the Jaime-Darry conversation that causes people to try to make the time line work. It might just be a mistake.

1 hour ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Dismissing a Hand a fortnight after naming said Hand does not raise a lot of credibility to naming someone new to the office, in my opinion.

Sure. But then, Aerys dismissed his Hands for a lot of irrational reasons, didn't he? There was no good reason to fire Merryweather and Connington, nor to burn Chelsted alive.

1 hour ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The suggestion that Aerys might have waited to name a new Hand because he might have promised the office to Rhaegar is just that.. a suggestion, a possibility.. And one that, if I recall correctly, you made a year ago yourself, as well.

I did? I hope not. I cannot recall ever having a different opinion on this Chelsted issue. I always thought the Jaime-Darry conversation must be a mistake.

1 hour ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

But that's the thing. Rossart was already capable of creating the wildfire plot without being Hand. If the King had ordered his men to allow Rossart to go and stand wherever he wanted (for example to place the wildfire at the gates and such), the loyalists still remaining would have allowed Rossart to do just that. He didn't needed to be Hand for that.

Apparently it made things work much better and a lot smoother with Rossart being the Hand. I mean, it is obvious that Aerys, Rossart, and the other pyromancers thought this was best kept secret from anyone. Which is why the king didn't inform his Hand Chelsted about this whole thing or allowed him to attend his meetings with the pyromancers.

But once Rossart was the Hand he spoke with the King's Voice and could essentially order about anybody in the city. And he was in a position where he wouldn't have to worry whether the Hand found out about his plans.

1 hour ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

It is simple. According to Yandel, Rossart was named after the Trident. According to Jaime, Rossart was Hand for a fortnight. Nothing suggests that one of them is wrong, and we have some indirect evidence supporting Rossart's fortnight from the Trident onwards. So if that means that Aerys spent some two weeks deciding on who to name Hand, or waiting on purpose before naming someone, that shouldn't be a problem. Whatever his reasons for doing so were.

But it is just an assumption that a month passed between Rhaegar leaving KL and the Sack. It could have been six weeks or two months (say, because the army marched slowly or they didn't go directly to the Ruby Ford). Then we would have to believe Aerys was without a Hand for a much longer period of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

George doesn't tell us that. There is just the problem of the Jaime-Darry conversation that causes people to try to make the time line work. It might just be a mistake.

OK, we have information from Jamie and Yandel. But we don't have any information that contradicts them, so why are you assuming a mistake?

I am open to the possiblity of one last rape before Aerys sent Rhaella to Dragonstone. Jamie is not an omniscient narrator and he could not be guarding Aerys 24/7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Rhaegar and Elia married in 280, so there is nine months of 280 gone.  Come on.

And you were quoting the World Book earlier.  Aegon was born near the new year of 282. (This does agree with my pre-World Book calculations.)  Early in 281 the Harrenhal Tourney is held.  Winter returns shortly afterwards.  Elia was bedridden for half a year after delivering Rhaenys, yet she attends the tourney.  It puts a pretty strict window on the time between Harrnehal and the sack of King's Landing.  Jaime's age confirms it. 

Rhaenys and Aegon ages at the time of the Sack are calculated from those dates and are approximations. The books do not specify their age when they died.

How do these influence the time between Rhaegar's departure and the Sack of KL? Or the length of the war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Rhaenys and Aegon ages at the time of the Sack are calculated from those dates and are approximations. The books do not specify their age when they died.

Yes, Tywin places Rhaenys' age when she was killed.  Aegon's age is placed in an SSM at about one year. 

28 minutes ago, Tucu said:

How do these influence the time between Rhaegar's departure and the Sack of KL? Or the length of the war?

It is nearly certain that Rhaegar did not leave Dragonstone before Aegon was born, based upon what Daenerys sees at the House of the Undying.  Further support through the World Book, about Rhaegar's whereabouts not being known during the bitter cold.  Brandon travels to Riverrun to answer Littlefinger's challenge, and this must be after the bitterest part of winter has receded.  After Brandon defeats Littlefinger he excuses himself from Riverrun for a short errand, and hears news that has him ride for King's Landing when he is returning.  Some time passes as Rickard is summoned to King's Landing, and he musters 100 men to accompany him.  And, it is after Rickard and Brandon are executed that Jon Arryn receives the message demanding the heads of his wards, that is the beginning of the war. 

So, lay it out on a timeline for yourself, and work things out on your own.  If you have a genuine question, I am sure that you will get a genuine answer, here.  I get tired of being challenged at each turning, for no reason at all.  To a thinking person, Rhaenys' age should have been the real turning point

Tywin, who was Hand when Rhaenys was born, the manner he uses places her age at death within a week or two either side of her third nameday.  Add that she must be born in the 10th or 11th month of the year (not noted for being near the new year for either Rhaegar's wedding, or her birth), and we have a month in 283 for the sack, or official end of the war.  At the very least it is in the third quarter of the year.  ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

Yes, Tywin places Rhaenys' age when she was killed.  Aegon's age is placed in an SSM at about one year. 

It is nearly certain that Rhaegar did not leave Dragonstone before Aegon was born, based upon what Daenerys sees at the House of the Undying.  Further support through the World Book, about Rhaegar's whereabouts not being known during the bitter cold.  Brandon travels to Riverrun to answer Littlefinger's challenge, and this must be after the bitterest part of winter has receded.  After Brandon defeats Littlefinger he excuses himself from Riverrun for a short errand, and hears news that has him ride for King's Landing when he is returning.  Some time passes as Rickard is summoned to King's Landing, and he musters 100 men to accompany him.  And, it is after Rickard and Brandon are executed that Jon Arryn receives the message demanding the heads of his wards, that is the beginning of the war. 

So, lay it out on a timeline for yourself, and work things out on your own.  If you have a genuine question, I am sure that you will get a genuine answer, here.  I get tired of being challenged at each turning, for no reason at all.  To a thinking person, Rhaenys' age should have been the real turning point

Tywin, who was Hand when Rhaenys was born, the manner he uses places her age at death within a week or two either side of her third nameday.  Add that she must be born in the 10th or 11th month of the year (not noted for being near the new year for either Rhaegar's wedding, or her birth), and we have a month in 283 for the sack, or official end of the war.  At the very least it is in the third quarter of the year.  ;) 

OK, you are now using insults and inventing facts. Nice way to prove your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...