Loyalists and Aegon´s disinheritance

[IceFire125]

38 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

Not Oldtown?

Dany will save Oldtown and be crowned there first by the new High Septon, just as Aegon the Conqueror was crowned there first before making his capital at Kingslanding.

The Hightower in the tower, Leyton, will descend and will convince the high septon in that city to yield and crown Dany as Queen.  It will be the reverse of what happened during Aegon I's crowning, where the High Septon told Lord Hightower to yield.

 

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

He did take a few hundred in his army, 

Well, that was Luwin expecting the crannogmen to join him. As far as we know that never happened because nobody ever mentions any crannogmen among Robb's hosts.

Quote

That idea does not make sense because the ultimate decision of going to the three-eyed-crow fell on Bran himself. 

If Bran hadn't agreed, they would never have taken him there. 

Sure, but they went there to convince him to go there, right? And Howland was fine with all that because he gave them permission to go in the first place.

Quote

On Jojen's green dreams -  The only dream he has before reaching Winterfell, that we know of, was the one where he saw a 3EC trying to break the chains of a wolf. The sea dream comes much later after reaching Winterfell - IIRC, before that, he has a green dream where he tells them about fresh cut meat/dead meat served to the Freys and Bran/Rickon.

In any case, Jojen is very fatalistic about his green dreams - he does not really try to interpret them or stop them from happening. He has one about Bran and Rickon's death as well at the hands of Reek, but doesn't do anything to prevent it from taking place, because he knows he can't.

So in that sense he and his father may have known they would eventually end up going to the three eyed crow, but the idea that they would have allowed Winterfell to fall and only then Bran could go, doesn't make any sense. It's more like they have the correct approach to prophecy - they know it's going to happen, no need to actively try to make it happen.

Well, then they could have stayed at home, couldn't they? One assumes (or rather I do) that Howland Reed was not exactly dependent on his son's dreams to tell him what to do or what to expect. The man lived and learned with the Green Men, after all. One expects him to have some talents of his own. I mean, every lord who came to the harvest feast brought a retinue but the Reeds did not. That certainly wasn't a coincidence.

Quote

Howland is not a seer -  we know that from Meera's story of the KoTLT. But I'm with you that the guy might have been in contact with the Children/BR and hence he felt comfortable sending his kids off on this mission. The idea that he actively tried to make it happen however doesn't fit.

That was Howland at the time of his return from the Isle of Faces. We don't know what he learned in the meantime or who contacted him since then.

Quote

Again, that heavily depends on how he's going to be able to prove to the world he's not Rheagar's bastard. A document signed by parents? A wedding cloak? The possible witnesses to such a wedding are dead too (AD and Whent.) How exactly is he going to get Westeros to believe he is the legitimate son of Rhaegar and thus people should fight for him? (Basically, only the Tyrells and Martells.)

My idea is that there has to be some proof independent of Jon Snow's existence that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married. We don't yet know why they went underground and did not live a happy short life on Dragonstone or at court. My idea is that George is going to reveal that Rhaegar and Lyanna married somewhere rather publicly shortly after the abduction (I have Maidenpool in mind because of the Florian-Jonquil association and the fact that Rhaegar had friends there). That then caused Aerys to call for Rhaegar's head because he had no permission to do such a thing and because he saw it as proof for the Rhaegar-Stark conspiracy he already saw in the coronation of Lyanna at Harrenhal. Brandon and Rickard were executed as Rhaegar's accomplices, not because Brandon had threatened him. Aerys wouldn't have had a problem with anyone threatening his ingrate son at that time. However, the Starks insisting that they were no traitors and refusing to confess their crimes could explain why they were treated the way they were.

Quote

Robert had a visceral hatred for all Targaryens, and especially Rhaegar. He expresses this repeatedly -  he says the war was to put an end to Targaryens, he tells Ned he still kills Rhaegar in his dreams every night, he says Targs have no honour, so on.

And Robert not killing Jon himself by his hands but not caring if someone else does it - typical for Robert. The same thing happened with Lady. Robert did not even bother to punish Gregor and Lorch.  Robert would never have done it himself(he's too much of a coward for that), but would have absolutely no qualms ordering the death of Jon - it's essentially the same thing.  If Cersei/Tywin had needled him to do so, he'd have done it.

The entire reason why Ned guards Jon's parentage so fiercely, even from Catelyn, is out of fear that Jon would suffer the same fate as Rhaegar's other children. ("I see no babes. Only dragonspawn.")

That all only makes real sense if Ned believes/knows that Jon is Rhaegar's legitimate child. A bastard would never be danger to Robert's claim nor would he be the target of Robert's wrath. Ned would not have been forced to disguise Lyanna's son as his bastard if he could also have made him her bastard - which would have been possible if nobody had any inclination that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.

Quote

That is not what I said at all. Jon isn't going to get the throne because he is a great guy (we saw how that failed with Dany in ADWD) but because GRRM is going to subvert the trope of the 'hidden prince' earning his throne due to the luck of birth - in this story, the prince has had to learn what leadership is the hard way. 

GRRM gave us through Davos (Arguably the moral compass of the series) what a true king should be doing - "Saving the kingdom to win the throne." That's what Jon has been doing since book 1. It's not a coincidence. It's also not a coincidence that his arc up till now has involved him becoming a reluctant leader to people, not an entitled jackass who's saying "follow me because I have so-and-so blood." (Again, seen through Stannis's arc.) It's not a coincidence that throughout ADWD more and more people kept turning to him as their leader during a troubled time.

Really, at this point in Westeros, the concept of 'rightful king' has been thrown out the window. It's literally 'might is right' at this point. GRRM is clearly trying to tell us something out here.

I really don't see that. As @Protagoras has pointed out what you describe as a subversion of the trope actually is the trope. It is effectively the very same thing as the story of both Aragorn and Simon Mooncalf. Aragorn had to prove his ability to rule in battle as well as in prophecy and while his life is not covered in TLotR in detail the appendices tell us how he serves among the Rohirrin and in Gondor in his youth.

The only difference between your view of Jon and Aragorn is that Aragorn already knows who he is in the story - but then, in his youth Elrond also kept the truth from him so even that is there in this character.

And the only difference between your version of Jon and Simon is that Simon never joined some weirdo warrior monks order. Aside from that they are pretty much the same.

But I don't see the world George has build allow for a Osten Ard-like naive ending. Everything is not going to resolve itself because the hero has proven his worth etc. Especially not in this setting where the majority of the Lords of Westeros doesn't even realize that this Jon Snow fellow actually exists, nor are any of them impressed by his leadership qualities. The idea that this could change in his favor is not very realistic.

And while he has made some alliances in the North he never really saved the Realm as of yet. The South was never threatened by Mance's wildlings - the lords down there had butchered them had they ever crossed the Neck - and for the people he saved he just prolonged the misery. The Others aren't defeated and unless the Wall is not going to fall a lot of people will most definitely die.

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Even if that is true, then maybe Daenerys show up, makes allies of the defeated Westermen and Reachmen and crushes Aegon and remove the castle again.

Sure, that is a possibility. In fact, I'm pretty sure that most of the people jumping the Aegon bandwagon will end up opposing Daenerys - meaning that she might in the end make common cause with people who never were Targaryen loyalists.

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Also, I don´t see the region being particulary interested to support Aegon - indeed they seems to be busy with their own warfare vs the Freys. And why back the Tullys. Maybe say Bracken or Mallister are the first to swear fealty and in return they are promised Riverrun and the overlordship. I have a hard time to believe that they will say no.

The examples you give are very unlikely indeed. The Mallisters are prisoners in their own castle right now Jonos Bracken has just joined King Tommen.

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

The scenario you paint doesn´t strike me as the most logical scenario. In fact, Tullys sucking it up to Aegon sounds unlikely. 

It is not the Tullys sucking up to Aegon it is Aegon sucking up to them. We are not talking the Tullys sending soldiers to Aegon or anything like that. We are talking about Aegon looking at the situation in the Riverlands and (morally) supporting the people who are dealing with the scum no king who wants to be popular would ever make common cause with.

Not to mention that the Riverlords might be aware that their liberation is only going to work because the Golden Company and Dorne are going to tie the hands of the Tyrells.

[LittleDove21]

For me, it will be hard for Targaryen loyalists to side with Aegon, or even Jon (if R+L=J is true) as there is no definitive proof that either one of them are Rhaegar's sons. 

The one thing which has always bugged me about Aegon's story is that Elia would save one of her children and not the other. It's easy to say that there was no little girl who resembled Rhaenys to swap with but would you really want to be parted from your children at such an uncertain time?

I should imagine that they will support Dany once she gets to Westeros as she is the one with the army and the dragons at her back. 

[Lion of the West]

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is a possibility. But dragon or not, Daeron was a weak follower and would be easily dominated by a man like Peake. He even allowed some bastard and a sot to push him around, after all.

That is just willful ignorance on your part. Aegon II fed his own sister to his dragon. What makes you believe Aemond or Daeron are exempt from such a treatment assuming they displeased him?

We are talking here about a scenario in which Aemond Targaryen defeats Rhaenyra and retakes the Iron Throne before Aegon II's fate is revealed to the public. If he believes his brother dead and has won the loyalty of the remaining Green lords he would be their king, not some guy who they presume dead. And should that man then turn up dragonless and in a bad shape he would be a threat to King Aemond's reign, not the king anybody wanted to restore. Why the hell should anyone prefer Aegon the Cripple to Aemond the Great?

If he was so easily pushed around then imagine how easily his brother and mother would take control over him from Peake. Also note that the bastard and sot were dragon riders. That changes things a great deal, while at the same time many brave men like Ser Roger Corn and Jon Roxton were not scared from going up against them.

Its hardly ignorance when I see the full picture. By the accounts I've seen Aegon had spent a life time to hate Rhaenyra and her sons , Aegon had lost brothers in a war against her and she had silently approved of Blood and Cheese which left Aegon's own son, still a child, murdered. I'd say that feeding Rhaenyra to Sunfyre was letting out all the hate, frustration and anger that had been building up across a life time and a major war. Aegon was by all accounts on good terms with his brothers and so I see no reason as to why he would react in the same way if they would crown themselves in the assumption that Aegon was dead.

Also note that Otto Hightower also displeased Aegon. His punishment was to be removed from office, not executed.

Problem is that if Aemond re-took King's Landing odds are that the clubfooted Lord Strong could inform him of Aegon being alive and that Aegon could be smuggled back to he capital to prove himself alive and so on.The main problem with this kind of reasoning is that we know to little at present about the relations and dynamics between Aegon and his siblings to create such counter-factual events with precision. I do however not think that the Greens would be to quick to embrace Aemond as their king if they got news Aegon was still alive. After all they utterly rejected Ulf and Hugh because they wouldn't accept just about any dragon rider as their king. Now Aemond can naturally make a stronger claim than any of those two, but I think it gives a hint that strength alone isn't going to convince the Green lords.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

If he was so easily pushed around then imagine how easily his brother and mother would take control over him from Peake. Also note that the bastard and sot were dragon riders. That changes things a great deal, while at the same time many brave men like Ser Roger Corn and Jon Roxton were not scared from going up against them.

Aside from Roxton they were all cowards because did not dare to challenge them openly like real men would. And Roxton was a fool because Vermithor and Hugh could really have helped them during Second Tumbleton. Killing him while they were attacked was just stupidity.

We are not talking about a discussion here, either. If Daeron I had had a battle coronation then he would have been king, regardless what Alicent or the cripple thought. And if Peake effectively took the reins of the government as he later did King Daeron might never interacted with his mother or elder brother ever again.

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

Its hardly ignorance when I see the full picture. By the accounts I've seen Aegon had spent a life time to hate Rhaenyra and her sons , Aegon had lost brothers in a war against her and she had silently approved of Blood and Cheese which left Aegon's own son, still a child, murdered. I'd say that feeding Rhaenyra to Sunfyre was letting out all the hate, frustration and anger that had been building up across a life time and a major war. Aegon was by all accounts on good terms with his brothers and so I see no reason as to why he would react in the same way if they would crown themselves in the assumption that Aegon was dead.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about Aegon II killing a sibling who displeased him. Once you open that door and kill a 'traitor' you can easily repeat that and both Aemond and Daeron so much as daring to look at his crown would have been treason. Why not kill such traitors? Trystane Truefyre was killed, too, after all.

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

Also note that Otto Hightower also displeased Aegon. His punishment was to be removed from office, not executed.

That was earlier in his reign and Hightower never actually betrayed his king. He just sucked at his job.

1 hour ago, LionoftheWest said:

Problem is that if Aemond re-took King's Landing odds are that the clubfooted Lord Strong could inform him of Aegon being alive and that Aegon could be smuggled back to he capital to prove himself alive and so on.The main problem with this kind of reasoning is that we know to little at present about the relations and dynamics between Aegon and his siblings to create such counter-factual events with precision. I do however not think that the Greens would be to quick to embrace Aemond as their king if they got news Aegon was still alive. After all they utterly rejected Ulf and Hugh because they wouldn't accept just about any dragon rider as their king. Now Aemond can naturally make a stronger claim than any of those two, but I think it gives a hint that strength alone isn't going to convince the Green lords.

Larys Strong had no idea that Aegon yet lived. Aemond knowing that his brother got out of the city doesn't mean that he survived nor is this a reason to wait and see whether the dude ever shows his face again. Not to mention that we could have had a battle coronation, too, based on the news/rumors that Aegon II was dead. And strictly speaking, Larys Strong is just one one. If Aemond doesn't want to hear what he has to say he is easily taken care of. Just as Lyman Beesbury was.

If Aemond had taken command of the Green forces in the field and successfully retaken KL with his dragon and the armies no one would have stood against him. And everybody would have preferred him as king, anyway, considering that he was neither a cripple nor a fat glutton. He was a true warrior.

[Free Northman Reborn]

I've been away from my PC for a while, so was limited to brief phone based comments. Where to pick up?

Well, let me say that if Jon is to become King, it will not be primarily due to his own, solitary actions, but due to some significant manipulation behind the scenes by some conspirators who want him there. And in his case, I am talking about some major supernatural influences in this conspiracy. To those who would dismiss this out of hand, please recall that his election as Lord Commander in itself was due to some clear supernatural intervention from Bran/Bloodraven in having Mormont's raven fly from the pot calling his name at just the right moment. So the precedent has been set. But now the stake are higher, so the magical intervention can be expected to escalate accordingly. Just like magic was responsible for Daenerys's "crowning" when the dragons were birthed.

In this vein, what most people - myself included - have largely ignored - is that there is a very good chance that Robb's will is currently at Greywater Watch. Meaning that it is with Howland Reed. The man who would know that while Jon is named heir in the will, that both Bran and Rickon are likely alive.

So the question becomes - how does he use this knowledge? Well, if he is on board with Bran/Bloodraven, he is going to steer the conspiracy in the direction that gets Jon the Kingship. And if that requires the power of the North to support Jon, and then eventually the power of the Riverlands and Vale to follow, then he will steer the conspiracy in that direction. So it won't be Jon who is just claiming the allegiance of these regions on his own. No, a conspiracy will put the various dominoes in place to fall at the right time to gain him this support.

All of the pieces are in Howland's hands now - most likely. Especially if Bran has started communicating with him directly through the weirwoods in the Neck. This is the part that gets missed when we talk about Jon's path to the Throne. To summarise: It won't be him pushing his claim alone, like Stannis had to. It will be a wide conspiracy, orchestrated by Bran/Bloodraven, supported by Howland Reed and everyone they are able to influence, such as the various loyal Northern lords, possibly Sansa directly and other lords in the Vale/Riverlands.

It won't be as simple as Aegon who just tries  to win the Throne by force.

[Lion of the West]

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Aside from Roxton they were all cowards because did not dare to challenge them openly like real men would. And Roxton was a fool because Vermithor and Hugh could really have helped them during Second Tumbleton. Killing him while they were attacked was just stupidity.

We are not talking about a discussion here, either. If Daeron I had had a battle coronation then he would have been king, regardless what Alicent or the cripple thought. And if Peake effectively took the reins of the government as he later did King Daeron might never interacted with his mother or elder brother ever again.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about Aegon II killing a sibling who displeased him. Once you open that door and kill a 'traitor' you can easily repeat that and both Aemond and Daeron so much as daring to look at his crown would have been treason. Why not kill such traitors? Trystane Truefyre was killed, too, after all.

That was earlier in his reign and Hightower never actually betrayed his king. He just sucked at his job.

Larys Strong had no idea that Aegon yet lived. Aemond knowing that his brother got out of the city doesn't mean that he survived nor is this a reason to wait and see whether the dude ever shows his face again. Not to mention that we could have had a battle coronation, too, based on the news/rumors that Aegon II was dead. And strictly speaking, Larys Strong is just one one. If Aemond doesn't want to hear what he has to say he is easily taken care of. Just as Lyman Beesbury was.

If Aemond had taken command of the Green forces in the field and successfully retaken KL with his dragon and the armies no one would have stood against him. And everybody would have preferred him as king, anyway, considering that he was neither a cripple nor a fat glutton. He was a true warrior.

For the first part, please define a "real man".

Secondly you forget Ser Roger Corn who was quite ready to go to physical attack on Hugh Hammer and then there was a slight problem. The loyalists had three dragons with the army at that time, two of whom were the Two Betrayers. This means for the first thing that the Blacks already had them outnumbered almost two-to-one in terms of dragons at that point as far as they knew. it would have been foolish to needlessly lose dragonriders nominally on their own side. Secondly the problem is that given how Hugh and Ulf were riding dragons there would only have been one, exactly, one shot to get them both killed so that would require some planning seeing how Hugh already had a following of men ready to fight for him which made it even harder to actually killed him. That Jon Roxton killed Hugh during the battle was foolish in one way, but it also ensure that Hugh couldn't use his dragon to take command over the army and turn it to his own ambitions.

Quote

We are not talking about a discussion here, either. If Daeron I had had a battle coronation then he would have been king, regardless what Alicent or the cripple thought. And if Peake effectively took the reins of the government as he later did King Daeron might never interacted with his mother or elder brother ever again.

As I re-read these parts you may have noticed that Lord Peake only wished to make Daeron Prince of Dragonstone while others, unnamed in the text, wanted to crown him. So in that regard there's no reason to think that it would have been Peake who desired to crown Daeron.

Quote

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about Aegon II killing a sibling who displeased him. Once you open that door and kill a 'traitor' you can easily repeat that and both Aemond and Daeron so much as daring to look at his crown would have been treason. Why not kill such traitors? Trystane Truefyre was killed, too, after all.

For the first thing Rhaenyra didn't "displease" him. She was his mortal enemy and rival for power throughout his entire life and the war with her had brought serious losses to Aegon, enough that he would hate her even more bitterly and seek to avenge himself on her. There are no reason to think that execution was his routine answer to being angry with people. And Trystane Truefyre was a nobody as far as Aegon was concerned. Trystane was not Aegon's brother that he had known throughout his life.

Now that don't mean that Aegon couldn't have sent a brother to the Wall or something if it came to it, but I don't see him executing his own brothers if these happily surrender their crowns to him.

Quote

That was earlier in his reign and Hightower never actually betrayed his king. He just sucked at his job.

 The problem was that Hightower still displeased Aegon and it happened without any punishment. If you don't mean "displease" when you write the word "displease" then consider using a different word.

Quote

Larys Strong had no idea that Aegon yet lived. Aemond knowing that his brother got out of the city doesn't mean that he survived nor is this a reason to wait and see whether the dude ever shows his face again. Not to mention that we could have had a battle coronation, too, based on the news/rumors that Aegon II was dead. And strictly speaking, Larys Strong is just one one. If Aemond doesn't want to hear what he has to say he is easily taken care of. Just as Lyman Beesbury was.

That makes little sense. If Aemond got to know that Aegon was alive after Aemond had captured King's Landing one assume it would have been a short thing to capture Dragonstone and from there find out if Aegon is alive in the fishing village or if he's died off. Its true that Aemond COULD have killed off Larys Strong but I don't see the hints of ambition in Aemond or of a rift between Aemond and Aegon that would warrant this behavior. A more likely scenario is that a fleet together with Vhaegar captures Dragonstone and Aegon is restored in triumph to the Red Keep and the throne of his father.

Quote

If Aemond had taken command of the Green forces in the field and successfully retaken KL with his dragon and the armies no one would have stood against him. And everybody would have preferred him as king, anyway, considering that he was neither a cripple nor a fat glutton. He was a true warrior.

I agree that could have happened, but given the lack of hints for this in Aemond's character, that Aemond didn't try to press for his own crown after Aegon went missing and that Aegon and Aemond seems to have gone along perfectly well, I would say that it was a very little risk of Aemond pushing his claim unless he was absolutely sure that Aegon was actually dead and gone.

[Lord Varys]

12 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well, let me say that if Jon is to become King, it will not be primarily due to his own, solitary actions, but due to some significant manipulation behind the scenes by some conspirators who want him there. And in his case, I am talking about some major supernatural influences in this conspiracy. To those who would dismiss this out of hand, please recall that his election as Lord Commander in itself was due to some clear supernatural intervention from Bran/Bloodraven in having Mormont's raven fly from the pot calling his name at just the right moment. So the precedent has been set. But now the stake are higher, so the magical intervention can be expected to escalate accordingly. Just like magic was responsible for Daenerys's "crowning" when the dragons were birthed.

That sounds not a likely possibility to me. The idea that some sort of choosing (during a Great Council, perhaps) in the end of the series would be a rather anticlimactic scenario especially if the whole Targaryen ancestry thing is going to play an important role during the War for the Dawn.

If Jon becomes a leader during that war then this in itself could/should very well qualify for the crown or already make him king (in all but the name). Afterwards he could then just take formal possession of the throne without allowing the people who already obeyed his orders to actually discuss that topic.

This is what I mean I say that Jon is going to become Dany's consort or her acknowledged heir as her nephew.

Quote

In this vein, what most people - myself included - have largely ignored - is that there is a very good chance that Robb's will is currently at Greywater Watch. Meaning that it is with Howland Reed. The man who would know that while Jon is named heir in the will, that both Bran and Rickon are likely alive.

There is no textual evidence that Manderly and Robett are in contact with Galbart and Howland. Only then could we assume that Howland knows that Bran and Rickon are still alive. Unless, of course, we assume that Howland is somehow in direct contact with Bloodraven. That is certainly possible but as of yet unproven.

Quote

So the question becomes - how does he use this knowledge? Well, if he is on board with Bran/Bloodraven, he is going to steer the conspiracy in the direction that gets Jon the Kingship. And if that requires the power of the North to support Jon, and then eventually the power of the Riverlands and Vale to follow, then he will steer the conspiracy in that direction. So it won't be Jon who is just claiming the allegiance of these regions on his own. No, a conspiracy will put the various dominoes in place to fall at the right time to gain him this support.

If there was such a conspiracy at work then Bloodraven would manipulate Willas Tyrell (via the Three Singers, most likely the most powerful hub of weirwood magic left alive south of the Wall) into that direction, not the Vale and the Riverlands. It is by now pretty clear that old gods still have some power south of the Neck. There are many weirwoods in the castles left and even the Lannisters might not be immune to Bloodraven's influence.

In fact, Bloodraven had decades to arrange Jon Snow's eventual kingship by messing with the heads of Ned, Catelyn, and many other people.

Quote

All of the pieces are in Howland's hands now - most likely. Especially if Bran has started communicating with him directly through the weirwoods in the Neck. This is the part that gets missed when we talk about Jon's path to the Throne. To summarise: It won't be him pushing his claim alone, like Stannis had to. It will be a wide conspiracy, orchestrated by Bran/Bloodraven, supported by Howland Reed and everyone they are able to influence, such as the various loyal Northern lords, possibly Sansa directly and other lords in the Vale/Riverlands.

The idea that Bran is in direct communication with anyone and we are not privy as readers to him first accomplishing this makes little sense to me. When Bran is going to speak first through a tree we will either witness this event firsthand through Bran's chapters or through the eyes of a POV who witnesses the event. After all, this should be a powerful and singular event in the (recent) history of Westeros. There is no hint that Bloodraven can do anything of that sort.

 

6 hours ago, LionoftheWest said:

For the first part, please define a "real man".

I'm going with Bobby Baratheon's definition. He (and Ned, to a lesser degree) defined what (noble born) masculinity is about in this series.

Quote

Secondly you forget Ser Roger Corn who was quite ready to go to physical attack on Hugh Hammer and then there was a slight problem. The loyalists had three dragons with the army at that time, two of whom were the Two Betrayers. This means for the first thing that the Blacks already had them outnumbered almost two-to-one in terms of dragons at that point as far as they knew. it would have been foolish to needlessly lose dragonriders nominally on their own side. Secondly the problem is that given how Hugh and Ulf were riding dragons there would only have been one, exactly, one shot to get them both killed so that would require some planning seeing how Hugh already had a following of men ready to fight for him which made it even harder to actually killed him. That Jon Roxton killed Hugh during the battle was foolish in one way, but it also ensure that Hugh couldn't use his dragon to take command over the army and turn it to his own ambitions.

That is wrong. The dragons were irrelevant. The Caltrops plotting the murder of Ulf and Hugh were just cowards. They were neither with their dragons nor close to them while they were in Tumbleton. The dragons were not kept inside the ruins of the town nor directly in the camp. The Caltrops were just too craven to attack Hugh/Ulf and their followers with their own men-at-arms. If they had done so they should have been able to overwhelm them. And if not, if Ulf and Hugh had more followers at this time than the Caltrops combined then Hugh actually had a very good reason to style himself king.

Quote

As I re-read these parts you may have noticed that Lord Peake only wished to make Daeron Prince of Dragonstone while others, unnamed in the text, wanted to crown him. So in that regard there's no reason to think that it would have been Peake who desired to crown Daeron.

That is irrelevant, too. We are not talking about what Peake actually wanted but about a scenario in which Daeron was crowned. Such a scenario entails that Peake was okay with that plan since Daeron most certainly wouldn't have crowned if he had opposed the idea.

Quote

For the first thing Rhaenyra didn't "displease" him. She was his mortal enemy and rival for power throughout his entire life and the war with her had brought serious losses to Aegon, enough that he would hate her even more bitterly and seek to avenge himself on her. There are no reason to think that execution was his routine answer to being angry with people. And Trystane Truefyre was a nobody as far as Aegon was concerned. Trystane was not Aegon's brother that he had known throughout his life.

Trystane Truefyre was (allegedly) Aegon II's half-brother.

Rhaenyra never harmed Aegon II personally. Daeron I or Aemond I wouldn't have done so, either, but would have stood between him and his throne. And if they hadn't abdicated again Aegon II could only have regained his throne over their corpses.

Quote

Now that don't mean that Aegon couldn't have sent a brother to the Wall or something if it came to it, but I don't see him executing his own brothers if these happily surrender their crowns to him.

But the scenario we are talking about is a scenario in which they don't happily surrender their crowns because they like being king (or their followers like that they are king).

Quote

 The problem was that Hightower still displeased Aegon and it happened without any punishment. If you don't mean "displease" when you write the word "displease" then consider using a different word.

There is no reason for that. You know that Rhaenyra displeased Aegon in a more serious manner than Otto ever did.

Quote

That makes little sense. If Aemond got to know that Aegon was alive after Aemond had captured King's Landing one assume it would have been a short thing to capture Dragonstone and from there find out if Aegon is alive in the fishing village or if he's died off.

We are not talking about King Aemond postponing his coronation. He could have proclaimed himself king as Aegon II's heir even before he retook KL. Or there could have been convincing rumors that Aegon II was dead.

Quote

Its true that Aemond COULD have killed off Larys Strong but I don't see the hints of ambition in Aemond or of a rift between Aemond and Aegon that would warrant this behavior. A more likely scenario is that a fleet together with Vhaegar captures Dragonstone and Aegon is restored in triumph to the Red Keep and the throne of his father.

I agree that could have happened, but given the lack of hints for this in Aemond's character, that Aemond didn't try to press for his own crown after Aegon went missing and that Aegon and Aemond seems to have gone along perfectly well, I would say that it was a very little risk of Aemond pushing his claim unless he was absolutely sure that Aegon was actually dead and gone.

If you don't see Aemond's tasteless and outright treasonous comments as evidence I can't help you. Saying the crown of his brother suits him, Aemond, much better than it ever did Aegon effectively means that Aegon is not suited to be king and he, Aemond, is should be king. Aemond tasted royal power when he was Prince Regent and there is little reason to believe that he would ever have given up that power if he had regained the Iron Throne.

[Lost Melnibonean]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm going with Bobby Baratheon's definition. He (and Ned, to a lesser degree) defined what (noble born) masculinity is about in this series.

Like he did here...

Quote

Have you seen Mace Tyrell's boy? The Knight of Flowers, they call him. Now there's a son any man would be proud to own to.

Eddard VII, Game 30

[Free Northman Reborn]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That sounds not a likely possibility to me. The idea that some sort of choosing (during a Great Council, perhaps) in the end of the series would be a rather anticlimactic scenario especially if the whole Targaryen ancestry thing is going to play an important role during the War for the Dawn.

If Jon becomes a leader during that war then this in itself could/should very well qualify for the crown or already make him king (in all but the name). Afterwards he could then just take formal possession of the throne without allowing the people who already obeyed his orders to actually discuss that topic.

This is what I mean I say that Jon is going to become Dany's consort or her acknowledged heir as her nephew.

There is no textual evidence that Manderly and Robett are in contact with Galbart and Howland. Only then could we assume that Howland knows that Bran and Rickon are still alive. Unless, of course, we assume that Howland is somehow in direct contact with Bloodraven. That is certainly possible but as of yet unproven.

If there was such a conspiracy at work then Bloodraven would manipulate Willas Tyrell (via the Three Singers, most likely the most powerful hub of weirwood magic left alive south of the Wall) into that direction, not the Vale and the Riverlands. It is by now pretty clear that old gods still have some power south of the Neck. There are many weirwoods in the castles left and even the Lannisters might not be immune to Bloodraven's influence.

In fact, Bloodraven had decades to arrange Jon Snow's eventual kingship by messing with the heads of Ned, Catelyn, and many other people.

The idea that Bran is in direct communication with anyone and we are not privy as readers to him first accomplishing this makes little sense to me. When Bran is going to speak first through a tree we will either witness this event firsthand through Bran's chapters or through the eyes of a POV who witnesses the event. After all, this should be a powerful and singular event in the (recent) history of Westeros. There is no hint that Bloodraven can do anything of that sort.

 

I'm confused by your position in the bolded parts. Howland clearly operates with a far more mystical perspective than your average Westerosi lord. Recall his visit to the Isle of Faces. Recall his kids surprise at the fact that Jon's origin story is not known to Bran.

 Do you imagine that Meera and Jojen snuck off to take Bran to the Three Eyed Crow without Howland's knowledge? Of course note. They were there officially, to re-swear their oaths, and to take him North. Howland knew this in advance, thanks to Jojen's greendreams.

Consider that Arya can warg into Nymeria across an ocean - without any training. We learn that the Children taught the First Men to speak through Ravens to each other. Bran should have no difficulty whatsoever in warging into a Raven in the Neck and talking to Howland directly. And this without any direct weirwood network communcations that is probably possible too.

Bloodraven is not going to mesmerize hostile southron lords to do his bidding, as you suggest he should have done with Willas Tyrell. I doubt that is possible. Instead, he/Bran are going to use their powers, foresight and knowledge to bring lords into the fold who would already be inclined to see the value of their cause, with a bit of prompting.

Howland Reed would be the first. Other Northern lords would be next, given their adherence to the Old Gods religion. The Blackwoods probably next.

Then Riverrun could be brought into the fold relatively easily by sending Rickon to rule there as their "puppet" - if Edmure can be killed off or if he just happens to die coincidentally. Alternatively, Edmure could be brought into the fold thanks to the oath he swore to Robb, and by revealing Robb's will to him. The options there work either way.

Next would come Sansa. Here they can target her family loyalty to the Starks, as well as her continued devotions to the Godswoods wherever she goes. If Bran was to reveal himself to her directly it would be the only prompting she needs to find a cause she believes in - which would be the restoration of her family. Especially if Bran reveals the bigger picture to her in terms of the threat of the Others. I'd imagine that someone like Bronze Yohn Royce might be a good candidate to bring into the fold as well, to help Sansa achieve mastery of the Vale.

As you will no doubt point out, Robb's will becomes effectively null and void once Jon's true identity is revealed. And this is where my point comes in that his true identity will be known to some, but not to others, and only revealed when the time comes. And this appropriate time would be at a point where Sansa is firmly in control of the Vale (which does not require Jon being  King in the North), when Bran/Rickon are back in Winterfell (which then no longer requires Jon to be Robb's heir for purposes of keeping the Riverlands aligned), and when a Targaryen identity will become a major factor in the greater politics of Westeros (meaning Daenerys has likely conquered the South).

All of this requires careful orchestrating. And who better than a magical demi-god who has near omniscient knowledge, who can instantly communicate across continental distances, and whose family are in key positions to rule the North, Riverlands and Vale?

It makes very good sense to me.

[IceFire125]

22 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

All of the pieces are in Howland's hands now - most likely. Especially if Bran has started communicating with him directly through the weirwoods in the Neck. This is the part that gets missed when we talk about Jon's path to the Throne. To summarise: It won't be him pushing his claim alone, like Stannis had to. It will be a wide conspiracy, orchestrated by Bran/Bloodraven, supported by Howland Reed and everyone they are able to influence, such as the various loyal Northern lords, possibly Sansa directly and other lords in the Vale/Riverlands.

Sam had direct influence with feeding discontent (to look unfavorably of the other candidates) and influencing the brothers for Jon to be elected.

Noticed that Maester Aemon wasn't directly involved.  GRRM will reverse this.  Sam will be stuck and unable to do any sort of influencing directly, because he will, by this time, have already forged a chain (at least).

I'm of the opinion that some how, Sam will have Maesters loyal to the great houses of Westeros, to influenced their respective lords to vote for Jon in the Great Council to come.

During the election for Lord Commander, it was the action the black winged raven (landing on Jon's shoulder) that caused the final tilt and significant factor to influence the brothers to vote for Jon.

Likewise, at the Great Council, it will be a much bigger black winged creature, a dragon, that will land next to and submits himself for Jon to mount his shoulder.  That will be the final tilt and factor to influence the great lords to vote for Jon to be king.

 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I'm confused by your position in the bolded parts. Howland clearly operates with a far more mystical perspective than your average Westerosi lord. Recall his visit to the Isle of Faces. Recall his kids surprise at the fact that Jon's origin story is not known to Bran.

Sure, I never said Howland Reed may not be some sort of powerful sorcerer. I know that he was trained by the Green Men and that should have given him some special powers or at least a deep insight into what really mattered.

What I doubt is just that he is in contact with everybody without anybody (including the reader) realizing this. We are likely to see what Bran is doing from his POV when he begins doing stuff that have an impact. Else George should simply drop Bran as a POV - which he isn't going to do because there is another Bran chapter that didn't made it into ADwD (possibly one that is connected to the Battle of Ice).

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

 Do you imagine that Meera and Jojen snuck off to take Bran to the Three Eyed Crow without Howland's knowledge? Of course note. They were there officially, to re-swear their oaths, and to take him North. Howland knew this in advance, thanks to Jojen's greendreams.

Sure. But as I've said recently here or elsewhere when talking to @Little Scribe of Naath I don't see that as a strong sign of Howland caring about the Stark cause politically. He could have sent more men than just Meera and Jojen to Winterfell, could he not? Men to protect her on their later journey and Meera/Jojen/Bran at Winterfell. If Howland had any knowledge of the future on his own - which may or may not be the case - then he effectively allowed Theon to take Winterfell. And one actually wonders whether the castle had to fall for Bran to be able to go to Bloodraven. Luwin, Rodrik, Cat, or Robb would never have allowed Bran to do such a thing.

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Consider that Arya can warg into Nymeria across an ocean - without any training. We learn that the Children taught the First Men to speak through Ravens to each other. Bran should have no difficulty whatsoever in warging into a Raven in the Neck and talking to Howland directly. And this without any direct weirwood network communcations that is probably possible too.

Well, he might do something like that eventually but there is no hint whatsoever that this is possible right now. The ravens cannot really talk in full sentences yet. In Theon 1 they barely are able to utter two word sentences. What makes you believe Bran secretly can talk to Howland in full sentences?

Bran might eventually be able to speak through the trees but I doubt that's going work easily. In fact, I think they will have sacrifice people to the trees again to make that work.

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Bloodraven is not going to mesmerize hostile southron lords to do his bidding, as you suggest he should have done with Willas Tyrell. I doubt that is possible. Instead, he/Bran are going to use their powers, foresight and knowledge to bring lords into the fold who would already be inclined to see the value of their cause, with a bit of prompting.

That is just your preference speaking. Willas Tyrell, Stannis Baratheon, Wyman Manderly, Cersei Lannister - all of these people would be mesmerized and in awe if a weirwood with a face would suddenly audibly speak to them. The idea that only the Northmen, Riverlords, Vale men would be open to such prompting makes no sense whatsoever.

An old god talking to you would essentially be proof that those gods actually exist - more than people can say about the Seven. And it is not that the stories about the Others and the Last Hero are unknown in Westeros. They are just considered to be fairy-tales. But if you have proof that aspects of those stories are real then people should quickly convince themselves that the other parts are real, too.

I'm not saying stuff like that could not also involve Sansa, some Northmen (although most of them are right now not in their castles near their own godswoods), or the Riverlords. I just see no reason why Bran should not want to reach as many people as he wants to reach. And the fact remains that the strongest hub of known weirwood power south of the Wall is actually at Highgarden, not in the North.

George has already told us that we would see Highgarden eventually (apparently in the next book) and it is hardly a coincidence that this castle got three weirwoods with faces rather than just one (or none at all).

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, IceFire125 said:

I'm of the opinion that some how, Sam will have Maesters loyal to the great houses of Westeros, to influenced their respective lords to vote for Jon in the Great Council to come.

During the election for Lord Commander, it was the action the black winged raven (landing on Jon's shoulder) that caused the final tilt and significant factor to influence the brothers to vote for Jon.

Likewise, at the Great Council, it will be a much bigger black winged creature, a dragon, that will land next to and submits himself for Jon to mount his shoulder.  That will be the final tilt and factor to influence the great lords to vote for Jon to be king.

Oh, come on now, the books are not called 'Jon Snow's Road to the Throne'. Sam would have host thousands of maesters in great parties for decades to convince them to persuade their lords to vote for Jon - beginning at the point when Sam actually learns that Jon is Rhaegar's son (which he most likely isn't going to learn soon).

And Drogon, well, let's just say the lords will have seen a lot of him during the War for the Dawn. The mystery of Jon Snow's parentage should be a matter of the distant past after the Others have been defeated. Jon might long be a dragonrider at this point.

[Free Northman Reborn]

46 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, come on now, the books are not called 'Jon Snow's Road to the Throne'. Sam would have host thousands of maesters in great parties for decades to convince them to persuade their lords to vote for Jon - beginning at the point when Sam actually learns that Jon is Rhaegar's son (which he most likely isn't going to learn soon).

And Drogon, well, let's just say the lords will have seen a lot of him during the War for the Dawn. The mystery of Jon Snow's parentage should be a matter of the distant past after the Others have been defeated. Jon might long be a dragonrider at this point.

And now it is your preference speaking.

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And now it is your preference speaking.

In the sense that I don't think that this story is revolving in a ridiculous way around Jon Snow, yes, my preference is speaking. But I think that preference is based on the nature of the story. Jon is just a POV among many and the idea that story elements like Sam studying to be a maester or the dragons are just plot devices to make Jon Snow king when they seem to be plot elements in their own right doesn't make any sense in light of the structure of the book.

Even if this series  was set up as some sort of soap it would be unbelievable that Samwell could make Jon king via the maesters of the other lords. There is no time for that, nor is Sam the kind of men to sway other men with his charisma or money - he has neither of those things.

Your idea that we'll get another North vs. South scenario which has then come to terms to deal with the Others seems to be to easy. We have Euron, Aegon, and Dany still in the mix as claimants (not to forget Cersei, the various Tyrells, Littlefinger and the Vale, the Faith, and even the Hightowers and the Dornish) in addition to Stannis/Jon, and we have no reason to believe that all those people won't be there anymore when the Others make their move. Some of those powers might be neutralized, some people might die, others might face troubles and overcome them.

The idea that the various claimants and conflicts George set up in AFfC/ADwD are just going to be dropped or tied up quickly makes little sense.

The truth is that we have no way to predict how things stand when the Others finally make their move because that event is still nowhere in sight.

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In the sense that I don't think that this story is revolving in a ridiculous way around Jon Snow, yes, my preference is speaking. But I think that preference is based on the nature of the story. Jon is just a POV among many and the idea that story elements like Sam studying to be a maester or the dragons are just plot devices to make Jon Snow king when they seem to be plot elements in their own right doesn't make any sense in light of the structure of the book.

Even if this series  was set up as some sort of soap it would be unbelievable that Samwell could make Jon king via the maesters of the other lords. There is no time for that, nor is Sam the kind of men to sway other men with his charisma or money - he has neither of those things.

Your idea that we'll get another North vs. South scenario which has then come to terms to deal with the Others seems to be to easy. We have Euron, Aegon, and Dany still in the mix as claimants (not to forget Cersei, the various Tyrells, Littlefinger and the Vale, the Faith, and even the Hightowers and the Dornish) in addition to Stannis/Jon, and we have no reason to believe that all those people won't be there anymore when the Others make their move. Some of those powers might be neutralized, some people might die, others might face troubles and overcome them.

The idea that the various claimants and conflicts George set up in AFfC/ADwD are just going to be dropped or tied up quickly makes little sense.

The truth is that we have no way to predict how things stand when the Others finally make their move because that event is still nowhere in sight.

My view can be summarized as having a whole bunch of factions fighting it out for the South (Dany, Aegon, Euron and Cersei), with a bruised and bloodied Daenerys emerging victorious, to then be met by a similarly bruised and bloodied North, Vale and Riverlands with Jon as its effective commander. And the two then uniting to face the Others.

Which is a far more nuanced story than Daenerys sweeping all before her only to come and save the desperate, starved and hopeless Northerners in their hour of need. So the purpose of Euron, Dorne, Aegon etc. are to provide the necessary opposition to Daenerys to prevent her from being this all powerful God-Queen who sweeps all before her imperiously.

[Protagoras]

 

4 hours ago, IceFire125 said:

Sam had direct influence with feeding discontent (to look unfavorably of the other candidates) and influencing the brothers for Jon to be elected.

Noticed that Maester Aemon wasn't directly involved.  GRRM will reverse this.  Sam will be stuck and unable to do any sort of influencing directly, because he will, by this time, have already forged a chain (at least).

I'm of the opinion that some how, Sam will have Maesters loyal to the great houses of Westeros, to influenced their respective lords to vote for Jon in the Great Council to come.

During the election for Lord Commander, it was the action the black winged raven (landing on Jon's shoulder) that caused the final tilt and significant factor to influence the brothers to vote for Jon.

Likewise, at the Great Council, it will be a much bigger black winged creature, a dragon, that will land next to and submits himself for Jon to mount his shoulder.  That will be the final tilt and factor to influence the great lords to vote for Jon to be king.

 

How exactly...why would Drogon humbly bow down for Jon? I know his fans think he is some kind of messiah, but this sounds ridiculous.

I assume Daenerys is dead in such a scenario (since a dragon only can have one rider). But what you describe is not close on what we have seen it work when people have tried and succeded to control dragons. You need to create a bond, show that you are not afraid, often dominating the dragon with force (like a whip) - very much like some kind of animal mastery test. And somehow Jon doesn´t have to do this because he is so super-awesome?

Or are you somehow assuming some kind of long-distance warging? Because I might forget something but there is no reason that would happen unless said dragon is really close to Bran in the first place - and even then, if somehow Drogon is close to Bran, I don´t see it as guaranteed that Bran will win such a struggle.  The nature of the beasts, according to Haggon, seems to be that the larger, more feral and more dangerous animal, the harder it is. Dragons therefore should be the hardest to warg. The greatest amongst the greenseers could wear the skin of any beast it is said, but Bran is not a full greenseer yet. He is a novice in training to become one. He shouldn´t be able to control dragons until he is finished with his training. And that in a best case scenario, assuming Bran is indeed so powerful people think he might be.  

In addition, doesn´t it seem pretty poor literature if GRRM repeats the same thing he did with the LC election but in a larger scale? Another bigger black winged creature. Another election with Sam influencing people somehow to vote for Jon. Doesn´t this strike you all as cheesy? (And quite frankly, GRRM broke my suspension of disbelief in that LC election. Jon is NOT a good compromizing candidate - you want an old geezer for that, so you can redo the process in a few years). If Jon somehow becomes king - I am most certain GRRM won´t repeat the same literary move. 

And I have to agree with Lord Varys (again). Certainly we can talk of "different preferences" but if one preference is "Everything is about Jon and the Starks" and one is "Jon and the Starks are not the only thing that matters in the series" one of these positions is not only having the burden of proof on it (You never have prove the something isn´t in a certain way, the burden is always on those claiming something to be the case) but frankly sounds like a very unlikely ending for the series. The other characters are simply too important to simply serve as Jons B-team and if GRRM actually did end it that way it would be a huge blow to the entire series. All the build-up for THAT kind of ending? That you can find in most young-adult fantasy? Big letdown. 

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

My view can be summarized as having a whole bunch of factions fighting it out for the South (Dany, Aegon, Euron and Cersei), with a bruised and bloodied Daenerys emerging victorious, to then be met by a similarly bruised and bloodied North, Vale and Riverlands with Jon as its effective commander. And the two then uniting to face the Others.

Which is a far more nuanced story than Daenerys sweeping all before her only to come and save the desperate, starved and hopeless Northerners in their hour of need. So the purpose of Euron, Dorne, Aegon etc. are to provide the necessary opposition to Daenerys to prevent her from being this all powerful God-Queen who sweeps all before her imperiously.

The problem with this take is that we have yet no clue what the hell the situation will be when Dany finally arrives in Westeros. Who is to say that the factions in the South won't invade the North in the meantime? I don't think that's a very likely move for Aegon while he still has to secure support for his cause in the South but I can't predict what he'll do should he ever sit sort of secure in the saddle in KL before Dany arrives. Would he then not make a move to subdue the North, too? Especially if he has by then learned about the threat the Others pose (or even that he has a half-brother up there, somehow).

The same goes for Euron, of course. War might even begin in the Vale where he is concerned. If Euron defeats the Redwyne Fleet he could very well invade the Vale and destroy the troops and ships there. In fact, that could be a smart move to prevent the Vale from joining his enemies.

The longer it takes for Dany to come to Westeros the more likely it is that Westeros won't be able to mount any (significant) opposition against her invasion. That's just a matter of arithmetic. Dany is always getting more troops throughout the story not less. Granted, there is a possibility that she might lose some in the Battles of Meereen but if she would gain the allegiance of the Dothraki those losses would be irrelevant. And if the soldiers of Volantis were to join her we would most likely have to add another huge army (in tens of thousands, one assumes) to her cause.

And by the way - I never said Dany would save the Northmen. I'm inclined to believe she will save Westeros with her men. Both from complete anarchy as well as from the Others. On which the focus is going to be will depend on the time line. Is Dany going to come before the Others make their move or thereafter? That's completely unclear and depends on George's plan for Westeros in the meantime. 

Every hint we got in AFfC/ADwD suggests that a lot of time is going to pass else there would have been no need to introduce Aegon, Euron, the Faith, Dorne, various sorcerers, the Citadel etc. as major players and factions. You can't fast-forward from the end of ADwD to Dany's arrival in Westeros.

[Protagoras]

20 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

My view can be summarized as having a whole bunch of factions fighting it out for the South (Dany, Aegon, Euron and Cersei), with a bruised and bloodied Daenerys emerging victorious, to then be met by a similarly bruised and bloodied North, Vale and Riverlands with Jon as its effective commander. And the two then uniting to face the Others.

Which is a far more nuanced story than Daenerys sweeping all before her only to come and save the desperate, starved and hopeless Northerners in their hour of need. So the purpose of Euron, Dorne, Aegon etc. are to provide the necessary opposition to Daenerys to prevent her from being this all powerful God-Queen who sweeps all before her imperiously.

I can at least for me say that I certainly don´t want Daenerys to think she is a messiah there to help the poor northerners. In fact, I don´t want her to help them at all in the first place, unless they are willing to swear fealty there and then. The idea that she rushes up with her dragons North without demanding anything just because she somehow have a religious belief in R'hllor and that she is Azor Ahai is strange to me. Not saying you support that party line, but the Northern arrogance presented by some of its fans is shocking - "Yeah, we want her dragons to help out, but fuck the Targaryen demands.  North forevah!"

Dragon-power doesn´t come free nor cheap. And not only did the Starks and the North overthrow her dynasty but recently seems to have this wild and crazy idea about separatism.  When she arrive, The North will have most likely fought (or even is fighting) an internal war, have one of the harshest winters ahead of them with little food as well as a supernatural enemy invading. If they want to keep their independence they can deal with that stuff themselves. Or make a really good beg as to why Daenerys should care about the relatives of one of the "usurper´s dogs" and send food, food which the south need themselves. 

Because why again would Daenerys and Jon be united vs the others? There is no reason Daenerys should care that they devastate a region unwilling to submit in the first place. Or are you assuming that Jon are willing to swear fealty to Daenerys there and then? Because if Jon say something like "I want your help, but North, Riverlands and Vale won´t bow to you", I really, really hope Daenerys take her soldiers and walk back to the south. 

 

[Lord Varys]

14 minutes ago, Protagoras said:

I can at least for me say that I certainly don´t want Daenerys to think she is a messiah there to help the poor northerners. In fact, I don´t want her to help them at all in the first place, unless they are willing to swear fealty there and then. The idea that she rushes up with her dragons North without demanding anything just because she somehow have a religious belief in R'hllor and that she is Azor Ahai is strange to me. Not saying you support that party line, but the Northern arrogance presented by some of its fans is shocking - "Yeah, we want her dragons to help out, but fuck the Targaryen demands.  North forevah!"

Dragon-power doesn´t come free nor cheap. And not only did the Starks and the North overthrow her dynasty but recently seems to have this wild and crazy idea about separatism.  When she arrive, The North will have most likely fought (or even is fighting) an internal war, have one of the harshest winters ahead of them with little food as well as a supernatural enemy invading. If they want to keep their independence they can deal with that stuff themselves. Or make a really good beg as to why Daenerys should care about the relatives of one of the "usurper´s dogs" and send food, food which the south need themselves. 

Because why again would Daenerys and Jon be united vs the others? There is no reason Daenerys should care that they devastate a region unwilling to submit in the first place. Or are you assuming that Jon are willing to swear fealty to Daenerys there and then? Because if Jon say something like "I want your help, but North, Riverlands and Vale won´t bow to you", I really, really hope Daenerys take her soldiers and walk back to the south. 

TFR has the idea that the North (sort of the help with its allied controlled by Northmen, i.e. the Riverlands and the Vale) will fare much better through the crisis caused by the Others (and somehow also by winter) than the South because there will be wights all over the place in the South (due to the Others raising all the corpses down there suddenly) while there will be a lot of (warm?) safe havens in the North. Also, the South will get an even worse bloodletting than the Riverlands and the North due to a greyscale epidemic and more infighting.

I agree on the pandemic (although Shireen might also spread a similar plague up in the North) but certainly not on the wights thing. The best thing the Others can do is to keep the people in the South ignorant about their existence and their powers. Not to mention that the idea that a long-distance resurrection of wights is pretty unlikely in the first place. Nothing suggests that this is even possible.

My personal guess is that it is very likely that Dany might arrive at a time when the Wall has already fallen and the Northmen are retreating/fleeing down south, thus making a political conflict between the two factions irrelevant. The idea that the people could survive in the North after the Wall has fallen - if it falls, that is - makes no sense at all.

Nor does the idea that Dany would go out of her way to offer help to the Northmen while they haven't submitted to her rule at a time in which the Wall still stands. But it doesn't make any sense at all that any sane person in the North would not do anything in his/her power to win the friendship of Daenerys Targaryen and her vast forces upon her arrival. If the Others have not yet made their move they could need any help they can get. Mormont and Aemon begged all the Five Kings to support the Night's Watch.

And once winter really shows its teeth the situation in the North should become much worse than it is right now. War continues and the stores are pretty much empty. Castles (Winterfell, Torrhen's Square, Deepwood Motte) have been plundered.

Jon Snow would most likely lick his aunt's boots if needed to gain her support in this fight. There is no question about that. Hell, he even openly admits that he could need a dragon at the Wall. What do you think would he agree to if this was actually a realistic prospect?