The Book of Swords - The Sons of the Dragon SPOILERS

[Colonel Green]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Lord Bracken wanted Barbra to marry King Aegon when Queen Naerys seemed to die, did he not? That would have hardly worked without the king's permission, right? And if there were plans to do that then Lord Bracken either already knew that Aegon would marry Barbra after Naerys was dead, or that he was confident that the man would agree to that. Independent of the weirdo polygamy thing it would have been very easy for Aegon to get rid of Naerys by allowing her to join the Faith while taking a new wife.

Yes, other people wanted to convince Aegon IV to marry if his wife died.  There's no indications as to his own thoughts on the matter.  And indeed, as you note, that Naerys died some time before he did and that he never bothered remarrying would seem to indicate he didn't feel any especial reason to do so.

And, as already discussed, he didn't want to get rid of Naerys because he enjoyed tormenting her.

Quote

The women exploiting Aegon would definitely be Bethany Bracken, Jeyne Lothston and her mother, and, of course, Serenei of Lys. The only mistress who may have honestly loved Aegon while he was king would Melissa Blackwood. And even there I'm doubtful.

You're assuming he thought they honestly loved him, or cared about that.  He clearly wanted absolute fidelity while they were his mistress, but we're not given any reason to think he didn't understand that his mistresses were looking for advancement.  We're talking about a guy who paid a dragon egg to a lord for the right to shag several of his daughters.

[Jaak]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

No, why should they? The High Septon was king in all but name after the High Septon and the Faith Militant had effectively deposed King Aenys.

And the Targaryens weren't usurpers or anything (Maegor was, technically, but that makes only sense if you think Prince Aegon had a claim to the kingship which the Faith would deny), they were abominations and monsters. They had no right to anything, not even to live. Which is why the Faith Militant tried to kill them all.

They were. Aegon I-s casus belli had been maiming his envoy. Even if the crime of returning a bringer of an insulting message maimed, rather than intact with an insulting answer justified forfeiture of Stormlands, the other kingdoms - Harren had been a "menace", but we never hear of Harren actually coming round to attack, and Dorne, Reach, Westerlands, Vale and North had done Aegon no wrong at all. Targaryens were usurpers there.

Faith could have declared an aim to restore pre-Conquest kingdoms (minus Hoares as ironmen...). Or they could have openly declared the goal to abolish the position of King as such and demand direct allegiance of all lords to High Septon for all purposes, religious and secular. Did they announce any war aims either way?

[Lord Varys]

39 minutes ago, Jaak said:

They were. Aegon I-s casus belli had been maiming his envoy. Even if the crime of returning a bringer of an insulting message maimed, rather than intact with an insulting answer justified forfeiture of Stormlands, the other kingdoms - Harren had been a "menace", but we never hear of Harren actually coming round to attack, and Dorne, Reach, Westerlands, Vale and North had done Aegon no wrong at all. Targaryens were usurpers there.

A usurper is usually a person who unjustly overthrows a monarch or head of state or government and installs a new one under his leadership.

The term is not used when there is a (just) war fought that results in the conquest of another nation. George W. Bush did not 'usurp' the place of Saddam Hussein, the vikings didn't 'usurp' the rule of England when they conquered it, etc.

If you are the sovereign head of state and declare war on another both the culture of Westeros as well as our real world cultures - some of which are still viewing just wars as a noble thing to do - then we would say that the conqueror can keep the lands he has conquered.

39 minutes ago, Jaak said:

Faith could have declared an aim to restore pre-Conquest kingdoms (minus Hoares as ironmen...).

Why should they do that? Nobody in the Faith wanted to go back to the Seven Kingdoms nonsense. In fact, the Faith's attacks against the Targaryens came from all the former Andal kingdoms. People from everywhere in the Realm were all united in their hatred of the Targaryens.

In that sense, the most likeliest outcome of a Faith victory would have been the High Septon taking over the Targaryen Realm, perhaps with himself as spiritual supreme head of the government and the Grand Captain of the Warrior's Son as the 'worldly ruler' on the Iron Throne.

You have to keep in mind that basically only the dragons did keep the lords on the Targaryen side. If the Targaryens had been gone the lords would have been forced to actually fight against the legal representatives of their gods on earth - and their military orders - and chances are not that high that they would have dared doing that. That would have been sacrilege and blasphemy. And the lords could then no longer hide behind the dragons of the Targaryen masters.

39 minutes ago, Jaak said:

Or they could have openly declared the goal to abolish the position of King as such and demand direct allegiance of all lords to High Septon for all purposes, religious and secular. Did they announce any war aims either way?

No, that was a war of annihilation - and then a fight for survival which they lost. The Faith wanted the Targaryens dead. That was the goal. What would happen afterwards was never discussed. 

2 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Yes, other people wanted to convince Aegon IV to marry if his wife died.  There's no indications as to his own thoughts on the matter.  And indeed, as you note, that Naerys died some time before he did and that he never bothered remarrying would seem to indicate he didn't feel any especial reason to do so.

And, as already discussed, he didn't want to get rid of Naerys because he enjoyed tormenting her.

Well, the whole thing is pretty inconsistent in any case. The Naerys thing prevented him from having a legitimate son in the first place, one he could have used to replace Daeron.

And the man did apparently entertain the notion of allowing his bastard to take a second wife in his own daughter. Do we really think the man never thought about taking a second wife himself?

Perhaps he didn't like the idea, sure. But this is never really my point. I don't want speculation as to why the man did what he did. I want an explanation as to what actually happened.

The point of my examples there always is to point out situations where I think it is reasonable to assume that the polygamy option must have come up in some fashion. If Jorah can urge Dany to take two consorts pretty much any Targaryen king could have been ask by anyone whether it would be cool if he took two wives.

It is quite clear that Aegon didn't think he could practice polygamy. And perhaps even did not want to do that. But it would be odd in light of the fact that he was apparently willing to grant the privilege to his bastard - who was not legitimized at the time - when he himself did not indulge that kind of behavior. I don't think Aegon was the kind of man who allowed other people debaucheries he himself shied away from.

But we also know he was a cautious man, smart enough to realize that he could not disinherit Daeron without risking to create an uprising that might result in him losing his crown.

Presumably polygamy could have resulted in a similar ending, especially while Aemon and Naerys was still alive. But that would then be a sign that polygamy was no longer really an option for a Targaryen king at that time.

2 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

You're assuming he thought they honestly loved him, or cared about that.  He clearly wanted absolute fidelity while they were his mistress, but we're not given any reason to think he didn't understand that his mistresses were looking for advancement.  We're talking about a guy who paid a dragon egg to a lord for the right to shag several of his daughters.

Well, that is royal generosity and openhandedness. The point I was trying to make is that Aegon's mistresses must have known how to play and manipulate to get what they wanted, Melissa Blackwood especially. The woman was very much unlike Aegon yet had the ability to remain in Aegon's good graces for over five years.

If one of those women had it in her mind to become Aegon's queen then she sure as hell should have been able to accomplish that goal. Assuming Aegon and his court thought polygamy was still technically possible for a Targaryen king. If Aegon was of the opinion that this was impossible - for him, at least - then it is quite clear why it didn't happen.

But the idea that Aegon just thought 'Well, if I marry one of those harlots it would be much more trouble to get rid of them later on.' I'm pretty sure some of his mistresses could have convinced him to change his mind on that one. After all, he himself admits that he loved all those women.

[Jaak]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

A usurper is usually a person who unjustly overthrows a monarch or head of state or government and installs a new one under his leadership.

The term is not used when there is a (just) war fought that results in the conquest of another nation. George W. Bush did not 'usurp' the place of Saddam Hussein, the vikings didn't 'usurp' the rule of England when they conquered it, etc.

How about a foreign conqueror who won an unjust war?

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If you are the sovereign head of state and declare war on another both the culture of Westeros as well as our real world cultures - some of which are still viewing just wars as a noble thing to do - then we would say that the conqueror can keep the lands he has conquered.

Yes, but they can say that this particular conqueror waged an unjust rather than just war.

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Why should they do that? Nobody in the Faith wanted to go back to the Seven Kingdoms nonsense. In fact, the Faith's attacks against the Targaryens came from all the former Andal kingdoms. People from everywhere in the Realm were all united in their hatred of the Targaryens.

... which does not rule out alliance of Seven Kingdoms as equals against a common foe, like Reach and Westerlands had been.

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In that sense, the most likeliest outcome of a Faith victory would have been the High Septon taking over the Targaryen Realm, perhaps with himself as spiritual supreme head of the government and the Grand Captain of the Warrior's Son as the 'worldly ruler' on the Iron Throne.

You have to keep in mind that basically only the dragons did keep the lords on the Targaryen side. If the Targaryens had been gone the lords would have been forced to actually fight against the legal representatives of their gods on earth - and their military orders - and chances are not that high that they would have dared doing that. That would have been sacrilege and blasphemy. And the lords could then no longer hide behind the dragons of the Targaryen masters.

Did Faith ever, before Conquest, attempt to take over secular rule that way in any of the Kingdoms?

Reach, Westerlands, Stormlands and Vale all had the legitimacy of ancient royal houses, hard for Faith to disown. But not Riverlands. Like the long anarchy from Justman to Teague. Did Faith ever try to fill the vacuum?

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

No, that was a war of annihilation - and then a fight for survival which they lost. The Faith wanted the Targaryens dead. That was the goal. What would happen afterwards was never discussed. 

The lords who were invited to fight for Faith and against Targaryens could easily have challenged the Faith to explain what they intended for aftermath. They certainly would have murmured about it.

 

[Lord Varys]

23 minutes ago, Jaak said:

How about a foreign conqueror who won an unjust war?

I really don't care how you call Aegon the Conqueror. The people of Westeros call him 'the Conqueror', not 'the Usurper'. That's Robert.

Quote

Yes, but they can say that this particular conqueror waged an unjust rather than just war.

Whether the war is just or not isn't the issue. The Targaryens did conquer and not usurp the rule of the Seven Kingdoms.

Quote

... which does not rule out alliance of Seven Kingdoms as equals against a common foe, like Reach and Westerlands had been.

The great lords of all the Seven Kingdoms either stood with King Maegor or not against him. Those standing with the Faith Militant apparently accepted the High Septon as their ultimate authority, not their liege lords, and certainly not the abominations.

Quote

Did Faith ever, before Conquest, attempt to take over secular rule that way in any of the Kingdoms?

As far as we know they did not do that. But it seems that the unification of the Realm and the end of House Gardener really strengthened the power of the Faith in the united Realm. They profited from that as much as the Targaryens.

Quote

Reach, Westerlands, Stormlands and Vale all had the legitimacy of ancient royal houses, hard for Faith to disown. But not Riverlands. Like the long anarchy from Justman to Teague. Did Faith ever try to fill the vacuum?

Again, the Faith never made such an attempt. The Faith Militant was pretty close and supportive of the last Teague kings, though.

Quote

The lords who were invited to fight for Faith and against Targaryens could easily have challenged the Faith to explain what they intended for aftermath. They certainly would have murmured about it.

Why should they do that? Those men were already accepting the High Septon as their ultimate authority. As both 'king' and 'spiritual leader' if you want to call it that. That is why they turned against King Maegor and House Targaryen - and their liege lords who stood with King Maegor and House Targaryen. One assumes they were quite happy with whatever theocratic regime the High Septon and Faith Militant would have installed after the Targaryens were gone.

But perhaps they did ask such questions. If they did, we don't know whether or what answers they were given.

[Jaak]

49 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I really don't care how you call Aegon the Conqueror. The people of Westeros call him 'the Conqueror', not 'the Usurper'. That's Robert.

Whether the war is just or not isn't the issue. The Targaryens did conquer and not usurp the rule of the Seven Kingdoms.

The Westerosi might have rallied to someone in order to resist a hated foreign conqueror, like the numerous Riverlands rebellions against Storm Kings, and then Ironmen.

49 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The great lords of all the Seven Kingdoms either stood with King Maegor or not against him. Those standing with the Faith Militant apparently accepted the High Septon as their ultimate authority, not their liege lords, and certainly not the abominations.

There could have been a lot of people who were with Faith Militant not because they accepted High Septon as their ultimate authority, but because they were against Maegor, or against abominations, or against Valyrian conquerors. Certainly the Faith Militant who held out after the order of High Septon Pater were not accepting Pater as an ultimate authority.

[The Dragon Demands]

18 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

Hey, when there's no explicit or implicit suggestion in the text, @Rhaenys_Targaryen's guess is as good as anybody's. 

As for Starks practicing avuncular or materteral incest... well, everyone knows those Northmen are just a bunch of savage Picts. 

My conclusion is still that the rest of Westeros, Starks included, draw the line between full uncle marriage and half-uncle marriage, as their definition of what constitutes "incest".  Real-life societies have examples of specifically this distinction.

[The Dragon Demands]

8 hours ago, Ran said:

There's material in F&B v1 concerning the first Grand Maester.

Ah, good, I'll stop asking...

[Fire Eater]

On 10/13/2017 at 2:51 PM, Lost Melnibonean said:

Or the emperor of Rome. 

That's not fair to Nero, Maegor didn't ban capital punishment nor build public works. 

[Lord Varys]

20 minutes ago, The Dragon Demands said:

My conclusion is still that the rest of Westeros, Starks included, draw the line between full uncle marriage and half-uncle marriage, as their definition of what constitutes "incest".  Real-life societies have examples of specifically this distinction.

That certainly could be the case. But if you check kin and cousin marriages, especially among noble and royal families, then full uncle-nice matches certainly did also happen.

And in the end the nobility and (former) royalty of Westeros had pretty much exactly the same marriage practices as many medieval noble and royal houses. They (usually) only married within their own classes, which limited their matches to a very high degree. Cousin marriages of various degrees would be very common and avuncular marriage (perhaps) somewhat more uncommon, but there is really no indication that they constituted abominable incest.

We have to keep in mind that the whole Targaryen incest thing caused - along with polygamy - a religiously motivated war against them. One assumes that the power of the Starks would have also been threatened had they done something questionable or close to incest. And it is not that the Starks don't like to marry their own. Far to the contrary actually, as Rickard Stark and Cregan Stark himself prove. The mother of Jonnel and Edric Stark was a Stark herself.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

The Westerosi might have rallied to someone in order to resist a hated foreign conqueror, like the numerous Riverlands rebellions against Storm Kings, and then Ironmen.

Well, obviously they did not do that, right? In fact, nobody mentions anything about the Targaryens seen as 'foreign' at that time. They were abominations, like any offspring of a father raping his daughter or a brother raping his sister would be seen in this world. Such people are put down.

The Faith Militant Uprising was a religious uprising, and the issue was rooted in religiously founded marriage customs.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

There could have been a lot of people who were with Faith Militant not because they accepted High Septon as their ultimate authority, but because they were against Maegor, or against abominations, or against Valyrian conquerors. Certainly the Faith Militant who held out after the order of High Septon Pater were not accepting Pater as an ultimate authority.

Well, if they hated abominations they would have been the kind of people the High Septon would have liked. Just as he would have liked people who hated Maegor. But nobody talks about Valyrian conquerors. The only 'Valyrian conqueror' still alive with would have been Visenya. Maegor and Aenys never conquered anything. They inherited the Seven Kingdoms.

And we also know that even High Septons can be seen as heretics - which also confirms for the first time that heresy exists in Westeros and is seen as a religious crime. That is important news. As is the fact that witchcraft is actually considered a crime punishable by being burned alive.

But to the topic at hand - it is pretty clear that the Faith is broken in the end and Pater and his successors are nothing but puppets as were, most likely, many or all subsequent High Septons. The Faith didn't change its doctrines but it stopped trying to enforce them, at least where the Targaryens were concerned. And from a point of view of a truly pious follower of the Seven who actually believes in the teachings of the religion that clearly constitutes a betrayal.

Just as the average zealous catholic anti-abortionist would feel very much betrayed if the Vatican declared tomorrow that abortion is perfectly fine.

Overtime many followers of the Seven would have made their peace with the new regime, especially during the conciliatory politics of the Conciliator. But this would have taken time. And the fundamentalists never went entirely away. Just as the Poor Fellows were never completely gone.

[Jaak]

It is not clear to me that Aegon and his sisters were not wed by Faith.

 

Dragonstone had been ruled by Valyrians for centuries. There must have long been Andals, worshippers of Seven and septons who were subject to Valyrians.

Aegon´s parents were neither polygamous nor incestuous. And we notably do not have any evidence of his grandmother or great-grandmother. Which makes a difference.

But before Conquest, the general public of Westeros was not concerned about dragons. Targaryens were treated as minor outside neighbours.

If a pre-Conquest Targaryen asked a septon to bless an incestuous marriage, could the septon have been pleased that his alien lord would condescend to want to marry in Faith rather than just stick to Valyrian wedding customs? Even while he recognized that the choice of bride was not Faith´s preference?

 

And if a mainland septon in Duskendale or at Storm´s End heard about it, the reaction could have been sneer for the subservience of Dragonstone septons - but would it have attracted all that much wrath?

[The Dragon Demands]

Major question I just realized:

Regarding the, uh....return of the priest-king Lodos, launching a rebellion on Old Wyk in the beginning of Aenys's reign:

If he claimed to be the same guy as the Lodos who walked into the sea during the Conquest ("to take counsel with my father, the Drowned God").....why is he formally styled "Lodos, Second of His Name" in this text?

 

Surely, he didn't call himself that.  I would assume it's what the maesters call him in later centuries.

 

 

 

 

 

[Lord Varys]

21 minutes ago, Fire Eater said:

That's not fair to Nero, Maegor didn't ban capital punishment nor build public works. 

Hey, he built the Dragonpit. And a huge castle.

But quite frankly, I think Maegor jumped the shark when he killed all the craftsmen and workers building his castle. That was just insane. It showed his utter contempt for his people, especially those living in the capital. We see how the Kingslanders loved the Targaryens in this poor Dick Bean guy. They prospered under the rule of Aegon and Aenys, and they did not expect this new king to be the monster that he was.

Some thoughts on the Master of Whisperers:

The association between the Mistress/Master of Whisperers and (the) spider(s) seems to go back to Tyanna as does the office itself. A reason why Jaehaerys I continued that innovation of Maegor's could be that he realized it was necessary to have good information on the thoughts and feelings of the people. His father King Aenys remained strangely ignorant and oblivious about the fact that public opinion turned against. If a man who just wanted to be loved by his people had known or foreseen how they would react to the Aegon-Rhaena marriage he most likely would have acted differently...

[Fire Eater]

31 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Hey, he built the Dragonpit. And a huge castle.

I think those count as private works not public, given both are meant for the exclusive use of the Targaryens and not the public. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Fire Eater said:

I think those count as private works not public, given both are meant for the exclusive use of the Targaryens and not the public. 

Sure, I was joking there. Although people were allowed to occasionally assemble in the Dragonpit to see the splendor and the power of the Targaryens. For instance, for the coronation of Aegon II.

But it is quite clear that Maegor had other priorities than better the life of his people, be they Kingslanders or other smallfolk. Aegon I and Jaehaerys I did that, and Aenys might have tried, but didn't have the time.

Maegor just didn't care.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

It is not clear to me that Aegon and his sisters were not wed by Faith.

Nobody said it was clear. It is just not that likely that Aegon married both Visenya and Rhaenys in a polygamous incestuous union in a ceremony officiated by a septon. Polygamy and incest both go against the Faith's understanding of a marriage. Which is monogamous and does not involve any incest.

If Maegor had to kill a dozen septons before he found one who would marry him to Tyanna chances are very low Aegon found any septon on Dragonstone to officiate at the freak wedding he was having. And in the eyes of most of the world Aegon Targaryen would have been a complete freak, marrying both his sisters. And what comes next? Is he going to grant his dragon a lordship?

You are free to believe that a septon may have married Aegon to Rhaenys and Visenya. I just don't find that very likely.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

And if a mainland septon in Duskendale or at Storm´s End heard about it, the reaction could have been sneer for the subservience of Dragonstone septons - but would it have attracted all that much wrath?

Do you think some Catholic priest could marry Trump tomorrow to his daughter Ivanka (a notion he apparently seems to like) in addition to his wife Melania - and the other wives who are still married to him per Catholic doctrine - just because Trump sits on a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons? Probably not. Worldly power doesn't mean you can tell the Church what a marriage is. They tell you that.

We know that the High Septon polices the Faith, there is a hierarchy and command structure there, and people can commit the crime of heresy. Septon Murmison was expelled from the Faith. One assumes a stupid septon who actually officiated at Aegon's wedding would suffer the same fate as Murmison, hacking to pieces included.

2 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

Surely, he didn't call himself that.  I would assume it's what the maesters call him in later centuries.

That is my assumption, too.

[Jaak]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Nobody said it was clear. It is just not that likely that Aegon married both Visenya and Rhaenys in a polygamous incestuous union in a ceremony officiated by a septon. Polygamy and incest both go against the Faith's understanding of a marriage. Which is monogamous and does not involve any incest.

If Maegor had to kill a dozen septons before he found one who would marry him to Tyanna chances are very low Aegon found any septon on Dragonstone to officiate at the freak wedding he was having. And in the eyes of most of the world Aegon Targaryen would have been a complete freak, marrying both his sisters. And what comes next? Is he going to grant his dragon a lordship?

World outside Dragonstone. Dragonstone itself had been under Valyrian power for centuries.

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

You are free to believe that a septon may have married Aegon to Rhaenys and Visenya. I just don't find that very likely.

Do you think some Catholic priest could marry Trump tomorrow to his daughter Ivanka (a notion he apparently seems to like) in addition to his wife Melania - and the other wives who are still married to him per Catholic doctrine - just because Trump sits on a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons? Probably not. Worldly power doesn't mean you can tell the Church what a marriage is. They tell you that.

We know that the High Septon polices the Faith, there is a hierarchy and command structure there,

No, we do not know that. And we have a strong implication from silence that there is no hierarchy or command structure.

About the worldly power - somebody did marry Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. A few, like Thomas More, did die for their faith. Most of the Catholic clergy did obey the worldly power and not King in 1530...1536, and after some grumbling kept their posts and followed orders.

The Catholic church of 2017, unlike that of 1530, is self-selected to consider the prospect of conflict with a worldly power and obey their faith rather than the worldly power. Even so, some would follow the worldly power. People´s Republic of China has a significant Patriotic Catholic Church.

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

and people can commit the crime of heresy. Septon Murmison was expelled from the Faith. One assumes a stupid septon who actually officiated at Aegon's wedding would suffer the same fate as Murmison, hacking to pieces included.

No, excluded.

While no High Septon before the one who launched Faith rebellion directly came out to bless and declare lawful Aegon´s incestuous polygamy, they also did not confront it in that manner. So hearing about individual septons who collaborated with Aegon more than they themselves did, they would not have acted as harshly.

Nor would anyone have dared to hack into pieces a septon for complying with the customs of his Valyrian overlords. Not in pre-Conquest Dragonstone. (What happened to septons of Stannis´ Dragonstone?). The fellow followers of Seven could have responded with social isolation and declared that going so far in Valyrian customs, he could as well have forsaken Seven and followed Valyrian ones... but they would not have dared rebel after centuries of acceptance.

After Murmison was another matter. With the hardening of attitudes against collaborationists of abominations, there was both the real threat of getting killed by Faith if Maegor did not kill you, and the moral attitude that it was better to die for upholding your faith than for betraying it.

[AlaskanSandman]

So something i noticed when looking at everything.

House Targaryen was almost extinct after Maegor's death. Like, closer than they were in Aerys II's time. Depending on where Rhaella and Aerea are.

Accounted though is Rhaena, Jaehaerys and Allysanne as the only Targaryen's between 48ac to at least 50ac.

Other than I guess Aegon I's time. Which makes me wonder alot about what was happening on Dragonstone and when exactly Aegon the Conquerors parents died. Like who raised the last 3 Targaryens? Did the parents death spark Aegon's motives. Just interesting.

Jaehaerys and his kids saved House Targaryen untill the Dance of the Dragons took it back out. 

[Jaak]

Let´s count the born and (known) alive members of the family at various times:

0: Male - Aegon, 26. Females - Visenya, 29; Rhaenys - 24

48: Male - Jaehaerys, 14. Females - Rhaena, 25; Alysanne, 12; Aerea - 6; Rhalla - 6

131: Male - Aegon, 11. Females - Jaehaera, 8; Baela, 13; Rhaena, 13;

283: Male - Aemon, 83; Viserys, 9. Female - Daenerys, 0.

[AlaskanSandman]

1 hour ago, Jaak said:

Let´s count the born and (known) alive members of the family at various times:

0: Male - Aegon, 26. Females - Visenya, 29; Rhaenys - 24

48: Male - Jaehaerys, 14. Females - Rhaena, 25; Alysanne, 12; Aerea - 6; Rhalla - 6

131: Male - Aegon, 11. Females - Jaehaera, 8; Baela, 13; Rhaena, 13;

283: Male - Aemon, 83; Viserys, 9. Female - Daenerys, 0.

Except at the dawn of 283 you also had Aerys II, Rhaegar, baby Aegon, Rhaenys, and Rhaella. 284 would fit better.

I really wonder what happened to Aerea and Rhalla.

Also, we know that Baela and Rhaena lived and had kids but we dont know who they wed. The kids wouldn't be Targaryen in name though. Though its worth mentioning that Rhaenys the Queen who never was, was born from a from such a branch off that came back into the Targaryen family. Both her parents and grandparents not being dragons riders though, while Rhaenys was. Its an interesting situation given the many ideas on Daenerys not being who she thinks she is. It opens the door that it is possible, long as Targaryen was in there some wheres.

 

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

World outside Dragonstone. Dragonstone itself had been under Valyrian power for centuries.

So what? Does this mean the Andals and septons living there adopted or grew to tolerate the barbaric ways of the rulers of that island? If you claim that, you would have to prove it.

What we actually do know is that the Targaryens there were actually capering and sucking up to the Andals and the Faith considering that they made those costly idols of the Seven out of the wood of the ships that carried them to Dragonstone. I guess those were not necessarily made during Aenar's or Gaemon's reign - the ships could have been used for another couple of decades after the arrival - but it seems likely that they were during the reign of Lord Aegon.

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

No, we do not know that. And we have a strong implication from silence that there is no hierarchy or command structure.

Reread TSotD. The High Septon really commands all branches of the Faith. That is why a group of Warrior's Sons actually thinks they should continue resisting Maegor even after he won the Trial of Seven. Because they are forced to obey the commands of the High Septon.

We also know the Most Devout are a group of people with more authority than the average septon and less authority than the High Septon.

We also know that heresy is an existent crime - as is witchcraft - and that both are severely punished. We also know that the Faith can expel a member of its order. We also know that the Faith has its own courts which usually sits in judgment over members of the Faith. That means there are institutions within the Faith to discipline members of the Faith.

If that is not policing I don't know what is policing.

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

About the worldly power - somebody did marry Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. A few, like Thomas More, did die for their faith. Most of the Catholic clergy did obey the worldly power and not King in 1530...1536, and after some grumbling kept their posts and followed orders.

Well, then those Catholics all became heretics. England was just some insignificant island at the time.

But in a sense Henry VIII is sort of how Maegor dealt with the Faith, too. He took control of the Church in his country. In Westeros Maegor took control of the entire Faith.

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

While no High Septon before the one who launched Faith rebellion directly came out to bless and declare lawful Aegon´s incestuous polygamy, they also did not confront it in that manner. So hearing about individual septons who collaborated with Aegon more than they themselves did, they would not have acted as harshly.

They politely overlooked Aegon's blasphemous marriages. If a septon had married Aegon to his sisters one could assume that the High Septon would have declared that marriage invalid before the Conquest. Either when the marriage took place. Or when Aegon sent out all his ravens. At that time nobody could know that the Targaryens would win this war, right? So there would have been no reason not to denounce Aegon's marriage the way the later High Septon denounced and condemned Maegor's second marriage, right?

But if Aegon never married his sister-wives in any of the Westerosi ways it wouldn't have really been the business of the Faith to condemn that. It would have only become an issue - and it did become an issue - after Aegon became the king of Westeros. Then the Targaryen had really pay lip service to the Faith and its rules since it was the majority religion of Westeros. And that's what they did. Incest and polygamy where the only part of the 'religious sphere' where Aegon could not possibly accommodate the Faith.

And why on earth would Aegon want to be married in the Westerosi ways on his island? And why should the Faith condemn his Valyrian marriages if he was not really part of their sphere of influence. The Faith also does not run around condemning Dothraki marriages, or anything.

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

Nor would anyone have dared to hack into pieces a septon for complying with the customs of his Valyrian overlords. Not in pre-Conquest Dragonstone. (What happened to septons of Stannis´ Dragonstone?). The fellow followers of Seven could have responded with social isolation and declared that going so far in Valyrian customs, he could as well have forsaken Seven and followed Valyrian ones... but they would not have dared rebel after centuries of acceptance.

How do you know that? And how do you know that the Faith did not have the power to discipline its own on Dragonstone? Do you know that there were not any Poor Fellows on the island? Do you know whether there was a small contingent of Warrior's Sons there?

Comparing the Targaryens on Dragonstone to the situation in Stannis' days is comparing apples and oranges.

Prior to the Conquest the High Septon actually and literally ruled the Faith. There were seven kingdoms but only one High Septon. He was the ultimate authority of the Faith, and all the Andal kings and lords would have bowed to him in religious matters.

It is King Maegor and his fire-breathing dragons that break the power of the Faith. And Jaehaerys I and his fire-breathing dragons - who are there as a remainder what would happen if people resisted, but not unleashed by this nice guy king - complete the work. Maegor's power was so great that many lords who might have stood with the Faith dared not to do that because they feared the dragons.

But the dragons are long dead. While the Faith does not regain its military orders after 153 AC, it still commands the hearts and souls of most of the people. The only form of real education the smallfolk gets comes through septons and septas. If a king and the Faith are at issue today - like Stannis is - then the chances that the Faith is actually defended against this blasphemy by quite a lot of people.

If people no longer fear dragonfire - because they are no dragons - they can push the powers in charge much harder. That is how and why the surviving Poor Fellows could seize power so quickly and efficiently. There was no one to oppose or intimidate them.

2 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

So something i noticed when looking at everything.

House Targaryen was almost extinct after Maegor's death. Like, closer than they were in Aerys II's time. Depending on where Rhaella and Aerea are.

Aerea and Rhaella are alive and well at the end of Maegor's reign. Aerea is with her mother, and Rhaella at Oldtown, training to become a septa as per Maegor's orders. Whether she actually did become a septa is unclear. I'm inclined to doubt it but you never know.

2 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Other than I guess Aegon I's time. Which makes me wonder alot about what was happening on Dragonstone and when exactly Aegon the Conquerors parents died. Like who raised the last 3 Targaryens? Did the parents death spark Aegon's motives. Just interesting.

It would be interesting to know that, yes. But we don't. What we do know is that Lord Aerion must have been dead for quite a while. He seems to have died not just before the Conquest, but quite some time before that, perhaps when Aegon was around twenty, or perhaps when he was still in his late teens. The text indicates that Aegon Targaryen made the choice to participate in the war against Volantis at a time when he was already in charge of Dragonstone. He did not act as a representative of his father, or anything of that sort.

But it would, of course, possible that Aerion was incapacitated for quite some time before he died eventually, with Aegon seizing power despite the fact that his father was still alive. Say, if Aerion had suffered a severe stroke, or if Aerion was suffering from dementia in old age, etc.

One assumes that death is the more likely scenario.

Valaena Velaryon could technically have been still alive during and after the Conquest. She would just have been the Dowager Lady of Dragonstone then.

Her case is a similar mystery as the whereabouts and death of Queen Shaera Targaryen. We know she survived Summerhall and lived during the reign of Jaehaerys II. Considering that no one ever said she was as frail and sickly as her brother-husband one should assume that she lived at least throughout some years of the first half of the reign of Aerys II, and perhaps even longer. She could have retreated to Dragonstone to live out the remainder of her life far from court.

2 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Jaehaerys and his kids saved House Targaryen untill the Dance of the Dragons took it back out. 

Well, that is not really true. Jaehaerys I had nine children living to adulthood but as I've said only four of those children had children of their own, and since Alyssa and Baelon married each other that makes only three branches of House Targaryen, reduced to two when Aemma Arryn married Prince Viserys. Prince Aemon had only a daughter, and Alyssa-Baelon effectively only two sons who had either no children (Daemon) or just daughter (Viserys) by the time Jaehaerys I died.

The future of House Targaryen was not exactly secured by the children of Jaehaerys I. And none of his children seemed to have survived the old man anyway. We know when Aemon and Baelon and Daella and Maegelle and Gael died. We know that Viserra predeceased her royal parents. Considering that Princess Alyssa is never mentioned anywhere aside from being Baelon's wife it is quite likely that she, too, was long dead by the time of the Great Council, perhaps dying in childbirth. The only ones who may have been still alive by the time of Jaehaerys' own death are Archmaester Vaegon and Saera, and they were both effectively dead as Targaryens. One had become an archmaester and the other had ran away and become a brothel owner (and presumably a whore earlier in her career). But even they might have been dead in 103 AC.

House Targaryen sort of recovers during the reign of Viserys I with him, Daemon, Rhaenyra, and eventually even Aegon the Elder having quite a few children of their own. But the Dance cuts all that short.

It is a pity George played it that way. The story could have greatly profited if there had been a couple of adult grandchildren and great-grandchildren - and perhaps even an aged child - of Jaehaerys I around during the Dance. Having so many children dragonriders was somewhat silly.

Those nine children could really have laid the groundwork for something bigger. But they did not. Aside from the Velaryon branch there was never a single acknowledged Targaryen cadet branch in existence which laster longer than two generations - later we have the Plumms and the Lothstons, thanks to Aegon IV, but they are only unofficial cadet branches.

What would have been the harm in giving Aenys and Maegor a little brother? Or Jaehaerys and Alysanne?