The Book of Swords - The Sons of the Dragon SPOILERS

[Lord Corlys Velaryon]

11 hours ago, Ran said:

First was a genuine error that crept in from the process of boiling things down.

Well, I'll be a monkey's nuncle. That actually makes a lot of sense as to why a half-Targaryen Velaryon who would be/was the queen-consort (seemingly) never claimed her own dragon when there were more than enough around, neither too large or aggressive (all after Quicksilver only hatching in the later years of Aegon's reign). Tbf, the wording in Sons gave me the impression that the degree of relation between Alyssa & Aenys was closest in the Velaryon line: Aethan's father most probably being Conquest-Daemon, who in turn was perhaps most likely Valaena's brother. Can you confirm that Valaena still had a Targaryen mother, or was that an error too? If the latter, that would really put the dampener on the belief that Targaryen women married into House Velaryon at times pre-Conquest.

@Lord Varys If Fire & Blood actually does end up with a "retcon" for Alyssa having a Targaryen mother & I'm correct about Sons highlighting the degree of cousin relation between Aenys & Alyssa as closest in the Velaryon line, it's unlikely that unnamed Targaryen lady would be a daughter or descendant of Lord Daemion, or perhaps even Lord Aerys.

[Ran]

I would have no expectations of "Sons of the Dragon" being substantially expanded for F&B, BTW.

[direpupy]

On 13-10-2017 at 0:19 AM, Lord Varys said:

Well, if you call it precise when the phrase 'a thousand years ago' is used to describe events that happened a couple of thousand years ago I'm not sure we are on the same page ;-).

The issue with that is just that we can't be sure that this is all correct because those texts are, unfortunately, full of errors. Chances are that Dreamfyre might be older than Vermithor. Chances are also that the Cannibal is older than Vermithor. Chances are that even Sheepstealer is older or about as old as Vermithor.

The reason I point this out is that this could actually be addressed or corrected in a proper publication of that history.

I never said I bought the 'the Cannibal already lived on Dragonstone before the Targaryens came' story. But if there was a kernel of truth to those rumors then the Cannibal could easily have hatched while Aenys was young or perhaps even before the Conquest.

 

Sorry for the late response i was away for a few days and then i got sick after i came home.

"A thousand years ago" is a generic frase for "a very long time nobody realy remembers how long it is". wheras "near a hundred" is a aproximation of age, so they are not frases of the same order its like comparing appels to oranges.

I agree that it is possible for Dreamfyre and Cannibal to be older, but the point i was arguing was that it might just as easily be perfectly true that Vermithor is they oldest. As to Sheepstealer, since Vermithor seems to have been born pryor or in the same year as Jaehaerys while Sheepstealer was born when he was young (so after Jaehaerys was born) i do not agree that Sheepstealer might be older then Vermithor.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Lord Corlys Velaryon said:

Well, I'll be a monkey's nuncle. That actually makes a lot of sense as to why a half-Targaryen Velaryon who would be/was the queen-consort (seemingly) never claimed her own dragon when there were more than enough around, neither too large or aggressive (all after Quicksilver only hatching in the later years of Aegon's reign). Tbf, the wording in Sons gave me the impression that the degree of relation between Alyssa & Aenys was closest in the Velaryon line: Aethan's father most probably being Conquest-Daemon, who in turn was perhaps most likely Valaena's brother. Can you confirm that Valaena still had a Targaryen mother, or was that an error too? If the latter, that would really put the dampener on the belief that Targaryen women married into House Velaryon at times pre-Conquest.

Valaena Velaryon definitely had a Targaryen mother, since that's also mentioned in the published version of the history of the Conquest. I doubt that was an error there.

The idea that Conquest-Daemon and Valaena were siblings makes sense to me. Aethan could then be Daemon's son, about the same age as the Targaryen siblings, or slightly younger. Ser Corlys Velaryon could be Aethan's younger brother.

In that sense, Aenys and Alyssa would be cousins two ways - second cousins through Daemon and Valaena who were siblings, and then cousins of unknown degree on the Targaryen side due to the fact that Valaena's Targaryen mother would also have been some relation of Daemion's.

1 hour ago, Lord Corlys Velaryon said:

@Lord Varys If Fire & Blood actually does end up with a "retcon" for Alyssa having a Targaryen mother & I'm correct about Sons highlighting the degree of cousin relation between Aenys & Alyssa as closest in the Velaryon line, it's unlikely that unnamed Targaryen lady would be a daughter or descendant of Lord Daemion, or perhaps even Lord Aerys.

Well, if something like that happened then the Targaryen lady could indeed be also a more distant relation, sure.

35 minutes ago, Ran said:

I would have no expectations of "Sons of the Dragon" being substantially expanded for F&B, BTW.

That is unfortunate to hear. Can you at least address some of the inconsistencies with George and ask him for his private thoughts on the Quicksilver matter? That is really driving me nuts. It would also make sense to know whether Prince Aegon and Prince Viserys actually did not have any dragons - and if that was so, why the hell it was the case.

[Visible Invisible]

Hey everyone!

I'm in doubts about Owen Bush's surname. Does anybody know if it's correct? Or should it be Bushy like Ben Bushy (House Bushy)?

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

And yet, the dragonless Viserys  did not claim his father's dragon. That we know, because if he had, Aegon would not have been able to claim the dragon later on. Viserys outlived his older brother, after all.

Sure, my pointing out of this fact is pointing out an inconsistency in the text. It may be that there is a reason as to why Viserys - while dragonless - did not claim his father's dragon. But then I want to see that reason be given in the text. Else the whole thing is a plot hole. And a rather glaring plot hole at that.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

She saw the safety of her children as more important than immediately trying to claim a dragon. A dragon is difficult to hide, after all.

Could be, but Alyssa did not hide on Driftmark, did she? And a dragon could have greatly helped the campaign of her son, not to mention keeping her and her other children safe.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

And risk leaving her children orphans? 

Sure, could have been a gamble. But Alyssa would have been the person Quicksilver would have been closest after Aenys. Surely Aenys took her along on the dragon's back occasionally. And it is not that she had no Targaryen blood or anything. She may have had more than Addam and Alyn of Hull who were just Corlys Velaryon's sons.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

As far as I am aware, we don't know when Jaehaerys and Alysanne claimed their dragons. All we know is that by 48 AC, when Jaehaerys ascended the throne, they had bonded with their dragons, but that doesn't mean that they already had in early 42 AC.

I've read the suggestion that they might have claimed their dragons later, after the escape from Dragonstone. But quite honestly, that doesn't make a lot of sense - and if it was the case it should be a plot point in that story, not just happening off page. The fact that this is not mentioned constitutes another plot hole.

As does the fact that Alyssa and her children could escape by ship without being discovered by Tyanna and Maegor in the years to come. Sailors talk, and if Tyanna can find Aerea and Rhaella it would be very odd that she could not find people essentially hiding in Maegor's backyard. It gets more glaring if they also hid with Vermithor and Silverwing, but even without the dragons it is somewhat of a stretch.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Dragons who have a rider are chained. Quicksilver had loat her rider, and thus might not have been anymore. She could have been roaming the Dragonmont freely, like the other rudderless dragon (both wild and previously ridden) did during the reign of Viserys I.

But one assumes that Quicksilver was still chained while King Aenys was still alive, right? So who do you think would have given the order to unchain her? 

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

As to choosing Crakehall over Driftmark,  who knows? At Crakehall there was another dragon, at Driftmark not, as far as we know. That might have made a difference. And the Targaryens on Driftmark were reasonably safe, whereas Aegon and Rhaena were besieged.

But Quicksilver couldn't have known any of that, could she? I mean, sure, perhaps dragons can feel the need and other emotions of their riders over (long) distances. There are hints in that direction with Aegon and Sunfyre, Dreamfyre and Helaena, and perhaps even Syrax and Rhaenyra (Rhaenyra's anger and grief over Joffrey's death might have led to Syrax's apparent suicide).

However, we have no reason whatsoever to believe that a dragon feels or cares about the emotions of people he is not bonded with.

And by the way - there is no hint whatsoever that there were dragons with Aegon and Rhaena at Crakehall. Dreamfyre sort of must have been there but if she had been there then Aegon and Rhaena would never have been besieged, right? They could have used her to attack the Poor Fellows or to fly away like Aegon the Elder fled from the Battle of the Gullet. Or at least Rhaena could have flown away to get help.

That nothing of that sort happened or is discussed in the story is another plot hole. There are certain ways how to resolve this - but that's something the author should do. I like speculating a lot, but I don't like to explain away plot holes. 

And nothing indicates Aegon already had Quicksilver when they went to Casterly Rock.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

But dragons are intelligent creatures, so I can't say it is fair to assume that they cannot act on their own.

They are still animals. George makes it very clear that Balerion is no match for a dragon like Smaug because, you know, Smaug can talk. Smaug is intelligent. Balerion is an animal. A magical animal, true, but still an animal.

3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Again, Alyssa's priorities might have been her children, not her husband's  dragon. And I would think that she would have wanted to have arrived at Driftmark, not still be at sea. And acting fast would have been important. Alyssa could not predict how long Visenya would be gone.

Sure, that is a possibility. But if that's what happened then I'd like George to tell me ;-).

[Ser Jon Darry]

45 minutes ago, Sovenok said:

Hey everyone!

I'm in doubts about Owen Bush's surname. Does anybody know if it's correct? Or should it be Bushy like Ben Bushy (House Bushy)?

Not sure, but probably no. Just Ser Owen Bush of the Kingsguard, he sounds like a piece of work though.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

54 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I've read the suggestion that they might have claimed their dragons later, after the escape from Dragonstone. But quite honestly, that doesn't make a lot of sense - and if it was the case it should be a plot point in that story, not just happening off page. The fact that this is not mentioned constitutes another plot hole.

As does the fact that Alyssa and her children could escape by ship without being discovered by Tyanna and Maegor in the years to come. Sailors talk, and if Tyanna can find Aerea and Rhaella it would be very odd that she could not find people essentially hiding in Maegor's backyard. It gets more glaring if they also hid with Vermithor and Silverwing, but even without the dragons it is somewhat of a stretch.

Aerea and Rhaella were hiding in Westeros, Alyssa and her younger children were, according to rumors, not. 

Queen Alyssa and her two youngest children remained in hiding (it was thought that they had fled across the narrow sea, to Tyrosh or perhaps Volantis), but they still represented a threat to Maegor's crown and any son he might father.

Tyanna might have had her connections back in Pentos, but considering the suggested locations, it doesn't seem like that's where they went.

 

58 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But one assumes that Quicksilver was still chained while King Aenys was still alive, right? So who do you think would have given the order to unchain her?

It is likely that she was chained while he was still alive, yes.

I don't know who might have decided to set her free. That might have been Alyssa, or simply a decision from someone serving at Dragonstone after Alyssa left, before Maegor and Visenya arrived. Perhaps Maegor or his mother even gave the order. A chained but unclaimed dragon on in the stables or in a courtyard would not be considered ideal, I'd say.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

They are still animals. George makes it very clear that Balerion is no match for a dragon like Smaug because, you know, Smaug can talk. Smaug is intelligent. Balerion is an animal. A magical animal, true, but still an animal.

Sure, they are animals. But George himself also described them to be intelligent (using, according to the SSM, that exact word), and regardless of the fact that they are animals, that means that they can make their own decisions.

During the second Tumbleton, Tessarion, riderless, joined in the battle of Vermithor against Seasmoke on her own. Why? We don't know, but Gyldayn speculates:

Who can know the heart of a dragon? Was it simple bloodlust that drove the Blue Queen to attack? Did the she-dragon come to help one of the combatants? If so, which? Some will claim that the bond between a dragon and dragonrider runs so deep that the beast shares his master’s loves and hates. But who was the ally here, and who the enemy? Does a riderless dragon know friend from foe?
We shall never know the answers to those questions. 

The bolded part I find rather interesting. If indeed the dragon and dragonrider share a bond which causes the dragon to share the loves and hates of its rider, Quicksilver (who had essentially grown up together with Aenys, and been with him for ~thirty years) might have only followed Aenys's desire to give aid to his heir, whom he was clearly deeply concerned about.

 

[Lost Melnibonean]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But one assumes that Quicksilver was still chained while King Aenys was still alive, right? So who do you think would have given the order to unchain her? 

Dyvim Tvar

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

17 hours ago, Ran said:

First was a genuine error that crept in from the process of boiling things down.

Ran,

If Alyssa does not have a Targaryen mother, what about the statement of TRP that Laenor Velaryon had Targaryen blood on both sides of his lineage? Because that seems to imply that his father, Lord Corlys, had a reasonably recent Targaryen ancestor. But I could be mistaken.

[Ran]

The Velaryons and Targaryens had interbred a great deal, so that could be said of any Velaryon. It was not intended to imply that Corlys had a mother or grandmother who was a Targaryen.

[The Grey Wolf]

5 hours ago, Ran said:

I would have no expectations of "Sons of the Dragon" being substantially expanded for F&B, BTW.

To be honest that really sucks IMO. Anyway, like Lord Varys said, can you ask GRRM to at least address some of the plot holes and inconsistencies? (Warrior's Sons of Gulltown, Dornish Poor Fellows, Aegon-Viserys-Quicksilver, Maegor's lack of an army during his attack on Oldtown, names for Gyldayn's sources, etc.)

 

[The Wondering Wolf]

And GRRM should consider the lack of a year 0 when it comes to Aegon's I age in 33 and 37 AC.

[Jaak]

17 hours ago, Ran said:

Fratricide among the Ottomans comes to mind -- there's a tremendous number of murdered half-brothers, uncles, etc. when you read the histories of the successions to the sultancy. I can't think of any medieval European kingdom that had anything like that kind of inner family turmoil, and it's not like the Plantagenets or Valois were necessarily all that friendly with one another... In any case, a lot of it was genuinely because of polygamous marriage practice and the devaluation it caused in typical concepts of kinship and blood relation.

Ptolemies were usually monogamous and incestuous... and did kill their full blood siblings, as well as their own children and parents.

17 hours ago, Ran said:

Polygamy complicates things even more so, presenting no strong reason to focus on birth order as determinant, so even the straightforward notion of Robb over Bran over Rickon could -- if each had had separate mothers who were simultaneously  Eddard Stark's wives -- have broken apart under the stress of competing outside interests (such as the families of their respective mothers).

Late Walder Frey is monogamous, yet as we hear from Merrett, his sons do not get along all that well. And we do not actually hear Merrett reflecting much about assistance to be expected from Crakehalls, the family of his late mother.

A bigger problem is that when a family has a surfeit of trueborn sons, they need not have too much market demand. Merrett was a fool, a cripple and a drunk. A head of family not as loyal as Walder or Stevron would have been better off making Merrett redundant and hiring a more competent outsider like ser Bronn at the market rates.

Both are slightly different for Targaryens.

As for polygyny, sororal polygyny eliminates the competing families. If Valaena Velaryon was in her late teens when she had Visenya, she would have been 55 when she had Aenys and 60 when she had Maegor. No reason to favour one or other while babysitting, both were equally her grandchildren.

As for hiring mediocre family members, think of the dragons. A pair of seeing eyes and a human mind a furlong up, moving far faster than a horse, is useful even if the mind is childish or below average. And a Targaryen who is not actually a dragonrider is potentially a dragonrider in future as more dragons hatch or get orphaned, or parent of pure-blooded children fit to become hopefully smarter dragonriders.

 

[Lost Melnibonean]

The High Septon spoke out against Maegor wedding his niece as incestuous, but as @Lord Varys notes upthread, such avuncular marriages have been accepted at other times. Since the High Septon, the brother of Lord Hightower, proposed his own niece, we have at least an appearance of impropriety, a corruption of the office in favor of nepotism. 

So, was the chief motivation of the High Septon keeping this degree of incest away from the Iron Throne, or was it nepotism and using the power of his office to advance the interests of House Hightower? 

[The Wondering Wolf]

14 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

The High Septon spoke out against Maegor wedding his niece as incestuous

Actually he never calls the match incestuous, but warns Aegon that the Faith would not look upon it with favour.

[Lost Melnibonean]

37 minutes ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Actually he never calls the match incestuous, but warns Aegon that the Faith would not look upon it with favour.

We read very little of what was actually (in our fictional world) said. But I think it's pretty clear given the context what the objection was, no? The specific account follows a discussion on the Targaryen practice of incest, and the Faith's thinly veiled opposition to Aegon's incestuous and polygamous marriages. What other grounds would the High Septon have for opposing it? 

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

To be honest that really sucks IMO. Anyway, like Lord Varys said, can you ask GRRM to at least address some of the plot holes and inconsistencies? (Warrior's Sons of Gulltown, Dornish Poor Fellows, Aegon-Viserys-Quicksilver, Maegor's lack of an army during his attack on Oldtown, names for Gyldayn's sources, etc.)

That is certainly something that should be done. And if @Ran doesn't do that I urge people to pester George with this stuff on conventions and the like. Those are not just minor inconsistencies.

But a way to deal with this stuff - and to address the whole polygamy thing, too - could be to actually work with the fictional setting of this 'Fire and Blood' history:

TWoIaF established that Maester Yandel found Gyldayn's manuscripts in the Citadel and is transcribing them. That would mean that in-universe he is very likely the editor of the first volume of 'Fire and Blood'. That could put him into the position of writing not just an editorial or preface - where he could tell us the history of the work, give a short biography of Gyldayn, etc. - but also allow him to comment on unclear, problematic, or controversial sections of Gyldayn's history. There could be sidebars or footnotes written by Gyldayn where he references his own scholarly work or quotes the work of other scholars to put Gyldayn into perspective.

This could make the actual work much more interesting than just the Gyldayn text.

And I really don't care who would write Yandel in that setting. Could be Ran/Linda, Anne, or George himself. I just want that the errors, inconsistencies, plot holes, etc. are corrected in a way that actually counts as canon. And I don't think it is too much to ask for this. It is not that hard to do that.

Oh, and by the way - if anyone wants to paint Maegor as an evil incestuous dude: What about a rumor that Maegor shared Visenya's bed while Aegon and Aenys where on their royal progresses? Such things could really add fuel to 'Maegor, the incest monster', much better than the Maegor-Rhaena marriage ever could.

As to the Dornish Poor Fellows:

A great way to get them into the story could be to make a considerable chunk the Vulture King's rabble Dornish Poor Fellows... If many of those were killed during the battles that could explain why they essentially were a non-issue afterwards and then, presumably, quietly disappeared after the High Septon formally disbanded them.

3 hours ago, Ran said:

The Velaryons and Targaryens had interbred a great deal, so that could be said of any Velaryon. It was not intended to imply that Corlys had a mother or grandmother who was a Targaryen.

Well, it would great to actually get empirical evidence for that. Alyssa Velaryon marrying Aenys Targaryen gives the Targaryens Velaryon blood but not vice versa. If the last Targaryen marrying into House Velaryon prior to Princess Rhaenys marrying Corlys Velaryon was the Targaryen mother of Valaena Velaryon (and possibly Daemon Velaryon) then the Targaryens did not exactly intermarry with the Velaryons all that often.

In that sense the claim that Laenor Velaryon had the blood of the dragon on both sides it rather questionable. We would also not say that a hypothetical son of Daenerys Targaryen and Quentyn Martell or Brown Ben Plumm would have 'the blood of the dragon on both sides', or would we?

If half a dozen or so daughters of House Targaryen married into House Velaryon prior to the Conquest such a claim would make sense, but as of yet we have no evidence for that.

The issue with Ottoman succession seems to be that there was no right of primogeniture there, and it was really that 'the strongest should rule'. Every son basically had the same blood claim, so things had to be fought out. But that kind of thing did also happen among the Merovingian and Carolingian kings. The issue there was not so much polygamy, it seems to me, but simply the custom to split up the lands and holdings of the father - essentially the kingdom - between the sons. 

48 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

The High Septon spoke out against Maegor wedding his niece as incestuous, but as @Lord Varys notes upthread, such avuncular marriages have been accepted at other times. Since the High Septon, the brother of Lord Hightower, proposed his own niece, we have at least an appearance of impropriety, a corruption of the office in favor of nepotism. 

The High Septon wasn't the brother of Lord Hightower but the brother of Lady Hightower, Ceryse's maternal uncle.

48 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

So, was the chief motivation of the High Septon keeping this degree of incest away from the Iron Throne, or was it nepotism and using the power of his office to advance the interests of House Hightower? 

I'd say we can say that the High Septon's own interest in this whole thing would have been to use the 'mind incest accusation' as a means to convince Aegon to marry his niece to his second son. Whether he, personally, cared about avuncular marriages all that much is unclear. I could see him being pragmatic about that. But we do know that the Most Devout and the Faith as an institution were very much against this incest thing, and an avuncular marriage in a family of people who prefer sibling incest - and cannot do it right now because there are no sisters - really sends the message that those people really want to continue their incestuous ways.

The Aenys-Alyssa marriage already sent that message. She was picked as a bride for Aenys because she was, presumably, the most closely related female cousin.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

We read very little of what was actually (in our fictional world) said. But I think it's pretty clear given the context what the objection was, no? The specific account follows a discussion on the Targaryen practice of incest, and the Faith's thinly veiled opposition to Aegon's incestuous and polygamous marriages. What other grounds would the High Septon have for opposing it? 

The difference is important in the sense that condemning something as incest - and calling the people doing it abominations - is remarkable different from just saying something along the lines of 'our institution wouldn't look on this kind of thing with favor'.

It is pretty clear that the avuncular marriage thing was the pretext used, but it is not the type of incest - if we want to count it as a degree of incest as Ran suggests above - that causes you or the children of such a union to be considered abominations.

[Lost Melnibonean]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The High Septon wasn't the brother of Lord Hightower but the brother of Lady Hightower, Ceryse's maternal uncle.

I'd say we can say that the High Septon's own interest in this whole thing would have been to use the 'mind incest accusation' as a means to convince Aegon to marry his niece to his second son. Whether he, personally, cared about avuncular marriages all that much is unclear. I could see him being pragmatic about that. But we do know that the Most Devout and the Faith as an institution were very much against this incest thing, and an avuncular marriage in a family of people who prefer sibling incest - and cannot do it right now because there are no sisters - really sends the message that those people really want to continue their incestuous ways.

The Aenys-Alyssa marriage already sent that message. She was picked as a bride for Aenys because she was, presumably, the most closely related female cousin.

Thanks for the correction on which side the Hightower family tree he came from. Would you mind pointing out the source for that detail? 

So you think High Septon Hightower was not motivated by a desire to keep the Iron Throne pure from the taint of avuncular incest, but to advance the interests of his house?