Jump to content

Daeron I: a harbinger of Robb’s fate?


Angel Eyes

Recommended Posts

On 2018-01-06 at 1:35 AM, Angel Eyes said:

Daeron I’s fate is similar to Robb’s: a king who was “The Young Dragon/Wolf”, a young conqueror who won every battle, but lost his life at a peaceful gathering. Robb once pretended to be Daeron as a boy.

I would think that you have a good point. Similar fates don't need to be identical for them to be foreshadowing hidden in the backstory. I would think that the Northmen will essentially get a leadership that really isn't interesting in settling lots of grudges but make peace and cut the losses.

34 minutes ago, Aegon1FanBoy said:

Too vague and daeron actually did what he set out to do. I know the freys will have every lasting scorn for the red wedding, but why aren't the martells hated for murdering Daeron under a banner of peace

I would say its the twin conditions of Baelor the Blessed forgiving the Martells and that the Martells have more favor with the author than the Frey do. Not to mention that if the Martells are pariah, then they will not be able to act in the story in the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, LionoftheWest said:

I would think that you have a good point. Similar fates don't need to be identical for them to be foreshadowing hidden in the backstory. I would think that the Northmen will essentially get a leadership that really isn't interesting in settling lots of grudges but make peace and cut the losses.

I would say its the twin conditions of Baelor the Blessed forgiving the Martells and that the Martells have more favor with the author than the Frey do. Not to mention that if the Martells are pariah, then they will not be able to act in the story in the same way.

Nah, they'll get either Jon or someone being a regent for Rickon. Possibly Jon being a regent for Rickon. The Bolton's will have to be wiped out for the Starks to be restored anyway and the Frey's and Lannisters are on borrowed time.

1 hour ago, Aegon1FanBoy said:

Too vague and daeron actually did what he set out to do. I know the freys will have every lasting scorn for the red wedding, but why aren't the martells hated for murdering Daeron under a banner of peace

They were, for a while. Every single kingdom in Westeros was raring to continue the war after Daeron's death. They wanted their revenge. They're just not as hated because peace banners aren't considered as sacred as Guest Right. But even then the Martell's; and Dorne in particular; still have a reputation of being untrustworthy in the rest of Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/01/2018 at 1:10 AM, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Too vague of a comparison. History is filled with promising young prodigies whose lives were tragically cut short. And we don’t know if Daeron won every battle he fought. Nor did they have the same goals or motivations, nor was Daeron the underdog.

He was attempting to do something that Aegon the Conqueror could not do and did so without Dragons. He was the underdog

 

1 hour ago, Aegon1FanBoy said:

Too vague and daeron actually did what he set out to do. I know the freys will have every lasting scorn for the red wedding, but why aren't the martells hated for murdering Daeron under a banner of peace

They likely were for some time given the huge amount of support Daeron II's opponent had. Obviously that scorn subsides given time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He was attempting to do something that Aegon the Conqueror could not do and did so without Dragons. He was the underdog

He had six kingdoms’ worth of armies versus one. Not to mention veteran commanders from the Dance in his war camp. I’d hardly call him an underdog like Robb was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Adam Yozza said:

Nah, they'll get either Jon or someone being a regent for Rickon. Possibly Jon being a regent for Rickon. The Bolton's will have to be wiped out for the Starks to be restored anyway and the Frey's and Lannisters are on borrowed time.

Problem is that that's not what I'm talking about. For there to not be, essentially, a war of vengeance, the post-Bolton Northern leaders will have to essentially ignore the Wall and march all their troops south in order to be able to destroy Lannisport, Casterly Rock, the Twins and probably King's Landing. I don't see them leaving the North like that. Now given how hollow the threat from the Others seems to be it could well happen, but I don't see it.

16 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

He had six kingdoms’ worth of armies versus one. Not to mention veteran commanders from the Dance in his war camp. I’d hardly call him an underdog like Robb was.

And Robb had two kingdoms against two kingdoms and many veteran commanders and warriors from Robert's Rebellion. Still people call Robb an underdog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

He had six kingdoms’ worth of armies versus one. Not to mention veteran commanders from the Dance in his war camp. I’d hardly call him an underdog like Robb was.

He was attempting something that had never been done and proved impossible for the older Aegon the Conqueror and he was doing this without Dragons. Conquering Dorne was a longshot, that is why Daeron, 150 years after his death, is remembered. 

If you want to argue that conquering Dorne was not seen as impressive in Westeros then I'd like to see some sources for this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

He was attempting something that had never been done and proved impossible for the older Aegon the Conqueror and he was doing this without Dragons. Conquering Dorne was a longshot, that is why Daeron, 150 years after his death, is remembered. 

If you want to argue that conquering Dorne was not seen as impressive in Westeros then I'd like to see some sources for this. 

No one claimed it wasn't impressive. But he still had the clear numerical advantage, something Robb did not have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

No one claimed it wasn't impressive. But he still had the clear numerical advantage, something Robb did not have.

Actually he likely did. 

Ser Kevan frowned over the map, forehead creasing. "Robb Stark will have Edmure Tully and the lords of the Trident with him now. Their combined power may exceed our own. And with Roose Bolton behind us . . . Tywin, if we remain here, I fear we might be caught between three armies."

If there was an underdog at the end of AGOT  then it was Tywin Lannister who was fighting a war on multiple fronts that serverly limited his movements

Jaime is taken, and his army for all purposes has ceased to exist. Thoros of Myr and Beric Dondarrion continue to plague our foraging parties. To our east we have the Arryns, Stannis Baratheon sits on Dragonstone, and in the south Highgarden and Storm's End are calling their banners."

Robb was actually not the underdog, he had two kingdoms to call upon and, unlike Tywin, had the option of forming an alliance with either of Stannis or Renly; no one forced him to wear the Crown.

And frankly you are missing the point. Aegon had the same numerical advantage that Daeron had as well as Dragons and still failed. He was attempting something that his predecessors could not do, taking Dorne was not expected and thus he is immortalised for doing so. 150 years later and he is still remembered as being the 'Conqueror'. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Actually he likely did. 

Ser Kevan frowned over the map, forehead creasing. "Robb Stark will have Edmure Tully and the lords of the Trident with him now. Their combined power may exceed our own. And with Roose Bolton behind us . . . Tywin, if we remain here, I fear we might be caught between three armies."

If there was an underdog at the end of AGOT  then it was Tywin Lannister who was fighting a war on multiple fronts that serverly limited his movements

Jaime is taken, and his army for all purposes has ceased to exist. Thoros of Myr and Beric Dondarrion continue to plague our foraging parties. To our east we have the Arryns, Stannis Baratheon sits on Dragonstone, and in the south Highgarden and Storm's End are calling their banners."

Robb was actually not the underdog, he had two kingdoms to call upon and, unlike Tywin, had the option of forming an alliance with either of Stannis or Renly; no one forced him to wear the Crown.

And frankly you are missing the point. Aegon had the same numerical advantage that Daeron had as well as Dragons and still failed. He was attempting something that his predecessors could not do, taking Dorne was not expected and thus he is immortalised for doing so. 150 years later and he is still remembered as being the 'Conqueror'. 

 

At the outset of the war Robb had 20,000 men. Tywin had 35,000. When the war began, Robb was at a numerical disadvantage, was pressed for time, had no experience to speak of and a man who was thought to be one of the best military commanders alive. He's the underdog. He managed to win some impressive victories that wiped out half of Tywin's army and rallied the Riverlords, giving him the advantage. That doesn't change that he started out as the underdog.

Aegon didn't have the same numerical advantage, not the first time at least. Daeron had at least  60,000 men involved in his conquest to Dorne's; at most; 50k. That's a numerical advantage. But again; I'm not saying it wasn't an impressive feat. It very much was. But he had advantages in his war that Robb did not have in his.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

At the outset of the war Robb had 20,000 men. Tywin had 35,000. When the war began, Robb was at a numerical disadvantage,

No he was not as Tywin was also fighting the Riverlands. I'm sorry, but there is little difference between the Westerlands and the North and the Riverlands. 

22 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

 

was pressed for time, had no experience to speak of and a man who was thought to be one of the best military commanders alive. He's the underdog.

And then by Riverrun he was in a far better position than Tywin was. 

Robb was never the underdog, the Tullys were, they were absolutely fucked by their position, but the Starks were not. Robb had options, him choosing to leave Moat Cailin is an option he took and an option that worked out quite well for him. 

22 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

 

He managed to win some impressive victories that wiped out half of Tywin's army and rallied the Riverlords, giving him the advantage. That doesn't change that he started out as the underdog.

He didn't start out as the underdog though. He had options. Being the underdog in war is not just about numerical advantage, it is also about positioning and freedom to move. 

 

Robb was a promising general with some excellent victories and some dumb mistakes but this need to make him Alexander the Great reborn is tiresome. 

22 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

Aegon didn't have the same numerical advantage, not the first time at least.

Did he not? I genuinely may have missed when this was said, though i still stand by the the Dragons more than make up for it. 

22 minutes ago, Adam Yozza said:

 

Daeron had at least  60,000 men involved in his conquest to Dorne's; at most; 50k. That's a numerical advantage. But again; I'm not saying it wasn't an impressive feat. It very much was. But he had advantages in his war that Robb did not have in his.

You do realise I had never said they were in the same position.  Not once. Some of you Stark fans are so sensitive about your boy Robb that you take everything as an insult. I merely pointed out that taking Dorne was not seen as a possible move, and in actual fact Daeron eventually failed. He too was not the favourite to succeed thus he too was the underdog. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018. 01. 06. at 1:35 AM, Angel Eyes said:

Daeron I’s fate is similar to Robb’s: a king who was “The Young Dragon/Wolf”, a young conqueror who won every battle, but lost his life at a peaceful gathering. Robb once pretended to be Daeron as a boy.

I think we are meant to make that connection. The two monikers (The Young Dragon / The Young Wolf) are extremely similar. Both of them were kings and military leaders at a very young age. Both of them were charismatic personalities and victorious in battle, yet, the military success did not last - both were assassinated before they were twenty, at a time they were not expecting an assault. Robb is described as "wed to his sword" by Catelyn, and what we know of Daeron I, makes it likely that he could have been described in a similar way. Of course, there is a point where the similarities end. Daeron I  wanted to finish the conquest of Westeros  by conquering the (Southern) region most associated with the Sun and thus fire. He was building an empire. Robb, on the other hand, fought against the empire, for the independence of the (Northern) region most associated with snow and ice. In this sense, they can be viewed not only as parallels but also as polar opposites. In both senses, the connection is definitely there.

You mention that "Robb once pretended to be Daeron as a boy". It is brought up in ASoS, when Jon recalls their childhood fights and games and how they were dreaming of being heroes. In this memory, Robb shouts two names, and I think both are relevant in some way as parallels to Robb.

Robb would shout back, "Well, I'm Florian the Fool." Or Robb would say, "I'm the Young Dragon" <snip>.

The Young Dragon association may be easier to see, but how is Robb Florian the Fool?

Of course, he is neither a knight, nor a fool in motley. However, according to legend, this is what Florian says:

"Sweet lady, all men are fools, and all men are knights, where women are concerned."

In a sad way, Robb is a great example of that quote, being both extremely chivalrous and arguably a total fool where a certain woman is concerned. 

This is all recalled when Robb's story has already finished, so Robb's words do not exactly foreshadow anything that the reader doesn't already know at this point in the story. But Jon also recalls what he shouted at the time in reply or as a challenge, and I think those words are meant to foreshadow aspects of Jon's future - not in a literal way, but symbolically and allowing for opposites as well as for parallels. 

Jon shouted:

1. "I'm Prince Aemon the Dragonknight" - another Targaryen (there have been speculations on Jon's original name perhaps being Aemon), cousin to Daeron I (impersonated by Robb here, hm), Lord Commander of the Kingsguard. This is in the chapter which will soon lead to Jon being chosen Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. The NW and the KG can be seen as polar opposites (just like the conquest of Dorne and the cause of Northern independence), but both have Lord Commanders.

2. "I'm Ser Ryam Redwyne" - another Southerner, another legendary Lord Commander of the KG. This can almost be called an abundance of Lord Commander images. 

3. "I'm Lord of Winterfell". Well, well. Of course, it is most of all reference to the choice he has to make at the moment (to refuse or accept Stannis's offer concerning Winterfell), but that's something we already know as we are reading this. There could still be an element of foreshadowing here, too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...