Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thedog

  1. Interesting hypothetical Im not sure it gets to that point. I even assuming the Dothraki and sell swords could take kings landings (they probably can since they have sacked many cities in Essos over the years), I don’t think they could take the red keep. Even if they could take the Red Keep. Maegor’s holdfast wouldn’t fall. Basically in the stories, it’s considered impregnable. But maybe they take Maegor’s Holdfast through betrayal (I could certainly see Cersei turning against people if she cooped up in there for months, and someone taking the risk of Dothraki versus being Cersei). I don’t see Dany treating Sansa any better (from her perspective) than Stark treated her niece and nephew. Robb also seemed to show the willingness to risk Sansa when she was held by the Lannisters.
  2. With the Blackfyres still posing a threat, that would seem to be a questionable move. I appreciate that they were legitimatized by Aegon IV, but still…
  3. I think these two have very different drives. Stannis only cares about the law and what is just. That isn’t Maekar. Stannis would not have demanded a trial of seven to vindicate Aerion/diffuse the dishonor of Daeron. I also do not see Stannis as feeling badly if he killed his brother during a trial of seven. If his brother died during such a contest, it was part of the law.
  4. Martial skill can allow low born men to rise high. It’s not easy but with the right breaks and enough skill you could even ride to the kingsguard and serve along side the sons of the most powerful houses. Pate the Woodcock and Duncan the Tall were among the lowest born of any person that we know and ended up being famous with their names immortalized. Of course, Pate might have been the best fighter in the Seven Kingdoms, and Duncan was a great fighter who had tons of lucky breaks. Nevertheless, even if you do not have such skills, you can at least join a city watch and rise up like Slynt. Or you can become a sell sword. Over generations, you families can move up. Look at Littlefinger. His great-grandfather was a sellsword. His grandfather was a knight. Littlefinger used his skill with coin to jump up several ranks.
  5. Sometimes it’s referred to as a wealthy, powerful, prestigious title. For example, when Little Finger is said to be able to marry better because he became the lord of Harrenhal, and when Lord Whent hosts the great tournament to show off his wealth (though even then it is suggest he couldn’t actually afford the tournament himself). Other times it is referenced as poor, like when Lord Maegor lived in only one tower with a small household or Lady Whent was unable to hold it. The only consistent answer seems to be that the amount of land attached the title varies depending on what the king grants the lord given the title.
  6. I’m not sure any of the lords paramount really have continued loyalty over time. The loyalty of a power vassal to his lord only seems as strong as the vassal and lord. Tywins father had a major uprising against him, which Tywin punished brutally. Meanwhile, we do not see prior the Current troubles, any such recent uprising against Stark. Nevertheless, Bolton and Karstark clearly aren’t loyal to Robb and Umber was of questionable loyalty until Robb earned his trust. Meanwhile, I’m not aware of any major uprising in the Reach against House Tyrell directly, but during the Blackfyre rebellions Tyrell vassals fought in both sides so clearly their ability to control vassals was at least questionable.
  7. I agree that the conquest of Westeros is more significant. Probably less compelling television though. The Dance of the Dragons involved a complex (and really messed) family conflict. And is driven by the relationships between brother and sister. Father and Daughter. Brother and Brother. Not to mention cousins. Plus tons of intrigue. The Conquest was a superior fighting force (due to dragons) fighting a bunch of fighting smallish kingdoms. There was, at least during the conquest, not a ton of personal drama. At least not compared to what followed. More actual fighting during the conquest on battle fields, but less personal drama.
  8. As king, he would be direct lord of the Crownlands. That region doesn’t fall within any of his primary vassals’ domains. Accordingly lesser houses from the Crownlands would be his direct vassal, and likely the crown would also hold land within that region directly. So he could certainly recruit men from that land. Additionally he could recruit directly from King’s Landing. Targaryens had no problem finding men to be Dragonkeepers, and presumably had guards in addition to the watch.
  9. A Queen he prestige through her husband. Tywin having men at court would seem to indicate that he thought that there would be situations where he thought Cersei might need swords who are not beholden to Robert (at least not any more beholden than any random commoner in Westeros). I guess that knowing Cersei her getting into a situation needing men did seem like a good precaution. nevertheless, i still Don’t get why Robert would let a force of men not loyal to him be permanently lodged under his roof. Obviously there is precedent for a Queen having a sworn shield (in this case the Hound). But a force of armed men? That seems to undercut his power.
  10. So at the start of the Game of Thrones (ie during peacetime), there are random Lannister men-at-arms just hanging around King’s Landing. Why? Lord Tywin is not present, and they are his men. Jamie is a Kingsguard, so he shouldn’t have a retinue of guards. They are not there for Tyrion since apparently only keeps only two retainers. I know you might say Cersei, but that doesn’t make a lot of sense. Daughters of great lords are always marrying into other families and they then use the guards of the new family. There are no Tully men hanging around Winterfell or the Vale, with the Tully daughters (well the Blackfish goes to the Vale, but it appears that he is not with a contingent of men). They apparently expect the loyalty of their husbands men. So why are there so many Lannister soldiers hanging around King Robert? It seem that Robert would and should object to this. He should have Baratheon men in droves, since he now controls the Crownlands directly, but it seems like all he has are the City Watch.
  11. A kingsguard can be sent to the wall to end his vows. Lucamore Strong was sent to the Wall after he was found to have broken his vows. Similarly Maegor’s surviving Kingsguard were given the option of taking the black or have trials by combat. So while they serve for life, going to the wall ends that service. Just like being sent to wall, strips a lord or heir of any rights to land or titles. if a knight of the kingsguard believed strongly enough to actually literally fall in his sword for the king, that is the type of knight that no king would ever want to be rid of. As mediocre as some Targaryens were, none seemed dumb enough to actually want to rid themselves of loyal kingsguard. Even the Mad King seemed to trust his kingsguard with the exception of Jamie. And we know Jamie would never follow such an order.
  12. As you reference there, it seems that the arm was simply flooded by rising sea waters, but by a magical event.
  13. With the exception of Maelor, non of those Targaryens ever really received hereditary titles. Daemon didn’t receive Runstone. He married the heir, and we know that in Westeros there is no such thing as jure uxoris. Women can inherit titles only if a lord has no true born male heirs, but if a woman does inherit, she holds the title in her own right. At the very least this is the law of the Vale, since Lady Arryan ruled in her own right, and imprisoned uncles and cousins as necessary. Accordingly, when Lady Royce was person who held the title and her husband would technically be a consort. If Prince Daemon had any legitimate claim to Runestone (and he tried to press a claim), he would not have let same go so easily. Rhaena got Dragonstone, but that was mostly to nullify any claim she had to the throne (and at that time the law Of Female succession for the throne wasn’t yet clear). She clearly didn’t have it as a title to be passed onto her daughters as it was later given to her nephews. To the extent that she actually had title of Harrenhal (rather than as Lord Towers’ guest) it was clear that the title would revert to the crown on her death since that that point she had no heirs eligible to inherit and she wasn’t having more kids. Viserys I created no titles for his sons by his Hightower wife and they were clearly of an age to hold titles. While he wanted his daughter to inherit, he would have known that his sons weren’t going to be given titles by their half-sister. This makes no sense, since Rhaenyra would clearly leave them destitute and Daemon was already without title or income, so you would have at least four Targaryen princes (the three Green Princes plus Daemon) all with strong claims (arguably stronger titles than the Queen Viserys wanted) sitting around kings landing with nothing to do but plot. Even someone as clueless as Viserys would have had to see that problem.
  14. The difference between the Tyrells (and the Tullys who were a minor house compared to the Blackwoods and the Brackens) is that they became lords paramount of one of the seven kingdoms. I appreciate that that the Hightowers Florents, Peakes, and even Osgreys have a better pedigree than Tyrell, but they are required to owe their fealty to House Tyrell. Accordingly they either need to accept that House Tyrell is either equal or their own honor will be lowered by having to bend the knee to a lesser house. No one now doubts the honor/prestige of Baratheon, and they were founded by a bastard only 300 years ago.
  15. Everything you say is true. Except that it’s just kind of a plot that extends to families besides the Targaryens. Take the Lannisters, we know they stripped lands from the Raynes and Tarbecks. That land went to someone. Tytos had multiple sons reach adulthood. Nevertheless, Ser Kevan acknowledged that he was landless as an adult despite his brother giving him money and responsibility. Now he had sons, but nothing to pass onto them. Carry that forward a few generations and you have Lannister hedge knights. Which no Lannister would want. Why not give Ser Kevan the Reynes’ lands? He had the ability and was liked by his brother/father, and the Lannisters now have extra land that needed a loyal vassal to manage. The only times any lord did this sensible step was Robert with Dragonstone after the rebellion, and Aegon with Stormsend Lords seem to give lands in a manner that creates plot points for the story rather than who makes the most sense. compare this to medieval Europe. English and French monarchs were constantly making younger sons dukes and even bought lands to make this happen. Why? Well an unlanded prince has nothing to lose of his older brother dies in a hunting accident (See William II’s death).
  16. That would make sense that no Targaryen would want to kneel to a Tyrell (they were stewards until The Conquest, after all!). But why not give them land in Crownlands? Prince Daemon became a problem for his brother precisely because he had no land. He had to hire mercenaries and go conquer the Stepstones. If he had land to rule over he would have been kept out of Court and stayed with his wife (a Royce) rather than making a nuisance of himself in King’s Landing or starting private wars. Daemon tried to claim Runestone after his wife died, and abandoned his kingship, so obviously he would have preferred to be an Arryn vassal rather than be landless/a king of some remote islands.
  17. There are definitely tiers of noble houses. The top tier are the lords paramount (Tully, Lannister, Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Martel, Tyrell). In Targaryen era Hightower and Velaryon were also in this tier and Velaryon might be in a tier above with Baratheon based on how often they married into the royal family. Then their is the tier of powerful lords whose families produce hands of the king/numerous small counsel members (note: obviously people of low nobility or even common birth could rise to the small counsel through ability, but generally these roles went to the same group of families) or could be matches for princes/princesses. I would also include in this tier powerful families who are old and powerful regionally. This would include the nine families above and families like Manderly, Butterwell (pre-Blackfyre), Peake (pre-Blackfyre), Celtigar, Royce, Rowan. Frey I would put in the third tier. Powerful family, but is not as prestigious to be considered for a court position. When a Frey was marrying Lord Butterwell, this was seen as Butterwell marrying down. Plus, it doesn’t seem like a Frey’s were ever considered to be a match in marriage for a Targaryen. Nor were the Targaryens recruiting Freys for roles on the small counsel or as hand of the king. families from tier 3 could marry tier 2 or even occasionally tier 1 (see Freys marrying Lannisters). But they would never be considered as a match for a prince or princess. so yes, I do think Frey was right to think he was looked down upon.
  18. Joffrey Velaryon is referred to as wearing rings which are…taken from him.
  19. Aegon III certainly seems to act like George Martin’s perception of a moody teenager.
  20. Maekar getting Summer Hall made the most sense. It never really made sense to me that younger Targaryen princes never any titles at all. Frankly it seemed like the most unbelievable thing about the history of Westeros. Lords were always rebelling. Why wouldn’t the lands stripped from these lords (and land was stripped from them, see Lord Peake) be given to a Targaryen prince? Why wasn’t a Targaryen given Dunstonbury and Whitegrove during the Blackfyre rebellions?
  • Create New...