The Sleeper

The issue is that sex work would have been one of the few options Tysha would have to make a living, regardless of what else happened. She was a crofter, basically a farmer, with no land and relatives. Learning another trade would require both money and connections. The money she had was not that much and she wouldn't have been able to hold on to it for long. Regarding the story, she certainly wouldn't tell people that she was married to a Lannister lordling. For one people wouldn't believe her and I am sure she has enough trauma tto keep telling people. There is also the fear of Tywin. The sailor story is pretty much the most generic story one could come up with in a port. As for Yna's prophecy it's not necessarily literal. The wording was that her love is dead. I don't think she would very much like Tyrion as he is now. The things that point to Tyrion is Lanna, of course but also the wedding gimmick. If it's true, it could mean that little Lanna could wind up the Lady of Casterly Rock.

The God's Eye has a strict non-trespasser policy and is annoyed that Harren built right on the shore, so they are messing with people's minds, exacerbating their worst tendencies, driving violence in order to keep people away.

How was she forced to swear her oaths? They were quite voluntary if I recall. Part of her predicament is the fact that she's sworn to three different sides with different agendas.

Survival horror at the Dreadfort... ETA or at Harrenhal, or beyond the Wall or soon enough basically anywhere.

The Seven Kingdoms are defunct as a political entity now and King's Landing will most probably end up as a heap of burnt rubble. I don't see how they would survive a second round of full-blown warfare. I could see a more loose coalition of regional kingdoms being set up afterwards, but other than that... But Bran is the King in the North. There's tons of foreshadowing since the first book. Nevermind the fact that he is the rightful heir, a religious symbol, the most powerful magic user in the books, the one most associated with Winterfell etc.

Braavos is a city with many factions in it, so I doubt that they would be monolithic in their treatment of Dany. Arya is a another story. Aside from the small matter of their family feud, they have tons in common. A princess who fled to Essos, after the fall of her House. She has lived among small folk and identify with them. She is driven by a personal sense of justice and duty. Is fascinated by ships and sailing. Speaks multiple languages and has lived in many different environments. Is deeply protective of those she deems her own. All of these statements apply to both Dany and Arya. Arya would also be enthusiastic about Dany freeing slaves, inspired by the fact that she is a young woman ruling in her own right and fascinated by the dragons. Plus her banter with Tyrion will be epic. In addition to that her skillset seems tailor made to counter Varys. She can disguise herself and ferret out information in ways he can't even dream off. And let's not forget cats eat little birds and mice. So, in the dance of the dragons Arya would gravitate on Dany's side. It might not play out quite like this.

If there is Eowyn-like character in ASoIaF, it is Brienne, not Arya. In Arya's case, she is more inclined to physical activities by nature but also because she wants to hang out with her brothers and father. That is also the source of her frustration with "ladylike" pursuits. Her ineptitude along with her resentment from being in Sansa's shadow lead her to being excluded from her immediate group of peers. Her interests in activities or lack thereof are not exclusive, but rather both stem from her desire to be included and her fiercely competitive nature. As for the warrior aspect of her arc, this is more of a tangent. For instance she has actually fought in very few cases and never as water dancer. Her training has served her as mental conditioning for keeping her composure and as a routine to center her when facing difficult situations. With the exception of circumstances of someone she considers her pack being in danger, she actively avoids fighting. She does not pursue a warrior ideal, nor does she seek glory in battle out of despair for her circumstances. On the contrary, she survived by any means necessary. She also has long been disabused of the notion of knights and warriors as sources of power, justice and honor. She is also keenly aware of their practical limitations. Furthermore, she had never idealised their behavior, but rather accepted as a matter of fact what she had been taught. All of these things happening, have pushed her into the opposite direction. Seeking another solitary type of violence that works for her. There are many paths that could lead to what you're describing, but not through what you're suggesting. There really isn't much else she can be disillusioned from, but the core aspects of her character. In that case, she wouldn't become a lady wife, but a septa, a woodswitch or a sellsword. I do agree that the FM are very likely to thrust her back into the stage as their pawn (she would not be happy about that). It doesn't seem that fugitive or assassin are the only possible end states for a trainee and if the FM are involved in politics, which they seem to be, her name and status would be more valuable to them in the current circumstances than the best assassin who ever lived.

My best guess is that she is going to get cought up in the conflict between Aegon and Dany. Probably on Dany's side. Her name and heritage would give her political relevance in that war, which she would also further gain if Stoneheart crown's her with Robb's crown, as she intends. I also think Braavos itself will have a more central place to the story. It is a port which gets information from everywhere in the world and from there one could likewise go anywhere in the world. Part of the reason there are so many possibilities for Arya is her current location. Furthermore the Iron Bank has involved itself with Stannis and undoubtedly Braavos itself will play a role in Dany's invasion of Westeros, whether facilitating or hindering it. I also don't think the House of Black and White is just a pit stop. In the west there are the weirwoods associated with Bran and Jon while in the east we have the trees that produce shade of the evening which are associated with Dany and Euron. Both are connected with visions and extending life after death. Between them, geographically and thematically, is the House of Black and White whose candles have the same effect as weirwood paste and shade of the evening and who consider themselves the arbiters of life and death. Considering Arya's association with death and the mystical aspects of the story, I think she will delve quite a bit more into their mysteries.

A bit late in the discussion for a topic that arose before, whether Aegon was planned from the start. At least as far as Clash, I think the foreshadowing is definite. There is Dany's vision of the mummer's dragon, as well as Varys's riddle. Besides that there is his interpretation of the comet which he claimed to be the herald of a king (not a queen) to come with fire and blood. However there is potential foreshadowing even in Game. When Varys visited Ned in the black cells and they discussed about the innocents who suffer, while speaking of Rhaenys, he neglected to mention baby Aegon. There is a far more compelling fact however. The existence of Varys and Illyrio themselves. They don't make sense as characters without Aegon as their motivation. As well as the fact that "Dance with Dragons" was always a planned title. As for Illyrio changing his plans all the time, the changing circumstances justify that and the irrelevance of those plans saves Martin the trouble of having to come up with them.

The point is not that he knocked over the cyvasse table, it is that he made Tyrion pick up the pieces. He wasn't just pissed, he asserted his authority by humiliating Tyrion. The comparison to Joffrey was apt. Varys's whole spiel is bullshit, in the sense that trying to manufacture this situation does not yield the results that he claimed. In truth Aegon has lived in a bubble which he was the center of the universe and everyone was devoted to him, revolved around his heritage and destiny. The world according to him exists to usher him to glory. Worse, his isolation would not have allowed for any counterpoint to exist. The danger he was in was only theoretical and his reaction at the bridge of dreams shows that he hasn't been in physical danger before. In other words, apart from luxury, his upbringing is the same and even more exaggerated in some regards to all the other nobles. In more practical terms, he is a prop for the ambitions of others, none of whom are decent people, even by Westerosi standards, all of them with different agendas. And he looks to be just smart enough to make things worse. He is shaping up to be the fulcrum for a new, even bloodied conflict, one that has the added religious element and from the narrative's perspective he is being set up as Dany's foil, so his odds don't look good. His "reign" is doomed before it has begun and between him and his supporters they look to unleash a fresh bout of atrocities.

I agree for the most part. What I wrote is reffering to the problems the positions bring him. He is simply does not have the clout to make good on the authority he should have in theory, in terms of prestige, military might and pedigree. Furthermore it is a contentious office which he acquired in dubious circumstances and has a tenuous claim to, which is why the Vale was on the brink of open revolt to deprive him of it as soon as he gained the position. His power lies in having a network of influence and making deals. Of course, having the title is better than not having it. If nothing else, he could well be kicked out of the Vale entirely if Robert dies. And being the Lord Protector gives him a place and a reason for people to deal with him and helps him expand his influence. The reason he is taking such risks is precisely because his status in the Vale is precarious. Essentially this is plan C. Plan A would have been a stable and manageable Lysa and B a healthy Robert whom he would have had the time to mold into his puppet, while ruling in his name. Sansa to Littlefinger is essentially Lysa 2.0.

It doesn't seem as much as an ambition as it is setting himself up for the future. Sweetrobin, as things stand now seems unlikely to grow up to a healthy individual much less an effective lord of the Vale. Being the guardian of such an individual is a liability, besides the fact that it is a position with an expiration date, though I don't believe that he cares that much for the title as it is not much good to him. Meanwhile, public displays of Sweetrobin's frailty and demeanor would only be ammunition to his rivals in regards to his suitability for the role of guardian and Lord Protector. However, it is a risky strategy, because should Robert die before he has secured his position in Harry's circle he is in danger of being marginalised. He needs to find a way to stay relevant.

Not really. Sansa in the Vale is behaving more or less like she was in early Game chapters. Think of how she dealt with Renly and Barristan. That is her baseline personality when she is feeling secure. It is not a behavior of bastard but of the lady of the house. Compare Maya Stone and Jon. They are much more reserved and defensive. She was subdued in King's Landing due to grief, danger and awkward social position.

Neither Littlefinger or Sansa, are trying to kill Sweetrobin. Littlefinger is Lord Protector because of Robert. He just has written him off as a future asset, so he is drugging him to keep up appearances with complete disregard about his long term health. As a method for murder it is hardly untraceable, unless he plans to kill the maester, too. Sansa is, however, in denial. Maester Colemon has been quite clear about the eventual outcome of giving him sweetsleep.

The Nymeria reference is about her being a commander and a leader rather than a warrior and her relationship with Moros has no bearing. Aegon's problem is with him being accepted as Rhaegar's son and not an impostor not with the strength of the claim itself. They all consider it stronger. The very reason they recruited Connington to begin with is to lend validity. Varys refers to him as a king and they raised him to be one. Dany was not included in their original designs. The reason they want her now is the dragons not her claim. They don't intend to share power. And Connington's dream is to sit him on the throne.

@Oana_Mika Jaehaerys passed over Rhaenys in favor of Baelon and still had to hold a great council for Baelon's son to succeed. The situation is identical with the exception of the genders being reversed. Viserys also had a clearly chosen heir and the result was a civil war.

That might have been what Aerys intended, but assuming the dynasty had progressed in any normal fashion, that would have blown the succession line out of the water. It still is a moot discussion, because it was done at the last few days of a failing dynasty, had no practical effect and Aerys was essentially powerless with no way to enforce his will. Dany was Viserys's heir essentially in a vacuum. And that pretty much will be the framework within which Dany's versus Aegon's claims will be contested. Rhaegar's popularity and primogeniture, which is the most accepted rule, favor Aegon. But by and large these will serve as rationalizations to cover people's actual agendas.

I heard you the first time, no need to shout. Rhaegar died, he was never disinherited. The presumptive heir versus the chosen heir never goes uncontested. And at the time Dany was not yet born. It never became an issue, because Rhaegar's children and Aerys died at the same time and Viserys never inherited anything, but had Rhaenys and Aegon lived you can't automatically assume that Dany would have been Viserys' heir. Primogeniture favors them over Dany.

So, he never disinherited Rhaegar. Rhaegar's alleged children still have a better claim than Dany.

Did I miss something? When did Aerys disinherit Rhaegar?

A few thoughts. It seems to me that this type of analysis would apply better to Cersei. You have the witch, the fact she is trying to emulate Tywin who is ultimately the source of her woes and the fact that her actions would lead to her fall. A tragic outcome is also relative. For instance I can totally see Tyrion dying at a later date (probably of liver failure) as the Lord of Casterly Rock with a prostitute giving him blowjob and still be utterly miserable because he is universally despised and loathed and the feeling is mutual. Regarding the essay about the Meereneese plot. I think the author makes a good case about the events themselves, however fails to address the greater context, that is that the peace involves a fundamental compromise of Dany's values, that the Yunkai'i and the Great Masters achieved it through threat of violence and that there is a greater world, the Volantene navy, that is about to fall on them and shatter it all to pieces. Consequently, peace is hung by a thread which why it fell so easily and ruinously apart. That is not to say that the issues examined were not woth examining. The consequences of violence do fall on everyone and generally speaking, the guilty are better insulated than the innocent. Which is why Dany accepted peace to begin with. Naturally, because Dany is our protagonist, the focus falls on her actions and motivations both from the perspective of the readers and the narrative. She is not the sole actor in the narrative and the moral cannot and should not fall entirely on her. Aegon has been set up to steal Dany's thunder and while he will be initially well received, he doesn't have the resources to pacify Westeros or to address its many problems. Nor would he care to, ultimately he is prop for a disparate group of people with conflicting and deeply problematic agendas.

Could be. The whole point is that a preconceived plan to overthrow the Starks seems implausible at the start of the campaign.

Communication occurs between castles via ravens or riders, so there is considerable. For instance Roose would have sent a report via raven to the Twins and a rider would have been sent to find Robb. They would have also presumably sent ravens north. Ravens can only fly between castles and if someone is on the field they could not have been contacted directly. A further problem would arise in the case their location is unknown. In Ramsay's case, regarding him raising the Dreadfort garrison and attacking Winterfell, he was a prisoner at Winterfell after he was arrested by Rodrick Cassel and when he was released by Theon he was pretending to be Reek. The only opportunity to contact his father would have been after he had returned to the Dreadfort and then he would have had to wait for a response. There shouldn't have been enough time for that, since what prompted his release from Winterfell was that Rodrick Cassel was returning to reclaim it.

Not really, for most of the time there would have been no one for Roose to answer to and by the time the question was raised they bigger issues to deal with. Besides, lords looking after their own asses first and foremost is nothing new. It doesn't speak to betrayal in and of itself. ETA and Robb, Edmure and Catelyn would not have a clear picture of the composition of his forces beyond what Roose himself reported.

Roose spent a lot time on the road and Ramsay spent a considerable amount of time as a captive and then I doubt that Luwin would send ravens on his behalf to Roose. They would have had trouble keeping track of each other, let alone send ravens and wait for replies. The issue with the any preconceived plan of supplanting the Starks is that it is almost impossible without the fall of Winterfell and the apparent deaths of Bran and Rickon, which could not have been anticipated. There is also another issue. Until Moat Cailin Roose would not have known that he was to be a commander and therefore have any freedom of movement. It was almost a year until Robb saw Roose in person again and then Roose blamed the debacle of Duskendale on Robett Glover. Roose probably spun the tale about the Green Fork however he wished. This is a good juxtaposition with Robb's reaction to Edmure. There is key difference, however. Roose's defeat, even though unnecessary, did serve its purpose in Robb's plan. On the other hand Edmure's victory completely derailed it. There is also the issue of what he was instructed to accomplish. It loos like initially Robb did not mind a confrontation, but then thought better of it as seen through his choice of commanders. I think that commanders are to meant to have a free rein in order to allow for adaptability in the face of lack of communication. His objectives were twofold in terms of Robb’s campaign. Keep Tywin busy long enough while also securing the route to the North. The battle did waste Tywin's time, while his own troops retreated in good order having two strong defensive positions to fall back to. So in a sense he accomplished both objectives. While he managed to get Manderly, Karstark and Hornwood captured or killed, this would not have been decisive as their fathers and brothers were with Robb. Their deaths however would allow him easier control of their own troops. Losing the battle so badly, does nothing for him. Outright betrayal, in the form of contacting either Tywin or Jaime would have been relatively simple, but gained him little. On the other hand the more damage he inflicted on Tywin the more he would have raised his stock among the North men and the better his negotiating position with Tywin. In short, I think he was playing it safe, hedging his bets and creating options for himself rather than having committed to a specific sort of action. Trying to juggle all these balls he botched the actual battle.