Jump to content

John Suburbs

Members
  • Content count

    4,450
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About John Suburbs

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,117 profile views
  1. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    Thanks Ran. That helps. But I still say it makes more sense for the BoB to happen after the wedding, since this would give Robert and Ned something to do with there 40k-man army than to fight little skirmishes for nine months rather than march on KL and put an end to it before the royalists can get their act together. Do you think this will be clarified in F&B II?
  2. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    One's destiny is one's destiny regardless of whether one knows it ahead of time or not. In fact, Jon would more likely fulfill his destiny if he does not know it growing up, which would put an awful lot of pressure on a little boy. Ned may know all about Jon, or he may not. Lyanna may have sworn Howland to secrecy, or they mutually agreed that no one but them and Rhaegar know what this is all about. Jon is more likely to learn proper warcraft and the ways of the world at Winterfell than at Greywater Watch. Brought up as a crannogman and trained with net and spear, Jon would be next-to-useless outside the Neck. Bran needed the escort to the 3EC, not Jon. If they had brought Bran to Jon, he never would have made it to the 3EC. Jojen is the greenseer, not Howland. So yes, Jojen told Howland what he saw in his dream, and that was to bring Bran to the 3EC. None of this had anything to do with Jon. Of course I'm assuming. If it was stated clearly and unequivocally in the book then there would be no need to even discuss it. He spent a good two years on the IoF. What could he have possibly been doing all this time if not discussing lore with the Green Men? And what lore would be more important than that which involves the coming threat to all mankind? Why do you assume that this knowledge would then cause Howland to become the chief instigator of all the subsequent events and ultimate protector of Jon? There are other people, kin to Jon, who are far more capable of protecting him than he, and as I said, if Jon's destiny is set, then there is nothing that Howland, or anyone, can do to change that. It's whatever True Tongue word that most closely translates to "song" in the common tongue. The children are "those who sing the song of earth" and they do literally sing this song: I imagine there are, or were, other ancient races who sang the song of the seas, the wind, ice, fire . . . If I had my guess, the song is everything that comprises the being of the singers: history, culture, beliefs, memories . . . And those who learn to sing these songs in their totality can use them to do all kinds of amazing things, like shatter land masses and control rings of volcanoes. In other words, the "song" is the underlying element of magic. It's the Force. Jace was a direct, first-born descendent of a Targaryan -- first-born son to the first-born child of King Viserys Targaryen. The pact would have married his first-born daughter to the first-born son and heir to Cregan. I doubt very much that last names count when it comes to blood magic, or else Edric Storm would be useless to Melisandre. Lyanna and Robert may also have produce an Ice-Fire baby, but it never happened so we'll never know. Mayhaps this was why the Green Men sent Howland to the tourney; to warn her against the marriage with Robert. Being the wolf-blooded child that she was, however, she decided to do so anyway with a Targaryen crown prince. Blood magic is a central element to the story, and the Targaryens are "blood of the dragon" whose forefathers supposedly descended from actual dragons. The Starks, meanwhile, were Kings of Winter and might, just might, have a touch of Other blood in their veins (but that's another theory). So I find it unusual that anyone would think that a fantasy series entitled "A Song of Ice and Fire" would think that there is not only no song in the story but no ice or fire magic either. As far as I can tell, there has been never been a Targ-Stark union in the history of the realm, not even a distant one. Yes, Jace and Sara Snow, whom Gyldane is pretty sure never happened, nor that Sara even existed; and such a thing would be woefully out-of-character for Jace. And it doesn't appear to have produce a child in any event. No, but it's odd that the only other mention of "ice and fire" comes from the Reeds. It must be important to them if they use it to re-swear their allegiance to Winterfell. And it seems to be the most important element of the oath because they say it together. There are all sorts of various natural things they could swear by, but they happen to pick ice and fire -- two things that have no known connection to House Reed.
  3. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    How do you know he hasn't? The crannogmen never leave their bogs and crannogs, but that doesn't mean they are incapable of learning about the outside world. He knew that Brandon was someone special and needed help. Jon was with Ned for many years, and then left for the wall. What would Howland have been able to do for him? Call it what you will, the PwtP, the Last Hero, AA . . . The point is that he has learned the true story behind the Song of Ice and Fire and how to make the person who will sing it. Rhaegar says "his is the song of ice and fire." So the SoIaF is not a person, but it seems that the person who sings it is. As far as I know, this is the only time anyone has ever mentioned the song of ice and fire, so it is very likely that nobody knows what this combination will do, in terms of blood magic, nor that Starks are necessarily the Ice component. Recall that after the HotU, Dany asked Jorah what the song of ice and fire is and Jorah says he has never heard of it. Before Jon, of course, the only time a Targ-Stark union was proposed was right after the DoD, but it never came to fruition. Maybe the Green Men had a hand in stopping that? Explaining to either Cregan or Aegon that the time was not yet right? One other caveat: the only other time the phrase "ice and fire" appears in the text are in the oaths that Meera and Jojen Reed swear to Brandon: To Winterfell we pledge the faith of Greywater. Hearth and heart and harvest, we yield up to you, my lord. Our swords and spears and arrows are yours to command. Grant mercy to our weak, help to our helpless, and justice to all, and we shall never fail you. I swear it by earth and water I swear it by bronze and iron. We swear it by ice and fire.
  4. John Suburbs

    The KoLT and Subsequent Events

    No, there is no difference. They are still breaking their oaths to protect their king. To sit out in the middle of nowhere doing nothing while armies are marching on the king is a gross dereliction of duty. Honor, and their oaths, mandated that they protect their king and they consciously chose not to do it because "we swore a vow." So they either swore that vow to Aerys, which lets them off the hook, or they swore it to someone else, making them oath-breakers in every sense of the word. Aerys told Lewyn to assemble the Dornish host, not Rhaegar. It stands to reason that Aerys also assigned Selmy and Darry to Rhaegar as well, or at the very least agreed with the command, or else they wouldn't have gone. Why would he think Martell lost deliberately, but not Rhaegar? They both lost; they both died. OK, now we are getting somewhere. Aerys ordered them to the ToJ. If you'll recall, this was one of the aspects of my OP. So the question then becomes, why? Why would Aerys devote nearly half his kingsguard, the only men in the entire kingdom he trusts, to look after Rhaegar's personal business, or to be anywhere doing anything else, when he has desperate need of them back in the Red Keep or on the Trident? Why does he care about Lyanna and her baby at all, especially since they are in about the safest location they can possibly be? To remind you again, this is fanfic. There is no text anywhere that says they were with Rhaegar at any time after Harrenhal. They next time we see them is the ToJ. Exactly, Aerys never questions their absence or their loyalty, which he certainly would be doing if he felt they were in any way involved with this disloyal act that was just perpetrated by the disloyal crown prince. All the more reason to suspect it was Aerys who sent them to the ToJ, not Rhaegar. I can't imagine a more idiotic command for the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard: go tell Rhaegar I want to talk to him, and then after he's promised to return home, ride off into the countryside to do whatever you please. Kind of a convoluted sentence, but if I am reading it correctly then it is yet another absurd comment. How on earth do you imagine that these three experienced warriors would think that Aerys was not in any danger when armies are fighting and rebellion is breaking out across the land? The entire kingdom is in danger. But are you saying that if they had left the ToJ because they did think the king was in danger, that would be the treason? That's is also patently absurd. That's like saying Barristan Selmy committed treason at Duskendale because Aerys didn't specifically order him to do it. Their oaths mandate that they defend their king with their lives, obey his commands and protect him from all harm. If they fail to do that, they have broken that oath. Only if Aerys specifically told them to remain at the tower no matter what happens are they off the hook. But this command must come from Aerys, the king, not the crown prince whom the king suspects of trying to usurp him. Suspicions, fears, beliefs, what he doesn't have is proof. But that doesn't let the KG off the hook by failing to defend their king just because the object of all these suspicions, fears and beliefs told them to sit tight. Their overriding command, sanctified by a sacred oath that they swore before the king, the court and the high septon, was to defend the king. To say that they failed to do this because the crown prince, who would then become king upon his death, told them not to is laughable. Again, I'll ask you: why does Aerys suddenly have all this faith in Rhaegar? His suspicions have been steadily mounting for years, and the whole kingdom was buzzing about dethronement when Rhaegar left for Dragonstone. The next time they meet is at Harrenhal, where Rhaegar earned zero brownie points from the king, and then in KL after Rhaegar supposedly launched the shitstorm that Aerys had to deal with for months while Rhaegar was off enjoying himself. For what possible reason would Aerys trust Rhaegar at this point? Sure, he makes him commander because your army is not likely to fight for you very well if your own son and heir is not willing to support you, but you are entirely missing the leverage here. Aerys is blackmailing Rhaegar through his wife and children. That's fine. Don't bother. We're just circling (and clashing?) here anyway. It was a lively debate, though. We can revisit it in the future when the truth comes out to show how wrong you are.
  5. John Suburbs

    About the Trident

    Again, the WB: So the battle is already screaming, it is already underway. And if you are referring to the quote I think you are (Ned 1, GoT), you have it wrong: So not only do we have "while the battle crashed", not clashed (and not "as soon as" the battle crashed but "while" the battle crashed), we also have the word "clash" in the progressive tense only a few sentences later. So even if there is some quote out there where the armies clashed, it by no means indicates that this was their very first contact. But let's take a closer view of your proposal. You have Robert and Rhaegar meeting at the beginning of the battle, where they "circled and clashed, again and again." Two men on horseback, with mace and sword, circling around each other. How many clashes do you think qualifies as "again and again"? A dozen? Two dozen? Let's say they did this 50 times. Now, how long do you give between each clash? How about 1 minute? They clash, ride away for 30 seconds, turn, and ride back again. Even still, we have this scene unfolding in less than an hour. So you are contending that the battle began, probably at dawn, and within that first hour: -Lewyn has pressed his advantage to Robert's left, only to die and Corbray rallies his side to slice up the loyalist right. And this after already destroying Robert's other right. (Even here, I think you have it wrong. Robert is in command of the entire army, so his right is the whole rightward division of that army, not the right flank of his center); -the numerous other lords and knights on both sides have died; -Jason Mallister takes out three loyalist bannermen; -Darry is cut down; -Selmy kills multiple foes and then is unhorsed and mortally wounded; And sorry, but the whole idea that Rhaegar would leap into the battle at the very beginning is a non-starter. Rhaegar has zero battle experience. He has never led an army, never planned strategy nor tactics, never even killed a man, not even those pesky gnats in the Kingswood. He is a complete novice, a tourney knight. Meanwhile, he has experienced fighters who have done all of these things, including the slayer of Maelys the Monstrous and the man who single-handedly fought is way out of a dungeon to rescue his king. So it is simply inconceivable that Rhaegar would be among the first to take the field, or that his men would even allow this knowing that if Rhaegar dies their cause is lost because no one wants to fight for the Mad King. Plus the fact that the battle actually did end when Rhaegar fell, at the end of a contest that you equate to an hour-long tilt somewhere else, would literally make the Trident the shortest major battle in Westerosi history. I seriously doubt even the Field of Fire was shorter than this. So I say no. Using a little critical thinking, we can see that the text clearly shows that R&R did not meet at the beginning of the battle. They met when it was well underway: after all three Kingsguard were removed and after Rhaegar realized that his lines were collapsing and he had no choice but to ride out and face Robert alone.
  6. John Suburbs

    About the Trident

    Lol, true enough, but if you look at history, every single female head of state did not hesitate to use warfare to further their own national, of even narrow political or personal, interests: Cleopatra, Isabella, Elizabeth, Catherine, Victoria . . .
  7. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    True about the initial battles. They must have been rather small to have happened so quickly. If we have a war that lasted "nearly a year", as Ned puts it, and eight months or so between the wedding the sack, than all that fighting in Gulltown, the Stormlands and the Reach had to happen in four months or less. Plus we also have Ned's flight north, through the mountainous Vale, never knowing which house is hostile, then rally his banners, wait for them to show up, march down the Kingsroad . . . Possible, but . . . My understanding is that the BotB pitted the armies of the Riverlands and the North vs. the loyalist host under Connington. I'm not sure where Jon Arryn is, but considering that Ned, Robert, Hoster and Jon are all at the wedding, then their four individual hosts are pretty much united at this point. 40,000 men should be plenty to take a city from 1000 gold cloaks and a few thousand loyalists in the Red Keep. So with this force intact, I don't see the sense of stamping out all of the little loyalist lords in the Riverlands, whose forces should be with Selmy and Darry now, so they're no threat to Robert's rear, rather than simply marching on KL and putting an end to it. Eventually, they will have to take the city, so does it make sense to do that with a full army at your back when your foe is still getting its act together? Or do you wait until their army is ready to go and face them in the field first? In the latter scenario, you either lose the rebellion right then and there, or now you have to take the very same city with maybe half the men you had before, or less. I'm no military strategist, but to me it makes sense to strike with overwhelming force first before your enemy has created a counter force. But this all changes if Mace is marching his host up the Rose Road. Now, Robert must deal with this threat first before he can consider attacking the capital. When he lost at Ashford, Mace diverted some of his host to the capital, which then followed Rhaegar to the Trident, while he went on the Storm's End. The World Book lists virtually every other event since the Dawn Age in chronological order, including every other battle in Robert's Rebellion. It seems implausible that they would list this one battle out of order. But I'm waiting for F&B 2 to find out for sure.
  8. John Suburbs

    The KoLT and Subsequent Events

    Whatever. They were at the Tower of Joy because that is where Rhaegar told them to be. They are not in King's Landing protecting their king with their lives, as their oaths require, they are instead hundreds of miles away looking after Rhaegar's interests. So sorry, but even if they cop the attitude that "we stayed at the ToJ because Aerys himself didn't order us back" that is a pitiful excuse because they are sworn to protect the king and everybody on the entire continent knows that the king's life is in danger. From Gyldane: So don't tell me there is no text that says Aerys thought Rhaegar was trying to dethrone him. There is plenty of text. These are not "occasional suspicions," this is a mounting fear that began four years prior at Duskendale and culminated at Harrenhal. And all the while, he has Chelstead, Merryweather, Staunton, Velaryon, Varys and Rossart whispering all kinds of conspiracy theories in his ear. Of course he would want Rhaegar to lead his armies. How would it look to Dorne, the Reach and any other loyalists that not even the crown prince supports him. He has Rhaegar over a barrel, just as he has Lewyn Martell, by holding his family. Why else do you think they were brought to the Red Keep after the tourney instead of back home to Dragonstone? Connington was "the next best thing" because his desire to spare Elia would make him just as pliant as Rhaegar, not because he thought he was the best for the job. He obviously wasn't. So he already suspected Rhaegar of plotting against him before Lyanna, and her abduction has led to rebellion that is now poised to overthrow his reign. In what possible way has Rhaegar given Aerys any reason at all to suddenly trust him with his armies and his guards? You really need to start reading between the lines. That's where most of the story exists with Martin. If you can give a single reason as to why Rhaegar is suddenly so trustworthy, I would give you the benefit of the doubt. Once again, this a theory that requires us to believe that everything is exactly as it seems. But it all falls apart upon even the most rudimentary scrutiny. Why does Aerys suddenly trust Rhaegar after all he's done? Why does Rhaegar wish to make changes now that's he back in his father's good graces? Why is Rhaegar using Elia to ensure the loyalty of Lewyn but not Rhaegar? And this mad, dying paranoia only applies to Lewyn but not to Rhaegar. Why? Rebellion is all around him, all of his kingsguard -- the only people he does trust -- are gone, save for the one young boy whom he does not trust, and never once does he think that maybe he needs a little more protection? No, they are ogg protecting Rhaegar's baby mama for months on end, and Aerys is perfectly fine with that. Please. Exactly, which is why this example is not even remotely comparable to the ToJ. They had every chance, months in fact, to return to KL and fulfill their oaths by protecting their king. Instead, they violated their oaths to stay with Lyanna. So yes, if they hadn't become oath-breakers, Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne. I was speaking of a Trial by Combat or, in Baelor's case, a Trial of Seven. It's not a law, however; more of a custom. According to Cersie, a KG must defend a royal "when the queen's honor is at stake." Otherwise, a KG is usually chosen to defend a royal, since they are supposed to be the most fearsome knights in the land. Except when one royal is accusing another; then both may choose a non-KG.
  9. John Suburbs

    About the Trident

    Sorry, but I'll go back to the World Book: So before you thrown around any more trash about paying attention to the quotes, you might want to start paying attention yourself. Darry and Martell clearly died before Rhaegar. The battle is already well underway before they met, and Lewyn was already dead, meaning the royalist right was already collapsing, regardless of what wings or flanks were winning before. Robert and Rhaegar clashed many times, but it's a stretch to say they met at the beginning of the battle and were fighting the whole time Lewyn was winning and then losing. Nor is it likely that Robert would have met Rhaegar while both Darry and Selmy were still ahorse. He would have to cut through Rhaegar's sworn shields before he can get to Rhaegar himself. So sorry, but there is nothing "apparent" about your sequence. Head canon only works until it starts to conflict with the facts.
  10. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    I can agree with this, but to add: what would make Rhaegar suddenly divert from his plans to take the crown to the prophecy of the three heads? One answer is Lyanna Stark hearing the truth about the Song of Ice and Fire from Howland Reed, who got it directly from the Green Men.
  11. John Suburbs

    The Blackfish and the Brotherhood

    We don't see any screen time for Likely Luke, Notch, Mudge or Beardless Dick, but they are all listed with Lady Stoneheart. Why would he lump some non-screen characters with her but not others? Ned and Co could very well be bringing Beric's body back. I hadn't considered that. But this would be a very risky venture through war-torn, hostile territory, and there would be no reason to separate them in the appendix and no reason for Thoros to lament that "our brotherhood is broken." Jaime and Brienne are far to the east while Greenbeard is to the south and west. If they were still causing trouble there is no reason why people in Darry or at Riverrun would be talking about it when they have outlaws of their own sacking seaports, raping little girls and eating people. You must have a different edition of FFC than me. All mine says is Randyll Tarley, Lord of Horn Hill.
  12. Eh, not bad, and it has always puzzled me that the World Book ends the RR section with Aerys' death but never tells us what happened to Lyanna. But the fact remains that in Ned's dream: These two memories are not independent, they are intertwined. And I believe the app says she was in the Tower, for whatever that's worth. So it's not a bad theory, but at this point it suffers from a lack of evidence. But then again, so does virtually every other theory on this subject.
  13. John Suburbs

    The KoLT and Subsequent Events

    The World Book for starters: Barristan Selmy: The wiki: So both in-story and in the fandom, the kidnapping was the spark that lit the fire. Nobody flew into a rage and demanded Rhaegar's head after Harrenhal. Nobody committed treason at Aerys' birth. By your logic, it wasn't Aerys' order that started the war, it was Jon Arryn calling his banners, and even then first blood was not shed until Gulltown, and this was against Arryn's bannermen, not Aerys'. Regardless of whether Aerys called for Jon/Rob's heads or not, the war was coming because they both would have called their own bannermen to bring justice to Rick, Bran and Lyanna. But the war would not have happened (not at this time and in this way) if Lyanna had not been kidnapped.
  14. John Suburbs

    The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

    We're getting a little off-topic, but I agree. We need at least seven or eight months between the wedding at Riverrun and the sack of King's Landing, since Robb is supposed to be a few weeks older than Jon, who was born on or about the sack. So that means Ned and Robb had their full army together for all this time but never thought to march on King's Landing and put an end to it. Instead, they apparently just dickered around the Riverlands fighting little skirmishes while Rhaegar and Aerys marshalled their forces. I still contend, however, that the World Book confirms that the Battle of Asheford did not take place until after the wedding, not before the Battle of the Bells as most people believe. So that would account for some of the time, but not all. I'm in the minority in that belief, but that's the way it's written in the WB.
  15. John Suburbs

    The KoLT and Subsequent Events

    No, it is widely accepted that the kidnapping is what touched off the whole thing. That was the completely unexpected act that took everyone by surprise. Arryn refusing to turn over the boys and calling his banners was what kicked off the fighting, but the real cause was Lyanna's abduction. Everything else flowed from that. Just like the cause of the Wot5K was Tyrion's abduction, not Tywin's attack at the Golden Tooth.
×