Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

18,929 profile views

Rhaenys_Targaryen's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. Just like events 'a decade ago' are not always exactly ten years, and 'a thousand years' does not always mean exactly a thousand years, 'a century' does not necessarily have to mean 'exactly a hundred years before'. And since the phrasing in TWOIAF resulted in discussion on the correct interpretation, it is nice to have now this confirmation
  2. While I don't check the forum daily anymore, I do still check in with some frequency The situation you describe would be an exception to the guideline. If the source says Aegon was born in 27 BC and that Visenya was two years older, we should indeed place het birth in 29 BC, until a future source specifies the placements of the births in the respective years.
  3. Regarding timelines, on the official George RR Martin Facebook there was a post today on Aenar the Exile. The post was accompanied bt the text: Kicking off #TargaryenThursdays with Aenar Targaryen, The Lord who Left or Aenar the Exile. In 114 BC, 12 years before the fall and after a prophetic dream from his Daughter, he fled Valyria and moved the Targaryen name to a new land and establishing Dragonstone. As I remember that the way it was phrased in TWOIAF it was still unclear if 114 BC was the year of the Doom, or whether 114 BC was the 12th year before the Doom, the above post seems to make it clear that 114 BC was the 12th year before the Doom, making 102 BC the year of the Doom. My question, @Ran, how (semi)-canon can we consider this post to be? It is (most likely, but not certainly) not written by GRRM himself, but it is posted via his account. As this would settle quite a long timeline argument, I am curious about your response
  4. Sorry, I think that was my mistake. I had started writing this morning on a correction for the page and pressed save much later today, so some newer edits might have gotten lost in the mix there. I will double check, but I have at least corrected the Maladon Moore issue already.
  5. It is good to have this information! Thank you! I have updated Catelyn's wiki page to reflect this.
  6. I agree with this conclusion, and have removed the note from the page. It is clearly stated that the information comes from a semi-canon source, and until there is something canon published that contradicts this semi-canon information, it should be fine to have it written like this without a note speculating why it might not have been included in the published materials.
  7. It is nowhere stated that Glendon was born 9 months after the Redgrass Field. Only that he was born after the Redgras Field. Domeric was fostered in his youth, for four years as a page by Lady Barbrey Dustin, and next three years in de Vale as a squire. As fostering usually ends at the age of sixteen, when the boy becomes 'a man grown', we can assume that he was no older than nine when his fostering started. We also know that Domeric was 'a man grown' by the time he died, in 297 AC. As it is unclear how much time passed between his return from the Vale and his death in 297 AC, we can only say that by 297 AC he was at least sixteen years old, which is why 281 AC is the last possible moment of his birth. Another clue is the fact that Domeric was fostered as a page by Lady Barbrey Dustin. This indicated he was fostered only after she was married to Lord Dustin, which occurred in 282 AC. A page is usually at least six years old, and from the fact that he was fostered in total seven years (four as a page, three as a squire) we can assume that he was not much older than nine at the most by the time that he first went to Barbrey. Even if he did not return home immediately after turning sixteen, his fosterage ended (in accordance with this SSM) So, based on this, we can say the following: Domeric was at least sixteen when he died, so he could not possibly have been born before 281 AC Domeric was fostered as Barrontown no earlier than 282 AC, as he arrived only after Lady Barbrey had married its lord Domeric would have been around 6-9 years old when he came to Barrowtown. The last two points together would imply that Domeric was nine at most in 282 AC, and so, born no earlier than 273 AC. This created the range of 273 AC to 281 AC. If he had been younger than nine when he became a page, his birth would fall in this range. If he had become a page later than 282 AC, his birth would still fall in this range. The thing about the Lyanna quote is, that, while it seems that Domeric and Lyanna did race at least once against each other, it gives absolutely no indication about their difference in age. I agree with you that Domeric would not have raced as a two year old boy against a girl some twelve years older, but as we cannot pinpoint any later number for him with certainty, this range of 273 - 281 AC remains the only factual range we can give. That he most likely was born in the earlier part of that range seems logical, but a number cannot be assigned to it with the information we currently have.
  8. Indeed, there are some months that pass between the turning of the new year (135 AC) and the statement of Floris having "recently" died. But what limits "recently"? A month? Half a year? We cannot use the phrase to determine how long Floris has been dead but this point. He could certainly still be mourning the loss of his young wife, as well as his child. He was considered a "doting husband", so it would not be surprising if he had truly cared about Floris as a spouse, instead of seeing her only as a politically gained price.. So, with the uncertainty considering the "recently" statement, I think we should follow the "two years later" reference, as that one presents a clear date that still fits with the other one.
  9. (I have not checked the years for all of the above, but) that approach sounds logical to me, yes
  10. According to Martin's writing, we can assume that highborn girls have their first period at an age of twelve or thirteen, on average: Sansa could not look at him, he shamed her so. "Septa Mordane says most … most highborn girls have their flowering at twelve or thirteen." (AGOT, Sansa VI) He also states that As in the real Middle Ages, highborn girls tend to flower significantly earlier than those of lower birth. Probably a matter of nutrition. As a result, they also tend to marry earlier, and to bear children earlier. You make an interesting point. Using all that was stated in text, she would indeed be between 13 and 26 years old. However, for a girl who has not yet had her first period, being maximally 26 seems a bit at odds. Of course, we have a minimum age for girls who have had their first 'flowering', in accordance with the quote above. But, that does not automatically mean that all 12/13 year old highborn girls in Westeros have had their first period by that age. In addition, although the age of majority in Westeros is 16, that does not mean that every girl has had her first period by that age. If we can find a good scientific source, we can attach a (give or take) maximum age to a girl getting her first period. ScienceDirect shows part of a book (Environmental Exposures and Women's Reproductive Health) which contains these two pasages: Menarche symbolizes the onset of sexual maturity and is characterized by the onset of the first menstrual bleeding. The average age at menarche is 13.8 years; however, it ranges from 9 to 18 years and varies by race and ethnicity [1]. The median age at menarche for European girls ranges from 12.6 years (Italy and Greece) to 15.2 years (Russia). The median age for North American girls varies from 12.5 years (U.S. blacks) to 13.8 years (U.S. Eskimos), the median age for Asian girls ranges from 12.7 years (Singapore) to 18.1 years (Nepal), and the median age for African girls varies from 13.2 to 17.0 years (Rwanda) [1]. [...] European studies indicate that age of menarche has declined from 17 years in 1840 to about 13 years in 1970 [1,40]. North American studies show that the age at menarche declined from about 15 years in 1890 to approximately 13 years in 1920 [1,41]. However, as the book is not available online, I cannot check which sources are being used here. Nonetheless, 18 could be a valid maximum age for menarche with ScienceDirect as a reference. That would mean that in 129 AC, Cassandra was at most 18 years old, which would place her birth between 111 AC and 116 AC. (And subsequently Maris's birth between 112 AC and 117 AC)
  11. I have been trying to respond all week but it is been busy, and my draft post was deleted. Just to let you know, I will respond to you in detail this weekend!
  12. Agreed! Good observation! Likely, but we cannot be certain yet, as it has not yet been confirmed when She-Wolves takes place exactly, or how long Beron lingered. While Aegon was eventually summoned to KL, that does not mean he could not have traveled back north afterwards, as @Thomaerys Velaryon pointed out. I agree that the two sections you quote limit Dagon's reaving to Aerys's reign. But, from those quotes we cannot deduce when Beron was attacked, or howlpng he was on his death bed. While I agree with you that he likely died not long after getting hurt, we do not have any data to rule out anything else, and so we must use, in my opinion, the dates we have of the lords that came after him.
  13. Nowhere is it stated that all squires are eight years old. Squires are at least eight years old, but could be older. Eight is the minimum age here. We have no clue when Arthur met Rhaegar, or when he came to King's Landing for the first time. He has been Rhaegar's friend for longer than Jon Connington was, but we don't know when Jon befriended Rhaegar either. No one is saying Arthur was 16 years old in 276 AC. He was at least 16, if not older. He was a Kingsguard knight by then, which means he had at least turned 16, as Jaime would later be the youngest knight to become a Kingsguard ever at the age of 15. So, while Arthur was at least 16 at the time, he could easily have been several years older. And we have absolutely no way of telling how many years that could possibly be. As such, we can say he was born no later than 260 AC, but that does not mean that he could not have been born any earlier. Only that he could not have been born after 260 AC.
  14. Apologies it took me a while to respond. My daily schedule has not permitted me with much time to check in, and I wanted to research a bit before responding. You are absolutely correct. We do no know when Rhaegar and Arthur met, and whether it was before Arthur became a KG knight. What I can find now, is that 276 AC (tournament in honor of Viserys's birth late in the year), is the first mention of Arthur as a knight of the Kingsguard (TWOIAF, Aerys II). Meaning that Arthur was at least 16 that year, and thus, had been born no later than 260 AC. I don't belief we have anything more to pinpoint it any further. If you know anything more, please share! And as always, thank you for your comments! As my user name might suggest, it's her, please Discussions are always nice, as everyone, including me, can make mistakes in the calculations, and I always appreciate it when someone manages to catch one so it can be corrected!
  15. Gwayne Hightower is currently stated to have been younger than Alicent Hightower, referring to TRP, but in both TRP and Fire and Blood I can only find the statement that Gwayne was Alicent's "youngest brother". That does not necessarily mean that Gwayne was younger than Alicent, only that of all of her brothers, he was the youngest. That could still mean he was older than her. Does anyone know of any other quote regarding Gwayne?
  • Create New...