Jump to content

Ellaena

Members
  • Content Count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ellaena

  • Rank
    Freerider
  • Birthday 10/28/1994

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

277 profile views
  1. There is no textual evidence for this statement. All we know is the match was made and we can safely assume Daemon was marrying an heiress because she came with lands and a seat while he had no right to any as a 2nd son. We know nothing about how the succession of their heirs would have been handled and I'm happy to agree to this. But I do find it curious that you would think the Targaryens would so publicly demand the Royces give up their ancestral seat (in name) to a Targaryen cadet branch because they wanted to take over Runestone but at the same time be happy for the crown to transfer to the Velaryon name. The two ideas just do not marry. Also, the idea that Jaehaerys or Viserys could publicly annexe a house of the age and prestige of the Royces of Runestone without any pushback doesn't sit well with me, because on one hand Jaehaerys understood the importance of diplomacy and Viserys was a man averse to conflict. Neither of them strike me as the type to seize a noble houses lands in this manner (forming a Targaryen cadet branch of Runestone would implicitly do exactly this as the Royces will no longer be the ruling lords although the bloodline would continue). Nor do I think the Royces would happily agree to this. As for the case of Orys Baratheon, again speculating, his name took precedence because the Durrandons were conquered. I don't think Argella had much say in the match or what happened to her house afterwards, which is not the case with the Royces or the Targaryens at the time of Viserys I. As I have said previously, I don't see any Westerosi house, be it small or big, willingly transferring their ancestral seat to another dynasty that does not bear their name IF they can help it. Your statement that this is just standard has no basis in the text because truth be told there is no mention whatsoever to this conundrum so we are all left speculating. Lastly, just to clarify, I was speculating that all the children would automatically have the father's name, however when it came time for one of them to inherit they would do so under the ancestral home name and not before that; in the same manner a monarch would change or choose their regal name upon ascending the throne in our real world (Queen Victoria). So there is no need to have all children bear the ancestral name from birth. This, I think, would be more consistent with the Westerosi society we know.
  2. Honestly, I have to agree with the other comments. While we don't know what the arrangement was in regards to the name of Rhea's children, same as Rhaenyra's, I find it hard to believe that the heir would keep the name of the father and not the house which he/she inherits. Rhaenyra's boys were named Velaryon, true, but one would think that the heir would take the throne under Targaryen. I don't think any Targaryens and for that matter any Royces would accept for the throne/ancestral seat to switch to a new dynasty. Now, true, this is never addressed in the text so it's all speculation, but going by what we know of Westeros, the Targaryens, and their customs I doubt any house would concede their titles and lands to a different name unless they were forced by a series of circumstances where they had no other choice, nor enough power to prevent it. To me the easiest solution to the problem would be that the heir carries on the name of the house he/she inherits and the other children get to keep daddy's name.
  3. Basically the skeleton for skirmishes are there no matter what due to Robert's ineffective rule, his reliance on John Arryn and the Lannisters and the Lannister's own ambitions, no to mention the precedent that Robert's Rebellion set which is that one can change the ruling dynasty of the 7 kingdoms. This reminds me of the political landscape before the Dance of the Dragons as far back as the Council of 101 which I have always said seemed to have delayed the Dance by one generation. Whenever you look at the different dragon riding branches/families and their own ambitions it seems inevitable that conflict will arise.
  4. We will probably never find out. The eggs stolen by Ellisa Farman are a fun bit of trivia that GRRM has thrown at us but knowing him he won't reveal where Dany's eggs come from. At the end of the day they could be from Asshai, it doesn't matter. It's not the eggs that are special (although rare at this point), it's Daenerys.
  5. For Naerys herself, definitely. For Aemon, maybe. He could no be a Kingsguard then but maybe the sole reason he joined was Naerys. But Viserys was not going to allow his first son to marry someone else when there was a perfectly eligible sister available. They had an essosi mother, he wanted to cement his image and their image as true Targaryens.
  6. If Joffrey or all of the kids were Robert's, the entire dynamic changes! Long answer as there is a lot to unpack. First of all, Cersei would have to be a different person to allow herself to have Robert's children. Would this Cersei love her children anyway or would her resentment trickle down to them as they would be a living embodiment of her lack of agency? I know she spits out some bullshit to Sansa about how she might not love her husband but she will love his children, but Cersei most certainly made sure she will never birth any of Robert's children, even going as far as aborting one of them. So Cersei herself would have to be somewhat different to begin with for the children to be Robert's. But lets say Cersei is a different person and she allows herself to birth Robert's children and she still loves them. It's very likely Joffrey ends up the same way. Please understand that Joffrey is very much a product of both of his parents and Robert would not suddenly have a personality transplant just because his child is a brunette. He was decent to Mya because he was a pre-war teenager at the time and on good terms with her mum. He is not on good terms with Cersei and as much as he is an absentee dad, Cersei also plays a big role in keeping her children away from him. As long as Robert has children with Cersei and both him and Cersei are not completely different people from how we know them then Robert will not be involved in the children's lives. Be it out of spite or because Cersei sees the children as extensions of herself still, she will keep him away, and he in return will not take much interest in them. If Cersei resents her children then Joffrey is not raised primarily by his mother and Robert might be more involved purely because Cersei is not blocking him or might still not care much. Either way, this Joffrey has more chance of being more like Tommen and Myrcella, who by all accounts we have seen to be decent people. So the only scenario where Joffrey has a chance of being a decent person is one where Cersei is not involved in his upbringing. However, at this point the political landscape looks different. Cersei has ensured the stability of this Lannister-Baratheon dynasty. Jon Arryn has no reason to suspect foul play and likely does not die. Yes, Lysa would still have a reason to get rid of him, but would Littlefinger? Littlefinger is the one who devises the plan, Lysa executes it. He needs Jon Arryn dead in the main series as he is not ready to have the Lannisters outed, so if Jon Arryn is not about to topple the Lannisters then does Littlefinger have a reason to get rid of him? Without Jon Arryn being dead the position of hand is not available. Ned Stark is not in KL. Cersei has no reason to get rid of Robert when she did. Renly's plan of supplanting Cersei with Margaery also does not make much sense when there are 3 trueblood children around and there is no reason to suspect them not to be Robert's. Stannis would not think himself the rightful heir. Renly would not think the throne is ripe for the taking. The North does not declare independence. The Others/Daenerys/Aegon find Westeros in a somewhat better shape. Varys would still try to destabilise things, but would need another strategy. Littlefinger would also still be there ready to take advantage of the chaos. Lets move this one step further then. Lets say Jon Arryn does die and the Starks and the others suspect foul play was involved and that the Lannisters had some other reason to want him dead. Lets say Cersei kills Robert for other reasons as well, such as wanting to be free of him now that she has a child who is close to his majority. Maybe she wants the regency and to enjoy her time in the sun. Stannis still would not think of himself as the rightful heir. Ned would not think of betraying Robert's son but would be weary of the Lannisters. The most likely scenario is that Tywin shows up and removes Cersei from the picture and takes main control of Joffrey's upbringing just like he meant to do in the main series. Ned does not back down because he thinks he has a duty to protect Robert's heir and keep the Lannisters in check. The Lannister have no excuse to declare the Starks as traitors. Potentially Tywin agrees to a shared regency a la Aegon III. Ned would still call for Stannis, but this time for support due to his suspicions that the Lannisters had Jon Arryn and Robert killed. Stannis would probably be part of the shared regency. So now you still have a Lannister-Stark power struggle but it's over Robert's heir. There is no War of the Five Kings. The Tyrells will be pushing hard for a Margery-Joffrey match knowing of the skirmishes between the Lannisters and the Starks and how Tywin might not want to have a Stark queen. If Stannis is convinced of some Lannister foul play as well he allies himself with the Starks in the attempt to diminish the Lannisters' power in court and over the heir. So you could end up with Lannister-Tyrell vs Stark-Baratheon skirmishes going on until either Daenerys or the Others come knocking on Westeros' door.
×
×
  • Create New...