Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About SFDanny

  • Rank
    Council Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

11,004 profile views
  1. You wanted a short answer, so I gave you mine. Want a discussion on the topic? Probably better to start a new thread or revive an old one than do it here.
  2. He should go to the Happy Port in Braavos. It's near the Ragman's harbor, and is just across from the Mummer's Ship. Ask for the Sailor's Wife or her daughter Lanna. Your mate might not make it out alive, but he will have his question answered.
  3. You're right that most of this is pure speculation, and as such we shouldn't put to much stock in believing one way or another. One thing we do know is that Yoren left the Wall long before Jon takes his vows. So he can't be the source of any news to Ned that Jon is a member of the Night's Watch. I don't think we have any evidence that Ned knows that fact before he dies. Which would make it extremely unlikely that his regret is because he knows he should have told him something before Jon takes his vows. Perhaps, his knowledge that Benjen is not there to stop Jon from doing so is a factor. I'd say his regrets around Jon most likely have to do with not having an opportunity to tell Jon who his mother was, and not knowing if Benjen will ever return to tell Jon in his stead. Again, the latter is based on my guess that Benjen knows that secret. That would be a reason to write a letter to Jon, but obviously the information in it might not be something he would want Varys to read. That's especially true if Rhaegar and Lyanna are Jon's parents. Perhaps a message for Jon to seek out Howland Reed? Another guess. We obviously need more evidence here.
  4. Very true, and I don't think we ever will, but we do know what is required to have a marriage under the rules of the Faith annulled. It takes a ruling of the High Septon or a "Council of Faith." We don't know for sure what a "Council of Faith" is, but it is most likely the meeting of the Most Devout that selects the High Septon. I know LV suggests it is something that a regional or local body of the Faith could do, but that makes no sense, if it is an ability of the High Septon, and also a power of any number of lesser septons. It makes sense if it is the same body that picks the new High Septon to be able to perform this action while the position of the High Septon is vacant. We also know it takes the testimony of at least one of the people involved in the marriage to testify that the marriage was never consummated. In this case we know that neither Tyrion or Tysha ever did so. You're right we don't have the entire body of canon law, but what we do have on this topic makes it clear that the needed procedures for an annulment didn't occur. Tywin fixing things so it was like the marriage "never took place" isn't a reference to the known procedure for annulment. It may mean records were destroyed (if they ever existed) or that bribes were paid or that the Septon who performed the wedding was intimidated, sent into exile, or murdered, but an annulment doesn't happen. See above. Why would we think a Septon being drunk was a reason to invalidate a marriage? It is the religious office that grants the power to perform a marriage under the Faith, not the degree of sobriety. The number of witness also makes no difference. It takes a Septon presiding and two people who want to get married, or in some cases people who can't object to getting married. As in a certain Lannister's wedding to an infant or Tyrion and Sansa. An annulment of a valid marriage is different from one in which a crime is committed. Tyrion and Tysha's wedding is valid. There was a septon who presided over the ceremony and two people who said their vows before him. They consummated the marriage. It is simply valid. None of the cases you ask about apply in the least. In those cases, punishments are given out. We see Bigamy, rape, marriages by members of the Night's Watch and the Kingsguard all punished. None of that applies here. Read what Tyrion says of his marriage to Bron. Of course he knows he had sex with Tysha. We also know Tysha was not a "whore." Jaime's confession of his lie tells us so. None of these things have any meaning in this case. A hoax means the whole marriage was a fake. One doesn't need to annul a hoax. The Sailor's Wife in the Happy Port in Braavos doesn't need an annulment of her marriages because they are fake. No appeal to the High Septon or a Council of Faith would ever take place. By doing so, it is an admission that the marriage was real and there is a valid reason for the Faith to set it aside because the marriage was never consummated. Of course that isn't the case here. We know the marriage was both done by a real Septon and was consummated. We also know Tyrion was never called to testify about whether or not the marriage was consummated because his father just took care of it. One doesn't need a copy of canon law to understand this simple fact. We also know that Tywin's lie is that the marriage was a hoax - something not needing an annulment by either the High Septon or a Council of Faith. What someone does to dismiss a hoax and what one does to get an annulment through the procedures of the Faith are two vastly different things that would tell anyone involved the lie of the marriage being a hoax was not true. Tyrion isn't an idiot. He was just thirteen at the time, but bright enough to figure out the contradiction. Yet he doesn't know it wasn't a hoax because he believes Jaime's story until Jaime confesses the lie. What then is his response? Among other things, like hitting his brother and threatening to kill him, he also says "She was my wife." Tyrion is very well aware he was really married once Jaime confesses. This really isn't even a question. It is why Tyrion is so obsessed at the end of ASoS and throughout ADwD about finding out where Tysha went. Why he keeps repeating Tywin's words of "wherever whores go." Was the marriage consummated? Yes. Combined with that a Septon presided and both Tyrion and Tysha pledged their vows makes it real. Read above I very much doubt this is a subject the Lannister spread as idle gossip. It is very much a secret. Which doesn't mean some people don't know about it. What they would know if they found out is the story as Tywin wanted Tyrion to believe it. It doesn't point to any annulment. The timing of Littlefinger's story to Sansa about Tyrion's role is important. How does he know? Well we know he is at the small council meeting in which Tyrion speaks of the matter, but we also know that the gang rape isn't part of the story Tyrion tells there. Where then does Littlefinger learn of the gang rape? He likely learns from someone later because he investigates the story. It is foolish of Tyrion to tell the story because it exposes his past to people he shouldn't want to have that kind of knowledge. They will surely be interested in his past history and anything they can use against him. The "game of thrones" is played most skillfully by those who seek out every potential rivals weak points. That is what Tyrion exposes as he tells this story to the small council.
  5. Perhaps, but we don't even know if it was the plan to allow Jon to actually take the vows. Ned needed to get Jon out of Winterfell and away from the antagonism with Catelyn, and to someone he trusted as far away as he can from King's Landing. Being at the Wall with Benjen might just have been a temporary solution. Such a interpretation would mean Benjen is in on the plan. Unfortunately, Benjen goes missing, and Ned doesn't find out about until Yoren arrives in King's Landing. Or Ned just placed Jon's safety over any ephemeral claims he might have had to the Iron Throne. Doesn't mean he wouldn't have told Jon before he joins the Night's Watch, but just that he doesn't have any belief that there is a chance Jon could ever sit the Iron Throne. His promise most likely was to just keep him safe at all cost. Something we will have to wait and see if it is ever answered. One reason I think we just might see Benjen again.
  6. Everyone in the books thinks Tyrion and Sansa are married. Both Tyrion and Sansa know that the marriage has never been consummated and therefore can be annulled, but all of Westeros, Robb and Catelyn included, think the marriage is real. Now, Tyrion does make the foolish mistake of telling his father he hasn't yet consummated the marriage, but Tywin isn't about to go around telling the world that fact. He wants a Lannister claim to Winterfell. For that to happen no one must know the truth about Tyrion's and Sansa's sex life. As to people not knowing about Tyrion's previous marriage, Tyrion also foolishly tells the Small Council of it. Littlefinger knows. Lord Varys knows. Pycelle knows. Perhaps Pycelle can be controlled, but the other two cannot be so easily.
  7. Sorry, you are using real world arguments for a fictional world. That's fine if we don't know the rules of Martin's world, but we do in this case. To get a marriage, that has been presided over by the rituals of the Faith, annulled requires the intercession of the High Septon. That is true for anyone not the king. The Targaryens have their own rules. The grounds for annulment for everyone else, as we are told, needs to include testimony there was no consummation of the marriage. This never happened. Tyrion never told the High Septon he didn't have sex with Tysha. If the question had been asked of Tyrion, he would have known the marriage was real. Tyrion has been forced to believe his marriage was a hoax put on for his benefit by his brother. Not something that was real. The Septon has to be dealt with in some way, and Tysha's credibly has to be destroyed, as well as showing her what can happen to her if she crosses the wishes of Tywin Lannister. But an annulment of a hoax is out of the question. It directly contradicts Jaime's story to attempt to do so. I have little doubt, that if Tywin could have used his influence to try to get an annulment, if he would have admitted the marriage was real. He can't do so and maintain that the marriage was a hoax. But he also cannot abide by the humiliation it would cost him to have the marriage revealed to all of Westeros. Petitioning the High Septon for an annulment would do just that. It would tell his rivals his dwarf son could not be controlled by the powerful Lord of Casterly Rock and subject him to ridicule. The same type of ridicule Tywin experiences with his father's treatment of his "whores." There is nothing Tywin hates more than that. Rather than risk that he does what he does best. He uses his power to destroy both Tyrion and Tysha, and uses Jaime as the foundation of the lie he makes up. He does so with the same callous brutality he did with his rivals in the Westerlands. There is no need to follow the rules here. Tywin makes his own rules. There is no annulment. There is only Tywin being the cruel heartless and vindictive bastard he has shown himself to be time and time again.
  8. One doesn't ask for an annulment of a marriage if it is a hoax. Everything Tywin did was predicated on destroying a real marriage through convincing his son to believe the marriage was never real. We know that to not be the case. Jaime's confession tells us so. There is no annulment. That would be an admission that there was a real marriage to annul. There is Tywin taking care of it with the Faith. Which likely means he "took care" of the Septon involved. Bribery, intimidation, or murder seems the most likely methods of making the marriage seem "like it never happened." Tywin was more than capable of all three. As such, Tywin didn't "forget" to annul anything. He never asked for one because to do so would have been counter to all his actions regarding the marriage. His story to the few who knew anything happened was the same as Jaime's lie. It is the lie, after all, Tywin made up himself and forced Jaime to tell and Tyrion to believe. If Tywin had actually asked for an annulment through the official channels of the Faith, it would be an admission the marriage was not a hoax, but was a real marriage. A disastrous and humiliating admission in Tywin's view. It would also place the power to get such an annulment in the hands of Tyrion. He would have had to say the marriage never was consummated, and Tysha would have to say the same. Perhaps Tysha could be intimidated into saying so, but Tyrion? There is no chance in the world Tywin would allow this to be dragged out in the open and risk the possibility his hated dwarf son would refuse to go along. The only point we agree upon here, LV, is that Tysha did not have the means, and more importantly, the power to challenge the lies and actions of the High Lord of Casterly Rock. Instead she could just be ground up and thrown away because no one would listen to her. That is not, however, true about Tyrion. Tyrion is the acknowledged son of Tywin. He maybe shunned and ridiculed, but he could have stood before the High Septon, and told the truth about his marriage. If he still believed his marriage was real. The real question here is what will Tyrion do if he ever finds Tysha? Do they have a child? If so, what does that mean concerning the future High Lord or Lady of Casterly Rock? It certainly is a possibility that Tyrion comes back to Westeros with Dany and her dragons. If so, Tyrion's claim to Casterly Rock is very much alive. Patricide be damned. It would be fitting if little Lady Lanna from Braavos ends up the new ruler of the Rock.
  9. I would disagree. I think the larger lesson is that all perspectives and all accounts of events should be evaluated for strengths, weaknesses, and bias. What Martin has done in the very structure of his novels is to give us different perspectives to view reality. If you have ever had the pleasure of seeing the classic film Rashōmon by Akira Kurosawa then you have a guide as to how to handle what is "true" and is to be "trusted." So, for instance, when we read Ned's innermost thoughts we should note that, unless Ned is delusional, those thoughts reflect his point of view of reality. Not reality itself. It is for the reader to judge what his bias does to how reality is interpreted. Yes, second hand accounts lack the perspective of someone who was on the scene. That does not mean they have no value. When we read Viserys's point of view, as told through the filter of Daenerys's memories, we need to note that Viserys was not present at the Trident, for instance, but it is very important to also note that he is likely to have been told his stories by other Targaryen partisans, including Rhaella and Ser Willem, who may well have reason to know things Viserys doesn't . The bias is important, but the stories are as well. If nothing else, Viserys's stories to his sister tell us what is likely the loyalist's view of history. Given that we get the rebel's view of history through almost everyone else's point of view it is extremely important not to just dismiss what Viserys says. So, yes, Viserys doesn't show a knowledge of the differences between Ned Stark and Tywin Lannister on the day of the sack of King's Landing, but his view, as told through Daenerys's perspective, of Rhaegar "dying for the woman he loved" tells important information that we don't get from all the rebel view points. The Targaryen story speaks of love, not of rape, brutality, and abduction in Rhaegar's motives and actions toward Lyanna. We would be foolish to dismiss that view for bias, just to accept the other biased viewpoints as told by Robert, Ned, and others. The lesson, it seems to me, is to evaluate all the evidence as distorted by perspective to some degree, and not assume bias from only one point of view.
  10. Ned was absolutely there during the sack of King's Landing. He confronts Jaime in the Red Keep as he sits upon the Iron Throne during the sack. Ned's troops come late to the sack, but they, and he, are there while it is still ongoing. So, no, not total bullshit. That the Targaryens don't make much of any differentiation between the Lannister's and the Stark's role in the sack is a important nuance in the reader's eyes, but not so much in the eyes of loyalists. Both armies were in the city and involved in the overthrow of Targaryen rule. It's not surprising that in Viserys's view they are both responsible for Aerys's death. Why should it matter to loyalists what the command structure was during the sack as long as they both were there, they both were responsible. After all, who ends up controlling the Iron Throne on that day? Stark troops do, with Ned Stark leading their way into that seat of royal power. Jaime surrenders it to them without a struggle.
  11. Well, I'm glad you think it makes logical sense, because that was what I was trying to communicate. But henceforth I will try to make my arguments with a greater sense of élan, style, and panache in order to avoid that "falls flat" feeling you reference. I'm hoping words like "henceforth," "élan," and "panache" help in that regard. Let me know if they do. I understand your assertion that is so, but asserting it as fact does not make it so. Here we are talking about a particular dream while Ned is in the black cells, and there is no reference in the dream to Lyanna. You make the leap it is about Lyanna, and I do not. I think there is a different possible source, or sources, for this dream's connection fo "broken promises" and "blood" than to Lyanna. In fact the reference to "broken promises" I've shown to be in contradiction to what we know of the promises Ned made to Lyanna on her deathbed. Ned Stark led a very bloody life. Blood shed in the rebellion by his siblings, Father, friends, bannermen, and many others. That Ned might have dreams of blood related to something or someone else than Lyanna would not be surprising in the least. Or shouldn't be. Even the much mentioned dream of the events at the Tower of Joy involves more people shedding their life's blood than Lyanna. I would expect the deaths of the men betrayed by Littlefinger in the Throne Room of the Red Keep would be a cause for haunting memories and dreams for Lord Stark. It was his trust in the broken promises of Petyr Baelish around the loyalty of the City Watch that caused those deaths, and which puts Ned in the Black Cells. This is the scene in which Littlefinger tells Ned he will secure the loyalty of the City Watch. One could call that a promise by Littlefinger to Ned. And then we have the scene in the Throne Room itself. We then witness the betrayal and subsequent murder of Ned's men. First, Tomard, then Varly, and then Cayn. As the others are killed Littlefinger holds Ned's dagger under his chin and says, I would say that shows the elements of both "broken promises" and "blood." When you cite the reference Ned makes of his dreams of broken promises and blood you fail to provide a link with Lyanna. Indeed there is no reference to her in those dreams. No Lyanna mentioned in relation to those dreams. Days, maybe weeks, later Ned has a dream in the Black Cells that does reference Lyanna and blood, but not any broken promises. Actually I would suggest, as I did above, that it is about events that are plainly laid out in the books, not some hidden reasons outside the knowledge of the readers. I think I've already stated as much. We agree this is not the likely cause of the broken promises Ned alludes to. Again we agree this is a unlikely source of Ned's dreams of broken promises. Ned is disturbed in his cell when thinking of Jon, but it doesn't seem to be about promises already broken. Ned would like to talk to Jon and tell him something, and that is a possible source of future broken promises if he is unable to do so. But not ones already broken. It is absolutely NOT the "only takeaway." I've given you a entirely plausible explanation and there are others as well. Others that have nothing to do with Ned's promises to Lyanna. Let me know when you come up with any evidence that suggests Ned broke his promises he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.
  12. Exactly. I would only add that the method with which he humiliated Tysha also has an ulterior motive, besides the obvious one of forcing Tyrion to accept Jaime's lie. The gang rape ensures that if Tysha is pregnant from her short time with Tyrion that the question of the father of the child is forever in dispute. Tywin can claim Tysha was a prostitute who slept with a barracks full of men and any child could be from anyone of her "clients." No child of Tysha could claim any right to Lannister land, title, or wealth.
  13. Given the fact I've provided a quote that directly contradicts your claim, and you have nothing that backs your conclusion, I think my argument is a rather solid one. Defensible as well. On that much we agree. Post hoc ergo propter hoc? Please don't mistake me here. Time sequence is important in most things. It shows context, or at least can show context, but if we make the mistake of believing that one event following the other means causality, then we fall into a fallacy. Which is why I stated my theory of the cause of Ned's dream here in the form of a guess. The context of Littlefinger's betrayal and broken promises to Ned and Catelyn combined with the massacre in the Throne Room is certainly an important part of the context of Ned's situation when he has the dream in question. I recognize that does not prove causality any more than your theory does. The problem with your theory is simply this: We know that on the day of Jaime's ambush of Ned and his men, that Ned quite clearly states he kept his promises to Lyanna that he made to her as she lay dying. If we accept that as fact, then we have to ask ourselves what has changed between that day and the one in which this new dream takes place that would have meant that one or more of those promises was broken? If we think one of the promises made to Lyanna was to bury her in the crypts of Winterfell alongside Rickard and Brandon, then nothing has changed to mean that promise is now broken. Nor is it in serious jeopardy of being broken. Nor has Jon's situation appreciably changed between the ambush and this dream. So, I think we can rule out that Ned thinks he failed Lyanna in the situation he left Jon as of the day of the ambush. However, I would concede that the death of Robert, and the triumph of the Lannisters, has seriously changed Ned's ability to continue to protect Jon, as well as all the other living members of his family. But then we are not talking about broken promises in the past tense. We are talking about a fear for the future that may mean Ned is unable to continue keeping his promises to Lyanna or anyone else. Which I didn't do. I suggested in my guess that both the mention of broken promises, and of blood, stem from the same event - the massacre in the Throne Room. In which both blood and broken promises are prominently involved. I don't dispute that Ned is haunted in his dreams about the promises he made to his dying sister. The dream of the encounter at the Tower of Joy is proof of that. I just don't think this particular reference to broken promises and blood has anything to do with Lyanna's deathbed pleas to Ned for him to promise her something.
  14. Where now does this reference Lyanna, or the promises Ned made to her? I'm fairly certain Ned has made promises to more people than Lyanna, and I'm fairly certain more people than Ned have broken promises. Some likely they made to him. Although this particular reference doesn't say who made the promise and who broke it, anymore does it explain if the "disturbing dreams of blood" are actually about a broken promise. Now, if I were a betting man, which I seldom do beside an occasional lottery ticket, I'd bet this has something to do with the context we find Ned in when he has these dreams. We can't be certain, but I would guess the broken promise of Littlefinger and his betrayal that led to the bloody deaths of most of Lord's Starks men right before his eyes, and then puts Ned in the Black Cells making him unable to protect his children all weighs heavily on his thoughts. But that just is my guess. An educated and in context guess, but a guess nonetheless. What isn't a guess is that we don't have any evidence that point to this as showing any doubt that Ned kept his promises he made to Lyanna as she lay dying.
  15. If this was true, it might be persuasive. It is not true or persuasive. You are using real world answers for Martin's world, and that isn't always the same. The marriage is performed by a septon and valid once it was consummated. Do we need to start listing examples? Start with Sansa's own marriage with Tyrion. under age but married nonetheless; though it can be set aside by the High Septon because it was not consummated. They needed to threaten and intimidate Sansa into giving her under age agreement. There are other examples. Egg's own children, Jaehaerys and his sister Shaera - both under age at fifteen and fourteen and without permission, for example. And only, once again, the High Septon has the right to set aside the marriage, and only for specific causes, btw. The rules were the same then, as when Tyrion and Tysha wed. Say the vows before a septon, and consummate the marriage and it is valid in the eyes of the Faith. Again, this isn't a case of official channels, that obviously were not taken. There is another reason for Martin to want this outcome that you are not thinking of in your declaration of "only purpose." That would be to have Tyrion and Tysha once again meet as still husband and wife. Not that such a meeting is going to mean "happily ever after." Still, it could end with both people dead. Murder/suicide perhaps? But who knows where Martin may want this story thread to end up? Perhaps he does want a happily ever after ending for someone in this tale. As unlikely as that is for either Tyrion or Tysha.
  • Create New...