[Spoilers] The Princess and the Queen, complete spoilers discussion

[The Sleeper]

Rhaenyra didn't order Nettles' death because she was sleeping with Daemon, she did it because she and her council decided that the new dragon riders were an unacceptable risk after Ulf and Hammer turned their cloaks. She did order Addam Hull's arrest two. As for Daemon he did what he did, because it was the only honorable path for him. If he allowed Nettles to be arrested or killed he would betray a battle-companion and potentially a lover (or perhaps Nettles was his bastard) and if he helped her escape he would betray his wife and queen. So he helped Nettle escape and fell on his sword, so to speak. He sacrificed himself taking out the biggest threat against Rhanyra to redeem himself. The sacrifice of the black ram was symbolic of that. The sacrifice of an alpha male, the head of the heard and black for Targaryen.

[History of Westeros]

Daemon and Nettles aren't said to be sleeping together. It is said that Daemon keeps the girl by his side, day and night. That's it.

There are just as many hints that Daemon and Nettles were lovers than that there were hints that they were father and daughter. That means, none at all :)

The only thing we have on this, is a rumour that arised amongst the inhabitants of Westeros. And we've learned not to trust rumours in Westeros and Essos blindly. By the time of aDwD, there are many horrible rumours about Dany going around, yet we know that none of them are true. Rumours aren't hints, unfortunately. So we don't really know anything about the Daemon/Nettles situation.

From the scene at Maidenpool: "The prince sleeps beside her... etc"

That's a major hint that they were lovers. Father and daughter are very unlikely to share a bed.

[History of Westeros]

Yes, and remember that Knights kept their squires close by when training them. I do think it is the other way around, and that Nettles was training Daemon in the old ways (yes, I am starting to think that Nettles was Leaf), but if Daemon was teaching her dragonlore or what not, there is no reason that they wouldn't have a master/apprentice relationship. When Jaime is traveling through the riverlands, he keeps his squires in the same tent as him (they sleep in mats in the corners of the tent). This is also true of Brienne and Pod, who is upset he can't stay in the same quarters as Brienne when they are on the Quiet Isle, and yet no one seems to think they are having a sexual relationship. The only reason a sexual relationship is thought to occur between Nettles and Daemon is because she (nettles) is female. For all of Daemon's supposed reputation, we haven't seen any evidence yet that it is true.

That is not a fair comparison. Nettles is 16 (a woman grown), and a badass. Pod is 10-11 (the show has made him older and apparently a sex god, but book Pod is an awkward boy).

[Bushido]

The prince sleeps beside her, but he has grown old. Three men should be enough to subdue him should he try to interfere

^ It seems clear to me.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

The impression I have is the opposite. We have quite a few Targaryens without named dragons. Most conspicuously Viserys the king himself does not appear to have a dragon, neither did Laena for that matter. Ran mentioned there is one dragon unaccounted for, but that still lives Jahaerys' children, for instance Viserys's parents. Who were the dragons. By contrast Arrax(?), Vermax, Syrax, and most of the younger gneration's dragons appear either to be young or to not have had a previous rider.

Don't forget that it is 100 years since the conquest, when there were three dragons in total. How prolific can a species that lives to be two hundred years old be? Daemon when speaking in the council he gives the impression that a dragon dying from other than natural means is not a frequent occurence. Provided that Balerion was the oldest and died at about two hundred years old during Jaehaerys's reign. As there was no war at a time, I'm assuming he died of old age. Since Vhagar lived to be 180, I am assuming that their life span is give and take two centuries. This means that any dragons born in the interrim would still be around.

All in all, it seems to me that this profusion of dragons is recent and not the norm. Besides even if they didn't have riders for them, it seems implausible let alone highly irresponsible to cut them loose. It is also a good question why they didn't deal with Cannibal who went so far as to descend on Targaryen hatcheries and eat eggs.

I'm more comfrotable with Ser Lepus explanation of them being the offspring of Targaryen dragons who were riderless and left a clutch of eggs in the wild, but still it leaves two very important questions: as Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal all appear to be of different ages, this would have to be a regural occurence. Why would the Targaryens allow their dragons to procreate outside their control and two: why would they abandon the resulting dragons to their own fate.

Well, it is unknown if, when a dragon dies before its rider, the rider can bond with another dragon. So perhaps Viserys' dragon died before him, and thus he was unable to bond with another dragon. I'm not sure about how likely that is for Viserys himself, but the fact that a dragon can die before its rider, is a possibility.

Whoever Aemon and Baelon were, they died before Rhaenyra, Aegon II, Daeron, Jacaerys, Lucerys, Joffrey, Baela and Rhaena were born. One of them might have ridden Syrax before Rhaenyra? I'm trying to make a list of the dragons and their sizes, but I'm very busy this week, so I'm not sure how long it's going to take. Dragons seem to keep growing, so the bigger, the older, right?

The only problem I have encountered about that so far, are the skulls of Balerion, Meraxes and Vhagar. We know Balerion was the eldest of the three, and died around 200 years of age. Vhagar was 181 years old when she died in 130 AL. But Tyrion notices that Meraxes' skull, though smaller than Balerions, is bigger than Vhagars, which means Meraxes was older than 181 when she died.

Balerion was born at Valyria, before the Targaryens fled. Meraxes and Vhagar were born at Dragonstone. We now know Vhagar was born in 51 BC.

Meraxes died together with Rhaenys in Dorne. Since Aegon never went to war in anger with Dorne, I think they died during the reign of Aenys, who was dealing with the Faith at that time. I believe it is unknown whether or not the Faith rose in rebellion immediately upon Aegon's death or whether or not a few days/weeks/months passed.

In other words, Meraxes must have been between 181 and 200 years old when she died, yet she died a while before Vhagar. She must have been born, however, between 100 BC and 51 BC.

See my dillema here? :)

[maidenandwarrior]

That is not a fair comparison. Nettles is 16 (a woman grown), and a badass. Pod is 10-11 (the show has made him older and apparently a sex god, but book Pod is an awkward boy).

I wasn't even referring to the show. My point is that just because a man and a woman share chambers, or any two people for that instance, does not mean they are in a sexual relationship. The whole "sleeps beside her" thing is speculation too, because all we know is that they share chambers. The Mootons are guessing as to the nature of their relationship. Aside from the chambers thing, there is absolutely no evidence that their relationship was sexual. They train and fly together, Caraxes gets upset when Sheepstealer flies away, and Nettles cries when she departs. There is never any mention of kissing or any known/observed romance.

[Ser Lepus]

Ran or anyone,

Can you give us any insight as to why Aemond insulted Lucerys by calling him "Strong"? Shouldn't he be calling him "Waters"? (or just "bastard"?). Not a big detail, but I found it curious.

There was rumor that Rhaenyra's first husband Laenor Velaryon was homosexual, and that she had her first three children with her lover Ser Harwin Strong.

[slayer420]

could Balerion be Viserys dragon?

[History of Westeros]

There was rumor that Rhaenyra's first husband Laenor Velaryon was homosexual, and that she had her first three children with her lover Ser Harwin Strong.

I'm aware of that, my question is based on the fact that under no circumstances would those princes be Strongs. They'd be Waters, they're bastards. I'm wondering if there's more to it, but I'm guessing there's isn't.

[slayer420]

he is just insulting them, the last name doesn't matter. He is not after all telling them to change there name.

[maidenandwarrior]

could Balerion be Viserys dragon?

That would be very interesting. We know that he died during the reign of Jaehaerys, so Viserys would have just been a young man when he perished (in battle maybe? Or illness...?).

[Anath]

The impression I have is the opposite. We have quite a few Targaryens without named dragons. Most conspicuously Viserys the king himself does not appear to have a dragon, neither did Laena for that matter. Ran mentioned there is one dragon unaccounted for, but that still lives Jahaerys' children, for instance Viserys's parents. Who were the dragons. By contrast Arrax(?), Vermax, Syrax, and most of the younger gneration's dragons appear either to be young or to not have had a previous rider.

I'm more comfrotable with Ser Lepus explanation of them being the offspring of Targaryen dragons who were riderless and left a clutch of eggs in the wild, but still it leaves two very important questions: as Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal all appear to be of different ages, this would have to be a regural occurence. Why would the Targaryens allow their dragons to procreate outside their control and two: why would they abandon the resulting dragons to their own fate.

Since dragons are the very symbol of Targaryen power and the means of convincing of the Seven Kingdoms to accept them, I think that King Viserys had a dragon who died before him. Same thing about Laena: she was a claimant for the Iron Throne. Would the lords really consider a dragonless queen when we saw how reluctant they were to affirm a queen regnant at all?

My explanation about riderless dragons is it was considered more dangerous to try and bond a dragon who had had a previous rider than be given an egg. The only people we know for sure to have bonded older dragons were two of Alicent's children. Older dragons mean bigger and more fearsome ones and we know she had a good reason to want such dragons, even if it meant elevated danger for the ones trying to bond them. In contrast, Rhaenyra and Daemon's children were all given eggs despite having more than enough dragons in their possession. We saw how protective of her children Rhaenyra was. Maybe even overprotective. She might not have been willing to take an elevated risk, however slight.

About wild dragons - your explanation is as good as mine. Or better, since I have none. :blushing:

[The Sleeper]

Well, it is unknown if, when a dragon dies before its rider, the rider can bond with another dragon. So perhaps Viserys' dragon died before him, and thus he was unable to bond with another dragon. I'm not sure about how likely that is for Viserys himself, but the fact that a dragon can die before its rider, is a possibility.

Whoever Aemon and Baelon were, they died before Rhaenyra, Aegon II, Daeron, Jacaerys, Lucerys, Joffrey, Baela and Rhaena were born. One of them might have ridden Syrax before Rhaenyra? I'm trying to make a list of the dragons and their sizes, but I'm very busy this week, so I'm not sure how long it's going to take. Dragons seem to keep growing, so the bigger, the older, right?

The only problem I have encountered about that so far, are the skulls of Balerion, Meraxes and Vhagar. We know Balerion was the eldest of the three, and died around 200 years of age. Vhagar was 181 years old when she died in 130 AL. But Tyrion notices that Meraxes' skull, though smaller than Balerions, is bigger than Vhagars, which means Meraxes was older than 181 when she died.

Balerion was born at Valyria, before the Targaryens fled. Meraxes and Vhagar were born at Dragonstone. We now know Vhagar was born in 51 BC.

Meraxes died together with Rhaenys in Dorne. Since Aegon never went to war in anger with Dorne, I think they died during the reign of Aenys, who was dealing with the Faith at that time. I believe it is unknown whether or not the Faith rose in rebellion immediately upon Aegon's death or whether or not a few days/weeks/months passed.

In other words, Meraxes must have been between 181 and 200 years old when she died, yet she died a while before Vhagar. She must have been born, however, between 100 BC and 51 BC.

See my dillema here? :)

I think it mentions that Syrax had never known another rider. That is not to say Syrax was younger than Rhaenyra, it could be either way. Size even isn't that telling. Drogon is three and is twenty feet long. A twenty year old dragon by comparison, would be huge.

Though of course, Martin could have modelled the dragons after crocodiles. Crocodiles have very large broods, though very few survive to adulthood, grow very large and never stop growing themselves. If this is the case, then it is easy to see how the Targs could have ended up wiht a but load of dragons, more thatn they knew what to do with and culled the majority themselves. In that case Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal could be escaped hatchlings.

This is however in contrast with the reverance they seem to treat the eggs with.

[History of Westeros]

I wasn't even referring to the show. My point is that just because a man and a woman share chambers, or any two people for that instance, does not mean they are in a sexual relationship. The whole "sleeps beside her" thing is speculation too, because all we know is that they share chambers. The Mootons are guessing as to the nature of their relationship. Aside from the chambers thing, there is absolutely no evidence that their relationship was sexual. They train and fly together, Caraxes gets upset when Sheepstealer flies away, and Nettles cries when she departs. There is never any mention of kissing or any known/observed romance.

My point is not that they were definitely lovers, it's that there is zero evidence for father/daughter and some evidence for them being lovers, so I personally find one more compelling than the other. I acknowledge that less likely doesn't mean impossible.

Sleeping in the same bed is not proof, but it is a clue. The fact that others believed they were sleeping together is a clue. The fact that Daemon is said to be a very sexual guy (even though said by his opponents) is a clue.

I have no problem with the belief that they were squire/master, there's a lot of room for that. But it's hard to ignore human nature. Two attractive people (we don't know if Nettles was attractive physically, but surely her bravery and skill stand a strong chance of being very appealing) sharing a bed night after night, surely there is sexual tension? Do Daemon really seem like the type to hold back? It's not a lock, I admit that, but I think the lovers argument is considerably stronger than the father/daughter. Squire/master and lover do not preclude each other, so the evidence of that possibility isn't particularly damning. They could've started as master/squire and had it grow into romance or simply become lustful.

[Emilydayne]

Do we know if Bloodraven already owned Dark sister before Baelors death? I thought Bloodraven waa only mentioned to own Dark Sister in the Sworn Sword. Perhaps Baelor owned it first and it passed to Bloodraven after Baelor died, which would give Maekar yet another reason to hate Bloodraven.

Bloodraven did have Dark Sister during the rebellion so that was well before Breakspears death. Not sure how he got it...

[maidenandwarrior]

My point is not that they were definitely lovers, it's that there is zero evidence for father/daughter and some evidence for them being lovers, so I personally find one more compelling than the other. I acknowledge that less likely doesn't mean impossible.

Sleeping in the same bed is not proof, but it is a clue. The fact that others believed they were sleeping together is a clue. The fact that Daemon is said to be a very sexual guy (even though said by his opponents) is a clue.

I have no problem with the belief that they were squire/master, there's a lot of room for that. But it's hard to ignore human nature. Two attractive people (we don't know if Nettles was attractive physically, but surely her bravery and skill stand a strong chance of being very appealing) sharing a bed night after night, surely there is sexual tension? Do Daemon really seem like the type to hold back? It's not a lock, I admit that, but I think the lovers argument is considerably stronger than the father/daughter. Squire/master and lover do not preclude each other, so the evidence of that possibility isn't particularly damning. They could've started as master/squire and had it grow into romance or simply become lustful.

I understand, and I certainly get your interpretation.

And honestly, they could have been, although in the end I think what I object to is the idea that their relationship was confined to simply a relationship between two lovers. There is so much strangeness surrounding Daemon and Harrenhal, and the thirteen lashes on the heart tree. Not to mention the way that Nettles is described, and the fact that she disappears never to be seen (or her dragon) again. And there is the way that she was the only person to tame a wild dragon, and she almost seems to be making blood sacrifices to it...and then too there is the fact that Daemon dies in the gods eye, at the edge of the Isle of Faces, and his body is never found...it all seems connected to me.

So, sure, they could have been lovers, but what it possible beyond that...so much more interesting.

[History of Westeros]

So, sure, they could have been lovers, but what it possible beyond that...so much more interesting.

No denying that :) If Daemon really went to the Green Men or ran off with her or something, yeah that's definitely more thought provoking. The slashes on the weirwood are fascinating, to be sure.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I wasn't even referring to the show. My point is that just because a man and a woman share chambers, or any two people for that instance, does not mean they are in a sexual relationship. The whole "sleeps beside her" thing is speculation too, because all we know is that they share chambers. The Mootons are guessing as to the nature of their relationship. Aside from the chambers thing, there is absolutely no evidence that their relationship was sexual. They train and fly together, Caraxes gets upset when Sheepstealer flies away, and Nettles cries when she departs. There is never any mention of kissing or any known/observed romance.

:agree:

I think it mentions that Syrax had never known another rider. That is not to say Syrax was younger than Rhaenyra, it could be either way. Size even isn't that telling. Drogon is three and is twenty feet long. A twenty year old dragon by comparison.

Though of course, Martin could have modelled the dragons after crocodiles. Crocodiles have very large broods, though very few survive to adulthood, grow very large and never stop growing themselves. If this is the case, then it is easy to see how the Targs could have ended up wiht a but load of dragons, more thatn they knew what to do with and culled the majority themselves. In that case Grey Ghost, Sheepstealer and Cannibal could be escaped hatchlings.

This is however in contrast with the reverance they seem to treat the eggs with.

Where did you get the idea that being twenty foot long compares to a twenty year old dragon? I'm very curious now :)

There was rumor that Rhaenyra's first husband Laenor Velaryon was homosexual, and that she had her first three children with her lover Ser Harwin Strong.

I have been thinking about this, and the line this is based on "No man's daughter will be safe, nor any man's wife. Even the boys... we know what Laenor was."

But using this sentence as the proof that Laenor was believed to be homosexual/pedophile, is strange to me. It isn't a good argument at all, since Laenor has been death for at least 10 years at that point.

I think "Even the boys..." refers to Jace, Luke, and Joff. "We know what Laenor was." indicates that Laenor had a reputation, and a bad one, and it was sexual of nature, given the context. But I believe the sentence refers to the fact that, what ever it was that Laenor was, his three sons could be exactly the same.

Though of course it is still possible Laenor was homosexual, if that line is the only proof, I'm not completely convinced.

Or am I forgetting some of the proof?

[Anath]

I have been thinking about this, and the line this is based on "No man's daughter will be safe, nor any man's wife. Even the boys... we know what Laenor was."

But using this sentence as the proof that Laenor was believed to be homosexual/pedophile, is strange to me. It isn't a good argument at all, since Laenor has been death for at least 10 years at that point.

I think "Even the boys..." refers to Jace, Luke, and Joff. "We know what Laenor was." indicates that Laenor had a reputation, and a bad one, and it was sexual of nature, given the context. But I believe the sentence refers to the fact that, what ever it was that Laenor was, his three sons could be exactly the same.

Though of course it is still possible Laenor was homosexual, if that line is the only proof, I'm not completely convinced.

Or am I forgetting some of the proof?

That might be it. But since the previous sentence refers to the possible victims of Rhaenyra and Daemon's ways, I think it's just a continuation of the list of the people who will be safe.

In fact, it sounds like the grand proclamations people feel obliged to make when they are in a heated conversation. Cole certainly was. They were listing Rhaenyra's vices and those of her circle. I think these were just talks, not talking about anyone specific. Just something else to show how bad, bad, bad these people would be for the realm. When you're talking so heatedly, you don't have to make sense. In fact, I've noticed that in such circumstances people don't make sense because they're too emotional to construct coherent arguments.

[Ser Lepus]

I'm aware of that, my question is based on the fact that under no circumstances would those princes be Strongs. They'd be Waters, they're bastards. I'm wondering if there's more to it, but I'm guessing there's isn't.

Calling them "Waters" is just like calling "bastards", it's an insult from a person who dislikes them. But, when she calls them "Strongs", she's reminding everybody present about Ser Harwin Strong. When you add one or two names of real people, a rumor becomes more believeable