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

[George W. Lannister]

Not sure if this has been covered...when and how does Silverwing die? I'm guessing in some mysterious way after the Dance is over?

[Emilydayne]

oops.

[Emilydayne]

GRRM said that Viserys I was the Old King's grandson. And Rhaenys isn't mentioned to have any brothers or sisters.

This being the case - Viserys being a grandson and only pressing a claim after Baelon's death - points that he was Baelon's son and heir

We can be certain that Aemon was Rhaenys father. And that Aemon, Bealon, and Deamon all had Targ papas. And that Rhaenys could have been heir before Bealon and again before king Viserys; by this fact we also know that (for whatever reason) Aemon wasn't in the picture in 92AL or the 101 council. The only reason Jaehaerys wouldn't choose his own child to succeed him is if A) he never a child ( or B) his child and/or children all died. Jaehaerys must have had a son if king Viserys is his grandson but Bealon was not Jaehaerys son (and neither was Deamon or Rhaeny's) and therefore not Viserys' father. That only leaves 2 options: 1) Aemon is Jaehaerys' son. Aemon dies before his father and upon his death Jaehaerys had to choose between his grandchildren. 2) Aemon is Jaehaerys' brother and Rhaenys and Bealon are Jaehaey's niece and nephew. But if the latter is true then who the eff is Jaehearys' son and Viserys' father and why was he never in the running for the throne?

[Emilydayne]

oops.

[Emilydayne]

oops.

[Emilydayne]

The reason why Lucerys thinks that being a son of Laenor Velaryon makes him more Targaryen than being a son of Harwin Strong is no mystery - it's because Laenor's mother, and therefore the boys' grandmother if they are really Laenor's, is Rhaenys Targaryen, the Queen that Never Was.

Rhaenyra herself having more Targ blood than her half-brother means that her Arryn mother was partially descended from the Targs, i.e. her mother may have been a Targ, or grandmother. Certainly not father, because in that case she would have had the last name Targaryen rather than Arryn.

Laenoor was Rhaenys son.

I'm not sure I'm right, but isn't it said somewhere that the boy Lord of the Vale at Aegon's Conquest marries a Targ? Could It relate to that?

I'm now hearing that Aenys had another daughter besides Alysanne, Rhaena? I bet Rhaena was the princess who was wed to the boy lord of the Vale. This woiuld explain why Rhaenyra would have gotten Targ blood from her mothers side.

It's not officially said anywhere that I know of, but it's a theory that makes a lot of sense. We know Visenya made some kinda pact with the maid of Arryn that secured their surrender without violence. If Aenys married an Arryn, it might explain Maegor taking the throne upon his death rather than Aenys's children. Maegor had more Targaryen blood.

Also, I dont think that Maegor would have been chosen becuase of purer blood-his children would the same amount has Aenys did. Does anybody know how old King Jae was when his father died? Maybe

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

There are multiple possibilities for Targaryen blood in Rhaenyra's Arryn mother.

Aegon the Conqueror and Queen Rhaenys had multiple children. Their first born was a daughter, then came Aenys, and next 2 or 3 more girls. Five years after Aenys, Maegor was born. Maegor married a sister of Aenys, the elder one, when he was 13 years old. At this point, Aenys was 18 years old, and his sister was 19 or older. It stands to reason that this marriage happened whilst Aegon the Conqueror was still alive.

Aenys died in 42 AC, and had at least three children. His firstborn was a girl. This may have been Rhaena, though this is not certain..Rhaena could also have been a younger daughter of Aenys. Maegor married the eldest daughter of Aenys as well, in an attempt to get himself an heir. If I had to guess, Aegon the Conqueror was no longer alive for this marriage. The girl in question must have been at least 13 when she got married, if Maegor wanted a realistic chance to get himself a Targaryen heir. Since Maegor died in 48 AC, the girl cannot have been born later than 35 AC.

During the conquest, the heir to the Vale was a young boy.

Aegon's children were all born after the Conquest, though he cannot have waited too long. He was already 27 years old at that point after all, and Visenya and Rhaenys were 29 and 26 respectively. The actual years of birth for the children of Aegon, Aenys and Jaehaerys are unknown. Although we can assume Jaehaerys had reached adulthood when Maegor died in 48 AC, placing his birth before 32 AC. This would make his sister who became Maegors bride a woman of 17 at the very least in 48 AC, seeing as she must have been born in 31 AC or sooner. This would place the year Aenys got married no later than 30 AC. Since Maegor, 5 years younger, got married at the age of 13, Aenys was most likely married around the same time, at the age of 18. This would place his birth around 12 AC. Since this is extremely late (his mother Rhaenys would have been 38 if this was the case), and I already argued that Aenys and his siblings were most likely born not too long after the Conquest, all of this most likely happened a few years sooner. For every year you pull all of these calculations down, Jaehaeeys becomes a year older at the time of his death. Jaehaerys ruled for 55 years, and was at least 16 when his reign began, making him at least 71 years old when he dies. Since I got the feeling from his description that he was around 80 years old when he died, that would add anorher 10 years, placing his birth around 22 AC, and placing Aenys' birth around 2 AC.

To get back to the original question, there are several options for a female Targaryen to marry an Arryn. Aenys had 2 or 3 sisters who we know nothing about. These sisters would have been old enough to marry the Son of the Vale. If it weren't any of them, than Rhaena is still an option, provided she did not become Maegors wife.

[Maia]

Jorah is also a middle age man from Bear Island. Not a young Targaryen or even a young child who had a dragon egg in their cradle.

So what? TPaTQ left it unclear if only the children/young could hatch eggs. Middle-aged Rhaenyra supposedly intended to hatch some when she returned to Dragonstone.

If anybody could hatch eggs, then why the difference between Jorah's perception and Dany's? Maybe because he was a man from Bear Island and not a Targaryen?

Actually, no one who wasn't from Dragonstone really doesn't mean anything. If it was me, I probably wouldn't go anywhere near a dragon for fear that I would die.

But we know that people not from Dragonstone _did_ try - Darklyn and some other knights in Rhaenyra's service, knights on the Green side at Tumbleton. None succeded. All the non-Targ riders were Dragonstone natives.

Oh, and riders of previously owned dragons weren't people who fed them and cleaned after them. Surely, it should have been even easier for them than for Nettle, seeing how they must have done it for years and dragons should have been very used to them?

Alot of other posters have brought up the fact that Nettles might not be a dragon seed at all. She took the time and care to gain the dragon's trust. Then he let her ride him.

Except that would mean that wild dragons are much easier to tame than any other carnivore in existence. Because Nettle's method wouldn't have worked with any of them, not even canines. Not so quickly and not to that extent, if one starts with a wild adult animal.

And if the dragons were so very easy to tame, then why did it only occur to Valyrians to try? GRRM confirmed that dragons once lived all over the world, after all.

I understand why many people want to believe that Nettle didn't have Targaryen blood and/or some other form of magic. They want to expose Targaryens and Valyrians as fools and their incest as a wholly unnecessary folly.

Funny, how nobody claims that anybody who is brave, resourceful and works hard enough can learn to be a warg/skinchanger or become a greenseer...

[Iona]

Funny, how nobody claims that anybody who is brave, resourceful and works hard enough can learn to be a warg/skinchanger or become a greenseer...

That's not fair. We have been given quite precise info on wargs/skinchangers and greenseers, whereas dragonriding is still a bit hazy.

[Ibbison from Ibben]

But we know that people not from Dragonstone _did_ try - Darklyn and some other knights in Rhaenyra's service, knights on the Green side at Tumbleton. None succeded. All the non-Targ riders were Dragonstone natives.

Oh, and riders of previously owned dragons weren't people who fed them and cleaned after them. Surely, it should have been even easier for them than for Nettle, seeing how they must have done it for years and dragons should have been very used to them?

.................................

And if the dragons were so very easy to tame, then why did it only occur to Valyrians to try? GRRM confirmed that dragons once lived all over the world, after all.

:agree:

If you could control a dragon be merely feeding it, the Valyrians never would have conquered the world.

In aSoIaF, Targ blood makes a difference. Dany feels heat from the eggs, and no one else does. The dragons react to Brown Ben Plumm and Quentyn Martel, but not to others (even those who care for them routinely). Tyrion has read many sources, and isn't limited to just Gyldayn like readers of tPatQ are. He thinks Targ blood counts.

The point is that tPatQ should be treated as not just a POV account - it's propaganda from the Citadel, which we have good reason to believe is executing its own corporate agenda. On matters concerning dragonlore and magic, we shouldn't trust Gyldayn.

[Ibbison from Ibben]

Nettles is portrayed as small but not as a child, nor as a dwarf, unlike the GotHH.

Glamours can change the perception of stature. Here's a quote from aDwD, when Mel removed the glamour on Mance.

All at once he was bigger than before, broader in the chest and shoulders, long-legged and lean, ...

[The hairy bear]

I agree that the story heavily supports that only people with Targaryen/Valyrian blood can tame dragons. At least Addam of Hull and Ulf the White clearly have Valyrian origins. Meanwhile, all of those from the mainland (Steffon Darklyn, the Queen's houshold knights, sailors, the men from the Reach that tried it after Tumbleton,...) invariably died.

IMHO, the theory of Nettles being a CotF is completely crackpot.

Aegon's children were all born after the Conquest, though he cannot have waited too long. He was already 27 years old at that point after all, and Visenya and Rhaenys were 29 and 26 respectively.

Do we know that for a fact? I am not aware of any indication that Aegon's boys were born after the Conquest and, if anything, the age of the Targaryen siblings would favor the theory that they were born before. In fact, the know birth dates of Targaryens indicates that they tend to have children at very early dates (Rhaenyra had Jace at 17. Aegon II his twins at 17. Aegon III had Daeron at 23. His brother Viserys had Aegon IV at 15, who had Daeron II at 17. Then Daeron II has Baelor Breakspear at 15, Maekar has Daeron the Drunk at 17, the Mad King has Rhaegar at 16...)

[Maia]

That's not fair. We have been given quite precise info on wargs/skinchangers and greenseers, whereas dragonriding is still a bit hazy.

You think that if a maester had written an account of skinchanging, it wouldn't have been described as some kind of parlour trick or superior training technique that anybody could duplicate, if they'd only known how? ;).

We only know differently because we read the POVs.

Dany's PoVs contradict Gyldain's accounts in many aspects, but some readers want to believe Gyldain over her, because they are against the notion of Targaryen bloodline being important and their incest being a rational decision (with some heavy drawbacks), rather than an arrogant folly.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I agree that the story heavily supports that only people with Targaryen/Valyrian blood can tame dragons. At least Addam of Hull and Ulf the White clearly have Valyrian origins. Meanwhile, all of those from the mainland (Steffon Darklyn, the Queen's houshold knights, sailors, the men from the Reach that tried it after Tumbleton,...) invariably died.

IMHO, the theory of Nettles being a CotF is completely crackpot.

Do we know that for a fact? I am not aware of any indication that Aegon's boys were born after the Conquest and, if anything, the age of the Targaryen siblings would favor the theory that they were born before. In fact, the know birth dates of Targaryens indicates that they tend to have children at very early dates (Rhaenyra had Jace at 17. Aegon II his twins at 17. Aegon III had Daeron at 23. His brother Viserys had Aegon IV at 15, who had Daeron II at 17. Then Daeron II has Baelor Breakspear at 15, Maekar has Daeron the Drunk at 17, the Mad King has Rhaegar at 16...)

Yeah, I know, that's what I first believed too. But Lord Varys, iirc, once posted in a reponse to a similar observation of mine that Aegon's children were indeed born after the Conquest. Perhaps something GRRM once said in a reading? I'm not sure.

The fact that Visenya, Aegon and Rhaenys are all in their late twenties when they conquer Westeros seems to be a bit late to have children indeed, but it's said that Aegon had been planning his invasion for quite some time. If he took 7 years to plot his invasion, for example, and got married and have his children in those seven years, when all three of them went to fight in the conquest, he faced the serious possibility of all three of them dying, leaving their children without parents. Perhaps that is what stopped them from having a family at a younger age? Because they were plotting an invasion and did not want to risk their children becoming orphans, which could have led to Dragonstone falling into the hands of another house. In such a scenario, any small child left behind on Dragonstone would have been killed.

I guess the World book will tell eventually. But, looking at the known Targaryens, if Aenys and Maegor had both been born before the Conquest, you'd almost say that there would be a generation of Targaryens missing.

Also, the birth year of Aegon IV isn't known, and neither is the correct birth year of Daeron II, nor of Daeron the Drunk. Those are assumptions and guessed years, though they probably won't be that far off from the truth.

I agree that 17/18 seems to have been the age to have your first born. But who knows what Aegon the Conqueror had been thinking?

[Anath]

Yeah, I know, that's what I first believed too. But Lord Varys, iirc, once posted in a reponse to a similar observation of mine that Aegon's children were indeed born after the Conquest. Perhaps something GRRM once said in a reading? I'm not sure.

The fact that Visenya, Aegon and Rhaenys are all in their late twenties when they conquer Westeros seems to be a bit late to have children indeed, but it's said that Aegon had been planning his invasion for quite some time. If he took 7 years to plot his invasion, for example, and got married and have his children in those seven years, when all three of them went to fight in the conquest, he faced the serious possibility of all three of them dying, leaving their children without parents. Perhaps that is what stopped them from having a family at a younger age? Because they were plotting an invasion and did not want to risk their children becoming orphans, which could have led to Dragonstone falling into the hands of another house. In such a scenario, any small child left behind on Dragonstone would have been killed.

I guess the World book will tell eventually. But, looking at the known Targaryens, if Aenys and Maegor had both been born before the Conquest, you'd almost say that there would be a generation of Targaryens missing.

Also, the birth year of Aegon IV isn't known, and neither is the correct birth year of Daeron II, nor of Daeron the Drunk. Those are assumptions and guessed years, though they probably won't be that far off from the truth.

I agree that 17/18 seems to have been the age to have your first born. But who knows what Aegon the Conqueror had been thinking?

Before Aegon I became king, there was no special need to produce as many heirs as fast as possible. Targaryens didn't have this much to lose. They only had Dragonstone which, as far as I can remember, was of any interest to Targaryens only.

It was well worth to wait if you're planning to create an empire through "Fire and Blood".

I really don't think we can fully compare Aegon and his sisters to later Targaryens. At their time, the rules about Targaryen as the royal family had barely started making shape/

[Lord Varys]

1. We don't know if Aegon's children were before or after the Conquest but the very fact that they were not mentioned during the reading of the Conquest seems to indicate that they were born afterwards. The fact that the Queen Regent of the Vale offered to marry Aegon if he would name her son Ronnel his heir strongly suggests that Aegon was still childless at this point.

2. My best guess on Aegon and his sisters is that Aerion Targaryen, his father, only died shortly before the Conquest and that Aegon did only then marry both of his sisters. It may be that Valyrian custom dictated that a son was forced to marry his elder upon his father's if he wanted to keep his father's holdings. Aegon may have waited for his father's death because he was he knew he would marry both his sisters.

3. It does seem as if Aenys was Aegon's firstborn child, not a daughter. Aenys's firstborn child was a daughter, though. Whether she was Rhaena is not clear yet. Could be that Aenys had four children in the end.

4. It is clear that Prince Aemon Targaryen has to be the eldest son of Jaehaerys who produced children of his own. Else Rhaenys would not have had as strong a claim as she did. Whether Baelon is a younger son of Jaehaerys, a younger brother of Rhaenys, or an elder brother of Viserys and Daemon remains to be seen. Rhaenys herself most certainly is not a sister of Viserys and Daemon; that would have been mentioned in the story!

I prefer him to be a younger brother of Rhaenys, forcing Jaehaerys to choose between an elder daughter and a younger son (just as it would later happen during the Dance). Him being a younger son of Jaehaerys I consider less likely. This would put the Realm into the hands of an older man upon Jaehaerys's death, and it may be that Jaehaerys did not want to do that. It depends on when Jaehaerys's children were born though - if he was already a man grown when he ascended the Iron Throne he could have had already 1-2 children back in 48 AC. Then those children - if still alive - would already be in their forties in the 90s. Perhaps not the best idea if the King wanted his successor to give the Realm a long and peaceful reign.

More importantly, if Baelon was a younger son of Jaehaerys - and the father of Viserys and Daemon - one would expect two things: 1. That Jaehaerys choosing his father as heir would make Viserys Baelon's unquestioned heir (and thus cause no need for a Great Council in 101). 2. That Baelon and Jaehaerys would marry Rhaenys to Viserys, not to Corlys.

But if we assume that Baelon was Rhaenys's only brother his death would make her de iure her father Aemon's legal heir, and only the Great Council could put another claimant before her. That would have been the reason why the council was called in the first place. Jaehaerys may have feared that many lords would support his grandson Viserys after his death since he was male.

I don't believe that Jaehaerys did not want Rhaenys to follow him (my guess is that he and Alysanne did). But during his long reign Jaehaerys's grandchildren most certainly had time and opportunity to gain followers of their own - either by inheriting the followers of their parents or by distinguishing themselves). We don't know anything about Viserys but it's not impossible that he was way too ambitious and well-liked in 101 to cause real trouble for Rhaenys should Jaehaerys name her his heir. The fact that Viserys won the day 20:1 at Harrenhal seems to confirm that.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Before Aegon I became king, there was no special need to produce as many heirs as fast as possible. Targaryens didn't have this much to lose. They only had Dragonstone which, as far as I can remember, was of any interest to Targaryens only.

It was well worth to wait if you're planning to create an empire through "Fire and Blood".

I really don't think we can fully compare Aegon and his sisters to later Targaryens. At their time, the rules about Targaryen as the royal family had barely started making shape/

:agree:

[Iona]

You think that if a maester had written an account of skinchanging, it wouldn't have been described as some kind of parlour trick or superior training technique that anybody could duplicate, if they'd only known how? ;).

We only know differently because we read the POVs.

Dany's PoVs contradict Gyldain's accounts in many aspects, but some readers want to believe Gyldain over her, because they are against the notion of Targaryen bloodline being important and their incest being a rational decision (with some heavy drawbacks), rather than an arrogant folly.

Exactly my point - it was not fair saying you don't see anyone "claiming that anybody who is brave, resourceful and works hard enough can learn to be a warg/skinchanger or become a greenseer..." since the sources of information are not similar in terms of credibility.

The contested information on who can be a dragonrider is still open for discussion, and I'm glad people are ready to question it. But comparing this topic with people not questioning warging/skinchanging/greenseeing was not exactly a brilliant argument.

[Anath]

1. We don't know if Aegon's children were before or after the Conquest but the very fact that they were not mentioned during the reading of the Conquest seems to indicate that they were born afterwards. The fact that the Queen Regent of the Vale offered to marry Aegon if he would name her son Ronnel his heir strongly suggests that Aegon was still childless at this point.

I agree.

2. My best guess on Aegon and his sisters is that Aerion Targaryen, his father, only died shortly before the Conquest and that Aegon did only then marry both of his sisters. It may be that Valyrian custom dictated that a son was forced to marry his elder upon his father's if he wanted to keep his father's holdings. Aegon may have waited for his father's death because he was he knew he would marry both his sisters.

An interesting theory and one well worth considering. Although it doesn't explain why Aerion wouldn't arrange a match for Rhaenys if he expected Aegon to marry Visenya. The three siblings were close in age and according to this theory, their age was well advanced for the standards of the time to stay unmarried for so long.

3. It does seem as if Aenys was Aegon's firstborn child, not a daughter. Aenys's firstborn child was a daughter, though. Whether she was Rhaena is not clear yet. Could be that Aenys had four children in the end.

Agree on both counts.

4. It is clear that Prince Aemon Targaryen has to be the eldest son of Jaehaerys who produced children of his own. Else Rhaenys would not have had as strong a claim as she did. Whether Baelon is a younger son of Jaehaerys, a younger brother of Rhaenys, or an elder brother of Viserys and Daemon remains to be seen. Rhaenys herself most certainly is not a sister of Viserys and Daemon; that would have been mentioned in the story!

Quite right.

I prefer him to be a younger brother of Rhaenys, forcing Jaehaerys to choose between an elder daughter and a younger son (just as it would later happen during the Dance). Him being a younger son of Jaehaerys I consider less likely. This would put the Realm into the hands of an older man upon Jaehaerys's death, and it may be that Jaehaerys did not want to do that. It depends on when Jaehaerys's children were born though - if he was already a man grown when he ascended the Iron Throne he could have had already 1-2 children back in 48 AC. Then those children - if still alive - would already be in their forties in the 90s. Perhaps not the best idea if the King wanted his successor to give the Realm a long and peaceful reign.

But on this account, Alicent's children would have had Baratheon blood too and by the text we saw that Rhaenys clearly considers her Baratheon blood as advantage over Aegon's side. Besides, Storm's End had always supported her rights and those of her children. Baelon and Viserys were nowhere in their considerations, so it looks like they did not have a Baratheon parent. Unless Aemon remarried after Rhaenys' birth, of course. No mentioning of such a thing and there wasn't any mentioning of a House throwing their support behind Baelon and Viserys as Baratheons did for Rhaenys.

More importantly, if Baelon was a younger son of Jaehaerys - and the father of Viserys and Daemon - one would expect two things: 1. That Jaehaerys choosing his father as heir would make Viserys Baelon's unquestioned heir (and thus cause no need for a Great Council in 101). 2. That Baelon and Jaehaerys would marry Rhaenys to Viserys, not to Corlys.

Not necessarily. Whatever Baelon was, his claim was clearly not strong enough to go undisputed. Yes, at the end he was chosen the heir but the fact that there was another Great Council at his death points as the fact that his claim was not strong enough to pass on to his children unquestioned.

Rhaenys might have been married to Corlys to gain his fleet and talents for the Targaryens unquestioningly. We saw that Aenys was (probably) not married to a sister, so it wouldn't be the first time such a thing happened. It wasn't the first Targaryen-Velaryon marriage. And Rhaenys might have had an older brother who died after her wedding without issue.

But if we assume that Baelon was Rhaenys's only brother his death would make her de iure her father Aemon's legal heir, and only the Great Council could put another claimant before her. That would have been the reason why the council was called in the first place. Jaehaerys may have feared that many lords would support his grandson Viserys after his death since he was male.

See above.

I don't believe that Jaehaerys did not want Rhaenys to follow him (my guess is that he and Alysanne did). But during his long reign Jaehaerys's grandchildren most certainly had time and opportunity to gain followers of their own - either by inheriting the followers of their parents or by distinguishing themselves). We don't know anything about Viserys but it's not impossible that he was way too ambitious and well-liked in 101 to cause real trouble for Rhaenys should Jaehaerys name her his heir. The fact that Viserys won the day 20:1 at Harrenhal seems to confirm that.

Agree.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

In the scenario Lord Varys suggests, Rhaenys and Baelon were brother and sister. That would indeed give Baelon as much Baratheon blood as Rhaenys had.

Yet, in this same scenario, Viserys and Daemon are of the same age as Rhaenys and Baelon. Viserys and Daemon's father is unknown in this scenario. So they would not have had Baratheon blood per sé.

I disagree that Jaehaerys would not want to be succeded by a 40 year old heir. Why would that matter? An older heir would have had more time to learn from his father, and thus be more ready to continue the peace his father has build. Whereas a younger heir will be more inexperienced, and more likely to make mistakes, or not be capable to deal with problems.