Jump to content

Small Questions v 10022


Stubby

Recommended Posts

Do you think Tywin's death was the reason Aegon & JonCon began moving in earnest and in the open?

They began moving because they assumed Daenerys was on her way. Taking the IT from a crowned Targaryen queen would be harder than from a Lannister bastard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, am I stupid or something? Why did Tyrion "trick" Aegon into going to Westeros? Is it because he wanted to be closer to Dany?

Not a small question. The topic has been discussed in other threads and you're sure to generate at least a couple of pages if you start a new thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Myrcella was legitimately a Baratheon, would she come before Stannis in the line of succession or would Stannis be ahead?

She would come before if they followed regular Andal Law, but after if they kept the special Targ-succession rules.

In the first case, "a daughter comes before an uncle" - think Cersei as Lady of the Rock instead of Kevan. As for Targs, post-Dance, a woman can never inherit as long as there is a male claimant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Myrcella was legitimately a Baratheon, would she come before Stannis in the line of succession or would Stannis be ahead?

I've always thought yes, she is before Stannis. Reason being that when Stannis and Renly are parleying in CoK, Stannis says he will name Renly his heir. I take that as meaning Shireen would come before Renly, technically. If Renly was ahead of Shireen in the line, there would be no reason to state that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here it is from the ADwD epilogue:

The seventh voice would be the Dornishwoman now escorting Myrcella home. The Lady Nym.

To me it sounds like the Lannisters think Myrcella is on her way home, accompanied by Lady Nym since Ser Balon is off Darkstar hunting. Yet, in TWoW Arianne chapter we learn

that Dornish hosts are massing in the Prince's Pass and the Boneway, and that Arianne has been sent to meet with Jon Connington at Griffin's Roost. Sounds to me like the letter promising Myrcella is on her way is probably a ruse. It's doubtful Doran would let such a valuable cyvasse piece slip through his fingers, at least not until he knows the situation with JonCon and Aegon.

Btw, Trystane is never mentioned after Doran's polite prevarication to Ser Balon in ADwD.

Thanks, thats what made me think she was returning. I also thought I had read somewhere that Trystane would remain in the Water Gardens but I dont remember where that was now. Maybe I imagined it :p

I did find it odd that Myrcella may have been allowed to leave Dorne without Ser Balon Swann though. Perhaps your right and its a ruse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought yes, she is before Stannis. Reason being that when Stannis and Renly are parleying in CoK, Stannis says he will name Renly his heir. I take that as meaning Shireen would come before Renly, technically. If Renly was ahead of Shireen in the line, there would be no reason to state that.

Maybe he wanted to name Renly as a reward since he was at the time a traitor. He says I will accept your kneeling and as you desire to be a King so much, you can at least be my heir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe he wanted to name Renly as a reward since he was at the time a traitor. He says I will accept your kneeling and as you desire to be a King so much, you can at least be my heir.

The point is that if Renly comes before Shireen, he wouldn't need to name him - he would be his heir either way. Meaning that as it is, it is Shireen, meaning that yes, Myrcella should be before Stannis were she a true Baratheon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that if Renly comes before Shireen, he wouldn't need to name him - he would be his heir either way. Meaning that as it is, it is Shireen, meaning that yes, Myrcella should be before Stannis were she a true Baratheon.

Well, if Renly carries out his war, he'll stay a traitor. In such a case, bending the knee usually means you'll lose certain power that you had before, and lands and titles. Going from traitor to heir to the throne is a big step and Stannis obviously believed it would be enough.

Since Stannis and Renly are ay war against each other, neither are each others heir. So it would be necessary for Stannis to name his brother in such a time, because otherwise people would consider Shireen the heir.

Edit: also, didn't Robert name Stannis his heir when he gained the throne? You'd think that it would be a logical thing, until Robert has a son, but he named him specifically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit: also, didn't Robert name Stannis his heir when he gained the throne? You'd think that it would be a logical thing, until Robert has a son, but he named him specifically.

But wasn't the point that he had given Renly Storm's end, which normally should be passed to the heir/older brother? As in "despite not giving you Storm's end, you are still my heir untill I have a son".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But wasn't the point that he had given Renly Storm's end, which normally should be passed to the heir/older brother? As in "despite not giving you Storm's end, you are still my heir untill I have a son".

Robert gave Stannis Dragonstone - made Stannis the Prince of Dragonstone. Prince of Dragonstone was the Targaryen term for Crown Prince / Prince of Wales / heir to the throne.

So if he in so doing actually disinherited Stannis, it would have been disinheriting him from the Stormlands.

But at the same time grooming him for being the next king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert gave Stannis Dragonstone - made Stannis the Prince of Dragonstone. Prince of Dragonstone was the Targaryen term for Crown Prince / Prince of Wales / heir to the throne.

So if he in so doing actually disinherited Stannis, it would have been disinheriting him from the Stormlands.

But at the same time grooming him for being the next king.

But Dragonstone was the Targ spot. Robert never made Stannis "Prince of Dragonstone", he made him Lord of Dragonstone, kind of abolishing the "Prince of DS" title and it's hereditary purpose. For example, Joffrey was never Prince of Dragonstone while Robert was king. So giving Stannis DS never meant that he was automatically next in line as it was with the Targs.

ETA: Another example - Shireen. As Stannis considers himself the rightful king, he considers Shireen the rightful princess. And she is from Dragonstone, but noone ever considers her "Princess of Dragostone". Only princess [of the seven kingdoms].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Dragonstone was the Targ spot. Robert never made Stannis "Prince of Dragonstone", he made him Lord of Dragonstone, kind of abolishing the "Prince of DS" title and it's hereditary purpose. For example, Joffrey was never Prince of Dragonstone while Robert was king. So giving Stannis DS never meant that he was automatically next in line as it was with the Targs.

ETA: Another example - Shireen. As Stannis considers himself the rightful king, he considers Shireen the rightful princess. And she is from Dragonstone, but noone ever considers her "Princess of Dragostone". Only princess [of the seven kingdoms].

From GRRM himself, as stated in an SSM:

Stannis always resented being given Dragonstone while Renly got Storm's End, and took that as a slight... but it's not necessarily true that Robert meant it that way. The Targaryen heir apparent had always been titled Prince of Dragonstone. By making Stannis the Lord of Dragonstone, Robert affirmed his brother's status as heir (which he was, until Joff's birth a few years later). Robert could just as lawfully retained both castles for his sons, and made Joffrey the Prince of Dragonstone and Tommen the Lord of Storm's End. Giving them to his brothers instead was another instance of his great, but rather careless, generosity.

So even though Stannis had been Robert's heir anyway, by naming Stannis Lord of Dragonstone, Robert showed that Stannis was indeed the next in line for the throne, should anything happen to Robert before he got himself a son.

Edit: Your problem about the title Prince of Dragonstone is in there as well :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why didn´t Robb and Jon attend tourneys. We know they loved knight and fighting from the books as joung children when they played in the yard...

We know that other high borns attended tourneys as soona s they could enter, hell Barristan enterd at at the age of 10 i think.

Is there any suggestion they trained with lances? I dont think there is, its very much a Southern pursuit with a scattering of Northerners. At the Tourney of the Hand we dont even get White Harbour men entering the lists. I think simply put; they were never trained as 'knights' or failing that (I just remembered Northern horseman sometime referred to as mounted lances) the tourneys were just too far away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why didn´t Robb and Jon attend tourneys. We know they loved knight and fighting from the books as joung children when they played in the yard...

We know that other high borns attended tourneys as soona s they could enter, hell Barristan enterd at at the age of 10 i think.

Is there any suggestion they trained with lances? I dont think there is, its very much a Southern pursuit with a scattering of Northerners. At the Tourney of the Hand we dont even get White Harbour men entering the lists. I think simply put; they were never trained as 'knights' or failing that (I just remembered Northern horseman sometime referred to as mounted lances) the tourneys were just too far away.

Robb and Jon did train with lances:

Jon swelled with pride. "Robb is a stronger lance than I am, but I’m the better sword, and Hullen says I sit a horse as well as anyone in the castle."

However, tourneys are entered by knights, and there aren't many knights in the north. I can imagine there weren't many tourneys in the north either.

Barristan entering at the age of 10 was an exception. The people present laughed at him. He was too young, he didn't stand a chance. But he tried, because he was a bold young boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any suggestion they trained with lances? I dont think there is, its very much a Southern pursuit with a scattering of Northerners. At the Tourney of the Hand we dont even get White Harbour men entering the lists. I think simply put; they were never trained as 'knights' or failing that (I just remembered Northern horseman sometime referred to as mounted lances) the tourneys were just too far away.

But isn´t Braandon Stark rememberd as a great tourney fighter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...