Septa Lemore identity (summary) and why it matters

[Starspear]

In other words you think Aegon is really the original prince Aegon.

But if so, why would the Golden Company back him? And why is he "the mummer's dragon"?

And how could everyone have predicted that a switch would be needed?

One thing that nags me: if the GC know he is Faegon, then Griff def knows he is Faegon (BF). In which case, all his POV thoughts on Aegon are lunatic.

[Starspear]

Yeah, Lyanna being suddenly alive would be too much IMO.

Undermines too much.

[Hippocras]

One thing that nags me: the the GC know he is Faegon, then Griff def knows he is Faegon (BF). In which case, all his POV thoughts on Aegon are lunatic.

I disagree actually. If you remember when he made his announcement, the GC had already heard about his "prince". This would likely be because they got a different story, and were told Jon would believe him to be real.

[Starspear]

I disagree actually. If you remember when he made his announcement, the GC had already heard about his "prince". This would likely be because they got a different story, and were told Jon would believe him to be real.

That's a bit cumbersome: 10,000 people hiding a secret from Jon Con.

[Hippocras]

That's a bit cumbersome: 10,000 people hiding a secret from Jon Con.

well not all of them, no. Just the captains.

[Hrafntýr]

In other words you think Aegon is really the original prince Aegon.

But if so, why would the Golden Company back him? And why is he "the mummer's dragon"?

And how could everyone have predicted that a switch would be needed?

Well, yes, that's the suggestion. But I'm not suggesting that Varys might not have been involved with this plot as much as the pisswater prince version or the version in which it's really all a lie, that Aegon really did have his brains smashed in and Varys concocted the story of the save while substituting a Blackfyre heir (if such an heir actually existed). But if Varys were substituting a bastard son of Aerys/Ashara for trueborn son of Rhaegar/Elia, it might provide him with all sorts of new pieces with which to play. But I fully and freely admit that we really don't have the necessary evidence yet to back up any of the theories of Aegon's true parentage OR what was going on with Ashara in the time between Harrenhal and her "suicide" at Starfall. All we know is that she was at some point "dishonored" and that she supposedly jumped from the tower at Starfall at the end of the rebellion, "shortly after" the stillbirth of a child (Barristan, interestingly, thinks it was a girl).

[Hippocras]

Well, yes, that's the suggestion. But I'm not suggesting that Varys might not have been involved with this plot as much as the pisswater prince version or the version in which it's really all a lie, that Aegon really did have his brains smashed in and Varys concocted the story of the save while substituting a Blackfyre heir (if such an heir actually existed). But if Varys were substituting a bastard son of Aerys/Ashara for trueborn son of Rhaegar/Elia, it might provide him with all sorts of new pieces with which to play. But I fully and freely admit that we really don't have the necessary evidence yet to back up any of the theories of Aegon's true parentage OR what was going on with Ashara in the time between Harrenhal and her "suicide" at Starfall. All we know is that she was at some point "dishonored" and that she supposedly jumped from the tower at Starfall at the end of the rebellion, "shortly after" the stillbirth of a child (Barristan, interestingly, thinks it was a girl).

I am interesting in the possibility that the Blackfyres might have inter-bred with the Daynes. Maybe it was actually a Dayne who married a Blackfyre woman, and Ashara herself is the Blackfyre connection in the story.

[Modesty Lannister]

Well, yes, that's the suggestion. But I'm not suggesting that Varys might not have been involved with this plot as much as the pisswater prince version or the version in which it's really all a lie, that Aegon really did have his brains smashed in and Varys concocted the story of the save while substituting a Blackfyre heir (if such an heir actually existed). But if Varys were substituting a bastard son of Aerys/Ashara for trueborn son of Rhaegar/Elia, it might provide him with all sorts of new pieces with which to play. But I fully and freely admit that we really don't have the necessary evidence yet to back up any of the theories of Aegon's true parentage OR what was going on with Ashara in the time between Harrenhal and her "suicide" at Starfall. All we know is that she was at some point "dishonored" and that she supposedly jumped from the tower at Starfall at the end of the rebellion, "shortly after" the stillbirth of a child (Barristan, interestingly, thinks it was a girl).

Where does the story of Ashara being raped by Aerys come from? There is no evidence, not even a hint of that in the books. I still don't get this obsession with "mummer's dragon"? Varys is a mummer. Aegon is the dragon he favours. Sometimes a stick is just a stick. And why wouldn't the Golden Company back Rhaegar's son. They are sellswords. They fight for money and in this instance a Targaryen on the throne would be better than a non-Targaryen. I can understand people can see Ashara Dayne as septa Lemore, because the story of Ashara's death is non-sensical. Was Barristan Selmy lying about a still-born girl? Why would he lie in his own head? Why would someone trick him into a false story? BS was a member of KG. He HAD to keep king's secrets. If there was a child of Aerys's rape why would anyone lie to BS when he cannot tell anyone anyway? Makes no sense to me.

[Hrafntýr]

It's totally an invented answer to the question: who "dishonored" Ashara Dayne? It supposes that Ashara *may* have continued to be companion/lady-in-waiting to Elia even after Harrenhal, possibly returning with her to KL; admittedly, Ser Barristan does not mention this, though neither does his description of Ashara suggest that Harrenhal was the only or last time he saw her (indeed, his description suggests longer familiarity, in my opinion). If Ashara's "suicide" took place "soon after" (as Barristan says) the stillbirth of her child, then it would have been conceived a little ways into the rebellion. But Barristan has her "dishonored" at Harrenhal, which contradicts his report of the birth. But, I agree that we don't know where Ashara was after Harrenhal. Another reason the Aerys rape scenario came up was that a bastard child of Aerys would be a more convincing substitute for a trueborn son of Rhaegar, looks-wise, for whoever is concocting for whatever reason these schemes to smuggle babies out of KL. Others have raised the question before: did Varys know that Gregor Clegane was going to smash in Aegon's skull, rendering him unrecognizable? Did he know that the children would be killed at all? What would have happened if Tywin's soldiers hadn't killed the children? Wouldn't the "pisswater prince" eventually have been revealed? and suggested that a Targ bastard would have convinced anyone. But I'm very sorry, I can't at all remember in which thread I read those ideas, it was quite a long time back. But maybe others can fill in some of the other explanations, those are the ones that I remember.

As for your other questions, sure, your point about the Golden Company is the same explanation that Ilyrio gives Tyrion (though Tyrion is skeptical). And indeed, the Ashara/Elia baby swap idea would mean that Aegon really is Aegon, if Ashara smuggled Aegon out of KL as her own child, and is the one responsible for getting him over to Essos.

As for Ser Barristan: No, I don't think he's lying in his own head, but neither do I think he was present when Ashara supposedly gave birth to a girl. I don't at all know where that story would have come from, though. It's true that the various stories taken together don't make sense, but quite frankly, Barristan's own story doesn't make sense even internally, timeline wise (the man doesn't seem to know how long a pregnancy lasts, for starters).

That's my understanding of this theory, though, i.e. my best stab at summarizing the various posts that I read here and on other Aegon threads or Ashara threads. Perhaps others have read about more of the argument and would be willing to share?

[Modesty Lannister]

Has anyone ever suggested that little boy's face (in case of a swap) may have been smashed after Clegane left the scene of his butchery?

When you are in love with someone, you pay close attention to what they do. So, it is very hard to imagine that BS would get a wrong info about the gender of his love's stillborn child. Barristan never said he dishonoured Ashara. He just said she was dishonoured at Harrenhall and from this quote it is pretty clear it was a Stark:

But Ashara’s daughter had been stillborn, and his fair lady had thrown herself from a tower soon after, mad with grief for the child she had lost, and perhaps for the man who had dishonored her at Harrenhal as well. She died never knowing that Ser Barristan had loved her. How could she? He was a knight of the Kingsguard, sworn to celibacy. No good could have come from telling her his feelings. No good came from silence either. If I had unhorsed Rhaegar and crowned Ashara queen of love and beauty, might she have looked to me instead of Stark? ADWD

EDIT: Thanks for the info btw.

[Starspear]

It's totally an invented answer to the question: who "dishonored" Ashara Dayne? It supposes that Ashara *may* have continued to be companion/lady-in-waiting to Elia even after Harrenhal, possibly returning with her to KL; admittedly, Ser Barristan does not mention this, though neither does his description of Ashara suggest that Harrenhal was the only or last time he saw her (indeed, his description suggests longer familiarity, in my opinion). If Ashara's "suicide" took place "soon after" (as Barristan says) the stillbirth of her child, then it would have been conceived a little ways into the rebellion. But Barristan has her "dishonored" at Harrenhal, which contradicts his report of the birth. But, I agree that we don't know where Ashara was after Harrenhal. Another reason the Aerys rape scenario came up was that a bastard child of Aerys would be a more convincing substitute for a trueborn son of Rhaegar, looks-wise, for whoever is concocting for whatever reason these schemes to smuggle babies out of KL. Others have raised the question before: did Varys know that Gregor Clegane was going to smash in Aegon's skull, rendering him unrecognizable? Did he know that the children would be killed at all? What would have happened if Tywin's soldiers hadn't killed the children? Wouldn't the "pisswater prince" eventually have been revealed? and suggested that a Targ bastard would have convinced anyone. But I'm very sorry, I can't at all remember in which thread I read those ideas, it was quite a long time back. But maybe others can fill in some of the other explanations, those are the ones that I remember.

As for your other questions, sure, your point about the Golden Company is the same explanation that Ilyrio gives Tyrion (though Tyrion is skeptical). And indeed, the Ashara/Elia baby swap idea would mean that Aegon really is Aegon, if Ashara smuggled Aegon out of KL as her own child, and is the one responsible for getting him over to Essos.

As for Ser Barristan: No, I don't think he's lying in his own head, but neither do I think he was present when Ashara supposedly gave birth to a girl. I don't at all know where that story would have come from, though. It's true that the various stories taken together don't make sense, but quite frankly, Barristan's own story doesn't make sense even internally, timeline wise (the man doesn't seem to know how long a pregnancy lasts, for starters).

That's my understanding of this theory, though, i.e. my best stab at summarizing the various posts that I read here and on other Aegon threads or Ashara threads. Perhaps others have read about more of the argument and would be willing to share?

I think you're right. Best reason for an Ashara feint is carrying baby Aegon.

Which now leads me to think that GRRM might pull a : Aegon was Faegon. Dies horribly. Then reveals Aegon was really Aegon. That'd be a downer.

[Hrafntýr]

When you are in love with someone, you pay close attention to what they do. So, it is very hard to imagine that BS would get a wrong info about the gender of his love's stillborn child. Barristan never said he dishonoured Ashara. He just said she was dishonoured at Harrenhall and from this quote it is pretty clear it was a Stark:

EDIT: Thanks for the info btw.

You're welcome! I'm sure there are parts I left out. Of course I suppose it's probably obvious, too, that part of the attraction of the theory is because it's easy to think of the Mad King doing Bad Things.

As for Barristan, on this point I don't think he's the most reliable narrator. He's got a crush on Ashara, and he wants to keep an untarnished image of her as his pretty, laughing, dancing queen of love and beauty, and so I think it was convenient for him to buy the story of Stark dishonoring hook, line and sinker. Because that story does seem like a deliberate fabrication that serves a very useful end. Despite Ned banning the story of Ned+Ashara=Jon being told at Winterfell, from the perspective of hypothetical Targ loyalists trying to protect a trueborn heir of Rhaegar, how very convenient that Ned's sailing away from Starfall with a baby, since whispered stories that Ashara had born Ned's son, that Ned had killed her brother, that she'd killed herself for all this, etc. are just perfect cover. Just as it's great cover for the fact that said baby brought back to Winterfell is Lyanna's (and probably also Rhaegar's). What's interesting, though, is that Ser Barristan doesn't seem familiar with the Ned+Ashara=Jon story; instead, he's got the stillbirth story, and the dishonoring at Harrenhal story (which would put the birth of her child back at the start of the rebellion, around the same time as Aegon's), even though these two cannot possibly work together, given a 40 weeks pregnancy. I think he probably has the timing of the conception more or less right, has picked up on the general Stark/Ashara rumor, and for some reason (willful self-deception?) nevertheless links Ashara's death with the death of her newborn child.

[Hippocras]

Has anyone ever suggested that little boy's face (in case of a swap) may have been smashed after Clegane left the scene of his butchery?

When you are in love with someone, you pay close attention to what they do. So, it is very hard to imagine that BS would get a wrong info about the gender of his love's stillborn child. Barristan never said he dishonoured Ashara. He just said she was dishonoured at Harrenhall and from this quote it is pretty clear it was a Stark:

EDIT: Thanks for the info btw.

No one ever claimed Barristan dishonoured her?

And no, that quote does NOT say clearly she was dishonoured by a Stark. It says she LOOKED TO Stark. Which means, in normal English usage, that she went to a Stark for HELP after being dishonoured. GRRM made the wording deliberately ambiguous though because we are meant to believe that Ashara was Jon's mom.

Barristan was involved in the fighting of the war. Ashara was at Starfall. Barristan was nowhere near Ashara when her child was born, and nor was anyone else near her except her family and servants. So if it was in their interest to spread a lie about her birthing a girl, and that she was stillborn, and that Ashara died so that Ashara herself could go away to Essos to hide the prince or her son from people who would kill him if they knew he was alive, then to me that makes perfect sense.

Barristan was not there, so is only repeating what he heard. What he heard may have been a deliberate lie so that Ashara could raise a Targ (real or bastard) in secret, thus saving the baby's life.

As for Gregor, he admits to having done the smashing himself, and was present when the baby corpse was "given" to Robert wrapped in the cloak. If it was mutilated beyond recognition after Gregor was done with it he probably would have had a "hey wait a minute I didn't do that" moment in his head. But he full, unambiguously admits to what he did when fighting Oberyn. So he did it. The question is, was the baby swap idea conceived afterwards to take advantage of the mutilation, or was it conceived long before that, possibly when Ashara left KL for Starfall, bringing the prince with her?

[Hippocras]

I think you're right. Best reason for an Ashara feint is carrying baby Aegon.

Which now leads me to think that GRRM might pull a : Aegon was Faegon. Dies horribly. Then reveals Aegon was really Aegon. That'd be a downer.

The ambiguity might have been needed to secure the support of the Golden Company. In spite of Illyrio's assurances to Tyrion, the Golden Company would NOT support the cause of a real Targaryen prince. This was made absolutely clear in the description of the GC camp when JonCon visited. It was a sloppy lie full of holes on Illyrio's part. For the Golden Company, putting a Blackfyre on the throne is the number one objective and the only thing that could persuade them to break a contract.

This may mean Varys, ironically, needed to pass off a real Aegon as a fake one to get the GC's help. Or it means, as most people think, that Aegon is actually a Blackfyre.

[Modesty Lannister]

You're welcome! I'm sure there are parts I left out. Of course I suppose it's probably obvious, too, that part of the attraction of the theory is because it's easy to think of the Mad King doing Bad Things.

As for Barristan, on this point I don't think he's the most reliable narrator. He's got a crush on Ashara, and he wants to keep an untarnished image of her as his pretty, laughing, dancing queen of love and beauty, and so I think it was convenient for him to buy the story of Stark dishonoring hook, line and sinker. Because that story does seem like a deliberate fabrication that serves a very useful end. Despite Ned banning the story of Ned+Ashara=Jon being told at Winterfell, from the perspective of hypothetical Targ loyalists trying to protect a trueborn heir of Rhaegar, how very convenient that Ned's sailing away from Starfall with a baby, since whispered stories that Ashara had born Ned's son, that Ned had killed her brother, that she'd killed herself for all this, etc. are just perfect cover. Just as it's great cover for the fact that said baby brought back to Winterfell is Lyanna's (and probably also Rhaegar's). What's interesting, though, is that Ser Barristan doesn't seem familiar with the Ned+Ashara=Jon story; instead, he's got the stillbirth story, and the dishonoring at Harrenhal story (which would put the birth of her child back at the start of the rebellion, around the same time as Aegon's), even though these two cannot possibly work together, given a 40 weeks pregnancy. I think he probably has the timing of the conception more or less right, has picked up on the general Stark/Ashara rumor, and for some reason (willful self-deception?) nevertheless links Ashara's death with the death of her newborn child.

I never read it that way. Too many unproven conjunctures. BS is an honourable man. We hear his thoughts. He is not lying to himself. I see no direct link between Ashara being "dishonoured" and the pregnancy in his head. According to him, she was dishonoured at Harrenhall by a Stark. No source mentions Ned as such. We hear it was a shy Stark. So, I guess Brandon is out. However, we cannot say anything for sure. Could be any Stark. Once a woman is dishonoured, she can sleep with whomever she wants and get pregnant much later. For a celibate knight in love with a lady, the act of dishonouring is what matters, not when or if she got pregnant. So, I do not think BS links Harrenhall with the stillborn child. I don't think man who saw many battles, blood, court intrigue and what not, can be accused of self-deception. Also, if Aerys raped Ashara, don't you think BS's loyalty to the king would be put to the test as strong as Jaime's had been in the end? So, I don't think Aerys had anything to do with Ashara. I think the narrative purpose of BS's mentioning of a still born daughter is to tell us she is not Jon Snow's mother and that we should pay attention to septa Lemore's stretch marks. Harrenhall is a very important event and GRRM is dropping clues sparingly, so we cannot conclude anything for sure. What we can conclude beyond doubt is that Aerys showed up because Varys made him believe RT was plotting a rebellion, that a Stark dishonoured Ashara, that H.Reed and BS were infatuated with Ashara and that there was a collective shock and awe when RT crowned Lyanna in front of Elia. So, the Starks and their bannerman Reed have so far been in the centre of the Harrenhall story, along with RT and Ashara. And yes, Jaime was promoted to KG. Just not enough for all the wild theories I read here.

[Modesty Lannister]

This may mean Varys, ironically, needed to pass off a real Aegon as a fake one to get the GC's help. Or it means, as most people think, that Aegon is actually a Blackfyre.

A very important point.

[Modesty Lannister]

No one ever claimed Barristan dishonoured her?

And no, that quote does NOT say clearly she was dishonoured by a Stark. It says she LOOKED TO Stark. Which means, in normal English usage, that she went to a Stark for HELP after being dishonoured. GRRM made the wording deliberately ambiguous though because we are meant to believe that Ashara was Jon's mom.

Barristan was involved in the fighting of the war. Ashara was at Starfall. Barristan was nowhere near Ashara when her child was born, and nor was anyone else near her except her family and servants. So if it was in their interest to spread a lie about her birthing a girl, and that she was stillborn, and that Ashara died so that Ashara herself could go away to Essos to hide the prince or her son from people who would kill him if they knew he was alive, then to me that makes perfect sense.

Barristan was not there, so is only repeating what he heard. What he heard may have been a deliberate lie so that Ashara could raise a Targ (real or bastard) in secret, thus saving the baby's life.

As for Gregor, he admits to having done the smashing himself, and was present when the baby corpse was "given" to Robert wrapped in the cloak. If it was mutilated beyond recognition after Gregor was done with it he probably would have had a "hey wait a minute I didn't do that" moment in his head. But he full, unambiguously admits to what he did when fighting Oberyn. So he did it. The question is, was the baby swap idea conceived afterwards to take advantage of the mutilation, or was it conceived long before that, possibly when Ashara left KL for Starfall, bringing the prince with her?

I see no ambiguity in that quote. Barristan did not touch Ashara. He wished he did. As for a separate story about Ashara hiding Aegon while leaving KL and the whole stillborn daughter story being fabricated, we still don't have any clues in the text for that although it would seem logical, but it's still a pure assumption. Her death story is also nonsensical, so I agree that the whole Ashara story so far has little to do with what happened. However, the narrative so far does not give us many clues as to what actually happened and I am restraining my imagination from running wild even along logical paths. As for the Mountain, it just seems too convenient for the boy's head to be completely smashed beyond recognition. This leads me to believe that the Mountain had an order to do it or that someone "helped" that head to be disfigured beyond recognition in all the chaos of the KL sacking. There was a time gap between the actual raping and killing the Mountain did and the presentation of RT children's bodies in the throne room. And I doubt the Mountain was in the Throne Room by then. He is not that important. So, Varys or whoever wanted to hide the swap had plenty of time to disfigure the boy's head even further and hide the swap. I'm not saying it happened, I'm saying there was time and motive for it to happen.

[bent branch]

Something that is nagging me though is - if fAegon is Ashara's son, wouldn't he look a little bit like Ashara, to the point that when the two are seen together a resemblance might be noted?

So would it not be possible that the switching and moving around of babies included putting Ashara with someone else's son while her child was sent to someone else?

I am a bit confused. I don't think Ashara's child is involved in this equation at all. I believe her child was stillborn as stated. I think Aegon is indeed Rhaegar's son. The only thing I was trying to suggest is that Aegon was removed from KL earlier in the rebellion and was at Starfall.

Some excellent points there. You really got me thinking. And quotes that may support this Haldon theory?

To be honest, I came to this conclusion by combining two different things I was contemplating. The first was a statement by GRRM in an interview that he wouldn't do a story about RR after he was finished with ASOIAF because we would know everything by the time the story was done. This made me wonder about the Duskendale Defiance (DD), because it seemed that all the people who could tell the Darklyn side of the story were dead. I read everything I could find about the DD in the books and also looked at the Wiki to see if there was someone mentioned who could possibly tell the story of the DD from the Darklyn's point of view. In Chapter 9-AFFC I found this (Brienne is speaking to the current Dunfort maester):

"And the Hollards?"

"Attainted and destroyed," said the maester. "I was forging my chain at the Citadel when this happened, but I have read the accounts of their trials and punishments..."

This doesn't actually mention the maester of the Dunfort at the time of DD, but we know there must have been one and this guy isn't him. However, we don't know anything else about this "missing" maester. DD happened ~25 years ago. This maester could be dead, a really old guy retired to the citadel or a middle-aged man assigned to another castle. There truly is no way to know. However, the only thing I was looking for was GRRM leaving himself an opening to explain what happened at the DD. A maester would have been placed highly enough in the household to know what was happening from the Darklyn's point of view, so GRRM has definitely left himself an opening to have the DD explained from the Darklyn's side.

The second thing I was contemplating was how Haldon fit into the group around Aegon. We know both JonCon and Duck's back story. We see that JonCon is loyal to Aegon through his loyalty to Rhaegar and Duck is loyal to Aegon directly. If Lemore turns out to be Ashara (and I am convinced she is), then Ashara is loyal to Aegon through her relationship with Elia. Since both JonCon and Lemore have a loyalty predating their being brought into this scheme, I think Haldon must have also somehow proven his loyalty to the Targs before being brought in. However, reading through the books it is amazing how little support the Targs had amongst the maesters. As far as I can tell the only maesters actually supportive of the Targs are Aemon and Marwyn, and they are obviously not Haldon. So, I was at an loss as to what Haldon could have done to prove his loyalty to the Targs.

Then, one day I was thinking about how Barristan got Aerys out of Duskendale and I thought he must have had help from inside. At the very least someone must have given him a map. This made me think of the "missing" maester. Then I thought, if the maester had helped Barristan in that way he would have had his chain taken away. Qyburn? No. HALDON! So that is pretty much how I arrived at the idea that Haldon was the maester at the Dunfort during DD. As you can see the only thing I have actual textural evidence for is that someone as yet unknown was the maester at the Dunfort during DD. To me it makes sense that Haldon is the maester of the Dunfort during DD, but I have never been good at bullshitting evidence that I don't have so I haven't got anything more.

Nice. Very nice. Not sure though about Haldon being maester of Duskendale, as can't find mention of a maester... but not impossible. And plausible if "inside man" proves true.

As you can see above my evidence is practically nil. However, what it would mean in story is that the three main people supporting Aegon are all personally known by Barristan to be Targ loyalists. This would explain why Varys and Illyrio sent Barristan to Dany. The hope would be that by the time the two groups were brought together, Dany would trust Barristan enough to believe his evaluation of Aegon being the real deal based on the people surrounding him. While I actually believe Aegon to be Rhaegar's son, this dynamic would work whether Aegon is real or not.

[bent branch]

That's an interesting speculation about there having been an "inside man" at the Dun Fort, and it's true that a maester would be stripped of his chain for going against the lord of the castle to which he's assigned. One wishes, though, that we'd received some hint about there having been such a person.

As for Aegon having been with Ashara at Starfall by the time that Ned returned Dawn, that's just what I was trying to argue for above. And I also was creating scenarios by which Ashara had swapped out her baby (speculation: child of rape with Aerys) with Elia's back in KL, and had returned with Aegon to Starfall to keep safe the true heir. This works not just with bent branch's point about Dayne being loyalists, but also with the fact that they are sworn to House Martell. With such a scheme Ashara would be saving not just the heir to the throne but also her liege-lord's nephew.

For some reason when I did multiquote it dropped your post. :dunno: However, if you look at the my previous post you'll see I do admit that I have developed this idea based on practically nothing. However, in my defense we know practically nothing about what happened at Duskendale. I typed up all the quotes about the Duskendale Defiance from the books and they only took up one page.

It's nice to know that there is someone who agrees with me that if Aegon is real, he was probably already at Starfall when Ned returned Dawn. :)

[Modesty Lannister]

post 178

Excellent points. If I may help you in any way, I'd emphasise that measters' official policy is opposition to magic. Hence, their opposition to Targs, because of their Valyrian magical roots. There is a strong case to be made that maesters' had their hand in killing dragons off. Marwin is an exception and as he said to Sam, one should not talk to maesters about what happens beyond the wall, because they would not accept Sam as an apprentice if they knew he was a witness to all ice magic events that we know he witnessed. Aemon is an exception because he is a Targ. So, in that sense, being on the Targ side is being on the side of forbidden magic from the maesters' POV.