Jump to content

Archived

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

Angalin

Small questions v.10079

Recommended Posts

But they were going south to cut off Joffrey's head. That's pretty permanent, and it would ruin wedding plans between him and Sansa, at the very least :).

Not at this point though. At this point they were going south to stuff their spears up Tywin's bunghole and then free Ned from the clutches of Cersei. I think it's not unlikely that Catelyn could've considered Joff to be a (largely) blameless pawn in his mother's hands. One thing is sure though - in her eyes, he was the rightful King of Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe she was still hoping to use Sansa to bond the Starks to a better family, since she was promising the hand of the Heir to WF(and KitN) to a Frey maybe she wanted more options for Sansa. There is another possibility but I would rather not say it out loud, though I'm sure you know what I mean. :)

Yeah, I get what you mean ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at this point though. At this point they were going south to stuff their spears up Tywin's bunghole and then free Ned from the clutches of Cersei. I think it's not unlikely that Catelyn could've considered Joff to be a (largely) blameless pawn in his mother's hands. One thing is sure though - in her eyes, he was the rightful King of Westeros.

^Indeed. Remember, at this point Robb was not the King in the North, Joffrey had not shown his true colours by executing Ned, and as far as all were concerned Joffrey was the legitimate child of Cersei and Robert. It wasn't until the meeting with Stannis and Renly that Catelyn learned about the incest, so its entirely possible that Catelyn hoped for...not a peaceful resolution perhaps, but some way to patch the wounds the war would open. I think its quite clear that Catelyn's animosity is largely directed towards Cersei.

ETA: someo.e tell me what Mindchap means :thumbsdown: I'm too dense to get it :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoster Tully fought with his father in some battle and befriended the man. He offered to foster Petyr as Riverrun out of friendship and gratitude. It would have been quite an opportunity for the son of the lord of a minor holding.

A great oppurtunity. I was curious about how a scion of an inconsuquential family from the Vale came to be in the bosom of the Warden of the Riverlands. I figured it must have been something like that but I haven't seen anything specific. War of the Ninepenny Kings perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETA: someo.e tell me what Mindchap means :thumbsdown: I'm too dense to get it :p

I want to know, too!

(Cat was in on the fAegon plot?!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A great oppurtunity. I was curious about how a scion of an inconsuquential Stormlands (or is it The Vale?) family came to be in the bosom of the Warden of the Riverlands. I figured it must have been something like that but I haven't seen anything specific. War of the Ninepenny Kings perhaps?

Itcan only.be the War of the Ninepenny Kings yes. And in answer to.the.mini sub-question: His father was a landed knight from.the smallest of.the Fingers, in the Vale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ser Arthur Dayne and the Sword of the Morning tradition are any indication, the Daynes most likely follow the Faith of the Seven.

You have to be a knight to join the Kingsguard right? (Prior to Cersei & Co. changing all the rules. Don't they make a deal about Sandor being the first non-knight?) So I don't think that's an indication of the family's religious beliefs. Though I can't think of any mention of the Daynes following the old gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to be a knight to join the Kingsguard right? (Prior to Cersei & Co. changing all the rules. Don't they make a deal about Sandor being the first non-knight?) So I don't think that's an indication of the family's religious beliefs. Though I can't think of any mention of the Daynes following the old gods.

That's why I mentioned the Sword of the Morning tradition. That title is only given to a knight of House Dayne. So all Swords of the Morning have been knights.

Also, as someone else said, Darkstar is a Ser, too - and little Edric was squiring for Beric Dondarrion with the eventual goal of being knighted by him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ser Bronn gets his wife pregnant would his kid inherit over the bastard? He is Lord Protector so idk really

Yes. Little Tyrion is a bastard, while every child Bronn manages to get on Lollys would be her trueborn heir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I mentioned the Sword of the Morning tradition. That title is only given to a knight of House Dayne. So all Swords of the Morning have been knights.

Where does this come up? I'm not trying to doubt you I just don't remember this. I did a search of the books and every mention of Sword of the Morning that I could find was referring to either Arthur Dayne specifically, or the constellation (and one instance where after talking about Dayne Myrcella asks Darkstar if he is the Sword of the Morning now.)

and then this SSM, which also never mentions the Sword of the Morning must be a knight.

- The same guy asked about the Daynes and the Sword of the Morning, asking how that title is decided. George said the Sword of the Morning is always a member of House Dayne, someone who is deemed worthy of wielding Dawn as decided within the House, that whoever it is would have to earn the right to wield it.

Is it mentioned on the app?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does this come up? I'm not trying to doubt you I just don't remember this. I did a search of the books and every mention of Sword of the Morning that I could find was referring to either Arthur Dayne specifically, or the constellation (and one instance where after talking about Dayne Myrcella asks Darkstar if he is the Sword of the Morning now.)

and then this SSM, which also never mentions the Sword of the Morning must be a knight.

Is it mentioned on the app?

It's mentioned in the wiki. Though now that I've taken a closer look at it, the wiki references the same SSM you've quoted - which doesn't mention the word "knight" anywhere. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Little Tyrion is a bastard, while every child Bronn manages to get on Lollys would be her trueborn heir.

Ha ha, don't get me going on this topic. The baby in every religion in the real world, and every legal system in the real world, becomes a child of the marriage and not a bastard once Bronn married his mother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha, don't get me going on this topic. The baby in every religion in the real world, and every legal system in the real world, becomes a child of the marriage and not a bastard once Bronn married his mother.

But the child isn't Bronn's. Its rabdom mob rapist #37

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha, don't get me going on this topic. The baby in every religion in the real world, and every legal system in the real world, becomes a child of the marriage and not a bastard once Bronn married his mother.

Huh? I don't get what you're saying here. In the U.S. if you are a single mother with a child out of wedlock (a bastard), and you marry someone, that person doesn't become the kid's father and cause his birth to retroactively become in wedlock. He become the kid's stepfather, but if he want the rights of a biological parent he has to formally adopt the kid. And I don't think stepkids have any automatically right to inherit from the stepparent....

Or are you saying that this "retroactive fatherhood" applies if you marry a pregnant woman but you didn't get her pregnant and both of you know that for sure? As in, if the kid is born before you marry his mom, he's a bastard, but if he's in the womb he's "yours" even if he's not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the child isn't Bronn's. Its rabdom mob rapist #37

Exactly. The child isn't Bronns, and inheritance goes through Lollys. The child will have to be either born within wedlock (which Tyrion was, even though Bronn us not the father), or legitimized. That can be asked to King Tommen, and then Tyrion Tanner will be the legitimate heir to Stokeworth.

Even if the legitimatization takes place after Bronn got a child on her.

So Tyrion isn't officially heir yet, but, for example, should Lollys die before another child can be born, Bronn can petition the rights of Tyrion and become his regent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the legitimatization takes place after Bronn got a child on her.

Isn't there a bit of a blur to the inheritance laws in this case? I always thought a legitimate's bastard place in the line of succession wasn't always the one he would have had, had he been born in wedlock, and that it varied from case to case.

Wasn't Daemon I older than Daeron the Good? I always thought, among with the other thousand reasons, the first Blackfyre Rebellion started because Aegon IV failed to precise whether he just legitimized his bastards, or actually put them in the line of succession.

Same goes for Roose's future children. He says he's pretty sure Ramsay will kill them all - why would he, though, if he was sure his claim was stronger than theirs, now that he's a Bolton? (of course, this is Ramsay we're talking about...)

I always thought a Lord could:

1. Claim a bastard - Edric Storm, or Alayne Stone's cases. They're still bastards, but their parentage is considered solid knowledge and, should there be no trueborn heir upon the death of their parents, they *might* be considered (like Lord Hornwood's bastard), but they have no place in the line of succession per se

2. Legitimize a bastard - Ramsay's case, and Aegon IV's bastards, if you listen to the pro-Targs. Allow him to use the name and arms of their parent's House, and give them an actual place in the line of succession, albeit after any trueborn heirs

3. Legitimize AND name a bastard heir - Addam and Alyn's case.

Or did I just get myself confused?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or did I just get myself confused?

The question with Tyrion is more of whether he is a bastard or not - because he was born after Bronn and Lollys were married. Then again, I can't think of any other cases in which we have a ruling Lady only having one bastard child.

As to you other points:

1. Daeron the Good was much older than Daemon - to the point where his firstborn son, Baelor Breakspear, was born in the same year as Daemon.

2. A bastard can't inherit unless he is legitimized - and that can only be done by a king. And even then, a bastard comes after any trueborn children - which is why Roose thinks Ramsay would kill any child that Walda produces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a bit of a blur to the inheritance laws in this case? I always thought a legitimate's bastard place in the line of succession wasn't always the one he would have had, had he been born in wedlock, and that it varied from case to case.

Yeah, it's still a little blurry. But usually, it's because the inheritance goes through the man. This time, it goes through Lollys.

Wasn't Daemon I older than Daeron the Good? I always thought, among with the other thousand reasons, the first Blackfyre Rebellion started because Aegon IV failed to precise whether he just legitimized his bastards, or actually put them in the line of succession.

No, Daeron was older. Daemon was of an age with DaeronĀ“s son Baelor :) The Blackfyre Rebellion had grounds because Daemon had been legitimized, and received Blackfyre. Also, because Daeron was rumoured to have been Aemon's, not Aegon's, leaving Aegon with no other sons than his legitimized bastards, of whom Daemon was the eldest.

Same goes for Roose's future children. He says he's pretty sure Ramsay will kill them all - why would he, though, if he was sure his claim was stronger than theirs, now that he's a Bolton? (of course, this is Ramsay we're talking about...)

Ramsay's mental state not included ( :) ), it seems to be the case that a bastard can be legitimized, but then isn't immediately in the line of inheritance. Ramsay is now Roose's only child. He could easily think that if Roose has a child born in wedlock, Ramsay can be thrown out of the line of inheritance. That can Always be done by the ruling lord. Walder Frey threathens with naming his youngest child heir over all the other sons and grandsons.

I always thought a Lord could:

1. Claim a bastard - Edric Storm, or Alayne Stone's cases. They're still bastards, but their parentage is considered solid knowledge and, should there be no trueborn heir upon the death of their parents, they *might* be considered (like Lord Hornwood's bastard), but they have no place in the line of succession per se

2. Legitimize a bastard - Ramsay's case, and Aegon IV's bastards, if you listen to the pro-Targs. Allow him to use the name and arms of their parent's House, and give them an actual place in the line of succession, albeit after any trueborn heirs

3. Legitimize AND name a bastard heir - Addam and Alyn's case.

Or did I just get myself confused?

1. A claimed bastard indeed has no place in the inheritance, but could be legitimized after all trueborn family members are dead (like the Hornwood bastard)

2. I don't think that Daemon had a place in the inheritance after Daeron.. Don't think this is ever stated.

3. This seems to be necessary. Sounds most logical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×