Bael's Bastard Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 I'm not sure Westerosi accounts of the number of dragons used in a Rhoynish/Valyrian war, hundreds of years before the Doom or Conquest, tell us anything about exactly where the Targs were among the forty families. I think it's been said they were not among the most significant, but they could have fallen almost anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Yeah, the total number of the dragons could have risen or dropped - and we don't know the total number of the dragons during the Rohynish Wars, either, just that 300 were involved in the battle against Garin -, but we know the number the Targaryens had when Aenar left, and we know indeed that the Targaryens were not one of the more powerful dragonlord families. That, in turn, could indicate that the Targaryens were 'new men' who only became dragonlords recently (i.e. that they are not a founding family of the Freehold), or that they were once more powerful but had declined and lost much prestige, wealth, and dragons in the last decades/centuries. I'd favor the former, but there is no evidence for that as of yet, although there is a slight chance that GRRM would have indicated it if the Targaryens had once been among the most powerful families of Old Valyria... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Yeah, the total number of the dragons could have risen or dropped - and we don't know the total number of the dragons during the Rohynish Wars, either, just that 300 were involved in the battle against Garin -, but we know the number the Targaryens had when Aenar left, and we know indeed that the Targaryens were not one of the more powerful dragonlord families. That, in turn, could indicate that the Targaryens were 'new men' who only became dragonlords recently (i.e. that they are not a founding family of the Freehold), or that they were once more powerful but had declined and lost much prestige, wealth, and dragons in the last decades/centuries. I'd favor the former, but there is no evidence for that as of yet, although there is a slight chance that GRRM would have indicated it if the Targaryens had once been among the most powerful families of Old Valyria... One of their dragon skulls is supposed to be three thousand years old so I'd say they've had dragons at least that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tze Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 One of their dragon skulls is supposed to be three thousand years old so I'd say they've had dragons at least that long. This is something I've been wondering about, actually. In AGOT, Tyrion mentions that (at least one of) the skulls the Targs had on the throne room walls was 3,000 years old. But then we have this: http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Dragons_in_Westeros December 11, 1999 Dragons in Westeros In 'The Hedge Knight' ancient dragons are mentioned, thousands of years olds. Were there Dragons in Westeros before the Targaryens brought them, or did the Targaryens bring the skeletons of the old Dragons with them? There were dragons all over, once. But I don't recall any mention of "ancient dragons", let alone any "thousands of years old", in The Hedge Knight. There is a mention in AGOT---the Tyrion scene where he mentions the 3,000-year-old dragon skull beneath the Red Keep---and I'm wondering if the "THK" part of this SSM question was a typo that should have read "AGOT"? (Unless there's some other edition of THK that mentions ancient dragons?) I bring this up because if this SSM was actually referring to the dragon skull scene in AGOT, then GRRM's answer here heavily implies that that ancient skull was not brought by the Targs to Westeros, but was found by them on Dragonstone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidenandwarrior Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Some people over on Tumblr are saying that GRRM read a section on the Westerlands at the Con. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjim Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Some people over on Tumblr are saying that GRRM read a section on the Westerlands at the Con. He did indeed. I didn't take notes, but I'm sure someone who did will be along to post them. What I also found interesting is his perceived publishing timeline. In prefacing the reading, he mentioned that he wrote so much for World of Ice and Fire that they decided to cut out some of the Targ history for a later book that will be published in 4-5 years - after Winds and Dream. As we all know, George's estimates aren't always right and this may be a case where he said something he had not given much though to before speaking Still, I thought it was worth mentioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidenandwarrior Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 He did indeed. I didn't take notes, but I'm sure someone who did will be along to post them. What I also found interesting is his perceived publishing timeline. In prefacing the reading, he mentioned that he wrote so much for World of Ice and Fire that they decided to cut out some of the Targ history for a later book that will be published in 4-5 years - after Winds and Dream. As we all know, George's estimates aren't always right and this may be a case where he said something he had not given much though to before speaking Still, I thought it was worth mentioning. Lol, pretty much just gives major weight to my personal belief that GRRM is on top of this, and we don't need to worry. Between this, and Anne Groell's 'reasonably soon', I am feeling very relaxed right now. I'm curious, did you notice anything in the reading that fits with Ran and Linda saying that GRRM dismisses a major theory in the WOIAF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 I hope someone took notes of his reading today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjim Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Lol, pretty much just gives major weight to my personal belief that GRRM is on top of this, and we don't need to worry. Between this, and Anne Groell's 'reasonably soon', I am feeling very relaxed right now. I'm curious, did you notice anything in the reading that fits with Ran and Linda saying that GRRM dismisses a major theory in the WOIAF? I'm pretty sure I'm aware of all the major theories and I didn't catch anything in the reading that would dismiss any of them. Maybe someone caught something I didn't though. The Wolves - someone in the BWB subforum said they have 7 pages of notes, so you should get something tonight or tomorrow. As a teaser, I can tell you that we get a much greater telling of the Reyne-Tarbeck Rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 I'm pretty sure I'm aware of all the major theories and I didn't catch anything in the reading that would dismiss any of them. Maybe someone caught something I didn't though. The Wolves - someone in the BWB subforum said they have 7 pages of notes, so you should get something tonight or tomorrow. As a teaser, I can tell you that we get a much greater telling of the Reyne-Tarbeck Rebellion.Thank You!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Do we get any more info on the Wonders of the World? I seem to remember reading that originally George had a description.of each of them after Tyrion mentions his reading of Lomas Longstrider's book, and I was womdering whether it would get recycled for the World book. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 The three thousand year old dragon skull may indeed be the skull of the first dragon of House Targaryen. If that was the case, then they are probably not exactly a young noble house, but this would also confirm that they were by no means among the founding houses of the Freehold. The Ghiscari Wars go back five thousands years, and the Freehold was probably founded quite some time before the First Ghiscari War began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs.Grumpy Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Didn't Ran said once Targs also brought dragon skulls from Valyria? I have a tiny little question :3Will we learn anything about that ruined city in Ulos? Because it seems mysterious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Didn't Ran said once Targs also brought dragon skulls from Valyria? I have a tiny little question :3 Will we learn anything about that ruined city in Ulos? Because it seems mysterious. I think he did, I vaguely remember something about that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Ran A question if you can answer it. I know the book will have some info on Valyria but I was wondering would the info be accurate in the sense that someone visited Valyria like a Maester and wrote the info down or would the Targaryens have some written info about Valyria that a Maester got ahold of? Or are the maester going off rumors of Valyria? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkenGiant Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Ran, Will there be information on families not specifically listed in the Table of Contents? As an example, the Lannisters are the only listing in the Westerlands but will that chapter talk about prominent families like the Crakehalls? Thanks, DG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 The Wolves, The maesters have various records and histories to draw from. I imagine actual maesters must have visited there at some point in the past, too. DrunkenGiant, There will be stuff about a number of families. The Crakehalls get a bit of new info, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Thanks Ran!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkenGiant Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardstone Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Will we get any information on the founding of the Citadel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.