Jump to content

Archived

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

Rhaenys_Targaryen

[TWOIAF Spoilers] Inconsistency or Intentional?

Recommended Posts

Not inconsistent. Haereg admits forests on three of the islands... out of 7 islands in the archipelago, or 31 in the larger system. That's not well forested when seen as a unit. :) At least, that's how we read it.

Okay. Makes sense.

ETA: Should this thread be closed for length, or are we going to keep this one open?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOIAF says that Ellyn Reyne-Tarbeck "departed Casterly Rock with her husband never to return" and "remained unwelcome at the Rock", but from Jaime's chapter in AFFC where he was discussing Tywin with Genna, we know that Ellyn was present at the feast where Genna's betrothal to Emmon Frey was announced (and laughed when she heard about it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yandel is "mistaken" on this point. Notice that the Red Lion stalking from the hall is not mentioned in that same passage, too. ;)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Iron Islands section:

All these differences, Archmaester Haereg asserts in his History of the Ironborn, are rooted in religion. These cold, wet, windswept islands were never well forested, and their thin soil did not support the growth of weirwoods.

There's also this, but it is both explainable and mythical besides. I'm pointing to it because it's cool and because it may qualify as an intentional inconsistency. I don't think it could be considered an error:

The Grey King also taught men to weave nets and sails and carved the first longship from the hard pale wood of Ygg, a demon tree who fed on human flesh.

Ygg is almost certainly a heart tree that received sacrifice. So either there were a few weirwoods on the Isles after all, or the Grey King built the first longship on the mainland... or it's just a myth.

I am amused at the idea of a weirwood ship, because old dead weirwoods eventually turn to stone. "where is my ship?!?!"....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one I don't see mentioned yet: the "Aerys II" chapter says that Cersei and Jaime were born in 266 and Tyrion in 273, but the novels repeatedly state that the twins were nine years old when Tyrion was born.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No issue. Even before the book, the sleuths here had pinpointed their birthdates as being exactly that (actually, they had Jaime and Cersei down as 266 and Tyrion as either 272 vs. 273) based on the evidence extant in the novels.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More of a clarification really.



Lord Butterwell (Ambrose' grandfather) served as Hand for Aegon IV and Ambrose Butterwell served as his Master of Coin. Was this concurrently?



Ambrose would later go on to serve as Hand for Daeron II before he was fired for let the Blackfyre Rebellion get out of hand.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the topic of Hands:



Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsil during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart - a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.



Am I reading this correctly that Rossart was appointed only after the news of the Trident had reached Aerys? Chelsted was burned before Rhaegar left for the battle, so that would basically mean that for a week or two, Aerys was without a Hand during war time..



So is Rossart indeed named after the Trident, or before?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always said that the burning of Chelsted occurred after Rhaegar left for the Trident. Jaime must confuse his conversation with Jon Darry with another night Rhaella was raped/mistreated by Aerys.



Things also suggest that Aerys immediately named Rossart Chelsted's successor, as the whole issue between Chelsted and Aerys was the wildfire plan. To ensure that no one interfered with it, Aerys named Rossart Hand.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other TPatQ stuff:



During Second Tumbleton, the battle begins in the middle of the night - Daeron the Daring dies either in his sleep or after he runs burning from his tent, Ulf White sleeps throughout the whole battle, Hard Hugh is killed after he wakes and prepares to ride to Vermithor, etc. - but the later description of the Dance between Seasmoke and Tessarion and the subsequent battle between Vermithor and Seasmoke/Tessarion are witnessed by a lot of people (among else, hundreds of people from the roofs of Tumbleton), some of whom (Benjicot Blackwood) watch episodes of those battles from as afar as fifty yards.



That would be clearly outright impossible if it was still night. All people would have been able to see are blasts of fire etc., but no details.



Is that an innate discrepancy of the text, or due to the TPatQ editing? Meaning, did the dragon battles only begin after dawn, and was a lot of the fighting during the night cut from the story?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the topic of Hands:

Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsil during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart - a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

Am I reading this correctly that Rossart was appointed only after the news of the Trident had reached Aerys? Chelsted was burned before Rhaegar left for the battle, so that would basically mean that for a week or two, Aerys was without a Hand during war time..

So is Rossart indeed named after the Trident, or before?

Where does it say that it was after the Trident? I think the chronology in the books gives him a fortnight as Hand starting with the burning of Chelsted, on which night Jonothor was still present while Rhaella was raped. Trident should be within that fortnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also this, but it is both explainable and mythical besides. I'm pointing to it because it's cool and because it may qualify as an intentional inconsistency. I don't think it could be considered an error:

The Grey King also taught men to weave nets and sails and carved the first longship from the hard pale wood of Ygg, a demon tree who fed on human flesh.

Ygg is almost certainly a heart tree that received sacrifice. So either there were a few weirwoods on the Isles after all, or the Grey King built the first longship on the mainland... or it's just a myth.

I am amused at the idea of a weirwood ship, because old dead weirwoods eventually turn to stone. "where is my ship?!?!"....

Yeah, I had the same thought the first time I read that part. And I agree that it's probably an intentional inconsistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does it say that it was after the Trident? I think the chronology in the books gives him a fortnight as Hand starting with the burning of Chelsted, on which night Jonothor was still present while Rhaella was raped. Trident should be within that fortnight.

It seems that way when reading the entire passage

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsil during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart - a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

The books state that Rossart was Hand for a fortnight, but nowhere is it specified that Rossart became Hand the night Chelsted died. I always figured that it would only be logical that Rossart would have been named within 24 hours of Chelsteds death (thus either that same night, or the next day).

The books also state that Jon Darry was present the night Chelsted died, and Aerys then raped Rhaella. Jon Darry left with Rhaegar, so Rhaegar would have left the next day, or even later..

But it isn't stated whether Rossart was named Hand immediately after Chelsted died, which makes me wonder. While the World Book seems to suggest that Rossart was named only after the Trident (which would mean a fortnight passed between the Trident and the Sack), that would mean that Aerys went a few weeks without a Hand.. Would that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it isn't stated whether Rossart was named Hand immediately after Chelsted died, which makes me wonder. While the World Book seems to suggest that Rossart was named only after the Trident (which would mean a fortnight passed between the Trident and the Sack), that would mean that Aerys went a few weeks without a Hand.. Would that make sense?

DIdn't Joffrey remain Handless between the time of Ned's death and the arrival of Tyrion? Officially, Tywin was the Hand, but he wasn't there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't there, but he had been named, hadn't he?

It's more likely it was already assumed. Another case would be Robert and Ned. After Jon died, he went North to tell him, but officially, Westeros had no Hand of the King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Yandel's chronicle, Chelsted is chief among Rhaegar's enemies, and an Aerys loyalist. In the main series, he vigorously objects to Aerys' plan to burn Kings Landing. He must have changed his mind very quickly after Rhaegar's death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Yandel's chronicle, Chelsted is chief among Rhaegar's enemies, and an Aerys loyalist. In the main series, he vigorously objects to Aerys' plan to burn Kings Landing. He must have changed his mind very quickly after Rhaegar's death.

I don't see the contradiction. Being an Aerys loyalist, especially in regards to a power struggle between Aerys and his son, does not mean supporting every idea that Aerys has, especially when that idea becomes as completely horrible and nonsensical as burning down King's Landing. I mean, doing something like that is so far out there that it could probably make most anyone reconsider their previous loyalties, or at the very least strenuously object to the plans of someone to whom they are otherwise quite loyal.

Just look at the falling out Ned has over King Bob over the plan to murder Daenerys, or the one over the murders of Rhaenys and Aegon. Ned was still loyal to his king. Look at Davos and his objections to Stannis's plan to kill Edric Storm. Davos is still a staunch Stannis loyalist. The big difference here is that Aerys seems to be the type to viciously murder his supporters when they tell him what he doesn't want to hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see anything odd about Aerys not naming a new Hand right away. He was insane & paranoid, after all. Possibly he couldn't settle his mind on someone who he could trust, which is possibly part of why he finally chose a guy with no political power.



Also, if the question is "why did he go several weeks without a Hand during a war?" Well, again, he named Rossart... a guy who is likely useless in terms of giving war advice. No Hand or Rossart as Hand is not much difference in terms of conducting the war. He was relying on Rhaegar by that point anyway.


Share this post


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

×