R+L=J v.122

[Ser Cold Fingers]

Your observation is correct, although unlike this time, discussions spinning around Occam's razor have been rather uncivil and unhelpful in the past. Also, in this thread it has been pointed out that Occam's razor is pretty much unsuited to a number of stylistic means (like repetituous imagery) in literature. So I see more harm than benefit in mentioning it in the OP and would prefer if we didn't.

That all said, I do believe it is the right tool in the right place.

<snip>

That's fair. I haven't been involved in too many of these threads...I try to lurk when I can because there are great discussions...I tend to glaze over when there are some heated debates turning ugly.

[finger]

Talking about Aegon. No opinion, no BS, no crackpot, just the crude Martin's wording:

“A feigned boy is what he was,” said Randyll Tarly.

“That may be. Or not.” Kevan Lannister had been here, in this very hall when Tywin had laid the bodies of Prince Rhaegar's children at the foot of the Iron Throne, wrapped up in crimson cloaks. The girl had been recognizably the Princess Rhaenys, but the boy... a faceless horror of bone, and brain and gore, a few hanks of fair hair. None of us looked long. Tywin said it was Prince Aegon, and we took him at his word.

You may think as you please.

[sj4iy]

Talking about Aegon. No opinion, no BS, no crackpot, just the crude Martin's wording:

“A feigned boy is what he was,” said Randyll Tarly.

“That may be. Or not.” Kevan Lannister had been here, in this very hall when Tywin had laid the bodies of Prince Rhaegar's children at the foot of the Iron Throne, wrapped up in crimson cloaks. The girl had been recognizably the Princess Rhaenys, but the boy... a faceless horror of bone, and brain and gore, a few hanks of fair hair. None of us looked long. Tywin said it was Prince Aegon, and we took him at his word.

You may think as you please.

To me it sounds like a great way to plant a red herring to distract from Jon, Rhaegar's actual living son.

[RumHam]

Aegon's death was a secret until after Robert's coronation. And it took some time for Robert to recover from the wound Rhaegar gave him and then bring the infantry down from King's Landing.

Tywin presented him to Robert when Robert got there, before his coronation. Ned and Robert fought and Ned rode south. I don't remember anything indicating that Aegon's death was kept secret until the coronation.

The only SSM about this is:
"Maegor the Cruel has multiple wives, from lines outside his own, so there was and is precedent. However, the extent to which the Targaryen kings could defy convention, the Faith, and the opinions of the other lords decreased markedly after they no longer had dragons. If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want, and people are less likely to object." - GRRM

Yeah I think we actually settled this pages back, Martin never said polygamy was legal or illegal. The thing in the first post has been changed. For the record there is another very similar SSM on the subject:

Maegor the Cruel had eight or nine wives, I seem to recall, though not all of them were simultaneous. He beheaded a few of them who failed to give him heirs, a test that all of them ultimately failed.

There might have been a few later instances as well. I'd need to look that up... (or make that up, as the case might be).

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Targaryen_Polygamy

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

I've read your posts all along.

I must say, it's really hard to tell. If you weren't claiming explicitly to have done so, I would swear it was not true. Even just in your responses to my last post, you seem to ignore my specific statements (eg, Snowfyre: I struck the words "Varys, one of the most untrustworthy in this entire story," not because I don't recognize Varys as devious, but [for another reason]...), and pretend that I'm arguing the very points I've disclaimed (eg, sj4iy: "Varys is a manipulative liar. I don't see how that's remotely disputable.")

You allege that I've said things I haven't ("Aegon has to be at the ToJ because the KG were there"), and you object to my ideas by challenging me to answer questions that I've already addressed (eg, "Why go to Starfall? Why not go somewhere else that would be safer and easier to get to? Like the Free Cities?")

If you've been reading my posts all along, then you also know that I asked you a couple of questions to clarify how you view Tyrion's account of Aegon's rescue and transit to Essos - specifically, whether you find it true or reliable, and how you think he received the information he relates. You didn't respond. And I remain confused - because while you rely on Tyrion's story as "fact" when you argue against my ideas (eg, Tyrion's account is "the only real version of events that we have, and nothing within the details allows for any possibility that Aegon was smuggled to Dorne ")... at other times you've claimed that Tyrion himself doesn't believe the tale (eg, "as Tyrion points out, it's too convenient... Tyrion is skeptical of it"), and you've used Tyrion's supposed skepticism to support your own (eg, "I lean towards believing [Aegon]'s fake because his story is too perfect. And Tyrion is skeptical of it.")

If, as you say, you've been reading my posts "all along," it would help the discussion for you to acknowledge the points I've made, and the questions I've asked, when you offer feedback. Even if you simply disagree with what I've said, or if you refuse to answer my questions, it would be helpful to know.

.

[Black Crow]

To me it sounds like a great way to plant a red herring to distract from Jon, Rhaegar's actual living son.

Whether or not Jon is indeed the son of Rhaegar, the timing is wrong for such a distraction. At the time the bodies were displayed Jon had either only just been born in far-off Dorne or had yet to be born. Ned, recall, had stormed off precisely because he disapproved both of the murder of the children and of Bob's approval - or at least relief.

There seems no good reason for Tywin to conceal the escape of Aegon; after all he is going to marry his daughter to Trouserless Bob and his own grandson is going to sit on the Iron Throne. A living Aegon is a threat just as first Viserys and then Danaerys is going to be. If Aegon is alive then Tywin has also been deceived, ie; someone told him that the bloody offal on the floor was Aegon.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Yes, if anyone thinks Aegon is still alive, they really need to answer the Pycelle question.

An explanation with a few questions in return.

Why can Varys killing Pycelle only have been because of Aegon's identity? If Aegon is really Rhaegar's son, and if Pycelle would know this, would Pycelle then not try and claim that the boy is a fake? Of course he would try to claim the boy is a fake, no matter whether the boy actually is a fake or not.. Pycelle serves the Lannisters, and will do whatever he can to safe his own skin.. He can't turn to House Targaryen for that.. The Lannisters are what he has left..

Why would Pycelle be able to identify Aegon? There are no records of Pycelle having been at Aegon's birth (with Pycelle in KL, Aegon born on Dragonstone, Aerys mistrusting Rhaegar and thus being unlikely to allow his personal doctor to go help out this son who was believed to be plotting against him not yet a year ago.).. Would Pycelle ever have seen Aegon? Sure, probably. But how often? We don't know. We can't know. Not yet.

We don't know when Aegon came to KL... It might have been as late as a few months before war's end (after Hightower was send out, for example, to ensure that Aerys had someone to use against Rhaegar upon Rhaegar's return...). The first half year of his life, if not more, Aegon would have spend at Dragonstone, with Elia, Elia's servants, and her multiple maesters.

We have no reason to assume that Pycelle would have been the one to check up on Aegon, once Aegon was in KL.. nor do we have any reason to assume this happened daily... or at any other frequency.

Why would Pycelle be capable of identifying this eighteen year old boy? We have absolutely no record of Pycelle keeping record of what Aegon looked like at birth... or a few months after... And if he did, what would be considered worthy to write down? He had a small mole on his left arm? Why would you want to write that down? What would the purpose be? Specifically: what would the purpose be in midieval times?

Why does the murder of Pycelle have to have been about Aegon's identity? Varys wanted something out of it, surely, otherwise there would have been little reason to do it.. Varys kept some of Robert's bastards around as proof against Joffrey/Myrcella/Tommen, most likely, when that time came. Varys tried to keep Ned alive to stall the war... And now he has killed Pycelle... Why? Could it be, that this has got nothing to do with Aegon's identity? Could it be, that, Pycelle and Kevan were doing such a good job stabilizing the realm (and they were), that they both had to go? Tommen is King, but he'll listen to everyone.. Cersei is needed to be allowed to find herself in a position where she can try and carry on "fighting" Tyrells, as she was before, causing more and more chaos. If your enemies are fighting against one another, they'll have less time to fight you, and that's not what anyone with the plans to conquer would want...

Killing only Kevan would have left Pycelle, who, on his own, would have had less power, but he would still have been in some position to work against Cersei's destructive powers. Killing only Pycelle, leaving Kevan alive, would have given Cersei even less of a chance. They both had to go.

Perhaps it was about Aegon's identity... Be honest, if the boy was real, Pycelle would tell everyone willing to listen that the boy is a fake, now wouldn't he? But, if the boy is a fake, Pycelle would tell everyone that exact same thing... If there's no difference in what Pycelle would say, why would killing him be proof of anything? Would his death than not simply have been to remove someone who, whatever the truth might be, could potentially have been capable of convincing the wrong people to work against you?

Pycelle helped to his birth and was probably his "doctor" when Aegon was a baby. He's not any ordinary Lord.

Did he now? There's no source for that.. In fact, Aegon was born at Dragonstone (as stated in the World Book), and Pycelle served at KL (as the Grand Maester befits). There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Pycelle went to Dragonstone to assist with Aegon's birth...

Pycelle was Aerys' personal staff.. Why would the king let his grand maester go help his son, whom he so distrusts..?

[RumHam]

Whether or not Jon is indeed the son of Rhaegar, the timing is wrong for such a distraction. At the time the bodies were displayed Jon had either only just been born in far-off Dorne or had yet to be born. Ned, recall, had stormed off precisely because he disapproved both of the murder of the children and of Bob's approval - or at least relief.

She means that at the end of Dance it's a way to distract the readers from the idea of Jon being Rhaegar's son. His apparent death could also help convince some people they were wrong about Jon's importance to the story.

[Jon Weirgaryen]

It's not odd. Robert offered everyone a choice: the old or the new. Varys isn't the only Targ admin who moved over to a new side once Robert had the throne: Barry, Pycelle, Varys...all worked for Aerys/the Targs. So unless you apply your rule across the board, it's neither odd nor part of a conspiracy.

ETA: I forgot one! Jaime. He Who Slew The Previous King..yeah, he sticks around too.

The bolded (by me) part inspired me to this infamous nitpick: we know of course that Varys had worked against, not for Aerys, and continued to work against Robert, at least after a while.

[sj4iy]

I must say, it's really hard to tell. If you weren't claiming explicitly to have done so, I would swear it was not true. Even just in your responses to my last post, you seem to ignore my specific statements (eg, Snowfyre: I struck the words "Varys, one of the most untrustworthy in this entire story," not because I don't recognize Varys as devious, but [for another reason]...), and pretend that I'm arguing the very points I've disclaimed (eg, sj4iy: "Varys is a manipulative liar. I don't see how that's remotely disputable.")

You allege that I've said things I haven't ("Aegon has to be at the ToJ because the KG were there"), and you object to my ideas by challenging me to answer questions that I've already addressed (eg, "Why go to Starfall? Why not go somewhere else that would be safer and easier to get to? Like the Free Cities?")

If you've been reading my posts all along, then you also know that I asked you a couple of questions to clarify how you view Tyrion's account of Aegon's rescue and transit to Essos - specifically, whether you find it true or reliable, and how you think he received the information he relates. You didn't respond. And I remain confused - because while you rely on Tyrion's story as "fact" when you argue against my ideas (eg, Tyrion's account is "the only real version of events that we have, and nothing within the details allows for any possibility that Aegon was smuggled to Dorne ")... at other times you've claimed that Tyrion himself doesn't believe the tale (eg, "as Tyrion points out, it's too convenient... Tyrion is skeptical of it"), and you've used Tyrion's supposed skepticism to support your own (eg, "I lean towards believing [Aegon]'s fake because his story is too perfect. And Tyrion is skeptical of it.")

If, as you say, you've been reading my posts "all along," it would help the discussion for you to acknowledge the points I've made, and the questions I've asked, when you offer feedback. Even if you simply disagree with what I've said, or if you refuse to answer my questions, it would be helpful to know.

.

Don't act as if I haven't. I wouldn't bother responding to you if I had not, and I don't appreciate you acting as if I didn't. This theory has changed from "Aegon was at the ToJ" now to "Aegon was at Starfall". I know, because I've been reading this thread for months now. It's a bit difficult to follow all the leaps and bounds it takes when people change their minds because they realize something makes no sense and then start arguing 3 or 4 different possibilities...none of which are based on any facts of the books.

I explained the reasons why this theory is unbelievable, and I explained what the facts of the book are compared to the make-believe parts of this theory.

We know for a fact that:

1. Varys orchestrated the 'switch' (if indeed there was a switch). Illyrio is also part of this.

2. When the 'fake' Aegon was dead was when the real Aegon was allegedly sent across the Narrow Sea.

3. They found Jon Connington, one of Rhaegar's friends, to raise the boy.

Now, nowhere in this story do we hear anything at all about "Sending Aegon to Starfall" or "Sending Aegon with Hightower or some entourage through the Dornish mountains" or anything like that.

I stand by what I said before: this entire theory is nothing more than an attempt to explain away the KG's conversation with Ned and not have it be Jon that they are talking about...even though it makes perfect sense that way and almost no sense with Aegon.

[sj4iy]

The bolded (by me) part inspired me to this infamous nitpick: we know of course that Varys had worked against, not for Aerys, and continued to work against Robert, at least after a while.

Varys works for his own interests and nothing else. Just like Littlefinger.

Neither have unwavering loyalty to anything or anyone.

[finger]

Let me begin with your take on the SSM i disagree with "The situation after the Sack, when the presumed king has no KG with him, is not"adressed in the SSM. The question posed to George and what he is answering to is for a time after the sack.

So at that point they knew Aerys was dead indicated by " Aerys would yet sit the throne" comment

So now to the TOJ analysis GRRM himself confirms and asks us to consider that it was a fever dream and so not to consider that and account for some inaccuracy,blurred,misplaced sequences is also not good.That's the reason i highlighted all i did because to me it is clear Ned'd dream is a mixture of events that may not have occured at the same time.

This is also still not the entire text Ygrain and not the ones i highligted i highlighted this:

"He dreamt an old dream, of three knights in white cloaks, and a tower long fallen, and Lyanna in her bed of blood.

In the dream his friends rode with him, as they had in life. Proud Martyn Cassel, Jory's father; faithful Theo Wull; Ethan Glover, who had been Brandon's squire; Ser Mark Ryswell, soft of speech and gentle of heart; the crannogman, Howland Reed; Lord Dustin on his great red stallion. Ned had known their faces as well as he knew his own once, but the years leech at a man's memories, even those he has vowed never to forget. In the dream they were only shadows, grey wraiths on horses made of mist."

This is showing that memory is a factor. The below shows how real life events could be blended within a dream and become part of if.

"No," Ned said with sadness in his voice. "Now it ends." As they came together in a rush of steel and shadow, he could hear Lyanna screaming.

"Eddard!" she called. A storm of rose petals blew across a blood-streaked sky, as blue as the eyes of death.

"Lord Eddard," Lyanna called again.

"I promise," he whispered. "Lya, I promise . . . "

"Lord Eddard," a man echoed from the dark.

(the quote you put there seems a jumbled of two different occassions...actually it is)

The below is when he was talking to Robert in the crypts,the above is when he'd gotten shagged in the leg by Jaime's man.

"I was with her when she died,"Ned reminded the King............He could still here her sometimes.Promise me,she cried in a room that smelled of blood and roses.Promise me ,Ned. The fever had taken her strength.....................Ned remembered how she smiled then,how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life,rose petals spilling from her palm,dead and black.After that he remebered nothing(AGOT,pg.44)

I'm doubting the fluidity of time and space of Ned's dream that it is not all the same event "at the same time"

I'll finish my thought with other texts including why i brought up the KG outside the tower while Lya was inside screaming but family duties call about now.

Forget about crackpot, let's come back to the reading.

And reading this carefully,... it wasn't in the context of the fighting. Two different ideas linked by Lyanna.

Again the weird behaviour of the KG. Had they an ill woman unattended in the mountains? Or were those two different scenes?

Another scenario is they fought at the ToJ, with the know outcome. There was no squalling baby in need of a wetnurse, so Ned and Howland spend the time they needed to bury the eight corpses (incidentally, giving any fleeing person the time to get to Lys, or farther away.) Ned took Down to Starfall and found Lyanna there. So was Wylla.

I feel it makes much more sense, but we must ask GRRM. :dunno:

[J. Stargaryen]

If you've been reading my posts all along, then you also know that I asked you a couple of questions to clarify how you view Tyrion's account of Aegon's rescue and transit to Essos - specifically, whether you find it true or reliable, and how you think he received the information he relates. You didn't respond. And I remain confused - because while you rely on Tyrion's story as "fact" when you argue against my ideas (eg, Tyrion's account is "the only real version of events that we have, and nothing within the details allows for any possibility that Aegon was smuggled to Dorne ")... at other times you've claimed that Tyrion himself doesn't believe the tale (eg, "as Tyrion points out, it's too convenient... Tyrion is skeptical of it"), and you've used Tyrion's supposed skepticism to support your own (eg, "I lean towards believing [Aegon]'s fake because his story is too perfect. And Tyrion is skeptical of it.")

YG and Tyrion describe the cover story, so there's no contradiction; i.e., the cover story actually exists, but that does not mean it's true.

If, as you say, you've been reading my posts "all along," it would help the discussion for you to acknowledge the points I've made, and the questions I've asked, when you offer feedback. Even if you simply disagree with what I've said, or if you refuse to answer my questions, it would be helpful to know.

.

You haven't really made any points, though. You just keep suggesting scenarios that you haven't seen ruled out yet. You're not offering any evidence to support your claims, just speculation. Remember what Hitchens said: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

[finger]

Dragging an infant into the mountains of Dorne is not 'safer' than simply shipping him across the sea...like he did with his own son.

Still, no evidence of this at all. Until you can provide some actual evidence that Aegon ever went to Dorne, this is a hypothetical conversation not grounded in textual evidence.

Sorry, but Aegon is more valuable to Dorne than Elia. Elia may be from Dorne, but Aegon was the heir to the Iron Throne. Think about that. That's the whole reason Dorne even joined the seven kingdoms with the promises of marriages to the Targaryens...to get their own on the Iron Throne. Elia is not nearly as useful as a hostage as Aegon is. I could not imagine any scenario where, Dorne would choose Elia over Aegon. It's nonsensical.

And who went with Hightower? Where is the evidence? And exactly how effective is it to send Hightower searching for Rhaegar (because he didn't actually know where he was) and then have an entourage in tow with an infant?

Basically, this scenario makes absolutely no sense in any way at all. None. Seriously, there's no textual evidence of any of this, it's simply throwing darts at a board. God-of-the-gaps arguments are pointless. Using this technique, I could argue that Zorro was hidden out in the ToJ.

I'm glad to see that you're having a royal time. Finding out so many lucicrous ideas must be hilarious.

I also find it funny when you use the flaws of the mainstream theory to make objetions. If Hightower didn't know where to find Rheagar, how did he manage to find him so quickly?

He didn't seem a man of decisions.

Not at all, Hightower was sent to the Prince's Pass to an unknown destiny. Then, someone went and looked for him. Rhaegar didn't went back untill Hightower arrived. Why? He was waiting for someone to deliver something, and it was not a message.

In my turn, I also find it ludicrous a LC of the KG looking for a grown up prince to convince him to come back whit da, and then staying in the mountains of Dorne on holidays with a couple chaps. I laughed at it long ago, but it's no fun any more.

[sj4iy]

I'm glad to see that you're having a royal time. Finding out so many lucicrous ideas must be hilarious.

Yeah, I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm disagreeing with a theory...you act as if I have made fun of it. I did not, I simply pointed out my objections to it...of which there are many, because I believe it to be a baseless theory.

I also find it funny when you use the flaws of the mainstream theory to make objetions. If Hightower didn't know where to find Rheagar, how did he manage to find him so quickly?

And where does it say that he 'found him quickly'?

He didn't seem a man of decisions.

Not sure what this means.

Not at all, Hightower was sent to the Prince's Pass to an unknown destiny. Then, someone went and looked for him. Rhaegar didn't went back untill Hightower arrived. Why? He was waiting for someone to deliver something, and it was not a message.

Oh, so being a messenger isn't convincing enough...he has to be a delivery man instead. Sound argument.

In my turn, I also find it ludicrous a LC of the KG looking for a grown up prince to convince him to come back whit da, and then staying in the mountains of Dorne on holidays with a couple chaps. I laughed at it long ago, but it's no fun any more.

Okay. Not that I ever thought that Hightower had a choice in the matter, myself, but believe what you want to. I mean, the man did die defending a random watch tower in the middle of the Dornish mountains, but I'm sure he was just hanging out on holiday.

I have no clue what happened between him and Rhaegar, because we have no information concerning that...and I could guess at it, of course, but I wouldn't claim it to be correct without something to substantiate it.

[sj4iy]

Of course, there's something that everyone is forgetting in this scenario:

If Aerys were actually in on sending Aegon away, why wouldn't Varys or someone else admit it? I mean, it would lend a whole lot more credibility to Aegon's claim, if Aerys had helped to orchestrate it...but no one is remotely suggesting that he had any part in the entire affair. So the idea that Aerys wanted to send Aegon away is baseless, as it would have been admitted by now.

[sj4iy]

YG and Tyrion describe the cover story, so there's no contradiction; i.e., the cover story actually exists, but that does not mean it's true.

You haven't really made any points, though. You just keep suggesting scenarios that you haven't seen ruled out yet. You're not offering any evidence to support your claims, just speculation. Remember what Hitchens said: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

^This.

[Kingmonkey]

Yes, if anyone thinks Aegon is still alive, they really need to answer the Pycelle question.

What actually is the Pycelle question?

I'm aware that it has been suggested that Varys had Pycelle killed to prevent him identifying a fake Aegon, but that's an answer not a question. If the question is simply "Why did Varys have Pycelle killed" I'd say there's already a rather better answer than to prevent him identifying a fake Aegon.

Whether Aegon is fake or not, it's hard to imagine that Varys was lying about wanting to perpetuate Cersei's "good work" in undermining the Lannister/Tyrell alliance. Pycelle was so worried about the Tyrells after his revelation of the moon tea he wanted guards. Kevan was the regent. When people find Kevan and Pycelle dead together, it's going to be pretty obvious that suspicion will fall on the Tyrells.

This seems like a more important issue than whether or not Pycelle could identify Aegon as a fake, which doesn't seem likely to change much. He's not exactly a neutral witness. It's not like people identifying Joffrey and Tommen as fake Baratheons caused a lot of people to change sides. Those already opposed to Aegon would jump all over it, those already for Aegon would just call it propaganda and ignore it.

[Han Snow]

I'm just gonna jump in and admit I have no idea what is being discussed here at the moment, more of the same I presume but I was just reading Sansa: the Unreliable narrator thread and Annara posted some quotes not explicitly related to this thread but still, one can draw some nice correlations.

Frog-faced Lord Slynt sat at the end of the council table wearing a black velvet doublet and a shiny cloth-of-gold cape, nodding with approval every time the king pronounced a sentence. Sansa stared hard at his ugly face, remembering how he had thrown down her father for Ser Ilyn to behead, wishing she could hurt him, wishing that some hero would throw him down and cut off his head. But a voice inside her whispered, There are no heroes, and she remembered what Lord Petyr had said to her, here in this very hall. “Life is not a song, sweetling,” he’d told her. “You may learn that one day to your sorrow.” In life, the monsters win..

That hero, as we know, is Jon, one of the few classic heroes this saga has as GRRM himself recently said but more importantly the wordplay is just brilliant:

Life is not a song

≠

He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire

[finger]

To me it sounds like a great way to plant a red herring to distract from Jon, Rhaegar's actual living son.

It's up to you.

I have a better opinion of GRRM as a writer.