R+L=J v 141

[Lord Varys]

Actually, I've suggested that the dead winter roses Lyanna clutched at the tower when she died actually were the remnants of her crown from Harrenhal. If she was into Rhaegar she may have kept it.

Rumor stuff:

News travel only as fast as horses or men can walk in a day (ravens excluded). If a city is sacked by an invading force it is a stretch to assume that people can easily get out/flee. Not to mention that only the merchant class would be allowed to travel. Peasants are bound to the land, after all. The big question is now why the hell any alleged fugitives would head to Dorne via the Prince's Pass? Dorne is not exactly a place where the average Kingslander has friends or kin. It is exotic and foreign despite the fact that it is part of the Realm for a century.

Rumors about the manner of death of Aerys and the children would travel very slowly as only witnesses (Lannister men) would be aware of Aerys' death and even less about the death of the children (only Amory Lorch and Gregor knew exactly what happened). We learn in ASoS that there exist only rumors to this day since nobody has questioned Gregor about it before Oberyn came along.

The average Kingslander who fled the city during the Sack would have no clue what had happened in the Red Keep as he would have to talk to somebody who was in there.

Rumors usually are also not spread by firsthand witnesses - which means only a distorted and incomplete version of events would have reached the tower (if it did, which I doubt). Not enough for the guys to decide Ned 'has to die' or is a 'mortal danger to his sister/nephew'.

The time line also suggests that Robert arrived shortly - within 1-2 days - after Ned as it presumably would have come to swords over the murder and betrayal of Aerys and the children had Ned and Tywin held the city together for (a) week(s). More importantly, we know that Tywin presented the bodies of the royal children to Robert in Lannister crimson to hide the blood - which means the blood stains were still fresh (else he should have used brownish cloth to hide dried blood) and the corpses not yet in an advanced stage of decay.

Ned did not stay long after Robert's arrival as they quarreled over the affair, and then he went straight to Storm's End and the tower.

While rumors would spread without the explicit goal to reach Lyanna's location (and thus travel slower) Ned was on his way to her. The best guess for him to learn the location would have been in KL (from one of Rhaegar's companions, Varys, or as nothing suggests anyone with Mace at Storm's End knew anything about Lyanna.

Heir naming stuff:

If the KG named a king (or chose a king for themselves) without sufficient knowledge about the will of the monarch and the political situation at large they would actually behave much differently than any other noble claimant who hides from his/her enemies or are protected by others. Bran and Rickon aren't 'Kings in the North', Arya and Sansa do not consider themselves Queen in the North/Lady of Winterfell, and Prince Aegon is not King Aegon VI.

More importantly, as the KG they are supposed to follow the king's orders and not proclaim or name kings. That's the job of the royal family and the Small Council. It would be especially weird if three knights known for the loyalty would suddenly decide to become great players in the political game.

[Mithras]

After the Sack, Robert should have sent ravens to everywhere about the latest news and at the same time to demand fealty. Surely, he didnot go into the details but he should have mentioned that Aerys was slain by Jaime and Elia/Rhaenys/Aegon were killed during the Sack.

[Lord Varys]

Why should he mention the murder of the children at all? I'd just omit that. The important thing would be: 'The king is dead, long live the king (I)'. Why even give the slightest indication that you murdered/condone the murder of children?

Not to mention that ravens wouldn't fly to the tower.

But I'm not sure about this ravens thing anyway - Mace, for instance, only bent the knee personally not because Storm's End received a raven from KL about Aerys' death which Stannis could then have told him. It seems the Tyrells first got the news from Ned.

I'd assume that such ravens only flew after the war was truly won, and Robert was apparently not the man who wanted to cut the fighting short...

[Mithras]

Ravens fly to the castles, not to the people in the wilderness. One of those ravens came to Starfall and that is how the KG learned the news. Mace would need a rider to get the news but Ned was in a hurry.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Actually, I've suggested that the dead winter roses Lyanna clutched at the tower when she died actually were the remnants of her crown from Harrenhal. If she was into Rhaegar she may have kept it.

O, i find that most likely. But that doesn't change the fact that we have no source stating that the flowers were her favorite prior to Harrenhal, and thus that it might very well be that they became her favorites only after.

[Lord Varys]

Rhaenys,

that is possible. However, Ned wouldn't know it then, would he?

Mithras,

Starfall is too far away from the tower, and we have no idea whether they actually knew they were there. Especially since nothing suggests that they actually knew about the children. That doesn't come up in the dream. And their apparent information on Jaime and Rhaella's location may actually come from parts of their conversation with Ned the dream omitted.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Lord Varys,

Why not? Did Lyanna spend all year in the Riverlands? Who authorized it then? Did they not return to Winterfell after the tourney, if only for a few short months? Did Lyanna never write a letter to the brother who loved her more than he did his other siblings?

[UnmaskedLurker]

You are arguing for and against a network that supplied the tower, but somehow did not deliver this particular information. There is abundant reasoning, some of which you list yourself, to support the idea these men made sure to their best extent to be informed of the news of the war, but let's just deal with your last list.

Priorities assumes some kind of burden on the servants at King's Landing that is not in evidence. While Aerys certainly would want more men to defend him, and he had summoned Tywin and threatened the Dornish for more men to accomplish that, none of that means that both cannot take place at the same time. Priorities doesn't mean a second paragraph in a letter cannot be written. Second, the purpose of the change is almost certainly TO OFFEND the Dornish. We know Aerys blames the defeat at the Trident on them. This is his payback, but Prince Doran must also remember he still holds Elia and her children. He has no reason to keep it secret, as I said, he wants it to be known that he has the power to put whomever he wants on the throne after him. Or so Aerys thinks. And he can change his mind whenever he wishes. Letting people know he has chosen Viserys over Aegon in no way restricts him from changing his mind and reversing this later, or even placing someone else as his heir. When Viserys goes to Dragonstone he does so with the royal fleet. The rebels have no power at sea. He is as safe as he can be until the rebels can build a navy or find one willing to attack Dragonstone.

Here is the fundamental difference that we have in the way that we analyze. You take a fact -- that Yandel reports that Viserys was the new heir -- and then use your judgment regarding the most likely course of behavior that Aerys would engage in after naming a new heir. But you have no evidence that Aerys did any of the things you assert he likely did. You say he likely did these things because your judgment guides you to the conclusion that he likely would do these things. But without other evidence, we simply don't know.

So I assume nothing about the behavior of Aerys after making the "decree" regarding the new heir. I look for other evidence of how widely known this information was at the time. And I find no other behavior of anyone else that this information was widely known. And I don't think the choice was made to OFFEND the Dornish -- it was because Aerys did not trust the Dornish and likely Elia -- a Dornish woman -- would have a good chance of being regent if Aegon became king while still a minor. The war was still going on and Aerys still needed the Dornish armies. Yes, he had Elia as captive, but that does not mean Aerys would want to make another bold move against the Dornish. We just don't know -- we have no information about this issue. So I make no assumptions based on logic of what I think Aerys would do -- I have no idea what Aerys would do. But I look at how other people behaved -- and their behavior is consistent only with the conclusion that the decree was not widely known.

Of course. I think it goes without saying that Varys has his own agenda though, right? LOL

I don't subscribe to the Varys Blackfyre theories, but this development (fAegon's Landing) is an intriguing point in favor of them.

Varys is backing a cloth dragon instead of an actual dragon, with dragons, who also happens to be the one true heir to the IT.

So at least maybe was agree in part on this issue. I am not certain of whether Varys is a Blackfyre, but if fAegon is the son of a Brightflame descendant father (Illyrio) and a Blackfyre descendant mother -- and if Varys is the brother of this mother -- then the behavior of Illyrio and Varys are more easily explained. Although the details are not entire clear to me, some variation involving fAegon being some sort of Blackfyre descendant seems to make the most sense. But this is way off-topic.

It was a facetious spoiler box, truth be told. LOL

It seems clear, to me anyway, that Aerys knew (from Varys) of Rhaegar's plans to usurp him. Hence the reason Aerys tagged along for the Tourney of Harrenhal. It also seems clear to me that Aerys put Rhaegar in harm's way, at what was soon to become the Ruby Ford (so named for Rhaegar's demise). And, last and certainly not least, it seems clear that Aerys was a Valyrian Supremacist, and did not approve of Rhaegar mixing his blood with lesser ilk. Thus, for Rhaegar's treasonous actions and lack of "silver of hair" children, he named Viserys his heir... disinheriting Rhaegar's true-born children.

OK. You are 100% wrong on all virtually counts. There is clear textual evidence to contradict almost every point you make here. The one point you make that has some support is that Varys likely told Aerys that Harrenhal involved potential plotting against the king. But the rest of what you write has basically no support. The war was not going particularly well and Rhaegar was needed in battle. Someone needed to gather and lead the Targ troops, and Rhaegar was the one viable candidate. Yes, Aerys put Rhaegar in harm's way, but Rhaegar agreed to go and Rhaegar was a skilled fighter. Aerys did not disinherit Rhaegar. The text is clear that Rhaegar remained the heir to Aerys up until the moment of Rhaegar's death. Aerys was the one that arranged for the marriage to Elia -- in part as an attack on Tywin who wanted Cersei to be married to Rhaegar. Yes, Aerys did not like the Dornish, but Aegon is said to have had silver hair (which is why it is important that fAegon has silver hair) and there is no evidence that Aerys's motives were about punishing Rhaegar. You also have no support in your assertion that Aerys disinherited Rhaegar's children. Naming Viserys the heir is NOT the same as disinheriting anyone. Aerys would want the Targ dynasty to survive. If Viserys died without children, Aegon would still be needed as a back-up heir. There is absolutely no evidence that Aerys disinherited anyone. You are making that fact up without any basis in logic, textual support of other evidence.

I applaud your gymnastics, and tie-breaking analysis, but Aerys was not a discreet man. The idea that his decree was discreet, or even subtle, doesn't seem to jive with the man he was.

Rather than shoehorning Aerys' decree into your interpretation of the events at the toj, it seems more reasonable, to me anyway, to simply recognize the information in its own light. And, in its own light, the decree makes Viserys the true heir. Any legitimate, or illegitimate children of Rhaegar, simply do not matter. They were passed over. Daenerys is the only heir of Viserys, who in turn was the only heir of Aerys.

Wow -- now because I disagree with you, it is gymnastics. We don't know what Aerys did with the "decree" (or whatever it was). You simply cannot assume it would be a big announcement. You don't know that. We have no independent evidence to support that. You don't get to make up your own facts. And the notion that Aerys made a widely known public announcement that Viserys was the new heir has no textual or other support. You simply conclude that you don't think Aerys was discreet and therefore he must have made a big public announcement. Why? Because it does not "seem to jive" with who you think he was. Nonsense. There are many reasons why the information might not have become as widely known as other information -- such as the deaths of Aerys and Aegon in the Sack.

Whether Viserys really was the only true heir of Aerys and Dany the only true heir of Viserys is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. The issue that was being discussed and the issue that I was arguing about was whether the 3 KG at ToJ considered Jon to be the King or whether they knew about the "decree" and knew that Aerys named Viserys as the new heir, but nevertheless failed to go to Viserys. That issue is the only issue I was really debating.

As a side note, personally, I don't think the "decree" would have stood on its own without a GC to validate it, but we will never know for sure because the Targs lost the war and the decree never became relevant in a contest between Viserys and Aegon for King of a unified Westeros. I admit, the "decree" might (and likely will) become relevant vis-a-vis Dany vs. fAegon (and maybe Jon as well), but we don't know for sure. I don't have a strong view on this issue.

The issue I have a strong view about -- and was the main topic of discussion -- was whether word of the "decree" reached the 3 KG at ToJ, assuming they got word of the deaths of Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon. So my "tie breaking" analysis is one in which I see how the 3 KG behave at ToJ and it is more consistent with not knowing about the decree. Thus, because we have no independent evidence one way or the other to suggest that this information would have been widely enough known to have gotten to ToJ, I conclude that apparently this information did not get to ToJ. No gymnastics. Just normal, deductive reasoning.

[Kingmonkey]

Why would it be a coincidence?

Ever considered that maybe they were Lyanna's favorites because she received them from Rhaegar in 281? That they were her favorites from that day forth?

Yes, I have considered it, I discussed it 4 posts above your own. It's possible either way, but the way Ned remembers Lyanna's love of flowers gives an edge to her liking them already.

It would be a coincidence because Lyanna's questionable prior fondness of them aside, blue winter roses are a northern flower, associated with Winterfell and Stark (winter is coming) maidens. Coincidences can be explained by poetic license, but they're still coincidences.

The fact is that we do not know. There is nothing in the text that tells us whether or not the crown would have been blue winter roses has it not been given to Lyanna. However there is absolutely no reason that it could not have been substituted at the last moment, and that's a better story.

[Avalatis]

You are arguing for and against a network that supplied the tower, but somehow did not deliver this particular information. There is abundant reasoning, some of which you list yourself, to support the idea these men made sure to their best extent to be informed of the news of the war, but let's just deal with your last list.

Getting supplies is not the same as having every detail of Kingslanding delivered to you on a daily basis. The people bringing the supplies might hear news, that doesn't mean they have Vary's giving them a detailed accounting of Kingslanding and all choices made.

Priorities assumes some kind of burden on the servants at King's Landing that is not in evidence. While Aerys certainly would want more men to defend him, and he had summoned Tywin and threatened the Dornish for more men to accomplish that, none of that means that both cannot take place at the same time. Priorities doesn't mean a second paragraph in a letter cannot be written.

Priorities means people have a task at hand that they don't want to distract from. If he is busy threatening the Dornish for more men he isn't insulting them in the same paragraph. You can play the crazy card, but his advisers and even he would not be that sporadic in a message. Priorities was also talking about the priority of news. Viserys being named heir (even if public, which is an assumption on your part) would be so low on the totem pole there is no reason to think it would be carried as news. Even an informant had to have sent it within a small time frame in which it was relevant and that information was highly over shadowed by a half dozen other events.

Second, the purpose of the change is almost certainly TO OFFEND the Dornish. We know Aerys blames the defeat at the Trident on them. This is his payback, but Prince Doran must also remember he still holds Elia and her children.

Again assumption. He might have saw it as evidence that they were working against him. That doesn't mean he would publicly announce such an insult. If he thought they were going to turn Aegon into a puppet on the throne than a will works just as good as a decree to ensure that doesn't happen. And if he survives long enough to ensure Aegon isn't a puppet he can change his will.

He has no reason to keep it secret, as I said, he wants it to be known that he has the power to put whomever he wants on the throne after him.

I gave you 4 reasons. You did not refute those reasons, you made some additional assumptions and acted like those assumptions were fact. Again you have assumptions based on assumptions based on assumptions to get to your end argument.

The rebels have no power at sea. He is as safe as he can be until the rebels can build a navy or find one willing to attack Dragonstone.

He's in the middle of a rebellion where his lords have "betrayed" him. He just lost Rhaegar who was the pride of the Loyalists. Paranoid Aerys is perfectly trusting of no more "betrayals"? You're using 20/20 hindsight to dictate this, not the perception of Aerys at the time he decided Viserys should be his heir.

[MtnLion]

What decree? I haven't seen any decree. No one in the main series has any inkling of a decree, or change of inheritance. I use Jaime for my test case, and he was the personal protector of Aerys, yet he knows nothing of a change in inheritance, considering placing Aegon on the throne after slaying Aerys.

[SFDanny]

Here is the fundamental difference that we have in the way that we analyze. You take a fact -- that Yandel reports that Viserys was the new heir -- and then use your judgment regarding the most likely course of behavior that Aerys would engage in after naming a new heir. But you have no evidence that Aerys did any of the things you assert he likely did. You say he likely did these things because your judgment guides you to the conclusion that he likely would do these things. But without other evidence, we simply don't know.

So I assume nothing about the behavior of Aerys after making the "decree" regarding the new heir. I look for other evidence of how widely known this information was at the time. And I find no other behavior of anyone else that this information was widely known. And I don't think the choice was made to OFFEND the Dornish -- it was because Aerys did not trust the Dornish and likely Elia -- a Dornish woman -- would have a good chance of being regent if Aegon became king while still a minor. The war was still going on and Aerys still needed the Dornish armies. Yes, he had Elia as captive, but that does not mean Aerys would want to make another bold move against the Dornish. We just don't know -- we have no information about this issue. So I make no assumptions based on logic of what I think Aerys would do -- I have no idea what Aerys would do. But I look at how other people behaved -- and their behavior is consistent only with the conclusion that the decree was not widely known.

No, I took a new piece of evidence and compared that evidence with what we already know from other sources and showed how this decree matched up with what those sources show us of Aerys's mindset. I showed how they fit together. I didn't come up with the idea that Aerys blamed the defeat at the Trident on Dornish betrayal - Jaime tells us he did. I didn't come up with the idea that Aerys held Elia and her children as hostage against his perception of that betrayal - Martin among other sources tells us he did. Yes, of course I use my judgement, as we all do, but all of those judgements are based in my post on references in the books. It's why I decided to do the posts in that long format, so I had the ability to do just that.

As to whether or not Aerys actually intended to offend the Dornish, I took the word used by another poster to make the point that Aerys's mindset at the time had nothing to do with playing nice with the Prince of Dorne. A more accurate word would be that he intended to "punish" the Dornish for their "betrayal." I really don't think he cared at all if they were offended. The dragon doesn't care if the beasts of the field are offended. Is that just my judgement? Yes, it is, but it is also my judgement based on evidence from the books.

So too, when I looked for evidence about how widely known the decree would be, I did so based on evidence from the series on how decrees are handled, including how a decree setting aside one claimant for the throne based on primogeniture in favor of another was handled in the past. I didn't snatch those examples out of my imagination; I used the history Martin has given us through all of the books to point toward what was the normal procedure. If you want to debate whether or not my examples show what I say they do, I'd be happy to do so, but I didn't make them up. None of this is based on one piece of information and my judgement. All of it is based on multiple references to support my argument. Regardless if you disagree with me, I think that much is self-evident from any honest read of what I have written.

[RumHam]

What decree? I haven't seen any decree. No one in the main series has any inkling of a decree, or change of inheritance. I use Jaime for my test case, and he was the personal protector of Aerys, yet he knows nothing of a change in inheritance, considering placing Aegon on the throne after slaying Aerys.

After first considering Viserys...

But the larger point is that we don't need this to be mentioned previously for it to be true. If Martin wakes up tomorrow and decides Aerys II had nipple rings and a neck tattoo, then Aerys II had nipple rings and a neck tattoo. It doesn't matter that it never came up before.

[Avalatis]

What decree? I haven't seen any decree. No one in the main series has any inkling of a decree, or change of inheritance. I use Jaime for my test case, and he was the personal protector of Aerys, yet he knows nothing of a change in inheritance, considering placing Aegon on the throne after slaying Aerys.

It's an assumption since it states Viserys was the new heir. If there was a decree it would be a retconn on Martin's part (since characters who involved such topics as Viserys being named heir never thought or mentioned it in the series).. Not that he doesn't have the authority to do retconns on his own work.

[MtnLion]

It's an assumption since it states Viserys was the new heir. If there was a decree it would be a retconn on Martin's part (since characters who involved such topics as Viserys being named heir never thought or mentioned it in the series).. Not that he doesn't have the authority to do retconns on his own work.

If GRRM is going to do the retconn, let's have it. No one else has the authority to retconn, or suggest a retconn. Until such time as some suggestion appears in the series, it did not happen. Suggesting that it did happen is an error. Insisting that someone in world knew about it is unsupported. Unsupported suggestions can be ignored without support.

[Kingmonkey]

Again assumption. He might have saw it as evidence that they were working against him. That doesn't mean he would publicly announce such an insult. If he thought they were going to turn Aegon into a puppet on the throne than a will works just as good as a decree to ensure that doesn't happen. And if he survives long enough to ensure Aegon isn't a puppet he can change his will.

It's all assumption until proven. However, here's the passage from AWOIAF:

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 a hostage against Dorne.

If Aerys was "certain that Lewyn (and thus Dorne) had betrayed Rhaegar (and thus the Targs)", then he's not trying to keep them onside, he's trying to undermine them. Elia being a "hostage against Dorne" fits this well.

Naming Viserys his heir over Aegon and not telling anyone seems rather pointless. You can't be king unless someone knows you're king. Of course if Aerys survives, he can have the news spread later, but then what's the point of doing it now? On the other hand, if he is not so much interested in naming Viserys as heir as he is in disinheriting Aegon to weaken the Dornish hand, it makes more sense to do it now, and makes more sense that Yandal mentions Viserys being the new heir in the same sentence as the hostages against Dorne. If Aegon remains heir, then the Dornish get the half-Dornish Aegon on the throne if they depose Aerys. With Viserys as heir and Elia and kids as hostages, he's acting against a Dornish threat he believes is already there -- but only if the Dornish are aware that he's disinherited the Dornish-smelling claimants.

So yes, we shouldn't assume that this change in the inheritance had been widely disseminated, but it makes sense that it would be. Of course with Aerys being mad he might not have been acting sensibly, but it's still reasonable to say this is the more likely option.

[RumHam]

If GRRM is going to do the retconn, let's have it. No one else has the authority to retconn, or suggest a retconn. Until such time as some suggestion appears in the series, it did not happen. Suggesting that it did happen is an error. Insisting that someone in world knew about it is unsupported. Unsupported suggestions can be ignored without support.

I don't think it rises to the level of a retcon, because nowhere was it established that Aegon was Prince of Dragonstone and heir to the Iron Throne. But if it is a retcon, then Martin did do it. I don't wanna revive the whole argument over the canonicity of the worldbook again, but all the info comes from Martin. So if it is a retcon, it's Martin's retcon. The idea that "it's not the main series so it doesn't count" is a ridiculous crutch for your argument.

[MtnLion]

After first considering Viserys...

But the larger point is that we don't need this to be mentioned previously for it to be true. If Martin wakes up tomorrow and decides Aerys II had nipple rings and a neck tattoo, then Aerys II had nipple rings and a neck tattoo. It doesn't matter that it never came up before.

Your are wrong to think that it hasn't had an opportunity to be exposed before. Immediately after killing Aerys Jaime's thoughts about the heir expose that he is unaware of any changes. No one is better placed to know what Aerys did or did not do in that last month or so.

[RumHam]

Your are wrong to think that it hasn't had an opportunity to be exposed before. Immediately after killing Aerys Jaime's thoughts about the heir expose that he is unaware of any changes. No one is better placed to know what Aerys did or did not do in that last month or so.

Where did I say there wasn't an opportunity for it to come up? There were opportunities, it just never did. Jaime's thoughts after killing Aerys do not include anything like "Well Aegon is the heir." He thinks of Viserys first, then Aegon. I'm not sure how you interpret this as "absolute proof" that Jaime felt Aegon was still the heir to the throne:

“Shall I proclaim a new king as well?” Crakehall asked, and Jaime read the question plain: Shall it be your father, or Robert Baratheon, or do you mean to try to make a new dragonking? He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar’s infant son Aegon, still in Maegor’s with his mother. A new Targaryen king, and my father as Hand. How the wolves will howl, and the storm lord choke with rage. For a moment he was tempted, until he glanced down again at the body on the floor, in its spreading pool of blood. His blood is in both of them, he thought. “Proclaim who you bloody well like,”

[Alia of the knife]

One thing that has always bothered me was the situation with Aerys, Elia and Dorne, is that I've always thought that it was unusual that Aerys would specifically use Elia and her children, (another turn of phrase I find unusual), to hold Dorne hostage, but not Rhaegar.