CJ McLannister Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 The problem with that is why didn't Varys just tell Eddard that Petyr was behind it? He wanted to see if Ned could figure it out himself. Varys also knew about the twincest and how Jon and Stannis had figured it out, but he didn't volunteer that information. He's kind of an asshole that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Weirgaryen Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 You might hand it to him that he does not mouth things that would cost his head... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSumm Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 He wanted to see if Ned could figure it out himself. Varys also knew about the twincest and how Jon and Stannis had figured it out, but he didn't volunteer that information. He's kind of an asshole that way. Plus, having just read the Arya chapter in which she overhears Varys and Illyrio, it seems Varys task is to delay the coming war between Stark and Lannister. Perhaps he thought Eddard wasn't doing so well, and 'armed' him with a few choice facts about the situation just to keep him in the game a while longer. As to the Littlefinger being involved question, Varys mentions to Illyrio "Littlefinger.......the Gods only know what game Littlefinger is playing." So, at least as much as Illrio and Varys are aligned, Littlefinger isn't part of their plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 LF does, imo, not seem to fit the first half of Varys' description... and he certainly does not fit the second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 LF does, imo, not seem to fit the first half of Varys' description... and he certainly does not fit the second.For what it's worth, I agree with this. If y'all wanna go way more in depth, I started this thread a while back and got some interesting ideas, especially from Lady G...http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/104810-varys-the-ned-lf-too-um-and-cersei/ A lot of good ideas pop up throughout the thread, and I'd like to discuss any additional input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1000th Lord Commander Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Random Question How do they pay the whores in Moles Town? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Random Question How do they pay the whores in Moles Town? http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1081 I assume that the Night's Watch does not pay the Black Brothers any wages in coin for their service - they get their provisions for free, after all. What I was wondering...how do the Brothers pay the whores in Moletown? Since they're not using coin, do they pay in naturalia filched from Night Watch' stores? I guess some women so far north would choose such a life (given that life is relatively harsher than farther south), even if they are not paid in coin... A lot of the Mole's Town transactions are paid by barter, certaintly, but there is coin at the Wall... not much, though, especially these days... (see following answer). Some coin comes north with the highborn brothers... someone like Ser Waymar Royce undoubtedly arrived well heeled, and I imagine families send gifts and such as well... and there's trade that goes in and out of Eastwatch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy Darwin Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 So this one has been nagging at me for a long time now. Why is Maegor "officially" considered a King? Why is he considered in the line of Targaryen Kings, and not Prince Aegon? He was undeniably usurping his nephew's throne, and considering how great and beloved a king he was, I don't understand why there wasn't more of a try to write him off the past Targaryen rulers. Yes, he did effectively rule. But then, so did Rhaenyra; she even sat the Iron Throne. Yet in the line of Targ rulers, we consider Aegon II to have become King right after Viserys, and Rhaenyra doesn't get a number. After the French Revolution, while the rulers were republicans, the royalists still considered Louis XVII, Louis XVI's son, to be King. He lived in horrible conditions as a prisoner to the republicans, until he died at the age of 10 (though some would have you believe there was a bit of an Aegon swap, but never mind that). He was never crowned, nor did he rule for a day. Yet when his uncle took the throne back, he was crowned as Louis XVIII, and if you asked the royalists by then, the republicans never had any legitimacy, and young Louis XVII was King in between his father and his uncle. Now, we know Prince Aegon laid claim to the throne, and people fought for him. Ultimately, Jaeherys' claim also had a lot to do with Maegor's demise. So why not, once the twat is dead, rewrite history a bit, and pretend Prince Aegon became King Aegon the Second of his name upon Aenys' death? Which he should have been, anyway? It would have made tons of sense. I guess it is because he was never crowned, but then my question becomes, why the hell not? When lords took up arms against Maegor, it was pretty obvious the only ways this could end was either with Aegon on the throne, or all of the rebels dead. (In fact, the way I read Yandel's words, it feels like Jaeherys was also only crowned after Maegor's death - why? He had the better claim, and again, it was fucking on at that point anyway) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Criston of House Shapper Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 So this one has been nagging at me for a long time now. Why is Maekar "officially" considered a King? Why is he considered in the line of Targaryen Kings, and not Prince Aegon? He was undeniably usurping his nephew's throne, and considering how great and beloved a king he was, I don't understand why there wasn't more of a try to write him off the past Targaryen rulers. Yes, he did effectively rule. But then, so did Rhaenyra; she even sat the Iron Throne. Yet in the line of Targ rulers, we consider Aegon II to have become King right after Viserys, and Rhaenyra doesn't get a number. After the French Revolution, while the rulers were republicans, the royalists still considered Louis XVII, Louis XVI's son, to be King. He lived in horrible conditions as a prisoner to the republicans, until he died at the age of 10 (though some would have you believe there was a bit of an Aegon swap, but never mind that). He was never crowned, nor did he rule for a day. Yet when his uncle took the throne back, he was crowned as Louis XVIII, and if you asked the royalists by then, the republicans never had any legitimacy, and young Louis XVII was King in between his father and his uncle. Now, we know Prince Aegon laid claim to the throne, and people fought for him. Ultimately, Jaeherys' claim had a lot to do with Maekar's demise. So why not, once the twat is dead, rewrite history a bit, and pretend Prince Aegon became King Aegon the Second of his name upon Aenys' death? Which he should have been, anyway? It would have made tons of sense. I guess it is because he was never crowned, but then my question becomes, why the hell not? When lords took up arms against Maekar, it was pretty obvious the only ways this could end was either with Aegon on the throne, or all of the rebels dead. (In fact, the way I read Yandel's words, it feels like Jaeherys was also only crowned after Maekar's death - why? He had the better claim, and again, it was fucking on at that point anyway) You mean Maegor, not Maekar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy Darwin Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Duh, of course. Sorry, my brain wasn't fully awake yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Maegor I was crowned, sat the Iron Throne, and lords of the realm paid him homage. No subsequent king ordered that his name be struck from the official record as was ordered against Rhaenyra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan slayer of hot pies Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 do you think we will ever learn what happened to bloodraven to give him the greensight? bran fell (pushed) from the tower. Jojen had the the grey fever. But what happend to Bloodraven? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 do you think we will ever learn what happened to bloodraven to give him the greensight? bran fell (pushed) from the tower. Jojen had the the grey fever. But what happend to Bloodraven?Dude was born with red eyes, right? "In a sense. Those you call the children of the forest have eyes as golden as the sun, but once in a great while one is born amongst them with eyes as red as blood, or green as the moss on a tree in the heart of the forest. By these signs do the gods mark those they have chosen to receive the gift. The chosen ones are not robust, and their quick years upon the earth are few, for every song must have its balance. But once inside the wood they linger long indeed. A thousand eyes, a hundred skins, wisdom deep as the roots of ancient trees. Greenseers. "Bran III, Dance 34 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan slayer of hot pies Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Dude was born with red eyes, right? Bran III, Dance 34 i thought that was only for the singers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSumm Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Reading Sansa's chapter at the Tourney of the Hand, we get this description of Ser Hugh's death that screams of foreshadowing / symbolism to me, but I couldn't find any threads on it: Varys later posits that Ser Hugh could have been the one to poison Jon Arryn, and I believe Pycelle mentions that he agrees. What I find odd is that it makes perfect sense if what we are lead to believe up until that point, that Jamie and Cersei are responsible, turns out to be true. Which of course it doesn't. A 'red handed' knight, made so by the sun (Jaime's face is often described as a sun) which then hides from view, leading to the blood stained moons that appear in the Arryn sigil. Ser Gregor of course, a Lannister man through and through. Unless GRRM changed his mind as to the perpetrator of Arryn's murder? Are there examples of foreshadowing Littlefinger & Lysa's involvement in aGoT? Kinda spread this out between two threads now, but just to answer my own question... "Leave us," she told them. "I wish to speak to my sister alone." She held Catelyn's hand as they withdrew ... ... and dropped it the instant the door closed. Catelyn's saw her face change. It was as if the sun had gone behind a cloud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aryagonnakill#2 Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Only 1 red eye too, not sure what color the other eye was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 i thought that was only for the singers Could be. Maybe it was when Aegor put out Brynden's eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy Darwin Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Maegor I was crowned, sat the Iron Throne, and lords of the realm paid him homage. No subsequent king ordered that his name be struck from the official record as was ordered against Rhaenyra. Okay, but why not? How was it not the first thing Jaeherys did upon ascending to the throne? Even with regards to the smallfolk and the Faith, such a decree would help position him as a different kind of king, which makes perfect political sense, doesn't it? Also, why does it seem neither him nor his elder brother were crowned when they took arms against Maegor? ETA: Hell, when you think of it, leaving things as they were and still are - that is, accepting Maegor as the third Targaryen King and giving him full legitimacy - sets a very dangerous precedent. Jaeherys is basically telling any descendant of his "hey, never mind the order of succession, if you got the biggest dragon, grab the throne before the real heir, it's cool, you'll keep your number and all". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Okay, but why not? How was it not the first thing Jaeherys did upon ascending to the throne? Even with regards to the smallfolk and the Faith, such a decree would help position him as a different kind of king, which makes perfect political sense, doesn't it? Also, why does it seem neither him nor his elder brother were crowned when they took arms against Maegor? ETA: Hell, when you think of it, leaving things as they were and still are - that is, accepting Maegor as the third Targaryen King and giving him full legitimacy - sets a very dangerous precedent. Jaeherys is basically telling any descendant of his "hey, never mind the order of succession, if you got the biggest dragon, grab the throne before the real heir, it's cool, you'll keep your number and all".But Jaehaerys was Maegor's heir since Maegor left no issue himself and Jaehaerys was Maegor's oldest nephew. And Maegor ruled for a significant amount of time. By contrast Rhaenyra ruled for a very short period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSumm Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 And Maegor ruled for a significant amount of time. By contrast Rhaenyra ruled for a very short period. Yea, I assume there can't really be any gaps so if you did declare it void, it'd technically become part of your reign. And it sounded like a sucky period to be putting on your CV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.