Jump to content
Rhaenys_Targaryen

Small Questions v. 10105

Recommended Posts

On 9/12/2018 at 3:01 PM, Ser Rhoddry of The Hill said:

Hello.

I've been a lurker on and off for years. Well I got a few question now. I read that Simon Vance will be narrating Fire and Blood. I generally don't listen to Audiobooks so I wonder if he's any good compared to Ser Roy Dotrice? I tried to listen to The Hedge Knight but the narrator had a terrible American accent. Does SV "act" when he reads like Ser Roy? SV reading Fire and Blood does this indicate that he will take up the microphone left by Ser Roy? 

 

Definitely a big fan of Simon Vance. When I saw he was going to be narrating Fire & Blood, I was relieved due to the big shoes left by Roy Dotrice. It will inevitably be strange to hear other voices for some of the characters of which I have grown accustomed to hearing Dotrice's version, but Vance is definitely one of the best out there.

I really enjoy his versions of James Maxwell's fantasy novels as an option to hear his style in fantasy, Evermen or Shifting Tides. Both are good enough to listen to. The narrator usually makes or breaks audiobooks for me. Some great books, I cannot listen to because I hated the narrator, and other mediocre books, I have enjoyed listening to because the narrator was great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now a small question:

Quote

 Catelyn V - aSoS

"If you make Jon legitimate, there is no way to turn him bastard again. Should he wed and breed, any sons you may have by Jeyne will never be safe."

Does this quote and really this whole scene where Catelyn questions Robb's plan to legitimize Jon and name him his heir suggest that Catelyn believes Jon to be older?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Valyrian Lance said:

Now a small question:

Does this quote and really this whole scene where Catelyn questions Robb's plan to legitimize Jon and name him his heir suggest that Catelyn believes Jon to be older?

No. As far as Catelyn knows (and we know, at the moment), Jon was conceived after Robb, and so The danger in legitimizing Jon (in Catelyn's mind) is that it gives Jon a claim to Winterfell. Should Robb die while only having an infant child, or a child below the age of majority, Jon (or his own children) could 'take' Winterfell from Robb's child, due to the legitimate claim. Even if Robb's child would be old enough to rule in his or her own right, any legitimate family member can make a claim, and if there is support enough for Jon (or a child of his), Robb's child could be disposed of Winterfell.

Catelyn's fear not just about what Jon might do, but also about what Jon's potential children might do.

"Yes, Aegon the Fourth legitimized all his bastards on his deathbed. And how much pain, grief, war, and murder grew from that? I know you trust Jon. But can you trust his sons? Or their sons? The Blackfyre pretenders troubled the Targaryens for five generations, until Barristan the Bold slew the last of them on the Stepstones. If you make Jon legitimate, there is no way to turn him bastard again. Should he wed and breed, any sons you may have by Jeyne will never be safe."

Even if a legitimized Jon might not fight Robb or Robb's children over Winterfell, there is no predicting what Jon's children might do. 

And even though Jon is younger than Robb, Daemon Blackfyre was some seventeen years younger than Daeron II, and yet he and his descendants fought five (four) wars against House Targaryen for the throne. That Daemon was younger did not matter to his supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

No. As far as Catelyn knows (and we know, at the moment), Jon was conceived after Robb, and so The danger in legitimizing Jon (in Catelyn's mind) is that it gives Jon a claim to Winterfell. Should Robb die while only having an infant child, or a child below the age of majority, Jon (or his own children) could 'take' Winterfell from Robb's child, due to the legitimate claim. Even if Robb's child would be old enough to rule in his or her own right, any legitimate family member can make a claim, and if there is support enough for Jon (or a child of his), Robb's child could be disposed of Winterfell.

Catelyn's fear not just about what Jon might do, but also about what Jon's potential children might do.

"Yes, Aegon the Fourth legitimized all his bastards on his deathbed. And how much pain, grief, war, and murder grew from that? I know you trust Jon. But can you trust his sons? Or their sons? The Blackfyre pretenders troubled the Targaryens for five generations, until Barristan the Bold slew the last of them on the Stepstones. If you make Jon legitimate, there is no way to turn him bastard again. Should he wed and breed, any sons you may have by Jeyne will never be safe."

Even if a legitimized Jon might not fight Robb or Robb's children over Winterfell, there is no predicting what Jon's children might do. 

And even though Jon is younger than Robb, Daemon Blackfyre was some seventeen years younger than Daeron II, and yet he and his descendants fought five (four) wars against House Targaryen for the throne. That Daemon was younger did not matter to his supporters.

I want to preface this by saying I agree, and I don't think Catelyn believed Jon to be older or that that thought is actually what was going through her mind. But isn't there the same possibility with any younger brother?

The Blackfyres are a good example of it, but they had a reason to think Daemon was the heir that was meant to be as he was given Blackfyre. Jon and his sons wouldn't even have that to stand on however hollow that might have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Valyrian Lance said:

I want to preface this by saying I agree, and I don't think Catelyn believed Jon to be older or that that thought is actually what was going through her mind. But isn't there the same possibility with any younger brother?

The Blackfyres are a good example of it, but they had a reason to think Daemon was the heir that was meant to be as he was given Blackfyre. Jon and his sons wouldn't even have that to stand on however hollow that might have been.

It is, certainly. However, in most families* siblings are rather loyal to each other. And this is also where the prejudice against bastards comes in. They are said to be "wanton and treacherous by nature". Not to be trusted. And, by extent, neither are their children.

 

The Frey's are a good examples of instances where this is not the case:

Lothar was a very amusing fellow to get drunk with, but Merrett would never be so foolish as to turn his back on him. In the Twins, you learned early that only full blood siblings could be trusted, and them not very far. (ASOS,, Epilogue)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catelyn makes it clear that she dislikes and distrusts Jon. While the risk of he or his progeny trying to stake their claim on Winterfell is valid, I think it is more down to her personal paranoia about Jon than anything else, even more so than mere prejudice against bastardy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a few questions, things that have been on my mind a while.

1. How do house names carry in Dorne? With Dornish law, the firstborn child is the heir, regardless of gender. But if the heir is female, which name do the children take? I would imagine that, for the Martell house to keep its name and seat for so long, the heirs would need to take the mother's name if she was the Martell? But alternatively, what happens when two heirs to different houses marry? Inheritance looks to get very messy then. Which child gets becomes lord/lady of which parent's house?

 

2. Can a lord willingly give up his claim to his seat, and allow his heirs to take over? I know that you can join the Knight's Watch, but what if a lord decided that ruling wasn't for him, and just wanted to run off to Braavos and allow his son to rule in his place? Would that be allowed?

 

3. All of Aegon IV's great bastards were legitimized, right? So why did only one of them take a last name different from their bastard name?

Edited by Robb St0rk
Found answer to question in another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aerion was sent to Essos in 209 AC and could have stayed there till 219 AC the latest, when he took part in the Third Blackfyre Rebellion.

Rodrik was the youngest child of Beron, who was born around 178 AC. So while it is not impossible, I do not think so.

 

Edited by The Wondering Wolf
Wrong year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Robb St0rk said:

I have a few questions, things that have been on my mind a while.

1. How do house names carry in Dorne? With Dornish law, the firstborn child is the heir, regardless of gender. But if the heir is female, which name do the children take? I would imagine that, for the Martell house to keep its name and seat for so long, the heirs would need to take the mother's name if she was the Martell? But alternatively, what happens when two heirs to different houses marry? Inheritance looks to get very messy then. Which child gets becomes lord/lady of which parent's house?

 

2. Can a lord willingly give up his claim to his seat, and allow his heirs to take over? I know that you can join the Knight's Watch, but what if a lord decided that ruling wasn't for him, and just wanted to run off to Braavos and allow his son to rule in his place? Would that be allowed?

 

3. All of Aegon IV's great bastards were legitimized, right? So why did only one of them take a last name different from their bastard name?

1. They pass on their names. Doran and Oberyn's mother ruled Dorne in her own right, and despite the fact that she had been married at some point, she passed on her name to her children. We also see it with Lady Larra Blackmont, who rules Blackmont. Her children have her last name, and her eldest child, a daughter, is set to inherit Blackmont after her.

2. Regarding inheritance (and thus, giving up your claim), Martin has said the following:

The short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modelled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations, and often contradictory

A Lord can, if he really wants to, name one of his younger children as his heir (if we can believe Walder Frey, who threatens to do so with nobody disputing that it was possible). And with Samwell Tarly, we see how Lord Randyll forced his son to give up his claim.  But even he felt it was only safe to do so by having Samwell take vows that would 1) prevent him from ever pressing his claim anyway, and 2) prevent Samwell from fathering heirs who could possibly stake their claim over his lands.

In the case of a lord, the closest thing I can think of is Lancel Lannister renouncing his claim to his seat, Darry. Lancel did not have any children of his own, and the idea was put forward to marry his younger brother to his wife (who he was renouncing as well) instead, so still to claim Darry. We also have the somewhat related example of Arianne Martell's plan for taking over Dorne. She wishes to take her seat prior to Doran's death, and let Doran live out his life in the Water Gardens. But neither come close to what you ask about.

Talking about your specific examples, if a lord leaves his seat long enough, leaving his heirs to rule in his stead during his absence, his heirs might just as well consolidate their own power and eventually take over, if they know their lord is not coming back. Running off across the narrow sea can be seen as self chosen exile, for example, so another possibility is having the heir petition to his/her overlord or king to officially inherit the seat. 

3.They were, but their last name has nothing to do with that :) Daemon Blackfyre did not take a new name because he was legitimized. When he was legitimized, he had already been called Blackfyre for two years.

Such surnames as Waters, Snow, Rivers etc indicate their bastard ancestry. The names holds a stigma, a "taint", but nonetheless, according to Martin most legitimized bastards decide to keep their bastard surname. Due to the taint that accompanies the name, their descendants might change the surname (for example, House Longwaters). 

So while the legitimized children of Aegon IV could have changed their surnames if they had wanted to, they decided not to. We can only speculate as to why.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

To those who loved putting dates to things, I was wondering about the odds that Aerion Brightflame and Rodrik Stark having crossed paths during their time as members of the Second Sons. Possible or impossible? 

 

1 hour ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Aerion was sent to Essos in 217 AC and could have stayed there till 219 AC the latest, when he took part in the Third Blackfyre Rebellion.

Rodrik was the youngest child of Beron, who was born around 178 AC. So while it is not impossible, I do not think so.

 

Small correction: Aerion was sent to Essos in 209 AC, after the tourney at Ashford. We don't know how long he was gone or when he returned, but he was back in Westeros to fight in the third Blackfyre Reblelionin 219 AC>

Also, we don't know when Rodrik was born, or when he died. Rodrik was the seventh child of Lord Beron, who was the second child of Lord Brandon, who was fifth child of Lord Cregan by his third wife. We don't know when Cregan married his third wife, but we do know that he married his second wife after the Dance of the Dragons ended in 131 AC. How long they might have waited to get married, we do not know.

Regardless, we know that Cregan and his second wife had four children, and that they could not have gotten married before the second half of 131 AC (as the war lasted half of 131 AC), so, even if he had gotten married to his second wife within the weeks after wars end, his youngest child by her could not have been born before 135 AC. In the most "generous" scenario, Cregan's second wife (Aly Blackwood) died that year and he immediately remarried (to Lynara Stark), who immediately became pregnant and gave birth at the end of that same year (135 AC). Brandon, the fifth child, could thus not have been born earlier than 140 AC, and Brandon's second child (assuming an age of 13 at the least for fathering a first child) in 154 AC (Beron). Subsequently, Beron's seventh child could not possibly have been born earlier than 19 years later, in 173 AC.

We also know, about Beron, that he was dying around 211 AC, placing Rodrik's birth no later than that.  However, these are minimums and maximums, so every year in between these two values (173 AC and 211 AC) is possible.

By counting back from the current generation of Starks, it might be possible to shorten the window a bit, but at the moment I do not have the time to take a look :) Or I am currently not thinking of something, @The Wondering Wolf? (Doing this count from the top of my head, with limited time).

 

So yes, it would certainly have been possible. But how likely it is, I cannot say. Aerion was rather young when he was temporarily exiled, and if we assume he served with the company during his exile, there are only a few years possible for that to have happened. Without knowing more about Rodrik (when he was born, when he went to Essos, when he returned), we cannot possibly say anything more.

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Small correction: Aerion was sent to Essos in 209 AC, after the tourney at Ashford. We don't know how long he was gone or when he returned, but he was back in Westeros to fight in the third Blackfyre Reblelionin 219 AC>

Of course, a typo. I am editing it.

GRRM said that Lord Beron was in his thirties when he was dying. I placed the She-Wolves in 213 AC, so Beron would have been born between 173 and 183 AC (or around 178 AC).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Of course, a typo. I am editing it.

GRRM said that Lord Beron was in his thirties when he was dying. I placed the She-Wolves in 213 AC, so Beron would have been born between 173 and 183 AC (or around 178 AC).

As yes, he was "thirty-something". I had forgotten. Do we have any hints as to when She-Wolves will take place? I know it won't take place many years after TMK, but do we have any way of establishing a limit?

Beron was gathering swords t o fight Dagon in 211 AC (TMK) and was injured fighting Dagon as per TMK ("") and this report. All we know further is that by 226 AC, Lord Willam Stark ruled the north, but logic tells us that Beron died years before that, of course :) Willam inherited Winterfell from his brother Donnor, who inherited his rule from Beron, but we do not know how long Donnor ruled.

Aegon v got married in 220 AC, so we might take that as a maximum? Is there anything else?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the WoIaF forum will be the space for books about the world -- LoIaF, TWoIaF, F&B, and whatever else ever turns up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rhaenys_Targaryen @The Wondering Wolf

The Blood of Dragons MUSH has

- Aly's death in 146 AC

- Lynara's birth in 131 AC

- Cregan/Lynara's first child Jonnel's birth in 150 AC

- Cregan/Lynara's last son Brandon's birth in 160 AC

Rodwell and Beron being born around 178-182 AC would be consistent with Beron being in his 30s around TMK.

Willam could be born around 197-202 AC, but Rodrik would seem likely to be a very young child around the time of Beron's death.

Even if the MUSH turns out to be off some on the date for Brandon, it seems unlikely to be too far off, considering Brandon's birth in 262 AC, Rickard being an only child, Edwyle being the eldest child, Willam being the second eldest and deceased by 226 AC.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2018 at 11:28 AM, Alexis-something-Rose said:

To those who loved putting dates to things, I was wondering about the odds that Aerion Brightflame and Rodrik Stark having crossed paths during their time as members of the Second Sons. Possible or impossible? 

I think it seems unlikely.

The Blood of Dragons MUSH has the following dates for the Starks of the 2nd century AC:

Lord Rickon Stark (b. 88 AC - d. 121 AC)
    Lord Cregan Stark (b. 108 AC)
      m. Lynara Stark (b. 131 AC)
        [Lord] Jonnel Stark (b. 150 AC) 
        Edric Stark (b. 151 AC)
        [Lord] Barathogan Stark (b. 158 AC)
        [Lord] Brandon Stark (b. 160 AC)

According to TWOIAF, there was also a Lyanna born between the second son Edric and the third son Barth.

If the MUSH information is close to accurate, then Beron probably wouldn't have been born much earlier than 179-180 AC, and his seventh child Rodrik probably wouldn't have been born much earlier than 204 AC, in the unlikely event there was no time between the births of Beron's children.

Even if it turned out that Brandon was born closer to 154 AC, and Beron closer to 173 AC, that would still put Rodrik not much earlier than 198 AC, in the unlikely event there was no time between the births of Beron's children.

In that case, Rodrik would have been around 13 years old in 211 AC at the oldest, at the time that Dunk and Egg intended to take up service with Lord Beron, and Aerion was already in exile in Lys.

I tend to think Rodrik wasn't likely to be much older than a few or more years old at the time when Aerion was in Essos, and it isn't inconceivable that he wasn't even born until around the time of Aerion's exile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wia said:

So, to our knowledge, did the Red Comet pass the Planetos by and not hit the surface ?

As far as I’m aware it was just a red streak in the sky that came and went. No mention of it getting bigger

Share this post


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

×