Floki of the Ironborn Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 When Baelor's son stands vigil over his father's body, and Dunk approaches him to offer his sympathies, Valarr remarks on how young his father was and how he would have been the greatest King since Aegon I. And while I won't pretend that a grieving son is the best judge of someone's whole character, we don't get any evidence to suggest Valarr was exaggerating. Baelor Breakspear was pretty much a perfect King in all but name. Great warrior, great Hand of the King, and a noble character. The worst things anyone could say about him was that he wasn't above fighting against his family members if he was convinced that they were in the wrong, and that he looked too Dornish. Neither of which are actually flaws. Now this brings me to Valarr's lament again. He wonders aloud why the gods would spare Duncan and kill Baelor. Assuming that the gods do exist, I'm inclined to agree with Valarr. Why WOULD they have Baelor killed? Every Targaryen King that came after Daeron the Good was either mediocre, a failure, or insane. Instead, we could have had Baelor be King, and his son follow him. But no, Baelor's entire line seems to be cursed with stillborn infants and early deaths. Did GRRM intend for this to be an example of cruel chance or is something truly sinister at work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelittledragonthatcould Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Because the Gods are Cruel and watching peace must be pretty boring. They like to spice things up.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwaywolf123 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I think bloodraven cursed Baelor's line, becouse he wanted egg to be king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelittledragonthatcould Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, norwaywolf123 said: I think bloodraven cursed Baelor's line, becouse he wanted egg to be king. That would require not only curing Baelor's line, but Rhaegal and Aerys lines as well as Egg's older brothers and Maekar as well since he was quite young when he had Egg. That seems a bit extreme and maybe a little out of Bloodraven's influence. Too make so many people die just to crown Egg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 28 minutes ago, norwaywolf123 said: I think bloodraven cursed Baelor's line, becouse he wanted egg to be king. How? I mean seriously how could he knew that Egg would had be the King after Breakspear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Fossoway Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 45 minutes ago, King Floki of the Ironborn said: The worst things anyone could say about him was that he wasn't above fighting against his family members if he was convinced that they were in the wrong If I understand this correctly, you mean Baelor didn't stand against his family members if he was convinced they were wrong. Well he took Duncan's side on the trial of seven against his very nephew, thus risking his own life, which ultimately got him killed. That was a stupid, melodramatic and unnecessary move. He could have sent a trusted knight of his to act in his name. Anything could have done, he was Hand after all. Take all Baelor's good deeds, noble character, whatever you want, but that final move of entering a life-risk event, CONSIDERING everything else (besides, most of his other relatives and would-be heir apparents were really not up to the job - a wise dude could have safeguard the crown -himself- succesion instead of just go carelessly jumping on other people's personal problems and die) just bash the good and bring me the alias of Baelor the Fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good Guy Garlan Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 The Seven work in mysterious ways, my son. Maybe Baelor wouldn't have fared well in the Third Blackfyre Rebellion, while Dunk pretty much saved the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redtree Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 50 minutes ago, King Merrett I Frey said: Take all Baelor's good deeds, noble character, whatever you want, but that final move of entering a life-risk event, CONSIDERING everything else (besides, most of his other relatives and would-be heir apparents were really not up to the job - a wise dude could have safeguard the crown -himself- succesion instead of just go carelessly jumping on other people's personal problems and die) just bash the good and bring me the alias of Baelor the Fool. It's 7 against 7 not a fight til death, Baelor was no fool. He thought no KGs in Maekar's side would hurt him let alone give a grave injury and they didn't. but Maekar did. It must've been a ridiculously hard blow that his scalp was broken and fell off. No wonder people say Maekar loved his brother til death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biter the Gallant Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 48 minutes ago, King Merrett I Frey said: If I understand this correctly, you mean Baelor didn't stand against his family members if he was convinced they were wrong. Well he took Duncan's side on the trial of seven against his very nephew, thus risking his own life, which ultimately got him killed. That was a stupid, melodramatic and unnecessary move. He could have sent a trusted knight of his to act in his name. Anything could have done, he was Hand after all. Take all Baelor's good deeds, noble character, whatever you want, but that final move of entering a life-risk event, CONSIDERING everything else (besides, most of his other relatives and would-be heir apparents were really not up to the job - a wise dude could have safeguard the crown -himself- succesion instead of just go carelessly jumping on other people's personal problems and die) just bash the good and bring me the alias of Baelor the Fool. But he had to go personally, because only a royal prince could defeat the three Kingsguard members without real fighting. Sending a substitute instead of himself would not have the same effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 49 minutes ago, King Merrett I Frey said: If I understand this correctly, you mean Baelor didn't stand against his family members if he was convinced they were wrong. Well he took Duncan's side on the trial of seven against his very nephew, thus risking his own life, which ultimately got him killed. That was a stupid, melodramatic and unnecessary move. He could have sent a trusted knight of his to act in his name. Anything could have done, he was Hand after all. Not the same. Baelor the Crown Prince could engage three knights of the Kingsguard and pound them at his heart's content, and they couldn't do anything beyond dodging and maybe holding their shields. Against Ser Whatshisname the Brave, they'd be free to process him into mincemeat. Was it necessary? Objectively, not. But he protected the rights, few as there were, of the smallest man against the abuse of power from the high and the mighty, even if they happened to be his family. I can only applaud that. And a man who could think "well, it's not important enough", would not make that great a king after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floki of the Ironborn Posted February 27, 2016 Author Share Posted February 27, 2016 37 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said: The Seven work in mysterious ways, my son. Maybe Baelor wouldn't have fared well in the Third Blackfyre Rebellion, while Dunk pretty much saved the day. He did a pretty good job against the First Blackfyre Rebellion, and that was the one that came closest to actually succeeding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veloknight Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 29 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said: Not the same. Baelor the Crown Prince could engage three knights of the Kingsguard and pound them at his heart's content, and they couldn't do anything beyond dodging and maybe holding their shields. Against Ser Whatshisname the Brave, they'd be free to process him into mincemeat. Was it necessary? Objectively, not. But he protected the rights, few as there were, of the smallest man against the abuse of power from the high and the mighty, even if they happened to be his family. I can only applaud that. And a man who could think "well, it's not important enough", would not make that great a king after all. And let's keep in mind this was in a time when the Kingsguard were probably a lot better than the incompetents we see around 300 AC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aryagonnakill#2 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 If events didn't happen exactly the way they did, Danaerys may not have ever hatched her dragons, and those dragons may well save the world from the WW's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Fossoway Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 58 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said: Not the same. Baelor the Crown Prince could engage three knights of the Kingsguard and pound them at his heart's content Was it necessary? Objectively, not. But he protected the rights, few as there were, of the smallest man against the abuse of power from the high and the mighty, even if they happened to be his family. I can only applaud that. And a man who could think "well, it's not important enough", would not make that great a king after all. He was still risking his life, in a time where you had a rogue Targ (Egg) a drunkard (Daeron) a guy with anger issues (Maekar)... Aerion... all living next to each other. HE was keeping order and balance. He made the huge mistake of exposing himself to a fight to death. I repeat myself, a Crown Prince should know better. Rhaegar didn't and shit blew up. Still Baelor the Fool for me. 58 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said: Not the same. Baelor the Crown Prince could engage three knights of the Kingsguard and pound them at his heart's content, and they couldn't do anything beyond dodging and maybe holding their shields. Against Ser Whatshisname the Brave, they'd be free to process him into mincemeat. Was it necessary? Objectively, not. But he protected the rights, few as there were, of the smallest man against the abuse of power from the high and the mighty, even if they happened to be his family. I can only applaud that. And a man who could think "well, it's not important enough", would not make that great a king after all. You aware that the KG chose not to engage him? They only defended themselves. He was the Crown Prince after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floki of the Ironborn Posted February 27, 2016 Author Share Posted February 27, 2016 1 minute ago, aryagonnakill#2 said: If events didn't happen exactly the way they did, Danaerys may not have ever hatched her dragons, and those dragons may well save the world from the WW's. OR, maybe Egg succeeds in hatching the dragons at Summerhall! Prove that it wouldn't have a chance of happening with Baelor as king! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aryagonnakill#2 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Just now, King Floki of the Ironborn said: OR, maybe Egg succeeds in hatching the dragons at Summerhall! Prove that it wouldn't have a chance of happening with Baelor as king! Well obviously I cannot prove that it wouldn't have happened, that's not possible even if we knew everything. But consider the butterfly effect, and the initial event was not a mere butterfly flapping its wings, but rather the heir to the Iron Throne dying. However, based on everything we do know, it seems likely that a sacrifice was always going to be needed, and that no wildfire was necessary. So I don't see any reason to suspect that Summerhall would have ever worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Steller Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 3 minutes ago, aryagonnakill#2 said: Well obviously I cannot prove that it wouldn't have happened, that's not possible even if we knew everything. But consider the butterfly effect, and the initial event was not a mere butterfly flapping its wings, but rather the heir to the Iron Throne dying. However, based on everything we do know, it seems likely that a sacrifice was always going to be needed, and that no wildfire was necessary. So I don't see any reason to suspect that Summerhall would have ever worked. We don't know the details of what really happened at Summerhall. And frankly, by the logic of needing a sacrifice, the fact that so many people died in that disaster should have been plenty of valuable sacrifice as it was. I mean we had a King, a King's son, the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, and who knows how many others who died in that blaze. The dragons should still have woken up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aryagonnakill#2 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Just now, James Steller said: We don't know the details of what really happened at Summerhall. And frankly, by the logic of needing a sacrifice, the fact that so many people died in that disaster should have been plenty of valuable sacrifice as it was. I mean we had a King, a King's son, the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, and who knows how many others who died in that blaze. The dragons should still have woken up. An accident is no sacrifice in my book, it has to mean something. Danaerys sacrificed everything she had, Jorah couldn't beat all 3 of her future bloodriders in a fight, she had no future without Drago, and she sacrificed her son for Drago just before that. It also seems unlikely that death by sand would count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Fossoway Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Whoa, long jump from the Breakspear to Dany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 3 hours ago, norwaywolf123 said: I think bloodraven cursed Baelor's line, becouse he wanted egg to be king. Bloodraven only became green seer after he left the wall. He did not know the future over that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.