Why Daenerys Dayne may not be a ridiculous idea.

[maudisdottir]

3 hours ago, Sigella said:

The fact she turned to the Starks after this dishonoring deed took place, pretty much rules out the lot of them imo.

Where are you getting that she turned to the Starks after the dishonouring took place?  According to Barristan she "looked to Stark":

Quote

If I had unhorsed Rhaegar and crowned Ashara queen of love and beauty, might she have looked to me instead of Stark?

 

Doesn't say whether it was before her "dishonouring" or after, and it also doesn't say she turned to anyone for help.  The context of what Barry is saying is that he wishes he could have been the champion who swept Ashara off her feet, then none of the bad shit would have happened.

[Sigella]

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Yet Barri knows nothing about Jon so it seems like he doesn't know many things. 

Neither does he of fAegon. Barristan having full knowledge on conspiracies is not what I'm arguing. I'm saying he surely asked questions/looked into Asharas demise due to his feelings for her. Obviously this is his conclusion on what he has heard. 

[Sigella]

40 minutes ago, maudisdottir said:

Where are you getting that she turned to the Starks after the dishonouring took place?  According to Barristan she "looked to Stark":

 

Doesn't say whether it was before her "dishonouring" or after, and it also doesn't say she turned to anyone for help.  The context of what Barry is saying is that he wishes he could have been the champion who swept Ashara off her feet, then none of the bad shit would have happened.

She wouldn't "turn to" anyone without reason, would she?

[maudisdottir]

She didn't "turn to" anyone.  She "looked to Stark" instead of Barristan (in his scenario), and he thinks if he had won the tourney he could have crowned her and avoided everything that happened after, including Ashara's downfall/demise (whatever the truth of that is).

Quote

If I had unhorsed Rhaegar and crowned Ashara queen of love and beauty, might she have looked to me instead of Stark?

It's clear to me that he's talking about romance.

[Ice Queen]

Pardon me for barging in, but...

I've just been reading the last few pages and there's something I don't understand. Why is it so important that Dany grow up in Dorne? That makes no sense. It seems to me that you're forgetting Viserys. He was next in line and it was HIS claim that mattered. Not hers. Dany was and is Plan C for Illyrio and Varys. If Aegon is the real deal, then her claim still plays second fiddle to his. 

Viserys was eight years older than Dany. If he says they wandered the Free Cities, maybe we should believe him. He definitely never said they stayed in Dorne and I see no reason why Doran Martell would want to shelter them there. Betrothing his daughter to Viserys is one thing. Having them so close to Robert and bringing down the whole might of the Seven Kingdoms on his head is quite another. 

[Sigella]

23 minutes ago, maudisdottir said:

She didn't "turn to" anyone.  She "looked to Stark" instead of Barristan (in his scenario), and he thinks if he had won the tourney he could have crowned her and avoided everything that happened after, including Ashara's downfall/demise (whatever the truth of that is).

It's clear to me that he's talking about romance.

 Fair points.

I'm not all in on it being romance, though, "looked to" as a synonym for "romanced" is not one I've ever heard. It doesn't sit right.

Admittedly it doesn't fit good with my speculation either. 

[Greywater-Watch]

5 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Oh, please, Voice, No! You are not still promoting that old nonsense. It's so full of holes and disinformation that it is embarrassing!

If one need to look at it, for historical sake as an early, not so good, attempt to build wild crackpot ideas out of nothing, then one should at least look at the rebuttal arguments in this thread. Note that all the argumentation for a faked birth at Dragonstone and against the escape to Braavos is omitted by most people in this thread who are trying to construct a way for a baby swap to work. I'd say that is good advice because it weighs the theory you link to down like a lead balloon.

I read both threads (the fDaenerys-thread and the rebuttal one). There are good arguments for both theories (the fDaenerys has several possible theories for fDaenerys true parentage in fact), as far as I can judge it.

I cannot share your harsh judgement on the fDaenerys theory, it does not seem to be a balloon made of lead to me, but floating, maybe not filled with Helium, but floating.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

2 hours ago, Sigella said:

Neither does he of fAegon. Barristan having full knowledge on conspiracies is not what I'm arguing. I'm saying he surely asked questions/looked into Asharas demise due to his feelings for her. Obviously this is his conclusion on what he has heard. 

It proves that Barri isn't a reliable source of information. First what he calls dishonoring could have been simply sex. It seems like something did happened to her at ToHH and after that she looked at a Stark, imnsho Ned.

[SFDanny]

43 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

I read both threads (the fDaenerys-thread and the rebuttal one). There are good arguments for both theories (the fDaenerys has several possible theories for fDaenerys true parentage in fact), as far as I can judge it.

I cannot share your harsh judgement on the fDaenerys theory, it does not seem to be a balloon made of lead to me, but floating, maybe not filled with Helium, but floating.

Similarly I am sorry I cannot share your view. When I see a theory that starts by lying to the reader about something as basic as the ability of Aerys and Rhaella to conceive a child, then I wonder why the theory has to base itself on falsehoods. I could go on, and on, but the post is replete with lies, distortions, and verbal sleights of hands. I've had to come to the conclusion the writer does this purposefully. I have respect for Voice and some of his views, but I have none for this type of writing. Not that he is responsible for this theory. I know it comes from his website, and I respect the need to promote a site such as this. I just wish he would promote some of the more interesting and truthful essays there. Repeating obvious lies over and over in ominous sounding terms doesn't change their nature.

[Greywater-Watch]

3 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

lying to the reader about something as basic as the ability of Aerys and Rhaella to conceive a child,

Where is he lying in that point?

[SFDanny]

2 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

Where is he lying in that point?

"Yet suddenly, in House Targaryen’s greatest hour of need Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella and she happens to successfully deliver the child who’s the girl named Daenerys Targaryen in our story? I call BS."

From my response:

"So, not counting Daenerys herself, the royal couple successfully conceive ten children before Dany. That means over the time period of the seventeen years stretching from Rhaegar's birth to Viserys's birth, Rhaella is pregnant more often than she is not. There is no problem with their ability to conceive."

It is precisely this kind of lie, delivered in the breathless style of misinformation as reveal truth, that the author uses throughout his essay.

 

[Greywater-Watch]

1 minute ago, SFDanny said:

"Yet suddenly, in House Targaryen’s greatest hour of need Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella and she happens to successfully deliver the child who’s the girl named Daenerys Targaryen in our story? I call BS."

From my response:

"So, not counting Daenerys herself, the royal couple successfully conceive ten children before Dany. That means over the time period of the seventeen years stretching from Rhaegar's birth to Viserys's birth, Rhaella is pregnant more often than she is not. There is no problem with their ability to conceive."

It is precisely this kind of lie, delivered in the breathless style of misinformation as reveal truth, that the author uses throughout his essay.

 

I understand it a bit differently. The wording "conceive" is probably not the best one. I think he means the whole process: sex - successful conception - pregnancy over 9 months - successful birth to a healthy child (should at least survive half a year or so).

That all depends on the strength/health of the man's semen as well as of the woman's health and her body preconditions (wide hips).

Now, the high number of "miscarriages" (including giving birth to unhealthy early dying children) the couple Aerys and Rhaella had is impressive.

Where is there a lie if someone points out this fact?

[SFDanny]

51 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

I understand it a bit differently. The wording "conceive" is probably not the best one.

The author starts the section with the title "Aerys and Rhaella's history of troubled conceptions and births" (my bold emphasis) and then proceeds to list many of the facts that disprove his assertion about a troubled history of conception and concludes by ignoring what the facts prove and breathlessly declares "in House Targaryen's greatest hour of need Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella..."? All as if there is any merit to this argument and that this distortion of the facts has anything thing to do with Daenerys not being Daenerys. It is manufactured evidence, distorted for the reader, and used to help try to prove something it has nothing to do with. And unfortunately, the author only getting started.

Now you and I can go over the facts, particularly the history of the viability of the couple's children and reach different conclusions. I stated in my rebuttal the following:

Quote

There may be a problem with the viability of children born to the royal couple that is out of the norm for Westeros. But how is that relevant to the idea that "Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella..." It isn't, and the core of this argument is what needs to called for its BS.

Without knowing the average number of still births or miscarriages or infant deaths among noble couples we can't say if the three surviving Targaryen children - three out of eleven - is unusual. We can make note of three factors that may be of importance in Daenerys's case.

First, the absence of Aerys during her pregnancy. If ever there was a father to make a normal pregnancy into a high-stress one, and a normal infancy into the same, it is Aerys. His paranoid delusions cannot help the odds of a child's survival.

Second, the fact this pregnancy is said to take place outside of King's Landing cannot but help the odds for a chid's survival. If there is a bigger cesspool of disease and illness in Westeros, I can't think of one.

Lastly, the absence of Grandmaester Pycelle from the birth, the pre-birth care of the mother, and the care of the infant may be critical for the child's chances. Pycelle as the prime suspect for saboteur in the Summerhall disaster (not my theory, but a long held favorite on these boards) and a great candidate for a member of the "maester's conspiracy," as well as a proven Lannister loyalist, just may not be the person a Targaryen would want to trust for their children's welfare.

But again, none of this has anything to do with calling into question Dany's identity.

[Ygrain]

Not to mention that the absence of her abusive crazy husband could have had a profound impact on Rhaella's ability to carry the child to the term.

[maudisdottir]

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

It seems like something did happened to her at ToHH and after that she looked at a Stark, imnsho Ned.

Again, that's not the timeline in the books.  It doesn't say "Ashara was dishonoured then she looked at a Stark".  Barristan is lamenting that Ashara might not have "looked to Stark" if he had crowned her, as though "look(ing) to Stark" is part of what caused her downfall.

[Ygrain]

7 minutes ago, maudisdottir said:

Again, that's not the timeline in the books.  It doesn't say "Ashara was dishonoured then she looked at a Stark".  Barristan is lamenting that Ashara might not have "looked to Stark" if he had crowned her, as though "look(ing) to Stark" is part of what caused her downfall.

That's my reading, as well - that the said looking to Stark might have been prevented, had he crowned her.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

19 minutes ago, maudisdottir said:

Again, that's not the timeline in the books.  It doesn't say "Ashara was dishonoured then she looked at a Stark".  Barristan is lamenting that Ashara might not have "looked to Stark" if he had crowned her, as though "look(ing) to Stark" is part of what caused her downfall.

My mistake. 

9 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

That's my reading, as well - that the said looking to Stark might have been prevented, had he crowned her.

So the dishonoring was after her falling for a Stark and caused by a Stark or was after her falling for a Stark and not caused by a Stark or the dishonoring was just a sexual relationship with a Stark?

[Ygrain]

5 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

So the dishonoring was after her falling for a Stark and caused by a Stark or was after her falling for a Stark and not caused by a Stark?

I think it was caused by a Stark but I may be wrong, GRRM managed to create a masterpiece of ambiguity here.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Not to mention that the absence of her abusive crazy husband could have had a profound impact on Rhaella's ability to carry the child to the term.

We absolutely think alike on this.

Quote

First, the absence of Aerys during her pregnancy. If ever there was a father to make a normal pregnancy into a high-stress one, and a normal infancy into the same, it is Aerys. His paranoid delusions cannot help the odds of a child's survival. (link)

 

[maudisdottir]

1 hour ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

My mistake. 

So the dishonoring was after her falling for a Stark and caused by a Stark or was after her falling for a Stark and not caused by a Stark or the dishonoring was just a sexual relationship with a Stark?

 

I think it's ambiguous but also rests on what is considered "dishonoured".  My personal belief is that the "dishonouring" was Ashara hooking up with Brandon (already betrothed to Catelyn) and either (a) getting caught and shamed in front of other guests (b) getting knocked up (c) being spurned by Brandon afterwards or (d) all of the above.  

Barristan thinks it was the catalyst for all of the bad stuff that went down, and could have been avoided if he had won the tourney instead of Rhaegar.  So not only is he regretting it on Ashara's behalf, but also what happened to the entire kingdom because of it (R+L and the "thousands (who) died for it").

Therefore I don't know if merely finding out that the woman he idolised had slept with another man was enough for Barristan to consider Ashara "dishonoured", particularly as the Dornish were generally less uptight about sex outside marriage.  But a man in love, especially an honourable (and celibate) knight like Barry, might have considered it as being dishonoured, especially if Ashara was heartbroken.  And it must be a pretty deep and painful regret for Barristan if, after all these years, he thinks the better path to have taken would be to go against his Kingsguard vows and declare his love for Ashara that way.

In any case, we know from other sources that Ashara was pregnant, so my money's on (b) to (d) inclusive.  Maybe throw in (a) as well because the secret got out somehow, otherwise how would Barry even know about it?

As for Brandon, he was a player so it may have merely been a one night stand.  But if he actually cared for Ashara, he still wasn't likely to do anything about it and jeopardise his betrothal to Catelyn.