Jump to content
Lord Varys

FIRE AND BLOOD Volume 1

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

Though I like Shaera I personally wouldn't mind if GRRM changed her name to Alysanne.

Oops. I forgot about Egg and Dany.

I'd be surprised if Daemon didn't name one of his daughters after his own mother given what we know of him.

Edited by The Grey Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

In that roleplaying game source book which came out ten years ago or so Rhaenyra's three sons by Lyonel Strong were mentioned. It is on the Harrenhal history section. That's where we got that. But it doesn't mean that the sons were already named, of course. But it is said they all died fighting in the Dance, so he may have had some ideas about their deaths at that time.

Ah, well, I was the source of that, so yeah, I guess he did. I can't find that version of the tree off hand, hence I couldn't remember. Still not certain they were named or not, he may have just listed that there were three sons.

Share this post


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

Ah, well, I was the source of that, so yeah, I guess he did. I can't find that version of the tree off hand, hence I couldn't remember. Still not certain they were named or not, he may have just listed that there were three sons.

It is just a rather strange and unexpected pattern change. He could have added some other names in the mix when there were non-Valyrian/Targaryen spouses (or even when there were not). A Lucas/Luke or Joffrey Strong is easily imaginable (not so sure about a Jace Strong), but the names may have stuck, hence the story about Joffrey Lonmouth, and the possible change from proper names to nicknames and the addition of proper Valyrian names for Jace and Luke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

In that roleplaying game source book which came out ten years ago or so Rhaenyra's three sons by Lyonel Strong were mentioned. It is on the Harrenhal history section. That's where we got that. But it doesn't mean that the sons were already named, of course. But it is said they all died fighting in the Dance, so he may have had some ideas about their deaths at that time.

Which book? I searched the Guardians of Order book and the Green Ronin book, but couldn't find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the campaign guide for the Green Ronin game. Check House Strong for the information.

15 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I'd be surprised if Daemon didn't name one of his daughters after his own mother given what we know of him.

Well, Daemon's children have weird names - another Aegon, sure, but why is the twin an Aemon? The Dragonknight wasn't Daemon's friend. Another Daemon, sure, why not? But Calla and Haegon are new names as far as we know. Aenys is a Targaryen royal name, so that also makes sense.

Daemon has at least one daughter more, and he may have three in total in total, but he clearly did not want to honor his mother or Daenerys by naming his first daughter.

And the Rhaenyra name is connected to Daemon Targaryen. He is 'the first Daemon' and the one Daemon Blackfyre himself was named after, and through Daena the Defiant and Aegon IV he is descended from both branches of the Targaryen family, from both sons of Rhaenyra and Daemon Targaryen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I agree.

@Ran

Can you tell us why Aeryn was removed in favor of Daenerys?

Maybe GRRM wants to have three Daeneryses and seven (king) Aegons. I've long thought seven Aegons was possible, so three Daeneryses makes perfect sense to me. Especially given how thematic that number is to her story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Maybe GRRM wants to have three Daeneryses and seven (king) Aegons. I've long thought seven Aegons was possible, so three Daeneryses makes perfect sense to me. Especially given how thematic that number is to her story.

But why would there be two more king Aegons crammed into just two more books?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bael's Bastard said:

But why would there be two more king Aegons crammed into just two more books?

Two more Aegons seems less daunting to me than a second Dance of the Dragons(/sixth Blackfyre Rebellion) plus a zombie apocalypse. Maybe he won't, though. Who knows. But the math checks out. Aegon V was the last king of that name, so you need two more to get Aegon VII. If only there were someone who was set up to crown himself Aegon VI and then die in a civil war. Hmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

The Targ names don't make much sense quite a bit.

More than once it looks like GRRM just randomly comes up with new names to use.

For example, why would Alicent allow Aegon II to name his second son Maelor? It's one letter away from Maegor!

As for Daemon: Maybe he meant for his Aegon and Aemon to be what the Unworthy and the Dragonknight failed to be. A good king (Aegon) and Kingsguard (Aemon).

Calla I have no clue why.

Haegon is a bad name in my opinion. It's one letter away from Aegon.

Btw, do you think Aelor and Aelora might have been named for Baelor Breakspear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

The Targ names don't make much sense quite a bit.

In some instances they do - Aenys seems to be named after both his father and his mother (or only after his mother, he has effectively her name, minus the 'Rh-'.

Rhaena, Aegon, and Viserys seem to be named after Rhaenys, Aegon, and Visenya. Jaehaerys might be a variation of the Velaryon traditional name Jacaerys, and Alysanne seems to be a variation of Alyssa. Vaella is an unknown but could be related to Valaena (which might also be the name Laena and Laenor are derived from).

Aerea and Rhaella are unknowns, possibly traditional Targaryen names.

The names of Jaehaerys' children are not that well chosen - Aegon makes sense, Daenerys is could be an allusion to or variation of Daenys. Aemon makes little sense - if Aegon, the first son, is named after the Conqueror or Jaehaerys' brother, then it would make sense to honor the second son by naming him Viserys. Baelon is likely named after the Dragonstonian lord, but they don't have that much of a connection - Gaemon makes more sense there, considering . He could have been an Aenys. Maegelle is reminsicent of Maegor and thus odd, Daella a new name, Vaegon a new name, Viserra makes sense as a name to honor Prince Viserys, Saera is unknown, Gael, too. Aerys sounded pretty good, but Valerion is strange.

Baelon's Viserys makes sense, just as his Daemon (either after the Daemon Velaryons or the Daemion Targaryen) and Aegon. Rhaenys, too.

Rhaenyra might a variation of Rhaenys.

Alicent's Aegon makes sense, Helaena and Aemond are strange. Daeron comes out of nowhere at that point. Jaehaerys and Jaehaera look good in the first moment, but why not Jaehaerys and Alysanne? Maelor is indeed odd. Daemon's daughters make sense because we get an explanation, as do Rhaenyra's Aegon and Viserys.

Aegon III's children seem to make sense, too - Daeron after Daenaera's father, not Daeron the Darin. Baelor after his aunt Baela and Baelon, Daena after her mother, and Rhaena after her aunt, and Elaena a traditional name from before the Conquest. Viserys II's Aegon makes sense, too, but his Naerys is odd. Daeron and Daenerys make sense, although prior to the first Daenerys the second Daenerys could have been a combination of the names Daeron and Naerys, now that I think of that.

Daeron II's Baelor and Aerys make sense, Rhaegel and Maekar not so much. Aelor and Aelora could be variation of Baelor, Daenora of Daenerys. Vaella and Maegor are clear, and Duncan, Jaehaerys, and Daeron, too - Shaera and Rhaelle are somewhat odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Alicent's Aegon makes sense, Helaena and Aemond are strange. Daeron comes out of nowhere at that point.

Aemond is Daemon with the first/last letter switched and something definitely happended between Daemon and Alicent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dead headofMaelysKinslayer said:

Aemond is Daemon with the first/last letter switched and something definitely happended between Daemon and Alicent.

Well, since they fell out if something happened it is odd that they named a son after him, and Aemon was the father of Rhaenys, the rival of King Viserys I.

Thinking about Helaena, it is actually a variation of Elaena, but still odd that they should want to name their first daughter about an obscure, pre-Conquest matriarch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Two more Aegons seems less daunting to me than a second Dance of the Dragons(/sixth Blackfyre Rebellion) plus a zombie apocalypse. Maybe he won't, though. Who knows. But the math checks out. Aegon V was the last king of that name, so you need two more to get Aegon VII. If only there were someone who was set up to crown himself Aegon VI and then die in a civil war. Hmm.

There may already have been six kings with the name Aegon if one counts Aenys' sons Aegon, who definitely was 'the rightful king' never mind what happened to him.

But George is not obsessed with the symbolism of numbers as a far as I can see, nor does he run around emphasizing the fact that some kings got official numbers and others did not.

Maron's Daenerys also turned out to be significant not just in the sense she is mentioned repeatedly in the books but also in the sense that she, and not some Martell prince, is the source for Water Gardens lesson of the Martell policy of protecting all the people. That is, most likely, one of the most important political principles in the entire series, a principle that goes beyond feudal responsibilities and duties, and the necessity to avenge your honor and name. And it was a Daenerys who came up with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Thinking about Helaena, it is actually a variation of Elaena, but still odd that they should want to name their first daughter about an obscure, pre-Conquest matriarch.

Presumably because she wasn't -- rather, it was a name that they liked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ran,

Thinking about such changes of names (Aeryn vs Daenerys) and other details, like the differences between TWOIAF and the Sons of the Dragon (and thus F&B), and the errors in TWOIAF, an official (online) errata might be worth a second consideration. :)

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the correct course would be to just do the errata on the wiki and we can link to that. Better it be there, and something we can manage. :) F&B v1 will be pretty well copyedited this time around. Weeded out a lot of minor issues and everything that needed changing from the various stories or TWoIaF has been corrected there in (i.e. folks, if there's some sort of detail not to your liking between the published Sons of the Dragon/The Rogue Prince/The Princess and the Queen/TWoIaF/etc. and the version in F&B, you'll have to live with it, because it was pointed out to George and he didn't feel it needed changing).

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the first time that Baela's marriage to Oakenfist was confirmed, right? It was only a logical supposition previously. I like the idea that her sister's marriages are only depicted until the end of Regency for Aegon III, because existence of her descendants with her second husband helped explain a lot of background prior to the Blackfire Rebellion and some other Hightower-related stuff. But still no husbands for Rhaena's daughters and/or a 3rd husband for her, which is disappointing, because without their offspring it is a mystery where the minor claimants during the Great Council of 101 could have come from. Also, The Queen Who Never Was never had a brother, which makes it even odder and less comprehensible that she wasn't married to her cousin Viserys to forestall a very foreseeble dynastic contraversy.  As to change of Aeryn to Daenerys, I guess that's to embed the fateful number 3 even deeper in Dany's background? Anyway, I don't see any particular reason why this new one would be remembered by anybody other then maesters if she died young - not even Quentyn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Presumably because she wasn't -- rather, it was a name that they liked.

That goes without saying. Any child presumably gets a name their parents liked. It is just odd that some get a story to that (Baela/Rhaena, Rhaenyra's sons, etc.) and others just names.

3 hours ago, Maia said:

This is the first time that Baela's marriage to Oakenfist was confirmed, right? It was only a logical supposition previously.

No, we have that in the TWoIaF family tree, too.

3 hours ago, Maia said:

I like the idea that her sister's marriages are only depicted until the end of Regency for Aegon III, because existence of her descendants with her second husband helped explain a lot of background prior to the Blackfire Rebellion and some other Hightower-related stuff.

Regardless whether Rhaena/Garmund are married or have already some children by the time the Regency ends, her daughters would be years away from marriage at that time. Depending when the elder daughters are born, they might be married in the last years of Aegon III's reign, but not before.

3 hours ago, Maia said:

But still no husbands for Rhaena's daughters and/or a 3rd husband for her, which is disappointing, because without their offspring it is a mystery where the minor claimants during the Great Council of 101 could have come from.

There are other ways for that - I always toyed around with the idea of bastards. Aenys I was popular with the women, so a bastard of his could have had grandchildren. And it could have been an older male line than Jaehaerys' own. Then there is the possibility of Aemon and Baelon and Vaegon having bastards, etc.

3 hours ago, Maia said:

Also, The Queen Who Never Was never had a brother, which makes it even odder and less comprehensible that she wasn't married to her cousin Viserys to forestall a very foreseeble dynastic contraversy.

The idea we always tossed around is that Rhaenys must have married before her father died - and if King Aemon I Targaryen had ruled then there wouldn't have been a struggle for succession, just as there wouldn't have been one if King Baelon I had ruled. Rhaenys (or any son he and Jocelyn may have had later) would have been been the unquestioned heir, just as Viserys would have been King Baelon's heir.

And if one looks at the merit of the men, then Corlys Velaryon is such an impressive figure that very few men would be able to keep up with him. The man is a living legend, and in on his own fields as accomplished as the Conqueror and the Old King. Aside from dynastic issues, Viserys would have little to offer Princess Rhaenys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There may already have been six kings with the name Aegon if one counts Aenys' sons Aegon, who definitely was 'the rightful king' never mind what happened to him.

Yes, that is also possible. I happen to think GRRM intends to crown Young Griff as Aegon VI, though. It would better mirror the original Dance that way, but it doesn't necessarily mean he plans to include that detail this time around. But, all things considered, it's my best guess for now that he does.

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But George is not obsessed with the symbolism of numbers as a far as I can see, nor does he run around emphasizing the fact that some kings got official numbers and others did not.

Seven and three feature pretty prominently in the series, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least that he'd attach them in a fairly significant or prominent way to the two main characters. Of course, he's already done it with Dany and three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ran

Could you please explain if it's Robar or Rogar Baratheon?

I remember when "Sons of Dragon" were published you said its "Rogar Baratheon" was a mistake from unedited copy which was given to Gardner, that George used both versions of the name but decided to go with Robar in the end.

Does this family tree means he is back to Rogar?

Personally, I think it doesn't make sense. Robar is close to Robert and can be viewed as "Baratheon family name" while Rogar is making you think of Rogare family of Lys.

Edited by DanaKz

Share this post


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

×