FIRE AND BLOOD Volume 1

[The Bard of Banefort]

I'm hoping we'll get a peek into how the Targaryens interacted with the North and Iron Islands. We know very little of the Iron Throne's relationship with those two regions post-Conquest, and truthfully, I'm very eager at this point to meet an Ironborn woman whose name isn't Asha. I also get the impression that Ned was the exception among the Starks, not the rule: I think the other Starks we'll meet will be more like Cregan, Brandon, and Lyanna. 

[lojzelote]

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It looks that way but if you are somewhat like me you really like any little tidbit of information. Ran/Linda did a great job summarizing the reign of Viserys I and the Dance (especially since they could focus more on the things that were not touched upon in TPatQ) and it is also true with the reign of Aenys I.

But most interesting details are gone from TWoIaF. The Vulture's Hunt is little more than a name in TWoIaF wheres Gyldayn makes it a small story.

And with the Dance there should be a lot more detail in FaB, too. I doubt George's accounts of the Erryk-Arryk battle and the death of Prince Maelor is a short and bloodless affair. Much to the contrary, actually.

I guess some might have showed their ugly heads throughout the first half of the Targaryen reign. I don't expect much on them, though. I guess a Bolton could have fought in the Dance, either with Lord Roderick's Winter Wolves or with Cregan's later host. Could even be that some second or third son of House Bolton ended up leading a group of Northern outlaws in the Riverlands and Crownlands. We do know that some of Cregan's men turned to banditry. 

And, of course, a detailed account of the reign of Jaehaerys I could give us also a detailed account of his royal progress up North where the king and the queen might have met some Boltons, too.

That's true. I guess that a couple of Northmen could have come to court at some point as well? Though I suppose not many since they are a rather isolationist lot for most past... except for the Manderlys, which makes sense since they have southron roots.

We should definitely find out more about the mermen, since J&A's daughter was betrothed to one and another Manderly was the Hand at the end of Aegon III's regency.

I must say I was a bit surprised by the overabundance of Manderlys in TWoIaF (well, "overabundance" may be a too strong a word). Aside of the Roderick Dustin stuff, they seem to have been the most prominent Norhtmen (at least outwardly) after the Starks. The same goes for the Stark family tree - there are two Manderly marriages, but zero marriages to the Boltons and the Dustins in the last 200+ years? One would expect they would like to shore up relationship with them. There's a chance that that one of the Starks daughters went to these houses, but I'm doubtful, because from we've seen so far they either kept them in the family or squandered them on the likes of Rogerses, Cerwyns, or cadet branch Royces. It makes me think they maybe they didn't want any of the prominent Northern houses getting a possible blood claim on WF? Otherwise I seriously question their dynastic choices.

That aside, I'd love to know if marrying vassal houses from another kingdom was a pre-Conquest thing. It seems like something that could in case of a war potentially bring problems to all involved. Honestly, wouldn't it have been preferable to marry an Arryn or a Tully to a Royce or a Blackwood? I do wonder if perhaps the later Targaryens might have followed in Rhaenys' footsteps by playing at matchmakers.

[Lord Varys]

17 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I'm hoping we'll get a peek into how the Targaryens interacted with the North and Iron Islands. We know very little of the Iron Throne's relationship with those two regions post-Conquest, and truthfully, I'm very eager at this point to meet an Ironborn woman whose name isn't Asha. I also get the impression that Ned was the exception among the Starks, not the rule: I think the other Starks we'll meet will be more like Cregan, Brandon, and Lyanna. 

I doubt that the Ironborn had any prominent or important women. They keep them very much in their place. George could come up with some setting of some strong woman playing a role as a Greyjoy widow running the islands while her son is still a boy but that's it. I doubt there are any other Ashas captaining ships and the like. That doesn't seem something the Ironborn allow their women to do under normal circumstances.

Cregan actually seems to be pretty much like Ned, one of the more reserved and cautious Starks, not one controlled by that stupid wolf's blood thing. Ned was still somewhat soft since he was never groomed to rule, which Cregan most likely was, so there is difference there. Rickard also seems to be somewhat harsher than Ned but personality-wise also more colder and less hot-headed than either Brandon or Lyanna.

I don't think the Targaryens had a lot of really important issues with the Starks or Ironborn during the time covered by the first book. They were not really in the position to make all that much trouble. This is especially confirmed for the Ironborn which basically did nothing of note between the reign of Maegor and the Dance.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

That's true. I guess that a couple of Northmen could have come to court at some point as well? Though I suppose not many since they are a rather isolationist lot for most past... except for the Manderlys, which makes sense since they have southron roots.

Having some people showing up is always possible. I mean, we could even have a Bolton joining the Kingsguard during the reign of Jaehaerys I. That could even make for an interesting side story.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

We should definitely find out more about the mermen, since J&A's daughter was betrothed to one and another Manderly was the Hand at the end of Aegon III's regency.

The story of Princess Viserra and the Lord of White Harbor could be rather interesting. The strong ties to House Manderly there could indicate that Jaehaerys I intended to show the Starks their place after they tried to resist the whole New Gift idea.

But independent of that there should always be strong ties between White Harbor and KL simply because of the trade relations, not to mention the tariffs and taxes the Iron Throne would have collected there.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

I must say I was a bit surprised by the overabundance of Manderlys in TWoIaF (well, "overabundance" may be a too strong a word). Aside of the Roderick Dustin stuff, they seem to have been the most prominent Norhtmen (at least outwardly) after the Starks. The same goes for the Stark family tree - there are two Manderly marriages, but zero marriages to the Boltons and the Dustins in the last 200+ years? One would expect they would like to shore up relationship with them. There's a chance that that one of the Starks daughters went to these houses, but I'm doubtful, because from we've seen so far they either kept them in the family or squandered them on the likes of Rogerses, Cerwyns, or cadet branch Royces. It makes me think they maybe they didn't want any of the prominent Northern houses getting a possible blood claim on WF? Otherwise I seriously question their dynastic choices.

Ah, well, it makes a lot of sense for the Stark not marry them Boltons. They are an ugly and dangerous lot, after all. Now, there must have been marriages there, of course, but one assumes those were strictly political and only part of those many peace treaties they had after the original conquest of the kingdoms of the Red Kings as well as the many crushed rebellions thereafter.

In addition, the North isn't exactly all that happy with this Stark rule. There are houses who would like to rule their lands in their own right again. Not just the Boltons but the Dustins, too.

The Starks preference to cousin and uncle marriages also helps to explain the prevalence of Karstark marriages. And we should seriously consider the possibilities that some of the marriages we see are cousin matches we don't recognize as such because the Starks marry cousins through the female line.

The marriages sort of reflect those houses who could see as good and true Stark loyalists at the beginning of the books - Karstarks, Manderlys leading, with the occasional Glover, Umber, and clanswoman in the mix. And apparently the Lockes are also not that unimportant for some reason.

The occasional marriages to some of the lower houses could be part of the Stark political program to keep close ties to their power base among the clans and the common people on which their rule seems to be founded in no small part. The more prominent (former royal) houses of the North are as much rivals and potential enemies than vassals and friends.

The marriages to the Royces, Blackwoods, Rogers, etc. must have stories of their own. They were either love matches (like Cregan-Alysanne) or arranged because the Starks of that generation had closer ties to the South than usually. That might be especially true for Willam-Melantha (which could have been arranged by Betha-Egg) and Jocelyn-Benedict.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

That aside, I'd love to know if marrying vassal houses from another kingdom was a pre-Conquest thing. It seems like something that could in case of a war potentially bring problems to all involved. Honestly, wouldn't it have been preferable to marry an Arryn or a Tully to a Royce or a Blackwood? I do wonder if perhaps the later Targaryens might have followed in Rhaenys' footsteps by playing at matchmakers.

Considering that the Starks apparently greatly opposed the match between Ronnel Arryn and Torrhen's daughter I doubt the kings of the Seven Kingdoms usually married amongst themselves. But it might also be that the just the Starks kept out of that because the Southern kings didn't want some tree-worshiping wives and the Starks had no interest in queens who followed the Seven.

But then, since we have no evidence for succession wars involving an attempted power grab by the Gardeners or Lannisters or Durrandons in another kingdom due to the intermarriage between those houses I doubt something like that happened all that often. Perhaps in the wake of some peace treaty, etc. but not on a regular basis.

That is where George's aristocratic setting is breaking with reality and plausibility because the desire to take over as many houses and acquiring more and more wealth and power through marriage should have been as prevalent there as it was in the real middle ages.

Realistically the nobility and royalty of Westeros should be one single complex of heavily interrelated cousins by the time of the Conquest. They had thousands of years to arrive at that, after all.

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

I doubt that the Ironborn had any prominent or important women. They keep them very much in their place. George could come up with some setting of some strong woman playing a role as a Greyjoy widow running the islands while her son is still a boy but that's it. I doubt there are any other Ashas captaining ships and the like. That doesn't seem something the Ironborn allow their women to do under normal circumstances.

 

Theon mentions in ACOK that it was not unheard of for women to captain their own ships on the Iron Islands, so I highly doubt Asha is the first prominent woman to do so (he also tells us that daughters inherit before uncles on the Iron Islands). When you consider how much time Ironborn men spend reaving in Essos or trading along the coast, it doesn't seem that peculiar for wives, daughters, and sisters to serve as castellans, either. And it isn't like George hasn't written about interesting women living in a patriarchal societies before: King's Landing is as patriarchal as they come, especially when one considers how, thanks to good ol' Jaehaerys, daughters aren't eligible for royal succession, and yet we still are given insight into the lives of important women there.

I'm also interested in the relationship among women on the Iron Islands. With the men being gone for months at a time and salt wives being brought in from various lands, I'm curious to see what the kinship among Ironborn women was like. We probably won't get any of that in Fire and Blood, but one would think that the circumstances of this society would make it more sensible to befriend other women rather than ignore one another. George has never been great at writing female friendships, but he's been improving a little bit with each book.

[lojzelote]

@Lord Varys

Quote

Ah, well, it makes a lot of sense for the Stark not marry them Boltons. They are an ugly and dangerous lot, after all. Now, there must have been marriages there, of course, but one assumes those were strictly political and only part of those many peace treaties they had after the original conquest of the kingdoms of the Red Kings as well as the many crushed rebellions thereafter.

In addition, the North isn't exactly all that happy with this Stark rule. There are houses who would like to rule their lands in their own right again. Not just the Boltons but the Dustins, too.

Well, to me the entire point of a dynastic marriage is marrying someone whom you neccessarily don't like for reasons of state. Sometimes it is an instrument to strengthen an already existing friendship, but not always. Besides, I refuse to believe that the Boltons are a long line of exclusively bad eggs. Even so, I may understand why they wouldn't want to marry one of their daughters to a scary guy whose ancestors flayed their ancestors, but certainly a Lord Stark could have married a female Bolton? It's not like she would actually kill her own children to ensure the Bolton supremacy in the North. Anyhow, the Starks cannot be surprised that the Boltons are not content with their rule if they have ignored them as political partners for hundreds of years.

I don't think we have any reason to believe that the Dustins were historically opposed to the Stark rule? Sure, they had been forced to bend the knee and the mutual relations might not have always been sunshine and roses, but I don't think we know enough to put them on the Bolton level. The only Dustins we have heard of were Roderick Dustin from the period of the Dance and Willam Dustin, whom Ned had taken with him to the Tower of Joy. Lady Barbrey is actually a Ryswell by birth, and her dislike for the Starks seems like a personal thing. Although, I suppose it is possible she is some kind of a Dustin cousin as well. After all, the houses that didn't marry into House Stark had to marry into some other houses to keep going.

[That said, I find it suspect that in ADwD GRRM introduced a woman ruling Barrowton that seems somewhat shady and speaks of what would she do if she were a queen, and in TWoIaF we find out that the Night's King corpse queen might have been a Barrow princess and that Barrow kings placed on themselves a curse that should have held them in power at the price of sucking off their vitality and life. It kinda makes me wonder... isn't Barbrey looking too old for her age? Half of her hair is supposed to be grey already and she even describes herself as dried-up. It seems pretty normal that in the medieval era a woman entering her fourties might appear much older to us than she really is, but Catelyn and Cersei had/have to be only a couple years younger, and were still considered beautiful and desirable.

I swear, the way the old North is described is vampiric. There were these corpselike Dustins and pale-eyed, brutal Boltons whose current lord happens to be obsessed with bloodletting, raw meat, and prunes, ... and the ancient Starks, who had to be locked in their tombs with iron swords lest they terrorize the living. Then they've got sacred blood-sucking trees, tales of “ghosts, cold vengeful spirits of the north who hunger for southron blood,”  and it doesn't help that at the Neck there is the Bite in which lie the Three Sisters, which is an obvious reference to the three brides of Dracula. Brrrr, what an unplesant place and people. If I were an Andal warlord, I wouldn't have tried to invade their Twilight Zone land at all.]

Anyway, I understand why secondborn, thirdborn etc. sons wouldn't have made a prestigious match, the Serena/Arrana/Aregelle marrying Umbers and Cerwyns I get too, since they had been apparently excluded from succession, but the likes of Cregan Stark marrying Arra Norrey boggle my mind. Surely that had to be another love match on his part? Glovers are not that important either. They are merely a masterly house at the moment, aren't they? And Jocelyn Stark, the only female Stark in two generations, leaving for the Vale to marry a younger son of a junior branch of House Royce. What sense does it make? Was she pregnant with a bastard or what?

I guess that some Lockes will likely pop out of the woodwork in TWoW. Much like the Dustins, they have probably become the object of GRRM's literary "gardening".

 

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Theon mentions in ACOK that it was not unheard of for women to captain their own ships on the Iron Islands, so I highly doubt Asha is the first prominent woman to do so (he also tells us that daughters inherit before uncles on the Iron Islands). When you consider how much time Ironborn men spend reaving in Essos or trading along the coast, it doesn't seem that peculiar for wives, daughters, and sisters to serve as castellans, either. And it isn't like George hasn't written about interesting women living in a patriarchal societies before: King's Landing is as patriarchal as they come, especially when one considers how, thanks to good ol' Jaehaerys, daughters aren't eligible for royal succession, and yet we still are given insight into the lives of important women there.

Well, the history of the Ironborn in TWoIaF is very thorough and the only mentioned therein are the ones who suffer at the hands of their Ironborn husbands. We never meet any female Hoare, Greyjoy, Harlaw, etc. raider captains or princesses, not to mention queens.

There are also no female captains mentioned as being present at the Kingsmoot, neither in AFfC nor in any of the historical kingsmoots.

I do not doubt that the Ironborn women can own and captain ships, but I doubt those are very big or important ships. And nothing indicates that those women are allowed to go raiding on a regular basis. They most likely are forced to do all the fishing while the men are away. Keep in mind that there is apparently no female martial culture on the Iron Islands while there is one such on Bear Island. The women there had to defend themselves. The Ironborn women did not because the Ironborn are the wolves of the sea. They attack others, they are not attacked themselves (unless the Lannisters send a huge armada over to beat them in the dirt), and that's why their women most likely were little more than property and chattel. Especially those salt wives.

I assume that Euron took a huge portion of the male population of the islands which means that right now the women are the ones doing the fishing to feed those feeble and ailing men who stayed behind.

The concept of a daughter coming before an uncle seems to be imported to the islands by the Targaryens/Andals. And just as with the Iron Throne it may refer to some lordship but it clearly doesn't refer to the Seastone Chair or the Iron Throne.

It is Jaehaerys I's granddaughter who is passed over in favor of his second son, not one his daughters. I'm pretty sure one of his daughters would have gotten the throne had all his sons and grandsons predeceased him.

6 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I'm also interested in the relationship among women on the Iron Islands. With the men being gone for months at a time and salt wives being brought in from various lands, I'm curious to see what the kinship among Ironborn women was like. We probably won't get any of that in Fire and Blood, but one would think that the circumstances of this society would make it more sensible to befriend other women rather than ignore one another. George has never been great at writing female friendships, but he's been improving a little bit with each book.

Well, I don't really want to read anything about Ironborn harems. I also don't care to know how Ygon Oldfeather's wives get along.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

@Lord Varys

Well, to me the entire point of a dynastic marriage is marrying someone whom you neccessarily don't like for reasons of state. Sometimes it is an instrument to strengthen an already existing friendship, but not always.

Well, once the Starks secured their rule in the North they apparently only needed mothers for their sons, not so much marriage alliances to gain a lot. And the same should basically go for most of the other kingdoms. I mean, marrying the daughter of your own vassal may get you some dowry and all but not likely a stronger political hold over guy whose family has long since bent the knee.

Marriage alliances can become important in crises and wartime but when everything is peaceful and quiet it shouldn't matter all that much whether your father-in-law has a big or only a mediocre army.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

Besides, I refuse to believe that the Boltons are a long line of exclusively bad eggs. Even so, I may understand why they wouldn't want to marry one of their daughters to a scary guy whose ancestors flayed their ancestors, but certainly a Lord Stark could have married a female Bolton? It's not like she would actually kill her own children to ensure the Bolton supremacy in the North. Anyhow, the Starks cannot be surprised that the Boltons are not content with their rule if they have ignored them as political partners for hundreds of years.

We don't know that they were ignored all that long. And I'm sure there are as many Stark-Bolton marriages as there are Bracken-Blackwood marriages, but it is not all that likely that those did occur all that often. And there would have to be a pretty good reason for any of those. I'm actually more inclined that the Starks were reluctant to take Boltons brides because they might have thought that could taint their bloodline somehow. Those Boltons aren't really nice creatures. Especially not the important ones. 

But when George puts his mind on a house he gives them some more interesting and positive guys. Just look at Forrest Frey, for instance. That seemed to have been a very fine man indeed.

For all we know Roose and Robb could be rather close cousins through the female line. I mean, perhaps Roose's mother was a Locke, the sister or niece of Marna Locke, the mother of Lord Rickard? That is not unlikely at all. The Boltons must get their brides from the same gene pool as the Starks. They are not going to marry peasants.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

I don't think we have any reason to believe that the Dustins were historically opposed to the Stark rule? Sure, they had been forced to bend the knee and the mutual relations might not have always been sunshine and roses, but I don't think we know enough to put them on the Bolton level.

That is technically true but the Dustins claim descent from the Barrow King who, in turn, claim they are the Kings of the First Men. That is a very prestigious and ancient lineage and thus quite likely to have had more than a few issues with Winterfell since the Starks presumed to rule the entire North. From their point of view the Starks would be upstarts and usurpers.

In addition, we see how the Greatjon treats Robb before he falls in love with him. The Umbers are a proud and ancient former royal line, too, somewhat more uncouth and savage than the more powerful Dustins. But when the Lord of Last Hearth and the Lord of the Dreadfort are as dangerous and chilly as Robb and Bran perceive them in AGoT one can only guess how an ambitious and ruthless Lord of Barrowton would have behaved towards them had there been one.

There are certain houses in the North who are Stark fans and followers. But the truly powerful and ancient ones are not. Or at least their loyalty is very conditional and fickle. We see that with the Karstarks.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

The only Dustins we have heard of were Roderick Dustin from the period of the Dance and Willam Dustin, whom Ned had taken with him to the Tower of Joy. Lady Barbrey is actually a Ryswell by birth, and her dislike for the Starks seems like a personal thing. Although, I suppose it is possible she is some kind of a Dustin cousin as well. After all, the houses that didn't marry into House Stark had to marry into some other houses to keep going.

Well, if Lady Barbrey was a Dustin cousin I guess it would have been mentioned. She seems to be ruling Barrowton by right of her late husband, which is not completely unheard of. Either there are no known Dustin heirs (unlikely) or Lord Eddard and King Robert decided to allow her to keep the castle and title until her death in exchange for the losses she suffered. Ned can be a pretty nice guy if he wans to, after all.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

[That said, I find it suspect that in ADwD GRRM introduced a woman ruling Barrowton that seems somewhat shady and speaks of what would she do if she were a queen, and in TWoIaF we find out that the Night's King corpse queen might have been a Barrow princess and that Barrow kings placed on themselves a curse that should have held them in power at the price of sucking off their vitality and life. It kinda makes me wonder... isn't Barbrey looking too old for her age? Half of her hair is supposed to be grey already and she even describes herself as dried-up. It seems pretty normal that in the medieval era a woman entering her fourties might appear much older to us than she really is, but Catelyn and Cersei had/have to be only a couple years younger, and were still considered beautiful and desirable.

People age differently, and Barbrey suffered a lot of losses at an early age, and then reinvented herself as the 'lonely widow'. Not to mention that managing vast estates like the Barrowlands all by yourself should be quite a stressful task.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

I swear, the way the old North is described is vampiric. There were these corpselike Dustins and pale-eyed, brutal Boltons whose current lord happens to be obsessed with bloodletting, raw meat, and prunes, ... and the ancient Starks, who had to be locked in their tombs with iron swords lest they terrorize the living. Then they've got sacred blood-sucking trees, tales of “ghosts, cold vengeful spirits of the north who hunger for southron blood,”  and it doesn't help that at the Neck there is the Bite in which lie the Three Sisters, which is an obvious reference to the three brides of Dracula. Brrrr, what an unplesant place and people. If I were an Andal warlord, I wouldn't have tried to invade their Twilight Zone land at all.

As long as those vampires and ghosts don't show up I'm not impressed. There is something odd going on in the Barrowlands, sure, but the Stark graves thing just sounds like superstition to me. At least as long no real ghost shows up in Winterfell.

There may be some twisted allusion to the wights there. Perhaps the ancient Starks had obsidian blades to keep their dead in their graves? Iron or bronze swords shouldn't help with that at all.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

Anyway, I understand why secondborn, thirdborn etc. sons wouldn't have made a prestigious match, the Serena/Arrana/Aregelle marrying Umbers and Cerwyns I get too, since they had been apparently excluded from succession, but the likes of Cregan Stark marrying Arra Norrey boggle my mind. Surely that had to be another love match on his part?

Could be, but doesn't have to. Say, Cregan's father was indebted to the Norrey due to saving him or young Cregan while they visited the clansmen at one point? There could have been a wildling attack or young Cregan fell into a cave in the mountains, or something. Or Lord Stark was nearly killed by some wolves or bears during a hunt, with the Norrey saving him, etc.

The possibilities there are endless. And there is the fact that the Starks might occasionally want to marry the daughters of the lower houses to keep the bond between them strong.

But we conveniently also don't know whether Cregan's hypothetical grandaunt ended up marrying into House Norrey for some reason, making Arra and Cregan second cousins. That could very well be. Cregan really seemed to have a thing for cousins as his third marriage to Lynara Stark confirms. Lynara could be the granddaughter of an unknown granduncle of Cregan's, by the way.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

Glovers are not that important either. They are merely a masterly house at the moment, aren't they?

They are now but they are also a former royal line and have been presumably not been all that unimportant since they control lands rather close to Winterfell.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

And Jocelyn Stark, the only female Stark in two generations, leaving for the Vale to marry a younger son of a junior branch of House Royce. What sense does it make? Was she pregnant with a bastard or what?

No idea. But we actually don't know from which branch the Royce wives of the Starks were, either, so that's not necessarily a mystery. I guess that match was made due to more interaction between North and South during the reign of Aegon V. Betha is also not unlikely to be the one between the Willam-Melantha match. Branda and Harrold Rogers most likely got together due to some acquaintances the Wandering Wolf made during his travels. I guess she might even have traveled with him for a time. The Rogers are a very obscure house from the Stormlands, after all. But then, they could also have met at court if Rodrik spent some time there with his family.

1 hour ago, lojzelote said:

I guess that some Lockes will likely pop out of the woodwork in TWoW. Much like the Dustins, they have probably become the object of GRRM's literary "gardening".

Perhaps. Or he has chosen them to not make the Starks closely related to any of the known houses? With the Lannisters there is a similar tendency. The Braxes and Farmans are powerful houses of the West, but the Kyndalls are very obscure. And then George decided to make Tytos' mother Lady Rohanne. Tywin's mother being a Marbrand also doesn't come as a surprise considering Jaime's closeness to Ser Addam and him serving as page at Casterly Rock.

[The Bard of Banefort]

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, the history of the Ironborn in TWoIaF is very thorough and the only mentioned therein are the ones who suffer at the hands of their Ironborn husbands. We never meet any female Hoare, Greyjoy, Harlaw, etc. raider captains or princesses, not to mention queens.

There are also no female captains mentioned as being present at the Kingsmoot, neither in AFfC nor in any of the historical kingsmoots.

I do not doubt that the Ironborn women can own and captain ships, but I doubt those are very big or important ships. And nothing indicates that those women are allowed to go raiding on a regular basis. They most likely are forced to do all the fishing while the men are away. Keep in mind that there is apparently no female martial culture on the Iron Islands while there is one such on Bear Island. The women there had to defend themselves. The Ironborn women did not because the Ironborn are the wolves of the sea. They attack others, they are not attacked themselves (unless the Lannisters send a huge armada over to beat them in the dirt), and that's why their women most likely were little more than property and chattel. Especially those salt wives.

I assume that Euron took a huge portion of the male population of the islands which means that right now the women are the ones doing the fishing to feed those feeble and ailing men who stayed behind.

The concept of a daughter coming before an uncle seems to be imported to the islands by the Targaryens/Andals. And just as with the Iron Throne it may refer to some lordship but it clearly doesn't refer to the Seastone Chair or the Iron Throne.

It is Jaehaerys I's granddaughter who is passed over in favor of his second son, not one his daughters. I'm pretty sure one of his daughters would have gotten the throne had all his sons and grandsons predeceased him.

 

We're given an insight into the lives of women in almost every other region of Westeros, but for the Iron Islands, all we have is Asha. Regardless of how much political power they wielded, it takes a certain mettle to survive in such a harsh environment, especially when you're a member of the "second sex." My point about Theon mentioning that daughters can inherit if there are no other sons is that, in order for this to be standard procedure, it must of happened at one point or another -- meaning that there have been Ironborn noblewomen who have presided over their Houses in the past. And a lord's wife does often influence his decisions, whether he admits it or not, as anyone from Eleana Targaryen to Serala of Myr can attest. To write off an entire culture of women as little more than obedient shrinking violets is mind-boggling to me, not to mention simplifying. 

30 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

Well, I don't really want to read anything about Ironborn harems. I also don't care to know how Ygon Oldfeather's wives get along.

 

. . . okay? I'm not sure what personal preference has to do with what the author eventually decides to publish. I wasn't personally interested in reading about Yi Ti or Tyrosh, but that doesn't mean George shouldn't have written about it. 

As for the salt wives, resistance and survival narratives play a huge role in this series (Dany in AGOT, Sansa and Arya in ACOK, Theon in ADWD, etc). Call me crazy for thinking George would be able to do an excellent job of writing what it means to survive on the Iron Islands. 

[Lord Varys]

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

We're given an insight into the lives of women in almost every other region of Westeros, but for the Iron Islands, all we have is Asha. Regardless of how much political power they wielded, it takes a certain mettle to survive in such a harsh environment, especially when you're a member of the "second sex."

I don't think we have gotten a good picture how it is to be a woman in any region of Westeros, at least not outside the noble class. We don't know how the life of the average peasant woman is like, anywhere.

There are some hints that the Ironborn women are somewhat resembling their men in the sense that they are blunt and outspoken (there is the example of Three-Tooth, the female steward of Ten Towers. And I think Balon has also some female servants in ACoK, has he not?

But we don't see any noblewomen with power on the Iron Islands aside from Asha. Alannys Harlaw Greyjoy and her sister Gwynesse are both jokes as characters.

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

My point about Theon mentioning that daughters can inherit if there are no other sons is that, in order for this to be standard procedure, it must of happened at one point or another -- meaning that there have been Ironborn noblewomen who have presided over their Houses in the past.

If that's so then we have no precedent for that. And we have it confirmed that this never happened for the Starks. It seems to have happened with some of the Northern and could also have happened with a couple of smaller more Andalized houses on Great Wyk but it clearly has never happened for the Greyjoys. And thus the idea that a woman could sit the Seastone Chair is just theory. As Asha's defeat then hammers home. Despite the fact that she was Balon's chosen and groomed heir she pretty much had no chance.

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

And a lord's wife does often influence his decisions, whether he admits it or not, as anyone from Eleana Targaryen to Serala of Myr can attest. To write off an entire culture of women as little more than obedient shrinking violets is mind-boggling to me, not to mention simplifying. 

I never said they couldn't do that kind of thing. That's pretty obvious. But if there is a culture where women were basically pretty obvious property and chattel it is the Iron Islands. It is the place where it is okay to 'steal' women and then 'marry' them. Or make them into their servants.

There is a chance that there is the occasional Black Swan among the salt wives but the overwhelming majority of them would simply have been sex slaves, baby machines, and servants, served to live in an environment they would not have chosen to live in if they had had a choice.

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

. . . okay? I'm not sure what personal preference has to do with what the author eventually decides to publish. I wasn't personally interested in reading about Yi Ti or Tyrosh, but that doesn't mean George shouldn't have written about it. 

Well, you can also mention your preferences in your postings, can't you?

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

As for the salt wives, resistance and survival narratives play a huge role in this series (Dany in AGOT, Sansa and Arya in ACOK, Theon in ADWD, etc). Call me crazy for thinking George would be able to do an excellent job of writing what it means to survive on the Iron Islands. 

Well, I doubt Dany's or Sansa's or Arya's story would be all that interesting if they had ended up living out their lives as sex slaves/servants of Drogo, Joffrey, or Weese, right? Just as the lives of the older wives of Craster up to their deaths wouldn't be all that interesting.

The interesting point about the stories of the main characters is that those things are just episodes in their larger stories. But for the average salt wife or servant woman they are pretty much the entire story, right?

[The Bard of Banefort]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

If that's so then we have no precedent for that. And we have it confirmed that this never happened for the Starks. It seems to have happened with some of the Northern and could also have happened with a couple of smaller more Andalized houses on Great Wyk but it clearly has never happened for the Greyjoys. And thus the idea that a woman could sit the Seastone Chair is just theory. As Asha's defeat then hammers home. Despite the fact that she was Balon's chosen and groomed heir she pretty much had no chance.

 

I was referring to any of the noble Houses, not the Greyjoys specifically. You are correct that they, like the Starks, have likely never had a matriarch.

I think we may have been misunderstanding each other. I realize that George doesn't really write about the smallfolk, but I don't think it's too much to hope to see a few more Ironborn noblewomen outside of Asha thrown in here and there. The reason why I mentioned salt wives is because, according to the text, they are still considered the legal wives of a lord, so even if they themselves aren't highborn, they are in one sense members of a noble family.  

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I was referring to any of the noble Houses, not the Greyjoys specifically. You are correct that they, like the Starks, have likely never had a matriarch.

Still, I really have trouble seeing an Ironborn house ruled by a woman. Informally, perhaps, and perhaps also since the Conquest, but in the old days of the Hoares and further back I doubt they would have suffered that kind of rule. Their entire warrior-culture is based on the exploitation of the weak and women are property there, more so among the elite than among the common people (who most likely never could afford a harem of salt wives).

What kind of captain/king would bow to a woman? Especially in the days of the driftwood crown kings?

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I think we may have been misunderstanding each other. I realize that George doesn't really write about the smallfolk, but I don't think it's too much to hope to see a few more Ironborn noblewomen outside of Asha thrown in here and there. The reason why I mentioned salt wives is because, according to the text, they are still considered the legal wives of a lord, so even if they themselves aren't highborn, they are in one sense members of a noble family.  

Even slaves have rights in a slaver society. Not that much, though. Salt wives and thralls aren't exactly slaves but they are all things you take by paying 'the iron price'. One assumes beautiful young woman can make 'a career' as a salt wife if they end winning 'the love' of the man who captures them, and there is certainly a good chance that there lived many Danys on the Iron Islands who never got around to hatch their dragon eggs. But it seems to me that the only ones profiting from this kind of arrangement were the children of such unions. What makes the whole thing better than slavery is that the children of salt wives aren't bastards nor born as thralls, just as the children of thralls are born free.

And if a man has just a (couple of) salt wives then the eldest son of those also can inherit stuff if things go well and they are not pushed aside by some brother or cousin. But I honestly doubt that it was pleasant for one or multiple salt wives to live alongside a rock wife and true Ironborn children.

We don't hear anything about our Greyjoys being descended from salt wives, do we? Perhaps they have some such ancestors far down the family tree but if so then this has yet to be mentioned.

George really had the chance to give us some Ironborn women in AFfC. There is no Goodbrother woman, nor Drowned Woman as far as I recall, no talk about the Drowned God having priestesses, the Reader's two sisters - one of which is married to Balon Greyjoy - essentially don't exist as characters, and there are no women at the Kingsmoot aside from Asha.

[Falcon2909]

Will we learn all the truths about the events at Summerhall?

[desire]

Maybe if we twist the words and make up enough theories we might get a date for winds of winter 

[lojzelote]

@Lord Varys

Quote

Well, once the Starks secured their rule in the North they apparently only needed mothers for their sons, not so much marriage alliances to gain a lot. And the same should basically go for most of the other kingdoms. I mean, marrying the daughter of your own vassal may get you some dowry and all but not likely a stronger political hold over guy whose family has long since bent the knee.

Marriage alliances can become important in crises and wartime but when everything is peaceful and quiet it shouldn't matter all that much whether your father-in-law has a big or only a mediocre army.

We don't know that they were ignored all that long. And I'm sure there are as many Stark-Bolton marriages as there are Bracken-Blackwood marriages, but it is not all that likely that those did occur all that often. And there would have to be a pretty good reason for any of those. I'm actually more inclined that the Starks were reluctant to take Boltons brides because they might have thought that could taint their bloodline somehow. Those Boltons aren't really nice creatures. Especially not the important ones. 

But when George puts his mind on a house he gives them some more interesting and positive guys. Just look at Forrest Frey, for instance. That seemed to have been a very fine man indeed.

Well, but you also say that not all of the North was reconciled to the Stark rule. I'd think that trying to solve that issue would have been their #1 preference. It's either that they were secure in their dominion over the North and could have married whom they wished... or they were not and had to take it into account while choosing who they married.

Either way, if the Boltons had given them repeatedly reason to consider them untrustworthy, they should have attainted them after last such incident and give the the Dreadfort and the surrounding lands to another family or at least reduce their power substantially. Letting them fester in spite and unfulfilled ambition without doing about it anything is like leaving a ticking bomb to explode.

It's hard to say without meeting him, but Domeric Bolton sounded like a decent boy. At least if the part about visiting Ramsay, because he wanted a brother is a true story.

Quote

That is technically true but the Dustins claim descent from the Barrow King who, in turn, claim they are the Kings of the First Men. That is a very prestigious and ancient lineage and thus quite likely to have had more than a few issues with Winterfell since the Starks presumed to rule the entire North. From their point of view the Starks would be upstarts and usurpers.

The Tyrells in the Reach are much bigger upstarts, but they have solved the problem of their lacking pedigree by marrying into the most prominent houses of the region. Mace Tyrell is a half Redwyne and his wife Alerie Hightower is half Florent. Their second son is married to a Fossoway, and as far as their heir and only daughter they are concerned, they tried to get the Stark heiress and the king himself. Olenna Redwyne is very open about the fact that it's Mace's way of raising the prestige of House Tyrell that is poor compared to other great houses of Westeros and the Reach itself.

The very same thing could be said of the Tullys. They had also been raised to their post by Aegon the Conqueror, they had not come to rule over the riverlands due to the natural pecking order. We know that Hoster Tully had also been very eager to find prestigious matches for all his family members.

Quote

Well, if Lady Barbrey was a Dustin cousin I guess it would have been mentioned. She seems to be ruling Barrowton by right of her late husband, which is not completely unheard of. Either there are no known Dustin heirs (unlikely) or Lord Eddard and King Robert decided to allow her to keep the castle and title until her death in exchange for the losses she suffered. Ned can be a pretty nice guy if he wans to, after all.

I don't think that she would have been a direct and clear heiress (in that case her brothers would have come first anyway), but I think it is possible she might have some sort of competing blood claim that together with her claim by marriage holds her safely in power? If the Dustins are supposedly so powerful, it is strange that the surviving Dustin heirs have no powerbase that would try to put them in their rightful place instead of an outsider dowager lady.

True, we see something similar happening with the Hornwood inheritance. It is apparent that the Northmen believe that marrying the widowed dowager lady will give them the right to control the Hornwood lands, although the last Lord Hornwood's sister and her two sons are still around. I'd think that it's obvious that Lady Berena or her oldest son should inherit. Instead everybody in the North waits for Robb to decide if he does not command Dowager Lady Donella to marry a Blackwood or a Frey to give them the rule of the Hornwood to to suit Robb's own political ends. It is even apparently feasible for Roose Bolton to inherit through his unlegitimized bastard son who kidnapped and forcibly married the said lady dowager and got executed for it.

Frankly, if the Starks have been playing at autocrats in a similar manner for their entire history, then I am not surprised they had been victims of multiple rebel lords. Let's imagine if the next king on the iron throne decided to hand over WF and the North to the Westerlings or the Tullys because of political expedience, although Sansa or Arya and their hypothetical sons would had given him no reason to disposses them of their house's ancestral seat and lands. That sort of treatment would have bred resentment.

But long story short, I don't see how the Dustins can be so powerful and prestigious and at the same time so easily discarded by the Starks.

Quote

As long as those vampires and ghosts don't show up I'm not impressed. There is something odd going on in the Barrowlands, sure, but the Stark graves thing just sounds like superstition to me. At least as long no real ghost shows up in Winterfell.

There may be some twisted allusion to the wights there. Perhaps the ancient Starks had obsidian blades to keep their dead in their graves? Iron or bronze swords shouldn't help with that at all.

Well, I don't expect GRRM to turn Winterfell into Shirley Jackson's Hill House anytime soon. I suppose it's there for atmosphere and to show that historical Starks had been kinda bad guys. But, it is clearly a permanent theme in regards to Winterfell. Back in AGoT Ned is unnerved by the idea of the spirits of the dead escaping their graves and he thinks of the cold hell that is reserved specially for the dead members of his house. It's a strangely anatagonistic way of thinking of one's long dead noble ancestors. It returns again with Theon in ACoK through ADwD to his TWoW spoiler chapter. (As for iron swords, didn't Old Nan claim that the Others hated iron?)

In TWoIaF GRRM further put a spin on their history by alluding that the ancestor of Bran the Builder was Brandon of the Bloody Blade. That guy sound like one of the aggressive humans whose existence might have had persuaded the Children that the creation of the Others is a good idea after all.

Similarly, I doubt that the Boltons are vampires (though the Bolt-On crack theory is great), but there is vampiric subtext to them. Roose (together with Euron Greyjoy) is greatly reminiscent of the evil vampire master from Fevre Dream, and Ramsay is similarly reminiscent of the said vampire's lowly, disgusting human servant that hopes that his master will reward him for his service by transforming him into a vampire as well. Then there's all the focus on the tainted blood, leeching, paleness, ageless appearance, and eating near raw meat.

The Dustins seem to be the latest addition to GRRM's Northern kingdom of horrors.

I have no idea if anything will come out of it, but it is there. I wonder if these ancient powerful Northern houses like the Starks, the Boltons, and the Dustins had not been into some kind of dangerous magical practice. Maybe it's all just creepy atmospheric talk, maybe not. At the very least we can be certain that the tales of the ancient Northmen practising human sacrifice are true.

(Hey, GRRM have corrected moderators in past interviews by saying that he's not only a writer of fantasy and science fiction, but also of horror. )

Quote

No idea. But we actually don't know from which branch the Royce wives of the Starks were, either, so that's not necessarily a mystery. I guess that match was made due to more interaction between North and South during the reign of Aegon V. Betha is also not unlikely to be the one between the Willam-Melantha match. Branda and Harrold Rogers most likely got together due to some acquaintances the Wandering Wolf made during his travels. I guess she might even have traveled with him for a time. The Rogers are a very obscure house from the Stormlands, after all. But then, they could also have met at court if Rodrik spent some time there with his family.

Quote

Actually, I think that the Willam-Melantha match must have been great for the Starks. Marrying a kinswoman of the Queen is nothing to scoff at. The rest not so much.

From the Doylist POV, I guess that GRRM simply wants to keep his family trees simple. He doesn't want the Starks to have scores of unaccounted for cousins he would have to deal with in future books.

OTOH

 

From Sansa's TWoW spoiler chapter it seems that Jocelyn Stark's descendants will make an appearance. It seems that at least one of her daughters wedded her way out of irrelevance by charming a guy that actually had some importance.

[Jussi]

It looks like Fire and Blood: A History of House Targaryen of Westeros, Volume 1 will be released October 4th, 2018.

https://www.bookdepository.com/Fire-and-Blood-George-R-R-Martin/9780008295561

Locus Forthcoming Books also says October:

https://locusmag.com/forthcomingbooks/

 

The German edition will be published in November 2018. The length is about 800 pages.

https://www.randomhouse.de/Buch/Feuer-und-Blut-Erstes-Buch/George-R.R.-Martin/Penhaligon/e539983.rhd

 

German blurb translated by Google Translate:

Quote

How it all started!
The gripping prehistory about the rule of the royal house Targaryen.

What is the Silmarillion for Tolkien's fans is now published by George R.R. Martin – the epic prehistory of A Song of Ice and Fire / Game of Thrones! Three centuries before the series begins, Aegon Targaryen and his sister wives and their three dragons conquered the continent of Westeros. The reign of his descendants lasted 280 years. They survived rebellion and civil war – until Robert Baratheon overthrew the mad King Aerys II from the Iron Throne. This is the story of the great house of Targaryen, written down by Archmaester Gyldayn, transcribed by George R.R. Martin.

 

German cover art:

https://www.randomhouse.de/content/edition/covervoila_hires/Martin_GFeuer_und_Blut_1_187782.jpg

[The Egg]

We knew about it, but still.... Where's Winds? 

[Rhodan]

I guess, his two "big news posts" he was talking about, were about british Wild Cards and Nightflyers trailer. So, maybe Fire and Blood material is the next now.  

[Blooddragon]

I actually can't wait

[Cas Stark]

So, is it confirmed that Fire and Blood is out Fall 2018?  That is actually surprising, but may mean that he could possibly get Winds of Winter out in 2019.  

I have no interest in the side anthologies myself, at least until the main series is complete,but that me.

[Lord Varys]

That's real. The German translation for 'Fire and Blood' is already on the way, and I've known that the book is going to come out later this year for quite some time now. However, I had no idea when the original would come out - although it was pretty obvious that it wouldn't come out after a foreign edition, so it was also clear that 'Fire and Blood' would indeed be a thing this year.

[The Egg]

He said in one of his blog posts a while ago actually.
He confirmed that he was writing it (not alone though, right?) and he concluded with something like "looks like I'll be releasing a book in 2018, maybe 2, a man can dream", so I concluded that he was pretty confident that he'd finish this by the year.

Let's hope this gave him the push to write TWOW too, I like his fake histories but I don't really feel the need to read them if the main stories don't come out.