Jump to content

The Book of Swords - The Sons of the Dragon SPOILERS


Lord Varys

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, direpupy said:

That is a weak argument, he cares because he believes in the old gods and he would want to make sure that his religion is respected. Manderly lands are not Andal lands in the North, they are lands given to a Lord of Andal decent. But we know for a fact that there where already First Men living there so at most its a mixed land, but under the  First men Overlordship of House Stark, who have nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing an armed force not under there control or sworn to them in there lands.

They did allow Night Watch.

But then again, Night Watch was specifically sworn not to interfere in the kingdoms. Faith Militant not so. Also Night Watch was specifically limited against South - such as the "castles" having no defences to the South, something that bites them in the back each time the wildings scale undermanned stretches of Wall and attack the "castles", yet what the Watch complies with as part of their deal with South.

If Manderlys wanted to allow Faith Militant in their lands, Starks might have demanded benefits and restrictions. Starks stand a lot to gain from Night Watch. What would Starks gain from allowing Faith Militant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jaak said:

They did allow Night Watch.

But then again, Night Watch was specifically sworn not to interfere in the kingdoms. Faith Militant not so. Also Night Watch was specifically limited against South - such as the "castles" having no defences to the South, something that bites them in the back each time the wildings scale undermanned stretches of Wall and attack the "castles", yet what the Watch complies with as part of their deal with South.

The Faith Militant most certainly would have had the right to go anywhere in the Seven Kingdoms of Aegon the Conqueror. Aegon was sucking up to the Faith.

Now, that doesn't mean the Faith Militant in the North could do or get away with the same things they did in the South - but some of them most definitely must have been up there. At least occasionally.

Just as there must have been members of the Faith Militant in Dorne. Perhaps no Warrior's Sons down there, due to the lack of towns and cities there, but the Poor Fellows were literally everywhere. One would also assume that Rhoynish culture limited the Faith's power in Dorne, just as the Starks would have limited the power of the Faith Militant in the Manderly lands.

But White Harbor isn't a desert wasteland. It is one of the largest settlements in all of Westeros.

48 minutes ago, Jaak said:

If Manderlys wanted to allow Faith Militant in their lands, Starks might have demanded benefits and restrictions. Starks stand a lot to gain from Night Watch. What would Starks gain from allowing Faith Militant?

What did the Starks gain from allowing the Manderlys into their kingdom? They came, and they bought themselves a huge tract of land with the wealth they brought. And it is not that the Manderlys and their city were useless to the Starks. They grew to effectively protect the mouth of the White Knife and thus the southern coastline of their kingdom.

The idea that the Starks cared how exactly the Manderlys did that - and whether they cared whether some of the men in their service where members of the Faith Militant - isn't clear.

And by the way - we don't know how old the Faith Militant is. The office of the High Septon doesn't go back to Andalos, either. It is an office that developed in Oldtown after the Hightowers converted to the Faith. It is not unlikely that the origin of the Faith Militant lie in zealous knights in service of the various Andal warlords and chieftains who later organized themselves into local orders in the service of this or that lord or king until they eventually only answered to the Voice of the Seven on Earth. But then, we don't know when exactly that happened. Could very well be that the Warrior's Sons and Poor Fellows did not yet exist in their present form when the Manderlys fled the Reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Faith Militant most certainly would have had the right to go anywhere in the Seven Kingdoms of Aegon the Conqueror. Aegon was sucking up to the Faith.

Now, that doesn't mean the Faith Militant in the North could do or get away with the same things they did in the South - but some of them most definitely must have been up there. At least occasionally.

Just as there must have been members of the Faith Militant in Dorne.

...Dorne was no part of Seven Kingdoms?

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Perhaps no Warrior's Sons down there, due to the lack of towns and cities there, but the Poor Fellows were literally everywhere. One would also assume that Rhoynish culture limited the Faith's power in Dorne, just as the Starks would have limited the power of the Faith Militant in the Manderly lands.

But White Harbor isn't a desert wasteland. It is one of the largest settlements in all of Westeros.

What did the Starks gain from allowing the Manderlys into their kingdom? They came, and they bought themselves a huge tract of land with the wealth they brought. And it is not that the Manderlys and their city were useless to the Starks. They grew to effectively protect the mouth of the White Knife and thus the southern coastline of their kingdom.

The idea that the Starks cared how exactly the Manderlys did that - and whether they cared whether some of the men in their service where members of the Faith Militant - isn't clear.

We know that while lords normally can have lords bannermen - Manderlies have twelve - they cannot make any. Manderlies could create a landed knight without approval if they had spare land, as Lannisters did with Clegane, but creating a lord like Baelish takes approval of King.

And lords are supposed to apply laws of the King and realm - in times of Aegon I, laws of the different realms. They often get away with incompetence and partiality, but not always. See lord Jorah Mormont.

You could easily have a Stark king considering an appeal against a Faith court in Manderly lands: "A noble widow sent to Walk of Shame for fornication? Seven may call it a sin of flesh, but the laws of our realm end marriage vows with death - no right to imprison a widow for fornication. Faith being the judge in a property dispute with itself? No way, either!". And giving some septons the Jorah Mormont treatment.

Or considering Manderly petition to accept Faith as a Manderly bannerman with jurisdiction, and Stark saying no for just such considerations: "You may worship Seven, but you will apply the laws of my kingdom, not your faith. And I will see to it that you and your bannermen judges do the same. I trust you and your secular bannermen lords to do so - do not suggest to me septons for this."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

You raised that point, so it is up to you to prove that this is the case. The fact that Aegon and Torrhen negotiated doesn't give us any evidence about what exactly they negotiated.

The First Men converted and andalized themselves. There was never a forced conversion going on there. Even in the Vale the foolish Shetts began it by actually making a show out of their conversion in an attempt to suck up to the Andals. And later all the First Men kings - the Lannisters, Durrandons, Gardeners - all converted of their own free will. Changing their religion was a way to keep their power, not something they cared about in and of themselves.

The people fighting the crusades were not 'secular men'. Nobody in the European middle ages was 'secular'. Everyone was religious. There was just a difference between the clerical class and the normal mortals.

Those holidays are now all Christian holidays, are they not? Their origins are irrelevant. The Westerosi godswoods are still the godswoods of the old gods. They have not been high-jacked or usurped by the Seven. If things had gone the way they went in our world there would be no castle godswoods around in the South, or they would all be used to worship the Seven now.

That would mean that Torrhen actually gave a shit about preserving the ancient traditions of the North. Can you prove that this came up in the negotiations. What would have concerned him is to be allowed to keep Winterfell and some semblance of power in the North. He did not negotiate with Aegon from a perspective of strength, no?

Again, we don't know whether religion came up. Aegon most likely allowed the Northmen to keep their gods, but that doesn't mean he is going to forbid them from changing it. And the Starks also allowed the Manderys to convert the Northmen living on their lands - or rather: they allowed them to change their religion as they saw fit.

And the older Andals were even more zealous than the last Teague king. So what? Those are wars of the distant past. The Faith Militant never went around and forced people to conform to some sort of theocracy. Westeros was never Iran, or Puritan New England, Calvinistic Geneva. 

The Faith Militant didn't have the power to force the Andal lords to fight against the Targaryens. How on earth do you think they could have had the power to forcefully convert any Nothmen when they were an utter minority up there?

They all did it by themselves. They were not forced. Not even the Royces or any of the other First Men houses who lost to Artys Arryn.

Why should they? Nothing indicates that there are any religious fanatics or zealots among the Northmen. In fact, even the Starks accept the term 'old gods' which indicates that, by and far, their beliefs and gods are a thing of the past, no?

The Starks actually married quite a few Manderlys and Royces themselves. They obviously don't care about the beliefs of the people they intermarry with. Why should they not allow the Manderlys to have some Faith Militant people on their lands - assuming they had the right or power to prevent them from doing so. They did allow the Manderlys themselves into their lands, and they brought pious knights and septons and septas with them.

You do know that there is essentially no real difference between a deeply pious knight and a knight of the Warrior's Sons. They can have exactly the same world view. And it is quite clear that quite a few of the Manderly knights are pious followers of the Seven.

Aegon conquered the Seven Kingdoms with dragonfire and steel, not by carrying favor with the majority religion. And he did antagonize them, you know, with his incestuous polygamous marriage.

Aegon and his sister-wives following the Seven was actually pretty much a joke. You are not following a religion properly if you insist on continuously committing two major sins which abominable in the eyes of the Seven.

How do you know that? The Starks were in no position to challenge the Targaryens. Aegon had very large dragons. Dragons that multiplied during reigns of his sons and grandson.

Because we have no reason to believe the Starks did not allow the Faith into their lands - they did with the Manderlys. And the Manderlys intermarried with other noble families in the North. By the time of AGoT there are living quite a few knights at Winterfell, not to mention the Tallharts who are essentially a house of landed knights.

White Harbor is still a city, not some town. And I never said the Warrior's Sons of White Harbor would have to be as powerful and presumptuous as some of their chapters in the South might have been.

It is you who come up with the idea that the Faith Militant must have been the same brand of fanatics everywhere. You could just as well say all Andals are equally aggressive. They are not. As the Manderlys and their bannermen living in the North prove.

Perhaps they did discuss it and Aegon told Torrhen that this kind of thing was out of his hands now that he was bending the knee to his new king. Prove me wrong ;-).

It is pretty obvious that very few people in the South actually cared about the North. It is a frozen wasteland with shitty winters in comparison to the more fertile lands. Only fools would go up there of their own free will. The Manderlys didn't go there for the mild climate.

Very few people should care about the way of life of the people in the North. The Iron Islands was different because the religion there encouraged and preserved this stupid raider culture that had caused trouble for the kingdoms of Westeros for centuries. Converting the Ironborn would actually have an effect on their way of life and end those raids.

All of your arguments boil down to one thing "i don't like that you stepped on something i thought was a cool idea" you make circular arguments, some of which simply contradict what we know. to give one example, they idea nobody cared for the North, plain wrong we are explicitly told army's smashed themselves against Moat Caelin for thousands of year so people in the South most certainly cared. And then pretending to not know the meaning of secular (someone who is not a member of or working for a religious institution, which says nothing about personal faith or believes)  even do i have seen you use it correctly in other treads  I'm sorry your idea of Faith Militant in the North was shot down, i understand your disappointed but really get over yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jaak said:

...Dorne was no part of Seven Kingdoms?

Sure it was. There must have been members of the Faith Militant in Dorne before and after the Conquest - and perhaps even before the coming of the Rhoynar (assuming the Faith Militant as such existed at that time).

11 hours ago, Jaak said:

We know that while lords normally can have lords bannermen - Manderlies have twelve - they cannot make any. Manderlies could create a landed knight without approval if they had spare land, as Lannisters did with Clegane, but creating a lord like Baelish takes approval of King.

That is the common practice during the Targaryen and the present days. It could have been very different before the Conquest, and there could have also have been different practices in the different kingdoms.

Many of Manderlys lordly vassals would have come north along with the Manderlys themselves. One assumes they would have been made lords by the Gardener kings - if that was the practice down there - not the Starks.

It is also pretty clear that the Starks gave the Manderlys more and different rights and privileges than their other vassals. After all, the Manderlys built a city there - which no other Northern lord did.

11 hours ago, Jaak said:

You could easily have a Stark king considering an appeal against a Faith court in Manderly lands: "A noble widow sent to Walk of Shame for fornication? Seven may call it a sin of flesh, but the laws of our realm end marriage vows with death - no right to imprison a widow for fornication. Faith being the judge in a property dispute with itself? No way, either!". And giving some septons the Jorah Mormont treatment.

There is actually no hint that the Starks/First Men don't see fornication committed by women as something they should get off the hook easily. But then - a noble widow most likely didn't get that kind of treatment back then. Not unless it was part of some bigger thing. The idea that the Faith could force the wives of kings and lords to walk naked through towns and cities isn't all that likely considering that we have no textual evidence that there are many precedents for that.

Aerys II and Baelor did similar walks - although not naked, presumably - but those were ways how they personally cleansed them of their sins. They were not forced to do that.

And neither was Cersei, in fact. Kevan and the High Septon gave her a choice. This wasn't her sentence in a proper trial or anything. 

11 hours ago, Jaak said:

Or considering Manderly petition to accept Faith as a Manderly bannerman with jurisdiction, and Stark saying no for just such considerations: "You may worship Seven, but you will apply the laws of my kingdom, not your faith. And I will see to it that you and your bannermen judges do the same. I trust you and your secular bannermen lords to do so - do not suggest to me septons for this."

Well, considering that the Starks wouldn't exactly be involved in a lot of trials - or any - the Manderlys conducted on their lands it is not very likely that stuff like that ever came up. The average peasant wouldn't be able to petition the king in distant Winterfell. There wasn't due procedure or anything. If you are accused of a crime or have some legal issues with another person you go to the next court - which would be in White Harbor (or perhaps even in some castle outside of White Harbor).

And if there are issues between a member of the Faith and 'a normal person' then a pious Andal lord like the Lord of White Harbor would usually either follow the view of the Faith in the matter if he conducted the trial, or he would refuse to make a ruling in the matter and allow the Faith's own courts to handle the case.

And the Faith in the North would have had its own courts - just as the Catholic Church still has.

9 hours ago, direpupy said:

All of your arguments boil down to one thing "i don't like that you stepped on something i thought was a cool idea" you make circular arguments, some of which simply contradict what we know. to give one example, they idea nobody cared for the North, plain wrong we are explicitly told army's smashed themselves against Moat Caelin for thousands of year so people in the South most certainly cared.

Some Andal warlords and petty kings tried to conquer the North - or parts of it - in the distant past, yes, but the last of those attempts took place a long time ago. The Arryns and Starks warred a long time over the Three Sisters but they did not try to conquer their respective kingdoms as far as we know - and if they did, they clearly failed at that considering that the best they could do was to attack and raid the fingers or the regions around the White Knife.

But even those ancient people just wanted to carve out some kingdoms for themselves. They did not want to convert the Northmen to their religion. 

If they wanted to do that - and if the Faith did send out missionaries and the like - then the North would be completely andalized by the time of the Conquest - and especially thereafter - considering that you can do this kind of thing without using military force.

9 hours ago, direpupy said:

And then pretending to not know the meaning of secular (someone who is not a member of or working for a religious institution, which says nothing about personal faith or believes)  even do i have seen you use it correctly in other treads.

The word 'secular' can have quite a few meanings. The point I'm making is that it is out of the question that there are any secular institutions the way we know them in modern societies in a medieval society like Westeros. Religion is everywhere. The laws, customs, norms, rituals, feasts, celebrations, etc. of the people - be they First Men or Andals - are shaped and ruled by religion. Gods and religions are used to justify laws, customs, institutions of state, etc.

In that sense, state and religion were always one in a medieval setting, both in Westeros as well as in reality. The fact that there were conflicts between religious and mundane authorities doesn't change that, nor does it change the fact that there were special laws, judicial procedures, and privileges for members of the clergy.

9 hours ago, direpupy said:

  I'm sorry your idea of Faith Militant in the North was shot down, i understand your disappointed but really get over yourself.

You gave no argument to shoot it down.

But then, I never said there must have been any members of the Faith Militant in White Harbor. I just said it would have been nice if they had been some. You claimed there couldn't have possibly been some - which, quite frankly, makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Sure it was. There must have been members of the Faith Militant in Dorne before and after the Conquest - and perhaps even before the coming of the Rhoynar (assuming the Faith Militant as such existed at that time).

Did Faith Militant operate in Dorne after having been dissolved in Westeros by Maegor and Jaehaerys?

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Many of Manderlys lordly vassals would have come north along with the Manderlys themselves. One assumes they would have been made lords by the Gardener kings - if that was the practice down there - not the Starks.

Does not mean they did not have to be made lords by Starks. Golden Company has not made Jon Connington a Lord, and he isn´t.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

It is also pretty clear that the Starks gave the Manderlys more and different rights and privileges than their other vassals. After all, the Manderlys built a city there - which no other Northern lord did.

Different, maybe. More? That´s not clear.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And if there are issues between a member of the Faith and 'a normal person' then a pious Andal lord like the Lord of White Harbor would usually either follow the view of the Faith in the matter if he conducted the trial, or he would refuse to make a ruling in the matter and allow the Faith's own courts to handle the case.

And the Faith in the North would have had its own courts - just as the Catholic Church still has.

And the pious Andal lord might get in trouble with Stark for that, like Mormont did.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

In that sense, state and religion were always one in a medieval setting, both in Westeros as well as in reality. The fact that there were conflicts between religious and mundane authorities doesn't change that, nor does it change the fact that there were special laws, judicial procedures, and privileges for members of the clergy.

Special laws were common, but not universal. Conflicts might result in limited privileges.

It makes perfect sense that the privileges of Faith differed greatly by Kingdom pre-Conquest. Very little in Iron Islands (septons banishes, septs destroyed), more in Old Gods´ North outside Manderly lands, that was not so actively hostile, also more in Riverlands with Faith majority under Ironmen rule, also more in Dorne, also more in Manderly lands under Stark kingdom and laws... and most in proper Andal kingdoms. But with wide range even there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

1)The word 'secular' can have quite a few meanings. The point I'm making is that it is out of the question that there are any secular institutions the way we know them in modern societies in a medieval society like Westeros. Religion is everywhere. The laws, customs, norms, rituals, feasts, celebrations, etc. of the people - be they First Men or Andals - are shaped and ruled by religion. Gods and religions are used to justify laws, customs, institutions of state, etc.

2)In that sense, state and religion were always one in a medieval setting, both in Westeros as well as in reality. The fact that there were conflicts between religious and mundane authorities doesn't change that, nor does it change the fact that there were special laws, judicial procedures, and privileges for members of the clergy.

3)You gave no argument to shoot it down.

4)But then, I never said there must have been any members of the Faith Militant in White Harbor. I just said it would have been nice if they had been some. You claimed there couldn't have possibly been some - which, quite frankly, makes no sense.

1) I was not talking about institution i was talking about the people who crossed over to conquer Westeros, and in the case of people secular has only one meaning the one i gave you in my previous post.

2)Including certain restrictions like you can not enter a certain area.

3) HAHAHA nice try, read my previous post i gave plenty of arguments none of which you had a real answer to.

4) i indeed claimed that and proved it with arguments where all you had was "i have a cool idea Faith Militant in the North"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/10/2017 at 10:58 AM, Curled Finger said:

I thought exactly the same thing.   History of Westeros just did a podcast about Sons of the Dragon.   They all seem very satisfied that Vhaghar's flames only started the fire.  Presumably this pyre involved burning materials.  If I understand correctly, Vhaghar only supplied the match but the fire was just a common wood fire.   Yah, I know, it's complicated.   I'm still second guessing my convictions regarding Lamentation after all this.   

We know Tobho Mott commented something to the effect that Oath Kieeper (and Widows Wail) seemed to drink in the color of the dye he was trying to incorporate.   Nonetheless, there is red in the ripples  so all was not lost.   I think it's possible the Valyrian Steel swords have a type of memory.  You may be onto something with absorption of the blood because it does all boil down to blood magic.   I would like to offer that if dragons are fire made flesh, flesh being live,  perhaps this darkening is in fact a reaction to the magic in the blade thriving on the living dragon flame?   

There is or was or is a VS sword called Orphan Maker.   It's blade is black.   Makes you wonder what happened there.  

Oathkeeper is dyed red, could it be King's Blood? maybe removed from Gendry? Just crackpotting a little here but we do know that Valyrians and Qohorik used blood magic and Maester Pol in AWOIAF mentions that the qohorik used it on reworking VS. So not too much away from logical, just a little unbeliveble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/10/2017 at 5:07 PM, Lord Varys said:

Isn't that what I said when I pointed out Varamyr's parents and the woods witch?

But I'm not sure the Children really believed in animism per se. The weirwoods seem to be divine to them - deities - because they are effectively immortal. But it is the spirits of the Children who literally go into those trees and make them 'remember'. All by themselves the weirwoods should be just trees. They don't care about people.

The point I made is that 'the old gods' - as agents acting and influencing the story - are nothing but the living greenseers or, perhaps, the (collective) echo of the greenseers in the weirwoods.

There is nothing truly divine about that. No transcendental deities or anything. Not even non-transcendental deities, like Zeus and Hera atop Mount Olympus.

They may not be individual deities then, but if all the "spirits" of ALL LIVING AND DEAD are there, connected, then they surely are the closest thing to transcedental gods that westros has.

In my own humble perspective Planetos thus is IN FACT an animistic, or rather pantheistic, world, and the OLD GODS are not JUST a bunch of creepy treeguys living with their minds trough weirnet. The reality of the Old Gods is shown in Varamyr chapter as an extension of all nature, including all, living and dead (body) things, including MINERALS.

In my opinion it is made very clear that this is not just the northen men beliefs, this is the TRUE reality of Planetos, if all the living things have the same fate and are intrinsecly connected i would risk to say that is fucking DIVINE and TRANSCEDENTAL, this world soul, in real world is sometimes called anima mundi, and it that shares all the souls of the world, i read it in another fictional book, but the same ontological idea is still spreaded amongst some groups even in nowadays.

In resume, if one man soul can be mixed with all the nature in the world, why couldnt it be concealed in an object? T least in part.

Not that I believe this personally, but i think the idea cant be just risked out yet.

To be true in my original post i did not even mentioned that his soul was somehow invlolved in the process or even that Aegon had one to start with, in fact i don't beleive in it at all. I just brought up the idea that his blood an/or ashes MAY have been absorved by the steel wich is completely different, and may be much more easily to prove.

Like we both said, there is no further textual proof or hint of it, but there is not textual capital proof against it either, at least not any you presented so far.

Again, this is just a seed of a theory that may or not be fed and grow further, an idea that passed by when readin that part. But as long as we don't have any precise answer we can just theorize using logic and the knowledge we already have about the matters.

Maybe it would be a good opportunity to formulate a question about valyrians and blood magic on metalwork to be asked on So Spake Martin...

And about the Valyrians being religious or not, does not matter to my theory at all, what matter is their beliefs in blood magic and specially in the power of valyrian blood, wich i assume you can't even try to argue against.

 

Sorry if i seem to be harsh or rude at some point, but surely one can't figure out all by himself that's why i shared the idea here, specially to have counter arguments like yours Lord Varys. So have a good time figuring out uncle George mind everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some thoughts about Aerea and Rhaella

I think the girls who were presented during wedding ceremony of Maegor were not real Rhaella and Aerea but imposters.

Rhaella tried to hide her daughters with the help of “powerful allies”. Possibly baby swapping as precaution was involved. We know that Lannisters used this trick - at least in the case of Myrcella and Rosamund more than two centuries later. And Lannisters most likely were among those powerful allies of Rhaena.

During Maegor’s wedding ceremony Rhaena just could not admit they were not real princesses. If she did, the innocent girls would probably be killed, Rhaena herself tortured, and, most importantly, hunt on real princesses would be renewed.

Maegor even wasn‘t the most dangerous threat to the princesses. High septon proclaimed Rhaena’s children as abominations. Had it became widely known that girls are hiding somewhere in Westeros, religious zealots could had launched abomination hunt. And whether Maegor prefer to catch princesses alive, Poor Fellows could just kill them on sight. Rhaena was besieged by Poor Fellows in Crakenhall, she knew the taste. She had to be afraid and for good reason.

On the other hand, so far as everyone thought Maegor had the princesses, the real ones were safe, no one hunted them. So, I think Rhaella just sold herself to Maegor for the safety of her children, only in different way that is known in public.

So Rhaena’s tears during the ceremony probably were tears of relief, after realization that her real daughters were somewhere safe. And also grief, because she realized that she could possibly never met them again.

Rhaena herself didn’t know where her girls were – that was her own plan, so that she could not to reveal their location even under torture or magic.

Their foster parents didn’t know who the girls were – that’s was part of Rhaena’s plan too. Princesses themselves were too young to remember who they were. Only the people who arranged hiding would know – but giving that girls ended in Taenna’s hands they could possibly had been killed at that point.

Dead end. Rhaena was possibly separated from Aerea and Rhaella forever.

I enjoyed this idea for a while, then came to even better and simpler one.

 

To be continued…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I enjoyed this idea for a while, then came to even better and simpler one.

Tyanna wasn’t almighty spymistress after all. She couldn’t even find Alyssa and her children. She also couldn’t find princesses. But she didn’t need to. All she needed was to learn that Rhaena didn’t know where her daughters are and that she hadn’t been seeing them for 4 years. Maegor’s marriage took place in 47, Aegon was killed in 43. It was not specified when did Rhaena parted with her daughters, only that she “acted quickly”, but it had to be soon after Aegon’s death. Rhaena could not risk – attack of Maegor with Balerion on Casterly Rock could be a matter of days or weeks.

So Rhaena was separated from her daughters when princesses were “barely a year old”. At that age children grow and change fast.  How on Planetos she could recognize them after 4 years?

Some birthmarks perhaps, if they had any? Some secret token or maybe tatoos – if Rhaena risked to leave some traceable link. Rhaena might have wanted someday be able to recognize them, also to tell them apart (because of claim – which one is older sister).

It is possibly, that Rhaena even didn’t know if her daughters are identical or non-identical twins, because it is not easy to differ between identical year old babies and just very similar ones, with differences yet to reveal during growth.

So, my point is, Tyanna provided imposters herself (bought some Valyrian girls of the right age in slave market of Lys or Volantis perhaps).

There was one very suspicious moment. if Tyanna had princesses, it would be sensible to show them to Rhaena before the wedding to ensure her submission. Instead Tyanna chose dramatically present them during the ceremony. Why?

To deprive Rhaena of chance to look at the girls closely and to think, that’s why. Tyanna assumed that Raena couldn’t recognize girls or at least couldn’t be sure. She simply bluffed. Just so.

She could have done the same also if she managed to find girls but wasn’t sure about their identity. Then she had to assume, that Rhaena can’t be sure about it either.

Later Rhaena probably learned the truth or at least suspected it. Or maybe she understood Tyanna’s ruse instantly at the wedding ceremony. One way or other, she played ignorant, because of reasons given above.

The only one truly ignorant was Maegor. He even made Aerea his heir.  Poor Maegor was deceived by two of his queens, who acted independently and for own reasons each. Rhaena kept her daughters safe. Tyanna kept her power and reputation of almighty spymistress. She also couldn’t reveal identity of the girls later, because that would mean admitting she deceived Maegor.

This imposter case can explain why Rhaella didn’t press on Aerea’s claim. Most reasonable solution was to marry Aerea to Jahaerys (9 years senior) and thus unite the claims. But it would only had worked if she had real Aerea, not FAerea.

As for poor FRhaella - she was probably left in custody of faith and eventually became septa.

And those girls never rode the dragons.

To be continued…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now we can plunge in to speculations about fate of real Aerea and Rhaella.

I am almost sure, that the princesses were separated. Single girl draws less attention than twins, also this way chances of surviving of Aegon’s/Rhaella’s line doubles. This gives us another intriguing possibility – Tyanna caught one real princess after all and only one girl was imposter. (Or one imposter is provided by Rhaena’s allies, other by Tyanna). This would only work with non- identical imposters.

To my opinion one of safest places to them was North. The Faith militant held no sway there. Tyanna found that Alysa was secretly communicating with Storm End, Eyrie, Caterly Rock and Winterfell. Rhaella probably also had contact with them through her host – Lannister. So North was definitely an option.

Iron islands were also free of septons power, but iron islands somehow don’t strike to me as proper place for hiding princesses.

Dorne was free of Maegor’s rule. Daeria was in good terms with Targs, Aegon and Aenys even visited Sunspear   in 23. Daeria surely would prefer descendants of peacefull Aenys to warlike Maegor, who could start next Dornish war anytime. I think she could gladly help Rhaena.

One and may be the only one link to lost princesses was through these powerfull Rhaena’s allies, to whom Rhaena entrusted her daughters. Maybe they died, or maybe they decided to keep this secret for themselves. After all, Aegon’s daughters technically had better claim than Jahaerys and his descendants. And this could grant way to the iron throne at the right circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pukisbaisals said:

Some thoughts about Aerea and Rhaella

I think the girls who were presented during wedding ceremony of Maegor were not real Rhaella and Aerea but imposters.

 

Rhaella tried to hide her daughters with the help of “powerful allies”. Possibly baby swapping as precaution was involved. We know that Lannisters used this trick - at least in the case of Myrcella and Rosamund more than two centuries later. And Lannisters most likely were among those powerful allies of Rhaena.

 

During Maegor’s wedding ceremony Rhaena just could not admit they were not real princesses. If she did, the innocent girls would probably be killed, Rhaena herself tortured, and, most importantly, hunt on real princesses would be renewed.

 

Maegor even wasn‘t the most dangerous threat to the princesses. High septon proclaimed Rhaena’s children as abominations. Had it became widely known that girls are hiding somewhere in Westeros, religious zealots could had launched abomination hunt. And whether Maegor prefer to catch princesses alive, Poor Fellows could just kill them on sight. Rhaena was besieged by Poor Fellows in Crakenhall, she knew the taste. She had to be afraid and for good reason.

 

On the other hand, so far as everyone thought Maegor had the princesses, the real ones were safe, no one hunted them. So, I think Rhaella just sold herself to Maegor for the safety of her children, only in different way that is known in public.

 

So Rhaena’s tears during the ceremony probably were tears of relief, after realization that her real daughters were somewhere safe. And also grief, because she realized that she could possibly never met them again.

 

Rhaena herself didn’t know where her girls were – that was her own plan, so that she could not to reveal their location even under torture or magic.

 

Their foster parents didn’t know who the girls were – that’s was part of Rhaena’s plan too. Princesses themselves were too young to remember who they were. Only the people who arranged hiding would know – but giving that girls ended in Taenna’s hands they could possibly had been killed at that point.

Interesting idea, but I don't think it would be that likely considering that Rhaena would need to find two girls who were also twins (or close enough in age to be able to pass as such) with the classic silver hair/purple eyes Valyrian look. Who would fake Aerea and fake Rhaella be then? Targaryen or Velaryon bastards (or descendants of bastards)?

The same logic would apply to the real Aerea and Rhaella...you would think it would be hard for two Valyrian-looking girls to be in hiding for the rest of their lives. Someone would notice then eventually, even if it was just years later. And yes, assuming the girls found by Tyanna were fakes, the silver hair and purple eyes description in the text would apply to them, but it would be almost impossible for Aegon and Rhaena's real twins not to have that look.

EDIT: Not to mention, Rhaena would have no reason to keep up the deception once Maegor and Tyanna were both dead. I have a hard time believing she would keep this a secret, and since her brother was the king, he would have the resources to look for them all over Westeros if he wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Helled said:

Interesting idea, but I don't think it would be that likely considering that Rhaena would need to find two girls who were also twins (or close enough in age to be able to pass as such) with the classic silver hair/purple eyes Valyrian look. Who would fake Aerea and fake Rhaella be then? Targaryen or Velaryon bastards (or descendants of bastards)?

I think they most likely were some lyseni smalfolk girls or even the slaves. I think in Lys  Tyanna could manage to find even identical twins of appropriate age.

38 minutes ago, Helled said:

The same logic would apply to the real Aerea and Rhaella...you would think it would be hard for two Valyrian-looking girls to be in hiding for the rest of their lives. Someone would notice then eventually, even if it was just years later. And yes, assuming the girls found by Tyanna were fakes, the silver hair and purple eyes description in the text would apply to them, but it would be almost impossible for Aegon and Rhaena's real twins not to have that look.

Yes, they would be easy to notice. Again, not in Lys. And probably not on Dragonstone, where were many of dragonseeds. And there are families possessing traits similar to Valyrians - Hightowers and Daynes.

 

46 minutes ago, Helled said:

EDIT: Not to mention, Rhaena would have no reason to keep up the deception once Maegor and Tyanna were both dead. I have a hard time believing she would keep this a secret, and since her brother was the king, he would have the resources to look for them all over Westeros if he wanted to.

Probably Rhaena was looking for them. Maybe she found them. We just don't know much about Jahaerys reign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jaak said:

See a blonde in Westerlands? Think of a Lannister bastard, not a Targaryen princess.

I suppose that could work if the girls happened to have hair closer to gold than silver in colour, which is not completely unheard of in Targaryens (Elaena had that golden lock of hair).

If they were also lucky enough to have eyes on the darker side of the violet/purple/etc. colour spectrum, they could also try to make them look dark blue by wearing blue clothes often or something of the sort (dying their hair blue like Young Griff not being an option in this case).

 

1 hour ago, Pukisbaisals said:

I think they most likely were some lyseni smalfolk girls or even the slaves. I think in Lys  Tyanna could manage to find even identical twins of appropriate age.

Yes, they would be easy to notice. Again, not in Lys. And probably not on Dragonstone, where were many of dragonseeds. And there are families possessing traits similar to Valyrians - Hightowers and Daynes.

I see, it's not really out of the realm of possibility that an Essosi Mistress of Whispers would know where to find adequate fake Targaryens...

There probably were quite a few dragonseeds around at this point in history, I guess, hadn't really remembered that. While there would possibly be some non-Targaryen people with Valyrian looks around in Westeros (dragonseeds, Velaryons, Daynes), I don't think Hightowers had that look at this point, it would be more likely for that to happen after Rhaena (daughter of Daemon and Laena) married into the family. (I could be wrong, though.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Helled said:

Rhaena would have no reason to keep up the deception once Maegor and Tyanna were both dead. I have a hard time believing she would keep this a secret, and since her brother was the king, he would have the resources to look for them all over Westeros if he wanted to.

Maybe Rhaena didn't trust Jahaerys. He was depicted as ideal king by maesters, but daughters of Aegon were direct threat to his claim. Maybe Rhaena used Fraella and Faerea in the same way as with Maegor - to create an illusion, that he was in control of things.

 

By the way, Dreamfyre had produced two cluthes of eggs to the moment of Rhaena's departing from Casterly Rock to the Fair Isle. I guess second clutch was laid in Casterly Rock, place where Rhaena's daughters were born (may be eggs are still there).

It is very tempting to assume, that Rhaena gave Dreamfyre's eggs to her daughters when she sent them away. But it would be very risky and would surely compromise all anonymity. On the other hand, dragonriding would be the best evidence of Targaryen descent.

And if Faerea and Fraella -unaware of their descent - tried to become dragonriders, they were probably barbecued.

50 minutes ago, Jaak said:

See a blonde in Westerlands? Think of a Lannister bastard, not a Targaryen princess.

Those are a little bit different sorts of blondes. But quite similar in  early childhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Helled said:

I I don't think Hightowers had that look at this point, it would be more likely for that to happen after Rhaena (daughter of Daemon and Laena) married into the family. (I could be wrong, though.)

The origin of Valyrian traits of Hightowers and Daynes is nebulous to me. I also thought that Hightowers got  them from Rhaena or maybe before that - from the same Aerea or Rhaella (genuine or fake, color was the same).

Daynes could had obtained Valyrian appearance from Maegor, son of Aerion Brightflame, grandson of lady Dyanna Dayne (here the theory). Or maybe even from secret child of Rhaenys and Aegon, who was born in Dorne after death of Meraxes.

But some people hold opinion that Hightowers and Daynes had this apearance from preTargaryen times, or even from preValyrian times. I would be gratefull for the source of information on this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy the story that Aerea and Rhaella were fakes. That would mean Maegor made some impostor his heir until a son was born to him, and he wouldn't do that. Nor would he bother sentencing Rhaella to death after Rhaena and Aerea had fled.

In addition, we have the fact that Rhaena had already agreed to marry her uncle when she came to KL. She did come, after all. It is said that the people expected a show of defiance from her but she had already agree to marry him, so what would have been the point of that charade?

Not to mention that Rhaena may have inquired what happened to the people hiding her children in the wake of her marriage and Maegor's demise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I don't buy the story that Aerea and Rhaella were fakes. That would mean Maegor made some impostor his heir until a son was born to him, and he wouldn't do that. Nor would he bother sentencing Rhaella to death after Rhaena and Aerea had fled.

You didn't pay attention. Maegor  was not aware of this swap. He believed he had real princesses.

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Not to mention that Rhaena may have inquired what happened to the people hiding her children in the wake of her marriage and Maegor's demise.

Rhaena didn't know who were the people who were hiding her children. That  was her own plan.

I am sure she tried to find them, but not sure if she succeeded. Her powerful allies could just lie that her daughters were dead or that they lost contact with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...