Jump to content
Lord Varys

The Book of Swords - The Sons of the Dragon SPOILERS

Recommended Posts

Oh, and just a thought on this 'Rhaenys was a skinchanger idea':

You guys need to keep in mind that Jaehaerys-Shaera, Aerys-Rhaella, and Viserys, Daenerys, and Rhaegar are all half-Blackwood thanks to Betha Blackwood.

If Bloodraven's greenseer abilities come from his Blackwood ancestry - which isn't confirmed as of yet, but no unlikely - then Rhaegar's children could have inherited similar abilities.

This doesn't have to have anything to do with the dragonrider thing. Assuming Balerion is not just a particular cranky tomcat - which an SSM actually indicates.

This could also mean that Daenerys could have or develop skinchanger abilities. People usually overlook that.

The idea that the Targaryens have second lives in their dragons makes little sense to me. If that was the case then Vhagar would have never bonded with Aemond, not to mention that she would never have tried to kill Caraxes and Daemon.

If there is anything we can say from the history of the Dance it is that the rider masters the dragon. The dragon catches and mimics the preferences and dislikes of its rider. Vhagar hated Lucerys Velaryon while he was ridden by Vhagar. When Laena was still her rider she wouldn't have disliked the boy at all. Might have even liked her, considering that Laena and Rhaenyra were very close.

Share this post


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

Oh, and just a thought on this 'Rhaenys was a skinchanger idea':

You guys need to keep in mind that Jaehaerys-Shaera, Aerys-Rhaella, and Viserys, Daenerys, and Rhaegar are all half-Blackwood thanks to Betha Blackwood.

If Bloodraven's greenseer abilities come from his Blackwood ancestry - which isn't confirmed as of yet, but no unlikely - then Rhaegar's children could have inherited similar abilities.

This doesn't have to have anything to do with the dragonrider thing. Assuming Balerion is not just a particular cranky tomcat - which an SSM actually indicates.

This could also mean that Daenerys could have or develop skinchanger abilities. People usually overlook that.

The idea that the Targaryens have second lives in their dragons makes little sense to me. If that was the case then Vhagar would have never bonded with Aemond, not to mention that she would never have tried to kill Caraxes and Daemon.

If there is anything we can say from the history of the Dance it is that the rider masters the dragon. The dragon catches and mimics the preferences and dislikes of its rider. Vhagar hated Lucerys Velaryon while he was ridden by Vhagar. When Laena was still her rider she wouldn't have disliked the boy at all. Might have even liked her, considering that Laena and Rhaenyra were very close.

Well as to the Blackwood bit, this is how Dany would have got the ability back, as again, it was lost during the Dance, abouts. 

As to Vhagar? Huh? Why does all of that have to be true? Who's to say who's soul even went into Vhagar? His egg by this line of thought wouldve been seeded by some one prior to Aegon and his sisters. As such, wouldn't have known any of these people your talking about in his life time. At best, some of his temperament might be there, but any extended memories over that long idk. Once inside the dragon, i imagine it's much like taking a wolf or something. Your soul gets lost in the beast and you become the beast. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

As to Vhagar? Huh? Why does all of that have to be true? Who's to say who's soul even went into Vhagar? His egg by this line of thought wouldve been seeded by some one prior to Aegon and his sisters. As such, wouldn't have known any of these people your talking about in his life time. At best, some of his temperament might be there, but any extended memories over that long idk. Once inside the dragon, i imagine it's much like taking a wolf or something. Your soul gets lost in the beast and you become the beast. 

I wasn't talking about that, but rather about the idea suggested farther above in the tread that Aenys I might have had a second life in Quicksilver, searching out Aegon in the process of it.

And I don't buy that.

We have some evidence that dragons like to around people with dragonlord blood, and they might even search out or feel the need (and pain) of their riders - as indicated by the behavior of Sunfyre and Dreamfyre in TPatQ.

Hell, Rhaenyra's pain and hate of Syrax after the death of Joffrey Velaryon could have caused Syrax to kill herself. She had killed Rhaenyra's son, after all, and if a dragon really feels the pain of its rider Syrax would have felt a lot of pain after that... 

Share this post


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

I guess George gave Ran/Linda special information on this.

And since it is fun another interesting question:

@Ran

Your wording in TWoIaF indicates that Alyssa Velaryon had indeed a Targaryen mother of unknown identity. Can you confirm that as canon? The way George phrases it in TSotD indicates that Aenys and Alyssa are only cousins through Aegon's mother Valaena Velaryon (who herself had had a Targaryen mother of unknown identity, of course).

We have oft used your words there as basis for speculation that Aethan Velaryon must have married some Targaryen cousin. A much younger sister of Lord Aerion, perhaps.

The latter idea would make them much closer cousins that the former. I'm pretty sure you did ask George about stuff like that, didn't you?

That doesn't convince me at all. If Aenys was living a second life in Quicksilver he and Aegon would have flown away from Balerion as quickly as their wings could carry them. Not to mention that the much easier way to help his sons would have been to bond with Prince Viserys who could then still have supported Rhaena and Aegon in the West.

Assuming Viserys dragonless - as he appears - for another stupid reason.

Well, we never really needed confirmation for that. It was always obvious. Although especially Visenya and Maegor could have transported a few people on Vhagar and Balerion. They were big enough for that. But they did not do that in that situation. And with smaller dragons - like Syrax, Sunfyre, etc. - the whole thing would become pretty much impossible.

That is not an irrelevant point. You know I don't think polygamy was formally outlawed by Jaehaerys I. That wasn't really necessary. It was never legal from the Faith's point of view to begin with. And if we take the incest thing then it is quite clear that incest remained a crime and a sin. What made it incestuous marriages possible was just that the kings arranged them, and thus gave the people involved permission - or their approval after the fact, as Aegon V did with Jaehaerys and Shaera - to indulge in that kind of behavior.

A twisted Targaryen king - say, one like Aerys II or Aegon IV, who really grew to resent his ingrate son - could very well have condemned a son who married his sister, and punished him for the crime of incest as the scriptures of the Faith demand.

And I'm sure a similar thing could have done with polygamy.

But the question at hand really is the material reason why the hell especially the dragonriding Targaryens didn't pursue the polygamy thing. As I listed above, there were situations where the idea must have come up to resolve a problem. And it is not that the law of a king could have stopped another king. Aegon IV - who surely must have been tempted to marry at least one of his mistresses - could have unmade any law Jaehaerys I made. Not to mention Viserys I who didn't give shit about the decrees of the Great Council which essentially made him king.

We know that the man was closer to Aerys II than Prince Rhaegar. Aerys II humbled himself and made walk of repentance to the Great Sept. That kind of thing must have gotten him very much into the good graces of the High Septon since that symbolically strengthens the power and authority of the Faith.

Allowing a Targaryen prince to take a second wife - which goes against the doctrines of the Faith - means that you weaken the authority and power of the Faith. 

In addition, it is quite clear that the permission of the High Septon wouldn't be worth much without the permission of the king. If the High Septon said 'yes, of course' to Rhaegar-Lyanna, and Aerys II said 'no way' then the High Septon would change his mind to 'no way' immediately. The Great Sept of Baelor stands in KL. Not on Dragonstone.

But the relevance of this question only is whether the Faith and pious lords and smallfolk of Westeros would actually recognize a child born by Lyanna as a legitimately born royal prince if there was some sort of wedding between Rhaegar and Lyanna (which I think there was). I very much doubt that.

In fact, I'm pretty sure if Maegor's women had given him children there would have been a lot of uncertainty as to who was worthy to succeed him. If Ceryse had suddenly given him a child she could claim it was the heir because she was the first and thus the most important/only lawful wife. A child by Tyanna could be dismissed - after her and Maegor's deaths, of course - as being of too lowborn on his mother's side, and a similar case could be made for a Westerling and Costayne child.

And, of course, all those children could be dismissed as heirs because of the polygamous nature of their marriage. The Catholic view on the matter - which also seems to be the Faith's view of the matter - is that only the first marriage of a bigamist or polygamist is valid. That is why anyone who divorces and takes another spouse is effectively committing continuous adultery by entertaining a concubine.

I wasn't discussing with. I was clarifying my position which you misrepresented.

That is actually not true. Rhaenys is the younger wife of Aegon the Conqueror, not necessarily 'the second wife'. We don't know when and how he married his sisters - I imagine it must have been one ceremony, like Maegor did with the black brides - but there is no reason to believe Rhaenys came after Visenya in any temporal sense there. And if Rhaenys actually happened to be the first wife then the marriage between Aegon and Visenya would have been invalid, not the one between Aegon and Rhaenys.

And no, if you outlaw practice p at point in time t you do not retroactively make all people indulging in practice p criminals. The First Night, for instance, only became a crime after King Aegon decreed it was a crime.

Or take the incest. Aegon V or any other Targaryen king could sure as hell make Targaryen incest a crime punishable by death in the future. But he would thus not invalidate the marriages of his ancestors who had been brother and sister.

You delude yourself there. Nobody accepted this marriage before Maegor beat people into submission. If you treated me the way Maegor treated the Faith I'd sing your tune, too, at least in people. But I'd still call you 'polygamous, incestuous abomination' behind your back, and never bow to the abominable bastards from such unions.

Assuming I had an issue with polygamy and incest, of course.

The Faith's concept of marriage sees marriage as a union between one woman and one man. That's it. That's the important part. If the Ghiscari and Lyseni, etc. allow polygamy then such unions would be invalid in Westeros.

The issue of this 'blood and fire' marriage of Maegor's is not the rite, it is the fact that he took a second wife.

In that sense the Westerosi seem to be somewhat more tolerant than the Meereenese. Although it seems quite clear if Aegon the Conqueror had taken a Westerosi wife - say, Sharra Arryn or the Hightower daughter - they would have insisted that he marry her properly in a sept the way the followers of the Seven do. This barbarous 'fire and blood' stuff was no longer done after Maegar-Alys. Not even when Maegor married Tyanna and subsequently the black brides.

And it is out of the question that anyone later on - like Rhaegar, say - revived that ancient stuff.

They are not as tolerant as you seem to think. Salt marriages are not seen as proper marriages outside the Iron Islands. There is a different marriage concept between the Ironborn (more complex, room for polygamy) and the rigid monogamous concept of marriage of the followers of the Seven. The tolerance only extends to the accepted religions of Westeros - meaning the old gods and the new gods. Whatever the promiscuity the Summer Islanders consider 'marriage' is most likely not accepted as such by either the First Men nor the Andals.

That would be a very difficult reading in the context of the paragraph. If that's what is meant the sentence should come up when the early 20s are discussed. Or it should be marked as a short episode, looking back in time to the year 23 AC.

As always Lord Varys you twist and shimmy your way to misconstruing every word I say. 

This is why I no longer choose to engage with you.

A good example of your slippery and unproductive methods is here in how you equate the Faith of the Seven with Catholicism and use that equation to insist your opinion is fact. But then deny that same equation when I use the Catholic model to suggest that children of a marriage declared unlawful retrospectively become bastards. When we know full well that in real-world history this is exactly what was done. Take Elizabeth Woodville's children with Edward IV. When their marriage was declared false due to Edwards previous pre-contract with another woman her children by him were made Illegitimate! This is how Richard III was able to take the English throne. Later when Henry VIII broke with Rome he used the same model of retrospective bastardy to delegitimise both Mary and Elizabeth in turn. As it suited him. 

BTW Not even the Iron Born view Salt wives as the same as Rock Wives, because these women are not wives at all but in fact are kidnap victims subjected to rape and abuse.  And yes whilst at the time there was outcry and calls for denunciation of Alys as Maegors wife. The histories record her and all the Black Brides as genuinely his wives. Which as I have been pointing out to you for years now is what actually matters in the long term. 

As to say a polygamous marriage of an essosi man? Why are you telling me Ser that should an important wealthy and influential Essosi merchant or political figure come to visit Westeros on a trade deal with his harem of wives that the Nobility of Westeros would stand there and say Of course these women are all whores, I don't think so! 

 

That's it that is all you're getting from me. I hope you can see from the few examples of the massive flaws and twists in your arguments why I have decided to no longer engage with you. You don't discuss the text to work out the likely events to come or those past but hidden. You discuss to support your own predetermined ideas and have a total inability to admit when you are mistaken. An example being how you claimed that you never said Maegors marriages were not seen as legitimate in the historical accounts when I could pull a dozen old threads where you indeed claimed just that. You denied it till you were blue in the face as they say. despite TWOIAF seeming to support that fact. A fact that TSoTD has made abundantly clear. ArchMaester Glydayn talks not of concubines, false wives and whores but of Queens. 

Share this post


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

I wasn't talking about that, but rather about the idea suggested farther above in the tread that Aenys I might have had a second life in Quicksilver, searching out Aegon in the process of it.

And I don't buy that.

We have some evidence that dragons like to around people with dragonlord blood, and they might even search out or feel the need (and pain) of their riders - as indicated by the behavior of Sunfyre and Dreamfyre in TPatQ.

Hell, Rhaenyra's pain and hate of Syrax after the death of Joffrey Velaryon could have caused Syrax to kill herself. She had killed Rhaenyra's son, after all, and if a dragon really feels the pain of its rider Syrax would have felt a lot of pain after that... 

Oh my bad :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

A good example of your slippery and unproductive methods is here in how you equate the Faith of the Seven with Catholicism and use that equation to insist your opinion is fact. But then deny that same equation when I use the Catholic model to suggest that children of a marriage declared unlawful retrospectively become bastards. When we know full well that in real-world history this is exactly what was done. Take Elizabeth Woodville's children with Edward IV. When their marriage was declared false due to Edwards previous pre-contract with another woman her children by him were made Illegitimate! This is how Richard III was able to take the English throne. Later when Henry VIII broke with Rome he used the same model of retrospective bastardy to delegitimise both Mary and Elizabeth in turn. As it suited him. 

I think you know that Elizabeth Woodville's children were declared illegitimate by a decree of Parliament. The Church and the Pope had nothing to do with that. The fact that this thing stood had most likely more to do with the insignificance of the Woodville family. You can treat those upstarts this way but not a Spanish princess.

I'm aware that children of annulled marriage can but don't have to be illegitimate in real life, but the point we are usually discussion is whether the children of a polygamous second marriage have the same status as the child of a first wife in a strictly monogamous society. And I'd contest that.

3 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

BTW Not even the Iron Born view Salt wives as the same as Rock Wives, because these women are not wives at all but in fact are kidnap victims subjected to rape and abuse.  And yes whilst at the time there was outcry and calls for denunciation of Alys as Maegors wife. The histories record her and all the Black Brides as genuinely his wives. Which as I have been pointing out to you for years now is what actually matters in the long term. 

Salt wives are wives by Ironborn standards, just as salt children are legitimate children. They are not bastards. They can inherit if there are no rock children around. There are different concepts of marriage there. The Ironborn marriage culture differs from the Westerosi culture. They allow a sort of polygamy, Westerosi culture does not.

And Valyrian culture doesn't allow it, either. There are scarce precedents for polygamy there, among the utmost elite. It is not a polygamous society. Marriage is seen as between one woman and one man.

3 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

As to say a polygamous marriage of an essosi man? Why are you telling me Ser that should an important wealthy and influential Essosi merchant or political figure come to visit Westeros on a trade deal with his harem of wives that the Nobility of Westeros would stand there and say Of course these women are all whores, I don't think so! 

If you recall, Davos tells Salladhor Saan to his face that his wives are not his wives but concubines. Perhaps they are, but chances are that the Valyrian elite in Lys continued to practice the variation of polygamy that was possible in Valyria. Possible for the utmost elite.

3 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

That's it that is all you're getting from me. I hope you can see from the few examples of the massive flaws and twists in your arguments why I have decided to no longer engage with you. You don't discuss the text to work out the likely events to come or those past but hidden. You discuss to support your own predetermined ideas and have a total inability to admit when you are mistaken. An example being how you claimed that you never said Maegors marriages were not seen as legitimate in the historical accounts when I could pull a dozen old threads where you indeed claimed just that. You denied it till you were blue in the face as they say. despite TWOIAF seeming to support that fact. A fact that TSoTD has made abundantly clear. ArchMaester Glydayn talks not of concubines, false wives and whores but of Queens. 

I always argued on the basis of the Alys Harroway example, pointing out the TSotD makes it clear that no one but Visenya, Maegor, and the Harroways saw that as a valid marriage. And I also pointed out that Maegor's many marriages - as laid out by Yandel in TWoIaF - were a huge part of the Faith's continued opposition against him.

I never doubted that historians correctly record that King Maegor had six wives. What I doubt is that those historians think, at their hearts, that those marriages were truly lawful and valid marriages. Some people might have accepted them, others not. If people were perfectly fine and happy with polygamy in the wake of Maegor's success then not only Targaryen kings but many lords should have mimicked Aegon and Maegor in this.

After all, having multiple wives can be a lot of fun for a powerful man, right?

Share this post


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

See above. I really don't think that would make a lot of sense. It was why I originally asked whether it makes sense that the High Septon was only 53 when he died. But it makes sense. A thirty-year-old certainly could be chosen. It would be somewhat early, but the man was really a forceful, ambitious, and charismatic guy.

Hm, not sure what to make of it.Ragarding the Hightower stuff:

Manfred had at least two younger sons, one a Warrior's son and one a septon.

Morgan was a Warrior's son and brother to Martyn, a Lord of Oldtown.

So I think it is safe to assume that Martyn was Manfred's son.

As Ran stated above, the Lord Hightower giving Ceryse to Maegor disappears in 35 AC, and at the same point Martyn's name appears. 

So the scenario would be: Manfred gives Ceryse to Maegor in 23 AC, dies in 35 AC and is inherited by his son Martyn (who is the father of Ceryse, according to the world book). 

58 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nobody liking the idea that he may have been a Gardener from an obscure cadet branch, given to the Faith before the Conquest?

Or at least a boy who lost a lot of family members on the Field of Fire...?

Of course that would be possible, but maybe he was just similar to the High Sparrow without any personal reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No  other houses copied Targaryen polygamy in the post-Aegon era for the same reason that no one copied Targaryen incest: it was a unique privilege permitted to them and no one else.  Simple as  that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

You actually think that? I never thought that at all. There is a good chance that those five other High Septons were all old and sick men who served only a couple of years - or some even months, like so many popes - between the years 11-23 AC.

The forceful High Septon died in 43 AC at the age of 53. That doesn't make it impossible that he received the Crystal Crown around the age of thirty in 23 AC, say. A younger brother to the Lady of Oldtown should always have a good shot at the highest office in the Faith.

I certainly do think it is possible :)

We are looking at a time period of 32 years, from  11 AC to 43 AC.  I  this time period, there were six High Septons (at least, since we know nothing about the number of High Septons in between  37 AC and 43 AC. It seems more likely to me that each of these High Septons served for a while in their office, than that five of them died with  the timespan of 13 years, between 11 AC and 24 AC, and that the sixth served almost twice as long as his five predecessors did combined. The ninety-year old Septon who was chosen to succeed him and who died after a year, seems to be more of an exception than the rule in terms of how long a High Septon  generally serves.

 

2 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

@Rhaenys_Targaryen It is an interesting idea that the High Septon in 23 AC was a different one than the one during the Faith Militant Rebellion. I never thought about that, because both times he is mentioned as Ceryse's uncle, but I guess this would work. The only way to learn the truth is probably waiting for Fire and Blood.

Sure, there are nearly two decades in between. The first could, for example, perhaps have been the younger son of Lord Manfred who had taken his septon's vows, while the second was related to Martyn's wife or mother, or the husband of a sister of Martyn. There are quite a lot of possibilities.

But with six High Septons in between 11 and 37 AC, I see no reason to assume that the guy who held the office in 24 AC must have been the same guy as in 43 AC. He could have been, but he just as well could have been someone else entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

As Ran stated above, the Lord Hightower giving Ceryse to Maegor disappears in 35 AC, and at the same point Martyn's name appears. 

35 AC? Could you link that, because i cannot find that..

Or did you mean 25 AC?

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

35 AC? Could you link that, because i cannot find that..

Or did you mean 25 AC?

He edited his post, so it is not there anymore. It was there before he realised that the Worldbook actually made a decision regarding Ceryse's father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2017 at 7:13 PM, Lord Varys said:

We have a well-known continuity error in the 'iron-and-ruby crown' thing George repeatedly does for the crown of the Conqueror. It sounds badass and all but it was Valyrian steel and rubies, not iron and rubies.

As to the timeline - how do you see Aenys I's grand progress from KL to Oldtown for his coronation and anointing? He goes by way of Riverrun, Lannisport, and Highgarden. Surely this doesn't mean he visited those castles before he went to Oldtown, right? After all, he was faced by Harren while staying with the Tullys, so the best idea would be that the royal party went that way:

KL - Highgarden (where Aenys already had been on a progress when his father died) - Oldtown - Lannisport - Riverrun (where the rebellions caught up with him).

The story does not allow for him to continue from Riverrun to Oldtown. At least not without contradicting itself.

I got the impression that he never made it past Riverrun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2017 at 9:21 PM, Lord Varys said:

Apparently, Rhaena was riding her dragon Dreamfyre since she was twelve. Rhaella was sent to Oldtown to become a septa after Maegor named Aerea his heir. Maegor sent for her head after Rhaena and Dreamfyre escaped on her dragon but the order was not executed. Rhaena also grew 'more than fond' of the son of Lord Farman during her stay on Fair Isle. Perhaps she ended up marrying that dude after the freak reign of Maegor was over?

There is a lot about Ceryse Hightower we never knew...

And, of course, it is Rogar Baratheon, not Robar Baratheon.

I was wondering what the point of that was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2017 at 7:53 AM, Lord Varys said:

The only mentioning of Dorne comes when Maegor's rule is collapsing. Then the Dornishmen prepare to invade the Reach and the Stormlands. Whether they do that or not remains to be seen. The recent speculations on Dornish Wars taking place in the early reign of Jaehaerys I might make sense in that regard. While Lord Rogar Baratheon effectively ruled the Realm as Hand and Protector of the Realm one assumes he would have reacted rather harshly if the Dornish invaded and raided his lands.

There's also the suggestion of taking a Dayne to wife to pry Starfall from Dorne. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2017 at 7:53 AM, Lord Varys said:

See above. However, it seems to be pretty clear to me by the way the Vulture King uprising is described that this constitutes a Second Dornish War. George/Gyldayn even refer to the Vulture King's men as 'the Dornish'. It wasn't an attempt to conquer Dorne but still an (unofficial) war with Dorne.

I got the impression that the Vulture King was used, if not set up, by House Martell to cause trouble for the Iron Throne. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I was wondering what the point of that was. 

I think this is just an extra reason for Rhaena to surrend to Maegor peacefully. She did not want Maegor to destory House Farman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excellent work, Rhaenys.  I'm sorry, I'm so confused by this. 
6 hours ago, Ran said:

I think I've already indicated that the High Septon was Ceryse's maternal uncle, and that Martyn and Morgan were brothers, while the Lady Patrice was sister to Martyn and Morgan's father. 

I had a fair bit here about the Hightowers, but now I see there was a decision for TWoIaF. I'm going to have to go through a bunch of notes and drafts to figure out the process, but will flag this for F&B v1 to try and make sure George thinks about it again when finalizing the text there.

"Some believe His High Holiness was removed by his own brother, Ser Morgan Hightower, " Rhaenys, that was corrected in later editions. It now reads: "Some believe His High Holiness was removed by Lord Hightower's brother, Ser Morgan"

Great.  Just to absolutely confirm this:  was the High Septon in 25 AC, stated to be Ceryse's maternal uncle, the same one who launched the Faith Militant uprising in 41-42 AC?  I mean it's a bit odd for there to be "six" High Septons during Aegon I's reign, but the last one ruled 20 years.....though not unprecedented, given how wacky Papal succession has been in real life (some holding office only one year, then you get like John Paul II, who held office for 27 years.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ran said:

Re: Daemon Velaryon turning against Maegor, it looks like the call was made to name him so, but in retrospect I suspect this was in fact supposed to be Aethan. That said, it feels like another thing to flag for George, as it's possible he indicated to Anne that Aethan was dead by this point and his successor was the one who turned.

Thanks, I was confused by this.

Okay, so Alyssa Velaryon was daughter of Aethan Velaryon, thus Rhaena is Aethan's niece....possible that Aethan was succeeded by a younger brother (thus still "niece") but Alyssa is mentioned as having brothers who would have succeeded Aethan....

Thanks for checking.  It's nice to feel useful :)

 

Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Rhaena is Aethan's grandchild, is she not?

(ack, typo, I was already going to fix that)

...er...actually, in context, it says: "Lord Velaryon of Driftmark advised Maegor to send for his niece Princess Rhaena, his brother’s daughter and the widow of his brother’s son,"...

 

Sorry, sorry, the council scene suggesting the "Black Brides" only refers to Rhaena as *Maegor's* niece, without specifying relation of this "Lord Velaryon" to Rhaena.  

 

 

Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×