R+L=J v.165

[Ygrain]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

There is no chance the rebel leaders would have put a Targaryen on the throne. They renounced Targaryen rule, and went to war against them to remove them from the Iron Throne, not place one of their babes on it.

Amen. There is absolutely no way Ned would want to put baby Jon on the throne, and absolutely no way he could gain support for such a plan.

[AlaskanSandman]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

 

I really wish some one would collect all of GRRM's quotes in SSM's that pertain to the story. Not the whole conversations and interviews, just the important bits. Like Martin confirming Elia was the one in Dany's vision of Rhaegar and Aegon. He's got alot of odd ball ones out there haha

[Bael's Bastard]

20 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Amen. There is absolutely no way Ned would want to put baby Jon on the throne, and absolutely no way he could gain support for such a plan.

I agree. I don't see a scenario in which the rebel leaders accept a Targaryen king on the Iron Throne short of the rebellion failing, and the surviving leaders, or their surviving heirs, being forced to swear to whichever Targaryen king lived to sit the throne. I don't see any scenario in which the rebels successfully defeat the Targaryens, and Robert lives, only to place a Targaryen on the throne. And if Robert had died, I am sure there is a long list of options they would have considered before putting any Targaryen on the throne. I would go so far as to say that, Targaryen succession be damned, Jon is the last Targaryen Ned would have ever put on the Iron Throne. 

[Bael's Bastard]

1 hour ago, AlaskanSandman said:

I really wish some one would collect all of GRRM's quotes in SSM's that pertain to the story. Not the whole conversations and interviews, just the important bits. Like Martin confirming Elia was the one in Dany's vision of Rhaegar and Aegon. He's got alot of odd ball ones out there haha

The Citadel says that GRRM confirmed that it is Elia, though it doesn't link to an SSM, so not sure where GRRM confirmed it. It is pretty obvious, though, since Rhaegar would have left for the Battle of the Bells long before Jon was born, and wouldn't have named him Aegon if he had been there seeing how he already had a firstborn son named Aegon.

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Prophecies/Entry/1811

[Bael's Bastard]

18 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

The Citadel says that GRRM confirmed that it is Elia, though it doesn't link to an SSM, so not sure where GRRM confirmed it. It is pretty obvious, though, since Rhaegar would have left for the Battle of the Bells long before Jon was born, and wouldn't have named him Aegon if he had been there seeing how he already had a firstborn son named Aegon.

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Prophecies/Entry/1811

Here is an SSM:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/15608

Quote

DECEMBER 26, 1998

RHAEGAR AND ELIA

[Note: This is something that I've known about for many years, having a copy of a copy of the message forwarded to me by a third party. However, recently I discovered details of the source of the information, including an approximate date for when Martin provided his response.]

<< Who is the couple celebrating the birth of a son that Dany sees in her vision in the wizard's palace in Qarth? Can you tell us? Is it Rhaegar and someone? Or is it the original Aegon (the Conqueror?) >>

Rhaegar and his wife, Elia of Dorne.

 

[Bael's Bastard]

Also, from an old forum:

http://community.fortunecity.ws/healthclub/rowing/100/clashkin/thread2s/thread2s1.html

Quote

Ran 
User ID: 0867924

Apr 10th 4:38 AM

This is from an e-mail that Revanshe forwarded to the board from an ASoIaF mailing list, originally posted by Rania after recieving a reply from GRRM: 

<< Who is the couple celebrating the birth of a son that Dany sees in her vision in the wizard's palacein Qarth? Can you tell us? Is it Rhaegar and someone? or is it the original Aegon (the Conqueror?) >> 

Rhaegar and his wife, Elia of Dorne. 

Someone else, or maybe still Revanshe, forwarded from the same list: 

I asked GRRM today about that, he said that the child from the scene is dead. I also asked whether The Song of Ice and Fire are the song of someone particular, he said that the phrase could be used in many contexts....obviously, he is hiding something

I don't share labor's dubiousness, because the second comment -- of A Song of Ice and Fire having multiple meanings happens to be a statement from March 17, 1999 ... exactly one day _before_ Martin confirmed that same thing, for the first time I've ever seen, at the Event Horizon Chat. So, the person definently did seem to have contacted him, and they seemed unequivocal about what GRRM said, even though they show a healthy amount of speculation concerning the second statement. 

Seems clear cut to me. I don't think Revanshe would have forwarded it unless she believed what the fellow said. 

As for Rhaenys surviving, and not Aegon, I've toyed with the possibility that Varys was able to save Rhaenys (replacing her, perhaps, with some poor child who looks much like Rhaenys -- one of his little birds? -- after suitable makeup tricks were put to use,) but not Aegon and Elia. It does seem that Rhaenys was all alone -- pulled out from under a bed, according to him -- and not with her mother, which is curious. 

I half suspect that the issue has to do with, almost certainly, Aerys's refusal to flee, since the queen and Viserys had to be snuck out of the Red Keep (I wonder if Varys helped with that? Almost certainly.) 

As to Tywin recognizing her? He hasn't seen her in well over a year or two. Children grow quickly. If she was five when she was 'killed,' she could have been three or even two, last time Tywin saw her.

 

[Bael's Bastard]

Ran commented about his old post from that old forum here:

https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/137649-rlj-v160/&amp;page=6&amp;tab=comments#comment-7528191

Quote

Decided to drop by. Nice research, Schmedricko, digging up the old EEsite archive. Just as an added note, the Revanshe mentioned by me in the above quoted post was the founder of the EEsite and EzBoard forums that were both direct predecessors to this one. She also co-ran one of the first ASoIaF fan sites. She in turn was, I believe, forwarding a statement from Rania, another long-ago member of the forum who actually occasionally chatted with GRRM via AIM chat. So their report of GRRM replying to her that it was Rhaegar and Elia I take as absolutely true.

However, the "child is dead"... I dug around a bit and I was reminded that the person who reported this, who went by the handle Monte Cristo, never provided an email for that statement. I ended up tracking them down and talking to them about it, asking them to recall it to the best of their ability, and in the end they admitted that they couldn't 100% vouch that they remembered the exact wording and so couldn't 100% vouch that George's statement about the death of the child was unequivocal.

So, grain of salt on that one.

 

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I agree. I don't see a scenario in which the rebel leaders accept a Targaryen king on the Iron Throne short of the rebellion failing, and the surviving leaders, or their surviving heirs, being forced to swear to whichever Targaryen king lived to sit the throne. I don't see any scenario in which the rebels successfully defeat the Targaryens, and Robert lives, only to place a Targaryen on the throne. And if Robert had died, I am sure there is a long list of options they would have considered before putting any Targaryen on the throne. I would go so far as to say that, Targaryen succession be damned, Jon is the last Targaryen Ned would have ever put on the Iron Throne. 

Without any textual evidence about the actual reasoning of the rebels this is a bold and unsupported statement. Remember, you are talking about a world here where Aegon II named Rhaenyra's son his heir. If he can do that, surely the rebels could have made another Targaryen king. Even Tywin's men contemplate this after the kingslaying, and Tywin's men should have known both about 'King Robert' as well as Tywin's intention for his 'good friend' Aerys.

All we do know is that they made Robert king. But not why. We cannot pretend we know more than that.

[Bael's Bastard]

18 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Without any textual evidence about the actual reasoning of the rebels this is a bold and unsupported statement. Remember, you are talking about a world here where Aegon II named Rhaenyra's son his heir. If he can do that, surely the rebels could have made another Targaryen king. Even Tywin's men contemplate this after the kingslaying, and Tywin's men should have known both about 'King Robert' as well as Tywin's intention for his 'good friend' Aerys.

All we do know is that they made Robert king. But not why. We cannot pretend we know more than that.

It's really not bold at all. And what is unsupported and completely without merit is the idea that Ned and the other rebels would have considered putting any Targaryen on the throne after their victory. Aegon II has nothing to do with what is being discussed, and no relevance to a situation where rebels fought to remove House Targaryen from the Iron Throne, not just one or another faction of House Targaryen. Nor do I recall Aegon II actually naming Aegon III his heir, though I am not interested in getting into an irrelevant debate about it. There is zero basis for the idea that the rebels had any desire or intention to consider putting another Targaryen on the throne they were removing them from.

You are projecting onto Tywin's men what Jaime assumes they mean, and what supposedly went through Jaime's own thoughts:

""Shall I proclaim a new king as well?" Crakehall asked, and Jaime read the question plain: Shall it be your father, or Robert Baratheon, or do you mean to try to make a new dragonking? He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar's infant son Aegon, still in Maegor's with his mother. A new Targaryen king, and my father as Hand. How the wolves will howl, and the storm lord choke with rage. For a moment he was tempted, until he glanced down again at the body on the floor, in its spreading pool of blood. His blood is in both of them, he thought. "Proclaim who you bloody well like," he told Crakehall. Then he climbed the Iron Throne and seated himself with his sword across his knees, to see who would come to claim the kingdom. As it happened, it had been Eddard Stark." (ASOS: Jaime II)

Ned repeats Jaime's statement when he approached the throne that makes clear Jaime understood that Robert was the rebel choice for king:

""I was still mounted. I rode the length of the hall in silence, between the long rows of dragon skulls. It felt as though they were watching me, somehow. I stopped in front of the throne, looking up at him. His golden sword was across his legs, its edge red with a king's blood. My men were filling the room behind me. Lannister's men drew back. I never said a word. I looked at him seated there on the throne, and I waited. At last Jaime laughed and got up. He took off his helm, and he said to me, 'Have no fear, Stark. I was only keeping it warm for our friend Robert. It's not a very comfortable seat, I'm afraid.'"
The king threw back his head and roared. His laughter startled a flight of crows from the tall brown grass. They took to the air in a wild beating of wings. "You think I should mistrust Lannister because he sat on my throne for a few moments?" He shook with laughter again. "Jaime was all of seventeen, Ned. Scarce more than a boy."" (AGOT: Eddard II)

And Jaime even portrays Aerys as realizing that Robert was the main threat to House Targaryen after the Battle of the Bells:

"He floated in heat, in memory. "After dancing griffins lost the Battle of the Bells, Aerys exiled him." Why am I telling this absurd ugly child? "He had finally realized that Robert was no mere outlaw lord to be crushed at whim, but the greatest threat House Targaryen had faced since Daemon Blackfyre. The king reminded Lewyn Martell gracelessly that he held Elia and sent him to take command of the ten thousand Dornishmen coming up the kingsroad. Jon Darry and Barristan Selmy rode to Stoney Sept to rally what they could of griffins' men, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south and persuaded his father to swallow his pride and summon my father. But no raven returned from Casterly Rock, and that made the king even more afraid. He saw traitors everywhere, and Varys was always there to point out any he might have missed. So His Grace commanded his alchemists to place caches of wildfire all over King's Landing. Beneath Baelor's Sept and the hovels of Flea Bottom, under stables and storehouses, at all seven gates, even in the cellars of the Red Keep itself." (ASOS: Jaime V)

And Jaime certainly portrays Aerys as being explicitly clear that he believed Robert to was the rebel choice for king after the Battle of the Trident:

""My Sworn Brothers were all away, you see, but Aerys liked to keep me close. I was my father's son, so he did not trust me. He wanted me where Varys could watch me, day and night. So I heard it all." He remembered how Rossart's eyes would shine when he unrolled his maps to show where the substance must be placed. Garigus and Belis were the same. "Rhaegar met Robert on the Trident, and you know what happened there. When the word reached court, Aerys packed the queen off to Dragonstone with Prince Viserys. Princess Elia would have gone as well, but he forbade it. Somehow he had gotten it in his head that Prince Lewyn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident, but he thought he could keep Dorne loyal so long as he kept Elia and Aegon by his side. The traitors want my city, I heard him tell Rossart, but I'll give them naught but ashes. Let Robert be king over charred bones and cooked meat. The Targaryens never bury their dead, they burn them. Aerys meant to have the greatest funeral pyre of them all. Though if truth be told, I do not believe he truly expected to die. Like Aerion Brightfire before him, Aerys thought the fire would transform him . . . that he would rise again, reborn as a dragon, and turn all his enemies to ash." (ASOS: Jaime V)

And, of course, we know from Jaime and Tywin that Jaime and Tywin knew Robert to be the rebel choice for king after the Battle of the Trident:

""Ned Stark was racing south with Robert's van, but my father's forces reached the city first. Pycelle convinced the king that his Warden of the West had come to defend him, so he opened the gates. The one time he should have heeded Varys, and he ignored him. My father had held back from the war, brooding on all the wrongs Aerys had done him and determined that House Lannister should be on the winning side. The Trident decided him." (ASOS: Jaime V)

"Lord Tywin stared at him as if he had lost his wits. "You deserve that motley, then. We had come late to Robert's cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever. And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children." His father shrugged. "I grant you, it was done too brutally. Elia need not have been harmed at all, that was sheer folly. By herself she was nothing."" (ASOS: Tyrion VI)

Not to mention Catelyn:

"Ned grimaced at that. There was small love between him and the queen's family, Catelyn knew. The Lannisters of Casterly Rock had come late to Robert's cause, when victory was all but certain, and he had never forgiven them. "Well, if the price for Robert's company is an infestation of Lannisters, so be it. It sounds as though Robert is bringing half his court."" (AGOT: Catelyn I)

But by all means, don't let that stop you from continuing to wrongly claim "we don't know" about things we do know or have good reason to think we know, and from continuing to speculate wildly while at the same time calling other people out for what you claim is them speculating.

[AlaskanSandman]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It's really not bold at all. And what is unsupported and completely without merit is the idea that Ned and the other rebels would have considered putting any Targaryen on the throne after their victory. Aegon II has nothing to do with what is being discussed, and no relevance to a situation where rebels fought to remove House Targaryen from the Iron Throne, not just one or another faction of House Targaryen. Nor do I recall Aegon II actually naming Aegon III his heir, though I am not interested in getting into an irrelevant debate about it. There is zero basis for the idea that the rebels had any desire or intention to consider putting another Targaryen on the throne they were removing them from.

You are projecting onto Tywin's men what Jaime assumes they mean, and what supposedly went through Jaime's own thoughts:

""Shall I proclaim a new king as well?" Crakehall asked, and Jaime read the question plain: Shall it be your father, or Robert Baratheon, or do you mean to try to make a new dragonking? He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar's infant son Aegon, still in Maegor's with his mother. A new Targaryen king, and my father as Hand. How the wolves will howl, and the storm lord choke with rage. For a moment he was tempted, until he glanced down again at the body on the floor, in its spreading pool of blood. His blood is in both of them, he thought. "Proclaim who you bloody well like," he told Crakehall. Then he climbed the Iron Throne and seated himself with his sword across his knees, to see who would come to claim the kingdom. As it happened, it had been Eddard Stark." (ASOS: Jaime II)

Ned repeats Jaime's statement when he approached the throne that makes clear Jaime understood that Robert was the rebel choice for king:

""I was still mounted. I rode the length of the hall in silence, between the long rows of dragon skulls. It felt as though they were watching me, somehow. I stopped in front of the throne, looking up at him. His golden sword was across his legs, its edge red with a king's blood. My men were filling the room behind me. Lannister's men drew back. I never said a word. I looked at him seated there on the throne, and I waited. At last Jaime laughed and got up. He took off his helm, and he said to me, 'Have no fear, Stark. I was only keeping it warm for our friend Robert. It's not a very comfortable seat, I'm afraid.'"
The king threw back his head and roared. His laughter startled a flight of crows from the tall brown grass. They took to the air in a wild beating of wings. "You think I should mistrust Lannister because he sat on my throne for a few moments?" He shook with laughter again. "Jaime was all of seventeen, Ned. Scarce more than a boy."" (AGOT: Eddard II)

And Jaime even portrays Aerys as realizing that Robert was the main threat to House Targaryen after the Battle of the Bells:

"He floated in heat, in memory. "After dancing griffins lost the Battle of the Bells, Aerys exiled him." Why am I telling this absurd ugly child? "He had finally realized that Robert was no mere outlaw lord to be crushed at whim, but the greatest threat House Targaryen had faced since Daemon Blackfyre. The king reminded Lewyn Martell gracelessly that he held Elia and sent him to take command of the ten thousand Dornishmen coming up the kingsroad. Jon Darry and Barristan Selmy rode to Stoney Sept to rally what they could of griffins' men, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south and persuaded his father to swallow his pride and summon my father. But no raven returned from Casterly Rock, and that made the king even more afraid. He saw traitors everywhere, and Varys was always there to point out any he might have missed. So His Grace commanded his alchemists to place caches of wildfire all over King's Landing. Beneath Baelor's Sept and the hovels of Flea Bottom, under stables and storehouses, at all seven gates, even in the cellars of the Red Keep itself." (ASOS: Jaime V)

And Jaime certainly portrays Aerys as being explicitly clear that he believed Robert to was the rebel choice for king after the Battle of the Trident:

""My Sworn Brothers were all away, you see, but Aerys liked to keep me close. I was my father's son, so he did not trust me. He wanted me where Varys could watch me, day and night. So I heard it all." He remembered how Rossart's eyes would shine when he unrolled his maps to show where the substance must be placed. Garigus and Belis were the same. "Rhaegar met Robert on the Trident, and you know what happened there. When the word reached court, Aerys packed the queen off to Dragonstone with Prince Viserys. Princess Elia would have gone as well, but he forbade it. Somehow he had gotten it in his head that Prince Lewyn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident, but he thought he could keep Dorne loyal so long as he kept Elia and Aegon by his side. The traitors want my city, I heard him tell Rossart, but I'll give them naught but ashes. Let Robert be king over charred bones and cooked meat. The Targaryens never bury their dead, they burn them. Aerys meant to have the greatest funeral pyre of them all. Though if truth be told, I do not believe he truly expected to die. Like Aerion Brightfire before him, Aerys thought the fire would transform him . . . that he would rise again, reborn as a dragon, and turn all his enemies to ash." (ASOS: Jaime V)

And, of course, we know from Jaime and Tywin that Jaime and Tywin knew Robert to be the rebel choice for king after the Battle of the Trident:

""Ned Stark was racing south with Robert's van, but my father's forces reached the city first. Pycelle convinced the king that his Warden of the West had come to defend him, so he opened the gates. The one time he should have heeded Varys, and he ignored him. My father had held back from the war, brooding on all the wrongs Aerys had done him and determined that House Lannister should be on the winning side. The Trident decided him." (ASOS: Jaime V)

"Lord Tywin stared at him as if he had lost his wits. "You deserve that motley, then. We had come late to Robert's cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever. And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children." His father shrugged. "I grant you, it was done too brutally. Elia need not have been harmed at all, that was sheer folly. By herself she was nothing."" (ASOS: Tyrion VI)

Not to mention Catelyn:

"Ned grimaced at that. There was small love between him and the queen's family, Catelyn knew. The Lannisters of Casterly Rock had come late to Robert's cause, when victory was all but certain, and he had never forgiven them. "Well, if the price for Robert's company is an infestation of Lannisters, so be it. It sounds as though Robert is bringing half his court."" (AGOT: Catelyn I)

But by all means, don't let that stop you from continuing to wrongly claim "we don't know" about things we do know or have good reason to think we know, and from continuing to speculate wildly while at the same time calling other people out for what you claim is them speculating.

 

Quote

 

A Game of Thrones - Eddard VII

Ned took the horn and drank. The beer was black and thick, so strong it stung the eyes.

Robert sat down again. "Damn you, Ned Stark. You and Jon Arryn, I loved you both. What have you done to me? You were the one should have been king, you or Jon."

"You had the better claim, Your Grace."

 

 

 

You forgot one

 

Edit- Maybe more relevant than what others thought

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It's really not bold at all. And what is unsupported and completely without merit is the idea that Ned and the other rebels would have considered putting any Targaryen on the throne after their victory.

But that wasn't what I suggested. We started this thing when I made it clear that Ned Stark must have thought about Jon Snow when Robert Baratheon died because as Rhaegar's son he would have had a claim to the throne. We also have good reason to believe Ned thought about Jon when discussing the Dany assassination thing with Robert and the council, and when he thought about Robert murdering Cersei's children the way he did not punish the murders of Elia and her children. A King Robert doing that would also be willing and capable to kill his nephew.

It is equally clear that we do not know the rebels stance on the Targaryens when the Rebellion started nor up until the point they made the decision to put Robert on the throne. It makes no sense to presume that we do. Which is actually an odd thing.

Just as we have no clue what Eddard Stark thought he might or could do with Rhaegar's son by Lyanna when he was in his grasp. He sure as hell could have used that child to try to unmake the king he had just helped to make. Nor do we have any idea what Ned may have done if Lyanna's son had been delivered to him around the time of the Trident, between the Trident and the Sack, or after the Sack while he was still in KL.

What would have Ned done to his nephew if there had been no way to hide his identity? We don't know, and we have no way of figuring out. Pretending we know he was fixed in his political thinking to the degree that he would have *never* considering pushing his claim simply doesn't make much sense to me.

6 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Aegon II has nothing to do with what is being discussed, and no relevance to a situation where rebels fought to remove House Targaryen from the Iron Throne, not just one or another faction of House Targaryen. Nor do I recall Aegon II actually naming Aegon III his heir, though I am not interested in getting into an irrelevant debate about it. There is zero basis for the idea that the rebels had any desire or intention to consider putting another Targaryen on the throne they were removing them from.

Ran confirmed it a while back that Aegon II was forced to accept Aegon the Younger as his heir in combination with Princess Jaehaera to whom Aegon was betrothed.

Your take on drawing the lines between 'houses' instead of between people makes no sense in this context. Aegon II had much more reason to loath and hate the spawn of his half-sister and uncle than Robert Baratheon ever had, no matter their family or house name. Robert lost no family member to his Targaryen cousins, Aegon II lost two sons and all his siblings to Rhaenyra.

There is also no indication that the rebels were rebelling against 'House Targaryen'. They were rebelling against King Aerys II of that house, a man they - quite correctly - saw as a lunatic and tyrant. You don't rebel against a house, you rebel against a king or lord. They certainly had chosen their pretender king by the time they proclaimed Robert king, but we have little to no knowledge at this point how and why that happened.

It makes little sense to pretend we do.

And the rebels agreeing that they want a 'King Robert' around the time of the Trident doesn't mean Robert had to truly become king after the Sack. What do you think would have happened if Lyanna hadn't died at the tower and insisted of keeping her son and reveal his true name and identity to the world? What do you think would have happened if Ned had had no intention to reconcile with his former friend after his return from the south? Would Robert had remained king if Ned had decided to turn against him, calling on the Northmen, Riverlords, Vale men, Dornishmen, and Reach men to stand with him - on behalf of either Viserys III or 'King Jon'? Would Ned have allowed Robert to kill his nephew and/or sister? I don't think so.

6 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

You are projecting onto Tywin's men what Jaime assumes they mean, and what supposedly went through Jaime's own thoughts.

Crakehall wouldn't have asked if he had thought that the only possible king was Robert, no? Then he could have asked 'Shall I proclaim Robert king as well?'

[The Twinslayer]

On 9/10/2018 at 3:15 PM, Bael's Bastard said:

Ran commented about his old post from that old forum here:

https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/137649-rlj-v160/&amp;page=6&amp;tab=comments#comment-7528191

 

It is good to know that Ran has done some sleuthing about some of these SSMs and realizes that some of them should be discounted as unreliable.  I tend to take all of them -- particularly those that pre-date A Dance With Dragons -- with a grain of salt for three reasons. 

First, we are relying on fans, some of whom are reliable and some of whom may not be, to report accurately what GRRM has said to them.

Second, GRRM was a lot more accessible in the 1990s and early 2000s, before the show made him really famous.  It seems that he had a real incentive to answer fan questions when he needed to do that to sell books and that he gave the best response he could to those questions based on whatever his current thinking was at the time. 

Third, he appears to have changed his mind over time about certain events.  For example, there are a lot of SSMs from the period immediately following the publication of Storm of Swords where he talked about the fact that there would be a "five-year gap" between the end of Storm and the beginning of the next book.  But he has freely admitted that he changed his mind about that.  That means that there are characters like Bran and Ned Dayne who were children in Storm and who were intended to be adults in the next book who did not age 5 years between the end of Storm and the beginning of A Feast for Crows.  That has obvious implications for the plot:  if Ned Dayne was supposed to be 17 or 18 in Dance but in fact was only 12 or 13, there are things GRRM intended for him to do that he cannot now do.  

And there are other good examples of things he told fans around the time Storm was published about which he has since changed his mind. 

On 9/10/2018 at 1:08 PM, AlaskanSandman said:

I really wish some one would collect all of GRRM's quotes in SSM's that pertain to the story. Not the whole conversations and interviews, just the important bits. Like Martin confirming Elia was the one in Dany's vision of Rhaegar and Aegon. He's got alot of odd ball ones out there haha

I would like to see in particular the one that supposedly says that the rebels decided that Robert would take the throne only around the time of the Battle of the Trident.  That seems inconsistent with some of the things we see in the books.  For example, in Game of Thrones, Ned says that at the start of the rebellion (fifteen years prior) "they had ridden forth to win a throne."  That implies that they intended to take the throne away from the Targaryens from the start of the rebellion.  And Dance with Dragons has Lord Godric recounting his reaction to the first battle of the rebellion (Gulltown) as follows:  "Robert was the first man to gain the wall, and slew Marq Grafton with his own hand.  'This Baratheon is fearless,' I said.  'He fights the way a king should fight.'"  That implies that from the moment Jon Arryn defied the order to deliver Robert and Ned to Aerys, there was an expectation that Robert would take the throne if the rebellion succeeded.  

[AlaskanSandman]

4 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

I would like to see in particular the one that supposedly says that the rebels decided that Robert would take the throne only around the time of the Battle of the Trident.

Ha, that would be interesting to see, as no one suggested there is one, you may be waiting a while hahaha and yea, it's already been shown that other presumed Robert. That's all that's been proven. Ned saying they went for a throne doesn't say which of them was intended to be crowned. Robert's cause so far as we know was Lyanna. No more, no less. The rest is, yes, assumption. Robert for his part, seems bothered by Jon and Eddard making him king, and expresses that he didn't want it.  

[Bael's Bastard]

11 hours ago, The Twinslayer said:

I would like to see in particular the one that supposedly says that the rebels decided that Robert would take the throne only around the time of the Battle of the Trident.  That seems inconsistent with some of the things we see in the books.  For example, in Game of Thrones, Ned says that at the start of the rebellion (fifteen years prior) "they had ridden forth to win a throne."  That implies that they intended to take the throne away from the Targaryens from the start of the rebellion.  And Dance with Dragons has Lord Godric recounting his reaction to the first battle of the rebellion (Gulltown) as follows:  "Robert was the first man to gain the wall, and slew Marq Grafton with his own hand.  'This Baratheon is fearless,' I said.  'He fights the way a king should fight.'"  That implies that from the moment Jon Arryn defied the order to deliver Robert and Ned to Aerys, there was an expectation that Robert would take the throne if the rebellion succeeded.  

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/US_Signing_Tour_Huntington_Beach_CA

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1388

The reports are from a tour in 2005, and don't state that that is when the rebels decided that Robert would take the throne, only that that is when Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne.

What information we have indicates the rebels had no intention of leaving or putting any Targaryen on the throne, and that Robert was viewed by pretty much everyone as the face of the rebellion, whether or not he had yet been chosen by his fellow rebel leaders, or had yet formally announced his intention to take the throne.

And while it is entirely possible the conversation between Robert, Jon, and Ned and whoever else determining that Robert "had the better claim" occurred around the time of the Trident or just after, I wouldn't be surprised if such a discussion occurred between Jon, Robert, and Ned while at the Eyrie, before Jon formally raised his banners.

Not that I think Jon considered not raising his banners, or that he had to think over whether or not to do it, but I think the messages telling them of the executions of Rickard, Brandon, and Elbert, and the command to execute Robert and Ned, would have cause Jon to sit Robert and Ned down to formulate just exactly what their objectives were going to be.

[AlaskanSandman]

45 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/US_Signing_Tour_Huntington_Beach_CA

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1388

 

 

Actually he said around the time of the Trident or just after. Something about the "Just after"

Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne ... around the time of the Trident. Would not elaborate any further.

so its fair to say they decided Robert was best sometime after Robert killed Rhaegar. Up till that point, it was undecided, and Robert likely was just thinking about Lyanna. Still doesn't mean Robert wanted to when the decision was made. Sounds kind of like Robb just going to war with out thinking it through, except Robb trusted the wrong people. I can see by the time Robert is decided upon though as the moment the remaining Targaryen's were doomed, and a decision was made (likely as a group, against Viserys, or Aegon.). Im still not wholly convinced though Robert hated Targaryens enough to do the deed him self though or order a baby murdered. 

And see, they just need to make a book or GRRM quotes lol  

[Bael's Bastard]

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But that wasn't what I suggested. We started this thing when I made it clear that Ned Stark must have thought about Jon Snow when Robert Baratheon died because as Rhaegar's son he would have had a claim to the throne. We also have good reason to believe Ned thought about Jon when discussing the Dany assassination thing with Robert and the council, and when he thought about Robert murdering Cersei's children the way he did not punish the murders of Elia and her children. A King Robert doing that would also be willing and capable to kill his nephew.

I am sure Ned thought of Jon often, like when he thought about what Jon said when they found the pups (AGOT: Eddard VI), or when he yearned for the sounds of Robb and Jon crossing swords (AGOT: Eddard VI), or when he saw Jon's face in front of him after the scene with Barra and her mother (AGOT: Eddard IX), or when he thoughts of what Catelyn would do if it were Jon's life against the children of her body (AGOT: Eddard XII), or when Varys brought Jon up and Ned felt shame and sorrow, and thought if he could only see the boy again, sit and talk with him (AGOT: Eddard XV).

And if the promise Lyanna begged Ned to make, which which Ned made, concern Jon, then it is reasonable to think that Ned thought of Jon on some of those occasions that he thought of Lyanna, like when he thought of her and her bed of blood and roses while reminding Robert that he was with her when she died (AGOT: Eddard I), or when he thinks of her whispering "Promise me, Ned" when telling Robert that he avenged Lyanna on the Trident (AGOT: Eddard I), or when he thinks of how Eddard had ridden out in a cold rage after Robert's justification of the murder of Rhaegar's children, and how only the grief they shared after the death of Lyanna had reconciled them (AGOT: Eddard II), or when he remembers Sansa pleading as Lyanna had pleaded once (AGOT: Eddard IV), or when he thought of the promises he had made Lyanna as she lay dying after making promises to Barra's mother (AGOT: Eddard IX), or when he thought of pale blue roses and wanted to weep after Cersei told him of Robert whispering "Lyanna" the night of their wedding feast (AGOT: Eddard XII), or how he thought of Lyanna saying "Promise me, Ned" when Robert asks him to promise him to serve the boar at his funeral feast (AGOT: Eddard XV)

I do not doubt that we are privy to only a small fraction of the times that Ned thought of Jon over the last nearly decade and a half. I am not objecting to the idea that Ned thought of Jon at different times.

I am objecting to the idea that Ned ever thought or would have thought of crowning Jon or any other Targaryen. There is no basis for that.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is equally clear that we do not know the rebels stance on the Targaryens when the Rebellion started nor up until the point they made the decision to put Robert on the throne. It makes no sense to presume that we do. Which is actually an odd thing.

This is an absurd claim. The rebels rebelled against the Targaryens. The lords flocked to Robert's banners against the Targaryens and those who remained loyal to them. It makes no sense to presume that any of the rebel leaders would have accepted a situation where a Targaryen sat the throne in any scenario where their rebellion was successful.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Just as we have no clue what Eddard Stark thought he might or could do with Rhaegar's son by Lyanna when he was in his grasp. He sure as hell could have used that child to try to unmake the king he had just helped to make. Nor do we have any idea what Ned may have done if Lyanna's son had been delivered to him around the time of the Trident, between the Trident and the Sack, or after the Sack while he was still in KL.

What would have Ned done to his nephew if there had been no way to hide his identity? We don't know, and we have no way of figuring out. Pretending we know he was fixed in his political thinking to the degree that he would have *never* considering pushing his claim simply doesn't make much sense to me.

Again, more baseless speculation. Regardless of what Ned could have done, we have zero basis to speculate that he had any thought or desire to do anything with Rhaegar and Lyanna's son re: the Iron Throne. I am not interesting in "what ifs" about if Jon had been delivered to him earlier. Start a "what if" thread if such hypotheticals interest you so much. That is of no interest to me in this discussion. It is irrelevant. As it stands, we have zero reason to speculate that Ned considered putting Jon or any other Targaryen on the throne at any point during the rebellion. We don't need his thoughts on the matter to demonstrate that he was devoted to removing the Targaryens and placing Robert on the Iron Throne. He explicitly states that Robert had the better claim than he or Jon, and he clearly doesn't care about Viserys and Jon have a superior claim to all three of them.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Ran confirmed it a while back that Aegon II was forced to accept Aegon the Younger as his heir in combination with Princess Jaehaera to whom Aegon was betrothed.

Your take on drawing the lines between 'houses' instead of between people makes no sense in this context. Aegon II had much more reason to loath and hate the spawn of his half-sister and uncle than Robert Baratheon ever had, no matter their family or house name. Robert lost no family member to his Targaryen cousins, Aegon II lost two sons and all his siblings to Rhaenyra.

There is also no indication that the rebels were rebelling against 'House Targaryen'. They were rebelling against King Aerys II of that house, a man they - quite correctly - saw as a lunatic and tyrant. You don't rebel against a house, you rebel against a king or lord. They certainly had chosen their pretender king by the time they proclaimed Robert king, but we have little to no knowledge at this point how and why that happened.

It makes little sense to pretend we do.

And the rebels agreeing that they want a 'King Robert' around the time of the Trident doesn't mean Robert had to truly become king after the Sack. What do you think would have happened if Lyanna hadn't died at the tower and insisted of keeping her son and reveal his true name and identity to the world? What do you think would have happened if Ned had had no intention to reconcile with his former friend after his return from the south? Would Robert had remained king if Ned had decided to turn against him, calling on the Northmen, Riverlords, Vale men, Dornishmen, and Reach men to stand with him - on behalf of either Viserys III or 'King Jon'? Would Ned have allowed Robert to kill his nephew and/or sister? I don't think so.

If you want to discuss the Dance of Dragons so badly, feel free to start a thread. I am not interested in blathering on about something that isn't the least bit pertinent to what we are discussing. The Dance of Dragons was a civil war between Targaryen siblings. Robert's Rebellion was a war to overthrow the Targaryens and replace them on the Iron Throne. Your speculation to the contrary is without basis and is of no interest to me. The rebels killed Rhaegar, they intended to kill Aerys, and they had no intention of putting any of their descendants on the Iron Throne, even if Ned and Jon would have argued to spare their lives. 

Again, not interested in your alternate reality "what ifs" about if Lyanna had lived or Ned had been handed Jon earlier, or if Ned had decided to support Viserys or Jon. None of those things happened or are implied to have been possibilities. That is not the story we have. Go start a thread if you want to speculate about that nonsense.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Crakehall wouldn't have asked if he had thought that the only possible king was Robert, no? Then he could have asked 'Shall I proclaim Robert king as well?'

More baseless speculation. The king was dead. Crakehall asking if he should proclaim a new king doesn't mean he considered there to be multiple possibilities, as Jaime's internal thoughts reveal he considered. And regardless of what Jaime considered, or Crakehall might have thought, it is clear that by that time Robert was the rebel choice for king, Tywin knew it, Jaime knew it, and Aerys had known it. That is what the text tells and indicates to us.

[Lord Varys]

@Bael's Bastard

All I'm saying there is not the slightest shred of evidence that the rebels were rebelling against 'House Targaryen' as such or had a clear picture who should succeed the Mad King if they were able to bring him down while Robert had not yet declared himself. Perhaps they privately decided that Robert should succeed Aerys II as early as the beginning of the Rebellion, but that's not confirmed.

While they hadn't make that decision they were just rebels against a king. You can rebel against a king and have no idea what you do when/if you get rid of him.

And rebelling against a king while you don't have a pretender among your ranks doesn't mean you rebel against the royal house and the potential heirs of the king - because, depending on the situation, they have nothing to do with the tyranny of that king.

Just look at Robb Stark. Did he rebel against 'House Baratheon'? No. He just rebelled against King Joffrey, and only because he felt Joff had imprisoned and then executed his father. He makes it very clear that he thinks Joff has to go, but he is also pretty clear about the fact that he thinks Tommen Baratheon is Joffrey's heir.

How do you know that the rebels didn't also think Viserys, Aegon, one of the women could succeed Aerys II while they had not yet decided that Robert should be king in their stead?

You just don't.

We also don't know when exactly Ned made the whole bastard story for Lyanna's son. It is not likely that he laid out the entire thing in just a few minutes or hours at the tower. He made a promise but we don't yet know what that promise was. The prince was only dead and gone when Ned had created 'Jon Snow' and not before. Was Ned tempted to keep Lyanna's son in the game of thrones? We don't know yet. If he was tempted he clearly decided not to take that road, but we cannot just rule out such a temptation.

[The Twinslayer]

16 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/US_Signing_Tour_Huntington_Beach_CA

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1388

The reports are from a tour in 2005, and don't state that that is when the rebels decided that Robert would take the throne, only that that is when Robert proclaimed his intention to take the throne.

What information we have indicates the rebels had no intention of leaving or putting any Targaryen on the throne, and that Robert was viewed by pretty much everyone as the face of the rebellion, whether or not he had yet been chosen by his fellow rebel leaders, or had yet formally announced his intention to take the throne.

And while it is entirely possible the conversation between Robert, Jon, and Ned and whoever else determining that Robert "had the better claim" occurred around the time of the Trident or just after, I wouldn't be surprised if such a discussion occurred between Jon, Robert, and Ned while at the Eyrie, before Jon formally raised his banners.

Not that I think Jon considered not raising his banners, or that he had to think over whether or not to do it, but I think the messages telling them of the executions of Rickard, Brandon, and Elbert, and the command to execute Robert and Ned, would have cause Jon to sit Robert and Ned down to formulate just exactly what their objectives were going to be.

Thanks for providing the quotes.  I don't remember seeing them before.  

They do point to an interesting aspect of the SSMs.  These are quotes from two fans who say they heard GRRM answer a question verbally in 2005.  We don't know for sure that the reports are accurate (and the two reports differ a little in the details).  For all we know, this SSM, and many others, may just have been made up but the fans who reported them.

And even if the thrust of the quote is accurate, we also don't know whether this was GRRM saying something off-the-cuff because he did not want to offend a fan by not answering.  Nor do we know if he had given any real thought to it before giving an answer.  On this issue, it seems like if it was important, he would have put it in one of the books.  

But let's assume that this is something GRRM thought about a lot but decided to reveal only if and when a curious fan asked the right question.  As you point out, it sounds like the question was when Robert "proclaimed" his intention to take the throne.  I have always thought that, before Jon Arryn called his banners, and before Ned left for Winterfell to call his banners, Arryn, Baratheon and Stark agreed on what the ultimate outcome should be:  Robert as King.  I have also thought -- based in part on the Jaime quotes you provided later reinforced by the Godric quote -- that it was widely known or expected that the rebels intended to put Robert on the throne.  So even if we assume that this SSM is an accurate account of GRRM's well thought-out decision, it does not mean that Robert had not decided to take the throne at the outset of the Rebellion.  It does not even mean that he had not shared that with the Houses he asked to join his cause (like House Tully).  It just means that he did not proclaim his intentions for all the world to see.

Finally, if the second reporter is right and GRRM suggested that Robert decided to proclaim himself King some time after the Battle of the Trident, that has interesting implications for Ned's activities.  I have always though that Ned left the Trident for King's Landing the morning after the Battle of the Trident.  But when Ned got to King's Landing, he knew the plan was to crown Robert, as did Jaime.  If Robert only made the proclamation some time after the Battle of the Trident, that suggests that Ned lingered for a period of days or more after that battle before he went to King's Landing.   

[Ran]

Both of the people who submitted those statements are very trustworthy, long-time members of the forums who also participated in the BwB. And these were providing comments on the same signing they both attended, so they're corroborative reports as well. (In fact, there's a third report from Huntington Beach as well, and while it touches on different aspects, I know that there was never any issues any of the three raised with one another's reports when they were made on the forum, beyond Aegon adding extra detail to BH's report.)

Many SSMs from signings and Q&As had duplicates or had more than one person confirm details, and often they came from people with long histories of trust in the community.

[Lord Varys]

We do know that the background story of the Rebellion and its buildup did change and may continue to change.

The Rhaegar-Aerys rivalry seems to have crept into the text later on. There is nothing of this in AGoT, and it may have come in when George was starting to wonder what the perfect prince thought of his mad father and his politics. The first evidence of this rivalry/plotting thing can be found in ASoS, if I remember correctly.

Another thing is Dragonstone as Rhaegar's permanent residence. Until TWoIaF the textual evidence we have indicated that Rhaegar and Elia resided in KL. This may have an outgrowth of George thinking about Dragonstone during the Targaryen history - what did they do with the place, who did actually live there? As it turned out, Rhaenyra, Daeron, and Rhaegar, in part because they were not getting along with other members of the royal family.

The claim of the Targaryen-Baratheon also seems to change over time. Renly doesn't seem to be aware of grandma Rhaelle, for instance. She is first mentioned in AFfC.

But Rhaelle actually gives Robert Baratheon a very strong claim. He is next in line after all the (male) Targaryens alive. That makes him the default claimant and pretender as soon as it becomes clear the rebels want to seat one of their own on the throne.

The unanswered question is when they made that decision - and especially when Robert himself thought he should or could be king. We know there are songs and stories told about Robert's cunning and bravery during the Rebellion. Was it is popularity that caused the rebel leaders and their followers think they should put him on the throne? Was that what made Robert himself think he should be king?

Or did his legal claim way as strongly from the start that Jon and Ned did think they could use Robert to topple the Targaryens from the start?

We don't know.

What seems clear to me, though, is that Robert's complaints that he didn't want to be king, that he was made king against his will, is post hoc nonsense. No rebel pretender becomes king against his will. If Robert had told Jon and Ned 'Fuck you!' when they offered him the crown - if that's what happened - then they would have been forced to go with Viserys or one of the girls, one assumes, perhaps even with Stannis or Renly.

The Rebellion story changed from a 'some very distant cousin toppled the ruling dynasty with an army and a war hammer' to 'the closest living cousin of House Targaryen made use of his strong legal claim in combination with an army (and a war hammer) to topple the king' narrative. And that is a significant change.