R+L=J v.165

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Aerys not immediately naming a new Hand is not a continuity error, and there's nothing inherently problematic about it. 

It depends how one defines continuity error. However, now that I think of it it is worse. A continuity error is an error dealing with continuity.

But this Aerys thing introduces a motivational problem which wasn't intended by the author. There it is Chelsted > Rossart, and not Chelsted > obscure vacancy > Rossart. Aerys not naming a Hand for quite some time would be an important and noteworthy event.

[SFDanny]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It depends how one defines continuity error. However, now that I think of it it is worse. A continuity error is an error dealing with continuity.

But this Aerys thing introduces a motivational problem which wasn't intended by the author. There it is Chelsted > Rossart, and not Chelsted > obscure vacancy > Rossart. Aerys not naming a Hand for quite some time would be an important and noteworthy event.

We talking of a vacancy of weeks, not months. So, "quite some time" doesn't describe what we are dealing with. The idea that there is a great mystery involved in the  reason Aerys does not appoint a successor to Chelsted immediately is more a detail than a real mystery. I'm all for filling out the details, but we are likely to never get an exact timeline. @Ran's response confirms what I've argued for a while to the extent that it clearly puts the events Jaime recalls of Aerys's assault on Rhaella before the Trident, and it puts the start of Rossart's tenure as Hand sometime later.

To me the more interesting part of this is whether this confirms that Rhaegar knew of Aerys's assault on his mother before he leaves to the Trident? Does he learn at all? Clearly his remarks to Jaime when he leaves tell us he was committed to removing Aerys if he won at the Trident. All of which shows the changing nature of this father and son's relationship. Sometime over long periods of time, and at others likely abrupt changes forced by events.

[Bael's Bastard]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It depends how one defines continuity error. However, now that I think of it it is worse. A continuity error is an error dealing with continuity.

But this Aerys thing introduces a motivational problem which wasn't intended by the author. There it is Chelsted > Rossart, and not Chelsted > obscure vacancy > Rossart. Aerys not naming a Hand for quite some time would be an important and noteworthy event.

@Lord Varys

There is no inherent problem with a short vacancy of the office of Hand. Any perceived problem comes from assumptions based on disliking the idea of a vacancy between Chelsted and Rossart. But that doesn't make a short vacancy between Chelsted and Rossart an actual issue. When we look at the information we have, and examine each piece against the others, we get a pretty coherent picture that makes a vacancy the likeliest explanation.

Quote

"Aerys Targaryen's last Hand was killed during the Sack of King's Landing, though I doubt he'd had time to settle into the Tower. He was only Hand for a fortnight. The one before him was burned to death. And before them came two others who died landless and penniless in exile, and counted themselves lucky. I believe my lord father was the last Hand to depart King's Landing with his name, properties, and parts all intact." (ACOK: Tyrion I)

Quote

Those purple eyes grew huge then, and the royal mouth drooped open in shock. He lost control of his bowels, turned, and ran for the Iron Throne. Beneath the empty eyes of the skulls on the walls, Jaime hauled the last dragonking bodily off the steps, squealing like a pig and smelling like a privy. A single slash across his throat was all it took to end it. So easy, he remembered thinking. A king should die harder than this. Rossart at least had tried to make a fight of it, though if truth be told he fought like an alchemist. Queer that they never ask who killed Rossart . . . but of course, he was no one, lowborn, Hand for a fortnight, just another mad fancy of the Mad King. (ASOS: Jaime II)

Quote

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.

"Everything was done in the utmost secrecy by a handful of master pyromancers. They did not even trust their own acolytes to help. The queen's eyes had been closed for years, and Rhaegar was busy marshaling an army. But Aerys's new mace-and-dagger Hand was not utterly stupid, and with Rossart, Belis, and Garigus coming and going night and day, he became suspicious. Chelsted, that was his name, Lord Chelsted." It had come back to him suddenly, with the telling. "I'd thought the man craven, but the day he confronted Aerys he found some courage somewhere. He did all he could to dissuade him. He reasoned, he jested, he threatened, and finally he begged. When that failed he took off his chain of office and flung it down on the floor. Aerys burnt him alive for that, and hung his chain about the neck of Rossart, his favorite pyromancer. The man who had cooked Lord Rickard Stark in his own armor. And all the time, I stood by the foot of the Iron Throne in my white plate, still as a corpse, guarding my liege and all his sweet secrets. (ASOS: Jaime V)

Quote

The day had been windy when he said farewell to Rhaegar, in the yard of the Red Keep. The prince had donned his night-black armor, with the three-headed dragon picked out in rubies on his breastplate. "Your Grace," Jaime had pleaded, "let Darry stay to guard the king this once, or Ser Barristan. Their cloaks are as white as mine."

Prince Rhaegar shook his head. "My royal sire fears your father more than he does our cousin Robert. He wants you close, so Lord Tywin cannot harm him. I dare not take that crutch away from him at such an hour."

Jaime's anger had risen up in his throat. "I am not a crutch. I am a knight of the Kingsguard."

"Then guard the king," Ser Jon Darry snapped at him. "When you donned that cloak, you promised to obey."

Rhaegar had put his hand on Jaime's shoulder. "When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but . . . well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return."

Those were the last words Rhaegar Targaryen ever spoke to him. Outside the gates an army had assembled, whilst another descended on the Trident. So the Prince of Dragonstone mounted up and donned his tall black helm, and rode forth to his doom. (AFFC: Jaime I)

Quote

The sight had filled him with disquiet, reminding him of Aerys Targaryen and the way a burning would arouse him. A king has no secrets from his Kingsguard. Relations between Aerys and his queen had been strained during the last years of his reign. They slept apart and did their best to avoid each other during the waking hours. But whenever Aerys gave a man to the flames, Queen Rhaella would have a visitor in the night. The day he burned his mace-and-dagger Hand, Jaime and Jon Darry had stood at guard outside her bedchamber whilst the king took his pleasure. "You're hurting me," they had heard Rhaella cry through the oaken door. "You're hurting me." In some queer way, that had been worse than Lord Chelsted's screaming. "We are sworn to protect her as well," Jaime had finally been driven to say. "We are," Darry allowed, "but not from him."

Jaime had only seen Rhaella once after that, the morning of the day she left for Dragonstone. The queen had been cloaked and hooded as she climbed inside the royal wheelhouse that would take her down Aegon's High Hill to the waiting ship, but he heard her maids whispering after she was gone. They said the queen looked as if some beast had savaged her, clawing at her thighs and chewing on her breasts. A crowned beast, Jaime knew. (AFFC: Jaime II)

Quote

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as a hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsel during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart—a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery. (TWOIAF: The Fall of the Dragons - The End)

This tells us that there must have been a short vacancy between Chelsted being killed, before Rhaegar rode off to the Trident, and Rossart being named Hand, after Rhaegar was confirmed killed on the Trident.

        - Rhaegar was still marshaling an army when Chelsted confronted and was killed by Aerys
        - Jaime and Darry stood guard outside Rhaella's bedchamber after Aerys killed Chelsted
        - Jaime asked Rhaegar to let Darry or Selmy stay and guard Aerys before they left for the Trident

        - Rossart was named Hand after news of Rhaegar's death reached Aerys
        - Rossart was Hand for a fortnight
        - Rossart was killed during the Sack of King's Landing

No matter how precise "Hand for a fortnight" is, we must acknowledge that there is a gap between Rhaegar heading off to the Trident, and Rhaegar being killed on the Trident, and we must acknowledge that Chelsted was killed before Rhaegar headed off to the Trident, and Rossart was named Hand after word of Rhaegar's death on the Trident reached the Red Keep.

Instead of questioning whether that is the case, we should turn to asking the possible reasons.

I think Ran has touched on one plausible explanation, which is that the office might have been "dangled" in front of Rhaegar pending a victory over Robert at the Trident. Despite their troubled relationship, Jaime's POV states that when Rhaegar couldn't be found, Aerys turned to the next best thing, and named his friend Jon Connington his Hand.

This implies that Jaime believes that Aerys might have named Rhaegar his Hand prior to the Battle of the Bells had he been present in King's Landing at the time. And it might be that Aerys had already filled the office of Hand with his once-upon-a-time trusted small councilor Chelsted before Rhaegar finally did turn up.

We don't know whether Aerys went back and forth on trusting and distrusting Rhaegar, or whether Rhaegar was ever able to convince his father of, or at least get him to give him a chance to prove, his loyalty. But Aerys need not have whole heartedly trusted Rhaegar to put him over the forces, or consider naming him Hand.

If nothing else, Aerys held Rhaegar's wife and children, and we know he was willing to threaten the lives of other people's loved ones to get them to do his will. And beyond that, Aerys knew that if things didn't go his way, he would burn King's Landing and everything in it to the ground rather than let anyone take it from him.

Another, perhaps much less likely, possibility is that Aerys had left the position open in hopes that Tywin might yet answer the summons Rhaegar had persuaded him swallow his pride and send. It's not clear whether Aerys's message to Tywin included an offer to restore him to his office of Hand, but if nothing else, he had the unspoken or spoken threat of Jaime's life being in his hands to get him to do his duty to his king.

Quote

The war had raged for close to a year. Lords great and small had flocked to Robert's banners; others had remained loyal to Targaryen. The mighty Lannisters of Casterly Rock, the Wardens of the West, had remained aloof from the struggle, ignoring calls to arms from both rebels and royalists. Aerys Targaryen must have thought that his gods had answered his prayers when Lord Tywin Lannister appeared before the gates of King's Landing with an army twelve thousand strong, professing loyalty. So the mad king had ordered his last mad act. He had opened his city to the lions at the gate. (AGOT: Eddard II)

Quote

Pycelle's breathing was rapid and shallow. "All I did, I did for House Lannister." A sheen of sweat covered the broad dome of the old man's brow, and wisps of white hair clung to his wrinkled skin. "Always . . . for years . . . your lord father, ask him, I was ever his true servant . . . 'twas I who bid Aerys open his gates . . ." (ACOK: Tyrion VI)

Quote

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)

Quote

"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)

 

[Bael's Bastard]

10 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Clearly his remarks to Jaime when he leaves tell us he was committed to removing Aerys if he won at the Trident. All of which shows the changing nature of this father and son's relationship. Sometime over long periods of time, and at others likely abrupt changes forced by events.

@SFDanny

Rhaegar's remarks to Jaime indicate that Rhaegar had already long ago intended to call a council and/or make changes.

Quote

"When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but . . . well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return." (AFFC: Jaime I)

So how far back had Rhaegar originally meant to do this, and why didn't he?

It seems likely that he had meant to do it at least as far back as the Harrenhal Tourney in late 281 AC. But it's not inconceivable that he had meant to do it earlier.

Whether true or not, he was apparently already rumored to be considering deposing Aerys as far back as 280 AC, after he wed Elia and they took up residence on Dragonstone, by which time Aerys had taken to burning traitors, murderers, and plotters.

And, of course, Aerys had believed as early as 278 AC that Rhaegar had conspired with Tywin to get him killed at Duskendale, so Rhaegar could mount the Iron Throne and wed Cersei, whether true or not.

It would be interesting to know at what point Aerys's paranoia and suspicions about Rhaegar became a self-fulfilling prophecy, and Rhaegar actually meant to act about his father.

[SFDanny]

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

@SFDanny

Rhaegar's remarks to Jaime indicate that Rhaegar had already long ago intended to call a council and/or make changes.

It does. It also clearly states as I said that Rhaegar was clearly committed to calling a council, presumably to finally remove Aerys, after the upcoming battle. Events at the Trident changed all of that, of course.

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

So how far back had Rhaegar originally meant to do this, and why didn't he?

It seems likely that he had meant to do it at least as far back as the Harrenhal Tourney in late 281 AC. But it's not inconceivable that he had meant to do it earlier.

Whether true or not, he was apparently already rumored to be considering deposing Aerys as far back as 280 AC, after he wed Elia and they took up residence on Dragonstone, by which time Aerys had taken to burning traitors, murderers, and plotters.

And, of course, Aerys had believed as early as 278 AC that Rhaegar had conspired with Tywin to get him killed at Duskendale, so Rhaegar could mount the Iron Throne and wed Cersei, whether true or not.

It would be interesting to know at what point Aerys's paranoia and suspicions about Rhaegar became a self-fulfilling prophecy, and Rhaegar actually meant to act about his father.

All of this is possible, but my guess is that Rhaegar finally begins planning to remove his father after Duskendale when Aerys's descent into madness becomes most marked. We see in Lord Connington's remarks and thoughts that Rhaegar's view of his father changes over time.

Quote

"There is wisdom in that," Griff admitted. It might have been different if Blackheart still commanded, but Myles Toyne was four years dead, and Homeless Harry Strickland was a different sort of man. He would not say that to the boy, however. That dwarf had already planted enough doubts in his young head. "Not every man is what he seems, and a prince especially has good cause to be wary … but go too far down that road, and the mistrust can poison you, make you sour and fearful." King Aerys was one such. By the end, even Rhaegar saw that plain enough. "You would do best to walk a middle course. Let men earn your trust with leal service … but when they do, be generous and openhearted." (ADwD 309) bold emphasis added

It is likely that the young prince would be shocked by the transformation of Aerys after Duskendale. Aerys was never a model of stability and always had a cruel streak in him, but it is after Duskendale that he changes into what is to be known as the "mad king."

My guess is also this builds into the plot to take place at the Harrenhal tourney, but Aerys's presence and the rejection of Rhaegar's plans by the Starks and others changes those plans. As I've said before, I think we see Rhaegar's plans shift from the start of the tourney to the its last day when he declares his support for his father in his action of naming Lyanna his Queen of Love and Beauty. 

This again changes when Rhaegar runs away with Lyanna and hides from Aerys's reach. But Rhaegar is forced to come back and join his father after the Battle of the Bells. I think this is largely due to the open threat to Elia and their children, but one should also not forget that both father and son have a common interest in Targaryen rule being maintained. Lastly we see in Rhaegar's comments to Jaime his plans to end Aerys's rule after a victory over the rebels.

All of which is to say, that we see in the Aerys/Rhaegar relationship the political game of thrones being played out just as we do in many others in the main series. Think of the Tyrell's shifting alliances over the space of a few months. That doesn't mean there are not personal ties between Aerys and Rhaegar than influence all of these changes. Which is one reason I wonder about what Rhaegar knew or did not know about Aerys's assault on his mother.

[Lord Varys]

@Bael's Bastard

This entire thing grows out of a mistake in dating. Everything we learn about the Chelsted-Rossart succession but the Jaime-Darry conversation implies that Chelsted was dismissed and subsequently burned by his successor who was appointed immediately after Chelsted was dismissed. That's the original intention of the author. The Jaime-Darry thing causes problems for that, and the solution of vacancy has considerable ripple effects - effects the idea of Jaime misremembering the circumstances around this crucial conversation simply do not have.

And this is a problem as far as I'm concerned - and as I've already laid out in the other thread - because now we (you give the example above ;-)) use actually speculation about the Aerys-Rhaegar relationship - which is, in my opinion, has very high plot relevance in relation to the events during the Rebellion and before - to try to explain this Chelsted thing.

That shouldn't be done. We should sit there and speculate why Aerys did not name another Hand for a considerable amount of time when the actually successor was right there, burning his predecessor. One can imagine a situation where the Realm remained without a Hand for some time - but not with this king, and not in this situation (it is about as likely as assuming Aerys I could manage the kingdom without a Hand for a considerable time - the government would break down). Aerys II was a virtual prisoner in his own castle. He was afraid of everything. He didn't go out there to address his troops, ensure the defenses of castle and city were in order, to manage the day-to-day business of ruling which would have to be maintained even (and especially!) in war time - he needed a man acting in his man, a man enacting his will, a man endowed with the authority to speak with the King's Voice. And that's the Hand. Yes, Aerys was mad, but the men around him weren't mad. Varys, Pycelle, the other councilors (if still in the city), and even Rossart would have pushed Aerys to name another Hand simply to ensure the city remained defended - and the king himself, who was surrounded by traitors left and right (and not just according to Varys).

And some of them would have suggested Rhaegar - especially Rhaegar himself, considering the man effectively ruled the Realm already, or could take the rule in his own hands, as the man not just leading but also raising and training the new army. If we assume Chelsted burned shortly before Rhaegar left - as those wishing for a short vacancy do - then Rhaegar actually already had enough of a power to rather openly tell a knight of the Kingsguard that he would come back and depose or imprison his father the king. How on earth does it make much sense Aerys had the power to dangle an office like the Handship in front of such a man? How likely is it that a man who actually seemed prepared to take either the throne or at least the regency in the name of his mad father had any interest in the office of the Hand?

See, now I've done it myself. I speculated about why Rhaegar didn't take the Handship. Because this would have been an option in this scenario. A proper solution to the dating problem would have to explain this, too. And if it were canon now that there is this vacancy then I think we have the right to demand a canonical explanation to as to why Aerys didn't name Rossart his new Hand immediately after the dismissal of Chelsted.

And then comes the rat's tail of other things - how much did/should have known Rhaegar about Rhaella and the wildfire plot (thanks to Jaime - and perhaps also common sense)? How likely is it that the wildfire plot was already implemented before the Trident? I once speculated whether Aerys intended to burn down KL in any case - meaning that he intended to either Robert or Rhaegar 'the king of ashes' but nothing in Jaime's memories allows for the idea that Aerys feared Rhaegar the way he feared Robert and intended to deal with either of them the same way. If Aerys believed Rhaegar would crush the rebels - as Rhaegar himself believed he would - then the point of no return (also the point for Chelsted's intervention) would have been when the king actually commanded to make preparations to burn down the entire city. It seems clear that wildfire was produced all the time, but that in and of itself isn't a sign for Aerys' mad wildfire plot. Chelsted must have had much more than that when he confronted Aerys.

17 hours ago, SFDanny said:

To me the more interesting part of this is whether this confirms that Rhaegar knew of Aerys's assault on his mother before he leaves to the Trident? Does he learn at all? Clearly his remarks to Jaime when he leaves tell us he was committed to removing Aerys if he won at the Trident. All of which shows the changing nature of this father and son's relationship. Sometime over long periods of time, and at others likely abrupt changes forced by events.

The time window allows for a lot of leeway, actually. Rhaegar had a very large army which would have needed more than two weeks to the Trident if two weeks is the time Ned's smaller host needed to race from the Trident to KL. Not to mention that we don't know whether the battlefield was clear when Rhaegar marched against Robert. Did they know in advance where they would meet, and was there some back and forth between them whether Rhaegar would try to cross the Trident to attack Robert or vice versa. That adds more days to the whole thing, etc.

Rhaella's situation must have been obvious to Rhaegar, though. Not because of the Chelsted thing but because of common sense. We do know that Chelsted was not the only person who caused Aerys to rape his sister-wife. He would have burned many other traitors while Rhaegar was still in the south and after his return while he was raising the new army. If he never found that out he would have to be both blind and deaf.

And chances are very low that Aerys could have prevented Rhaegar from actually seeing his mother in her chambers when Rhaegar's own wife and children lived in Maegor's Holdfast.

Of course, if we imagine Rhaegar was sort of blackmailed into serving his royal father in all that then this scenario could be more credible - but would a Rhaegar who was actually forced by his father to serve as his general, a man who had to worry about the well-being of his wife and children openly entertain the notion of moving against that father? In front of men sworn to defend the king with their lives?

I don't see that.

Which, in the end, means chances are pretty good that Rhaegar knew what his father did to his mother just as he would have known what his father threatened to do to his wife and children if the Dornish didn't comply. He may not have been okay with that on an emotional level, but he was apparently not in the position to do anything about that - which casts a very bad light on him no matter how one spins it.

It goes into the territory of fighting Hitler's wars for him and declaring one would only topple him after the war. That kind of thing doesn't make you a hero.

And it is very difficult to imagine that Rhaegar would not have had the power - thanks to this army he had trained - to depose Aerys before he went to the Trident.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

23 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

This entire thing grows out of a mistake in dating. Everything we learn about the Chelsted-Rossart succession but the Jaime-Darry conversation implies that Chelsted was dismissed and subsequently burned by his successor who was appointed immediately after Chelsted was dismissed. That's the original intention of the author. The Jaime-Darry thing causes problems for that, and the solution of vacancy has considerable ripple effects - effects the idea of Jaime misremembering the circumstances around this crucial conversation simply do not have.

We don't know what the original intent of the author was. Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. GRRM gave himself enough room to decide later on.  We know that the issue was discussed, after which the author made the decision (as per Ran's post) to place Rossart's appointment explicitly after Rhaegar's death at the Trident (as per TWOIAF). 

We do learn about the Chelsted-Rossart succession, but the only thing that we learn is that Chelsted was burned by Rossart, and that Rossart was named after Chelsted. We learn nothing, at no point whatsoever, about the amount of time that passed, or did not pass, in between. That is, until TWOIAF, where a timing is finally given.

All the other quotes ( @Bael's Bastard's previous post gives a nice overview of all available quotes) only tell us that Rossart came after Chelsted, and that Darry was present at King's Landing the night Chelsted was burned, and eventually left with Rhaegar for the Trident.

The Jaime-Darry "thing" causes no problem whatsoever`. Darry was in KL when Chelsted was burned (AFFC, Jaime 2). Darry left for the Trident with Rhaegar (AFFC, Jaime 1). Rossart was Chelsted's successor as Hand (ACOK, Tyrion 1; ASOS Jaime V), after Rhaegar had died (TWOIAF: The Fall of the Dragons - The End), Rossart was Hand for a fortnight (ACOK, Tyrion 1; ASOS, Jaime 3).

 

We are talking about a vacancy that lasted about two weeks, and the person who was to appoint a Hand was a paranoid king in the middle of a war. That he did not immediately appoint a new Hand is not a strange thing. Whatever the reason, and no matter if that reason was originally intended, or only decided upon after fleshing out that part of the war more.

[Bael's Bastard]

@Lord Varys

There is no reason to make it that convoluted. A total of five or so people are listed as having enjoyed Aerys' trust before the war: Chelsted, Velaryon, Staunton, Varys, and Rossart. And by the end, it seems Aerys trusted Rossart with his deepest and darkest plots above the rest. But that doesn't mean he was in a rush to elevate this low born executioner to Hand. This is a guy who wouldn't wed his son and heir to the daughter of one of the realm's greatest and wealthiest lords. So it isn't at all odd that Aerys didn't jump to name a new, lowborb Hand after he had one of his trusted small councilors burn one of his other trusted small councilors to death, until after his son and heir Rhaegar was dead.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

@Lord Varys

There is no reason to make it that convoluted. A total of five or so people are listed as having enjoyed Aerys' trust before the war: Chelsted, Velaryon, Staunton, Varys, and Rossart. And by the end, it seems Aerys trusted Rossart with his deepest and darkest plots above the rest. But that doesn't mean he was in a rush to elevate this low born executioner to Hand. This is a guy who wouldn't wed his son and heir to the daughter of one of the realm's greatest and wealthiest lords. So it isn't at all odd that Aerys didn't jump to name a new, lowborb Hand after he had one of his trusted small councilors burn one of his other trusted small councilors to death, until after his son and heir Rhaegar was dead.

I think it makes perfect sense for Aerys to immediately raise the guy he trusts with killing everyone to a position from which he can actually do that - even more so when the predecessor in that office actually tried to prevent those plans.

And there are no hints that Aerys did prevaricate as much as his ancestor Aenys - or even as Doran Martell. There was a war going on, and the way the government is set up means the king - especially this king - needs a Hand. 

If we had reason to believe Aerys didn't know who to name this speculation would make some sense. But there isn't. Rossart really is the natural successor to Chelsted - not just because he burned the man, not just because the king's trusts him, but because he is the guy executing the mad plan. He doesn't just need the king's favor to do that, he can do it best as the King's Hand. This is part of the secrecy thing of the wildfire plot.

If some pyromancer pet of the king's does suspicious things beneath/outside or within the Great Sept (or many other key places in the city that are not exactly property of the king), then this is not just going to be ignored or not raise any suspicion. And Aerys clearly did not involve the City Watch and its officers in this thing (else much more people would have known about the plan). The King's Hand, wearing the chain of office and speaking with the King's Voice should be able to do much and more without raising as much suspicion - and very few people would openly dare to challenge or investigate what he did.

4 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

We don't know what the original intent of the author was. Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. GRRM gave himself enough room to decide later on.  We know that the issue was discussed, after which the author made the decision (as per Ran's post) to place Rossart's appointment explicitly after Rhaegar's death at the Trident (as per TWOIAF). 

We do learn about the Chelsted-Rossart succession, but the only thing that we learn is that Chelsted was burned by Rossart, and that Rossart was named after Chelsted. We learn nothing, at no point whatsoever, about the amount of time that passed, or did not pass, in between. That is, until TWOIAF, where a timing is finally given.

What we get before that is a succession. We also don't know how quickly Merryweather succeeded Tywin, or how long Aerys waited before he made Connington Merryweather's successor (although he we have reason to believe some time passed because Aerys originally wanted to name Rhaegar). 

The implication always is that this happened as fast as possible - and it is obviously that as fast as possible originally meant 'immediately'. Because that's what you do if the guy you 'fired' and his successor are in the room at the same time. Chested > Rossart is basically the same as Otto Hightower > Criston Cole - and we would only speculate about Criston only succeeding Otto a fortnight or a month or whenever if some continuity error were forcing us to assume that Cole simply wasn't there when Otto was fired.

If Rossart did not immediately succeed Chelsted then I want to know why that is. I think that's too important an issue to just invent a solution for yourself and then stick with that.

[SFDanny]

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I think it makes perfect sense for Aerys to immediately raise the guy he trusts with killing everyone to a position from which he can actually do that - even more so when the predecessor in that office actually tried to prevent those plans.

It is crystal clear that you think this makes sense. I won't argue what you think makes sense. But that is hardly the point. The author has chosen the timeline of events that says what you prefer, because it makes sense to you, didn't happen. Martin is not only not writing the story to your specifications, but he is writing them to someone else's - his own. Time to get over this.

Also, that the office of Hand is left open obviously doesn't mean Aerys plan is somehow stifled. If anything Rossart is as free as he ever was to proceed.

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And there are no hints that Aerys did prevaricate as much as his ancestor Aenys - or even as Doran Martell. There was a war going on, and the way the government is set up means the king - especially this king - needs a Hand.

I'm going to assume you got caught in a autocorrect mistake here. "Prevaricate" is a synonym for "lie." I think you must have meant something like "procrastinate." If not tell me please how the degree Aerys lies has to do with anything here. The two examples you give would seem to point to putting off decisions.

The substance of your point, I think, is wrong. We already have an example of Aerys not immediately replacing one Hand with another during the rebellion. That occurs when Connington is finally appointed to the position after "Rhaegar could not be found."

Quote

When Merryweather failed so dismally to contain Robert's Rebellion and Prince Rhaegar could not be found, Aerys had turned to the next best thing, and raised Connington to the Handship. (AFfC 408) bold emphasis added

This implies searching for Rhaegar. How long a search we don't know, but a delay in appointing Connington as Hand, during wartime and by this same king, took place. Just as importantly is that we know Aerys considered Rhaegar as his Hand after Merryweather's failures. It maybe he does so again if Rhaegar wins against the rebels. Which implies he would wait until the outcome to make the decision of who should replace Chelsted. We know this is precisely the time delay in question, as the quote in TWoI&F places Rossart's appointment after the news of the Trident.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

If we had reason to believe Aerys didn't know who to name this speculation would make some sense. But there isn't. Rossart really is the natural successor to Chelsted - not just because he burned the man, not just because the king's trusts him, but because he is the guy executing the mad plan. He doesn't just need the king's favor to do that, he can do it best as the King's Hand. This is part of the secrecy thing of the wildfire plot.

It is not that Aerys didn't know who his candidates for he new Hand could be, but rather that events delayed that decision. Rhaegar,  or raising up another member of the small council might have been considered in normal times. As would elevating a proven loyal lord from outside. All of this would be "natural." What is outside the box is, as @Bael's Bastard shows is the elevation of a low-born pyromancer to such a high position. There is nothing natural about it. And again, the delay in naming a new Hand in no way hinders the pyromancer plot.

What we should be asking ourselves here is, is the pyromancer plot aimed solely at the rebels? Is it aimed at also, or even more directly, at the royal army, led by a victorious Rhaegar, coming back to King's Landing and trying to dictate the terms of victory? We know from Jaime that Rhaegar is out of the loop of information about the pyromancers activities. Is that purposefully done or is it just an accident of his activity?

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

If some pyromancer pet of the king's does suspicious things beneath/outside or within the Great Sept (or many other key places in the city that are not exactly property of the king), then this is not just going to be ignored or not raise any suspicion. And Aerys clearly did not involve the City Watch and its officers in this thing (else much more people would have known about the plan). The King's Hand, wearing the chain of office and speaking with the King's Voice should be able to do much and more without raising as much suspicion - and very few people would openly dare to challenge or investigate what he did.

The King's Hand issuing orders through the normal forms of his office might also draw attention that Aerys didn't want. If Chelsted had to figure this out, it is quite likely others on the small council and throughout the bureaucracy did not know. Keeping the knowledge to only those who had to do the work fits the needs of the plot much more than any discussion in the small council or decree issued in the Hand's name.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The implication always is that this happened as fast as possible - and it is obviously that as fast as possible originally meant 'immediately'. Because that's what you do if the guy you 'fired' and his successor are in the room at the same time. Chested > Rossart is basically the same as Otto Hightower > Criston Cole - and we would only speculate about Criston only succeeding Otto a fortnight or a month or whenever if some continuity error were forcing us to assume that Cole simply wasn't there when Otto was fired.

That is not obvious at all. You have been given numerous reasons why the appointment of Rossart might have been delayed. You just don't want to consider them and insist that because you have a problem with the timeline as the author puts it that it must be done immediately. It looks to me, my friend, like you have painted yourself in a corner here and just don't want to acknowledge it.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

If Rossart did not immediately succeed Chelsted then I want to know why that is. I think that's too important an issue to just invent a solution for yourself and then stick with that.

Perhaps we will learn more about this time period - I hope so - but the author is under no obligation to give any more information than he already has. His timeline here is in no way in conflict with what he has told us up to this point. It fits.

[Ran]

26 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

His timeline here is in no way in conflict with what he has told us up to this point. It fits.

Undersigned. Given that that is the solution presented in TWoIaF and does not conflict with any information otherwise given, I think we can move on from going away from it. Maybe George will eventually decide to change prior books and adjust details to present some other timeline, but until he does so, this is what we have no matter how much one might wish otherwise.

I do think it's very interesting to consider the question of what Rhaegar knew about the death of Chelsted and the rape and abuse of his mother in the days before he left for the war. My guess is that it was more stuff he abhorred, but he had a war to win and couldn't very well launch a coup or call a Great Council to try and put his father aside without jeopardizing everything.

[SFDanny]

8 hours ago, Ran said:

Undersigned. Given that that is the solution presented in TWoIaF and does not conflict with any information otherwise given, I think we can move on from going away from it. Maybe George will eventually decide to change prior books and adjust details to present some other timeline, but until he does so, this is what we have no matter how much one might wish otherwise.

No doubt if our author wants to change anything he has that right, and the ability to write the story as he sees fit. I also agree that it seems unlikely changes will happen here. Not that I'm wanting for no new information during this time period. Please tell George that there is a market for all the details he wants to pour out to his fans. I say this as one who has pre-ordered Fire & Blood in print, e-book, and audiobook  formats, so I'm not sure I'm the best person to judge the interest, but I can hope.

8 hours ago, Ran said:

I do think it's very interesting to consider the question of what Rhaegar knew about the death of Chelsted and the rape and abuse of his mother in the days before he left for the war. My guess is that it was more stuff he abhorred, but he had a war to win and couldn't very well launch a coup or call a Great Council to try and put his father aside without jeopardizing everything.

If we suppose Darry told him of the attack on Rhaella, or Rhaegar had other sources in the Red Keep, or even that Rhaella herself meets with her son before he leaves and can't hide the aftermath of the attack, it makes for truly tragic impotence on Rhaegar's part that he cannot do anything but what he did. How one swallows the rage the inability to protect your mother from such brutalization would cause is beyond me.

But who is left to tell the story? Off the top of my head I can only think of Varys. I can't see a Varys POV coming, but perhaps he will tell the story to Dany if she ever arrives.

I absolutely agree that Rhaegar had to fight a war. Nothing changes with Aerys if he doesn't win at the Trident. That he would win against his father in a battle for the Throne is unsure, but winning against those who would do away with the Targaryens is a prerequisite to any chance Rhaegar has. A council or a coup attempt would only split the loyalist forces when they needed maximum unity to defeat the rebellion.

What's the old Jose Marti quote about the "time of the furnaces"? Rhaegar had reached his time of the furnaces, and like Marti he died in his first battle. Perhaps his son or sister can win through. 

 

[Alexis-something-Rose]

10 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

But who is left to tell the story? Off the top of my head I can only think of Varys. I can't see a Varys POV coming, but perhaps he will tell the story to Dany if she ever arrives.

Jaime, Barristan are also two characters left who can tell the story. Both are in the Red Keep at the same time as Rhaegar.

[JNR]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I think it makes perfect sense for Aerys to immediately raise the guy he trusts with killing everyone to a position from which he can actually do that - even more so when the predecessor in that office actually tried to prevent those plans.

I agree with this as far as it goes, but am not sure about the timing in context because:

1. Aerys' point and goal of naming an alchemist as Hand seems clearer if Aerys knew that King's Landing was likely to fall (because Rhaegar had lost). 

2. Prior to the Trident, but after Chelsted died, Aerys may have thought of Rhaegar as his de facto Hand in executing his (Aerys') will in the critically important matter of crushing the Rebellion (even if Rhaegar hadn't been formally bestowed with the title).

3. For Aerys to burn Hand A, and fail to appoint Hand B immediately, would, I agree, be irrational... but Aerys was, in certain ways, irrational (though just how irrational, and when, remains to be seen).

In this last matter, I would draw a parallel to the American president and the chief of staff.  Chief of staff is an enormously important and powerful position, but given a sufficiently foolish president, it's conceivable to me that a president could fire a chief of staff and yet not appoint another one any time soon.  And thus, the many critical duties of chief of staff would go unperformed, by anyone, for an extended period. 

It's for exactly this reason that if Trump fires John Kelly and doesn't immediately replace him -- completely breaking with both precedent and common sense -- I will be unsurprised.  Trump is not rational, and if like Aerys he drops a turd into his pants just before the end, that won't surprise me either.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

Jaime, Barristan are also two characters left who can tell the story. Both are in the Red Keep at the same time as Rhaegar.

Good additions. I was thinking of us understanding already Jaime's history of the time, but perhaps he has more to tell. Ser Barristan is another who could tell us something. He doesn't seem to have been in King's Landing in Jaime's memories of the time, but that could just be because we are limited in scope to the specifics of each of Jaime's memories. At the very least he could be a source for Rhaegar's thoughts going north to the Trident.

[Alexis-something-Rose]

12 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Good additions. I was thinking of us understanding already Jaime's history of the time, but perhaps he has more to tell. Ser Barristan is another who could tell us something. He doesn't seem to have been in King's Landing in Jaime's memories of the time, but that could just be because we are limited in scope to the specifics of each of Jaime's memories. At the very least he could be a source for Rhaegar's thoughts going north to the Trident.

We know Barristan did leave King's Landing to go to Stoney Sept with Jon Darry to rally the royalist forces after they were defeated at Stoney Sept. But with Darry returned and standing with Jaime at that door while Aerys raped Rhaella, I think there is a good chance Barristan was also back. He may even have been helping Rhaegar. With Gerold Hightower in the south, Barristan is probably the one with war experience who is left to assist him.

If Rhaegar spoke so openly to Jaime about changes after the Trident while Jon Darry was standing with them, then I think there's a good chance Barristan has a lot more to tell us.  

With regard to Jaime, I do agree that perhaps he has told us all that he had to tell us about the situation at the Red Keep. I guess my expectation is coming from him finding out that Jon Connington is alive and could have Aegon with him, that this could unlock a little more with him.

[Lord Varys]

Again, my overall point is that I do want to know why Aerys did not immediately name Rossart. It is not that I cannot imagine why he may have not done that. But if he did that - which we don't actually know at this point considering that we have yet no mentioning of the time gap between Chelsted's death and Rossart's appointment in any published work - then I'd like George to tell us, and not have us speculate about why this might be the case.

Especially since the relationship between Aerys and Rhaegar seems to be far too important to me to be influenced or changed because of a stupid continuity error. Which I still think the Darry-Jaime conversation was. George did intend there to be a confusion about the Chelsted-Rossart thing. That just grows out of the fact that Darry and Jaime couldn't have talked if Chelsted was burned after Rhaegar had left.

9 hours ago, Ran said:

I do think it's very interesting to consider the question of what Rhaegar knew about the death of Chelsted and the rape and abuse of his mother in the days before he left for the war. My guess is that it was more stuff he abhorred, but he had a war to win and couldn't very well launch a coup or call a Great Council to try and put his father aside without jeopardizing everything.

It is interesting, but the really interesting issue there is why on earth Rhaegar stood with his father the monster against Lyanna's family. If Rhaegar can fight a war against Ned and his allies after Brandon and Rickard, he surely can also ignore Chelsted and even the fate of his own mother.

It is difficult to say when a dutiful son would have been obliged to abandon the ship of the Mad King, but I say the point to consider serious changes would have been long before Chelsted and Rhaella. And the idea that Rhaegar couldn't have just put his father in a cell if he was the man commanding the army is just not very likely.

And a peaceful solution like a Great Council seems to be out of the questions considering that the rebels would be put down in force. Their leaders wouldn't have a (loud) voice in the order after the war.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

42 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Again, my overall point is that I do want to know why Aerys did not immediately name Rossart. It is not that I cannot imagine why he may have not done that. But if he did that - which we don't actually know at this point considering that we have yet no mentioning of the time gap between Chelsted's death and Rossart's appointment in any published work - then I'd like George to tell us, and not have us speculate about why this might be the case.

The entire discussion came forth from the fact that TWOIAF does, in fact, place Rossart's appointment after Rhaegar's death at the Trident. And thus, a little while after Chelsted's death. That is a reference in a published work, even if no specific amount of weeks are stated.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The entire discussion came forth from the fact that TWOIAF does, in fact, place Rossart's appointment after Rhaegar's death at the Trident. And thus, a little while after Chelsted's death. That is a reference in a published work, even if no specific amount of weeks are stated.

That was nothing new, considering that Tyrion already told us that Rossart was Hand only for a fortnight. TWoIaF doesn't talk about a vacancy in the Handship, various candidates, or gives any reason whatsoever why Aerys didn't name Rossart at once. It doesn't even indicate that some time (days, weeks, or months) passed between Chelsted's death and Rossart's appointment.

11 hours ago, JNR said:

In this last matter, I would draw a parallel to the American president and the chief of staff.  Chief of staff is an enormously important and powerful position, but given a sufficiently foolish president, it's conceivable to me that a president could fire a chief of staff and yet not appoint another one any time soon.  And thus, the many critical duties of chief of staff would go unperformed, by anyone, for an extended period. 

I'm not expert on the subtleties of the American White House, but I do know that the Chief of Staff doesn't seem to be very similar to the Hand. The Chief of Staff isn't president when the king is absent or incapacitated - the Hand is effectively king in such situations. The Hand runs the government and rules the kingdom when a king cannot do that - and Aerys couldn't even do that very well before Duskendale. Afterwards he shut himself in his castle.

With a proper bureaucracy a sane person could rule this way relying only on a handful of trusted agents - but Aerys was not sane, and the court doesn't have a proper bureaucracy. There is the king and then there is the Hand (who effectively can be king when necessary). The next level is not clear. There are no regulations who does what and who has what authorities in the government when both the king and the Hand were dead/absent.

While Aerys had no successor for Chelsted everything the Hand would usually arrange, order, decide, command, enact, decree, etc. in the king's name would have to go through Aerys himself. And that in the middle of a war. It is just not feasible that Aerys wanted to take that stress on himself, especially not in the middle of a war he was losing and in the delusional state he was in.

And if he had some people - Varys, say, or Pycelle - handle all those things for him then why on earth didn't they wear the chain of the Hand. The way how a king gets rid of the tedious business of government is to name a Hand...

As for the question what Rhaegar knew:

It is obvious he must have known about Aerys threatening the lives of Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon. Prince Lewyn did fight in Rhaegar's army, after all. He apparently didn't do anything about that, either, which is pretty much insane if you ask me, unless, of course, Rhaegar himself was similarly threatened. But if he was then it was utter stupidity to talk about his post-war plans while the Kingsguard was listening.

Aerys threats to the Martells (and Rhaegar himself) would only be as good as the men he could trust. So if Rhaegar could trust that Darry and Jaime would not arrest him for contemplating treason, then how on earth could Aerys trust that whoever held Elia and the children would execute his commands? How could Aerys blackmail Rhaegar if Aerys' men already were Rhaegar's to the degree that they would not harm Elia and the children?

[Frey family reunion]

12 hours ago, JNR said:

3. For Aerys to burn Hand A, and fail to appoint Hand B immediately, would, I agree, be irrational... but Aerys was, in certain ways, irrational (though just how irrational, and when, remains to be seen).

Actually it's quite rational in Aerys' thinking.  Aerys appointed Chelsted only to have him stick his nose in his side project (blowing up King's Landing and transforming into a dragon).    Why would Aerys appoint another Hand only to have the new Hand stick his nose in Aerys' business.  All Aerys really needed a Hand for was to lead his army.  And with Rhaegar performing this function he didn't need a Hand.  If Aerys had appointed Rossart while Rhaegar and the Kingsguards were still in the city, it would have only aroused suspicion.  Once Aerys hears about Rhaegar's death, he thought it was time to fo full speed ahead with his plan to transform into a dragon, so he appoints Rossart giving up all pretenses that he was really running a kingdom.