Jump to content
AlaskanSandman

Bael & Queen Alyssane (Updating)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

The Bolton flaying part wasn’t in the song... that’s the alternate ending Ygritte provides courtesy of her mother. 

If we are doubting details, this makes me inclined to doubt that part more than the Song/Lewin’s history/and Nan’s stories.

Since there was almost certainly some sort of invasion during the reign of Jaehaerys and Alysanne, given the donations to the Night’s Watch and stories told by Viserys, is there a better candidate for King Beyond the Wall at the time?

I see no reason to doubt it, as again, Ygritte is not giving us any lyrics to the song, just giving us the gist of the story the song tells, along with the tradition of the aftermath.

So it is a matter of either some easily explained anachronisms in wording in the current form of the song or story or even just Ygritte's telling, or a completely fictitious addition of flaying to the story or convoluted explanation for how the Boltons actually did flay and wear the skin of a Lord Stark in the Targaryen era, yet are still accounted as having not done so since they bent the knee to the Starks.

TWOIAF, for its part, names the Bolton who swore fealty to the Starks as Rogar the Huntsman, and puts him at a time when "the first Andals were crossing the narrow sea in their longships." In other words, long before the Targaryens, or even the Rhoynar centuries before them, made their conquests in Westeros.

Whatever the explanations for Alysanne's and Jaehaerys's actions in the North and at the Wall, and whatever the truth behind the stories Viserys tells his grandchildren about them fighting beyond the Wall, I see absolutely no reason to link Bael, who was killed by a Stark after leading his wildlings south, with that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I see no reason to doubt it, as again, Ygritte is not giving us any lyrics to the song, just giving us the gist of the story the song tells, along with the tradition of the aftermath.

So it is a matter of either some easily explained anachronisms in wording in the current form of the song or story or even just Ygritte's telling, or a completely fictitious addition of flaying to the story or convoluted explanation for how the Boltons actually did flay and wear the skin of a Lord Stark in the Targaryen era, yet are still accounted as having not done so since they bent the knee to the Starks.

TWOIAF, for its part, names the Bolton who swore fealty to the Starks as Rogar the Huntsman, and puts him at a time when "the first Andals were crossing the narrow sea in their longships." In other words, long before the Targaryens, or even the Rhoynar centuries before them, made their conquests in Westeros.

Whatever the explanations for Alysanne's and Jaehaerys's actions in the North and at the Wall, and whatever the truth behind the stories Viserys tells his grandchildren about them fighting beyond the Wall, I see absolutely no reason to link Bael, who was killed by a Stark after leading his wildlings south, with that time.

I hear what you are saying, and we don’t have the information to be sure of anything.

I just find it easier to believe a Bolton did skin a Stark and it’s not something publicized (the starks seem to have covered this whole story up) or there is more to the story than to believe that the rest of it is all misinformation and misdirection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I just find it easier to believe a Bolton did skin a Stark and it’s not something publicized (the starks seem to have covered this whole story up) or there is more to the story than to believe that the rest of it is all misinformation and misdirection.

You have no reason to believe that Jaehaerys I fought against a king-beyond-the-Wall. Viserys I doesn't tell his grandchildren about Bael the Bard - or any other wildling king -, or does he?

And it makes no sense whatsoever to assume the Starks could have covered up the fact that the Lord of Winterfell was flayed by a rebellious Bolton in the Targaryen era.

In fact, it also makes no sense that a Stark bastard - Bael's son - would become Lord of Winterfell in the Targaryen era. The Kings in the North could legitimize their own bastards (or perhaps simply call whatever get they children had 'Stark', be he or she of legitimate or illegitimate birth). The Lord of Winterfell could not. Why on earth should a Targaryen king legitimize the get of some wildling king? Why should he name such a person his Warden of the North?

The whole scenario simply makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 5:42 AM, OtherFromAnotherMother said:

How would this be possible if Bloodraven didn't go to the wall until 233? Redbeard was already dead.

Oops. That was an error, my bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×