Heresy 209 Of Ice and of Fire

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, Brad Stark said:

I don't buy into most of these theories,  but we are told Viserys didn't know about his own marriage pact.  It is unlikely he'd know the truth about any of these theories.  Unless of course there was no marriage pact, and Dorne just made this up recently. 

Revisiting this post to talk about the marriage pact that Doran Martell informed his daughter, Arianne, about. When could such a pact have been made? When Rhaegar went "down south", or is it more likely that Rhaella made the deal?

Arianne was promised to Viserys, and Quentyn to Dany. Whose children are they? Not Rhaegar's. They are Rhaella's children, but I am quite positive that neither Aerys nor Rhaegar could have possibly conceived this marriage pact when Rhaella didn't even know she was pregnant when she fled Kings Landing. 

Either Rhaella herself made a pact with Dorne, or Doran Martell - who I might point out is an overly-cautious man - made a marriage pact with the Cheese Monger, Illyrio Mopatz. The latter sounds totally unlikely to me. 

[SirArthur]

3 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

I'm not quite following you regarding the crown prince being left behind.

I don't quite understand why Aegon would be heir over Viserys. We do not know if there is any house pact within the Targaryens, that defines the heir as a title you cannot change. And since a crown prince is the heir, I also do not understand why Aegon would have any "rightful" claim over Viserys. Either there is no house pact, then Viserys is heir or there is a house pact, then any action/fake should better fake the escape of the heir. 

Also we do not know if there is any 7 kingdoms law, defining the crown prince besides the great councils. Anyway, since Viserys is known as the "beggar king" and Aegon's existence is not even known, it is simple to default on Viserys as heir through simple fame. In effect the same function the title of crown prince should create.

This entire thing is only such a mess, because GRRM, for some weird reason, decided to copy paste the history of a bunch of nobles, who didn't care about law in the first place. It's like discussing the right faith, when only heathens are in the room: a pointless act. I mean take Edric Storm. Under medieval english law an acknowledged bastard counts as a rightful son. And GRRM is good at ignoring the parts of medieval law he does not want. And that is ok. It is just the immersion of law and right, that does not really hold up to the medieval immersion. Usually this is solved with fantasy, however he does not do that. he could have solved the issue with one sentence.

Actually, thinking about it, he did it very clearly. He did not only call Viserys "crown prince", he also called him the "beggar king". What more should GRRM do to make it clear in his world, who is the crown prince ?

[Melifeather]

You know the other thing about it being a "Luke Skywalker" type of situation could be more like Darth Vader's words to Luke, "No, I am your father." which would imply that Jon's father is still alive, and perhaps rhymes with Darth Vader. (Mance Raydar) 

If Jon's father is Mance Raydar that too would fulfill the description of Jon having more of the north in him as well as being the son of Bael the Bard, like the Bastard O'Winterfell that he is.

[Melifeather]

8 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

I don't quite understand why Aegon would be heir over Viserys. We do not know if there is any house pact within the Targaryens, that defines the heir as a title you cannot change. And since a crown prince is the heir, I also do not understand why Aegon would have any "rightful" claim over Viserys. Either there is no house pact, then Viserys is heir or there is a house pact, then any action/fake should better fake the escape of the heir. 

Also we do not know if there is any 7 kingdoms law, defining the crown prince besides the great councils. Anyway, since Viserys is known as the "beggar king" and Aegon's existence is not even known, it is simple to default on Viserys as heir through simple fame. In effect the same function the title of crown prince should create.

This entire thing is only such a mess, because GRRM, for some weird reason, decided to copy paste the history of a bunch of nobles, who didn't care about law in the first place. It's like discussing the right faith, when only heathens are in the room: a pointless act. I mean take Edric Storm. Under medieval english law an acknowledged bastard counts as a rightful son. And GRRM is good at ignoring the parts of medieval law he does not want. And that is ok. It is just the immersion of law and right, that does not really hold up to the medieval immersion. Usually this is solved with fantasy, however he does not do that. he could have solved the issue with one sentence.

Actually, thinking about it, he did it very clearly. He did not only call Viserys "crown prince", he also called him the "beggar king". What more should GRRM do to make it clear in his world, who is the crown prince ?

The line of inheritance follows through the eldest child, and in ASOIAF it's only through the male heirs. Aegon, as Rhaegar's eldest son, has precedence over Viserys, who is Rhaegar's younger brother. It's no different than after Prince Charles, Prince William's children, George, Charlotte, and now little Louis, will all come before William's brother, Prince Harry.

Rhaegar's son was also presumed dead, as well as his daughter, so Viserys would then be next in line.

[SirArthur]

17 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

The line of inheritance follows through the eldest child, and in ASOIAF it's only through the male heirs. Aegon, as Rhaegar's eldest son, has precedence over Viserys, who is Rhaegar's younger brother. It's no different than after Prince Charles, Prince William's children, George, Charlotte, and now little Louis, will all come before William's brother, Prince Harry.

Then let Aegon stand in front of the Westerosi parliament and claim his title by constitution. 

[Melifeather]

7 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

Then let Aegon stand in front of the Westerosi parliament and claim his title by constitution. 

Well, Robert took the throne by conquest, but I think little Aegon would have been hunted, just as Viserys and Dany were hunted their whole lives had it been known he was still alive. Remaining "dead" to the world allowed him to grow and train in relative peace.

 

[Frey family reunion]

On 6/25/2018 at 12:00 PM, Tucu said:

I am not sure if that is compatible with Ned not hating Rhaegar. If he had ordered the burning of children Ned would probably have him in the same group as Tywin, Clegane or Lorch. Unless the oath to acomplish the task was to Aerys.

Boy this thread started moving fast.  But in reply, I’m not sure we know what Ned thought of Rhaegar, other than he was not a person who probably frequented brothels.  But one thing I will concede is that Ned seemed to lay the blame of the murder of children at the feet of Aerys as opposed to Rhaegar.  Of course, if the Prince that was Promised was supposed to be a sacrifice to “wake the dragon” or to be reborn as a dragon, it would make some sense that Aerys might be the driving force, considering that he was only married to Rhaella to bring about the Prince that was Promised prophecy in the first place.

[Black Crow]

10 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

Revisiting this post to talk about the marriage pact that Doran Martell informed his daughter, Arianne, about. When could such a pact have been made? When Rhaegar went "down south", or is it more likely that Rhaella made the deal?

 

Notwithstanding the "hostage" situation it was most likely agreed by Rhaegar as the price for Dornish intervention - and of course casts interesting light on why Rhaegar was down there in the first place, ie; not spending all his time in a long abandoned watch tower 

[Melifeather]

5 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Notwithstanding the "hostage" situation it was most likely agreed by Rhaegar as the price for Dornish intervention - and of course casts interesting light on why Rhaegar was down there in the first place, ie; not spending all his time in a long abandoned watch tower 

Rhaegar couldn't have known his mother was pregnant, much less that it would be a girl.

[Frey family reunion]

17 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

The line of inheritance follows through the eldest child, and in ASOIAF it's only through the male heirs. Aegon, as Rhaegar's eldest son, has precedence over Viserys, who is Rhaegar's younger brother. It's no different than after Prince Charles, Prince William's children, George, Charlotte, and now little Louis, will all come before William's brother, Prince Harry.

Rhaegar's son was also presumed dead, as well as his daughter, so Viserys would then be next in line.

Take it for what you will, but according to the Worldbook, Aerys made Viserys his heir when he sent him to Dragonstone, while Aegon and Rhaenys were still alive.  

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

Take it for what you will, but according to the Worldbook, Aerys made Viserys his heir when he sent him to Dragonstone, while Aegon and Rhaenys were still alive.  

Right. And after he learned of Rhaegar’s death, correct? 

[Frey family reunion]

10 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Right. And after he learned of Rhaegar’s death, correct? 

I think so.  It is said that after he learned of Rhaegar’s death he sent his new heir Viserys and Rahella away to Dragonstone, while keeping Aegon and Rhaenys in King’s Landing as hostages along with Elia.

I suppose the simplest, and most reasonable explanation is that Aegon wouldn’t make much of a hostage if he was also known to be the heir of the kingdom.  This would call Aerys’ bluff.  But if Aegon is disinherited, then Doran would more easily believe that his grandson’s life would be forfeit if they didn’t come to Aerys aid.

[Tucu]

13 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Boy this thread started moving fast.  But in reply, I’m not sure we know what Ned thought of Rhaegar, other than he was not a person who probably frequented brothels.  But one thing I will concede is that Ned seemed to lay the blame of the murder of children at the feet of Aerys as opposed to Rhaegar.  Of course, if the Prince that was Promised was supposed to be a sacrifice to “wake the dragon” or to be reborn as a dragon, it would make some sense that Aerys might be the driving force, considering that he was only married to Rhaella to bring about the Prince that was Promised prophecy in the first place.

I was going by Ned never saying or thinking anything bad about Rhaegar. If he had been a child sacrificing rapist I would expect a bit more disgust (as the disgust he showed for Aerys)

[SirArthur]

49 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

I think so.  It is said that after he learned of Rhaegar’s death he sent his new heir Viserys and Rahella away to Dragonstone, while keeping Aegon and Rhaenys in King’s Landing as hostages along with Elia.

I suppose the simplest, and most reasonable explanation is that Aegon wouldn’t make much of a hostage if he was also known to be the heir of the kingdom.  This would call Aerys’ bluff.  But if Aegon is disinherited, then Doran would more easily believe that his grandson’s life would be forfeit if they didn’t come to Aerys aid.

As far as I know the text talks about Elia as the hostage. 

 

Funny enough Aegon would be Viserys' heir, as there is a Westeros law that male come before female. 

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

I think so.  It is said that after he learned of Rhaegar’s death he sent his new heir Viserys and Rahella away to Dragonstone, while keeping Aegon and Rhaenys in King’s Landing as hostages along with Elia.

I suppose the simplest, and most reasonable explanation is that Aegon wouldn’t make much of a hostage if he was also known to be the heir of the kingdom.  This would call Aerys’ bluff.  But if Aegon is disinherited, then Doran would more easily believe that his grandson’s life would be forfeit if they didn’t come to Aerys aid.

Aerys was probably strong-arming Dorne, plus he seemed to dislike Elia based on her race. Didn't he say something to the effect that Rhaegar's children "smelled" Dornish? Shortly after hearing that Rhaegar was dead he names Viserys heir, and Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon become hostages. Rhaegar's son is effectively removed from the line of inheritance. Why? Wouldn't protecting Elia and keeping Aegon as crown prince be equally effective?

The official record is that Prince Oberyn Martell sailed to Braavos to meet with Ser Willem Darry to forge the secret pact between the Targaryens and the Martells, asking that Viserys be promised to Arianne in exchange for Dorne's support. After hearing of Viserys death, Doran sends Quentyn to Daenerys to inform her of the pact, and Dorne's promise to still honor it if Daenerys were to marry Quentyn.

[SirArthur]

6 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

and Dorne's promise to still honor it if Daenerys were to marry Quentyn.

As long as Aegon is alive, Dany can't be the heir. 

[Black Crow]

3 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

I think so.  It is said that after he learned of Rhaegar’s death he sent his new heir Viserys and Rahella away to Dragonstone, while keeping Aegon and Rhaenys in King’s Landing as hostages along with Elia.

I suppose the simplest, and most reasonable explanation is that Aegon wouldn’t make much of a hostage if he was also known to be the heir of the kingdom.  This would call Aerys’ bluff.  But if Aegon is disinherited, then Doran would more easily believe that his grandson’s life would be forfeit if they didn’t come to Aerys aid.

Its more likely a pragmatic recognition that babies are fragile and even if it lives 15 or more years of regency will do no-one any good. Viserys is healthy and not far off adulthood; much better to proclaim him than set up a very uncertain future

[SirArthur]

I don't think Aerys expected to loose King's Landing. He still had his "hostage" Jaime, he still had the fleet and he still had at least one army, the one besieging Storm's End. 

If there is any faking of heir because a loss was expected, then Aerys would have left KL. And if Rhaegar would have left his belongings anywhere, the Tower of Joy seems as a good indication. So, what could be at the tower ? A dragon egg ? Reason enough for the KG to protect it ? 

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, SirArthur said:

I don't think Aerys expected to loose King's Landing. He still had his "hostage" Jaime, he still had the fleet and he still had at least one army, the one besieging Storm's End. 

If there is any faking of heir because a loss was expected, then Aerys would have left KL. And if Rhaegar would have left his belongings anywhere, the Tower of Joy seems as a good indication. So, what could be at the tower ? A dragon egg ? Reason enough for the KG to protect it ? 

Pretty Pig/Some Pig wrote a fantastic analysis of the parallels and inversions between Mirri's tent revival and the tower of joy.   There are enough parallels for me to believe that someone was trying to resurrect Rhaegar.

[SirArthur]

9 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

 There are enough parallels for me to believe that someone was trying to resurrect Rhaegar.

Resurrecting Rhaegar has no purpose. Why the dead fallen prince ? What should he do ? Resurrect him for what purpose ? Sure, someone has to die for someone else to live. But who would that be ? How does it work in a state of the body far beyond Cat's ?

Is Rhaegar now an ancient mummy running around with a crushed in body ? And if he hangs around long enough he is a ham, born in salt and smoke ?