Jump to content
Legitimate_Bastard

Southron Ambitions - what were they?

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Archmaester Marwyn tells Samwell Tarley to ask himself why Aemon Targaryen was allowed to waste his life upon the Wall, when by rights he should have been raised to archmaester, and answers: "His blood was why. He could not be trusted. No more than I can." So Marwyn clearly believes the "grey sheep" at the Citadel have conspired against Targaryens themselves, not just their dragons. We don't know how far back that conspiracy goes, or the extents of it, but we have at least one archmaester telling us that it exists, and has since before the dragons came back, so it isn't just some baseless fan theory.

We do know that Marwyn believes this thing, but we actually do know that 'not being allowed to become an archmaester' is actually not the reason Maester Aemon went to the Wall. He did that to prevent to be used as a figurehead-pretender against his younger brother, King Aegon V. One can assumes that being an archmaester would have given Aemon even more prominence than Maester Aemon already had.

This is actually part of the reason why Marwyn might be somewhat in paranoia/nut case territory in his belief in 'conspiracy theories'. He is apparently not properly informed about the inner workings of Aemon's decision - which is hardly surprising considering that he, most likely, never actually talked to Aemon Targaryen in person.

But I certainly think it makes sense that the Citadel would not want to have Aemon among the archmaesters if they knowledge about the conspiracy to eradicate the dragons after the Dance was discussed there.

However, it seems clear that the Citadel was rather open for Targaryens back in the days of Jaehaerys I, or else Prince Vaegon would have never become an archmaester.

42 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I think that there was an anti-Targaryen faction that developed among the archmaesters of the Citadel at some point, and I think there is a good chance that faction preferred to see Tywin Lannister on the throne. That said, the Citadel got along just fine for centuries or millennia before there was a single united kingdom in Westeros, so I don't think a divided realm would necessarily do them great harm.

My take on the 'anti-dragon conspiracy' is actually that the Citadel concluded the dragons had to go after the Dance - because of threat of another Dance of the Dragons, one that might see the great cities, towns, and castles of the Realm burn, and not just Tumbleton and minor castles/towns in the Riverlands. A couple of dragons are good, dozens of dragons in the hands of royal family who turns against themselves are very, very bad.

Whether the Citadel ever believed that the Targaryens could bring the dragons back is at this point unclear. Only then, I think, it would make sense for them to actually plot against them.

They may have fallen prey to their own propaganda - if magic doesn't work then all attempts by the Targaryens to bring the dragons were madness and stupidity. Even more so if the maesters actually found ways to prevent dragon eggs from hatching. If they poisoned the living dragons, they may have poisoned the eggs as well. We don't yet know why the five eggs of the last dragon and the other, older dragon eggs did not hatch.

Share this post


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

We do know that Marwyn believes this thing, but we actually do know that 'not being allowed to become an archmaester' is actually not the reason Maester Aemon went to the Wall. He did that to prevent to be used as a figurehead-pretender against his younger brother, King Aegon V. One can assumes that being an archmaester would have given Aemon even more prominence than Maester Aemon already had.

This is actually part of the reason why Marwyn might be somewhat in paranoia/nut case territory in his belief in 'conspiracy theories'. He is apparently not properly informed about the inner workings of Aemon's decision - which is hardly surprising considering that he, most likely, never actually talked to Aemon Targaryen in person.

But I certainly think it makes sense that the Citadel would not want to have Aemon among the archmaesters if they knowledge about the conspiracy to eradicate the dragons after the Dance was discussed there.

However, it seems clear that the Citadel was rather open for Targaryens back in the days of Jaehaerys I, or else Prince Vaegon would have never become an archmaester.

My take on the 'anti-dragon conspiracy' is actually that the Citadel concluded the dragons had to go after the Dance - because of threat of another Dance of the Dragons, one that might see the great cities, towns, and castles of the Realm burn, and not just Tumbleton and minor castles/towns in the Riverlands. A couple of dragons are good, dozens of dragons in the hands of royal family who turns against themselves are very, very bad.

Whether the Citadel ever believed that the Targaryens could bring the dragons back is at this point unclear. Only then, I think, it would make sense for them to actually plot against them.

They may have fallen prey to their own propaganda - if magic doesn't work then all attempts by the Targaryens to bring the dragons were madness and stupidity. Even more so if the maesters actually found ways to prevent dragon eggs from hatching. If they poisoned the living dragons, they may have poisoned the eggs as well. We don't yet know why the five eggs of the last dragon and the other, older dragon eggs did not hatch.

If there is a conspiracy among some of the Maesters at the Citadel, I think it probably stems from the Doom of Valyria and the Century of Blood that followed. The institution of the Maesters had to be aware of what was going on in Valyria - regardless of which theory you believe on how it went down, it involved the usage of magic. Dragons were apparently created using vile methods of magic.

When dragonlords showed up in Westeros there was bound to be a faction of Maesters who feared Westeros would grow in to another Valryia-esque state that would end the same way. It is not hard to imagine a faction who were intent on preventing that from happening. Suppression of magical knowledge would be a way the faction would try to fight the influence of the Targaryens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

What do you mean not only marriage? There were no marriages. And only two betrothals, which went years without being sealed into marriages. And we know for a fact that marriage can't wait when it comes to war. Hoster didn't contribute a single sword to war until two of the three rebel leaders agreed to wed his daughters, all while Robert and his rebellion threatened to be put down at Stoney Sept. Marriages are urgent matters when it comes to war. And yet there were none before the war.

As for foster care, Ned (and presumably Robert) was fostered with Jon starting in 271-272 AC. There is absolutely no hint of an issue between Rickard and Aerys, Steffon and Aerys, or Jon and Aerys anywhere near that far back. There is no evidence for these fosterings having any offensive or defensive intent towards House Targaryen.
 

I mean first of all, all the Starks in long history were bethroted and married someone from the North, the only acception is are the Blackwoods, who are first men, maybe that some 3rd son married a southern house, but they prefer the wall before that kind marriage.

And i think the reason for the alliance and the hate for the king has nothing to do with Harrenhall, i think in fact that the skyrocket taxes on the Harbors (accept Kingslanding) is the big problem. Aerys did teh same as Aegon the 5th in that matter. This was before all the fostering happened (accept brandon 269AC). This are three of the big regions that felt the high taxeses (Lannisport, Gulltown, white Harbor) Only Oldtown what is allready a very rich port is not in the conspiracy. (maybe they are because of the maesters) The north is not so rich so i think they felt it the most and so rickard was maybe not plotting to end the king, but maybe to get more power in the south.

after 269AC there happend something and this is the only thing i can think of. And i told allready i think there was no hurry even if they would have married in 291AC, you have more power over the Targaryan and the Dornish. So i think there was a conspiracy from the lords and the masters (a winwin) but everything went completely wrong, because Rhagaer interferred with that Harrenhall Tournament and later with Lyanna. Just a STRATEGIC POLITICAL MOVEMENT for in the future.

Another note is that Aerys promised Rickard, when he came to KL a Wall behind the old one and he just did not do that, this was also before that time and we dont know what Aerys did more.    

Edited by Seaserpent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Seaserpent said:

Another note is that Aerys promised Rickard, when he came to KL a Wall behind the old one and he just did not do that, this was also before that time and we dont know what Aerys did more.    

I did not know that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Legitimate_Bastard said:

I did not know that!

Yes is in the world of ice and fire page 113 in my book. In 264AC Rickard came to KL. Aerys said to built 300 mile behind the old Wall one a new one with new land in between. It would not have worked, but it could be he made Rickard some promises about new land, but in stead  of doing that he increased the taxes 3 or 4 times over on the only port there white harbor. It would have been frustrating dealing with a king like this, so a bit more power would have been better.

Edited by Seaserpent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Legitimate_Bastard said:

When dragonlords showed up in Westeros there was bound to be a faction of Maesters who feared Westeros would grow in to another Valryia-esque state that would end the same way. It is not hard to imagine a faction who were intent on preventing that from happening. Suppression of magical knowledge would be a way the faction would try to fight the influence of the Targaryens. 

The important point there would be the Dance, not the Doom. Valyria always had many dragonlord families, Westeros had only one, and it took a considerable time until there were so many dragons that civil war with many dragonriders threatened. The Dance did give people a taste of that, and it would make sense that the Citadel may have been determined to pretend another Dance by killing the remaining dragons.

The Citadel wouldn't have been opposed to a great king having a lot of power as the guy controlling the dragons - it only becomes problematic when there are too many dragons and too many branches of the royal family. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

 It would not have worked, but it could be he made Rickard some promises about new land,

Do you mean they could not have physically constructed another wall? Or that having another wall in general would not have been a good idea?

 

13 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The important point there would be the Dance, not the Doom. Valyria always had many dragonlord families, Westeros had only one, and it took a considerable time until there were so many dragons that civil war with many dragonriders threatened. The Dance did give people a taste of that, and it would make sense that the Citadel may have been determined to pretend another Dance by killing the remaining dragons.

The Citadel wouldn't have been opposed to a great king having a lot of power as the guy controlling the dragons - it only becomes problematic when there are too many dragons and too many branches of the royal family. 

You are right. For another 'Doom' I suppose it would take many many centuries, perhaps longer to end up with that many rival dragonlord families.

What do  you think about the other theories about the cause of the doom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

I mean first of all, all the Starks in long history were bethroted and married someone from the North, the only acception is are the Blackwoods, who are first men, maybe that some 3rd son married a southern house, but they prefer the wall before that kind marriage.

That's not accurate.

For one, we have limited information about who the Starks married over their long history. We have a Stark family tree that goes back only about 230 years, with a focus on the ancestors of the current generations of Starks. There are Starks, like the two sons of Artos, who are shown to have had children, but we don't know with whom. And we don't know how many of the Starks that are simply listed, without showing a marriage or that they had children, did in fact wed and/or have children.

Second, that Stark family tree shows us that they most certainly wed both houses outside the North, and houses in the North that worshiped the Seven, in the decades and centuries leading up to Lord Rickard agreeing to take Catelyn Tully (Riverlands) for his eldest son and heir Brandon, and agreeing to let Lord Robert Baratheon (Stormlands) take his daughter Lyanna. Lord Rickard's grandmother was a Blackwood, his aunt Jocelyn wed and had children with a Royce in the Vale, and Ned's aunt Branda wed to a Rodgers in the Stormlands.

Marriages to Northern House Worshipers of the Seven:

- Rickon, Lord Cregan's eldest son and heir, wed Jeyne Manderly
- Lord Rodwell, eldest son of Lord Brandon and grandson of Lord Cregan, wed Myriame Manderly

Marriages to Southron Houses:

- Lord Cregan wed Alysanne Blackwood (Riverlands) 
- Lord Beron, second son of Lord Brandon and grandson of Lord Cregan, wed Lorra Royce (Vale)
- Lord Willam, second son of Lord Beron, wed Melantha Blackwood (Riverlands)
- Jocelyn, daughter of Lord Willam and granddaughter of Lord Beron, wed Benedict Royce (Vale) 
- Branda, daughter of Rodrik and granddaughter of Lord Beron, wed Harold Rogers (Stormlands)

16 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

And i think the reason for the alliance and the hate for the king has nothing to do with Harrenhall, i think in fact that the skyrocket taxes on the Harbors (accept Kingslanding) is the big problem. Aerys did teh same as Aegon the 5th in that matter. This was before all the fostering happened (accept brandon 269AC). This are three of the big regions that felt the high taxeses (Lannisport, Gulltown, white Harbor) Only Oldtown what is allready a very rich port is not in the conspiracy. (maybe they are because of the maesters) The north is not so rich so i think they felt it the most and so rickard was maybe not plotting to end the king, but maybe to get more power in the south.

Tywin had originally reduced taxes and tariffs on shipping going in and out of King's Landing, Lannisport, and Oldtown, which had won him the support of many wealthy merchants. Later, King Aerys is claimed to have doubled port fees at King's Landing and Oldtown, and tripled them for Lannisport and the realms other ports and harbors. When a delegation of small lords and wealthy merchants came before the Iron Throne to complain, Aerys blamed Tywin for the increase, and restored the the port fees and tariffs to their previous levels. So Aerys actually received much acclaim for overturning what is claimed to have been his idea, while Tywin is the one who was actually held responsible for the temporary increases.

So the theory that this was responsible for a conspiracy against House Targaryen really doesn't make sense. Especially when many theories of a conspiracy against House Targaryen actually include the man who was held responsible for the temporary increases, and who actually was responsible for giving King's Landing, his own port of Lannisport, and Oldtown preferential taxes and tariffs in the first place.

Also, where are you getting a date for when Brandon was fostered? Brandon was only born in the year before Ned, and became a man grown in 278 AC. So even if he was fostered as young as Ned was, at age eight, that would put the start of his fostering around 270-271 AC. Anyways, just curious where you are getting information about when Brandon was fostered.

16 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

after 269AC there happend something and this is the only thing i can think of. And i told allready i think there was no hurry even if they would have married in 291AC, you have more power over the Targaryan and the Dornish. So i think there was a conspiracy from the lords and the masters (a winwin) but everything went completely wrong, because Rhagaer interferred with that Harrenhall Tournament and later with Lyanna. Just a STRATEGIC POLITICAL MOVEMENT for in the future.

If there was a conspiracy against House Targaryen then marriages and children to create blood ties were of the utmost urgency. The lack of marriage and child between Brandon and Catelyn at the time of Brandon's death led to Hoster sitting out the war, as Robert fought in battle after battle in which he could have been killed and the rebellion snuffed out. It led to Hoster demanding that Ned and Jon agree to wed his daughters before he would agree to join his swords to their cause, as a wounded Robert was being hunted house by house by the royalists before the Battle of the Bells.

Aside from having to make new marriages with Hoster Tully, who had previously negotiated the betrothal of his daughter to the murdered Brandon Stark with the murdered Lord Rickard Stark, to bring him into the war, before all that, there were all the bannermen of the Vale, Stormlands, and Riverlands who could not be counted on to automatically fight on the side of their lord against the king. And yet, in all those years when the great lords are alleged by these theories to have been plotting, Ned, Benjen, Stannis, Edmure, Lysa, etc. were not utilized to secure more support, and Brandon/Catelyn and Robert/Lyanna were never wed.

The murder of Brandon Stark and the abduction and death of Lyanna Stark demonstrated exactly how pointless a betrothal could be rendered to be. Marriage and blood ties are no guarantee, but without even those, everything can fall apart. In the end, it was truly the relationships developed between Jon, Robert, and Ned that formed the core of the rebellion, and nobody can demonstrate that those relationships were intended to form the heart of a future rebellion, nor show that any of the parties could have predicted at the time the fosterings were made that such relationships would be formed.

16 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

Another note is that Aerys promised Rickard, when he came to KL a Wall behind the old one and he just did not do that, this was also before that time and we dont know what Aerys did more.    

All we are told is that a visit to King's Landing by Lord Rickard in 264 AC awakened Aerys's interest in the North, and that he hatched a plan to build a new Wall a hundred leagues north of the existing one, and claim all the lands in between. We aren't told that Aerys made any promises to Rickard. We aren't even told that Aerys came up with this plan while Rickard was still there, let alone that he ever told Rickard of his plan.

And considering that the fifty leagues south of the Wall (Brandon's Gift and the New Gift) were already removed from House Stark and given to the Night's Watch, it is pretty absurd to think that Aerys had an intention, or Rickard any hope, of seeing any of the hundred leagues north of the Wall going to House Stark in the event Aerys executed his plan and succeeded.

We have no reason to believe that Rickard's interactions with Aerys in 264 AC were negative, or that Rickard developed negative feelings for Aerys by 271-272 AC when Ned was fostered with Jon. There is not a hint that Rickard would have had reason to have issue with Aerys until 282 AC, a decade after Ned had been sent to foster with Jon.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Marriages to Northern House Worshipers of the Seven:

- Rickon, Lord Cregan's eldest son and heir, wed Jeyne Manderly
- Lord Rodwell, eldest son of Lord Brandon and grandson of Lord Cregan, wed Myriame Manderly

Marriages to Southron Houses:

- Lord Cregan wed Alysanne Blackwood (Riverlands) 
- Lord Beron, second son of Lord Brandon and grandson of Lord Cregan, wed Lorra Royce (Vale)
- Lord Willam, second son of Lord Beron, wed Melantha Blackwood (Riverlands)
- Jocelyn, daughter of Lord Willam and granddaughter of Lord Beron, wed Benedict Royce (Vale) 
- Branda, daughter of Rodrik and granddaughter of Lord Beron, wed Harold Rogers (Stormlands)



We have no reason to believe that Rickard's interactions with Aerys in 264 AC were negative, or that Rickard developed negative feelings for Aerys by 271-272 AC when Ned was fostered with Jon. There is not a hint that Rickard would have had reason to have issue with Aerys until 282 AC, a decade after Ned had been sent to foster with Jon.

In those 230 years what is a long period, 3 times it was a second son that marriad with 2 times a Royce and 1 time a blackwood. Those men were not the heirs of the current lords. There big brothers married a Nothern house. Blackwoods and Royces are also first men with the same culture. The Manderlings are a northern house for a long time and the woman will not marry a stark lord in a seven wedding. Only Cregan married as a heir with a Blackwood and this is also the only person before Rickard were we know of who has southron ambitions.

One time we know of the Lords were really angry at their king and that was with Aegon the 5th abouth the increase of harbor taxes. So that Rickard is only angry with the king in 282AC is not correct. It would be way more logical that he was angry at him about that, because all the lords in future were angry about it. And Aerys increased it even more 3 to 4 times over. If Rickard is ok with this and not tried something to get more influence he was not a smart Lord. I dont say there he has a big conspiracy, but onl to get more influence in the south, to get an alliance against the king just political. And nobody has to marry is 3 weeks for that, that could also be an establishment for the future problems. That 282AC there cam a tragedy is not in my theory, that just happend and at that moment there were allready some connections made. So Rickard was not trying to end the Targaryand but only to get more power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Seaserpent said:

In those 230 years what is a long period, 3 times it was a second son that marriad with 2 times a Royce and 1 time a blackwood. Those men were not the heirs of the current lords. There big brothers married a Nothern house. Blackwoods and Royces are also first men with the same culture. The Manderlings are a northern house for a long time and the woman will not marry a stark lord in a seven wedding. Only Cregan married as a heir with a Blackwood and this is also the only person before Rickard were we know of who has southron ambitions.

You are making assumptions based on incomplete information.

The House Stark family tree names 42 Starks from Lord Benjen to Lord Rickard, but only gives the names of spouses for 23 of those Starks. So for 19 Starks, just under half of the Starks named from Lord Benjen to Lord Rickard, we do not know whether they lived to wed, how many times they wed, or who they wed if they did. That's not counting the unnamed and unnumbered issue of Artos's sons Brandon and Benjen, who would also have been Starks.

Those 23 Starks are known to have had 28 spouses, including 8 Stark spouses (or 4 Stark/Stark marriages). Of the 20 cases where the spouse was not also a Stark, 5 were from Southron houses whether worshipers of the seven or the old gods (Blackwoods, Royces, Rogers), 2 were from originally Southron houses that worship the seven (Manderlys), and 3 are from Northern houses that have knights among their known members (Lockes, Ryswells).

Starks with known spouses

1. Lord Benjen wed Lysa Locke
2. Lord Rickon, son of Lord Benjen, wed Gilliane Glover
3. Bennard, son of Lord Benjen, wed Margaret Karstark
4. Lord Cregan, son of Lord Rickon, wed Arra Norrey, Alysanne Blackwood, and Lynara Stark
5. Lynara wed Lord Cregan Stark
6. Rickon, son of Lord Cregan, wed Jeyne Manderly
7. Lord Jonnel, son of Lord Cregan, wed Robyn Ryswell and Sansa Stark
8. Edric, son of Lord Cregan, wed Serena Stark
9. Lord Brandon, son of Lord Cregan, wed Alys Karstark
10. Serena, daughter of Rickon, wed Jon Umber and Edric Stark
11. Sansa, daughter of Rickon, wed Lord Jonnel Stark
12. Arrana, daughter of Edric and Serena, wed Osric Umber
13. Argelle, daughter of Edric and Serena, wed Robard Cerwyn
14. Lord Rodwell, son of Lord Brandon, wed Myriame Manderly
15. Lord Beron, son of Lord Brandon, wed Lorra Royce
16. Lord Willam, son of Lord Beron, wed Melantha Blackwood and Lyanne Glover
17. Artos, son of Lord Beron, wed Lysara Karstark
18. Rodrik, son of Lord Beron, wed Arya Flint
19. Lord Edwyle, son of Lord Willam, wed Marna Locke
20. Jocelyn, daughter of Lord Willam, wed Benedict Royce
21. Branda, daughter of Rodrik, wed Harrold Rogers
22. Lyarra, daughter of Rodrik, wed Lord Rickard Stark
23. Lord Rickard, son of Lord Edwyle, wed Lyarra Stark

Starks with unknown spouses

1. Benjen, son of Bennard, wed ?
2. Brandon, son of Bennard, wed ?
3. Elric, son of Bennard, wed ?
4. Sarra, daughter of Lord Cregan, wed ?
5. Alys, daughter of Lord Cregan, wed ?
6. Raya, daughter of Lord Cregan, wed ?
7. Mariah, daughter of Lord Cregan, wed ?
8. Lyanna, daughter of Lord Cregan, wed ?
9. Lord Barthogan, son of Lord Cregan, wed ?
10. Cregard, son of Edric and Serena, wed ?
11. Torrhen, son of Edric and Serena, wed ?
12. Arsa, daughter of Lord Brandon, wed ?
13. Lord Donnor, son of Lord Beron, wed ?
14. Berena, daughter of Lord Beron, wed ?
15. Alysanne, daughter of Lord Beron, wed ?
16. Errold, son of Lord Beron, wed ?
17. Brandon, son of Lord Willam, wed ?
18. Brandon, son of Artos, wed ?
19. Benjen, son of Artos, wed ?

It would certainly not be remarkable that House Stark chose more often than not to wed their bannermen, as all the great houses do. But we see that House Stark has had no issue wedding Southron houses, be they worshipers of the old gods or the new, or wedding Northern houses that worship the seven, or have had no issue embracing the seven. That was especially true in the decades leading up to Lord Rickard's children and their betrothals.

Lord Rickard's mother was a Locke, who have knights. Lord Rickard's sister wed a Royce of the Vale, who have knights. Lord Rickard's grandfather wed a Blackwood of the Riverlands. Lord Rickard's great grandfather wed a Royce of the Vale, who have knights. Lord Rickard's great grandfather's brother wed a Manderly, who have knights. Lord Rickard's wife's sister, his cousin, wed a Rogers of the Stormlands, who have knights.

So Lord Rickard was well acquainted with Southroners and worshipers of the seven before he betrothed his children to Catelyn Tully and Robert Baratheon. Whatever House Stark had done historically, Lord Rickard wasn't the first Stark to look to wed his children to Southroners and/or worshipers of the seven.

2 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

One time we know of the Lords were really angry at their king and that was with Aegon the 5th abouth the increase of harbor taxes. So that Rickard is only angry with the king in 282AC is not correct. It would be way more logical that he was angry at him about that, because all the lords in future were angry about it. And Aerys increased it even more 3 to 4 times over. If Rickard is ok with this and not tried something to get more influence he was not a smart Lord. I dont say there he has a big conspiracy, but onl to get more influence in the south, to get an alliance against the king just political. And nobody has to marry is 3 weeks for that, that could also be an establishment for the future problems. That 282AC there cam a tragedy is not in my theory, that just happend and at that moment there were allready some connections made. So Rickard was not trying to end the Targaryand but only to get more power.

There's nothing logical about making assumptions about Rickard being angry with Aerys when there is zero evidence of such a thing. We have no evidence of Rickard having an issue with Aegon V, or Jaehaerys II, or Aerys II, until his son kidnapped his daughter, and he imprisoned his son. Rickard's children were betrothed for years and yet he had no urgency to get them wed. That makes zero sense if he is actually part of a plot that has offensive or defensive intent against House Targaryen. The same goes for all the other great houses that are claimed to be part of such a plot, yet make no attempt to strengthen ties through marriage and blood ties in the years leading up to the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, the increase in port fees was short lived, and it was ultimately blamed on Tywin, while Aerys received credit for reversing them, so there is really no basis for the idea that Rickard or anyone else had any long lasting anger at Aerys over it.

Yes, I would agree that Rickard was trying to get more influence in the south. I suspect he was hoping to get much closer to the Iron Throne, and to put his descendants in better position to eventually marry with the Targaryens.

House Baratheon was as close as it got to House Targaryen. Robert was a great-grandson of Aegon V, and his grandfather's sister had originally been intended to wed Prince Duncan and eventually be his queen.

House Tully had also been considered worthy to have a daughter of theirs wed a Targaryen prince, as Prince Jaehaerys (II) had originally been betrothed to Celia Tully. Had he not broken his betrothal, Jaehaerys's queen would have been a Tully.

What I object to is the idea of Rickard being part of an offensive or defensive conspiracy against Aerys and House Targaryen, which is what many theories about his "Southron Ambitions" propose.

Share this post


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


It would certainly not be remarkable that House Stark chose more often than not to wed their bannermen, as all the great houses do. But we see that House Stark has had no issue wedding Southron houses, be they worshipers of the old gods or the new, or wedding Northern houses that worship the seven, or have had no issue embracing the seven. That was especially true in the decades leading up to Lord Rickard's children and their betrothals.

There's nothing logical about making assumptions about Rickard being angry with Aerys when there is zero evidence of such a thing. We have no evidence of Rickard having an issue with Aegon V, or Jaehaerys II, or Aerys II, until his son kidnapped his daughter, and he imprisoned his son. Rickard's children were betrothed for years and yet he had no urgency to get them wed. That makes zero sense if he is actually part of a plot that has offensive or defensive intent against House Targaryen. The same goes for all the other great houses that are claimed to be part of such a plot, yet make no attempt to strengthen ties through marriage and blood ties in the years leading up to the war.

The lords were you refere to are lords who became lord after the brothers died before the fathers. So they were allready betrothed to there less important bannermans or blackwoods or Royces. It is a theory and the truth only George knows and for me the evidence is enough to conclude this.

All the first sons who are the only important ones, were bethroted or fotsred to an heir in Rickards and even Tywinns mind. Brandon-Cat Lisa-Jaimie Jon-Robert-Ned and Robert Lyanna. That a second son married some other house in the south is npot creating anything. This was the first time so many first born children were betrothed this way. So for me in this a conspiracy for more political power.

The 28 other Starks we dont know, so we have to make a suggestion over the Stark we know and is see a total different patron after 270AC. We dont know from Aegon V that Rickard and other Lords are very angry about the increasing of harbor taxes. Thats the only thing we know so far. So still think making the taxes even more hight would let them be furious. If everything was allready said in the books we dont have a discussion, because if in the world of ice and fire was saying: "Rickard was so angry that he could kill this king", than we had not a discussion. I just think George will not tell us everything at once thats why there is room for theories.

Share this post


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

What I object to is the idea of Rickard being part of an offensive or defensive conspiracy against Aerys and House Targaryen, which is what many theories about his "Southron Ambitions" propose.

Yes but i think it is offensive but there was no hurry, just a opposite block against the kings ideas and maybe just more democracy.

Share this post


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

The lords were you refere to are lords who became lord after the brothers died before the fathers. So they were allready betrothed to there less important bannermans or blackwoods or Royces. It is a theory and the truth only George knows and for me the evidence is enough to conclude this.

Evidence of what? Clearly House Stark already had no issue wedding southron houses and northern houses that worship the seven before Rickard Stark came along, so I am not sure what evidence you are talking about, or what point you are trying to make.

46 minutes ago, Seaserpent said:

All the first sons who are the only important ones, were bethroted or fotsred to an heir in Rickards and even Tywinns mind. Brandon-Cat Lisa-Jaimie Jon-Robert-Ned and Robert Lyanna. That a second son married some other house in the south is npot creating anything. This was the first time so many first born children were betrothed this way. So for me in this a conspiracy for more political power.

Neither a betrothal nor a fostering insures that a house will join you in war. We see how worthless Brandon's betrothal to Catelyn was once Brandon was murdered. Hoster didn't lift a finger until his daughters were actually wed to two out of the three rebel leaders. And there was no guarantee Jon would act as he did, especially with Aerys having his nephew and heir Elbert. Nobody could have possibly intended things to work out the way they did a decade before the war when the fosterings were made.

Brandon, Lord Rickard's heir, was unwed with no legitimate issue.
Ned, Brandon's next in line, was unbetrothed and unwed with no legitimate issue.
Lyanna was unwed with no legitimate issue.
Benjen was unbetrothed and unwed with no legitimate issue.

Lord Robert was unwed with no legitimate issue.
Stannis, Lord Robert's heir, was unbetrothed with no legitimate issue.

Lord Jon was unwed with no legitimate issue.
Elbert, Lord Jon's heir, may or may not have been betrothed or wed, but appears to have had no legitimate issue.

Edmure, Lord Hoster's heir, was unbetrothed and unwed with no legitimate issue.
Catelyn was unwed with no legitimate issue.
Lysa was unbetrothed and unwed with no legitimate issue.

Jaime, Lord Tywin's heir, was unbetrothed and unwed with no legitimate issue.

None of the lords or heirs were actually wed, which means they had no tangible ties, only agreements which could be easily severed by them or a third party (like Aerys or Rhaegar). None of them were in a relationship in which they could actually produce a legitimate blood tie to each other. That is a huge sweep of the leg to the idea that any of them were plotting with each other against House Targaryen. They have all of these pieces to create strong bonds between each other, but none of them are actually using them. Even the two betrothals go years without any urgency to make them a marriage

 

Share this post


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

Yes but i think it is offensive but there was no hurry, just a opposite block against the kings ideas and maybe just more democracy.

The last thing the great lords would want is democracy. That is simply not the society they exist in and rule over. They have one king over them, but they also have many lords and people under them. They are not looking to "gain more" by giving that away. 

Share this post


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


None of the lords or heirs were actually wed, which means they had no tangible ties, only agreements which could be easily severed by them or a third party (like Aerys or Rhaegar). None of them were in a relationship in which they could actually produce a legitimate blood tie to each other. That is a huge sweep of the leg to the idea that any of them were plotting with each other against House Targaryen. They have all of these pieces to create strong bonds between each other, but none of them are actually using them. Even the two betrothals go years without any urgency to make them a marriage

 

Marriage is only important after and the plan was a marriage at some moment. Asoiaf tells us about all the plans of the betrothels and marriages in future. You are only talking about 282AC, but that was not a plan. The plan was more connection to the houses .First there were non and later all the big houses are connected (or almost connected). The evidence that marriage is important we see later when the war has started Hoster only joins if Ned becomes the husband of Cat and not sooner. Also is it his discision to marry Lisa off to Jon. Robert was Neds best friend what is logical in a foster period were you have so much tiome together. Offcourse Robert and Steffron would accept Lyanna as the lady of storms end. If ther was no Harrenhal and no war all that houses would be connected with each other for what we know fisrt time in history. This is all we know and the evidence that allainces in war are built on marriage or (bethroted) pacts we have seen in Robert Rebellion. Therewas no URGENCY in the beginning so even with a marriage when they are 40 years old would give those houses a good front against Aerys or whoever rules Westeros. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What were Southron Ambitions? They weren't. At least nobody in the plot acts like they were.

Before and during the Rebellion, Rickard Stark doesn't confer with his alleged conspirators or even raise the banners. Neither does Jon until the very last possible moment. You'd think if there ever was a conspiracy, Jon would start communicating with his alleged allies once his fellow conspirator was taken prisoner by the King and executed for conspiracy.

Similarly, people place way too much trust in the words of a butthurt golddigger and self-contradicting maester.

Barbrey Dustin is obviously desperate to construct some grand story about her tragic love story with Brandon. She simply is too bitter to accept that Brandon pumped her and dumped her and all her dreams of being Lady of Winterfell, with the power and prestige akin to royalty, were bullshit self-delusion. The match with Tullys is actually a sound, logical idea for the Starks. After all, their domain regularly starves and Tully's domain is geographically close, is fertile and has its own port to facilitate shipments. Having living, contributing, tax-paying, conscriptable subjects instead of frozen emaciated corpses is a great profit.

Marwyn on the other hand spews obvious lies. Aemon was not put on the Wall, he volunteered for his own reasons. And the idea that some grand anti-magic conspiracy would ever allow a lose cannon like Marwyn to become Citadel's Number One on magic is just ludicrous. It's like entrusting mob money to a known snitch. Murderous conspirators would have him killed and replaced with a hardcore Citadel loyalist long before the books. Marwyn is not paranoid, nor is he a conspiracy nut - he is merely a manipulator. He quite obviously tries to isolate Sam, to make the boy afraid and thus shut the only source of quite valuable information. 

Edited by Myrish Lace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Seaserpent said:

Marriage is only important after and the plan was a marriage at some moment. Asoiaf tells us about all the plans of the betrothels and marriages in future. You are only talking about 282AC, but that was not a plan. The plan was more connection to the houses .First there were non and later all the big houses are connected (or almost connected). The evidence that marriage is important we see later when the war has started Hoster only joins if Ned becomes the husband of Cat and not sooner. Also is it his discision to marry Lisa off to Jon. Robert was Neds best friend what is logical in a foster period were you have so much tiome together. Offcourse Robert and Steffron would accept Lyanna as the lady of storms end. If ther was no Harrenhal and no war all that houses would be connected with each other for what we know fisrt time in history. This is all we know and the evidence that allainces in war are built on marriage or (bethroted) pacts we have seen in Robert Rebellion. Therewas no URGENCY in the beginning so even with a marriage when they are 40 years old would give those houses a good front against Aerys or whoever rules Westeros. 

Your post doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

The lack of marriages and betrothals between the great lords as late as 281-282 AC, despite having many marriageable pieces at their disposal, is evidence that there was never an anti-Targaryen plot between the great houses. Had they actually been plotting, they would have needed to tie themselves together through actual marriages and blood ties, not just fickle friendships and unfulfilled commitments.

And no less important, they would have needed to tie some of their most powerful but of questionable loyalty bannermen to them and their cause. But they didn't. They let the two meager betrothals between them go nowhere for years, until two of the four people involved died without the betrothals ever producing actual marriage or blood ties.

Everything we know of Lord Steffon Baratheon is that he was loyal to King Aerys and House Targaryen until the day he died in 278 AC. Everything we know about Lord Robert Baratheon is that he was loyal to King Aerys and House Targaryen until Rhaegar crowned Lyanna at Harrenhal in 281 AC, whom he had already long been betrothed to, and abducted her in 282 AC, and Aerys called for Jon Arryn to behead him in 282 AC.

So there is no basis for the idea that either Steffon or Robert were ever part of a plot with any of the other great houses against Aerys or House Targaryen prior to the war. Which highlights the absurdity of any idea that Lord Jon Arryn, Lord Rickard Stark, or his children plotted or were part of a plot with Steffon or Robert against Aerys or House Targaryen.

We know that Lord Tywin Lannister was still Aerys's long time loyal Hand and was refusing every offer for Cersei's hand as late as 281 AC, while still trying to wed her to a Targaryen prince. That is the man whose son and heir Lord Hoster Tully was negotiating to wed his daughter Lysa to, and who had invited him to go to King's Landing and finalize their betrothal agreement under Aerys's nose.

So while there is good evidence that Tywin might have actually been plotting with Prince Rhaegar to restrict Aerys's power, and have Rhaegar rule in his place, there is no evidence that Tywin was ever part of a plot with any of the other great houses against Aerys or House Targaryen. His historical closeness to Aerys and House Targaryen, and well known desire to get even closer to House Targaryen, highlights the absurdity of any idea that any great lord would be stupid enough to think Tywin was someone they could plot against House Targaryen with.

The Lyanna-Robert match Rickard and Robert agreed to would have sent Rickard Stark's only daughter far away from her family, to the impregnable Stormlands castle of the Targaryen descended Baratheons, who were still close friends and family to the Targaryens, and whose castle was located right near the Targaryen Red Keep.

The Lysa-Jaime match Hoster and Tywin were negotiating would have sent Hoster Tully's daughter to the impregnable Westerlands castle of the Lannister Hand of the Targaryen king, who was the Targaryen king's oldest friend and loyal servant, who was still trying to wed his own daughter to one of the sons of the Targaryen king.

The Cersei-Targaryen Prince match Tywin Lannister so consistently desired going back nearly a decade would have kept Tywin Lannister's only daughter in the Targaryen Red Keep with King Aerys.

Rickard would be relinquishing his only daughter to the house with closest blood and friendship ties to House Targaryen. Hoster would be relinquishing his daughter to the house that had the next closest friendship ties and was still actively seeking to create marriage and blood ties to House Targaryen. Tywin would be relinquishing his only daughter to Aerys himself, and House Targaryen itself.

So in none of these cases does a defensive or offensive anti-Targaryen conspiracy make sense or hold up. They are no evidence of a plot against Aerys or House Targaryen, but evidence against such a plot.

And with Rickard agreeing to wed his only daughter into the house with the closest blood and friendship ties to House Targaryen, and Hoster on the verge or agreeing to wed his youngest daughter into the house with the next closest friendship ties to House Targaryen, a house that was still actively trying to wed its own only daughter/eldest child to the sons of King Aerys himself, the agreement between Rickard and Hoster, which would have sent Hoster's eldest daughter far away from her home, into the isolation of the far North to wed Rickard's eldest son and heir, does not hold up as part of an anti-Targaryen plot.

What these agreed and proposed ties reveal are attempts to get closer to those who were closest to the Targaryens, and closer to the Targaryens themselves, not any offensive or defensive anti-Targaryen plot. Such a plot pre-war is a fantasy based on the uncorroborated rantings of the bitter Ryswell widow of Lord Dustin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Myrish Lace said:

Barbrey Dustin is obviously desperate to construct some grand story about her tragic love story with Brandon. She simply is too bitter to accept that Brandon pumped her and dumped her and all her dreams of being Lady of Winterfell, with the power and prestige akin to royalty, were bullshit self-delusion.

So barbrey has no role in asoiaf anymore and stays disloyal to any Stark? We have to wait for Winds than, but i think she is plotting against the Boltons. Ramsey after all murdered her nephew. Going to the crypt was not to see any Stark only to see if the swords are really missing and if there is hope for a new Stark rule, but we will find out soon in the next book. 

Share this post


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

So while there is good evidence that Tywin might have actually been plotting with Prince Rhaegar to restrict Aerys's power, and have Rhaegar rule in his place, there is no evidence that Tywin was ever part of a plot with any of the other great houses against Aerys or House Targaryen. His historical closeness to Aerys and House Targaryen, and well known desire to get even closer to House Targaryen, highlights the absurdity of any idea that any great lord would be stupid enough to think Tywin was someone they could plot against House Targaryen with.
 

There is also no evidence for that only that he said might Aerys die we have the new king here. If he wanted Aerys dead there was enough oppurtunity for years. I think Tywin plotted and paid for the tournament in Harrenhall, but there is also a lack of evidence for this, its just guessing what a smart Tywinn would do.

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

×