Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Moondancer

FIRE AND BLOOD EXCERPT

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Ran said:

"They do come off" is a subjective impression, it must be said. And I agree that they give an impression of being more knowledgable in some areas, but being more knowledgeable is not the same as having developed a modern philosphy of historiography. They have a decidedly non-modern approach to history. The amount of dialog quoted verbatim in the Targaryen material, generally without any kind of reference, is a dead giveaway. And then out of the novels, George has explicitly said "Look, these guys are writing long after the fact, with various sources of differing reliabilty, their own biases", etc.

I see it as equal as the adaption movie "Troy". Well after the fact and told from a biased pov trying to cut out the god's and myth and make more "realistic". Every retelling comes with some other twist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Aegon I became Lord of Dragonstone and King of Westeros over his elder sister Visenya.

Aegon was heir of Aenys I over his elder sister Rhaena.

Jaehaerys I became King of Westeros over his elder sister Rhaena, and the daughter of Aenys I's heir Aegon with Rhaena.

Targaryens, like the usurper Maegor and Viserys I, may have felt free to name a woman as their heir, but there was no precedent for a woman actually inheriting the throne, and the precedents had men over women who would have come first without question had they been men.

I don't see how any of that applies to Rhaenys.  She wasn't Baelon's sister, she was his niece.  The child of his elder brother.  Under Andal law she comes before Baelon and the Targs were supposedly following Andal law and the Seven. 

What does apply is really only the case of Jaehaerys getting the throne and not the children of Aegon and Rhaena.   Which then puts him in a mess if he does follow Andal tradition and have Rhaenys as heir because then he's branding himself a usurper of his nieces.  The councils don't really solve anything though either because all sorts of claims get put forward during those every time.  Women's claims still get put forward, sons from the female line as well.  In the right circumstances with enough might on her side a woman may have been chosen.  Hell a Blackfyre who managed to hatch a dragon would have probably got plenty of backing too especially by all those who fall into the Daeron was illegitimate camp.

It does appear though plenty of people did think Rhaenys was going to be queen.  It all ended up in a mess in the end anyway with the Dance, it probably wouldn't have been that much better had Rhaenys been queen, maybe Daemon would have flown off the handle about that and the dance would have still happened just in different ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, if Alysanne's talk may be more or less invented, based on certain ideas and biases of Gyldayn, then her actual beliefs don't really matter. We don't know them as such, nor have we an inclination whether Alysanne actually believed Viserra wanted to be queen.

5 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

I don't see how any of that applies to Rhaenys.  She wasn't Baelon's sister, she was his niece.  The child of his elder brother.  Under Andal law she comes before Baelon and the Targs were supposedly following Andal law and the Seven. 

The Targaryens would not follow Andal law as such. They are not Andals, and if they actually follow 'succession laws' and precedents, it would be those set by their ancestors on Dragonstone, not by the kings and lords of the Seven Kingdoms.

Visenya not being Lord of Dragonstone in Aegon's place indicates indeed that they do not follow equal primogeniture - or at least not in that particular case.

And the fact that two times brothers and not sons followed a Lord of Dragonstone back before the Conquest, as Ran pointed out, might indicate that daughters - and sons! - may have been pushed aside by (ambitious) uncles in the past. Dragonstone was ruled by the Targaryens, and their lordship there was of their making, not of the making of the Andals. In that sense Maegor succeeding Aenys rather than Aegon might actually not be without precedent in the Targaryen family.

Male primogeniture is an Andal thing, which means many of the maesters and lords citing precedents and custom refer to Andal king precedents - like when Gawen insisted that Aegon should succeed Aenys, not Maegor. But this doesn't mean the Targaryens were caring about that all that much.

The relative strength of the female claim prior to the 92/101 AC is pretty clear, though. We have Aenys as Heir Apparent and Maegor as unquestioned spare - until Aenys' daughter Rhaena is born. Then some people think Maegor is still #2 whereas others think he has fallen behind Rhaena. Aegon apparently seals the deal. He is Aenys' unquestioned heir and comes before Maegor.

Now, with Rhaenys and Baelon we have an Aenys in Aemon, a Rhaena in Rhaenys, and an Maegor in Baelon.

Perhaps some people still didn't know whether Rhaenys or Baelon came directly after Aemon, but if a King Aemon I had ruled his child - male or female - would be the rightful heir.

Being king simply changes things. Your opinion is much more important now, and you usually want to hand the crown to the next generation, not favor your brother over your children.

We get that then later with Viserys I and Daemon and Rhaenyra. Viserys loves both his daughter and his brother. At first he abides by the Great Council - the male line and only the male line - and hopes for a son rather than acknowledging Daemon as his heir - who would have been his successor if he had no male issue as per the Great Council thing.

But then the man vexes him more and more and his daughter gets what he thinks she should deserve.

And that's how most, if not all, monarchs in this world would act, especially in light of the fact that brothers make for poor heirs if they are close to your own age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the Targs on Dragonstone, but as I've not kept huge track on where this new material kicks off, does the new book cover any of the pre-conquest Targs?  Or is it just from Visenya, Aegon and Rhaenys until Aegon III regency?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

Speaking of the Targs on Dragonstone, but as I've not kept huge track on where this new material kicks off, does the new book cover any of the pre-conquest Targs?  Or is it just from Visenya, Aegon and Rhaenys until Aegon III regency?

It starts with the Aegon's Conquest text as published in TWoIaF, so just provides a sketch of them. A little more information about Dragonstone, the dragons, and past Targaryens appears in some of the new material, but nothing like a history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it is worth, George actually lets it slip in that video about Balerion that he doesn't seem to have a good picture of the Dragonstonian Targaryens yet, considering that he says the five dragons that came with Aenar to Dragonstone just died off one after the other, without hinting at how or why that took place.

One imagines that interesting stories could be told about that era, considering this all took place in the Century of Blood, and the Lords of Dragonstone from Aenar to Aegon I would have all been involved in the wars and battles of the era.

And the fact that Lord Aerys and Lords Baelon and Daemion may have seized Dragonstone against nieces/nephews could also make for a fine infighting story. We have that line about Quicksilver and Balerion being the first dragons to fight each other since the Doom, but that's Gyldayn, and what does he know?

The guy writing a history of the Targaryens on Dragonstone would be Maester Thomax, and he has already done that, considering that Dragonkin, Being a History of House Targaryen from Exile to Apotheosis, with a Consideration of the Life and Death of Dragons seems to be a book about the Targaryens on Dragonstone rather than those in Westeros (the exile being Aenar's exile, the apotheosis being Aegon's Conquest of Westeros).

I'm pretty sure I'd read that book.

Share this post


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

For what it is worth, George actually lets it slip in that video about Balerion that he doesn't seem to have a good picture of the Dragonstonian Targaryens yet, considering that he says the five dragons that came with Aenar to Dragonstone just died off one after the other, without hinting at how or why that took place.

One imagines that interesting stories could be told about that era, considering this all took place in the Century of Blood, and the Lords of Dragonstone from Aenar to Aegon I would have all been involved in the wars and battles of the era.

And the fact that Lord Aerys and Lords Baelon and Daemion may have seized Dragonstone against nieces/nephews could also make for fine infighting story. We have that line about Quicksilver and Balerion being the first dragons to fight each other since the Doom, but that's Gyldayn, and what does he know?

The guy writing a history of the Targaryens on Dragonstone would be Maester Thomax, and he has already done that, considering that Dragonkin, Being a History of House Targaryen from Exile to Apotheosis, with a Consideration of the Life and Death of Dragons seems to be a book about the Targaryens on Dragonstone rather than those in Westeros (the exile being Aenar's exile, the apotheosis being Aegon's Conquest of Westeros).

I'm pretty sure I'd read that book.

Yes. Martin’s words were something like : “I had them bring five dragons from Vayria, I THINK”. Doesn’t sound like he even had the dragons other than Balerion named, going by that, let alone fleshed out their lives and deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Yes. Martin’s words were something like : “I had them bring five dragons from Vayria, I THINK”. Doesn’t sound like he even had the dragons other than Balerion named, going by that, let alone fleshed out their lives and deaths.

Yeah, that indicates we essentially have just names for the Targaryens there - not exactly a detailed unwritten story in the back of his head. But such a history could be interesting, considering the Century of Blood could very well have affected Westeros, too, and in no small degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, that indicates we essentially have just names for the Targaryens there - not exactly a detailed unwritten story in the back of his head. But such a history could be interesting, considering the Century of Blood could very well have affected Westeros, too, and in no small degree.

Like seeing open opportunity in the east for plunder or glory or land. Im definitely curious

Share this post


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

Yeah, that indicates we essentially have just names for the Targaryens there - not exactly a detailed unwritten story in the back of his head. But such a history could be interesting, considering the Century of Blood could very well have affected Westeros, too, and in no small degree.

My main interest in all these history books are generally all the world building that goes on.  I'm not massively into the Targs, I enjoy them but they're not top of my list.  But equally any history of them is exciting because it also encompasses the realm, whilst its a history of their family its also about all the other people involved in their orbit as well so it expands out knowledge of other families, other regions, factions, magic etc. 

I'd love to know more about Westeros before the coming of the Targs but I don't holdout much hope for that. I'm just happy for whatever we get.  Worldbuilding is such fun, and done this way with unreliable narrators adds something unique to it and fuels debate on what's true, what's false and what's more of a half truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Saera and Viserra were big trouble apparently.

Alyssa dying of childbirth disappoints me.

Yea i was quite surprised by Saera and Viserra hahaha definitely not what i saw coming hahah some great twist though 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

My main interest in all these history books are generally all the world building that goes on.  I'm not massively into the Targs, I enjoy them but they're not top of my list.  But equally any history of them is exciting because it also encompasses the realm, whilst its a history of their family its also about all the other people involved in their orbit as well so it expands out knowledge of other families, other regions, factions, magic etc. 

I'd love to know more about Westeros before the coming of the Targs but I don't holdout much hope for that. I'm just happy for whatever we get.  Worldbuilding is such fun, and done this way with unreliable narrators adds something unique to it and fuels debate on what's true, what's false and what's more of a half truth.

See i love the world building but i equally love the myth and it's possible bearing on the actual story. I love learning more about his religions and such and wonder greatly about the Valyrians. Being dragon riders and seeming like opposites to the Others and greatly tied to the myths. I very much wish to know more about them. Though i do admit it keeps much intrigue and mystery alive by not giving it and instead giving us the grounded perception and lives of the normal people in his world, and how magic occasionally affects there lives. Its his story so i enjoy it for what he ultimately wants to share, but yes, great curiosity in many things 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alyssa of House Arryn said:

I think at first Targaryen (kings) followed traditional Andal law. With Jaehaerys, it is simple; Aerea might be the lawful heir, but Maegor needs to be overthrown, now, but no one will follow six-year-old Princess Aerea. Fourteen-year-old Prince Jaehaerys is a much better choice, and when he gets the Throne, he won't simply hand it over his child niece, when the people were ready to fight so he would sit the Iron Throne.

Not even Rhaena? She´s the only adult dragonrider opposing Maegor with some experience. 24, against 14 of Jaehaerys newly appeared on Vermithor.

And Jaehaerys´ claim could have been further tied up by promising to marry Aerea eventually.

With respect to Faith, Septon Moon and Joffrey Doggett, Jaehaerys/Aerea would have been less distasteful than Jaehaerys/Alysanne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it very likely that this Alys Hill is the daughter of Rhaena Targaryen and Androw Farman? She seems to be of the right age, and when she finds three islands she names them Aegon, Visenya and Rhaenys...

The texts refers to her as "Lady Alys Hill, born Elissa of House Farman". The story of how she lost her name should be interesting too.

 

53 minutes ago, Jaak said:

Not even Rhaena? She´s the only adult dragonrider opposing Maegor with some experience. 24, against 14 of Jaehaerys newly appeared on Vermithor.

Alyssa would be the one calling the shots. But I don't think Rhaena had any interest in becoming queen. She had seen her husband and brother killed, forced to marry his murderer, had her baby daughters taken from her and used to blackmail her, had to flee for her life,... I don't think she was interested in leading the opposition to Maegor.

53 minutes ago, Jaak said:

With respect to Faith, Septon Moon and Joffrey Doggett, Jaehaerys/Aerea would have been less distasteful than Jaehaerys/Alysanne.

The Faith doesn't seem to have any problem at all with marriages between cousins: Tywin Lannister and Joanna, or Paxter Redwyne and Mina Tyrell are first cousins. And Lysa suggests a marriage between Robert and Sansa.

Marrying Jaehaerys and Aerea would have made sense. Perhaps they felt that they urgently needed a male heir (when Jaehaerys gained the throne, he was the only Targaryen male alive), and didn't want to wait Aerea (6 at the time) to grow old.In any case, I don't think that the Jaehaerys faction thought that they needed to do any effort to gain the support of the Faith. Even an incestuous couple would be more acceptable than an incestuous and polygamous sadist who had murdered thousands of septons .

Share this post


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

Not even Rhaena? She´s the only adult dragonrider opposing Maegor with some experience. 24, against 14 of Jaehaerys newly appeared on Vermithor.

Rhaena is a sister. Andal law states that a younger brother comes before an older sister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Isn't it very likely that this Alys Hill is the daughter of Rhaena Targaryen and Androw Farman? She seems to be of the right age, and when she finds three islands she names them Aegon, Visenya and Rhaenys...

The texts refers to her as "Lady Alys Hill, born Elissa of House Farman". The story of how she lost her name should be interesting too.

 

Alyssa would be the one calling the shots. But I don't think Rhaena had any interest in becoming queen. She had seen her husband and brother killed, forced to marry his murderer, had her baby daughters taken from her and used to blackmail her, had to flee for her life,... I don't think she was interested in leading the opposition to Maegor.

Alyssa was the mother of both Rhaena and Jaehaerys, but not herself a dragonrider.

Rhaena may not have been all that interested in "leading" the opposition - but she was by far the eldest of the three opposition dragonriders, on the oldest and biggest dragon. The boast of having 3 dragons against Maegor´s 1 assumed Rhaena was willing to participate in fighting, rather that refuse by e. g. continuing her flight with Aerea to Dorne or Essos.

Yes, by Andal law, Rhaena herself was behind Jaehaerys. Aerea, as Aegon´s daughter, was not. Rhaena could have fought for her daughter, and ruled as Queen Regent in her daughter´s name, and asked Jaehaerys to follow her flag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a reason why I opened the discussion that the Jaehaerys-Alysanne makes little sense from a dynastic point of view when compared to the availability of both Rhaena and Aerea. If Jaehaerys wanted a sister, he should have taken Rhaena, not Alysanne - or both, like his grandfather did.

One assumes that the Farman thing was introduced to explain why they didn't follow the Targaryen tradition of marrying the elder sister.

However, Jaehaerys' claim doesn't have to be as rock solid as the Old King and all that implies. Aerea was not only Maegor's named heir, but also the heir of Jaehaerys' older brother, the pretender Prince Aegon.

But one should keep in mind that not all matches are dynastic or even arranged matches. Rhaena did not marry Androw Farman out of dynastic reasons - he was the second son of a minor lord, after all. And whether Jaehaerys-Alysanne is more a love match or a dynastic match remains to be seen as well. Aegon I loved Rhaenys, and what we know about Jaehaerys-Alysanne implies they loved each other very much, too. So perhaps Rhaena and Aerea were on the table for Jaehaerys, but he decided not to take that road?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was talking to...someone....about the Doom of Valyria, they said Aenar fled to Dragonstone with three dragons.  I had to sharply correct “five, four died and two more hatched”.  But they were just glossing over that part...

Share this post


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

There is a reason why I opened the discussion that the Jaehaerys-Alysanne makes little sense from a dynastic point of view when compared to the availability of both Rhaena and Aerea. If Jaehaerys wanted a sister, he should have taken Rhaena, not Alysanne - or both, like his grandfather did.

One assumes that the Farman thing was introduced to explain why they didn't follow the Targaryen tradition of marrying the elder sister.

However, Jaehaerys' claim doesn't have to be as rock solid as the Old King and all that implies. Aerea was not only Maegor's named heir, but also the heir of Jaehaerys' older brother, the pretender Prince Aegon.

But one should keep in mind that not all matches are dynastic or even arranged matches. Rhaena did not marry Androw Farman out of dynastic reasons - he was the second son of a minor lord, after all. And whether Jaehaerys-Alysanne is more a love match or a dynastic match remains to be seen as well. Aegon I loved Rhaenys, and what we know about Jaehaerys-Alysanne implies they loved each other very much, too. So perhaps Rhaena and Aerea were on the table for Jaehaerys, but he decided not to take that road?

When was Rhaena available though?  Or rather how quickly, because she wouldn't have been able to marry as soon as she fled from Maegor because surely birthed could have been seen as Maegor's.  Was there a gap when she could have married Jaehaerys after Aegon died before he married Alysanne, when did Alysanne and Jaehaerys marry? I'm unsure of that timeline and quite how all those events overlap. Maybe they/Alyssa thought the faith would accept one brother sister marriage but not another sister added into the mix? 

Maybe Rhaena didn't want anything to do with it all and used the power of her huge dragon to get what she wanted.  She'd support and help them depose Maegor as long as she was left alone afterwards to finally be free with whatever remained of her daughters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

When was Rhaena available though?

The reference I made was to the version of TSotD we read back in The Book of Swords. There Rhaena and Aerea clearly are available for Jaehaerys since she abandoned Maegor and became a widow after his death.

11 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

Or rather how quickly, because she wouldn't have been able to marry as soon as she fled from Maegor because surely birthed could have been seen as Maegor's.  Was there a gap when she could have married Jaehaerys after Aegon died before he married Alysanne, when did Alysanne and Jaehaerys marry? 

According to known information Jaehaerys and Alysanne married after the end of the Regency in 50 AC. If Rhaena is one of the Three Brides then she may have married Androw as early as 49 AC. That would mean she was no longer available for Jaehaerys.

11 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

I'm unsure of that timeline and quite how all those events overlap. Maybe they/Alyssa thought the faith would accept one brother sister marriage but not another sister added into the mix? 

Sure - TSotD just had that one little obscure reference to Androw. That alone wasn't a marriage. With this marriage no confirmed it makes sense why Jaehaerys and Rhaena didn't marry, despite the fact that this would have likely been the best dynastic incest match.

Here we have an explanation for this - it is a more tricky case later with Daena the Defiant marrying Baelor rather than Daeron I. Jaehaerys and Alysanne may have loved each other - Baelor and Daena never did, apparently.

11 minutes ago, naseridrl said:

Maybe Rhaena didn't want anything to do with it all and used the power of her huge dragon to get what she wanted.  She'd support and help them depose Maegor as long as she was left alone afterwards to finally be free with whatever remained of her daughters?

From a dynastic viewpoint there also has to be an explanation why Jaehaerys I's male heir - be he Aegon or Aemon - ended up marrying Jocelyn Baratheon and not Aerea. Yes, there was a considerable age gap, but Aerea was of the elder line and her marrying anyone but Jaehaerys' heir could be a recipe for disaster later down the road. Even if Rhaena was fine with Jaehaerys on the throne - Aerea was a young girl and would not understand what was done to her in 48 AC - and any husband or sons she may have in the future could make use of her claim (and the sons could even claim dragons).

They must have known this. Jaehaerys and Alysanne and Alyssa lived through the age of Maegor, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×