Jump to content
TheSeason

She Smells Dornish: Perfume, Corruption, Poison... The Treasons of Dorne against Aerys II

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

oops is right.  It's not the Dornish who committed treason.  It was Robert and Rickard who were plotting against their king.

Oops because when I pressed enter as I was editing my essay, the forum generated a topic that I had not even finished. 

The Dornish did commit treason, though. I have not even gotten to that part in the essay in what the forum generated (Gods alone know why, since I was still in the editing box when I pressed it!). Their treason is: Fifty thousand Dornish spears.... to start with. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheSeason said:

Oops because when I pressed enter as I was editing my essay, the forum generated a topic that I had not even finished. 

The Dornish did commit treason, though. I have not even gotten to that part in the essay in what the forum generated (Gods alone know why, since I was still in the editing box when I pressed it!). Their treason is: Fifty thousand Dornish spears.... to start with. :)

You will have a tough time proving that, my friend.  Dorne was loyal to Aerys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

You will have a tough time proving that, my friend.  Dorne was loyal to Aerys.

Well, I will be happy to put forth my evidence (when it's actually done). I'd actually prefer to delete this thread, since I was only editing the essay when the forums went all wonky on me, as they usually do. You'd think I'd've learned my lesson by now!

 

2 minutes ago, TPTWP Timett said:

Calling exaggerating strength treason is a rough judgement on Done.

It is treason to lie to a king, and that's what the Dornish did. Let alone lying to gain the throne for your family, even at the expense of the safety of the realm and the King and his family. There's much more to this treason than this single lie, though. On the strength of this lie, the Dornish put Aerys in a position of weakness against a powerful enemy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only number we get on Dornish troops ever being sent from Dorne is from Robert's Rebellion which is 10,000 spears. We know Dorne sent spears to fight in the first Blackfyre Rebellion but, as far as I know, we were never told how many Dornish soldiers fought for the Targaryens in that conflict. Daeron I is the one who claimed Dorne had a force of 50,000 soldiers to make his short term conquest of Dorne sound that much more impressive. Now in present time is sounds like Dorne has been able to raise somewhere close to 20,000 fighters, split in two different camps, IIRC.

From what we know of Robert's Rebellion some claim Doran was angered by Rhaegar's actions with Lyanna and was slow to send support to Aerys II because of that. Dorne certainly didn't raise an army as fast as the Reach did at the start of the conflict and only participated in the last battle at the Trident. Some say Aerys II had to remind Doran that Elia was to be queen and her son would be become king in order to get Doran to send troops while others claim Aerys II flat out threatened Elia in order to get Doran to send spears. I guess it depends on the context in which everything went down on whether or not you could consider Doran's actions or inaction "treasonous." Did Aerys II send a raven to Dorne at the start of the conflict ordering them to raise their banners and send an army to support the loyalist and Doran refused because he was mad that Rhaegar was missing with Lyanna? Did Doran plan on ignoring Aerys II orders until Aerys threatened Elia? Did Aerys II only order Dorne to send troops until after Robert won the Battle of the Bells and Aerys realized Robert was a much greater threat than he originally thought? Either way Dorne sent 10,000 spears, if Aerys II was honestly expecting 30,000 or 40,00 thousand more then he was even madder than everyone thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

Quentyn committed treason against Daenerys when he tried to dragonap her children.  That is Dornish treason for you.  

I'm being quite literal in this estimation of treason. 

Eddard III, Game

"Enough!" the king [Robert] roared, rising from his seat, his voice thick with irritation. Silence fell. He glowered at Arya through his thick beard. "Now, child, you will tell me what happened. Tell it all, and tell it true. It is a great crime to lie to a king." Then he looked over at his son. "When she is done, you will have your turn. Until then, hold your tongue."

The "great crime" that Robert speaks of here: high treason. If this is so for a child (Arya) having a fight with a dangerous and unstable lying prince (Joffrey, who does commit treason with his accusations against the daughter of the Lord of Winterfell; being a prince does not absolve him or provide him immunity against commission of the high treason of perjury against his king, which is why Cersei is so careful to press forward her version of events) and if this children's fight, as Robert later presents it so as to dismiss the matter entire, suspecting that it's Joffrey doing all the lying and committing all the treasons at trial (despite the fact that Joffrey assaulted Mycah, a peasant under his protection, and Arya, a lady of Winterfell!, both with naked steel) can result in: Cersei demanding Arya's maiming or even death (with Jaime literally looking for her to carry out the sentence!) because she dared to defend herself, and her wolf (like any other guard dog) dared to defend her life against an existential threat (Joff with naked steel), Joffrey sending the Hound to "run down" poor Mycah and butcher him so terribly his father mistook his remains for a butchered pig, and Cersei demanding the life of the animals that did no wrong (the wolf that bit Joffrey because he assaulted a lady with naked steel, like any loyal or well-trained guard "dog" would for its master; the wolf that was not even present and was so well-trained she'd never once acted out in her life)… I fail to see how the ruling Princess of Dorne should ever be held to a lesser standard than a child (a girl child and young lady by Westerosi standards, even worse!) defending her/his life by fighting back from a potential maiming or killing, or fleeing into the woods in terror after being maimed (his face cut open by his prince) and yet never once fighting back to defend himself (wisely, knowing the game is rigged against people like him). Mycah's only crime is that he ran away in sheer terror, but the Hound is later deemed to have committed a "justifiable" killing according to the Brotherhood without Banners (or their red god) because Joffrey unjustly demanded he be slaughtered for fleeing and it is not the Hound's place to question his prince's commands. Arya's only crime is not wanting to be maimed or killed, and thereby defending her life against the prince's assaults upon her right to life. Nymeria's only crime is defending the life of a child in danger, her master. Lady's only crime is being born a direwolf. Yet, all of this is treated as serious business (because the prince alleges assaults against his person) and these children are either brought before the king himself for a trial to determine their guilt and punishments or ridden down and slaughtered like an animal without trial. They were punished because it was a prince that assaulted them, and the laws about striking princes (even in self defense, apparently) are either clear or vague enough that they can be twisted to this vile purpose. It amounts to high or low/petty treason (depending upon how a prince at Joffrey's age is legally categorized in Westeros, but instinctively and based upon English legal traditions, I'd name it low/petty treason, as Joffrey is a legal superior but not the Sovereign, for which "high treason" is customarily reserved as charge). Just like lying to a king is high treason. When you testify to a king, you are under oath to tell the truth; you are avowing yourself before all gods and men, that they might bear witness to your truths.

I do not mean to quibble about opinions of what constitutes treason in this essay; I rely upon the definitions of treason, high treason, low/petty treason, sedition, when making such charges. Martin has made it quite clear (and according to historical traditions, particularly those of western societies, on which Westeros is based) that perjuring oneself to a king is a vile crime indeed with the steepest of punishments. All law and all justice proceed from the regent (the king's justice). A king who does not punish perjury as a divine injury against his person is a foolish king indeed. The king is the living embodiment of the law and the god's justice on earth. For a ruling princess to flout the law to her king's face like this is abhorrent, let alone for her to think there should or would be no punishment for her crimes, let alone to presume that she ought to be rewarded for them. The sad irony is, were it one of her bannermen who lied to her, she would without doubt charge that they had committed low/petty treason to do so! Depending upon just how "sovereign" are the individual kingdoms, and just how significant is the courtesy entitlement Prince/Princess of Dorne, and just how "imperial" in nature is the dynasty of the reigning monarchy of Westeros... she might even have the right to accuse "high treason" instead. The Princess of Dorne (or, currently, Doran Martell) would in no way tolerate out of an inferior this treasonous crime that they themselves engage in. "Fifty thousand Dornish spears" is not a boast, but a statement of strength, and when it is given to a king, wholly untrue and with intent to deceive for personal gain and advancement, there is no way to wiggle around that this is a commission of high treason. (Were House Yronwood, for example, to promise Prince Doran three thousand Dornish spears, including five hundred ahorse, but show up  for battle instead with a mere fifteen hundred, with two hundred fifty ahorse, and unable or unwilling to muster a single man more, crippling the Dornish strength and weakening their position in time of war, House Nymeros Martell would rightly cry treason. Yet, this deplorable crime, they expect should be handwaved for their sake when given to a sovereign king or queen?) 

What Quentyn did (stealing from a queen, especially her personal property and her war machines, undermining her power and authority to do so and endangering the lives of all those on her counsel, in her residence, and in her city) is also high treason and sabotage. Worse, he does it in hopes to force her to marry him, which is as great an attempted theft as the attempt to steal a dragon, which would be treason too. 

Just because Quentyn committed one kind of treason (trying to steal Dany's dragons) does not mean he did not commit another too (lying to Dany, who he by necessity means to accept as his queen; but, even if he didn't wish to take Dany for his queen, in her city, he falls under her jurisdiction and must obey her laws, so it's treasonous either way). 

And, as I said above, the fifty thousand spears lie is only one aspect of the treason the Princess of Dorne committed against Aerys II... but since you are making such judgments without first bothering to wait to see any of my evidence for the argument, then I really don't know that you care about measuring evidence in the first place, and may merely wish to assert your belief that the crimes of Dorne against Aerys II were inconsequential (which they weren't, and had grave consequences indeed)--for example, imagine that Dany jumped at Quentyn's proposal, thinking he had to offer fifty thousand spears to her army, and sailed to Westeros to begin her campaign with only her Unsullied, Storm Crows, Second Sons, Freed Men/Mother's Men, Brazen Beasts, Ironborn reavers and longships, and the remainder of her Dothraki… only to arrive in Dorne and learn that they can offer her a fifth of the strength they promised under oath--two-fifths, at a stretch and digging down deep to the dregs--as opposed to a rival power with a stronger force, which would have joined her were a betrothal on the table, but instead sits the war out because they gain nothing from it (as Hoster Tully was willing to do in Robert's Rebellion), and she then finds her pitiful army swallowed up and shattered apart by a stronger Westerosi force (familiar with Unsullied tactics and able to counter them, with strong enough infantry to break her Dothraki horselords and send them running, and greatly outnumbering her ten thousand Dornish spears, too, prompting the sellswords to simply abandon ship, as they are so prone to do when battles and wars turn against them), which results in her untimely death. Would the lie that led her there now qualify in your opinion as high treason? 

IDK if you perhaps like Dorne or mislike Aerys or simply take offense to the wording of my title, but my evidence suggests just how messy this relationship was, with everyone taking nasty jabs at the other (Aerys, Tywin, Princess of Dorne, Joanna Lannister, Rhaella Targaryen). Aerys isn't innocent because he was fooled by the Dornish treasons. If that's what you thought I was suggesting, it's likely because you've misunderstood my title, having nothing more to judge upon. 

5 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

Either way Dorne sent 10,000 spears, if Aerys II was honestly expecting 30,000 or 40,00 thousand more then he was even madder than everyone thought.

Whether Aerys II was "mad" to take the Dornish princess at her word , as was his right as king (according to law and custom) or merely naïve (given that he likely considered her something of a friend and definitely considered her to be an ally), I leave to you to decide. Aerys knew exactly what he was doing when he chose Elia of Dorne to marry Rhaegar and Dorne to be Rhaegar's (and his) ally, and it absolutely was not to make Rhaegar "weaker" (as I have seen argued in many a thread), but to multiply the strength of House Targaryen, especially at the expense of any (would-be) rivals or external and existential threats to his dynasty. 

 

I'd be happy if you'd both deign to return to read the evidence for the Dornish treasons and how it impacted the war for the Targaryen survival, but I'd understand if neither of you were interested in it, either. My essays do tend to go a little long, because I like to rely upon a preponderance of evidence for any analysis, and to acquire it, I require to quote liberally from the primary textual sources (ASoIaF) with some quotes from a complimentary secondary source (TWoIaF) thrown in for clarity or elucidation wherever necessary. The analysis takes a good long look at several toxic relationships (personal and political) and how these historical events pre-Robert's Rebellion have enriched the current Dornish plot and Dany's Meereenese chapters (which I, admittedly, find quite boring). Like Quentyn, Lewyn Martell is a much more important character than a cursory reading may suggest--not necessarily in himself, but in what he represents. Just as well, Aerys did tend to be politically coherent and even politically astute in many ways, so it is important to take a close look at the complaints or quotes attributed to him, and what they might truly mean. "She smells Dornish," for instance, is not a literal complaint of an addled mind, but an astute political observation and subtle jab at Dorne, bespeaking of his mistrust and disdain for Dorne and House Nymeros Martell (not for Rhaegar!). Aerys II also felt vastly different about Rhaegar's crowning of and absconding with Lyanna Stark than a cursory reading might suggest. Even his wildfire plot is or contains a political move--vicious, brutal, and utterly amoral, yes, and even unfeeling and disrespectful of his late son's memory--but coldly and politically astute in its intention (whether it would have worked out exactly as he hoped is a bit questionable). House Nymeros Martell might feel vastly different about suffering themselves to aid in a Targaryen restoration so as to achieve their vengeance if they knew the truth of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

I should have given the matter more thought.  But yes, if Doran Martell intentionally misrepresented his capabilities to his king.  Whether it had any impact on the war or not.  It is still a crime.  

 

I do not know whether Doran intentionally misrepresented his strength to Aerys II, or whether he perpetuated his mother's lie (which, I believe, was passed down to her too), or whether he felt trapped by his mother's lie (although, given his actions in Feast/Dance, I do not believe this to be the case, since he willfully uses it again, thinking himself so clever to do so), but I do posit that the Princess of Dorne deliberately misrepresented the strength of Dorne (even on the cusp of all-out warfare erupting) in order to win her betrothal and her "tilt" with Tywin Lannister, amongst other things, for which Aerys II had legitimate grievances against her and her realm. With the actions that led him to take (for political course correction and for pure spite), Aerys II was also being politically coherent and politically astute  when he took Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon hostage against Dorne to force those ten thousand spears up the kingsroad. :) 

Writing and editing this essay, I cannot help but think, though, just how pitiful it is and just how wrong of Martin, not to give this wretched lady a name! Any name! A Dornishwoman by any other name would smell as sweet! She's a major player in the game, the only reigning lady of a major kingdom, a cunning snake in the grass, and yet, we're stuck calling the poor woman Princess of Dorne or (Man's) mother, as if she were utterly insignificant! :bang::crying: :bawl: :bs:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TheSeason said:

but I do posit that the Princess of Dorne deliberately misrepresented the strength of Dorne

The person who deliberately misrepresented the strength of Dorne is Daeron I Targaryen. He said in his books that their strength was 50K spears and the Dornish did nothing to correct that because it suited them just fine. Doran himself makes mention of this.

As far as the Princess of Dorne using that to sway Aerys to her idea of marrying her daughter to his son, I don't know if there's ever mention of troops during negotiation, but Aerys isn't exactly a Tywin fan by then and he thinks Tywin and Rhaegar mean to depose him and that Rhaegar will marry Cersei. It just seems like as much as the Princess of Dorne wants to stick it to Tywin for the way he treated her and her children, Aerys wants to stick it to Tywin whom he doesn't even like anymore and to Rhaegar who he doesn't trust. 

I do think, though, that Doran may have been waiting for Rhaegar to bestir himself and come out of hiding before he committed his troops. Doran has Elia and his uncle in King's Landing, so if anything, he would be well aware of what's going on there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

The person who deliberately misrepresented the strength of Dorne is Daeron I Targaryen. He said in his books that their strength was 50K spears and the Dornish did nothing to correct that because it suited them just fine. Doran himself makes mention of this.

I'm aware of this. But does this absolve the Princess of Dorne of perpetuating this lie to her king? The evidence suggests that there was a clear conversation about what Aerys II could expect from Dorne in exchange for the actions he takes as part of their deal. It's gnarly. She lied. Lying to a king is treason. Splitting hairs to absolve the Princess of Dorne (oh, someone else started that lie, so it's acceptable for her to commit this treason) is unfair and disingenuous to Aerys II and to the Princess of Dorne, who knew exactly what she was doing when she lied and who would be outraged if a bannerman served her that same treatment. 

The same conversation that takes place between Dany and Quentyn parallels the conversation that took place between Aerys II and the Princess of Dorne. Quentyn lies knowingly to his queen (in her city). Lying to a queen is treason. Dany escapes the trap her father fell into. For both of them, Aerys and Dany, however, there are grave consequences--damned if you do (treason done against you: lies that cripple you and sabotage your war machine in wartime), damned if you don't (treason done against you: lies and thefts that cripple you and sabotage your war machine in wartime). 

I'm happy to post the evidence when it's completed. This was an accidental post (don't ask me how, I don't know; I was typing, and then randomly I wasn't. The forums are always wonky for me, much to my chagrin). But you cannot judge evidence that I've yet to present, so, if you're interested in what this analysis is all about, please try to keep an open mind. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Count me interested. I've been interested in the Martells just based off the unlikely marriage of Rhaegar to Elia as a "political match?". Wasn't love, we know that. Seemed more duty than not. Yet, for a political match, it seems an ill choice. They are no strength on land or Sea, they have no great wealth, they control no great trade, and Aerys II hates them. Remarking that Rhaegar's children smelled Dornish. 

Aerys being noted as suspecting the Martell's of treason regarding the death of Rhaegar for some reason, maybe just his paranoia or maybe something there. Sending a lot less men to help your son fight the usurper would count in my book. Specially when the king thought you had more men. Crap situation for the Martell's though since Aerys holds Elia and her kids. Were the Martell's expecting her to stay on Dragonstone? Not sending enough troops when your sister is being held seems a betrayal to Elia too. Could not Doran or someone sneak in to rescue Elia and children?

I have always found it interesting that Varys pops up before Rhaegar wed's Elia, then ends up possibly with one of Rhaegar's kids. Or not. One can easily imagine Varys destroying any plans the Martell's may have had also. Or he possibly tried to save them. Varys did advice Aerys not to open his gates to Tywin. Ned remarks when Varys tells of the death of Rhaenys, that Varys looks like a man who carried all the sadness of the world in a sack upon his shoulders

 

Quote

 

A Game of Thrones - Eddard XV

"No," Ned pleaded, his voice cracking. "Varys, gods have mercy, do as you like with me, but leave my daughter out of your schemes. Sansa's no more than a child."
"Rhaenys was a child too. Prince Rhaegar's daughter. A precious little thing, younger than your girls. She had a small black kitten she called Balerion, did you know? I always wondered what happened to him. Rhaenys liked to pretend he was the true Balerion, the Black Dread of old, but I imagine the Lannisters taught her the difference between a kitten and a dragon quick enough, the day they broke down her door." Varys gave a long weary sigh, the sigh of a man who carried all the sadness of the world in a sack upon his shoulders. "The High Septon once told me that as we sin, so do we suffer. If that's true, Lord Eddard, tell me … why is it always the innocents who suffer most, when you high lords play your game of thrones? Ponder it, if you would, while you wait upon the queen. And spare a thought for this as well: The next visitor who calls on you could bring you bread and cheese and the milk of the poppy for your pain … or he could bring you Sansa's head.
"The choice, my dear lord Hand, is entirely yours."

 

 
 
While never making mention of Aegon dying. Maybe they're only talking daughters? Or maybe Varys actually got Aegon out. 
 
So i can't wait to see where your going with this and the Martell's part in this all. 
 
Edit- (Side note) ^ Can't help but wonder if Varys had this conversation with Lord Rickard before his death.
Edited by AlaskanSandman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

15 hours ago, TheSeason said:

Whether Aerys II was "mad" to take the Dornish princess at her word , as was his right as king (according to law and custom) or merely naïve (given that he likely considered her something of a friend and definitely considered her to be an ally), I leave to you to decide. Aerys knew exactly what he was doing when he chose Elia of Dorne to marry Rhaegar and Dorne to be Rhaegar's (and his) ally, and it absolutely was not to make Rhaegar "weaker" (as I have seen argued in many a thread), but to multiply the strength of House Targaryen, especially at the expense of any (would-be) rivals or external and existential threats to his dynasty. 

During The War of the Ninepenny Kings Dorne fought for the Targaryens, and Aerys II himself fought in that war. Shouldn't he as a Prince of the realm have known how many Dornish fought in that war for his family? One would assume he could expect roughly the same number of Dornish to fight for him in a similar conflict. Did Aerys II ever ask the Princess of Dorne how many soldiers Dorne could raise? Did the Princess of Dorne ever give him a false answer? Was Dorne's military ever even discussed between Aerys II and the Princess of Dorne or Doran Martell before Robert's Rebellion?

Also, consider this, had any Dornish Prince or Princess tried to correct the statement Daeron I made about Dorne having 50,000 fighters they'd be calling a Targaryen king a liar. A king's word is law and contradicting it is treason.

We all saw what happened to the Dornish woman Tanselle Too-Tall when she performed a puppet show of a dragon getting killed by a knight. A Targaryen prince considers it treasonous and breaks her finger and has his Targayen soldiers beat up her fellow puppeteers. Nasty business when some of these men react to what they don't want to see or hear.:ack:

Share this post


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

Yet, for a political match, it seems an ill choice.

I used to think it bizarre too, until I realized the game that was played, and then it started making a lot more sense as to the choice of Dorne for Rhaegar's bride and ally. Aerys II definitely thought he was strengthening his house and creating a counter-power bloc of his own. The tell is the complete 180 he does on Rhaegar, and the reason for it. He thought the Dornish were successful in their scheming goal... until Rhaegar proved him otherwise. 

25 minutes ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

During The War of the Ninepenny Kings Dorne fought for the Targaryens, and Aerys II himself fought in that war. Shouldn't he as a Prince of the realm have known how many Dornish fought in that war for his family?

Wasn't this a united effort, though, and not a civil war? Everyone mustering together to throw off the yoke of a would-be invading force? Dorne would not be expected to make as great a contribution when the whole of Westeros was fighting together, nor any other kingdom, for that matter. In a civil war and fractured kingdom, however, allies need to band together a goodly part of their strength to rally against kingdoms with similar strength on the opposite end of the field. There's no unifying enemy to bring everyone together for the war effort from all corners of the continent, and that's a huge difference; civil war is a war for survival in more ways than one. The nature of the existential threat is quite different here. 

28 minutes ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

Also, consider this, had any Dornish Prince or Princess tried to correct the statement Daeron I made about Dorne having 50,000 fighters they'd be calling a Targaryen king a liar. A king's word is law and contradicting it is treason.

Lying to your king is high treason, not answering him truthfully when he asks how many soldiers he can expect you to muster and rally to his cause. Princess of Dorne did not fear punishment for treason. If she did, she would not have lied to her king. Fearing of punishment for treason--don't commit high treason!

Second of all, Aerys II would not be the one passing this lie, he's the victim of it. He did not say, I'll give you this betrothal if you muster an impossible number of soldiers for me--and even if he did, it was the Princess of Dorne's duty to tell him that she would not be able to make that muster. Telling a king wholly truthful, "I am incapable," is not treason; telling a king, wholly untruthful, "I am capable," is high treason. Telling a king a book has quoted a number that is not factual is not treason; telling him that you are quite capable in fact to muster that impossible (not even improbable, but downright impossible!) number he may or may not have read about in a book is high treason. Princess of Dorne is entitled to keep this boastful and dangerous secret from everybody *but* Aerys II, her king, and from Rhaegar after him (or any agent currently speaking on his behalf)!

Thirdly (lastly!), the Princess of Dorne is a cunning and capable political actor, who knew exactly what she was doing in this negotiation and in making this deal, and as a cunning and capable political actor, she deliberately committed high treason (just as Doran is doing now, via his son Quentyn) because she judged two things: the benefits outweighed the risks of doing so, and that once the deal was made, her king would be largely incapable to punish her for her high treasons, especially with her blood destined to inherit his throne, especially with a war on. As a bonus, in committing high treason, she gets her vengeance, too. She thinks it's a win-win-win situation, this commission of high treason. She was wrong. It was zero sum, and she bet the zeros. She's in fact a hypocrite, as she forgets her most important lesson in seeking of vengeance; just like Doran "Where is my son?" Martell. :) 

:cheers:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TheSeason said:

She's in fact a hypocrite, as she forgets her most important lesson in seeking of vengeance; just like Doran "Where is my son?" Martell.

I think the Princess of Dorne's hypocrisy isn't her telling Aerys that she had tons of troops in a conversation that may or may not have happened. The Princess of Dorne allowed her eldest son and heir to marry for love. She allowed her youngest son to not marry at all, and she sold her daughter to Aerys for a vengeance against Tywin. Out of everything she is being accused of, in my book, this was her gravest sin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:19 PM, Silver Bullet 1985 said:

oops is right.  It's not the Dornish who committed treason.  It was Robert and Rickard who were plotting against their king.

Nobody was plotting against Aerys  .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I think the Princess of Dorne's hypocrisy isn't her telling Aerys that she had tons of troops in a conversation that may or may not have happened. The Princess of Dorne allowed her eldest son and heir to marry for love. She allowed her youngest son to not marry at all, and she sold her daughter to Aerys for a vengeance against Tywin. Out of everything she is being accused of, in my book, this was her gravest sin. 

Ah, yeah, that's what I meant when I mentioned her hypocrisy. Her children are "children" too, and deserving of safety and security and her protection, and she's putting them in grave danger with her decisions and desire for vengeance. Those overripe blood oranges splat-splat-splatting were hers to start with. If she can't manage to remember her best advice and most important lesson where her own children are concerned, why should we have any faith that she remembered it where other people's children are concerned. And, of course, she didn't, because she got them all involved in a gruesome war for sake of personal vengeance for a mere insult (being told "no" for Cersei and Jaime, that Tywin had other plans for them and Joanna had failed to consult him about those plans she made, making them more a "scheme" in his mind, doubtless, and being offered Tyrion in place)! There are some just causes to want to go to war as last resort, but an insult that wounded her pride is not one of them. Prince Doran actually had much more causus belli than his mother ever did to seek vengeance upon Tywin Lannister and lead his family into a Targaryen's war; of course, Dorne should have sent troops to defend Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon once they were already there and endangered, but there really was no need for them to be there in the first place if it is almost all about getting back at a rival rather than arranging a good betrothal for her daughter. It's the difference between having a king exercising his entitlement to demand a bannerman's troops and that bannerman volunteering those troops well in advance, no matter the cost, for petty reasons that make this hypocrisy so poignant. She put herself (and Prince Doran), her child (and future grandchildren), and her people between a rock and a hard place for a momentary smug smile and the satisfaction to "win that tilt." 

Also, as to that conversation that may or may not have happened and the number of troops quoted, two things: the number of troops wasn't the only issue in this scheme, but the one for which Aerys II rightly decries them traitors, and even if it were--when a betrothal is being arranged for her daughter that sends her child into a warzone (or warzone erupting, because the crown was definitely anticipating high treason and all-out war) and the question is, "If I marry my child to yours, how many troops will you be able to field for the defense of her life and our dynasty?" the mother needs to take a deep breath and a good long look at just what she's doing and what she's plotting to get her children and her country involved in! That she doesn't is alarming; that she continues to lie about it is mind-boggling! Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon were not the only Dornish innocents that Princess of Dorne's vengeful "tilt" got killed. And since the question would have been asked up-front and in all seriousness by the king in question in this hypothetical conversation or correspondence, the Princess of Dorne has little reason to downplay the likelihood that she's involving everyone in a devastating war and sabotaging her own (and her chosen king's!) war engine in the process to do it! She's gambling on "best case" results to tell that lie in a zero sum game ("win or die"). It's bewildering. Take, for example, Robb Stark, who at least had the foresight to name a successor to muddle the succession for Winterfell and possibly rejuvenate his cause after his death (and, indeed, the Lannisters and Freys even help on that end, by giving him a martyr's death in midst of their divine abomination!), thereby betting on "worst case" results in his zero sum game ("win or die"); yet an older and more cunning and more politically experienced actor in the Princess of Dorne is really making a strange choice to lie to her king about their joint war machine in any scenario that might overthrow their joint dynasty. If the question of troop numbers boils down to: if I marry my child to yours, will we all win or will we all die? I find it quite senselessly queer that the Princess of Dorne chooses to lie "We'll win for sure!" on those odds (because she's implying with those numbers that the loyalists in all probability will have overwhelming force against the rebels). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TheSeason said:

Wasn't this a united effort, though, and not a civil war? Everyone mustering together to throw off the yoke of a would-be invading force? Dorne would not be expected to make as great a contribution when the whole of Westeros was fighting together, nor any other kingdom, for that matter. In a civil war and fractured kingdom, however, allies need to band together a goodly part of their strength to rally against kingdoms with similar strength on the opposite end of the field. There's no unifying enemy to bring everyone together for the war effort from all corners of the continent, and that's a huge difference; civil war is a war for survival in more ways than one. The nature of the existential threat is quite different here. 

Robert and his followers were labeled traitors and rebels by the Targaryens. the same as the other Blackfyres including Maelys. which is why the War of the Ninepenny Kings is also known the 5th Blackfyre Rebellion. The War of the Ninepenny Kings took place in the Stepstones, which is closer to Dorne than any other Kingdom in Westeros, so one would assume they'd raise as much troops as possible, not just to join the offensive, but to protect it's border. Maelys was much closer to Dorne than Robert or his allies ever came. In fact had the Ninepenny Kings been successful Dorne would be the first Kingdom in which Maelys would have to cross to get to King's Landing. So Dorne was very much invested in winning the 5th Balckfyre Rebellion, as the war was heading straight their direction and the Blackfyres and their supporters have historically always hated Dorne and vice versa. The Dornish would have their own separated forces outfitted in their distinctive armor and weapons. Most importantly they'd be fighting under their different banners so the other Westerosi could identify them, this is the same for all of the other Kingdoms. Aerys should have been able to see how many banners were Dornish and be able to roughly estimate how many soldiers they had compared to the other Kingdoms.

22 hours ago, TheSeason said:

Lying to your king is high treason, not answering him truthfully when he asks how many soldiers he can expect you to muster and rally to his cause. Princess of Dorne did not fear punishment for treason. If she did, she would not have lied to her king. Fearing of punishment for treason--don't commit high treason!

Can you show the text where Aerys II asked the Princess of Dorne how many troops Dorne could raise and where the Princess of Dorne gave him false information?  Can you show the text where Aerys II and the Princess of Dorne or Doran Martell discuss Dorne's military strength? 

Your also forgetting the reason Aerys II married Rhaegar to Elia Martell, because she had the most Targaryen blood out of all the noble women in Westeros around Rhaegar's age. Before that Aerys sent Steffon Barartheon to Essos to find Rhaegar a wife with Targaryen blood, not a wife who's family could field the largest army.

Edited by Ralphis Baratheon

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

×