What Keeping the Blood Pure, Actually Looks Like

Lord Varys · April 14, 2019

11 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

And we have to remember that before Aegon conquered Westeros, these were in fact distinct kingdoms. The Kings of each region would have knitted their own kingdoms together through marriages, but I doubt they reached outside their region. The Starks in particular seem to have been restricted in the marriage partners they chose being averse to intermingling with the Andal lords that the southern houses accepted. It's probably only since the time of Good Queen Alysanne that the nobles of the great houses would have been marrying daughters of houses outside their kingdom.

It started with the marriages Rhaenys and Visenya brokered after the Conquest, but the resistance Torrhen's sons expressed about the marriage between their sister and Lord Ronnel Arryn implies that this kind of thing didn't happen often before the Conquest - especially not among the second-tier houses between which Rhaenys and Visenya also brokered marriages.

However, I expect there were occasional marriages between the royal houses of the various warring kingdoms, i.e. the Gardeners and Durrandons and Lannisters, etc. when they made a peace, possibly even among the Starks and the Arryns to seal a peace in the thousand years war - sort of like it happened between the Brackens and Blackwoods, too - but here the religious and racial differences may have been a greater problem than they would have been between the Andal royal houses.

Also, one imagines that the Yronwood and Fowler kings of Dorne also occasionally intermarried with their Marcher neighbors, etc.

Quote

To get a little bit off topic - are we sure either of these statements are true? Yes, we have the example of Varamyr, none of whose children were skinchangers. On the other hand, we have seen that Bran, Jon and Arya at the very least of Ned's children have some ability as wargs, and I think George has hinted that all six children have some ability. If it's not an inherited trait, it does seem quite the coincidence that it crops up so strongly in a single family all of a sudden. We also have the story of the Warg King which I think could be interpreted as a hint that it is indeed an inherited trait. I'm not saying it definitely is, just that there is some contradictory evidence.

Oh, but we have Bloodraven and the Children give Bran statistics about skinchangers and greenseers within a given population, not talk about it being a trait that is inherited and can be, well, preserved by marrying your own. Considering that Bloodraven is a Targaryen and definitely aware of the incest thing for the dragonrider stuff it is rather odd he wouldn't have mentioned that skinchangers and greenseers can theoretically be bred - and have, perhaps, been done in the past.

Also, the fact that there is basically no historical precedent in the non-legendary history of the North and House Stark of a Stark king or lord or simply a son from a cadet branch who was either a skinchanger or greenseer.

The Warg King wasn't a Stark, by the way. He was a king the Starks crushed alongside the Children who were fighting at his side.

Quote

Similarly I don't think it's clearcut with dragonriding. While it is certainly true that the Targaryens believed dragonriding to be an inherited ability, I don't think the evidence is conclusive. The fact is that nobody outside the Targaryen family had access to dragons, so opportunity and access could have been the reason that all dragonriders were apparently Targaryens. The sowing of the dragonseeds during the Dance however might contradict this theory. There were far more failures than successes and we assume that the successful dragonriders were accepted by their mounts because of some existence of Targaryen blood and the failures because of a lack. However, we don't know for sure that this is true and it is quite possible that there is another explanation.

We know for a certainty that all the successful dragonseed dragonriders were Dragonstonian or Driftmarkian by birth. Some - like the Hull boys and Ulf - actually looked Valyrian, confirming their dragonseed descendant status, and Hugh is never actually physically described.

Quote

I think the story of Nettles provides a possible explanation. She certainly doesn't have the look in any way shape or form, and her story in fact seems to hint that dragonriding has nothing to do with Targaryen blood. She supposedly won Sheepstealer by wooing it with gifts of food until it became comfortable with her. You can see an analogy to this with how some people are more comfortable around dogs or other animals than others. People who grow up around animals often are more comfortable and confident in their interactions with them. Likewise, Targaryen kids who grow up around dragons would have had a certain comfort level and understanding of how to interact with dragons simply by being around them more than any other person.

Nettles is a confirmed bastard born by a dockside whore on Driftmark. I personally think that she is Daemon's daughter, but even if that's not true, she comes from a population - like all the Dragonstoninans and Driftmarkians - that have a lot of Valyrian ancestors - in addition to the Targaryens of old fucking their women left and right.

It is quite clear why Nettles had success with Sheepstealer - the only wild dragon was claimed. Unlike Vermithor, Seasmoke, and Silverwing Sheepstealer was not accustomed to human presence or riders and thus infinitely more dangerous than the castle dragons who had been ridden before.

If anyone could claim a dragon then one should expect the non-Targaryen dragonriders during the Dance to be members of the Dragonkeepers - who protect and guard them - or the servants and grooms who feed them, clean their stables, etc. But none of those people ever claimed a dragon - and that's very significant and counts as a confirmation, I think, that the blood is the deciding factor.

I mean, you have to keep in mind that royal children did not spend little to no time with the royal dragons in comparison to the servants, etc. Especially during the days of Jaehaerys I when all the dragons aside from Vermithor, Silverwing, and Dreamfyre were (eventually) actually kept in the Dragonpit and the children and grandchildren of the king could only approach them with royal permission.

Syl of Syl · April 14, 2019

6 minutes ago, Megorova said:

I think, that all of them have abilities, because their blood is a mix of Blackwoods (power of Old Gods, greenseers, wargs) and Targaryens (power of R'hllor, dragondreams/gift of foresign).

Aegon V had five children with Black Betha. Every single one of them would have had a Blackwood for a mother and a Targaryen for a father. Viserys and Dany and Robert Baratheon and Stannis and Renly and even Young Griff and little Shireen can all claim descent from this line. If all it took were having both a Blackwood and Targaryen for ancestors, I have to assume we'd see this ability crop up somewhere in this tree but there's no evidence of any of them having greensight or skinchanging ability.

11 minutes ago, Megorova said:

Now about possibility of Starks having dragon-genes.

It's possible, that Melantha Blackwood not only was 1/8 Stark, but also 1/4 Targaryen. My calculations could be totally off, but it seems, that Melantha Blackwood could be daughter of either Mya or Gwenys Rivers, and one of Blackwood-boys. Mya and Gwenys were bastards of Aegon IV, so their children were 1/4 Targs. If Melantha Blackwood really was who I think she was, then Eddard, Brandon and Lyanna were 1/32 Targaryens. Though it doesn't mean, that Bran, Arya, etc. are 1/64 Targaryens, that's because they have more Targaryen genes thru their mother

Catelyn Tully is daughter of Hoster Tully and Minisa Whent. There's only one known Whent still alive - Lady Shella Whent. Based on what is known about Harrenhal, it seems, that Shella's grandfather was first Lord Whent of Harrenhal, and founder of their House. It seems, that Shella's grandfather was also Minisa's grandfather. It doesn't even matter whether Shella and Minisa were sisters or first cousins, in both cases they had the same grandfather. This man was Catelyn's great-grandfather. I think, that he was the Bastard of Harrenhal.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Bastard_of_Harrenhal

Also I think, that he was secret son of Aegon IV Targaryen, and Aegon's own daughter, Jeyne Lothston. If that is correct, then Jeyne was 1/2 Targaryen, and her son was 3/4 Targaryen. This Bastard of Harrenhal was founder of House Whent, and Catelyn's great-grandfather. By the way, he is also Littlefingers' ancestor, which makes Cat and Petyr something like third cousins.

So the Bastard of Harrenhal and first Lord Whent was 3/4 Targaryen and 1/4 Stokeworth. He married with an uncknown woman, and their children were 4/8 Uncknown 1/8 Stokeworth 3/8 Targaryen. Then Shella, Minisa, and Shella's husband, who was her cousin, were something like 8/16 Unknown2 4/16 Uncknown 1/16 Stokeworth and 3/16 Targaryen.

Minisa Whent + Hoster Tully = 8/32 Unknown2 4/32 Uncknown 1/32 Stokeworth 3/32 Targaryen + 8/32 Tully + 8/32 Unknown3 (Hoster's mother, who, probably was not a Tully) <- Catelyn, Lysa, Edmure - 3/64 Targaryen.

Which makes Cat's children = Eddard 1/32 Targaryen + Catelyn 3/64 Targaryen - 5/64 Targaryens. Approximately 7,8% of Targaryen blood, and even higher percentage of Blackwood blood. That's if I calculated correctly.

Again, I have to say that this is not how genetics works.

CAllDSmith · April 14, 2019

9 minutes ago, Megorova said:

I think, that all of them have abilities, because their blood is a mix of Blackwoods (power of Old Gods, greenseers, wargs) and Targaryens (power of R'hllor, dragondreams/gift of foresign).

As I wrote in this thread earlier, it's fairly possible, that Eddard's great-grandmother, Melantha Blackwood (wife of Willam Stark), is a descendant of Melissa Blackwood's daughters from Aegon IV - Mya and Gwenys. If those girls, or even one of them, married back into Blackwood family, then next generations of Blackwoods were carriers of dragon-genes, and later passed them to Starks.

Willam Stark was great-grandson of Cregan Stark, who, same as Willam, was married with a Blackwood (Alysanne Blackwood), and had with her four daughters. It's likely, that those daughters could have married back into Blackwood family. So their descendants were bloodrelated to Starks. And that could be the reason, why several generations later, Willam Stark married with a Blackwood-girl - because they were cousins of some sort.

Just look at Starks' family tree - they nearly always married with Northerners, and there are only a few rare exceptions. And first of those exceptions in the Stark family tree was Alysanne Blackwood. Her marriage with Cregan Stark was result of a special circumstances (agreement made in the end of the Dance of the Dragons). Next exception (marriage outside of The North) was marriage between Cregan's grandson Beron and Lorra Royce (from The Vale). Beron's son, Willam Stark married with Alysanne Blackwood, and later Beron's granddaughter, Jocelyn, married with Benedict Royce. And Willam's great-grandson, Eddard Stark, married with Catelyn Tully.

So in 300 years of Starks' history they have married with someone from outside of The North only 5 times - 2 of them with Blackwoods, 2 with Royces, and 1 with Tully (which was also caused by special circumstances, same as marriage with Alysanne Blackwood).

It's highly likely, that Melantha Blackwood actually was Cregan Stark's great-grandchild, same as her husband, Willam Stark. So they were second cousins.

Also it's possible, that Benedict Royce, husband of Jocelyn Stark, was actually her first cousin. His parents were Raymar Royce and an Unknown wife. Jocelyn's grandmother, Lorra Royce, had two daughters, Berena and Alysanne, and it isn't known with whom those two were married. I think, that one of them was that Unknown wife of Raymar Royce, and mother of Benedict Royce.

Also it's possible, that Lorra Royce was Cregan Stark's granddaughter. With his second wife, Lynara Stark, Cregan had five children. One of them died, three married with other Northerners, but it isn't known, with whom married their only daughter, Lyanna Stark. If Cregan Stark, during the Dance of the Dragons, forged any sort of alliance or friendship with someone from House Royce, then it's likely, that later he married his daughter Lyanna with a member of House Royce, and thus Lorra Royce, that became wife of Cregan's grandchild, Beron Stark, also was Cregan's grandchild, same as her husband.

If my guesses are correct, then it means, that Starks not only always married with people, that were Northerners by blood (like Melantha Blackwood, Lorra and Benedict Royce), but were also closely blood-related to Starks. And, thus, the only real exceptions in Starks' family tree, is marriages of Starks with Alysanne Blackwood and Catelyn Tully - both were made to either end the war, or to gain military support in a span of war.

Now about possibility of Starks having dragon-genes.

It's possible, that Melantha Blackwood not only was 1/8 Stark, but also 1/4 Targaryen. My calculations could be totally off, but it seems, that Melantha Blackwood could be daughter of either Mya or Gwenys Rivers, and one of Blackwood-boys. Mya and Gwenys were bastards of Aegon IV, so their children were 1/4 Targs. If Melantha Blackwood really was who I think she was, then Eddard, Brandon and Lyanna were 1/32 Targaryens. Though it doesn't mean, that Bran, Arya, etc. are 1/64 Targaryens, that's because they have more Targaryen genes thru their mother

Catelyn Tully is daughter of Hoster Tully and Minisa Whent. There's only one known Whent still alive - Lady Shella Whent. Based on what is known about Harrenhal, it seems, that Shella's grandfather was first Lord Whent of Harrenhal, and founder of their House. It seems, that Shella's grandfather was also Minisa's grandfather. It doesn't even matter whether Shella and Minisa were sisters or first cousins, in both cases they had the same grandfather. This man was Catelyn's great-grandfather. I think, that he was the Bastard of Harrenhal.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Bastard_of_Harrenhal

Also I think, that he was secret son of Aegon IV Targaryen, and Aegon's own daughter, Jeyne Lothston. If that is correct, then Jeyne was 1/2 Targaryen, and her son was 3/4 Targaryen. This Bastard of Harrenhal was founder of House Whent, and Catelyn's great-grandfather. By the way, he is also Littlefingers' ancestor, which makes Cat and Petyr something like third cousins.

So the Bastard of Harrenhal and first Lord Whent was 3/4 Targaryen and 1/4 Stokeworth. He married with an uncknown woman, and their children were 4/8 Uncknown 1/8 Stokeworth 3/8 Targaryen. Then Shella, Minisa, and Shella's husband, who was her cousin, were something like 8/16 Unknown2 4/16 Uncknown 1/16 Stokeworth and 3/16 Targaryen.

Minisa Whent + Hoster Tully = 8/32 Unknown2 4/32 Uncknown 1/32 Stokeworth 3/32 Targaryen + 8/32 Tully + 8/32 Unknown3 (Hoster's mother, who, probably was not a Tully) <- Catelyn, Lysa, Edmure - 3/64 Targaryen.

Which makes Cat's children = Eddard 1/32 Targaryen + Catelyn 3/64 Targaryen - 5/64 Targaryens. Approximately 7,8% of Targaryen blood, and even higher percentage of Blackwood blood. That's if I calculated correctly.

Lot of good points, (Some of them I've made.) but a few missed points or speculations. You've forgotten about the Manderly marriages (They still count as southrons, even though they're in the North.) And the bit about the Bastard of Harrenhal seems out there, unsubstantiated and fanficky. Especially the tinfoil hat about Littlefinger. There's also at least two more Whents I can think of still alive, both married to Freys, or Frey-adjacents.

Rose of Red Lake · April 14, 2019

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Actually, it would be pretty good if the nobility and royalty of Westeros were just racist in their marriage practices - that way millions of people would actually be eligible to marry into the main branches of the great families (i.e. all First Men, Andals, and Rhoynar in Westeros, basically). Instead those people - all those people not just the ruling dynasty - only marry among their own class. They are elitist to the highest degree, marrying only among their own circles.

The Great Houses are just commoners from the perspective of the "blood of the dragon." They turned the nobility into inferior "common men" because they moved the goal posts of human hierarchy. It's like the Ptolemies with nuclear weapons ruling over the primitives. Furthermore, no other noble family has been consistently written with the race-coded word "pure" as something to achieve, complete with a race-coded blood test to distinguish the "strong" from the "weak." They set up a superstructure even above the normal nobility and would rather kill millions of Dornish than dilute their blood. Then they set up a doctrine that says they shouldn't be judged for their actions. No other noble family went that far. The disease-resistance is also a disturbing aspect with race coding, through concepts of racial hygiene to prevent hereditary diseases. In fact instead of blood purity we can use the word "hygienic." A nice touch of Nazi eugenics, just for the Targaryens. Dany trying to find the purple in Daario's eyes while thinking Brown Benn is a "mongrel" illustrates how the Targaryens are the only House to develop a socially constructed hierarchy through phenotype.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

As George unfortunately established in FaB Westeros is just rife with bigoted racism - not just the nobility, but the smallfolk as well. Do you remember how they treated the Rogares in FaB - with Lord Manderly effectively celebrating that he could cruelly punish that Lyseni who, in the end, was guilty of no crime whatsoever? How Rego Draz was cruelly killed by those savage Kingslanders? How the Kinglanders spread lies and filth about Lady Larra Rogare for the sole reason that she wasn't capering to their whim, refusing to abandon her religion and learn their language?

Well, sure prejudice runs through all levels of the system. But the attacks on the Rogares weren't an official, systematic campaign to establish average people (Targaryens) as a branch above lesser humans. This is why whatever power they thought they got from incest should be undercut by showing it to be flawed or at least giving them negative consequences.

Syl of Syl · April 14, 2019

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, but we have Bloodraven and the Children give Bran statistics about skinchangers and greenseers within a given population, not talk about it being a trait that is inherited and can be, well, preserved by marrying your own.

One in a thousand, one in a thousand, something like that? Lord Bloodraven really like the number one thousand. Despite this statistic, Lord Bloodraven himself is the only skinchanger that we know of south of the neck. It seems that all the other examples from history and current are in the North or north of the Wall. So it definitely appears to be a trait that is at least more prevalent in a particular population, which contradicts the idea that it is random.

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Warg King wasn't a Stark, by the way. He was a king the Starks crushed alongside the Children who were fighting at his side.

I know, but the Starks took his daughers as prizes, so the Warg King probably contributed to the genetic pool of the North, particularly in the region of the Wolfswood where the Blackwoods were also perhaps from...

I also took the story to be a hint that the children of the forest are the source of these abilities. The Warg King was said to be allied with them. It doesn't seem to be something that exists outside Westeros or even outside the North.

I had a wild notion that one possible explanation for the existence of warging ability and greensight was that they were something that came out of the First Men mixing with the Children of the Forest and that in populations where the children have contributed some genetic material, these abilities might crop up more frequently.

But even if this wild notion doesn't hold up, the fact still remains that these abilities seem to belong to certain populations. If it was a random thing, I question why we have no stories that even indicate at its existence in the southern kingdoms or across the seas.

Syl of Syl · April 14, 2019

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Nettles is a confirmed bastard born by a dockside whore on Driftmark. I personally think that she is Daemon's daughter, but even if that's not true, she comes from a population - like all the Dragonstoninans and Driftmarkians - that have a lot of Valyrian ancestors - in addition to the Targaryens of old fucking their women left and right.

Yes. You are probably right about there being something inherited. And you are definitely right about Nettles having a good chance of having some Targaryen ancestor. The point of bringing up her story was that I thought it provided a possible alternate explanation to how people can bond and dragons.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

If anyone could claim a dragon then one should expect the non-Targaryen dragonriders during the Dance to be members of the Dragonkeepers - who protect and guard them - or the servants and grooms who feed them, clean their stables, etc. But none of those people ever claimed a dragon - and that's very significant and counts as a confirmation, I think, that the blood is the deciding factor.

That's a good point. It doesn't seem like any Dragonkeeper ever tried to claim a dragon tho, so we don't necessarily know for sure that one of them would have failed. Take as analogy the Kingsguard who guard the king and presumably spend more time with him than anyone and know him best, and yet for the most part they stick to guarding and with the exception of Criston Cole, none seem to have a desire to take a hand in ruling, which shows how serving and protecting doesn't necessarily translate to a desire for more. And I assume also that the Dragonkeepers would believe that only Targaryens could ride a dragon as well as fearing that if they tried and survived without getting burnt alive, they'd face a penalty of death.

I agree with you that dragonriding ability probably does end up being something inherited. I just don't think it is a cut and dry case yet.

Megorova · April 14, 2019

2 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

There's also at least two more Whents I can think of still alive, both married to Freys, or Frey-adjacents.

There's only one - Wynafrei Whent, wife of Danwell Frey, eight son of Walder Frey, from Walder's third marriage. There was one more Whent, Walder's fifth wife, Sarya Whent, but she's dead, and had no children. And Wynafrei also has no children, only many stillbirths and miscarriages. Her husband is between 39-48 years old. It's unlikely, that they will ever have children.

So for now Shella is the only Whent-Whent, not some distant Whent married into some other House.

2 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

And the bit about the Bastard of Harrenhal seems out there, unsubstantiated and fanficky. Especially the tinfoil hat about Littlefinger.

The clues are out there in the books. So it is possible, both things - that the Bastard of Harrenhal was Aegon's son, and that Littlefinger's great-grandfather, the sellsword from Braavos, was illegitimate son of Harrenhal's Bastard (fathered by him in Braavos with descendant of Aegon IV from his mistress Bellegere Otherys, First Black Pearl of Braavos). The Bastard's name was Manfryd (or Manfred), and he was that son of Lucas Lothston, that betrayed Daemon Blackfyre during First Blackfyre Rebellion.

But, even though, general public in Westeros thought, that Manfryd, who was known as the Bastard of Harrenhal, was son of Lucas Lothston, actually he was a secret Targaryen-bastard. Similar situation, as with Jon Snow, who is known to people, as the Bastard of Winterfell, and an illegitimate son of Eddard Stark. While actually he is a secret child of Eddard's sister and prince Rhaegar Targaryen.

Don't you think, that if GRRM had used this sort of twist once (with Jon), then it's likely, that he could have used the same trick with some other character?

Or look at Craster and his wifes-daughters. If GRRM did it once, maybe, he did it again, and again. Like - Jeyne Lothston is actually Aegon's daughter, and her son Manfry(e)d is simultaneously Aegon's son and grandson; and Aegon himself, is most likely, had fathered a baby with his own mother, because I think, that Aegon's mistress Serenei of Lys is actually his mother, Larra Rogare, which makes Shiera Seastar a product of incest between mother and son.

Littlefinger, being dragonseed, is not as tinfoily, as you think.

GRRM said, that "ae" in names of his characters is a clue, that people with names like that are Valyrians/dragonseeds, or something like that (maybe other posters remember where exactly he gave that info). Like Aegon, Aemon, Aerys, Jaehaerys, Shaera, Daenerys, Rhaenys, Maelys and Aenys (Blackfyre), Maekar, Baelor, Baelon, Daeron, Daemon, Aenar, Rhaenyra, Vaella, Alysanne, Rhaella, Elaena, Naerys, Aelora and Aelor, Aemma Arryn (daughter of Princess Daella), Laena and Laenor Velaryons, Saera, Maegelle, Baratheon, Targaryen, etc.

Like in - Petyr Baelish.

Like in Manfred (fake son of Lucas Lothston).

And, besides "ae", in Valyrian/Targaryen names is also fairly common "e-y" (ery, eny, ely, e...y).

Aerys, Jaehaerys, Daenerys, Rhaenys, Maelys, Aenys, Rhaenyra, Naerys, Viserys, Visenya, Jacaerys Lucerys and Joffrey Velaryon-Targaryens, Rosey and Gwenys (Aegon IV's bastard-daughters), Jocelyn Baratheon.

Like in - Petyr. Or Jeyne Lothston.

Petyr Baelish. It's possible, that he is a dragonseed. Obviously, that my theory about his origin isn't based solely on his name, there's other clues.

If in the Winds, when fAegon will "officially" arrive to 7K, Littlefinger will take out Targaryen banners, that he was hiding in Darry castle, and will agitate people to cheer for fAegon and Golden Company, then know, that I was right about him - he is descendant of Falene Stokeworth and Jeyne Lothston. I think, that this part of the plot GRRM had based on the Bible. During the end of the world, described in The Book of Revelation, first appeared the Beast out of the sea, it had ten heads, and one of those heads was mortally wounded, but then healed itself, people were owed by this miracle, and became followers of that Beast. Then appeared second Beast, this one had dragon's voice and lamb's horns. It said to people, to make image of the first Beast, and to worship him. So fAegon, who is pretending, that he is Rhaegar's son (who died, when his head was smashed), is the Beast out of the sea. And Littlefinger with his Targaryen-banners, and his Lothston-Targaryen-bastard ancestor (dragon's voice) and Stokeworth ancestor (their banner is a lamb on green field - lamb's horns) is the second Beast, or false prophet. While Dany, Rhaego and Jon are "Holy Trinity" of ASOIAF (the dragon has three heads) - the Mother, the Son, the Holy Ghost. If, when Dany will be brought to Vaes Dothrak, she will be reunited there with Rhaego, know, that I was right about everything. :cheers:

The Lord of the Crossing · April 14, 2019

It's impossible to keep the blood pure once foreign blood gets introduced into the family. I think that may be the difference or one of between the pre-doom Targaryens and the recents. The Dragonlords must have married outside the family but it was still Valyrian + Valyrian. The introduction of the blood of regular people contaminated the genes.

Clegane'sPup · April 14, 2019

On 4/12/2019 at 9:23 PM, Syl of Syl said:

From what I understand, this is not really how genetics work. Leaving aside some of the assumptions, I don't think your math accurately represents how genetics work.

What is creepy about pure blood is american eugenics and a certain individuals interest in such.

CAllDSmith · April 14, 2019

33 minutes ago, Megorova said:

The clues are out there in the books. So it is possible, both things - that the Bastard of Harrenhal was Aegon's son, and that Littlefinger's great-grandfather, the sellsword from Braavos, was illegitimate son of Harrenhal's Bastard (fathered by him in Braavos with descendant of Aegon IV from his mistress Bellegere Otherys, First Black Pearl of Braavos). The Bastard's name was Manfryd (or Manfred), and he was that son of Lucas Lothston, that betrayed Daemon Blackfyre during First Blackfyre Rebellion.

But, even though, general public in Westeros thought, that Manfryd, who was known as the Bastard of Harrenhal, was son of Lucas Lothston, actually he was a secret Targaryen-bastard. Similar situation, as with Jon Snow, who is known to people, as the Bastard of Winterfell, and an illegitimate son of Eddard Stark. While actually he is a secret child of Eddard's sister and prince Rhaegar Targaryen.

Don't you think, that if GRRM had used this sort of twist once (with Jon), then it's likely, that he could have used the same trick with some other character?

This is fanfiction plain and simple fanfiction. In 136 Ser Lucas Lothston was made master-at-arms to replace the asshole that was Ser Gareth Long. In 149 Falena Stokeworth (who had come to the court years earlier, and was possible the eldest daughter of the black Lord Stokeworth.) became Aegon the Unworthy's first mistress. Two yeas later she's married to the master-at-arms and packed out to Harrenhal where Aegon would visit her for another two years. Now there's also Jeyne Lothson who was born in 162 (Which kind of ruins the rumors that she was Aegon's daughter.) and came to court with her dad Lucas and Lucas was made the Hand of the King until Aegon gave her a pox. Neither Jeyne nor Falena left King's Landing with child so Aegon cannot be the father of the Bastard of Harrenhal, even if the Bastard of Harrenhal was Jeyne of Falena's child.

On top of that we have some confusion created by AFFC and World. There are two Lucas Lothston's and two Manfryd/Manfreds. Since the father of Manfryd O'the Black Hood is Lucas the Pander, and pander is another word for pimp, we can guess that Lucas Lothson the Hand of the King and Lucas Lothson the Pander are probably the same person.

As for the Manfryd?Manfreds, the former is mentioned in AFFC as Manfryd o' the Black Hood and the latter is mentioned in Sworn Sword as Manfred Lothston. Given the age of Lucas Lothston at that point (Most likely late sixties.) It is certainly possible that both are the same person and and Lucas the Pander's son. Since Arlan Pennytree beat the Bastard of Harrenhal in 193, and Manfred Lothston was late bringing his forces to Redgrass n 196, and if the Bastard of Harrenhal was a Great Bastard he would have no longer been a bastard in 193, and that Dunk doesn't call Manfred Lothston the Bastard of Harrenhal when Eustace is talking about all the Blackfyre supporters, AND that neither Manfred/Manfryd are ever call Rivers it is a safe bet that neither of them were bastards.

The Bastard of Harrenhal going to Braavos and having a kid with one of the Otherys who would then become Baelish also makes no sense, and is fanfiction. Since: If the Bastard of Harrenahl were a child of Aegon the Unworthy he would be legitimized AND that a child of two legitimized Targaryen bastards would be a Targaryen unless they took another name, AND that Daeron II was very good to his Great Bastard siblings AND that there's no mentioned connection between the Bastard of Harrenhal, or House Lothston with Braavos this is all fanfiction.

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

There's only one - Wynafrei Whent, wife of Danwell Frey, eight son of Walder Frey, from Walder's third marriage. There was one more Whent, Walder's fifth wife, Sarya Whent, but she's dead, and had no children. And Wynafrei also has no children, only many stillbirths and miscarriages. Her husband is between 39-48 years old. It's unlikely, that they will ever have children.

So for now Shella is the only Whent-Whent, not some distant Whent married into some other House.

You're right, I was thinking of the Darrys.

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

Littlefinger, being dragonseed, is not as tinfoily, as you think.

GRRM said, that "ae" in names of his characters is a clue, that people with names like that are Valyrians/dragonseeds, or something like that (maybe other posters remember where exactly he gave that info). Like Aegon, Aemon, Aerys, Jaehaerys, Shaera, Daenerys, Rhaenys, Maelys and Aenys (Blackfyre), Maekar, Baelor, Baelon, Daeron, Daemon, Aenar, Rhaenyra, Vaella, Alysanne, Rhaella, Elaena, Naerys, Aelora and Aelor, Aemma Arryn (daughter of Princess Daella), Laena and Laenor Velaryons, Saera, Maegelle, Baratheon, Targaryen, etc.

Like in - Petyr Baelish.

Like in Manfred (fake son of Lucas Lothston).

And, besides "ae", in Valyrian/Targaryen names is also fairly common "e-y" (ery, eny, ely, e...y).

Aerys, Jaehaerys, Daenerys, Rhaenys, Maelys, Aenys, Rhaenyra, Naerys, Viserys, Visenya, Jacaerys Lucerys and Joffrey Velaryon-Targaryens, Rosey and Gwenys (Aegon IV's bastard-daughters), Jocelyn Baratheon.

Like in - Petyr. Or Jeyne Lothston.

Petyr Baelish. It's possible, that he is a dragonseed. Obviously, that my theory about his origin isn't based solely on his name, there's other clues.

If in the Winds, when fAegon will "officially" arrive to 7K, Littlefinger will take out Targaryen banners, that he was hiding in Darry castle, and will agitate people to cheer for fAegon and Golden Company, then know, that I was right about him - he is descendant of Falene Stokeworth and Jeyne Lothston. I think, that this part of the plot GRRM had based on the Bible. During the end of the world, described in The Book of Revelation, first appeared the Beast out of the sea, it had ten heads, and one of those heads was mortally wounded, but then healed itself, people were owed by this miracle, and became followers of that Beast. Then appeared second Beast, this one had dragon's voice and lamb's horns. It said to people, to make image of the first Beast, and to worship him. So fAegon, who is pretending, that he is Rhaegar's son (who died, when his head was smashed), is the Beast out of the sea. And Littlefinger with his Targaryen-banners, and his Lothston-Targaryen-bastard ancestor (dragon's voice) and Stokeworth ancestor (their banner is a lamb on green field - lamb's horns) is the second Beast, or false prophet. While Dany, Rhaego and Jon are "Holy Trinity" of ASOIAF (the dragon has three heads) - the Mother, the Son, the Holy Ghost. If, when Dany will be brought to Vaes Dothrak, she will be reunited there with Rhaego, know, that I was right about everything.

ae names like: Malaquo Maegyr, Doniphos Paenymion, Nyessos Vhassar (The Triarchs of Volantis) or like Ferrego Antaryon and Tormo Fregar ( The current Sealord of Braavos and his possible replacement?) having a Valyrian sounding name does not mean that a person is descended from Targaryens and even if House Baelish was, they would have been legitimized over a century ago. (And you'd think maybe it might have been noted if Baelish looked anything other than white?)

This theory is literally the definition of tinfoily, and using Revelation in that chaotic way only makes it even more tinfoily. (Especially since GRRM isn't a practicing Christian and using any Revelation symbolism in general takes way too much effort for the amount of still wrong because it's an allegory for the early Roman Empire that probably shouldn't even be in the Bible.)

Lord Varys · April 14, 2019

2 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

The Great Houses are just commoners from the perspective of the "blood of the dragon." They turned the nobility into inferior "common men" because they moved the goal posts of human hierarchy. It's like the Ptolemies with nuclear weapons ruling over the primitives. Furthermore, no other noble family has been consistently written with the race-coded word "pure" as something to achieve, complete with a race-coded blood test to distinguish the "strong" from the "weak." They set up a superstructure even above the normal nobility and would rather kill millions of Dornish than dilute their blood. Then they set up a doctrine that says they shouldn't be judged for their actions. No other noble family went that far. The disease-resistance is also a disturbing aspect with race coding, through concepts of racial hygiene to prevent hereditary diseases. In fact instead of blood purity we can use the word "hygienic." A nice touch of Nazi eugenics, just for the Targaryens. Dany trying to find the purple in Daario's eyes while thinking Brown Benn is a "mongrel" illustrates how the Targaryens are the only House to develop a socially constructed hierarchy through phenotype.

That actually sounds like a lot of stuff that's not in the books. The Targaryen marriage policy is rather exclusive, but where on earth is there any indication that everybody has a right to intermarry with them? They are royalty, and royalty usually has a rather exclusive marriage policy in a medieval setting.

Drawing an artificial line between the Targaryens and the other (former) royal and noble families is, well, an artificial line. It makes no sense.

And it is actually not the case that Targaryen incest is equal to real world inbreeding in various noble and royal dynasties. The real world monarchies did that to keep power wealth in the family and to protect themselves against outsiders, but Targaryen incest goes back to the incestuous marriage practices of Old Valyria - which was not a monarchy but an aristocratic republic similar to Rome. It is certainly true that part of the reason for the incestuous unions of the Valyrian dragonlords and other Valyrians had to do with protecting the family assets against outsiders. But the main reason we are given for Valyrian incest revolves around the dragons. In a political system where power is shared and no monarch/royal dynasty can concentrate power in their hands alone the development of sibling incest to preserve power and wealth is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

Just imagine what would have happened if Caesar had married his sister? He couldn't have made political alliances with the other great noble families. Valyria of old would have been a cesspit of shifting and changing alliances between the powerful factions and families - like the Free Cities still are - and marriage alliances among the powerful and wealthy would have been a very useful, even natural, way to cement power in that environment.

Yet for some strange reasons the Valyrian dragonlords did not predominantly intermarry with their dragonlord peers from other families. They married their own sisters. This needs explanation in this setting. And the explanation given is that this had to do with the dragons, not so much with the idea that other people were not worthy to marry you because are so great - it is connected to the dragons, and the fear or knowledge that the infusion of outsider blood might reduce the likelihood that all of your descendants could become dragonlords, too.

Because in the end it seems that there must have been a trial-and-error phase in the history of Old Valyria. The first dragonlords wouldn't have awoken one morning deciding that their sisters are so hot that they can only marry them. Rather, one imagines, that there were some dragonlords who for some reason or another intermarried more with other dragonlords (who likely also happened to be their cousins to some degree, especially if all the dragonlords were to go back to one person or a couple who bonded with the first dragons) than non-dragonlords and then there may have been such who intermarried only with non-dragonlords. If it turned out that the latter eventually lost their ability to bond with their dragons - perhaps happening in such a way that the great-great-great-grandchildren of a founding dragonlord couple of Valyria were actually killed by the dragons their great-great-great-grandparents had ridden in glory a century ago - then such a thing would have caused the other dragonlord families to come up with a solution for that problem. It may even be that their started with cousin marriages and only ended up with sibling incest because they didn't want to take any chances. We don't know.

However, we do know that it is wrong to compare the Targaryens and the Ptolemies insofar as their internal reasoning for incestuous unions is concerned. It is clear that the Ptolemies inspired Targaryen incest, but that doesn't mean the reasoning behind that is identical or supposed to be interpreted as identical.

[And just to cut to the chase - the Ptolemies actually just married their own Hellenistic/Persian ideas of divine kingship (the Persian kings married their sisters, too) to about 3,000 years of (divine royal) incest in Ancient Egypt. Back in Macedonia the Ptolemies and did not marry their sisters - and of the successors of Alexander only the Ptolemies adopted royal incest - making it rather likely that the Ptolemies adopted this kind of thing to please their new subjects, not necessarily because they thought that this was a great idea. In fact, when they first did that during the reign of Ptolemy II it caused a great scandal in the Greek world.]

In any case, we can say that the fact that the Targaryens intermarried with a lot of lesser houses - in connection with the, at times, rather obscure spouses that were seriously considered for royal princes and princesses - makes it clear that preferring to marry your own doesn't mean you consider other nobility inferior or sub-human.

But they were, of course, the rulers of Westeros. Everybody was subject to their rule. Kings and queen do not have equals.

Your ideas that this has anything to do with racial hygiene are, quite frankly, laughable.

As for mongrels: The term is used by a lot of people in those books.

2 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Well, sure prejudice runs through all levels of the system. But the attacks on the Rogares weren't an official, systematic campaign to establish average people (Targaryens) as a branch above lesser humans. This is why whatever power they thought they got from incest should be undercut by showing it to be flawed or at least giving them negative consequences.

Oh, the Targaryens do pay a price for their superiority complex. They were toppled, were they not? And they are troubled by their fair share of freaks and madmen (although it seems they are actually less than one would have expected them to be - there is no genuine mad Targaryen of the type of Aerys II throughout the entirety of FaB, for instance).

What we cannot expect from George is to actually have him - who tells a history about individual people and their decisions rather than dynastic marriage policies - condemn or punish people for the decisions of their parents. As I said, Jaime and Cersei are not condemned for their love (and it is one of Jaime's good traits that he is not ashamed of his love for his sister), either, and there are no Targaryen siblings who could intermarry during the main series.

The love of Jon and Dany will be an actual romance, likely the great romance this entire series is supposed to lead towards, and the author is not condemning these two for their love, just as nobody should condemn the love of half-siblings or full siblings who never knew each other as children and that happened to fall in love without never knowing that they are related.

6 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

One in a thousand, one in a thousand, something like that? Lord Bloodraven really like the number one thousand. Despite this statistic, Lord Bloodraven himself is the only skinchanger that we know of south of the neck. It seems that all the other examples from history and current are in the North or north of the Wall. So it definitely appears to be a trait that is at least more prevalent in a particular population, which contradicts the idea that it is random.

Actually, there are skinchangers supposed to be elsewhere. The Farwynds on Lonely Light, for instance, the legendary Rose of Red Lake, and, in my opinion, the necromancer-king from the West, Morgon Banefort.

And I didn't say that it was completely random, just that nobody said it was a trait that you inherit. And I pointed out the fact that it is quite clear that there are no 'skinchanger dynasties' in the same way that there are dragonlord families.

6 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

I know, but the Starks took his daughers as prizes, so the Warg King probably contributed to the genetic pool of the North, particularly in the region of the Wolfswood where the Blackwoods were also perhaps from...

Yeah, but if that was supposed to meaningful in the sense that the Starks were subsequently a skinchanger family, too, why are there no known Stark skinchangers at all before the generation of Ned's children? This is actually a very important question.

6 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

I also took the story to be a hint that the children of the forest are the source of these abilities. The Warg King was said to be allied with them. It doesn't seem to be something that exists outside Westeros or even outside the North.

See above for out of the North. And keep in mind we don't know all that much about the lands beyond Westeros

6 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

I had a wild notion that one possible explanation for the existence of warging ability and greensight was that they were something that came out of the First Men mixing with the Children of the Forest and that in populations where the children have contributed some genetic material, these abilities might crop up more frequently.

Oh, I entertain that notion, too. But at this point there is no direct hint in that direction whatsoever. And there is strong evidence against that. Remember the giants among the rotting remnants of Bloodraven's greenseer predecessors? We can imagine a union between a Child and a First Man, perhaps, but between the Children and the giants? Not very likely in my opinion. And the idea that such a trait was carried to the giants from the Children via the First Men would be far too much to swallow for me.

In the end we have, at this point, just the belief of the Children and Bloodraven that some people are for blessed with this gift for some mysterious reason. And I doubt that there is going to be a proper in-world explanation for any of that. The time for that would have been the greenseer background chapter we got in ADwD.

6 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

But even if this wild notion doesn't hold up, the fact still remains that these abilities seem to belong to certain populations. If it was a random thing, I question why we have no stories that even indicate at its existence in the southern kingdoms or across the seas.

Oh, one imagines that especially the greenseer talent has to be actively honed to work. Think of Bran. He needed Bloodraven's dream visit opening his third eye (something he actually had to want to agree to) and then he needed Bloodraven's training and the weirwood paste and he is still not there yet.

Bloodraven himself was, in my opinion, completely unaware of the fact that he was a greenseer until the Children or his predecessor in the cave contacted him (or he arrived there clueless for some reason). In fact, it might go as far that he did not understand that he was a skinchanger until he took the black and met some other skinchangers there.

It might very well be that the presence of the weirwood magic and the active interaction with them is part of what ensures that greenseers and skinchangers continue to be born. That is no longer happening in most of Westeros aside from beyond the Wall.

You have to keep in mind that the majority of the people of Westeros still are, genetically, First Men, and whatever they did with the Children in the North beyond the Wall they would have been doing in the West, the Riverlands, the Stormlands, etc., too. So if there was a genetic trait there then it should be still prevalent in more or less the entire Westerosi population with, perhaps, a slight decrease in heavily andalized regions like the Vale.

Also, considering that nobility intermarry with nobility the noble houses would actually be the least First Men compared to, say, some rural where essentially no Andals ever settled. Even the Starks intermarried with houses of Andal blood in the Manderlys, Blackwoods, Royces, and Tullys - and considering that the Manderlys would also have intermarried with all the houses the Starks would later also takes brides from, they should also have inherited such traits from there.

In that sense I really feel we should not assume that Ned's children somehow inherited their talents - it is much more likely that this has something to do with the specific situation the current generation find themselves in - the Others and stuff - not something that would happen randomly due to the genetic setup of people.

It is the same with Daenerys - it is quite clear that her ability to become the Mother of Dragons is something she inherited, something that's present in many of those who have 'the blood of the dragon'. But it is still a unique set of circumstances that led to her being able to wake the dragons from stone.

5 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

That's a good point. It doesn't seem like any Dragonkeeper ever tried to claim a dragon tho, so we don't necessarily know for sure that one of them would have failed. Take as analogy the Kingsguard who guard the king and presumably spend more time with him than anyone and know him best, and yet for the most part they stick to guarding and with the exception of Criston Cole, none seem to have a desire to take a hand in ruling, which shows how serving and protecting doesn't necessarily translate to a desire for more. And I assume also that the Dragonkeepers would believe that only Targaryens could ride a dragon as well as fearing that if they tried and survived without getting burnt alive, they'd face a penalty of death.

But there were a lot of servants and grooms and other people who tried to claim a dragon during the Sowing and were unsuccessful. If George had wanted to sent the message that there are other ways to bond with a dragon then he could just have given us at least one dragonseed with no obvious Dragonstonian or Driftmarkian ancestry. But he didn't do that, did he?

5 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

I agree with you that dragonriding ability probably does end up being something inherited. I just don't think it is a cut and dry case yet.

It likely never will be, but at this point we can safely say that George had a lot of opportunities to establish that dragonlord blood is not the only way to claim a dragon - and he took neither of those possibilities.

He even refused to have a Targaryen fail in his or her attempt to mount a dragon - which would definitely have dealt a blow to the idea of 'the magical blood'. And there isn't even a convincing example of a dragon disobeying a Targaryen who had mounted it.

And Aerea is not such an example. I have laid out somewhere that I don't think Balerion mastered her - he brought her back, after all, and to KL at that, not Dragonstone. I think if Aerea allowed the dragon to take her where he wanted rather than where she wanted to go then this is because Aerea only had one goal when she fled Dragonstone - to get far, far away from her mother, her aunt, her uncle, everybody she knew. A girl like her would have been very excited at the chance to explore Valyria, wouldn't she?

In the end the idea that weak-willed Viserys I should have been able to master the Black Dread but whereas as a girl as strong-willed and determined as Aerea Targaryen should have been unable to do so is not exactly convincing to me. Especially since it is quite clear that children like Aemond and Laena could claim the equally foul-tempered Vhagar, too.

Lord Varys · April 15, 2019

8 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

@Lord Varys makes a great point about the elitism and racism within Westeros. Unfortunately as part of building a believable medieval fantasy certain stereotypes are injected to avoid an uncanny valley and a destruction of a suspension of disbelief. That doesn't mean they're depicted as being right. It's the Huck Finn issue, where just because people keep dropping the n-word people nowadays think the book is racist when actually it's very much anti-racist.

Oh, well, one can and should ask the question whether a man like George - who isn't exactly conservative - should actually create a fantasy world with such bad traits as his world?

That is a valid question because there is no real reason why a writer of fantasy literature has to create such a fucked-up world as George has done.

I use to say that ASoIaF is a huge manifesto against feudalism, aristocracy, and monarchy precisely because it depicts societies and people as shitty as they are. You cannot really learn anything from the heroes in this story aside from the fact the lives they have to live and the decisions they have to make suck.

But this doesn't change the fact that you don't have to read it that way, and that the way it is written - from an elitist, aristocratic viewpoint, telling a story of nobility and royalty - doesn't necessarily help to give the oppressed and torn-down people a voice.

From any culture George shows we almost exclusively meet the leaders, the brave, the elite. That is also true for the fringe groups - the wildlings, the clansmen, etc. Saying that this is necessary to tell a great story is actually a bad excuse. It was only necessary for the kind of story George wanted to tell. He could have included peasant revolts, merchant revolutions, etc. - he chose not to do that kind of thing. Just as he chose to make men of humbler or fringe origins - like Davos, Areo Hotah, and Brienne - to be viewpoint who actually try to live up and be part of the elite world rather than making any attempt to change it.

Not to mention that it is crystal clear in this world that any change will not come via revolution but as a reform from the top - by means of a Targaryen restoration with Jon and/or Daenerys rediscovering and implementing all of Aegon V's reforms, say. The only realistic way out of the mess of this feudal nightmare is actually a proper absolutist monarchy. That could happen in the end when whoever crushes the Others and survives remakes him-/herself into some sort of supreme messiah monarch.

It would be better for the people in this world but as a work of art from which one tries to draw any sort of political or societal meaning it would be lacking on many fronts.

CAllDSmith · April 15, 2019

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

From any culture George shows we almost exclusively meet the leaders, the brave, the elite. That is also true for the fringe groups - the wildlings, the clansmen, etc. Saying that this is necessary to tell a great story is actually a bad excuse. It was only necessary for the kind of story George wanted to tell. He could have included peasant revolts, merchant revolutions, etc. - he chose not to do that kind of thing. Just as he chose to make men of humbler or fringe origins - like Davos, Areo Hotah, and Brienne - to be viewpoint who actually try to live up and be part of the elite world rather than making any attempt to change it.

Not to mention that it is crystal clear in this world that any change will not come via revolution but as a reform from the top - by means of a Targaryen restoration with Jon and/or Daenerys rediscovering and implementing all of Aegon V's reforms, say. The only realistic way out of the mess of this feudal nightmare is actually a proper absolutist monarchy. That could happen in the end when whoever crushes the Others and survives remakes him-/herself into some sort of supreme messiah monarch.

It would be better for the people in this world but as a work of art from which one tries to draw any sort of political or societal meaning it would be lacking on many fronts.

I of course never said that it was necessary to tell a great story ( and I know you didn't say I said it.) only that there are certain things that are expected of a medieval fantasy series and that doing different things creates a slightly different genre that didn't really exist in the 90's (Ex. Dragon Age: Inquisition or many parts of the Cosmere.) Even WoT doesn't so much subvert the feudal culture as much as flip it around the other way.

I have found that the many examples of poor leadership in GoT (Since the show is more accessible to some people.) Actually make talking about real world politics easier. Explaining that we don't need or want leaders like Cersei, Littlefinger, Tywin or the Boltons (or Frank Underwood.) actually helps explain the flaws with some in the real world. I think there are actually some interesting merits in the absolute monarchy system in a brief moment (Think Cincinatus or the Hour of the Wolf.) and that both Dany and Egg's journeys getting to know peasants and slaves (as well as Tyrion's self-revelation that smallfolk are often treated worse than slaves.) actually provide a fair example of how reform should go about peacefully. The opposition to Egg's reforms also gives a pretty good conversation opener to discuss the real world issue of people thinking that rights are a zero-sum game.

Final Point: Dunk beating the ever loving shit out of Aerion is the best scene in the whole franchise so far.

Syl of Syl · April 15, 2019

15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Remember the giants among the rotting remnants of Bloodraven's greenseer predecessors?

No, I didn't remember that. I didn't remember anything said of his predecessors. I looked back and saw there were giant bones in the entrance to the cave, but there were also bones of various birds and beasts as well. I didn't think this passage was meant that all the bones were the bones of greenseers. After all, not every greenseer has sat in that cave and that cave hasn't housed only greenseers. Was there somewhere else that he mentioned his predecessors?

Syl of Syl · April 15, 2019

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But there were a lot of servants and grooms and other people who tried to claim a dragon during the Sowing and were unsuccessful. If George had wanted to sent the message that there are other ways to bond with a dragon then he could just have given us at least one dragonseed with no obvious Dragonstonian or Driftmarkian ancestry. But he didn't do that, did he?

Quote

Lots tried, but they were mostly from Dragonstone with a few from Driftmark I suppose. If any of those had succeeded, we'd have some theory how they were a bastard of one Targaryen or another. The one oddity we have is Ser Steffon Darklyn for whom I can only imagine the wild theories trying to relate him to the Targaryen tree. Maybe it's not something George wanted to refute. The only examples we have of failures is from the sowing and we don't know most of those who attempted and failed. Could be one of those was one such with Targaryen blood. In the end, I'll agree with you that yours is the most likely explanation, but other than giving us a noble that we could definitively say is not a Targaryen or a commoner who was from somewhere far from Dragonstone, I don't see how we could have gotten a commoner more unlikely to be Targaryen than Nettles.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

He even refused to have a Targaryen fail in his or her attempt to mount a dragon - which would definitely have dealt a blow to the idea of 'the magical blood'. And there isn't even a convincing example of a dragon disobeying a Targaryen who had mounted it.

Yeh, a bit odd that. One would have thought that if keeping the blood pure was so important to dragonriding ability, one of these later generation Targaryens like the Strong sons would have failed or the half Hightower kids. So how do we explain that except to say that maybe it has nothing to do with genetics?

Syl of Syl · April 15, 2019

To work it out, let's assume that dragonriding is something inherited. For simplicity's sake, let's say that there is a single genotype related to dragonriding - we'll use big D and little d to mark the alleles a(nd you can work out the Punnett squares at home along with me if you like). If dragonriding was a dominant trait, then it would have been a lot more prevalent amongst the smallfolk who attempted to claim a dragon during the sowing of the seeds. So if we assume that it's recessive, a Targaryen has to have the double 'dd' allele to express the dragonriding trait.

That brings us to Rhaenyra Targaryen and her three children by Harwin Strong and Laena and Laenor Velaryon and Alicent Hightower's four children - all are dragonriders despite having one parent who is not and in some cases that parent has no relation to the Targaryen family. The probability of this outcome is extremely low. Just taking this group (and there are others who fit the bill as well), that gives us ten examples with four different non-dragonriding parents. All four of Alicent Hightower, Harwin Strong, Aemma Arryn and Corlys Velaryon would have to have the 'Dd' in order to have any chance of children with the 'dd' allele. Given this assumption which in itself is unlikely, the chance that all ten children express the dragonriding trait without a single failure is 50% times 10 which is a 5% chance. This is already a pretty stunning improbability without factoring in the probability that all four of the previously mentioned parents have to be carriers.

Put this together with the example of Addam of Hull and Nettles and Hugh the Hammer and Ulf White - the complexity of relations to the Targaryen family tree that we have to assume in order for all these outcomes to fit a genetic model become untenable. Of course, you could argue that this particular genetic model is an oversimplification, but any way that we slice it the inherited trait is either too prevalent amongst the royal family or not prevalent enough amongst Targaryen-adjacent peoples. I feel like the only conclusion is that it is either a much more common trait than believed with external factors related to my theory of comfort and confidence when dealing with dragons or there is something magical going on that we don't understand or has yet to be revealed.

Lord Varys · April 15, 2019

15 minutes ago, Syl of Syl said:

No, I didn't remember that. I didn't remember anything said of his predecessors. I looked back and saw there were giant bones in the entrance to the cave, but there were also bones of various birds and beasts as well. I didn't think this passage was meant that all the bones were the bones of greenseers. After all, not every greenseer has sat in that cave and that cave hasn't housed only greenseers. Was there somewhere else that he mentioned his predecessors?

Bran sees them on their thrones, some of them alive but too rotten to speak, some only bones. The implication, I think, is clearly that all those bones in the vicinity to Bloodraven's throne are remnants of former greenseers. The times the Children had living or dying non-greenseer giants in their cave should be over for millennia... There is, of course, also a reason why there are no wildlings there, no humans but Bloodraven.

53 minutes ago, Syl of Syl said:

Lots tried, but they were mostly from Dragonstone with a few from Driftmark I suppose. If any of those had succeeded, we'd have some theory how they were a bastard of one Targaryen or another. The one oddity we have is Ser Steffon Darklyn for whom I can only imagine the wild theories trying to relate him to the Targaryen tree. Maybe it's not something George wanted to refute. The only examples we have of failures is from the sowing and we don't know most of those who attempted and failed. Could be one of those was one such with Targaryen blood. In the end, I'll agree with you that yours is the most likely explanation, but other than giving us a noble that we could definitively say is not a Targaryen or a commoner who was from somewhere far from Dragonstone, I don't see how we could have gotten a commoner more unlikely to be Targaryen than Nettles.

We hear that lot of people who explicitly weren't seeds themselves or confirmed descendants of dragonseeds. But I actually came forward with ideas that both Gormon Massey and Steffon Darklyn actually had a drop of Targaryen blood - either through a Velaryon ancestor with Targaryen blood (FaB revealed that the second Daemon Velaryon had a lot of descendants) or through an actual Targaryen-Massey/Darklyn marriage before the Conquest.

Duskendale was the greatest harbor at the Westerosi eastern coast, it wouldn't be surprising if one of the Lords of Dragonstone strengthened their trade relations with the town by marrying a spare daughter, niece, aunt, or cousin to a Lord Darklyn. And the fact that Alyssa Velaryon's mother turned out to be a Massey (which was likely also the reason why the Masseys stood with Aegon rather than Argilac during the Conquest) makes not unlikely at all that a Velaryon with Targaryen blood - or even a Targaryen from a cadet branch herself - ended up marrying into that house.

The example of Daenaera Velaryon's mother - Hazel of House Harte - gives us a hint what kind of brides men from cadet branches of House Velaryon got. But such cadet branches would also have produced daughters, meaning that the blood of the dragon is likely actually much more prevalent in the houses of the Crownlands, Stormlands, Narrow Sea, and Riverlands than one might imagine at first glance.

I mean, we can say that the Estermonts seem to have the blood of the dragon, too - through the daughter of Larissa Velaryon by her Tarth husband who ended up marrying Lord Estermont (assuming they had any issue, of course).

53 minutes ago, Syl of Syl said:

Yeh, a bit odd that. One would have thought that if keeping the blood pure was so important to dragonriding ability, one of these later generation Targaryens like the Strong sons would have failed or the half Hightower kids. So how do we explain that except to say that maybe it has nothing to do with genetics?

George clearly doesn't want to send the message that you have to incest-born to ride a dragon. But, one assumes, there is a reason why only one of Marilda of Hull's sons became a dragonrider, don't you think? The blood of the dragon would have been very diluted in these two if we assume they are Corlys' sons rather than Laenor's.

I don't think we can get get that thing down to genetics. The dragonbonding thing is 'magical'.

Megorova · April 15, 2019

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

This is fanfiction plain and simple fanfiction. In 136 Ser Lucas Lothston was made master-at-arms to replace the asshole that was Ser Gareth Long. In 149 Falena Stokeworth (who had come to the court years earlier, and was possible the eldest daughter of the black Lord Stokeworth.) became Aegon the Unworthy's first mistress. Two yeas later she's married to the master-at-arms and packed out to Harrenhal where Aegon would visit her for another two years. Now there's also Jeyne Lothson who was born in 162 (Which kind of ruins the rumors that she was Aegon's daughter.)

First of all, she was born in 164, not in 162. Second - source about rumors, that she was Aegon's daughter, is the World book, people of 7K suspected it, so they had reasons for it. If Aegon was nowhere near Falena, when she became pregnant, then there would have been no rumors like that.

In 161 Aegon was sent as an envoy to Braavos, where he met Bellegere Otherys, and had an affair with her for 10 years. Though it doesn't mean, that in span of those 10 years he was staying in Braavos. If people of 7K thought, that Aegon could have impregnated Falena in 164 or 163, then he was back at 7K at that time, or it was Falena who visited him in Braavos. What GRRM said about Ashara Dayne - that during Robert's Rebellion she wasn't nailed to the floor of Starfall, which means, that she could have left Starfall, and could have went anywhere. Same thing with Aegon and Falena. So Jeyne could be their daughter.

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

and came to court with her dad Lucas and Lucas was made the Hand of the King until Aegon gave her a pox. Neither Jeyne nor Falena left King's Landing with child so Aegon cannot be the father of the Bastard of Harrenhal, even if the Bastard of Harrenhal was Jeyne of Falena's child.

It was Jeyne's mother, who brought her to court.

"Jeyne was brought to court by her mother, Falena Stokeworth, in 178 AC, when she was fourteen. King Aegon the Unworthy made Lord Lucas Lothston of Harrenhal his new Hand, and it was said (but never proved) that he enjoyed mother and daughter together in the same bed. Aegon soon gave Jeyne a pox he had caught from the whores he had seen after Lady Bethany Bracken's execution, and the Lothstons were then all sent from court.^[1]"

You are so so naive. :rolleyes: There were rumors, that Aegon gave Jeyne a pox, and the same source of rumors was saying, that Aegon had sex with both of those women, with mother and with daughter. But according to those same rumors, only Jeyne got "something" from Aegon. If he had sex with both of them, then how come he infected only one of them? Also, just think about it logically - if Falena wasn't infected, unlike Jeyne, then why did Aegon sent ALL OF THEM back to Harrenhal? It's not like he stoped having sex after that, not to infect more people. Thus, what was the point of sending away Falena, who was not infected, so he could have continued to XXXX her?

Jeyne got pregnant, and when they realised it, Aegon sent all of them away, for Jeyne to gave birth to her child in secret, for Falene to take care of both of them (Jeyne and the baby), and for Lucas to bring that baby to Harrenhal and to claim, that the baby is his bastard. Most likely, even at Harrenhal people didn't knew, that the mother of that baby was Jeyne, not Lucas' nonexistent mistress. So, Manfred of the Black Hood, the one who was the Bastard of Harrenhal, and betrayed his half-brother Daemon I Blackfyre during First Rebellion of Blackfyres, was actually son of Jeyne Lothston.

"In 193 AC, Ser Arlan unhorsed Lord Stokeworth and the Bastard of Harrenhal in a melee at King's Landing."

Jeyne got pregnant in 178, so her son was born either in that same year or in 179, so in 193 he was 14 or 15 years old. At the time of that melee he was just a teen/very young, while Lord Stokeworth, who was also at the same event defeated by Ser Arlan, was an old man. So both were easy targets for Arlan, who at that time was in his prime (six years later he even defeated Baelor Breakspear). That Lord Stokeworth was relative of Falena Stokeworth, and Falena was Bastard's maternal grandmother. So when Bastard's old uncle was unhorsed by Ser Arlan, Bastard wanted to avenge him, and went after Arlan, but was also unhorsed by him.

During First Blackfyre Rebellion ser Arlan fought on the side of Blackfyres. So mentioning the Bastard of Harrenhal together with Lord Stokeworth in Arlan's bio is a clue from GRRM, that both of those guys are connected to Blackfyres, same as Arlan.

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

On top of that we have some confusion created by AFFC and World. There are two Lucas Lothston's and two Manfryd/Manfreds. Since the father of Manfryd O'the Black Hood is Lucas the Pander, and pander is another word for pimp, we can guess that Lucas Lothson the Hand of the King and Lucas Lothson the Pander are probably the same person.

As for the Manfryd?Manfreds, the former is mentioned in AFFC as Manfryd o' the Black Hood and the latter is mentioned in Sworn Sword as Manfred Lothston. Given the age of Lucas Lothston at that point (Most likely late sixties.) It is certainly possible that both are the same person and and Lucas the Pander's son. Since Arlan Pennytree beat the Bastard of Harrenhal in 193, and Manfred Lothston was late bringing his forces to Redgrass n 196, and if the Bastard of Harrenhal was a Great Bastard he would have no longer been a bastard in 193, and that Dunk doesn't call Manfred Lothston the Bastard of Harrenhal when Eustace is talking about all the Blackfyre supporters, AND that neither Manfred/Manfryd are ever call Rivers it is a safe bet that neither of them were bastards.

This is actually simple. There was only one Lucas and one Mafred. The guy in AFFC called him "Manfryd o' the Black Hood" because he was an uneducated smallfolk, and they have funny accents, so instead of Manfred he said Manfryd.

Manfred was Manfred Rivers, at the time when he was the Bastard of Harrenhal. He was planning to support Blackfyres in their Rebellion, because he was the same as Daemon Blackfyre and Aegon Rivers - Aegon's bastard, but he betrayed them, and for that was legitimized by King Daeron, and from Manfred Rivers became Manfred Lothston, like Ramsay Snow became Ramsay Bolton. During First Blackfyre Rebellion he was 17 or 18 years old. At that age he became Lothston. Though, even though he was legitimized, someone else got Harrenhal, one of Lucas' real children, and Danelle Lothston was daughter of that someone. So Manfred Lothston was left with nothing, which caused him to orchestrate downfall of House Lothston, and Harrenhal was "inherited" by Whents. Either Manfred himself was this first Lord Whent of Harrenhal (because later in his life he took a different lastname), or first Lord Whent was husband of Manfred's daughter. Or something like that.

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

The Bastard of Harrenhal going to Braavos and having a kid with one of the Otherys who would then become Baelish also makes no sense, and is fanfiction. Since: If the Bastard of Harrenahl were a child of Aegon the Unworthy he would be legitimized AND that a child of two legitimized Targaryen bastards would be a Targaryen unless they took another name, AND that Daeron II was very good to his Great Bastard siblings AND that there's no mentioned connection between the Bastard of Harrenhal, or House Lothston with Braavos this is all fanfiction.

Aegor and Brynden continued to be Rivers even after legitimization, and Daemon continued to be Blackfyre, while Shiera continued to be Seastar. None of them became Targaryens.

Also in the World Book it was said, that even though Aegon legitimized his bastards, for many of them it changed absolutely nothing. Those of Aegon's children, that were not acknowledged by him, while he was alive, after his death got nothing. Aegon never acknowledged Jeyne Lothston as his daughter, same with the Bastard of Harrenhal. Officially that guy was son of Lucas Lothston, and they were not stupid to reveal the truth to general public. If the rumors were true, then Manfred was a product of incest between father and daughter, and even for Targaryens that was overboard. So how would have people of 7K reacted to revelation about Manfred's real origin?

Manfred and Jeyne were not acknowledged by Aegon, same as his three children from Bellegere Otherys. About them it was said - Bellegere gave birth to three children during the decade, two girls and a boy of doubtful paternity; it was said that Bellegere had a husband in every port and that Aegon was one of many <- was that really truth, or was it Aegon, who was spreading those rumors about his woman, same as he was making up stories about Naerys' unfaithfulness, and Daeron's bastardy. So, based on "ae-rule", at least Balerion Otherys was Aegon's child.

So Manfred went to Braavos to meet with Aegon's unacknowledged children, that, same as Manfred, got deprived by their Targaryen-relatives. Bellegere's children are considerably older than Manfred, they were born in 161-170, so they were 8-17 years older than him. It's more likely, that even though Aegon's affair with Bellegere lasted for 10 years, she gave birth to his children in the beginning of their affair, not near the end of it, so they were 15-17 years older than Manfred. He came to Braavos some time later after Rebellion of 196, so at that time Bellegere's children were in their 30s, so they already had their own children. And that's with whom Manfred fathered a child, that later became a sellsword in Braavos - with granddaughter of Bellegere Otherys, daughter of Bellenora or Narha, or, most likely, Balerion's.

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

And you'd think maybe it might have been noted if Baelish looked anything other than white?

Aegon IV (Valyrian with a Targaryen father and Lyseni mother) + Bellegere Otherys (her mother was Princess of Summer Isles, but her father was a Sealord (probably white), so Bellegere was a mix, not pure Summerislander).

Aegon (VAL/VAL) + Bellegere SI/White or Not-white SEAlord = Bellenora, Narha, Balerion (1/4SI 1/4SEA 2/4VAL).

Bellenora, Narha, Balerion + Uncknown partner (even if this person/people are 100% Summerislanders, then their children will be 5/8SI 2/8VAL 1/8SEA).

Manfred (8/8VAL) + Bellegere's granddaughter (5/8SI 2/8VAL 1/8SEA) = Sellsword, LF's great-grandfather (10/16VAL 5/16SI 1/16SEA).

Sellsword (10/16VAL 5/16SI 1/16SEA) + Wife from Westeros (16/16FMA - mix of First Men and Andals, I'm not adding here Rhoynars, because LF's ancestors were living in Westeros only in The Vale, not anywhere near Dorne) = Grandfather Hedge knight (16/32FMA 10/32VAL 5/32SI 1/32SEA).

Grandfather (16/32FMA 10/32VAL 5/32SI 1/32SEA) + Wife from Westeros (32/32FMA) = LF's father (48/64FMA 10/64VAL 5/64SI 1/64SEA).

Father + Wife (64/64FMA) = 112/128FMA 10/128VAL 5/128SI 1/128SEA.

So Littlefinger has only 3,9% of Summerislander genes, 7,8% Valyrian genes, 0,78% from his Sealord ancestor (grandfather of Bellegere Otherys), and the rest 87,52% is blood of First Men and Andals. That's not exactly how genetic works, but still, in LF's family three generations of women were from Westeros, so he is mostly First Men/Andal, same as majority of inhabitants of The Vale. He is white. Which doesn't mean, that he can't have a few Summerislanders or white/not-white Sealords as his distant ancestors.

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

This theory is literally the definition of tinfoily, and using Revelation in that chaotic way only makes it even more tinfoily. (Especially since GRRM isn't a practicing Christian and using any Revelation symbolism in general takes way too much effort for the amount of still wrong because it's an allegory for the early Roman Empire that probably shouldn't even be in the Bible.)

Have you read GRRM's other stories?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_of_Cross_and_Dragon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuf_Voyaging#"Call_Him_Moses"

He does use Bible as his source.

Megorova · April 15, 2019

17 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

there's no mentioned connection between the Bastard of Harrenhal, or House Lothston with Braavos

If you'll keep in mind, that the Bastard of Harrenhal, who was presented to general public as son of Lucas Lothston, and betrayed Blackfyres during First Rebellion, was actually Aegon's bastard, then there is a connection, and here it is:

- Son of Lucas Lothston first pretended to support Daemon I Blackfyre, but then betrayed him; So Lothstons are connected to Blackfyres.

- Lothstons were Lords of Harrenhal, so the Bastard of Harrenhal in 193 was definitely a Lothston-bastard, same as Jon, the Bastard of Winterfell, is the bastard of a Stark (at least, that's what general public was made to believe);

- Lothstons' sigil is a bat, Whents' sigil is also a bat/s;

- Whents originally were knights in service of House Lothston. In 193 the Bastard of Harrenhal participated in the melee at KL, if that melee was for knights, and it seems, that it was, because Arlan was a knight, thus the Bastard was also a knight, which means, that he could be one of those Whent-knights, that later served to House Lothston;

- LF's great-grandfather, the Sellsword from Braavos in Westeros was serving to Lord Corbray. House Corbray was indebted to Blackfyres, because Daemon I spared Kingsguard Gwayne Corbray on battlefield, and died because of his kindness. So it's possible, that Corbrays were asked by someone (Blackfyre-related from Essos) to take this Sellsword from Braavos (who was bloodrelated to Blackfyres) into their service;

- Manfred betrayed Daemon, so there's no reason for Blackfyres to ask Corbrayes to help to Manfred's son. But the thing is, it seems, that Manfred betrayed not only Daemon, but also his "girlfriend" in Braavos, left her with their child, and returned to Westeros to destroy House Lothston, and to become Lord of Harrenhal. So Manfred's son from Braavos was not amongst his fans, same as his betrayed Blackfyre-relatives. Thus, the one who asked Blackfyres for a favour, was Black Pearl of Braavos, that was that Sellsword's mother (or aunt, or grandmother, or sister), and was bloodrelated to Blackfyres (second Black Pearl of Braavos, her brother and sister were Daemon Blackfyres' half-siblings, so their children and Daemon's children were first cousins);

- And, because betrayal was in his blood, his descendants were also traitors. For example, Blackfyres used Corbray's debt to help Manfred's son, but later this guy's grandson betrayed Blackfyres, and fought against them in the War of the Ninepenny Kings (Fifth Rebellion of Blackfyres). And Littlefinger also betrayed Blackfyres. Varys is bloodrelated to Blackfyres. It seems, that he knew about LF's ancestry, and that's why he recruited LF, as one of his agents, many years ago. LF known so much about Varys and his plans, because LF used to be one of his Little Birds, and his personal sigil, mockingbird, is a hint about it.

CAllDSmith · April 15, 2019

4 hours ago, Megorova said:

If you'll keep in mind, that the Bastard of Harrenhal, who was presented to general public as son of Lucas Lothston, and betrayed Blackfyres during First Rebellion, was actually Aegon's bastard, then there is a connection, and here it is:

So if I believe fanfiction and ignore facts. The Bastard of Harrenhal has no known involvement with the Blackfyres, Manfred LOTHSTON cannot be a bastard of anyone because his last name is Lothston not Rivers, or Targaryen or anything else.

4 hours ago, Megorova said:

- Son of Lucas Lothston first pretended to support Daemon I Blackfyre, but then betrayed him; So Lothstons are connected to Blackfyres.

- Lothstons were Lords of Harrenhal, so the Bastard of Harrenhal in 193 was definitely a Lothston-bastard, same as Jon, the Bastard of Winterfell, is the bastard of a Stark (at least, that's what general public was made to believe);

- Lothstons' sigil is a bat, Whents' sigil is also a bat/s;

- Whents originally were knights in service of House Lothston. In 193 the Bastard of Harrenhal participated in the melee at KL, if that melee was for knights, and it seems, that it was, because Arlan was a knight, thus the Bastard was also a knight, which means, that he could be one of those Whent-knights, that later served to House Lothston;

- LF's great-grandfather, the Sellsword from Braavos in Westeros was serving to Lord Corbray. House Corbray was indebted to Blackfyres, because Daemon I spared Kingsguard Gwayne Corbray on battlefield, and died because of his kindness. So it's possible, that Corbrays were asked by someone (Blackfyre-related from Essos) to take this Sellsword from Braavos (who was bloodrelated to Blackfyres) into their service.

It's not stated Gwayne Corbray actually died at Redgrass (also how can you have a debt for someone killing your kin?) This is both entirely fanfiction and a Chewbacca defense ("If Chewbacca lives on Endor you must acquit.)

6 hours ago, Megorova said:

First of all, she was born in 164, not in 162. Second - source about rumors, that she was Aegon's daughter, is the World book, people of 7K suspected it, so they had reasons for it. If Aegon was nowhere near Falena, when she became pregnant, then there would have been no rumors like that.

I admit I mistyped, but the later date makes your argument worse not better. The bold is not evidence. Rumors and hearsay are not evidence. things the people of the 7K also believed for no good reason: Aemon the Dragonknight was Daeron's real father, Rhaenyra could some how be cut by the Iron Throne in full armor, that Tyrion was some kind of evil monkey, all of the BS that Eustace and Mushroom were slinging. Here's what the World says about Aegon fucking Falena before she came back with Jeyne

Quote

Lady Falena "made him a man" in 149, when Aegon was fourteen. When a Kingsguard found them abed together in 151, his father wed Falena to his master-at-arms, Lucas Lothston, and persuaded the king to name Lothston Lord of Harrenhal in order to remove Falena from court. However, over the next two years, Aegon paid frequent visits to Harrenhal.

There is no mention of Aegon visiting Falena or Falena visiting Aegon after that point. He had an affair with the Black Pearl for ten years, and as I've said multiple times there is a vast difference between could and is pick up some Hume for Pete's sake.

6 hours ago, Megorova said:

It was Jeyne's mother, who brought her to court.

"Jeyne was brought to court by her mother, Falena Stokeworth, in 178 AC, when she was fourteen. King Aegon the Unworthy made Lord Lucas Lothston of Harrenhal his new Hand, and it was said (but never proved) that he enjoyed mother and daughter together in the same bed. Aegon soon gave Jeyne a pox he had caught from the whores he had seen after Lady Bethany Bracken's execution, and the Lothstons were then all sent from court.^[1]"

You are so so naive. There were rumors, that Aegon gave Jeyne a pox, and the same source of rumors was saying, that Aegon had sex with both of those women, with mother and with daughter. But according to those same rumors, only Jeyne got "something" from Aegon. If he had sex with both of them, then how come he infected only one of them? Also, just think about it logically - if Falena wasn't infected, unlike Jeyne, then why did Aegon sent ALL OF THEM back to Harrenhal? It's not like he stoped having sex after that, not to infect more people. Thus, what was the point of sending away Falena, who was not infected, so he could have continued to XXXX her?

Jeyne got pregnant, and when they realised it, Aegon sent all of them away, for Jeyne to gave birth to her child in secret, for Falene to take care of both of them (Jeyne and the baby), and for Lucas to bring that baby to Harrenhal and to claim, that the baby is his bastard. Most likely, even at Harrenhal people didn't knew, that the mother of that baby was Jeyne, not Lucas' nonexistent mistress. So, Manfred of the Black Hood, the one who was the Bastard of Harrenhal, and betrayed his half-brother Daemon I Blackfyre during First Rebellion of Blackfyres, was actually son of Jeyne Lothston.

First, don't call me naive. I'm being polite to you, return the favor. Second, there were not rumors of Aegon gave Jeyne a pox, it's stated right there as a fact. There's a period there for a reason. I can think of over a dozen reasons why Jeyne received a pox from him and her mother didn't, including that ,once again, rumors are not facts. They were all sent back because Aegon was done screwing Jeyne and that was the only reason the other two were there. Why would Jeyne keep the birth a secret? It wasn't the first bastard that Aegon fathered by far. And again you have provided no proof that Manfred is the same person as the Bastard of Harrenahl, NONE.

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

During First Blackfyre Rebellion ser Arlan fought on the side of Blackfyres. So mentioning the Bastard of Harrenhal together with Lord Stokeworth in Arlan's bio is a clue from GRRM, that both of those guys are connected to Blackfyres, same as Arlan.

No. Just plain and simple no. Arlan's squire was killed by Gormund Peake. Arlan fought for Lord Hayford the Hand of the King. This is stated in every single published Dunk and Egg story.

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

only one Lucas and one Mafred. The guy in AFFC called him "Manfryd o' the Black Hood" because he was an uneducated smallfolk, and they have funny accents, so instead of Manfred he said Manfryd.

I'm aware. That was my point I literally just said that there was only one.

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Manfred was Manfred Rivers, at the time when he was the Bastard of Harrenhal. He was planning to support Blackfyres in their Rebellion, because he was the same as Daemon Blackfyre and Aegon Rivers - Aegon's bastard, but he betrayed them, and for that was legitimized by King Daeron, and from Manfred Rivers became Manfred Lothston, like Ramsay Snow became Ramsay Bolton. During First Blackfyre Rebellion he was 17 or 18 years old. At that age he became Lothston. Though, even though he was legitimized, someone else got Harrenhal, one of Lucas' real children, and Danelle Lothston was daughter of that someone. So Manfred Lothston was left with nothing, which caused him to orchestrate downfall of House Lothston, and Harrenhal was "inherited" by Whents. Either Manfred himself was this first Lord Whent of Harrenhal (because later in his life he took a different lastname), or first Lord Whent was husband of Manfred's daughter. Or something like that.

I know you think that you've done something to prove any of the bold, but you really haven't, at all. The Whents also didn't inherit Harrenhal. It's blatantly stated that they were granted it for helping take down "Mad Maid" Lothston. Furthermore, if Daeron was the one to legitimize Manfred Lothston then Eustace would call him Rivers, and somewhere in World or in Dunk & Egg the fact that the Bastard of Harrenhal and Manfred Lothston were the same person.

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Aegor and Brynden continued to be Rivers even after legitimization, and Daemon continued to be Blackfyre, while Shiera continued to be Seastar. None of them became Targaryens.

Also in the World Book it was said, that even though Aegon legitimized his bastards, for many of them it changed absolutely nothing. Those of Aegon's children, that were not acknowledged by him, while he was alive, after his death got nothing. Aegon never acknowledged Jeyne Lothston as his daughter, same with the Bastard of Harrenhal. Officially that guy was son of Lucas Lothston, and they were not stupid to reveal the truth to general public. If the rumors were true, then Manfred was a product of incest between father and daughter, and even for Targaryens that was overboard. So how would have people of 7K reacted to revelation about Manfred's real origin?

Manfred and Jeyne were not acknowledged by Aegon, same as his three children from Bellegere Otherys. About them it was said - Bellegere gave birth to three children during the decade, two girls and a boy of doubtful paternity; it was said that Bellegere had a husband in every port and that Aegon was one of many <- was that really truth, or was it Aegon, who was spreading those rumors about his woman, same as he was making up stories about Naerys' unfaithfulness, and Daeron's bastardy. So, based on "ae-rule", at least Balerion Otherys was Aegon's child.

Aegor became Bittersteel and Brynden became Bloodraven. The people who call them Rivers are the people who don't like them. Daemon didn't "continue to be" Blackfyre, he ceased being Water and became Blackfyre. It is not stated when Shiera received her nickname Seastar. He never acknowledge Jeyne Lothston, because there was literally no way for him to be her father. Same with the Bastard of Harrenhal. There is just as much evidence that the Bastard of Harrenhal was Aemond Targaryen's son as there is for anything you're saying. There isn't even any statement that the Bastard of Harrenhal was Lucas Lothston's son.

There is no "ae-rule" the way you're using it. Are ae sounds connected to some Valyrian families? yes. Does everyone with an ae descend from a Targaryen? No as I pointed out with the other Valyrian families. Do all Targaryen descended people have ae? No, there's Duncan, Viserys, the Plumms, the Penroses, the Tarths, and many more. Do all Valyrian houses have ae? No Qoherys, Vhassar, Celtigar (If you say that last one counts so does Eddard, Mance, Catelyn and most other names.)

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

So Manfred went to Braavos to meet with Aegon's unacknowledged children, that, same as Manfred, got deprived by their Targaryen-relatives. Bellegere's children are considerably older than Manfred, they were born in 161-170, so they were 8-17 years older than him. It's more likely, that even though Aegon's affair with Bellegere lasted for 10 years, she gave birth to his children in the beginning of their affair, not near the end of it, so they were 15-17 years older than Manfred. He came to Braavos some time later after Rebellion of 196, so at that time Bellegere's children were in their 30s, so they already had their own children. And that's with whom Manfred fathered a child, that later became a sellsword in Braavos - with granddaughter of Bellegere Otherys, daughter of Bellenora or Narha, or, most likely, Balerion's.

You're trolling me now right? You've just been a troll this whole time right? That is literally the definition of fanfiction.

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Have you read GRRM's other stories?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_of_Cross_and_Dragon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuf_Voyaging#"Call_Him_Moses"

He does use Bible as his source.

No I have not, but again I never said he didn't use the Bible as a source (And both the examples there are actually incredibly basic. Both stories he's take inspiration from there have at least two motion picture movies about them and are literally some of the most common stories to be discussed in the world.) we're talking about him using as an inspiration a book that professional Bible scholars still argue the meaning, significance and value of.

Sign In

The Latest News

Notable Releases

What Keeping the Blood Pure, Actually Looks Like

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived