Jump to content

What Keeping the Blood Pure, Actually Looks Like


CAllDSmith

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Manfred LOTHSTON cannot be a bastard of anyone because his last name is Lothston not Rivers, or Targaryen or anything else. 

Ramsay Bolton prior ASOS was Ramsay Snow, and he was legitimized by King Joffrey. Similar thing could have happened during First Blackfyre Rebellion. For example, the Bastard of Harrenhal pretended (same as Roose Bolton and Ramsay Snow), that he is supporting rebells Daemon Blackfyre and Bittersteel against King Daeron (how Boltons pretended to support Robb Stark against King Joffrey Baratheon and Lannisters). Then, prior the Battle at the Redgrass Field, he went to the King, and made with him an agreement - Daeron legitimized him, and from Manfred Rivers made him Manfred Lothston. Thus, some time later, when Manfred was intentionally late with bringing Daemon's reinforcements to the battlefield, by that time he was already a Lothston. So the history remembered him as Lothston.

Manfred Lothston could have been a bastard, same as Ramsay Bolton WAS a bastard. Are you intentionally ignoring this FACT?

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

It's not stated Gwayne Corbray actually died at Redgrass (also how can you have a debt for someone killing your kin?)

Probably, I phrased incorrectly, what I wrote before. Daemon Blackfyre helped Gwayne Corbray, and because he was distracted, while he was taking care of wounded and blinded Gwayne, and ordered to bring a van, and to take Gwayne away from battlefield, Bloodraven's archers "snicked up" on Daemon and killed him. So Corbrays were indebted to Daemon, because Daemon saved Corbray (he was given medical help on Daemon's order, and was safely retrieved from battlefield). Daemon was killed, and Gwayne survived thanks to Daemon.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

There is no mention of Aegon visiting Falena or Falena visiting Aegon after that point.

There's also a lot of other things and events, that were not mentioned in the World Book, which doesn't mean, that they didn't happened.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

First, don't call me naive. I'm being polite to you, return the favor.

Sorry.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Why would Jeyne keep the birth a secret? It wasn't the first bastard that Aegon fathered by far.

But it was the first bastard, that was a product of incest between father and daughter. Even for Targaryens that was overboard. So Aegon had to keep this in secret, otherwise it could have caused a rebellion. Because once before there was already an anti-Targaryen rebellion, caused by marriage between Targaryen brother and sister. So what would have done people of 7K, when they found out about Aegon impregnating his own daughter? He's not some insignificant wildling like Craster, he's the King of Seven Kingdoms. He was reckless, but he wasn't stupid. There was a limit even to his antics. Yes, he had sex with his daughter, and yes, he impregnated her, though he wasn't going to make it known to general public, he kept it as his dirty little secret.

And he neved acknowledged, as his child, not only Manfred, but also Jeyne, in case if someone at Harrenhal, besides Jeyne, Falena and Lucas, knew, that Manfred was actually Jeyne's child and not Lucas'. For example, if Aegon admitted, that Manfred was his son, then people would have realised, that Aegon was hiding it before, because of those rumors, that Jeyne was his daughter, and if he was hiding before, that Manfred is his son, while he wasn't hiding his other bastards, then the reason for him to hide this child, is because this child is not only his son, but also his grandson, because Jeyne really is his daughter. Or a different possibility - if Aegon admitted, that Jeyne was his daughter, then, even if people didn't knew, that Manfred was Jeyne's child, and thus, possibly was Aegon's son, people would have still rebelled, because people knew, that Jeyne used to be Aegon's mistress. Thus, admitting, that Jeyne is his daughter, is not an option. Same as admitting, that Manfred is his son. Because even acknowledging one of those childen, would have caused people to realise the whole truth.

Isn't this possible?

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

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. 

Maybe. At the time I was writting that post, the Wikia was malfunctioning, so I couldn't check who was who in that rebellion. I mistaken him with Eustas Osgrey, he was the one who fought for Blackfyres.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

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. 

Not necessary. The source of info, about Arlan defeating Lord Stokeworth and the Bastard of Harrenhal, was Arlan himself. Could be, that he didn't even knew, what was the name of that Bastard. And the source of info, that Manfred Lothston was late on battlefield, was some guy in one of ASOIAF books. It's likely, that Arlan didn't knew, that Manfred Lothson was the same guy, that he defeated three years ago at the melee at KL. Who is Arlan? -> Just some hedge knight. So nobody was informing him about tactical movements on battlefield. He had no idea who was supposed to arrive, from where, what for, with what reinforcements, etc. He was just fighting, and doing what he was ordered. He was just some small fry. And he never met Manfred Lothston face to face. When the two of them met before, it was a brief encounter, three years ago, and the Bastard of Harrenhal at that time, most likely, was wearing a helm, because they were fighting in a melee. Furthermore, three years passed, so his face changed, and even if he was still recognizable, it's unlikely, that Arlan still remembered how the Bastard looked like.

Thus, there's no inconsistence in one source stating, that Arlan defeated the Bastard of Harrenhal, and the other source mentioning Manfred Lothson, and neither of those sources saying, that later the Bastard was legitimized and became a Lothston, or that before Manfred was a Lothston, he used to be a Rivers.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

There isn't even any statement that the Bastard of Harrenhal was Lucas Lothston's son. 

At that time Lothstons were Lords of Harrenhal, so any bastards of Harrenhal, that were born in that time period, were Lothston-bastards. That's OBVIOUS, and doesn't even require any explanations.

Edit:

It wasn't stated anywhere, that Manfred Lothston, who was son of Lucas Lothston, was also son of Lucas' wife Falena Lothston. And there's no mentioning, that Lucas ever remarried, or had a different wife, besides Falena. So, if Manfred Lothston is son of Lucas Lothston, but not son of Falena Stokeworth-Lothston, then it means, that Manfred is Lucas' legitimized ex-bastard.

And, when it was said in the World Book, that Falena brought Jeyne to court, and Lucas was made King's Hand, it wasn't mentioned, that Lucas' son Manfred was also there with them. That's because at that time Manfred wasn't even born yet.

15 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

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

I'm not trolling you. I'm serious. It's a theory. And a theory later could be revealed to be either correct, or incorrect. It's not a fanfiction.

Though, maybe, you and me have different definition for a word "fanfiction". In your opinion - "Jon Snow is son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark" is a fanfiction? In my opinion, it is not a fanfiction, it's a theory, and there are clues in the books, on which this theory is build. Same with my theory, that Littlefinger is a dragonseed (descendant of the Bastard of Harrenhal, and thru him bloodrelated to House Whent and Catelyn Tully, and thru his great-grandfather bloodrelated to Black Pearls of Braavos), I build this theory on clues from the books. This theory later could be revealed to be correct, or incorrect, but it's not a fanfiction. At least, not by my definition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Manfred Lothston could have been a bastard, same as Ramsay Bolton WAS a bastard. Are you intentionally ignoring this FACT?

No statement with the words "could have been" is a fact. Simply by the way English works. 

 

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Probably, I phrased incorrectly, what I wrote before. Daemon Blackfyre helped Gwayne Corbray, and because he was distracted, while he was taking care of wounded and blinded Gwayne, and ordered to bring a van, and to take Gwayne away from battlefield, Bloodraven's archers "snicked up" on Daemon and killed him. So Corbrays were indebted to Daemon, because Daemon saved Corbray (he was given medical help on Daemon's order, and was safely retrieved from battlefield). Daemon was killed, and Gwayne survived thanks to Daemon.

Okay I see what your point was now, but there's still a lot there wrong with it. First, we don't actually know the fate of Ser Gwayne Corbray, we don't know if Redtusk ever made it to him or managed to get him to a maester, we also don't know if the maester's could have healed his wounds. We know he's not at Ashford Tourney thirteen years later, and we know that no Corbrays were invited to Whitewalls. The second issue is that, while a cool act, Daemon is the one that wounded him, crippled him, and maimed him in the first place. Third, Gwayne Corbray was actively fighting against the Blackfyres, whether he lived to be a blinded, crippled Kingsguard knight for any amount of time afterwards aiding the Blackfyres in any way would be a dishonor to what he was fighting for in the first place. 

 

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

But it was the first bastard, that was a product of incest between father and daughter. Even for Targaryens that was overboard. So Aegon had to keep this in secret, otherwise it could have caused a rebellion. Because once before there was already an anti-Targaryen rebellion, caused by marriage between Targaryen brother and sister. So what would have done people of 7K, when they found out about Aegon impregnating his own daughter? He's not some insignificant wildling like Craster, he's the King of Seven Kingdoms. He was reckless, but he wasn't stupid. There was a limit even to his antics. Yes, he had sex with his daughter, and yes, he impregnated her, though he wasn't going to make it known to general public, he kept it as his dirty little secret.

And he neved acknowledged, as his child, not only Manfred, but also Jeyne, in case if someone at Harrenhal, besides Jeyne, Falena and Lucas, knew, that Manfred was actually Jeyne's child and not Lucas'. For example, if Aegon admitted, that Manfred was his son, then people would have realised, that Aegon was hiding it before, because of those rumors, that Jeyne was his daughter, and if he was hiding before, that Manfred is his son, while he wasn't hiding his other bastards, then the reason for him to hide this child, is because this child is not only his son, but also his grandson, because Jeyne really is his daughter. Or a different possibility - if Aegon admitted, that Jeyne was his daughter, then, even if people didn't knew, that Manfred was Jeyne's child, and thus, possibly was Aegon's son, people would have still rebelled, because people knew, that Jeyne used to be Aegon's mistress. Thus, admitting, that Jeyne is his daughter, is not an option. Same as admitting, that Manfred is his son. Because even acknowledging one of those childen, would have caused people to realise the whole truth.

Isn't this possible?

The anti-Targ rebellion was over a century before, Dunk doesn't think it's possible for a poor guy from Flea Bottom to become a member of the Kingsguard (Let alone Lord Commander.) only thirty years later from the moment we're discussing, but almost the entire KG after the Faith Militant uprising were lowborn badasses. While there certainly would be a LOT of unrest if Aegon had actually had a child with his daughter (or his perceived daughter) there are a few flaws with this idea (It's not quite to a theory due to these flaws.) beyond the above issue about how we have no evidence that the Bastard of Harrenhal (Who if he was Jeyne Lothston's son then he couldn't be Manfred Lothston who was Lucas Lothston's son.) is actually Manfred Lothston. The biggest flaw is that IF Jeyne was Aegon's daughter and IF Jeyne was pregnant with Aegon's kid then there is NO WAY Lucas could be dismissed as Hand of the King because of the supposed blackmail power. Another issue is the time differences we mentioned, Aegon wasn't even in Westeros when Jeyne would have been conceived and if Falena went to Braavos at that time she still wouldn't have arrived in time to have Jeyne on time and she certainly was being watched by Viserys and Baelor. Third, is that Aegon could use that knowledge of dates to make it clear that Jeyne wasn't his kid. Fourth,  Aegon was in fact very very stupid, giving Blackfyre to Daemon, personally spreading the rumor that Daeron was illegitimate, wildfire tanks, boning two Brackens and a Blackwood, giving away dragon eggs, legitimizing his bastards on his death bed etc. 

While your idea is maybe 0.01% possible that does not make it fact. It is possible that Melantha Blackwood and Betha Blackwood were siblings or cousins through Mya and Gwenys Rivers (Same as it's possible Walder's Blackwood wife was as well.) It is not a fact. It's also possible (and I'd say much more likely than this.) that Brown Ben Plumm gets his Braavois and Summer Islander genes from an Otherys, but it's not fact. 

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Maybe. At the time I was writting that post, the Wikia was malfunctioning, so I couldn't check who was who in that rebellion. I mistaken him with Eustas Osgrey, he was the one who fought for Blackfyres.

Yeah those same bugs were messing with me too.

 

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Not necessary. The source of info, about Arlan defeating Lord Stokeworth and the Bastard of Harrenhal, was Arlan himself. Could be, that he didn't even knew, what was the name of that Bastard. And the source of info, that Manfred Lothston was late on battlefield, was some guy in one of ASOIAF books. It's likely, that Arlan didn't knew, that Manfred Lothson was the same guy, that he defeated three years ago at the melee at KL. Who is Arlan? -> Just some hedge knight. So nobody was informing him about tactical movements on battlefield. He had no idea who was supposed to arrive, from where, what for, with what reinforcements, etc. He was just fighting, and doing what he was ordered. He was just some small fry. And he never met Manfred Lothston face to face. When the two of them met before, it was a brief encounter, three years ago, and the Bastard of Harrenhal at that time, most likely, was wearing a helm, because they were fighting in a melee. Furthermore, three years passed, so his face changed, and even if he was still recognizable, it's unlikely, that Arlan still remembered how the Bastard looked like.

Thus, there's no inconsistence in one source stating, that Arlan defeated the Bastard of Harrenhal, and the other source mentioning Manfred Lothson, and neither of those sources saying, that later the Bastard was legitimized and became a Lothston, or that before Manfred was a Lothston, he used to be a Rivers.

Except that wasn't what I was saying. Tourneys and melees have heraldry so that you can identify who you're fighting, as well as these people having names that are announced. For Arlan Pennytree to have known he beat the Bastard of Harrenhal (Besides the fact that he's fighting a guy dressed as Batman, since I just realized what a Lothston bastard's coat of arms would be.) he would have to know who the Bastard of Harrenhal is. The issue isn't that Eustace isn't telling Arlan that they're the same person, the issue is that Dunk consistently remembers who Pennytree has beaten or was impacted by. When Eustace Osgrey mentioned Manfred Lothston (Who Osgrey would be calling Rivers, because Daeron isn't the true king to him.) Dunk would have thought about how Pennytree had beat Lothston in a melee, because that's how Dunk has consistently been shown to keep track of who is who in all the history he's learning. The inconsistency isn't between two different sources it's between one source talking to a guy who doesn't have the tact not to (presumably) bring up that Lady Vaith screwed Egg's great-grandpa. 

 

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

At that time Lothstons were Lords of Harrenhal, so any bastards of Harrenhal, that were born in that time period, were Lothston-bastards. That's OBVIOUS, and doesn't even require any explanations.

Edit:

It wasn't stated anywhere, that Manfred Lothston, who was son of Lucas Lothston, was also son of Lucas' wife Falena Lothston. And there's no mentioning, that Lucas ever remarried, or had a different wife, besides Falena. So, if Manfred Lothston is son of Lucas Lothston, but not son of Falena Stokeworth-Lothston, then it means, that Manfred is Lucas' legitimized ex-bastard.

And, when it was said in the World Book, that Falena brought Jeyne to court, and Lucas was made King's Hand, it wasn't mentioned, that Lucas' son Manfred was also there with them. That's because at that time Manfred wasn't even born yet.

I've already provided a perfectly reasonable alternative Bastard of Harrenhal (Aemond Targaryen's child with Alys Rivers) there's also the fact that Harrenhal is a huge place, with many places near by anyone could pull a Gaemon Ball and call themselves the Bastard of Harrenhal for being born near Harrenhal and being a bastard. While your edit tries, it fails at logic. 

Your syllogism is: 

A; Manfred Lothston is the son of Lucas Lothston 

B: Manfred Lothston is not said to be the son of Lucas Lothston's wife 

C: Lucas Lothston is not said to have had another wife. 

QED: Manfred Lothston has to be legitimized bastard of Lucas Lothston and therefore the bastard son of Jeyne Lothston and her father Aegon Targaryen.  

There's several syllogistic fallacies that are present here, but the most obvious is what's in bold. Here's an example of a syllogism using the same fallacies 

A: All Men have root and stem 

B: Varys does not have root and stem 

QED: Varys is secretly the merling king. 

This second syllogism is obviously not true for several reasons, the first being that A is not true, the second is that B has actually not been proven, the third is that there is no proof of merling's existing or walking on land or having a king, and finally removing a man's root and stem does not make a person a merling let alone their king. 

While you might be right that Manfred was not born in 178, I highly doubt it considering the fact that both Lothston's were already in their near to mid-fifties and that Walder Frey and Jon Arryn are the exception not the rule to male fertility. There are  also countless possible reasons why Manfred was not mentioned to come to court, many of them more likely than Jeyne being his mother. 

8 hours ago, Megorova said:

I'm not trolling you. I'm serious. It's a theory. And a theory later could be revealed to be either correct, or incorrect. It's not a fanfiction.

Though, maybe, you and me have different definition for a word "fanfiction". In your opinion - "Jon Snow is son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark" is a fanfiction? In my opinion, it is not a fanfiction, it's a theory, and there are clues in the books, on which this theory is build. Same with my theory, that Littlefinger is a dragonseed (descendant of the Bastard of Harrenhal, and thru him bloodrelated to House Whent and Catelyn Tully, and thru his great-grandfather bloodrelated to Black Pearls of Braavos), I build this theory on clues from the books. This theory later could be revealed to be correct, or incorrect, but it's not a fanfiction. At least, not by my definition.

 R+L=J is not fanfiction for several reasons, the most obvious being that it actually has evidence in the text to make it a possible theory. There is no evidence for your Littlefinger dragonseed theory, which makes the theory itself tinfoil or not really a theory at all. The stuff in between- The Bastard of Harrenhal being Manfred, somehow becoming a Whent, and somehow his great-grandfather being a sellsword descendant of the Black Pearls, is fanfiction, because there is no evidence. To add further proof that there's no evidence for it I offer this 1.How is the Mad Maid Lothston Lady of Harrenhal if Manfred had Sellsword-Baelish with the Black Pearl? 2.) House Lothston was removed (at the absolute latest, and lest likely.) in 233 when King Maekar died in the Peake Uprsing, even though it's likely it was even earlier since Ben Blackthumb has served three generations of Whents and only sixty years have passed between King Maekar's death and him making that statement. 3.) Littlefinger's father, Lord Baelish was of an age with Hoster Tully and befriend him during the War of the Ninepenny Kings (260 AC) We can then determine that Lord Baelish was born approximately 239 AC at the latest, given that his father was a hedge knight (HK-Baelish) who had already acquired the lands in the Fingers HK-Baelish would have to have been born (again at the latest) in 219 AC, when Mad Maid Lothston was already Lady of Harrenhal. Which would then mean, (again really stretching the unlikeliness of this.) 199 AC when it is much likelier that Sellsword-Baelish was an adult during Redgrass Field since he was never knighted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wrote before something like Aegon couldn't have impregnated Falena, because at that time he was already in relationship with Bellegere Otherys. I went thru timeline of Aegon's mistresses and children, and found there evidences, that he could have done that.

1. Aegon met Bellegere in 161, their relationship lasted for 10 years, which means, that they were still together by the time of their 10th Anniversary. If they met on 1st January of 161, then they have separated not earlier than 1st January of 171, and if they met later in 161, it also means, that they have separated later in 171, and Daena Targaryen gave birth to Aegon's son, Daemon Blackfyre, in 170, while he was still in relationship with Bellegere.

2. In 176 Aegon impregnated Elaena Targaryen, while he was still in relationship with Melissa Blackwood. He separated with Melissa in 177, after he met Bethany Bracket.

(3.) In 172 Barba Bracken gave birth to Aegon's son, Aegor Bittersteel Rivers. Two weeks later Aegon's wife gave birth to Daenerys and stillborn son. If both pregnancies were full-termed, then it means, that Aegon impregnated his wife two weeks after impregnating his mistress.

Those are facts. Even though in 170 Aegon's official mistress was Bellegere, and in 176 Melissa, at that time he was still having sex with other women, and even had children with them.

In 178 Jeyne Lothston was 14 years old. So she was born either in 163 or 164, and was conceived sometime in 162-164. At that time Bellegere was Aegon's mistress, but, as it's evident from those two examples from above, Aegon was cheating not only his wife, but also his mistresses.

Though I realised, that you were also right - there really was no need for the Bastard of Harrenhal to go to Braavos, to meet there with children of Bellegere Otherys. That's because they were at King's Landing, not in Braavos.

If someone wants to eat a cake, he doesn't go to live in the bakery to do it, instead he goes to bakery, buys there that cake, and brings it back, to eat it at home. So, even though Aegon has met Bellegere in Braavos, it doesn't mean, that in the span of their 10-years-long relationship, they both were living in Braavos, and he occasionally made visits to Westeros, to have there sex with other women. Instead, after he met Bellegere, he took her with him to King's Landing, when he returned there from his mission to Braavos. And that mission didn't lasted for a long time. So, most likely, all three of Bellegere's children were born in King's Landing, and thus, they could have stayed there, even after their mother returned to Braavos after 171. Or, because one of Bellegere's daughters, Bellenora, later became first Black Pearl of Braavos, it's possible, that either 1) Bellegere gave birth to Bellenora already after she broke up with Aegon and returned to Braavos; or 2) Bellegere gave birth to all three of their children in KL, and left them there, when she returned to Braavos, but later at least Bellenora also went to live in Braavos.

Now, based on who was the mother of the Sellsword from Braavos (Littlefinger's great-grandfather), there's also several options of when and where she met the Bastard of Harrenhal, Manfred "Lothston", future father of her son. His mother could have been: 1. Bellenora, 2. Narha, 3. Bellenora's daughter, 4. Narha's daughter, 5. Balerion's daughter, 6. daughter of Balerion and Narha, 7. daughter of Balerion and Bellenora. In my opinion, the most likely option, is that out of Bellegere's children, Bellenora was the youngest, and she had the least age difference with the Bastard of Harrenhal. For example, if she was born in 171 or 172, and he was born in 178 or 179, then she was only 6-8 years older than him. Thus, it's possible, that they had a child together, even though she was older. Probably they have met in Westeros. Most likely, because at the time, when Aegon impregnated Falena (in 162-163-164), Bellegere was already his mistress, so she knew, that Jeyne Lothston was Aegon's daughter. So it's likely, that Jeyne and her half-siblings, Bellegere's three children, knew about each other, and, maybe, even were staying in touch. So Jeyne's son have met Otheryses thru his mother. And that's how, when and where (in Westeros) he hooked up either with one of Bellegere's daughters, or with her granddaughter (that's if three Otheryses were significally older than Manfred). Then, for some reason, after Manfred impregnated that girl, she left Westeros and went to Braavos, so their son was born there, and later became a sellsword. Eventually he went to Westeros, and went into service of Lord Corbray, and he got that post thru his mother's connections with her Blackfyre relatives, and Corbrays took him in, because they were indebted to Blackfyres. 

And the reason, why the Sellsword's mother left Westeros, could have something to do with First Blackfyre Rebellion. For example, she was Blackfyre-supporter, and Manfred was either also pro-Blackfyre, or he just pretended, that he is supporting Daemon Blackfyre. Then the Rebellion happened, and Manfred betrayed Daemon. So after Daemon's wife and children left Westeros and went to Tyrosh, Manfred's pregnant girlfriend also went with them, but because she had relatives in Braavos (she was descendant of the Sealord of Braavos), she went not to Tyrosh but to Braavos. In 196, in span of that Rebellion, Manfred was 17 or 18 years old, so it's likely, that by that time he already had a girlfriend (whom he impregnated). Or maybe they were even married, and their son (future Sellsword) was already born by 196, so when she went to Braavos, she took their son with her. Maybe, besides that one son, Manfred and his woman had other older child/children, but she took to Braavos only one (maybe because he took away their other children, when he was preparing to betray Daemon. But he didn't knew, that she was pregnant again. So after his betrayal she managed to escape, and one of their children was "with her"). If with that woman Manfred had other children, then one of those children later became first Lord Whent of Harrenhal, and was Shella Whent's grandfather. Or maybe it was Manfred's daughter, who married with knight Whent, that later became first Lord Whent of Harrenhal, which means, that Manfred's daughter was Shella Whent's grandmother. Or, after Manfred's woman (Otherys) escaped with their child, he married with someone else, and it was their children or grandchildren, that became Whents of Harrenhal. Eitherway, the Bastard of Harrenhal was Shella Whent's great-grandfather, and Littlefinger's great great-grandfather.

Something like that.

For some reason GRRM has revealed to readers LF's ancestors way back to that sellsword. Add this to LF becoming Lord of Harrenhal, and his obsession with the Tully girls (that are half-Whents). Then all this forms into a possibility, that Littlefinger is a descendant of both the Black Pearl of Braavos and the Bastard of Harrenhal (who somehow was ancestor of Harrenhal's Whents).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is what keeping a blood line pure did to the Spanish Hapsburgs

https://allthatsinteresting.com/habsburg-jaw

That is just the physical, The mental is not good either but to be fair, there was a double dose of mental disease that came into the Hapsburg line via Joanna The Mad, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, sister of Queen Catherine of Aragon (first wife of Henry VIII of England and Aunt to Queen Mary, better known as "Bloody Mary", who was herself a bit "Prickly".  She married her second cousin, Phillip of Spain, Joanna The Mad's Grandson. England should thank its lucky Stars they did not successfully breed an heir and make matters worse than they already historically have been when it comes to "That Family".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

here is what keeping a blood line pure did to the Spanish Hapsburgs

https://allthatsinteresting.com/habsburg-jaw

That is just the physical, The mental is not good either but to be fair, there was a double dose of mental disease that came into the Hapsburg line via Joanna The Mad, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, sister of Queen Catherine of Aragon (first wife of Henry VIII of England and Aunt to Queen Mary, better known as "Bloody Mary", who was herself a bit "Prickly".  She married her second cousin, Phillip of Spain, Joanna The Mad's Grandson. England should thank its lucky Stars they did not successfully breed an heir and make matters worse than they already historically have been when it comes to "That Family".

I'm very much aware (Hapsburgs are probably the only royal house of Europe I'm not directly descended from in some way.) Which is why I brought up the theory about Valyrian dragonlords using magic to genetically engineer them in a certain way. As has been pointed out incest only causes bad traits if those bad traits are there. Meanwhile, while this is not a history forum I would like to point out several unfortunate parts of your statement. First, Joanna's madness is a very controversial issue among medievalists and is probably comparable to the lobotomy of Rosemary Kennedy combined with a terrible understanding of health and a misogynistic view of women at the time. Her son Charles even said something along the lines of "no one talk to her ever". Second, the moniker "Bloody Mary" is propaganda (keep in mind I'm a Protestant seminarian.) she was not more or less "bloody" than most other reigning monarchs at the time. Third,  while I typically do  not dabble in speculative history in this way I would say that a child by Mary and Philip might have been better for the Hapsburgs than what ended up occurring since it was the lack of an heir from Mary that forced Phillip to marry his third wife. Like I said this is not a history forum, so I'd prefer we leave the real world history at the points we've made. 

 

2 hours ago, Megorova said:

2. In 176 Aegon impregnated Elaena Targaryen, while he was still in relationship with Melissa Blackwood. He separated with Melissa in 177, after he met Bethany Bracket.

(3.) In 172 Barba Bracken gave birth to Aegon's son, Aegor Bittersteel Rivers. Two weeks later Aegon's wife gave birth to Daenerys and stillborn son. If both pregnancies were full-termed, then it means, that Aegon impregnated his wife two weeks after impregnating his mistress.

Those are facts. Even though in 170 Aegon's official mistress was Bellegere, and in 176 Melissa, at that time he was still having sex with other women, and even had children with them.

Likely as it may be we cannot take Viserys Plumm being Aegon's child as fact. Aegon's mistresses obviously coincide with his sister-wife. You are correct that Aegon did have sex with other women besides his wife and mistresses. Though the nature of Yandel's history of the mistresses would suggest he never went back. 

 

2 hours ago, Megorova said:

If someone wants to eat a cake, he doesn't go to live in the bakery to do it, instead he goes to bakery, buys there that cake, and brings it back, to eat it at home. So, even though Aegon has met Bellegere in Braavos, it doesn't mean, that in the span of their 10-years-long relationship, they both were living in Braavos, and he occasionally made visits to Westeros, to have there sex with other women. Instead, after he met Bellegere, he took her with him to King's Landing, when he returned there from his mission to Braavos. And that mission didn't lasted for a long time. So, most likely, all three of Bellegere's children were born in King's Landing, and thus, they could have stayed there, even after their mother returned to Braavos after 171. Or, because one of Bellegere's daughters, Bellenora, later became first Black Pearl of Braavos, it's possible, that either 1) Bellegere gave birth to Bellenora already after she broke up with Aegon and returned to Braavos; or 2) Bellegere gave birth to all three of their children in KL, and left them there, when she returned to Braavos, but later at least Bellenora also went to live in Braavos.

We honestly do not know where the three Otherys children grew up, though considering they are not called Waters and were not considered among the Great Bastards we can guess that they were probably born in Braavos or raised with Bellegere on her ships. As for Aegon's timeline, we no he was sent away in 161 to avoid him abusing Naerys. We also have no evidence of him returning to King's Landing until 169/170 when Daemon was impregnated. Aegor Rivers came into the world a fortnight before Daenaerys in 172, so "ten years" could be 161-170 or thereabout depending on if Bellegere visited him in KL. Since Naerys didn't get pregnant again until after Baelor died we can guess (but again not know.) that Aegon was not near her during that period of time. 

Since we know that Aegon had Merry Meg as his mistress from 155-158, and that he had Cassella Vaith from about then until 161 and we know that he only visited Harrenhal for about the years 151-153, that Jeyne was born in 162 per the wiki (the number you actually corrected me on.) There is no evidence for Jeyne being Aegon's get. 

2 hours ago, Megorova said:

Now, based on who the mother of the Sellsword from Braavos (Littlefinger's great-grandfather), there's also several options of when and where she met the Bastard of Harrenhal, Manfred "Lothston", future father of her son. 

*knocks Arkham's razor out of your hands, pushes you out of the Epileptic Trees, and forces Occam's razor into your hands.* 

We have nothing to base who Sellsword-Baelish's mother was off of. Nothing. He was born in Braavos, came to Westeros as a sellsword, his son became a hedge knight who was granted land suspiciously close to Braavos and his family line has resources and skills disproportionate to their public front. That is all we know. Per Occam's razor, Sellsword-Baelish's mother was some woman in Braavos. 

When you hear hoof beats think horses not zorses. 

Also I recommend looking up Alexandre Dumas (The Black Devil.) father of Alexandre Dumas pere (the author.) who would be similar in appearance to what Sellsword-Baelish would look like according to your theory. He very much would have been the only dark-skinned man in the Vale during the time. That plus his surname would have made "Black Baelish" a memorable  figure, especially when people are throwing shade at Littlefinger. (Though I will admit that a black and white picture of Alexandre Lippman does look eerily like Aiden Gillen) 

2 hours ago, Megorova said:

For some reason GRRM has revealed to readers LF's ancestors way back to that sellsword. Add this to LF becoming Lord of Harrenhal, and his obsession with the Tully girls (that are half-Whents). Then all this forms into a possibility, that Littlefinger is a descendant of both the Black Pearl of Braavos and the Bastard of Harrenhal (who somehow was ancestor of Harrenhal's Whents).

LF gives us this history because that's the origin of his House. GRRM also gives us the Starks back to Brandon the Builder, the Targs back to Daenys the Dreamer's father, Baratheon's back to Orys, Martells to Nymeria, the Reach to Garth Greenhand, the Arryns to whoever, the Ironborn to the Grey King etc. That's where they start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

here is what keeping a blood line pure did to the Spanish Hapsburgs

https://allthatsinteresting.com/habsburg-jaw

That is just the physical, The mental is not good either but to be fair, there was a double dose of mental disease that came into the Hapsburg line via Joanna The Mad, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, sister of Queen Catherine of Aragon (first wife of Henry VIII of England and Aunt to Queen Mary, better known as "Bloody Mary", who was herself a bit "Prickly".  She married her second cousin, Phillip of Spain, Joanna The Mad's Grandson. England should thank its lucky Stars they did not successfully breed an heir and make matters worse than they already historically have been when it comes to "That Family".

Various mental afflictions have a strong genetic component to it. If you are stricken with that kind of thing then cousin or avuncular marriages are not exactly the best course of action. But nobody in the middle ages had any clue about that, nor is it by any means clear that the various monarchs who were branded as 'mad' were actually suffering from a mental affliction in a modern sense (there is, to my knowledge, rather extensive literature on the idea that Joanna the Mad, for instance, was not actually mentally incapable of ruling but rather pushed out of the way by branding her as mad). There certainly were other cases where monarchs were suffering from real mental afflictions, but diagnosing them on the basis of (often contradictory) accounts in various chronicles is, in the end, a futile enterprise.

The funny thing, though, is that it is actually a ridiculous and completely unhistorical to assume that the medieval guys - and the ancient Egyptians and Persians, etc. - were aware of the fact that sibling incest or continuous inbreeding via avuncular or cousin marriages causes any problems for the offspring.

In fact, there are cultures which prefer cousin marriages to this (certain regions in Pakistan, I'm told) and they fervently reject the idea that this kind of thing is bad for the children than come from that union. Parents usually greatly reject the idea that them conceiving children is bad for them.

And medieval/ancient explanations for things like infertility, child mortality, madness, and sickness in general were not exactly rational or scientific, but rife with superstition - i.e. divine punishment, curses, black magic, demons, evil spirits, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:
On 4/16/2019 at 3:47 PM, Megorova said:

Manfred Lothston could have been a bastard, same as Ramsay Bolton WAS a bastard. Are you intentionally ignoring this FACT?

No statement with the words "could have been" is a fact. Simply by the way English works.  

I meant, that a fact, is that Ramsay Bolton was a bastard. And English is my fourth language, and I'm still in the process of learning it, so it's likely, that in some cases I'm using incorrect phrasing.

16 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Okay I see what your point was now, but there's still a lot there wrong with it. First, we don't actually know the fate of Ser Gwayne Corbray, we don't know if Redtusk ever made it to him or managed to get him to a maester, we also don't know if the maester's could have healed his wounds.

Whether Gwayne died then, or whether he survived, people, that witnessed that battle, told to others about what happened. So eventually members of House Corbray also heard that story. Good intentions and mercy are still worth something, even if in the end Daemon didn't saved Gwayne's life. But it's not like those Corbrays gave away their castle to the Sellsword, as a Thank-you present, they just hired him to work in their household, and that's a small favour to Blackfyres for what Daemon did, or tried to do.

17 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

We know he's not at Ashford Tourney thirteen years later

He was blinded in that battle (196). Between then and tournament at Ashford (209) 13 years passed. We don't know how old was he in 196. Maybe by 209 he had already died from old age, or an illness, or an accident. Or maybe he was still alive, but because he remained blind, he was not efficient as a Kingsguard, so he was nearly always staying at the White Sword Tower, not to be in the way. Also at Ashford he was not the only Kingsguard that wasn't there. There was Roland Crakehall, Donnel of Duskendale, and Willem Wylde. Besides Gwayne, three more Kingsguards were not at that tournament. Which is not surprising, because someone had to stay behind and guard Daeron, because he is the King and they are Kingsguards. So three of them went to Ashford, and four (including Gwayne, if he was still alive) remained with the King.

17 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

we know that no Corbrays were invited to Whitewalls.

So what?

Other Blackfyres were also not present there. So did Rohanne and Bittersteel.

I'm not saying, that Corbrays became pro-Blackfyre just because of what Daemon did, or tried to do, all I'm saying, is that they were slightly indebted to Blackfyres because of what happened in 196.

17 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

The second issue is that, while a cool act, Daemon is the one that wounded him, crippled him, and maimed him in the first place.

It was war. Nothing personal.

Daemon could have not only wounded Gwayne, and crippled and maimed him, he could have also killed him, while Gwayne was blind and couldn't fight anymore. But Daemon not only didn't killed him, on the contrary, he helped him. So yes, I think, that if Gwayne survived that war, he was thankful to Daemon not recentful.

17 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

afterwards aiding the Blackfyres in any way would be a dishonor to what he was fighting for in the first place. 

Unless, what Blackfyres asked, was just a small favor, that wasn't dishonorable, or in any way harmful to Targaryens or Corbrays. Maybe, whoever asked Corbrays for that favor, didn't even revealed to them, that the guy, that they are asking Corbrays to hire into their household, is bloodrelated to Blackfyres. So Corbrays didn't saw anything incriminating in hiring him.

There are several options of what could have happened. Including - Sellsword went to Westeros, came to Gwayne Corbray, reminded to him how Daemon aided him, and asked for a return favor (and did revealed to Gwayne his identity, or didn't). Maybe he brought with him a "recommendation letter" from Blackfyres, with a request to provide a job for this guy, as a payback for Daemon's help. Or maybe it was Gwayne himself, or one of his relatives, who felt indebted to Blackfyres, and thus went to Essos to find them, and offered them to ask for what they need (if that is not something illegal, or dishonorable, or bad for Targaryens).

There's another option. Pbobably this one is my favourite. The thing is, there's no maesters in Essos, so in Essos they don't use raven-mail. And because news about death of someone's relative is not the kind of information, that is passed on by strangers, especially if that someone is also your own relative, then, probably, when Daemon II died, King Maekar sent a messenger to Rohanne, to inform her about death of her son. And that messenger was Gwayne Corbray. Targaryens were anticipating, that Blackfyres won't kill blind messenger, even if he will bring them news about death, especially because they have already spared him once before.

Then, based on the time of Sellsword's birth, either he was already grown-up (in 219 approximately 22-23 years old, if he was born in 196 or 197, after the Rebellion, or, if he was born earlier than 196, then in 219 he was older than 23) and living with his mother (or separately) in Braavos, or, when Gwayne brough to Essos news about Daemon II's death, he was accompanied there by Manfred (who at that time was 40-41 years old), and that's when Manfred met Otherys-girl (in this case - granddaughter of Bellegere Otherys), that later gave birth to Manfred's son (Sellsword). So the Sellsword could have been born anywhere between 194 and 220.

 

The main reason, why I got an idea, that LF's great-grandfather, who was a sellsword from Braavos, and was serving to Lord Corbray, could be bloodrelated to Targaryens/Blackfyres/Aegon's other bastards, is because of Lord Corbray. Why did that Sellsword out of all Houses of 7K went to work specifically for Corbrays, or was hired by Corbrays? I was reading thru history of their House, to figure out, why them?, and the most significant thing about them, is what happened in 196 between Kingsguard Gwayne Corbray and Daemon Blackfyre.

This is resume of their history in Targaryen Era:

"During the reign of King Aegon I Targaryen, Ser Gawen Corbray was chosen by Queen Visenya Targaryen as master-at-arms for her son, Prince Maegor, on Dragonstone. On account of his reputation as being one of the deadliest knights in the Seven Kingdoms in his day.[5]

Ser Corwyn Corbray was named a regent in 134 AC, during the regency of the young king, Aegon III Targaryen. He was killed by a crossbowman at Runestone that same year[6] when confronting Lord Royce, who supported Ser Arnold Arryn instead of Lady Jeyne's chosen heir, Ser Joffrey Arryn. The Corbrays subsequently supported Ser Joffrey's claim in the war of succession in the Vale.

During the First Blackfyre Rebellion, Ser Gwayne Corbray of the Kingsguard was part of the loyalist forces that fought Daemon Blackfyre at the battle of the Redgrass Field. They dueled for nearly an hour, their Valyrian steel swords Blackfyre and Lady Forlorn clashing loudly. At last, Blackfyre struck Gwayne's helm and left him blind and bleeding. Daemon dismounted to tend to his foe and ordered Redtusk to carry Gwayne back to the maesters for healing, an action that afterwards some considered decisive, since it gave the Raven's Teeth enough time to find a good position to fire the arrows that killed Daemon.[7]

Petyr Baelish's great-grandfather was born in Braavos, and came to the Vale as a sellsword hired by Lord Corbray.[8]"

Gawen Corbray was Maegor's master-at-arms. Corwyn was Aegon's regent for less than a year. And the most detailed and significant information about their House is info about Gwayne's duel on the Redgrass Field.

Around that same time I was reading thru history of Harrenhal, and then those two timelines clicked/matched.

1. LF - 2. LF's father - 3. LF's grandfather - 4. Sellsword - 5. the Bastard of Harrenhal

1. Cat, Lysa, Edmure - 2. Hoster, Minisa, Shella, Walter - 3. Shella's father - 4. Shella's grandfather/first Lord Whent of Harenhal - 5. the Bastard of Harrenhal

18 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

The biggest flaw is that IF Jeyne was Aegon's daughter and IF Jeyne was pregnant with Aegon's kid then there is NO WAY Lucas could be dismissed as Hand of the King because of the supposed blackmail power.

:lmao:

(I'm not being impolite, it's just really funny)

You are totally misinterpreting their relationship, and the balance of power between them.

Aegon took Falena's virginity, and afterwards Lucas was married to her, to clean up Aegon's mess. A man with dignity, wouldn't have agreed to something like that. When newlyweds were sent away to Harrenhal, Aegon went after them, and continued to frequently visit Falena in Lucas' house, whenever he wanted to have sex with her. Lucas was pimping out his own wife. First his wife, and then also his supposed daughter. That's why he was called the Pander. Synonyms for pander - pimp, cater, accomplice, ally, encourager.

Lucas became master-at-arms at the Red Keep in 136. At that time he was at least 16 years old, or, which is more likely - in his 20s or even 30s. So he was born approximately in 106-120. Thus, in 151, when he married with Falena, he was 31-45, while Falena was close to Aegon's age. At the time of Jeyne's birth, in 163 or 164, Lucas was 44-57, while Aegon was 28-29. In 178, when Lucas brought Falena and Jeyne to court, he was 58-72, and Aegon was 42-43. I highly doubt, that in 27+ years of their marriage, Lucas ever had sex with his wife. He never touched her. She was Aegon's woman, and Lucas was just another "Ossifer Plumm".

So Lucas, blackmailing Aegon, is close to impossible.

19 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Another issue is the time differences we mentioned, Aegon wasn't even in Westeros when Jeyne would have been conceived and if Falena went to Braavos at that time she still wouldn't have arrived in time to have Jeyne on time and she certainly was being watched by Viserys and Baelor.

Baelor sent Aegon to Braavos in 161, to prevent him from having sex with Naerys, at least until she will recover from her latest childbirth, and death of those children. Aegon wasn't staying in Braavos for a long time. He returned home, either still in 161, or in 162 (which is more likely, because it seems, that Baelor had sent Aegon away in late 161, so he probably have returned to Westeros in 162). And went to visit Falena, either after his return, or later, or maybe it was Falena who visited Aegon at court.

Distance between Braavos and Harrenhal is approximately 1200 miles (1042 nauticl miles). He could have sailed past King's Landing, up Blackwater Rush river to God's Eye lake, on shore of which is located Harrenhal. Speed of medieval ship is 5 knots, or ~5 miles per hour. Thus, it takes ~10 days to travel from Braavos to Harrenhal, and even less from Braavos to KL.

Also Baelor and Viserys were not watching Falena after she was married to Lucas. As a married woman, she stopped being their problem. If she got pregnant, it was her husband's problem, not theirs. Based on the same reasoning, Aegon married Elaena to Ossifer Plumm.

20 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Third, is that Aegon could use that knowledge of dates to make it clear that Jeyne wasn't his kid.

Exactly. Which proves, that by that time he was already back. If Aegon wasn't back at Westeros, at the time when Falena became pregnant, then there would have been no rumors, about him being the father of her child.

20 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

While your idea is maybe 0.01% possible that does not make it fact. It is possible that Melantha Blackwood and Betha Blackwood were siblings or cousins through Mya and Gwenys Rivers (Same as it's possible Walder's Blackwood wife was as well.) It is not a fact. It's also possible (and I'd say much more likely than this.) that Brown Ben Plumm gets his Braavois and Summer Islander genes from an Otherys, but it's not fact. 

I'm not saying, that it's a fact, just that it's a possibility. Though, in my opinion, it is much higher than 0.01%.

20 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

While you might be right that Manfred was not born in 178, I highly doubt it considering the fact that both Lothston's were already in their near to mid-fifties and that Walder Frey and Jon Arryn are the exception not the rule to male fertility.

I'm saying the opposite - that he WAS born in 178, or maybe in 179. And that has nothing to do with Lucas being 58-73 year old at that time, because he wasn't Manfred's real father. Same as Ossifer Plumm wasn't Viserys Plumm's real father.

20 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

1.How is the Mad Maid Lothston Lady of Harrenhal if Manfred had Sellsword-Baelish with the Black Pearl?

Manfred didn't inherited Harrenhal from Lucas, instead, other Lothstons got it - Lucas' relatives.

By the time of Blackfyre Rebellion, if Lucas was still alive, he would have been ~ 76-90 years old, or even older. But I think that in 196 he was already dead. Do you really don't see, where's the problem here? :huh:

Lucas died prior 196, and he had no legitimate children at the time of his death, so Harrenhal passed to Lucas' relatives. Probably to Lucas' significally younger brother or sister, or to his nephew or niece (if Lucas' brothers/sisters were also already dead), or even to his grand-nephew/grand-niece. So that other Lothston inherited Harrenhal and the title, and became Second Lord/Lady Lothston of Harrenhal. And, based on timeframe of Second Rebellion, Danelle Lothston was daughter or granddaughter of that heir, and Third or Fourth Lothston-ruler of Harrenhal.

By the time when Manfred was legitimized in 196, Harrenhal was already owned by other Lothston, and Manfred's legalization, even though it changed his lastname, was not enough to challenge ownership of the castle and title. Probably he thought, that when he will be legalized, and will become a Lothston, then, as a sole child of Lord Lucas, he will have rights to claim Harrenhal. But those other real Lothstons argued, that he has no rights. Could be, that afterwards Manfred went to King Daeron, and tried to "sue" owner of Harrenhal. But either there was a trial (maybe trial by battle), and he failed, or Daeron said to him, that their agreement was to legitimize Manfred as a Lothston, not to make him Lord Lothston or to take Harrenhal away from its current owners and give it to Manfred.

So after legal system had failed Manfred, he and his descendants (knights Whents) took over Harrenhal from Lothstons by machinations.

Though besides Whents, Manfred also had a child with Black Pearl of Braavos. But that son was not with Manfred, and wasn't Whent, and didn't got Harrenhal. That's why Littlefinger was obsessed with Tully-girls. Because he and them had the same great great-grandfather, but after that those family lines separated, and Whents received Harrenhal, and later one of their descendants even got Riverrun (Edmure Tully, son of Minisa Whent), while LF's line got nothing.

21 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

2.) House Lothston was removed (at the absolute latest, and lest likely.) in 233 when King Maekar died in the Peake Uprsing, even though it's likely it was even earlier since Ben Blackthumb has served three generations of Whents and only sixty years have passed between King Maekar's death and him making that statement.

Manfred was born in 178 or 179. So by 233 he was 54-55. Or if the fall of House Lothston was caused by House Whent earlier than in 233, then at that time Manfred was younger then 54. Even in 233 he could have played a role of mastermind, while the ground work was done by his children.

Danelle Lothston was not a witch. It was Manfred and his family, and his people, who were spreading those horrible rumors about Danelle.

Just think about it - if she was a monster and a bad person, then why did she supported Bloodraven at Whitewalls? She could have pretended to be ill - what Lord Swann did.

 

I'll continue later 3) and so on, in a different post.

P.S. Can't now check spelling, so sorry for mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

I'm very much aware (Hapsburgs are probably the only royal house of Europe I'm not directly descended from in some way.) Which is why I brought up the theory about Valyrian dragonlords using magic to genetically engineer them in a certain way. As has been pointed out incest only causes bad traits if those bad traits are there. Meanwhile, while this is not a history forum I would like to point out several unfortunate parts of your statement. First, Joanna's madness is a very controversial issue among medievalists and is probably comparable to the lobotomy of Rosemary Kennedy combined with a terrible understanding of health and a misogynistic view of women at the time. Her son Charles even said something along the lines of "no one talk to her ever". Second, the moniker "Bloody Mary" is propaganda (keep in mind I'm a Protestant seminarian.) she was not more or less "bloody" than most other reigning monarchs at the time. Third,  while I typically do  not dabble in speculative history in this way I would say that a child by Mary and Philip might have been better for the Hapsburgs than what ended up occurring since it was the lack of an heir from Mary that forced Phillip to marry his third wife. Like I said this is not a history forum, so I'd prefer we leave the real world history at the points we've made. 

 

 

I am aware that Joanna did suffer from abuse, neglect in addition to the misogynistic society, even for royals in her day and its undeniable contributing factors to her fate. I do agree, As for Mary, she did execute a lot of people based on her reign was only 5 years compared to her dad's of 38 and her kid Sister/? Elizabeth of 45.

Back to the story, The Targs inbred because they wanted to make sure they had as much control/compatible connection to the Dragons as possible due to them being the source of there cultural and military power.  This is kinda funny on the show because Dany has no clue yet that Jon is her Nephew and offered him to ride Rheagal without so much as a thought. I know Drogon let him pet him last season but Viserys told her so many stories, surely he told her about why it was important for the blood line to be pure/inbred as he intended to marry her himself some day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Back to the story, The Targs inbred because they wanted to make sure they had as much control/compatible connection to the Dragons as possible due to them being the source of there cultural and military power.  This is kinda funny on the show because Dany has no clue yet that Jon is her Nephew and offered him to ride Rheagal without so much as a thought. I know Drogon let him pet him last season but Viserys told her so many stories, surely he told her about why it was important for the blood line to be pure/inbred as he intended to marry her himself some day.

Only because it pertains to the books: Viserys did not know. Partially because the Targaryens stopped knowing themselves around the time of Aegon Dragonsbane, and had certainly lost the knowledge completely by Baelor. Viserys didn't even know that his parents hadn't wanted to marry, or that of all of the reigning Targaryens between his grandfather( Jaehaerys II in 260) and Aegon Dragonsbane ((133) only the worst of them all (Aegon the Unworthy) married his sister. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Various mental afflictions have a strong genetic component to it. If you are stricken with that kind of thing then cousin or avuncular marriages are not exactly the best course of action. But nobody in the middle ages had any clue about that, nor is it by any means clear that the various monarchs who were branded as 'mad' were actually suffering from a mental affliction in a modern sense (there is, to my knowledge, rather extensive literature on the idea that Joanna the Mad, for instance, was not actually mentally incapable of ruling but rather pushed out of the way by branding her as mad). There certainly were other cases where monarchs were suffering from real mental afflictions, but diagnosing them on the basis of (often contradictory) accounts in various chronicles is, in the end, a futile enterprise.

The funny thing, though, is that it is actually a ridiculous and completely unhistorical to assume that the medieval guys - and the ancient Egyptians and Persians, etc. - were aware of the fact that sibling incest or continuous inbreeding via avuncular or cousin marriages causes any problems for the offspring.

In fact, there are cultures which prefer cousin marriages to this (certain regions in Pakistan, I'm told) and they fervently reject the idea that this kind of thing is bad for the children than come from that union. Parents usually greatly reject the idea that them conceiving children is bad for them.

And medieval/ancient explanations for things like infertility, child mortality, madness, and sickness in general were not exactly rational or scientific, but rife with superstition - i.e. divine punishment, curses, black magic, demons, evil spirits, etc.

Well, for what it is worth, the Catholic Church in the day did have a rule that I believe prohibited marriages within the 5th Degree of Consanguinity. However, I do not think anyone here is assuming that Medieval Society, whether Royal, Scholar and or Church had a clue as to how incest marriages could create the problems with offspring and theirs and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CAllDSmith said:

Only because it pertains to the books: Viserys did not know. Partially because the Targaryens stopped knowing themselves around the time of Aegon Dragonsbane, and had certainly lost the knowledge completely by Baelor. Viserys didn't even know that his parents hadn't wanted to marry, or that of all of the reigning Targaryens between his grandfather( Jaehaerys II in 260) and Aegon Dragonsbane ((133) only the worst of them all (Aegon the Unworthy) married his sister. 

I am sure that Viserys knew that his, Dany and Rheagar's ancestors married Valaryian blood, incest included to control dragons and after they died out, more of an arrogance, racist superiority thing. Hell, Aerys allowed Rheagar to marry Elia as she was the only woman, royal in Westeros that had any Targ Blood/Valaryian blood in her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Well, for what it is worth, the Catholic Church in the day did have a rule that I believe prohibited marriages within the 5th Degree of Consanguinity. However, I do not think anyone here is assuming that Medieval Society, whether Royal, Scholar and or Church had a clue as to how incest marriages could create the problems with offspring and theirs and so on.

Oh, but the Church's ban on (ridiculously distant) cousin marriages was just a means by the Vatican to collect money from those noble and royal bloodlines who actually did know that their were fifth cousins and wanted to marry. Who on earth does know whether his/her spouse is a fifth cousin? Only people obsessed with genealogy who also happen to have the means to investigate their family tree.

But my general point was more that the Christian ban on such things was not, in any way, motivated by empirical evidence but was essentially a religious commandment which could, if you paid the Church their fee, be overturned. That in and of itself is confirmation that nobody thought it was bad in principle. If the people thought this kind of thing would increase the risk of (hereditary) diseases in their offspring it wouldn't have been practiced the way it was. I mean, some of the longest and worst wars in medieval and early modern histories are succession wars triggered by the fact that a monarch died without an heir of his body. At least once proper states had started to be formed the ministers and other advisors would have insisted that those old ideas of marrying only among royalty was problematic and should be abandoned - instead this kind of thing continued into the 20th century.

The idea that the incest taboo does not go back to empirical or intuitive knowledge about population genetics seems to be pretty evident by the fact that various culture also included various unrelated people - step-kin, adoptive kin, various in-laws, etc. which doesn't make any sense.

People have been trying explain the incest taboo with empirical knowledge about population genetics and stuff, but as things stand today even the Westermarck Effect (the alleged natural non-attraction to close kin if raised together) might have to do more with social norms that are implemented and reinforced early on than actual biology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, but the Church's ban on (ridiculously distant) cousin marriages was just a means by the Vatican to collect money from those noble and royal bloodlines who actually did know that their were fifth cousins and wanted to marry. Who on earth does know whether his/her spouse is a fifth cousin? Only people obsessed with genealogy who also happen to have the means to investigate their family tree.

But my general point was more that the Christian ban on such things was not, in any way, motivated by empirical evidence but was essentially a religious commandment which could, if you paid the Church their fee, be overturned. That in and of itself is confirmation that nobody thought it was bad in principle. If the people thought this kind of thing would increase the risk of (hereditary) diseases in their offspring it wouldn't have been practiced the way it was. I mean, some of the longest and worst wars in medieval and early modern histories are succession wars triggered by the fact that a monarch died without an heir of his body. At least once proper states had started to be formed the ministers and other advisors would have insisted that those old ideas of marrying only among royalty was problematic and should be abandoned - instead this kind of thing continued into the 20th century.

The idea that the incest taboo does not go back to empirical or intuitive knowledge about population genetics seems to be pretty evident by the fact that various culture also included various unrelated people - step-kin, adoptive kin, various in-laws, etc. which doesn't make any sense.

People have been trying explain the incest taboo with empirical knowledge about population genetics and stuff, but as things stand today even the Westermarck Effect (the alleged natural non-attraction to close kin if raised together) might have to do more with social norms that are implemented and reinforced early on than actual biology.

Oh yes, big money making makers indeed and Royals in particular or noble families would certainly be aware of their blood lines so it would fit the situation. As for inbred insanity and other complications. they were probably not fully aware but there may have been suspicions.

Lets just say that Incest is very, very bad and it is best not to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

I am sure that Viserys knew that his, Dany and Rheagar's ancestors married Valaryian blood, incest included to control dragons and after they died out, more of an arrogance, racist superiority thing. Hell, Aerys allowed Rheagar to marry Elia as she was the only woman, royal in Westeros that had any Targ Blood/Valaryian blood in her.

Three problems though: First, there is no way for Viserys to know that they married to control dragons because we don't even know that for sure and in-universe the last three people alive who could have been told by their parents (Aegon Dragonsbane and his half-sisters) were all unable to hatch dragons without guesswork meaning the dragonlore was not passed on. Second, after the last dragon died only 4  Targs had incestous marriages by Westerosi standards 1,) Naerys and Aegon the Unworthy. We do not yet know the reason why Viserys ordered them to marry. 2.) Aelor and Aelora, who were twins. Considering where they were in the line of succession before 212, and that no other Targaryen in their generation or the generation before had married a sibling, it's entirely possible they married for love. 3.) Jaehaerys and Shiera, who explicitly did not marry as part of arrogance or some kind of psuedo-racial superiority thing (notice how races don't exist on Planetos except when the readers make them.) but for love. 4.) Aerys and Rhaella who also did not marry for arrogance or a psuedo-racial superiority thing, but because their parents forced them to in order to make the Prince that Was Promised. Third and finally, Aerys was a Mad King and was blatantly wrong. Of the Houses that had Valyrian blood in them in 278 we have 1. Baratheons (okay possible all the female cousins had died out by then.) 2.) House Velaryon (No way all the cousins died out.) 3. House Celtigar (not enough info.) 4.) House Plumm 5.) House Penrose 6.) House Hightower (snag the maid or Mace's wife.) 7.) House Tarth and I'm pretty sure I'm missing one. 

My point is that the only people who could have taught Viserys anything about brother-sister incest were his parents who hadn't wanted to get married, and William Darry. 

This again ties back to the issue of incest IRL versus incest Valyrian. The problem of incest is that it can only accentuate traits that are already there (the Hapsburg jaw.) The traits Valyrians (specifically Targaryens) seem to have is being physically attractive, gold-blonde hair, purple eyes, heightened disease immunity, and magic. 

Quote

Lets just say that Incest is very, very bad and it is best not to do it.

Of course, no one here is advocating for incest (though there might be some disagreement on what incest is for some people.) because by definition incest is a taboo you do not do. We're discussing specifically a fictional situation in a fictional world where apparently there is a population semi-immune to the detrimental effects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Lets just say that Incest is very, very bad and it is best not to do it.

Well, actually incest/inbreeding is a crucial part of artificial breeding and natural evolution, especially in the speciation process. Part of the reason biological human evolution has basically stopped is that we are all far to interrelated and have been for quite some time, so potentially beneficial mutations cannot really pile up and take root in an isolation population giving those people a possible adaptation advantage. Isolated population have and do procreate with close kin. It is the only choice they have. There is also genetic drift as a factor, but, for instance, all isolated island populations and species that have developed there are and always have been very inbred.

If you want to get results fast in, say, dog-breeding, you breed incestuously for generations choosing the physical and behavioral traits you want. Fertility and survival traits drop for a time, but once the reinforced bad traits you get in part of the offspring are bred out of the specimen you keep you get your poodle or mastiff or whatever kind of dog you wanted.

15 minutes ago, CAllDSmith said:

Three problems though: First, there is no way for Viserys to know that they married to control dragons because we don't even know that for sure and in-universe the last three people alive who could have been told by their parents (Aegon Dragonsbane and his half-sisters) were all unable to hatch dragons without guesswork meaning the dragonlore was not passed on.

While it is true that crucial information might not have been handed down from Rhaenyra to Aegon III - the fact that Joffrey Velaryon didn't know that he should not ride his mother's dragon is a strong indication there - and prior to that from King Aenys/Aegon I to Jaehaerys I, considering that the latter also lost his father at the age of eight - there is also no reason to believe that the Targaryens ever had any special knowledge about hatching dragon eggs. They usually just hatched, period. And the tradition to put eggs in the cradles of royal children only properly developed during the reign of Viserys I, which means rather late. Prior to that dragons and Targaryens were not living together so much - you went to the Dragonpit to mount a dragon and prior to that you were given or took a hatchling from Dragonstone. There was nothing special about all that.

And the tradition of the eggs long survived the Dance and the death of the last dragon considering that even Egg has his own dragon egg in the early 200s.

15 minutes ago, CAllDSmith said:

Second, after the last dragon died only 4  Targs had incestous marriages by Westerosi standards 1,) Naerys and Aegon the Unworthy. We do not yet know the reason why Viserys ordered them to marry.

Most likely because of the marriage policy of the family. And you forget Baelor-Daena here. The marriage was annulled later on but they were married. Also you forget the later betrothal between Egg and his sister Daella. They did not marry but they were betrothed, meaning that Daeron II and Maekar wanted to continue the incestuous marriage policy and chose to marry those two siblings to each other who were closest in age.

15 minutes ago, CAllDSmith said:

2.) Aelor and Aelora, who were twins. Considering where they were in the line of succession before 212, and that no other Targaryen in their generation or the generation before had married a sibling, it's entirely possible they married for love.

Here the issue simply seems to be that many Targaryens actually sisters to marry in the age of Daeron II. Aegon IV only had two living children by his sister-wife, and Daeron II was married to Myriah Martell long before Daenerys was even born. She could have been married to Baelor Breakspear, of course, but Daeron II took another route using her for a political match. That kind of thing was not unusual if you think back of Maegor-Ceryse or various marriage proposals for Jaehaerys I or Rhaenyra.

The four brides of Daeron II's sons all seem to be unrelated but at least one of them is confirmed to have been a cousin, Aelinor Penrose, who originally was imagined as Aerys I sister-wife. In light of the six Targaryen-Hightower daughters as well as the second Laena Velaryon born in FaB (and possibly other Targaryen-Velaryon daughters of Baela and Alyn born later) there is a pretty good chance that all or at least some of Daeron II's daughters were married to cousins, too, not unrelated strangers. Only Alys Arryn has the necessary standing to be seen as a worthy bride for a royal prince without having any Targaryen blood herself.

Considering that it was supposedly a scandal that Egg married a Blackwood later on I cannot really see Baelor Breakspear marrying a Dondarrion bride without this causing an even greater scandal - the Blackwoods are a great Riverlands house with royal roots in the Age of Heroes, etc., whereas the Dondarrions are basically just up-jumped messengers. The Prince of Dragonstone marrying a Dondarrion should have been a major issue, exploited by the Blackfyres during the Rebellion - unless she had Targaryen blood herself, either through the second Laena Velaryon or one of Rhaena's daughters by Garmund Hightower. In fact, Princess Elaena's marriage to Ronnel Penrose could also be explained with the latter's Targaryen blood (one imagines that Aelinor Penrose is going to turn out to be Ronnel's daughter from a first marriage, sort of like Jeyne Arryn turned out to be the descendant of the elder half-brother of Aemma Arryn).

A similar thing could also have happened with Dyanna Dayne. She could be a Targaryen cousin, too, through a marriage arranged during Daeron's Conquest or later on after Daeron II and Myriah had already been betrothed/married. But here the need to find a suitable bride with Targaryen blood wouldn't be as important considering nobody would have expected Maekar to continue the royal line.

One would also think that Daeron II actually felt a pretty strong need to do something to preserve the Valyrian looks of his dynasty in light of the Blackfyre Rebellion and the fact that Daemon I and some of his sons at least had all very prominent and distinct Valyrian features whereas his own heir, Baelor Breakspear, was looking rather common. This would have been already been apparent when Daeron II arranged those matches for his sons, likely causing him not to look for brides to dilute the royal bloodline further (especially for the two elder sons, Baelor, the heir, and Aerys, the spare. They would have been expected to produce the heirs to continue the main royal branch.

In general my guess is that Viserys III obsession with Targaryen superiority is basically just stuff he learned about his family. The Doctrine of Exceptionalism has been an official tenet of the Faith for centuries now. People are actually taught that Targaryens are different and marry their sisters and other close kin rather than 'common men' by the septons and septas of Westeros. You don't need to get a special instruction to learn this. And, of course, for Viserys III family traditions and the like would have been the thing to hold on to in exile.

In fact, if one thinks about it, it actually seems that the Faith-supported doctrine for Targaryen specialness is actually part of the main reason why both Aerys II and Viserys III are so obsessed about the incest thing despite the fact that recent generations of Targaryens have not been as observant of the incestuous marriage policy as the Doctrine of Exceptionalism implies. Incestuous marriage basically has become a part of religiously founded Targaryen identity. Although, strictly speaking, Daeron-Myriah is just political marriage aberration and Aegon-Betha a love match, which happens occasionally, too. Maekar-Dyanna may be a cousin marriage or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

Three problems though: First, there is no way for Viserys to know that they married to control dragons because we don't even know that for sure and in-universe the last three people alive who could have been told by their parents (Aegon Dragonsbane and his half-sisters) were all unable to hatch dragons without guesswork meaning the dragonlore was not passed on. Second, after the last dragon died only 4  Targs had incestous marriages by Westerosi standards 1,) Naerys and Aegon the Unworthy. We do not yet know the reason why Viserys ordered them to marry. 2.) Aelor and Aelora, who were twins. Considering where they were in the line of succession before 212, and that no other Targaryen in their generation or the generation before had married a sibling, it's entirely possible they married for love. 3.) Jaehaerys and Shiera, who explicitly did not marry as part of arrogance or some kind of psuedo-racial superiority thing (notice how races don't exist on Planetos except when the readers make them.) but for love. 4.) Aerys and Rhaella who also did not marry for arrogance or a psuedo-racial superiority thing, but because their parents forced them to in order to make the Prince that Was Promised. Third and finally, Aerys was a Mad King and was blatantly wrong. Of the Houses that had Valyrian blood in them in 278 we have 1. Baratheons (okay possible all the female cousins had died out by then.) 2.) House Velaryon (No way all the cousins died out.) 3. House Celtigar (not enough info.) 4.) House Plumm 5.) House Penrose 6.) House Hightower (snag the maid or Mace's wife.) 7.) House Tarth and I'm pretty sure I'm missing one. 

My point is that the only people who could have taught Viserys anything about brother-sister incest were his parents who hadn't wanted to get married, and William Darry. 

This again ties back to the issue of incest IRL versus incest Valyrian. The problem of incest is that it can only accentuate traits that are already there (the Hapsburg jaw.) The traits Valyrians (specifically Targaryens) seem to have is being physically attractive, gold-blonde hair, purple eyes, heightened disease immunity, and magic. 

Of course, no one here is advocating for incest (though there might be some disagreement on what incest is for some people.) because by definition incest is a taboo you do not do. We're discussing specifically a fictional situation in a fictional world where apparently there is a population semi-immune to the detrimental effects. 

Well, i know this is the show and not the books but the Author, GRRM has stated more than once that the inbreeding by the Targs and before they were all but the last Valaryian family left was done to better control the dragons, so I will take the author at his word. As for Viserys, while he was, say... unstable, it should not be a stretch to assume that the blood purity thing was a thing. Also, in the history of this family in particular, several members were in love with their close relations but that is going into the book verse so I will leave it there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, actually incest/inbreeding is a crucial part of artificial breeding and natural evolution, especially in the speciation process. Part of the reason biological human evolution has basically stopped is that we are all far to interrelated and have been for quite some time, so potentially beneficial mutations cannot really pile up and take root in an isolation population giving those people a possible adaptation advantage. Isolated population have and do procreate with close kin. It is the only choice they have. There is also genetic drift as a factor, but, for instance, all isolated island populations and species that have developed there are and always have been very inbred.

 

Well, look, I am not really into the Dr Mereau stuff. The moral of the story and the history is that inbreeding is really fucked up and should not be applauded, encouraged, admired or practiced. I am not saying that you in particular or anyone else in this forum is exactly excusing it but it is just .... wrong for so many reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Well, i know this is the show and not the books but the Author, GRRM has stated more than once that the inbreeding by the Targs and before they were all but the last Valaryian family left was done to better control the dragons, so I will take the author at his word. As for Viserys, while he was, say... unstable, it should not be a stretch to assume that the blood purity thing was a thing. Also, in the history of this family in particular, several members were in love with their close relations but that is going into the book verse so I will leave it there.

Viserys's instability was due to his entire family save Dany dying when he was 7-8 years old, being forced to into exile from all he had known and running for his life from assassins while also raising his sister. Those stresses will cause anyone to be unstable after a time. We're in the book forum for a reason I'd I've already laid out that book territory. I think it's safe to say that the Valyrians are not human as we would consider them. That point ties in with your other quote so I'll put it there. 

 

33 minutes ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Well, look, I am not really into the Dr Mereau stuff. The moral of the story and the history is that inbreeding is really fucked up and should not be applauded, encouraged, admired or practiced. I am not saying that you in particular or anyone else in this forum is exactly excusing it but it is just .... wrong for so many reasons.

Dr. Moreau used visection to create animal-human hybrids using 19th century psuedo-biology. His whole issue was creating anthros not inbreeding. If by "the story" you mean Dr. Moreau's story or ASOIAF we can't really say that's the moral, since there are hundreds of other factors shown in the stories.  While I'm not questioning or attempting to change your own personal views on the real world issues, I would point out that you're mixing up two terms. "Inbreeding" and "incest" are not the same thing. Every person of Western European descent is inbreeding when they have a child with another person of Western European descent. The same holds true for many East Asians and in general every ethnic group when having children within the ethnic group. If it's your opinion that people should not marry or have children inside their own race (keeping in mind that race is a social construct not a biological one.) you're certainly entitled to that opinion that I would not say it's a popular or necessary opinion for the development of society. Whereas, incest, by definition is those relations between relations that are considered forbidden or taboo. In Judaeo-Christian tradition those relations include: mother-son, father-daughter, sister (half, full, or in-law) and father's brother's wife. This taboo has changed in late modern times to be blood siblings, aunts-uncles, cousins, grandparents and their siblings, and descendants of them. With some expanding their incest taboo to include anyone who you can trace a connection to (typically since arriving in America.) These are two different things. 

Now as to what I was saying about the Valyrians not being human, I took a human evolution course in undergrad for one of my science credits and one of the things I pointed out to my professor is how biased and borderline racist taxonomy is. For example, the loose rule is that if an animal can have a child with another animal, and that animal can have a child consistently they are the same species, but if they can have a child, but their child cannot have a child consistently they are in the same genus ex. wolves and dogs are the same species, but donkeys and horses are not. I made the observation to my professor that according to taxonomy  a person from today could not travel 10,000 years into the past and have a child with the same people who might be their ancestors (homo neanderthalensis, Denisovans etc.) and that ,for various reasons, if I were to toss a modern sub-saharan African skeleton in one location and a modern Native American skeleton in another in the right rock layer, they would be described as different species. 

Here's how this applies to Valyrians: Valyrians do not consistently have viable pregnancies in, or following,  cross-ethnic breeding (Dany and Drogo, Maegor's wives, Aegon and Naerys after mixing with Rogares, Jaehaerys and Shaera, Aerys and Rhaella after Aegon V mixed with First Men.) and they possess specific traits and characteristics that are not present in other groups. This could lead to the possibility that (according to modern taxonomy that I don't agree with.) Planetos might be divided into multiple different species (homo sapiens sapiens, homo sapiens CoF, homo sapiens gigantes, homo sapiens Ibbenese, homo sapiens sothoryois, homo sapiens valyrians etc.) I'm not sayin this i the case, or that I believe that it is the case, only that there is clearly something strange happening in this fictional world so that our laws of genetics do not seem to apply consistently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A Ghost of Someone said:

Well, look, I am not really into the Dr Mereau stuff. The moral of the story and the history is that inbreeding is really fucked up and should not be applauded, encouraged, admired or practiced. I am not saying that you in particular or anyone else in this forum is exactly excusing it but it is just .... wrong for so many reasons.

Yeh, my reading of ASOIAF suggests that whilst it's a major plot-point, the inbreeding of the Targaryans has led to 50% of them being seriously mad, and that Viserys was presented as a young man totally screwed by 'angry dragon' psychopathic genes. It wasn't nurture at all - it was 100% his genes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/17/2019 at 12:10 AM, CAllDSmith said:

3.) Littlefinger's father, Lord Baelish was of an age with Hoster Tully and befriend him during the War of the Ninepenny Kings (260 AC) We can then determine that Lord Baelish was born approximately 239 AC at the latest, given that

his father was a hedge knight (HK-Baelish) who had already acquired the lands in the Fingers

HK-Baelish would have to have been born (again at the latest) in 219 AC, when Mad Maid Lothston was already Lady of Harrenhal. Which would then mean, (again really stretching the unlikeliness of this.) 199 AC when it is much likelier that Sellsword-Baelish was an adult during Redgrass Field since he was never knighted. 

Let's use for short: Petyr's father - Baelish (because he was first Lord Baelish of their clan), grandfather - Hedge (hedge knight), great-grandfather - Sellsword (sellsword from Braavos, that served to Lord Corbray).

First of all - who said, that Baelish was the same age as Hoster Tully?

On Petyr's page in Wikia, there are two sources of info about his father, [10] and [19], I don't have a World App, but in [19] - "In response to the why was LF fostered at Riverrun when he was a insignificant lord question: GRRM said that Petyr's father and Hoster met up during the War of the Ninepenny Kings and became friends. Apparently that was a time when a lot of people from all over the realm forged friendships. LF's dad later "cashed in" on the friendship to get LF fostered at Riverrun." <- NO INFORMATION ABOUT AGE.

In [7] - no info about them being of the same age. Though there was this:

Quote

"Harrenhal."

It was interesting to watch his face. Lord Petyr's father had been the smallest of small lords, his grandfather a landless hedge knight; by birth, he held no more than a few stony acres on the windswept shore of the Fingers. Harrenhal was one of the richest plums in the Seven Kingdoms, its lands broad and rich and fertile, its great castle as formidable as any in the realm . . . and so large as to dwarf Riverrun, where Petyr Baelish had been fostered by House Tully, only to be brusquely expelled when he dared raise his sights to Lord Hoster's daughter.

Littlefinger took a moment to adjust the drape of his cape, but Tyrion had seen the flash of hunger in those sly cat's eyes. I have him, he knew. "Harrenhal is cursed," Lord Petyr said after a moment, trying to sound bored.

No age given. And Hedge was a landless knight. Baelish was first of his clan, who got some land. Sellsword served to Cobrays. 

"The Corbrays were an Andal house during the Andal invasion. Corwyn Corbray conquered the Fingers by defeating Houses Brightstone and Shell, claiming for himself the title of Lord of the Five Fingers." "The Fingers are narrow peninsulas of the northeastern Vale of Arryn which extend into the narrow sea and the Shivering Sea."

House Corbray owned lands of the Fingers. They were a small House with small lands, there was nothing to gain there for Hedge. So he left the Fingers, and became a traveling sellsword for hire. He was knighted either before he left, or some time later during his travels.

For simplification, for now, let's take this timescale - Petyr born in 60s, Baelish in 40s, Hedge in 20s, Sellsword in 200s. But it's too inaccurate, too vague. Because it's obvious, that it's not like all of them became fathers when they were 20. :unsure: Don't know, how to explain this. For example, Petyr was born in 268, if his father was about the same age as Hoster Tully, then Baelish was born between 238 and 240. So Petyr was born, when his father was between 28 and 30 years old. Catelyn was born in 264 or 265. And she was her father's third child. Prior Cat's birth, Hoster's wife gave birth to two sons. If that was not a double pregnancy, then Hoster became a father for the first time approximately in 262 (or even earlier). He inherited Riverrun in or after 264. Which means, that when he got married, he wasn't yet Lord Tully. So if 262 is correct, then Hoster became a father, when he was 22-24 years old (or even younger), but Baelish became a father, when he was 28-30. So a timescale with 20 years per generation is incorrect. As we can see from example of Petyr and his father, 30 years per generation seems more likely. Petyr is already 30 years old, and he still has no children (unless Robert Arryn is his son, in which case LF became a father in 292, when he was 24 years old). Though 30 years per generation could also be incorrect, who knows, maybe, when Baelish was born in 238-240, his father Hedge was barely 15 years old, same thing with Sellsword. So a timescale, that includes all possibilities, should be with 15-35 years per generation of those characters whose year of birth is unknown. Thus, it goes like this:

Petyr 268

Baelish 238-240 (or not, he could be older or younger than Hoster Tully)

Hedge 203-225 (238 - 35 and 238 - 15, 240 - 35 and 240-15)

Sellsword 168-210 (203 - 35 and 225 - 15).

If the Bastard of Harrenhal was son of Jeyne Lothston, then he was born in 178 or 179, and that's in timeframe of possible years of Sellsword's birth (168-210). If Sellsword is Bastard's son, then he could have been born in Westeros, even prior First Blackfyre Rebellion, or if he was born in Braavos, then his parents could have met there years after the Rebellion, as far as in 210, and grandson could have been born as far as in 225.

So, no to this

On 4/17/2019 at 12:10 AM, CAllDSmith said:

HK-Baelish would have to have been born (again at the latest) in 219 AC, when Mad Maid Lothston was already Lady of Harrenhal.

Hedge could have been born later than in 219, as late as 225.

So, it's even possible, that Bastard went to Braavos some time prior Second Rebellion (212 AC), and maybe he was somehow involved in it. Maybe he was even at Whitewalls, when Daemon II was there, either he was one of knights, present on that wedding, or he was beyond the walls, with troops of Danelle Lothston. And his grandson Hedge could have also been there, as a young squire, if he was born closer to 203 than to 225. Maybe Egg even met him there.

This is another (very approximate) scale of several generations from different Houses, in relation to LF's family tree:

1

Rhaenyra Targaryen + Daemon Targaryen = Aegon III, Viserys II

Sealord of Braavos + wife = Sealord's son

Lysandro Rogare + Johanna Swann the Black Swan of Lys = Larra Rogare

2

Viserys II Targaryen + Larra Rogare = Aegon IV, Aemon, Naerys

Sealord's son + Princess of Summer Islands = Bellegere Otherys

3

Lucas Lothston + Falena Stokeworth - no children

Falena Stokeworth + Aegon = Jeyne Lothston

Naerys + Aegon = Daeron II Targaryen, Daenerys (wife of Maron Martell)

Daena Targaryen + Aegon = Daemon I Blackfyre

4

Daeron II Targaryen + Mariah Martell = Maekar I

Bellegere Otherys + Aegon = Bellenora, Narha, Balerion

Jeyne Lothston + Aegon = the Bastard of Harrenhal

5

[Otheryses + spouses = children (one of them is Sellsword's mother)]

 

Maekar + Dyanna Dayne = Aegon V

The Bastard of Harrenhal + wife = First Lord Whent

The Bastard of Harrenhal + Otherys-girl (either Bellegere's daughter or granddaughter) = Sellsword

6

Aegon V + Betha Blackwood = Jaehaerys II and Shaera, Duncan Targaryen

First Lord Whent (Shella's grandfather) + wife = three sons (fathers of Shella, Walter and Oswell, Minisa)

Sellsword + wife = Hedge

7

Jaehaerys + Shaera = Aerys II and Rhaella

Second Lord Whent + wife = Shella

Two brothers of Second Lord Whent + spouses = Walter and Oswell, Minisa

Hedge + wife = Baelish

8

Aerys + Rhaella = Rhaegar, Viserys, Daenerys

Shella + Walter = (Sarya), four sons, Wynafrei

Hoster Tully + Minisa Whent = Catelyn, Lysa, Edmure

Baelish + Alayne = Petyr

9

Petyr + Lysa (Whent) Tully-Arryn-Baelish = Robert "Arryn"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...