Jump to content
silverwolf22

thoughts on the theory by indeepgeek that littlefinger witnessed lyanna willingly go with rhaegar and was the one who told brandon that rhaegar kidnapped lyanna a

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

If Lyanna's stay had been arranged prior the tourney, it would have been a huge insult to House Whent to renege on the arrangement (basically implying that you don't trust them not to pimp Lyanna out to Rhaegar). Furthermore, offending the Whents wouldn't sit well with the Tullys, either, for obvious reasons

You are right about a possible insult, but if the Starks have to choose between insulting the Whents and knowing that Rhaegar doesn't have access to Lyanna which do they choose? Lyanna seems to have developed a serious case of the wandering eye at Harrenhal, and she has made no secret of what she thinks of Robert. The Starks have given their word, specifically Lord Rickard has, to Robert that Lyanna will marry him. Which vow is the most important? I would think they would risk the insult to the Whents, take Lyanna with the brothers, and trust the Tullys are satisfied with the marriage of Catelyn to the heir of the North. 

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

This feels like a rather modern concept, though. Do we have any such example in-world? The only one coming to mind is Myrcella, but that was more of a political move to appease Dorne. I don't think it was customable for young maidens to spend the time in a different household to get to know their betrothed, even under supervision.

It may seem that way, but perhaps that is only in the tongue-in- cheek way I phrased it. Having a young maiden surrounded by family, family allies, and her betrothed in order to prevent her from acting in a way that would harm the Stark's pledged marriage pact is in keeping with a very old view of arranged marriages. That was really what I was trying to convey. I don't know that Robert could do anything that would make Lyanna think of him as an acceptable husband, but the Starks could make her living arrangements into a constantly supervised hell. Which is what I'm suggesting they did.

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

You're forgetting another option - pulling an Alys to run from an unwanted marriage. In that scenario, Lyanna would indeed travel alone.

No, I'm not forgetting it. I've been arguing about it with @Frey family reunion. I agree Lyanna could always have run away, but if that is the case it certainly changes what the quote from Dany about "swordpoints" means. Who then are the sword points pointed towards if Lyanna has run away on her own? It certainly suggests if Rhaegar, Dayne, and Whent felt the need to pull their swords against Lyanna alone that the kidnapping really is just that, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ran said:

Doubtful. Jon Snow is of the wrong age to have been conceived before Brandon's death.

Oh I didn't mean that little Snow. I was thinking more of Ashara's stillborn daughter. (sorry for being coy about that.)

 

6 hours ago, SFDanny said:

But you are in the best of hands if you are working with @Rhaenys_Targaryen. The irony about Cat's thoughts on Petyr's age is that she is amongst the best sources for such information in the books. Much better than Ned, who can't remember Renly's, or Tommen's ages to save his life.

 Less working with so much as standing on the shoulder's of giants. Thank you for your comments and input, btw. :cheers:

 

5 hours ago, SFDanny said:

My main problem with this is that is seems highly unlikely that the Starks would allow Lyanna to stay with a loyalist house so closely aligned with Rhaegar. After the events at Harrenhal is seems a highly unlikely choice for her to stay. Much more likely, it seems to me, is if Lyanna travels with her brothers to the Vale. The better for her and Robert to spend some quality supervised time together getting to know each other. Whether or not Lyanna goes north with Benjen, only to turn around and come back with Rickard seems an open question to me. But, either traveling from the Vale or ahead of her father's column it seems likely she leaves with a small party to go onto Riverrun herself, and it is on this journey that she is "kidnapped."

The Whents are her future in-laws through Catelyn Tully so building ties is probably a good idea. I also don't remember it being said that Whent's sons died under the Dragon at the Trident, but I might be wrong. It would certainly make sense for them to side with the Tully's due to Minisa Whent. Personally I find it tactically strange that the battle would take place at the Ruby Ford if the Targaryen's held Harrenhal and Darry.

My personal mental image of the tactics of the battle (complete with with standard History Channel moving graphics.) has the battle taking place on both sides of the ford (since the ford doesn't seem large enough to handle such numbers as mentioned going abreast.) with the Martells  fighting the Vale on the northern bank, Rhaegar and Robert holding the center at the ford and rivermen versus rivermen on the south bank with Jonothor Darry having already crossed to Darry earlier making a kind of diagonal battle line as opposed to a straight line on line fight as many picture. But that's just my head canon for the moment.

Share this post


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

But even if YG is the real deal - which I don't quite exclude - the question is, why the whole baby swap? KL was supposed to burn to the ground. I find it highly improbable that Varys never learned about the wildfire plot but we haven't had single indication that he tried to prevent it. It was Jaime who offed first Rossart and then the other pyromancers, and I don't think that Jaime's actions could have been predicted.

I'm sure he knew about the wildfire. If Qarlton Chelsted knew, then I'm assuming Varys would have likely known as well, although we also know that Varys had no idea that Ned's head would be lopped off and while he knew the poison that was used to kill Jon Arryn, we don't know if he knows who the actual poisoner is. 

That said, I think the wildfire plot would have played in his favor. The enemy is at the gate. Aerys opened the gates for Tywin even though Varys counseled him not to. If Rossart isn't killed by Jaime and the wildfire is set off then I'm assuming that Tywin, who is arguably the most powerful lord in the realm, and most of his army might have been taken out. That's the Warden of the West and his lords. It would have left the westerlands in disarray.

Quote

So, if Varys was willing to let KL burn, he didn't need a substitute for little Aegon; in fact, he could have smuggled out Elia herself with both children and no-one would have known they were alive.

Contingency plan, perhaps? Plus, I don't think he can take Elia and the children out of the Red Keep until the very last possible moment because of Aerys. Elia and the kids were his hostages. If they are stolen away, then it could have made Aerys even more volatile than he was. 

Once Tywin and his army are at the gate and Aerys decided to listen to Pycelle and they began sacking the city, Varys can't stall anymore. 

Quote

Which still makes me think that Varys is following his own agenda rather than support the Targaryens.

Maybe we should look at the interaction between Varys and Ned and the conversation Arya overhead between Varys and Illyrio. Varys does wants chaos between the Lannisters and the Starks, but at the same time, when Ned is arrested, Varys doesn't want him to die, so he arranges for him to go to the Wall. 

Varys is following his own agenda, but at the same time, he seems to genuinely want to protect Ned. Is it because Ned is an honorable man? Is it because he thinks that Robb will be more tractable and support a Targaryen restoration? Is it because he thinks that sparing Ned's life will stall the war and give him more time to continue preparing? Or maybe Varys wants Ned at the Wall for something very specific (I do think Varys has a man at the Wall).  

But more to your point, I doubt Varys does anything out of the goodness of his heart. But I do think that maybe he carries a lot of guilt around and I don't think he is nearly as cold as Littlefinger.

But I resigned myself a long time ago that we will never find out what half of Varys's motivations and agendas are.

Also, OP, sorry for 100% deviating from your thread and original question.

Edited by Alexis-something-Rose

Share this post


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

My main problem with this is that is seems highly unlikely that the Starks would allow Lyanna to stay with a loyalist house so closely aligned with Rhaegar. After the events at Harrenhal is seems a highly unlikely choice for her to stay. Much more likely, it seems to me, is if Lyanna travels with her brothers to the Vale. The better for her and Robert to spend some quality supervised time together getting to know each other. Whether or not Lyanna goes north with Benjen, only to turn around and come back with Rickard seems an open question to me. But, either traveling from the Vale or ahead of her father's column it seems likely she leaves with a small party to go onto Riverrun herself, and it is on this journey that she is "kidnapped."

Personally, I don't think Lyanna stayed at Harrenhal after the tourney.

But it can't be taken for granted that House Whent had been a loyalist house, or that it had been especially close to Rhaegar. Ser Oswell, a single Kingsguard knight, is the only Whent that is indicated to have been close to Rhaegar.

I think it is likely that Lord Walter Whent arranged the Harrenhal Tourney as a result of something his brother Ser Oswell conveyed to him during his visit, shortly before the tourney was announced, likely something that originated with Rhaegar.

But even if true, that doesn't necessarily indicate that House Whent had been loyalists, in the sense the word took on when war broke out and bannermen had to choose between king and liege lord, or that they had been especially close to Rhaegar.

What is certain is:

  • House Whent had been sworn to House Tully
  • a daughter of House Whent had wed Lord Hoster Tully and mothered his children and heirs
  • the eldest of those children, Catelyn, was to wed Lyanna's brother Brandon Stark, the heir to Winterfell

And unlike the Darrys, Rygers, and Mootons, who are singled out as bannermen that fought with Rhaegar, and the Freys, who are singled out as arriving well after the battle was over, there's no hint the Whents fought against their liege lord or withheld their forces during the last battles involving the houses of the Riverlands.

Catelyn knew them all: the Blackwoods and the Brackens, ever enemies, whose quarrels her father was obliged to settle; Lady Whent, last of her line, who dwelt with her ghosts in the cavernous vaults of Harrenhal; irascible Lord Frey, who had outlived seven wives and filled his twin castles with children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, and bastards and grandbastards as well. All of them were bannermen to the Tullys, their swords sworn to the service of Riverrun. Catelyn wondered if that would be enough, if it came to war. Her father was the staunchest man who'd ever lived, and she had no doubt that he would call his banners … but would the banners come? The Darrys and Rygers and Mootons had sworn oaths to Riverrun as well, yet they had fought with Rhaegar Targaryen on the Trident, while Lord Frey had arrived with his levies well after the battle was over, leaving some doubt as to which army he had planned to join (theirs, he had assured the victors solemnly in the aftermath, but ever after her father had called him the Late Lord Frey). It must not come to war, Catelyn thought fervently. They must not let it.

- AGOT: Catelyn V

It can't be ruled out, but there is not hint of it in the above quote or elsewhere.

And if it turns out that Lord Walter joined the Battle of the Bells on the side of Lord Tully and the rebels, I wouldn't be surprised if this is at least part of the reason Rhaegar left Ser Oswell about as far away from both King's Landing and the Riverlands as he could get, while men like Myles Mooton and Jonothor Darry, whose houses remained loyal to the Targaryens, and Lewyn Martell, whose niece was being held hostage by the king, fought against the rebels.

Aerys is already noted in TWOIAF to have been suspicious of Lord Walter during the Harrenhal Tourney. And in a scenario where Lord Whent joined Lord Tully and the rebels for the Battle of the Bells, there is a very real chance of the hostage-mad Aerys making Ser Oswell a hostage if he were to return to King's Landing. Or worse if threats to Oswell's life akin to those made to Lewyn about Elia failed to convince House Whent to abandon the rebels. 

Depending on when and how Ashara left King's Landing, there could be a similar motivation for Rhaegar keeping Ser Arthur Dayne down south.

Though I wouldn't go so far as to suggest it definitely was the reason, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Rhaegar was attempting to keep Arthur and Oswell away from harm at the hands of Aerys no less than he was attempting to keep Lyanna away from harm at the hands of Aerys by keeping them all in what may have been a sort of no man's land on the fringes of Dorne and the Stormlands, far away from King's Landing.

It could be argued that, if there was any threat of danger to Arthur, Oswell, and/or Lyanna at the hands of Aerys and his supporters, it was because of their respective connections to Rhaegar, and the perhaps off-and-on suspicions of treason Aerys had about Rhaegar, stoked by his lickspittles.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


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

Personally, I don't think Lyanna stayed at Harrenhal after the tourney.

But it can't be taken for granted that House Whent had been a loyalist house, or that it had been especially close to Rhaegar. Ser Oswell, a single Kingsguard knight, is the only Whent that is indicated to have been close to Rhaegar.

I think it is likely that Lord Walter Whent arranged the Harrenhal Tourney as a result of something his brother Ser Oswell conveyed to him during his visit, shortly before the tourney was announced, likely something that originated with Rhaegar.

But even if true, that doesn't necessarily indicate that House Whent had been loyalists, in the sense the word took on when war broke out and bannermen had to choose between king and liege lord, or that they had been especially close to Rhaegar.

I agree with most of what you wrote, but here I think you use the wrong test. What we are talking about is if the Starks can trust the Whents to keep her from contact with Rhaegar, not with which side of a future rebellion the House may fight, or even which side the House would ultimately side with in a possible conflict Aerys and Rhaegar. That Lord Walter is willing to play the role he did in bringing the tourney together for Rhaegar should make the Starks wary of leaving their daughter in Harrenhal under Lord Walter's protection.

I see Rhaegar's naming of Lyanna as he Queen of Love and Beauty as a political move as well as a declaration of personal interest in Lyanna's fate. Rhaegar stands before the realm and proclaims through this action of honoring Lyanna that he places himself between Lyanna and the marriage to Robert.

Brandon has to be restrained, not because he thinks the crown prince is a little too forward in his compliment of Lyanna, but because he is interfering in a marriage pact already pledged and negotiated by Lord Rickard and Robert. This has the potential of the breaking of the marriage pact of Prince Duncan with House Baratheon all over again. In fact, it turns out to be worse.

So, when the Starks leave Harrenhal they have to be worried that their right to make such contracts and have them honored are being called into question by both Rhaegar, and by Aerys in the naming of Jaime to the Kingsguard. After all the first blow lands on House Tully and Lannister at the start of the tourney.

With that as the background, I don't see how the Starks can take a chance on Lord Whent's loyalty to House Tully meaning he will choose the Stark interest in keeping Lyanna away from Rhaegar as paramount. After all, how would he turn away Rhaegar if he came visiting? Would he place Lyanna under lock and key for the duration of royal visit? And foremost, I take Brandon's reaction at Harrenhal as an indication he wouldn't allow his sister anywhere near Rhaegar or anyone who supports Rhaegar in any way. That, of course, doesn't mean Lyanna would willingly go along with what Brandon told her to do, but Brandon as the eldest and the heir would make the call in his father's absence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lyanna being carried off near Harrenhal doesn't mean she was staying there. And ten leagues is still a little over 30 miles, which is a pretty fair distance. So her so-called abduction could have happened anywhere within that radius of ten leagues. I'm not sure why Rickard Stark would have kept his daughter at Harrenhal when he could have sent her to Riverrun where she could have stayed and gotten to know the woman who was going to become the Lady of Winterfell.

Also, the Starks did have kin in the south where she could have stayed. Her mother's sister was married to a storm lord. And yes, she is 100% unknown quantity, but she existed.

About the Houses that fought for the Targaryens, while Catelyn mentions on the three in her thoughts, we find out House Goodbrook is another. So there could definitely be more. 

Edited by Alexis-something-Rose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2019 at 7:02 PM, CAllDSmith said:

I'm doing this whole little project involving a timeline for the Rebellion that partially uses something Rhaenys posted a while ago and the Litllefinger dating on the wiki and honestly there's only two logical conclusions for Littlefinger's age. 1.) George can't (or didn't) do math, that bane of all great writers or 2.) Cat honestly has no thrice-damned clue how old Littlefinger is, since she always just thought of him as being "younger than her" and "too young for her". When she tells us that Littlefinger is "shy of thirty" it's after also admitting that she hasn't even thought of him in over fifteen years. No rational person is going to jump thirteen to fifteen when telling a story, especially when the point of the story is "I was really young and out of my league and the other guy was twenty", so I honestly believe that Cat is experiencing that issue where you always think people who are younger than you are always younger than they are. There's also the issue that we don't even know how old Cat, Lysa, or Edmure are for sure. Cat never thinks about it, which considering the little bit about her clock ticking, but still being able to give Ned a sixth kid, makes me think she also might not be wanting to admit her age at that point. 

 

On 4/25/2019 at 8:31 AM, SFDanny said:

But you are in the best of hands if you are working with @Rhaenys_Targaryen. The irony about Cat's thoughts on Petyr's age is that she is amongst the best sources for such information in the books. Much better than Ned, who can't remember Renly's, or Tommen's ages to save his life.

The hints for Baelish's age are indeed contradictory.

We know that:

  • Baelish was "scarcely fifteen" in 282 AC
  • Baelish was "still shy of thirty" in 298 AC
  • And had been eight or younger when Catelyn was twelve.

"still shy of thirty" tells us that the eldest Baelish could be, was turning thirty in 298 AC (but that his birthday had not yet been at by that chapter). So, Baelish was, at least, born either in 268 AC, or later.

 

Further, we know that Baelish was "scarcely fifteen" in 282 AC, suggesting his fifteenth nameday had not been that long ago. Did he turn fifteen in 282 AC, or (if the duel took place early in the year) in (late) 281 AC? With his fifteenth birthday in 282 AC, he would have been born in 267 AC. With his fifteenth birthday in 281 AC, he would have been born in 266 AC.

 

Yet neither one of these two options can be reconciled with the "still shy of thirty" information we receive, nor with information we receive later on in AGOT.

Catelyn recalls:

She had not thought of that in years. How young they all had been—she no older than Sansa, Lysa younger than Arya, and Petyr younger still, yet eager. 

We know that Sansa and Arya are 2 more than years apart, despite their constant description of "two years". Sansa was born in late 286 AC, Arya in 289 AC. The fact that they describe it as "two years" regardless heavily implies, if not outright confirms, that Sansa and Arya differ more than 24 months, but less than two and a half year, as differing more than two and a half years would most likely be rounded up to "three years"

What Catelyn tells us here, is that she and Lysa differ more in age than Sansa and Arya, yet, they also describe their age difference as "two years". So, Catelyn and Lysa too differ between two and two and a half years in age.  Baelish is even younger, telling us that Baelish is younger than Catelyn by at least two and a half, if not more, years.

In fact, by referring to the ages her children have at the moment, Catelyn tells us that she was "no older than twelve" (Sansa's age at the time). Lysa had been younger  than Arya. Whether Arya is still nine, or already ten is not entirely clear. My guess would be ten, as stating that Lysa had been younger at the time than Arya was now would suggest that Lysa had been nine at the time Catelyn was twelve, (any younger would make it unable for her to have been two-two and a half years younger than Catelyn. Baelish was "younger still" than Lysa, suggesting he was eight (or younger) at the time.

So when Catelyn was  twelve Baelish was eight or younger. Catelyn was born in 264 or 265 AC, so she was twelve in either:

  • If born in 264 AC
    • Turning twelve in 276 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 277 AC
  • If born in 265 AC
    • Turning twelve in 277 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 278 AC 

So in either 276 AC, 277 AC, or 278 AC, Baelish was eight years old, or younger.

Being 8 in 276 AC would place his birth in 268 AC or 267 AC, depending on whether the memory took place before or after his birthday.

Being 8 in 277 AC would place his birth in 269 AC or 268 AC, and being 8 in 278 AC would place his birth in 270 AC or 269 AC.

 

If Baelish had been younger than eight at the time of the memory, his year of birth would be later than the options given by this information (267 AC, 268 AC, 269 AC, or 270 AC). However, the fact that, in 298 AC Baelish was “still shy of thirty” tells us that he cannot have been born any earlier than 268 AC, eliminating 267 AC as a possibility.

 

 So it is the "scarcely fifteen" that causes problems.

I found one online dictionary defining "scarcely" as:

  • barely; hardly; not quite: The light is so dim we can scarcely see.
  • definitely not: This is scarcely the time to raise such questions.
  • probably not: You could scarcely have chosen better.

The first of these definitions could suggest that Baelish was in fact fourteen years old at the duel, which would place his birth in either 268 AC (if he had turned fourteen that year) or 267 AC (if he was fourteen turning fifteen that year). With 268 AC overlapping with "shy of thirty", it would mean that that is his year of birth.... But fact remains that the most logical interpretation of "scarcely fifteen" makes Baelish having recently turned fifteen at the time of the duel.

 

So clearly, at least one of these hints is wrong. As two of the hint go together, and only one contradicts, my guess would be that the "scarcely fifteen" one is Catelyn remembering things incorrectly here.

Similarly, we have several hints regarding Renly Baratheon's age, but one of them (Eddard recalling Renly having been a boy of eight when Robert took the throne) contradicts the others, implying Eddard was remembering things incorrect there. The same situation would apply here. (The only difference being that in Baelish's case, all hints come from the same person)

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

What Catelyn tells us here, is that she and Lysa differ more in age than Sansa and Arya, yet, they also describe their age difference as "two years". So, Catelyn and Lysa too differ between two and two and a half years in age.  Baelish is even younger, telling us that Baelish is younger than Catelyn by at least two and a half, if not more, years.

Not exactly. Baelish is "younger still" than Lysa, but that could be by as little as a single day. 

I don't think you are giving enough leeway in the rough language use here.

"No older than Sansa" can mean 'the same number of birthdays as Sansa", so include some period of time less than 1 year actually being older. Its only safe to conclude that is Sansa is now 12, then Catelyn back then was <13.

"Lysa younger than Arya" doesn't help a lot as we don't know Arya's precise age. I Agree we can calculate Sansa as 12 and Arya as 9 or 10 gives Sansa-Arya as something over 2. 
Using that comparison and "no older than Sansa" = <13 could easily put Lysa as 10, even 10.5, and Petyr can be almost the same age. 

For example: Petyr =10.1, Lyss =10.3, Catelyn = 12.7, fits with everything, no?

 

I'm no expert here, it just appeared to me that your reasoning out the numbers appeared to be flawed in that not all the assumptions were strictly true (for example, Catelyn - Lisa = 2 to 2.5, therefore Catelyn-Peter = >2.5 is not logically true, though it may be correct), and all the estimates consistently erred one way, creating an overall anomaly where perhaps one might not exist?

Share this post


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

 

The hints for Baelish's age are indeed contradictory.

We know that:

  • Baelish was "scarcely fifteen" in 282 AC
  • Baelish was "still shy of thirty" in 298 AC
  • And had been eight or younger when Catelyn was twelve.

"still shy of thirty" tells us that the eldest Baelish could be, was turning thirty in 298 AC (but that his birthday had not yet been at by that chapter). So, Baelish was, at least, born either in 268 AC, or later.

 

Further, we know that Baelish was "scarcely fifteen" in 282 AC, suggesting his fifteenth nameday had not been that long ago. Did he turn fifteen in 282 AC, or (if the duel took place early in the year) in (late) 281 AC? With his fifteenth birthday in 282 AC, he would have been born in 267 AC. With his fifteenth birthday in 281 AC, he would have been born in 266 AC.

 

Yet neither one of these two options can be reconciled with the "still shy of thirty" information we receive, nor with information we receive later on in AGOT.

Catelyn recalls:

She had not thought of that in years. How young they all had been—she no older than Sansa, Lysa younger than Arya, and Petyr younger still, yet eager. 

We know that Sansa and Arya are 2 more than years apart, despite their constant description of "two years". Sansa was born in late 286 AC, Arya in 289 AC. The fact that they describe it as "two years" regardless heavily implies, if not outright confirms, that Sansa and Arya differ more than 24 months, but less than two and a half year, as differing more than two and a half years would most likely be rounded up to "three years"

What Catelyn tells us here, is that she and Lysa differ more in age than Sansa and Arya, yet, they also describe their age difference as "two years". So, Catelyn and Lysa too differ between two and two and a half years in age.  Baelish is even younger, telling us that Baelish is younger than Catelyn by at least two and a half, if not more, years.

In fact, by referring to the ages her children have at the moment, Catelyn tells us that she was "no older than twelve" (Sansa's age at the time). Lysa had been younger  than Arya. Whether Arya is still nine, or already ten is not entirely clear. My guess would be ten, as stating that Lysa had been younger at the time than Arya was now would suggest that Lysa had been nine at the time Catelyn was twelve, (any younger would make it unable for her to have been two-two and a half years younger than Catelyn. Baelish was "younger still" than Lysa, suggesting he was eight (or younger) at the time.

So when Catelyn was  twelve Baelish was eight or younger. Catelyn was born in 264 or 265 AC, so she was twelve in either:

  • If born in 264 AC
    • Turning twelve in 276 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 277 AC
  • If born in 265 AC
    • Turning twelve in 277 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 278 AC 

So in either 276 AC, 277 AC, or 278 AC, Baelish was eight years old, or younger.

Being 8 in 276 AC would place his birth in 268 AC or 267 AC, depending on whether the memory took place before or after his birthday.

Being 8 in 277 AC would place his birth in 269 AC or 268 AC, and being 8 in 278 AC would place his birth in 270 AC or 269 AC.

 

If Baelish had been younger than eight at the time of the memory, his year of birth would be later than the options given by this information (267 AC, 268 AC, 269 AC, or 270 AC). However, the fact that, in 298 AC Baelish was “still shy of thirty” tells us that he cannot have been born any earlier than 268 AC, eliminating 267 AC as a possibility.

 

 So it is the "scarcely fifteen" that causes problems.

I found one online dictionary defining "scarcely" as:

  • barely; hardly; not quite: The light is so dim we can scarcely see.
  • definitely not: This is scarcely the time to raise such questions.
  • probably not: You could scarcely have chosen better.

The first of these definitions could suggest that Baelish was in fact fourteen years old at the duel, which would place his birth in either 268 AC (if he had turned fourteen that year) or 267 AC (if he was fourteen turning fifteen that year). With 268 AC overlapping with "shy of thirty", it would mean that that is his year of birth.... But fact remains that the most logical interpretation of "scarcely fifteen" makes Baelish having recently turned fifteen at the time of the duel.

 

So clearly, at least one of these hints is wrong. As two of the hint go together, and only one contradicts, my guess would be that the "scarcely fifteen" one is Catelyn remembering things incorrectly here.

Similarly, we have several hints regarding Renly Baratheon's age, but one of them (Eddard recalling Renly having been a boy of eight when Robert took the throne) contradicts the others, implying Eddard was remembering things incorrect there. The same situation would apply here. (The only difference being that in Baelish's case, all hints come from the same person)

And now, you know just why the "Order of the Greenhand" basing their entire timeline and much of their theory on Petyr's birth is so absurd. Thank you, RT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

 

  • If born in 264 AC
    • Turning twelve in 276 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 277 AC
  • If born in 265 AC
    • Turning twelve in 277 AC
    • Twelve turning thirteen in 278 AC 

So in either 276 AC, 277 AC, or 278 AC, Baelish was eight years old, or younger.

Being 8 in 276 AC would place his birth in 268 AC or 267 AC, depending on whether the memory took place before or after his birthday.

Being 8 in 277 AC would place his birth in 269 AC or 268 AC, and being 8 in 278 AC would place his birth in 270 AC or 269 AC.

The thought occurred to me while reading this about how this aligns with the relationship between Hostery Tully and Lord-Baelish (I personally refer to Littlefinger's ancestors as Sellsword-Baelish, Hedge Knight Baelish, and Lord-Baelish for clarity.) Since we know both sparked their friendship in 260 during the War of the Ninepenny Kings and how that impacts some of the knowledge we have of other people in relation to them. All in all, I lean towards the "shy of thirty" being the mistake due to the factors I mentioned above. 

 

18 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

We know that Sansa and Arya are 2 more than years apart, despite their constant description of "two years". Sansa was born in late 286 AC, Arya in 289 AC. The fact that they describe it as "two years" regardless heavily implies, if not outright confirms, that Sansa and Arya differ more than 24 months, but less than two and a half year, as differing more than two and a half years would most likely be rounded up to "three years"

This is a point that I think should become a quick quote when discussing the timeline of 282-284 since Robert's Rebellion is typically said to have been fought for "almost a year" or "about a year" and language like that when we know from Robb's age and travel times that the war almost certainly lasted longer than a year, but not necessarily much longer than that. It makes me wonder when they are truly counting the rebellion as beginning, with Jon Arryn refusing to turn over Robert and Ned, or at the battle of Gull town, or possibly not until Robert arrived at Storm's End? (personally as a historian I would count the war as beginning either when Rhaegar 'abducted' Lyanna or when Brandon and Rickard were executed.) 

 

As a side note, I'm currently working to create a vague age range for Ser Gerold Hightower (Mostly based around Pycelle and some other hints, nothing solid as of yet.) is that something I might be able to receive your assistance in or is it not concrete enough for your interests? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, corbon said:

Not exactly. Baelish is "younger still" than Lysa, but that could be by as little as a single day. 

Sure, of course that is possible. But as Catelyn is comparing them to people, if Lysa and Baelish had been a few days apart (so both nine years old for example), it would, imo, be odd to compare Lysa's age to Arya's, but not Baelish's.

 

Quote

I don't think you are giving enough leeway in the rough language use here.

"No older than Sansa" can mean 'the same number of birthdays as Sansa", so include some period of time less than 1 year actually being older. Its only safe to conclude that is Sansa is now 12, then Catelyn back then was <13.

"Lysa younger than Arya" doesn't help a lot as we don't know Arya's precise age. I Agree we can calculate Sansa as 12 and Arya as 9 or 10 gives Sansa-Arya as something over 2. 
Using that comparison and "no older than Sansa" = <13 could easily put Lysa as 10, even 10.5, and Petyr can be almost the same age. 

For example: Petyr =10.1, Lyss =10.3, Catelyn = 12.7, fits with everything, no?

 

I'm no expert here, it just appeared to me that your reasoning out the numbers appeared to be flawed in that not all the assumptions were strictly true (for example, Catelyn - Lisa = 2 to 2.5, therefore Catelyn-Peter = >2.5 is not logically true, though it may be correct), and all the estimates consistently erred one way, creating an overall anomaly where perhaps one might not exist?

Even if Catelyn's "no older than Sansa" is meant to indicate an age younger than Sansa is at the moment, by calling Baelish younger than Lysa, imo, she is informing us that Lysa did not, at the time of the memory, had the same age as Baelish. Purely because she compares both herself and Lysa to specific ages.

Of course, that's just my humble opinion. Feel free to disagree :)  :cheers:

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


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

The thought occurred to me while reading this about how this aligns with the relationship between Hostery Tully and Lord-Baelish (I personally refer to Littlefinger's ancestors as Sellsword-Baelish, Hedge Knight Baelish, and Lord-Baelish for clarity.) Since we know both sparked their friendship in 260 during the War of the Ninepenny Kings and how that impacts some of the knowledge we have of other people in relation to them. All in all, I lean towards the "shy of thirty" being the mistake due to the factors I mentioned above. 

Why would Petyr's father having befriended Hoster Tully during the War of the Ninepenny Kings rule out Petyr having been born no earlier than 268 AC? 

 

7 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

This is a point that I think should become a quick quote when discussing the timeline of 282-284 since Robert's Rebellion is typically said to have been fought for "almost a year" or "about a year" and language like that when we know from Robb's age and travel times that the war almost certainly lasted longer than a year, but not necessarily much longer than that. It makes me wonder when they are truly counting the rebellion as beginning, with Jon Arryn refusing to turn over Robert and Ned, or at the battle of Gull town, or possibly not until Robert arrived at Storm's End? (personally as a historian I would count the war as beginning either when Rhaegar 'abducted' Lyanna or when Brandon and Rickard were executed.) 

History records the start of Robert's Rebellion as the moment Jon Arryn called the banners

The full depth of King Aerys’s madness was subsequently revealed in his depraved actions against Lord Stark, his heir, and their supporters after they demanded redress for Rhaegar’s wrongs. Instead of granting them fair hearing, King Aerys had them brutally slain, then followed these murders by demanding that Lord Jon Arryn execute his former wards, Robert Baratheon and Eddard Stark. Many now agree that the true start of Robert’s Rebellion began with Lord Arryn’s refusal and his courageous calling of his banners in the defense of justice. (TWOIAF, The Fall of the Dragons - Robert's Rebellion)

 

 

7 hours ago, CAllDSmith said:

As a side note, I'm currently working to create a vague age range for Ser Gerold Hightower (Mostly based around Pycelle and some other hints, nothing solid as of yet.) is that something I might be able to receive your assistance in or is it not concrete enough for your interests? 

I'd be interested to hear what evidence and hints there are to estimate his age :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Why would Petyr's father having befriended Hoster Tully during the War of the Ninepenny Kings rule out Petyr having been born no earlier than 268 AC? 

It doesn't, but it does tell us a bit about Alayne, the ages of the various Baelish's and some other possibilities in age for people they interact with. 

38 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I'd be interested to hear what evidence and hints there are to estimate his age :)

It's mostly circumstantial, "he had to be at least eighteen this year because of x, and it's not unlikely he's brother to the Lord of Hightower when Pycelle was at the Citadel because y." type of stuff. I'll message you what I've got some time tonight.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Sure, of course that is possible. But as Catelyn is comparing them to people, if Lysa and Baelish had been a few days apart (so both nine years old for example), it would, imo, be odd to compare Lysa's age to Arya's, but not Baelish's.

I don't see why its odd. She compares herself to Sansa and her sister to Arya (Sansa's sister). Then almost as an afterthought adds that Petyr is even younger than Lysa. Thats a very natural progression to me. The sisters to the sisters, and oh, this other guy who is even younger (and thus indirectly compared to Arya).

45 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Even if Catelyn's "no older than Sansa" is meant to indicate an age younger than Sansa is at the moment, by calling Baelish younger than Lysa, imo, she is informing us that Lysa did not, at the time of the memory, had the same age as Baelish. Purely because she compares both herself and Lysa to specific ages.

I'm not sure what you mean here?
Of course Lysa didn't, at any time, have the same age as Baelish. He's younger than her and always will be. But there is nothing that indicates she means he had not, at that time, had as many namedays (ie be less than 'same age' in terms of 'years old') as Lysa. The only implication in Catelyn's wording there is that Petyr is younger than Lysa. 

Perhaps I should resummarise. IMO, given casual language Catelyn is using:
1. "she no older than Sansa" can actually mean "has had the same number of birthdays" = could actually be a bit older, not just definitely younger.
2.  "Lysa younger (than Arya), and Petyr younger still" can simply mean Petyr is younger than Lysa, by any amount, not necessarily by a significant amount.

Given these two things, I can see, as in the example I gave already, Cat = 12.7, Lysa = 10.3, Petyr = 10.1, where your complaint is that you calculate Petyr at 8 and this creates a 2 yr discrepancy with the "scarcely 15" later. No?
And those are not at all extremes for my calculation. Petyr could be as little as 2yrs and a few weeks younger than Cat, potentially.

45 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Of course, feel free to disagree :)  :cheers:

:cheers: Heh sure. I don't think I care enough to disagree really, other than I think the work some people have done on timelines is incredible, and you are generally reckoned as one of the foremost among those. I'm just pointing out that the statements you made are not actually logically true, though they may still be factually true.
I think thats somewhat relevant when there appears to be a discrepancy in the 'facts' thats causing an issue, yet the discrepancy might just go away if you applied differently-accurate ( ;) ) understandings of what the written text actually means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rumor of Lyanna‘s abduction couldn’t have spread through some commoners who might have seen them travelling south, because in AGoT the people (who got attacked by G Clegane) didn’t even realise that Ned is not the king, despite wearing the colours of House Stark. Similarly, the Mallisters did not recognise Cat when they met on the kingsroad. 

Hence, even if people saw Lyanna and Rhaegar on the road, they probably would have said something like „hey, guess what, today I saw the prince riding south with some pretty girl, was that his wife? Wasn’t she from Dorne? This one didn’t look like it though...“

So Brandon must have learned about them through someone who knew her personally (as long as they didn’t carry like large banners or shields with them).

Do we know what Howland Reed did all this time after the tournament?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2019 at 7:26 PM, OneFretfulTrout said:

Do we know what Howland Reed did all this time after the tournament?

Nope. We don't know whether he went home or stuck around the Riverlands, or even went elsewhere. He was on a mini adventure it sounds like so goodness knows what he got up to. Odds are we'll only find out once the shadow finally steps into the limelight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, but unlikely. I don't think LF was in the business by then. But someone else was working on making a mess of the Targaryen's dynasty: Varys. And no doubt he was looking closely on Rhaegar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×