Heresy 221 and the Children of Winterfell

[SirArthur]

47 minutes ago, St Daga said:

I don't put it past GRRM to being very tricky with the whole birthday/nameday concept, and something important might be hidden in plain site.

Like Jon being born with the Wildlings ?

[BlackLightning]

I think it's also worth mentioning that Sansa's age is currently being fudged up before our very eyes.

Case in point: how old is she now? There's Sansa's age and then there's Alayne's age. The lords of the Vale will know how old Alayne is but won't be quite sure on the age of Sansa. I think that there's a one or two year age difference between Sansa and Alayne.

Maybe the whole Sansa/Alayne thing is a roundabout way of shedding light on the mysteries of the ages of Aegon, Daenerys and Jon. Aegon's age is particularly important because this is one way we can find out if he really is what Varys says he is or not.

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, St Daga said:

Yes, I have wondered about this. Like is a name day different than an actual birthday? North of the wall, it seems like a child is given a name on it's second birthday, but is the day of birth always referred to as a name day, or just the actual name day. And could that mean these wildlings are actually two years older than anyone thinks?

But does that translate to south of the wall? The baby that is born and named in our story that comes to mind is Lollys Stokeworth's bastard, whom Bronn names Tyrion Tanner. Why Tanner? It's not a traditional name for a bastard from Kings Landing, but I guess it's associated with the location of Lollys' rape.  But more importantly, this child seems to get a name soon after birth, so this would be different from wildling tradition. But does Tyrion Tanner have a birthday AND a nameday?

I don't put it past GRRM to being very tricky with the whole birthday/nameday concept, and something important might be hidden in plain site.

On one level it ought to be straightforward enough. A nameday corresponds with christening in our world and so far as parish registers are concerned it can be quite tricky working out dates. Sometimes they will helpfully record both the birth date as well as the baptism but all too often they will record only the baptism. The two events [except in an emergency when the child wasn't thought likely to live] are quite distinct. Custom and practice can obviously vary as to the time between birth and baptism, but its worth noting that Catholic children are or used to be named for their saint's day, which provides a handy reminder of birthdays when there's no calendar nailed to the wall.

Where it becomes less straightforward is that the emphasis on name days in ASoIF clearly implies that they take precedence over a supposed birth day and that there could be quite an interval between the two due to circumstances as well as custom.  The feast of John the Baptist falls on 24 June, and that of John the Evangelist on 27 December, roughly marking mid-summer and mid-winter. Hypothetically speaking if Jon Snow were named for either, his actual birth date might possibly be quite different by a long way

[Melifeather]

4 hours ago, SirArthur said:

My big problem with an earlier Dragonstorm (I just call it that way, because it was a storm right before Dragonstone was stormed by Stannis) has always been the "rebuilding of the ships" part. Even if the wood is available and already shaped, the construction needs time. 1 year is a good estimated time to build a warship and 9 months is prob. very fast. 

The other problem is, that the Targaryen fleet was supposed to wait 9 month on Dragonstone. Quite frankly, the fleet should have been able to support King's Landing before the fall or was even there but couldn't do anything because of the betrayal. And then they still have time. They can reach Storm's End before Ned and should have enough time during the 9 month for a couple of operations. Mostly Velaryon ships, which shouldn't really be destroyed on their own local ground. I get it when a foreign fleet unfamiliar with the region gets destroyed. The local fleet however should be able to get a portion of their ships out. 

The next problem is the fleet itself. It has a vast number of sailors and soldiers. All stranded on Dragonstone. With no means and ships to leave the island until Stannis arrives. If there are 5000 sailors, Stannis should have lost about 20k men taking a heavily fortified fortress island. Far too many in my opinion.

I think if you shorten the supposed time span, you should explain it better in this case.

I guess I need to read up on the Targaryen fleet, because I was under the impression that Ser Willem Darry only had a small garrison on Dragonstone and not a large armada? I was thinking only one ship would be needed to bring a group of soldiers across the bay to take the children hostage. Could you provide text to support the notion there were 5000 loyalist sailors on Dragonstone?

[JNR]

9 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

So, to me, it seems like:

1. GRRM has intentionally fudged up the birthdates between Aegon, Jon, Robb and Daenerys.
2. That GRRM has been doing it ever since Jon I and Catelyn II in A Game of Thrones

I feel like that speaks volumes. To be specific, I feel like that the conceptions and births of Aegon, Jon and Daenerys (and Robb but he's the monkey wrench) are a part of the central mystery of the song of ice and fire.

Well, GRRM's been generally vague about things like birthdays and exact ages at certain points in time... with most characters (Ned being a good example -- when is his birthday?). 

As Frey Family Reunion pointed out, this is just GRRM's standard routine.

ASOIAF is also obviously shot through with unreliable narration of many kinds.   So even in cases where something seems simple, like how old so-and-so is, it can turn out to be tricky knowing for sure.

That's annoying at times, but it also means that GRRM's puzzles, broadly speaking, don't require this kind of timing or logistical data to solve.  There are usually better roads to get to our target destination, if we can find them.

9 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

When Aerys sent Rhaella to Dragonstone with Viserys, she was already visibly pregnant. I'm sorry I don't have the reference to hand

Well, I don't think there is any such reference. 

We're just told she was "cloaked and hooded," the day she left for Dragonstone, so fans have sometimes wondered if she was visibly pregnant.  Or sometimes they wonder if it was even Rhaella, etc.  

But the canon certainly never says she was visibly pregnant at that time.

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

Well, GRRM's been generally vague about things like birthdays and exact ages at certain points in time... with most characters (Ned being a good example -- when is his birthday?). 

As Frey Family Reunion pointed out, this is just GRRM's standard routine.

ASOIAF is also obviously shot through with unreliable narration of many kinds.   So even in cases where something seems simple, like how old so-and-so is, it can turn out to be tricky knowing for sure.

That's annoying at times, but it also means that GRRM's puzzles, broadly speaking, don't require this kind of timing or logistical data to solve.  There are usually better roads to get to our target destination, if we can find them.

Well, I don't think there is any such reference. 

We're just told she was "cloaked and hooded," the day she left for Dragonstone, so fans have sometimes wondered if she was visibly pregnant.  Or sometimes they wonder if it was even Rhaella, etc.  

But the canon certainly never says she was visibly pregnant at that time.

It’s from the world book:

The World of Ice and Fire - The Fall of the Dragons: The End

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as a hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsel during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart—a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

[Black Crow]

5 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

It’s from the world book:

The World of Ice and Fire - The Fall of the Dragons: The End

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as a hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsel during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart—a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

Not convinced.

Remember that this is Yandel talking. Pregnancy can be, and indeed has to be inferred, if Danaerys is to be recognised as Aerys' daughter since he never saw Rhaella again, but it doesn't follow that she was visibly pregnant and indeed given the red door rabbit hole it might even be worth considering whether she might not have been pregnant at all. 

[asongofheresy]

No one doubting the legitimacy of Daenerys and no one figuring of RLJ in universe is so confusing for me. So an Essosi girl claim to born during the worst storm no one remembers and people believe her just because a boy known to be mad as his father says they are siblings. A Northern Lord goes to find his sister in Dorne comes back with a baby and body of said sister, no one doubts the boy may not be lord's own son although they know the sister was raped many times. If Westerosi aren't supposed to be dumbasses compared to book readers we have to assume Daenerys is a Targaryen and Jon is a Snow. And why would Illyrio/Varys need everyone to know Viserys and his sister roams from city to city in Essos when Viserys is the crowned king, but hides Aegon from his own uncles when Aerys passed Rhaegar's children anyway? 

[St Daga]

18 hours ago, SirArthur said:

19 hours ago, St Daga said:

I don't put it past GRRM to being very tricky with the whole birthday/nameday concept, and something important might be hidden in plain site.

Like Jon being born with the Wildlings ?

Maybe! There is the concept of Jon having "more of the north" in him than his brothers, which could be a nod to two northern parents.So certainly this could include parents from the North,  but does north of the wall also count? I would think so! We have Mance as a very important character in Jon's story, and he seems to be a reminder of Bael the Bard. In theory, Bael got a baby on a Stark maiden, so perhaps Lyanna was kidnapped, only she was never taken south, she was taken north. Mance has a fascination with Winterfell and has been there multiple times. His physical description is vague, but I think he has brown eyes. Qhorin is also interesting, with his grey eyes and serious demeanor, and there would be great tragedy in Jon unknowingly killing his father.

Several options would work for Jon's mother and father both to be from the kingdom of the North in Westeros, also, even if a person doesn't like the idea of Starkcest, I can't help but think of Roose the Raper and his actions with Ramsay's mother.

But, would being born north of the wall, cause Jon's age to be so skewed? That I am not sure of. 

 

17 hours ago, Black Crow said:

On one level it ought to be straightforward enough. A nameday corresponds with christening in our world and so far as parish registers are concerned it can be quite tricky working out dates. Sometimes they will helpfully record both the birth date as well as the baptism but all too often they will record only the baptism. The two events [except in an emergency when the child wasn't thought likely to live] are quite distinct. Custom and practice can obviously vary as to the time between birth and baptism, but its worth noting that Catholic children are or used to be named for their saint's day, which provides a handy reminder of birthdays when there's no calendar nailed to the wall.

Where it becomes less straightforward is that the emphasis on name days in ASoIF clearly implies that they take precedence over a supposed birth day and that there could be quite an interval between the two due to circumstances as well as custom.  The feast of John the Baptist falls on 24 June, and that of John the Evangelist on 27 December, roughly marking mid-summer and mid-winter. Hypothetically speaking if Jon Snow were named for either, his actual birth date might possibly be quite different by a long way

Sure, my baptism date is six months after my birthday, but my birthday is what counts for how old I am. Does it work the same where you are at? Age based on birthday? Or christening day? Because in Westeros, age seems derived from name day. Now, maybe we will hear that a child isn't named until it's seen likely to survive, but we have the names of several Targaryen children who were named and died after just a few days. 

I do wonder about the naming of children in our story. Who names them? A father? A mother? Is it a combined decision? The Stark children all have northern names, except Robb, I think. Robb is a name that comes up in the ASOIAF world as associated with the Riverlands and the Westerlands. Is Robb short for Robert, as many assume? Did Cat name him or did he not have a name until Ned met him?

Again, with Tyrion Tanner, we get the information that Bronn named the child. Bronn is his acting father but is certainly not his biologic father. Does Lollys not get a choice or does she just not care about her rape child? Does a name correlate to where you might have been born? Robb was certainly born in the Riverlands while the rest of Ned and Cat's children were born in the north, perhaps hence their northern names. Or maybe it's because Ned did have some influence on the names of these children, while he wasn't around for Robb's birth.

Which then does make me wonder who named Jon. I know there is the SSM that says that Ned named him, and that might be very true, but if so, is this a father's privilege to name a son? To name all his children?

This also leads my mind to wonder about Theon, who is Iron Born but claims that Theon Stark, the Hungry Wolf was his namesake! I have always found that interesting. And sorry, I know this is wild diversion from the nameday question! 

[JNR]

5 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Not convinced.

Remember that this is Yandel talking.

Yes, agreed.

This doesn't mean Rhaella was visibly pregnant; it just means a historian, writing about the event more than a decade later, is aware she was pregnant, because of course she subsequently gave birth to Dany.

Yandel could similarly describe Aerys as doomed at any point in the World book, because he knows Aerys was in fact doomed, if he wanted to.  But that wouldn't mean people at that time could look at Aerys and know he was doomed.

[JNR]

1 hour ago, Jova Snow said:

So an Essosi girl claim to born during the worst storm no one remembers and people believe her just because a boy known to be mad as his father says they are siblings.

I think their bonafides were established by Willem Darry having made the arrangements to care for them in Essos in the first place. 

His identity as master-at-arms at the Red Keep was established, and they also had some physical evidence at first:

Quote

Years past they had been forced to sell their last few treasures, and now even the coin they had gotten from Mother's crown had gone.

This one is a bit more awkward for GRRM:

1 hour ago, Jova Snow said:

A Northern Lord goes to find his sister in Dorne comes back with a baby and body of said sister, no one doubts the boy may not be lord's own son although they know the sister was raped many times.

Yes, it's a little peculiar.    I think the idea here is that Ned has such a reputation for being honorable that if he claims Jon is his bastard, and Jon then grows to resemble him so closely, it must be true, but you'd still think a few people would wonder.  (Perhaps they have, and we just haven't been told so in the story yet...)

1 hour ago, Jova Snow said:

And why would Illyrio/Varys need everyone to know Viserys and his sister roams from city to city in Essos when Viserys is the crowned king, but hides Aegon

Mopatis really doesn't seem to have thought any of it through, I agree.  If he sincerely wants a Targ on the Iron Throne, it would have been better to hide all three, and keep them as safe as he could, while trying to raise sufficient military force to give them a shot.

Selling Dany to a barbarian warlord was deeply risky. Sending Aegon up and down a river full of stone men and pirates was too.

I think on this, we're just supposed to pretend it makes sense and not think too hard about it, like the idea the Andals could never have invaded the North by sea, or the idea that Winterfell sits on a pressurized water table and yet the crypts are not full of water.

 

[LynnS]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

  2 hours ago, Jova Snow said:

And why would Illyrio/Varys need everyone to know Viserys and his sister roams from city to city in Essos when Viserys is the crowned king, but hides Aegon

Putting Viserys on display, in a matter of speaking, keeps attention off of Aegon, who is Varys/Illyrio's real prize.  It doesn't matter to them if Viserys is assassinated, but keeping Aegon existence a secret is far more important.  Nobody suspects that Rhaegar's son is still alive. With the possible exception of Ned Stark.   Viserys has been told that the usurper has assassins out looking for him and he should have been done away with a long time ago.  I think Jon Arryn and possibly Varys, had something to do with downplaying that threat to Robert.  It wasn't until Dany was sold of to Drogo and became pregnant, that Robert really sent assassins after her.

So as a diversion, it makes sense to me.  Viserys simply had no value to them.

[Melifeather]

No one in power ever questioned the validity that Daenerys was Aerys and Rhaella’s child. If it became known that she was “conveniently” born nine months after Rhaella left Kings Landing, I think there’d be whispers. Plus, in medieval Westeros, a female typically isn’t an heir or threat to the Iron Throne, unless she marries someone powerful and births a son. When Daenerys was pregnant, it would have been an opening for people to question her validity, but they don’t. IMO there’s no reason to question that she is who everyone believes her to be.

As for Young Griff - I’ve changed my mind. I thought he was Aegon, but after sorting through the parallels between Ashara and Sansa, I now believe Edric Dayne is Aegon. Young Griff is an imposter assembled by Varys, because he knew Aegon survived, and decided to create his idealistic vision of a good ruler.

The irony of Edric being Aegon is that he was part of a group that abducted Arya.

[St Daga]

19 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

No one in power ever questioned the validity that Daenerys was Aerys and Rhaella’s child. If it became known that she was “conveniently” born nine months after Rhaella left Kings Landing, I think there’d be whispers. Plus, in medieval Westeros, a female typically isn’t an heir or threat to the Iron Throne, unless she marries someone powerful and births a son. When Daenerys was pregnant, it would have been an opening for people to question her validity, but they don’t. IMO there’s no reason to question that she is who everyone believes her to be.

I agree that no one questions that Rhaella could have bore a child that his Dany's age, so Rhaella was either known to be pregnant (though known to be pregnant and visibly pregnant are two different things) or Rhaella was pregnant so often that no one questioned that she could be pregnant again and when a child was born and people claimed in was Rhaella's, no one disputed it. However, I really doubt that Dany is the child of Aerys and Rhaella, but the text doesn't outright dispute it. This is the same rational for R+L=J, which is never outright talked about as being possible in world nor disputed. It could be or it couldn't be.

 

22 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

As for Young Griff - I’ve changed my mind. I thought he was Aegon, but after sorting through the parallels between Ashara and Sansa, I now believe Edric Dayne is Aegon. Young Griff is an imposter assembled by Varys, because he knew Aegon survived, and decided to create his idealistic vision of a good ruler.

Isn't Edric Dayne too young to be Aegon? When Arya meets him in Storm she thinks he is ten or twelve and he is listed as twelve in the appendix if that novel. Now, the appendix's might not be absolute truth, but shouldn't Aegon be 16-17 at this point in time, roughly a year older than Robb and Jon. Twelve and seventeen is a large age difference, one that I think is too big to be passed off as a growth restriction.

 

[Melifeather]

54 minutes ago, St Daga said:

I agree that no one questions that Rhaella could have bore a child that his Dany's age, so Rhaella was either known to be pregnant (though known to be pregnant and visibly pregnant are two different things) or Rhaella was pregnant so often that no one questioned that she could be pregnant again and when a child was born and people claimed in was Rhaella's, no one disputed it. However, I really doubt that Dany is the child of Aerys and Rhaella, but the text doesn't outright dispute it. This is the same rational for R+L=J, which is never outright talked about as being possible in world nor disputed. It could be or it couldn't be.

 

Isn't Edric Dayne too young to be Aegon? When Arya meets him in Storm she thinks he is ten or twelve and he is listed as twelve in the appendix if that novel. Now, the appendix's might not be absolute truth, but shouldn't Aegon be 16-17 at this point in time, roughly a year older than Robb and Jon. Twelve and seventeen is a large age difference, one that I think is too big to be passed off as a growth restriction.

 

If Edric is Aegon he should be 7 months older than Jon, 16 months older than Robb, and newly turned 16 when A Game of Thrones begins. Do you have the text handy where Arya wonders about his age?

[JNR]

2 hours ago, St Daga said:

Isn't Edric Dayne too young to be Aegon?

Far too young.

Quote

 

"I never learned the lance, but I could beat you with a sword," said Arya. "Have you killed anyone?"

That seemed to startle him. "I'm only twelve."

I killed a boy when I was eight, Arya almost said, but she thought she'd better not. "You've been in battles, though."

 

Even if we imagine he's lying, it's very hard to imagine that he could be claiming he's twelve when he's really more like seventeen.  It never even occurs to Arya to doubt he's twelve.

[JNR]

3 hours ago, LynnS said:

Putting Viserys on display, in a matter of speaking, keeps attention off of Aegon, who is Varys/Illyrio's real prize.  It doesn't matter to them if Viserys is assassinated, but keeping Aegon existence a secret is far more important.

I'm not so sure, because Mopatis gives Dany those dragon eggs for a wedding present in AGOT.

They are enormously valuable, even putting aside their theoretical potential to hatch, and Mopatis knew that.  So if Dany and Viserys meant nothing to Mopatis, I can't believe he'd have given up those eggs.

I think he was hedging his bets.  In such a position -- wanting to restore the Targs but having no way to know how things might play out in the future -- he supported his three different options in different ways. 

But none of the ways he chose were safe enough, IMO.  All three Targs stood a good chance of getting killed, and Viserys did in fact wind up dead.

[LynnS]

8 minutes ago, JNR said:

I'm not so sure, because Mopatis gives Dany those dragon eggs for a wedding present in AGOT.

They are enormously valuable, even putting aside their theoretical potential to hatch, and Mopatis knew that.  So if Dany and Viserys meant nothing to Mopatis, I can't believe he'd have given up those eggs.

I think he was hedging his bets.  In such a position -- wanting to restore the Targs but having no way to know how things might play out in the future -- he supported his three different options in different ways. 

But none of the ways he chose were safe enough, IMO.  All three Targs stood a good chance of getting killed, and Viserys did in fact wind up dead.

Mopatis does have a specific interest in Dany as demonstrated when he gives her the eggs.  But I think that Viserys is more or less a decoy and expendable.  He's the Targaryen heir and must be done away with in some fashion if Aegon is to take his place.

Mopatis is a R'hllorist and I'm not sure he thinks that Aegon is the pwip once Dany hatches the eggs.  If proof to Mopatis that she is the chosen one.  I know he says something about it but I can't find the quote. 

Certainly there are risks to all three but they aren't putting their eggs in one basket.

 

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, JNR said:

Far too young.

Even if we imagine he's lying, it's very hard to imagine that he could be claiming he's twelve when he's really more like seventeen.  It never even occurs to Arya to doubt he's twelve.

Welp, back to the drawing board! There’s something there though. Too many parallels to be nothing.

[asongofheresy]

A late night crackpot for you guys entertainment because I can't sleep. What if X is a Targaryen theory too! You know how there are thoughts about Gerold Dayne being a son of Rhaella and Aerys right? What if Ashara Dayne was actually a Targaryen? In 267 ac Queen Rhaella gave birth to a daughter Shaena, Rhaegar was eight, who was stillborn. But Aerys, Rhaegar and half the court were at westerlands. Rhaella, who was hated her brother husband, and probably hated her own incestuous parents for her marriage based on a words of a woods witch, decide to save her own daughter from the same future. Ashara Dayne's age is never given but based on the information we have she should be born between 261-270 ac so things are great with this tinfoil. But the main issue is Ashara's hair, she is said to have dark hair by Barristan but that's up to debate. Barristan says Ashara's stillborn daughter would look like Daenerys, Jorah says Daenerys reminds him Lynesse, Lynesse's sister Alerie has silver hair, Daeron the Drunk had sandy blond hair and his mother was Dyanna Dayne. So it is possible Ashara had dark hair compared to other Arthur. Which will make Shaena's parentage questionable, but my man George never write about Hasty's hair color so no visable hole in my tinfoil armour yet. He also made Hasty serve for Merryweather at some point so Rhaella could be close to her first love even after her marriage. Bless. Years later Shaena returns to court as a lady in waiting for Elia, and at Harrenhall she is fourteen, has a Stormlander knight who love her but tragically ends up giving birth to her brother's baby, something Rhaella wanted to avoid, but said child, Daenerys is still the only Targaryen to hatch a dragon after their death, making her the Princess that was promised! Enjoy chapter one, I will post chapter two soon.