The Fellowship of the Prince that was Promised

[corbon]

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

I find incredibly hard to believe that the rebels let a royalist army get gathered and linked with the main royalist army in front of their faces.

Riiight. Because thats the only way it could happen. And because they have full and immediate information about all troop movements everywhere and enough troops everywhere to stop anyone moving a substantial force.

Remember the scattered survivors of tBotBs being rallied at the Stoney Sept by Darry and Selmy? The rebels won the battle but they they withdrew to Riverrun for the weddings. And the reason Robert was there was he'd been chased up from Ashford. South of Stoney Sept is loyalist territory.

Jon Darry, if Jaime's recollection is correct, had returned to KL. Had Barristan? Had those troops? We don't know. 

What I do know is that the BotTrident was closer to Riverrun than KL. So if the Rebels, led by Robert (famed for lightning marches) were marching south already and Rhaegar reacted to them, how come he got further along than they did?

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

Because Gulltown, as any proper city in Westeros, is not weak and by taking them, the rebels should heavily outnumber the royalists.

For a thousand years, Winterfell and the Eyrie contested for the rule of the Three Sisters. The Worthless War, some dubbed it. Time and time again the fighting seemed at an end, only to flare up once more a generation later. The islands changed hands more than a dozen times. Thrice the Northmen landed on the Fingers. The Arryns sent a fleet up the White Knife to burn the Wolf’s Den, and the Starks replied by attacking Gulltown and burning hundreds of ships in their wroth when the city walls proved too strong for them.

Yup. Gulltown has walls. And when well defended in a time of war (this was a retaliation for an earlier Arryn strike against the Starks), its not easy to attack.

But it was attacked, it was taken by an assault over the walls. There is no indication of a siege, or the walls being battered down, or a huge battle costing thousands of men. There are no great lists of casualties like you would get in a major assault on a fortified and well defended city, just Marc Grafton.
Which rather argues for my position over yours, no? I mean, you are literally arguing that what we are told happened happened in a nearly impossible way, instead of my relatively easy way.

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

Martin has also said that the power of the Vale is far more concentrated than the North and Robb lasted less than a month to gather 20k swords. There is really no reason that a few weeks of preparations happen, while a few skirmishes were being fought in the Vale.

Sure there is. Robert has to get home, quickly. 

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

The royalist would try to defend Gulltown

They did. Or at least the Graftons did, and pre-spurs Lynn Corbray. Note there are also Arryns based in Gulltown.
I doubt Marc Grafton had 'organised' resistance by multiple loyalist Lords through the Vale, concentrating them at Gulltown. Frankly, give there are Arryns in Gulltown, I'm not even sure he had the full support of everyone in Gulltown. Probably mostly just his own men and maybe one or two other Lords (Corbray wasn't even a knight at this stage, so he's probably a squire fighting under another family's banner - Graftons? 
But Jon Arryn and Robert would have been riding hard for Gulltown to get Robert home, and picking up troops from every loyal house along the way. 

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

since Ned and Robert had to get out of the Vale to call their banners and the rebels would have to get ready to take the city.

Err, Ned went the other way.

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

1000 guys can't take any city.

Of course they can. 50 men can take a city if its not defended. You just need to take the rulers and compel them to submit. How many men did Theon use to take Winterfell?

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

To get to the Gates of the Moon, they have to pass the bloody gates first

So I misremembered the name of the choke point. Oops.

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

and it doesn't take that many people to properly defend it, it's likely that by the time of the trident, they are either lost or unreliable. 

Not many men to defend the Bloody gates, no. But Gulltown, and many other locations need defenders. It would look bad if the Rebels were all at Riverrun with a huge combined army while royal forces (or other forces, like the Ironborn) took the Vale, the Neck, the North etc.
Thats the point.

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

I guess you're right that's the thing in my world but since Tywin straight up ignored the rebels and the royalists

Did he?
"Ignoring calls to arms" is not the same thing as not talking at all. It means he didn't address calling his arms on their side. That doesn't mean they weren't trying to find something he'd agree to. 
What it does show is that they were trying to get him to join.

[frenin]

4 minutes ago, corbon said:

Riiight. Because thats the only way it could happen. And because they have full and immediate information about all troop movements everywhere and enough troops everywhere to stop anyone moving a substantial force.

Right before the Trident?? Prettty much yes, the rebel army would've already been gathered and would certainly overwhelm any significant army in the area  and also be aware of any significant army in the area.

 

6 minutes ago, corbon said:

Remember the scattered survivors of tBotBs being rallied at the Stoney Sept by Darry and Selmy? The rebels won the battle but they they withdrew to Riverrun for the weddings. And the reason Robert was there was he'd been chased up from Ashford. South of Stoney Sept is loyalist territory.

Jon Darry, if Jaime's recollection is correct, had returned to KL. Had Barristan? Had those troops? We don't know. 

But all that happened almost a year after the trident. Aerys sent Darry and Barristan right away after the Bells to get the survivors before even Robb was conceived.

 

9 minutes ago, corbon said:

Remember the scattered survivors of tBotBs being rallied at the Stoney Sept by Darry and Selmy? The rebels won the battle but they they withdrew to Riverrun for the weddings. And the reason Robert was there was he'd been chased up from Ashford. South of Stoney Sept is loyalist territory.

Jon Darry, if Jaime's recollection is correct, had returned to KL. Had Barristan? Had those troops? We don't know. 

Who says the rebels were at Riverrun when they decided to march?? It's a long detour if the plan is going straight up to King's Landing.

 

22 minutes ago, corbon said:

Yup. Gulltown has walls. And when well defended in a time of war (this was a retaliation for an earlier Arryn strike against the Starks), its not easy to attack.

It's not easy to surpass its walls in any way, i don't really see when we're told Gulltown is weak, it has walls, just

 

24 minutes ago, corbon said:

But it was attacked, it was taken by an assault over the walls. There is no indication of a siege, or the walls being battered down, or a huge battle costing thousands of men. There are no great lists of casualties like you would get in a major assault on a fortified and well defended city, just Marc Grafton.
Which rather argues for my position over yours, no? I mean, you are literally arguing that what we are told happened happened in a nearly impossible way, instead of my relatively easy way.

Perhaps because the only info we have of the battle is an offhand comment?? Marq Grafton was an important loyalist in th Vale, his dead, the fact that Robert was the one who killed and the fact that Gulltown had passed to rebel hands is the main info and is the info that made Lord Borrell spare Ned's life, we don't know about the rest because the rest  is irrelevant to the one telling the tale who is talking to someone who should know what happened in Gulltown. But sure, maybe it was just Robert and Jon Arryn.

Unless heavily outnumbered, it's very very unlikely a storm is to suceed.

 

32 minutes ago, corbon said:

But it was attacked, it was taken by an assault over the walls. There is no indication of a siege, or the walls being battered down, or a huge battle costing thousands of men. There are no great lists of casualties like you would get in a major assault on a fortified and well defended city, just Marc Grafton.
Which rather argues for my position over yours, no? I mean, you are literally arguing that what we are told happened happened in a nearly impossible way, instead of my relatively easy way.

And to that they need to get ready to march against Gulltown.

 

33 minutes ago, corbon said:

They did. Or at least the Graftons did, and pre-spurs Lynn Corbray. Note there are also Arryns based in Gulltown.
I doubt Marc Grafton had 'organised' resistance by multiple loyalist Lords through the Vale, concentrating them at Gulltown. Frankly, give there are Arryns in Gulltown, I'm not even sure he had the full support of everyone in Gulltown. Probably mostly just his own men and maybe one or two other Lords (Corbray wasn't even a knight at this stage, so he's probably a squire fighting under another family's banner - Graftons? 
But Jon Arryn and Robert would have been riding hard for Gulltown to get Robert home, and picking up troops from every loyal house along the way. 

The Gulltowns Arryns are not considered part of the House, nor do we know their loyalties during the fight. I don't really know why he shouldn't, the loyalist know that the only viable way for Robert and Ned to get out of the Vale is via Gulltown, i doubt many were considering Ned's risky move, Gulltown is the default zone of a major conflict. 

 

51 minutes ago, corbon said:

Err, Ned went the other way.

Because he could not wait to take Gulltown.

 

53 minutes ago, corbon said:

They did. Or at least the Graftons did, and pre-spurs Lynn Corbray. Note there are also Arryns based in Gulltown.
I doubt Marc Grafton had 'organised' resistance by multiple loyalist Lords through the Vale, concentrating them at Gulltown. Frankly, give there are Arryns in Gulltown, I'm not even sure he had the full support of everyone in Gulltown. Probably mostly just his own men and maybe one or two other Lords (Corbray wasn't even a knight at this stage, so he's probably a squire fighting under another family's banner - Graftons? 
But Jon Arryn and Robert would have been riding hard for Gulltown to get Robert home, and picking up troops from every loyal house along the way. 

Did i need to make obvious that the case is if it's defended??

 

54 minutes ago, corbon said:

Not many men to defend the Bloody gates, no. But Gulltown, and many other locations need defenders. It would look bad if the Rebels were all at Riverrun with a huge combined army while royal forces (or other forces, like the Ironborn) took the Vale, the Neck, the North etc.
Thats the point.

They don't need that many to defend those lands.

 

 

55 minutes ago, corbon said:

Did he?
"Ignoring calls to arms" is not the same thing as not talking at all. It means he didn't address calling his arms on their side. That doesn't mean they weren't trying to find something he'd agree to. 
What it does show is that they were trying to get him to join.

He did.

Ignoring calls to arms, when the message is a  call to arms is pretty telling and we know that Tywin did ignore the ravens of Aerys and Ned says that he ignored both sides of the war.

It does show that they were trying to get him to join, i never denied thatm i said that they would not have spent a lot of time doing it.

[Frey family reunion]

15 hours ago, Lady Rhodes said:

Also, it is said that Lyanna disappeared close to the start of the year,

No, not really.  Here is what it says:

Quote

With the coming of the new year, the crown prince had taken to the road with haf a dozen of his closest friends and confidants, on a journey that would ultimately lead him back to the riverlands.  Not ten leagues from Harrenhal, Rhaegar fell upon Lyanna Stark of Winterfell, and carried her off, lighting a fire that would consume his house and kin and all those he loved - and half the realm besides.

Rhaegar leaves King's Landing at the beginning of the year, but it's unknown when his journey leads him back to the Riverlands.  Assuming that he headed straight towards the Riverlands and assuming that Lyanna was present near Harrenhal at that time period, then yes, we can assume that she disappeared close to the start of they year.

But we don't know if Rhaegar and company were riding out just to collect Lyanna.  And we don't know when Lyanna would have first been present in the Riverlands.  These unknowns make it suspect to assume that Lyanna disappeared at the beginning of the year.

I think @Bael's Bastard did a pretty good job of summarizing the events that had to have happened after the start of the year before Lyanna could have been abducted.

The wording of the World Book also makes me think that GRRM is leaving the time of her abduction purposely vague.  Why not just say that Rhaegar and company left King's Landing where they came upon Lyanna not ten leagues from Harrenhal.  The fact that they would ultimately come back to the Riverlands, makes me think that they may have journeyed to some other locations first.

[Frey family reunion]

On 4/26/2020 at 11:01 AM, Lady Rhodes said:

The Varys bit is interesting but he certainly isn’t infallible. It seems he was unaware of the Braavos pact. 
There are a lot of questions that I have given the tourney of Harrenhal:

1) Why did Ned return to the Vale instead of attending Brandon’s wedding?

2)Why was Lyanna alone near Harrenhal months past the tourney? If she was with someone, who? And where are they now? (Or Is she the pregnant woman in Bran’s vision?)

 

I have a possible explanation for some of these questions.  If indeed, Brandon left Riverrun to meet up with his father's wedding party as stated in the App (I'm not really sure of the source for this info, so take it with a grain of salt).  Then it seems very possible that Brandon in fact met up with his father's wedding party and they travelled together to Riverrun.  

Since we were dealing with a presumably large party (especially if it also involved Valemen in addition to Northmen) it stands to reason that they may have stopped at one of the castles large enough to host such a party.  Harrenhal would be a location that could fit this bill.  It could also have been a meeting place for travelers from the North and travelers from the Vale to come together as they journeyed towards Riverrun.    The fact that both Rickard Stark and the Whents were "friends of the Watch" makes me think they may have had friend/interests in common.

So that would put Rickard, Brandon, Lyanna, and possibly Ned and Robert all together at Harrenhal at the time of Lyanna's disappearance.  Brandon and his groomsmen then make a mad dash to King's Landing, while Rickard and the wedding party stay at Harrenhal as they try and figure out what happened to Lyanna.  Aerys then sends word of Brandon and company's imprisonment to Harrenhal and demands that their fathers come to King's Landing.  

Rickard complies but not before sending Ned and Robert to the Eyrie for their protection.  

 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, frenin said:

Right before the Trident?? Prettty much yes, the rebel army would've already been gathered and would certainly overwhelm any significant army in the area  and also be aware of any significant army in the area.

You realise that a triangle made up of Stoney Sept, Riverrun and the area of the Battle of the Trident has sides somewhere around 200 miles long?

Quote

But all that happened almost a year after the trident. Aerys sent Darry and Barristan right away after the Bells to get the survivors before even Robb was conceived.

I think you mean before, not after. And its not a year, maybe 6 months or so. Some argue less. Some argue a bit more.
The simple fact is that we have no information whatsoever as to the whereabouts of any part of the main rebel army between the BotB and the Trident, except that the main commanders and probably a good part of the army congregated at Riverrun after the BotBs for negotiations and a twin wedding. 
And that Ned (and presumably some or all of the army) left Riverrun a couple of weeks after the wedding, to go to war. Where too, who knows? But looking at a map and the strategic and logistical situation and the lack of a major battle mentioned, there are a lot more interesting places closer to the Trident than Riverun is rather than further away. Which supports my 'possible' argument (we don;t know the army that was already on the way to the Trident was the rebels )more than your 'definitive' argument (it was the rebels).

And they weren't sent to 'get' the survivors (ie bring them back to KL), they were sent to 'rally' them (ie reform them into a fighting force. Maybe they came back to KL maybe they didn't. The point is, when I say we don't know that the other army marching to the Trident before Rhaegar left KL was the rebels as you stridently assume, we don;t know. The text points to other possibilities being open. 

Quote

Who says the rebels were at Riverrun when they decided to march?? It's a long detour if the plan is going straight up to King's Landing.

They probably weren't, since Ned left Cat after only two weeks and didn't see her for a year. Perhaps they were closer to the Trident, perhaps further. Given the main Royalist Host was at KL, it seems more likely rather than less likely that they were between Riverrun and the Trident, which, if you care to look at a map, is basically on the direct travel route between Riverrun and KL - along the River Road and the Kings Road, rather than through the woods and holls of High Heart and Acorn Hill and around the Gods Eye.

Perhaps they were further away - say at Hornvale or the Mummers Ford, ad they did leave for the Trident first, but took longer despite Robert leading because of the terrain vs the Kingsroad and Rhaegar was responding to them. I just don't think thats a reasonable assumption to make.

Quote

It's not easy to surpass its walls in any way, i don't really see when we're told Gulltown is weak, it has walls, just

Perhaps because the only info we have of the battle is an offhand comment?? Marq Grafton was an important loyalist in th Vale, his dead, the fact that Robert was the one who killed and the fact that Gulltown had passed to rebel hands is the main info and is the info that made Lord Borrell spare Ned's life, we don't know about the rest because the rest  is irrelevant to the one telling the tale who is talking to someone who should know what happened in Gulltown. But sure, maybe it was just Robert and Jon Arryn.

Unless heavily outnumbered, it's very very unlikely a storm is to suceed.

Well gee. Thats what I'm saying and you're nay-saying.
The fact remains, it did succeed. Robert was first over the walls and slew Marc Grafton. No one else is mentioned except Squire Corbray fighting at the gates. 
And it succeeded relatively quickly. By the time Ned got to Sisterton the news of the Battle of Gulltown had preceeded him there.

Here's a thing about being outnumbered. Its simply odds. Its much easier to get, say, 5-1 outnumbering when the numbers are in the hundreds, than when they are in the thousands.
Plus, once the defenders have enough men to fully man the walls, then it starts getting exponentially harder for the attackers.

Quote

Because he could not wait to take Gulltown.

You've looked at a map right?

Gulltown is in the opposite direction, more or less.

Robert needed to get home just as urgently - more urgently given their respective strategic locations, than Ned. I think it speaks of their characters that they decided two different things. Robert went for the shortest route home, with a fight on the way, and it worked for him. Ned chose a less uncertain route, being the more cautious of the two, and went in the opposite direction where no fight would need to be won before he got home. 
Note that by the time Ned got to the Sistertons, Robert was probably already at Storms End, as the news of the battle of Gulltown preceded Ned's arrival and Storms End is pretty much just as close to Gulltown as the Sisterton is by ship.
 

1 hour ago, frenin said:

He did.

Are there you go, all definitive again. Never mind what the text says or what actually happened.

Quote

Ignoring calls to arms, when the message is a  call to arms is pretty telling

Yup. Its called not actually announcing military support. Beyond, thaht, its says nothing.

Quote

and we know that Tywin did ignore the ravens of Aerys and Ned says that he ignored both sides of the war.

No, Ned says he ignored 'calls to arms'. All that means is that he didn;t accept their pretexts for rebellion and wouldn't join them..

Quote

It does show that they were trying to get him to join, i never denied thatm i said that they would not have spent a lot of time doing it.

Ok. They must have done it your way. Tywn didn't answer so they just ignored him and left themselves wide open in the rear.
Whatever.

[SFDanny]

17 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

It could be possible that the attack took place as Elia was traveling to King's Landing for her wedding, although there are a few thoughts that come up with this scenario. Would Aerys, already paranoid and fearful that Tywin was planning to assassinate him, agree to part from any one of his Kingsguard, specifically the Lord Commander, for a large amount of time? Would Hightower, if the attack had taken place a year or more before the Brotherhood was defeated, not have eventually taken over command of the force against them? 

 

It is true that we do not know when Jaime joined the force against the outlaws, but we can conclude that Sumner Crakehall and his squires participated in the campaign at least for a few months, if we consider all that happened to Merrett. Some time passed after the end of the campaign and the tourney as well, at least slightly more than a month.

. "I earned my knighthood. Nothing was given to me. I won a tourney mêlée at thirteen, when I was yet a squire. At fifteen, I rode with Ser Arthur Dayne against the Kingswood Brotherhood, and he knighted me on the battlefield. It was that white cloak that soiled me, not the other way around. So spare me your envy. It was the gods who neglected to give you a cock, not me."

In this quote by Jaime, he tells Brienne about his accomplishments.  If he had joined the force against the Brotherhood at the age of fourteen, would that not have been the age he would have mentioned here?

In addition, if the encounter Elia and Hightower had with the Brotherhood had occurred as she was traveling to King's Landing for her wedding, that would mean that the campaign against the Brotherhood had lasted more than a year. The Kingswood is quite close to King's Landing, so while it would have taken Arthur Dayne some time to convince the smallfolk to trust him and bring their issues to the King, it is not the case that they were so far away that this distance would significantly increase the length of the campaign.

It is possible that the encounter occurred before Elia's marriage to Rhaegar, of course, but IMO it might be more likely to have occurred during her marriage. I had really hoped that the Kingswood Brotherhood would have been mentioned in 

There is a lot we don't know about this campaign. When it starts? Could someone else have commanded it before Ser Arthur? When the campaign ends? And much, much else is totally unknown to us about this tantalizing bit of backstory. My guess is that the initial encounter with the bandits takes place while Hightower escorts Elia to her wedding in King's Landing. How far before the wedding we don't know, but we know the timing of the wedding and Rhaenys birth both being in 280 AC likely places the wedding in very early 280. That is especially true given Aegon's birth and the six months of bed rest Elia needs after Rhaenys's birth which pushes the wedding back to the first or second month of 280. 

Of course, there are assumptions here. I'm assuming Rhaenys isn't conceived until after the wedding. I'm assuming Elia's pregnancy with both Rhaenys and Aegon are full term ones. I'm also assuming Elia isn't prone to riding through bandit infested forests on a regular basis. And I think I'm right in taking the hint Martin gives us in the White Book with sending Ser Barristan to escort Cersei to her wedding that using the Lord Commander for such duty is not uncommon. I'm going to have to do a re-read of Fire & Blood to see if there aren't more historical examples of the Lord Commander leading brides-to-be to royal weddings. Of course, the fact the Targaryens have so many sibling weddings may limit the need for such escorts. I think I'm on safe ground here, but there could be other explanations.

But let me put forward another bit of speculation about his subject. I find it a bit unusual that Aerys would appoint Ser Arthur to lead this campaign, regardless if he takes it over from someone else or did so from the beginning. I say that only because Aerys must know Ser Arthur is Rhaegar's man. His closest friend and confidant. Perhaps Aerys is not concerned about this task, but if he was we would think to expect he would use the same tactics he did against the rebels at Duskendale. Meaning gruesome annihilation of not only those who did the crime, but also those in anyway connect to the criminals. A signature of Aerys's mindset at this point in his life.

Ser Arthur as a commander and the tactics he uses seems to be the opposite of that. Which tells me that Rhaegar somehow persuaded his father to let Ser Arthur to do this job, and the tactics are those he approves. By which I mean, I see not putting to the sword or burning every last crofter and woodsman who at anytime gave support to the Kingswood Brotherhood as a smart thing to do for someone who is trying to win people to his side in a factional fight for the throne.

Such an approach takes time, but the only thing we have to say how long that was is the range of possibilities must include at least a short period after Jaime turns 15 in very early 281 AC. Knighthood is conferred on Jaime after that, and we know he rode with Ser Arthur in the campaign after he turned 15 as well. Whether or not Jaime joins Ser Arthur before his name day is an open question. As is whether or not Ser Arthur and Jaime's time fighting against the bandits are the same or merely overlap in some of the timeframe. On the other end, I think we can agree that the earliest possible and realistic time for Elia and Hightower's encounter is during her traveling to her wedding. I don't see the combination of the two as likely before that.

[frenin]

11 hours ago, corbon said:

You realise that a triangle made up of Stoney Sept, Riverrun and the area of the Battle of the Trident has sides somewhere around 200 miles long?

Why you keep using Riverrun again?? 

 

11 hours ago, corbon said:

I think you mean before, not after. And its not a year, maybe 6 months or so. Some argue less. Some argue a bit more.
The simple fact is that we have no information whatsoever as to the whereabouts of any part of the main rebel army between the BotB and the Trident, except that the main commanders and probably a good part of the army congregated at Riverrun after the BotBs for negotiations and a twin wedding. 
And that Ned (and presumably some or all of the army) left Riverrun a couple of weeks after the wedding, to go to war. Where too, who knows? But looking at a map and the strategic and logistical situation and the lack of a major battle mentioned, there are a lot more interesting places closer to the Trident than Riverun is rather than further away. Which supports my 'possible' argument (we don;t know the army that was already on the way to the Trident was the rebels )more than your 'definitive' argument (it was the rebels).

Robb is a rather premature kid then, but Cat is the one who gives us the timeline and she says that nine months passed between the events. No we don't have any info of the rebels whereabouts which why is rash to pin them in Riverrun,

There is no need really for major battles in the Riverlands before the  Trident, the loyalist would still be confuse and the rebels would outnumber them, so unless the loyalist wanted to be visited one by one as Goodbrok was, they would have made it south asap where it was safer.

 

12 hours ago, corbon said:

And they weren't sent to 'get' the survivors (ie bring them back to KL), they were sent to 'rally' them (ie reform them into a fighting force. Maybe they came back to KL maybe they didn't. The point is, when I say we don't know that the other army marching to the Trident before Rhaegar left KL was the rebels as you stridently assume, we don;t know. The text points to other possibilities being open. 

Why rally them in enemy territory?? With the rebel host gathered and the main royal host pinned down at KL until new order they were easy picking to them it makes far more sense if they were all taken to King's Landing, anyway, you were the one assuming that the rebels moved because of Rhaegar.

 

12 hours ago, corbon said:

They probably weren't, since Ned left Cat after only two weeks and didn't see her for a year. Perhaps they were closer to the Trident, perhaps further. Given the main Royalist Host was at KL, it seems more likely rather than less likely that they were between Riverrun and the Trident, which, if you care to look at a map, is basically on the direct travel route between Riverrun and KL - along the River Road and the Kings Road, rather than through the woods and holls of High Heart and Acorn Hill and around the Gods Eye.

They would be probably reducting enemies lands until the very momwent, perhaps when they marched they were simply further.

 

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

They probably weren't, since Ned left Cat after only two weeks and didn't see her for a year. Perhaps they were closer to the Trident, perhaps further. Given the main Royalist Host was at KL, it seems more likely rather than less likely that they were between Riverrun and the Trident, which, if you care to look at a map, is basically on the direct travel route between Riverrun and KL - along the River Road and the Kings Road, rather than through the woods and holls of High Heart and Acorn Hill and around the Gods Eye.

Perhaps, i also don't think it's a reasonable assumption that loyalist hosts were being gathered in front of the rebel eyes.

 

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

Well gee. Thats what I'm saying and you're nay-saying.
The fact remains, it did succeed. Robert was first over the walls and slew Marc Grafton. No one else is mentioned except Squire Corbray fighting at the gates. 
And it succeeded relatively quickly. By the time Ned got to Sisterton the news of the Battle of Gulltown had preceeded him there.

Here's a thing about being outnumbered. Its simply odds. Its much easier to get, say, 5-1 outnumbering when the numbers are in the hundreds, than when they are in the thousands.
Plus, once the defenders have enough men to fully man the walls, then it starts getting exponentially harder for the attackers.

No, you're saying that Gulltown could be taken by a few hundred men and i disagree,

It did succeed and quickly which tells us that the rebels overwhelmed the loyalist and yes, no one is mentioned except squire Corbray, Grafton, Robert and Arryn, perhaps they were the only ones who fought in that battle.

Sure and yet it's not hard to see that Gulltown may have had say 1500-2000 fighting men and the rebels could easily muster 10k-15K and then march, same story, same outcome.

 

 

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

You've looked at a map right?

Gulltown is in the opposite direction, more or less.

Robert needed to get home just as urgently - more urgently given their respective strategic locations, than Ned. I think it speaks of their characters that they decided two different things. Robert went for the shortest route home, with a fight on the way, and it worked for him. Ned chose a less uncertain route, being the more cautious of the two, and went in the opposite direction where no fight would need to be won before he got home. 
Note that by the time Ned got to the Sistertons, Robert was probably already at Storms End, as the news of the battle of Gulltown preceded Ned's arrival and Storms End is pretty much just as close to Gulltown as the Sisterton is by ship.

Yes, i did.

Opposite direction... to what exactly??  Gulltown is far more closer to the Eyrie than the Fingers and its port and ships are far safer than mind you a fishboat.

I don't know how it speaks for the characters but k.

I fairly doubt it, Sisterton is far closer to Gulltown than Gulltown to Storm's End and it's not likely than Robert could get as fast since pretty much the waters would be heavily patroled by the Royal Fleet.

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

Yup. Its called not actually announcing military support. Beyond, thaht, its says nothing.

It says that he didn't answer at all.

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

You've looked at a map right?

Gulltown is in the opposite direction, more or less.

Robert needed to get home just as urgently - more urgently given their respective strategic locations, than Ned. I think it speaks of their characters that they decided two different things. Robert went for the shortest route home, with a fight on the way, and it worked for him. Ned chose a less uncertain route, being the more cautious of the two, and went in the opposite direction where no fight would need to be won before he got home. 
Note that by the time Ned got to the Sistertons, Robert was probably already at Storms End, as the news of the battle of Gulltown preceded Ned's arrival and Storms End is pretty much just as close to Gulltown as the Sisterton is by ship.

Ned says he ignored the calls to arms to both sides and Jaime makes clear that he didn't return any ravens from  the King's Landing.

But sure, he must've been sending ravens back and forth with the rebels that we're  not told about.

 

13 hours ago, corbon said:

Ok. They must have done it your way. Tywn didn't answer so they just ignored him and left themselves wide open in the rear.

I didn't say that they left themselves wide open in the rear i said that they stopped trying to get Tywin to join them.

 

 

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

@SFDanny, I'm sorry for my late response, but the first time I had written a response, it was accidentally deleted, and I did not have the time afterwards to sit down for it again

 

On 4/28/2020 at 9:44 AM, SFDanny said:

There is a lot we don't know about this campaign. When it starts? Could someone else have commanded it before Ser Arthur? When the campaign ends? And much, much else is totally unknown to us about this tantalizing bit of backstory. My guess is that the initial encounter with the bandits takes place while Hightower escorts Elia to her wedding in King's Landing. How far before the wedding we don't know, but we know the timing of the wedding and Rhaenys birth both being in 280 AC likely places the wedding in very early 280. That is especially true given Aegon's birth and the six months of bed rest Elia needs after Rhaenys's birth which pushes the wedding back to the first or second month of 280. 

Of course, there are assumptions here. I'm assuming Rhaenys isn't conceived until after the wedding. I'm assuming Elia's pregnancy with both Rhaenys and Aegon are full term ones. I'm also assuming Elia isn't prone to riding through bandit infested forests on a regular basis. And I think I'm right in taking the hint Martin gives us in the White Book with sending Ser Barristan to escort Cersei to her wedding that using the Lord Commander for such duty is not uncommon. I'm going to have to do a re-read of Fire & Blood to see if there aren't more historical examples of the Lord Commander leading brides-to-be to royal weddings. Of course, the fact the Targaryens have so many sibling weddings may limit the need for such escorts. I think I'm on safe ground here, but there could be other explanations.

I agree on the timing of the wedding and Rhaenys's conception. Without any evidence that a pregnancy did not last the full nine months, I think we should assume that they did indeed take nine months, and that, in addition to the six months of bedrest following Rhaenys's birth, does not allow for much room regarding the timing of the wedding, or Rhaenys's birth.

Regarding Barristan escorting Cersei, you are absolutely right of course that he did so. I can't think of any other example, but of course, most Targaryen weddings are between siblings, which means often would place the bride-to-be already at court. The only non-Targaryen wedding that I can think of at the moment where the location of the bride was mentioned is the wedding of Aemon and Jocelyn Baratheon, but of course, she had arrived at court years before.

There is one difference between Cersei's situation and Elia's situation that I do think is worth mentioning. Cersei was going to marry the King, Elia the son of a king, who is at odds with that king already before the wedding. Would Aerys allow for his Lord Commander (and possibly other knights of his Kingsguard?) to escort Elia, either the entire way, or part of the way? Would Elia, with her fragile health, travel to King's Landing over land, or by ship? With a betrothal in 279 AC and a wedding in early 280 AC,  it would seem that she would have traveled to King's Landing towards the end of fall, or even already in winter (which had lasted for nearly two years by the Harrenhal tourney in 281 AC).

 

On 4/28/2020 at 9:44 AM, SFDanny said:

But let me put forward another bit of speculation about his subject. I find it a bit unusual that Aerys would appoint Ser Arthur to lead this campaign, regardless if he takes it over from someone else or did so from the beginning. I say that only because Aerys must know Ser Arthur is Rhaegar's man. His closest friend and confidant. Perhaps Aerys is not concerned about this task, but if he was we would think to expect he would use the same tactics he did against the rebels at Duskendale. Meaning gruesome annihilation of not only those who did the crime, but also those in anyway connect to the criminals. A signature of Aerys's mindset at this point in his life.

Ser Arthur as a commander and the tactics he uses seems to be the opposite of that. Which tells me that Rhaegar somehow persuaded his father to let Ser Arthur to do this job, and the tactics are those he approves. By which I mean, I see not putting to the sword or burning every last crofter and woodsman who at anytime gave support to the Kingswood Brotherhood as a smart thing to do for someone who is trying to win people to his side in a factional fight for the throne.

Such an approach takes time, but the only thing we have to say how long that was is the range of possibilities must include at least a short period after Jaime turns 15 in very early 281 AC. Knighthood is conferred on Jaime after that, and we know he rode with Ser Arthur in the campaign after he turned 15 as well. Whether or not Jaime joins Ser Arthur before his name day is an open question. As is whether or not Ser Arthur and Jaime's time fighting against the bandits are the same or merely overlap in some of the timeframe. On the other end, I think we can agree that the earliest possible and realistic time for Elia and Hightower's encounter is during her traveling to her wedding. I don't see the combination of the two as likely before that.

Why would it be unusual for Arthur to be given the position? By sending a Kingsguard man who was also Rhaegar's man, two things could happen: Either Arthur would succeed, for which Aerys could take some of the credit as the man who had appointed Arthur, or Arthur would fail, which would have a negative impact on Arthur's reputation (at least in Aerys's eyes, most likely).

The methods that Arthur used are indeed the far opposite of Aerys's tactics following Duskendale, but regardless, Aerys was the one who had agreed to everything, even if he was not the one who thought of it. However, if Arthur would have traveled back and forth (or send a messenger) as long as you seem to argue, it would require Rhaegar to have been at court for a long period of time, if he had indeed played some part in this. Yet, we know that he moved to Dragonstone after his wedding, and had already had a bad relationship with his father before that. Why would Aerys listen to Rhaegar, and when would Rhaegar have the time to try and convince his father, if he spend most of that year, if not all, on Dragonstone?

I agree that it is unlikely that Hightower and Elia would have been traveling through the Kingswood together before a betrothal took place.

Yet regarding Jaime's quote, what he is arguing is how young he was when he accomplished these feats. He mentions that he won a tourney mêlée at thirteen, and rode with Dayne at fifteen. Had he started in the campaign at a younger age, would he not have mentioned that? After all, had he also won a tourney mêlée at a younger age, he would have mentioned that younger age, not the elder one. Perhaps he was mentioning only fifteen because he wanted to connect it to his age at receiving his knighthood, but to me it does not read that way.

[SFDanny]

20 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

@SFDanny, I'm sorry for my late response, but the first time I had written a response, it was accidentally deleted, and I did not have the time afterwards to sit down for it again

Never a problem, RT! I'm quite possibly the worst offender in making tardy responses, so believe me I have no room for complaints. I'm just glad to read your thoughtful contributions when you make them.

20 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I agree on the timing of the wedding and Rhaenys's conception. Without any evidence that a pregnancy did not last the full nine months, I think we should assume that they did indeed take nine months, and that, in addition to the six months of bedrest following Rhaenys's birth, does not allow for much room regarding the timing of the wedding, or Rhaenys's birth.

I agree and would only add that Martin gives us evidence in Doran's account of Elia's own birth just how unusual it is for a child to be born, and survive, an early birth of approaching one month. I think we can say such premature births are almost unheard of in Martin's world. I would also say that we do have evidence (Rhaella's nine moons plus pregnancy with Dany) that shows nine months, or nine moons, is clearly an estimate used often in the books to mean a full term pregnancy. That may be a week or so earlier than nine months or a few weeks later, but Martin's world reflects real world realities in a pre-modern setting.

I also agree absolutely with effect of the six months bedrest on the timeframe.

20 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Regarding Barristan escorting Cersei, you are absolutely right of course that he did so. I can't think of any other example, but of course, most Targaryen weddings are between siblings, which means often would place the bride-to-be already at court. The only non-Targaryen wedding that I can think of at the moment where the location of the bride was mentioned is the wedding of Aemon and Jocelyn Baratheon, but of course, she had arrived at court years before.

I'm still a bit behind on starting another reread of Fire & Blood, so I haven't found another reference either. If I do I'll let you know.

20 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

There is one difference between Cersei's situation and Elia's situation that I do think is worth mentioning. Cersei was going to marry the King, Elia the son of a king, who is at odds with that king already before the wedding. Would Aerys allow for his Lord Commander (and possibly other knights of his Kingsguard?) to escort Elia, either the entire way, or part of the way? Would Elia, with her fragile health, travel to King's Landing over land, or by ship? With a betrothal in 279 AC and a wedding in early 280 AC,  it would seem that she would have traveled to King's Landing towards the end of fall, or even already in winter (which had lasted for nearly two years by the Harrenhal tourney in 281 AC).

My belief here is that this travel by land is part of a tradition of royal processions whereby the realm is shown the new royal princess-to-be. That cannot really be done effectively by a sea voyage. The symbolism in sending the Lord Commander on such a mission to escort the new member of the royal family would be unmistakeable. The Kingsguard safeguards the body of the king and his family. By sending the White Bull to escort Elia, Aerys is symbolically including the betrothed Elia into his family and his protection. Traveling the distance from Dorne to King's Landing under Ser Gerold's protection is, to me, as much a part of the tradition of royal processions as any of Aegon's were, or of any of the Kings who followed the Conqueror's example. I think that too is the meaning of Robert sending Ser Barristan to escort Cersei to King's Landing for her marriage. By which, I mean I don't see the admitted difference of Robert being a crowned king, and Rhaegar being the crown prince, as terribly significant in the symbolism or the purpose involved in the use of the Lord Commander as an escort.

None of which negates the importance of the particulars you raise concerning the situation between Aerys and Rhaegar, or with Elia's health. Starting with the latter, I'd ask if we have any evidence to say at this time Elia would have health concerns that would not permit the journey? Certainly we have evidence to suggest she was never the most healthiest of women, but this is obviously before the births of Rhaenys and Aegon which effected her health profoundly. I'm not sure we should rule out a royal escorted journey from Dorne to King's Landing on the basis of what small evidence we have of Elia's health at the time this would have taken place.

Nor do I think the factional struggles between king and crown prince would mean Aerys would not send Hightower on this mission. First, it seems to me that Elia is Aerys's choice for Rhaegar's wife after the failure of Steffon's mission to the Free Cities. I say that not so much to say that Rhaegar may or may not have approved as well, but only on the basis that the last thing that Aerys wants is for Rhaegar to marry Cersei. That would be Aerys's nightmare to see his heir married into the family of the man who he believes, rightly I think, tried to have him murdered by his actions at Duskendale.

Which is only to point out that the factional fighting isn't just between father and son, but includes many players to the game. At some points Rhaegar and Aerys are aligned and at others they are opposed, but they share the need for the continuation of Targaryen power. So, does Aerys choice of Elia for Rhaegar mean he won't then try to undermine their alliance? No, absolutely he does, but in the time the marriage of Elia and the crown prince it seems they share the need promote it as the continuation of Targaryen rule. Which gives Aerys the incentive to use all the symbolism of a Lord Commander's escort to King's Landing to undercut Tywin. He is only a servant, and she only a servant's daughter after all, right? Or so Aerys wants the whole of Westeros to understand.

To your point of the seasons, I can only say that what winter means for the ability to travel over the Red Mountains and onto King's Landing is unknown. At least as far as I can see.

On 5/11/2020 at 12:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Why would it be unusual for Arthur to be given the position? By sending a Kingsguard man who was also Rhaegar's man, two things could happen: Either Arthur would succeed, for which Aerys could take some of the credit as the man who had appointed Arthur, or Arthur would fail, which would have a negative impact on Arthur's reputation (at least in Aerys's eyes, most likely).

Excellent points. It is likely this frames Aerys's decision, but I would hazard a guess it is after Varys points these advantages to him. The post Duskendale Aerys may miss the subtler parts of politics when gorging on vengeance. Not that he doesn't have some skill in the game of thrones, but madness erodes that skill. I would also guess that Rhaegar plays a role in getting Ser Arthur the command and the formulation of the strategy and tactics of the campaign. I can't see Aerys initial response to bandit attacking his escort of Elia as anything like what Ser Arthur does. Burn the entire forest to the ground and skin the Brotherhood's members and supporters alive? That sounds like the Mad King's response.

On 5/11/2020 at 12:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The methods that Arthur used are indeed the far opposite of Aerys's tactics following Duskendale, but regardless, Aerys was the one who had agreed to everything, even if he was not the one who thought of it. However, if Arthur would have traveled back and forth (or send a messenger) as long as you seem to argue, it would require Rhaegar to have been at court for a long period of time, if he had indeed played some part in this. Yet, we know that he moved to Dragonstone after his wedding, and had already had a bad relationship with his father before that. Why would Aerys listen to Rhaegar, and when would Rhaegar have the time to try and convince his father, if he spend most of that year, if not all, on Dragonstone?

We know, according to The World of Ice & Fire the wedding of Rhaegar and Elia is announced in the "early part" of 279 AC (TWoI&F 120.) We are also told that the wedding takes place in 280 AC, we agree the timing of Rhaenys birth in the same year and a nine month pregnancy places the wedding in the first part of that year likely the first or second month. Given the new couple don't leave to Dragonstone until after the wedding, it leaves most of 279 AC for the escort to take place, the confrontation with the Kingswood Brotherhood to happen,  and for Rhaegar to persuade his father to let Ser Arthur command the response. Indeed if Rhaegar and Elia don't leave King's Landing until the end the second or third month, it leaves almost a full year for these events to happen. The campaign itself may not start until some time into 280, but what we know is that it continues into 281 when Jaime turns 15. I think there is plenty of time for events of the confrontation and campaign to happen, and time for Rhaegar to persuade his father. Of interest to me here is just when does Varys arrive on the scene? It is sometime after Lord Steffon's death, but I don't see it tied down much further than that. This decision by Aerys could be one of the first on which he gives counsel to Aerys.

On 5/11/2020 at 12:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I agree that it is unlikely that Hightower and Elia would have been traveling through the Kingswood together before a betrothal took place.

Yes, it doesn't make much sense before.

On 5/11/2020 at 12:21 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Yet regarding Jaime's quote, what he is arguing is how young he was when he accomplished these feats. He mentions that he won a tourney mêlée at thirteen, and rode with Dayne at fifteen. Had he started in the campaign at a younger age, would he not have mentioned that? After all, had he also won a tourney mêlée at a younger age, he would have mentioned that younger age, not the elder one. Perhaps he was mentioning only fifteen because he wanted to connect it to his age at receiving his knighthood, but to me it does not read that way.

I guess it depends on how we read the word "rode" doesn't it? Does it mean when Jaime first arrives to take part in the campaign, or does it mean when Dayne and Jaime rode into battle against the Brotherhood? I don't have a problem with Jaime doing all of that after his fifteenth name day, but I don't think that means either that Jaime is with Dayne at the start of the campaign or that his first ride into combat is the same as his arrival into the campaign. I guess I'm just trying to point out that Jaime's quote only means at least part of his participation in, and the end of the campaign itself at least culminate after Jaime is 15, but it tells us little about when it starts.