Why are Valyrians and Qartheen so incredibly pale and white?

[sweetsunray]

In this essay of mine on Varys I discuss the whiteness of the Qartheen and the Valyrians: https://sweeticeandfiresunray.com/2017/11/03/the-spiders-origin-part-i/#Qarth

I personally do regard the Valyrians to have their looks based in part on albinism. When we use the word "albino" we tend to think of the extreme form, but there are various forms, as the mutation for albinism occurs spontaneously amongst peoples often. Some affect only the eyes, some eyes and hair but may even allow for tanning, etc. So, albinism in truth has a spectrum. Bloodraven is certainly an albino. He is referred to that. And BR is the example of the "complete albinism". However, even with BR the albinism is a fantasy form of albinism, since he has the sight of an eagle to kill people with accuracy from a large distance with his arrows. Real world albinism where the person has red eyes would be incapable of such a thing. The eyes are red, because the iris lacks the blackscreen pigment behind the part of the eye that we assess as green/amber/blue/brown. Without this blackscreen, all the light that falls into the iris and not just the pupil, creating a too big aperture for seeing something sharp. So, George's Valyrians and proto-Valyrians and the Blackwoods have an independent fantasy albinism mutation that doesn't interfere with their functioning abilities such as exposure to the sun and vision. Important here is that it is of a recessive nature, and why it only seems to be a dominant phenotype with island people (genetic drift)

The Qartheen do not suffer from albinism, but imo fantasy leucism. Leucism is another genetic mutation of an entirely different type where skin lacks pigment, but never affects the eyes. In most animals we encounter leucism in the piebald form: white patches, such as cats with white paws and belly, cows with white patches, etc... Full leucism is rare (an all white animal with normal colored eyes), but we prize such animals: white hart, white lion, white elephant, white brown bears, true white horses. Most leucism, including complete leucism, tends to be genetically dominant (except for white lions). In the real world, there is no known full/complete leucism with humans, only a piebald form. The mutation necessary to bring about full leucism amongst humans would basically destroy the viability of the embryo/foetus. But George doesn't need to care about that on Planetos, just as he doesn't have to care one bit that Bloodraven cannot shoot someone accurately from a distance with bow and arrow in the real world. 

The difference between dominant leucism and recessive albinism on a sociological level is that any child of a leucist would have his phenptype. If a Qartheen master beds his Naathi slave, his bastard slave child would look like a Qartheen leucist. There's no way to distinguish the bastard child with the slave from the trueborn child with his wife based on skin, which is why imo the Qartheen have an ancient noble faction who aim to distinguish themselves by faction name - Pureborn. As Dany noted: everybody in the Qartheen streets looked or appeared "noble" - tall and white. Hence, the Qartheen are not obsessed about "what you look like", but having the "birth certificate". Qartheen are basically birthers. The Valyrians on the other hand are obsessed with "looks", "appearances". If a child doesn't look Valyrian, even if they have a Valyrian parent and are offspring of a marriage, the rumors of them being bastards arise.

I agree though that ultimately it hardly matters. George picked the appearances for symbolic color schemes, to associate characters with certain characteristics that are important for the story, more than for the world building.

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Orm said:

Cersei, I remember looks down on the Estermont blood in Robert through his mum.... But never have I ever read any Lannister or any other "great" house  stating that Baratheon/Durrandon blood is beneath them.... Or even question their legitimacy as royals unless your a Targ loyalist...

Jon says that cause Robert in AGOT is just a sorry ass to what he was.....

"Peerless Robert Baratheon", "Giant among princes", "Muscled like a maiden's fantasy", "Baratheon fights as a King should fight" etc etc

Then we have this again with Renly,

According to Sansa, Renly is the "handsomest man she had ever seen", "powerful frame", "Jet black mane" etc

So what is your point actually? The Baratheons who are Durrandons in all but name even have devine origins to their credit , which no other great house has......

I did talk specifically about the Lannisters there, not everybody. Cersei thinks Robert is a shitty king and doesn't behave like a king, and sucks at kingship comparing to the Targaryens. Tywin views Robert as a fool, and is correct about that, and it is quite clear that the prestige and wealth of the Lannisters far outshine that of the Baratheons.

The point isn't that Robert is not an impressive guy, personally. It is that those people who knew Robert as the Lord of Storm's End would not be all that happy that this somewhat backwater guy - if you speak from the view of a Westerman or a Riverlord or a Reach lord - should now be king when they are more wealthy, more powerful, have a more impressive family tree.

You can compare that to the situation on the Iron Islands after the Hoares were destroyed - the Volmark fellow had the blood of the Hoares, but he was a minor lord, not one of the great lords of the islands, hence people weren't keen to submit to him. It is similar when the Tyrells are made Lords of Highgarden.

And if one looks at the strength of Robert's coalition then he would truly be fucked if Mace Tyrell decided to call his banners and make an end to his regime - especially in winter/late autumn. Ned would take very long to marshal an army, Jon Arryn would be cut off from the mainland because the mountains can't be crossed (or would take too long, too), and the Stormlanders and Riverlanders couldn't stand against the Reach on their own - assuming Hoster Tully would even dare to march against 100,000 Reach men (not very likely).

This is the scenario where it makes sense to make Cersei Lannister the new queen - because having Tywin Lannister as your father-in-law gives people pause. And he could easily enough attack the Tyrells and their allies if they were to make trouble.

[Orm]

22 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

did talk specifically about the Lannisters

Those specific Lannisters look down on everybody....

 

25 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Cersei thinks Robert is a shitty king and doesn't behave like a king, and sucks at kingship comparing to the Targaryens. Tywin views Robert as a fool, and is correct

It is quite clear that kingship doesn't suit Robert..... The author said so himself....

But can you give me specific quotes where Cersei or Tywin compares him to Targs in terms of being a king?..... I remember that Tywin thought dirt of Aerys........

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

and it is quite clear that the prestige and wealth of the Lannisters far outshine that of the Baratheons.

Where is that stated or implicated?? Joffrey being an inbred Lannister, had to be pushed nominally to be a Baratheon to ensure his legitimacy, which is Robert's legitimacy.....

I know in an interview where George explicitly stated that the kingdoms turned their backs on Targaryens due to the shenanigans of Aerys and Rhaegar.... And now they are going to war again cause nobody accepts Joffrey as a Baratheon but a Lannister king.... And they will not bow to him...

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

You can compare that to the situation on the Iron Islands after the Hoares were destroyed - the Volmark fellow had the blood of the Hoares, but he was a minor lord, not one of the great lords of the islands, hence people weren't keen to submit to him. It is similar when the Tyrells are made Lords of Highgarden.

Obviously when your first of your line.... You will have shaky grounds....

 

35 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And if one looks at the strength of Robert's coalition then he would truly be fucked if Mace Tyrell decided to call his banners and make an end to his regime - especially in winter/late autumn. Ned would take very long to marshal an army, Jon Arryn would be cut off from the mainland because the mountains can't be crossed (or would take too long, too), and the Stormlanders and Riverlanders couldn't stand against the Reach on their own - assuming Hoster Tully would even dare to march against 100,000 Reach men (not very likely).

This is the scenario where it makes sense to make Cersei Lannister the new queen - because having Tywin Lannister as your father-in-law gives people pause. And he could easily enough attack the Tyrells and their allies if they were to make trouble.

Highly unlikely that Mace would risk war even if Robert hadn't married Cersei.... But Jon Arryn  wanted to be sure, just in case.....

Which turned out to be a can of worms than a solution, unfortunately.....

[frenin]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I did talk specifically about the Lannisters there, not everybody. Cersei thinks Robert is a shitty king and doesn't behave like a king, and sucks at kingship comparing to the Targaryens. Tywin views Robert as a fool, and is correct about that, and it is quite clear that the prestige and wealth of the Lannisters far outshine that of the Baratheons.

Cersei believes that Robert shoud behave like a Targaryen, aka kill them all, which is very very stupid and while it's true that Tywin does believe Robert an idiot, i don't know were it's said that the prestige of the Lannisters outshine that of the Baratheons.

This is a notion that you choose to believe for whatever reason, but that's never even hinted, let alone mentioned them.

 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The point isn't that Robert is not an impressive guy, personally. It is that those people who knew Robert as the Lord of Storm's End would not be all that happy that this somewhat backwater guy - if you speak from the view of a Westerman or a Riverlord or a Reach lord - should now be king when they are more wealthy, more powerful, have a more impressive family tree.

I would love to see where are you getting all of this, honestly, the Baratheons were never looked down, not even when Rogar was leaading they were. And given their personal ties with the Targaryens, they were, with the Velaryons, for 130 years, the most most important non royal house in the Realm. that only stopped with them being on the losing side of the Dance and by the time of Aegon 5, they are again, one of them most important great houses, that is further enhanced with Ormund's and Rhaelle's marriage.

And no, given that the Baratheons descend from both the Targs and Storm kings, none of those nobles have a more impressive family tree.

 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

You can compare that to the situation on the Iron Islands after the Hoares were destroyed - the Volmark fellow had the blood of the Hoares, but he was a minor lord, not one of the great lords of the islands, hence people weren't keen to submit to him. It is similar when the Tyrells are made Lords of Highgarden.

Comparing the politics of the Iron Islands and the Greenlands is  pretty absurd, but to each...

 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And if one looks at the strength of Robert's coalition then he would truly be fucked if Mace Tyrell decided to call his banners and make an end to his regime - especially in winter/late autumn. Ned would take very long to marshal an army, Jon Arryn would be cut off from the mainland because the mountains can't be crossed (or would take too long, too), and the Stormlanders and Riverlanders couldn't stand against the Reach on their own - assuming Hoster Tully would even dare to march against 100,000 Reach men (not very likely).

Those banners would never come, that's one of the reasons Mace Tyrell bent the knee at Storm's End when he commanded a host that with all probability outnumbered Ned's. 

Robb raised 20k men in a very short notice,  Jon Arryn's army abandoned the Vale in winter during the Robellion, besides of Gulltown being a port city and Robert having the Royal Fleet at their command to transport troops.

So, there it goes your apocalyptic theory

Btw, i don't even know were you get the impression of Hoster being a coward but whatever.

 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

This is the scenario where it makes sense to make Cersei Lannister the new queen - because having Tywin Lannister as your father-in-law gives people pause. And he could easily enough attack the Tyrells and their allies if they were to make trouble.

All the rebel leaders have gained a fame as spectacular as Tywin and gave people just as pause. Nor Jon Arryn was thinking about that when he pushed Robert to the marriage.

 

[Lee-Sensei]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I did talk specifically about the Lannisters there, not everybody. Cersei thinks Robert is a shitty king and doesn't behave like a king, and sucks at kingship comparing to the Targaryens. Tywin views Robert as a fool, and is correct about that, and it is quite clear that the prestige and wealth of the Lannisters far outshine that of the Baratheons.

The point isn't that Robert is not an impressive guy, personally. It is that those people who knew Robert as the Lord of Storm's End would not be all that happy that this somewhat backwater guy - if you speak from the view of a Westerman or a Riverlord or a Reach lord - should now be king when they are more wealthy, more powerful, have a more impressive family tree.

You can compare that to the situation on the Iron Islands after the Hoares were destroyed - the Volmark fellow had the blood of the Hoares, but he was a minor lord, not one of the great lords of the islands, hence people weren't keen to submit to him. It is similar when the Tyrells are made Lords of Highgarden.

And if one looks at the strength of Robert's coalition then he would truly be fucked if Mace Tyrell decided to call his banners and make an end to his regime - especially in winter/late autumn. Ned would take very long to marshal an army, Jon Arryn would be cut off from the mainland because the mountains can't be crossed (or would take too long, too), and the Stormlanders and Riverlanders couldn't stand against the Reach on their own - assuming Hoster Tully would even dare to march against 100,000 Reach men (not very likely).

This is the scenario where it makes sense to make Cersei Lannister the new queen - because having Tywin Lannister as your father-in-law gives people pause. And he could easily enough attack the Tyrells and their allies if they were to make trouble.

1) Cersei thinks that Robert is a shitty ruler and she’s right about that. Of course, she’s a far worse ruler than he was. Robert at the very least was capable during wartime and for the most part left the business of ruling to more capable peacetime Lords like Jon Arryn and Stannis, where as Cersei thinks that she’s a genius and margianalizes competent and loyal advisors like Pycelle, while promoting people because they’re sycophants, beautiful or useful as hostages.

2) That’s Robert personally. Robert as we seem him is an oafish, lazy, lush. He clearly respects Stannis and considered him a greater danger then everyone else that opposed the Lannisters combined when he had 5,000 men.

3) The Lannisters have more money than the Baratheons, but they don’t have more prestige. Money can’t by you that kind of respect. Just ask the Frey’s. The Baratheons are descended from the Storm Kings through the female line and they’re one of only two families to rule Westeros, a continent the size of a South America. If Cersei died somehow and Jaime was released from his vows and a Lord had the opportunity to marry his daughter off to King Robert or Ser Jaime, who do you really think they’d choose?

4) They may be more wealthy, but they’re certainly not more powerful or prestigious individually.

5) Robert probably has about 50,000 men between the Stormlands and the Crownlands. The Riverlands probably has the same number. Even if we assume that they’d be outnumbered, that doesn't mean that they wouldn’t stand a chance. What did Stannis say about Robert fighting battles outnumbered again in his conversation with Jon Snow?

“That will bring you to the Dreadfort,” said Jon, “but unless your host can outmarch a raven or a line of beacon fires, the castle will know of your approach. It will be an easy thing for Ramsay Bolton to cut off your retreat and leave you far from the Wall, without food or refuge, surrounded by your foes.”

“Only if he abandons his siege of Moat Cailin.”

“Moat Cailin will fall before you ever reach the Dreadfort. Once Lord Roose has joined his strength to Ramsay’s, they will have you outnumbered five to one.”

 

“My brother won battles at worse odds.”

5) I agree that marrying Cersei makes sense on paper.

[Morte]

On 8/4/2020 at 12:14 AM, frenin said:

Such coalitions are necessary if you pretend to rule properly and you don't have dragons.

Without a fiery deterrent, be it a Baratheon, be it a Lannister, be it a Targaryen , the King is in practice Primus inter pares, feudal monarchies were based on that idea, absolutism is hard to materializewhen you have no dragons. 

Yes and no. Robert does indeed have even more problems to maintain the influence of the king over his lords than the Targaryens had post dragons; basically he is in a position even more similar to the German Kings of the Mediaeval Ages, he is too much primus inter pares, and too little sovereign.

While it is true that kings in feudal monarchies have to rely on working with their lords, there are a lot of different degrees in which this is necessary: For example the French kings or the Sicilian kings even before Friedrich II and many other feudal kingdoms were less dependent on their fellow aristocrats than the German kings were. That's also why every dynasty on the German Throne worth their salt wanted to chance that.

The power and influence of the Targaryen kings over their kingdoms stands somewhere between the dynasties of the Salier and Staufer as Kings of Germany and sovereign feudal monarchs, while Robert is really more like the typical primus inter pares the German King was (power and influence-wise).

9 hours ago, Orm said:

The Baratheons who are Durrandons in all but name

There is one, ONE, Durrandon in the Baratheon's family tree. ONE. They are at least double as much Targaryen than they are Durrandon, not to mention all the other families who married into House Baratheon - They are essentially everything else more than they are Durrandon...

[frenin]

19 minutes ago, Morte said:

Yes and no. Robert does indeed have even more problems to maintain the influence of the king over his lords than the Targaryens had post dragons; basically he is in a position even more similar to the German Kings of the Mediaeval Ages, he is too much primus inter pares, and too little sovereign.

While it is true that kings in feudal monarchies have to rely on working with their lords, there are a lot of different degrees in which this is necessary: For example the French kings or the Sicilian kings even before Friedrich II and many other feudal kingdoms were less dependent on their fellow aristocrats than the German kings were. That's also why every dynasty on the German Throne worth their salt wanted to chance that.

The power and influence of the Targaryen kings over their kingdoms stands somewhere between the dynasties of the Salier and Staufer as Kings of Germany and sovereign feudal monarchs, while Robert is really more like the typical primus inter pares the German King was (power and influence-wise).

Doubtful, both remind me to the Plantagenet, the French kings both under the Valois and the direct Capetiens until Philip August needed very much their lords. During 130 years, the Crown had no influence in the Iron Islands, the Starks resented them and Dorne was conquered, after the dragons died, the Crown's presence and influence in both the Iron Islands and the North was literally none existent, they just paid taxes.

The only kingdom that is against Robert is Dorne, but Dorne's political standing is no different than it was even after it was brought to the fold, it's still a "you do you, let me do me", type of deal. 

I  cannot  tell a single difference between the Iron Islands under Robert and the Iron Islands under the Targaryens and Robert's influence over the rest of the kingdoms is unchallenged.

 

Mind you, I have said it a lot of times, comparing the standing of a king from a dynasty 300 years old and the first king of a new dynasty, is cheating at solitaire, The Targs after the lost their dragons were already consolidated in Westeros, had they lost their dragons during Aenys or Jaeharys's early reign, they wouldn't have made it.

 

 

[Only 89 selfies today]

On 7/28/2020 at 7:36 PM, Bowen Marsh said:

To underline their uniqueness.  They have physical characteristics which make them different from the other families in Westeros.  I do not think there is any internal reason except that it serves the story.  They live in a tightly controlled society.  The nobles rule by right of class and held themselves apart from the folks they ruled over.  The Targaryens have these unique looks to make them different from the other families.  This difference is one reason why their rule was accepted.  They were not ruling over peers and equals.  The Targaryens had no equal.  The nobles and the commons respected that difference.  It is easier on your honor to take orders from demigods.  Your pride will be wounded if you had to take orders from your peers.  

The high born people of Westeros value family history.  The Targaryens were one of the ruling families in Old Valyria.  No other family alive at the current story time period can boast such illustrious ancestry as House Targaryen.  The Targaryens are as close to gods as there are. 

[Orm]

9 hours ago, Morte said:

There is one, ONE, Durrandon in the Baratheon's family tree. ONE. They are at least double as much Targaryen than they are Durrandon, not to mention all the other families who married into House Baratheon - They are essentially everything else more than they are Durrandon...

They look Durrandon,They Descend from the uncontested Durrandon heir, they have the Durrandon sigil or heraldry, the Durrandon words, the Durrandon honours, the Durrandon mythical castle and the Durrandon lands..... Everything about them is that of the of the Storm kings.....

I am pretty certain, Argella made sure that her sons married, her Durrandon cousins/neices.( either 2nd , 3rd or 4th cousins, we don't know)...

They have been breeding in the region where Durrandons had been breeding for over 8000 years....

If Orys decided not to rebrand the house( I started a thread to know why he thought the name is lame but everything else is too cool).... Then essentially there wouldn't be a House Baratheon but House Durrandon as it always had been.....

So tell me why isn't house Baratheon, house Durrandon in everything but name?

[Morte]

38 minutes ago, Orm said:

They look Durrandon

Do they now? Or do they look like Orys in all but eye colour (if his eyes were indeed black, and than we don't know if Orys "black eyes" were indeed a very dark indigo)?

We do not know, but the black hair is (at least also) from Orys.

45 minutes ago, Orm said:

They Descend from the uncontested Durrandon heir

Yes, Orys Baratheon took Argella as wife - he did not have too, she was given to him in chains and gagged.

51 minutes ago, Orm said:

they have the Durrandon sigil or heraldry, the Durrandon words, the Durrandon honours

Continuity is not bad, Orys did not hold lands until then, nor does he seem to have a sigil of his own (at least we don't know one), so it's just logical that he keeps the one of House Durrandon - it also showed the Stormlanders that he honoured his wife (who they gave him in chains).

And it also was common to include the colours of a new territory to your arms, if you got one though marriage or conquest. As Orys doesn't have (as far as we know) any arms of his own, including the Durrandon arms to his own make them his, essentially.

As an example here the arms of Charles V of Habsburg and the House Habsburg - one could play this "game" with other dynasties just as well:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Greater_Arms_of_Charles_I_of_Spain%2C_Charles_V_as_Holy_Roman_Emperor.svg

And all together the House Habsburg abandoned their original coat of arms (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Familienwappen_Habsburg-Stroehl.jpg) almost completely for the arms of Austria (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Bindenschild_Privilegium_maius_1512.svg); combined they look like this (including Lorraine): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/Habsburg_Lorraine_Trishield.png

 

1 hour ago, Orm said:

the Durrandon mythical castle and the Durrandon lands

Now, should he have destroyed a fine castle and made his domain somewhere else? The first one nobody would do, the second is, well... - He did conquer the Stormlands, and married the daughter of the lord of this domain, so the second suggestion is somewhat strange.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

Mind you, I have said it a lot of times, comparing the standing of a king from a dynasty 300 years old and the first king of a new dynasty, is cheating at solitaire, 

Sure. It's just that @Lord Varys suggested that because it was harder for Robert to begin with, making him that dependent on the other Houses (read: one House - Lannister) wasn't a smart move on Robert's and Jon Arryn's behalf. Especially since the Stormlands aren't a very strong power base in itself.

At the very least Robert should have punished the thugs who raped Elia and killed her and her children. Him not doing this (leaving aside why he did not do it) send a message of his dependence from the Lannisters as well as one of the vulnerability of royal blood and discard-ability of vows. Ned is by far not the only one who would have send Jaime to the Wall and wanted to see the murderers of Elia and her children punished.

[Orm]

8 hours ago, Morte said:

Do they now? Or do they look like Orys in all but eye colour (if his eyes were indeed black, and than we don't know if Orys "black eyes" were indeed a very dark indigo)?

We do not know, but the black hair is (at least also) from Orys.

Yes they do..... If they don't tell me who they look like?

Argilac's hair colour has been explicitly mentioned as "his famous mane of black hair has turned grey, and prowess of arms has faded"..... Funny that Rogar,Borros, Lyonel and Robert all echo Argilac, rather than Orys.....

I have seen Lord Varys aswell making the argument that Orys's black eyes( granted could be dark indigo) translates into

8 hours ago, Morte said:

 

Blue eyes in his Descendents.... How?? In what world, indigo/purple=clear blue??

The fact that Orys married into a family which shared most his traits but the eyes, doesn't the least bit change that his Descendents are more like his wife and her semi-divine family than him.......

8 hours ago, Morte said:

Yes, Orys Baratheon took Argella as wife - he did not have too, she was given to him in chains and gagged.

Ok..... And that made his sons uncontested/legal/undisputed heirs of the Durrandon line..... Not him..... As you are projecting....

Orys was smart and shrewd enough to know it.... And also knew he could get away with rebranding it.....

[frenin]

1 hour ago, Morte said:

Sure. It's just that @Lord Varys suggested that because it was harder for Robert to begin with, making him that dependent on the other Houses (read: one House - Lannister) wasn't a smart move on Robert's and Jon Arryn's behalf. Especially since the Stormlands aren't a very strong power base in itself.

Every other person from every other kingdom aiming to take the throne, would have to make the exact same alliances to hold it, you can't hold a land as big as South America otherwise, nor i see how he was dependent to the Lannisters, he relied just as much on his other allies, that without saying that the only reason Cersei became Queen was Lyanna's deaths.

 

1 hour ago, Morte said:

At the very least Robert should have punished the thugs who raped Elia and killed her and her children. Him not doing this (leaving aside why he did not do it) send a message of his dependence from the Lannisters as well as one of the vulnerability of royal blood and discard-ability of vows. Ned is by far not the only one who would have send Jaime to the Wall and wanted to see the murderers of Elia and her children punished.

No it doesn't, it sends a lot of messages, but that he is dependent of the Lannisters is not one of them, mind you, i don't think that Robert sent any message after pardoning Balon.

Robert's hatred for Rhaegar and company had become increasingly virulent, everyone could see why Robert would never bother to punish Targaryens murder.

The premise is not following the evidence here, the evidence is following the premise.   

[Morte]

8 hours ago, Orm said:

I have seen Lord Varys aswell making the argument that Orys's black eyes( granted could be dark indigo) translates into

Blue eyes in his Descendents.... How?? In what world, indigo/purple=clear blue??

The fact that Orys married into a family which shared most his traits but the eyes, doesn't the least bit change that his Descendents are more like his wife and her semi-divine family than him.......

Because we do have the description of indigo eyes such dark that they appear to be black with the right light, and blue eyes are well in the Valyrian spectrum, so we don't know there the eyes of the Baratheons come from.

And as other have told you already - Orys hair is just as black as is Argilacs, and we don't have his daughters hair colour yet (but yes, she might have had black hair, too).

8 hours ago, Orm said:

Ok..... And that made his sons uncontested/legal/undisputed heirs of the Durrandon line..... Not him..... As you are projecting....

I am projecting nothing. He could have taken a pink sparkling pony for his arms  - he did not, I tried to explain why he did not, and how this was completely understandable and normal in a feudal society. That it was important for the Stormlanders to have a Durrandon as Lord over them is indeed quite unlikely, as they delivered Argella gagged and in chains; I doubt anyone would have even blinked, had Orys decided to end the Durrandon in the female line, too. Orys Baratheon would have become the Lord of the Stormlands whether he married Argella or not.

And his sons are uncontested/legal/undisputed heirs of House Baratheon.

8 hours ago, Orm said:

Orys was smart and shrewd

On this we agree.

[Orm]

1 hour ago, Morte said:

am projecting nothing. He could have taken a pink sparkling pony for his arms  - he did not, I tried to explain why he did not, and how this was completely understandable and normal in a feudal society. That it was important for the Stormlanders to have a Durrandon as Lord over them is indeed quite unlikely, as they delivered Argella gagged and in chains; I doubt anyone would have even blinked, had Orys decided to end the Durrandon in the female line, too. Orys Baratheon would have become the Lord of the Stormlands whether he married Argella or not.

So I assume, you would also say the Stark name/blood had no value after Robb Stark was betrayed and murdered at his uncle's wedding by his own banner-men, right??

If so, I am sorry..... But I am sure that it isn't the case while I was reading the books... and it's quite unlikely that it was  the case with Durrandon name/blood....  

We know the Tyrells and Tullys had issues of supremecy with their banner-men...... The Baratheons didn't courtesy their Durrandon legitimacy.....

You did not have to go and explain why Orys kept everything Durrandon....

He tells us that he did that to honour Argilac's valour in battle..... I am quite eager to know why that respect did not extend to keeping the name aswell....

[Morte]

21 hours ago, Orm said:

So I assume, you would also say the Stark name/blood had no value after Robb Stark was betrayed and murdered at his uncle's wedding by his own banner-men, right??

No, because we KNOW it isn't so. We know nothing about the Stormlanders wanting to keep the Durrandon, you are assuming the situation would be similar to the Starks and the North, I doubt it.

We are deep in the terrain of speculations here.

21 hours ago, Orm said:

He tells us that he did that to honour Argilac's valour in battle..... I am quite eager to know why that respect did not extend to keeping the name aswell....

Because he didn't want to, it's a strong hint that it wasn't necessary to rule the Stormlands undisputed - even more: that all the things Durrandon he kept would also not have been necessary.

It seems his own name, even though it wasn't an important one (as far as we know, if it would be a Valyrian name, like it was suggested in your other thread, this would be a possible explanation - but it might be sufficient that he deeply loved and respected his foster father, and thus kept his name), was more precious to him than the old and myth-laden name of his wife.

[Orm]

29 minutes ago, Morte said:

No, because we KNOW it isn't so. We know nothing about the Stormlanders wanting to keep the Durrandon, you are assuming the situation would be similar to the Starks and the North, I doubt it.

The case is quite likely than to be unlikely..... Since the Durrandon legitimacy in the Storm-lands is arguably older than Stark legitimacy in the North.... And that old legitimacy is the reason the north remembers....

And the same reason why I think Baratheon legitimacy of their kingdom is never questioned unlike the Tyrells and Tullys.......

29 minutes ago, Morte said:

Because he didn't want to, it's a strong hint that it wasn't necessary to rule the Stormlands undisputed - even more: that all the things Durrandon he kept would also not have been necessary.

It seems his own name, even though it wasn't an important one (as far as we know, if it would be a Valyrian name, like it was suggested in your other thread, this would be a possible explanation - but it might be sufficient that he deeply loved and respected his foster father, and thus kept his name), was more precious to him than the old and myth-laden name of his wife.

You literally were arguing that Orys kept everything Durrandon for continuity in your earlier posts.... The only thing he saw fit to change was the name.....

And it is pretty understandable why he could get away with it.... Even if he did the same rebranding with let's say the Starks or Lannisters....

He conquered the region, defeated the previous king in single combat... That is pretty legitimate ground on overthrowing a dynasty.... But then he assimilates himself with the Dynasty (smart move) rather than destroying it....

Argella suffered a complete defeat... Even after that Orys treated her with respect and chivalry, and adopted everything of her family but the name...

I don't think she could afford to be upset, than grateful at that turn of events.... Even with the name change..... 

And yeah Baratheon could be his alleged father's name but we DONT know that  unfortunately......

[Morte]

40 minutes ago, Orm said:

The case is quite likely than to be unlikely..... Since the Durrandon legitimacy in the Storm-lands is arguably older than Stark legitimacy in the North.... And that old legitimacy is the reason the north remembers

It's not just the age of the dynasty with the Starks, it's also because they are heavily invested in the myths of the North. I don't know if the Durrandons are as interwoven in the myths of the Stormlands as the Starks are in the North. Granted: We know very little about the myths of the Stormlands - the region is heavily underdeveloped in world building.

40 minutes ago, Orm said:

And the same reason why I think Baratheon legitimacy of their kingdom is never questioned unlike the Tyrells and Tullys

Might be a part of it, yes. But I think Orys as a person made also a difference - because he wasn't just a steward who was raised to his rank by Aegon, but the kings half-brother, who defeated the last Storm King in single combat. Imho this also played a part.

40 minutes ago, Orm said:

You literally were arguing that Orys kept everything Durrandon for continuity in your earlier posts.... The only thing he saw fit to change was the name

Yes, because that's what you do, or can do in a feudal society - but we don't know if it was necessary. I think it helped and was seen as honourable and chivalrous(?spelling?). Especially his treatment of Argella.

40 minutes ago, Orm said:

He conquered the region, defeated the previous king in single combat... That is pretty legitimate ground on overthrowing a dynasty.... But then he assimilates himself with the Dynasty (smart move) rather than destroying it....

Argella suffered a complete defeat... Even after that Orys treated her with respect and chivalry, and adopted everything of her family but the name...

I don't think she could afford to be upset, than grateful at that turn of events.... Even with the name change

On this we agree.

40 minutes ago, Orm said:

And yeah Baratheon could be his alleged father's name but we DONT know that  unfortunately......

Yes, that's unfortunate. It's still quite strange, even if his foster father was very much loved and respected by all four (half-)siblings, to keep a "nobody's-name", than you can get a very old and reverend one "for free".

So either it was a very human and loving gesture, or it was this and the name Baratheon had some weight on it's own. If it would be an old Valyrian name, even if not a (very) noble one, keeping the name with the arms and colours of Durrandon would point toward both ancient and venerable roots.

But as you say: We unfortunately don't know; maybe we get some more insight when F&B reaches the marriage of Ormund and Rhaelle... One can always hope.

[Orm]

8 minutes ago, Morte said:

It's not just the age of the dynasty with the Starks, it's also because they are heavily invested in the myths of the North. I don't know if the Durrandons are as interwoven in the myths of the Stormlands as are the Starks are in the North. Granted: We know very little about the myths of the Stormlands - the region are heavily underdeveloped in world building

Come on..... House Durrandon has the most badass mythical origin story of all the houses over 8000 years old....

It is nigh impossible that they are not interwoven with the myths of their region..... Since the house matriarch is literally a goddess.....

Martin mainly focuses on Starks and Targaryens for world building.... So I do agree that other regions are underdeveloped......

15 minutes ago, Morte said:

Might be a part of it, yes. But I think Orys as a person made also a difference (because he wasn't just a steward who was raised to his rank by Aegon, but the kings half-brother, who defeated the last Storm King in single combat. Imho this also played a part.

I never argued that Orys's badassary, position and leadership up until the loss of his hand, doesn't help.....

[The Hoare]

Are the valyrians really whiter than most westerosi? In the Sworn Sword Egg managed to get a nice tan

"In Dorne he went about bare-chested, and turned brown as a Dornishman. It is his dragon blood, Dunk told himself."

[Darth Sidious]

On 7/28/2020 at 7:36 PM, Bowen Marsh said:

To underline their uniqueness.  They have physical characteristics which make them different from the other families in Westeros.  I do not think there is any internal reason except that it serves the story.  They live in a tightly controlled society.  The nobles rule by right of class and held themselves apart from the folks they ruled over.  The Targaryens have these unique looks to make them different from the other families.  This difference is one reason why their rule was accepted.  They were not ruling over peers and equals.  The Targaryens had no equal.  The nobles and the commons respected that difference.  It is easier on your honor to take orders from demigods.  Your pride will be wounded if you had to take orders from your peers.  

 

On 8/3/2020 at 3:50 AM, Orm said:

Well Robert was accepted as king quite well without displaying any Targ features........ Not saying that his features in his youth weren't "a maiden's fantasy" but still proves my point......

I don't think that there looks had anything to do with their right to rule........

The looks in of themselves did not and does not give them the right to rule.  But their unique appearance and over the top loveliness sets them apart. That appearance became a symbol of the right to rule over the other families.  Like every other family, they ruled through strength.  But unlike them, the Targaryens ruled over the High Lords too.  The Targaryens stood alone at the apex of the social hierarchy.  So the looks became associated with the right to rule over everybody.