Criston Cole

[Annara Snow]

18 minutes ago, SoftSpell said:

When he was Lord of House Hightower received a letter from his younger brother, Ser Otto;

On no account can Prince Daemon be allowed to ascend to the Iron Throne.[...] He would be a second Maegor the Cruel, or worse.[...] Better the Realm’s Delight than Lord Flea Bottom.

So he KNEW about it being likely to happen in the future. Ormund would lead his family's forces in the Reach. So yes, 'House Hightower' as in more than one member, as a broader political entity, participated in the coup.

What does that letter have to do with the coup? That was about how Otto thought Darmon mustn't be the heir/king, so Otto preferred Rhaenyra to be the heir - two decades earlier.

No, House Hightower didn't participate in the coup. Ormund didn't send his forces from Oldtown to besiege King's Landing so Aegon could be crowned or whatever. They supported their fanily members - naturally - after the war broke out (which was not Otto's or Alicent's or anyone's initial plan, they hoped it could go over without a war) So did the Lannisters and many other houses. The coup was carried out in KL with forces that Otto had authority over as the Hand of the King. He didn't need to ask his nephew for permission and certainly didn't need or ask for his logistical support in the coup.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Annara Snow

[SoftSpell]

When you're not head of an aristocratic family,yeah, you need permission. Nitpicking about locations is a waste of effort. Distances for communication are compensated by raven and couriers on two legs. House Hightower participated.

[Lord Varys]

On 3/9/2023 at 12:56 PM, Annara Snow said:

It's implied Jon Arryn knew, because I think it's mentioned he probably resented Lysa for having to marry a 'soiiled' girl.

However, Jon Arryn was practically blackmailed by Hoster Tully because he wouldn't give him military support in the war unless he married Lysa. And for that to happen, Hoster needed to trick Lysa into miscarring her child - because Jon would obviously not want to acknowledge another man's child as his own, nor would be have married a girl who had a bastard, and neither Hoster nor Jon would've tolerated their reputations being smeared and Jon Arryn would never agree if it meant people would laugh at him. So it was incredibly important no one else knew.

That is just in your head. The timeline doesn't allow for Hoster to abort Littlefinger's child so that Lysa could marry Jon Arryn ... as Lysa most likely lost her child long before the Rebellion even started. The duel took place before Harrenhal, and Harrenhal took place months before the actual war. And Hoster only ended up making a deal with Ned and Jon months after the war had started. Lysa's pregnancy cannot have lasted longer than four months, say. Else it would have been public knowledge that she was pregnant - and Cat didn't know it, for instance.

On 3/9/2023 at 12:56 PM, Annara Snow said:

There is no doubt that public knowledge of a woman having had a bastard and generally having been "soiled" significantly reduces her chances in that society, both for a good marriage, and, which is crucial in this case, of inheriting - especially when it's the throne. It certainly contributed to reducing Daena's chances of taking the throne.

It is all about power. If Rhaenyra remains the heir, people will want her even if she has a harem of lovers. Because with her hand come power, prestige, and the fucking Iron Throne.

On 3/9/2023 at 12:56 PM, Annara Snow said:

And both the book and show imply that at least Daemon believed that ruining Rhaenyra's reputation would be enough for him to blackmail Viserys to marry her to him, because "no one else would want her now". 

You are misconstruing things - in one book scenario Rhaenyra was in love with and had had sex with Daemon, and they both ask for her hand. The other is Mushroom's silly fantasy where Daemon actually thinks he can claim a niece he hadn't even seduced so far on the basis of giving her practical sex education simply because those stories would tarnish her reputation.

That obviously never happened as Rhaenyra is still surrounded by suitors in 111-113 AC, and neither Laenor nor Harwin have a problems with slutty Rhaenyra.

In the show it is clear that Daemon doesn't want Rhaenyra because she is a slut, but because he, as a Targaryen, is the only worthy husband she could have - just as she is the only worthy bride for him.

24 minutes ago, SoftSpell said:

When he was Lord of House Hightower received a letter from his younger brother, Ser Otto;

On no account can Prince Daemon be allowed to ascend to the Iron Throne.[...] He would be a second Maegor the Cruel, or worse.[...] Better the Realm’s Delight than Lord Flea Bottom.

So he KNEW about it being likely to happen in the future. Ormund would lead his family's forces in the Reach. So yes, 'House Hightower' as in more than one member, as a broader political entity, participated in the coup.

The lord in question here would be Otto's older brother, not Ormund. But you are quite right that House Hightower plotted the coup, as Otto and Alicent Hightower ran the Green Council. And Lord Ormund Hightower later aided and abetted the traitors, just as Alicent's brother Gwayne did.

In the show it is even more obvious that the Hightowers as a house are traitors, as the ultimate architect of the 'King Aegon II traitor project' is Otto's older brother, the Lord of Oldtown, not Otto himself nor Alicent.

King Viserys I makes it clear in episode 3 that anyone assuming Aegon was the rightful heir was a traitor, commanding Jason Lannister to rat such traitors out. There is no doubt about the legal situation in the show.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Lord Varys

[Annara Snow]

Just now, SoftSpell said:

When you're not head of an aristocratic family,yeah, you need permission. Nitpicking about locations is a waste of effort. Distances for communication are compensated by raven and couriers on two legs. House Hightower participated.

No, you don't, when you're Hand of the King. You are, in fact, the second highest authority in the realm after the monarch or the regent - and the ultimate authority in the realm in the interim when there is no crowned monarch.

Hand of the King > Lord Paramount

And in the show, Alicent was the Regent for ill Viserys so she outranked them too (technically she outranked her father too before the coronation).

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, Annara Snow said:

No, you don't, when you're Hand of the King. You are, in fact, the second highest authority in the realm after the monarch or the regent - and the ultimate authority in the realm in the interim when there is no crowned monarch.

Hand of the King > Lord Paramount

That is not so, as a landless knight is also beholden to his lordly brother, as Otto shows in the show. He is subservient to his brother, never mind that he wields authority as the highest royal official. The Handship is a temporary job, not a title.

The Hand is also not by default the big shot during an interregnum - that would depend on whether a dying monarch or the council name a regent or not. If no arrangement is made, then the Hand might be the one in charge - also that would also depend on the status of the Heir Apparent and the Dowager Queen's role in the government.

1 minute ago, Annara Snow said:

And in the show, Alicent was the Regent for ill Viserys so she outranked them too (technically she outranked her father too before the coronation).

Nope, Otto was running the show, not Alicent, he sat the throne in Viserys' absence, not she. She wielded informal power and authority due to her access to the king, but she wasn't an official regent. They didn't name one since the situation wasn't that bad, apparently.

[SoftSpell]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nope, Otto was running the show, not Alicent, he sat the throne in Viserys' absence, not she. She wielded informal power and authority due to her access to the king, but she wasn't an official regent. They didn't name one since the situation wasn't that bad, apparently.

Also it's a patriarchal society. So the perception was automatically that her father outranked her just by being a male. There had never been a ruling Queen, by herself, in Westeros. A civil war was inevitable for any woman barking orders from the Iron Throne.

Edited May 30, 2023 by SoftSpell

[Lord Varys]

5 minutes ago, SoftSpell said:

Also it's a patriarchal society. So the perception was automatically that her father outranked her just by being a male. There had never been a ruling Queen in Westeros ever. A civil war was inevitable for any woman barking orders from the Iron Throne.

There were queens who sat the Iron Throne - Rhaenys and Visenya did that, but they were effectively Aegon's co-conquerors and co-rulers. Alicent is clearly subservient to her father in every respect ... until episode 9. There she asserts control, but even then she isn't a regent but merely the one demanding to run the Green faction now, controlling things because she controlled Aegon's person.

In the book it may be that Alicent had more power/agency in her own right as she was the one who brought Otto back as Hand and may have been more of a driving force in the entire thing - but it is difficult to say.

[Annara Snow]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is not so, as a landless knight is also beholden to his lordly brother, as Otto shows in the show. He is subservient to his brother, never mind that he wields authority as the highest royal official. The Handship is a temporary job, not a title.

The Hand is also not by default the big shot during an interregnum - that would depend on whether a dying monarch or the council name a regent or not. If no arrangement is made, then the Hand might be the one in charge - also that would also depend on the status of the Heir Apparent and the Dowager Queen's role in the government.

Nope, Otto was running the show, not Alicent, he sat the throne in Viserys' absence, not she. She wielded informal power and authority due to her access to the king, but she wasn't an official regent. They didn't name one since the situation wasn't that bad, apparently.

Actually, you are wrong, the Hand has a higher authority than any of the Lord Paramounts, just as the King has, since the Hand is seen as "speaking with King's voice" and yielding that authority when the King is absent or incapacitated and if there is no Regent to perform the role of the King. The Hand can sit the Iron Throne and pronounce Lord Tywin Lannister's bannerman Ser Gregor Clegane a traitor to the crown, without asking Lord Tywin for permission or caring what Lord Tywin would say, as Ned Stark did.

Otto acting deferential to Hobart in the show while they are talking to each other has nothing to do with their formal authority - Otto is the one who outranks Hobart there - it is about their familiar relationship and the fact even someone as powerful as Otto is unable to stop looking at his older brother as his older brother. (But I doubt he feels the same about his nephew.)

This is no different from how Tywin was ordering both Cersei and Joffrey around. Tyrion at one point even thinks to himself in ASOS that Cersei should not be obeying Tywin's orders - she outranks him as the Regent. Regent > Hand. But she can't stop seeing him as her father, the all powerful Lord Tywin. It doesn't matter who the formal highest authority is when Tywin has the real life authority and reputation he has, and plus he is a man, and her father.

Similarly. as a woman, Alicent struggles to assert herself, because  the Council would rather listen to Otto, who is a man, and he's expected to have authority over her as her father. And Daemon all but usurps Rhaenyra's authority in the season  1 finale at some points - doing things without any consultation with her, because he is a man, and because he is her husband, so people tend to see him as maybe the one to listen to, even though he is just a consort.

 

 

 

Edited May 30, 2023 by Annara Snow

[Lord Varys]

25 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Actually, you are wrong, the Hand has a higher authority than any of the Lord Paramounts, just as the King has, since the Hand is seen as "speaking with King's voice" and yielding that authority when the King is absent or incapacitated and if there is no Regent to perform the role of the King. The Hand can sit the Iron Throne and pronounce Lord Tywin Lannister's bannerman Ser Gregor Clegane a traitor to the crown, without asking Lord Tywin for permission or caring what Lord Tywin would say, as Ned Stark did.

That is not authority in the Hand's own right, but the king's authority transferred to the Hand. A lord's authority, though, remains. And the Hand only wields royal authority in the king's place if the king is unable to speak. Which is rarely the case. This is not a power invested in the Hand at all time. And it is not a power at all if the Hand tries to contradict the will of the king and the king can actually still talk.

The power of the Hand is all borrowed power, similarly to having the power of representation in a company setting. You are just an employee, but allowed to speak for the director(s) in a binding way - but you don't own or run the company as such. You are just a servant.

The Lord of Oldtown, though, owns and runs Oldtown and adjacent lands. He has real power and real wealth.

25 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Otto acting deferential to Hobart in the show while they are talking to each other has nothing to do with their formal authority - Otto is the one who outranks Hobart there - it is about their familiar relationship and the fact even someone as powerful as Otto is unable to stop looking at his older brother as his older brother. (But I doubt he feels the same about his nephew.)

Otto doesn't outrank his brother there. Otto is a hired servant - the king's first servant but still a servant - while his brother is a great lord in his own right. Otto might wield more power than his brother, but that doesn't have any effect on rank in a feudal society. Otto has no land, no vassals, no bannermen, no levies. He has no real power at all. He has just power as a cog in the Targaryen machine.

Of course, this changes when the Hand is not a landless knight like Otto but a great lord in his own right or even a royal prince. Such people have a higher rank as per their status independent of the Handship.

Also, keep in mind that rank =/= power. Queens are the highest ranking women in the Realm, just as lady wives have the same rank as their husbands ... yet they rarely have any formal power nor a say in the government. But a Hand or steward definitely has to show deference to a queen or the lady wife of his lord. Although they definitely are rarely obliged to obey them.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Lord Varys

[Annara Snow]

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is not authority in the Hand's own right, but the king's authority transferred to the Hand. A lord's authority, though, remains. And the Hand only wields royal authority in the king's place if the king is unable to speak. Which is rarely the case. This is not a power invested in the Hand at all time. And it is not a power at all if the Hand tries to contradict the will of the king and the king can actually still talk.

Except that's not how it goes in real life.. especially when the King is dead (as when Viserys died and no one had been crowned yet), absent, underage, incapacitated or uninterested in ruling. 

Either way, the Hand answers to the King first and not to their Lord Paramount. Imagine how Westeros would run if it was otherwise?! Any Hand of the King who's not a Lord Paramount would be taking orders from their Lord instead of the King! Or Septon Barth taking orders from the High Septon while ignoring Jaehaerys!

Jon Connington taking orders from Robert Baratheon instead of Aerys and Rhaegar?

Unwin Peake taking orders from Lyonel Hightower? LMAO He also wasn't taking orders from underage Aegon II and was actually ignoring the king's wishes, a lot.. and the Regency was technically the utmost authority but they were weakened so it was pretty much just Unwin Peake doing whatever he wanted.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Except that's not how it goes in real life.. especially when the King is dead (as when Viserys died and no one had been crowned yet), absent, underage, incapacitated or uninterested in ruling. 

Not doubting that the Hand can wield much power - but again, it is borrowed power, not invested power. The Hand is the first royal official - and as such people have to honor him. But he doesn't have power in his own right. Which is why in the feudal context actual lords and princes do outrank a Hand like Otto Hightower or Septon Barth (who would be an even better example for this).

How little the power of the Hand can mean you can see when Aegon II is incapacitated. Criston Cole doesn't take charge - Prince Aemond does.

4 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Either way, the Hand answers to the King first and not to their Lord Paramount. Imagine how Westeros would run if it was otherwise?! Any Hand of the King who's not a Lord Paramount would be taking orders from their Lord instead of the King! Or Septon Barth taking orders from the High Septon while ignoring Jaehaerys!

Jon Connington taking orders from Robert Baratheon instead of Aerys and Rhaegar?

Unwin Peake taking orders from Lyonel Hightower? LMAO He also wasn't taking orders from underage Aegon II and was actually ignoring the king's wishes, a lot.. and the Regency was technically the utmost authority but they were weakened so it was pretty much just Unwin Peake doing whatever he wanted.

Unwin Peake's liege lord would be Lord Tyrell, not Lord Hightower. But, of course, the Hand doesn't take orders from them. But again - the Handship is an office and not a title. A lord wields real power he can pass on to his heir, the Handship is just a job. And, of course, the Hand's prestige and authority hinges on his general standing. Otto Hightower is a very powerful Hand in 129 AC because his daughter is the queen and his grandson the king he wants to make - had Otto still been little Ser Landless in 129 AC he couldn't have pulled a coup.

Whereas a Hand like Bloodraven or Viserys II or Baelor Breakspear - having royal blood and the prestige that comes with that - or a great lord like Tywin Lannister or Eddard Stark would have less problems exerting the powers that can come with the office - or even some powers that don't come, strictly speaking, with the office. Because they have real power independent of the office of Hand of the King.

In a very real context even the smallest lordship is a better gig than the Handship. The Hand is a servant, an employee, a guy who does a job. A lord owns lands, a castle or keep, and has levies or bannermen he can call to war. The Hand can be a lord, of course, but as Hand he has nothing of his own. Also, his job is only temporary while a lord remains a lord all his life unless he commits treason. In that sense it makes no sense to say that Otto has more prestige or outranks his brother. Because he doesn't really have a rank. He just has a job. And one word of the king can see him without a job ... which then actually happens.

It is also misleading to assume the Hand can have an agenda of his own. Speaking with the King's Voice means he repeats and reinforces the king's words. He doesn't twist his words. Yes, he can step in for the king in emergency cases, but that actually rarely happens and even with disinterested or absent kings ... the king remains the king and the Hand just the Hand. One word of the king can see him gone, can revoke anything the Hand decides.

Ned was stretching things pretty far when he condemned Gregor Clegane - Robert could have revoked that decree as soon as he heard of it. And, of course, no Hand is going to remain in office for long if they are at odds with the king's policies, wishes, or general agenda. That wouldn't make sense. That Aerys put up with Tywin for as long as he did was quite unusual. Ned wouldn't have continued much longer as Hand had Robert lived longer consider over what trivial issues they were constantly clashing.

[Annara Snow]

Yes, Tyrell - we were talking too much about the Hightowers so my finger slipped LOL And did Unwin Peake take orders from him? Nope! He was the most powerful man in the realm.

Anyway - this has been a long digression debate.

Point: Otto did not need to ask his nephew for permission to do the coup, legally or not, just like Criston Cole didn't go and ask Borros Baratheon fod permission. Where did that idea even come from?

Otto could have talked to him at some point, but he really didn't have to. Ormund didn't provide any logistical support for the coup. All Otto would need from him was support in the war - but at that point he didn't even think there would be war. And of course the Hightowers would support their close relatives.

It would also be very weird, if Ormund was a co-conspirator, that there was no inkling of that in either book or show. Otto's brother, called Lord Hobart in the show, appeared just twice and years before - the first time when he was expecting that 2 year Aegon would be named heir, which many thought at the time, and the second one at Rhaenyra's wedding to tell Alicent he was proud of her. Otto may want to impress his brother, but the Oldtown Hightowers were absent  and distant in most of season 1, with no indication that Otto is consulting with them on his plotting and that they're active participants in the plans that he had to  send a letter to say "important: I will be making Aegon II king in spite of Viserys' wishes; waiting for further instructions"

Edited May 30, 2023 by Annara Snow

[frenin]

On 5/30/2023 at 2:46 PM, SoftSpell said:

When you're not head of an aristocratic family,yeah, you need permission. Nitpicking about locations is a waste of effort. Distances for communication are compensated by raven and couriers on two legs. House Hightower participated.

That's like saying Tywin participated in Robert's murder.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ormund knew, as tthe Greens acted methodically, but there's a big difference between being vaguely aware and participating in a coup.

And they did not even expect Ormund's military help, just the Aegon already being crowned and enough political support meant that the succesion was settled.

 

On 5/30/2023 at 3:17 PM, Annara Snow said:

Actually, you are wrong, the Hand has a higher authority than any of the Lord Paramounts, just as the King has, since the Hand is seen as "speaking with King's voice" and yielding that authority when the King is absent or incapacitated and if there is no Regent to perform the role of the King. The Hand can sit the Iron Throne and pronounce Lord Tywin Lannister's bannerman Ser Gregor Clegane a traitor to the crown, without asking Lord Tywin for permission or caring what Lord Tywin would say, as Ned Stark did.

Yeah and it's also stated that it was the fact that he was so powerful what bothered Daemon in the first place.

 

About Criston Cole... he is overhyped in the books and he's also in the show. The show has managed to make a terribly boring character like Aemond compelling enough but Cole is just as flat, he resents Rhaenyra because she refused him 20 years ago and that's about it.

 

 

[Eternally_Theirs]

I am wondering whether Criston is the only one who tried to commit suicide on the show?

[Areisius]

On 1/13/2023 at 6:59 PM, Eternally_Theirs said:

Well, honestly, I don't get why he is so hated. It seems that people's intelligence and willingness to look into character in-depth took a nosedive lately, of which Criston is the best example. People before would have called him a complex character while theorizing what made him the way he is now. People now merely call him 'a dickhead' for turning against Rhaenyra with no thoughts regarding how or why.

It's sad, but true.

I couldn't agree with you more. Criston Cole has every right to hate Rhaenyra for lying and manipulating him.

[BlackLightning]

On 8/30/2023 at 5:55 PM, Areisius said:

I couldn't agree with you more. Criston Cole has every right to hate Rhaenyra for lying and manipulating him.

Why does he hate Rhaenyra for lying when he lied too? And I wouldn't say that Rhaenyra manipulated him either...

It's projection. They have very different values.