Marwyn

[Artanaro]

Unless Aemon is really eliding and lying about things, Marwyn at the very best has the situation completely wrong, and at worst is actively passing around a false conspiracy theory, re: Aemon.

Ran Mutu, why can't it be both? Consider this situation. The Citadel offers Aemon the position and tells him if he doesn't accept, he will experience trouble and will end up dead. Aemon knows that as a favored brother/son to the king, he could give the word to Aegon and have all their heads removed, thus eliminating the problem. Aemon decides that accepting their offer is the best way to keep his vows. Both sides think they are responsible for the choice.

I don't want to imply it happened that way, but it is an example where both sides come away thinking, "I won."

Artanaro

[shadowbinding shoe]

Ran Mutu, why can't it be both? Consider this situation. The Citadel offers Aemon the position and tells him if he doesn't accept, he will experience trouble and will end up dead. Aemon knows that as a favored brother/son to the king, he could give the word to Aegon and have all their heads removed, thus eliminating the problem. Aemon decides that accepting their offer is the best way to keep his vows. Both sides think they are responsible for the choice.

I don't want to imply it happened that way, but it is an example where both sides come away thinking, "I won."

Artanaro

Would they dare to threaten him that way? As you say he could have their heads for this. You don't use these scare tactics on someone as well connected as Aemon. It would hardly be a conspiracy if Aemon mentioned their existence to his royal siblings. And wouldn't he have warned Sam about them if he knew about such conspirators.

[Artanaro]

Would they dare to threaten him that way?

Like I said, I don't mean to imply it happened that way . I used extreme points to present the example concretely. All that matters is that there is the possibility where both sides think they got the best result, but where everyone had different motivations.

Artanaro

[wvlr]

Marwyn suggests that Aemon was at the Wall because the Citadel wanted him away from them, whereas Aemon says he was on the Wall because, well, he swore vows to get away from being used against his brother.

Unless Aemon is really eliding and lying about things, Marwyn at the very best has the situation completely wrong, and at worst is actively passing around a false conspiracy theory, re: Aemon.

RM,

Surely there are other options than what you give?

Say:

Archmaester X - chief plotter - talking to Aemon years ago. "You know Aemon, now that you are a Maester there should not be any chance that someone like Lord Y would come along and use you against King Egg. But many people are not happy with King Egg and think that it was very suspicious for Egg to be crowned. Many think that the crown should have gone to you. I know that your interests lie elsewhere but that does not mean that others will see it the same. Don't you think that, as an added measure, if you were to join the Night Watch as their Maester that it would visably remove yourself from their possible manipulation even more. Surely no one will try the unspeakable then? And you don't want anything bad to happen to Egg? Sure your family has suffered enough already?"

Surely this is only one possible but plausable senario that shows how Aemon could have been unknowingly MANIPULATED into joining the NW.

So BOTH Aemon and Marwin could easily be speaking the truth.

[Ran]

It's all rather reaching, though, introducing third parties that Aemon never hinted at. Aemon has _always_ presented it as solely being his own decision. He never said (and now will never say, which is why I think this isn't going to be correct; and indeed, there's almost certainly no one alive at the Citadel who was an archmaester at the time of this whole thing), "I did not know what to do, until my old mentor, Archmaester Magicsucks, suggested I join the Night's Watch."

[Red Rex]

How much trust can we put in Marwyn's claims? Dragons are gone from Westeros but as far as we know the Maesters had nothing to do with it.

Actually I can't place where I read it, but there's an air of suspicion hanging over the citadel in so far as the death of dragons because they were the clear beneficiarys from the diminishment of magic [directly linked to the existence or lack thereof of dragons]. Magic users and the pyromancers guild were rivals of the citadel in terms of power and influence until the last dragon died which seems directly linked to the citadel becoming the preeminent power in terms of hoarding knowledge and knowing the kingdoms secrets. it'd be interesting to know if the 1st Wisdom of the alchemists once held a similar small council chair that the Grand Maester now holds.

[shadowbinding shoe]

Actually I can't place where I read it, but there's an air of suspicion hanging over the citadel in so far as the death of dragons because they were the clear beneficiarys from the diminishment of magic [directly linked to the existence or lack thereof of dragons]. Magic users and the pyromancers guild were rivals of the citadel in terms of power and influence until the last dragon died which seems directly linked to the citadel becoming the preeminent power in terms of hoarding knowledge and knowing the kingdoms secrets. it'd be interesting to know if the 1st Wisdom of the alchemists once held a similar small council chair that the Grand Maester now holds.

There's a suspicion? Marwyn must have secretly planted them in your copies of the books

The magic was gone once Valyria fell. The little leftovers of the pyromancers, bloodmages, shadowbinders and their ilk was petty after that. The few dragons the Targareyn kept made small difference in the big equation. So saying the Maesters were beneficiaries of the Targareyn dragons' demise is questionable. They were already taking over and I imagine the Targareyns would have preferred the Maesters' advice over the pyromancers' on taking care of their dragons if they needed anyone's help. After all while the pyromancers slave in their icy basements the maesters learn how to take care of flying animals. Unless you want to claim that the maester-guild is the one responsible for the fall of Valyria this falls.

[Red Rex]

I imagine the Targareyns would have preferred the Maesters' advice over the pyromancers' on taking care of their dragons if they needed anyone's help. After all while the pyromancers slave in their icy basements the maesters learn how to take care of flying animals. Unless you want to claim that the maester-guild is the one responsible for the fall of Valyria this falls.

No, the Maesters weren't responsible for Valyria falling, but I'll find where it was said [i'm thinking in one of the D+E books] that the Dragons Bane and the Maesters had something to do with the last Targaryen dragon dying.

[wvlr]

Ran,

The senario I presented was just to show that the potential for manipulation certianally existed. In addition it points out the joining the Night Watch was somewhat redundent. Aemon was alread a Maester which should have removed him from being any threat to Egg.

So with Aemon already a Maester AND clearly already supporting Egg who is already on the throne -WHY is there any need whatsoever for Aemon to join the NW. It is rather tripple redundent unless something was pushing him in that direction.

You may discount Marwin's statements out of hand, but to me they seem to have a "ring of truth" to them. Marwin seems to "have it together" more so than quite a few characters in the books and even, years ago, when I read about dragons in AGoT it made no sense to me that Dragons owned by Kings would not thrive. If they could exist in the wild and had existed in captivity for thousands of years, then under the care of kings - (which should have massive resourses available to give the best of care).

Yes, Marwin is an Arch-Maester which seems, on the surface to go against the theory of an anti-magic Citadel, but he is clearly looked down upon in general. In addition, he clearly acquired a significant amount of his "magical" training outside of the Citadel. In my view, it could be that with dragons gone they saw little threat in one young Maester taking an unusual interest in the "arts", then after years of his travels and research, when he returned he was too far along for them to do anything about it. So all they can do now, is to try to "belittle" him and his presuits.

Edited to add:

Of corse this is not a sure thing, but I think GrrM has left plenty of room for it to occur, and has left a potential trail of evidence.

[Artanaro]

It's all rather reaching, though, introducing third parties that Aemon never hinted at.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a third party. I'd call it "the voice of the citadel." Whether the citadel was represented by one or multiple people really shouldn't matter. All that matters is if someone at the citadel wanted Aemon at the wall, and Aemon knew they wanted him at the wall. It doesn't matter if Aemon ever hinted this was the actual case for leaving. We have evidence based on Marwyn's testimony that this was the case. His words don't prove it was the case, but it is more than speculation now. Without Aemon giving specifics about why he went to the wall, (or anyone else providing them for that matter), it's difficult to say what Aemon considers to be "my choice." You may be right, Ran, but you could be equally wrong, without more evidence.

Artanaro

[wvlr]

And the point that I am trying to get through, is that it could have been done in such a way that Aemon "thought" that it was his own idea. So both Marwin AND Aemon could have been completely truthful in the statements that they made.

[Artanaro]

And the point that I am trying to get through, is that it could have been done in such a way that Aemon "thought" that it was his own idea. So both Marwin AND Aemon could have been completely truthful in the statements that they made.

I support this position completely. :cool:

Artanaro

[Ran]

Artanaro,

We have evidence based on Marwyn's testimony that this was the case.

As far as I can tell, Marwyn wasn't even alive when Aemon went to the Wall. His testimony is ... well, frankly, meaningless. Just because someone tosses a crazy idea out there doesn't necessarily mean that it's true, even in the books.

And for that matter, nothing says that his conspiracy theory is necessarily invalidated if he's particularly wrong about Aemon's situation. It just means he's let his theory get the better of him, and he's read too much into that particular event ... but it doesn't mean he's wrong.

In the end, there's no evidence in the first four books that Marwyn's theory is correct. Marwyn is, in fact, the only person who presents the theory, and he offers no evidence but for his say-so. It's one thing to say the Citadel is institutionally negative on the topic of magic, but it's quite another to then say that the Citadel actively tried to crush it, had a direct hand in the deaths of dragons and Targaryens, and so on. The burden of proof, it seems to me, would be on him.

In any case, no, I don't think that Aemon was convinced by anyone or any group to make his decision, because if that were the case, I think some hint of this would have been given. Since Aemon is dead, as are his contemporaries, such evidence is very unlikely to ever make itself apparent ... and so I think what's likelier here is that we're going to be discovering down the road is that Marwyn isn't necessarily right about everything, because he has his own biases and agendas. That seems to me rather more fitting with ASoIaF's nature. Trusting in someone just because he says what you want to hear (and many readers clearly wanted to hear that magic is great and that there's a conspiracy against it) sounds a bit like what Ned did with Littlefinger, towards the end.

I'm not saying Marwyn is a _bad_ person. I'm just saying that at least some of his claims are likelier to be false than true at this point.

[shadowbinding shoe]

I think Aemon had reason to be worried. He was supposed to come before Egg to kingship and he seemed easy to put under your thumb I think. That's plenty of motive for power player to try and use him. And the maesters' vows and chains could only help him so much. Look at the history of Westeros. Who heard of a bastard becoming legalized and inheriting his father's titles? A king with the power to do so decided he wanted to do that and changed the laws. Now anyone calling himself king can have bastards legalized, something unheard of two hundred years ago. Similarly potential power players could bend the arch-maesters counsil to their will and they'd release Aemon from his vows. Or they could have a high septon ask the gods to release Aemon from his vows. You see how easily it could happen.

[wvlr]

Artanaro,

As far as I can tell, Marwyn wasn't even alive when Aemon went to the Wall. His testimony is ... well, frankly, meaningless. Just because someone tosses a crazy idea out there doesn't necessarily mean that it's true, even in the books.

And for that matter, nothing says that his conspiracy theory is necessarily invalidated if he's particularly wrong about Aemon's situation. It just means he's let his theory get the better of him, and he's read too much into that particular event ... but it doesn't mean he's wrong.

In the end, there's no evidence in the first four books that Marwyn's theory is correct. Marwyn is, in fact, the only person who presents the theory, and he offers no evidence but for his say-so. It's one thing to say the Citadel is institutionally negative on the topic of magic, but it's quite another to then say that the Citadel actively tried to crush it, had a direct hand in the deaths of dragons and Targaryens, and so on. The burden of proof, it seems to me, would be on him.

In any case, no, I don't think that Aemon was convinced by anyone or any group to make his decision, because if that were the case, I think some hint of this would have been given. Since Aemon is dead, as are his contemporaries, such evidence is very unlikely to ever make itself apparent ... and so I think what's likelier here is that we're going to be discovering down the road is that Marwyn isn't necessarily right about everything, because he has his own biases and agendas. That seems to me rather more fitting with ASoIaF's nature. Trusting in someone just because he says what you want to hear (and many readers clearly wanted to hear that magic is great and that there's a conspiracy against it) sounds a bit like what Ned did with Littlefinger, towards the end.

I'm not saying Marwyn is a _bad_ person. I'm just saying that at least some of his claims are likelier to be false than true at this point.

Good Points all, but none of these addresses the fact that Marwin just recently came into posession of an instrument that can be used to read minds as well as other things that I am sure that we are not aware of. And if Marwin for some reason had had suspecions of his associates at the Citadel I would think that, or just random curiosity, this could easily lead to him first experimenting on them once the Glass Candle became active. With the recent birth of Dragons and significant signs of magical resurgence in the world, the likelyhood of the Arch-Maesters being caught by Marwin and the Glass candle becomes significantly likely. If they were in on the plot and getting Intel on these occurances they would at least be "thinking" on the subjects a lot and most likely having significant clandestine meetings to discuss courses of action. In these meetings/thoughts they could easily have addressed the history of their crusade against Magic and successes against Dragons. Possible even discussing what poison they used in the past.

The reason that Marwin brings this up to Sam could easily be because it (along with the Glass Candle) were new revelations to him only recently uncovered.

Of corse we have no proof yet, either way, but I for one will be very interested in any Marwin POV we hear in the future or even someone just talking to him (Maybe Danny).

[Artanaro]

Good Points all, but none of these addresses the fact that Marwin just recently came into posession of an instrument that can be used to read minds as well as other things that I am sure that we are not aware of.

Question, wvlr. Where does it imply or say that the dragon glass candle can read minds? Or are you referring to another item?

Artanaro

[Blackstone]

That Marwynn is completely, utterly wrong about Aemon irreparably damages his credibility. All of the evidence for the conspiracy by the Citadel rests ultimately on Marwynn's testimony.

Other than the dragons dying, which has other more reasonable explanations, Marwynn's only other evidence was Aemon.

The fact that Marwynn lives, comes and goes as he pleases and spouts crackpot tales of dragon murder and targaryen banishment is evidence that there is no conspiracy.

Marwynn is a crank.

[Guest Other-in-law]

That Marwynn is completely, utterly wrong about Aemon irreparably damages his credibility.

So the only options are that one is either infallibly correct about everything, or they are wrong about everything?

All of the evidence for the conspiracy by the Citadel rests ultimately on Marwynn's testimony.

No, there is circumstantial evidence in favour of it as well. Evidence and proof do not mean the exact same thing. We have plenty of evidence of hostility toward magic by mainstream maesters such as Cressen, all the Archmaesters that Armen the Acolyte parrots, and even by those formerly sympathetic like Luwin.

Other than the dragons dying, which has other more reasonable explanations

,

Such as? A building who's mere doors are wide enough for 30 knights to ride through it abreast causing an mastiff sized dragon's skull to be "oddly misshapen"? That's hardly a veal cage situation, and earlier dragons like Silverwing would have lived much of their lives in the Dragonpit with no apparent deformities. And as it happens the 'confinement theory' was introduced by, yep, the maesters. Gee, what a coincidence.

Marwynn's only other evidence was Aemon.

I don't even count that as evidence. I think Marwyn's claims about Aemon can be dismissed.

The fact that Marwynn lives, comes and goes as he pleases and spouts crackpot tales of dragon murder and targaryen banishment is evidence that there is no conspiracy.

Again, that merely shows that the grey sheep are in Tyrion's intellectual range rather than Cersei's. 'When you tear a man's tongue out, you show the world that you fear what he says'.

[Blackstone]

I'm acquainted with the difference between proof and evidence. Not only does Marwynn have no proof of his conspiracy, he has no credible evidence to support it.

The most reasonable explanation for the death of the dragons is inbreeding and the intercine conflict of the Dance of Dragons. Barristan Selmy's testimony that the dragons were adversely affected by confinement need only be a contributing factor and not the entire explanation.

The other Maesters aren't trying to stamp out magic, they just think its a worthless topic of study. They don't prohibit people from studying it, nor have they abolished the post of a valyrian steel arch-maester. They don't even kill Cersei's necromancer, they just dechain him and banish him.

Cressen tried to kill Mellisandre for personal reasons, not because she was a magic-user per se.

Suggesting that the "grey sheep" are such machivellian players of the game that they allow Marwynn to openly talk to anyone about the conspiracy that they are trying to hide and by allowing Marwynn to speak, they more successfuly hide their conspiracy in plain sight is ridiculous.

[Guest Other-in-law]

Not only does Marwynn have no proof of his conspiracy, he has no credible evidence to support it.

That's more overstatement. We don't know the full extent of Marwyn's knowledge, only the brief rant he made to Sam before dashing off to the docks.

The most reasonable explanation for the death of the dragons is inbreeding and the intercine conflict of the Dance of Dragons. Barristan Selmy's testimony that the dragons were adversely affected by confinement need only be a contributing factor and not the entire explanation.

Of course the Dance of the Dragons killed most of the dragons, that's not the point. The last stunted two are the ones that matter, since the species went extinct with their deaths. Is there any textual basis for inbreeding being bad for dragons? It hasn't caused the human Targaryens to go extinct. Barristan's (maester originated) explanation is less credible than Marwyn's claims, and even Jorah Mormont was skeptical of it.

The other Maesters aren't trying to stamp out magic, they just think its a worthless topic of study.

Opinion.

Cressen tried to kill Mellisandre for personal reasons, not because she was a magic-user per se.

Very much a matter of opinion, I'd say. There are Cressen's curious thoughts about faith.

Suggesting that the "grey sheep" are such machivellian players of the game that they allow Marwynn to openly talk to anyone about the conspiracy that they are trying to hide and by allowing Marwynn to speak, they more successfuly hide their conspiracy in plain sight is ridiculous.

To someone who's already drank the cool-aid, I suppose. What's going to draw more attention, letting someone rant and rave and laughing at him for being a nut, or murdering the one who rants and raves? The former is less like to raise questions, imo. And there's no harm to letting him babble if one thinks they've already succeeded in putting a stop to magic. Especially if he has no proof, as you insist.