Jump to content

The ASOIAF wiki thread


Onion Knight
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

 

I have noticed this passage as well, but can we really rule out that 'next generation' refers to the Targaryens?

To me the « one generation » thing is between the ones who fought during the Conquest Loren Lannister/Aegon I Targaryen and the following generation. As Rhaena and Aegon (grandchildren of Aegon I) and Maegor I (son of Aegon I) are mentioned in the passage, I doubt the « one generation » refers to the Targaryens.

It’s probably best to wait for Ran’s input, but I’m with LordSeaSnake on this one: Lyman was the son of Loren born after the Conquest Tyrion refers to in AGOT Tyrion II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this line was meant to establish the relation of Loren and Lyman, why did nothing like this come up in F&B? The only way Elio and Linda would have known that Lyman is Loren's son is by GRRM himself (especially since the material excluded from the Worldbook might have already stated Loren's heir was betrothed to a Redwyne while Lyman was married to a Tarbeck). So they should be able to tell us if there was a confirmation on this matter or if 'a generation later' was just broad wording without any further knowledge.

Edited by The Wondering Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

If this line was meant to establish the relation of Loren and Lyman, why did nothing like this come up in F&B?

This line comes from the Westerlands section of The World of Ice and Fire, not the Targaryen kings section. Its omission from Fire & Blood, a book focusing on the Targaryens, is not strange.

Quote

"He smiles, but he was raised on tales of the Field of Fire; he will not have forgotten."

-Rhaena Targaryen about Lyman Lannister, Fire & Blood - A Surfeit of Rulers

This quote does not confirm any relation between Loren and Lyman, but at least it is consistent with the idea of Lyman being born after the Conquest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

This line comes from the Westerlands section of The World of Ice and Fire, not the Targaryen kings section. Its omission from Fire & Blood, a book focusing on the Targaryens, is not strange.

Lyman features rather heavily in F&B, so there would have been enough opportunities to mention his relations to Loren. As you quoted, Rhaena even talks about him growing up with tales of the Field of Fire, but no mention of his father. I do not say it would have been necessary to mention it, but it is noteworthy though that Loren's heir was supposed to marry a Redwyne girl. Now maybe they never married (a bit useless to mention the whole thing then) or she died and he remarried (too much guesswork in my opinion), but without further confirmation I do not think we can be sure of anything.

It is even possible that GRRM did not remember he had established that Loren fathered one son after the Conquest. Or he did remember but decided that Tyrion had not got it entirely right.

Edited by The Wondering Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Now maybe they never married (a bit useless to mention the whole thing then) or she died and he remarried (too much guesswork in my opinion)

Loren's heir and the Redwyne girl are mentioned as having married not being betrothed, there is no debate about their marriage. Given that they are mentioned amidst an enumeration of betrothal/marriages between important Houses, I'm guessing GRRM simply did not think of the ramifications of what he was writting. I mean it has already being pointed out in one of your own post, how messy the early Hightower and Stark family trees are.

Quote

but without further confirmation I do not think we can be sure of anything.

That's the center of the issue, we are dancing on technicalities here. Unless @Ran has some more information or GRRM tackles the problem himself, we will never know for sure.

1 hour ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

It is even possible that GRRM did not remember he had established that Loren fathered one son after the Conquest. Or he did remember but decided that Tyrion had not got it entirely right.

That sure wouldn't help to resolve the issue.

One thing that also intrigues me is Lyman's sons. Why was it his bastard son, Ser Tyler Hill, who courted Princess Rhaena and not his trueborn sons from his wife Jocasta Tarbeck ? Did the Lannister really thought the daughter of a king would marry/succumb to the charm of a bastard. Surely one of the legitimate sons would be more successful than Tyler, no ? Unless those legitimate sons were too young at the time due to Jocasta being Lyman's second wife after the Redwyne girl. Food for thought.

Edited by Thomaerys Velaryon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not really happy with the article on Lord Staunton. There are four dates (48, 50, 54, 59 AC), and while it would be kind of overloaded, in theory at any of these points there could have been a different Lord Staunton. We see this with the Lord Darklyn at the end of Maegor's reign, who suddenly disappears within three years without further mention. The only reason we know he died is because he is described as father of Jonquil Darke and at another point the Lord of Duskendale is her brother. Any proposals how to handle that?

Call out to @Thomaerys Velaryon who created the article.

Edited by The Wondering Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, given that the USA elections are coming up with national party conventions going on now, I dashed off an article on "Elections" (I thought there already was one).  Just a quick treatment I wrote in one sitting, to get the ball  rolling:  https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Elections

It needs artwork.  I thought I remembered some artwork of the Night's Watch election but I can't find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2020 at 9:28 PM, The Dragon Demands said:

Hey, given that the USA elections are coming up with national party conventions going on now, I dashed off an article on "Elections" (I thought there already was one).  Just a quick treatment I wrote in one sitting, to get the ball  rolling:  https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Elections

It needs artwork.  I thought I remembered some artwork of the Night's Watch election but I can't find it.

The main thing that is currently lacking are proper references.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SERIOUS PROBLEM:  I was going to add "Daemon Targaryen" to the list of LGBT characters on "Gender and Sexuality".....ever since I read TPATQ in 2013, I thought it was presented that he was bisexual.  

Someone questioned this, and going back...the wording is confusing, and seems more due to the many comparisons Elio & Linda made between Daemon Targaryen and Oberyn Martell.  

Did I just ASSUME this these past seven years?   Needs clarification.

see main thread:  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Asked for the birth order of Rickon Stark's daughters Serena and Sansa (the Worldbook Stark family tree says Serena was the older one), Elio revealed in the Discord chat:

The order in the trees was not necessarily designed to represent birth order, for reasons of space and compactness. GRRM presented Sansa as the elder and Serena as the younger when he provided us the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following edits need to be made:

1) Ser Titus Peake and Ser Gyles Belgrave need to be added to the list of Greens

2) Ser Roger Corne should be removed from the Green Reachermen section (since he's already listed under "defectors" and was probably from the Crownlands)

3) The Red Fork should list the Lannisters as having 1K knights and 7K crossbowmen + men-at-arms, which means Lords Piper and Vance had less than that and that the Lannisters had less than 8K at Acorn Hall as well as the Fishfeed

4) Depending on how many casualties Borros took subduing KL as well as the rest of the Crownlands the Stormlands' strength at the Kingsroad should read "less than 4K foot and 600 knights"

5) Lord Derrick Darry needs to be added to the list of casualties at Second Tumbleton

6) In the lead-up to First Tumbleton Munkun's account states that the Hightower army was 20K strong and that a tenth of that (2K) were knights 

7) F & B also revealed, if I recall correctly, that the Greens marched out of KL with around 500+ men (500 household knights and an unknown number of sellswords if my memory serves) but after adding the strength of Rosby as well as Stokeworth and sacking Duskendale the Greens' strength at Rook's Rest was roughly 4K

Edited by The Grey Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8) There were no battles at Rosby and Stokeworth but there was the battle three days after Acorn Hall as well as the short, sharp battle at the Gods Eye between Ser Criston Cole's vanguard and Houses Wode, Roote, and Darry, the latter group's leader being Ser Oswald Wode

9) The Sack of Lannisport, the Capture of Kayce, and the Fall of Fair Isle should maybe get their own pages

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

5) Lord Derrick Darry needs to be added to the list of casualties at Second Tumbleton

Not sure about that one. All we know is that Derrick died at some point between Addam's flight to the riverlands and the Bloody Mess (a most fitting name for the Darry trees in the books). Since he is not mentioned to have died at Tumbleton, I would not state it as fact (Elmo Tully dies without fighting, too).

2 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

9) The Sack of Lannisport, the Capture of Kayce, and the Fall of Fair Isle should maybe get their own pages

Was Kayce actually captured by the Ironborn? F&B makes it appear as Johanna Lannister saved the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@The Wondering Wolf

I could have sworn he was one of the two Black lords that died at Second Tumbleton.

As for Kayce, I'm not sure. TWOIAF says Kayce fell and one of Dalton's salt wives in F & B V1 is the widow of the Knight of Kayce.

Also, the Battle of the Kingsroad was known as the Muddy Mess, not the Bloody Mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I could have sworn he was one of the two Black lords that died at Second Tumbleton.

It's not easy to keep track of all those Darry lords during the Dance.

11 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

As for Kayce, I'm not sure. TWOIAF says Kayce fell and one of Dalton's salt wives in F & B V1 is the widow of the Knight of Kayce.

The Red Kraken himself led the attack that captured Kayce. Faircastle fell, and with it Fair Isle and all its wealth. Lord Dalton claimed four of Lord Farman's daughters as salt wives and gave the fifth—"the homely one"—to his brother Veron. (World of Ice and Fire)

With the Red Kraken’s longships still menacing their coasts, the Lannisters were more concerned with defending Kayce and retaking Fair Isle than with renewing the struggle for the Iron Throne. (Fire & Blood)

Lady Johanna at last donned a man’s mail to lead the men of Lannisport and Casterly Rock against the foe. The songs tell of how she slew a dozen ironmen beneath the walls of Kayce, but those may be safely put aside as the work of drunken singers (Johanna carried a banner into battle, not a sword). Her courage did help inspire her westermen, however, for the raiders were soon routed and Kayce was saved. (Fire & Blood)

There seems to be some discrepancy.

11 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Also, the Battle of the Kingsroad was known as the Muddy Mess, not the Bloody Mess.

Sure. Don't (almost) sleep and write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2020 at 4:06 PM, Thomaerys Velaryon said:

This line comes from the Westerlands section of The World of Ice and Fire, not the Targaryen kings section. Its omission from Fire & Blood, a book focusing on the Targaryens, is not strange.

This quote does not confirm any relation between Loren and Lyman, but at least it is consistent with the idea of Lyman being born after the Conquest.

I think one should tentatively go with Lyman as son of Loren, but even if Ran said that this was 'the plan' back when they made TWoIaF then that's not enough for a canonical confirmation while George doesn't actually mention this in published material.

My personal take on Lyman would be that he is Loren's firstborn son born after the Conquest, Jocasta Tarbeck is his second wife, his heir is the son of the Redwyne girl, his bastard son Tyler Hill was born between his marriages, by the time of Rhaena's second stay at Casterly Rock Lyman's heir and the son who courted Jeyne Westerling in 47 AC were already married (explaining why Tyler Hill was the major Lannister courting Rhaena), while the younger trueborn sons of Lyman's also courting Rhaena would have been much younger than Rhaena, born by Jocasta.

That kind of thing works best if you want to make sense of it.

Lyman as a second son would work, too, I guess, but lacks an elegant explanation as to why the bastard was the main guy trying to marry Rhaena (a ridiculous proposal, if you think about it). If Jocasta had been producing children together for decades then there should have been some unmarried elder sons. But if their sons were still pretty young because Jocasta was a second wife (say, around ten or so) then this explains why Lyman didn't really have an impressive Lannister husband ready for Rhaena.

On 8/23/2020 at 4:29 PM, The Wondering Wolf said:

Lyman features rather heavily in F&B, so there would have been enough opportunities to mention his relations to Loren. As you quoted, Rhaena even talks about him growing up with tales of the Field of Fire, but no mention of his father. I do not say it would have been necessary to mention it, but it is noteworthy though that Loren's heir was supposed to marry a Redwyne girl. Now maybe they never married (a bit useless to mention the whole thing then) or she died and he remarried (too much guesswork in my opinion), but without further confirmation I do not think we can be sure of anything.

It is even possible that GRRM did not remember he had established that Loren fathered one son after the Conquest. Or he did remember but decided that Tyrion had not got it entirely right.

That is a good argument as to why we cannot really be sure that Lyman is Loren's son ... but it is not a good a argument that George could have done stuff but chose not to since FaB is full of such little holes. No information about the connection between Donnel Hightower and Martyn, nothing about Otto Hightower's family or the later Starks, no parents for the Sea Snake or Rogar Baratheon and his four brothers despite the big role those people played in the overall narrative.

And it is not that George didn't stop and talk about the Sea Snake's birth when he was born. He did that. He just didn't bother mentioning his parents by name. Just as a he didn't bother to mention Rogar's parents when writing about him in the Jaehaerys material or amending TSotD to clarify whether Davos Baratheon succeeded his father Orys as lord or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...