A Thread for Small Questions II

[MountainThatRides]

Thanks, however I wonder why Tywin did not give him Tarbeck Hall or Castamere.

Castamere and Tarbeck Hall are largely ruins, as Tywin pulled them down following the destruction of the Houses that held them. It's possible that they could be rebuilt, but I think he prefers to keep them as a symbol for those who might betray him.

Also, it strikes me that the Lannisters are quite clannish, at least where immediate family is concerned, and it's probably not out of the ordinary for the Lord's brothers to remain at Casterly Rock in service to him. The sisters would obviously be married off for political purposes.

[Octavian West]

Castamere and Tarbeck Hall are largely ruins, as Tywin pulled them down following the destruction of the Houses that held them. It's possible that they could be rebuilt, but I think he prefers to keep them as a symbol for those who might betray him.

Also, it strikes me that the Lannisters are quite clannish, at least where immediate family is concerned, and it's probably not out of the ordinary for the Lord's brothers to remain at Casterly Rock in service to him. The sisters would obviously be married off for political purposes.

Sounds good to me :thumbsup: Thats one less question I have to ponder, nothing is better than getting a great answer to a bugging question.

[Liadin]

What are the possible options for Daenerys's Unsullied following the reconquest of her throne? If she should prove successful, and any number of the Unsullied come through the fighting alive (against Daenerys's rivals or the Others), she can't just sell them, nor do I think she would. She's a pretty fierce opponent of slavery. Moreover, eunuchs seldom make popular fellows in the Seven Kingdoms -- the whole aspect of virility being a virtue of a man, knight, lord, etc., the ability to father sons. It's one of the reasons why Varys is reviled despite his obvious uses. I assume if the number of surviving Unsullied is low enough, she could keep them on as guardsmen, but it makes more sense to send them to the Wall or use them to bolster the ranks of the Faith Militant following some mass conversion.

However, entering service -- whether in the Faith or especially the Night's Watch -- would in some cases require vows of chastity. That's not a significant sacrifice for a eunuch to make, and renders the oath rather hollow. Moreover, if the Others are defeated, the Night's Watch and the Wall itself sort of loses their purpose.

I don't think the fact that chastity represents less of a sacrifice for a eunuch than your average man means the Night's Watch/the Faith/the Kingsguard/etc. would want them less. I can't speak for the Faith (and am not at all sure a sovereign in possession of her senses would want to bolster their power anyway), but with the NW and the KG, they're not asking for these vows as a symbolic sacrifice so much as to ensure that their men have no families, and thus no loyalty that might conflict with their job. (In fact, the NW's oath only says "I will take no wife, father no children"--not quite a vow of chastity although they seem to interpret it that way.) So I don't think the oath would be made "hollow"--heck, it wouldn't be much of an inconvenience to a gay man either--since the really important part is the oath to serve.

Assuming that Dany doesn't change her mind on slavery, she would have to let the surviving Unsullied do as they like. Westeros folk may not be huge fans of eunuchs, but they don't seem to be deporting them either, and Varys is pretty slimy aside from just being a eunuch. I suppose they could stay in her service, go home, enter the NW, become tradesmen (not that they seem talented at that so far), become mercenaries.... whatever they liked.

And unless Westeros colonized the lands beyond the Wall, I think they'd keep the NW there, Others or no Others. (After all, they have it now when no one believes in the Others.) It makes sense to keep your borders fortified if you don't have good relations with the folks on the other side.

[Daena the Defiant]

Castamere and Tarbeck Hall are largely ruins, as Tywin pulled them down following the destruction of the Houses that held them. It's possible that they could be rebuilt, but I think he prefers to keep them as a symbol for those who might betray him.

Also, it strikes me that the Lannisters are quite clannish, at least where immediate family is concerned, and it's probably not out of the ordinary for the Lord's brothers to remain at Casterly Rock in service to him. The sisters would obviously be married off for political purposes.

In the recent generations, we see this - Kevan is esentially one of Tywin's household knights. However, a fun wrinkle is that Genna and her Frey husband live in the Rock, and not at the Twins.

[King Bronn l]

Anyone else feel like Coldhands is actually the Nights King?

[Werthead]

A couple more ponderings from ACoK:

Is the song that Rymund the Rhymer sings in Riverrun whilst Edmure is holding the fords a reference to the Battle of Redgrass Field? "Red the grass beneath his feet." He calls it the Bloody Meadow, but I imagine that battle probably has a few different names.

And is Dolorous Edd's comment that a glass knife is as useful as 'nipples on a knight's breastplate' a reference to Batman and Robin, that came out a year earlier? ;)

[schpat]

And is Dolorous Edd's comment that a glass knife is as useful as 'nipples on a knight's breastplate' a reference to Batman and Robin, that came out a year earlier? ;)

I'm sure it is, but I'm also sure it gets used more than once.

Also I think that Caitlyn says something about two things going together as well as snails and porridge, which I'm sure is a reference to Hester Blumenthal's Snail Porridge. I've wanted to post these two things on the refernces and homages for awhile but I never remember to find the refernece in the text. :)

[Alexia]

A question regarding Lady Hornwood and the Bastard of Bolton.

Would the Boltons have had any claim to Lady Hornwood's lands through that sham marriage? I would scoff at the idea but Ser Rodrik and Maester Luwin seemed to think they would try. But the consistent thread throughout ASOIAF seems to be that spouses don't get a claim to land, only children.

Lysa's only claim to the Vale is through Robert. If he died, she would promptly lose her status as Lady Arryn. With Tyrion's marriage to Sansa, the important thing is getting Sansa pregnant. So how could the Boltons have any sort of claim to those lands unless they wanted to ask Robb to give it to them as a reward for their efforts in battle or something? There were several collateral male relatives and she wasn't even a Hornwood so how could she be heiress?

Is it just that Ramsey isn't aware of those kinds of things since he wasn't raised at the Dreadfort, or did something go completely over my head?

[schpat]

A question regarding Lady Hornwood and the Bastard of Bolton.

Would the Boltons have had any claim to Lady Hornwood's lands through that sham marriage? I would scoff at the idea but Ser Rodrik and Maester Luwin seemed to think they would try. But the consistent thread throughout ASOIAF seems to be that spouses don't get a claim to land, only children.

Lysa's only claim to the Vale is through Robert. If he died, she would promptly lose her status as Lady Arryn. With Tyrion's marriage to Sansa, the important thing is getting Sansa pregnant. So how could the Boltons have any sort of claim to those lands unless they wanted to ask Robb to give it to them as a reward for their efforts in battle or something? There were several collateral male relatives and she wasn't even a Hornwood so how could she be heiress?

Is it just that Ramsey isn't aware of those kinds of things since he wasn't raised at the Dreadfort, or did something go completely over my head?

The laws aren't cast in stone, I think that there are two factors that are important here

1. Perception, anything that confers even a little claim can be used to lobby suport. Obviously the next lord up the chain would need to be the one convinced, but he may make a decision based less on actual tital and more on the predisposition of his other vassals and the commons who suport them.

2. You keep what you can hold, in this world so often might makes rights, and a sham marriage could lend that tiny bit of credibility to the whole thing that the lord would not loose face by backing out of a conflict over a small piece of land.

[Sable899]

The laws aren't cast in stone, I think that there are two factors that are important here

1. Perception, anything that confers even a little claim can be used to lobby suport. Obviously the next lord up the chain would need to be the one convinced, but he may make a decision based less on actual tital and more on the predisposition of his other vassals and the commons who suport them.

2. You keep what you can hold, in this world so often might makes rights, and a sham marriage could lend that tiny bit of credibility to the whole thing that the lord would not loose face by backing out of a conflict over a small piece of land.

Compare Ramsay's situation with Lady Hornwood with that of Littlefinger's situation with Lysa Arryn. In Ramsay's case, it came down to you keep what you can hold. Ramsay held Lady Hornwood and none of the legitimate Hornwood claimants had the ability to oppose him. Might makes right.

Littlefinger gave the perception that his marriage to Lysa was a love match and that she rested a great deal of trust in him to manage her affairs and be protector to her son. He had no arms to defend his claim to the Vale after Lysa's demise, but he gave the perception that his claims were legitimate based on the desires of his late wife. He used his strength of personality and political cunning to manipulate those with the strength to oppose him, effectively neutralizing them as long as he held sway with the Arryn heir.

[Sable899]

And unless Westeros colonized the lands beyond the Wall, I think they'd keep the NW there, Others or no Others. (After all, they have it now when no one believes in the Others.) It makes sense to keep your borders fortified if you don't have good relations with the folks on the other side.

If they do manage to defeat the Others, that doesn't mean that the Others will be totally annihilated. Surely there would be a need to maintain a watch in the event that the Others were someday able to rise again and pose a significant threat. Can Evil ever be utterly vanquished?

[Alexia]

The difference between LF/Lysa and Ramsey/Lady Hornwood is that LF wasn't claiming the Vale as his own - just the position of Lord Protector and Robert's guardian. It had an expiration date. Whereas Ramsey is claiming to be heir to Hornwood (as I understand it) based on his marriage to Lady Hornwood, who had no claim to those lands herself.

If LF had announced that he was now Lord Arryn because of his marriage to Lysa, the Lords Declarant would have kicked him out on his rear after they stopped laughing. Of course, Lord Hornwood had no clear heir and Lady Hornwood no Lords Declarant to protect her, which is how I guess Ramsey's getting away with this.

[Ran]

What Ramsay did was exploit the fact that Lady Hornwood, in the role of essentially Lord Protector of the Hornwood lands after her husband's death with no clear heirs, had an important say in who would ultimately succeed to the Hornwood lands. When it's suggested her late husband's natural son be made heir, it's noted that that's not like to please her and the question is left unsettled because of this.

While it seems natural to us that, ultimately, some person actually related to the Hornwoods should inherit, it seems in Westeros the question is rather thorny (as Luwin says). Circumstances could be such that Bolton's dubious claim to be heir must ultimately win the day.

[Alexia]

New question. :)

WRT the murder of Jon Arryn, Cersei very emphatically states that she did not kill him and we all know that she spoke the truth - that was Lysa and Littlefinger. But what needles at me is that Pycelle says in AFFC, "I was a friend to you in the matter of Jon Arryn". He also confesses his involvement to Tyrion in ACOK.

I don't believe Cersei knew what happened when she spoke to Eddard, "Is that why you called me here, my lord? To pose me riddles?" I also believe that she was ignorant of what happened when she spoke to Tyrion, "How should I know?".

So how is that Pycelle took action to speed along Jon Arryn's death without telling Cersei, at the very least? How is she going to know he was a friend to her WRT that? It's one little plot point that continues to confuse me.

[Ran]

He thinks she had arranged the initial poisoning. All she knows is that Jon Arryn was ill or, perhaps, poisoned by someone else, and Pycelle helped see Jon dead by deliberately providing him sub-optimal care.

[Alexia]

He thinks she had arranged the initial poisoning.

Doh! *facepalm*

That makes much more sense. Thanks! :)

[Mixta]

New Question:

I cannot recall the prologue of AFFC at the moment. If I'm not mistaken a faceless man kills someone who has stolen something for him. Do we know what that item was and if it had any importance?

[schpat]

New Question:

I cannot recall the prologue of AFFC at the moment. If I'm not mistaken a faceless man kills someone who has stolen something for him. Do we know what that item was and if it had any importance?

It was a key that opened all the locks in the citadel.

[Daemon23]

New Question:

I cannot recall the prologue of AFFC at the moment. If I'm not mistaken a faceless man kills someone who has stolen something for him. Do we know what that item was and if it had any importance?

The Faceless Man's description matches the appearance that Jaqen H'ghar assumes when he takes his leave of Arya Stark at Harrenhal:

Jaqen passed a hand down his face from forehead to chin, and where it went he changed. His cheeks grew fuller, his eyes closer, his nose hooked, a scar appeared on his right cheek where no scar had been before. And when he shook his head, his long, straight hair, half red and half white, dissolved away to reveal a cap of tight black curls.

- ACoC, p. 519

He was just a man, and his face was just a face. A young man's face, ordinary, with full cheeks and the shadow of a beard. A scar showed faintly on his right cheek. He had a hooked nose, and a mat of dense black hair that curled tightly around his ears. It was not a face Pate recognized.

- AFfC, p. 15

The item that the Faceless Man, whom we know to have been Jaqen H'ghar, asked Pate to steal was an Archmaester's key, able to open any lock in the Citadel. What the Faceless Man's mission at the Citadel of Oldtown was, we do not know, but he spoke to Arya of having "duties too" and "promises to keep".

The Alchemist, AKA the Faceless Man, AKA Jaqen H'ghar (and I am of the camp who believes this is also AKA Syrio Forel), is still at the Citadel when Samwell arrives, in the final chapter of AFfC, wearing the shape of the hopeless novice (and reluctant thief), Pate. He is present when Sam gives Maester Aemon's message to Archmaester Marwyn, along with Oberyn Martell's illegitimate (but acknowleged) daughter, Sarella - in her guise as Alleras "the Sphinx" (whom Doran Martell expects to "show more sense than her sisters" and tells Hotah to "leave her to her... game").

Whatever the Faceless Man's mission at the Citadel, he is now privy to several facts: A glass candle is alight, Daenerys Targaryen has hatched three dragons, Maester Aemon felt it vital she have a Maester's counsel and return to Westeros ASAP, and that Maester Marwyn left immediately on hearing this to find her before the "grey sheep" do.

[Daemon23]

New question: Why (and when) did Benjen Stark choose to go to the Wall?