AvengerofWinterfell Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Yes,why would fine laws of magic,oath -taking,sacrificing be important in Martin's world,I wonder. Thanks for the bolded part,though! actually, the person above you is right. The KG is not just a body guard service for the King, but for the entire royal family. The only specifics involving the king are that one of them has to be with the King at all times. If you read the stories of Duncan the Tall, Baelor states that the members of the KG they faced in the Trial of Seven would be sworn to protect him, thereby allowing him to engage them safely. Unless the 3 KG members were expressly commanded by Aerys to return to KL then they would not be betraying their vows as members of the KG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I don't need anyone to explain anything to me,and that's evident from my posts.Something's evident from your posts but I don't think it's that.actually, the person above you is right. The KG is not just a body guard service for the King, but for the entire royal family. The only specifics involving the king are that one of them has to be with the King at all times. If you read the stories of Duncan the Tall, Baelor states that the members of the KG they faced in the Trial of Seven would be sworn to protect him, thereby allowing him to engage them safely. Unless the 3 KG members were expressly commanded by Aerys to return to KL then they would not be betraying their vows as members of the KG.Bingo. And Aerys can't order them back if he can't find them, or if he thinks they're actually doing what he told them to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengerofWinterfell Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Wait...did i just get a co-sign from Apple Martini? Happy Dance (Im not being sarcastic btw.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Wait...did i just get a co-sign from Apple Martini? Happy Dance (Im not being sarcastic btw.)Up, ser kneeler. Up, up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elric the White Wolf Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Alia of the Knife made a great point about the statue. I am also a long-time lurker on these threads, and I am convinced by the excellent evidence compiled by the posters here and in the essay. Ned, I believe, would never have made the statue just out of sentiment -- he was very deliberate if not always his actions had *points.* I don't think he would have done this purely for memorialization. It is also interesting to me that Danny's visions in the Undying section had/have to do with the Starks. If I remember correctly one of her visions had to do with Robb and the Red Wedding (in addition to the others concerning the blue rose, etc.) This is another compelling connection between the Targs and the Starks and it always makes me wonder why Danny is seeing visions of Robb, etc. If there is nothing at all to the theory.On the question of the line -- the line would go from oldest living son to oldest living son -- at least following the classic pattern. So Aerys's oldest son is Rhaegar, then the line would go to Rhaegar's oldest living son. Primogeniture -- the title is inherited (think of the agony in Downton Abbey) and goes from eldest son to eldest son (Viserys as the younger son would never inherit so as long as Rhaegar had living children). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teal'c Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I don't need anyone to explain anything to me,and that's evident from my posts.Actually,I did pay attention while attending every logics/philosophy class,and I was trying to point to mistakes in deducing. (not a fertile soil for crackpoting plants,I see)I don't want to derail the thread,you are free to proceed.By use of deductive reasoning, and textual evidence, what did Ned promise to Lyanna? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengerofWinterfell Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Alia of the Knife made a great point about the statue. I am also a long-time lurker on these threads, and I am convinced by the excellent evidence compiled by the posters here and in the essay. Ned, I believe, would never have made the statue just out of sentiment -- he was very deliberate if not always his actions had *points.* I don't think he would have done this purely for memorialization.It is also interesting to me that Danny's visions in the Undying section had/have to do with the Starks. If I remember correctly one of her visions had to do with Robb and the Red Wedding (in addition to the others concerning the blue rose, etc.) This is another compelling connection between the Targs and the Starks and it always makes me wonder why Danny is seeing visions of Robb, etc. If there is nothing at all to the theory.On the question of the line -- the line would go from oldest living son to oldest living son -- at least following the classic pattern. So Aerys's oldest son is Rhaegar, then the line would go to Rhaegar's oldest living son. Primogeniture -- the title is inherited (think of the agony in Downton Abbey) and goes from eldest son to eldest son (Viserys as the younger son would never inherit so as long as Rhaegar had living children).you're mostly right, except on the last point. Rhaegar died before Aerys so at that moment Viserys became the heir to the throne. Now had Aerys died first, followed by Rhaegar, Rhaegars son would have the right of succession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teal'c Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 you're mostly right, except on the last point. Rhaegar died before Aerys so at that moment Viserys became the heir to the throne. Now had Aerys died first, followed by Rhaegar, Rhaegars son would have the right of succession.But now that Viserys is dead, his nephew Jon is the king? No female succession until all males are exhausted, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengerofWinterfell Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 that would be the case. Not necessarily because Jon's the nephew, but because he's the last male Targaryen alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonfish Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 you're mostly right, except on the last point. Rhaegar died before Aerys so at that moment Viserys became the heir to the throne. Now had Aerys died first, followed by Rhaegar, Rhaegars son would have the right of succession.No, this is false. After Rhaegar died, his heir(s) would have been his remaining male children (first Aegon, then Jon, if he was born legitimate). In order for Viserys to inherit, all of Rhaegar's male children would have to be dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elric the White Wolf Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Yes, Dragonfish is exactly right. Given the theory (that Jon is legitimate), Jon would be king and heir (as Rhaegar's son) regardless of Viserys being alive or dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elric the White Wolf Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Sorry, I meant to post the helpful bit from the wikipedia entry on Norman-style primogeniture (which applies to the inheritance pattern in Westeros): "The eligible descendants of deceased elder siblings take precedence over living younger siblings, such that inheritance is settled in the manner of a depth-first search." So Viserys would become king -- even given the idea that Rhaegar died before King Aerys -- only if every single one of Rhaegar's legitimate male children had been killed (or didn't exist in the first place --if Rhaegar had been childless or had only female children). Poor Lady Mary on Downton Abbey (unrelated I know, but it is the main source of agony on that show). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kg1982 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Okay.. so we're going to the Kingsguard again. I think that Rhaegar was defacto king and that is why all the Kingsguard followed him. At least four of the Kingsguard - Dayne, Hightower, Whent, and Darry - were loyal to Rhaegar and they were planning a legal council/ coup against crazy Aerys. Jaime was sixteen when this was happening; he had the same naiveté as Jon and Dany. Of course, they stayed to defend King Jon Targaryen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Okay.. so we're going to the Kingsguard again. I think that Rhaegar was defacto king and that is why all the Kingsguard followed him. At least four of the Kingsguard - Dayne, Hightower, Whent, and Darry - were loyal to Rhaegar and they were planning a legal council/ coup against crazy Aerys. Jaime was sixteen when this was happening; he had the same naiveté as Jon and Dany. Of course, they stayed to defend King Jon Targaryen.I think this is where Jaime's historical knowledge of the Kingsguard sometimes having internal power struggles comes into play. I can see Dayne, Whent and Hightower being pretty progressive and siding with Rhaegar. Dayne was his best friend, Hightower was ... a Hightower (a notably educated, forward-thinking house), and it appears that Whent was doing behind-the-scenes stuff at Harrenhal. I'd say that the three of them were pitted against sticks-in-the-mud, to-the-letter Selmy and Darry (I put Darry more on Aerys' side given his attitude when Aerys was raping Rhaella). Meanwhile, young and naive Jaime and Lewyn Martell — who would probably side with Rhaegar but couldn't risk upsetting Aerys because of Elia — were caught in the middle. Given this, it's very possible that Rhaegar's three did already see him as the de facto king, and would treat his orders as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delstark Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I think it is pretty obvious that the kingsguard is there to protect Rhaegar's heir given the conversation they have with Ned. What I would like to know is how Ned knew they were there in the first place. Wasn't ToJ a secret location? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I think it is pretty obvious that the kingsguard is there to protect Rhaegar's heir given the conversation they have with Ned. What I would like to know is how Ned knew they were there in the first place. Wasn't ToJ a secret location?A popular theory is that Ashara Dayne was the one who finally tipped off Ned as to where Lyanna was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delstark Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Hmm, I can buy that theory. I don't have the book handy but I seem to remember Barristan thinking of Ashara and how she was in love with a Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budj Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Maybe she actually did kill herself for telling Ned where they were, resulting in the Sword of the Morning's demise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Hmm, I can buy that theory. I don't have the book handy but I seem to remember Barristan thinking of Ashara and how she was in love with a Stark.Well Ned was attracted to Ashara, that is all we really know. We don't know her feelings towards Ned or Brandon, or her level of involvement with either of them.But Ashara is definitely is a position to know a lot. I like to think that she was part of the 'inner circle', along with her brother and a few other young nobles, who were friends with Rhaegar and Elia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Maybe she actually did kill herself for telling Ned where they were, resulting in the Sword of the Morning's demise.That, or she faked her death to avoid ever having to answer any questions about Jon's parentage. I think Ashara was "kept" as a possible candidate for Jon's mother in case Jon grew up to look like a Targ — they'd just say oh he must get it from his Dayne side. But that wouldn't explain Jon going with Ned and not Ashara, and Ashara is still a loose end hanging about. So she took herself out of the equation — a lot of people think she's Septa Lemore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.