Khal Rhaggat - Cart King Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Looks like maybe Alliser Thorne's great-great-great-uncle was KG material.I noticed that as well and was shocked. Will be cool to hear about the two KG brothers. December can't come soon enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
History of Westeros Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I have also guessed previously that the Starks sided with the Blacks. Certainly upholding Andal tradition would not be a concern for First Men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steinnis Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 From the review.If Tyrion is going dragon riding guess who's his daddy.Quentyn Martell had Targaryen blood... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs.Grumpy Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Woah. That damn Hightowers.I'm really curious about Alys Rivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Really? Then what is Bridget referring to in this sentence of her review: 'Rhaenyra takes a more active role—the story paints her as far more of a warrior than previous references have allowed.'Does this mean she is at least some kind of Dany (i.e. personally overseeing/directing the troops/knights who fight for her, taking an active part in strategy discussions and such)?Or are we back to the dragon-riding Cersei again - which was very much the character impression I got from the old portrait description? A spoiled and fickle princess, being aware of her status and rights, never forgetting real and imagined slights, etc.?We already get a certain vibe on some great houses in the excerpt:The Hightowers are staunch greens, the Arryns may be staunch blacks. Lord Beesbury (a bannermen of House Hightower!) is a strong Rhaenyra loyalist. The brother of the current Lord of Casterly Rock sits on the Small Council as well. Ser Lament Marbrand is with Rhaenyra, as is Ser Erryk Cargyll. Since the Marbrands are still a powerful house in the West up to the present, I would not be surprised if the Lannisters eventually sided with Rhaenyra.It's obvious that Alicent, Otto, and Criston are not going to get Aegon II crowned before they get permanently rid of the Rhaenyra loyalists in the capital. Both Beesbury and the Grand Maester may soon die, and Criston Cole most certainly will be the man who ends up securing the Iron Throne for Alicent/Aegon II by removing obstacles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooghar Targaryen Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 This is interesting:"Since dragons will only accept and bond with riders of Targaryen blood, the story chronicles the search for bastard-born “dragonseeds” to join the fray (with mixed results)—a subplot which clearly holds some potential relevance for Daenerys and her trio of dragons as events continue to unfold in the novels…" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushido Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I have also guessed previously that the Starks sided with the Blacks. Certainly upholding Andal tradition would not be a concern for First Men.Yet, we don't have a case where a woman ruled in the North, no?I guess that Rhaenyra being named the successor by the king made Starks' decision easy if indeed they were among the Blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arataniello Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Hallelujah, some new GRRM material to review and digest. Fantastic. Thanks for posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eggs Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I guess that Rhaenyra being named the successor by the king made Starks' decision easy if indeed they were among the Blacks.that would be the point, yeah? Her brothers only claim was his gender, which is bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrunderhill Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Some very interesting revelations already. I guess this pretty much confirms that the Arryns have Targaryen blood and a very weak claim to the throne, which means the Starks likely did to. Robert just had the most Targaryen blood, most recently.It's also more likely that Tyrion would be a bastard of Aerys now. It seems history is repeating itself and bastard Targaryens might be needed to ride the dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Mac Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Hmm, cool stuff. I like how we got a full small council reveal as well as KG. I really want to know who the Great Lords were at this time.If the lords were truly split by half, I'm guessing the Starks went to Rhaenrya, as well as the Arryns (especially given her half Arryn parentage).Perhaps the Hightowers managed to convince the Tyrells to join Aegon, or the Reach split amongst itself (which wouldn't be a surprise). The Lannisters likely sided with whoever Tyland chose.In fact though, Tyland Lannister may have played an important role, since it says that "much of the slaughter took place on the water" and he was Master of Ships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrunderhill Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 that would be the point, yeah? Her brothers only claim was his gender, which is bullshit.LOL. It's more complicated than that. Should a king be allowed to name his heir over the usual rules of the land? Aegon IV seemed to have tried it with Daemon and as much as I like Daemon, I would have fought for the red dragon. Here it's a tough one, but it seems Viserys I went through all the proper channels to change the law, so I would fight for the blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anath Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 I'm seeing this as the whole Stephen/Matilda debacle. Matilda was no warrior, she was strong-willed, haughty and what not, yet she was a better administrator than Stephen and she did not lack courage, with all her escapades that were not only legendary but pretty dangerous.And, Matilda had the support of her bastard brothers as well, one of which, Robert of Gloucester, first went to Stephen and then became one of his sister's staunchest supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushido Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Her brothers only claim was his gender, which is bullshit.Not to Westerosi... (well, the majority) The complications one faces when they don't inbreed. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maia Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Hm... Very, very interesting that Rhaenyra actually was a publicly named and acclaimed heir, to whom allegiance has been already sworn while her father was alive (analoguous to early medieval royal heirs getting crowned while their fathers were still alive to make smooth succession more likely, I guess). I thought that there was just some uncodified understanding and/or a deathbed will that was set aside by Aegonist faction or something. Viserys I was rather stupid to make his good-father Hand and/or to marry his Hand's daughter if he intended for Rhaenyra to succeed him, though. And, certainly, he should have kept her by his side and on his council when he began to falter. Sigh... Presumably, that was another example of a disastrous "marriage for love"? I mean, it seems that there were enough cadet branches around that Viserys didn't _need_ to re-marry for the sake of Targaryen dynasty, even if he only had Rhaenyra as a heir.This really puts Stannis's views on justice, laws and legality of royal powers in question, though. Which aligns with him never accepting that Renly was made a lawful Lord Paramount of the Stormlands and remained so after Robert's death, of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eggs Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 LOL. It's more complicated than that. Should a king be allowed to name his heir over the usual rules of the land?I don't think Aegon tried it with Daemon. The Black Dragons arguments were also bullshit.yeah, but it's not that complicated. What's her face had been trained for years and most Lords accepted her as the true heir. Her brother didnt even want the throne apparently and had to be convinced to go after it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrunderhill Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Hm... Very, very interesting that Rhaenyra actually was a publicly named and acclaimed heir, to whom allegiance has been already sworn while her father was alive (analoguous to early medieval royal heirs getting crowned while their fathers were still alive to make smooth succession more likely, I guess). I thought that there was just some uncodified understanding and/or a deathbed will that was set aside by Aegonist faction or something.Viserys I was rather stupid to make his good-father Hand and/or to marry his Hand's daughter if he intended for Rhaenyra to succeed him, though. And, certainly, he should have kept her by his side and on his council when he began to falter. Sigh... Presumably, that was another example of disastrous "marriage for love"? I mean, it seems that there were enough cadet branches around that Viserys didn't _need_ to re-marry for the sake of Targaryen dynasty, even if he only had Rhaenyra as a heir.This really puts Stannis's views on justice, laws and legality of royal powers in question, though. Which aligns with him never accepting that Renly was made a lawful Lord Paramount of the Stormlands and remained so after Robert's death, of course...It seems like Viserys tried to make it clear to the world that Rhaenyra was his heir, by making her princess of dragonstone. A good PR move, but a terrible one in reality. It kept her away from Kings Landing and the governing of the throne, though Stannis and Baelor had a big influence in court, with Baelor being the Hand. Strange that she did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 According to Ran, Lyonel Strong no longer is Rhaenyra's first husband. At least, that's what he said some time ago somewhere here on the board (most likely in this very thread). Her second husband, the father of Aegon III and Viserys II, the man she should be married to when the Dance broke out, was apparently Targaryen on both sides and some sort of a genius (Targaryen Red Viper and stuff).Tyland Lannister may either influence whoever his brother is going to choose (Rhaenyra, if Lament Marbrand stays with her), or Alicent ends up using him as hostage to force the Lannisters to side with Aegon.The review indicates that the Targaryens made the law of succession during this time. They had not to follow Andal customs and crap, they had dragons and they did want ever they wanted to do. I've said it earlier, it seems as if the early Targaryen generations had the luck of having good incest couples as rulers (Aegon and sisters, Jaehaerys and Alysanne) but this could not last. We don't yet know if there was ever trouble before this situation, but it does really seem as if Maegor stole the Iron Throne from Aenys' children, or at least it would look that way if we assumed that the Targaryens at this time followed a strict law of succession.Upon Viserys death it seems as if many non-Targaryens were in charge of managing the Realm, and it's obviously the Hightower influence and the bitch war between Rhaenyra and Alicent which caused the whole thing. But it's also obvious that Rhaenyra was the rightful heir of the Iron Throne, and I think we should now finally start calling her Rhaenyra I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Mac Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 It seems like Viserys tried to make it clear to the world that Rhaenyra was his heir, by making her princess of dragonstone. A good PR move, but a terrible one in reality. It kept her away from Kings Landing and the governing of the throne, though Stannis and Baelor had a big influence in court, with Baelor being the Hand. Strange that she did not.Indeed. If he had thought it out more, he would probably give Rhaenyra as SC position, potentially in addition to making her Princess of Dragonstone. This would likely put her in KL at all times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrunderhill Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 yeah, but it's not that complicated. What's her face had been trained for years and most Lords accepted her as the true heir. Her brother didnt even want the throne apparently and had to be convinced to go after it. I don't think Aegon tried it with Daemon. The Black Dragons arguments were also bullshit.It still is. Viserys was going against established Westeros law and probably the established Targaryen law as well. Whilst he got some Lords to except this, I bet many were not happy with the change. Either for sexist reasons or because they were not comfortable with the king changing the inheritance laws to fit his desires.I think the Blackfyre claim was a very strong one, but this is not the place to discuss it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.