Olenna's Targaryen Prince: Duncan the Small?

[Bastard of Baltimore]

Interesting theory Apple.

[Maxpey]

That's an interesting theory, and very well thought out. But why would Olenna try to pretend that she jilted the Prince and not the other way around? Doesn't everyone in Westeros know that the Prince fell in love with Jenny? Would anyone really believe Olenna if she said otherwise?

I think it's human nature for us to tell little white lies to make ourselves out to be something more, especially to someone like Sansa who probably wouldn't know the truth.

[Ser Leftwich]

snip

It's also mildly interesting that Olenna characterizes her would-have-been betrothed as just "a Targaryen" instead of a prince or the crown prince. It almost sounds like the Redwynes were being offered a lesser member of the Targaryen family, perhaps one not in line for the throne at all.

Depending on when this possible arrangement between Oleanna and Duncan the Small was, he might have been very far down the succession to the point that he was not even called "prince."

btw, This is great stuff.

How would this information come to light and/or why would it be important to the story?

Who alive might know about this? Oleanna, Walder Frey, on the less likely, but possible list: Barristan, Blackfish, Bonifer Hasty (as they were all contemporaries in court during Egg's reign.)

If it comes up in the Dunk and Egg stories, that is much easier.

[Lemon_Cake]

On the discussion about the Queens of Thorns age, GRRM says here that she is in her sixties. http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Month/1999/12/

[Ygrain]

On the discussion about the Queens of Thorns age, GRRM says here that she is in her sixties. http://www.westeros..../Month/1999/12/

Good to know - and here we have and interesting quote from that SSM: "As to her betrothal, that's a story to be told yet" Whoah, now I am intrigued even more than before...

[Lemon_Cake]

Good to know - and here we have and interesting quote from that SSM: "As to her betrothal, that's a story to be told yet" Whoah, now I am intrigued even more than before...

Yep, I am very intrigued too =)

[Arataniello]

Some great discussions here from everyone.

My recollection is that Summerhall and the tragedy there was caused by another attempt by the Targaryens to wake dragons - I cannot remember where I got this idea from. If that is the case, it becomes less llikely that Olenna was involved, or was responsible, or whatever it is that is being suggested in this thread.

[Frey Pie]

If this was indeed the case then something must have been done to smooth things over with the Redwyne's. They ended up being one of House Targaryen's most loyal, if not the most loyal bannermen during Robert's rebellion.

Were they really though? IIRC all they did was keep Stannis out of the war. Did they join the fleet protecting Dany and Viserys? Did they send men to the Trident or to help KL? Nope. Mace Tyrell sitting on his tod as SE for the whole war is one of the mysteries or holes in Roberts Rebellion. Is this now a reason for it?

Well done Apple on a nice theory. Now does it stand to reason that Olenna may not like the Targs/hold a grudge for what happened? In the same way Tywin does about Cersei and Rhaegar not getting married. Does she purposely tell Mace not to send the thousands of troops he could have if he wanted to the Trident? And how does this bode for Aegons chances? I thought for a while the Lannisters were going to be on their own in the upcoming war but perhaps not if the QoTs holds a grudge

[Ygrain]

Yep, I am very intrigued too =)

Because, you know, it sounds like it is a sort of plot point... the past shaping the future generations is such a strong recurring topic, and it would be unreasonable to expect that Robert's Rebellion would be the only event of such an impact. And, though AM hasn't touched on it in this thread, I do believe that there might be some connection to the tragedy of Summerhall (whether Duncan's spurned bride was really Olenna or someone else), and by extension to Rhaegar, whose fascination with the site seems really intense.

[Ygrain]

Were they really though? IIRC all they did was keep Stannis out of the war. Did they join the fleet protecting Dany and Viserys? Did they send men to the Trident or to help KL? Nope. Mace Tyrell sitting on his tod as SE for the whole war is one of the mysteries or holes in Roberts Rebellion. Is this now a reason for it?

Well done Apple on a nice theory. Now does it stand to reason that Olenna may not like the Targs/hold a grudge for what happened? In the same way Tywin does about Cersei and Rhaegar not getting married. Does she purposely tell Mace not to send the thousands of troops he could have if he wanted to the Trident? And how does this bode for Aegons chances? I thought for a while the Lannisters were going to be on their own in the upcoming war but perhaps not if the QoTs holds a grudge

A good point - Trident was shaping as a really decisive battle, was it truly so urgent to maintain the siege of Storms' End?

[Frey Pie]

A good point - Trident was shaping as a really decisive battle, was it truly so urgent to maintain the siege of Storms' End?

A good point - Trident was shaping as a really decisive battle, was it truly so urgent to maintain the siege of Storms' End?

Urgent yes. Its never wise to leave an enemy untaken at your back. But Mace could have left 10000 men at Storms End, ensuring the siege would continue and stopping any posiible coming together of the remaining Stormlords. Looking at their numbers in the WotFKs he can easily afford to send 20-30000 men to the Trident. There are only a few reasons why he didnt that i can think of:

George is human and it is an oversight on his part

Aerys was paranoid and didnt want so many flowers so close to the capital so ordered them to maintain the siege and keep the Stormlords at home

Olenna prevented Mace from sending too many men north to the Trident because shes holding this grudge over how she was spurned

It also acounts for how easily Ned persuaded them to dip their banners

[The Sleeper]

Urgent yes. Its never wise to leave an enemy untaken at your back. But Mace could have left 10000 men at Storms End, ensuring the siege would continue and stopping any posiible coming together of the remaining Stormlords. Looking at their numbers in the WotFKs he can easily afford to send 20-30000 men to the Trident. There are only a few reasons why he didnt that i can think of:

George is human and it is an oversight on his part

Aerys was paranoid and didnt want so many flowers so close to the capital so ordered them to maintain the siege and keep the Stormlords at home

Olenna prevented Mace from sending too many men north to the Trident because shes holding this grudge over how she was spurned

It also acounts for how easily Ned persuaded them to dip their banners

We know that 10000 of the 40000 that Rhaegar had on the Trident were Dornish. Where did the rest 30000 come from?

[Frey Pie]

IIRC they were made up of loyalist river lords, vale lords and crownland forces with the remainder of Jon conns army also. And yes a smattering of reachmen but not the thousands there could have been

[bbstark]

Because, you know, it sounds like it is a sort of plot point... the past shaping the future generations is such a strong recurring topic, and it would be unreasonable to expect that Robert's Rebellion would be the only event of such an impact. And, though AM hasn't touched on it in this thread, I do believe that there might be some connection to the tragedy of Summerhall (whether Duncan's spurned bride was really Olenna or someone else), and by extension to Rhaegar, whose fascination with the site seems really intense.

What an aha! moment ...ok, I think I might be swayed by this yet... I was fairly skeptical at first ;)

Here's what struck me: The Tyrells have much for which to thank the Targaryens. Their ancestors stepped up from Stewards to Lords of Highgarden. It always struck me as odd that they yielded to Robert so easily, and I attributed it their survivalist nature, which I respect to an extent.

Here we are given another layer of texture in the actions of a family from whom we do not get a single POV: a personal vendetta from a woman spurned. In this picture of a spurned bride, Olenna's influence in the Tyrell household must have contributed to an anti-Targ sentiment, going as far as dropping the Targs like hot potaoes when it was no longer in their favor to support them. I mean Doran has been slowly plotting to bring the 'rightful rulers' (i.e. in his eyes, the Targs) back to the throne for years, why haven't the Tyrells done the same? Could it be Olenna's influence? I think so...well now :)

Though in general the reason I like this, is because it shows how the priorities and world view of an individual (Olenna) dominate over a philosophy held by the family, and probably passed down from generation to generation. It shows that in spite of obvious loyalty to the family the path they take can easily be altered by the personal ambitions, and unfinished business, of one single member.

[Lion of Judah]

Were they really though? IIRC all they did was keep Stannis out of the war. Did they join the fleet protecting Dany and Viserys? Did they send men to the Trident or to help KL? Nope. Mace Tyrell sitting on his tod as SE for the whole war is one of the mysteries or holes in Roberts Rebellion. Is this now a reason for it?

Well done Apple on a nice theory. Now does it stand to reason that Olenna may not like the Targs/hold a grudge for what happened? In the same way Tywin does about Cersei and Rhaegar not getting married. Does she purposely tell Mace not to send the thousands of troops he could have if he wanted to the Trident? And how does this bode for Aegons chances? I thought for a while the Lannisters were going to be on their own in the upcoming war but perhaps not if the QoTs holds a grudge

They kept Stannis out of the war for a year, that's a long time to be out of a war. Daenerys also regards them as one of the few houses to remain loyal to the Targaryens and noted that they had no reason to love the present regime in KL. The same regime that held Paxter's sons hostage. Be that as it may; if there were bitter feelings in the past over a broken marriage pact between Redwyne and Targaryen something significant was done for them to remain loyal till then end.

[Dr. Pepper]

They kept Stannis out of the war for a year, that's a long time to be out of a war. Daenerys also regards them as one of the few houses to remain loyal to the Targaryens and noted that they had no reason to love the present regime in KL. The same regime that held Paxter's sons hostage. Be that as it may; if there were bitter feelings in the past over a broken marriage pact between Redwyne and Targaryen something significant was done for them to remain loyal till then end.

I'm not really following you. Stannis was in Storm's End to ensure that Storm's End remained in Baratheon hands. He was successful at this. He wouldn't have been at Robert's side anyway, even if the Redwyne fleet had taken their ships and men elsewhere. Their risk in remaining at a sea blockade is minimal.

It's important to keep in mind where Dany learns her history -primarily from Viserys. The Redwynes were loyal to the Tyrells.

[Lion of Judah]

I'm not really following you. Stannis was in Storm's End to ensure that Storm's End remained in Baratheon hands. He was successful at this. He wouldn't have been at Robert's side anyway, even if the Redwyne fleet had taken their ships and men elsewhere. Their risk in remaining at a sea blockade is minimal.

It's important to keep in mind where Dany learns her history -primarily from Viserys. The Redwynes were loyal to the Tyrells.

What is there not to follow? Did they fight for the Targaryens or not? If there were bitter feelings about any marriage slight they got past it.

[Twinslayer]

The way that Barristan relates the story of the end of Duncan's status as Crown Prince suggests that it was Duncan's, agency, not Aegon's, at work in removing the Prince of Dragonflies from the line of succession, "The Prince of Dragonflies loved Jenny of Oldstones so much he cast aside a crown." It seems clear that although Duncan was no longer the Crown Prince, his marriage was not the cause of a long-standing schism between him and his father, as he always seemed to remain close to the family and he was present at Summerhall.

In a number of real life monarchies, a prince who marries without the King's consent removes himself and any offspring of the marriage from the line of succession automatically. The purpose of this rule is to ensure that the king controls the succession. If the Targs followed this rule, it may just be that Duncan the Small married in secret and presented Egg with a fait accompli, knowing that by doing so he was automatically giving up his crown. Could be as simple as that.

[Dr. Pepper]

What is there not to follow? Did they fight for the Targaryens or not? If there were bitter feelings about any marriage slight they got past it.

My point is they didn't really fight for anyone as much as they remained loyal to their in-laws. Olenna was a Tyrell by marriage at this point. The risk in maintaining a sea blockade is minimal when there is no one battling. We've seen time and time again that houses connected via marriage are reluctant to fight against one another. Whether their were bitter feelings or not, their loyalty to the Targaryens did not extend to actually fighting to protect the dynasty even when they had several months to do so.

[Ser Greg of House House]

Great theory. A good story, totally in the feeling of asoiaf. I love it, makes a great background story for Olenna and the thing about their obsession with making Margeary queen is simply great.