A Dragonfly Among the Reeds - Is Howland Reed the Grandson of Duncan the Small?

[Daemon Blackfyre IV]

Aegon would never have Jamie Lannister in his Kings Guard..... never ever

[Lord Varys]

To continue ancient stuff:

 

Ibbison,

 

you can use special pleading for your 'Duncan is not a Targaryen' case but that doesn't cloud the issue that George routinely omits the family name if he gives you the moniker or nickname of a character (e.g. 'Barristan the Bold' and not 'Barristan Selmy the Bold' or '(Prince) Aemon the Dragonknight' and not '(Prince) Aemon Targaryen the Dragonknight'). In Duncan's case we have the problem that the man had two nicknames - (Prince) Duncan the Small and the Prince of Dragonflies. Combine that with the fact that Duncan is not referenced often in those books it is hardly surprising that he is never named 'Targaryen'. That is hardly positive proof that Duncan lost his Targaryen family name at one point in his life.

 

If you have no precedent for a Targaryen giving up his name you cannot positively claim that this is the case. Duncan's case wasn't completely without precedent, either. Other people had been passed over by kings and Great Councils and they did not lose their family name in the process (confirmed for all the female Targaryens who were passed over, and very likely to be the case with little Prince Maegor). Duncan Targaryen was the eldest son of the king, and not banished from court in the process. If we knew Duncan had been forced to leave court and had been never allowed to return to KL after his improper marriage you would have a point. But there would be simply no reason to assume that a man who quickly regained the favor of his father (or never truly lost it) was actually forced to give up his family name. And come to think of that - I still don't believe that Egg was really against the Duncan-Jenny match at heart. Yandel writes official history and a king who happily accepts an alleged commoner in his heart as the new queen would be too much. It may very well be that Egg's court forced him to treat Duncan the way he did simply because they could and wanted to humiliate the Peasant King. Aegon V's enemies may have been part of his court at one time or the other - or rather, even his supporters may have not been willing to support a future king whose wife may have been a peasant.

Hell, Duncan's and Jenny's presence at Summerhall may actually be a hint that Aegon V gave the castle to them - Prince Daeron would never have any children, and Jaehaerys and Aerys would have Dragonstone and eventually the Iron Throne. But Duncan and his family - if he had any - could have been perfectly happy at Summerhall (although there are also hints that Aegon V may have kept Summerhall for himself, since it was his favorite castle).

 

Bloodraven uses Jojen as a tool to get Bran to his cave. That's why he reached out to him - and he used presumably him rather than some random guy in Winterfell because he was the closest person in the region he could reach. Do you think Bran has Targaryen blood, too, because Bloodraven chose to speak to him in his dreams? And why the hell did the man never talk to Jon Snow who also seems to have Targaryen blood?

 

I've thought about the Howland-prophecy-angle, and I find it very unlikely that Howland is very much involved in the promised prince stuff. If that was the case he would most likely have urged Ned to consider the possibility that Lyanna's son was that guy, and would subsequently have pushed Ned to tell him the truth/prepare him for his destiny. Even if Ned dismissed all that one would expect Howland to try to reach Jon Snow as quickly as he could after Ned's death. But he does nothing of this sort.

And strictly speaking, the fact that the crannogmen still have ties to the Green Men doesn't mean that the Green Men are actually sharing important secrets with them - especially not stuff about prophecies and such.

 

Any problems with claims and such between Jenny's children and Jaehaerys' children could be resolved by marriage. If suddenly the Reed-Targaryens were considered to be royal enough to come before Jaehaerys II and/or his children - despite the fact that Duncan had given up all his claims - then a marriage between these two branches would have been the best way to resolve the issue. Considering that Jaehaerys II actually followed the advice of Jenny's companion when he married Aerys to Rhaella one really has to wonder - surely the Ghost could have arranged a match between one of Jenny's children and Aerys/Rhaella the same way if she had that much influence over Jaehaerys?

 

Kingsguard stuff:

 

Well, you can go with special pleading for the Ashford Tourney but I don't think that would make much sense. If the tourney was rigged in Valarr's favor then the KG would be the ideal pawns to fall before Valarr's lance to make him look good (and Aerion and Daeron, too, by the way) since they were very good knights, and thus presumably also very good in falling off their horses. The KG during that day and age aren't better or worse than those of previous or later days (check the Dance, the Regency, or how Prince Aegon acquired Merry Meg for comparison). I only remember Maegor fighting against knights of the KG in tourneys - and back in Aegon's day the KG may only have been protecting the royal person - and the various incidents during the reign of Aerys II where KG actually rode against Prince Rhaegar. We know that the king decides who is subject to KG protection - Barristan Selmy tells us as much in ADwD. If Maegor wasn't subject to KG protection - or got his father's leave to fight against KG in a melée - then that would be in order. But generally I doubt that the KG is allowed to ride against a prince or king they are sworn to protect unless they are commanded to do so - else a KG could involuntarily slay a king/prince of the blood during a tourney accident. Skill helps you to minimize the risk but it cannot completely rule it out. And death isn't the only thing that could happen - a KG could cripple or maim his king/prince, and that would be nearly as worse as killing him.

 

Anyway, the idea that Howland was under KG protection at the tower of joy makes no sense to me at all. Howland was a rebel and a traitor at that point, and if the knights were still upholding the Targaryen cause at this point, Howland deserved death as much as Ned or Robert himself.

 

Aegon V made huge efforts to help the people in the North during the long winter - efforts that were considered to be too great by some people down south. It makes no sense that he acted in all that without working closely together with House Stark/answering pleas for help from Winterfell unless we assume Egg had a magical 'smallfolk-in-need' detector or was closely working together with other major Northern houses and not the Starks. The fact that he may be an in-law to the Starks through his wife as well as the fact that he should have befriended some Starks during his stay at Winterfell as a boy it makes sense to assume he worked closely with the Starks during that crisis.

 

Will stuff:

 

It isn't the Rowans who made the will, though. That was Lord Webber, Lady Rohanne's father. Lord Rowan just decided to uphold it. Which, in turn, suggests that fathers can add special clauses to their wills which then can stand. Say, something like 'my son cannot rule, he won't inherit', 'my son refused to marry as I commanded him, I disinherit him'. And so on. It may be easier with daughters than it is with sons, but the fact that it is possible with daughters certainly is a good hint that it can work with sons, too. Just because we don't have a precedent doesn't mean there could be one, right?

 

Lizard lion thing:

 

I took that only as a hint that the Reeds once were powerful skinchangers/greenseers who could use animals in battle, nothing more.

[Ibbison from Ibben]

To continue ancient stuff:
 
Ibbison,
 
........
That is hardly positive proof that Duncan lost his Targaryen family name at one point in his life.
 
If you have no precedent for a Targaryen giving up his name you cannot positively claim that this is the case.

 
I never said any of my claims were "positive".  It's just incredibly suspicious that Duncan is never referred to as Duncan Targaryen. That's why this is a hypothesis, awaiting testing in TWoW. GRRM is throwing hints at us. He is under no obligation to provide all the data at this point. ASoIaF is not an Ellery Queen story, where the author tells us at a certain point, "You now have all the information you need to solve the mystery. Make your guess now, and then read on to see if you got it right." GRRM is withholding info for dramatic purposes. Sometimes we have to do some speculating. This is a case where I'm doing that. But I think my speculations are sound - they cannot be contradicted with the info we currently hold. That doesn't mean they are right; it just means we need to wait for more info.

 

Duncan's case wasn't completely without precedent, either.

 
Yes it is. Maegor was passed over by a Great Council, deemed unfit (or likely to be so, and not worth the risk) due to his parentage. Disputed female successions are a completely different issue. Duncan was the legitimate heir to the throne, and accepted as such.
 

Bloodraven uses Jojen as a tool to get Bran to his cave. That's why he reached out to him - and he used presumably him rather than some random guy in Winterfell because he was the closest person in the region he could reach.

 
A sickly teenaged crannogman seems an unlikely choice if BR had any other alternatives. And. as I asked and you failed to answer, how could BR be sure that Jojen would be allowed to go to Winterfell? BR's choice of messenger wasn't only dependent upon mental/magical ability, it was about willingness to take on the role. Who better to trust than family?
 
 

I've thought about the Howland-prophecy-angle, and I find it very unlikely that Howland is very much involved in the promised prince stuff. If that was the case he would most likely have urged Ned to consider the possibility that Lyanna's son was that guy, and would subsequently have pushed Ned to tell him the truth/prepare him for his destiny.

 

I speculated that Howland served as a link between the Green Men and Rhaegar. We're not sure what obligations/oaths either party put him under. Rhaegar himself at this time thought that he was TPtwP, although he would later switch to his son Aegon. Ned's friendship with Robert would become a huge complication later on. Perhaps the Green Men only gave Howland part of the story themselves; Howland may have his own uncertainties.
 

 
Kingsguard stuff:
 
... If the tourney was rigged in Valarr's favor then the KG would be the ideal pawns to fall before Valarr's lance to make him look good (and Aerion and Daeron, too, by the way) since they were very good knights, and thus presumably also very good in falling off their horses.

 

 

You note that the KG has varied in individual's commitment to honor throughout history, but Crakehall and Donnel of Duskendale certainly seem to be at the high end of the scale. I stand by my analysis.

 

 

 
Anyway, the idea that Howland was under KG protection at the tower of joy makes no sense to me at all. Howland was a rebel and a traitor at that point, and if the knights were still upholding the Targaryen cause at this point, Howland deserved death as much as Ned or Robert himself.
 

 

From the standpoint of Maekar and the KG he ordered to support Aerion, Baelor Breakspear was defending a lowly hedge knight who assaulted Aerion in defense of a puppeteer who was committing treason, and who also was responsible for kidnapping Aegon. Not much difference. The parallel is rather clear if you open your eyes. The Dunk and Egg stories are more than just fun prequels to ASoIaF. There are clues and parallels to be found.

 

 

Will stuff:
 

 

The rules of primogeniture are quite clear. Wars get fought when they are violated. The whole point of the inheritance laws is to prevent conflict by making inheritance rights objective, not subjective. Randyll couldn't disinherit Sam.

[Lost Melnibonean]

Aegon would never have Jamie Lannister in his Kings Guard..... never ever

But he might allow him to take the black...

[Lost Melnibonean]

 
I never said any of my claims were "positive".  It's just incredibly suspicious that Duncan is never referred to as Duncan Targaryen. That's why this is a hypothesis, awaiting testing in TWoW. GRRM is throwing hints at us. He is under no obligation to provide all the data at this point. ASoIaF is not an Ellery Queen story, where the author tells us at a certain point, "You now have all the information you need to solve the mystery. Make your guess now, and then read on to see if you got it right." GRRM is withholding info for dramatic purposes. Sometimes we have to do some speculating. This is a case where I'm doing that. But I think my speculations are sound - they cannot be contradicted with the info we currently hold. That doesn't mean they are right; it just means we need to wait for more info.
 
 
Yes it is. Maegor was passed over by a Great Council, deemed unfit (or likely to be so, and not worth the risk) due to his parentage. Disputed female successions are a completely different issue. Duncan was the legitimate heir to the throne, and accepted as such.
 
 
A sickly teenaged crannogman seems an unlikely choice if BR had any other alternatives. And. as I asked and you failed to answer, how could BR be sure that Jojen would be allowed to go to Winterfell? BR's choice of messenger wasn't only dependent upon mental/magical ability, it was about willingness to take on the role. Who better to trust than family?
 
 
 
I speculated that Howland served as a link between the Green Men and Rhaegar. We're not sure what obligations/oaths either party put him under. Rhaegar himself at this time thought that he was TPtwP, although he would later switch to his son Aegon. Ned's friendship with Robert would become a huge complication later on. Perhaps the Green Men only gave Howland part of the story themselves; Howland may have his own uncertainties.
 
 
You note that the KG has varied in individual's commitment to honor throughout history, but Crakehall and Donnel of Duskendale certainly seem to be at the high end of the scale. I stand by my analysis.
 
 
From the standpoint of Maekar and the KG he ordered to support Aerion, Baelor Breakspear was defending a lowly hedge knight who assaulted Aerion in defense of a puppeteer who was committing treason, and who also was responsible for kidnapping Aegon. Not much difference. The parallel is rather clear if you open your eyes. The Dunk and Egg stories are more than just fun prequels to ASoIaF. There are clues and parallels to be found.
 
 
 
The rules of primogeniture are quite clear. Wars get fought when they are violated. The whole point of the inheritance laws is to prevent conflict by making inheritance rights objective, not subjective. Randyll couldn't disinherit Sam.

He could, but Samwell could then appeal to Tyrell, and then to the crown.

[Lord Varys]

Ibbison,

 

well, if it wasn't hypothesis we wouldn't be discussing the thing at all ;-).

 

I don't see a big difference between Duncan and Maegor - both were princes, and both were disinherited/passed over. If Duncan had to give up his Targaryen name, then one would expect that this would happen to any other claimant from the elder branch who was passed over. i.e. all the Targaryen girls, and Prince Maegor. Why making Duncan a special case? Especially in light of the fact that there was no real breakup between Aegon V and Duncan - he and his wife remained at court.

 

Aegon IV also seemed to seriously consider disinherited Prince Daeron, suggesting that disinheriting your eldest son wasn't something completely unheard of in the history of Westeros. It is quite clear that kings can do whatever the hell they want to. Their decisions can be challenged in war/rebellion, of course, but even a successful rebellion doesn't resolve anything. It may set a precedent against female inheritance, for instance, but that isn't going to make it impossible for future princesses to try to seize the throne for themselves.

Come to think of it - there would be no need for decrees or last wills if they were effectively meaningless in regards to who the heir was. If the eldest son would always inherit, then Aegon I wouldn't have had any reason to show off Aenys as his heir simply because no one in the Realm would ever consider backing Maegor against Aenys. Nor would a Great Council or a king ever have passed over a scion from the elder line - simply because it would be unthinkable.

 

Jojen:

 

I'm lost there. Do you think Jojen/Meera know who the three-eyed crow is? There is no reason to believe that, and if they don't know that the dream guy is their kin, turning to Jojen wouldn't make any sense from Bloodraven's POV - if they don't know he is their relative, he can't expect them to trust him more than any other guy, right? Jojen's health would be of no concern to Howland if he believes that Jojen's green dreams come true - and if he has dreamed that he'll bring Bran to the place where he is supposed to be there is no reason to believe Jojen wouldn't make it even if the odds are very much against that.

 

Howland/Jon:

 

Well, Howland would know whose son Jon Snow is. Considering that Rhaegar and Aegon were dead, only Viserys, Daenerys, and Jon Snow remain as potential promised princes. If Howland had any idea about the three dragon heads he would most certainly believe that Jon might be one of them, considering that only three Targaryen descendants of Aerys and Rhaella were still alive at that point. And I assume you believe that Howland and Rhaegar would have spoken about the prophecy, right?

 

More importantly, if Howland is a Targaryen he could easily have contacted his own great-granduncle, Maester Aemon, about that. There is simply no explanation as to why Howland would not tell Aemon about that if they were kin, considering what it might mean if Rhaegar's son is now serving at the Wall. The man would appear like a cruel guy who did everything in his power to ensure that great-great-granduncle and great-great-granduncle would never recognize each other. George would effectively create a huge plot hole by making Howland Reed a Targaryen descendant unless he came up with some 'vow of silence' thing that exceeded well beyond the death of Ned Stark. Not to mention how stupid it would look if Howland Reed would be the one telling Jon the truth later on (which I don't expect to happen).

 

We don't know anything about the KG at Duskendale. Are the name-dropped lords not supporting Dunk's cause supposed to be perceived as dishonorable? I don't think so, not caring about Dunk's fate doesn't make you evil, just as being nice to Dunk doesn't make you great.

[VorianDayne]

I'm sure everyone has had this thought (and perhaps there is already a post on it), but it's worth noting that dragonflies are plentiful around swamps and bogs. 

 

I could see "Prince of Dragonflies" being an epithet for Duncan he adopted has a term of pride. Perhaps in a future installment of D&E some haughty lord will coin the term thusly "Prince of Dragons? Ha, he is a mere Prince of Dragonflies." 

 

It's also easy to see Howland being intrigued by the Harrenhal tournament, drawn by curiosity to a great gathering of his cousins.

 

All in all, a great theory! It's getting harder and harder to find new, textually supported, non-crazy theories. I love the explanatory power of this one, and the loose ends it ties up. It also doesn't feel out of left field, cheesy, or forced.

 

Edited for syntax

[Ibbison from Ibben]

Given the state of the forum, I would prefer to suspend this conversation for now. We might be losing most of this page when the forum switches again. Everyone really needs to read Ran's "Rollback and Future Upgrade" post.

 

Lord Varys, I would suggest copying anything on this page you posted. I'll copy mine. (Make sure you get the post #.) We can recreate it after the upgrade.

 

Thanks

[Lord Varys]

Yeah, I'll do that. Didn't read Ran's post until a few hours ago ;-).