Jump to content

Mathis Rowan and his role in the next book


ironhandbywater

Recommended Posts

Exactly, sending the head costs him literally zero effort and has no risk at all attached to it. It may not have won him any favor with Aerys but it might have. Thus it's what people in the gambling world call a "freeroll" = no risk, possible reward.

When you do something with no risk that requires no effort, it's not good evidence of devotion or loyalty.

Additionally, I think Randyll also enjoyed sending the head to Aerys because it shows that he was the one that took it. He might have let Mace claim the glory of his victory but I don't think he was happy about it. Our Randyll is a very martial man and I think he takes pride in his accomplushments in battle.

It will be quite funny to see Randyll (most likely a Blackfyre supporter) fight alongside Mathis (most likely a Targaryen loyalist) in tWoW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. The problem isn't that "I can't name them" it's more that we simply don't know where *most* of the houses stood in the BF rebellions, period. Something like 80% of the houses in Westeros, we simply don't know who they fought for.

I find it highly unlikely that "half the realm" somehow didn't include at least a few major houses. Nor have you actually made it clear that Daemon's support came mostly from lesser lords and knights. As you have said to me, you're welcome to that assumption. :)

2. My assertion was supported by logic: out of all the houses that fought for the Black Dragon, after 100 years, surely some of them have gained/re-gained some power, *especially if they were treated leniently, and especially given that some *might* have won favor with Robert during his rebellion*. Nothing in that statement is a stretch, nor am I calling it a certainty.

1. Now you are trying to confuse the issue. GRRM gave us the notable houses that partially supported Daemon. He specifically gave us the names of the great houses and regions that stayed loyal to the king. I am sure the younger sons of great houses may have supported Daemon, as part of keeping a foot in both camps, but nothing more. The notable deaths and captains that served Daemon all point to middling and lesser lords. Massing the middling lords, lesser lords, and younger sons of great houses very well could be half the realm.

2. Flawed logic. If leniency was indeed granted, which I suspect that is was, there would be no to regain power that was never lost. The only house mentioned is House Peake, which lost two of their three castles, because of continued support for the Blacfyres.

My assumptions are supported by evidence from the books, the author, and author approved fan sites. You have provided mere speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Now you are trying to confuse the issue. GRRM gave us the notable houses that partially supported Daemon. He specifically gave us the names of the great houses and regions that stayed loyal to the king. I am sure the younger sons of great houses may have supported Daemon, as part of keeping a foot in both camps, but nothing more. The notable deaths and captains that served Daemon all point to middling and lesser lords. Massing the middling lords, lesser lords, and younger sons of great houses very well could be half the realm.

2. Flawed logic. If leniency was indeed granted, which I suspect that is was, there would be no to regain power that was never lost. The only house mentioned is House Peake, which lost two of their three castles, because of continued support for the Blacfyres.

My assumptions are supported by evidence from the books, the author, and author approved fan sites. You have provided mere speculation.

1. No, GRRM did not do that. The vast majority of the houses of Westeros loyalties' during the Blackfyre rebellions are unknown. That is not speculation, and it is straight from the books, etc.

2. Not flawed, either way my point is made. I'll restate it as it has been a while: there probably are houses that were loyal to the Blackfyres that are major houses today. Either because they lost power and regained it, or more likely, never lost it in the first place (thanks to the leniency). The fact that we know of at least one (Yronwood) only strengthens this case and proves that it is not mere speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You're right about what they'd *want* to do, perhaps, but that isn't the same as what they are *able* to do. The King and/or his Hand would decide the punishment for the Reynes, not House Lannister.

2. He'd jump at the chance, but you're assuming that chance existed. Far from certain. Mace Tyrell is an outlier because he has massive sway at court thanks to the royal marriage.

3. Fighting on both sides may not be as common as you're making it out to be. (it could be, we don't really know). Out of several rebellions we only have a handful of examples of houses playing both sides. Not only that, but smaller houses play both sides as well. House Smallwood did so during Robert's Rebellion and so did House Swann.

In Yronwood's case this doesn't make sense at all. They rose with Bittersteel 2 or 3 times. Assuming they played both sides each of those times is bizarre.

1. No, not necessarily. Tywin eliminated the Reynes and Tarbecks without the leave of House Targaryen. Tywin awarded Castamere and its land and incomes to House Spicer on his own authority as Lord Paramount of the Westerlands. With the deaths of the Hornwood lord and heir, and the forced marriage of the widow to Ramsay, Ser Rodrik Cassell was constrained by Northern Law in the land dispute.

Lord Paramounts and regions are typically left to their own laws and customs, absent a need for the monarch to interfere.

2. No I'm not. I'm assuming House Reyne stayed loyal to Daeron along with its lord paramount. Mace Tyrell is not an outlier. See my post above. Mace's demand to Tywin was for show and a sign of respect for the newly minted alliance between Houses Tyrell and Lannister. All of the division was more than likely decided before that sit down ever took place. Garlan still had to take part of his father's army and secure his new castle and lands. Since Alester Florent never bent the knee to Joffery and saved himself, Mace was free to seize the lands and income on his authority as Lord Paramount of the Reach, bases upon the Florents treason against him.

3. What books have you been reading? Double dealing and betrayal are essential to playing the game of thrones. This is what many great houses do to survive. I made no reference to commonality whatsoever. If a house with much to lose is unsure of the claimants to the throne, it have been proven that the house will provide some form of support to both sides.

I'm not sure what would be uncommon about house Yronwood sending younger sons to fight in both Blackyre rebellions. They can't take Dorne from the Martell by force, but maybe the support of a victorious Blackfyre usurper would do the trick.

I can't say for sure why house Martell did not punish house Yronwood. They certainly could have done so, but I would bet that the Yronwoods protected themselves. All we know for sure is that two of the current Lord Yronwood's forebears rode with Bittersteel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without sending the head, it wouldn't have been clear that Lord Randyll was a major part in defeating the enemy. Mace took credit for the win.

It would have been clear once Lord Randyll was presented to the king as part of the victory celebration, much like the Blackwater. My point is and always has been that Lord Randyll sent to head to show Aerys he has at least one loyal and devoted follower, who can get the job done. You can reword and rephrase this all you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have been clear once Lord Randyll was presented to the king as part of the victory celebration, much like the Blackwater. My point is and always has been that Lord Randyll sent to head to show Aerys he has at least one loyal and devoted follower, who can get the job done. You can reword and rephrase this all you like.

No one is rewording or rephrasing, but several of us have made a different interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. No, GRRM did not do that. The vast majority of the houses of Westeros loyalties' during the Blackfyre rebellions are unknown. That is not speculation, and it is straight from the books, etc.

2. Not flawed, either way my point is made. I'll restate it as it has been a while: there probably are houses that were loyal to the Blackfyres that are major houses today. Either because they lost power and regained it, or more likely, never lost it in the first place (thanks to the leniency). The fact that we know of at least one (Yronwood) only strengthens this case and proves that it is not mere speculation.

1. You are wrong again.

List of known Targaryen Supporters: Arryn, Lannister, Martell, Baratheon, Corbray, Waynwood, Templeton, Hayford, Caswell, Penrose, and Lefford.

List of known Blackfyre supporters: Costayne, Bracken, Hightower (both camps), Peake, Shawney, Osgrey, Yronwood, Strickland, and Sunderland.

See a difference? I certainly do.

2. Wrong, this is too speculative. No textual support. We do not know the level of house Yronwood's support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. No, not necessarily. Tywin eliminated the Reynes and Tarbecks without the leave of House Targaryen. Tywin awarded Castamere and its land and incomes to House Spicer on his own authority as Lord Paramount of the Westerlands. With the deaths of the Hornwood lord and heir, and the forced marriage of the widow to Ramsay, Ser Rodrik Cassell was constrained by Northern Law in the land dispute.

Lord Paramounts and regions are typically left to their own laws and customs, absent a need for the monarch to interfere.

2. No I'm not. I'm assuming House Reyne stayed loyal to Daeron along with its lord paramount. Mace Tyrell is not an outlier. See my post above. Mace's demand to Tywin was for show and a sign of respect for the newly minted alliance between Houses Tyrell and Lannister. All of the division was more than likely decided before that sit down ever took place. Garlan still had to take part of his father's army and secure his new castle and lands. Since Alester Florent never bent the knee to Joffery and saved himself, Mace was free to seize the lands and income on his authority as Lord Paramount of the Reach, bases upon the Florents treason against him.

3. What books have you been reading? Double dealing and betrayal are essential to playing the game of thrones. This is what many great houses do to survive. I made no reference to commonality whatsoever. If a house with much to lose is unsure of the claimants to the throne, it have been proven that the house will provide some form of support to both sides.

I'm not sure what would be uncommon about house Yronwood sending younger sons to fight in both Blackyre rebellions. They can't take Dorne from the Martell by force, but maybe the support of a victorious Blackfyre usurper would do the trick.

I can't say for sure why house Martell did not punish house Yronwood. They certainly could have done so, but I would bet that the Yronwoods protected themselves. All we know for sure is that two of the current Lord Yronwood's forebears rode with Bittersteel.

1. That's because the Reynes and Tarbecks revolted against House Lannister, not against the throne. Kings deal with those who rebel against them, Lords deal with those who rebel against them, etc. If the Reynes had rebelled against the throne, it's very likely that it would be the throne who punished them.

Rodrik was forced to deal with the Hornwood situation by leaving it alone because of his rank, but as he and Luwin pointed out, Robb was free to deal with it differently. He even suggested Roose might abandon his claims in light of "Reek" providing testimony that Lady Hornwood was forced into a wedding.

2. and you're doing this in the face of a famous member of House Reyne fighting for Daemon. On one hand, we have a bit of evidence, on the other hand, we have your assumption. A reasonable enough assumption, to be fair, but it's clear that there is contrary evidence.

3. Of course they do, if you got the impression I was suggesting otherwise then I've been misunderstood. As to sending Yronwood sending younger sons, I think you missed my point.

The safe assumption is that they were not playing both sides because they "rode with Bittersteel" in 3 rebellions. There is no implication nor evidence that Yronwood kept a foot in both camps other than your assertion that playing both sides is more common amongst larger houses than small.

The not safe assumption is that we were given very misleading data on the situation. It would be strange for us to have been told that House Swann fought for Stannis (while in truth, they fought for Stannis AND Joffrey (or Renly, I forget)). Likewise it would be strange for us to be told "Yronwood rode with Bittersteel," when the truth was actually that Yronwood fought for both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You are wrong again.

List of known Targaryen Supporters: Arryn, Lannister, Martell, Baratheon, Corbray, Waynwood, Templeton, Hayford, Caswell, Penrose, and Lefford.

List of known Blackfyre supporters: Costayne, Bracken, Hightower (both camps), Peake, Shawney, Osgrey, Yronwood, Strickland, and Sunderland.

See a difference? I certainly do.

1. The statement you are calling wrong is "The vast majority of the houses of Westeros loyalties' during the Blackfyre rebellions are unknown. "

That statement is absolutely true and it's a bit amazing that you would deny it. There are hundreds of lords in Westeros and of those, we only know the loyalty of about 20 of those.

As for the list of supporters. You are providing this list as evidence that the Lords who supported Daemon were on the smaller side. In general you are against the notion that major houses supported Daemon. House Peake had 3 castles and lost 2 of them, so it sounds like they were major.

If major lords didn't rise for Daemon would they rise for his sons? Possible, but not so likely. Lord Butterwell joined the Second BF rebellion and so did Lord Frey. Butterwell was extremely wealthy and had been Master of Coin and Hand of the King. That's a major house. Frey is a major house now and they were likely a major house then. They wouldn't make a weak house a fundamental part of their rebellion. For all we know, houses like Costayne and Sunderly could've been more signficant as well. We just don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. That's because the Reynes and Tarbecks revolted against House Lannister, not against the throne. Kings deal with those who rebel against them, Lords deal with those who rebel against them, etc. If the Reynes had rebelled against the throne, it's very likely that it would be the throne who punished them.

Rodrik was forced to deal with the Hornwood situation by leaving it alone because of his rank, but as he and Luwin pointed out, Robb was free to deal with it differently. He even suggested Roose might abandon his claims in light of "Reek" providing testimony that Lady Hornwood was forced into a wedding.

2. and you're doing this in the face of a famous member of House Reyne fighting for Daemon. On one hand, we have a bit of evidence, on the other hand, we have your assumption. A reasonable enough assumption, to be fair, but it's clear that there is contrary evidence.

3. Of course they do, if you got the impression I was suggesting otherwise then I've been misunderstood. As to sending Yronwood sending younger sons, I think you missed my point.

The safe assumption is that they were not playing both sides because they "rode with Bittersteel" in 3 rebellions. There is no implication nor evidence that Yronwood kept a foot in both camps other than your assertion that playing both sides is more common amongst larger houses than small.

The not safe assumption is that we were given very misleading data on the situation. It would be strange for us to have been told that House Swann fought for Stannis (while in truth, they fought for Stannis AND Joffrey (or Renly, I forget)). Likewise it would be strange for us to be told "Yronwood rode with Bittersteel," when the truth was actually that Yronwood fought for both sides.

1. Once again you are trying to confuse the argument. Lord Paramounts/Wardens rule in the name of the monarch. A rebellion against one is technically a rebellion against the other. Technically it should have been the king who parceled out the Reyne and Tarbeck lands, but Tywin did as he saw fit. The Point is that Lord Paramounts are left with a great amount of autonomy. House Lannister could and likely would have dealt with House Reyne sooner given the proper pretext.

Ser Rodrik felt that the laws of the North were on the Bolton's side and that it was unlikely that Roose Bolton would drop a claim concerning land. Once again, the point is that every constituent region has its own laws and customs. These laws and customs are supreme unless they come into conflict with the laws of the Monarch. See the Lords First Night.

Think of it in terms of federalism, the continuing push and pull between the powers of the US government and those of the 50 states.

2. One fighter of one house deciding the fate of that entire house. Thats pure speculation at best. You have no evidence. You have what is likely a younger son of a great house supporting Daemon Blackfyre.

3. Given that house Yronwood has not been extinguished is strong evidence for my assertion that the house protected itself. Think about it. What house would be allowed to participate in three failed rebellions and not lose power? The reasonable assumption is that some members of the house stayed loyal to the king and house Martell.

Incomplete data is not misleading data. I assume you are using the Wiki to make some of your arguments, which is fine, but also make sure you look to the text to avoid confusion. The Wiki is off in various places. What we know from the text is that three forbearers of the current Lord Yronwood rode with Bittersteel. This may be ancestors who were younger sons or not lords of the house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. The statement you are calling wrong is "The vast majority of the houses of Westeros loyalties' during the Blackfyre rebellions are unknown. "

That statement is absolutely true and it's a bit amazing that you would deny it. There are hundreds of lords in Westeros and of those, we only know the loyalty of about 20 of those.

As for the list of supporters. You are providing this list as evidence that the Lords who supported Daemon were on the smaller side. In general you are against the notion that major houses supported Daemon. House Peake had 3 castles and lost 2 of them, so it sounds like they were major.

If major lords didn't rise for Daemon would they rise for his sons? Possible, but not so likely. Lord Butterwell joined the Second BF rebellion and so did Lord Frey. Butterwell was extremely wealthy and had been Master of Coin and Hand of the King. That's a major house. Frey is a major house now and they were likely a major house then. They wouldn't make a weak house a fundamental part of their rebellion. For all we know, houses like Costayne and Sunderly could've been more signficant as well. We just don't know.

1. That truly counts are the Lord Paramounts and the handful of great houses within each constituent region. This is where majority of the troops and wealth will come from. This is not really debatable. Plotting out the allegiances of the heavy hitters is good way to gauge the support for the respective sides.

So, yes there are many lords in the whole of Westeros, but as we know all lords are not made equal.

2. Not necessarily. It may have been three smaller castles. Certainly, the house is/was not on par with the likes of Tyrell, Hightower, Rowan, Oakheart, Redwyne, and Tarly. Aside from Daemon and his sons, no one of note died from his contingent. I think thats pretty telling.

Sure Daemon had some strong fighters with him: Bittersteel, Ser Quentyn Ball, Red Tusk, The Reyne fellow, etc,. But the fact remains the great bulk of the major houses stayed loyal. It makes sense given they had the most to lose.

3. First off, the second Blackfyre Rebellion was a joke. It never got off the ground due to Daemon II being a weakling. The rabble that assembled at Whitewalls never stood a chance.

Secondly, Lord Butterwell being Master of Coin and Hand of the King does not make his house great. It is unclear if Lord Frey was a part of the conspiracy. He was the father of the bride yes, but given the Freys quick rise to power, I doubt he would have put his rising families fortunes in danger. House Costayne is a banner house of House Hightower, middling at best.

The rest are just not worth mentioning. The Houses that rode with Bloodraven on the other hand are more famous: Darklyn, Hayford, Massey, Rosby, Stokeworth, Mooton, Lothston, and House Blackwood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. One fighter of one house deciding the fate of that entire house. Thats pure speculation at best. You have no evidence. You have what is likely a younger son of a great house supporting Daemon Blackfyre.

3. Given that house Yronwood has not been extinguished is strong evidence for my assertion that the house protected itself. Think about it. What house would be allowed to participate in three failed rebellions and not lose power? The reasonable assumption is that some members of the house stayed loyal to the king and house Martell.

Incomplete data is not misleading data. I assume you are using the Wiki to make some of your arguments, which is fine, but also make sure you look to the text to avoid confusion. The Wiki is off in various places. What we know from the text is that three forbearers of the current Lord Yronwood rode with Bittersteel. This may be ancestors who were younger sons or not lords of the house.

2. One fighter *is* evidence, especially when that fighter is famous. On top of that we have this quote:

"if Hightower and Tarbeck and Oakheart and Butterwell had lent us their full strength instead of trying to keep one foot in each camp"

House Reyne is far more important than House Tarbeck (in the west and in general) yet Lord Osgrey doesn't lament that House Reyne split their support.

House Yronwood isn't mentioned as a half supporter either, and they most certainly are/were bigger than Oakheart, Butterwell and Tarbeck.

3. I don't rely on the wiki at all and haven't used it to make any of my points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. That truly counts are the Lord Paramounts and the handful of great houses within each constituent region. This is where majority of the troops and wealth will come from. This is not really debatable. Plotting out the allegiances of the heavy hitters is good way to gauge the support for the respective sides.

So, yes there are many lords in the whole of Westeros, but as we know all lords are not made equal.

2. Not necessarily. It may have been three smaller castles. Certainly, the house is/was not on par with the likes of Tyrell, Hightower, Rowan, Oakheart, Redwyne, and Tarly. Aside from Daemon and his sons, no one of note died from his contingent. I think thats pretty telling.

Sure Daemon had some strong fighters with him: Bittersteel, Ser Quentyn Ball, Red Tusk, The Reyne fellow, etc,. But the fact remains the great bulk of the major houses stayed loyal. It makes sense given they had the most to lose.

3. First off, the second Blackfyre Rebellion was a joke. It never got off the ground due to Daemon II being a weakling. The rabble that assembled at Whitewalls never stood a chance.

Secondly, Lord Butterwell being Master of Coin and Hand of the King does not make his house great. It is unclear if Lord Frey was a part of the conspiracy. He was the father of the bride yes, but given the Freys quick rise to power, I doubt he would have put his rising families fortunes in danger. House Costayne is a banner house of House Hightower, middling at best.

The rest are just not worth mentioning. The Houses that rode with Bloodraven on the other hand are more famous: Darklyn, Hayford, Massey, Rosby, Stokeworth, Mooton, Lothston, and House Blackwood.

1. This, said by you "This is where majority of the troops and wealth will come from....Plotting out the allegiances of the heavy hitters is good way to gauge the support for the respective sides." is *exactly* why some of the heavy hitters had to fight for Daemon, and some of them had to be fairly committed. If half the realm rose for Daemon and few of them were heavy hitters then you're assuming by extension that a huge number of smaller houses went against their own liege lords. Mathematically it's very difficult to make that fit and it doesn't sound very likely. More likely that each side of the conflict had it's share of large and small houses, though clearly the King had the greater share of the large houses.

Surely some of the major lords fought for Daemon or else "half the realm" is really hard to get to. You say yourself that most of the smaller lords don't pack a big punch and you're completely right. It takes a ton of minor lords to equal one Great House, yet as you point out *4* Great Houses fought for the King. So where the heck did Daemon get the rest of his strength? The logical conclusion is that *some* fairly major to major lords joined him.

2. Yes, not necessarily. But no, they weren't "certainly not" as strong as those houses. It's possible House Peake were as strong as some of them. Without knowing what those 3 castles were it is basically possible. But it's clear they were not minor.

3. Master of Coin and Hand do not make his House great, it's true. Add to that the fact that his ancestor was Hand to Aegon IV, and that Aegon IV had a Butterwell mistress, and that he had an incredibly lavish castle, and the case that they were major is pretty strong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. One fighter *is* evidence, especially when that fighter is famous. On top of that we have this quote:

"if Hightower and Tarbeck and Oakheart and Butterwell had lent us their full strength instead of trying to keep one foot in each camp"

House Reyne is far more important than House Tarbeck (in the west and in general) yet Lord Osgrey doesn't lament that House Reyne split their support.

House Yronwood isn't mentioned as a half supporter either, and they most certainly are/were bigger than Oakheart, Butterwell and Tarbeck.

3. I don't rely on the wiki at all and haven't used it to make any of my points.

1. One fighter is not ample evidence of the full support of the entire house. Sorry, not buying it. Every one of the houses mentioned are exceptionally powerful. House Hightower is far stronger and powerful than even House Reyne. Osgrey not mentioning the Reynes is just as likely to mean that the house gave no support to Daemon whatsoever. One younger son of the house branching out on his own does not equal full support of the house.

House Yronwood is the second most powerful house in Dorne, which has the smallest populations of any of the constituent regions. Being the second strongest house in Dorne does not mean being stronger than House Oakheart. House Yronwood may be a bit stronger than House Tarbeck, who was quite strong and influential in the West. Additonally, whatever support given by house Yronwood may have been nominal at best, not really worth mentioning by Osgrey.

3. Well, you are either using something other than the text, or you are simply making some flawed points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...