goodqueenaly

[goodqueenaly]

Not sure if you are the right person to ask this but what is the deal with Gerion's trip to Valyria? Because according to Fire and Blood, after Aerea died Jaehaerys forbid anyone from Westeros from ever going there and ordered than any ship suspected of having been there should be turned away from ports.

Did somebody later overturned that order so it was again legal to go there, did Gerion think it wouldn't apply to him because he's a Lannister or did Tywin find a neat way to get rid of problematic brother without dirtying his hands personally?

I think the No-Prize Answer is that even if this law was still on the books, so to speak, and remembered by anyone (except, say, the platinum-link maesters of the Citadel) by 291 AC, Robert Baratheon was probably not particularly inclined either to recall this bit of history or enforce it as king, especially when it came to his uncle by marriage. Robert was by no means stupid, but his areas of expertise were never highly scholastic, and so a decree issued nearly two and a half centuries prior may not have even registered in Robert’s mind as an important point in his education. Moreover, as king - especially a king almost a decade into his reign by 291 AC - Robert displayed little interest in his role as supreme judicial authority in the realm, calling laws a “tedious business” and bemoaning the work of “listen[ing] to them [i.e. his subjects] complain until my mind is numb and my ass is raw”. It is possible, if not indeed probable, that Robert was too busy hunting, hawking, and/or pursuing a fleeting extramarital affair to even bat an eye at the idea of one of his subjects sailing to the ruins of Valyria, much less whether such a voyage would be legally forbidden.

Too, even if Robert had thought to bring up Jaehaerys I’s decree, he may have refrained from doing so in deference to his Lannister in-laws. It is no secret, certainly by the time of AGOT, that Robert had allowed Lannister influence to flourish at court, to the exclusion of virtually any other aristocratic faction: his acceptance of Tyrek and Lancel Lannister as his squires, his acceptance of Jaime as the Warden of the East following the death of Jon Arryn, his concession to Cersei over Lady at Darry. While Gerion Lannister left Westeros some seven years before the start of the main novels, I could very much believe that Robert had already begun to allow this Lannister domination at court: after all, he had seemingly raised no objection to his (ostensible) firstborn son being given an explicitly Lannister( and to that point, historically pointed) name, nor to his daughter being given a very Lannister-like name (and in fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Cersei named Tommen after Uncle Gerion himself and his voyage, a nod to the Lannister glory once lost by King Tommen which this favorite uncle hoped to reclaim). I don’t tend to think Tywin engineered Gerion’s voyage - an audaciously confident far-reaching quest to reclaim the symbol of Lannister regal power, undertaken by this most reckless of Tytos Lannister’s sons, doesn’t seem too far off from some of the actions of, say, Jaime or Tyrion - but I do think that if some or all of the Lannisters supported Gerion in this voyage (and funded him going on it), Robert may not have been personally inclined to fight his queen and/or the Lannister faction about it.

Of course, the practical answer is that GRRM introduced the idea of Gerion Lannister sailing to Valyria, (almost certainly) never to return, many years before he described Jaehaerys I forbidding Westerosi from sailing to Valyria. Just as Fire and Blood Volume 1 described the infrastructure improvements in the capital instituted by Jaehaerys I without acknowledging what happened to King’s Landing thereafter to make it the stinking cesspit of the main novels, for example, and alluded to hatchlings and young drakes extant during the reigns of Jaehaerys I and Viserys I without ever explaining why there were no more adult dragons than those we already knew going into that book, so F&B gave us this decree without attempting to reconcile it with the current attitude of the Westerosi legal system toward voyages to the Smoking Sea. It’s entirely possible we get an answer to this apparent contradiction in a future novel, and/or in Fire and Blood Volume 2, but for now it simply remains an apparent unanswered question.

#asoiaf meta #gerion lannister #fire and blood volume 1

[goodqueenaly]

Specifically to that second point, remember what Tyrion thinks in the aftermath of the Purple Wedding:

Assuming Joffrey had not simply choked to death on a bit of food, which even Tyrion found hard to swallow, Sansa must have poisoned him. Joff practically put his cup down in her lap, and he’d given her ample reason. Any doubts Tyrion might have had vanished when his wife did. One flesh, one heart, one soul. His mouth twisted. She wasted no time proving how much those vows meant to her, did she? Well, what did you expect, dwarf?

Tyrion assumes, not (entirely) correctly but also not without reason, that Sansa poisoned Joffrey at the latter's wedding. Consequently, if obviously unfairly, Tyrion uses that assumption to characterize Sansa as betraying the vows of unity spoken at their wedding. Whether or not we as readers find this sort of characterization objectively fair is not really the point. Having spent the vast majority of his life believing, or being encouraged or outright instructed to believe, that no one could or would ever truly love him explicitly because of his disability, Tyrion, particularly in this low moment of imprisonment and a near-certain guilty verdict, falls back on that worldview to understand Sansa and her actions.

In Dance Tyrion thinks of Sansa as being false. How was Sansa false she never pretended to love or like Tyrion, hell she made it very clear to Tyrion that she would never love him at their wedding?

None of this stops Tyrion from desperately wanting romantic love. Nor does it erase how he's a member of a society that says wives belong to their husbands, that they owe their husbands support and fidelity etc etc.

And Sansa was concealing her involvement in a plot that ultimately ended up with Joffrey dead and Tyrion in prison, sentenced to death.

#turtle paced #tyrion lannister #sansa stark

[goodqueenaly]

I posted about it a few days ago, but if you haven’t seen, Steven Attewell, perhaps better known on here as @racefortheironthrone, just passed away.

Steven Attewell wasn’t just a great writer and analyst (though he obviously was), nor just a great podcaster (though he was that too), nor just a great academic mind (though he was that as well). Attewell was a supremely kind, thoughtful, funny, and upstanding human being, someone I was very fortunate to call my dear friend. Hardly a day or two went by without one of us bouncing ideas for an essay or post off the other, or swapping some historical trivia, or sharing thoughts about the latest MCU project. When I got engaged, he was one of the first people I told, and whenever I, say, read a book about New York’s gilded age, or listened to a podcast episode about Reginald Pole, or learned that some Americans were still using hand crank phones into the 80s (no, really), I often thought “Attewell would appreciate that”. 

Even now, it seems utterly surreal to think of him as passed. Just a week before he died, I had been telling him how much my fiancé adored his X-Men ‘97 podcast. A few days before, he and I had been joking about the recent east coast earthquake. I knew how excited he was about his “Tyrion IX” ASOS CBC essay, since he and I had been discussing it in the weeks before he died, and his Tumblr posts right to the end displayed that same high quality you could always expect from him. I keep waiting for my messenger app to pop up with his name again, or his familiar avatar to appear at the top of my Tumblr feed with another ask from him. 

We have lost a giant of the ASOIAF community, but far more importantly, we have lost a very good person. Read some of Attewell’s works - “Who Stole Westeros” is a seminal piece IMO, as is his CBC analysis of “Eddard XI”, but you can’t go wrong with anything he wrote, and if I tried to list every piece I could recommend from him it would be a novel in itself. Listen to some of his podcasts or vlogs - his excitement over X-Men ‘97 is infectious. Keep reading and writing, just as he was doing. Miss him and grieve, by all means, but know that for the many people, myself included, he inspired and touched and interacted with, his memory and impact won’t be forgotten. 

#racefortheironthrone

[goodqueenaly]

I don’t have a lot of words right now but Steven Attewell, who you all reading this probably know as @racefortheironthrone , just passed away. He was a very great writer, friend, and person, and it’s a horrible loss.

#racefortheironthrone

[goodqueenaly]

How do you think Melisandre will react when she discovers that Stannis isn't actually Azor Ahai reborn? What about the Queen's Men?

Perhaps the better question to ask - although it might amount to about the same thing - is what Melisandre and the Queen’s men (not to mention Selyse herself, and Shireen) will do as TWOW opens - namely, in light of both the bombshell news (or purported news) from the pink letter that Stannis is (again, supposedly) dead, as well as the assassination of Jon. If, as Ramsay’s letter to Jon so bluntly asserted, Ramsay had slain Stannis after seven days of battle, then the hopes of both Melisandre and the Queen’s men might seem, perhaps to use an apt turn of phrase, snuffed out: Stannis obviously could not be the hero chosen by R’hllor to save the world if he was already dead, and at the hands of so mundane and temporal an enemy as Roose Bolton’s bastard son. That Stannis isn’t in fact dead, as I very much believe is the case, does not really matter; so far as anyone at the Wall knows, the would-be apocalyptic champion of the Lord of Light is currently lying dead in the snows around Winterfell.

Melisandre, in her sole chapter, had already faced the trouble of vague portentous guidance on Stannis as Azor Ahai. More to the point, Melisandre had also already received at least some indication via her fiery visions that the identity of Azor Ahai was indisputably linked to Jon Snow. Consequently, I think she may realize or believe she now understands, as TWOW opens, that she had been focusing on the wrong person as Azor Ahai. Stannis was clearly not “the Lord’s chosen, the warrior of fire”, as she put it to Davos, since the apocalypse was still nigh; clearly, what R’hllor was trying to tell her was that the person to look for was Jon. Now, the fact that Jon had also recently been killed may not seem as big a stumbling block to Melisandre as it might objectively, in terms of the identity of a universal savior; Melisandre may not have ever brought anyone back from the dead (so far as we know), but as Thoros and Moqorro demonstrate, the ability of R’hllor’s priests (and presumably priestesses) to defy even death in the name of their god is a substantial power indeed. I have a feeling Melisandre is going to move quickly to return Jon to the land of the living via her fire magic (with the unconscious bonus, perhaps, of having Jon’s “soul” still be preserved in his wolf in the interim).

As far as the queen’s men go, the death of Stannis may seem more like a political tragedy than a cosmic one. The true devotion of the queen’s men to R’hllor is a mixed bag: some truly converts to the new religion (like young Devan Seaworth), some devoted only for the cruelty the exercise of that religion allows (like Clayton Suggs), and some converts only in name (like the late Alester Florent). However, whether or not any given pro-Stannis aristocrat at the Wall feels a sense of cosmological devastation at the news of Stannis’ (supposed) death, all of them would know that their political prospects were now far from certain. In the patriarchal, misogynistic world of Westerosi politics generally, a preteen girl might have a very hard time asserting herself as queen in her own right; as a result, the queen’s men at the Wall might be pretty uncertain about what to do without the strong male warrior-king figure of Stannis behind whom they could rally.

And of course, that’s without the immediate problems at the Wall overtaking them all as well. Jon’s assassination was the acme of a chaotic day at the Wall: not only had Jon dropped his bombshell news regarding the letter from Ramsay, his planned march on Winterfell, and the planned mission to Hardhome, but Ser Patrek had taken the opportunity to challenge Wun Wun the giant to seize Val - which ended about as much as anyone might have expected. With Jon murdered out in the open, the Wall is going to be, to put it bluntly, a mess: anti-Jon conspirators with his blood quite literally still on their hands, pro-Jon brothers potentially retaliating against those conspirators, queen’s men rushing about to rescue and/or avenge Ser Patrek from Wun Wun, free folk realizing that their pseudo-leader at the Wall is now dead. Any questions of Stannis’ death, and the apparent failure of him to be Azor Ahai, may be subsumed in something like a miniature civil war breaking out at the Wall, and them being caught in it.

#asoiaf meta #speculation #TWOW #melisandre

[goodqueenaly]

Hope you are well! I was wondering, do you think Margaery and her cousins will remain in Randyll Tarly's custody (if I remember correctly) during the trial, and that he's planning to hold them hostage against Mace?

I don’t particularly think so. When Cersei met with Kevan back in “Cersei I” TWOW, the latter reported that “Lord Randyll swore a holy oath to deliver them [i.e. Margaery and her cousins] for trial when the time comes”. As unjust, misogynistic, and all around awful as Randyll Tarly certainly is, I don’t think he’s quite brash and foolish enough to tempt the patience of the High Septon at a time when the Father of the Faithful has a large, zealous, and dangerous following in King’s Landing by saying “just kidding, Your High Holiness, I’d like to hold onto the Tyrell girls if you don’t mind”. I also believe that Margaery and her cousins aren’t going to be long in the Faith’s custody either: unlike her namesake and partial inspiration Marguerite of Burgundy in The Accursed Kings (I know, it me), Margaery I think has too weak a case against her for the Faith to succeed, as even the High Septon admits.

Which doesn’t mean, of course, that conflict isn’t coming between Randyll and Mace. Randyll may already have been tipped off about the coming of our Aegon and the Golden Company (given his noticeably, perhaps suspiciously, vehement attempts to deny Aegon’s identity at Kevan’s last small council); he may also be leading that army Halden Halfmaester reports is marching on Storm’s End from King’s Landing. Whether either of these may turn out to be true (or both), I definitely believe that Randyll at some point is going to take out his long-simmering resentment against Mace Tyrell by quite literally stabbing his liege lord in the back and declare for the would-be Aegon VI. It’s also very possible, I think, that Aegon’s government will take Margaery hostage against the surrender of her Tyrell brothers in the Reach - which, unfortunately, I think will go very poorly for her (and everyone else) when the city explodes.

#asoiaf meta #Randyll tarly #mace tyrell #margaery tyrell #speculation #TWOW

[goodqueenaly]

Do you think that (if Robb was willing) Tywin was ready tomake peace with Robb? Was there a point where he decided that a negotiated surrender wasn’t an option and that only Robb’s death would do?

The closest Tywin came to conceding to a settlement with Robb was a post facto admission he gave Tyrion following the Battle of the Camps:

Lord Tywin seated himself. "You have the right of it about Stark. Alive, we might have used Lord Eddard to forge a peace with Winterfell and Riverrun, a peace that would have given us the time we need to deal with Robert's brothers. Dead … [sic]" His hand curled into a fist. "Madness. Rank madness."

Now again, this was an admission Tywin was only giving after the fact, when such a settlement was obviously already impossible. As Tyrion had so dramatically demonstrated to Ser Harys Swyft, the feasibility of peace with the Stark-Tully faction following the execution of Eddard Stark was as broken as his shattered cup. Even before the Greatjon cut through the political Gordian knot with his acclamation of Robb, the Stark-Tully faction had no reason to settle with Tywin and the Baratheon-Lannister regime, and even less so once Ned had been killed. (For the record, I don't think Ned taking the black as had been the original agreement would necessarily have prevented war between the Stark-Tully faction and the Baratheon-Lannister regime anyway, but that's a different story.)

So by ACOK, Tywin had instead fully committed himself to a war against Robb, though this campaign could hardly have been called a glorious triumph for Tywin. While it might be amusing to consider what Tywin would have done if Robb's plan to lure Tywin west had been completed, Edmure's defeat-in-victory at the Fords made this scenario a moot point. Tywin was going to defeat Robb - in the field, and then when he could not do so, through the use of carefully cultivated treacherous allies and a shocking betrayal of guest right.

#asoiaf meta #tywin lannister #robb stark

[goodqueenaly]

It’s also worth noting the author’s words on this:

How did Ned manage to become such a paragon Northener and a close friend of Lyanna's if he spent his time in the Vale from age 8 to 18? Or did he return home at some point(when?) and was just visiting Jon Arryn prior to and after the tourney at Harrenhal?

He was fostered, not exiled. Yes, certainly he returned home. Less frequently the first few years, when he would have been performing the duties of a page and then a squire, more often and for longer periods later. During his "squire" years (he wasn't a squire in the strict sense, since he wasn't training for knighthood, but he was acting as one), he would also have accompanied Jon Arryn on many travels out of the Vale. And once he reached the age of sixteen he was a man grown, free to come to go as he liked... [sic] which would have included both time at home and in the Vale, since Jon Arryn had become a second father. The same was true of Robert, who divided his time between Storm's End and the Vale after reaching manhood, not to mention dropping in on tourneys and whatever choice fights he could find.

So I would guess that (at least for Westerosi boys), emotional ties on both personal and familial levels could also dictate when wards stay and go (assuming that relations between the families stay positive enough, or political considerations hold out long enough, for the ward to be there until his majority). A Westerosi (male) ward in the traditional, non-antagonistic model of fosterage, without any pressing reason to return home (like, say, the scandal of Littlefinger’s near-fatal duel with Brandon Stark), may simply prefer to spend some or even much of his time with his foster family. We certainly see this with Ned and Robert, as illustrated above, as well as Quentyn Martell, whose hostage-like initial trade to the Yronwoods became, for him, a pointedly clear replacement family. Too, in situations where the (again, male) ward is fostered with a significant and/or higher-ranking aristocrat, it may indeed be politically advantageous to continue living with the foster family for some part of his time. Jon Arryn was, I think, a key piece in the Stark-Tully-Arryn coalition during Aerys II’s reign, tasked with training the next generation of the power block’s leadership; more recently, we also see Harry Hardyng, born to a mere landed knight but with claims to a much greater inheritance through his mother, staying with his mother’s more elevated Waynwood kinswoman, Lady Anya.

Importantly, too, there can be an almost literally knife edge distinction between a ward and a hostage. If an aristocratic child is specifically taken as a hostage, that individual is almost certainly not at liberty to decide if and when they ever go home. Think of, say, Alysanne Osgrey, who never left King’s Landing after she was taken as a young child following the defeat of the Blackfyres, and House Osgrey with them. The Westerosi expectation of hostages is to execute the individual so taken when their family breaks whatever promise accompanied the hostage-taking in the first place; consequently, a Westerosi government would not typically let its hostages come and go at their leisure, no matter their age, if there were still a concern about the hostage’s birth family threatening that government. (Think of, for example, the shock and outrage in some quarters to the new-acceded King Baelor’s decision not only not to execute the Dornish hostages, but to send them home during his public march of humility to Dorne.) That’s not an absolute rule, of course - Baelor Blacktyde, taken as a hostage following the Greyjoy Rebellion, did return after eight years (though perhaps his conversion to the Faith convinced his foster family that he was no longer a threat) - but it is worth keeping in mind.

What do you think is the age limit for wards? I know Theon's case is special, since he's a hostage, but he's 19 in AGOT, very much an adult, and he doesn't seem to have a function in Winterfell like squire or master-at-arms or lady-in-waiting or stuff that can be used to cover the hostage situation in polite society (like with Hos Blackwood or probably some of Marg's ladies). Wouldn't it be weird to call a 30-something a ward?

Likely to depend on whether someone's AMAB or AFAB. AMAB it might vary, because there are situations like Theon's where they're thinly-veiled hostages and the arrangement isn't politically safe to end. If the kid in question takes recognised oaths elsewhere that would likely end the arrangement, some of it's going to be down to the host and whether they're willing to keep paying for upkeep...

AFAB I think it's much simpler. Marriage or the silent sisters, otherwise the wardship continues.

#turtle paced #fostering

[goodqueenaly]

Hello! If Daenerys returns to Meereen, what do you think will happen to Skahaz? I can see him presenting Barristan s murder as the work of the Harpy, but killing all those child hostages? Any way he wiggles out of that?

I tend to think that the horror of the murder of the child hostages will be seen through Barristan's eyes, rather than Dany's. Barristan was the one who more recently, and just as vehemently as Dany, argued with the Shavepate over killing the children; Barristan is the one who helped reinstate the Shavepate as a leading power player in Meereen; Barristan is the one who left Skahaz as the most prominent member of Dany's court/entourage not on the battlefield itself. For Barristan, who already deeply distrusts the secrecy and brutality of Skahaz and his Brazen Beasts, the Shavepate's murder of the queen's young cupbearers will I think be the ultimate betrayal: the allusion by Barristan to the murdered children of Prince Rhaegar, whom Ser Barristan was unable to save from Tywin's vicious sacking of King's Landing, will I believe prove a tragic prophecy, as his sometime ally stands over the "bloody bodies" of murdered Meereenese children. In turn, just as Barristan swore not to condone such an act, so I think Barristan will attempt to prove what he said in his mind he would have done with Robert - namely, that "[i]f [Barristan] had seen him [i.e. Robert Baratheon] smile over the red ruins of Rhaegar's children, no army on this earth could have stopped [Barristan] from killing [Robert]".

To this point as well, I also tend to think Dany is not going to be returning to Meereen immediately at the beginning of TWOW. Dany is definitely going to return to Meereen, to be sure, albeit I think relatively briefly, but she has more immediate problems - and different semi-mystical or overtly mystical demands - temporarily pulling her away from the conflicts of Meereen - namely, Khal Jhaqo and Dany's foreseen return to the Mother of Mountains, there almost certainly to be acclaimed as the stallion that mounts the world. As a result, I don't think Dany is going back to Meereen until well after (again, relatively speaking) the time of the murders has passed, giving Skahaz plenty of time, if he might so choose (and if he remains alive to do so, of course), to come up with a plausible cover story for the murders of not just the children (and, probably, Hizdahr and Reznak), but also Barristan himself (a skill Skahaz definitely has, given his plot with the locusts and his successful framing of Hizdahr for that poisoning).

All of this is to say that Dany may not be in the best position, on a strictly narrative level, either to know precisely or learn later what happened with respect to Skahaz and the child hostages or, as a consequence, to react with the sort of disgust and fury I think we'll definitely see through Barristan's perspective in this moment (which, to be clear, I think she absolutely would if and when she should ever learn the truth). I don't know that any of Dany's courtiers or new would-be advisors would know or have reason to know precisely what happened with respect to Barristan and Skahaz, especially if Skahaz publicly proclaims that it was the no-good-very-bad Sons of the Harpy who killed the old white knight and the child cupbearers. Too, I don't think Dany is going to be particularly invested in sticking around in Meereen, and so she may simply accept Skahaz (again, if he is still alive) as a suitable enough regent in her name in Meereen, or king in his own right, to continue the revolution she started. Of course, Skahaz may not survive at all - always a distinct possibility, given the instability of post-Dany Meereen exacerbated by the sudden influx of outside power players following the battle outside the city's walls - making the whole question potentially moot.

#asoiaf meta #skahaz mo kandaq #speculation

[goodqueenaly]

Do you think the colors Arrax, Vermax, and Tyraxes, are the same colors as Viserion, Rhaegal, and Drogon, and that both trios dragons mother was Dreamfyre? I saw in a ASOIAF calendar that Arrax was white and gold like Viserion, and sorry to bring up a show that must not be named but still has GRRM involvement that Vermax was green like Rhaegal, does it follows that Tyraxes would be black and this is a history repeats motif that is going on?

(Once again, I am not talking about That Other Show and I am blocking you if you're using this post to talk about That Other Show.)

The only dragon that we can speak to with any chromatic certainty is Arrax, specifically because of the calendar you mentioned. While neither the original novellas (that is, "The Princess and the Queen" and "The Rogue Prince"_ nor Fire and Blood Volume 1 specified Arrax's color, the 2021 ASOIAF calendar did show the infamous death scene of Arrax and Lucerys. As noted by the artist, Sam Hogg, "Arrax was described as pearlescent white with yellow flame, golden eyes and a golden chest". Whether or not this means Arrax was the offspring or a descendant of Dreamfyre is impossible to say: while Dreamfyre was certainly capable of producing eggs (and fertilized eggs to boot), her coloring - pale blue with silvery markings - doesn't seem particularly similar to that of the white and gold Arrax, and quite frankly the pedigrees of House Targaryen's dragons cannot even charitably be called vague.

More to the point, I don't think GRRM was trying to draw a deliberate connection between the dragons belonging to the "Velaryon" princes and those hatched by Dany. Not only did he himself not even bother to identify the dragons by color in the text - relegating a third of that detail to a calendar created years after he introduced these dragons - but he did nothing to suggest a narrative or thematic link between Vermax, Arrax, and Tyraxes and Drogon, Viserion, and Rhaegal. The former were not hatched by the miraculous application of dormant ancestral knowledge but simply by the ordinary process of dragon breeding common to the Targaryens of their time. Nothing in the lives of either these princes or their dragons appears to parallel any events in the lives of Dany or her dragons. What's more, the princes' dragons were not uniquely a trio in their own time, as Dany's dragons are in the main novels: Rhaenyra's elder son by Daemon (the future King Aegon III) had a dragon of his own, as did the boys' cousin and Jacaerys' betrothed Baela Targaryen, to say nothing of all the dragons among the children and grandchildren of the green faction. To put it simply, I really don't see any similarity between these groups of dragons at all.

And as far as Dreamfyre being the ancestress of Dany's dragons ... this seems to get rather too close for to the "Dany's eggs were the same ones stolen by Elissa Farman" theory (even though Elissa's stolen eggs were themselves not even necessarily laid by Dreamfyre), which is at best a possible explanation with very little support from the author himself. (For more on that discussion, see here from @nobodysuspectsthebutterfly.) I personally don't think it really matters which specific historical dragons, if any that we would even know, were in the pedigree for Dany's dragons; the operative point, for me, is that Dany hatched them, that she's becoming the rider of Drogon, and that these dragons are going to help Dany (and two other future riders *cough cough Jon and Tyrion*) save the world.

#asoiaf meta #dragons #fire and blood volume 1

[goodqueenaly]

What do you see as the end game for Slaver's Bay? Do you think Dany will return or will we just see the beginnings of the Shavepate's takeover from Barristan's POV (up until his "in their hands, the daggers" moment) and then just wild rumours?

For one, I don't think we're going to be entirely lacking a POV in or around Meereen. While yes, I absolutely believe that Barristan is going to be murdered by the Shavepate/his Brazen Beasts in "Barristan III" TWOW, remember that Tyrion is with the Second Sons, who have (as of "Tyrion II" TWOW) re-declared their allegiance to Daenerys. When (not if) the battle outside Meereen turns to the favor of the pro-Dany forces, Tyrion is going to be part of that victorious side - and with the confusion of post-victory leadership in Meereen (between what I think is coming with the Shavepate's purge of his enemies, the death of Barristan, and the arrival of not just Tyrion (and Jorah) but also Moqorro and, for however long he lasts, Victarion), Tyrion may have the chance he needs to put his intelligence, shrewdness, and leadership experience to use.

As far as Dany goes, I do think she'll come back to Meereen, for the basic fact that her army, and indeed what I'll call for lack of a better term her court/following, is still there. Dany may have realized at the end of ADWD that she was not meant to stay in Meereen, that she was meant to be a queen in Westeros rather than in Slaver's Bay, but as a practical matter she needs more than personal confidence and a single dragon to turn a paper crown into a reality. While I doubt she'll stay for any significant length of time in Meereen - Dany has important business to get to in Volantis and probably Pentos, not to mention the Stepstones and Westeros - I do think she'll come back to gather her forces, set someone as her successor, and bid a permanent farewell to Slaver's Bay.

#asoiaf meta #twow #speculation #daenerys targaryen #meereen #tyrion lannister

[goodqueenaly]

Moreover, I think Cersei is all but guaranteed to win her trial by combat. Not only does this outcome make sense, I believe, from a narrative perspective - a loss at her trial by combat doesn’t seem to satisfy either her prophesied downfall at the appearance of a “younger and more beautiful” queen or her prophesied murder at the hands of the valonqar - but the anxiety expressed by the Lannister guardsmen in Braavos - that “the queen will have his head” if Ser Harys does not return with the much-desired funds - suggests a Cersei restored to full or nearly full royal power, as opposed to a Cersei without executive authority. Whatever Cersei may personally feel about the outcome of this trial (especially considering whoever the Faith’s champion may be), the trial will prove, at least publicly and ostensibly, that Cersei never conspired to kill Robert or had a romantic/sexual relationship with her brother (which I don’t think is going to make Jaime any happier but that’s besides the point).

Nor, perhaps, should we discount what might seem more validations than victories to us but nevertheless could amount to something close to the same thing in Cersei’s eyes. As Varys predicted to the dying Kevan, Cersei may well “think the Tyrells had [Kevan] murdered, mayhaps with the connivance of the Imp”. For Cersei, having believed from almost moment one of AFFC that the Tyrells were (and are) out to get her and her son, the assassination of Kevan might serve to justify even further her paranoia; what more evidence would she need that those-no-good-very-bad Tyrells had bad intentions to dominate everyone at the expense of the Lannisters than the dead body of her uncle, who had replaced Cersei herself as regent? What more proof might Cersei need that Margaery is, so she supposes, that prophesied queen than Margaery’s own equally likely legal victory; after all, Margaery can’t be the chief villain of Cersei’s story (along with Tyrion), in her own mind, if she, Margaery, is put to death. Again, these would not be what I would call “victories” in the strict sense of the word, but rather perhaps confirmations of Cersei’s own worldview; she’ll be proven right, I think she’ll believe, even if she hates the answer.

Do you think Cersei gets any sort of "win" before being valonqared? Right now, she is at her lowest of her lows, so any subsequent defeat would be kicking a dog when its down. But I also don't see how she can ever politically recover from the Walk of Atonement.

I think she might succeed in killing some of the Tyrells in town, maybe some of the Sparrows, now that she has Frankengregor on her side. I also think that any success in murdering her way back to the top of the heap will be promptly undone - Tommen and Myrcella are both fated to die and Aegon's not far away.

#turtle paced #cersei lannister #speculation #twow

[goodqueenaly]

I’m rereading F&B and find myself very confused about Jaehaerys’s proposed marriage candidates? They either seem self serving (which, understandable) or utterly nonsensical to the point of harming J’s future rule Rogar’s choice: Archon of Tyrosh’s daughter (unnamed) to forge alliances across the narrow sea Maester Benifer: a daughter of a neutral great house Daemon Velaryon: Elinor costayne (show Maegor’s supporters were forgiven) and adopt her sons (?wut even?) I kind of understand Benifer’s idea, but the other ones seem doomed from the jump.

I don’t know why Tumblr ate this ask but anyway here we go.

I think there are some logical explanations, at least on a surface level, to a few of the mooted nuptial matches. Alyssa’s proposal to have Jaehaerys marry into one of “the houses who had risen in support of Aegon the Uncrowned in the Battle Beneath the Gods Eye” follows her stated desire at the opening of Jaehaerys’ reign for violent vengeance against Maegor’s supporters; if Alyssa truly believed that “[Maegor’s] entire reign was unlawful and those who had supported him were guilty of treason and must needs be put to death”, then the clearest expression of that belief was to reward the supporters of Aegon the Uncrowned with the greatest possible royal marriage. By contrast, Benifer’s idea to appeal to one of the recently neutral Houses underlined his desire to have the regime move on from the factionalism and civil war of Maegor’s reign - particularly understandable on Benifer’s part, considering he himself had served and then abandoned Maegor before being recalled to court by Jaehaerys. Rogar’s choice doesn’t seem particularly related to his, Rogar’s, goals otherwise - we don’t really see him trying to forge alliances with the Tyrosh or any other Free Cities, or understand why he might have wanted to build ties with Tyrosh - though I took this match as something of an authorial wink to both Dany and our Aegon. Alyssa’s point that “[t]he smallfolk of Westeros would never accept a foreign girl with dyed tresses as their queen” recalls the dyed hair our Aegon adopts to disguise his identity (ostensibly, indeed, to honor his supposed Tyroshi mother), which he wished to have rinsed out ahead of his meeting with Golden Company (that is, when he revealed himself to be, allegedly, a Targaryen prince); too, Alyssa’s allusion to the “delightful” Tyroshi accent of the Archon’s daughter may echo Dany’s own apparently Tyroshi accent (and, of course, her ambition to be a queen in Westeros, despite a lifetime spent almost completely in Essos). (This dispute may also be a hint to the xenophobia and alienation experienced by Larra Rogare during the Lysene Spring and her marriage to Prince Viserys.)

Now, yes, some of the matches are less explainable, except (to a limited extent, anyway) outside of blatant personal ambition. Indeed, given that the Tullys and Celtigars barley hid their motives for pushing their familial relations as potential brides for young Jaehaerys, I am more surprised that no other families attempted to shove their pretty daughters in front of the king and/or Rogar. Yet these potential brides pale in comparison to Elinor Costayne, who was for my money the strangest choice. The oddity of her candidacy is heightened by the fact that her sponsor was Daemon Velaryon, a man who did not appear to gain anything by her potential elevation as Jaehaerys’ queen. While the argument that “Queen Elinor’s proven fertility was another point in her favor” might have carried some weight (considering King Jaehaerys, the only male-line male Targaryen left, would presumably needed to father an heir sooner rather than later), and the suggestion that Jaehaerys adopt Elinor's sons by Theo Bolling mirrors Sharra Arryn’s offer to Aegon the Conqueror during the Targaryen Conquest - another king with no offspring or obvious male heir - I am still baffled as to why Lord Daemon, of all people, would have supported the choice of a woman so publicly associated with Maegor’s tyrannical reign for his nephew’s royal bride. Perhaps this was just par for the course with Daemon, considering he had previously suggested that Maegor marry his own niece: just as Daemon had argued that by marrying Rhaena, Maegor would “unite their claims, prevent any fresh rebellions from gathering around her, and acquire a hostage against any plots … [Alyssa Velaryon] might foment”, maybe Daemon believed that a marriage between Elinor and Jaehaerys would link Jaehaerys to the claim of Elinor’s late (second) husband and his own official predecessor, and/or prevent any remaining pro-Maegor factions from rallying around his (unmarried) widowed queen. Still, it’s largely a bizarre notion acceptable only in the brevity with which it is presented; the story barely lingers on it, so neither should we.

The real point, of course, is to present a bunch of equally unpalatable (to Jaehaerys personally, at least) options in order to contrast them with the young king’s “true love”, Alysanne (heavy air quotes here). Since GRRM could not specifically duplicate The Accursed Kings here with the Jaehaerys and Alysanne story (as he does otherwise with Alysanne) - only copying the supposed love match, not the political advantage the marriage brought to the boy’s mother or the revolution against a tyrant king - he instead goes full romance, the sort of love versus duty that the author so enjoys portraying. As any number of his descendants will later - Princess Baela, the future King Aegon V, and indeed his own namesake, the future King Jaehaerys II, among others - the young Jaehaerys I rejects a potential diplomatic or otherwise dutiful marriage arranged by another (or multiple others) in order to wed according to the dictates of his heart.

#asoiaf meta #fire and blood volume 1 #jaehaerys i targaryen #marriage making

[goodqueenaly]

Let’s give Team Black the best case scenario where they win the war uncontested and there are no betrayals by any dragonseeds- where do you think Nettles would fit in the regime after the war? Ulf & Hugh get to be knights and have holdings while Addam is taken under Corlys’s wing, but Nettles is now a (presumably) non Valyrian lowborn dragonriding female- she’s kind of a conundrum for the powers that be.

Jace’s call to action is gendered- “…vowing that any man who could master a dragon would be granted lands and riches and dubbed a knight. His sons would be ennobled, his daughters wed to lords, and he himself would have the honor of fighting beside the Prince of Dragonstone against the pretender Aegon Il Targaryen and his treasonous supporters.”

Do you think the plan could have been marriage as opposed to knighthood for Nettles? But then that introduces the sticky situation of essentially giving dragons to other noble houses. I thought maybe Alyn (assuming Addam survived in this scenario), but I’m not sure.

(Obvious preface that this is not about That Other Show and anyone using this to talk about That Other Show is getting blocked.)

You ask an interesting question, because Nettles very clearly stood apart from the other non-Targaryen dragonriders in ways that I think would have left her without an obvious place even in a world where the black faction was victorious. Addam of Hull (and, by extension, his dragonless brother Alyn) fit most comfortably in the black faction’s political calculus: as the acknowledged bastardborn “grandsons” (really sons) of the Lord of the Tides, helpfully introduced just after that same Lord Velaryon had lost his designated male heir, Marilda’s sons could follow the same path as so many aristocratic Westerosi bastards before them (including knighthoods, lordships, and aristocratic marriages); moreover, as very evidently Valyrian descendants (with one riding a Velaryon dragon, no less), these boys could be logically accepted as Valyrian-blooded dragonriders. While neither Hugh Hammer nor Ulf the White displayed so open a connection to any such Valyrian heritage, their lifetime residence on Dragonstone and seemingly “natural” bond with their respective dragons (not to mention Ulf’s silvery hair) allowed for a satisfactory narrative which cast them as dragonseeds, ancillary dragonriding scions of House Targaryen akin, if not specifically equivalent, to other royal and aristocratic bastards. While it doesn’t appear Rhaenyra had specific careers, so to speak, in mind for either Hugh or Ulf - both were knighted and given small holdings seemingly only after the Rosby and Stokeworth inheritance dispute - their identification as male dragonseeds could, to some extent, smooth their transition into a level of aristocratic life for them within the black faction. 

However, where could Nettles fit in this socio-political universe? Nettles’ scheme to ride Sheepstealer did not simply demonstrate her cleverness (though it certainly did) - it also provided Nettles with a unique, indeed perhaps revolutionary, path to personal power. Rejecting Jacaerys’ proud declaration that “only Targaryens ride dragons” (emphasis in the original), Nettles, by her shrewd tactics,  argued that one did not necessarily have to be a Valyrian descendant to be a dragonrider. The singular Targaryen mastery of dragons, which constituted the source of their dominance during the Conquest, the cornerstone of their diplomacy afterward, and the foundation of their religious Exceptionalism, now potentially lost its potency; if anyone could ride a dragon, why should the Targaryens rest at the top of the feudal hierarchy? The black faction, in any post-victory scenario, would need to grapple with the presence of a woman whose very existence as the sort of dragonrider she was opposed the Targaryen royal narrative, even if she herself was no rebel against the black faction or the Targaryen political system. 

Furthermore, Nettles would still be subject to a variety of prejudices even in a post-victory world for the black faction. Sexist Gyldayn’s disgusting and typically derogatory commentary aside, Nettles certainly came from what Westerosi (and specifically blue-blooded Westerosi) would consider a rather unsavory background: “a bastard of uncertain birth”, potentially “the daughter of a dockside whore”, “foul-mouthed” and apparently considered ugly by Westerosi standards (at least in the opinion of the openly pro-green Septon Eustace, who in all likelihood never actually saw her). Hugh and Ulf might have been just as lowborn, to be sure - Hugh is identified as a “blacksmith’s bastard”, while Ulf is described as a man-at-arms, in other words a low-ranking soldier - but since Westerosi patriarchy is gonna patriarchy, these men could pursue careers and have levels of social standing that Nettles, simply by virtue of her gender, never could; consequently, these men could also be moved up the social ladder, to at least a limited extent, with some ease where Nettles, by contrast, could not. Even if Nettles never actually worked as a sex worker (again, Gyldayn can fuck off with any such notion), the surface-level associations would always be there, certainly in the eyes of those already prone to look down on Nettles - she was the (presumed) daughter of a whore, living alone on the streets without any obvious trade or skills, so of course she was no more than a whore herself, or at least so onlookers would assume. In a world where even aristocratic women born to power and privilege have a harder time than their male counterparts in asserting their rights and claims to authority, how could the orphaned, lowborn girl Nettles be left to enjoy the sort of independent power she had as not just a dragonrider, but as what we might call a self-made dragonrider?

Too, because Nettles was a person of color, she was that much more easily othered by Westerosi society. Rhaenyra might have been the most blatant in using Nettles’ appearance (which is to say, her race) to undermine her, Nettles’, accomplishments - calling her a “a low creature” and declaring that “[y]ou need only look at her to know she has no drop of dragon’s blood in her” - but Mushroom, Munkun, and indeed Gyldayn all define Nettles first by her race, in a way they very obviously do not for the non-POC characters. With the racial xenophobia and prejudice which can permeate Westerosi society - see, for example, the dismissal of the current generation of Westerlings for the “doubtful blood” inherited from their Essosi great-grandmother, or the exotification of the Myrish Taena Merryweather, or the long history of antagonism against the people of Dorne from their non-Dornish Westerosi neighbors - Nettles might have found herself very much alone even among a triumphant black faction. Would she too be seen as a lesser dynastic prize, or ineligible for holdings in her own right, by virtue of her race, someone excluded from the upper echelon of Westerosi power politics because of the color of her skin and the foreign ancestry it represented? 

So I could see where, even in a victory scenario, Nettles may not have found herself totally or indeed at all welcome among the black faction. Nettles was a young woman who challenged the expectations of Targaryen draconic power, and who did so despite her race, sex, and class all assigning her an otherwise likely permanently low-ranking position in Westerosi society. Sadly, Nettles’ actual choice at the end of the Dance IOTL demonstrates the limited options she faced even as someone ostensibly so powerful as a dragonrider; her best case scenario in a post-Dance world was to live in permanent exile from the only home she had ever known, among people who were completely alien to her in custom, religion, and background, left to be isolated, worshiped, and feared as a local god. 

#asoiaf meta #nettles #alternate universe #dance of the dragons

[goodqueenaly]

If Littlefinger fails to convince the Tyrell's to join the Lannister's would he go back to Kingslanding or go straight to the Vale?

But I don’t see a scenario where Littlefinger fails to convince the Tyrells? After all, what is the better option for the Tyrells in that moment? Having first openly and quickly backed a man not only now dead but also now seen (certainly by the regime on the Iron Throne) as a traitor, the Tyrells can’t really say “you know what, we’d like to just sit out the rest of the War of the Five Kings if that’s alright with you all”. More to the point, with Renly dead, the Tyrells have lost their (first) opportunity to secure their ultimate dynastic aim - that is, Margaery as queen and a Tyrell grandson as king. Littlefinger’s embassy provided the solution to both: by betrothing Margaery to Joffrey, the Tyrells secured their access to the Iron Throne while avoiding repercussions for the failed Renly rebellion.

Littlefinger was going back to King’s Landing, no question - not only because the trip was going to be a success, but also because he needed to collect on that success (that is, receiving Harrenhal.)

#asoiaf meta #acok #Littlefinger #petyr baelish #house tyrell

[goodqueenaly]

Also, I think it’s important to note that the Riverlands had been an independent and distinct state for various, sometimes significant periods of Westerosi political existence. While the Riverlands did not enjoy the benefit of a single unifying royal dynasty for the majority of history (as the Lannisters, Durrandons, and Gardeners had represented for the Westerlands, Stormlands, and Reach, respectively), there were nevertheless royal dynasties who had ruled much if not all of what Aegon I later established as his feudal vassalage. This was not, in other words, a new territorial invention by the Targaryens, in the manner of, say, the Crownlands, but something closer to the restoration of an older political legacy.

So just as I praised Aegon I for recognizing the historical independence of the Riverlands, I think distributing the various riverlord holdings among non-riverlord lieges would only portray Aegon as the same sort of turncoat foreign liberator-turned-conqueror as, say, Arlan III Durrandon or Harwyn Hoare. Aegon would consequently, I think, only be inviting the same sort of resistance and rebellion among the riverlords which the Durrandon and Hoare regimes had encouraged, while saddling the Lannisters, Baratheons, and Tyrells with these truculent new vassals.

How do you think post-Conquest history would have changed had Aegon I divided what we now know as the Riverlands between the Reach, the Stormlands and the Westerlands rather than creating a new, distinct province?

I think the monarchy would have been less stable, with fewer mightier vassals who would no doubt squabble over who got the better deal. Moreover, without a buffer state between them, you'd get more direct border conflicts.

#racefortheironthrone #Targaryen conquest #the Riverlands

[goodqueenaly]

How did Lyman Lannister plan to marry his son to Rhaena Targaryen if she was already married? Was he planning on killing Androw?

It became apparent to her that the bedmaids and servants assigned to them were tattlers and spies, bringing word of their every doing back to Lord and Lady Lannister. One of the castle septas asked Samantha Stokeworth whether the queen’s marriage to Androw Farman had ever been consummated, and if so, who had witnessed the bedding. Ser Tyler Hill, Lord Lyman’s comely bastard son, was openly scornful of Androw, even whilst doing all he could to ingratiate himself to Rhaena herself, regaling her with tales of his exploits at the Battle Beneath the Gods Eye and showing her the scars he had taken there “in your Aegon’s service.”

I think Lyman Lannister's strategy was pretty unsubtle here. By having his castle septa question whether the marriage had actually been consummated, and getting reports from bedmaids and servants (who, presumably, would be using their personal access to the couple to see whether Rhaena and Androw were actually sleeping together), Lyman was establishing whether he could pursue the one confirmed avenue for Westerosi annulments - that is, non-consummation of the marriage. By having his bastard son rather bluntly try to show off his (by Westerosi standards) manliness, Lyman was likely trying to present Rhaena with an obvious contrast to (and, again by Westerosi standards, better choice than) the "half a girl" Androw Farman. Given that the Farmans were also Lord Lyman's bannermen, I can imagine that Lyman assumed that the Farmans would not fuss too much if he persuaded (read: forced) them into accepting the end of Androw's marriage to Rhaena (again, perhaps on the grounds that it had never been consummated).

It was not a particularly clever strategy, of course, and Rhaena clearly saw right through it. Having no interest in being forced into another political marriage, or pursuing a romantic relationship via marriage, and very much recognizing the ambition barely veiled beneath Lyman's actions, Rhaena was not the easy nuptial prey Lyman might have hoped she would be.

#asoiaf meta #fire and blood volume 1 #rhaena daughter of aenys #lyman lannister #marriage in asoiaf