Why do you think the “broken pact” theory of the Others is so popular, given the overwhelming textual evidence against it?

Because people seem to think that the core thesis of ASOIAF is grey-on-grey morality and the subversion of every trope known to genre fiction.

Which is a kind of over-extension error, IMO.

Did Robb make the right call RE: the Karstark execution?

Well, I’ll get into this in detail in ASOS, but yes. What people forget is that in ASOS, Rickard Karstark ordered his men to desert before he carried out the murder of the two prisoners, so unlike in the show, Robb isn’t losing thousands of soldiers – he’s already lost them.

Meanwhile, no ruler (King or Lord Paramount) can allow hostages to be murdered by his bannermen against his explicit orders. To allow that example to stand is to risk the complete disintegration of his army, as lords realize that there is no penalty to treason and wanton disregard of the oldest laws known to the First Men.

RFTIT Weekly Tumblr Roundup

Hey, folks! This one’s going up a little later than normal, because I’m actually still on vacation (although I go back home on Monday and will start seriously preparing to teach next semester then). However, I’ve still had time to add quotes to Dany V, Arya X (which I am incredibly excited for), and Sansa VIII, so work will begin on those shortly. In the mean time, Tumblrs: Did Tywin have his dad…

View On WordPress

Had Aegon straight up accused Naerys of adultery instead of scudding around and using proxies? What then? Other than Aemon did love his sister is there any proof?

Well, ask Ned Stark about proof of adultery. Not easy to come by in an era without DNA testing. (And gods only know what inter-Targaryen DNA tests would look like)

And Stannis takes the city. What then? If Tommen gets to grandpa in the West, the kingdom is going to be split apart- you can’t crack Casterly Rock, Mace has no love for Stannis (with supporting the entire upsurption and kinslaying), and Robb being King in the North. Could Stannis get support ( even with having no heir beyond a scarred little girl) or does the war get in a stand off?

If Stannis takes the city, first thing that happens is that the half of the Stormlands that’s been holding back declares for Stannis, which starts to change the military math considerably.

And that changes the political math. If all that Tommen is a king in exile in Casterly Rock acknowledged by no one else than the +10K men that Tywin has left, he’s less attractive to anyone outside the Westerlands, while Stannis’ stock will grow from victory.

Moreover, time is not on the side of the Tyrell-Lannister alliance. Unlike in OTL, they can’t focus their whole army at wiping out the Starks, because Stannis will be a major threat who has to be guarded against. Which is also going to reduce the likelihood of the Red Wedding happening. Moreover, in a few months, Balon’s going to be dead, the North’s going to have a chance to recover, and Euron’s going to attack the Reach – and that’s going to change the appetite of Reachermen for adventurism considerably.

You’ve said that Daeron II was Aemon’s spiritual son. But… Aemon was a famed swordman, Daeron barely touched a dagger his whole life. Daemon resembled Aemon more than Daeron ever did. Daeron II was like Baelor I.

Hence the use of the phrase “spiritual son” rather than “spitting image.” I was referring to Daeron and Aemon’s collaboration in opposing Aegon’s corruption or his treatment of Naerys.

If Stannis had managed to take the city, wouldn’t the Lannisters still have a claim to the throne in Tommen? Or would that not be enough to keep the alliance with the Tyrells together when there are still other rebels?

1. That depends on whether they go looking for Tommen and manage to find him.

2. Even then, a lot of lords would think twice about supporting a boy king who’s just lost the capitol against an adult male who’s just won it.

Jimmy Asks: Ned as a swordsman

Hi,

I have read the analysis of Ned’s chapter when he breaks his leg during the scuffle with Lannister’s. In the ‘What if’ section it only discusses Jaime beating Ned in a duel. Why do so many fans doubt Ned’s sword fighting ability? He survived the rebellion without many scars (physically at least) and killed the sword of the morning. He is even modest enough to give the credit for that kill to Howland Reed. He must have been a seriously skilled swordsman to achieve what he did.

Well, GRRM has said that Ned was an average swordsman, although an excellent general, and that Jaime is one of the best swordsmen alive. So odds are Ned loses that fight.

OTHO, as Ser Barristan says in ASOS:

“I have seen a hundred tournaments and more wars than I would wish, and however strong or fast or skilled a knight may be, there are others who can match him. A man will win one tourney, and fall quickly in the next. A slick spot in the grass may mean defeat, or what you ate for supper the night before. A change in the wind may bring the gift of victory.“ He glanced at Ser Jorah. "Or a lady’s favor knotted round an arm.”

So it’s certainly possible that Ned could beat Jaime. Maybe because Jaime’s overconfident and Ned’s fired up, but more likely in that scenario is that the rain/cobbles/horse situation applies to both men.

I really enjoyed the Unspoiled! podcasts you did with Natasha and Miles on WOIAF. I know the series got put on hold because of the show, but do you know if it’s going to be started back up again at some point?

That’s a great question for @unspoiledpodcast! I know Natasha mentioned tentative plans when I was doing catchup on a bunch of podcasts, but I don’t remember the specific details.

But I’m always down to talk WOIAF.

So…what’s the deal with Aegon IV legitimizing his bastards? A “fuck you” to his heir, or just another symptom of his YOLO lifestyle? Even for a guy as amoral as A the U, it seems kind of stupid.

Let’s start by saying that GRRM seems bound and determine to leave the question of whether Aegon IV actually wanted to name Daemon his rightful heir a mystery of history, so ultimately this is a bit unresolvable. At the same time, though, Aegon IV did go to some effort to throw the whole question into doubt.

It does seem that it was bound up in a lot of personal and political things. Personally, Aegon was horribly ill-suited for a relationship with Naerys, probably viewed his marriage as a puniushment from his eternally disapproving father, and had huge ongoing problems with Aemon’s relationship with her. Whether those problems were rooted in his ongoing Goofus and Gallant relationship with his Dragonknight brother, a genuine belief that physical adultery had happened (remember Lancelot!), or an undeniable truth that what we would today call emotional infidelity was going on, I don’t know. So when Daeron becomes so close to Aemon, I think his mind would be predisposed to look in that direction.

Moreover, Aegon IV was, like his historical counterpart Henry VIII, a former jock who had nothing in common with his son Daeron – whereas he showed a lot more interest in his sons Aegor and Daemon who were talented warriors. Thus, I think we could say that regardless of their paternity and legitimacy, Daeron was Aemon’s spiritual son and Daemon was Aegon’s spiritual son.

But, as I argue here, we can’t ignore the politics. Aegon IV was a veteran of Daeron’s Conquest who had a severe reaction to Daeron I’s murder (handing over Cassella Vaith to be executed), and then his son was married off to the Martells without his say-so. And as he grew older, his son’s Dornish marriage both gave him an independent power base with which to oppose his father and made him a vocal Dornish partisan who fought every attempt by Aegon IV to avenge his cousin’s murder and win glory for himself. What king or crown prince would look at a crown prince actively opposing him on public policy as anything but an attempt to supplant them? In that light, his son’s un-filial disobedience and quasi-treasonous love of the enemy would have seemed like political bastardy, even if physical bastardy could not be proved.

At the same time, Daemon had been raised by Daena the Defiant, who had shared his admiration of Daeron I. Daemon was a military prodigy who was every inch the Valyrian dreamboat that Aegon had been in his youth, who probably had been raised with the belief that it was his mission to complete the unfinished work of his uncle and father. Here was everything that Aegon wanted in a son and heir, and unlike his other dalliances, Daemon was indisputably Targaryen on both sides. The only thing preventing him from being the perfect heir was his bastardy, and a king could do something about that.