Category: Uncategorized

Do you think it’s odd that the Starks haven’t raised up a Lord of Moat Cailin considering its strategic location and long history? I’d think that over time a Stark cadet branch from a younger son would have sprung up, possibly intermarrying with the crannogmen to reinforce the security of the Neck. Possibly because there isn’t enough arable land and smallfolk nearby to support a lord?

I think you’ve hit on the crux of it. 

From reading your chapter recaps, Its become pretty obvious that Roose knew Tywin meant to double cross him. Is Roose just playing for power impulsively? Also, If Tywin were still alive at the end of aSoS, How could Roose have managed to create a stable, Bolton-ruled North?

It’s interesting you say that, because we haven’t really seen Roose negotiating with Tywin yet. I’ll get into this more later, but I think Roose was thinking very pragmatically about de facto vs. de jure power: i.e, once he gets back to the North with an army of 6,000 men, and kicks out the Ironborn invaders, he is the real power in the North.

Yes, on paper Tyrion is the new Lord of Winterfell, but no Northman is ever going to bend the knee to a Lannister,  the Lannisters are too badly weakened to send Tyrion with enough troops to make royal decrees take, and it’s a long way from Winterfell to King’s Landing and Roose will be the one holding Moat Cailin. So if push comes to shove, Roose isn’t going to lose any support in the North if he betrays the Lannisters and “rescues” Sansa. 

What do you think about the outcome of the Great Council of 233 AC? The main question for the Great Council of 101 AC to me seems to have been female-line inheritance. But in 233 AC by both precedent and using male-line succession Maegor was clearly the proper heir. Do you think the fact that he was discounted so quickly speaks more to reluctance to have a long regency or fear of Aerion’s madness? Isn’t this sort of thinking destabilizing in the long run since it undermines primogeniture?

Probably both.

But is it destabilizing? Not necessarily – when Parliament decided that it got to decide who the King of England was rather than going by primogeniture, the British monarchy didn’t destabilize in the long run, it just changed the principle by which succession takes place. 

So in this case, subtly, the Great Council was establishing a precedent that, in the case of a disputed succession with a number of subpar candidates (a baby, a maester, a youngest son, etc.), the support of the majority is what makes the king legitimate. 

Is the discussion of naming Jaime Lannister as Warden of the East in AGOT a retrospective early worldbuilding error or is holding/inheriting a wardenship allowed under Kingsguard vows (Ned seems to think that Jaime will inherit the title Warden of the West eventually as well, making it seem like GRRM hadn’t yet fully fleshed out the details of the situation)?

Probably a mix of each? On the one hand, the Wardenship isn’t lands and castles – it’s a royal appointment – so it doesn’t quite fall under the Kingsguard vows. On the other hand, it’s possible Ned just assumes that Robert will eventually release Jaime from his vows to please Tywin.

But most likely, GRRM just hadn’t made up his mind about that particular aspect of the Kingsguard yet. 

I was intrigued after I read your ‘double-swap’ theory regarding ‘Aegon’ on reddit. Regardless of who he really is (actually Rhaegar’s son, random Valyrian-looking foundling, Aegon Mopatis, Aegon Brightfyre, etc.) do you think people will actually learn it? One scenario might be that Dany is seen as killing the rightful Targaryen king and is hated as a usurper and kinslayer even if he was actually a fake. His historical pretender analogues suggest that some people might buy into the charade.

I think the masses are going to believe absolutely that he’s Rhaegar’s son – the prophecy of the mummer’s dragon is all about cheering crowds carrying dragon banners after all. 

As for Dany being hated as a usurper, I think she who has dragons makes the rules.

Do you think Theon will survive his apparent impending execution in TWOW? I’d like to think that his story isn’t over yet. There’s a reason Qarl brought up the story of Torgon the Latecomer and the invalidation of a kingsmoot. Could you envision a scenario where Theon is sent back to Pyke where Aeron (convinced his nephew is living proof of the what-is-dead-can-never-die creed) helps organize a popular revolt against Euron and his followers? The issue here is why Stannis would let it happen.

My theory is that Bran makes the quid-pro-quo for telling Stannis where the secret passages through Winterfell’s walls sparing Theon’s life. 

And yes, I think we’ll get a Torgon the Latecomer scenario, but I think it’s going to be less of a popular revolt and more of a coup in Euron’s absence. 

Anon: House Bracken’s history

The Brackens have a history of being opportunists. They even kind of remind me of the Campbells.

When the Ironborn attack, Lord Bracken betrays his fellow riverlords to join them in hopes of a reward. He was an idiot to think it would be a crown. They also fought for the Blackfyres thanks in no small part to Bittersteel who was using Daemon to secure a place at the royal court. Now we see Jonos Bracken fighting his former ally on behalf of the Lannisters who attacked his fief without provocation, and burned his castle and raped one of his daughters. Something tells me he’ll join Aegon. 

On top of that, Bracken was responsible for “they lay with lions,” and isn’t loyal to his wives or his fellow riverlords.   

What do you think?

Honestly, I kind of feel bad for the Brackens, because GRRM has clearly picked them out to be an family of heels (in the wrestling sense), similar to the Peakes, Florents, etc. Compared to the Blackwoods, who are clearly his special favorites – they follow the Old Gods, they’ve got a special weirwood tree, they’ve got magic in their background, etc. The Brackens almost always end up on the losing side of any conflict – whether it’s the Dance of Dragons, Aegon IV’s mistresses, the Blackfyre Rebellions, etc. 

And honestly? I think the Brackens are probably in the right, to the extent that anyone can be in the right of a blood feud. Let’s take the origin of their dispute:

“The Blackwoods say they were kings and the Brackens little more than petty lords set on betraying and deposing them, while the Brackens say much the same about the Blackwoods.”

Given that the Blackwoods were originally a Northern House who had to immigrate to the South (”the Blackwoods of Raventree, whose own family traditions insist they once ruled most of the wolfswood before being driven from their lands by the Kings of Winter”), it’s a lot more likely that the Brackens were the kings and the Blackwoods the disloyal vassals than vice versa. Sort of puts the whole dispute in a different light, doesn’t it?

And if you look deeply, there’s always two sides to the same story – the Brackens backed the Ironborn because the Blackwoods had invited the Storm Kings to invade the Riverlands to make Lord Rodrick Blackwood King of the Rivers and Hills, which makes the Blackwoods rather horrendous traitors to their liege lords the Teagues. (Although they’d say they were fighting for their faith)