Heresy 102 of Ice and Fire

[Mother Other]

I'll agree with that. I see the Valyrians as being guilty of magical over-reach. If we see the dragons as natural magic creatures neither good nor bad, then the Valyrians were exploiting them. Binding them with horns and spells and using them for nefarious purpose. Typical abuse of power which is never a good thing. So, I'm pretty sure we know the why, just not the who and how. That's for Dany to figure out I assume :dunno:

Although I will share my little cracked pot that the children/singers may know. I think they may have been able to see into Valyria via a flyer/seer, Hardhome was their attempt to duplicate it when the settlement was growing and caused threat that men may become civilized and more advanced on "their" side of the wall.

[JNR]

Given the apparent degree of concensus among we miserable heretics that Jon is not going to turn into Rhaegar Targraryen the Prince that was Promised, do we need a discrete thread on the subject? We still have 10 pages to go on this one and unlike the white walkers it wouldn't be straying off topic. Indeed the OP was set up to allow for discussion on this right here and now on this very thread.

Normally I would agree -- demonstrating that considerable doubt does exist about Jon's legitimacy (never mind his parents!) is relatively easy.

All we have to do is cite the evidence that makes it doubtful, a process we have both already begun. And some of that evidence is exceedingly strong.

The trouble as I see it is that this subject will bring in far more attention and response than a usual subject.

Ten pages left isn't going to come close, IMO. Note the 75 iterations of 22 pages or so each of the R+L=J thread -- a truly incredible amount of discussion on a tiny subject, compared to the broad range of Heresy. So I'm sure traditionalists will be venturing into Heresy on this subject who normally never would. At least one has already been directly invited.

[King of Winters]

I'm not sure on that one. Its assumed that catastrophe overtook the Valyrians, but I'm interested in exploring the idea that they brought it upon themselves which is why Azor Ahai/Prince that was Promised may have nothing at all to do with the Ice (and by extension Jon) and everything to do with the evil in demon-haunted Valyria

So who, besides the FM, could have engineered the fourteen fires to erupt?

[Black Crow]

The Valyrians themselves.

[Black Crow]

Normally I would agree -- demonstrating that considerable doubt does exist about Jon's legitimacy (never mind his parents!) is relatively easy.

All we have to do is cite the evidence that makes it doubtful, a process we have both already begun. And some of that evidence is exceedingly strong.

The trouble as I see it is that this subject will bring in far more attention and response than a usual subject.

Ten pages left isn't going to come close, IMO. Note the 75 iterations of 22 pages or so each of the R+L=J thread -- a truly incredible amount of discussion on a tiny subject, compared to the broad range of Heresy. So I'm sure traditionalists will be venturing into Heresy on this subject who normally never would. At least one has already been directly invited.

Suck it and see, its directly relevant to Ice and Fire and can easily be carried over on to 103 if it runs that far.

[JNR]

The Valyrians themselves.

Very wisely said...

[JNR]

Suck it and see, its directly relevant to Ice and Fire and can easily be carried over on to 103 if it runs that far.

OK, I'll get something posted later today.

[wolfmaid7]

Given the apparent degree of concensus among we miserable heretics that Jon is not going to turn into Rhaegar Targraryen the Prince that was Promised, do we need a discrete thread on the subject? We still have 10 pages to go on this one and unlike the white walkers it wouldn't be straying off topic. Indeed the OP was set up to allow for discussion on this right here and now on this very thread.

Yeah we don't want to be told take it to the other thread....I think some clever phrase "The Dragonsong and the Winter Rose". You kinda know where talking about it,but it's not going to raise any flags.

I had an interesting thought that combines my post above with an earlier discussion on the Stone Men. Search images of the bodies from Pompeii, they look very much like "stone men" to me, quite creepy actually.

ETA: many of those are plaster casts, but the bones are preserved as a stone like material as in my above post. Also brings to mind that weirwoods turn to stone IIRC?

Snowy and i talked about this for the "cold theory" and per the second theory as to what it maybe,we landed upon if it wasn't supernatural,then it was some cold loving extremeophile. Hence the similarity and use of "the cold" and the environment.

I think the Faceless Men might be behind the Doom. They wanted revenge on the Dragonlords and caused the volcanoes to erupt but probably didn't know the devastation it would cause.

I don't think they had that type of juice to cause that type of catastrophe,the Valyrians dabbled to much into sorcery especially when it came to a very powerful elemental "the dragons" and i think that instigated what followed.

Tormund also says they are never far. I take this to mean their armor being camouflage,that if they stand still you may not see them even if you look directly at them. There is the well know talk of they bring the cold or it gets cold when they appear. Also mentions of bringing darkness or it getting dark when they appear. Like I said I was reading the wiki titled Others.... my original,search topic was white walkers. It's interesting that D&D chose WW instead of Others,to avoid,confusion by the Unsullied(show watchers only)

I didn't read it that way,Tourmond didn't see anything,but used that phrase we use even today...Yeah their there,you may not see them but their there. See my below quotes.

It could be their armour or they could be concealed by the woods, and it's the cold they bring with them that makes Tormund know they're there.

This is kind of a fallacy because they are not the only creatures that bring cold with them so we can't say that Cold equates them "only". Also, seeing as the wights seem to use as a unit and no WWs present it is very doubtful that they are responsible for them.I like to use the stone men as an example. Wights with cold present no WWs...outstanding variable "the cold"

"Do you think the Wights are gone?" Sam asked Grenn

Why don't they come finish us?"

"They only come when it's cold "

Yes" said Sam ,but is it the cold that brings the Wights or the Wights that bring the cold?"(Sam,asos,pg.448-449).

The flame flickered and swayed, the shadows moved around him, the room seemed to grow darker and colder. I will not sleep tonight, Jon thought. Yet he must have dozed.......... Jon was startled to see how tall he'd grown. "Ghost, what is it?" he called softly. The direwolf turned his head and looked down at him, baring his fangs in a silent snarl. Has he gone mad? Jon wondered. "It's me, Ghost," he murmured, trying not to sound afraid. Yet he was trembling, violently. When had it gotten so cold? (AGOT,Jon)

They are here."The ranger drew his longsword.........."Looks", the ranger muttered darkley "Can you feel the cold? There 's something here.Where are they?" (ADWD,Bran,pg.164 electronic version).

"He crept to the door.The air was so cold it hurt to breathe,but such a fine sweet hurt(asos,Sam,pg.646).

These are all incidents ( there is a few more) that occurred when we are positive that there is Wights only. As Tourmond explained a few of his people got lost when they were moving.Given the events with Thistle and on the Fist the cold emitted by the Wight horde could be felt over a long distance. The WWs seem to emit a localised cold as in the Prologue and Ser Puddles.I say this to draw attention to the possibility of "The cold" from Wights not WWs.

[FainRivers]

I'll agree with that. I see the Valyrians as being guilty of magical over-reach. If we see the dragons as natural magic creatures neither good nor bad, then the Valyrians were exploiting them. Binding them with horns and spells and using them for nefarious purpose. Typical abuse of power which is never a good thing. So, I'm pretty sure we know the why, just not the who and how. That's for Dany to figure out I assume :dunno:

Although I will share my little cracked pot that the children/singers may know. I think they may have been able to see into Valyria via a flyer/seer, Hardhome was their attempt to duplicate it when the settlement was growing and caused threat that men may become civilized and more advanced on "their" side of the wall.

I agree. My main takeaway from TPATQ was the sheer abuse of power, re: their dragons.

A being thousands of years old, snuffed out largely due to personal vanity and power grubbing.

[Mother Other]

Snowy and i talked about this for the "cold theory" and per the second theory as to what it maybe,we landed upon if it wasn't supernatural,then it was some cold loving extremeophile. Hence the similarity and use of "the cold" and the environment.

My post was in reference to the way fire can also preserve and an earlier discussion about which side the stone men might be attributed to (ice/fire). I'd like to read your thoughts on it. I am aware of the basics of your cold theory, but was unaware that the fire side was also discussed. Could you point me to this please?

[King of Winters]

The Valyrians themselves.

So was it an accident as some have put forth, the Valyrian's magic backfired or was it a deliberate sabotage?

[wolfmaid7]

My post was in reference to the way fire can also preserve and an earlier discussion about which side the stone men might be attributed to (ice/fire). I'd like to read your thoughts on it. I am aware of the basics of your cold theory, but was unaware that the fire side was also discussed. Could you point me to this please?

I'm afraid that we didn't talk about it in terms of the "fire side" on account of Tyrion's description of a fog and mist that seemed unnatural,in addition to the cold that was present on the sorrows. I never considered the fire/cold combo until two quotes.

Jojen's quote about " If ice can burn"

and Ser Jorah's description of Dany's eggs. She had begun to feel the warmth emitting from them,and asked Jorah what he felt when he touched them and he said " Cold stone Kahalessi " which i felt was an interesting mix of the two.I will try to find it,but i know it was in AGOT.

[Black Crow]

So was it an accident as some have put forth, the Valyrian's magic backfired or was it a deliberate sabotage?

I'd be inclined to speculate that it weas a deliberate aspiration, something not unlike Master Benero's pronouncement:

"She is Azor Ahai returned… and her triumph over the darkness will bring a summer that will never end… death itself will bend its knee, and all those who die fighting in her cause shall be reborn…”

Now in this case he's calling for her to smite the Valyrians and isn't it interesting that he refers to them as "the darkness"?

However, I can imagine fanatics within Valyria preaching the triumph of an endless Fire.

[horizon]

Jojen's quote about " If ice can burn"

;) Eddard's big sword "Ice" ?

[TheButcherCrow]

If the Valyrians brought about their own doom with a "magical over-reach", some sort of effort to touch god or gain god-like powers, then I would point you to the CotF and say "it has happened before". The Valyrians binding dragons to their will is reminiscent (to me anyway) of the Singers jacking greenseers into the Weirwoods.

"You have brought Sin to Heaven

And doom upon all the world."

[Mother Other]

I'm afraid that we didn't talk about it in terms of the "fire side" on account of Tyrion's description of a fog and mist that seemed unnatural,in addition to the cold that was present on the sorrows. I never considered the fire/cold combo until two quotes.

Jojen's quote about " If ice can burn"

and Ser Jorah's description of Dany's eggs. She had begun to feel the warmth emitting from them,and asked Jorah what he felt when he touched them and he said " Cold stone Kahalessi " which i felt was an interesting mix of the two.I will try to find it,but i know it was in AGOT.

Ah thank you, I see where you are coming from here. I do like to explore the ways these elements are alike as most seem to see them as completely different. In a very general sense I believe it will be such likenesses that help to bring about the overall balance in the end. As I know you have pointed out in your Dragonlord thread the dragon bond and the direwolf bond is another thing Ice/Fire have in common. :cheers:

[Mother Other]

If the Valyrians brought about their own doom with a "magical over-reach", some sort of effort to touch god or gain god-like powers, then I would point you to the CotF and say "it has happened before". The Valyrians binding dragons to their will is reminiscent (to me anyway) of the Singers jacking greenseers into the Weirwoods.

"You have brought Sin to Heaven

And doom upon all the world."

:agree:

Exactly. Slavery of magic, plain and simple exploitation.

[aDanceWithFlagons]

If Jon is a legitimate son of Rhaegar, how does that give him the right to rule Westeros. The Targs never had the right, they forced their way to the top. Kneel or burn. We see the same with Dany's thoughts about Westeros. She plans to take an army and dragons to fight her way to the Iron throne. So if Jon is legitimate, why would he get the throne. Will everyone think 'the bastard of Winterfell is a Targ so we can put away our swords and ambitions since we have a Targ to rule us. One king to rule them all. Or, will Jon turn his attention to the Iron Throne and seize it by conquest. I do not see it. He has been putting all his effort into dealing with winter and whats north of the wall.

A thought on Valyrians, I ageee that their ambitions led them to their demise. They seemed to take on the aspect of apex predator like the dragons. And if they could rule the dragons then why not rule everyone. They took power lust and greed to far and dug too deep. Instead of their greed bringing a dragon, it destroyed the dragons.

Or maybe the Singers had a hand in it.

[JNR]

Is Jon the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen? Meaning: Were Rhaegar and Lyanna married?

Part I

It’s an extraordinary claim… one that requires Rhaegar secretly to have pursued polygamy for the first time in many generations of Targaryen rule.

If you're going to make an extraordinary claim, you need extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on those making the claim.

But those making the claim haven't provided much evidence at all. All they have is the presence of three of Aerys’ Kingsguard at the ToJ when Ned arrived. Their idea is: "KG are sworn to guard the king. The KG were at the ToJ. So was baby Jon. Therefore, baby Jon must be the king."

Now, GRRM has been asked about this exact subject. And very unusually for him, he’s given a direct answer.

Shaw: Can you explain why the King's Guard chose to stand and fight Ned at the Tower of the Joy instead of protecting the remaining royal family members?

Martin: The King's Guards don't get to make up their own orders. They serve the king, they protect the king and the royal family, but they're also bound to obey their orders, and if Prince Rhaegar gave them a certain order, they would do that. They can't say, "No we don't like that order, we'll do something else."

This is quite plain. Rhaegar ordered the KG to stay at the ToJ, before he rode off to his eventual death at the Trident, and long before Jon was even born. That's why the KG did stay at the ToJ until Ned showed up.

Now, GRRM’s statement above has been dismissed by R+L=J people, very heatedly and repeatedly. Usually, they roll out this kind of reasoning: "Rhaegar’s orders died with him. The KG would not have been bound by Rhaegar's orders after the Trident."

Well, you can read what GRRM actually said, above, and decide for yourself.

As far as I'm concerned, in any dispute between GRRM and some of his fans, I side with GRRM.

PART II

I would find the Jon Is King! argument weak anyway, even without the above, for other reasons. Here are just two of them.

1. We have excellent reason to think the KG don't always defend the king.

Notice that the KG at the ToJ did not move to defend King Aerys — the living Targaryen king — after Rhaegar's forces were defeated at the Trident, when Aerys' life was in blatant danger.

This, again, is quite straightforward. It clearly suggests that the KG did not consider themselves bound by oath to guard the Targaryen king, in person, under all circumstances. Instead, they consider themselves subject to the direct orders of the royal family, and they assume (and hope) the royal family knows what it's doing, in issuing those orders.

Here's the typical R+L=J response: "The KG didn't know Rhaegar lost, or Aerys was in peril. The ToJ was off the raven network. And they had no other possible way to get news quickly."

Here's the problem with that idea: There is no such statement in the books at all. It's just a convenient assumption, like the idea that Rhaegar and Lyanna got married, that pleases certain people.

Furthermore, we know for sure that the KG did get news fairly quickly. Because by the time Ned showed up, the news that Aerys was dead, and Jaime killed him, beat him there. The three KG already knew it.

So the Jon Is King! crowd is a bit trapped. They think that information was slow getting to the ToJ, and that's why the KG never tried to guard King Aerys. But they also think that information was quick getting to the ToJ, and that's why it outran Ned. These ideas can't both be true.

My own belief is that the KG got their information quickly. It seems likely they did know Aerys was in trouble, and yet were bound by strict orders from Rhaegar, which predated Jon's birth, to remain at the ToJ carrying out some ultra-important mission.

This, you will notice, is exactly what GRRM suggests above. He is implying the ToJ KG wanted to leave the ToJ, because they knew full well what was happening… but they were bound by strict orders given by Rhaegar.

2. Ned's dialogue with the KG at the ToJ also contains a couple of other very interesting hints on this subject. I just recently noticed these.

Let's walk through that dialogue.

Structurally, it's quite simple. Ned is asking the three KG where the hell they have been all this time. He points out four different places they could have been. Then the KG explain why they weren't there.

The first two are the Trident and the Sack. I've already discussed those two above.

The third location is Storm's End, when Ned showed up there to lift the siege. Now, notice there were no Targaryens at Storm's End at that time. Ned knows that. So Storm's End shouldn't even be on his list, right?

Yet he still thinks the three KG could all have been there -- and not with Viserys on Dragonstone. Why does Ned think that's possible?

Because he knows the KG are bound to follow their orders — whether those orders include personally guarding the royal family or not. This, again, supports what GRRM said above, about orders being the determining factor in KG behavior.

The fourth location Ned brings up is even more suggestive. Ned says:

"Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him."

Here, Ned is moving backwards in time… to a point after the Trident, but before the Sack. Because that's when Viserys sailed.

Now, if you've read this far, you know what the Jon Is King! crowd should predict the KG answer should be:

"We, the KG, couldn't have sailed with Viserys before the Sack. We had no idea Rhaegar had died, or that the royal family was even threatened, until the Sack had already happened. We were getting our information very slowly."

But that's not what the KG say. Not at all:

"Ser Willem is a good man and true," said Ser Oswell.
"But not of the Kingsguard," Ser Gerold pointed out. "The Kingsguard does not flee."
"Then or now," said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

Again: They don't say "we couldn't have fled with Viserys, because we didn't know he was fleeing."

They say "we didn't flee with Viserys. Because we are Kingsguard and Kingsguard don't flee. Then or now."

The clear implication is that the KG knew what was happening all along. They were getting information rapidly, and that info included the fact that Viserys and Rhaella were about to flee to Dragonstone -- before the Sack happened.

Now, once again… if the KG were getting rapid information, that means they chose not to guard King Aerys, even knowing he was in danger after Rhaegar lost at the Trident. Instead, they followed Rhaegar's direct orders (just as GRRM explicitly said).

Which means the KG are not always bound by oath to personally guard the king at all times, but instead, are bound to follow direct orders.

Which means that their presence at the ToJ when Ned arrived does not prove baby Jon was the king.

Thus, it is not demonstrated that Jon is the king, that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, or that Jon is legitimate. Those making the extraordinary claims have failed to provide adequate evidence to back up the extraordinary claims.

[King Benjen II]

Just as the WW may be the consequence of Ice magic, there may be a Fire counterpart in Valyria. These Black Walkers may be the source of the idea that Valyria. Or if residual magic also contribrutes to the reason Valyria is shunned, we may find residual Ice magic in LoAW as well.