Jump to content

Heresy 102 of Ice and Fire


Black Crow

Recommended Posts

I agree it's not really very godly at all... which is why, encumbered by Small Paul, it was unable to cope with an exceptionally slow, exceptionally fat Night's Watchman who was described as "falling" directly at it, with his outstretched hand full of an obsidian dagger.

There are also no references in the annals of the Night's Watch describing the Others as having the power to shift between phases of matter. It seems quite a stretch.

Sorry, catching up. I don't think they actually turn into mist. I think they are just so cold the water in the air can turn to mist around them. As far as the "mists" around the wights, I believe that is a visual indication of the magic controlling the wights.

With all of that said, we've been told that the Others have the ability to "camouflage", bending light so that they aren't seen unless they want to be. So just because we don't see Others among the hordes of Wights doesn't mean they aren't there, and it doesn't mean they aren't controlling them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps its as simple as that. Perhaps they are indeed shadows; like those birthed by Mel. We saw how Varamyr "flew" after being expelled from Thistle's body and how Mel's shadow babies were similarly a part of Stannis, drawn from his spirit. He, as it happens is the one who refers to them as demons made of snow and ice and cold; so perhaps they are wargs who can create new bodies for themselves which are stable but only for so long as it is cold enough.

Disembodied "Old Gods/Greenseers" that can create their own bodies of ice and snow through sacrifice has been my theory for a very long time :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is Dany's vision in the HOTU. While BC is right, it does seem like Rhaegar is looking at Dany, he also appears to believe that there needs to be another head for the dragon.

"Viserys, was her first thought the next time she paused, but a second glance told her otherwise. The man had her brothers hair, but he was tal er, and his eyes were a dark indigo rather than lilac. Aegon, he said to a woman nursing a newborn babe in a great wooden bed. What better name for a king?

Will you make a song for him? the woman asked.

He has a song, the man replied. He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire. He looked up when he said it and his eyes met Danys, and it seemed as if he saw her standing there beyond the door. There must be one more, he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in the bed she could not say. The dragon has three heads. He went to the window seat, picked up a harp, and ran his fingers lightly over its silvery strings. Sweet sadness filled the room as man and wife and babe faded like the morning mist, only the music lingering behind to speed her on her way."

This is suggestive of the idea that one more child is required if the PTWP is to come from Rhaegar's line. As Maester Aemon says to Sam, (I'm paraphrasing), when considering the prophecy, they weren't thinking about a girl. So perhaps R thought another child, specifically a son, is required. And Elia couldn't have any more children, so possibly R decided to revive an old practice.

I wonder how the prince that was promised and the threeheads of the dragon are connected. If Rhaegar believed Aegon is the ptwp why the need for another child. I do not recall this connection in other parts of the book. Unless this is about ruling Aegon I style with two sister wives. Still, it seems weird.

On the opposite side -Then the song of ice and fire quote by Rhaegar. It is put in for the reader and for Dany. Its like hearing a movie title spoken in the movie. Anyway, it seems the song is part of the PtwP prophecy. Or at least they are being connected by the author. If RL=J then Jon may be the real PwtP. Yet it will be totally different than the Targs expected.

ETA when Rhaegar was alive there were a few other Targs around to be a third head. So maybe Lya's child had nothing to do with the prophecy in Rhaegar's mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you provide quotes that foreshadow Jon and Dany meeting? Do you feel they require fulfillment or are they adequate as misdirections? I currently haven't imagined a heretical scenario where they will. But if they do I don't think we yet have the evidence. I don't know if they'd meet as dragons. Maybe Jon in Ghost and Dany in Drogon.

I am way behind on my Bran Vras. I have to remedy that. Love his work.

I think the first vision Dany has of Jon occurs in the tent during MMD's ritual with Drogo, his horse, and apparently his unborn son.

Inside the tent the shapes were dancing, circling the brazier and the bloody bath, dark against the sandsilk, and some did not look human. She glimpsed the shadow of a great wolf, and another like a man wreathed in flames.

Now compare this with the vision Melisandre has of Jon

The flames crackled softly, and in their crackling she heard the whispered name Jon Snow. His long face floated before her, limned in tongues of red and orange, appearing and disappearing again, a shadow half-seen behind a fluttering curtain. Now he was a man, now a wolf, now a man again.

Then we have two of Dany's visions in the House of the Undying the first one is easily attributable to Jon:

A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness...

The next vision most attribute to the Red Wedding and Robb Stark, but I believe it is a vision of Jon and an event yet to unfold (why would Dany be shown a vision of the Red Wedding?)

Farther on she came upon a feast of corpses. Savagely slaughtered, the feasters lay strewn across overturned chairs and hacked trestle tables, asprawl in pools of congealing blood. Some had lost limbs, even heads. Severed hands clutched bloody cups, wooden spoons, roast fowl, heels of bread. In a throne above them sat a dead man with the head of a wolf. He wore an iron crown and held a leg of lamb in one hand as a king might hold a scepter, and his eyes followed Dany with mute appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If were were to assume R+L=J were true, what would that mean, necessarily, for Jon? Does his lineage have to set him apart, and on some predetermined path? must he have some prophecy to fulfill. I guess the laws of narrative would make it so, why else would GRRM include such a plot point. If so, what roles might he fill? Does his parentage keep from anything that Ned being his father may have availed him? Is he better of R+J son or was bastardhood better?

On one level, it matters to Jon's character. The one question that keeps popping up in his own mind concerns his mother. Then, there's the part where he feels shut out from belonging in his dreams of the crypts of Winterfell. And another part, where the tension he feels between staying in the NW and otherwise belonging to the rest of the world:

"He had no destination in mind. He wanted only to ride. He followed the creek for a time, listening to the icy trickle of water over rock, then cut across the fields to the kingsroad. It stretched out before him, narrow and stony and pocked with weeds, a road of no particular promise, yet the sight of it filled Jon Snow with a vast longing. Winterfell was down that road, and beyond it Riverrun and King's Landing and the Eyrie and so many other places; Casterly Rock, the Isle of Faces, the red mountains of Dorne, the hundred islands of Braavos in the sea, the smoking ruins of old Valyria. All the places that Jon would never see. The world was down that road . . . and he was here." (Jon AGOT)

Why Jon thinks that he'll be able to travel if he chooses other employment options, I don't know. I'm not going to make too much of it, but do think it interesting that on his list are the Isle of Faces, the red mountains of Dorne (possibly his birthplace), and "the smoking ruins of old Valyria."

Additionally, he views the kingsroad as "a road of no particular promise, yet the sight of it filled [him] with a vast longing," which could mean a destiny that he is leaving behind by joining the NW. Oddly enough, the road he describes doesn't end in KL and the location of the IT, but takes him all the way past Dorne (past his potential place of birth), and back to Valyria, as if it is in fact a road that could take him back through history, his own, and the origins of the Targaryens.

Instead, Jon goes North.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conversely, the problem with the Jon son of Rhaegar theory is that it conspicuously fails to address that. Jon is seen in terms of a Targaryen prince and rightful king of Westeros who will defeat the Others astride a Targaryen dragon donated one way or another by Danaerys. There is ringing talk of of him representing the balance as a son of both ice and fire but a curious lack of a workable theory as to how this will actually work out in practice in an outcome that envisages the defeat of Ice but says nothing of how such a victory will serve to balance the Fire

Fire has already been 'balanced'... Jon, Dany, and the Dragons are the last remnants of the power of fire, fighting to bring balance to ice.

Once during the Valyrian's reign fire was at it's height, but the Doom ended most of that, and the death of the Dragons was the final death knell until Dany's dragons were born. So you've gone from this very powerful thriving society right in the middle of active volcanoes doing all sorts of crazy things with fire and magic and blood, and now the world is down to 3 dragons, and a couple of people with the "blood of the dragon" in their veins.

Now I think that Jon's maternal line is just as important because there is definitely a story to tell about the Stark line and it's connections to the Children and the Old Gods and the Pact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the issue of Dragonsteel, I feel that it is a mistranslation for dragonbone.



Tyrion reads about the qualities of dragonbone in AGOT





Dragonbone is black because of its high iron content, the book told him. It is strong as steel, yet lighter and far more flexible, and of course utterly impervious to fire.



Basically dragonbone is a naturally occurring alloy of iron and other substances. Which basically makes it akin to steel. With the passages pertaining to Beric and Thoros always having their steel swords break due to the stress that lighting them on fire causes, my guess is the Last Hero (or heroes) learned to use dragonbone as swords which they could light and not worry about the swords breaking during battle.



I think it also is going to be a nice parallel to the petrified weirwood, which I believe the dragons are going to be susceptible. White stone weirwood, and black iron like dragon bone, one to defeat dragons and one to defeat WW.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Jon's status as a Targaryen on his paternal side, I think the relevance is going to lie not in his legitimacy to take the Iron Throne, but in the special genetic traits passed on through the paternal Targaryen line. Just like I assume that he has also inherited unique genetic traits of a different sort from his maternal line.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not dismissing Dany and her dragons at all, but rather the happy assumption that they will either win or at least provide the firepower for the great victory over the Others. My argument is that while Jon the son of Winterfell must deal with the Ice - and not necessarily in battle. Danaerys must deal with the Fire by going into Valyria.

But we have the vision of him battling the Others, wearing obsidian armor...

I think that is most definitely his destiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And so, firmly, back to Ice and Fire.

In considering R+L=J , the problem I feel is that the question itself has become the problem. As I said in the OP there is no good reason to doubt that Jon is the son of Lya Stark. That is clear from Ned Stark's affection for a boy he knows is not his own, and from his frequent and significant recollections of his beloved sister and the promise he made while she lay a dying. From there it requires no great leap of the imagination to work out that Jon's father was Rhaegar Targaryen, author of all Westeros' misfortunes.

The quite unnecessary problem which then arises in a certain other place is an obsession with proving that Rhaegar and Lyanna were lawfully wed and that in consequence Jon Snow is therefore the rightful heir to the Iron Throne, the Prince that was Promised and ultimately destined to ride a dragon to victory over the Others. In order to prove that continuation of the theory we therefore see textual analysis taken to imaginative depths to demonstrate that the whole series of books has been painstakingly written precisely in order to reveal to the initiated faithful that theirs' is the one - and that any questioning of this creed is indeed rank heresy.

In this, Lya Stark is unimportant. This is denied, often indignantly, but no good theory has been presented, far less sustained as to how she is important to the story of the return of the Targaryen Prince and why the Dragon Queen is not. Instead everything revolves around the possibilities of Jon's "real" Targaryen name, and the clues which must lie in his mother's tomb - which seemingly is what the mystery of the Winterfell crypts is all about.

In short, its one of these arguments that proceeds from a presumption, in this case that Jon Stark is Jon Targaryen and spends its time looking for "evidence" to support it and "finding" it in the most unlikely places and through over hopeful interpretation of passages such as the confrontation with the King's guard at the Tower.

This particular one, just to get my oar in before JNR, is presented as the ultimate proof that Jon is the true king of Westeros, yet to my mind the exchange, allied to GRRM's statement that they were obeying orders, reveals honourable men whose adherence to those orders means that they have failed in their duty and all that remains is but to die - honourably.

No, Jon Snow might, arguably be a union of Ice and Fire, but so too is Bloodraven and he is north of the Wall. Jon, as no less than Aemon Targaryen declared is a son of Winterfell just as Bael the Bard's son was before him and it is as a son of Winterfell not as a Targaryen prince that he must go on.

While I do think that Jon's father AND mother are important, I don't see whether they were married or not and thus "legitimate" as being an issue, as I don't think Aegon or Dany will be alive at the end of the books, leaving Jon as the last heir, legitimate or not.

It will simply serve as a way to acceptance for those in the South that aren't involved in the heritage of the Starks or what's going on with the Wall. A rallying cry if you will. Jon will not want to accept the mantle, but IMO he will begrudgingly accept it as he'll see it as his duty. Not because he's a Targaryen, but because he's the "son" of Eddard Stark who taught him to put the Kingdom and his family and it's honor above all else.

I actually do think Jon could end up riding dragons, and he and Dany leading the remaining forces of men against the Others and their zombie horde, and I even think a child could result from that union, as who else will be left to take the realm forward at the end? But I don't see Dany living to the end, and I don't see Jon taking power because he wants to play the Game of Thrones, I see him taking it out of a sense of duty to the Realm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright – I said I’d put together some of my thoughts on Jon Snow for this thread. As usual, my days are too full for me to get this stuff as organized as I’d like... but I don’t mind sharing some of what I’ve been thinking about in a somewhat stream-of-consciousness format.

So here you go. Sorry if it comes across as disjointed - but here are a few thoughts and readings to help contextualize Jon Snow, according to Snowfyre:

It is remarkable how closely the history of the Apple-tree is connected with that of man...

Pliny, adopting the distinction of Theophrastus, says, "Of trees there are some which are altogether wild, some more civilized." Theophrastus includes the apple among the last; and, indeed, it is in this sense the most civilized of all trees. It is as harmless as a dove, as beautiful as a rose, and as valuable as flocks and herds. It has been longer cultivated than any other, and so is more humanized; and who knows but, like the dog, it will at length be no longer traceable to its wild original? It migrates with man, like the dog and horse and cow; first, perchance, from Greece to Italy, thence to England, thence to America; and our Western emigrant is still marching steadily toward the setting sun with the seeds of the apple in his pocket, or perhaps a few young trees strapped to his load...

[Regarding wild apples...] Every wild-apple shrub excites our expectation thus, somewhat as every wild child. It is, perhaps, a prince in disguise. What a lesson to man! So are human beings, referred to the highest standard, the celestial fruit which they suggest and aspire to bear, browsed on by fate; and only the most persistent and strongest genius defends itself and prevails, sends a tender scion upward at last, and drops its perfect fruit on the ungrateful earth. Poets and philosophers and statesmen thus spring up in the country pastures, and outlast the hosts of unoriginal men.

Henry David Thoreau, Wild Apples (1862)


-----

In 1816, James Hart Stark and a small band of pioneers moved from Kentucky and settled on the western banks of the Mississippi in a place that would later become Louisiana, Missouri. With him, Stark brought a bundle of apple scions from his family orchard in Hutchison. From this bundle grew a thriving nursery business which became the world famous Stark Bro's Nurseries & Orchards Co.

By carefully selecting and propagating only the best varieties, James Stark started a tradition in horticultural excellence... Through a dedication to quality, Stark Bros.’ has gained world leadership as a developer and promoter of outstanding fruit varieties. The most famous of these are the Stark Red Delicious Apple from 1893 and the Stark Golden Delicious Apple from 1914.

- Stark Bros Website (Our Story)


-----

I suspect that Apples, generally, represent an inspirational link between ASOIAF and the project Martin was working on when first struck by the vision of the dying mother direwolf and her pups in the snow. The working title of that project, Martin says, was Avalon. One of the mythological Irish "synonyms" associated with Avalon is the Land of Apples.

In a previous post, several threads back, I listed a few varieties of apples that seem particularly relevant in the context of our story. Many were Stark Bros. patented cultivars (Stark Winter King, Starking Giant, Stark Jumbo, various "Starkspur" varieties), though certainly there is a wide spectrum of references to apples in Westeros beyond the Stark name itself. See the branches of House Fossoway for one obvious example - and then search the web for info on the Old Fosse Way, and Fossoway Cider.

As I’ve continued to turn apple-connections over in my mind, several varieties of the fruit have stood out to me as relevant to Martin’s story. One in particular is the "Wolf River" cultivar - both because it is widely recognized as one of (if not the) largest apple varieties in the world, and because its name seems particularly reminiscent of the Wolfswood-Riverlands union of House Stark and House Tully that is so central to these books.

The significance of the apple metaphor for House Stark was only reinforced in my mind during our recent Heresy discussion of Winterfell – when, early in the thread, we revisited Bran's recollection of Maester Luwin's comment that Winterfell had grown and expanded over the years like an enormous, sprawling tree of stone:

“[Winterfell] had grown over the centuries like some monstrous stone tree, Maester Luwin told him once, and its branches were gnarled and thick and twisted, its roots sunk deep into the earth.”

AGOT, Chapter 8 (BRAN)


I suggested then that Winterfell itself is the metaphorical Heart Tree, if not of Westeros, then certainly of the North. I continue to like that idea - and I think it can be expanded upon, perhaps with reference to various world-tree mythologies. But perhaps it would be more useful, in some ways, to consider Winterfell as a fruit-bearing tree. Even an apple tree...

Certainly the Winterfell tree metaphor has plenty of textual support in the analogies Martin uses to describe different members of House Stark. Sansa is frequently identified as a songbird, and shares her name with a particularly well-bred apple cultivar (the Sansa). Bran’s wall and tower climbing leads Ned to say that “You’re not my son... you’re a squirrel;" he is described during his coma as half-bird, half-tree; he is Catelyn's "special boy," and the apple of her eye. And Lyanna, whose status as the only Stark daughter of her generation makes her the flower - the "blue winter rose" of this story. (Apples and roses, of course, are family members - taxonomically-speaking. Both belong to the Roseaceae family).

And then there's Jon Snow – who I submit is the Bael fruit, aka the Stone Apple - and as Maester Aemon says, a "son of Winterfell." (Somewhere along the way, “the fruit of the tree” and “the fruit of the loins” become more or less the same thing...)

BAEL

The Bael fruit - the Stone Apple, thus the fruit/son of the Stone Tree that is Winterfell.

There’s a great deal of potential symbolism and meaning wrapped up in the image of the Bael fruit. The Sanskrit name for the Bael tree is Bilva – and the tree is said to be sacred to the three-eyed Hindu god Shiva. It may be this tree that best fits the Winterfell tree metaphor:

The Bilva tree grows in almost all parts of India, irrespective of the nature of the soil, and is bitter, astringent and dry by nature. Tall and austere, with a stern aspect, gnarled trunk and sharp thorns, the Bilva is undoubtedly Lord Shiva’s tree. Shiva is always worshipped with its leaves, and it is said that this tree is much loved by him...

The English name for Bilva is Bael, also called ‘stone apple’ as its rather large fruit is like pale yellow suns when ripe. The Hindi appellation is Bel or Bael Sripal. In Sanskrit it is also called Bilva or Sriphal. The botanical name for this tree is Aegle Marmelos, and it belongs to the Rutaceae family. In the Atharva Veda it is described as being so sacred that its wood may not be burned for fuel. It is still worshipped today as a totemic deity by the Santhal tribes in India.


A couple of other interesting meanings for the word “bael” ...

(2) King Bael (demon) - According to le Grand Grimoire, Bael is the head of the infernal powers. He is also the first demon listed in Wierus' Pseudomonarchia daemonum. According to Wierus, Bael is first king of Hell with estates in the east. He has three heads: a toad, a man, and a cat. He also speaks in a raucous, but well formed voice, and commands 66 legions. Bael teaches the art of invisibility, and may be the equivalent of Baal, one of the Seven princes of Hell.

(3) Bǣl (Old English)

Etymology - From Germanic *bālo, from Proto-Indo-European *bʰel-. Cognate with the Old Norse bál (whence the Icelandic bál (“a fire; a conflagration”), Danish bål (“fire, bonfire, pyre”), Norwegian bål and Swedish bål (“pyre, bonfire”)). Proto-Indo-European cognates include Sanskrit भाल (bhāla, “splendour”), Ancient Greek φαλός (phalos, “white”) and Old Armenian բալ (bal, “fog”).

bǣl n (nominative plural bǣl)

1. funeral pyre, bonfire
2. fire, flame, blaze


Keeping these meanings in mind, it’s interesting to reread the scene in which Jon first hears the tale of Bael the Bard – ACOK chapter 51, after Jon takes Ygritte captive. Given that another name for the fruit of the Bael tree is "Stone Apple," does it seem coincidental that Jon's partner in scaling the heights to hear that story is named "Stonesnake?" The story Ygritte tells there on the mountain – the parable of Bael the Bard - is a genesis tale, an explanation of origins and the background for this Song of Ice and Fire. And it may be more than that... (anyone know what happened to Stonesnake?) But I think it is very much the story of Jon Snow.

The bael fruit and the orchard apple are completely different plants – not naturally to be found on the same tree. But the horticultural practice of grafting appears frequently in English literature as a metaphor for the unnatural joining of like with unlike – by way of sexual violence and rape, or unacceptable unions across social classes or other boundaries – and “the graft” may simultaneously call to mind the joining itself (the sexual encounter), and the product or fruit of that event (the bastard).

I’ll save most of my thoughts on the “Bastard Graft” for another time... but thought it might be a useful segue here to point out how the Bael and the Sansa end up on the same tree. Because another intriguing potential metaphor on my mind takes us back to the orchard apple tree.


Setting the King Bloom

Wondering about the King of Winter... otherwise, nothing original to say about this one for now, so I’m just going to cut ‘n paste:

Every fruiting spur on an apple tree produces a cluster of six buds; five centered around a central blossom known as the King Blossom. This blossom is the first to open and pollination of it is key in insuring good fruit set. The fruit of the king blossom is often larger than the others in the cluster and is selected at thinning time if one is thinning by hand.

In general terms, the king bloom is usually the strongest flower in the cluster of apple flowers. The king bloom usually is the first flower to open in a cluster, which is nature’s way of ensuring that the strongest flower is pollinized. Side blooms are a tree’s way of ensuring that some of its flowers are pollinized if something should happen to the king bloom. In general, apples produced from the king bloom will be larger than apples set from the side bloom from the same spur. Having adequate sources of available pollen is extremely important when trying to set the king bloom.


And finally... I found myself reading a bit about the Lord of the Rings, Beowulf and Grendel today, so might as well throw this into the mix:

From http://www.tolkiensociety.org/ed/study_a_s_2.html -

The naming of swords - The naming of swords in ancient Northern European story and legend is a reflection of the society in which those stories arose. In a warrior society the weapon with which a man defends his life, the lives of those he reveres or loves, and with which he defends his home and homeland, will always have a special significance. We may be more familiar with King Arthur's sword Excalibur, or Durendal, the sword of the French hero Roland, but in many in stories of warrior-heroes the special significance of the hero's sword is shown through the naming it is given. Beowulf wields two named swords: Hrunting, which is lent to him, and Nailing which was taken from Dayraven champion of the Franks. However, neither sword is actually strong enough for the use to which he puts it. SeeThe Fellowship of the Ring, Book 2 Chapter III.

The melting blade - Only the sword he finds in Grendel's mother's lair is strong enough to withstand being wielded by Beowulf against his supernatural foes. It is orþanc enta ærgeweorc - the cunning work of giants - but when Beowulf kills Grendel's mother and beheads Grendel with it the monsters' blood makes even this huge blade melt like ice.

Þa þæt sweord ongan

æfter heaþoswate hildegicelum,

Wigbil wanian; þæt wæs wundra sum,

Þæt hit eal gemealt ise gelicost.

[Then the sword began to dwindle from the blood on the blade; that was a wonder, how it all melted just like ice]



And from http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/ghosts.shtml :

Grendel's abode may also be related to the barrow of the draugr. The dwellings of the dead were often said to be located beneath a stone or boulder, and the mere of Grendel is likewise to be found beneath a harne stan (l. 1415, "grey stone"). There are three other occurences of the phrase under harne stan in Beowulf, each describing the lair of a dragon (ll. 887, 2553, 2744). Old English literature firmly links dragons to barrows: "To the Anglo-Saxon poets there is little doubt that a burial mound containing treasure was the 'hill of the dragon.'" (Ellis-Davidson, "The Hill of the Dragon," p. 178). The dragon's lair in Beowulf is explicitly described many times as a barrow (beorh), and after Beowulf has directed Wiglaf to seek out the dragon's treasure under harne stan (l. 2744), the young warrior obeys and retrieves the gold from under beorges hrof (l. 2755, "under a barrow's roof"). Thus the description under harne stan acts as a kenning for a barrow, a form of verbal shorthand conveying the idea of the supernatural and the home of the dead.

Alright. No time to tie them all together with prose. But I see connections...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On one level, it matters to Jon's character. The one question that keeps popping up in his own mind concerns his mother. Then, there's the part where he feels shut out from belonging in his dreams of the crypts of Winterfell. And another part, where the tension he feels between staying in the NW and otherwise belonging to the rest of the world:

"He had no destination in mind. He wanted only to ride. He followed the creek for a time, listening to the icy trickle of water over rock, then cut across the fields to the kingsroad. It stretched out before him, narrow and stony and pocked with weeds, a road of no particular promise, yet the sight of it filled Jon Snow with a vast longing. Winterfell was down that road, and beyond it Riverrun and King's Landing and the Eyrie and so many other places; Casterly Rock, the Isle of Faces, the red mountains of Dorne, the hundred islands of Braavos in the sea, the smoking ruins of old Valyria. All the places that Jon would never see. The world was down that road . . . and he was here." (Jon AGOT)

Why Jon thinks that he'll be able to travel if he chooses other employment options, I don't know. I'm not going to make too much of it, but do think it interesting that on his list are the Isle of Faces, the red mountains of Dorne (possibly his birthplace), and "the smoking ruins of old Valyria."

Additionally, he views the kingsroad as "a road of no particular promise, yet the sight of it filled [him] with a vast longing," which could mean a destiny that he is leaving behind by joining the NW. Oddly enough, the road he describes doesn't end in KL and the location of the IT, but takes him all the way past Dorne (past his potential place of birth), and back to Valyria, as if it is in fact a road that could take him back through history, his own, and the origins of the Targaryens.

Instead, Jon goes North.

Very Nice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an awesome quote and to me exemplify Jon.Plus to me him choosing recognition as anything but is to typical of other stories.In this case I prefer the Bastard who would not be King.

:)

I wonder how the prince that was promised and the threeheads of the dragon are connected. If Rhaegar believed Aegon is the ptwp why the need for another child. I do not recall this connection in other parts of the book. Unless this is about ruling Aegon I style with two sister wives. Still, it seems weird.

On the opposite side -Then the song of ice and fire quote by Rhaegar. It is put in for the reader and for Dany. Its like hearing a movie title spoken in the movie. Anyway, it seems the song is part of the PtwP prophecy. Or at least they are being connected by the author. If RL=J then Jon may be the real PwtP. Yet it will be totally different than the Targs expected.

ETA when Rhaegar was alive there were a few other Targs around to be a third head. So maybe Lya's child had nothing to do with the prophecy in Rhaegar's mind.

I always wondered why Viserys wasn't included. He seemed to take after Aerys, though, so perhaps unworthy, though he was only a child at the time. Maybe since R didn't turn out to be the PTWP, he thought it must be one of his children. I find this particular prophecy with the dragon has 3 heads to be somewhat convoluted.

'The dragon has three heads' sounds a bit like 'There must always be a Stark in Winterfell,' one of those family sayings that seem portentious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or as some of our gang might say, he hit them for six.

Now I'm looking forward to Feather Crystal's reasons why Jon's father is not Rhaegar but Mance, which she promised us this evening.

Lol...Haven't heard that phrase in a long time,but better he hit us a six than a four for a six.

Yeah,i am intrigued by what Feather has to put forth,i think the R+L=J theory is so widely accepted as fact,it is seldom questioned,so it will be good to have an alternate to it.

yeah, didn't she mention training in Asshai.

Your right i think she did,was it there she met Qyburn also ?

If were were to assume R+L=J were true, what would that mean, necessarily, for Jon? Does his lineage have to set him apart, and on some predetermined path? must he have some prophecy to fulfill. I guess the laws of narrative would make it so, why else would GRRM include such a plot point. If so, what roles might he fill? Does his parentage keep from anything that Ned being his father may have availed him? Is he better of R+J son or was bastardhood better?

For me i think any legitimization detracts from his story,by that i mean should he accept. I think the turmoil of deciding what to do and how he will respond getting pulled in so many direction will be the real story.We have seen bastard status looked down upon by so many including Bastards themselves i.e Craster and Ramsey. It maybe Jon's role to embrace that status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

What if he's already led the victory over the Others, and is recognized as having the blood of Rhaegar, with most of the rest of the nobility dead? He would basically be begged to take the throne (or whatever is left of it) in such a situation, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't seriously imagine that Jon (or Dany for that matter) will survive the climax of their respective stories.



If there is to be a cliched "worthy king ruling justly" at the end of the story, I think the most likely bet would be Tyrion.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I agree with you that their presence at the ToJ isn't direct evidence that Jon is king. I think the oath is that there always must be a KG present with the King. Jaime Lannister was the one "protecting" Aerys.

But I do think it is some pretty telling foreshadowing by the Author, that they are King's Guard there protecting Jon.

I'm not sure Jon is the current legitimate King, and to tell you the truth, I think that's irrelevant, because in the end, I think he's going to be about the only one left that will have any claim whatsoever, be it a bastard's claim or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Jon is the current legitimate King, and to tell you the truth, I think that's irrelevant, because in the end, I think he's going to be about the only one left that will have any claim whatsoever, be it a bastard's claim or not.

I think it's irrelevant because the struggle for who gets to sit on that uncomfortable chair is the distraction to the main story not the culmination of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the first, there are demons of snow and ice and cold in the North so why not demons of flame in Valyria. As to Mel I think its opportunistic happenstance. When we first met her she had no notion of trouble up North. She reckoned she had identified Stan the Man as Azor Ahai (clever old her) and only saw her real chance for glory after Davos picked his way through that letter. Never mind Master Benero and the darkness in Valyria. She knows better and she's going to show him. Ha!

The biggest reason why not to me is that we are in book 5 of seven, and there has been almost no time whatsoever spent on anything similar to that in Valyria, whereas we're bombarded with everything going on North of the Wall, right down to the prologue of the entire series. There are a few hints in the text of 'demons' and the like in Valyria, and then there's the Lannister Sword story, but that's about it. If there is a trip to Valyria in the story, I suspect it will be a short one, not a significant ending to the "story of fire".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's irrelevant because the struggle for who gets to sit on that uncomfortable chair is the distraction to the main story not the culmination of it.

I agree with your premise that it is a distraction from the main story. But once the main story is resolved, someone will have to be left to pick up the shattered pieces of the realm and to re-build human society.

And that person, is quite clearly Jon, the one person in the books that can unite the North and the South.

The North can accept a Stark on the Throne, and the South can accept a Targaryen on the throne, and that's why, he'll ultimately be the only one left to unite what's left of the realms of men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...