Suzanna Stormborn Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Is the stash still there, though? I understood it that the discovered stashes were used for the defence of the city during the battle of Blackwater. ^ But the wildfire was removed from the Great Sept. "...Only last year, two hundred jars were discovered in a storeroom beneath the Great Sept of Baelor. No one could recall how they came there, but I’m sure I do not need to tell you that the High Septon was beside himself with terror. I myself saw that they were safely moved. I had a cart filled with sand, and sent our most able acolytes. We worked only by night, we—” - ACoK p. 309 That being said, the idea of just the Great Sept being burned down does work really well for the story. Well I agree that the wildfyre has been moved around some, and it would be easy to get more of it moved around if Cersei so desired. But we know there is a vast store room underneath the Sept, and that she will want revenge on practically everyone she saw the day she was taken prisoner, the high-septon, the women who tortured her, and the sparrows all around the plaza of the Sept. I really cannot see another way for her to properly pay them back Cersei-style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 In Vaes Dothrak, Khal Drogo slew a stallion and I ate his heart, to give our son strength and courage. ... and Azor Ahai thrust the smoking sword through her living heart. It is said that her cry of anguish and ecstasy left a crack across the face of the moon, but her blood and her soul and her strength and her courage all went into the steel. Jon=LB guys. Do not be too late to jump on the train :P Also this: The other wight, the one-handed thing that had once been a ranger named Jafer Flowers, had also been destroyed, cut near to pieces by a dozen swords… but not before it had slain Ser Jaremy Rykker and four other men. Ser Jaremy had finished the job of hacking its head off, yet had died all the same when the headless corpse pulled his own dagger from its sheath and buried it in his bowels. Strength and courage did not avail much against foemen who would not fall because they were already dead; even arms and armor offered small protection. - AGoT, Jon VIII Strength and courage, the aspects one receives their mother (Jon, Rhaego, and "LB"), was not enough to kill the wight. Wights being associated with winter forces, btw. Starks, Winter is Coming, etc. It took fire to kill the wight, the aspect Jon received from his father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Of course, dude, because Jon is an acknowledged Stark bastard.. not sure what the point is here?. People were ever asking if he's depicted as a wolf. GRRM told Valyrian Steel to give him the inversed Stark colours. So that's depicting him as a wolf. There are no former arms to place with Jon, as Jon did not formally have any. He wad never knighted. They could place a reversed Stark sigil on his pyre. They could also simply place nothing. They'll place something with his body, they have too. They burned the ranger’s corpse at sunset, in the fire that Grenn had been feeding earlier that day. Tim Stone and Garth of Oldtown carried out the naked corpse and swung him twice between them before heaving him into the flames. The surviving brothers divided up his clothes, his weapons, his armor, and everything else he owned. At Castle Black, the Night’s Watch buried its dead with all due ceremony. They were not at Castle Black, though. And bones do not come back as wights. As for Jon not having arms, he mentions that they took away his stuff when he joined the Night's Watch. Whether he was wearing Stark clothes or not isn't known, but they took his former clothes and armour. They have something to burn with his body, or they'll simply make something for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Jon shrugged. “Girls get the arms but not the swords. Bastards get the swords but not the arms. I did not make the rules, little sister.” - AGoT, Arya I We know that some bastards do get arms, so this statement is not an absolute truth. However, I think it tells us pretty clearly whether or not Jon himself received arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Leftwich Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 We know that some bastards do get arms, so this statement is not an absolute truth. However, I think it tells us pretty clearly whether or not Jon himself received arms. I always read that to mean that bastards that do get arms always get their own sigils/coats of arms, new sigils/coats of arms. Specifically not the family ones. (Bittersteel, Walder Rivers, the Blackfyres) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Any knight can have a coat of arms. Just not one they're not entitled to. See: Dunk. People were ever asking if he's depicted as a wolf. GRRM told Valyrian Steel to give him the inversed Stark colours. So that's depicting him as a wolf. It's really not though. The sword holder or whatever for the Longclaw replica is not what I'd consider a canon source. Plus in that blurb you posted it says Martin said to do it that way because it was common for bastards to invert the colors. They're not even saying Martin said that Jon ever actually did that in the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Don't most bastards who get arms make them up themselves? They weren't handed down to them as father-son, but they simply decided what arms they wanted and made it their own? If Jon's been thinking about joining the NW for awhile, and we know he has, then has no need of arms at all. J.Star's quote shows that he probably never even thought about making his own arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Don't most bastards who get arms make them up themselves? They weren't handed down to them as father-son, but they simply decided what arms they wanted and made it their own? If Jon's been thinking about joining the NW for awhile, and we know he has, then has no need of arms at all. J.Star's quote shows that he probably never even thought about making his own arms. Yeah. They're expressly forbidden from taking their father's arms unless they are legitimized. They can do something that incorporates their fathers arms, like inverting the colors or quartering. On the one hand I think Jon had no cause to create a sigil before he joined the Watch. On the other hand I could see it being something boys that age think about a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Yeah. They're expressly forbidden from taking their father's arms unless they are legitimized. They can do something that incorporates their fathers arms, like inverting the colors or quartering. On the one hand I think Jon had no cause to create a sigil before he joined the Watch. On the other hand I could see it being something boys that age think about a lot. Think about, for sure. But actively create a sigil and decide that it was his own going so far as to put it on something or tell other people that he had made his own sigil...not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I always read that to mean that bastards that do get arms always get their own sigils/coats of arms, new sigils/coats of arms. Specifically not the family ones. (Bittersteel, Walder Rivers, the Blackfyres) I kind of mucked up the way I presented that idea. If Jon had his own arms, we would've read about it there, or shortly after. In fact, I should've written it as ... received had arms. Part of the mucking. In other words, agreed. Speaking of Jon-related arms, has anybody taken a look at House Cassel's sigil? Notable of course because "Proud Martyn Cassel" was one of Ned's ToJ seven. Link. Ten white wolves on a grey background, bordered by black. I'll start from the end. Bordered by black relates to Jon as a brother of the NW. White wolves on a grey background are the reverse colors of House Stark. Has everyone already guessed how the "ten" part relates to Jon? I'm sure plenty of you have. Ned’s wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three. [...] It was said that Rhaegar had named that place the tower of joy, but for Ned it was a bitter memory. They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed. - AGoT, Eddard X (tower of joy).There's a similar Jon Snow-related theme with House Karstark's sigil and words. The Karstarks were from a lesser branch of House Stark, just like Jon would be. His mother was younger (lesser) than Ned, so his children constitute the main branch of House Stark. White (snow) sun on black (NW) background. White and black are opposites, like ice and fire. Words, The Sun of Winter. Think, son of Winterfell. - Link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lojzelote Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 People were ever asking if he's depicted as a wolf. GRRM told Valyrian Steel to give him the inversed Stark colours. So that's depicting him as a wolf. They'll place something with his body, they have too. As for Jon not having arms, he mentions that they took away his stuff when he joined the Night's Watch. Whether he was wearing Stark clothes or not isn't known, but they took his former clothes and armour. They have something to burn with his body, or they'll simply make something for him. They don't have to. I mean, what sigil would they burn with brothers of common origins? The answer is none. The only sigil Jon has ever had is a black nothing on black background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aDanceWithFlagons Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 If Jon became Lord of Winterfell, or started a lesser House, he might do something like Longwaters and add to the bastard name. I'm thinking Snow + Stark = House Snark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Also this: Strength and courage, the aspects one receives their mother (Jon, Rhaego, and "LB"), was not enough to kill the wight. Wights being associated with winter forces, btw. Starks, Winter is Coming, etc. It took fire to kill the wight, the aspect Jon received from his father. It might be nothing, but one thing I noticed which connects Drogo + Dany = Rhaego to the ToJ is the red stallions of Drogo and William Dustin. The only reason it stands out to me is because Dustin's red stallion was specifically mentioned on multiple occasions (Game* Dance**). As if GRRM wanted to draw attention to it. I searched "red stallion" in the books, and I noticed that Tyrion rides one during the BotB, and Ramsay rides one in Dance. Also, A red stallion is also featured in the sigil of House Bracken, fwiw. * In the dream his friends rode with him, as they had in life. Proud Martyn Cassel, Jory’s father; faithful Theo Wull; Ethan Glover, who had been Brandon’s squire; Ser Mark Ryswell, soft of speech and gentle of heart; the crannogman, Howland Reed; Lord Dustin on his great red stallion. Ned had known their faces as well as he knew his own once, but the years leech at a man’s memories, even those he has vowed never to forget. In the dream they were only shadows, grey wraiths on horses made of mist. - AGoT, Eddard XV ** Lord Dustin and I had not been married half a year when Robert rose and Ned Stark called his banners. I begged my husband not to go. He had kin he might have sent in his stead. An uncle famed for his prowess with an axe, a great-uncle who had fought in the War of the Ninepenny Kings. But he was a man and full of pride, nothing would serve but that he lead the Barrowton levies himself. I gave him a horse the day he set out, a red stallion with a fiery mane, the pride of my lord father’s herds. My lord swore that he would ride him home when the war was done." - ADwD, The Turncloack --- I also noticed something else that could easily fit with R+L=LB. I was looking up bull and bat symbolism. As in, Ser Gerold Hightower, the White Bull, and Ser Oswell of House Whent. One of the recurring themes with both of them is death and rebirth (Link 1). But also I made another bat-related discovery that I was unaware of. Now, bulls are well known symbols of male virility. I think most of us are probably familiar with that idea. But bats are sometimes linked to the concepts of motherhood (links 2 & 3) and sacred womb (link 4). Bats symbolize death and rebirth. - Link 1 Although our modern conception of bats in the west has largely been a negative one, a journey back in time reveals that this was not always the case. According to the ancient Greeks, Diana was the many-breasted virgin goddess of the forest who watched over births and infancy. The Greeks also knew that bats suckle their young, the only flying creature to do so. It thus seemed natural for them to pair the two images together such that bats will sometimes accompany Diana in classical legends, where both came to symbolize motherhood. It was only a small step from the symbolism of motherhood to the symbolism of fertility and sex. - Link 2 Bats represent: Social relationships, communication, motherhood It is a symbol of communication. Native Americans observed bats to be highly social creatures with strong family ties. They are nurturing, exhibiting verbal communication, touching, and sensitivity to members of their group. Bats are sensitive to their surroundings and are seen as intuitive, with the ability to see through illusion and discern truth. Devotion of the Bat totem will never fade, encouraging the journey to achieve the highest possible potential from an individual. (Information paraphrased from this page on Animal Totems) Since bats are the only winged creatures to suckle their young, they are also a symbol of motherhood (and by association… fertility and sexuality… which is also supported by the dwelling in caverns in the “womb” of mother earth.) - Link 3 Link 4. I can't c+p from this page for some reason. The point being, at the ToJ you have three KG who are symbolized by/associated with: a bull (male virility), a bat (motherhood, sacred womb, etc.) and a 'magic' sword. (I don't think it's a coincidence that this sword, Dawn, can be connected quite easily with the legends of the original LB. Whether it actually was the original LB, or GRRM is making the connection for some other reason I'm not sure.) So, if the bull represents the father, and the bat represents the mother, then what does the sword represent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg171 Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 Any knight can have a coat of arms. Just not one they're not entitled to. See: Dunk. It's really not though. The sword holder or whatever for the Longclaw replica is not what I'd consider a canon source. Plus in that blurb you posted it says Martin said to do it that way because it was common for bastards to invert the colors. They're not even saying Martin said that Jon ever actually did that in the story. I'm not saying he ever had one or ever made one. Just that according to GRRM, it should be the inverted Stark colours as that's what bastards generally do. They don't have to. I mean, what sigil would they burn with brothers of common origins? The answer is none. The only sigil Jon has ever had is a black nothing on black background. Jon wasn't common born though. He's of nobility, even if he wasn't one himself. He's the acknowledged bastard of a Lord Paramount. They're going to burn him with something, otherwise what was the point of pointing out the purpose of Shieldhall, right before Jon was assassinated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 lol. Do you think GRRM has gone that road: reptile brumation? because Drogon is getting comfortable, and Viserion too, was burrowing...what good are brumating dragons in winter? http://www.petinsurance.com/healthzone/pet-articles/pet-health/Reptile-Brumation.aspx Honestly, reptiles are pretty lazy. As for dragons, I think they would be especially lazy because of the momentum it would take for them to power-up, but this is fantasy, so while Martins "Ice Dragon" is a seperate concept, I don't think its off the table a creature as unique as Jon is created to counter the other dragons.Danys dragons would likely be useless in dead-on winter for just the reasons you mentioned, and we don't know they are "saviors." Aegon the Conquerors were grounded in a rainstorm in the Riverlands Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Charles of Rosehaven Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 I just have a doubt. If Jon is son of Rhaegaria and Lyanna why does ser Barristan resent Ned for what happened to ashara? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 I'm not saying he ever had one or ever made one. Just that according to GRRM, it should be the inverted Stark colours as that's what bastards generally do. But you do understand the difference between "If Jon needed a non-Night's Watch sigil he would probably invert the Stark's" and a prophetic/metaphorical/whatever representation of Jon as a wolf in the books, right? If you really wanted, you could run with the "destiny" part of the quote and try to claim it's evidence that Longclaw is staying with Jon and that Jon's destiny is to be a Stark bastard and not a Targaryen or member of the Night's Watch. (though it seems to me they didn't do a Night's Watch thing because just plain black would be boring.) But that's really stretching it. This is one guy acknowledging that only Martin knows what will happen, and then saying he told them to just "do what most bastards would do." It's not someone claiming Martin said "paint it this way because it is indicative of Jon's destiny." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceFire125 Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 In Vaes Dothrak, Khal Drogo slew a stallion and I ate his heart, to give our son strength and courage. ... and Azor Ahai thrust the smoking sword through her living heart. It is said that her cry of anguish and ecstasy left a crack across the face of the moon, but her blood and her soul and her strength and her courage all went into the steel. Jon=LB guys. Do not be too late to jump on the train :P Also this: Strength and courage, the aspects one receives their mother (Jon, Rhaego, and "LB"), was not enough to kill the wight. Wights being associated with winter forces, btw. Starks, Winter is Coming, etc. It took fire to kill the wight, the aspect Jon received from his father. If that is so, then did GRRM just describe Lightbringer something of 'Fire & Blood' in nature, when describing Jon's hunger??... It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade. And from LC Mormont... Are you such a mighty warrior, or do you carry a grumkin in your pocket to magic up your sword? In Old Nan’s stories about men who were given magic wishes by a grumkin, you had to be especially careful with the third wish, because it was the last. A hundred days and a hundred nights he labored on the third blade, and as it glowed white-hot in the sacred fires, he summoned his wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 Honestly, reptiles are pretty lazy. As for dragons, I think they would be especially lazy because of the momentum it would take for them to power-up, but this is fantasy, so while Martins "Ice Dragon" is a seperate concept, I don't think its off the table a creature as unique as Jon is created to counter the other dragons. Danys dragons would likely be useless in dead-on winter for just the reasons you mentioned, and we don't know they are "saviors." Aegon the Conquerors were grounded in a rainstorm in the Riverlands Dany's dragons are clearly hot blooded (I don't think blood hot enough to nearly melt a metal spear is the result of regular Mereen temperatures). Even without the whole "magical fucking creature thing," taking their ability to breath fire and fly as simply consistent with the laws of nature in Martin's world, why would they "likely be useless in dead-on winter?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 If that is so, then did GRRM just describe Lightbringer something of 'Fire & Blood' in nature, when describing Jon's hunger??... It was a hunger inside him, sharp as a dragonglass blade. And from LC Mormont... Are you such a mighty warrior, or do you carry a grumkin in your pocket to magic up your sword? In Old Nan’s stories about men who were given magic wishes by a grumkin, you had to be especially careful with the third wish, because it was the last. A hundred days and a hundred nights he labored on the third blade, and as it glowed white-hot in the sacred fires, he summoned his wife. I can't recall if I posted it in the R+L=LB thread, but I discussed with Schmendrick that the Targaryen words could well be describing his version of Lightbringer; i.e., Jon skinchanging a dragon. The dragon has the fire, Jon has the (special) blood. Lightbringer, Fire and Blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.