Heresy 157

[Black Crow]

Welcome to Heresy 157, and its original [we hope] take on the Song of Ice and Fire.

So what’s Heresy all about about - and why has it been running continuously for over three years now?

The short answer is that it is a free-flowing and currently very fast flowing discussion, or argument if you will, largely concerned with the Wall, the Heart of Darkness which lies beyond it, the white walkers and the possible Stark connection to both – or in short, Winter. The Heresy itself, is not therefore a particular theory far less a belief or set of beliefs, formulated proclaimed and defended, but rather an application of chaos theory

The strength and the beauty and ultimately the value of Heresy comes from its diversity. This is a thread where ideas can be discussed – and argued - freely and because it’s a strong thread it can support discussion and argument that might simply vanish in the maelstrom of the general forum, because above all it is about an exchange of ideas and sometimes too a remarkably well informed exchange drawing upon an astonishing broad base of literature ranging through Joseph Conrad, Susannah Clarke, CS Lewis, and so many others all to the way to the Táin Bó Cúailnge and the Mabinogion; it’s about history [and 1189] archaeology, ringworks and chambered tombs and even, the Gods save us, heroic geology.

In short it’s a way of thinking that looks at the story holistically and openly challenges some of those easy assumptions that the Others are the ultimate enemy and that it only awaits the unmasking of Jon Snow as Azor Ahai and the rightful heir to the Iron Throne [or the other way around] for the story to reach its epic conclusion in a great battle pitting Dany’s amazing dragons and three dragonriders against the icy hordes.

GRRM’s original synopsis from 1993, transcribed below does emphasise that he is taking the story through five related story arcs, not one. While the story has obviously changed and moved in a number of interesting directions since its original conception, the synopsis does indeed confirm that the overall story does not revolve around the question of Jon Snow’s mother, but rather that particular mystery is just one particular plot device in an altogether much larger and much richer story.

If new to Heresy you may also want to refer to to Wolfmaid's essential guide to Heresy: http://asoiaf.wester...uide-to-heresy/, which provides annotated links to all the previous editions of Heresy, latterly identified by topic.

Don’t be intimidated by the size and scope of Heresy, or by some of the ideas we’ve discussed over the years. We’re very good at talking in circles and we don’t mind going over old ground again, especially with a fresh pair of eyes, so just ask, but be patient and observe the local house rules that the debate be conducted by reference to the text, with respect for the ideas of others, and above all with great good humour.

Beyond that, read on.

[Black Crow]

And now the slightly spoilerish full text of GRRM's1993 letter to his agent, Ralph Vicinanza. Things have obviously changed a bit since then but If you don’t want to know, don’t read on:

October 1993

Dear Ralph,

Here are the first thirteen chapters (170 pages) of the high fantasy novel I promised you, which I'm calling A Game of Thrones. When completed, this will be the first volume in what I see as an epic trilogy with the overall title, A Song of Ice and Fire.

As you know, I don't outline my novels. I find that if I know exactly where a book is going, I lose all interest in writing it. I do, however, have some strong notions as to the overall structure of the story I'm telling, and the eventual fate of many of the principle [sic] characters in the drama.

Roughly speaking, there are three major conflicts set in motion in the chapters enclosed. These will form the major plot threads of the trilogy, intertwining with each other in what should be a complex but exciting (I hope) narrative tapestry. Each of the conflicts presents a major threat to the peace of my imaginary realm, the Seven Kingdoms, and to the lives of the principal characters.

The first threat grows from the enmity between the great houses of Lannister and Stark as it plays out in a cycle of plot, counterplot, ambition, murder, and revenge, with the iron throne of the Seven Kingdoms as the ultimate prize. This will form the backbone of the first volume of the trilogy, A Game of Thrones.

While the lion of Lannister and the direwolf of Stark snarl and scrap, however, a second and greater threat takes shape across the narrow sea, where the Dothraki horselords mass their barbarians hordes for a great invasion of the Seven Kingdoms, led by the fierce and beautiful Daenerys Stormborn, the last of the Targaryen dragonlords. The Dothraki invasion will be the central story of my second volume,A Dance with Dragons.

The greatest danger of all, however, comes from the north, from the icy wastes beyond the Wall, where half-forgotten demons out of legend, the inhuman others, raise cold legions of the undead and the neverborn and prepare to ride down on the winds of winter to extinguish everything that we would call "life." The only thing that stands between the Seven Kingdoms and and endless night is the Wall, and a handful of men in black called the Night's Watch. Their story will be the heart of my third volume, The Winds of Winter. The final battle will also draw together characters and plot threads left from the first two books and resolve all in one huge climax.

The thirteen chapters on hand should give you a notion as to my narrative strategy. All three books will feature a complex mosaic of intercutting points-of-view among various of my large and diverse cast of players. The cast will not always remains the same. Old characters will die, and new ones will be introduced. Some of the fatalities will include sympathetic viewpoint characters. I want the reader to feel that no one is ever completely safe, not even the characters who seem to be the heroes. The suspense always ratchets up a notch when you know that any character can die at any time.

Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women. The five key players are Tyrion Lannister, Daenerys Targaryen, and three of the children of Winterfell, Arya, Bran, and the bastard Jon Snow. All of them are introduced at some length in the chapters you have to hand.

This is going to be (I hope) quite an epic. Epic in its scale, epic in its action, and epic in its length. I see all three volumes as big books, running about 700 to 800 manuscript pages, so things are just barely getting underway in the thirteen chapters I've sent you.

I have quite a clear notion of how the story is going to unfold in the first volume, A Game of Thrones. Things will get a lot worse for the poor Starks before they get better, I'm afraid. Lord Eddard Stark and his wife Catelyn Tully are both doomed, and will perish at the hands of their enemies. Ned will discover what happened to his friend Jon Arryn, but before he can act on his knowledge, King Robert will have an unfortunate accident, and the throne will pass to his sullen and brutal son Joffrey, still a minor. Joffrey will not be sympathetic and Ned will be accused of treason, but before he is taken he will help his wife and his daughter escape back to Winterfell.

Each of the contending families will learn it has a member of dubious loyalty in its midst. Sansa Stark, wed to Joffrey Baratheon, will bear him a son, the heir to the throne, and when the crunch comes she will choose her husband and child over her parents and siblings, a choice she will later bitterly rue. Tyrion Lannister, meanwhile, befriend both Sansa and her sister Arya, while growing more and more disenchanted with his own family.

Young Bran will come out of his coma, after a strange prophetic dream, only to discover that he will never walk again. He will turn to magic, at first in the hope of restoring his legs, but later for its own sake. When his father Eddard Stark is executed, Bran will see the shape of doom descending on all of them, but nothing he can say will stop his brother Robb from calling the banners in rebellion. All the north will be inflamed by war. Robb will win several splendid victories, and maim Joffrey Baratheon on the battlefield, but in the end he will not be able to stand against Jaime and Tyrion Lannister and their allies. Robb Stark will die in battle, and Tyrion Lannister will besiege and burn Winterfell.

Jon Snow, the bastard, will remain in the far north. He will mature into a ranger of great daring, and ultimately will succeed his uncle as the commander of the Night's Watch. When Winterfell burns, Catelyn Stark will be forced to flee north with her son Bran and her daughter Arya. Hounded by Lannister riders, they will seek refuge at the Wall, but the men of the Night's Watch give up their families when they take the black, and Jon and Benjen will not be able to help, to Jon's anguish. It will lead to a bitter estrangement between Jon and Bran. Arya will be more forgiving... until she realizes, with terror, that she has fallen in love with Jon, who is not only her half-brother but a man of the Night's Watch, sworn to celibacy. Their passion will continue to torment Jon and Arya throughout the trilogy, until the secret of Jon's true parentage is finally revealed in the last book.

Abandoned by the Night's Watch, Catelyn and her children will find their only hope of safety lies even further north, beyond the Wall, where they fall into the hands of Mance Rayder, the King-beyond-the-Wall, and get a dreadful glimpse of the inhuman others as they attack the wildling encampment. Bran's magic, Arya's sword Needle, and the savagery of their direwolves will help them survive, but their mother Catelyn will die at the hands of the others.

Over across the narrow sea, Daenerys Targaryen will discover that her new husband, the Dothraki Khal Drogo, has little interest in invading the Seven Kingdoms, much to her brother's frustration. When Viserys presses his claims past the point of tact or wisdom, Khal Drogo will finally grow annoyed and kill him out of hand, eliminating the Targaryen pretender and leaving Daenerys as the last of her line. Daenerys will bide her time, but she will not forget. When the moment is right, she will kill her husband to avenge her brother, and then flee with a trusted friend into the wilderness beyond Vaes Dothrak. There, hunted by Dothraki bloodriders [?] of her life, she stumbles on a cache of dragon's eggs [?] of a young dragon will give Daenerys the power to bend the Dothraki to her will. Then she begins to plan for her invasion of the Seven Kingdoms.

Tyrion Lannister will continue to travel, to plot, and to play the game of thrones, finally removing his nephew Joffrey in disgust at the boy king's brutality. Jaime Lannister will follow Joffrey on the throne of the Seven Kingdoms, by the simple expedient of killing everyone ahead of him in the line of succession and blaming his brother Tyrion for the murders. Exiled, Tyrion will change sides, making common cause with surviving Starks to bring his brother down, and falling helplessly in love with Arya Stark while he's at it. His passion is, alas, unreciprocated, but no less intense for that, and it will lead to a deadly rivalry between Tyrion and Snow.

[7 Lines Redacted]

But that's the second book...

I hope you'll find some editors who are as excited about all of this as I am. Feel free to share this letter with anyone who wants to know how the story will go.

All best,

George R.R. Martin

What’s in that redacted passage we don’t know but here’s what appears to be the equally spoilerish original synopsis/publisher’s blurb for Winds of Winter; not the forthcoming one, alas, but one apparently dating back to when it was still to be the third volume of the trilogy and following directly on in content and style from the first synopsis set out above:

Continuing the most imaginative and ambitious epic fantasy since The Lord of the Rings Winter has come at last and no man can say whether it will ever go again. The Wall is broken, the cold dead legions are coming south, and the people of the Seven Kingdoms turn to their queen to protect them. But Daenerys Targaryen is learning what Robert Baratheon learned before her; that it is one thing to win a throne and quite another to sit on one. Before she can hope to defeat the Others, Dany knows she must unite the broken realm behind her. Wolf and lion must hunt together, maester and greenseer work as one, all the blood feuds must be put aside, the bitter rivals and sworn enemies join hands. The Winds of Winter tells the story of Dany’s fight to save her new-won kingdom, of two desperate journeys beyond the known world in to the very hearts of ice and fire, and of the final climactic battle at Winterfell, with life itself in the balance.

[Black Crow]

And from last night's race to the finish:

As others have noted above, the world book implies that the Marsh King was one of the later monarchs to bend the knee to House Stark, possibly second to last (to the Boltons). That would explain why they swore to the King in the North.

As to why they incorporate the esoteric language of ice and fire in their oath, I think that it is because they are so closely connected to the Children of the Forest, unlike the other northmen. Like the wildlings, they remember things that the Starks have forgotten. So, the oath has elements going back to the Pact because the crannogmen's bones remember.

I have a recollection too that it was one of the Reeds who quoted a proverb about ice and fire and how ice can burn.

As to titles, its worth bearing in mind that titles are not exclusive insofar as its not necessary to give one up to assume another. As we see in the story of Bael, the Starks are Lords of Winterfell and perhaps too are still Kings of Winter as well as Kings in the North, as proclaimed by Maege Mormont. In the note on the Mountain Clans it says that they "owe their allegiance to the Starks, but their disputes have oft created difficulties for the Lords of Winterfell and the Kings of Winter before them" which would also suggest the same.

I'm intrigued too by the nine iron swords on the crown and whether they have any significance and that there's a distinction made between the likes of the titled kings such as the Barrow Kings and the petty ones such as the mountain clans.

If so, those mentioned are, in no particular order:

1. The Kings of Winter

2. The Red Kings [boltons]

3. The Barrow Kings

4. The Warg Kings

5. The Marsh Kings

Any suggestions on the other four? They're probably already included in the book by name but not by title.

[King Tyrion XX]

Wow that went fast.

[Black Crow]

Yeah, another three day special :fencing:

[WeaselPie]

And from last night's race to the finish:

I have a recollection too that it was one of the Reeds who quoted a proverb about ice and fire and how ice can burn.

As to titles, its worth bearing in mind that titles are not exclusive insofar as its not necessary to give one up to assume another. As we see in the story of Bael, the Starks are Lords of Winterfell and perhaps too are still Kings of Winter as well as Kings in the North, as proclaimed by Maege Mormont. In the note on the Mountain Clans it says that they "owe their allegiance to the Starks, but their disputes have oft created difficulties for the Lords of Winterfell and the Kings of Winter before them" which would also suggest the same.

I'm intrigued too by the nine iron swords on the crown and whether they have any significance and that there's a distinction made between the likes of the titled kings such as the Barrow Kings and the petty ones such as the mountain clans.

If so, those mentioned are, in no particular order:

1. The Kings of Winter

2. The Red Kings [boltons]

3. The Barrow Kings

4. The Warg Kings

5. The Marsh Kings

Any suggestions on the other four? They're probably already included in the book by name but not by title.

The Seastone Kings of the Iron Islands - not sure if Robb would presume this

The Seal Kings? or whatever we want to call White Harbor (see The Wolf's Den)

The Mountain Kings? Flints, Slates etc.

Not sure if Blackwood could be considers... River Kings?

ETA Stony Shore and Karhold, geographically

[Black Crow]

I'm not sure about the Flints, Slates, Norreys, Liddles and all the other mountain clans. Individually I think they are too small to qualify and I'm not aware of there having been a single Mountain King or King of the Mountains.

I'm looking at this by way of trying to understand some of the underlying political dynamics of what appears to be going on in the North, I'm coming to see it as something more akin to the Holy Roman Empire - which as someone famously remarked was neither holy, Roman nor even an empire: that is, the King in the North is effectively a High King. As Kings of Winter the Starks retain their ancestral family lands and bannermen and as Kings in the North they are also owed the allegiance of those other one-time kings as set out above.

The Seastone Kings [are they referenced] might be a possibility and yes, the Manderleys might have taken the place of an earlier line of Kings. However if we're including lost kingdoms no longer represented by houses I can't help avoiding the intriguing thought that the Nights King is represented by one of those nine swords.

:commie: :commie: :commie:

[WeaselPie]

I'm not sure about the Flints, Slates, Norreys, Liddles and all the other mountain clans. Individually I think they are too small to qualify and I'm not aware of there having been a single Mountain King or King of the Mountains.

I'm looking at this by way of trying to understand some of the underlying political dynamics of what appears to be going on in the North, I'm coming to see it as something more akin to the Holy Roman Empire - which as someone famously remarked was neither holy, Roman nor even an empire: that is, the King in the North is effectively a High King. As Kings of Winter the Starks retain their ancestral family lands and bannermen and as Kings in the North they are also owed the allegiance of those other one-time kings as set out above.

The Seastone Kings [are they referenced] might be a possibility and yes, the Manderleys might have taken the place of an earlier line of Kings. However if we're including lost kingdoms no longer represented by houses I can't help avoiding the intriguing thought that the Nights King is represented by one of those nine swords.

:commie: :commie: :commie:

I'm on the same page with that one, which leaves three more (kudos for that catch).

"Green King" (Garth), Joruman (or insert other King beyond the Wall here), also isn't there a mention of a Green Queen in TWOIAF? Not much info about her

ETA are we officially naming Gaven Greywolf the Warg King?

[Black Crow]

I'm on the same page with that one, which leaves three more (kudos for that catch).

"Green King" (Garth), Joruman (or insert other King beyond the Wall here), also isn't there a mention of a Green Queen in TWOIAF? Not much info about her

ETA are we officially naming Gaven Greywolf the Warg King?

I'm very much inclined to, that was certainly my first thought on re-reading the chapter earlier

[Bryaugh]

Wow that went fast.

Yeah, it's been really hard to keep up the past few weeks. A lot of good stuff though.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

I'm looking at this by way of trying to understand some of the underlying political dynamics of what appears to be going on in the North, I'm coming to see it as something more akin to the Holy Roman Empire - which as someone famously remarked was neither holy, Roman nor even an empire: that is, the King in the North is effectively a High King. As Kings of Winter the Starks retain their ancestral family lands and bannermen and as Kings in the North they are also owed the allegiance of those other one-time kings as set out above.

An interesting take. As I've been reading along, a somewhat different idea was taking form in my head - that is, simply, that those conquered by Winterfell would clearly refer to the Stark as the King in the North... emphasis on the exclusivity of the definite article... and given that the Starks won out in the end, that designation turns out to be "true." A sort of political survivor bias, if you will...

That said - the suffix, "in the North," looks odd to me. Why would Northerners ever use that phrase amongst themselves? The title makes much more sense as a term used in the south, perhaps among septons or maesters recording histories. Seems a bit odd that the Reeds would use it, not to mention all the northern lords campaigning with Robb Stark. (Though to be fair, there were houses from the Riverlands among Robb's supporters - and that was a declaration of sovereignty over and against another king. Also, Maege Mormont tosses in the "King of Winter" title, almost as an aside... so at least that's there.)

[WeaselPie]

An interesting take. As I've been reading along, a somewhat different idea was taking form in my head - that is, simply, that those conquered by Winterfell would clearly refer to the Stark as the King in the North... emphasis on the exclusivity of the definite article... and given that the Starks won out in the end, that designation turns out to be "true." A sort of political survivor bias, if you will...

That said - the suffix, "in the North," looks odd to me. Why would Northerners ever use that phrase amongst themselves? The title makes much more sense as a term used in the south, perhaps among septons or maesters recording histories. Seems a bit odd that the Reeds would use it, not to mention all the northern lords campaigning with Robb Stark. (Though to be fair, there were houses from the Riverlands among Robb's supporters - and that was a declaration of sovereignty over and against another king. Also, Maege Mormont tosses in the "King of Winter" title, almost as an aside... so at least that's there.)

I agree with the strange language. Queen of Thorns, Kings of Winter etc. King in the North. Hrm.

[Black Crow]

I think its simply a way of distinguishing between the high king and the others. Although the terminology is slightly different there's a similar usage in Scotland where we have kings [and queens] of Scots, but not of Scotland. Thus it would appear that Stark of Winterfell is king in the North but not King of the North. I suppose another way of expressing it by reference to the business of there always being a Stark in Winterfell and that the king in the North is only such while he's in the North, outside of it he's only Lord Stark - or perhaps King of Winter, his ancestral tiles in other words.

[JNR]

1. The Kings of Winter

2. The Red Kings [boltons]

3. The Barrow Kings

4. The Warg Kings

5. The Marsh Kings

Any suggestions on the other four? They're probably already included in the book by name but not by title.

Well, the Umber kings of Last Hearth are certainly missing and I believe the ancient Blackwoods were supposed to have ruled the Wolfswood, which by itself was about the size of Great Britain.

However, if the premise is that these smaller kingdoms map to the nine spikes of the crown, I'm doubtful nine would be enough. The North is just too big.

Also, we're told this crown is the crown of the Kings of Winter.

The ancient crown of the Kings of Winter had been lost three centuries ago, yielded up to Aegon the Conqueror when Torrhen Stark knelt in submission.

So it seems the crown spikes can't map to those other houses. If the crown had been created to reflect that overlordship, it would have been called the crown of the Kings in the North, since it was made at the same time as that title.

That said - the suffix, "in the North," looks odd to me. Why would Northerners ever use that phrase amongst themselves?

My guess is that they had a strong collective Northern identity because they were frequently the collective object of expansionist agendas of First Men kings from south of the Neck.

The World book remarks about the Marsh King creating ad hoc alliances with other northern kings, to prevent this, in the days before there was a King in the North, seem to support this slant.

There may also even that early have been significant cultural differences, including things like local accent, though they wouldn't have been as noticeable as in the days after the Andals.

[Black Crow]

Well, the Umber kings of Last Hearth are certainly missing and I believe the ancient Blackwoods were supposed to have ruled the Wolfswood, which by itself was about the size of Great Britain.

However, if the premise is that these smaller kingdoms map to the nine spikes of the crown, I'm doubtful nine would be enough. The North is just too big.

Also, we're told this crown is the crown of the Kings of Winter.

So it seems the crown spikes can't map to those other houses. If the crown had been created to reflect that overlordship, it would have been called the crown of the Kings in the North, since it was made at the same time as that title.

Not necessarily. As it was being worn until Aegon tooled up and Robb donned a replica as King in the North, its more likely that the original crown of the Kings of Winter was bronze and that the iron swords may have been added as the kingdoms fell. There are indeed too many kingdoms and petty kingdoms to correspond to the nine swords, which is why I'm suggesting that only the titled ones made it on to the royal diadem, hence the:

1. The Kings of Winter

2. The Red Kings [boltons]

3. The Barrow Kings

4. The Warg Kings

5. The Marsh Kings

6. Nights King

and?

[Eira Seren]

Well, the Umber kings of Last Hearth are certainly missing and I believe the ancient Blackwoods were supposed to have ruled the Wolfswood, which by itself was about the size of Great Britain.

However, if the premise is that these smaller kingdoms map to the nine spikes of the crown, I'm doubtful nine would be enough. The North is just too big.

Also, we're told this crown is the crown of the Kings of Winter.

So it seems the crown spikes can't map to those other houses. If the crown had been created to reflect that overlordship, it would have been called the crown of the Kings in the North, since it was made at the same time as that title.

My guess is that they had a strong collective Northern identity because they were frequently the collective object of expansionist agendas of First Men kings from south of the Neck.

The World book remarks about the Marsh King creating ad hoc alliances with other northern kings, to prevent this, in the days before there was a King in the North, seem to support this slant.

There may also even that early have been significant cultural differences, including things like local accent, though they wouldn't have been as noticeable as in the days after the Andals.

How many of the spikes might correspond to what might now be considered wildlings? Because wildlings are formed out of this process of stark consolidation, is that right? But are conveniently forgotten?

[WeaselPie]

Yes, why not Raymun/Gorne/Bael/Joruman? Some of these defeats are more clear than others, of course.

[Black Crow]

It would only need one, so "Joruman of the Wildlings" - as King of the Wildlings, not King-beyond-the-Wall might work, although I have my reservations, but that would still leave us with two titles to identify.

[WeaselPie]

Hmm. Skagos.

ETA it might be impossible to decide which "king" fits since we only have limited characters called "kings"

[JNR]

Not necessarily. As it was being worn until Aegon tooled up and Robb donned a replica as King in the North, its more likely that the original crown of the Kings of Winter was bronze and that the iron swords may have been added as the kingdoms fell.

So it was originally just a bronze crown with runes?

Then they conquered the Umbers and added one sword, so it was a one-sword crown... then they conquered the Warg King, so it was a two-sword crown... etc? Seems a little goofy-looking as crowns go. One also wonders what would happen if they ran out of room on the crown for more swords.

How many of the spikes might correspond to what might now be considered wildlings? Because wildlings are formed out of this process of stark consolidation, is that right? But are conveniently forgotten?

Well, that's an interesting point. Personally, I wouldn't think there would be any swords corresponding to them.

The Starks were wearing this crown until Aegon. Yet as far as we've ever heard, the Starks never saw themselves as ruling any territory north of the Wall, which is the only place wildlings could be said to exist.

It's possible, I guess, that Starks saw themselves as ruling what became the area north of the Wall, before the Wall was built... but I doubt it, because that's awfully damn far north, and the Starks at such an early point as that would have been petty kings (nowhere near kings of the whole North).

I am additionally reluctant to think Joramun had a thing to do with the crown because he is never really said, in the series proper, to have been a KbtW, let alone a king who was conquered by the Starks. Rather, he collaborated with the Starks.

ADancewithFlagons is familiar with this topic. Note also the World book says otherwise, but whoever wrote that bit didn't even capitalize the term King-beyond-the-Wall properly.