241 replies to this topic

[ronm]

gogorath, on 08 September 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

Umm, valonquar means "little brother."  That's not in dispute, is it?  I don't mean to offend, but this argument is kind of ridiculous.  Because the person talking used "the" instead of "your", then the stated definition of the word is completely wrong -- despite absolutely no other evidence for that -- and it really means something completely else?  I feel like I am taking crazy pills here.  If Maggy had meant "father," she would have used the word for father.  

That all said, I think Jaime is likely the valoquar, but in the little brother sense.

If there's any linguistic curiousity to me is why say "little brother" and only that, in Valyrian?

I think the point about "the" vs "your" is that "your" could only mean Jaime or Tyrion while "the" could mean someone else's little brother. It is not changing the meaning of the word, but questioning who's little broer is being refered to.

[Maester Tormund]

ronm, on 09 September 2012 - 11:34 PM, said:

I think the point about "the" vs "your" is that "your" could only mean Jaime or Tyrion while "the" could mean someone else's little brother. It is not changing the meaning of the word, but questioning who's little broer is being refered to.

Or it could be a title.  There's the Elder Brother, perhaps then other brothers are known as Younger Brothers?

Just a thought to tie in to my theory

[Harry the Heir]

The Valonqar prophecy isn't the only foreshadowing of Cersei's death. The idea that Jaime and Cersei will die together like they were born together has been repeated a number of times in the books. Jaime killing Cersei is also the logical endpoint of his current arc. So I think Jaime is a much stronger candidate for valonqar than somebody who just happens to be a younger brother in a completely different family.

Edited by Harry the Heir, 10 September 2012 - 12:09 AM.

[Maester Tormund]

Harry the Heir, on 10 September 2012 - 12:06 AM, said:

The Valonqar prophecy isn't the only foreshadowing of Cersei's death. The idea that Jaime and Cersei will die together like they were born together has been repeated a number of times in the books. So I think Jaime is a much stronger candidate for valonqar than somebody who just happens to be the younger brother of somebody at some point.

Jamie killing Cersei doesn't mean he would be dying though?

They could die at different times at different places.

[Harry the Heir]

The Lost Baratheon, on 10 September 2012 - 12:09 AM, said:

Jamie killing Cersei doesn't mean he would be dying though?

Based on the valonqar prophecy alone, no. But taking all the foreshadowing together, I think Jaime and Cersei are going to end up killing each other. (Jaime is not quite at the point where he would kill Cersei, iirc, but Cersei is already at the point where she would see Jaime dead based on her final AFFC chapter.)

[Maester Tormund]

Harry the Heir, on 10 September 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

Based on the valonqar prophecy alone, no. But taking all the foreshadowing together, I think Jaime and Cersei are going to end up killing each other. (Jaime is not quite at the point where he would kill Cersei, iirc, but Cersei is already at the point where she would see Jaime dead based on her final AFFC chapter.)

Well I could see that I guess if you also took the story of Ser Arryk and Ser Errryk into the equation as well.

[ab aeterno]

gogorath, on 09 September 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

And I'd like to point out that Jaime has two hands -- one flesh, and one golden.  I missed the part where Maggy the Frog said, "the valonqar shall wrap his two original hands of flesh, not made of gold and definitely neither having been a replacement for a hand cut off, about your pale white throat and choke the life from you."

I'd also like to point out that prophecies aren't guaranteed to come true, either, but but points seem to go over the head of everyone on this board.

Agreed, none of the prophesies are guaranteed to occur at all, and hardly any come about as expected. Having said that, I do think that his prophesy seems very likely to come true, albeit either in an unexpected manner or brought about by Cersei herself. I think it's very unlikely to be Tyrion, so Jaime or Stannis would seem like the most probably candidates. As has been mentioned, she never says, IIRC, your little brother, so I think that gives it some degree of wiggle room. I think it would be nice if there was some totally unexpected candidate that makes sense in hindsight. Personally I'd prefer that it weren't Jaime, but he's certainly a likley candidate.


Edit

Apologies concerning the fact that some of this stuff has already been posted, the board has been a nightmare this morning, not loading properly, not displatying posts properly, no posting properly etc.

Edited by DCS1122, 10 September 2012 - 04:40 AM.

[Quiet Isle]

Davos, on 07 September 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

This is my first try at this, and i just came up with this looking at the prophecy.

Cersei:''Will the king and i have children?''
Maggy:''Oh, aye. Six-and-ten for him, and three for you.''
Maggy: ''Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds,'' she said. ''And when your tears have drowned you, the volanqar shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you''

^ I think looking at this chronologically, it implies that all of Cersei's kids will die before the Volanqar kills her. So this could suggest Tommen and Myrcella will soon die, which will surely drown Cersei in tears.

As for the volanqar, it is said to mean little brother, but i think that is a big red herring. I might be over-thinking, but notice how it says 'The volanqar'. Why would Maggy call it 'The Little brother'?

''Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds,'' she said. ''And when your tears have drowned you, the little brother shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you''

it would make much more sense for it to be 'Your little brother', wouldn't it? What is my point? My point is that looking at the whole passage, it makes sense that the volanqar could in fact mean father instead of little brother. In the passage the kids are mentioned, and then 'the volanqar', i think 'the father' would fit in perfectly, after mentioning the kids.

Read it like this. Maggy: ''Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds,'' she said. ''And when your tears have drowned you, the father shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you''

It also makes sense cause before in the same prophecy, Maggy mentions that Robert will have many kids, and Cersei will have three, and then she mentions how the kids will have golden crowns and golden shrouds, but whats missing? The father. The whole part of the prophecy seems to be missing who will be the father to these children. Cersei asked about the children she will have, don't you think Maggy would have found out that her children will actually only be through incest? which is why i'm pretty sure 'The Volanqar' means the father (Jaime) and not little brother, which doesn't fit in the passage at all

How did i do?

  It only makes sense that Jaime will kill her.  I've looked at it from a million possibilities.  but NO, i don't think the children will die (joff's gone of course).  Jaime is going to come back to claim his children.  Cersei won't let him.  He will kill her.

[Quiet Isle]

On a side note here, has anyone researched the Norse Mythology of Ragnarok and Flimbwinter (that could be spelled wrong).  It is SPOT on for what is going on in ASOIAF.    also, has anyone researched  the BRAHAN SEER of scotland.  you know, like BRAN.  like greenseer.  LIKE BRANSEER.  very interesting parallels.    By the way his last name was ODHAR.  like other.  the OTHERS.  connection?  you decide.

[Quiet Isle]

scurvy, on 08 September 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

Being genderless in Old Valyrian Valonqar could mean Little Sister or Little Sis.  Arya.  Who, as a Faceless Man (or woman/girl -again they come from Old Valyria so it's really Faceless Person) will use the strangler poison to kill Cersei.  She's done it before and it seems like a very common tool for assassination.

  FACELESS MEN CANNOT KILL PEOPLE THEY KNOW.  it CAN'T be arya.  THAT'S CANON.

[SerLoin]

LaDonna Sargent, on 10 September 2012 - 11:45 AM, said:

FACELESS MEN CANNOT KILL PEOPLE THEY KNOW.  it CAN'T be arya.  THAT'S CANON.

Correction...The FM would not send her to kill someone she knows.  That does not preclude her from killing someone she knows.  If the FM find out...I don't think they would be too happy, but that is a different argument.

[Harry the Heir]

scurvy, on 08 September 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

Being genderless in Old Valyrian Valonqar could mean Little Sister or Little Sis.  Arya.  Who, as a Faceless Man (or woman/girl -again they come from Old Valyria so it's really Faceless Person) will use the strangler poison to kill Cersei.  She's done it before and it seems like a very common tool for assassination.

Valyrian isn't genderless. The word "dragon" doesn't have a specific gender because dragons themselves are neither male nor female.

[ab aeterno]

Harry the Heir, on 10 September 2012 - 02:13 PM, said:

Valyrian isn't genderless. The word "dragon" doesn't have a specific gender because dragons themselves are neither male nor female.

I'm not trying to pick fault, but were we told that "dragon" was genderless? I remeber Maester Aemon saying that "prince" was genderless in Valyrian, meaning that Dany could be the Prince that was Promised, but I don't remember anyone saying that "dragon" was.

[Harry the Heir]

DCS1122, on 10 September 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

I'm not trying to pick fault, but were we told that "dragon" was genderless? I remeber Maester Aemon saying that "prince" was genderless in Valyrian, meaning that Dany could be the Prince that was Promised, but I don't remember anyone saying that "dragon" was.

This is from Aemon, talking about the prophecy: "No one ever looked for a girl. It was a prince that was promised, not a princess. ... What fools we were, who thought ourselves so wise! The error crept in from the translation. Dragons are neither male nor female, Barth saw the truth of that, but now one and now the other, as changeable as flame."

[Jaime's Wench]

I really hope the Volanqar doesn't end up being somebody obscure. Tyrion, Jaime... possible Stannis, I will accept. The prophecy reminds me of that given to MacBeth, who was tricked into believing he couldn't be killed by someone who was born of a woman. The fact that Cersei trusts Jaime implicitly and despises Tyrion would result in a similar irony if it turned out to be Jaime.

I really hope Jaime doesn't kill himself. It seems like the logical 'tragic hero' conclusion to his story arc. He chokes his sister to death then kills himself... it would be terribly Shakespearean and cliche.

[ab aeterno]

Harry the Heir, on 10 September 2012 - 03:01 PM, said:

This is from Aemon, talking about the prophecy: "No one ever looked for a girl. It was a prince that was promised, not a princess. ... What fools we were, who thought ourselves so wise! The error crept in from the translation. Dragons are neither male nor female, Barth saw the truth of that, but now one and now the other, as changeable as flame."

Fair enough, thanks for digging up the quote!

[ab aeterno]

Raula, on 10 September 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

I really hope the Volanqar doesn't end up being somebody obscure. Tyrion, Jaime... possible Stannis, I will accept. The prophecy reminds me of that given to MacBeth, who was tricked into believing he couldn't be killed by someone who was born of a woman. The fact that Cersei trusts Jaime implicitly and despises Tyrion would result in a similar irony if it turned out to be Jaime.

I really hope Jaime doesn't kill himself. It seems like the logical 'tragic hero' conclusion to his story arc. He chokes his sister to death then kills himself... it would be terribly Shakespearean and cliche.

A similar irony, yes, buy too predictable from the perspective of a reader IMO. I think Jaime is the most likely candidate, but thinking about it, it could also refer to Stannis or Ned, if what causes her downfall is the revelation of her affair with Jaime etc. The strangling could be figurative- I don't put too much stock in the show concerning these things, but the quote (roughly) "this is what ruling is, lying on a bed of weeds pulling them out one by one before they strangle you in your sleep," (which was invented for the show I think?) might hint at that sort of thing- GRRM has said that he has told the producers how all the major storylines will play out. Personally I think that sort of thing would be better in hindsight- a slow, creeping death rather than a quick ending with Jaime.

[Jaime's Wench]

DCS1122, on 10 September 2012 - 03:31 PM, said:

A similar irony, yes, buy too predictable from the perspective of a reader IMO. I think Jaime is the most likely candidate, but thinking about it, it could also refer to Stannis or Ned, if what causes her downfall is the revelation of her affair with Jaime etc. The strangling could be figurative- I don't put too much stock in the show concerning these things, but the quote (roughly) "this is what ruling is, lying on a bed of weeds pulling them out one by one before they strangle you in your sleep," (which was invented for the show I think?) might hint at that sort of thing- GRRM has said that he has told the producers how all the major storylines will play out. Personally I think that sort of thing would be better in hindsight- a slow, creeping death rather than a quick ending with Jaime.

GRRM spoke about not wishing to be predictable in his last interview. I would choose to play it differently, therefore, with perhaps the Prophecy not coming true at all. I hate prophecies. I only include them sparingly in my own novels.

[Harry the Heir]

I think you have to consider GRRM's desire to be unpredictable in context. He does want to surprise the reader, but the books to date have a pretty traditional setup-payoff structure and he's never really dropped in a major twist from the clear blue sky without foreshadowing it in some fashion. So I don't think that he's just going to let the valonqar prophecy dangle without paying it off. So there are always clues beforehand, and the very obsessive (which includes most people here) can still predict many major plot developments in advance, even if they play as unpredictable for most of the readers.

Also, the longer the series goes on, the easier it should get to predict (in broad strokes) because we know largely what kind of story this is now. It was easy for GRRM to misdirect us into believing that Ned was the hero once upon a time because it was the first book, but something on that level would be harder now.

Edited by Harry the Heir, 10 September 2012 - 03:53 PM.

[ab aeterno]

Raula, on 10 September 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

GRRM spoke about not wishing to be predictable in his last interview. I would choose to play it differently, therefore, with perhaps the Prophecy not coming true at all. I hate prophecies. I only include them sparingly in my own novels.

I could go along with something like that; the prohpesy not coming true but the belief in the prophesy causing someone's (probably Cersei's) downfall anyway. Though you could say that that would be the prophesy coming true anyway in a round about way, if something such as her fear/hatred of Tyrion brought her down.

I can't see the propesy coming to nothing though; all of the other Maggy prophesies came true, and it has been too much of a recurring feature to not come back IMO. I would be very, very surprised if it didn't bring her down either directly or indirectly. I.e. IIRC Melara died because she believed in the prohpesy- I believe that it is implied that Cersei drowned her so that Melara wouldn't be able to marry Jaime.