Heresy 185

[House Cambodia]

Wow, that's great. 100+ different 'heresies', or 100+ threads repeating the same few?

[Arry'sFleas]

8 hours ago, Voice said:

Actually, we do have one tidbit I recently found for @Matthew. in this post.

Thanks, I had missed it from GoT Bran 7:

Maester Luwin tugged at his chain collar where it chafed against his neck. <snip>. Male and female hunted together, with weirwood bows and flying snares

 

I actually had spotted the same one in the world book:

They learned to make bows of weirwood and to construct flying snares of grass, and both of the sexes hunted with these.

 

However, in Bran 7 it is a Mr Luwin history lesson. But is there any evidence that there are still any CotF males alive and caving?

 

The WB also mentions this bit ' the greenseers—the wise men of the children—were able to see through the eyes of the carved weirwoods.'

But perhaps the word 'men' here is to be taken in the same context as 'First men' ie meaning 'people'. After all, can only males be greenseers?

 

[Arry'sFleas]

4 hours ago, Lady Dyanna said:

The threads are still around and archived and can be found if you do a Google search for them. Heresy 100 has a series of essays that were done at the time as a lead up to the Centennial edition.

 

this one is also quite useful

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/98456-the-heretics-guide-to-heresy/

 

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

On 5/23/2016 at 9:25 AM, Black Crow said:

We may not, alas, be allowed to discuss the show, but it does indeed confirm an awful lot of the "big" stuff we have sweated on Heresy.

A belated congrats, BC. Looks like you've attracted a couple of screenwriters along the way.  They must read Heresy.  

'Course, the great irony - in my view, and I realize some will disagree - is that now less than ever is discussion of the show likely to "spoil" those interested in the books. Because I just don't think the screenwriters are doing the same thing Martin set out to do. That said, folks have always had a bear of a time keeping the two versions apart - so I suppose separating the conversations makes sense. (Otherwise, there ends up being nowhere to discuss the books at all.)  Think you'll move Heresy over to the show boards permanently?

[Black Crow]

10 hours ago, House Cambodia said:

Wow, that's great. 100+ different 'heresies', or 100+ threads repeating the same few?

Basically we're on slightly less that 185 iterations of discussion going back to about October of 2011 mostly talking about the Starks, Winterfell, the Wall and the magic otherlands beyond from a variety of perspectives. We lost a couple on the way for various reasons but there are certainly more that 180:

As some of you will recall Heresy 137 was destroyed by a novice named Vinculus who got caught short one night and grabbed the first thing he saw to wipe his arse afterwards. As it happens all that was lost was the OP which is pretty much the same from heresy to heresy but he was so stricken with terror at what he'd done that he tore up the rest and ate it in an attempt to destroy the evidence. 

Unfortunately all the words then appeared on his skin. Like most novices he rarely washed so this curious mark of his guilt went undiscovered for some time. Eventually however the secret came out and his fellow novices were set to copying it out but no-one could agree as to the running order of the posts and some of the text ran into places no-one cared to go so that while a number of transcripts are understood to exist, most are regarded as incomplete or apocryphal.

[Black Crow]

4 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

A belated congrats, BC. Looks like you've attracted a couple of screenwriters along the way.  They must read Heresy.  

'Course, the great irony - in my view, and I realize some will disagree - is that now less than ever is discussion of the show likely to "spoil" those interested in the books. Because I just don't think the screenwriters are doing the same thing Martin set out to do. That said, folks have always had a bear of a time keeping the two versions apart - so I suppose separating the conversations makes sense. (Otherwise, there ends up being nowhere to discuss the books at all.)  Think you'll move Heresy over to the show boards permanently?

Ah well, what's rank heresy today is orthodoxy tomorrow...

The forum over on the mummers' side is structured differently with different sub-forums for each episode so a permanent presence isn't really practical and hopefully Winds of Winter will be out before the next season anyway. And yes the two are quite different for the reasons I gave earlier - other than for certain important milestones, and given their importance I don't see the dam holding for much longer. So we'll stick with the books over here.

[Black Crow]

7 hours ago, Arry'sFleas said:

Thanks, I had missed it from GoT Bran 7:

Maester Luwin tugged at his chain collar where it chafed against his neck. <snip>. Male and female hunted together, with weirwood bows and flying snares

 

I actually had spotted the same one in the world book:

They learned to make bows of weirwood and to construct flying snares of grass, and both of the sexes hunted with these.

 

However, in Bran 7 it is a Mr Luwin history lesson. But is there any evidence that there are still any CotF males alive and caving?

 

The WB also mentions this bit ' the greenseers—the wise men of the children—were able to see through the eyes of the carved weirwoods.'

But perhaps the word 'men' here is to be taken in the same context as 'First men' ie meaning 'people'. After all, can only males be greenseers?

 

I'm not sure where this one is coming from. Leaf, obviously, is female and prominent because she's Bran's contact/interpreter but I never got the impression from the text that all of the tree-huggers in the cave were female; I don't recall any comment made to that effect and just assumed they were a regular lot of boys and girls.

[Fox of House McCloud]

14 hours ago, Lady Dyanna said:

There truly are 184 prior renditions of this thread. I believe it was started way back in 2011. Unfortunately with the latest update on Westeros most of the links to the prior heresy threads in the guide don't work correctly any more. The threads are still around and archived and can be found if you do a Google search for them. Heresy 100 has a series of essays that were done at the time as a lead up to the Centennial edition. 

 

Thanks, I'll definitely check that out! 

On the subject, though, it seems like a ton of Old Nan's stories tie really well into these 'heresies'. Has this been talked about much? I have a few ideas, but don't want to just repeat what others have already noticed... 

[Black Crow]

Not recently, although we have done in the distant past. In fact one hardly soul quite early on collated all her stories and references by other characters to her stories, but that was a long time ago so if you have some ideas post away and we'll see where they go.

[Matthew.]

Random musing for 5/25/2016:

Although the name "First Men" is understood in modern Westeros as a chronological term, telling us that the First Men arrived earlier than, say, the Andals, the title might actually have an alternate meaning. I'm taking some inspiration here from random oddities, such as the "First Keep" in Winterfell, which strikes me as a weird name, and the "First King" of legend.

Maybe the original meaning of the title First Men wasn't meant to imply chronology, but status. The First Men held primacy among all other men, a status granted to them by the Pact; the First Men adopted the weirwood and inherited the sorcery of the CotF, and all lesser men must obey the Pact or become sacrifice fodder.

Okay, that's all probably wrong, but I do find it interesting that "First Men" is a term used even as far north as the Thenns, when it's unlikely that they've even had occasion to interact with many other types of men, much less ever been given Andalized history lessons by some maester of the Citadel.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not trying to imply that the Thenns would be ignorant of the general history south of the Wall, such as the coming of the Andals, or the Targaryens, and so forth, I just find it interesting that that particular title would take root on such a widespread basis, especially among a people who, with a few exceptions, still speak the Old Tongue, and have declared themselves "the last of the First Men."

[Black Crow]

Interesting point and if I read you aright they should more properly be First among Men. Its certainly not impossible. If we look to the Andals their invasion was accomplished by relatively few of them conquering or marrying into the local aristocracy. The same may have been true of the First Men. We've noted before that they may not literally have been the first men to reach Westeros, but rather were aristos who set up for petty kings over the original inhabitants and thus were first as in first in order of precedence over them. Its certainly what we see in the early invasions of Britain and Ireland. What we think of as the Celts were just the latest in a long line of incomers, all setting up for kings over their predecessors.

[jopher]

54 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

Random musing for 5/25/2016:

Although the name "First Men" is understood in modern Westeros as a chronological term, telling us that the First Men arrived earlier than, say, the Andals, the title might actually have an alternate meaning. I'm taking some inspiration here from random oddities, such as the "First Keep" in Winterfell, which strikes me as a weird name, and the "First King" of legend.

Maybe the original meaning of the title First Men wasn't meant to imply chronology, but status. The First Men held primacy among all other men, a status granted to them by the Pact; the First Men adopted the weirwood and inherited the sorcery of the CotF, and all lesser men must obey the Pact or become sacrifice fodder."

 

Hmmmmm. You may be onto something. In the Nights Watch, they use the titles too! First Ranger, First Builder, First.... etc

[Matthew.]

2 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Interesting point and if I read you aright they should more properly be First among Men. Its certainly not impossible. If we look to the Andals their invasion was accomplished by relatively few of them conquering or marrying into the local aristocracy. The same may have been true of the First Men. We've noted before that they may not literally have been the first men to reach Westeros, but rather were aristos who set up for petty kings over the original inhabitants and thus were first as in first in order of precedence over them.

This is what I was getting at, and I think examples like the Iron Born may slightly contradict the simplistic picture that Luwin creates of ancient Westerosi history, and the so-called First Men.

 

2 hours ago, jopher said:

Hmmmmm. You may be onto something. In the Nights Watch, they use the titles too! First Ranger, First Builder, First.... etc

This is a great example that I hadn't even considered, even more so because the NW is such an old institution, and may itself have been founded in the aftermath of some agreement between men and CotF.

I had a far more speculative scenario I wanted to lay out, involving the "curse of the First King," the First Keep, the nine weirwoods outside the Wall, the nine iron swords on the Stark crown, the notion of defeated rival kings being forced to serve at the Wall...unfortunately, I can't really make it fit, because the First King, if he ever existed, is supposed to be a Dustin ancestor rather than a Stark ancestor. Oh well :I

[Arry'sFleas]

true, there is nothing saying that all the Children are females in the cave, but nevertheless there are no male children introduced.

I was wondering if there is not a link between this situation and the dwindling of the race as mentioned by Leaf.

Also, linked to this is the lack of news or presence of Benjen Stark with these Children. After all, where else would Ben Jen Stark be if not with the Children?

[Arry'sFleas]

7 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Heresy 137 was destroyed by a novice named Vinculus who got caught short one night and grabbed the first thing he saw to wipe his arse afterwards

nicely written..

eventually, was his manhood chopped off and fed to the goats?

[Mace Cooterian]

13 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

A belated congrats, BC. Looks like you've attracted a couple of screenwriters along the way.  They must read Heresy.  

'Course, the great irony - in my view, and I realize some will disagree - is that now less than ever is discussion of the show likely to "spoil" those interested in the books. Because I just don't think the screenwriters are doing the same thing Martin set out to do. That said, folks have always had a bear of a time keeping the two versions apart - so I suppose separating the conversations makes sense. (Otherwise, there ends up being nowhere to discuss the books at all.)  Think you'll move Heresy over to the show boards permanently?

Let's hope not.  I think there is plenty of room in the play pen to keep a mummer's version and a canon version.

Although I must confess...I do like playing in both sides from time to time.  The challenge for everyone is keeping things in check and to avoid the common pitfall of making claims in one area while citing events from the other side...of the play pen, of course.

Besides, once TWoW comes out later this year (right, I'm holding my breath too) then this subject takes on a different perspective.  I think.

[Black Crow]

4 hours ago, Mace Cooterian said:

Let's hope not.  I think there is plenty of room in the play pen to keep a mummer's version and a canon version.

Although I must confess...I do like playing in both sides from time to time.  The challenge for everyone is keeping things in check and to avoid the common pitfall of making claims in one area while citing events from the other side...of the play pen, of course.

Besides, once TWoW comes out later this year (right, I'm holding my breath too) then this subject takes on a different perspective.  I think.

I'd say so. The real question is the milestones. With no WoW to base it on the mummers version is largely going to be irrelevant to book-based discussion anyway. What is going to be important is applying the milestones to this side of the board. Presumably an SSM confirming one or all of them will be sufficient to release them.

[House Cambodia]

14 hours ago, Black Crow said:

I'm not sure where this one is coming from. Leaf, obviously, is female and prominent because she's Bran's contact/interpreter but I never got the impression from the text that all of the tree-huggers in the cave were female; I don't recall any comment made to that effect and just assumed they were a regular lot of boys and girls.

To be fair, they do look kinda asexual, so it might be hard to tell unless you're a chicken sexer by trade. By the same token, who's to say that under all the armour and rotting flesh, some of the Others aren't female?

[Black Crow]

The wights may be rotten, but Craster's boys certainly aint: "the Others are not dead" - GRRM

[House Cambodia]

I meant the undead horses they ride on.