The Journey from Ice to Lightbringer

[Nezza86]

6 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

I'm sure there are quotes somewhere, but really the only thing you need for proof is Harrenhal. The towers weren't all twisted and eerie until the Targaryens attacked with dragonfire.

I don't think it rules out Dawn being LB though. 

 

I believe that's why hiemal used the term "paraphrase." To paraphrase is to restate something in different terms. Changing the meaning slightly is allowable in paraphrasing.

I don't know. The Others have real, physical swords. I would think there should be a comparable equivalent men could use, but to defeat them overall is probably going to mean taking out their source and a sword may not cut it for that. Might require a dragon.

It will be interesting if we get the rest of the Last Hero story and it includes the making of a special sword.

Great point! I'm disappointed I didn't think of that. Ive been looking for a melted rock for a while. I did get excited though haha. 

Yeah I guess if obsidian is caused by geothermal activity then a sword made from the centre of a celestial body could be fire proof. But ICE has so much plot armour for me. And the sacrifice (or forced sacrifice) of noble blood was the key for me. I am blinkered though.

[Nezza86]

5 hours ago, Praetor Xyn said:

I'm almost positive that if Lightbringer actually exists, then it's Dawn. What is dawn if not the bringer of light? It's also a one-of-a-kind sword with all the properties of Valyrian steel but is as pale as milkglass, so if you say brandish it before a sunrise it would presumably reflect and spread the light everywhere.

Any sword that's on fire would literally bring light as well. Dawn the time of day doesn't bring light. Dawn is the name for the time when the sun first appears at your location and it's the sun that brings light. Sorry that's very pedantic of me. But I think George loves to misdirect you. Look at the shiny, look at the shiny.... oh it was ICE all along haha.

[hiemal]

45 minutes ago, Nezza86 said:

So the stories of thoros setting his sword on fire or when we physically saw Beric set his on fire by nothing more than cutting his hand with it, have no relevance on the legend of a flaming sword.

 

I wouldn't say that, and I probably was too concise in my original post.  I see the flaming sword as a physical manifestation of a magic that is more closely tied to the nature of reality. For example, the mythology of R'hllor surrounding Azor Ahai and Lightbringer, flame and power, have been ritualized to the point where Thoros uses a sword dipped in Wildfire to counterfit it before whatever shift in the magical currents allow him and Beric to use some other power to produce the effect- Combine this with Melisandre's obvious ringer and I, personally, am left with the feeling that while the flaming sword is an important rallying symbol I'm not convinced that it lies at the heart of the actual legend.

45 minutes ago, Nezza86 said:

And we seem to have a story that's shifted from the starks to the lannisters around the same time that ICE has passed hands between the family.

Admittedly, the case for Ice is much weaker. By the time it was forged, the Kings of Winter had already knelt. The speculation I'm running with here is that the VS Ice was a replacement for an earlier blade- one lost during the Battle for the Dawn. I should have brought that up, but sometimes my own tinfoil confuses even me, hehe.

45 minutes ago, Nezza86 said:

 Lightbringer is definitely not the dragons, if the ending is that drogon breathes fire on the nights king to kill him then I'm donating all my books and blu rays to the charity shop haha.

That would be a sorry ending, but my tinfoil doesn't speculate that LB is just the dragons (there is evidence that they existed before the Long Night) but the ability to control them and the dragon does have three heads. I'm confident that whatever confrontation eventually plays out between Ice and Fire, there will still be swords involved and people to swing them. A flaming sword can be a comet, a dragon's breath, an alchemists trick, and a genuine piece of arcane power all at the same time.

[hiemal]

35 minutes ago, White Ravens said:

 

It's nitpicky, I know, but the Freud quote would  more closely state "sometimes a sword is just a sword".  This is in line with my attitude towards the many sword theories floating about on these forums.  Lightbringer is a sword out of the fogs of legend and ancient history.  It may not have ever existed how it is literally described in the legend of AA.  At any rate all these magical swords are tied up in much legend and mystery in the books and have taken on a great deal of perceived importance here in speculation land.  I'm inclined to think that Lightbringer will embody an idea, or serve as a metaphor but won't actually appear as a real physical sword. 

Haha, I was thinking the exact same thing and almost rewrote it, but I figured close enough and it drove my point home a bit better.

Bingo.

[hiemal]

6 hours ago, Praetor Xyn said:

I'm almost positive that if Lightbringer actually exists, then it's Dawn. What is dawn if not the bringer of light? It's also a one-of-a-kind sword with all the properties of Valyrian steel but is as pale as milkglass, so if you say brandish it before a sunrise it would presumably reflect and spread the light everywhere.

I've seen convincing arguments that Dawn is both Lightbringer and Ice and both are fairly plausible. The Bloodstone Emperor is associated with the Black Stone (a meteor?) which reminds me the black stone Magna Mater brought to Rome to honor Cybele. The Dayne's do seem to be pre-Valyrian and there is at least some suggestion that perhaps the Great Empire of the Dawn was active in Westeros on Battle Isle.

As for Ice, if the Stark's were literally in bed with the Others during the Long Night and they (or at least some of them) went down during the Battle for the Dawn it's possible that the Sword was claimed as a trophy and renamed and the story of being forged from the heart of a falling star refers to something more symbolic actualy meteorites.

So many possibilities...

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

THE RIDDLE OF STEEL

STEEL IS STRONG , BUT FLESH IS STRONGER

Another theory coming down . Originally I thought  Dawn , Ice and Lightbringer was the same sword , but now I think that Ice and Dawn  maybe the same sword , while Lightbringer is something different . Now let's look at the description of Dawn pale as milk glass which glittered like ice , it's description matches that of a lesser known sword from J.R.R Tolkien's The Silmarillion  known as Ringil (Cold Star) . And I doubt you would name a burning sword Ice .  Perhaps Lightbringer is not the name of the sword , but the name of its wielder .

[Lady Blizzardborn]

2 minutes ago, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

THE RIDDLE OF STEEL

STEEL IS STRONG , BUT FLESH IS STRONGER

Another theory coming down . Originally I thought  Dawn , Ice and Lightbringer was the same sword , but now I think that Ice and Dawn  maybe the same sword , while Lightbringer is something different . Now let's look at the description of Dawn pale as milk glass which glittered like ice , it's description matches that of a lesser known sword from J.R.R Tolkien's The Silmarillion  known as Ringil (Cold Star) . And I doubt you would name a burning sword Ice .  Perhaps Lightbringer is not the name of the sword , but the name of its wielder .

Never heard of freezer burn? 

I like that!

[Jon's Queen Consort]

2 hours ago, Nezza86 said:

Not irrefutable, but dragon glass kills them and I always think obsidian is some form of rock leftover from volcanic activity and the dragons are fire made flesh. So there's a link to it though it is definitely tenuous. Agreed though that is something that's still to be proven. Probably not a bad assumption though.

Dragon glass is obsidian.

2 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

They are living fire factories. They're not likely to freeze to death given that they produce their own heat. 

You would had been right if it was a normal Winter. But it isn’t, it is an apocalyptic kind of winter. If Aegon’s dragon had problem flying during a normal storm Dany’s trio could end up being ice pops.

My guess that the dragons cannot kill the Others is based on the fact that we were not told that the dragons had be used against the Others during LN 0.1 while we do know that there were ancient Westerosi dragons.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

1 minute ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Dragon glass is obsidian.

You would had been right if it was a normal Winter. But it isn’t, it is an apocalyptic kind of winter. If Aegon’s dragon had problem flying during a normal storm Dany’s trio could end up being ice pops.

My guess that the dragons cannot kill the Others is based on the fact that we were not told that the dragons had be used against the Others during LN 0.1 while we do know that there were ancient Westerosi dragons.

Please refrain from outright saying someone else is wrong just because you think differently. The series isn't over and I'm sure there'll be something to surprise each of us.

Even in an apocalyptic winter it will not be storming all the time.

We're not told anything that was used against the Others in Long Night, so that's not a good criteria. GRRM has deliberately given us almost nothing about the Long Night. Pretty much any suggestion that isn't anachronistic to the setting has a fair chance.

Let me ask you, if the dragons are no good in fighting the Others, then what is their purpose in the overall story arc? Why bother including them if, as you suggest, they're going to freeze to death?

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 minute ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Please refrain from outright saying someone else is wrong just because you think differently. The series isn't over and I'm sure there'll be something to surprise each of us.

Even in an apocalyptic winter it will not be storming all the time.

I am not just thinking differently I am just pointing how huge the difference is. There is a huge difference between a common winter or storm and apocalypse.

4 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

We're not told anything that was used against the Others in Long Night, so that's not a good criteria. GRRM has deliberately given us almost nothing about the Long Night. Pretty much any suggestion that isn't anachronistic to the setting has a fair chance.

And do you think that if they actually do kill the Others is a “fair chance”? Or an old boring “powerful good vs many but weak evil”? Because if they actually do kill the Others because it seems like the latter.

8 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Let me ask you, if the dragons are no good in fighting the Others, then what is their purpose in the overall story arc? Why bother including them if, as you suggest, they're going to freeze to death?

Except from taking out the lesser villains or the wights? Three flying red herrings. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

3 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I am not just thinking differently I am just pointing how huge the difference is. There is a huge difference between a common winter or storm and apocalypse.

And do you think that if they actually do kill the Others is a “fair chance”? Or an old boring “powerful good vs many but weak evil”? Because if they actually do kill the Others because it seems like the latter.

Except from taking out the lesser villains or the wights? Three flying red herrings. 

You are thinking differently. I think the dragons will be fine. You think they won't. That is a difference of thought.

Of course there's a difference between a common winter and an apocalyptic one. There's also a difference between a gecko and a dragon. The dragons are the opposite to the Others. Fire and Ice, like it says in the title of the series.

You misunderstood. I was not saying anything about the odds of battle being fair. I was saying that at this point most ideas posited for ways to defeat the Others have a fair chance of being correct or valid. 

Flying red herrings makes no sense. Martin doesn't write that way. Does he use red herrings? Sure. Does he make them central to the story? No. But out of curiosity what are they supposedly red herrings for?

[Praetor Xyn]

3 hours ago, Nezza86 said:

I like that idea, otherwise it's hard to see how Dawn gets into the hands of Jon. Of course someone else might be AA but I'm set on Jon. So naysayers how does your AA get their hands on Dawn if Dawn is or will become Lightbringer?

One theory is that Dawn is the original Ice, and after the Night's King was defeated, the Starks in their shame gave it to House Dayne to steward. There were a series of threads on this board about it and Jon Snow being the next SotM that I really liked but I can't hunt up the links at the moment.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

20 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

You are thinking differently. I think the dragons will be fine. You think they won't. That is a difference of thought.

I meant the difference between a common winter and LN2.0.

20 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Of course there's a difference between a common winter and an apocalyptic one. There's also a difference between a gecko and a dragon. The dragons are the opposite to the Others. Fire and Ice, like it says in the title of the series.

True but Dany's dragons are closer to lizards than to Aegon's dragons. 

20 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Flying red herrings makes no sense. Martin doesn't write that way. Does he use red herrings? Sure. Does he make them central to the story? No. But out of curiosity what are they supposedly red herrings for?

Yet they didn't supposed to be in the books, they were added later. If they were the weapon of humanity against the Others why how they were not in the original plan? The humans and nature. I believe that bothe the Others and the dragons are enemies of the humanity and they both have to die.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

1 minute ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

I meant the difference between a common winter and LN2.0.

True but Dany's dragons are closer tolizards than Aegon's dragons. 

Yet they didn't supposed to be in the books, they were added later. If they were the weapon of humanity against the Others why how they were not in the original plan? 

And that was not the difference I meant. Seems we missed each other on that point.

The size of the dragons in question is not material. Aegon's dragons aren't around, so they can't do any good against Others, wights, or anything else.

We don't know the that the Others were in the original plan either. And lest you mention that three-page summary, it was not the original plan. 

[fire&blood]

I loved reading this theory.  ICE being something more than we think...being the Song of ICE and FIRE (ICE becoming FIRE) is a fascinating theory. Love the comparison to the Elder Wand btw. Thanks for the post. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

21 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

The size of the dragons in question is not material. Aegon's dragons aren't around, so they can't do any good against Others, wights, or anything else.

True. My point still stands though. We do know that there were ancient Westerosi dragons, if they had any effect on the Others there would had been a mention about it.

21 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

We don't know the that the Others were in the original plan either. And lest you mention that three-page summary, it was not the original plan. 

You are right we don't know if the Others were in the original plan however we know that the dragons were not.  

[Lady Blizzardborn]

1 minute ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

True. My point still stands though. We do know that there were ancient Westerosi dragons, if they had any effect on the Others there would had been a mention about it.

You are right we don't know if the Others were in the original plan however we know that the dragons were not.  

If that were the case, then nothing would have any effect on the Others because there were no mentions of anything working against them. You seem to be forgetting that the Long Night was 8,000 years before Aegon showed up, 4,000 years before the Andals. There were no records. The characters literally know NOTHING about how to defeat the Others, and Sam only finds out about the obsidian by accident. They don't even have the knowledge of fire killing the wights. 

It's silly to assume that there would be mentions of dragons in relation to the Long Night when there aren't mentions of anything to use against the Others. It's also silly to assume that if they didn't have dragons during the first Long Night, that would somehow automatically mean they wouldn't be useful in a second Long Night.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

@Jon's Queen Consort I've been thinking about this for the last few minutes and decided you may be right. Maybe they didn't have dragons during the last Long Night.

Maybe that's why it lasted a generation.

Maybe having dragons the next time around will make it much, much shorter. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

@Lady Blizzardborn My point is that we cannot say for sure if the dragons can harm the Others and more importantly Dany’s three baby dragons will be able to fight against the Others. I believe that we underestimate the LN2.0 and overestimate the lizard babies.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

Just now, Jon's Queen Consort said:

@Lady Blizzardborn My point is that we cannot say for sure if the dragons can harm the Others and more importantly Dany’s three baby dragons will be able to fight against the Others. I believe that we underestimate the LN2.0 and overestimate the lizard babies.

They're not babies anymore. They're big enough to ride, and they spit fire on command.

And my point is that we have no reason to believe that the dragons won't be of help in fighting LN2.0

We've only got two books left so there isn't time to have a generation-long winter. Something has to make this one a much shorter battle. Dragons are a logical possibility for what will make the difference.