Jump to content

Pacts and the Others.


Helikzhan

Recommended Posts

I don't know if this has been discussed at length so forgive me if I'm resurrecting it. I had a thought about the pact the First Men may have made with the Others. Specifically Craster and his role in this pact sacrificing his sons. We can assume that Craster's Keep was a refilling depot for the Others based on what Gilly told Jon. His own family lineage or one he joined may have trained him to serve the pact. The pact being only meaningful on one side of the wall over thousands of years likely gets forgotten on the other side. 

Do you think this pact was made between the First Men and the Others at the time to ward / sacrifice human kin to the Others? In exchange for the pact, the Others would return north. On this condition the wall would be constructed keeping outsiders out and fresh babies would be given to the Others for their society (whatever that is). Maybe the War for the Dawn took its toll on the Others and they needed that pact to replenish? 

 

It would explain a few things. 

1. Craster and his role in sacrificing sons and impregnating all of his daughters (more seeds more offerings). While this behavior may seem normal in the books, Craster really stands out to me.

2. Why the Others kill any man, woman or child found north of the wall that isn't at Craster's Keep. 

3.  Why the official story doesn't make a lot of sense (First men with Bronze weapons and CoTF) beating ice zombies and murderous wights on the battlefield. 

 

We already have some idea that the Andal version of this age isn't very useful. So maybe the official story got this part all wrong? I do think there was a War for the Dawn event but I don't think it ended how we read it ended. I think the war was lost actually and the remaining CoTF and First Men were instructed to build the wall and give babies. Maybe all the associated prophecies keyed in on local events and credited them with the end when it had officially ended with the surrender in Westeros. 

 

One last point: We know that the First Men crossed the arm of Dorne around 12,000 BCE. I find this significant because it means First Men had no ships to cross water. If this is so, then it's also possible that the wall was constructed on the order of the Others because the Others believed First Men could not enter their territories any other way. When looking at the defense a wall could provide, it makes much more sense that the wall was built to protect the far north against those south of the wall wherever they may come from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Helikzhan said:

One last point: We know that the First Men crossed the arm of Dorne around 12,000 BCE. I find this significant because it means First Men had no ships to cross water. If this is so, then it's also possible that the wall was constructed on the order of the Others because the Others believed First Men could not enter their territories any other way. When looking at the defense a wall could provide, it makes much more sense that the wall was built to protect the far north against those south of the wall wherever they may come from. 

While the First Men might have mostly crossed into Westeros through the land bridge, I doubt that any bronze-age-technology humans couldn't build any rafts/boats that traverse rivers and hug the coasts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The show's version of the origin of the Others 

Spoiler

The children created the others from human stock to defend them against the first men.

The books have yet to tell use where they came from.  But we have two clues.

  • The Others are powerful skin changers.  They can control the flesh of the dead.  Powerful stuff.  Perhaps the ability came from them originally and it passed on to the First Men.  Parallels the Valyrian resistance to heat coming from their dragons.
  • They prized Craster's baby boys.  There is clearly something unique about Craster.  They are "ice" so it could mean Craster is a Stark.

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.  

 

Very interesting question. I just assumed it was a theme in GRRM work where women were only rarely seen as fit for battle (see Brienne or the Sand Snakes). Though now you mention it there must be a reason for it as female wights are used. Maybe a female Other can't be due to their making. Or like we're discussing they count as wards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Helikzhan said:

 

Very interesting question. I just assumed it was a theme in GRRM work where women were only rarely seen as fit for battle (see Brienne or the Sand Snakes). Though now you mention it there must be a reason for it as female wights are used. Maybe a female Other can't be due to their making. Or like we're discussing they count as wards.

The Others seem to have a culture.  They have armor and weapons.  They have humor.  Maybe they have a culture.  That culture could relegate their females to non-combat roles.  We know they have females.  The Night's Queen.  If the Others we are seeing is their equivalent of a military force they would consists mainly of males.  If they are Hive-Minded as some theorists believe them to be, maybe there can only be one queen per hive.  One of the queens took an interest in the 13th lord commander, a Stark.  Why?  Perhaps his blood was compatible with theirs.  Are we then sure that all of their children are dead?  Could the Starks be descended from one of their half ice children?  Did they sacrifice all of their children to their gods?  Could be this is the reason why the Starks sacrificed to the trees.  It is a family tradition that they must continue, to sacrifice a son to the trees on some predetermined interval.  Each generation?  Each turn of the season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

The Others seem to have a culture.  They have armor and weapons.  They have humor.  Maybe they have a culture.  That culture could relegate their females to non-combat roles.  We know they have females.  The Night's Queen.  If the Others we are seeing is their equivalent of a military force they would consists mainly of males.  If they are Hive-Minded as some theorists believe them to be, maybe there can only be one queen per hive.  One of the queens took an interest in the 13th lord commander, a Stark.  Why?  Perhaps his blood was compatible with theirs.  Are we then sure that all of their children are dead?  Could the Starks be descended from one of their half ice children?  Did they sacrifice all of their children to their gods?  Could be this is the reason why the Starks sacrificed to the trees.  It is a family tradition that they must continue, to sacrifice a son to the trees on some predetermined interval.  Each generation?  Each turn of the season?

That's a good point. If viewing the south to the Others there would be few or no human women either. Aside from Craster's Keep of course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Magical abilities are carried in the bloodlines.  It makes sense to those with the power to avoid diluting their blood.  Craster unknowingly did just that.  His bloodline was pure as pure can get.  The Others would want Craster's son back.  Jon sent the wrong baby to safety.  

We have to ask why the Night's Queen wanted to mate with a human in the first place.  Maybe she wanted to refresh their blood line without diluting their skin change abilities and the Stark lord commander was a skin changer.  I do like the theory that one or more of their children survived and Craster (or the Starks) are descended from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

I don't know if this has been discussed at length so forgive me if I'm resurrecting it. I had a thought about the pact the First Men may have made with the Others. Specifically Craster and his role in this pact sacrificing his sons. We can assume that Craster's Keep was a refilling depot for the Others based on what Gilly told Jon. His own family lineage or one he joined may have trained him to serve the pact. The pact being only meaningful on one side of the wall over thousands of years likely gets forgotten on the other side. 

Do you think this pact was made between the First Men and the Others at the time to ward / sacrifice human kin to the Others?

No,  I don't. 

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

In exchange for the pact, the Others would return north. On this condition the wall would be constructed keeping outsiders out and fresh babies would be given to the Others for their society (whatever that is). Maybe the War for the Dawn took its toll on the Others and they needed that pact to replenish? 

But if they won why the need for a pact at all?

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

It would explain a few things. 

1. Craster and his role in sacrificing sons and impregnating all of his daughters (more seeds more offerings). While this behavior may seem normal in the books, Craster really stands out to me.

I don't think his behaviour is normal in Westeros... not even beyond the Wall. :eek:

 

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

2. Why the Others kill any man, woman or child found north of the wall that isn't at Craster's Keep. 

We don't know that. 

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

3.  Why the official story doesn't make a lot of sense (First men with Bronze weapons and CoTF) beating ice zombies and murderous wights on the battlefield. 

Course it does. We know, we have "seen w/ our own eyes" what happened to ser Puddles when Sam accidentally stabbed him w/ the obsidian. 

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

We already have some idea that the Andal version of this age isn't very useful. So maybe the official story got this part all wrong? I do think there was a War for the Dawn event but I don't think it ended how we read it ended. I think the war was lost actually and the remaining CoTF and First Men were instructed to build the wall and give babies. Maybe all the associated prophecies keyed in on local events and credited them with the end when it had officially ended with the surrender in Westeros. 

What little info we have points to the FM + CotF having won. 

1 hour ago, Helikzhan said:

One last point: We know that the First Men crossed the arm of Dorne around 12,000 BCE. I find this significant because it means First Men had no ships to cross water. If this is so, then it's also possible that the wall was constructed on the order of the Others because the Others believed First Men could not enter their territories any other way. When looking at the defense a wall could provide, it makes much more sense that the wall was built to protect the far north against those south of the wall wherever they may come from. 

We actually don't know that either... It could be a lot, lot less. Or not. Impossible to be sure with what we know at the mo. 

48 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

The show's version of the origin of the Others 

  Reveal hidden contents

The children created the others from human stock to defend them against the first men.

 

 

No. Show. Talk. Not even in secret eye spoiler thingy. 

 

 

48 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

 

The books have yet to tell use where they came from.  But we have two clues.

  • The Others are powerful skin changers.  They can control the flesh of the dead.  Powerful stuff.  Perhaps the ability came from them originally and it passed on to the First Men.  Parallels the Valyrian resistance to heat coming from their dragons.

The WW being skinchangers would have to be a proven theory before it can be a clue to anything else, and it isn't. It's a theory - a good one imo - but so far just a theory. 

48 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:
  • They prized Craster's baby boys.  There is clearly something unique about Craster.  They are "ice" so it could mean Craster is a Stark.

We don't know that. We know one baby boy was taken. End of story. What's unique about Craster is that he's the most fucked up creep in ASoIaF (together w/ Ramsay). And come to think about it, in many regards worse than Ramsay! :ack:

 

48 minutes ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.  

If the WW demand babies from Craster, or if there's some treaty between Craster and them, it may very well be for babies regardless of gender. And Craster spins it to his daughter-wives that the "Gods" demand boys... only that's just his way of getting rid of offspring that, in his eyes, would be more likely to pose a real threat/opposition to his rule. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

The Others are powerful skin changers.  They can control the flesh of the dead.  Powerful stuff.  Perhaps the ability came from them originally and it passed on to the First Men.  Parallels the Valyrian resistance to heat coming from their dragons.

So you're suggesting that humans got the ability to warg/skin change by breeding with the Others and not Children of the Forest? I actually kind of like that theory.

 

2 hours ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.  

I've always had the theory that they simply have too few females, or none at all, to reproduce naturally with and no one is sacrificing girls to them. And I actually began to wonder whether or not that was intentional on the First Men's part; if the First Men were selective in which boys they chose to sacrifice, they could give the Others their weak sons only and save their strong sons for future fighting and reproduction (similarily to Sparta). The Free Folk know that incest makes children weak and there is no way Craster is unaware of this fact. Perhaps he is sacrificing his sons by his daughters to the Others on purpose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Enzo Ferrari said:

The show's version of the origin of the Others 

  Reveal hidden contents

The children created the others from human stock to defend them against the first men.

The books have yet to tell use where they came from.  But we have two clues.

  • The Others are powerful skin changers.  They can control the flesh of the dead.  Powerful stuff.  Perhaps the ability came from them originally and it passed on to the First Men.  Parallels the Valyrian resistance to heat coming from their dragons.
  • They prized Craster's baby boys.  There is clearly something unique about Craster.  They are "ice" so it could mean Craster is a Stark.

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.  

Good points in the rest of the post, i especially like the idea of a Other Day Watch. Onto the bolded part, maybe i am misunderstanding what you mean but that seems kind of pointless?

Taking the male babies from just one family won't weaken the potential male warriors of the whole human race. Unless you are implying that more families ( like almost all of them) in the past sacrificed babies to the others. If that's true, it begs the question: why were they ok with the numbers of sacrifices getting so low over the years?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Vaedys Targaryen said:

Why only boys?  Because it serves to keep men weak when they have to give up their future warriors?  Because we are only seeing a small part of their population and what we are seeing is the equivalent of their Night Watch.  Their Day Watch.  Other males who have sworn their lives to protect their realm from an outside threat.

 

House Mormont comes to mind as a possible exception to that rule.

Quote

 Their hall is made of huge logs, surrounded by an earthen palisade. On the gate is a carving of a woman in a bearskin with a child in one arm suckling at her breast and a battleaxe in the other. Like the other women of Bear Island, the women of House Mormont learn how to defend themselves from ironmen and wildlings.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/House_Mormont

I find the subject of the Others most confusing, @Enzo Ferrari

I'm not entirely sure about their origins, their motivations or even the nature of their game.

TWOW can't come soon enough for me.

 

 

10 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Magical abilities are carried in the bloodlines.  It makes sense to those with the power to avoid diluting their blood.  Craster unknowingly did just that.  His bloodline was pure as pure can get.  The Others would want Craster's son back.  Jon sent the wrong baby to safety. ...

I hadn't thought of that, @Moiraine Sedai. Good catch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Course it does. We know, we have "seen w/ our own eyes" what happened to ser Puddles when Sam accidentally stabbed him w/ the obsidian. 

 

Sam was close enough to the Other without any of his wight friends. The Other let his guard down with Sam because he took him to be a coward. He simply didn't respect Sam enough to bear martial or necromancer skills. 

First Men armed with bronze or obsidian, even with CoTF (who were also slaughtered by the Others) would be zero match against legions of wights and Others bearing martial prowess. It might be crazy on my part but I disbelieve they won. 

 

10 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

We actually don't know that either... It could be a lot, lot less. Or not. Impossible to be sure with what we know at the mo. 

What time it actually happened is less important than what happened. Given the origin of the First Men (had to be Essos) we know they would be used to horses, open plains and far less sea faring. The Arm of Dorne makes a lot of sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...