Barbrey Dustin

Bowen Marsh was right to remove Jon from office.

487 posts in this topic

26 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, technically any citizen born in the US can ran for POTUS, right? I mean, you could do it assuming you are that. But nobody would give you any votes, of course. You have to be famous or the means to become famous rather quickly - which means you need money.

Obama and Reagan acquired both during their (political) careers.

Right, but that doesn't really apply to an organization with a small number of people.  It's like saying the people on your community board (if you live in a city) or town council are the wealthiest or most powerful.  Often they aren't, especially not at first.  It's the people who want to put the time in.

Obama acquired his "wealth" because he was a very competent lawyer.  He became a politician because he was a gifted public speaker, and became President almost entirely on that basis; his speech at the 2004 DNC was essentially his only exposure to the national spotlight before his campaign.  In other words, his success was due to the fact that he was smart, hardworking, and good at what he did.  You are confusing causation with correlation - President's tend to be wealthy, or famous, or powerful, because no one runs for the most powerful position in the world without being known in SOME way.  But it's disingenuous to imply that one must be wealthy or powerful to aspire to this.

Reagan became known as an actor, became president of SAG through sheer luck, and parlayed that into turning on his members by finking to HUAC.  That allowed him the political credibility to run on the right, and he gauged the temperature of the American polity astutely and became President.  At no point was he particularly rich, or particularly famous.  Yes, George W Bush and Donald Trump are both morons born to huge wealth, which is the only reason they became successful politicians, but that doesn't apply across every President.

And to tie it back to the Night's Watch - essentially everyone knows everyone's name within the Watch, as there are only 1,000 people.  One can gain influence and respect without having "power" and certainly not wealth.  Qhorin Halfhand and Donal Noye are well respected and have powerful voices within the institution despite holding no ranks and no lordly titles.

40 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

You see how stable that system is when people still stick to candidates with noble backgrounds - like Mallister, Pyke, Slynt, Marsh, Yarwyck, or Jon Snow - rather than competent commoners even after a succession of tragedies eradicated most of the noble elite of the Watch.

Pyke isn't a noble, and I don't know we have any evidence Bowen Marsh is either.  They are both competent.  And while I get your point, to be nitpicky, Jon isn't a noble either.  He's a bastard.

And people speak up for those with leadership experience, which is to be expected after a disaster.  Mallister and Pyke run the two side forts, and Marsh and Yarwyck each head important subgroups within the Watch.  And Slynt, for all his many faults, was technically the head of a large armed force for the last several years at least, and has the added benefit of perhaps being in a position to requisition more support from Kings Landing if elected.

In the final analysis, the race comes down to Cotter Pyke and Denys Mallister.  A competent commoner and a competent noble.  So what is the issue?  You haven't even mentioned which "competent commoner" we're supposed to be considering - all the rangers, basically, are dead.  So are folks like Donal Noye.  No one else actually steps up to be Lord Commander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

LV, I’m going to take the easy way out and go with what is said in the link below. If there has been information released in the App or the coffee table book that disputes it let me know.  Monastic is an interesting word. In my mind a monk, using Thomas Merton as an example, is not a taking up arms to defend the realm.

I'm not LV, but I quite sure he means this kind of monastic order:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Order

and this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta

and maybe you know this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar

there were a lot more. Of course, the still existing aren't military orders anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

So where do you think those women and boys and girls there came from? Especially the young one who reminded Jon of Arya when she pretended to be a boy to be allowed to help fight the wildlings? Depending how long the brothel exists there many of the people at Mole's Town must be descendants of black brothers fucking them. If all the women there drank moon tea regularly then the men who are pimping their wives or close kin out to the black brothers wouldn't have any grandchildren and the village would disappear within a generation or two.

Long story short, I disagree w/ everything you said, and I have no time to reply properly at the mo. But here we have a mistake, so let me address that now.

The girl who wanted to join the Watch was a wildling, as were all the other kids we saw in that scene. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Morte said:

I'm not LV, but I quite sure he means this kind of monastic order:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Order

and this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta

and maybe you know this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar

there were a lot more. Of course, the still existing aren't military orders anymore.

Thanks for sharing the information and the links.

What boggles my mind is that this part of my post was left out.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Night's_Watch

The Night's Watch is a military order dedicated to holding the Wall, the immense fortification on the northern border of the Seven Kingdoms, defending the realms of men from what lies beyond the Wall. The order's foundation dates back to the Age of Heroes, at the time when the Others were pushed back. The men of Night's Watch wear only black, and they are known as black brothers.[1] Recruits who join the Watch are said to take the black.[2]

For conversational purposes I will add oaths.

The below is the NW oath.

A Game of Thrones - Jon VI    "Hear my words, and bear witness to my vow," they recited, their voices filling the twilit grove. "Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

The below is the Kingsguard oath as relayed by Barristian.

A Dance with Dragons - The Queensguard     The first duty of the Kingsguard was to defend the king from harm or threat. The white knights were sworn to obey the king's commands as well, to keep his secrets, counsel him when counsel was requested and keep silent when it was not, serve his pleasure and defend his name and honor. Strictly speaking, it was purely the king's choice whether or not to extend Kingsguard protection to others, even those of royal blood. Some kings thought it right and proper to dispatch Kingsguard to serve and defend their wives and children, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins of greater and lesser degree, and occasionally even their lovers, mistresses, and bastards. But others preferred to use household knights and men-at-arms for those purposes, whilst keeping their seven as their own personal guard, never far from their sides.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

What boggles my mind is that this part of my post was left out.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Night's_Watch

The Night's Watch is a military order dedicated to holding the Wall, the immense fortification on the northern border of the Seven Kingdoms, defending the realms of men from what lies beyond the Wall. The order's foundation dates back to the Age of Heroes, at the time when the Others were pushed back. The men of Night's Watch wear only black, and they are known as black brothers.[1] Recruits who join the Watch are said to take the black.[2]

I'm not quite sure at what you are hinting in this text, but as all knightly/monastic orders, the NW is referring to its members as "brothers" and "sisters" [if there are women in the order - fun fact, maybe coming soon to Westeros (spear wifes!): most of this orders of old which still exist today have female branches now], and as all orders the NW has its own colours, in this case: black (for the KG/QK the colour is white).

17 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

A Game of Thrones - Jon VI    "Hear my words, and bear witness to my vow," they recited, their voices filling the twilit grove. "Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

 

The below is the Kingsguard oath as relayed by Barristian.

 

A Dance with Dragons - The Queensguard     The first duty of the Kingsguard was to defend the king from harm or threat. The white knights were sworn to obey the king's commands as well, to keep his secrets, counsel him when counsel was requested and keep silent when it was not, serve his pleasure and defend his name and honor. Strictly speaking, it was purely the king's choice whether or not to extend Kingsguard protection to others, even those of royal blood. Some kings thought it right and proper to dispatch Kingsguard to serve and defend their wives and children, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins of greater and lesser degree, and occasionally even their lovers, mistresses, and bastards. But others preferred to use household knights and men-at-arms for those purposes, whilst keeping their seven as their own personal guard, never far from their sides.

Unfortunately we dont have the oath as such for the KG, but it seems that Aegon designed the KG with a more absolutistic vision in mind, if they are truly sworn only to the head of the state: L'etat c'est moi.

But for this we need the exact spelling of the White Cloak's oath, without it will be nothing but speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Morte said:

L'etat c'est moi.

FFS, I canna get no accolades. I have no idea what L'etat c'est moi means.

BUT if you are suggesting as @Lord Varys did that the Night's Watch is a monastic order --- nope don't agree.:angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

FFS, I canna get no accolades. I have no idea what L'etat c'est moi means.

BUT if you are suggesting as @Lord Varys did that the Night's Watch is a monastic order --- nope don't agree.:angry:

"I am the State" would be my guess, but maybe it's something else entirely. And I agree, I don't see the NW as a monastic order, regardless of the father no children and take no wives vow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

"I am the State" would be my guess, but maybe it's something else entirely. And I agree, I don't see the NW as a monastic order, regardless of the father no children and take no wives vow.

 

Hopefully you have read enough of my posts to know that I'm joking around. Damn, having to explain a joke kinda takes the laughter out of it.

Being a member of this this site for a while I have learned that the text is open to interpretation depending upon the individuals social, economical, educational, spiritual, mental background.

Serious though. I think @Lord Varys over reached on the monastic idea.

And @Morte may not understand that fictional novelists wanting to sell fantasy books in the USA  need to make their story understandable and enjoyable to their audience without going to the internet to find out wtf is going on.

Edited by Clegane'sPup
had to get my wtf straighten out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Morte said:

I'm not LV, but I quite sure he means this kind of monastic order:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Order

and this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta

and maybe you know this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar

there were a lot more. Of course, the still existing aren't military orders anymore.

Yeah, I was basically thinking about the Knights Templar and - of course - the Warrior's Sons and Poor Fellows in Westeros. The Faith Militant also are 'warrior-monks' of the same type as the sworn brothers of the Night's Watch.

The only difference between them and the NW is that the NW is not a religious order. But they behave and are de facto structured as if they were monks.

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Right, but that doesn't really apply to an organization with a small number of people.  It's like saying the people on your community board (if you live in a city) or town council are the wealthiest or most powerful.  Often they aren't, especially not at first.  It's the people who want to put the time in.

It is still, on average, a specific class of people who fill that kind of offices. People who can afford to do it. And to have spare time to volunteer for stuff like that - and run campaigns to be elected - means that you have money. There are always exceptions, of course. But you can do a statistical survey of such people.

There are always exceptions and important factors to consider.

Sure, you do have to have talent and charisma and all. But that's true for many an woman and many a black man and they get nowhere. Obama got to the top. But Trump and George W. had a much easier way there, didn't they? And how easy would it have been for JFK, Jr. had he lived, or a Gore Vidal with Obama's charisma?

Also note that you guys in the US were a developing country for most of your history. You and your ancestors conquered and violently subdued a huge chunk of a 'new continent' while the technological advances and the industrial revolution changed the world all around us. It was remarkably easy to acquire wealth in an environment where you could simply take it from the natives or claim land that belonged to no one. In that kind of setting many people can rise high from very low beginnings. There is a lot of social mobility there - as is there when they are new technologies are developed (just think of Bill Gates). But this kind of thing doesn't last. Once there no longer any pieces of cake to be handed out to the people trying to get some you are stuck with the breadcrumbs. Nobody is going to grow as rich as Rockefeller through oil in our days. That kind of thing only works when particular industry or economy is young and it is not yet firmly in the hands of the big sharks who will eventually going to control it.

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Reagan became known as an actor, became president of SAG through sheer luck, and parlayed that into turning on his members by finking to HUAC.  That allowed him the political credibility to run on the right, and he gauged the temperature of the American polity astutely and became President.  At no point was he particularly rich, or particularly famous.  Yes, George W Bush and Donald Trump are both morons born to huge wealth, which is the only reason they became successful politicians, but that doesn't apply across every President.

I'd be very surprised if it turned out that most US Presidents from Washington onwards weren't part of the ruling elite. Sure, there are no Rockefellers among them but people this far up really didn't need to be President. If you want to know who ran the US government during the first half of the 20th century, for instance, looking to Even Trump didn't need to be President to exercise whatever economic power he has. He wanted to be President to stroke his ego.

You don't have to officially run the country to get what you want if you are a major economic power.

In Westeros that's different. There political and economic power are visibly one, and people are directly ruled by the men who have the money and land. They know and accept that. They don't fool themselves into believing their voice counts. It doesn't.

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

And to tie it back to the Night's Watch - essentially everyone knows everyone's name within the Watch, as there are only 1,000 people.  One can gain influence and respect without having "power" and certainly not wealth.  Qhorin Halfhand and Donal Noye are well respected and have powerful voices within the institution despite holding no ranks and no lordly titles.

These two are certainly exceptional. Jon thinks Noye could have had a shot at the office of the Lord Commander had he lived. But he would have been presumptuous to actually throw his head in the ring? I don't think so. He knew that he was a humble smith. The same goes for Qhorin Halfhand. He was essentially the embodiment of the values of the NW. Nothing matters but the mission and you sacrifice everything for it. If he had lived he may have accepted the position of First Ranger, perhaps, but I doubt he would have allowed the men to make him Lord Commander. He would have been ill-suited for that position.

I'm not saying that some men might not want to elect one of their own humble peers (although most would not) - I'm also saying that most humble men would consider it improper or wrong for them to rise or even aspire to high office. 

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

Pyke isn't a noble, and I don't know we have any evidence Bowen Marsh is either.  They are both competent.  And while I get your point, to be nitpicky, Jon isn't a noble either.  He's a bastard.

A bastard can be of noble - or even royal - birth. Or do you think anyone ever said Daemon Blackfyre who was Targaryen on both sides was baseborn?

Any man bearing a bastard name has noble or royal blood. And that counts for something. If you mother was a commoner you might also be baseborn but that would then be only one side of the coin. Cotter Pyke's father might not be the greatest lord of the Iron Islands but some nobleman there acknowledged him as his son or else his name would be simply Cotter without the Pyke.

The Marshes are a noble house in the North. Bowen Marsh is most certainly not a commoner.

And Jon is clearly seen and treated as a boy with a noble background throughout all the books. Sure, he is a bastard, but he is set apart from actual commoners and peasants by virtue of his name as well as his education and training at Winterfell. At Winterfell he might be at the very end of the noble food chain, sure, but at the Wall and among the other recruits he clearly is part of the noble class - perhaps even the noblest, considering his Stark background.

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

And people speak up for those with leadership experience, which is to be expected after a disaster.  Mallister and Pyke run the two side forts, and Marsh and Yarwyck each head important subgroups within the Watch.  And Slynt, for all his many faults, was technically the head of a large armed force for the last several years at least, and has the added benefit of perhaps being in a position to requisition more support from Kings Landing if elected.

Yes, and presumably that's how it always goes. Which means the leadership of the Watch will always be in noble hands. Sure, there might be some ennobled people amongst them, people who were baseborn but received a knighthood throughout their lives, etc. But a knighthood raises you up very high. You see how far removed Dunk is from the actual rabble. He owns horses and castle-forged steel. He has been trained at arms. He can enter the service of lords and landed knights and most certainly could always join one of the City Guards.

47 minutes ago, cpg2016 said:

In the final analysis, the race comes down to Cotter Pyke and Denys Mallister.  A competent commoner and a competent noble.  So what is the issue?  You haven't even mentioned which "competent commoner" we're supposed to be considering - all the rangers, basically, are dead.  So are folks like Donal Noye.  No one else actually steps up to be Lord Commander.

That is sort of my point. Apparently no commoner did rise to high office or a position of influence among the Watch during the terms of Qorgyle and Mormont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon actually broke his vows but you can't blame him especially when it is about stannis. How could he turn a blind eye when d only king who answered the watch's summons was blundering to him demise? As to fArya and  mance, he just let them happen since it didn't hurt him or the watch . however, Bowen Marsh took it too far due to his shortsightedness. It was a plan in d making all along. D reading of the letter was just d nail in d coffin. I hope tormund  bowensbane tears him limb to limb because I am certain the wildlings won't take that lying down. Finally, there was no other way GRRM could free Jon from d NW. The NW is to jon what meereen is to dany. They have to leave or die trying. 

Edited by Wet groping lips
Typographical error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Lucamore wasn't known as 'the Lusty' in life, and he was very discreet until his sworn brothers found out and told the king.

hmm I don't remember any text that says he was very discreet. Only that he had over a dozen children with three different women which to me suggests he was not. I mean fathering 2 or 3 children on one woman is one thing but fathering over a dozen on three different woman is different. He became less discreet with each woman he bedded and each child he fathered. Unlike Lewyn Martell who had one mistress and as far as we know no children.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Hopefully you have read enough of my posts to know that I'm joking around. Damn, having to explain a joke kinda takes the laughter out of it.

Being a member of this this site for a while I have learned that the text is open to interpretation depending upon the individuals social, economical, educational, spiritual, mental background.

Serious though. I think @Lord Varys over reached on the monastic idea.

And @Morte may not understand that fictional novelists wanting to sell fantasy books in the USA  need to make their story understandable and enjoyable to their audience without going to the internet to find out wtf is going on.

As Varys pointed out, they are an order, albeit not a religious one.

And the story is quite understandable, isn't it? You don't have to know which part of history, which battle, which sack of a city, what myth and troupe* and historic persons Martin is using as blueprints in his work, you can still enjoy the story.

They are not necessary to read the novel and understand what is happening, because Martin tells you everything you have to know (harmless example: moon tea is dangerous, you do not need to know the real world recipe, Martin told you its no fun) , but they are a lot of fun to discover. ;)

*One of my favourites images: A girl wearing a lions pelt on a white fearless filly. Just beautiful!

Edited by Morte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

hmm I don't remember any text that says he was very discreet. Only that he had over a dozen children with three different women which to me suggests he was not. I mean fathering 2 or 3 children on one woman is one thing but fathering over a dozen on three different woman is different. He became less discreet with each woman he bedded and each child he fathered. Unlike Lewyn Martell who had one mistress and as far as we know no children.  

We know that he wasn't known as 'the Lusty' during his career. And until the truth was out nobody suspected him. That means he must have been pretty discreet.

As to the warrior-monks thing:

The NW certainly is a genuine creation of George's. What makes them very similar to a religious military order is the fact that they have a well-defined mission (to protect the Wall - the Knights Templar protected pilgrims on the way to the holy land), live a chaste life (like monks are supposed to be), have a leader they choose from among their own ranks (like an Abbot or Abbess usually is or like a religious order elects its leader).

All that makes them very similar to a religious military order and their life in those castles at the Wall is very similar to the way a medieval Benedictine monastery was living. The monks sit in their monastery/castle and on the lands around the peasants are working to feed the monks. That's what the people living in the Gifts are doing.

Even the quasi-religious fervor with which the NW conduct their duty is reminiscent of a religious order. Just reread Qhorin Halfhand's 'sermons' about the duty of the NW.

Thinking about the whole moon tea thing a little bit:

It is very unlikely that the women in Mole's Town have any considering that it is a rather complex recipe:

From Lysa we learn that some ingredients of moon tea are tansy, mint, wormwood, honey, and pennyroyal. Some of those plants might grow up in the Gifts, perhaps, but I'd be surprised if all of them would be available up there - assuming the women there know how to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

FFS, I canna get no accolades. I have no idea what L'etat c'est moi means.

translated from a Wiki page:

“L'État c'est moi” is a formula attributed to Louis XIV and which he would have pronounced on April 13, 1655 before the Parisian parliamentarians. It is supposed to recall the primacy of the royal authority in a context of mistrust with the Parliament, which disputes edicts taken in a bed of justice on 20 March 1655. Nevertheless, historians dispute that this sentence*, which does not appear in the registers of the parliament, was actually pronounced by Louis XIV.

* Actually Louis XIV even said the opposite on his deathbed, in 1715: "Je m'en vais mais l'État demeurera toujours" ("I am going, but the State will always remain."). Louis XIV dissociated himself from the State, of which he defined himself as only the first servant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

translated from a Wiki page:

“L'État c'est moi” is a formula attributed to Louis XIV and which he would have pronounced on April 13, 1655 before the Parisian parliamentarians. It is supposed to recall the primacy of the royal authority in a context of mistrust with the Parliament, which disputes edicts taken in a bed of justice on 20 March 1655. Nevertheless, historians dispute that this sentence*, which does not appear in the registers of the parliament, was actually pronounced by Louis XIV.

* Actually Louis XIV even said the opposite on his deathbed, in 1715: "Je m'en vais mais l'État demeurera toujours" ("I am going, but the State will always remain."). Louis XIV dissociated himself from the State, of which he defined himself as only the first servant.

Just put that phrase in because I did not understand what the Pup was pointing at with the two citations, so it was not 100% serious, just a pointy comment about the king as sole target of the White Cloaks oath (or so we presume, because as stated, we dont know its literal wording).

We are going far into Off-topic here, so I put this part into spoiler:
 

Spoiler

 

It's about the role of the ruler compared to his peers/the aristocrats. So the two statements do not contradict themselves: The person Louis XIV is going, but with breaking the power of aristocracy and because his other political manoeuvres  France will remain, richer and more stable when it would without him.

We see a distinction between the person and the office here, nothing new really, dating back at least as far as the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (and honestly something all good or not-bad monarch did try to keep as much as possible). I would not expect less from the king who took his hat off even for maidservants.

The "first servant of the state" is from Friedrich dem Großen (Frederik the Great), written in his "Mémoires pour servir a l'histoire de la maison de Brandebourg" and also in his "L'Antimachiavel" (Yes, originally written in French, so have fun! :) ); his greatest fan, Joseph II of Austria has even gone as far as to state: "all for the people, nothing through the people". But these are statements from Enlightened Absolutism, Louis XIV does have some glimpses of Enlightenment in his reign, but he is not yet an enlightened monarch.

Maybe we should stop this, we may be scaring off US-Americans with too much history. :x

 

 

Edited by Morte
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Thinking about the whole moon tea thing a little bit:

It is very unlikely that the women in Mole's Town have any considering that it is a rather complex recipe:

From Lysa we learn that some ingredients of moon tea are tansy, mint, wormwood, honey, and pennyroyal. Some of those plants might grow up in the Gifts, perhaps, but I'd be surprised if all of them would be available up there - assuming the women there know how to make it.

I think you overestimate the complexity. Some of those ingredients are obviously to improve the flavor (honey and mint), that leaves three active ingredients. Not very complex.

Furthermore, as to the availability of the ingredients in the North:

Quote

If Ygritte does not want a child, she will go to some woods witch and drink a cup o' moon tea. You do not come into it, once the seed is planted.

Tormund Giantsbane to Jon Snow, ASoS, Ch 15

If the ingredients are available north of the Wall then they are definitely available in Brandon's Gift. And if the Free Folk have it that readily available then it stands to reason that a woman in Mole's Town can acquire it without too much hassle.

Also, with regards to the prior claim that Mole's Town is hours away from Castle Black, that is absolutely incorrect. Mole's Town is half a league south of the Wall. Since a league is defined as the distance a man can walk in an hour (modern definition is generally about three miles), Mole's Town is 30 minutes on foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Red Man Racey said:
5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Thinking about the whole moon tea thing a little bit:

It is very unlikely that the women in Mole's Town have any considering that it is a rather complex recipe:

From Lysa we learn that some ingredients of moon tea are tansy, mint, wormwood, honey, and pennyroyal. Some of those plants might grow up in the Gifts, perhaps, but I'd be surprised if all of them would be available up there - assuming the women there know how to make it.

I think you overestimate the complexity. Some of those ingredients are obviously to improve the flavor (honey and mint), that leaves three active ingredients. Not very complex.

No, the recipe is not complex, thats true (through you can mix in other plants if you have not enough of one). It's just poisonous and dangerous (see my post further up this thread), and gets more dangerous the less you know about medical herbs and their powers (and no, just as in reality no maester or wood witch knows enough to make it harmless).

11 minutes ago, Red Man Racey said:
Quote

If Ygritte does not want a child, she will go to some woods witch and drink a cup o' moon tea. You do not come into it, once the seed is planted.

Tormund Giantsbane to Jon Snow, ASoS, Ch 15

If the ingredients are available north of the Wall then they are definitely available in Brandon's Gift. And if the Free Folk have it that readily available then it stands to reason that a woman in Mole's Town can acquire it without too much hassle.

The recipes vary in the real world, they may vary in Westeros too. The main ingredients however are common in most parts of Europe, including Scandinavia and Russia, and also in variations native to North America. Them being easy to obtain is the reason why Martin did change the recipe into Fantasy herbs, so desperate people don't try to do it at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Wet groping lips said:

Jon actually broke his vows but you can't blame him especially when it is about stannis. How could he turn a blind eye when d only king who answered the watch's summons was blundering to him demise? As to fArya and  mance, he just let them happen since it didn't hurt him or the watch . however, Bowen Marsh took it too far due to his shortsightedness. It was a plan in d making all along. D reading of the letter was just d nail in d coffin. I hope tormund  bowensbane tears him limb to limb because I am certain the wildlings won't take that lying down. Finally, there was no other way GRRM could free Jon from d NW. The NW is to jon what meereen is to dany. They have to leave or die trying. 

I need to re-read, but I recall it being so unclear what Jon actually authorized Mance to do.  Obviously as the leader of the NW Jon bears the responsibility for allowing Mance to leave on a mission, even if that mission was just to go to Longlake and retrieve "Arya"/Alys Karstark.   Mance mentions a "ploy" he wants to carry out that he needs spearwives for.  Jon's response is to ask Melisandre what Mance means and she replies "Your sister.  You cannot help her but he can."  

It's just really unclear what exactly Jon thought Mance was gonna do and where he was gonna go.  Why would Mance need spearwives to carry off a "ploy" if he was just going to rescue Arya on her way to the Wall?  There are more than a few open questions regarding what exactly Jon thought Mance was doing and what exactly Mance intends to do, which I imagine we will be getting much more clarification on when TWOW comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

I need to re-read, but I recall it being so unclear what Jon actually authorized Mance to do.  Obviously as the leader of the NW Jon bears the responsibility for allowing Mance to leave on a mission, even if that mission was just to go to Longlake and retrieve "Arya"/Alys Karstark.   Mance mentions a "ploy" he wants to carry out that he needs spearwives for.  Jon's response is to ask Melisandre what Mance means and she replies "Your sister.  You cannot help her but he can."  

It's just really unclear what exactly Jon thought Mance was gonna do and where he was gonna go.  Why would Mance need spearwives to carry off a "ploy" if he was just going to rescue Arya on her way to the Wall?  There are more than a few open questions regarding what exactly Jon thought Mance was doing and what exactly Mance intends to do, which I imagine we will be getting much more clarification on when TWOW comes out.

I haven't read it in a while either but Mance doesn't need Jon's authorization to leave the wall. He isn't a member of the NW, he is Stannis' prisoner. I was under the impression Mance needed the spear wives to infiltrate WF because he was going to save fArya prior to her running for the wall. I may be wrong though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I haven't read it in a while either but Mance doesn't need Jon's authorization to leave the wall. He isn't a member of the NW, he is Stannis' prisoner. I was under the impression Mance needed the spear wives to infiltrate WF because he was going to save fArya prior to her running for the wall. I may be wrong though

I get your point.  I used to think that Mance didn't need Jon's authorization but now it seems pretty clear he does need Jon's authorization.  Stannis is no longer at the Wall and Mance is presumed dead by Stannis's orders- Melisandre is lying to Stannis and everyone else about Mance.  When she first runs the idea by Jon to send "Rattleshirt" and he doesn't know it's Mance yet, he threatens to decapitate Rattleshirt before he leaves.  That suggests to me Jon has the power and Mance needs his authorization, which I tend to agree with as Jon is the one in charge at the Wall now that Stannis and his army have left.  

I've actually been rereading because I thought so too on Winterfell but now it's clear that Jon has no idea what Mance is up to. He later thinks to himself after sending Mance away "A grey girl on a dying horse, fleeing from her marriage.  On the strength of those words he had loosed Mance Rayder and six spearwives on the North.  Young ones, and pretty, Mance had said."  So again, the question becomes why Jon would allow Mance spearwives to just rescue Arya from Longlake?  And why would they need to be young and pretty?  At one point Mance says having the spearwives there will help Arya to trust him, but it's still super unclear as he muddies it up with "I have a ploy" in mind that I need them for.  Presumably his major mission is not a "ploy", so he's referring to something else.  Yet there's no follow up from Jon.

And then once Alys Karstark shows up, it becomes clear that Jon has no idea of Winterfell.  He thinks to himself  at separate points "But what had become of Mance Rayder and his spearwives?...What game are you playing, priestess?  Did you have some other task for Mance?"  Later on in a different chapter Jon thinks this:  "Mance Rayder and his spearwives had not returned, and Jon could not help but wonder whether the Red Woman had lied of a purpose.  Is she playing her own game?

So is it a question of plausible deniability?  Because there is no pushback from Jon on Mance needing spearwives, and the only clarification that Mance offers is that Arya is more likely to trust him if they are with him.  Maybe that's it?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.