Three Eyed Raven

[Spilly]

1. How did the Brandon Ryvers come to be the three eyed raven? Also how did he know to seek out Bran?

 

[4 Eyed Crow]

Brynden Rivers was some sort of sorcerer (supposedly) that joined the Night's Watch, and then disappeared while ranging beyond the wall. I think that's when he ended up in that cave became the three eyed raven, though the specifics are never discussed. As the three eyed raven, he could see practically everything, so he'd probably been watching Bran all along.

Also, he had a red birthmark that was sort of in the shape of a raven, so that's why he was called Bloodraven. 

[Lost Melnibonean]

You are lost. This is the side of the forum for the novels. There is no three-eyed raven in the novels. 

[4 Eyed Crow]

2 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

You are lost. This is the side of the forum for the novels. There is no three-eyed raven in the novels. 

Yeah, it was a crow in the books. 

[Krokantekneks]

Brynden Rivers, The three-eyed Crow, Bastard son of Aegon IV, the unworthy, who also fathered the first Blackfyre. Aegon did a lot of really neat stuff in his life, it is implied that The Blackfish, was named after him. Brynden Rivers later became lord commander of the Night's Watch and like 4eye said^ He disappeared while ranging beyond the wall, probably to join the CotF.

[asongofheresy]

There is no three eyed Raven in the books. That's a crow. But Bloodraven rejected that he was a crow when Bran asked him if he was the crow. He said he was called a crow when he took the black, but he isn't a crow anymore. Crows and Ravens are different animals and symbolzises different things. Crows are on the bad side in our story, as Old Nan said to Bran they are tricksters. 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Jova Snow said:

There is no three eyed Raven in the books. That's a crow. But Bloodraven rejected that he was a crow when Bran asked him if he was the crow. He said he was called a crow when he took the black, but he isn't a crow anymore. Crows and Ravens are different animals and symbolzises different things. Crows are on the bad side in our story, as Old Nan said to Bran they are tricksters. 

Bloodraven didn't actually say that. He didn't flat out confirm he is the 3EC but he never denied it either. 

[asongofheresy]

4 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Bloodraven didn't actually say that. He didn't flat out confirm he is the 3EC but he never denied it either. 

He can't be three eyed crow and Bloodraven at the same time. Bloodraven was interested in prophecies and most likely sided with First Men, and their beliefs about praising life and fertility, three eyed crown comes to people that had real life experience and seem to be more connected to Children or Faceless Men in nature. 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Jova Snow said:

He can't be three eyed crow and Bloodraven at the same time. Bloodraven was interested in prophecies and most likely sided with First Men, and their beliefs about praising life and fertility, three eyed crown comes to people that had real life experience and seem to be more connected to Children or Faceless Men in nature. 

Sorry, your explanation for why he can't be Bloodraven and the 3EC makes no sense whatsoever. 

[The Fattest Leech]

44 minutes ago, Jova Snow said:

He can't be three eyed crow and Bloodraven at the same time. Bloodraven was interested in prophecies and most likely sided with First Men, and their beliefs about praising life and fertility, three eyed crown comes to people that had real life experience and seem to be more connected to Children or Faceless Men in nature. 

eh? 

[Tijgy]

There are arguments why you can say he is the three-eyed crow and why he might not be the one. 

Some of the arguments can be found in this thread

I think the easiest explanation will always be the 3EC is Bloodraven. Bloodraven was man of the NW, a crow, and a greenseer, someone with three eyes. 

[asongofheresy]

23 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Sorry, your explanation for why he can't be Bloodraven and the 3EC makes no sense whatsoever. 

Both in books and in mythology too crows and ravens symbolizes opposite things, so Bloodraven who are supposed to be on the good side in the books can not be on the side of Three Eyed Crow as well. They aren't working for the same purpose in the story. 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Jova Snow said:

Both in books and in mythology too crows and ravens symbolizes opposite things, so Bloodraven who are supposed to be on the good side in the books can not be on the side of Three Eyed Crow as well. They aren't working for the same purpose in the story. 

Nope, still doesn't make sense. But let's leave that aside for the moment. 

I have a few other questions. I'm not trying to be a pain, I'm just trying to understand. 

1 - how/why do you know/think that Bloodraven is on the side of good?

1a - what is "good" in the context of the story in your opinion?

2 - what is each of their purposes in the story?

 

[asongofheresy]

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Nope, still doesn't make sense. But let's leave that aside for the moment. 

I have a few other questions. I'm not trying to be a pain, I'm just trying to understand. 

1 - how/why do you know/think that Bloodraven is on the side of good?

1a - what is "good" in the context of the story in your opinion?

2 - what is each of their purposes in the story?

 

We know Bloodraven is one of the Targaryen bastards at first and he is a misunderstood character. He is really successful and he holds the realm together, he makes sure there is law and order in Westeros as the Hand of the King but due to the birth mark on his face and later his one eye, people misjudged him based on appearance like Tyrion. He is a really great archer and has a team of archers called Raven Teeth. At some time he is accused of treachery and takes to black, Raven Teeth follow him to the Wall as well. Apart from that he seem to be interested in sorcery and prophecies like his half sister Seastar. I do think he was aware of the danger Children poses for the humanity, this subject is first brought up in AGOT when Jon spots the children and there is a line "trees have eyes again", him taking the black will just give him more opportunities to search for Children and Others as well as the secrets of Weirwood trees, and during one of his journeys he becomes a prisoner, when we first met him he is skeleton looking, all life drained from him by the tree and he is stuck there, his powers can be manipulated by children easily. His words aren't to be trusted in my eyes. 

The good side for me would be Jon, Lord Commander Mormont, Stannis, Mance, Tormund, Halfhand, Bloodraven, Melisandre and those who are smart enough to understand the dangers of Children and Faceless Men, and their believes about death. Melisandre's Light God actually is a reference to how First Men burned Weirwood trees after they learned Children were using them to spy on humans. Burning of those trees can happen again in the future during the war against WW and CoTF. 

There is one side that represents life and fertility, we see that with First Men and Garth the Gardener, his many children proves that and then there is Children and Faceless Men, Valar Morghulis, All Men Must Die, their worship of death, human sacrifices especially to Weirwood trees, Craster's sons and how there are given to the White Walkers or the Children by him. There are Moon singers of Braavos, many faced/named God of Essos etc. I actually seperated Bloodraven and Three Eyed Crow from each other when Crow associated itself with Euron Greyjoy, their belief of Drowned God - I think - is also worth searching in my eyes, and then found out Garth and his Knights used Raven wings as symbol so two species of birds who might look similar is essentially on the opposites. ASOIAF may not be purely black and white but it also showed who are the allies and enemies are supposed to be. 

That's how I see things btw. 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Jova Snow said:

We know Bloodraven is one of the Targaryen bastards at first and he is a misunderstood character. He is really successful and he holds the realm together, he makes sure there is law and order in Westeros as the Hand of the King but due to the birth mark on his face and later his one eye, people misjudged him based on appearance like Tyrion.

Yeah. And not just his appearance but also the fact that he was, even back then, seen as a sorcerer. 

 

Just now, Jova Snow said:

He is a really great archer and has a team of archers called Raven Teeth. At some time he is accused of treachery and takes to black,

Well, his actions were treacherous. He gave Aenys safe passage and had him arrested and killed. He claims he sacrificed his honour for the realm. Egg gave him the choice, the NW or death. 

Just now, Jova Snow said:

Raven Teeth follow him to the Wall as well. Apart from that he seem to be interested in sorcery and prophecies like his half sister Seastar. I do think he was aware of the danger Children poses for the humanity, this subject is first brought up in AGOT when Jon spots the children and there is a line "trees have eyes again", him taking the black will just give him more opportunities to search for Children and Others as well as the secrets of Weirwood trees, and during one of his journeys he becomes a prisoner, when we first met him he is skeleton looking, all life drained from him by the tree and he is stuck there, his powers can be manipulated by children easily. His words aren't to be trusted in my eyes. 

Here's where we really disagree... First, I think you may be confusing a few things. Jon never spots the CotF. Not in AGoT, nor in any of the other books. The line above it the trees having eyes again appears in ACoK first.

"The cold winds are rising. Mormont feared as much. Benjen Stark felt it as well. Dead men walk and the trees have eyes again. Why should we balk at wargs and giants?"

Then again in the very next chapter, Jon VIII:

There was no question of riding double. Stonesnake offered to lay in wait for the pursuit and surprise them when they came. Perhaps he could take a few of them with him down to hell. Qhorin refused. "If any man in the Night's Watch can make it through the Frostfangs alone and afoot, it is you, brother. You can go over mountains that a horse must go around. Make for the Fist. Tell Mormont what Jon saw, and how. Tell him that the old powers are waking, that he faces giants and wargs and worse. Tell him that the trees have eyes again."

I don't think BR was captured by the CotF, I think he sought them out and joined them of his own free will. 

Just now, Jova Snow said:

The good side for me would be Jon, Lord Commander Mormont, Stannis, Mance, Tormund, Halfhand, Bloodraven, Melisandre and those who are smart enough to understand the dangers of Children and Faceless Men, and their believes about death. Melisandre's Light God actually is a reference to how First Men burned Weirwood trees after they learned Children were using them to spy on humans. Burning of those trees can happen again in the future during the war against WW and CoTF. 

There is one side that represents life and fertility, we see that with First Men and Garth the Gardener, his many children proves that and then there is Children and Faceless Men, Valar Morghulis, All Men Must Die, their worship of death, human sacrifices especially to Weirwood trees, Craster's sons and how there are given to the White Walkers or the Children by him. There are Moon singers of Braavos, many faced/named God of Essos etc. I actually seperated Bloodraven and Three Eyed Crow from each other when Crow associated itself with Euron Greyjoy, their belief of Drowned God - I think - is also worth searching in my eyes, and then found out Garth and his Knights used Raven wings as symbol so two species of birds who might look similar is essentially on the opposites. ASOIAF may not be purely black and white but it also showed who are the allies and enemies are supposed to be. 

That's how I see things btw. 

And here I disagree 100%. The CotF and the Faceless Men are the only ones who are right: all things must die. Anything different than death after life is the real unnatural abomination here. 

So, we will have to wait to see how it all unfolds. Tks for explaining your points.

 

[asongofheresy]

18 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yeah. And not just his appearance but also the fact that he was, even back then, seen as a sorcerer. 

 

Well, his actions were treacherous. He gave Aenys safe passage and had him arrested and killed. He claims he sacrificed his honour for the realm. Egg gave him the choice, the NW or death. 

Here's where we really disagree... First, I think you may be confusing a few things. Jon never spots the CotF. Not in AGoT, nor in any of the other books. The line above it the trees having eyes again appears in ACoK first.

"The cold winds are rising. Mormont feared as much. Benjen Stark felt it as well. Dead men walk and the trees have eyes again. Why should we balk at wargs and giants?"

Then again in the very next chapter, Jon VIII:

There was no question of riding double. Stonesnake offered to lay in wait for the pursuit and surprise them when they came. Perhaps he could take a few of them with him down to hell. Qhorin refused. "If any man in the Night's Watch can make it through the Frostfangs alone and afoot, it is you, brother. You can go over mountains that a horse must go around. Make for the Fist. Tell Mormont what Jon saw, and how. Tell him that the old powers are waking, that he faces giants and wargs and worse. Tell him that the trees have eyes again."

I don't think BR was captured by the CotF, I think he sought them out and joined them of his own free will. 

And here I disagree 100%. The CotF and the Faceless Men are the only ones who are right: all things must die. Anything different than death after life is the real unnatural abomination here. 

So, we will have to wait to see how it all unfolds. Tks for explaining your points.

 

Your welcome but I am 1000% against Children and Faceless Men - they are the villain we are searching for in my eyes, that's why I don't trust Bran or Arya and I am glad Sansa and Rickon are safer. Btw Jon does sees Children atleast their harvest moon like eyes there, that's why Halfhand is saying trees have eyes, he knew that was Children who spy on them. 

[Curled Finger]

Why are these fun topics not in general where I can just see them?    My friend @The Fattest Leech calls Bloodraven and the COTF baddy bads.   She's hell bent these folks just ain't right.   Still, I wonder.     I have a hard time understanding why we have to go through all of Bran's chapters to have him get sucker punched by the dark side.    I have Euron, I don't need Bloodraven to be a jackass too.   There and again is that gorgeous and maddening ambivalence GRRM has toward us.   He lets us make up our minds until he decides we're either wrong or we get a scooby snack.   

Bloodraven's cave is a spooky damned place, with all those bones and creepy shadows and eyes looking out from trees that you can watch follow you around.   Now I wonder if the whole COTF/Greenseer thing isn't one of personal choice.   If Euron has had some greenseer training and has perverted it with his drug addiction and sociopathy there must be a place where you own this power and chose what to do with it.    It's well established that Bloodraven was a sorcerer and even the Citadel calls the study of magic the higher mysteries.   We've already seen Bran jump out of line a time or 2 in skinchanging Hodor, maybe Meera and staying way too long in Summer.  Perhaps all that is just a little boy learning what his power is and it will come down to real choice for Bran to reject these practices.   Jump in the bad guy's heads and make their eyes pop instead of taking poor Hodor over.    Perhaps the 3EC and Bloodraven are not the same.    I tend to think they are because BR has this higher understanding of things and impossible patience.   His crow vocabulary may be limited in Bran's consciousness.  What strikes me most in the whole BloodRAVEN/Three-Eyed CROW persona is that BR was sent to the Wall a criminal and still managed to become Lord Commander.   He literally became a crow.  He tells Bran his name was Brynden--not Bloodraven.   I think this dude identifies with being a crow.   Then again, maybe BR had no idea his summons to Bran manifests itself as a literal crow with 3 eyes.   

The Children...well we know they can be nasty little bastards when their dander is up.   But they were defending their homes, land and liberty too.   I guess I just haven't seen any current evidence of evil intent.  Then again they sound like little deer people to me and I've seen Bambi!

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Curled Finger said:

Why are these fun topics not in general where I can just see them?    My friend @The Fattest Leech calls Bloodraven and the COTF baddy bads.   She's hell bent these folks just ain't right.   Still, I wonder.     I have a hard time understanding why we have to go through all of Bran's chapters to have him get sucker punched by the dark side.    I have Euron, I don't need Bloodraven to be a jackass too.   There and again is that gorgeous and maddening ambivalence GRRM has toward us.   He lets us make up our minds until he decides we're either wrong or we get a scooby snack.   

No one will be able to convince me that Bloodraven and the CotF are "evil". Well, no one except [maybe] George RR Martin.

To me they represent nature, the natural cycle of life - and death. Life w/o death is the unnatural abomination; as are zombies, regardless of the element behind their unnatural reanimation. Only nature is absolutely not gorgeous elfs doing good everywhere and everything is as cute as a Disney story, w/ bunny rabbits running around a meadow covered in multi-coloured wild flowers. Nature is ruthless and gorgeous. It can be violent and peaceful,  lovely and horrific. And Martin does a brilliant job, as usual. Because he doesn't fall for the Disney version of nature, but rather a much more realistic one. 

Just now, Curled Finger said:

Bloodraven's cave is a spooky damned place, with all those bones and creepy shadows and eyes looking out from trees that you can watch follow you around.   Now I wonder if the whole COTF/Greenseer thing isn't one of personal choice.

The first part here should have been in the first part of my reply...

And the bold: Imo it absolutely is. 

Just now, Curled Finger said:

If Euron has had some greenseer training and has perverted it with his drug addiction and sociopathy there must be a place where you own this power and chose what to do with it.    It's well established that Bloodraven was a sorcerer and even the Citadel calls the study of magic the higher mysteries.   We've already seen Bran jump out of line a time or 2 in skinchanging Hodor, maybe Meera and staying way too long in Summer.  Perhaps all that is just a little boy learning what his power is and it will come down to real choice for Bran to reject these practices.   Jump in the bad guy's heads and make their eyes pop instead of taking poor Hodor over.  

I can't bring myself to blame Bran for what he does to Hodor. I don't like that he does it, but I think it happens mostly for three reasons:

1. he has to learn and master the skill of skinchanging into people.

2. He also has to understand why it is wrong. And not just by listening to someone say it's wrong, but actually understand why.  Bran is very empathetic, and he will learn. 

3. I can't help but think, he's a little boy, and in such a position, after all that's happened to him and his whole family... it's very wrong, but I do understand why he does it. And if I'm honest, if I were to be put in the exact same situation I'd probably do the same.

 

Just now, Curled Finger said:

 Perhaps the 3EC and Bloodraven are not the same.    I tend to think they are because BR has this higher understanding of things and impossible patience.   His crow vocabulary may be limited in Bran's consciousness.  What strikes me most in the whole BloodRAVEN/Three-Eyed CROW persona is that BR was sent to the Wall a criminal and still managed to become Lord Commander.   He literally became a crow.  He tells Bran his name was Brynden--not Bloodraven.   I think this dude identifies with being a crow.   Then again, maybe BR had no idea his summons to Bran manifests itself as a literal crow with 3 eyes.   

I don't see how Brynden "Bloodraven" Rivers isn't the 3EC. It's one of the few things I'm totally certain of. Yes, I am aware that even if I am totally sure I can still be wrong.

 

Just now, Curled Finger said:

The Children...well we know they can be nasty little bastards when their dander is up.   But they were defending their homes, land and liberty too.   I guess I just haven't seen any current evidence of evil intent.  Then again they sound like little deer people to me and I've seen Bambi!

I'm not sure what you mean here? ((Probably something I forgot?)

And ditto, I haven't seen any evidence or even hints of evil intent. 

Bambi, Dumbo, all those fucking horrible stories, I blame them for not liking animation to this day!

[The Fattest Leech]

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

Why are these fun topics not in general where I can just see them?  

I have noticed many, many new threads have been started in the incorrect sub-forum lately. Maybe it is the way the menu is set up when starting a new thread???

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

 My friend @The Fattest Leech calls Bloodraven and the COTF baddy bads.   She's hell bent these folks just ain't right.  

You are killing me

Is this all because of my admitted crackpot I had about six months ago? To be honest, I do wonder about the intent of those surrounding my boy Bran at the moment. That tricksy bird George has my brain all a flutter with the darkness, the back door, the water, and that greenseer that tries to call out to Bran. It makes me panic for Bran's future. Does he leave? Does he stay? Is he changing already? No matter what, I do like discussing it.

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

 

Still, I wonder.     I have a hard time understanding why we have to go through all of Bran's chapters to have him get sucker punched by the dark side.    I have Euron, I don't need Bloodraven to be a jackass too.   There and again is that gorgeous and maddening ambivalence GRRM has toward us.   He lets us make up our minds until he decides we're either wrong or we get a scooby snack.   

Bloodraven's cave is a spooky damned place, with all those bones and creepy shadows and eyes looking out from trees that you can watch follow you around.  

I liken the many-faced god to the other many faced gods of the weirwoods. It seems Bran and Arya are on parallel comparable journeys for training to help in the long night. As much as I may flip flop, I think what Bloodraven is doing is good for the realm in the end. There may be some uncomfortable events along the way, but nothing of value is free. He has always worked for the bigger picture.

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

Now I wonder if the whole COTF/Greenseer thing isn't one of personal choice.

What a coincidence. Just this morning I was having this same discussion with someone else about the individuals in the story. They are all having an identity crisis of sorts, and they are all faced with tough decisions (or will be within the first few chapters of TWOW) and they have to make a choice. We see this most blatantly with Brienne and her interactions with Lady Stoneheart. Brienne is faced with a waterfall of choices all at once, each one affecting the next, and it will be what she chooses that defines her final character. Every little step leads to something bigger. George said that by the very end of Daenerys' chapters in ADWD, she has chosen her family words fire and blood. It is happening to everyone.

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

  If Euron has had some greenseer training and has perverted it with his drug addiction and sociopathy there must be a place where you own this power and chose what to do with it.    It's well established that Bloodraven was a sorcerer and even the Citadel calls the study of magic the higher mysteries.  

I have come to realize that even though the weirwood net and the Citadel seem to serve similar purposes, information and history telling, it is the Citadel that is corrupted by the human element. The maesters used to work with the CotF to a degree eons ago, but now it seems failry clear that they now want to covet that magic power for themselves. Another fire and ice dichotomy.

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

Perhaps the 3EC and Bloodraven are not the same.    I tend to think they are because BR has this higher understanding of things and impossible patience.   His crow vocabulary may be limited in Bran's consciousness.  What strikes me most in the whole BloodRAVEN/Three-Eyed CROW persona is that BR was sent to the Wall a criminal and still managed to become Lord Commander.   He literally became a crow.  He tells Bran his name was Brynden--not Bloodraven.   I think this dude identifies with being a crow.   Then again, maybe BR had no idea his summons to Bran manifests itself as a literal crow with 3 eyes.   

I do believe that Brynden Bloodraven Rivers is the three-eyed crow. That I have always believed.

6 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

The Children...well we know they can be nasty little bastards when their dander is up.   But they were defending their homes, land and liberty too.   I guess I just haven't seen any current evidence of evil intent.  Then again they sound like little deer people to me and I've seen Bambi!

They may have mucked something up big time in the past and are paying for it now? I dunno because that part is still a real mystery to me (most posters, I guess).

 

[Curled Finger]

@kissdbyfire, I was blown away by the truth of your statement regarding the simple beauty and violence of nature.   I've been MIA most of this year around this joint, but when I took my absence there was a ton of discussion regarding the identity of Bran's 3EC.  Of course there are the citations of BR's seeming oblivious to Bran's question, but that is the only leg the argument stands on for me.   Then again, I'm not a symbology expert and often use raven and crow interchangeable.    But I have learned some about Norse mythology and Arthurian legend, so steady she goes and perhaps this difference between the 2 birds will engage my curiosity some day.  You know me, I'm pretty literal so much of the lovely metaphor is lost on me.   Being this literal brick I've not come across anything "wrong" nor dangerous that the 3EC tells Bran in dreams.   This flying lesson was in a sense liberating Bran from his body.   How is that bad?   I think as a community we sometimes make way too much of a single sentence or setting where the magic is concerned.   The drought between books doesn't help, either.  

To the Groovie Ghoulies Cave, I thought all the bones were sacrifices left for a god.  I've read and reread the descriptions and observations.   There is nothing there that screams unsafe to me.   Not a place I want to set up shop, but no worse than a sad roadside memorial or dumping field.   If we accept that the weirwoods are the repository for memories and history and that their price for being is blood it just makes sense to me.    Blood is the one thing that keeps it going.   So? 

To the COTF temper tantrums...I was thinking the Arm of Dorne.  The 1st Men on their worst day couldn't blow like that--that we know of.  

I agree 100% with you about Bran and his power.   He's got to learn and what is learning for children?   The difference between right and wrong.   Like that 5 year old with the stitches.   I've been on his case since he learned to walk not to skip on the garden stones.   He fell every time.   He steers clear now.   I love Hodor, still as an interested reader I have to wonder what his purpose is beyond being Bran's vehicle.   I don't think Bran will stop and I don't think he's guilty of premeditated harm in the possessions, either.    They are reactions to grave danger and later simple curiosity.    The curiosity part needs to stop.  

@The Fattest Leech, I'm pretty sure baddy bads goes back at least a year, maybe more.  Your wonderful sense of  humor aside, it was the argument that actually made me reread Bran with the intent of finding the alternate view.  I've got to quit taking these long absences from the forum.  A thousand apologies Leech, it was a great argument, but it was a long time ago.   i never meant to misrepresent your ideas--but dammit Leech, they were so good!   

It is one of the discussions that still interests me after all this time.