What does the night king want? Theories?

[Michael Leonardo]

Just wondered if there is any inclination as to what the Night King is after?

Does anyone have Theories?

I have one Myself.

We all know that White Walkers are the Night Kings army. He doesn't care for them, and they are solely created to kill...

This begs the question. Does he rule over different beings to White Walkers that we haven't seen yet?

I think that his Ice Kingdom may actually have living people, but obviously not Humans, but more like him. You could call them Ice people...

I've been thinking about this and it could come down to one of two things. His Ice Kingdom has a Magic spell around it that was placed by the same person

Who put the spell on the Wall ( to keep them out ), but this spell was to keep them in. However. The spell only works on keeping the Ice Kings People in, not the king himself.   

This would hold water and might answer why he's marching through Westeros. He may have found a way of releasing the spell and freeing his people.

To answer "Why Now" could easily be answered with that fact he didn't have enough army until now. He may have been collecting white walkers for hundreds or thousands of years and now he finally has enough. 

The other thing I couldn't understand is Where do the babies he collects go to. Do they go back to the Ice Kingdom to be brought up as an Ice Person? or As one of his Generals who aren't actually white walkers either?

Of course. The Generals could actually be Ice people... Why John Snow ( I mean Aegon ) cut down one when they ambushed them. The Ice person turned to, well, to ice cubes and all of the white walkers in his command died ( Again ). Maybe his generals are actually his Ice people and they are somehow connected to the white walkers they command. This to me, seems to point to the fact that when a general turns someone into a white walker, they are connected to them through the power ( or Magic ) that was used on them. This would explain when Aegon killed one of the ice generals, it killed all the white walkers in his command ( and who he turned into walkers ). This would also explain why one walker, the one they captured, didn't die. Maybe that walker was turned by a different general...

 

Anyway. Whats your thoughts on this?

[falcotron]

You seem to be confused. Everything you're suggesting here is either something we already know for a fact, or something that isn't possible.

To start with:

• The things you're calling "White Walkers", the zombies that make up the army of the dead, are not White Walkers, they're wights.
• The things you're calling "Ice Generals" and "Ice People", those are the White Walkers.
• They do have an "Ice Kingdom", called the Lands of Always Winter, but we've seen it, and it's not full of any other kind of people, just White Walkers.
• There's nothing keeping anyone in the Lands of Always Winter, because we see the same Walkers at the altar there in later scenes elsewhere.
• We saw the Night King put Craster's last son on an altar in the Lands of Always Winter and convert him into a new White Walker.
• We already know that killing a White Walker kills all the wights it turned.

 

[Kajjo]

As far as I understood it:

• The Night King was created by the Children of the Forest by plunging a dragon glass dagger into a living human man.
• The White Walkers are created by the Night King by touching living humans, mostly babies. White Walkers can be killed by Valyrian steel, dragon glass or fire.
• The wights (zombies) are created by the Night King and by White Walkers by magically raising dead humans, horses, ice bears, dragons and so on. Wights shatter to shards if the White Walkers dies that created them. Wights can be finished off by fire.

[Khorkalba]

I think he's a fairly generic evil dark lord with very little backstory beyond what we already know:

• The CoF created him to fight back against men, giving him the power to turn men into White Walkers.
• He became hostile to all living things and started raising an army of dead soldiers to wipe all life from Westeros.

There is a Night's King in the books with a little bit more of a backstory, but the two may not even be connected. It's very possible that the show producers just wanted a boss for Jon to fight and thought the name Night King sounded cool.

Also, I don't buy into the theory that he is in fact Bran, as a result of some time travelling mistake.

[falcotron]

I think the famous song says it best:

Quote

A little love that slowly grows and grows
Not one that comes and goes
That's all I want from you
A sunless day with hopes up to the sky
A kiss and no goodbye
That's what I want from you

Don't let me down or show me that you care
Remember when you give you also get to share
Don't let me down I have no time to wait
Tomorrow might yet come when dreamers dream too late

Oh a little love that slowly grows and grows
Not one that comes and goes
That's what I want from you

Don't let me down or show me that you care
Remember when you give you also get to share
Don't let me down I have no time to wait
Tomorrow might yet come when dreamers dream too late

Oh a little love that slowly grows and grows
Not one that comes and goes
That's what I want from you
That's all I want from you

Of course Dino's version uses "sunlit" instead of "sunless", and "tomorrow might not come" instead of "tomorrow might yet come", but he had to adapt it for the Atlantic City crowds, much as D&D had to adapt the story for TV.

[Kytheros]

I think that for purposes of the Show, the White Walkers are going to be relatively generic evil, and we'll probably never know their motivations for moving again.

 

In the books, however, the White Walkers are significantly different, and my personal theory as to why the Book!Walkers are stirring out of their functional thousands of years of inactivity, is because of what happened to the Starks at/around Robert's Rebellion - specifically the fact that Rickard Stark was burned alive, and Lyanna Stark bore a child with Valyrian dragonlord blood. I think that one or both of those things triggered the Walkers to move, either because it violated some sort of Pact that ended the Long Night, and/or it fulfilled some sort of condition for the Walkers.

[Pearly]

1 hour ago, Kytheros said:

I think that for purposes of the Show, the White Walkers are going to be relatively generic evil, and we'll probably never know their motivations for moving again.

 

In the books, however, the White Walkers are significantly different, and my personal theory as to why the Book!Walkers are stirring out of their functional thousands of years of inactivity, is because of what happened to the Starks at/around Robert's Rebellion - specifically the fact that Rickard Stark was burned alive, and Lyanna Stark bore a child with Valyrian dragonlord blood. I think that one or both of those things triggered the Walkers to move, either because it violated some sort of Pact that ended the Long Night, and/or it fulfilled some sort of condition for the Walkers.

That's actually very interesting and the timelines fit. So if I understand correctly, the Starks 'corrupted' their bloodlines somehow? And would this also involve marrying a Southron (Catelyn) or is that irrelevant?

On another note (carefully arranging tinfoil), someone had started a thread about why King Torrhen bent the knee to Aegon the Conqueror - perhaps part of the pact was that the Northerners would never 'wage war' south? (Doesn't make sense even to me, but it does explain why Torrhen knelt), so when Ned fought in the rebellion, he violated that condition as well?

[falcotron]

59 minutes ago, Pearly said:

And would this also involve marrying a Southron (Catelyn) or is that irrelevant?

But Ned is hardly the first Stark, even since Torrhen, to marry a Southron woman. If you look at the family tree in WoIaF, there are multiple Royces, multiple Blackwoods, a Rogers from all the way down in the Stormlands, etc. So the theory must be specifically about mixing Stark magic blood with Valyrian magic blood, not with Southrons in general.

But I'm not sure why there'd be such a rule. Even if the Long Night ended up with some kind of unknown pact between the First Men and the Others, why would it have any provisions relating to a clan of semi-nomadic shepherds halfway across the world who were millennia away from discovering dragons?

1 hour ago, Pearly said:

perhaps part of the pact was that the Northerners would never 'wage war' south? (Doesn't make sense even to me, but it does explain why Torrhen knelt)

Doesn't make sense to me either. Ned is hardly the first Stark to fight south of the Neck. The North did manage to stay out of the War of the Ninepenny Kings, and maybe even the main Blackfyre rebellions (that's not entirely clear), but they were a major part of the Dance of the Dragons and the later Dornish Wars.

[Pearly]

8 minutes ago, falcotron said:

But Ned is hardly the first Stark, even since Torrhen, to marry a Southron woman. If you look at the family tree in WoIaF, there are multiple Royces, multiple Blackwoods, a Rogers from all the way down in the Stormlands, etc. So the theory must be specifically about mixing Stark magic blood with Valyrian magic blood, not with Southrons in general.

 

The Blackwoods and the Royces are mostly blood of the First Men I think. I know the Blackwoods were one of the few families to keep the Old Gods in the South so I'm fairly certain with them but there's something in the back of my memory about the Royces as well being associated with First Men but I'm not sure if they kept the Old Gods (which might be the 'decisive' factor here). I know nothing about the Rogers.

[Kytheros]

1 hour ago, Pearly said:

That's actually very interesting and the timelines fit. So if I understand correctly, the Starks 'corrupted' their bloodlines somehow? And would this also involve marrying a Southron (Catelyn) or is that irrelevant?

On another note (carefully arranging tinfoil), someone had started a thread about why King Torrhen bent the knee to Aegon the Conqueror - perhaps part of the pact was that the Northerners would never 'wage war' south? (Doesn't make sense even to me, but it does explain why Torrhen knelt), so when Ned fought in the rebellion, he violated that condition as well?

No, I don't think marrying Catelyn is relevant to the Walkers.

Nor do I think that there would have been a prohibition against waging war in the South or outside of the North. After all, the Starks ripped the Andals a new one repeatedly when they tried to come over - even to the point of counter-invading the Andal homelands. Also, at whatever time a pact to end the Long Night would have been made, it would have been early in the existence of House Stark - the Kings of Winter would not yet have been Kings of the North, and the lands under their control would not have encompassed the entire North. Also, Lord Cregan Stark went South during the Dance. Besides, what do the Walkers care if the Starks do things to other humans? No, the Walkers might care about/pay attention to what happens to the Starks, but not what the Starks do to non-Stark humans.

 

 

Specifically, I think there are two options for the trigger event, although there are variations on the "why" of each "what", but the "why" variations come in three basic kinds "it violated the pact keeping the Walkers quiescent" or "it's something the Walkers are acting/responding to on behalf of, or in service to, the Starks" or "it's a sign or omen of things to come in Walker prophecies":

Option One - Rickard Stark, the ruling Stark of Winterfell, head of House Stark, Heir to the Kings of Winter, was burned alive, not sure if being burned alive by Wildfire mattered or not, but I'm inclined to say it didn't matter it was wildfire. This most likely either violated some condition of the pact to keep the Walkers quiescent, so the Walkers aren't bound to stay that way anymore, OR this violated something else, possibly insulted the Walkers in some way, and the Walkers are stirring to wreak vengeance on behalf of the Starks/Kings of Winter. Alternatively, a Stark being burned is a sign or omen of things to come in some sort of Walker prophecies.

Option Two - Lyanna Stark had a child with Rhaegar Targaryen - someone with dragonlord blood, resulting in a Stark dragonlord (alternatively, a Stark being abducted by a Dragonlord). This is possibly a violation of the pact that ended the Long Night, or fulfills some sort of condition of the pact, or the combination of Stark and dragonlord blood results in something that woke the Walkers up. Possibly the combination is one that is portentious for and/or important to the Walkers in some way - either a combination that can communicate, interface, and/or command them in some way, or has the ability to do something that the Walkers want or do not want to have happen, or because prophecies of their own involve a Stark with dragonlord blood, either as a central figure or as a sign or omen that things are going to happen. Variations on this option involve Rhaegar's House Dayne ancestry being as or more relevant than being of dragonlord blood.

The dragonlord blood and/or House Dayne blood links are more derivative of information from the World Book, especially Great Empire of the Dawn lore and theory. Also, there's pre-Valyrian structures in Westeros consistent with Valyrian dragon and sorcery crafted buildings, and dragons did exist in Westeros. Alternatively, the less complicated and "purer" version that relies solely on the novels, is Starks are linked to Ice, and Targaryens are linked to Fire, and it's that mixture of Ice and Fire that's either some sort of violation of the pact or meets some condition for Walkers to act upon.

 

Or some sort of combination of the two options and reasons.

 

 

In my opinion, the Stark seat being "Winterfell", the Starks originally being the "Kings of Winter", the Stark family sword being "Ice", and the Stark words being "Winter is Coming" are all things that are going to be massively important. Also, "There must always be a Stark at Winterfell" - that's going to matter, too.

At least, on the magical side of things.

But depending on what the magical consequences are, it's distinctly possible that they'll have additional repercussions on the non-magical side of things. IE, if the Walkers are rising because of offenses against the Stark bloodline, because Winter comes to the enemies of the Starks, the Walkers might do less damage to the North and go for the enemies of the Starks; most likely where Rickard was burned alive (ie, King's Landing), and where Starks have been killed or Stark blood has been shed recently (the Twins for Robb, possibly also Castle Black for Jon, and King's Landing again for Ned), and/or they may try to seek out and communicate with a Stark for directions/identification of the enemies of the Starks (or they could look for Jon to give them direction/target identification).

[Hoo]

They have a Kingdom.  The king is the NK. The NK was created by the children of the forest to balance the power of kingdoms south of the wall.  (It appears that at some point, the NK has turned against his creators, the children of the forest.)

 The NK has his court composed of white walkers.  White Walkers are Crasters kids.   Craster fathered children with all his daughters but offered all male babies to the NK.  The NK turns them to white walkers.  That's how they procreate.

Wildlings who are humans also live in the NK's kingdom.  They are differing tribes of free folk because they cannot have king.   There is only one king, The NK.

The NK and the white walkers practice religious rituals.  At times, they kill the wildlings and animals, and arrange their bodies in sacred shapes on the ground as offerings to gods.

When wildlings are killed or die, they are not necessarily "dead" in that kingdom.  They are often revived by the NK as wights to serve NK's purpose, usually as army.

They live in ice.  The weather dictates their territory, as well as the wall which was built to protect the southern kingdoms (first men).  And water, they can't swim.  (Maybe they can man ships, they do not build them.)

Southerners and the NK have lived in peace for thousands of years, with the wall representing the boundary between the two kingdoms.  (I believe it's 8000 years.)

The wall is manned by the Night's Watch, a set of southern military outposts along the wall.  The Night's Watch is allowed to conduct military reconnaissance in the Land of Always Winter to check on the wildlings.  Wildlings are a threat to southerners because they sometimes invade and pillage southern lands.

During these reconnaissance mission, over the years, the Night's Watch has gotten into battles with the wildlings.  People were killed and they had become enemies.  

While the white walkers allow the Night's Watch to conduct patrols on wildlings, they do not allow them to bring armies, usurp the sacred grounds or rituals, go after the children of the forest, and do other stupid stuff that has nothing to do with their limited patrols.  (See for example S1E1 opening scene.)

 

The winter is coming.  The wildlings were scared because they needed a way to survive the winter.  They intended to migrate south of the wall.  To do that, they decided to unite under one new King  who will lead them south, because they expect to encounter military resistance.  This was a problem for the Night's Watch, and it usurped the power of the NK.

The Night's Watch sent an expedition to see what the wildlings were up to. This expedition went awry in many ways.   First, they found themselves on a path of the wight army which was probably raised against Mance.  Second, when the remaining men retreated to Crasters, they killed Craster, burned his house down.  Third, Sam and Gilly took Craster's baby, and killed a white walker.  

The NK is coming for the baby.  And he is coming for the wall, because he does not need it any longer.  The Night's Watch has failed to keep peace.

[Pearly]

18 minutes ago, Kytheros said:

But depending on what the magical consequences are, it's distinctly possible that they'll have additional repercussions on the non-magical side of things. IE, if the Walkers are rising because of offenses against the Stark bloodline, because Winter comes to the enemies of the Starks, the Walkers might do less damage to the North and go for the enemies of the Starks; most likely where Rickard was burned alive (ie, King's Landing), and where Starks have been killed or Stark blood has been shed recently (the Twins for Robb, possibly also Castle Black for Jon, and King's Landing again for Ned), and/or they may try to seek out and communicate with a Stark for directions/identification of the enemies of the Starks (or they could look for Jon to give them direction/target identification).

1

You have no idea how many wheels and cogs are in motion in my brain right now! This is making SO much sense and explains so many things that I am certain that even if it's not completely right, it's the closest I've seen anyone come to what might actually happen.

And now I need to think about how this might explain Winterfell's Crypts and more specifically, the swords of the deceased Kings of Winter as well as some of the visions and prophecies in the books.

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, Pearly said:

The Blackwoods and the Royces are mostly blood of the First Men I think. I know the Blackwoods were one of the few families to keep the Old Gods in the South so I'm fairly certain with them but there's something in the back of my memory about the Royces as well being associated with First Men but I'm not sure if they kept the Old Gods (which might be the 'decisive' factor here). I know nothing about the Rogers.

The Blackwoods do keep the Old Gods.

The Royces do not. They do trace their line back to the Dawn Age, but they're actually given as an example of a First Men royal house that's mostly Andal today. Upon losing to the Arryns, they converted to the Seven and have been their firmest allies ever since, intermarrying with them frequently.

The Rogers, we don't know anything about them but a bunch of cute Zelazny/Amber references, but I doubt they do.

Also, these aren't the only southron houses the Starks have married into.

Also, I didn't even think of this at the time, but the Blackwoods and Royces aren't just Southrons, they're among the few houses who've married Targaryens. Which isn't surprising—anyone important enough to marry into the Great Houses of other realms is probably on the list of being worth considering by Targaryens. But it may shoot a hole in the "Forbidden Starkgaryen blood" theory—someone would have to trace through the order and see if we know whether there's any doubly-maternal-second-generation-vs.-maternal-fourth-generation Starkgaryens hanging out in the Vale or the Riverlands.

[Kytheros]

7 hours ago, Pearly said:

You have no idea how many wheels and cogs are in motion in my brain right now! This is making SO much sense and explains so many things that I am certain that even if it's not completely right, it's the closest I've seen anyone come to what might actually happen.

And now I need to think about how this might explain Winterfell's Crypts and more specifically, the swords of the deceased Kings of Winter as well as some of the visions and prophecies in the books.

Cheers!

Oh, my theory is probably off in some ways, and incomplete, but it does do a few things that are hard to come up with explanations for otherwise.

It explains the Winter-theme of the Starks - especially their House words "Winter is coming".

To quote Catelyn "Every noble house had its words. Family mottoes, touchstones, prayers of sorts, they boasted of honor and glory, promised loyalty and truth, swore faith and courage. All but the Starks. Winter is coming, said the Stark words."

Oh, sure, that's not entirely true - some of them are threatening boasts, especially among the First Men noble houses, but the Stark words are still an oddity, in some ways even more of an oddity, unless "Winter is coming" has some greater meaning than "the season of winter is coming".

In addition, it provides a reason for the Walkers to be active now, and not some other time.

It also, especially in the variants where the Walkers are acting/responding on behalf of the Starks or against those who acted against the Starks, or even obeying the Starks, provides the Starks and the North a way to survive the coming of the Walkers, yet still have the Walkers get at the South.

 

As for the Winterfell Crypts and the iron swords placed on the laps of the Kings of Winter (and I think all the Lords of Winterfell), supposedly to keep them from rising. There's also sections of the Crypts that are collapsed and sealed off. There's probably something going on there that we don't know about yet. In the books, at least, it seems Wights can probably use weapons. It's distinctly possible that the Kings of Winter are armed to keep something in or out of the crypts.

 

6 hours ago, falcotron said:

The Blackwoods do keep the Old Gods.

The Royces do not. They do trace their line back to the Dawn Age, but they're actually given as an example of a First Men royal house that's mostly Andal today. Upon losing to the Arryns, they converted to the Seven and have been their firmest allies ever since, intermarrying with them frequently.

The Rogers, we don't know anything about them but a bunch of cute Zelazny/Amber references, but I doubt they do.

Also, these aren't the only southron houses the Starks have married into.

Also, I didn't even think of this at the time, but the Blackwoods and Royces aren't just Southrons, they're among the few houses who've married Targaryens. Which isn't surprising—anyone important enough to marry into the Great Houses of other realms is probably on the list of being worth considering by Targaryens. But it may shoot a hole in the "Forbidden Starkgaryen blood" theory—someone would have to trace through the order and see if we know whether there's any doubly-maternal-second-generation-vs.-maternal-fourth-generation Starkgaryens hanging out in the Vale or the Riverlands.

I'm pretty sure that the Targaryens lines that joined the Blackwoods and Royces got brought back into House Targaryen proper within a few generations. And mostly, I think it was Blackwood and Royce daughters marrying Targaryen princes, rather than Targaryen daughters marrying into the Blackwoods and Royces. Also, at least with the Royces, there are multiple branches of House Royce with separate and independent seats - which makes figuring out geneaologies just by name complicated.

As for the Blackwoods ... most likely Stark/Targaryen links would, I think, be through the Blackwood daughter Egg married.

Also, I'm not sure we have enough information on the relevant family trees to backtrace for a Stark/Targaryen bloodline crossing if one or both sides is more than a generation or two back. At any rate, even if there is such a crossing, it's not clear that the "Stark"-ness and "Targaryen"-ness would still be strong enough to count if it's that indirect.

R+L=J is definitely the first direct Stark/Targaryen bloodline mixing, or, more likely, Stark/dragonlord bloodline mixing. I think the Dragonlord bloodline is the important bit, rather than specifically Targaryen.

It's also possible that the Stark/dragonlord bloodline mix happening isn't enough on its own for the Walkers to act, but combined with a Stark being burned alive, it was enough to rouse the Walkers. Or vice versa, really.

In addition, even if there were previous indirect Stark/Targaryen crosses, it's likely none of them would have grown up at Winterfell. That may have also been a contributing factor for the purposes of the theory.

However, I'm inclined towards saying that there probably haven't been prior instances of the Stark and Targaryen bloodlines meeting/crossing. While the North is the only region that never shed blood against Aegon's Conquest, which one would think would be worth rewarding, the only time a Stark/Targaryen marriage is ever arranged is as part of the Dance, and that never came to fruition, as the Targaryen princess died. And GRRM made a point of telling us about it.

 

I freely admit that it's not a perfect theory - I certainly haven't done the kind of in-depth research dive on it that would be needed for an essay on it - and there certainly could be some elements or variations that can be ruled out if such a research dive is done. But it's certainly thought-provoking.

[lxxf]

God damn the casual new fans who've run out of Love Island

[BalerionTheCat]

18 hours ago, Kytheros said:

I think that for purposes of the Show, the White Walkers are going to be relatively generic evil, and we'll probably never know their motivations for moving again.

In the books, however, the White Walkers are significantly different, and my personal theory as to why the Book!Walkers are stirring out of their functional thousands of years of inactivity, is because of what happened to the Starks at/around Robert's Rebellion - specifically the fact that Rickard Stark was burned alive, and Lyanna Stark bore a child with Valyrian dragonlord blood. I think that one or both of those things triggered the Walkers to move, either because it violated some sort of Pact that ended the Long Night, and/or it fulfilled some sort of condition for the Walkers.

I pretty much agree. IMO, in books, the Others are mirroring the events of the 1st Long Night. Something like the Blood Betrayal has angered the gods. And the Others have been sent to punish the wicked men. I don't think it's something specifically concerning the Starks. But the core of the corruption is KL. The blood magic, the red priests, Euron, possibly the dragons and Daenerys are what the Others are against.

But in show, the Others are just the villains. Drogon or Jon will kill the NK. Then all the Others and wight will break in ice shards and bone dust. And the world will be saved.

[falcotron]

6 hours ago, Kytheros said:

I'm pretty sure that the Targaryens lines that joined the Blackwoods and Royces got brought back into House Targaryen proper within a few generations. And mostly, I think it was Blackwood and Royce daughters marrying Targaryen princes, rather than Targaryen daughters marrying into the Blackwoods and Royces. Also, at least with the Royces, there are multiple branches of House Royce with separate and independent seats - which makes figuring out geneaologies just by name complicated.

As for the Blackwoods ... most likely Stark/Targaryen links would, I think, be through the Blackwood daughter Egg married.

Even if a line gets brought back into House Targaryen proper, unless there are no daughters or second sons in those intervening generations, that Targaryen blood is still out there.

And meanwhile, if it's Egg's descendants, the royal line, who have Starkgaryen blood rather than some random river cadets, I'd assume that would be, if anything, more of a problem, not less.

6 hours ago, Kytheros said:

At any rate, even if there is such a crossing, it's not clear that the "Stark"-ness and "Targaryen"-ness would still be strong enough to count if it's that indirect.

Well, that's really the big question with all "magic bloodline" theories.

It can't literally be about blood, or genetics, because Lyanna Stark has only a tiny, tiny fraction of that from the first Brandon, and probably not significantly more than half the other people in the North.

And I doubt the gods sit around drawing up the kinds of inheritance diagrams people do to work out the 5073 qualified potential heirs to the British crown in order of succession. (And, even if they did, the people don't have access to that succession law, and it probably isn't even Rickard's family who "legally" should have been on the seat.)

So what is it about then? The name? Or does each investiture ceremony "top up" the magic for the new King/Lord Stark as long as he had enough to count? Is it about people's beliefs?

Most hack fantasy just ignores this question and lifts things straight out of Tolkien (ignoring the fact that Tolkien actually worked things out in excruciating detail in his notes and letters). And it can even be a legitimate decision to decide you're writing a fairy tale and use fairy tale logic. But if that's the case here, then there can't actually be a mystery we're meant to figure out. So we have to assume (if we're assuming there's a mystery) that there is an answer to how magic blood works in this world. But I have no idea what that answer is.

6 hours ago, Kytheros said:

R+L=J is definitely the first direct Stark/Targaryen bloodline mixing, or, more likely, Stark/dragonlord bloodline mixing. I think the Dragonlord bloodline is the important bit, rather than specifically Targaryen.

It would be hilarious if the real answer were some Stark-via-Royce bastard adventurer whose blood ended up mixing with Nettles' via the mountain clans, and Nettles had no Valyrian ancestry much less Targaryen but that isn't what matters.

6 hours ago, Kytheros said:

It's also possible that the Stark/dragonlord bloodline mix happening isn't enough on its own for the Walkers to act, but combined with a Stark being burned alive, it was enough to rouse the Walkers. Or vice versa, really.

In addition, even if there were previous indirect Stark/Targaryen crosses, it's likely none of them would have grown up at Winterfell. That may have also been a contributing factor for the purposes of the theory.

That's ultimately the problem here. If this is something GRRM expects us to solve, and the best anyone can come up with is "Maybe this was relevant in some way we can't figure out, or, if not, maybe this was instead", then he hasn't really done a good job laying out the mystery. If you look at R+L=J, or gravedigger=Hound, or whatever, once you hear the theory you can find tons of evidence for it, and answers to all of the questions.

Of course it's possible that this isn't something GRRM expects us to solve, it's actually intended to be a complete surprise, but he's had to leave some information as foreshadowing. But I can't think of anything that's worked out that way in the first five books. And, even then, it's not really a theory, it's just a guess that might happen to be right.

But, as you say, until someone does the work to try to dive in and do the research, we can't be sure it can be ruled out. And it's certainly an interesting idea.

[Kytheros]

4 hours ago, falcotron said:

Even if a line gets brought back into House Targaryen proper, unless there are no daughters or second sons in those intervening generations, that Targaryen blood is still out there.

And meanwhile, if it's Egg's descendants, the royal line, who have Starkgaryen blood rather than some random river cadets, I'd assume that would be, if anything, more of a problem, not less.

Well, that's really the big question with all "magic bloodline" theories.

It can't literally be about blood, or genetics, because Lyanna Stark has only a tiny, tiny fraction of that from the first Brandon, and probably not significantly more than half the other people in the North.

And I doubt the gods sit around drawing up the kinds of inheritance diagrams people do to work out the 5073 qualified potential heirs to the British crown in order of succession. (And, even if they did, the people don't have access to that succession law, and it probably isn't even Rickard's family who "legally" should have been on the seat.)

So what is it about then? The name? Or does each investiture ceremony "top up" the magic for the new King/Lord Stark as long as he had enough to count? Is it about people's beliefs?

Most hack fantasy just ignores this question and lifts things straight out of Tolkien (ignoring the fact that Tolkien actually worked things out in excruciating detail in his notes and letters). And it can even be a legitimate decision to decide you're writing a fairy tale and use fairy tale logic. But if that's the case here, then there can't actually be a mystery we're meant to figure out. So we have to assume (if we're assuming there's a mystery) that there is an answer to how magic blood works in this world. But I have no idea what that answer is.

It would be hilarious if the real answer were some Stark-via-Royce bastard adventurer whose blood ended up mixing with Nettles' via the mountain clans, and Nettles had no Valyrian ancestry much less Targaryen but that isn't what matters.

That's ultimately the problem here. If this is something GRRM expects us to solve, and the best anyone can come up with is "Maybe this was relevant in some way we can't figure out, or, if not, maybe this was instead", then he hasn't really done a good job laying out the mystery. If you look at R+L=J, or gravedigger=Hound, or whatever, once you hear the theory you can find tons of evidence for it, and answers to all of the questions.

Of course it's possible that this isn't something GRRM expects us to solve, it's actually intended to be a complete surprise, but he's had to leave some information as foreshadowing. But I can't think of anything that's worked out that way in the first five books. And, even then, it's not really a theory, it's just a guess that might happen to be right.

But, as you say, until someone does the work to try to dive in and do the research, we can't be sure it can be ruled out. And it's certainly an interesting idea.

True. It's a problem pretty much any theory tied specifically to magic bloodlines runs into.

Actually, I think what would "top off", "recharge", "refresh", or "confirm", or whatever term you want to use, the relevant element of Stark-ness/Stark blood is probably connected to living in Winterfell, proximity to the Winterfell Godswood (or the Crypts/something in the Crypts), and/or oaths of loyalty being sworn to an individual as the Stark of Winterfell, as I don't think there's a specific ceremony of investiture or anything for a new Stark of Winterfell, just the vassals showing up and reswearing/reconfirming their allegiance to the new Stark of Winterfell.

Although the way bloodlines/genetics on Planetos is kind of magic in its own right, so eh?

 

As far as whether or not GRRM intended us to solve the mystery of Walker motivations, I'm fairly sure that there's GRRM statements to the effect that they're not just some mindless irrational evil, that they have a purpose. However, he's also given out very little information about the Walkers themselves to date, and we haven't even seen that much of their actions thus far. I think it's been said that we'll learn more about them, but I could be wrong about that. At any rate, I think we need more information before we can put that much weight behind a theory of White Walker motivations, even if that information is what they do and where they go after they get South of the Wall.

We may never know the full picture behind the Book!Walkers (almost certainly won't, really), but I think we're going to learn at least some of it - certainly more and differently from the show - especially as relates to their modern motivations/trigger event. I'm pretty sure that GRRM has said that we're going to go further North in future books, so we'll probably learn more about Book!Walkers when we do that. We as readers will probably learn more about the Book!Walkers than the characters ever do, and be able to figure out even more.

[#teamNightking]

On 9/6/2017 at 7:36 PM, Kytheros said:

I think that for purposes of the Show, the White Walkers are going to be relatively generic evil, and we'll probably never know their motivations for moving again.

It is my understanding they have been waiting for another long night and decades long winter that only rarely happen?

I think their primary mission is and has always been destroy the living...

At some point I theorize if they could have been shut off by the CotF they would have done so...

Maybe the night King wants what any other King wants. Increase his lands and expand his kingdom... 

And that we have never seen a female walker there might be some sexual frustration involved as to why he's so angry and never seems to smile. 

Maybe he wants nothing more than to take over the southern lands and turn all the living dead... Sit down on the iron throne in the end and flip off Westeros (and the viewers) with a grin. 

Fade to black, roll credits. 

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, #teamNightking said:

Maybe the night King wants what any other King wants. Increase his lands and expand his kingdom... 

And marry Margy Tyrell.

I'm not sure if he can pull that off, or if she blowed up to good to be wighted, but he's at least got to try.