Ygrain Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I'm glad my question got some traction.You do understand that this makes it even more unlikely that neither Ned nor Lyanna nor Brandon nor any other Stark is ever mentioned to have had this ability. We know for a fact Ned didn't have it (or, if he did, never got close enough to an animal to discover it) and we know for a fact that any time Ned recalled his brother and/or his sister in his own thoughts, he never thought about them having warging abilities. I understand it may have been a trait that was feared throughout the land, but I'm still willing to bet Ned would have thought of it at some point in his own musings. He doesn't.This intrigues me, but it begs the question: Is the warging ability (yes, I'm lumping actual skin-changing with the shared vision/dream state as Bran seemed to start with the second and progressed to the first, seeming to indicate they are both part of the same talent) inherent in the Stark kids or in the direwolves? Varamyr and Borroq certainly didn't need direwolves to warg, though, granted, they were specifically trained in the art. I get that a bond would need to exist between the animal and the warg, but I'm willing to bet at least one of the Stark kids got close to a horse or a kennel dog enough growing up that any latent ability probably would've been triggered.The only thing I'll say about the Mormonts and the Skagosi is simply that none of what's been said about them has been confirmed. It's all heresay and conjecture in the books.I guess my real problem with this is Robb, Sansa, Arya, Bran and Rickon all have the exact same parentage and all (apparently) have this ability, which is largely unique south of the wall. Jon has two completely different parents (making him a cousin) and still has this ability. It seems to suggest that ANY offspring of ANY Stark has this ability latent, merely waiting for the right trigger (the direwolves, I guess). And yet, throughout all the Stark history that has been given in the books, no mention, even among the Starks themselves, of any of them being wargs.Jon has been with Ghost on the Wall on the wall. How many people there know that he is a warg? How many people in Winterfell figured out that Bran was a warg?How much time did Ned spend with Brandon and Lyanna to know that they were wargs, especially if they themselves were not aware of their ability, like Jon?In other words, Ned not mentioning anything is not a proof that there weren't warg abilities in the family earlier, and Lyanna's and Brandon's exceptional riding skills could easily be a hint at these.The Kingsguard probably weren't at the TOJ on Aerys's orders. The KG knew that Rhaegar intended to remove Aerys as king after the battle of the Trident, and recognized Rhaegar as king. We learn from Ser Barristan that some kings chose to use the KG to defend their wives, children, mistresses and bastards, they are sworn to obeyYep. And he also says that this is NOT the true purpose of Kingsguard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 The Kingsguard probably weren't at the TOJ on Aerys's orders.They were there on the crown pince's orders, to be sure. If Aerys had known where Rhaegar (and Lyanna) took up residence, I'm sure that the story would be completely different. The KG knew that Rhaegar intended to remove Aerys as king after the battle of the Trident, and recognized Rhaegar as king.There is nothing to substantiate this, at all. And the discussion at the tower shows that the Kingsguard present still viewed Aerys as the king, when Jaime slew him. So, no, the fact is that Rhaegar may have made up his mind when he returned to King's Landing, as he talked with Jaime, but not before. And those at the tower were ignorant of any possible actions to install Rhaegar as king. We learn from Ser Barristan that some kings chose to use the KG to defend their wives, children, mistresses and bastards, they are sworn to obeyAnd, you are going where with this? Are you going to suggest that those Kingsguard at the tower were guarding a mistress or a bastard in lieu of defending and protecting the king? They say that they would have killed Jaime to protect Aerys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Looking at the board, I can see we're having another Rhaegar-Lyanna time. I will do my best to abstain from these (alright, I did mess in to point out that 14 is perfectly legal age of consent even these days), as I really tire of explaining that "couldn't predict a civil war" does not equal "didn't anticipate any problems" and the likes. It really baffles me how difficult it seems for some to separate the knowledge of the reader from the knowledge of the character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bronn of Sunspear Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 One last note about the warging things through the generations (i know its getting off topic), but in AGOT, wasnt the only out of body experience when Bran had the dreams that BR sent (please correct me if im wrong)? That would indicate to me that the warging south of the wall came after the dragons were born, and magic came back to the world. Giving us another reason (asside from the "one in one thousand") why the older starks may not have had the ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 One last note about the warging things through the generations (i know its getting off topic), but in AGOT, wasnt the only out of body experience when Bran had the dreams that BR sent (please correct me if im wrong)? That would indicate to me that the warging south of the wall came after the dragons were born, and magic came back to the world. Giving us another reason (asside from the "one in one thousand") why the older starks may not have had the ability.I'm extremely leery of pinning the "cause of magic" thing on the dragons. I think the dragons are actually a byproduct of increased magic, not necessarily the root cause. It seems like you're either born a warg or you're not. In which case, the Starks were born wargs long before Dany's dragons hatched. And the arrival of the direwolves is what "sparked" the Starks' warging abilities, not the dragons.And of course, Bloodraven was sure as hell warging south of the Wall waaaaay before the dragons hatched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foothill Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I am currently starting my reread of the series and I wanted to post this. I am sure it has been mentioned somewhere, but I just found it and had a good laugh. It may mean nothing but I thought it was interesting...Jon drew in a breath, and he saw Sam Tarly staring. Even in the wolfswood, you never found more than two or three of the white trees growing together; a grove of nine was unheard of. The forest floor was carpeted with fallen leaves, bloodred on top, black rot beneath. The wide smooth trunks were bone pale, and nine faces stared inward. (GoT).IF this can be taken as a hint, it is further "proof" Jon is a Targaryen because red-on-black is the Targaryen symbol.Also, the nine faces could be symbolic as well, because Jon COULD eventually have nine faces. (Snow/Stark/Targaryen...Lord Commander/King in the North/Lord of the Seven Kingdoms...Azor Ahai Reborn, The Prince that was Promised, The Last Hero).I could be off, but I though I would bring it up anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 IF this can be taken as a hint, it is further "proof" Jon is a Targaryen and not a Blackfyre, because red-on-black is the Targ symbol...and not the Blackfyre one.To my knowledge nobody anywhere has ever suggested that Jon is a Blackfyre. That's Aegon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foothill Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 To my knowledge nobody anywhere has ever suggested that Jon is a Blackfyre. That's Aegon.Whoops! I had a brain fart and forgot that Targ bastards dont take that name. I will fix it.Regardless...it still makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Do you have any proof that they explicitly recognized Rhaegar as their king at that point? Because when Ned confronts them, Hightower says that if they had been in action, Aerys would still be sitting on the Iron Throne. Aerys, not Rhaegar.In any case, I think Dayne and Whent were at the Tower on Rhaegar's orders — not because they thought he was their king, but because they were with him and he as the crown prince could give them an order — and Hightower ended up there after Aerys commanded him to find Rhaegar.About the whole "oh they were just loyal to Rhaegar" thing, that might be a better sell if it was just Dayne or just Dayne and Whent. Dayne was Rhaegar's best friend and Whent apparently helped him run off with Lyanna. But Hightower's presence should be Exhibit A that something else is going on there. He's never presented as anything less than 100% by the book, and as such wouldn't be putting Rhaegar ahead of Aerys. His presence should be an "Aha" moment.ETA: And for what feels like the 50th time, none of what you're suggesting explains why they were still there after Aerys, Aegon and Rhaegar were dead.Aegon is alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Aegon is alive1. No, he is not.2. Even if fake Aegon is actually Aegon, the three men at the Tower would still, at the time, be operating under the assumption that he was dead. If he's alive at that time, they don't know it. (But he isn't.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Maybe Dayne and Whent, but not Ser Gerold Hightower. He was the LC of the KG and is always shown as being honourable. He says to Jaime that they should protect the King, not judge him, so he defends Aerys even though he's burning people alive. If it was just Dayne and Whent at the Tower of Joy, then the argument for them staying there to defend Rhaegar's wife and [bastard] son because they were his friends could be made, but not with Hightower.Hightower wouldn't stay there defending Lya and Jon of he knew Viserys was alive, and if Jon is a bastard then he'd be the King. But Hightower didn't go there. He stayed with Dayne and Whent to defend Lyanna and Jon when Rhaegar commanded him to, but when he died and Aerys and Aegon, Jon became King, so they were there to do what Kingsguard do, defend the King.It doesn't work. To defend their king, they had to send him away, as it was done with Viserys.So Jon wasn't their king, so sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 It doesn't work. To defend their king, they had to send him away, as it was done with Viserys.So Jon wasn't their king, so sorry.Viserys was never their king. That's kind of the entire point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 They were there on the crown pince's orders, to be sure. If Aerys had known where Rhaegar (and Lyanna) took up residence, I'm sure that the story would be completely different. There is nothing to substantiate this, at all. And the discussion at the tower shows that the Kingsguard present still viewed Aerys as the king, when Jaime slew him. So, no, the fact is that Rhaegar may have made up his mind when he returned to King's Landing, as he talked with Jaime, but not before. And those at the tower were ignorant of any possible actions to install Rhaegar as king. And, you are going where with this? Are you going to suggest that those Kingsguard at the tower were guarding a mistress or a bastard in lieu of defending and protecting the king? They say that they would have killed Jaime to protect Aerys.The KG at ToJ said they wouldn't flee there, and they wouldn't have fled should thay'd been with Viserys. In both instances they'd stayed covering the escape while someone true fled with the king (no, I'm not saying Viserys was king; I mean should he were). If Jon was their king, their behaviour was downright stupid. They were dealing with Jon's uncle, so they could always get a better outcome by bargaining. They didn't act like they did because of Jon, they died for Aegon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Viserys was never their king. That's kind of the entire point.I know, I know. Even though, some Targ loyalist fled with him. What would they do for their king?It's tiring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I am currently starting my reread of the series and I wanted to post this. I am sure it has been mentioned somewhere, but I just found it and had a good laugh. It may mean nothing but I thought it was interesting...Jon drew in a breath, and he saw Sam Tarly staring. Even in the wolfswood, you never found more than two or three of the white trees growing together; a grove of nine was unheard of. The forest floor was carpeted with fallen leaves, bloodred on top, black rot beneath. The wide smooth trunks were bone pale, and nine faces stared inward. (GoT).IF this can be taken as a hint, it is further "proof" Jon is a Targaryen because red-on-black is the Targaryen symbol.Also, the nine faces could be symbolic as well, because Jon COULD eventually have nine faces. (Snow/Stark/Targaryen...Lord Commander/King in the North/Lord of the Seven Kingdoms...Azor Ahai Reborn, The Prince that was Promised, The Last Hero).I could be off, but I though I would bring it up anyways.Not in my opinion.Jon is AAR.Danaerys is TPTWPTyrion is the last hero. It bothers me because I like the character, but I suppose someone has to ride a dragon into the Heart of Winter. At least, he'll die a giant.They are the thre heads of the dragon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I know, I know. Even though, some Targ loyalist fled with him. What would they do for their king?It's tiring.Some Targ loyalist who was NOT a member of the Kingsguard, as very explicitly established. If Viserys had actually been their king, they would have gone to him. But they didn't, because he wasn't the king. I sincerely do not understand why this is so confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finger Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 1. No, he is not.2. Even if fake Aegon is actually Aegon, the three men at the Tower would still, at the time, be operating under the assumption that he was dead. If he's alive at that time, they don't know it. (But he isn't.)1. He is. As Rhaegar's elder son, he's the king.2. The KG knew of him. It was Hightower who took him to ToJ.Btw, I haven't found another scenario which doesn't rest in making the KG look stupid, cruel or useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 The KG at ToJ said they wouldn't flee there, and they wouldn't have fled should thay'd been with Viserys. In both instances they'd stayed covering the escape while someone true fled with the king (no, I'm not saying Viserys was king; I mean should he were). If Jon was their king, their behaviour was downright stupid. They were dealing with Jon's uncle, so they could always get a better outcome by bargaining. They didn't act like they did because of Jon, they died for Aegon.Ned served Robert, who had already allowed Aegon and Rhaenys to be killed and was going to deny Jon his kingship. There's no bargaining there. What's downright stupid is stashing your two heirs in the same place, which is what would have been the case if Aegon were alive and at the Tower. But he wasn't alive and at the Tower, because he's dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foothill Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 They are the thre heads of the dragon.I always thought (I could be wrong) that the quote was "Three heads HAS the dragon."To me...that implies one dragon with three heads. Which is why I think it is Jon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 1. He is. As Rhaegar's elder son, he's the king.2. The KG knew of him. It was Hightower who took him to ToJ.Btw, I haven't found another scenario which doesn't rest in making the KG look stupid, cruel or useless.He's a Blackfyre or some other pretender. The real Aegon is dead and always has been. Young Griff is not Aegon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.