Jump to content

Brad Stark

Members
  • Posts

    1,392
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Brad Stark

  1. Where did we get the idea Jon's real name was Aegon? Is this from the show? This makes no sense, given Rheagar had another son Aegon already, who was probably still alive when Jon was born. I always suspected his name was Aemon, like the dragonknight he specifically thinks about and looks up to.
  2. I've always thought future Bran lured past Bran to the tower - so Bran is responsible for what happened even though it wasn't a coincidence. I can't believe the dagger was chosen because it was the least conspicuous in Robert's collection. Lots of people today carry a knife on them wherever they go, knives are everywhere, and in Westerous would be even more prevalent, and in Bran's condition, he could have been killed with a spoon. Either the employer had access to the dagger and happened to grab it because it was convenient, or more likely, with the intent of framing someone. I've always thought Bowen Marsh was manipulated by Melisandre, although not in a magical way.
  3. Catelyn does not recognize the dagger as anything special, but Rodrik Cassel does. A non-expert at arms would probably get the same reaction Catelyn did - just a sharp knife with nothing special about it. If this was an attempt to use a dagger traced back to anyone, it was someone who knew Rodrik would examine the dagger and know what it was. Probably someone close to House Stark or actually in Winterfell. Why use a priceless dagger (yours or someone else's) when it is likely to be cast aside as just another knife?
  4. I've actually considered 3) and 4) for Maester Ludwin himself. He's clearly against magic and Bran's association with it, but emotionally attached to the Stark children as well as loyal out of his job. If he already saw Bran as a problem, and now saw killing him as a mercy, he has motive. He knows what is going on better than anyone, and his reaction to Catelyn returning to Bran when she did seems to fit. The knife doesn't fit at all - Ludwin has no motive to frame anyone and is unlikely to pick up this dagger by chance.
  5. I don't see it as that simple. Assuming you are right about the employer not anticipating Catelyn's return or the assassin getting caught, that still leaves the question of why use this knife? Do you go along with the idea that the knife was intended to frame someone? If not, why not just use a cheap kitchen knife? If you agree the knife was intended to frame someone, who was it intended to frame? and who was the employer? And why kill Bran? I do agree this is highly unlikely to be a faceless man. I disagree with your logic - not looking, sounding or behaving like a faceless man is exactly what faceless men do best. The killer was almost certainly contracted after Bran fell, and it is a real stretch to see someone rushing to Bravos and hiring a faceless man, especially for an unconscious boy. And then why impersonate someone who looks like a common criminal instead of Ludwin, a servant, or anyone else? And a faceless man would not fail this badly to get away or kill Catelyn on discovery.
  6. I can't see Ned turning on Robert, not without more substantial evidence, and Cersei likely knew it. I believe Tyrion speculated that Joffrey wanted to impress Cersei and Jamie by killing Bran. I don't remember where this was mentioned, but it is possible, especially if the dagger wasn't distinct or distinctly associated with Joffrey. Cersei or Jamie might know the dagger was Joffrey's even if no one else did. The motive is questionable - if Joffrey considered the Starks a threat, or thought Cersei or Jamie did, killing Ned would make sense. Killing Bran is just going to make them a bigger threat, and going after a cripple, and not even doing it yourself is not exactly the best way to prove you are anything. Another argument against Littlefinger - He claimed to have lost the dagger to Tyrion. If he planned this from the start, it would have made much more sense to make people aware of this story before the incident.
  7. I believe Jamie when he admits to throwing Bran but denies hiring the catspawn. She has by far the strongest motive of anyone else to want Bran dead. This fits the theory of the dagger happened to be "close at hand" with the assumption the catspawn would not get caught. I don't see her doing this if the dagger was in any way connected to Joffrey, as she's too clever and Joffrey is her main motive for everything at this point.
  8. He tells Catelyn "You aren't suppose to be here". Did the employer intentionally mislead the catspaw so he'd get caught? Or did the employer expect the assassination to be successful without anyone finding the blade? I don't believe the catspaw was told to leave the knife behind, it would be too easy to say he left the knife and someone else must have taken it. The assumption everyone (readers and characters) seem to make is that the employer is the owner of the dagger. To me, it seems obvious that it is someone else. The dagger was too valuable to gift to the assassin, especially if this was a poor man desperate for food. Stealing the dagger from someone else makes a lot more sense. The problem I have with Littlefinger as a suspect, is it seems the employer intended the catspaw to get caught by Catelyn, leading to a very real risk that Catelyn would die. I don't see Littlefinger wanting her dead, and might even be plotting against Ned in hopes of winning her over, especially at this point in the story. It seems entirely possible that Littlefinger never owned the dagger, but made up the story about losing it to Tyrion to set the Starks against the Lannisters, and the employer stole it from Joffrey with the intent of framing him. Varys seems a likely suspect, if for no other reason than we can rule out most of the other people with motives. Another alternative is the dagger was stolen without any intent to frame, but happened to be "close at hand". If that's the case, then the catspawn was not intended to be caught.
  9. I was almost certain I was the only one still lost on who and why gave the Catspaw the dagger to assassinate Bran. Theories are all over the place though, so I am surprised this has been barely discussed over the years when so many less important questions have been repeatedly beat to death on this board.
  10. Not supposed to discuss the show, but this was a minor change that only affects the timing of the TV episodes. In Fire and Blood, Cole kills Lonmouth during the tournament the next day, possibly on purpose, possibly by accident. The show just moved the death up a day and made it clearly on purpose - probably for no other reason than to give us a clear and dramatic ending to the episode instead of starting the next episode with Lonmouth's death. The show might also skip this tournament altogether.
  11. The dagger's significance in the books is to figure out who wanted Bran assassinated. I haven't really figured it out myself, although Littlefinger is my prime suspect. It is an odd choice of weapon, why hire an assassin and give him such an expensive weapon? Grrm is involved in HOD, so I doubt it would take on so much significance for the show if it isn't important in the books. However, the books talk about a Lightbringer sword, so this has to end up the central legendary weapon.
  12. Rhaenyra and Daemon are very much how I pictured them in Fire and Blood. Alicent is very different, and I don't like the changes.
  13. I thought they did a wonderful job with House of the Dragon. Fire and Blood provides a skeleton for the story, and I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as the novels, but the actors really bring the characters to life. So much better than the last few seasons of A Game of Who Cares how this ends we all just want to wrap it up and move on.
  14. My answer to the riddle of the Valaryian Sphinx. Firewryms and Wyverns are naturally occurring creatures, dragons are not. Thousands of years ago, skinchangers took control of Firewyrms and Wyverns among other creatures. They created a dragon by combining parts of the two, along with the mind and spirit of a human skinchanger. I can't find the quote, but GRRM was asked if we'd see anyone warg a dragon. He didn't answer yes or no, but said there were things about dragons people have long forgotten making this much more difficult than skinchanging other creatures.
  15. We've seen with the dragons, one individual can be very destructive, you don't need an army. If Sam didn't actually kill an Other, but just destroyed its temporary body, they might be very difficult to kill. If they can raise and control the dead from a distance, one Other can take out an army of men who aren't prepared. As long as each dead man kills on average 1 living man, the whole army dies and is under control of the Other.
  16. Chronologically, I assume that the 6 new White Walkers in the prologue didn't exist until well after Jon's birth and maybe only a few days before Waymar's death. We know the Watch was both much larger and much more important when Aegon invaded. So I find it likely that the Others did not exist recently. We also know the Stark's haven't had wolves in many generations. Maybe this is all tied together, the last Stark Wolf, the last Other and the last Dragon all died at the same time. Tying Gared to the wolves is interesting. Gared obviously didn't have the wits to be acting on his own plan - either he panicked and ran to Winterfell, or he was told to go there and obeyed. The wolves didn't choose to go to Winterfell either. Either mommy wolf did or her warg did. So did Gared lead the Starks to the Wolves by coincidence? Or was mommy wolf following Gared? Or was Gered following mommy wolf? Was mommy wolf's death a coincidence? A warg might choose to use mommy wolf to transport pups to the Starks, but what reason would they have to kill her after? What scared Gerad so badly? Reading aGoT, I assumed seeing a white walker was enough to freak him out - but Sam sees (and kills) one and is barely even shaken up. I'd assume Sam would scare more easily.
  17. Back to parity between Starks and Targaryens - anyone else notice how conspicuously absent any marriages or children between these 2 families are? Of course Targaryens mostly married Targaryens, with Velaryons making up most of the other marriages. But Daenerys (assuming her parents are who we were told) has Martell and Arryn ancestors. She likely has Tyrell and Tully ancestry through Blackwood and Hightower, respectively. We have examples of Baratheons and Lannisters with Targaryen ancestry. But the closest Stark gets is a rumored affair that likely never resulted in children and a marriage proposal that never came to be. Stark and Targaryen are far more disconnected than any other pair of great Houses. Does anyone else think GRRM may be avoiding (consciously or subconsciously) other mixing of these houses because of R+L=J?
  18. We are mish-mashing timelines and unrelated events. The Pact of Ice and Fire was written after 100 AC by Jacaerys Velaryon promising the Stark's his first daughter, then he died childless. The Starks were Kings of the North and no longer Kings of Winter long before the conquest. The dragons were extinct in 153AC, likely due to the maesters seeing how much damage they did during the Dance. I do think there is some sort of parity (if not equality) between the Starks and the Targaryens, but as I said before, I haven't seen any evidence that either the Starks or Targaryens are aware of it. Is material in "House of the Dragon" but not in "Fire and Blood" fair game for discussion?
  19. I'd have to reread aGoT again, but isn't the first time Ned thinks about broken promises in the black cell? If so, then the broken promise was probably something he promised he'd do, but knew he wouldn't (as opposed to something he did that he promised he wouldn't). He does mention that if only he could see Jon again when he thinks about the broken promise. I doubt he promised to kill Jon, the most obvious reason is why promise to kill Jon as a teenager or adult and not a baby? Ned doesn't seem to have any issue with Jon taking the Black, so his promise isn't broken by Jon never becoming King or having children, nor does Ned seem in any way bothered by the end of the Targaryen dynasty and Jon never having a claim to the throne. Ned also either doesn't see Jon as the Price who was Promised or a head of the dragon, or at least doesn't see joining the Night's Watch as interfering with that. If anything, Ned is supportive or relieved by Jon's decision. My thought was Lyanna wanted her son to have a normal life, or even just a normal childhood. "Promise me Ned that Robert never finds out who Jon's father was. Promise me you'll keep it a secret from everyone, but once Robert is dead, tell Jon alone who his father was".
  20. Given Mance's cloak story, I assumed red was a popular color in Asshai. This doesn't tell me much, except Quaithe is probably being honest about being from there.
  21. I also read this as Quaithe wanting Dany to sail around the world, but south and north don't make sense. If I live in California in the West, sailing off the edge of the map makes sense if I want to get to Japan in the East. But sailing for South to Antarctica if I want to go to Alaska does not.
  22. "There must always be a Stark in Winterfell" - I've seen that on this board many times, usually assuming it has something prophetic or at least magical. I've never assumed it this way reading, I don't think any of the Starks or other book characters have, and I don't see any evidence for it. Suppose a castle has a strong front door, but is often attacked, infiltrated or sabotaged from enemies scaling the west wall. A General declares there must always be an officer in the west tower. Not because believes a prophecy that an attack will come when an officer is not there, that some magic spell will go awry without officer blood in the tower, or even that he distrusts men who are not officers. He simply knows it is likely to be a problem in the future, takes responsibility and prioritizes resources accordingly. Similarly, I believe Winterfell was the site of 1 or more major battles in the past, won by the Starks. The Starks of Old expected future battles there, felt responsible for the North or the all of Westeros, and therefore declared that one of their family must always be there so one of them is when the next battle arrives. This makes even more sense if the Starks are responsible for the Others, or at least felt that they were.
  23. I doubt this. Fire and Blood (and aSoIaF to a lesser extent) spells out how people saw Aegon as an enigma and wondered what his motives were. It is heavily implied at several points that he was being guided by dreams and prophesies related to the current story, although less specific. Why GRRM decided to hit people in the face with it when so much of his success is because he's great at subtly hiding things, I don't know. Maybe HBO wanted to tie to Game of Thrones, but if it were me, I'd want to distance myself from that as much as possible, especially from the resolution to the whitewalkers invading.
  24. I've always thought this was just GRRM's way of show how wasteful the enormous and expensive Harrenhal was, as it was never really used. Having dragons burn Harren while the hall was under construction isn't as great a story, nor does having Harren enjoying his new hall for a few years before being toasted. But consider how close it is to the Isle of Faces, and Harren used Wierwood as building material, and the surrounding area, while extremely good farmland, was not enough to support a fully staffed castle. Assuming the Targaryens saw it in their dreams, maybe Harren was about to do something that would have serious consequences and forced Aegon to invade earlier than he planned.
  25. Somewhat repeating my previous post, but Daenys likely was responsible. If they knew before her, why not conquer Westeros sooner? Why conquer Westeros at all if it was after Aegon's time? Even accepting this timeframe, Aenar, Gaemon or Aegon could have been responsible, but your question was "When". I don't discount that this was based on Rhoynish or other Essos legends or prophesies. Unlike the Doom, The Long Night happened before, and a lot of myths related to it are clearly not from the Targaryens. But I am saying Daenys is when they inserted their family into it and believed they had to conquer Westeros. I don't see evidence the Targaryens know or care (or ever did) about the Starks and their Musgrave Ritual. We do have the Pact of Ice and Fire, but it was well over 100 years after the conquest and never fulfilled. We have no evidence before Rhaegar that any Targaryens treated the Starks any different from any other Westeros nobility. We do have evidence Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna Stark because he thought he needed to father another child because of the prophesy, but we have no evidence Lyanna's Stark heritage played any part in the decision - she could simply have been a fertile young girl. Rhaegar though his son with Elia was TPWWP and his child with Lyanna would be less important. It is interesting Rhaegar thought he needed a 3rd child (and thus 3 heads of the dragon must be siblings), while Aemon considered himself a candidate to be one of the heads even though he'd be a distant relation to the TPWWP instead of a sibling.
×
×
  • Create New...