Aebram

Well, that's a good point Escape is a third option, sort of a middle ground between submission and death. But attempting to escape risks death, torture, and the other dangers I mentioned. So it presents a similar dilemma, although not as extreme. And the existence of a third option actually reinforces Tyrion's point: the choice is always there.

The North is sparsely populated, especially the Western part. I don't think it's possible for them to fund a navy. A more efficient way to improve life there would be to boost security at the Wall, to cut down on wildling raids. Then the Gift and New Gift would be safe places to live again, as they were years ago when the Night's Watch was stronger, and all 19 castles were manned. And in fact, something like that may happen soon. The Watch has diminished because most Westerosis believe the Long Night and the Others are mere folklore. Westeros is about to be reminded that these are real threats. That will probably lead to an increase in the prestige and power of the Watch. For the Riverlands, yes, water power would be valuable; it would reduce the cost of flour and sawn lumber, two important commodities, among other things. Well-placed bridges, built large and strong to withstand floods, would do a lot to enhance commerce and travel. Rivers are useful to Invaders and bandits, so some sort of fresh-water naval force (in my head it's called the River Watch) would be valuable.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. How is "doing his damnedest to get out" not a choice? No one is forcing him to do it.

I would say that Tyrion is technically correct: the choice is always there. But choosing death is something that goes against the survival Instinct that is programmed deeply into the DNA of all living creatures. And there are other considerations. A disobedient slave might be tortured during or before his execution. And there might be children or other family members who would also suffer.

You ask a lot of questions! Here are a few thoughts. We don't know much about the Rhoynar religion, but we do know that the river itself was considered sacred. When they moved thousands of miles away from the river, and raised generations of children who never even saw it, it seems natural for them to be drawn into the local religion. None of the religions we've seen in the story seem to be of the extreme type that regard other faiths as evil and try to punish the believers. We discussed schisms and heresies in another thread. The consensus was that they weren't necessary to the plot, and never spontaneously sprouted in the George's creative "garden." But I think we may see one soon; the way the High Sparrow is running things in King's Landing, I won't be surprised if a rift develops between him and Oldtown. I would say that the Fot7 is clearly an organized religion. They have a hierarchy of clergy, and a headquarters with a ruling council. The religion of the ironborn, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have any organization. It's apparent.y just a collection of wandering priests, who may have some authority in special occasions, such as calling a kingsmoot. When they ruled the Riverlands, they may have regarded the "soft green-lands men" as not worthy of joining their religion.

I've seen this theory before, and I rather like it. But where is this confirmation please? Can you post a link?

My personal hunch is that LF will first marry Sansa to Harrold. Then he'll arrange Sweetrobin's death himself; no need to involve Sansa in that. Then he'll arrange Harrold's death, and try to win Sansa's heart for himself.

SeanF and Astarkchoice, you made some good points. It does look like many of the slave cities are in a fragile condition. But freeing the slaves is not simply a matter of killing the masters. Remember what happened in Astapor; Dany certainly does. And in Meereen as well, she is encountering many obstacles and resistance to her goal. Dany genuinely wants to be a good ruler. She wouldn't want to leave a trail of Astapors in her wake ... at least not yet. I suppose some evil event or person might transform her into the Mad Queen ...

Eliminating slavery in so many countries across the known world will probably take many years and many battles. I don't think there will be room in the books for that, unless the George uses an intermittent writing style, where a few chapters are spread across a long span of time, and we learn about most of the battles by dialog and characters' memories.. (Personally, I think the world he's built is too big to be limited by a finite number of books. It's fine with me if he just keeps on writing more and more of them. Book 8 could be titled "The Flames of Freedom.")

By the time that we met Daenerys in the opening chapters of Game, Illyrio had already had the Young Griff plot underway for years, possibly a decade or more. It seems very possible that marrying her to Drogo was just a ploy to get her out of the picture, so that she wouldn't interfere with his original plan. Of course, that changed radically after he found out that she had hatched three dragons.

Interesting theory. Off the top of my head, I see several questionable points. 1. I find it hard to believe that Arthur Dayne would agree to, and even help with, his own sister getting pregnant outside of wedlock, even for his prince. 2. If Ashara wanted her daughter to be hidden, it seems unlikely that she would, or even could, arrange to have her raised by wildlings. 3. What's that about Manderly having a secret fortress? Are you referring to the Wolf's Den?

Certainly, Dunk is an admirable character, and well written. But in two of the three stories that have been published so far, the events that he deals with revolve around the Targaryens and their intramural battles and intrigues. And of course, Egg himself is a Targaryen. Westeros is a big place. I'm sure that, if he wanted to, the George could have written some very fine adventures for Dunk without weaving every plot into Targaryen history. Hence my "walking camera" comment.

There seem to be so many that do; and it's not surprising, really. The Targaryens ruled Westeros for 300 years. I'm sure every noble family made some effort to arrange a marriage to one of them. Just a little exercise for the genealogically inclined. :^)

I am largely in agreement with this. To me, it seems like House Targaryen is the real protagonist in the mega-story: the entire history of the world that the George has built. The World book has about 100 pages devoted specifically to them. Then there is another entire book, Fire and Blood, with another volume yet to come. Even the Dunk and Egg stories are largely about the Targaryens, with Dunk serving as a "walking camera" to witness their actions. With all that build-up, I'll be very surprised if Daenerys, or possibly a Targaryen to be named later, does not end up as a major victor / heroic figure at the end of the story. Of course, the George does like to break stereotypes, so I'm not placing any bets.

Sorry, but that is simply not true. If Bowen was a good leader, he would not have launched his surprise attack during the meeting in The Shield Hall. Instead, he would have waited until late at night, when everyone was sleeping. Then he and a few supporters would arrest Jon and move him to a cell, or perhaps just post guards outside his chambers and confine him there. Then he would confer with a few senior brothers, to make sure he had some support for becoming temporary commander, or to choose someone else for that position. The next morning, he would announce and explain his actions to everyone, and start some sort of council to decide the future of the Watch. But Bowen is not a skilled leader. He tried to murder Jon at a time and place where his (Jon's) support was quite strong among the brothers. This, I think, is bound to unleash chaos: distrust, doubt, anger, and confusion will engulf the Watch and the wildlings. It won't surprise me if we learn that Bowen himself was killed moments later by an angry mob.

I find myself in agreement with Buried Treasure about the "trueborn heir" matter, but for a different reason. Robert mentioned Joffrey specifically, but he was dying at the time. He was probably not thinking clearly; and at any rate, he was never interested in legal matters. This is a medieval world. Joffrey could die at any time, before becoming king, as a result of violence, disease, a riding accident, Etc. So a phrase such as "my trueborn heir" or "my lawful heir" seems a better choice.

Well, yes, but on the other hand ... I think "it is known" that Aemon's remark about "the riddle, not the riddler" is some sort of prophecy or magical message, not just the raving of an old man in poor health. Sphinxes are mentioned several times in the five books, but not in a way that has, or even hints at, any importance to the story ... except perhaps for one. This prologue discusses the sphinx, more, I think, than all the other chapters of all the books combined. And this sphinx happens to be someone that Sam meets on his first day at the Citadel. The story isn't over, of course. It's possible that the meaning of Aemon's statement will be revealed later; we may not have any good clues yet about it. But from what we've read so far, I think it's most likely that it refers to Sarella. She's a very interesting character: smart, daring, a good archer, connected to the ruling family of Dorne, and a daughter of Oberyn. She's well positioned to play some important role later in the story.

Yes, separating assumptions from facts is important for clear thinking and effective debate. Thanks for pointing this out. That being said, I will respectfully disagree with you on one point: We know that Littlefinger's interest in Catelyn started in his early teens. He was, what, 15 years old? -- when he challenged the bigger, older Brandon Stark to a duel for her hand. That seems more like love than some sort of political ambition. But you've studied this more than I. Can you fill in some details? What do you think he was "really doing?"

Here's what Yandel says about that: Of course, we can't believe everything the Maesters tell us ...

Pate isn't even a character; he is Westerosi folklore, a fictional character in a fictional world. It seems that the George likes this trope; so it's not surprising that he puts at least one of them in the story as a "real" character (if you'll pardon the expression). I think Dunk fits this pattern well. I'm not so sure about Victarion; honestly, I don't understand why so many people here think he's dumb. As another reader pointed out, he is clearly a competent fighter, sailor, and leader; those are things that require some wits. We've spent many hours debating whether various characters are good or evil. Now we get to debate whether they are smart or dumb. The George certainly likes his shades of gray.

Before the Conquest, Westeros was divided into seven (or more) kingdoms; and throughout most of its history, some of these kingdoms were always at war with others. The Targaryens put a stop to that, thanks in large part to dragonpower. They could have used the dragons to commit Black Harren- style atrocities, oppressing the smallfolk and confiscating their wealth; but they didn't. So in that sense, they arguably made life better for the common people. On the other hand: Indeed. And the war was waged by Targaryens fighting against each other, not by rebellion or intramural war between other lords.

Yes, I definitely think this is a possible explanation. That's a good point. Daenerys hatches her dragons in the last chapter of Game, and Arya leaves King's Landing with Jaqen and Yoren in the first chapter of Clash. We don't know exactly how much time elapsed between them; but given the sequence of chapters, it probably wasn't very long. And of course, even after the dragons hatched, most of the world would have been completely unaware of them until after she brought them to Qarth, some weeks or possibly a few months later. All of this does seem to support the idea that, after leaving Arya, Jaqen went back to Braavos before traveling to the Citadel. This raises the question of why he wanted to go to the Wall. Perhaps The Faceless Men had heard about the increasing threat of the Others, and wanted to investigate that.

When I came across this passage during one of my rereads, I had a sudden thought that this must be the reason why Jaqen H'ghar wanted access to the Citadel, which led to him killing Pate the novice in the prologue of Feast. The recent discovery of the original outline for that book seems to confirm this. https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/18519cz/spoilers_extended_grrms_20032004_outline_for_affc/ The section on the prologue includes the words "Pate -- steals book -- Death of Dragons." Of course, the story line may have changed since that outline was written. But assuming that it's still true, what does it tell us? This has interesting implications. At the House of Black and White, Arya learns that the Faceless Men are very thoughtful and selective about who they kill. When Arya proposed to kill the insurance broker by first killing one of his guards, the Kindly Man chastised her about "hacking down every man who stands in your way" (Dance 64). Yet Jaqen seems to have killed Pate simply to advance his own mission. Are the Faceless Men not as scrupulous as Arya was led to believe? Has Jaqen gone rogue? Or is there, perhaps, some special reason why the Faceless Men want that book, something so important that it justifies the killing of an innocent? The Faceless Men are based in Braavos, a city founded by escaped slaves. Its people have a deep-seated hatred of slavery, and presumably of Valyria and dragons as well. So it's possible that the birth of Daenerys's dragons prompted the FM to take some extreme measures, in order to be able to fight against or even kill the dragons. Jaqen kills Pate in the prologue of Feast; but in the last sentence of the last chapter of the book, we learned that "Pate" is still serving Marwyn at the Citadel. Apparently Jaqen took Pate's face, and then he took his place. But surely it wouldn't take long for a Faceless Man to find and steal a single book. Why has he stayed there so long? I have ideas about answers to some of these questions. I won't dignify them by calling them "theories," since they're very speculative, with little or no evidence. For instance, once Jaqen had disguised himself as Pate, he was perfectly positioned to spy on Marwyn: watching him, reading his books and scrolls, etc. So it made sense for him to stay a while. Perhaps when he does leave, he'll take a glass candle or two, as well as the book. Perhaps it's time for another reread ... What say you? Your humble scribe, Aebram of Underhedge APPENDIX: As long as we're discussing Jaqen, I'll remind you that there are some other puzzling questions about him, such as: * How did Jaqen, a master spy and assassin, get captured and sent to the Wall? * Were Rorge and Biter part of his mission, or was their presence a coincidence? * Why did he feel the need to give Arya three lives? We don't see this idea mentioned anywhere else in the book, at least not among the Faceless Men . Again, it seems to contradict the idea that they are very selective about whom they kill. And after all, people get rescued from dangerous situations all the time. Are they all cheating the god of death?

Crouching Lion, Hidden Dragon Brandon and Ned's Excellent Adventure Love is a Many-Splendored King "But seriously," that tournament seems like an odd subject for a drama, since nothing happened there that was very, y'know, dramatic. Yes, things happened that led to rebellion, war, and upheaval; but those came much later. And of course, a play doesn't have locations or special effects. I'll guess that it will focus in on one or two characters, and imagine things that are not on any of the George's pages: conflicts and romances, promises and threats. Do we know any more about the story line? I wonder if Ashara Dayne will play a role? And as for the title, I'll just opine that it needs to contain at least one word that links it to fantasy or medieval history: king, throne, dragon, etc. "The False Spring" has several good qualities, but it's too vague; only those of us who have read the books would get the reference.

If "Bob" had known that Cersei's children were fathered by Jaime, he probably would have had them all killed -- Jaime, Cersei, and their kids.