Jump to content

Black Crow

Members
  • Posts

    21,068
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Black Crow

  1. Its horrendously complicated, but worth bearing in mind for its possible relevance to Westeros, so sit down quietly and pay attention. You may also want to take notes. Her Majesty the late Queen was a direct descendant of King George I, Duke of Brunswick-Luneberg and Prince Elector of Hanover. [a German] His claim to the throne in 1714 was through his mother Sophia, who was herself a grand-daughter of King James VI of Scotland, [via Frederick of Bohemia], which is where the Stewart connection comes in. However, while the new King, Charles III, has inherited the throne from his mother, his father was Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh. When living, the Duke was irreverently known as "Phil the Greek", due to being a sometime member of the Greek royal family, although just to complicate things further they were not ethnic Greeks, but were actually Danish! Therefore, if you want to trace King Charles through the male line, he is of Danish descent and the family name was originally Gluckstein. Now in Westerosi terms it really is a question of whether descent is accounted through the father or the mother. Some quite different results may arise
  2. Nah, not today. Oddly enough I actually come from near Balmoral, but not there today
  3. The conclusion we reached after a lot of discussion was that the raising of the wights wasn't down to individual white walkers but to the cold. Exactly how this might actually work has yet to be established but probably the easiest way to visualise it is a cold mist flowing over the land and raising every dead thing that it touches. The white walkers on the other hand I believe are wargs who can create their own temporary bodies of snow and ice - and perhaps the same cold that raises the wights. It may turn out to be significant of course that those seen in the AGoT prologue look like Starks
  4. Nice summary and all that I'd add at this point is that while Varamyr and his prologue are incredibly useful/important in this interpretation, he's only a skinchanger and has no connection to direwolves. GRRM has been very close-lipped about the difference between skinchangers and wargs and I strongly suspect that we'll discover that its wargs [like Jon] who can still remain free - unlike Varamyr who finishes up being trapped in One Eye. In other words the get out of jail free card when Jon goes to Ghost
  5. There's no doubt at all that White Walkers are dangerous with a capital D. My point is that they aint an army waiting to invade Westeros. They aint the Dothraki and so the nature of the threat is very different
  6. As to the first, they are certainly a long way apart if they are expected to walk [no pun intended] but if riding the cold winds passing between the two locations could take no time at all. As to the second, there is an obscure but very significant SSM explaining... Posted 16 March 2015 - 04:47 PM "In an interruption to our advertised program I'm watching a feature on Sky Atlantic, providing a catch up on the HBO series thus far and featuring interviews with [among others] GRRM, who has just confirmed that when Sam pinked Ser Puddles "he broke the spell holding him together."
  7. Really wouldn't surprise me. Whatever the precise detail of the story eventually turns out to be, the Starks are just as compromised as the Targaryens - but on the other side
  8. We're Heretics because for years we've discussed what might really be going on, looking beyond the simplistic notion of a big bad up north and the world being saved by the return of Azor Ahai and the dragons. Inevitably, as this leads to questioning certain orthodoxies, we've attracted a fair degree of hate over the years. We're used to it.
  9. I'd be wary of getting too hooked up on the White Walkers on this, or rather it may be a mistake to work on the basis that they were running the show, when in reality they may turn out to be the servants. I'm still very much of the opinion that there's a fairly fundamental misconception of their role in that while they're obviously dangerous individuals we've not so far seen any real evidence that they constitute an army
  10. And then a quick thought about the big scaly beasties of this thread... In the previous post I emphasised how there were six white walkers, six direwolf pups and six children Suppose the same is true on the other side? Danaerys is given three eggs which obviously end up hatching into three dragons In the House of the Undying she's given a vision of Rhaegar, who declares pretty heavily that there must be a third Discussion of this scene has tended to concentrate on who the "third" might be, but looking at the direwolves there's another explanation. If the six direwolves were intended to bond with the six children of Winterfell, was Rhaegar referring to a bonding with the three dragons ?
  11. Just a thought running on from the above, but in a different direction... We've [separately] discussed both the nature of the White Walkers and the arrival of the direwolf pups, but I think there's an interesting implication resulting. We've been struck by the fact that the delivery of the six pups may be connected with the Prologue of AGOT in which that patrol is scragged by six White Walkers. When its pointed out that the six pups equate to the six children of Winterfell, there's general agreement that they're meant to have them and then later Jon Snow realises that his direwolf at least belongs to the Old Gods. What of the other ones? Separately, we've discussed the nature of White Walkers and come up with a pretty solid theory that they may be Wargs, released by death and instead of being sucked into a second life with their familiars as happens to ordinary skinchangers, they can create new bodies of snow and ice and cold. If so, then the six White Walkers who scragged Ser Waymar Royce and his men could easily find berths in the six pups delivered to the six Stark children. Now, the thought that occurs from there, is that we're pretty familiar with those pups and with the possible exception of Shaggydog, they aint evil, which in turn suggests that if they did once tread lightly on the snow, those Walkers may not be as evil as we have been led to suppose. Lets see what happens to Jon
  12. GRRM has been deliberately vague about the convergence of widely separated events, so the fact that the wolves turn up at the beginning of AGoT and the dragons at the end oughtn't to be regarded as significant in terms of timing or of cause and effect, other that both are engineered. In Westeros six white walkers scrag a patrol from the Nights Watch in the Haunted Forest. At some point afterwards the only survivor turns up below the Wall and thereby leads the Starks to the six direwolf cubs sent to them by the Old Gods In Essos, Danaerys Targaryen is given three dragon eggs which later mysteriously hatch into beasties not hitherto seen for hundreds of years. In terms of story pages the hatching obviously happens long after the appearance of the direwolves, but given that Danaerys was given the eggs at about the same time we can't conclude that the hatching is a reaction.
  13. But is he? Up north, beyond the Wall there is something cold and nasty which raises the dead. Way down south there's hot and nasty which raises the dead. Humans are in the middle except [when they join with one or the other, eg: Craster and Melisandre] but so far we haven't actually seen the two directly opposed. Arguably the Others might be opposed to the Red lot and so "relatively less bad"
  14. All things are possible, but I think that you need more than a couple of possible parallels - and reasons/consequences
  15. Could be, here's what Mel's boss, Master Benero has to say about Danaerys... Her coming is the fulfilment of an ancient prophecy. From smoke and salt was she born to make the world anew. She is Azor Ahai returned… and her triumph over the darkness will bring a summer that will never end… death itself will bend its knee, and all those who die fighting in her cause shall be reborn…” Summer never ending sounds good [until you think of drought etc.] but then death bending the knee and "all those who die fighting in her cause shall be reborn…" sounds a bit like wights
  16. We're getting a bit philosophical here. Something can't be proven until its written/published. Thus far GRRM hasn't told us what comes next. People quite naturally speculate and offer theories - I earlier outlined why I think Jon is likely to become a White Walker/Nazgul - but I can't prove it thus for because GRRM hasn't told us one way or the other, so complaining that asking for proof is an exercise in futility is dangerously like a tantrum
  17. Yes, they've been around for a while. We don't really know on account of their being mysterious like, but I get the impression that they've been around longer than Jon has, but what I think is important is that the supposed threat - this looming invasion by the six icy lads and now their growing collection of undead, is rather more recent than Jon's birth
  18. Ordinarily, no, certainly not. Apart from anything else I don't have access to Sky, so haven't a clue what's going on, but... While what's been mentioned wasn.t even in Fire and Blood, GRRM explicitly raised it in interview, saying that while it hadn't previously been published and so was a bit controversial it is indeed canon - there was some discussion of this on the last thread when I raised exactly the same point
  19. I certainly wouldn't hang an argument on it either way, but the chronology of the different threads isn't synchronised That said its clear that the Walkers were around - if only coming calling at Craster's, but that kinda emphasises it. Early on we're talking about a handful of individuals lurking in the woods, not the reputed army supposedly on the point of invading along with hordes of wights.
  20. In this case I'm suggesting that the pact was to renounce the Ice and Fire. The dragons are gone and the Starks are no longer Kings of Winter. However... Danaerys Targaryen has been led to hatch her dragons and so the white cold iswalking
  21. Oh indeed. In all honesty while alternate fathers are proposed [Arthur Dayne being a notable one] I'm not convinced its worth the effort and would happily settle for a bare-bones R+L=J, where I have reservations is over the proposed centrality of the argument and the assumptions anent where its going
  22. If you mean fighting against her - as a threat trying [perhaps unknowingly] to bring the dragons back, then it may well be To a degree and quite understandably she's portrayed as a hero in this story, when in reality she's Typhoid Mary on Speed
  23. Not the usual topic for an Heresy OP, but it follows on from discussion which came up in the last thread. There’s a theory out there, commonly referred to as R+L=J, holding that Jon Snow is actually the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark. Both are conveniently dead and unavailable for comment, but the point, supposedly, is that Jon is really a Targaryen Prince [with a secret name!] and thanks to being half Targaryen and half Stark will turn out to be the legendary Oriental hero Azor Ahai and will ride dragons to victory over the mysterious Others/White Walkers and win the Battle for the Dawn. While the band plays “Believe it if you like”… As Heretics we have our doubts about this of course, but in the light of a couple of references in the Mummers’ Version Mk.II, its worth shifting the question sideways a bit, because in promoting the R+L=J theory its all to easy to lose sight of something important. Contrary to the impression created by the Mummers’ Version Mk.I, GRRM is not engaged in writing multiple volumes of A Game of Thrones, but a saga entitled A Song of Ice and Fire. The Dragons, obviously, Danaerys Targaryen and Mad Mel, clearly come within the heading of Fire, but thus far we haven’t seen much of the Ice and waving the R+L=J/AA banner makes this imbalance worse by trying to stuff Jon Snow on to the side of Fire. And its that Fire which raises concern. At first we were told how Azor Ahai would save the day when the Ice came, but them GRRM started dropping some hints that a victory by fire might not be as warm and cuddly as it first appeared. Now we hear, thanks to the Mummers Mk.II of the Pact of Ice and Fire, and there it gets interesting. We still don't know what its about, or was intended to be about because seemingly it never happened, but... A pact is an agreement, a binding agreement and seemingly one between equals, which immediately raises questions and requires dialling back in history on both sides of the proposed pact. On the one hand we have the Targaryens. They are Valyrians and Dragonlords, but perhaps not actually all that they seem. Back in the day and seemingly influenced by prophecy they moved out of Valyria proper and settled in Dragonstone on the very edge of the empire. Thus they escaped the Doom, which is obviously good. They even hung on to some dragons but then something strange happened. A war or series of wars breaks out in Essos as the local population rises up against the rump Valyrian colonial administration. Not at all unexpected, but Aegon Targaryen joins the rebels and pitches in against the Valyrians. Then he turns his back on Essos as well and goes and conquers Westeros - sort of Or rather, using his dragons he starts conquering the seven kingdoms by frying any opposition until he gets to the southern border of the North. History, for what its worth, says that the Stark king surrendered or submitted. Aegon tuned back south and the Stark remained - although he may no longer have called himself the King of Winter. Why ? If we are looking for a pact of Ice and Fire then there may be something of an equality here between the Stark Kings of Winter and the Targaryen Dragonlords But then there's more. There’s also that mysterious warning that the Targaryen mastery over the dragons was an illusion. We may also discover over time that it was some of the Targaryens themselves, not some mysterious maesters, who killed off the dragons first time around. What if that too was a part of the Pact of Ice and Fire which both families have forgotten. Of course if it is, it throws an interesting - and dangerous - light on Danaerys Targaryen hatching three healthy dragons and so perhaps breaking the Pact
  24. May or may not sit for a while in Ghost. We've yet to see what happens. As for the Others, its not a question of "inhabiting" a White Walker's body, but rather of creating himself a new body madke of snow and ice and cold [as described by Stannis] GRRM has said that the walkers are not dead, but area different form of life and then when commenting on the walker stabbed by Sam in the retreat from the Fist he remarked that the dragonglass dagger "broke the spell" holding him together; in other words the Walkers are not born and bred, but are created As to sides, this is the Song of Ice and Fire and which side are the Starks really on - they are [or were] Kings of Winter and they are not served or supported by down south
×
×
  • Create New...