The hairy bear

No it doesn't. It's true that, in real history, some families tended to reuse names. And it's true that in some cases, given names became family names and vice versa. No one is disputing that. But what you are saying is that if I happen to meet someone name Louis, he is likely descended from the French royal house. And that any Frederik is "very likely" to descend from the Danish monarchs. And this is obviously counterfactual. Many? Pearse Caron is a famed singer, and includes a harp in his personal arms. But who else from the Caron family is ever linked to music? Not Lord Bryce Caron from the main series, nor his father Bryen or his half-brother, the bastard of Nightsong. I also don't recall anything from Royce Caron, her daughter Ellyn, lord Morton, or Petyr Pimple. It seems to me that the relationships you are proposing are extremely tenuous at best. It goes: There is one musician in House Caron => All the Carons are musicians There is one musician in House Blackwood => It must descend maternally from House Caron. So, we disregard the info that we have, and then assume that the info that we do not have fits into your theory? It seems I won't be able to convince you, so I'm happy to leave it here.

OK, fair enough. That's a reasonable hypothesis. Nah. You can't use a theory to prove a theory. There's nothing supporting this assumption. I don't think names are repeating that much, as I pointed out in my previous post. Let's take house Baratheon, for example. We know 27 different characters from that house. Not a single name is ever repeated. More examples: we have 17 named characters born as Tullys. There is only one repeated name (Hoster's son Edmure shared his name with the father of the founder of his house). Or the Arrys. There are 34 of them, and only two instances of a repeated name (two kings of old named Roland, and two Ronnels after the Conquest). In real life, there were some families that used a very limited pool of names. But that's clearly not the norm in Westeros. Even unusual families that are more prone to repeat names, such as the Stark, most of the names are still original. If you take the family tree from TWOIAF, there are 37 out of the 54 Starks have a unique name. The Sworn Sword was published in 2003. The Lannister family tree appeared with TWOIAF's publication, more than a decade later. Your association only works because you ignore the Ellyns that do not share the supposedly common trait. The legendary Ellyn Ever-Sweet or Lady Ellyn Caron were not entitled, arrogant or rebellious.

Do we have any example of George doing that in the past? Has he given a name to a character so that we could make a connection to his obscure ancestry as a hint to a later revelation? I may be misremembering, but I don't recall any. In fact, there have been situations where George could have used this "tool". If that was "really his style", wouldn't Rohanne Webber have been named Cersei? Wouldn't Galladon Tarth (Brienne's brother) have been named Duncan? It's not that I don't want to see characters as not connected. Of course most noble families will certainly be connected if you go far enough. It's just that I believe that sharing a name doesn't have a significant impact on the likelihood of a recent connection.

@Hippocras I think that you give far too much weight to the possibility that people that share the same name are related. Most Westerosi nobles share the same culture. If anything, what we know from the lists of rulers that we have, suggests that with the only exception of the Targaryens it is very rare for a Westerosi ruler to repeat names. See what has happened since the Conquest with the lords of the kingdoms of old: Stark: Torrhen, Brandon (Boisterous), Roderik, Brandon (Boastful), Walton, Alaric, Edric, Ellard, Benjen, Rickon, Cregan, Jonnel, Barthogan, Brandon, Rodwell, Beron, Donnor, William, Edwyle, Rickard, Eddard, Robb Lannister: Loren, Lyman, Tymond, Jason, Loreon, Damon, Tybolt, Cerelle, Gerold, Tytos, Tywin, Cersei Tully: Edmyn, Prentys, Grover, Elmo, Kermit, Medgar, Hoster, Edmure Greyjoy: Vickon, Goren, Dalton, Toron, Dagon, Alton, Torwyn, Loron, Quellon, Balon, Euron Arryn: Ronnel, Jonos, Hubert, Darnold, Rodrik, Jeyne, Joffrey, Donnel, Jasper, Jon, Robert Tyrell:Harlan, Theo, Bertrand, Martyn, Mathos, Lyonel, Leo, Luthor, Mace Baratheon: Orys, Rogar, Boremund, Borros, Olyver, Lyonel, Ormund, Steffon, Robert, Renly Martell: Meria, Nymor, Deria, Morion, Mara, Qoren, Aliandra, Maron, Doran Except for the the name Brandon in the Stark family, that is repeated thrice, no other single name is repeated.

Not that I really believe it, but I often like to imagine that Viserys II is an horrible, horrible person. I see him as someone who is always trying to rule from the sidelines. The deaths of the three kings that preceded him are suspicious: Aegon III's early death at 36 may have not been entirely natural, the Young Dragon's murderers were immediately forgiven, and Baelor the Blessed's death was widely rumored to have been Viserys's work. He could also have manipulated his brother into eliminating all dragons out of spite, since he didn't have one. He would have been the one to oversee the education of the princes in ways that ensured that they had no offspring and/or died an early death (war and zealous religious fervor). His would be the idea to close Baelor's sisters in the maidenvault, preventing them from gaining allies and ensuring that they did not marry. After Daena's three escapes, Viserys feared that she would elope and marry someone powerful, so he sent his son Aegon to ensure that a potential rival for the throne suffered public shame and disgrace. Her wife would know the kind of men he was, and would eventually leave him. Angered by that, Viserys send poisoners to kill her in the Free Cities. His son Aegon would come out the way he came due to all this trauma, not daring to out his father but feeling guilty for all crimes of his sire.

They still live longer than the average man. Denethor himself kills himself at 89, and at this age he is still able to carry the weight of his fully grown son with him, and also breaks his rod of office over his knee. His father Ecthelion had lived up to 98, and his son Faramir reached 120.

The Gondorians would soon soon rule the seven kingdoms. They are stronger, taller, and with a longer live-span. They would teach their new subjects that the names of their seven gods: the Father is called Manwë, the mother Varda, the Smith is Aulë, the Stranger is Mandos... and they'll reveal to them that there were seven more gods that they were missing, and a supreme God that rules above them all.

Surely not. Or else he would have denounced him. If Bloodraven's goal was to infiltrate large gatherings in glamour to detect Blackfyre sympathizers and destroy conspiracies from within, then it would make sense for him to attend to the Ashford Torney or the Butterwell wedding. But a remote border conflict between two minor lords would not be of much interest. That said, it must be stressed that when George wrote THK, Bloodraven and Daemon Blackfyre hadn't been created as characters. So the theory shouldn't be taken too seriously. It's just a fun theory.

Robin Rhysling was Bloodraven, and he killed Baelor. In the Mystery Knight it is shown how Bloodraven is able to use glamor, and he uses it to disguise himself as a low-profile knight to attend significant events. In the Mystery Knight we see how Bloodraven's glamor is not perfect, and Dunk is almost capable of seeing through it: "Through the rain, all he could make out was a hooded shape and a single pale white eye." What would Bloodraven do to disguise this weakness? One idea could be to wear a moonstone brooch to confuse people, as he does in TMK. But another idea would be just to wear an eyepatch. The motive: Baelor was championing a lenient approach to the deafeated black rebels. The king was old, and would not live much longer (he was already 55, older than any previous Targ king had lived save for the Conciliator). Once Baelor gets the throne, not only Bloodraven would probably lose both his chair in the small council and his personal army, but he may very wall have to see how Bittersteel and the rest of the exiles came back home. His actions at the Great Council of 233 prove that he is capable of murder and betrayal to ensure that the Throne doesn't go to the wrong hands. Baelor's helmet was "crushed down at the back", which would be consistent with having received the fatal blow by someone fighting "at his side". ETA: Robin Rhysling's actions are consistent with someone who is actively trying to be recruited by rebels. He challenges Leo Longthorn, the main Red supporter in the Reach. He fights bravely and disregards his own safety, as would be expected of someone willing to join a coup. And he volunteers to fight for Dunk at the Trial of Seven, that before Baelor's involvement, was a conflict against the Targaryen establishment. Now, we don't know which side the Rhyslings (or the Redwynes) fought for, but given that the black dragon seems to be very strong in the southwestern part of the Reach (Ball, Peake, Costayne, plus Higtower and Oakheart keeping a foot in each camp), it's not unlikely that they were Blackfyre supporters, thus making Robin even more attractive to "recruiters".

George revealed that he was writing about Harry the Heir less than a year after the publication of ASOS, way before he decided to scrap the five year gap. This confirms that Harry is not a late addition to the plot, and that the idea of his marriage with Sansa had been there since the beginning. Morover, I find it very telling that George mentions Harry the Heir altogether with the King of Mummers. They will first appear in Arya I and Sansa I from TWOW respectively. We know that Arya I from TWOW was supposed to be Arya I from pre-gap AFFC, with minimal variations. So I'd say that it's not unlikely that the same is true for Sansa I, and that Myranda Royce & Co had been there from the earliest conceptions.

Ah OK. To clarify, the assumption is that George's original idea, as portrayed in his outline, is that Robert Strong was just the reanimated body of Gregor Clegane. Then, Cersei had to send a fake head to Dorne (a head that would be distinct from Gregor's because of a missing teeth in either of the skulls). But it's almost certain that this is not the idea that George ultimately went with. In the published versions, the skull in Dorne is Gregor's and Robert Strong is some kind of Frankenstein's monster with parts from multiple dead bodies.

Why would the skull need to be of the same size? It's not like anyone will see what's under Robert Strong's helmet, and the guy has made a vow of silence. As suggested above, it's entirely possible that the head is from Falyse Stokeworth.

I was assuming that this plot was about Stannis sending Davos to intercept "Arya" when she is being sent to Barrowton to marry Ramsay. "Recapture" would make more sense in this context than if that was the real Arya, I think.

I don't think that a skull missing one tooth would prove that the skull is not Clegane's. It could have fallen at any point after his death. If anything, I feel it should be the opposite. Elia remembering that Clegane lost one teeth in his fight with Oberyn, and the skull having all the teeth. But, as you say, that was never mentioned before, and it would seem a little bit forced. So I'm glad George (apparently) scrapped that part and chose to have Frankengregor. Yep. Still, I wonder what this "witness to incest" means. Was George going to reveal that he knew about Cersei and Jaime all along? Yes, given the name of the book, I'd assume that Aegon was always going to make his appearance in ADWD. Yes, that's one of his other names. George once said that he made several attempts at a chapter where Tyrion met the Shrouded Lord until deciding to scrap it. Apparently, Tyrion asked him where do whores go, and the Shrouded Lord told him that he should get over it.

It's far too easy, and far to cliche, to have an wicked black-dressed lord who is responsible for all the evil in the world. George has said that shades of grey are much more interesting, and I agree with him. As I see it, the potential descend into darkness of Tyrion or Danaerys will be much more interesting to read than the deeds of an overblown evil character that has been needlessly cruel since its introduction.

I'd say this is very unlikely. George has never used printed pages as a reference when giving updates in the past. Even when he was more open about his progress, he always gave the number of manuscript pages. This makes all the sense, since this is the figure he would be familiar with (it's the one that appears in his word processor). Although he may have a rough idea of how many printed pages that would translate to, that would vary and would ultimately depend on the editor. Yeah, that would be my take too. In fact, he said that he stopped giving regular updates precisely because of this: people would assume that he has not been working for long periods of time or even going backwards, when the truth is that he is rewriting, scraping and cutting non-stop.

When we were told that there would be a time jump after ASOS, fans were mostly OK with it. I don't recall any complain. So I don't think people would have much issue with it now. But George will not do that. He tried it once and it didn't work. He explained that he disliked having to use to much flashbacks to explain what had happened in-between, and in other cases, it just didn't make sense that things had remained stable during five years and then suddenly everything started to get busy again. As I see it, and using George's famous metaphor, a time gap is something that an architect writer could pull off, but it's incredibly difficult for a gardener writer to make it work.

I would also rank them ASOS > AGOT > ACOK > AFFC > ADWD. This is fair, and I agree that after the shitstorm that ASOS was, a deceleration was in order. But AGOT was also an introductory book, and it is well-loved. I'd say that the main problems many fans (me included) have with the ADWD are: We don't really believe the content in ADWD is really introducing the second trilogy. In AGOT, we knew that the politics at King's Landing were going to be central in the future books. Meanwhile, we all know Dany is leaving Mereen, so whatever happens there just feels like a passtime. It seems a safe bet that the Green Grace or Skahaz won't be rellevant in the final book, while Littlefinger and Varys will. They are very long books. AGOT is the shortest book in the series, and manages to introduce aa whole set of characters in a very economical way. Things move forward quickly. The royal comitive travels from WInterfell to KL much quicker than Tyrion goes from Pentos to Mereen. Jon's training take less chapters than Arya's. At the end of AGOT, three big battles take place in quick succession while in Dance George had to cut the two climaxes (further damaging the structure of the books). It feels to me that most if not all of the plots of Feast and Dance should have been dealt with with much less space. There's too much meandering, too much insisting on the same ideas, too much focus on sideshows.

I don't think having different languages would complicate Martin's history that much. All the nobles from the North would speak Andalish correctly (particularly the Stark kids, having an Andal mother and being educated by septons). Davos is an old smugler, so could be familiar enough with Firstmannish to negotiate at the Meerman's court (and in any case, the idiotic Freys would be monoglots, so the conversations would be in Andalish anyway. The only place where communication may be a little bit tricky is at the Wall. Recruits from the South, specially the lowborn, could not be able to communicate with people from the North. But having a bilingual Wall would not be that hard to manage.

Never in history has a kingdom changed its language because they traded with another one. It'S something that just wouldn't happen. The Manderlys also do not work as a justification. The refugees that arrived could have amounted, at the very most to a 5% of the population of the North. They can't be enough to change the language of the rest of the population.

The Freys that we know for sure that took part in the Red Wedding (and therefore should clearly be classified as scum) are: Lord Walder, Ryman, Edwyn, Black Walder, Merrett, Ser Raymund, Lame Lothar, Ser Whalen, Ser Benfrey, Ser Harys Haigh, Ser Tytos, and Ser Hoosten. The ones that we in all likelihood were also part of the Red Wedding, because they were adult males living in the Twins, were present in the Great Hall just before the killing started, and/or they have full-brothers or fathers involved, are: Petyr Pimple, Ser Danwell, Ser Jammos, Emmon, Ser Aenys, Rhaegar, Ser Donnel Haigh, Alyn Haigh, Ser Jared, Ser Arwood, and Symond.

No it isn't. At least we have: House Rowan (named after its founder Rowan Gold-Tree, and also the name of a wilding spearwife) House Ambrose (sharing the name with Ambrose Butterwell) House Rogers (there are several Rogers, including Roger Reyne, Roger Blackwood, Roger Hogg,...) Absolutely nothing. It's just a common name that gets reused. In real life there are also many first names that also work as surnames and it doesn't need to have any particular meaning.

The very first think i tried when I saw that pic is enlarging the image and trying to read the text.

The assumption that Nymor's letter threatened to reveal Aegon's sterility doesn't necessarily rely on Rhaenys having been tortured or even having survived Meraxes' fall. Nymor could have learned it through other means: a letter found in Rhaenys body, or perhaps the testimony of some of Rhaeny's favorites. (after her death, they may have been expelled from court. Nymor could have welcomed them in Sunspear to get information about the Targaryens). When George wrote the story of the Conquest, he was imagining that Gyldayn was living in the Targaryen era. Even after the retcon, if Gyldayn writes at George's pace, he may have easily written the first chapters of Fire and Blood during the Mad King's reign.

I'd add that the idea that Aegon was infertile not only is the only reasonably consistent theory that fans have come up with to explain the contents of Nymor's letter, but also is suspected by many people in Westeros. It seems clear to me, at least, that Glyndan thinks that's the case. The way he stresses how Aegon spent lots of nights with Rhaenys, that the boy didn't resemble Aegon at all, that there were rumors about his parenthood right after his birth, that Rhaenys surrounded herself with favourites,... it can't be by chance that Glyndayn writes that Aenys lacked Aegon's "size and strength", but had a great singing voice and was "charming and clever" (right after giving echo to the rumor that his real father was "a singer, a mummer or a mime".)