R + L = Lightbringer -- Updated with Part II

[J. Stargaryen]

I like the theory, too. But everybody's got Blood. ;)

Jon's blood is special. He is a powerful skinchanger/warg and part Valyrian.

[tommystinker]

Mods, why isn't this in the R+L thread? All other R+L= something threads, or R+L doesn't equal something threads, end up in the pinned thread, or are locked.

Seriously whats wrong with you.

Really enjoying reading this thread and some great posts from other readers.

Bring on part three (unless someone trys to get it locked/moved.

[ctid1977]

Any chance of getting this linked to the Compendium of theories thread please?

[trepesoa]

Excited for Part III then. I guess I am getting a bit ahead of you! :)

ETA: Trepesoa, the theory is not about the readers picking answers that rid the book of cliches. Martin has said that the Red religion was based on two real-life religions or beliefs, and the theory tries to examine future events of the book, specifically Lightbringer, in alignment with the ideals of the two cultures/religions mentioned here. Jon Snow is a symbolic sword who will be forged three times. Did you get to that part of this theory? (Just curious. It seems like it's related to what you're actually theorizing.) The dragons were not all forged three times individually, quite the opposite. All three dragons were forged once, for three total "forgings" but equaling to one "forging" per dragon. Playing devil's advocate here: if the dragons are Lightbringer, and by that I mean all three dragons together with their riders are Lightbringer, where are the other two "forgings"?

I definitely enjoy the analysis and it is certainly fun to get so deep into a theory. Extreme fans would be able to follow such a complex "riddle" as the prophesized sword lightbringer actually being a person but I strongly suspect the average reader, who still hasn't even puzzled out that R+L=J, would respond to such a solution as Lightbringer = person with total befuddlement. I'm not saying Martin is incapable of pulling off such a master stroke it's just that, above all else, he is a storyteller. If he loses 90% of his audiance, it suddently doesn't become a well told story anymore. I think Martin's dislike of magic swords is why he has Stannis with a fake magic sword. But I still think Lightbringer is a sword (I'm hoping it's Ice refordge by Gendry personally). I think the relation to Catharism is simply Ned hiding that Jon is of R+L lineage and possibly deeper that the Starks themselves are descended from Azor Ahai himself (which is why there must always be a Stark in Winterfell, why any Stark who joins the watch becomes Commander despite age, why the Stark funeral rites involve swords, and why the Stark words are Winter is Coming). If we equate AA to Christ, than the Catharism parallel is some descendent of AA is still alive.

[Mithras]

Jon’s eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black. AGoT

Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black. ASoS

[Han Snow]

Jon’s eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black. AGoT

Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black. ASoS

Nice.

Part three where are you? :read:

[furiousmoose0]

Nice.

Part three where are you? :read:

This is a thread about Lightbringer and as we known the third forging took the longest lol

[Ghost's Shadow]

:lol:

Yeah, you're right. Hope Schmendrick is okay and is finding time to work on the next part. :)

[Kienn]

snip

Very nice write up, I'm not sure if this is what you intended, but all together for me it seems like rather than just riding a dragon, Jon may die and live again in a dragon (Drogon) - I feel like this also ties into Dany's prophecy of threes about fires, treasons, and mounts since from what we know a dragon can only have 1 rider at a time (either Jon must die to merge with Drogon, or Dany must die for him to become Drogon's rider).

I do love how you are tying together many of the seemingly separate Lightbringer candidates(Ice, Dany, Dragons, NW, Jon), each that already fulfill or will fulfill the forging process by the end, into one. I'd still put money that in the end it will be unclear which is the "true" Lightbrighter(some or all will seem to qualify) - so relating them all this way is pretty cool.

Looking forward to Part III - and I'd love your feedback (Schmendrick - everyone else is free to comment too) on my theories in my sig if you have time(in my threads or pm - Thanks!).

[Onna Lewyys]

I do love how you are tying together many of the seemingly separate Lightbringer candidates(Ice, Dany, Dragons, NW, Jon), each that already fulfill or will fulfill the forging process by the end, into one.

I love that about it too.

But Jon wouldn't have to die in order to merge with a dragon. They could develop a bond like the one he has now with Ghost. Especially as we assume he will live inside Ghost for a time in TWOW, that experience could end up accelerating his warging power so that he could control a dragon.

I was rereading a bit of Part II, Schmendrick, and I forgot to say before that I really love your assessment of dragon/Targaryen blood as Fire and skinchanging magic as Ice.

[Jô Maltese]

Schmendrick, you are yet to conclude, but I guess your thesis is that Dany is AAR and that Jon is LB. Well, your (excellent) thread has actually convinced me of the opposite! Jon is AAR / tPtwP and Dany is Nissa Nissa / LB.

Indeed you have convinced me that Jon is the Moon / Ice (Lyanna) and the Sun /Fire (Rhaegar)'s son. On the other hand, Dany is often associated with the Moon and she married her "Sun and stars". Her son was prophesied to become tStwMtW. But Rhaego died, and she is now barren.

My feel is that somehow, her son, tStwMtW = tPtwP = AAReborn, will be Jon : Dany the Moon will bring light to the Night, she will be the light bringer (it's not the Sun that enlightens the night, but the Moon), the mother of dragon, the one who kills the boy (Direwolves can only bound with children, compare with Sansa or Robb) and let the man (the dragon) be born. Then Jon will yield her Fire /Light power (her dragons and army - I could do with a dragon or three...) to defeat the Others, having Dany killed (sacrificed) in the process (in a battle, like Rhaenys, the Princess 'Aunt in tPatQ?).

The glitch is in my somehow... :ohwell:

[ctid1977]

Dany is often associated with the Moon and she married her "Sun and stars". Her son was prophesied to become tStwMtW. But Rhaego died, and she is now barren.

To me that kind of first his theory too anyway. Rhaego died but the dragons were born through the pyre. Assuming that Jon gets a dragon (Would it then be Rhaegal?) then if this theory works then those two (Jon and Dragon) become Lightbringer.

[Mithras]

“When your dragons were small they were a wonder. Grown, they are death and devastation, a flaming sword above the world.”

If Jon is a sword, he will be a flaming sword once he was joined with a dragon.

[Mithras]

"Dany glimpsed Ser Barristan sliding closer, a white shadow at her side."

"Ghost padded after him, a white shadow at his side."

Given that Barristan is highly foreshadowed to die at Meereen (white calf to be sacrificed for Aquan the Red Bull) [1], [2], I think what really will wake Jon up may be the sacrifice of Ghost. Lady’s execution and Bran’s waking from coma are in the succeeding chapters and the TV show made these events simultaneous. We actually saw the resurrection of Drogo by the sacrifice of his red stallion. Did BR used the sacrifice of Lady to wake Bran and will he do the same thing with Ghost-Jon?

[Ghost's Shadow]

It's a bit difficult to make a sacrifice out of Ghost when Jon is in him or mentally connected to him, that'll either kill him or hurt him further.

[furiousmoose0]

"Dany glimpsed Ser Barristan sliding closer, a white shadow at her side."

"Ghost padded after him, a white shadow at his side."

Given that Barristan is highly foreshadowed to die at Meereen (white calf to be sacrificed for Aquan the Red Bull) [1], [2], I think what really will wake Jon up may be the sacrifice of Ghost. Lady’s execution and Bran’s waking from coma are in the succeeding chapters and the TV show made these events simultaneous. We actually saw the resurrection of Drogo by the sacrifice of his red stallion. Did BR used the sacrifice of Lady to wake Bran and will he do the same thing with Ghost-Jon?

Lady's sacrifice before Bran woke up I believe. Bran had seen the aftermath of the situation during his BR dream. I suppose that her sacrifice could have returned him to consciousness as it would seem he hadnt had any prior to his BR dream. I guess I always assumed that it was BR who "awoke" him. Also with the other "ressurections" the ressurected seem to loose their minds (in small portions the red way and all at once with blood magic). Since Bran seems to not exhibit anything like this (his legs were a product of his fall) I tend to disagree. I think GRRM usage of "shadow at his side" might be significant though. It crops up too much to not be intentional. Think of how Mel is compared to Stannis "Red Shadow". Maybe we will get a smattering in Part 3.

[butterbumps!]

I finally got got around to reading part 2. First, I want to say that I really like the way you think, Schmendrick, in particular the way you connect the hypothesis back into the story as a whole. In terms of research and the type of analysis happening, I find these essays quite valuable.

However, I don't think the essays truly yield the conclusions you're making.

In a nutshell, the major problem I have with accepting your conclusions is that in order to get to these conclusions, we have to look too extensively at outside sources in order to apply meanings back into ASOIAF. For example, you're taking pieces of the puzzle found in ASOIAF, filtering them through our own world mythologies, then applying those new meanings (found outside ASOIAF) to support R+L= Lightbringer. In order to get to R+L=Lightbringer, you have to rely on too much applied meaning from outside sources.

I don't believe Martin's doing this, though. Martin provides his own logic and meanings within the text itself. He's borrowed pieces from a number of sources, but through his writing, severs a lot of the old meanings and expectations, creating new ones that operate within his universe. I think it's very problematic to rely this much on secondary sources in order to posit a theory relating to a primary source, particularly in the case of Martin who is crafting his own mythological framework.

In other words, I like your methodology and thought-process, but I think this methodology is not speaking enough to what's directly found within ASOIAF itself, and rather, is more compelling when looked at as a comparative ASOIAF-real world religions analysis than something that illuminates a truth within the text itself.

I very much applaud that you're seeking a comprehensive explanation that elegantly puts all these pieces into place, but I don't believe this does; I actually think it takes us off the path, and sends us on the wrong one by virtue of its reliance on outside sources for meaning. I think the elegant, comprehensive explanation can be found entirely within the story of ASOIAF itself, and that looking at this from a comparative religions standpoint, as you're doing, yields answers and layers to different questions than the ones you're seeking.

I don't want to rain on the parade, so I won't go into detail here (unless you're interested, and don't think my elaboration would be off-topic or anything). But at any rate, I like what you did, but I think its value is in something other than how it's being applied.

[Rooseman]

I don't want to rain on the parade, so I won't go into detail here (unless you're interested, and don't think my elaboration would be off-topic or anything)

I'm interested. Schmendrick as well, I'm sure. What is this thread for, it not for critically discussing the analysis?

Regarding the outside sources, I'm with you. I don't like them for the same reasons you already provided. However, with Part II, I didn't feel that he was heavily basing his whole analysis on those external mythologies. There's a lot of symbolism right inside the books where he found very interesting connections, you could skip the whole Mithras part and the rest would still be worthwile.

But there's a whole lot to process and it's possible that more of his later analysis depends on the other mythologies than I recall.

So please, go into detail. :)

[J. Stargaryen]

I think House Karstark's words and sigil might tie into some of the stuff Schmendrick is talking about wrt to the "sun's son."

Sigil: White sun on a black background. Snow-white, Night's Watch. The Karstark sigil has almost nothing in common with the grey direwolf on white of House Stark, except for the latter color. And I think it's reasonable to associate the white background on the Stark banner with snow. Which then means that describing the Karstark sun as snow-white might not be terribly farfetched.

Words: The Sun of Winter. To me, this almost implies more of the sun/son wordplay; e.g., son of Winterfell, but also with a connection to the Starks. And, the idea of a 'sun in winter' has some obvious implications for upcoming events like the WftD2.

What's interesting, as well as likely relevant, is that the Karstark's are in a unique position in the series, as the only (existing) cadet branch of House Stark. Which, in a way, parallels Jon Snow's relationship to this generation's current mainline Starks -- he's from a lesser branch of the Stark tree. Or maybe also, it could hint at him branching off to start his own House.

snip

I'm interested. Schmendrick as well, I'm sure. What is this thread for, it not for critically discussing the analysis?

Regarding the outside sources, I'm with you. I don't like them for the same reasons you already provided. However, with Part II, I didn't feel that he was heavily basing his whole analysis on those external mythologies. There's a lot of symbolism right inside the books where he found very interesting connections, you could skip the whole Mithras part and the rest would still be worthwile.

But there's a whole lot to process and it's possible that more of his later analysis depends on the other mythologies than I recall.

So please, go into detail. :)

I was going to reply to bumps!, but these are basically my thoughts.

[butterbumps!]

I'm interested. Schmendrick as well, I'm sure. What is this thread for, it not for critically discussing the analysis?

Regarding the outside sources, I'm with you. I don't like them for the same reasons you already provided. However, with Part II, I didn't feel that he was heavily basing his whole analysis on those external mythologies. There's a lot of symbolism right inside the books where he found very interesting connections, you could skip the whole Mithras part and the rest would still be worthwile.

But there's a whole lot to process and it's possible that more of his later analysis depends on the other mythologies than I recall.

So please, go into detail. :)

I was going to reply to bumps!, but these are basically my thoughts.

Oh, well, I wanted to ask if I should, because if I'm working from the premise that we shouldn't look at borrowed meaning at all, and this thread is predicating on reframing the discussion around borrowed meanings, then that could be too incompatible for discussion.

Also, I did think the second part borrowed meaning pretty heavily in that the OP observed that although some of these questions were easily answered in story, we should be looking at these other religions, which enables/ justifies the idea that we can find different ASOIAF aspects that also "fit" (also kind of filtered through the other religions to get there) so I actually had more trouble with part 2 than 1 in some ways.

Since I have such a different premise, I'm not sure what the most sensible way of approaching going into detail would be. Would providing an entirely text-based explanation of Lightbringer and how all these figures fit together be off topic? If I suspend my own premise and work with the framework provided here, it's not that I take issue with conclusions made from the premise, it's an issue of the premise itself, so going through point by point wouldn't work or anything like that. ETA: I'm a little further conflicted about it in light of the fact that part 3 hasn't happened yet, so I'm not wanting to try to "shut" something down before it's even finished.