Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Wait, what? Craster wasn't a noble, and his wives / daughters were just wildlings. How does that make his sons bastards? theyr enot legit, are they? i mean, if youre not married in the eyes of gods and men, which, for all we know, is one single person. right? legally you cant have more than one wife unless that one dies. no? ...and, maybe he does have noble blood. we dont know who his father and mother were Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 hmmm... this is an interesting point, and i never got the correlation until just now. Why cant they name there babies before 2? "Dont you dare name that baby, Jon Snow!" before she leaves i thought they dont name the babies before 2 because they are "free folk" who believe baby has right name to itself? i remember Gilly saying that to Jon, but doesnt Ygritte mention something along those lines about the freedom to name itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Think of it, they're called, The Others. inadvertantly, it kind of makes sense, the "other" child. we'll just give him away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 theyr enot legit, are they? i mean, if youre not married in the eyes of gods and men, which, for all we know, is one single person. right? legally you cant have more than one wife unless that one dies. no? ...and, maybe he does have noble blood. we dont know who his father and mother were In westeros, the term 'bastard' really only applies to the nobles not commoners. Being born 'out of wedlock' doesn't make you a bastard. Besides, as far as we know, Craster did marry all of his wives with whatever wildling or other (see what I did there) ceremony he felt like using. "Bastards" are the children of kings and lords with title. Nobody seems to really care if common folk have kids out of wedlock enough to label them or give them special names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 In westeros, the term 'bastard' really only applies to the nobles not commoners. Being born 'out of wedlock' doesn't make you a bastard. Besides, as far as we know, Craster did marry all of his wives with whatever wildling or other (see what I did there) ceremony he felt like using. "Bastards" are the children of kings and lords with title. Nobody seems to really care if common folk have kids out of wedlock enough to label them or give them special names. But dude, if he has royal/noble blood, wouldnt that authenticate the children as bastards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 But dude, if he has royal/noble blood, wouldnt that authenticate the children as bastards? You're reaching back into crackpot theory territory there. I can't really add 'bastard' theory of Jon Snow onto an already fabricated theory we have no real proof of yet. One one crackpot theory allowed at a time please! :ack: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 You're reaching back into crackpot theory territory there. I can't really add 'bastard' theory of Jon Snow onto an already fabricated theory we have no real proof of yet. One one crackpot theory allowed at a time please! :ack: lmao/ It's been debated often that craster was noble or had kings blood. this wasnt the first. it's all good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 [emoji23] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 lmao/ It's been debated often that craster was noble or had kings blood. this wasnt the first. it's all good And it won't be the last time either, I'm sure! ;) My point was (perhaps made too sarcastically) was that you had said something along the lines of maybe Jon was somehow connected to the others because he was a bastard and then how Craster's kids were all bastards too... which is getting confusing because we don't have any proof that Craster has noble or king's blood (though I did find the theory interesting and less 'crackpot'' than some others I've seen). Aaaanyways, it's all gotten very confusing now by the second thread already in it's 7th page and still no real proof of anything. For all we know, D&D pulled that whole scene right out of their butts as to laying a magical clawed finger on the baby's cheek and all that. George may have never mentioned anything at all about it. They read the passage I quoted from the book and decided to create 'what happens to the babies' straight out of their imaginations. All we know for certain is that they don't die or get eaten... this was confirmed by the wives/daughters of Craster. We assume they become White Walkers / Others. D&D assumed the same thing and created that whole ending scene based off their assumptions. MAYBE. We may never know if George rubber stamped that scene or not. He's not saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 And it won't be the last time either, I'm sure! ;) My point was (perhaps made too sarcastically) was that you had said something along the lines of maybe Jon was somehow connected to the others because he was a bastard and then how Craster's kids were all bastards too... which is getting confusing because we don't have any proof that Craster has noble or king's blood (though I did find the theory interesting and less 'crackpot'' than some others I've seen). Aaaanyways, it's all gotten very confusing now by the second thread already in it's 7th page and still no real proof of anything. For all we know, D&D pulled that whole scene right out of their butts as to laying a magical clawed finger on the baby's cheek and all that. George may have never mentioned anything at all about it. They read the passage I quoted from the book and decided to create 'what happens to the babies' straight out of their imaginations. All we know for certain is that they don't die or get eaten... this was confirmed by the wives/daughters of Craster. We assume they become White Walkers / Others. D&D assumed the same thing and created that whole ending scene based off their assumptions. MAYBE. We may never know if George rubber stamped that scene or not. He's not saying. agreed with all of this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 And it won't be the last time either, I'm sure! ;) My point was (perhaps made too sarcastically) was that you had said something along the lines of maybe Jon was somehow connected to the others because he was a bastard and then how Craster's kids were all bastards too... which is getting confusing because we don't have any proof that Craster has noble or king's blood (though I did find the theory interesting and less 'crackpot'' than some others I've seen). Aaaanyways, it's all gotten very confusing now by the second thread already in it's 7th page and still no real proof of anything. For all we know, D&D pulled that whole scene right out of their butts as to laying a magical clawed finger on the baby's cheek and all that. George may have never mentioned anything at all about it. They read the passage I quoted from the book and decided to create 'what happens to the babies' straight out of their imaginations. All we know for certain is that they don't die or get eaten... this was confirmed by the wives/daughters of Craster. We assume they become White Walkers / Others. D&D assumed the same thing and created that whole ending scene based off their assumptions. MAYBE. We may never know if George rubber stamped that scene or not. He's not saying. Yeah, youve got a point. Still, youre still reading this. Every word that im typing. Every. Single. One. And that's what makes this thread interesting. There's some merit behind it though. It would give definition and origin to the very name, "Others." The other child, the one nobody wants. We'll give it away, to the gods. My only ideas behind Jon's connecting with them, is that, yes, he has bastard's blood regardless of his parentage, but id think if this theory has ANY merit, he'd be a beacon to them. He has bastard's blood, noble blood, and first men blood. He's what they want, if you think about it. Now i could be, and very well will be, very wrong about all this. It adds up though. Somehow, in my head, it's making sense. And after 1132 posts im TIRED. and if there's some way, to make the story happen where every child Craster creates is a bastard, it would further support it. Give away the boys, keep the female bastards, to create more. Regardless of a half-assed crackpot theory that just was created before your very eyes 40 minutes ago, i think we all could agree: it COULD be bastard's blood (dont care, find me evidence that specifically proves it ISNT) or it could be first men blood it's something. something makes these kids important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Say it with me, together now: Craster's Bastards.... Craster's Bastards.. you know you want to. Craster's..........Bastards...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Yeah, youve got a point. Still, youre still reading this. Every word that im typing. Every. Single. One. And that's what makes this thread interesting. There's some merit behind it though. It would give definition and origin to the very name, "Others." The other child, the one nobody wants. We'll give it away, to the gods. My only ideas behind Jon's connecting with them, is that, yes, he has bastard's blood regardless of his parentage, but id think if this theory has ANY merit, he'd be a beacon to them. He has bastard's blood, noble blood, and first men blood. He's what they want, if you think about it. Now i could be, and very well will be, very wrong about all this. It adds up though. Somehow, in my head, it's making sense. And after 1132 posts im TIRED. :P Yes I'm still reading. I never said the debate should end, just that it was getting confusing with all the wild theories flying! ;) As for Jon being the 'perfect thing' they are looking for ... touching into still more theories - wouldn't Jon's possible royal blood (if R+L=J is true) be more of a factor than being a bastard? He would technically be both. But I'm still not sure why being a bastard is important in your theory anyways. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 ^^ he's already answered that...Craster's Bastards! [emoji1] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Yes I'm still reading. I never said the debate should end, just that it was getting confusing with all the wild theories flying! ;) As for Jon being the 'perfect thing' they are looking for ... touching into still more theories - wouldn't Jon's possible royal blood (if R+L=J is true) be more of a factor than being a bastard? He would technically be both. But I'm still not sure why being a bastard is important in your theory anyways. LOL. well, bastard's blood is tainted blood. it symbolizes corruption. cheating. they say it's traitorous, lustful, sinful. right? my idea only hit because the "other" children becoming "Others" seemed to fit. Add in craster's children may all be bastards, the "other" children, it hit hard. i too dont like the direction this went Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 still, i gotta admit. a shirt with Craster's face that says, "I went to Craster's Keep and all I got was one of Craster's Bastards" is an INGENIUS marketing plan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envie Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Well ok! My head hurts now. I'm going to go away and be angsty that we'll probably never know the truth about the Others, R'hLOL or whatever he's called and who is important or not until George finishes the damn books. Which could be NEVER at this rate! *dramatic pose* So unfair! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Well ok! My head hurts now. I'm going to go away and be angsty that we'll probably never know the truth about the Others, R'hLOL or whatever he's called and who is important or not until George finishes the damn books. Which could be NEVER at this rate! *dramatic pose* So unfair! break out the marilyn manson cd! shying away from bastard blood theory. it's something in the children. something in the blood. something that craster, and the wildlings at whitetree know about, and other wildlings to take part in the ritual. something Jeor Mormont knew about. the daughters know about. "I gotta make right with the Old Gods" he said. well, what did he do wrong in the first place? ...unless..... Craster's a BASTARD HIMSELF :O no but seriously. we know The Night's King did this ritual too, per the wiki. and if it's been going on for THAT long, this is a measure that sustains their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgryn-strk-lnstr-mrtell Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Well ok! My head hurts now. I'm going to go away and be angsty that we'll probably never know the truth about the Others, R'hLOL or whatever he's called and who is important or not until George finishes the damn books. Which could be NEVER at this rate! *dramatic pose* So unfair! i truly believe GRRM either 1) wants to die before book 7, thereby immortalizing himself and his legacy 2) has very little idea of how to finish the books... there is a third option...that is pulling a bill gates and already has book 7 completed but just milking the series for all its worth (like Vista) before releasing the last book (win 7) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazfemur Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 alright, im done for awhile. i gotta let my brain relax. these debates and "what if's" and trying to find the answer to "if this is this, then this" is hurting. gonna read Dunk & Egg 3 for awhile. ill be back later but, until then: That bastard Craster's "other" children, the Craster Bastard's, are given to The Others, making them, Craster's Bastard Others. ..what? :O Later :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.