High Septon = Howland Reed 3.0

[Antler's Fury]

Bear Island women are simply women warriors from Bear Island, many of which went with Maege when they assisted Robb in his campaign.

What is the deal with people continuing to assert that the only she-bears are Maege and her daughters? For christ's sake, it's right there in the text: she-bears are the women warriors of Bear Isle. And many of them went with Maege.

But the entire basis for this "septas = she bears" idea is that the septas' descriptions are similar to those of the MORMONT WOMEN, not regular women-warriors from Bear Island. We have no reason to believe that regular warrior-women from Bear Island look like the Mormonts, and therefore no reason to believe that they resemble the septas that look like the Mormonts.

You're realy just not worth arguing with anymore.

Whining in the face of criticism does not strengthen your case. And goodness knows, it needs all the help it can get, poorly argued as it is. I wouldn't be able to post "walls of nothing" if this theory, or at least your defense of it, did not rest on such weak foundations.

[Ser Quork]

Has anyone considered the irony of Cersei and The Rains of Castamere?

A song that details the ignorance and arrogance of a certain lord, which leads to the eventual destruction of their House.

Cersei much?

Let's pretend for a moment that Howland is the High Septon. Now let's look at the circumstances of the song:

A Father (Tywin/Howland) comes to a proud noble (Roger/Cersei) who perceives them as weak, and is in turn destroyed.

And who are you, the proud Queen said,

that I should bow so low?

Only a frog of a different coat, (maggy/howland)

that's all the truth I know...

;)

I like that Maggy/Howland 'froggy' analogy. If this theory comes to fruition, you need to tag this.

SQ: I'm going to respond to this little lot, just to show how repetitive it is and yet doesn't offer constructive criticism of the theory.

That's exactly what he is.

SQ: Correction - unless you have inside information, you should say that it what you believe him to be.

To introduce the smallfolk and the Faith into the Game of Thrones and show that they are now taking matters into their own hands after becoming fed up at the corruption, tyranny, and complacency of their leaders.

SQ: Doesn't really answer the question of why the author would use this mysterious person with no verifiable background. Why not use someone whose credentials could be verified, someone more like Meribald even - someone known? That's the question asked that you aren't addressing.

Did Howland have a reason to believe that the Goldcloaks or Lannister guards would not try stop him?

SQ: Does any insurrectionist when resorting to force of arms? Alternatively, perhaps he did. (I'm not so keen on the mystical answers, but, given HR's background, it's possible and can't be discounted.) However, this statement is just a call to speculation and doesn't disprove anything.

Again, did Howland have a reason to believe that Cersei would allow this? One of the many weaknesses of this theory is that it requires Howland to assume that things he has zero control over will automatically go his way.

SQ: Call to speculation. I also find it odd how no-one ever argues this about others who plot and scheme, like Littlefinger and Varys - men who have no actual power, but manipulate others based on information, opportunity, etc., for their own ends.

So why would they follow him when he reveals that his actual plan is to crown Jon or fight the Others or what have you? If they are following a pious septon and Howand reveals that he is not a pious septon, why would any of his followers still follow an admitted fraud and liar?

SQ: A question that calls for speculation of how the story will unfold, and disproves nothing in itself.

How is any of this evidence? Is the Neck the only place in Westeros with mud, moss, tree roots, and reeds? And for the umpteenth time, what on earth do the faces carved into the High Sparrow's chamber have to do with anything? They are the faces of the Seven, not weirwoods.

SQ: These are word choices of the author, or literary clues to those who use literary analysis. Clearly, you wish to ignore this form of analysis. That's fine if it doesn't work for you - no-one is forcing you to agree. However, it remains a recognised form of literary analysis whether you like it or not, and to others it is indicative and forms part of the basis of the theory.

They are not a usual form of Sept decoration from what we have been shown before, and they are reminiscent of weirwood face carvings, which unnerve Cersei.

Not difficult concepts, but only time will tell whether these clues are right or not. That is the nature of clues.

Obara Sand and Lady Dustin also have knotted brown hair. Are they secret crannogmen too? Of course not. Clearly, knotted brown hair is not definitive proof of anything.

SQ: No, it's word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

Jojen is referred to as having a solemn face that Bran wants to slap. The High Sparrow is referred to as having a solemn face that Cersei wants to slap. Edric Dayne is referred to as having a solemn face that Arya threatens to slap. Is Edric Dayne a secret crannogman? Of course not. Again, this is not proof.

SQ: Word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

How is there any definitive connection here? Yes, Meera traps Summer, who struggles to escape and only makes his situation worse, just like Cersei does when she is imprisoned by the High Sparrow, but these two are hardly the only people who do this. For instance, Theon and Jaime are both imprisoned, try to escape, and make their situation worse. Does this mean that their captors, Ramsay and Robb, are secret crannogmen? Of course not. This is just more tenuous, manufactured "evidence."

SQ: Word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

(However, as an aside, I'd be willing to bet solid Brit currency that we'll find out HR used a net in just this manner at the ToJ at one point. And wouldn't knights just hate that, and call it cowardly?)

A point in favor of what? What does Jaime's description of Brienne have to do with anything here? The septas are deceptively strong because, as Cersei notes, they have spent a lot of time doing manual labor in the sept. This doesn't mean that they are Mormont women, or Tarth women, or what have you.

SQ: Word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

So are you saying that the Neck is the only place in Westeros that is cold, with mud, roots, trees, stone, and thin, solemn people? These things are omnipresent on the continent; the books are full of references to people getting mud on them, or seeing trees and stones, etc. Again, not proof. Much like brown hair, trees, stones, mud, etc are painfully mundane.

SQ: Word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

What threat is there in KL? Cersei? She is not threatening the North, her Bolton and Frey proxies are. So it follows logically that Howland ought to be fighting them, not wasting time playing septon.

SQ: This again? Cersei - responsible for Ned's imprisonment and slaughter of his household, has various bastards on the throne, is Queen Regent, Bolton/Freys in league with Lannisters - possible long-game - vengeance - been through all this before.

I don't know why people seem to think that the Boltons and Freys are finished. They Freys still hold the Twins and Riverrun. They still have Riverlord captives. Notably, Edmure Tully is being held captive at Casterly Rock, not KL. The only Freys who have died have been worthless, weak idiot Freys like Stevron, Ryman, Jared. etc. The dangerous ones, like Walder, Black Walder, Bastard Walder, etc. are alive and well. Roose has one of the strongest castles in Westeros fully manned. He has plenty of food. It is Stannis' army that is starving and freezing. If they assault Winterfell, they will lose. The only way they can take Winterfell is through subterfuge, and I'm pretty sure that a crannogman would be able to help with that. Howland's time would be much better spent fighting these actual threats to the North instead of trying and failing miserably to bring down House Lannister.

SQ: Not like there is going to be a battle outside of Winterfell, is there? Or a trap sprung on the Karstarks that could work to Stannis's advantage? Or a possibility that Manderly troops might lead disguised troops into Winterfell? Or any other number of plans that we have yet to see unfold? According to you, only a crannogmen is capable of subterfuge to get them into WF? Is that really your argument?

To be frank, this is just a distraction mechanism, and doesn't really do anything to address the theory. It's just argumentative.

All that Howland's "efforts" amounted to was giving way real leverage (the Crown's debt and Tommen's blessing) in exchange for the re-arming of the zealous Faith Militant, which has zero interest in crowning a bastard/product of polygamy like Jon, or fighting the Others, and the removal of Cersei from the regency, which allowed Kevan to return and actually stabilize the situation. Had he not been killed by Varys (something that Howland had nothing to do with) Howland's plan would have horribly backfired.

SQ: This is repetition of your previous opinion that re-arming the faith was a bad move with which a number of us have already disagreed, several times. Repeating it won't make your opinions better opinions. It is also speculation about how the story will unfold, which you are presenting as fact.

No, it deals with an overly ambitious lord who tries to overthrow House Lannister and fails, resulting in the destruction of his House. It would be ironic alright, because that is exactly what Howland is according to the theory: an overly ambitious lord attempting to overthrow House Lannister. Will Reed fail just like Reyne before him?

SQ: Actually, I like this. Given how hopes are often dashed in-world, I could actually imagine this.

I'm sure that's as dull for you to read as it was for me to write, because it's all been said before - there's nothing new here.

Antler's Fury, your first post was interesting and detailed in giving your opinion why you don't like the theory, and made a refreshing change from negative one-liners that crop up. However, for me, its umpteenth iteration of opinion and speculation that actually disproves nothing is rather wearing.

[Faceless Void]

Pretty sure we don't see a single other warrior woman who isn't a Mormont. The OP yields no examples. In fact, in the passages quoted, they specifically say the women stay on the island to defend it and take care of the families. I'm not aware of any female warriors described in any of the battles or marching with the men.

So where exactly are these random she-bears coming from if not Bear Island?

There aren't any Bear Isle men mentioned in the battles either - does that mean they weren't there? See how flawed your logic is?

The she-bears are female warriors, and it's safe to assume that the group Maege brought with her was both men and women from Bear Isle.

[Faceless Void]

snip

Not to mention the complete dismissal of the set criteria. Example: yes Jaime gets covered with mud, but no, Jaime is not thin or small or solemn OR EVEN DESCRIBED AKIN TO MUD!

You can't take the proposed list of descriptions and affix characters to PARTS of it, while ignoring the rest - which is exactly what AF is doing.

So tired of these opinion based arguments. I wish the counter would actually take the time to cite passages which support their position instead of posting opinion-supported arguments ad naseum. Ugh.....

[willofDorne]

No I'm suggesting that the Bear Island women are coming from...... bear island. The only Bear Island women we know who are outside of Bear Island are Maege, Dacey, and Alysane. Maege could be anywhere. Dacey is dead (and doesn't match any description. Alysane didn't leave Bear Island until after the IB took Deepwood Motte.

I'm saying it's ridiculously unlikely that the septas are she-bears.

No, Maege could not be "anywhere" because her last known location was the Twins on her way to see Howland. That's in the text. So what are you trying to debate? That her daughters didn't go with her? Sure, valid point. I'm sure Maege went just as moral support and Robb Stark was glad to have her for her witty observations. She brought no she-bears, not even her daughters. Is that what you want us all to say?

[Faceless Void]

I like that Maggy/Howland 'froggy' analogy. If this theory comes to fruition, you need to tag this.

If Howland is in fact the High Septon, then we have the parallel to the frog spear - the tool used to poke at the prey until it's drawn into the trap:

You have a frog, Howland, goading Cersei into coming to the Sept of Baeler

You have a frog, Maggy, with her memory and foretelling driving Cersei insane

Cersei, during her walk of shame, even sees Maggy standing in the crowd.

[Universal Sword Donor]

There aren't any Bear Isle men mentioned in the battles either - does that mean they weren't there? See how flawed your logic is?

The she-bears are female warriors, and it's safe to assume that the group Maege brought with her was both men and women from Bear Isle.

That has to be the weakest response I've seen in the thread. Of all the soldiers we've seen in a Westerosi army, there are what, six women? I'm excluding Targaryen relations from this as they are not current amd also have the obvious advantage of having the Planetos equivalent of WMDs.

* Meris

* Brienne

* Alysane

* Maege

* Dacey

* Chella

Obviously women going to war or learning how to fight is not a widespread phenomena. There are many allusions to this (Lyanna and no sword, Brienne's entire storyline, Cersei's thoughts and words).

Alysane doesn't have any women with her at the crofter's village, and once again Maege specifically says the women stay behind to defend from IB raids, which coincidentally have risen over the past year or two....

Dacey and Maege are leading their feudal levy. Alysane is essentially doing the same. They are there as commanders first, not fighters. Given the sheer paucity of women who actually fight, Maege's explanation, and no specific mention of women fighting, I'm not really sure why it's a safe assumption that Bear Island women went south with Robb. It's not like we haven't gotten detailed descriptions of the armies either. Not a single woman was noted in the Battle of the Green Fork, which included all the Bear Island foot. Literally everyone but Shae and Chella in that chapter was male.

[Universal Sword Donor]

No, Maege could not be "anywhere" because her last known location was the Twins on her way to see Howland. That's in the text. So what are you trying to debate? That her daughters didn't go with her? Sure, valid point. I'm sure Maege went just as moral support and Robb Stark was glad to have her for her witty observations. She brought no she-bears, not even her daughters. Is that what you want us all to say?

No Maege went as Lady of Bear Island, to lead the fuedal levy. Dacey went along as her heir, just as Smalljon went with Greatjon and Harrion went with Rickard.

There's literally no substantive evidence or even a hint that Bear Island women, who would have to be the septas in this case, went south with Robb. They'd have had to come from Bear Island.

[Faceless Void]

That has to be the weakest response I've seen in the thread. Of all the soldiers we've seen in a Westerosi army, there are what, six women? I'm excluding Targaryen relations from this as they are not current amd also have the obvious advantage of having the Planetos equivalent of WMDs.

* Meris

* Brienne

* Alysane

* Maege

* Dacey

* Chella

Obviously women going to war or learning how to fight is not a widespread phenomena. There are many allusions to this (Lyanna and no sword, Brienne's entire storyline, Cersei's thoughts and words).

Alysane doesn't have any women with her at the crofter's village, and once again Maege specifically says the women stay behind to defend from IB raids, which coincidentally have risen over the past year or two....

Dacey and Maege are leading their feudal levy. Alysane is essentially doing the same. They are there as commanders first, not fighters. Given the sheer paucity of women who actually fight, Maege's explanation, and no specific mention of women fighting, I'm not really sure why it's a safe assumption that Bear Island women went south with Robb. It's not like we haven't gotten detailed descriptions of the armies either. Not a single woman was noted in the Battle of the Green Fork, which included all the Bear Island foot. Literally everyone but Shae and Chella in that chapter was male.

Ugh. You just don't understand.

Want to convince me? Show me where ANY Bear Isle warrior is described in the fighting.

Your argument is just plain ridiculous. You're asserting that, since there was no mention of the women, they can't be there. I counter with, there's no mention of any Bear Isle men either. You stay the course... FFS...

Whatever, you win. There weren't any other women with Maege other than her daughters because there aren't any women mentioned. Grats! Now lets stop arguing.

[7th-key]

If Howland is in fact the High Septon, then we have the parallel to the frog spear - the tool used to poke at the prey until it's drawn into the trap:

And Quentin was nicknamed frog, too! Isn't he also short? And he is from Sunspear!

[willofDorne]

No Maege went as Lady of Bear Island, to lead the fuedal levy. Dacey went along as her heir, just as Smalljon went with Greatjon and Harrion went with Rickard.

There's literally no substantive evidence or even a hint that Bear Island women, who would have to be the septas in this case, went south with Robb. They'd have had to come from Bear Island.

So you admit you knew she was there and yet you persisted anyways with this accusation that she was "anywhere?" Please choose your words carefully and stop throwing around words.

[Faceless Void]

And Quentin was nicknamed frog, too! Isn't he also short? And he is from Sunspear!

Oh yea! And he's described to trees, and roots, and the cold, and being skinny, and solemn.

High-five!

[Universal Sword Donor]

Ugh. You just don't understand.

Want to convince me? Show me where ANY Bear Isle warrior is described in the fighting.

Your argument is just plain ridiculous. You're asserting that, since there was no mention of the women, they can't be there. I counter with, there's no mention of any Bear Isle men either. You stay the course... FFS...

Whatever, you win. There weren't any other women with Maege other than her daughters because there aren't any women mentioned. Grats! Now lets stop arguing.

I stayed the course because comparing the two is an exercise in ridiculous and tortured logic. Of the, let's say 150K on the safe side, of armies we've seen there are 149,994 men and 6 women. That's 99.996% of the army as male. All the organized fighting we've seen, face to face, has been done by people who are explicitly men, except Chella and Dacey, if you consider flagon smashing and getting stabbed organized combat. We are hammered over the head that women fighting is the exception to the rule in Westeros, and the mere presence of fighting women is noted explicitly on multiple occasions from multiple angles.

There is a non-zero chance that Bear Island women deployed with the men, despite what Maege said. Given what we know of the armies and attitude of female combatants in Westeros, it's not much above zero.

[Universal Sword Donor]

So you admit you knew she was there and yet you persisted anyways with this accusation that she was "anywhere?" Please choose your words carefully and stop throwing around words.

She can be anywhere now. We all know she was at Hag's Mire with Robb and was sent to find Howland Reed. I'm not concerned with Maege. I never was. I'm still trying to grasp why anyone would assume that previously unmentioned Bear Island women would be more than 2,000 miles away from home. The mind fairly boggles.

[Antler's Fury]

SQ: Doesn't really answer the question of why the author would use this mysterious person with no verifiable background. Why not use someone whose credentials could be verified, someone more like Meribald even - someone known? That's the question asked that you aren't addressing.

Because it makes sense for a septon who is a member of the smallfolk to lead a mob of frustrated smallfolk in a religious reform movement, and smallfolk generally don't have verifiable backgrounds. They are people who live in nameless villages and don't even have last names that you could use to verify their identities. This septon is one who has seen what the common people go through, and understands their suffering. Therefore, they are more likely to trust someone who are can relate to, not some detached, uninterested septon from KL who we actually know, like the fat High Septon, or one of the Most Devout. Septons who are of the elite are not going to care about the smallfolk - which is the exact problem that the High Sparrow is trying to address. The only septon who is a member of the smallfolk that we know aside from the High Sparrow is Meribald, and he does not have the puritanical belief system required to do what the High Sparrow is doing. We don't know of many other "normal" septons because the POV characters are mostly elites who deal with the corrupt septon establishment, not barefoot traveling septons. It would actually be weird if the High Sparrow was someone known, because no character that we know of has displayed any desire to reform the religion of the Seven. It makes much more sense that an outsider who has seen the consequences of the corruption of the religious leadership would want to change it.

SQ: Correction - unless you have inside information, you should say that it what you believe him to be.

There's no reason to believe that he is anyone other than who he says he is. If the mere fact that people have written a crackpot theory about his identity is grounds for doubting what the book tells us about him, then we can't assume that any character is who they say they are. By this logic, even the most well-established identities in the books could be false identities of other people, merely because people have written crackpot theories like Mance=Rhaegar.

SQ: Does any insurrectionist when resorting to force of arms? Alternatively, perhaps he did. (I'm not so keen on the mystical answers, but, given HR's background, it's possible and can't be discounted.) However, this statement is just a call to speculation and doesn't disprove anything.

The point here is that we are supposed to believe that Howland is capable of formulating and carrying out this grand conspiracy, yet he overlooks important details like resistance from the GCs, even though their failure to stop him was crucial for his supposed plan to succeed. I'm saying that he had no reason to believe that the GCs would inexplicably fail to stop him, which suggests that he would never formulate and carry out a plan that required them to not stop him. It's not speculation, it's pointing out a hole in the theory's logic.

SQ: Call to speculation. I also find it odd how no-one ever argues this about others who plot and scheme, like Littlefinger and Varys - men who have no actual power, but manipulate others based on information, opportunity, etc., for their own ends.

I am not speculating, I'm saying that Howland had no reason to believe that Cersei would allow him to reform the FM, and thus would never carry out a plan that hinged on her doing just that. Varys and LF are different because they generally carry out their plans through easily disposable third parties, so that even if their plans are poorly thought out and fail, they are not personally affected. Thus, they have a network that allows them to carry out unwieldy, large-scale conspiracies without much risk of personal harm despite the risk of failure. There is no evidence that Howland has any such network, and in this conspiracy, he is personally carrying out much of the work, not relying on disposable catspaws that would allow him to make mistakes and survive them.

SQ: A question that calls for speculation of how the story will unfold, and disproves nothing in itself.

The entire OP is based on a theory about how the story will unfold; I am asking for clarification about that. Howland's plan is supposed to involve redirecting the FM to do something other than defend the Faith, like crown Jon or fight the Others or what have you. What I am asking is how Howland intends to convince the FM to do what he wants after he reveals himself to be a fraud. I am arguing that they never would, and therefore Howland would never formulate and carry out a conspiracy that required them to follow him even after he revealed he had lied to all of them.

They are not a usual form of Sept decoration

Yes they are. Just about every sept we have seen has some kind of carving of the Seven.

from what we have been shown before, and they are reminiscent of weirwood face carvings, which unnerve Cersei.

Cersei is not unnerved that they resemble weirwoods. She is unnerved because she feels that the faces have power, just as people who follow the Old Gods would be unnerved if they felt that weirwood faces have power. These are two totally separate religions whose religious iconography can unnerve their adherents. There is no reason to assume that the text is trying to connect them merely because different people feel the same sense of unease when looking at completely different iconography. Some characters are also unnerved by Melisandre and her fires, which represent another religion. Should we therefore assume that the text is trying to connect all three religions? Of course not.

SQ: No, it's word choice, mirroring, also known as literary clues.

I am arguing that it is not mirroring because similar word choice was used in plenty of other unrelated scenarios, which suggests that the specific instances pointed out by the OP are not uniquely significant instances that would point to a connection between the High Sparrow and the Reeds, Mormont women and septas, etc.

SQ: This again? Cersei - responsible for Ned's imprisonment and slaughter of his household, has various bastards on the throne, is Queen Regent, Bolton/Freys in league with Lannisters - possible long-game - vengeance - been through all this before.

No one has explained why Howland would see Cersei as more responsible for Stark suffering than Tywin, or Joffrey or the Boltons or Freys, who are directly responsible.

SQ: Not like there is going to be a battle outside of Winterfell, is there? Or a trap sprung on the Karstarks that could work to Stannis's advantage? Or a possibility that Manderly troops might lead disguised troops into Winterfell? Or any other number of plans that we have yet to see unfold?

What exactly does this have to do with Howland? He could hardly have known that Stannis would be forewarned about the Karstark trap, because Tycho Nestoris told him about that, and no one in the North knew that he was going to show up - not even Stannis. Similarly, Howland could hardly have known about Manderly's double-crossing the Boltons, because that would most likely be based on the deal Manderly struck with Davos, something that no one in the North, not even Manderly, could have anticipated given that Davos turned up at White Harbor unexpectedly. Indeed, Manderly could also hardly have known that Roose would send him out with the Freys to fight Stannis, giving him an opportunity to switch sides. Therefore, Howland had no reason to assume that his supposed skill at subterfuge would be unnecessary in the Northern fight against the Boltons, and thus had no reason to believe he'd have enough free time to waste it playing septon.

According to you, only a crannogmen is capable of subterfuge to get them into WF? Is that really your argument?

I have never said this. I clearly stated that Howland's supposed skills at subterfuge would be more useful at WF than in KL, where they have accomplished precisely nothing for the North and indeed, backfired.

SQ: This is repetition of your previous opinion that re-arming the faith was a bad move with which a number of us have already disagreed, several times. Repeating it won't make your opinions better opinions. It is also speculation about how the story will unfold, which you are presenting as fact.

None of this is my opinion or speculation about how the story will unfold. It is a simple fact that removing Cersei resulted in the return of Kevan, who stabilized the Tyrell-Lannister alliance that Cersei tried to destroy. Thus, if Howland's goal was to destabilize the Lannister regime by removing Cersei, his plan backfired. Only Varys' removal of Kevan, which Howland had nothing to do with, saved his plan, and Howland could hardly have anticipated this. Thus, I am arguing that Howland had no reason to believe that Cersei's removal would destroy the Lannister monarchy, and thus had no reason to carry out a plan based on this happening.

However, for me, its umpteenth iteration of opinion and speculation that actually disproves nothing is rather wearing.

I really don't get what you are so frustrated by. I am presenting facts. It is the OP that is presenting pure, unadulterated speculation and opinion. Everything that you consider "a recognized form of literary analysis" is simply the author of the OP insisting that his/her singular interpretation of alleged clues is the correct one, all while deliberately ignoring all other evidence to the contrary. I am questioning the validity of this interpretation, but you seem to have a problem with that too. Sorry - the only theories that deserve to exist are those that can withstand intense scrutiny. I would not ask so many questions if the theory were not so full of unexplained assumptions. This theory is frustratingly vague and rests on baseless connections and unsupported leaps of logic backed up by petulance, self-righteousness, and a whole lot of hot air.

You can't take the proposed list of descriptions and affix characters to PARTS of it, while ignoring the rest - which is exactly what AF is doing.

No, that is what you are doing. I presented more descriptions that are applied to the High Sparrow but not the crannogmen, which would suggest that the High Sparrow is not a crannogman. You ignored that, and insist that the only "set criteria" that anyone ought to consider are those you propose. You can't just ignore relevant information that challenges the theory you are defending, at least if you want your views to be taken seriously.

I wish the counter would actually take the time to cite passages which support their position instead of posting opinion-supported arguments ad naseum. Ugh.....

Funny, considering that this is exactly what you are doing, insisting that certain words (mud, stone, solemn etc) are uniquely connect characters because you say so, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Oh yea! And he's described to trees, and roots, and the cold, and being skinny, and solemn.

High-five!

Jojen is not associated with words like implacable, utterly mad, clean, scrawny, sour, etc. So by your own logic, he has just as much of a connection to the High Sparrow as Quentyn: none.

Idiot...

You seriously don't get it, do you? The point 7th key was tying to make was that you can associate any character with any other character if you rely on common words in this manner. Thus, if we can assume that the High Sparrow is connected with Jojen merely because words like "solemn" and "thin" are used to describe them both, then why can't we say the same about Quentyn and Howland Reed since words like "spear" and "frog" are associated with both? Yes, there are words that describe the High Sparrow that have nothing to do with Quentyn, but, as I pointed out, there are also plenty of words that describe the High Sparrow that have nothing to do with Jojen, words you ignore because they are inconvenient.

Btw personal attacks do not help your case. Accusing people of being idiots because they point out the obvious weaknesses in your "logic" is poor form.

[Universal Sword Donor]

I am arguing that it is not mirroring because similar word choice was used in plenty of other unrelated scenarios, which suggests that the specific instances pointed out by the OP are not uniquely significant instances that would point to a connection between the High Sparrow and the Reeds, Mormont women and septas, etc.

To be fair, it's not just the Mormont women, it's all Bear Island women, who haven't been seen or identified, are extremely unlikely to serve in any army, and have absolutely zero reason to leave BI while the IB are raiding.

[Antler's Fury]

To be fair, it's not just the Mormont women, it's all Bear Island women, who haven't been seen or identified, are extremely unlikely to serve in any army, and have absolutely zero reason to leave BI while the IB are raiding.

I don't think it's unreasonable for Bear Island to have a large number of female warriors outside House Mormont. After all, we know that the island has been targeted by both the Ironborn and the wildlings. If this forced Mormont women to become warrior-women, then it could be that other families, whether lordly or not, also had to train their women to fight simply for the sake of survival.

That said, there is no reason to assume that the septas are warrior-women from Bear Island. As I've said several times now, all of the supposed connections between the septas and Bear Island warrior women are the supposed similarities between them and the women of House Mormont, and they are way too old to be Mormont women. We can't assume they are general warrior-women from Bear Island, because the connection between them and Bear Island is their supposed resemblance to Mormont women, and we have no reason to believe that warrior-women outside House Mormont resemble the women of that House in appearance.

[Universal Sword Donor]

I don't think it's unreasonable for Bear Island to have a large number of female warriors outside House Mormont. After all, we know that the island has been targeted by both the Ironborn and the wildlings. If this forced Mormont women to become warrior-women, then it could be that other families, whether lordly or not, also had to train their women to fight simply for the sake of survival.

That said, there is no reason to assume that the septas are warrior-women from Bear Island. As I've said several times now, all of the supposed connections between the septas and Bear Island warrior women are the supposed similarities between them and the women of House Mormont, and they are way too old to be Mormont women. We can't assume they are general warrior-women from Bear Island, because the connection between them and Bear Island is their supposed resemblance to Mormont women, and we have no reason to believe that warrior-women outside House Mormont resemble the women of that House in appearance.

Let me clarify, I totally agree on the existence of female warriors on Bear Island. Maege talks about it. Alysane talks about it. That is not something I dispute.

What I dispute is how and why on GRRM's green planetos these warrior women would be septas in KL despite every reason in the world why they wouldn't.

[willofDorne]

There are two very important points I just want to bring up.

1. Howland Reed is not only an interesting character, but he's a shadow in Ned's dream. Shadows are powerful and hold a lot of influence literally speaking in this novel. Remember, "A small man can cast a very large shadow"

Remember Ned's dream, the six riders were wraiths, on horses made of mist. But they were also shadows. This is no accident. Why would GRRM make such a claim? He doesn't waste words.

Also... In a following passage, Ned says he does not like that he should dream that dream again after so many years. 5 men died, two walked away, Eddard Stark and the little crannogman, Howland Reed.

Doesn't like that TWO walked away, and one of them was this small man. Perhaps it's because he needed Howland, or knew he would need him again, on some level, unconsciously. He's thinking of the past, but it's foreshadowing as well. Writers often say (GRRM included said this last month) they get their most inspiring moments at that time between dreaming and waking up. And this happens just as Ned awakes.

[Faceless Void]

I think it's important to highlight the connection between the Warrior's Sons, Lightbringer, and Jon.

After Cersei foolishly grants the High Septon the right to re-establish the Faith Militant, he turns his rugged contingent of sparrows into the new Warrior's Sons.

The Warrior's Sons ancient symbol is a shining sword on a field of darkness, aka Lightbringer.

Jon's Night's Watch vow: "I am the sword in the darkness"

Furthermore, as Rhaegar decided to become a warrior, Jon is quite literally the warrior's son.

The point is, the High Septon forgoes nearly a MILLION gold dragons, in order to re-establish an army whose symbol is basically Jon.

What other reason is Howland in the story, if not to bring Jon's mystery full circle? He's conveniently the last person alive to know of Jon's actual lineage. Which also means he knows about Jon's right to the throne. Robb sends Maege and Galbart into the Neck, with full consent to promote Jon as King upon his death, and he dies soon after.

It makes perfect literary sense for for Howland to avenge the Starks by destroying the Lannisters, and supplanting them with Jon. And that's precisely what the High Septon is doing - tearing down the Lannisters with one hand, and pushing Jon's army with the other.