Jump to content

Reasons why Lightbringer is NOT a literal sword


Mithras

Recommended Posts

· George does not like his prophecies (especially the central ones) to be too literal or too easy.


· Within only 150 years, many people came to believe that Baelor the Blessed jumped into a pit of vipers to save his brother from captivity and since he was so holy, the snakes did not bite him. The reality is that “pit of vipers” was a metaphor for Dorne but people liked the other tale better. Imagine what would happen to a prophecy of at least 5000 years old.


· At this point of the story, it does not make sense for a person to come up with a magical sword to save the mankind. That is not the nature of the current crisis Westeros faces.


· Obsidian is already proved to be deadly against the Others. Fire and steel work fine for the wights. Why should people need an extra magical sword (however cool that is) to turn the tide of the battle?


· The description of what the Lightbringer did to the beast according to Jade Compendium suspiciously fits well to the descriptions of how dragonfire kills men and animals in several cases.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

· George does not like his prophecies (especially the central ones) to be too literal or too easy.

If that's so, then Dany's dragons won't be the 'dragons woken from stone' because that's too literal and too easy.

· Within only 150 years, many people came to believe that Baelor the Blessed jumped into a pit of vipers to save his brother from captivity and since he was so holy, the snakes did not bite him. The reality is that “pit of vipers” was a metaphor for Dorne but people liked the other tale better. Imagine what would happen to a prophecy of at least 5000 years old.

...and? No one is arguing that the legend might not have changed in the telling. That doesn't mean that the legend is wrong, though. Or that theer are no longer elements of truth, literal or metaphorical. We don't have enough information to make a definitive assessment either way, though.

· At this point of the story, it does not make sense for a person to come up with a magical sword to save the mankind. That is not the nature of the current crisis Westeros faces.

It didn't make sense that Dany could walk into a funeral pyre, hatch dragons and survive, either. That's why this is fantasy. Anything can happen.

· Obsidian is already proved to be deadly against the Others. Fire and steel work fine for the wights. What should people need an extra magical sword (however cool that is) to turn the tide of the battle?

I don't know. We haven't seen what the sword is capable of, how can we judge how effectual or ineffectual it may or may not be? And it's not as if this war will be fought by three people riding three dragons...there will be people down in the trenches fighting hand-to-hand combat. A flaming sword that could kill the dead (and possibly the Others) would be a great weapon in that situation.

· The description of what the Lightbringer did to the beast according to Jade Compendium suspiciously fits well to the descriptions of how dragonfire kills men and animals.

It also very much fits the description of a flaming sword.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, it doesn't have to be "one magical sword that will save the world." It could be that the story got simplified over time because people like to narrow things down to one hero.



Dragon steel is weapons made from dragon bone.



And steel does not work on the wights. Jon tried that and it didn't work so he had to use fire. Dragon bone, by the way is impervious to fire so it could quite possibly kill the wights and the Others, whereas fire only kills the wights, and obsidian may only kill the Others. Wouldn't it make sense to have a weapon (or a few hundred) that can do double duty, so you don't have to switch between waves of oncoming cold warriors?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AA prophecy isn't literal. It's open to many interpretations; for me, it's a metaphor. Azor Ahai will be the one (or the ones?) who defeats the Others. Lightbringer will be his weapon: any object or animal or whatever it means. Nissa Nissa will be the sacrifice he will have to make. In my opinion, there are three azor ahai: Dany, Jon and ?, one for each dragon, which are the Lightbringer. Nissa Nissa will be Drogo (who Dany killed to get the dragons alive) and Ygritte (who Jon abandoned to save the Wall). I don't know who's the third; I believe Aegon is fake, so he's out. Mabe Tyrion or Jaime...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

· Within only 150 years, many people came to believe that Baelor the Blessed jumped into a pit of vipers to save his brother from captivity and since he was so holy, the snakes did not bite him. The reality is that “pit of vipers” was a metaphor for Dorne but people liked the other tale better. Imagine what would happen to a prophecy of at least 5000 years old.

Not to mention Rodrik Stark winning Bear Island from the Ironborn in a wrestling match being a metaphor for the contested struggle between the North and the Iron Isles.

I don't think LB is a sword either. I doubt a magic sword could have changed things. It was one man, and if the sword was the dangerous to the Others they just would have sent their armies of wights to overwhelm him. Also the sword was supposedly dragonsteel, and steel didn't exist in Westeros until after the Andals arrived millenia after the War for Dawn.

It could be a metaphor for something a dragon, the NW or something I haven't thought of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention Rodrik Stark winning Bear Island from the Ironborn in a wrestling match being a metaphor for the contested struggle between the North and the Iron Isles.

I don't think LB is a sword either. I doubt a magic sword could have changed things. It was one man, and if the sword was the dangerous to the Others they just would have sent their armies of wights to overwhelm him. Also the sword was supposedly dragonsteel, and steel didn't exist in Westeros until after the Andals arrived millenia after the War for Dawn.

Where does it say that AA was in Westeros?

It could be a metaphor for one of two things either a dragon or the NW.

I see no reason why there can't be a flaming sword and dragons. Both would be very useful against an enemy made of cold and ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that AA was in Westeros?

The Long Night and the Battle of the Dawn were fought by First Men and Children of the Forest. Since the Andals came from Essos, and the First Men were "naturalized" to being a Westeros-culture then we can assume that the War for the Dawn/Long Night was fought in Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that AA was in Westeros?

The Long Night and the Battle of the Dawn were fought by First Men and Children of the Forest. Since the Andals came from Essos, and the First Men were "naturalized" to being a Westeros-culture then we can assume that the War for the Dawn/Long Night was fought in Westeros.

This assumes that the Last Hero and AAR are the same person. I agree that the War for the Dawn was fought in Westeros, but no one who is Westerosi by birth mentions AAR unless they come into contact with Mel. We heard about the WftD through Nan, who called the hero something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Long Night and the Battle of the Dawn were fought by First Men and Children of the Forest. Since the Andals came from Essos, and the First Men were "naturalized" to being a Westeros-culture then we can assume that the War for the Dawn/Long Night was fought in Westeros.

...the legend doesn't say that AA was IN Westeros, though. It doesn't say where he was when he forged LB. I don't think we can 'assume' anything about AA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the legend of AA was based on the LH but because of great distances in time and space, the tale was distorted heavily in the telling. That is why no one in Westeros seems to equate these two figures and that is why people in Essos know nothing about the Others and also that is why they consider some vague darkness as the enemy of AAR.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that AA was in Westeros?

I see no reason why there can't be a flaming sword and dragons. Both would be very useful against an enemy made of cold and ice.

The Long Night was in Westeros, and AA and the last hero both deal with a broken sword in their stories. There are many stories and legends in Europe pertaining to characters in the foreign land of Palestine.

A flaming sword would be useful in a one-on-one fight against the Others, but in battle against an army of wights swarming, I think that would be less effective. The Others would send their wights to deal with him, and I think if they faced him would be many on one given the danger he posed to their cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Long Night was in Westeros, and AA and the last hero both deal with a broken sword in their stories. There are many stories and legends in Europe pertaining to characters in the foreign land of Palestine.

I know it was in Westeros- that doesn't mean AA forged his sword in Westeros or used Westerosi technique. That's my point

A flaming sword would be useful in a one-on-one fight against the Others, but in battle against an army of wights swarming, I think that would be less effective. The Others would send their wights to deal with him, and I think if they faced him would be many on one given the danger he posed to their cause.

We know we're getting dragons. No one has said "sword OR dragons". But dragons have their drawbacks, in that they don't work for certain kinds of combat. A sword would serve better for hand to hand combat, obviously. Jon is a swordsman, and a good one. He would be able to make use of a flaming sword.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the legend of AA was based on the LH but because of great distances in time and space, the tale was distorted heavily in the telling. That is why no one in Westeros seems to equate these two figures and that is why people in Essos know nothing about the Others and also that is why they consider some vague darkness as the enemy of AAR.

If that is the case, wouldn't it make sense if AA is a completely different story rather than being a distorted version of the LH and Long Night? I mean if no one in Westeros knows of it and none of the symbols arr known by anyone in Westeros, it seems to me that the most logical explanation is that it never happened in Westeros, especially since all the characters that talk about it are from the East.

Based on the OP since you believe Lightbringer= dragons, I'm assuming you believe the LH defeated the Others with dragons?

However that doesn't connect with Nan's story of the LN considering it ended with the CotF being the factor that stopped, what we don't know is what role they played in stopping it. So I doubt AA is the same as the LH.

The Long Night was in Westeros, and AA and the last hero both deal with a broken sword in their stories. There are many stories and legends in Europe pertaining to characters in the foreign land of Palestine.

The difference is that AA was trying to forge a sword, the LH wasn't, it was destroyed by the others and I'm pretty sure the way the story ended he isn't going to get a chance to makes another sword like AA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, it doesn't have to be "one magical sword that will save the world." It could be that the story got simplified over time because people like to narrow things down to one hero.

Dragon steel is weapons made from dragon bone.

And steel does not work on the wights. Jon tried that and it didn't work so he had to use fire. Dragon bone, by the way is impervious to fire so it could quite possibly kill the wights and the Others, whereas fire only kills the wights, and obsidian may only kill the Others. Wouldn't it make sense to have a weapon (or a few hundred) that can do double duty, so you don't have to switch between waves of oncoming cold warriors?

I thought dragon bone is just called dragon bone.

Somewhere there's a reference to archers using bows made of dragon bone, but they don't call it dragon steel, and the dagger intended to kill Bran was referred to as having a dragon bone, not dragon steel, handle or hilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the legend of AA was based on the LH but because of great distances in time and space, the tale was distorted heavily in the telling. That is why no one in Westeros seems to equate these two figures and that is why people in Essos know nothing about the Others and also that is why they consider some vague darkness as the enemy of AAR.

It's possible, yes. I assume there was traveling between Essos and Westeros after the War for the Dawn, and that's how stories spread and get picked up by other cultures to adapt and change them to fit their own (side note: what came first, the religion of R'hllor or the legend of AAR?)

I just think there is more to the LH story than we're being told; the fact that Old Nan got cut off and that exact place is...suspicious. It's like GRRM saying, "there is something super vital here, but you don't get to know it yet." I, personally, don't think LH and AAR are the same (ice champion becoming a champion for the fire religion?) but I think the ending of LH story is not "and then the hero somehow managed to pick up the broken sword and brought the dawn CAUSE HERO!!!" I also think it's odd that Luwin's story to Bran about the COTF/Others got cut off at the climax as well...hmm..connection?

Back to your OP: If LB is a dragon then would that really have been changed. Dragons are not unknown to Westeors thanks to the Targs, and stories about them haven't become radically altered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...