GRRM on TWoIaF [YT video]

[Wmarshal]

Well, just because the Warg King had greenseers on his side, doesn't mean that the Starks didn't have ones on their side too.

I'd imagine without such assistance defeating an army with multiple greenseers in its ranks would be virtually impossible.

That really is hard to believe, the first men were said to kill large amounts of them.

[naseridrl]

The Starks are starting to seem to me like they were okay with ''magic'' stuff like warging and such if it was them who could do it, but if it was anyone else they didn't like it and fought it. Although that might just be the Maesters wanting to put an anti-magic/non-human slant on things.

Weirdly I kind of like that the Starks seem to be just as assholey as everyone else in Westeros, it's only this younger generation that seems easier to like.

[The Wolves]

I wonder what the runes of the First Men look like and shouldn't they be all over the North especially in the tombs and the barrow lands etc.

[Bael's Bastard]

Speaking of history, I hope some idea is given how long maesters have been around in Westeros. It has always been my impression that they have been around for thousands of years, but I have had a difficult time finding a book attributed to a maester that dates prior to the Targaryen era.

[RumHam]

Speaking of history, I hope some idea is given how long maesters have been around in Westeros. It has always been my impression that they have been around for thousands of years, but I have had a difficult time finding a book attributed to a maester that dates prior to the Targaryen era.

I'm sure their order is very old, but according to Tyrion they only supplanted the Alchemists in "recent centuries."

[Lord Varys]

If I remember a comment from Ran some time ago correctly, then the origins of the Citadel will be discussed. Although I'm not sure that we'll get precise dates on when exactly it was founded.

But my guess is that the Citadel should be older than the Starry Sept/the arrival of the Andals in Oldtown, since I'm not sure that the High Septon would have wanted to coexist in a city of 'science'. That could suggest that the roots of the Citadel go back into First Men era, but that does not need to be the case.

[Ran]

I think the word "guess" means something different than the way you're using it.

[Lord Varys]

I guessed as much at one point. It is difficult to imagine that the Citadel could have developed as an independent body in a Faith-dominated Oldtown.

Oldtown must really have been a very interesting place before the Conquest, with faith and reason vying for influence in the same city. Were they at odds most of the time? Or are they even sort of allied in some things? We learn that the septons are in charge of the books in various castles, and there are hints that the High Sparrow's religious views are somewhat more archaic (the wooden idols) than the sort of 'enlightened monotheism' Catelyn clings to. This could mean that the established Faith was much more rational than the school of thought the new High Septon represents.

But I'm shutting up.

[Bael's Bastard]

I think the Citadel are more likely to be a response to the Andals and their religion than something than predates them. I would be surprised if the maesters went back that far. I am already skeptical that they go back very far before the Targaryen era.

[The Idle Raven]

Redfort, Dreadfort. Vale Bolton Conspiracy is go. Red kings, Royce Bolton, Domeric warding in the Vale. Can't think of anything else, but perhaps Bolton had Vale allies, and instigated the R*pe of the Three Sisters. After all, we have the Pink Pavilion made of Sistermen, which is most probably Bolton related.

I christen this conspiracy "The Great Flayed Vale Conspiracy". May the seven bless it and all who sail in it and may it drive the members of this forum mad with incessant argument and counter argument!!!

[The Idle Raven]

Agreed. I have a bachelors degree in classical archaeology and took a college course on prehistoric Europe and found it interesting that many of the battles and 'wars' were with small bands around 8v8 or 15v15 but then usually the contest was settled with single combat. So a King back then could have just been the baddest mofo in a clan with the ability to win single combat quarrels. As mentioned above, there are no known remains of a Glover stone castle or foundation, so the Glover Kings didn't have incredible resources.

Although, many of the high numbers given for armies in past conflicts do suggest large populations and resources, or they could be exaggerated as numbers often are in ancient or prehistoric histories.

I agree. Anyone who has read Herodotus will know about his exaggerations, claiming the the Persian army led by Xerxes against the Greeks in the early 5th century BC was 1 million strong. Equally, those familiar with the semi-legendary histories of Ireland prior to the arrival of Christian missionaries will know that much of it is open to endless debate and argument with little chance of consensus or resolution being reached.

'Armies' in western Europe in the period following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire could range from short term larger forces put together by say, the Lombards or Franks or smaller semi-tribal forces of the Picts, Gepids or Geats. Our knowledge of them, their leaders, motivation and quite often their Kings as well are incomplete and open to further argument.

My feeling is that the book that we are all craving to read, me as much as anyone else, will answer many questions, but at the same time, as this thread proves, open up many, many others!! Sufficient to keep us all coming up with fresh theories and revive old ones until we get our eager little hands on new printed copies of TWOW.