Starks and blood sacrifices to the Others

[Maester of Valyria]

I guess every King in Winterfell had to do a sacrifice. Perhaps it was not an open practice even before the Targaryen conquest. Not a secret, but not a public event either. And there are records about human sacrifices in the North in the past, but no recordings of when it ended.

While this is indeed possible, I have to say I find the idea very unlikely. If it was such an important practice, surely the Starks would have ensured that everyone who was anyone knew about it? In addition, the liklihood of the Stark family dying out at some point over thousands of years would be great enough to throw any deal of this sort into jeopardy before it even began.

As for your point about blood sacrifices:

Being an Account of the History of White Harbor from Its Earliest Days, which recounts the practice of blood sacrifice to the old gods. Such sacrifices persisted as recently as five centuries ago, according to accounts from Maester Yorrick's predecessors at White Harbor.

 

[Dragonsmurf]

While this is indeed possible, I have to say I find the idea very unlikely. If it was such an important practice, surely the Starks would have ensured that everyone who was anyone knew about it? In addition, the liklihood of the Stark family dying out at some point over thousands of years would be great enough to throw any deal of this sort into jeopardy before it even began.

As for your point about blood sacrifices:

Being an Account of the History of White Harbor from Its Earliest Days, which recounts the practice of blood sacrifice to the old gods. Such sacrifices persisted as recently as five centuries ago, according to accounts from Maester Yorrick's predecessors at White Harbor.

 

Isn't kinslaying on of the worst sins of all according to their religion? Perhaps that's a reason to not flash it around.

[thor2006]

Isn't kinslaying on of the worst sins of all according to their religion? Perhaps that's a reason to not flash it around.

Why kill a kin in a sacrifice, when you can get a criminal, a stranger or a smallfolk to sacrifice instead?

[Maester of Valyria]

Isn't kinslaying on of the worst sins of all according to their religion? Perhaps that's a reason to not flash it around.

While kinslayingis regarded as the most heinous of crimes, we don't know what happens if the person is killed for the purpose of a holy sacrifice, and there is also no evidence that it had to be a Stark who did the throat-slitting. As thor2006 pointed out, you can also sacrifice criminals and other non-nobles to the trees, perhaps to keep the Others happy in the meantime.

[Dragonsmurf]

Part of the theory is that it was Starks that had to be sacrificed, blood relatives of Bran the builder. He offered his own family to save humankind. As for the Starks being the ones who did the throat-slitting, the Starks does not have executioners. The one who says the sentence should swing the sword and so on...

[Maester of Valyria]

Part of the theory is that it was Starks that had to be sacrificed, blood relatives of Bran the builder. He offered his own family to save humankind. As for the Starks being the ones who did the throat-slitting, the Starks does not have executioners. The one who says the sentence should swing the sword and so on...

I know that Starks did need to be sacrificed every generation or so, but to maybe build up some credit or please the Others even more they may have sacrificed criminals in the meantime? As for the Starks not having executioners, IIRC that was Eddard's personal philosophy, possible instilled in him by Jon Arryn and not Rickard, and not necessarily adhered to by all the Starks. I could be wrong on that one; it's been a while since I read the books properly.