There's Power in King's Blood

[John Suburbs]

I'm wondering if Qyburn will really go and burn Tommen's body. Cersei gave him a pretty direct order to just go and do it, so it doesn't appear that she is all that interested in witnessing it herself.

Mayhaps this will put Tommen in position to become the valonquar after all? Wrapping his hands around her pale white throat that way wights like to do it? 

[CrypticWeirwood]

I think you need real King's blood. Tommen probably wouldn't count.

[Lord Lannister]

4 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

I think you need real King's blood. Tommen probably wouldn't count.

It seems a dubious requirement. Stannis counted despite the fact he technically hasn't ruled anything beyond a few small chunks of the Seven Kingdoms. Robert's bastards count somehow even though his lineage only ruled for a single generation. Mance's child counted even though Mance wasn't royalty and was chosen to be king beyond the wall. Aemon passed on ruling yet still counted long after his relatives dynasty was overthrown. If Robert can conquer his throne, if Stannis can just declare he rules, if Mance can be chosen to rule, if Aemon can decline to rule, I think Tommen, who actually does rule, would satisfy the requirement of being a king better than those who have already been stated to meet it.

[Chib]

3 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

It seems a dubious requirement. Stannis counted despite the fact he technically hasn't ruled anything beyond a few small chunks of the Seven Kingdoms. Robert's bastards count somehow even though his lineage only ruled for a single generation. Mance's child counted even though Mance wasn't royalty and was chosen to be king beyond the wall. Aemon passed on ruling yet still counted long after his relatives dynasty was overthrown. If Robert can conquer his throne, if Stannis can just declare he rules, if Mance can be chosen to rule, if Aemon can decline to rule, I think Tommen, who actually does rule, would satisfy the requirement of being a king better than those who have already been stated to meet it.

 

I think King's blood means blood of powerful ruler or powerful individuals...

[Chib]

3 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

It seems a dubious requirement. Stannis counted despite the fact he technically hasn't ruled anything beyond a few small chunks of the Seven Kingdoms. Robert's bastards count somehow even though his lineage only ruled for a single generation. Mance's child counted even though Mance wasn't royalty and was chosen to be king beyond the wall. Aemon passed on ruling yet still counted long after his relatives dynasty was overthrown. If Robert can conquer his throne, if Stannis can just declare he rules, if Mance can be chosen to rule, if Aemon can decline to rule, I think Tommen, who actually does rule, would satisfy the requirement of being a king better than those who have already been stated to meet it.

 

I think King's blood means blood of powerful ruler or powerful individuals...

[Lord Lannister]

Just now, Chib said:

I think King's blood means blood of powerful ruler or powerful individuals...

But if the requirement was centered around a person and the power they wield and not their lineage, why is king's blood hereditary?

[JonSnow4President]

I think it purely refers to actual sacrifice.  For a king, this requires the sacrifice of your own kin (or yourself).  For loyal men, this could be a leader/great man in their eyes whose loss would be a dear cost.  Personally, I suspect Salador's telling of Azor Ahai and Nissa Nissa is closer to the mark than Mel. 

[Chib]

Just now, Lord Lannister said:

But if the requirement was centered around a person and the power they wield and not their lineage, why is king's blood hereditary?

 

Maybe some believe that there's some magic in the blood of the descendants of those wield power?

[Darkstream]

I'm a little confused with the responses here. What does King's blood have to do with it?  Isn't the op asking if Qyburn will resurrect Tommen, as he did with Gregor, instead of burning his body as per Cercei's instructions?  

If so, the issue I would find with that, is that the Mountain was not actually dead. He was still alive when Qyburn started his experiments on him. I think it's safe to assume Tommen is dead dead. Unless resurrection is the new sweeping fad to take over kinslaying in Weisseros, I don't think that it is very likely.

ETA: OK, I just noticed the title of the thread, so I guess I was wrong, sorta, I guess. Although, the op still seems to be eluding to my interpretation. Anyway, are you all assuming that Qyburn is practicing the arts of the red priests now? Plus, wouldn't Tommen need to be alive still, for Qyburn to use him as a blood sacrifice? I'm still confused. Someone please explain this thread to me.

[House_Tony_Stark]

11 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

But if the requirement was centered around a person and the power they wield and not their lineage, why is king's blood hereditary?

I think it has more to do with the fact that the heirs of kings are usually great people because their traits and genetics get are passed onto their children. There with nothing special about Tommen, he is so gullible it would not surprise me if he got robbed while playing Pokemon go.

[illinifan]

First, it is only religion of the Red God that suggests there is power in King's blood.  Qyburn might be unaware of the spells that the Red Faith uses with king's blood.

Second, we do not know if Melisandre's spells actually worked or why they worked.  It could be R'hllor working his will to get the pieces in place for the final battle.

[Kytheros]

14 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

But if the requirement was centered around a person and the power they wield and not their lineage, why is king's blood hereditary?

 

2 hours ago, House_Tony_Stark said:

I think it has more to do with the fact that the heirs of kings are usually great people because their traits and genetics get are passed onto their children. There with nothing special about Tommen, he is so gullible it would not surprise me if he got robbed while playing Pokemon go.

I kind of like the explanation that David Weber used for a similar concept in his Norfressa sequence, although his version applied somewhat more broadly.

" the more intelligent a creature, the greater its energy. That's why the most powerful blood rituals use people, not animals. And, by the same token, a younger person has more energy than someone who's old and closer to death ... Some people, well, they 'resonate' with the life force around them. ... You see, when someone follows another person, then a tiny bit of his energy is tied up with that person's. It's . . .  well, it's like a burning glass. Whenever you give allegiance to someone, that person is a focus for you, almost a part of you, and if you give allegiance willingly—because you trust or love them, not just because you must—the bond is stronger. ... Well, when you're a ruler—or a ruler's heir—you're the focus of a great many people's energy. "

- Oath of Swords, by David Weber

 

It provides a viable explanation for the "mystique" of kingsblood (and such phenomena) in lieu of a canon explanation, or more canon information that would serve to contradict it.

Plus, there's almost certainly some sort of magical bloodlines stuff going on as well.

[MoreOrLess]

16 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

It seems a dubious requirement. Stannis counted despite the fact he technically hasn't ruled anything beyond a few small chunks of the Seven Kingdoms. Robert's bastards count somehow even though his lineage only ruled for a single generation. Mance's child counted even though Mance wasn't royalty and was chosen to be king beyond the wall. Aemon passed on ruling yet still counted long after his relatives dynasty was overthrown. If Robert can conquer his throne, if Stannis can just declare he rules, if Mance can be chosen to rule, if Aemon can decline to rule, I think Tommen, who actually does rule, would satisfy the requirement of being a king better than those who have already been stated to meet it.

One the show thus far you could I spose argue its really Targaryen blood that the Baratheon's have by relation.

[Lrd Commander Midnight]

I think kings blood works like this: If u are the son or daughter of a king, bastard or not, u have magic running through ur veins(hereditary). If u usurp a king, and others following you accept u as their king u then have magic running through ur veins. The power of the people waiting on u, looking up to u, following u, loving u, dieing for u, passionately hateing u, that admiration puffs the king/queen up so to speak. Gives them ego. The giving of that trust, power and obedience greatly increases the kings confidence and thus power. That I think is were the power comes from. The ability to choose life or death for someone, to rip out her or his tounge, the giving away others property, land, castles, that power leads to a more personal power that grows from others giving their trust and life so to speak in said king/queen.

 

I recall King Stannis asking Melisdre to make him another "son." Melisandre tells him, "your fire burns to low my king," meaning that for whatever reason after the blackwater defeat, King Stannis had a major blow to his ego which had a negative effect on Stannis magic making potential.

 

22 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

I think you need real King's blood. Tommen probably wouldn't count.

Of course Tommen counts. He was crowned King, and named protector of the relm.

 

I agree with the below statement except for the powerfull individual. You have to be powerfull or have a lot of power/authority to even have a chance at becoming a ruler/king. That power you aquire before reaching that top rung charges something within them and finally is released with that title of king. It's the authority and the fact your able to do whatever you ppossibly like, that's the secret ingredient that transforms the blood to do many other things than just pump through your veins(oxygen to ur cells for the layperson).

18 hours ago, Chib said:

I think Kings blood means blood of powerfull ruler or powerfull individual

[John Suburbs]

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2016 at 4:27 AM, Darkstream said:

I'm a little confused with the responses here. What does King's blood have to do with it?  Isn't the op asking if Qyburn will resurrect Tommen, as he did with Gregor, instead of burning his body as per Cercei's instructions?  

If so, the issue I would find with that, is that the Mountain was not actually dead. He was still alive when Qyburn started his experiments on him. I think it's safe to assume Tommen is dead dead. Unless resurrection is the new sweeping fad to take over kinslaying in Weisseros, I don't think that it is very likely.

ETA: OK, I just noticed the title of the thread, so I guess I was wrong, sorta, I guess. Although, the op still seems to be eluding to my interpretation. Anyway, are you all assuming that Qyburn is practicing the arts of the red priests now? Plus, wouldn't Tommen need to be alive still, for Qyburn to use him as a blood sacrifice? I'm still confused. Someone please explain this thread to me.

I was just trying to get some perspective about next season. Cersei simply told Quyburn to burn the body, as in, immediately. She didn't tell him to prepare the body and build a pyre somewhere and then burn him upon her further command; she just said, burn him. So Quyburn could simply return to the queen the next day and say "it's done, I burned him last night." All the while he has the body down in his dungeon lab doing who knows what with it, which could conceivably bring an undead Tommen back next season (or later) for him to be the valonquar.

 

On ‎7‎/‎13‎/‎2016 at 2:55 PM, illinifan said:

First, it is only religion of the Red God that suggests there is power in King's blood.  Qyburn might be unaware of the spells that the Red Faith uses with king's blood.

Second, we do not know if Melisandre's spells actually worked or why they worked.  It could be R'hllor working his will to get the pieces in place for the final battle.

I'm not sure if this is true. Mel is the only one who prefers king's blood for her spells, but I believe in the books Dany makes a reference to the power of Drogo's blood. It's all blood magic, after all, so the quality of the blood you use should have some affect on the spell, and the blood of kings would be pretty rare and highly prized.

But regardless of the blood, is it possible that since Cersei gave no expressed order that she should witness the burning, would Quyburn give up a nice young cadaver like Tommen? After all, if he were to walk into the throne room at some point, wouldn't he still be king (a la Jon at the wall) while remaining under Q's complete control?

[illinifan]

1 minute ago, John Suburbs said:

I'm not sure if this is true. Mel is the only one who prefers king's blood for her spells, but I believe in the books Dany makes a reference to the power of Drogo's blood. It's all blood magic, after all, so the quality of the blood you use should have some affect on the spell, and the blood of kings would be pretty rare and highly prized.

But regardless of the blood, is it possible that since Cersei gave no expressed order that she should witness the burning, would Quyburn give up a nice young cadaver like Tommen? After all, if he were to walk into the throne room at some point, wouldn't he still be king (a la Jon at the wall) while remaining under Q's complete control?

It is rare and prized by Melisandre for her spells.  Mel is the only one who discusses the use of king's blood and we aren't even sure that it works.  For instance, burning Shireen ended up leading to Stannis' defeat.  Mel has powers but she has also been shown to be clueless and misread obvious cues.  My absolute favorite one is of her POV chapter where she keeps missing the obvious Jon Snow reference.

[Darkstream]

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I was just trying to get some perspective about next season. Cersei simply told Quyburn to burn the body, as in, immediately. She didn't tell him to prepare the body and build a pyre somewhere and then burn him upon her further command; she just said, burn him. So Quyburn could simply return to the queen the next day and say "it's done, I burned him last night." All the while he has the body down in his dungeon lab doing who knows what with it, which could conceivably bring an undead Tommen back next season (or later) for him to be the valonquar.

Yeah, that is what I thought you meant, it was more the responses that were confusing me, not your op. Anyway, as I alluded to in my first post, Qyburn doesn't posses the ability to raise the dead. He was using scientific methods to keep Gregor alive, as opposed to resurrecting him. I think it's safe to assume that Tommen is dead, and not just severely injured from his fall, so I don't see this being a possibility. It's a fun thought though, it would have been interesting to see an un-dead Tommen confronting Cercei, instead of just the meek and malleable puppet who was afraid to stand up to her. I would have loved to see an un-dead Tommen grabbing Cercei by the throat and start stuffing beats in her mouth.

[John Suburbs]

On ‎7‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 1:30 AM, Darkstream said:

Yeah, that is what I thought you meant, it was more the responses that were confusing me, not your op. Anyway, as I alluded to in my first post, Qyburn doesn't posses the ability to raise the dead. He was using scientific methods to keep Gregor alive, as opposed to resurrecting him. I think it's safe to assume that Tommen is dead, and not just severely injured from his fall, so I don't see this being a possibility. It's a fun thought though, it would have been interesting to see an un-dead Tommen confronting Cercei, instead of just the meek and malleable puppet who was afraid to stand up to her. I would have loved to see an un-dead Tommen grabbing Cercei by the throat and start stuffing beats in her mouth.

I'm not so sure about your take on Gregor. The eyes looking through the helm look awfully dead to me. The skin is all blue and nasty. Q was relieved of his chain not just for performing autopsies but killing people and trying to bring them back. Maybe he's using pure science and not magic, but it looks to me like G is the walking dead.

[adamr]

On 13.07.2016 at 9:09 AM, Lord Lannister said:

It seems a dubious requirement. Stannis counted despite the fact he technically hasn't ruled anything beyond a few small chunks of the Seven Kingdoms. Robert's bastards count somehow even though his lineage only ruled for a single generation. Mance's child counted even though Mance wasn't royalty and was chosen to be king beyond the wall. Aemon passed on ruling yet still counted long after his relatives dynasty was overthrown. If Robert can conquer his throne, if Stannis can just declare he rules, if Mance can be chosen to rule, if Aemon can decline to rule, I think Tommen, who actually does rule, would satisfy the requirement of being a king better than those who have already been stated to meet it.

Tommen was named a king by treachery. Stannis was the rightful heir, and Robert won his throne by conquest. Mance was chosen to be a leader by his people, just like Robb.

[Lord Lannister]

1 hour ago, adamr said:

Tommen was named a king by treachery. Stannis was the rightful heir, and Robert won his throne by conquest. Mance was chosen to be a leader by his people, just like Robb.

So the blood can... distinguish actions and assign morality to them and be different?