Jump to content
Lord Varys

FIRE AND BLOOD Volume 1

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Promo video:

 

New blurb from UK publisher:

https://www.waterstones.com/book/fire-and-blood/george-r-r-martin/doug-wheatley/9780008307738

300 years before A Game of Thrones, dragons ruled Westeros

From the masterly imagination behind A Game of Thrones - one of the greatest fantasy epics of all time and an unmissable HBO hit series - comes a definitive history of Westeros’s past as told by Archmaester Gyldayn.

Unravelling events that led to A Song of Ice and Fire, Fire and Blood is the first volume of the definitive two-part history of the Targaryens in Westeros. Revealing long-buried secrets and untold lasting enmity, it sets the scene for the next heart-stopping title in the series, The Winds of Winter.

300 years before the events of A Song of Ice and Fire, long before the schism that set the houses of Westeros at each other’s throats, one house ruled supreme and indomitable. House Targaryen, the house of the last remaining dragonlords.

After surviving the Doom of Valyria the Targaryen’s established themselves on Dragonstone. This volume traces their legendary lineage from Aegon the Conqueror to the bloody Dance of Dragons; a civil war that pitted Aegon II and his half-sister Rhaenyra in a bitter conflict for the throne of their father, nearly wiping out the Targaryen dynasty forever.

What really happened during the Dance of the Dragons? Why did it become so deadly to visit Valyria after the Doom? What is the origin of Daenerys’s three dragon eggs? These are but a few of the questions answered in this essential chronicle, as related by a learned maester of the Citadel.

With all the scope and grandeur of Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Fire and Blood is the ultimate guide to Westeros’s past. Featuring more than eighty all-new black-and-white illustrations by artist Doug Wheatley this is an essential volume for any Game of Thrones fan’s library. For the first time the full tapestry of Targaryen history is revealed.

Edited by Jussi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When was slavery outlawed in the Seven Kingdoms- IOW, was Aegon also a Breaker of Chains or just a Maker of Thrones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hiemal said:

When was slavery outlawed in the Seven Kingdoms- IOW, was Aegon also a Breaker of Chains or just a Maker of Thrones?

Since time immemorial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I just reapplied today, when I was seeing if I can preorder this book yet...

...

It's kind of a downer...

but...

There has been one novel in the aSoIaF series released in the past 13 years. It goes to 2 if you include this one as a prequel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Yeah, the UK covers for both this and TWOIAF kind of suck, IMO. The US ones are much better.

My only concern with the US cover is that it depicts the Targaryen dragon on a white background instead of a black background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Revised family tree has been released!

https://78.media.tumblr.com/11f9bef85c324fecfd8a516cce002a34/tumblr_pc55dgnm3t1u48o2uo1_1280.jpg

Changes:

1. Prince Aeryn has been replaced with a Princess Daenerys

2. The children who died young are bunched together

3. Alyssa is now younger than Baelon (#5 instead of #2), Daella is now younger than before (#8 instead of #5), Maegelle switched places with Vaegon, and Saera switched places with Viserra

4. Rogar is canon

Edited by The Grey Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Revised family tree has been released!

https://78.media.tumblr.com/11f9bef85c324fecfd8a516cce002a34/tumblr_pc55dgnm3t1u48o2uo1_1280.jpg

Changes:

1. Prince Aeryn has been replaced with a Princess Daenerys

2. The children who died young are bunched together

3. Alyssa is now younger than Baelon (#5 instead of #2), Daella is now younger than before (#8 instead of #5), Maegelle switched places with Vaegon, and Saera switched places with Viserra

4. Rogar is canon

I was *just* reading that elsewhere and came here to see if there was discussion yet. 

Still taking it in and pulling out books, so not much else from me at the moment... besides lots of “why’s” buzzing around in my head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

I was *just* reading that elsewhere and came here to see if there was discussion yet. 

Still taking it in and pulling out books, so not much else from me at the moment... besides lots of “why’s” buzzing around in my head. 

Alyssa being younger than Baelon makes sense. After all, if she was older why wasn't she married to Aemon?

As for Aeryn and Daenerys I have no clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Changes:

5. Aegon I didn't marry Rhaenys. (UpdateConfirmed as an error)

6. Daemon's daughter Rhaena didn't marry Garmund Hightower. 

7. Rhaenyra's monster baby Visenya is now included in the family tree. 

8. Viserys II is not marked as King.

As for cases 6 and 8, seems like the family tree represents the status by the end of the Regency of Aegon III. So I guess Rhaena and Garmund Hightower got married after 136 AC.

Edited by zionius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Can't say anything much about this at this time, but will say that George had some new ideas for some of the names and the stories of the children who died young, and corrected some issues that came out of his original birth order (we actually got the names of all the kids quite late in the production of TWoIaF -- literally a month before we had to finalize the book -- so there was not much time to interrogate it). However, the stories of those who live to adulthood, as published in TWoIaF, do remain the same (just, of course, much more detailed).

We're seeing if we can get TWoIaF's family tree updated accordingly, to make sure it stays in line.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Dead headofMaelysKinslayer said:

Confirmed once more: Aenys's father is a singer, not Aegon I. 

No. Just an error which I've pointed out (but they are still in San Diego so not sure when they will be able to fix it). George does not draw the tree himself. The tree he has done himself in the past correctly listed Rhaenys as Aegon's wife and Aenys their offspring.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ran said:

No. Just an error which I've pointed out (but they are still in San Diego so not sure when they will be able to fix it). George does not draw the tree himself. The tree he has done himself in the past correctly listed Rhaenys as Aegon's wife and Aenys their offspring.

Just notice two errors from TWOIAF tree still persist in this new tree: 

Laenor should be younger than Laena, Daenaera Velaryon misspelled as Valeryon, 

Edited by zionius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they make the family tree reflect the status at the end of the Regency then Aegon the Unworthy and the Dragonknight should be there, as well, unless George changed their birth dates.

6 hours ago, zionius said:

As for cases 6 and 8, seems like the family tree represents the status by the end of the Regency of Aegon III. So I guess Rhaena and Garmund Hightower got married after 136 AC.

.That sounds likely.

2 hours ago, Dead headofMaelysKinslayer said:

Confirmed once more: Aenys's father is a singer, not Aegon I. 

If that were so, we would have lines in there marking bastardy, but that isn't the case. Not to mention that we then, most likely, would also get Ser Harwin Strong in there as the true father of Rhaenyra's sons - which isn't the case.

For completeness sake it is also odd that the first child of Viserys I and Aemma - the son before Rhaenyra - isn't name yet. As per TRP they had a son that died in the cradle, did they not? I'm not with my books right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind there are also space limitations. That is an extremely crowded page as is given the design decisions. I expect some things were left off to be picked up in F&B v2 when they are more pertinent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ran said:

Bear in mind there are also space limitations. That is an extremely crowded page as is given the design decisions. I expect some things were left off to be picked up in F&B v2 when they are more pertinent. 

Well, I've no idea how and where the thing should fit in the book, of course, but considering that the TWoIaF family tree did cover the entire Targaryen family tree, I daresay about half the people to fit gives you more leeway to add more, even if the format of the book is much smaller.

The known children of Aegon III and Viserys II provide the ideal end for a family tree in FaB I, giving us both closure and some sneak peak 'into the future' while Laena-Daemon-Rhaenyra could also serve as 'founding fathers' for the family tree of FaB II, especially if the sons of Daeron II actually do end up intermarrying, at least in part, with Baela and Rhaena's descendants.

And thinking about that:

For a later edition of TWoIaF you could actually suggest the idea to make the Targaryen family tree two double pages - with the first double page covering the Targaryens up to the Dance (basically the new family tree for FaB I), and the second double pages the generations from the Dance to the present.

That way one could also include the Baratheon and Velaryon cadet branches in a more complete manner. On the one hand, those family trees seem to be treated as easter eggs and fan service, but my approach to such things usually is that you can use them as a correct and complete reference. And for that it should be as complete and correct as possible.

I mean, Princess Rhaenys and Corlys Velaryon are actually more closely related on the Velaryon side side of the family (with their Velaryon (great-)grandparents Alyssa and Daemon Velaryon being siblings) than the Targaryen side (if the only known Targaryen ancestor Corlys has is the Targaryen mother of Valaena Velaryon) - something that could be depicted very effectively if we had an interconnected Targaryen-Velaryon-Baratheon family tree.

By the way:

If there are any Starks mentioned in FaB I in addition to those we already know one should also seriously consider the possibility to get George to make a more complete Stark family tree, adding the generations between King Torrhen Stark and Cregan Stark. That would also fit in nicely in a new edition of TWoIaF. And it wouldn't be that many generations. Just about ninety years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If F&BV1 covers until year 136, does it mean, that there will also be more information about Rogare family (Larra and Viserys II married in 134)? Will there be information about who was Larra's mother? Or will the book will be focused only on Targaryens and no one else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't just add two pages to a book. Books are made of spreads of four pages. TWoIaF is made of 85 spreads, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×