Time comparison (Mostly for the North) Updated.

[Corvo the Crow]

@AlaskanSandman

I see you have included Wolf's Den

We have roughly a thousand years of known rule for it starting with the 500 years of Greystark. And after a long break, 900 years with Manderly rule.

If Bartimus is telling the history chronologically, then Greystarks ruled it before the Rape of the Sisters which occured two thousand years ago. Their rule ended when they rebelled together with Boltons, so Boltons have already bended the knee by then.

 

Also on Bael, we know songs are "updated", winged knight is one such example. So even if he fought against a King Stark, it would have been updated to lord in the last 300 years. 

Bolton in the story may also be updated to his vassal rather than a rival king... But! Since this was after the Andal Invasion, he must have been his vassal indeed and rebelled. He may or may not have skinned him. A "bard's truth is different" and since Boltons were known for skinning people, lord in the story is told to have skinned him, though he may not have done this.

Theon thinks Boltons bent their knee to Starks a thousand years ago and agreed to stopped flaying. This thousand may or may not be Grrm being figurative. If they indeed stopped flaying, then this knee bending must be after a rebellion as practice persisted long after AI; Rape of the Sisters.

There is also a Harlon Stark who have defeated Boltons in their rebellion hundreds of years ago, so Bael may also have lived around this time with Harlon being his "son"s son. We know "a thousand" is many times just some hundreds rounded up to a thousand just likr Manderly's 600 years BC is rounded to thousand in Davos' chapter in WH.

 

Personally I think Boltons only rebelled two times, at most three as what is the point of allowing them to stay powerful or even live if they are a constant nuisance?

 

So, I think 2 rebellions, one with Greystarks before the rape and one during Harlon's time. Though if Bartimus' chronology is incorrect, and Harlon extinguished the greys, there's more than 300 years of rule and Manderlys may have received it at the end of that succession of houses around 600BC,  it may fit. Barely.

[AlaskanSandman]

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

@AlaskanSandman

I see you have included Wolf's Den

We have roughly a thousand years of known rule for it starting with the 500 years of Greystark. And after a long break, 900 years with Manderly rule.

If Bartimus is telling the history chronologically, then Greystarks ruled it before the Rape of the Sisters which occured two thousand years ago. Their rule ended when they rebelled together with Boltons, so Boltons have already bended the knee by then.

 

Also on Bael, we know songs are "updated", winged knight is one such example. So even if he fought against a King Stark, it would have been updated to lord in the last 300 years. 

Bolton in the story may also be updated to his vassal rather than a rival king... But! Since this was after the Andal Invasion, he must have been his vassal indeed and rebelled. He may or may not have skinned him. A "bard's truth is different" and since Boltons were known for skinning people, lord in the story is told to have skinned him, though he may not have done this.

Theon thinks Boltons bent their knee to Starks a thousand years ago and agreed to stopped flaying. This thousand may or may not be Grrm being figurative. If they indeed stopped flaying, then this knee bending must be after a rebellion as practice persisted long after AI; Rape of the Sisters.

There is also a Harlon Stark who have defeated Boltons in their rebellion hundreds of years ago, so Bael may also have lived around this time with Harlon being his "son"s son. We know "a thousand" is many times just some hundreds rounded up to a thousand just likr Manderly's 600 years BC is rounded to thousand in Davos' chapter in WH.

 

Personally I think Boltons only rebelled two times, at most three as what is the point of allowing them to stay powerful or even live if they are a constant nuisance?

 

So, I think 2 rebellions, one with Greystarks before the rape and one during Harlon's time. Though if Bartimus' chronology is incorrect, and Harlon extinguished the greys, there's more than 300 years of rule and Manderlys may have received it at the end of that succession of houses around 600BC,  it may fit. Barely.

Indeed, some of that information was just too much to incorporate and easier to let people incorporate them in, based on which Maesters work they find more plausible. I tend to lean more towards Maester Denestan myself (No offense Yandel). 

I agree with most everything you said so i don't really have much to add hahaha Bael i think was likely real and happened before the Targaryen's. Most likely around Brandon the Burner and Harlon Stark roughly around 300Bc. The Bolton's may well have flayed that Stark though as Harlon had to deal with the Bolton's, who rightfully would rebel against the Starks who would now be wildling by blood and not who they knelt too. Theon i think is referring to this time roughly or around abouts. The Bolton's imo likely officially bent the knee sometime just before 1700Bc when the Inner Walls of Winterfell were built. Bolton's likely the people who smashed the gate that it replaced when the Starks were still a rising power. 

The Wolf's Den i think was built sometime shortly before 1700Bc also, giving the 1000 year span needed for Wolf's Den history before passing to Manderly's and making dates there work. Plus also leaves room for Andals to have roughly took 1000 years to reach the Iron Isles.

 

Mixing in the Iron born and the Reach into this.

 

Wolfs Den created by King Jon Stark 2000Bc?

       Son King Rickard Stark defeats Marsh kings. 

Last Red king Rogar the Huntsman bends knee as Andals set sail (To Theon or possibly his father?) 
King Theon Stark vs Argos Seven Star & Harrag Hoare and his son Ravos the Raper. 18-1700Bc?

(Andals have reached the Vale and RiverLands- Start of House Justman and 300 years about of rule.)

*Next three happen all within same century and sack Old Town

King Samwell Dayne

King Qhored Hoare vs House Justman, ends their line. Starting rule of House Teague sometime after. 1400bc? 

King Gyles Gardener I  sells 3/4 population into slavery (Note slavery still practiced in Westeros, and Old Town not part of Reach yet)                                                             Scouring of Lorath should be happening around this time too.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

King Garland II Gardener weds daughter of Lymond Hightower winning Old Town into Reach. Lymond vs King Theon III Grey Joy. (1300Bc?)

               (Lymond revives slavery long enough to put Iron born to rebuilding Old Town, Meaning slavery has ended on main land Westeros)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                                                           Erik V Harlaw

Gareth II Gardener                                                           vs           son of Erik V Harlaw, Harron Harlaw.                 

                                 (within 50 yeas later)

Gyles II Gardener                                                               vs                                             Joron I Blacktyde        

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               Last King's Moot, start of 1000 years of Grey Iron rule. Hoare rule should begin at least by 100Bc so that Hawyn, Halleck and Harren line up. Meaning Grey Iron's possibly began 1100Bc after taking the Andals almost 1000 years to reach the Iron Isles.

[AlaskanSandman]

^ The above time line leaves room for the other known event's also. Like the either 1000 years or 500 years before Andal arrival of Blackwood-Bracken usurpation. Also leaves room for the either couple hundred years war or 1000 years war between Starks and Barrow Kings. Also leaves room for House Mudd to rule for 1000 years before ending due to Andals arriving. Also for Gendal and Gorne in 2700BC.

[Corvo the Crow]

9 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

^ The above time line leaves room for the other known event's also. Like the either 1000 years or 500 years before Andal arrival of Blackwood-Bracken usurpation. Also leaves room for the either couple hundred years war or 1000 years war between Starks and Barrow Kings. Also leaves room for House Mudd to rule for 1000 years before ending due to Andals arriving. Also for Gendal and Gorne in 2700BC.

But wasn't the rape 2000 BC? Or do I misremember it?

[Bael's Bastard]

16 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well, a key difference is that Westeros has a “University” going back thousands of years. An dedicated repository of knowledge that gathered records from whatever sources were available going back pretty much to since there was writing.

And in Valyria, Rhoyne, Ghis etc there has been writing for 5000 years or more. We know the Valyrians traded with Oldtown for millenia, and similarly if they were the ones exerting pressure on the Andals, there would be a Tacitus - probably multiple Tacitus’s, who would have recorded when this was taking place. There would be records of major changes that occurred in those areas, and an institution like the Citadel would surely have been keenly interested in obtaining those records in the centuries and millenia preceding the Doom. And thereafter as well, of course.

And yet, despite its claimed continuity spanning millennia, supposedly going back to pre-Andal times, that "University" contains and maintains records with conflicting dates and accounts, perhaps even between records its own created in the first place. And despite the claimed literacy and continuity spanning millennia of the Andals and certain Andal regions, such as the Vale, they still have records that contain conflicting dates and accounts, either internally, or against the dates and accounts of their neighbors. 

Despite expectations that the Citadel and literate Andals and Septons should have undisputed dates for certain important events and people, we see that is very clearly not the case. Andal nobles like Catelyn Tully believe Alyssa lived 6,000 years ago, while True History says 4,000 years ago, and Denestan says 2,000. Rather than view this as a mistake or a retcon, we should accept that this is the reality in-world, and if anything, look at the reasons why there could exist such far off dates.

And if we look at real world records and histories, we see various reasons.

To give just one example, Jews/Israelites claim literacy and a chain of transmission of their histories and traditions going back 3,500 years, including their central religious text(s). Archaeological proof of that literacy goes back at least 3,000 years. Because of their continuous chain of transmission down to today, we are in possession of compilations spanning thousands of years of their history, where for great contemporary kingdoms and empires like the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians, we have sometimes extensive but fragmentary records, not necessarily centuries or millennia spanning histories. 

Yet, even with a continuous chain of transmission down to today, periods of war with and persecution against Jews/Israelites by Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, etc. has contributed to gaps of uncertainty about certain dates, particularly when attempting to synchronize with the sometimes extensive but fragmentary records of those kingdoms/empires. The two centuries of the Persian period prior to Hellenistic persecutions are a primary example. And that is a people with a continuous history and chain of transmission over 3,000 years that is still the keeper of its own history.

Sometimes synchronizations can be made, or attempted, because of the appearance of the same person or people across the records of multiple of these kingdoms/empires which show when certain people or periods were contemporary, or had some overlap. But it isn't always so easy. Even well preserved records aren't necessarily historical, or helpful for precise dating, let alone records that have been destroyed by war, or time, or even other rulers of that same people/culture.

There are high, low, middle, majority, minority, etc. chronologies on a number of pre-common era events, peoples, and periods, based on any number of different things, and that was even before sciences like carbon dating. Records that may or may not have recorded observance of an eclipse from a particular spot, and calculations of the years that such an eclipse would have been observable from that spot, and other things, can create very small or very large gaps between possible dates even internally, let alone when trying to synchronize something or someone from one people/culture with something or someone from another.

Granted, in most cases we are talking about tens of years or centuries rather than millennia, but we also don't have dynasties that span millennia. And whether in the real world or fiction, we shouldn't assume that continuity of a culture, or even a dynasty, means continuity of all knowledge or records that might have once existed at one point. In the real world and in fiction, the continuation of a culture or a dynasty does not negate the effects time, climate, war, whether internal or external, and other factors can have on knowledge, and uncertainty over that knowledge that is preserved, whether complete or in fragments.

There are just so many ways that certainty about dates and people can be lost or become distorted. Yes, it is perhaps on a larger scale than in our world, but so are the lengths of dynasties and seasons. The seasons, war, etc., not to mention conflicting accounts between neighboring kingdoms or houses, or cultures, are all reasonable explanations for why there are such differences in datings.

[AlaskanSandman]

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

But wasn't the rape 2000 BC? Or do I misremember it?

I don't recall a start date, just that it lasted roughly 1000 years and took place between Starks and Arryns. Fm Arryns tied to Winged Knight or Andal Arryns tied to the Falcon knight? The discrepancy between the two Artys's and the odd placement of Alyssa before Artys in the time line i think is hinting at this. Which makes me think of House Lannister being FM, but mostly Andal now, so perhaps something like that?

[Ran]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

And yet, despite its claimed continuity spanning millennia, supposedly going back to pre-Andal times, that "University" contains and maintains records with conflicting dates and accounts, perhaps even between records its own created in the first place. And despite the claimed literacy and continuity spanning millennia of the Andals and certain Andal regions, such as the Vale, they still have records that contain conflicting dates and accounts, either internally, or against the dates and accounts of their neighbors. 

Well said. This is a key point. I don't think George has a plan to "explain" all this uncertainty, it's just a facet of the world that he found convenient (re: his explanation to me why he introduced uncertainty).

[Lord Varys]

This talk about Tacitus is pretty fun. Thanks to what remains of his work we have some in-depth knowledge of the reigns of Tiberius, Claudius and Nero - but there is no Tacitus for many other, later Roman emperors, and the sources mainstream historian actually cite for certain eras of late antiquity/early medieval times are saints' lives full of magic and miracle stories. Our picture of those eras are not exactly very good or accurate.

And the idea that on a continent where war never ceased before the Conquest, where castles were stormed and razed and rebuilt, where kingdoms rose and fall any kind of clear historical continuity was kept is insane.

Parchment does rarely survive a millennium, and we are talking about multiple millennia here. Even if it was the case that continuity could somehow be maintained over 2-3 millennia, the books would have to be copied multiple times.

Perhaps we have a better chronology on Oldtown and the surrounding lands but this wouldn't help us when we are interested in the history of other regions - and it is rather interesting that we have no real canonical story or myth on the origins of Oldtown or the Hightowers.

The idea that many contemporary sources survived the many sacks and raids and burnings is just not very likely.

[AlaskanSandman]

32 minutes ago, Ran said:

Well said. This is a key point. I don't think George has a plan to "explain" all this uncertainty, it's just a facet of the world that he found convenient (re: his explanation to me why he introduced uncertainty).

So you don't think the history has any bearing on the actual plot, irrelevant of pinned time dates? 

Also seems more cumbersome to not have a worked out time line your working from (Grrm). I can understand the structure he has and his intent to mirror real history of the times, and i imagine serves as a great tool when not wanting to be so detailed and maybe wanting to hide plot material. Either way though, even if you were not trying to do this. Seems a messy way to work. Does this not just confuse GRRM him self more, just as much as us?

[AlaskanSandman]

49 minutes ago, Ran said:

Well said. This is a key point. I don't think George has a plan to "explain" all this uncertainty, it's just a facet of the world that he found convenient (re: his explanation to me why he introduced uncertainty).

To be more specific, my work here was to try to back my work else where showing any possible Valyrian activity in Westeros. In one of the comments in here above i show this time line roughly bridging to Theon Stark and to the Reach, and in it you can roughly see the end of slavery on main land westeros and it's presence up till then. Does this not have anything to do with Ghis and Valyria who would have been around back then? Is this pointless fruitless work to look into? Let alone the deeper ideas others have had long before me about the Valyrians getting their start in Westeros before going to Valyria.

[AlaskanSandman]

I find it interesting that Yandel states but doesn't cite who has lineal claims in the Reach and Westerlands to Valyria and it's rise. Along with tales of Gardener's being Targaryen kings and Serwyn serving them in their kings guard (Probably rainbow guard), and fighting dragons and giants. Serwyn being pinned to 5 specific Gardener kings too. The presence of Daeryssa and Ae phonetics in her name. Davos the Dragon Slayer, Old Crackbones tying up dragons, Galladon killing a dragon, Hightowers ending dragons etc. 

Seems a lot of work for naught 

[Free Northman Reborn]

6 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

I find it interesting that Yandel states but doesn't cite who has lineal claims in the Reach and Westerlands to Valyria and it's rise. Along with tales of Gardener's being Targaryen kings and Serwyn serving them in their kings guard (Probably rainbow guard), and fighting dragons and giants. Serwyn being pinned to 5 specific Gardener kings too. The presence of Daeryssa and Ae phonetics in her name. Davos the Dragon Slayer, Old Crackbones tying up dragons, Galladon killing a dragon, Hightowers ending dragons etc. 

Seems a lot of work for naught 

As has been pointed out before, the passage you reference does not say that. It says that that a particular history book had a number of errors in it. And the most prominent of these errors were:

1. Some details on Valyria, and

2. Certain lineal claims in the Reach.

The two issues are not linked. They are merely part of a list of issues the book allegedly got wrong, according to Yandel.

Valyria and the Reach have nothing to do with one another. They just happen to be two separate topics covered in that particular history book - along with a host of other topics that Yandel has no academic issues with, and therefore does not mention.

[AlaskanSandman]

48 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As has been pointed out before,

When? By who?

[Ran]

9 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

So you don't think the history has any bearing on the actual plot, irrelevant of pinned time dates? 

I think some things may have a bearing on the plot, but a feature George added after the third novel in the series -- the uncertainty of ancient history -- at a time where he already knew the ending of the series is not something that is in itself important, especially since he told me that he did that because of people like me who kept trying to get more precise details.  

Lots of the ancient history George generated in TWoIaF was generated because it was fun, not because it was necessary. As an example, I'd categorize the details of Yi Ti and the Dawn Empire and the oily black stone as the same thing -- fun stuff, not necessary stuff.

[Corvo the Crow]

10 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

I don't recall a start date, just that it lasted roughly 1000 years and took place between Starks and Arryns. Fm Arryns tied to Winged Knight or Andal Arryns tied to the Falcon knight? The discrepancy between the two Artys's and the odd placement of Alyssa before Artys in the time line i think is hinting at this. Which makes me think of House Lannister being FM, but mostly Andal now, so perhaps something like that?

Won't quote it as I'm on phone but Godric Borrel says to Davos it was 2000 years ago, which is not necessarily an exact 2000 but can be something close to that. He also says it lasted a thousand years but it's probably as a figure of speech, though we do know it lasted for several generations and Starks took the islands a dozen times.

 

The fact we learn about the history of the bite in several Davos chapters following each other and there's no contradiction in dates, unlike other dates and despite getting it from both of the two opposing sides should mean it's correct. 

There's also another tidbit of informarion given to us by Godric Borrel and also confirmed somewhat by Dick Crabb.

Borrrel's had "the mark" for five thousand years, which is probably when their house started as we see houses retain their features. Ser Clarence Crabb fought squishers, creatures whose description is an over exaggeration of Godric Borrell.

So if 5000 years ago(roughly that is) was when house Borrell was founded, then Andals started to arrive after that. As Theon was the first Stark king to Face Andals and he also faced Ironman and Sisterman and it took Andals a thousand years to reach II and the Worthless war to take the Sisters, these two certainly existed before Andals.

Also Wolf's Den was built before the Andals. It was taken by Sisterman reavers once, and not the "Falcons", meaning Sisterman were free then.

So; 5000 years ago Andals haven't arrived yet, this is also the time Valyria has just started to rise so it makes much sense there is nothing driving them. And 2000 years ago Kingdom of Mountain and Vale is already established with most of it's current territory and Boltons are still flayers. Sometime inbetween Andals started crossing the sea and they also take their chances with the North, Boltons bend their knee to Starks around this time likely because of  Andals. Theon repels them, fights against the Sisterman and Ironman. 

We don't know how long it took the Arryns to include the sisters after they founded their kingdom, though it was founded more than 2000 years ago but less than 5000 years ago.

AI started somewhere between these two marks.

 

Also using Alyssa Arryn to determine could mislead us; she was probably an Arryn indeed but the false 6000 years "Andal nobles" believe possibly comes from the wrong belief Andals arrived 6000 years ago. So she probably was one of the first few generations of Arryns.

[Nittanian]

19 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

But wasn't the rape 2000 BC? Or do I misremember it?

That is what Godric says.

Quote

Lord Godric began to eat his trencher, tearing it apart in his big hands. The stew had softened the stale bread. "I have no love for northmen," he announced. "The maesters say the Rape of the Three Sisters was two thousand years ago, but Sisterton has not forgotten. We were a free people before that, with our kings ruling over us. Afterward, we had to bend our knees to the Eyrie to get the northmen out. The wolf and the falcon fought over us for a thousand years, till between the two of them they had gnawed all the fat and flesh off the bones of these poor islands." (ADWD Davos I)

 

17 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Sometimes synchronizations can be made, or attempted, because of the appearance of the same person or people across the records of multiple of these kingdoms/empires which show when certain people or periods were contemporary, or had some overlap. But it isn't always so easy. Even well preserved records aren't necessarily historical, or helpful for precise dating, let alone records that have been destroyed by war, or time, or even other rulers of that same people/culture.

Granted, in most cases we are talking about tens of years or centuries rather than millennia, but we also don't have dynasties that span millennia. And whether in the real world or fiction, we shouldn't assume that continuity of a culture, or even a dynasty, means continuity of all knowledge or records that might have once existed at one point. In the real world and in fiction, the continuation of a culture or a dynasty does not negate the effects time, climate, war, whether internal or external, and other factors can have on knowledge, and uncertainty over that knowledge that is preserved, whether complete or in fragments.

There are just so many ways that certainty about dates and people can be lost or become distorted. Yes, it is perhaps on a larger scale than in our world, but so are the lengths of dynasties and seasons. The seasons, war, etc., not to mention conflicting accounts between neighboring kingdoms or houses, or cultures, are all reasonable explanations for why there are such differences in datings.

Just with Oldtown, for instance, the city was sacked by Qhored the Cruel, Samwell the Starfire, and Gyles the Woe, so the Citadel's records might have been disrupted during that century. Otho II subsequently built strong walls to protect the city, but George could always write about later times when Oldtown was threatened. We also know very little about the Citadel's history; maybe there were doctrinal disputes between factions of maesters, maybe maesters came into conflict with the Faith at the Starry Sept, etc. 

[Bael's Bastard]

6 minutes ago, Nittanian said:

Just with Oldtown, for instance, the city was sacked by Qhored the Cruel, Samwell the Starfire, and Gyles the Woe, so the Citadel's records might have been disrupted during that century. Otho II subsequently built strong walls to protect the city, but George could always write about later times when Oldtown was threatened. We also know very little about the Citadel's history; maybe there were doctrinal disputes between factions of maesters, maybe maesters came into conflict with the Faith at the Starry Sept, etc. 

These are very good points.

[Lord Varys]

Oldtown must have lost considerable knowledge and accounts during the days it was still threatened routinely by the Ironborn, Gardeners, other Reach lords/kings, and the Dornishmen.

In that sense it is very telling - as I already said above - that Oldtown has no idea about the origins of Oldtown and the Hightowers. And then there is also the fact to consider that the Citadel as an institution would have only grown overtime, not being exactly as careful or scholarly as the later maesters are.

Scholarly disputes and disagreements could also have led to the (inadvertent) destruction of certain crucial pieces of knowledge. Even if there is/were no evil anti-magic conspiracy the overall disinterest in magic in recent years could very have led to the destruction of crucial books and scrolls simply because no maester or scribe bothered copying them again before they crumbled away.

Relative peace/security behind strong stone walls does not protect one against fires or calamities in the city (like riots the way they happened after the grey plague had come to Oldtown). Still, one should assume that the Citadel does have reasonably good sources on a decent part of Oldtown/Hightower history, going back much farther when compared to what they have on the history of the West, the Riverlands, or the North.

This would also extend to that part of Oldtown history that took place after the union between the Hightower and Highgarden - although for Highgarden itself we would likely see the sack and destruction of the castle and the Oakenseat by the hands of the Dornishmen as a key event in destroying a lot of ancient knowledge stored and kept at Highgarden. 

For Winterfell we do know that the castle was taken and damaged/destroyed and rebuilt countless times in the past eras, and each time would have also meant the destruction of crucial pieces of knowledge stored there. This goes for many other castles - the only place aside from Oldtown which might still contain knowledge going back to very ancient times would be Casterly Rock (which was never taken) and Storm's End (which was never taken by storm - implying that it only ever yielded to terms which may have no included blatant destruction afterwards).

But overall the most crucial problem in all that would have been the madness of trying to systematize things after the seven kingdoms of the Andal days eventually formed themselves. Whatever stories and records and tales there would have been of the petty kings of old would have been based on their dating methods, they ways of making sense of things, and if you only have fragments of actual contemporary sources (ancient manuscripts, runes on trees, etc.) in comparison to oral tales and songs to compare them to this should become pretty much an impossible task.

I'm mean, Dietrich von Bern, the Kings of Burgundy, and King Etzel have literally nothing to do with historical Theodoric the Great, the Kings of Burgundy, and King Attila (aside from the names).

The maesters sift through stuff like that as they do with the two Artys Arryns, but without good historical information it should be very difficult to get to the bottom of what actually happened - which is why the Battle of the Seven Stars is told essentially as a retelling of fable, containing more legend than truth.

[AlaskanSandman]

18 hours ago, Ran said:

I think some things may have a bearing on the plot, but a feature George added after the third novel in the series -- the uncertainty of ancient history -- at a time where he already knew the ending of the series is not something that is in itself important, especially since he told me that he did that because of people like me who kept trying to get more precise details.  

Lots of the ancient history George generated in TWoIaF was generated because it was fun, not because it was necessary. As an example, I'd categorize the details of Yi Ti and the Dawn Empire and the oily black stone as the same thing -- fun stuff, not necessary stuff.

This is definitely something i try to keep remembered when thinking on those far flung cultures. Much of what is talked about here comes straight from GRRM him self in the main novels. (I try not to stray from those first 3) That being said, my build up in this topic runs across much of the North's history and some of the rest of the realm. Alysanne, Queen'scrown, Wildlings "kissed by fire", Bael, Hardhome, slavery in Westeros, and much else seems built into the story pretty early on. At least by the 2nd novel GRRM seems to have decided certain points regarding the wildlings and Stark history. 

What's in the crypts, Bael, and why the wildlings are stuck on the other side of the wall, did Valyria start in Westeros, etc. These questions may or may not be important to the main plot, but they seem to definitely not be added fluff only added in through TWOIAF. Though deciding what seems important and what is fluff, is not easy. Take Bran meeting Bloodraven on the 13th chapter of ADWD or Jon dying on his 13th pov chapter of ADWD. Are these just hap chance that it worked out like that, or is GRRM telling us something. Its very hard to tell what's George being clever and what's George just adding fluff, and what's not George at all but hap chance. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

5 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Are these just hap chance that it worked out like that, or is GRRM telling us something.

Option A.