Jump to content

Heresy 214 The Last Heretic


Melifeather

Recommended Posts

On 11/30/2018 at 11:45 AM, Frey family reunion said:

Now combine these two nuggets of information.  The Warlord wishes to bestow a blessing on the maiden through the First Night.  The First Men also fed the weirwoods with blood.  My guess is that the Weirwoods hungered for special blood, as Melisandre puts it: “kingsblood”.  

I would assume that the Warlords of the First Men would be loathe to feed the weirwoods their own children, but if they passed on their magical bloodlines to other women via the First Night, then they could feed the weirwoods kingsblood without sacrificing their heirs.

Oooh, nice idea!! 

The one potential problem I see is that the First Men have firm rules prohibiting kinslaying of any kind. On the other hand, we hear about the Rat Cook who was white with red eyes and could only eat his own young. That could refer instead to feeding your own young to the weirwood. 

On 11/30/2018 at 12:01 PM, Frey family reunion said:

As long as the weirwoods were fed magical blood, would it matter from what source?  And to tie into our story, do we have a bastard with magical king’s blood, who has already been described as a Corn King?  I.e. a sacrifice?

Two, actually. Melisandre claims Edric Storm's king's blood will wake the stone dragon, and Euron impregnated the bastard girl on the Shield Islands - and now has her tied to the prow of his ship, where she (and her king's blood baby) will likely be sacrificed to call krakens. 

It's also suspicious how Roose Bolton's children had a tendency to die in infancy. Not to mention Craster, who was a NW bastard. The NW has included its share of lords over the years, so he may well have king's blood that he is passing on to his sons and then sacrificing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just to add to the confusion:

-We have a bastard who`s mother was the queen of love and beauty. And he got literal queen's blood through the umbilical cord.

-we have different stone dragon versions from Mel, in one it is a dragon, in another it is plural (dragons)

And while I do not know what is going on, I would argue that the queen of love and beauty is connected to the Isle of Faces and to the Others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a change of direction, but I've been thinking about the SSM were GRRM talks about speculation that Aegon the Conqueror knew there would be a another Long Night and wanted to unite Westerous to fight it.

The biggest question is why Aegon invaded Westerous.  His predecessors seemed more concerned with affairs to the east.  We know Septon Barth believed that the Valyrians came to Westeros because their priests prophesied that the Doom of Man would come out of the land beyond the narrow sea.  So either this prophesy didn't exist until Aegon's time, or Aegon was the first of his line to act on it.

We also have a coincidence with the dates - the story starts around 298AC, which is very near a round number (300AC).  And Aegon didn't invade in the year 0 AC or 1 AC, he invaded either 1 BC or 2 BC.  So AGOT starts almost exactly 300 years after Aegon landed in Westerous.  AGOT was published in 1996, and everyone was thinking about our dates changing (From Crazy Y2k and end of the world stuff to just a reason to party), so the change of dates would be on GRRM's mind while writing it.

What I suggest is that Aegon not only knew there would be another Long Night, but he knew when it would be.  Neither Aegon nor his predecessors had any real interest in Westerous, but they agreed to start preparing 300 years ahead.  So most likely, something in 297 AC, 298 AC or 300 AC (Aegon himself chose the date to start counting at) happened that we didn't pay enough attention to - something that is the beginning of the end.  This could be as simple as the Other's in the prologue, unless we are correct that the Others appeared from time to time.  It isn't the comet, which was seen before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Janneyc1 said:

One of the most commonly known SSM is the description of the Walkers "Think the Sidhe made of Ice". I think that a mistake that gets made is that the description is just their physical traits. I think it extends farther than that. The supernatural elements of our world make a huge deal about being invited inside the hearth and home. 

In this case, I think that Magical beings (Possibly including the CotF) are blocked by a ward. They can only cross once they are invited across the ward. In the case of Melisandre and the wights in the Lord Commander's tower, a mortal brought them across the ward. In the case of ASOIAF, I think that Wards can only be crossed by magical beings once they have been invited across by a mortal. Evidence of this includes the wights in the tower, Mel's shadow baby, and the huge emphasis of Guest Rights in certain parts of the country. These areas are the ones that often come into more contact with the magical realms. 

What are your thoughts on this?

 I think this is a great idea. And if this is the case, then the "weaknesses" in the Wall are real - but can only be exploited with an invite. Old Nan said the monsters can't cross the Wall as long as the men of the NW are true. But if one of them is not true, if he invites the Others... then they can come through the Gorge or around Eastwatch. Maybe even the Black Gate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possible this changes our view on Coldhands slightly.  We assume if he wasn't lying, he couldn't cross the Wall, as if he were running into a glass window.  But perhaps he could cross easily, but his crossing would mean something bad - the Others being able to cross or even the Wall coming down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, MaesterSam said:

 I think this is a great idea. And if this is the case, then the "weaknesses" in the Wall are real - but can only be exploited with an invite. Old Nan said the monsters can't cross the Wall as long as the men of the NW are true. But if one of them is not true, if he invites the Others... then they can come through the Gorge or around Eastwatch. Maybe even the Black Gate?

IMO this has already happened. The wildlings are the Others, and Jon invited through the Wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

the SSM were GRRM talks about speculation that Aegon the Conqueror knew there would be a another Long Night and wanted to unite Westerous to fight it

Is there anything about this in Fire and Blood?

I think Aegon may have had some idea in this area, but I also think he couldn't have had much clue when... because if he did, he would have made it clear to others, and we'd have heard of it by now. 

For instance, Egg certainly would have known, in D&E, that this second Long Night was coming in about a hundred years.  Quite a memorable concept that would be; I'd expect it to come up repeatedly in those novellas.  But it never does.

The other issue of course is that we'd expect constant and obvious Targ support of the Watch.  But instead of growing and strengthening, the Watch has declined tremendously since Aegon's day (the brief help and respect of Alysanne notwithstanding).

So I think if Aegon had such an idea in his head, and he may have, the timing of it was not something he felt sure of.  And it was definitely not something he passed on in a way that convinced subsequent Targs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aegon the Holy was such a good guy, he acted on some potential thread 300 years in the future. He simply was to good for the world. And now King Aegon is sleeping with his sword Excalibur under some rock near King's Landing and will awake when Britannia err I mean Westeros needs him most.

Fantasy has always ben full of tropes and for me the question is more, how far will GRRM go in his drawings. He has had his fair share of style over substance in the past (e.g. the Ironborn). The Wall (and it's size) is another example where he may have drawn the picture a little too extreme. 

I can definitly see Aegon as an overdrawn hero. Much like with Tolkien, where some rulers are good and wise, while everything is in declining. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JNR said:

Is there anything about this in Fire and Blood?

I think Aegon may have had some idea in this area, but I also think he couldn't have had much clue when... because if he did, he would have made it clear to others, and we'd have heard of it by now. 

For instance, Egg certainly would have known, in D&E, that this second Long Night was coming in about a hundred years.  Quite a memorable concept that would be; I'd expect it to come up repeatedly in those novellas.  But it never does.

The other issue of course is that we'd expect constant and obvious Targ support of the Watch.  But instead of growing and strengthening, the Watch has declined tremendously since Aegon's day (the brief help and respect of Alysanne notwithstanding).

So I think if Aegon had such an idea in his head, and he may have, the timing of it was not something he felt sure of.  And it was definitely not something he passed on in a way that convinced subsequent Targs.

Not much in FOB itself, but it does back Aegon as more of a uniter and less of a conqueror.  This is mostly from the SSM talking about FOB. 

I disagree this does not come up.  The Targaryens talk about a Prince who was Promised, the Dragon must have 3 heads, etc.  Aemon seems to be aware of something coming. The Targaryens clearly knew more than we have learned as readers. The only question is whether that includes timing information and whether it goes back to Aegon 1.  

It certainly isn't proof, but Rhaegar believed he was TPWWP, then believed his son was - we have no record of early Targaryens believing they were, there seems to be an understanding of when TPWWP arrives. 

We don't have direct evidence of any of this in the Dunk and Egg stories, but we know Aegon V was obsessed with bringing back dragons, so much it killed him and his first born son.  This could be him just believing they'd make ruling easier, but he could have known they were needed. 

None of the FOB Targaryens after the conquer seem to care about any threat in the future and are mostly selfish, with the exception of Jaeherys, who is only an exception for being a good ruler in general.  This actually supports the idea they knew about the timing.  It is a lot easier to ignore a problem you know won't happen in your lifetime - all our politicians do this now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SirArthur said:

Aegon the Holy was such a good guy, he acted on some potential thread 300 years in the future. He simply was to good for the world. And now King Aegon is sleeping with his sword Excalibur under some rock near King's Landing and will awake when Britannia err I mean Westeros needs him most.

Fantasy has always ben full of tropes and for me the question is more, how far will GRRM go in his drawings. He has had his fair share of style over substance in the past (e.g. the Ironborn). The Wall (and it's size) is another example where he may have drawn the picture a little too extreme. 

I can definitly see Aegon as an overdrawn hero. Much like with Tolkien, where some rulers are good and wise, while everything is in declining. 

I think GRRM appears to include tropes, but they'll have unexpected twists. Jon's presumed secret identity as Rhaegar's son is the biggest trope that will get twisted on its head. Same with Lyanna's abduction. It's not going to be the romantic fairy tale trope of running away with a prince. I see evidence that she resisted her father's plans and went on to do some heroic things before being abducted for real, but not by Rhaegar. 

Your mention of King Aegon sleeping with his sword Excalibur under some rock is Bran's story, or rather an inspired version of Castell Dinas Bran

Quote

"Dinas Bran" is variously translated as "Crow Castle," "Crow City," "Hill of the Crow," or "Bran's Stronghold."

Quote

 

TALES OF DINAS BRAN

Legends associate Castell Dinas Bran with the king of Britain mentioned in the "Mabinogion," whose story dates to Arthurian times and whose name (Bran) translates to "raven." The king was killed after invading Ireland, and his head was buried in what may have been London's Tower Hill. Stories then added that, as long as Bran's head remained buried, Britain would be safeguarded. Perhaps, the idea that the head is linked with the Tower of London derives from the ongoing presence of real ravens, creatures also said to have the magical power to protect the kingdom from disaster. Tales also state, however, that King Arthur retrieved the head, choosing to protect Britain himself rather than resorting to the power of a buried body part. Claims have also been made that the Holy Grail or a golden harp are hidden in the hillock at Dinas Bran and that fairies dwell there.

According to "The Romance of Fulk Fitzwarine," the Normans pushed their way into the eastern borderlands of Wales and stopped just beneath the ruins of Dinas Bran. An arrogant knight, Pain Peveril, noticed the crumbling walls and learned that the site was once the home of King Bran. Since Bran's demise, no one had enough courage to stay overnight inside the remains, for fear of evil spirits. To prove their mettle, Pain and some of his cohorts climbed up to the ruins, determined to endure the night. During that night, a storm arose and forced the men to seek shelter. 

Suddenly, an evil, mace-wielding giant appeared. This giant was the notorious Gogmagog, a man possessed by an evil spirit who had terrorized the countryside for years. Pain defended his men with his shield, protected with a cross, a shield so sturdy that it withstood the penetration of the giant's mace. His brazen defiance startled the giant and Pain swiftly stabbed him with his sword. As Gogmagog died, the evil spirit recounted KingBran's bravery against the giant's attacks. Bran had even built the palace atop the hillock to thwart the giant and enraged the evil spirit inside Gogmagog. Then, the giant forced Bran and his followers to flee. The dying spirit also claimed that a great treasure, including a golden ox, was buried beneath the hill. The next day, King William learned of Pain's adventure, disposed of Gogmagog's body, and kept the mace as a spoil of battle.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Your mention of King Aegon sleeping with his sword Excalibur under some rock is Bran's story, or rather an inspired version of Castell Dinas Bran

When I was in Cornwall, I thought I would have picked up that story with Arthur. 

Anyway, I think GRRM suffers a little bit from the Prince Valiant/Hal Foster syndrom of gigantism when it comes to european castles. When I was a child I loved the Prince Valiant comics. Boy oh boy was I dissapointed, when I saw Tintangle or the supposed hill where Camelot was (according to legend) in real life.

In recent years I tend to see GRRM more as a Hal Foster/Karl May type of writer. Soaking up rumors and information wherever he can get it and rewriting them with a new spin on them. For me the question is more or less, which spin it will get. And I think he suffers a little bit from the idea that he has to connect everything with everybody in the story at that point.

So my conclusion would be, that Aegon knew about the long night. Not because it really brings the story forward, but simply to connect everything. It is much the same question if we need to know about the old sword Ice: we don't, but the fans want to know about it. So why not do it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

I disagree this does not come up.  The Targaryens talk about a Prince who was Promised

This is a good example of what I mean about the ambiguity, though.

We're told that Aerys and Rhaella were married because a woods witch said the PtwP would emerge from their line. 

But there is no reference to when.  Ten years... a hundred years... or a thousand years... no reference.

50 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

It certainly isn't proof, but Rhaegar believed he was TPWWP, then believed his son was

But had Aegon ever even heard of the PtwP?  We don't know.  All we know is that he decided to invade Westeros, though earlier Targs on Dragonstone had not.

50 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

we know Aegon V was obsessed with bringing back dragons, so much it killed him and his first born son.  This could be him just believing they'd make ruling easier, but he could have known they were needed.

Many Targs were obsessed with bringing back dragons, spanning many generations, starting from the moment the dragons died out in Westeros.

It's also notable that we never hear about any of this from Dany or Viserys.

If Viserys knew the Long Night was coming in a few years, I would expect him to mention this at least once in AGOT, particularly when Dany receives dragon eggs at her wedding. 

"We need to hatch these to fight the Popsicles," he might say.  "According to Aegon the Conqueror, they're already invading Westeros."

But it simply doesn't come up.   Neither he nor Dany appear to have the faintest clue that something horrific has already begun in the far north of Westeros in that book, and Dany still seems to have zero clue as of her last chapter in ADWD.

I also doubt any prophecy in this series would be so quantified.  GRRM keeps his prophecies quite vague and uncertain, like all his other clues.  They come with signs and portents, not numbers, so as to keep his characters guessing (just as they keep us guessing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JNR said:

This is a good example of what I mean about the ambiguity, though.

We're told that Aerys and Rhaella were married because a woods witch said the PtwP would emerge from their line. 

But there is no reference to when.  Ten years... a hundred years... or a thousand years... no reference.

But had Aegon ever even heard of the PtwP?  We don't know.  All we know is that he decided to invade Westeros, though earlier Targs on Dragonstone had not.

I disagree.  The TPWWP was meant to be a warrior, and a 10 year old boy is not much of a warrior.  While it isn't explicitly stated, "from their line" seems to imply it wouldn't be their children, but grandchildren or further.  So we can assume they were expecting at least 50 years before the next Long Night.

So it could be thousands of years - but only if we discount the idea Aegon the Conqueror knew about the threat to the North.  If had no idea this would happen within a thousand years, it wouldn't be his motivation for invading.

8 minutes ago, JNR said:

It's also notable that we never hear about any of this from Dany or Viserys.

If Viserys knew the Long Night was coming in a few years, I would expect him to mention this at least once in AGOT, particularly when Dany receives dragon eggs at her wedding. 

"We need to hatch these to fight the Popsicles," he might say.  "According to Aegon the Conqueror, they're already invading Westeros."

But it simply doesn't come up.   Neither he nor Dany appear to have the faintest clue that something horrific has already begun in the far north of Westeros in that book, and Dany still seems to have zero clue as of her last chapter in ADWD.

Not notable at all.  It is unlikely Viserys would be taught about a distant prophesy as a little child.  Dany wasn't even born when Aerys died.  And Aerys the mad king may not have had the good of the world as his first priority.  So likely this knowledge died with Aerys, expect what Aemon and Bloodraven know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't checked in for days, so I apologize if I am commenting on something that was already addressed down thread.

On 11/28/2018 at 12:26 PM, Brad Stark said:

Dragons are different from direwolves in that

1). There were real direwolves, although not as large as GRRM's 

2) We have evidence dragons are unnatural creations instead of natural animals 

 

Reading Alysanne's passage again, it is very clear this isn't like a bird flying into a glass window.  The dragon chooses not to fly over the Wall.  Of course that could be the dragon being aware it would be like a bird flying into a window, but I think being afraid of something on the other side is more likely.

I do think the dragon worried or sensed something over the wall or in the wall that made it hesitate but I do think if pushed by a different motivation, the dragon would have passed over the wall. I think some of this is to make us curious about what might happen when Dany eventually arrives in Westeros, or at the wall, if she ever does leave Essos!

Yes, direwolves did exist in the history of our planet, but they are very different than GRRM's direwolves. GRRM's direwolves are hinted to still exist north of the wall, but we have no proof of that. They might have been just as extinct as the dragons, and therefore the rebirth of direwolves might be just as magical as the rebirth of dragons!! Part of me feels there is a very ying and yang relationship to the dragons and direwolves. And that would mean they are either both natural elements of this world GRRM has created, or they are both magical elements.

It's very possible that the direwolves are the magic bond that touched/opened the Stark children's abilities, and not the other way around. I don't know if our Stark's are wargs and skinchangers in exactly the same way that Varamyr and Borraq are. They might be, of course, but it seems like those children would have already started bonding with dogs, like Varamyr did as a very young child. But we get no hint of that. That is one of the reasons I think the birth of the direwolves is just as magical as the birth of the dragons.

As to world history mimicking dragons, I do find it very interesting that many mythologies talk about dragon-like beings, which indicates some connection in our past world. Perhaps it's just things like pterodactyls/pterosaurs, the largest fossils indicating a wing span of up to 35 feet, that survive in stories from the past. Now, I know that is not the size that we are told Balerion the Black Dread was, but GRRM's direwolves are larger than real world direwolves, too. It's his world and we are just along for the ride!

 

On 11/28/2018 at 1:19 PM, Tucu said:

"dead things" is used by multiple characters as a reference to wights, human or not.

With regards to the wights bypassing The Wall from the sea, we have this from Patchface:

Quote

Patchface jumped up. “I will lead it!” His bells rang merrily. “We will march into the sea and out again. Under the waves we will ride seahorses, and mermaids will blow seashells to announce our coming, oh, oh, oh.”

In the past I suggested that this was reference to resurrection as it is the same language Asha uses for the Drowned God hall. But it also works for a wight invasion through the sea.

I guess this could indicate that the wights cannot climb the wall, therefore they have to go around it, or perhaps under it. But it also hints to me of not just the recent dead, but perhaps hundreds of years of drowned victims. I just hope someday we get some sort of conclusion for all of these questions.

 

On 11/28/2018 at 2:23 PM, SirArthur said:

I think it was feather who suggested a few heresies back, that this is the Iron fleet landing near Meereen during the battle of the Wind of Winters sample chapter.

As part of an inversion? I don't connect Patchface himself with the Iron Fleet at all, unless he is just a spokesperson for predicting the future?

 

On 11/28/2018 at 2:55 PM, SirArthur said:

I don't remember how Alliser Thorne traveled with Wight Othor's hand to King's Landing. Was it by Eastwatch ?

Yes, by Eastwatch, although I don't know if he showed off the wight hand or not! You would think he would but who the heck knows. If only Tyrion hadn't been such an ass and looked at the hand when Ser Alliser arrived in Kings Landing, perhaps things would have worked out so much different.

 

On 11/30/2018 at 8:22 AM, Feather Crystal said:

It's interesting how they claim that first night is somehow a custom of the old gods. Who would want to support such gods? Nobel women in medieval times were treated like commodities, or rather "prostituted" by their own fathers for the gain of their House. The fathers of course wouldn't view their actions that way...they loved their daughters, but they used them just the same to make alliances and to garner support from the throne. The tradition of "first night" was perhaps a small scale version of what the King was doing to their daughters.

To raise the child of a god who walks on the land could be seen as a gift by many. Of course, that would have been some thing that started thousands of years ago, probably from the time of Garth Greenhand, who scattered his seed where ever he went. I can totally see how this tradition developed. Years and years had twisted it to be something that lords who do not carry special blood could still take part in. I haven't read all of Fire and Blood yet, but Alysanne was appalled by this practice, but when she took it to Jaehaerys, he was not as upset. No doubt he was very aware of what was Targaryen tradition on Dragonstone but kept some of this away from Alysanne's knowledge. Several times he tried to protect her from the harsher realities of life. 

Some of how honored a person was to be raising a lords bastard would depend on the lord who planted the seed and the lord who raised the bastard, as well as the woman who bore the child. So many variables are in play. There would also be an unknown aspect, if the husband quickly followed the lord in the girls bed. Roose even hints at this with Ramsay, being unsure.

 

On 11/30/2018 at 9:45 AM, Frey family reunion said:

I would assume that the Warlords of the First Men would be loathe to feed the weirwoods their own children, but if they passed on their magical bloodlines to other women via the First Night, then they could feed the weirwoods kingsblood without sacrificing their heirs.

While not their legal heirs, these sacrifices still would have been their children. I am not as sure that the weirwoods are looking for a special blood to be fed by as I think any blood might work. But it would take special blood to connect to the weirnet and live in it, like Bloodraven or Bran, perhaps. But we see from Varamyr, that at death, he is part of the weirnet, but as far as we know, his blood or body is never given to a tree.

I would think the blood of the special bastards was in hope of raising a great warrior, not just food for the tree's, but I am certainly prepared to be wrong about that. GRRM does have a love of horror and the macabre, so this is certainly a possible outcome of the first night tradition.

 

On 11/30/2018 at 10:17 AM, Feather Crystal said:

I think the source of the sacrifice does matter, and Dany is the example. She sacrificed her child and his father and successfully hatched dragon eggs. That's not to say that there's not some type of significance about Jon being a sacrificial bastard. What I am suggesting is that perhaps the reason why magic wasn't working was because bastards were used.

This is possible, but blood is still blood, and Rhaego had as much of Dany's blood in him, regardless of marriage or not. I honestly don't think that marriage does matter that much in the genetics of the child. It seems to matter when it comes to inheritance. Of course, the argument to that presented in the books in Craster, who seems to think he needs to marry all his daughters and not produce bastards. Of course, we don't really know that Craster is right or wrong, but he certainly seems to look down on Jon for his bastard birth. Which is really odd in a wildling, because the majority of the wildlings don't seem to care about this at all. Craster might ultimately have been personally scarred as a youth by being called a bastard, therefore swore he would never have a bastard, meaning it's only important to him, even if it means polygamy.  Do the gods really care if you are married or not? I honestly doubt that. Marriage is a structure of society and men, not the "gods".

 

On 11/30/2018 at 12:08 PM, Feather Crystal said:

However, incest is not accepted by the old gods - at least I don't think it is, so why is he marrying his daughters rather than using them to make alliances (prostituting) with other wildings? Marrying his daughters prevents other wildlings from "stealing" them for marriage, which is the preferred wildling way...the wildlings too, abstain from making alliances by marrying off their daughters - rather the decision is left to the daughter. She accepts being stolen by not slitting her prospective bridegroom's throat. Are we to conclude that Craster's daughters willingly submit to being married to their father? There are, after all, many more of them, and it should be easy for them to slit his throat. But don't they also claim that Craster is protecting them?

We are told several times in the story that incest is reviled by the old gods, but our sources for this are the Faith (who I mostly discount), Catelyn, who is wrong about A LOT of things, and Ygritte. Ygritte is the person I take the most serious in this but still are not given her reasoning for this. I think it will have something to do with the Night's King of history, but I could be wrong. 

Craster seems to see nothing wrong with incest, but does see something wrong with not marrying someone who you lay with. His ideology is almost opposite what we hear about from Ygritte. I suppose the reality lies somewhere in the middle. And I do think incest will turn out to be important, as it would produce a special, strong blood line, genetically. Perhaps most of the wildlings thoughts are based on NEVER wanting to produce such a blood line again, because of dire consequences they have seen in the past, while Craster's motivation is to attempt to bring back some genetically strong bloodline. The purpose of one is to avoid an outcome, while the purpose of the other is to provide the outcome!!!

And yes, Craster's wives and daughters are interesting. They could easily revolt if they wanted too. But they don't. It's possible that they are so demoralized by their life, they don't understand there is a different way to live, but these women strike me as practical. Of course, they have no doubt been a bit brainwashed by Craster's preaching for years and years. They do seem to see Gilly's child as worth saving though, as opposed to being given as a sacrifice, so they can fight for something, if they want too.

 

On 11/30/2018 at 2:17 PM, Frey family reunion said:

It did debunk one of my favorite theories, however.  Namely that Queen Alysanne’s lengthy stay up North, separate from her husband, would have allowed her to have conceived and given birth to a bastard child, left in the care of the Mountain clans.  Who’s descendant perhaps was Arya Flint who then married into House Stark, and the grandmother of Eddard and his siblings.  

I had some great tinfoil in my head about Aerea Targaryen's bloodline ending up in the Starks. The name is just a perfect fit for Arya (Flint or Stark) with a Targaryen spelling, it seemed too perfect. Even some of her behavior fit's what we know of Arya or Lyanna.  I haven't finished F&B yet, but I did get past Aerea's fate, so most of my theory is debunked. However. I do see some possibilities yet for her. In the year she was missing, there is a lot that could have happened. I even question if what returned on Balerion was Aerea. There is also the tempting bloodline of her twin sister. I really think F&B teases us with very little information to formulate anything with, but has lot's of interesting filler that might not matter to the overall conclusion of the story. What will matter, I think, won't be revealed until Winds or Dream (at this point, I don't think we will ever get Dream but I still have hope for Winds).

 

I will break this off now, as I have already probably tied to much stuff into a maddeningly long post. Ooops!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, St Daga said:

Yes, direwolves did exist in the history of our planet, but they are very different than GRRM's direwolves. GRRM's direwolves are hinted to still exist north of the wall, but we have no proof of that. They might have been just as extinct as the dragons, and therefore the rebirth of direwolves might be just as magical as the rebirth of dragons!! Part of me feels there is a very ying and yang relationship to the dragons and direwolves. And that would mean they are either both natural elements of this world GRRM has created, or they are both magical elements.

 

The opposing force to dragons isn't direwolves - its white walkers. White walkers are ice made flesh which is the flip side of fire made flesh. This is why I assert that the Stark's are not the representatives of ice in this story. They are the family that defeated ice. That's a big difference.

 

1 hour ago, SirArthur said:

When I was in Cornwall, I thought I would have picked up that story with Arthur. 

Anyway, I think GRRM suffers a little bit from the Prince Valiant/Hal Foster syndrom of gigantism when it comes to european castles. When I was a child I loved the Prince Valiant comics. Boy oh boy was I dissapointed, when I saw Tintangle or the supposed hill where Camelot was (according to legend) in real life.

In recent years I tend to see GRRM more as a Hal Foster/Karl May type of writer. Soaking up rumors and information wherever he can get it and rewriting them with a new spin on them. For me the question is more or less, which spin it will get. And I think he suffers a little bit from the idea that he has to connect everything with everybody in the story at that point.

So my conclusion would be, that Aegon knew about the long night. Not because it really brings the story forward, but simply to connect everything. It is much the same question if we need to know about the old sword Ice: we don't, but the fans want to know about it. So why not do it ?

Of course GRRM is weaving together tidbits of ancient histories and mythologies to create one garment - the Song of Ice and Fire! A lot of the old mythologies are probably based on some truth, but since much of it was passed on orally the stories took on a bit of symbolic flavor.

I think it's important to note that Aegon visited Westeros for many years before his conquest, and he spent a lot of time in the southern part of the continent around Oldtown. It may be that he was gathering support already way back then. I suspect the Hightowers had some type of involvement, but surely this information was given for a reason? 

1 hour ago, JNR said:

This is a good example of what I mean about the ambiguity, though.

We're told that Aerys and Rhaella were married because a woods witch said the PtwP would emerge from their line. 

But there is no reference to when.  Ten years... a hundred years... or a thousand years... no reference.

But had Aegon ever even heard of the PtwP?  We don't know.  All we know is that he decided to invade Westeros, though earlier Targs on Dragonstone had not.

Many Targs were obsessed with bringing back dragons, spanning many generations, starting from the moment the dragons died out in Westeros.

It's also notable that we never hear about any of this from Dany or Viserys.

If Viserys knew the Long Night was coming in a few years, I would expect him to mention this at least once in AGOT, particularly when Dany receives dragon eggs at her wedding. 

"We need to hatch these to fight the Popsicles," he might say.  "According to Aegon the Conqueror, they're already invading Westeros."

But it simply doesn't come up.   Neither he nor Dany appear to have the faintest clue that something horrific has already begun in the far north of Westeros in that book, and Dany still seems to have zero clue as of her last chapter in ADWD.

I also doubt any prophecy in this series would be so quantified.  GRRM keeps his prophecies quite vague and uncertain, like all his other clues.  They come with signs and portents, not numbers, so as to keep his characters guessing (just as they keep us guessing).

I agree that there isn't enough evidence to suggest that Aegon the Conqueror had advance knowledge of a second coming of white walkers. IMO the "prince that was promised" was a formula or recipe on how to hatch a dragon. The Targaryen obsession with hatching dragons and the story of the tragedy of Summerhal is our evidence. 

Hatching dragons was Aegon V's obsession. He sought out the woods witch for help and attempted to follow her instructions by having Aerys and a pregnant Rhaella at Summerhal. Rhaella was in labor with Rhaegar at the prince that was promised ritual at Summerhal, but I suspect Ser Dunk the lunk got scared and picked her up when the spirits came to dance, much like Jorah Mormont picked Dany up, but instead of heading into the tent he carried Rhaella out, thus saving her and baby Rhaegar. Ser Duncan must have went back in for Aegon V and burned in the pyre with him. It's odd though that Aerys lived and Aegon V died, because Aerys should've been the one sacrificed like Khal Drogo, but I wonder if Aerys suffocated Aegon V with a pillow? Years later Dany got it right though, because in order to hatch dragons you have to sacrifice first the father, then the son so they both die as kings.

1 hour ago, Brad Stark said:

I disagree.  The TPWWP was meant to be a warrior, and a 10 year old boy is not much of a warrior.  While it isn't explicitly stated, "from their line" seems to imply it wouldn't be their children, but grandchildren or further.  So we can assume they were expecting at least 50 years before the next Long Night.

So it could be thousands of years - but only if we discount the idea Aegon the Conqueror knew about the threat to the North.  If had no idea this would happen within a thousand years, it wouldn't be his motivation for invading.

Not notable at all.  It is unlikely Viserys would be taught about a distant prophesy as a little child.  Dany wasn't even born when Aerys died.  And Aerys the mad king may not have had the good of the world as his first priority.  So likely this knowledge died with Aerys, expect what Aemon and Bloodraven know.

Aemon brought up the prince that was promised prophecy when he learned Dany had dragons, which is evidence that this prophecy is tied to hatching dragons. He said dragons have no sex - they are both male and female. There was no mention of using the dragons to save the world from white walkers. That's purely an assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JNR said:

But had Aegon ever even heard of the PtwP?  We don't know.  All we know is that he decided to invade Westeros, though earlier Targs on Dragonstone had not.

We don't know, though I had an interesting discussion about the Targaryen coat of arms (the three dragonheads) a while back. We do not know where they come from, some people suggested they are there because of Aegon and his sisters. 

However, we have seen variations of the coats (Aegon II) with a golden dragon (and three heads). This to me at least opens the possibility that the three heads have nothing to do with Aegon and his sisters. As there was a house before Aegon and after him. Yet the three heads stayed, the color however changed (including the red of Blackfyre). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/2018 at 3:23 PM, SirArthur said:

I think it was feather who suggested a few heresies back, that this is the Iron fleet landing near Meereen during the battle of the Wind of Winters sample chapter.

 Not I. Not sure what you're thinking of here.

38 minutes ago, St Daga said:

As part of an inversion? I don't connect Patchface himself with the Iron Fleet at all, unless he is just a spokesperson for predicting the future?

My comment about the "dead things" was about wights not being able to move south of the Wall and theorizing that the Wall extends both east and west of the physical wall. The physical aspect of the Wall was built to deter the wildlings, but the magical warding on the Wall was to prevent magical beings from crossing on their own. If they are dragged across or invited through, then they can exist on the south side. I guess the dead things in the water could float around the Wall, but they aren't swimming around Eastwatch of their own accord. Perhaps the Watch at Eastwatch are making sure of that? Surely they know what happened with Othor and Jafer.

At the same time it's a little more complicated for the cold winds, which are necessary to raise the dead. If the cold winds are all it takes to raise the dead, then the dead on the south side of the Wall should already be rising as wights - but currently, they don't. I think this is enough evidence to support the theory that white walkers are needed to raise the dead. Furthermore, if white walkers cannot pass the Wall, then someone has to create white walkers on the south side of the Wall in order to activate wights, which means someone already did that early on with Othor and Jafer. White walkers are the flip side of shadow babies, except instead of dissipating like smoke, ice preserves, so this white walker might still be "alive" somewhere south of the Wall.

 

39 minutes ago, St Daga said:

Yes, by Eastwatch, although I don't know if he showed off the wight hand or not! You would think he would but who the heck knows. If only Tyrion hadn't been such an ass and looked at the hand when Ser Alliser arrived in Kings Landing, perhaps things would have worked out so much different.

The wight's hand rotted before anyone would see Ser Alliser. It was too warm in Kings Landing.

41 minutes ago, St Daga said:

Of course, we don't really know that Craster is right or wrong, but he certainly seems to look down on Jon for his bastard birth. Which is really odd in a wildling, because the majority of the wildlings don't seem to care about this at all. Craster might ultimately have been personally scarred as a youth by being called a bastard, therefore swore he would never have a bastard, meaning it's only important to him, even if it means polygamy.  Do the gods really care if you are married or not? I honestly doubt that. Marriage is a structure of society and men, not the "gods".

Craster seems to be an acronym of Stark. "Starc-er"

It could mean he's a branch relative, or it could mean his "ways" are starker than the other wildlings, as in harsher or grimmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

We don't know, though I had an interesting discussion about the Targaryen coat of arms (the three dragonheads) a while back. We do not know where they come from, some people suggested they are there because of Aegon and his sisters. 

However, we have seen variations of the coats (Aegon II) with a golden dragon (and three heads). This to me at least opens the possibility that the three heads have nothing to do with Aegon and his sisters. As there was a house before Aegon and after him. Yet the three heads stayed, the color however changed (including the red of Blackfyre). 

Is it possible that he only wanted to make a variation on an already established family sigil?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I think it's important to note that Aegon visited Westeros for many years before his conquest, and he spent a lot of time in the southern part of the continent around Oldtown. It may be that he was gathering support already way back then. I suspect the Hightowers had some type of involvement, but surely this information was given for a reason? 

I agree that there isn't enough evidence to suggest that Aegon the Conqueror had advance knowledge of a second coming of white walkers. IMO the "prince that was promised" was a formula or recipe on how to hatch a dragon. The Targaryen obsession with hatching dragons and the story of the tragedy of Summerhal is our evidence. 

My interpretation is Aegon wanted to unite Westerous peaceful at first, then realized that would never work. 

The books themselves don't provide much evidence Aegon knew about the White Walkers beyond the Septon Barth quote.  GRRM all but confirmed Aegon knew about the White Walkers in his SSM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

 Is it possible that he only wanted to make a variation on an already established family sigil?

Do you mean Aegon I or Aegon II ?

If you mean Aegon I, that is my thought, as we do not have any family signs for the house of Targaryen. It has been written that Valyrians didn't use coat of arms, however there should be some family heritage that predates Aegon I and defines the family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...