Jump to content
Black Crow

Heresy 222 vindication

Recommended Posts

The Targaryens were fixated on the prince that was promised prophecy. They had been in power for nearly 300 years, but their dragons had died out roughly 150 years ago. Aegon V thought if he could hatch a dragon that it would help him keep the realm under better control. I believe the prophecy is not about a person, but about a dragon. Rhaegar thought he'd be the one to bring forth a dragon, but when the red comet was spotted above Kings Landing when Aegon was conceived, he thought that it meant Aegon would bring back dragons.

The ritual that Aegon V attempted at Summerhal was a failure. He may have followed the ritual correctly, but if magic was still being suppressed, it was doomed right from the start. If magic were loose in the realm and you followed the magic ritual "recipe" correctly, you should get a live dragon at the end. 

The Targaryens must have gotten very confused when their magic ritual recipe stopped working. I had introduced the idea of likening the door held by the hinge upon the Wall as a "coin". When the "coin" door is standing on edge, magic is suppressed. Flip it so that (dragon) "heads" is facing up, the magical wards allow dragons to hatch. Flip it back onto its side and dragons slowly cease to exist. The "tails" side of the door allows white walkers to be created.

I theorized that when Harren the Black built Harrenhal, he "massacred" a forest of weirwood trees to use as rafters and beams. The Children were so horrified that they flipped the coin door to dragon heads, and Aegon and his sisters arrived, killed Harren, unified the seven kingdoms into one, and adopted the Andal Faith of the Seven - thus eliminating the threat to weirwoods. Since the threat was eliminated, the coin door was closed and stood on end once again. Aegon arrived 300 years ago, but the last dragon died about 153 years ago. During those 150 years or so the dragons became smaller and smaller until finally even the eggs stopped hatching. 

The Targaryens didn't know why their magic ritual stopped hatching dragons, so they began experimenting with human sacrifice - burning people alive and even trying to burn themselves like Aegon V did at Summerhal. Where was this "prince" or "dragon" that was promised? They thought they were doing everything right. Finally the woods witch told them that a descendent of Aerys and Rhaella would be successful at bringing forth the promised prince (dragon).

I had also suggested that "three heads of the dragon" indicated the three times the "coin" was open to (dragon) "heads", but the Targaryens also thought it meant three people. Rhaegar, Viserys, and Daenerys are the three children of Aerys and Rhaella. Rhaegar and Elia were prevented from having a third child, and I think Bloodraven had something to do with this and he's to blame for nearly ripping the "coin" door off its hinges. His attempt to suppress dragons brought back both dragons and white walkers proving that you should never try to force a prophecy to be fulfilled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, JNR said:

The great houses, in many cases, go back thousands of years before there was any king to whom they reported.  Also, of course, the above policy is never said to exist in the books.

Not so much a formal policy as good commonsense. The significance I think is the fact that the houses are sufficiently emboldened to be be preparing for a post-Targaryen Westeros - which rather undermines the argument in another place for Jon Snow being the rightful Targaryen heir.

What's also interesting here is that as you say the great houses [as distinct from the parvenu Targaryens] go back thousands of years. Curiously however they don't multiply. The Starks and the Lannisters don't seem to extend beyond uncles. The only Stark branch appears to be the Karstarks and they sprang from the Winterfell line a very long time ago. GRRM has acknowledged this peculiarity but not offered an explanation

Edited by Black Crow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, St Daga said:

Here is what I thought of when reading your post. I already had mentioned that Addam Marbrand, Melisandre and Sansa are the only character's in the text that I have found to have copper colored hair. So, you bring up some nice hints that the Marbrand's, with Addam being the only one we know, as possible weirwood burners. Then we have Melisandre, who is reported to have burned the weirwood at Storm's End, and we see her orchestrating wildlings burning weirwood branches as part of a ritual to cross the wall. And then we have Sansa with the copper hair... does this hint that Sansa perhaps is going to be linked to the burning of weirwoods?

Maybe. In general, women with red/copper hair are said to be kissed by fire, so the link is there. Show-Sansa betrayed Jon (and in a way, Rickon and the entire Northern host) for her own benefit, because she wanted Winterfell. While I sincerely hope that book Sansa will be a better person, she too has had Cersei and now Littlefinger as her mentors throughout her formative years, so she is likely to develop her own ambitions sooner rather than later. Stannis offered Winterfell to Jon, on the condition that the weirwood would be burned. Jon turned him down, but Sansa may not. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

What's also interesting here is that as you say the great houses [as distinct from the parvenu Targaryens] go back thousands of years. Curiously however they don't multiply. The Starks and the Lannisters don't seem to extend beyond uncles. The only Stark branch appears to be the Karstarks and they sprang from the Winterfell line a very long time ago. GRRM has acknowledged this peculiarity but not offered an explanation

I think the Wall could have something to do with this. We know that until recently, service in the NW was considered honorable, and it wasn't always just criminals who served. In the case of the Starks especially, it seems to have been fairly common for younger sons to take the black rather than starting families of their own. This would have served the added purpose of avoiding family infighting, and may be why we haven't heard of a Dance of the Direwolves (the fighting hellhounds at the Nightfort notwithstanding).

The tradition is seemingly followed by other First Men families, such as the Royces who donated Waymar to the Watch. Even Sam in a way is an unwanted "extra" heir in a family that doesn't need/want him. 

The other anti-expansion action we see is the occasional cousin-cousin marriage, whereby a side branch can rejoin the "main" family (Ex: Tywin & Joanna Lannister). Combined with high childhood mortality rates and short life expectancies, IMO it doesn't seem too far fetched that these families did not expand the way the Targaryens did for example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Black Crow said:

Not so much a formal policy as good commonsense. The significance I think is the fact that the houses are sufficiently emboldened to be be preparing for a post-Targaryen Westeros - which rather undermines the argument in another place for Jon Snow being the rightful Targaryen heir.

What's also interesting here is that as you say the great houses [as distinct from the parvenu Targaryens] go back thousands of years. Curiously however they don't multiply. The Starks and the Lannisters don't seem to extend beyond uncles. The only Stark branch appears to be the Karstarks and they sprang from the Winterfell line a very long time ago. GRRM has acknowledged this peculiarity but not offered an explanation

GRRM does explain that too many heirs is just as bad a problem as too few.  In my genealogy research, I found nobles with many children, but only 1 would be an heir and even women married less than half the time - the extra kids joined the Church with vows of celibacy.  So you only had 1 family with the name at a time for many generations.  Some had a few families around, but they consciously limited themselves by most of their children joining the Church. 

Before the Targaryens, Westeros was consolidating.  We had a Marsh King, Red King, Borrow King, Warg King, etc.  Their power was consolidated into the Starks.  Left alone, this may have continued, but power in the 7 Kingdoms stayed mostly as is under the Targaryens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MaesterSam said:

Maybe. In general, women with red/copper hair are said to be kissed by fire, so the link is there. Show-Sansa betrayed Jon (and in a way, Rickon and the entire Northern host) for her own benefit, because she wanted Winterfell. While I sincerely hope that book Sansa will be a better person, she too has had Cersei and now Littlefinger as her mentors throughout her formative years, so she is likely to develop her own ambitions sooner rather than later. Stannis offered Winterfell to Jon, on the condition that the weirwood would be burned. Jon turned him down, but Sansa may not. 

Red hair does seem to be noted to be "kissed by fire" by the wildlings but Ygritte, who this is mostly tied to, is never once described with hair of copper. And Ygritte never burned a weirwood either. I wonder what she would have done if faced with Melisandre's requirement for crossing the wall? Anyway, I might be way off base with this copper hair thing, but a couple years ago, I noted that in the description of Addam Marbrand, and then later I noted in about Melisandre. It was only with a search engine that I tied Sansa in with the copper hair. My tinfoil at the time was that Mel and Sansa are in somewhat connected or will cross paths, but Addam didn't fit. Until you got me thinking about his family sigil and the burning tree, which is something he certainly has in common with Melisandre. So, Sansa is the oddball, but this might be foreshadowing! In another year or two, I will probably have some new "copper" tinfoil to promote! :smoking:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, St Daga said:

Red hair does seem to be noted to be "kissed by fire" by the wildlings but Ygritte, who this is mostly tied to, is never once described with hair of copper. And Ygritte never burned a weirwood either. I wonder what she would have done if faced with Melisandre's requirement for crossing the wall? Anyway, I might be way off base with this copper hair thing, but a couple years ago, I noted that in the description of Addam Marbrand, and then later I noted in about Melisandre. It was only with a search engine that I tied Sansa in with the copper hair. My tinfoil at the time was that Mel and Sansa are in somewhat connected or will cross paths, but Addam didn't fit. Until you got me thinking about his family sigil and the burning tree, which is something he certainly has in common with Melisandre. So, Sansa is the oddball, but this might be foreshadowing! In another year or two, I will probably have some new "copper" tinfoil to promote! :smoking:

Looking forward to it! :cheers:

What initially drew my attention to the Marbrands was the fact that they married into the Lannister family, and fairly recently too. There is something going on with Cersei and fire, and I was looking for an alternative explanation besides her and Jaime being secret Targaryens. I was also trying to reconcile the show union of Cersei & Euron with this passage from The Forsaken:

Quote

The dreams were even worse the second time. He saw the longships of the Ironborn adrift and burning on a boiling blood-red sea. He saw his brother on the Iron Throne again, but Euron was no longer human. He seemed more squid than man, a monster fathered by a kraken of the deep, his face a mass of writhing tentacles. Beside him stood a shadow in woman’s form, long and tall and terrible, her hands alive with pale white fire. Dwarves capered for their amusement, male and female, naked and misshapen, locked in carnal embrace, biting and tearing at each other as Euron and his mate laughed and laughed and laughed …

This shadow in woman's form is very cleary linked to fire, which had initially led me to interpret her as Daenerys, especially since there has been some foreshadowing of this in Dany's arc (her dream about Hizdahr having blue lips and a cock as cold as ice and  her "mount to dread" complete with vision of probably Aeron at the prow of a ship).  However, the dwarves being made to caper at her feet and being laughed at doesn't fit Dany at all, while Cersei would love nothing more than to humiliate Tyrion in any way she can. And through her Marbrand grandmother, Cersei does have a link to fire as well, and we know she enjoyed burning the Tower of the Hand a little too much... :dunno:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Now if you go back to the approximate time of Aemon's conception, it just about coincides with the time that the announcements for the Harrenhal tourney are sent out.

I see you join me in disbelieving Maester Yandel.  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

The theory is these marriages were made as part of alliances leading up to the rebellion.

Well, we know exactly why Jon Arryn married Lysa:

Quote

Lysa's match with Lord Arryn had been hastily arranged, and Jon was an old man even then, older than their father. An old man without an heir. His first two wives had left him childless, his brother's son had been murdered with Brandon Stark in King's Landing, his gallant cousin had died in the Battle of the Bells. He needed a young wife if House Arryn was to continue . . . a young wife known to be fertile.

So it can't have happened because of a pre-Rebellion alliance -- it happened as a direct consequence of the Rebellion.

However, Brandon's proposed marriage to Catelyn probably was part of such an alliance.  So was Lyanna's to Robert. 

These IMO are exactly what is meant by Rickard having southron ambitions.   His grandchildren stood to inherit quite a bit of political power as a result of such betrothals -- far more than if their Stark parents had married Stark vassals.

Edited by JNR

Share this post


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

What initially drew my attention to the Marbrands was the fact that they married into the Lannister family, and fairly recently too. There is something going on with Cersei and fire, and I was looking for an alternative explanation besides her and Jaime being secret Targaryens. I was also trying to reconcile the show union of Cersei & Euron with this passage from The Forsaken:

Quote

The dreams were even worse the second time. He saw the longships of the Ironborn adrift and burning on a boiling blood-red sea. He saw his brother on the Iron Throne again, but Euron was no longer human. He seemed more squid than man, a monster fathered by a kraken of the deep, his face a mass of writhing tentacles. Beside him stood a shadow in woman’s form, long and tall and terrible, her hands alive with pale white fire. Dwarves capered for their amusement, male and female, naked and misshapen, locked in carnal embrace, biting and tearing at each other as Euron and his mate laughed and laughed and laughed …

This shadow in woman's form is very cleary linked to fire, which had initially led me to interpret her as Daenerys, especially since there has been some foreshadowing of this in Dany's arc (her dream about Hizdahr having blue lips and a cock as cold as ice and  her "mount to dread" complete with vision of probably Aeron at the prow of a ship).  However, the dwarves being made to caper at her feet and being laughed at doesn't fit Dany at all, while Cersei would love nothing more than to humiliate Tyrion in any way she can. And through her Marbrand grandmother, Cersei does have a link to fire as well, and we know she enjoyed burning the Tower of the Hand a little too much... :dunno:

Interesting idea! I had to look at the Lannister lineage just to get a feel for this. If this shadow woman is Cersei, then perhaps it does hint at a future for her and Euron. The Iron Islands and the Westerlands have butted against each other for centuries, it seems. I think there is also a quote about Cersei having fire in her eyes, connecting her to a lioness. Green eyes also hint to me of green fire, which is wild fire (we see that Cersei does us this to burn the Tower of the Hand) but it's also connected to Shaggydog, whose eyes also burn like green fire at times. I have wondered if this means Rickon or Shaggy will be the valonquar. After all, they could both be considered "little brother's" to things harmed by Cersei, such as Bran and Sansa (mental pain) and Lady.

Another thing that I never have once paid attention to is that Tyrek Lannister, our missing golden boy, has a Marbrand for a mother AND a grandmother. He and Cersei share Jeyne Marbrand as a grandmother, but he one-up's her with his mother being Darlessa Marbrand. There has always been something very mysterious about his disappearance and maybe it has something to do with the Marbrand connection?

I never once thought of fire in regards to the Lannister's as a family (thinking this is a hint of Targaryen blood for Cersei and Jaime or perhaps Tyrion) but thinking back, Tyrion has several fire references, as well. I wonder about Jaime? I appreciate you pointing me in this direction. Personally I see quite a bit of heat and fire references in the Starks, and have wondered if they carry some Targaryen blood, but perhaps fire is important to all of these families, but not in the way that seems most obvious-ie: House Targaryen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Black Crow said:

The significance I think is the fact that the houses are sufficiently emboldened to be be preparing for a post-Targaryen Westeros - which rather undermines the argument in another place for Jon Snow being the rightful Targaryen heir.

Well, I think Jon not being any sort of Targaryen will undermine it even more.

I'm not really sure the houses were quite as emboldened as that, though.  I think they may have been hoping for Rhaegar to step in as a sane Targ.

18 hours ago, Black Crow said:

GRRM has acknowledged this peculiarity but not offered an explanation

Yes, he looks the other way sometimes in cases where reality or probability is inconvenient for him.

It reminds me of his similar peculiarity that for thousands of years after invading the south by sea, the Andals were nevertheless constantly unable to invade the North by sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JNR said:

Well, we know exactly why Jon Arryn married Lysa:

No, we don't.   If Lysa was the only young and fertile unmarried woman in the seven kingdoms, we'd know why.  Jon easily could have married a young fertile woman in the Vale or maybe elsewhere.   Instead he married the daughter of another ruler of another of the seven kingdoms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Jon/Lysa marriage is easy to explain, Jon needed a fertile wife for an heir and Hoster had to marry Lysa of after her affair with Littlefinger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brad Stark said:

Instead he married the daughter of another ruler of another of the seven kingdoms. 

Sure, but it simply did not happen because of some "pre-Rebellion alliance."

It happened because after the Battle of the Bells, he had no heir.

As for the idea that for the thousands of years before the Rebellion, the great houses "always married vassals," not other great houses... 

I'm again going to ask you to name all the heirs of all the great houses, going back thousands of years, and list their wives, so we can establish how true or false that claim is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shadow woman is one of the most interesting mysteries.   

Is this a real living woman?  'Shadow' could imply Lyanna, Elia, or anyone long dead who still influences future events. 

Is she by Euron because she is working with him, or planning to?  Or is it just a jumble of people and images that put her near Euron with no connection?

Why is the fire pale?  Is it hot or cold?

Is she tall?  Or just her shadow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JNR said:

Sure, but it simply did not happen because of some "pre-Rebellion alliance."

It happened because after the Battle of the Bells, he had no heir.

As for the idea that for the thousands of years before the Rebellion, the great houses "always married vassals," not other great houses... 

I'm again going to ask you to name all the heirs of all the great houses, going back thousands of years, and list their wives, so we can establish how true or false that claim is.

We don't know all the heirs going back to the conquest (I wouldn't count before, as the political climate is different).  If I have time, I may list what we do know. 

In the mean time, use Google, most of these trees are online. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JNR said:

Well, I think Jon not being any sort of Targaryen will undermine it even more.

I'm not really sure the houses were quite as emboldened as that, though.  I think they may have been hoping for Rhaegar to step in as a sane Targ.

If things were as complicated as Yandel seems to suggest, that may have been what Rhaegar was hoping for too,

Conversely, if we revert for a moment to both the 1993 synopsis and the Mummers'version, Aerys' behaviour was sweetness and light by comparison with Danaerys the Dragonlord, her beasties and her Dothraki Donkey Wallopers. The Targaryen name was well and truly tainted by the time she was done and any of this rightful lawful king [or queen] nonsense well out the window. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

In the mean time, use Google, most of these trees are online. 

All we have is the info from the last few decades before the Rebellion. 

But that is just the tiniest drop in the bucket compared to the total history of the great houses, which goes back many thousands of years.  We can't even begin to guess who the heirs or their wives were.

31 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

If things were as complicated as Yandel seems to suggest, that may have been what Rhaegar was hoping for too

Sure.  I think that was implied by his last remarks to Jaime.

34 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

if we revert for a moment to both the 1993 synopsis and the Mummers'version, Aerys' behaviour was sweetness and light by comparison with Danaerys the Dragonlord, her beasties and her Dothraki Donkey Wallopers

The show, yes, but the show is obviously saturated with logical failures and outright bullshit from the moment it left canon on.  

It would be like saying "On the show, we know a raven can fly a thousand miles in less than one day, so let's extrapolate from that to the books."

As for the synopsis, it simply says this:

Quote

The Dothraki invasion will be the central story of my second volume, A Dance with Dragons.

What that meant to GRRM then, or may mean for future books if it happens, we can't know yet. 

But such an invasion doesn't suggest, to me, that Dany will use one or more dragons to torch thousands of noncombatants in King's Landing after the city has already surrendered (as happened on the show). 

So I am not at all sure it would be a worse atrocity than what Aerys planned in the Wildfire Plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JNR said:

So I am not at all sure it would be a worse atrocity than what Aerys planned in the Wildfire Plot.

But no-one beyond a couple of people  knew of that. The point I'm making is that despite the fond imaginings of the R+L=J crowd not only does this story not revolve around the Targaryens, but no-one had any reason to love them, and would have even less reason once Danaerys the Dragonlord had worked them over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all, 

I have been lurking for a few weeks. I've been dying to see what others think will be the continuation of the story now that the Mummer's are done. First I'd love to hear what others think of whether Dany, Jon, Sansa, Tyrion, Arya and Bran's stories will come to the same conclusion or not. If not, then how do you think their story will go, and end? The more I lurk, the more I decided I'd like to stick around and see how well I (and we) can predict what will happen in TWOW and beyond.

My current thoughts on the 6:

Jon: I didn't like it at first, but minus the details, especially actually honoring a pledge to a dude that just sailed to Naath for... forever, I can see Jon's story ending with him living with the Free Folk or still in the Night's Watch. He may end up taking a dark turn if he needs a resurrection though. 

Sansa: I don't think her book story will end the same as the Mummer's version. I think it more likely she rules the Vale in her own right. As Lady Sansa Stark, the Vale Lords naming her heir to Lisa/Robin. It may be that she gets the Vale to fight for her, but her being Queen of the North wouldn't continue the Stark bloodline. In the books, though...Rickon is still alive.

Bran: Bran may make less sense than Sansa. Even though the actor claims D&D said GRRM says that Bran will be King... I agree the Lords of Westeros would laugh at his tales and would laugh louder at the idea of him being King of the 6 or 7 Kingdoms. But how do he and his story get from a tree throne (uh oh...) underground north of the Wall all the way to King's Landing?

Tyrion: Tyrion is one of my favorite characters so I'd love to see him end up as Hand again. Or as Lord of Casterly Rock... but so far in the books he has yet to team up with Dany. He still needs to be named her Hand AND have her conquest be successful this time...in a manner that wouldn't make him quit. I think we got too fairytale of an ending and there won't be a King Bran to name Tyrion Hand as punishment. 

Dany: In book Dany still needs to resolve her Dothraki situation, hopefully Victarion ends up being her escape from Meereen and fast forward button to Westeros. I do think we get Mad Queen Dany in a different way. Maybe she burns King's Landing "by accident" with the wildfire caches exploding. Right now I'd guess Dany dies in battle either trying to take King's Landing or after in the fight against the Others.

Arya: Arya's story may be the most interesting to me of the 6. I actually loved that she is sailing off on an adventure to the unknown west of Westeros. I'd like to find book evidence to support this. However, the Mummer's version clearly cut off her real storyline to rush her and everyone else to Westeros. We really, as far as we know, got no continuation of her book storyline at all. Yet her sailing off west of Westeros made the most sense to me of the 6. I just don't know how she gets from her training in Braavos to there. Her arc would have to include something to get her out of the Faceless Men organization or her sailing would be a Faceless Men mission.

 

With George now expecting to have a copy of TWOW in hand within 15 months, we don't have much longer to wait to see how some predictions play out! Plus we should have an even better idea of where the story is going!

If this would derail the current thread discussion, I'd be happy to hear opinions on these 6 fates in PM. I have read the past 3 Heresies and do have a few things to say and many questions as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×