Heresy 226 of wolves, dragons and other familiars

[LynnS]

16 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I think it's a hint that the gods had a hand in manipulating events during the tourney.

But what about the reaction 'all the smiles died'.  Were the gods being mocked in some way?

 

[Melifeather]

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

But what about the reaction 'all the smiles died'.  Were the gods being mocked in some way?

Well, there was the Knight of the Laughing Tree. Maybe it was the other way around? Howland prayed for a way to win and he won his tilts, but maybe the old gods were happy that they figured out a way to right the past wrong that occurred so many thousands of years ago.

[LynnS]

1 minute ago, Feather Crystal said:

Well, there was the Knight of the Laughing Tree. Maybe it was the other way around? Howland prayed for a way to win and he did, but maybe the old gods were happy that they figured out a way to right the past wrong that occurred so many thousands of years ago.

Well Aerys was certainly pissed off.  Did he think he was being mocked?  Did he instruct Rhaegar to give Lyanna the crown of roses?  Was it the Knight of the Laughing Tree or the Knight of the Mocking Tree?  LOL

[Melifeather]

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

Well Aerys was certainly pissed off.  Did he think he was being mocked?  Did he instruct Rhaegar to give Lyanna the crown of roses?  Was it the Knight of the Laughing Tree or the Knight of the Mocking Tree?  LOL

Aerys definitely thought he was being mocked. 

Might I point out that this would make a nice inverted parallel? The gods mocked the humans at the tourney and then Jon was concerned about mocking the gods.

[corbon]

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

Why would you say something like this.  

Apparently you are offended. I have no idea why. It was a reply to Crystal Feather, who was insinuating that I knew all about how prophecy works. My reply shows that no, neither I nor anyone else actually know how it works, and thinking you do gets you screwed over by it, as per the metaphors given by GRRM.

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

The business of Jon becoming a sword without a handle (metaphorically) is an old conversation, one that you haven't been party to. 

Should I apologise for not being a regular? For having the temerity to enter into discussion?

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

It's not a stretch for anyone here to think the sword could be a dragon or that the sword could be a character. 

Well apparently it is, since I was mocked for thinking it could be anything other than a metal sword - I'm aware that I was probably being mocked for preferring the literal to the metaphorical in general.
I didn't think it was a stretch for people. Just answered a question/comment/point someone made.

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

"I am the sword in the darkness, etc."  The point I was making was specifically about all the references to salt and smoke.  My comment was addressed to Frey Family Reunion.  Someone I've been conversing with for years.

Since I wasn't addressing a comment from you, unless you've moved on to a different insult I've apparently committed, I'm not quite sure what your reference is to - post 61 of yours I guess, which I didn't answer or address.

Repeated references were made by several people to Aemon's interaction with Mel, regarding AA and tPtwP being the same or not. Since that was not the relevant bit of text that shows AA and tPtwP prophesies are clearly the same (at least originally), I felt it was necessary to lay that out more clearly, since people were still misunderstanding.

And in reference to the salt and smoke, several people, yourself including if I understand #61 correctly, were indirectly pointing out how almost meaningless salt and smoke are, given there are so many ways that can be resolved to include almost anyone.
But the subject under discussion was whether the two prophecies are the same. In that context, the logic that 'salt and smoke are far too common' is backwards. It matters not that the resolution is common, its that the marker itself (its description) is unique out of all the infinite numbers of possible markers (not possible ful-fillers), and definitely in common between the two prophecies. In other words, AA prophesy is the same as tPtwP prophecy, given the 5 different specific markers they have in common. 

I absolutely agree that lots of characters could have salt and smoke applied to their birth (plus it appears that their birth's are not the relevant issue, its AA/tPtwP' birth that matters ie the emergence of the hero, not the birth of the person that becomes the hero).

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

We have beaten the bushes on the prophecies for the umpteenth time and the one new thing I got from this was Frey Family Reunion's Rhoynish connection.  Splendid.

Indeed. Beating the bushes is what this forum (wider, not just heresy) is for isn't it?

13 hours ago, LynnS said:

I'm going to move on to something else at this point.

 

Sure, Well, however I offended you, sorry. The conversation has been interesting even if its nearly all old ground.

6 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

Patchface predicted the Red Wedding.   Are you saying that if he did something specifically to bring it about, and it wouldn't happen if he didn't?

Not at all. 
I'm saying that if Walder Frey hadn't of organised the Red Wedding, it wouldn't have happened. And Patchface's 'prophecy' would have just been some meaningless drivel, not a prophecy.

6 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

That isn't prophecy, that is an instruction manual.   You may as well prophecized a cake will appear if you mix eggs, sugar and flour and bake it in the oven.

Not at all. 
Say I prophecy "tomorrow evening there will be a cake after dinner, and it will be the best cake ever". I'm certainly not going to bake it, btw - cake should be edible!
As I see it, there are several main possibilities (just the main ones to keep it simple enough to write out).
1, Someone randomly drops a cake off at our house. Its the best ever, yay. Prophecy fulfilled! how lucky!
2. My wife decides thats a great idea and bakes a cake (my wife because she likes baking, I'm terrible and hate it, and the kids are too young, not because of some masculine/feminine thing). Its the best ever. Well done wife, yay, prophecy fulfilled.
3. My wife decides thats a great idea and bakes a cake. Its good, but not the best ever. end of story. Prophecy failed.
4. nobody does anything. no cake arrives, prophecy fails. 
5. My wife decides thats a great idea and bakes a cake. Its good, but not the best ever. A cake arrives, randomly delivered, it is the best ever. Yay, prophecy fulfilled.

To me, the original statement may or may not have been a (divinely inspired) prophecy. We don't know for sure. All 5 options are possible. 
The most likely way for it to be a prophecy, and for us to get the best cake ever is 2. The least likely way for us to get cake is 4 (or rather 4+1). If we do 4, the most likely result is just 4, not 4+1. Even if my wife tries 2, most of the time she'll get 3, because you can't always make the best cake ever, only once.

If it was a true prophecy, then 1, 2 or 5 could apply. Attempting 2 gives us the best chance of fulfilling the prophecy, even if the result ends up being 5 (or 30. Acting 4 and hoping for 1, is the best way for the prophecy to turn out not to have been a divinely inspired prophecy after all..

5 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

Yes, that is actually what I am asserting. The prophecy will manifest no matter what. People can try to make it happen or interfere to try and stop it, but it will still manifest in such a way that all the details will still be there. It may unfold in an unexpected way, but I think the author has demonstrated multiple times how something can be repeated in different ways.

First point, how do you know what is divinely inspired prophecy, and what isn't? Until it actually happens?

Second point, so fate is fixed, no matter what anyone does? Why doesn't everyone stop 'fighting' then and just chill out on a tropical beach somewhere. Fates gonna happen anyway.... Ultimately that belief leads to nihilism and failure.

I see prophecy as a glimpse of the future. Not a future that will be, no matter what, but a future that can be, should be, needs to be. Things can be changed. They probably won't, because time is a huge river and little ripples of changes get lost in the general flow all the time. But it can change.  A small change can lead to bigger changes and the whole river, or a section of it, can divert.
In order for the prophecied future to happen, certain things along the way have to happen. It may be that they happen organically, or it may be that different choices made lead to changes in the flow and the prophecy never comes to fruition, or must wait until another time, another set of circumstances.

I do agree that people trying to make it happen or interfere, usually have no real effect - they are in effect mostly just making the 'choices' that were 'forseen' (or part of that forseen paradigm) anyway. 
But I also see the probability that the 'right' person in the 'right' time and the 'right' place, still needs to make the 'right' choices for the prophesy to successfully manifest. And making the 'wrong' choices will cause the prophesy to fail. It may be that the future forseen in the prophecy actually included the past where the person consciously attempted to "do the right things". In which case they better bloody well do them and not just wait for things to happen! 

[LynnS]

21 minutes ago, corbon said:

Apparently you are offended. I have no idea why. It was a reply to Crystal Feather, who was insinuating that I knew all about how prophecy works. My reply shows that no, neither I nor anyone else actually know how it works, and thinking you do gets you screwed over by it, as per the metaphors given by GRRM.

It wasn't clear to me that you were responding to Feather.  I thought you were commenting on my post to FFR about the sword without a hilt since you bring up the cock without a hilt, cock-biting, and cue cock biting and sword without a hilt etc.  What could you mean by this if it didn't have something to do with the post I made about the sword without a hilt.  This was an old conversation that I've had with FFR, one that you wouldn't know anything about where he proposed that Jon was the sword without a hilt.   His argument was rather brilliant which is why I remember it.

26 minutes ago, corbon said:

Well apparently it is, since I was mocked for thinking it could be anything other than a metal sword - I'm aware that I was probably being mocked for preferring the literal to the metaphorical in general.
I didn't think it was a stretch for people. Just answered a question/comment/point someone made.

I wasn't mocking you. I wasn't expecting you to prefer the metaphorical to the literal. That hasn't been typical of the way you have been presenting yourself.  This icon is the one we use for heretics. 

29 minutes ago, corbon said:

Since I wasn't addressing a comment from you, unless you've moved on to a different insult I've apparently committed, I'm not quite sure what your reference is to - post 61 of yours I guess, which I didn't answer or address.

Which is why I asked you to clarify what you meant.

[Black Crow]

A little tranquility and remembrance of the local house rules here could be a good thing. 

And just for the record my own feeling is that the prophecies in GRRM's world are mince. Like the horoscopes at the back of newspapers they can mean what you want them to mean, in retrospect. The problems arise in text, when characters try to pull an Manx cat and try to manipulate events in order to make the prophecy come to pass, with unhappy results

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

First point, how do you know what is divinely inspired prophecy, and what isn't? Until it actually happens?

You don't. It can be serendipitous, cyclical, or divined. And many times you don't recognize that it occurred until in hindsight.

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Second point, so fate is fixed, no matter what anyone does? Why doesn't everyone stop 'fighting' then and just chill out on a tropical beach somewhere. Fates gonna happen anyway.... Ultimately that belief leads to nihilism and failure.

I guess I differentiate between prophecy or fate and co-creation.

Prophecy is something somebody predicts will happen, and it's going to happen whether someone is an active participant or not. The Prince that was Promised was going to be born of Aerys and Rhaella's line - that was their fate. Fate is something that is unavoidable whether it's tragic or fortuitous. They might have married each other of their own volition, or Aerys could have raped his maiden sister just because he got horny after seeing someone being burned by flames, but some other circumstance could have brought them together as well. It just so happened that out of all the possible ways to get these two together, their father chose to force the marriage.

Co-creation is something that I believe is possible in the real world. You bring about what you think about and it's based upon the Law of Attraction. It's why people practice positive affirmations. Our brains are basically computers. It only believes what you tell it and then goes about creating that reality.

1 hour ago, corbon said:

I see prophecy as a glimpse of the future. Not a future that will be, no matter what, but a future that can be, should be, needs to be. Things can be changed. They probably won't, because time is a huge river and little ripples of changes get lost in the general flow all the time. But it can change.  A small change can lead to bigger changes and the whole river, or a section of it, can divert.
In order for the prophecied future to happen, certain things along the way have to happen. It may be that they happen organically, or it may be that different choices made lead to changes in the flow and the prophecy never comes to fruition, or must wait until another time, another set of circumstances.

Your definition of prophecy is actually more like how I define co-creation. Melisandre is actually trying to co-create by convincing people that Stannis fulfills a prophecy, but Stannis himself has never believed nor proclaimed that HE IS Azor Ahai reborn. He couldn't give two shits about Azor Ahai. He's on a mission to sit the Iron Throne and he's willing to use whatever tools he can get his hands on to accomplish that goal even if it means showing off a fake sword and use magic to kill his own brother. Stannis cannot be or become Azor Ahai, because that is not his fate.

That earlier quote about Archmaester Rigney is actually a nod towards Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series which also had false dragons - men that declared they were the dragon reborn, and people that had their own agendas that tried to present others as the dragon reborn, but the real dragon reborn was a teenager named Rand who never even saw himself as the dragon. ASOIAF not only has false dragons - it has Stannis as an example of a false Azor Ahai too. 

 

[Frey family reunion]

On 8/20/2019 at 11:24 AM, LynnS said:

Yes, there is lots of that.  The Wall has a smoke house and plenty of salt.  The Quiet Isle with the saltpans and their smoking beehives.  Any active seamount like Dragonstone.  Bran also tastes a salty tear when he passes through the Black Gate, but where is the smoke?  Unless it's Jon's smoking blood as he lays dying.

Didn't you say that Jon was the sword without a hilt once his consciousness passes to Ghost?  That those two things have to be put back together to make the sword whole?

It’s actually the theory I was the most confident about, because you can see the groundwork being laid back in AGOT.  The basic premise is that Jon’s consciousness (or part of it) transferred to Ghost during his stabbing.  Leaving Jon’s “shadow self” behind.  So we have Jon/Ghost as the hilt of the sword, and UnJon resurrected (perhaps by Melisandre or through a sacrifice of Melisandre) returning as a darker version of himself, the blade of the sword (or the pointy end).

So perhaps Jon’s true role isn’t AA or TPTWP, but as an embodiment of Lightbringer.  And as swords are wont to do in mythology, he gets broken in half ( a la the Norse sword Gram or the LOTR sword Anduril or perhaps ASOIAF’s Ice).  But it’s Jon’s consciousness/psyche that gets broken in two.

It’s also a bit of a nod to Jungian psychology.  In Jungian psychology we are composed of our animus/psyche and our shadow self.  Our shadow self is our darker impulses that we try to disassociate ourselves from.  It’s only when we are able to integrate our animus with our shadow selves do we obtain self actualization.

So perhaps Martin is using these themes in a fantasy setting, which would require the two halves of Jon to reintegrate, like the sword Gram was forged back together creating a more powerful weapon than before.  (And a weapon that was used to slay the dwarf turned dragon Fafnir, a role that could very well be played by Tyrion).

I’m less confident about this theory now because of the rumors that Martin was dissatisfied with the direction he took a major character and was rewriting a good part of the book.  Which makes me wonder if Martin planned on taking Jon down this route, but found that it didn’t work in the execution.  

[Frey family reunion]

4 hours ago, LynnS said:

For some reason, their near drowning invokes the Drowned God for me.  I would add Samwell in Braavos and Tyrion at the Bridge of Souls.  And Patchface.

I also came across this passage.  What do you make of it?

 

Rebirth = a baptism.  So when one is supposed to be reborn in smoke and salt, I think we have to think of a character or characters who have been baptized in smoke and salt.

The clearest parallel to a a Christian baptism is what we see in the Iron Islands.  But the Ironborn are baptized in salt water.  And we have a major character in Theon who returns to his roots in the Iron Islands and half-heartedly allows himself to be baptized in salt.

Then we have Stannis who also half-heartedly allows himself to be baptized as AA by Melisandre in the smoking ruins of the statues of the Seven.

So here we clearly have two different characters one baptized or reborn in salt, and the other in smoke.

Interestingly enough both characters have been brought together in Winds of Winter.

We also have two characters in Davos and Tyrion who have even more literally been reborn in a salt water bay, which had been set on fire.  And both seem to have some type of metaphysical experience after their near death experiences.  Davos hears a disembodied voice while Tyrion has his dream/memory invoking a post apocalyptic waste land, which may or may not have been the aftermath of the Blackwater battle. 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

You don't. It can be serendipitous, cyclical, or divined. And many times you don't recognize that it occurred until in hindsight.

Or not actually truly prophecy at all? 

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

I guess I differentiate between prophecy or fate and co-creation.

Prophecy is something somebody predicts will happen, and it's going to happen whether someone is an active participant or not. The Prince that was Promised was going to be born of Aerys and Rhaella's line - that was their fate. Fate is something that is unavoidable whether it's tragic or fortuitous. 

So you are saying its impossible that Rhaella could have died before Rhaegar was born?

I can't accept that fate is completely unavoidable, That by definition leads to a nihilistic philosophy and ultimately, death and the failure of prophecy (except for that one prophecy!) Ultimately, determinism (prophecy is determinant) is a self defeating realism.

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

They might have married each other of their own volition, or Aerys could have raped his maiden sister just because he got horny after seeing someone being burned by flames, but some other circumstance could have brought them together as well. It just so happened that out of all the possible ways to get these two together, their father chose to force the marriage.

Yup. I can agree with that part. 
But I don't agree that, for example, it was impossible for Rhaella to die before the child was born. She had the choice to commit suicide, for example, and she could have taken that choice, which would have broken the prophecy. She didn't, but she did have that power, that choice, it was a possibility.

1 hour ago, Feather Crystal said:

Co-creation is something that I believe is possible in the real world. You bring about what you think about and it's based upon the Law of Attraction. It's why people practice positive affirmations. Our brains are basically computers. It only believes what you tell it and then goes about creating that reality.

Your definition of prophecy is actually more like how I define co-creation. Melisandre is actually trying to co-create by convincing people that Stannis fulfills a prophecy, but Stannis himself has never believed nor proclaimed that HE IS Azor Ahai reborn. He couldn't give two shits about Azor Ahai. He's on a mission to sit the Iron Throne and he's willing to use whatever tools he can get his hands on to accomplish that goal even if it means showing off a fake sword and use magic to kill his own brother. Stannis cannot be or become Azor Ahai, because that is not his fate.

 

I don't think of mine as co-creation like you describe.
In mine, its not necessarily a requirement that someone (not necessarily the subject) be 'trying' to fulfill the prophecy. But it is a possibility that the prophecy will only be fulfilled because someone (the right someone) tried. Its also a possibility that it will be fulfilled without anyone 'trying' (ie including your belief), and also a possibility that it will fail, not be fulfilled at all.

The origin, IIRC, of this particular sub-conversation, was (paraphrased) the question, "why would Aemon want to go to Dany (or send another Maester) and guide her?" (#52) @Brad Stark seems to agree with your beliefs about prophecy in asking that question.
I think my understanding allows for Aemon's thoughts, right or wrong. I think your understanding just labels him a fool - it is pointless to try to do anything to help once she's been confirmed as the 'prophesied hero' (in his understanding), because its all just going to work out anyway, yay! 

Each to his own, I was addressing the original thought about Aemon's wish to 'help' Dany.

[LynnS]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

I’m less confident about this theory now because of the rumors that Martin was dissatisfied with the direction he took a major character and was rewriting a good part of the book.  Which makes me wonder if Martin planned on taking Jon down this route, but found that it didn’t work in the execution.  

Yes, that the one alright.  I still like it.  I do wonder what will happen in the aftermath of Jon's assassination.  The immediate jeopardy will be that someone will want to burn his body.   I can see Borroq, Val and Morna taking him off the crypts, in the lichyard, to stop that from happening; although that would be counter to the normal practices.  

[alienarea]

I'm just a little bit not sober and have a feeling it helps the overall picture.

GRRM is a smart bitch and playing to maximize his profit.

He puts out conflicting and at times contradicting information retreating to an unreliable narrator concept to disguise he makes up stuff as he goes. The pieces contradict and we try hard creating a logic that makes sende.

[Melifeather]

2 hours ago, corbon said:

Or not actually truly prophecy at all? 

So you are saying its impossible that Rhaella could have died before Rhaegar was born?

I can't accept that fate is completely unavoidable, That by definition leads to a nihilistic philosophy and ultimately, death and the failure of prophecy (except for that one prophecy!) Ultimately, determinism (prophecy is determinant) is a self defeating realism.

Yup. I can agree with that part. 
But I don't agree that, for example, it was impossible for Rhaella to die before the child was born. She had the choice to commit suicide, for example, and she could have taken that choice, which would have broken the prophecy. She didn't, but she did have that power, that choice, it was a possibility.

I don't think of mine as co-creation like you describe.
In mine, its not necessarily a requirement that someone (not necessarily the subject) be 'trying' to fulfill the prophecy. But it is a possibility that the prophecy will only be fulfilled because someone (the right someone) tried. Its also a possibility that it will be fulfilled without anyone 'trying' (ie including your belief), and also a possibility that it will fail, not be fulfilled at all.

The origin, IIRC, of this particular sub-conversation, was (paraphrased) the question, "why would Aemon want to go to Dany (or send another Maester) and guide her?" (#52) @Brad Stark seems to agree with your beliefs about prophecy in asking that question.
I think my understanding allows for Aemon's thoughts, right or wrong. I think your understanding just labels him a fool - it is pointless to try to do anything to help once she's been confirmed as the 'prophesied hero' (in his understanding), because its all just going to work out anyway, yay! 

Each to his own, I was addressing the original thought about Aemon's wish to 'help' Dany.

Rhaella could not and did not die until she produced a third child that would live. With all of her miscarriages it seems likely someone was poisoning her.

[St Daga]

On 8/20/2019 at 3:41 PM, Feather Crystal said:

There's not enough time for Elia to give birth to a third child. Aegon was said to be 10-14 months old when he died. Elia would have to have conceived a third near the end of 282, but would still be pregnant when she died in 283.

 I know we have discussed the timeline at length but I don't think anything is finalized. However, if we look at at the World Book claiming that at the beginning of 282, Rhaegar was not at Dragonstone with Elia and Prince Aegon, then Aegon was already born by Jan/Feb 282. If she waits 6 months to conceive again, then that puts her getting pregnant July/Aug of 282 and due to deliver as early as April/May 283 at the earliest. At the latest, Elia could have conceived just prior to Rhaegar's marching off to the Trident. It could have been Elia who Jaime thinks was Rhaella, the hooded woman stuck out of the Red Keep, on her way to Dragonstone. And whom ever Gregor Clegane raped and murdered was not the real Elia Martell. Actually Daenerys' later birth date fits conception closer to Rhaegar's death, if she truly was born in 284, which is when the wiki places Dany's birth. And if she was born earlier, then a conception as early as July/Aug 282 could work, as well. All we really know, and that is from the wiki, is that Jon and Dany are separated by 8-9 months. 

Of course, this idea depends on Elia not dying at the Red Keep during the Sack. Even if Aegon was 10-14 months when he died (supposedly died), that doesn't alter the fact that IF Elia was again pregnant and snuck out of the Red Keep after the loyalist loss at the Trident, then Dany could still be the babe born on Dragonstone well after the Sack of Kings Landing and the end of the Rebellion. The only difference is that her parents are not Aerys and Rhaella, but Rhaegar and Elia. I understand its tinfoil, but I think it's possible. 

I would have pulled a few quotes but I have been having problem with this site for the last week. If I don't respond back, it's probably because I can't. The page shut down three times on me just trying to make this post. 

[Melifeather]

5 minutes ago, St Daga said:

However, if we look at at the World Book claiming that at the beginning of 282, Rhaegar was not at Dragonstone with Elia and Prince Aegon, then Aegon was already born by Jan/Feb 282. If she waits 6 months to conceive again, then that puts her getting pregnant July/Aug of 282 and due to deliver as early as April/May 283 at the earliest.

Having the birth in April 283 when Aegon was 15 months old? GRRM said Aegon was 10-14 months old during the Sack. When are you suggesting the Sack took place then?

I don’t see any reason to disbelieve Daenerys isn’t Aerys and Rhaella’s child. What purpose would that serve?

IMO the wiki has an incorrect birth year for Daenerys, but I’m going to refrain from going down this path, because it doesn’t fit the current topic.

[LynnS]

On 8/20/2019 at 3:01 PM, corbon said:

Two of the dragons have red amongst their flames. Drogon, black flames shot with red, sounds like a black iron sword with red flames.

I can easily see Drogon as a flaming sword even if his fire is primarily black.  This is the 'sword' that Dany wields because I can't see her actually using a real sword.

Specifically Mel is talking about a red sword and this brings me to the tale that AA slew a beast and the sword was always warm afterwards.  I think this is more likely to be the red sword of legend.  Potentially the dawn sword which may take on the fiery attributes by piercing a flaming heart.

Then there is Jon, who may have been marked by R'hllor as one of the 'fiery hands' when he burned his hand fighting Othor.  IMO Jon will become the sword in the darkness by some means we don't know yet. 

So potentially, there will be more than one 'flaming sword'.

I also think that both Dany and Jon will be/or have been reborn in salt and smoke.  In Dany's case, I think that's already happened and we will see what happens to Jon, soon I hope.

Like everything else, I don't think the salt and smoke interpretation is literal or as specific as we might think.  The salt tear that Bran tastes passing through the Black Gate and Jon' smoking blood, works for me.  The salt tears that Dany sheds for the sacrifice of her son and the smoke of the ritual to raise Drogo also works for me. There is plenty of blood in that event as well.

 

[LynnS]

On 8/18/2019 at 4:10 AM, Black Crow said:

Mel claims the story was written down [not necessarily originating] in the books of Asshai 3,000 years ago and Aemon says she's talking about the Battle for the Dawn. He has read the Jade Companion so knows what she is talking about. She thinks he's talking about the Prince, but he refers to the Targaryens  being mistaken about it for 1,000 years.

Jon has read the section that Aemon marks for him in the Jade Compendium and now I wonder if Aemon was literally telling Jon to arm himself with this knowledge.

Quote

 

A Dance with Dragons - Jon III

"His Grace is not an easy man. Few are, who wear a crown. Many good men have been bad kings, Maester Aemon used to say, and some bad men have been good kings."

"He would know." Aemon Targaryen had seen nine kings upon the Iron Throne. He had been a king's son, a king's brother, a king's uncle. "I looked at that book Maester Aemon left me. The Jade Compendium. The pages that told of Azor Ahai. Lightbringer was his sword. Tempered with his wife's blood if Votar can be believed. Thereafter Lightbringer was never cold to the touch, but warm as Nissa Nissa had been warm. In battle the blade burned fiery hot. Once Azor Ahai fought a monster. When he thrust the sword through the belly of the beast, its blood began to boil. Smoke and steam poured from its mouth, its eyes melted and dribbled down its cheeks, and its body burst into flame."

Clydas blinked. "A sword that makes its own heat …"

"… would be a fine thing on the Wall." Jon put aside his wine cup and drew on his black moleskin gloves. "A pity that the sword that Stannis wields is cold. I'll be curious to see how his Lightbringer behaves in battle. Thank you for the wine. Ghost, with me." Jon Snow raised the hood of his cloak and pulled at the door. The white wolf followed him back into the night.

 

I wonder if Jon will figure out that plunging his sword into Mel's firery heart will change his magic sword into a sword that is alway warm to the touch. 

[Matthew.]

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

I can easily see Drogon as a flaming sword even if his fire is primarily black.  This is the 'sword' that Dany wields because I can't see her actually using a real sword.

I agree, and while I have my own theories about a new Lightbringer (as a literal sword) being forged, I'm content to accept Drogon as a "burning sword;" besides the fact that I don't think it's that unreasonable as a figurative interpretation, I think that Dany also has a lot going for her in terms of her character arc.

Particularly, more than any other character - at least for now - I think that her journey in AGOT is the one that most closely thematically parallels the AA/Nissa Nissa tale: she slowly 'forged' her weapon over the course of the novel, beginning by leaving the eggs in burning braziers, holding them close to her belly while she was pregnant with Rhaego, and finally sacrificed what she loved most in the world to acquire her magical weapon. 

In addition, while a lot of emphasis is being placed on the idea of AAR defeating the Others, there appear to be certain revolutionary expectations being placed on the coming of the fire messiah as well:

Quote

 "Benerro has sent forth the word from Volantis. Her coming is the fulfillment of an ancient prophecy. From smoke and salt was she born to make the world anew."

...

In Volantis, thousands of slaves and freedmen crowd the temple plaza every night to hear Benerro shriek of bleeding stars and a sword of fire that will cleanse the world. He has been preaching that Volantis will surely burn if the triarchs take up arms against the silver queen."

Obviously, a lot of that is colored by Benerro's personal ambitions, and the political situation in Volantis, but the notion of a prophesied figure coming to re-order the world is not exclusive to Benerro's preaching, and perhaps not exclusive to the AAR prophesy. It's reminiscent to me of Aeron's Shade of the Evening visions of Euron:

(Spoilers TWOW)

Spoiler

“The bleeding star bespoke the end,” he said to Aeron. “These are the last days, when the world shall be broken and remade. A new god shall be born from the graves and charnel pits.” take up arms against the silver queen."

There's also the Dothraki idea of a prophesied messiah - a conqueror whose Khalasar will stretch to the ends of the earth, and who appears to Dany in her HoTU visions with a burning city in the background - and this allusion to prophesy from the Green Grace:

Quote

"We are an old people. Ancestors are important to us. Wed Hizdahr zo Loraq and make a son with him, a son whose father is the harpy, whose mother is the dragon. In him the prophecies shall be fulfilled, and your enemies will melt away like snow."

He shall be the stallion that mounts the world. Dany knew how it went with prophecies. 

The coming of a prophesied figure whose enemies will die in fire appears to be a bit of a running theme.

[Black Crow]

1 hour ago, Matthew. said:

The coming of a prophesied figure whose enemies will die in fire appears to be a bit of a running theme.

Up to a point. As I read these prophecies [and Mel's thought] they seem to be about an apocalyptic cleansing of the world in which only the elect will be saved. 

Or to put it another way and to paraphrase Craster, you're going to have to be right with the Gods and have a bunker handy when the the big red button gets pressed and the nuclear holocaust begins