Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
King Adrian Storm

Major hint that Bran will be King

Recommended Posts

Melisandre POV:

"Show me Stannis Lord. Show me your King, your instrument..."  "A face took shape within the hearth. Stannis? She thought, for just a moment... but no, these were not his features. A wooden face, corpse white. Was this the enemy? A thousand red eyes floated in the rising flames. He sees me. Beside him, a boy with a wolf's face threw back his head and howled."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean this should be taken as a hint that Bran will also become king by the end of ADOS?

 

I've never believed the theory that Bran will sit the Iron Throne. I don't have an alternate explanation for this quote, but my opposition is grounded in the practical realities of succession. George tries to be as realistic as possible with regards to real world historical politics, and the Starks do not have ANY claim to the throne, at all. No Targaryen princess has ever married into House Stark, nor has the non-Targaryen descendant of any Targaryen prince or princess. Certainly, power is power (Varys) and Robert's blood-based claim was a justification pasted over his military victories over the Targaryen armies (Renly), but a claim to rights through descent from Aegon the Conquerer is a necessary prerequisite to sitting the Iron Throne. The Starks are neither well known enough nor militarily strong enough to put one of their own on the throne to rule all of Westeros. Without a blood link to the Targaryens there's no way the other noble houses would accept a Stark royal dynasty.

In medieval politics the only ways to assume control over a territory were through military force (conquest) or a claim seen as legitimate by the other power players in the region. Westeros is grounded in real world type medieval politics and the North is NOT strong enough to conquer the other six kingdoms and the Starks have the same claim to the throne (i.e. none) that other noble houses like the Tyrells, the Lannisters, or the Hightowers have. It would be more likely for a Martell, a Velaryon, or even a Plumm to sit the Iron Throne, as those three houses all had Targaryen princesses marry into them over the close to 300 years of Targaryen rule.

Personally I see three possible scenarios for the endgame, in terms of politics:

1. The Seven Kingdoms split into two or more independent kingdoms - probably not the same kingdoms from before the conquest, for example a Stark becomes monarch of the North and the Riverlands (uniting Ned's claim to Winterfell and the North and Catelyn's claim to Riverun and the Riverlands and maybe also Harrenhal (through Catelyn's mother Minisa Whent)). If this monarch is Sansa the kingdom might also the Vale of Arryn, through marriage to Harry the Heir.

2. A Targaryen claimant (Dany, fAegon, Stannis, Jon as Rhaegar's son, someone else, or a combination of (married) claimants) takes the Iron Throne and restores Targaryen rule over the Seven Kingdoms.

3. A Targaryen claimant takes the Iron Throne and reigns over a portion of the Seven Kingdoms, with one or more regions (e.g. Dorne or the Iron Islands) becoming independent nations.

I personally think that scenario 1 or 3 is more likely than scenario 2, but I don't consider Bran (or any Stark) ruling the Seven Kingdoms from King's Landing to be at all possible or plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 3:00 PM, King Adrian Storm said:

Melisandre POV:

"Show me Stannis Lord. Show me your King, your instrument..."  "A face took shape within the hearth. Stannis? She thought, for just a moment... but no, these were not his features. A wooden face, corpse white. Was this the enemy? A thousand red eyes floated in the rising flames. He sees me. Beside him, a boy with a wolf's face threw back his head and howled."

It's a good find. I wonder if it's describing two separate people, the "wooden face with a thousand red eyes" being the three-eyed raven, and the boy with the wolf's face being Bran.

Makes me wonder if the three-eyed raven is manipulating Mel's visions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 3:00 PM, King Adrian Storm said:

Melisandre POV:

"Show me Stannis Lord. Show me your King, your instrument..."  "A face took shape within the hearth. Stannis? She thought, for just a moment... but no, these were not his features. A wooden face, corpse white. Was this the enemy? A thousand red eyes floated in the rising flames. He sees me. Beside him, a boy with a wolf's face threw back his head and howled."

"Your instrument" doesn't mean "king", and even "your King" doesn't have to literally mean political throne king - just like Bran's wolf face is metaphorical, so can be the king title.

 

It's possible, but clearly the show writers were confused about it as in s7 they had him said he couldn't be a Lord of anything.

 

On 5/23/2020 at 1:56 PM, Rhaenyra's Fool said:

Do you mean this should be taken as a hint that Bran will also become king by the end of ADOS?

 

I've never believed the theory that Bran will sit the Iron Throne. I don't have an alternate explanation for this quote, but my opposition is grounded in the practical realities of succession. George tries to be as realistic as possible with regards to real world historical politics, and the Starks do not have ANY claim to the throne, at all. No Targaryen princess has ever married into House Stark, nor has the non-Targaryen descendant of any Targaryen prince or princess. Certainly, power is power (Varys) and Robert's blood-based claim was a justification pasted over his military victories over the Targaryen armies (Renly), but a claim to rights through descent from Aegon the Conquerer is a necessary prerequisite to sitting the Iron Throne. The Starks are neither well known enough nor militarily strong enough to put one of their own on the throne to rule all of Westeros. Without a blood link to the Targaryens there's no way the other noble houses would accept a Stark royal dynasty.

In medieval politics the only ways to assume control over a territory were through military force (conquest) or a claim seen as legitimate by the other power players in the region. Westeros is grounded in real world type medieval politics and the North is NOT strong enough to conquer the other six kingdoms and the Starks have the same claim to the throne (i.e. none) that other noble houses like the Tyrells, the Lannisters, or the Hightowers have. It would be more likely for a Martell, a Velaryon, or even a Plumm to sit the Iron Throne, as those three houses all had Targaryen princesses marry into them over the close to 300 years of Targaryen rule.

Personally I see three possible scenarios for the endgame, in terms of politics:

1. The Seven Kingdoms split into two or more independent kingdoms - probably not the same kingdoms from before the conquest, for example a Stark becomes monarch of the North and the Riverlands (uniting Ned's claim to Winterfell and the North and Catelyn's claim to Riverun and the Riverlands and maybe also Harrenhal (through Catelyn's mother Minisa Whent)). If this monarch is Sansa the kingdom might also the Vale of Arryn, through marriage to Harry the Heir.

2. A Targaryen claimant (Dany, fAegon, Stannis, Jon as Rhaegar's son, someone else, or a combination of (married) claimants) takes the Iron Throne and restores Targaryen rule over the Seven Kingdoms.

3. A Targaryen claimant takes the Iron Throne and reigns over a portion of the Seven Kingdoms, with one or more regions (e.g. Dorne or the Iron Islands) becoming independent nations.

I personally think that scenario 1 or 3 is more likely than scenario 2, but I don't consider Bran (or any Stark) ruling the Seven Kingdoms from King's Landing to be at all possible or plausible.

Well those rules only apply as long as they apply, don't they - if the story starts out as realistic middle ages but then magic takes over everything maybe they will crown a psychic God-King, no matter what his name is?

 

Although idk Bran becoming king rings the falsest to me, out of all the late season developments; a lot of it has to do with the way it happened in the show, but still meh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for pointing this out and I do think its a clue. There is also a conversation between Jon the Old Bear that suggests Jon follows Aemon and Bran follows Aegon V. Bran wouldn't sit the Iron Throne it would be the end of that era. GRRM is just very screwed in terms of dropping that 5 year gap and making him too young to begin with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2020 at 7:56 AM, Rhaenyra's Fool said:

Do you mean this should be taken as a hint that Bran will also become king by the end of ADOS?

 

I've never believed the theory that Bran will sit the Iron Throne. I don't have an alternate explanation for this quote, but my opposition is grounded in the practical realities of succession. George tries to be as realistic as possible with regards to real world historical politics, and the Starks do not have ANY claim to the throne, at all. No Targaryen princess has ever married into House Stark, nor has the non-Targaryen descendant of any Targaryen prince or princess. Certainly, power is power (Varys) and Robert's blood-based claim was a justification pasted over his military victories over the Targaryen armies (Renly), but a claim to rights through descent from Aegon the Conquerer is a necessary prerequisite to sitting the Iron Throne. The Starks are neither well known enough nor militarily strong enough to put one of their own on the throne to rule all of Westeros. Without a blood link to the Targaryens there's no way the other noble houses would accept a Stark royal dynasty.

In medieval politics the only ways to assume control over a territory were through military force (conquest) or a claim seen as legitimate by the other power players in the region. Westeros is grounded in real world type medieval politics and the North is NOT strong enough to conquer the other six kingdoms and the Starks have the same claim to the throne (i.e. none) that other noble houses like the Tyrells, the Lannisters, or the Hightowers have. It would be more likely for a Martell, a Velaryon, or even a Plumm to sit the Iron Throne, as those three houses all had Targaryen princesses marry into them over the close to 300 years of Targaryen rule.

Personally I see three possible scenarios for the endgame, in terms of politics:

1. The Seven Kingdoms split into two or more independent kingdoms - probably not the same kingdoms from before the conquest, for example a Stark becomes monarch of the North and the Riverlands (uniting Ned's claim to Winterfell and the North and Catelyn's claim to Riverun and the Riverlands and maybe also Harrenhal (through Catelyn's mother Minisa Whent)). If this monarch is Sansa the kingdom might also the Vale of Arryn, through marriage to Harry the Heir.

2. A Targaryen claimant (Dany, fAegon, Stannis, Jon as Rhaegar's son, someone else, or a combination of (married) claimants) takes the Iron Throne and restores Targaryen rule over the Seven Kingdoms.

3. A Targaryen claimant takes the Iron Throne and reigns over a portion of the Seven Kingdoms, with one or more regions (e.g. Dorne or the Iron Islands) becoming independent nations.

I personally think that scenario 1 or 3 is more likely than scenario 2, but I don't consider Bran (or any Stark) ruling the Seven Kingdoms from King's Landing to be at all possible or plausible.

As far as Bran having no chance of claiming the throne through his bloodline, by the end of the story Jon could be revealed as the true heir, and when it's time for him to become king he turns it down like maester Aemon did. Then through Jon's bloodline the next person through succession would be Bran, especially if Jon becomes a legitimized Stark at some point. (Assuming Aegon and Dany die).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King Adrian Storm said:

As far as Bran having no chance of claiming the throne through his bloodline, by the end of the story Jon could be revealed as the true heir, and when it's time for him to become king he turns it down like maester Aemon did. Then through Jon's bloodline the next person through succession would be Bran, especially if Jon becomes a legitimized Stark at some point. (Assuming Aegon and Dany die).

Bran is not of Jon's bloodline. People always forget that. Their shared bloodline is Stark via Lyanna Stark. The only bloodline of Jon's that would count here is the Targ one and Bran has zero of that in him. Jon can't claim the throne via his Targ bloodline and abdicate to a non-Targ. There are plenty of people with Targ blood left in the books, such as Edric Storm who also happens to be a Baratheon (aka the last legitimate regime). The Starks have no bloodline designs on any throne except the one in the North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mystical said:

Bran is not of Jon's bloodline. People always forget that. Their shared bloodline is Stark via Lyanna Stark. The only bloodline of Jon's that would count here is the Targ one and Bran has zero of that in him. Jon can't claim the throne via his Targ bloodline and abdicate to a non-Targ. There are plenty of people with Targ blood left in the books, such as Edric Storm who also happens to be a Baratheon (aka the last legitimate regime). The Starks have no bloodline designs on any throne except the one in the North.

By the end of the story it's most likely that all possible Targ's will be out of the picture in claiming the throne. Jon won't pursue the throne, and Dany and Aegon will probably die somehow. Edric Storm is in the free cities and I don't think he will be returning to Westeros. Jon and Bran ARE related. If Jon is legitimized as a Stark, then Bran becomes his heir.  That is not entirely impossible.

In terms of story it makes sense as well. Westeros needs to reform after the Others are dealt with. You don't do that by putting another Targaryen on the throne.

Hints Bran could be King in the end:

  • Mel's vision asking to see her king and when a face takes shape it's Bran,
  • Lots of foreshadowing of Bran watching over cities watching everything that's going on like a king would. (Also 3EC)
  • It's made a point how men give in to their desires easily and, and Bran becoming crippled takes that away pretty much. He can't have sex, and he can't fight.
  • Bran gives good counsel while he's ruling in Winterfell in ACOK.
  • The first men and andals came to Westeors and overthrew the cotf etc., this is their way of revenge by sitting a greenseer on the throne.
  • Bran's direwolf being named summer, hinting at Bran rebuilding Westeros after the long night ends.
  • Bran had the first chapter and he will likely have the last.
  • Jaime trying to kill Bran early on in the books, mirrors Jaime killing his own king in an ironic way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Hints Bran could be King in the end:

  • Lots of foreshadowing of Bran watching over cities watching everything that's going on like a king would. (Also 3EC)

To me it was more a sign that Bran might become a sort of God… (the views from the sky…)

  • Bran gives good counsel while he's ruling in Winterfell in ACOK.

I've always though that these scene (with a very wise Bran, specially at his age) was foreshadowing something important, like a key-position somewhere…

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

In terms of story it makes sense as well. Westeros needs to reform after the Others are dealt with. You don't do that by putting another Targaryen on the throne.

Why would a Stark be better though? They are all still children and will still be children by the end of the story. Children should not rule, especially over a devastated continent. And of course Westeros needs reforms but having a single ruler on a throne is the same old, same old.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Mel's vision asking to see her king and when a face takes shape it's Bran,

Mel? Visions? Really?

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Lots of foreshadowing of Bran watching over cities watching everything that's going on like a king would. (Also 3EC)

Yes, we call that surveillance state. A king can't see everything everywhere unless you are asserting that all the Kings have had this power. Limitations on a ruler are necessary. A ruler that can see everything is a frightening concept.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

It's made a point how men give in to their desires easily and, and Bran becoming crippled takes that away pretty much. He can't have sex, and he can't fight.

Bran doesn't give into his desires? So when he wargs Hodor for shits and giggles, which is a form of rape, that doesn't have anything to do with desire? Imagine if he gets even more powerful, to the point of being able to do that to a healthy human brain. Free will would be nonexistent then. That's frightening.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Bran gives good counsel while he's ruling in Winterfell in ACOK.

Not really, the older and more experienced ones who are helping him do just as much, if not more.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

The first men and andals came to Westeors and overthrew the cotf etc., this is their way of revenge by sitting a greenseer on the throne.

How is this a good ending? The whole story was basically how the American Indians waited a couple thousand years to finally get revenge on the people who exterminated them. Even though the current generations had nothing to do with what happened back then and are innocent. Especially in this saga where GRRM has made it a point about the futility of revenge.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Bran's direwolf being named summer, hinting at Bran rebuilding Westeros after the long night ends.

Bran is a summer child. Nothing to do with rebuilding, especially since the last book is called Dream of SPRING and not Dream of Summer. Making Winterfell out of snow, now that's a metaphor for rebuilding. A direwolf being named Summer is not. Not to mention that Ned's dream was to re-build/re-settle The Gift and not the entirety of Westeros.

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Bran had the first chapter and he will likely have the last.

Never understood the significance of that. So what if he did? If Euron had been the first chapter, would everyone be arguing he will be King of Westeros at the end of the story just because he was the first POV?

5 hours ago, King Adrian Storm said:

Jaime trying to kill Bran early on in the books, mirrors Jaime killing his own king in an ironic way. 

This only works if you assume Bran will actually be King. Otherwise it's meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What makes you think Bran will still be a boy at the end of the series. The long night isn't going to come and go like it did in the show. ADOS will probablly last 5-10 years. That way the characters can age up and mature. If the Others are defeated in less than a year when the stories say the first long night lasted an entire generation, it would be super underwhelming.

2. Yes, mel's visions. The point of her vision was to see how she misinterprets everything. When she saw Bran she assumed he was the enemy, not her king. George wouldn't have wasted her entire chapter to show visions of things that will never happen.

3. Bran watching over the city is just a visual metaphor that you could relate to a king.

4. Bran doesn't know he's breaking the rules by warging into hodor, and he's not doing it for fun. He does it when he's in a serious situation. He will eventually learn what he's doing is wrong. Probably after hodor's "hold the door" moment.

5. He does give good counsel, and even so he's learning how to be a better leader from Luwin and ser Rodrick.

6. You're exaggerating about the native american concept. The real analogy would be a native american became president in the end.

7. Have you not noticed that the direwolf names hint at the fates of the stark children. And you're in denial if you think George doesn't mean summer when he titles the book spring. It's just a better title.

8. But Euron didn't have the 1st chapter. Bran was the first character George thought of when he created this whole story. Theres good reason to think that the first character he created in his mind would end up being king in the end too.

9. I do assume Bran will be king in the end. Ya know why? Because George told the writers of the show and the actor who played Bran this. If the showrunners had their way Jon or Dany would have ended up on the throne. D&D didn't care about Bran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2020 at 1:35 PM, King Adrian Storm said:

ADOS will probablly last 5-10 years. That way the characters can age up and mature.

Wasnt that supposed to be the 5 year gap after Feast, that didnt work out. How would this work in the last book? I dont think GRRM has ever sped up a war through exposition. I recall him saying something like, if a 9 year old has to save the world, so be it.*

*correction, it was a 12 year old

Edited by Rose of Red Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another bit of foreshadowing is when Rodrik tells Bran in ACOK "You've done well so far and I believe you will make a fine lord one day" or something along those lines.

I like the idea of Bran as king. There's a poetry to it, the war starts with Jaime throwing him out a window and ends with him as king. I agree he'll probably have the last POV chapter after having the first.

Just don't see how he gets from where he is currently in the books to becoming king. The show obviously executed the whole thing horribly. He's not going to become king because "he has the best story" in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2020 at 8:46 PM, Rose of Red Lake said:

I recall him saying something like, if a 9 year old has to save the world, so be it.*

*correction, it was a 12 year old

And I don't understand why some people use this as some kind of justification for Bran becoming King. Saving the world is different from ruling the world. A kid can absolutely save the world but should they really be ruling it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D&D already admitted they had Arya kill the Night King as fan service. So anything after season 6 should be taken with a huge grain of salt as to potential plot impacts on Winds and Dream. Assuming we see either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2020 at 5:34 PM, Lord Lannister said:

D&D already admitted they had Arya kill the Night King as fan service. So anything after season 6 should be taken with a huge grain of salt as to potential plot impacts on Winds and Dream. Assuming we see either.

Except that HBO and the actor of Bran confirmed that Bran becoming King came straight from GRRM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest issue with Bran becoming King is the following:

When once asked why he begun writing ASOIAF, GRRM said that he was allways dissatisfied with the ending of LotR, where Tolkien wrote about how Aragorn ruled good and wise for years after. He wanted to know what that meant. He wanted to write a story, about what makes a good king. GRRM answer to that is, it seems, an All-Knowing God-King with superpowers. Well, thanks Einstein. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2020 at 1:46 AM, Dalinar said:

My biggest issue with Bran becoming King is the following:

When once asked why he begun writing ASOIAF, GRRM said that he was allways dissatisfied with the ending of LotR, where Tolkien wrote about how Aragorn ruled good and wise for years after. He wanted to know what that meant. He wanted to write a story, about what makes a good king. GRRM answer to that is, it seems, an All-Knowing God-King with superpowers. Well, thanks Einstein. 

I think this quote came up as his defence of Dany and Jon's arcs in Dance where you see the day to day decision making. He was kind of defending his five year gap filler.

All knowing god king doesnt have to be the way it turns out. Bran could be mentored by the free folk's warg council. They have strict social norms about how to handle magic. I do think Bran is GRRM's version of Harry Seldon and psychohistory. Rule by a logician, not a god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2020 at 9:46 AM, Dalinar said:

My biggest issue with Bran becoming King is the following:

When once asked why he begun writing ASOIAF, GRRM said that he was allways dissatisfied with the ending of LotR, where Tolkien wrote about how Aragorn ruled good and wise for years after. He wanted to know what that meant. He wanted to write a story, about what makes a good king. GRRM answer to that is, it seems, an All-Knowing God-King with superpowers. Well, thanks Einstein. 

Bran's becoming king might not be a  happy ending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...