Jump to content

Who forged Ice?


Brandon Ice-Eyes

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dsjj251 said:

Since the land for Riverrun was given to House Tully by an Andal, it is most certainly not irrelevant. but nice try. 

It's irrelevant since you have no clue when the landings in the North started. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, frenin said:

It's irrelevant since you hafve no clue when the landings in the North started. 

The Andal invasion started in the Vale. 

King Yorwyck Royce who first fought the Shetts and Graftons is the grandfather of Robar II Royce, the last firstman King of the Vale who lost his Kingdom to House Arryn

Roland II Arryn, who was killed Tristifer IV Mudd, is the 3rd great grandson of Artys Arryn, the first king of the unified Vale(the Corbrays controlled the fingers before this, thats key). 

Tristifer V, the son of Trystifer IV, was the last King of the Rivers and Hills , and Since King Armistead Vance killed Tristifer IV and beat Tristifer V in battle, it can be assumed this happened fairly quickly, maybe even in the same battle.

This is when House Tully is granted lands at the Tumblestone by King Armistead Vance

Theon Stark pushed back the first Andal invasion on his shores, and went to war with House Arryn(not Corbray) landing an army in the fingers.

4 Generations from Artys,controlling the Vale, the Earliest point Theon could have fought them for the daughters and fingers to Roland(fighting the last Mudds), when House Tully was granted Riverrun dated as 1000 years ago.  

 

For Theon to be alive to throw back the first andal invasion and to fight House Arryn in the fingers(and not the corbrays), it means that it could not have taken place until after the Arryns ruled the Vale entirely and we have direct linage to show succession to the point of conquest of the riverlands. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

The Andal invasion started in the Vale. 

King Yorwyck Royce who first fought the Shetts and Graftons is the grandfather of Robar II Royce, the last firstman King of the Vale who lost his Kingdom to House Arryn

Roland II Arryn, who was killed Tristifer IV Mudd, is the 3rd great grandson of Artys Arryn, the first king of the unified Vale(the Corbrays controlled the fingers before this, thats key). 

Tristifer V, the son of Trystifer IV, was the last King of the Rivers and Hills , and Since King Armistead Vance killed Tristifer IV and beat Tristifer V in battle, it can be assumed this happened fairly quickly, maybe even in the same battle.

This is when House Tully is granted lands at the Tumblestone by King Armistead Vance

Theon Stark pushed back the first Andal invasion on his shores, and went to war with House Arryn(not Corbray) landing an army in the fingers.

4 Generations from Artys,controlling the Vale, the Earliest point Theon could have fought them for the daughters and fingers to Roland(fighting the last Mudds), when House Tully was granted Riverrun dated as 1000 years ago.  

 

For Theon to be alive to throw back the first andal invasion and to fight House Arryn in the fingers(and not the corbrays), it means that it could not have taken place until after the Arryns ruled the Vale entirely and we have direct linage to show succession to the point of conquest of the riverlands. 

 

"A thousand years ago" is pretty commonly used in the series to refer to "a long time ago". It is pretty clear that this is what it means in the case of the Tully's being granted Riverrun, if it coincided with the life of Tristifer V Mudd. We have too many other dates involving the Andal invasion that far predate 1000 years ago.

To start with the Manderlys came to the North around 1000 years ago and were fleeing from a Reach that was already converted to the Andal faith. We note that the Reach was converted to the Andal faith much later than the Vale, Riverlands or Stormlands. In fact, between the time of the first Reach Kings who prepared to face the Andal invaders and King Perceon III who exiled the Manderlys, it seems at least 20 Gardener Kings ruled - and it could be a lot more given the gaps in the record. So the Manderlys came to the North centuries after the Andals took over the Reach, which in itself was centuries after the time they defeated Tristifer V to conquer the Riverlands.

So working back, we get the Manderly arrival in the North circa 1000 years ago, the Andal conversion of the Reach many centuries before that, and going back further, the Andal defeat of Tristifer V (and the granting of Riverrun to House Tully) more centuries before that.

A second, corroborating date is the Rape of the Three Sisters, which according to the Maesters occurred 2000 years ago, and coincided with the life of Mathos II Arryn who first engaged in the War Across the Water with the North. He in turn lived AFTER Robyn Arryn, who lived more or less when Armistead Vance defeated Tristifer V and granted Riverrun to the Tullys.

So again, going by this date, Trister V lived more than 2000 years ago.

Thirdly, if you read Ser Bartimus's account of the history of the Wolf's Den, it is clear that the War Across the Water took place before the Manderlys were granted the Wolf's Den and built White Harbor, which was 1000 years ago. In fact, it seems quite likely that the establishment of White Harbor was what led the Starks to lose interest in the "Worthless War", given that White Harbor would now secure the White Knife from pirate raids from the Three Sisters.

So again, if Theon kicked off the War Across the Water with the Rape of the Three sisters, it dates him at about 1000 years before the arrival of the Manderlys, which in itself was around 1000 years ago. So 2000 years ago, roughly.

The Andal invasion itself likely stretched over a 500-600 year period (or maybe longer) starting around 2300 years ago and ending around 1700 years ago. With Argos SevenStar's failed invasion of the North happening at the height of this migration period, during Theon Stark's reign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

"A thousand years ago" is pretty commonly used in the series to refer to "a long time ago".

I agree with that.

Quote

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Date_of_The_Hedge_Knight_and_Tyrions_Age

Mormont's dialogue -- and the dialogue and thoughts of other characters, for that matter -- needs to be understood =as= dialogue. When we talk, we tend to be imprecise about such things, saying something happened "in the sixties" or "at the turn of the century," or that World War II was "fifty years ago." It's no different in the Seven Kingdoms.

And that goes for distances as well as dates. A phrase like "a thousand leagues" is not meant to be a precise measure of distance, only the equivilent of "a million miles away," ie, "a very long way."

Quote

A thousand years of humus lay thick upon the godswood floor, swallowing the sound of her feet, but the red eyes of the weirwood seemed to follow her as she came. (AGOT Catelyn I)

Quote

They raced down Valyrian roads a thousand years old and straight as a Dothraki arrow. (AGOT Daenerys III)

Quote

"Your brother had part of the truth," Ser Jorah admitted. "The Dothraki do not build. A thousand years ago, to make a house, they would dig a hole in the earth and cover it with a woven grass roof. The buildings you see were made by slaves brought here from lands they've plundered, and they built each after the fashion of their own peoples." (AGOT Daenerys IV)

Quote

Just beyond, through the mists, she glimpsed the walls and towers of Moat Cailin … or what remained of them. Immense blocks of black basalt, each as large as a crofter's cottage, lay scattered and tumbled like a child's wooden blocks, half-sunk in the soft boggy soil. Nothing else remained of a curtain wall that had once stood as high as Winterfell's. The wooden keep was gone entirely, rotted away a thousand years past, with not so much as a timber to mark where it had stood. All that was left of the great stronghold of the First Men were three towers … three where there had once been twenty, if the taletellers could be believed. (AGOT Catelyn VIII)

Quote

Theon was given a suite of chilly rooms with ceilings so high that they were lost in gloom. He might have been more impressed if he had not known that these were the very chambers that had given the Bloody Keep its name. A thousand years before, the sons of the River King had been slaughtered here, hacked to bits in their beds so that pieces of their bodies might be sent back to their father on the mainland. (ACOK Theon I)

Quote

"Prince Doran's grievance against House Lannister goes back only a generation, but the Dornishmen have warred against Storm's End and Highgarden for a thousand years, and Renly has taken Dorne's allegiance for granted." (ACOK Tyrion V)

Quote

Jon remembered a spray of red blood on white snow, and the way Theon Greyjoy had kicked the dead man's head. The man was a deserter. On the way back to Winterfell, Jon and Robb had raced, and found six direwolf pups in the snow. A thousand years ago. (ACOK Jon III)

Quote

The north is hard and cold, and has no mercy, Ned had told her when she first came to Winterfell a thousand years ago. (ASOS Catelyn III)

Quote

"So Crabb's keep got named the Whispers. Still is, though it's been a ruin for a thousand years. A lonely place, the Whispers." (AFFC Brienne III)

Quote

It was very tart, like biting into a lemon. A thousand years ago, she had known a girl who loved lemon cakes. No, that was not me, that was only Arya. (ADWD The Ugly Little Girl)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2020 at 4:53 AM, BalerionTheCat said:

Agree. We don't know exactly how Valyrian steel was made. But there seem to be deaths and dark secrets around it. It was so rare, the price to make one would be deterring. Anyway, the Valyrians were not shy of slavery and blood magic and sacrifices.

The North and the Starks were also big practitioners of human sacrifices.  It can also be argued that warging and skinchanging are forms of slavery.  

On 6/6/2020 at 4:53 AM, BalerionTheCat said:

Possibly, Likely. The CotF found a way to survive or live with the Others, or have them in rest. I suppose the Starks (and the survivors of the LN) will learn (again) how to live this way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Van Gogh said:

The North and the Starks were also big practitioners of human sacrifices.  It can also be argued that warging and skinchanging are forms of slavery. 

The last slaver I'm aware of is Jorah. His father took the Black by shame. It doesn't seem slavery is rooted in the North. Nothing to compare with Valyria, slavery or sacrifice, at any time.

The North had its monsters, yes. The Red kings (the Boltons ancestors), the Warg kings (skinchangers are despised, particulary when using humans). The Starks fought them all. Other wars, we don't know the hows and the whys. The Night King was probably a Stark. Other Starks probably fought him.

It seems the Starks are mostly appreciated. No one, as everywhere else, sided with the Andals invaders to overthrow their overlords. These days, maybe ever, the Stark don't even have a significant army of their own. IIRC, Ned only had 50 men to go to KL.

We have one case of sacrifice in Bran's vision. And we don't know who is the Stark, the victim or the killer. And why.

Quote

When there was a Stark in Winterfell, a maiden girl could walk the kingsroad in her name-day gown and still go unmolested, and travelers could find fire, bread, and salt at many an inn and holdfast

Not something you could say of many places now or before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2020 at 1:04 AM, Free Northman Reborn said:

"A thousand years ago" is pretty commonly used in the series to refer to "a long time ago". It is pretty clear that this is what it means in the case of the Tully's being granted Riverrun, if it coincided with the life of Tristifer V Mudd. We have too many other dates involving the Andal invasion that far predate 1000 years ago.

 

Except, we are given time frames of "2,000 years ago" "3,000 years ago" and "300 years ago", "400 years ago"  as references of time as well, we even get a couple of "1,500 Years ago "

 

so you cant really say that means "a long time ago" instead of literally 1,000 years ago. 

 

Quote

To start with the Manderlys came to the North around 1000 years ago and were fleeing from a Reach that was already converted to the Andal faith. We note that the Reach was converted to the Andal faith much later than the Vale, Riverlands or Stormlands. In fact, between the time of the first Reach Kings who prepared to face the Andal invaders and King Perceon III who exiled the Manderlys, it seems at least 20 Gardener Kings ruled - and it could be a lot more given the gaps in the record. So the Manderlys came to the North centuries after the Andals took over the Reach, which in itself was centuries after the time they defeated Tristifer V to conquer the Riverlands. 

So working back, we get the Manderly arrival in the North circa 1000 years ago, the Andal conversion of the Reach many centuries before that, and going back further, the Andal defeat of Tristifer V (and the granting of Riverrun to House Tully) more centuries before that.

Again, The Wiki attached to this forum has timelines that shows the flaw here. 

The Stormlands where conquered before the The Reach. 

There is no line in any of the books that says as man as 20 kings (or more) could have ruled. It says generations, but generations could mean 2 or 50, And generations are about linage, not time.  Robb Eddard and Rickard are 3 generations,(will touch on this later)

So No, it wasnt centuries later after the conquest of the Riverlands, which itself didnt take all that long. 

To add to this TWOIAF says the conquest of the Stormlands was happening as the Vale was first being attacked. 

 

Quote

 

A second, corroborating date is the Rape of the Three Sisters, which according to the Maesters occurred 2000 years ago, and coincided with the life of Mathos II Arryn who first engaged in the War Across the Water with the North. He in turn lived AFTER Robyn Arryn, who lived more or less when Armistead Vance defeated Tristifer V and granted Riverrun to the Tullys.

 

See, clearly, they can date in multiple thousand year increments, so either the founding of Riverrun is wrong, or the Maesters are. Im going with the Maesters. 

Quote

So again, going by this date, Trister V lived more than 2000 years ago.

Thirdly, if you read Ser Bartimus's account of the history of the Wolf's Den, it is clear that the War Across the Water took place before the Manderlys were granted the Wolf's Den and built White Harbor, which was 1000 years ago. In fact, it seems quite likely that the establishment of White Harbor was what led the Starks to lose interest in the "Worthless War", given that White Harbor would now secure the White Knife from pirate raids from the Three Sisters.

The Wiki puts the Manderlys move north at 900 years ago to 1,300, with quotes from the book, same with Riverun. Im not guessing 1000 years ago, it says 1000 years ago for Riverrun  or 900/1,300 for White Harbor, thats the quotes from the books. 

Quote

So again, if Theon kicked off the War Across the Water with the Rape of the Three sisters, it dates him at about 1000 years before the arrival of the Manderlys, which in itself was around 1000 years ago. So 2000 years ago, roughly.

The Andal invasion itself likely stretched over a 500-600 year period (or maybe longer) starting around 2300 years ago and ending around 1700 years ago. With Argos SevenStar's failed invasion of the North happening at the height of this migration period, during Theon Stark's reign.

There was no 600 year Migration/invasion, that is indeed an over exaggeration. 

If you look at the Wiki, the time between Robb Starks birth and his 3rd great grandfather death is only 62 years, And those Starks werent even at war. 

The Andals who invaded Westeros likely had shorter lives being at war and So to claim it took 500 to 600 years is absurd. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Except, we are given time frames of "2,000 years ago" "3,000 years ago" and "300 years ago", "400 years ago"  as references of time as well, we even get a couple of "1,500 Years ago "

 

so you cant really say that means "a long time ago" instead of literally 1,000 years ago. 

 

Again, The Wiki attached to this forum has timelines that shows the flaw here. 

The Stormlands where conquered before the The Reach. 

There is no line in any of the books that says as man as 20 kings (or more) could have ruled. It says generations, but generations could mean 2 or 50, And generations are about linage, not time.  Robb Eddard and Rickard are 3 generations,(will touch on this later)

So No, it wasnt centuries later after the conquest of the Riverlands, which itself didnt take all that long. 

To add to this TWOIAF says the conquest of the Stormlands was happening as the Vale was first being attacked. 

 

 

See, clearly, they can date in multiple thousand year increments, so either the founding of Riverrun is wrong, or the Maesters are. Im going with the Maesters. 

The Wiki puts the Manderlys move north at 900 years ago to 1,300, with quotes from the book, same with Riverun. Im not guessing 1000 years ago, it says 1000 years ago for Riverrun  or 900/1,300 for White Harbor, thats the quotes from the books. 

There was no 600 year Migration/invasion, that is indeed an over exaggeration. 

If you look at the Wiki, the time between Robb Starks birth and his 3rd great grandfather death is only 62 years, And those Starks werent even at war. 

The Andals who invaded Westeros likely had shorter lives being at war and So to claim it took 500 to 600 years is absurd. 
 

There is a lot of corroborating evidence mounted against your position.

For one, in the books the Maesters date the Andal arrival at between 2000 and 4000 years ago. 

Secondly, the Maesters, again, date the Rape of the Three Sisters at 2000 years ago, at the time when Mathos II Arryn ruled the Vale, meaning the Andals had been ruling it for a number of generations.

Thirdly, the Manderly arrival in the North is dated quite clearly between 900 and 1300 years ago. I'm happy with any date in that range, but the point is this is a much more specific reference than the common phrase of "a thousand years ago" which usually merely signifies "a long time ago"

So, since the Manderlys are of Andal faith, the Reach they left from would have been Andalised already by the time of their departure. We also know that their exile was during the reign of Perceon III. And we can count just the known kings between Perceon III and the first Reach Kings who started preparing for Andal invaders.

Gwayne IV was the first Reach King to start preparing for the Andal invaders "generations before they actually arrive in the Reach", by seeking the help of the Children. So clearly at this time they had already conquered the Vale (and probably the Riverlands too), else he would hardly have seen them as a threat all the way down in the Reach. 

Mern II strengthened the walls of Higharden

Mern III got a Woods Witch to prepare them for the invaders.

At this point the Reach is still of First Man religion, and it is still generations before the Andals arrive in the Reach.

Then, after generations, the three Sage Kings are noted, who invited the Andals into the Reach, the last of which converted to the Andal Faith. They were:

Garth IX

Merle I

and Gwayne V (who created House Tyrell for an Andal knight in his service

Then we have Garland VI

and Gyles III

And then Garth X Graybeard who ruled for 90 years

Then Merne VI

And Garth XI who had a "long reign" Long reign is likely multiple decades

And at some point after this - we don't know how long, we have Perceon III who exiled the Manderlys.

So from the above it is clear that centuries passed between the first Reach Kings who took note of the Andal conquests in the Vale and Riverlands, and the time of the Manderly exile roughly one thousand years ago. And in turn, the Reach Kings would only have started seeing the Andals as a threat after the Vale and Riverlands had fallen, which in itself was a couple of centuries after the first Andals arrived.

All of the above makes sense and ties together. Along with a bunch of other sources, like Ser Bartimus's history of the Wolf's Den.

The only proposal that doesn't make sense is your suggestion that Tristifer V lived a mere 1000 years ago. He more likely lived more than 2000 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

There is a lot of corroborating evidence mounted against your position.

No, there isnt. 

Quote

For one, in the books the Maesters date the Andal arrival at between 2000 and 4000 years ago. 

Secondly, the Maesters, again, date the Rape of the Three Sisters at 2000 years ago, at the time when Mathos II Arryn ruled the Vale, meaning the Andals had been ruling it for a number of generations.

Cool, but the Maesters have been wrong. There are entire threads about that, further more, As I already stated, if we can get multiple thousand year increments and inbetween, its reasonable to assume the founding of Riverrun if correct.

Quote

Thirdly, the Manderly arrival in the North is dated quite clearly between 900 and 1300 years ago. I'm happy with any date in that range, but the point is this is a much more specific reference than the common phrase of "a thousand years ago" which usually merely signifies "a long time ago"

So, since the Manderlys are of Andal faith, the Reach they left from would have been Andalised already by the time of their departure. We also know that their exile was during the reign of Perceon III.

Andalization didnt take long.  The grandson of the first sage king was born into the faith. We are talking 30 years tops. 

 

Quote

And we can count just the known kings between Perceon III and the first Reach Kings who started preparing for Andal invaders.

 

Gwayne IV was the first Reach King to start preparing for the Andal invaders "generations before they actually arrive in the Reach", by seeking the help of the Children. So clearly at this time they had already conquered the Vale (and probably the Riverlands too), else he would hardly have seen them as a threat all the way down in the Reach. 

Im fine with that assumption, but not that it somehow took 500+ years. 

Quote

Mern II strengthened the walls of Higharden

Mern III got a Woods Witch to prepare them for the invaders.

At this point the Reach is still of First Man religion, and it is still generations before the Andals arrive in the Reach.

Again, Generations = lineage, not a set number of years.  Some of these kings you listed succeeded their grandfathers and great grandfathers. Entire generations get skipped in ruling. So generations can literally mean 1 year in come cases. 

Quote

 the three Sage Kings are noted, who invited the Andals into the Reach, the last of which converted to the Andal Faith. They were:

Garth IX

Merle I

and Gwayne V (who created House Tyrell for an Andal knight in his service

Then we have Garland VI

and Gyles III

And then Garth X Graybeard who ruled for 90 years

Gyles III fought Lancel IV Lannister.

 

Lancel IV Lannister used Brightroar to behead a Hoare hereditary King of the Iron Island. 

The Lannisters only had Brightroar for  about 100 or 200  years before the doom(Doom was 102 BC), so 502 to 602 years ago. 

So Now we are faced with wondering if the Kings are in order or discussed by importance,or if the writers of TWOIAF just screwed up, because if Perceon comes after that, that puts the founding of White Harbor no earlier than 601, 300 years before the earliest previous estimate. 
 

Quote

Then Merne VI

And Garth XI who had a "long reign" Long reign is likely multiple decades

And at some point after this - we don't know how long, we have Perceon III who exiled the Manderlys.

So from the above it is clear that centuries passed between the first Reach Kings who took note of the Andal conquests in the Vale and Riverlands, and the time of the Manderly exile roughly one thousand years ago. And in turn, the Reach Kings would only have started seeing the Andals as a threat after the Vale and Riverlands had fallen, which in itself was a couple of centuries after the first Andals arrived.

All of the above makes sense and ties together. Along with a bunch of other sources, like Ser Bartimus's history of the Wolf's Den.

The only proposal that doesn't make sense is your suggestion that Tristifer V lived a mere 1000 years ago. He more likely lived more than 2000 years ago.

Again, you are using "generations" to justify your argument, but it doesnt. Especially with that Gyles II reign being the first one mentioned after the Sage Kings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

No, there isnt. 

Cool, but the Maesters have been wrong. There are entire threads about that, further more, As I already stated, if we can get multiple thousand year increments and inbetween, its reasonable to assume the founding of Riverrun if correct.

Andalization didnt take long.  The grandson of the first sage king was born into the faith. We are talking 30 years tops. 

 

Im fine with that assumption, but not that it somehow took 500+ years. 

Again, Generations = lineage, not a set number of years.  Some of these kings you listed succeeded their grandfathers and great grandfathers. Entire generations get skipped in ruling. So generations can literally mean 1 year in come cases. 

Gyles III fought Lancel IV Lannister.

 

Lancel IV Lannister used Brightroar to behead a Hoare hereditary King of the Iron Island. 

The Lannisters only had Brightroar for  about 100 or 200  years before the doom(Doom was 102 BC), so 502 to 602 years ago. 

So Now we are faced with wondering if the Kings are in order or discussed by importance,or if the writers of TWOIAF just screwed up, because if Perceon comes after that, that puts the founding of White Harbor no earlier than 601, 300 years before the earliest previous estimate. 
 

Again, you are using "generations" to justify your argument, but it doesnt. Especially with that Gyles II reign being the first one mentioned after the Sage Kings. 

I'm interested in why you ignore so many sources while believing the individual who loosely referred to Riverrun's founding as happening a thousand years ago. Why is this person more credible to you than all of the other sources. Most of all, why is this person more reliable than the Maesters, who actually study history?

For the Manderly arrival we have at least three separate sources. We have one of the Starks who originally stated in Book 1 that White Harbor was founded 1000 years ago. Then we have Wylla Manderly who stated it was founded a thousand years before the Conquest, meaning 1300 years ago. And we have Lord Borrel who said it was 900 years ago. That type of variation is quite understandable, but what it does do is give us a very solid range of time for dating the Manderly arrival.

About 1000 years ago falls nicely in the middle of that range, so let's go with that as a round number.

And then it is fact that between the first King of the Reach who realised the Andals were a threat, and the time of King Perceon who exiled the Manderlys at least a dozen kings are mentioned - (and probably as many more are not), with one of those kings ruling for 90 years and another stated to have had a long reign.

Why do you also discount the Maesters dating of the Rape of the Three Sisters, which occurred at a time when the Andals were long established in the Vale?

Why do you also discount the Maesters official timing of the Andal arrival, which even though disputed, is stated as a minimum of 2000 years ago and a maximum of 4000 years ago?

The Brightroar quote is an interesting one, but easily explained as an anachronism similar to the Winged Knight being claimed to be an Arryn when he was not, or the Starks having had an ancestral sword called Ice thousands of years before they had the Valyrian steel blade of the same name.

Clearly, the overwhelming evidence points to an Andal arrival of at least 2000 years ago.

But I suspect you have some strong affinity to dating the Andal arrival as a mere 1000 years ago, so all of the above will probably not have much impact.  Be that as it may.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I'm interested in why you ignore so many sources while believing the individual who loosely referred to Riverrun's founding as happening a thousand years ago. Why is this person more credible to you than all of the other sources. Most of all, why is this person more reliable than the Maesters, who actually study history?

I had a giant long thought out reply, but my computer crashed and its gone, so excuse this shorter reply. 

No one person is more credible than the other, its the collection of evidence im looking at. 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

For the Manderly arrival we have at least three separate sources. We have one of the Starks who originally stated in Book 1 that White Harbor was founded 1000 years ago. Then we have Wylla Manderly who stated it was founded a thousand years before the Conquest, meaning 1300 years ago. And we have Lord Borrel who said it was 900 years ago. That type of variation is quite understandable, but what it does do is give us a very solid range of time for dating the Manderly arrival.

About 1000 years ago falls nicely in the middle of that range, so let's go with that as a round number.

Im fine with anything from 1,300 to 900 years ago, all of that makes sense. 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And then it is fact that between the first King of the Reach who realised the Andals were a threat, and the time of King Perceon who exiled the Manderlys at least a dozen kings are mentioned - (and probably as many more are not), with one of those kings ruling for 90 years and another stated to have had a long reign.

The problem with your argument is that the length of time  a King reigns is different for each king, You are assuming these kings are in order or even  that they reigned long. 

Also, the time when the Manderlys moved north is irrelevant to when the Andals came.  in and of itself. It clearly happened after the conquest. 

What you are actually looking for is the time between Garth VII and Garth IX.

 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Why do you also discount the Maesters dating of the Rape of the Three Sisters, which occurred at a time when the Andals were long established in the Vale?

The Rape of the Three Sisters
The War Across The Waters
Theon Stark's Conquest of the Three Sisters.


Could all be three separate events.  Or at least 2 different point within the larger War Across the Waters. 

Only the Rape of the 3 sisters is listed as 2,000 years ago, and that is when the Sisters were independent(No House Arryn ),  Theon Stark isnt listed as having been apart of that either.

In the context of the War, we are only told of its conclusion, which is Mathos II is asked to add the Sisters to his domain and rid it of Stark rule.  

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Why do you also discount the Maesters official timing of the Andal arrival, which even though disputed, is stated as a minimum of 2000 years ago and a maximum of 4000 years ago? 

Because it doesnt make sense.  Again, we have a direct timeline for the Vale to the Riverlands, and we can even argue we have a direct timeline of rule from the fall of House Mudd to today.

Its roughly 1170 Years. 

House Hoare 2 BC to roughly 77 BC

( Harwyn Hoare died at  64 and spent "half" his reign in the riverlands, so half his life, 32, would be the max since he died in 45 B.C., and we know his son died in 42, so there is only a 3 year gap from 45-42 and then grandson from 42 to 2 BC.

House Durrandon 77 to 377 BC 

We are told they rule the Riverlands for 300 years. 

House Teague 377 -???

9 Teague Kings are mentioned. 5 are crowned or died in the Battle of 6 kings.  the other 4 are. 
Torrance Teague, the founder. 
2 unnamed successor kings who are listed as the 2nd and 3rd Teague Kings. 
Theo Teague, Saddle-Sore , who is listed as the 4th Teague King. 

All First of their name

House Justman "Near" 300 years.

Infighting among Andal petty Kings for " Near a century"

Andals invade

 

so 1177 years accounted for, when assuming "near" is rounded up. The only way you get to 2000 years, is to have the Teagues rule the Riverlands for 833 years.  Which isnt even close to likely. 
 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The Brightroar quote is an interesting one, but easily explained as an anachronism similar to the Winged Knight being claimed to be an Arryn when he was not, or the Starks having had an ancestral sword called Ice thousands of years before they had the Valyrian steel blade of the same name.

No, we are specifically told there are multiple "Ice" and that the VS one is named after the others, where as we are also specifically told that the Brightroar used by Lancel IV is indeed VS and we are even given the date he wielded it. 

So we have approximate dates. Note perfect, but it isnt too vague either. 

13 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Clearly, the overwhelming evidence points to an Andal arrival of at least 2000 years ago.

But I suspect you have some strong affinity to dating the Andal arrival as a mere 1000 years ago, so all of the above will probably not have much impact.  Be that as it may.

Consolidation of the Kingdoms of the Rock, Trident and Reach pretty much show it cant be 2000 years ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

I had a giant long thought out reply, but my computer crashed and its gone, so excuse this shorter reply. 

No one person is more credible than the other, its the collection of evidence im looking at. 

Im fine with anything from 1,300 to 900 years ago, all of that makes sense. 

The problem with your argument is that the length of time  a King reigns is different for each king, You are assuming these kings are in order or even  that they reigned long. 

Also, the time when the Manderlys moved north is irrelevant to when the Andals came.  in and of itself. It clearly happened after the conquest. 

What you are actually looking for is the time between Garth VII and Garth IX.

 

The Rape of the Three Sisters
The War Across The Waters
Theon Stark's Conquest of the Three Sisters.


Could all be three separate events.  Or at least 2 different point within the larger War Across the Waters. 

Only the Rape of the 3 sisters is listed as 2,000 years ago, and that is when the Sisters were independent(No House Arryn ),  Theon Stark isnt listed as having been apart of that either.

In the context of the War, we are only told of its conclusion, which is Mathos II is asked to add the Sisters to his domain and rid it of Stark rule.  

Because it doesnt make sense.  Again, we have a direct timeline for the Vale to the Riverlands, and we can even argue we have a direct timeline of rule from the fall of House Mudd to today.

Its roughly 1170 Years. 

House Hoare 2 BC to roughly 77 BC

( Harwyn Hoare died at  64 and spent "half" his reign in the riverlands, so half his life, 32, would be the max since he died in 45 B.C., and we know his son died in 42, so there is only a 3 year gap from 45-42 and then grandson from 42 to 2 BC.

House Durrandon 77 to 377 BC 

We are told they rule the Riverlands for 300 years. 

House Teague 377 -???

9 Teague Kings are mentioned. 5 are crowned or died in the Battle of 6 kings.  the other 4 are. 
Torrance Teague, the founder. 
2 unnamed successor kings who are listed as the 2nd and 3rd Teague Kings. 
Theo Teague, Saddle-Sore , who is listed as the 4th Teague King. 

All First of their name

House Justman "Near" 300 years.

Infighting among Andal petty Kings for " Near a century"

Andals invade

 

so 1177 years accounted for, when assuming "near" is rounded up. The only way you get to 2000 years, is to have the Teagues rule the Riverlands for 833 years.  Which isnt even close to likely. 
 

No, we are specifically told there are multiple "Ice" and that the VS one is named after the others, where as we are also specifically told that the Brightroar used by Lancel IV is indeed VS and we are even given the date he wielded it. 

So we have approximate dates. Note perfect, but it isnt too vague either. 

Consolidation of the Kingdoms of the Rock, Trident and Reach pretty much show it cant be 2000 years ago. 

We are told the Rape of the Three Sisters 2000 years ago started the War Across the Water. And that it was Mathos II Arryn who was the King who first joined this war at the behest of the Sistermen. So that firmly dates  Mathos II to 2000 years ago.

And he lived generations after the original Arryn conquest of the Vale.

The Manderly arrival in the North is important because it signifies a time after the Andal Faith had taken over the Reach. And that was after the Vale, Riverlands and Stormlands had already been conquered. Now, look at the Storm Kings timeline:

Erich IV is listed as the Storm King who lived during the beginning of the Andal invasion - and died while the Andals conquered the Vale. After him we have (only those who are mentioned):

Quarlton II - who lived during the Andal invasion

Quarlton III - who lived during the Andal invasion

Monfred V - who lived during the Andal invasion

Baldric I - who lived during the Andal invasion

Duran XXI - who lived during the Andal invasion

Cleoden I - who lived during the Andal invasion

Maldon IV - who took an Andal maiden to wife

Duran XXIV - who also took an Andal wife and started giving lordships to Andal warlords in the Stormlands

Ormund II - who finally set aside the Old Gods and took on the Andal Faith

Note that there are clearly gaps in this record - e.g. we have Duran XXI mentioned  and Duran XXIV, all during the Andal invasion, but no mention of Duran XXII or XXIII. So it is safe to assume that there are a bunch of Storm Kings not mentioned in this list, but who also lived during the  Andal invasion, and the above are only notable ones that warranted a mention in the history books. 

So again, we are easily talking about a dozen to a score of Storm Kings between the time that the Andals conquered the Vale and the time they conquered the Stormlands.

And only after the conquest of the Stormlands did they enter the Reach, after which we had the Three Sage Kings who welcomed them and half a dozen more mentioned Reach kings (and who knows how many unmentioned ones) before we get to the Manderly exile. And at least two of these intervening Reach Kings are mentioned as ruling for 90 years and having a "long reign". So at a minimum we are talking centuries between the Three Sage Kings and the Manderly exile.

And given that we have an incomplete Kings list - with perhaps more kings missing than those that are mentioned, it is very easy to fill in a thousand years before the Manderly exile to get back to the Andal conquest of the Vale.

After all, the Mathos II Arryn quote means we have to do so. Not a single Maester has dated the Andal invasion to 1000 years ago. The Rhoynar migration happened 1000 years ago, and at that point all of southern Westeros had been Andalised.

EDIT

As for Gyles III and Brightroar, I have no problem placing Gyles III around 500 years ago. There is nothing requiring him to have lived prior to the Manderly departure. He is not linked to any of the Kings that lived between the Three Sages Kings and King Perceon III. So if we want to use the reference to Brightroar to date him that's fine. It doesn't impact any of the rest of the timeline.

Edit 2

As for the Riverlands we are not told how long House Teague ruled. We are merely given a few notable names from that House. So 2000 years can easily be achieved by suggesting:

Targaryens - 300 years

Hoares - 70 years

Storm Kings - 300 years

Teagues - 900 years

Various Andal petty kings - 100 years

Justmans - 300 years

Bringing us back to the era of Tristifer V.

Also, the World of Ice and Fire says it was centuries of warfare after the fall of Tristifer V before a major Riverland king emerged again. So there were centuries between the fall of Tristifer Mudd and the rise of House Justman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

We are told the Rape of the Three Sisters 2000 years ago started the War Across the Water. And that it was Mathos II Arryn who was the King who first joined this war at the behest of the Sistermen. So that firmly dates  Mathos II to 2000 years ago.

TWOIAF doesnt say what you claim, and the Wiki specifically splits these events because of that.Again, there are whole threads on this. I already pointed this out. 

You are assuming they all took place at the same time, but there is no confirmation of that, infact, it seems the opposite.

Mathos is only listed as the king the Sistermen knelt to, that could have been on year 1 of this war, or year 1,999, but based on how its worded, Mathos would have had to have had control of the Sisters to claim/rule it, no different than the other wars talked about. So its safe to say Mathos comes at the end, not the beginning.  

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And he lived generations after the original Arryn conquest of the Vale.

The Manderly arrival in the North is important because it signifies a time after the Andal Faith had taken over the Reach. And that was after the Vale, Riverlands and Stormlands had already been conquered. Now, look at the Storm Kings timeline:

Erich IV is listed as the Storm King who lived during the beginning of the Andal invasion - and died while the Andals conquered the Vale. After him we have (only those who are mentioned):

Quarlton II - who lived during the Andal invasion

Quarlton III - who lived during the Andal invasion

Monfred V - who lived during the Andal invasion

Baldric I - who lived during the Andal invasion

Duran XXI - who lived during the Andal invasion

Cleoden I - who lived during the Andal invasion

Maldon IV - who took an Andal maiden to wife

Duran XXIV - who also took an Andal wife and started giving lordships to Andal warlords in the Stormlands

Ormund II - who finally set aside the Old Gods and took on the Andal Faith

Note that there are clearly gaps in this record - e.g. we have Duran XXI mentioned  and Duran XXIV, all during the Andal invasion, but no mention of Duran XXII or XXIII. So it is safe to assume that there are a bunch of Storm Kings not mentioned in this list, but who also lived during the  Andal invasion, and the above are only notable ones that warranted a mention in the history books. 

So again, we are easily talking about a dozen to a score of Storm Kings between the time that the Andals conquered the Vale and the time they conquered the Stormlands.

No we arent. Erich's grandson succeeded him as king ,which means he was alive when the Andals invaded the Vale. Since we are told they also took Massey's hook and didnt hold it long. Thats 4 kings and 5 generations in less than 30 years. 

Then you only have 3 more kings before assimilation. 

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And only after the conquest of the Stormlands did they enter the Reach, after which we had the Three Sage Kings who welcomed them and half a dozen more mentioned Reach kings (and who knows how many unmentioned ones) before we get to the Manderly exile. And at least two of these intervening Reach Kings are mentioned as ruling for 90 years and having a "long reign". So at a minimum we are talking centuries between the Three Sage Kings and the Manderly exile.

 

How many kings before the manderlys left is irrelevant to when the Andals invaded.  Only when White Harbor existed. 

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

And given that we have an incomplete Kings list - with perhaps more kings missing than those that are mentioned, it is very easy to fill in a thousand years before the Manderly exile to get back to the Andal conquest of the Vale.

No, you are assuming  long reigns. 

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

After all, the Mathos II Arryn quote means we have to do so. Not a single Maester has dated the Andal invasion to 1000 years ago. The Rhoynar migration happened 1000 years ago, and at that point all of southern Westeros had been Andalised.

I already explained why you are wrong here, if you disagree state why, but dont just keep repeating it  without listing an explanation for why you disagree. 

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

EDIT

As for Gyles III and Brightroar, I have no problem placing Gyles III around 500 years ago. There is nothing requiring him to have lived prior to the Manderly departure. He is not linked to any of the Kings that lived between the Three Sages Kings and King Perceon III. So if we want to use the reference to Brightroar to date him that's fine. It doesn't impact any of the rest of the timeline.

We know the expansion and contraction of each kingdom after the invasion. 

So we can make some educated guesses here. So yes, it matters, because it also dates Perceon, it dates the iron islands, and riverlands. So  by your own standard, it changes the timeline to be something like 600 years away from when you need it to be to make your argument work. 

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Edit 2

As for the Riverlands we are not told how long House Teague ruled. We are merely given a few notable names from that House. So 2000 years can easily be achieved by suggesting:

Targaryens - 300 years

Hoares - 70 years

Storm Kings - 300 years

Teagues - 900 years

Various Andal petty kings - 100 years

Justmans - 300 years

Bringing us back to the era of Tristifer V.

Also, the World of Ice and Fire says it was centuries of warfare after the fall of Tristifer V before a major Riverland king emerged again. So there were centuries between the fall of Tristifer Mudd and the rise of House Justman.

Except, no one here thinks the Teagues ruled that long, not even you, especially since all of the Teague Kings were the First of their names. Of everyone you named, they have the shortest section in the book, even the Andal petty kings got more information listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m afraid you’re contradicting the evidence. From the Wiki:

During the Rape of the Three Sisters, the name by which the Northern conquest of the isles is best known, the atrocities done by the Kings of Winter were horrible enough, that the remaining lords of the Three Sisters asked King Mathos II for his help, help he gladly gave. The help came, provided upon the condition that the Three Sisters agreed to do fealty to him and House Arryn and acknowledge the right of the Eyrie to rule them.

His wife questioned the wisdom of fighting this War Across the Water, but he replied: "that he would sooner have a pirate than a wolf for his neighbour".

He set sail for Sisterton with a hundred warships but he never returned. His sons carried on the war after him

End quote

It really can’t be clearer. Mathos is the Arryn King who first joined this war.

Also:

The Rape of the Three Sisters was an invasion of the Three Sisters by the north two thousand years ago. It led to a thousand years of war between the north and the Vale of Arryn,[1] which are described in The Chronicles of Longsister.[2]

In response to the invasion by the northmen, the Sistermen turned to Mathos II Arryn, King of Mountain and Vale, for assistance in ousting the northmen. In return, the previously independent Sistermen bent the knee to the Eyrie. The Rape of the Three Sisters became the first act in a thousand years of conflict between the Starks and Arryns over the islands, known as the War Across the Water, or the Worthless War.[1]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2020 at 5:46 AM, Free Northman Reborn said:

I’m afraid you’re contradicting the evidence. From the Wiki:

During the Rape of the Three Sisters, the name by which the Northern conquest of the isles is best known, the atrocities done by the Kings of Winter were horrible enough, that the remaining lords of the Three Sisters asked King Mathos II for his help, help he gladly gave. The help came, provided upon the condition that the Three Sisters agreed to do fealty to him and House Arryn and acknowledge the right of the Eyrie to rule them.

His wife questioned the wisdom of fighting this War Across the Water, but he replied: "that he would sooner have a pirate than a wolf for his neighbour".

He set sail for Sisterton with a hundred warships but he never returned. His sons carried on the war after him

End quote

It really can’t be clearer. Mathos is the Arryn King who first joined this war.

Also:

The Rape of the Three Sisters was an invasion of the Three Sisters by the north two thousand years ago. It led to a thousand years of war between the north and the Vale of Arryn,[1] which are described in The Chronicles of Longsister.[2]

In response to the invasion by the northmen, the Sistermen turned to Mathos II Arryn, King of Mountain and Vale, for assistance in ousting the northmen. In return, the previously independent Sistermen bent the knee to the Eyrie. The Rape of the Three Sisters became the first act in a thousand years of conflict between the Starks and Arryns over the islands, known as the War Across the Water, or the Worthless War.[1]

Not a contradiction at all seeing as I stated no war lasted 1,000 years. My overall point being that all of this happened in a relatively short amount of time, 50 to 100 years or so). 

I have however argued in the context of the other person I was debating with. i.e. If you believe this one fact, ill concede it to show you the bigger flow. 


Also, the Andals were still in  Andalos until at least 1,836



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Not a contradiction at all seeing as I stated no war lasted 1,000 years. My overall point being that all of this happened in a relatively short amount of time, 50 to 100 years or so). 

I have however argued in the context of the other person I was debating with. i.e. If you believe this one fact, ill concede it to show you the bigger flow. 


Also, the Andals were still in  Andalos until at least 1,836



 

Not sure I understand this last post correctly.

The Mathos II Arryn dating is important because it confirms well established Andal rule in the Vale 2000 years ago.

The Andal invasion of course did not involve the relocation of the entire Andal population. Far from it. Artys Arryn was merely an Andal knight. Argos Sevenstar was just an Andal warlord. Many other Andal petty kings started out as mercenaries for hire.

These bands of Andal adventurers, warlords and knights continued invading Westeros for centuries. Mathos II clearly lived generations after Artys Arryn , yet at that time Argos Sevenstar still departed from Andalos to invade the North. 

So it makes sense that there were still Andals in Andalos 1800 years ago. It bolsters the point that the invasion stretched over centuries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Not sure I understand this last post correctly.

The Mathos II Arryn dating is important because it confirms well established Andal rule in the Vale 2000 years ago.

Neither the "Coming of the Andals" or the War across the Water lasted more than 100ish years.

 

 

3 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The Andal invasion of course did not involve the relocation of the entire Andal population. Far from it. Artys Arryn was merely an Andal knight. Argos Sevenstar was just an Andal warlord. Many other Andal petty kings started out as mercenaries for hire.

These bands of Andal adventurers, warlords and knights continued invading Westeros for centuries. Mathos II clearly lived generations after Artys Arryn , yet at that time Argos Sevenstar still departed from Andalos to invade the North. 

As I said before, TWOIAF says the invasion of the North and Vale happened at the same time.

And Yes, the Andal invasion does indeed involve the relocation of the Andal population, as Andalos became part of the Freehold's colonies.  

3 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

So it makes sense that there were still Andals in Andalos 1800 years ago. It bolsters the point that the invasion stretched over centuries. 

No, it really doesnt, because you also get the successive action of the founding of the Free cities

 

these 2 threads will help, or make it worse, LOL
 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...