Given Bran's vision of his ancestor killing a captive, how horrible were the Starks of old?

[Rondo]

On 10/8/2020 at 6:22 PM, Barbrey Dustin said:

I think the Starks practicing blood sacrifice to weirwoods was a regular thing.  Viewed from the lens of the current story's time period, yeah, they would be horrible people.  

How true.  

[Rondo]

On 10/8/2020 at 6:59 PM, CamiloRP said:

We don't know that the people in that vision were Starks, I always took it to be first men living in what one time would become Winterfell.

Even then, I doubt the tradition ended with Rickard because Ned didn't know, he was 16 when his father and brother died, in contrast, Bran sees Ned execute Gared when he was Eight. Also, there'd be rumors about the Stark as there is about the Boltons flaying people. So if the Starks ever partook in it (which is likely) I'd say the stop before the conquest at the very minimum, probably a lot earlier.

But also, that wouldn't make them horrible even for current Westeros, killing captives is really common, offering them to Gods doesn't change the situation, unless you do it like R'lhor followers do (burning) or Drowned God followers do (drowning).

I don't think she could have been anybody else.  She was a Stark.  It doesn't make them any better morally.  

[Rondo]

On 10/9/2020 at 12:45 AM, Quoth the raven, said:

They were savages who sacrificed to the trees directly and indirectly to their "gods."  We know that human sacrifice can pacify the White Walkers.  Craster was doing it until recently.  An ancient pact must have existed between the WW and the Starks.  Being a Stark, Craster was fulfilling this pact without realizing it.

We can be confident that the woman who slit the victim's throat was a Stark.  The vision was a Stark family album.  She was a Stark.

The woman was Bran's ancestor.

[Rondo]

On 10/11/2020 at 8:41 AM, The Lord of the Crossing said:

Possible, because Rickard and his heir died before they can pass on the ritual of human sacrifice to Ned.  Theon Stark the Hungry Wolf came from this family.  The Starks spilled a lot of blood to those trees.   The Old Gods are a hungry lot.

I would caution the reader not to judge the Stark family based on Ned.  He would not have gone along with human sacrifice.  Not of children.  

[Rondo]

On 10/10/2020 at 1:14 AM, Lee-Sensei said:

They were probably a mixed bag like every other family. I do tend to believe that the old Stark hat was more about being wild, savage and harsh. More like a Rickard Karstark than Eddard Stark.

Today, yes.  But perhaps they were not in a time not so long ago.  Brandon and Lyanna had the wild wolf blood.  Ned was not talking about a regular wolf.  He was talking about direwolves.  Dw are wilder and more savage by far.

[Rondo]

On 10/9/2020 at 3:35 PM, Shierak Qiya said:

Given Bran's vision of his ancestor killing a captive, how horrible were the Starks of old?

Horrible.  They were savages.  Winterfell was built on a foundation of blood.  The Starks were feeding the trees and the seers with blood.  It was their religion.  

It may be the religion of some in the north but I was specifically talking about the Starks.  They were doing this for reasons to benefit their family.  The blood forged a bond between them and that old tree.  There must always be a Stark in Winterfell to tend the tree and give it the blood of their victims.  

[Rondo]

On 10/10/2020 at 2:54 AM, SeanF said:

Well, the Starks of old were pretty ruthless, by all accounts.

No doubt they did practise human sacrifice, and the practice was likely common throughout the North.  But, I’m sure they ceased it, long before Ned’s father’s time.  As suggested upthread, I expect the victims were criminals, although perhaps, when circumstances were really dire, one had to sacrifice an innocent, or perhaps sacrifice oneself.

Human sacrifice is common throughout Martin’s world.

Criminals?  Not necessarily.  Victims.  They were victims of the Starks.  

[CamiloRP]

1 hour ago, Rondo said:

I don't think she could have been anybody else.  She was a Stark.  It doesn't make them any better morally.  

If you read further on, I put in a lot of reasons for why I don't think she was a Stark, we actually get no indication that she was.

On it making them better morally. No, it doesn't, but everyone in this story is a piece of shit looked out of context, but in context the story changes. I see two possible explanations for how they got their victim:

- He was a criminal (less likely)

- He was a rival or part of a rival faction (more likely)

Both types of people would be killed in modern day Westeros. Is that okey? nope, but in their society it is. It's like saying "OMG Garlan Tyrell is such an asshole, he benefits from feudalism!" Yeah, it's true, but it means nothing in context

[The Commentator]

On 10/9/2020 at 12:45 AM, Quoth the raven, said:

They were savages who sacrificed to the trees directly and indirectly to their "gods."  We know that human sacrifice can pacify the White Walkers.  Craster was doing it until recently.  An ancient pact must have existed between the WW and the Starks.  Being a Stark, Craster was fulfilling this pact without realizing it.

We can be confident that the woman who slit the victim's throat was a Stark.  The vision was a Stark family album.  She was a Stark.

The woman with the blade was a Stark.  There was no purpose to that scene if she were not.  Bran was watching his ancestors.  

[Jeeves]

On 10/10/2020 at 9:24 PM, Khal Rhaego Targaryen said:

Well, it's the starks... There must be some explanation of how the rituals of hanging innocent people's entrails on tree branches was something honorable

The Starks were servants of the Greenseers who calls out to them in dreams to phone in their dinner orders.  All the Starks heard was "make mine moist and fresh".

[Mystical]

23 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

The woman with the blade was a Stark.  There was no purpose to that scene if she were not.  Bran was watching his ancestors.  

But why would a female Stark do that? Assuming that these things were generally done by whoever was in charge and who would have the authority, that excludes female Starks. There has never been (according to GRRM) a female Stark who ruled in her own right. So some random Stark woman seems unlikely. Or did she sneak off to sacrifice someone randomly and in secret?

[Megorova]

Who knows who that captive was. Maybe he was a deserter from the Night's Watch. We can't be 100% sure that his killing had a sacrificial purpose. The white-haired woman could be not the Corpse Queen, just an old woman, a head of House Stark. Thus it was her duty to deal with situations like that, same as generations later it became Ned's duty. She executed him for something that he did, and to kill him she used a sickle because she was old and fragile, thus it's not like she could have beheaded him with a sword or an axe. Also could be that Bran tasted blood not because that captive's blood got on the weirwood tree, but because while Bran was sleeping the weirwood seeds in his stomach started to grow and ripped thru his insides to bind him to the cave's ground, same as what years ago happened to Bloodraven.

[Rondo]

4 hours ago, Mystical said:

But why would a female Stark do that? Assuming that these things were generally done by whoever was in charge and who would have the authority, that excludes female Starks. There has never been (according to GRRM) a female Stark who ruled in her own right. So some random Stark woman seems unlikely. Or did she sneak off to sacrifice someone randomly and in secret?

Some women in that family were she-wolves.  They had the wild, savage nature of the dire wolves.   The Starks of the time were wildling primitive.  The whole family was nursing that tree.  It was the woman's turn to serve dinner that day.  One of the Stark men served the next meal.  

[Damsel in Distress]

On 10/8/2020 at 6:08 PM, Rondo said:

Bran was given a vision of one of his ancestors murdering a captive and feeding his blood to the Stark's weirwood tree.   So the Starks of old were practitioners of human sacrifice.  Is it possible that this practice only ended with the deaths of Rickard and Brandon Stark?  Ned was too young to inherit the family tradition.  

It is possible.  The chain of duty was broken when Rickard died without getting the chance to pass on the knowledge to his second son.  That or perhaps Eddard considered the tradition a barbaric nonsense and refused to maintain the custom.  This could be another lovely way to work Lyanna's backstory into the plot.  Lyanna got pregnant with (take your pick: Brandon, Rhaegar, Mance, whoever) and knew a son would be sacrificed.  Enough motivation to run away, right.  Gilly would not be the first mom to run off and save her son.  Craster got along with the Others by donating his sons.  The Starks were doing the same thing and more.  Not only Stark sons were sacrificed but any victim who would not be missed in the north.  Bastards.  Inconvenient babies and children.  

The Others would have great numbers if they could accept just any discarded boy from the Wildlings.  Why did it have to be Craster's son?  It is perhaps because Craster is related to the Night's King, who was a Stark.

[The Commentator]

19 hours ago, Mystical said:

But why would a female Stark do that? Assuming that these things were generally done by whoever was in charge and who would have the authority, that excludes female Starks. There has never been (according to GRRM) a female Stark who ruled in her own right. So some random Stark woman seems unlikely. Or did she sneak off to sacrifice someone randomly and in secret?

The lord of Winterfell, or whatever the head of the clan was called at the time, was not the only person who had desires.  Anybody in the Stark family who wanted a favor from the god(s) would sacrifice to that tree.  

[LynnS]

On 10/8/2020 at 11:47 PM, Curled Finger said:

That sacrificing to the weirwoods was no doubt a part of the Pact with the COTF.  What says the vision isn't telling us that specifically over someone simply being sacrificed?  Perhaps it's time the North remembered in the weirwoods' eyes.  

Hah!  The north only remembers where their sigils are concerned.  It's the north beyond the Wall that truly remembers.  Jon Snow knows nothing.  I'm not sure that people are executed before the heart tree for the sole purpose of feeding blood to the tree.  You can't lie in front of a heart tree that can see the truth in your heart and soul.  I suspect execution for crimes committed occur in front of a heart tree or greenseer.

[Curled Finger]

1 hour ago, LynnS said:

Hah!  The north only remembers where their sigils are concerned.  It's the north beyond the Wall that truly remembers.  Jon Snow knows nothing.  I'm not sure that people are executed before the heart tree for the sole purpose of feeding blood to the tree.  You can't lie in front of a heart tree that can see the truth in your heart and soul.  I suspect execution for crimes committed occur in front of a heart tree or greenseer.

LynnS, it's always interesting to chat with you.  I was listening to a podcast last night.  They were discussing The Pact between the COTF and 1st Men.  Actually they were discussing The World of Ice and Fire app.  I did not realize Martin blessed this thing as canon.  I will have to paraphrase since I don't have the actual thing, so please pardon any error I am certain to make here.  The app says The Pact was broken when the Andals came and burned all the weirwoods and killed so many COTF.  The podcasters discussed a forest battle wherein the animals even joined the fight and the Andals still won.  The wording is specific in The Pact is broken.  

Execution as sacrifice amounts to much the same thing.  Those trees require life blood to maintain their brand of magic.  Your statement about the North beyond the wall may be right on.   Why the hell don't we have a Wildling POV?  Bronze Yohn sent his boy and I believe Benjen and Jon were always meant to go to the Wall as part of the same "deal".  Does it have to be a spooky weird thing?  I don't think so.  I think the sacrifices of blood before the trees and a son on the Wall afford the North a sort of protection.  Any thoughts on that possibility?  

[LynnS]

8 minutes ago, Curled Finger said:

I think the sacrifices of blood before the trees and a son on the Wall afford the North a sort of protection.  Any thoughts on that possibility?  

I very much enjoy reading your posts! I don't have the app either. It's canon but comes with the unreliable narrator caveat. 

 Well, Jon tells Ygritte that the Wall is made of ice and she tells him he knows nothing, that the Wall is made of blood.  Blood fed to the weirwood who maintain the magic of the Wall perhaps?  I'm also thinking of the Black Gate in connection to the weirwood at Whitehall.  The thing with power that Jon can feel, that terrifies the rest of the NW.  A mouth full of charred wood, ashes and bones.  It may well power the gate.

Blood very well have something to do with maintaining magical power of the weirnet in general.  I do think that when a tree is given a face;  it's given the face of the one who is sacrificed.  That seems to be part of wildling lore if you consider the drunken ash, old chestnut and the big oak Jon sees on the way to Molestown.  

I also think Benjen and Jon were meant to go to the Wall and this is a long tradition or duty with the Starks.  I think it's as much a thing as the Stark words that there must always be a Stark in Winterfell (because) Winter is Coming.  This could all be dependent on the terms of the Pact beyond the division of territory.  In other words, the part of the agreement the Starks have forgotten if Jojen is anything to go by.   

At this point I don't know what protection the Wall provides if it isn't to block undead revenants, white walkers and the killing cold.  It may also stop dragons from going north beyond the Wall.  An ice Wall that is 400 miles long will certainly affect the climate and ultimately, I think it has to come down to restore balance.

If it is meant for protection, it seems more likely to me that protecting what lies north of the Wall, the last refuge of the COTF and their greenseers is it's purpose.  We have Melisandre at the Wall, who burns down weirwoods, searching for the ancient enemy and Euron who is making it his purpose to kill all the gods including 'the small gods.  I'd say the WW's are tooling up for this confrontation more than anything.  It may be part of the Pact for Starks to provide this protection.

Of course anything I say could be hogwash.  So I will invoke the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principles. 

[TheLastWolf]

4 minutes ago, LynnS said:

So I will invoke the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principles. 

I was just studying that!!! Chemistry test next week. 

[LynnS]

3 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

I was just studying that!!! Chemistry test next week. 

Awesome!  Go with blessings and ace it!