Whitehaired priestess in Bran's flashback

[James Fenimore Cooper XXII]

Bran experienced a flashback from the time Winterfell was newly built.  He saw his ancestors murdering a prisoner and feeding the blood to the white tree.  Bran tasted the blood of the poor dying man as he is going through his death spasm.  Bran can feed through his dreams.  He has fed on human blood thrice.  This time, through his direwolf, and perhaps through the bloody soup which may be Jojen Reed's flesh.  But who is the lady with the bronze sickle? 

We should be careful to avoid making definitive conclusions.  Even the dark haired First Men grow old and lose their hair color in old age.  Simply said, perhaps the woman had dark hair and slowly lost the color as she aged.  The use of a primitive weak metal tells us this woman comes from a people lacking the knowledge of working with iron.  She is not Valyrian else she would have at least a quality iron sickle.  But maybe she had to make do with the tools available to the First Men.

Compare this woman to the old kings in Daenerys' vision of her family's past.  The men wore fancy clothing and had glowing weapons.  The difference is rather stark.  However, all of this does not mean there could not be a people so lost in history that they have been forgotten.  An elder specimen of humans who had knowledge of magic and practiced experiments that are unknown today.  Not everybody is of royal status.  While Daenerys' ancestors were clearly important people in their time there must have been commoners.  Commoners always make up the majority of a population. 

The woman in Winterfell was someone with authority over the barbarians of the north.  She was leading the ceremonial killing of the captive.  We already know the power of blood sacrifices to buy peace with the Others.  Craster, who is likely a man kin by blood to the Starks, kept the Others satisfied with blood offerings.  Literally offering his own blood, Stark blood, to the Others in trade for his freedom to live where he was.  The woman, I will call her a dark priestess, was showing the First Men how to give offerings to the Others.  The ritual killings had multiple purposes.  The Others get what they need, the Weirwood is fertilized, and the Greenseers get their blood meal.  The Starks of Winterfell kept up the practice and the Weirwood grew strong over the thousands of years since. 

The woman could have been part of an elder race which existed at the same time as the Great Empire of the Dawn and a few survived to the building of Winterfell.  Daenerys, on the other hand, has knowledge which is even older than Asshai.  This is impossible unless genetic memory exists.  We have always known that Daenerys is very special.  I think Daenerys in her previous life lived before the events in Bran's vision.  Daenerys is a member of the ruling line who are endowed with superhuman abilities.  The Stark line also have superhuman abilities which I believe they got from interbreeding with the Others.  The rulers of Daenerys' line must have had an opposing force and that is the Others.  We know the silver haired Gods were not in control of the whole world during their entire dynasty.  One branch, the reds of the Bloodstone emperor, tried to usurp the throne but he must have been defeated after a time and either killed or banished to the North.  I think his people became the Others.  The priestess in Winterfell came from a line of followers of the reds.  The black meteorite is either hidden deep within Asshai, which is not likely.  More likely it is hidden somewhere in the North.  Either somewhere on the other side of the Wall or guarded by the Kings of Winter in their stronghold.  The pale corpse queen was of the defeated royal line of the Bloodstone emperor.  The Warg king, where the Starks supposedly got their inherited power of wolf bonding, was also descended from emperor Bloodstone.  The white haired woman carried out hybridization experiments with the Others and the ancestors of the Warg king and the Starks.  The Others from the prologue seemed to behave like they feel entitled.  Craster's relations with them also seems to paint the Others as feeling entitled of worship and servitude.  The punishment for the crime of betraying the Amethyst Empress was the removal of the Bloodstone line's ability to reproduce.  Loyal followers like the white haired priestess used ancient knowledge and magic to get around this through advanced hybridization.  One unusually successful hybrid, the corpse queen found a biologically compatible mate in the Nights' King. The Night's King was a Stark. 

Eye color is indicative of lineage and affinity.  The Weirwoods have red sap, red leaves, and when carved, red eyes.  The purest form of a Northern creature, Ghost, has red eyes.  Genetic material from the Bloodstone line spread in the North through genetic experiments. 

The weaker emperors of the East later had to build the Five Forts to protect themselves from outside threats.  Threats which happened to be on the north side of the fortifications.  This can mean the Bloodstone's clan was banished to the north and a land bridge, perhaps made of perpetually frozen water, connected the continents.  The strange creatures today are the results of hybridization experiments carried out by his followers. 

[House Cambodia]

If they are characters who have been mentioned elsewhere in the canon, the best candidates for me are the Night's King and his Corpse Queen.

On the other hand, their identities might be unimportant - the takeaway is that the tree required blood sacrifices, and always has. We see this very early on in the canon with the Starks continuing the tradition of cleaning the blood of beheaded men off Ice over the roots of the tree, suggesting the reason their leaves are red. This raises the further complication of whether Bloodraven and ultimately Bran is an agent for Good or Evil.

Edited March 10 by House Cambodia

[StarkTullies]

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Even the dark haired First Men grow old and lose their hair color in old age.  Simply said, perhaps the woman had dark hair and slowly lost the color as she aged.  The use of a primitive weak metal tells us this woman comes from a people lacking the knowledge of working with iron.  She is not Valyrian else she would have at least a quality iron sickle.  But maybe she had to make do with the tools available to the First Men.

Is this to make a case that this woman is from the First Men and not Valyrian?  Of course she is from the First Men.  This was many, many thousands of years ago, when First Men were the only inhabitants of Westeros.

But if you go back far enough in time, even Valyrians used "primitive" weapons.  Civilizations often advance with time.

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

While Daenerys' ancestors were clearly important people in their time there must have been commoners.

Well, yes.  After Dany's ancestors tamed fire-demon weapons of mass destruction to have the power to enslave others and build empires on the backs of their tortured slaves, the Targaryens became "important people".  Going farther back in time prior to taming the dragons, Dany's Valyrian ancestors were just peasant shepherds, as were all Valyrians.

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

The woman in Winterfell was someone with authority over the barbarians of the north.

We don't know if Winterfell was even built at this time.  Winterfell was built around the tree.  Regardless, I'm okay with assuming this woman was a Stark ancestor (but that is only an assumption).  Maybe this woman had authority, maybe she didn't.  We know nothing about this woman, or her prisoner.  Was she performing a sacrifice of an innocent for the sake of sacrifice, or was she executing a murderous criminal in the eyes of her gods?  We don't know.  Below is the entirety of the passage, there is not much to conclude from these two brief paragraphs.  The only thing that we can conclude is that Bran wanted to stop the execution.  So much for evil, blood-thirsty Bran.  

Then, as he watched, a bearded man forced a captive down onto his knees before the heart tree. A white-haired woman stepped toward them through a drift of dark red leaves, a bronze sickle in her hand.

"No," said Bran, "no, don't," but they could not hear him, no more than his father had. The woman grabbed the captive by the hair, hooked the sickle round his throat, and slashed. And through the mist of centuries the broken boy could only watch as the man's feet drummed against the earth… but as his life flowed out of him in a red tide, Brandon Stark could taste the blood.

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Craster, who is likely a man kin by blood to the Starks

Another popular anti-Stark "theory".  Can you share any supporting evidence for this... other than Craster is clearly a terrible person and you hate the Starks?  There is more evidence that Craster is a Targaryen due to his disgusting affinity for incest (but no, I don't think he is Targaryen either).

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

The woman, I will call her a dark priestess, was showing the First Men how to give offerings to the Others.

You can call her whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true.  See the entire brief passage of this woman further above.  The assumptions above cannot be proven or disproven.

Also, maybe you should think twice before using ancestral human sacrifices as proof that their modern day descendants are evil, lest you will be trashing your own favorite character.  Dany performed human sacrifices: see below.  If Dany is Azor Azai, then she knew exactly what she was doing to bring the dragons to life.  Or if her triple-sacrifice had nothing to do with the dragon births, then she didn't know what she is doing and she's not Azor Ahai.  You can't have it both ways.

Dany's thoughts: (The dragons) had been born from her faith and her need, given life by the deaths of her husband and unborn son and the maegi Mirri Maz Duur.

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

The Night's King was a Stark. 

Maybe.  Maybe not.  Old Nan is hundred years old, not ten thousand years old, and the ancient histories weren't kept for 9,900 years and then all forgotten within the past 100 years.

But I'm fine with conceding that the Night's King was likely a Stark, and then... who cares?  One evil Stark doesn't mean all other Starks are evil, and who says that the Night's King was evil?  Surely you don't believe every ancient rumor about him when his official records were destroyed.  We know that the Night's King didn't "give his seed" to an Others woman (someone whose body is so unbearably cold that you can barely breathe in their presence), because that would be physically impossible.  If we can't believe that very important part of the Night's King legend, what else can we believe about the Night's King?  Personally, I think Coldhands is the Night's King (but just my belief, and I'm not going claim it as fact).

If we are expected to blindly believe all the 10,000-year-old hearsay about the Night's King, then then we should also blindly believe the fresh hearsay about Dany:

If even half the stories coming back from Slaver's Bay are true, this child is a monster. They say that she is bloodthirsty, that those who speak against her are impaled on spikes to die lingering deaths. They say she is a sorceress who feeds her dragons on the flesh of newborn babes, an oathbreaker who mocks the gods, breaks truces, threatens envoys, and turns on those who have served her loyally. They say her lust cannot be sated, that she mates with men, women, eunuchs, even dogs and children, and woe betide the lover who fails to satisfy her. She gives her body to men to take their souls in thrall.

We aren't supposed to believe everything we hear, obviously.

9 hours ago, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

We should be careful to avoid making definitive conclusions.

This is the only part of your post that I agree with, but this statement disagrees with the entire rest of your post.

Edited March 10 by StarkTullies

[The Lord of the Crossing]

The Night's King had children with the Night's Queen.  The Starks came from their babies.  Jon, Arya, Bran, etc carry the DNA of the NK and the NQ.  Bran will ask the people of the north to offer human sacrifice to him.  Most will refuse and that will create a rift in the north.  Those who will side with evil will give the sacrifice. 

[YeniAy_Ottoman]

In the official phone application of ASOIAF, it was written that this woman was called "priestess", I watched it in a video years ago. I think the prisoner was an Andal prisoner. 

So this must be an image of the Andal period invasion. This Stark could be Theon the Hungry Wolf, the Andals were coming during his time. Blood sacrifice still existed in the north at that time. The fact that the sickle is bronze indicates the prevalence of bronze before steel at that time.

The detail of the priestess is interesting because in the northern faith there is no clergy, there are forest witches. Maybe what the priestess means is that this woman is a forest witch.

[Craving Peaches]

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

He saw his ancestors murdering a prisoner and feeding the blood to the white tree. 

• No proof that it was his ancestors
• No proof it was murder

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Bran can feed through his dreams.

• It's made very clear there is no actual feeding involved or Bran wouldn't have been hungry from lack of food etc.

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

We should be careful to avoid making definitive conclusions.

• Please follow your own advice

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

She is not Valyrian else she would have at least a quality iron sickle. 

• Valyrians were simple shepherds prior to discovery of the dragons

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

An elder specimen of humans

• WTF does this mean?

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

barbarians of the north. 

• Oops, your bias is showing again

3/10.

Some creativity but let down by everything else.

[Springwatch]

On 3/10/2024 at 1:34 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Eye color is indicative of lineage and affinity.  The Weirwoods have red sap, red leaves, and when carved, red eyes.  The purest form of a Northern creature, Ghost, has red eyes.  Genetic material from the Bloodstone line spread in the North through genetic experiments. 

Mel has red eyes too - do you want to develop further on this?

On 3/10/2024 at 10:37 AM, StarkTullies said:

Also, maybe you should think twice before using ancestral human sacrifices as proof that their modern day descendants are evil, lest you will be trashing your own favorite character.  Dany performed human sacrifices: see below.  If Dany is Azor Azai, then she knew exactly what she was doing to bring the dragons to life.  Or if her triple-sacrifice had nothing to do with the dragon births, then she didn't know what she is doing and she's not Azor Ahai.  You can't have it both ways.

Dany's thoughts: (The dragons) had been born from her faith and her need, given life by the deaths of her husband and unborn son and the maegi Mirri Maz Duur.

Triple-sacrifice is wrong; the quote doesn't say she sacrificed them and that's not what we saw happen. It's doubtful that even MIrri could be called a sacrifice because Dany's only religious idea at the time is Drogo's ascent to the afterlife, which doesn't even need a sacrifice. More likely Mirri's death was extreme punishment in revenge for her causing the deaths of Drogo and Rhaego. Which she did.

[StarkTullies]

11 hours ago, Springwatch said:

the quote doesn't say she sacrificed them and that's not what we saw happen.

I agree that Drogo being a sacrifice doesn't make sense.  Dany killed Drogo after Mirri put him in a vegetative state, and that looked like a mercy-killing to me, not a sacrifice.  Dany's thoughts didn't literally say that Drogo was sacrificed to give the dragons life, but that's how blood magic works in this world, and Mirri just gave her a lesson on blood magic.

I also think it is a stretch that Dany sacrificed Rhaego for the dragons, but she did sacrifice him... except she sacrificed him for Drogo.

Quote

"You warned me that only death could pay for life. I thought you meant the horse."

"No," Mirri Maz Duur said. "That was a lie you told yourself. You knew the price."

Had she? Had she? If I look back I am lost. "The price was paid," Dany said. "The horse, my child, Quaro and Qotho, Haggo and Cohollo. The price was paid and paid and paid." She rose from her cushions. "Where is Khal Drogo? Show him to me, godswife, maegi, bloodmage, whatever you are. Show me Khal Drogo. Show me what I bought with my son's life."

And of course Dany's thoughts didn't outright admit that she knowingly sacrificed her son, and her thoughts never will.  Briefly struggling with her self-denial before refusing to look back is the most we'll ever get.  Dany is not the type of person to ever admit guilt, but this is the most confirmation we'll ever get from a book told through biased point-of-views.

And for the above quote (You warned me that only death could pay for life), Dany walked into the fire expecting the dragons to hatch, waiting for them to hatch.  How would she expect three lives unless they were paid for by three deaths?  In the beginning of the next book, Dany named those three deaths.  Naming any random death as a "price" for an unrelated purchase would seem like cheating, so in her mind, Dany sacrificed them.

Yet I still kind of agree with you.  Drogo and Rhaego's deaths being used to give the dragons life seems like "cheating", but Dany said what she said.

Also note that I don't necessarily think that Dany is right or that Dany did know what she was doing.  I was responding to a poster who has previously claimed that Dany is Azor Ahai, and if she is, then she had to know what she was doing... and therefore she performed human sacrifices.  I was mostly pointing out the double-standard of supporting Dany while also claiming that Starks are terrible because an unidentified woman who might be a Stark performed a human sacrifice 10,000 years ago.

11 hours ago, Springwatch said:

More likely Mirri's death was extreme punishment in revenge for her causing the deaths of Drogo and Rhaego.

It was both an execution/punishment and a sacrifice.  See Alester Florent.  Stannis executed Alester for "treason" by means of Melisandre sacrificing him to R'hllor.

11 hours ago, Springwatch said:

Dany's only religious idea at the time is Drogo's ascent to the afterlife, which doesn't even need a sacrifice.

It's not true that Dany's only religious concepts were of the Dothraki religion.  Dany seemed to believe that the Dothraki religion is true for the Dothraki, but she also seems to be of the ideology that everybody's religion is true for them.  She was definitely raised with the awareness of the Faith of the Seven whether or not she believed.  And she knew some of Mirri's religion (only death can pay for life), which she applied when killing Mirri to hatch dragons.

[SeanF]

11 hours ago, StarkTullies said:

I agree that Drogo being a sacrifice doesn't make sense.  Dany killed Drogo after Mirri put him in a vegetative state, and that looked like a mercy-killing to me, not a sacrifice.  Dany's thoughts didn't literally say that Drogo was sacrificed to give the dragons life, but that's how blood magic works in this world, and Mirri just gave her a lesson on blood magic.

I also think it is a stretch that Dany sacrificed Rhaego for the dragons, but she did sacrifice him... except she sacrificed him for Drogo.

And of course Dany's thoughts didn't outright admit that she knowingly sacrificed her son, and her thoughts never will.  Briefly struggling with her self-denial before refusing to look back is the most we'll ever get.  Dany is not the type of person to ever admit guilt, but this is the most confirmation we'll ever get from a book told through biased point-of-views.

And for the above quote (You warned me that only death could pay for life), Dany walked into the fire expecting the dragons to hatch, waiting for them to hatch.  How would she expect three lives unless they were paid for by three deaths?  In the beginning of the next book, Dany named those three deaths.  Naming any random death as a "price" for an unrelated purchase would seem like cheating, so in her mind, Dany sacrificed them.

Yet I still kind of agree with you.  Drogo and Rhaego's deaths being used to give the dragons life seems like "cheating", but Dany said what she said.

Also note that I don't necessarily think that Dany is right or that Dany did know what she was doing.  I was responding to a poster who has previously claimed that Dany is Azor Ahai, and if she is, then she had to know what she was doing... and therefore she performed human sacrifices.  I was mostly pointing out the double-standard of supporting Dany while also claiming that Starks are terrible because an unidentified woman who might be a Stark performed a human sacrifice 10,000 years ago.

It was both an execution/punishment and a sacrifice.  See Alester Florent.  Stannis executed Alester for "treason" by means of Melisandre sacrificing him to R'hllor.

It's not true that Dany's only religious concepts were of the Dothraki religion.  Dany seemed to believe that the Dothraki religion is true for the Dothraki, but she also seems to be of the ideology that everybody's religion is true for them.  She was definitely raised with the awareness of the Faith of the Seven whether or not she believed.  And she knew some of Mirri's religion (only death can pay for life), which she applied when killing Mirri to hatch dragons.

My impression is that there was more than one will at work, when Dany walked into the fire. She in turn, sensed that something miraculous was happening, without knowing exactly what.

As to the O/P, I don’t doubt that human sacrifice was once common in the North, and likely still happens in some places.  But what of it?  Human sacrifice is a feature of all religions, other than the Seven.

 

Edited March 13 by SeanF

[House Cambodia]

7 hours ago, SeanF said:

As to the O/P, I don’t doubt that human sacrifice was once common in the North, and likely still happens in some places.  But what of it?

I'm quite persuaded by the idea that Craster's behaviour is the last surviving remnant of a once-common practice. Feeding bastard babies to The Others is what kept them happily ensconced behind the Wall. In the North, lords practising their "First Rights" created a healthy supply of bastard Northern babies who were sacrificed for The Others (via their blood soaking into Weirwood roots), and it was only when Good Queen Alysanne banned the custom that shortages of Other-food began to become an issue.

[Darth Sidious]

On 3/10/2024 at 2:09 PM, YeniAy_Ottoman said:

In the official phone application of ASOIAF, it was written that this woman was called "priestess", I watched it in a video years ago. I think the prisoner was an Andal prisoner. 

So this must be an image of the Andal period invasion. This Stark could be Theon the Hungry Wolf, the Andals were coming during his time. Blood sacrifice still existed in the north at that time. The fact that the sickle is bronze indicates the prevalence of bronze before steel at that time.

The detail of the priestess is interesting because in the northern faith there is no clergy, there are forest witches. Maybe what the priestess means is that this woman is a forest witch.

A woods witch. Yeah that’s possible. But just because she was the leader in the memory doesn’t mean it began with her. The Greenseer told her and the Starks to do this. They were giving human blood to the tree and indirectly feeding the Greenseer who was probably Bran in a previous life. 

[Darth Sidious]

Sometimes names are given after the fact. I wouldn’t think the Bloodstone Emperor was called that during his time. The name came after. Bloodstone because he was sacrificing blood to the stone. The stone is the black object that came from the sky. Sort of like the story in Heavy Metal.