Jump to content

Archived

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

Mystery Knight

Edited Title - Speculations on Geography

Recommended Posts

Sorry, that I interfere, but, Prince, how can you be sure that Azor Ahai was one of the First Men? How can you be sure that the First Men were the only people of that time? They were the first people who came to Westeros from Essos, but that doesn't mean that they were the only people in the World. Azor Ahai could easily have been from another nationality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's only an answer to a fairly small part of the issue.

The Tower of Joy fight has only been seen in memory and flashback, but that hardly makes it insignificant.

He's questioning if it'll be even seen there. That tells me its unlikely to be an important plot point-if it was he'd be cryptic, or possibly just say "In flashbacks". or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, that I interfere, but, Prince, how can you be sure that Azor Ahai was one of the First Men? How can you be sure that the First Men were the only people of that time? They were the first people who came to Westeros from Essos, but that doesn't mean that they were the only people in the World. Azor Ahai could easily have been from another nationality.

I know. There are lots of possbilites, but at this point the only humans we know were there were the First Men. And, as OiL points out, the distance between Ashai and Westeros is big. Saying that Azor Ahai is of the First Men seems much more likely then saying he was from Ashai, and I'm not sure if they had vessels for covering that difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Other-in-law
The books TELL that it was the First Men who inhabited Westeros at that time. The Andals and whoever else came later. That IS a fact. There's no point denying it just because you want to stick your head in the sand and ignore what I'm saying.

Enough with the asinine strawmen. You know perfectly well which part of your statement I was objecting to; it was the bolded part. You claimed that "and that Azor Ahai was in Westeros" is a fact. It isn't, it's sheer speculation. I wasn't disputing that the First men were the only humans in Westeros during the Long Night. That sort of disingenous method of arguing pretty much trashes your credibility.

I'll quote the Citadel: "The red star would be the comet, and the Others and the coming winter would be the darkness, like that of the Long Night."

The Citadel is not the series. The Concordance is a good objective summary (though still subject to differing interpretations), but that looks like it comes from the rather more speculative Prophecies section. Of course you didn't specify or provide a link.

If there is a shred of proof for your theory, point it out.

While you continue to claim that Azor Ahai was a First Man in Westeros on the basis of nothing more than your say so, huh?

"No foreshadowing besides Quaithe repeatedly telling Dany that she must go to Asshai to get the truth, go East to get West, and pass beneath the Shadow to reach the light? No, no foreshadowing besides that at all."

I don't see how that has any bearing on you're theory. It says that the Shadow will be involved. How exactly does that connect with the idea that Azor Ahai came from Asshai and fought the Shadow rather than the Others???

Cut the bullshit. That answer was in response to your comment: "I said it'd be dissapointing for Martin to tell us about the Others and build that whole story up, and then bring in the Shadow (following your theory), which had no foreshadowing nor build up." You claimed there was no foreshadowing to connect the Shadow and prophesied future fight against the Others; I pointed out exactly how it was foreshadowed; then you pretend that I was supposed to be answering about where the original Azor Ahai lived? Try to show a little more integrity.

Now since you apparently have no idea of how to provide actual textual evidence to back up your case, I'll show you how. I've already mentioned the Asshai'i scriptures, but here's the original source, from page 113, US hardcover ACoK:

"In Ancient books of Asshai it is written that there will come a day after a long summer when when the stars bleed and the cold breath of darkness falls heavy on the world. In this dread hour a warrior shall draw from the fire a burning sword. And that sword shall be Lightbringer, the Red Sword of Heroes, and he who clasps it shall be Azor Ahai come again, and the darkness shall flee before him."

So the ancient prophecy of the return of the messiah figure of the Asshai'i religion comes from...surprise, surprise...ASSHAI. Astonishing, huh? While it's perfectly reasonable to see this prophecy referring to a future fight against with the Others, it nevertheless appears to have originated in Asshai in the distant past. Against that, Rh'llorianism is clearly a recent introduction to Westeros; Thoros came during Aerys II's reign and Mel came at the end of Robert's. There may be older inroads in Dorne and Oldtown, where there's more contact with the Free Cities, but it obviously the newest religion in Westeros. The phrase "Done in the light of the Lord" was unfamiliar to the Small Council, Westerosi like Arya had difficulty even pronouncing Rh'llor's name, there's no evidence of any lingering presence of stories explicitly about Azor Ahai and Nissa Nissa in Westeros (Davos heard it from a Lysene), no ruins of ancient Red temples, nothing at all to indicate that Rh'llor or Azor Ahai were known to Westeros in the past at all. Which would be quite odd if his heroic deeds were actually done there, and the Rh'llorian religion founded there.

Meanwhile, Mel even provides a date for the prophecy that she tells of, on page 711, UK hardcover aSoS:

"You are he who must stand against the Other, the one whose coming was prophesied 5,000 years ago. The red comet was your herald. You are the prince who was promised, and if you fail the world fails with you."

In this case, she doesn't explicitly identify the prophecy as Asshai'i, though it's most probable that she would no more of Assha'i scriptures than any other. The main alternative source, given the PtwP reference, is that it is Valyrian. Valyria was strong enough to smash the Ghiscari Empire 5,000 years ago, but the oldest (in fact only) Valyrian prophecy that we've heard of comes from the daughter of Aenar Targaryen, who lived 1,000 years before the Doom (thus, only 1,400 years ago). Could be either one.

With that, I'm done with this thread and will now be placing "Prince Who Was Promised" on my ignore list, which the appropriate way to deal with those who post with such shameless dishonesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does ANY OF THIS prove the theory that Azor Ahai fought the Shadow instead of the Others???

Well if you assume the he's an Asshi hero then its likely he fought the thing closest to Asshi. But it's possible that he is a first man whose legend spread far and wide and was approrpaited by others to fit their culture.

But I think based on GRRM's answer that we wont see Asshai outside of flashbacks indicated that even if the shadow is a 2nd hinge, its unlikely to be a major battle front in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly. But it doesn't make much sense to say he fought the Shadow when legends claim he fought the Others.

Why don't you "quote" these legends from the book. We have Mel's version of the legend where she says Azor Ahai will be reborn to fight against a great Darkness. Which she interprets to mean Stannis will fight against the Others. And we all know how trustworthy Mel's interpretation skills are. The prophecy regarding Azor Ahai only mentions a darkness that will creep over the earth. No mention specifically of the Others.

The enemy that Azor Ahai originally fought could be manifest as the Others at this point in time.

The two incarnations of The Adversary do not HAVE to be identical in appearance/form.

Azor Ahai and The Last Hero:

The Last Hero would have been an adherent to the Old Gods in order to have received help from CotF.

Azor Ahai is specifically a legend held by the followers of R'hllor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adherent to the Old Gods? Maybe. Or the Children were in trouble and couldve used some help. There WAS a pact after all.

And you seem to be forgetting the Prince that Was Promised, which Aemon (a very reliable source) says fights the Others. No other big antagonist has been revealed, so it's a stretch to invent one.

Yes, there is likely a connection between the prophecy and the Shadow (although that could also be some other things), but that doesn't mean that it was the Shadow that was defeated all those years ago. Far from it.

EDIT: Not to mention that the fact that Melisandre identifies Azor Ahai's adversary as "the darkness" only re-enforces that idea that it was the Others because the religion identifies the Great Other as the God of Darkness.

And how silly would it be to bring up the Long Night and then say that Azor Ahai REALLY fought the Shadow, and the Long Night had nothing to do with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem if The Last Hero and Azor Ahai turn out to be two seperate entities? It does not make the PWWP prophecy any less significant or relevant.

And thinking back to Nan's retelling of the story of the Last Hero, I think that Lightbringer would have been a major focus of the story especially when told to Bran who is enamoured of all things knightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one ever said Azor Ahai and the Last Hero were the same, to my knowledge. But them being seperate entities would make the who "Azor Ahai" bit have less meaning. And it just wouldn't make sense given the info we've gotten.

I mean, if it happens, I'm sure GRRM will make it work, but right now there's not enough evidence to convince me otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one ever said Azor Ahai and the Last Hero were the same, to my knowledge. But them being seperate entities would make the who "Azor Ahai" bit have less meaning. And it just wouldn't make sense given the info we've gotten.

I mean, if it happens, I'm sure GRRM will make it work, but right now there's not enough evidence to convince me otherwise.

I'm sorry I must be mistaken in what i've been reading for the last two/three pages. My thought was that one of the major premises for you claiming that Azor Ahai fought the Others was likening his story to that of the Last Hero.

Another one of your premises seems to be taking Melisandre's word as canon and as I've stated before we all know how reliable her inferences can be. Just because Mel is stating her version of the prophecy does not make it true. She is one priestess of a religion alien to Westeros and from the little we know of the religions existing in ASOIAF, we know even less of that of R'hllor.

I can see how Azor Ahai can be linked to the PWWP prophecy but you can't deny that you were trying to liken the story of Azor Ahai to fit in with that of the Last Hero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not exactly of the opinion that Azor Ahai and the Last Hero were the same. They can be, yes, but there's not enough evidence for or against, considering Azor Ahai "didn't fight his war alone". I was likening Azor Ahai to the hero in the sense that they both fought the Others. If any other connection exists, it has yet to be identifyed.

And it's not Mel I don't trust, it's her interperitation. It's not like she made up the Great Other (which has been mentioned in the eastern continent, I'll try to find a exerpt later) or the prophecy (Aemon quoted it, I believe, again, I'll look for it later).

My premise is that there's not nearly enough evidence to give OiL's theory merit, and, though he can say it however freely he wants, the Azor Ahai vs. Great Other makes much more sense with what we've been given, ecspeacially against OiL's sufficient lack of evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Aemon and Mel have identified the Others are the reason for the rebirth of the AA the PTWP, Thus it's a heavy implication that the Evil that the original AA faced where the Others by no means is it fact but at this point in time it's a lot smaller jump than "Theres another superpower enemy lurking out there" that have yet to be mentioned or seen.

And working on this basis if the enemy are one and the same and there has only been one confrontation to date then the two heroes credited for defeating the Darkness must be the same, Thus AA and the Last Hero should be the same person in reality.

Going by this an explanation, why a Westeros occurence like the War of Dawn can be such a pivotel concept in a Far off lands religon can easilly be explained as the story spreading across continents (Which many myths and stories have done throughout history), Then being adopted and used as a tool of the local religon to promote their brand of faith which is documented of Happening throughtout History (Everyone knows the story of Christmas and Christianity right?). Hell i've heards of loads of times historians pointing out correlations between aspects of Christianity and incredibly similar concepts in other Faiths and thus claiming that Teachings from one where adopted by the others.

As for the differences in accounts of the LTH and AA this can also been explained by the spreading of the Tale, it is known that when infomation is spread indirectly it can be corrupted by errors such as embellishment or bad recollection of the account as it is passed (Anyone ho was taught the game Telephone in school can belief this)

It's entirely circumstancial at best, but it accords with Logic in my opinion. It seems alot more logical to believe that AA and the TLH are one and the same as opposed to theres another Big Bad out there it's just we haven't seen it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both Aemon and Mel have identified the Others are the reason for the rebirth of the AA the PTWP, Thus it's a heavy implication that the Evil that the original AA faced where the Others by no means is it fact but at this point in time it's a lot smaller jump than "Theres another superpower enemy lurking out there" that have yet to be mentioned or seen.

Quotations? Evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other point: It's possible that AA was a real, distinct hero. But Mellissendre is confused about his target and/or his story isn't relevant in westeros.

Or it could just be wrong, and the point of the AA story was its effect on the Stannis storyline. Which would be all the explanation i needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quotations? Evidence?

Um..."When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai will be reborn admidst smoke and salt to wake the dragons out of stone"?

Or ""In ancient books of Asshai it is written that there will come a day after a long summer when the stars bleed and the cold breath of darkness falls heavy on the world. In this dread hour a warrior shall draw from the fire a burning sword. And that sword shall be Lightbringer, the Red Sword of Heroes, and he who clasps it shall be Azor Ahai come again, and the darkness shall flee before him."?

Aemon: "It is the War for the Dawn you speak of, my lady, but where is the Prince That Was Promised?"

What other reason IS there for Azor Ahai/Prince That Was Promised to come again since his goal is to fight the Others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×