Heresy 8

[Lykos]

@Iceborn

It´s the same as in Braveheart, the Lord has the right to the "First Night" when his subjects marry.

ETA: I´m not so comfortable with explaining the NW R´hllor connection, since I didn´t blieve in it. The NW vows are very close to Melisandre reciting the legend of AAR.

[Black Crow]

On Time : Part One and a Bit

The question of how time is measured is one which I originally meant to include in part 1 but overlooked when I was typing it all up. Leaving aside the very valid points raised above about the length of a year as caluculated in Westeros before or after the Andal take over, there is also the little matter of reconciling different calendars, in our world for example we have the Christian calendar, counting up and down dates before and after the presumed birthday of Jesus Christ. Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Chinese and all sorts of other people have their own quite independent calendars and while a certain amount of cross referencing can be made by discovering that an event in the year 100 in one calendar is also recorded in another as taking place in the year 575 the whole process is fraught with opportunities for confusion. Thus by misreading a runic date, or assuming two battles fought in a particular place 200 years apart were one and the same, or confusing two or even three King Brans, its entirely possible that an event recorded in the Andal histories as taking place 3,000 years ago only took place 1,000 years ago, of which more anon in Part 2 proper.

[Black Crow]

can you explain "First Night" can't find it in my copy, but the kindle is only 90% software quality. Also the night's watch where formed by First Men not andels that points away from the red lot and towards the old gods, maester Aemon says: "They came from a hundred quarrelsome [first men] kingdoms"

As Lykos says first night is the Lord's right to have the bride on her first night of marriage. Its not entirely a one-sided business in that like the wet nurses provided by the mountain clans its reckoned to tie the said Lord into his people when the first born pops out nine months later and telling whether its father is its mother's husband, or the Lord's.

As to the Nights Watch, heresy holds there's a strong liklihood that the Watch as we now know it may have originated with the Andals, replacing an earlier one allied to the Others and led by Bran Stark, the Night's King (and probably King of Winter too). Reading Heresy 6 and 7 should enlighten you. :cool4:

[Iceborn]

So we have two "watches" now that is confusing :dunno: It would explain the different parts of the vow i.e. no wife etc against darkens and fire and shields. And yes I think it is connected somehow but we have a chicken and egg problem here.

[Uncat]

The Harpy. The Sphynx. The Dragon

I finaly did what I should have done long before. I looked up some stuff.

The harpys were the embodyment of stormwinds (anybody thinking about Storms End now ;)). Their name meens "Snatcher" and one of their job was to snatch the souls of the dead that had enraged Zeus (the Boss of the Greek gods) and carry them into the underworld. Harpys are hybrids, large preying birds with a womans uper body. Initialy they were wild, imortal and beatyful. Later on peole prefered them as terribel monsters.

The Spynx stems from the ancient orient. It is a Hybrid to. The animal part would mostly be a lion with large bird wings and with a mans head. Only later the head was interpreted as a womans head and in many modern languages they are actually refered to as female at least as far as grammar is concerned. And now the best part: They are close tied to deat and the underlworld. Their name actualy stems from a Greek word for "binding" in a magical sense. I guess this makes the Sphynx a Shadow Binder and our beloved Mel becomes a Spynx. Nice, isn't it?

This makes two out of three.

Dragons are hybrids, too. But in this case no human parts are (mytologicaly speaking) envolved. They are usually some kind of winged sepents. As oposed to the other two dragons are not connected to death per se but rather to total chaos either in the beginning or in the end of all days. The kind of dragon we meet in in ASOIAF did not turn up before the Middlle Ages. It has a direct connection to the devil and the Original Sin that happend in Paradise.

No explanation yet but some thoughts on this:

There is a straight line of unnatural beast at least as sigils from Old Ghys to Valyria and the reign of Targs. And I am sure, that this line stems from under the Shadow.

One beast is more unnatural then the other. A harpy is part bird, part human. A spynx is part lion, part bird, part human. A dragon is composed of up to twelve different animals. And for ASOIAF it might emcompase as the most important part an invisible human soul instead of a vissible human head

All three of them are strongly related to death and "matters of the soul" i.e. mortality and imortality. The relation of the harpys is on a one to one level, that of the spynx is rather on a one to many level while the dragon stands for the sin per se and all the souls lost to it.

This gives a lot of wheight to what Butterbumps suggested in Heresy 7, that we are not actually dealing with an imbalance between summer and winter but between live and death.

And: The Dragon has three heads. Or is it, that the dragon is the third and worst incarnation of something that is going on for milenia? But this last thought is just my late night crackpot for you.

[The Last Hero]

My thoughts about the NW and the Red Lot (and I think this was talked about in previous heresies) was that the Watch had been founded to safeguard a pact between the first men and the COTF, with the pact later being broken in order to broker a peace between the Andals and the First Men in the North. To do this the original watch had to be destroyed, hence the story of the Night's King and his demonization. I wonder if afterwards the Red Lot formed the new NW to guard the seven kingdoms against retaliation for the breaking of the pact, like say through an attack by the WW. But I still see some holes in this idea, for example saying the very fire-centric vows in order to pass through the Black Gate at the Nightsfort would undermine the idea that the vow is proof of a connection to R'hllor implemented after the Night's King. And also what reason would Joramun have to fight the Night's King and break the pact? :dunno:

[Uncat]

Sorry, completly out of sync with you. But I am still chewing on the live and death thing, Butterbumps brought up. I just came across the adventures of Arya with the Brotherhood without Banners which is the first time that we witness a fire resurection in the book. And it also shows Arya as a mercyless person who whants to deal out death.

With Butterbumps idea in mind, this suddenly connected so much with the faceless men. Both religions stem from the slave lands. At their very core is the promise to end the suffering. But they have developed to very different ways to deal this end out.

The faceless men bring the mercy of death to those who are praying for it. Being dead, they are dead and their suffering has ended.

The red preasts bring hope of salvation. And in the dark of the night they brought the kiss of fire to slaves that died that day. Being dead, they now are free to go and their suffiering has ended.

Each body created a religion around their belive system. And those belive systems are absolutly antagonistic, culminating in the fact, that the faceless man start to become the accountants of death, saying, that death must happen and when somebady destined to die survives someone else must make up for this in order to keep the acount balanced. Or, if you want to put it this way: for each man or woman ressurected, someone else must die.

That would make the R'hollorists and the Faceless Men worst enimies for all eternity.

The possibility, that the Great Other is actually the Manyfaced God was discussed earlier in a lot of threats. But it never made sence, because the FM had no assiciation to the Others who seemd to be the big bad guys. But as the Heresy threats sucessfully removed the Others as the ultimate villains and dethroned them to be mere agents of somebody else, I start to see two conflict lines, that are about to meet in Westeros and that became entangled for the parties involved, too.

First of all, there is the Old conflict in Westeros between the settlers and the original habitants that somehow resulted in tilted seasons and a huge wall. This conflict is picking up speed again in which way ever. This is the Westeros string of events.

Second od all I see a conflict between two religious bodies who are fighting each other since the dawn of time and throuout the rise and fall of such empires as Old Ghis and Valyria. This is the Essos string of events.

The red side of this conflict is either conviced that what is happening in Westeros is part of their war. Or the red lot tries to use (or even encourages) the restart of the Westerosi string of events in order to align Westeros on their side.

This would explain, why we need The whole "Essos and the Slaves" part of the plot. It is not just Danny learning to rule (or failing to do so). It is Danny becomming the decisive player on the Essos string of events, which revolves around the slavery issue. And much point into her becomming the champion of the red lot.

In the meantime, Aryas training finaly makes sense. She will incorporate the side of the Manyfaced God in the Essos string.

And Jon? He is the poor guy who stands between everybody else far in the north where it all will come down.

Ok, I know this is not yet a theory. It still has a lot of holes and very few proofs. But it would be fit to explain a few things. Most important of all, it would explain the great Other of the red lot and it would give the Faceless men a real place in the story.

Long post short: We are not dealing with a two sided duell but with a fore sided melee. And Arya which seemed to go nowhere suddenly goes somewhere. She is going to be the Champion of Death in this fight.

Edit: Some typos

[Black Crow]

My thoughts about the NW and the Red Lot (and I think this was talked about in previous heresies) was that the Watch had been founded to safeguard a pact between the first men and the COTF, with the pact later being broken in order to broker a peace between the Andals and the First Men in the North. To do this the original watch had to be destroyed, hence the story of the Night's King and his demonization. I wonder if afterwards the Red Lot formed the new NW to guard the seven kingdoms against retaliation for the breaking of the pact, like say through an attack by the WW. But I still see some holes in this idea, for example saying the very fire-centric vows in order to pass through the Black Gate at the Nightsfort would undermine the idea that the vow is proof of a connection to R'hllor implemented after the Night's King. And also what reason would Joramun have to fight the Night's King and break the pact? :dunno:

I think the first part of your post is a pretty fair summary of some of the recent thinking on the subject. As to the question of Joruman - and Gendel and Gorne - I'll be covering this in timelines 2 which I'll now try and get posted early tomorrow morning GMT

[Lykos]

@Uncat

I have to go soon, so I just give this little bit I stumbled upon in ADWD, in the Melisandre POV she thinks to herself that sleep is the little death and dreams are sent by the great Other to misguide us, I think the R´hllor - ians are afraid of death.

Fanatically afraid.

On the other hand Selyse says that the wildlings at Hardhome should be left to die and be reborn in the light of R´hllor and Mel says to Jon that Selyse has the right of it.

[lokisnow]

imo the Great Other = Death = The Stranger = the Many Faced God

Love the idea that the Faceless Men are accountants of death. In a way, they're like the magical version of the maesters (accountants of knowledge). Both want to eradicate magic, I think, which is causing imbalance, chaos and disorder within their realms. The idea that the faceless men would be extremely upset about the resurrections of the wights, the fire-wights (Catelyn, Melisandre, etc), and drowned makes perfect sense. I wonder if the faceless men are even against Weirwood immortality? On the other hand, the face magic of the faceless men is something of a resurrection itself. Blood and bones and skin are so terribly, terribly important to magic, too bad we don't know more.

***

I came here to post a thought I had though, the reference to "Ice" as the ancestral sword of the Starks.

Why would they have a Valyrian Steel sword? Wouldn't it make more sense that they are the only human holders of an unnatural 'ice' sword of the White Walkers?

If you think about it, it gives another meaning to the idea of Aegon the Conquerer Melting down the swords of his enemies to forge the Throne. There's magic in the Throne construction, I wonder if 'melting' Ice to forge the throne is part of that? Or is the Original Sword Ice hidden deep in the crypts? hidden by Torrhen, I presume.

It would also make sense that the distribution of the Valyrian Steel Swords to the Houses of the realm, was to replace the swords taken by Aegon. It's a symbolic way to bind them. Take their ancestral swords, but give them a newer, better weapon to replace said swords. So many of the lords would have been shamed at having given up their swords and so wowed at how much better Valyrian Steel was that it was in every lord's best interest to continue on that their swords were the same as always.

Isn't it horribly funny that we've all overlooked this? Every house has a story about their ancestral sword, but from the very first book, we've been told that Aegon made his chair from the swords of his enemies! Do you really think Aegon would be content to use the swords of hedge knights and sworn swords to craft the symbol of his rule? Nope, i think the Targaryens knew enough of magic that to bind the kingdoms to them they had to have the swords of the kings/lords/rulers.

ETA: And since Dorne wasn't conquered, Dawn would be one of the very few ancestral swords not taken by Aegon.

[Eyron]

I hope in the end, we get to see the iron throne de-constructed.

And lockesnow, I agree about the swords and Dawn. I really think Dawn and the Daynes have been flying under the radar for a purpose lately (since ser Arthur). We will see it pop up again.

[Bran Vras]

The notion that the Targaryens gave Valyrians swords to replace the swords they have taken is pleasant enough. But it seems to me that several of the swords in circulation are older than the Conquest, not by much though.

[Bran Vras]

I'll try to follow more closely the Heresy Threads in the future. Since I believe the big mysteries can be solved by looking at the little things, this will be a repost something I wrote for the Roose Bolton thread. I intended to study the notion that Reek came from Whitetree. This is why I tried to have a close look at that village and the religious practices there. I repeat only the part which concerns the village. Recall that Craster's mother was a wildling from Whitetree.

Does anyone see more than I do?

Whitetree, the village was named on Sam’s old maps. Jon did not think it much of a village. Four tumbledown one-room houses of unmortared stone surrounded an empty sheepfold and a well. The houses were roofed with sod, the windows shuttered with ragged pieces of hide. And above them loomed the pale limbs and dark red leaves of a monstrous great weirwood.

It was the biggest tree Jon Snow had ever seen, the trunk near eight feet wide, the branches spreading so far that the entire village was shaded beneath their canopy. The size did not disturb him so much as the face . . . the mouth especially, no simple carved slash, but a jagged hollow large enough to swallow a sheep.

Those are not sheep bones, though. Nor is that a sheep’s skull in the ashes.

It's suggested, but never said, that it is a human skull. There is another smaller skull in the tree.

The inside of the hollow was red with dried sap and blackened by fire. Beneath the skull he saw another, smaller, the jaw broken off.

I am not sure what sense I should make of this. Apparently, an adult and a child have been burnt inside the tree. The rangers of the Night's Watch presume that the wildlings have burnt their dead. But why burn them in a tree? Is there a sense to make of the broken jaw?

On his way back from Craster's Keep, in ASoS. Sam mistook another village for Whitetree.

All wildling villages looked much alike, though. A huge weirwood grew in the center of this one . . . but a white tree did not mean Whitetree, necessarily. Hadn’t the weirwood at Whitetree been bigger than this one? Maybe he was remembering it wrong. The face carved into the bone pale trunk was long and sad; red tears of dried sap leaked from its eyes. Was that how it looked when we came north? Sam couldn’t recall.

Around the tree stood a handful of one-room hovels with sod roofs, a longhall built of logs and grown over with moss, a stone well, a sheepfold . . . but no sheep, nor any people.

The other village is typical: it has a weirwood (smaller than Whitetree's, and without the big mouth), etc but has something that Whitetree lacks: a wooden longhall. I guess that buildings made of different material serve different functions, especially in such a small place. Here is a little indication that the longhall could have a religious function

[sam's] back ached so abominably from the walking that he would have liked to lean up against one of the carved wooden pillars that supported the roof, but the fire was in the center of the hall beneath the smoke hole and he craved warmth even more than comfort.

Is there a connection between the absence of longhall in Whitetree and the presence of the hollow weirwood? Is this discrepancy the sign of different religious practices?

Are the inhabitants of Whitetree the orthodox or the heretics? Craster, despite originating from Whitetree, seems to have the opposite religious affiliation: he lives in a longhall, but has nothing to do with stone buildings and weirwoods. We know that Craster is religious, since he insists on calling himself a godly man.

[lokisnow]

The notion that the Targaryens gave Valyrians swords to replace the swords they have taken is pleasant enough. But it seems to me that several of the swords in circulation are older than the Conquest, not by much though.

It's in the interest of the houses to promote the myth that their swords are older than the conquest, even when everyone knows that Aegon took the swords of the houses. If the house swords were so old, Aegon would have demanded their Valyrian Steel swords be melted to form his throne.

The sword names are older than the conquest, I think, I think the swords themselves are relatively new.

[jon rr stark]

imo the Great Other = Death = The Stranger = the Many Faced God

Love the idea that the Faceless Men are accountants of death. In a way, they're like the magical version of the maesters (accountants of knowledge). Both want to eradicate magic, I think, which is causing imbalance, chaos and disorder within their realms. The idea that the faceless men would be extremely upset about the resurrections of the wights, the fire-wights (Catelyn, Melisandre, etc), and drowned makes perfect sense. I wonder if the faceless men are even against Weirwood immortality? On the other hand, the face magic of the faceless men is something of a resurrection itself. Blood and bones and skin are so terribly, terribly important to magic, too bad we don't know more.

***

I came here to post a thought I had though, the reference to "Ice" as the ancestral sword of the Starks.

Why would they have a Valyrian Steel sword? Wouldn't it make more sense that they are the only human holders of an unnatural 'ice' sword of the White Walkers?

If you think about it, it gives another meaning to the idea of Aegon the Conquerer Melting down the swords of his enemies to forge the Throne. There's magic in the Throne construction, I wonder if 'melting' Ice to forge the throne is part of that? Or is the Original Sword Ice hidden deep in the crypts? hidden by Torrhen, I presume.

It would also make sense that the distribution of the Valyrian Steel Swords to the Houses of the realm, was to replace the swords taken by Aegon. It's a symbolic way to bind them. Take their ancestral swords, but give them a newer, better weapon to replace said swords. So many of the lords would have been shamed at having given up their swords and so wowed at how much better Valyrian Steel was that it was in every lord's best interest to continue on that their swords were the same as always.

Isn't it horribly funny that we've all overlooked this? Every house has a story about their ancestral sword, but from the very first book, we've been told that Aegon made his chair from the swords of his enemies! Do you really think Aegon would be content to use the swords of hedge knights and sworn swords to craft the symbol of his rule? Nope, i think the Targaryens knew enough of magic that to bind the kingdoms to them they had to have the swords of the kings/lords/rulers.

ETA: And since Dorne wasn't conquered, Dawn would be one of the very few ancestral swords not taken by Aegon.

Cant remember wheren the info comes from but Im pretty sure the valyrian swords predate Aegons invasion

[jon rr stark]

Edit

@Jon rr stark and all. Ups, this one could get a wrong ring to you. Did not mean in a bad way.

No idea what this means?

[Jojen]

ADWD, in the Melisandre POV she thinks to herself that sleep is the little death and dreams are sent by the great Other to misguide us, I think the R´hllor - ians are afraid of death. Fanatically afraid.

I think so, too. But why are they so afraid? I doubt it's a simple fear of the unknown, because they have a pretty definite conception of what the Great Other is, so it's probably more than that. Is it because, as Tyrion states, "death is just so terribly final, while life is full of possibilities"? Or is it feared because there is no power without life (in other words, if everyone's dead, there's no one to burn)?

the reference to "Ice" as the ancestral sword of the Starks.

Why would they have a Valyrian Steel sword? Wouldn't it make more sense that they are the only human holders of an unnatural 'ice' sword of the White Walkers?

If you think about it, it gives another meaning to the idea of Aegon the Conquerer Melting down the swords of his enemies to forge the Throne. There's magic in the Throne construction, I wonder if 'melting' Ice to forge the throne is part of that? Or is the Original Sword Ice hidden deep in the crypts? hidden by Torrhen, I presume.

It would also make sense that the distribution of the Valyrian Steel Swords to the Houses of the realm, was to replace the swords taken by Aegon. It's a symbolic way to bind them. Take their ancestral swords, but give them a newer, better weapon to replace said swords. So many of the lords would have been shamed at having given up their swords and so wowed at how much better Valyrian Steel was that it was in every lord's best interest to continue on that their swords were the same as always.

Isn't it horribly funny that we've all overlooked this? Every house has a story about their ancestral sword, but from the very first book, we've been told that Aegon made his chair from the swords of his enemies! Do you really think Aegon would be content to use the swords of hedge knights and sworn swords to craft the symbol of his rule? Nope, i think the Targaryens knew enough of magic that to bind the kingdoms to them they had to have the swords of the kings/lords/rulers.

ETA: And since Dorne wasn't conquered, Dawn would be one of the very few ancestral swords not taken by Aegon.

I've wondered as well what the story is behind Ice. Where did they get it and how? And why, exactly? It's one of the newer Valyrian steel blades, so they seem to have been late in jumping on that particular bandwagon. What sort of sword did they have before, and what became of it? Was it lost, or deemed unfit for continued use? Was Ice forged just for them, or did they get a "used" model? Was there a sudden need for Valyrian steel in particular? The WW are said to be vulnerable to dragonsteel, which might be another word for Valyrian steel, so maybe they decided that they of all people should have an anti-Other weapon. Which is ironic if a connection is ever explicitly made between the Others and the Kings of Winter.

I don't think we'll ever really know the answer to that.

Apparently, an adult and a child have been burnt inside the tree. The rangers of the Night's Watch presume that the wildlings have burnt their dead. But why burn them in a tree? Is there a sense to make of the broken jaw?

On his way back from Craster's Keep, in ASoS. Sam mistook another village for Whitetree.

The other village is typical: it has a weirwood (smaller than Whitetree's, and without the big mouth), etc but has something that Whitetree lacks: a wooden longhall. I guess that buildings made of different material serve different functions, especially in such a small place. Here is a little indication that the longhall could have a religious function

Is there a connection between the absence of longhall in Whitetree and the presence of the hollow weirwood? Is this discrepancy the sign of different religious practices?

Are the inhabitants of Whitetree the orthodox or the heretics? Craster, despite originating from Whitetree, seems to have the opposite religious affiliation: he lives in a longhall, but has nothing to do with stone buildings and weirwoods. We know that Craster is religious, since he insists on calling himself a godly man.

If they did burn them in a tree, perhaps it was some sort of mixing the traditional sacrifice rites of the Old Gods and those of the Red God. By whom, I don't know. I also don't know what to make, if anything, of the broken jaw.

I'm very curious about something else, though. In Jon 6 in ADWD, Mel encourages Jon's warging, saying there's power in him and in Ghost and that he should "embrace it" and "use it." Why would she do this if the Red God is anti all other gods--especially the Old Gods, whom she suspects may be in league with the Great Other anyway? Interestingly, she doesn't try to claim that the power comes from R'hllor, so what is her motivation? It is simply that she's finally coming around to him being AA Reborn and that she believes AA must use whatever powers he has available, powers that do not come from R'hllor?

[Elaena Targaryen]

imo the Great Other = Death = The Stranger = the Many Faced God

Love the idea that the Faceless Men are accountants of death. In a way, they're like the magical version of the maesters (accountants of knowledge). Both want to eradicate magic, I think, which is causing imbalance, chaos and disorder within their realms. The idea that the faceless men would be extremely upset about the resurrections of the wights, the fire-wights (Catelyn, Melisandre, etc), and drowned makes perfect sense. I wonder if the faceless men are even against Weirwood immortality? On the other hand, the face magic of the faceless men is something of a resurrection itself. Blood and bones and skin are so terribly, terribly important to magic, too bad we don't know more.

***

I came here to post a thought I had though, the reference to "Ice" as the ancestral sword of the Starks.

Why would they have a Valyrian Steel sword? Wouldn't it make more sense that they are the only human holders of an unnatural 'ice' sword of the White Walkers?

If you think about it, it gives another meaning to the idea of Aegon the Conquerer Melting down the swords of his enemies to forge the Throne. There's magic in the Throne construction, I wonder if 'melting' Ice to forge the throne is part of that? Or is the Original Sword Ice hidden deep in the crypts? hidden by Torrhen, I presume.

It would also make sense that the distribution of the Valyrian Steel Swords to the Houses of the realm, was to replace the swords taken by Aegon. It's a symbolic way to bind them. Take their ancestral swords, but give them a newer, better weapon to replace said swords. So many of the lords would have been shamed at having given up their swords and so wowed at how much better Valyrian Steel was that it was in every lord's best interest to continue on that their swords were the same as always.

Isn't it horribly funny that we've all overlooked this? Every house has a story about their ancestral sword, but from the very first book, we've been told that Aegon made his chair from the swords of his enemies! Do you really think Aegon would be content to use the swords of hedge knights and sworn swords to craft the symbol of his rule? Nope, i think the Targaryens knew enough of magic that to bind the kingdoms to them they had to have the swords of the kings/lords/rulers.

ETA: And since Dorne wasn't conquered, Dawn would be one of the very few ancestral swords not taken by Aegon.

First I like your thoughts on the Faceless Men.

I was thinking about the houses valyrian blades lately and I wanted to ask what everyone thought about them...now I know what you think. :) There are seven swords besides the Targaryens blades, Blackfyre and Dark Sister, and I found that number crurious. There are two that we can question the origin of more than the others; Red Rain which was taken from an unknown knight, I'm speculating from the Stormlands; Longclaw which is from House Mormont, but why/how do they have one, I find this strange and speculate Longclaw is really Darksister from the Targs; so now that puts us at six house blades, excluding Dorne, which has Dawn and it's not valyrian steel, for the original six kingdoms and that makes your theory work and I like it. Heartsbane=Reach; Lady Forlorn=Vale; Nightfall=Iron Islands/Riverlands (they were ruled together at this time) Brightboar=Westerlands; Ice=North; Red Rain=maybe Stormlands; Longclaw=North-or is it? Or maybe the North took two valyrian blades and that explains Longclaw.

Now we have heard that Heartsbane and Longclaw have been family ancesteral blades for five hundred years and Ice has been one for Stark for four hundred years and we have not heard a time for any others. It was the one hundred year difference that had me curious and I wondered if it could be connected to something like breaking the pact or accepting Andals in the North., or whatever. I don't know why but I felt something bad connected to House Stark getting the valyrian blade so I wanted to think about it more. I do love the theory that the original Ice, and other swords as well, may have been melted to make the Iron Throne, we have been told this from the beginning but I never connected it because of the timelines and as a heretic I should question this. I have speculated before that the first Ice may have been a WW sword, and I like the idea of it being melted and adding magic to the throne. I think it was the Sword of Winter for the Kings of Winter. Something interesting must have happened to make them give it up I think.

@Eira or Lummel, could you explain the mooncult thing again/or a little more. There was King Walton Stark the Moonking, and maesters use a bronze link for astrology, so I've been a little more focused on this type of thing lately. I'm not sure why. :)

[Sword Of Mid Afternoon]

Just saw this.... kind of ties in with 7 indirectly... perhaps not only was Bloodraven in contact with the Others, but he had done so far earlier than any of us had ever suspected. I happened upon this bit from The Mystery Knight... Warriors is all together too difficult to get a hold of. I should probably just buy a copy. I always have to send away via some damned interlibrary loan silliness.

But none the less....

I found the following passage most intriguing. Bold, underlining mine, of course.

Every word was treason. Even so, it was a shock to see him here, with holes where his eyes had been. "That's him, aye," Dunk said, "and another good reason to put this town behind us.” He gave Thunder a touch of the spur, and he and Egg rode through the gates of Stoney Sept, listening to the soft sound of the rain. How many eyes does Lord Bloodraven have? the riddle ran. A thousand eyes, and one. Some claimed the King's Hand was a student of the dark arts who could change his face, put on the likeness of a one-eyed dog, even turn into a mist. Packs of gaunt grey wolves hunted down his foes, men said, and carrion crows spied for him and whispered secrets in his ear. Most of the tales were only tales, Dunk did not doubt, but no one could doubt that Bloodraven had informers everywhere.

[lokisnow]

If Ice was the sword of house Stark at the time of the conquest, Aegon should have taken it to add to his throne.

Aegon may have taken Ice from house Stark to add to his throne, why would he accept any lesser sword? If they had the Valyrian Ice he would want that, if they had a WW Ice he would want that. If they had just an ordinary bad ass castle-forged sword that was renewed every couple hundred years, he would want that. The point is, he would want the sword of House Stark for his throne. And he may have gotten it, melted it down, and he then would have given the Starks a new sword, which the Starks then began calling Ice, a generation or two away, and no one knows the difference.

On the other hand, the four hundred years thing intrigues me. 400 years was the doom of Valyria. The Targaryens fled to Dragonstone then, and 100 years later, invaded Westeros.

What if, when the Targaryens arrived at Dragonstone, they made a pact with the great houses of Westeros, and sent to those great houses gifts, swords of Valyrian Steel, as a show of good faith that they had no malicious intent. Then, a hundred years later, Aegon invades, after having hatched his dragons in secret.

BTW, has there been any connection in the heresy threads between Water Dancers and Wood Dancers?