Heresy 10

[Corm]

True, Small Paul wasn't moaning for brains or growling but... When someone you know to be dead comes straight at you with their new bright blue shining - if you let them get close enough to touch you then your that stupid person in horror movies that goes off by yourself to investigate a strange noise. Your dead, proving that it really is better to be safe than sorry. And Small Paul did go for Gilly and the baby "who stank of life" once he heard/smelled them. He was after the baby, a whole horde of the newly undead bright eyed zombies were drawn to the baby's smell.

So I wonder, is it all new life/babies they go after or is it only Crasters,( who has a cold smell') offspring that draw them?

You've confused White Walkers and wights, I was referring to when Small Paul attacked the WW, died and Sam killed the WW with obsidian. That's a point I made already, the contradiction of the WWs' lack of savagery vs. their minions' hunger for blood/life.

[Black Crow]

Indeed and its important to appreciate a couple of things. First although Old Nan refers to the White Walkers as cold dead things, we've now had GRRM's very explicit statement that they're not dead. Secondly Old Nan (who I've just contradicted) also says that the White Walkers fed the babies to their undead followers, the Wights.

I don't think we need to over-analyse this. The Others are bad news, but if they want babies its not to eat them - standard demonise your enemy stuff, I believe Napoleon Bonaparte was accused of the same by old biddies hushing children to sleep - its as changelings rather than fuel.

The odd thing about the Small Paul episode is that he had obviously come for the baby, but his fellow Wights politely waited outside rather than crowding in drawn by the savoury smell of life, which suggests he'd been sent to collect it rather than devour it.

[Stark@heart]

You've confused White Walkers and wights, I was referring to when Small Paul attacked the WW, died and Sam killed the WW with obsidian. That's a point I made already, the contradiction of the WWs' lack of savagery vs. their minions' hunger for blood/life.

Its true the Others didn't act first but the same theory applies. If you wait "it" to make the first move, your gonna end up a blue eyed zombie or mayhaps in hock for all your male children.

[Corm]

Its true the Others didn't act first but the same theory applies. If you wait "it" to make the first move, your gonna end up a blue eyed zombie or mayhaps in hock for all your male children.

Well that's the point I was making, we've seen the wights attacking first, never the WW. And there's no need for the WW to have an ordinary fight, they can move silently so sneaking up on someone is simple, especially when there are a number of them versus one man. I just thought there might be some importance in the fact that they are never described as starting an attack.

[Black Crow]

Two occasions hardly justifies "never", whatever way you look at it the White Walkers/Sidhe are dangerous to know. The distinction is that they think about it rather than simply automatically rushing in and killing every living thing they see.

I know the comparison isn't exact but I confess I rather like referring to them as the Sidhe, because apart from the appropriateness its a name of their own. "Others, White Walkers and White Shadows" is what other people call them. Its not their real name. :cool4:

[Corm]

I agree that two instances don't make a pattern but it struck me as more than a little odd, most of all the way that they stand around and watch without interfering. I can see two reasons for this:

1. Fear of steel. They don't want to risk more than one of their number at any one time by fighting someone with iron/steel. We have yet to see how they react to actually being touched by steel (have we? I'm afraid my memory is failing me atm) so it could mean instant death. But with this argument, surely 2/3/4 on 1 is less likely to result in a death/injury? Also, with their unnatural speed, surely they don't need to worry about being hit?

2. Some semblance of honour. They feel that everyone should have a chance to fight for themselves, that ganging up on someone is ignoble. But then, why did they proceed to butcher Royce when he fell, cut with steel shards. They were laughing as well which doesn't really sound like honourable behaviour. There also seemed no need to cut him to ribbons as they did.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why they acted so strangely? Perhaps it was a form of bravado, bragging about how good they are at killing humans?

[Elaena Targaryen]

@Corm on #2 I remember in a much earlier thread the discussion on the WW and Royce some thought it resembled a wolf pack, the alpha wounds the prey then the rest of the pack comes in and finishes the kill.

[Corm]

@Corm on #2 I remember in a much earlier thread the discussion on the WW and Royce some thought it resembled a wolf pack, the alpha wounds the prey then the rest of the pack comes in and finishes the kill.

Thanks! All I could find was the one post in Heresy 4 but it was a much more rounded theory than mine. Just leaves so many questions!

[Sword Of Mid Afternoon]

I can't bring myself to accept that the First Men sided with Andals to combat the Children. That's a massive civilization altering shift. That almost certainly would've make it into the oral history.... if not of the peasant class, certainly in that of the Northern nobility, and even more certainly with the Kings of Winter.

Night's King was stricken from written history, yet he was preserved in the oral history. Perhaps you can tell from my recent posts I've come to place a new importance on the oral history traditions... particularly those of the first men who relied almost exclusively on oral history due to their primitive & seldom used written language of runes. If it happened, it really should be there!

I would very much like to know when the Children stopped giving their weapon levy to the Night's Watch and why.

[Black Crow]

I agree that two instances don't make a pattern but it struck me as more than a little odd, most of all the way that they stand around and watch without interfering. I can see two reasons for this:

1. Fear of steel. They don't want to risk more than one of their number at any one time by fighting someone with iron/steel. We have yet to see how they react to actually being touched by steel (have we? I'm afraid my memory is failing me atm) so it could mean instant death. But with this argument, surely 2/3/4 on 1 is less likely to result in a death/injury? Also, with their unnatural speed, surely they don't need to worry about being hit?

2. Some semblance of honour. They feel that everyone should have a chance to fight for themselves, that ganging up on someone is ignoble. But then, why did they proceed to butcher Royce when he fell, cut with steel shards. They were laughing as well which doesn't really sound like honourable behaviour. There also seemed no need to cut him to ribbons as they did.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why they acted so strangely? Perhaps it was a form of bravado, bragging about how good they are at killing humans?

The steel question is one we've discussed before. Traditionally iron is said to be a problem for Faerie folk like the Sidhe not because its inherently dangerous to them but because it blocks their magic. There's also a thought that the first one was sizing up Ser Waymar to check he had an ordinary blade rather than one of dragonsteel. I've no doubt he would still have fought Ser Waymar even if he did have a dragonsteel blade, he was just prudently weighing up his approach.

[Black Crow]

I can't bring myself to accept that the First Men sided with Andals to combat the Children. That's a massive civilization altering shift. That almost certainly would've make it into the oral history.... if not of the peasant class, certainly in that of the Northern nobility, and even more certainly with the Kings of Winter.

Night's King was stricken from written history, yet he was preserved in the oral history. Perhaps you can tell from my recent posts I've come to place a new importance on the oral history traditions... particularly those of the first men who relied almost exclusively on oral history due to their primitive & seldom used written language of runes. If it happened, it really should be there!

I would very much like to know when the Children stopped giving their weapon levy to the Night's Watch and why.

Well this is why some of us think that the story of the Night's King is the oral version of why the Children and the other old races fled north and that Stark of Winterfell cut a deal with the Andals to depose his brother and expel the Children.

As to the giving. Its been noted before that the 100 pieces of dragonglass may correspond to the 100 kingdoms of the First Men which existed at the time of the Pact as its clearly a symbolic gift. As to when they stopped giving, its possible the size of the gift may have correspondingly reduced as the original 100 kingdoms were hammered into seven, but either way will have gone with the Children.

[Free Northman]

Well this is why some of us think that the story of the Night's King is the oral version of why the Children and the other old races fled north and that Stark of Winterfell cut a deal with the Andals to depose his brother and expel the Children.

As to the giving. Its been noted before that the 100 pieces of dragonglass may correspond to the 100 kingdoms of the First Men which existed at the time of the Pact as its clearly a symbolic gift. As to when they stopped giving, its possible the size of the gift may have correspondingly reduced as the original 100 kingdoms were hammered into seven, but either way will have gone with the Children.

Well, I just fundamentally oppose the theory that the King in the North had to "cut a deal" with the Andals on anything.

The Children share the religion of the Northerners.

I sincerely believe you are completely on the wrong track with this part of your dissertation.

[redriver]

I have trouble with this too.According to accepted timelines the Andals had not even invaded Westeros at the time of the Night's King and when they did they couldn't get further North than the Neck.

Also the story of the NK was related by Old Nan to Bran who said a Stark,who was a brother of the NK,deposed him with the aid of Joramun.

We are told repeatedly that Old Nan is ever reliable,so why has she been set aside now?

[Free Northman]

I think a more likely reason for the gradual decline of the Children in the North is that the very act of raising the Wall was a self sacrifice by them.

They knowingly infused the Wall with their magic, knowing that it would weaken them over the centuries, causing them to dwindle as a race.

They did so to save the humans who they had a Pact with.

In order to weaken the Others, they were weakening themselves as well.

People like the Night's King were probably just rogue humans who chose to embrace the Others from time to time, just like you get devil worshippers in the real world.

This doesn't mean that humanity as a whole betrayed the Pact. That's why the Night's King was rightfully deposed.

This obsession with bringing House Stark into some official alliance with the Others is totally unfounded, and in my view speaks of a desire to simply upset the applecart for no other reason than a defiance of all things conventional.

Were there rogue Starks - like the Night's King - who may have gone over to the Others in ages past? Yes, there have been good and bad Starks over the millenia.

Does this mean that there is some fundamental connection between House Stark and the Others? Hell no. The Starks overthrew the rogue Night's King - if he even was a Stark and not some Bolton or Ryswell in the first place - and that was the end of his folly.

[Lummel]

I can't bring myself to accept that the First Men sided with Andals to combat the Children. That's a massive civilization altering shift. That almost certainly would've make it into the oral history.... if not of the peasant class, certainly in that of the Northern nobility, and even more certainly with the Kings of Winter.

...

I would very much like to know when the Children stopped giving their weapon levy to the Night's Watch and why.

The question of why there are no children between the neck and the wall is a mystery. If the Pact endured why should they go north of the Wall? We know that Southeron armies were beaten back more than once at Moat Calin, so the North seems safe from the Andals.

There are a few theories I think:

(i) The actions of the Andals convinced the children that the pact was broken and peace with any kind of men was impossible (but note that there are written records of the Watch receiving obsidian from the children)

(ii) The children fled the south but some stayed south of the Wall, but they weren't very numerous and either died out/intermarried with the first men. (but then why do they survive north of the wall where there are also men)

(iii) something changed in the North and the kingdoms of the first men also turned against the children - and at some point the children did stop giving obsidian to the Watch.

[Free Northman]

The question of why there are no children between the neck and the wall is a mystery. If the Pact endured why should they go north of the Wall? We know that Southeron armies were beaten back more than once at Moat Calin, so the North seems safe from the Andals.

There are a few theories I think:

(i) The actions of the Andals convinced the children that the pact was broken and peace with any kind of men was impossible (but note that there are written records of the Watch receiving obsidian from the children)

(ii) The children fled the south but some stayed south of the Wall, but they weren't very numerous and either died out/intermarried with the first men. (but then why do they survive north of the wall where there are also men)

(iii) something changed in the North and the kingdoms of the first men also turned against the children - and at some point the children did stop giving obsidian to the Watch.

See my post above, where I address this issue.

To summarize: The Wall became a "hinge of the world" as Mellisandre calls it, with the effect of weakening the Children over the millenia, either by consuming much of their life energy into maintaining its spells, or by weakening magic in the world in general as a side effect of weakening the Others.

The Children are in their "long dwindling" as Leaf told Bran in Dance. They weren't driven out of the North, their population just gradually shrunk until the last remnant of their culture was left in the cave where Bran found Bloodraven.

[Black Crow]

We are told repeatedly that Old Nan is ever reliable,so why has she been set aside now?

True, but reliable doesn't equate with infallible. As mentioned above Old Nan tells us that the Others/Sidhe are cold dead things, yet the first thing GRRM says in that email is that they're not dead.

GRRM has always been fond on the unreliable narrator. What he's telling us is that the written records are mince (or to use his word rather than mine "misty"), which is why Old Nan is used to point us towards what's really happening, but she's still just a less unreliable narrator as you would expect with oral history.

[Stark@heart]

I thought I could get used to the idea of Crasters son's being changlings or changed into "Others" but not yet, since something interesting just struck me from your post above about what GRRM said.

The Others are alive.

So, they're alive but they don't reproduce and they need a host/vessel to continue their race. Not very practical when you don't have a symbotic/ mutual need relationship with the hosts you use, which totally goes against nature but this is fantasy and magic can make just about anything happen so I can kind of "get" it that way but it still just makes more sense to me if they are eating the poor things. Blood is a big deal in this series in all sorts of different ways so I think we'll see some kind of vamprire-ism whether is be actual blood drinking ( which may take place on the Isle of Faces ) or the taking of the lifeforce. I think it's kinda both - drink the blood to gain the life in the blood.

So, since they are alive, what do they eat/require to keep them healthy?

It's pretty much been decided here on the boards that Mel is not really a living person from her own chapter about how she doesn't feel the cold or eat. It's widely assumed that she is either feeding off Stannis's lifeforce ( I think, in this case his lifeforce is being used solely for the Shadowbabies since Stannis is her AA and to important to be used as only a meal) or is somehow fed by the flames of her fires/Rhloor/ fire magic or maybe its the human sacrifices she makes to R'hloor/ fire magic that sustain her? I happen to think it's a combo of pulling lifeforce from other people, either one on one or by burning them.

We've been told over and over that "only death can pay for life" The COTF (and some of their allies) at some point give their life over to the Weirtree/Old Gods so why should it be different for Mel or the Others?

So, how do the Other/Sidne pay for their life?

Maybe another part of Old Nan's story that was off the mark was who was actually feeding on the blood of newborn children.

BTW, my books are loaned out again so I can't look the story up for myself but does Old Nan actually say newborn children or does she say highborn? I'm like 90% sure that she says newborn and even if she didn't, saying highborn children is just a poke at the Stark kids. She might have just said children? It's getting foggier by the minute now so I'll move on.

This seems to be my favorite and to some, most out there CPT but this is the place for it, right?

Anyway, this is where the story, the boards and my own guesstimations have gotten me. I've read a lot of vampire fiction so that might explain it. I think Anne Rice was the greatest but she quit vampires when she found religion and I've had to make due with lesser takes on the genre.

What I'm trying to say it that maybe Twilight really did rot my brain. :drunk: Have fun sticking my pet theory with the pointy end!

[Lummel]

...Blood is a big deal in this series in all sorts of different ways so I think we'll see some kind of vamprire-ism whether is be actual blood drinking ( which may take place on the Isle of Faces ) or the taking of the lifeforce. I think it's kinda both - drink the blood to gain the life in the blood...

Haven't we already seen this in the way kings blood is used, the sacrifice of Varys' manhood and the blood offereings to the trees?

[Elaena Targaryen]

While the oral histories are important, and all we have before the Andals ( and the history they "filled in" is questionable as well ), the older histories are well...for those who have not seen it...this is from a SSM where Martin decribes the misty details...

Much of those details are lost in the mists of time and legend. No one can even say for certain if Brandon the Builder ever lived. He is as remote from the time of the novels as Noah and Gilgamesh are from our own time.

Now that comes after a question on how the Wall was constructed. We know the Wall is there but do we know any of the how, when, where or why of the Wall? I think it's good to question and explore possibilities, even if you get off the track a little, because you can discover new potentially compatible ideas. It's also possible that Martin will not tell us all of these misty details so it is guesswork for the fun of it and if it leads to anything else then good.