Heresy 11

[alienarea]

This is more about Ned being Jon's father but I assume it ties in here as well so I'd like to ask you for your opinion.

The closest we get to Ned naming Jon's mother is when Robert asks him for a certain girl and Ned gives her name as Wylla. Going with the idea that she is Jon's mother she needs to have something special otherwise Ned could give her name. I speculate that from the name Wylla she has a similar background as Dalla and Val. She is a fisherwomen so she could have come from a port in the North (=Hardhome?). In my reasoning Ned doesn't tell Catelyn about Jon's mother Wylla because a) Ned knows he was seduced by a woman of the North (wildling/fairy/washerwoman?) B) because of this Jon is more of a Northman than Ned's children with Catelyn, i.e. she would always fear that Ned could favor Jon over Robb c) from an OOU point of view Jon is ice and Dany fire.

What do you think?

[Ferrous]

Ned was down in the south fighting a war when Jon was conceived (and born).

[alienarea]

Ned was down in the south fighting a war when Jon was conceived (and born).

It is known.

But it doesn't contradict my post above.

[DragonSpawn]

The unhappy sequel to the story is not just the son killing the father, but one of his lords (not named but presumably a Bolton) slaying him and using his skin as a cloak - so was the son where the skinchanging came into the Starks?

Where did this come from with the skinwearing? Was that the same Lord Stark? - Also what timeline are you working to? A Lord Stark implies within the last 300 years? Elsewise - King Stark would have been more appropriate... i thought all the skinflaying was a Bolton thing during the age of heroes? .. Ive already speculated about the Boltons being an off-shoot of house Stark via the Nights King... but i'm getting confused about all these lords / kings that seem to be the wrong way round...

Also, What's you take on the Bael the Bard story?

Given that Joramun and the Starks have worked together in the past against the Night's King... there seems to be an alliance of mutual respect there...

But the Bael story all seems rather convenient... the Stark line was on the verge of dying out... no sons... and then the daughter was kidnapped... I can image Bael being won over by the daughter... but that must have caused a lot of panic considering "there must always be a Stark in Winterfell"...

The Bastard was legitmised and was never told who his father was... why!? If this is a foreshadowing of Jons story then it doesn't bode well for the other Stark kids! But it also saved the Stark Bloodline which seems to be really important...

So Bael did the Starks a favour...?

But Kinslaying is bad is it not? It's an old god rule i thought? It stops Bael from killing his son but Bael seems to let his son kill him... now surely that will curse the Stark bloodline..? So he didn't do the Starks a favour!!! - What's your thoughts?

I can only really get my head around this if Bael was a legend from the age of heroes... and The Nights King was a direct result of Kinslaying ... and also why Joramun took some responsibility for the Nights King being overthrown... it was the fault of the Starks and the Wildlings pissing around in their personal conflicts which have nothing to do with saving the realm... it was a shame on them all so was stricken from the records... but i'm a bit clueless on timings...

[Bran Vras]

As to the Watch, changing subject a little, I'm reminded of this passage where Jaimie is learning about the Rysewells and the Brackens:

“Five hundred years before the Andals. A thousand, if the True History is to be believed. Only no one knows when the Andals crossed the narrow sea. The True History says four thousand years have passed since then, but some maesters claim that it was only two. Past a certain point, all the dates grow hazy and confused, and the clarity of history becomes the fog of legend.”

And yet there are some out there who insist that the Watch goes back to the Long Night when Bran the Builder built the Wall (or not, according to GRRM) with all their Lord Commanders dutifully recorded except one. Institutions, including regiments, create their own legends.

Bear with me (as ever) A simple and for our purposes quite good example is the Scots Guards, who were actually raised in 1661 but insist that their true origin was in 1642 - 20 years earlier. This claim is based on an interesting chain of events.

Between 1639 and 1660 there were a series of wars(with intervals) in the three kingdoms of Britain collectively known as the Great Rebellion or the English Civil War. In very simple terms his was primarily a struggle between a would-be absolutist monarchy and a would-be democracy, complicated by a parallel religious war between Catholics and Protestants. In October 1641 a Catholic rebellion broke out in Ireland and a couple of months later King Charles I authorised the raising of a number of Scottish regiments to go deal with it. Later that year the English Civil War began, the Scots Protestants intervened to help defeat the King and to cut a long story short in 1649 the survivors of those regiments came home and were formed into what were called the Irish Companies. King Charles I had been executed by that time and his son came to Scotland as Charles II in the following year. His return was opposed by the hard-line Protestants and so the Irish companies were assigned as a guard - in the sense of gaolers, to prevent any attempt by Charles to rally personal support. If he was to be formally crowned it would be on the Protestants' reluctant terms. Exactly what happened to this guard in the end is uncertain but they appear to have been destroyed at the battle of Worcester in 1651 and therefore had no connection at all with the Scottish Regiment of Foot Guards raised in 1661 following the Restoration.

Now the point of this story is that not only do the Scots Guards claim an earlier origin than is the case, but they base it on not one but several organisations which not only had no connection with the 1661 unit, and which were to all intents and purposes on the other side, ie: against the King - exactly as we've been considering in relation to the Watch, ie; that they're not as old as they claim, and until the overthrow of the Night's King they were effectively "on the other side", owing allegiance not the the Red lot (as their oath implies) but to the Winter Court of the Sidhe.

Nice story about the Scots' guard. It seems to me that every institution will tend to exaggerate its age. The passage you cite from the young Blackwood encourages us to adopt the methods of historians for reconstituting ancient past: doubt single sources (old Nan is an exception, of course), and believe in redundant information. I have tried to make archaeology speak in the Stone vs Wood thread. I believe there is some significance in the different types of stairs (ice for the Nightfort, gravel or wood or stone for the other castles) that lead to the top of the Wall.

Concerning the history of the Watch. It seems that an important transition took place relatively recently. At the time of the Conquest, the Watch was composed of ten thousands brothers, and had its main seat at the Nightfort. Visibly big changes happened in the north when King Jaehaerys, Queen Alysanne, half the court and six dragons came to Winterfell (and perhaps Septon Barth as well): notably, the first night was abolished. This is precisely when the Nightfort was abandoned, at the insistence of Queen Alysanne, supposedly because the place was too decrepit (but we see now that the Watch can restore it for Stannis in a year).

I rather suspect that while the north had to abandon certain savage practices, the Night's Watch had to reform itself as well. One thing I find creepy is the comparison between Harrenhal and the Nightfort (both are mentioned by old Nan, and have been built with blood in the mortar, moreover Harren the Black was the brother of the Lord Commander of the time). One little detail in the description of the Nightfort made me think of Harrenhal: the presence of bathhouses. The bathhouse of Harrenhal played of role in the bad reputation of the place, with the story of mad Lady Lothstone bathing in blood when her House ruled Harrenhal.

So I wonder what practices of the Night's Watch had to be abandoned during Jaehaerys' reign. Here is the description of the Nightfort

They spent half the day poking through the castle. Some of the towers had fallen down and others looked unsafe, but they climbed the bell tower (the bells were gone) and the rookery (the birds were gone). Beneath the brewhouse they found a vault of huge oaken casks that boomed hollowly when Hodor knocked on them. They found a library (the shelves and bins had collapsed, the books were gone, and rats were everywhere). They found a dank and dim-lit dungeon with cells enough to hold five hundred captives, but when Bran grabbed hold of one of the rusted bars it broke off in his hand. Only one crumbling wall remained of the great hall, the bathhouse seemed to be sinking into the ground, and a huge thornbush had conquered the practice yard outside the armory where black brothers had once labored with spear and shield and sword. The armory and the forge still stood, however, though cobwebs, rats, and dust had taken the places of blades, bellows, and anvil. Sometimes Summer would hear sounds that Bran seemed deaf to, or bare his teeth at nothing, the fur on the back of his neck bristling . . . but the Rat Cook never put in an appearance, nor the seventy-nine sentinels, nor Mad Axe. Bran was much relieved. Maybe it is only a ruined empty castle.

Details possibly of interest in bold.

[Black Crow]

Where did this come from with the skinwearing? Was that the same Lord Stark? - Also what timeline are you working to? A Lord Stark implies within the last 300 years? Elsewise - King Stark would have been more appropriate... i thought all the skinflaying was a Bolton thing during the age of heroes? .. Ive already speculated about the Boltons being an off-shoot of house Stark via the Nights King... but i'm getting confused about all these lords / kings that seem to be the wrong way round...

Ygritte variously refers to him either as "The Stark in Winterfell" or as "Lord Brandon". Jon asks "Which Brandon was this supposed to be? Brandon the Builder lived in the Age of Heroes, thousands of years before Bael. There was Brandon the Burner and his father Brandon the Shipwright, but-"

"This was Brandon the Daughterless," Ygritte said sharply... "Lord Brandon had no other children..." She then goes on to say that the boy grew to be the next Lord Stark and that Jon therefore has Bael's blood in him.

The bit about flaying comes later. Thirty years afterwards the young Lord Stark kills Bael at the Frozen Ford and when he returned home with Bael's head on his spear his mother threw herself off a tower and "her son did not long outlive her. One o' his lords peeled the skin off him and wore him for a cloak"

[Eyron]

Bran Vras, very interesting comparison between Harrenhall and the Nightfort.

The Bell tower is significant in that it is used to signal foes. We hear that the Booming tower in Seagard had not been used for 300 years before the bells rang to warn the people of Seagard to take shelter in the castle when the ironmen sailed in (during the Greyjoy rebellion about a decade ago).

Winterfell has a belltower as well. I don't know what other places have such towers, hopefully someone with an e-book can search for it, if anyone is interested mayhaps...

The inn at the crossroads has one, but that tower is rather new, so probably not significant.

The ice steps in the Wall at the Nightfort has only suggested to me that it is much older than all the other castles at the Wall. We already know that it is supposed to be twice the age of Castle Black, which puts Castle Black being built some 4000 years ago, i.e. after Andal invasion (if the Nightfort is about as old as the Wall and the Wall is about 8000 years old...).

What purpose did the belltower have at the Nightfort? Was there an imminent risk of attack? From where? I'd say either from the south or that the castle was built before the Wall and it warned against attacks from any direction, just like I suppose the bells in Winterfell and Seagard do. I doubt they used the bell to warn against the white walkers coming over the Wall, but perhaps that was it. But there should not be attacks from men from the south if history is correct. I have thought for a while that the Nightfort existed as a holdfast before the Wall came up, and I think this makes that theory stronger. I could be grasping for straws here, but what use is there of a bell tower at a place like the Nightfort? The only thing they were supposed to do according to the history was to defend the Wall from attack from the north.

The cells in the dungeon are also interesting. This sounds more like the dungeons of the Red Keep, room for many. I wonder who they were built for, for what they needed so many cells. I think that the Nightfort was not just a castle at the Wall, not only meant to harbour brothers of the Night's Watch protecting the Wall, but that it was a seat of a lord or a king before it became the first castle of the Night's Watch. A king's seat would need many cells, a castle of the Night's Watch at the Wall - not so many.

[Black Crow]

The cells in the dungeon are also interesting. This sounds more like the dungeons of the Red Keep, room for many. I wonder who they were built for, for what they needed so many cells. I think that the Nightfort was not just a castle at the Wall, not only meant to harbour brothers of the Night's Watch protecting the Wall, but that it was a seat of a lord or a king before it became the first castle of the Night's Watch. A king's seat would need many cells, a castle of the Night's Watch at the Wall - not so many.

It certainly sounds as though it was a stand-alone fortress and the seat of a King. Bran associates itwith the Nights King so perhaps it was the Stark's seat when they were Kings of Winter, before the upstart younger brother Stark of Winterfell cast him down.

[Black Crow]

This is more about Ned being Jon's father but I assume it ties in here as well so I'd like to ask you for your opinion.

The closest we get to Ned naming Jon's mother is when Robert asks him for a certain girl and Ned gives her name as Wylla. Going with the idea that she is Jon's mother she needs to have something special otherwise Ned could give her name. I speculate that from the name Wylla she has a similar background as Dalla and Val. She is a fisherwomen so she could have come from a port in the North..

What do you think?

I always thought the fisherman's daughter was a red herring :cool4:

[Eyron]

It certainly sounds as though it was a stand-alone fortress and the seat of a King. Bran associates itwith the Nights King so perhaps it was the Stark's seat when they were Kings of Winter, before the upstart younger brother Stark of Winterfell cast him down.

This is what I've been thinking too. The Stark who threw down the Night's King could have been the Stark brother who founded Winterfell. There are so many possibilities but I think that one is not too far fetched.

Unless of course Winterfell is older as some think in the story.

On another note, the Black gate (again)... The black gate is probably in an old tunnel of the Children's. I think it must be them who set the gate in place, probably in collaboration with First Men. The weirmagic is theirs and the lands north of the Wall is likely theirs too. The gate enables the Children to decide who can pass through north, into their lands. That is why I've been thinking that the Wall is there to protect the old races from the southern threat of human civilization (but also to protect men from the threat from the north). That there are no civilizations beyond the Wall is something I think is important, the land devoted to the old races can't have that, or the same thing will happen there as it did south of the Wall. Some thought I have...

[Bran Vras]

The cells in the dungeon are also interesting. This sounds more like the dungeons of the Red Keep, room for many. I wonder who they were built for, for what they needed so many cells. I think that the Nightfort was not just a castle at the Wall, not only meant to harbour brothers of the Night's Watch protecting the Wall, but that it was a seat of a lord or a king before it became the first castle of the Night's Watch. A king's seat would need many cells, a castle of the Night's Watch at the Wall - not so many.

It seems to me that the ice steps are part of the original design of the Wall. If the Wall had been conceived with the idea of several castles, there would have been ice steps for every castle. So originally there was only one access to the top of the Wall. It's not clear that the Nightfort was built were the steps were, or if the Wall was built after the Nightfort, with steps to access the top from this particular castle. However it is clear that the other castles came later, and were not part of the design of the Wall.

It's possible that the position of the ice steps was determined by the position of the Black Gate, and that the Nightfort came later.

The progression in building material for the steps (first gravel and earth, then wood, then stone) seems to indicate that the Wall has been there from the most archaic times.

(There is little game to be played: guessing on the basis of name which castle has which type of steps.)

[Elaena Targaryen]

Bran Vras, very interesting comparison between Harrenhall and the Nightfort.

The Bell tower is significant in that it is used to signal foes. We hear that the Booming tower in Seagard had not been used for 300 years before the bells rang to warn the people of Seagard to take shelter in the castle when the ironmen sailed in (during the Greyjoy rebellion about a decade ago).

Winterfell has a belltower as well. I don't know what other places have such towers, hopefully someone with an e-book can search for it, if anyone is interested mayhaps...

The inn at the crossroads has one, but that tower is rather new, so probably not significant.

Just for you Eaeron I checked all of the books including Dunk & Egg and there was not much more than what you've already mentioned, except you did forget King's Landing but that one is obvious. The inn at the crossroads is not very old anyway, it was built at the time of the first Jaehaerys and the bell tower added later like you said. The Eryie may have a bell tower, they rang bells to summon everyone to the trial. In Norvos bells seemed significant but that is not important. No other mention of castle bell towers just bells at septs and...

Let's not forget Stoney Sept and the Battle of the Bells, deep bronze booms and silver chiming. There seems to be bells at the septs, even the Quiet Isle, and also bells seem of import to the seven, they are always ringing some damn bells. They ring bells for warnings, meals, deaths which stop at sunset, and just morning bells.

Not to mention they rang the tower bells during the walk of shame and a septa rang a bell while walking with Cersei. Infact I noticed we had a Tyrion chapter with his slave collar bells, then Cersei's shame bells, and another chapter of Tyrion and his slave bells. ( parallel ? )

And then the damn Dothraki with their bells and Patchface, also Sansa plays bells. But I know this stuff is not what you were looking for but it is all there was. I'm sure some castle's would have bell towers but who knows with Martin. :shrugs:

ETA House Belmore of Strongsong in the Vale has six silver bells as their sigil.

And at Castle Black they pull a bell rope for the winch cage, it does not say just how big the bell is, maybe just a small bell in the shack.

[Black Crow]

And at Castle Black they pull a bell rope for the winch cage, it does not say just how big the bell is, maybe just a small bell in the shack.

700 feet of rope, presumably with pulleys to prevent it snagging on the wall, but in turn needing regular maintenance to sttop them freezing...

[Black Crow]

This is what I've been thinking too. The Stark who threw down the Night's King could have been the Stark brother who founded Winterfell. There are so many possibilities but I think that one is not too far fetched.

Unless of course Winterfell is older as some think in the story.

On another note, the Black gate (again)... The black gate is probably in an old tunnel of the Children's. I think it must be them who set the gate in place, probably in collaboration with First Men. The weirmagic is theirs and the lands north of the Wall is likely theirs too. The gate enables the Children to decide who can pass through north, into their lands. That is why I've been thinking that the Wall is there to protect the old races from the southern threat of human civilization (but also to protect men from the threat from the north). That there are no civilizations beyond the Wall is something I think is important, the land devoted to the old races can't have that, or the same thing will happen there as it did south of the Wall. Some thought I have...

I don't think we need necessarily tie ourselves in knots at this point, providing we get away from the notion that the Wall was built in order to defend Westeros from the Others/Sidhe.

The Nighfort may therefore have been built not as a barracks for men of the Nights Watch manning the Wall but as a fortress to protect the Westeros entrance to that passage below, and as such the obvious seat of the Nights King given his connection with the Sidhe - a very heretical spin off from this being that while we know GRRM has indicated that the Wall wasn't built by Bran the Builder, that doesn't preclude the possibility that he built the Night Fort and may therefore be the same Bran known as the Nights King.

Winterfell may well have been the original Stark seat, its not uncommon for older houses to be cascaded down to younger sons when a new and grander one is built.

There is though a reservation that my earlier suggestion of its being built on top of a Hollow Hill might itself be cause for conflict. Apparently the Sidhe were very touchy about that sort of thing and even cutting trees and bushes growing on top was liable to get them violently upset - well if somebody came along and started dancing on your roof...

On which subject why is a certain hill north of the Wall known as the Fist of the First Men? We've discussed the possibility that its a hollow hill - which is why Ghost doesn't like it and perhaps why the Wights attacked. Is it remembered as the First of the First Men not because it was an ancient fortresss but because they tried to build one and were horribly massacred by the Sidhe living in the hill?

[DragonSpawn]

Ygritte variously refers to him either as "The Stark in Winterfell" or as "Lord Brandon". Jon asks "Which Brandon was this supposed to be? Brandon the Builder lived in the Age of Heroes, thousands of years before Bael. There was Brandon the Burner and his father Brandon the Shipwright, but-"

"This was Brandon the Daughterless," Ygritte said sharply... "Lord Brandon had no other children..." She then goes on to say that the boy grew to be the next Lord Stark and that Jon therefore has Bael's blood in him.

The bit about flaying comes later. Thirty years afterwards the young Lord Stark kills Bael at the Frozen Ford and when he returned home with Bael's head on his spear his mother threw herself off a tower and "her son did not long outlive her. One o' his lords peeled the skin off him and wore him for a cloak"

Did not recall that bit! Ouch... Kinslaying has it's price i suppose...

[Sofia Aillard]

I don't think we need necessarily tie ourselves in knots at this point, providing we get away from the notion that the Wall was built in order to defend Westeros from the Others/Sidhe.

The Nighfort may therefore have been built not as a barracks for men of the Nights Watch manning the Wall but as a fortress to protect the Westeros entrance to that passage below, and as such the obvious seat of the Nights King given his connection with the Sidhe - a very heretical spin off from this being that while we know GRRM has indicated that the Wall wasn't built by Bran the Builder, that doesn't preclude the possibility that he built the Night Fort and may therefore be the same Bran known as the Nights King.

Night’s Watch… That name… Did GRRM created that name as just a badass name (well it is!)? Shouldn’t the name had to have anything Wall related, I mean they are the "watcher on the walls" (that plural just drives me crazy...)? I think we always assumed that they got that name because they “started” at Nightfort… Fine, but why did the Nightfort got IT’s name? Night’s King got his name from the fort also, right? Well, maybe, it’s the other way around. The Night’s King, according to Old Nan’s tale, “was only a man by light of day, Old Nan would always say, but the night was his to rule.” So the King has already a “connection” to “night”. Was the Fort the spark of that connection? Did living/commanding that Fort turned on that connection? Or the things he did connected him to the night thing and then, because he lived at a fort, that fort became known as "Nightfort"?

[Lykos]

... And maybe the 500 cells were for the original Night´s Watch the Night´s King ruled the night with, or the original Night´s Watch had used them to put the men, the Night´s King bound to his will with strange sorcery, under lock and key.

[Lummel]

Night’s Watch… That name… Did GRRM created that name as just a badass name (well it is!)? Shouldn’t the name had to have anything Wall related, I mean they are the "watcher on the walls" (that plural just drives me crazy...)? I think we always assumed that they got that name because they “started” at Nightfort… Fine, but why did the Nightfort got IT’s name? Night’s King got his name from the fort also, right? Well, maybe, it’s the other way around. The Night’s King, according to Old Nan’s tale, “was only a man by light of day, Old Nan would always say, but the night was his to rule.” So the King has already a “connection” to “night”. Was the Fort the spark of that connection? Did living/commanding that Fort turned on that connection? Or the things he did connected him to the night thing and then, because he lived at a fort, that fort became known as "Nightfort"?

Oh Sofia! We've had a bunch of ideas about these things and all of us were driven crazy too :)

There is this thread started by Kissedbyfire about the nights watch oath in translations - and it seems that most keep the plural - Walls not wall, one idea we had was that originally the watch wasn't just at the Wall but at other places too - like Moat Calin maybe.

I think about the name Nights Watch we have (at least) two groups of ideas. One particularly championed by Black Crow points out that the Night's Watch oath has some similiarities to the R'hllor night prayer - they also watch through the night for the dawn. An older idea that we had was that the name comes from watching out for the return of the Night's king.

The Night's King is really interesting. OK so he rules at night, why the night, what is special about nighttime? Well we know that is when wights are active, also if you are a warg and you sleep then your beast might be active at night. Darkness is also somewhere safe that you can hide (Bloodraven and Syrio both say this). Perhaps one reason why it took a long time before he was brought down (thirteen years in the story) might be because he hid his dark deeds by doing them at night?

My guess is that Night's king came first and the fort took on his name afterwards, like a badge of shame to warn the watch to do better in future. On the other hand we've been discussing in Heresy 10 (and a bit before) that the nightfort was a ceremonial place where contact was made with the children or maybe the white walkers - if the ceremonies were held at night maybe that would explain the name of the fort - but that is just a guess.

[Sofia Aillard]

Oh Sofia! We've had a bunch of ideas about these things and all of us were driven crazy too :)

There is this thread started by Kissedbyfire about the nights watch oath in translations - and it seems that most keep the plural - Walls not wall, one idea we had was that originally the watch wasn't just at the Wall but at other places too - like Moat Calin maybe.

Been there, done that, thanks to Buckwheat pointing it out to me! :drool: But since it wasn't GRRM doing the translations (mostly plural), I don't think we can put much faith in that, rather then there's a lot of Literature/Language students/graduates (intelligent people! :drunk: ) thinking that it was important to leave like the original.

I think about the name Nights Watch we have (at least) two groups of ideas. One particularly championed by Black Crow points out that the Night's Watch oath has some similiarities to the R'hllor night prayer - they also watch through the night for the dawn. An older idea that we had was that the name comes from watching out for the return of the Night's king.

The Night's King is really interesting. OK so he rules at night, why the night, what is special about nighttime? Well we know that is when wights are active, also if you are a warg and you sleep then your beast might be active at night. Darkness is also somewhere safe that you can hide (Bloodraven and Syrio both say this). Perhaps one reason why it took a long time before he was brought down (thirteen years in the story) might be because he hid his dark deeds by doing them at night?

My guess is that Night's king came first and the fort took on his name afterwards, like a badge of shame to warn the watch to do better in future. On the other hand we've been discussing in Heresy 10 (and a bit before) that the nightfort was a ceremonial place where contact was made with the children or maybe the white walkers - if the ceremonies were held at night maybe that would explain the name of the fort - but that is just a guess.

I'm reading ( :eek:) the Heresy threads... Or trying to, anyways... And someone somewhere pointed that the Wall, could be a frozen attempt of the Hammer of Water (I think it was Black Crow who said that Moat Cailin was also a Hammer of Water failed attempt). So maybe another wall at MC? Catching up with the Heresy threads is almost as frustrating at the things we do not know yet of the books!! It won't kill you to make the same awesome summary you did at Heresy 6, you know! :laugh:

Thank you so much for that, BTW... Noobs from all over are adding that to favorites!

As for the NK... But didn't they erase the guy from all books and remarks? Why erase all reference from the guy and what happened and at the same time, allow the fort to still carry it's name and more so, rename the Sworn Brothers after the very thing/men/event they wanted kept out of History?

Ok, I'll read Heresy 10 next. And there better have some answers! :drunk:

[brut]

Speaking of the motive to build the Wall, shall we look from a slightly different angle, and ask ourselves, what would had been the ultimate threat to the Sidhe? What would cause them thinking of certain protection? Summer, warmth, fire. So, how about this motivation: The Sidhe built the Wall to protect themselves from the advancement of Summer Court. If we phase in the mysterious duality of WW - they both cause cold, and the cold causes them - the need of magical protection from the world of Fire would actually make a lot of logical sense, as sans cold there is no existence to the Sidhe of Winter.