Heresy 19

[mrazny]

Just accept it:

In a word: No.

For all of the reasons extrapolated. No.

Many here to varying degrees see it differently. You don't. So, if it bothers you so much, by all means you don't have to be a part of this thread's particular discussion.

But please, show we the Valyrian scroll that Tyrion dives into to declare that the Valyrians have an account of the Long Night that affected the ancientier Ghiscari Empire that Valyria vouches for as existed for "at least a few millenia"...

We have plenty of people that have their own agenda within our story, which constantly remind us that no one seems to have the whole story. Why should we assume that empires and history have the whole and right of it?

[Ser Leftwich]

Along these lines, I was very interested in the tapestry that XXD gave to Dany. It is fairly old, I don't recall how old exactly. He mentions that 'Westeros is down over there' (not the exact quote)

Very curious as to what is on the tapestry in Westeros.

[greygnarl]

Along these lines, I was very interested in the tapestry that XXD gave to Dany. It is fairly old, I don't recall how old exactly. He mentions that 'Westeros is down over there' (not the exact quote)

Very curious as to what is on the tapestry in Westeros.

My guess would either be wolves or something WW related.

[Free Northman]

In a word: No.

For all of the reasons extrapolated. No.

Many here to varying degrees see it differently. You don't. So, if it bothers you so much, by all means you don't have to be a part of this thread's particular discussion.

But please, show we the Valyrian scroll that Tyrion dives into to declare that the Valyrians have an account of the Long Night that affected the ancientier Ghiscari Empire that Valyria vouches for as existed for "at least a few millenia"...

We have plenty of people that have their own agenda within our story, which constantly remind us that no one seems to have the whole story. Why should we assume that empires and history have the whole and right of it?

The cities of Slavers Bay have existed since the time of the Empire of Old Ghis. They were once part of the Empire of Old Ghis. Just like ancient Sumerian and Egyptian texts give quite detailed lineages and dates for guys like Ramses the Great, Cyrus the Great, Darius the Great, Xerxes the Great etc, so the Ghiscari would have done the same.

It is the Ghiscari who tell us that Valyria conquered them 5000 years ago. And while we have not been shown this yet, I am pretty certain that the Valyrian colonies like Lys, Volantis and other Free cities that were part of old Valyria would have written records showing exactly which battle took place in which year, or which dynasty ruled in which decade, exactly like Tacitus has histories of the Roman invasions of Germania, or like the histories of Ceasar's invasions of Gaul.

Now scale this up by an order of magnitude because this is fantasy and Valyria was to Rome what Gregor Clegane is to Tyrion Lannister.

The point is, the major dates along the long term timeline corroborate one another. There is nothing supporting the frenzied declarations in the Heresy Unlimited threads that we are looking at a 10 fold error here or something.

We are talking about an unbroken series of civlizations with written records in Essos going back at least to the Ghiscari Empire. Who knows how far Ashai's records go back.

There is enough information from widely independent sources supporting the traditional timeline to justify the view that the participants of the neverending heretic threads are making things up as they go along.

[Free Northman]

The Andal invasion is probably the only aspect of the timeline that is in flux.

Personally, I would support the view that Valyrian incursions from around 4000 years ago put pressure on the Roynar - who were by all accounts a mighty and advanced civilization. The Roynar were forced northward and westward, which in turn put pressure on the Andals, who headed to Westeros in response. This was probably between 2000 and 4000 years ago.

But the arrival date of the Andals changes nothing in terms of the macro timeline, which goes back to the Long Night 8000 years ago, and the arrival of the First Men 12000 years ago.

In any case, Bran will soon know the exact answer to all of this. Whether he will share some glimpses with us though is the big question.

[mrazny]

If you want to temper certain arguments, by all means make the case. But Please, show me:

The detailed adventures of Azor Ahai

Evidence that the Long Night affected Essos at any point?

There are moving parts, and its easy to suggest that the history of WESTEROS is unreliable. Valyria doesn't affect Westeros until Aegon lands.

There aren't grand cruxes to arguments that rely on the Long Night happening 2,000 years ago. We're investigating things. And many of us buy in only to varying degrees. I don't believe the Long Night happened 2,000 years before Aegon. But I also don't believe we have an accurate measure of the history of Westeros, most likely due to people in power trying to hide their shame as to how things happened.

[Frey Pie]

Im curious. Has the timeline been mentioned around any of the Starks? As in the 8000 year figure? Because if it has, and as the Maesters have questioned it, would not the Starks be like hold up!! Wev only got 30 generations of Starks down in the Crypts and thats where we always burry our lords so wev only really ruled the North for 1500 years or so

[greygnarl]

I think that a complete Stark history will tell us exactly when the Long Night happened. Bran via Winterfell's heart tree is in prime position to give us exactly that.

[Free Northman]

Im curious. Has the timeline been mentioned around any of the Starks? As in the 8000 year figure? Because if it has, and as the Maesters have questioned it, would not the Starks be like hold up!! Wev only got 30 generations of Starks down in the Crypts and thats where we always burry our lords so wev only really ruled the North for 1500 years or so

That's the argument I made way back in Heresy 2 or 3 or whichever earlier version it was.

The Starks can count the statues in their crypts. Just on the top level, it goes at least as far back as Jon Stark who founded the Wolf's Den at White Harbor (Bran mentions him in one of his visits to the crypts). The older Kings are buried on the lower levels.

Ser Bartimus of the Wolfs Den tells us about the Greystarks who held the Wolf's Den for 5 centuries, the Lockes who held it for 2 centuries and the Flints for 1 century, and of lots of other Houses who held it before and after these Houses, for shorter periods. This was all before the Rape of Sisterton 2000 years ago.

So Jon Stark at the latest lived around 3500 years ago, and could well have lived as far as 4500 years ago.

And he is still on the top level of the crypts. The Kings before him, are buried lower down. We haven't even been shown one of the lower levels, and there are a number of them.

The Starks have an unbroken line of statues going back to Bran the Builder below their keep. We just haven't been shown the entire collection, but it is there to be counted.

[Frey Pie]

Makes sense to me!

[Tyryan Lannister]

I don't recall what you're basing your "Valyria had written records for over 5,000 years." Same for Old Ghis. We were told Valyria conquered Old Ghis 5,000 years ago, but not the source of that if I'm recalling correctly. Most likely its from a book that Tyrion read somewhere. Again, they don't have carbon dating. Do you really think an expanding Empire would wait 4,000 years between destroying Ghis before looking towards the Rhoynar? That doesn't add up. Ghis is dead, and so is Valyria. Where is the constant sustained reliable empire that has clear astrological documentation of the passing of time?

The Andals *would* try to change history to avoid admitting that they fled the Valyrians. If the Andals were characterized correctly, they came in violently, which would put the earliest conflicts as probably just after their arrival. So if the Arryns and Starks accurately have been fighting 2,000 years ago, that's more evidence towards the Andals couldn't have arrived much earlier than then. And that's *if* that 2,000 figure is accurate.

If its to be believed, the Rhoynar taught the Andals how to shape Iron. Which would make the Rhoynar as old as Valyria in the traditional timeline, and more likely of a kind with Old Ghis, but this isn't what we're told at any point that I remember.

Next, what evidence is there again that the Long Night extended to Essos? Azor Ahai? The incredibly detailed struggles of Azor Ahai? The Long Night is a legend based on an event. Legends tend to expand the scope of their event. The Long Night only affecting Westeros is completely on the table.

The who is as important as the what when we are told things.

Damn it all, you said everything I was going to say :bawl:

:cheers:

Along the lines of the Andals arrival, what I think the generally accepted heretical timeline is something like this:

2000 years ago, the Andals begin arriving in Westeros in small groups, conquering the Vale and establishing many petty kingdoms down in Dorne. They are unable to conquer anywhere else do to the strength of the Iron Born, Storm Lords, and Kings of Winter/in the North; the biggest wars between the Andals and First Men after this first conquest are between the North and Vale over the Three Sisters and between the Dornish kings themselves and the Marsher lords.

1000-1200 years ago, the Valyrians move into the Rhoynish lands, forcing Nymeria and her people out; they eventually sail to Dorne, Nymeria establishes an alliance through marriage with the Martells, and they conquer what is now known as Dorne.

Shortly after conquering the Rhoynish lands***, the Valyrians move into the Andal lands. They, remembering their kindred out West, also flee westward, eventually conquering/marrying into the Storm Lands, the River Lands, and the Westerlands; this is also when the vast majority of the southern weirwoods are destroyed, we have (from Rodrik the Reader) the end of the rule of House Greyiron, the Manderlies being given White Harbor, Andal influence in the Night's Watch (i.e. Castle Black being built), and many other things that are pegged at roughly 1000 years ago AND that involve the Andals.

Basically, the heretical train of thought is NOT that the Andals only came 1000-1500 years ago, but that they did not come in full force until then; there is way too much evidence of something major relative to the Andals having happened roughly 1000 years ago for this date to be ignored; me (and I assume many heretics) believe that the Andals, particularly the Vale and Dorne ones, arrived quite a bit early than the rest of them.

*** I put the Rhoynish being conquered first because, through Tyrion's journey through Essos, we learn that Andalos is farther north and west than the lands of the Rhoyne, therefore making it much more likely that the Valyrians, traveling from the south east, would conquer the Rhoynish first.

[7V3N]

Sigh.

I don't get this need you heretics have to shorten the history of Westeros. All of your crazy theories would work just as well if Westeros had a 16000 year history, rather than an 8000 year old one.

Rather than try and chip away at the grandeur and immensity of it all, you should be embracing it.

If a wolf weighs 100 pounds in real life, a direwolf weighs 500 pounds.

If a giant squid has arms 30 feet long, a kraken has arms 300 feet long.

If a big medieval knight was 6 foot 2 inches tall, Gregor Clegane is 7 and a half feet tall.

If your normal medieval country was the size of England, Westeros is the size of 60 Englands put together.

If the Colossus of Rhodes was 100 feet tall, the Titan of Braavos is 400 feet tall.

The Great Pyramid of Giza is 440 feet high, but the Great Pyramid of Meereen is 800 feet high.

The Lighthouse of Alexandria stood 400 feet high, but the Hightower of Oldtown is 800 feet tall.

If Hadrians wall was 6 feet tall, the Wall, which is based on Hadrians wall is 700 feet tall and 300 miles long, for Pete's sake!

The Canadian Rockies may be 15000 feet high, but Martin states that the Frostfangs are the equivalent to the Himalayas, because this is fantasy and he can therefore do what he wants.

And lastly, if the real history of civilization since the start of the Bronze Age is 6000 years old, in Westeros it is 12000 years old.

That's the beauty of the story. Everything is bigger and grander than in real life. You guys are trying to buck the trend here, and you are wrong.

The Manderlys arrived at White Harbor 1000 years ago. That is corroborated by a number of cross referenced sources.

The Rape of Sisterton occurred well before White Harbor existed, so it HAD to be well before 1000 years ago. In fact, the centuries long war with the Vale occurred between the Rape of Sisterton and the establishment of White Harbor, because Osgood Arryns son - the Talon - burned the Wolf's Den to the ground during this war.

So a date of 2000 years ago - provided by the Maesters, fits the Rape of Sisterton perfectly.

Then we have a full list of lords, and the number of generations that each one occuppied the Wolf's Den BEFORE the Rape of Sisterton occurred. This goes back more than another 1000 years. Possibly 2000 years.

Bringing us to at least 4000 years ago for the time of King Jon Stark.

The Valyrians were a civilization of unparralled technology, magic and sophistication. Their records would be far more precise than even that of the Egyptians, who can date their pharoanic Dynasties very accurately based on ancient scrolls. And the Valyrians show that their Empire goes back 5000 years.

The Empire of Old Ghis stretches back for at least a couple of millenia before that, which equates to the era of the Egyptian pharoas in our word (with the Valyrians being the Greeks/Romans who came after).

Hence, it is clear that we are looking at an unbroken record of civilization going back around 8000 years, without the interruption of an extinction level event such as the Long Night.

It is pretty obvious that the historic timeline for these major events is pretty consistent with the canon we have been fed from the start.

The exact date of the Andal arrival can vary, and might well tie in better with a time when Valyrian pressure forced them from Essos around 3000 - 4000 years ago, rather than the 6000 that was originally stated.

But the longer term history going back 8000 years to the Long Night is almost certainly in the right ballpark. You can't halve it, for example, because then the Valyrian and Ghiscari Empires couldn't have existed when they did.

Just accept it: The History of Westeros is far grander than the history of our boring real world. We are talking 8000 year long dynasties of a single House here, my friends. And ain't it glorious!

Not every Heretic accepts the timeline, though we have all discussed it. I (like Ser Skeptic himself) am skeptical about the condensed timeline, but there is certainly evidence that suggests the "accepted" timeline of Westeros, in regards to pre-Aegon, is hearsay. Different people suggest different things, the maesters have been hinted many times at being untrustworthy, (IIRC) the First Men did not record things in written language, .... We preach tolerance here, so I recommend you try not to make fun of us. We accept that there are non-believers in most of what we say, but we each get something different out of it. So do not call us silly, say you have trouble finding one of our theories plausible. There is no reason to demean our intelligence.

ETA: Really, you have no merit calling us silly since you do not even know anything beyond our conclusion. I recommend you go back and read what we have discussed. You may find that we are not pulling things out of our asses, we are using evidence provided by the books, mythological/folkloric inspirations, and things GRRM says himself.

ETA2: Also, these maesters you like to trust also teach that magic does not exist, something we know to be far from true.

[Black Crow]

Response to wrong query. - deleted

[Tyryan Lannister]

The point is, the major dates along the long term timeline corroborate one another. There is nothing supporting the frenzied declarations in the Heresy Unlimited threads that we are looking at a 10 fold error here or something.

But there is...

GRRM has stated that he made the Wall too tall; it's not that far of a stretch to extrapolate this out into "and I also made some of the events too long ago" (and IIRC he has said that). You need to look at everything from early on, especially Game, as suspect; GRRM has also stated that his characters (and especially the Maesters and septons) err in their historical assumptions and that we should not believe everything we hear from them; so there is ample evidence from Martin directly that we should look at the given history as inaccurate

[Elaena Targaryen]

Check out the video from Elio aka Ran on Dawn ( if you have not seen it yet ) starting around the 50 sec mark he discusses the timeline and how it may not be so long as we think.

Now does it really matter? Does it change the story in a dramatic way? It's no big deal but it certainly has been fun trying to puzzle it all out! I'd imagine if Westeros was real several people would want to study the Wall and there would still be arguments on just how old the Wall actually is just like with the pyramids and such. Just relax and have fun. :)

[Black Crow]

The point about the dodgy timelines is not to argue whether the Andals tooled up yesterday or the day before yesterday, but rather that we have been sold a history of Westeros that is nothing of the sort, but a collection of myths and legends masquerading as history.

In the first place GRRM has very explicitly said in interviews that after the first 1,000 years or so it all gets misty, and then backed it up in text with people like Sam and Hoster Blackwood telling us how inaccurate and unreliable the written histories are - and by way of circularity I also recall some mention being made by GRRM himself that Old Nan's stories are the true history. Actually we know that some of the things she said aren't true, but once again he was reinforcing what he's been saying for a long time about the written histories being mince.

The point of all this is that here on this thread cycle we're trying to work out what really happened rather than just sitting back and complacently accepting a history of Martin's world that he himself keeps telling us is unreliable and often untrue.

[Free Northman]

But there is...

GRRM has stated that he made the Wall too tall; it's not that far of a stretch to extrapolate this out into "and I also made some of the events too long ago" (and IIRC he has said that). You need to look at everything from early on, especially Game, as suspect; GRRM has also stated that his characters (and especially the Maesters and septons) err in their historical assumptions and that we should not believe everything we hear from them; so there is ample evidence from Martin directly that we should look at the given history as inaccurate

I indeed think that Martin has reconsidered some of the initial dates he started off with before his history was properly fleshed out.

In the Glossary to GoT, the Andal arrival is given as 6000 years ago. As fact.

Then when Rodrik the Reader refers to two conflicting dates in the histories for the arrival of the Andals, his LONG count is 4000 years, and his short count is 2000 years. The 6000 year option isn't even mentioned. So I do think that by the time of Feast - when Rodrik makes this statement - Martin had revised his estimate for the arrival of the Andals.

But he cannot revise the date for the Long Night, because the theme of the book requires the Long Night to be a threat to all mankind, and the fact that it was known of as far as Ashai means that it was a planetwide, extinction level event. A nuclear winter that lasted a generation.

Hence, none of the ancient empires of the East could have survived through it, nor have been around at the time, else it would have been recorded in writing.

In fact, it makes perfect logical sense that the all the old empires only arose out of the ashes of the Long Night, and all date from after it's end.

So what Martin has done is push the Andal arrival to a more recent date, to tie in with a convincing reason for the Andals to feel the pressure to migrate (the pressure that the Valyrians were applying to the Rhoynar, who in turn pushed westwards against the Andals), but he can't change the 8000 year date of the Long Night.

[Black Crow]

Having made that general point about the unreliability of what we're told about what went down in Westeros before Aegon's conquest, the reason for deconstructing the imaginary timeline is that we're trying to make sense of the clues which we are being given.

While 1,000 years ago might be a convenient shorthand for long long ago, there is a certain consistency emerging in regard to a number of significant events. In contrast to the original date of 6,000AL for the arrival of the Andals, we're now looking with the aid of Hoster Blackwood and Rodrik the Reader at their arriving sometime around 2,000AL. Maester Luwin very plausibly speaks of the conquest of the Six Kingdoms taking place over a number of centuries which brings us close to a thousand years ago, when we have clear evidence of a number of historical events that seem to be related; for example the conversion of the Tarlys to the Faith of the Seven, which is consistent with Cat's musing on how the weirwoods were burnt out in the south 1,000 years ago.

Where heresy comes into this is that we know the Children also fled north as a result, but puzzlingly didn't find refuge in the North where the First Men continued to hold sway and ought to have offered them the protection of the Pact. This is why some of us think that the stories of the Nights King and the Night that Ended battle belong 1,000 years ago rather than go all the way back to the Long Night.

This is indeed an epic fantasy and that's precisely why, as heretics, we are anticipating a story of epic grandeur, rather than accepting the pedestrian chronicles of the maesters.

[nanother]

OK, I started making a collection of all references to 'n thousand years ago', 'thousands of years ago' etc - I have the books as (scanned) pdfs and made a script that hopefully printed me a list of all those references, but ... there's a lot of them... I'm a short way into asos and got bored with it for the moment.

However, one thing I noticed was that Osha also mentioned the burning of weirwoods in the South, only she dates it to thousands of years ago. So either she's wrong, or Cat is wrong, or it was a process that started, and the bulk of it done, much longer ago, and then the few weirwoods that somehow survived that were burned later, 1000 years ago.

Mind you, we know that Black Harren still found some weirwoods to cut just a few hundred years ago, but I guess they both might have been talking about the trees with faces (and not in a godswood)

Another curious bit info related to Harrenhal (and also from Cat): "Weirwoods that had stood three thousand years were cut down for beams and rafters." Huh? what's up with the 3 thousand years?

[Black Crow]

Another curious bit info related to Harrenhal (and also from Cat): "Weirwoods that had stood three thousand years were cut down for beams and rafters." Huh? what's up with the 3 thousand years?

I don't think its significant; more a matter of reflecting how long it takes a weirwood to grow to a particular size. A century old weirwood is probably just a sapling.