HERESY 50

[Mace Cooterian]

The fact that the show calls Bran the three-eyed crow, but the Wiki calls Bloodraven the TEC, doesn't have to be a conflict.

I've always suspected that Bran was pegged to be Bloodravens replacement so that he could pass on.

I'm probably in the minority on this in that I really have no desire to watch the show now since reading the books, and the fact they are changing up things reenforces it.

I get why they have to do it sometimes, but I suppose just speaking for myself, I'm just content to wait for the books. :dunno:

Once I read a book I generally have no desire to watch the movie. A recent notable exception would be Steig Larsson's books on Lisabeth Salandar - The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo. I saw the movie first, fell in love and bought the next two books and devoured them only to find myself waiting for book #4, which is held up in court after Larsson passed away with no Last Will. But what I just described is how I came into the world of Ice and Fire. Saw a few of the episodes on TV, fell in love with some characters, bought the rest of the books and find myself waiting for book #6. In both examples, I find myself wanting to watch the books being portrayed on TV for the imagery sensation that I experienced while reading the books.

My biggest fear is that something happens, which causes HBO to go..."okay, lets' wrap it up"....and the screenwriters quickly bring the story to an abrupt end; just like I described a few posts ago with series Deadwood and Rome. In the middle of Season 3 for Deadwood, contracts expired and HBO could not keep actors due to other committments, so the writers took the last remaining episodes and closed out the story. What a huge disappointment to alot of people.

Sorry for the side show as this is really not Heresy material; but I've vented and feel much better.

[direwolfgreyonblack]

Welcome to the forum :cool4:

All things are possible in this game. We have discussed something of this in the past on the heresy threads, but think that the significance doesn't necessarily lie in the bastardy but the way the mother's identity is concealed.

In Jon Snow's case I think most of us here subscribe to the theory that he is the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, but while most people are running around proclaiming him the lost heir to the Targaryen throne we tend to look on his mother being a Stark as being more important and that he is first and foremost a son of Winterfell. Similarly Bloodraven, or Brynden Rivers if you prefer, is commonly identified as a Targaryen bastard while we look to his mother being a Blackwood - and to Bittersteel being a Bracken and so on it goes.

Thanks for the speedy reply, reading through I understand the emphasis is greatly on the mother as well as what this means as far as the connection with the land/nature. Is it the general opinion of the heretics though that Melisandre is mistaken and that in fact kings blood holds no power whereas the sacrificing of bastards/bastard blood could hold significant power as it has considerable historical precedence.

[Black Crow]

Thanks for the speedy reply, reading through I understand the emphasis is greatly on the mother as well as what this means as far as the connection with the land/nature. Is it the general opinion of the heretics though that Melisandre is mistaken and that in fact kings blood holds no power whereas the sacrificing of bastards/bastard blood could hold significant power as it has considerable historical precedence.

Its the general opinion of heretics that Mel is bat-shit crazy and although I don't recall us discussing the king's blood business I'd say there's a general assumption that its mince. As to bastard blood, no, as I said before we've not had any views on this beyond reckoning that the mother is generally more important in this story than the father.

[Hrafntýr]

Thanks for the speedy reply, reading through I understand the emphasis is greatly on the mother as well as what this means as far as the connection with the land/nature. Is it the general opinion of the heretics though that Melisandre is mistaken and that in fact kings blood holds no power whereas the sacrificing of bastards/bastard blood could hold significant power as it has considerable historical precedence.

I expressed a related idea some time back, when I was noting the practice of the naming of bastards, which always emphasize a connection to natural forces or the land (Snow, Stone, Storm, Sand, Rivers, Waters, Pyke, Hill, Flowers). They are children of place, and connected, by name at least, with the dominant natural features of their birthplace.

[Black Crow]

Perfectly true of course, but happily I don't see that as justification for chucking them down wells.

[Tyryan Lannister]

Its the general opinion of heretics that Mel is bat-shit crazy and although I don't recall us discussing the king's blood business I'd say there's a general assumption that its mince. As to bastard blood, no, as I said before we've not had any views on this beyond reckoning that the mother is generally more important in this story than the father.

This, ;plus Martin, the World App, and a common sense future-informed second or third reading all state that the three King's deaths had nothing to do with Mel burning the leeches from Edric--Martin has stated it as such, the World App clearly points it out as such on the Mel page, and all the foreshadowing/after-the-fact details of the three deaths (Robb, Joffrey, and Balon) show that the deaths were in the works long before Mel even started to leech Edric (for the Red Wedding, you can see the beginnings of the betrayal during Roose's time in Harrenhall back in Clash).

[alienarea]

I guess Bran being the TEC and Bloodraven being the TEC can both be true ... from a certain point of view. Just ask Obi Wan Kenobi.

[Tyryan Lannister]

Perfectly true of course, but happily I don't see that as justification for chucking them down wells.

It's probably the same "justification" used by the common folk to chuck their other unwanteds (looking at you, Tyrion) down a well--also adds another dimension to "All dwarfs are bastards in their father's eyes"

But on the topic of the bastards' names, one thing that has always bugged me is why the hell is Jon "Snow"? We know that the identity of the father isn't necessarily used for the given name (see: Brynden and Aegor Rivers, Edric Storm*, Mya Stone). Despite the fact that Ned is very secretive about the identity of Jon's mother and he claims Jon as his own, one thing that is almost without dispute is that Jon was born in the south, either in the Stormlands or in Dorne--so why isn't he Jon Storm or Jon Sand--why Jon Snow? Regardless of the fact that (as well are all in agreement of here) it is Jon's Stark-Ice heritage that matters, he is still technically not a bastard of the North, but a bastard of one of the southern lands, so why did Ned give him a northern surname? It just doesn't jive with what we have seen from the other naming conventions Martin has used for the rest of the known noble bastards

*Edric is one possible exception due to his father being from the Stormlands, but at the time of Edric's birth, Robert was already king, so his royal bastards technically should have all been Waters from his coronation onwards

[Tyryan Lannister]

I guess Bran being the TEC and Bloodraven being the TEC can both be true ... from a certain point of view. Just ask Obi Wan Kenobi.

Does this mean that Bran is our only hope?

[Mace Cooterian]

I guess Bran being the TEC and Bloodraven being the TEC can both be true ...

Maybe it is like the trinity...the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

[Tyryan Lannister]

Maybe it is like the trinity...the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Rhaegar, Jon, and the Direwolf?? :devil:

[Frey family reunion]

I just want to make sure I am on the same page as most of the posters in this thread. It appears that the First Men, would make ritual human sacrifices to either appease the Old Gods or obtain a boon from the Gods. People would be sacrificed in front of the Weirwoods (some type of blood ritual perhaps?). They would also be thrown down wells or chucked into the sea to appease the waster spirits (perhaps the purpose of the black pool in front of the Stark's Weirwoods?). Perhaps at the Eyrie people would be thrown out the Moon Door to appease the Wind Gods? Do these sound like reasonable conclusions?

[Hrafntýr]

But on the topic of the bastards' names, one thing that has always bugged me is why the hell is Jon "Snow"? We know that the identity of the father isn't necessarily used for the given name (see: Brynden and Aegor Rivers, Edric Storm*, Mya Stone). Despite the fact that Ned is very secretive about the identity of Jon's mother and he claims Jon as his own, one thing that is almost without dispute is that Jon was born in the south, either in the Stormlands or in Dorne--so why isn't he Jon Storm or Jon Sand--why Jon Snow? Regardless of the fact that (as well are all in agreement of here) it is Jon's Stark-Ice heritage that matters, he is still technically not a bastard of the North, but a bastard of one of the southern lands, so why did Ned give him a northern surname? It just doesn't jive with what we have seen from the other naming conventions Martin has used for the rest of the known noble bastards

*Edric is one possible exception due to his father being from the Stormlands, but at the time of Edric's birth, Robert was already king, so his royal bastards technically should have all been Waters from his coronation onwards

A most excellent question! I didn't think that the father's realm was supposed to matter at all in the naming, at first; I thought that all the bastards who have a father from one place and a mother from another take the surname associated with their mothers' lands, but as you note, this is not true of Edric Storm, and neither is it true of Obara Sand (mother from the Reach; as for Nymeria and Syrella: no idea what the rule is for a mother of the Free Cities or the Summer Isles). So, there would seem to be precedent for giving a bastard the bastard surname associated with his/her father's realm.

[Maglor78]

Thoros, Dondarrion and Mel share a scene at some point in S3...the heretical possibilities...

http://winteriscomin...aracters-video/

go to the 8:00 mark for a few seconds of it

[Hrafntýr]

I just want to make sure I am on the same page as most of the posters in this thread. It appears that the First Men, would make ritual human sacrifices to either appease the Old Gods or obtain a boon from the Gods. People would be sacrificed in front of the Weirwoods (some type of blood ritual perhaps?). They would also be thrown down wells or chucked into the sea to appease the waster spirits (perhaps the purpose of the black pool in front of the Stark's Weirwoods?). Perhaps at the Eyrie people would be thrown out the Moon Door to appease the Wind Gods? Do these sound like reasonable conclusions?

I've been wanting for a while now to raise the subject of the "threefold death" and your post really points in that general direction. (So sorry if this has been discussed before...the search function is not working for me, I'm assuming because the forums are in "performance mode"?).

So there is a hypothetical Indo-European practice of a form of sacrifice known as the threefold death, in which the victim is killed in three ways: by hanging (or falling, or strangulation), by wounding, and by drowning. The obvious mythic figures associated with this motif are Odin and Merlin (in his Welsh form, Myrddin Wyllt); in the case of Odin, he undergoes the threefold death himself in order to attain secret knowledge/prophecy. Merlin is less directly connected: he prophesies a threefold death for someone else, and he ends up dying this way.

A commentator on Lucan's Pharsalia notes that the Celts (he's talking about the Gaulish ones) offer sacrifices to the god Taranis (a storm or thunder god) by burning, to Teutates/Toutatis by drowning, and to Esus (associated with trees and a three-headed bull) by means of suspending his victims from trees and ritually wounding them.

The Old Irish materials hint at a special relationship between this form of death and kingship, though that is work of serious reading between the lines in the extant literature (it's clearest in the stories of Muirchertach macc Ercae, Áed Dub, and Diarmat, but the motif lurks through lots of cattle-raid stories, and that of Da Derga's Hostel). I posted a while back about sacrifice and wells in the British Isles: not human, generally speaking, but there's a strong motif linking decapitation with wells.

In any event: drowning, falling/hanging/wounding, and burning seem to match up pretty well with what you've suggested, FFR. An earlier era may have practiced human sacrifices. Also, the implements of drowning, wounding and burning are present in the Reed Oath.

[Tyryan Lannister]

Thoros, Dondarrion and Mel share a scene at some point in S3...the heretical possibilities...

http://winteriscomin...aracters-video/

go to the 8:00 mark for a few seconds of it

While, as I think has been rather established by now, I oppose any and all deviations from the books on a matter of principle, in trying to figure out why Mel is there the only conclusion I can come to is that it is as a means of showing that they follow the same religion (and probably going on to show that Mel, when faced with someone who actually has been brought back to life, still maintains that she is in the right and that everyone else is wrong, which we of course know to be the exact opposite of the truth--stupid Mel; sorry, can never resist a Mel-bashing :devil: )

Edit: me no can right Anglish :dunce:

[wolfmaid7]

I expressed a related idea some time back, when I was noting the practice of the naming of bastards, which always emphasize a connection to natural forces or the land (Snow, Stone, Storm, Sand, Rivers, Waters, Pyke, Hill, Flowers). They are children of place, and connected, by name at least, with the dominant natural features of their birthplace.

You bring up a pretty cool point,and here's a crackpot. Now as i can't remember the Norse phrase/word for "gift of the manchild" in my mythology class.What if the naming of bastards after representations of nature wasn't always so. Maybe bastards were supposed to be tributes at-lease certain tributes paid to the gods.Where even though tributes were paid, not all were accepted by the gods.Could this be something to that effect?

[Hrafntýr]

You bring up a pretty cool point,and here's a crackpot. Now as i can't remember the Norse phrase/word for "gift of the manchild" in my mythology class.What if the naming of bastards after representations of nature wasn't always so. Maybe bastards were supposed to be tributes at-lease certain tributes paid to the gods.Where even though tributes were paid, not all were accepted by the gods.Could this be something to that effect?

This was the idea that FFR was responding to from earlier posts in Heresy 50, the idea that bastards were sacrificial tributes, and in particular highborn bastards, which may have been related to or a justification of the First Night practice. And we could see a remnant of this in Mel's fixation on king's blood for her fire rituals. We haven't, however, seen any preference for king's blood in the rituals of the Drowned God, have we? There was something about a rumor that the Crow's Eye offered a human sacrifice for favorable winds, but that may have even been to the Storm God for all we know...he's not exactly an orthodox follower of the Drowned God.

[wolfmaid7]

This was the idea that FFR was responding to from earlier posts in Heresy 50, the idea that bastards were sacrificial tributes, and in particular highborn bastards, which may have been related to or a justification of the First Night practice. And we could see a remnant of this in Mel's fixation on king's blood for her fire rituals. We haven't, however, seen any preference for king's blood in the rituals of the Drowned God, have we? There was something about a rumor that the Crow's Eye offered a human sacrifice for favorable winds, but that may have even been to the Storm God for all we know...he's not exactly an orthodox follower of the Drowned God.

Well that does not bode well for Jon,they fully claimed him as theirs at lease i believe the Crow has.

Seal a pact with marriage,

Seal a pact with land.

Seal it with a bastard.

Let us all walk hand in hand.

[Kallb123]

I believe people are really over reacting to this episodes "reveal" of Bran as 3EC. I interpreted Jojen's words to mean that the 3EC is Bran's vision of {insert entity}, he can't just shoot it. As someone else has stated previously, BR maybe unaware of the form he takes in Bran's dreams (if it is him at all) and may appear different for other people.

Even if Jojen means Bran is the 3EC, he's just a youngling (a green(seer) youngling, granted) so why are his beliefs fact?

I do think the next couple of Bran scenes will be crucial in deciding whether BR is cut or whether Jojen was just implying something abstract to grab viewers.

On another note, I've really enjoyed all the talk of the dire wolf mother, Gared, Coldhands and Craster's boys. I too believe the timing is just too perfect and the antler too must be pointer at Coldhands' elk.