"Lucifer" is Latin for "light bringer"

[BitsOfBrains]

I don't think Martin does straight up good and evil.

Even the most deplorable characters have one or two redeeming qualities and the most righteous characters do stupid/bad/immoral things.

We know that the dragons (fire made flesh) are pretty bad, so why would their polar opposites not also be pretty bad but mixed with a little good just like the dragons?

[Caspoi]

Daen Targaryen@ Last I checked Lucifer was not the name of a missunderstood hero.

On a side note is the revival of really old threads allowed?

[LmL]

wow who's ressurrecting my old threads?? I forgot I wrote this one, this was a looooong time before I figured out all the astrnomy shit. Look at me, stumbling on the truth like a blind dog with a biscuit. Heh heh. I have to chuckle at the "it's probably a coincidence" comments on here. Heh. Not so much.

Adam, although it's true the fruit wasn't an apple, it was meant to be seen as the "fruit of the gods," which brings the knowledge of good an evil. The fact that the snake (lucifer) brings the light of knowledge in the garden creates a fire -knowledge connection. And of course this idea can be found in many places, notably Mithraism and similar Persian mytholigical concepts.

[LmL]

Daen Targaryen@ Last I checked Lucifer was not the name of a missunderstood hero.

On a side note is the revival of really old threads allowed?

You haven't checked then, ever! ;) Lucifer is absolutely a misunderstood hero. Check out my Bloodstone Compendium essay in my signature. ;)

[Ser Lepus]

Luciferus, Euphoros and Hesperus were originally just knicknames for the planet Venus, and didn't have any demonic connotations. The were even used as given names; there was once a Greek bishop named Luciferus.

It became one of the names of Satan only become the Church decided that sex = evil, and Venus was associated with goddesses of sex and love like Ishtar and Venus.

[EternET]

There are MANY conotations we can associate, just read the "morning star" in Isaiah. As for why the "bringer of knowledge" is poorly depicted, I guess it's an accretion of the legend of Prometheus "the one who brought fire to men, and was punished by the gods for that" from the greeks/romans.

Well there's also the addition of the "book of Enoch" where the "Nephilim" bring other knowledges and coruptions that leads to the flood. Anyway, knowledge and science were repressed for a long time thanks to those kind of myths.

[LmL]

See Lepus: correct. It was Pope Gregory in 600-something AD who interpreted "Lucifer" in the passage in Isaiah to refer to Satan. The passage itself is comparing a Babylonian King to a mighty figure that has fallen, and therefore describes this King as a Morningstar. Lucifer is a classic Morningstar deity (Jesus and Osisiris as well, some people call these deities "Osirian deities"), one who either challenges God and is booted from heaven (just as Venus, the brightest star, tries to outshine the sun but fails) or one who comes from heaven to bring divine knowledge, or both. The mythology of the Morningstar deity is based on the celestial actions of Venus, which is consistent with basically all ancient myth having a basis in astronomy.

If you're at all familiar with comparative mythology, you're aware that mythological archetypes travel well. Almost all religions are based in part on previously existent religious or mythological concepts and archetypes. The Bible is no different. There are certainly many versions of the Eden myth, the fruit of the gods story, most of which have to do with a snake. The Morningstar deity is a very common figure as well, and is viewed in different lights depending on the culture. What's funny is that Satan, as understood by modern Christians, and Jesus are both Morningstar deities. Satan gives us the version of the Morningtsra booted from heaven for challenging God, while Jesus gives us the version where the Morningstar descends from heaven to bring the light, the "light-bringer" which is one of the literal translations of "lucifer."

Euphoros, or Phorphorus, is the Morningstar, while Hesperous is the evening star. Both are Venus, of course, but due to Venus having an orbit inside our own, it alternates between Morningstar and Evenstar behavior every 584 days.

Generally speaking, the story of "Morningstar deity" contains the Evenstar lore as well. This deity is usually resurrected as lord of the underworld, lord of the dead, or lord of heaven. This was a personification of Venus first acting as the Morningstar, the last and brightest star to shine before Dawn, then eventually acting as the Evenstar, rising first in the evening - this is the ressurrected hero, the lord of night.

For the purposes of the book, George has transferred all of the Venus / Morningstar lore on to the comet. This is possible because as the comet's orbital path takes it inside that of Planetos. It acts the same way as Venus, alternating between Morningstar and Evenstar behavior depending on its positioning in relation to Planetos. Doing this allowed for Lightbringer the sword comet to happen, which fits perfectly with all the Mithras stuff he is using here.

This post I made almost three years ago now was my first spark of curiously into this subject, but if you haven't read my Astronomy of Planetos theories, I go into more detail about Morningstar mythology and the comet and how that is all working in ASOAIF. Also, some drivel about this comet killing the formerly existent second moon and causing the Long Night, 10,000 years ago.

[LmL]

There are MANY conotations we can associate, just read the "morning star" in Isaiah. As for why the "bringer of knowledge" is poorly depicted, I guess it's an accretion of the legend of Prometheus "the one who brought fire to men, and was punished by the gods for that" from the greeks/romans.

Well there's also the addition of the "book of Enoch" where the "Nephilim" bring other knowledges and coruptions that leads to the flood. Anyway, knowledge and science were repressed for a long time thanks to those kind of myths.

You're hitting on the theme here - knowledge as a burden vs ignorance as bliss. Knowledge as power vs ignorance as chains and fetters. The Nephilim stuff is right up this alley. As is "A Few Good Men." So to is modern man's struggle to use science in a way that isn't destructive. It parallels the idea of magic being a great burden which must be handled responsibly.

[Adam de Felden]

Actually LmL I can really recommend the book of enoch and the book of jubilees to you, lots of astronomical information you would really dig. Might be useful if you haven't checked them already.

[LmL]

I've read about the book of Enoch (and the rest of the Apocrypha) a fair amount, but not the actual book. I am loosely familiar with Nephilim and Azaziel, stuff like that. I should probably get a copy of that one... I have read Graham Hancock's Talisman, which covers that material quite a bit. GH's books are one the biggest reasons why I approach ASOIAF the way that I do.

[Adam de Felden]

Strange you should mention Talisman, I checked it out of the library this afternoon. Part of why I am checking out Hancock is that you mentioned him as being an inspiration on one of your threads... strange how the world works!

[LmL]

You'll definitely like that one, given your interests. Cheers and let me know what you think of it ;)

[Lady Blizzardborn]

Beware of false light. And false Light bringers--pun so, so intended. Glamoured swords anyone?

What are some other falses in the series. There's the false spring. Are there any others? Just curious.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

wow who's ressurrecting my old threads?? I forgot I wrote this one, this was a looooong time before I figured out all the astrnomy shit. Look at me, stumbling on the truth like a blind dog with a biscuit. Heh heh. I have to chuckle at the "it's probably a coincidence" comments on here. Heh. Not so much.

Adam, although it's true the fruit wasn't an apple, it was meant to be seen as the "fruit of the gods," which brings the knowledge of good an evil. The fact that the snake (lucifer) brings the light of knowledge in the garden creates a fire -knowledge connection. And of course this idea can be found in many places, notably Mithraism and similar Persian mytholigical concepts.

The serpent didn't bring anything. He just tricked Eve into eating some fruit. The tree was already there. His job was manipulating the humans who didn't know any better. And I'm not sure that the serpent is supposed to be Lucifer.

[AllOfTheHours]

Wow! Come to think of it what do we know about the red god?

- He is the lord of fire and light

- He likes human sacrifices

- His priest can produce demon assassins

- Worshipers are fire obsessed

Kind of sounds more like the devil than god to me.

All true. :agree:

Martin liberally borrows from a number of mythologies, (Norse and Celtic primarily) but also others, including imagery from the Bible.

All true! He takes a lot of inspiration from myths and religions, both metatextually as part of the overall arch of the plot/characters (The Rangarok theory is the best example of this) and within the text as a subject in and of itself (he developed all the unique religions in the series to compare and contrast their beliefs and their believers). Religions seem to fascinate him on many levels, so it makes sense he would have a passing knowledge of the Fall and the other name for "Light Bringer."

Plus, even if he didn't want to use Biblical references, I'm sure he or his publisher googled "Light Bringer" before publishing (to make sure there was no copyright infringement). So I am sure he knows what it means and either chose to use it for the reference or learned the reference and kept it in.

[LmL]

The serpent didn't bring anything. He just tricked Eve into eating some fruit. The tree was already there. His job was manipulating the humans who didn't know any better. And I'm not sure that the serpent is supposed to be Lucifer.

Well, as I discussed in my second essay, it's all a matter of how you look at the garden of Eden. Jehovah wanted to keep us from enlightenment; the serpent was the catalyst for enlightenment. The Morningstar deity always brings enlightenment, in some form. Whether he brought the apple or merely told Eve to eat it, its a semantic difference in this case. Lucifer brings knowledge to man in Genesis, and Jesus brings it later in the New Testament. It's kind of parallel to the idea of AA coming again, actually, since lucifer and Jesus are both morningstar deities.

[LmL]

All true. :agree:

All true! He takes a lot of inspiration from myths and religions, both metatextually as part of the overall arch of the plot/characters (The Rangarok theory is the best example of this) and within the text as a subject in and of itself (he developed all the unique religions in the series to compare and contrast their beliefs and their believers). Religions seem to fascinate him on many levels, so it makes sense he would have a passing knowledge of the Fall and the other name for "Light Bringer."

Plus, even if he didn't want to use Biblical references, I'm sure he or his publisher googled "Light Bringer" before publishing (to make sure there was no copyright infringement). So I am sure he knows what it means and either chose to use it for the reference or learned the reference and kept it in.

You might enjoy reading the first three essays in my signature, particularly the third one. :)

[Lady Blizzardborn]

Well, as I discussed in my second essay, it's all a matter of how you look at the garden of Eden. Jehovah wanted to keep us from enlightenment; the serpent was the catalyst for enlightenment. The Morningstar deity always brings enlightenment, in some form. Whether he brought the apple or merely told Eve to eat it, its a semantic difference in this case. Lucifer brings knowledge to man in Genesis, and Jesus brings it later in the New Testament. It's kind of parallel to the idea of AA coming again, actually, since lucifer and Jesus are both morningstar deities.

Yeah, my analysis of that story is rather different.

[JonisHenryTudor]

Interesting.

There are two versions for the word, actually. Ironically, it is one of the few Latin words where there is only one or two meanings.

1. Lucifer/eri (can't put the proper accent marks): This has two meanings. Morning star or the devil.

- It should also be noted that this is a new Latin word, and it was created in the Late Middle Ages. The original (below) is the classical word.

2. lucifer/era/erum - This is an adjective which means light-bringing.

If Martin relied on the Latin word, my guess would be the second version. They are not the same words, and as noted above the first is a product of the late Middle Ages, and it does not mean light-bringer. The second, however, does, but it does not mean lucifer. But I don't know how well versed he is in Latin, if at all.

Now since Arthur Dayne is known as the sword of morning and has a star on his standard.....

Still an interesting grab. But if we are following a strict Latin base, then light-bringer is not associated with the devil or something bad. Having said that, Martin could blend the two, and Azor Ahai doesn't exactly sound like a friendly name, so....there is that.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I always figured Azor Ahai is Asshai'i for Last Hero.