windriverdelta - Tumblr blog

[windriverdelta]

A thought on Black supporters during the book!Dance

I kind of wonder if the Riverlandish, Vale and Northern support for Rhaenyra might be motivated by the Greens neglecting the three northern kingdoms before the Dance.

One thing that jumps out to me is that Otto Hightower's council has only one Riverlander - Larys Strong, and I am not sure if Harrenhal is part of the Riverlands rather than the Crownlands - and no one from the Vale and the North. The Kingsguard at Viserys I's death too seems to lack personnel from these regions, while the Reach, Stormlands and Westerlands (e.g Tyland Lannister) are well represented. At least AWOIAF doesn't seem to know of any of Alicent's children visiting the three northern kingdoms before the Dance.

By contrast, not only did Rhaenyra partake in a royal progress there, when the war erupted her emissaries (Daemon and Jace) were the first ones to visit the three northern kingdoms. It thus stands to reason that the North, the Vale and many Riverlanders would resent the Greens b/c of the lack of attention & court appointments and be favourably disposed at Daemon's and Jace's entreaties, quite aside from the first-mover advantage.

The mechanics of Aegon II's coronation probably didn't do him any favours, either. Rhaenyra is held out as the heir for years, and suddenly as soon as Viserys dies someone else ascends the Iron Throne? I expect a lot of people to think "palace coup". If the actual events - Otto's violent purge in King's Landing and Criston's and Alicent's actions - were well-known, even more so. We know that both Cregan Stark and Jeyne Arryn had to deal with usurpation attempts; I dare say they would be less than impressed by the underhanded methods. The Greens' approach may also be seen as a precedent for succession being decided by fait accompli, risking succession wars and disorder. The Riverlands historically have been unstable, so this worry might have been amplified there.

The coda/TL;DR is that Otto Hightower and the Greens were so focused with King's Landing politics that they neglected the world outside, especially north of Harrenhal, and how they would be perceived there.

[windriverdelta]

Reblogging this because when people hear that Bran will be king (one of the three things GRRM told the Game of Thrones showrunners), for some reason they keep thinking a political office. I think Sansa is more likely to have the political office.

When it comes to what type of King Bran will be, I think he'll partly be chosen because of his magical abilities to guide westeros into a more magical era on whatever level of magic returns, but he'll also be chosen for the decent political skills he has for his age.

I think he'll be sold as a heroic or divine figure who saved westeros from the others as part of the campaign by those who want him to be King but underneath it all he'll still be a ordinary person just trying to make the best decisions he can.

I do think he'll implement changes so by law cruel Kings like Maegor and Aerys II can be removed peacefully and Kings cannot implement something without the consent of some type of Parliament, not full blown democracy or anything but a real change to the current system.

That's just what I think, I could be totally wrong though.

completely agree that Bran will lead some kind of 'return to magic' - like Westeros is the opposite of Middlearth in that Middlearth leaves magic behind and Westeros finds it again. I do think of Bran more as a symbolic king rather than a governing one, however - like I think that Westeros is more likely to be run by some kind of parliament, whilst Bran occupies the role of a kind of oracle.

Bran does prove as adept as any kid could be in Robb's place when he's left to rule Winterfell in ACOK, but I don't think that level of education would really sustain him as an independent reigning monarch within a year, and having Westeros managed by the magic of a wizard boy-king also doesn't sound very GRRM, which is why I tend towards a symbolic king, who will advise parliament rather than the other way around.

and Bran will probably choose his successors as Bloodraven chose Bran - which does leave room for mistakes like Euron (or like we believe Euron to have been) which presents some... interesting prospects for future Westeros lmao, but I think ultimately a better one than hereditary monarchy, which is how you end up with guys like Maegor. and you know, Charles III etc

[windriverdelta]

This is why in my AU I have Rodrik's kids by his first wife die in infancy & have Jeyne, Aemma and Joffrey Arryn's mum (Amanda?) be Daella's daughters & have Rodrik die during Joff's mum's conception. A new spin on death by childbirth...

Rodrik Arryn is a mega creep?

Oh yes. (Got long, more under the cut.)

Weiterlesen

[windriverdelta]

Is the Greenblood a magical(ly sustained) river?

So, Westeros is full of oddball river courses (although as demonstrated by the Tiete in Brazil, not impossible ones) but one that jumps out is the Greenblood - it somehow originates in the middle of desert lands...

The next part should be slow and simple, she thought, up the Greenblood and onto the Vaith, as far as a poleboat can go. That would give her time enough to prepare Myrcella for all that was to come. Beyond Vaith the deep sands waited -AFFC The Queenmaker

(a view supported by the maps) and yet it is navigable enough not only for the poleboats of the Orphans of the Greenblood but also for Alyn "Oakenfist" Velaryon's fleet during Daeron I's war for Dorne. So where does that water come from?

Well, there is evidence that the Rhoynar have water magic at their disposal, and thus when Nymeria arrived in Dorne with her ten thousand ships...

Even more crucially, it is said the Rhoynish water witches knew secret spells that made dry streams flow again and deserts bloom -TWOIAF

So it may be the case that her water wizards "created" or expanded the Greenblood. This would also have given House Martell (whose lands include this river) a long-term edge over the other Houses, facilitating and maintaining the union of Dorne.

Unfortunately, not only is there no concrete evidence for this theory, other parts of TWOIAF are clear that a Greenblood existed even before Nymeria's arrival. Sad!

[windriverdelta]

Response to @goodqueenaly response to my comment

"That will not happen, my lord." Like most innkeeps, Ser Forley was no man's fool. "Scouts and outriders will screen our march, and we'll fortify our camps by night. I have picked ten men to stay with Tully day and night, my best longbowmen. If he should ride so much as a foot off the road, they will loose so many shafts at him that his own mother would take him for a goose."

So, funny thing. When I wrote my comment, I was thinking that GRRM won't spell out what Forley Prester intends to do unless it is going to fail. There is no dramatic tension if someone explains in detail what will happen, only for it to happen exactly as announced. Martin does stick to typical drama tropes like the Unspoken Plan Guarantee, as we can see from "Some battles are won with swords and spears, others with quills and ravens" succeeding while Robb's detailed plans to retake Moat Cailin and Tywin's to defeat Robb at the Green Fork failing. So I'd expect the weather, Nymeria and/or BwB to eliminate Prester's scouts and outriders, and the convoy to be attacked while it's on the move and/or burned out of its fortified camps akin to how the BwB smoked out Utt's gang in Arya VII ASOS...

...however, upon rereading I notice he's talking mainly about Edmure's safety detail. Edmure probably survives; I tend to concur that he'll be among the "rebuilders" and we haven't had the payoff for "My people. They were afraid." But that doesn't mean that Jeyne will survive as well - for one thing, during an attack Prester might have to pick between letting Edmure escape or letting Jeyne escape and deciding Edmure's the smaller loss.

Now, I am rather partial to Forley Prester being the prologue POV as we haven't had much of a Westerlander perspective on the story so far (the Lannister POVs so far are more King's Landing-centred than Casterly Rock-centred), rather than Sybell or Whitesmile Wat.

[windriverdelta]

Another thing worth adding is that it's not clear whether Tom O'Sevens knows that Jeyne Westerling is innocent. If he doesn't, then Lady Stoneheart won't be forewarned and instead assume that the Westerlings were all in on the Red Wedding, in line with her indiscriminate approach. In that case, it might be her that kills Jeyne rather than Prester - which is more dramatic and thematically appropriate IMO.

If he does, then it gets a bit murkier - @turtle-paced and @goodqueenaly do we know whether Tom O'Sevens was around for Jaime's meetings with the Westerlings?

You said you were worried about Jeyne Westerling. Do you think that Lady Stoneheart will come after her? If so why, would she think she was responsible?

I think the prospect of Lady Stoneheart attacking the party Jeyne Westerling's in as she leaves Riverrun is a very real possibility.

Lady Stoneheart is also not currently much for rationality. Maybe, in her heart of zombified hearts, she doesn't believe that Jeyne was responsible for the Red Wedding itself...but I can easily see how Lady Stoneheart would believe that Jeyne was responsible for Robb's death.

[windriverdelta]

On Stannis Baratheon's eventual fate in the ASOIAF books

So, we know that Stannis Baratheon is going to burn his daughter alive in the books like in Game of Thrones, since Martin has confirmed that this is one of his "moments" for GoT. That naturally raises the question of what will happen to Stannis afterwards.

TL;DR, I find Stannis becoming a Night's Watch member - and probably Lord Commander - by the end of ASOIAF the most likely outcome.

In the show, Stannis lost the subsequent battle with the Boltons and was then killed by Brienne. While the same battle ("Battle of Ice") is also happening in the books shortly after the Theon TWOW chapter, we can actually rule out this scenario rather easily for the books. One, Shireen is hundreds of miles away in Castle Black, and there is no way that she could get to Stannis in time to get burned. Two, Stannis is likely going to win the battle and seize Winterfell afterwards, for both plot and theme reasons. Three, in the Davos ASOS chapters we see that Stannis is prepared to burn an innocent child alive ... to save a million from the dark. A.K.A from the Others, not for a battle. And Melisandre wanted to wake a dragon from stone with said sacrifice, but there is no stone dragon available anywhere except maybe in Winterfell. Fourth, Brienne is nowhere near close enough to Stannis and the only appearance of Stannis in her POV is this:

They are not his sons. Stannis told it true, that day he met with Renly. Joffrey and Tommen were never Robert's sons. 

This isn't the comment she'd make if she still cared deeply about avenging Renly - especially when contrasted to this:

Timeon was still trying to fight as she pulled her blade from him, its fullers running red with blood. He clawed at his belt and came up with a dagger, so Brienne cut his hand off. That one was for Jaime. 

Fifth, Stannis being Azor Ahai is one of the lies Daenerys has to slay. Him falling against the Boltons would break that prophecy.

In fact, I am going to go out on a limb and say that any scenario that has Stannis dying before the invasion of the Others is ruled out for the above reasons. That probably guarantees his survival into ADoS, since it's likely that the climax of the Other invasion and Daenerys' arrival happen there.

That leaves a few scenarios. The one where he is killed by Daenerys is seemingly unpopular, probably for good reason: There isn't much of a concrete reason for her to do so - especially since in the books, the conflict and eventual destruction of King's Landing likely precedes Daenerys' arrival in the North - and when you look closely you notice that the "blue-eyed king" (=Stannis) isn't actually the subject of the slayer of lies prophecy, while the "cloth dragon" (=Aegon) and "stone beast" (=Euron?) are. A hint that this encounter will be less lethal.

A very popular theory is that Stannis becomes the new Night's King. Probably unjustifiably so, though:

The similitude between the two isn't that great. Melisandre as we see in her POV chapter isn't actually an Evil Seducer, while the woman with the Night's King seems to fit the description of the Others more. Human sacrifice wasn't the Night's King's foremost sin, either. Finally, lots of people other than the Night's King resided or set foot in the Nightfort, there is no evidence that it has a cursing effect akin to the Harrenhal curse, and Stannis hasn't actually visited it yet.

Going by Old Nan's tale of the Night's King, it seems like he was seduced by the power to betray humanity to the Others. While Stannis contemplates sacrificing one person for humanity. In other words, the exact opposite motivations. In this context, @turtle-paced's analysis of the Night's King here as book!Euron should be read.

Oh yeah, and the Euron Greyjoy we see in TWOW The Forsaken preview chapter is a far better candidate for "new Night's King" than Stannis (or Jon Snow, or Bran)

The second-to-last theory is that Stannis simply dies, presumably in battle against the Others, after the attempt to awake a dragon with thr Shireen sacrifice fails. Given that the "slayer of lies" prophecy and the discussions between Melisandre, Maester Aemon and Jon Snow imply that Stannis isn't Azor Ahai, I think it's safe to assume that the sacrifice will indeed fail. That said, while once again @turtle-paced wrote an argument I once again can't find about how this outcome would be in character, I don't recall any specific foreshadowing.

The last theory also presumes that the sacrifice will fail, but that Stannis will join the Night's Watch in atonement at the end. And that, well, has some foreshadowing: In Jon XI ASOS:

They found Stannis Baratheon standing aloneat the edge of the Wall, brooding over the field where he had won his battle, and the great green forest beyond. He was dressed in the same black breeches, tunic, and boots that a brother of theNight's Watch might wear. Only his cloak set him apart; a heavy golden cloak trimmed in black fur, and pinned with a brooch in the shape of a flaming heart

Jon VIII ADWD, in particular considering the fact that the Shireen sacrifice will consist of burning her alive as per the other sacrifices Melisandre and Stannis have carried out:

Jon's temper flashed. "They have followed worse. The Old Bear left a few cautionary notes about certain of the men, for his successor. We have a cook at the Shadow Tower who was fond of raping septas. He burned a seven-pointed star into his flesh for every one he claimed. His left arm is stars from wrist to elbow, and stars mark his calves as well. At Eastwatch we have a man who set his father's house afire and barred the door. His entire family burned to death, allnine. Whatever Satin may have done in Oldtown, he is our brother now, and he will be my squire."

And given that Stannis takes advice from a King's Landing smuggler and will win the battle of Winterfell with pirate tactics ("wrecking" with false lighthouses; Davos I ADWD), Davos II ACoK:

"Salladhor Saan thinks only of gold!" Stannis exploded. "His head is full of dreams of the treasure he fancies lies under the Red Keep, so let us hear no more of Salladhor Saan. The day I need military counsel from a Lysene brigand is the day I put off my crown and take the black." The king made a fist. "Are you here to serve me, smuggler? Or to vex me with arguments?"

Moreover, it's noted in-story that Jon Snow is the 998th Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, and after his assassination we'll probably see the election of a 999th afterwards - probably one of the mutineers. That leaves slot 1000 for after the series, since the Wall will almost certainly fall, and it calls for a big name. And the dutiful, skilled-in-military-matters, not very sociable Stannis Baratheon would probably fit right in the Night's Watch.

[windriverdelta]

This cannot be restated frequently enough in Randyll Tarly discussions - so many people don't notice that his issue with rapists isn't moral condemnation. That's Daenerys.

Calling Randyll Tarly a "rape apologist" for saying - albeit harshly - that it's dangerous for a woman to wander around a warzone is the sort of hysteria that makes most people hate feminism. Seriously, get a grip. Not everything is "rape culture" or whatever.

No, not “everything” is about rape culture, but rape culture is. 

Seriously, this is the clearest form of rape apologetics to ever occur in all of fiction in the english language. This is how the blog Finally Feminism 101 defines rape apology.

The simple answer is that a rape apology is any argument that boils down to the myth that rapists can be provoked into raping by what the victim does or does not do.

Such apologies feed off the old myth that rapists have no control over the sexual temptation they experience in response to the victim, therefore the victim could have avoided awakening the irresistible rape temptation by behaving differently. It’s classic victim-blaming.

Most people who make such arguments are not consciously intending to defend rapists. They are simply repeating arguments they have heard before and haven’t fully examined.

Now let’s look at what our friend said:

“They were knights,” she said, stunned, “anointed knights.”

“And honorable men. The blame is yours.”

The accusation made her flinch. “I would never … my lord, I did nought to encourage them.”

“Your being here encouraged them. If a woman will behave like a camp follower, she cannot object to being treated like one. A war host is no place for a maiden. If you have any regard for your virtue or the honor of your House, you will take off that mail, return home, and beg your father to find a husband for you.”

***

“Try, then. You have your letter, you do not need my leave, but I’ll give it nonetheless. If you’re fortunate, all you’ll get for your trouble are saddle sores. If not, perhaps Clegane will let you live after he and his pack are done raping you. You can crawl back to Tarth with some dog’s bastard in your belly.”

***

“Go where you want and do as you will … but when you’re raped don’t look to me for justice. You will have earned it with your folly.” 

I mean, what are we even discussing here: he literally says “if you are raped it will be your fault.” 

And it’s clear to me that the root of his objection is not a concern for her safety, that’s just ridiculous:

“Did Lord Randyll command you to follow me again?”

“He commanded me to stay away from you. Lord Randyll is of the view that you might benefit from a good hard raping.”

The root of his objection is that he’s offended by her non-conformity to genders roles. Which, surprise, surprise, also seems to be his main objection to Sam.

“Well, you’ve had your taste of blood. Proved whatever it is you meant to prove. It’s time you took off that mail and donned proper clothes again. There are ships in port. One’s bound to stop at Tarth. I’ll have you on it.”

“Thank you, my lord, but no.”

Lord Tarly’s face suggested he would have liked nothing better than to stick her own head on a spike and mount it above the gates of Maidenpool with Timeon, Pyg, and Shagwell. “You mean to continue with this folly?”

“I mean to find the Lady Sansa.”

“If it please my lord,” Ser Hyle said, “I watched her fight the Mummers. She is stronger than most men, and quick—”

“The sword is quick,” Tarly snapped. “That is the nature of Valyrian steel. Stronger than most men? Aye. She’s a freak of nature, far be it from me to deny it.”

His sort will never love me, Brienne thought, no matter what I do. “ […]

“As for you, my lady, it is said that your father is a good man. If so, I pity him. Some men are blessed with sons, some with daughters. No man deserves to be cursed with such as you. Live or die, Lady Brienne, do not return to Maidenpool whilst I rule here.”

Also, thank you for calling me “hysterical” for stating facts and pointing out the author’s clear intention. 

[windriverdelta]

Now I want to know what the Iron Throne would make with a dragonrider having a study period at the Citadel.

In a world where Vaegon Targaryen is alive and well at the start of the Dance, what changes? At some point do people start looking again at trying to install him?

Vaegon was only in his late-sixties when the Dance happened - who says he wasn't alive and well? Anyway, Vaegon doesn't have a dragon and due to being in the Citadel, does not have a strong base of political support.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[windriverdelta]

Reblogging this as it's quite important for our understanding of the Lannincest. It is not acceptable in Westeros to do what Cersei and Jaime did, not just politically but also morally, and Stannis' attitude to the incest bastards is not a crank opinion.

Several characters in the story say that if the Lannister incest is proven it means the executions of Cersei, Jaime and their children. Why execute the kids? They had no involvement in the incest or treason, seems like their only crime is being born which they had no option in. How would it be legal to execute them? Why not give them to the Faith or in the boys cases the NW or Citadel? Stannis even plans to execute them, how would that be just?

If the boy was truly Jaime’s seed, Robert would have put him to death along with his mother, and few would have condemned him. Bastards were common enough, but incest was a monstrous sin to both old gods and new, and the children of such wickedness were named abominations in sept and godswood alike. 

That’s Catelyn thinking, and I think the “few would have condemned him” is a telling point. In the eyes of “sept and godswood alike”, these are “abominations”, products of sin rather than innocent children. (The Targaryens, as she goes on to note, got a pass from their dragons and their Valyrian heritage). Stannis may not practice the Faith anymore, but he was certainly raised with its precepts, including those against the “monstrous sin” of incest. If Stannis declared that the children of Cersei were “abominations” and thus deserved to die, followers of the Faith might have nodded: just as the Starry Sept’s denunciation of Aenys as “King Abomination” had turned pious lords and even pro-Aenys smallfolk to revolt against the crown, so a declaration that these children were abominations might have justified in those men’s minds the children’s deaths. Certainly, there would probably have been a few, like Ned and Davos, who considered them children first, no matter their circumstances of their births; but for as entrenched in both faiths a hatred of incest and its ��abomination” results are, I think Stannis’ executing all the children would have been seen as justified by others.

[windriverdelta]

House Mormont's political allegiances in ADWD

Question that came up in earlier blogposts and comments of mine: Where does House Mormont's political allegiances lie? We have a few bits of evidence:

The first on-page appearance of the House politicians (rather than its exiles and Night's Watch members) is in Bran VI AGOT, where Maege Mormont challenges Robb's authority. After that moment though, the Mormonts are on Robb's side and I don't recall any dissension.

Lyanna's reply to Stannis Baratheon : "Bear Island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name isSTARK." Jon Snow wonders why a 10-year old girl who is not the heir to Bear Island is writing back.

The current boss of House Mormont is still Maege Mormont as of ADWD. Her oldest child Dacey was murdered at the Red Wedding, but she has other daughters and grandchildren. As of ADWD Alysane is the heir, while Lyanna is last in the succession.

In (I think) Catelyn V ASOS Robb made Maege one of the witnesses of his will (but without giving her a physical copy, most likely) and dispatched her to Greywater Watch with Galbart Glover to Howland Reed. The will almost certainly legitimizes Jon Snow, thus making him his heir, but Howland Reed knows that Jon isn't Ned's son.

We don't see Maege Mormont in action in ADWD, but from Alysane's words about her family to Asha ("The King's Prize") it seems like Alysane and Maege are in correspondence.

Alysane Mormont joins in as Stannis liberates Deepwood Motte, a perfectly timed synchronized attack that is probably not a happy coincidence.

There, Alysane joins Stannis' army with an unknown amount of troops. She is one of the "wolves" who strong-arm Stannis into marching on Winterfell. We don't know on which terms Stannis agreed to this operation.

In Theon's TWOW chapter, Stannis intends to send "Arya Stark" (actually, Jeyne Poole) to Jon Snow and Alysane is supposed to accompany her.

It is not entirely clear from this all what House Mormont's political allegiances are, other than being anti-Ironborn.

My minimal theory is that they are definitively going to support a Stark restoration, but are keeping their options open regarding Stannis because they don't know whether Jon Snow will actually agree to fulfill Robb's will. They don't let anyone, not even a Stark, and certainly not some Southron king sending letters, boss them around. Their support must be earned - by Robb during that conference, by Stannis by liberating Deepwood Motte or Winterfell.

Or not in Stannis' case, since the house has only committed Alysane from what we can see and hasn't bent the knee. I am not sure whether Alysane brought a lot of troops when she joined Stannis' army.

One thing that is certain is that Maege Mormont knows about Robb's will, but has taken no concrete steps to inform or persuade Jon Snow to implement it so far. I think it's because she doesn't think he'll play ball - if she only had her and Galbart Glover's word, Jon might very well refuse. And he's become LC of the Watch in the meantime. We don't know if the Mormonts know of Jon's participation in Stannis' war council in Jon IV ADWD, but it also speaks of Jon staying with the Watch. And that leaves Stannis Baratheon the only game in town if you don't like the Ironborn or Freys/Boltons...

...but there is room for the Mormonts to back a KitN if other witnesses to Robb's will return or Jon Snow becomes more amenable after resurrection.

[windriverdelta]

Thanks for the reply, but I have to disagree on a few points:

This is pre-death/pre-resurrection Jon Snow, who was Lord Commander of the NW and wanted no involvement in the politics of the realm owing to the neutrality of the NW. We see all this change in Jon's last chapter where the LC decides to attack the Warden of the North with an army of Wildlings in effect destroying the 8000 year old long standing neutrality of the Wall. We don't know - and it's hard to predict - what decisions the more darker, more wolfish Jon Snow will make after coming back from a brutal death, with some of his last thoughts being of Arya (Stick em' with the pointy end). The NW is now completely different - majorly made up of Freefolk. The LC has been assassinated. There is open mutiny. I don't see Jon Snow continue to be LC after resurrection.

While I concur that Jon Snow will not continue to be LC in the future, you are assuming a bit more personality rewrite than we can plausibly assume. Beric Dondarrion was forgetting about his family and castle but still pursuing justice in the Riverlands. Catelyn murdered Jinglebell in the last seconds of her life and is now murdering her way through the Freys. Jon Snow has the benefit of an incoming "soul jar" in form of Ghost, as stated in Varamyr's prologue. He'll probably become more "wolfish", sure, but actually resemble his life-self.

Considering his situation in the TWoW sample chapter, maybe he does not have much of a choice in the North deciding on a KITN? About 80% of Stannis' army is currently made up of Northern houses and mountain clans. His own Southron army is falling every day in the brutal winter snowstorm. Justin Massey has to travel all the way to Braavos and back with the sellswords and how long is that going to take? So at the moment the North have the upper hand, not Stannis.

Thing is, even by your own formulation the North will be divided between several candidates. We know what happened the last time in ASOIAF when one group went against multiple enemies that weren't coordinating - the Lannisters against Stannis, Renly/Tyrells, Robb Stark, Lysa Arryn, and the Lannisters won. You are also assuming that all of these factions will be aiming at installing their favourite Stark as king rather than as lord - I can see the Mormonts and Glovers, for example, since they certainly know about the will. But we have no idea where the mountain clans fall, and I doubt that Barbrey Dustin is interested in raising a new Stark king in the North. That the Manderlys are entrusting Rickon to consummate Stannis loyalist Davos Seaworth means that either a) they are even less careful than Cersei when it comes to political plotting - Davos may well be forewarned due to Robett Glover's loose tongue - or b) they don't give a fig about whether the Starks become kings again or just lords.

Did you miss out on the entire ADwD Northern plot and 'The North Remembers' speech, Barbrey's speech, Big Bucket Wull's speech etc.? It seems personal at this point, they want vengeance against the the crown in KL and the Boltons/Lannisters/Freys for the Red Wedding, having lost family members to the betrayal and they want the Starks back in Winterfell in a position of power.

No, I didn't miss anything - they are speaking of justice for the North and restoration of the Starks. Nothing about whether in form of kings or as lords under Stannis. Wyman Manderly and the girl (Wynafryd?) in Davos III speak of the latter scenario, Lyanna's letter and Robett Glover's statements of the former. To read an insistence on a Stark king into all of them is putting words in their mouth.

Also with Jon Snow back in the picture, it's less about Northern independence and more about having an united realm against a greater apocalyptic threat. Remember that things are dire at the Wall, the Others have reached Hardhome and the army of the dead is moving slowly but inexorably towards the Wall. As KITN, Jon Snow has to start with the North, stop the infighting, bring Thenn and Umber, Freefolk and Northerners together before he can turn his attention to the rest of the realm. Who can unite the North against a common enemy? A Northerner like Jon Snow who knows the nitty gritty details of how the North works or Stannis Baratheon? There's a reason GRRM detailed how politically savvy Jon Snow is in ADwD.

Surely there is a difference between Stannis Baratheon and Robb Stark for Jon Snow. Robb Stark is a big part of Jon Snow's story arc, in him dealing with the themes of bastardy and Winterfell. When Stannis offers him Winterfell, in the chapter where Jon Snow considers it, Robb Stark plays a big part in the pros and cons of Jon accepting Lord of Winterfell.

There is a difference in Stannis demanding that Jon Snow burn down the Godswood and become Lord of Winterfell and Jon's much beloved brother - who in their childhood tells Jon that he can never be Lord of Winterfell owing to his bastardy - legitimizing Jon and naming him Lord of Winterfell and King in the North. The emotional impact of the latter cannot be overstated - it's important closure for Jon Snow's character arc as a bastard as he proceeds to the next phase of his story before the Targaryen revelations. Jon Stark, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North.

Yeah ... ""Half my army is made up of unbelievers," Stannis had replied. "I will have no burnings. Pray harder."" when a R'hllorite in Stannis' army demands that he burn a Northman is not a figment of my imagination, nor are the maps which show the North as part of a wider continent. "The realm" is more than "the North" - as "the realms of men" acknowledges - and Stannis Baratheon is not as unbending as you are thinking. Dragons and Daenerys and Tyrion and Rhaegar also aren't Northern. People tend to forget that Robb Stark was acclaimed king of the North and Riverlands too, after going the wrong way per Osha's words. And he's dead now. Oh yeah, and also GRRM on Amazon.co.uk (h/t @joannalannister)(Archive)

"And it is important that the individual books refer to the civil wars, but the series title reminds us constantly that the real issue lies in the North beyond the Wall. Stannis becomes one of the few characters fully to understand that, which is why in spite of everything he is a righteous man, and not just a version of Henry VII, Tiberius or Louis XI."

So yeah, I am pretty confident in saying that a KitN goes against the theme.

If Stannis thinks he is Azor Ahai - essential to the defeat of the Others - he may refrain from attacking the KITN. Additionally, Melisandre - who is at the Wall, is interested in Jon Snow and may realize that he is Azor Ahai - could end up manipulating Stannis to low key support Jon Snow

In an alternate universe where GRRM didn't tell the showrunners that Stannis will burn Shireen, sure, but that really does not square with Melisandre' characterization (" I pray for a glimpse of Azor Ahai, and R'hllor shows me only Snow" - have you ever considered that Jon Snow is AAR, Mel? I don't think you ever did. Or all the other misinterpreted prophecies) or with the HOTU "slayer of lies" prophecy or with Shireen-burning. I think Melisandre will treat Stannis as AAR until (Shireen's) bitter end, instead.

It's funny that the fandom keeps trying to make that damned, pesky Will irrelevant and yet the author keeps bringing it up to remind everyone that yes - the decree is actually out there, is known by important Northern lords/ladies who have made it North and yes it will have a role to play in the story. Clearly George RR Martin thinks that the words of Maege Mormont and Galbart Glover - the heads of two houses playing an important role in the Northern uprising in ADwD - will be important.

Y'know, from googling "Robb's will asoiaf" it seems like the fandom does actually give that will a lot of consideration...but often assuming that there is a physical copy still around, without evidence. That the will has a role to play does not mean that it will lead to Jon becoming king, there are lots of other story functions it could have. I'll write something about House Mormont.

You think Jon Snow is going to become a dragonrider in TWoW but there is no time for him to become KITN?!

The only Stark reunion happening in TWoW is that between Jon and Rickon and it's going to lead to one of the two of them being named KITN. I think due to age and experience and the need to have a strong leader to face the existential threat of the Others, the North will rally behind Jon Snow and Rickon Stark will just be happy to reunite with his beloved elder brother once again. I think for the North, TWoW will end with Jon becoming KITN, uniting the North and bam! - Howland Reed turns up with the truth of Lyanna and Rhaegar. There's no time for anything else. Hopefully GRRM manages to get Dany/her dragons/Tyrion/Arya etc. to Westeros by the end of the next book. That is if the next book ever gets done and gets published.

Yeah, the first was a mistake of mine - Jon Snow dragonrider can also happen in ADOS. However, the Theon TWOW chapter is likely setting up Bran's reveal, Arya's TWOW chapter her leaving Braavos, and I tend to think that Sansa will be heading to the North before long. I think there is room for the Stark Reunion at the end of TWOW, as a light for the future - TWOW per the title and GRRM's comments will not be a happy book, but even ASOS with the Red Wedding ended with some positive notes.

Jon Snow - King in the North?

One of the open questions of TWOW/ADOS is whether Jon Snow will ever become King in the North, as in Game of Thrones and in Robb's will. Now the KitN point in the show was extremely sloppily done - Jon didn't really accomplish anything with it, and some people suspect that the show simply gave Jon Stannis Baratheon's book function - and unlike "Stannis burns Shireen" or "Bran becomes king" it's not one of the moments-from-the book we know of, but given the show's tendency to write "moments" without a solid foundation just because they occur in the future books it's not ruled out. There are also some references by Mormont's raven and elsewhere that compare Jon to a king.

That said, I find it improbable. The first big problem is Stannis Baratheon. He's never going to abide a new King in the North, as he makes clear to Catelyn and Davos in ACOK. Jon Snow is effectively a Stannis supporter in ADWD, as we can see from e.g the way he calls him "the king" without qualifiers to Alys Karstark and tries to warn him about Arnolf Karstark. I doubt that he'd try to usurp Stannis. And crucially, Stannis has a lot of plot armour/guaranteed survival going in to TWOW/ADOS - unlike the show, Shireen has been left at the Wall and there is no way she could reach Stannis at Winterfell before his army starves to death, so we know he has to survive. And while we've seen with the Edric Storm affair in ASOS that Stannis is prepared to sacrifice a child to stop the Long Night, until the Long Night is actually underway I doubt that he'll give his only child to stop it. Lastly, Stannis being Azor Ahai is one of the lies Daenerys must slay, not the Boltons or Jon. Him dying before ADOS is an exceedingly unlikely prospect.

Second, there are a lot of political obstacles to Jon Snow becoming King in the North. While Robb's will almost certainly legitimized him, there is no evidence that a written copy of the will survived the Red Wedding and the Grand Northern Conspiracy is not a thing. All what he'd have is Maege Mormont's and Galbart Glover's word, since all other witnesses are trapped south of the Neck/in Iron Throne ally custody - and oh yeah, they are with Howland Reed who knows that Jon is not Ned's son. Also, the will assumed that Bran and Rickon were dead and Sansa in the power of the Lannisters; they aren't, and this is going to come out in TWOW between Davos' mission and Bran revealing himself in the crofters' village, complicating Northern politics as all these candidates have advantages and disadvantages over Jon. It's also unclear whether Northern independence is actually strongly supported in the North after the Red Wedding - we don't have much evidence of patriotic fervour in ACOK and ASOS, let alone in the history of the North during the Targaryen dynasty, and the current movers-and-shakers in the North mostly weren't around for the war council in Riverrun where Robb's acclamation took place. Their attitudes might be very negotiable. And as for the notion of Jon being acclaimed like in the show after defeating the Boltons - that's extremely unlikely in the books for sundry logistical and thematic reasons.

Speaking of, I think it's somewhat thematically unsound for a story where per GRRM the "true conflict is north of the Wall" and where Osha tells Bran that Robb is marching in the wrong direction, to suddenly champion the cause of Northern independence. Stannis, not Robb, is still alive at the end of ASOS. A coalition between wildlings, Starks, Team Stannis and small-o others - later joined by Daenerys and Tyrion as future dragonriders - is way more likely in my opinion.*

Vis-a-vis Jon Snow, there is also the question of how KitN fits into his character arc. He has already declined Stannis' offer of Winterfell in ASOS, making a tilt in TWOW might be repetitive. His story in TWOW is likely going to head to a resurrection, the Stark Family Reunion, the R+L=J reveal and becoming a dragonrider (two of them must be Targaryens), probably also an identity crisis - KitN seems more like a detour, especially as the timeline does not leave much time for anything else. Abandoning the fight against the Others for political games in the North only to return to fighting the Others would be questionable storytelling.

Credit to @nobodysuspectsthebutterfly @poorquentyn @turtle-paced for inspiration/citations.

*Or a very dark possibility: Northern separatists try to force Jon's (or someone else's) accession by fighting with Stannis ... only to be taken in the rear by the Others when the Horn of Joramun brings the Wall down and their attempt to end in catastrophe as their armies are smashed between Others and pro-Stannis troops. The fiefs of the most pro-independence Northerners we've seen - Lyanna Mormont (OK, she's way down the Mormont succession order), Greatjon Umber and Robett Glover - are also the closest to the Wall, discounting the mountain clans, and thus closest to the "firing line". That might be a set-up to such a tragedy.

[windriverdelta]

Jon Snow - King in the North?

One of the open questions of TWOW/ADOS is whether Jon Snow will ever become King in the North, as in Game of Thrones and in Robb's will. Now the KitN point in the show was extremely sloppily done - Jon didn't really accomplish anything with it, and some people suspect that the show simply gave Jon Stannis Baratheon's book function - and unlike "Stannis burns Shireen" or "Bran becomes king" it's not one of the moments-from-the book we know of, but given the show's tendency to write "moments" without a solid foundation just because they occur in the future books it's not ruled out. There are also some references by Mormont's raven and elsewhere that compare Jon to a king.

That said, I find it improbable. The first big problem is Stannis Baratheon. He's never going to abide a new King in the North, as he makes clear to Catelyn and Davos in ACOK. Jon Snow is effectively a Stannis supporter in ADWD, as we can see from e.g the way he calls him "the king" without qualifiers to Alys Karstark and tries to warn him about Arnolf Karstark. I doubt that he'd try to usurp Stannis. And crucially, Stannis has a lot of plot armour/guaranteed survival going in to TWOW/ADOS - unlike the show, Shireen has been left at the Wall and there is no way she could reach Stannis at Winterfell before his army starves to death, so we know he has to survive. And while we've seen with the Edric Storm affair in ASOS that Stannis is prepared to sacrifice a child to stop the Long Night, until the Long Night is actually underway I doubt that he'll give his only child to stop it. Lastly, Stannis being Azor Ahai is one of the lies Daenerys must slay, not the Boltons or Jon. Him dying before ADOS is an exceedingly unlikely prospect.

Second, there are a lot of political obstacles to Jon Snow becoming King in the North. While Robb's will almost certainly legitimized him, there is no evidence that a written copy of the will survived the Red Wedding and the Grand Northern Conspiracy is not a thing. All what he'd have is Maege Mormont's and Galbart Glover's word, since all other witnesses are trapped south of the Neck/in Iron Throne ally custody - and oh yeah, they are with Howland Reed who knows that Jon is not Ned's son. Also, the will assumed that Bran and Rickon were dead and Sansa in the power of the Lannisters; they aren't, and this is going to come out in TWOW between Davos' mission and Bran revealing himself in the crofters' village, complicating Northern politics as all these candidates have advantages and disadvantages over Jon. It's also unclear whether Northern independence is actually strongly supported in the North after the Red Wedding - we don't have much evidence of patriotic fervour in ACOK and ASOS, let alone in the history of the North during the Targaryen dynasty, and the current movers-and-shakers in the North mostly weren't around for the war council in Riverrun where Robb's acclamation took place. Their attitudes might be very negotiable. And as for the notion of Jon being acclaimed like in the show after defeating the Boltons - that's extremely unlikely in the books for sundry logistical and thematic reasons.

Speaking of, I think it's somewhat thematically unsound for a story where per GRRM the "true conflict is north of the Wall" and where Osha tells Bran that Robb is marching in the wrong direction, to suddenly champion the cause of Northern independence. Stannis, not Robb, is still alive at the end of ASOS. A coalition between wildlings, Starks, Team Stannis and small-o others - later joined by Daenerys and Tyrion as future dragonriders - is way more likely in my opinion.*

Vis-a-vis Jon Snow, there is also the question of how KitN fits into his character arc. He has already declined Stannis' offer of Winterfell in ASOS, making a tilt in TWOW might be repetitive. His story in TWOW is likely going to head to a resurrection, the Stark Family Reunion, the R+L=J reveal and (eta: in ADOS - see conversation with @jackoshadows) becoming a dragonrider (two of them must be Targaryens), probably also an identity crisis - KitN seems more like a detour, especially as the timeline does not leave much time for anything else. Abandoning the fight against the Others for political games in the North only to return to fighting the Others would be questionable storytelling.

Credit to @nobodysuspectsthebutterfly @poorquentyn @turtle-paced for inspiration/citations.

*Or a very dark possibility: Northern separatists try to force Jon's (or someone else's) accession by fighting with Stannis ... only to be taken in the rear by the Others when the Horn of Joramun brings the Wall down and their attempt to end in catastrophe as their armies are smashed between Others and pro-Stannis troops. The fiefs of the most pro-independence Northerners we've seen - Lyanna Mormont (OK, she's way down the Mormont succession order), Greatjon Umber and Robett Glover - are also the closest to the Wall, discounting the mountain clans, and thus closest to the "firing line". That might be a set-up to such a tragedy.

[windriverdelta]

This is more or less what I expect.

MY ‘THE WINDS OF WINTER’ PREDICTIONS.

Since George said: “But I tell you this — if I don’t have THE WINDS OF WINTER in hand when I arrive in New Zealand for worldcon, you have here my formal written permission to imprison me in a small cabin on White Island, overlooking that lake of sulfuric acid, until I’m done,” ( not that I dare believe him ) I thought I would document all the TWOW predictions I have in one post. 

These aren’t all theories that I came up with from scratch, but rather ones that have been circulating around the fandom which I subscribe to. Now when the book comes out, we can all go back to this post and laugh at how WRONG I was about everything.

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS ON THIS POST.

Weiterlesen

[windriverdelta]

Also worth noting that fighting along most of the length of the upstream Red Fork is not "defending Riverrun" - we are talking about a frontline hundreds of miles long.

Whose fault do you think was it that the plan to lure Tywin to the Westerlands failed? Edmure's for deciding to fight at the fords or Robb's for not telling him the plan?

100% Edmure’s.

The orders that Edmure’s were given were to hold Riverrun, not engage in a series of protracted battles. It’s difficult to argue that holding Riverrun would involve such a long and involved military operation, not without explicit orders. Even something as vague as Lee’s orders to Ewell to take the hill “if practicable” were absent in this, Robb clearly did not give permission to engage, and Tywin was not attacking Riverrun necessitating Edmure to both fulfill his orders and defend himself.

This is supported by other moves Edmure makes. When Robb leaves, Edmure brags about ordering Roose to take Harrenhal, but there’s nothing that suggest Edmure was ordered to take Harrenhal. Edmure didn’t come up with the Harrenhal Caper, Roose and/or Robett Glover came up with the plan, which meant Edmure ordered his armies to throw themselves at the walls of Harrenhal in direct violation of his orders.

Then, you have the location. Arguing that Edmure was defending his lands doesn’t hold up because Tywin is leaving Edmure’s lands. Tywin has been in the eastern Riverlands out of Harrenhal (a castle in vassalage to Edmure), and he’s marched almost completely out of Edmure’s territory before Edmure does battle, keeping Tywin in the Riverlands.

Finally, we have the lack of follow-up. If Edmure was looking to destroy Tywin in the field, perhaps attempting to seize Tywin and force a Lannister surrender, why was there no follow-up? Why was nothing done to capitalize on his advantage. Of course, Edmure didn’t have much in the way of resources, and winning 11 vs. 20 on the defensive is not the same as winning 11 vs. 20 on the offensive, and Edmure isn’t fool enough to not notice that. Edmure knows he cannot follow up an engagement to successfully eliminate Tywin’s Westerlander army with the forces he has. The Fords was a battle to avenge his humiliation at his two previous battles, to win the respect of the Riverlanders since Edmure had frequently been a mockery of court with his capture (and earlier with the whole floppy fish deal).

So, now that we have the idea that there was no real strategic reason to do battle at the Fords, here’s the second question: Should Robb have told Edmure his orders? That too, is a resounding no.

Edmure is a braggart and a gossip, with a penchant for whoring, and Robb’s plan requires secrecy. Edmure would be considered an information security risk, and cluing him in would be dangerous if the word could get back to Tywin that Robb was luring him into a trap.

Also, up to this point, Edmure had botched two major engagements and had proven himself to be a significant liability. The Golden Tooth and the Battle Beneath Riverrun were disasters, but Robb couldn’t publicly chastise Edmure without risking his nascent kingdom. Riverlanders might think that they’ll always be second-fiddle to Robb’s Northmen. This concern is not unique, the newly-formed union of Rhoynish and Andal culture that would later become an exclusively Dornish culture forbade the Rhoynish tongue explicitly to discourage factionalism and separatism.

Now, we know that Edmure isn’t an idiot, the Battle of the Fords shows clearly that Edmure learned from his mistakes. He saw how mobility and terrain could work for him and he used them to his best advantage. But of course, we don’t know that until after the Fords. At this point, Edmure seems to be a military dunce, easily goaded into foolish tactical positioning and unnecessary engagements.

So, Edmure exceeded his orders, and Robb was right not to clue him in. It’s Edmure’s fault. He’s a lovable guy, a kind-hearted guy. I wouldn’t be surprised if, in another, more peaceful, age, he could be counted on to provide tangible benefits to his people. He’d take his noblesse oblige even more seriously than any of his contemporaries. Sadly, that was not the age he was born in.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[windriverdelta]

The previous episode went on about the crypts in Winterfell, and the show seems to be setting up the idea of wights beneath the walls for some payoff. Do you see this happening in the books? My feeling is that in a similar situation, I imagine whoever is in charge would burn the remains within the crypts and I kind of think it's supremely dumb Jon and others haven't done so.

I don’t think the Starks of ages past, so focused on the coming of winter, buried their dead with iron swords because they were stupid men.

If anything, I think the Winterfell crypts are GRRM’s spin on the Dead Men of Dunharrow. 

[windriverdelta]

how-much-farther-to-go asked:

I’m thinking you’ve heard of the theory that Bran is the third head of the Dragon. What do you make of it? I like the symmetry it adds in the “Ice and Fire” trope. Bran is “pure” Stark (=Ice), Dany is pure Targyaryen (=fire), and Jon is both. Dany would be the Promised Prince(ss), Jon is Azor Ahai, and Bran the Last Hero, because has literally gone in search of the Children. There’s also the symbolic connection of swords between AA and the NW for Jon. The colors of the dragons are symbolic too.

I have heard it, but I don’t buy it.

Who gets which magical title is irrelevant to me (I’m more interested in results), so I’m not going to go into that, but nobodysuspectsthebutterfly has talked quite a lot about the titles recently. Basically, I agree with her when she says 

I also believe that the three heroes/prophecies mean three people who will all fulfill multiple aspects of the prophecies, thus “the dragon must have three heads”. 

Bran’s role in saving the world does interest me though. I think that Bran is one of the main heroes of ASOIAF, just not one of the three heads of the dragon. Bran is the battle commander.

Let me explain how I’m betting the apocalypse will go down, how Bran is going to save the world, and how it all ties together thematically:

Weiterlesen