I have no idea what they are going to do for next season. It seems strange to even start the Ironborn side-plot with where they are now in the narrative. Likewise the way the passed over Dorne and the riverlands.
I guess we could catch up with Bran. But we have caught up with the books now (and gone past them in some respects). So it should be fun for everyone from here on out.
Too bad George will write for another 10 years before the books will catch the show.
They're caught up with the books in pretty much every aspect of the storyline..except for one major part in the book...which will probably be the last scene in the season finale...I'm guessing that Olley kid will probably be the most hated character on tv Sunday night at 9pm.
Certainly seem to be foreshadowing that, don't they? That said, I'm guessing he won't be the one to do it. It's too obvious and I think the writers will try to surprise us. Plus, it will be more in line with what actually happens if they have several of the Brothers do it in order to "protect the Watch." They sorta hinted it with Ser Alliser's comment to Jon after letting him through the Wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabo32
Another interesting take on R+L=J from Reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comme...ing_secret_in/
The Theory
Rhaegar's unique silver-stringed harp is in Lyanna's tomb.
"Will you make a song for him?" the woman asked.
"He has a song," the man replied. "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire."
ACOK, Daenerys IV
The quote is about Aegon and it's between Elia and Rhaegar. Recall what Marwyn says, "Prophecy is like a treacherous woman". Rhaegar may have been wrong about Aegon; or more likely he believes that one, all or any of the three 'heads of the dragon' are/is the prince that was promised.
Thematically it's more sensible if Jon Snow is the prince that was promised and especially when you consider his parentage. Simply combine the Stark and Targaryen words. This isn't exactly a novel concept, many ASOIAF fans have thought the same.
The Importance of Legitimacy
I was deeply conflicted when I first read ADWD. I've been a longtime believer in the R+L=J theory, so I have a personal bias. I struggled with this bias over Aegon/Young Griff, but intellectually I knew I couldn't answer the question of who is actually legitimate.
It then occurred to me that the more practical question is how to prove said legitimacy. This poses a challenge to both Aegon and Jon. Looking at them closely:
Aegon
It's not enough to just show up looking like a Targaryen or declaring yourself one; you need legitimacy, you need proof. The lords of Westeros already doubt his legitimacy so he must prove it or subjugate them all. At some point winning bannermen via a legitimate claim will be more valuable than conflict. It doesn't help that he's backed by the Golden Company either. It is telling that he and his advisors all know this, which is why he is initially bent on securing Daenerys's hand in marriage; so he has her blood and her dragons to establish him.
Jon
He's supposedly dead. Keep in mind, if the notion of establishing some connection between Jon and Rhaegar is important to the story irrespective of his living status, then this theory is still useful. No one aside from Howland Reed has knowledge of Jon's heritage, so he has no self-driven need to find something like this harp. But for those of us who would like to see him revealed as a bastard- or trueborn Targaryen, Azor Ahai or the prince that was promised, he must also prove it to himself and/or others.
So obviously we then ask "What would significantly bolster a claim of Targaryen ancestry?" My thoughts immediately ran to the Valyrian swords Dark Sister and Blackfyre. Unfortunately both are associated with bastard lines of Targaryens, each attainted with histories that would actually detract from a pretenders' legitimacy, even if I think Bloodraven is a badass. Both have also gone unseen for a number of years and there could be serious logistical questions regarding whether they've stayed in families of true or bastard Targaryen blood.
But this thought process is revealing; we readers inherently know that if any kind of proof exists; it will be something both
Well-known to the high lords and ladies of the realm
Universally recognized as a symbol of the true Targaryen lineage
We can also exploit some knowledge of factors that exist outside of the books themselves. In the fifth book of a seven book series, it would be sophomoric to introduce a new piece of evidence to the story merely for the sake of answering the riddle of legitimacy. It would be seen by readers as a cop-out. GRRM has already stated that he wants to avoid writing such an ending to the series because he was unhappy with the ending of Lost. Additionally, knowing GRRM, the evidence is likely something lurking beneath our very noses. The kind of thing we'll kick ourselves over when you look back.
So while I was brainstorming every possible Targaryen artifact, tome and treasure I had a sudden tangential thought, Rhaegar never wanted to be a fighter, he only did it to meet Lyanna. He would have much rather continued playing his harp. That idea may not be true and it's not important to this theory; only the fact that the harp jumped into my mind. That's when the epiphany hit me like an anvil. It's that damn harp.
A Reluctant Agreement to a Tricky Promise
I can't deductively prove that harp is in Lyanna's tomb. What I did was speculate the circumstances that led to it's being there with a high degree of confidence. I then considered this theory against alternatives using the notions of 'least complicated' and 'most relevant to the narrative' to arrive at the conclusion that this is more likely that any alternatives. It is a puzzle piece that solves more of the puzzle than any other possibility.
The circumstances regarding how the harp ends up in Lyanna's tomb:
Rhaegar left it at the Tower of Joy
Rhaegar loved to play his harp. It's something everyone familiar with him says. He elopes with Lyanna for almost a year before returning to King's Landing and then to his doom at the Trident. It's unlikely that Rhaegar would leave his harp behind while 'retreating' to the Tower of Joy.
After the outbreak of Robert's Rebellion, it appears he waited until it was clear that Lyanna was with child. Assuming he planned on returning, it is likely he would not carry things to war that he didn't plan on using or would be coming back to. Taking it to war or to King's Landing also puts it at risk of being destroyed should he lose. He also may have left it as a symbol for Lyanna of his affection and promise to return.
At the very least, there has been no mention of it at any time during or after Robert's Rebellion, implying it vanished somewhere.
Rhaegar may have calculated the odds of his own demise. Leaving the harp also may have been a deliberate attempt to leave a trace of his lineage; Particularly if he really feels like Lyanna's child will be the prince that was promised. This would be based on the fact that his harp is so unique, it's presence in the wrong place would suggest a relationship with Rhaegar.
Now we all know what happened after that. The Battle of the Trident, the fight at the Tower of Joy. Promise Me, Ned; and a bed of blood. Or do we?
"Promise me, Ned" and Eddard's reluctance.
Imagine someone saying to you "Promise me ,<yourname>". Imagine it being said multiple times. If you're like me, the most immediate thing that comes to mind is someone asking you to vow to do something you'd be otherwise reluctant to do or something they might not otherwise trust that you'll do; i.e., "Promise me you'll clean this mess up", means "I know you don't want to do it, but please do it."
As existing theories point out, asking to be buried in the Winterfell crypts seems mundane for a dying wish (ironic after you read this theory). The real reason is shown below, but first we need context.
Ned loves his family and as shown at his death is willing to lie when necessary to protect his kin. I have no doubt that even if Lyanna hadn't asked him, he would have taken Jon in. As many challenges as he would incur from adopting Jon, he would do it. But going back to what I said about the nature of asking promises of others, Lyanna most likely asked him to do something he was apprehensive about. What seems likely is that she is asking him to preserve Jon's heritage, which is something Ned would never want to do. Remember that Ned has endured the loss of his father, his brother, Jon's half-brother and half-sister and is witnessing the death of his sister. Any sane man would be understandably traumatized. He's seen too much death and war. With the apparent end of the Targaryen dynasty at hand, there seems to be no practical reason to ever telling Jon his ancestry. Such would only re-open wounds just starting to heal (at that time), tarnish Lyanna's image to the kingdom, and likely result in Jon's death both as a Targaryen and as a bastard pretender (consider that the nature of his parentage recalls the bastards of the Blackfyre Rebellion).
There are several possible reasons why Lyanna could want Jon to know his bloodline:
She also believes in the prophecy of the prince that was promised.
She doesn't want him to live never knowing who his mother and father are.
'It all can't have been for nothing'. She does this for the personal reasons of wanting to feel like her and Rhaegar's deaths weren't just for a vain cause.
I surmise that either Ned would vocally argue that he would never tell Jon or that Lyanna just implicitly knows he doesn't want to.
Lyanna demands that Ned promise to bury her in Winterfell. With some personal effects (harp included).
It stands to reason that if Lyanna really felt that there must be some final way for Jon to find out, or that some evidence (even dubious) her liaison with Rhaegar was mutual should be preserved, Lyanna would have to demand a promise from Ned. A promise that he could keep, that didn't seem to put too many people at risk. While asking to be buried in the crypts in Winterfell is unusual because no women are buried there, it's a far cry less hazardous than telling Jon who his parents are. It's further plausible that if there was any evidence of their relationship, she could have easily convinced him that hiding it in her tomb would be the best way to conceal it.
This creates a beautiful duality between the original, straight-forward interpretations of 'Promise me, Ned' readers first have, and the more intuitive interpretations put forth by the R+L=J theorists.
The Importance of Tomb Selection
Setting aside speculations about the promise Lyanna asked of Ned, there are several intriguing factors surrounding the crypts in the context of her burial there and the possible contents within her tomb. She may have known that these factors might eventually attract attention to her tomb.
There are no other female tombs.
The sole exception in a population set as large as 'all the lords of Winterfell back to the time of Bran the Builder', being the only female tomb is an extreme outlier. It draws attention to itself on that basis alone.
Only the male tombs have swords across their laps, intended to conceal their spirits within.
The importance of this is entirely speculative; but it could be implied that the absence of the sword for Lyanna implies that her tomb does not contain her spirit and is possibly less ominous, opening it if necessary is less abominable as opening others.
What better place to hide secret Targaryen relics than in a tomb you know Robert will never defile?
Talk about hiding in plain sight. If there were any Targaryen relics of importance at the Tower of Joy that should be hidden in order to clear Lyanna of any 'wrong-doing' in her dalliance with Rhaegar, hiding them in a place where Robert would never think or dare to look is brilliant.
The big question that remains is "How does Jon or anyone know to look in the tomb?"
Jon Snow has had frequent ominous dreams of a mysterious destiny that awaits him in the crypts. Bran and Rickon dreamed of Eddard trying to talk to them about Jon in the crypts, and Eddard regretted things he never told to Jon while in the black cells. As for how Jon might learn, consider the possibility that Jon may have a Bran-like dream or vision while he is dead/warged. If you remember that dream of his in the Winterfell crypts ?the one he can never finish because he always wakes up? Well, in this dead/warged state he can't wake up and is forced to finish the dream. This dream gives him the knowledge he needs.
The Relevance of the Harp
What is the significance of the harp? Is it just a random object thrown in the story and being mistakenly attributed too much importance in this post? What would other people in Westeros think of it? Does it tie into an character development, larger plots or even into the larger themes of the series?
The harp has been mentioned in four of the five books currently in print.
Almost every time the subject of Rhaegar is discussed at any length the harp is mentioned. Particularly when characters are reflecting on their experiences with him. The only exception I can think of is Jaime's remembered talk with him before Rhaegar departed for the Trident.
It's unique silver strings are mentioned every time.
And I do mean every time.
It seems to have a unique sound.
When people recall his playing, they often recall that his songs or the instrument itself create a melancholy tune.
His harp would have been widely known.
Not only are there many times where Rhaegar is explicitly remembered to have played his harp, it is implied that Rhaegar played at many tournaments and other gatherings in general and that he played it a lot on his sojourns to Summerhall. This suggests that it has been exposed to a wide variety of people.
Major players already introduced have prominent knowledge of the harp.
Cersei, Jorah Mormont, Daenerys, Ser Barristan and most importantly Jon Connington are all characters who recall seeing the harp. With Connington's looming death anything that suggests there may be another of Rhaegar's line might sow the seeds of doubt in him.
The emergence of the harp may help establish legitimacy for Jon if that becomes important.
The harp alone can't prove anything. I do think it's more useful than a bridal cloak or a document alone, since it has the distinction of being something a lot of people saw during Rhaegar's life; other items can be disputed. The harp in combination with other objects however, and especially if the opening of the tomb is witnesses by people of note, could substantiate his bloodline and perhaps his inheritance. Coupled with Jon Snow's eventually legitimization as a Stark (:D) this will give him the entire North.
'Waking a dragon from stone'
If Jon or someone retrieves this evidence from the tomb, it seems likely that it may amount to the completion of the prophecy regarding waking dragons out of stone. This could imply that Jon is Azor Ahai, or instead the person who retrieves the harp.
Finally, out of all the passages in the books related to harps, only one is in the abstract, and is rather eye-catching in light of this theory:
"A harp can be as dangerous as a sword, in the right hands." - Littlefinger
Every word drips, pregnant with meaning; true to GRRM's style.
Mic drop
Hell of a theory, cain. Certainly lots of circumstantial evidence to support it. The one problem I have is with the "Promise me" part of the theory. I've always assumed Lyanna was asking Ned to hide Jon's lineage from literally everyone including Jon himself and to raise Jon as his son. In her mind, it was the only way to keep Jon safe. But she also knew Ned's honor would make participating in such a grand deception extremely difficult for him. But I could also see her extracting a promise from Ned to bury her with an artifact that indisputably belonged to Rhaegar, assuming her relationship with Rhaegar was mutual. Regardless, it's an interesting thought.
I'm beginning to think the High Sparrow is indeed Howland Reed, and will drop the R+L=J on Westeros from a position of power.
After he takes down the entire Lannister family.
That actually pretty closely aligns with my own theory on R+L=J. The question is in the revealing, proving, and why it matters. Jon would have to betray everything it means to be a Stark prettymuch in order for it to matter -- or the Night's Watch vows have to be eradicated altogether.
Not buying. How would he know he would ever be in position to gain true power? How would he know he would be armed in the foolish manner that he actually was? What would be his beef with the Tyrells -- knowing that he has to proceed with caution now, lest he get KL taken and all the small folk he caters to slaughtered by Randyl Tarly.Quote:
Originally Posted by curmudgeon
I think it more likely that he's in the Neck at Greywater Watch preparing for the war to come from the north. He seemed to be one that knew of magic and the coming issues in advance, as well as someone that understood prophecy. IMO there is COTF in his blood. The importance of Moat Cailin has never been greater. Given what we know about it's history, I find it as good as any place to make the true stand against the WW.
Not buying either..they would have cast a much younger actor for that role. Remember, the show writers know how the story ends
Whomever wrote the theory has wayyy to much time on their hands. The R+L=J theory is pretty cut and dry
I tell yall one theory that has been destroyed..the whole mance rayder is really...(fill in the blank)...in disguise.
How so? If he's truly Targaryen and a blending of the Northern & Southern bloodlines, I'm not seeing how that betrays what it means to be a Stark. He'll liberate the North and give it to Sansa. As for the Night's Watch, he can be legitimized and excused from his oaths by the legitimate ruler of Westeros. If Dany shows up and unites everyone, why wouldn't she excuse him from service to be co-ruler with her? Hell, Stannis already offered him that very deal. And he was stabbed by the Watch for deciding to march on Winterfell.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
Then again, maybe I'm and idiot and need it spelled out. If so, apologies.
No. Mance "died" at the stake in the book too. Still holding out I am!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabo32
To "liberate the north" is to break these vows. Breaking these vows is betraying what it means to be a Stark. Given his show clash with the WW -- it really doesn't make sense for him to turn his attention to the realms of men regardless of what happens. None of that is the real war. Unless he's forced with Ramsay backing him into a corner with the threat of annihilation from the south. And IMO there's a decent chance the NW doesn't exist anymore when he comes back. WunWun is about to wipe out Castle Black for that little mutiny. It was just stupid on their part. Might as well have stabbed Stannis while he was posted at Castle Black if the goal was to commit suicide to the whole castle. For Jon to ever actually hold the north -- he also has to usurp Bran and Rickon -- who Jon has a very good idea are still alive through their meeting with Sam and coming into contact with one of their direwolves.Quote:
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
Stannis also offered Jon something that was not his to offer. And is in distinct defiance/at odds with Jon's "true" claim. For him to be a Targ gives him a claim that supercedes Stannis' claim. Stannis would not support him given those conditions. And to be clear, Stannis didn't offer him any "co-rulership" -- he offered to legitimize him as a Stark which would give him a legitimate claim to Winterfell and the wardenship of the north -- but you still have to defeat the Lannisters/Tyrells/fAegon/Martells and actually hold the Iron Throne for any of that to matter. Jon is still not a trueborn Stark nor a trueborn Targ, even as a Targ/Stark bastard. He can't hold Winterfell ahead of Bran and Rickon. He can't heir the Targ dynasty ahead of Dany. And by the Laws of the Seven, there is no way he's considered a true Targ, since he was a bastard conceived while Elia was still alive.
We have no record of anyone ever being excused from their oath in the NW that I'm aware of. We know it was offered to Aemon and refused. And why would someone in power offer to take less power in order to give it away to someone they have never met? Why would Daenerys offer that up? It just doesn't make sense. Even if it is apparent that he is Rhaegar's offspring. It still becomes -- "why does it matter and what can he do with that power"? He's just not in position to play the "Game of Thrones". He's on the true front lines. I do agree that he's probably the main/most important character in the struggle -- as both Fire and Ice. Maybe he's the champion for both or the valonquar for both. I don't know. He may be the ultimate hero of the story -- but he's not finishing it in any great position of power in regards to the Seven Kingdoms IMO. Even if he's the one that actually saves them. He's the Stanislav Petrov of the story IMO.
I think that's why Jon got stabbed.. Jon has to die so his watch can end. Then he can be freed from his oath.
I can completely agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
And I didn't mean to imply that Stannis offered to make him co-ruler, because he clearly didn't. Just that he'd been offered legitimacy and to be excused from the Watch.
I have been thinking this myself. Jon "dies" and his watch is ended. Maybe he realizes he is needed elsewhere.
Too cheap... For the books anyway. Where else would he be needed? He's fighting on the front lines of the real war and IMO leaving there doesn't make a bit of sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
For Jon to leave, the wall has to come down IMO...
Someone has to rally the rest of the kingdom. Unless a lot more people show up, the Nights watch is just going to be a speed bump.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
I believe with the Red priestess showing up at the wall that Jon will be brought back to life. Maybe she sees in the flames Davos has to go get Rickon. I enjoy Arya story but unless she is going to kill Cersi I don't understand how she relates back to Westeros.
I am very interested to see if they really killed Marcella. I know the prophecy says all the kids will die. It is interesting to see if some of the book storylines actually aren't going anywhere.
She won't die. The sand snake with a thing for Bronn slipped him the antidote when she got Frisky with him before he got on the boat. Just as in the book, there is an attempt on her life that she will survive. What I can't figure out is where they will go. I don't think she's actually headed to KL in book so I'm thinking shipwreck maybe?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
I wonder if the sand snakes have much left in the show next season.
This. The Night's Watch, even with the Wildlings, isn't in a position to fight a war with the Walkers and the Others. In the books, they were opening some of the other castles along the Wall, but they really didn't have enough men to do it. They need the manpower of a united Westeros. That's why the politics behind capturing the Iron Throne matters. And Jon is apparently the only one with the first hand experience, speaking ability, and clout to actually convince the Seven Families to band together.....if he can prove that he's really the heir of Rhaegar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
I'm really interested to see what happens with Dany next season. The group of Dothraki is led by Khal Drogo's top bloodrider who swore to kill her if he saw her again when she refused to join the Crones after Drogo's death. Of course, that was before she had burned Drogo's body and the dragons were hatched. I'm guessing he reconsiders when Drogon shows up and sets a good part of his khalasar on fire.
And I know I'm beating a dead horse by now, but I wouldn't read too much into what they change between the books and tv. I'd be shocked if GRRM and the producers haven't worked out some significant plot changes to force those of us already reading to continue to buy the books after GoT ends. We may know the ultimate end (Iron Throne Winner, Jon's parentage, the Stark family fate, Others/Walkers or Humanity triumphs, etc.), but how they get there will be pretty different. Look at some of the differences just within this episode: Arya being found out and punished for killing someone on her list instead of being blinded as part of the training process, Sam convincing Jon to send him to Maester school instead of the other way around, Myrcella being poisoned and on a ship to KL instead of being cut with a sword and staying in Dorne. Plus, simply for the sake of budget realities, it's necessary for GoT to combine plot points, characters, or eliminate some altogether. Personally, I think we'll wind up enjoying both for what they are.
So it just hit me but could Dany be Aziz Ahari? She came back out of the flames and could the "flaming sword" be the dragons?
I'm in the camp that thinks there are multiple AA/TPTWP characters. "Three heads of the Dragon" Jon, Dany, and one other we aren't sure of yet. I've seen lots of speculation in regards to Sam.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
Agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by War Machine Dawg
In The World of Ice and Fire, there is talk of Five Forts, which is the Essos version of The Wall. That war is going to be fought on multiple fronts when time comes IMO...
I think the 3rd head is Tyrion. Some things point to Tyrion being the child of the Mad King raping Joanna Lanister. Tyrion has always been drawn to dragons and it would make more sense why Tywin always hated him.
5 main characters that survive until the end:
Jon, arya, bran, Dany, and tyrion.... Per original GRRM manuscript...
Fire - Dany
Ice - bran
Fire&ice - Jon
Tyrion and Arya could go either way....
Awesome. I didn't know that.
I would figure Tyrion for fire being part Targeryen and Arya ice being a Stark.
From Cersei fortune does Jamie or Tyrion kill her? If Marcella is dead only Tommen left to die. I am wondering if somehow her scheming and quest for power gets Tommen killed and Jamie turns on her.
I rewatched HardHome last night, and I heard a line that could be a little foreshadowing. When talking to Ollie about Jon, Sam says "Don't worry about Jon. He'll come back. He always does."
Jon is coming back. Martin allowed them to make the show after they guessed who Jon's mom was. If Jon was actually dead his mother wouldn't matter.
That isn't in the manuscript...
alot has obviously been changed since then, but the original script had Jaime ending up on the throne...and cutting a bloody path to get there while framing tyrion for most of it...
Search it out -- it is extremely interesting to read...
Doesn't say will KILL her. Says will bring about her downfall. I still maintain its the Hound defeating unGregor in trail by combat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
Damn I never thought about how the prophecy wouldn't be her brother. It would be funny that she has always hated Tyrion because of the prophecy she assumed he was responsible.