Lord Brynden Rivers (ADWD and Mystery Knight spoilers)

[The Imp]

There will be spoilers for non-readers of aDWD and The Mystery Knight.






We now know that Lord Brynden Rivers, former Lord Commander of the King's Guard, former Hand to the king, and former lord Commander of the night's Watch, is the Three Eyed Crow. We know that at least by reputation he has been seen as an almost sinister character. It's not clear that he is really sinister or even evil, but it's certainly not clear that he's good. The safest thing to say is that we really don't know.

Having said that, it becomes at least a bit worrisome that Bran has been under his influence and now is now being taught by him, maybe even turned into him. The Three Eyed Crow has never said anything to bran about good or evil, so we don't know where he stands on that. I plan to look at all of the TEC material again to see if anything jumps out now that we know who he is.

It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking in cliches, and come to the conclusion that dark is bad and light is good. My feeling is that it will turn out to be a Yin-Yang thing and that one won't be able to exist without the other, but I digress. My real point/question is, what are the possible ramifications of Bran being his "protege". It worries me that Jojen Reed saw Bran dead in a green dream. I fear that Bran is being used somehow, and that possibly Brynden Rivers and the return of The Others (after thousands of years) may be more than coincidence. It seems pretty clear that at the very least Rivers is very powerful and is training Bran to "succeed" him. I'm very curious to see what the keen minds on this board have to say.

 

[juleska]

If that is the direction that Bran's story is going, I will be very, very disappointed. Bran deserves better. I think it would be a pretty radical departure from the direction the rest of the Stark kids have gone. For all their mistakes or misfortunes, the Stark kids have each (as much as we've seen) prevailed in their own way on the higher road. I hope that Bran isn't going the way you seem to think.

I must've missed something that connected Rivers to the TEC. Was that made more explicit in the Mystery Knight? I've been meaning to pick that up.

 

[Koopa]

Bloodraven was lord commander of the kingsguard? Missed that one.
In any case, i've never considered Brynden to be evil. It seems to me that a lot of people wanted him to be looked upon like that for various reasons. His feud with Bittersteel, him being loyal to Daeron, him having killed Daemon and his sons, him being hand of the king instead of maekar, him seemingly to know all thanks to his little birds (not an invention of Varys).

And then there was the matter of him being a *******, an albino to boot with a very viusual facial birthmark.

Put them all together and you have an easy recipy for a very hated man.
In my opinion he was in truth a very loyal man who served the realm as best as he could. He stayed true to daeron, he was from what we gathered a good hand stopping the second blackfyre for instance before it even began. Considering the state the realm was in both his warging abilities and his use of little birds was exactly what was needed imo.

yes he did kill his own half-brother, slept with a half-sister, and while neither are commendable, considering him being half a Targ it's quite understandable.

The only thing that makes me wonder about him is the fact that the king felt he needed to sent Bloodraven to the wall. What was the reason for that. Did the king feel Bloodraven had become to powerful? Was brynden grasping for power? Did pressure from the nobles made him do it? Did Brynden commit a felony? Or had Brynden or the targ king had a dream? Realising the need for him to be at the wall? Was it a combination of the fore-mentioned reasons?

And going from that, what where his motivations for his actions at the wall? Why did he seek out the children of the forest? Or did the children of the forest seek him out? Did he see the future and saw Bran? ...

And then there is Brynden own nickname and appearance to speculate one.

An albino, Brynden had milk white skin, long white hair, and red eyes. He had a red birthmark that extended from his throat up to his right cheek. Some thought that it resembled a bird. Brynden was not as tall or muscular as his half-brothers. He typically wore the colors of "blood and smoke", with smoke being a dark grey that was mottled and streaked with black. Because his skin was sensitive to light, he usually went about cloaked and hooded. He lost an eye during the Blackfyre Rebellion and rarely covered the empty socket with a patch. He wore his white hair straight and to his shoulders, with the front brushed forward to cover his missing eye.

He has the colouring of a weirwood tree. He has a birthmark in the form of a raven. A bloody red raven. Dark wings, dark words--> red wings, red words. Is it a message that bloody days are coming. Or is it a reference to the solution? Blood and fire, or perhaps the intermingling of the blood of the first men with targ blood. With Stark blood being the books forementioned represention of being of the First men. And so much more, like the colour of his clothing blood and smoke.

I also wanted to add that he was given the valyrian ancestral sword dark Sister. And that none knows where the sword is now. Speaking of his weaponry, he preferred his weirwood bow. I wonder if weirwood arrows would have any affect against the others. Probably not.

Lots of questions, no answers... The man as ever is an enigma.
Is that why i've always liked him?

 

[hadd]

Where can I read about the Brynden Rivers bit? I've only read ASOIAF and have Dreamsongs. Would love to catch up on the short novellas.

 

[Koopa]

He appears mostly in the third novella: The mystery knight in the anthology "Warriors".

 

[The Imp]

Bloodraven was lord commander of the kingsguard? Missed that one.
In any case, i've never considered Brynden to be evil. It seems to me that a lot of people wanted him to be looked upon like that for various reasons. His feud with Bittersteel, him being loyal to Daeron, him having killed Daemon and his sons, him being hand of the king instead of maekar, him seemingly to know all thanks to his little birds (not an invention of Varys).

And then there was the matter of him being a *******, an albino to boot with a very viusual facial birthmark.

Put them all together and you have an easy recipy for a very hated man.
In my opinion he was in truth a very loyal man who served the realm as best as he could. He stayed true to daeron, he was from what we gathered a good hand stopping the second blackfyre for instance before it even began. Considering the state the realm was in both his warging abilities and his use of little birds was exactly what was needed imo.

yes he did kill his own half-brother, slept with a half-sister, and while neither are commendable, considering him being half a Targ it's quite understandable.

The only thing that makes me wonder about him is the fact that the king felt he needed to sent Bloodraven to the wall. What was the reason for that. Did the king feel Bloodraven had become to powerful? Was brynden grasping for power? Did pressure from the nobles made him do it? Did Brynden commit a felony? Or had Brynden or the targ king had a dream? Realising the need for him to be at the wall? Was it a combination of the fore-mentioned reasons?

And going from that, what where his motivations for his actions at the wall? Why did he seek out the children of the forest? Or did the children of the forest seek him out? Did he see the future and saw Bran? ...

And then there is Brynden own nickname and appearance to speculate one.

He has the colouring of a weirwood tree. He has a birthmark in the form of a raven. A bloody red raven. Dark wings, dark words--> red wings, red words. Is it a message that bloody days are coming. Or is it a reference to the solution? Blood and fire, or perhaps the intermingling of the blood of the first men with targ blood. With Stark blood being the books forementioned represention of being of the First men. And so much more, like the colour of his clothing blood and smoke.

I also wanted to add that he was given the valyrian ancestral sword dark Sister. And that none knows where the sword is now. Speaking of his weaponry, he preferred his weirwood bow. I wonder if weirwood arrows would have any affect against the others. Probably not.

Lots of questions, no answers... The man as ever is an enigma.
Is that why i've always liked him?

All of the points you make are fair ones Kiwibird. Your post is actually reassuring to me, and I feel better about Bran being in his care.

This is the Wiki article I got the LC of the KG from. I think it's the same one you quoted from. So much info, so easy to miss stuff

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Brynden_Rivers

I think I kind of got sucked in by that preacher who was railing against Bloodraven in the beginning of the book. Egg certainly defends him, and while he's young i trust his judgement.

 

[Needle]

Just read The Mystery Knight for the first time and while I love the dunk and egg stories for themselves I think I am now completely confused! I had hoped for some answers about Targ history but ended up with more questions! Maybe I'm just tired! Will try again later!

 

[TK-421]

Dear Mr. Imp:

I was with you in your theory because in ASOIF, there is no clear good or bad.

BUT, the major problem with your theory is why would the Children of the Forest be helping Bran be used for some evil purpose? The Children are the enemies of the Others and true guardians of the earth, no?

 

[Ursa major]

The thing is, I'm sure that there are several passages in the books where a character points out that the distant past as recorded is unlikely (or possibly/probably downright wrong). Are these passages telling the readers to beware of making assumptions about what we've been told about those times. After all, we haven't seen a POV from six-, eight-or ten-thousand years ago, so cannot truly know one way or the... er... other.

And given the great lengths of time, can we even assume that the battle lines of millennia ago have stayed static since then? (No doubt some of the part-made-up history of the distant past reflected the time when it was "written".)

 

[The Imp]

Dear Mr. Imp:

I was with you in your theory because in ASOIF, there is no clear good or bad.

BUT, the major problem with your theory is why would the Children of the Forest be helping Bran be used for some evil purpose? The Children are the enemies of the Others and true guardians of the earth, no?

I'm not sure about the Children of the Forest. As I said in my op, and others have said, there is very little in aSoIaF that is all black or all white. Most things seem to be varying shades of grey.

I wonder what Varys meant when he said to Kevan Lannister "for the children". Certainly Varys isn't doing whwatever it is that he is doing because he's worried about ensuring a good future for yet unbron generations in Westeros? Or does he mean exactly that?

I was going to start a thread about which POV people would like to see the most. I think if i could choose one I'd be torn between Varys and Howland Reed, but would ultimately choose Varys because he seems so pivotal to everything that hass happening beginning with aGoT. Just as with melisandre, i'd love to know what he's thinking, as opposed to what he's been saying.

 

[obinGilchrist]

And going from that, what where his motivations for his actions at the wall?

 

[The Imp]

And going from that, what where his motivations for his actions at the wall?

Welcome obinGilchrist

Coould you perhaps be more specific about what you're referring to?

 

[C Of K]

I wonder what Varys meant when he said to Kevan Lannister "for the children". Certainly Varys isn't doing whwatever it is that he is doing because he's worried about ensuring a good future for yet unbron generations in Westeros? Or does he mean exactly that?

I don't think Varys is in the least bit concerned with future generations, or even the children of Westeros in the current generation. I really don't believe he cares all that much for the realm. At least, not any more than anyone else on the small council.

I believe one of his original plans was to sit Viserys on the throne by inciting war, death and destruction throughout the realm, and in the midst of it all, unleashing a Dothraki horde. That in itself leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. No matter how bad a ruler Robert Baratheon was, I'm certain he would be better for Westeros than Viserys.

One could conclude that he could have Viserys assassinated, and sit Dany, or Aegon on the throne. But what about the Dothraki Horde? Once they cross the Narrow Sea, I get the feeling they won't meekly cross it again to return to their native dirts. If they ended up winning the war for the Targaryens, any castle, or city they visited would have to pay them homage, for fear of a pillaging. It would be difficult for any outsider, Kaleesi or not, to change their customs in time to spare Westeros the proper raping it would get in such a scenario. Neither Dany, or Viserys had the strength of character to tame the Dothraki at the time the deal was made with Kal Drogo

I think, if that statement about the children can in any way be taken as a genuine sentiment, I'm inclined to believe it refers to Aeries', and Rhaegar's children. Throughout the series, they are the only children Varys has been intimately tied to, even though we've never seen him face to face with any of them. The children that work for Varys are nameless, and faceless. The story has invested little in them, but loads in Varys. I don't think he meant the children of the forest. If he did, I would have to say GRRM hit me with a ball right out of left field with that one.

 

[The Imp]

I don't think Varys is in the least bit concerned with future generations, or even the children of Westeros in the current generation. I really don't believe he cares all that much for the realm. At least, not any more than anyone else on the small council.

I believe one of his original plans was to sit Viserys on the throne by inciting war, death and destruction throughout the realm, and in the midst of it all, unleashing a Dothraki horde. That in itself leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. No matter how bad a ruler Robert Baratheon was, I'm certain he would be better for Westeros than Viserys.

One could conclude that he could have Viserys assassinated, and sit Dany, or Aegon on the throne. But what about the Dothraki Horde? Once they cross the Narrow Sea, I get the feeling they won't meekly cross it again to return to their native dirts. If they ended up winning the war for the Targaryens, any castle, or city they visited would have to pay them homage, for fear of a pillaging. It would be difficult for any outsider, Kaleesi or not, to change their customs in time to spare Westeros the proper raping it would get in such a scenario. Neither Dany, or Viserys had the strength of character to tame the Dothraki at the time the deal was made with Kal Drogo

I think, if that statement about the children can in any way be taken as a genuine sentiment, I'm inclined to believe it refers to Aeries', and Rhaegar's children. Throughout the series, they are the only children Varys has been intimately tied to, even though we've never seen him face to face with any of them. The children that work for Varys are nameless, and faceless. The story has invested little in them, but loads in Varys. I don't think he meant the children of the forest. If he did, I would have to say GRRM hit me with a ball right out of left field with that one.

I agree with much of what you said, but I think that it would be very "GRRMish" to have varys says "for the children" and then have it turn out he meant the Children of the Forest. That's probably out there with other crackpot theories, but it's a thought.

 

[C Of K]

GRRM does make it difficult to rule anything out. At the moment, I trust the Children of the Forest about as far as I trust Varys (Bran isn't out of danger, now that he's with Brynden Rivers) It is possible the Varys' connection to the Targaryen children stems from some affiliation with Brynden Rivers.

I wonder, could Varys' greatest spy be a three eyed crow?

 

[The Imp]

This is most likely silly, BUT, we know that GRRM has paid homage to various characters from other stories and genres in aSoIaF. I was playing the old viedeo game DIablo 2 today, and I realized that the second quest of the game involves killing a woman named Bloodraven. The first thing you hear her say is "Join my army of the dead"

just saying

 

[Koopa]

I used to play that game alot. Never cared for the crappy expansion though.
Why Blizzard went out of their way to ruin such a awesome game i'll never understand.
They are probably making the same mistakes as we speak with Diablo 3.
Thank god, you could chose to remain in classic.
Still i don't see GRRM playing Diablo 2.

 

[The Imp]

I used to play that game alot. Never cared for the crappy expansion though.
Why Blizzard went out of their way to ruin such a awesome game i'll never understand.
They are probably making the same mistakes as we speak with Diablo 3.
Thank god, you could chose to remain in classic.
Still i don't see GRRM playing Diablo 2.

GRRM has mentioned playing D and D and he also mentioned in an interivew that he had to stop playing video games becuase he was spendding too much time on them. I could actually see him playing this game. The Bloodraven thing is probably coincidence, but it's really impossible to do anything but guess.

 

[The Imp]

i just realized that another Diablo 2 tie is Bael the bard and Bael, who is the last boss in the Diablo 2 expansion.

 

[Tywin]

Bael is a common name in fantasy I think. I remember it in the Baldur's Gate Series.

Probably all comes from this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal_(demon)

Baal is spelled Bael depending on where it's written.