I'd say there is a good possibility that both the Daynes and Hightowers have a good chance of having Valyrian roots. After all there were dragons in Westeros before Aegon's conquest. Its not improbable that there were Valyrians as well.
Except that the Daynes seem to predate the Valyrian empire.
They aren't from Valyria itself. However, it has been speculated that their origin prior to coming to Westeros is from the same civilization from which the Valyrians originated, most likely the Great Empire of the Dawn.
Yup!
That works as well the point being they seem to come from the same source. Not which one came first.
Darkstar will be the next Vulture King.
Craster has 19 daughters and there are 19 castles on the Wall, coincidence I think not!
I'm going to put this here, as it is relevant to the thread subject and relevant to something else I'm doing. Found it in the SSMs....most interesting. Some of the bolding is for my benefit.
December 26, 2005 The Great Bastards Submitted By: Amoka
[Note: The following continues GRRM's series of descriptions of notable Targaryens (and Targaryen bastards) for Amoka.]
DAEMON BLACKFYRE.
The first and greatest of the Blackfyre Pretenders was the natural son of Daena Targaryen, sister, betrothed, and (briefly) wife to King Baelor the Blessed. Baelor never consummated the marriage, and had it dissolved when he ascended the Iron Throne. Daena and her two sisters were thereafter kept in a comfortable confinement in the Red Keep, in what became known as the Maidenvault. Despite her guards, however, Daena became pregnant and give birth to a strong, healthy son, Daemon. She refused to divulge the name of his father, and thereby became known as "Daena the Defiant." It was not until many years later, when the boy was a squire and bested a score of other squires in a tournament melee, that King Aegon IV (Princess Daena's cousin) acknowledged him as his own, and presented him with Blackfyre, the Valyrian steel blade of Aegon the Conquerer and all the Targaryen kings thereafter.
Targaryen on both side, Daemon had all the hallmarks of his house; the silver-gold hair, the deep purple eyes, fine features of almost inhuman beauty. Daemon's friends and supporters often remarked on how much he resembled Aegon the Conquerer (or at least his likeness, since none of them had ever seen Aegon in the flesh), and indeed there was a certain similarlity, though Daemon wore his hair long, flowing down to his shoulders in a silvery-gold mane. He went clean-shaved, with neither beard nor mustache. Daemon looks every inch the warrior; broad shoulders, big arms, a flat stomach, but he was also a man of considerable charm. I'd give him a warm smile. He made friends easily, and women were drawn to him as well.
As a bastard, Daemon Blackfyre bore the arms of House Targaryen with the colors reversed: a black three-headed dragon on a red field. Thus he became known as "the Black Dragon." His armor would be ornate and costly, all black and red plate, and his warhelm was distinctive, with batlike steel "dragon wings" on the sides.
Rhaegar in his ornate black armor, with the scarlet cloak creating a red 'field' for the Black Dragon.
I wonder if the Darry's may have Rhaegar's armor? or would that be too obvious?
Post by freyfamilyreunion on Jan 30, 2016 16:12:09 GMT
I think the simplest explanation (which of course isn't always the only explanation in these books) is that Jon's dream is highly symbolic over the temptations that he is feeling at the time of the dream. The icy black armor represents the black clad Night's Watch on the Wall, Jon's "shield" against the wars being fought in Westeros. Melisandre (or perhaps Melisandre and Stannis together) represent the fiery sword. Their presence gives Jon a weapon, that can not only defeat the "Others" but one he can also use to take Winterfell (hence his slaying of his brother Robb in the dream).
I just posted the following in the SSM thread re: black armor:
The black ornate armor points to Daemon as being a black knight, but all Targaryens wear black armor. All the way back to Aegon the Conqueror. Are you concluding that the black armor connects Jon Snow with Rhaegar? The black armor is very apparent as a connection, but it's very confusing to me, because the theory of the black knight as the hero that wields the fiery Ice should be a bastard of Winterfell and the Targaryens have only been in Westeros 300 years. So there was never a black knight in Winterfell before Jon?
Just to clarify, right now I'm not connecting anything armor-related to Jon - this is all about Rhaegar for the time being. I know there's all the Jon-in-black-ice imagery out there to contend with, but at this three seconds, my synapses are all firing around associations with Rhaegar.
This is all going to part of my Kings essay, so it won't make sense to any one but me right now.
No, go crazy with it! If you want to use info for black/white knight inversion, go for it! I am just not at that stage yet of bringing Jon into the picture. Soon, soon....
If Mance is Jon's father then he's a bastard of Winterfell too. The Black Knight is the reverse of the White Knight. While the White Knight is of noble birth, the Black Knight is the opposite...a bastard.
I'm still struggling with the idea of that level of specificity in the inversions or echoes. . . seems more like slightly jumbled repeats and reflections.
Just to clarify, right now I'm not connecting anything armor-related to Jon - this is all about Rhaegar for the time being. I know there's all the Jon-in-black-ice imagery out there to contend with, but at this three seconds, my synapses are all firing around associations with Rhaegar.
And might also tie to Dany's seeing herself in Rhaegar's armor. I just keep thinking that the armor and the Targ colors are part of an old story, maybe even part of the "Prince that was Promised"--something they copy in pursuit of the prophecy. And they might have it wrong.
This is all going to part of my Kings essay, so it won't make sense to any one but me right now.
We shall respect your genius and process, oh greatest of all
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
I think the simplest explanation (which of course isn't always the only explanation in these books) is that Jon's dream is highly symbolic over the temptations that he is feeling at the time of the dream. The icy black armor represents the black clad Night's Watch on the Wall, Jon's "shield" against the wars being fought in Westeros. Melisandre (or perhaps Melisandre and Stannis together) represent the fiery sword. Their presence gives Jon a weapon, that can not only defeat the "Others" but one he can also use to take Winterfell (hence his slaying of his brother Robb in the dream).
I think the guilt is definitely part of it.
But the specificity of the dream--going backwards in time from the fight with the Wildings to fight with the wights. Feels like the dream of the crypts--a dream about his future that echoes the past.
As for Mel and Stannis and the sword--Mel makes no appearance in the dream. Jon seems to reject a lot about Mel and Stannis and that sword and the fire. And Aemon says that thing about the sword's not being real. Seems like "Longclaw"--the magical sword bestowed on him for valor--turning into the flaming sword might not be Mel or Stannis's sword.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
And might also tie to Dany's seeing herself in Rhaegar's armor. I just keep thinking that the armor and the Targ colors are part of an old story, maybe even part of the "Prince that was Promised"--something they copy in pursuit of the prophecy. And they might have it wrong.
Yep. And I'm starting to lean toward the notion that there's a specific reason that they have it wrong.
Yep. And I'm starting to lean toward the notion that there's a specific reason that they have it wrong.
And I will be waiting impatiently for you to go into further detail! In case I haven't made it clear, I am beyond impressed with the connections you are making and have enjoyed these threads enormously. You go !
Why must I always be the isle of crazy alone in an ocean of sensibility? The should to everybody else’s shouldn’t? The I-will to their better-nots?
Very interested in your reasons why they got it wrong.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Regarding the Targaryens in general. If the Starks and Daynes were already designated as shields at either end of the realm to defend each end from opposing magics, and if the Starks are the black knight and Daynes the white knight, it seems to me that the Targaryens are interlopers.
The Targaryens are known to be interested in prophecy and they've attempted many times to interpret the prophetic meanings, but they've always tried to apply these prophecies to themselves. In this way they are like Melisandre. They manipulate the messages in order to apply them to their own family members, and I think this is also why the Targaryens dress themselves in black armor. They think because they have dragons that they should possess the position of the black knight and have usurped this role from the Starks. And this may be what actually happened when Torrhen kneeled.
I'm liking this very much. Am thinking that they thought they could "end" the winters (Aerys and his wildfire climate control--nutso!) But that they probably just made things even less stable. . .
I need to let this simmer in my head a bit.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.