Fire & Blood

I know it's not Winds of Winter, but I am psyched that we'll soon have our hands on this one!

georgerrmartin.com/grrm_book/fire-and-blood/

tj993qesr6zu.jpg

The thrilling history of the Targaryens comes to life in this masterly work by the author of A Song of Ice and Fire, the inspiration for HBO’s Game of Thrones.

With all the fire and fury fans have come to expect from internationally bestselling author George R. R. Martin, this is the first volume of the definitive two-part history of the Targaryens in Westeros.

Centuries before the events of A Game of Thrones, House Targaryen—the only family of dragonlords to survive the Doom of Valyria—took up residence on Dragonstone. Fire and Blood begins their tale with the legendary Aegon the Conqueror, creator of the Iron Throne, and goes on to recount the generations of Targaryens who fought to hold that iconic seat, all the way up to the civil war that nearly tore their dynasty apart.

What really happened during the Dance of the Dragons? Why did it become so deadly to visit Valyria after the Doom? What is the origin of Daenerys’s three dragon eggs? These are but a few of the questions answered in this essential chronicle, as related by a learned maester of the Citadel and featuring more than eighty all-new black-and-white illustrations by artist Doug Wheatley. Readers have glimpsed small parts of this narrative in such volumes as The World of Ice & Fire, but now, for the first time, the full tapestry of Targaryen history is revealed.

With all the scope and grandeur of Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Fire and Blood is the ultimate game of thrones, giving readers a whole new appreciation for the dynamic, often bloody, and always fascinating history of Westeros.

Comments

  • edited August 28
    From what I understand, it was decided to release this prior to Winds of Winter, because the first approved prequel/successor series will be about this time frame in Westeros history. I personally think that it is highly likely that the man, that the Children of the Forest turned into the Night King, was a stranded and/or traveling pre-Doom dragon lord from Valyria. He has been depicted as being small of stature, light-haired, and blue-eyed. Many think that he was a Stark but, the Starks have notoriously had dark hair and eyes - until Eddard married Catelyn Tully, which produced some red-headed and blue-eyed children. Since the dragon lords were known for their own magic (and magical bloodlines), it would make more sense that the Children of the Forest created an unexpected creature, rather than the one intended, when they created the Night King, and why he turned on them. They were dealing with a magical creature from another land that they knew nothing about. This could also explain WHY the Night King was prepared for Daenerys and her dragons, and why he became a dragon master so quickly. If he was a greenseer / dragon lord from Valyria before the doom, he would also have dragon dreams, and possess similar qualities possessed by Blood Raven (Brynden Rivers being of Targaryen bloodline). This makes a lot more sense to me than a Stark, or Bran Stark, being the Night King - as many theorists are suggesting.

    Anyway, I'm hoping that history is covered in this book, and I almost expect it to be, along with history of the ancient Starks / the First Men, the Andals, and other bloodlines of that time period.

    It was just announced not long ago that the first prequel series will start filming early next year (2019), and will be covering this time period in Westeros history. So, it seems to be an attempt to get the book canon out ahead of the series.
    "Zaldrīzes dohaeriros iksos daor." - High Valyrian
    "A dragon is not a slave."
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    isn't the night king a converted first man? didn't the first men arrive in westeros thousands of years before valyrians found and tamed dragons?
    By the night king being a stark is the theory that he's an ancestor of the starks?...which would also make him an ancestor of some "non starks"...you sure they aren't talking about the lord commander "night king", who was said to have been making sacrifies to the others among other things (the others being the real night king and his army)
    how can he be a greenseer from valyria? did valyria have greenseers? skin changes/wargs maybe but I thought greenseer is essentially a children of the forest/westeros magic thing, since you know you need the wierwood tress to see out of and the children of the forest are the one who supposedly carved the faces into the trees.

    ok thats it p.s those are made as both statements and as actual questions, as I only really know the show lore and whatever I've read on wikis.
  • The books and show can clearly diverge; even in the name of a character.

    Books: The Night's King
    Show: The Night King

    In A Storm of Swords, Ch56
    While on his way north, Bran Stark recalls stories told to the Stark children of Night's King and the Nightfort by Old Nan, servant in Winterfell. She said some people believe Night's King was a Bolton, a Magnar of Skagos, an Umber, a Flint, a Norrey, or a Woodfoot. However, she identifies Night's King as a Stark of Winterfell and brother to the King of Winter and suggests his name was Brandon.

    On the HBO show he appeared to predate the Houses we all know. He was one of The First Men.

    When asked if there is a connection between the Night King of the White Walkers and the Night's King of legend, George R. R. Martin replied, in 2015:

    "As for the Night's King (the form I prefer), in the books he is a legendary figure, akin to Lann the Clever and Brandon the Builder, and no more likely to have survived to the present day than they have."
  • NNNN ✭✭✭
    yes they "diverge".
    So in the books Old Nan flat out claims night king/king of winter to be a stark? because Idk how exactly to interpret she saying night's king was a brother to him.....pretty sure one predates the other by a few thousand years even in the stories, so was it meant to be taken as brother in the literal sense or as brother in the figurative sense? I'm leaning towards figurative,
  • Sounds interesting.
Sign In or Register to comment.