Jump to content

Maggy the Frog and valonqar: a complete analysis


Gecco78

Recommended Posts

I understand this is one of those prophesies that many people might already have a set belief on who the valoqar is (Jamie, Tyrion, the Hound, Aegon, Stannis, Jon, Arya...so on), and would automatically dismiss my theory because it is very different than what one might originally has thought to be. So I ask to please keep an open mind and really pay attention to the premise of my argument :)



Having finished my reread of the books, and spending countless hours of searching for similar theories online (which, I've found several alluding to the possibility, but not providing any conclusive supporting material), I think I have figured out the identity of the valonqar mentioned in Maggy the Frog's prophesy – it is Tommen.



The premise of my argument consists of 2 parts:



First, it is very important to focus on the context and the situation within which the prophesy was given, not just the words of the prophesy itself.



Second, realize just how very specific and direct this particular prophesy is compared to others in the book, e.g. Quaithe, the Ghost of High Heart, etc.



So, keeping these two things in mind, let's begin to dissect.



As a girl, Cersei and her 2 friends, Jeyne and Melara, come to Maggy during the tourney for King Aerys II's visit to the Westerlands (where Cersei becomes enamored with Prince Rhaegar) after hearing rumors about her magical powers. Jeyne flees the scene at the sight of Maggy's yellow eyes. Maggy initially refuses to tell the futures of the remaining girls, but grudgingly agrees faced with Cersei's threats. She then allows each girl 3 questions only.



This description alone is very telling, IMO. Here we have Maggy, who is NOT cool with this whole ordeal to begin with, finally giving in, though still extremely unhappy about it, to Cersei's threats, and agreeing to answer 3 questions, and 3 questions only. Nothing more.



“Three questions you may ask,” the crone said, once she'd had her drink. “You willl not like my answers. Ask, and begone with you.” - AFFC, ch. 36




And did I mention Maggy does not want to do this? Which means she is not going to go above and beyond the 3 questions she allows Cersei.




“Begone,” croaked Maggy, a third time. - AFFC, ch. 36






Now, moving to the actual questions.



1) Cersei: “When will I wed the prince?”


Maggy: “Never. You will wed the king.”



Analysis:


Topic: marriage.


Cersei poses a very direct question. Maggy gives a very direct answer. When? - Never. A slight bonus material, which is still on the topic: You will wed the king.



Status: Fulfilled. She did end up marrying Robert after the rebellion thus after his coronation.



2) Cersei: “I will be queen though?”


Maggy: “Aye.” Malice gleamed in Maggy's yellow eyes. “Queen you shall be... until there comes another, younger and more beautiful, to cast you down and take all that you hold dear.” - AFOC, ch 36



Analysis:


Topic: queenship.


Again, another direct question and direct answer. Will I? - Yes. A slight bonus material, which is still on the topic: another queen will take over.



Status: partially fulfilled. She did indeed become a queen, or THE queen as she likes to think of herself. She's been paranoid about the latter part ever since Margaery came into play, and perhaps rightfully so. I have my theories on who the “younger, more beautiful one” might be, but do not have sufficient evidence as of now, so moving on...



And finally...



...she still had one more question due her, one more glimpse into her life to come. - AFFC, ch. 36




3) Cersei: “Will the king and I have children?”


Maggy: “Oh, aye. Six-and-ten for him, and three for you.”




That made no sense to Cersei. Her thumb was throbbing where she'd cut it, and her blood was dripping on the carpet. How could that be? She wanted to ask, but she was done with her questions.



The old woman was not done with her, however. “Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds, she said. And when your tears have drowned you, the valonqar shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you.” - AFOC, ch. 36





Analysis:


Topic: Cersei and king's children


Once again, a direct question, and a direct response. Will we have? - Yes. A slight bonus material, which is still on the subject: 16 for him and 3 for you. Another bonus material, still on topic: their hair will be golden (possibly implying the Lannister origin), this also could imply they will all be kings and queens wearing golden crowns. Gold shrouds, implying they will all die (valar morghulis). Then we have another bonus material from Maggy, STILL ON TOPIC: and when your tears have drowned you – this, followed by the gold shrouds, implies she will witness their deaths. The valonqar shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you. STILL ON TOPIC OF HER CHILDREN. Very literal. Very direct. The valonqar, which means “younger brother” in high valyrian. Read, “the younger brother of all your children will strangle you to death with HIS hands.” “Younger” eliminates Joffrey. “His” eliminates Myrcella. Leaving Tommen.



BOOM. Drops the mic.



… picks it up again because the argument isn't actually finished.



Remember how I mentioned in the beginning that it is important to take Maggy's answers literally? And how context matters? Maggy does not want to answer Cersei's questions. She grudgingly agrees only after being threatened, and even then says she will answer 3 questions only. Over and over again within the chapter itself, as shown in quotes above, we have Cersei wanting to ask more, eager to hear the elaboration, but realizing she only has 3 questions... So why would Maggy give any more information to Cersei than what their agreement states? Why would she go off topic and tell Cersei about her death if it wasn't related to her initial question, which was about her children? Because Maggy is still talking about Cersei's children! And she never says “your” valonqar, which would then mean Jamie or Tyrion. She says “the” valonqar within the context of Cersei's children.



Anticipating other questions you might have:



- yes, I do think shrouds mean death for her children, because...



Shroud/noun - a cloth that is used to wrap a dead body - Merriam-Webster Dictionary.




- why valonqar in valyrian? I think it is simply used as a literary device. It sounds more ominous. Assuming that she implies the person in question is of valyrian origin is farfetched, IMO, because the rest of her prophesy hasn't been figurative enough to imply that.



But wait, we did previously prove and agree that all her children will die before her. How will then sweet Tommen come back and strangle her? Like, he will rise from the dead? Like, ….a wight? Like, a wight that tried to strangle LC Mormont at the Wall or the wightefied Waymar Royce who strangled Will? Like, a wight that is described to attack “with surprising strength?” Making a sweet 9 y.o. (or however old he is by then) Tommen more than capable to overpower his grown mother? Aye to all of the above questions.





“Long, elegant hands brushed his cheek, then tightened around his throat. They were gloved in the finest moleskin and sticky with blood, yet the touch was icy cold.” - AGOT, prologue.





To me, you don't hang this Chekhov's gun on the wall in the very first prologue of the series, if you don't plan to have a big use for it later on.



How will Tommen turn into a wight? I don't know. But with the way things are, it seems the war with the Others is inevitable and that they might move beyond the Wall. But I'm sure we will learn the details sooner or later.



This is all I have on the topic. It is a bit long, but it was necessary for me to present all the valid points and draw out a reasonable conclusion. Hope you enjoyed!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Will the king and I have children?

- Yes. He will have 16, and you will have 3. Your children's hair will be golden, and they will all be crowned with golden crowns. Also, your children will die and their dead bodies will be covered with golden shrouds. And after you've cried your eyes out, the younger brother of your children will strangle you to death with his own hands.

See how much simpler this has become once you replace “valonqar” with “younger brother?”

!

But you don't just replace "valonqar" with "younger brother"--you replace "valonqar" with "younger brother of your children" which is much more specific. If instead you restate your sentence as "And after you've cried your eyes out, the younger brother will strangle you to death with his own hands," the question remains unanswered--whose younger brother. Cersei assumes her own younger brother--and assumes that means Tyrion. Others point out that Jaime is also her younger brother. Some argue is could be any younger brother. I don't think you have "proven" that it is the younger brother of her children. Personally, I still lean toward Jaime as the valonqar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cersei assumes her own younger brother--and assumes that means Tyrion. Others point out that Jaime is also her younger brother. Some argue is could be any younger brother. I don't think you have "proven" that it is the younger brother of her children. Personally, I still lean toward Jaime as the valonqar.

Only if you ignore:

a. the premise, which is that Maggie doesn't want to tell Cersei's future, and only reluctantly agrees to 3 questions after being threatened. Cersei doesn't ask about her death. She asks about her children. Anyone but Joffrey, Mycella and Tommen will make that part of the answer irrelevant. And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to.

b.the fact that she says "the valonqar" not "your valonqar."

While it would certainly be poetic and satisfying for Jamie to kill Cersei, to me it would be too obvious and not at all climatic. Plus, Jamie doesn't strike me to be the kind of guy who strangles. He's a warrior. He stabs. He stabbed Aerys. That's his thing. Wightified Jamie, however....More likely. Strangling to wights is like stabbing to Jamie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to."

You're kind of contradicting yourself here (or at least going back and forth in your interpretation as it suits the point you're trying to make). Either Maggy was pissed about missing her afternoon nap and refused to give expanded answers, or she was REALLY pissed and gave answers with little bonuses that would destroy Cersei's peace of mind (and eventually part of her sanity)for the rest of her life.

If it was the former, then her answers would have been 1. You won't. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. If it was the latter, then you get the collateral information, obviously very intentionally designed to turn Cersei into a paranoid and irrational woman - in which case I don't think we can make assumptions about what topics Maggy would have stuck to or wandered off from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if you ignore:

a. the premise, which is that Maggie doesn't want to tell Cersei's future, and only reluctantly agrees to 3 questions after being threatened. Cersei doesn't ask about her death. She asks about her children. Anyone but Joffrey, Mycella and Tommen will make that part of the answer irrelevant. And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to.

b.the fact that she says "the valonqar" not "your valonqar."

While it would certainly be poetic and satisfying for Jamie to kill Cersei, to me it would be too obvious and not at all climatic. Plus, Jamie doesn't strike me to be the kind of guy who strangles. He's a warrior. He stabs. He stabbed Aerys. That's his thing. Wightified Jamie, however....More likely. Strangling to wights is like stabbing to Jamie.

I have not ignored either point. While Maggy might not be thrilled to give Cersei her fortune, giving Cersei bad news might be something Maggy is thrilled to do. As long as there is some connection between the death of the children and Cersei's death--it works. For example, if Jaime blames Cersei for one or more of the deaths and while they are mourning, she says something to enrage him and he strangles her. That would be consistent with the tone of the prophecy. The point is that while she is crying over her children, something will cause "the" valonqar to strangle her.

I also have not ignored the use of the article "the" rather than "your" in my analysis. While "your" would have been unambiguous, "the" does not really tell us anything definitively. In this case "the" merely means the specific valonqar that ends up strangling Cersei--whoever that ends up being is "the" valonqar.

While I don't discount your analysis entirely, it just seems that a mindless wight killing Cersei is not the same -- even if Tommen's body -- as Tommen killing her -- and not nearly as satisfying to the reader as someone close to Cersei intending to kill her. I think I would believe UnTommen as the vaonqar rather than wight-Tommen as the valonqar. But I still see Jaime as the most emotionally satisfying, so I lean toward him (but not in a definitive manner).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to."

You're kind of contradicting yourself here (or at least going back and forth in your interpretation as it suits the point you're trying to make). Either Maggy was pissed about missing her afternoon nap and refused to give expanded answers, or she was REALLY pissed and gave answers with little bonuses that would destroy Cersei's peace of mind (and eventually part of her sanity)for the rest of her life.

If it was the former, then her answers would have been 1. You won't. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. If it was the latter, then you get the collateral information, obviously very intentionally designed to turn Cersei into a paranoid and irrational woman - in which case I don't think we can make assumptions about what topics Maggy would have stuck to or wandered off from.

:agree: Yes, this point was basically part of what I was trying to say in my last post (but said much better than I did).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to."

You're kind of contradicting yourself here (or at least going back and forth in your interpretation as it suits the point you're trying to make). Either Maggy was pissed about missing her afternoon nap and refused to give expanded answers, or she was REALLY pissed and gave answers with little bonuses that would destroy Cersei's peace of mind (and eventually part of her sanity)for the rest of her life.

If it was the former, then her answers would have been 1. You won't. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. If it was the latter, then you get the collateral information, obviously very intentionally designed to turn Cersei into a paranoid and irrational woman - in which case I don't think we can make assumptions about what topics Maggy would have stuck to or wandered off from.

What I meant was "more information beyond the 3 answers to the 3 questions." She stays on the topic of each question: marriage, queenship, children. And she also says "you will not like my answers," which to me sounds like she is planning on answering the questions in a way that will upset Cersei.

Take the last question as an example (the question in question, so to say... :) )

(and I understand this part can be perceived as more speculative based on my personal interpretation, but hear me out!)

Maggy, who is determined to upset Cersei with her answers (because Cersei not only woke her up, but also threatened to whip her behind), but also stick to the agreement gives the following answer to the question "Will we have children?"

- Yes. 16 for him and 3 for you.

Normally, that would be upsetting. Cersei, however, is not upset. She's puzzled, but not visibly upset.

Maggy, seeing that Cersei's isn't quite upset yet, takes it one step further and says "Also, your kids will all die." And even further, "Oh, also, they will die before you. AND one of them will actually kill you."

At least this is how I interpret their interaction. And I understand that sometimes we all agree to disagree, and someone can read and interpret this passage differently. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not saying I fully buy into this theory, but the truth is I have read this section a couple of days ago and it kind of struck me that what the propehcy literally means is probably more like the younger brother among the children.



Do I interpret that as Tommen killing Cersei? Not necessarily.But on my first read the first thing that jumped into my mind when I saw this text was "Ok he wants us to think its Tyrion but this is obviously Jaime!" . Never noticed how that the text actually sounds more reasonable when talking about her younger child not her own brother.



The problem is Tommen the wight theory sounds weird to me. I find it hard to imagine the setup in which this will happen, and how this will be a great plot line.


Perhaps the Valonqar can be one of Roberts children as they are also mentioned here but this is probably twisting the text too much, and also not seeing much value there.



I still think its Jamie.


One big thing in favor of Jaime as Valonqar is how the keep repeating that the came into the world together and will leave it together. It makes sense that they also kill each other.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think its Jamie.

One big thing in favor of Jaime as Valonqar is how the keep repeating that the came into the world together and will leave it together. It makes sense that they also kill each other.

You know, I actually see this as GRRM pulling an unreliable narrator on the readers. I believe only Cersei states that in AFFC (at least, as far as I can remember) because she is so delusional about everything, including her current relationship with Jamie. Where she believes that even when all else fails, she will always have Jamie. That they are so in sync. Whereas, as far as Jamie goes, they are very much not.... he is already giving up on Cersei (not responding to her plea being one big example), and does not see them as one being split into two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this. Yes, that bit of prophecy deals specifically with Cersei and Robert's children. "Valonqar" should fit that context. It could be Tommen or wight Tommen, but the prophecy also mentions Robert's bastards. We don't know if Cersei caught and killed all of them; Gendry survived. Another option would be that the youngest surviving male bastard strangles Cersei. That would be more emotionally satisfying for me than Tommen, Jaime, or Tyrion doing the deed.



You know, I actually see this as GRRM pulling an unreliable narrator on the readers. I believe only Cersei states that in AFFC (at least, as far as I can remember) because she is so delusional about everything, including her current relationship with Jamie. Where she believes that even when all else fails, she will always have Jamie. That they are so in sync. Whereas, as far as Jamie goes, they are very much not.... he is already giving up on Cersei (not responding to her plea being one big example), and does not see them as one being split into two.



This.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this because, you're right it says THE Valonqar, but I still think it's 1st Jamie or 2nd Tyrion, but it's very interesting anyway.

It seems almost impossible for it to be Tyrion because Cersei believes it is Tyrion. In these stories--and particularly with GRRM--the overtly stated resolution to a prophecy is never the actual resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, agreed, it's gonna be Tommen, been saying this for a while. Now it's the only interpretation that I don't find aesthetically displeasing. First, the killer is "the valonqar". The valonqar.

There are multiple interpretations where a poster would pick pretty much any person in the world who's ever had an older sibling: Arya, Sandor, Loras, etc. That's the proud first tier of awful. So Maggy the Frog talks to young Cersei about, say, Loras Tyrell, and picks "somebody's younger brother" as the one and only word to describe him? Also, "somebody's younger brother", or,worse yet, "somebody's younger sibling", narrows the field to something like three quarters of humankind. What more useful info do you have for us, Frog? A water drinker, maybe? A nose breather? Someone with two arms and two legs? If Maggy the Frog wanted to give Cersei no information whatsoever about her future killer, there's a very simple way to do that: just shut up and not waste breath.

There was time when Tyrion was my pick and I was willing to accept Jaime. But there's where aesthetics comes to play. "Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds. And when your tears have drowned you, the valonqar shall wrap his hands about your pale white throat and choke the life from you." It just flows naturally: they'll be crowned, they'll be killed, you'll cry, the youngest shall kill you. It sounds awkward, artificial, if "the valonqar" suddenly refers to somebody else entirely, Jaime or Tyrion. That's what first got me thinking about Tommen.

And there's the completely revolutionary thought, which everyone has apparently been ignoring for the past nine years: asked and answered. Maggy granted Cersei questions three, Cersei asked, Maggy answered. About marriage, about crown, about children. So when Cersei asks about her and Robert's kids, that is what Maggy is talking about. Of course, I, too, missed it completely. When a fellow poster pointed it out a few weeks ago (I think), that pretty much settled the issue for me.

The immense beauty of it? There's no doublespeak, no metaphors, no gotchas, no convoluted figures of speech, no deception - Maggy tells Cersei everything as it is, plain and simple. She all but names the killer. And Cersei still doesn't, can't, decipher it. That's how you artfully fuck somebody in the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if you ignore:

a. the premise, which is that Maggie doesn't want to tell Cersei's future, and only reluctantly agrees to 3 questions after being threatened. Cersei doesn't ask about her death. She asks about her children. Anyone but Joffrey, Mycella and Tommen will make that part of the answer irrelevant. And Maggy doesn't strike me as the type of person who gives away more information than what she agreed to.

b.the fact that she says "the valonqar" not "your valonqar."

While it would certainly be poetic and satisfying for Jamie to kill Cersei, to me it would be too obvious and not at all climatic. Plus, Jamie doesn't strike me to be the kind of guy who strangles. He's a warrior. He stabs. He stabbed Aerys. That's his thing. Wightified Jamie, however....More likely. Strangling to wights is like stabbing to Jamie.

But that's exactly what she does. As you pointed out, Cersei doesn't ask about her own death. Maggy gives her that as a little extra.

You are assuming that Maggy didn't switch subjects, but she may have. We really won't know until much later. Tommen will be buried somewhere in King's Landing. By the time the Others get that far, word of how to fight them will have spread, and Cersei will already be dead or have fled the city. She will not stick around waiting for the walking dead to come for her. Also, Myrcella will be the last to die, as indicated by the fact that she is the last to be crowned. Tommen will have been dead for long enough that Cersei is unlikely to be clinging to his little body still.

It seems almost impossible for it to be Tyrion because Cersei believes it is Tyrion. In these stories--and particularly with GRRM--the overtly stated resolution to a prophecy is never the actual resolution.

True, but the irony level would be astonishing if this was the one thing in the entire series Cersei was actually right about.

And we are ALL assuming that whoever told Cersei the meaning of valonqar actually knew the meaning. What if they were wrong, or making it up because they didn't know and didn't want Lord Tywin to find out they lied on the resume?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...