A+J=T v. 2

[Mladen]

For some of us at least, it is not so much about adding to the story as it is simply providing Tyrion with the ability to ride a dragon, which would then affect the story a whole lot.

But the point is that Tyrion doesn't need to be Aerys' bastard to ride a dragon, or at least we can argue that. Which is why, without this segment, this theory is completely empty. Simply, take out dragonriding and you get basically nothing.

[Mithras]

There are many Tyrion the Dragonrider threads. My own thread is among the most comprehensive and the necessity of Targ blood is not among my arguments about why Tyrion will ride Viserion.

[Lord Varys]

Mladen,

well, I should have been more precise there:

That is no chicken/egg thing. The Valyrians first got dragons, and then became the rulers of the world. Real world 'nobles' or 'rich people who only marry their peers' - be they the remnants of medieval aristocracy (hello, GB), or billionaire dynasties - don't have actual 'special' or 'noble blood', but the Valyrians actually may be special in exactly that sense.

In the case of the Targaryens this blood essentially became 'the royal blood of Westeros', but that's just a side effect of the original dragonbinding thing.

Other magical bloodlines in Westeros did not use their magical abilities to create dynasties to conquer (parts of) the world. Certain skinchangers clearly could have tried. Perhaps incest would also have helped them to create powerful skinchanger or even greenseer dynasties - who knows?

Ran has put forward the idea that Dragonbinder and similar horns were actually designed to be used in the internal struggles for supremacy amongst the dragonlords - to steal the dragons of other dragonlords, basically. And the whole Euron threat thing always made me believe that Dragonbinder could actually be a threat to the bond between Dany and Drogon, not so much a tool to help her and her guys.

To the general question:

We have to ask us why the hell Tyrion is even important in the story. He is an interesting character, but ACoK aside, he is essentially just some guy on hold. He does not really do all that much, and especially ASoS is completely used to destroy every single shred of connection/relationship he has to his family.

George cannot possible have him return home to claim Casterly Rock. He would end the way Dalton Greyjoy did two pages after the Epilogue of ADoS (if he survived the series).

ACoK showed us that he has a thirst for power, an ambition to rule. But without his family he is nothing. A dragon alone cannot really change that. He has to find a new purpose in life, a new identity, possibly even a new family (Dany's camp, and possibly even her).

Not to mention that pretty much all the series does is reassess and reinterpret established (family) relationships and friendships. Cat, Lysa, Hoster; Ned and Robert; Cersei and Jaime; Doran and Oberyn etc. And, of course, Tywin and his children. It is to be expected that this continues. A big plot point of the revelation of the true heritage of Jon, Tyrion, Tommen, Myrcella, Aegon etc. will be how the people involved deal with that, and how this changes the view on the established characters and their relationships to each other (and their mostly dead parents).

[Wouter]

Mladen,

well, I should have been more precise there:

That is no chicken/egg thing. The Valyrians first got dragons, and then became the rulers of the world. Unlike other real world 'nobles' or 'rich people who only marry their peers' - be they the remnants of medieval aristocracy (hello, GB), or billionaire dynasties - those people have no 'special' or 'noble blood', but the Valyrians actually may have such blood.

In the case of the Targaryens this blood essentially became 'the royal blood of Westeros', but that's just a side effect that of the original dragonbinding thing.

Other magical bloodlines in Westeros did not use their magical abilities to create dynasties to conquer (parts of) the world. Certain skinchangers clearly could have tried. Perhaps incest would also have helped them to create powerful skinchanger or even greenseer dynasties - who knows?

I agree. Not only some Valyrians (dragonlords) may have special blood, the same goes for wargs. There is an aura hanging over the Starks, too, with their first-men blood and also the injection from the Warg kings.

[Lord Varys]

And if we really go with Mladen's overall 'special blood/nobility destruction' thing, one should expect that there is no reason to believe that the promised prince has either Targaryen nor Stark or any noble/special blood. But that is really not the case unless we enter crackpot territory. In fact, the Targaryen version of the promised prince prophecy seems to be pretty straightforward that the birth of Targaryen child is prophesied.

The Azor Ahai thing is different, but that may actually be not be all that trustworthy. But that's another topic.

Wouter,

yeah, with TWoIaF I daresay we can all agree that the Starks have essentially more than a drop of 'magical blood' which suddenly resurfaced again in this time of dire need. And who knows, perhaps the Stark blood still had that potential because the (recent) Starks (at least) also tend to marry their kin rather than to marry into many different family (and many of the old First Men lines certainly would have a similar magical potential anyway).

[Mladen]

And if we really go with Mladen's overall 'special blood/nobility destruction' thing, one should expect that there is no reason to believe that the promised prince has either Targaryen nor Stark or any noble/special blood. But that is really not the case unless we enter crackpot territory. In fact, the Targaryen version of the promised prince prophecy seems to be pretty straightforward that the birth of Targaryen child is prophesied.

Way to miss the point. The deconstruction is not about complete loss of some magical powers that run down in certain people. And let we take PTWP as an example. According to snippets of info that we got about it, we can assume that most likely candidate for position is Jon. Now, is the origin what makes Jon special? Is that the driving force of his role in upcoming WfD? Absolutely not. He is doing the deed as Jon Snow. And GRRM hasn't spent 5 books in building the character of Jon Snow, just to toss it when the first opportunity arrives (which, just for the record, already did with Stannis' offer). The hero, the savior of the world might very well be some bastard who wants to honor his vows. And in that is in part the deconstruction of the "special blood/nobility" thing - in fact that Jon Snow is doing something that neither Jon Stark nor Jon Targaryen could have ever done.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Way to miss the point. The deconstruction is not about complete loss of some magical powers that run down in certain people. And let we take PTWP as an example. According to snippets of info that we got about it, we can assume that most likely candidate for position is Jon. Now, is the origin what makes Jon special? Is that the driving force of his role in upcoming WfD? Absolutely not. He is doing the deed as Jon Snow. And GRRM hasn't spent 5 books in building the character of Jon Snow, just to toss it when the first opportunity arrives (which, just for the record, already did with Stannis' offer). The hero, the savior of the world might very well be some bastard who wants to honor his vows. And in that is in part the deconstruction of the "special blood/nobility" thing - in fact that Jon Snow is doing something that neither Jon Stark nor Jon Targaryen could have ever done.

But what I think you miss is that it is not something that someone with only Stark or only Targ blood could accomplish--it is the combination of the magic of warging (Stark) with the magic of dragon binding (Targ) that will allow Jon to be TPTWP--so magical bloodlines is what makes it possible for Jon to do whatever he ends up doing to win the Battle for the Dawn 2.0. At least I strongly suspect as much (of course I cannot know for sure where GRRM will take the story).

By way, I don't think it is an accident that there is no prior example of Targ/Stark offspring (the Pact of Ice and Fire never came to pass). There is something special about this blood combination. GRRM is deconstructing in some sense--but not entirely.

And if Tyrion rides a dragon, he will be more than just a dragon rider--he will be one of the three heads of the dragon. For him to be described as a head "of the dragon" he really needs to be "of the dragon" in some sense. A Targ father would do that. No Targ parent--not "of the dragon".

[Mithras]

GRRM said in an interview that the Targs practiced incest to keep the bloodlines pure and better control dragons. His words--not mine.

Where is that SSM? Was he talking from a maester's POV because that is what Yandel thinks too?

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

But the point is that Tyrion doesn't need to be Aerys' bastard to ride a dragon, or at least we can argue that. Which is why, without this segment, this theory is completely empty. Simply, take out dragonriding and you get basically nothing.

I agree that the theory would be a bit lacking if Targ blood is not necessary to ride a dragon. But I think TWOIAF made it clear that you do need the right drop of Targ blood, but that is totally up for debate, and there was in fact a pretty lengthy debate about it in my "Tyrion, Son of the Mad King" thread linked in the OP. I will repeat my biggest point here: show me a single example ever of someone without magic dragon blood riding a dragon and I will believe it is possible (I'm inclined to believe Nettles was a dragon seed).

I'm not sure what exactly dragonbinder will do, but we will have to wait until TWOW to find out. Since the person who blows it dies, it is obviously some form of blood magic sacrifice.

[Mithras]

I agree that the theory would be a bit lacking if Targ blood is not necessary to ride a dragon. But I think TWOIAF made it clear that you do need the right drop of Targ blood, but that is totally up for debate, and there was in fact a pretty lengthy debate about it in my "Tyrion, Son of the Mad King" thread linked in the OP. I will repeat my biggest point here: show me a single example ever of someone without magic dragon blood riding a dragon and I will believe it is possible (I'm inclined to believe Nettles was a dragon seed).

I'm not sure what exactly dragonbinder will do, but we will have to wait until TWOW to find out. Since the person who blows it dies, it is obviously some form of blood magic sacrifice.

The problem is, we cannot be sure whether Nettles or any other seeds really had Targ blood or Gyldayn and his sources assumed that they did because they succeeded in riding a dragon. This is circular logic.

Rhaenyra let Gormon Massey and Denys Darklyn (who had very little probability of having Targ blood) try to tame dragons and they were burned to death. One cannot propose that if Targ blood was a must to ride dragon, Rhaenyra didnot know that. So, why did she let these most precious followers (a Lord and the LC of her KG) commit suicide, if there is really such a thing?

I think we are supposed to work our reasoning here.

[Mladen]

But what I think you miss is that it is not something that someone with only Stark or only Targ blood could accomplish--it is the combination of the magic of warging (Stark) with the magic of dragon binding (Targ) that will allow Jon to be TPTWP--so magical bloodlines is what makes it possible for Jon to do whatever he ends up doing to win the Battle for the Dawn 2.0. At least I strongly suspect as much (of course I cannot know for sure where GRRM will take the story).

I understand the union of ice and fire in Jon. I am just saying that Jon is doing the thing completely unaware and beside the entire "powerful bloodline" thing. Jon basically spent 5 books in coming to agreement with his bastard status, with his purpose in the world. He came long way from dreaming Stark name to rejecting what Stannis offered him. The identity of Jon Snow is not just some mask that is easily thrown off, like perhaps the mask of Alayne Stone is. That is why, regardless of Jon's true parentage, he is doing what a hero should do. And he is doing that as a bastard. For quite some time, I have believed that the parentage will serve as some sort of facilitator to Jon becoming King or whatever hero, but the fact is that "Snow" trumped "Stark" and I see no reason why it wouldn't trump "Targaryen" too. Lastly, it is completely wrong to assume that magical bloodline makes it possible for Jon to do what he is doing. In fact, it is his bastard status that set him on the path of heroism.

And if Tyrion rides a dragon, he will be more than just a dragon rider--he will be one of the three heads of the dragon. For him to be described as a head "of the dragon" he really needs to be "of the dragon" in some sense. A Targ father would do that. No Targ parent--not "of the dragon".

Have you read TWOIAF? I think that origin of three-headed dragon speaks volumes and I wouldn't be so quick to assume that prophecies are necessarily connected with the sigil. Regardless of what Rhaegar might have thought.

I agree that the theory would be a bit lacking if Targ blood is not necessary to ride a dragon. But I think TWOIAF made it clear that you do need the right drop of Targ blood, but that is totally up for debate, and there was in fact a pretty lengthy debate about it in my "Tyrion, Son of the Mad King" thread linked in the OP. I will repeat my biggest point here: show me a single example ever of someone without magic dragon blood riding a dragon and I will believe it is possible (I'm inclined to believe Nettles was a dragon seed).

I'm not sure what exactly dragonbinder will do, but we will have to wait until TWOW to find out. Since the person who blows it dies, it is obviously some form of blood magic sacrifice.

Well, you believe Nettles is a dragonseed (something we don't have exact proof of), and someone can believe otherwise. Several times, GRRM has pointed out the importance of Tyrion knowing all the Westerosi history and dragonlore. All in all, I believe there is not enough to claim other side with certainty, but I strongly believe that dragonhorn is introduced for some purpose.

[IRON BANK]

After reading awoiaf I have to go with the story that Tyron is a tag. The timeline fits and it makes complete sense. Considering the animosity that twin shows Tyrion .

[Lord Varys]

Whether Jon thinks he is entitled or special does not matter (to me). If he is Rhaegar's son by Lyanna he is even more 'special' than by just a noble bastard (which still makes him much more special than the truly average guy).

I'm not sold that he his the promised prince, as I'm not sure that the prophecy necessarily refers to one person alone, but even if he is, I'd be very surprised if he actually did whatever that guy is supposed to be doing as Ned Stark's bastard...

Not to mention that realizing that he was not, in fact, Jon Snow - or a bastard at all - but essentially robbed of his birthright and identity by his 'loving and caring father' should really have a strong impact on Jon. His ambition to become 'Jon Stark' was reined in only by the fact that he knew he was a bastard and would thus usurp the place of his trueborn half-siblings.

Nettles certainly is a dragonseed in the same sense Ulf White, Hugh Hammer, and Addam of Hull are. I really don't understand why people try to make an exception for her and not for the others.

As to the dragon heads:

Here we have to differentiate between the dragon heads of prophecy and the Targaryen banner. The latter is a coincidence of history, the former may be part of the original prophecy of the promised prince which may actually date back to a time before the Targaryens moved to Dragonstone or conquered Westeros. In fact, the mentioning of Aenar Targaryen's maiden daughter in AFfC makes it not unlikely that the prophecy goes back to Daenys the Dreamer, and was then later recovered (for House Targaryen) by Aerys I.

If that's really the case then Rhaegar should have been smart enough to realize that the dragon heads in the prophecy had nothing to do with the Targaryen banner.

Mithras,

if I'm not mistaken, then the interview UL is talking about was actually the recent promotional thing about TWoIaF George did in New York. He did elaborate on the Valyrian incest as well as on the dragonbinding process.

[Danelle]

I think that this is the interview where the Targaryen incest is described as a strategic choice linked to the control of dragons.

Unlike the Lannisters, the Targaryens were incestuous for strategic reasons.
The practice of marrying brothers and sisters was common in the Targaryen homeland, Valyria, because the ability to tame dragons is inherited and they wanted to keep it in the family. But even those born with this aptitude didn’t have an easy time of it, as Dany’s own trouble controlling her dragons testifies. At the 92Y, Martin related that his good friend and collaborator, the writer Melinda Snodgrass, owns a Lusitano stallion and practices dressage; her experiences training horses have shaped Martin’s conception of the difficulty of taming dragons.

[MoIaF]

I think that this is the interview where the Targaryen incest is described as a strategic choice linked to the control of dragons.

Thank you for sharing the link - it's very interesting that GRRM finally spoke about something a lot of us have suspected for some time now.

Way to miss the point. The deconstruction is not about complete loss of some magical powers that run down in certain people. And let we take PTWP as an example. According to snippets of info that we got about it, we can assume that most likely candidate for position is Jon. Now, is the origin what makes Jon special? Is that the driving force of his role in upcoming WfD? Absolutely not. He is doing the deed as Jon Snow. And GRRM hasn't spent 5 books in building the character of Jon Snow, just to toss it when the first opportunity arrives (which, just for the record, already did with Stannis' offer). The hero, the savior of the world might very well be some bastard who wants to honor his vows. And in that is in part the deconstruction of the "special blood/nobility" thing - in fact that Jon Snow is doing something that neither Jon Stark nor Jon Targaryen could have ever done.

Completely agree with the bolded and it's why I believe Jon is a bastard or will continue to identify as a bastard. His personal struggle with his identity and his place in the world is an integral part of his character. Coming to terms and accepting who he is and learning to become a leader even if he is a bastard is important to the story as well. You don’t have to have the right name to do the right thing, to be a leader and help save the realm.

If all of a sudden Jon becomes legitimate, then what was the struggle all about, he was always going to be great, he has the right bloodline and now he has the right name. He was surely destined to be great, to maybe even be king. All that struggle to show us that a true hero was always, well, true. Now all you bastards go back to your places, you just can’t be real leaders or real heroes, because remember your bastards.

Rising above what you are, what and where you came from would make a much more interesting story for me.

[Hangover of the Morning]

But what I think you miss is that it is not something that someone with only Stark or only Targ blood could accomplish--it is the combination of the magic of warging (Stark) with the magic of dragon binding (Targ) that will allow Jon to be TPTWP--so magical bloodlines is what makes it possible for Jon to do whatever he ends up doing to win the Battle for the Dawn 2.0. At least I strongly suspect as much (of course I cannot know for sure where GRRM will take the story).

By way, I don't think it is an accident that there is no prior example of Targ/Stark offspring (the Pact of Ice and Fire never came to pass). There is something special about this blood combination. GRRM is deconstructing in some sense--but not entirely.

And if Tyrion rides a dragon, he will be more than just a dragon rider--he will be one of the three heads of the dragon. For him to be described as a head "of the dragon" he really needs to be "of the dragon" in some sense. A Targ father would do that. No Targ parent--not "of the dragon".

Are you saying that GRRM is trying to tell us that you can breed a saviour? What a disgusting notion. So even if Rhaegar did indeed kidnap Lyanna and raped her multiple times, he would have been justified, because the product will save the world? And Jon will be AA no matter what path he chose in life, just because his parents were two people with special blood?

[MoIaF]

Are you saying that GRRM is trying to tell us that you can breed a saviour? What a disgusting notion. So even if Rhaegar did indeed kidnap Lyanna and raped her multiple times, he would have been justified, because the product will save the world? And Jon will be AA no matter what path he chose in life, just because his parents were two people with special blood?

I kind of agree with you here. I'm fine with the magical bloodline thing, it's part of the world, whatever. What I find strange is that if indeed Rhaegar set out to "create" a special child of ice and fire and actually manage to accomplish it. That is that for the first time in the series someone sets out to fulfill a prophecy and actually manages to fulfill it as is.

Now, I don't doubt for a second that Jon is special but there is something that's off I don't know what it is.

[ssls6]

Aegon and his two sisters bring Westeros to heal...that's how I interpret the 3 heads

Will Dany and her two brothers do the same? How the 2nd long night plays into this I cannot imagine....before, during, or after or is it the real reason to get the band back together? The author, GRRM, is still firmly in control and anything is possible at this stage.

The similarities between Dany, Jon, and Tyrion seem way more than coincidental in my opinion. Each could be considered born of a mother's blood sacrifice.

[sj4iy]

If eating burnt food is a clue, why do we never hear about how Dany, Aemon or Jon likes their food blackened?

Unless there is an established pattern of behavior, I don't see how this is admissible as evidence.

[Mladen]

Aegon and his two sisters bring Westeros to heal...that's how I interpret the 3 heads

Will Dany and her two brothers do the same? How the 2nd long night plays into this I cannot imagine....before, during, or after or is it the real reason to get the band back together? The author, GRRM, is still firmly in control and anything is possible at this stage.

The similarities between Dany, Jon, and Tyrion seem way more than coincidental in my opinion. Each could be considered born of a mother's blood sacrifice.

Even if Tyrion is Aerys' son, Dany doesn't have two brothers. Also, the origin of three heads simply speaks mundane and political, not mystical and prophetic. As for dead mothers, common thing in medieval setting. They certainly are not the only ones whose mothers died. As for sacrifice, I am sorry, it doesn't have much sense to me.

Now, I don't doubt for a second that Jon is special but there is something that's off I don't know what it is.

In what way?

Completely agree with the bolded and it's why I believe Jon is a bastard or will continue to identify as a bastard. His personal struggle with his identity and his place in the world is an integral part of his character. Coming to terms and accepting who he is and learning to become a leader even if he is a bastard is important to the story as well. You don’t have to have the right name to do the right thing, to be a leader and help save the realm.

If all of a sudden Jon becomes legitimate, then what was the struggle all about, he was always going to be great, he has the right bloodline and now he has the right name. He was surely destined to be great, to maybe even be king. All that struggle to show us that a true hero was always, well, true. Now all you bastards go back to your places, you just can’t be real leaders or real heroes, because remember your bastards.

Rising above what you are, what and where you came from would make a much more interesting story for me.

Yeap... Just as Jon isn't special because of his blood, Dany is special because of what she does, not what she is. She learned that lesson very early in AGOT.