divica

Members
  • Content count

    330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About divica

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight
  1. Maybe rhaegar wanted tptwp to be named Aegon and at that point he thought it was jon? Depending on the legal side of things maybe rhaegar wanted to make his sons with lyanna his heirs so he decided to name him Aegon?
  2. the jon name was certainly by ned, but while lyanna was pregnant she and rhaegar certainly discussed names and decided in a name for a boy and another for a girl...
  3. And what if jon's true name is also Aegon? Do you have the exact quote from grrm?
  4. Just to add that we actually have a close reference to "a song of ice and fire" in the "pact of ice and fire". So, if the "song of ice and fire" is an actual story within the planetos universe it makes sense that for the characters it is related to house stark and targaryen. Therefore it makes sense for rhaegar to link it to jon because he is the union of those 2 houses. On the other hand how can rhaegar link it to his first Aegon? We haven t seen any connection between Aegon and ice elements... In addition, if we consider that D&D aren t complete idiots and decided to then there is more evidence that jon might actually be the baby described in the pictury. Besides, if I am not mistaken elia was bedridden for several months after Aegon was borne and rhaegar was galivating shortly after Aegon was borne (in order to conceive jon) so is it even possible to be elia in the scene? I am pretty sure this must have been discussed a thousand times so is there a concensus? The biggest problem in the Aegon in the vision being jon ends up being that rhaegar's speech about needing another head doesn t make much sense (he would have his 2 previous kids+jon)... The most I can think is that the vision isn t a real scene and is used to show danny that jon is Aegon and is the second head and that she must find the third head.
  5. I hope you are very wrong about nearly all your predictions. I think grrm said danny and tyrion will meet in the book (towards the middle or end?) however I think if you read the realeased chaps you will find out about what happens with the siege of meereen I change my opinion about what happens to stannis every year. I mean, his northern army can t be defeated because there aren t any more northern soldiers and at the same time I don t think he will win winterfell. So I think he somehow has to return to the Wall where something will happen to him and jon will end up in charge of the army and eventually somehow king in the north? Oh, and I kind of hope that in the first jon chapters bran sends him dreams/visions about important stuff related to the ww and kind of trains his warging abilities (like arya was starting to do if I am not mistaken). In regards to KL, I agree that it will be very similar with the people revolting against cersei and declaring Aegon as the true king. And a greyscale plague would be something grrm might do (completly unexpected) but I fail to see what it could do for the story besides weakning westeros even further... And there are a lot of interesting things that might have happened to Benjen. however by now he must have been a captive from the wildlings, cotf or others (for misterious reasons) and maybe alister will end up saving him?
  6. I think it could have worked if they introduced him in the primiere of season five (like oberyn was in season 3) and make him give a ride to tyrion like in the books. After that they could make him go hire the golden company with the endrosement of varys or one of his friends and end season five with them sailing to westeros/ starting to conquer the stormlands/ somthing like that. This would also be good for the story of jon's parentage because we would have more characters that could talk about what happened in the time of robert's rebellion. I think the only possible motives to not use Aegon are that he ends up as being non important in the books, D&D thought he would make danny look lame and stupid because a character in similar conditions as her would be much more efective in conquering westeros or they simply like their feminine empowerment too much.
  7. I think that seeing what in the show this season Aegon should have been included. The thruth is everybody has had enough of cersei, we wouldn t need the ridiculous disaperance of the dornish and reach armies for reasons no one understands, we wouldn t have people misteriously accepting cersei as their queen, we wouldn t have the infinite lannister army and other idiotic plots! To me after cersei burned the septon the smallfolk of KL shoud have rebelled and killed her and her soldiers in the city. Then Aegon arrives as the hero of the people, the heir to the throne, etc... with a dornish wife and making some highgarden hand and with the golden company. This combination would be a much more believable chalenge for danny than cersei is. In adition, instead of ignoring the riverlands and the vale they should have them unite with the north so that we would have 3 clear factions (Aegon conquered the stormlands before KL)...
  8. I don t understand you. You are saying that you agree that if somebody is alive he wouldn t be a wight. In the show beric's body is alive so you agree he isn t a wight? Honestly I didn t understand your post. The discussion was if in the show beric and jon are fire wights or not because their bodies are alive. And you agree with me and then talk about the books where beric is obviously a fire wight because grrm said so.
  9. To me in the bolded part where he says "his heart isn t beating, his blood isn t flowing in his veins, he's a wight". Him being a wight is a conclusion from what he said earlier. If his body was alive he wouldn t be a wight.
  10. Again. In the show there aren t fire wights because both jon and beric have beating hearts and breath. So beric doesn t foreshadow a lot besides plot holes. Besides grrm says beric.is a wight because his body is dead even though he is alive (read your quote). So if in the books there are consequences for ressurectiom amd diferent ways to use magic that don t exist in the show what do you want to conclude? Logic show is diferent from book logic...
  11. Have you read what grrn says? He calls him a wight because even though he is ressurected his body is dead, his heart isn t beating. What I am saying is that a fire wight is a person ressurected by fire magic into a dead body that stays dead (so the body is animated by fire magic because it is biologically impossible for a dead body to.move). In the show jon and beric bodies have beating hearts and breath... therefore they aren t fire wights. They are people ressurected with fire magic into living bodies. Did you understand?
  12. To me it is a person ressurected by fire magic into a body animated by fire magic. The body isn t alive. To me that is the complete information given by grrm.
  13. To me a fire wight is a person ressurected by fire into a body animated by fire magic. It isn t a true ressurection. That is what grrm said. And jon warging into gohst is 99% true because of the prologue and mel vision where jon is constantly changing between gohst and man. Adding that jon thinks of gohst in the last moment there is a lot of book canon that supports this theory. On the other hand there is zero book canon suporting mel ressurecting jon in the book. She shouldn t even have the motivation to do so. You are using show canon and using an interview about another character to predict future book events. However, in matters related to magic the show isn t a good source. For example, what would be the point for the show to have jon warging into gohst? 1) there would tons of people saying it was deux ex machina 2) they don t want the starks warging into the wolves 3) jon ressurection had zero consequences, so why add the warging? Warging into gosht would only be useful for book readers...
  14. Again, we aren t really sure about if and how jon ressurects because his ressurection had no consequences in the show besides leaving the NW which can happen diferently... And don t forget that the show cut a lot of magic that exists in the books, so them using mel doesn t mean she must do it in the books. Again, grrm doesn t say that beric was foreshadowing for jon specifcally. You are the one assuming it as fact. Besides what we actually know as 99% fact is that if jon dies his conscience will go into gohst! It won t go into whatever comes after life and it is a great difference compared to beric. Just this fact makes me doubt that mel could ressurect jon with a dead body because we hanven t seen noone warging into a dead body yet and somehow move the body. So could you discribe preciselly what is a fire wight for you?
  15. The problem is that in the show beric isn t a wight. He is a ressurected person with normal body functions. And in the books jon isn t confirmed to be dead. Grrm said that in his books beric is a fire wight. That doesn t apply yet to jon because in the show there aren t fire wights and jon isn t yet dead in the books... And I think you are applying the word wight wrongly. To be a wight I think you must be using a dead body (as in your heart doesn t beat while you are walking around). Besides, even by you definition if after his body dies jon wargs into gohst, then someone heals his body and then he wargs back into his body he was never dead nor.ressurected. the wight thing is a phisical matter!