The Slayer of Lies

[Shierak Qiya]

From an interview with GRRM:

The whole point of the scene in A Game of Thrones where Daenerys hatches the dragons is that she makes the magic up as she goes along; she is someone who really might do anything. I wanted magic to be something barely under control and half instinctive--not the John W. Campbell version with magic as the science and technology of other sorts of world, that works by simple and understandable rules.

That settles the matter. She is the Mother of Dragons and the Unburnt.

The first two lies appear to be straight-forward. pointing to Stannis and Aegon. The third, could simply involve Daenerys correcting how the followers of R'Hllor have been misrepresenting her to the people. Benerro wants to use her celebrity (for lack of another word) and her power to sway people to his religion. She's going to do this and that, end the long night, keep winter from coming back, and her followers get to cheat death. Benerro expects her to make his religion the official religion of slaver's bay and westeros. I expect that Dany will set him straight.

[sweetsunray]

That settles the matter. She is the Mother of Dragons and the Unburnt.

The first two lies appear to be straight-forward. pointing to Stannis and Aegon. The third, could simply involve Daenerys correcting how the followers of R'Hllor have been misrepresenting her to the people. Benerro wants to use her celebrity (for lack of another word) and her power to sway people to his religion. She's going to do this and that, end the long night, keep winter from coming back, and her followers get to cheat death. Benerro expects her to make his religion the official religion of slaver's bay and westeros. I expect that Dany will set him straight.

Yes, that could work with my OP. Although I have my doubts as dragons being the all-powerful ultimate tool against the Others' magic of winter weather. Dragons in storms and hailstorms for example don't seem to last so long. Not sure they could withstand a snow or ice blizzard, evne if they are fire in the flesh.

[Isobel Harper]

I've been rereading Undying prophecy:

From a smoking tower, a great stone beast took wing, breathing shadow fire.

Perhaps this foreshadows Daenerys admitting that dragons bring death and destruction. She began to realize in ADwD ("dragons plant no tree"), but instead of beginning to embrace it as she did in the end of the book, perhaps she begins to admit that dragons are a part of the impending apocalypse, even if the dragons are so unwittingly.

[El Guapo]

No, he is. The Targs broke the feudal contract and were overthrown by the Arryns, Starks, and Tullys (the Baratheons were there too, but they were much less important to the conflict). Then the whole realm accepted the Baratheon dynasty. But even if that didn't happen, Stannis would still be the rightful king. Females cannot claim the Targ throne, it goes to the most suitable male. Stannis is Dany's cousin, so his claim is better than hers by the Targ rules.

Renly is a bullshitter. Tradition and law matter a lot in medieval society. In fact, that's why Robert Baratheon was king at all, rather than Jon Arryn. He was Dany's cousin too. And that's why Renly was going to be crowned king (he at least had some claim). If that idea was true, Renly would be dead (well, dead sooner), and Mace would be king. That army was his, not Renly's.

No it isn't. He is not a Targaryen male.

[Isobel Harper]

No it isn't. He is not a Targaryen male.

But he can claim the throne through Targaryen blood. His grandmother was Targaryen. Think of Robert's Rebellion as the War of the Roses with the Targaryens and Baratheons being the Lancasters and the Yorks. (No direct parallelism intended.)

[GravyFace]

But he can claim the throne through Targaryen blood. His grandmother was Targaryen. Think of Robert's Rebellion as the War of the Roses with the Targaryens and Baratheons being the Lancasters and the Yorks. (No direct parallelism intended.)

Stannis does not come before Dany. It makes no sense for the Targaryen house to allow a member of another house with a different name to inherit before an actual Targaryen who would give the Targaryen name to their offspring. Letting Stannis inherit over Dany would effectively end the Targaryen house, and the whole point is to try to preserve the house and it's name.

[sweetsunray]

I've been rereading Undying prophecy:

From a smoking tower, a great stone beast took wing, breathing shadow fire.

Perhaps this foreshadows Daenerys admitting that dragons bring death and destruction. She began to realize in ADwD ("dragons plant no tree"), but instead of beginning to embrace it as she did in the end of the book, perhaps she begins to admit that dragons are a part of the impending apocalypse, even if the dragons are so unwittingly.

Here I think you touched upon why "waking dragons out of stone" is the false identifier for the PtwP or Azor Ahai reborn. Dragons against wights? Whoosh, light 'em up, Dany! That works! But against Others? Hailstorms? Icestorms? They are magical in that they are fire made flesh, but they are also very very mortal. And they can and no doubt will be used to cause a lot of conquest destruction. Dany can't control all 3, and one no doubt will be stolen by IB. (And Dany can't carry her army on her back, but needs to get across the Narrow Sea with ships. If the IB offer a whole fleet to her and pledge themselves to her...) Eventually that does not make for a savior against the Long Night. What will be immune to Others? What has been immune to Others for thousands of years? A Wall of Ice, not a wall of fire. Someone who is ice made flesh would be immune against Others. But someone would not survive being ice made flesh, I suspect, without having enough fire in them to keep them human still.

[sweetsunray]

The Targ line of inheritance was Rhaegar -> his trueborn male children -> his daughter -> Viserys -> Daenerys before any Baratheon. The change of inheritance law after DwD did not disinherit women altogether, but made it so that the female sisters would come after her brothers and their children even if the brother was younger than her. It is only when there are no brothers left, and the brothers have no children (including no daughters), that a sister can inherit. Until Aegon's reappearance that was the case for Dany. But with Aegon's reappearance, she has no Targ dynasty claim anymore. Of course, she will probably use the HotU vision as proof to herself to dethrone Aegon. If she kills him she will be a kinslayer as well as a kingslayer.

[Lord Varys]

Stannis isn't all that much of a metaphor in the vision, or is he? Dany has never seen him, so the blue-eyed king would have been a vision of Stannis bearing his fiery crown which identified him as a king. The lost shadow may have been a sign that Mel had drawn quite a lot of life force out of him for the two shadows she made. That's not exactly a metaphor. This vision being relatively close to reality may be due to the fact that Stannis had already done all that stuff by that time - while Aegon's revelation and the stone beast are still in the future.

I don't think the Undying tried to use metaphoric vision to confuse Daenerys - I think the very nature of magic in George's world makes prophetic visions and dreams not exactly easy to decipher. For instance, we see that Maggy the Frog can answer concrete questions about the future of a person by tasting their blood. Yet it doesn't seem that whatever she tastes in the blood gives her more than a glimpse of the future. She got the numbers of Cersei's and Robert's children right - but did she see all their faces in front of her inner eye? She may have seen golden crowns and shrouds for her children, but does that mean all we sit the Iron Throne? She has seen that a younger brother (presumably Cersei's younger brother) will kill or destroy her, yet could she actually name or describe that brother? We don't know.

In a more literal sense the winged/flying stone beast breathing shadow fire suggests an artificially created dragon. As a metaphor this could refer to another fake Targaryen, or a Targaryen descendant who is artificially/magically amplified to fulfill the role of the savior. Shadow fire suggests shadowbinding and fake fire to me rather than something that is actually very powerful on its own. Just as Stannis' Lightbringer most likely won't be of much help against an Other, a creature breathing shadow fire most likely won't be able to burn an Other.

The visions aren't completely metaphors. The only metaphor in the Stannis' vision is the lack of a shadow (he still has a physical shadow, I assume), and the cheering crowd in the Aegon vision is most likely also no metaphor (in fact, the vision could be a rendering of a coming scene when King Aegon VI Targaryen presents himself to the people of KL on the walls of the Red Keep and his cheered by the smallfolk). In that sense, I'd expect the tower being no metaphor in the stone beast vision, either.

Could the tower be the Hightower of Oldtown, and the stone beast being something Lord Leyton and the Mad Maid are working to create? The Hightowers are one of the great houses who may have Targaryen blood, after all (through the Rhaena-Garmund match).

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

In a more literal sense the winged/flying stone beast breathing shadow fire suggests an artificially created dragon. As a metaphor this could refer to another fake Targaryen, or a Targaryen descendant who is artificially/magically amplified to fulfill the role of the savior. Shadow fire suggests shadowbinding and fake fire to me rather than something that is actually very powerful on its own. Just as Stannis' Lightbringer most likely won't be of much help against an Other, a creature breathing shadow fire most likely won't be able to burn an Other...

Could the tower be the Hightower of Oldtown, and the stone beast being something Lord Leyton and the Mad Maid are working to create? The Hightowers are one of the great houses who may have Targaryen blood, after all (through the Rhaena-Garmund match).

This makes some sense given that the prophesy suggests to me a dragonlike machine used as a weapon of war. Though we also have legends of stone dragons from Dragonstone and Winterfell as potential candidates. I noticed that someone in the 'Dragon in Winterfell' thread (http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/66547-a-dragon-in-winterfell-hot-springs/) suggested that Winterfell was where the last battle of the Long Night was fought. Perhaps the stone dragon is a buried weapon left over from this time *huge crackpot.

[sweetsunray]

Stannis isn't all that much of a metaphor in the vision, or is he? Dany has never seen him, so the blue-eyed king would have been a vision of Stannis bearing his fiery crown which identified him as a king. The lost shadow may have been a sign that Mel had drawn quite a lot of life force out of him for the two shadows she made. That's not exactly a metaphor. This vision being relatively close to reality may be due to the fact that Stannis had already done all that stuff by that time - while Aegon's revelation and the stone beast are still in the future.

I don't think the Undying tried to use metaphoric vision to confuse Daenerys - I think the very nature of magic in George's world makes prophetic visions and dreams not exactly easy to decipher. For instance, we see that Maggy the Frog can answer concrete questions about the future of a person by tasting their blood. Yet it doesn't seem that whatever she tastes in the blood gives her more than a glimpse of the future. She got the numbers of Cersei's and Robert's children right - but did she see all their faces in front of her inner eye? She may have seen golden crowns and shrouds for her children, but does that mean all we sit the Iron Throne? She has seen that a younger brother (presumably Cersei's younger brother) will kill or destroy her, yet could she actually name or describe that brother? We don't know.

In a more literal sense the winged/flying stone beast breathing shadow fire suggests an artificially created dragon. As a metaphor this could refer to another fake Targaryen, or a Targaryen descendant who is artificially/magically amplified to fulfill the role of the savior. Shadow fire suggests shadowbinding and fake fire to me rather than something that is actually very powerful on its own. Just as Stannis' Lightbringer most likely won't be of much help against an Other, a creature breathing shadow fire most likely won't be able to burn an Other.

The visions aren't completely metaphors. The only metaphor in the Stannis' vision is the lack of a shadow (he still has a physical shadow, I assume), and the cheering crowd in the Aegon vision is most likely also no metaphor (in fact, the vision could be a rendering of a coming scene when King Aegon VI Targaryen presents himself to the people of KL on the walls of the Red Keep and his cheered by the smallfolk). In that sense, I'd expect the tower being no metaphor in the stone beast vision, either.

Could the tower be the Hightower of Oldtown, and the stone beast being something Lord Leyton and the Mad Maid are working to create? The Hightowers are one of the great houses who may have Targaryen blood, after all (through the Rhaena-Garmund match).

Oh, I completely agree that metaphors is the typical language and imagery when it comes to prophecies and dreams. This is not just for magical reasons. It's because that is the language in dreams, period, even our dreams. When dreaming, the centres of the brain that deal with space and time of reality are periodically blocked (less blood towards it, less activity), same for rational tought. The parts of the brain that get hyperactive are that of symbolic language, that are way more related to emotional understanding of the world, than a rational one. If you write out the imagery of a dream you had you'll be struck at how many wordplay and puns are present in the dream. Dreams are basically imagery of words and concepts. The only thing that in dreams is pretty much straightforward are not the events or the imagery, but the emotons that the dreamer feels during the dream sequence. That's why for dream understanding, making note of the different emotions the dreamer felt during the dream is so important.

If someone tells you they saw a future event in a dream and describe a literal event with a literal interpretation you can be sure they're lying. Because the literal language and real-life related parts of the brain are non-active. Within the scientific dream research done, including future event dreams, they always use symbolic language. Dreams and visions and prophecies use imagery as a language. Even most of Mel's visions in the fire contain that symbolic nature, although she sees literal future events... she just interpretes them wrongly.

Call it a metaphor, call it wordplay, call it puns, call it symbolic visionary language... the fact remains that aside from the daughter of death visions (that have to do with the past) all the other visions use metaphors, images for wordplay and puns. And yes, your argument about Stannis vision containing only one metaphor was something I already pointed out (strange, how you point something out to me that I pointed out even in the OP already). Notice how she sees Stannis literally how he looks, but he does nothing. She is merely given a literal idea of what he looks like. But he does not do anything in her vision. And what the vision does show about what he has been doing is portrayed symbolically/metaphoirically... he's been spending his "shadow" to make "shadowbabies" until he has no shadow left anymore. By the time Dany has this vision of him in the HotU, Stannis has already used up his shadow for the two shadow babies to kill Renly and the man holding Storm's End in order to get to Edric Storm. What's more, he has already completely outed himself and has been claimed to be Azor Ahai publically. Stannis claims and his identity are completely in the open already, and the present at the time of the HotU. In contrast, Aegon is still hidden and Rhaegar only made the claim about him being the PtwP to Elia, and to which only Dany has been a witness to in the HotU in a vision of a past event. And while Dany has woken dragons out of stone eggs already, she and her dragons are hidden as well, and any claim made about her being Azor Ahai reborn or the PtwP is still to be made in the future.

Note too, how this vision is a bridge between the literal events/hopes of the past that died (Viserys getting a pot of molten gold on his head, Rheago burning down cities as the Stallion that mounts the wolrd, and Rhaegar's death). We move from literal visions to metaphorical ones. To do so completely, for the reader, would be too abrupt. So GRRM sneaks an increasingly amount of metaphors with each new vision.

Next is the cloth dragon on poles carried by people. This is not a literal scene. Yes, obviously Aegon will be wlecomed, hailed and popular by the people. But it's still a symbolically represented event. And of course Aegon does not literally look like a cloth dragon on poles.

To then jump back to a literal event being shown simply makes no sense, not from a writing POV, not from a reading POV, not from a dream/prophetic language POV, and not in the sequence where we go from literal events of the past to purely metaphorical ones for the last three (silver in the grass plains representing her marriage to Drogo, a dead (what is dead may never die) Greyjoy (grey lips smiling sadly) on the prow of a boat (commander of a fleet), and a blue rose in a wall (Lyanna's son Jon = wall of ice). GRRM does write this prophecy with great detail and care and within a certain logic in order to decipher it. If he goes from literal to increasingly metaphorical, jumps unexpectedly back to 'sorry completely literal', and then back to completely metaphorical ones in that order, then that's a badly written prophecy and it is then completely pointless for readers to try and figure it out (it's cheating). I count on GRRM being a way better writer than that.

[The Dames do Moan]

A sword like "Lightbringer", and "blue eyed king" points us very easily to Stannis Baratheon. The "no shadow" part confirms this conclusion because Stannis basically gave his shadow to Melisandre to make shadowbabies.

Not a huge thing, and I agree that the first vision is portraying Stannis "slaying the lie" that he is AA. But in my opinion I think the "cast no shadow" refers to Mel not supporting the idea that he is AA anymore rather than the shadow babies. I think it foreshadowing Mel eventually ending up not backing Stannis anymore as AAR and only after that does Dany "slay" the lie.

Multiple times Mel is referred to as Stannis's "Red Shadow". Eventually she will leave him and then Stannis won't have his shadow anymore. The quotes seem to be about how she is always with him or near him, which just leads me to believe she won't be in the future.

Only the dead were left behind. Jon watched Stannis descend from the platform, with Melisandre by his side. His red shadow. She never leaves his side for long.

All of you did not seem to include Lady Melisandre. The king's red shadow.

[sweetsunray]

Not a huge thing, and I agree that the first vision is portraying Stannis "slaying the lie" that he is AA. But in my opinion I think the "cast no shadow" refers to Mel not supporting the idea that he is AA anymore rather than the shadow babies. I think it foreshadowing Mel eventually ending up not backing Stannis anymore as AAR and only after that does Dany "slay" the lie.

Multiple times Mel is referred to as Stannis's "Red Shadow". Eventually she will leave him and then Stannis won't have his shadow anymore. The quotes seem to be about how she is always with him or near him, which just leads me to believe she won't be in the future.

Possible, though I think without the "no shadow" part there would be endless discussions whether it's Stannis or not from aCoK onwards. Why do I say that? I think that aGoT and aCoK must contain all the information needed to figure out the prophecies. Some events may have not yet come to pass, some claims may have not yet been made, but the deciphering of the HotU visions and the identification must be doable with the info on just the text of the first two books alone. Ohterwise, I'm pretty sure GRRM would count it as cheating. The "no shadow" symbol is used by GRRM to make 100% clear to us who he is. Note how there's no mentioning of black haired whiskers, beard of bald head, only the blue eyes.

Stannis' red shadow is from the later books.

[Lord Freddy Blackfyre]

Stannis isn't the rightful King and the supposed legitimacy of the Baratheon doesn't come from the so called "right of conquest" but because he had the blood of the dragons, that's why neither Jon Arryn or Ned Stark (the real leaders of the rebellion) couldn't be King, that's also the reason why Robert needed all the Targaryen children dead.

[sweetsunray]

Stannis isn't the rightful King and the supposed legitimacy of the Baratheon doesn't come from the so called "right of conquest" but because he had the blood of the dragons, that's why neither Jon Arryn or Ned Stark (the real leaders of the rebellion) couldn't be King, that's also the reason why Robert needed all the Targaryen children dead.

It's a combination of conquest and dragonlord blood. Robert did declare a Baratheon dynasty, not a Targaryen one. Once Robert's dynasty is going, then Stannis is the rightful king, because Robert only has bastards for his own children (none of them legitimized), and his wife has only children by another man. And yet Cersei, nor Tywin claim Lannisters rule the throne. They claim the children are Baratheons, not Lannisters, which are lies. Robert claimed he was a Baratheon, not a Targaryen, after conquest. The fact that Cersei must maintain the lie about who fathered her children says enough about who would be the rightful king otherwise in the people's and lords' eyes. Hell, even the Martells would side with Stannis in that case, over lionspawn on the IT

[Sanset]

I think the prophecy is going to be fulfilled in a twisted but rolling-eyes way.
Edric Storm and Daenerys have a very interesting link through Dragon-stone and Stannis. They were smuggled out because Stannis wanted to kill them because of their kingsblood.

Alayne Stone, is a lie. Dany is supposed to clash with her if (f)Aegon and Littlefinger are in the middle. And if Sansa, who was a Stone, has a baby with fAegon, that baby is a dragon awaken from a stone=Sansa, an echo from (auntie) Lyanna and (uncle) Rhaegar.

But what about Mya Stone: She is a "dragonseed" because of Robert's dragonblood and she reminds me of Nettles, not only because she seems to be a nobody out of the blue heroine, but also because her impossible love story, like Nettles.

I think Robert was not a true king, he was an usurper. He knew that so he wanted to murder every other "blood of the dragon". But! he has kingsblood because of his Targaryen grandmother. I think the importance of Robert, the kinslayer, is because what he wanted to erase: the dragonblood. And he was after the true dragon: Daenerys. Ironically, that explains all those pages and pages about his bastards: the dragonseeds. There are readers who even compared him with Aegon IV, because the troubles he caused to the Realm.

In synthesis: I think the *stones* are metaphorical the same way the prophetic dreams displays dragons but they mean Targaryens.

ETA: There's also that suggestive name of Storm's End, Stormborn.

For those who've read Asimov's Foundation it's such a cool connection.

[Balerion the kitten]

Firstly - As it's been pointed out, the same logic that goes into Stannis's claim is the same one that goes into Tommens. Which is "if you can take it it's yours". Hence Stannis isn't the rightful ruler.

Secondly - it's not him being a fake dragon, the vision was showing how she needs to slay the lie that comes along with the mummers dragon. Mummer = varys, dragon = aegon. The lie that comes with the mummers dragon (varys's dragon) is the name targaryen.

The lie isn't him being azor ahai.

Thirdly - it was a stone beast. The deliberate description of a beast instead of a dragon is an important factor to consider. Daenerys is a dragon, so she doesn't qualify for that.

[sweetsunray]

Firstly - As it's been pointed out, the same logic that goes into Stannis's claim is the same one that goes into Tommens. Which is "if you can take it it's yours". Hence Stannis isn't the rightful ruler.

Secondly - it's not him being a fake dragon, the vision was showing how she needs to slay the lie that comes along with the mummers dragon. Mummer = varys, dragon = aegon. The lie that comes with the mummers dragon (varys's dragon) is the name targaryen.

The lie isn't him being azor ahai.

Thirdly - it was a stone beast. The deliberate description of a beast instead of a dragon is an important factor to consider. Daenerys is a dragon, so she doesn't qualify for that.

1 - Tommen is a pretender, because he pretends to be a Baratheon, which he isn't. The only Baratheon left, next in line is Stannis. As long as Cersei and Tommen only rely on the claim that he's a Baratheon without changing the dynasty name, then they're pretenders, not throne takers.

2- and yet Dany sees the HotU vision of Rheagar claiming Aegon is the PtwP. And he stares at Dany at the end. What's the relevance of showing it in the HotU. If it was just about PtwP and the "song of ice and fire" for the reader alone, then GRRM could have Aemon babble about it. But it's shown to Dany. This means that GRRM wants Dany to know this piece of information. What would be the relevance for her? Because it ties back to Rhaegar's claim about the person who is the mummer's dragon. She needs that info for the lie part about him.

3 - it's not just a "stone beast". It's a stone beast with wings breathing smoking fire. "beast with wings breathing smoking fire" = dragon. If you know any other animal in the whole of planetos with wings that breathes fire than a dragon, then please enlighten me. It being made of "stone" is the hint that the vision is a metaphor, symbolical. It being a "beast" indicates the lie involves dragon-beasties, rather than dragon-people (Targs, Blackfyres, Velaryions, Baratheons). But dragon-beasties are not a lie. They are back, alive, growing, foraging, breathing fire. There can only be one lie about them in aGot and aCoK, and that is that the PtwP or Azor Ahai reborn will "wake dragon-beasties out of stone" (which completely fits the vision of the stone dragon rising from a tower, though of course pictured in an absurd way that would never happen, in the way Mel thought it would, and never succeeded in). In other words, Dany having dragons and Dany being the Mother of dragons does not make her the PtwP or Azor Ahai. Same goes for anyone else who wakes a dragon-beastie. She may be PtwP or Azor Ahai reborn for many other reasons, but Aemon's ascertion "the dragons prove it" is the lie.

[Balerion the kitten]

Not answering one because this isn't about Stannis's claim, and I don't wish to derail the thread.

2) fair enough.

3) It was described as shadow fire, hence a fake dragon. Because one, it was described as a beast and two it's not real fire.

[sweetsunray]

Not answering one because this isn't about Stannis's claim, and I don't wish to derail the thread.

2) fair enough.

3) It was described as shadow fire, hence a fake dragon. Because one, it was described as a beast and two it's not real fire.

Yes sorry, "shadow fire"... sounds like "black fire". Would you say that about Balerion the Black Dread as well? He breathes black fire, as black as his scales. And who gives us that bit of info? Dany in aCoK

Exactly because it's described as a "beast", I wouldn't call it a "fake dragon", nor would I call Belarion a fake dragon because his fire was as black as a shadow would be.

"Aegon's dragons were named for the gods of Old Valyria," she told her bloodriders one morning after a long night's journey. "Visenya's dragon was Vhagar, Rhaenys had Meraxes, and Aegon rode Balerion, the Black Dread. It was said that Vhagar's breath was so hot that it could melt a knight's armor and cook the man inside, that Meraxes swallowed horses whole, and Balerion . . . his fire was as black as his scales, his wings so vast that whole towns were swallowed up in their shadow when he passed overhead."(aCoK? Daenerys I)