A+J=T v.7

[Weirdo]

I agree as the name Tyrion predates the Andals, so I doubt it has anything to do with the Targs. Though the name is the name of at least two Kings.

I didn't bring Tytos as a name up earlier in reference to Targs. It was about Tytos Blackwood, and the possibility that his ancestor Betha was the source of Tyrion's black hair. in that case, George might relate the Blackwoods to Tyrion using allusions, and indeed he does, in Jaime's chapter with Tytos, if you'll see my post above (#185). The name Tytos, as JM points out in the very next comment, might be another allusion to Tyrion as well.

 

The Blackwood clan is of the First Men, and strongly devoted to the old gods. Thus a splash of northern blood in Tyrion, if A+J=T is correct. Ice and fire, indeed.

[ASOIAF_Ali]

 

How many exactly do we know about besides Jon? And Shiera Seastar? The latter being an "official" Targ bastard, of course.

Well it's not the knowing about them, just that secret targ theories are everywhere, I'd just personally prefer him as a lannister, maybe it's just me. Having Jon and Tyrion both be secret targs just seems like overkill to me  :dunno:

[Jô Maltese]

Tyrion would still be a Lannister, just like Jon would still be a Stark.

[Lady Barbrey]

I really want to thank you for putting all the information on AJT up front. I haven't read all eleven pages but at least 7 of them so I think I've got the gist. You've presented a convincing argument with many things I hadn't noticed on my first read through.

There were things I did notice though that made me suspicious. One is a developing trope in the series of what I call 'corrupted Camelot trios', with Arthurian characters, particularly Arthur himself, as a basis for more than one character, twisted out of shape by GRRM.

I won't go into this theory here but suffice to say Robert-Cersei-Jaime is one based on an Arthur Guinever Lancelot trio where Arthur becomes an unhappy bloated king and Lancelot and Guinevere are incestuous twins.

Another is the Aerys-Joanna-Tywin trio based on Uther-Ygrainne-Gorlois. Casterly Rock might as well be Tintagel with its similarity of description and location. Tintagel was where King Arthur was conceived and born. Aerys's lust for Joanna is striking and seems out of place but it is described exactly like High King Uther's lust for Ygrainne, wife of subject king Gorlois, is described. The result of a shapechange - Ygrainne believes she is sleeping with her husband but it is really Uther - is King Arthur who scholars suspect was a real life war leader.

I mention all this briefly - I know myth texts can be boring to people who haven't read the originals - because in combination with Tyrion's shadow being as tall as a king's, his comfort in the hall of dragons, his interest in dragons, and Ghost's immediate dislike of him, this tale underpinning Tyrion's birth, his birthplace, his parents, and his role as a war leader at King's Landing made me suspect he might be Aerys's son with Joanna Lannister. I had never read a post on this subject (didnt even know the forums existed) and moreover wasn't even considering him riding a dragon at that point. But the Arthurian allusions made me suspect it more than anything, so if you do include mythical allusions as evidence for your theory, here is something that helps support it.

So not only is George using textual clues such as Tyrion's eyes, he is using allusion that a lot of fantasy readers who've read the Arthur sagas such as myself might pick up on. But it's disturbed and almost unrecognizable because as I said this is a corrupted Camelot trio playing by George's rules in an end-time, a twilight, not a beginning. Tyrion is a dwarf because of Aerys's dragon inheritance, son of a mad king, probably the result of a rape rather than a shapechange (though we can't rule that out in a book where shapechanging happens). George follows these kinds of myth and legend tropes again and again, alluding to them then twisting them. But they are still there.

Also, I don't know if you included this: Azor Ahai tried to temper his 'sword' in a lion's heart - Joanna was Tywin's 'heart'- but failed to produce Lightbringer. Tyrion is the result instead.

His time was too soon, as was Rhaegar's (crackpot:who might be Bonifer Hasty's son born from his father's 'water' house too hastily amidst the Bonfire of Summerhall). Tinfoil I know but why did we get that tidbit about Bonifer?

Lastly,when did George make that remark about dragonriders not having to be Targs? I ask because I wonder if it's because of the show, which doesn't have time to include much backstory. In the show, we might have Tyrion riding a dragon without any reveal about his possible heritage, whereas in the books we get the clues and a possible reveal. If it's not going to be in the show, that might be a reason for his remarks?

[Mithras]

Tyrion would still be a Lannister, just like Jon would still be a Stark.

 

So the only point of giving Targaryen heritage to Tyrion is to make him a dragonrider. Is that so? Do you think the only point of giving Jon a Targaryen heritage is to make him a dragonrider as well?

[Jô Maltese]

I really want to thank you for putting all the information on AJT up front. I haven't read all eleven pages but at least 7 of them so I think I've got the gist. You've presented a convincing argument with many things I hadn't noticed on my first read through.

There were things I did notice though that made me suspicious. One is a developing trope in the series of what I call 'corrupted Camelot trios', with Arthurian characters, particularly Arthur himself, as a basis for more than one character, twisted out of shape by GRRM.

I won't go into this theory here but suffice to say Robert-Cersei-Jaime is one based on an Arthur Guinever Lancelot trio where Arthur becomes an unhappy bloated king and Lancelot and Guinevere are incestuous twins.

Another is the Aerys-Joanna-Tywin trio based on Uther-Ygrainne-Gorlois. Casterly Rock might as well be Tintagel with its similarity of description and location. Tintagel was where King Arthur was conceived and born. Aerys's lust for Joanna is striking and seems out of place but it is described exactly like High King Uther's lust for Ygrainne, wife of subject king Gorlois, is described. The result of a shapechange - Ygrainne believes she is sleeping with her husband but it is really Uther - is King Arthur who scholars suspect was a real life war leader.

I mention all this briefly - I know myth texts can be boring to people who haven't read the originals - because in combination with Tyrion's shadow being as tall as a king's, his comfort in the hall of dragons, his interest in dragons, and Ghost's immediate dislike of him, this tale underpinning Tyrion's birth, his birthplace, his parents, and his role as a war leader at King's Landing made me suspect he might be Aerys's son with Joanna Lannister. I had never read a post on this subject (didnt even know the forums existed) and moreover wasn't even considering him riding a dragon at that point. But the Arthurian allusions made me suspect it more than anything, so if you do include mythical allusions as evidence for your theory, here is something that helps support it.

So not only is George using textual clues such as Tyrion's eyes, he is using allusion that a lot of fantasy readers who've read the Arthur sagas such as myself might pick up on. But it's disturbed and almost unrecognizable because as I said this is a corrupted Camelot trio playing by George's rules in an end-time, a twilight, not a beginning. Tyrion is a dwarf because of Aerys's dragon inheritance, son of a mad king, probably the result of a rape rather than a shapechange (though we can't rule that out in a book where shapechanging happens). George follows these kinds of myth and legend tropes again and again, alluding to them then twisting them. But they are still there.

Also, I don't know if you included this: Azor Ahai tried to temper his 'sword' in a lion's heart - Joanna was Tywin's 'heart'- but failed to produce Lightbringer. Tyrion is the result instead.

His time was too soon, as was Rhaegar's (crackpot:who might be Bonifer Hasty's son born from his father's 'water' house too hastily amidst the Bonfire of Summerhall). Tinfoil I know but why did we get that tidbit about Bonifer?

Lastly,when did George make that remark about dragonriders not having to be Targs? I ask because I wonder if it's because of the show, which doesn't have time to include much backstory. In the show, we might have Tyrion riding a dragon without any reveal about his possible heritage, whereas in the books we get the clues and a possible reveal. If it's not going to be in the show, that might be a reason for his remarks?

Very interesting, this is a new "angle of attack". Thank You Lady Barbrey. Go ahead and publish your full textual analysis on this thread or as an independent topic - I will certainly read it.

 

 

 

So the only point of giving Targaryen heritage to Tyrion is to make him a dragonrider. Is that so? Do you think the only point of giving Jon a Targaryen heritage is to make him a dragonrider as well?

I do not want to "make" Tyrion anything or do not think Jon will be a dragonrider for that matter. A bit like Lady Barbrey quoted above, I thought of the possibility of T=T (and R+L=J) quite early during my first reading.  Since then, I have kept finding more evidence in my re-reads, or in some threads in this forum (including your "dragon riders"), or while watching the TV series ("I raised you as my own son") and of course in tWoIaF. Today, for me, the evidence (circular or not, biased or not) has become overwhelming and I just don't understand how people like you can't at least acknowledge it (without necessarily buying it).

[ASOIAF_Ali]

 

So the only point of giving Targaryen heritage to Tyrion is to make him a dragonrider. Is that so? Do you think the only point of giving Jon a Targaryen heritage is to make him a dragonrider as well?

Just out of interest, what would be the point of making Tyrion a Targaryen? I mean, GRRM said himself that dragon riders didn't need to have Targ blood didn't he? If he wanted to make Tyrion a dragon rider, he could without making him a targ. I don't hate this theory, just wondering what the point of it would be? 

[yolkboy]

Just out of interest, what would be the point of making Tyrion a Targaryen? I mean, GRRM said himself that dragon riders didn't need to have Targ blood didn't he?

 

This isn't true

 

But he did say (at 92Y)

 

(Targs were) 'keeping the bloodlines pure in order to better control the dragons'

[ASOIAF_Ali]

 

This isn't true

 

But he did say (at 92Y)

 

(Targs were) 'keeping the bloodlines pure in order to better to control the dragons'

Ok thanks, I wasn't sure, just thought I'd heard he'd said it somewhere. That would make more sense with this theory to me  ^_^

[Mithras]

 I mean, GRRM said himself that dragon riders didn't need to have Targ blood didn't he?

 

George said these:

 

This third Targaryen might very well be -not- a Targaryen, to quote his exact words... "Three heads of the dragon... yes... but the third will not nessesarily BE a Targaryen..."

 

5. Since all of their mothers died, who gave Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen and Tyrion Lannister their names?

Mothers can name a child before birth, or during, or after, even while they are dying. Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, Jon by Ned.

 

Just wait and see how the AJT crowd brushes away these obstacles. It always gives me  :rolleyes:  

[ASOIAF_Ali]

 

George said these:

 

This third Targaryen might very well be -not- a Targaryen, to quote his exact words... "Three heads of the dragon... yes... but the third will not nessesarily BE a Targaryen..."

 

This quote you've used makes me think that the third head won't be a targaryen, and since it's likely to be Dany, Jon and Tyrion, I don't think Tyrion will be a targ since R+L=J is much more likely. I might be wrong though  :cool4:

[Mithras]

I do not want to "make" Tyrion anything or do not think Jon will be a dragonrider for that matter. A bit like Lady Barbrey quoted above, I thought of the possibility of T=T (and R+L=J) quite early during my first reading.  Since then, I have kept finding more evidence in my re-reads, or in some threads in this forum (including your "dragon riders"), or while watching the TV series ("I raised you as my own son") and of course in tWoIaF. Today, for me, the evidence (circular or not, biased or not) has become overwhelming and I just don't understand how people like you can't at least acknowledge it (without necessarily buying it).

 

Yes but this is a literary product. Something as important as RLJ or AJT have to solve a problem and contribute to something. George cannot make them true on a whim.

[yolkboy]

 

George said these:

 

This third Targaryen might very well be -not- a Targaryen, to quote his exact words... "Three heads of the dragon... yes... but the third will not nessesarily BE a Targaryen..."

 

you're assuming the three heads = three dragon riders.

[yolkboy]

 

5. Since all of their mothers died, who gave Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen and Tyrion Lannister their names?

Mothers can name a child before birth, or during, or after, even while they are dying. Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, Jon by Ned.

 

Tywin will always be Tyrion's father. Maybe you don't understand fatherhood? You can be a father either by siring or raising.

[Mithras]

you're assuming the three heads = three dragon riders.

 

I am not assuming that. AJT people are assuming that because it is one of the two key presuppostions of the AJT theory though they cannot openly admit it (the other one being Targaryen blood necessary to ride dragons).

[Mithras]

Tywin will always be Tyrion's father. Maybe you don't understand fatherhood? You can be a father either by siring or raising.

 

Then, you should admit that the only reason why Tyrion is Aerys' bastard is to give him Targ blood for some purpose.

[yolkboy]

 

Then, you should admit that the only reason why Tyrion is Aerys' bastard is to give him Targ blood for some purpose.

 

That's the theory as i understand it.

[Mithras]

That's the theory as i understand it.

 

Well, if that "some purpose" is the ability to ride dragons, it is circular logic for the time being. Worse, it is spelled out in the text as such before it is proven. That brings it closer to a giant red herring territory.

 

Moreover, A+J is not the only way to give Targaryen blood to Tyrion if that is the only purpose. Six daughters of Garmund Hightower and the possible descendants of Viserys Plumm or some illegitimate descent are perfectly valid options.

 

So, the picture is more or less like this:

 

The foundation of the AJT is based on circular logic.

The danger of red herring is in the horizon.

The evidences are very inconclusive and stretchy.

If the only purpose is Targ blood, there are many other options.

Two SSMs that challenge AJT seriously are hard to brush away.

[Lord Varys]

People usually ignore the 'not necessarily' part of that SSM. That doesn't mean that not all three dragonriders/dragon heads will turn out to have Targaryen blood or bear the Targaryen name. It just opens the possibility that this might be the case.

 

And besides, who is the third dragon head going to be who isn't a Targaryen in that quote? It could easily be Jon Snow considering the fact that the man might never actually bear the name 'Targaryen' throughout the whole series. Tyrion wouldn't be a Targaryen, too, in the true sense of the word, if he was Aerys' bastard son and never legitimized. A Hill is a Hill, and a Targaryen is a Targaryen.

[Mithras]

Hey, I am on fire again.

 

AJT proponents say that this theory will have no consequence to Tywin-Tyrion dynamics because Tywin is dead and the said dynamics is frozen.

 

This is logical fallacy. If a new and important fact about this dynamics emerges, we have to redefine this dynamics. We have to reinterpret everything we know about Tywin and Tyrion’s relationship in such a case. This is a significant change of dynamics.

 

There is another bad consequence of this theory. Due to some words and actions of Tywin and his desire to resign at the Anniversary Tourney, the proponents say that Tywin had legitimate doubts that Tyrion is not his son and use them as evidences of this theory.

 

If Tywin had legitimate doubts about Tyrion’s paternity, then all the shitty treatment Tyrion got from him is justified. This is a whitewashing of Tywin.

 

Therefore, you should either stop proposing that Tywin had any doubts about Tyrion’s paternity or agree to whitewash Tywin. There is no middle ground.