R+L=J v.160

[Ygrain]

Does anyone have the link to the SSM or whatever it was where GRRM confirms that the HotU scene shows Rhaegar with Elia and baby Aegon, please?

[Black Crow]

A quick google hasn't turned up anything but as usual its probably a matter of how the search is phrased. As the child in the vision is named Aegon the query would have to be framed around Elia, but I do have a recollection though of another [?] SSM in which GRRM said that the child in the vision is now dead.

 

[Consigliere]

6 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Does anyone have the link to the SSM or whatever it was where GRRM confirms that the HotU scene shows Rhaegar with Elia and baby Aegon, please?

I searched long and hard about a year ago for this SSM and nothing turned up. If it was mentioned in one of those video interviews then the chances of finding it are slim unless you know exactly which video you are looking for. The only place I've seen it stated is Ran's entry in the prophecies section at The Citadel where he says that Martin confirmed the vision was of Rhaegar, Elia and newborn Aegon.

[Consigliere]

3 hours ago, Black Crow said:

but I do have a recollection though of another [?] SSM in which GRRM said that the child in the vision is now dead.

Ran makes mention of this at The Citadel as well. Apparently it was mentioned in a mail to an individual, however, the exact wording of the statement was never produced and the person could not confirm that he had interpreted Martin's statement correctly.

[Walder Waters]

Do you think that R+L=J was "arranged" by the order of the green men?

I mean Howland Reed's mere presence was causal for the development at Harrenhal and may actually have been a conditio sine qua non. Considering that Howland was at the Isles of Faces before, he might have been send by the green men... What do you think?

[MtnLion]

11 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Does anyone have the link to the SSM or whatever it was where GRRM confirms that the HotU scene shows Rhaegar with Elia and baby Aegon, please?

I have been looking for it, on and off.  The more I look, the more convinced I am that it is in one of the online chat sessions near the date of the release of Clash.  It would be nice if Elio could be persuaded to provide a reference. 

8 hours ago, Black Crow said:

A quick google hasn't turned up anything but as usual its probably a matter of how the search is phrased. As the child in the vision is named Aegon the query would have to be framed around Elia, but I do have a recollection though of another [?] SSM in which GRRM said that the child in the vision is now dead.

 

Now, that is NEW to me. 

[Black Crow]

7 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

I have been looking for it, on and off.  The more I look, the more convinced I am that it is in one of the online chat sessions near the date of the release of Clash.  It would be nice if Elio could be persuaded to provide a reference. 

Now, that is NEW to me. 

See Consigliere's post above, but as he observes whilst there's no real reason to doubt it interpretation is problematic.

Sandor Clegane is dead but the gravedigger lives...

[Ygrain]

2 hours ago, Walder Waters said:

Do you think that R+L=J was "arranged" by the order of the green men?

I mean Howland Reed's mere presence was causal for the development at Harrenhal and may actually have been a conditio sine qua non. Considering that Howland was at the Isles of Faces before, he might have been send by the green men... What do you think?

There is definitely heavy CotF influence in the whole Prince that was Promised business, so Howland may have been their pawn, yes.

1 hour ago, MtnLion said:

I have been looking for it, on and off.  The more I look, the more convinced I am that it is in one of the online chat sessions near the date of the release of Clash.  It would be nice if Elio could be persuaded to provide a reference. 

But the vision in question was only revealed in Clash, or am I confusing something?

1 hour ago, MtnLion said:

Now, that is NEW to me. 

To me, too - that would be basically confirming that YG is not the real deal, and I don't think George would do that, ADWD doesn't provide that much material to claim this with certainty, so it would be giving away a major plot point.

Unless, of course, he said something like "the baby whom everyone believes to be dead", which, IMHO, is way likelier.

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

Sandor Clegane is dead but the gravedigger lives...

Yeah but here we have a person whose dead body was never seen (see the Bene Gesserit aphorism, 'Never count a Human as dead until you see his body. And even then you can make a mistake.'), assuming a new identity, whereas in Aegon's case it's a supposedly dead boy who continues the previous identity.

[MtnLion]

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

But the vision in question was only revealed in Clash, or am I confusing something?

Soon after the release of Clash, is probably a better way for to have phrased that response.  Sorry.

By the bye, if you are looking for it for the same reason that I was, that OP is being silly.  He won't accept Ran's word for it, in spite of Ran posting all of the SSMs. 

[Shmedricko]

On 3/30/2016 at 10:25 PM, Ygrain said:

Does anyone have the link to the SSM or whatever it was where GRRM confirms that the HotU scene shows Rhaegar with Elia and baby Aegon, please?

On 3/30/2016 at 0:40 AM, Black Crow said:

A quick google hasn't turned up anything but as usual its probably a matter of how the search is phrased. As the child in the vision is named Aegon the query would have to be framed around Elia, but I do have a recollection though of another [?] SSM in which GRRM said that the child in the vision is now dead.

On 3/30/2016 at 4:34 AM, Consigliere said:

I searched long and hard about a year ago for this SSM and nothing turned up. If it was mentioned in one of those video interviews then the chances of finding it are slim unless you know exactly which video you are looking for. The only place I've seen it stated is Ran's entry in the prophecies section at The Citadel where he says that Martin confirmed the vision was of Rhaegar, Elia and newborn Aegon.

On 3/30/2016 at 4:40 AM, Consigliere said:

Ran makes mention of this at The Citadel as well. Apparently it was mentioned in a mail to an individual, however, the exact wording of the statement was never produced and the person could not confirm that he had interpreted Martin's statement correctly.

On 3/30/2016 at 9:34 AM, MtnLion said:

I have been looking for it, on and off.  The more I look, the more convinced I am that it is in one of the online chat sessions near the date of the release of Clash.  It would be nice if Elio could be persuaded to provide a reference. 

Now, that is NEW to me. 

From the old EEsite forum:

Quote

[Ants:] Ran, are you sure it's Elia in Dany's vision? I haven't got my book around, but I always thought it was Lyanna, and the reason the child was prophesized was that it had Stark (Ice) and Taergayen (Fire) blood in it, it being Jon.

[Ran:] It's Elia with Aegon. GRRM's confirmed that. It's not part of the SSM collection as I could never get a hold of the folk who found that out to get a copy, but the people who said it are trustworthy. Someone else learned from GRRM that the child in the scene is definently dead.

http://community.fortunecity.ws/healthclub/rowing/100/song/thread43/thread431.html

Quote

[Ran:] This is from an e-mail that Revanshe forwarded to the board from an ASoIaF mailing list, originally posted by Rania after recieving a reply from GRRM: 

<< Who is the couple celebrating the birth of a son that Dany sees in her vision in the wizard's palacein Qarth? Can you tell us? Is it Rhaegar and someone? or is it the original Aegon (the Conqueror?) >> 

Rhaegar and his wife, Elia of Dorne. 

Someone else, or maybe still Revanshe, forwarded from the same list: 

I asked GRRM today about that, he said that the child from the scene is dead. I also asked whether The Song of Ice and Fire are the song of someone particular, he said that the phrase could be used in many contexts....obviously, he is hiding something

I don't share labor's dubiousness, because the second comment -- of A Song of Ice and Fire having multiple meanings happens to be a statement from March 17, 1999 ... exactly one day _before_ Martin confirmed that same thing, for the first time I've ever seen, at the Event Horizon Chat. So, the person definently did seem to have contacted him, and they seemed unequivocal about what GRRM said, even though they show a healthy amount of speculation concerning the second statement. 

Seems clear cut to me. I don't think Revanshe would have forwarded it unless she believed what the fellow said.

http://community.fortunecity.ws/healthclub/rowing/100/clashkin/thread2s/thread2s1.html

[Black Crow]

Ah, most kind. Thank you. 

[IceFire125]

Whoa! therefore... fAegon confirmed?? not that I doubted it in the first place.

[Ygrain]

12 minutes ago, IceFire125 said:

Whoa! therefore... fAegon confirmed?? not that I doubted it in the first place.

Neither did I :-)

Thanks for the links, Shmedricko, much appreciated.

[IceFire125]

37 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Neither did I :-)

Thanks for the links, Shmedricko, much appreciated.

That link is full of gold.

Ran made an opinion that is similar to mine all along.

Quote

I figure he (Rhaegar) was rash, yeah. He was naming his kids after the Conqueror and his sisters. He no doubt presumed he was having another daughter with Elia, too. And then, flash from above, he sees Lyanna and somehow comes to realize that the "prince that was promised" must come from her.

I wonder if he also believes, like me, that factoring in what Rhaegar read in Daenys' scrolls, remembering the pact of Ice and Fire with the Starks, dreams/visions maybe from Bloodraven, and the virtue, beauty, and icy vein of Lyanna, he came into realization that TPWTP must come from the blood of a Targaryen and a Stark... thus the "flash from above" in Ran's description.

[Erudain]

So long fAegon?
Another victory for logical theories backed up with actual written material, timeline and overall common sense? what kind of sorcery is this?

 

[corbon]

On 01/04/2016 at 0:37 PM, Shmedricko said:

Someone else, or maybe still Revanshe, forwarded from the same list: 

I asked GRRM today about that, he said that the child from the scene is dead. I also asked whether The Song of Ice and Fire are the song of someone particular, he said that the phrase could be used in many contexts....obviously, he is hiding something

Thanks, first.

On this one, I'd really need to understand precisely what GRRM said. We know he's been coy about the death of Aegon before (for example absolutely confirming the death of Rhaenys but being conspicuously silent about Aegon) and it strikes me as unlikely he'd change that. I suspect that there is a misunderstanding here, for example perhaps the way he said it allowed for the death of the pisswater prince.
Just to be clear I'm not denying this completely, I'm just pointing out that its a very vague report and doesn't apparently fit with what the way GRRm has acted on exactly this subject at other times.

17 hours ago, Erudain said:

So long fAegon?
Another victory for logical theories backed up with actual written material, timeline and overall common sense? what kind of sorcery is this?

 

Well, first of all, the f in fAegon stands for possibly fake, so its actually a boost for the fAegon theory if the real Aegon did die as reported here.
Secondly, while the fAegon theory that sees Young Griff as a fake is not illogical (though certain non-critical parts of it I personally find to be very very thin indeed), and is well researched, its not like the opposite theory (YG= true Aegon) doesn't work perfectly well in every respect as well. So its not the sort of 'victory' you describe, its just a case of one of two perfectly good options being the case.

[Ran]

Decided to drop by. Nice research, Schmedricko, digging up the old EEsite archive. Just as an added note, the Revanshe mentioned by me in the above quoted post was the founder of the EEsite and EzBoard forums that were both direct predecessors to this one. She also co-ran one of the first ASoIaF fan sites. She in turn was, I believe, forwarding a statement from Rania, another long-ago member of the forum who actually occasionally chatted with GRRM via AIM chat. So their report of GRRM replying to her that it was Rhaegar and Elia I take as absolutely true.

However, the "child is dead"... I dug around a bit and I was reminded that the person who reported this, who went by the handle Monte Cristo, never provided an email for that statement. I ended up tracking them down and talking to them about it, asking them to recall it to the best of their ability, and in the end they admitted that they couldn't 100% vouch that they remembered the exact wording and so couldn't 100% vouch that George's statement about the death of the child was unequivocal.

So, grain of salt on that one.

 

 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

Decided to drop by. Nice research, Schmedricko, digging up the old EEsite archive. Just as an added note, the Revanshe mentioned by me in the above quoted post was the founder of the EEsite and EzBoard forums that were both direct predecessors to this one. She also co-ran one of the first ASoIaF fan sites. She in turn was, I believe, forwarding a statement from Rania, another long-ago member of the forum who actually occasionally chatted with GRRM via AIM chat. So their report of GRRM replying to her that it was Rhaegar and Elia I take as absolutely true.

However, the "child is dead"... I dug around a bit and I was reminded that the person who reported this, who went by the handle Monte Cristo, never provided an email for that statement. I ended up tracking them down and talking to them about it, asking them to recall it to the best of their ability, and in the end they admitted that they couldn't 100% vouch that they remembered the exact wording and so couldn't 100% vouch that George's statement about the death of the child was unequivocal.

So, grain of salt on that one.

 

 

Thanks Ran.

[MtnLion]

9 hours ago, corbon said:

Thanks Ran.

Echo.  You might find an old message from me, if you check your PMs, Ran.  It had to do with the wiki and Jon vs Robb description being mucked up. 

[Ygrain]

Yeah, thanks for dropping in and confirming the stuff, it's always good to know where things come from.