The "Truth" About Dany

[The Twinslayer]

8 hours ago, Ran said:

GRRM doesn't lie to fans. If he doesn't want to reveal something, he simply doesn't respond, or he misdirects.

Take it from me, I've been curating the SSM for nearly 20 years. George has never been caught in a deliberate lie about the story, especially about something fundamental to the narrative.

Ran, take another look at that specific SSM.  He made the statement not long before the publication of Storm of Swords, and it was a response to a question about whether Catelyn would have to be foolish to believe that Ashara Dayne could be Jon's mother, due to timeline problems.  GRRM stated that ("a tiny tidbit from SOS"):  Ashara was "one of Princess Elia's lady companions in King's Landing, in the first few years after Elia married Rhaegar."  He also said that "Ashara Dayne was not nailed to the floor at Starfall . . . [t]hey have horses in Dorne too . . . [etc.]." Finally, he says that Jon was born around 8 or 9 months before Dany, which would place his birth around the time of the Sack or up to a month later.   That makes it sound like GRRM had a draft chapter for SOS in which he was planning to reveal that Ned and Ashara met up around 9 months prior to the Sack, which would reinforce the notion that Ned and Ashara were Jon's parents.  

We know now that he changed his mind (so not a lie, he just changed his mind).  SOS says nothing about Ashara being a lady in waiting to Elia in King's Landing (instead, the World Book has Elia living on Dragonstone at that time).  SOS has no meeting between Ned and Ashara 9 months before the Sack.  Instead, there is the conversation between Ned Dayne and Arya and the follow up between Arya and Harwin, which is more ambiguous.  

This is all a way of saying that i think the timing of Jon's birth (8-9 months before Dany's birth) was part of a plan to make the Ned/Ashara parentage possible; once GRRM decided not to do that explicitly, he scrapped that draft chapter of SOS, and the "8-9 months before Dany" birthdate for Jon is no longer operative.

So I don't think we can say with any certainty that we know when Jon was born in relation to Dany's birth (and in fact, I think R+L=J works much more easily if Jon was born around the same time as Dany, since that would explain why Cersei thinks that Jon might have been born from a Dornish peasant, which would put his birth 9 or so months after Ned lifted the siege of Storm's End).  

[IceFire125]

2 hours ago, The Twinslayer said:

Ran, take another look at that specific SSM.  He made the statement not long before the publication of Storm of Swords, and it was a response to a question about whether Catelyn would have to be foolish to believe that Ashara Dayne could be Jon's mother, due to timeline problems.  GRRM stated that ("a tiny tidbit from SOS"):  Ashara was "one of Princess Elia's lady companions in King's Landing, in the first few years after Elia married Rhaegar."  He also said that "Ashara Dayne was not nailed to the floor at Starfall . . . [t]hey have horses in Dorne too . . . [etc.]." Finally, he says that Jon was born around 8 or 9 months before Dany, which would place his birth around the time of the Sack or up to a month later.   That makes it sound like GRRM had a draft chapter for SOS in which he was planning to reveal that Ned and Ashara met up around 9 months prior to the Sack, which would reinforce the notion that Ned and Ashara were Jon's parents.  

We know now that he changed his mind (so not a lie, he just changed his mind).  SOS says nothing about Ashara being a lady in waiting to Elia in King's Landing (instead, the World Book has Elia living on Dragonstone at that time).  SOS has no meeting between Ned and Ashara 9 months before the Sack.  Instead, there is the conversation between Ned Dayne and Arya and the follow up between Arya and Harwin, which is more ambiguous.  

This is all a way of saying that i think the timing of Jon's birth (8-9 months before Dany's birth) was part of a plan to make the Ned/Ashara parentage possible; once GRRM decided not to do that explicitly, he scrapped that draft chapter of SOS, and the "8-9 months before Dany" birthdate for Jon is no longer operative.

So I don't think we can say with any certainty that we know when Jon was born in relation to Dany's birth (and in fact, I think R+L=J works much more easily if Jon was born around the same time as Dany, since that would explain why Cersei thinks that Jon might have been born from a Dornish peasant, which would put his birth 9 or so months after Ned lifted the siege of Storm's End).  

Or GRRM remembered that he placed clues in the first book signifying Jon having royal blood. Bastards (Joffrey/Tommen), shouldn't spar with Princes.  Only trueborn swords should be allowed to bruise a prince.

Bran described him as an old hand at justice.  Which later on Dany described the definition of a King--a person that do justice.

Jon stting at the back of the long hall opposite from the high bench where the royals and nobles were sitting, far from "honor", during Robert's visit to Winterfell.  Later Viserys proclaimed that sitting opposite from the high bench where Dany and Khal Drogo sat, at the back of the hall, far from "honor", was not a place for a king.

This is on top of Jon ironically denying his blood is no more royal that Mance's (who is a king).

Jon telling Gilly to not kneel before him, that kneeling for someone should only be done for kings.

GRRM has been consistent with the clues of Jon having royal blood through out the books.  Jon being the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna is consistent with the 3KG's hard stance at the tower of joy.

[MostlyMoody]

6 hours ago, pirate of pentos said:

Dany's birth is canon. She is Stormborn- her name literally has Stormborn in it lol plus Jaime heard the king raping Rhaella back in KL not long before he kingslayed him and then Dany is born 9 moons later. I am 100% sure she is the mad king's daughter.

Jon being the bastard of Ned is also canon, since nothing but that was proven in the books by the author. 

Danny calls herself Stormborn, from the knowledge she has from Viserys. That name is common knowledge only because she has a tendency of announcing her full title everytime she meets anyone.

Jaime heard the king raping Rhaella, true. You saying it happened not long before the Sack of KL is an assumption on your part, he never mentions when this happened, only that it did. I am working this off memory so I may be wrong too.

[MostlyMoody]

12 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Wait a minute.

So, on Dragonstone, Queen Rhaelle dies giving birth to a little Daenerys (who isn't Dany). Little Daenerys, along with Viserys, are smuggled out by Ser Willem Darry on a boat, and, at some moment in the future, Daenerys gets swapped with Dany? Then how on Earth Viserys never mentioned that (he wasn't exactly a master at keeping his tongue), and what did then happen to the real Daenerys?

Or alternatively she was simply made up from the beginning, Rhaelle didn't die giving her birth (how did she die, then?), and some years later people in Westeros just accept the existence of another Targaryen princess, even though on Dragonstone, where she supposedly was born, nobody had heard of her?

Sorry, I have yet to see a version of the alleged Daenerys Stormborn fabrication that isn't utterly unbelievable.

The thing is, in the interpretation you're proposing Dany doesn't need to "remember", she needs to "learn something she's completely unaware of". Two different things.

I think there was no little Daenerys on Dragonstone. Both the child and mother could've died at childbirth.

I don't understand why people assume everyone on Dragonstone would know who was born to Rhaelle. The only people who could possibly be present would be a midwife, Viserys and those most loyal to the queen, those who smuggled Viserys off Dragonstone. 

It is in Viserys character and interests to lie about Danny's upbringing. If she is the daughter of Rhaegar she is the legitimate heir, before Viserys in the line of succession. Despite the fact that the line of succession can be muddy and it would be possible for Viserys to be king anyway if most lords supported him, it is much safer and easier to simply lie to Danny.

She remembers her childhood, which if we assume this theory is true was not in Braavos. If she remembers where she was she will realize that what she was told was a lie and begin to question her past entirely.

[theblackdragonI]

My opinion on the Lemon tree is this. Either they were fostered in the home of a wealthy person in Braavos which is very plausible as many powerful people across the Narrow Sea would love to have Targaryens (e.g. Illyrio, Rogares) as a tool in their games. 

Or, they were kept in Dorne for a very small amount of time immediately after the Trident. It appeared to be common knowledge that Darry spirited the royal family off to Dragonstone. It is not too outlandish to assume this could be a wild herring? Perhaps Darry proclaimed he was bringing them to Dragonstone, when in fact he went to Dorne the remaining loyal province? Remember that Oberyen wanted to raise Dorne for Viserys after the Sack of KL. Why would he want to do this if the Targaryens were not in reach? He was reckless yes but not stupid. 

That's just my opinion on it, could go either way but it seems odd that GRRM would talk about lemons so much and how they can't grow in braavos just to go back on all that and say oh yea they can actually grow in rich peoples houses.   

[the trees have eyes]

17 hours ago, wordpuncher said:

Sorry, I led you way off base here. What I'm getting is the possibility that NO BABY was born to Rhaella on Dragonstone. There's no secret to keep there so the other people on Dragonstone become irrelevant. There was nothing for them to witness.

It is common knowledge that Rhaella was pregnant and died in childbirth on Dragonstone.  The author refers to these events a number of times from different character povs.  To doubt these events is to be on equal footing with those who claim Rhaegar did not die on the trident because there is no line in the text that specifically references Robert removing the helm of the man he had just killed and announcing to the world "look it really was Rhaegar!".  Now you may be one of those people who believes that Rhaegar's "death" is not certain and that GRRM is being deliberately sneaky and misdirecting us, even to the extent of giving misleading SSMs and interview responses but you have to work pretty hard to ignore the text and everything the characters tell us.  We are given all this information about Aerys' rape of his wife, her flight to dragonstone, her pregnancy and death in childbirth, even the monniker attached to the child of "Stormborn" confirming the time and place of her birth as the storm batterd the island and wrecked the fleet at anchor in the harbour.

The one thing I don't get out of the fake Dany theories is the why of it.  Viserys is Aerys's son and following Aerys's, Rhaegar's and Aegon's deaths he is the Targaryen heir.  There is simply no point at all in manufacturing a fake sister for him.  Why?  What advantage does this give?  If Rhaella wasa never pregnant why pretend that she was and fool the whole kingdom?  You can't hide a pregnancy so either she walked around Dragonstone with a pillow in her dress or she was kept a recluse from the castle's inhabitants.  And why would she be?  Dragonstone is the ancestral seat of House Targaryen - the people there would be fiercely loyal to their Targaryen Queen and its likely many of the castlefolk knew her.  If she miscarried why not admit as much?  Viserys is still the heir after all.  It's so much more believable that Rhaella actually gave birth to his sister, Dany, as all the stories say and all the 7K knows.

10 hours ago, wordpuncher said:

No. What's canon is that Dany believes she was born during a summer storm at Dragonstone. She is the only person who gives us this information, and she got that from Viserys. We're basically counting on the memory of Viserys as a child (or the honesty of Viserys as an adult). The events themselves are not confirmed.

This is wrong.  Dany is not the only person who tells us the story of her birth, it is relayed by a number of pov characters.  It is true that Viserys is Dany's only source of information as a child but not that Dany / Viserys are the only sources of information to the reader on her birth.  Also it depends on what you mean by confirmation.  Not one person is Westeros doubts her parentage or doubts the story of her birth.  Why do you think that is?

5 hours ago, Rupert Honeybun said:

Jon being the bastard of Ned is also canon, since nothing but that was proven in the books by the author. 

Danny calls herself Stormborn, from the knowledge she has from Viserys. That name is common knowledge only because she has a tendency of announcing her full title everytime she meets anyone.

Jaime heard the king raping Rhaella, true. You saying it happened not long before the Sack of KL is an assumption on your part, he never mentions when this happened, only that it did. I am working this off memory so I may be wrong too.

Again this is wrong.  All of Westeros and Essos know the story of her birth.  As a 13 year old girl she is far less of interest to the good and great of Planetos than her elder brother and the Targaryen heir, Viserys, but she becomes of great interest politically when she is old enough to marry, even more so when she becomes pregnant and even more so again when, after Viserys's death, she becomes the Targaryen claimant.  But she doesn't have to establish her identity at all, this is widely known and never doubted in story.  What she does have to establish is her credibiliity as a leader or a claimant to the throne and that is where the PR machine kicks in with the titles and list of accomplishments.  Stormborn is not something she tags on to fool people as to her identity, not even to establish her identity to people somehow ignorant of this tale on every gossip's tongue, she uses it because everyone in Planetos immediately recognises it and associates it with the tale of Rhaella's death and her birth on Dragonstone.  It's the sort of thing a pollster or marketing campaign would seize on today because the name and brand are instantly recognised, in other words she isn't creating an image / identity she is tapping into and projecting what is already widely known.  In short I think you have this backwards.

5 hours ago, Rupert Honeybun said:

I think there was no little Daenerys on Dragonstone. Both the child and mother could've died at childbirth.

I don't understand why people assume everyone on Dragonstone would know who was born to Rhaelle. The only people who could possibly be present would be a midwife, Viserys and those most loyal to the queen, those who smuggled Viserys off Dragonstone. 

It is in Viserys character and interests to lie about Danny's upbringing. If she is the daughter of Rhaegar she is the legitimate heir, before Viserys in the line of succession. Despite the fact that the line of succession can be muddy and it would be possible for Viserys to be king anyway if most lords supported him, it is much safer and easier to simply lie to Danny.

She remembers her childhood, which if we assume this theory is true was not in Braavos. If she remembers where she was she will realize that what she was told was a lie and begin to question her past entirely.

But same queston as above: why lie about it?  Viserys is heir.  Smuggle him away as in fact happens but why invent this changeling in place of his deceased infant sister / brother?

Why would the Queen's pregnancy and the outcome fo that pregnancy need to be kept a secret from the Targ loyalists garrisoning the ancestral seat of House Targaryen?  The whole damn castle would have been getting ready to celebrate the birth of a new Targaryen, the serving girls and washer women would be fidgeting and gossiping wondering how things were going, the guardsmen would have been taking bets on names or sex and the smallfolk would have been lighting candles and saying prayers in the sept for a healthy child.  Because the birth of a royal child is one hell of a big deal!  It's not some dirty little secret in a cabin in the woods, its in the castle at the heart of Targaryen power and loyalty.  The Queen would have been attended by one or several maesters: why would they all lie and what possible purpose would they have for doing so?

As for the argument that Viserys knew his sister was a fake but lied to her out of insecurity that she would supplant it that just doesn't ring true.  When he is angry he blames her for the fall of House Targaryen, telling her that she was born too late, that if she had been born sooner Rhaegar could have married her as was Targaryen custom rather than having to settle for Elia and then fixating on Lyanna which led to their ruin.  All part of the act or much more in line with Viserys's vicious bullying character?  My money is on the latter.  Then there is the fact that he despises having to marry Dany to Drogo because as his sister and the only Targ princess going she should be his bride, not Drogo's.  This is evidenced by Illyrio telling Tyrion that Viserys claimed that she should have been his and that if he could not have her hand in marriage he could at least have her maidenhead and attempting to enter her bedchamber the night before her wedding to do just that.  More acting?  That Dany didn't know about to boot?  Or a resentful brother seeing his intended bride being sold to a barbarian horselord and realising that he will have to dilute his precious Targaryen progeny the way Rhaegar was forced to.  He hates everything about this arrangement and begins to unravel and descend into madness precisely because it is such a blow to his ego, his prestige and his hopes for Targaryen greatness that he has to surrender his sister and deny himself what he sees as his birthright.  It's even worse that giving away Rhaella's crown: a new crown can be forged but there is no way to make a full blooded Targaryen princess for him to marry.

[wordpuncher]

46 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

It is common knowledge that Rhaella was pregnant and died in childbirth on Dragonstone.  The author refers to these events a number of times from different character povs.  To doubt these events is to be on equal footing with those who claim Rhaegar did not die on the trident because there is no line in the text that specifically references Robert removing the helm of the man he had just killed and announcing to the world "look it really was Rhaegar!".  Now you may be one of those people who believes that Rhaegar's "death" is not certain and that GRRM is being deliberately sneaky and misdirecting us, even to the extent of giving misleading SSMs and interview responses but you have to work pretty hard to ignore the text and everything the characters tell us.  We are given all this information about Aerys' rape of his wife, her flight to dragonstone, her pregnancy and death in childbirth, even the monniker attached to the child of "Stormborn" confirming the time and place of her birth as the storm batterd the island and wrecked the fleet at anchor in the harbour.

OK, if you can point to other characters with first-hand knowedge talking about Dany's birth, please point me to that. I'm serious. This is exactly what I'm trying to find. Because other than Dany, there is no POV character who could have been at Dragstone at that time. So, if you know of non-Dany evience, please point me in that direction.

That said, Dany's birth is more canon than Jon Snow's parentage. Is it "canon" that Ned fathered Jon Snow? No, it's canon that everyone believes this is true.

The fact that they call her Stormborn could mean she was born at Dragonstone during a summer storm. But maybe she was born somewhere else during a summer storm. Maybe there was no storm and Viserys made it up. That name proves nothing.

The information about the rape isn't conclusive either. Read Jamie talking about it. I believe it's actually some time before she leaves for Dragonstone. We don't know exactly how long.

I'm inclined to believe that Rhaegar died. Although the rubies must have some significance, and could conceivably have been involved in a glamour, I have a hard time believing that Rhaegar survived and has just been hanging out all this time. But there is WAY more evidence for Rhaegar dying at the Trident. So many other characters were there.

I don't even really doubt that Dany was born at Dragonstone. I just haven't accepted it as true. It could be true. But the information we have does NOT rule out something else. It just doesn't. 

The name "Stormborn" is a completely useless piece of information. It is dispositive of nothing.

Why lie about these things? That's the best question. Obviously a means to an end. Viserys, or whoever was trying to benefit from having a couple of Targaryen children in their control, may have felt it was more valuable to have legitimate children of the Mad King. I'll admit, THIS is the biggest question here.

Anyway, other than Dany, I can't find any character in this story who can verify the story of her birth. "Common knowledge" isn't good enough. It's "common knowledge" that Ned fathered Jon Snow. It's "common knowledge" (to the people of Westeros) that Tyrion poisoned Joffrey. So, what everyone knows to be true is not necessarily the truth.

 

 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

1 minute ago, wordpuncher said:

Anyway, I other than Dany, I can't find any character in this story who can verify the story of her birth. "Common knowledge" isn't good enough. It's "common knowledge" that Ned fathered Jon Snow. It's "common knowledge" (to the people of Westeros) that Tyrion poisoned Joffrey. So, what everyone knows to be true is not necessarily the truth.

 

You know what? I'm beginning to have doubts whether Cat Stark was Hoster's Tully's daughter, or whether Ned was truly a Stark. And were Jaime and Cersei the children of Joanna Lannister? Are they even twins? The same caveats apply, after all. "Common knowledge" is pretty much our only source of information regarding their pedigree (and one can't be considered a reliable witness in regards to his own birth, let alone conception). Seriously, apart from Cat's kids, Cersei's kids and maybe Tyrion, there's no character whose birth couldn't be put into question on similar grounds.

The thing is, a royal birth isn't a private affair, and exactly for this reason: the fates of kingdoms depend on the question, "is X truly the son of Y and Z?", and if it's twins, then it's crucial which one is the oldest. Wars are fought over the order of succession. So, it needs to be a verifiable fact, not a "huh, you know what? actually I have no idea".

Bottom line, I don't doubt in the slightest that Dany is, in fact, the daughter of Aerys II and Rhaella Targaryen, Daenerys Stormborn, born on Dragonstone during a memorable tempest. (BTW, I mixed up - again - Rhaella and Rhaelle; thank you, George!) I can't imagine the crew of Dragonstone maintaining the charade, nor can I imagine Stannis Baratheon, charged with winning back Dragonstone from the Targaryens, not discovering the truth.

[Ygrain]

8 hours ago, Rupert Honeybun said:

Jaime heard the king raping Rhaella, true. You saying it happened not long before the Sack of KL is an assumption on your part, he never mentions when this happened, only that it did. I am working this off memory so I may be wrong too.

The rape took place after Aerys had Lord Chelstead burnt, and Jaime compares his and Rhaella's screams. After Chelstead, Rossart becomes Hand, and his Handship lasts about a fortnight till Jaime kills him.

[wordpuncher]

Here's a thought. What if, at some point, the children went through Braavos en route to Dorne? Why would someone do that? Because it's the safest route, and it's exactly what Tyrion ordered when he sent Myrcella to Dorne.
 

Quote

He cleared his throat. "You know your orders, Captain."
"I do my lord. We are to follow the coast, staying always in sight of land, until we reach Crackclaw Point. From there we are to strike out across the narrow sea for Braavos. On no account are we to sail within sight of Dragonstone." 

COK, Tyrion IX

Now, Tyrion then explains the rationale for sending Myrcella through Braavos.

 

Quote

...(Tyrion) had engaged a Braavosi to bring her the rest of the way to Sunspear. Even Lord Stannis would hesitate to wake the anger of the greatest and most powerful of the Free Cities. Traveling from King's Landing to Dorne by way of Braavos was scarely the most direct of routes, but it was the safest ... or so he hoped.

COK, Tyrion IX  

Consider that when Tyrion did this, KL was in basically in the same circumstances it was in when Willem Darry fled. The city is about to be sacked (or is at least facing an impending attack). So, what does Tyrion do? The most rational thing he can in this situation. He tries to bind a powerful ally through marriage pact and sends the betrothed royal to Dorne. Maybe Willem Darry (or Varys) has the same thought prior to the sack of KL. 

So, here's a hypothesis: Rhaella leaves for Dragonstone in the morning, and the whole Realm is led to believe that she's taken Viserys with her. Instead, Willem Darry takes Viserys at night to Braavos, seeking the cover of Braavosi transportation. While in Braavos, he signs a marriage pact with the exiled Oberyn (was Oberyn in Essos at this time?). Now, let's say Darry receives word that another Targaryen is born — Dany. Either in Dragonstone (via Rhaella) or in Dorne (via Lyanna). So, Darry brings Viserys down to Dorne and pairs them up. The Dornish have no idea that the TargBabies are actually in Dorne. It works if Darry has another conspirator.

I'm certain that some things are missing here, but let's just consider for a second that Tyrion's plan for Myrcella is something that Darry could have used before the sack of KL.

 

 

[wordpuncher]

12 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

The rape took place after Aerys had Lord Chelstead burnt, and Jaime compares his and Rhaella's screams. After Chelstead, Rossart becomes Hand, and his Handship lasts about a fortnight till Jaime kills him.

Yes, the only I can't find is where that "fortnight" is documented. If that's accurate, it means that Aerys last had sex with Rhaella (presuming that was a rape that Jaime heard), two weeks prior to Rhaella's departure from KL. Therefore, if Rhaella did die in childbirth, it's plausible that someone other than Aerys is the father.

[Ygrain]

2 minutes ago, wordpuncher said:

Yes, the only I can't find is where that "fortnight" is documented. If that's accurate, it means that Aerys last had sex with Rhaella (presuming that was a rape that Jaime heard), two weeks prior to Rhaella's departure from KL. Therefore, if Rhaella did die in childbirth, it's plausible that someone other than Aerys is the father.

I'll find the quote for you when I have the time.

Dany was born 9 months after the flight from KL. That doesn't leave very much time for a brutally raped woman to seek a sexual relationship.

[wordpuncher]

18 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

 

You know what? I'm beginning to have doubts whether Cat Stark was Hoster's Tully's daughter, or whether Ned was truly a Stark. And were Jaime and Cersei the children of Joanna Lannister? Are they even twins? The same caveats apply, after all. "Common knowledge" is pretty much our only source of information regarding their pedigree (and one can't be considered a reliable witness in regards to his own birth, let alone conception). Seriously, apart from Cat's kids, Cersei's kids and maybe Tyrion, there's no character whose birth couldn't be put into question on similar grounds.

The thing is, a royal birth isn't a private affair, and exactly for this reason: the fates of kingdoms depend on the question, "is X truly the son of Y and Z?", and if it's twins, then it's crucial which one is the oldest. Wars are fought over the order of succession. So, it needs to be a verifiable fact, not a "huh, you know what? actually I have no idea".

Bottom line, I don't doubt in the slightest that Dany is, in fact, the daughter of Aerys II and Rhaella Targaryen, Daenerys Stormborn, born on Dragonstone during a memorable tempest. (BTW, I mixed up - again - Rhaella and Rhaelle; thank you, George!) I can't imagine the crew of Dragonstone maintaining the charade, nor can I imagine Stannis Baratheon, charged with winning back Dragonstone from the Targaryens, not discovering the truth.

Well, GRRM isn't giving reason to reconsider the parentage of Catelyn or Ned. It's very clear that SOMETHING is up with Dany's past. There are too many clues floating around for everything to be exactly as it was told to us. I don't know that it was Dany's parentage. I've already said, maybe it's not. But I'm just asking questions to see if we can find conclusive evidence that rules things out. And I'm having trouble finding it. 

As far as your theory about the "crew" on Dragonstone, I simply don't think you've considered my response. Think of a place you were 15 years ago. Now tell me about something that DIDN'T happen there. If Dany wasn't born on Dragonstone, then there are no stories about that happening. If you were there, maybe you're thinking, "I guess I wasn't there when that happened." 

Also, if you were trying to make up a story to sell someone's lineage, wouldn't you set that story during a major event? LIKE A STORM. 

Again, I just think the evidence is as conclusive as you. Nothing here is set in stone.

 

[wordpuncher]

Just now, Ygrain said:

I'll find the quote for you when I have the time.

Dany was born 9 months after the flight from KL. That doesn't leave very much time for a brutally raped woman to seek a sexual relationship.

Thanks, I just can't find that fortnight in the text.

Again, we don't know that she was "raped." We only know that Aerys, "took his pleasure." Maybe she had an ongoing affair with someone else, like Darry. That two-week window is a little off, considering that she had the baby exactly nine moons after leaving.

[wordpuncher]

3 minutes ago, wordpuncher said:

Well, GRRM isn't giving reason to reconsider the parentage of Catelyn or Ned. It's very clear that SOMETHING is up with Dany's past. There are too many clues floating around for everything to be exactly as it was told to us. I don't know that it was Dany's parentage. I've already said, maybe it's not. But I'm just asking questions to see if we can find conclusive evidence that rules things out. And I'm having trouble finding it. 

As far as your theory about the "crew" on Dragonstone, I simply don't think you've considered my response. Think of a place you were 15 years ago. Now tell me about something that DIDN'T happen there. If Dany wasn't born on Dragonstone, then there are no stories about that happening. If you were there, maybe you're thinking, "I guess I wasn't there when that happened." 

Also, if you were trying to make up a story to sell someone's lineage, wouldn't you set that story during a major event? LIKE A STORM. 

Again, I just think the evidence is as conclusive as you. Nothing here is set in stone.

 

OK, I found it in a Tyrion chapter. He was Hand for a fortnight.

[Ebrose]

16 minutes ago, wordpuncher said:

As far as your theory about the "crew" on Dragonstone, I simply don't think you've considered my response. Think of a place you were 15 years ago. Now tell me about something that DIDN'T happen there. If Dany wasn't born on Dragonstone, then there are no stories about that happening. If you were there, maybe you're thinking, "I guess I wasn't there when that happened." 

Also, if you were trying to make up a story to sell someone's lineage, wouldn't you set that story during a major event? LIKE A STORM. 

Wait.. what? Do you think a royal birth in a feudal land within the royal castle is something you could not be aware of and think that if you don't remember about it is because you weren't there??? If a queen is about to give birth, the whole castle and its surroundings is absolutely focused on the event.

It has been almost 15 years since 9/11 and I can perfectly remember what I was doing, where, and with whom... and I'm not even American.

[aryagonnakill#2]

8 hours ago, Rupert Honeybun said:

Jon being the bastard of Ned is also canon, since nothing but that was proven in the books by the author. 

Danny calls herself Stormborn, from the knowledge she has from Viserys. That name is common knowledge only because she has a tendency of announcing her full title everytime she meets anyone.

Jaime heard the king raping Rhaella, true. You saying it happened not long before the Sack of KL is an assumption on your part, he never mentions when this happened, only that it did. I am working this off memory so I may be wrong too.

He mentions it was after he burned Lord Chelstead, who was replaced by Rosart who was only hand for two weeks.

[ThePrinceThatKnewNothing]

19 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

You can still square the SSM with the Dany-as-changeling idea. The real Dany was born 8-9 months after Jon, just as GR says, but that baby died. The nine-month-old new-Dany, born of Lyanna Stark and residing at Starfall or perhaps Sunspear, was swapped in and no one was the wiser except Derry and perhaps a few of Rhaella's most trusted servants.  Even Viserys might not have known.

It's a long shot, but not outside the realm of possibility.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes maybe this. there's something definitely going on with Danys birth. But maybe George found a way to twist the truth when asked how far apart Jon and Dany were born. I just don't buy that she was born to Aerys and Rhaella

[wordpuncher]

25 minutes ago, wordpuncher said:

Well, GRRM isn't giving reason to reconsider the parentage of Catelyn or Ned. It's very clear that SOMETHING is up with Dany's past. There are too many clues floating around for everything to be exactly as it was told to us. I don't know that it was Dany's parentage. I've already said, maybe it's not. But I'm just asking questions to see if we can find conclusive evidence that rules things out. And I'm having trouble finding it. 

As far as your theory about the "crew" on Dragonstone, I simply don't think you've considered my response. Think of a place you were 15 years ago. Now tell me about something that DIDN'T happen there. If Dany wasn't born on Dragonstone, then there are no stories about that happening. If you were there, maybe you're thinking, "I guess I wasn't there when that happened." 

Also, if you were trying to make up a story to sell someone's lineage, wouldn't you set that story during a major event? LIKE A STORM. 

Again, I just think the evidence is as conclusive as you. Nothing here is set in stone.

 

It's a huge stretch. We don't even know who, if anyone, was on Dragonstone. But let's say there were people there. What happened to them? And what evidence do you have of another royal birth during war time with the royal family on the run? Multiple people saw Aegon VI die. 

Here's the thing: I don't think any of the evidence is "conclusive." Most of it isn't even evidence. And none of it is direct evidence. What you have a tautology that Dany was born on Dragonstone because of course she was. Look at the actual facts. You're citing Dragonstone servants that we've never heard from. We have no idea what they have to say. You can't cite that as evidence. I wish we had something conclusive. Even if it prove you were right. That would satisfy me. I could move on to something else.  But we don't have that. We basically have Dany's story and very little to verify it.

[wordpuncher]

14 minutes ago, Ebrose said:

Wait.. what? Do you think a royal birth in a feudal land within the royal castle is something you could not be aware of and think that if you don't remember about it is because you weren't there??? If a queen is about to give birth, the whole castle and its surroundings is absolutely focused on the event.

It has been almost 15 years since 9/11 and I can perfectly remember what I was doing, where, and with whom... and I'm not even American.

It's a huge stretch. We don't even know who, if anyone, was on Dragonstone. But let's say there were people there. What happened to them? And what evidence do you have of another royal birth during war time with the royal family on the run? Multiple people saw Aegon VI die. 

9/11 is not a reasonable comparison. That's like asking if someone remember the Doom of Valyria. But let's say you worked at the Camp David. And I said, where you there on the day that Michelle Obama gave birth. And I asked you this 15 years later. You might just answer no.