Is Dany really Dany?

[SFDanny]

In the Heresy Project thread it became clear that some of the theories relied on the idea that Daenerys Targaryen somehow really isn't who she thinks she is. As wacky as that idea is to many, there is a portion of readers who have adopted this idea, and part of those that rely on this essay as a source for believing so. In order to provide a space to evaluate this theory I've created this thread to do just that.

Let me state unequivocally that I don't support these ideas, but I do think it important to speak to the  points raised in the essay. So, here is the start of my take on these ideas,

The "Aerys and Rhaella's history of troubled conceptions and births."

The author of this essay has a list of areas he/she says cast doubt on Dany being Daenerys Targaryen. The irony is it starts with a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between the ability to conceive a child and an ability to carry the child to full term, and for that child to live beyond its infancy. Specifically, the author makes this claim, "Yet suddenly, in House Targaryen's greatest hour of need Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella and she happens to successfully deliver the child who's the girl named Daenerys Targaryen in our story? I call BS." The irony is the author precedes this with a long list of successful conceptions by Aerys and Rhaella. The author disproves this part of his or her contention before stating it as a problem. 

From The World of Ice & Fire:

Quote

Relations between the king and queen grew even more strained when Rhaella proved unable to give Aerys any further children. Miscarriages in 263 and 264 were followed by a stillborn daughter born in 267. Prince Daeron, born in 269, survived only a half a year. Then came another stillbirth in 270, another miscarriage in 271, and Prince Aegon born two turns premature in 272, dead in 273. (TWoI&F 115)

 The above is listed in the author's argument, but the impact on the idea that Rhaella and Aerys have trouble conceiving children seems lost to the author.

This all takes place after Rhaegar's birth in 259 AC. To this we must add the following:

Quote

The march of the king's madness seemed to abate for a time in 274 AC when Queen Rhaella gave birth to a son. So profound  was His Grace's joy that it seemed to restore him to his old self once again ... but Prince Jaehaerys died later that same year, plunging Aerys into despair.

and

Quote

His Grace's new fidelity was apparently pleasing to the Mother Above, it must be said, for the following year, Queen Rhaella gave the king the second son that he had prayed for. Prince Viserys, born in 276 AC, was small but robust, and as beautiful a child as King's Landing had ever seen.

So, not counting Daenerys herself, the royal couple successfully conceive ten children before Dany. That means over the time period of the seventeen years stretching from Rhaegar's birth to Viserys's birth, Rhaella is pregnant more often than she is not. There is no problem with their ability to conceive.

There may be a problem with the viability of children born to the royal couple that is out of the norm for Westeros. But how is that relevant to the idea that "Aerys manages to finally successfully impregnate Rhaella..." It isn't, and the core of this argument is what needs to called for its BS.

Without knowing the average number of still births or miscarriages or infant deaths among noble couples we can't say if the three surviving Targaryen children - three out of eleven - is unusual. We can make note of three factors that may be of importance in Daenerys's case.

First, the absence of Aerys during her pregnancy. If ever there was a father to make a normal pregnancy into a high-stress one, and a normal infancy into the same, it is Aerys. His paranoid delusions cannot help the odds of a child's survival.

Second, the fact this pregnancy is said to take place outside of King's Landing cannot but help the odds for a chid's survival. If there is a bigger cesspool of disease and illness in Westeros, I can't think of one.

Lastly, the absence of Grandmaester Pycelle from the birth, the pre-birth care of the mother, and the care of the infant may be critical for the child's chances. Pycelle as the prime suspect for saboteur in the Summerhall disaster (not my theory, but a long held favorite on these boards) and a great candidate for a member of the "maester's conspiracy," as well as a proven Lannister loyalist, just may not be the person a Targaryen would want to trust for their children's welfare.

None of which suggest Daenerys wasn't conceived when we are told or born when she says.

"Dany's official timeline vs what she remembers."

This could be called "the mystery of the ill-logical and mistaken itinerary." The author of this theory makes a great deal about Daenerys's thoughts of her early days of travel from Braavos to Myr, and on to Tyrosh, then to Qohor, and next to Volantis, and thence to Lys, and lastly to Pentos. Particularly, he/she finds the idea of the a safe haven in Braavos as crazy on the face of it.

While it is quite right that, as the author points out, Braavos was founded by escaped slaves from the Freehold, it is also true that, as the author also points out, that at least one Sealord of Braavos was willing to sign a secret pact witnessing a marriage agreement between Ser Willam and the Red Viper. Unfortunately this second fact, which as I said the author acknowledges, but which the fact of the Sealord's obvious involvement with these particular Targaryens does not dissuade him or her from ignoring it to build an argument out of thin air. The pact proves Ser Willem and Prince Oberyn were in Braavos, just as Daenerys recalls her brother and Ser Willem being.

But the theory doesn't stop there. A major case that something must be wrong in Dany's story because it makes no sense to travel to these places in that order. It's as if a better travel agent would never make plans in this order, so it all must be false and the story bogus. Never mind Dany is actually remembering these cities she visited. And, of course, it isn't the best and most efficient use of travel time that impels the fugitive Targaryens on their way. It is to get away from the spies and assassins of the usurper - real or imagined - that sends them looking for safe haven. If Viserys thinks the nearest or most likely safe haven is Myr, it makes no difference if Tyrosh is closer. This is not an itinerary of tourists looking to see the sights in the most efficient manner. It is a desperate teenage boy looking for some one who he thinks won't turn him and his sister over to Robert.

The last piece of "evidence" is that Dany remembers a trip to Braavos that isn't listed as one of the places they went for safe haven. Of course, Dany doesn't state she and Viserys went back to Braavos and stayed there, only that they were on a ship to Braavos. This difference of which seems to escape the author. We have no clue as to why the Targaryens are on a ship to Braavos, but it could easily be they are doing so to get passage to somewhere else.

There are no clues here that suggests Daenerys wasn't in Braavos with Ser Willem when he signed the pact, nor that she didn't travel to all the cities she remembers. This is more castles in the air. 

The miscalculation of "The problem with Jon being 8-9 months older than Dany if Dan's born 9 months after the Sack"

In this part of the essay the author makes the point there must be something wrong with Daenerys's name day because how Martin's "infamous SSM" which the author of this essay states means "Jon is 8-9 months older than Dany." To start with, this isn't an auspicious beginning because that isn't exactly what Martin says in the SSM in question.

Here then is Martin's full response to the question:

Quote

All of which is a long winded way of saying, no, Jon was not born "more than 1 year" before Dany... probably closer to eight or nine months or thereabouts (SSM 1040)

As with all things with times and dates, George likes to give himself plenty of room. The approximation he gives here is "eight or nine months or thereabouts." Not "eight or nine months" as the essay's author states. Because Martin doesn't say seven months or ten months we can be sure our range is less than those three months, but we can't be sure how much less.

What this does to our timeline of Jon and Dany's name days is to say that using Daenerys's quote from A Game of Thrones, "She had been born on Dragonstone nine moons after their flight, while a raging summer storm threatened to rip the island fastness apart" (AGoT 25,) and places her birth nine months after the "flight," not after the sack. The difference in time which we don't know for sure but is likely in the two week area. Jon's name day is then in the range, let's estimate some nine and half months  to almost ten before Dany's, or a couple of weeks before the flight to a month before if we push it to the extreme, and then to one and half months to almost two months after the flight in the extreme on the other end.This seems straight forward enough. Remember the latter part of that range. But our essay's author's miscalculation only starts there.

This is his/her interpretation.

Quote

Therefore if Dany is born 9 months after the Sack,  and Jon's born in the TOJ as most fans think, he'd be like 3 months old, which occurs after the Siege, which itself occurs month after the Sack, I'd expect him to be around only at most 5-6 months older than Dany as the TOJ would be months after the Sack.

This is curious math indeed. Not only does this exaggerate the time it takes for the Tower of Joy scene to take place after the sack, it ties Jon's birth to the author's timing of that scene instead of using the range Martin gives us. Jon is born from a few weeks before the flight to a month to six weeks after. Nothing about when the siege's end or when Ned arrives to the tower changes that.

People think Ned may arrive shortly after Jon is born or Jon may be a month or so old when he gets there. Assuming this is where Ned finds Jon, that is the likely range of his age when he finds him. It could be Jon is older than we assume when Ned reaches the Tower, or when he finds him later on his journey. But the range of Jon's age is still tied to the time of the flight to Dragonstone, not to the lifting of the siege or the arrival of Ned at the Tower.

Now we can look at when some of these events take place relative to Jon's range of birth, but that only tells us how old he likely is when these things happen. In particular, the one year of the siege would seem to be important because in his dream of the encounter with the Kingsguard trio at the Tower of Joy has Ned wondering why the three were not at Storm's End, thereby placing Storm's End the events of the tower. While we have no real way to nail down the difference between the start of Robert's Rebellion to the beginning of the siege of Storm's End, let's take an approximation of six weeks to two months difference and see how that works. 

It means that Ned takes approximately six weeks to two months to get to Storm's End. If we push this end of the range for Jon's birth, he is being born as Ned's party leaves from lifting the siege. How long does it take tor for seven riders to get to the Tower? Again we don't know, but two weeks does not seem unrealistic. But the real point here is we are arguing about how old Jon would likely be when Ned arrives at the tower. Is he about two weeks old, or his he about a month and a half. Whether that is important or not depends on if you think Ned finds Jon at the tower.

Please note that the author is betraying his/her bias here. This is only a problem if one is trying to disprove a very particular scenario relating to R+L=J. that Ned has to be at the tower when Lyanna is giving birth. Most posters familiar with the subject place his birth to likely 10-11 days before Lyanna's death, not on the day of her death itself. This is because of the idea she dies of puerperal fever. Nothing says that has to be the cause of death other than it fits the symptoms. Other causes of death from childbirth complications could place Jon's birth before this and would fit more closely to month difference in his age range.

But instead of trying to prove or disprove R+L=J, let's just apply the clues to the timeline and let the chips fall where they may.

More later.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

This is a post from the Heresy wrap-up thread, but by the time I had caught up reading all new posts, there was already a discussion about whether to make a thread for Dany specifically. So I figured it would be better to reply to it here:

On 12-9-2016 at 11:27 PM, Sly Wren said:

Such as why Dany insists she never sees anyone chasing them while Viserys insists that they are. Why on earth the servants put Dany and Viserys out after Darry's death--they were the valuable ones, not Darry. Why would his death have made them less valuable? Especially since they found refuge elsewhere? "Darry's" being half blind and completely bed ridden. Apparently his health plummeted after his being sent to protect Viserys and the Queen. Either that, or Dany's "Darry" isn't Darry. Things like this.

First to the bolded: That's not what Dany says happened, and we only have her account on it to begin with. The quote:

That was when they lived in Braavos, in the big house with the red door. Dany had her own room there, with a lemon tree outside her window. After Ser Willem had died, the servants had stolen what little money they had left, and soon after they had been put out of the big house. Dany had cried when the red door closed behind them forever.

Darry died, the servants stole the remainder of the money, and soon after their money had been stolen, Daenerys and Viserys were put out of the house. Nowhere does Daenerys say that the servants kicked them out of the house.

Would that not be logical? If you no longer have money to rent a house, you will eventually be put out of the house?

 

Secondly, the "hired knives". Daenerys didn't see them, but Viserys is convinced that they are there. That says more about his paranoia (he doesn't state he ever saw them, after all) than about Dany's past, i'd think.

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

"Dany's official timeline vs what she remembers."

This could be called "the mystery of the ill-logical and mistaken itinerary." The author of this theory makes a great deal about Daenerys's thoughts of her early days of travel from Braavos to Myr, and on to Tyrosh, then to Qohor, and next to Volantis, and thence to Lys, and lastly to Pentos. Particularly, he/she finds the idea of the a safe haven in Braavos as crazy on the face of it.

While it is quite right that, as the author points out, Braavos was founded by escaped slaves from the Freehold, it is also true that, as the author also points out, that at least one Sealord of Braavos was willing to sign a secret pact witnessing a marriage agreement between Ser Willam and the Red Viper. Unfortunately this second fact, which as I said the author acknowledges, but which the fact of the Sealord's obvious involvement with these particular Targaryens does not dissuade him or her from ignoring it to build an argument out of thin air. The pact proves Ser Willem and Prince Oberyn were in Braavos, just as Daenerys recalls her brother and Ser Willem being.

But the theory doesn't stop there. A major case that something must be wrong in Dany's story because it makes no sense to travel to these places in that order. It's as if a better travel agent would never make plans in this order, so it all must be false and the story bogus. Never mind Dany is actually remembering these cities she visited. And, of course, it isn't the best and most efficient use of travel time that impels the fugitive Targaryens on their way. It is to get away from the spies and assassins of the usurper - real or imagined - that sends them looking for safe haven. If Viserys thinks the nearest or most likely safe haven is Myr, it makes no difference if Tyrosh is closer. This is not an itinerary of tourists looking to see the sights in the most efficient manner. It is a desperate teenage boy looking for some one who he thinks won't turn him and his sister over to Robert.

The last piece of "evidence" is that Dany remembers a trip to Braavos that isn't listed as one of the places they went for safe haven. Of course, Dany doesn't state she and Viserys went back to Braavos and stayed there, only that they were on a ship to Braavos. This difference of which seems to escape the author. We have no clue as to why the Targaryens are on a ship to Braavos, but it could easily be they are doing so to get passage to somewhere else.

In support of this:

In AGOT, Daenerys lists the first few cities they visited, and the order in which they visited them in

They had wandered since then, from Braavos to Myr, from Myr to Tyrosh, and on to Qohor and Volantis and Lys, never staying long in any one place.

It clearly isn't all, as Daenerys doesn't list Pentos as having followed Lys, indicating that we only know the first part of their travel route, but not whatever their destination became after Lys. That there were more trips seems clear:

The narrow sea was often stormy, and Dany had crossed it half a hundred times as a girl, running from one Free City to the next half a step ahead of the Usurper’s hired knives.

So I don't see any problem with the idea of Daenerys and Viserys having visited Braavos again, whether it was a stay in the city, or simply a change of ships at the port.

[Ygrain]

Copying from the Heresy thread:

As for the supposed lemongate:

Leaving aside the logistics of the baby swap, or that everyone refers to the events of the seige of DS and following in the same manner, what really doesn't work is getting Dany into Viserys' presence. While Dany supposedly walks somewhere warm and sunny and lemoney, everyone and their mother know that Viserys is chilling out in the Free Cities. And he does so for quite some time - Dany must have been several years old to retain the memories of Darry and the house with the red door. And after all that time when Viserys was on his own, nobody bats a lash when he conjures a sister? Or did he have a substitute sister, who was then swapped for Dany, and Viserys apparently never noticed because he never made a single comment about that? And he developed a brotherly - as much brotherly as he was capable of - towards a completely different girl whom he first met when she was like four or five years old? Really? Come on.

 

[Little Scribe of Naath]

The simpler explanation for the lemongate is that Dany is conflating different elements from different places where she lived into one memory -  not unusual for two reasons -

i) The unreliable narrator technique- which we know GRRM uses 

ii) The house with a red door has mostly served as a symbol and a fantasy in Dany's arc up until now. The inaccuracy may be representative of the fact that it's an imperfect, unattainable fantasy.

[Protagoras]

Considering that GRRM is already doing this with Jon, Aegon and maybe, maybe Tyrion it does feel redundant that he will do the same with Daenerys. I don´t think we are supposed to doubt her heritage. Nor are we supposed to doubt that Arya is Neds and Catelyns child. 

[The Ice Wolf of Loki]

Most likely scenario Dany is exactly who everyone thinks she is Aerys and Rhaella's daughter born on Drangonstone circa 9 months after the sack of King of Kings Landing and any inconsistencies are the misrememberings of a child and  her paranoid and delusional sibiling, 99.99%

Now there maybe be a 0.01% chance she is not what she and everyone thinks she is which is foder for wild specualtion my favoutire being the following.

Dany is the daughter or Lyanna and Rhaegar and Jon's twin.

Dany had the Targaryen look so Ned could not pass her off as his own unlike Jon.

Willam Glover survived the fight at the Tower of Joy and takes on the duty of being her protector. With the held of the Daynes he is setup in a house with a Red Door in Dorne. He is the "Ser Willem" of her memory. Dany is then placed with Viserys as his "sister" at a latter date.

One thing though has to be true there must still have been Daenerys born on Dragonstone as recorded for any swap to occur this "real" Daenerys has to have died either shortly after birth or within early childhood.

The obvious hole in this theory is that at some point the Martells had to be in on it.

[SeanF]

On top of everything else, Dany's supernatural experiences point to her being who she thinks she is (hatching/bonding with dragons, visions of her dead ancestors etc.)

[El Guapo]

Yes she is really Dany.

[Aedam Targaryen]

6 minutes ago, SeanF said:

On top of everything else, Dany's supernatural experiences point to her being who she thinks she is (hatching/bonding with dragons, visions of her dead ancestors etc.)

That's what I was just thinking. The odds of finding a random girl that has Targaryen looks, passing her off as a Targ, then this fake-Targ that you chose as an infant also happens to be the first person to wake dragons in hundreds of years? Nope. 

Dany = Dany

[The Ice Wolf of Loki]

7 minutes ago, SeanF said:

On top of everything else, Dany's supernatural experiences point to her being who she thinks she is (hatching/bonding with dragons, visions of her dead ancestors etc.)

They just point to her being a Targaryen which she would be whether she was Rhaella's Daughter or Grand Daughter.

[SeanF]

Just now, Aedam Targaryen said:

That's what I was just thinking. The odds of finding a random girl that has Targaryen looks, passing her off as a Targ, then this fake-Targ that you chose as an infant also happens to be the first person to wake dragons in hundreds of years? Nope. 

Dany = Dany

There are a lot of people in Essos who look like Targaryens, but a random girl with silver-blond hair and lilac eyes won't wake dragons.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

Going to Braavos at any point isn't a problem. If you're running from the Usurper's hired knives, or even just think you are, then changing ships at a well-known port that has many ships docking and departing every day is a smart move.

[Frey family reunion]

What this thread is completely ignoring, is that while the odds of finding a random Valyrian blooded bastard to wake a dragon are pretty low, it's still better odds then the genetics of House Targaryen at the time of their fall.  

Let us not forget that the current line of House Targaryen came from Viserys Targaryen II who could not ride or hatch a dragon, and the daughter of a Lysean banker.  Their bloodlines are further "diluted" by House Martel, House Dayne, and House Blackwood.

Just because your last name is Targaryen does not magically grant you the ability to hatch dragons.  The key is the magical bloodline possessed by your predecessors, Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters.  

So ironically it would probably have taken a bastard bloodline which combined the disparate dragon riding bloodlines that split off after the time of the Dance.

[LynnS]

8 hours ago, SFDanny said:

In the Heresy Project thread it became clear that some of the theories relied on the idea that Daenerys Targaryen somehow really isn't who she thinks she is. As wacky as that idea is to many, there is a portion of readers who have adopted this idea, and part of those that rely on this essay as a source for believing so. In order to provide a space to evaluate this theory I've created this thread to do just that.

Thanks for using this belittling language to set the tone for this discussion.  One can hardly evaluate the OP on it's merits; or the intelligence of the author or readers; when it's made so clear that anyone engaging in free and open-minded inquiry is deemed wacky.  This is inviting people to ridicule rather than use their noggins or challenge their own assumptions.

[SFDanny]

44 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

What this thread is completely ignoring, is that while the odds of finding a random Valyrian blooded bastard to wake a dragon are pretty low, it's still better odds then the genetics of House Targaryen at the time of their fall.

Yet we are told the "woods witch" who accompanied Jenny of Oldstones had told King Jaehaerys II Targaryen that the Prince (Princess) Who Was Promised would be born of Aerys's and Rhaella's line.

Quote

Ser Barristan went on. "I saw your father and your mother wed as well. Forgive me, but there was no fondness there, and the realm paid dearly for that, my queen."

"Why did the wed if they did not love each other?"

"Your grandsire commanded it. A woods witch had told him that prince was promised would be born of their line." (ADwD 300)

If the prophecy was true, and Daenerys waking the dragons seems like the confirmation of the prophecy, then you're wrong.

[Ygrain]

 

40 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

What this thread is completely ignoring, is that while the odds of finding a random Valyrian blooded bastard to wake a dragon are pretty low, it's still better odds then the genetics of House Targaryen at the time of their fall.  

Let us not forget that the current line of House Targaryen came from Viserys Targaryen II who could not ride or hatch a dragon, and the daughter of a Lysean banker.  Their bloodlines are further "diluted" by House Martel, House Dayne, and House Blackwood.

Just because your last name is Targaryen does not magically grant you the ability to hatch dragons.  The key is the magical bloodline possessed by your predecessors, Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters.  

So ironically it would probably have taken a bastard bloodline which combined the disparate dragon riding bloodlines that split off after the time of the Dance.

You mean, just like the warging abilities of the Stark ancestors are dilluted in later generations? Ah, wait...

Not to mention that as a daughter of Aerys and Rhaella, Dany has Targ genes from both sides. Might actually account for something, given that the Valyrian incest was established in order to maintain something in their bloodlines.

10 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Thanks for using this belittling language to set the tone for this discussion.  One can hardly evaluate the OP on it's merits; or the intelligence of the author or readers; when it's made so clear that anyone engaging in free and open-minded inquiry is deemed wacky.  This is inviting people to ridicule rather than use their noggins or challenge their own assumptions.

Open-minded =/= automatically embracing any idea, especially when its faults are glaring.

[SFDanny]

8 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Thanks for using this belittling language to set the tone for this discussion.  One can hardly evaluate the OP on it's merits; or the intelligence of the author or readers; when it's made so clear that anyone engaging in free and open-minded inquiry is deemed wacky.  This is inviting people to ridicule rather than use their noggins or challenge their own assumptions.

As I said earlier, I have my judgements on the validity of this theory, and I don't intend to hide them. I do think this idea is "wacky" and the essay flawed in many ways. That isn't a personal attack on you. It is very much an attack on this idea.

[LynnS]

13 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

As I said earlier, I have my judgements on the validity of this theory, and I don't intend to hide them. I do think this idea is "wacky" and the essay flawed in many ways. That isn't a personal attack on you. It is very much an attack on this idea.

No, the tone is set.  Anyone reading or deeming the thread worthy of consideration is wacky.  Have you notified the author?  Asked him to comment.  Was it really necessary to editorialize in this manner?  Why is it so threatening? 

[aryagonnakill#2]

What I have always noticed about the people who claim Dany is not who she says she is, is that they seem to make the assumption that absolutely nothing happens off screen in the normal version of events where Dany is who she thinks.

For example, it seems obvious that when Stannis took Dragonstone the soldiers would tell him Rhaella died giving birth to a baby girl, and that if no one said that, no one in Westeros would've ever known who Danaerys was.  Yet those who deny Dany is Dany say we are only going off Viserys word.

[Ygrain]

2 minutes ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

What I have always noticed about the people who claim Dany is not who she says she is, is that they seem to make the assumption that absolutely nothing happens off screen in the normal version of events where Dany is who she thinks.

For example, it seems obvious that when Stannis took Dragonstone the soldiers would tell him Rhaella died giving birth to a baby girl, and that if no one said that, no one in Westeros would've ever known who Danaerys was.  Yet those who deny Dany is Dany say we are only going off Viserys word.

That's what I was aiming at in my first post, as well. Robert's small council had been keeping tabs on Viserys for years, yet when he suddenly grows a sister, no-one apparently bats a lash.