My thoughts on the Tyrion Targaryen Theory

[Weirwood Ghost]

On 09/06/2017 at 1:26 PM, purple-eyes said:

Why Tyrion has to be a bastard?

Aerys as the king might secretly marry Joanna as a second wife by Valyrian tradition.

Just like Jon and Lyanna case, and even more reasonably because Aerys is actually a king, not just a prince. 

Therefore Tyrion will be a trueborn Targ. 

 

I've been reading John Ashdown-Hill's Royal Marriage Secrets - Consorts & Concubines, Bigamists & Bastards. It's interesting to note that in the medieval world, marriage was not recorded with authorities either civil nor Church, there was no written record kept, this included royal marriages of which many were often small private affairs and not big extravagant events full of pomp we're under the impression they held.

Marriage was a verbal agreement between two people that was followed with sexual intercourse. There need be no witnesses, not even a priest. This changed over time due to the problem of either party making the declaration of marriage but never following through hence legal staunches between the pledged two people.

It could be possible that in this vein Martin has created a King Aerys character similar to that of King Henry VIII, in that he pledged himself to Joanna because he was obsessively attracted to her (as King Henry VIII was drawn to Anne Boleyn). Joanna seems to be written as the dominant careful partner in her marriage to Tywin, and with a female character of ambition she could have had her own aspirations for Tywin through the crown. We know that Anne Boleyn became Henry's VIII's second wife and she begot him a daughter who would go on to be Queen Elizabeth I. Anne Boleyn had been secretly married to Henry Percy before she ever went to the court of Henry VIII but the marriage was annulled.

If you mix up dates and situations it's completely credible, with a station in life that has one playing secret actions, that Aery's and Joanna did have a pledge of marriage and coupling resulting in Tyrion.

Do I believe this is the case? I don't know enough information about Joanna yet.

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

Why assume that she did? She just happened to live on the island where dragonseeds (as well as many non-dragonseeds) lived, and she tamed Sheepstealer through cleverness, much as Tyrion would. It is entirely possible that the supposed requirement for Targ blood to ride dragons is just Targ propaganda, since Nettles succeeded without any such established parentage.

It is not that difficult. A lot of other Dragonstonians tried and failed to claim a dragon. They either had no dragonlord blood, not enough dragonlord blood, or they made a mistake (like Quentyn did).

It is common misconception to assume that Nettles tamed Sheepstealer through cleverness. That is wrong. Nettles got close to a wild dragon by slowly making him comfortable with her being around it. That's why she brought him food for quite some time before she tried to mount him. But she forged the same lasting and exclusive bond with him as any other dragonrider did.

And we do know that you cannot just ride any dragon, never mind the fact that it is comfortable around you. Syrax knew and was comfortable around Joffrey Velaryon, too, yet when the boy mounted her she rejected him and he fell to his death.

The Targaryen dragons would have been accustomed to the presence of a lot of people - servants who fed them, stable boys who cleaned the Dragonpit and the hatcheries on Dragonstone, etc. - yet none of these people ever became a dragonrider when in fact such people should have been the first to volunteer and have success when Jacaerys Velaryon was looking for new dragonriders.

Instead we get Addam of Hull, Hugh, Ulf, and Nettles - none of which ever seem to have interacted or been close to a dragon before they came forth.

If it had turned out that one of those new dragonriders were a person not from Dragonstone or Driftmark, or a person where it would have been very, very likely/almost impossible that he or she had Targaryen or Valyrian ancestors I'd say that this would indicate that Targaryen or dragonlord blood is not necessary to mount a dragon.

George could easily have done this by making one of those dragonseeds a, say, visiting wildling who jumped a ship at Eastwatch, a clansman from the North who had recently come to Dragonstone to swear fealty to Rhaenyra, a visiting Dornishwoman, etc. Instead we have Addam of Hull with confirmed Velaryon-Targaryen ancestors, a man-at-arms in service on Dragonstone (Ulf), indicating that he was born there and that his ancestors had lived there, too, a blacksmith's bastard (Hugh), and a thirteen-year-old (Nettles).

Smallfolk doesn't travel in Westeros, making it essentially impossible that Hugh and Nettles are not Dragonstonians by birth, or have at least one parent who was Dragonstonian. Not to mention that Jace searched for dragonriders while Rhaenyra only controlled the island holdings sworn to Dragonstone. They had lost all holdings on the mainland by then, making it exceedingly unlikely that any of the (would-be) dragonriders could have come from Westeros proper or Essos. It would have been different if, say, they had searched for dragonriders after they had taken KL or if Aegon II had done so at some point during the war.

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

He did, but if GRRM meant when he said that the third head not necessarily be a Targ rather that the third head must have Targ blood, that seems deliberately misleading fans, which is not something GRRM normally does. 

That is not the case. George was asked a specific question about the dragon heads there. And that wasn't a question about whether the three dragon heads have to have Targaryen or dragonlord blood. From what we know they have to.

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

We don't know that Targ blood is required to ride dragons. Nettles' example suggests that it isn't.

It doesn't suggest that at all. It only proves that you don't have to look like a Targaryen to mount a dragon. But Rhaenyra's three sons also prove that.

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

And even if Targ blood is needed for riding dragons, then that doesn't make a Targ of Tyrion unless you assume that Tyrion will ride a dragon, and that's by no means a given.

I think we can be pretty sure that this is going to happen. I'd be surprised if it didn't. But, sure, if Tyrion doesn't become a dragonrider he is most likely not going to be one of the dragon heads, either. But this is exceedingly unlikely at this point in the story because it seems to be a given that the dragons will be claimed by main characters. Brown Ben might also claim a dragon - or he might fail, despite his blood - but he is most certainly not going to turn out to be one of those three dragon heads.

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

That doesn't establish parentage, though. Joanna was married to Tywin at the time of Tyrion's conception. Unless Barristan has unimpeachable knowledge of Joanna having sex with Aerys and not Tywin nine months ahead of Tyrion's birth, which is extremely unlikely, all he can know is Aerys and Joanna maybe having an affair after the marriage, which certainly wouldn't establish parentage.

He can either have what you demand of him - say, know that Aerys II and Joanna Lannister did have sex nine months before Tyrion's birth because he stood outside Aerys' bedchamber when they did have sex - or he could have overheard a conversation in which Aerys II made it clear that Tyrion was his son. Varys and other people at court could know stuff like that, too.

That would be about as good evidence as we have of the parentage of Cersei's children. All we have there is Cersei's claim that they are all Joffrey's. But we don't know for sure, do we, without paternity tests. Robert could have had sex with Cersei around the time Joff was conceived, too, without mentioning or remembering it. All we have there is her belief that her children are Jaime's.

Sure, Aerys II could be mistaken or Selmy's conclusion that Aerys must be Tyrion's father because he had sex with Joanna around the time of Tyrion's conception could be wrong. But if Tyrion becomes a dragonrider and we learn this about Aerys and Joanna then this would be more than enough to convince me that this story is true. 

Especially if future discussions of dragonlore essentially confirm that you have to have dragonlord blood to become a dragonrider. That is what Tyrion already seems to believe and he is an expert on those matters.

6 hours ago, Newstar said:

Lots of reasons. Building suspense for when they actually do meet by presenting a missed opportunity.

Well, I don't see any intrinsic meaning or suspense in such a meeting. It would most likely have been even worse than the lukewarm reception Quentyn got. Daenerys has no use for an ugly dwarf with a big mouth who murdered his father and nephew. Unless she gets a good reason to trust him. But 'I killed two of your worst enemies for my own selfish reasons' and 'I'm now hated and despised kingslayer and kinslayer in Westeros' is not going to help him win Dany's trust. Or the trust of anybody on her camp.

Tyrion certainly is smart and competent but that means nothing if you don't have a reason to trust him. Smart and competent people make very good traitors. And any man murdering his own father and nephew should be watched.

The whole family connection thing as well as the dragonrider thing could help Tyrion with that when he finally meets Daenerys for the first time. And as I've already said - it could also help him to actually choose her side in the coming struggles rather than using her as his pawn. Right now Tyrion has little incentive aside from his own problems to join Daenerys. It is basically the only option he has got right now. But that's not a good basis for a long and productive partnership. He might be tempted to defect back to Aegon once they reach Westeros or to reconcile with his Lannister family. But if Dany is his half-sister (and he learns or comes to believe that Aegon is not his half-nephew but some Blackfyre descendant) he is quite likely to stick with her until the very end.

[Newstar]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is not that difficult. A lot of other Dragonstonians tried and failed to claim a dragon. They either had no dragonlord blood, not enough dragonlord blood, or they made a mistake (like Quentyn did).

There's nothing proving that Nettles has Targ blood. Assuming backwards based on her dragonriding ability makes no sense, since in your argument the dragonriding ability is the only proof of Targ blood. It is entirely possible that Targ blood being a prerequisite to ride dragons is nothing more than Targ propaganda, and Nettles succeeding through cleverness where many others failed is a hint that it's just that, propaganda. It's circular reasoning: Nettles must have Targ blood because she tamed a dragon due to having Targ blood.

Nettles taming a dragon despite a lack of established Targ blood through the use of her wits could be paving the way for another non-Targ descendant (Tyrion) to accomplish the same feat in ASOIAF.

 

Quote

And we do know that you cannot just ride any dragon, never mind the fact that it is comfortable around you. Syrax knew and was comfortable around Joffrey Velaryon, too, yet when the boy mounted her she rejected him and he fell to his death.

Maybe Joffrey should have tried bringing Syrax food on a regular basis, then.

 

Quote

 

He can either have what you demand of him - say, know that Aerys II and Joanna Lannister did have sex nine months before Tyrion's birth because he stood outside Aerys' bedchamber when they did have sex - or he could have overheard a conversation in which Aerys II made it clear that Tyrion was his son. Varys and other people at court could know stuff like that, too.

That would be about as good evidence as we have of the parentage of Cersei's children. All we have there is Cersei's claim that they are all Joffrey's. But we don't know for sure, do we, without paternity tests. 

 

No, Cersei can reliably vouch for her children's parentage, because she personally saw to it that Robert never finished inside her, meaning he couldn't possibly have fathered her children, and she told Ned as much. Joanna is dead and can provide no such assurance, and unless Barristan was in the room with Aerys and Joanna and every time with Joanna and Tywin, he would have no idea what specifically went on between them or between Joanna and Tywin. For all he knows Joanna could have been pulling the same trick with Aerys that Cersei did with Robert.

 

Quote

Especially if future discussions of dragonlore essentially confirm that you have to have dragonlord blood to become a dragonrider.

Well, at least we're in agreement that that has yet to be confirmed in any way.

 

Again, I keep coming back to "What would be the point of A+J=T?" It's only necessary from a plot perspective IF dragonlord blood is required to ride dragons and IF Tyrion is going to ride a dragon. That's it. Assume either of those things out of the equation, and there's really no reason why GRRM would do it.

 

 

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

There's nothing proving that Nettles has Targ blood. Assuming backwards based on her dragonriding ability makes no sense, since in your argument the dragonriding ability is the only proof of Targ blood. It is entirely possible that Targ blood being a prerequisite to ride dragons is nothing more than Targ propaganda, and Nettles succeeding through cleverness where many others failed is a hint that it's just that, propaganda. It's circular reasoning: Nettles must have Targ blood because she tamed a dragon due to having Targ blood.

There is no reason to entertain the idea that Targaryen blood being necessary to ride a dragon is propaganda. Nobody in the series brings up that notion. That something certain readers did, back when we had little to no information how the dragonriding thing did work. Before ADwD we didn't even have any indication that you can only ride one dragon at a time, a fact that was later confirmed by the TWoIaF and the other historical texts (not just by the Joffrey-Syrax example but also by the fact that Maegor refused to mount a dragon because he intended to claim Balerion after his father's death).

Nobody in books thinks people falsely believe this just because of 'Targaryen propaganda'. If we consider it a viable method to discredit plot elements on the basis that those things could be based on lies or errors without good reason we could essentially question everything. On that basis I could also argue that it may be 'propaganda' or 'nonsense' that Durran Godsgrief, Lann the Clever, Brandon the Builder, etc. existed or did the things they did. Or one could even argue that some Targaryen kings of the past - the Conqueror, the Old King, etc. - we never met in a story are simply inventions by the historians/singers because, say, 'they were too good/successful to be real people.

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

Nettles taming a dragon despite a lack of established Targ blood through the use of her wits could be paving the way for another non-Targ descendant (Tyrion) to accomplish the same feat in ASOIAF.

Nothing indicates that Nettles couldn't have had Targaryen or dragonlord blood, nor is there any indication that she did something different to establish her lasting bond with Sheepstealer. Feeding a dragon isn't the same thing as bonding with it. Believing that is a mistake. Irri, Jhiqui, Missandei, etc. also interact with Dany's dragons yet they are not likely to claim them as riders. Because there is more to that than just being close to such a beast.

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

Maybe Joffrey should have tried bringing Syrax food on a regular basis, then.

He clearly was as close to her as Nettles was before she finally mounted him and thus made herself his rider. Sheepstealer was a wild dragon, he was not accustomed to the presence of humans but Syrax was, even more so the the sons of her rider. A wild dragon seems to be much more dangerous than a domesticated dragon who has had riders in the past (but even those can kill would-be riders who try to claim them). Alyn Velaryon certainly had Targaryen blood but was rejected by Sheepstealer while Addam Velaryon succeeded with Seasmoke. And Drogon nearly killed Daenerys when she mounted him. There is no guarantee of success there.

But certainly also no indication that anybody can jump on a dragon's back and become its permanent rider. If this had been the case the Valyrian dragonlords would have lost their dragons pretty early after the founding of the Freehold. If anybody feeding a dragon would have been able to steal them then stealing a dragon would have been incredibly easy. Not only could have Valyrian slaves stolen the dragons of their masters but the Ghiscari and other enemies of Valyria could easily enough have gotten themselves some dragons. Hell, even in Westeros the Faith Militant and the other other rebels and enemies of the early Targaryen kings could have simply stolen the Targaryen dragons.

The fact that nobody ever tried to do that (or succeeded at that) is a strong indication that this was simply not possible.

This doesn't mean having Targaryen/dragonlord blood is the only way to claim and control a dragon. Skinchanging might work, too, especially if we had a skinchanger with Targaryen blood (like Jon Snow, or perhaps even Daenerys and Tyrion, too, considering that they all would have Blackwood blood through Betha). There is also the chance that there are spells and magical artifacts like Dragonbinder which enable a person without dragonlord blood to claim a dragon. But if that's the case then this seems to be without a precedent up to this point. We don't know what Dragonbinder can do, and we have no reason to believe Nettles used any spells or magical artifacts to bind Sheepstealer to her.

But we can be pretty sure that dragonriding has essentially nothing to with winning the trust or domesticating an animal. It is some sort of magical bond. The very idea that a enormous and ancient dragon like Vhagar would submit herself to the whims and will of a ten-year-old boy like Prince Aemond is pretty much ridiculous. You cannot explain such a connection without a very real and effective magical bond.

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

No, Cersei can reliably vouch for her children's parentage, because she personally saw to it that Robert never finished inside her, meaning he couldn't possibly have fathered her children, and she told Ned as much. Joanna is dead and can provide no such assurance, and unless Barristan was in the room with Aerys and Joanna and every time with Joanna and Tywin, he would have no idea what specifically went on between them or between Joanna and Tywin. For all he knows Joanna could have been pulling the same trick with Aerys that Cersei did with Robert.

Cersei gives us her own opinion. She could be mistaken. Her children were conceived years ago and we all know that coitus interruptus isn't exactly an effective means of birth control. Cersei might believe that her children are all not Robert's but without a paternity test it is impossible to confirm. I mean, if it was so clear that Robert had had no vaginal intercourse whatsoever around the time the children were conceived one should assume he himself would have gotten suspicious. Sure, Cersei cites the fact that he was often drunk when they had sex but still...

Cersei's own pure-blooded Lannister ancestry doesn't make it so unlikely that even a Baratheon child of hers could have golden hair and green eyes.

I'm not saying this is the case, of course, but it is a possibility we cannot refute, either. Not if we want the standards of 'truth' you apparently want. We can also not be sure that Ned and his siblings are truly Rickard's children - perhaps Lyarra (a Stark, too) entertained some lovers and they inherited their Stark looks exclusively from her. And so on.

In Tyrion's case it should be more than enough for Selmy and/or Varys confirming the fact that Aerys is Tyrion's father on the basis of the knowledge they might have. It is not that unlikely that Tywin and Joanna did not, in fact, have vaginal intercourse during the days of the anniversary tourney in KL in 272 AC. And if that's the case, and that's going to turn out to be the time Tyrion was conceived, then this will be more than enough evidence that Tyrion is in fact Aerys' son.

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

Well, at least we're in agreement that that has yet to be confirmed in any way.

Sure, it has to be confirmed. But there are a lot of ways to do it. By making Tyrion a dragonrider the Targaryen way (i.e. by simply jumping on a dragon's back and establishing a permanent bond this way), by revealing the Aerys-Joanna sex thing in 272 AC in some fashion, and by establishing that only dragonlord descendants can claim dragons 'the Targaryen way'.

If Tyrion became a dragonrider in a different manner - say, by means of Dragonbinder and by making it clear that his blood was completely irrelevant in the magical ritual involved - then this would certainly also not work as evidence that he is or may be Aerys' son.

But we have to wait and see how Dragonbinder works. That is a huge and complicated issue in itself. We know all Valyrian magic was rooted in blood and fire, and blood plays a role in the workings of Dragonbinder, too, yet do the Valyrian glyphs (if correctly translated by Moqorro) mean that smearing any blood on the horn is going to make it properly work? Or do you need 'the blood of the dragon'? And is smearing blood on the horn actually what's meant there? Or does it mean a blood sacrifice of some sort?

This is as of yet a complete mystery. But my gut feeling is that Dragonbinder is not going to work the way Victarion expects. That would be far too easy. And Moqorro's ominous reference to Victarion's future doesn't exactly make it likely he is acting in Victarion's best interest. He does not want Euron or Victarion to claim either Daenerys or her dragons. He uses Victarion and his fleet for his own ends. And he can foresee the future very effectively and in very great detail. He may have foreseen that he needs the Ironborn fleet in Slaver's Bay at the time they now arrived to help Dany's people defeat the Yunkish allies and deliver Dragonbinder to them. But once that's done he might be of no further use. I'd not be surprised at all if Rhaegal ended up going mad and ripping Victarion to pieces after the horn is blown.

[Newstar]

55 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There is no reason to entertain the idea that Targaryen blood being necessary to ride a dragon is propaganda.

We don't know either way. A girl of uncertain Targ blood taming Sheepstealer through using her wits could be a hint. Or, for the reasons you've laid out, it may not be a hint. It does bug me that GRRM has had ample opportunity to clear up this ambiguity about whether or not dragonlord blood is a prerequisite for dragonriding and has refused to do so. On the other hand, GRRM had ample opportunity to rule out A+J=T in TWOIAF with the dates, so who knows?

 

Quote

Cersei gives us her own opinion. She could be mistaken. Her children were conceived years ago and we all know that coitus interruptus isn't exactly an effective means of birth control.

It wasn't coitus interruptus, though. Cersei said that she hadn't let Robert inside her for years and pleasured him in other ways. We all have a pretty good idea what those "other ways" are, and she couldn't have gotten pregnant by any of them.

 

Quote

In Tyrion's case it should be more than enough for Selmy and/or Varys confirming the fact that Aerys is Tyrion's father on the basis of the knowledge they might have. It is not that unlikely that Tywin and Joanna did not, in fact, have vaginal intercourse during the days of the anniversary tourney in KL in 272 AC.

Not that unlikely, sure, but who could confirm it, other than Joanna? Selmy might know what he heard behind Aerys' door, but he wouldn't know exactly what they were doing (see above about "other ways"), and he certainly wouldn't know whether Tywin and Joanna were having vaginal intercourse or not during that period, either.

R+L=J can be confirmed with near-certainty because a number of people in the know would know that Rhaegar was the only one bedding Lyanna when Jon was conceived. With Tyrion, though, the best you'd get is the possibility that Tyrion could have been fathered by either Tywin or Aerys. If Joanna was having sex with both of them during the month of Tyrion's conception, she may not even have known herself who was the father and would be unable to vouch for Tyrion's parentage even if she were still alive. If Joanna herself had no idea, Varysand Selmy would have been equally clueless. And that goes back to the impossibility of confirmation short of a "dragonriding as paternity test" situation of the kind you described, which wouldn't work unless dragonblood was indeed required for dragonriding, which is not confirmed at this point.

[BalerionTheCat]

19 hours ago, The Mother of The Others said:

 I let the personalities of the lannisters dictate to me who the parents were for each. 

Exactly!!!

Cersei and Joffrey both have the paranoiac attitude of Aerys and Viserys. Believing everyone is betraying them. They have the cruelty of the worst Targaryens. Yes Ramsey is no less cruel. But he is not paranoiac. It does not invalidate the evidence for Cersei.

And yes, Jaime is the parallel of Rhaegar.  Forsaking honor and reputation for what MUST be done.

Between eyes color and mindset or fate, I much prefer the evidences by the latter.

[Newstar]

10 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Exactly!!!

Cersei and Joffrey both have the paranoiac attitude of Aerys and Viserys. Believing everyone is betraying them. They have the cruelty of the worst Targaryens. Yes Ramsey is no less cruel. But he is not paranoiac. It does not invalidate the evidence for Cersei.

And yes, Jaime is the parallel of Rhaegar.  Forsaking honor and reputation for what MUST be done.

Between eyes color and mindset or fate, I much prefer the evidences by the latter.

Lysa is also extremely cruel and paranoid. Does that make her a secret Targaryen?

The Targs do not have the monopoly on cruelty and paranoia. 

[Guilherme Rubira]

44 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Exactly!!!

Cersei and Joffrey both have the paranoiac attitude of Aerys and Viserys. Believing everyone is betraying them. They have the cruelty of the worst Targaryens. Yes Ramsey is no less cruel. But he is not paranoiac. It does not invalidate the evidence for Cersei.

And yes, Jaime is the parallel of Rhaegar.  Forsaking honor and reputation for what MUST be done.

Between eyes color and mindset or fate, I much prefer the evidences by the latter.

Cercei is paranoid because of Maggy the Frog's prophecy. Joffrey just a reflection of his mother.
I really doubt the twins are not pure Lannisters.

[Lord Varys]

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

We don't know either way. A girl of uncertain Targ blood taming Sheepstealer through using her wits could be a hint. Or, for the reasons you've laid out, it may not be a hint. It does bug me that GRRM has had ample opportunity to clear up this ambiguity about whether or not dragonlord blood is a prerequisite for dragonriding and has refused to do so. On the other hand, GRRM had ample opportunity to rule out A+J=T in TWOIAF with the dates, so who knows?

The point is that nobody in the books seems to believe that somebody without dragonlord blood can become a dragonrider. The only in-universe information we have on this topic is that Targaryens (and dragonlord descendants in general) are (or may be) 'special'. But there is nobody doubting that they aren't. Even the Citadel seems to acknowledge they have magical blood. That's why Marwyn thinks the grey sheep wouldn't have trusted Aemon. There is not the smallest hint that this is all a red herring and Targaryens/dragonlords in general are normal people.

The dragonseeds certainly are ambiguous to a degree but this is actually to be expected. This is a medieval society and people like Ulf, Hugh, and Nettles have no way of knowing that they are Targaryen descendants if a parent or grandparent was a Targaryen bastard but not acknowledged. We know that Aenys I was popular with the women. In light of the fact that Alyssa Velaryon seems to have been a pretty strong woman and Aenys not exactly the most strong-willed of kings it is easily imaginable that he left quite a few dragonseeds on Dragonstone without ever acknowledging any of them. The First Night was only forbidden during the reign of his son.

But we also have Gyldayn's long paragraph on the Targaryens before the Conquest. If they left a lot of seeds there throughout the decades Ulf, High, and Nettles could actually have had multiple Targaryen ancestors.

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

It wasn't coitus interruptus, though. Cersei said that she hadn't let Robert inside her for years and pleasured him in other ways. We all have a pretty good idea what those "other ways" are, and she couldn't have gotten pregnant by any of them.

I know that, but Cersei never specifies that Robert and she didn't have vaginal intercourse during the years Joffrey, Myrcella, and Tommen were conceived. It seems as if Robert is only having sex with Cersei a few times a year by the time of AGoT, and those never involve vaginal intercourse. But that clearly wasn't the case back when they first married. She even says she had one child by Robert which she aborted with Jaime's help. If it could happen once it may have happened a second time

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

Not that unlikely, sure, but who could confirm it, other than Joanna? Selmy might know what he heard behind Aerys' door, but he wouldn't know exactly what they were doing (see above about "other ways"), and he certainly wouldn't know whether Tywin and Joanna were having vaginal intercourse or not during that period, either.

The idea is that Selmy may not only have firsthand knowledge that Joanna and Aerys had sex in 272 AC, around the time Tyrion was conceived, but also overheard a conversation between Aerys and Tywin (or another person) where Aerys acknowledged that Tyrion was his son. It is easily imaginable that the issue of Lord Tywin's dwarf was discussed at court behind closed doors. If Aerys acknowledged Tyrion - perhaps even in front of Tywin - then this should be pretty good evidence. Even better evidence might be a conversation between Joanna and Tywin recorded by little birds and preserved by Varys.

There are ways to give us good evidence for that. And if George wants he can give us visions of the event, either in magical dreams or through Bran.

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

R+L=J can be confirmed with near-certainty because a number of people in the know would know that Rhaegar was the only one bedding Lyanna when Jon was conceived.

That is actually difficult to establish. Rhaegar and Lyanna don't seem to have been alone. Whent or Dayne could just as well have slept with her, as could Rhaegar's other six companions. That is not very likely but difficult to rule out.

We would here accept the evidence as it is given. If Howland Reed tells us Jon Snow is Rhaegar's son by Lyanna we are most likely going to believe that even if we never get a vision of them actually having sex or witness the birth of the boy in some form.

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

With Tyrion, though, the best you'd get is the possibility that Tyrion could have been fathered by either Tywin or Aerys. If Joanna was having sex with both of them during the month of Tyrion's conception, she may not even have known herself who was the father and would be unable to vouch for Tyrion's parentage even if she were still alive.

That is only true if we assume Tywin and Aerys had sex with Joanna around the same time. This can be questioned because the fact that Tywin and Joanna had only twins and then no children for a couple of years despite the fact that Tywin spent months in Casterly Rock after the death of his father could be a hint that they didn't have vaginal intercourse all that often.

The fact that Tywin had the tunnel made to sneak into Chataya's is also very interesting in this context. The widowed Tywin Lannister could do whatever the hell he wanted to do. Why shouldn't he frequent brothels? But if Joanna did indeed rule him he may not have dared doing that while she was alive. And why should Tywin - who allegedly was so much in love with Joanna - have frequented brothels while his wife was still alive? Those are interesting questions.

But in any case - if Tywin and Aerys both technically could be Tyrion's father then the dragonrider thing is most likely going to resolve this question in favor of Aerys.

Quite honestly, I think Tyrion is very likely to become a dragonrider accidentally in the coming battle(s). He may be confronted with Viserion there, and be forced to either die or try to jump on the dragon's back. And considering that he has those mad fits of courage and gallantry from time to time it would be not surprising at all if he does something like that in an attempt to save the life of Penny or somebody else (Jorah).

Afterwards Selmy could then tell Tyrion what he knows, leading to him accepting his Targaryen ancestry. But Tyrion may even figure out the basics - that he must have an immediate Targaryen ancestor -. even without Selmy's input. On his own he could not be sure. But Aerys-Joanna would be the most likeliest scenario. Tyrion would know it if there was a Targaryen-Plumm among his ancestors (he would then already have revealed to Brown Ben that they are cousins). The only other scenario I could imagine is that Rohanne Webber Osgrey Lannister may have had an affair with Egg. But Dunk is a much likelier candidate there, and that wouldn't give Tyrion Targaryen blood.

44 minutes ago, Newstar said:

If Joanna herself had no idea, Varysand Selmy would have been equally clueless. And that goes back to the impossibility of confirmation short of a "dragonriding as paternity test" situation of the kind you described, which wouldn't work unless dragonblood was indeed required for dragonriding, which is not confirmed at this point.

Well, Ran is of the opinion that basically all the dragonriders he knows about had dragonlord ancestors. He knows the full story of Nettles and the other dragonseeds and he is implying that he knows they all have dragonlords blood. The crucial factor is that you have the right drop of dragonlord blood. 

[BalerionTheCat]

1 hour ago, Newstar said:

Lysa is also extremely cruel and paranoid. Does that make her a secret Targaryen?

The Targs do not have the monopoly on cruelty and paranoia. 

Lysa was paranoid (who would not be with LF counsels). And it made her do stupid things. But she was not cruel by pleasure. And even if it was, it doesn't invalidate the argument for Cersei.

54 minutes ago, Guilherme Rubira said:

Cercei is paranoid because of Maggy the Frog's prophecy. Joffrey just a reflection of his mother.
I really doubt the twins are not pure Lannisters.

Cersei killed her best friend because she wanted Jaime. At this time she didn't believe in the prophecy (or was not yet maddened by it). Of course Joffrey had Cersei for model. But are Tommen and Myrcella like him?

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Exactly!!!

Cersei and Joffrey both have the paranoiac attitude of Aerys and Viserys. Believing everyone is betraying them. They have the cruelty of the worst Targaryens. Yes Ramsey is no less cruel. But he is not paranoiac. It does not invalidate the evidence for Cersei.

And yes, Jaime is the parallel of Rhaegar.  Forsaking honor and reputation for what MUST be done.

Between eyes color and mindset or fate, I much prefer the evidences by the latter.

There is simply no shred of evidence supporting the idea that Aerys II could be the biological father of Cersei and Jaime. Those parallels mean basically nothing in relation to that question. George draws subtle parallels between Joffrey, Cersei, and Aerys II but that doesn't mean he intends to give us the impression they are related in any way.

There are also parallels between Robb and Duncan the Small and parallels between Joffrey and Aerion Brightflame yet nothing indicates those people are descended from each other.

[Guilherme Rubira]

6 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Cersei killed her best friend because she wanted Jaime. At this time she didn't believe in the prophecy (or was not yet maddened by it). Of course Joffrey had Cersei for model. But are Tommen and Myrcella like him?

You have a point. Cercei is really crazy and mean even before the prophecy started haunting her.

That said, I still have a hard time accepting theorys about Cercei, Jaime and Tyrion parentage.

[Newstar]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The point is that nobody in the books seems to believe that somebody without dragonlord blood can become a dragonrider. The only in-universe information we have on this topic is that Targaryens (and dragonlord descendants in general) are (or may be) 'special'. But there is nobody doubting that they aren't. Even the Citadel seems to acknowledge they have magical blood.

Sure. Dragonlord blood is magical, but the question here is whether it is necessary to ride dragons, and that hasn't been answered yet. It may never be answered.

 

[Lord Varys]

Just now, Newstar said:

Sure. Dragonlord blood is magical, but the question here is whether it is necessary to ride dragons, and that hasn't been answered yet. It may never be answered.

What proof do we have that dragonlord blood is magical aside from the dragonrider thing? Daenerys hatching the dragon eggs was a singular magical event, according to George. Perhaps her blood had something to do with that but there seems to be more to it than that.

The only real magical property of dragonlord blood we seem to know about is the dragonbonding and dragonriding thing. If that was gone the Targaryens would just be normal people with weird looks.

[BalerionTheCat]

46 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There is simply no shred of evidence supporting the idea that Aerys II could be the biological father of Cersei and Jaime. Those parallels mean basically nothing in relation to that question. George draws subtle parallels between Joffrey, Cersei, and Aerys II but that doesn't mean he intends to give us the impression they are related in any way.

There are also parallels between Robb and Duncan the Small and parallels between Joffrey and Aerion Brightflame yet nothing indicates those people are descended from each other.

One interesting point it that Joanna "seldom" visited KL after Rhaella revoked her from her court. But for Cersei and Jaime to be fathered by Tywin: either Tywin visited Casterly Rock at the right time, or  Joanna came to KL. Tywin was Hand of the King. Given Ned's experience in the office, I don't know which one was the less "seldom". If it was the later, Aerys had as much chance as Tywin. Besides, the later we go in Aery's reign, the less he would be attractive for Joanna. Remember how badly he humiliated her at the Lannisport tourney, asking publicly about the ruin of her breasts. Do you think it would have put her in the right mood?

[Newstar]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

What proof do we have that dragonlord blood is magical aside from the dragonrider thing? Daenerys hatching the dragon eggs was a singular magical event, according to George. Perhaps her blood had something to do with that but there seems to be more to it than that.

The only real magical property of dragonlord blood we seem to know about is the dragonbonding and dragonriding thing. If that was gone the Targaryens would just be normal people with weird looks.

Prophetic dreams, stillborn babies with scales, etc. etc. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, BalerionTheCat said:

One interesting point it that Joanna "seldom" visited KL after Rhaella revoked her from her court.

Indeed. And one of those visits was in 272 AC, the year before Tyrion was born. Nothing indicates Joanna was in KL around the time the twins were conceived. And Aerys himself only visited Casterly Rock in the year after the birth of the twins, after Tytos had died.

Quote

But for Cersei and Jaime to be fathered by Tywin: either Tywin visited Casterly Rock at the right time, or  Joanna came to KL. Tywin was Hand of the King. Given Ned's experience in the office, I don't know which one was the less "seldom". If it was the later, Aerys had as much chance as Tywin.

That is technically true, but as I've said above there is no hint that Joanna was in KL at the right time. Unlike with Tyrion. I'd assume that the twins were conceived during one of Tywin's visits in the West. The twins were born shortly after Joanna had to leave court, and it is actually pretty likely that she did not exactly return there in the next few years. Displeasing the queen is no small thing.

Quote

Besides, the later we go in Aery's reign, the less he would be attractive for Joanna. Remember how badly he humiliated her at the Lannisport tourney, asking publicly about the ruin of her breasts. Do you think it would have put her in the right mood?

That wasn't the Lannisport tourney. It was the anniversary tourney in KL. The first edition of TWoIaF makes a mistake there that has been corrected in later editions.

I could see Aerys apologizing for the insult later. I could see Aerys summoning her to his chambers and raping her there. I could see Aerys using the hidden tunnels leading into the Tower of the Hand and raping her there. And I could also see Joanna - being pissed at Tywin's announcement to her that he intends to resign as Hand because Aerys had insulted Joanna - going to Aerys and have sex with him to ensure that Aerys would not accept Tywin's resignation. Her motivation for that could be that she wanted Tywin to remain Hand because she didn't want him at Casterly Rock or she enjoyed the power she could wield through him if he continued to serve as Hand.

Joanna Lannister is, after all, Cersei Lannister's mother.

But, really, there are many possible ways to resolve this thing if it did happen. The stage for Joanna and Aerys is set in KL in 272 AC, not in 265-66 AC. If there is something to this whole thing we will see it unfold in that year during the tourney.

1 hour ago, Newstar said:

Prophetic dreams, stillborn babies with scales, etc. etc. 

Prophetic dreams are not something that is singular Targaryen. And those monstrosities might be propaganda, too. After all, we never really saw Dany's baby, the source for the looks of Rhaenyra's stillborn daughter Visenya is Mushroom, and the talks about Maegor's children might be just go back to evil slanders. 

People who don't like the idea of the 'magical blood of the dragon' concept in general have tried to do that.

[BalerionTheCat]

41 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That wasn't the Lannisport tourney. It was the anniversary tourney in KL. The first edition of TWoIaF makes a mistake there that has been corrected in later editions.

Ok, the 272 tourney was in KL, not Lannisport. Thank you for fixing that. The Lannisport's was the one when Cersei received her prophecy. She was 10, so it would be 276. But Lannisport or KL, the players and date are the same. Agree KL is more convenient for Aerys, for a rape and to dissimulate it. But I don't feel it counterbalances the arguments in favor (or disfavor) of Jaime and Cersei. I can't see anything Targaryen in Tyrion. And everything in Cersei, Joffrey, and even in Jaime (but more like Rhaegar).

[Lord Varys]

6 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Ok, the 272 tourney was in KL, not Lannisport. Thank you for fixing that. The Lannisport's was the one when Cersei received her prophecy. She was 10, so it would be 276.

Yeah, that is the tourney Tywin threw to celebrate the birth of Prince Viserys.

6 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

But Lannisport or KL, the players and date are the same. Agree KL is more convenient for Aerys, for a rape and to dissimulate it. But I don't feel it counterbalances the arguments in favor (or disfavor) of Jaime and Cersei. I can't see anything Targaryen in Tyrion. And everything in Cersei, Joffrey, and even in Jaime (but more like Rhaegar).

There is nothing in Jaime that makes him particularly like Rhaegar. Rhaegar had a melancholic side, he was very smart and intelligent, and good at everything he did. Jaime is just a great fighter. He is neither particularly smart nor intelligent. There is also no hint that Rhaegar ever liked the idea of becoming a great knight all that much - but that's the thing that defined Jaime's life. That and Cersei. But Rhaegar had no important woman in his life until he met Lyanna.

Jaime is compared to other Lannisters by Genna and never compared to a Targaryen. In fact, not even Cersei is. Only Joff is, and he only by Tyrion.

But aside from all that - again, similarities in characters and similar arcs don't indicate biological kinship (or paternity).

We could draw all sorts of parallels between apparently unrelated characters and then claim that they may be closely related simply because nothing confirms that their parents weren't close to each other around the time of their conception.

We need more than such parallels. And we don't have that for the twins. We have it for Tyrion.

[Jon Ice-Eyes]

Didn't Aerys "take liberties" at the bedding on Tywin and Joanna'a wedding night? Which could make him the twins' father? 

For the record, I think that Tyrion is indeed Aerys' son. But I feel like The George put that other stuff in there to cast doubt on Cersei and Jaime's parentage as well.