What should be Jon's new Targaryen name?

[Toe]

This obviously assumes that Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon. If so, then what new Targaryen name should Jon take? "Jon" likely comes from Jon Arryn. However, a Targaryen heir needs a Targaryen name in order to emphasize his connection to the Targaryen dynasty. Some suggestions...

Rheagar II (or I?) - his father

Aegon VI - a new beginning for the dynasty like Aegon I

...

Other possible names here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Targaryen

He will also most likely be given an epithet. Suggestions...

The Bastard

The Crow

The Great

Wallbreaker

...

So in history books he would then be called, for example, Rheagar II the Bastard.

[Gregor Barksdale]

Emon ?

[winterqueen]

IF Jon is the son of Lyanna and Rhaegar, my guess would be Lyanna lived long enough to name him. I am sure she gave him a Targ name. Rhaegar already had a Rhaenys and Aegon so perhaps Lyanna played with the name Visenya to put a male twist on the spelling? Maybe Viserion? MMmmmm? Isn't that the name of a certain white dragon?

Regardless of if Jon was given a name at birth by his parents, I think Ned would change any Targ name to protect the baby. People would not think twice about the name Jon. They would just think it was to honor Jon Arryn or King Jon Stark.

[dolorouseddwasright]

Why can't he stick with Jon? It is a servicable name and he can be Jon, first of his name, king of the blah blah blah.....

I know it isn't an official Targaryen name but a name has to start somewhere. Someone must be first of his name. Especially since he is already used to Jon. It would be kind of embarrasing for someone to be trying to call him by his Targ name and Jon ignoring him because he can't remember that's his new name.

But if he must change his name, he should choose Bob. :D

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

Jonarion The Oathbreaker :P

Oathbreaker because IN MY OPINION his Night's Watch oaths are lifelong so he would have to break them to lay claim to any of his Targ birthright)

BTW I'm aware that "Jonarion" is a really really stupid name, because IMO it's a really bad idea for Jon to be king anyway. I'm really really hoping that he'll never become king.

[Seerow]

Personally I expect he'll stick with Jon. But if he does change his name for whatever reason, and he himself picks it, I could see him going for Aemon. He seemed to hold a lot of respect for the old man, and it would be pretty fitting.

[Blue Steel]

Personally I expect he'll stick with Jon. But if he does change his name for whatever reason, and he himself picks it, I could see him going for Aemon. He seemed to hold a lot of respect for the old man, and it would be pretty fitting.

Jon the Butcher of Bakersfield. Killian, here's your Subzero, now plain zero.

[Arbor Gold]

I'm going to go with Jaemon the Emo.

[Alexia]

Jonarion The Oathbreaker :P

Oathbreaker because IN MY OPINION his Night's Watch oaths are lifelong so he would have to break them to lay claim to any of his Targ birthright)

BTW I'm aware that "Jonarion" is a really really stupid name, because IMO it's a really bad idea for Jon to be king anyway. I'm really really hoping that he'll never become king.

:bowdown:

:agree:

You said it first, you said it best.

[feardeathbywater]

The letter of the oath commands brothers not to take wives or father children. That could be one reason (other than simple common sense) why nobody cares that they visit the brothel in Mole's Town. In the same way Jon never broke his oaths: he never fought against the Watch, he followed his commanding officer's orders, and he and Ygritte were, at least by non-Wildling standards, merely lovers. I suppose the Wildlings might consider him married if he had claimed to be: their customs are a bit sketchy.

Pointless, anyway, for I don't think Rhaegar was his father.

[dolorouseddwasright]

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come." (NW Oath)

If Jon becomes king, he will have to break his oath. How could anyone follow him after that? I like the idea of R+L=J but I don't like the idea of Jon being king. I think he needs to keep his happy ass at the wall as a loyal member of the NW. I would like to think that he is Stark enough to take that duty seriously and do his job. He would definitely get more respect for that from me than if he dumps the NW to be king. I don't dislike Jon, but I really want him to keep his vows.

[Toe]

if the Others are defeated, the Wall broken, and the Wildlings killed/settled to the south/colonized after the Wall is broken, then there is no need for the NW. It can be dissolved. Local nobility, or a new Wildling nobility, can take over any remaining duties. The Wall stopped conquest and culture exchange in both directions. The Faith or the southern nobility have no particular interest in preserving the NW. Prisoners can better be sent to the mines or something similar.

[Lord Varys]

Rhaegar Targaryen still thought he himself was Azor Ahai when his first child, Princess Rhaenys, was born. That's why he called her Rhaenys and not Visenya, as he should have called her, if he already intended to mirror Aegon I and his sisters in his own children. Visenya was Aegon's elder sister, Rhaenys his younger sister.

Why Rhaegar preferred Rhaenys over the 'Vise-' type of valyrian names we do not know, but it might have something to do with the fact that all the Targaryens descended from Aegon and Rhaenys, and not from Visenya (due to the fact that Maegor the Cruel died without issue) - at least if Aenys I did not marry a daughter of Visenya.

[One also might speculate that Egg's naming policy tried to connect to the great Targaryens of the past. Prince Duncan obviously is named after Dunk, but Jaehaerys II certainly honors the Conciliator, and Aerys II the learned book-King Aerys I, both of which were neither mad nor cruel, or warrior-kings.]

But when Rhaegar's son Aegon was born, his view changed. He assumed that his son, nor he himself was the prophesied savior. That is why he named him Aegon, and this is also why he needed yet another child - probably with another woman, as Elia (and her child) likely would not survive another pregnancy.

With Rhaegar's child being Azor Ahai, it makes sense to assume that he now intended to emulate his children closely to Aegon and his sisters, which makes it likely that his child from Lyanna would be named Visenya if it would turn out to be female. If it happened to be male, it would likely be named in the male version of the name 'Visenya' which I assume could be Viserys. At least, Viserys is the only 'Vise-' kind of name we see among the Targaryens, and the fact that two prominent Targaryen Kings bore that name, makes it possible that they were names so to honor Aegon's sister.

So in my mind Jon Snow's true Targaryen name is Viserys Targaryen; and if Aegon VI is really dead, then he would also be Viserys Targaryen, the Fourth of His Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar, and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms (and soon, when he comes of age) Protector of the Realm.

All under the assumption that Rhaegar's and Lyanna's decision about his name become known. I rather doubt that any of them cared to name their child after Jon Arryn. This makes no sense at all. Ned had to keep his true name secret when he decided to pass of the child as his son. Ned Stark might name his child after his foster father, Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen never would.

Possible epithets of Jon the Dragon could be

- the Ice/Wolf Dragon (due to his Stark heritage, and Ghost)

- the Trueborn Bastard (he has to be of legitimate birth to have a chance to become King)

- the Mummer's Dragon (well, he appears to be a Stark, not a dragon)

I doubt that Jon would try to leave the Wall if the Others are not utterly defeated. He is going to fulfill his duty, that much has to be clear by now. But I'm not sure he will be needed there (or stay behind) if the whole Realm is destroyed and without clear leadership after the War for Dawn has finally ended. If this thing is really going to a huge conflict, then all the Realm is going to suffer, and even if there is still a Night's Watch after it, not only it will be needed to rebuild but the Realm as a whole. Maybe even a new Realm, where the tasks of the Night's Watch (which now yet again would be recognized as being most important tasks). This rebuilding has to be done by a person all of Westeros could accept as a leader. It has to be a Targaryen. And if Dany dies, things might easily revert to War of the Numerous Kings and Queens 2.0, even if half the Realm is starving to death. The last known Targaryen alive certainly would be a better alternative for the crown than Shireen the Disfigured (if she is still alive), or anyone else.

So Jon might be step down from the Night's Watch if the Realm needs him elsewhere. Especially if he was King of Westeros since the day of his birth, and only tricked out of his birthright by deceitful relatives.

[Alexia]

Why dissolve it when, 1) nobody believed in the Others to begin with; 2) its such a handy, ancient institution for sending prisoners to; 3) its an ancient, honorable institution; 4) everyone in there has taken vows, many of whom have been convicted of crimes and something else would need to be found for them; 5) the subjugation of the entire wildling culture is unlikely and unrealistic, considering the wildlings from the Mountains of the Moon. Its a great prison camp - if it ain't broke, why fix it?

I'm still voting for Jonarion the Oathbreaker, or perhaps the Serpent (no true dragon, he). Songs will be sung a thousand years from now, of bastards borne of lust and lies who succumb to their nature, as exemplified by the Oathbreaker.

The Mummer's Dragon works well too.

[RobMRobM]

In jest, because this topic makes me punchy...

Dragonwarg J

Jon Stormwed

Jon of Summerville...

and the number one answer: Dany Boy

[Zizoz]

I've seen it suggested that he was named after Rhaegar's friend Jon Connington.

[Lord Varys]

Alexia,

the point in dissolving the NW could be to make the (remaining) threat of the Others (which I hope is not going to be a remaining threat in the end) something all the Realm has to deal with, not just a bunch of criminals. And who will be able to enforce this view better on the Realm than the former Commander of the Night's Watch who personally dealt with the Others, and likely played a huge part in mankind's victory?

Stannis' idea of giving the abandoned keeps of the Night's Watch to his own vassals makes a lot of sense. Men have to live up there, if this ice-monsters really should be kept in line. They can't just send their criminals up there.

And if the threat of the Others has ended, the criminals will be put to the sword. Westeros does not need prisons beside the dungeons in major castles. The Seven-pointed Star states:

'Sins may be forgiven. Crimes have to be punished.'

The people who joined the NW never actually got punished, as they swore an oath - and you only can swear an oath, if you swear it voluntarily. At least technically, they are no different from the people who join the NW entirely voluntarily. But of course they will have to answer for their crimes if they leave the Wall. But they will not be executed as oathbreakers, but punished according to the crimes they committed before they were sent to the Wall.

[Alexia]

The people who joined the NW never actually got punished, as they swore an oath - and you only can swear an oath, if you swear it voluntarily. At least technically, they are no different from the people who join the NW entirely voluntarily. But of course they will have to answer for their crimes if they leave the Wall. But they will not be executed as oathbreakers, but punished according to the crimes they committed before they were sent to the Wall.

I'd like some quotes to show this to be the case. Arya, for example, clearly kills Dareon for oathbreaking (though I think there's some rage that he won't take her to the Wall influencing that, as well). Ned Stark kills Gared for being an oathbreaker and even tells Bran of how dangerous the men abandoning the NW are as oathbreakers. I didn't see Ned Stark executing Gared for poaching or whatever it was he was sent there for.

Jaime wonders at one point what the High Septon would think of an oath sworn under duress. Wonders! Is there anything in the books, anywhere, suggesting that the men of the NW are not bound by their oaths?

And what crimes did Ser Aliser and others sent to the Wall for fighting on the wrong side commit besides fighting for their sworn lord? They swore their oaths under duress...

[Radio Changes]

Ah yes, the tale of the Wallbreaker. A fierce general many years ago! Tore the great wall in the north down with his bare hands he did! Had a magical wolf with blood red eyes as his companion. Son of dragons and wolves he was!

Yeah, the Wallbreaker sounds pretty badass.

Also, calling him Rhaegar II (Epithet) is wrong, the Epithet replaces the number, Baelor the Blessed, Aegon the Unworthy.

[Gurkhal]

I agree with those who thinks that Jon will work perfectly as a name. I'm fairly sure that even if acknowledged as a Targaryen Jon would still be a bastard. That would mean that he would still be named Jon Snow, or if legitimized, as Jon Targaryen.

If one look on "Bloodraven", another Targaryen bastard (if the information on the Westeros.org wiki are to be trusted which I presume it can be) who was acknowledge but didn't get a traditional Targaryen name.