Jump to content

J. Stargaryen

Members
  • Content count

    4,990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About J. Stargaryen

  • Rank
    Maegor II

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    With Dark Sister

Recent Profile Visitors

13,001 profile views
  1. An excellent choice for a great sword that nobody knew to use is Tormund's Member.
  2. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    No, there is textual evidence that Kevan and Cersei assumed or believed he did. Simply untrue. You think you're in charge of deciding what does or does not count as textual evidence but you're not. I remember when you were translating TWoIaF and you discussed spoilers from the book under the guise of your own ideas. That was incredibly underhanded if not unethical. You are no one to sit in judgment of another's honesty, intellectual or otherwise. We do not know what Rhaegar had been planning when his first child was born and named Rhaenys. But then he had a son and called him Aegon, and mentioned that there must be one more dragon head. The original three heads of the dragon were Visenya, Aegon, and Rhaenys. The fact that he has named two of his children Aegon and Rhaenys and he also mentions that there must be one more dragon head suggests an extremely obvious candidate for the third dragon head's name—Visenya. Why does Rhaenys precede the hypothetical Visenya here? Another obvious answer suggests itself—Because all Targaryens are descended from her, and none from Visenya. This all remains to be seen. Except that the text suggests that Rhaegar believed otherwise. Maybe GRRM is trying to trick us, but the common reading of that scene from the HotU is that Rhaegar believes his son with Elia is the PtwP and also one of the dragon heads, along with his sister. Except that his newborn by Elia is the subject of Rhaegar's dialogue, so when he says that there must be one more because the dragon has three heads, the natural reading is that Aegon and Rhaenys are the first two, according to Rhaegar. He's saying he must have another child, and as such is equating his children with the THotD. Again, this is not what the text indicates. What little it does points to Rhaenys and Aegon so far, with another child, likely a girl, IMO, to be the third and final head. Except that Aemon explains nobody looked for a girl. They all just assumed it was a prince, not a princess. What Aemon comes to believe in his last days is irrelevant to what Rhaegar believed when his son with Elia was born. The circumstances are much different, obviously. Maester Aemon is reacting to the belief that he is the only other living Targaryen, as well as the sickness that will eventually claim his life. I do not recognize your authority on how GRRM usually does or does not work. So, maybe try a different approach. One that does not involve elevating your opinion to the realm of fact and truth... Which is what you do here, too. Not only that, but you continually argue in bad faith. I've pointed out textual evidence in support of this theory on several different occasions only for you to declare that none exists. Yet you accuse me of intellectual dishonesty. I'm not sure if you're missing the point on purpose here, and I don't really care at this point. If you weren't unable to understand what I said, you'd be unwilling. I never said that Jon possibly being Aegon VII reflects the non-Targaryen side of his identity. R+L=J means Jon is a Targaryen by right of birth, but he is both Targaryen and Stark by blood, and that is surely meant to be important. So, if the number seven doesn't usually symbolically pair with House Targaryen, then it might reflect the joining of these bloodlines and/or even a unique event. Instead of thinking in terms of Targaryen or Stark, try thinking in terms of Targaryen and Stark.
  3. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    There is evidence that Kevan and Cersei Lannister made the natural assumption that Rhaegar, like any lord or future king, wanted sons. Beyond that is your own extrapolation. However, I am charitable enough to admit your explanation is a possibility, rather than applying your own standard which would read—there is no textual evidence indicating Rhaegar wanted multiple sons. Yes, there is. The fact there is a popular and intuitive theory that he was trying to recreate, in name, the original trio proves you are wrong or at least proves you are constraining the definition of "textual evidence" in an unuseful way. We probably don't know the whole story behind everything to do with the invasion, especially in the case that it ties into current events, prophetically or otherwise. Except that apparently, Rhaegar didn't think the third dragon head had been born yet by the time Aegon was. Based on textual evidence, of course. You're plainly conflating the THotD with the PtwP. I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish in doing so. Why on earth would you assume that GRRM would want to make this hypothetical solution uncomplicated? Occam's Razor is poorly applied here, and certainly not the default assumption. If GRRM didn't create a scenario where Aegon was the most unlikely name for Jon Snow, it would be the most obvious. So, he would have a motive to create exactly this type of scenario with it's "convoluted story" needed to explain away the obstacle if Aegon was indeed the name. People who write walls of text proposing the kind of ideas above should probably restrain from accusing others of "babbling." As for the rest of the paragraph, one of the most basic concepts of R+L=J, as it pertains to Jon's identity, is that he's not just a Targaryen. So, theoretically, he would bring more to the table symbolically than just the Targaryen portion of his identity.
  4. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Fantastic post. 1) A possibility, NOT a requirement. 2) A possibility, NOT a requirement. 3) You're just adding a condition to the faulty argument from #2 with "cared" in place of "believed." I'm unsure if you intended that to be a distinction. But again, what you've constructed is a possibility, NOT a requirement. The basis that any of these possibilities might be true is the series of textual hints that Jon was named Aegon by his mother. The collection of those hints and the underlying logic comprise a theory which is widely recognized by the fandom. Describing these possibilities as having "no basis or indication in the text" is uncharitable as well as wrong. I'm not sure what is to be expected evidence-wise at this point in the story when we still have lots to learn about RLJ. 4) Based on what? What do you know about Lyanna that informs this judgment? 5) When you say it like that... You combined three different elements here: Knowledge of the sack; feeling justified; even if using the name was distasteful. 1) I view this as probable, at least. 2) I don't know if "justified" is the word I'd use. She must have felt it was allowed at least. Possibly there was even some sense of obligation. 3) If she named her son Aegon, I think it's likely she didn't believe it was distasteful or unpleasant. But sure, I suppose I agree with your Unlikely judgment of this uncharitable combination. You make a really good point. Aegon is the only one that stands out as different from the rest. It's the only name we're all pretty sure can be ruled out right away. The only one that has a real obstacle. Which is interesting, because if it didn't, it would almost surely be the most popular choice. With that in mind, it's worth noting that the perceived obstacle looks more like a flimsy pretext to many upon closer inspection.
  5. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Aegon is a counterintuitive choice specifically for that reason, so I think we see this much the same way. If Jon=Aegon, I think it's likely GRRM decided Jon's true name was Aegon Targaryen first, and then later decided to give Elia's son the same name in order to discourage people from figuring it out. In other words, he wanted to give the audience a reason to doubt Jon=Aegon. Otherwise, it would be easily guessed.
  6. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Rhaegar definitely never asked her to do that. Had he been around when she surprised him with a son, he would've chosen a different name. Aemon seems like a good bet in that scenario. I think Rhaegar was expecting a girl for his third dragon head and didn't bother choosing a boy's name. So when he died, followed shortly by Elia and her children, Lyanna was left to choose the name on her own. If I'm right that Rhaegar didn't pick out a boy's name for Lyanna's child, then Aegon is the only boy's name he ever chose for a son.
  7. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    So you're saying you prefer completely unsupported ideas. I believe you. We've been debating this for years now and you still have, or pretend to have, a beginner's grasp on how the theory works. I view it as a possibility, but not a necessity. As you know, Rhaegar calls the child Aegon and then asks rhetorically, "What better name for a king?" He then goes on to discuss the child's supposed destiny as the PtwP with the SoIaF. I agree with anyone who says that Rhaegar thinks Aegon is the best choice for a future king. Based on the limited evidence available, I would also agree with anyone who considered the default assumption to be, that this is at least the primary, and possibly the sole reason the name was chosen. On the other hand, the name simply cannot be disentangled from the destiny Rhaegar believes is in store for the child. So, we should consider the possibility that the default is assumption is wrong. It's based entirely on two whole sentences, after all. Not exactly what I would call written in stone, just all we have so far. But, even if the default assumption is correct, and the name and destiny are more or less coincidence, it's not a deal-breaker for Lyanna naming Jon Aegon. She doesn't have to know why Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for his son and heir, only that he did. Personally, I think there is probably more to it but it is not required that she know specifics. Of course, it's completely fine if you don't believe the theory to be true, but I just wanted to address a couple of misconceptions.
  8. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Jon was tired. I need sleep. He had been up half the night poring over maps, writing letters, and making plans with Maester Aemon. Even after stumbling into his narrow bed, rest had not come easily. He knew what he would face today, and found himself tossing restlessly as he brooded on Maester Aemon's final words. "Allow me to give my lord one last piece of counsel," the old man had said, "the same counsel that I once gave my brother when we parted for the last time. He was three-and-thirty when the Great Council chose him to mount the Iron Throne. A man grown with sons of his own, yet in some ways still a boy. Egg had an innocence to him, a sweetness we all loved. Kill the boy within you, I told him the day I took ship for the Wall. It takes a man to rule. An Aegon, not an Egg. Kill the boy and let the man be born." The old man felt Jon's face. "You are half the age that Egg was, and your own burden is a crueler one, I fear. You will have little joy of your command, but I think you have the strength in you to do the things that must be done. Kill the boy, Jon Snow. Winter is almost upon us. Kill the boy and let the man be born." - ADwD, Jon II Maester Aemon gives Jon the same counsel that he once gave his brother, Aegon V. "Kill the boy within you [...] It takes a man to rule. An Aegon, not an Egg." And then, "Kill the boy, Jon Snow. Winter is almost upon us. Kill the boy and let the man be born." (Handy key: Boy = Egg, man = Aegon.) I'm not saying that is the case. It wouldn't surprise me if it was, but it's not a necessity for the theory. Honestly, are you reading my posts or just LV's replies? None of what you say in this paragraph is relevant to the theory or my arguments.
  9. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    You said you didn't think the theory, in general, was all that bad, but that my arguments, specifically, were. I was saying that my arguments by and large are the mainstream arguments of the theory. So, unless you think some obscure version of this theory is the one that is not all that bad, I'm calling bullshit on your criticism of my arguments in particular. Just wanted to clear that up quick. I'll take another look at your post later.
  10. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Well, that's just bullshit because my arguments are pretty mainstream. I know because I saw them become mainstream a couple of years ago after I had been making them beginning in 2014. It's possible some of my arguments are more specific than you're used to seeing, but that's probably because I'm more familiar with the evidence than most. Again, having been pointing some of it out for five years now. I think you're trying to ask if I can really be that thick. Assuming that is the case, well, I don't know if I can be specifically that thick, but thick enough to assume you'd respond in good faith, and/or have the ability to understand what was very obviously implied in my writing. Without a doubt, it is the fate of Elia, and especially her children, that is relevant to Lyanna at that time. You don't know any of this. You're taking what might be a coin flip and deciding that it would have come down on the side that suits you. This is probably your co-favorite tactic to employ. The other being, declaring a character would or would not behave in a way that suits you. It only has to travel as fast as Ned, as I've stated. I am not making any assumptions about when Jon was born. In fact, as time has passed I have come to think that Jon may have been born as late as during the fight between Ned and the KG. Probably a little before, but I'm uncertain. What if she asked? If she didn't already know, it makes sense to assume any character in her position would for obvious reasons. It could. You are right, however, the emphasis on the fear going out of her eyes after Ned agreed to the promise points us in a more specific direction. Lyanna already knew she was dying, so that's not what she was afraid of since Ned was able to put her at ease before she dies. And, sure, she could have been afraid for the life of her child either way, but the murders of Elia and her children add an infinite amount of urgency to that prior paranoia. After all, before hearing about the sack, by which I mean the slaughter of Rhaegar's wife and children, Lyanna may have had some hope that Robert would spare her child out of love for her or Ned. This is just as ridiculous an argument as ever, yet it keeps popping up. First, it's not the Aegon part that even matters in this scenario, it's the of House Targaryen part that counts. Second, why on earth do you people think that the child would have to be called Aegon, or whatever, Targaryen by Ned and company? It's like you people get so caught up in your ridiculous hypotheticals that you forget Ned actually came up with a name to hide the boy's true identity. Because his true identity is as the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna whether or not he has a Targaryen name. The fact that Ned came up with the name Jon Snow, and the lie about his origins, means he was capable of doing so whether or not he had a true name. What, no long-winded response here? The one place where an explanation is actually called for. Just a bare declaration. That's unusual and convenient. The two things are intertwined though. Rhaegar believes his son and heir is the PtwP with the SoIaF; Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for his son and heir, asking—"What better name for a king?" So, the fact is Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for the child he believed to be the PtwP and SoIaF. That's what Lyanna would have known, hypothetically. Yes, a girl's name. The text I point to in support of my argument is Rhaegar appearing to look right at Daenerys in all her violet-eyed, silver-haired Valyrian glory while he says that he must have another child for his third dragon head. That's on top of the intuitive and old argument about him reusing the names of the original three heads of the dragon. Which is a notable piece of evidence regardless of what you think about it. Ned might actually be the perfect person in this hypothetical. He was a very powerful great lord who possessed the ability to fracture the STAB alliance. If that happens, a Targaryen restoration is not out of the question. It's all very hypothetical, so I'm not invested in the idea, but it can be interesting to think about. For example, it could be as simple as wanting her son to be named Aegon without considering Rhaegar's wishes. I don't think that's the case, but it's possible. Probability doesn't really exist in literature. Something either is or isn't, the in-universe odds are irrelevant. In actuality, fiction is where we often look to see the highly improbable come true—wouldn't you say? In the event that the probability to which you refer means the odds that the author made X choice, then you're going about that the wrong way as well. Being able to connect several dots in a row is worth more than the ability to make up reasons why some of those dots shouldn't be connected. The best argument I've read that Jon's name is not Aegon is the theory arguing it is Aemon. Don't get me wrong, a person cannot simply claim to have connected a series of dots ignoring gaping holes in their theory. But as we both know, that is not the case with this theory which has a good amount of support among the fandom these days. So, even if you can come up with 8,000 reasons why not, it really only takes one reason why. If it's true it's true. Which is exactly what I've argued on many occasions, some of them in this thread. Rhaegar Jr. is just a bizarre theory based on nothing. Sure, Lyanna could've chosen a name she thought Rhaegar might have liked, or she could have chosen one she knew he did. You seem to think the former is more likely. It doesn't have to be "likely" in-universe since that's not a real standard as I explained above. I mean, was it likely or unlikely that Dany would hatch the three dragon eggs gifted to her? In-universe, it was completely improbable but was also simultaneously fairly obvious to many readers that she would. None of that matters more than the fact that Jon was born a Targaryen prince, and that is all the reason Lyanna needed to give him a traditional Targaryen name. You can pretend otherwise to the detriment of your own credibility all you like. I'm not going to humor this nonsense any further though. Lyanna wouldn't necessarily have been naming the child in the way you suggest. She simply could have been applying the name Rhaegar chose for his son and heir, which is what her child now was. Nope. Way to double down on misunderstanding baseless. The distinction as such does not erase the precedent, and therefore basis, upon which the assumption is made. The assumption may turn out to be faulty, but that does not mean it was baseless, to begin with. I'm pretty sure I've also said stuff like this, more or less.
  11. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    That's a matter of opinion, I guess. More specifically, I would describe your counter-arguments as a mishmash of chaotic alternatives, misunderstandings, and irrelevancies which only exist for the sake of disagreement with this theory. Incorrect by any reasonable standard. Perhaps you were motivated by a strong subconscious desire to describe your own writing at the beginning of this paragraph. The assumption that Lyanna knew about the Sack of King's Landing is based on a few different things. Let's see: We know she definitely had access to the information via Ned. Possibly even before that per the ToJ dialogue. There's also her desperation in extracting the promise from Ned. She was afraid of something until he acceded, at which point "the fear had gone out of his sister's eyes." The surface reading is that Lyanna wanted to be buried in the Winterfell crypts, but it is almost universally accepted that her dying wish was for Ned to protect her child. This behavior, emphasized by the fear in her eyes, is consistent with knowledge of the sack. Conclusion: She had access to the information and behaved as if she knew it. Based on these factors, I find it hard to assess the likelihood she knew about the sack as anything less than probable. Only if it is a requirement of the theory, which this is not. I have suggested, as a possibility, that Lyanna may have been motivated in some part by her knowledge of Rhaegar's beliefs. I have also suggested that she may have simply decided to give her son the only boys' name she was certain that Rhaegar found suitable. There are a few different reasons, and combinations of reasons, she could have chosen that name, including selfish ones that have nothing to do with Rhaegar's wishes. Counterargument: Lyanna was a Targaryen princess by marriage, and any child of hers by Rhaegar would be a Targaryen prince or princess by birth.
  12. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    Real quick... Who is suggesting that we make this assumption?
  13. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. We've been back and forth on this more than once, and you keep offering your opinions as evidence. I might be wrong about all of this, but I'm laying out the evidence and offering explanations in good faith. Not pulling stuff like "Rhaegar Jr." out of thin air, and then pretending to know whether or not Lyanna gave a fig about Rhaegar's beliefs. You've yet to present any argument that justifies the confidence of your dismissiveness. That's your right, but I'm under no obligation to take you seriously when you do so. I respect your knowledge and grasp of the data of this series, but I do not respect your lazy and even rude arguments about this subject especially which I've encountered on multiple occasions. I don't dislike you, I just find the repetition of this behavior annoying. I am available via PM if you would like to continue our off-topic discussion.
  14. J. Stargaryen

    Jon Snow's Real Name

    @Lord Varys Reading your posts makes me think you're attempting to recreate the Wall itself in text form, or perhaps the Hightower. I'd have no doubt you could do pull off this feat if only blustering opinions were magic. In that case, there might be no limit to your powers. For, as we can all see, you seem to have an endless supply of self-inflated opinions. I must say, however, having encountered you on this battlefield previously, the next time you come up with a decent counter-argument on this topic will be the first. Please, send a raven on such an occasion. P.S., LOL at Rhaegar Jr. P.P.S., For what it's worth, Elio and Linda both think Jon's name being Aegon is reasonable. I can't recall the exact wording. Something like they think Lyanna might have wanted to do that, or would have had reason to. I'm paraphrasing from memory. I point this out only to counter the dismissiveness of people like LV.
×