R+L=J v 67

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

That could also still be the Targaryens trying to apply an older prophecy to a new one they just found out.

But he mentions that the language about dragons and gender and prince/princess had been misleading them for a thousand years. Which suggests that the "prince" bit of it is that old.

[Ser Creighton]

We don't know that the PtwP prophecy only goes back to the Ghost. For all we know it's a much older prophecy and she only added onto it or narrowed down the parameters. I was never under the impression that it originated with her, only that she gave additional information about it.

She didn't give the PtwP, she gave a prophecy about a union that would lead to the birth/return/born again person that is known as the PtwP.

A prophecy can be written in many languages and have many different takes on it. Have you ever scene how many versions there are of the bible. There are over 150 thousand variations in the bible, even though only 50 variants are significant.

Though I really tend to believe Martin when he says the Prince and Azor are one in the same, however that doesn't mean the either prophecy is right or wrong. After all Martin is man who loves to emphasize the mistakes characters make not minimize them, though I think he goes over board with it sometimes. Yes I get it a little girl lied about stealing candy and the entire realm suffered the 9 planes of hell for it and it's all her fault. Lyanna ran away with a guy, there for we must have massive war, and death. Got it.

[Disputatious]

On the issue of TPTWP and AAR being the same, it hasn't been confirmed by GRRM.

The SSM many people speak of, GRRM was speaking from the POV of Mel, she is the one that believes they are the same, and she has been known to misinterpret things.

It has been indirectly: Aemon tells Sam that Melisandre is wrong about the sword, but does not tell him that she is wrong about AAR and the PTWP being the same. Benerro has the opportunity to say that there are two but, as Tyrion explicitly says Benerro says that there is one promised one. Marwyn also has the opportunity to say two and does not. Aemon, however, is the key witness since he has the exchange with Melisandre.

[Disputatious]

We don't know that the PtwP prophecy only goes back to the Ghost. For all we know it's a much older prophecy and she only added onto it or narrowed down the parameters. I was never under the impression that it originated with her, only that she gave additional information about it.

Just so. She is plainly referring to a preexisting prophecy.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

But he mentions that the language about dragons and gender and prince/princess had been misleading them for a thousand years. Which suggests that the "prince" bit of it is that old.

I forgot who it was, but I remember a poster argued that the "prince" could just be a label the Targaryens put on this particular prophecy. It may have been that TPTWP is the same as AAR but the prophecy the GoHH told wasn't and the Targaryens just labelled it as TPTWP.

If the GoHH is actually a greenseer then I would expect her prophecy to be for someone of first men blood rather then dragon centric.

Also before the Targs met the GoHH they were digging ways to bring dragons back (Aerys I is an example) they could easily have misinterpreted her prophecy and "tagged" it with one about dragons, out of desperation or misinterpretation.

[Lyse Stark]

I forgot who it was, but I remember a poster argued that the "prince" could just be a label the Targaryens put on this particular prophecy. It may have been that TPTWP is the same as AAR but the prophecy the GoHH told wasn't and the Targaryens just labelled it as TPTWP.

If the GoHH is actually a greenseer then I would expect her prophecy to be for someone of first men blood rather then dragon centric.

Also before the Targs met the GoHH they were digging ways to bring dragons back (Aerys I is an example) they could easily have misinterpreted her prophecy and "tagged" it with one about dragons, out of desperation or misinterpretation.

And that can confirm Jon is the PTWP, in my opinion.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I forgot who it was, but I remember a poster argued that the "prince" could just be a label the Targaryens put on this particular prophecy. It may have been that TPTWP is the same as AAR but the prophecy the GoHH told wasn't and the Targaryens just labelled it as TPTWP.

If the GoHH is actually a greenseer then I would expect her prophecy to be for someone of first men blood rather then dragon centric.

Also before the Targs met the GoHH they were digging ways to bring dragons back (Aerys I is an example) they could easily have misinterpreted her prophecy and "tagged" it with one about dragons, out of desperation or misinterpretation.

I think you're reaching. Whether or not AA and tPtwP are the same person, Aemon's "thousand years" line and general inference strongly suggest that this was an existing prophecy that the Ghost just elaborated on. How can it be a thousand-odd years old but somehow originate from her? That doesn't make any sense. Just like the Stallion That Mounts the World seems to have been an existing prophecy that the crones narrowed down in that particular instance; the prophecy didn't originate with them in the present time.

And if she is a greenseer and the "solution" is likelier to have the First Men heritage, well that's just another checkmark in the Jon column now isn't it.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

I think you're reaching. Whether or not AA and tPtwP are the same person, Aemon's "thousand years" line and general inference strongly suggest that this was an existing prophecy that the Ghost just elaborated on. How can it be a thousand-odd years old but somehow originate from her? That doesn't make any sense. Just like the Stallion That Mounts the World seems to have been an existing prophecy that the crones narrowed down in that particular instance; the prophecy didn't originate with them in the present time.

And if she is a greenseer and the "solution" is likelier to have the First Men heritage, well that's just another checkmark in the Jon column now isn't it.

Not that it existed from her but her prophecy could have been different then what Aemon etc were reading. We don't know if she actually used the word "prince" or "dragon", there is an open possibility she said something else and the "prince" and "dragon" everyone else was reading was simply a different prophecy that they tagged on to hers.

It could easily be Jon I agree, but I think it could be Bran aswell if the whole Rhaella and Aerys union was made up by the targs rather than her.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Not that it existed from her but her prophecy could have been different then what Aemon etc were reading. We don't know if she actually used the word "prince" or "dragon", there is an open possibility she said something else and the "prince" and "dragon" everyone else was reading was simply a different prophecy that they tagged on to hers.

It could easily be Jon I agree, but I think it could be Bran aswell if the whole Rhaella and Aerys union was made up by the targs rather than her.

So you're saying that you think we're actually working with, what, four prophecies now? The PtwP, AA, the Stallion and whatever it is you think the Ghost was talking about. ... OK.

I tend to actually think she was putting the prophecy into a context that the Targaryens who were hearing it would be familiar with, i.e. she used the language of their prophecy and a "buzz phrase" that they would understand. The association would be clear to them based on that. If she had been talking to a red priest, for example, if they are the same thing, then she probably would have used the Azor Ahai wording.

I'm not seeing why the Rhaella and Aerys thing would be faked.

[Lyse Stark]

So you're saying that you think we're actually working with, what, four prophecies now? The PtwP, AA, the Stallion and whatever it is you think the Ghost was talking about. ... OK.

I tend to actually think she was putting the prophecy into a context that the Targaryens who were hearing it would be familiar with, i.e. she used the language of their prophecy and a "buzz phrase" that they would understand. The association would be clear to them based on that. If she had been talking to a red priest, for example, if they are the same thing, then she probably would have used the Azor Ahai wording.

I'm not seeing why the Rhaella and Aerys thing would be faked.

I agree, I think that in order to bring back the balance, the PTWP have to be both of First Men and Old Valyrian blood, and that mean bringing balance back to the seasons by killing off both the Others and the dragons, or doing something that produce a similar effect.

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

So you're saying that you think we're actually working with, what, four prophecies now? The PtwP, AA, the Stallion and whatever it is you think the Ghost was talking about. ... OK.

I tend to actually think she was putting the prophecy into a context that the Targaryens who were hearing it would be familiar with, i.e. she used the language of their prophecy and a "buzz phrase" that they would understand. The association would be clear to them based on that. If she had been talking to a red priest, for example, if they are the same thing, then she probably would have used the Azor Ahai wording.

I'm not seeing why the Rhaella and Aerys thing would be faked.

Not four prophecies, still two. In a nutshell this is what I am trying to say.

1. There is an ancient prophecy about dragons, bleeding star, etc. in scrolls which probably some of the scholarly targs were reading.(Probably the same as AAR and is also called dragon promised.

One day a ghost tells them a prophecy about a hero, long night etc. or something along those lines.

The targaryens get the prophecy in symbols and possibly due to some similarities like star and stars they start applying theirs to it and start calling it what they have been reading.

So a possibility of her prophecy getting mixed up with what they were reading, which I think is a different prophecy related to the return of dragons.

I am still in doubt that she actually was basing her prophecy off a previous one. Everything points to her being a greenseer like this "The old gods stir and will not let me sleep" .

It would be odd for GRRM to make her a greenseer and her prophecy that changes the events of westeros was simply something she read in a book, also if anything greenseers, CotF etc. have been shown to be original rather than reading prophecies through books they actually see them.

The Aerys and Rhaella thing I don't think was faked but could have been misinterpreted. It could have been a "union" which the Targaryens misinterpreted to be Rhaella and Aerys but was rather a union of a Valyrian and first men blood or something else.

As an aside, if the GoHH was a greenseer I find it odd her prophecy would have to be of the union of two people of valyrian blood, considering her powers are north centric. I think her prophecy was more about someone with first men blood and had nothing to do with dragons and that prophecy is completely different.

However all I'm saying could be completely wrong and silly :p

[Ser Leftwich]

If it is an important enough event (birth of a person that can fix the seasons) why can't more than one person have had prophetic visions about it over thousands of years?

[J. Stargaryen]

Not four prophecies, still two. In a nutshell this is what I am trying to say.

1. There is an ancient prophecy about dragons, bleeding star, etc. in scrolls which probably some of the scholarly targs were reading.(Probably the same as AAR and is also called dragon promised.

One day a ghost tells them a prophecy about a hero, long night etc. or something along those lines.

The targaryens get the prophecy in symbols and possibly due to some similarities like star and stars they start applying theirs to it and start calling it what they have been reading.

So a possibility of her prophecy getting mixed up with what they were reading, which I think is a different prophecy related to the return of dragons.

I am still in doubt that she actually was basing her prophecy off a previous one. Everything points to her being a greenseer like this "The old gods stir and will not let me sleep" .

It would be odd for GRRM to make her a greenseer and her prophecy that changes the events of westeros was simply something she read in a book, also if anything greenseers, CotF etc. have been shown to be original rather than reading prophecies through books they actually see them.

The Aerys and Rhaella thing I don't think was faked but could have been misinterpreted. It could have been a "union" which the Targaryens misinterpreted to be Rhaella and Aerys but was rather a union of a Valyrian and first men blood or something else.

As an aside, if the GoHH was a greenseer I find it odd her prophecy would have to be of the union of two people of valyrian blood, considering her powers are north centric. I think her prophecy was more about someone with first men blood and had nothing to do with dragons and that prophecy is completely different.

However all I'm saying could be completely wrong and silly :P

Why though? Maggy the Frog, who was described as a woods witch, prophesied about Cersei and her friend, even though she was Essosi and they were Andal.

As for the whole AAr/PtwP discussion, I think it's pretty simple: there was an old prophecy about Azor Ahai returning, similar to Jesus or King Arthur in our own world. The GoHH said that this individual would come from the line of Aerys and Rhaella. That's all.

[Han Snow]

Daenys Targaryen, called Daenys the Dreamer prophesied the Doom of Valyria and was the reason why Targs moved to Dragonstone. I always assumed that she also prophesied tptwp, or rather knew that Azor Ahai will be a Targ.

When GRRM is talking in that video about Azor slash TPTWP there is no doubt in my mind by the way he speaks that he thinks them one and the same, HE, not Mel the character in his novel. It works far better this way then some convoluted idea that there are multiple messiahs.

[MoIaF]

I also believe that there are two seperate prophecies and perhaps each prophecy will fufill a different role in the War for Dawn.

I mentioned this on another thread but I'll add it here too.

The prophecy (whichever one it turns out to be AAR or TPTWP) clearly says to wake dragons from stone NOT be awoken from stone.

If Jon wakes dragon(s) from stone then we can say he's fufilled all the prerequisites, just like Dany.

However, we should note that GRRM said that the birth of the dragons was a onetime miracle so whichever prophecy that particular deed of waking dragons from stone belongs to points directly to Dany.

[LadyMary]

Yes I also believe Rhaegar rejected Cersei because he saw something in her that didn't sit well with him, and told Aerys that he shouldn't accept Tywin's offer.

I think so too. While there's nothing explicit in the text to support it, I think there are hints in the texts that could lead to that conclusion, or at least to the conclusion that Cersei's reputation for spite and cruelty precedes her and would be unappealing to Rhaegar.

I note that Oberyn and Elia Martell were present when Cersei abused baby Tyrion. Maybe that sort of thing may be written off as childish spite but it may also indicate just one of other incidents of cruelty that Cersei committed in front of witnesses.

Cersei seems particularly blind to her own faults and tends to blame others for the malicious actions she commits. She might not consider how her cruel and vindictive actions looks to other people because she feels justified. There are other incidents of cruelty and spite committed by Cersei that we know about, and perhaps some incidents that witnesses spread gossip about it. That sort of information might give someone like Rhaegar the strong impression that Cersei was vindictive, cruel and not trust-worthy, and certainly not the kind of woman he wanted for a wife. In view of Aerys' distrust of Tywin Lannister, Rhaegar's adamant refusal to marry Cersei would just make the decision to refuse Tywin's offer easier.

Thinking about the trouble Aerys went through in sending Steffon Baratheon to Essos to find a Valyrian bride for Rhaegar (only to fail and end in tragedy), Aerys could have considered Cersei as a convenient plan B, but he didn't. Why? I think it was because Rhaegar didn't want to marry Cersei. Elia had some Targaryen ancestors which probably appealed to Aerys and I'm sure the intelligence they had about her character made her a more suitable choice in Rhaegar's consideration.

ETA:

I may be confusing this with something but wasn't Gregor knighted because he had proven himself in a fight or something like that? I gather it was quite common to knight someone for showing skill and valour, and there was definitely no research done into the person's background (not that I think that the Cleganes exactly advertised what had happened to Sandor, anyway).

I think there's a difference between how (some) knights are supposed to represent and conduct themselves, and how they actually do. The books are full of these incidents. Some knights serve vicious Lords and commit acts of brutality against the helpless at the behest of those Lords. Does that make them good knights for being dutiful, or bad because of their un-knightly acts? Jaime saved 500,000 people by killing the King. Instead of being hailed a true knight for protecting the people, he's called Kingslayer and reviled for it for violating his oath as a knight who serves the corrupt King.

Think of Boros Blount who beat Sansa Stark, a very un-knightly action, and his acts of cowardice. The Kings Guard are the supposedly the best and most noble knights in the realm and this one is as corrupt as the regime he serves. He was stripped of his white cloak by Joffrey and then reinstated to the Kings Guard by Tywin. Why? Tywin likes useful lackeys and doesn't seem to care about honor.

There are "good" knights and "bad", depending on one's point of view.

Gregor was knighted for some feat he accomplished in the field of battle, presumably, regardless of concerns about his character. I'm not sure that Rhaegar spent a lot of effort investigating whether Gregor was a psychopath if Tywin Lannister or other Lords vouched for his valor in battle.

[MtnLion]

It could be. But there are some things we have to keep in mind.

The Ghost of High Heart told the Targaryens a prophecy and that prophecy is TPTWP, which is a modern prophecy, since the GHH has visions. AAR is an ancient prophecy and it seems less likely that the red priests know about the PTWP prophecy to take a spin off it.

I believe that this is a misunderstanding. I believe that the prophecy about the PtwP was old before the Targaryens arrived in Westeros (a scroll that Rhaegar read). The Woods Witch was just clarifying about the necessity for Aerys and Rhaella to wed.

[Black Crow]

Its worth bearing in mind that fortune tellers have a certain reputation for telling their clients what they want to hear.

[alienarea]

Its worth bearing in mind that fortune tellers have a certain reputation for telling their clients what they want to hear.

That makes them unreliable narrator's, doesn't it? ;-)

[Julian Rayne]

Its worth bearing in mind that fortune tellers have a certain reputation for telling their clients what they want to hear.

In our world. They can afford to flatter their clients because since it's all bullshit anyway, flattery will not affect their accuracy.

Where prophecy does exist, fortune tellers would be more like say doctors or something. They'd have a vested interest in being as accurate as possible.