Possible Crackpot: Did Aerys foresee Jon's birth?

[Jô Maltese]

(...) The thesis here is that of all these variables, we dismiss the specifics as basic misinterpretation so that the only part that matters is that Aerys saw a dragon rising from some sort of destruction, and that this phoenix is Jon?

You got it! :drunk:

[J. Stargaryen]

I asked for some clarifications a few times on this, and that's kind of what I wanted to know. So the premise is that Aerys completely misunderstood the location, that there would be a literal fire, that he'd personally rise as a dragon, and that he'd destroy the rebels as said dragon. The thesis here is that of all these variables, we dismiss the specifics as basic misinterpretation so that the only part that matters is that Aerys saw a dragon rising from some sort of destruction, and that this phoenix is Jon?

The premise is that Aerys misunderstood the symbolic nature of his dragon dream.

Was he wrong about the location? Only partially. A dragon did rise out of the destruction in KL. It's just that dragon wasn't physically there. Do you think that's a deal breaker? I don't.

Was he wrong about who the dragon would be? Yes. Again, not a deal breaker for me.

Was he wrong about a literal fire? Yes, but there was death and destruction.

Was he wrong about turning his enemies to ash? Yes, but Jon's birth caused a chain reaction that led to the eventual downfall of Robert, Jon Arryn and Ned. Jon's birth killed Lyanna -> Robert married Cersei, etc.

The answers assume that the OP is true, of course.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I don't think it could apply to aegon because he's both dead, and already born pre-sack. Then we have Jon who aerys has no knowledge of (or people like darry would've known and told viserys) and I was SPECIFICALLY told we had to work within the constructs of aerys developing the dream all in his own mind. Therefore this purely theoretical dream (which I don't wana be pretending is fact even for the sake of conversation) would only make sense for Dany who as he may have known his wife was pregnant and Dany was actually conceived in KL (unlike Jon who's absolutely no where near KL) and goes on to many things involving dragons and fire of which this fabricated dream was apparently built on

Why on earth do you think that Aerys not knowing about Jon would mean he couldn't have a vision of something representing him? That doesn't make any sense. Look at everyone the GoHH sees in visions; do you think every single one of them is on her radar?

And given how soon Rhaella left the capital after the Trident and Dany's conception, I wouldn't be surprised if Aerys never even knew she was pregnant. Meaning he wouldn't necessarily have known about Dany, either.

[Lyse Stark]

Aegon V, obviously. The one we actually get to see fulfill a dragon vision. And the "mold" is being decent, worthy, competent, etc. As in, so far, the people we see who ACTUALLY have fulfilled dragon visions have been decent. It's the assholes screaming about how they a ARE dragons who AREN'T. I'm sorry, I thought my meaning was clear.

And yes Viserys, Aerion, and Aerys II are not the kind of person I would support. They are messed up jackasses, and their actions make me think of Caligula and Hitler, their crimes and how bad they would(or were, in Aerys' case) as kings. Jon on the other hand, would be a true (ice) dragon; he is a decent person who accepts others for who they are, and walks the talk of leadership, as evidenced by how he personally executed Janos Slynt for not doing his duties.

[Arya kiddin']

No one is saying that what Aerys actually said is a CORRECT prophecy. Rather, it's idea that he DREAMED or saw something prophetic and INTERPRETED it to mean that, incorrectly. If only we had other examples of people misinterpreting things they dreamed about or foresaw, right?

Actually we don;t know if he dreamed of it or not. Targ dreams are prophetic sometimes, and special. So unless we know it was a dream let's not call it a dream. All Jaime says is Aerys "thought" he may rise as a dragon. For all we know he tried to pull off an Aerion Brightflame in a bigger fashion. Or he was just crazy - something for which we have evidence. Add to that the fact that he actually said, not thought "Let him be King over coked bones and charred meat" that this was likely an attempt to rob his foes of their prize.

BTW, do you believe that "Two Kings to wake...... " prophecy is a legitimate prophecy?

The VISION wouldn't have been false, his interpretation would have been. It's not who HAS the vision, it who the vision REPRESENTS.

This pattern is really a stretch imo. X targ dreams of targ Y, and if the dream comes true targ Y is the TRUE DRAGON irrespective of X targ's mental condition.

The premise is that Aerys misunderstood the symbolic nature of his dragon dream.

Do we have any evidence that it was actually a dream?

[oursisthefury69]

Yet again what did he interpret incorrectly? In the past its been targs misinterpreted dragons as being literal in their dreams, and they always end up being symbolic of a specific targaryen. There's no actual dragons in KL during the sack, and by the end of it, there's no targaryens either so what exactly did he so specifically misinterpret that we should ignore the conceivable pattern of behavior from a man who's done what hes done

[oursisthefury69]

Also idk what books everybody else has been reading, but the books I read give me the privilege of being in Danys mind, and I know she isn't conceited or even thinks she's better than people(commonfolk even). She simply knows she is the last scion of a great house who had a miserable existence until she finally starting asserting herself for the first time in her life(right before the hatching) Ever since then things have worked out much better for her. I have never got a superiority complex from her mind once thus far, and if she ever does say "blood of the dragon" its because she's trying to kill the girl and let the woman be born. If she looks back she is lost. She knows she cant go back to being the passive girl who was abused by viserys her whole life and sold like a sheep to the dothraki. She now carrys quite a burden on her shoulders, being the mother of the only 3 dragons and the world, and in her mind the last survivor of her family; her goal is to restore her family name back to the glory she's been convinced(by the only people she grew up with) they rightfully deserve

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Actually we don;t know if he dreamed of it or not.

I'm sorry, but NO SHIT we don't, that's what the idea of the OP is about: working backward based on Aerys's thoughts to make an educated guess as to 1. why he thought what he did and 2. what his vision, if he did have one, might actually have referred to. But bloody obviously we don't KNOW that he dreamed anything.

BTW, do you believe that "Two Kings to wake...... " prophecy is a legitimate prophecy?

Yes, but that it's correlational and not causal. Specific to this specific instance, and that king's blood in general is not some magical power on its own.

This pattern is really a stretch imo. X targ dreams of targ Y, and if the dream comes true targ Y is the TRUE DRAGON irrespective of X targ's mental condition.

We see people misinterpret prophecy all the time. The focus of a prophecy is almost always who fulfills it, not who sees it. I don't see what's so controversial about that.

we have any evidence that it was actually a dream?

Like I said before, THAT IS THE IDEA POSED IN THE OP.

[Jô Maltese]

(...)

Do we have any evidence that it was actually a dream?

No we don't, that's the whole point of this thread: re-read the OP.

ETA: :ninja: ed by AM

[Krugal]

I like this theory and it got me thinking of more of the Mad kings actions and odd behaviour, and how they might be partially explained by having prophetic, but difficult-to-interpret, dreams (as has been suggested previously in the thread). I'm not completely satisfied with explaining his behaviour with just being mad - even if your paranoid or delusional there is always a subjective logic behind your reasoning. I guess it's also plausible that if Aerys had this one prophetic dream he might have had more, maybe for most of his life (as Daeron the drunk says: "My dreams are not like yours - my dreams come true). If this is true i also suppose that being locked up in a dungeon at Duskendale for six months, with not much more company than your dreams, that you know are prophetic but do not really understand, is a good prerequisite to become paranoid.

As we know, Aerys's actions prior to Roberts rebellion do not seem logic, but maybe there is some sort of subjective logic to them. Imprisoning Brandon, sending for Rickard, executing them in a grotesque manner and then send for Ned's head as well, to any objective observer seems like a sure way to fuel a rebellion (instead of say put Brandon to trial and execute him legally),but suppose Aerys had had a dream prior. Maybe a dream about a direwolf causing the death of a dragon. This would then refer to Lyanna causing the death of Rhaegar, but would be easy for Aerys to misinterpret and lead him to act as he did. I also always thought that there is something peculiar about the execution of Brandon and Rickard, even for a mad king. If he is so obsessed with burning, why is he letting one of them be strangled? Why this sophisticated device that causes them to kill eachother? And why the big display in the throne room? It seems almost like some kind of ritual. What if Aerys had dreams that he tried to fulfill with this ritual? Maybe dreams about the death of two kings dying for the Prince that was promised to be born (if you yourself are the only king in Westeros than it must be tempting to interpret the concept of king more widely, say to kings in the north). Or dreams about fathers and sons causing the deaths of eachother, leading to TPTWP to be born (Aerys, Rhaegar, Aegon?).

Maybe he had even tried performing rituals earlier. We are told that the only time he slept with his wife was after he had had someone burned, and this is explained by him getting aroused by it. But maybe (and this might be stretching it a bit), if he had had dreams about TPTWP being born from his and Rhaellas line, it was at least in part a way of completing the ritual (the dragon rising from the ashes).

This is all of course very speculative, but both me and my wife found it intriguing to think about.

[Arya kiddin']

I'm sorry, but NO SHIT we don't, that's what the idea of the OP is about: working backward based on Aerys's thoughts to make an educated guess as to 1. why he thought what he did and 2. what his vision, if he did have one, might actually have referred to. But bloody obviously we don't KNOW that he dreamed anything.

Yes, but that it's correlational and. Not causal. Specific to this specific instance, and that king's blood in general is not some magical power on its own.

We see people misinterpret prophecy all the time. The focus of a prophecy is almost always who fulfills it, not who sees it. I don't see what's so controversial about that.

Like I said before, THAT IS THE IDEA POSED IN THE OP.

Ok I noticed now that the whole OP is just a big "What if" Scenario.

• What if Aerys had a dream of a dragon bursting out of the city, and

• What if he tried to burn the city not to exercise revenge on the men who destroyed his dynasty, but he suddenly thought he is fulfilling a prophecy, and

• What if the prophecy about Two Kings to wake is actually a prophecy, and

• What if the conjecture - X targ dreams of targ Y, and if the dream comes true targ Y is the TRUE DRAGON irrespective of X targ's mental condition ,

- if all of these mere conjectures are true then we can say what - that Jon is the dragon woken when two kings died. And you're saying this isn't a stretch?

Also, what does it contribute to the story? That's the litmus test for a theory in my opinion. Are you suggesting Two Kings to wake a dragon is something that has already happened? And it was mentioned by a irrelevant unreliable person in the text for this very reason - that we work backwards to it, using all of the above shaky cnjectures of course.

[butterbumps!]

The premise is that Aerys misunderstood the symbolic nature of his dragon dream.

Was he wrong about the location? Only partially. A dragon did rise out of the destruction in KL. It's just that dragon wasn't physically there. Do you think that's a deal breaker? I don't.

Was he wrong about who the dragon would be? Yes. Again, not a deal breaker for me.

Was he wrong about a literal fire? Yes, but there was death and destruction.

Was he wrong about turning his enemies to ash? Yes, but Jon's birth caused a chain reaction that led to the eventual downfall of Robert, Jon Arryn and Ned. Jon's birth killed Lyanna -> Robert married Cersei, etc.

The answers assume that the OP is true, of course.

Ok, this sort of clears things up. Until now, I wasn't sure that the claim was that Aerys misunderstood more than what a dragon vision entails, i.e. not a literal dragon but a Targ. I've been operating from the premise that you were thinking that this will pertain to some Jon-related event involving the destruction of KL, past or future. Ok, so your position is that Aerys foresaw Jon's birth that occurred in the ToJ-- that there isn't some future fulfillment of this to come, but that it pertains to Jon's birth, right?

For the moment, I'll roll with this. So I guess, my initial question in this thread was asking what the broader implications of that is-- I mean, is the notion that Aerys foresaw this dragon an additional piece of "Jon Targaryen" reference? Is this what you're thinking, that it's just another piece adding to Jon's identity, perhaps an easter egg, or is there some other development you're thinking of?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Ok I noticed now that the whole OP is just a big "What if" Scenario.

You couldn't have realized that before you tried to debate it multiple times?

[Arya kiddin']

You couldn't have realized that before you tried to debate it multiple times?

Now that I have maybe answer the doubts I presented?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

For the moment, I'll roll with this. So I guess, my initial question in this thread was asking what the broader implications of that is-- I mean, is the notion that Aerys foresaw this dragon an additional piece of "Jon Targaryen" reference? Is this what you're thinking, that it's just another piece adding to Jon's identity, perhaps an easter egg, or is there some other development you're thinking of?

I think for now that that's where it fits best, until the plot develops further. It can corroborate the "two kings" idea and might eventually lead to something else. It also works on its own as a way to explain why Aerys did what he did apart from the fact that he was nuts; it's another example, if it's true, of Targ being consumed by prophecy.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Now that I have maybe answer the doubts I presented?

1. It's no more of a stretch than some of the stuff we've seen. The term "stretch" is also completely subjective, and as such I don't see how it has any meaning here. What you think of as a stretch has no bearing on what someone else might see as a stretch, and a lot of the time, "stretch" is a lazy euphemism for "I don't want to actually consider this."

2. I explained above in a reply to BB how it might influence the story, even if it only turns out to flesh out Aerys and his motivations.

Bur hey thanks for finally reading the OP, I guess.

[J. Stargaryen]

I think for now that that's where it fits best, until the plot develops further. It can corroborate the "two kings" idea and might eventually lead to something else. It also works on its own as a way to explain why Aerys did what he did apart from the fact that he was nuts; it's another example, if it's true, of Targ being consumed by prophecy.

This is my take as well.

[butterbumps!]

I think for now that that's where it fits best, until the plot develops further. It can corroborate the "two kings" idea and might eventually lead to something else. It also works on its own as a way to explain why Aerys did what he did apart from the fact that he was nuts; it's another example, if it's true, of Targ being consumed by prophecy.

I have a large concern with this, but I'll voice it after a question I have so I'm not arguing against something you're not arguing. Are you thinking that whether this was a dream will be confirmed or close to confirmed? (or even more broadly, whether it will become more clear if insane Targs= Targs unable to interpret their dreams properly?)

[Ser Creighton]

Further cracked pottery, Aerys had some dream based fear of Starks/wolves. Aerys foresaw it all!!

.... and I second on the likely arrival of Darth Arya.

Only if she has the respirator.

[Ser Leftwich]

Ok, this sort of clears things up. Until now, I wasn't sure that the claim was that Aerys misunderstood more than what a dragon vision entails, i.e. not a literal dragon but a Targ. I've been operating from the premise that you were thinking that this will pertain to some Jon-related event involving the destruction of KL, past or future. Ok, so your position is that Aerys foresaw Jon's birth that occurred in the ToJ-- that there isn't some future fulfillment of this to come, but that it pertains to Jon's birth, right?

Yeah, just a very simple, that Aerys sees a "dragon" born from destruction. Nothing directly about KL. That is just the meanings that Aerys put to said dream.

For the moment, I'll roll with this. So I guess, my initial question in this thread was asking what the broader implications of that is-- I mean, is the notion that Aerys foresaw this dragon an additional piece of "Jon Targaryen" reference? Is this what you're thinking, that it's just another piece adding to Jon's identity, perhaps an easter egg, or is there some other development you're thinking of?

Further implications are more difficult. Speculatively, if the Dunk & Egg stories do end with the Tragedy at Summerhall, we might learn about the reasons/build-up to the incident or even prophecies involved or Egg's dragon dreams.

And the similarities of Summerhall and the Sack already exist.

Aside: Was Rhaegar born at Summerhall or at the same time as the Tragedy, but at a different location? If it was a different location, that adds merit to this OP theory.