Jump to content

So, Tyrion is a Lannister… But, Why?


Slayer of Lies

Recommended Posts

My money is on Tyrion being Lannister, with a Targ grandmother.

There are plenty of hints that all 3 Lannisters have Targ traits. I guess you can use the Plumm theory as well but I prefer the simpler explanation that Joanna was 1/2 Targ.

Tywin was ambitious, he wanted to further his house - so why would he marry a cousin when he could marry the daughter of another great lord, or a strong bannerman to solidify his own realm after slaughtering the Reynes and Tarbecks?

Because his cousin was half Targ, so a daughter with her could be queen! Just as he made sure Cersei was in the end. I think this does the best job explaining all of Joanna's kids.

I don't think Joanna can be a half Targ. That is highly unlikely. Tytos had two elder brothers and a younger borther. Joanna is the daughter of that younger brother. How can a fifth fourth son marry such a high profile bride? However, a Plumm-Targ ancestry can still hold for Joanna.

By the way, is there a confirmed Lannister family tree up to date? I think there is a mystery about it.

Damon Lannister (aka the Grey Lion) and his son Tybolt Lannister were competent fighters at the Tourney of Ashford in 209. Shortly after the tourney, the Great Spring Sickness occurred and Damon died. Tybolt became the Lord Lannister with his brother Gerion Lannister beside him.

Tytos Lannister died from a heart attack in 267 and Jaime said he was the third son of his father. We know that Tytos also had a younger brother, who is the father of Stafford and Joanna. Tytos fathered Tywin at 244. Therefore, Tytos is either the son of Tybolt or Damon Lannister himself. The latter option requires that both Tytos and his younger brother be born before 209. I think this option stretches thing too much. It is more reasonable to assume that Tybolt is the father of Tytos and his brothers.

We know that Tybolt wanted to marry Gerion to Rohanne Webber to claim her lands. I think he should have a hard time to marry all 4 of his sons. Therefore, the youngest son marrying a lady with a Targaryen surname is unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Joanna can be a half Targ. That is highly unlikely. Tytos had two elder brothers and a younger borther. Joanna is the daughter of that younger brother. How can a fifth fourth son marry such a high profile bride? However, a Plumm-Targ ancestry can still hold for Joanna.

By the way, is there a confirmed Lannister family tree up to date? I think there is a mystery about it.

Damon Lannister (aka the Grey Lion) and his son Tybolt Lannister were competent fighters at the Tourney of Ashford in 209. Shortly after the tourney, the Great Spring Sickness occurred and Damon died. Tybolt became the Lord Lannister with his brother Gerion Lannister beside him.

Tytos Lannister died from a heart attack in 267 and Jaime said he was the third son of his father. We know that Tytos also had a younger brother, who is the father of Stafford and Joanna. Tytos fathered Tywin at 244. Therefore, Tytos is either the son of Tybolt or Damon Lannister himself. The latter option requires that both Tytos and his younger brother be born before 209. I think this option stretches thing too much. It is more reasonable to assume that Tybolt is the father of Tytos and his brothers.

We know that Tybolt wanted to marry Gerion to Rohanne Webber to claim her lands. I think he should have a hard time to marry all 4 of his sons. Therefore, the youngest son marrying a lady with a Targaryen surname is unlikely.

A lesser branch female is hardly a big prize. At that point it's just about familial alliances, Targ-lannister makes a good alliance for both sides and it's lesser branch to lesser branch.

It fully explains the entire Lannister family so I see no reason to dismiss it.

Tywin - gets some dragon blood for his children to get the daughter-queen he wanted.

Joanna - why she spent time at kings landing with other princesses and why Aerys lusted for her.

Twins - twincest

Jaime - prophetic dreams

Cersei - fascination with fire

Tyrion - plenty of things listed throughout this thread.

Joffrey/tommen - coin flip

Why go reaching back a dozen generations when Joanna is right there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to all involved (so far) for providing thoughtful, collaborative replies which serve to elevate the discourse.



And thanks as well to those who have thank or acknowledged the effort behind this thread, which might be perceived as helping the “other side” to see why Tyrion as a Lannister or Tyrion is a part-Targaryen is better for the series in your view.



As I see it, the OP itself is not intended to be or come off as a “theory,” and this thread isn’t intended to “prove” anything in itself, but rather open lines of communication between readers who disagree on what might tell a better story, given what we know so far.



Of course, different readers perceive and add up clues differently, sometimes ignoring the one(s) you find most important, and elevating the one(s) you don’t agree with, and there are readers on the other side who might like to better understand why you feel so strongly about (in this case) Tyrion’s lineage.



To try a new approach that might help others explain – not that they think Tyrion is a [blank] – but why they like that particular possibility better, I propose the below “template” as an alternate means of demonstrating your position, and allows you to navigate to the “why,” and discuss what would bother you and what wouldn’t. Again, as mentioned in the OP, it often seems readers are “forced” into choosing where they think the series (or a particular arc) is going, based on clues that often seems at least somewhat contradicting. In the case of Tyrion’s lineage, for example, “accepting” Tyrion’s Targ-related foreshadowing would seem to mean “rejecting” what others find significant about Genna’s quote, Moqorro’s prophecy and so on, where accepting Tyrion as a Lannister means rejecting his Targ- and/or dragon-related foreshadowing insofar as it impacts the possibility of an alternate lineage. In my case…



I accept that: all of the clues in the OP in regards to Tyrion’s mismatched eyes, fascination with dragons, Targaryen prince dreams, widespread travel to interface with “dragons” (e.g. Jon, Aemon, Aegon, Dany, Brown Ben), Aerys’ apparent attract to Joanna, Joanna dying birthing Tyrion, and all of the rest of the dragon-related clues open the door for Tyrion to be revealed as a part-Targaryen… thanks in particular (most recently, at least) to Barristan’s quote, implying not only that Aerys may have “taken liberties” with Joanna, but that Aerys may have been attracted to Joanna, and that it’s possible their union later produced Tyrion.



I reject that: the present evidence of Genna’s quote, Moqorro’s prophecy, GRRM’s statement that Tyrion’s father named him, etc., can be accepted as definitive proof that Tyrion is Lannister and there’s no reason to think otherwise. While Tyrion could most certainly be a Lannister, I believe the door is still open on an alternate part-Targ lineage.



I feel that: Tyrion as a part-Targ tells a better story because…



· …he would not have committed patricide


· …he and Jaime would have killed each other’s fathers


· …it would more richly explain or justify his white blonde hair, his mismatched eyes, his Targ prince dreams, his fascination with dragons, etc. than simply being a Lannister


· …it would more cleanly justify Tywin’s statements that he cannot prove Tyrion is not his


· …it’s an interesting twist on why Genna wouldn’t speak to Tywin for a year after telling him to his face that Tyrion was more his son than Jaime was, because it would mean Tywin was reminded of his suspicions that Tyrion was, in fact, not his


· …it would mean that Aegon’s apparent attraction to Joanna (in a way I find much more satisfying than Jaime/Cersei) was not a red herring meant to lead readers down an “alternate lineage” path


· …an “authentic” part-Targ would have beaten fAegon at cyvasse, sent fAegon to Westeros, and continued on in search of his “new” half-sister Dany for the purpose providing strategic and political guidance, and a “second chance”


· …it’s a more fulfilling explanation of why GRRM sent Tyrion to the Wall to interact with Jon in a sort of “big brother” (or uncle) capacity, and share his dragon dreams with him


· …it adds an interesting layer to why his character is “really” in Essos, and why it is so important that he interface with Jon, Aegon and Dany, in particular


· …it would mean one of the longest standing and most interesting POVs might have a more direct role or “investment” in defeating the Others and/or the possible reclamation of WF, and Tyrion’s present lack of investment could use a “change of heart,” if you ask me


· …it might mean that his “custom saddle-making ability” pays off again, and he finds himself on dragon-back, where he might even be “aboard” a dragon that Bran has warged into, sort of “completing the circle” of him giving Bran the saddle in the first place



It wouldn’t bother me that: Tyrion is part-Targ because…



· Regarding Tyrion’s relationships with Tywin, Jaime and Cersei in terms of their meaning, depth and importance to the series with Tyrion as a Lannister, I personally feel that absolutely none of that would be undermined by a “change” of lineage, because it’s in the past and Tyrion (just like Jon) believed certain things to be true in that portion of his arc. Further, he would still be half-brother to Jaime and Cersei, and have been raised/influenced/permanently “impressed upon” by Tywin no matter how you slice it


· The potential for a “double Targ reveal” notion seems to offend several readers, or cause people to state that they’re sick of secret Targaryens. In the microcosm I think of most often, only Jon, Dany and Tyrion would have a significant amount of Targaryen blood, where Jaime and Cersei are Tywin’s kids, Aemon is dead, Aegon is somehow removed from power, Brown Ben is burnt to a crisp or written into obscurity, etc. It seems to me that most readers who are “sick” of the “secret Targ” angle are simply overwhelmed by the amount of Targs readers propose in general, and I think a “trinity of Targs” would be fitting to the endgame.



Anyway, just trying to get a few more folks going on why their proposed Tyrion lineage tells a better story… What bothers them, what doesn’t, what would be awesome, what would be perceived as a missed opportunity, etc.



I’ve certainly enjoyed what I’ve read in the tread so far, and I’d love to see more!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally feel that there is very little textual evidence (if any) for Tyrion being a Targ. Going from "Aerys took liberties with Joanna at the bedding" to "Aerys raped Joanna at a later time" is a pretty big leap. Aerys' fascination for Joanna is mentioned in the books as one of the reasons why Aerys was jealous of Tywin; there's nothing more to it. The OP posits many points for why Tyrion as a Targ would tell a better story, but none of these points are significant when it comes to how it regresses Tyrion's character arc and how it undermines the relationship between Tyrion and Tywin, which is again a big part of Tyrion's character arc.



There is no need for Tyrion to be a Targ for him to be an "interface" between characters. Nor to explain his fascination with dragons. He doesn't need to be a Targ to be a dragon rider either. He could very well do all this while being a Lannister. Also why should Tyrion be absolved of patricide? That would be quite unfair if you ask me, since characters have paid with their lives for far lesser crimes in these books.



The biggest problem I have with this theory (as I mentioned in another thread) is that it actually makes Tywin right in thinking that he couldn't possibly father a dwarf. And I find it very hard to swallow that Tywin would allow Tyrion to live and spend Lannister gold on his whoring and drinking if he even suspected him of being Aerys' bastard.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I personally feel that there is very little textual evidence (if any) for Tyrion being a Targ. Going from "Aerys took liberties with Joanna at the bedding" to "Aerys raped Joanna at a later time" is a pretty big leap. Aerys' fascination for Joanna is mentioned in the books as one of the reasons why Aerys was jealous of Tywin; there's nothing more to it. The OP posits many points for why Tyrion as a Targ would tell a better story, but none of these points are significant when it comes to how it regresses Tyrion's character arc and how it undermines the relationship between Tyrion and Tywin, which is again a big part of Tyrion's character arc.

2. There is no need for Tyrion to be a Targ for him to be an "interface" between characters. Nor to explain his fascination with dragons. He doesn't need to be a Targ to be a dragon rider either. He could very well do all this while being a Lannister. Also why should Tyrion be absolved of patricide? That would be quite unfair if you ask me, since characters have paid with their lives for far lesser crimes in these books.

3. The biggest problem I have with this theory (as I mentioned in another thread) is that it actually makes Tywin right in thinking that he couldn't possibly father a dwarf. And I find it very hard to swallow that Tywin would allow Tyrion to live and spend Lannister gold on his whoring and drinking if he even suspected him of being Aerys' bastard.

1. There are plenty of textual elements - if not evidence, to at least believe T=T is a possibility. Re-read the OP, Slayer of Lies pretty much give them all. There are a few more:

- Viserion being very much described like Tyrion (a roaring chunk of curved rock, making Danny giggle, gold with green eyes, the smaller dragon, interacting with Brown Ben Plumm etc).

- Tyrion eating his bacon charred black.

- The title 'A Dance with Dragons', a book essentially centred on Jon, Danny... And Tyrion.

- The fact that so far, the characters he gets on well with are Targs (bastards or not) or strongly suspected to be: Jon, Aemon, Varys, Illyrio, Aegon, Brown ben Plumm. And soon Danny, it is known.

- The six rubies and the wait for the seventh, compared to the 'old and young, true and false, bright and dark... and you [Tyrion] in the midst of all' (6+1).

- The irony with the Second Sons if Tyrion was indeed a Targ: all his signatory notes would be worthless, and he would not be a second son but a third one... the 3rd head?

2. You are wrong about Dragon riding: Targaryen blood is needed, it is known: tPatQ confirmed it. This, is actually the one fact that convinces me Tyrion has at least 2 drops of Targaryen blood: the textual hints at Tyrion becoming a dragon (Viserion) rider are too numerous to be discarded as wishful bias.

3. As I stressed it in another thread, Tywin is above all concerned about his Family / House / Name honour and greatness... And Kinslaying's curse! Joanna was a Lannister, so whoever Tyrion's father was, Tyrion is still a Lannister (the TV show stresses this better, changing 'since I cannot prove you are not my son' into 'because you are a Lannister') and Tywin wouldn't dare harm / kill him, but above all bring shame on his name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it weird some posters find it desirable to absolve Tyrion of kinslaying. The idea that kinslaying is worse than other types of murder is a Westerosi social construct. One that has origins in many real world cultures, but a construct nonetheless. We, as readers, don't have to accept it as true. The concept that the kinslayer is cursed is widely believed in universe, but we don't see much actual evidence that this is true. Bad shit doesn't just randomly befall kinslayers. Rather, Tyrion set in motion the misery he's in. Likewise, Karstark accuses Robb of kinslaying, but the events that led to his death were already in motion. It remains to be seen the outcome of Stannis's role in Renly's murder.

If you remove this construct, I don't see why it is worse that Tyrion committed patricide because he murdered his father. His father was, most will agree, a piece of shit in human skin who abused Tyrion. I don't see why killing him, to us modern readers, should be seen as more immoral than murdering Shae, or ordering Bronn to make singer's stew out of a guy whose crime is annoying him and making him jealous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it weird some posters find it desirable to absolve Tyrion of kinslaying.

For me, it’s more that kinslaying would appear to be more of a stigma in Westeros than “regular” slaying, given the context in which it is spoken about.

Characters throw around phrases like, “the gods hate kinslayers,” “as cursed as the kinslayer,” “kinslaying was worse than kingslaying, in the eyes of gods and men,” and so on, showing that they appear to believe it is the worst “variety” of a killing a man can perform.

Therefore, in Tyrion’s case, he might be viewed more favorably by the characters around him as a “hero” for killing an asshole he wasn’t related to, not to mention one who was in “Dany’s way” in her quest for the IT, as opposed to some accursed creep-of-man who’s so demented he killed his own father, which might muddy the waters.

It’s for this reason that, as a Lannister, I have a harder time envisioning Dany (or anyone in power that Tyrion might appeal to) readily accepting Tyrion into a counselor capacity if she believes that he committed not only regicide, but patricide. However, if an A+J=T reveal came about, the characters surrounding Tyrion might take note of the distinction as cause for at least partial “absolution,” regardless of our earthly opinions on the matter.

Perhaps that helps to explain better why some posters feel this way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it weird some posters find it desirable to absolve Tyrion of kinslaying. The idea that kinslaying is worse than other types of murder is a Westerosi social construct. One that has origins in many real world cultures, but a construct nonetheless. We, as readers, don't have to accept it as true. The concept that the kinslayer is cursed is widely believed in universe, but we don't see much actual evidence that this is true. Bad shit doesn't just randomly befall kinslayers. Rather, Tyrion set in motion the misery he's in. Likewise, Karstark accuses Robb of kinslaying, but the events that led to his death were already in motion. It remains to be seen the outcome of Stannis's role in Renly's murder.

If you remove this construct, I don't see why it is worse that Tyrion committed patricide because he murdered his father. His father was, most will agree, a piece of shit in human skin who abused Tyrion. I don't see why killing him, to us modern readers, should be seen as more immoral than murdering Shae, or ordering Bronn to make singer's stew out of a guy whose crime is annoying him and making him jealous.

You make a good argument. My response would be this is only one little piece of the T=T theory.

Cousin vs father. I get what people are saying there. But, they were far enough removed (Tywin and Joanna) to get married, and not have it be viewed as creepy. So, making the stretch that Tyrion is still kinslaying by killing his mother's cousin, who is related to her, but far enough removed so they can get married, is reaching, IMO. Killing your father! Much bigger deal.

Back your point though.... If Martin is so big on this, give us 5 or 6 examples! In Victarion's POV I think we have him wishing that he could kill Euron, but it would make him a kinslayer. Other than that, I think all we have is Robb, and a very distant cousin in Karstark. And even with that, a King must do difficult things. When a High Lord kills little kids, he deserves to die. If there are loop-holes, that's gota be one. Compare this to guest right. Bran's story of the Rat King is a clear example of what happens to those who violate guest right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the T=T notion for many reasons, and I do think we see evidence of a transition for Tyrion over the course of ADWD. But I'm not sure Martin will provide definitive proof, and in the end I think it might be in his interest to preserve some ambiguity in the matter.

I've lately been taken with the idea that "the dragon must have three heads" could mean "the dragon must have three heads [of Houses]." And if that were the case, it would put an interesting twist on the "secret Targ" theories. Because to be head of a House, one must by definition be a member of that House, right? And there is only one House Targaryen - so that would mean two of the heads could not be Targaryens.

So then... what would that mean? How might it play out? I guess it just leaves me wondering whether Tyrion might remain a Lannister (the Lannister), and Jon become a Stark (the Stark) - without their possible Targaryen parentage becoming public knowledge. Whether the characters themselves figure out the truth is an open question - and readers might be left to puzzle it out or make up their own minds.

The other question it leaves me with in the end is this: What/who is "the dragon?"

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, it’s more that kinslaying would appear to be more of a stigma in Westeros than “regular” slaying, given the context in which it is spoken about.

Characters throw around phrases like, “the gods hate kinslayers,” “as cursed as the kinslayer,” “kinslaying was worse than kingslaying, in the eyes of gods and men,” and so on, showing that they appear to believe it is the worst “variety” of a killing a man can perform.

Therefore, in Tyrion’s case, he might be viewed more favorably by the characters around him as a “hero” for killing an asshole he wasn’t related to, not to mention one who was in “Dany’s way” in her quest for the IT, as opposed to some accursed creep-of-man who’s so demented he killed his own father, which might muddy the waters.

It’s for this reason that, as a Lannister, I have a harder time envisioning Dany (or anyone in power that Tyrion might appeal to) readily accepting Tyrion into a counselor capacity if she believes that he committed not only regicide, but patricide. However, if an A+J=T reveal came about, the characters surrounding Tyrion might take note of the distinction as cause for at least partial “absolution,” regardless of our earthly opinions on the matter.

Perhaps that helps to explain better why some posters feel this way?

I can understand this perspective, though I think I'd rather Tyrion stop looking for external approval. But it's valid to want him to get it. He has been searching for so long :(

You make a good argument. My response would be this is only one little piece of the T=T theory.

Cousin vs father. I get what people are saying there. But, they were far enough removed (Tywin and Joanna) to get married, and not have it be viewed as creepy. So, making the stretch that Tyrion is still kinslaying by killing his mother's cousin, who is related to her, but far enough removed so they can get married, is reaching, IMO. Killing your father! Much bigger deal.

Back your point though.... If Martin is so big on this, give us 5 or 6 examples! In Victarion's POV I think we have him wishing that he could kill Euron, but it would make him a kinslayer. Other than that, I think all we have is Robb, and a very distant cousin in Karstark. And even with that, a King must do difficult things. When a High Lord kills little kids, he deserves to die. If there are loop-holes, that's gota be one. Compare this to guest right. Bran's story of the Rat King is a clear example of what happens to those who violate guest right.

Yeah, I agree that "it's still kinslaying!" to kill a first cousin once removed is pretty weak. I'd say that the three examples I listed are the only textual instances of kinslaying really happening. (And that the Robb/Karstark thing was more old Rickard wanting to live than actual kinslaying.) Victarion refusing to kill Euron because of the taboo is a good example of the construct at work. We don't know what the consequences would be if he did it. I'd argue that in non-kinslaying cases, we see that the gods don't intervene as much as the Westerosi think (the Hound's trial with the BWB). Their role in the story is very mysterious.

I think the guest right taboo is interesting. The Rat King story is obviously a fable to teach the taboo (as so many fables for children instruct). Like all the old stories, we can't be sure how literally true it is. But the RW is something we can see as reprehensible from most any angle. For the Westerosi, it violates a huge social taboo. For most of us I think, a whole bunch of innocent people were murdered for a 'crime' they had no part in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect that "kinslaying" has a broader definition in Martin's mind than most readers assume - particularly in terms of how it might apply to fostering and/or adoptions. Also to the extent that Houses are families.

Thus, Theon Greyjoy is named kinslayer for the slaughter and destruction of his adoptive family House Stark. And Tyrion is a kinslayer forevermore, regardless - because he was raised a Lannister, and because he bore that name when he murdered Tywin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. There are plenty of textual elements - if not evidence, to at least believe T=T is a possibility. Re-read the OP, Slayer of Lies pretty much give them all. There are a few more:

- Viserion being very much described like Tyrion (a roaring chunk of curved rock, making Danny giggle, gold with green eyes, the smaller dragon, interacting with Brown Ben Plumm etc).

- Tyrion eating his bacon charred black.

- The title 'A Dance with Dragons', a book essentially centred on Jon, Danny... And Tyrion.

- The fact that so far, the characters he gets on well with are Targs (bastards or not) or strongly suspected to be: Jon, Aemon, Varys, Illyrio, Aegon, Brown ben Plumm. And soon Danny, it is known.

- The six rubies and the wait for the seventh, compared to the 'old and young, true and false, bright and dark... and you [Tyrion] in the midst of all' (6+1).

- The irony with the Second Sons if Tyrion was indeed a Targ: all his signatory notes would be worthless, and he would not be a second son but a third one... the 3rd head?

2. You are wrong about Dragon riding: Targaryen blood is needed, it is known: tPatQ confirmed it. This, is actually the one fact that convinces me Tyrion has at least 2 drops of Targaryen blood: the textual hints at Tyrion becoming a dragon (Viserion) rider are too numerous to be discarded as wishful bias.

3. As I stressed it in another thread, Tywin is above all concerned about his Family / House / Name honour and greatness... And Kinslaying's curse! Joanna was a Lannister, so whoever Tyrion's father was, Tyrion is still a Lannister (the TV show stresses this better, changing 'since I cannot prove you are not my son' into 'because you are a Lannister') and Tywin wouldn't dare harm / kill him, but above all bring shame on his name.

1. There are textual elements that can be interpreted in certain ways to fit practically any theory. I've read all the arguments presented by the OP and I don't find any of them credible enough and feel they can easily be explained without Tyrion having to be a Targ. This includes the points that you have mentioned.

2. Has it really? Is Nettles a Targaryen?

3. I disagree. Tyrion would be a Targ bastard, Aerys' bastard, before being a Lannister. Tywin is not Ned Stark. Raising the bastard of the man he hated the most as his own goes against everything we know of Tywin. He is a vengeful man. The books have hit us over the head with it. The Rains of Castamere. Elia and her children. The rape of the Riverlands. Tywin could easily cause Tyrion's death by an accident and thus be absolved of blame (kinslaying or otherwise), but he didn't. Because in his head he might refuse to believe that he could father a dwarf, but in his heart he knew that Tyrion is his son.

I have to ask, why do people feel that Tyrion needs to be a Targaryen to be special? I'm sure if given a choice between a dragon and Casterly Rock, Tyrion would choose the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Joanna Lannister was simply drop dead gorgeous and Tywin was in love with her. That is why he married her. No, Tyrion is a trickster which is the cornerstone of the Lannister family traits. Tyrion is wise and shrewd, Just like Tywin. Genna Lannister, Tywin's only sister, who strikes me to be as perceptive as it gets told Tywin so. Tywin devoted his whole life to perfection in all that he did, whether it be family or work and Tyrion just blew that all up as well as him losing his wife. Tywin has been so disgusted by Tyrion, he simply could not see how brilliant he is. It is Cersei and Jaime that are Aerys II kids, no doubt about it. Tyrion, Lannister, 100%.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tyrion being truly a Lannister makes for a better story on so many grounds.

- The irony: The son that Tywin didn't want is the one who is, personality-wise, most like him (certainly) and definitely his, while the son he really wanted is the one who is most unlike him, and indeed has rejected his family connections to be part of the Kingsguard, and defied Tywin when Tywin suggested he quit the Kingsguard and marry. (It also allows for the possibility that Jaime and Cersei are really Aerys's.)

- If Tyrion can control or bond with a dragon, it blows the whole myth out of the water about Valyrian blood being special or necessary for a dragon connection. This will, of course, be a major shock to Daenerys, or indeed anyone else who thinks that their drop of Valyrian blood entitles them to be considered special somehow. Double points for this if he manages to do this WITHOUT needing a dragon horn, purely by persuasion of a free / uncontrolled dragon.

- He doesn't get absolved of being a kinslayer by finding out that Tywin wasn't his real father, and has to find a way to live with *that* stigma rather than pretend the past didn't happen or wasn't important. Nor, indeed, can he make excuses for Tywin by saying "you know, the man was right - I wasn't really his son".

- He gets to stand by his own deeds instead of everything, good or bad, being put down to an ancestry that is somehow magical.

-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bet is that GRRM keeps this ambiguous, so that we can all nerd out and argue about it. FWIW, I think that, despite the excellent arguments I've seen above (and they really are excellent, I mean it), Tyrion is actually Tywin and Joanna Lannister's son. The three heads are Jon, Dany, and fAegon. Aunt Genna was right. Tyrion's narrative place is as the unlikely survivor of the total chaos that's coming to Westeros, which he feels some guilt over, since his family was, in part, responsible for it. I reckon GRRM is going to give us, as the last chapter of ADOS, a perspective from an unlikely survivor. It might be Tyrion, Davos, Sam Tarly, or even a Greyjoy. But I think he'll let us stew on the T=T thing forever, since he felt so angry about fans figuring out R+L=J. Which, at this point, he might even change.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more to do with the fact that there's already (f)Aegon and Jon. If Tyrion is a Targ it might seem like a bit of an overkill of secret Targs introduced into the story. Even maester Aemon was a secret Targ (well not really, but kind of)

I'm not denying the possibility though.

:agree:

Where are all the secret Starks or Lannisters? There have been enough Baratheons...but why can't Brandon Stark have a secret Bastard hanging around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...