Why do people think Jon is Azor Ahai?

[BearQueen87]

Oh, gladly. And the second she picks up a bow and starts working some figurative magic from the back of a dragon (which I find highly unlikely), I'll consider her a warrior.

And since we don't have the original prophecy (kind of funny how we keep coming back to that point), we don't know whether or not that is truly a requirement.

Gods willing that thing is sitting in the Citadel somewhere ;)

And for what it's worth, I don't think she'll pick up some bow and use it either. I agree with sj4iy that she's sort of "second in command" and her role is dragon-rider/head over "epic warrior who leads the charge"

[JonSnow4President]

Gods willing that thing is sitting in the Citadel somewhere ;)

And for what it's worth, I don't think she'll pick up some bow and use it either. I agree with sj4iy that she's sort of "second in command" and her role is dragon-rider/head over "epic warrior who leads the charge"

My money's on the whole Jon being the husband to love, and betrayal for love, possibly fitting in as her being a figurative Nissa Nissa. If written well (and we're talking about GRRM here), that could be very bittersweet, except for Dany haters.

[sj4iy]

No, I don't consider that to be a warrior, no more than Tyrion would be if he only commanded. At minimum, I think to be a warrior, you and you alone have to be capable of joining the combat. Dany cannot (at present). Without Drogon, she is little more than a swaddling babe in combat. Jon isn't Barristan or Jaime, but he is still capable of fighting. By the same token, I wouldn't count Tywin as a warrior if he never did anything more than commanded, although I'm sure he was at some point in the past. Dany doesn't have even a history as one to back it up though.

Agreed, she's not a warrior. However, if she were to fly Drogon into battle, she would be a dragon warrior, as the dragon would be her weapon- sort of like calvary. But Jon is very definitely a warrior in the traditional sense of the word, and that is something Dany could never be given her lack of arms training, strength and experience.

[JonSnow4President]

Agreed, she's not a warrior. However, if she were to fly Drogon into battle, she would be a dragon warrior, as the dragon would be her weapon- sort of like calvary. But Jon is very definitely a warrior in the traditional sense of the word, and that is something Dany could never be given her lack of arms training, strength and experience.

The horse doesn't make the person mounted on it a warrior though. It allows for greater mobility across the battlefield, but sitting on a horse makes me a warrior as much as being in a garage makes me a car.

Now, if she rides Drogon into battle, completely (or even mostly) in control, I will concede warrior. At present though, she doesn't have the level of control. She'd simply be more along for the ride. Now, as Drogon is actually a warrior, born under the red star.... Drogon is Azor Ahai!!!

[ToTheWolves]

This is a quote by ministral from another thread I was reading thought it was pretty interesting

"Because what little we know of this convoluted and annoying "Prince that was promised", Jon actually fulfills it in a very mundane manner:

Quote

"Born amidst salt and smoke, beneath a bleeding star. I know the prophecy"

From the last chapter of AFFC in Sam's chapter, said by Marwyn the Mage.

He gets stabbed and there is smoke rising from his wounds, and Marsh is crying salty tears.... And the giant is flailing around Ser Patrek of Kings mountain just as this event occurs. Guess what his sigil is. A star, that is prominent on his blood stained cloak. The whole setup for this "Prince" has been tortured for five books and we get introduced to it like this... It made me sigh when I read about it."

[JonSnow4President]

This is a quote by ministral from another thread I was reading thought it was pretty interesting

"Because what little we know of this convoluted and annoying "Prince that was promised", Jon actually fulfills it in a very mundane manner:

Quote

"Born amidst salt and smoke, beneath a bleeding star. I know the prophecy"

From the last chapter of AFFC in Sam's chapter, said by Marwyn the Mage.

He gets stabbed and there is smoke rising from his wounds, and Marsh is crying salty tears.... And the giant is flailing around Ser Patrek of Kings mountain just as this event occurs. Guess what his sigil is. A star, that is prominent on his blood stained cloak. The whole setup for this "Prince" has been tortured for five books and we get introduced to it like this... It made me sigh when I read about it."

*insert comment about Ser Patrek being a football easter egg (Giants beat Cowboys, whose emblem is a star), and how that would just be bad writing if it were fulfilling the prophecy.

[Caerl Targaryen]

I don't see why not. They are the same story with different details. If the show drops a hint that Jon is AAR, then it's fair to bring up as evidence because the show isn't going to make Jon into something he isn't in the books.

I think it's a bad idea to use the show to back up book theories. And I think the reverse is also a bad idea. Why? Because the details are different and that impacts the story. They're similar stories. They aren't the same story.

BS. They are streamlining a huge book series to fit it into a 10-episode season with less than 10 hours per format. All of their cues come from the books. But I'm not about to get into an argument about the show in a thread that has nothing to do with this subject. Hate the show all you want, they are still telling the same story and if the show says "This character is Azor Ahai Reborn" then that character is Azor Ahai Reborn.

"Making shit up" is a figure of speech. It doesn't mean I think everything they've made up is actually bad. Or are you arguing that they haven't made anything up at all? Because they're making up a ton of stuff.

My point is they're making things up and that impacts where they're going with the story. The showrunners and GRRM tend to agree with me given the sheer number of times they've talked about ripple effects and the show having to do things differently as a result of those ripples. But let's just pretend they've never, ever talked about that.

No one is saying she isn't clear. People are saying that she's a red herring. And that she doesn't have Lightbringer. It's a fair assessment.

Yes, they are. The post I quoted says exactly that. "I don't think the evidence for Dany is as clear as people say it is." Or does that mean something different than what it actually says?

Being a conqueror and a liberator does not make her a warrior at all.

Rhaegar saying he need to become a warrior to the master of arms clearly imply that the PTWP need to know how to fight.

Rhaegar was also wrong about a lot of things. He's not exactly a credible source. Melisandre also sees things based on preconceived beliefs. She isn't particularly credible either.

I'm not sure how riding a dragon and being able to burn opposing armies isn't fighting. Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters fought using dragons. Were they warriors? If they were, then so is Dany. Or she's becoming one at least. I know people love to hate Dany but pretending she doesn't have the fantasy equivalent of weapons of mass destruction and the means to use them against her enemies is just ridiculous. You don't need to know how to physically fight to ride on a dragon and burn people. Her dragons are her weapons.

There are also many different ways to fight. You could even argue that inspiring people to ally against a common enemy (e.g., the Others) is fighting. Did Frodo know how to physically fight to get the Ring to Mordor? No, not really. He couldn't physically fight worth a damn. He could swing a sword but that was about it. His strength of character and his courage (along with Sam) are what helped him resist the Ring and fight Sauron's will.

Assuming that Azor Ahai has to be a warrior in the traditional sense is extremely limited. If Azor Ahai is made up of three different people, then they could easily be three different types of warriors. Playing an active role in the war against the Others would make them warriors of sorts. One could be physically trained in combat (Jon), one could have mastery over dragons (Dany), and one could be politically brilliant (Tyrion or maybe Aegon?). I'm just throwing out ideas. The point is, there are many ways that the characters can work to fight back the Others and there are many ways to describe a warrior.

[JonSnow4President]

I'm not sure how riding a dragon and being able to burn opposing armies isn't fighting. Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters fought using dragons. Were they warriors? If they were, then so is Dany. I would think that melting Harrenhal and conquering Westeros through the use of dragons would make them warriors. I know people love to hate Dany but pretending she doesn't have the fantasy equivalent of weapons of mass destruction and the means to use them against her enemies is just ridiculous. You don't need to know how to physically fight to ride on a dragon and burn people.

IIRC correctly, each of them was capable on the ground as well. They were warriors who rode on Dragons. Dany is simply a person who rides on dragons at this point in time. And if you're calling Frodo and Sam warriors, that is not exactly helping your cause.

I don't think Mel is adding anything to the prophesy (see page 5 of this thread for her 3 uses of it), but she is likely leaving out something minor each time.

As far as Rhaegar, he likely read the original prophesy as bookish as he was, and he immediately determined that he had to be trained in the crafts of war. While neither source is perfectly reliable, the fact that we have two sources does increase the credibility.

[Caerl Targaryen]

IIRC correctly, each of them was capable on the ground as well. They were warriors who rode on Dragons. Dany is simply a person who rides on dragons at this point in time. And if you're calling Frodo and Sam warriors, that is not exactly helping your cause.

I don't think Mel is adding anything to the prophesy (see page 5 of this thread for her 3 uses of it), but she is likely leaving out something minor each time.

As far as Rhaegar, he likely read the original prophesy as bookish as he was, and he immediately determined that he had to be trained in the crafts of war. While neither source is perfectly reliable, the fact that we have two sources does increase the credibility.

I said that Sam and Frodo fought against Sauron despite the fact that they weren't literally fighting him. I didn't call them "warriors." If the requirement is that Azor Ahai has to fight and help defeat the Others (Rhaegor and Melisandre are assuming it's literal fighting), then that can take on many different forms. That's my point. The assumption that it has to mean physically fighting is a bad one because there are many ways to fight.

[JonSnow4President]

I said that Sam and Frodo fought against Sauron despite the fact that they weren't literally fighting him. I didn't call them "warriors." If the requirement is that Azor Ahai has to fight and help defeat the Others (Rhaegor and Melisandre are assuming it's literal fighting), then that can take on many different forms. That's my point. The assumption that it has to mean physically fighting is a bad one because there are many ways to fight.

Gotcha, and I would agree with that.

In 2 of 3 of Melisandre's telling of the coming of Azor Ahai, he's a warrior twice.

Interestingly, in the other, he is the one who will lead the fight against evil (paraphrase. See p5 of this thread for exact).

[El Guapo]

Also, the look Melisandre gave Jon on the show... very foreboding. That look screamed "That is him."

Yes Mel think it is him. That doesn't mean everyone else in the story believes it is him. Nor does it make Mel correct.

[MoIaF]

Gods willing that thing is sitting in the Citadel somewhere ;)

And for what it's worth, I don't think she'll pick up some bow and use it either. I agree with sj4iy that she's sort of "second in command" and her role is dragon-rider/head over "epic warrior who leads the charge"

I would definitely consider her a warrior, the root of the word warrior is to "wage war" which Dany has obviously done. I think she'll be a more fiscal warrior once she begins to ride Drogon into battles. I don't think she'll be anyone's second in command, it's just not who Dany is, however, I can see her being a co-leader with Jon and perhaps someone else.

A couple of other points:

Dany I ACOK:

The Dothraki called the comet "shierak qiya" which means bleeding star.

Dany III ADWD:

XXD said this about the dragons: "When your dragons were small they were a wonder. Grown, they are death and devastation, a flaming sword above the world.”

Jon read this passage in the Jade Compendium:

"Once Azor Ahai fought a monster. When he thrust the sword through the belly of the beast, its blood began to boil. Smoke and steam poured from its mouth, its eyes melted and dribbled down its cheeks, and its body burst into flame.”

This has almost identical wording to when Drogon killed Kraznys in Astapor:

“’Drogon,’ she sang out loudly, sweetly, all her fear forgotten. ‘Dracarys.’

A lance of swirling dark flame took Kraznys full in the face. His eyes melted and ran down his cheeks, and the oil in his hair and beard burst so fiercely into fire that for an instant the slaver wore a burning crown twice as tall as his head.”

Then Stannis tells us how much more useful a dragon would be compared to a magic sword:

"It glimmers prettily, I’ll grant you, but on the Blackwater this magic sword served me no better than common steel. A dragon would have turned that battle. Aegon once stood here as I do, looking down on this table. Do you think we would name him Aegon the Conqueror today if he had not had dragons?”

[MoIaF]

Assuming that Azor Ahai has to be a warrior in the traditional sense is extremely limited. If Azor Ahai is made up of three different people, then they could easily be three different types of warriors. Playing an active role in the war against the Others would make them warriors of sorts. One could be physically trained in combat (Jon), one could have mastery over dragons (Dany), and one could be politically brilliant (Tyrion or maybe Aegon?). I'm just throwing out ideas. The point is, there are many ways that the characters can work to fight back the Others and there are many ways to describe a warrior.

This is how I see it, I think it'll be an amalgamation of three different characters. One person can't do it alone, we've been shown that over and over again in the series.

[~DarkHorse~]

Dany isn't a warrior? She's conquered multiple cities in Slaver's Bay and she has plans to take back Westeros with her dragons. She's a conqueror and a liberator. I'm pretty sure that counts as a "warrior."

That is more a leader than a warrior. She will probably lead men into battle ridding Drogon (his flames are her weapon). However, I can't see her wielding a flaming sword and cutting down (dead) men like Jon does in his dream. Jon has combat experience and knows how to swing a sword, I can't see Dany getting good enough in such a short time so she can wield Lightbringer.

[Caerl Targaryen]

Gotcha, and I would agree with that.

In 2 of 3 of Melisandre's telling of the coming of Azor Ahai, he's a warrior twice.

Interestingly, in the other, he is the one who will lead the fight against evil (paraphrase. See p5 of this thread for exact).

There are often many ways to interpret religious texts, and the made up ones in ASOIAF are certainly no different. Some people tend to take more of a literal stance on things and others take more of a metaphorical stance. Melisandre seems to fall in the former category. Her literal interpretation of the prophecy is very problematic.

While it does seem as if there are forces allying with "fire"/light and forces allying with "ice"/darkness, when looking more closely at the people involved, it isn't nearly as simple as good vs. evil or light vs. darkness. It's why I think that Azor Ahai reborn isn't nearly as simple as a single person fighting against the Others and it's also why I don't put much stock in the idea that Azor Ahai has to be physically skilled in hand-to-hand combat. It doesn't mean he or she can't be skilled in combat, though. It just means it's an unanswered question.

As I said above, I believe that Azor Ahai reborn is actually the three heads of the dragon. If the three heads all have different skills that are used to fight against the Others in their own way, then some may be literal warriors and some may be metaphorical warriors. Melisandre seems to take many things in her faith incredibly literally, and I think that's problematic because it doesn't seem to match how the story is unfolding. Nor does it match GRRM's style. We also can't assume that any one character is 100% right in their beliefs.

[JonisHenryTudor]

I said that Sam and Frodo fought against Sauron despite the fact that they weren't literally fighting him. I didn't call them "warriors." If the requirement is that Azor Ahai has to fight and help defeat the Others (Rhaegor and Melisandre are assuming it's literal fighting), then that can take on many different forms. That's my point. The assumption that it has to mean physically fighting is a bad one because there are many ways to fight.

Maybe but the historical definition of warrior is one who actually fights. If Dany fought mid-flight on a dragon's back, then she would certainly be defined as a warrior. Historically speaking, when we use the term warrior, we are referring to people who wielded some form of arms in a given battle. For example, Elizabeth the first (despite the latest movie) helped conduct a war against Spain, but she is not considered a warrior. It is also one of the major issues historians have in defining Joan D'Arc. The whiggish version likes to refer to her as the girl warrior, but the reality is she did very little in battle or in the conferences (I have read the manuscripts). Most recent work done is very reluctant to regard her as a warrior, she was little more than a mascot.

Dany is not a warrior by any definition. She is a leader, perhaps on the verge of despotism, who has orchestrated war, but not fought. Let's consider the modern era, would you consider Obama a warrior? He is not fighting abroad, but he is the head of all US military decisions. The difference between say Obama and Dany is that Dany is on "ground zero" while Obama is in DC. Even the great Philip II is not considered a warrior, and his accomplishments dwarf Dany fictional conquests. The only time a grey area exists is when we discuss Holy Warrior or ghazi, because often people like Saladin are considered Holy Warriors and never lifted a weapon, although I do believe he did fight. He certainly was trained as a soldier.

Dany has had no military training, she has not wielded a weapon in battle, nor has she actually fought on the back of a dragon. That doesn't mean that she will not fight, but at this point in the story Dany is without a doubt not a warrior.

Def. - a brave or experienced soldier or fighter

[Zoravar Singh]

To all the people saying that Ser Patrek would be bad writing, I would like to point out that If Ser Patrek is given any other name, he could still have a blue star as his heraldry. If the bet was never placed, he would still have the Blue star as his heraldry and another name. Ser Patrek was just giving a name to someone who GRRM had already decided to place in his books.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Assuming that Azor Ahai has to be a warrior in the traditional sense is extremely limited. If Azor Ahai is made up of three different people, then they could easily be three different types of warriors. Playing an active role in the war against the Others would make them warriors of sorts. One could be physically trained in combat (Jon), one could have mastery over dragons (Dany), and one could be politically brilliant (Tyrion or maybe Aegon?). I'm just throwing out ideas. The point is, there are many ways that the characters can work to fight back the Others and there are many ways to describe a warrior.

Perhaps surprisingly, I basically agree. While Rhaegar would know that TPTWP would be a warrior, we don't know that Rhaegar understood what type of warrior TPTWP would be. We also know that TPTWP prophesy is tied to the three heads of the dragon theory in which TPTWP would lead and be one of the three heads. So if AAR is a different culture's telling of the TPTWP story, perhaps AAR is the same as the three heads of the dragon rather than only being TPTWP. I don't know at this point. While Jon almost certainly is TPTWP because he is the Son(g) of Ice (Lyanna) and Fire (Rhaegar), and while Jon almost certainly is at least part of AAR (Mel sees Snow), AAR could be three people who are also the three heads of the dragon. But if AAR is one person, it seems that it must be Jon.

[sj4iy]

I would definitely consider her a warrior, the root of the word warrior is to "wage war" which Dany has obviously done. I think she'll be a more fiscal warrior once she begins to ride Drogon into battles. I don't think she'll be anyone's second in command, it's just not who Dany is, however, I can see her being a co-leader with Jon and perhaps someone else.

A couple of other points:

Dany I ACOK:

The Dothraki called the comet "shierak qiya" which means bleeding star.

Dany III ADWD:

XXD said this about the dragons: "When your dragons were small they were a wonder. Grown, they are death and devastation, a flaming sword above the world.

Jon read this passage in the Jade Compendium:

"Once Azor Ahai fought a monster. When he thrust the sword through the belly of the beast, its blood began to boil. Smoke and steam poured from its mouth, its eyes melted and dribbled down its cheeks, and its body burst into flame.

This has almost identical wording to when Drogon killed Kraznys in Astapor:

Drogon, she sang out loudly, sweetly, all her fear forgotten. Dracarys.

A lance of swirling dark flame took Kraznys full in the face. His eyes melted and ran down his cheeks, and the oil in his hair and beard burst so fiercely into fire that for an instant the slaver wore a burning crown twice as tall as his head.

Then Stannis tells us how much more useful a dragon would be compared to a magic sword:

"It glimmers prettily, Ill grant you, but on the Blackwater this magic sword served me no better than common steel. A dragon would have turned that battle. Aegon once stood here as I do, looking down on this table. Do you think we would name him Aegon the Conqueror today if he had not had dragons?

You can't really have a co-leader...that would be detrimental to any army to not have a clear chain of command. Jon is better at taking advice and compromising than Dany is, and he knows more about the enemy and the North than Dany does. It makes no sense for her to swoop in and take over at this point when she is clearly the inferior candidate.

I'm not saying she won't be the leader of her own forces, I'm just saying that I don't see her becoming the leader of humanity's forces.

[BearQueen87]

I would definitely consider her a warrior, the root of the word warrior is to "wage war" which Dany has obviously done. I think she'll be a more fiscal warrior once she begins to ride Drogon into battles. I don't think she'll be anyone's second in command, it's just not who Dany is, however, I can see her being a co-leader with Jon and perhaps someone else.

A couple of other points:

Dany I ACOK:

The Dothraki called the comet "shierak qiya" which means bleeding star.

Dany III ADWD:

XXD said this about the dragons: "When your dragons were small they were a wonder. Grown, they are death and devastation, a flaming sword above the world.”

Jon read this passage in the Jade Compendium:

"Once Azor Ahai fought a monster. When he thrust the sword through the belly of the beast, its blood began to boil. Smoke and steam poured from its mouth, its eyes melted and dribbled down its cheeks, and its body burst into flame.”

This has almost identical wording to when Drogon killed Kraznys in Astapor:

“’Drogon,’ she sang out loudly, sweetly, all her fear forgotten. ‘Dracarys.’

A lance of swirling dark flame took Kraznys full in the face. His eyes melted and ran down his cheeks, and the oil in his hair and beard burst so fiercely into fire that for an instant the slaver wore a burning crown twice as tall as his head.”

Then Stannis tells us how much more useful a dragon would be compared to a magic sword:

"It glimmers prettily, I’ll grant you, but on the Blackwater this magic sword served me no better than common steel. A dragon would have turned that battle. Aegon once stood here as I do, looking down on this table. Do you think we would name him Aegon the Conqueror today if he had not had dragons?”

Right, I don't think she's going to use a sword or anything but Drogon is her weapon which is why I asked about how it was different from wielding a sword in combat.

That is more a leader than a warrior. She will probably lead men into battle ridding Drogon (his flames are her weapon). However, I can't see her wielding a flaming sword and cutting down (dead) men like Jon does in his dream. Jon has combat experience and knows how to swing a sword, I can't see Dany getting good enough in such a short time so she can wield Lightbringer.

She's wielding a flaming dragon though to cut down dead men. Again, how is this significantly different?

And until we know that AAR simply must be a "warrior" (whatever the heck it means) Dany is still a contender for...something.