Aerys and Joanna (TWOIAF Spoilers)

[Danelle]

There was presumably blackmail/use of the king's position involved yes. But Aerys had already insulted her and was very drunk, so him being violent with her seems likely, especially as this would have been a way to get at Tywin.

I wouldn't be surprised if he forced her to have sex with him while he threatened to harm Tywin and the twins if she refused.

[honeyed chicken]

I have been wracking my feline brain about this. I'm pretty sure Aerys did rape Joanna in 273. We hear Tywin offered to resign the next day, implying that the real reason he wanted to quit his job occurred sometime after Aerys's remark about Joanna's breasts (a night after). The king was also drunk and violating Tywin's wife seemed like a good idea at the time. Joanna and Tywin must have been trying for another child at the time, so Joanna didn't want to drink moon tea. When Tyrion was born Tywin suspected Joanna had been wrong about not getting impregnated by Aerys.

I thought Jamie was the reason for Tywin's resignation. Aerys deprived Tywin of his heir when he took Jamie into the KG.

eta 1

While I like your analysis, i have quite a different opinion than this one of yours:

"This then explains the cruelty of his punishment of Tyrion wrt Tysha. That never made sense as just as 'stiff lesson,' or a warning not to be Tytos and stay away from 'gold diggers.'"

The man who authored the Reins of Castamere, and whose words could easily be "Heads, Spikes, Walls" not go over the top with punishments? He does so repeatedly. It's what Tywin is best known for (aside from "shitting gold" - which turned out in the end not to be true. ;) ).

eta2

Oth, I like this:

"Tyrion, who now appears more like his father, gets darker."

Or as Auntie Genna says to Jamie:

"I was seven when Walder Frey persuaded my lord father to give my hand to Emm. His second son, not even his heir. Father was himself a thirdborn son, and younger children crave the approval of their elders. Frey sensed that weakness in him, and Father agreed for no better reason than to please him.My betrothal was announced at a feast with half the west in attendance. Ellyn Tarbeck laughed and Red Lion went angry from the hall. The rest sat on their tongues. Only Tywin dared speak against the match. A boy of ten. Father turned as white as mare's milk, and Walder Frey was quivering." She smiled. "How could I not love him, after that? That is not to say that I approved of all he did, or much enjoyed the company of the man he became . . . but every little girl needs a big brother to protect her. Tywin was big even when he was little." She gave a sigh. "Who will protect us now?"

Jamie kissed her on the cheek. "He left a son."

"Aye, he did. That is what I fear most the most, in truth."

That was a queer remark. "Why would you fear?"

"Jamie," she said, tugging on his ear, "sweetling, I have known you since you were babe at Joanna's breast. You smile like Gerion and fight like Tyg, and there's some of Kevan in you, else you would not wear that cloak . . . but Tyrion is Tywin's son, not you. I said so once to your father's face, and he would not speak to me for half a year. Men are such thundering great fools. Even the sort that come along once in a thousand years."

[Chaircat Meow]

I thought Jamie was the reason for Tywin's resignation. Aerys deprived Tywin of his heir when he took Jamie into the KG.

This is Tywin's attempted resignation in 272. Aerys refused it.

[Chaircat Meow]

eta 1

While I like your analysis, i have quite a different opinion than this one of yours:

"This then explains the cruelty of his punishment of Tyrion wrt Tysha. That never made sense as just as 'stiff lesson,' or a warning not to be Tytos and stay away from 'gold diggers.'"

The man who authored the Reins of Castamere, and whose words could easily be "Heads, Spikes, Walls" not go over the top with punishments? He does so repeatedly. It's what Tywin is best known for (aside from "shitting gold" - which turned out in the end not to be true. ;) ).

The destruction of House Reyne wasn't over the top. I haven't read the entry in the world book, but the reading George did on the westerlands history presented it as harsh but necessary action to restore lannister authority. They refused to surrender and flooding was the best way to take the fortress. And if people on the council had been screwing up the lannister war effort by having Ned executed, damn right they should have got the chop.

Tywin has always been ok with harsh ruthless punishment, but senseless over the top sadism isn't what he usually does. And he does know the difference, which is one of the reasons he lies about Elia.

[honeyed chicken]

The destruction of House Reyne wasn't over the top. I haven't read the entry in the world book, but the reading George did on the westerlands history presented it as harsh but necessary action to restore lannister authority. They refused to surrender and flooding was the best way to take the fortress. And if people on the council had been screwing up the lannister war effort by having Ned executed, damn right they should have got the chop.

Tywin has always been ok with harsh ruthless punishment, but senseless over the top sadism isn't what he usually does. And he does know the difference, which is one of the reasons he lies about Elia.

If he had had Tysha killed, that would have been a little over the top. But what he in fact did i gentle by his standards.

[Chaircat Meow]

If he had had Tysha killed, that would have been a little over the top. But what he in fact did i gentle by his standards.

That's not just about Tysha though, it was about Tyrion too. Yes, I know, Tywin genuinely believed she was a gold digger, despite putting Jaime up to telling Tyrion that, but teaching Tyrion the error of his ways by having his wife raped in front of him and making him go last is a frankly insane way to ensure your son doesn't embarrass you further. Really really OTT, even by Tywin standards.

[oursisthefury69]

Lol at all the people trying to work through how this actually now makes plenty of sense when considering all of the Tyrion Tywin interactions, after years on these forums of the most used argument against this theory being "oh it would ruin the relationship dynamic between the two"

[mezmerised]

I have been wracking my feline brain about this. I'm pretty sure Aerys did rape Joanna in 273. We hear Tywin offered to resign the next day, implying that the real reason he wanted to quit his job occurred sometime after Aerys's remark about Joanna's breasts (a night after). The king was also drunk and violating Tywin's wife seemed like a good idea at the time. Joanna and Tywin must have been trying for another child at the time, so Joanna didn't want to drink moon tea. When Tyrion was born Tywin suspected Joanna had been wrong about not getting impregnated by Aerys.

I'm also thinking about this way too much! I'm like 50% 'Yay, all this great new info! I love the world book!' and 50% 'WTF, George, A+J=T?! What are you doing?!?'

I get all the points you made but my main question would be why didn't Tywin sent Tyrion away (to the Citadel/Faith/Wall/whatever)? It would be absolutely necessary so he doesn't have a Targ bastard in the Lannister line of succession and it would also help him for his own emotional well being (not being confronted with living proof that Aerys raped his beloved Joanna which then lead to her death in child birth).

And yea I think that if it happened it really looks like it was rape and not anything resembling a consensual affair. Even if they used to have an affair when they were younger I see no proof that Joanna would continue that once she was a married mother of two and after Aerys just humiliated her in front of the whole court.

But personally I'm not even convinced anything consensual ever happened between them. The maesters are writing their books biased by their own inherent misogyny (example: they can't be certain that nothing happened because of what they know about Joanna's personality but only because Tywin 'wouldn't feast upon another man's leavings' lol). And in the same way they describe Queen Rhaella as being angry with Aerys for turning her ladies-in-waiting into whores, but maybe she was more upset for the sake of her close companions, so her 'dismissing' Joanna from court was really her way of saving her by helping her get out of the King's reach.

Tyrion's dwarfism could now also be seen as a clue. Altough I don't like this turn of events either. When Tyrion was definitely a Lannister the message seemed to be 'Yes, it can happen even in the same family. Some people look like Jaime and some people look like Tyrion. It doesn't define who they are as a person.' Tyrion as a Targ kind of puts him in the long line of malformed Targ babies, whatever was going on with Rhaenyra's baby girl, Rhaego (?) and people like Maelys the Monstrous. The Targs apparently are/were doing something sinister and have to pay for it by having more difficulty to have healthy babies than other families.

Another clue I hate but that I can't unsee anymore: Joanna's rape and the possibility that Tyrion ends up with CR mirrors one of the more gross myths about how Lann took the Rock from the Casterlys (impregnating all the daughters while they were asleep). If Tyrion is a secret Targ and ends up as Lord of CR the Lannisters will have lost the Rock and the Westerlands in a similar way to how they got it in the first place.

But again I hate this idea and I prefer the Lann story where he scares and tricks the Casterlys so much that they believe CR is haunted or the more realistic one where the Casterly's daughter and Lann have an affair and get married.

[oursisthefury69]

And so many people with all these minor revelations like "Tyrions dwarfism was probably a clue." Dear god

You dont just find out something is going to be true and then recant every detail on the character and be like ":yea that was a clue." Somethings not a clue if you have the mystery solved first and then backtrack half-ass through the books saying anything about him wether or not its relevant and being like "cluee" once you already know what you're looking for.

Theres literally dozens dozens of clear cut foreshadowings on top of small possibilities like him being a dwarf. If you brought up Tyrion being a dwarf as evidence of him being Aerys son on these forums like 2 weeks ago you'd immediately face a series of dismissive comments from people like Mladen, and the thread would go to shit soon thereafter.

Now these are the type of things people try providing as original evidence because it was something too miniscule for people that actually supported this theory before the worldbook to include in their evidence. For the record, theres people who knew this before the worldbook, we had better more evidence than Tyrions physical appearance, and the great majority of users never gave the theory the attention it deserved, mainly because most people on here are entirely influenced by the obsessive 10,000+ posters and their opinions. And those posters generally attempted to steer the forums away from this theory because they never realized it themselves because they were too busy working on R+L=J for the last 18 years

[Chaircat Meow]

SNIP

Hang on. I'm not saying A+J=T is true. I'm saying A raped J and consequently Tywin believes T might be A's son, but knows he doesn't know one way or the other. I was trying to provide a way of explaining why GrrM included the info which actually didn't lead us to assume he necessarily meant to reveal T as a Targ. I'm saying he told us this not so we conclude T was a Targ but so that we'd finally get Lord Tywin. However, unquestionably the Woiaf is good news for those A+J theorists, and they might be right, but I don't think this proves it.

I would imagine Tywin just took it for granted Tyrion was not his heir. The lords of the west would know Tywin did not intend Tyrion to inherit, and wouldn't want him to themselves either. Robert and Jon had probably agreed to release Jaime if he requested it, and they wouldn't want the west held by Tyrion. So I expect Tywin anticipated no problems.

[mezmerised]

And so many people with all these minor revelations like "Tyrions dwarfism was probably a clue." Dear god

Lol if this is supposed to be directed at me. I'm not saying 'OMG, i just totally found a new clue' but rather that even though I hate the idea of A+J=T I can agree with the other side that parts of what they say makes sense.

I still think it would be a bad literary decision that would undermine the Tywin/Tyrion dynamic, the Lannister family dynamic, the balance between Starks/Lannisters/Targs in the story as a whole, it weakens Joanna's character, makes Tywin less believable, destroys the basic idea that it's really their choices that defines a person rather than their blood.

I agree that GRRM just threw oil in the fire of that particular discussion but I hope he's just trolling us a bit and doesn't really take his story in that direction.

[Mladen]

Theres literally dozens dozens of clear cut foreshadowings on top of small possibilities like him being a dwarf. If you brought up Tyrion being a dwarf as evidence of him being Aerys son on these forums like 2 weeks ago you'd immediately face a series of dismissive comments from people like Mladen, and the thread would go to shit soon thereafter.

Please restrain yourself of mentioning me in debate I am not active participant. It is tasteless, but alas, not surprising. Thank you very much.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I know you have been somewhat outspoken against A+J=T for a long time. But I am interested in why you are so strong in your feeling that it would be an awful literary choice.

If you know that then you should know that I have already explained my case multiple times and see no use in wasting my time repeating it when you're just going to repeat yet again that you don't agree. Similarly to how your text wall hasn't convinced me of this theory's literary value. Accept that we're at an impasse, we're not going to agree, and get over it.

It's also funny that your support for this theory is largely based on the "big three" all being Targs, when the author is on the record as saying that the third head, however it manifests, doesn't even need to be a Targ at all.

[Mithras]

BTW, there is no "big three". There is only Jon :)

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

BTW, there is no "big three". There is only Jon :)

Even if there is the "big three," that does not mean that Tyrion is or has to be a Targaryen. That was my point. Arguing that Tyrion is a Targ based on that ignores the author's earlier assertion that all three heads do not have to be (read: probably are not) Targs.

[Mithras]

One should ask if A+J=T is as true as R+L=J and it is a similar construct since from the beginning with subtle clues, then why are there over 100 R+L=J threads whereas A+J=T related posts cannot amount to more than 5 threads?

[butterbumps!]

Even if there is the "big three," that does not mean that Tyrion is or has to be a Targaryen. That was my point. Arguing that Tyrion is a Targ based on that ignores the author's earlier assertion that all three heads do not have to be (read: probably are not) Targs.

For those who believe Aegon is a Blackfyre, "the dragon" already has 3 heads (a "red" Targ branch that's Dany, a "black" bastard branch reflected in Aegon, and a "white" Snowy branch). DwD was not called a Dance with Dragons for nothing. Tyrion was the one "snarling" betwixt them all.

I still think Tyrion = Targ makes no sense. The "is it possible" question wasn't the issue for me (nearly anything is "possible" in a technical sense). It's whether such a revelation is really in conversation with the rest of ASOIAF, and I still say no.

[Lord Varys]

Tyrion is a Hill, not a Targaryen. Thus George's comment fits. Not to mention that Jon is effectively a Snow.

Ran has confirmed that Tywin was named Hand in 263 AC, not in 262 AC. That should sort of confirm that Joanna did indeed 'rule as Aerys' mistress' for a few months after his coronation.

Assuming that this thing began with rape is a stretch, too. In 259 AC, when Aerys apparently deflowered Joanna, he was only 15 years old. That's pretty young for a rape, and I guess she would not have stayed at court if that was the case.

Rhaella banishing Joanna is also very telling. She did not want that her ladies whore around, and Joanna was already married when she was banished. What could that possibly mean?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

For those who believe Aegon is a Blackfyre, "the dragon" already has 3 heads (a "red" Targ branch that's Dany, a "black" bastard branch reflected in Aegon, and a "white" Snowy branch). DwD was not called a Dance with Dragons for nothing. Tyrion was the one "snarling" betwixt them all.

I still think Tyrion = Targ makes no sense. The "is it possible" question wasn't the issue for me (nearly anything is "possible" in a technical sense). It's whether such a revelation is really in conversation with the rest of ASOIAF, and I still say no.

Yeah, good point. Tyrion was the guy snarling among the dragons, he wasn't seen as a dragon himself. And if the three heads are Aegon, Dany and Jon, then the subversion could be that the heads are in conflict, not cooperation (i.e. people think the three heads will come together to defeat the Big Bad and that might not be the case).

And I am in total agreement with your last graf.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Tyrion is a Hill, not a Targaryen. Thus George's comment fits. Not to mention that Jon is effectively a Snow.

If you feel like playing with semantics, maybe.

ETA: I also have no idea what point you think you're trying to make with 15 being too young for a rape. What, teenagers can't rape or be raped? Whatever you're going for, it's worded atrociously.

ETA2: Given that Tyrion was born a good 10 years after the dates you mention, I'm also not sure why you think that because Aerys and Joanna may or may not have boned in 259-263, it means Aerys must have fathered Tyrion in 272-273.