There are no other dragons on Planetos besides Drogon, Viserion and Rhaegal

[Taenqyrhae]

Osha saying they still existed multiple times:

"The giants I’ve seen, the children I’ve heard tell of, and the white walkers ..."

"The children of the forest could tell you a thing or two about dreaming."

"North of the Wall, things are different. That’s where the children went, and the giants, and the other old races"

These quotes are all from book one. The CotF stilling being alive is hinted at a lot. Whereas Dragons are universally considered extinct.

Who knows what Osha has seen. Maybe what she is calling giants are really tall men. She admittedly has only heard tales of CotF or Others. When I read that scene, I did not take it as proof that giants and the CotF were still alive and that they were going to be an integral part of the story, and if you had only read the story to that point, I think you'd have to admit that a very strong argument could be made that Osha is relaying the same kind of tales that Old Nan did, northern folklore. I know people who will straight-faced tell you that drop bears are real and that they've seen weird creatures out in the woods. One wildling telling a child that mythical creatures are real is not a very strong textual clue that they are real.

And dragons were NOT universally considered extinct, not by a long shot. Scholars speculated that historical wild dragons might still be alive in remote areas. Practically all the smallfolk around Winterfell believed that dragons were still around. People from Asshai, a city that engages in regular trade with Westeros, claim that dragons are still around in their lands. Where are you getting these ideas?

[TallTyrion]

Who knows what Osha has seen. Maybe what she is calling giants are really tall men. She admittedly has only heard tales of CotF or Others. When I read that scene, I did not take it as proof that giants and the CotF were still alive and that they were going to be an integral part of the story, and if you had only read the story to that point, I think you'd have to admit that a very strong argument could be made that Osha is relaying the same kind of tales that Old Nan did, northern folklore. I know people who will straight-faced tell you that drop bears are real and that they've seen weird creatures out in the woods. One wildling telling a child that mythical creatures are real is not a very strong textual clue that they are real.

And dragons were NOT universally considered extinct, not by a long shot. Scholars speculated that historical wild dragons might still be alive in remote areas. Practically all the smallfolk around Winterfell believed that dragons were still around. People from Asshai, a city that engages in regular trade with Westeros, claim that dragons are still around in their lands. Where are you getting these ideas?

You didn't ask for proof you asked for textual references hinting at their existence. Well there they are.

Do you have references for any of those claims?

Also you disbelieve Osha because she's just some nutty savage but the smallfolk around Winterfell are quality sources?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Are there honestly people who are pro-dragon just because they are annoyed at people who want Dany to be special?

No more than there are people who are anti-dragon because they want Dany to be special.

What led you to ever assume that speculating an aspect of mythos casually is in any way related to demeaning one character's story arc?

What led you to ever assume I was talking about myself? My point was that the OP's silly accusation — that people want there to be other dragons to demean Dany's specialness — could be flipped around to pertain to her — that she doesn't want there to be other dragons because it reinforces Dany's specialness. That's all.

[NOT A TARG I SWEAR]

Not only will there be other dragons in the story, Dany's dragons will be the least special of all of them.

[Mithras]

Who knows what Osha has seen. Maybe what she is calling giants are really tall men. She admittedly has only heard tales of CotF or Others. When I read that scene, I did not take it as proof that giants and the CotF were still alive and that they were going to be an integral part of the story, and if you had only read the story to that point, I think you'd have to admit that a very strong argument could be made that Osha is relaying the same kind of tales that Old Nan did, northern folklore. I know people who will straight-faced tell you that drop bears are real and that they've seen weird creatures out in the woods. One wildling telling a child that mythical creatures are real is not a very strong textual clue that they are real.

And dragons were NOT universally considered extinct, not by a long shot. Scholars speculated that historical wild dragons might still be alive in remote areas. Practically all the smallfolk around Winterfell believed that dragons were still around. People from Asshai, a city that engages in regular trade with Westeros, claim that dragons are still around in their lands. Where are you getting these ideas?

That is your problem because in the Prologue of the first book, we see the Others in action; something even Ned ridiculed as a tale of Old Nan. That means we were led by the author to pay attention to the northern folklore, which means the giants and the CotF could very well be as alive as the Others we have seen in the Prologue.

[Malik Ambar]

What led you to ever assume I was talking about myself? My point was that the OP's silly accusation — that people want there to be other dragons to demean Dany's specialness — could be flipped around to pertain to her — that she doesn't want there to be other dragons because it reinforces Dany's specialness. That's all.

Uh, Ma'am... I actually agree with you. I've elaborated it further down the comment. That sentence was meant for the OP, the quotes i mention are the ones that follow a similar thought process to mine.

[Taenqyrhae]

You didn't ask for proof you asked for textual references hinting at their existence. Well there they are.

Do you have references for any of those claims?

Also you disbelieve Osha because she's just some nutty savage but the smallfolk around Winterfell are quality sources?

I already listed all the clues since the reveal of the dragon of Winterfell that provide backstory for it. You say that the existence of CotF and Giants count as textural references, what's wrog with mine? As I explained, the textual clues are not always provided before the reveal of the magical paradigm shifts. We heard no tales of people hatching fossilized dragon eggs with fire and blood sacrifice, until the eggs actually hatch the text could just as easily, AND MORE PLAUSIBLY BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW AT THE POINT, they could simply be a symbol of Dany's attempt to connect to her dragonrider ancestry. I knew dragons were real in the series before I read it, but if I came in blind, that's probably would have been my guess. In such a low-magic setting, it seems unlikely that stone dragon eggs could hatch. So after the story says "Surprise! Those weren't just stone carvings, those were real hatchable dragon eggs!", the later books provide more information on the background of dragon hatching, and let us know Euron had an egg once, and there's legends of dragons in other lands, and the Targaryans tried to hatch fossilized dragon eggs in the past - and if all that had been revealed before the surprise hatching, it would not have been a surprise.

We have the same thing here, but since we have no POV characters to witness the hatching, there's less immediate reinforcement of what Summer saw - but there is plenty to shift the explanation from "Hallucination" to "possibly real".

[TallTyrion]

I already listed all the clues since the reveal of the dragon of Winterfell that provide backstory for it. You say that the existence of CotF and Giants count as textural references, what's wrog with mine? As I explained, the textual clues are not always provided before the reveal of the magical paradigm shifts. We heard no tales of people hatching fossilized dragon eggs with fire and blood sacrifice, until the eggs actually hatch the text could just as easily, AND MORE PLAUSIBLY BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW AT THE POINT, they could simply be a symbol of Dany's attempt to connect to her dragonrider ancestry. I knew dragons were real in the series before I read it, but if I came in blind, that's probably would have been my guess. In such a low-magic setting, it seems unlikely that stone dragon eggs could hatch. So after the story says "Surprise! Those weren't just stone carvings, those were real hatchable dragon eggs!", the later books provide more information on the background of dragon hatching, and let us know Euron had an egg once, and there's legends of dragons in other lands, and the Targaryans tried to hatch fossilized dragon eggs in the past - and if all that had been revealed before the surprise hatching, it would not have been a surprise.

We have the same thing here, but since we have no POV characters to witness the hatching, there's less immediate reinforcement of what Summer saw - but there is plenty to shift the explanation from "Hallucination" to "possibly real".

You asked what textual references there were regarding giants and CotF before we knew they existed. I provided them. There are characters that talk about Giants and the Children still existing before we saw them. There is no equivalent for that when it come to dragons. In fact it's just the opposite since every character who talks about it says that dragons are extinct or that Dany's are the only 3 in the world.

You're only textual reference to other dragons existing is a misreading of Summer's POV.

Also what is the citation for scholars believing there are wild dragons still around, the Winterfell Smallfolk believing dragons are still around, and people form Ashai claiming there are dragons there?

[Fae Boleyn]

You disagree that the POV switches to omnipotent on a few occasions?

We established that hundreds = anything over 100.

No. No you did not. You established that saying that "for the first time in a century and a half" would've been clunky and sound bad. Your definition is something of a misunderstanding, I'm afraid. Perhaps it's technically correct, but it still would leave GRRM using a word in a way it simply isn't.

"For the first time in over a hundred years" is what a perfectly correct statement would read. As it is, the statement is dramatic exaggeration, though I suppose it's possible that the last, stunted dragons were mutes or something. There's nothing wrong with it being dramatic, though; it's meant to be. And it's not even an exaggeration in the sense that it's almost certainly true for the continent Dany is currently on. But hundreds is just not used for less than two hundred.

I'm not saying you're wrong - as it happens, I mostly agree with you. Just picky about word usage. Anyway, I don't think there are any other normal dragons alive in the known world of ASOIAF - perhaps beyond where people can sail but that's canonically unreachable and so irrelevant. Jury's still out on ice dragons, and there could be eggs in a number of places. One or more of those could hatch but they'd be as useless as Dany's three were for most of book two.

Although... If Mel was right about dragons being stone on Dragonstone, backed up a bit by Shireen's dream... Petrified is not alive, that does conceivably work too. But I don't think they'll have a chance to go back and find out.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Yeah but not being able to disprove something is a bad reason to believe it. Lots of people believe that there are other dragons in the story and there's good reason to believe that's not the case.

GRRM's opinion on what constitutes lying to the reader paired with the numerous textual references to dragons being extinct is sufficient evidence to conclude that Dany's dragons are the only ones that exist.

Exactly!

There's also the fact that in ACOK, the alchemists' productivity suddenly takes a big surge, and when Tyrion asks about it the head pyromancer asks whether any dragons have been seen lately. He says that wildfire production got harder after the last dragon died.

If dragons were still extant anywhere in the world between the death of Westeros' last dragon and the hatching of Dany's three, what accounts for the alchemists' spells suddenly working better? Since Dany and her dragons are in Qarth when this happens, I don't think distance has anything to do with it.

Yes, exactly my point about the pyromancers. They specifically said that their magic is stronger recently, even suggest that it is because dragons are back. This is so OBVIOUS in the writing.

No more than there are people who are anti-dragon because they want Dany to be special.

What led you to ever assume I was talking about myself? My point was that the OP's silly accusation — that people want there to be other dragons to demean Dany's specialness — could be flipped around to pertain to her — that she doesn't want there to be other dragons because it reinforces Dany's specialness. That's all.

Nah totally untrue, it does not work both ways, see one way is how the books are written and one way is total fanfic. I think Dany's dragons are the only ones because they are the only ones, which has been stated in the writing about 200 times. I am not the one who made her the only person with dragons, GRRM did.

How it works is, what is in the writing is fact, when someone suggests something spectacular that is not backed up by the books in any way, then we go into 'theory'. The facts from the books I have shown on the thread in multiple quotes all confirm Drogon, Viserion and Rhaegal are the ONLY dragons. This is a fact I hardly need to illustrate anyway as anyone who has read Game of Thrones should know it already.

If someone has a theory about other dragons existing out there, that is fine, but it will be a theory nonetheless. I was not making any accusation, I have heard people flat out say that they want other people to have dragons so that 'Dany's won't be the only ones', I was commenting that while they may want it, it won't make it true.

[aryagonnakill#2]

Couldn't agree with the OP more. Dragon eggs certainly, "hibernating dragons" "stone dragons" or anything else is entirely made up and not supported by the book.

Edit: I also read the end of Danys chapter when she hatches dragons as omniscient.

[ChillyPolly]

Of course there are other dragons. There is simply too much smoke for there not to be fire. Too many places for them to hide. Too much evidence that all the skeptical maesters of Oldtown (who don't believe in anything that they cannot find within an hour's walk of their Citadel) do not really know what they are talking about. Too many missing Westerosi dragons unaccounted for. Too many dragon eggs unaccounted for.

People don't want there to be other dragons because they believe "the whole point of Dany's arc" is for her to be the most super-special girl in the whole universe. Obviously if there were other dragons it would TOTALLY SPOIL her little ego-driven power fantasy.

People say that GRRM doesn't lie, and therefore ignore the subjective POV structure when it suits them. But then of course they must turn around and say that GRRM was lying to us when he said that Summer saw a "great winged snake whose roar was a river of flame" just outside Winterfell.

We are told that the caverns below Winterfell are deep and endless and populated by rats the size of small dogs.

We are told that Sea Dragon Point is uninhabited and populated by large herds of seals.

We are told that hardly anyone ever visits Skagos. We are told of mysterious disasters that wiped out Skane and Hardhome, the latter explicitly involving fire.

There is an entire subplot about stone dragons, to be re-awakened by human sacrifice. We learn that the dragon-statues of Dragonstone are so amazingly realistic that they must have been made by a sculptor's art not known to modern men. We have explicit foreshadowings of such "statues" shimmering as though about to come to life. We are told that the volcanic caverns of Dragonstone are so deep and endless that they resist full exploration and anything can hide in them. And we have a mystery of Loras going to Dragonstone in the hopes of finding dragon eggs, and being burned in some mishap. Somewhat mysteriously, he has not been seen since, though he is apparently alive.

And then of course, there is a small pile of new hints in "The World of Ice and Fire."

[Mal Malenkirk]

No matter how many dragons are alive right now, I hope they are all dead at the end! Once and for all! I don't see them as a positive force in the world.

So far, when their powers are channelled by humans, all we've seen in the serie is that they can be used to establish an empire by force... and then maintain it in a stagnation indefinetely!

A government established through the power of dragon fire will naturally concentrate powers in the hands of the very few who controls the dragons and then stagnate that way with no hope of developping a civil society and a state of right. How can power be shared if the power of the state is based on the dragons and the dragons can't be shared?

How can a 'dragon state' be anything else than a brutally unequal form of government? It crystalizes the worses form of despotism possible and then won't evolve.

For the good of the world, dragons must die!

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Of course there are other dragons. There is simply too much smoke for there not to be fire. Too many places for them to hide. Too much evidence that all the skeptical maesters of Oldtown (who don't believe in anything that they cannot find within an hour's walk of their Citadel) do not really know what they are talking about. Too many missing Westerosi dragons unaccounted for. Too many dragon eggs unaccounted for.

People don't want there to be other dragons because they believe "the whole point of Dany's arc" is for her to be the most super-special girl in the whole universe. Obviously if there were other dragons it would TOTALLY SPOIL her little ego-driven power fantasy.

People say that GRRM doesn't lie, and therefore ignore the subjective POV structure when it suits them. But then of course they must turn around and say that GRRM was lying to us when he said that Summer saw a "great winged snake whose roar was a river of flame" just outside Winterfell.

We are told that the caverns below Winterfell are deep and endless and populated by rats the size of small dogs.

We are told that Sea Dragon Point is uninhabited and populated by large herds of seals.

We are told that hardly anyone ever visits Skagos. We are told of mysterious disasters that wiped out Skane and Hardhome, the latter explicitly involving fire.

There is an entire subplot about stone dragons, to be re-awakened by human sacrifice. We learn that the dragon-statues of Dragonstone are so amazingly realistic that they must have been made by a sculptor's art not known to modern men. We have explicit foreshadowings of such "statues" shimmering as though about to come to life. We are told that the volcanic caverns of Dragonstone are so deep and endless that they resist full exploration and anything can hide in them. And we have a mystery of Loras going to Dragonstone in the hopes of finding dragon eggs, and being burned in some mishap. Somewhat mysteriously, he has not been seen since, though he is apparently alive.

And then of course, there is a small pile of new hints in "The World of Ice and Fire."

Well if all you say is true, then GRRM has lied to us over and over again in GOT and the other 4 books, he made the pyromancers liars, and the omniscent POV for Dany, as well as Tyrion, Irri, Jhiqui, Aemon and everyone else.

What is the exact context and quote regarding Summer seeing a dragon??....I must have missed that....Lol oh ok, From CoK, Bran is in Summer's Head.....Summer is clearly seeing into the past or the future, not sure which, probably the past. Or are you suggesting there is a dragon running around the North in COK that only Summer can see???? I think Meera, Hodor or Jojen would have noticed a giant fire-breathing lizard if it was nearby.....

I have never seen any poster say 'the whole point of Dany's arc is for her to be the most special girl in the universe"...... oh except for the posters who hate her and are using that in an argument sans anyone actually having ever said it, which is interesting.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

No. No you did not. You established that saying that "for the first time in a century and a half" would've been clunky and sound bad. Your definition is something of a misunderstanding, I'm afraid. Perhaps it's technically correct, but it still would leave GRRM using a word in a way it simply isn't.

"For the first time in over a hundred years" is what a perfectly correct statement would read. As it is, the statement is dramatic exaggeration, though I suppose it's possible that the last, stunted dragons were mutes or something. There's nothing wrong with it being dramatic, though; it's meant to be. And it's not even an exaggeration in the sense that it's almost certainly true for the continent Dany is currently on. But hundreds is just not used for less than two hundred.

I'm not saying you're wrong - as it happens, I mostly agree with you. Just picky about word usage. Anyway, I don't think there are any other normal dragons alive in the known world of ASOIAF - perhaps beyond where people can sail but that's canonically unreachable and so irrelevant. Jury's still out on ice dragons, and there could be eggs in a number of places. One or more of those could hatch but they'd be as useless as Dany's three were for most of book two.

Although... If Mel was right about dragons being stone on Dragonstone, backed up a bit by Shireen's dream... Petrified is not alive, that does conceivably work too. But I don't think they'll have a chance to go back and find out.

We did establish that the definition of the word hundreds = anything over 100. So the statement is correct.

My opinion about sentence structure has nothing to do with it, that was just my guess as to why he worded it that way.

Couldn't agree with the OP more. Dragon eggs certainly, "hibernating dragons" "stone dragons" or anything else is entirely made up and not supported by the book.

Edit: I also read the end of Danys chapter when she hatches dragons as omniscient.

Yes exactly.

[The King in Black]

I have never seen any poster say 'the whole point of Dany's arc is for her to be the most special girl in the universe"...... oh except for the posters who hate her and are using that in an argument sans anyone actually having ever said it, which is interesting.

You did start it by proclaiming that anybody who wondered whether dragons exist are so daenerys hating that their myopia has resulted in this.... you know, just saying.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

You did start it by proclaiming that anybody who wondered whether dragons exist are so daenerys hating that their myopia has resulted in this.... you know, just saying.

Is that what I said?

I think posters WANT there to be another dragon so that Dany will not be special in that respect.

Not really. And anyway, that was just one small reason for the thread. There are many others which make it true.

And like I said, I have seen many posts that flat out say, 'I don't want Dany to be the only one with dragons".

But I have never seen anyone say, 'The whole point of Dany's arc is for her to be the most special girl in the universe".

So even if I 'started it', at least I am using accurate statements, sorry if there is not a good counter-argument.

[The Dames do Moan]

My belief is that the dragon bones Dany found in the Red Waste were Cannibals.

Wasn't it said that he was last seen around the area of Asshai?

[The King in Black]

Is that what I said?

Not really. And anyway, that was just one small reason for the thread. There are many others which make it true.

And like I said, I have seen many posts that flat out say, 'I don't want Dany to be the only one with dragons".

But I have never seen anyone say, 'The whole point of Dany's arc is for her to be the most special girl in the universe".

So even if I 'started it', at least I am using accurate statements, sorry if there is not a good counter-argument.

I can now simply state that I have seen claims that people want daenerys to be most special girl in the universe, while never having seen people claim the former. This is useless, and I can't understand why this couldn't simply be an exercise in discussing possibility of existence of dragons ( which I myself believe is suspect by the way). Your premise itself is built on the wrong assumption that simply wondering whether dragons exist is in some way related to degrading daenerys's story arc.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I can now simply state that I have seen claims that people want daenerys to be most special girl in the universe, while never having seen people claim the former. This is useless, and I can't understand why this couldn't simply be an exercise in discussing possibility of existence of dragons ( which I myself believe is suspect by the way). Your premise itself is built on the wrong assumption that simply wondering whether dragons exist is in some way related to degrading daenerys's story arc.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/107722-cannibal-will-be-jons-dragonmount-crackpot/ like this thread.

I doubt the bolded very much.

My premise is not based on that one small statement, my premise is that we have been told for 5 books that these 3 are the only dragons, so it makes no sense to the story to change all that now and throw in some random dragon from left field. But if it makes you happy i will remove it, makes no difference to me in regards to proof on this topic.