A+J=T v. 2

[Lord Varys]

Mladen,

I'd consider all the people with magic abilities 'special' in this 'magical sense'.

As to the right drop: To become a dragonrider you have also have enough courage to not let the beast see your fear when you trying to mount it. Drogon nearly killed Dany, so this is always a possibility. Indeed, a large percentage of the population may have a drop of Targaryen blood through Aegon the Unworthy, but is that going to matter? No, because they may not even know that this is the case, and thus they most likely will not try to mount a dragon even if they chance upon a riderless dragon - which is not likely right now.

Considering that the Valyrian dragonlords began the practice of incest we have to consider the idea that 'the purity of blood' also matters in the sense that it probability that you become a dragonrider drops considerably if the dragonlord family allows that the blood becomes too diluted. The dragonlords most likely wanted that all their sons and daughters can claim a dragon, not just one in ten, or one in a hundred.

If that is the case then the chance that some descendant of Aegon IV who has only a drop of dragon blood through him is not all that likely to have 'the right drop of blood' since we know that pretty much all of the incest-born Targaryens from Aegon I to Aegon III had 'the right drop' to become dragonriders, and some of them (Aemond, Helaena, Viserys I) claimed older, foul-tempered dragons like Vhagar or Balerion.

And the whole point of the dragonseeds (and, perhaps, of Jace, Luke, Joff, and Aenys I) is that you can become a dragonrider if you are born on the wrong side of the blanket (or are of bastard-descent).

In essence, it was the power of the dragons which made the Valyrians 'special', not the other way around (although the magical connection between the dragonlords and their dragons is clearly lasting).

Knight Of Winter,

1. I think I've already addressed that point. Note though that the a descendant of another Valyrian dragonlord family may not be able to claim a Targaryen dragon - and thus all the Volantene and Lysene nobles with no Targaryen blood may actually have no chance to claim a Targaryen dragon.

2. Quentyn had a drop of Targaryen blood. He had a chance and he may have failed. But one should note that he was killed by Rhaegal, the dragon he overlooked, not by Viserion, the one he was trying to claim. If Rhaegal had not been there he may have succeeded.

3. TWoIaF gives a lot of hints that the Valyrians may have created dragons or may have found a way to share the actual blood of dragons. Whether this is true or not is not clear yet, but it does not seem likely that just stumbling upon the dragons of the Fourteen Flames is the whole truth.

[UnmaskedLurker]

I want to clarify that I acknowledge that some of the "evidence" I presented may not really be evidence at all (like burnt bacon or illness immunity) but I wanted to lay out all the major clues referenced in prior threads and leave it to each person to decide the validity of each clue. So I freely acknowledge that one or more of the pieces of evidence might not really serve as evidence at all. We will have to wait and see.

As to whether a non-Targ can bond with a dragon, I think LV has laid it out pretty well that it is unlikely a non-Targ will have that ability, and I basically agree with his analysis. The dragonlord families did something to make dragon-bonding possible--most likely a form of blood magic. A dragonhorn is not going to allow Tyrion to ride a dragon (IMHO)--that would be way too mundane. In an interview, GRRM stated that the Targs engaged in incest to keep the bloodlines pure to better control dragons. GRRM would not have made that statement if Targ blood was not required to bond with a dragon, or at least the Targs certainly thought so. Maybe the Targs got it wrong and some magical horn can substitute for an ancient form or blood magic, but I highly doubt it.

[Weirdo]

I think it is compelling that in the pits of Meereen, Dany saves Tyrion from lions. Symbolically, it can be taken to mean that his Targaryen identity will be his salvation, even as his Lannister identity has always been a burden to him.

Jon Connington also saves him from drowning, and Connington is a Targ partisan.

Neither of these are conscious acts, since Dany doesn't know him, and JC would not suspect him of having Targ blood, but both acts could be read as symbols, or as fate: Tyrion's fortunes improve as he champions the Targaryen claim.

[Dofs]

Well, the theory definitely got its boost but some proofs your listed here are a very big stretch and don't prove anything at all:

9. Moqorro’s vision—“Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of it all.” (ambiguous whether Tyrion is an additional dragon or just among the other dragons)

12. Only character to have contact with both Dany (known Targ) and Jon (strongly suspected to be a Targ)

14 Similarities to Bloodraven, a Great Bastard: (i) distinct marking (mismatched eyes / huge red birthmark); (ii) mutilation in defense of royals (cut nose / missing eye); (iii) capable rulers but hated nonetheless; (iv) arrested on false accusations of treason; and (v) kinslayers.

17. Dreams he has two heads and kills Lannisters, while one head is laughing and one is crying (is the laughing head Targ and the crying head Lannister?)

9. I don't see how you can claim that it is a proof that Tyrion is Targaryen. Moqorro clearly makes a difference between dragons and Tyrion. If anything, this is an argument that Tyrion is not, in fact, son of Aerys.

12. That's a streeeeetch

13. Again, a big stretch, not to mention that Bloodraven was justly arrested

17. I have no idea how Tyrion having to heads in the dream hints at his Targaryen heritage, sorry. That seems like an argument for the sake of the argument

[Lord Varys]

A really important feature in the whole dragonbonding thing is also the fact that you have to show no fear. If you know you are a incest-born Targaryen, or have a lot of Targaryen blood, the fact that lots and lots of Targaryens have successfully claimed dragons will it make somewhat easier to overcome your fear - especially if your parents, siblings, and kin are dragonriders, too, and you have grown up with the creatures.

That thing in itself should make it all but impossible that some great-great-great-grandchild of Aegon IV suddenly decides he/she wants to become a dragonrider, or manages the courage to try it, even if he/she actually would have 'the right drop'.

I see about three possibilities for Tyrion to become a dragonrider:

1. An accidental encounter with one of the dragons (Viserion) during the coming battle. Tyrion will have to try to jump on the dragon's back or die. Afterwards, he is a dragonrider. This confirms for him his true heritage (and Barristan later fills in the bits).

2. Barristan tells Tyrion the truth about his parents after the battle, and this results in his half-voluntary, half-forced attempt to claim a dragon to prevent Viserion or Rhaegal to continue to wreak havoc in the city. The success may also be Tyrion's entry ticket into Barristan's/Dany's inner circle (as an equal, not some guy you can pump for information),

3. Something involving Dragonbinder. But this is much less likely as I'd be very surprised if the horn would actually work a second time on the same riderless dragon. Victarion has commanded that Dragonbinder be blown during the battle, and this will most likely cause something. Either one dragon will end up with Victarion, or the dragon hearing the sound will run amok, or something else will happen. The idea that he'll fly straight to Euron who has prepared the horn for this is a stretch but not unlikely.

Moqorro:

He knows more than he tells Tyrion when he is talking to him. He pretty much knows everything what's going to happen to anyone on the ship. If he has foreseen that Tyrion will become a dragonrider (and how), and if knows that this event will coincide with his understanding that he is a Targaryen bastard, he would not tell him that, or would he?

He would not, especially if this was a version of the future he wants to occur (and is there to cause).

[Weirdo]

Moqorro's statement is a bit ambiguous, but it seems to me he is listing Tyrion as one of the dragons he sees in the flames. It doesn't matter that he refers to Tyrion as a small man - most of the dragons he is referring to are also men, I think. He says dragons old and young, for instance, and Dany's actual dragons are all young, so the old dragon must be a man, Aemon for instance.

[Consigliere]

Moqorro's statement is a bit ambiguous, but it seems to me he is listing Tyrion as one of the dragons he sees in the flames. It doesn't matter that he refers to Tyrion as a small man - most of the dragons he is referring to are also men, I think. He says dragons old and young, for instance, and Dany's actual dragons are all young, so the old dragon must be a man, Aemon for instance.

Well it's open to interpretation but I never read it that way. Seems to me that Moqorro differentiates Tyrion from the dragons when he say: “And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

[UnmaskedLurker]

Well, the theory definitely got its boost but some proofs your listed here are a very big stretch and don't prove anything at all:

9. I don't see how you can claim that it is a proof that Tyrion is Targaryen. Moqorro clearly makes a difference between dragons and Tyrion. If anything, this is an argument that Tyrion is not, in fact, son of Aerys.

12. That's a streeeeetch

13. Again, a big stretch, not to mention that Bloodraven was justly arrested

17. I have no idea how Tyrion having to heads in the dream hints at his Targaryen heritage, sorry. That seems like an argument for the sake of the argument

I agree that it is not clear that every one of these supposed clues are actual clues. I intended to be over-inclusive to give each person a chance to decide for himself or herself. But I will take a crack at the ones you point out.

9. I really think Moqorro's vision is stated in a way that is intentionally ambiguous. When he says "And you" it could be taken as Tyrion being a seventh dragon or merely that Tyrion is a man among the six dragons (or some people think two dragon described in three different ways, although I don't see it that way). I think it could be a clue, but I agree it could be consistent with Tyrion not being a Targ.

12. Maybe it is a stretch--it was mentioned in other threads that Tyrion is the only character so far to have contact with both Jon and Dany, and that fact appears to basically be true. It could symbolize Tyrion going from one unknown relative to another--or it could just be that GRRM is having his main characters interact. Again, I leave it to each person so decide if it is a clue or not.

14. There do seem to be some overlaps in the lives of Bloodraven and Tyrion, like history sort of repeating itself a bit. I think this information could be seen as a hint that Tyrion is really a Targ bastard. Of course, it might mean nothing (as with all of these clues), and some of the parallels might not be perfect. But if Tyrion is a Targ bastard, I actually do not think these parallels would be a pure accident.

17. I would have thought this symbolism would be fairly obvious. Rather than having two Lannister parents, as he believes (from only one house he would have only one head), he has a Lannister mother and a Targ father--two heads. As he dreams of killing Lannisters, one head laughs and the other cries. The head representing Aerys, his Targ side, laughs, and the one representing Joanna, his Lannister side, cries. I am not sure why you don't see the connection.

[Weirdo]

If Moqorro is using the same methods as Melisandre, then he probably isn't sure what it means himself, hence is ambiguous language (which is probably a habit for him). Whether or not he groups Tyrion with the dragons or is commencing a new bullet point, I find it significant that Tyrion and the Targaryens are appearing together in the same vision.

[Weirdo]

It's also interesting that Aemon also points out that Tyrion's small stature belies his significance.

[UnmaskedLurker]

If Moqorro is using the same methods as Melisandre, then he probably isn't sure what it means himself, hence is ambiguous language (which is probably a habit for him). Whether or not he groups Tyrion with the dragons or is commencing a new bullet point, I find it significant that Tyrion and the Targaryens are appearing together in the same vision.

It's also interesting that Aemon also points out that Tyrion's small stature belies his significance.

Welcome to the boards--Excellent observations. GRRM would never make it too obvious until he is ready for the "big reveal" so of course the wording of the vision is ambiguous. The point in my view is that no one clue alone proves anything. It is the accumulation of clues that all seem to point in the same direction that suggest that GRRM is pointing in a direction--A+J=T. It would be classic GRRM (IMHO) to have a quote like that which initially seems to put Tyrion separate from the dragons, but on closer examination might really be putting Tyrion as a seventh dragon.

[Weirdo]

Welcome to the boards--Excellent observations. GRRM would never make it too obvious until he is ready for the "big reveal" so of course the wording of the vision is ambiguous. The point in my view is that no one clue alone proves anything. It is the accumulation of clues that all seem to point in the same direction that suggest that GRRM is pointing in a direction--A+J=T. It would be classic GRRM (IMHO) to have a quote like that which initially seems to put Tyrion separate from the dragons, but on closer examination might really be putting Tyrion as a seventh dragon.

Thanks, glad to be here.

[Wouter]

Well it's open to interpretation but I never read it that way. Seems to me that Moqorro differentiates Tyrion from the dragons when he say: “And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

Moqorro's statement is very ambiguous, it can be taken both ways. Neither supports nor goes against the theory. It does indicate (again) that Tyrion is important, though; whether or not he himself has Targ blood, he is a mover and shaker among them.

Regarding the Targaryen blood: the reasoning is that Valyrian mages bonded specific bloodlines to specific dragons - which explains why bloodlines have to be kept pure. The magical "dragonmark" gen would then be passed down in the family, but maybe not to every individual member of that family (Martin could choose any rules, or non-rules, that he would want). It stands to reason then, that having a lot of dragonblood (like having 2 Targ parents, as Dany does) will give a better shot at possessing said "magical gen" then having very diluted Targ blood from an ancestor of Aegon IV times. Presumably, the farther away from "pure blood" (as it was when the mages were operating) one gets, the lesser chance of bonding a dragon.

By this reasoning, Euron may have the means to successfully bond a dragon: the horn (assuming it works), a brother to sacrifice and sorcerors to bind his own blood to it. I wonder if his ploy will be succesful.

[Mithras]

In my opinion, this theory has to be taken as seriously as the Jon Snow thing, especially in light of TWoIaF and ADwD. I was not really a fan of this one prior to ADwD, but I'd be really surprised if it turned out to be wrong.

No way :)

[Mladen]

In essence, it was the power of the dragons which made the Valyrians 'special', not the other way around (although the magical connection between the dragonlords and their dragons is clearly lasting).

Bolded partis basically the chicken/egg debate. It is unimportant what makes them special, it is entire "Valyrian supremacy" that is completely in contrition with some of the motifs of the series. With this, I am not rejecting the power of certain bloodlines, or better say, entire nations, but we shouldn't take anything for granted, especially when the rules are so ambiguous and open for discussion. Neither one of us can claim with certainty.

[Mithras]

Magic in the series does not necessarily mean that incest was practiced only for magical purposes.

Look at the Ptolemys. Their family tree can put shame to Targaryens. I doubt they practiced incest to keep the bloodline pure for some occultist reason.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Magic in the series does not necessarily mean that incest was practiced only for magical purposes.

Look at the Ptolemys. Their family tree can put shame to Targaryens. I doubt they practiced incest to keep the bloodline pure for some occultist reason.

GRRM said in an interview that the Targs practiced incest to keep the bloodlines pure and better control dragons. His words--not mine.

[Hangover of the Morning]

I just do not understand what Tyrion being Aerys' bastard adds to the story.

We already know that Aerys slept around and that he had the hots for Joanna. George already pulled one secret Targaryen (Aegon) out of the hat and has another big one coming (Jon). Not sure if he can do it effectively if we have Tyrion = Tarq reveal somewhere in between. One of the main aspects of Tyrion's story is his troubled relationship with his own family, particularly his father. Revealing that Tyrion's father is Aerys rather than Tywin is pointless since Joanna, Tywin and Aerys are all dead so there won't be any conflict or drama as a consequence.

A+J=T is possible but I highly doubt it. I am surprised that so many funs find the theory appealing.

[Chaircat Meow]

I just do not understand what Tyrion being Aerys' bastard adds to the story.

We already know that Aerys slept around and that he had the hots for Joanna. George already pulled one secret Targaryen (Aegon) out of the hat and has another big one coming (Jon). Not sure if he can do it effectively if we have Tyrion = Tarq reveal somewhere in between. One of the main aspects of Tyrion's story is his troubled relationship with his own family, particularly his father. Revealing that Tyrion's father is Aerys rather than Tywin is pointless since Joanna, Tywin and Aerys are all dead so there won't be any conflict or drama as a consequence.

A+J=T is possible but I highly doubt it. I am surprised that so many funs find the theory appealing.

There will be internal conflict/introspection from Tyrion as he wrestles with the question of whether he's really Tywin's son. That's what a lot of his DwD story is about anyway. There is also potential for drama/conflict with Dany and Jon about his parentage.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

I just do not understand what Tyrion being Aerys' bastard adds to the story.

We already know that Aerys slept around and that he had the hots for Joanna. George already pulled one secret Targaryen (Aegon) out of the hat and has another big one coming (Jon). Not sure if he can do it effectively if we have Tyrion = Tarq reveal somewhere in between. One of the main aspects of Tyrion's story is his troubled relationship with his own family, particularly his father. Revealing that Tyrion's father is Aerys rather than Tywin is pointless since Joanna, Tywin and Aerys are all dead so there won't be any conflict or drama as a consequence.

A+J=T is possible but I highly doubt it. I am surprised that so many funs find the theory appealing.

For some of us at least, it is not so much about adding to the story as it is simply providing Tyrion with the ability to ride a dragon, which would then affect the story a whole lot.