A+J=T v. 2

[UnmaskedLurker]

I think that if someone is going to establish that Tyrion is Aerys' son, then they need to:

1. Prove that Aerys and Joanna could have conceived him

and

2. Prove that Tyrion has known Targaryen features or personality traits

I don't think #1 is likely, but the new book established that it was at least possible.

#2 is where most people try to make their case, and really, it can only work in conjunction with #1 because any "Targaryen" personality trait or feature could be applicable to many people without Targaryen blood. Like 'burnt bacon', for example.

Basically, I think it would be more prudent to start with proving #1 beyond a doubt and then start on using #2 to back up #1.

The issue I have with your approach is that I think it sets up an impossible standard for this type of mystery. This mystery is quite different than R+L=J in one important respect--part of the mystery is whether there is a mystery at all. In RLJ, we know that the identity of Jon's mother is a mystery--we are told this many times. We are then given outright red herrings for the identity (Wylla, Ashara, fisherwoman). I know that you know all of this particularly well (you know the RLJ analysis probably as well or better than anyone on the boards).

But if A+J=T is true, it is a completely different type of mystery because GRRM has not set it up as an explicit mystery. We are told that Tywin and Joanna are Tyrion's parents and most people will have no reason to give this fact a second thought. So the clues are going to be different and in some sense less definitive. GRRM is not going to give any clues that make it functionally impossible for Tywin to be the father, and any clues GRRM gives are going to be clues that could just be "coincidence" or explained in some other way. Once it becomes clear that definitive "proof" will not be given, a lower level of evidence needs to be considered.

So now let's look at your formula: (1) prove A&J could have conceived T and (2) show T with Targ traits. As much as anyone could expect GRRM to do these things, he has.

(1) GRRM has basically shown that Aerys and Joanna could have conceived Tyrion. Prior to ADWD, a few people speculated about Tyrion because GRRM dropped some hints about his looks and personality that did not really fit but there was no indication of any real connection between Aerys and Joanna. Then ADWD came out and Barristan is quoted as saying that Aerys would have married Joanna if he was not forced to marry his sister, and was so obsessed with Joanna that he was "inappropriate" at the bedding ceremony (probably overly handsy) and said something about wanting first rights. So this information ignited the AJT theories, but people continued to complain that Joanna was raising the twins at CR while Aerys was running kingdom in KL--no known occasion when they would be together. While this absence of proof was not really proof, it was a hole that needed to be filled in the plot. So GRRM makes sure to add in WOIAF that Joanna was in KL during the tourney of 272, the year before Tyrion is born. If that is not evidence that Aerys and Joanna could have conceived Tyrion, I don't know what more you would want from GRRM. He cannot make it any more explicit under the circumstances. But he does make it a little more specific--he adds all the rumors about Aerys and Joanna having had an affair when younger (potentially leading to Joanna's dismissal from service--although there are other theories about why she left her service to Rhaella). GRRM also has Aerys make an insulting remark about Joanna's breasts when she arrives at court for the tourney. What more do you want from GRRM to set up a situation in which Aerys has a sexual desire for Joanna and was in KL at a time that could have been the conception for Tyrion? Anything more definitive would make the issue too obvious--GRRM does not want it to be too clear that Tywin is not really the bio-dad. But as far as proving that Aerys and Joanna could have conceived Tyrion, I think we have pretty good evidence. We are not going to get absolute proof prior to the "big reveal" but we have gotten more evidence than I would have even expected.

(2) GRRM has given Tyrion quite a few Targ traits. He gives him pale bond hair with black streaks. No other Lannister has this hair coloring. The pale blond is perhaps closer to Targ sliver than Lannister gold, and the black streaks could come from Bertha Blackwood (another WOIAF revelation) whereas we have no known source of black streaks on the Lannister side. We are thrown off the trail a bit by finding out that Tommen has pale blond hair but then we find out that as he ages, it becomes golden, like the rest of the Lannisters (Tyrion remains pale as an adult). Tyrion has mismatched eyes--not really a Targ trait but possibly an allusion to Shiera, a Targ bastard. We have Tryion's fascination with dragons and dragonfire and dragon bones. No other character is shown having such an interest in dragons at that level. We have him described to have been born with deformities (perhaps just unfounded rumors)--but again, even if not true, an allusion to the deformed Targ miscarriages. GRRM has given Tyrion as much of a connection to being a Targ as GRRM might dare without making the situation too obvious.

Then, to top all of that off, we have multiple quotes that could be allusions to Tyrion as a Targ. I know you are a fan of collecting these type of quotes (your sig being a big give away on that score). So GRRM gives the observant reader clues like Tyrion's shadow being like a king, and Tywin saying Tyrion is no son of Tywin's and Tyrion saying that dwarfs are bastards. Do you think all of these quotes are just there for other reasons or just there are a big red herring?

Then we have other clues which to me are the most important--the connections among Jon, Dany and Tyrion (#19 in the OP list). We are pretty sure that Dany and Jon are related (aunt/nephew). With all the connections among these three characters, and two pretty much assumed to be related, the chances that Tyrion is also related seems quite high. These similarities also suggest to me they are likely to be the three heads of the dragon. In my view someone who is 100% "lion" will not be described in a prophecy as being a head "of the dragon." For me, I started to find the AJT theory persuasive when I realized that all three had mothers die in childbirth. That fact alone made me incredibly suspicious. When I considered that making Tyrion a Targ could be critical to him being a head of the dragon and/or ride a dragon, I became not quite convinced absolutely, but thinking it was more likely to be true than not. I am not sure we will get to 100% certainty before the "big reveal" but the evidence is fairly strong.

If you wait for the level of proof provided for R+L=J, then you are going to have to wait for the "big reveal" (or lack of a big reveal) to find out. And I have never claimed that the proof for A+J=T is definitive in the way that the R+L=J proof happens to be. So as I have said, I am not 100% convinced that A+J=T is true, as GRRM has potentially given himself an "out" if it is not true. But to merely ignore all of this evidence because there is no "proof" is holding this mystery to a standard that it can never be expected to meet given the nature of the mystery.

[Mladen]

And who is to say that the Conqueror trio's choice of a sigil didn't also allude to the Promised Prince prophecy, as well as to their own triumvirate? In fact, the prophecy may have played a part in their decision to conquer and unite Westeros in the first place.

Because (TWOIAF spoilers)

Heraldic banners had long been a tradition amongst the lords of Westeros, but such had never been used by the dragonlords of old Valyria. When Aegon’s knights unfurled his great silken battle standard, with a red threeheaded dragon breathing fire upon a black field, the lords took it for a sign that he was now truly one of them, a worthy high king for Westeros.

The quote not only shows that the creation of the sigil was more or less political move to represent Targaryens as truly Westerosi. The argument indeed can be made in both directions, but the origin of this sigil shows far mundane reasons than some sort of prophecy/vision thing. The three-headed dragon thing could mean thousand things, and while one of the option certainly is this thread's premise, thing is that there are few more options that are wide open.

[Weirdo]

...maybe GRRM put that in the text merely as an "Easter Egg" or sorts to associate Tyrion with something burnt--reminiscent of the dragons.

If Tyrion ever suspected himself of being a Targaryen, then things like the bacon, the hot baths he likes, the lions in the pit, would be excellent red herrings, leading him (and us) down the primrose path, as they say. But he never thinks such a thing, to my recollection. We may be fooling ourselves, but as of yet, Tyrion isn't fooling himself, which makes me suspect that the presence of Easter eggs give weight to the theory.

[sj4iy]

The issue I have with your approach is that I think it sets up an impossible standard for this type of mystery. This mystery is quite different than R+L=J in one important respect--part of the mystery is whether there is a mystery at all. In RLJ, we know that the identity of Jon's mother is a mystery--we are told this many times. We are then given outright red herrings for the identity (Wylla, Ashara, fisherwoman). I know that you know all of this particularly well (you know the RLJ analysis probably as well or better than anyone on the boards).

It's only impossible because there's very little information to support it.

I have no problem with vague theories...I simply don't believe in them as a rule. I require strong evidence supporting a theory before I will believe it.

[Lord Varys]

Mladen,

the Gyldayn quote does not tell us who designed the Targaryen banner, nor why Aegon and his siblings decided to go with that instead with just one dragon, or three dragons (Balerion, Meraxes, Vhagar), the Citadel of Dragonstone, or something else. Gyldayn just tells us that the Targaryens now had a banner of their own, and that this had an effect on the Aegon's followers. It does not tell us anything about the origin of the sigil itself.

If the Targaryens were privy to some prophecy about a promised prince and 'three heads of the dragon', this could explain why they chose that sigil rather than something else.

Tyrion thing:

Actually, this would just be variation of the Jon Snow theme. Jon bay be a trueborn son disguised as bastard, Tyrion a bastard disguised as a trueborn son. This thing really is dominant in the series. The mystery surrounding Cersei's and Robert's children, Aegon, Gilly's son posing as Craster's, and Craster's son possibly being disguised as Sam's non-existent bastard (and the whole story being Jon Snow's brainchild!).

TWoIaF shows us that things can be hushed up rather effectively if no one ever speaks up about them: Aenys' true heritage, Rhaenyra's sons by Laenor, the Unworthy founding House Lothston, the Unworthy continuing the Plumm line, etc.

[UnmaskedLurker]

It's only impossible because there's very little information to support it.

I have no problem with vague theories...I simply don't believe in them as a rule. I require strong evidence supporting a theory before I will believe it.

Well, personally, I think the level of evidence is fairly strong, as strong as GRRM could give under the circumstances. And I don't "believe it" in the sense of "knowing" it is true. I merely think the evidence is strong enough that it seems more likely than not. Why else does GRRM put in all of these clues if they amount to nothing?

[sj4iy]

Well, personally, I think the level of evidence is fairly strong, as strong as GRRM could give under the circumstances. And I don't "believe it" in the sense of "knowing" it is true. I merely think the evidence is strong enough that it seems more likely than not. Why else does GRRM put in all of these clues if they amount to nothing?

I don't think there are very many clues, tbh. As I stated before, liking burnt or spicy food, hot baths and dragons aren't actual characteristics associated with Targaryens in general.

I think that there's enough doubt around these clues to suggest a red herring. And really, I think the evidence is stronger that he is Tywin's son because he and his father are described over and over again as similar in personality. That's what made their relationship so great. That's part of what made Tyrion's character so great. It would all ring very hollow if it turned out that he was never related to Tywin in the first place.

[Mladen]

The issue I have with your approach is that I think it sets up an impossible standard for this type of mystery.

I am sorry, but inability to answer on certain raised questions isn't missing the type of the mystery, since we are all rather well acquainted with differences between this one and RLJ mystery. The problem with this is very simple, it simply doesn't answer on the question what does it bring to the story. Yes, you made argument that secret parentage will make Tyrion worthy or special to become a dragonrider, thus crating a existential purpose for this theory. But, if we take that out from this, you are left with basically nothing. This theory without dragonriding thing is totally empty, regardless of all the clues and conjectures.

One thing that this theory intentionally omits, due to existential reasons, is abundance of little things regarding dragonriding. He introduced us with dragonhorn. What would be the point of dragonhorn, if we have already set in stone three Targaryen riders? What is the point of Nettles thing left ambiguous, basically pointing that the more you know dragon, the better chances are to control it, if we are bound to have three Targaryen dragonriders? What is the point of Martin emphasizing Tyrion's knowledge of dragonlore, or the fact that third head doesn't need to be Targaryen? What is the point of such strong deconstruction of "chosen hero" trope? Problem many people have with this theory isn't in fact that it isn't possible (I mean, EVERYTHING can be possible), but in the simple fact that the theory, or its purpose, is in discord with some rather strong themes of this series. Basically, if we are in WOT Universe, I would say kudos, because this type of things works in Jordan's universe so brilliantly. In Martin's, alas, things are different. And that is why this theory is being attacked on structural, thematic and meta level, rather than on "is it possible or not".

I also personally believe that there is zero skepticism in believers' of this theory. The overwhelming desire to equate it with R+L=J, looking narrowly at some things (I mean, WOIAF even strengthen my belief that nothing happen in 272AL between Aerys and Joanna. Offensively commenting woman's breasts in front of her children is not a foreplay, by any definition of the world.) and working on a premise that is far from certain. All of that simply allows too much objective criticism towards this theory, and response has usually been circumvented to premise that, even the strongest believers in theory, has to be acknowledged by as solely one of the options.

That being said, if Martin decides to go this way (or, to be more precise, if he has already decided), then the theory is valid and we will be all be "well done". But, given the previous 5 installments, I am seriously doubting it.

Mladen,

the Gyldayn quote does not tell us who designed the Targaryen banner, nor why Aegon and his siblings decided to go with that instead with just one dragon, or three dragons (Balerion, Meraxes, Vhagar), the Citadel of Dragonstone, or something else. Gyldayn just tells us that the Targaryens now had a banner of their own, and that this had an effect on the Aegon's followers. It does not tell us anything about the origin of the sigil itself.

If the Targaryens were privy to some prophecy about a promised prince and 'three heads of the dragon', this could explain why they chose that sigil rather than something else..

I would agree that we don't know exact origin of the sigil, but Gyldayn is very much into believing the political background of the creation of the sigil. I am inclined to believe that sigil is simply product of Aegon's political aspirations since the prophecy existed for quite some time, completely independent of the sigil, or idea of three-headed dragon. Although, I do assume that the number 3 possibly had some relevance in the prophecy.

[Hangover of the Morning]

Maybe I am not a very astute reader but I simply don't see any Targaryen qualities in Tyrion's appearance or personality.

He has the quintessential Lannister blonde hair even if the shade is not the same as his siblings. Maybe Tywin and/or Joanna had pale blonde hair two. I know that "genetics" don't exactly work in Westeros but I would still find it ridiculous if somehow every Lannister had the exact same shade of hair. Making them all slightly different makes it a bit more realistic. Do the Tyrells have all exactly the same hue of brown hair? George gave all the Targs purple eyes but even their shade varies from violet to lilac.

The reference to Bertha Blackwood is so random that it's not even worth commenting. Some of Tywin's and Joanna's ancestors were almost certainly black-haired, unless the Lannisters were practicing direct incest for generations.

On a side note, Gerold Dayne has pale blonde hair with black streaks and dark, almost black eyes. Does it mean that Tyrion is a Dayne?

Mismatched eyes are not a Targaryen trait (I know the OP said it) even though long time ago there was one Targaryen bastard who had mismatched eyes (though completely different colour). It can't be used as a clue. There's nothing to suggest that mismatched eyes are more prevalent in the Targaryen family than any other.

Intrest in dragons means absolutely zero. It's like wanting to be an astronaut when you're a kid. Doesn't mean you're Neil Armstrong's love child.

If Tyrion more than anything enjoyed basking on the sun or gardening would it make him a secret Martelll or Tyrell respectively?

I feel that any of the so called "evidence" or "clue" has a much more logical and probable explanation. Piling them up and adding ridiculous ones (burnt bacon) on top doesn't make it any more likely.

It's like the High Septon = Howland Read all over again, though I grant you, this theory is 1000 x more solid. The author of the HS = HR collected an enormous amount of evidence (pages and pages of direct clues) making it look like it can't simply all be a coincidence. But not a single one of these clues held any water under the scrutiny of logic so no matter how many allusions and clues there were, the theory was completely flawed on the fundamental level.

Again, I am asking what Tyrion = Aerys' bastard add to the story besides possibly allowing Tyrion to become a dragon rider. Firstly, we don't know if that's what George has in plans for his favourite character and second, we are not sure yet if being a Targaryen is indeed a necessary prerequisite for riding a dragon.

[Weirdo]

...liking burnt or spicy food, hot baths and dragons aren't actual characteristics associated with Targaryens in general...

I think the evidence is stronger that he is Tywin's son because he and his father are described over and over again as similar in personality. That's what made their relationship so great. That's part of what made Tyrion's character so great. It would all ring very hollow if it turned out that he was never related to Tywin in the first place.

Doesn't Dany like spicy food, hot baths and dragons? She's only one Targ, granted. I would venture that liking dragons is a general characteristic of the Targaryens, and the food does seems to get spicier as we head south in this world.

But I find the Tywin/Tyrion relationship really rich too, and I think it is only deepened knowing that Tywin may have spent his whole life with a gnawing doubt about both Tyrion and his beloved dead wife. If he can't bring himself to despise Joanna for her infidelity, he would settle for despising the child, despite his talents and their shared predilection for skullduggery.

[Mithras]

2. I don't think Euron was born with mismatched eyes.

So how did he end up with one black and one blue eye? Targaryen bastard wannabe?

[Weirdo]

...Offensively commenting woman's breasts in front of her children is not a foreplay...

Not to you, maybe, but this is Aerys we're talking about!

[Mladen]

Not to you, maybe, but this is Aerys we're talking about!

Perhaps to him, but what about her? You need two for a tango.

[sj4iy]

Doesn't Dany like spicy food, hot baths and dragons? She's only one Targ, granted. I would venture that liking dragons is a general characteristic of the Targaryens, and the food does seems to get spicier as we head south in this world.

Liking dragons is a general characteristic of ALL kids. Especially in Westeros. They are the superheroes of Westeros, and we see that kids like Tyrion, Robb, Jon, Bran, etc all grow up wanting to be a Targaryen with a dragon. There's no discrimination there. It's very generalized and has nothing at all to do with their blood.

As far as spicy food or hot baths, I don't see any sort of pattern amongst Targaryens that suggests it is a feature of those with Targaryen blood. We have both Aemon and Jon featured quite prominently, and neither ever profess a liking for either.

But I find the Tywin/Tyrion relationship really rich too, and I think it is only deepened knowing that Tywin may have spent his whole life with a gnawing doubt about both Tyrion and his beloved dead wife. If he can't bring himself to despise Joanna for her infidelity, he would settle for despising the child, despite his talents and their shared predilection for skullduggery.

I don't think that had Tywin had ANY DOUBTS WHATSOEVER about Tyrion that he would have left him alive. If there were even one sliver of a doubt, Tyrion would have been killed. The only reason Tywin let him live was because he truly believes him to be a Lannister.

No one can ever convince me that Tywin, if he had even a hint of a doubt that Tyrion was Aerys, would have let Tyrion live and treated him like his son. That's not the kind of man Tywin is.

[Dofs]

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.

9. Well, when I read this for the first time, I didn't see anything ambiguous in it. And still don't see, as Tyrion is a small man, not a dragon according to Moqorro. As Moqorro saw a vision of this, he couldn't really see Tyrion as a dragon and as a small man at the same time in it. But if you see it as ambiguous, fine. But this vision still can serve as an evidence that Tyrion is not Aerys' son.

14. Well, even if he is a Targ bastard, I would still think that those parallels would be a pure accident, because these parallels are too different.

17. It's really a stretch, even if Tyrion is revealed as Aerys' bastard. His two heads, imo, represent purely his contradicting feelings towards Jaime. As it was him that Tyrion was killing, when he found out that his second head was crying.

[Mithras]

Rape or consentual sex do not agree with the text. To make this theory work, you should completely redefine Tywin/Joanna and Aerys. That is not how theories are supposed to work.

[Weirdo]

Perhaps to him, but what about her? You need two for a tango.

Again, this is Aerys. And we don't know much about her character traits, yet.

[Weirdo]

Liking dragons is a general characteristic of ALL kids. Especially in Westeros. They are the superheroes of Westeros, and we see that kids like Tyrion, Robb, Jon, Bran, etc all grow up wanting to be a Targaryen with a dragon. There's no discrimination there. It's very generalized and has nothing at all to do with their blood.

As far as spicy food or hot baths, I don't see any sort of pattern amongst Targaryens that suggests it is a feature of those with Targaryen blood. We have both Aemon and Jon featured quite prominently, and neither ever profess a liking for either.

I don't think that had Tywin had ANY DOUBTS WHATSOEVER about Tyrion that he would have left him alive. If there were even one sliver of a doubt, Tyrion would have been killed. The only reason Tywin let him live was because he truly believes him to be a Lannister.

No one can ever convince me that Tywin, if he had even a hint of a doubt that Tyrion was Aerys, would have let Tyrion live and treated him like his son. That's not the kind of man Tywin is.

He indulges in denial about Cersai and Jaime, because he doesn't want to admit the truth, no? It also suits his ends - maybe he and Aerys regarded Tyrion as a hostage.. But you are right, this is the weakest link in the chain.

However, I think it's just as likely that Tywin loved his wife too much to admit the truth to himself about Tyrion.

Great, now I'm late for work.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Liking dragons is a general characteristic of ALL kids. Especially in Westeros. They are the superheroes of Westeros, and we see that kids like Tyrion, Robb, Jon, Bran, etc all grow up wanting to be a Targaryen with a dragon. There's no discrimination there. It's very generalized and has nothing at all to do with their blood.

As far as spicy food or hot baths, I don't see any sort of pattern amongst Targaryens that suggests it is a feature of those with Targaryen blood. We have both Aemon and Jon featured quite prominently, and neither ever profess a liking for either.

I don't think that had Tywin had ANY DOUBTS WHATSOEVER about Tyrion that he would have left him alive. If there were even one sliver of a doubt, Tyrion would have been killed. The only reason Tywin let him live was because he truly believes him to be a Lannister.

No one can ever convince me that Tywin, if he had even a hint of a doubt that Tyrion was Aerys, would have let Tyrion live and treated him like his son. That's not the kind of man Tywin is.

Finally, we get to the core of your objection. We really don't know what Tywin would have done. Prior to finding out about Shae, I think most readers would have thought it unlikely Tywin would have such a whore--incompatible with his personality (but it wasn't). Tywin could not be sure, and the belief against kinslaying is strong. I think it quite plausible that Tywin would not risk killing his own son even if Tywin suspected Tyrion was not really his son.

I don't think there are very many clues, tbh. As I stated before, liking burnt or spicy food, hot baths and dragons aren't actual characteristics associated with Targaryens in general.

I think that there's enough doubt around these clues to suggest a red herring. And really, I think the evidence is stronger that he is Tywin's son because he and his father are described over and over again as similar in personality. That's what made their relationship so great. That's part of what made Tyrion's character so great. It would all ring very hollow if it turned out that he was never related to Tywin in the first place.

The personality issue proves nothing. GRRM very well could be demonstrating that personality is often a "nurture" and not a "nature" trait. Tyrion tried to get his father's approval and wanted to be like his father. That alone is enough to explain why it is emphasized that they are alike. And it is a red herring for what? It is never explicitly stated, unlike most red herrings. And what is the "true solution" that is being distracted from by this red herring?

[ssls6]

Didn't Tywin mention that dwarves are normally left out to die but Joanna begged him not to before dying? I don't know why that sticks in my mind.

Tywin is clearly a bit blind when it comes to family. He did not notice Jaime and Cerse relationship.