Spoilery about Targaryen End Game?

[OmnomnomPomelo]

I think we can read a lot about Targaryens coz they were involved in Westeros' life for 300 years and they generated the most conflicts.

Well, I really hope that Jon won't even get near the Iron Throne. I think the best would be if he stops the Others' invasion during what he disappears forever. So then years and decades will pass, everybody forgets about what happened just like with the Long Night,and people will only remember the hero's name: Jon Snow (just like Azor Ahai).

Also I'm still with the scenario in which Dany will die during childbirth at the end, and her child(ren) will get only Dragonstone and maybe the "Crownlands".

And for "Aegon" I could imagine that he's a Blackfyre, and either will die before the end or somehow meets and lives with Sansa after the end, but not as the one king on the Iron Throne...give the Iron Throne and King's Landing to the wildfire.

[The Wolf Lord's Daughter]

Excellent list of characters with probable Targaryen blood.

Uh, no.

Arya, Bran, Sansa: The Stark lineage in the World book goes back more than 200 years and there are no Targaryens in sight. They mostly married other Starks or Northern houses. Plus, if the Starks had any Targaryen blood in them, it would have been mentioned, the way it was for the Arryns, Baratheons, Velyarons, Hightowers and even the lords of Tarth.

Jaime, Tyrion: The Lannister family tree similarly shows no Targaryens and no Lannister-Targaryen marriage is ever mentioned. The World book also confirmed that Jaime and Cersei couldn't be Aerys' children as Joanna was at Casterly Rock and Aerys at KL during their conception. I still am not convinced that Tyrion is Aerys' child.

Theon: Again, no Greyjoy had married a Targaryen.

[Big Daddy]

I'm all for more Targaryen supplemental material. To me they're the most interesting house and I've enjoyed how fleshed out they are with their history. I enjoy all of the good things as well as the unbelievable stupidity that has come from them. How can anyone NOT love a family history filled with guys like Aegon the Unworthy, the Blackfyres, an a guy who drinks wildfire?

I'm definitely up for more. And I hope for a new Targ dynasty on the Iron Throne at the end of the series.

[Acnologia Targaryen]

I'm all for more Targaryen supplemental material. To me they're the most interesting house and I've enjoyed how fleshed out they are with their history. I enjoy all of the good things as well as the unbelievable stupidity that has come from them. How can anyone NOT love a family history filled with guys like Aegon the Unworthy, the Blackfyres, an a guy who drinks wildfire?

I'm definitely up for more. And I hope for a new Targ dynasty on the Iron Throne at the end of the series.

You forgot to put sarcasm in parenthesis :cool4:

[The Fresh PtwP]

-Illyrio foreshadowing

-clanky Dragon analogy

-golden company supporting Aegon

-unlikeliness of escape from KL

-The fact there already is a son of Rhaegar walking around

-miles of backstory on the cadet branch of House targaryen

-mummers Dragon prophecy

Against

- word of a known bullshitter

I don't understand how that's evidence, never did (especially that sign...like what?). I left the two that to me actually pertain to the situation. Btw I think Aegon is real, but since I'm not GRRM I'm not going to call some else's opinion delusional because newsflash: None of us know for sure.

Back on topic. The dragons, IMO are making a comeback, if for no other reason than the true wildcard (the small folk) have had it with the other beasts in the woods. I think we're leading to another Targ empire.

[Lord Lannister]

From a bastard line stretching 150 years back

Considering the Targ family tree is virtually a single trunk with few branches stretching back 300 years, I'd say a bastard branch with a few more genes in the pool is an improvement.

[Eiko Dragonhorn]

Uh, no.

Arya, Bran, Sansa: The Stark lineage in the World book goes back more than 200 years and there are no Targaryens in sight. They mostly married other Starks or Northern houses. Plus, if the Starks had any Targaryen blood in them, it would have been mentioned, the way it was for the Arryns, Baratheons, Velyarons, Hightowers and even the lords of Tarth.

Jaime, Tyrion: The Lannister family tree similarly shows no Targaryens and no Lannister-Targaryen marriage is ever mentioned. The World book also confirmed that Jaime and Cersei couldn't be Aerys' children as Joanna was at Casterly Rock and Aerys at KL during their conception. I still am not convinced that Tyrion is Aerys' child.

Theon: Again, no Greyjoy had married a Targaryen.

You know they don't have to have someone with the last name "Targaryen" in their lineage to have Targ blood right?

If Targs marry into the Arryns (which they did), and the Arryns marry into the Royces (likely as Royces are a major house of the Vale) and then the Royces marry into the Starks...

Do the Starks have Targ blood?

Get it now?

Or repeat same process with the Blackwoods. etc etc.

Like I said, there are literally hundreds of loose ends in the Targaryen family tree so going on the assumption that they've basically spread all around is far safer than going on the assumption that they haven't. Nobility marries nobility, that's just what they do.

[Rho'd Berth]

Yes, the Targaryens have been ruling for 300 years but the Starks have ruled for 8000! I guess I'm surprised that a history book has such a huge focuses on the monarchs and not nearly as much on the individual regions and wondering if we should see that as indication of which family is considered the important one.

The ancient Stark/Arryn/Lan the Clever/etc. stories are myths.

The recent Targaryen stories are actual history.

GRRM can't start writing about those myths, that'll destroy the mistique and the mysteries around them. They are and will remain what they are: old vague stories where nobody can be sure if they happened and how.

Any story on 'how the wall was created' only dumbes down the entire world of ice and fire.