Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

UnmaskedLurker

A+J=T v.6

Recommended Posts

 

As I always happily point out, the actual backbone of A+J=T theory is this as proved in your post once again:

 

Tyrion will ride a dragon.

Targ blood is necessary to ride one.

Three heads of the dragon are three dragonriders.

 

Ergo, Tyrion is a Targaryen and a head of the dragon.

 

You do see the amount of leaps here right?

 

I get the same feeling. People just assume that he will ride a dragon (because who else besides Jon and Dany? (I'm not even sure about Jon to be honest)). Because he will ride a dragon (assumption) he has targ (dragon) blood (assumption that this is required, however it is likely). And because he rides a dragon ánd has dragonblood he has to be one of the three heads (assumption again).

 

We don't know if he will ride a dragon

We don't know if you need dragon blood to ride a dragon (however, I have to agree its safe to assume you have to)

We don't know if it's required to 'ride a dragon' to become one of the three heads of the dragon.

We don't know if the three heads of the dragon are literally or figuratively.

 

Yet all these uncertainties are used to backup a theory. That's my entire problem with these 'clues' and all the arguments that are used. It's all assumption on top of other assumption. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a typo up there. George has said he has not yet written a scene involving Shireen's death yet, and would not comment on it considering that this would mean him spoiling his own books. Considering the fact that Shrieen is a tertiary character in the books (making it unlikely that he would put off writing her death scene until the very end of the books especially since it would have to be from Mel's POV), and considering the fact that show had Stannis kill her rather than Mel while sticking to Jon's assassination I see little reason to assume that Shireen or Theon will be in any way connected to whatever happens to Jon. The show would have to come up with another way to bring Jon back if the books have either a Shireen or Theon sacrifice for that. If it was Shireen than the show would have saved her sacrifice for the next season.

 

The whole point of a Shireen sacrifice is that her father is going to be desperate enough to do that. The show completely botched this a concept, but George most likely is going to save that moment for a point in Stannis' story when he really is desperate, not just stuck in a snowstorm.

 

Vic has now a burned and smoking arm. If Jon's body was healed magically in a similar fashion one would expect him to be transformed into some guy who is burned and smoking all over the place considering the amount of wounds Mel would have to heal this way. Magic has its price, and we know in what state Drogo was after he has been healed by blood magic. The chances that Jon Snow can cheat without any disfiguring or character-changing strings attached are very low if you ask me. But if his spirit is in Ghost then the core of him will survive relatively unchanged (although he might become a more savage kind of guy afterwards if he has to spend weeks or months in Ghost). That is the road George is going. And who knows, perhaps he don't has to be restored to his own body. If souls exist in Martinworld then Jon would be Jon whatever body he inhabited, and the whole concept of skinchangers taking over other human bodies permanently most likely hasn't only be introduced for the sake of Bran and Hodor.

 

Jon could even take over the body of a wight, or his own wightified body if that happens to him. That would be a rather unexpected twist but if George plans him to not survive the final battle against the Others then there would be no real reason to preserve his good looks or his own body. I don't really expect that to happen but it is a possibility how he might come back.

 

Claiming that Tyrion has to have Targaryen blood with Dragonbinder out there and about to become a plot point makes little sense. That thing could change the rules. But then, we don't know whether it will work on somebody who doesn't have Valyrian blood. But in any case - the hints for Tyrion's Targaryen heritage have nothing to do with our expectations that he might become a dragonrider. They are actually part of the books that have already been published. Just as all the hints towards Jon's real heritage - which also do not mean that he'll become a dragonrider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in any case - the hints for Tyrion's Targaryen heritage have nothing to do with our expectations that he might become a dragonrider.

 

Lol, really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As I always happily point out, the actual backbone of A+J=T theory is this as proved in your post once again:

 

Tyrion will ride a dragon.

Targ blood is necessary to ride one.

Three heads of the dragon are three dragonriders.

 

Ergo, Tyrion is a Targaryen and a head of the dragon.

 

You do see the amount of leaps here right?

 

I always felt like the backbone of the theory was:

 

- Tyrion is malformed, like many Targaryen babies

- Tyrion dreams about dragons

- "You are no son of mine.", "All dwarfs are bastards in their father's eyes" and other such quotes

- Aerys loved Joanna

 

None of this has to do with dragon-riding. That's just a consequence of the theory if it's true, not something to back it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This again is based on the assumption that he will ride a dragon. I don't like theories based on other assumptions.. 'Tyrion must be a Targ because I believe he will ride a dragon' doesn't really make a strong story. 

This theory is not based on the assumption that Tyrion is riding a dragon. But if this theory is true it will happen. So it is natural we speculate based on that assumption when we are predicting the future. Tyrion riding a dragon is also a motive for GRRM to have made Tyrion a son of Aerys so with so many people complaining about too many secret Targaryens a motive why GRRM might have done this is natural to bring up. But I was just answering a question why Selmy would tell this to Tyrion or what might happen later so it is strange you think the theory is only based on this. I was not talking about why I believe this will happen. The reasons to believe this theory are in the front page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mithras,

 

yes. I wasn't keep on that theory prior to ADwD myself. Back then there was no textual evidence for the idea that you have to have Targaryen/dragonlord blood to ride a dragon, and I really bought Tyrion as Tywin's biological son. Speculating that a character is somebody else's son without any real reason to do so is just silly. He could have become a dragonrider another way - say, with the help of that huge horn that was conveniently introduced in AFfC.

 

But the Joanna story in ADwD as well as TWoIaF really changed my mind. George doesn't give us rumors and gossip just to fill pages. Nobody cares whether Joanna had one or a hundred lovers if that's not relevant to the plot. And it can really be only relevant to the plot if one of her children - Tyrion, after TWoIaF, since the others are out of the equation - is Aerys'. While Tywin and Joanna's private life may be interesting for some people it is completely irrelevant for the story George is telling. Both Tywin and Joanna are dead now, so mentioning or talking about their past makes no sense unless it is relevant to the plot. I imagine Rickard and Lyarra's private life may have been interesting, too, yet George has yet to mention the name of Ned's mother in the books. That makes it rather unlikely that anything there is relevant to the plot.

 

Not to mention that Tywin is awfully present on everybody's mind despite the fact that he is dead. Not just as the overwhelming father figure, but also insofar as revelations about him are concerned. George clearly isn't done with the Lannister back story and is building up things for a huge twist there. Just as he is in regards to the Starks were the revelation of Jon's true parentage will also have a tremendous effect on his surviving siblings (if they ever find it out) as well as on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
I always felt like the backbone of the theory was:
 
- Tyrion is malformed, like many Targaryen babies
- Tyrion dreams about dragons
- "You are no son of mine.", "All dwarfs are bastards in their father's eyes" and other such quotes
- Aerys loved Joanna
 
None of this has to do with dragon-riding. That's just a consequence of the theory if it's true, not something to back it up.

If Tyrion was malformed the way several Targaryen children were, he would have been dead.
Nor is it stated that Aerys loved Joanna. Desired, lusted after.. never once did someone use the word love in canon to describe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This theory is not based on the assumption that Tyrion is riding a dragon. But if this theory is true it will happen. So it is natural we speculate based on that assumption when we are predicting the future. Tyrion riding a dragon is also a motive for GRRM to have made Tyrion a son of Aerys so with so many people complaining about too many secret Targaryens a motive why GRRM might have done this is natural to bring up. But I was just answering a question why Selmy would tell this to Tyrion or what might happen later so it is strange you think the theory is only based on this. I was not talking about why I believe this will happen. The reasons to believe this theory are in the front page.

 

If this theory is true, it's likely to happen, but not certain. And maybe it's natural to speculate based on that assumption, but IMO that doesn't fit in this topic. If you want to speculate on 'what happens if A+J=T is true', make a topic about that.

 

I guess we just need tWoW lol. 

 

If Tyrion was malformed the way several Targaryen children were, he would have been dead.
Nor is it stated that Aerys loved Joanna. Desired, lusted after.. never once did someone use the word love in canon to describe it.

 

Agreed on both points. Aerys always had a desire for several women, but that often was only for a short period of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Tyrion was malformed the way several Targaryen children were, he would have been dead.

 

Maybe noone ever tried to let one of the other malformed children live, maybe they were always just killed after they were born. Or maybe Tyrion was slightly less malformed than e.g. Maegor's monstrocities and thus survived. There are rumors, at least, about Tyrion having a tail among other things I don't recall at the moment. Those rumors didn't just come out of nowhere.

 

 

Nor is it stated that Aerys loved Joanna. Desired, lusted after.. never once did someone use the word love in canon to describe it.

 

You totally got hung up on one word there, you know what I meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe noone ever tried to let one of the other malformed children live, maybe they were always just killed after they were born. Or maybe Tyrion was slightly less malformed than e.g. Maegor's monstrocities and thus survived. There are rumors, at least, about Tyrion having a tail among other things I don't recall at the moment. Those rumors didn't just come out of nowhere.

 

The first part I see hightly unlikely, because some survived for a year or 2, so they weren't just killed of.

 

Those rumors can come out of nowhere. He was a dwarf of a high Lord! I don't know where you live, but I live in a small town and things like this get exaggerated all the time. It starts with; 'Have you heard; Lord Tywins kid is a Dwarf! He killed his mother when he was born!' That person tells it to the next one a bit different to make the story more interesting: 'Have you heard about Lord Tywin's new son? They said the little monster killed his mother!. The next time he actually is monster, instead of using the term offensive. And after that the little monster has a tail. It's not something weird, it's called gossiping and happens everywhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaehaerys II and Aegon II's Jaehaerys lived with mild deformities. Tyrion could well be part of that category rather than the other. And we also don't know anything about the four children of Jaehaerys I or Prince Aegon, the brother of Viserys I and Daemon. Did they die in childbirth or did they live a few years or were carried away by sickness before they reached adulthood? Some of them might have been deformed in some fashion, but Yandel would have had no need to mention that.

 

It is established that there were deformed Targaryens who lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe noone ever tried to let one of the other malformed children live, maybe they were always just killed after they were born. Or maybe Tyrion was slightly less malformed than e.g. Maegor's monstrocities and thus survived. There are rumors, at least, about Tyrion having a tail among other things I don't recall at the moment. Those rumors didn't just come out of nowhere.

 

Visenya's description, according to Mushroom;

When the babe at last came forth, she proved indeed a monster: a stillborn girl, twisted and malformed, with a hole in her chest where her heart should have been and a stubby, scaled tail. Or so Mushroom describes her.
 

Maegor's children:

What was expelled from her womb was a monstrosity, eyeless and twisted, and in his fury Maegor blamed and executed her midwives, septas, and the Grand Maester Desmond. 

 

She, too, became pregnant, and like Alys before her, she gave birth to a stillborn abomination said to have been born eyeless and with small wings. 

 

In 47 AC she was with child, but three moons before the child was due, her labor began, and from her womb came another stillborn monster. She did not survive the child for long.

 

And Rhaego:

“Monstrous,” Mirri Maz Duur finished for him. The knight was a powerful man, yet Dany understood in that moment that the maegi was stronger, and crueler, and infinitely more dangerous. “Twisted. I drew him forth myself. He was scaled like a lizard, blind, with the stub of a tail and small leather wings like the wings of a bat. When I touched him, the flesh sloughed off the bone, and inside he was full of graveworms and the stink of corruption. He had been dead for years.”

 

 

Visenya, Rhaego, and all of Maegor's children are described as stillborn. There's no possible way the child could have been saved after birth.. At birth, those children were already dead.

 

Compare that to Tyrion:

“And well you might, since you were said to have one, a stiff curly tail like a swine’s. Your head was monstrous huge, we heard, half again the size of your body, and you had been born with thick black hair and a beard besides, an evil eye, and lion’s claws. Your teeth were so long you could not close your mouth, and between your legs were a girl’s privates as well as a boy’s.”

 

Sounds rather different to me. Even the mentioning of the tail is different, as Tyrion's was not said to have been stubby or scaled, as Rhaego's and Visenya's.

 

And as Oberyn points out, everything was exaggerated. 

 

“Cersei even undid your swaddling clothes to give us a better look,” the Dornish prince continued. “You did have one evil eye, and some black fuzz on your scalp. Perhaps your head was larger than most... but there was no tail, no beard, neither teeth nor claws, and nothing between your legs but a tiny pink cock. [...]"

 

 

And we all know that the smallfolk especially love to talk about the worst concerning their lords, including Patchface fathering Shireen on Selyse Florent.

 

 

You totally got hung up on one word there, you know what I meant.

 

If you don´t mean that he loved her, you should say that he loved her. That seems logical.. There's quite a difference between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The first part I see hightly unlikely, because some survived for a year or 2, so they weren't just killed of.

 

Those rumors can come out of nowhere. He was a dwarf of a high Lord! I don't know where you live, but I live in a small town and things like this get exaggerated all the time. It starts with; 'Have you heard; Lord Tywins kid is a Dwarf! He killed his mother when he was born!' That person tells it to the next one a bit different to make the story more interesting: 'Have you heard about Lord Tywin's new son? They said the little monster killed his mother!. The next time he actually is monster, instead of using the term offensive. And after that the little monster has a tail. It's not something weird, it's called gossiping and happens everywhere. 

Are you thinking here of the children of Aerys II? They are not mentioned to have been malformed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The first part I see hightly unlikely, because some survived for a year or 2, so they weren't just killed of.

 

Those rumors can come out of nowhere. He was a dwarf of a high Lord! I don't know where you live, but I live in a small town and things like this get exaggerated all the time. It starts with; 'Have you heard; Lord Tywins kid is a Dwarf! He killed his mother when he was born!' That person tells it to the next one a bit different to make the story more interesting: 'Have you heard about Lord Tywin's new son? They said the little monster killed his mother!. The next time he actually is monster, instead of using the term offensive. And after that the little monster has a tail. It's not something weird, it's called gossiping and happens everywhere. 

 

But this isn't real life, it's a story created in some dude's mind. These rumors feel very much like Chekov's rumors. And we know that Cersei was told that Tyrion wouldn't survive particularly long because of his deformations, so it was kind of a miracle that he survived in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you thinking here of the children of Aerys II? They are not mentioned to have been malformed.

 

No I was pretty sure there were some malformed children in the targ line who only lived for a short while. But now you name Aerys II's children, iirc Rhaella had a lot of miscarriages and kids who lived short, but none of them were malformed, that's true. Maybe I mixed that info up with the malformed children in the Targ line.. 

 

Now I see your quotes and they refresh my memory. I guess all the malformed Targ children were stillborn.

 

But this isn't real life, it's a story created in some dude's mind. These rumors feel very much like Chekov's rumors. And we know that Cersei was told that Tyrion wouldn't survive particularly long because of his deformations, so it was kind of a miracle that he survived in the first place.

 

Rhaenys has given a good explanation above. As stated there, these are most likely smallfolk rumors, they love that. I even forgot about the Oberyn quote, even though I heard it again quite recently. 

 

‘It doesn’t matter’ she [Cersei] told us. ‘Everyone says he’s like to die soon. He shouldn’t even have lived this long.’

 

She was told he wouldn't live for very long, but I don't think it was a miracle. 

 

Edit: I made a mistake, corrected it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Tyrion was malformed the way several Targaryen children were, he would have been dead.
Nor is it stated that Aerys loved Joanna. Desired, lusted after.. never once did someone use the word love in canon to describe it.

And Tywin also told Tyrion that he was sending him to King's Landing because he was Tywin's son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If this theory is true, it's likely to happen, but not certain. And maybe it's natural to speculate based on that assumption, but IMO that doesn't fit in this topic. If you want to speculate on 'what happens if A+J=T is true', make a topic about that.

 

I guess we just need tWoW lol. 

 

 

Agreed on both points. Aerys always had a desire for several women, but that often was only for a short period of time. 

I agree wholeheartedly with your second point!

 

As to your first point: Three Heads is an important part of this discussion, because it's the main reason why we care at all in the first place. If there were no repercussions for the central story of the whole series, I don't think we'd be on the sixth incarnation of this thread. Take RLJ - if it didn't mean that Jon might well be the rightful heir to the throne (and quite possibly a reborn mythical savior), then it wouldn't merit much discussion either. Both theories aren't just about some guy finding out their genealogy. If true, both theories have big implications, and although those repercussions are based on an assumption, I think it's just as valid to discuss those repercussions as it is to discuss whether Tyrion and Tywin's relationship would be ruined by AJT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree wholeheartedly with your second point!

 

As to your first point: Three Heads is an important part of this discussion, because it's the main reason why we care at all in the first place. If there were no repercussions for the central story of the whole series, I don't think we'd be on the sixth incarnation of this thread. Take RLJ - if it didn't mean that Jon might well be the rightful heir to the throne (and quite possibly a reborn mythical savior), then it wouldn't merit much discussion either. Both theories aren't just about some guy finding out their genealogy. If true, both theories have big implications, and although those repercussions are based on an assumption, I think it's just as valid to discuss those repercussions as it is to discuss whether Tyrion and Tywin's relationship would be ruined by AJT.

 

I disagree.

 

Tyrion and Tywin's relationship is true. We know for a exactly what happened between them (not everything, but a lot). The point I tried to make was: If Tywin isn't really Tyrions father (and he would've known) he wouldn't have cared. The reason their relationship is like that is because he is his son. Discussing the fact that this entire struggle doesn't work as good if it turns out he isn't his son, makes a valid point against A+J=T. This isn't based on speculation at all, but based on the current info we have. And IMO, making Tyrion the son of Aerys wouldn't fit the story arc as good, but we've already discussed that.

 

The speculation that he might fly a dragon is based on assumptions. I think those discussions shouldn't be in a topic which is to determine whether a theory is true ore not, because it doesn't add anything to the discussion. It only goes offtopic and it makes the theory weaker on itself, but that last part is just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the same feeling. People just assume that he will ride a dragon (because who else besides Jon and Dany? (I'm not even sure about Jon to be honest)). Because he will ride a dragon (assumption) he has targ (dragon) blood (assumption that this is required, however it is likely). And because he rides a dragon ánd has dragonblood he has to be one of the three heads (assumption again).
 
We don't know if he will ride a dragon
We don't know if you need dragon blood to ride a dragon (however, I have to agree its safe to assume you have to)
We don't know if it's required to 'ride a dragon' to become one of the three heads of the dragon.
We don't know if the three heads of the dragon are literally or figuratively.
 
Yet all these uncertainties are used to backup a theory. That's my entire problem with these 'clues' and all the arguments that are used. It's all assumption on top of other assumption.


It would be a huge waste of storyline potential to knock off two dragons from use right away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×