A+J=T v.9

[Lord Varys]

@Free Northman Reborn

I'm obviously interested in the historical stuff but I don't think for a moment that this is actually important to the overall story (or if it seems to be then the historical stuff grew obviously out of the series and may mirror-image future developments in the series because it casts its shadows back into the past and in the future). I don't think I've an especially 'Targaryen focused' perspective. I think I base my interpretation of the series and my expectancies about the future on the hints in the text (e.g. the fact that the setup of the series has a deposed royal line whose last remaining scions' plan to retake their rightful throne is at the core of the mundane political plot - and I'm talking there, in a sense, about both Daenerys and Jon Snow).

I'm not so sure Jon Snow cares all that much about his dead Stark relatives (i.e. Rickard, Brandon, and Lyanna) because he never met them and their memory didn't seem to be as present in Winterfell as it could have been (I think we'll get a version of that theme with Prince Aegon who most likely couldn't care less about the fact that his grandfather was murdered by Jaime Lannister - Aerys II was just his grandfather, had severe issues with his father, Prince Rhaegar, and also happened to pass him over in the succession). And there certainly wasn't a Targaryen hatred present in Winterfell, either. I'm not sure on what textual evidence you base Palpatine-Vader analogy. I do not remember any general Targaryen hatred among the Starks in particular or the Northmen in in general.

AGoT establishes Robert's burning hatred of the Targaryens (both Aerys and Rhaegar) and overall the more informed people in the series agree that Aerys was, in the end, a terrible king, but this never takes on the shape of demonizing the Targaryens in general. If House Targaryen would have been as hated as it apparently was at Robert's court then the Young Dragon most likely wouldn't have been one of Jon Snow's heroes - because in such a scenario the overall Stark policy wouldn't have allowed Luwin to paint the Targaryen history in a positive light.

I'm did not mean to say that Jon Snow will suddenly grow to resent his living Stark cousins or reconsider his allegiances in some war from the past (neither Ned's surviving children nor any surviving Targaryens had any part in Robert's Rebellion - not even Tyrion).

I was talking about the effect it will have on Jon Snow that his so-called father wasn't, in fact, his biological father, and that he betrayed him and did not trust him enough to tell him the truth. I don't see this having no effect at all on him because this is the standard reaction of any adopted child who was not trusted by his adoptive parents about his true origins or happened to uncover the truth by accident.

We also don't know how and in what details Jon Snow will learn the truth. One can, of course, imagine some long-winded and civil conversation between Jon and Howland Reed (or something similar) but it is also possible that he only deduces the truth from certain bits and pieces of information he receives, or reaches wrong conclusions about certain details or motivations in the story.

In any case, the point I was trying to make here is that Tyrion's personality/character and arc might actually profit from the revelation of his heritage while the same revelation would not necessarily be positive or empowering for Jon Snow. Tyrion should have less trouble switching from a Lannister to a Targaryen (bastard) identity because he had a very bad relationship with Tywin (and in the end his entire family).

But Jon Snow has no reason not to want to be Eddard Stark's son, or to see himself as a Stark. Being a Stark bastard is essentially his entire identity, and he also loves his half-siblings very much (aside from Sansa, perhaps) and also has no reason to want himself to distance himself from them.

Sure, Jon's upbringing as a Stark (bastard) is not going to be erased by the revelation about his true heritage (just as Tyrion will always remain Tywin's son in the sense that this man raised him, clothed him, and fed him for most of his life) but it will cause him to reassess and reinterpret his entire life and his place in there. And from a dynastic point of view Jon Snow will be transformed from a Stark bastard into a royal prince of House Targaryen by this revelation. That is a major change affecting both his own self-image as well as how he'll be perceived by others (assuming this whole story will have any political relevance at all).

I'm not convinced that Jon Snow will like this revelation. First because it will rob him of the only father he knew, Eddard Stark, but also because the revelation will inevitably poison the 'posthumous relationship' between Jon and Ned. Ned did not trust Jon with the truth, the entire War of the Usurper only led to secrets and mistrust in Jon's own 'family' (i.e. Ned's own household), and Jon Snow (and also Catelyn Stark, although I'm not sure Jon will see this or care about it) had to pay the price for that.

How guilty is Ned Stark in the death of Jon's true father, Rhaegar Targaryen? He certainly didn't do anything to prevent Robert from killing him. How much blame can be laid at the feet of Rickard/Brandon Stark for starting a series of events that led to the deaths of Jon Snow's parents? Presumably Lyanna Stark wouldn't have died in childbirth had she given birth while being attended by maesters.

The truth will turn Jon Snow's entire world on its head. The man he thought was his father wasn't, his actual parents are dead, too, as well as his actual half-siblings (Princess Rhaenys and Prince Aegon). That is not exactly a comforting thought. Yeah, okay, he gains an aunt in his age, but that's it, really.

As to Jon's ambitions:

We know the boy always wanted to make a name and reputation for himself. Knowing that 'the love' of his 'father' robbed him of his true identity and name (and the self-image that can come with the knowledge that you are royal prince) and replaced it with the stain of a bastard heritage shouldn't be easily overcome, either. Yes, Jon has made his peace with being a bastard but only because he thinks he actually is a bastard - which he might not be. It is not difficult (and actually very unrealistic not) to imagine that the truth will make him very angry on an emotional level. He might certainly understand that Ned did this all only to protect him, etc. but to understand that rationally isn't the same thing as overcoming the emotion of feeling betrayed.

I mean, Prince Rhaegar's son could/can be the King on the Iron Throne. Jon Snow will know that. And he certainly dreamed of crowns and glory in his boyhood before he joined the NW. It would be a lot to swallow for him that his 'father' took all that away from him while in addition making his life more miserable than it might have been by raising him as a bastard.

Not to mention that Jon might also feel betrayed in relation to his dead/innocent Targaryen kin. Princess Rhaenys and Prince Aegon were his half-siblings, butchered by the Lannisters. Prince Viserys and Princess Daenerys (the latter being his closest living relative) were forced into exile. Sure, Jon has no emotional connection to those people but just as any child/person who finds out (s)he has been adopted he'll get very interested in actually getting to know them (that is then Dany and/or Aegon, depending when he finds out the truth) and creating such a connection.

Considering all those implications and the nature of this series (rather interesting twists) I'd be very surprised if the revelation of the truth of Jon Snow's parentage would actually not cause more problems than it is going to solve. In fact, it might only cause problems. People are usually so absorbed by or obsessed with that prophecy stuff that they don't care about the human angle of this entire plot.

And to come back to Tyrion: In his case the revelation might actually solve a lot of problems (issues with self-image, guilt over Tywin's murder, dragonrider stuff, future relations with Daenerys Targaryen, return of Tyrion as an actual political player). Not to mention the potential this change in his identity might have for the conflicts between Tyrion and the surviving members of his family (Jaime, then the murderer of his father just as Tyrion is now the murderer of Jaime's father) as well as Dany's enemies.

[Free Northman Reborn]

54 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@Free Northman Reborn

I'm obviously interested in the historical stuff but I don't think for a moment that this is actually important to the overall story (or if it seems to be then the historical stuff grew obviously out of the series and may mirror-image future developments in the series because it casts its shadows back into the past and in the future). I don't think I've an especially 'Targaryen focused' perspective. I think I base my interpretation of the series and my expectancies about the future on the hints in the text (e.g. the fact that the setup of the series has a deposed royal line whose last remaining scions' plan to retake their rightful throne is at the core of the mundane political plot - and I'm talking there, in a sense, about both Daenerys and Jon Snow).

I'm not so sure Jon Snow cares all that much about his dead Stark relatives (i.e. Rickard, Brandon, and Lyanna) because he never met them and their memory didn't seem to be as present in Winterfell as it could have been (I think we'll get a version of that theme with Prince Aegon who most likely couldn't care less about the fact that his grandfather was murdered by Jaime Lannister - Aerys II was just his grandfather, had severe issues with his father, Prince Rhaegar, and also happened to pass him over in the succession). And there certainly wasn't a Targaryen hatred present in Winterfell, either. I'm not sure on what textual evidence you base Palpatine-Vader analogy. I do not remember any general Targaryen hatred among the Starks in particular or the Northmen in in general.

AGoT establishes Robert's burning hatred of the Targaryens (both Aerys and Rhaegar) and overall the more informed people in the series agree that Aerys was, in the end, a terrible king, but this never takes on the shape of demonizing the Targaryens in general. If House Targaryen would have been as hated as it apparently was at Robert's court then the Young Dragon most likely wouldn't have been one of Jon Snow's heroes - because in such a scenario the overall Stark policy wouldn't have allowed Luwin to paint the Targaryen history in a positive light.

I'm did not mean to say that Jon Snow will suddenly grow to resent his living Stark cousins or reconsider his allegiances in some war from the past (neither Ned's surviving children nor any surviving Targaryens had any part in Robert's Rebellion - not even Tyrion).

I was talking about the effect it will have on Jon Snow that his so-called father wasn't, in fact, his biological father, and that he betrayed him and did not trust him enough to tell him the truth. I don't see this having no effect at all on him because this is the standard reaction of any adopted child who was not trusted by his adoptive parents about his true origins or happened to uncover the truth by accident.

We also don't know how and in what details Jon Snow will learn the truth. One can, of course, imagine some long-winded and civil conversation between Jon and Howland Reed (or something similar) but it is also possible that he only deduces the truth from certain bits and pieces of information he receives, or reaches wrong conclusions about certain details or motivations in the story.

In any case, the point I was trying to make here is that Tyrion's personality/character and arc might actually profit from the revelation of his heritage while the same revelation would not necessarily be positive or empowering for Jon Snow. Tyrion should have less trouble switching from a Lannister to a Targaryen (bastard) identity because he had a very bad relationship with Tywin (and in the end his entire family).

But Jon Snow has no reason not to want to be Eddard Stark's son, or to see himself as a Stark. Being a Stark bastard is essentially his entire identity, and he also loves his half-siblings very much (aside from Sansa, perhaps) and also has no reason to want himself to distance himself from them.

Sure, Jon's upbringing as a Stark (bastard) is not going to be erased by the revelation about his true heritage (just as Tyrion will always remain Tywin's son in the sense that this man raised him, clothed him, and fed him for most of his life) but it will cause him to reassess and reinterpret his entire life and his place in there. And from a dynastic point of view Jon Snow will be transformed from a Stark bastard into a royal prince of House Targaryen by this revelation. That is a major change affecting both his own self-image as well as how he'll be perceived by others (assuming this whole story will have any political relevance at all).

I'm not convinced that Jon Snow will like this revelation. First because it will rob him of the only father he knew, Eddard Stark, but also because the revelation will inevitably poison the 'posthumous relationship' between Jon and Ned. Ned did not trust Jon with the truth, the entire War of the Usurper only led to secrets and mistrust in Jon's own 'family' (i.e. Ned's own household), and Jon Snow (and also Catelyn Stark, although I'm not sure Jon will see this or care about it) had to pay the price for that.

How guilty is Ned Stark in the death of Jon's true father, Rhaegar Targaryen? He certainly didn't do anything to prevent Robert from killing him. How much blame can be laid at the feet of Rickard/Brandon Stark for starting a series of events that led to the deaths of Jon Snow's parents? Presumably Lyanna Stark wouldn't have died in childbirth had she given birth while being attended by maesters.

The truth will turn Jon Snow's entire world on its head. The man he thought was his father wasn't, his actual parents are dead, too, as well as his actual half-siblings (Princess Rhaenys and Prince Aegon). That is not exactly a comforting thought. Yeah, okay, he gains an aunt in his age, but that's it, really.

As to Jon's ambitions:

We know the boy always wanted to make a name and reputation for himself. Knowing that 'the love' of his 'father' robbed him of his true identity and name (and the self-image that can come with the knowledge that you are royal prince) and replaced it with the stain of a bastard heritage shouldn't be easily overcome, either. Yes, Jon has made his peace with being a bastard but only because he thinks he actually is a bastard - which he might not be. It is not difficult (and actually very unrealistic not) to imagine that the truth will make him very angry on an emotional level. He might certainly understand that Ned did this all only to protect him, etc. but to understand that rationally isn't the same thing as overcoming the emotion of feeling betrayed.

I mean, Prince Rhaegar's son could/can be the King on the Iron Throne. Jon Snow will know that. And he certainly dreamed of crowns and glory in his boyhood before he joined the NW. It would be a lot to swallow for him that his 'father' took all that away from him while in addition making his life more miserable than it might have been by raising him as a bastard.

Not to mention that Jon might also feel betrayed in relation to his dead/innocent Targaryen kin. Princess Rhaenys and Prince Aegon were his half-siblings, butchered by the Lannisters. Prince Viserys and Princess Daenerys (the latter being his closest living relative) were forced into exile. Sure, Jon has no emotional connection to those people but just as any child/person who finds out (s)he has been adopted he'll get very interested in actually getting to know them (that is then Dany and/or Aegon, depending when he finds out the truth) and creating such a connection.

Considering all those implications and the nature of this series (rather interesting twists) I'd be very surprised if the revelation of the truth of Jon Snow's parentage would actually not cause more problems than it is going to solve. In fact, it might only cause problems. People are usually so absorbed by or obsessed with that prophecy stuff that they don't care about the human angle of this entire plot.

And to come back to Tyrion: In his case the revelation might actually solve a lot of problems (issues with self-image, guilt over Tywin's murder, dragonrider stuff, future relations with Daenerys Targaryen, return of Tyrion as an actual political player). Not to mention the potential this change in his identity might have for the conflicts between Tyrion and the surviving members of his family (Jaime, then the murderer of his father just as Tyrion is now the murderer of Jaime's father) as well as Dany's enemies.

I think I get your general argument, but I find it difficult to follow all the way, I must admit. Some of it seems somewhat contradictory - like Eddard will always be his father, but he will hate his father for not saving his true father, etc. No. If he knows Eddard, he will understand that Eddard did so out of duty to Lyanna, and at huge cost to himself.

In Jon's case, I see it less twisted than the standard family relationships in this series. The Stark family dynamic has always been depicted as purer than that. Sansa excluded. 

I see Jon's warging abilities taking a huge leap forward during his "death", much like Arya's leapt forward during her blindness, and Bran's grew drastically during his coma after his fall. And I see Jon eventually getting his personal revelation in all its colour and detail via a weirwood vision, once his talents have developed to that point.

So no misunderstandings, no false blame for Eddard, and a full grasp of the nuances that were at play, the tragedies that led to the current state of affairs. The time for Jon's brooding moping about his fate in life has ended with his death. The boy has been killed, and the man has been born.

As for Tyrion, I fully agree that the truth of his identity will be liberating for him, rather than a burden. Because let's face it. His family situation is already as dysfunctional as it can be. Any new development can only be an improvement for him.

 

[Lord Varys]

@Free Northman Reborn

Well, you are, of course, free to imagine some sort everything fits nicely into each other development for this plot. But I don't expect something like that to happen. I'd be very surprised if George went down the road to make this a nice and cozy revelation. This series has a tendency of messing with the minds of people and twisting the readers expectation (e.g. Robert never learning about Cersei's betrayal, Joffrey never having a talk about his parents with either Jaime or Cersei, Tyrion not meeting Daenerys in ADwD, etc.) that I don't see good reason to assume that the author is going to take a different road with Jon Snow of all people.

And the conflict/situation is, of course, contradictory by definition. Ned Stark will remain Jon Snow's father in the same way Tywin will remain Tyrion's father - these men raised Jon and Tyrion as their sons, after all. But this can, of course, also entail some conflict. After all you can love and hate your father, can't you?

I did not try to paint a scenario in which Jon completely denounces his Stark heritage or posthumously condemns Ned. But I expect him to distance himself from his Stark legacy if we assume there is time for this. This is a patrilinear society. The name and blood of the father matters more than the blood of the mother. Catelyn Stark's children are first and foremost Starks, not Tullys. If the revelation about Jon's true heritage will play any political role at all one would expect him ending up embracing his Targaryen legacy, whatever that may mean.

But for me the idea of some nice and self-explanatory vision to reveal everything to Jon is pretty unlikely. Bran might access the knowledge this way, but Bran is a different case, and he might not be able to reach Jon Snow easily after his death or resurrection. There has to be a reason why the hell there is no godswood directly at the Wall.

[Free Northman Reborn]

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@Free Northman Reborn

Well, you are, of course, free to imagine some sort everything fits nicely into each other development for this plot. But I don't expect something like that to happen. I'd be very surprised if George went down the road to make this a nice and cozy revelation. This series has a tendency of messing with the minds of people and twisting the readers expectation (e.g. Robert never learning about Cersei's betrayal, Joffrey never having a talk about his parents with either Jaime or Cersei, Tyrion not meeting Daenerys in ADwD, etc.) that I don't see good reason to assume that the author is going to take a different road with Jon Snow of all people.

And the conflict/situation is, of course, contradictory by definition. Ned Stark will remain Jon Snow's father in the same way Tywin will remain Tyrion's father - these men raised Jon and Tyrion as their sons, after all. But this can, of course, also entail some conflict. After all you can love and hate your father, can't you?

I did not try to paint a scenario in which Jon completely denounces his Stark heritage or posthumously condemns Ned. But I expect him to distance himself from his Stark legacy if we assume there is time for this. This is a patrilinear society. The name and blood of the father matters more than the blood of the mother. Catelyn Stark's children are first and foremost Starks, not Tullys. If the revelation about Jon's true heritage will play any political role at all one would expect him ending up embracing his Targaryen legacy, whatever that may mean.

But for me the idea of some nice and self-explanatory vision to reveal everything to Jon is pretty unlikely. Bran might access the knowledge this way, but Bran is a different case, and he might not be able to reach Jon Snow easily after his death or resurrection. There has to be a reason why the hell there is no godswood directly at the Wall.

Howland Reed knows the full story. Bran knows the full story. Meera knows the full story. Jon is going to encounter at least some of them over the course of the next two books. He doesn't even need to be in contact with Bran to have Bran interact with him.

As for his death: Varamyr could sense the weirwoods as entities as much as he could sense the animals and humans, when he left his body. I expect some interaction between Jon and Bran at that stage already. And once Bran comes South, which will be in the next book, he is bound to encounter Jon, with full knowlege of the past.

In any case, Jon will embrace his Targaryen heritage not because he rejects his Stark ancestry, but because he must, in order to save the realm. Like Eddard, he will likely head South to King's Landing (if he ever heads that way) with a heavy heart, knowing his place is in the North. There won't be some kind of break with the Starks out of bitterness or any such development. That is not Jon's story.

 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 5/29/2016 at 9:25 AM, Rhaechyll Targaryen said:

Obviously the idea that it wouldn't be good writing to have Tyrion turn out to not be Tywin's biological child is completely subjective. Considering that the hints for AJT are in every book including the world book, I think it would be a complete letdown for there to be no pay off after so much set up. I won't be so arrogant as to call it bad writing, but Tyrion being Tywin's is certainly the most boring outcome in comparison to AJT because it doesn't add anything new to the story. AJT OTOH opens up loads of possibilities not to mention fascinating backstory. 

In terms of the narrative and what we know of the characters, the AJT theory explains quite a bit and certainly goes in line with what the books have put out there. I feel like it answers so many questions.

The timeline revealed in the world book actually makes AJT more likely whereas it pretty much splashed cold water over the idea that Jaime and Cersei could be Aerys's. The world book could have taken the AJT idea off of the table all together but instead it only fanned the flames in a major way.

It's very strange to me how people still see Ned as Jon's father even though they know his biological father is likely Rhaegar, but don't extend the same attitude towards Tyrion and Tywin. Nobody ever says that the Jon/Ned relationship is ruined by the idea of RLJ. Ned's paternal relationship with Jon doesn't magically go away just because Ned wasn't his biological father. Ned raised Jon and Jon looks to Ned's example as he would to a father figure and Jon is, unsurprisingly, very much like Ned. How is it any different with Tyrion? Tywin raised Tyrion and was his only parent. Tyrion having a different biological father doesn't make their relationship go away. It's still incredibly complex and only becomes more complex with the reveal.

Tyrion being Tywin's biological son doesn't satisfy any of the elements that make AJT make sense as a theory. The connections make less sense and become less interesting especially his relationships with Dany and Jon. These relationships become a lot more special if AJT is true. 

Tyrion isn't the only character the AJT would end up impacting. 

The evidence you speak of is all speculation. None of it is confirmed and it is all just subjective. The only real evidence for this theory would be Arys interest in Joanna, however....the timeline puts it as far more likely that he would have fathered Jaime and Cersei, and not Tyrion. However, the evidence is still extremely subjective and they are nothing more than rumors. Many rumors in the books have ended up just being.....rumors. As to why its not good writing, because there is so little "evidence"....its bad writing. If it was actually a true theory (which it isn't, I'll lay down money on it being incorrect, that is how sure I am of it), than GRRM did very little to give any evidence. Tyrion had a scaled tale (was a rumor proven to be untrue), Tyrion has mixed eyes that have no Targaryen traits. Tyrion has mixed hair, again with no Targaryen traits. The timeline also makes little sense, there is no evidence that Aerys and Joanna were ever near each other anytime during which she would have become pregnant with Tyrion. The reason it ruins their relationship story is because Tywin hates Tyrion BECAUSE he is his son. If he was someone elses son, that ruins the whole angle of the hatred and makes it much less of an impact. We must have read a different world book, I just read it again....nothing.....It would only be a let down because someone made up a theory and you believed it, however it won't be for us who just enjoy the actual things that GRRM writes and not fanboy/fangirl theories of people who just love Tyrion and want him to be everything. Again, there are no real hints.....NONE. There are a bunch of things that people have either misinterpreted or things that are merely rumors they have taken as facts...that are simply not true. I'm sorry and again, if you want to lay down money, I'd be more than happy to. Tyrion is not Aerys's son. 

[Lord of Raventree Hall]

On 5/17/2016 at 9:52 AM, Elisabetta Duò said:

Tyrion is NOT a Targaryen imo (it would be cheap if GRRM used the same 'trick' two times and R+L=J is 99% going to happen, Tyrion's relationship with Tywin is one of the most deep and meaningful on the show and it's not meant as a cover up for a Targ twist, GRRM said you don't need Targ blood to be a dragon rider, Tyrion's connection with dragons  as set up since book 1 may have another explanations, etc. etc.) even though I think he will ride Viserion, that's pretty obvious since book 1, because Viserion is smaller in size than any other dragon, he's gold and he has a roar able to send a hundred lions running..and when they followed the red comet he sank his teeth in the lion's mane.. so the dragon may be the instrument of the revenge against the Lannisters who wronged Tyrion. 

Tywin hates him because:

1) he's a dwarf; 

2) he 'killed' Joanna

Even assuming Tywin wanted to hint / believed that Tyrion were a bastard and acted that way, what Tywin thinks is not necessarily the truth.

Tyrion is, in my opinion, a Lannister to boots and 'truly Twyin's son', the one who is best  suited to follow his father's steps (if only his father could see that), he has his father's instincts for politics + that bit of compassion which might make him similar to the man Tywin was before Joanna died.

His name is GRRM's way to underline this aspect, imo. He didn't choose names randomly, just for example Cersei is clearly named after Omero's Circe. Jamie might be a joke for J'aime.

Tyrion's name starts with the "Ty-" prefix, like his father Tywin and his grandfather Tytos (and Tygett, Tybolt, Tygett, Tyrek, Tya Lannister). Similar names are later used elsewhere but they mostly came from the same source (Tya married a Baratheon) and nowhere you find a concentration of Ty-prefix names as huge as with the Lannister family.

Other houses use other prefixes (Aemon, Aegon, etc.).

The Ty = Lannister thing is very fitting because I've read that Ty = Land and the Lannisters are known for their wealth in a world where land is one of the status symbols along with gold (which is one of the Lannisters' colors), even their family name Lannister looks like an ibrid between Lancaster and Land and smells of 'Land-owner/runner', so it fits them that their names start with a syllabe meaning land, as a synonym of power.

Tyrion embodies both Land (Ty-prefix) and gold (he's never short of gold and uses it to buy allies, to buy freedom, etc.) because metaphorically he would be the best suited to follow after Tywin, the only one with his skills and inheriting his capability in politics (Tywin, as stern and cold hearted as he was, has been the best Hand of the King ever for 20 yrs…). If taken almost literally, his name might even be foreshadowing  that Tyrion is meant to inherit Casterly Rock, if he survives...the son with the Ty-prefix inherits the land.

With this, I'm NOT implying Jamie and Cersei are not Lannisters. They definitely are to me. It's just that it suited GRRM better to have them all named for specific aspects he wanted to underline. He wanted Tyrion to be the only 'true son' of Tywin. 

In the narrative, it's easy to justify that only Tyrion was given the Ty-name because Joanna (who ruled Tywin)  got away with naming their first child (the twins) so that the Ty-name was given to the next son … so Tyrion was probably named before he was born, so his father didn't know he was a dwarf.

But the real reason is that GRRM wanted to give the characters names that were linked with the character. 

In AFFC, we learn that Tyrion was a name given to Kings before Aegon: even if I don't think this is foreshadowing of Tyrion being King, I think that as Cersei knew that, Tywin had to know that as well and probably resented Tyrion even more, because he had high expectations for him, named him with a Ty-name suitable for a King, and he was born a dwarf and 'killed' Joanna.

This, unless we suppose that Tyrion was named specifically after King Tyrion II Lannister the Tormenter, who was said to enjoy sex with women only after he made them bleed (basically he was a Jeoffrey), as little Tyrion made Joanna blead to death and/or was born to torment Tywin. I dont think so though:  King Tyrion I and King Tyrion III were apparently honorable Kings and I can't see Tywin givin a dwarf ANY Ty- name, not even the one of a tormenter and especially if there were other honorable Kings with that name. He wouldn't give a dwarf the name of a King, end of.

If any of this rant about names is correct, there are slim chances he isn't a Lannister, so the Targ theory has to be wrong, because GRRM would have known since the start if Tyrion whether a Targ or not and I would exclude he named him Tyrion as red herring (too small as a clue to be a red erring, hence genuine clue).

I just want to say I agree with all of this, although I am not sure that Tyrion will be a dragon rider (but I think it is possible)

[Rhaechyll Targaryen]

7 hours ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

The evidence you speak of is all speculation. None of it is confirmed and it is all just subjective. The only real evidence for this theory would be Arys interest in Joanna, however....the timeline puts it as far more likely that he would have fathered Jaime and Cersei, and not Tyrion. However, the evidence is still extremely subjective and they are nothing more than rumors. Many rumors in the books have ended up just being.....rumors. As to why its not good writing, because there is so little "evidence"....its bad writing. If it was actually a true theory (which it isn't, I'll lay down money on it being incorrect, that is how sure I am of it), than GRRM did very little to give any evidence. Tyrion had a scaled tale (was a rumor proven to be untrue), Tyrion has mixed eyes that have no Targaryen traits. Tyrion has mixed hair, again with no Targaryen traits. The timeline also makes little sense, there is no evidence that Aerys and Joanna were ever near each other anytime during which she would have become pregnant with Tyrion. The reason it ruins their relationship story is because Tywin hates Tyrion BECAUSE he is his son. If he was someone elses son, that ruins the whole angle of the hatred and makes it much less of an impact. We must have read a different world book, I just read it again....nothing.....It would only be a let down because someone made up a theory and you believed it, however it won't be for us who just enjoy the actual things that GRRM writes and not fanboy/fangirl theories of people who just love Tyrion and want him to be everything. Again, there are no real hints.....NONE. There are a bunch of things that people have either misinterpreted or things that are merely rumors they have taken as facts...that are simply not true. I'm sorry and again, if you want to lay down money, I'd be more than happy to. Tyrion is not Aerys's son. 

It isn't all speculation. 

You are also incorrect about the timeline being more supportive of the idea that Jaime and Cersei are Aerys's than of the timeline supporting AJT. One of the big reveals of the world book is that Joanna was in King's Landing (a place she rarely went after her marriage) in 272 and Tyrion is born in 273. We're given no reason to think that Joanna and Aerys were together before the birth of the twins. It's possible that he made a secret visit to Casterly Rock but that doesn't go in line with Aerys typical behavior IMO nor are there any hints to indicate this happened.

I think you're discounting a mountain of evidence. Tyrion's paternity is called into question in his very first chapter in the series.

I disagree hugely about Tyrion's hair not having Targaryen traits. What Tyrion's hair doesn't sound like are the Lannisters with the golden curls. Given how much hair color is emphasized in the series when it comes to proving the paternity of the Baratheon bastards, it's strange to me that people want to blow off hair color when it comes to Tyrion. His hair color easily sounds like the hair color of the Targaryens. 

As for the eyes, Tyrion has mismatched eyes like another notable Targaryen bastard. I also think it's possible that Tyrion's black eye is actually dark purple. 

Tyrion's "twisted" appearance sounds very much like other Targaryen "monstrosities" that pop up in the world book only Tyrion managed to live. 

I disagree that the relationship is ruined. I argue that the Tyrion/Tywin relationship only becomes more complex with the AJT reveal. People act like it's a bad thing for Tywin's feelings about Tyrion to have more depth apart from being annoyed that he fathered a dwarf. To me it makes a lot more sense that his hatred is a combination of things. He blames Tyrion for Joanna's death. He feels cursed by the gods that he can't prove that Tyrion isn't his. He wrestles back and for with whether or not it's better if Tyrion is his but is ultimately never satisfied. If Tywin thinks that Tyrion isn't his, he has to acknowledge that the love of his life was either raped or unfaithful. If he acknowledges that Tyrion is his then not only does he think that the gods have cursed him, but there's a part of him that would also blame himself for Joanna's death. 

For all of the people who are worried that AJT will somehow let a monster like Tywin off of the hook for his treatment of Tyrion, consider what a truly awesome punishment this is for one of the great bad guys in the series. It was tailor made for him and caused him agony every day for the rest of his life. How is that not both emotionally and narratively satisfying? (It also doesn't become okay for Tywin to treat an innocent child like shit no matter who the child's father was.)

Lol, I have to address the idea that I must somehow be a fan of Tyrion's who wants him to have everything because that couldn't be further from the truth. It was in thinking that this theory couldn't be true that I felt that I stumbled across evidence for the opposite. When I first read the theory more than five years ago now, I thought 'Whaaaat? No way, that can't be.' Then I realized that every single book is filled with hints.

I was sold on the theory based on what GRRM has written, so frankly it's a little obnoxious to me to imply that people who are proponents of the theory must by Tyrion fanboys/fangirls who aren't looking to the text to support their arguments.

Honestly have you bothered to read the OP in this thread? We're talking about loads of quotes and analysis from every book in addition to extras like the world book and D&E. 

What do you consider to be a real hint? 

We have Tyrion's appearance, we know for a fact that Aerys was sexually interested in Tyrion's mother. (Why would GRRM bother mentioning this? Why not have the woman he was most interested in be a random character? Why do we keep learning more about Aerys interest in Joanna? Why is it that Joanna is always mentioned in some sort of sexual way when it comes to Aerys?) So far we only have characters with Valyrian blood who have dreams about dragons, we have Tyrion's paternity called into question at more than one point, Tywin's uses his last words to tell Tyrion that he isn't his son (the show included this but didn't include Tywin telling Jaime that he wasn't his son), Tyrion's conversation with Jon takes on new layers that make the encounter more special and meaningful, we have the conversation that Tywin has with Tyrion about Casterly Rock that makes a lot more sense if Tywin's real issue is that he knows in his heart that Tyrion isn't his but isn't fully willing to acknowledge this because of all of the baggage that would come with facing the truth. Tywin is very good at shutting out what he doesn't want to see or acknowledge. 

As to why Tywin allowed Tyrion to live, I feel like there were multiple factors that came into play but one thing I disagree with is what I see as an oversimplification of Tywin's personality that assumes he would have had Tyrion killed if he'd suspected. I don't feel like that's factoring in everything that we know about Tywin especially the importance of his pride and the way he felt about Joanna.

[UnmaskedLurker]

@Rhaechyll Targaryen and @Lord of Raventree Hall --

RT has done quite a good job addressing the issues that I would have addressed but I want to emphasize a couple of points that she made. First, LoRH, please read the OP -- including the hidden text sections (which are hidden only for space reasons). I think many of your objections are addressed quite clearly. The two main issues that you seem to either misunderstand or ignore are Joanna at KL and Tyrion's hair color.

WOIAF makes it quite clear that Joanna was in the same location as Aerys during the year prior to Tyrion's birth. So I really don't know what LoRH means when stating that the book includes no clue about this issue. Aerys even seem to show some sort of interest in Joanna (even if it is to make a sexual insult to her). So why does GRRM bother to place Joanna at this location at that time? 

As to hair color, Tyrion is the only Lannister we hear about with pale blond hair (Tommen was pale blond but turns golden blond by the time he is 10). Where would Tyrion get the pale blond hair from when no other Lannister has it. But perhaps more interesting are the black streaks. I pondered that for a long time until WOIAF came out and included the information that Betha Blackwood -- who has black hair -- married Aegon V and would be Tyrion's great-great-grandmother (if Aerys is Tyrion's father). So where does the black streaks come from when no Lannister has any black hair of any kind?

@Free Northman Reborn and @Lord Varys --

I think that how Jon reacts likely depends on what he learns. If Jon learns that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married and wanted to have a child together -- then Jon's reaction might be quite different than if Jon think he was the product of Rhaegar raping Lyanna. If Jon learns the former, then it totally reverses his view of himself -- rather than the bastard son of High Lord, he becomes the legit son of the Crown Prince. Interestingly, if AJT is correct, then Tyrion is no longer the arguably legit heir to CR but rather the bastard son of the Mad King. These "reversals of fortune" are part of what makes me believe that AJT is correct.

[Elisabetta Duò]

On 30 maggio 2016 at 2:10 PM, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

I just want to say I agree with all of this, although I am not sure that Tyrion will be a dragon rider (but I think it is possible)

cheers

[Elisabetta Duò]

On 30 maggio 2016 at 1:55 PM, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

not fanboy/fangirl theories of people who just love Tyrion and want him to be everything.

I do love Tyrion, he is my fave character and I still don't think he is a Targ, nor I would like it. There is at least 1 alternative explanation for basically all the supposed clues listed here, but honestly, unless one wants to spend all their time here arguing, it would take too much time… we'll find out soon (at least those of us who watch the show ...this year or in a couple of years). As for any category of fans, there are many different types of fan. If he turns out to be, fine, I'll accept it, GRRM can do as he likes, but it would ruin the whole Tyrion-Tywin dynamic imo.

[LmL]

4 hours ago, Elisabetta Duò said:

I do love Tyrion, he is my fave character and I still don't think he is a Targ, nor I would like it. There is at least 1 alternative explanation for basically all the supposed clues listed here, but honestly, unless one wants to spend all their time here arguing, it would take too much time… we'll find out soon (at least those of us who watch the show ...this year or in a couple of years). As for any category of fans, there are many different types of fan. If he turns out to be, fine, I'll accept it, GRRM can do as he likes, but it would ruin the whole Tyrion-Tywin dynamic imo.

I strongly disagree with this oft-trotted out canard. Hear me out, @Elisabetta Duò. I've thought a lot about this I think it makes perfect sense. To whit: consider an adopted child. Who is the parent of an adopted person? Who would they say is their father or mother? Well, if you've ever known someone who was adopted, there's only one answer - "the people who raised me are my parents." Ned Stark will ALWAYS be Jon's "father," and Rhaegar merely a sperm donor, if you will. Tywin is Tyrion's father, and always will be. The idea that Tyrion is not Tywin's blood son (although he would be a distant nephew since Joanna was a Lannister too) according to this theory does nothing to change Tywin and Tyrion's relationship, except to add an extra layer of cruel irony where it concerns Tywin, who would have loved nothing better than to disown Tyrion, but could not because of his pride in the family name. You dig? Tywin is Tyrion's father, period. The only reason blood is important here is for 1.) inheritance reasons, and more importantly, 2.) magical lineage. I suspect magical lineage is the point of both RLJ and AJT, not claims to a throne or seat. 

[LmL]

@UnmaskedLurker, @Free Northman Reborn, et al: 

It is with great pleasure that I bestow upon you a heap ton of new A+J=T evidence, mythical astronomy style. I have written a new podcast / essay called "Tyrion Targaryen" in which I attempt to explore Tyrion's mythological influences and provide support for the A+J=T theory in a very different way than anyone has undertaken before. 

As many of you will know, I have developed a certain flavor of close analysis of the text, focusing on Martin's old internal mythology and the real-world mythology which he draws from, and with a special eye towards myth which is based on observation of the cycles of the heavens and of nature. The Long Night was caused by a comet "stabbing" a moon, and these events are reflected in the myth of Lightbringer and the Qarthine "dragons come from the moon" story and many others, yadda yadda yadda. The point for Tyrion and A+J=T has to do with the mythological identities George has given Tyrion and how they fit into the three heads of the dragon and "Azor Ahai reborn" ideas: twisted monkey demon, and gargoyle.

Gargoyles are hellish stone beasts which are thought to wake at night and fly around. Already you can see that gargoyles make a great parallel to Martin's notion of "waking dragons from stone," with dragons being flying hell beasts. But wait - it gets much better. The story of the first gargoyle involves a Church saint slaying a dragon and mounting its hard-as-stone head and neck to the walls of the new cathedral to frighten away evil spirits.

That's right, the first gargoyle was a dragon. A dead stone dragon which later is said to wake at night. In the fake Lightbringer re-enactment ceremony on Dragonstone, Davos saw the stone gargoyles and dragons "through a veil of tears" and it looked to him "as if the beasts were trembling, stirring...", so we can be confident Martin is well aware of these waking from stone connotations of the gargoyle.

George describes Tyrion as a gargoyle very early on in book one - he's called a gargoyle before George ever mentions the gargoyles of Winterfell - and he continues to label Tyrion a gargoyle through book five. It's not just a name he picked because Tyrion is short and hideous - Martin does not make haphazard choices like that, in my opinion. Calling Tyrion a gargoyle is almost the same thing as calling him a stone dragon. 

Four times in ACOK, Tyrion is called a monkey demon or twisted little monkey demon. Many other times he is separately associated with demons or monkeys, and monkeys are a couple of times themselves compared to demons. Well, that's not all just idle chat, either - Martin is actually drawing directly from a famous figure in Chinese mythology known as Sun Wukong. Sun Wukong is a stone monkey demon king who was born from a magical rock at the top of a mountain - waking from stone, y'all. Sun Wukong challenges heaven and upsets the natural order and balance, just as Azor Ahai, the man who killed his wife to work blood magic and broke the moon, caused the Long Night (according to my theory, of course). But setting aside my ideas about evil Azor Ahai, the main thing about Sun Wukong besides being a stone demon who wakes from a stone egg is that he is decked out in dragon weapons and dragon armor. He himself is not a dragon, but he IS a total, 100% badass, and he travels to the bottom of the ocean and defeats various dragons of the four seas and takes all their weapons, armor, and talismans. His main dragon weapon is this invincible black iron staff which supposedly weights thousands of tons - it's actually the pillar of heaven, the celestial axis taken form. Anyway, this black dragon staff is notable for burning and lighting on fire. When it multiplies into a flying swarm, the text of the myth says it was like filling the air with a thousand dragons. If you've read any of my writings, you know that I think Azor Ahai's Lightbringer was actually a black sword made from a black moon meteor, so a black dragon weapon which lights on fire in the hands of Sun Wukong is pretty on the nose, for me. The myth about the moon cracking and pouring forth dragons Dany hears in book one is simply a mythological way to describe a meteor shower, so the thousand flying dragons from Sun Wukong's black dragon staff is pretty sweet.

If Tyrion gets his hands on a staff sometimes in the next book, watch out.

Sun Wukong can cause the sun to blotted out - just like the Long Night - and he overturns the reincarnation cycle by wiping his name from death's book. The quest for immortality is at the core of so many myths, and the Azor Ahai myth is no different in my opinion. Azor Ahai is a lucifer / prometheus figure, one who steals the fire of the gods. In ASOIAF, this takes the form of literally stealing the moon from heaven, the great sin of Azor Ahai which caused the Long Night. I could go a lot farther with those ideas, and I do in my essays and podcasts, but the point is made. Tyrion's mythological forefathers both scream out "dragons" and "Azor Ahai."

Speaking in terms of theme, we can see that Tyrion is indeed one who challenges the gods and all authority. If he is one of the three heads of the dragon - I say yes - then he's absolutely going to be a chaos agent like Sun Wukong, one who tips the scales of fate in one direction of the other. Tyrion plays this role exactly, having a dramatic influence on everyone he meets  - and I am sure you all have discussed the fact that Tyrion is the only "Targaryen" who has met all the others (at least, that will be true when he meets Dany in the next book). He's even spun Young Griff off in a mother direction, on and on. Dragons bright and dark, old and young, yadda yadda, and Tyrion snarling in the midst of all. Tyrion himself is a snarling dragon amidst dragons, and he's right in the middle because he is the one who tips the scales, like Sun Wukong.

Clearly Tyrion is one of the smartest and most clever characters, and Sun Wukong is called "the great sage who equals heaven." Clever monkey, you know?

As for themes of gargoyles, they are primarily associated with protection. They are put up there to scare evil spirits away. One of the best scenes where Tyrion is referred to as a gargoyle (and a monkey demon, actually) comes when he perches atop the merlons of King's Landing - perching like a gargoyle, that's the idea - while he oversees the defense of King's Landing. He's warding the entire city from evil! From the red demon god! You get the idea. Couldn't be any more of a protective gargoyle if he wanted to. Better yet, right in the middle of that scene, Tyrion looks at his wildfire demon and wonders if this wasn't something like what Aegon the fucking Conqueror must have felt like looking down from dragon back on the field of fire. Egads! Pretty on the nose. 

Tyrion also protects maidens - Sansa and Penny. In mythical astronomy terms, both of those maidens great examples of "moon maidens," women who represent the moon. That's all important, which I get into in the main essay / podcast. But the simple point is - protection. George has really thought about the mythical characters he draws from to create his own characters, and he's really worked the themes of gargoyles and Sun Wukong pretty hard, and to great effect. 

Finally, my essay / podcast (they mirror each other, so chose you preferred format if you are interested) will examine the phenomena of dragon dreams - dreams of dragons by people who have never seen a dragon - and what it means that Tyrion's open dragon dreams are mentioned so frequently. Short answer: it means he's almost certainly a Targaryen. The longer answer involves analysis of the various dragon dreamers, their specific dreams, and the phenomena in general. 

There's also a subsection talking about Winterfell and the King of Winter archetype, because once I started talking about gargoyles, I had to take a look at the First Keep and well... that led to some shit. 

Anyway, ye kind folks of the A+J=T thread, I submit to you a new line of evidence which provides very strong support for our favorite secret Targaryen theory. If you have never read any of my stuff, it does help to read at least my first one before Tyrion Targaryen - it's moderately entertaining, being that it claims to solve the puzzle of the Long Night and Lightbringer -  but I've written the first half of TT for a general audience as much as possible, so you can feel free to just hop in and read it. Just understand I might go off on little detours about moon meteors and Azor Ahai and whatnot, and it might not always make perfect sense. 

I hope you guys will take a look at my research, which I've just summarized in brief for you here, and see what you think.  It's kind of exciting to have some fresh material when you've been going over a lot of the same details for nine iterations now. Not nearly the beaten dead horse that RLJ v.847 has become - egads! - but you know what I mean. Fresh meat is always good.  Oh and I gave this thread a big shoutout right at the top, referring anyone who wants the down-low on all the established evidence for AJT to this very place.

And Tyrion is a motherf**king Targaryen. 

[Jô Maltese]

2 hours ago, LmL said:

(...)

This is brilliant and certainly deserves a nod in the OP @UnmaskedLurker.

@LmL I read some of your contributions before and, to be honest, I often found you were far-reaching but always acknowledged (to myself) the quality of your research and analysis and enjoyed your different "angle" of reading. Typically, my analysis on the Stone Dragon is much more straightforward:  Tyrion is born in Castlerock, also called "the Rock", and a translation could give "out of stone", but your analysis puts so much more meat on the bone! Do you have anything pending on the Sphinx (Tyrion IMHO) theme? Can a Sphinx be compared to a Gargoyle in general mythology?) Let me know.

[LmL]

1 hour ago, Jo Maltese said:

This is brilliant and certainly deserves a nod in the OP @UnmaskedLurker.

@LmL I read some of your contributions before and, to be honest, I often found you were far-reaching but always acknowledged (to myself) the quality of your research and analysis and enjoyed your different "angle" of reading. Typically, my analysis on the Stone Dragon is much more straightforward:  Tyrion is born in Castlerock, also called "the Rock", and a translation could give "out of stone", but your analysis puts so much more meat on the bone! Do you have anything pending on the Sphinx (Tyrion IMHO) theme? Can a Sphinx be compared to a Gargoyle in general mythology?) Let me know.

Thanks Jo! Glad you liked these connections, I was pretty tickled at all of these finds, for sure.

I mentioned the Casterly Rock thing when I talked about being born from a rock, yes - it's yet another manifestation of that idea. I haven't delved too deeply into the sphinx theme, although in general it seems the accepted view is to classify sphinxes, basilisks, manticores, wyverns, and other chimeras in the general "dragon" category. Are sphinxes associated with guarding? It seems like they might be, but I am not certain off of the top of my head. What ideas do you have in regards to Tyrion as a sphinx?

[Elisabetta Duò]

9 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

This is brilliant and certainly deserves a nod in the OP @UnmaskedLurker.

@LmL I read some of your contributions before and, to be honest, I often found you were far-reaching but always acknowledged (to myself) the quality of your research and analysis and enjoyed your different "angle" of reading. Typically, my analysis on the Stone Dragon is much more straightforward:  Tyrion is born in Castlerock, also called "the Rock", and a translation could give "out of stone", but your analysis puts so much more meat on the bone! Do you have anything pending on the Sphinx (Tyrion IMHO) theme? Can a Sphinx be compared to a Gargoyle in general mythology?) Let me know.

IF the sphinx is a person, I think Tyrion may be the sphinx, hence the 'riddle' ("the Sphinx is the riddle, not the riddler"): at a minimum, the sphinx had human head and lion body and he's a lion (=Lannister) with human face so he's half-man, half-lion (and he's noseless as the sphinx in popular culture and recent times (not in ancient egypt/greek one). When the sphinx has wings (for example in the grek mythology), they are hawk or eagle wings, not dragon wings.

It's true they meet a Valyrian sphinx with a dragon's body and a woman's face, but that's just to let Tyrion say the obvious line “A dragon queen” = Daenerys ... and it's not how sphinxes usually are, even in ASOIAF. The sphinxes found at the Citadel have the body of a lion, the face of a human, the wings of an eagle and the tail of a serpent.

In the story we have both male and female sphinxes, as the valyrian word for "prince" can allude both to a man or a woman. So some people suggested that the riddle would be that the prophecy can speak of a woman as much as of a man: dragons like sphinxes can be either male or female. If they are right, the sphinx is not a person.

Anyway, the egyptian sphinx was a man and benevolent, while the greek one was a woman and malevolent. The greek version had often also snake tail and eagle wings. Both had a ferocious strength and both were thought of guardians, often of temples (as gargoyles are - also - guardians of churches and castles, so sphinxes = gargoyles in serving as grotesque stone guardians). If Tyrion is the sphinx, then we reasonably have to look for the egyptian one and not for the greek one when looking for clues, unless GRRM mixed things up and used both the mythologies.

A mythological being with the body of a lion and the head of a human being is present also in the traditions, mythology and art of South and South-East Asia where it's known as man-beast or man-lion.

During the mannerist period, there was a return to sphinxes in art, there was this female sphinx rendered as a recumbent lioness (french sphynx); sphinxes were revived in art when the "grotesque" decorations of the Nero's Domus Aurea were brought to light in late 15th-century Rome (where the term grotesque here refers to the extravagant style of Ancient Roman decorative art, long used largely interchangeably with arabesque and moresque for types of decorative patterns using curving foliage elements; only in more recent times, 18th century, grotesque has come to be used as a general adjective for the strange, fantastic, ugly, disgusting and thus is often used to describe weird shapes and distorted forms). The terms comes from the italian grotte (caves), because the grotesque paintings were found in Roman ruines that were called at that time Le Grotte (The Grottoes) due to their appearance (rooms and corridors of the Domus Aurea, the unfinished palace complex started by Nero after the Great Fire of Rome).

Then we also have:

Quote

"Dragons," Moqorro said in the Common Tongue of Westeros... "Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all."

It's quite ambiguous and open to debate if Moqorro did count Tyrion amongst the dragons or not. I think this may mean that Dragons and Tyrion are different things. There are all sort of dragons and then there's him, a snarling gargoyle = guardian = sphinx, in the midst of the mess. The dragons are listed as x,y,z, then there's a full stop. 'And you'. It's possible he was still counting him as a dragon, but it's more likely he didn't.

Also, Tyrion mentions to Brown Ben Plumm most of the stories heard about dragons are fodder for fools, one of which is Dragons riddling with Sphinxes.

Again, I think this means that dragons and sphinxes are usually two different things and - it's a stretch and I'm not sure of it but still a possibility - it might even mean that the man lion = sphinx (Tyrion) will riddle with the Dragon (Daenerys), he will be playing riddles with her, she won't understand him or his true intentions so he will be the lion who betrays her.

It's maybe too obvious (tyrion is basically the only lion interacting with daenerys), but I just thought that given how things are now, I can't see Tyrion sticking with her in the long run.. their approach to power is completely different (he's a politician and a reformer, she's a conqueror and a revolutionary) and i think he will end up thinking she lost it and he will change side (maybe aligning himself with Jon? i don't know, it depends on how it all will play out..the fire to destroy the white walkers, etc.)

Anyway, all the references scream 'Tyrion = noseless lion-man = sphinx = grotesque guardian = gargoyle' to me.

The people who favor A+J=T think that Tyrion = sphinx => he's a targ; I'm not onboard with A+J=T, so I'm personally more inclined to think that IF he's the sphinx, it foreshadows something else (one of the reasons for Tyrion being the sphinx is him being a lion = lannister, not a dragon), maybe him being a riddle as being a dragon rider without being a Targ (or being a descendant of a Targaryen through his direct line of ancestors), having a special connection with dragons and being able to influence them (waking dragons from stone, fending evil off, whatever, etc.), a connection which is still unclear and which might have many different outcomes (especially the gargoyle theme, which has been interpreted in many different ways, all of them nicely put and somehow convincing) or maybe even something else about his role as a guardian in the fight against the others (Mormont said to him "we need men like you ON the wall" = stone guardian as gargoyles on the walls, not a man fighting AT the wall). They will need to figure out the 'riddle'.

Others think of Alleras ("A sphinx is a bit of this, a bit of that: a human face, the body of a lion, the wings of a hawk. Alleras was the same: his father was a Dornishman, his mother a black-skinned Summer Islander."). Others imply that this reference makes Tyrion the sphinx as a targ, because his mother and his father are from different houses as alleras parents were. I think that it was just a simpler misdirection like 'looook it's alleras!' while it's not him.

Others think of somebody else, because when Maester Aemon is talking about "the sphinx is the riddle, not the riddler," it was in the context of the prophecy of the Prince that was Promised. so that he might be talking about  the valyrian sphinx as it is more closely related to valyrian society/mythology, so about somebody being half dragon (Jon?).

If the sphinx is Daenerys (dragon + woman face), then she's the riddle because we don't know if  she'll be benevolent or malevolent, whehter she's turning into a mad conqueror burning everything she doesn't like like her father or not... the riddle will be how she will behave.

Or maybe it's none of them, the sphinx statue at the Citadel might even mean that the Citadel's intentions are the riddle itself (cheap theory but still, just to say it's not necessarily a person). Anyway, we'll see.

GRRM let us understand Tyrion will be a dragon rider since 1996, when he said "oh, if Tyrion could fly..." as well as, imo, he let us know Tyrion is Tywin son, when he said Tyrion was named by "his father" and Jon "by Ned".

[UnmaskedLurker]

5 hours ago, Jo Maltese said:

This is brilliant and certainly deserves a nod in the OP @UnmaskedLurker.

@LmL I read some of your contributions before and, to be honest, I often found you were far-reaching but always acknowledged (to myself) the quality of your research and analysis and enjoyed your different "angle" of reading. Typically, my analysis on the Stone Dragon is much more straightforward:  Tyrion is born in Castlerock, also called "the Rock", and a translation could give "out of stone", but your analysis puts so much more meat on the bone! Do you have anything pending on the Sphinx (Tyrion IMHO) theme? Can a Sphinx be compared to a Gargoyle in general mythology?) Let me know.

I added the analysis from @LmL in the "Additional Analysis" section. Interesting analysis. I admit that I tend to get lost when people make arguments by analogy to other literary sources, but the analysis certainly well researched and well thought out.

[LmL]

@Elisabetta Duò, cool stuff on the Sphinx idea. Tyrion is never called a sphinx, as he is a gargoyle and monkey demon, but the nose does seem to be a pretty good clue. The protection aspect of sphinxes (thanks for confirming this) obviously gels well with the gargoyle persona. And even if Tyrion is half Targ, he's still half lion as well, so it figures that he gets a lion figure identity. Of course, some sphinxes in ASOIAF are dragon-related, so I don't find his Sphinx identity to be in conflict with AJT, myself, particularly since monkey demon and gargoyle are specifically applied to Tyrion where Sphinx is not.

I can definitely see him riddling with dragons. Tyrion is one for riddles after all. 

I realize the Moquorro quote is ambiguous, and I'm sure it's been discussed plenty here. I see it as being able to go either way, myself. What I find much more compelling is Tyrion's repeated dragon dreams. To me, THAT is the strongest evidence for AJT in the whole book. It's a narrative argument - in a series where dragon people dream of dragons in a prophetic way, Tyrion is a character whose dragon dreams are referenced from book one to book five. That's always been what sold me. 

As for the SSM about Ned and Tyrion's father, I don't think that indicates anything, myself. 

What did you think of the monkey demon with dragon weapons line of research, as well as the first gargoyle being a dragon? Those seem like pretty good clues. 

[LmL]

3 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I added the analysis from @LmL in the "Additional Analysis" section. Interesting analysis. I admit that I tend to get lost when people make arguments by analogy to other literary sources, but the analysis certainly well researched and well thought out.

Cool man, I appreciate it. When you have time, you might try to full essay and see if it's easier to follow. I was summarizing a lot of research here without my usual helping of text quotes, but of course in the essay proper I try to back up everything I say with text quotes. 

I don't know what to say about the difficulty and murkiness of trying to trace out Martin's real world influences, because I have never seen a writer come anywhere close to using as many influences in a story as Martin has here. Mythology from every corner of the world, European medieval history, Biblical stuff, Marvel comics, it's all in there. It takes patience to trace these out but it's very rewarding and you learn about mythology and literature in the process, which I have to believe is part of Martin's intention in putting all these influences in his books. He views himself as keeping a tradition alive, I would think. 

[LmL]

BTW, I have started a thread for this podcast / essay, in case anyone wants to discuss it in more detail without completely derailing the AJT thread. Cheers!

 

[Jô Maltese]

@LmL and @Elisabetta Duò

About Tyrion the Sphinx - I have posted a few of my ideas here and there in different threads over the years, but basically @Daendrew and @Isobel Harper exposed those in a much better way a year ago here:  http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/128994-tyrion-is-the-riddle-of-the-sphinx/&page=1.

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - Tyrion III

"How kind of her." Tyrion made a waddling bow, but at the cabin door, he turned back. "What if we should find the queen and discover that this talk of dragons was just some sailor's drunken fancy? This wide world is full of such mad tales. Grumkins and snarks, ghosts and ghouls, mermaids, rock goblins, winged horses, winged pigs … winged lions."