Jump to content

Tyrion Targaryen?


if it please m'lord

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

The dragon must have three heads.

Has that prophecy appeared in the show?

I think Tyrion has to ride the dragon at some point. But he doesn't need to be Targ.

I am sure the books will have a Tywin thought he was by Aerys twist. but the show has different dynamics. If it was something Tywin suspected but wasn't actually true, probably best to cut it altogether. 

I can even see the show cutting out a Tyrion Targ reveal. They have cut fake Aegon who I suspect is not actually a Targ at all.

The only person in the show who might give a reveal would be Benjen Stark. And he might just be coming back about now because he got a shout out last season. Benjen has probably been on ice precisely because he knows the truth of Jon's parentage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no doubt that if Tyrion is a Targ in the books, he will be one in the show. If he were a second-tier or third-tier character, who cares? However, Tyrion is one of the most important characters in the series. He is arguably THE most important character. The show is not going to change his parentage from what it is in the books.

I agree that there has been ample support for R+L=J in the show: Stannis expressing doubt that Ned was the type of man to cheat, Oberyn characterizing Rhaegar as running off with another woman, Littlefinger's thoughtful face when Sansa says that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and raped her, etc. etc. The setup started a while ago. Joanna, on the other hand, has never even been mentioned by name in the show, let alone Aerys having a thing for her. If the show was going to reveal Tyrion being a Targ, given that he is the closest thing the show has to a main character, wouldn't they have dropped some hints by now? I mean, even if Varys is blown away by Tyrion's dragontaming, what's he going to do, sit Tyrion down next episode and be all "LOL, turns out you're a Targ, I guess Aerys raped your mom"? This season is definitely letting the revelations fly fast and furious, but come on.

With all that said...GRRM made a silly comment about Tyrion flying years ago on Livejournal. If you assume that Jon, Dany and Tyrion are going to be the three dragonriders and form a trinity of sorts, it would be weird for two of them to be Targs and one of them to be a non-Targ. Mucks up the symmetry a bit, and GRRM like any writer loves his symmetry.

With respect to Nettles, she inarguably tamed Sheepstealer using food bribes. However, I thought she was supposed to be a dragonseed. Nettles is described as such in the list of the dragons in TWOIAF ("A wild dragon tamed by a dragonseed"). Was it just that everyone in Westeros assumed she must be a dragonseed because she tamed the dragon, or was it in fact confirmed that she was a dragonseed? Because if it's the latter, then I don't think there would be any instances in ASOIAF history of a non-Targ taming a dragon (which would bode well for the Tyrion Targ theory if Tyrion IS in fact going to ride one). If it's the former, then that clears the way for a non-Targ to tame a dragon in the books.

Assuming Nettles had Targ blood, it seemed from the dragonseed stuff that having Targ blood was a necessary but not sufficient condition for riding dragons (in the books, anyway). You needed to have Targ blood, but the mere fact of having Targ blood wouldn't suffice, which is why Nettles succeeded using food bribes. Thus many dragonseeds died trying to tame dragons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hallam said:

That is actually a good point. The show has cut fake Aegon and Lady Stoneheart and might well cut Tyrion's backstory for the same reason - too much duplication.

The lack of setup is not. The show does not do the same long precursors that the books do. We have only just started to get basic info on Robert's rebellion.

No, we haven't.  We've had information about Robert's Rebellion, Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Start since the first episode of season one.  The show does a lot of backstory when it's necessary to explain the story at hand.  Show watchers could tell you who Lyanna Stark or Mad King Aerys was...they couldn't tell you the name of Tyrion's mother.  That alone should be enough to dispute the theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

The dragon must have three heads.

Im a bit hazy, but what does this quote actually intend to put forward?

Does it mean that Rhaegar needed three children ie Jon? Does it mean that there must be 3 dragon riders? Or is it just a generic symbol of 3 that keeps repeating within the Targaryen superstitions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 6:19 PM, Mourneblade said:

For those who do not feel there has been foreshadowing, you are forgetting what is staring you in the face.

Tywin Lanister's last words were "You are not my son!" It does not matter where you stand on this debate, but to deny that that could be foreshadowing is closing your mind based on your viewpoint.

You have a point.

It could be foreshadowing
But the first thing we hear of Tywin (in both books and show IIRC) is Tyrion's comment to Jon that all dwarves are bastards in their fathers' eyes.
I think that "You are not my son!" is simply that attitude coming to the fore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Hodor's Election Agent said:

But the first thing we hear of Tywin (in both books and show IIRC) is Tyrion's comment to Jon that all dwarves are bastards in their fathers' eyes.

Since I fell in love with Tyrion Targaryen theory I've read this quote as "I'm unhappy with being a dwarf. My father treads me like a bastard. That must be because I'm dwarf and not as golden shiny as my (trueborn) brother."

Tyrion avoids the company of other dwarves. How would he know their relationship to their fathers. Common sense dictates that a father wants his son healthy and strong over little and weak, I know. So the quote can be read either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, messem said:

Since I fell in love with Tyrion Targaryen theory I've read this quote as "I'm unhappy with being a dwarf. My father treads me like a bastard. That must be because I'm dwarf and not as golden shiny as my (trueborn) brother."

Tyrion avoids the company of other dwarves. How would he know their relationship to their fathers. Common sense dictates that a father wants his son healthy and strong over little and weak, I know. So the quote can be read either way.

I'm not sure he would need to have met any other dwarves to say that.
It's just (IMO) a bitter reflection based on how his father has always viewed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hodor's Election Agent said:

It's just (IMO) a bitter reflection based on how his father has always viewed him.

I totally agree, but is dwarf or bastard the key word here? Key word for the reader not Tyrion! I think it's open to interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said "lack of foreshadowing" earlier, I meant they had plenty of opportunities for Jamie, Barriston, Tywin to make throw away statements to could be interpreted as "Tyrion's father is questionable".  Jamie or Barriston could have mentioned Ayres obsession with Joanna but they did not.  It takes book knowledge combined with Tywin's angry rant to make a connection (not just GRRM's book but the History book as well).

I just don't see it in the show and to throw it in at the end would be cheesy (like an identical twin showing up in a soap opera at the last minute or a miracle cure to a deadly disease).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin, who had always hated Tyrion for what he was and what it meant for his family, tells him that he's not his son after Tyrion has just shot him with a crossbow.

I don't think there are any subtle clues to glean from that statement.  It's straight up Tywin disowning him for killing him.  If Tywin had ever thought for one moment that Tyrion wasn't truly his son, Tyrion would have been dead long ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Newstar said:

Assuming Nettles had Targ blood, it seemed from the dragonseed stuff that having Targ blood was a necessary but not sufficient condition for riding dragons (in the books, anyway). You needed to have Targ blood, but the mere fact of having Targ blood wouldn't suffice, which is why Nettles succeeded using food bribes. Thus many dragonseeds died trying to tame dragons.

Personally, I think the "dragonseed" explanation is an ex post factum attempt to shore up the Targ status quo...

In other words it's re-writing history to protect the special snowflake status of the elite... Let's face it, if it became common knowledge that some people with the right disposition and approach could tame a dragon it would be incredibly damaging to the Targ dynasty.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, sj4iy said:

Tywin, who had always hated Tyrion for what he was and what it meant for his family, tells him that he's not his son after Tyrion has just shot him with a crossbow.

I don't think there are any subtle clues to glean from that statement.  It's straight up Tywin disowning him for killing him.  If Tywin had ever thought for one moment that Tyrion wasn't truly his son, Tyrion would have been dead long ago.

:agree: 

25 minutes ago, Anne Hill Crosby said:

Joanna has been mentioned several times in the show. In fact she has been mentioned this season, when Ceirce was talking about the first dead body she ever saw. And if I am not mistaken, Jamie and Tyrion talk about Joanna.

Yes, Joanna has been mentioned, but never in the same context with the Mad King. (while Lyanna and Rhaegar are mentioned together most of the times, by Oberyn, the Starks, Robert, possibly Jorah or Barristan too though I'm not too sure of that) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, hallam said:

No way do we find out who Jon's parents are until Book 7 and season 8. And even then it is most likely we get many red herrings thrown at us.

The Tower of Joy is next week.  They're telling the whole story this season, hence, why they began by introducing who Lyanna was.

11 hours ago, hallam said:

We only heard about the Maggy the frog prophecy last season and we haven't heard the whole thing either.

I think that in the books the possibility that Tyrion is by Aerys is going to turn out to be a key point in Tywin's motivation. But that does not mean he was right.

We heard about the Maggy prophecy at the exact same time we learned about it in the books.

The lack of foreshadowing of the Tyrion = Targaryen twist in the books by this point is also evidence against it, incidentally.  All there is in the actual source material is Barristan's passing comment about him being overly familiar at the bedding ceremony; everything else is from supplementary materials.

7 hours ago, Newstar said:

With all that said...GRRM made a silly comment about Tyrion flying years ago on Livejournal. If you assume that Jon, Dany and Tyrion are going to be the three dragonriders and form a trinity of sorts, it would be weird for two of them to be Targs and one of them to be a non-Targ. Mucks up the symmetry a bit, and GRRM like any writer loves his symmetry.

With respect to Nettles, she inarguably tamed Sheepstealer using food bribes. However, I thought she was supposed to be a dragonseed. Nettles is described as such in the list of the dragons in TWOIAF ("A wild dragon tamed by a dragonseed"). Was it just that everyone in Westeros assumed she must be a dragonseed because she tamed the dragon, or was it in fact confirmed that she was a dragonseed? Because if it's the latter, then I don't think there would be any instances in ASOIAF history of a non-Targ taming a dragon (which would bode well for the Tyrion Targ theory if Tyrion IS in fact going to ride one). If it's the former, then that clears the way for a non-Targ to tame a dragon in the books.

Assuming Nettles had Targ blood, it seemed from the dragonseed stuff that having Targ blood was a necessary but not sufficient condition for riding dragons (in the books, anyway). You needed to have Targ blood, but the mere fact of having Targ blood wouldn't suffice, which is why Nettles succeeded using food bribes. Thus many dragonseeds died trying to tame dragons.

There are already a lot of parallels between them.  I don't think it's necessary for him to be a Targaryen too on top of all that, particularly since Tyrion being a dragonrider as a result of his own wit and ingenuity is arguably also more in line with the spirit of the books.

Regarding Nettles, people just assume she's a dragonseed because she tamed a dragon, which they believe only Targaryens can do.  Of the four dragonseed, the only one with a confirmed Targaryen ancestor was Addam Velaryon (son of Lord Corlys Velaryon).  The other dudes supposedly had Valyrian appearance, I believe, but Nettles looked nothing like a Targaryen and the maester just wrote "there's tons of Targaryen blood circulating on Dragonstone, so presumably she had some".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tyrion = Targ is as much bleaching as Rheagar and Lyanna actually married theory.

8 hours ago, Newstar said:

I have no doubt that if Tyrion is a Targ in the books, he will be one in the show. If he were a second-tier or third-tier character, who cares? However, Tyrion is one of the most important characters in the series. He is arguably THE most important character. The show is not going to change his parentage from what it is in the books.

I agree that there has been ample support for R+L=J in the show: Stannis expressing doubt that Ned was the type of man to cheat, Oberyn characterizing Rhaegar as running off with another woman, Littlefinger's thoughtful face when Sansa says that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and raped her, etc. etc. The setup started a while ago. Joanna, on the other hand, has never even been mentioned by name in the show, let alone Aerys having a thing for her. If the show was going to reveal Tyrion being a Targ, given that he is the closest thing the show has to a main character, wouldn't they have dropped some hints by now? I mean, even if Varys is blown away by Tyrion's dragontaming, what's he going to do, sit Tyrion down next episode and be all "LOL, turns out you're a Targ, I guess Aerys raped your mom"? This season is definitely letting the revelations fly fast and furious, but come on.

With all that said...GRRM made a silly comment about Tyrion flying years ago on Livejournal. If you assume that Jon, Dany and Tyrion are going to be the three dragonriders and form a trinity of sorts, it would be weird for two of them to be Targs and one of them to be a non-Targ. Mucks up the symmetry a bit, and GRRM like any writer loves his symmetry.

With respect to Nettles, she inarguably tamed Sheepstealer using food bribes. However, I thought she was supposed to be a dragonseed. Nettles is described as such in the list of the dragons in TWOIAF ("A wild dragon tamed by a dragonseed"). Was it just that everyone in Westeros assumed she must be a dragonseed because she tamed the dragon, or was it in fact confirmed that she was a dragonseed? Because if it's the latter, then I don't think there would be any instances in ASOIAF history of a non-Targ taming a dragon (which would bode well for the Tyrion Targ theory if Tyrion IS in fact going to ride one). If it's the former, then that clears the way for a non-Targ to tame a dragon in the books.

Assuming Nettles had Targ blood, it seemed from the dragonseed stuff that having Targ blood was a necessary but not sufficient condition for riding dragons (in the books, anyway). You needed to have Targ blood, but the mere fact of having Targ blood wouldn't suffice, which is why Nettles succeeded using food bribes. Thus many dragonseeds died trying to tame dragons.

In regards with Dragonseed, they were referred to the batards of the Targ and Valeryion that Rheanrya hired durin the Dance of Dragon. Though Nettles was count as one of them due to being a dragon rider and assuming my thought to be a bastard (though we don't know which heritage and this may not be true).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RhaeBee said:

No, but I read the books. Did you? It comes from Oberyn, Doran, Barristan all the people who were in connection with Elia and Rhaegar. Why would Doran and Oberyn lie about their sister's help and how would it serve anybody to lie about it? You need to base these things on something. 

Oh the Tower of Joy? I thought Jon was born at Dragonstone, so how and why is he at the Tower or Joy now and why does Lyanna commit suicide? 

I still have no answer to who is the heir to the thrown the King's Guard guards at Tower of Joy according to you. Just like I still have no answer to when Jon was convinced and why his supposed mother Elia left him when she went to King's Landing or how and why Jon got to be in Ned's care. There is nothing wrong with a theory but at this point I'm not even sure there is one. You did not support a single one of your claims. 

And what on gods earth has Lyanna to do with Brienne? 

Look, if you can't figure out that Brienne and Lyanna were both female knights then you really can't expect to understand anything else. Brienne is there to establish the range of things that Lyanna might have done. Such as pledge service to Rheagar as Brienne does to Cat.

Jon is taken from Dragonstone to ToJ by Lyanna who is charged with protecting him. They had these things called horses, they allow characters to get from one location to another. The surviving members of the Kingsguard arrive to protect him as the new King after the murder of his siblings and the sack of KL. 

Oberyn says Elia was fragile but does not know her state of health after giving birth. There is no way for him to know it. Same for the rest of them.

Jon Convinced? He was conceived shortly after the birth of R+E's second child. Since it is established that the conception occurs between that date and Rheagar's death, there is no timeline for R+L=J that isn't going to work for R+E.

The central issue for Jon's character, the issue that causes him to join the NW is that he is a bastard. So any theory that does not make him a legitimate heir without resorting to nonsensical polygamous marriages is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hallam said:

Look, if you can't figure out that Brienne and Lyanna were both female knights then you really can't expect to understand anything else. Brienne is there to establish the range of things that Lyanna might have done. Such as pledge service to Rheagar as Brienne does to Cat.

Jon is taken from Dragonstone to ToJ by Lyanna who is charged with protecting him. They had these things called horses, they allow characters to get from one location to another. The surviving members of the Kingsguard arrive to protect him as the new King after the murder of his siblings and the sack of KL. 

Oberyn says Elia was fragile but does not know her state of health after giving birth. There is no way for him to know it. Same for the rest of them.

Jon Convinced? He was conceived shortly after the birth of R+E's second child. Since it is established that the conception occurs between that date and Rheagar's death, there is no timeline for R+L=J that isn't going to work for R+E.

The central issue for Jon's character, the issue that causes him to join the NW is that he is a bastard. So any theory that does not make him a legitimate heir without resorting to nonsensical polygamous marriages is wrong.

Lyanna was not a female knight, at least there is absolutely nothing to support this. She may or may not have been the Knight of the Laughing Tree, but there is literally nothing to indicate that she ever became a knight like Brienne. 

Why did Elia leave Jon behind? And why would Lyanna be charged with protecting him of all people? And why would he be taken to the Tower of Joy instead of off to a save place like Viserys and Daenerys from Dragonstone? The King's Guard members at the Tower of Joy did not arrive after the sack of King's Landing, they were never at the sack of King's Landing or the battle of Trident, they were at the Tower of Joy all along, hence there was also nothing for them to survive. 

If somebody has a fragile health, it is most likely to get even more fragile after child birth as that is kind of a strain on the human body. We also know that Elia was bedridden for half a year after the birth of her first child. And we also know that Rhaegar left Dragonstone shortly after the birth of Aegon. The female body will also not conceive before recovering from the previous, fragile health makes this process even longer, as it did in the case of Elia's first child. Let me add that Aegon was born only one year before Jon and Elia and Rhaegar spent the majority of that year apart, as Rhaegar left Dragonstone soon after Aegon's birth and the next time he appeared was to command the battle of trident, by which time Elia would have given birth to Jon, according to you. There is not enough time. 

And Jon Snow's issue being a bastard is no proof whatsoever that he has to be in truth a legitimate heir. He could be, but it's no way necessary. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, RhaeBee said:

Lyanna was not a female knight, at least there is absolutely nothing to support this. She may or may not have been the Knight of the Laughing Tree, but there is literally nothing to indicate that she ever became a knight like Brienne. 

Truly the most bizarre allegation I’ve seen in quite some time here, and there's never been a shortage of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, RhaeBee said:

Lyanna was not a female knight, at least there is absolutely nothing to support this. She may or may not have been the Knight of the Laughing Tree, but there is literally nothing to indicate that she ever became a knight like Brienne. 

So Lyanna was not a knight. Only she was a knight in the tournament. 

Make up your mind.

What is the point of the laughing tree story if not to indicate that Lyanna was capable of fighting as a knight? Arya and Brienne both represent different sides of Lyanna's personality. Arya more so than Brienne of course.

If Lyanna was capable of fighting as a knight, why dismiss the possibility Rheagar would make her one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...