Aejon Targaryen???

[Florina Laufeyson]

20 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

Aejon would be tacky as all hell.

Yes. Down with Aejon. 

20 hours ago, Ser Blake said:

Aemon would be poetic

I agree with that. Rhaegar having correspondence with Maester Aemon. Maester Aemon being something of a mentor figure for Jon. (i knew there was a reason he was blind...) Jon's real name maybe even being Aemon would be so lovely. Would Rhaegar ever anticipate the relative in the Night's Watch he corresponded with would ever meet his fated son? Mannnn im really rooting for the name to Aemon now! 

18 hours ago, JohnStormWeaver said:

wouldn't something like Visenyar make more sense given the motif of Rhaegar naming his kids after the 3 dragonriders that conquered Westeros, Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya ?

 

Wasnt the masculine version of Visenya basically Viserys?

[CrypticWeirwood]

32 minutes ago, Cron said:

What is it about Aejon that is worse than Aegon? Or Aemon?   They are all made up names for ASOIAF, as far as I know.  Why are "g" and "m" cool, but "j" is NOT?

No, they are not. They are both real names, often spelled differently, like Egan and Eamon.

Unlike the ludicrous name with a J, which is simply silly.

[Cron]

Just now, CrypticWeirwood said:

No, they are not. They are both real names, often spelled differently, like Egan and Eamon.

Wow, I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong, but what's your source for that?

Are you aware of ANYONE who has ever been named Aegon or Aemon except in ASOIAF??

I don't think just b/c they are simlar to "real" names means GRRM did not "coin" Aegon and Aemon for ASOIAF.   There are a number of names in ASOIAF that are similar to, or even seem to be derivatives of, "real" names, but that does NOT mean GRRM did not "coin" the ASOIAF versions.

And even IF there has ever been a "real" Aegon or Aemon, I'd have to say they are so obscure that, once again, i really don't understand what makes some people say Aegon and Aemon are cool, but Aejon is not.

[CrypticWeirwood]

2 minutes ago, Cron said:

Wow, I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong, but what's your source for that?

Are you aware of ANYONE who has ever been named Aegon or Aemon except in ASOIAF??

I don't think just b/c they are simlar to "real" names means GRRM did not "coin" Aegon and Aemon for ASOIAF.   There are a number of names in ASOIAF that are similar to, or even seem to be derivatives of, "real" names, but that does NOT mean GRRM did not "coin" the ASOIAF versions.

And even IF there has ever been a "real" Aegon or Aemon, I'd have to say they are so obscure that, once again, i really don't understand what makes some people say Aegon and Aemon are cool, but Aejon is not.

Because Martin deliberately gives names spelling twists, like Kevan instead of Kevin. These are beyond all counting.  Don’t get hung up on spellings. Spellings don’t better.  It’s still the same name.

Eamon is a perfectly normal name. So is Egan.  Both are Celtic.  Furthermore, there are the overtones and connotations brought on by the Greek word.

Nothing was made up here.

 

[Cron]

14 minutes ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Because Martin deliberately gives names spelling twists, like Kevan instead of Kevin. These are beyond all counting.  Don’t get hung up on spellings. Spellings don’t better.  It’s still the same name.

Eamon is a perfectly normal name. So is Egan.  Both are Celtic.  Furthermore, there are the overtones and connotations brought on by the Greek word.

Nothing was made up here.

 

With respect, I simply disagree.

"Nothing was made up here"???

Uhhhh...yes it was.  I never heard of or saw a Kevan, Aemon, or Aegon (or quite a few other names) in my life before ASOIAF.  To the best of my knowledge, GRRM simply made them up.  The fact that they are similar to other "real" names DOES NOT mean "[n]othing was made up here."

What's coming next here, a claim that GRRM did not coin "Jaehaerys" b/c it's somewhat similar to Jerry or Jerome?  And if not, then why is Jaehaerys cool, but Aejon isn't???

IF GRRM was the first one to ever name a person or character Aegon or Aemon, then he made those particular names up as applied to a person.

But even if he didn't, and even if there HAVE been "real" people named Aegon and Aemon, then as I said above, I think the names are so rare and obscure that they are no more or less "valid" than Aejon.

IN FACT, here, check THIS out:  "Aejon" is as close to "Jon," a "real name,"  as "Aegon" is to "Egan."  In fact, I would argue Aejon is CLOSER to Jon (a "real name") than Aegon is to Egan. So again, why is Aegon valid, but Aejon isn't???

[JGP]

I think you might be invested in Aejon so much as to border on the unhealthy. Aegon isn't far from Agenor [a historical Phoenician name] and an Aegon is noted in Greco-history. And, I know three Kevans in real life.

Aejon doesn't work for me because it doesn't follow the Targaryen aesthetic. And if Martin had instead chosen Aejon the Conqueror, it would've made me chuckle.

[J. Stargaryen]

I think it's Aemon, Aegon, or Aeron(Aeryn?).

I think Aemon is the most likely, for all the reasons already stated.

If it's Aegon, the rationale behind it is pretty simple. Lyanna would have heard from Rhaegar all of the prophecy stuff, about Aegon being his heir, and the PtwP, etc. Then, she would have learned that Rhaegar died, and his family--namely Aegon--were murdered. Knowing this, and then giving birth to a boy, Lyanna could have used it to try and fulfill the prophecies that Rhaegar told her about.

If it's Aeron, it would be kind of neat the way GRRM hid Jon's Targ in plain sight-- Jon Arryn. The person he was named after. And, upon hearing "Aeron" from Lyanna, "Jon" would likely have popped into Ned's head by association. As far as I can recall, there had never been an Aeron Targaryen, but there had also never been a Targ-Stark union either. And Jon is supposed to be one of a kind.

[Cron]

24 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

I think you might be invested in Aejon so much as to border on the unhealthy. Aegon isn't far from Agenor [a historical Phoenician name] and an Aegon is noted in Greco-history. And, I know three Kevans in real life.

Aejon doesn't work for me because it doesn't follow the Targaryen aesthetic. And if Martin had instead chosen Aejon the Conqueror, it would've made me chuckle.

(1)  I'm actually not as invested in Aejon as you might think.  Actually, I think there's a distinct possibility she whispered Azor, which is why the show did not reveal the name last night, cuz if they had, they would have ALSO been revealing Jon is Azor Ahai.

(2)  Aejon doesn't work for you b/c it doesn't follow the Targaryen aesthetic, and you would have chuckled if GRRM had named Aegon "Aejon"???  My friend and fellow ASOIAF enthusiast, GRRM INVENTED the Targaryens (or is someone going to next be telling me GRRM didn't create the Targaryens and their history, either?) AND their "aesthetics."  It IS whatever GRRM says it is.

If GRRM had written about Aejon the Conqueror, then THAT would have been the Targaryen aesthetic,and in my opinion, book readers would have accepted it every bit as much as Aegon.

[JGP]

I get what you're saying, but I'm saying that if Aejon was canonized and Aegon not, I wouldn't like the Targaryen aesthetic, at least insofar as that particular name goes. It doesn't hint at any grasp toward antiquity, but a nonsensical mash. 

[Cron]

6 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

I get what you're saying, but I'm saying that if Aejon was canonized and Aegon not, I wouldn't like the Targaryen aesthetic, at least insofar as that particular name goes. It doesn't hint at any grasp toward antiquity, but a nonsensical mash. 

Well, that's cool, of course.

Beauty and aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder, that's certainly true.

There's nothing wrong with that, and I respect your opinion about it.

 

[CrypticWeirwood]

43 minutes ago, Cron said:

With respect, I simply disagree.

"Nothing was made up here"???

Uhhhh...yes it was.  I never heard of or saw a Kevan, Aemon, or Aegon (or quite a few other names) in my life before ASOIAF.  To the best of my knowledge, GRRM simply made them up.

I'm deeply sorry that you have missed the point utterly and completely.

[Cron]

2 minutes ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

I'm deeply sorry that you have missed the point utterly and completely.

The fact that GRRM invented new names that are similar to existing names does not mean GRRM did not invent new names.

They either previously existed, or they didn't.

These names for people, to the best of my knowledge, DIDN'T.

But it's okay, I respect your opinion, although I am confident we are not going to agree here, and that's fine.

[Tywin Tytosson]

21 hours ago, Cron said:

Well, we can't be positive, but frankly I think Lyanna would not be so basic as to name yet another Targaryen "Aegon," I think she would be more creative.

Also, as has been pointed out, not only have there been 6 Aegons already, but one of them is Rhaegar's son, who is still alive at this time (or just recently was alive).  Would Rhaegar have two sons named Aegon?

havent read thru this thread, so i'll apologize if this has been mentioned already.

Rheagar could very well have named the boy.  If so, he could very well have named the child in honor of just-killed brother.  Very normal and common.  Ned Stark did this himself -- Brandon and Rickon were Ned's father and brother, killed by King Aerys.

Another possibility is Rheagar named Aegon because of the Prophesy he was following.

I assume Ned just abbreviated and shortened Aegon to Jon.  He certainly could not call this child 'Aegon'  or 'Egg'.  That would cause too many questions.  Why name your alleged bastard son after a famous person in the family u just helped overthrow?  So ... Instead ... Jon.

Jon and Aegon could very well be the same name....just in different base languages (Andal/First Men vs. Valyrian).  Like the real John vs Ian vs Ivan vs Johann/Hans vs Jacques vs Juan

Sorry Cron... as far as i can tell ... its Aegon.

 

[CrypticWeirwood]

19 minutes ago, Cron said:

The fact that GRRM invented new names that are similar to existing names does not mean GRRM did not invent new names.

They either previously existed, or they didn't.

These names for people, to the best of my knowledge, DIDN'T.

But it's okay, I respect your opinion, although I am confident we are not going to agree here, and that's fine.

Names are what people say. Spelling is immaterial. Those are the same names.

[Cron]

17 minutes ago, Thror Baratheon said:

havent read thru this thread, so i'll apologize if this has been mentioned already.

Rheagar could very well have named the boy.  If so, he could very well have named the child in honor of just-killed brother.  Very normal and common.  Ned Stark did this himself -- Brandon and Rickon were Ned's father and brother, killed by King Aerys.

Another possibility is Rheagar named Aegon because of the Prophesy he was following.

I assume Ned just abbreviated and shortened Aegon to Jon.  He certainly could not call this child 'Aegon'  or 'Egg'.  That would cause too many questions.  Why name your alleged bastard son after a famous person in the family u just helped overthrow?  So ... Instead ... Jon.

Jon and Aegon could very well be the same name....just in different base languages (Andal/First Men vs. Valyrian).  Like the real John vs Ian vs Ivan vs Johann/Hans vs Jacques vs Juan

Sorry Cron... as far as i can tell ... its Aegon.

 

Well, ser, with respect, I don't think Rhaegar COULD have named the baby in the honor of his just killed brother.

My understanding is that Rhaegar died at the Trident, which was BEFORE the sack of King's Landing, and thus BEFORE Gregor killed members of the royal family.

Thus, my understanding is that Rhaegar died before the "just killed brother," and thus could not have named Lyanna's baby Aegon in honor of the just killed brother.

[Magnar of Skagos]

The way Lyanna's mouth moved looked more like Jon was named Aerys.

[Cron]

9 minutes ago, Hrokkan of Skagos said:

The way Lyanna's mouth moved looked more like Jon was named Aerys.

I've seen some others suggest that, and I don't know for sure, but I just don't think they're gonna saddle Jon with that name.

My goodness, Aerys killed both Lyanna's father and brother (recently, as of the time Jon was born).  I can't imagine Lyanna would agree to that (much less suggest it)

In fact, I'm thinking "Aerys" is permanently retired in Westeros.

[Magnar of Skagos]

20 minutes ago, Cron said:

I've seen some others suggest that, and I don't know for sure, but I just don't think they're gonna saddle Jon with that name.

My goodness, Aerys killed both Lyanna's father and brother (recently, as of the time Jon was born).  I can't imagine Lyanna would agree to that (much less suggest it)

In fact, I'm thinking "Aerys" is permanently retired in Westeros.

Kinda like 'Adolf' in that respect haha. I don't know though, reading her lips really does look like Aerys. She doesn't close her mouth to make the 'M' sound for Aemon (which would be great because we've never had an Aemon as king), and it just didn't seem much like she made a 'G' either. Could be wrong. Just what it looked like to me.

[Darien Underhill]

His name is Aragorn son of Arathorn, the heir of Isildur, King of Gondor.

[Charles Stuart]

21 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

What a stunning find! It speaks to FJon secretly being not merely Prince Aemon (as do other indicators), but indeed a dragonknight!

Which dragon will be his, do you think?

1. Rhaegal the Green because that dragon is FJon’s father’s namesake?
2. Visenya White because the white color hearkens back to the albino-as-mystic motif seen in Ghost, Bloodraven, the weirwoods, and the Ghost of High Heart?

Probably viserion following the white colouration theme prevalent with Jon.

 

As for names, I am thinking Jaehaerys, Ned would have just shortened and changed it to avoid suspicion. I believe Rhaegar also had a grandfather named it so it might be a fit since if I remember correctly a lot of the recent lore regarding the prince who was promised occurred with Jaeharys around as told in the prophecy by the woods witch/ Ghost of High heart.