Moqorro's quote to Tyrion

[LynnS]

51 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Tyrion is not going to be snarling in the middle of the dead dragons so you can cross off Dany's brothers.

Being a Targaryen does make him a dragon. If you can include Viserys (of whom Dany says "he was no dragon") you can't exclude Jon. A false dragon is still a dragon. False doesn't have to mean fake.

I think you can also interpret true and false as someone's nature rather than whether or not they are a dragon.  Aemon would be someone that I would consider to be true while Varys (if he is a Blackfyre) as false.  In other words a false friend or ally. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

On 3/20/2017 at 2:58 PM, LynnS said:

I think you can also interpret true and false as someone's nature rather than whether or not they are a dragon.  Aemon would be someone that I would consider to be true while Varys (if he is a Blackfyre) as false.  In other words a false friend or ally. 

Yes, that's what I was getting at. False has more than one meaning. 

[the conquering bastard 25]

On 3/16/2017 at 10:03 AM, Good Guy Garlan said:

My guess is:

Old = Aemon

Young = Jon

True = Dany

False = Aegon

Bright = Bloodraven

Dark = Varys

Tyrion's met them all except Bloodraven. 

 There is a passage where Tyrion looks at the moon and it reminds him of an eye following them. I would propose that this is a referenece to Bloodraven. He seems intrested in Jon the stark children and Tyrion but not Dany....also this passage was when they were on the shy maid. So he's keeping an eye on Aegon Blackfyre as well...

[Greywater-Watch]

And if it is really dreagons meant? Tyrion visited the skulls of the old Dragons below the Red Keep. Bright and dark might refer to Drogon and Viseryion. And maybe one of Daenery's Dragon will turn out to be treacherous (e.g. changing sides by the horn).

[velo-knight]

4 minutes ago, Greywater-Watch said:

And if it is really dreagons meant? Tyrion visited the skulls of the old Dragons below the Red Keep. Bright and dark might refer to Drogon and Viseryion. And maybe one of Daenery's Dragon will turn out to be treacherous (e.g. changing sides by the horn).

Dragons True and False could be a reference to Dany's dragons (actual, real dragons) and the Targaryens (the "dragons" who are not, in fact, dragons)

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

On ‎3‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 3:04 PM, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Tyrion is not going to be snarling in the middle of the dead dragons so you can cross off Dany's brothers.

Being a Targaryen does make him a dragon. If you can include Viserys (of whom Dany says "he was no dragon") you can't exclude Jon. A false dragon is still a dragon. False doesn't have to mean fake.

But what is Viserys favorite warning to Dany  ? " Don't wake the Dragon . " Jon sigil is a white wolf on a gray field .

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

4 hours ago, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

But what is Viserys favorite warning to Dany  ? " Don't wake the Dragon . " Jon sigil is a white wolf on a gray field .

That's really cool actually I like that a lot. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

7 hours ago, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

But what is Viserys favorite warning to Dany  ? " Don't wake the Dragon . " Jon sigil is a white wolf on a gray field .

Jon doesn't have a sigil. He's never claimed one. And if he finds out he's half Targaryen he may well choose a white dragon on red or black for his sigil. Jon may be the dragon woken from stone (you know, if it wasn't the eggs hatching).

[Lost Melnibonean]

1 hour ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Jon doesn't have a sigil. He's never claimed one. And if he finds out he's half Targaryen he may well choose a white dragon on red or black for his sigil. Jon may be the dragon woken from stone (you know, if it wasn't the eggs hatching).

Jon's sigil is the black field of the Night's Watch. 

[H Wadsworth Longfellow]

Depending on how much credibility you give Moqorro, this is evidence that Tyrion is not a Targaryen.  "snarling in the midst of dragons" prove he's not himself a dragon.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

4 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

Jon's sigil is the black field of the Night's Watch. 

Which is still not a white wolf on a gray field.

3 hours ago, Green-Lipped Mussel said:

Depending on how much credibility you give Moqorro, this is evidence that Tyrion is not a Targaryen.  "snarling in the midst of dragons" prove he's not himself a dragon.

Yep.

[Shi Qiang]

7 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Jon doesn't have a sigil. He's never claimed one. And if he finds out he's half Targaryen he may well choose a white dragon on red or black for his sigil. Jon may be the dragon woken from stone (you know, if it wasn't the eggs hatching).

Bastards do not carry the sigils of their fathers.  It would be an insult to the Targaryens (Daenerys and Aegon) for a bastard like Jon to put a dragon on his banner. 

[Lady Blizzardborn]

6 hours ago, Allardyce said:

Bastards do not carry the sigils of their fathers.  It would be an insult to the Targaryens (Daenerys and Aegon) for a bastard like Jon to put a dragon on his banner. 

Bastards who choose to have sigils generally use their father's sigils with the colors inverted. That's why Daemon Blackfyre's sigil is a black dragon on red instead of a red dragon on black. 

[The Sleeper]

I'm not sure about old and young, but I'm pretty sure the true dragon is Dany and/or Jon with the false being Aegon.

I am also pretty sure that the bright dragon is Dany with the dark being Jon. Dany is reknowned, in the spotlight and celebrated and reviled as a Targaryen, while Jon lies in obscurity, his heritage unknown even to him.

[Lost Melnibonean]

1 hour ago, The Sleeper said:

I'm not sure about old and young, but I'm pretty sure the true dragon is Dany and/or Jon with the false being Aegon.

I am also pretty sure that the bright dragon is Dany with the dark being Jon. Dany is reknowned, in the spotlight and celebrated and reviled as a Targaryen, while Jon lies in obscurity, his heritage unknown even to him.

The old and young fits in with your reasoning as well. Which dragon is relatively young, and which is relatively old... Targaryen or Blackfyre? 

[The Sleeper]

8 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

The old and young fits in with your reasoning as well. Which dragon is relatively young, and which is relatively old... Targaryen or Blackfyre? 

If you take it another way, the Blackfyres are descended from Aegon III, through Daena, while the current Targaryens are descended from Viserys. Which makes the Blackfyres the senior branch...

Apart from the literal age of Aemon or Bloodraven, one of which is dead and the other half-dead, I can't think of anyone who would matter enough to fit. Out of the more prominent dragons we have all three are young.

I am wondering about Marwyn the mage. He said that Aemon couldn't be trusted due to his blood, and neither coud he ... for the same reason perhaps? Targaryen ancestry is not that big a deal. Due to the efforts of Aegon the IV, there could well be hundreds of them. Marwyn is pretty old and he was mentioned in the first book.

I think Brienne will also be alot more pivotal. The world book mentions that Tarth was tied to house Targaryen. She may have Targaryen ancestry as far back as three generations, which would make her a young dragon?

The same could be said for the Baratheons of course.

I haven't seen a particularly convincing candidate for the young vs old dragons.

[Lost Melnibonean]

1 hour ago, The Sleeper said:

If you take it another way, the Blackfyres are descended from Aegon III, through Daena, while the current Targaryens are descended from Viserys. Which makes the Blackfyres the senior branch...

House Blackfyre did not exist until Ser Daemon Waters found it, and presumably,King Daeron II accorded it legal standing. Thus House Targaryen, which was one of the dragonlord families of old Valyria, is clearly older than House Blackfyre. 

[The Sleeper]

1 hour ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

House Blackfyre did not exist until Ser Daemon Waters found it, and presumably,King Daeron II accorded it legal standing. Thus House Targaryen, which was one of the dragonlord families of old Valyria, is clearly older than House Blackfyre. 

Doesn't work for me. For one I don't see them as a seperate house, but mostly they are not really that much a part in the main sequence. While Martin has spent a lot of keystrokes on them in Dunk & Egg and the World book, refferences of them in the Song of ice and fire are few and far between. Other than background for the Golden Company, possibly Illyrio and some easter eggs for his hardcore fans, I don't see them featuring heavily in the story.

[Lost Melnibonean]

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Doesn't work for me. For one I don't see them as a seperate house, but mostly they are not really that much a part in the main sequence. While Martin has spent a lot of keystrokes on them in Dunk & Egg and the World book, refferences of them in the Song of ice and fire are few and far between. Other than background for the Golden Company, possibly Illyrio and some easter eggs for his hardcore fans, I don't see them featuring heavily in the story.

I beg to differ.

Red and black combinations keep coming, and coming...

Spoiler

Quote

Ser Harrold had the grace to blush.  “Her father says she is more precious to him than gold.  He’s rich, the richest man in Gulltown.  A fortune in spices.”

“What will you name the babe?” she asked.  “Cinnamon if she’s a girl?  Cloves if he’s a boy?”

Alayne, Winds

Note that the red one is a girl, and the black one is a boy... Hmm... That reminds me of a pair of dragons... An old one and a young one, a true one and a false one, a bright one and a dark one.  

[The Sleeper]

31 minutes ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I beg to differ.

Red and black combinations keep coming, and coming...

  Reveal hidden contents

Alayne, Winds

Note that the red one is a girl, and the black one is a boy... Hmm... That reminds me of a pair of dragons... An old one and a young one, a true one and a false one, a bright one and a dark one.  

That's your prerogative.