Jump to content

Archived

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

falcotron

Why is Jon's name Aegon?

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Ingelheim said:

It's really confusing. I'm even wondering if Lyanna named him Aegon without Rhaegar's blessing.

 

I believe Lyanna naming him is the most likely scenario. 

---

Going to try and squeeze in some replies this afternoon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Or Arthur Dayne's...

It seems very unlikely that Ned Stark would regard Arthur Dayne as 'the finest knight he ever saw' if he had knocked up his Prince's wife. And considering that Dayne would have spent most of his time in King's Landing, not Dragonstone, it rather limits the opportunities they had to be together, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/08/2017 at 1:29 PM, purple-eyes said:

I failed to understand your point. 

Plenty of things could happen in real history, true, but this does not mean they could also happen in this certain fiction. This universe has its own history and lore which we should follow. Among thousands of characters and family trees, there is no single case that two siblings share same name. Therefore we can safely assume it would not happen that Jon and Aegon both were named as Aegon Targaryen. 

Sure, you could say Rhaegar might decide he should be the first one in this universe who names his two sons with same name, but why? 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis,_Duke_of_Burgundy#Issue

Scroll down to "issue".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tywinelle said:

I agree with this evidence; for me the hinging point is how a) Lyanna knew that the elder Aegon had died and b ) why she decided to still use Aegon even if she did know.

In Louis' case, the oldest male by tradition had to be called Louis. The Targaryens do not have that tradition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I agree with this evidence; for me the hinging point is how a) Lyanna knew that the elder Aegon had died and b ) why she decided to still use Aegon even if she did know.

In Louis' case, the oldest male by tradition had to be called Louis. The Targaryens do not have that tradition.

Maybe Rhaegar asked her to name the baby Aegon if it was a boy?  I don't know.  As I said before, I don't see how it's a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tywinelle said:

if you are saying real life example I really do not need your information.

Even one of my college classmates took her dead elder sister's name. Her sister died very young so her parents gave them exact same name.

what I was saying was," thousands of characters (in this GRRM ice and fire universe)", can you name even one example?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/08/2017 at 0:06 PM, purple-eyes said:

if you are saying real life example I really do not need your information.

Even one of my college classmates took her dead elder sister's name. Her sister died very young so her parents gave them exact same name.

what I was saying was," thousands of characters (in this GRRM ice and fire universe)", can you name even one example?

 

Are you serious?  Have you ever heard the saying 'there is always a first time for everything'?  Besides the Westerosi family trees are incomplete so how are we to know that there weren't cases of the same name being given to a newborn as his previously deceased sibling?

The Targs were whackos.  Why is it so hard for you to accept that Rhaegar would give two of his sons the same name????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2017 at 9:45 AM, UnmaskedLurker said:

OK -- so I probably should not have stated that the issue of the name not being a real mystery was my biggest problem -- because it really is not my biggest problem. I was just reading a post of yours in which you were going on and on about how the name Aegon would be a perfect name for GRRM to have used given the nature of his mysteries -- and I just though the analysis was kind of silly. What I mean is that, as I noted in my prior post, I just don't see how the name really could have been something GRRM expected readers to contemplate. Who is Jon's mother? Yes. Who is the Valonqar? Yes. And of course, one of my favorites, might Aerys really be the father of Tyrion? Apparently, Yes. But what is Jon's real Targ name? I don't see it because it only gets asked if a reader already figured out that Rhaegar is Jon's father -- and that Rhaegar and Lyanna would have named Jon (given that neither lived to what would have been Jon's name day). While GRRM might have seen people looking that forward and trying to figure out the name -- I tend to doubt it. More likely is that GRRM intended the name ultimately to be revealed and have significance -- and he probably left some clues for people to look back and catch -- but GRRM is not setting up the name as a big mystery for readers to try to uncover before the reveal.

1

GRRM said he expected some careful readers to work out Jon's parentage. Contemplating his name is one of the most obvious and logical next steps. I'm certain GRRM anticipated this and more. 

Quote

So what are my real reasons for my skepticism regarding the proposition that Jon's name in the books will be revealed as Aegon. There are two people who could have reasonably be understood to  have given Jon his Targ name, Rhaegar or Lyanna. I will take each in turn and show why I have trouble with the logic that either could have selected Aegon as Jon's real name.

Obviously, the biggest obstacle to Jon being named Aegon is that his half-brother's name was Aegon (for purposes of this post I will call him rAegon for the "real" Aegon). But before going into that issue in detail, I want to review the relevant facts that I believe we know from the books.

We know that Rhaegar died before rAegon died. We know that Rhaegar named rAegon and stated that Aegon is a good name for a king. We know that at the time of rAegon's birth, Rhaegar thought that rAegon was TPTWP. Rhaegar never states that TPTWP must have the name Aegon. In fact, we know that the prophecy does not give a name to TPTWP -- the prophecy actually does not even give a definitive gender -- as Maester Aemon stated that Dany might be TPTWP because apparently the prophecy in ancient Valaryrian actually reference the "dragon" that was promised -- and dragon not having an actual gender but when translated has been understood to mean "prince" (although the real importance obviously is that "dragon" actually is a reference to House Targ -- but that was confirmed by the woods witch who indicated that TPTWP would come from the Aerys/Rhaella line). Oh, and while some people do not seem to accept as fact that Lyanna knew of rAegon's death before she told Ned Jon's real name -- I actually think we can be pretty sure that she knew this information given that the KG during the ToJ confrontation with Ned seemed to confirm that the KG were aware of the events in KL before Ned arrived. So while the text does not give 100% confirmation that Lyanna would have known about rAegon's death, the likelihood seems quite high that she did (a fact perhaps in your favor, but I am trying to give your argument every benefit to determine its plausibility). Oh, and one final "fact" that is potentially relevant (and one that I have seen some -- not you but other -- suggest is not a "fact") -- Rhaegar did not expect to die in the war -- the evidence being that he told Jaime that he would deal with the situation by calling a council after the war was won -- so Rhaegar expected to beat the rebels and return to KL presumably to become reagent (although unclear exactly what Rhaegar thought the council would do -- but the important point is that Rhaegar did not have a vision confirming his own death at the Trident).

So now on to my analysis. Would Rhaegar have decided to name Jon as Aegon. I am not sure that even you are arguing for this proposition, but I will analyze it for thoroughness. Rhaegar left ToJ to help in the war effort. Rhaegar had no reason to believe that he -- and by extension his children -- would die in the War. So the notion that Rhaegar would decide to name two of his children Aegon would have been virtually unthinkable. Rhaegar would have been essentially rejecting his other two children by Elia and making the aftermath of the War even that much trickier with Dorne. Given that Dorne seems to be helping Rhaegar and Lyanna (or at least the Whent family was), Rhaegar does not seem to be in a state of mind to offend Dorne and reject his other children. So the theory that Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for Jon is quite weak. Only by assuming that Rhaegar wanted to disown his other two children would this theory make any sense. And the evidence from the text does not support Rhaegar disowning his other two children. On the contrary, the best evidence is that Rhaegar thought that his three children would be the three heads of the dragon.

12

I agree with this analysis. I've repeatedly stated that Rhaegar did not name Jon, Lyanna did. He may have been indirectly responsible for Lyanna choosing it. Having told her about reAegon's (R+E=Aegon) destiny as the SoIaF and PtwP, etc.

Quote

Now moving to the theory that Lyanna named Jon as Aegon after the death of Rhaegar and rAegon. I just do not follow the logic for why Lyanna would have done so. Why? Because Lyanna would have had no apparent reason to do so and a very good reason not to do so. At the point that Lyanna would have been naming Jon Aegon, Lyanna would have known that Jon was never going to be king (as rAegon only died at the time that Robert and the rebels took KL and killed Aerys, Elia and the children), giving Jon a "good name for King" would be pointless. Even if we assume that Lyanna came to believe the prophecy as much as Rhaegar (no evidence for this -- but we have huge gaps in our knowledge of what happened between them, so possible), the prophecy does not give a name to TPTWP. Rhaegar does not believe that TPTWP needs to be named Aegon (he originally thought that he himself was TPTWP -- and his name is not Aegon), and his contact with Maester Aemon does not suggest any belief that the name Aegon has any connection to TPTWP. And of course, Rhaegar's understanding of TPTWP is that it is a "prince" and not "king" so TPTWP does not need a King's name. We also would need to assume that Lyanna and Rhaegar never decided on a boy's name. Given that Rhaegar could not know how long he would be away from ToJ, Rhaegar would have wanted to name his child, so he almost certainly would have discussed the matter with Lyanna and chosen names -- and as noted above, Aegon would would not have been one of them.

4

Rhaegar believed his son by Elia was the PtwP. He chose Aegon, the Targaryen name, for that child. I don't think that is a coincidence.

I've already provided evidence that Rhaegar was expecting the third head to be a girl by way of the HotU scene with Rhaegar, Elia, and their son. Rhaegar apparently sees Dany—a girl!—while telling Elia that he needs another child/dragon head. A plausible interpretation suggests itself. Rhaegar "sees," or maybe more accurately envisions, the third head/child as a girl. That's what he expects. In turn, we should expect him to act accordingly.

Rhaegar seems like a true believer who was attempting to fulfill the prophecy as he interpreted it. If he believed he was destined to have another daughter, and there is evidence indicating he saw it that way, why would he pick out a boy's name? Which idea is more consistent with that characterization: "I'm destined to have another daughter. Call her Visenya." Or, "I'm destined to have another daughter. Call her Visenya. But just in case I'm wrong and it's a boy, call him Aemon." 

I know you have your own head canon about this. You believe Rhaegar wanted a Son(g) of Ice and Fire with Lyanna, not a daughter as widely assumed. I've gone back and forth on it myself. I don't expect you to adopt my explanations as your new head canon. I am merely trying to explain how I think this works, or at least could have worked in the story. I'm not looking to rehash that debate. 

Quote

So the logic would have to be that either for some reason Rheagar and Lyanna did not discuss names (or were so CERTAIN that Jon would be a girl that they only discussed a girl's name) or they did and Lyanna switched names after rAegon's death. While either is possible, they are both a bit of a stretch. But even if we get past that obstacle, why choose Aegon? If Lyanna wanted to honor Rhaegar, she would have named Jon Rhaegar. Even if Lyanna determined that Rhaegar would have considered Jon to be TPTWP, as noted above, nothing in the prophecy indicates that the name of TPTWP is Aegon. Lyanna was not rAegon's mother. If she were, perhaps she might take this step after the death of rAegon. But to pick this name -- a name that she would have known could never become known to anyone other than Ned and maybe one day Jon himself -- makes no sense. What is the point? Either use the name that Rhaegar picked, if he picked a name, and if he did it was not Aegon. Or name the child Rhaegar, after his late father. But the name Aegon would be pointless under these circumstances and requires Lyanna to go through a thought process that is nonsensical.

3

I answered most of this above, but you finish off by asking what is the point of Lyanna naming Jon Aegon? Ultimately, the point is that GRRM wanted him to have the Targaryen name, which makes sense when you think of it. He's one of the main characters in the story and probably one of the two main heroes. If the prophesied Targaryen prince of Aerys and Rhaella's line is a male, Aegon seems like the obvious choice for a name. As for Lyanna's in-universe justification, it could be the same. Or it could have been something more related to the prophecies. And/or she could have been attempting to fulfill Rhaegar's wishes to have his son and heir be named Aegon. 

Lol at Rhaegar Jr.

Quote

Here are the elements that seem unlikely. First, either Rhaegar and Lyanna never chose a boy's name or they chose a name and Lyanna changed it. While the former is possible, it seems unlikely as Rhaegar would not have been able to be certain the baby would be a girl and knew he might not return until after the birth so he would have picked a name -- possible he did not but unlikely. If they picked a name, then Lyanna would have had to decide not to use that name and choose a different name. Or if no name was picked, Lyanna would have had to decide on her own to pick Aegon. Why would Lyanna do either when rAegon was named Aegon -- even if already dead? How would changing the name honor Rhaegar? If no name was picked, how would choosing Aegon be a plausible pick? Given that the prophecy does not name the promised prince, why would Lyanna believe Jon needed to or should be named Aegon?

Finally, what serves the story? How does naming Jon Aegon serve the story? If only the main series books are considered, only a few Targ male names are prominent -- Aerys, Viserys, Rhaegar, Aemon and Aegon. I don't consider Aerys to be a possibility, and Viserys is possible only on the theory that Rhaegar was naming his three children after the original three Targs (which is possible, but not that likely). I don't consider any other Targ name to be plausible as the vast majority of readers would have no connection to the name. So what name would have the most impact on the readers -- and on Jon as a character. The two that seem most impactful would be Rhaegar (as the name of his dead father) or Aemon (the name of his mentor). No one is suggesting that Jon's real name is Rhaegar. So that leave Aemon. Why not Aegon? What does it serve in the story? The theory seems to be that Aegon the Conqueror is the greatest Targ in history, so Jon being the greatest Targ ever should have the same name. While that rationale is possible -- it seems quite a bit weaker than Jon realizing that the only Targ he knew and someone he greatly admires is the person for who Jon was named. That choice has a bigger impact and is more meaningful to both Jon and the readers than Aegon. There is not and has never been an Aegon in the main books with whom the readers identify. GRRM has left numerous hints that readers can go back and see after the reveal that support Jon as Aemon (you know the clues -- from the number of Aemons in Targ history who were brothers to an Aegon to Jon wanting to be Aemon the Dragonheart as a child to Jon stating that he is no Aemon Targaryen -- and probably some others). While I understand there also are hints to Jon being Aegon, those clues seem more aligned to hints that Jon will be a great leader.

Sorry this post got so long, but after being a little flippant in my last post, I wanted to be thorough this time. Also apologies for any typos, I am too tired and busy to go back and proofread this post.

You know the answer to this question, but you don't like it, so you say it's "weaker." Btw, I do agree that being named Aemon would be more meaningful for Jon. I could see the name Aegon Targaryen becoming a responsibility for him. To put it another way, Aemon would be sweet, Aegon would be bittersweet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine suggested an answer that makes sense to me.

If Lyanna knows that Rhaegar and his first two kids are dead, and the Mad King, and she believes Viserys and Dany are dead (after all, they probably didn't broadcast Darry's secret plan around the raven-net), then her son is now the last ever Targaryen.

So, she's not naming him Aegon because he will be a king (which she doesn't expect him to be), or because it's part of a prophecy (the prophecy is already screwed, if it even exists in the show universe), or to honor the child of her husband's first wife (who would do that?), but just because it feels right for the last Targaryen to have the same name as the first one.

Of course Aegon isn't actually the first Targaryen, that was whoever founded the family in the early years of the Freehold. But he's the first Westerosi Targaryen, and I can see both Lyanna and millions of viewers thinking this way, so that's not a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brain tends to fill in missing items sometimes, like I thought Arya had said to Tywin, "Aegon and his sister-wives." But she only said, "sisters."

I can't remember, but have the names of Rhaegar's children ever been mentioned in the show? 

I know I'm going out on a limb here, but I think we're likely to find out in both books & show, why Jon is named Aegon. 

My guess is, just like the Kingsguard looking after her, of course Lyanna knew Rhaegar died at the Trident. She also knew the Mountain killed his kids, and that Robert was now on the throne - which is why she  makes Ned promise to keep her child safe. If Robert was dead, none of this would be an issue.

She probably also knew how important the prophecy was to him, and that his son be named Aegon. That's my guess. What will actually happen remains to be seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ShadowKitteh said:

I can't remember, but have the names of Rhaegar's children ever been mentioned in the show? 

Yes. For example, in episode S3E04, Thoros says, "House Clegane was built upon dead children. I saw them lay Prince Aegon and Princess Rhaenys before the Iron Throne."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2017 at 0:02 AM, falcotron said:

Why not Jon Targaryen, or Jaehaerys Targaryen, or Rickard Targaryen? Or, since it seems like he was never going to get an official naming ceremony and Ned was going to put him in hiding right away, why not just (unnamed boy) Targaryen, who will have to choose his name if he's ever revealed as Rhaegar's heir?

They've already told us that Rhaegar's first son—who, as far as I know, Lyanna should at this point believe is still alive and well—is named Aegon. At least Thoros referred to him by name in season 3, and I think there are a couple of others.

If there were some compelling reason for D&D to reuse the name, maybe it would be worth it anyway, but I can't figure out what that reason might be. Are they drawing a connection to one of the five kings named Aegon? Or planning to drop a prophecy next season that names Rhaegar's son Aegon by name, and the big secret is that it means Jon rather than his brother? All I can think is that they deliberately wanted us—and by us, I mean the book readers—to connect him to the other Aegon as a winking nod to the Little Griff story they cut. But they have to know that book snobs will be unhappy with that, and nobody else will get it.

In-universe, it's much the same question, but I suppose there might be a different answer to "what were D&D thinking" and "what was Lyanna thinking".

"Why is Jon's name Aegon?"

Well, obviously because we already have way too many people named AEJON running around, and a shortage of people named AEGON, so they went with Aegon.

HARRR!!!

(By the way, I think "Aegon" is boring, cliche, and overused.  I would have strongly preferred that Jon be given a unique Targaryen name, that NO character in ASOIAF/GoT has ever had, to reflect Jon's unique role in the story and history.  But...ANOTHER Aegon??  Come on.  Boring.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the case for Aemon or Aegon. I'm not sure there's a substantive difference between the two, in-universe, for the books, or show, really.

One point in favor of Jon Snow being another Aegon would be an additional parallel with Egg:

Let the boy (Egg*) die, so the man (and King) (Aegon V) can be born. *Nickname derived from diminutive of given name, using first syllable.

Let the boy (Jon*) die, so the man (and King) (Aegon ??VI or VII, depending) can be born. *Nickname derived from diminutive of given name, using second syllable.

Egg, King Aegon V, wanted to reform things, but couldn't push his reforms through. His getting the Crown was a major longshot before it happened.

Jon, the future King Ae(g/j)on VI/VII, wanted to reform things, but got stabbed. His becoming Lord Commander was a major longshot before it happened.

Huh, as I think about it, there are a lot of similarities between Aegon the Unlikely and his reign, and Lord Commander Jon Snow and his term as Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. This could well strengthen the case for Jon Snow being an Aegon Targaryen in the books.

Aegon V mostly failed to achieve the reforms he wanted, especially long-term. Jon might just succeed in the long-term with the reforms he wants.

 

 

 

Sure, it's a mystery, potentially, but I'm not sure it's one that actually matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kytheros said:

Let the boy (Egg*) die, so the man (and King) (Aegon V) can be born. *Nickname derived from diminutive of given name, using first syllable.

Let the boy (Jon*) die, so the man (and King) (Aegon ??VI or VII, depending) can be born. *Nickname derived from diminutive of given name, using second syllable.

Multiple people have suggested this "Aejon" idea, but the obvious problem with it's not Aejon, it's Aegon. We heard it pronounced that way, with a g. And Jon is not a diminutive of Aegon, it's an entirely unrelated name, that we've never heard used as a diminutive. It just happens to rhyme with the second syllable in about the same phonological way as Lann rhymes with Bran, or Don with Orton, etc., and I don't see anyone suggesting that Lann the Clever is somehow related to Bran the Builder.

And the problem with the other Egg-Jon parallels is that they all fit Dany even better, and of course she also fits Aegon I even better, plus the two Aegons of the Dance, while Jon doesn't fit any of them. So, they could maybe reinforce the out-of-universe connotations of the name if there were already a good reason for it, but they really don't serve as a reason on their own. And, meanwhile, they don't help at all for the in-universe answer.

My friend's suggestion that in-universe show!Lyanna chose Aegon not because he's supposed to be a king but because she thinks he's the last-ever Targaryen seems more appealing the more I think of it. That makes it ironic out-of-universe, of course, but the whole discovery of Jon's ancestry is ironic—he finally loses the stain of bastardy, but only by losing his father; he gets a solid claim to a throne he doesn't want by losing the good-enough claim to the one he has; etc. But it's much harder to guess the in-universe story in the books in this case than with some of the other explanations. (For example, if it really were "Rhaegar insisted, for prophecy reasons", I'd be pretty sure that was lifted straight out of the books.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Rhaegar discovered Aegon wasn't really his, and this led him to seek out Lyanna. There's a lot about his marriage to Elia we have yet to find out. Jon, I believe, was his only true son

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Smokefall said:

I reckon Rhaegar discovered Aegon wasn't really his, and this led him to seek out Lyanna. There's a lot about his marriage to Elia we have yet to find out. Jon, I believe, was his only true son

Could it be that the kids were not completely healthy? Elia herself was not very strong after giving birth. Elia's marriage to Rhaegar was arranged though, so the simple answer is that Rhaegar and Lyanna just fell in love and as a king he was able to annul the first marriage, so he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Smokefall said:

I reckon Rhaegar discovered Aegon wasn't really his, and this led him to seek out Lyanna. There's a lot about his marriage to Elia we have yet to find out. Jon, I believe, was his only true son

What do you base this highly unlikely scenario on? Please don't tell me it's the old "well all Dornish women are promiscuous because Arianne" thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mikkel said:

What do you base this highly unlikely scenario on? Please don't tell me it's the old "well all Dornish women are promiscuous because Arianne" thing.

To be fair, there is an in-universe stereotype, not just one character.

That being said, it's still pretty silly. The stereotype is that they're open about their promiscuity, not that they hide it behind their partners' backs. Dorne is full of acknowledged Sands, not secret bastards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×