Jump to content

Jon Snow's Real Name


Lucia Targaryen

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

the point of this story is that it doesn't matter. If Jon leads the fight against the Others, as I think we both agree he will, it is because he is "the man" not because he is King Aegon Targaryen, seventh of his name. Titles, vows, oaths, prophecy, they're all just words and words are wind. This is a story about actions, standing up and being counted, owning who you are, doing the right thing, regardless of whether you're highborn, lowborn, bastard or king.

I don't exactly agree with you on this. I think, that who his father was, is important, but not because his father was Crown Prince, or next in line of Targaryen inheritance, but rather because of their blood, their "dragon" blood. What matters, is that blood, because thanks to it, Jon is one of three heads of the dragon. If the prophecy about the promised Prince, and Azor Ahai with his Lightbringer, will come true, if it's not a red herring, used by Martin, but actually a "spoiler", of what will happen next, then it does matter. Jon is the destined hero of ASOIAF not because of what kind of person he is, but because he is a "dragon". Possibly, he will become one of three dragonriders, alongside with Dany and Rhaego (or fAegon, if Rhaego is really dead, which I don't believe), and he will be able to wield Lightbringer, which is, possibly, Dawn sword of Daynes, because he is both - a Targaryen and a Dayne thru his father (and Aegon V's mother, Queen Dyanna Dayne).

Arthur Pendragon became King of Britain, because he was son of Uther Pendragon, and was able to draw Excalibur out of stone. People followed him, because in the prophecy it was said, that whoever will draw that sword from stone, is the rightful King of Britain. He drew the sword = he is the King.

In the end of LOTR people has crowned Aragorn, not because he was a great war hero, but because he was son and heir of previous King.

Jesus was Lord of lords and King of kings and Messiah, etc., because he was born by a mother, that was a virgin. His conception and birth was a miracle. If he was just an average human being, then people wouldn't have followed him. His half-God blood, is what made him able to do all those miracles, that he did.

Cinderella was able to attend royal ball, and meet with the prince, because she was a god-daughter of a fairy (thanks to her ancestry, she had connections with the right people ^_^). And she got married with that prince, because the shoe fitted.

Jon is partially Targaryen, which will enable him to ride a dragon. And he is partially Dayne, which will enable him to wield Lightbringer/Dawn of Daynes. Stannis also has a bit of those same genes as Jon, but Jon's Targaryen+Dayne blood is purer than Stannis', Jon is 1/2 Targaryen and 1/8 Dayne, while Stannis is only 1/8 Targaryen and 1/16 Dayne, thus there's higher probability, that Jon is the One. Many people has followed Stannis, because he is sort of capable and people believed in him. But it all doesn't matter, because he isn't the promised Prince. The woodswitch has said to Targaryens, that Jaehaerys' descendant will be the One, while Stannis is descendant of Jaehaerys' sister, Rhaelle, so he doesn't fit into the criteria of the prophecy. And people of 7K won't be following Jon, just because he has gained respect of the wildlings, and let them pass thru the Wall. They will follow him, because he is the rightful ruler of 7K, as the son of the Crown Prince Rhaegar. One of Dany's dragon will (probably) let Jon mount it, because Jon is of dragon blood, not because of his personality, or his achievements. 

So I think, that it does matter, and this is exactly the point of the story. Robb has fallen. Stannis will also fall. And Jon and Dany will be leading people into the battle against the Others, not because of who they are, but because of what they are - they are blood of the dragon, and this is what this story is about. It's about magic and destiny predetermined by this magic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Megorova said:

(...)

Possibly, he will become one of three dragonriders, alongside with Dany and Rhaego (or fAegon, if Rhaego is really dead, which I don't believe), and he will be able to wield Lightbringer, which is, possibly, Dawn sword of Daynes, because he is both - a Targaryen and a Dayne thru his father (and Aegon V's mother, Queen Dyanna Dayne).

(...)

When you suddenly decide to stop reading a poster's contributions... :bang: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

Arthur Pendragon became King of Britain, because he was son of Uther Pendragon, and was able to draw Excalibur out of stone. People followed him, because in the prophecy it was said, that whoever will draw that sword from stone, is the rightful King of Britain. He drew the sword = he is the King.

In the end of LOTR people has crowned Aragorn, not because he was a great war hero, but because he was son and heir of previous King.

Jesus was Lord of lords and King of kings and Messiah, etc., because he was born by a mother, that was a virgin. His conception and birth was a miracle. If he was just an average human being, then people wouldn't have followed him. His half-God blood, is what made him able to do all those miracles, that he did.

Cinderella was able to attend royal ball, and meet with the prince, because she was a god-daughter of a fairy (thanks to her ancestry, she had connections with the right people ^_^). And she got married with that prince, because the shoe fitted.

And this is the trope I'm suggesting GRRM will subvert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 7:54 PM, J. Stargaryen said:

Calling the baby Aegon wasn't about Elia and her son. It wasn't a slight, or spite, or anything negative. It was about what her husband wanted his son and heir to be called. I see it as a very emotionally impactful and powerful moment. "What better name for a king?" doesn't necessarily mean Jon is going to be king. But it does tell us what Rhaegar wanted his son and heir to be called because of the way succession works.

I must admit that when the show called jon Aegon I thought it was ridiculous. However, after thinking things through lyanna's pov it is the best name she could give her son.

She just had her at least lover murdered by robert, elia and her children brutally murdered by tywin henchmen and the remaining targs were in dragonstone trapped. She must have wanted revenge!

It makes sense for lyanna no name her son Aegon because she wants him to avenge rhaegar and his siblings and retake the 7 kingdoms for the targs. And it just shows how big ned's treason is towards lyanna and jon… So many broken promises...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

I don't exactly agree with you on this. I think, that who his father was, is important, but not because his father was Crown Prince, or next in line of Targaryen inheritance, but rather because of their blood, their "dragon" blood. What matters, is that blood, because thanks to it, Jon is one of three heads of the dragon. If the prophecy about the promised Prince, and Azor Ahai with his Lightbringer, will come true, if it's not a red herring, used by Martin, but actually a "spoiler", of what will happen next, then it does matter. Jon is the destined hero of ASOIAF not because of what kind of person he is, but because he is a "dragon". Possibly, he will become one of three dragonriders, alongside with Dany and Rhaego (or fAegon, if Rhaego is really dead, which I don't believe), and he will be able to wield Lightbringer, which is, possibly, Dawn sword of Daynes, because he is both - a Targaryen and a Dayne thru his father (and Aegon V's mother, Queen Dyanna Dayne).

Arthur Pendragon became King of Britain, because he was son of Uther Pendragon, and was able to draw Excalibur out of stone. People followed him, because in the prophecy it was said, that whoever will draw that sword from stone, is the rightful King of Britain. He drew the sword = he is the King.

In the end of LOTR people has crowned Aragorn, not because he was a great war hero, but because he was son and heir of previous King.

Jesus was Lord of lords and King of kings and Messiah, etc., because he was born by a mother, that was a virgin. His conception and birth was a miracle. If he was just an average human being, then people wouldn't have followed him. His half-God blood, is what made him able to do all those miracles, that he did.

Cinderella was able to attend royal ball, and meet with the prince, because she was a god-daughter of a fairy (thanks to her ancestry, she had connections with the right people ^_^). And she got married with that prince, because the shoe fitted.

Jon is partially Targaryen, which will enable him to ride a dragon. And he is partially Dayne, which will enable him to wield Lightbringer/Dawn of Daynes. Stannis also has a bit of those same genes as Jon, but Jon's Targaryen+Dayne blood is purer than Stannis', Jon is 1/2 Targaryen and 1/8 Dayne, while Stannis is only 1/8 Targaryen and 1/16 Dayne, thus there's higher probability, that Jon is the One. Many people has followed Stannis, because he is sort of capable and people believed in him. But it all doesn't matter, because he isn't the promised Prince. The woodswitch has said to Targaryens, that Jaehaerys' descendant will be the One, while Stannis is descendant of Jaehaerys' sister, Rhaelle, so he doesn't fit into the criteria of the prophecy. And people of 7K won't be following Jon, just because he has gained respect of the wildlings, and let them pass thru the Wall. They will follow him, because he is the rightful ruler of 7K, as the son of the Crown Prince Rhaegar. One of Dany's dragon will (probably) let Jon mount it, because Jon is of dragon blood, not because of his personality, or his achievements. 

So I think, that it does matter, and this is exactly the point of the story. Robb has fallen. Stannis will also fall. And Jon and Dany will be leading people into the battle against the Others, not because of who they are, but because of what they are - they are blood of the dragon, and this is what this story is about. It's about magic and destiny predetermined by this magic.

I really disagree.

I think jon will be leading kingdoms not due to his targ heritage but because he is ned's bastard, or robb's heir or sansa's brother and people will end up chosing him to lead. And in the end if he ends up as king it will be as jon snow and not as a targ. Showing that despite him being the heir to the IT he got there as jon snow due to his actions and friendships and circunstances and not his targ blood. 

And I think we just need to look at past and current events to see this trend. So far both the watch and the wildlings chosed him as a leader figure because of his stark heritage and his actions (both were important). If he ends up as king in the north (and riverlands) it will be because his blood and people actually like him (robb thought he was worthy of being his heir and some northerns will have to support him). And if the vale joins the north and the riverlands will be due to sansa influencing people to support jon because he is her sibling and I supose she will end up understanding what it means to be a bastard.

It is doubtfull that if people like stannis or joffrey were in jon's position they would achieve the same position that jon might achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

When you suddenly decide to stop reading a poster's contributions... :bang: 

What's with your reaction? <_< I could be right about all of that. And I'm not wrong about Jon being partially Dayne, thru Dyanna Dayne, if he is Rhaegar's son.

Dyanna Dayne + Maekar Targaryen = (1/2 Dayne) Aegon V + Betha Blackwood = (1/4 Dayne) Jaehaerys + (1/4 Dayne) Shaera = (1/4 Dayne) Aerys + (1/4 Dayne) Rhaella = (1/4 Dayne) Rhaegar + Lyanna = (1/8 Dayne) Jon.

And Rhaego could be alive, because besides words of Mirri Maz Duur, there's no evidence of his death, not even his corpse. And she said, that he was born dead, but it's a lie, and there's evidence in the book, that Rhaego was alive, when he was born.

This is Rhaego's POV in Dany IX, what he has experienced inside Dany's body, during his birth (it's his experience, not Dany's, and the hall with stone arches and the red door is a birth canal and vagina):

"She was walking down a long hall beneath high stone arches. She could not look behind her, must not look behind her. There was a door ahead of her, tiny with distance, but even from afar, she saw that it was painted red. She walked faster, and her bare feet left bloody footprints on the stone.

...

She felt the dark behind her, and the red door seemed farther away than ever.

...

She raced, her feet melting the stone wherever they touched. "Faster!" the ghosts cried as one, and she screamed and threw herself forward. A great knife of pain ripped down her back, and she felt her skin tear open and smelled the stench of burning blood and saw the shadow of wings (<- Dany's POV mixed with Rhaego's POV. It's the moment of the final push, after which the baby came out. Those ghost kings is, most likely, Shiera Seastar, who is also Quaithe and the Three-Eyed Crow, and them crying to Dany "Faster, faster" is actually "Push, push". Shiera was assisting Dany during Rhaego's birth <- You may not agree with my ideas, but just because you don't agree, doesn't mean, that I'm wrong. I could be right about this). And Daenerys Targaryen flew. (<- going thru red door and flying means being born.)

...

The door loomed before her, the red door, so close, so close, the hall was a blur around her, the cold receding behind. And now the stone was gone and she flew across the Dothraki sea, high and higher, the green rippling beneath, and all that lived and breathed fled in terror from the shadow of her wings. She could smell home, she could see it, there, just beyond that door, green fields and great stone houses and arms to keep her warm, there. She threw open the door.

...

And saw her brother Rhaegar, mounted on a stallion as black as his armor. Fire glimmered red through the narrow eye slit of his helm. "The last dragon," Ser Jorah's voice whispered faintly. "The last, the last." Dany lifted his polished black visor. The face within was her own."

<- thru usage of Shiera's blood magic, in that chapter Dany saw events thru her own eyes, and thru eyes of her unborn child. And when Rhaego was born, and lifted up, he saw his mother's face, Dany was in his consciousness, and thus she had out of body experience, during which she saw herself thru eyes of newborn Rhaego.

Let's wait until release of TWOW, I'm 90% sure, that Dany will be reunited with Rhaego in Vaes Dothrak, and that his kidnapping by his Dothraki relatives was first out of three treasons, predicted by the Undying - the treason for blood. The other 10% is that he was kidnapped by Shiera, and now he's in Asshai. He is half-Dothraki and half-dragonseed, so his kidnapping also could be classified as the treason for blood, if he was kidnapped by his distant aunt of Targaryen blood.

I get it, that you, and majority of other posters on this forum, disagree with my ideas, but it doesn't mean, that my ideas are wrong. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

And this is the trope I'm suggesting GRRM will subvert.

Why would he? What exactly made you think so?

31 minutes ago, divica said:

I think jon will be leading kingdoms not due to his targ heritage but because he is ned's bastard, or robb's heir or sansa's brother

Not all people followed Ned. No one rose in the rebellion against Lannisters, after they killed Ned. Not even all of Ned's ex-people and supporters were willing to follow Robb. There was no rebellion after Lannisters killed Robb and his people. No one tried to prevent Sansa's marriage with Tyrion. No one tried to get her out of Red Keep, and out of Lannisters' control. Thus - so what if he is Ned's bastard, Robb's heir, and Sansa's brother? -> People have given zero contribution to Ned, Robb and Sansa, so why would they be doing something for the sake of someone Ned's-Robb's-or-Sansa's?

Also what's the difference in whether he will be chosen as a ruler, because of his sister/brother/adopted father, and him being chosen, because of his real parentage? -> Both cases are all about connections, and determining someone's value, or net-worth, based on who he is to other important people, not based on who he is himself. Isn't it basically the same thing? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2019 at 2:57 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

(...)

The Rhaegar jr. stuff seems to be pulled out of real life as opposed to the text. There's hardly any juniors in the entire series and none in the Targaryen and Stark histories that I know of. (Did I miss some in F&B?)

(...)

Indeed. I do not really believe in this hypothesis myself - but it would not really be a "junior" then, just a "Rhaegar" reborn (not unlike Danny naming her first dragon "Drogon"). And for the record, I do think GRRM bases the personalities (and therefore their choices) of his characters on real life, as opposed to the world they live in.

More significantly, to quote you: there's hardly any example in the entire series and none in the Targaryen and Stark histories that I know of... Of a family having two sons named the same. Even when the first born died at an early age or born from a second wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Megorova said:

In the end of LOTR people has crowned Aragorn, not because he was a great war hero, but because he was son and heir of previous King.

Er.... Aragorn was the heir of a lineage derived from the same ancestor 3000 years ago, and once of his ancestors had already been denied the claim once when the local branch got extinct (and that was at a time when the said ancestor was still a king in his own, not a mere chieftain). Being a hero accomplished in battle and a saviour of Minas Tirith was what brought him the crown, or else he could have demanded it years back when he was serving the Steward as Thorongil. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Every morning they had trained together, since they were big enough to walk; Snow and Stark, spinning and slashing about the wards of Winterfell, shouting and laughing, sometimes crying when there was no one else to see. They were not little boys when they fought, but knights and mighty heroes. “I’m Prince Aemon the Dragonknight,” Jon would call out, and Robb would shout back, “Well, I’m Florian the Fool.” Or Robb would say, “I’m the Young Dragon,” and Jon would reply, “I’m Ser Ryam Redwyne.”

Thinking about this quote more I started to wonder if there was more to this and it turns out people have already built solid theories around it. They are not the same people but there are unmistakable parallels and it gives clues as to events that may happen in the rest of the story.

Robb

Telling-the-future-from-the-past-the-foolish-wolf

Jon

The-stubborn-dragon

This may not influence Jon's name, I still don't believe Lyana named him, but I am now convinced his character is based upon Aemon Targaryen... and Ryam Redwyne. Or more correctly they are based on Jon Snow.

Likewise Robb has very strong parallels as a combination of Daeron "the young dragon" Targaryen and Florian the fool. In Robb's case they are arguably even stronger and more obvious, although this may be because his story is at an end and we know all of it.

To summarise the above links

Robb, like Daeron, was a young King and a military genius, although in both cases their success on the battlefield was fleeting. They were known as the Young Wolf and the Young Dragon respectively. They both made use of a animals track to slip behind the enemy unknown to record some of their most remarkable victories. Robb was betrayed and murdered at the Red Wedding, effectively an event organised to make good with his former allies, Daeron was betrayed and murdered at peace talks.

Florian represents Robb's tragic love story as a catalyst to his demise.

As for Jon, he and Aemon became lord commander of the Nightswatch and Kingsguard respectively at a young age.

They were both cousins to the King.

They both loved their "sisters" very much although it was unclear whether this was in a carnal manner or not. 

They both survived assassination attempts (assuming Jon isn't actually dead).

As for Ryam Redwyne, the writer of those theories based this on their shared stubbornness and honour. When they wrote that very little was known about Ryam Redwyne, now Fire and Blood is out it would be interesting to reexamine Redwyne more to see if there is anything else of interest.

If these clues do persist in the story we might see Jon imprisoned and saved by another brother (bran?) and then in turn rescuing that brother by carrying him a long distance to safety. It would also see Jon remain true to his vows and stay at the Nightswatch for the rest of his days rather than become King. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

Indeed. I do not really believe in this hypothesis myself - but it would not really be a "junior" then, just a "Rhaegar" reborn (not unlike Danny naming her first dragon "Drogon"). And for the record, I do think GRRM bases the personalities (and therefore their choices) of his characters on real life, as opposed to the world they live in.

More significantly, to quote you: there's hardly any example in the entire series and none in the Targaryen and Stark histories that I know of... Of a family having two sons named the same. Even when the first born died at an early age or born from a second wife.

That is true. But there are a bunch of Aegons, and GRRM would need a way to distract us from realizing Jon was one of them, lest it be extremely obvious. Rhaegar jr. isn't at all obvious.

If Elia's son hadn't been called Aegon, would you, or most of the fandom really, have any doubt that it was Jon's true name? We could expect some contrarians to emerge, but I'm sure you'd agree that it would be the overwhelming favorite in that case. What better name for a Targaryen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

If Elia's son hadn't been called Aegon, would you, or most of the fandom really, have any doubt that it was Jon's true name? We could expect some contrarians to emerge, but I'm sure you'd agree that it would be the overwhelming favorite in that case. What better name for a Targaryen?

Nope, I would not. A bit sad that it makes me a contrarian, though! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Megorova said:

Why would he? What exactly made you think so?

Why would he? In my opinion, because it would better suit the story he is telling, as I interpret it at least. This is obviously subjective.

Let me add that I don't buy the common hype about GRRM always deconstructing tropes or breaking conventional storytelling rules because while he does deconstruct tropes and break rules he also uses standard tropes and sticks to the rules when the story demands it, and there are multiple examples of each in the series. (And besides, when you step out of one trope you invariably step into another.) But I do expect him to subvert the tropes we are discussing here, (hidden-king, chosen-one) as they are the quintessential fantasy tropes and I don't think GRRM is trying to tell the typical fantasy story, even if at times it looks like that's where we are going.

What exactly makes me think so? It's hard to be exact as it is not one specific thing but rather something that permeates the whole series. The answer would be an essay in itself, but I guess some of the key points would include the mood of the story, the themes of the story, the pov structure and choice of pov characters, the way he sets up and subverts reader expectations, the way he has played with tropes throughout the series, some well known quotes from GRRM about his own work and the work of others, the role of Mance and the free folk in the story, and of course a bit of speculation thrown in with regard to how the story will end.

But mainly because I like the sound of Jon Snow, King of Winter.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

(...)

If Elia's son hadn't been called Aegon, would you, or most of the fandom really, have any doubt that it was Jon's true name? We could expect some contrarians to emerge, but I'm sure you'd agree that it would be the overwhelming favorite in that case. What better name for a Targaryen?

It would certainly raise the odds in my analysis, but I would still have doubts for sure. "What better name for a Targaryen" in GRRM's twisted mind would certainly encourage me to look for other names! :P

In this line of thought, when you read tWoIaF or FaB, the standing out leaders are not necessarily Aegons (rarely actually, Aegon I and maybe V tbc), but often other Kings or Queens - that often never were, like Rhaenys (the second one), Daeron, Jaeharys and Alyssane, Viserys I, Daemon (RP), Baelor, Maekar (tbc)... And of course Aemon the dragon knight, who seems to be the most admired Targaryen prince by the 7K people. And this particularity of never was could well be Jon's fate in the end, as many of us think (I do).

Last, but not least, there are some very well-thought theories in this Forum's archives about Dany and Jon being associated respectively with the Moon and the Sun... One example: 

And Amon(-Râ) is the Sun in Egyptian mythology...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't buy the common hype about GRRM always deconstructing tropes or breaking conventional storytelling rules because while he does deconstruct tropes and break rules he also uses standard tropes and sticks to the rules when the story demands it, and there are multiple examples of each in the series.

:agree:

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

But I do expect him to subvert the tropes we are discussing here, (hidden-king, chosen-one) as they are the quintessential fantasy tropes and I don't think GRRM is trying to tell the typical fantasy story, even if at times it looks like that's where we are going.

And I think, that ASOIAF is not a typical fantasy story, because, in my opinion, it is based on the Bible, specifically on The Book of Revelation, which depicts Apocalypse.

Dany, Rhaego and Jon are the Holy Trinity of ASOIAF, three heads of the dragon - The Mother, The Son, and The Holy Ghost; fAegon, who is the mummers dragon, is a parallel to Antichrist, or the beast out of the sea, with one mortally wounded head; Varys is a parallel to Biblical Dragon/Satan, and him and Littlefinger are fAegon's false prophets, LF is the beast out of the earth, the one with lamb's horns and dragon's voice, because he is, possibly, descendant of Aegon IV and his mistress and bastard-daughter, Jayne Lothston, daughter of Falena Stokeworth, so he has dragon's voice, because he is partially Targaryen, and he has lamb's horns, because lamb is a sigil of Stokeworths; Dany is also a parallel to Mother Mary, and to the woman of the Apocalypse/the pregnant woman clothed in the sun, that is chased by the Dragon; Rhaego is a parallel to Jesus, who in The Book of Revellation was referred to, as the great shepherd, and King of kings and Lord of lords, while about the Stallion that mounts the world, it was said in the Dothraki prophecy, that he is Khal of khals (which means King of kings), and that all people of the world will be his herd, i.e. he will be their shepherd; and Jon is also a parallel to Jesus, because he will be revived, and because in ASOIAF he will serve the same purpose, as the Lamb of God in the Bible, "slain but standing", by his sacrifice he will take away the sin of the world, so in the end of the series he won't be ruling as the King of 7K, because he will sacrifice himself for the sake of his people; The Bleeding Star comet is simultaneously a parallel to the Wormwood Star of Apocalypse (probably, GRRM's white Weirwood is inspired by it - Artemisia herba-alba, the white wormwood plant) and the Star of Bethlehem, that has lead three wisemen from the east to Mother Mary, after she gave birth to Jesus, in ASOIAF three eastern wisemen, that came to Dany, after she gave birth to Rhaego, were Quaithe, Xaro Xhoan Daxos and Pyat Pree; etc.

I don't think, that I have just imagined all this parallels between the Bible and GRRM's ASOIAF. He was raised in a very religious environment, so either he is subconsciously using all this Biblical elements, or, which is more likely, he is using them intentionally, and the Second Long Night is indeed a parallel to the Biblical Apocalypse. If we will consider the Bible as a fantasy story, then, yes, ASOIAF is still a fantasy story, even if it is based on the Bible. Though Biblical tropes are not a typical for fantasy genre, so GRRM using them is him straying away from typical fantasy stereotypes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

It would certainly raise the odds in my analysis, but I would still have doubts for sure. "What better name for a Targaryen" in GRRM's twisted mind would my very first reason to look for other names! :P

I understand where you're coming from, but I feel like that's the same line of thinking that leads people to say that they don't think RLJ is true because it's too obvious. GRRM is definitely tricky, but he's not above going the "obvious" route. He just distracts the reader from realizing that the obvious choice is actually the correct one.

As for F&B, not every important male character can be called Aegon. Maybe GRRM even decided over the last year-and-a-half or so that he wanted to emphasize that fact. Also, I wouldn't overlook the fact that one can deduce Jon's name is Aegon from the first two books. I put more weight on those texts than F&B, as I'm sure you do. Not just because they form the beginning of the main series, but they also reveal GRRM intent from the start.

I'm basically 100% certain that Jon's name is Aegon or Aemon. With something like 90% of that certainty for Aegon. There is a good case to be made for both. It's just that I find it really suspicious that there is any case at all for Aegon. That is what has been nagging at me since mid-2014. There really shouldn't be any evidence for that name. Nor should there be such a clear path through the seemingly disqualifying obstacles. But there is.

As far as Ser Creighton's thread, I might have read it before. I'll have to take another look.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

there's hardly any example in the entire series and none in the Targaryen and Stark histories that I know of... Of a family having two sons named the same.

How would that support the premise that Rhaegar did have two sons named the same?

As for the idea the Starks never had a Jr. -- meaning a son named the same as his father -- that's easy to disprove:

Quote

That's a Brandon, the tall one with the dreamy face, he was Brandon the Shipwright, because he loved the sea. His tomb is empty. He tried to sail west across the Sunset Sea and was never seen again. His son was Brandon the Burner, because he put the torch to all his father's ships in grief.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

:huh: You probably want to talk to @J. Stargaryen, not me?

Always. :)

Those damn Brandons. :bang: So there are "juniors" in the Stark family. Maybe even lots of them, relatively speaking. So maybe we can't rule out the idea that Lyanna would've thought "Rhaegar jr." was weird. Still, there's no evidence in favor of it that I know of.

Thank you, @JNR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

I understand where you're coming from, but I feel like that's the same line of thinking that leads people to say that they don't think RLJ is true because it's too obvious. GRRM is definitely tricky, but he's not above going the "obvious" route. He just distracts the reader from realizing that the obvious choice is actually the correct one.

As for F&B, not every important male character can be called Aegon. Maybe GRRM even decided over the last year-and-a-half or so that he wanted to emphasize that fact. Also, I wouldn't overlook the fact that one can deduce Jon's name is Aegon from the first two books. I put more weight on those texts than F&B, as I'm sure you do. Not just because they form the beginning of the main series, but they also reveal GRRM intent from the start.

I'm basically 100% certain that Jon's name is Aegon or Aemon. With something like 90% of that certainty for Aegon. There is a good case to be made for both. It's just that I find it really suspicious that there is any case at all for Aegon. That is what has been nagging at me since mid-2014. There really shouldn't be any evidence for that name. Nor should there be such a clear path through the seemingly disqualifying obstacles. But there is.

As far as Ser Creighton's thread, I might have read it before. I'll have to take another look.

 

I am with you on many points here, especially on the fact that most of the clues are in the early books of the series - which also supports the Aemon camp IMHO. I also agree on the "either Aegon or Aemon" stance - I did point elsewhere that (unlike you) my favourite theory was Aemon, but that Aegon was a solid theory as well. I am not sure I fully understand the bolded part though. Could you clarify?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...