The house with the red door and the lemon tree

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

So your idea is that "Child of Three" means one of three people, who all started life as children.  I find that unsatisfying.  Are you not leaving out a whole slew of dead, and not particularly successful, Targs?  Why not "child of 30"? 

The only children who lived a reasonable time, to adolescents for sure, are Rhaegar, Viserys, and Daenerys.  

[Platypus Rex]

7 minutes ago, Wolf's Bane said:

The only children who lived a reasonable time, to adolescents for sure, are Rhaegar, Viserys, and Daenerys.  

I suppose you are restricting it to descendants of Aerys and Rhaella (per the Woods Witch prophesy).  But already you are leaving out whatever child was born at the Tower of Joy.  Surely that would make it "Child of Four"?  Or was that child not Rhaegar's?  And if Baby Aegon survived, that would make it "Child of Five"?

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

I suppose you are restricting it to descendants of Aerys and Rhaella (per the Woods Witch prophesy).  But already you are leaving out whatever child was born at the Tower of Joy.  Surely that would make it "Child of Four"?  And if Baby Aegon survived, that would make it "Child of Five"?

The prophecy had to be restrictive.  The line of (Aerys AND Rhaella) has a very different meaning from (Aerys) OR (Rhaella).  Why does it have to be that restrictive?  Because the baby needed to have Targaryen parents.  In other words, Targaryen + Targaryen.  The baby's immediate parents needed to both be Targaryen.  That rules out Aegon, Rhaenys, and anybody else who is not a child of Aerys + Rhaella.

[Platypus Rex]

2 minutes ago, Wolf's Bane said:

The prophecy had to be restrictive.  The line of (Aerys AND Rhaella) has a very different meaning from (Aerys) OR (Rhaella).  Why does it have to be that restrictive?  Because the baby needed to have Targaryen parents.  In other words, Targaryen + Targaryen.  The baby's immediate parents needed to both be Targaryen.  That rules out Aegon, Rhaenys, and anybody else who is not a child of Aerys + Rhaella.

Umm, Aegon and Rhaenys (and any other children or Rhaegar) DO descend from Aerys and Rhaella.  

Sounds like you think "Child of Three" means one of a set of 3 siblings, all of whom are dead except Dany.  Except Dany had many more dead siblings than just the 2.  But some dead siblings don't count because some are more dead than others?  Seems a bit arbitrary.

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

Umm, Aegon and Rhaenys (and any other children or Rhaegar) DO descend from Aerys and Rhaella.  

Sounds like you think "Child of Three" means one of a set of 3 siblings, all of whom are dead except Dany.  Except Dany had many more dead siblings than just the 2.  But some dead siblings don't count because some are more dead than others?  Seems a bit arbitrary.

Like I said, the Chosen One needed to come from the union of Aerys and Rhaella.  Targaryen for both the father and the mother.  Aegon and Rhaenys do not count because they are the products of a Targaryen + Martell union.  That does not fulfill the prophecy.  

[Platypus Rex]

1 minute ago, Wolf's Bane said:

"Like I said, the Chosen One needed to come from the union of Aerys and Rhaella."

Grandchildren DO come from the union of Aerys and Rhaella.

"Targaryen for both the father and the mother."

Well, the woods witch did not say this, but you can if you like.

But it does not explain "child of three".  Dany is an only child if we count living children, and one of a lot more than 3 if we count dead ones.

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

Grandchildren DO come from the union of Aerys and Rhaella.

"Targaryen for both the father and the mother."

Well, the woods witch did not say this, but you can if you like.

But it does not explain "child of three".  Dany is an only child if we count living children, and one of a lot more than 3 if we count dead ones.

The grandchildren are not Targaryen on both sides.  They don't count.  The nobles of Valyria have stressed the importance of keeping the blood pure.  The grandchildren of Aerys and Rhaella are impure.  Aegon and Rhaenys are half Martell.  Mongrels.  Rhaegar, Viserys, and Daenerys are the result of Targaryen + Targaryen.  

 

[Platypus Rex]

11 minutes ago, Wolf's Bane said:

"The grandchildren are not Targaryen on both sides.  They don't count."

Says you.  The woods witch did not say that.

"The nobles of Valyria have stressed the importance of keeping the blood pure."

Maybe they did, but the woods witch did not.  Anyhow, it is too late for blood purity.

"The grandchildren of Aerys and Rhaella are impure."

So are Aerys and Rhaella.   They are the grandchildren of Aegon V and his Non-Targ wife; with no additional infusion of Targaryen blood.  They are not only mongrels, but inbred mongrels, born of mating a mongrel brother to a mongrel sister.

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

Says you.  The woods witch did not say that.

"The nobles of Valyria have stressed the importance of keeping the blood pure."

Maybe they did, but the woods witch did not.  Anyhow, it is too late for blood purity.

"The grandchildren of Aerys and Rhaella are impure."

So are Aerys and Rhaella.   They are the grandchildren of Aegon V and his Non-Targ wife.

Their children are at least two-generations pure.  

 

[Platypus Rex]

6 minutes ago, Wolf's Bane said:

Their children are at least two-generations pure.  

That makes no sense.  Mating a mutt to a mutt does not create a purebred.  Unless you are trying to create a new breed.

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

That makes no sense.  Mating a mutt to a mutt does not create a purebred.  Unless you are trying to create a new breed.

The requirement to fulfill the prophecy is for Aerys and Rhaella to produce the special child together.  That is a specific requirement.  The Chosen One can only be one of three children:  Rhaegar, Viserys, Daenerys.  It's not Rhaegar and Viserys.  It is Daenerys.

[Platypus Rex]

Just now, Wolf's Bane said:

The requirement to fulfill the prophecy is for Aerys and Rhaella to produce the special child together. 

Were those the woods witch's precise words?

[Wolf's Bane]

Just now, Platypus Rex said:

Were those the woods witch's precise words?

The child must come from both of them.  In other words, Targaryen on both sides.  The prophecy is about the return of the dragons.  It's centered on the Targaryens.  It's not about any other family.  

[Back door hodor]

15 hours ago, Wolf's Bane said:

The child must come from both of them.  In other words, Targaryen on both sides.  The prophecy is about the return of the dragons.  It's centered on the Targaryens.  It's not about any other family.  

I'm inclined to agree with platypus here.

The words witch words are "from the line of"

I take this to mean that yes the child of prophecy will be one of thier descendants, meaning anyone from thier children to thier great,great,great, etc, grandchildren.

Which means for us the reader there are a few candidates. The most popular theories support Jon, Dani, and (f)aegon. One child and two grandchildren if we are keeping score.( there are other theories and possibilities of course).

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

Spoiler

 

On 1/25/2019 at 11:55 PM, The Map Guy said:

Quick Off Topic: Thank you for introducing me to my long lost crazy twin @40 Thousand Skeletons!! His crazy theories may be crazier than mine but I actually agree with some of them after a quick glance. But I'll finish reading the rest when I have free time. I always believed Howland Reed was the cause of everything in ASOAIF ... he is GRRM's Bilbo Baggins! (Sorry for the intrusion, back to topic!)

But NO NO NO NO to R+L=D and B+A=J. When HBO's D&D approached GRRM, GRRM asked them "Who are Jon's parents?" and D&D got it right. D&D's version is shown all around the world and its the most accepted version of TOJ.

Brandon + Ashara = Jon is debunked @40 Thousand Skeletons

Lucky for me, the way GRRM phrased the original question to D&D keeps my pet theory alive. Sneaky GRRM hehe. 

No offense, but your theories are ultra speculation based (i.e. the forks of the trident point to Rhaegar's rubies), while my theories are solidly based on the text. My theories aren't even crazy, but most people think they are crazy because they haven't read GRRM's other books, IMHO. All I am proposing is that GRRM is effectively rewriting/combining a bunch of his old stories and for some reason people call me crazy...

We aren't really supposed to talk about the show so I won't be shocked if these comments get deleted, but the show is the show, and the books are the books. Tons of shit is different. Your "most accepted version of TOJ" has 2 KG, and Arthur Dayne wields 2 swords... so let's not pretend it is book cannon.

1. We don't know what D&D answered

2. They never said they answered correctly, only that "GRRM smiled"

3. They never said they would make the show identical to the answer they gave at that initial meeting a decade earlier

HBO version proves absolutely nothing. They notoriously over simplify the plot because they consider the audience to be stupid, because at the screening of the original pilot, people didn't understand that Cersei and Jaime were brother and sister and it spoiled D&D from that point onward. They take everything remotely complicated or hard to follow out of the show. Example: they took out the Tysha part of the conversation when Tyrion killed Tywin and made it just about Shae even though they had established the Tysha backstory, probably because they felt they hadn't talked about it enough and the audience would be confused in the moment. Ashara Dayne was never even mentioned in the show, so it wouldn't surprise me that they would just make the show different from the books yet again. Not to mention a slew of other characters who are missing or die early. Imagine revealing that Ashara is Jon's mother, then the show watchers would be like... who the fuck is that?

B+A=J is not debunked. I think it makes more sense for the story and the clues GRRM left and fits the timeline better.

 

[HBO spoilers]

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

@Wolf's Bane

You are wrong about the nature of the prophecy as understood by Rhaegar. It is about genetics, not male-based surname bullshit. Aegon V was the son of a Dayne and married a Blackwood. Rhaegar procreated with a Martell (who had Targaryen blood) and then a Stark (who was definitely a non-Targaryen skinchanger) in his efforts to fulfill prophecy.

Also prophecy is all a lie/self-fulfilling. The purpose of prophecy is to manipulate the characters.  

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

@Dead men sing no songs

I really like your theory of Lyanna being buried under the lemon tree and Dany's lemon tree being = to Jon's crypt dreams (his crypt dreams probably being about his father Brandon who is down there). And I like your observations of Jon's behavior and actions paralleling Brandon.  

I of course have some friendly critiques as well. I doubt the ToJ itself is the house with the red door, because 1) Dany seems to remember the house vividly, 2) Willem Darry and Viserys were there, and 3) Ned claims to have destroyed the ToJ. But who knows, maybe if they were heading to Dorne anyways they may have journeyed to the ToJ, and Ned didn't actually destroy it . 

I think the more important reason for Ned to keep Jon's parentage a secret is that it would fundamentally threaten the Stark-Tully alliance at the dawn of King Robert's fragile new reign, because Jon is the heir to Winterfell before Ned and before Cat's children by Ned as you pointed out. The Starks and Tullys are allied solely because Cat's children stand to inherit Winterfell. Ned had to claim Jon as his bastard, and it was super honorable.

I think incest actually increases the probability of inheriting/expressing the powerful recessive genetic traits required for skinchanging/dragon hatching/other "magic" shit. Dany could hatch dragons because she got special genes from both Lyanna and Rhaegar, not because she married/sacrificed Drogo, although that king's blood may also have been a necessary component of "waking dragons from stone". I don't think magic ever "went to sleep". Simply, the dragons died off 150 years ago, and dragons being alive again seems to enhance the telepathic ("magical" ) abilities of humans, just like the volcryn in the GRRM story Nightflyers, which was responsible for the miracles of Jesus Christ simply by flying through space close to Earth during that time period (red comet cough cough).

If "seven, facing three" actually refers to Ned, Howland, and Arthur as the three, that would be some total bullshit sneaky language, so I don't buy it. Also, I think Ned and Arthur's interests were not aligned and that is why they fought to the death. Arthur wanted to fulfill prophecy for Rhaegar, which may or may not have involved sacrificing Lyanna and/or her baby by burning the ToJ with them inside. Ned would obviously be anti-burning Lyanna and baby alive, so he heroically killed Arthur Dayne!  

[The Map Guy]

On 1/26/2019 at 4:53 PM, Three-Fingered Pete said:

I remember them only being asked and answering who Jon's mother was. Am I remembering incorrectly?

Oh my bad then ... these little details I forget.

On 1/26/2019 at 5:24 PM, Platypus Rex said:

Don't get me wrong.  I think R+L=J is probably correct.  So, my guess would be that when GRRM asked them who Jon's mother was, and they answered (according to GRRM, correctly), I would guess they probably said "Lyanna Stark" and not "Ashara Dayne".  Because, well, that's what I already believe, more or less.

But when you take ambiguous, non-committal, statements, as absolute proof of what you already believe, we have a phrase for that.  It is called "confirmation bias".

R+L=J will be confirmed when (and if) GRRM confirms it.  Until then, you're just going to have to cope with the uncertainty, or at least, the disagreement or uncertainty of others.

GRRM obviously intends to keep us guessing.  IMHO he is doing a good job.

Well GRRM wants us the believe that Jon is Ned's bastard son. That is what everyone in the ASOIAF in-world is thinking (except Howland Reed). If GRRM asked just who Jon's mother was ... its would be Lyanna along Ned as the father ... which is super weird. I figured the question GRRM asked D&D was a package deal for the father & mother. I hope this doesn't open up any [Lyanna + some guy = Jon] theories.

Anyways, D&D guessing Jon's mother correctly AND GRRM still not confirming R+L=J is:

• win & tie for pure R+L=J
• lost & win for B+A=J and R+L=D and baby swap
• win & win for R+L=J&M 

And I can't wait until GRRM to confirm the parentage of Ty-win's children Jaime & Cersei, and Tyrion ... whether they are Lannisters or Targaryens ... or a tie between the houses.

[Platypus Rex]

3 minutes ago, The Map Guy said:

If GRRM asked just who Jon's mother was ... its would be Lyanna along Ned as the father ... which is super weird.

GRRM said they guessed correctly about the mother.  He explicitly declined to comment on whether they guessed (correctly or not) about the father.  

And, of course, he never confirmed that they said "Lyanna".  You believe they said "Lyanna", because you already believe it is the correct answer.   They could have said "Ashara", and then the father could still be Ned … or Brandon.

[The Map Guy]

3 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

  Hide contents

 

No offense, but your theories are ultra speculation based (i.e. the forks of the trident point to Rhaegar's rubies), while my theories are solidly based on the text. My theories aren't even crazy, but most people think they are crazy because they haven't read GRRM's other books, IMHO. All I am proposing is that GRRM is effectively rewriting/combining a bunch of his old stories and for some reason people call me crazy...

We aren't really supposed to talk about the show so I won't be shocked if these comments get deleted, but the show is the show, and the books are the books. Tons of shit is different. Your "most accepted version of TOJ" has 2 KG, and Arthur Dayne wields 2 swords... so let's not pretend it is book cannon.

1. We don't know what D&D answered

2. They never said they answered correctly, only that "GRRM smiled"

3. They never said they would make the show identical to the answer they gave at that initial meeting a decade earlier

HBO version proves absolutely nothing. They notoriously over simplify the plot because they consider the audience to be stupid, because at the screening of the original pilot, people didn't understand that Cersei and Jaime were brother and sister and it spoiled D&D from that point onward. They take everything remotely complicated or hard to follow out of the show. Example: they took out the Tysha part of the conversation when Tyrion killed Tywin and made it just about Shae even though they had established the Tysha backstory, probably because they felt they hadn't talked about it enough and the audience would be confused in the moment. Ashara Dayne was never even mentioned in the show, so it wouldn't surprise me that they would just make the show different from the books yet again. Not to mention a slew of other characters who are missing or die early. Imagine revealing that Ashara is Jon's mother, then the show watchers would be like... who the fuck is that?

B+A=J is not debunked. I think it makes more sense for the story and the clues GRRM left and fits the timeline better.

 

[HBO spoilers]

I know the HBO show is far different than the books. The show is messy but doesn't mean D&D got everything wrong. We are shown TOJ (even though that is not how green-seeing should work) and that should be a call-back to GRRM's Jon's mother question to D&D when they first met in 2007? (i forgot the year).

Anyways back to B+A=J. Today is my son's birthday, he is 1 year old. We had a birthday party for him yesterday where my wife hung a banner with pictures of him from newborn to 1 month old to 2 months old ........ to 12 months old. The picture of my son as newborn is MUCH tinier than ~9 months or whatever the age difference between Jon and Robb that B+A=J is suggesting.

Why is B+A=J so special anyways? I don't see why Ned would lie about either.
Jon being Brandon's son with Ned not telling Cat to protect her feelings and solidified the Stark-Tully alliance????
Well Cat got hurt more with her husband cheating on her, and her cheating husband should affect the Stark-Tully alliance even more.

If I was Ned in B+A=J, I would have told Cat & the rest of the Tully family in a heartbeat, and put the blame & truth on my dead brother....instead of jeopardizing MY relationship going forward with the families and the rest of the world knowing.

Anyways in regards to my R+L=J&M theory ... there are 6 parts with 1 part that was ban. I tried to present R+L=J&M in conventional ways and unconventional ways. My unconventional ways rely on GRRM hiding Easter Eggs and me identifying & solving them. I have been finding and solving a lot. If you don't think these unconventional Easter Eggs are real, so be it. But I am having a lot of fun researching them on my own. It even gave me the potential ending to ASOIAF.

But to each their own. I guess we'll see in TWOW and ADOS. May the best theorist win 

50 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

GRRM said they guessed correctly about the mother.  He explicitly declined to comment on whether they guessed (correctly or not) about the father.  

And, of course, he never confirmed that they said "Lyanna".  You believe they said "Lyanna", because you already believe it is the correct answer.   They could have said "Ashara", and then the father could still be Ned … or Brandon.

If D&D guessed it right, what is the whole point of spending millions and millions of dollars airing a TOJ version that is SIGNIFICANTLY different than the answer?

But lets forget D&D's answer now, and the age difference of Jon & Robb, and Ned's reasoning for not being honest with Cat, or that a single lemon tree could be grown anywhere with sun and good care by a wealthy homeowner, or that Gilly's baby swap may have a different purpose....

.......what is so special about R+L=D and B+A=J anyways?? Jon is dead at the end ADWD, is there any significant reason why he should be revived? He is the son of a dead Stark and a dead Dayne. Why would someone like R'hllor/Melisandre revive him? He ain't getting no dragon if he is not a Targ.

Is it to wield Dawn to fight the Others? I rather have a fire-dragon (or a lighting-dragon). Can Dawn even kill an Other like dragonglass does? Does Dawn give a Dayne special powers to fight the Others? Why can't someone else with no Dayne DNA steal Dawn and use it to fight the Others? The current generation of Targaryens have Dayne DNA from Dyanna Dayne anyways. If Dawn is so special, how come the last fight it was in, the wielder lost?