Ser Alliser's True Purpose

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

4 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Ah yes, people seeing what they expect or want to see despite the evidence to the contrary, I wonder if you can see the irony here.  

This knife cuts both ways Frey.

4 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

But let's go sift through the facts:

Forget hair and eye color, and just look at facial features:

Catelyn certainly doesn't want to see her husband in Jon's face, but even she is perturbed about how much Jon looks like Eddard.

the five quotes you provided were all in comparison to the other stark children who outwardly resemble Tully more than stark, yet none look exactly like their mother. Jon is certainly more stark looking than most of his siblings, but the entire focal of these quotes are people looking at the stark traits and comparing them to the Tully traits. outwardly he is the most stark looking, because that is what people are expecting/know to look for when comparing the children to each other. it does not mean Jon has no non-stark traits, its that people are looking for stark traits when comparing him with his siblings. for cat, more than any, it would disturb her, and therefore it would be what stuck out the most to her in her impression of Jon even if she didn't want to see it. ever want to forget a bad memory, but you can't help remembering it? some type of conundrum. 

the Craster example is slightly better, but how many people does craster actually know? he was clearly familiar with benjen stark, we know highborn lords look different for the most part to the more common looking lowborn, so in considering the laws of exposure and proximity, that he would recognize the outward Stark traits is not so strange. 

4 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

So my challenge to you is to go through the books and find support about any Valyrian features that Jon may have, or any hint thereof, where a simple change of hair color will announce to the world Jon's "true" heritage.

coloration is key. its one of the hints that faegon is probably not aegon. a dark eye color is is actually one the very few descriptors besides hair shade that is used to describe Rhaegar. though it will probobly be Martell traits that Arianne will look for in faeg. that and we know R had elegant fingers.

very little else seems to be said in truth about Valyrian features.

otherwise we have a physical description of Jon as being slender, fair, graceful, quick as opposed to the more muscular and strong Robb. presuposing his hair turns and his eyes become more visibly purple as the theory entails, ser alliser, as the only knight to serve in kings landing in Aerys day that we know is currently serving at the wall, is in a position where he can be "wait I know that coloration." I don't think this theory necessitates him having to recognize more than that, but it obviously opens the potential too.

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

3 hours ago, Julia H. said:

Another thing in the books that I find interesting is that the only person around Jon who definitely knew Rhaegar well enough to remember his looks in detail after so many years is blind. That's, of course, Maester Aemon. And that, again, just makes it possible that besides all the Stark features, there could be something in Jon - not even necessarily in his face, it could be the way he walks, the way he smiles, the way he makes a certain gesture - that could remind people of Rhaegar, provided they knew Rhaegar well and are sufficiently interested in Jon Snow to look at him long enough to notice these features.  

To continue this totally idle speculation, Jon does have a predisposition to melancholy, just like Rhaegar - but then so does Ned, I guess. Yet another interesting circumstance is that there are no singers in Winterfell, and the boys' education does not include anything remotely artistic - so Jon Snow probably never had the chance to try his talent with a harp or learn to sing (a pastime Ned would probably have never tolerated with regard to Jon Snow anyway). 

So, yes, much is made of Jon Snow's Stark features, and if he has anything that he has inherited from his biological father, it is carefully hidden. 

if only the maester could have kept his eyes  . I do think this might be an important hint. Did Aemon need to be blind as a character just so sam could be his Stewart? or to make it so the perceptive maester would not notice something important? we will never know but it would have been interesting if he had his eyes. imagine the irony of ned sending Jon to the wall to keep his secret only for his great great uncle to recognize him...

im not sure how well we can use emotions to split stark from targ as you say both "fathers" were melancholy, and just as men "wake the Dragon" Starks are known fro their wild "wolf blood."

3 hours ago, Julia H. said:

Back to the main point of the thread, Thorne's reaction to this piece of news would be extremely interesting, because we cannot be sure what it might be beyond the obvious surprise. Would his Targaryen loyalty win out over his deep-rooted dislike of the person? Does his Targaryen loyalty still exist at all, after what he considers half a lifetime of unfair punishment for his original loyalty / for not being smart enough to switch sides before it was too late? What does this bitter man think of his youthful self after his years on the Wall - would he voluntarily fight / take personal risks for a Targaryen or for any sort of a king again? Would he see following an LC-turned-king as his own best chance to leave the Wall, and would such hopes be realistic at all, or bound to lead to disappointment? 

 

such an internal conflict would certainly be interesting. I feel that as we have not had him participate in the assassination attempt, he stands to be useful in some other way, lest he dies offscreen. to that end this is the best way I can think to use him. given at least some of his animosity to Jon derives from him being a stark (ie his hatred for Jons father), realizing the truth may inspire some change in that relationship. it would be a second chance, and after years on the wall, that may be a very tempting opportunity.

[Julia H.]

33 minutes ago, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

such an internal conflict would certainly be interesting. I feel that as we have not had him participate in the assassination attempt, he stands to be useful in some other way, lest he dies offscreen. to that end this is the best way I can think to use him. given at least some of his animosity to Jon derives from him being a stark (ie his hatred for Jons father), realizing the truth may inspire some change in that relationship. it would be a second chance, and after years on the wall, that may be a very tempting opportunity.

I'm reminded of a compelling theory @bemused had about Thorne sneaking back to Castle Black from the ranging Jon had sent him on, hiding there in secret and orchestrating the assassination attempt, with Bowen Marsh and others carrying out his plan. (According to the theory, the plan went wrong on various points, and eventually the conspirators were forced to improvise.) If it were indeed so, it would be even more interesting to watch Thorne as he is realizing the truth about Jon.

I totally agree that Thorne's hatred of Jon is rooted in his hatred of Ned and possibly all Starks for the role Ned played in removing the Targaryens from power. (Thorne may well have hated Benjen, too, without being in a position to pick on him.) However, over time, a lot of issues came up that must have made his hatred of Jon quite personal (Jon's attack on Thorne, Jon being the reason why Thorne lost his relatively comfortable position in CB, Thorne assisting Janos Slynt, then Slynt's death, and finally Thorne himself being sent beyond the Wall on ranging, which he wasn't at all happy about). So, yes, quite an interesting internal conflict, and Thorne might also have to admit to himself one day that their enmity would never have got that far if he had known about Jon Snow's real origin.  

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

5 minutes ago, Julia H. said:

I'm reminded of a compelling theory @bemused had about Thorne sneaking back to Castle Black from the ranging Jon had sent him on, hiding there in secret and orchestrating the assassination attempt, with Bowen Marsh and others carrying out his plan. (According to the theory, the plan went wrong on various points, and eventually the conspirators were forced to improvise.) If it were indeed so, it would be even more interesting to watch Thorne as he is realizing the truth about Jon.

I haven't read that one but it sounds neat and definitely plausible. my only objection would be that implied the cooperation of Dywen and his partner, when most of the "rangers" seems to at least be Jon supporters (or at least more exposed to wildings and therefore more like to see them as human), but of course there may be outliers. Glendon Hewett being in command at Eastwatch could at least provide him a possible path back past the wall. alliser's betrayal followed by revelation would be an entertaining scene that I would love to read.

10 minutes ago, Julia H. said:

I totally agree that Thorne's hatred of Jon is rooted in his hatred of Ned and possibly all Starks for the role Ned played in removing the Targaryens from power. (Thorne may well have hated Benjen, too, without being in a position to pick on him.) However, over time, a lot of issues came up that must have made his hatred of Jon quite personal (Jon's attack on Thorne, Jon being the reason why Thorne lost his relatively comfortable position in CB, Thorne assisting Janos Slynt, then Slynt's death, and finally Thorne himself being sent beyond the Wall on ranging, which he wasn't at all happy about). So, yes, quite an interesting internal conflict, and Thorne might also have to admit to himself one day that their enmity would never have got that far if he had known about Jon Snow's real origin.  

and your right. most certainly there is more to the relationship now that the two have know eachother for so long. I would appreciate the redemption though. Jon's summer friends are staring to melt away. soon enough we'll find out who his true allies are. begrudged as its been, alliser has been loyal in his own way, and he was loyal to targs until the end. I would appreciate the humility to admit his own fault in the degradation and animosity between the two.

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

coloration is key

Ok, let's talk coloring.  

Let's start with Jon's hair.  It isn't black, it's brown.  

Quote

Jon made himself smile. “That would be a welcome sight to see, Owen.” Ignoring the twinge of pain in his leg, he swept a black fur cloak about his shoulders, gathered up his crutch, and went out onto the Wall to face another day.
A gust of wind sent icy tendrils wending through his long brown hair. 

Brown, like a Stark's.

And his eyes, they aren't dark purple, they're dark grey:

Quote

“Sam?” Jon called softly.
The air smelled of paper and dust and years. Before him, tall wooden shelves rose up into dimness, crammed with leatherbound books and bins of ancient scrolls. A faint yellow glow filtered through the stacks from some hidden lamp. Jon blew out the taper he carried, preferring not to risk an open flame amidst so much old dry paper. Instead he followed the light, wending his way down the narrow aisles beneath barrel-vaulted ceilings. All in black, he was a shadow among shadows, dark of hair, long of face, grey of eye. Black moleskin gloves covered his hands; the right because it was burned, the left because a man felt half a fool wearing only one glove.”

Grey, like a Stark's.

So to recap:  1.  Face: Stark.  2.  Eyes: Stark.  3. Hair: Stark.

To paraphrase Tyrion, whichever of Jon's parents weren't a Stark, they didn't leave much of themselves in Jon's face.

Now, if you are desperate to find something Valyrian that resembles Jon, I wouldn't look to the persons, I would look to their steel.

The author describes Jon as dark, grey, slender.  The same description that he gives Valyrian steel, at least the steel that was forged into the swords.

To hammer home the point even more, Jon is given a valyrian steel sword, specifically a bastard long sword.  Attached to the hilt of a white direwolf with dark red eyes.

Just like Jon.

Now whether or not that means Jon is himself part Valyrian, maybe, I don't know.  Of course it could also mean that Jon was "forged" by a Valyrian, or perhaps Jon was conceived in the Valyrian way...

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Let's start with Jon's hair.  It isn't black, it's brown.  

that is true, it is dark brown, but im not so certain it will stay that way. what's important to this theory is not what color it is now (because that color is suggestive of stark) but what color it will/may become.

 

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

And his eyes, they aren't dark purple, they're dark grey:

Grey, like a Stark's.

"Jon's eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. He was of an age with Robb, but they did not look alike. Jon was slender where Robb was muscular, dark where Robb was fair, graceful and quick where his half brother was strong and fast."

so not just grey, but so grey they appeared black in the dreary north. Dunk thought eggs eyes were blue when first they met, and Tyrion the same for faegon, whilst JonCon knew rheagar to have darker eyes then faegons purple. Tyrion, another suspect targ by many has a green eye and a black eye (or an eye that is so dark as to seem black).

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

To paraphrase Tyrion, whichever of Jon's parents weren't a Stark, they didn't leave much of themselves in Jon's face...

to not leave much implies to have left some, and Tyrion would not know what rheagar looked like and so would not see it no matter how long he studied Jon's face or body.

"He had the Stark face if not the name: long, solemn, guarded, a face that gave nothing away."

disregarding the first, the rest are mannerism, learned and wore but not quite what I would call features. same as Tyrion is very like his own "father" Tywin despite being likely only half Lannister.

and on the topic of Lannisters, oakheart saw Robert in myrcella despite her not being his daughter (if maggy's prophecy is to be believed)

"The two children could not have looked more different, him with his olive skin and straight black hair, her pale as milk with a mop of golden curls; light and dark, like Queen Cersei and King Robert. He prayed Myrcella would find more joy in her Dornish boy than her mother had found with her storm lord." 

(unless one is to interpret that part of the quote being symbolic purely of their truculent relationship)

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Now, if you are desperate to find something Valyrian that resembles Jon, I wouldn't look to the persons, I would look to their steel.

The author describes Jon as dark, grey, slender.  The same description that he gives Valyrian steel, at least the steel that was forged into the swords.

To hammer home the point even more, Jon is given a valyrian steel sword, specifically a bastard long sword.  Attached to the hilt of a white direwolf with dark red eyes.

Just like Jon.

Now whether or not that means Jon is himself part Valyrian, maybe, I don't know.  Of course it could also mean that Jon was "forged" by a Valyrian, or perhaps Jon was conceived in the Valyrian way...

I actually really enjoy line of thought. its not particularly useful in terms of any character identifying Jon as Valyrian, but as a reader I could see this as a subtle hint by the author. Jon's coat of arms definitely mirrors blood raven in this way, and the implication becomes more obvious if your amongst the camp who think long claw is actually dark sister.

to the purposes of "forging" him, im a fan of theories of people being light bringer (the Davos is light bringer theory being my favorite) so I could see this as veiled foreshadowing in that way, or more plainly just the implication that he is part Valyrian. 

either way it does make for some enjoyable symbolism to read into.

[Seams]

10 hours ago, Julia H. said:

Back to the main point of the thread, Thorne's reaction to this piece of news would be extremely interesting, because we cannot be sure what it might be beyond the obvious surprise. Would his Targaryen loyalty win out over his deep-rooted dislike of the person? Does his Targaryen loyalty still exist at all, after what he considers half a lifetime of unfair punishment for his original loyalty / for not being smart enough to switch sides before it was too late? What does this bitter man think of his youthful self after his years on the Wall - would he voluntarily fight / take personal risks for a Targaryen or for any sort of a king again? Would he see following an LC-turned-king as his own best chance to leave the Wall, and would such hopes be realistic at all, or bound to lead to disappointment? 

The most important literary clues about Thorne are

1) wordplay on "throne" and "Dorne" (the German word for thorn);

2) his "Master-at-Arms" role;

3) his scene with Tyrion and the dead wighted hand at the Iron Throne.

I think Alliser Thorne may personify the Iron Throne, a magnificent high seat built by Aegon the Conqueror using dragon fire. He is sent away after the Targaryens are deposed. Since we are engaged in a Game of Thrones, it's a bad omen for Robert's monarchy that Ser Alliser is not at the Red Keep. 

One thing we learn from the histories is that the Iron Throne sometimes doesn't like the king and causes him to be nicked and cut. Some kings are even killed by the throne, according to some accounts. So the "prickly" personality of Ser Alliser would be consistent with the ornery attitude of the Iron Throne. 

If there is an affinity or parallel between Ser Alliser Thorne and the land known as Dorne, he might like learning that Jon Snow was born in the Prince's Pass in Dorne. (If that Tower of Joy stuff turns out to be an account of Jon's birthplace.) If Jon has Targaryen heritage but has darker coloring, this would be consistent with the Dornish-looking members of the Targaryen family.

The Master-at-Arms title is really interesting if Ser Alliser is the throne. The throne is made out of swords. Maybe Ser Alliser's sneering approach to teaching swordsmanship to Night's Watch recruits could be compared to the stone daring King Arthur to try to pull out the sword that has been embedded in the stone. He doesn't believe anyone is worthy of wielding the sword but Jon outsmarts him with some help from Donal Noye, who makes swords (and warhammers).

When L. C. Mormont sends Ser Alliser to King's Landing with the wight's hand, this is GRRM being funny with the "Master of Arms" title. Alliser is in charge of a whole new kind of arm. And he presents his arm evidence while Tyrion is sitting on the Iron Throne. Lots of layers of meaning in this scene, I'm sure. We know that Ned found Jaime sitting on the Iron Throne right after Jaime killed King Aerys. What does it mean that Ser Alliser has a severed hand and Jaime's hand will soon be severed? And Tyrion is the acting Hand of the King? 

Tyrion makes fun of Ser Alliser, as he did during the crab feast at Castle Black. He offers to provide shovels to the Night's Watch so they can bury their dead. The burying ties Ser Alliser (or the whole Night's Watch) to the Gravedigger at the Quiet Isle (thought to be Sandor Clegane) and to Shagwell, the horrifying fool, at Crackclaw Point. (Possibly also to the diggers at Coldmoat in The Sworn Sword.) 

I buy the theories that say Tyrion is a chimera with both Lannister and Targaryen paternity. So maybe Ser Alliser was seething but willing to accommodate Tyrion as someone worthy to sit on the Iron Throne. Still, he couldn't have been too happy with the way Tyrion treated him. 

If Jon Snow needs to be reborn after dying of his wounds at the Wall, could Ser Alliser as Gravedigger play a role in the resurrection process? GRRM has never made it clear that Gravediggers only bury people; maybe they also exhume bodies. 

Or maybe it's not the Gravedigger identity but the personification of the Iron Throne has a special role in resurrecting Jon Snow. Sandor Clegane's horse won't let anyone else ride him. And dragons have only one rider at a time. Maybe the Iron Throne gets to choose its rider, too. 

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

54 minutes ago, Seams said:

When L. C. Mormont sends Ser Alliser to King's Landing with the wight's hand, this is GRRM being funny with the "Master of Arms" title. Alliser is in charge of a whole new kind of arm. 

There is a lot of great and interesting things in your post, but honestly I never noticed this joke before and it kills me.

[Johny123]

1. Jon is not a Targaryen.

2. Jon is dead. He may live in ghost for some time but that's it. His body will be probably reanimated by some other telepath as Lady Stonehart or lord Lightning . 

[Julia H.]

Throne + thorn + master-at-arms (swords) = Iron Throne

Master-at-Arms + severed arm + Hand of the King

Absolutely fantastic observations, @Seams, thank you for sharing them!

So, right now the Iron Throne hates Jon Snow, and this feeling is mutual. Hm...

BTW, if thorny Thorne personifies the Iron Throne, it is understandable why he is so difficult to like and why he has no sense of humour.

 

[Seams]

Here's a really old comparison of Ser Alliser and Olenna Redwyne (Queen of Thorns). If Olenna was truly responsible for killing Joffrey, this could add more credence to the notion of Ser Alliser, as personification of the Iron Throne, sometimes deciding to kill a king. 

But the thread is old and archived. I'm sure there are things in it that I would no longer support or defend. 

 

[Jaenara Belarys]

On 9/11/2021 at 12:26 AM, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

I think there is two reasons to believe this was not a one time only thing. 

 

Check GRRM, I'm fairly certain he said he was a one time thing. 

On 9/11/2021 at 12:26 AM, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

1. Dany survived Drogon breathing fire on her in the pit in Meereen, suggesting a Valyrian natural resistance to fire. So not a one time thing already. (and a trait I would be surprised if she alone possesed)

 

Dany ducked under the jet of flame, and her hands are burned. She has a mild tolerance for heat, but she isn't the fireproof Dany from the show. 

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

3 hours ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

Check GRRM, I'm fairly certain he said he was a one time thing. 

it is your claim. if you would claim it, it is up to you to support it with evidence. If you find the article or blog post in which he states this, I would love to read it, and I mean that honestly.

3 hours ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

Dany ducked under the jet of flame, and her hands are burned. She has a mild tolerance for heat, but she isn't the fireproof Dany from the show. 

Dragon fire burns like wild fire. if she were normal, her scalp would be permanently scarred, like Sandor. Jon by chance has also only been burned one place, his hand. both recovered/ are recovering from that surprisingly well. in fact I wouldnt be surprised if it was his burned hand he used to lift ser alliser up off the floor when he choked him. 

[Nathan Stark]

2 hours ago, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

it is your claim. if you would claim it, it is up to you to support it with evidence. If you find the article or blog post in which he states this, I would love to read it, and I mean that honestly.

Well, there is this comment by George regarding A Game of Thrones:

Quote

 

Lastly, some fans are reading too much into the scene in GAME OF THRONES where the dragons are born -- which is to say, it was never the case that all Targaryens are immune to all fire at all times.

 

 

Here's the link: https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/945/

There is also this exchange from a Q&A that George participated in prior to A Storm of Swords:

Quote

Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

Here is the link for that conversation as well: http://web.archive.org/web/20000615222300/http://www.eventhorizon.com/sfzine/chats/transcripts/031899.html

I also think Dany's experience with Drogon is pretty easy to explain. He simply caught her hair on fire, and it burned partly or completly away without causing her any direct injury, which is certianly not impossible.

[Jaenara Belarys]

Thanks @Nathan Stark. 

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

@Nathan Stark thank you for finding both of those quotes. @Jaenara Belarys even if your are not interested in my arguments on the implications of those two quotes by George, I want you to consider the textual evidence I included at the bottom supporting my Drogon pit claims.

"which is to say, it was never the case that all Targaryens are immune to all fire at all times."

This seems very specifically worded to me. All Targaryens, All Fire, at All times. This implies that it is conditional more than it implies that it never happens or is exclusive. If he wanted to say 'no Targaryens are immune to fire,' he would have wrote it as I just wrote it. The first "All" in fact makes it an almost dismissible statement, because it requires just one to not be fireproof. I'm not arguing that it is a common thing, but this wording does not denote a one time event/power to me, only a rare event/power. Not All Targaryens are dreamers either, nor All first men wargs.

George: "TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold."

Interviewer: "So she wont be able to do it again?"

George: "Probably not."

So as conceded already, not All Targaryen are All immune to All fire. The Dance proves that well enough. this is also not the same as saying dany is not immune to fire. depending on how you interpret the tone when George says 'probably not', he is being glib or causally indecisive. in the case of the former, that is as well as saying no, while is the case of the latter he is reserving judgment to say if a similar event will happen With Dany in the unwritten portion of the work, which would imply it is something that could happen, but something he is reluctant towards. If he did plan to use it or a similar event again, I doubt he would come out and stay it. And mind you this interview is from 1999, before the release of Swords and 12 years before the release of Dance. If George wasn't capable of changing his mind, we would have ended up with a Tyrion Arya Jon love triangle amongst other things.

So even if it is a miracle or conditional, that does not mean it can't be what is about to happen with Jon. Unless Jon isn't really dead, a miracle is quite literally likely to happen, and in a similar fashion to Dany's miracle. Be it the Night Watch that survives the coming conflict or the wildings, or a mix of both, Jon is likely going to be consigned to the flames, as is done with the dead by watchmen and wildling alike. if the wildlings win that conflict, Val will want to burn Shireen, as she has already expressed, and some traitors will burn with them too most like. If the Watch wins Melisandre will burn Asha.

So just like Dany we will have a Pyre with a Targaryen Prince, A sacrifice of kings blood, and the blood of (a) betrayer(s).

It's all set up and ready. If Jon comes back just an ice wight, the watch and the wildings will re-kill him out of hand.

 

Now finally as to Dany and Drogon

When reflecting on the first time she didn't burn and the more recent time she didn't burn: "The fire burned away my hair, but elsewise it did not touch me. It had been the same in Daznak's Pit. That much she could recall," Dany 10 ADWD

And  

"She ran a hand across her stubbly scalp where her hair had burned away, and felt more ants on her head, and one crawling down the back of her neck." Dany 10 ADWD

HER HAIR BURNT ALL THE WAY OFF BOTH TIMES ALL THE WAY TO HER SCALP. FIRE IMMUNITY EVENTS = 2.

and if the word "stubble" bothers you, not only did she stay on "Dragon Stone" for more than a little while allowing some regrowth, look up how much hair is considered stubble on any image search engine and you will see it is a couple millimeters to centimeters in most if not all cases. A fire that close would burn skin if the skin could burn. Unless your hair is flying upwards the whole time or burned off immediately (and it did not by all accounts), it would fall on her back and shoulders or across her face, causing burns there. Don't believe me? Look at what happen to Michael Jackson.

 

Not that this topic post was even supposed to be a conversation of this particular aspect of the theory. 

 

 

[Jaenara Belarys]

Suppose that's true. 

[Moiraine Sedai]

Thorne is an interesting adversary for Jon at the Wall. He's not a villain. Thorne is a harsh man but he has ethics. He obeys the law. I don't think your scenario will happen though.  Jon grew up surrounded by people. Anything odd, like having skin that doesn't burn, would have been noticed.  

I'll buy into R+L=J for a moment. That only makes him 50% or less Targaryen. He is more Stark. He will not have the blessings of fire resistance.  

[Targaryeninkingslanding]

1 hour ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Jon grew up surrounded by people. Anything odd, like having skin that doesn't burn, would have been noticed.  

so if you look a little higher in the thread, you'll see we have more or less established that fire immunity is more conditional than perpetually sustained. dany has survived two fire baths but still managed to burn her hands at some point. interesting Jon has also sustained a burned hand. both have recovered remarkable well for such an injury though, with Jon's burned hand possibly being the one he used to strangle alliser. for the purposes of this theory though, Jon does not need to be free proof every time, just this one time during his revival.

I wrote this above but its relevant so:

"

So even if it is a miracle or conditional, that does not mean it can't be what is about to happen with Jon. Unless Jon isn't really dead, a miracle is quite literally likely to happen, and in a similar fashion to Dany's miracle. Be it the Night Watch that survives the coming conflict or the wildings, or a mix of both, Jon is likely going to be consigned to the flames, as is done with the dead by watchmen and wildling alike. if the wildlings win that conflict, Val will want to burn Shireen, as she has already expressed, and some traitors will burn with them too most like. If the Watch wins Melisandre will burn Asha.

So just like Dany we will have a Pyre with a Targaryen Prince, A sacrifice of kings blood, and the blood of (a) betrayer(s).

It's all set up and ready. If Jon comes back just an ice wight, the watch and the wildings will re-kill him out of hand."

1 hour ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

I'll buy into R+L=J for a moment. That only makes him 50% or less Targaryen. He is more Stark. He will not have the blessings of fire resistance.  

the problem with this argument is that it is somewhat self defeating. if 50% weren't enough pure blood to activate a trait, then we should have no expectation of Jon being able to warg or be powerfully gifted in the ability as he is only half stark, but he can, so clearly a halfblooded threshold isn't enough to say a power on the other side of his blood can't work. And if stark blood is magical in some way, it is not strange to assume that it may be catalyst to dormant targ abilities just as Blackwood blood was.

[Frey family reunion]

On 9/11/2021 at 4:41 PM, Targaryeninkingslanding said:

Jon's eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. He was of an age with Robb, but they did not look alike. Jon was slender where Robb was muscular, dark where Robb was fair, graceful and quick where his half brother was strong and fast."

so not just grey, but so grey they appeared black in the dreary north. Dunk thought eggs eyes were blue when first they met, and Tyrion the same for faegon, whilst JonCon knew rheagar to have darker eyes then faegons purple.

There is a fundamental difference between the passages concerning Egg’s eyes and Young Griff’s and the passage concerning Jon’s eye color.

We first meet Egg through the POV, (i.e. the eyes) of Duncan the Tall.  Likewise we’re introduced to Young Griff through the lens of Tyrion’s POV.  So we’re learning about Egg and Young Griff through the subjective observations fo another character.

Jon’s description is a different beast.  The description of Jon’s grey eyes are given in Jon’s own POV chapter.  So since it’s unlikely that Jon is actively thinking about his eye color as he searches for Sam in the catacombs, we’re getting a description of Jon unfiltered from the author himself.

So it’s fairly safe to say, that unequivocally Jon’s eyes are dark, but that they are dark grey, not purple.  

Once again, like Valyrian steel.  As Tyrion observed of the sword, Widow’s Wail:

Quote

“Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black, as was true here as well.”

Now I don’t think that it’s very good evidence that Rhaegar couldn’t be Jon’s dad.  Early on, it’s brought out that Arya has brown hair, and grey eyes, and looks like Ned and his sister Lyanna.  So unlike her other siblings she looks like a Stark and not a Tully.  But it’s un debatable that her mother is Catelyn Tully.  

So the fact that Jon looks like Ned in the face, and he has brown hair and grey eyes, isn’t good evidence that Rhaegar couldn’t be his dad.  

But it’s probably a safe bet that Jon’s hair changing color isn’t suddenly going to make Jon look like a Targaryen.  There isn’t anything in any of the passages to suggest that.  If his hair changes to white, he’s going to look like a Stark with white hair.

Now, I would add that the idea of Thorne “crowning” Jon is an intriguing one.  I think the author has intentionally attributed some “Christ” imagery to Jon.  And Jesus was called “the king of kings”.  Of course he never held an earthly monarchy, or sat on a throne.  But he did have a crown, specifically a crown of thorns.  And the crown was meant to mock him and cause him pain.  Much like Thorne does to Jon.

So Jesus was a king of sorts, just not a king of Israel or Rome.  In the terms of mythology, Jesus could be considered a “corn king”.

Quote

The corn king is the god who sacrifices himself for the goddess, for the Land, for the good harvest to come next year. 

And in fact Mormont’s raven perhaps refers to this very notion:

Quote

“Free,” the raven muttered. “Corn. King.”

The Corn King, much like Jesus, is all about death and rebirth.  Dies in the winter to help feed the people, and then is reborn in spring.

So if Jon is a sort of “corn king”, then to be crowned as such, he first needs to be killed.  So if Thorne does have to do with “crowning” Jon, it might be as suggested above, that he might have been involved in Jon’s murder.  After all to crown the Corn King, is to kill the Corn King.