House of the Dragon Flood Gates Open

[Ran]

I feel like the dragon has three heads prophecy originated with Daenys the Dreamer, and that the belief that he and his sisters were that figure made Aegon believe they were destined for greatness and that their true destiny was in Westeros.

But the Azor Ahai prophecy are of a different origin. I don't believe they are ever going to be, in the books, part of Aegon the Conqueror's motives. The show universe is of course free to do different things, and I'm not surprised that they've done the rather obvious thing if giving the Targaryens a more explict belief in a prophetic role in the events of GoT, launching off the idea of Daena's prophecy.

There is no evidence of this secret belief passed from king to king in the books because it didn't happen in the books, it's a show thing.

[Denam_Pavel]

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Maegor was a usurper. Could be his mother knew and she may have told him ... or not, we don't know.

Jaehaerys could easily enough have learned the truth from his mother who was there when his father Aenys died and who he may have told so that she could pass the knowledge on to his heir Aegon who was far away at that point. Visenya could also have told Jaehaerys considering he was there on Dragonstone when she died.

Jaehaerys I supposedly also visited the Wall as per the stories we get in ASoS.

But one has to keep in mind that the Targaryens are under no obligation to think the Watch or the Wall are *that important* just because there is a threat beyond the Wall they are destined to take care of. The point of unified Westeros kind of is that you no longer need a Night's Watch.

Visenya, Aegon I's righthand woman and who conquered and ruled the Seven Kingdom's with him, put Maegor on throne and stayed with him for years afterwards. I don't understand how you can truly think this information could have easily passed to Jaehaerys without him. 

And could you tell me where in ASoS this was said, I cannot find it, just this: “A queen stayed there for a night.” Old Nan had told him the story, but Maester Luwin had confirmed most of it. “Alysanne, the wife of King Jaehaerys the Conciliator. He’s called the Old King because he reigned so long, but he was young when he first came to the Iron Throne. In those days, it was his wont to travel all over the realm. When he came to Winterfell, he brought his queen, six dragons, and half his court. The king had matters to discuss with his Warden of the North, and Alysanne grew bored, so she mounted her dragon Silverwing and flew north to see the Wall. This village was one of the places where she stopped. Afterward the smallfolk painted the top of their holdfast to look like the golden crown she’d worn when she spent the night among them.”

They don't need to think the Wall itself is THAT important, but if they decided to dedicate their whole lives and those of their children to a threat beyond the Wall, then the area beyond the wall would be of some minute interest to them, of which written or living eyewitness accounts can really only be found at the Wall, due to the way things work around there.

[dsjj251]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

So far that's not part of any leaks that I'm aware of ... Viserys I supposedly dreamed about a son of his being crowned king with the crown of Aegon the Conqueror. Viserys confusing his own daughter with Daenerys in a dream would be kind of weird - not only looks Syrax much different than Drogon, but inbreeding or not - Dany and Rhaenyra do not look identitcal.

i take all youtubers with a grain of salt,

 

Spoiler

supposedly , the "succession" discussion in the trailer isnt one cohesive conversation, its 4 different moments(which makes sense) . Viserys  specifically says "placed my heir on the iron throne" for dramatic effect, and then says, " a daughter", and thats when you get the , "no queen has ever sat the iron throne" line from Corlys  .

As for looks, im assuming this happens when  early on, so an adult dany and baby Rhaenyra. Same with the dragon.

it seems plausible. and actually would explain why Viserys never even attempted to change the succession . we will know how true this is in 2 weeks. 

I do find it interesting that of the  mayor youtubers who did see the premiere(emergency awesome, david lightbringer,and the 50 others i follow, lol)  all say the prophecy is in episode 1 , that you see the "dream", but they all say heir, they dont even slip up and say son, which seems purposeful.

 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

16 minutes ago, Ran said:

But the Azor Ahai prophecy are of a different origin. I don't believe they are ever going to be, in the books, part of Aegon the Conqueror's motives.

But isn't that what GRRM is implying here?

 

 

 

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

I feel like the dragon has three heads prophecy originated with Daena the Dreamer, and that the belief that he and his sisters were that figure made Aegon believe they were destined for greatness and that their true destiny was in Westeros.

Certainly could be, though that would lay a lot of prophetic baggage at Daenys' feet - not just the Doom of Valyria but also future Targaryen stuff - where they would go after they settled on Dragonstone, etc.

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

But the Azor Ahai prophecy are of a different origin. I don't believe they are ever going to be, in the books, part of Aegon the Conqueror's motives. The show universe is of course free to do different things, and I'm not surprised that they've done the rather obvious thing if giving the Targaryens a more explict belief in a prophetic role in the events of GoT, launching off the idea of Daena's prophecy.

Marwyn indicates that the prophecy Aemon and Rhaegar believed in is certainly very old. But there must be a more recent addendum to this more generic prophecy making it about 'a promised prince (of the Targaryen dynasty)', or else the Targaryens are all mad entitled brats who for no good reason believe that they are connected to or destined to fulfill a prophecy that was actually never connected to their bloodline in any of the prophecies they knew.

I mean - pretend to be Jaehaerys II for a moment, and having the dwarf woman tell you that your children marrying each other will produce the promised prince: Why would you care about that, why would it concern you if you didn't care about this prophesied figure in the first place? Would you even ask her about this kind of thing if you didn't care about it before? Would the concept even mean something to you?

The link there certainly could be a more recent Targaryen - Aegon I, his father, one of his sisters, etc. - having a prophetic dream/insight causing them to link the more ancient generic savior prophecy to the bloodline of House Targaryen.

It is also quite clear that Melisandre and Benerro are lacking crucial bits of information linking the prophecy to (specific branches of) House Targaryen. Benerro seems to declare Dany the savior more or less because she brought the dragons back.

4 minutes ago, Ran said:

There is no evidence of this secret belief passed from king to king in the books because it didn't happen in the books, it's a show thing.

That could be a simplification for show purposes, of course - but Aegon, etc. being motivated by such things and this kind of knowledge being passed down to the next generations, being garbled and eventually lost as the years went by is certainly something that could make sense in the books.

I mean, it is actually quite striking how crucial (political) decisions of Targaryens and Blackfyres both are shaped by dreams. Dany's egg hatching and other decisions are also influenced by such things - it would actually fit quite well if various historical Targaryens were motivated or influenced by similar things.

[dsjj251]

59 minutes ago, Denam_Pavel said:

See that's fine with me. Talk of shadows over snow wouldn't make anyone feel these leaks are herecy. I'm worried they'll go quite a bit further then that to give the threat beyond the Wall a part in this story.

I  would hope its not central to the plot overall, but I dont think it would actually be going to far, we have had the whole "Aegon conquered Westeros  for other reasons" theory for a while. It never made sense for him to do it just because Harren was about to go to war with Argilac, or to crown himself while technically controlling none of the 7 kingdoms and even at Oldtown only controlling 3 of the 7 kingdoms. 

[The Bard of Banefort]

I’m guessing that, within the show universe, Aenys confided in Alyssa about the prophecy, which she then passed on to Jaehaerys. Judging by the leaks, Rhaenyra ends up telling Daemon about it, so it may not be forbidden to tell your consort. It’s probably just a precaution to keep the secret within the family and away from the maesters, who are more likely to spread the word through letters and records.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m guessing that, within the show universe, Aenys confided in Alyssa about the prophecy, which she then passed on to Jaehaerys. Judging by the leaks, Rhaenyra ends up telling Daemon about it, so it may not be forbidden to tell your consort. It’s probably just a precaution to keep the secret within the family and away from the maesters, who are more likely to spread the word through letters and records.

In light of all that one could easily enough assume Aegon himself told Aegon and Viserys considering he died telling them stories about the Conquest.

Aegon and his sisters would have told all their children and grandchildren about something as pivotal as this ... while Jaehaerys and Alysanne may have restricted such information to the more crucial branches of the family ... but it seems to be pretty obvious that they would have told Baelon long before Aemon's death.

In the show it seems as if Viserys actually wants to confide in Daemon about the prophecy and dream stuff ... but then doesn't because the man ridicules such things.

One might also imagine that documents might exist which are handed down from king to king who discuss such matters. But there we enter into territory whether they would read such things, etc.

[Ran]

28 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But isn't that what GRRM is implying here?

 

 

 

It's not what he's implying. He was referring to fan speculations. There are no such speculations in F&B (which some people assumed he meant  in that video which was to promote F&B), and indeed there is zero to suggest that "We need to unify Westeros to prevent disaster from beyond the Wall" was a motivating factor for Aegon (gave up Dornish conquest after Prince Nymor's letter, made no apparent effort to learn more about the danger beyond the Wall), Aenys (never tried to conquer Dorne, never tried to do anything beyond the Wall), Maegor (ditto), Jaehaerys (ditto), Viserys I (ditto), Aegon II/Rhaenyra (ditto), Aegon III (ditto), etc. 

This is a convenience for the show to make it this very blunt secret knowledge thing.

 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

It's not what he's implying. He was referring to fan speculations.

But why would he mention it at all if it's just random fan speculation? And why would he approve such an idea for a show he is very much involved in if it contradicts his story?

[Ran]

On 8/7/2022 at 7:34 PM, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

But why would he mention it at all if it's just random fan speculation?

Because at that point in time he's obviously trying to attract fans of GoT to trying out FaB, by connecting it to a matter that was topical to GoT. It's not untrue that there was speculation among fans, and it's not untrue that there is a prophetic something to the three heads of the dragon and Daenys the Dreamer and Aegon the Conqueror, so he's not saying anything wrong. But he's not endorsing every speculation, he's just bringing it up in a promotional video made for Random House's marketing.

I'd have brought up that speculation too, if I was the one making a video about TWoIaF and explaining how maybe the details in it connect to details in the mega-hit TV show. 

On 8/7/2022 at 7:34 PM, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

And why would he approve such an idea for a show he is very much involved in if it contradicts his story?

Because the show universe is the show universe, not the ASoIaF universe. I mean, why did he approve Rhaenyra and Alicent being nearly the same age despite the massive contradiction to the story that it entails? Because it's a different universe and the needs of TV drama are not the same as those of the books.

[Ran]

Just to go a bit further, consider how George has praised Paddy Considine's performance and how it's deepend and complicated the figure of Viserys I. He explicitly says, Viserys was just this king who was around at this time, he liked to have fun, and this whole drama comes up in his reign... but Viserys was just, well, just this king, a nice guy but not a great king.  But Considine's Viserys is not just that -- they have added complication by apparently giving him this firm belief that he has a far more important role than anyone realizes, and that adds pathos to his choices.

But then... if they added it, it means George never actually had it in mind when he wrote F&B. And that's because he didn't. Simple as that.

I could certainly see him feeling an urge to retcon that into the histories (though he'd have had a golden opportunity by directing us to do it in TRotD, and suffice it to say, he did not), but it would in fact be an obvious retcon for reasons already outlined. It's not a natural part of the ASoIaF universe, this secret passed from king to king that is somehow supposed to explain all these things that they do (except that they don't, for the most part).

[Lord Varys]

45 minutes ago, Ran said:

Just to go a bit further, consider how George has praised Paddy Considine's performance and how it's deepend and complicated the figure of Viserys I. He explicitly says, Viserys was just this king who was around at this time, he liked to have fun, and this whole drama comes up in his reign... but Viserys was just, well, just this king, a nice guy but not a great king.  But Considine's Viserys is not just that -- they have added complication by apparently giving him this firm belief that he has a far more important role than anyone realizes, and that adds pathos to his choices.

But then... if they added it, it means George never actually had it in mind when he wrote F&B. And that's because he didn't. Simple as that.

I could certainly see him feeling an urge to retcon that into the histories (though he'd have had a golden opportunity by directing us to do it in TRotD, and suffice it to say, he did not), but it would in fact be an obvious retcon for reasons already outlined. It's not a natural part of the ASoIaF universe, this secret passed from king to king that is somehow supposed to explain all these things that they do (except that they don't, for the most part).

I think there we have to differentiate between background stuff for the Aegon and the Conquest ... and the reign of Viserys I.

I'm completely with you that George didn't come up with the idea of Aegon and the Conquest as being something that influenced the prelude to the Dance in George's mind when writing FaB ... but the prophecy stuff about the promised prince and the War for the Dawn, etc. might very well have influenced Aegon I.

And it might also be something his descendants knew or heard about ... although it doesn't really seem as if this was something they very much believed in or cared about all that much.

[Ran]

I would say it's something some of his descendants noticed but didn't necessarily believe, and it's not clear that they themselves necessarily knew that it specifically mattered to Aegon or to what degree it did after the initial generation after Aegon.

Aerys I (and Bloodraven and Shiera), Egg, Aemon, Rhaegar. Those are the only post-Maegor who may have given any real care to it, and whether they connected it to Aegon, the Conquest, or a threat from beyond the Wall is up in the air.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Marwyn indicates that the prophecy Aemon and Rhaegar believed in is certainly very old. But there must be a more recent addendum to this more generic prophecy making it about 'a promised prince (of the Targaryen dynasty)', or else the Targaryens are all mad entitled brats who for no good reason believe that they are connected to or destined to fulfill a prophecy that was actually never connected to their bloodline in any of the prophecies they knew.

I mean - pretend to be Jaehaerys II for a moment, and having the dwarf woman tell you that your children marrying each other will produce the promised prince: Why would you care about that, why would it concern you if you didn't care about this prophesied figure in the first place? Would you even ask her about this kind of thing if you didn't care about it before? Would the concept even mean something to you?

I mean, as long as GRRM actually has answers to all of these mysteries I'll be happy.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

I would say it's something some of his descendants noticed but didn't necessarily believe, and it's not clear that they themselves necessarily knew that it specifically mattered to Aegon or to what degree it did after the initial generation after Aegon.

If Aegon and his sisters were motivated (to a degree) by dreams and prophecies ... then Maegor's reign certainly sets the stage for Jaehaerys and Alysanne being kind of cut off from that tradition. Rhaena and Alyssa may have told them some things, but it would have been second hand stuff, which never become as important to them as it could have been. Although it is pretty much implied that Alysanne's visit to the Wall did get her and, presumably, also Jaehaerys thinking - but Gyldayn glosses this over or never knew about it.

And go back to Bran's dream about the youth with the three weirwood arrows. We have often thought it may have been Brandon Snow preparing to slay three dragons. If so, why didn't it come to that? Think about the fact that Torrhen knelt without even trying to fight back. If he and Aegon talked about the Others and prophecies and how handy some gigantic dragons might be if they ever came back ... then the submission of the Starks suddenly makes much more sense, doesn't it? The Starks get the promise of dragon support against the Others ... and in exchange pretty much nothing changes for them, aside from a nominal submission and the loss of royal title and a crown. If Torrhen was a man who believed in the Others then he could have been the kind of man for whom something like that was acceptable ... some of his sons apparently didn't see it that way, though. Which is also understandable.

It is not necessary for the plot to work, of course, but it could be a background element we know pretty much nothing about ... because the Starks and the Targaryens were in pretty big trouble in the last centuries. Rickard and Brandon may have known much more than they ever told Ned ... just as Ned knew a lot of stuff he never told Robb (or Jon).

2 hours ago, Ran said:

Aerys I (and Bloodraven and Shiera), Egg, Aemon, Rhaegar. Those are the only post-Maegor who may have given any real care to it, and whether they connected it to Aegon, the Conquest, or a threat from beyond the Wall is up in the air.

It is definitely the case that the sorcerer court of Aerys I (and perhaps also of the late Daeron II - Aerys would have done his magical research for years while his father was still alive) got something going there ... but Egg ended up focusing more on the return of the dragons for political reasons, not because it was a part of some ancient prophecy. His son Jaehaerys believed in the promised prince. But Egg either thought he was that guy because he though he could hatch dragon eggs ... or he thought he knew and understood things better than ancient prophecy, that dragonlore was a kind of magical science you could make work even if prophecy and destiny weren't favoring you.

At this point it is still just speculation that Egg's throwaway line in TMK about his uncle reading a prophecy about the return of the dragons refers to the promised prince prophecy. It could be, of course, but it could also be a different prophecy. It would make sense that the dragonless Targaryens would have jumped on any prophetic fragment promising or predicting the return of the dragons under certain conditions ... but it is also clear that the return of the dragons isn't exactly a core feature of the promised prince prophecy in the Targaryen version, because then they would have known that they would lose the dragons one day and may have taken precautions to try to prevent that.

So far Rhaegar's belief about the promised prince revolves around a special destiny/fight this person has go through ... not so much that he is going to bring the dragons back.

In the end, though, we should not judge the characters by their actions. Maester Aemon knew and believed in the prophecy for a very long time ... yet nothing indicates that he sent weekly letters to the kings living throughout his reign - especially during the decades he spent at the Wall - to urge them to prepare for the War of the Dawn (which he also knows about).

It would thus not be an outlandish that Jaehaerys I or Viserys I or Daeron II also knew about this stuff ... and behaved the way they did.

It also strikes me as kind of ingenious for symmetry reasons to have Aegon be concerned with the same problem Dany and Jon have to deal with now. Marwyn is presumably going to play a considerable role in convincing Dany that she should go to Westeros ... and that would work much better as an argument if she also realized that those issues, her issues were issues her most prominent ancestors also were concerned with.

If Dany understands why Aenar and Aegon went west rather than east, it might convince her to go there, too. If she doesn't get such information then what's going to stop her from going east or staying in the Dothraki Sea to be Stallion Who Mounts the World?

 

[The Bard of Banefort]

I think the best course of action would be to consolidate the regency, with the Hour of the Wolf being directly followed by Viserys’ return. I would even keep Corlys alive until the end. Most of the main characters would be dead by then, and it would be pretty jarring to devote more than a few episodes to a new cast of characters.

[chrisdaw]

I tend to think it's going to be in the main series. Dany dreams of what can be assumed to be TWFTD. I think many Targs, most of them probably, were having similar prophetic dreams. I think prophecies (dragon must have three heads, PTWP) originating from Daenys, in the Signs and Portents or passed down orally gave following Targs a framework for their dreams, it explained to them what the dreams were, and it strengthened the resolve of those who knew and things went off the rails a bit for those without the framework when the knowledge was lost. And obviously they couldn't talk about it outwardly because they'd seem mad, if you're not on the same blood it's all self-serving nonsense.

I think the Dornish letter relates to this or other Targaryen secret prophetic knowledge.

[C.T. Phipps]

8 hours ago, Mithras said:

Retcons are not necessarily bad. But when they are, as it seems like the route GRRM is going for the motivation behind Aegon's conquest, they really ruin everything.

I admit, I don't mind the Aegon the Conqueror thing because I actually think it's really entertaining if they go with [i]Aegon is a complete and utter failure at this.[/i] The ProphecyTM trademark that compells him to invade Westeros and build a vast centuries-long empire is only interesting in the context that he failed to achieve almost anything in terms of preparing for the Others. That's the kind of good writing I expect from George R.R Martin.

It might impact stories like Visenya's murder of her nephew (if she did) and Maegor the Cruel (who might have been doing all he did because he HAS to be in order to save the world). However, we have a pretty good cut off point for when the Targaryens "lose" their knowledge of the future and that's Rhaenyra and Aegon III. It's the perfect place to have him have no idea about any of this and the continuity of knowledge being broken.

At least until Bloodraven rediscovers it and he absolutely does not share it.

However, what I would HATE would be attempting to tie together everything in the setting to the March of the Others. I mean, for example, Aegon II's queen goes mad. That should be because her children were murdered in front of her and the horrible abuse she has at the hands of her husband. Don't make it because she's a seer or something. Dorn shouldn't have secret knowledge of the Others either. They should go with something more mundane. It makes the universe too small.

I will say I don't begrudge George R.R. Martin changing his mind on things, though. If he wants Viserys to become a more complicated and interesting figure because the man has delusions of destiny (which aren't delusions), that's fine. The books aren't done yet and if he's inspired by other people's ideas and performances, it's his world.

[Lord Varys]

6 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

It might impact stories like Visenya's murder of her nephew (if she did) and Maegor the Cruel (who might have been doing all he did because he HAS to be in order to save the world). However, we have a pretty good cut off point for when the Targaryens "lose" their knowledge of the future and that's Rhaenyra and Aegon III. It's the perfect place to have him have no idea about any of this and the continuity of knowledge being broken.

It is not just that - one could also imagine them being too occupied with other things, no longer believing into that stuff all that much because nothing happens and/or they don't have any personal (prophetic) dreams about that stuff.

Aegon III wouldn't have cared much about that, even if he had known ... because he was too depressed. Viserys II too grounded in real world politics, Daeron I too obsessed with war and glory, Baelor too pious, Aegon IV too self-absorbed, etc.

But in context, though, we must say how well-prepared Westeros still was for the Others in the beginning of AGoT. Sure enough, the Targaryens were gone, but there was still a working centralist monarchy, and people were proud of their warrior king and his rule. For all his shortcomings, Ser Waymar Royce dies a good death beyond the Wall. He is courageous and brave.

And if you imagine Ned informing Robert in time about the threat beyond the Wall, if you imagine them having time and opportunity to raise a vast army from all the kingdoms ... then they should be more than a challenge to the Others and their wights.

They might not win in the end because there is magic and stuff to consider ... but they should fare pretty well.

If you think how the Realm looked during the dragonriding Targaryen kings and ... and even later during the more powerful/impressive dragonless kings ... say, Daeron II or Maekar - then they might even be more effective then.

The kings knowing/believing in a threat beyond the Wall might have felt justified to have done enough to be prepared for such a threat simply by keeping the peace.

6 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

However, what I would HATE would be attempting to tie together everything in the setting to the March of the Others. I mean, for example, Aegon II's queen goes mad. That should be because her children were murdered in front of her and the horrible abuse she has at the hands of her husband. Don't make it because she's a seer or something.

That is likely also going to be the trigger for her depression in the show, one imagines. But it makes her actually a more complex character if she has prophetic dreams or visions than she would be if she was just a woman who has a couple of unremarkable lines and then ends up being the mad woman imprisoned in the attic her chambers.

It could be a rather interesting plot for her to fall in a deep depression after what she had to suffer ... and have this be a catalyst for her having more (detailed) dreams about the future, pertaining not so much to distant future stuff but rather some events during the Dance itself. Her bad mental state could contribute to her talk not being taken all that seriously ... which could, in turn, worsen her depression and mental health.

For instance, in the wake of Blood and Cheese she could foresee Aegon's own fall and disfigurement at Rook's Rest. She could try to warn and he could misunderstand her completely. Then there is the Harrenhal ruse, the betrayal of the City Watch and, under Rhaenyra's rule, Maelor's death, First and Second Tumbleton, Daemon-Aemond, and, most importantly, the Storming of the Dragonpit and Rhaenyra's death on Dragonstone.

If they like to explore things like that - which would only right and proper for ASoIaF content since GoT cut almost all the prophetic dreams and visions - they could even have Helaena's warnings stopping certain characters from doing something which then ends up causing the foreseen event. Having Helaena as figure similar to book Jojen fits very well with the spirit of George's work.