What is compelling about having Daenerys be someone other than the daughter of Aerys and Rhaella?

[Alester Florent]

This thread has just turned into Lemongate Mk2, hasn't it? I can't remember the last post that addressed CP's actual query as given in the title.

For me, that's the biggest single point against Lemongate, that I think it would be a rubbish, gratuitous twist which undermines the story we've been told so far rather than enhancing it.

Overall though, I dislike it principally because it essentially follows the classic conspiracy theory reasoning: there are a handful of shreds of inconsistency which are treated as vital clues, spurious conclusions are drawn from that, and then those spurious conclusions are used to support each other, so that the reasoning becomes largely circular. Meanwhile, the vast quantity of contrary evidence, which outweighs it significantly, is dismissed for spurious reasons up to and including, if all else fails, something along the lines of "that's what they want you to think".

I admire the creativity up to a point, but that's what it is, creativity. Not analysis.

[csuszka1948]

BTW I am not a native English speaker, so explain to me if I am wrong about this.

I believe "Dany was most like named by her mother" doesn't mean that Dany was most likely named by her mother, but that Dany, like most of the children in medieval times, was named by her mother; while Tyrion and Jon were both exceptions, not being named by their mother but Tywin and Ned.

[csuszka1948]

2 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

This does kind of indicate that Jon couldn't have been born to Lyanna nine months before she had Dany, though, doesn't it? If GRRM flat out says Ned named Jon, then George is either ...

1. sticking to established canon (Jon is Ned's bastard)
2. alluding to the commonly believed fact: that Ned is there at Jon's birth, when Lyanna died. Or ...
3. using careful wording ('most likely') to metaphorically cross his fingers - if the Lyanna having two children in one year theory is still held to be true. 

I'm not sure I like option 3 as it seems a bit weasely for George. He'd usually give more of a 'no comment' type answer in this case.

 

I am not a native english speaker, so I might be wrong, but for me George's wording 'Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father and Jon by Ned' implies that Dany - like most babies in medieval times (and even today) - was named by her mother, unlike Tyrion (named by his father Tywin) and Jon (named by Ned).

It's not about some probabilities ('most likely named by her mother'), but that Dany named by her mother was the regular thing, while Tyrion named by Tywin or Jon named by Ned was irregular.

[csuszka1948]

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

How do you know this?

 After that he remembered nothing. They had found him still holding her body, silent with grief. The little crannogman, Howland Reed, had taken her hand from his. Ned could recall none of it.

 

Yes, Howland and the nursemaid Wylla were there. I don't see any contradiction here.

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

I think the issue is that people put to much stock in Cat's view of Jon when it comes to his age, which was biased at best, and in my opinion likely more akin to willful ignorance.

The story about Ned and Ashara, that Cat seemingly believed, as told to Arya, was a conception at Harrenhall.

 

Is there any indication in the text that 'Cat seemingly believed' this tale? Because I don't remember anything in Cat's POV hinting towards it.

[Gilbert Green]

8 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I think Viserys is the 'weak link' in this theory, so to speak. Points about the way he treats and speaks to Daenerys are easily explained by him just being a rude person. If it was only Daenerys he spoke to in this way I would be more suspicious.

True.  Like all the (supposed) clues, they have plausible deniability.

8 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

But we see he is also rude to Jorah, Doreah and eventually Khal Drogo and co. when drunk.

He has to get drunk to be rude to Khal Drogo however.  When sober, the man is not entirely without sense, however much it may humiliate him to hold back.

8 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

If Viserys was aware Daenerys wasn't really Daenerys, why does he bother to tell her all the stuff about 'their' escape from Dragonstone, the Targaryen blood and so on, multiple times? Is Illyrio persuading him to do so in some way to try and reinforce the false identity?

The obvious answer is "yes".  Like you say, he is telling her stories as part of her false-identity programing.  And yes, I think this was Illyrio's idea, not his.

But it's not just that.  Viserys is a king with only one subject.  Who else is he going to tell stories to?  To whom else is he going to rant and rail and dream and scheme?  Anyone who will listen, I guess, but how often can he find an audience?  He has a captive audience in Dany.

I think this is what ultimately leads to his death.  When his only subject seems to become a more important person than himself, it was one humiliation too many.

8 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Finally, based on how we see Viserys act in the book, I would not think he was a good person to include in a plot such as this at all. He is rash, quick to anger, arrogant, prideful, overestimates his own capabilities and we see him get drunk. 

Most of what you say is true to a degree.  But I don't think his drunken acts that lead to his death were typical of him.  I think the final humiliation of Dany becoming more important than himself was a last straw that snapped him.  And how often have we seen him drunk?  How often had Illyrio seen him drunk when the scheme was formed all those years ago.  We don't know.

My other objection is that this is to some extent an argument against the uncontroverted text.  Illyrio DID form a years-long scheme involving Viserys and Dany and some eventual marriage, even if Dany is genuine.  Viserys DID almost spoil this scheme due to his impulsivity, on the even of her wedding, according to Illyro, even if Dany is genuine. 

Illyrio and Viserys are not entirely on the same page.  Viserys thinks he has sold Dany to a barbarian in exchange for an army for HIMSELF.  But, as we later find out, it was Illyrio who sold Dany to a barbarian in exchange for an army for Young Griff.

9 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

As for where Illyrio sourced 'Daenerys', excluding Braavos, I would say either Lys or Tyrosh.

 @Corvo the Crow made a similar point. 

I think it is fair to guess that a wealthy slaver like Illyrio has contacts and agents in Tyrosh.  The Tyroshi are known slavers.  But there is no need for Illyrio to send to Westeros for slaves.  The slavers will bring their goods to Illyrio, either directly (by bringing them to Pentos) or indirectly (by bringing them to Tyrosh (where Illyrio no doubt has agents).  Slavers and pirates who  unload their goods are not necessarily going to say where they picked them up.  Jorah had no difficulty selling Bear Island poachers to a Tyroshi sea captain.  I would guess these slaves passed through Tyroshi slave markets, before ending up somewhere else.

9 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I am still not convinced by Dorne, because lemons are not exclusive to Dorne, and if it was in Dorne, why would Oberyn need to travel to Braavos to sign the marriage pact? I don't see the point unless he was that invested in having the Sealord as a witness.

I think he went to Braavos because that was where Ser Willem Darry and Viserys were living at the time. 

Dany was (I guess) somewhere else, in a tall stone house with a red door, somewhere in the mountains of Dorne, surrounded by the smell of roses "the perfumes of her childhood", being cared for by an entirely different man who was also named Willam. 

And I guess, Oberyn knew nothing about her.  But whether he did or not, the proposed marriage pact involved Viserys, not Dany.  So that's why he had to go to Braavos.

Sure, lemons are not exclusive to Dorne.  And neither are perfumes, I'm sure. 

But the Tower of Joy is a dangling plot thread shrouded in mystery.  So is Starfall.  Both are in Dorne.  Surely the plot threads will start to come together.  Surely, eventually, the story will come home.  Surely GRRM cannot allow the story to branch off in 1000 directions indefinitely.  Does GRRM really have time to explore every Free City in Essos before the scattered threads of the story start to coalesce?

9 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

As far as I am aware the version of the theory we are discussing here has 'Daenerys' being a young bedslave-in-training at some point.

My theory is that Valyrian featured girls are bought and sold because they are particularly valuable.  They are valuable for unsavory reasons that lurk in the background.  But this is often only incidental to the motives of those who steal them, sell them, and buy them.  They are stolen, bought and sold because they are valuable, and people want money.  Same reason Jorah sold the poachers, except more money.

Illyrio does deal in bedslaves, so it is perfectly plausible that a Valyrian featured girl would fall into his hands in the ordinary course of business.

10 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

The two slaving cities famed for bedslaves are Yunkai and Lys.

I'm sure Illyrio has agents there as well.  And if you're a sea captain with a Valyrian featured slave girl to unload, both these places are good places to unload such "goods". 

10 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

We also have another example of Illyrio sourcing a bedslave from Lys, since he got Doreah there.

Yes, but note that Doreah's coloring does not seem to come close to matching Dany's.  She seems not much more than an "ordinary" blue-eyed blonde.  Someone like Dany would be quite a find, with her silver hair and purple eyes.

Sorry if I did not address every point. 

[Gilbert Green]

2 hours ago, Hippocras said:

It doesn't fit with Ned's timeline. Lyanna only had one child. Unless she had twins, but that would be extremely gimmicky IMO.

I have provided timelines that work.  People ignore them.  And then say things like this.  What am I to do?

[Nevets]

@Gilbert Green There are no memories from Daenerys or other hints that even suggest time spent in slavery, or previous contact with Illyrio for that matter.  George is good about that sort of thing, and it needn't be too obvious.  But we have nothing.

At 5 years old, a fake Dany is totally worthless to Viserys.  Her only use would be as marriage bait, but that only works if she's marriageable, which won't be for 8-9 years at least, and I don't see him being willing to wait that long.  Patience isn't one of his virtues.  Even then, she is of limited value in sealing an alliance, because her family controls nothing and has no visible support.  

No one in Westeros is going to touch her.  They would be sticking their neck out just so Robert can ride up and chop it off.  

The only reason Viserys has waited until now to arrange a marriage isn't because he is patient, it's because he been ineffective in drumming up support and is desperate.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Nevets
Added notification

[Gilbert Green]

3 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

Jon by Ned.

This does kind of indicate that Jon couldn't have been born to Lyanna nine months before she had Dany, though, doesn't it? If GRRM flat out says Ned named Jon, then George is either ...

1. sticking to established canon (Jon is Ned's bastard)
2. alluding to the commonly believed fact: that Ned is there at Jon's birth, when Lyanna died. Or ...
3. using careful wording ('most likely') to metaphorically cross his fingers - if the Lyanna having two children in one year theory is still held to be true. 

I'm not sure I like option 3 as it seems a bit weasely for George. He'd usually give more of a 'no comment' type answer in this case.

Wylla gives birth to a child; Ned names him "Jon".  Lyanna gives birth to Rhaegar's son, and he gets a name, which is not "Jon".  Wylla's son Jon dies.   Jon arrives at the ToJ and finds Lyanna dying in childbirth with Rhaegar's daughter, and also finds an older son.  Jon takes custody of both children, and gives the older son to Wylla, and names him "Jon", causing him to assume the identity of Wylla's dead son.

Ned named Jon.  If he got named by someone else, it was with a name other than Jon.

[Craving Peaches]

38 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

My other objection is that this is to some extent an argument against the uncontroverted text. 

Apologies if it wasn't clear, I was not intending to make an argument that Illyrio would not have Viserys part of any plot whatsoever, rather that he would not have him part of a plot that involved him keeping a major secret such as Daenerys not being the real Daenerys, because he has demonstrated that he has traits which make it unlikely he could keep the secret.

42 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

But there is no need for Illyrio to send to Westeros for slaves. 

I thought your idea was that someone else picked up 'Daenerys' first, and then Illyrio got her from wherever? I agree that Illyrio would not be going to Westeros for slaves.

46 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

Does GRRM really have time to explore every Free City in Essos before the scattered threads of the story start to coalesce?

Hopefully not, but we do have Edric Storm already in Lys, and it would make a good stop if someone needed to stock up on some supplies on their way to Westeros.

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, Alester Florent said:

This thread has just turned into Lemongate Mk2, hasn't it? I can't remember the last post that addressed CP's actual query as given in the title.

There were more at the start, I think what happened is that different people had different versions of the alternative Daenerys theory and so needed to explain them first and then explain why it was compelling. The discussion has been fun, but it also reminds me of the endless Elder Scrolls 6 speculation threads (what over 12 years without a new game does), so I think it is a sign we really need a new book.

Spoiler

Not to mention even the Elder Scrolls shitposting subreddit thinks theories like this are crazy... 

 

[Gilbert Green]

13 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

I thought your idea was that someone else picked up 'Daenerys' first, and then Illyrio got her from wherever? I agree that Illyrio would not be going to Westeros for slaves.

Right.  So, for example, Lord Willam is dying in a tall stone house hidden in the mountains, surrounded by servants and the scent of blue roses, and bellowing orders from his sickbed.  He also has a small Valyrian featured girl that (think the servants) the old perv is obviously saving for himself for when she gets older.   Lord Willam dies.  The servants steal everything.  One of them steals the little girl.  Little girl cries as the red door closes behind her forever.  Servant takes little girl to a port, finds a Tyroshi sea captain of dubious reputations, and exchanges the useless brat for some cold hard cash.  Tyroshi sea captain returns to Tyrosh, or Lys, or whatever, and unloads the little girl for even more cash, earning a profit.  In the chain of commerce, little girl gets picked up by one of Illyrio's procurers.

Or whatever.  GRRM will supply the details not me. 

[csuszka1948]

2 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

This thread has just turned into Lemongate Mk2, hasn't it? I can't remember the last post that addressed CP's actual query as given in the title.

For me, that's the biggest single point against Lemongate, that I think it would be a rubbish, gratuitous twist which undermines the story we've been told so far rather than enhancing it.

Overall though, I dislike it principally because it essentially follows the classic conspiracy theory reasoning: there are a handful of shreds of inconsistency which are treated as vital clues, spurious conclusions are drawn from that, and then those spurious conclusions are used to support each other, so that the reasoning becomes largely circular. Meanwhile, the vast quantity of contrary evidence, which outweighs it significantly, is dismissed for spurious reasons up to and including, if all else fails, something along the lines of "that's what they want you to think".

I admire the creativity up to a point, but that's what it is, creativity. Not analysis.

 

I overall agree and find the number of hints towards Dany being 'fake' too few compared to its significance (compared with, say, R+L=J, pertaining another main character), find the plot inconsistent with the behaviour of several characters (chiefly Ned and Viserys) and the entire scheme looks too complicated and accidental (that the slave Illyrio has bought was really a Targaryen) at the same time.

That said, GRRM has given multiple interviews in which he said that some reveal related to the Red Door will be coming, and he put multiple clues in later books that something is wrong with Dany's memories (lemon trees don't grow in Braavos), so some speculation is warranted.

[Gilbert Green]

5 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Lyanna may very well have squeezed two pregnancies during that time frame we've explicitly not been told the length of. The problem with the theory here is that GRRM himself gave times for Dany's and Jon's births in SSMs.

Sorry my bad, Dany one didn't pop up for some reason. 

Okay, but, I addressed how my timeline fits GRRM's SSM above.  How was my solution unworkable?

[Gilbert Green]

3 hours ago, Nevets said:

@Gilbert Green There are no memories from Daenerys or other hints that even suggest time spent in slavery, or previous contact with Illyrio for that matter. 

Why would she necessarily need to meet directly with Illyrio?  Why would she remember if he did, since we know her memories from that period are fragmentary?  And even if the did meet with Illyrio, and even if she did remember, where does it say in the text that this never happened?

The only thing the text tells us about her and Illyrio is that she understands him better than Viserys does and does not trust him.  She has inquired about him and knows things about him.  As to whether she ever remembers meeting him before, or how many times she has met him before, as a very small child, or later, the text is entirely silent.

Why on earth would she remember "being a slave"?  She remembers sea voyages, likes sea voyages, and we are simply never told what her first sea voyage was like, or how well she remembers it.  If the sailors were reasonably nice to her, why on earth would she remember that money changed hands at the beginning and end of the journey?  Even if she were treated somewhat badly, by what logic is her treatment likely to have been worse than her years with Viserys? 

3 hours ago, Nevets said:

At 5 years old, a fake Dany is totally worthless to Viserys. 

I never specified her age.  So make her younger.  She needs to be young enough so her memories are fading and fragmentary (which they are!), and old enough so that she remembers SOMETHING (which she does).  Which is the exact situation GRRM has created.  You tell me what you think is the right age.

But if I make her younger (say, 3 or 4) someone else will come along and say that it is too young, and it is unrealistic to expect her to remember anything.  Because any stick is good enough to beat a theory you don't like. 

And remember that no matter how old you make her, she will be younger than Theon/Reek or fake Arya.

3 hours ago, Nevets said:

Patience isn't one of his virtues. 

Time and poverty and humiliation have made him madder and more bitter and more desperate.  There may have been a time when his impatience was less obvious, at least to Illyrio.

3 hours ago, Nevets said:

No one in Westeros is going to touch her.  They would be sticking their neck out just so Robert can ride up and chop it off. 

Drogo was willing to touch her.

3 hours ago, Nevets said:

The only reason Viserys has waited until now to arrange a marriage isn't because he is patient, it's because he been ineffective in drumming up support and is desperate.

And yet Illyrio says Viserys almost spoiled years of planning when he tried to deflower Dany before her wedding.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Nevets]

25 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

Why would she necessarily need to meet directly with Illyrio?  Why would she remember if he did, since we know her memories from that period are fragmentary?  And even if the did meet with Illyrio, and even if she did remember, where does it say in the text that this never happened?

The only thing the text tells us about her and Illyrio is that she understands him better than Viserys does and does not trust him.  She has inquired about him and knows things about him.  As to whether she ever remembers meeting him before, or how many times she has met him before, as a very small child, or later, the text is entirely silent.

Why on earth would she remember "being a slave"?  She remembers sea voyages, likes sea voyages, and we are simply never told what her first sea voyage was like, or how well she remembers it.  If the sailors were reasonably nice to her, why on earth would she remember that money changed hands at the beginning and end of the journey?  Even if she were treated somewhat badly, by what logic is her treatment likely to have been worse than her years with Viserys? 

I never specified her age.  So make her younger.  She needs to be young enough so her memories are fading and fragmentary (which they are!), and old enough so that she remembers SOMETHING (which she does).  Which is the exact situation GRRM has created.  You tell me what you think is the right age.

But if I make her younger (say, 3 or 4) someone else will come along and say that it is too young, and it is unrealistic to expect her to remember anything.  Because any stick is good enough to beat a theory you don't like. 

And remember that no matter how old you make her, she will be younger than Theon/Reek or fake Arya.

Time and poverty and humiliation have made him madder and more bitter and more desperate.  There may have been a time when his impatience was less obvious, at least to Illyrio.

Drogo was willing to touch her.

And yet Illyrio says Viserys almost spoiled years of planning when he tried to deflower Dany before her wedding.

You missed my point entirely.  It is not that Daenerys has no memories suggestive of slavery; it is that George R.R. Martin has not seen fit to give us any such memories, or other hints of any kind.  And it doesn't have to be obvious. 

For example, she could have memories of being in a room with a bunch of kids that look like her; being in a locked room she can't leave; being surrounded by strangers for no apparent reason; being examined by people she doesn't know, or being naked around strangers.  That's just what I thought of offhand, and I'm not even a writer. Someone of Martin's caliber could easily come up with something subtle but obvious on retrospect.

Viserys has no use for a 5 year old fake.

"What use is a five year old that I'm not even related to.  I kept my sister around so I could marry her later.  This kid is useless for that".  

"You can marry her off in exchange for an army".

"That would take years.  Nobody is going to want to marry a five year old.  Or a ten year old for that matter.  I'm not about to wait that long.  If this is the best you can do, go away and leave me alone.  And take that useless brat with you!"

Viserys is mean.  He's not stupid.

By the way, Drogo is not in Westeros.  He's in Essos.

[Gilbert Green]

10 minutes ago, Nevets said:

You missed my point entirely.  It is not that Daenerys has no memories suggestive of slavery; it is that George R.R. Martin has not seen fit to give us any such memories, or other hints of any kind.  And it doesn't have to be obvious.

Yeah, but who made you boss?  No matter how many subtle clues I point to, you are going to insist that there has to be one more.  Bottom line is, you just don't like the theory.  Which is fine. 

11 minutes ago, Nevets said:

By the way, Drogo is not in Westeros.  He's in Essos.

Sure, but what's your point?  Illyrio's plan was to wed her to a Dothraki warlord.

[Nevets]

28 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

Yeah, but who made you boss?  No matter how many subtle clues I point to, you are going to insist that there has to be one more.  Bottom line is, you just don't like the theory.  Which is fine. 

Sure, but what's your point?  Illyrio's plan was to wed her to a Dothraki warlord.

What subtle clues about slavery?  I don't remember seeing any mentioned, at least nothing specific to Daenerys.

Whether or not Illyrio's plan always included Drogo, which I doubt, Viserys's plans for damn sure didn't.  So who could Viserys possibly plan to marry her to?

Edited July 11, 2023 by Nevets

[Corvo the Crow]

3 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

Okay, but, I addressed how my timeline fits GRRM's SSM above.  How was my solution unworkable?

Because then it would make Jon too old.

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Because then it would make Jon too old.

In what way?  I gave you a timeline, and you ignored it.  It's like we're not actually having a conversation.

[Corvo the Crow]

7 minutes ago, Gilbert Green said:

In what way?  I gave you a timeline, and you ignored it.  It's like we're not actually having a conversation.

Yes you told that Dany is born 10 months after Jon, so Rhaegar should still be alive and kicking for at least a month after(Dany not being premature) Jon’s birth, which would put it before the Trident, cause, you know, Iron Bank of Braavos wasn’t a sperm bank that Rhaegar could deposit to so he needs to spend some time with Lyanna. Born before Trident makes Jon too old.