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

[Nevets]

2 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

One problem with the "20 questions" tactic of objecting to theories is that ultimately, even if the theory is correct, it is GRRM, and not me or Mourning Star, who will answer all these questions.

But just to be sporting, again, here are some answers.  Not necessarily the same as Mourning Stars, or GRRM's either.

Dany's caretaker died and the servants stole things.  One of the things they stole was Dany.  Someone took her to a port, sold her to a sea captain, and she ended up in the slave trade.  She fell into Illyrio's hands in the ordinary course of business, and he provided her to Viserys.

As far as Varys and Viserys and Illyrio are concerned, it does not matter.  Neither of them know she is the blood of the dragon.  They think she's just a slave girl with Lyseni or other Valyrian features.

Her actually being blood of the dragon was a twist they never counted on.

How do you know Ned did not try to find her?  Viserys spend years dodging "hired knives", and Ned had not even sent any hired knives yet, as far as I know.  Nor is it clear that Ned ever succeeded in tracing her.  And it's not like he can tell King Robert about it.

If Varys does not know about her Targ heritage, he probably does not know about her Stark heritage either.

 

This is supposed to make more sense than what we have already?  Sure doesn't look like it; it makes a lot less sense to me, and that's taking into account the lemon tree mystery.  It also raises far more questions than it answers, which is the opposite of what a good theory should do.

[Gilbert Green]

1 hour ago, Nevets said:

This is supposed to make more sense than what we have already?  Sure doesn't look like it; it makes a lot less sense to me, and that's taking into account the lemon tree mystery.  It also raises far more questions than it answers, which is the opposite of what a good theory should do.

No.  A good DENOUEMENT, perhaps, should answer more questions than it raises.  But that will be written by GRRM, not by me.  I imagine his denouements will be spread out over several chapters, and be rather elaborate, much like the books themselves.  And I cannot guarantee that his denouements will be good denouements.

The only test of a theory, like R+L=D, is that it turns out to be correct.

But if you want to ask me more questions, feel free.  I will try to answer them, in the same spirit of good sportsmanship, but with the same disclaimers.  And of course, you have no obligation to be interested, just as I cannot summon any interest in the HERESY threads.

Edited June 29, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[csuszka1948]

6 hours ago, Nevets said:

This is supposed to make more sense than what we have already?  Sure doesn't look like it; it makes a lot less sense to me, and that's taking into account the lemon tree mystery.  It also raises far more questions than it answers, which is the opposite of what a good theory should do.

 

Honestly, it provides a better explanation regarding the role of Illyrio/Varys, even if I still object to the role of the Viserys based on his characaterization. 

The big problem is Dany having no memories at all about her years as a slave.

[Hippocras]

I am somewhat intrigued by the idea that Dany may not be who she thinks she is, however I absolutely do NOT buy that she is the daughter of Lyanna and Rhaegar. I find that convoluted and unnecessary. Why obliterate Jon's identity Just to make a bizarre theory for Dany?

I am open to Dany being the daughter of Ashara who was raped by Aerys. I am open also to Dany being the daughter of Rhaella but NOT Aerys. I do not, however, much like any theory saying that she is Rhaegar's daughter and not his sister (or half sister).

[Gilbert Green]

5 hours ago, Hippocras said:

I am somewhat intrigued by the idea that Dany may not be who she thinks she is, however I absolutely do NOT buy that she is the daughter of Lyanna and Rhaegar. I find that convoluted and unnecessary. Why obliterate Jon's identity Just to make a bizarre theory for Dany?

Uh ... because of the clues we mention.  You don't have to be convinced. 

Remember, R+L=J is only a theory.  We cannot "obliterate" what was never established in the first place. 

The only way to construct a coherent timeline of Robert's Rebellion is to discard the supposedly-mandatory requirement that it be made to fit standard versions of R+L=J.

Non-standard versions of R+L=J can be made to fit.  Given the 20+ month long "abduction", Jon and Dany can be "Irish twins".  The dragon has three heads, after all, and Dany is a "child of three".  Maybe Aegon, Jon and Dany.

Alternatively, Dany can be the daughter of Rhaegar and Ashara, and still be born at more-or-less the same place at more-or-less the same time.  Dany would still be a "child of three", one of Rhaegar's three (surviving) children.  The only problem is that the timeline problems of Jon being born at the time of the TOJ battle remain an issue.

 

[Mourning Star]

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

How was Dany found and taken away from the 'House with the Red Door'?

Great question.

Someone always tells.

If the house with the red door was in Dorne, I wouldn't be surprised to find that the Martells were involved. Especially since we are told Oberyn went to Braavos to negotiate the marriage pact with Viserys (which doesn't mention Dany) and Dany remembers sailing into Braavos.

If I'm really feeling wildly speculative, I think the idea that Darkstar knows about these events, and that's what makes him the most dangerous man in Dorne, is interesting.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Why does it matter that this Dany is actually a Targaryen, not just a lookalike, because if they used her for 'coin' they can use anyone looking like a Targaryen?

Did Drogo care that she was a Targaryen or just that she looked like a Valyrian princess? Unclear to me. I'm not sure that Dany had to be a Targaryen to be sold. But I do think it's worth noting that Dany being Rhaegar's sister instead of his daughter does change her position in the line of succession, especially in relation to Viserys.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Why didn't Ned Stark do anything about it for years, despite knowing that someone has taken her, she is brainwashed by Viserys and her life is constantly in danger?

I don't think it's clear what Ned knew or assumed.

We don't get many direct thoughts of his in this regard except for the repeated objection to killing children, paralleled to both Cersei in the "bitter cup" of exile conversation, and to Rhaegar's children.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Why doesn't Varys confront Ned Stark about Dany and use him as an ally for his scheme?

To what end? Varys and Illyrio, judging by the conversation Arya overhears, intended to see Ned removed from power.

Blackmailing a man like Ned doesn't seem like a great plan to me either, but it's all hypothetical. We can only speculate about why characters don't do things they don't do in the story, and I'm not sure there's much value in it.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

I said the alternative explanation for house with red door&lemon tree.

I don't think it's convincing to hand wave away the repeated lemon tree discrepancy. I don't think these were written for no reason. I also think I'm providing a much more coherent explanation for what Dany sees in the House of the Undying.

But, everyone is entitled to make up their own opinion.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

The discrepancies in Viserys' story I countered neatly, but you think he would lie about small details for no reason.

I don't know what you mean by countered. The discrepancies exist, you can try and provide other explanations, like sloppy writing if you want, but I don't think they are more convincing than assuming what was written was intentional. If it was intentional, then there was a reason. Any one discrepancy is easy to dismiss, that there are multiple small inconsistencies is, I believe, for the benefit of the reader, and evidence of Viserys dishonesty.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:30 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Dany doesn't have enough Stark characterization to be convincing, she has a parallel dream to Bran (what would darkness do, roar? howling is more terrifying) and Lyanna. What House of the Undying visions?

I disagree about the Stark characterizations of Dany.

She is a natural rider without training on a Stark colored horse (her silver), and is described like a centaur.

She wears Stark colors with flowers in her hair.

It's not the darkness described as howling, it's Dany... the devil is in the details. Dragons are never described as howling, wolves repeatedly are.

The red door was so far ahead of her, and she could feel the icy breath behind, sweeping up on her. If it caught her she would die a death that was more than death, howling forever alone in the darkness.

The shadows Dany sees in the tent of Mirri:

She glimpsed the shadow of a great wolf, and another like a man wreathed in flames.

Etc. etc. etc...

Off in the distance, a wolf howled. The sound made her feel sad and lonely

On 6/27/2023 at 8:44 PM, csuszka1948 said:

They don't. Jahaerys didn't expect the marriage to end in a war with the overthrow of the Targaryen dynasty, and Aerys didn't rape Rhaella with the desire to birth a prophecy child, he ignored prophecies.

Do you have any textual evidence for the claim that Aerys ignored prophesy, or his intents?

On 6/27/2023 at 8:44 PM, csuszka1948 said:

It was Rhaegar who cared the most about prophecies and his behaviour has drastically changed after reading some scrolls.

Which led him to learning to use a sword, and he died in a swordfight.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:44 PM, csuszka1948 said:

It's recently have been revealed that the 'song of ice and fire' refers to Aegon's dream of the three-headed dragon fighting some darkness coming from the North and (partly) this motivated Aegon to conquer.

Do you have a quote from the books to support this claim?

On 6/27/2023 at 8:44 PM, csuszka1948 said:

It usually plays a significant part (especially the parents by action), but it doesn't determine and there are many instances when this shows (see Aenys vs Aegon, Daeron II vs Aegon IV or Aegon III vs Rhaenyra&Daemon or Aerion vs Maekar or Aerys vs Jahaerys II etc.).

The Ghost of High Heart makes a prophesy about bloodline leading to the prince who was promised, so in this case it seems to me to be directly relevant to the return of dragons.

On 6/27/2023 at 8:44 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Viserys, was her first thought the next time she paused, but a second glance told her otherwise. The man had her brother’s hair, but he was taller, and his eyes were a dark indigo rather than lilac. “Aegon,” he said to a woman nursing a newborn babe in a great wooden bed. “What better name for a king?”

“Will you make a song for him?” the woman asked.

“He has a song,” the man replied. “He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire.” He looked up when he said it and his eyes met Dany’s, and it seemed as if he saw her standing there beyond the door. “There must be one more,” he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in the bed she could not say. “The dragon has three heads.” He went to the window seat, picked up a harp, and ran his ngers lightly over its silvery strings. Sweet sadness lled the room as man and wife and babe faded like the morning mist, only the music lingering behind to speed her on her way."

Rhaegar is talking about his children here and looks at Dany.

I like this next little connection as well, although I don't expect everyone else to find it compelling.

Rhaegar's quote above is the equivalent of Star Wars' "There is another", which is a reference to Luke and Leia.

Luke also sees a vision of his own face in Vader's black armored helmet, Vader is his father.

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

Edited June 29, 2023 by Mourning Star

[Gilbert Green]

7 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

The big problem is Dany having no memories at all about her years as a slave.

"Years" as a slave, before she became a slave owned by Viserys, are not necessary.  Weeks or months, maybe.  What specifically do you think she ought to remember?  You don't send a Valyrian featured slave girl to the coal mines.  And you don't necessarily make her do sex work prior to puberty either.  You don't yell "SLAVE SLAVE SLAVE" at her every day, especially while trying to smuggle her out of Westeros where slavery is illegal.  Most likely, you assign some female servant (or slave) to care for her, until ready to sell or use her. 

I imagine a whole lot of memories will come flooding back when she finally finds the House with the Red Door.

[Hippocras]

I personally think that Dany is far too strongly linked to Fire and Blood to have anything at all to do with the frigid North. The daughter of a Stark is not the right person to bring dragons back into the world. It feels wrong on a fundamental level.

As for other ideas, I don't see them being debated much here, but the Aerys and Ashara theory is not without basis:

We know for example that Aerys was not expected to go to Harrenhal, but when he did it caused some unspecified kind of trouble. We also know that Ashara was "dishonoured" at Harrenhal but of course we have no idea if the trouble Aerys caused and the trouble Ashara found herself in were one and the same thing. Still, it these two things are one and the same, then it follows that Aerys compelled Ashara, by some level of kingly coercion, to have sex with him, or even to become his longer term mistress. Ashara then had a child sometime between late 281 and her death in 283. If the birth was in the later part of this timeline then the child could potentially have been passed off as Rhaella's daughter, following Rhaella's death. Possible, though not all that likely. The main point in favour of this theory, or course, is that if true then it would answer the endlessly nagging mystery of what role Ashara plays in this saga, while bringing us closer to understanding what the meaning of all those Drnish lemon references are all about.

[Gilbert Green]

8 hours ago, Hippocras said:

I personally think that Dany is far too strongly linked to Fire and Blood to have anything at all to do with the frigid North. The daughter of a Stark is not the right person to bring dragons back into the world. It feels wrong on a fundamental level.

And yet  Rhaegar says (of Aegon), "his is the song of ice and fire"; and (looking at Dany) "there must be one more", because "the dragon has three heads".

It has plausibly been foreshadowed that "the dragon" (who has three heads) represents the union of ice and fire.

Edited July 2, 2023 by Gilbert Green

[Gilbert Green]

HOTU to Dany:  ". . . the shape of shadows . . . morrows not yet made . . . drink from the cup of ice  . . . drink from the cup of fire . . ."

[Hippocras]

2 hours ago, Gilbert Green said:

And yet  Rhaegar says (of Aegon), "his is the song of ice and fire"; and (looking at Dany) "there must be one more", because "the dragon has three heads".

It has plausibly been foreshadowed that "the dragon" (who has three heads) represents the union of ice and fire.

His Song being the Song of Ice and Fire does not need to mean that he himself is both the ice and the fire of the song. A song is not only about the person but also the things they do. And clearly these "dragons" are meant to fight against the big icy baddy in the far North, so that is all the "Ice" that is necessary to make a song.

The dragon has 3 heads - I am with you there. There need to be 3 heads of the dragon. But that does not mean all 3 "dragons" need to be Rhaegar's children and not his father's. Dany as Rhaegar's sister or half-sister is still very much a "dragon".

The idea that Rhaegar has 3 living children is interesting, I just struggle with it. Why, for example, would those involved go to so much trouble to hide Jon and Young Griff (Aegon is real theory) but leave Daenerys so exposed? If they swapped a child of Rhaegar's for Rhaella's daughter then that means they put her directly in harm's way (I hope you are not proposing that Rhaegar impregnated his mother). I would have to conclude that if Rhaegar has 3 living children, then Daenerys is not one of them.

[Hippocras]

Just to add:

The 3 head of the dragon thing is a mystery with so many moving parts. It is really hard to get a solid theory because every proposal is based on very large numbers of assumptions. I think Dany is one of the 3 heads of the dragon, and I think she is probably who she thinks she is (but I will not have a tantrum if she is not). Rhaegar, at the time of Aegon's birth, had no reason to believe that his mother would ever have another successful pregnancy and that is why he thought it was up to him to father all 3 dragons. But in fact itis not at all necessary for all 3 to descend from Rhaegar.

As for the other 2 dragon heads, Jon is one, and the last of the 3 is probably young Griff. However I doubt that Young Griff is who he thinks he is. He may be purely and simply a Blackfyre descendant with various other threads worked into his bloodline over time. He may be BOTH a Blackfyre descendant (via Ashara) and a Targaryen (via Rhaegar or Aerys). He may even not be a Blackfyre at all in which case either his mother was still Ashara but she was not a female line Blackfyre, or he really is Prince Aegon. If either of these last versions is true, then it means the entire elaborate construction of the Blackfyre rebellion histories is just one giant red herring.

If it turns out NOT to be young Griff who completes our set of 3, then we need to look at the more convoluted theories surrounding the Lannisters or at other mistresses of Aerys: Harder to justify, or see the path to get there, but not impossible. I don't know how many people would be satisfied if the theory that Tyrion was fathered by Aerys turned out to be true. Ditto for Jaime. Allyria Dayne has yet to appear so seems unlikely, and to find any OTHER dragons we would need to look farther back in history.

 

[csuszka1948]

6 hours ago, Hippocras said:

Just to add:

The 3 head of the dragon thing is a mystery with so many moving parts. It is really hard to get a solid theory because every proposal is based on very large numbers of assumptions. I think Dany is one of the 3 heads of the dragon, and I think she is probably who she thinks she is (but I will not have a tantrum if she is not). Rhaegar, at the time of Aegon's birth, had no reason to believe that his mother would ever have another successful pregnancy and that is why he thought it was up to him to father all 3 dragons. But in fact itis not at all necessary for all 3 to descend from Rhaegar.

As for the other 2 dragon heads, Jon is one, and the last of the 3 is probably young Griff. However I doubt that Young Griff is who he thinks he is. He may be purely and simply a Blackfyre descendant with various other threads worked into his bloodline over time. He may be BOTH a Blackfyre descendant (via Ashara) and a Targaryen (via Rhaegar or Aerys). He may even not be a Blackfyre at all in which case either his mother was still Ashara but she was not a female line Blackfyre, or he really is Prince Aegon. If either of these last versions is true, then it means the entire elaborate construction of the Blackfyre rebellion histories is just one giant red herring.

If it turns out NOT to be young Griff who completes our set of 3, then we need to look at the more convoluted theories surrounding the Lannisters or at other mistresses of Aerys: Harder to justify, or see the path to get there, but not impossible. I don't know how many people would be satisfied if the theory that Tyrion was fathered by Aerys turned out to be true. Ditto for Jaime. Allyria Dayne has yet to appear so seems unlikely, and to find any OTHER dragons we would need to look farther back in history.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I very much agree on this. 

It seems that the dream of Aegon was about a 'three-headed dragon' (fire) fighting against the 'icy darkness' (ice) coming from the North - he named it 'song of ice and fire' and believed he and his sisters are the 3 heads he saw.

However, why does everyone take it for granted that the heads of the "3-headed dragon" actually have to represent 3 people, 3 dragon riders?

There are 2 reasons I ask it:

1) The dream/prophecy is about 3 heads of one dragon, which implies the 3 heads must trust each other unconditionally and work together, that's why they are not just 3 random dragonriders. Dany even thinks that she must find the 2 other heads of the dragon, the "2 men in the world she can trust". 

However, Quaithe (who seems to be genuinely helping Dany towards her destiny) warns Dany against certain people: 

"No. Hear me, Daenerys Targaryen. The glass candles are burning. Soon comes the pale mare, and after her the others. Kraken and dark flame, lion and griffin, the sun's son and the mummer's dragon. Trust none of them. Remember the Undying. Beware the perfumed seneschal." -

Quaithe warns him against Victarion, Tyrion and Young Griff, saying that she shouldn't trust them. The other possible dragonriders in the story are insignificant characters, Jon, and Euron, and Dany definitely won't trust Euron. This means that the only other dragonrider character who Dany can fully trust, who doesn't plan on using her, is Jon.

2) The author has mentioned multiple times that some sort of 'Dance of Dragons' will take place, and introduced a dragonhorn, that can probably be used to steal and tame dragons.

Doesn't this make it very likely that some sort of dragon-dragon combat will occur in the future, with riders on both sides? And if such a combat occurs, a dragon or two can easily (and probably) die, making it impossible for three riders to fight against the Others.

 

Edited July 2, 2023 by csuszka1948

[Hippocras]

10 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, I very much agree on this. 

It seems that the dream of Aegon was about a 'three-headed dragon' (fire) fighting against the 'icy darkness' (ice) coming from the North - he named it 'song of ice and fire' and believed he and his sisters are the 3 heads he saw.

However, why does everyone take it for granted that the heads of the "3-headed dragon" actually have to represent 3 people, 3 dragon riders?

 

I think it is because of the Heads. Seems to imply leadership. 

[csuszka1948]

On 7/2/2023 at 6:55 PM, Hippocras said:

I think it is because of the Heads. Seems to imply leadership. 

 

 

 

 

 

It only implies a dragon with three heads, where the 3 heads work together.

Personally I think the 'dragon head' that completes the set of 3 is Drogon, and Dany and Jon will ride it together, forming the 3 heads of a dragon OR the third head will be the pregnant child inside of Dany.

1) Rhaegar is saying that 'there must be one more' and he is referring to Jon, but he is also looking at Dany - a hint that Jon is the one head she needs to find on the other side of the world.

2) In his last moments, Aemon was vailing about the sphinx being the riddle and not the riddler (as in classic mythology), and that "he is too old and frail' to be one of them, but he doesn't say anything about a third Targaryen being necessary.

Let's look into the kind of sphinx Aemon could have talked about, namely a Valyrian sphinx

The next evening they came upon a huge Valyrian sphinx crouched beside the road. It had a dragon's body and a woman's face.

"A dragon queen," said Tyrion. "A pleasant omen." - Tyrion II, ADWD

which Tyrion instantly associates with Dany (could be riding Drogon, but could have a child with unknown gender - just like a dragon, changeable as flame - inside her), but she misses her king:

"Her king is missing." Illyrio pointed out the smooth stone plinth on which the second sphinx once stood, now grown over with moss and flowering vines. - Tyrion II, ADWD

3) Melisandre, who is the 'most misunderstood' character (according to GRRM) seems to be always be so close to the truth but miss it by an inch, says:

I am not a wolf, he thought. "And how would I do that?" "I can show you." Melisandre draped one slender arm over Ghost, and the direwolf licked her face. "The Lord of Light in his wisdom made us male and female, two parts of a greater whole. In our joining there is power. Power to make life. Power to make light. Power to cast shadows." "Shadows." The world seemed darker when he said it.

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by csuszka1948

[Gilbert Green]

10 hours ago, Hippocras said:

His Song being the Song of Ice and Fire does not need to mean that he himself is both the ice and the fire of the song.

Sure.  It is only (arguably) a clue and every clue is deniable.  And when I mention the "Pact of Ice and Fire" -- a proposed marriage alliance between Stark and Targaryen, you will naturally refuse to connect those dots.  Because after all, they are only dots and no iron-clad rule of logic says you have to connect them.  I can also mention that "ice" is the ancestral sword of house Stark, and no iron-clad rule of logic says you have to connect that dot either.

And are told, per HOTU, that Dany at least will drink from both cups, that of ice and that of fire.  Whatever that means.  HOTU calls her a "child of three" and when she is asked what that means they tell her that the dragon has three heads.    So Dany at least is one of the 3 heads of the dragon, who will drink from the fire cup and the ice cup.

And of course HOTU says Dany will ride 3 mounts:  horse, dragon, and .... what exactly?

10 hours ago, Hippocras said:

The dragon has 3 heads - I am with you there. There need to be 3 heads of the dragon. But that does not mean all 3 "dragons" need to be Rhaegar's children and not his father's. Dany as Rhaegar's sister or half-sister is still very much a "dragon".

Blackfyres are dragons too.  But I think it goes too far to assume that everyone who could be a "dragon" is plausibly a "head of the dragon".  It renders all our clues useless.

Every clue is deniable.  But if anyone can be a head of the dragon, why not Rhaegar?  There must be a reason, because Rhaegar decided he was NOT the promised prince, nor apparently a head of the dragon either, as we shall see.  Nor has history proven him wrong, so I guess he was on to something.

Instead, he seemed to decide that the 3 heads of the dragon would be his 3 children.  You can speculate that he is wrong (because every clue is deniable) but it is one of the few clues we have.

We have many clues of this.  He named 2 of his children after Aegon & Sisters, who are the 3-headed dragon so Targ heraldry.  Then (per HOTU) he declared Aegon to be TPTWP, and (while seeming in the vision to look at Dany) said "there must be one more" because the dragon has 3 heads.  Then, after the Maesters told him Elia could have no children, he went chasing after Lyanna.  (And maybe Ashara too?  But that's more speculative).

10 hours ago, Hippocras said:

The idea that Rhaegar has 3 living children is interesting, I just struggle with it. Why, for example, would those involved go to so much trouble to hide Jon and Young Griff (Aegon is real theory) but leave Daenerys so exposed? If they swapped a child of Rhaegar's for Rhaella's daughter then that means they put her directly in harm's way (I hope you are not proposing that Rhaegar impregnated his mother).

In this case, my own idea is that the conspirators (Varys, Illyrio, Doran, Viserys) did not know anything about Dany's heritage.  They simply procured, through Illyrio, a Valyrian featured slave-girl to sell to a barbarian in exchange for an army.  They made her forget her past through abusive programming (like Jeyne Poole, only not so bad, since young children are more malleable and impressionable). 

Note that when they forced her to forget her past, they were not forcing her to forget that she was Rhaegar's daughter.  She didn't know.  That is not a secret one tells to small children.  Small children blab things, and such secrets could cost her her life while babykiller King Robert was still on the throne.

Dany remembers being punished by an enraged Viserys for thinking she could be anything other than a Targaryen Princess.  And we already know that Illyrio believed and intended that Dany would not survive on the Dothraki Sea.

As for Young Griff, I think he is a Blackfyre, through his Blackfyre-descended mom, Lemore/Mellario.   Aegon is alive (Varys' story is partly true) but Young Griff is someone else.  This was a true baby swap.  For me, this is just following the clues, starting with HOTU telling us that baby Aegon is TPTWP.

9 hours ago, Hippocras said:

The 3 head of the dragon thing is a mystery with so many moving parts. It is really hard to get a solid theory because every proposal is based on very large numbers of assumptions.

Sure.  Even if the 3 heads are Rhaegar's 3 kids, there are many options.  1 by Elia, 1 by Ashara, 1 by Lyanna.  Or 1 by Elia, 2 by Lyanna.  Or 1 by Ashara, 2 by Lyanna.  Etc. etc. etc.  I'm inclined think Aegon is one (though Elia) because of HOTU.

Many other possibilities of course.

Many fans want to narrow down the possibilities.  They get frustrated and angry when others try to brainstorm theories.

9 hours ago, Hippocras said:

I think Dany is one of the 3 heads of the dragon, and I think she is probably who she thinks she is (but I will not have a tantrum if she is not).

That's good.  It's all guesswork until GRRM writes it.

10 hours ago, Hippocras said:

Rhaegar, at the time of Aegon's birth, had no reason to believe that his mother would ever have another successful pregnancy and that is why he thought it was up to him to father all 3 dragons.

Ah, but you forget.   His mother had already had a second viable child at that point, and the boy was about 5 or 6 years old and (at least physically) healthy.  For some reason or another, Rhaegar did NOT ever consider that Viserys was likely to be one of the 3 heads of the dragon. 

And yes, I know that's not an airtight argument.  You can work around it.  And I guess you will.

Nonetheless, the few clues we have do tend to point in a certain direction.

Another aspect of this.  Yes, Rhaegar probably did not expect his mother to ever again have a healthy viable child.  But he could easily have expected her to have more pregnancies, stillbirths, and sickly dying children.  She had already had LOTS of those. 

Based on Rhaella's history, the surprising thing about the baby born on Dragonstone is not that it was born alive, but that it survived afterwards.  But this, if you like, can be another clue.  It is at least plausible that Rhaella's daughter DID die, and hence that Dany is someone else.

10 hours ago, Hippocras said:

As for the other 2 dragon heads, Jon is one, and the last of the 3 is probably young Griff

My guesses would be, in birth order, Frog (the real Aegon), Jon, and Dany.  Frog is still alive.  It was an identically dressed Windblown member (Tatters himself IMHO) who died on Dany's bed burnt beyond recognition.  The real Frog survived the attack and is bonding with Viserion in an abandoned pyramid.  Because he is the blood of the dragon and TPTWP.  He's the Frog who will become a Prince (that was Promised).  There's a "meek shall inherit" theme going on here.

[Hippocras]

For someone who on another thread was determined to believe only the most basic, straightforward explanation, your ideas here are pretty far out there. I don't buy any of it, but time will certainly tell.

IMO, Dany being a slave girl and blood magic being rooted in....nothing at all makes zero sense. It would mean hundreds of centuries of magical practices have no basis, and people who want superpowers and a dragon of their own can just go ahead and murder anyone they want to achieve magical ends, because who does the magic, and who is sacrificed for it; these things mean nothing at all.

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Hippocras

[Frey family reunion]

On 7/1/2023 at 10:52 PM, Gilbert Green said:

And yet  Rhaegar says (of Aegon), "his is the song of ice and fire"; and (looking at Dany) "there must be one more", because "the dragon has three heads".

It has plausibly been foreshadowed that "the dragon" (who has three heads) represents the union of ice and fire.

Maybe, but if we look at Aemon's beliefs about the role of the prince that was promised, assuming that Rhaegar and Aemon were of similar beliefs, fire and ice were in an adverserial role.  

Aemon believes that the prince that was promised was destined to lead the war for the dawn.  Presumably against the icy forces beyond the Wall.  

So if the prince that was promised is part of the dragon with three heads belief, then one may assume that these three will be joined in battle against ice.

 

[Frey family reunion]

2 hours ago, Hippocras said:

IMO, Dany being a slave girl and blood magic being rooted in....nothing at all makes zero sense. It would mean hundreds of centuries of magical practices have no basis, and people who want superpowers and a dragon of their own can just go ahead and murder anyone they want to achieve magical ends, because who does the magic, and who is sacrificed for it; these things mean nothing at all.

This is a fair point.

If Dany isn't the daughter of Aerys and Rhaella, then a possible reason is that Dany needs to be closer to the original Targaryen bloodline than the royal family was at the time of the rebellion.

George seems to have made in effort in keeping House Velaryon bloodlines seperate from House Targaryen bloodlines after the events of the Dance.  At least the bloodlines of those that hatched and rode dragons.  If Dany isn't the daughter of Aerys and Rhaella then my guess is that she may be the reunion of those bloodlines.

Which explains why blood magic and shadow binding by themselves aren't enough to hatch petrified dragon eggs.  The presence of someone with the necessary magical bloodlines is required.  Perhaps the Targaryens lost something crucial after the Dance, which Dany brought back, by ironically not being a legitimate Targaryen.

[Sandy Clegg]

5 hours ago, Hippocras said:

Dany being a slave girl and blood magic being rooted in....nothing at all makes zero sense. It would mean hundreds of centuries of magical practices have no basis, and people who want superpowers and a dragon of their own can just go ahead and murder anyone they want to achieve magical ends, because who does the magic, and who is sacrificed for it; these things mean nothing at all.

Isn't there a theory that the maesters had been subtly messing with the Targ bloodline since the first Aegon, ensuring that his descendants 300 years later have so little Targ blood left that they are functionally unable to do whatever they need to do to breed dragons, via their 'blood bond'? 

That version of events would make it very much pertinent if Dany wasn't a real Targ, as it means that whatever version of Aegon's bloodline survives is now in a 'bastard tributary' way off the official bloodline. To which Dany must logically somehow belong. Because Dany's story surely goes hand in hand with the fact that the line of Targ dragons  had withered and died away by the time of AGOT. Whatever the Targs had in them 300 years ago to breed dragons - it was lost over the centuries. By natural means or foul. They lost their mojo.

Not saying I believe the Dany origin alternatives presented here either, but saying her alternative origin means 'nothing' is a bit of an overstatement, when Dany's non-Targ origins plus her ability to breed dragons goes a long, long way to explaining one of the central mysteries of GRRM's universe - why the dragons died out, and why she was able to bring them back.

And if indeed it turns out that there is an alternative bloodline that can breed dragons - then surely this would start a massive goldrush for anyone out there who actually was related to Dany. Which Illyrio, for example, might have knowledge of.

So the ability to breed dragons wouldn't just transfer to 'anybody who wants to'. Instead, the story would shift on its axis - to tracking down whoever really does remain of Aegon's bloodline. And that, to me, sounds like one hell of a story avenue to pursue. Regardless, it doesn't take away from Dany's story. She was able to do what no-one else had done for over a century. Her bloodline has what it takes. It just might have been mis-labelled. So ... why argue about the label, when it's the fire and blood within which drive the story?