Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

glamazon

Two Kings to Wake the Dragon

Recommended Posts

I was just reading the Jon chapter posted on GRRM's website. It says two kings to wake the dragon, the father first and then the son, so both kings die. Could this not refer to Ned and Robb? I'm just wondering. Not sure where this sleeping dragon is tho. And, since time has passed since N and R died, not sure what would wake up the dragon. Just the start of my odd theory.

Please mark spoilers from ADWD chapters in the thread title - m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps by "dragon", it refers to Dany. Still not sure how the two kings tie in or who they may be, but it's just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly crackpot, but could the two kings have been Drogo and Rhaego? After all, Rhaego was prophesied to be the stallion that mounts the world, the khal of khals. Their combined deaths did lead to the dragons hatching on Drogo's funeral pyre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped reading this as soon as u said the chapter was posted of GRRM website. shouldnt this be in the ADWD subform. I dont want to read or hear about any of the spoiler chapters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't this thread be under "A Dance with Dragons"? Hint: spoiler chapter.

Edit: Oh.. dylan was quicker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If R+L=J then maybe the dragon is Jon. One problem with your theory is that Ned wasn't considered a king. Maybe it refers to the Mad King and Rhaegar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly crackpot, but could the two kings have been Drogo and Rhaego? After all, Rhaego was prophesied to be the stallion that mounts the world, the khal of khals. Their combined deaths did lead to the dragons hatching on Drogo's funeral pyre.

agree with this one, im thinking the three dragons will be all we'll see of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't this about burning Mance Rayder and his infant son in order to wake a stone dragon? If so, it's a false prophecy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was discussed to death in the Jon 2 spoiler chapter topic. Here's what I wrote on the subject, with minor revisions:

So, we have a supposed prophesy that says, "two kings to wake the dragon, the father first and then the son, so both die kings." Several people have tried to interpret this as referring to Dany and the deaths of Drogo and Rhaego, but that interpretation doesn't really work since Rhaego died before Drogo and not after.

However, what if this prophecy (if it is indeed a prophecy) refers to the deaths of Khals Ogo and Fogo, the ones killed by Drogo in one of the later Daenerys chapters? After all, it was the injury that Drogo took in his fight with them that indirectly lead to the birth of Dany's dragons. And the fact that Fogo was killed after his father, thereby making him khal when he died, is mentioned at least twice by two different characters. Now, I realize this may seem like a bit of a stretch, since these khals' deaths probably didn't contribute anything directly to the birth of the dragons (as the deaths of Drogo and MMD did). But remember, we don't actually know how this prophecy is worded. For all we know, it could say something along the lines "First one kings dies, then another, his son, then come the dragons," or something more eloquent. It's easy to see how Melisandre might misinterpret a prophecy worded this way as saying "in order to wake dragons, you must kill two kings," while in reality it is saying that each of these events follow closely on the heels of the other. In other words, the deaths of Ogo and Fogo may simply have been harbingers of, rather than direct contributors to, the birth of Dany's dragons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:agree:

Possibly crackpot, but could the two kings have been Drogo and Rhaego? After all, Rhaego was prophesied to be the stallion that mounts the world, the khal of khals. Their combined deaths did lead to the dragons hatching on Drogo's funeral pyre.

If R+L=J then maybe the dragon is Jon. One problem with your theory is that Ned wasn't considered a king. Maybe it refers to the Mad King and Rhaegar.

Both Rhaegar and Rhaego died before their fathers, not after..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading the Jon chapter posted on GRRM's website. It says two kings to wake the dragon, the father first and then the son, so both kings die. Could this not refer to Ned and Robb? I'm just wondering. Not sure where this sleeping dragon is tho. And, since time has passed since N and R died, not sure what would wake up the dragon. Just the start of my odd theory.

Please mark spoilers from ADWD chapters in the thread title - m.

how about aerys and Rhaegar

(it already happend and nobod thinks it already happend)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhaegar wasn't a king when he died (since he died before Aerys did). However, as others have mentioned, Viserys did die after Aerys, so he might fit. That said, from what little we've heard of the prophecy it sounds like the son must die soon after the father, which is not the case with Aerys and Viserys. Of course, that's just pure speculation on my part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drogo died when he fell off his horse. Or maybe Drogo died when he ignored MMD and took off the poultice. Or Drogo died when MMD took him in the tent, which was before Rhaego died.

Not saying that the theory is right, just that Drogo could easily have died before Rheago, at least in the terms of prophesy. My problem with the prophesy is that Rhaego was never a king; the Khalasar will not follow a child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's really stretching things. From the text it seems clear that Rhaego's "life force" or whatever was transferred to Drogo, so it can only be the case that Rhaego died before Drogo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's really stretching things. From the text it seems clear that Rhaego's "life force" or whatever was transferred to Drogo, so it can only be the case that Rhaego died before Drogo.

I don't think it's that simple.

First, GRRM wants prophesies to be vague, I think as long as you can argue something, its a possibility.

Second, I'm not at all sure that Rhaego's life force went into Drogo. Rhaego's life was the price of what Drogo became, but remember, Dani thinks something like "that is not life to one such as Drogo. Life was a horse between his legs, or a woman, life was battle, etc." And yes I know that's not exact.

My point is I don't think its very reasonable to say that Drogo died before Rhaego did. Because what Rhaego was killed for was not life, but something less.

That said, I still don't think Rhaego can reasonably be called a king at any point; the Khal is not hereditary. You'd have to go to the dream sequence where Dani sees him conquering and looking cool, only to burn up. And that's too far stretched for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"First, GRRM wants prophesies to be vague, I think as long as you can argue something, its a possibility."

True, a lot of historical "prophecies" were like this so they could be stretched to fit any outcome, and at least one prophecy in the book ("the Stallion That Mounts the World") has been shown to be false. But as you say, you have to argue the theory, and I think yours relies too much on stretching the meaning of death to be as plausible as other theories. I won't say it's out and out false, I just think that other options fit the bill more so than Drogo and Rhaego do.

"Second, I'm not at all sure that Rhaego's life force went into Drogo. Rhaego's life was the price of what Drogo became, but remember, Dani thinks something like "that is not life to one such as Drogo. Life was a horse between his legs, or a woman, life was battle, etc." And yes I know that's not exact."

I like the way you describe what happened to Rhaego better than how I described it, but I think the implications are still the same. Rhaego's life had to be paid in order to keep Drogo "alive", and he therefore died before Drogo did.

I should mention here that I hold to the theory that Dany is Azor Ahai (or rather, the figure that that prophecy refers to), that her dragons are Lightbringer, and that she "tempered" Lightbringer using the life of her love (i.e.-Drogo). So for me, Drogo died on the pyre, and therefore after Rhaego. But I admit there is some flexibility to all of this, given the inherent vagueness of prophecies.

"My point is I don't think its very reasonable to say that Drogo died before Rhaego did. Because what Rhaego was killed for was not life, but something less."

Wait, this confused me, so you don't believe that Drogo died before Rhaego did?

If you meant to say that it isn't very reasonable to argue that Drogo died after Rhaego, then I have to disagree, it seems quite reasonable to me.

If you meant to say that it is very reasonable to argue that Drogo died before Rhaego, well, I suppose that's true. But to me, even though the theory is reasonable, it's not really plausible.

"That said, I still don't think Rhaego can reasonably be called a king at any point; the Khal is not hereditary. You'd have to go to the dream sequence where Dani sees him conquering and looking cool, only to burn up. And that's too far stretched for me."

Except that Drogo himself states that Fogo was khal when he killed him, simply because his father, the previous khal, had just died. So there appears to be some hereditary element to becoming khal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

recently I was thinking about this matter and vagueness of the prophecy and Jon's spoiler chapter from the GRRM's site.

(btw. whole thing has some sense only if we assume R+L=J)

Anyway I came across such thought: Important thing is the death of two kings, right?

I believe that Mellisandre saw in flames that the death of two kings will "wake the dragon", she assumed that the easiest way to achieve the situation will be killing Mance and his son. Vagueness of the prophecy is strenghtened more in Jon's spoiler chapter when he wonders if Mel wants to wake the dragons, meaning golden dragons - it seems silly but maybe it's the GRRM's way to show that "waking the dragon" may have other meanings, not literal.

Mance's son isn't there anymore and considering other spoiler chapters

Mance will die anyway

. So that leaves one more king.

The only one available near is Stannis.

So is it at least remotely possible that Stannis' death will make Jon approve his lineage as Targaryen, thus death of Mance and Stannis "waking the dragon"?

It would be somewhat similar to the situation when Viserys was refering to himself as a dragon in "Do you want to wake the dragon?".

Of course this gets us to some buts:

-Jon must know earlier about his lineage, which is problematic

-Viserys' "Waking the dragon" was mainly refering to him getting angry

-Stannis would have to die somehow but it isn't completely impossible

-Mel may be lead to completely opposite thoughts and will want to kill Mance (king beyond the wall) and Jon (King of the North - if that is in Robb's decree) to wake some real dragon.

Nevertheless I believe it may be wise to consider that "waking the dragon" may mean something completely diferent than waking some presumably sleeping beast. (It may even refer to the situation where Targaryen's "insanity genes" will awake in Jon).

Cheers

(it probably was disscussed somewhere 1000 times but I didn't encounter it, sorry if it was)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×