Tyrion as a Targaryen

[Ser Creighton]

I'm providing evidence that he's a Dragon. You're telling me it doesn't belong? I'm not trying to derail the argument, I'm trying to support it for pro-Targaryen. I could have made a gigantic post in THIS thread, but I left it as a link.

Oh, whoops, you don't know what a metaphor is. My bad.

Who said I was referring to you? But yes I do know what a metaphor is. Tell me how is it I can say I like a lot of your theory and you get offended from it. I believe I was speaking about Gargoyles was I not? Does the forum revolve around you? Is everything about you? Is your own sarcasm now confusing you? If I have something to say to someone I generally say it, and I will let you know if I have a problem with you? Yes I know what a metaphor is, I also understand the use of repetitive designation, I know what a leitwortstil is (where do whores go), I understand thematic patterns, and I very much understand what an overstatement is.

Now if I really want to get into your theory I will go to your theory and discuss it. You know for someone running around taking pride in being a smart aleck you really are very sensitive. You stated your opinion, got it. Not sure what else you want.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

Lol go to his thread. It's been quashed. He doesn't even understand his own terminology.

[bent branch]

I just want to say that I have become almost completely convinced that there are 6 or seven Targaryens in the story. I take this from Moqorros vision of dragons. I think they are:

Old: Aemon

Young: Jon

True: Dany

False: Viserys

Bright: Aegon

Dark: Varys

Possible seventh: Tyrion

I know that practically everyone and their mother wants to place Aegon in the false catagory, but putting Aegon there means there are more Targaryens in the story than just these. I have explained why this is true in the past so I won't explain it again unless specifically asked. The reason I think this is the best answer is each of the pairs is related directly to each other. Also, this interpretation of Moqorro's vision means there are no other Targaryens in the story. Four of these Targaryens have been "revealed" and the remaining three are suspected. Any how, I don't think there is going to be huge amounts of Targaryens in this story. Just these six or seven.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I just want to say that I have become almost completely convinced that there are 6 or seven Targaryens in the story. I take this from Moqorros vision of dragons. I think they are:

Old: Aemon

Young: Jon

True: Dany

False: Viserys

Bright: Aegon

Dark: Varys

Possible seventh: Tyrion

<snip

I'm going to rearrange your choices a bit.

Young: Jon

Old: Aemon or BR

True: Dany

False: Daario (this is admittedly in Ultra-Crackpot territory, but still possible) or Aegon

Bright: Varys

Dark: either Aegon or Tyrion.

I figure they go together in pairs.

Young & Old. Jon and Aemon, both in the Watch, as was BR.

True & False. Dany and Daario (possible descendant of Haegon Blackfyre), or Aegon goes without saying. Of course false could have been Viserys, in that he was not a "true dragon" in the way that Rhaegar was and Dany is. The only problem I have with that is that Moqorro is supposed to be glimpsing the future and Viserys won't be in the future.

Bright & Dark. Either referring to Brightflame and Blackfyre, or to Brightflame and some kind of darkness. Tyrion is a rather dark character. We could throw Daario in on dark, but he has no connection to Varys as far as we know so that would wreck my "pairs" idea.

Technically Tyrion really shouldn't be in here because even if he's half Targ he's a Bastard, whereas Jon at least has a chance of being legally a Targareyn. But, if we can include Tyrion, we can also include Mance, son/grandson of Bloodraven. He could be plugged into Old(er than Jon) or Dark (wears dark colors, but then so does Jon really).

I just had a thought...what if Moqorro is talking about actual dragons? Old and young. There are those who think Sheepstealer and/or Cannibal might still be alive--they would be the old, Dany's are the new. True and False: Rhaegal will turn while Viserion will remain loyal. Bright and Dark: Not sure on bright, but Drogon is definitely dark.

[bent branch]

I'm going to rearrange your choices a bit.

Young: Jon

Old: Aemon or BR

True: Dany

False: Daario (this is admittedly in Ultra-Crackpot territory, but still possible) or Aegon

Bright: Varys

Dark: either Aegon or Tyrion.

I figure they go together in pairs.

Young & Old. Jon and Aemon, both in the Watch, as was BR.

True & False. Dany and Daario (possible descendant of Haegon Blackfyre), or Aegon goes without saying. Of course false could have been Viserys, in that he was not a "true dragon" in the way that Rhaegar was and Dany is. The only problem I have with that is that Moqorro is supposed to be glimpsing the future and Viserys won't be in the future.

Bright & Dark. Either referring to Brightflame and Blackfyre, or to Brightflame and some kind of darkness. Tyrion is a rather dark character. We could throw Daario in on dark, but he has no connection to Varys as far as we know so that would wreck my "pairs" idea.

Technically Tyrion really shouldn't be in here because even if he's half Targ he's a Bastard, whereas Jon at least has a chance of being legally a Targareyn. But, if we can include Tyrion, we can also include Mance, son/grandson of Bloodraven. He could be plugged into Old(er than Jon) or Dark (wears dark colors, but then so does Jon really).

I just had a thought...what if Moqorro is talking about actual dragons? Old and young. There are those who think Sheepstealer and/or Cannibal might still be alive--they would be the old, Dany's are the new. True and False: Rhaegal will turn while Viserion will remain loyal. Bright and Dark: Not sure on bright, but Drogon is definitely dark.

Okay, lets look at the assumption that all fire visions must be of only the future. When Stannis saw the Fist of the First Men, that vision was as far as I can tell real time. So, it seems that the visions can be real time and the future. Also, the most precise timeline in existance says that Moqorro saw his vision of dragons after Aemon's death and definitely after Jon and Aemon were no longer together. So, if we assume that what the fire shows is what the viewer needs to see rather than only the future, then Moqorro could have seen Viserys. If indeed the fire only shows the future than it can't be Viserys, however, lets look at the false dragon to see if any of our other candidates really fit.

First we need to ask what quality makes the false dragon false. Most people answer that it is Aegon because he is a Blackfyre or because he is not what he purports to be. Looking at the idea that what makes Aegon a false dragon is that he is a Blackfyre would mean that all the other dragons must be Targaryens. This would eliminate Jon since he is a Snow. This would also mean that we can't substitute Bloodraven for Aemon (if the fire only shows the future) because he is a Rivers. So if the dragons that Moqorro sees can only be Targaryens in the future, the only person that fits that criteria is Dany and we need to have four more Targaryens appear in the story. Lets say just for arguments sake that Jon is indeed a legitimate Targaryen and Moqorro sees this, then we still need three other Targaryens to show up. This is why Aegon can't be the false dragon based solely on the fact of being a Blackfyre. This argument is the same for any Targaryen bastards.

So if the quality that makes the false dragon false is that he his pretending to be something he is not, then Jon would also fit this quality and would be a false dragon. However, just as Jon is not purposely hiding who he is, Aegon is also operating under the assumptions he has been given. Also, if we look for "dragons" who are operating openly as who they are and we know for certain who they are, we are left with Dany. Again, we would need to find four dragons to fill those other slots. So, if we are to say the false dragon is false because he (or she) is operating under false pretenses, we need a whole boatload of dragons to show up.

Your suggestion of Daario is an interesting one. Daario could be a Blackfyre and he could be operating under false pretenses. However, as I have hopefully shown, that isn't enough to qualify him as a false dragon. He could, however, be false in that he is open to betraying Dany. That would be another definition of false. Just like Viserys was no true dragon, thereby making him a false dragon, Daario could have another quality that makes him a false dragon. I will think on it further.

As to your suggestion that the dragons Moqorro sees are actually dragons, I have thought of this myself but have never been able to make it work. I think it is more likely that Moqorro is seeing Targaryens of one sort or another, but would love to see someone work out a way it could be about actual dragons.

[corbon]

*bump* before I'm buried. I'm genuinely curious as to whether I'm misunderstanding or whether there is an explanation

First, the 'rape' argument isn't a strong case but some people argued Joanna would never have had sex willingly. In response it was pointed out that Aerys is shown (later, but still) to not require consent as he rapes his wife, so he has record, precedent (post-cedent if you like) in case Joanna did not consent.

Secondly, if Tywin also had sex with Joanna within a week or two of the same time (and we have to assume he did, or he'd be suspicious if he hadn't been in her bed around the right time), she wouldn't be sure who the father was. Could she risk the life of her child by telling Tywin that it might be Aerys? Could she risk the peace of the seven kingdoms, her whole family, in a civil war Tywin may create if she told him? In both cases, perhaps, but also perhaps not. Different people would have different pressures, prioirties, and decisions in such a case.

Thirdly, some people can just love the child, regardless of its conception. Maybe not you, thats up to you. Maybe not her, thats up to her. Maybe not me, I've never been in tha situation and hope to never be in that situation. But also maybe she could and did, and wouldn't risk her unborn child to Tywin's wrath even if it was a rape-child.

You can't ignore the fact that he isn't dead or dying after swallowing "half the Rhoyne", which is basically liquid death. He reflects later about Septon Barth's notes on dragons, and how death comes out of a dragon's mouth (note that the mouth is also Tyrion's strongest weapon) but not into a dragon's mouth (which is why Tyrion is fine and Griff is wilting). Why else would GRRM have Tyrion remember this specific passage? Come on, do your homework guys!

Sure you can. The whole "Targaryen can't get sick" shtick is just Viserys' bullshit that Dany swallowed whole. The fact is Targaryens have died of the plague, and Dany gets sick.

And Shirren Baratheon, who has a full Targ great grandmother, has greyscale.

Tyrion not (yet) getting greysclae is irrelevant to the Targ discussion.

Not everyone agrees with that. He's not really a lion if he's not a Lannister. He is especially not a lion if he's a dragon/Targaryen.

Not that Quarth's warning is not a prophecy, but a warning. Its clearly things she's used sorcery, perhaps glass candles, to see, and see "now", not 'in the future' (other than the pale mare, clearly plague, and easily predictable, especially if she's seen the early cases starting up). That means that there is a fair chance that her descriptions are what she thinks, not what is metaphysically 'real'.

So her calling Tyrion a lion fits because thats his identity. Its how he self identifies, its how everyone else identifies him. Its how Quaithe identifies him.

Its also half his blood at least, regardless of anything else.

Wow. "Tyrion = Wyvern Gargoyle" gets no love, eh?

Ok :frown5:

No, no love. End of story here.

That doesnt say she was born that way. Im not saying she changed her own eye color but I think that if people say that Eurons eye color could be because of magic then Shieras could too. They both were said to practice magic.

It has not been established that Euron was born with mismatched eyes. At the same time it has also not been established that Shiera was born with mismatched eyes. So let us just dismiss Euron because "it could be down to magic" and at the same time accept Shiera. Talking about cherry picking.

Euron's eye colour has got nothing to do with magic.

There are three reasons to consider his condition a hyphema rather than a genetic condition.

The first is his nickname of "crows eye'. His other eye is blue, and crows eyes change from a light blue/grey to a red/black colour as they mature, which suggests perhaps that Euron's eye changed colour around the time he reached maturity.

The second is his sigil, which is a red eye with a black pupil. That suggests his patched eye might be dark red, or once have been red rather than the black Theon recalls.

The third is the patch. The patch suggests that the eye does not have good sight, or else he would lose much by covering it most of the time.

Arguably the fourth is his lifestyle. Trauma injuries seem rather fitting amongst the Ironborn, especially the most adventurous of them.

Hyphema is effectively a bruise on the eye. If comes usually from a blow to the eye causing bleeding. If it does not clear up the blood can thicken and turn black and damage to vision can be permanent. That fits everything we know about Euron.

If Euron sustained an eye injury causing a hyphema during his early career, that would have happened before Theon's birth and as far as Theon is concerned it would have 'always been like that'

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I'm going to rearrange your choices a bit.

Young: Jon

Old: Aemon or BR

True: Dany

False: Daario (this is admittedly in Ultra-Crackpot territory, but still possible) or Aegon

Bright: Varys

Dark: either Aegon or Tyrion.

I figure they go together in pairs.

Young & Old. Jon and Aemon, both in the Watch, as was BR.

True & False. Dany and Daario (possible descendant of Haegon Blackfyre), or Aegon goes without saying. Of course false could have been Viserys, in that he was not a "true dragon" in the way that Rhaegar was and Dany is. The only problem I have with that is that Moqorro is supposed to be glimpsing the future and Viserys won't be in the future.

Bright & Dark. Either referring to Brightflame and Blackfyre, or to Brightflame and some kind of darkness. Tyrion is a rather dark character. We could throw Daario in on dark, but he has no connection to Varys as far as we know so that would wreck my "pairs" idea.

Technically Tyrion really shouldn't be in here because even if he's half Targ he's a Bastard, whereas Jon at least has a chance of being legally a Targareyn. But, if we can include Tyrion, we can also include Mance, son/grandson of Bloodraven. He could be plugged into Old(er than Jon) or Dark (wears dark colors, but then so does Jon really).

I just had a thought...what if Moqorro is talking about actual dragons? Old and young. There are those who think Sheepstealer and/or Cannibal might still be alive--they would be the old, Dany's are the new. True and False: Rhaegal will turn while Viserion will remain loyal. Bright and Dark: Not sure on bright, but Drogon is definitely dark.

This is my take on them

Dragons

young: Drogon, Viserion, Rhaegal

old: Bloodraven

true: Aemon

false: fAegon

bright: Dany

dark: Jon

you with a snarling shadow: Tyrion

Or Alternative Crackpot;

Dragons

young: Drogon, Viserion, Rhaegal

old: An old dragon that survived the last 150 years

true: Aemon

false: fAegon

bright: Dany

dark: Jon

you with a snarling shadow: Tyrion

[oursisthefury69]

Crazy how people make the connections they want to see in the story.

Ive seen intricate threads about extremely hidden meanings in things like sapphires, arbor gold, even corn codes; But never have I seen a thread that notes all the times that Dragons are associated with casting large shadows and the connections to Tyrion i.e a prophecy from Moqorro, or a chapter ending observation from one of Jons first chapters in the series

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Crazy how people make the connections they want to see in the story.

Ive seen intricate threads about extremely hidden meanings in things like sapphires, arbor gold, even corn codes; But never have I seen a thread that notes all the times that Dragons are associated with casting large shadows and the connections to Tyrion i.e a prophecy from Moqorro, or a chapter ending observation from one of Jons first chapters in the series

What does the fact that it's Jon first chapter have to do with anything?

[pobeb]

What does the fact that it's Jon first chapter have to do with anything?

I'm thinking he's referring to my Tyrion = Gargoyle = Dragon theory.

Firstly, sorry to everyone for bringing this up again. I understand I'm not welcomed in this thread, so this will be the last you see of me in it.

Secondly, if you can believe that GRRM is deliberately drawing a metaphor between Tyrion and Gargoyles, then you can safely assume that Tyrion and Sphinxes are related - as the Sphinx, like the Gargoyle, is a stone ward, mixed of various creature parts.

Interestingly enough, Alleras (the only confirmed "sphinx" in the story) is described thusly:

A sphinx is a bit of this, a bit of that: a human face, the body of a lion, the wings of a hawk. Alleras was the same: his father was a Dornishman, his mother a black-skinned Summer Islander

Alleras (Sarella) is a half-breed, akin to how a sphinx is (as shown above).

That's the tie-in with Tyrion. Alleras' make-up is to suggest to us that Tyrion is also a half-breed (Lion and Dragon). And we know sphinxes are tied to dragons because Aemon brings up "the riddle is the sphinx, not the riddler" in a time when he's on his deathbed, ranting constantly about dragons.

The riddle is the sphinx, not the riddler? I think, if you believe my theory, we can safely assume this is about Tyrion. You could even say it's about Jon (Wolf + Dragon)

Again, sorry for interrupting this thread. I won't return. Just thought you might want to know what he was referring to, since you were asking.

[corbon]

Firstly, sorry to everyone for bringing this up again. I understand I'm not welcomed in this thread, so this will be the last you see of me in it.

I think you are entirely welcome.

Just no one (here, so far) cares about the gargoyle theory. Its the annoying dead-horse flogging that people don't like.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

I think you are entirely welcome.

Just no one (here, so far) cares about the gargoyle theory. Its the annoying dead-horse flogging that people don't like.

:agree:

[The Killer Snark]

Another similarity between Jon, Daenarys and Tyrion is that all three have survived fire, Daenarys on two separate occasions, Jon after his fight with the Other where his hand was almost crippled, Tyrion during the Battle of the Blackwater, on top of the other similarities which have been pointed out elsewhere.

[Wmarshal]

What are talking about? Neither Jon or Tyrion were burned alive.

[The Killer Snark]

Jon's hand was severely burned when he saved the Lord Commander, and Tyrion was injured on a burning ship. The fact that they weren't burned alive is the point that I was making. It's obviously there to be picked up, even if they're not resistant to fire.

[Wmarshal]

I don't see how, neither were on the threat of burning.

[oursisthefury69]

@Pobeb "I think hes referring to my Tyrion = Gargoyle = Dragon theory" Nope, im certainly not referring to that and I don't even know/want to know what it is

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

One other thing:

Tyrion loves whores, Tywin (secretly) loves whores, Tytos loves whores. Runs in the family.

Aerys has committed rape. So has Jamie and Cersei. Joff suggest he will be raping Sansa frequently. Runs in the family.

Edit: And if you're looking for some foreshadowing, Tyrion oft refers to Joff as Aerys III. How awesome would it be if, genetically speaking, this were the case.

*Drops the mic*

[RumHam]

I don't think loving whores or being a rapist are genetic traits.

[VarysIsAerys]

This was probably already mentioned. Tyrion as a Targ (while assuming Jon is also a Targ) would add more significance to the beginning of GoT when the two are together on the wall. Jon Snow, Tyrion, and Maester Aemon would have been a three headed dragon (the Targaryen banner) at the front line of the war that really mattered before the "game" in the South started to heat up.

I don't understand why some believe that Tyrion being Targaryen would diminish the power of his relationship with Tywin. I think it only enhances it. Tywin was always waiting for Jaime to come around and be heir to the Rock. Instead Jamie's only desire was to be with his twin sister, which is an expression of his narcissism because the books mention many times how similar they are to each other. It would be so much more ironic if Tyrion was a Targ because he was the only 1 of the 3 Lannisters with the intelligence like Tywin's to win the game of thrones and strengthen the Lannister dynasty.