Jump to content

Archived

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

Iotun

Tyrion as a Targaryen

Recommended Posts

I think all three are probably Tywin's, but the twins make a mountain of more sense than Tyrion. I have no idea why people want Tyrion to be a Targ, but ignore the actually pretty decent circumstantial evidence that the twins are Targs.

I don't really "want" Tyrion to be "anything." I think that he "is" Tywin's son. All the more reason for the clues about Tyrion to be the distraction.

These two positions seem to me to be inconsistent?

The first accuses people of 'wanting' Tyrion to be something then blatantly ignores the fact that there is a lot more evidence for Tyrion than for Jaime and Cersei.

The second effectively claims not to be 'wanting' Tyrion to be a Lannister then prtrays that the clues for Tyrion must be a 'distraction' yet the first indicates that the lesser clues for Jaime+Cersei are 'pretty decent circumstantial evidence'.

Seems to me that if you have two piles of evidence, and you accept the lesser evidence as 'pretty decent circumstantial' but refute the greater evidence as 'a distraction' then that is all about an emotive choice.

No?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These two positions seem to me to be inconsistent?

The first accuses people of 'wanting' Tyrion to be something then blatantly ignores the fact that there is a lot more evidence for Tyrion than for Jaime and Cersei.

The second effectively claims not to be 'wanting' Tyrion to be a Lannister then prtrays that the clues for Tyrion must be a 'distraction' yet the first indicates that the lesser clues for Jaime+Cersei are 'pretty decent circumstantial evidence'.

Seems to me that if you have two piles of evidence, and you accept the lesser evidence as 'pretty decent circumstantial' but refute the greater evidence as 'a distraction' then that is all about an emotive choice.

No?

I don't think I'm being inconsistent. I'm saying the "flashier," less-subtle hinting (I don't want to call it evidence because I don't think it is real evidence) does seem to point to Tyrion, but that, if you look at hints and insinuations that aren't handed out on a platter, the twins make more sense. When I read the books, I've come to expect that if something seems incredibly obvious, there's probably something going on in a different direction. You can disagree if you want.

What "more evidence" for Tyrion are you talking about, exactly? What is this idea based on, if not the thinking that Tyrion has to be a Targaryen to be a dragonrider? Because honestly that's the only argument I see for it. Any other arguments — like Aerys fancying Joanna — could equally point to Aerys fathering the twins.

I'm honestly baffled that you take offense to me suggesting that people might want Tyrion to be a Targ, and that want influencing their interpretations. I think that you'll find that a lot of the interpretations of the story rely at least somewhat on what people want to happen as much as what they think will happen. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as people admit that their opinions do influence how they think and what they predict. For instance, I freely admit that my disdain for Dany makes me not want her to fly in and save the day, and that that lack of want makes me look for alternative candidates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, there is a fair amount of evidence. My own list would be:

- Tywin (who is in a better position to judge) suspects Tyrion is not his own.

- White-blond hair.

- Is not the only Targ to have mismatched eyes (Shiera Seastar has green & blue).

- Is not the only Targ to have been born with a tail (Rhaego).

- Other Targs have had miscellaneous deformities (Maego the Monstrous with his two heads; Bloodraven with his albinism & huge birthmark)

- Some black eyes are really purple, if the light is bright enough.

- has a "morbid fascination with dragons" GOT-Ch13.

- has a morbid fascination with fire, including wildfire.

- seems to lack fear in the face of fire.

(Also, I recall someone mentioning that he likes his meat burnt, though I cannot recall this myself from my own memory).

He is fiercely hated by the direwolves in a disturbing and completely unique manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaime notes that Cersei displays a similarity to Aerys when burning the Tower of the Hand and recalls Aerys hinting at his plan to incinerate much of the vicinity around King's Landing. Perhaps Cersei's last stand will involve some similar plan of immolation.

However, there seems to be almost no real plot justification for having the three most important Lannisters be yet more unknowingly secret Targaryens. Having Tyrion be one contributes nearly nothing to the story and causes problem with the character. Using it as a rationale for him riding dragons would be a very lame reason to do it. There is more of a justification for the other two but the limit of this hidden Targaryen thing is getting reached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'm being inconsistent. I'm saying the "flashier," less-subtle hinting (I don't want to call it evidence because I don't think it is real evidence) does seem to point to Tyrion, but that, if you look at hints and insinuations that aren't handed out on a platter, the twins make more sense. When I read the books, I've come to expect that if something seems incredibly obvious, there's probably something going on in a different direction. You can disagree if you want.

Well, if you don't want to call it evidence than it's not "incredibly obvious", is it? And anyway, if something is "incredibly obvious" (say, like it is obvious that it was Roose who killed Robb) it likely is true. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc...

And also "if you look at hints and insinuation that aren't handed out on a platter" reads to me like it is just a more PR savvy way to state "if you don't look at hints and insinuations that you want to ignore".

What "more evidence" for Tyrion are you talking about, exactly? What is this idea based on, if not the thinking that Tyrion has to be a Targaryen to be a dragonrider? Because honestly that's the only argument I see for it. Any other arguments — like Aerys fancying Joanna — could equally point to Aerys fathering the twins.

The first argument that goes for Tyrion alone is that Tywin himself stated he wasn't sure if Tyrion was his son (he could never prove it either way, as he told Tyrion to his face). Moreover, he acted like he meant that statement and thus made sure that the person who maybe is his son and maybe not, would certainly not disinherit the children he doesn't doubt (Jaime and Cersei).

That he once said to Jaime "you are not my son" was in an entirely different context (namely, that Tywin was pissed off at Jaime on that very moment and spoke out of anger) and quite obviously Tywin didn't mean his statement to be taken literally as a declaration of Jaime's biological parentage. With Tyrion, my impression is that Tywin is dead serious when he tells Tyrion "I could never prove you weren't mine".

The second argument is Tyrion's "morbid fascination with dragons" - a strong pointer to a Targ connection, at least as strong as Cersei's wildfire fetish.

The third argument is Tyrion's appearance - the mismatched eyes, the white-blond hair, his whole deformation that could be a result of a failed attempt at abortion (or not). Jaime and Cersei look like 100% bona-fide golden Lannisters. While Tyrion's appearance doesn't scream that he isn't a Lannister (he is Joanna's son in any case), Jaime and Cersei explicitly do look like the part of the genuine Lannister article.

For the rest, there are some small things like Jon's remark of Tyrion's shadow "standing tall like a king", the "great man of the river" surfacing on the Rhoyne, Moqorro's remarks on Tyrion (which can be interpreted multiple ways).

And there are the shared arguments with Jaime and Cersei: mostly the insinuations about Joanna and Aerys.

All in all, there is nothing definite about Tyrion and each line of argument can be reasoned away by itself, but things are starting to add up by ADWD. The biggest problem is the question of how/when Aerys would have had access to Joanna (without Tywin knowing for sure), but that goes as well for Tyrion as for Jaime and Cersei.

On the other hand, there isn't much separate evidence for Jaime and Cersei. There is the incest thing, but whether that is caused by Targ genes or merely by Targ "inspiration" (and their own narcissism) is an open question. There is Cersei's wildfire fetish, but this isn't shared by Jaime and if Cersei got this with Targ genes then so should Jaime have gotten it.

If you have more arguments to add, by all means do so. I'm open to changing my mind on this thing if you can find better evidence.

I'm honestly baffled that you take offense to me suggesting that people might want Tyrion to be a Targ, and that want influencing their interpretations. I think that you'll find that a lot of the interpretations of the story rely at least somewhat on what people want to happen as much as what they think will happen.

And people who don't want Tyrion to be Targ, or who want Jaime/Cersei to be Targs are definitely not immune to that. Some people also look first at the evidence and then weigh possibilities (without necessarily coming to any definite or near-definite conclusion), which is a better way to approach such discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, there seems to be almost no real plot justification for having the three most important Lannisters be yet more unknowingly secret Targaryens.

I wonder how many of the people using this particular argument do believe that Aegon really is the son of Rhaegar, saved by Varys at the sack of KL. Do you, Sunset King?

And does this apply to Jon as well? No real plot justification for having him as yet another Targaryen?

Also, I don't think anybody is arguing that all three of the Lannisters are hidden Targaryens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of the people using this particular argument do believe that Aegon really is the son of Rhaegar, saved by Varys at the sack of KL. Do you, Sunset King?

And does this apply to Jon as well? No real plot justification for having him as yet another Targaryen?

Also, I don't think anybody is arguing that all three of the Lannisters are hidden Targaryens.

I doubt that the person claiming to be Aegon Targaryen actually is the son of Rhaegar. There is a chance that he is real but I consider it more likely that he is not the person Varys claims he is. Doesn't mean he may not seize the throne for a time though.

On the subject of Jon being a secret Targaryen, it depends on how it is used. If it is going to be used to make give him a viable claim to the throne and present him as some kind of Westeros messiah that will save the day, then no, that will not be good. However, since R + L seems to have a quite decent chance of being true, it must be going to matter considerably. There will be at least some kind of identity struggle and decision about the Night's Watch. There is more potential here though than with Tyrion secretly being a Targaryen. Furthermore, the purpose of having either of them being secret Targaryens diminishes if there are so many and, mysteriously, it is used to differentiate the more positive characters from the negative ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm honestly baffled that you take offense to me suggesting that people might want Tyrion to be a Targ, and that want influencing their interpretations.

Because the only reason to say this (except when admitting it oneself in order that people can fairly judge one's own statements) is to devalue an argument. Reasoning based on emotive values is weaker, or less reliable, than reasoning based on objective principles. So by claiming people only reason X result emotively is putting down any reasoning that reaches X result.

Note that this isn't personal vs you Apple Martini. I personally find you to be one of the better (politer and fairer) debaters on the forum of late. You just happened to be the latest committer (I think) of this particular 'sin' which gets up my nose (especially as it is almost always reverse case). The people who dismiss T=T and claim it is only from 'wanting' Jon to be a Targ almost always dismiss the accumulated T=T evidence 'out of hand' and refuse to accept it as possible evidence at all (similar to what you have done). In short they make an emotive choice to disregard evidence, rather than weigh it. If they weighed it, they'd come up with some value of 'possible but unlikely' rather than 'only worth sneering at people who 'want' it'. Which really measn that they are guilty of exactly what they are sneering at.

You may take the fact that I thought it worth bringing up as a compliment. It means I consider you at least someone who will listen and think and weigh things up.

FWIW I do not give two hoots which way Tyrions parentage falls, as long as it fits within GRRMs story nicely, and I trust GRRM that it wll do so brilliantly either way.

At the moment, my estimation is about 30% chance T=T, 70% Lannister. In short he really probably is Lannister, but the accummulated evidence gives a reasonable chance that he might be Targ.

Wouter, what were Moquorro's remarks, I missed those?

Of almost no value at all, there is also that Tyrion prefers his bacon burnt black. One of those 99.9%-means-nothing comments, but oh so fitting if he does turn out to be Targ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, the purpose of having either of them being secret Targaryens diminishes if there are so many and, mysteriously, it is used to differentiate the more positive characters from the negative ones.

I don't know if we can still call Tyrion one the more positive characters. He is very much a gray character with both good and bad sides - there are plenty of non-Targaryens who are more "positive". And Aerys and Viserys were not positive at all.

Wouter, what were Moquorro's remarks, I missed those?

Of almost no value at all, there is also that Tyrion prefers his bacon burnt black. One of those 99.9%-means-nothing comments, but oh so fitting if he does turn out to be Targ.

I had forgotten that one. It's a very small thing, but I agree it would stand out on a re-read should Tyrion indeed turn out to be Targ.

Moqorro's remarks:

“Someone told me that the night is dark and full of terrors. What do you see in those flames?”

“Dragons,” Moqorro said in the Common Tongue of Westeros. He spoke it very well, with hardly a trace of accent. No doubt that was one reason the high priest Benerro had chosen him to bring the faith of R’hllor to Daenerys Targaryen. “Dragons old and young, true and false, bright and dark. And you. A small man with a big shadow, snarling in the midst of all.”

It's a small thing too, because it can be interpreted in several ways, but it makes one wonder if the "and you" is including him with the "dragons bright and dark" or merely pointing out that he is smack in the middle of Jon, Aegon and Dany. Tyrion's "big shadow" is referenced again, too.

Another story possibility is that Tyrion is not really a son of Aerys biologically, but that a combination of rumours about Joanna and Aerys and Tyrion's (probably) becoming a dragonrider may cause Dany to suspect or outright believe so. That way, Martin would be going somewhere with the insinuations without it necessarily being true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if we can still call Tyrion one the more positive characters. He is very much a gray character with both good and bad sides - there are plenty of non-Targaryens who are more "positive". And Aerys and Viserys were not positive at all.

I agree that Tyrion has progressively become a less positive character and has periodically shown a tendency toward rage and retribution. However, he is a very popular character and is still at least less negative than Tywin or Cersei. It seems to kind of unnecessarily create a lineal detachment from Tywin and some of the other Lannisters when none need exist.

The main problem that I have with him being Targaryenish is that it might be used to justify him forming some kind of dragon riding, AA/PTWTP/something else trio with Daenerys and Jon. All three of these characters are plenty important and well developed enough to do without adding connections between them through prophecies or making them too central over other characters. It is indeed true that a great many Targaryens were quite negative but the formation of such a trio would be one of the more traditional and too easily expected possibilities. Since GRRM usually does not go for the traditional or obvious possiblities, though, this may not end up happening.

My dislike of "T=T" is entirely separate from how likely I consider it to be true though. The idea that of there being a 70% chance that he is a "pure" Lannister, 30% for T=T seems quite logical. Like the Jaime/Cersei hints, there are various points which draw attention toward the possibility but nothing too blatant or concrete. Perhaps it will remain a lingering point that is never definitvely confirmed or denied. There is no simple way that it could be confirmed by other characters in the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first argument that goes for Tyrion alone is that Tywin himself stated he wasn't sure if Tyrion was his son (he could never prove it either way, as he told Tyrion to his face). Moreover, he acted like he meant that statement and thus made sure that the person who maybe is his son and maybe not, would certainly not disinherit the children he doesn't doubt (Jaime and Cersei).

.... With Tyrion, my impression is that Tywin is dead serious when he tells Tyrion "I could never prove you weren't mine".

I take that line to mean Tywin would like to disown Tyrion. Manufacturing false proof that Tyrion is not Tywins son would not be be hard, Tywin is lord paramount in the West and if he put out a story that made it impossible for him to be Tyrions father nobody could contest him. Only the king could overrule him and neither Aerys nor Robert cared enough to do so. What stopped Tywin was this would have dishonoured Joanna's memory.

That does not have any bearing on whether Tywin actually thought that he had been cuckolded. I think not, Tywin resigned in anger when Jaime was named to the KG - I think he would have gone at least as far if he knew Aerys had forced Joanna.

I wonder how many of the people using this particular argument do believe that Aegon really is the son of Rhaegar, saved by Varys at the sack of KL. Do you, Sunset King?

And does this apply to Jon as well? No real plot justification for having him as yet another Targaryen?

We would be here forever if we doubted the parentage of every character for whom we do not have a POV from their mother drunk.gif . There has to be a lot of smoke to get me thinking fire. With Jon Snow we start questioning his parentage because Ned is oddly quiet about the identity of a bastards mother; we were told Aegon was dead so there is reason enough to doubt his reappearance. I just don't see that the smoking gun is there to doubt the paternity of Tywin's children - some circumstancial evidence in Tyrions case if you are already suspicious, but I don't buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dragon has 3 heads. Tyrion, Jon, Dany.

Look at the similarities of their births. Mothers all died after giving them life. All three had to grow up quickly in somewhat hostile enviroments. Dragons grow quickly. Food and freedom make them grow large and fierce. When Tyrion, Jon and Dany are given large responsibities they excel, the more freedom they have in deciding and accomplishing their goals, the better they do. It's just that others don't always see "the big picture" like they do so they are most often undermined and villified for their actions instead of cheered but the blood of the dragon does not weep so they carry on.

Plus it explains their plot armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dragon has 3 heads. Tyrion, Jon, Dany.

Look at the similarities of their births. Mothers all died after giving them life.

If we are going by that then we need to consider at least a dozen Freys as dragonriders. Childbed is perhaps the number one cause of premature death for noblewomen.

All three had to grow up quickly in somewhat hostile enviroments. Dragons grow quickly.

Also true for any number of youngsters in Westeros. It's a hard place.

Plus it explains their plot armor.

Now that it a fair cop. It does not prove they are all Targaryens but they do seem to have a purpose to fulfill at the end of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see that the smoking gun is there to doubt the paternity of Tywin's children - some circumstancial evidence in Tyrions case if you are already suspicious, but I don't buy it.

Not for Jaime and Cersei no, but Tywin tells Tyrion, in so many words, that he has doubts. Nothing definite no, but there is smoke in Tyrion's case.

I consider Cersei's wildfire fetish to be a likely diversion to muddy the waters, on the other hand.

Sunset king; Martin sometimes does go for traditional and even obvious possibilities - Jon's Snows parentage seems to be quite obvious (well, if you re-read AGOT carefully after the first read, and certainly once the theory is explained on the board) and is also traditional as a ploy for Fantasy. Would Martin not go for that one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not for Jaime and Cersei no, but Tywin tells Tyrion, in so many words, that he has doubts. Nothing definite no, but there is smoke in Tyrion's case.
On that note, guess who this was directed at:

"You are not my son." Lord Tywin turned his face away.

"You say you are the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, and only that. Very well, ser. Go do your duty."

And no, I don't think it's Tywin having "doubts" about Jaime, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that note, guess who this was directed at:

"You are not my son." Lord Tywin turned his face away.

"You say you are the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, and only that. Very well, ser. Go do your duty."

And no, I don't think it's Tywin having "doubts" about Jaime, either.

I don't need to guess Errant Bart, I already mentioned this myself in a post a bit above yours. Quoting myself here:

The first argument that goes for Tyrion alone is that Tywin himself stated he wasn't sure if Tyrion was his son (he could never prove it either way, as he told Tyrion to his face). Moreover, he acted like he meant that statement and thus made sure that the person who maybe is his son and maybe not, would certainly not disinherit the children he doesn't doubt (Jaime and Cersei).

That he once said to Jaime "you are not my son" was in an entirely different context (namely, that Tywin was pissed off at Jaime on that very moment and spoke out of anger) and quite obviously Tywin didn't mean his statement to be taken literally as a declaration of Jaime's biological parentage. With Tyrion, my impression is that Tywin is dead serious when he tells Tyrion "I could never prove you weren't mine".

No, Tywin most surely does not have doubts about Jaime. Taking this to mean that he doesn't have doubts about Tyrion is ignoring the context - Tywin was actively attempting to make Jaime his heir (and was angry exactly because Jaime turned him down on that, hence the outburst "you are not my son - you don't want to be my heir"!) while also making very sure that Tyrion would not ever have The Rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first argument that goes for Tyrion alone is that Tywin himself stated he wasn't sure if Tyrion was his son (he could never prove it either way, as he told Tyrion to his face). Moreover, he acted like he meant that statement and thus made sure that the person who maybe is his son and maybe not, would certainly not disinherit the children he doesn't doubt (Jaime and Cersei).

I say if Tywin thought Tyrion is not his son, he would have killed him before or sent him to the NW. Ala Tarly. If Tyrionis Aerys's son I honestly can't come up with any possible explanation why Tywin let him live, or why didn't he just sent him to the NW. He was a dwarf and people were laughing at House Lannister because of him, caused Joanna's death, and on top of that maybe he is the result of a rape? I

And about this, Genna said that Tyrion is Tywins son, not Jaime, she said when she told this to Tywin, he didn't speak with her for quite a time. And Tywin did tell Tyrion he is his son when he was counting on him. Being a dwarf automaticly disapoints Tywin and when his children disapoint him he tells them they are not his.

The second argument is Tyrion's "morbid fascination with dragons" - a strong pointer to a Targ connection, at least as strong as Cersei's wildfire fetish.

I say the morbid fascination is a bit too much. At my first read i didn't even notice he did care about them at all. But the Maesters are sure interested in dragons as well, etc etc, and they are not Targs. Dragons are the strongest piece in the game (alá cywiss) and Tyrion ultimatly wants to be powerful and wants to have the strongest pieces. I interpreted it as his powerhungriness.

The third argument is Tyrion's appearance - the mismatched eyes, the white-blond hair, his whole deformation that could be a result of a failed attempt at abortion (or not). Jaime and Cersei look like 100% bona-fide golden Lannisters. While Tyrion's appearance doesn't scream that he isn't a Lannister (he is Joanna's son in any case), Jaime and Cersei explicitly do look like the part of the genuine Lannister article.

Tommen has also white-blond hair, so that haircolor is either part of the Lannister gene, or all the three are Aerys's children. His deformation can be because his parents (Joanna and Tywin) were cousins as well. I am no expert in dwarfism, but I know that in the case of cousin mariages the chance that the kid will have some deformation (physically, mentally) is bigger.

For the rest, there are some small things like Jon's remark of Tyrion's shadow "standing tall like a king", the "great man of the river" surfacing on the Rhoyne, Moqorro's remarks on Tyrion (which can be interpreted multiple ways).

tywin was said to look like the real King compared to Aerys as well. Jaime was said to look like a king as well, I don't remember who said that, one of them Starks at Winterfell, either Jon or Bran. And he can be a king, if the seven kingdoms separate, no need to have targ genes for that

And there are the shared arguments with Jaime and Cersei: mostly the insinuations about Joanna and Aerys.

All in all, there is nothing definite about Tyrion and each line of argument can be reasoned away by itself, but things are starting to add up by ADWD. The biggest problem is the question of how/when Aerys would have had access to Joanna (without Tywin knowing for sure), but that goes as well for Tyrion as for Jaime and Cersei.

On the other hand, there isn't much separate evidence for Jaime and Cersei. There is the incest thing, but whether that is caused by Targ genes or merely by Targ "inspiration" (and their own narcissism) is an open question. There is Cersei's wildfire fetish, but this isn't shared by Jaime and if Cersei got this with Targ genes then so should Jaime have gotten it.

I say the evidences poining to Jaime and Cersei are around the same amount as the ones pointing at tyrion. Not tywins son was said both to Jaime and tyrion, like a king was said about both jaime and tyrion. Tyrion might have white-blond hair, but so does the twins kid, Tommen. tyrion has interest is dragons, Cersei is obsessed with fire as well and she found rhaegar the prettiest and is obsessed with pretty silver haired man (Aurene Waters), tyrion might physically deformed, but the twins kid Joffrey seems similar to vis or some other mad targs (you can say he deforemd emotionally).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for Jaime and Cersei no, but Tywin tells Tyrion, in so many words, that he has doubts. Nothing definite no, but there is smoke in Tyrion's case.

I guess these theories don't mean much to me because there aren't discrepencies or unanswered questions at around the conception or birth of any of Joanna's children. That is what I'd say is the lack of smoking gun compared to Jon's mysterious appearance or Aegons supposed death at an age when he could be easily substituted.

Joanna dying in childbirth is a common piece of bad luck, Tyrion being born a dwarf is a rare piece of bad luck. Nothing that is suspicious connects; the only time we know of Aerys taking 'liberties' was years earlier, Tywin resigns in anger years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We just don't enough about Tyrion mother at this point. Shireen comments that she dreams about dragons in the prelude of ACOK. I think she is about 1/8 Targaryean. We do know that Joanna spent time at court with Danys Mom and Elias Mom, is this an indication she had Targ blood perhaps on the wrong side of the sheet, she was a lesser Lannister and not married to Tywin yet. It seems like Ser Barristan knows more about this than he is saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunset king; Martin sometimes does go for traditional and even obvious possibilities - Jon's Snows parentage seems to be quite obvious (well, if you re-read AGOT carefully after the first read, and certainly once the theory is explained on the board) and is also traditional as a ploy for Fantasy. Would Martin not go for that one?

Yes, it is quite possible that such a trio might be used by Martin, though it is just as likely something more unpredictable might happen. I agree that the R + L theory has considerable evidence and indicates something important for the coming books although it remains to be seen just what Snow will make of it if it is confirmed. It does not have to mean that he is some kind of prophetic personage, though it is conceivable that is the case. Until more is known about what the "heads" on the "dragon" mean, it cannot be definitively known whether this "dragon" will dominate portions of the final book in a new War for the Dawn. The evidence for Daenerys being Azor Ahai is noteworthy but it is not yet possible to tell whether she must link up with two other Targaryens to suddenly solve the realm's problems at the end. Entirely possible but there are other possible ending scenarios as well that have a decent chance of unfolding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×