[ADwD Spoilers] Azor Ahai and Jon

[cteresa]

Maybe it wasn't quite as platonic as he made it sound and didn't want to talk about it in detail?

Precisely. And what possible implications does that have? A scenario of the queen saying goodbye to her old lover in a non platonic way before setting sail for Westeros is not beyond reason...

[Claireducky]

Only one thing is certain the books are centered around the Starks and Targaraeyens. But maybe Jon is the union born of both Ice and Fire. R+L=j

Thats why when Dany saw the vision of Rhaeger holding a child and saying his song is the song of ice and fire i'm sure its Jon. Aegon was born a dragon. Jon is potentially both ice and fire therefore his song is the song of ice and fire.

It wasn't Jon. Rhaegar tells the woman in the vision that the child will be named Aegon. It is NOT Jon unless for some reason Rhaegar would name two of his children Aegon. Rhaegar thought himself TPTWP until he became convinced Aegon was, because he saw a comet the night Aegon was conceived.

[MultiClassGeek]

According to Jaime, what really got Aerys going was having people burned. Guy sounds like a catch.

in which case, maybe Aerys was secretly a worshipper of Rh'llor?

And that his idea of blowing up King's Landing was intended to be one final sacrifice to the Red God?

I mean, we've seen a lot of insanity from the Lord of Light's worshippers (arguably more than from any followers of other gods)

[Claireducky]

Precisely. And what possible implications does that have? A scenario of the queen saying goodbye to her old lover in a non platonic way before setting sail for Westeros is not beyond reason...

Not beyond the realm of possibility, I suppose, but very unlikely.

Rhaella and Aerys married in around 258 AL. It was at this time that Bonifer turned pious and declared that only the Maiden would have him from now on.

Nearly 30 years passed between then and when she fled King's Landing. With as suspicious as Aerys was, I doubt Bonifer ever got near Rhaella ever again, for both of their sakes, and to not dishonor his vows of piety.

[wolfbird]

in which case, maybe Aerys was secretly a worshipper of Rh'llor?

And that his idea of blowing up King's Landing was intended to be one final sacrifice to the Red God?

No, I think Targs just really like fire.

Rh'llor, however, seems to be of the same general "nature" as the Targs, if you go by the theory that the two main powers in this world are Ice and Fire.

[Saracen]

It wasn't Jon. Rhaegar tells the woman in the vision that the child will be named Aegon. It is NOT Jon unless for some reason Rhaegar would name two of his children Aegon. Rhaegar thought himself TPTWP until he became convinced Aegon was, because he saw a comet the night Aegon was conceived.

Forgot that part. Maybe Rhaeger realized that he was wrong and Aegon wasn't promised and that's why he sought Lyanna. To make a child born of both ice and fire.

[elur]

I think it more likely for Dany to be AA and Jon to be Nissa Nissa!

Plunging a sword into Dany could make Lightbringer. Plunging a sword into Jon, much less likely.

Drogon as sacrifice instead of Dany or Jon is also a possibility.

[Saracen]

It doesn't matter in the end the dragon has three heads. Don't you guys get it Rhaeger and Aemon read a prophecy that indicated that the prince was a targareayn or dragon. Rhaeger thought that meant male but Aemon realised that the dragon was genderless and the it has THREE HEADS. The prince is actually 3 people. The last three targareayns. Jon, Dany, and maybe tyrion?

[Steve Moss]

Looked it up and I think you're confused and thinking of Aegon.

Rhaegar originally thought himself TPTWP, but then changed his mind to believe it to be about Aegon, because of a comet seen in the sky the day he was conceived.

So whether the Red Comet portion of the prophecy applies at either conception or birth could be a factor and could clue in both Dany and Jon, if there are roughly nine months separating the two?

It wasn't Jon. Rhaegar tells the woman in the vision that the child will be named Aegon. It is NOT Jon unless for some reason Rhaegar would name two of his children Aegon. Rhaegar thought himself TPTWP until he became convinced Aegon was, because he saw a comet the night Aegon was conceived.

Unless it was R+L=Aegon, but when Ned took custody he really couldn't pass of his bastard as being named Aegon, so to minimize the lie, he gave him the nickname "Jon" (Aegon with a "gee" sound for the "g") in order to conceal the Targ connection while at the same time keeping honor intact. He's done something similar, always refering to Jon as "my blood" and not "my son".

Rhaeger thought that meant male but Aemon realised that the dragon was genderless and the it has THREE HEADS. The prince is actually 3 people. The last three targareayns. Jon, Dany, and maybe tyrion?

Three people instead of one serving as the "Prince that was Promised" is a possibility.

[wolfbird]

You see, Ser Patrek of King's Mountain and his star sigel comes from a sports bet GRRM made with a fan. The sigel, in fact, is the star of the Dallas Cowboys.

It's quite possible that GRRM just wanted to use this as an excuse so we aren't certain (and another reason why he wanted to delay ADWD - so that he had enough time to lose the bet!) It would be rather hilarious how the grand imagery of the prophecies turn out to be so much mundaneness. But the star could also turn out to be absolutely nothing.

It could very well be both a bet and a sign. What better way to misdirect us? If the star sigel wasn't important, why mention it? He could have given the star sigel to any knight, why this one?

[Claireducky]

So whether the Red Comet portion of the prophecy applies at either conception or birth could be a factor and could clue in both Dany and Jon, if there are roughly nine months separating the two?

The comet doesn't have anything to do with their conception or first birth, IMO. The Red Comet was first seen during Drogo's pyre, signalling Dany's rebirth.

And I don't know why more people haven't noticed this passage in ADWD, when Jon and the new Night's Watch members return from the grove of weirwoods:

"Jon glimpsed the red wanderer above, watching them through the leafless branches of great trees as they made their way beneath. The Thief, the free folk called it."

The Wiki on here claims that the Thief is what the free folk call the comet, but I think that is wrong: from aSoS- "The red wanderer that septons preached was sacred to their Smith up here was called the Thief. And when the Thief was in the Moonmaid, that was a propitious time for a man to steal a woman."

The wildlings obviously have lore about this red wanderer star and have for a long time, and the reference in aSOS to it being sacred to the Smith backs up that it is NOT the comet, but probably a wandering planet like Mars.

Now, THAT SAID, Jon sees this red wanderer just a couple of chapters before being stabbed. I'd think that could qualify as the red star bleeding, not some dumb knight with a star sigil.

Unless it was R+L=Aegon, but when Ned took custody he really couldn't pass of his bastard as being named Aegon, so to minimize the lie, he gave him the nickname "Jon" (Aegon with a "gee" sound for the "g") in order to conceal the Targ connection while at the same time keeping honor intact. He's done something similar, always refering to Jon as "my blood" and not "my son".

Aegon was already an infant when Jon was conceived/born. Jon is NOT Aegon. Aegon is either dead or he is Young Griff.

[Été]

Only one thing is certain the books are centered around the Starks and Targaraeyens. But maybe Jon is the union born of both Ice and Fire. R+L=j

Thats why when Dany saw the vision of Rhaeger holding a child and saying his song is the song of ice and fire i'm sure its Jon. Aegon was born a dragon. Jon is potentially both ice and fire therefore his song is the song of ice and fire.

Rhaegar had already died on the Trident, months before Lyanna died giving birth to Jon at the ToJ.

[cteresa]

Aegon was already an infant when Jon was conceived/born. Jon is NOT Aegon. Aegon is either dead or he is Young Griff.

No.

1- Aegon was the child whose head was smashed. he is dead.

2- Aegon survived the sack:

2.1 Aegon died in the years in between

2.2 Aegon is alive

2.2.1 Aegon is YG

2.2.2 Aegon is some other person

2.2.2.1 Aegon is some other character we have seen on the series

2.2.2.2 Aegon is a character we never saw on the series yet (and should put more lines about odds we find out, we do not find out cos GRRM leaves it ambiguously).

But it´s not as simple as or Aegon being dead or being YG.

[Claireducky]

No.

1- Aegon was the child whose head was smashed. he is dead.

2- Aegon survived the sack:

2.1 Aegon died in the years in between

2.2 Aegon is alive

2.2.1 Aegon is YG

2.2.2 Aegon is some other person

2.2.2.1 Aegon is some other character we have seen on the series

2.2.2.2 Aegon is a character we never saw on the series yet (and should put more lines about odds we find out, we do not find out cos GRRM leaves it ambiguously).

But it´s not as simple as or Aegon being dead or being YG.

Fair points, all-- basically all I was trying to say is that JON is not Aegon.

[cteresa]

Fair points, all-- basically all I was trying to say is that JON is not Aegon.

ah, there totally agreed. Jon is much too young, at least one year younger than Aegon. Jon was a newborn brought to the North by a wetnurse Wylla, after Aegon was killed (aged 1), or maybe not killed at the sack if KL.

So far as I can tell, from people whose ages are mentioned, only Sam Tarly *could* be Aegon´s age.

[Steve Moss]

Now, THAT SAID, Jon sees this red wanderer just a couple of chapters before being stabbed. I'd think that could qualify as the red star bleeding, not some dumb knight with a star sigil.

. . .

Aegon was already an infant when Jon was conceived/born. Jon is NOT Aegon. Aegon is either dead or he is Young Griff.

Good catch about the red wanderer.

ah, there totally agreed. Jon is much too young, at least one year younger than Aegon. Jon was a newborn brought to the North by a wetnurse Wylla, after Aegon was killed (aged 1), or maybe not killed at the sack if KL.

So far as I can tell, from people whose ages are mentioned, only Sam Tarly *could* be Aegon´s age.

I think you both missed my point. I'm not saying the Jon is Aegon, the son of Rhegar and the Princess of Dorne (Rhella?) who was allegedly killed at the sack of KL, but a second son born of Rheagar and Lynna, named Aegon on his birth (in memory of his murdered brother?) but nicknamed by Ned as Jon to cover up the fact that Jon is not his bastard (as calling Jon his true name of Aegon would have raised far too many questions.).

Just a speculative theory.

[cteresa]

Good catch about the red wanderer.

I think you both missed my point. I'm not saying the Jon is Aegon, the son of Rhegar and the Princess of Dorne (Rhella?) who was allegedly killed at the sack of KL, but a second son born of Rheagar and Lynna, named Aegon on his birth (in memory of his murdered brother?) but nicknamed by Ned as Jon to cover up the fact that Jon is not his bastard (as calling Jon his true name of Aegon would have raised far too many questions.).

Just a speculative theory.

That is a very old theory. Let´s call him Jon, if he was named anything else it is irrelevant by now. (and Aegon is pronounced with a real G anyway as far as I know, Jon is not much of a nickname for it)

[Steve Moss]

That is a very old theory. Let´s call him Jon, if he was named anything else it is irrelevant by now. (and Aegon is pronounced with a real G anyway as far as I know, Jon is not much of a nickname for it)

William can become a Bill, Eddard a Ned, or John a Jack. Nick naming conventions is not anywhere near universal.

And I am aware its an old theory. I don't know if I was the first (personally I doubt it) but I know I raised it years ago to rebut the case that the vision of Aegon as an infant couldn't possibily refer to Jon.

[Claireducky]

William can become a Bill, Eddard a Ned, or John a Jack. Nick naming conventions is not anywhere near universal.

And I am aware its an old theory. I don't know if I was the first (personally I doubt it) but I know I raised it years ago to rebut the case that the vision of Aegon as an infant couldn't possibily refer to Jon.

The vision of Aegon as an infant CAN'T refer to Jon. Rhaegar is the man with the harp in the vision, and Rhaegar was long dead by time Jon would have been born. The vision is of Rhaegar with Elia and newborn Aegon.

Now, whether Jon is *really* what Jon's birth name was-- who knows, but I agree with cteresa that it's pretty irrelevant.

[Steve Moss]

The vision of Aegon as an infant CAN'T refer to Jon. Rhaegar is the man with the harp in the vision, and Rhaegar was long dead by time Jon would have been born. The vision is of Rhaegar with Elia and newborn Aegon.

"CAN"T" is a pretty conclusive statement which I don't think wise to apply to GRRM.

First, a vision could just as easily be a metaphor, as seen more than once in the series.

Second, the adults are never conclusively named as Rheagar and Elia. That is an assumption (though I admit a very reasonable one). But Rheagar was not the only silver haired man in the series. For example, the Daynes looked like Targs, were Targ loyalists, may have been in the vicinity of Lyanna when she gave birth, and may have been in the know about Rheagar's opinions and repeated them when they saw Jon and Lyanna.

Third, we don't know how old Jon was when Ned arrived. We can assume that he was a newborn infant and the "bed of blood" is a reference to Lyanna dying in child birth. Or it may be that Lyanna suicided due to depression brought on by word that Rheagar was dead and that Jon was a crawling infant but not fresh from the womb. Or perhaps she caught some horrible disease. Or perhaps Jon was the first of two Targ kids with Lyanna and the second died with her.

There is a whole lot that we don't know. And until we do know (Howland Reed making an appearance would be more than satisfactory) all we have are theories, though admittedly some are more likely than others. But until it is resolved (if it ever is) then we should dismiss those we don't agree with out of hand.