[ADWD SPOILERS] Unrevealed Prophecies

[Silmarien]

Is anyone else bothered by the fact that Rhaegar named his kids in the wrong order? Visenya was the oldest girl, Rhaenys the youngest.

No, Rhaenys was the elder.

ETA: Nm, sorry, someone else already mentioned this. My bad!

[PatrickStormborn]

I'm going to disagree with you regarding the dragons. Daenerys woke dragons from stone eggs that had been petrified. I don't think any character has actually woken Bloodraven. And if every word in the prophecy is meaningful, there must be MORE THAN ONE dragon. Dragons.

Like I've said, I've never seen a clear and concise argument as to why Jon Snow is the Prince Who Was Promised. I wouldn't be totally surprised if he did turn out to be the Prince Who Was Promised, but I just can't see how he could be. But as I've said, his role is still important.

[Eyron]

Rhaenys was older than Aegon, and supposedly Rhaegar didn't change his mind until Aegon was born, so I guess it makes sense that Rhaegar wasn't yet trying to re-create the Visenya/Aegon/Rhaenys trio when Rhaenys was named.

Right, I see this as yet another example of someone trying to manipulate events as to fit the prophecy, with poor result.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree there. GRRM has, on multiple occasions, used the word "smoke" as a color, so I can see "smoke and salt" referring to colors, and House Stark claims to have had its colors since the building of the Wall. And GRRM keeps hitting us over the head with the fact that Arthur Dayne, of Starfall, bled and died at the Tower of Joy. This repetition probably means something, and I don't think it's a coincidence that a "star" bled at what we think was Jon's birth.

Remember Theon thinking about the colours of the world looking outside in Winterfell, all the world had turned to the Stark colours, white snow and grey stone.

No, Rhaenys was the elder.

Aegon I was the middle child, Visenya was his older sister and Rhaenys his younger. Where does it say Rhaenys was the older?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I'm going to disagree with you regarding the dragons. Daenerys woke dragons from stone eggs that had been petrified. I don't think any character has actually woken Bloodraven. And if every word in the prophecy is meaningful, there must be MORE THAN ONE dragon. Dragons.

In the Dunk and Egg stories, "dragon" is used interchangeably with "Targaryen." Awaking a stone dragon could mean embracing a dormant or as-yet-unknown Targaryen identity. I'll tell you what I tell everyone else when it comes to the prophecies: Don't. Take. Them. Literally.

[tze]

In the Dunk and Egg stories, "dragon" is used interchangeably with "Targaryen." Awaking a stone dragon could mean embracing a dormant or as-yet-unknown Targaryen identity. I'll tell you what I tell everyone else when it comes to the prophecies: Don't. Take. Them. Literally.

In fact, a major plot point of The Mystery Knight involved a man who had a vision of a dragon hatching from an egg and believed that the vision meant an "actual" dragon would hatch from an egg. Yet the "dragon hatching" turned out to be Egg/Aegon V Targaryen. And before that, Prince Dareon had a vision of a dead dragon falling on Dunk, and the "dragon" turned out to be Baelor "Breakspear" Targaryen. There's precedent for GRRM writing about visions of "dragons" which actually refer to members of House Targaryen, not literal dragons.

[PatrickStormborn]

In the Dunk and Egg stories, "dragon" is used interchangeably with "Targaryen." Awaking a stone dragon could mean embracing a dormant or as-yet-unknown Targaryen identity. I'll tell you what I tell everyone else when it comes to the prophecies: Don't. Take. Them. Literally.

There's not taking prophecies literally, and then there's taking them completely figuratively.

From Melisandre: "It is written in prophecy as well. When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again amidst smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone. The bleeding star has come and gone, and Dragonstone is the place of smoke and salt. Stannis Baratheon is Azor Ahai reborn!"

Here's my interpretation of the prophecy: Daenerys was born amidst smoke and salt at Dragonstone. Years later, at the end of the longest summer on record, she walked into Drogo's funeral pyre and woke dragons from stone. It was around this time that the red comet/star was first noticed. Melisandre seems to think that Dragonstone and that red comet are important parts of the prophecy, and generally she is quite knowledgeable (if inaccurate at times; but I see that as more wishful thinking). She even knows how important it is to have dragons.

Like I've said, as a reader I understand how people can interpret the prophecy as being Jon Snow, but from a literary point of view I don't get it. We don't know when the prophecy originated, but I think it's likely that it has something to do with why the Targaryens fled to Dragonstone. I would assume that someone/a prophet foresaw dragons being woken beneath a red star as darkness approached. I'd guess that they also knew that the hero would come from Dragonstone/a place of smoke and salt. I don't imagine that they'd have a vision of someone being born as a knight bled at the end of the Targaryen reign.

I like the interpretation of "waking dragons from stone" meaning waking Targaryens from stone. However, it still requires more than one Targaryen. Bloodraven is only one, and I don't see how he relates to the prophecy. As far as we know, no character has "woken" him, and I'd argue that if he were to be woken from stone then the one who'd do that would be Bran, not Jon. But Bran can't be the Prince Who Was Promised, because he doesn't come from Aerys and Rhaella's line.

One final thing I'd like to say is how important the dragons seem to be in the prophecy. From Aemon's words in AFFC, we learn that the prophecy is Valyrian and has been translated into the Common Tongue. He also talks about how "prince" can be "princess" because the Valyrian word for dragon is neither male nor female, like dragons themselves. I think this would suggest that the Valyrian version of the prophecy may have been about the dragon who was promised. This doesn't prove it's Daenerys or Jon, but it is something that I feel has to be mentioned as it seems quite important.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

There's not taking prophecies literally, and then there's taking them completely figuratively.

From Melisandre: "It is written in prophecy as well. When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again amidst smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone. The bleeding star has come and gone, and Dragonstone is the place of smoke and salt. Stannis Baratheon is Azor Ahai reborn!"

Here's my interpretation of the prophecy: Daenerys was born amidst smoke and salt at Dragonstone. Years later, at the end of the longest summer on record, she walked into Drogo's funeral pyre and woke dragons from stone. It was around this time that the red comet/star was first noticed. Melisandre seems to think that Dragonstone and that red comet are important parts of the prophecy, and generally she is quite knowledgeable (if inaccurate at times; but I see that as more wishful thinking). She even knows how important it is to have dragons.

Like I've said, as a reader I understand how people can interpret the prophecy as being Jon Snow, but from a literary point of view I don't get it. We don't know when the prophecy originated, but I think it's likely that it has something to do with why the Targaryens fled to Dragonstone. I would assume that someone/a prophet foresaw dragons being woken beneath a red star as darkness approached. I'd guess that they also knew that the hero would come from Dragonstone/a place of smoke and salt. I don't imagine that they'd have a vision of someone being born as a knight bled at the end of the Targaryen reign.

I like the interpretation of "waking dragons from stone" meaning waking Targaryens from stone. However, it still requires more than one Targaryen. Bloodraven is only one, and I don't see how he relates to the prophecy. As far as we know, no character has "woken" him, and I'd argue that if he were to be woken from stone then the one who'd do that would be Bran, not Jon. But Bran can't be the Prince Who Was Promised, because he doesn't come from Aerys and Rhaella's line.

One final thing I'd like to say is how important the dragons seem to be in the prophecy. From Aemon's words in AFFC, we learn that the prophecy is Valyrian and has been translated into the Common Tongue. He also talks about how "prince" can be "princess" because the Valyrian word for dragon is neither male nor female, like dragons themselves. I think this would suggest that the Valyrian version of the prophecy may have been about the dragon who was promised. This doesn't prove it's Daenerys or Jon, but it is something that I feel has to be mentioned as it seems quite important.

Generally, my thinking is that if someone within the story thinks they've solved the AA mystery — whether the solution is Stannis or Dany — it means that they haven't really. I don't care who it is, Melisandre or Aemon or a bunch of other red priests. The prophecy is such an overarching part of the story that I just can't believe that it'd be completely given away in the first book and allowed to more or less just hang there. Your interpretation of the prophecy is the one that's the most pat, the most obvious and the most agreed-upon, within and without of the story. It's the lowest-common-denominator theory. Which is why I think it's a red herring and a distraction. You're welcome to disagree.

The Targaryens fled from Valyria because one of their daughters supposedly foresaw the Doom of Valyria. If I understand it correctly, it had little or nothing to do with with the AA prophecy.

[PatrickStormborn]

Generally, my thinking is that if someone within the story thinks they've solved the AA mystery — whether the solution is Stannis or Dany — it means that they haven't really. I don't care who it is, Melisandre or Aemon or a bunch of other red priests. The prophecy is such an overarching part of the story that I just can't believe that it'd be completely given away in the first book and allowed to more or less just hang there. Your interpretation of the prophecy is the one that's the most pat, the most obvious and the most agreed-upon, within and without of the story. It's the lowest-common-denominator theory. Which is why I think it's a red herring and a distraction. You're welcome to disagree.

The Targaryens fled from Valyria because one of their daughters supposedly foresaw the Doom of Valyria. If I understand it correctly, it had little or nothing to do with with the AA prophecy.

That's fair enough. I've always felt that Martin doesn't focus too much on the prophecy and has handled it creatively if it is indeed Daenerys. And if it is, she still needs to learn that she's the Prince Who Was Promised, get to Westeros, find the other two heads of the dragon, and then battle against the Others. Martin is showing us that the prophecy isn't the most important part of the story - especially as the prophecy wasn't introduced until the second book (by which time, I believe, it had already been fulfilled).

Most of the arguments against Daenerys being TPWWP is because she seems "too obvious". I don't think she was an obvious choice until Aemon told Sam that he thought it was her. Maybe it was obvious for those of us who like to debate the issue, but for most readers I don't think it was obvious.

[Sevumar]

Generally, my thinking is that if someone within the story thinks they've solved the AA mystery — whether the solution is Stannis or Dany — it means that they haven't really. I don't care who it is, Melisandre or Aemon or a bunch of other red priests.

I think it's significant that while readers and characters in the story have identified several candidates, only one has made that claim himself, Stannis. Maester Aemon claimed Dany was the Prince that was Promised, but I'm not sure if he also tried to claim the mantle of Azor Ahai for her. Benerro does, but we never see that Dany herself is aware of either of these prophecies and she's definitely never claimed to be the subject of them.

The prophecy is such an overarching part of the story that I just can't believe that it'd be completely given away in the first book and allowed to more or less just hang there.

I agree and this is one reason why I don't think Dany is AA without the role including multiple people.

The Targaryens fled from Valyria because one of their daughters supposedly foresaw the Doom of Valyria. If I understand it correctly, it had little or nothing to do with with the AA prophecy.

This is pretty much my understanding too, and that the Prince that was Promised may somehow tie in here. I think AA is and always has been a separate prophecy from a different part of the world. We don't know when the faith of R'hllor became popular in the western part of Essos.

[Black Crow]

Most of the arguments against Daenerys being TPWWP is because she seems "too obvious". I don't think she was an obvious choice until Aemon told Sam that he thought it was her. Maybe it was obvious for those of us who like to debate the issue, but for most readers I don't think it was obvious.

As I've said before, I think its a double bluff. Dany fits the prophecy far better than anybody else we've met, but she isn't going to be the saviour of the world as advertised by the Red lot

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Most of the arguments against Daenerys being TPWWP is because she seems "too obvious". I don't think she was an obvious choice until Aemon told Sam that he thought it was her. Maybe it was obvious for those of us who like to debate the issue, but for most readers I don't think it was obvious.

It wasn't "obvious" as it was happening because, as you said, we didn't learn of the parameters of the prophecy until the second book. At that point, in hindsight, it was obvious that Dany had more or less "fulfilled" it. I don't want to say it was stupidly obvious, but it was pretty damn blatant, to me. And this was before I ever sought out message boards and whatnot.

I also never addressed this point of yours:

There's not taking prophecies literally, and then there's taking them completely figuratively.

The only prophecy that I know of that has unfolded more or less literally is Maggy's prophecy to Cersei. It's very straightforward. Just about every other prophecy has layers of meaning and has not unfolded literally. Did Sansa really have purple serpents in her hair? Is Euron literally a one-eyed crow? Does the Wall really have a blue winter rose growing out of it?

I agree and this is one reason why I don't think Dany is AA without the role including multiple people.

I'm willing to buy into the idea that Dany is one of three "heads" who will combine to be AA. But as to the idea that she, alone, is AA, I think it's bunk.

As I've said before, I think its a double bluff. Dany fits the prophecy far better than anybody else we've met, but she isn't going to be the saviour of the world as advertised by the Red lot

Agreed. I also think it's a matter of a strict difference between fulfilling a prophecy based on things that are out of one's control or a weird fluke (which Dany has done) and fulfilling the actual "savior" part based on one's choice and actions. It doesn't matter what Dany "fulfills" if she never gets off her duff and gets to Westeros in time to do anything worthwhile.

[Dragonfish]

Because they were his wives. The characteristics that make a woman a wife are different (some sort of ceremony) than the characteristics that make a woman a sister (blood ties or adoption).

I don't see how this follows. Just because they became his wives does not mean they stopped being his sisters.

[tze]

I don't see how this follows. Just because they became his wives does not mean they stopped being his sisters.

Of course not. I'm saying that marrying his sisters might have been a (failed) attempt to fulfill some as-yet-unrevealed prophecy, because being a wife and being a sister are usually contradictory roles.

[Sevumar]

Of course not. I'm saying that marrying his sisters might have been a (failed) attempt to fulfill some as-yet-unrevealed prophecy, because being a wife and being a sister are usually contradictory roles.

Do we know anything about whether or not incestuous polygamy (or just polygamy) was widely practiced in Valyria, or if this is a post-Doom innovation of the Targs?

[ARYa_Nym]

The Valyrians commonly wed brother to sister (II: 364)

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Concordance/Entry/The_Freehold_of_Valyria/

[Dragonfish]

Of course not. I'm saying that marrying his sisters might have been a (failed) attempt to fulfill some as-yet-unrevealed prophecy, because being a wife and being a sister are usually contradictory roles.

I'm still not seeing it. Rhaenys and Visenya were his sisters and would always be his sisters, no matter what further roles they were assigned.

[Sevumar]

http://www.westeros....old_of_Valyria/

Ok, so this doesn't seem like a behavior specifically tailored to fulfill a prophecy. It's likely what he'd've done anyway.

[tze]

Ok, so this doesn't seem like a behavior specifically tailored to fulfill a prophecy. It's likely what he'd've done anyway.

No, not necessarily. Catelyn mentions this "fact" offhandedly in ACOK, but as many other threads have pointed out, there's been no actual proof that incest was a Valyrian practice. No maester or other learned person has ever made this claim. Multiple characters have been tromping throughout the remains of the Valyrian Empire in Essos, including Volantis (which claims the "purest" Valyrian culture) and there's been no hint at all that anyone there practices incest or has ever practiced incest. There's been no hint at all that other Valyrian families in Westeros, including House Velaryon, practice incest or have ever practiced incest. If incest was practiced in Valyria before the Doom, you'd think we'd have seen at least one incestuous relationship somewhere in Essos, or at least, someone in Essos would have mentioned such relationships. But there's been nothing.

I'm still not seeing it. Rhaenys and Visenya were his sisters and would always be his sisters, no matter what further roles they were assigned.

I really don't know how to make myself any clearer. Sansa and Arya will always be Jon's sisters, even if R+L=J, because they were all bonded (for greater and lesser lengths of time) to direwolves from the same litter. To the vast, vast, vast majority of people in ASOIAF, a wife isn't a sister and a sister cannot be a wife. I'm saying there's a parallel between Aegon the Conqueror and Jon, in that Rhaenys/Visenya served two different "relationship" roles to Aegon (as wives and as sisters) which would ordinarily be impossible, just as Sansa and Arya serve two different "relationship" roles to Jon (as true sisters and as biological cousins) that would ordinarily be impossible, as most cousins don't have the option of being bonded to sibling direwolves.

[Cydal]

No, not necessarily. Catelyn mentions this "fact" offhandedly in ACOK, but as many other threads have pointed out, there's been no actual proof that incest was a Valyrian practice. No maester or other learned person has ever made this claim. Multiple characters have been tromping throughout the remains of the Valyrian Empire in Essos, including Volantis (which claims the "purest" Valyrian culture) and there's been no hint at all that anyone there practices incest or has ever practiced incest. There's been no hint at all that other Valyrian families in Westeros, including House Velaryon, practice incest or have ever practiced incest. If incest was practiced in Valyria before the Doom, you'd think we'd have seen at least one incestuous relationship somewhere in Essos, or at least, someone in Essos would have mentioned such relationships. But there's been nothing.

I might have to look for a source for this but it was mentioned explicitly that Valyrians of old DID practice incest to keep the blood pure so as to be able to control dragons and keep binding them to their blood. House Velaryon is Valyrian but they weren't DragonLords. So they have no need to.

[tze]

I might have to look for a source for this but it was mentioned explicitly that Valyrians of old DID practice incest to keep the blood pure so as to be able to control dragons and keep binding them to their blood. House Velaryon is Valyrian but they weren't DragonLords. So they have no need to.

If you can find a textual source for that, I'd love to see it. The whole "incest was needed to control dragons" theory is, I think, something fans came up with on these boards that has been repeated so many times that many people assume it's gospel. The Dance of the Dragons, for example, involved Rhaenyra, whose mother was an Arryn, and Aegon, whose mother was a Hightower, and they were both dragonriders; their parents didn't need to be siblings for them to ride dragons.