It occurred to me recently, and i'm not sure if it has been pointed out already, but in Eragon, Brom's retelling of Galbatorix's story says the line:

"...she died in his arms..."

in reference to Galby's first dragon's death. Later in the series in Brisingr, Arya was talking about the Forsworn's dragons being "un-named" (Du Namar Aurboda, or Banishing of the Names), and mentioned Galbatorix's first dragon (Jarnunvosk) being spared because of the line:

"...for it was not his fault he was killed by Urgals..."

It refers to his dragon as "her" first and then "him" later.

So by the evidence, there is this list in order (a skewed order at that, for we know not what goes on through this)

Unnamed Female Dragon (First, as called by Brom)
Jarnunvosk (First, as called by Arya)
Shruikan

By book facts alone, Galbatorix has had 3 dragons, not just 2 like most think. Could it be an author's error, or a possible Chekhov's Gun?

SaphireSoul
~The Swiftwind Crew~

i just checked and you right it could just be a mistake or what i don't know.

Knowing CP's knack for throwing in plot twists more often than M Night Shyamalan (that's unlikely), i'm leaning towards the Chekhov's Gun theory right now, and that the 4th book will reveal it. Yet he wrote Eragon really young, so it could just be a slip of consistancy because of time. But all other foreshadowing has kept constant as far as I know, so I can't prove either way.

i think it was an accident

Very well could have been. I guess we'll see when Book 4 comes out!

i think that is very unlikely that the riders would let a new rider have two dragons

Unless it was along the lines of "The first was tragedy enough, so they gave him a 2nd dragon out of sympathy, but when that one died too, they refused the obviously irresponsible and now manic Galbatorix yet another dragon, so he had to steal one instead".

yeagh and then he would be expecing another dragon.

If he had been given a second dragon to replace his first, it would only make sense that he would feel betrayed if they refused to replace that one too, since he was now treating the dragons like just transport and property that can be replaced when one dies away.

and it would explain how he was able to steal all the hoh so easly.

Yes, it would. And as for both Brom and Arya mentioning two different "first" dragons, Brom was getting on in age and could have just forgotten, or maybe even wasn't around when Galbatorix got a second dragon. I don't think the Shur'tugal leaders would make it well known that they replaced someone's dragon because of a tragic loss, otherwise there would be fights for other Riders to get as many eggs as they can. With that logic, Brom wouldn't know the female was his second and assume it was his first dragon. But Elves were the first Dragon Riders and the most deeply linked to the dragons, it would make sense that they would know about the second dragon, so Arya would be able to name off Jarnunvosk as Galbatorix's first dragon and be correct, with the female dragon being the second one for him to own and lose. Brom, in his faulty memory or lack of the full story, would naturally say the female was the first. So it would really be Jarnunvosk>Unnamed Female>Shruikan

if this is true then it's weird that both dragons were killed by ugals.

Galbatorix had a nasty habit of going thrillseeking, and it seems anyone who could fell a number of Urgals or Kull would become honored and respected. So he could have failed the first time with Jarnunvosk, thought he was more prepared and skilled the second time around, slipped up, and lost his second one too in his pursuit for respect and renown throughout the Riders. At which point, being denied yet another dragon, he would steal one instead and get known by not just the Riders, but the entire world, by being the Rider who, by sheer power and underhanded tricks, took down Vrael and every Rider still allied to him.

Personally, I think it was probably an accident.
He was what, 15 when he started writing Eragon?

And even though the books are edited, there are often still mistakes.

Take Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire for example, when Barty Crouch is up in Dumbledore's study.
I can't remember if at that point Barty Crouch was dead but it was definitely supposed to be Mad-Eye Moody.

Author's make little mistakes like that all the time, and they're easily overlooked.

If it WAS an author's mistake, I just did CP a favor by creating a logical explanation to fill in the margin of error. xD With Jaythe_wise's help, of course, otherwise I wouldn't have thought long enough to formulate it.

Bahahah, yeahhh.
Get the word out ;O

We'll convince everyone that's how it really happened :')

i think it was a mistake but cp might be able to turn that mistake into something that makes the story better.

I don't know. It is possible. But we have to wait for the fourth book.

Chances are it was a mistake. I probably would have done something just like that if I ever wrote a book.

i dont think he has three dragons but who knows i dont we just have to wait

that dragon looks ugly

whatever u say but i found the pic and i liked it

however i really doubt that galby has 3 dragons.

I don't think he did because Oromis explained what exactly happened. His dragon died and then stole one other person's dragon.

we keep saying has in the present tense if this idea is right then we should say he had two other dragons and got a third one.

And he might of just said that so if saphira died then eragon woulded try to get the last egg to hatch for him.

well it is a cool theory and it could be possible

Agreed, its been said many times Galbatorix has had two dragons
He got one, and went on a reckless little adventure thinking that
his powers as a Rider would protect him regardless of any threats
and during a battle with the Urgles his dragon was mortally wounded
she died in his arms, and he went mad with grief, but was able to hide it well. Until the order of Riders at the time denied him a second dragon, at which point he killed another rider, and forged a pact with the newly hatched dragon using a crude spell with dark magick, enslaving him.

it was just a small error, I actually didn't even notice it until I read this XD

I noticed it but passed it off as a mistake. I haven't heard this theory that Glaby had 3 dragons before. I wonder what the implications would be if CP tossed it in as some kind of plot twist...if it wasn't a mistake in the first place, which it most likely was.

or it could be how a sailor calls his/her ship a she could be like that

the only way for galby to have 3 dragons that i can come up w/ is that people must be counting thorn and the last egg on top of shruakin as well