The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones Ice Letter Opener
Game of Thrones Ice Letter Opener
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

R+L =J, v. 77


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
433 replies to this topic

#1 TerraPrime

TerraPrime

    Social Justice King's Guard

  • Board Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,958 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 05:27 PM

PLEASE REPORT THE THREAD ONCE IT REACHES 400 POSTS.  THANK YOU.

 

Reference guide

The Tower of the Hand has an excellent analysis of this theory:
Jon Snow's Parents

And Westeros' Citadel also provides a summary:
Jon Snow's Parents

A Wiki of Ice and Fire:
Jon Snow Theories


Frequently Asked Questions:

How can Jon be a Targaryen if he has a burned hand?
Targaryens are not immune to fire. Aerion Brightflame died drinking wildfire. Aegon V and his son Duncan are thought to have died in a fire-related event at Summerhall. Rhaenyra was eaten by Aegon II's dragon, presumably roasted by fire before the dragon took a bite. Viserys died when he was crowned with molten gold. Dany suffered burns from the fire pit incident at the end of A Dance with Dragons. Finally, the author has stated outright that Targaryens are not immune to fire. Jon's burned hand does not mean he is ineligible to be part Targaryen. For more information about the myth of Targaryen fire immunity, see this thread.

How can Jon be a Targ if he doesn't have silver hair and purple eyes?
Not all Targaryens had the typical Valyrian look. Alysanne had blue eyes. Baelor Breakspear and his son(s) had the Dornish look. Some of the Great Bastards did not have typical Valyrian features. Jon's own half-sister Rhaenys had her mother's Dornish look.

If Jon isn't Ned's son, then why does he look so much like him?
Much is made over the fact that Arya looks like Lyanna, and Jon looks like Arya. Ned and Lyanna shared similar looks.

How can Jon be half-Targ if he has a direwolf?
Ned's trueborn children are half Stark and half Tully. Being half Tully didn't prevent them from having a direwolf so there is no reason to think being half Targaryen would prevent Jon from having a direwolf. If Lyanna is his mother, then he's still half Stark. Furthermore, there is already a character who is half Targaryen and half blood of the First Men and was a skinchanger: Bloodraven.

Since Rhaegar was already married, wouldn't Jon still be a bastard?
The evidence that Jon is legitimate is that Targaryens have a history of polygamous marriages which makes it a possibility that Rhaegar had two wives. Three Kingsguards were present at the Tower of Joy when Ned arrived. Even after Ned said that Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon were dead and Viserys had fled to Dragonstone, the Kingsguard opted to stay at the Tower of Joy stating they were obeying their Kingsguard vow. The heart of a Kingsguard's vow is to protect the king. With Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon dead, the new king would have been Viserys, unless Lyanna's child was legitimate making him the new king of the Targaryen dynasty.
 For a comprehensive analysis of Jon's legitimacy, see the detailed explanations in the two linked articles.

But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?
The practice was never made illegal and there may have been some less prominent examples after Maegor, as stated in this SSM. Furthermore, Jorah suggests it to Dany as a viable option. 

Weren't the Kingsguard at Tower of Joy on the basis of an order from Aerys, to guard Lyanna as a hostage?
Aerys was sane enough to realize how taking someone hostage works even at the end of the Rebellion, and he would hardly miss the opportunity to bring Ned and Robert in line any time after the situation started to look really serious.
 Furthermore, regardless of on whose order the Kingsguard might have stayed at Tower of Joy, they would still be in dereliction of their duty to guard the new king.

This theory is too obvious and too many people believe it to be fact. How can it be true?
The theory is not obvious to the majority of readers. Some will get it on first read, most will not. Keep in mind that readers who go to online fan forums, such as this one, represent a very small minority of the A Song of Ice and Fire readership. Also, A Game of Thrones has been out since 1996. That's more than 17 years of readers being able to piece together this mystery.

Why doesn't Ned ever think about Lyanna being Jon's mother?
Ned doesn't think about anyone as being his mother. He says the name 'Wylla' to Robert, but does not actively think that Wylla is the mother. He also doesn't think of Jon as his son. There are numerous mysteries in the series, and Jon's parentage is one of those. If Ned thought about Jon being Lyanna's son, it would not be a mystery.

Why should we care who Jon's parents are? Will Jon careWho cares if he's legitimate?
Once one accepts that the evidence is conclusive and that Jon's parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna and that he is most probably legitimate, these become the important questions.

Previous editions:

 

Please click on the spoiler below to reveal links to all previous editions of this thread.

 

Spoiler


Edited by Kat, 30 March 2014 - 06:29 PM.


#2 Ghost's Shadow

Ghost's Shadow

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,376 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 06:41 PM

Thanks to the both of you! ;)



#3 Kevvy

Kevvy

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 208 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 09:26 PM

If R+L=J is a given, why do we need 77 threads on it?  :commie:



#4 Ross The Fiddler

Ross The Fiddler

    Sheepherder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,101 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 10:12 PM

Agreed^

 

77 threads is absurd.  However, it is a discussion board so I can't hate too hard.



#5 Sir Dominus

Sir Dominus

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 10:55 PM

There are always more people to reveal the truth to about Jon's true heritage and/or destiny.

#6 aDanceWithFlagons

aDanceWithFlagons

    The music our collisions make!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 819 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 12:37 AM

Agreed^
 
77 threads is absurd.  However, it is a discussion board so I can't hate too hard.


True. It is a discussion board, but this is not a discussion thread, in my opinion. If you ask a question, you will probably be directed to the list of basic points of old on the first page. If you disagree with the list and/or a lot of the posters here, your arguments will be considered old and referred back to the list. If you continue asking/disagreeing.... So just read the list and post only if you decide it is everything you need. Good Luck!

This is my short experience here. A couple of months back I looked into the threads after hearing much about this subject. After reading and asking questions and not agreeing with all the answers, I (see previous paragraph for the answer.)

I do believe (now we're gettin' into my beliefs system) Lyanna is probably Jon's mother and Rhaegar is possibly his father, but there are a lot of unknowns in the theory. I also believe Ned promised his dying sister to raise her son as his own son. If Ned told anyone the truth, he would break his promise made to his sister on her deathbed. I do not believe Lyanna was occupying the Tower of Joy the entire time she was missing in action.

Edited by aDanceWithFlagons, 31 March 2014 - 12:39 AM.


#7 Winds of Winter blow cold

Winds of Winter blow cold

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,111 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 12:45 AM

If R+L=J is a given, why do we need 77 threads on it?  :commie:

Because we would miss it if it were gone.



#8 Jon Weirgaryen

Jon Weirgaryen

    Crouching Tigrewolf & Hidden Dragon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 01:27 AM

If R+L=J is a given, why do we need 77 threads on it?  :commie:

 

Honestly, it is a theory, it is also unconfirmed.

 

Not too bad, the creator of the world has not yet confirmed most theories like gravity...

 

But quite like gravity, we keep discovering some new small facts and hints in almost every of these threads, and may have do dismiss ones we started the theory upon when new data comes in.



#9 Red.Queen

Red.Queen

    Queen of Everything

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 01:58 AM

If R+L=J is a given, why do we need 77 threads on it?  :commie:

1- There are always newbies who aren't familiar with this theory and they want to see it explained.

2- There are people who refuse to believe it and keep coming up with alternative theories.

3- There are always little details to explore.



#10 FrozenFire3

FrozenFire3

    Kai su, teknon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 910 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 03:30 AM

1- There are always newbies who aren't familiar with this theory and they want to see it explained.

2- There are people who refuse to believe it and keep coming up with alternative theories.

3- There are always little details to explore.

 

Absolutely. Not to mention new textual and meta-textual little gems/discoveries popping up on a regular basis: these books are an inexhaustible mine of symbolisms, parallels, recurring patterns and narrative.

On a side note, I do enjoy discussion and analysis here, thank you. My restless mind never stops learning and being challenged. It's slightly creepy that the very existance of a thread is called into discussion. Especially considering the cyclical cloning on these boards of 'hate for the sake of hate' threads.



#11 Rhaenys_Targaryen

Rhaenys_Targaryen

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,595 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 03:47 AM

1- There are always newbies who aren't familiar with this theory and they want to see it explained.

2- There are people who refuse to believe it and keep coming up with alternative theories.

3- There are always little details to explore.

 

Yes, every now and then, someone finds something new that points to R+L=J.. Even after 77 threads :)



#12 J. Stargaryen

J. Stargaryen

    Ice Dragon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,515 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 03:51 AM

True. It is a discussion board, but this is not a discussion thread, in my opinion. If you ask a question, you will probably be directed to the list of basic points of old on the first page. If you disagree with the list and/or a lot of the posters here, your arguments will be considered old and referred back to the list. If you continue asking/disagreeing.... So just read the list and post only if you decide it is everything you need. Good Luck!

This is my short experience here. A couple of months back I looked into the threads after hearing much about this subject. After reading and asking questions and not agreeing with all the answers, I (see previous paragraph for the answer.)

I do believe (now we're gettin' into my beliefs system) Lyanna is probably Jon's mother and Rhaegar is possibly his father, but there are a lot of unknowns in the theory. I also believe Ned promised his dying sister to raise her son as his own son. If Ned told anyone the truth, he would break his promise made to his sister on her deathbed. I do not believe Lyanna was occupying the Tower of Joy the entire time she was missing in action.

 

This is completely standard internet protocol. Hey, I have a question. Okay, here is a link containing the answer.

 

Believe it or not, a lot of the same objections/ideas/alternatives have been brought up numerous times before. As it turns out, there is often a known refutation to this objection/idea/alternative. And frankly, I think that upsets a lot of people. And then R+L=Jers come off as jerks to that person because we didn't give them the validation they were seeking. I'm not saying that was necessarily the case here, though. Just in general.

 

An example of the 'known refutation' point is the possibility that Lyanna was already pregnant when Rhaegar made off with her. To which the answer is: No, the timeline definitively rules this out. Which is then verified by referring to the Citadel link on page 1.

 

Now sometimes, I think we could be nicer. Of course that probably applies to every aspect of the internet as well as life. But, on balance, I think the regulars here have demonstrated a great deal of patience and willingness to help out those who genuinely want it. But, we are human, and prone to things like frustration. Which can happen when people refuse to admit that their idea is impossible based on what we know.

 

An example of the above is the user who not too long ago insisted that Jon Snow was the real Aegon, which does not work due to the difference in age between the two.



#13 Chebyshov

Chebyshov

    in charge of feasts and frolics

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,809 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 07:59 AM

On theme of "more details to explore," and I'm sorry if this is a noob question (still new here), but what is the deal with Borrell's "fisherman's daughter" story? I certainly don't think it discounts the overwhelming R+L=J evidence, but I have a difficult time making sense of it. Why would Ned need secret passage to the fingers from the Bite (in the North/Eyrie where he was protected)? I'm guessing people just made assumptions about what happened with the daughter, but what are everyone's thoughts on this story?



#14 Consigliere

Consigliere

    Green and Gold

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 08:11 AM

On theme of "more details to explore," and I'm sorry if this is a noob question (still new here), but what is the deal with Borrell's "fisherman's daughter" story? I certainly don't think it discounts the overwhelming R+L=J evidence, but I have a difficult time making sense of it. Why would Ned need secret passage to the fingers from the Bite (in the North/Eyrie where he was protected)? I'm guessing people just made assumptions about what happened with the daughter, but what are everyone's thoughts on this story?

From ADwD:

 

"At the dawn of Robert’s Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark’s head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite.”

 

Regarding the fisherman's daughter, their alleged meeting would have taken place at the start of the rebellion (when Jon Arryn called his banners) in 282AC. The rebellion lasted for approximately a year. Jon was born in 283AC sometime around the Sack of KL. So the timeline does not fit for the fisherman's daughter to be Jons mother

 



#15 Chebyshov

Chebyshov

    in charge of feasts and frolics

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,809 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 08:14 AM

From ADwD:

 

"At the dawn of Robert’s Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark’s head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite.”

 

Regarding the fisherman's daughter, their alleged meeting would have taken place at the start of the rebellion (when Jon Arryn called his banners) in 282AC. The rebellion lasted for approximately a year. Jon was born in 283AC sometime around the Sack of KL. So the timeline does not fit for the fisherman's daughter to be Jons mother

 

 

Thanks! Very succinct response. I must have missed that ADWD passage somehow. 



#16 WhiteWalder

WhiteWalder

    Giving seed to goat milkers

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 741 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 08:46 AM

From ADwD:

 

"At the dawn of Robert’s Rebellion. The Mad King had sent to the Eyrie for Stark’s head, but Jon Arryn sent him back defiance. Gulltown stayed loyal to the throne, though. To get home and call his banners, Stark had to cross the mountains to the Fingers and find a fisherman to carry him across the Bite.”

 

Regarding the fisherman's daughter, their alleged meeting would have taken place at the start of the rebellion (when Jon Arryn called his banners) in 282AC. The rebellion lasted for approximately a year. Jon was born in 283AC sometime around the Sack of KL. So the timeline does not fit for the fisherman's daughter to be Jons mother

 

I've seen the argument several times.  The timeline fits if you take into account that the fisherman's daughter could have traveled most of the way back to WF with Ned. 



#17 jet199

jet199

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 09:22 AM

On theme of "more details to explore," and I'm sorry if this is a noob question (still new here), but what is the deal with Borrell's "fisherman's daughter" story? I certainly don't think it discounts the overwhelming R+L=J evidence, but I have a difficult time making sense of it. Why would Ned need secret passage to the fingers from the Bite (in the North/Eyrie where he was protected)? I'm guessing people just made assumptions about what happened with the daughter, but what are everyone's thoughts on this story?

I think it is perfectly possible that Ned does have a bastard but that doesn't mean it has to be Jon. If Jon is Ned's only acknowledged bastard and his real bastard is hidden then people are going to assume that the fisherman's grandchild and Jon are one and the same.

 

“You were never the boy you were,” Robert grumbled. “More’s the pity. And yet there was that one time … what was her name, that common girl of yours? Becca? No, she was one of mine, gods love her, black hair and these sweet big eyes, you could drown in them. Yours was … Aleena? No. You told me once. Was it Merryl? You know the one I mean, your bastard’s mother?

“Her name was Wylla,” Ned replied with cool courtesy, 

 

Ned doesn't say that Wylla is Jon's mother but gives her name in answer to the question of who his "bastard's mother" is. If Ned did have a fling with a fisherman's daughter then he was telling Robert the truth while keeping silent about Jon's origins. Arya talks of visits to White Harbour to see her cousins but the Starks don't seem to have gone out of their way to visit other family members so it might be that Ned's bastard is hidden there.



#18 Chebyshov

Chebyshov

    in charge of feasts and frolics

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,809 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 09:29 AM

Warning: apc_store(): Unable to allocate memory for pool. in /home/sites/westeros.org/forum_web/ips_kernel/classCacheApc.php on line 72

 

I think it is perfectly possible that Ned does have a bastard but that doesn't mean it has to be Jon. If Jon is Ned's only acknowledged bastard and his real bastard is hidden then people are going to assume that the fisherman's grandchild and Jon are one and the same.

 

“You were never the boy you were,” Robert grumbled. “More’s the pity. And yet there was that one time … what was her name, that common girl of yours? Becca? No, she was one of mine, gods love her, black hair and these sweet big eyes, you could drown in them. Yours was … Aleena? No. You told me once. Was it Merryl? You know the one I mean, your bastard’s mother?

“Her name was Wylla,” Ned replied with cool courtesy, 

 

Ned doesn't say that Wylla is Jon's mother but gives her name in answer to the question of who his "bastard's mother" is. If Ned did have a fling with a fisherman's daughter then he was telling Robert the truth while keeping silent about Jon's origins. Arya talks of visits to White Harbour to see her cousins but the Starks don't seem to have gone out of their way to visit other family members so it might be that Ned's bastard is hidden there.

 

But Wylla was Jon's wet-nurse (according to Edric Dayne). So if Wylla is the fisherman's daughter like you're suggesting, she was knocked up at the beginning of the war up North, and then found Ned in Dorne at the end of the war to nurse Jon? Or are there two Wyllas? Also, does it sound like Ned to leave a woman with "a bastard in her belly and a bag of silver." Seems to go against his sense of honor (as does fathering a bastard). I just have a hard time buying this one.



#19 Jon Weirgaryen

Jon Weirgaryen

    Crouching Tigrewolf & Hidden Dragon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 09:36 AM

Warning: apc_store(): Unable to allocate memory for pool. in /home/sites/westeros.org/forum_web/ips_kernel/classCacheApc.php on line 72

 

oh well, let's see then...

 

Ned doesn't say that Wylla is Jon's mother but gives her name in answer to the question of who his "bastard's mother" is. If Ned did have a fling with a fisherman's daughter then he was telling Robert the truth while keeping silent about Jon's origins. Arya talks of visits to White Harbour to see her cousins but the Starks don't seem to have gone out of their way to visit other family members so it might be that Ned's bastard is hidden there.

 

Hmm...

 

I've seen the argument several times.  The timeline fits if you take into account that the fisherman's daughter could have traveled most of the way back to WF with Ned. 

 

Bright conclusion, so why wouldn't the story be told in Winterfell instead of The Sisters.

So probably only zhe in situ on the beach version was viable, if it was at all.



#20 Ygrain

Ygrain

    One who prefers walking around unlabelled

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,666 posts

Posted 31 March 2014 - 09:39 AM

Warning: apc_store(): Unable to allocate memory for pool. in /home/sites/westeros.org/forum_web/ips_kernel/classCacheApc.php on line 72

 

Warning: apc_store(): Unable to allocate memory for pool. in /home/sites/westeros.org/forum_web/ips_kernel/classCacheApc.php on line 72

 

 

But Wylla was Jon's wet-nurse (according to Edric Dayne). So if Wylla is the fisherman's daughter like you're suggesting, she was knocked up at the beginning of the war up North, and then found Ned in Dorne at the end of the war to nurse Jon? Or are there two Wyllas? Also, does it sound like Ned to leave a woman with "a bastard in her belly and a bag of silver." Seems to go against his sense of honor (as does fathering a bastard). I just have a hard time buying this one.

“Her name was Wylla,” Ned replied with cool courtesy, “and I would sooner not speak of her.”
“Wylla. Yes.” The king grinned. “She must have been a rare wench if she could make Lord Eddard Stark forget his honor, even for an hour.
You never told me what she looked like …”
Ned’s mouth tightened in anger. “Nor will I. Leave it be, Robert, for the love you say you bear me. I dishonored myself and I dishonored Catelyn, in the sight of gods and men.
“Gods have mercy, you scarcely knew Catelyn.”
I had taken her to wife. She was carrying my child.”
 
Ned met the fisherman's daughter before he wed and impregnated Catelyn, so the timeline doesn't fit again, and if FMD was tagging along the whole time, there is no way the good folks of Winterfell wouldn't have noticed.