R+L=J v.92

[Attitude]

If she had known the true, then she would know Jon is Ned's nephew, and even legitimate if the allegations of L and R being married are correct. I doubt she would do it.

Releasing Jamie, (one of) the most unreliable person in the eyes of the people of westeros and especially the North, but not sending her nephew (bastard or not)? At a point she only had Robb left. Her daughters were in KL (as far as she knew) and her other sons were death. Robb was in a war and it didn't look like he was winning it, so if her only chance at that point to get her daughters back (so she 'has' 3 children again instead of 1) was trading Jon for them. She'd do it.

[KingofSothoryos]

I think there is a distinct difference between freeing the Kingslayer against Robb's wishes and sending Jon to his certain death in a trade for the Stark girls with Tywin Lannister. I think its true Cat was desperate but I don't think she'd go as far as to sacrifice Ned's nephew for her girls, that would not uphold the Tully words of Family, Duty, Honor!

[redrose]

Releasing Jamie, (one of) the most unreliable person in the eyes of the people of westeros and especially the North, but not sending her nephew (bastard or not)? At a point she only had Robb left. Her daughters were in KL (as far as she knew) and her other sons were death. Robb was in a war and it didn't look like he was winning it, so if her only chance at that point to get her daughters back (so she 'has' 3 children again instead of 1) was trading Jon for them. She'd do it.

Interesting theoretical argument! But let's not forget that John is a member of the nights watch at this point and is out of reach of the westerosi politics:)

[The guy from the Vale]

When did Tywin ever care about the neutrality of the NW? Or Cersei, for that matter? Both wanted to send their pawns up there to entangle them in their politics - Slynt and Kettleblack, to be precise.

I love Cat. But I think in this hypothetical situation, she definitely would have done the trade. Ned was absolutely right in not telling her. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.

[Attitude]

I think there is a distinct difference between freeing the Kingslayer against Robb's wishes and sending Jon to his certain death in a trade for the Stark girls with Tywin Lannister. I think its true Cat was desperate but I don't think she'd go as far as to sacrifice Ned's nephew for her girls, that would not uphold the Tully words of Family, Duty, Honor!

Actually, it would uphold the words. Family goes first, and then I am safe to say; children before nephews. Sansa/Arya are children of a big house, Jon is just a nephew.

And it isn't true that it would be a certain death. Westeros has accepted Robert/Joffrey/Tommen as their king (maybe Joffrey not because of his personality, but he is the rightful heir in their eyes). Therefor Jon isn't really a threat at that point, just a potential one. It would make the grip on the martells a bit more firm, they might even use Jon as a way to persue the Dorne to make a 100% alliance with the Lannisters (F)Baratheon.

Interesting theoretical argument! But let's not forget that John is a member of the nights watch at this point and is out of reach of the westerosi politics:)

That of course is true. However I'm not sure Jon would go to the wall if he wasn't a bastard. He did that because he felt he would never be like everyone else, because he was a bastard. He was always treated as a bastard at official occasions and always by Cat. At the wall everyone is equal.

[Dorian Martell]

Hodor

[FrozenFire3]

When did Tywin ever care about the neutrality of the NW? Or Cersei, for that matter? Both wanted to send their pawns up there to entangle them in their politics - Slynt and Kettleblack, to be precise.

I love Cat. But I think in this hypothetical situation, she definitely would have done the trade. Ned was absolutely right in not telling her. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.

:agree: Interesting enough, Ned's musings are echoed by the following Jon-Sam exchange:

"Jon, could there be honor in a lie, if it were told for a . . . a good purpose?"

"It would depend on the lie and the purpose, I suppose."

And in both cases we are dealing with disguising children's identity...

[sj4iy]

Yeah, I don't think it was coincidence that Jon did pretty much the same thing Ned did to him...force a prince to live life as a bastard to save him. That will definitely come back to him when he finds out about himself.

[Attitude]

Funny, Jon took more revenge for his 'father' (which is actually his uncle) then Robb. Robb did nothing but follow his dick and got killed for it. Jon did what was right and beheaded Slynt.

Jon is more honorable then Robb, this means honor isn't just inherited, but more raising/parenting. Maybe because Jon was treated as a bastard, things got through to him. Robb was heir to winterfel from the day he was born, and that made him arrogant (especially in comparison to Jon). This eventually ended up in Robb's death. How ironic.

[corbon]

@Corbon

I still think the WB makes sense as a reveal to the masses in Westeros about R+L=J, regardless of show or book. HR will let the reader know.

So when pointed out the reasons why something is highly unlikely your response is to ignore the facts and just state that you think it still makes sense that will be the reveal?

And asking for a link for such a strong statement isn't unheard of.

I don't disagree. Just that this is old news and was linked to a dozen or so times within the last few days. Then someone comes in late and starts yelling...

Yes, but that's so not Aerys. He covers his ends, even in his madness.

Does he? Care to cite an exhaustive list of examples?

I think you are imputing something we have no evidence for, and I can't even see where you are getting your imputation from.

We do, but one could assume that he was required to return to the king, having fulfilled his mission, because KG protection can only be given by the king himself.

Why would we make an assumption which has no foundation and causes problems with the narrative when if we follow the actual evidence we have we have no problems with the narrative?

I'm actually seeing a pattern here. It seems very much like you have decided a narrative of your own, one that doesn't necessarily have evidence to support certain details within it, but when something comes up that doesn't mesh with those details you throw out questions at the larger narrative picture picture rather than taking a second look at the extra details you've added in that introduce those issues. Am I being unfair?

Do you agree with me that the three KG knew about everything that had happened, including the death of Rhaegar and the sack of KL?

Yes, its pretty clear from the conversation with Ned, that by the time Ned arrived they knew it all.

Also, I never thought about it, but maybe they waited to see if the baby was a boy or girl. That being said, I'd still think their duty would be to go to Viserys if they knew Rhaegar and Aerys were dead, unless they saw R+L get married and was legitimized and crowned before birth, which conflicts with my previous statement.

Indeed. Unless they know R+L were married, their duty demands that one of them at least go to Viserys as soon as they hear the news of the Sack.

No I don't think he can order them. All 7 do as the king pleases.

Logically they must have to follow his orders to some extent. He's the crown prince, far senior to them in every way and not in the presence of the king. Its an unworkable situation to have the sort of incredibly hidebound organisation that only one person can give them orders ever and they must follow those orders, and only those orders, strictly to the letter, no matter what the situation, even when their original orders are in conflict with the local situation or create difficulties or run against the spirit of their orders or their vows.

No, what happens is that you have the KG, especially the ones assigned to Rhaegar, taking Rhaegar's orders when they are detatched from the King, so long as those orders don't conflict with the King's orders or their vows.

It is, after all, part of their duties to follow orders.

Your position isn't just "all 7 do as the King pleases", but, whether you realise it or not, "all 7 do exactly and only as the king commands regardless of everything". And thats just not workable for any sort of organisation.

The mad king is essentially Howard Hughes. So I work from that starting point. That aside, I feel like he might have lost control of the KG near the end, that the three survivors (not including Barry and Jamie) were not following his orders. Many like to cite Hightower, but even he has to have a breaking point, I'm sure, and since the Hightowers place such a high value on knowledge and books that maybe Rhaegar showed him something that changed his mind.

There is no evidence he 'lost control' of the KG. They are all following their last known orders when they die and provided R+L were married none are breaking their vows or going against even the spirit of their known orders.

Hightower at the end reiterates that they still serve Aerys faithfully.

There is no indication that Hightower was ordered to return, no logic that he must have been and no indication that he thought he was breaking his vows at any time. The information we have allows all this, so why are you introducing new and illogical data that throws a spanner in the works? We know what happened, more or less. We should be hypothesising assumptions that fit with that, not assumptions that break it.

I've argued that Rhaegar does not have authority over Dayne and Whent, but if they are his personal body guard, which again I disagree with, then I feel like they also were supposed to come back with Rhaegar and he told them to stay, defying Aerys.

Its not 'defying Aerys' if they consider Rhaegar protected (he has the other 4KG to allocate to himself and Aerys) and Rhaegar gives them another task.

Don't forget, Rhaegar was brought back specifically to take charge of the war. That includes force allocation unless anything specifically is required otherwise by Aerys' orders or the KG vow.

So as long as we use the information we have, and don't create information that we don't have, eveything fits.

These feel like parts to a mutiny. Many counter this with how highyl Ned regards the three KG, but he couldn't have known the internal politics of the KG.

It only feels like a mutiny because you've invented a number of data points that don't exist. Leave them out of the picture and the narrative remains true. As theKG reiterate to Ned, they remain faithful to the Targaryen dynasty and Aerys in particular.

Maybe. I still think once the mission is accomplished he's required to return to base for new orders. Your argument implies a general can supersede a commander in chief.

Thats that extra data you've invented causing the wrinkle again. Take away the invention and the wrinkle goes away. First, Rhaegar could easily have made it a condition of his returning that Hightower guard his pregnant wife. Thus Hightower is stuck there or he can't fulfill his orders from Aerys. There is an example for you of a wrinkle added/assumption made that fits with the known data, not works against it.

Second, there is no reason at all that Rhaegar can't give the KG general orders, so long as those orders do not contradict the Kings orders or the KG vows. And ordering Hightower to stay would not do either unless Aerys specifically ordered Hightower to return to KL, which is not the data we have.

Jon would have to be rather old, and Lyanna survived a long time, or Ned arrived right as all this happens. Neither work for me.

Both are likely wrong, learn the timeline a little. It sounds like it works for you if you understand it. The best guess is Jon was born probably between 2 weeks (10 days or so extended a little) and a few days before Ned arrived

This is the hardest part to analyze. He is honor bound like Ned, but I've taken it as he converts to supporting Rhaegar, or he knows the babes are dead and has seen Jon legitimized (this would happen way before Jon was born). Otherwise he's betraying Aerys.

He's not betraying Aerys by the data we have, only by your unsupported additional ideas. He reiterates he is fulfilling his vows, and his support of Aerys at the very end.

Please stop

The only way to stop trolls is ignore them. And even thats a slow process.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

:agree: Interesting enough, Ned's musings are echoed by the following Jon-Sam exchange:

And in both cases we are dealing with disguising children's identity...

:agree:

The parallels in the situations are notable. As far as lies with honor go, let's recall what Ned told Arya about chasing Nymeria away and lying to the King to protect her:

"It was right,” her father said. “And even the lie was... not without honor."

Since we later see him lying to Cersei in an effort to protect his daughters, it seems this is a theme with Ned. Why would we doubt his willingness to lie to Cat when we know "He had lived his lies for fourteen years" ? The lie would be a form of protection for her (as in the quote tgftv cited "Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.")

Another thing we should remember is Ned's lingering doubt about the lengths Cat would go to in order to protect her own children:

Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would.

The knowledge of Jon's identity is a dangerous secret. Sharing it with Cat might put her in danger (make her an accessory) but it might also put her in the position Ned prayed she would never be-- having to choose between Jon's life and those of her own children.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

So when pointed out the reasons why something is highly unlikely your response is to ignore the facts and just state that you think it still makes sense that will be the reveal?

I don't disagree. Just that this is old news and was linked to a dozen or so times within the last few days. Then someone comes in late and starts yelling...

Does he? Care to cite an exhaustive list of examples?

I think you are imputing something we have no evidence for, and I can't even see where you are getting your imputation from.

Why would we make an assumption which has no foundation and causes problems with the narrative when if we follow the actual evidence we have we have no problems with the narrative?

I'm actually seeing a pattern here. It seems very much like you have decided a narrative of your own, one that doesn't necessarily have evidence to support certain details within it, but when something comes up that doesn't mesh with those details you throw out questions at the larger narrative picture picture rather than taking a second look at the extra details you've added in that introduce those issues. Am I being unfair?

Yes, its pretty clear from the conversation with Ned, that by the time Ned arrived they knew it all.

Indeed. Unless they know R+L were married, their duty demands that one of them at least go to Viserys as soon as they hear the news of the Sack.

Logically they must have to follow his orders to some extent. He's the crown prince, far senior to them in every way and not in the presence of the king. Its an unworkable situation to have the sort of incredibly hidebound organisation that only one person can give them orders ever and they must follow those orders, and only those orders, strictly to the letter, no matter what the situation, even when their original orders are in conflict with the local situation or create difficulties or run against the spirit of their orders or their vows.

No, what happens is that you have the KG, especially the ones assigned to Rhaegar, taking Rhaegar's orders when they are detatched from the King, so long as those orders don't conflict with the King's orders or their vows.

It is, after all, part of their duties to follow orders.

Your position isn't just "all 7 do as the King pleases", but, whether you realise it or not, "all 7 do exactly and only as the king commands regardless of everything". And thats just not workable for any sort of organisation.

There is no evidence he 'lost control' of the KG. They are all following their last known orders when they die and provided R+L were married none are breaking their vows or going against even the spirit of their known orders.

Hightower at the end reiterates that they still serve Aerys faithfully.

There is no indication that Hightower was ordered to return, no logic that he must have been and no indication that he thought he was breaking his vows at any time. The information we have allows all this, so why are you introducing new and illogical data that throws a spanner in the works? We know what happened, more or less. We should be hypothesising assumptions that fit with that, not assumptions that break it.

Its not 'defying Aerys' if they consider Rhaegar protected (he has the other 4KG to allocate to himself and Aerys) and Rhaegar gives them another task.

Don't forget, Rhaegar was brought back specifically to take charge of the war. That includes force allocation unless anything specifically is required otherwise by Aerys' orders or the KG vow.

So as long as we use the information we have, and don't create information that we don't have, eveything fits.

It only feels like a mutiny because you've invented a number of data points that don't exist. Leave them out of the picture and the narrative remains true. As theKG reiterate to Ned, they remain faithful to the Targaryen dynasty and Aerys in particular.

Thats that extra data you've invented causing the wrinkle again. Take away the invention and the wrinkle goes away. First, Rhaegar could easily have made it a condition of his returning that Hightower guard his pregnant wife. Thus Hightower is stuck there or he can't fulfill his orders from Aerys. There is an example for you of a wrinkle added/assumption made that fits with the known data, not works against it.

Second, there is no reason at all that Rhaegar can't give the KG general orders, so long as those orders do not contradict the Kings orders or the KG vows. And ordering Hightower to stay would not do either unless Aerys specifically ordered Hightower to return to KL, which is not the data we have.

Both are likely wrong, learn the timeline a little. It sounds like it works for you if you understand it. The best guess is Jon was born probably between 2 weeks (10 days or so extended a little) and a few days before Ned arrived

He's not betraying Aerys by the data we have, only by your unsupported additional ideas. He reiterates he is fulfilling his vows, and his support of Aerys at the very end.

The only way to stop trolls is ignore them. And even thats a slow process.

:lmao:

How much time did you waste writing this?

[Shinjuku Thief]

Good points, corbon.

[IceFire125]

:agree:

The parallels in the situations are notable. As far as lies with honor go, let's recall what Ned told Arya about chasing Nymeria away and lying to the King to protect her:

"It was right,” her father said. “And even the lie was... not without honor."

Since we later see him lying to Cersei in an effort to protect his daughters, it seems this is a theme with Ned. Why would we doubt his willingness to lie to Cat when we know "He had lived his lies for fourteen years" ? The lie would be a form of protection for her (as in the quote tgftv cited "Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.")

Another thing we should remember is Ned's lingering doubt about the lengths Cat would go to in order to protect her own children:

Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would.

The knowledge of Jon's identity is a dangerous secret. Sharing it with Cat might put her in danger (make her an accessory) but it might also put her in the position Ned prayed she would never be-- having to choose between Jon's life and those of her own children.

I completely agree.

Ned's thoughts during his confessional talk with Cersei and when he was at the dungeon thinking wanting to see and talk to Jon once more, I would also add his thoughts at Lady's killing and when he was meeting the prostitute with Robert's child, and even the subtlety of when Benjen noticed Ned not being in a festive mood during the feast when Robert visited Winterfell, was due to the usurper and the rightful heir sitting in the same room. These were big clues of Ned's heavy burden and secret, to play the lie for the promise he made to his sister.

The detractors/doubters of Jon being royalty, always gloss these heavy thoughts of Ned so easily.

- That if Jon was a bastard of Rhaegar, there wouldn't be such a burden for Ned in those years, there was no threat to Ned, Cat, their children and Jon, to the Baratheon Crown.

- If Jon was Brandon's and Ashara's son, it even furthers the point, there wouldn't be the burden for Ned to go through, again, no threat to the Crown.

- Add to the behaviors of the 3KGs at the tower, the dramatic irony of statements Jon says to Arya and Sam, the foreshadowing hints and clues of the hidden dragon & king.

All these factors do add up strongly pointing Jon as the true heir and the rightful King, but only if you put all of these together. And thus, they are justified in leading to Ned's burden. They were the reasons for me to recognize that not only R+L=J, but R+L= legitimate J.

[Attitude]

All these factors do add up strongly pointing Jon as the true heir and the rightful King, but only if you put all of these together. And thus, they are justified in leading to Ned's burden. They were the reasons for me to recognize that not only R+L=J, but R+L= legitimate J.

I have to agree on that. I never figured it out myself. I just read the books and was like; alright Jon is a bastard but at least he's doing a great job at the wall (up to his last page). That's it.

But then I started reading on the internet and after the first speculations I read I was quite sure. I didn't have to hear every debate about 'who was at the ToJ and who wasn't'. Things that Ned doesn't call Jon his son, but his blood. The 'bed of blood', the fact he thinks about Jon at certain event, he still wanted to talk to Jon, never talking about his mother. Those facts were clear enough for me. If you add the deeper thoughts to that, it's very clear.

GRRM rewrites his sentences so often. He has put in 'my blood' knowing what it meant. Won't even start about al the other small hints.

The only thing that would make it NOT true, was if it turns out that Ned was delirious at the ToJ or something similar. So that it turns out that everything Ned tought was true, was a illusion created by himself. But that would be very lame and wouldn't fit in the story nor in Ned's character.

[UnmaskedLurker]

:lmao:

How much time did you waste writing this?

It is a waste only because you are so stubborn, you cannot see the obvious correctness in corbon's analysis. I think for those of us with an open mind who are using logic and deductive reasoning to sort through the issues, corbon's time was not wasted. But his time clearly was wasted on you.

[Jon_Samwell_Snow]

92 threads! I think we will be at hundred sooner than we will think.

What are we talking about now?

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

So when pointed out the reasons why something is highly unlikely your response is to ignore the facts and just state that you think it still makes sense that will be the reveal?

What did I ignore? I never said my idea about the WB was fact. I said it seemed like it could work. I also asked for information, and expanded my idea based on what people responded.

Again, what is so unlikely about Jamie reading the WB and further inquiring about why the three KG died in Dorne, away from the raging war?

Does he? Care to cite an exhaustive list of examples?

I think you are imputing something we have no evidence for, and I can't even see where you are getting your imputation from.

We have some examples that Aerys is a schemer. Some work, some don't. I love these assertions of falsifying information though.

My implication for this exact situation is it seems unlikely Aerys would give a very loose order to Hightower. I am clearly not the only person who thinks Hightower might have been implied to return.

Why would we make an assumption which has no foundation and causes problems with the narrative when if we follow the actual evidence we have we have no problems with the narrative?

To make theories work, you have to at times guess things that happen off camera/off the page. That's very different from saying everything must happen as you say.

My guess here in no way effects the greater narrative. Hightower is at the ToJ, and that's what matters. We were nip picking if Rhaegar commanded him to stay.

I'm actually seeing a pattern here. It seems very much like you have decided a narrative of your own, one that doesn't necessarily have evidence to support certain details within it, but when something comes up that doesn't mesh with those details you throw out questions at the larger narrative picture picture rather than taking a second look at the extra details you've added in that introduce those issues. Am I being unfair?

Well I was developing a THOUGHT. So yes, you are. And again, nothing I stated is blatantly wrong. They are concepts people have debated for years, and the information is not clear enough to make absolutist claims.

At this point I'm wondering why you're freaking over two points I've made:

1. We don't know Hightower's motivations, since we are never in his head and only have a hand full of quotes from him. Basically, all we know is honor comes first, second and third for him.

2. Jamie reads the WB and pieces together R+L=J. Scandalous, I know. What an evil, vicious theory to explore. Since, the only thing stopping it is Jamie's desire to read.

Indeed. Unless they know R+L were married, their duty demands that one of them at least go to Viserys as soon as they hear the news of the Sack.

Now after agreeing with a few things I've said, am I still such a monster?

Also, this highlights the vagueness in the KG's responsibilities. True, the royal family needs a KG, but who determines their movements at this point?

Logically they must have to follow his orders to some extent. He's the crown prince, far senior to them in every way and not in the presence of the king. Its an unworkable situation to have the sort of incredibly hidebound organisation that only one person can give them orders ever and they must follow those orders, and only those orders, strictly to the letter, no matter what the situation, even when their original orders are in conflict with the local situation or create difficulties or run against the spirit of their orders or their vows.

No, what happens is that you have the KG, especially the ones assigned to Rhaegar, taking Rhaegar's orders when they are detatched from the King, so long as those orders don't conflict with the King's orders or their vows.

It is, after all, part of their duties to follow orders.

Your position isn't just "all 7 do as the King pleases", but, whether you realise it or not, "all 7 do exactly and only as the king commands regardless of everything". And thats just not workable for any sort of organisation.

Logically, in the absence of a royal command from the King, the prince probably has some leeway to command the KG. I was just saying Rhaegar's commands cannot void Aerys' otherwise it would be treason. If you go back and read closely, I never said this actually happened. I said IF.

And in that sense, yes, in the presence of the king, the 7 must do exactly what he says.

There is no evidence he 'lost control' of the KG. They are all following their last known orders when they die and provided R+L were married none are breaking their vows or going against even the spirit of their known orders.

Hightower at the end reiterates that they still serve Aerys faithfully.

There is no indication that Hightower was ordered to return, no logic that he must have been and no indication that he thought he was breaking his vows at any time. The information we have allows all this, so why are you introducing new and illogical data that throws a spanner in the works? We know what happened, more or less. We should be hypothesising assumptions that fit with that, not assumptions that break it.

It was a guess at one possible scenario. Stop taking everything to the literal extreme. Notice I almost always preface my statements with MIGHT.

And you said it yourself. We know, more or less. We have a fever induced dream and a few glimpses of conversations.

Its not 'defying Aerys' if they consider Rhaegar protected (he has the other 4KG to allocate to himself and Aerys) and Rhaegar gives them another task.

Don't forget, Rhaegar was brought back specifically to take charge of the war. That includes force allocation unless anything specifically is required otherwise by Aerys' orders or the KG vow.

So as long as we use the information we have, and don't create information that we don't have, eveything fits.

Actually I goofed on this one, you're right. I had meant to say Aerys might have assumed that if Rhaegar was returning, then his KG would too. But since it seems it wasn't explicitly ordered, then I'm probably wrong.

On a side note, Rhaegar left long before Jon's birth, right? What if there were complications and Jon didn't survive. Seems like a bad idea to leave three KG, especially Dayne. Don't forget, if Rhaegar slays Bobby B, then the ToJ wouldn't need to be heavily guarded because the Targs likely win the war.

It only feels like a mutiny because you've invented a number of data points that don't exist. Leave them out of the picture and the narrative remains true. As theKG reiterate to Ned, they remain faithful to the Targaryen dynasty and Aerys in particular.

You really are a fan of overstatements. But yes, that is true, their intentions don't really change anything..

Also, they could have given up on Aerys, still protested what Jamie did, and defend the Targ dynasty by staying and guarding Jon, at the same time.

Thats that extra data you've invented causing the wrinkle again. Take away the invention and the wrinkle goes away. First, Rhaegar could easily have made it a condition of his returning that Hightower guard his pregnant wife. Thus Hightower is stuck there or he can't fulfill his orders from Aerys. There is an example for you of a wrinkle added/assumption made that fits with the known data, not works against it.

Second, there is no reason at all that Rhaegar can't give the KG general orders, so long as those orders do not contradict the Kings orders or the KG vows. And ordering Hightower to stay would not do either unless Aerys specifically ordered Hightower to return to KL, which is not the data we have.

Damn, you act like we know everything about the inner workings of the KG. WE DON'T! The most insight we've gotten comes from Selmy, and many fans believe he implies only the king can control the KG. Furthermore, please tell me a military style force where the number #2 can openly defy the #1. I want to read about their massive failures.

Also, if Rhaegar gave Hightower an order that conflicted with Aerys' order like in your example, then Rhaegar is in the wrong. Aerys would want Rhaegar and Hightower to return. Rhaegar says he will return, if and only if, Hightower stays. Hence he is saying Aerys only can have me. Thus he is defying Aerys.

Both are likely wrong, learn the timeline a little. It sounds like it works for you if you understand it. The best guess is Jon was born probably between 2 weeks (10 days or so extended a little) and a few days before Ned arrived

LOL. Way to fail at keeping things in context. My post which you didn't like, was in response to another iffy timeline someone else suggested. My comment is that it implied Jon was a month old or just born, which I didn't agree with. So yes, I agree. Jon could very well be two weeks old. We just don't know for sure and GRRM's timeline for AGoT events is sloppier than his other books.

He's not betraying Aerys by the data we have, only by your unsupported additional ideas. He reiterates he is fulfilling his vows, and his support of Aerys at the very end

I love how in your long winded post, you basically just keep arguing about what Hightower said in a feverish dream. And as I said before, he could have turned his back on Aerys, still protested what Jamie did, and defend the Targ dynasty. He is, after all, a human.

EDIT: Also, the example you used before suggest this is the case.

1. Hightower doesn't return with Rhaegar because Rhaegar says he will return only if Hightower stays. (disobeyed Aerys because he wants him to return with Rhaegar).

2. He rectifies this by thinking he is still honoring the royal family.

3. Aerys is slain, and the LC, still loyal to his vows, condemns Jamie.

4. Having accepted Jon's legitimacy (assuming Rhaegar had the authority to do this, which I don't believe he did), Hightower remains at the ToJ to defend the royal line.

The only way to stop trolls is ignore them. And even thats a slow process.

:agree:

[MtnLion]

:lmao:

How much time did you waste writing this?

I see you making some false assumptions, like, "Aerys did not trust Rhaegar". This is such obvious bullshit, since Aerys is calling Rhaegar back to solve the problem of the rebellion. But even earlier, Aerys appoints Rhaegar's close friend Jon Connington as Hand, because he perceives that he needs the youthful strength that Rhaegar exhibits. The only thing that you can say that Aerys was suspicious of was the tourney at Harrenhal being a conveyance to provide Rhaegar close contact with lords paramount that Varys whispered into Aerys' ear. More Aerys was wary, but of everyone, not Rhaegar in particular.

You also seem to insist that only the king can give orders to the Kingsguard. So, Aerys orders Whent and Dayne to be Rhaegar's bodyguards and follow his orders. Does that contradict your perception? Does Rhaegar ordering Jaime to remain and guard Aerys, because it is his father's wish to have Jaime close as leverage against Tywin? Does Hightower getting stuck at the tower contradict? No, we don't have enough resolution on the timing to know for sure. We only know that Jon is born three to ten days before Ned arrives, and that Ned arrives after the sack. Jon could be born before the sack to some two weeks after. Rhaegar was in King's Landing two weeks before the sack, and took Jonothor Darry who was present at Daenerys conception with Jaime, to his death at the Trident about a week before the sack. About a week before the sack Rhaella and Viserys are ordered to Dragonstone and are escorted by Willem Darry because there are no Kingsguard available aside from Jaime. What this all means is that Whent and Dayne could still be travelling back to the tower when King's Landing is sacked, but news of it would be weeks away from getting to the tower.

[Queen Ayras Lord Commander]

I see you making some false assumptions, like, "Aerys did not trust Rhaegar". This is such obvious bullshit, since Aerys is calling Rhaegar back to solve the problem of the rebellion. But even earlier, Aerys appoints Rhaegar's close friend Jon Connington as Hand, because he perceives that he needs the youthful strength that Rhaegar exhibits. The only thing that you can say that Aerys was suspicious of was the tourney at Harrenhal being a conveyance to provide Rhaegar close contact with lords paramount that Varys whispered into Aerys' ear. More Aerys was wary, but of everyone, not Rhaegar in particular.

You also seem to insist that only the king can give orders to the Kingsguard. So, Aerys orders Whent and Dayne to be Rhaegar's bodyguards and follow his orders. Does that contradict your perception? Does Rhaegar ordering Jaime to remain and guard Aerys, because it is his father's wish to have Jaime close as leverage against Tywin? Does Hightower getting stuck at the tower contradict? No, we don't have enough resolution on the timing to know for sure. We only know that Jon is born three to ten days before Ned arrives, and that Ned arrives after the sack. Jon could be born before the sack to some two weeks after. Rhaegar was in King's Landing two weeks before the sack, and took Jonothor Darry who was present at Daenerys conception with Jaime, to his death at the Trident about a week before the sack. About a week before the sack Rhaella and Viserys are ordered to Dragonstone and are escorted by Willem Darry because there are no Kingsguard available aside from Jaime. What this all means is that Whent and Dayne could still be travelling back to the tower when King's Landing is sacked, but news of it would be weeks away from getting to the tower.

What? It has been implied by a lot of fans that he feared Rhaegar might be laying the ground work to declare himself. Aerys was clearly concerned with what could happen, so accompanied them, leaving the Red Keep for the first time since the Defiance at Duskendale. That's trust? Go read Griff's first chapter and decide for yourself.

Nope. Giving orders to follow someone else's orders is a normal thing. Hypothetically, it would be disobeying orders if Aerys told the two of them they must always escort Rhaegar where ever he goes, and instead they stayed at the ToJ on Rhaegar's orders.

And I don't think he gave Jamie an order as much as he denied his request. Telling Jamie he can't take him his hardly an order.