Jump to content

R+L=J v.146


Ygrain

Recommended Posts

Maybe--but would need a lot more in context to make it work. Seems more like irony re: Joffrey than evidence re: Jon.

But the irony part would only be half of the quote, right? Bastards are not allowed to damage young princes.. the point being that this is the reason why Jon is not allowed to train with the others. With Joffrey a bastard, the quote could be seen as a hint (not proof, but a hint in that direction) that Jon is trueborn.

[Ned has just finished meeting Barra and her mother]

Good to you, Ned thought hollowly. “I will tell him, child, and I promise you, Barra shall not go wanting.”

She had smiled then, a smile so tremulous and sweet that it cut the heart out of him. Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow’s face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts?

Barra is the bastard.. She wasn't Robert's first bastard. Which connects to Robert's personality, perhaps?

“Love is sweet, dearest Ned, but it cannot change a man’s nature.”

This quote comes only shortly above the first passage I quoted.

In contrast to Jon, whom Ned now compares with himself, at least in appearance. Are we supposed to see the contrast between Ned's honorable character (as Rhaegar is also described as honorable?), and Robert's way of handeling his bastards?

OR

Good to you, Ned thought hollowly. “I will tell him, child, and I promise you, Barra shall not go wanting.

She had smiled then, a smile so tremulous and sweet that it cut the heart out of him. Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow’s face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts?

Is it about the fact that Ned is making a promise here? With promising Barra's mother that Barra will not go wanting, as compared to Ned promising Lyanna that Jon would not go wanting? Could that have been Ned's promise/one of the promises?

Promise me, Ned. The fever had taken her strength and her voice had been faint as a whisper, but when he gave her his word, the fear had gone out of his sister’s eyes. Ned remembered the way she had smiled then, how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life, the rose petals spilling from her palm, dead and black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think not, Ice Fire proofed from last thread they pledged, and OP is clear polygamy has precedence which it's legal in Westeros.

He provides canon at end of post. http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/131377-rlj-v145/?p=7149978

Hi, Shiny!! welcome- in response to Ice Fire's proof, Sly Wren is correct below:

1. The IceFire post on last thread--as I argued on last thread--is not evidence of R and L's being pledged. It just isn't. It's at best suggestive. Much more about Jon's coming to terms with growing up and his relationship with Ned.

2. Yes, OP points out that polygamy has been legal in Westeros--as Martin quips, pretty much anything can be legal when you've got a dragon. But that doesn't mean R and L were married. They could have been, but the fact that it was legal at some point doesn't in any way prove R and L availed themselves of the option. At best, it means they might have.

Essentially, nothing is canon, unless it's explicitly stated in the books. I believe Ran even confirmed that the books trump SSMs, so those can only really be considered "semi-canon". The whole thing about polygamous marriage, is that it hasn't happened in 200 years. Also, something to consider: if Lyanna was so concerned about Robert staying to one bed, why on earth would she marry an already married man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essentially, nothing is canon, unless it's explicitly stated in the books. I believe Ran even confirmed that the books trump SSMs, so those can only really be considered "semi-canon". The whole thing about polygamous marriage, is that it hasn't happened in 200 years. Also, something to consider: if Lyanna was so concerned about Robert staying to one bed, why on earth would she marry an already married man?

Agreed on polygamy and Lyanna's objections to Robert. It's one of the reasons I have a hard time accepting that Lyanna "ran off" with Rhaegar out of love. I can't rule it out--way too many gaps in the text, so the love option is on the table. But if Rhaegar did manage to convince Lyanna to run off with him for love, I really hope we get to see that scene in the books, via Bran or something. That's gotta be one hell of a speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed on polygamy and Lyanna's objections to Robert. It's one of the reasons I have a hard time accepting that Lyanna "ran off" with Rhaegar out of love. I can't rule it out--way too many gaps in the text, so the love option is on the table. But if Rhaegar did manage to convince Lyanna to run off with him for love, I really hope we get to see that scene in the books, via Bran or something. That's gotta be one hell of a speech.

It doesn't have to be one and not the other. It's not hard to look at the clues in Meera's tale of the KotLT, combine them with Lyanna holding on to rose petals as she dies, and add in all the hints about Rhaegar loving Lyanna to see that the two may well have loved each other and it may be a factor in why they ran away together. That doesn't mean other factors may not be in play at the same time. I've speculated about Lyanna and Robert's wedding being either moved up or approaching quickly when the abduction takes place, and Lyanna's objections to Robert as a husband could absolutely be a factor along with feelings for Rhaegar. So, if there is a chance meeting of the two on the road and Lyanna expresses the same things she says to Ned to Rhaegar, would the crown prince offer to take her away? Now, Rhaegar has other factors motivating him as well, prophecy, politics etc. but none of this has to be just one thing that led to the decision to run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the irony part would only be half of the quote, right? Bastards are not allowed to damage young princes.. the point being that this is the reason why Jon is not allowed to train with the others. With Joffrey a bastard, the quote could be seen as a hint (not proof, but a hint in that direction) that Jon is trueborn.

I'd been reading the whole scene as Joff being an unqualified horror of a human being yet still being given deference because he's a prince. Irony is he's both a prince and a bastard. But in that case, the irony could also work for Jon--he and Joff are both bastards, yet no one at Winterfell (save Jaime and Cersei) knows this. So Joff gets the deference.

If the statement includes Jon in the irony, I'd see it that way as more likely than a hint at Jon's legitimacy. Seems you have to assume he's legitimate to see the irony being that way. Bottom line--can't see it as conclusive on Jon's legitimacy--but can agree that it could be a hint.

[Ned has just finished meeting Barra and her mother]

Good to you, Ned thought hollowly. “I will tell him, child, and I promise you, Barra shall not go wanting.”

She had smiled then, a smile so tremulous and sweet that it cut the heart out of him. Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow’s face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts?

Barra is the bastard.. She wasn't Robert's first bastard. Which connects to Robert's personality, perhaps?

“Love is sweet, dearest Ned, but it cannot change a man’s nature.”

This quote comes only shortly above the first passage I quoted.

In contrast to Jon, whom Ned now compares with himself, at least in appearance. Are we supposed to see the contrast between Ned's honorable character (as Rhaegar is also described as honorable?), and Robert's way of handeling his bastards?

OR

Good to you, Ned thought hollowly. “I will tell him, child, and I promise you, Barra shall not go wanting.

She had smiled then, a smile so tremulous and sweet that it cut the heart out of him. Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow’s face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lusts?

Is it about the fact that Ned is making a promise here? With promising Barra's mother that Barra will not go wanting, as compared to Ned promising Lynn that Jon would not go wanting? Could that have been Ned's promise/one of the promises?

Promise me, Ned. The fever had taken her strength and her voice had been faint as a whisper, but when he gave her his word, the fear had gone out of his sister’s eyes. Ned remembered the way she had smiled then, how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life, the rose petals spilling from her palm, dead and black.

I may be reading you wrong--in which case, feel free to mock me and throw things at my head--but I can't see how the two readings you propose above are innately incompatible.

Ned is being honorable towards Lyanna's son to fulfill a promise (I really think that's at least one of the promises Ned made--we don't have the list yet, I know, but doesn't seem too big an assumption to at least put that one on there) re: her son. Who may be a bastard. And who has been raised as a bastard. Granted, Jon could have been legitimate, but I can't see how this passage excludes his being a bastard. Seems much more tied to his being so, and to Ned's sympathy for bastards in general, and Jon in specific.

Again--if I misread you, feel free to let me have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not impossible, but then it is not clear why Robert bashing Rhaegar's honour evokes the memory of Promise me, which I have always read as Ned knowing that Rhaegar didn't treat Lyanna dishonourably. Also, it breaks the line of thought in the comparison between Robert and Rhaegar - Robert frequented brothels, Rhaegar didn't. Robert fathered bastards, Rhaegar... If both fathered bastards, and Rhaegar on Ned's own sister on top of it, I'm not sure if the contrast between the two quite works.

I think that a simple straightforward reading of the text here suggests that Ned thinks of Jon as a bastard child. What has been argued in the past and what many of us have disagreed with is that this represents Ned thinking of Jon as his own bastard son. That is a leap too far from what the text shows. That Ned is thinking of Jon as Rhaegar's bastard is also somewhat of a leap here, but I think better supported by other parts of the text than Ned as his father. I think assumptions get made here that shouldn't be passed over. There really is nothing that shows Ned knows Jon is the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, even if that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't have to be one and not the other. It's not hard to look at the clues in Meera's tale of the KotLT, combine them with Lyanna holding on to rose petals as she dies, and add in all the hints about Rhaegar loving Lyanna to see that the two may well have loved each other and it may be a factor in why they ran away together. That doesn't mean other factors may not be in play at the same time. I've speculated about Lyanna and Robert's wedding being either moved up or approaching quickly when the abduction takes place, and Lyanna's objections to Robert as a husband could absolutely be a factor along with feelings for Rhaegar. So, if there is a chance meeting of the two on the road and Lyanna expresses the same things she says to Ned to Rhaegar, would the crown prince offer to take her away? Now, Rhaegar has other factors motivating him as well, prophecy, politics etc. but none of this has to be just one thing that led to the decision to run.

Fair enough--I'm arguably exposing my own prejudice for seeing that speech, for, if they ran off together, hearing how they managed to justify it--am thinking that could be some fabulous psychological and rhetorical work. But, as you say, there could be a lot of factors, including politics and prophecy. For now--huge gaps in the plot re: how and why they disappeared.

Even the clues you give re: romance require interpretation to be clues per se, especially if you add them up. I fully agree that the text has hints at potential romance. But it also has contradictions and huge gaps. Lyanna's objection to Robert's future infidelities being one. There are definitely reasons to doubt romance, if nothing to exclusively rule it out. Bottom line: however those two ended up off together, it's going to be a great read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be reading you wrong--in which case, feel free to mock me and throw things at my head--but I can't see how the two readings you propose above are innately incompatible.

Ned is being honorable towards Lyanna's son to fulfill a promise (I really think that's at least one of the promises Ned made--we don't have the list yet, I know, but doesn't seem too big an assumption to at least put that one on there) re: her son. Who may be a bastard. And who has been raised as a bastard. Granted, Jon could have been legitimate, but I can't see how this passage excludes his being a bastard. Seems much more tied to his being so, and to Ned's sympathy for bastards in general, and Jon in specific.

Again--if I misread you, feel free to let me have it.

Ah, no, I didn't mean that the passage excludes the possibility of Jon being a bastard.. :)

I was trying to see if there was a possibility that the mentioning of first Jon, then bastards in general, could be pointing in any other direction that Jon being a bastard.. whether it could possibly tie in with Jon being trueborn..it doesn't exclude Jon from being a bastatd, certainly.

Earlier, I left out the sentence of Ned promising Barra's mother to look after her, which made me wonder how Jon and bastards in general could fit (if it could) with Jon possibly being trueborn.

But not taking that sencente into consideration when looking at the passage might have been the mistake. I think, atm, that the mentioning of Jon in that passage is because of the promise Ned now makes regarding Barra, whereas the mentioning of bastards ("if the gods frowned so...") comes due to the fact that Barra is a bastard, and that we are not supposed to connect it to Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems convenient to oppose individual posts based solely upon what is in the post. The truth is that here is a mountain of evidence to support what IceFire125 said. What he posted further supports the linked information. Please do take time to read the linked information, as it will help you understand what is being discussed.

Not quite. That is a mountain of supposition. And a few references to more theories. From my understanding, this thread was made to discuss Jon's parentage: Not to pile up all the material gleaned from the text that some people believe 'proves' Jon is the son of R+L and ignore the faults in the 'proofs.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Shiny!! welcome- in response to Ice Fire's proof, Sly Wren is correct below:

Essentially, nothing is canon, unless it's explicitly stated in the books. I believe Ran even confirmed that the books trump SSMs, so those can only really be considered "semi-canon". The whole thing about polygamous marriage, is that it hasn't happened in 200 years. Also, something to consider: if Lyanna was so concerned about Robert staying to one bed, why on earth would she marry an already married man?

Why does 200 years matter. If the King says "legal" then it's legal, especially if the High Septon is under his thumb (as it seems all high septons are) and therefore won't make a fuss for religious reasons. And it has happened in the past 200 years to a group of people who are also outside and above Westerosi law (like the Targaryens): the Wildlings. Craster had man wives and the men of the NW aren't disgusted by the number of his wives, but that his wives are also his daughters. Look at how the men of the NW react to Ygon Oldfather: 17 wives. They don't bat an eye. It's incest that's the big issue, not polygamy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does 200 years matter. If the King says "legal" then it's legal, especially if the High Septon is under his thumb (as it seems all high septons are) and therefore won't make a fuss for religious reasons. And it has happened in the past 200 years to a group of people who are also outside and above Westerosi law (like the Targaryens): the Wildlings. Craster had man wives and the men of the NW aren't disgusted by the number of his wives, but that his wives are also his daughters. Look at how the men of the NW react to Ygon Oldfather: 17 wives. They don't bat an eye. It's incest that's the big issue, not polygamy.

Other than Craster, who else practiced polygamy among the wildlings? Sure they disregard Craster's wives, but the Wildlings aren't subject to Westeros laws anyway. The 200 years matters because if it was common place, why isn't it still happening? And I believe the polygamy was with sisters, right? My main point though was that it doesn't seem like Lyanna would elope with a married man if she was already concerned about Robert being faithful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does 200 years matter. If the King says "legal" then it's legal, especially if the High Septon is under his thumb (as it seems all high septons are) and therefore won't make a fuss for religious reasons. And it has happened in the past 200 years to a group of people who are also outside and above Westerosi law (like the Targaryens): the Wildlings. Craster had man wives and the men of the NW aren't disgusted by the number of his wives, but that his wives are also his daughters. Look at how the men of the NW react to Ygon Oldfather: 17 wives. They don't bat an eye. It's incest that's the big issue, not polygamy.

There were only what, three? polygamous marriages in the Targ's 200 year history.

At a tenuous time in Aerys's reign, Rhaegar managed to rile up Stark, Baratheon and Arryn and raise eyebrows all over the realm. Then after kidnapping Lyanna and the tortuous deaths of her father and brother, and the start of a wide-scale civil war... he marries her? I don't buy it. It doesn't make anything better, or more romantic. It makes Rhaegar and Lyanna reprehensible and selfish.

Which I don't believe they were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than Craster, who else practiced polygamy among the wildlings? Sure they disregard Craster's wives, but the Wildlings aren't subject to Westeros laws anyway. The 200 years matters because if it was common place, why isn't it still happening? And I believe the polygamy was with sisters, right? My main point though was that it doesn't seem like Lyanna would elope with a married man if she was already concerned about Robert being faithful.

Ygon Oldfather had 17 wives. I pointed him out in my first post.

It's not common. It's special to those who are outside or above the law, like the Wildlings who do not subject themselves to the laws of Westeros and the Targs who *make* the laws and can decide to break or keep to them as they see fit. And, of course, there is no evidence that polgyamy was ever illegal. It just wasn't practiced, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be.

As for Lyanna...we'll have to see but she was concerned that Robert wouldn't be faithful to her. Why do we believe that she'd have that same concern about Rhaegar? I believe he would have avoided his wife's bed because of her health. So is it really cheating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ygon Oldfather had 17 wives. I pointed him out in my first post.

It's not common. It's special to those who are outside or above the law, like the Wildlings who do not subject themselves to the laws of Westeros and the Targs who *make* the laws and can decide to break or keep to them as they see fit. And, of course, there is no evidence that polgyamy was ever illegal. It just wasn't practiced, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be.

As for Lyanna...we'll have to see but she was concerned that Robert wouldn't be faithful to her. Why do we believe that she'd have that same concern about Rhaegar? I believe he would have avoided his wife's bed because of her health. So is it really cheating?

Lyanna would be the "cheater", and Starks are supposed to be honorable. However, let's say they had a secret polygamous marriage under the Weirwood. Why is it a secret? If the argument is that as the Dragon King, or a royal, they are above the law, there would be no need to abduct/kidnap/elope at all. Just send for Lyanna, have the second wedding, and screw Robert. At least that's how I see it. I used to believe RLJ, btw, I only changed my mind when I started my latest reread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not impossible, but then it is not clear why Robert bashing Rhaegar's honour evokes the memory of Promise me, which I have always read as Ned knowing that Rhaegar didn't treat Lyanna dishonourably. Also, it breaks the line of thought in the comparison between Robert and Rhaegar - Robert frequented brothels, Rhaegar didn't. Robert fathered bastards, Rhaegar... If both fathered bastards, and Rhaegar on Ned's own sister on top of it, I'm not sure if the contrast between the two quite works.

This is quite possible to father bastards without frequenting brothels...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, no, I didn't mean that the passage excludes the possibility of Jon being a bastard.. :)

I was trying to see if there was a possibility that the mentioning of first Jon, then bastards in general, could be pointing in any other direction that Jon being a bastard.. whether it could possibly tie in with Jon being trueborn..it doesn't exclude Jon from being a bastatd, certainly.

Earlier, I left out the sentence of Ned promising Barra's mother to look after her, which made me wonder how Jon and bastards in general could fit (if it could) with Jon possibly being trueborn.

But not taking that sencente into consideration when looking at the passage might have been the mistake. I think, atm, that the mentioning of Jon in that passage is because of the promise Ned now makes regarding Barra, whereas the mentioning of bastards ("if the gods frowned so...") comes due to the fact that Barra is a bastard, and that we are not supposed to connect it to Jon.

Ah--you were making a much narrower point than I saw--sorry.

I agree the scene could be compartmentalized as you say--but given how Lyanna and Jon both come up in the scene, how it cuts Ned to the heart to see this girl with her baby, even how the girl seems to long for Robert (maybe an argument for Lyanna's loving Rhaegar)--the scene seems to lump it all together in Ned's head. Really seems that he sees Jon as a bastard.

That being said--Martin has left himself wiggle room on whether or not Jon is a bastard, regardless of Ned's perception. Lyanna could have been too sick to fully explain. Could have been a polygamous marriage that Ned doesn't see as legit--etc. (These are clearly just hypotheticals on my part--no evidence, just guessing.)

But whether or not Ned sees Jon as a bastard (though I think he does in this scene), Martin could still have some room on whether or not Jon is a bastard. Lots of gaps to be filled--hopefully soon with good writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...