The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones Logo Poster [11x17]
Game of Thrones Logo Poster [11x17]
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

R+L = J v 38


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

#1 Stubby

Stubby

    The night is dark and full of Dropbears

  • Board Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,484 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 09:22 AM

Have at it.

#2 Lady of Whisperers

Lady of Whisperers

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 09:32 AM

For all guys who are new to this topic.
This post has been made by Doctor Pepper in R+L=J v. 34. Best read it before you start asking: "How can Jon be a Targ if he has a burned hand" or before you come up with "He doesn´t look like a Targaryen. I also recommend reading you the analyses of the links they are great.


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 Targ 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. Many of the Great Bastards did not have 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 probably the 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 KG opted to stay at the TOJ stating they were obeying their Kingsguard vow. The heart of a KG 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.

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 ASOIAF readership. Also, A Game of Thrones has been out since 1996. That's more than 15 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 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 care? Who 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.

Thank you Doctor Pepper this has been really great work!!!

#3 Lady of Whisperers

Lady of Whisperers

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 09:36 AM

There has been a discussion about the Targaryen line of successsion in the last R+L=J thread.
I once made a thread about the question if males who are from other houses, but have Targaryen anchestors come before females in the line of succession. Most people believed that Dany would come before Robert.
Here is the link to the thread: http://asoiaf.wester...n/#entry3836009

Hope it helps /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

#4 nekrohsis

nekrohsis

    Hedge Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 10:29 AM

So my mom just finished AGOT. I asked her who she thought Jon's parents were and she said it was probably Lyanna and Rhaegar: because Lyanna made Ned promise her something, and Jon was the right age to be her son, and she knew Lyanna and Rhaegar had sex, and Jon has Rhaegar's white hair . . .

It took a while for me to explain that Jon actually has black hair, but I was impressed she was able to solve the mystery when I didn't until I first discovered the forum.

#5 Chiswyck

Chiswyck

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:09 AM

Was Jon born at the time of Aerys's death? If not then surely the throne would have passed to Viserys not him. I'm sure the has been covered before but I was just pondering

#6 l2 0 5 5

l2 0 5 5

    Sheepherder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:10 AM

Have at it.

What else is to be had?

#7 MtnLion

MtnLion

    On the Prowl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,381 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:10 AM

There has been a discussion about the Targaryen line of successsion in the last R+L=J thread.
I once made a thread about the question if males who are from other houses, but have Targaryen anchestors come before females in the line of succession. Most people believed that Dany would come before Robert.
Here is the link to the thread: http://asoiaf.wester...n/#entry3836009

Hope it helps /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

Nice job on your first post. This one is nice, too. However, most people are not grand council or members of Westeros society. Robert even points out that Daenerys, herself, is no threat to his right to the throne, but that her male child could be if he came with a significant force at arms. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> Since the Dance of the Dragons females are specifically barred from the throne. Just a fact of Westeros. Daenerys may think otherwise, but we all know her as shallow and naive, not to mention completely uneducated. She thought since her brother was an heir that she should be, after his death.

Anyway, this thread is truly about Jon's parents and their status when he was born. Rhaegar and Lyanna eloped. (Littlefinger in retribution to Brandon stirred the pot.) Near the end of Lyanna's pregnancy Rhaegar learns of a need for his leadership and returns to King's Landing to take command of the army and put down the rebellion. Three of the most honorable, most skilled knights in the realm die because of their vow to protect and defend the king. We know that the child is at the Wall because of Daenerys vision of the blue flower. Jon is that child, Lyanna's son, Rhaegar's son, and is true born thus king. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />

#8 MtnLion

MtnLion

    On the Prowl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,381 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:12 AM

Was Jon born at the time of Aerys's death? If not then surely the throne would have passed to Viserys not him. I'm sure the has been covered before but I was just pondering

If there is a possibility that the wife of an heir may give birth to an heir, appropriate time is given. Witness Jaime's considerations in Dance for the pregnant or possibly pregnant women.

#9 Lady of Whisperers

Lady of Whisperers

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:21 AM

Nice job on your first post. This one is nice, too. However, most people are not grand council or members of Westeros society. Robert even points out that Daenerys, herself, is no threat to his right to the throne, but that her male child could be if he came with a significant force at arms. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> Since the Dance of the Dragons females are specifically barred from the throne. Just a fact of Westeros. Daenerys may think otherwise, but we all know her as shallow and naive, not to mention completely uneducated. She thought since her brother was an heir that she should be, after his death.

Anyway, this thread is truly about Jon's parents and their status when he was born. Rhaegar and Lyanna eloped. (Littlefinger in retribution to Brandon stirred the pot.) Near the end of Lyanna's pregnancy Rhaegar learns of a need for his leadership and returns to King's Landing to take command of the army and put down the rebellion. Three of the most honorable, most skilled knights in the realm die because of their vow to protect and defend the king. We know that the child is at the Wall because of Daenerys vision of the blue flower. Jon is that child, Lyanna's son, Rhaegar's son, and is true born thus king. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />


Tahnks.
I agree with everything you wrote except for the Dany beeing shallow and navie part.
You are speaking to a huge Dany fan /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

#10 MtnLion

MtnLion

    On the Prowl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,381 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:32 AM

Tahnks.
I agree with everything you wrote except for the Dany beeing shallow and navie part.
You are speaking to a huge Dany fan /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

Heh, I knew that, but i think your opinion of her may change. She really has failed to rule, and failed to behave as a ruler. She has been ruled by customs and used by the Green Grace. She may grow up, but I have been waiting too long for that. /tongue.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':P' />

#11 Lady of Whisperers

Lady of Whisperers

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 12:26 PM

Heh, I knew that, but i think your opinion of her may change. She really has failed to rule, and failed to behave as a ruler. She has been ruled by customs and used by the Green Grace. She may grow up, but I have been waiting too long for that. /tongue.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':P' />


I doubt that my opinoin of her will change. I am currently re-reading all ASoIaF books to prepare my self with arguements for my "Dany is a good queen" thread I will start after I have finished my re-read. You are welcome to join the discussion than /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

Anyway this is a R+L=J thread and not a thread for discussing Dany´s ruling abilities and the last thread has allready moved away from the topic a bit. So lets focus on R+L again /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

#12 Lady Gwynhyfvar

Lady Gwynhyfvar

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,575 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 01:15 PM

So my mom just finished AGOT. I asked her who she thought Jon's parents were and she said it was probably Lyanna and Rhaegar: because Lyanna made Ned promise her something, and Jon was the right age to be her son, and she knew Lyanna and Rhaegar had sex, and Jon has Rhaegar's white hair . . .

It took a while for me to explain that Jon actually has black hair, but I was impressed she was able to solve the mystery when I didn't until I first discovered the forum.


That raises the interesting question of the white wolf (is that why she thought Jon had white hair?)... not sure if that's ever been discussed in this context, but it makes me wonder...

So yes it is of course discussed at length in other threads. Consensus seems to be that Ghost's red eyes and white fur represent a weirwood tree, but it is something I'll continue to ponder.

Edited by Lady Gwynhyfvar, 12 January 2013 - 02:08 PM.


#13 Black Lady

Black Lady

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 02:26 PM

Was Jon born at the time of Aerys's death? If not then surely the throne would have passed to Viserys not him. I'm sure the has been covered before but I was just pondering


dutch law student and here we have rules for this kind of stuff. I'm aI'm not sure about westros law but but most law systems in the middle ages had a law that said "If it's in the benefit of the unborn child, that child wil be considered born." Most country's still have a law like that. If the father dies that child will still inherit it's part.
If a situation like this would happen in a European monarchy they wait and until the baby is born. In this case a female would not have been able to inherit, if Jon had been a girl the throne would still have gone to Viserys.

#14 Yavannie

Yavannie

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 03:08 PM

I'm on my second reading of the series, and this theory did not occur to me when I first read it. I'm one of those people who just gobble books up as fast as possible, so I never pay enough attention to detail. When I finished ADWD I thought Jon was dead and was mightily pissed off since he was finally growing into something more than a snivelling, holier-than-thou brat. Googled info and theories on Jon and came across R+L=J, which makes sense to me.

I don't tend to think of it as a sure sign of anything though. Plenty if people with "rights" have had them denied! Hopefully it does mean that Jon is still alive.

#15 Hill

Hill

    Sellsword

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 03:39 PM

Is it really 38? It properly could be I suppose.

#16 GreyDeLeon

GreyDeLeon

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 04:47 PM

The biggest reason this theory is true to me is because it hasn't been revealed for 6 books, why keep it hidden and for so long if it wasn't significant? Rarely do authors build up a mystery for an anticlimactic reveal...

#17 Apple Martini

Apple Martini

    The Snarker on the Wall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,751 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 07:59 PM

Was Jon born at the time of Aerys's death? If not then surely the throne would have passed to Viserys not him. I'm sure the has been covered before but I was just pondering


Traditionally — and this has happened in both France and Spain in actual historical cases — if a queen is pregnant with an heir, the throne is "vacant" until the heir is born. So the throne wouldn't pass to Viserys just because Aerys died before Jon was born.

ETA: And I consider the French and Spanish cases to be more pertinent here than the William IV case, because the French and Spanish queens were CONFIRMED pregnant. William IV's queen was not. Had his queen been confirmed to be pregnant, Victoria would not have been crowned, even conditionally, and the throne would be vacant until the queen had her baby. I consider the Victoria situation much more of a "crossing Ts and dotting Is" technicality for legal cover; no one actually thought William IV's wife was pregnant.

Edited by Apple Martini, 12 January 2013 - 08:40 PM.


#18 Twinslayer

Twinslayer

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:35 PM

Was Jon born at the time of Aerys's death? If not then surely the throne would have passed to Viserys not him. I'm sure the has been covered before but I was just pondering

I believe you are correct. When William IV of England died without legitimate issue, his niece (Victoria) was proclaimed Queen, subject to ouster if William's wife bore him a legitimate child after William's death.


#19 McStagger

McStagger

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 10:03 PM

So I just finished reading the whole shebang about R+L=J and I am very curious about how they are going to drop this on the TV show. At this point it seems like it is just going to be laid out in a very cavalier fashion by some random who just happens to know all. Probably LF or Varys. Granted they may come up with a compelling way but from where I am sitting, it just seems like one of the more breadcrumb aspects of the book is going to completely lose it's balls for the show.

#20 Dragonfish

Dragonfish

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,573 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 10:04 PM

Nice job on your first post. This one is nice, too. However, most people are not grand council or members of Westeros society. Robert even points out that Daenerys, herself, is no threat to his right to the throne, but that her male child could be if he came with a significant force at arms. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />


No he doesn't. He says no such thing. That's just an inference that you've made, but in my opinion, it is not necessarily true. When Robert found out about Daenerys' child, Viserys was still alive. Under the logic of your argument, we would be forced to conclude that since Robert fears the child more than Viserys, the child must have a better claim than him. But that's clearly not the case. Everyone agrees that Viserys' claim is better than anyone's under Targ succession rules. So clearly the child's claim isn't the only factor here. More likely, Robert fears Dany's child because he would represent the continuation of the Targaryen line, which means their family will hound him and his descendants for some time to come, much as the Blackfyres did to the Targaryens. There's also the fact that the child would likely be raised to be a strong and charismatic figure who would command the loyalty of a horde of Dothraki, which, when combined with the historical preference for male claimants, would significantly improve his chances to rally people behind his cause.

Now, as for why Robert isn't as fearful about Viserys, the answer is simple: Viserys is a fool, and everyone knows it. It doesn't matter if he has a better claim, because he won't be able to capitalize on it. This same rationale could easily explain why he doesn't fear Dany as much either (remember, she was a rather timid character to begin with). There's nothing here to tell us definitively that Robert doesn't fear Dany because he has a better claim.

Since the Dance of the Dragons females are specifically barred from the throne. Just a fact of Westeros.


No, George specifically said that female claimants were placed behind male claimants, not that they were barred from the throne. I've found a quote of the original SSM that forms the basis for this argument (the link to the SSM unfortunately doesn't work anymore). It's in post #3 of this thread:

"I told George that when he changed Viserys I from a son to a brother he created an error in that Baelor's sisters did not inherit the throne after him, George replied that women came after all men in the Targaryen succession after TDWD. Something interesting and neatly explains Daena and the rest not becoming queen."

Note that George says nothing about women being barred from the throne. He also doesn't make any reference to "agnatic primogeniture," either.