The Latest News
Connect with Us

Notable Releases
From the Store
Game of Thrones Distressed Targaryen Sigil Hoodie -
Game of Thrones Distressed Targaryen Sigil Hoodie -
HBO US
Featured Sites
License Holders

Jump to content


Photo

R+L = J v 64


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

#1 Stubby

Stubby

    The night is dark and full of Social Justice Warriors

  • Board Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,279 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 02:37 AM

B)



#2 corbon

corbon

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,489 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 02:43 AM

post luckily saved from thread closure!

 

The problem with timelines here, at least for me, is: it is said the child was about a year, when he was killed, the rebellion lasted about a year (rebellion, I mean from the first and the last battles). Let's say the Sack was on 8-9(7-8) month after the beginning of the rebellion and the boy is a year, that means their are only 4-3 months for Rhaegar to witness the birth of Aegon in KL,

 
About a year. Which could mean up to, say 14 months?
The Sack is right at the end of the rebellion. The only thing happening after that is Ned taking official surrenders at Storms End, really. there is also Dany's birth 9 months later and Jon;s within a month or so of the sack.
 
So Rhaegar probably has only about 2-3 months to witness Rhaegar's birth, then everything happens with Lyanna etc. However, thats not as difficult to fit in as might initially be thought.
 

go to the North (I presume Lyanna was there somewhere or travelling to her brother's wedding in Riverland), abduct her, to be absent for few month, then come back to the KL, before the Trident, not mentioning all the fuss about Brandon's travelling to the KL to fight Rhaegar, being captured and then Rickard's traveling and so on (I really do not know how long it would all take really). 
 
So, my point is that: either we are told lies about why he abducted her or when, or there is a problem with the timeline.

 
No reason to assume Lyanna was up north. Everything points to her being still in the south, which is also more convenient for our timeline.
 
What we need then is:
Rhaegar from KL to Riverlands to find and "abduct" Lyanna - 2 weeks?
Brandon to hear of it - a few days?
Brandon to ride to KL - a few days
Aerys to send word to Rickard et all - less than a week
Rickard et all to turn up - a month, probably less
The trials - a few days
The demand for Robert and Ned's heads to get to Jon Arryn - a few days
Jon Arryn to reply - a few days
Bang, rebellion starts officially.

Note that we aren't told where he abducted her from, so no lies there! The Riverlands, Harrenhal or Riverrun being prime candidates seem most likely for reasons laid out elsewhere.

So, given everything is deliberately vague, and Martin himself confesses he's not too good on timeline stuff, it can all fit perfectly well within 2 months or a little more, and we probably have around that much time if not a little more. What is a turn anyway, a week? a season? a month?
 

What is striking and strange he is always described as dutiful, good and etc, a perfect almost,even by Ned (where he sort of compares him with Robert and his taste for brothels), and then he made an unspeakable and stupid thing like that.


Unless of course, its not as unspeakably stupid as people think. But they are all so ready to judge on so little data - because of the results of course, but not because it didn't make sense at the time.
IMO most people here also make huge judgements on how things in Westeros will be perceived by Westerosi, judgements on events that we just don't have the cultural or specific insight to necessarily understand. And IMO that greatly affects the apparent disconnect between how Westerosi seem to perceive Rhaegar and his apparent actions.

If things don't add up, thats usually because one of the ingredients is wrong. Which is more likely to be wrong - how they interpret events, or how we interpret events (given a huge gap in our basic knowledge)?

For example, Rhaegar is widely pilloried for 'insulting' Elia and passing her over as QoLaB. But that doesn't make sense. While the award can be used as a romantic statement, it isn't always (or even mostly, it seems) used as such. Jorah clearly did, and Barristan indicates he would have used-it-as-one-without-using-it-as-one (given his adherence to his vows) but the brothers and uncle of the Whent girl clearly didn't intend to, nor did Loras to Sansa (despite the show for the crowd), nor did (probably) the KG who beat Rhaegar in the final at Storms End, nor did the winners in the D&E stories (AFAICR). Instead it seems to me that everyone expected dutiful Rhaegar to award Elia, because that sort of boringly dutiful guy he was, so when he didn't there was initial shock (all the smiles died), excitement (ooh, something interesting, is it salacious) and anger (WTF, why did he do that, thats my betrothed/sister he's messing with). But we don't hear anything more about them until the abduction, the best part of a year later, so clearly those first reactions soon passed back to the status quo.

But we put something romantic on it, because of the later actions and the fact that later they were said to be in love. Perhaps they were even then, but that doesn't mean that he insulted Elia by passing her over and awarding QoLaB to Lyanna (secretly for her KotLT exploits).



#3 corbon

corbon

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,489 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 03:07 AM

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:

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread one)

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread two)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III)” (thread three)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part IV)” (thread four)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part V)” (thread five)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part VI)” (thread six)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread Part VII” (thread seven)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII” (thread eight)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part IX” (thread nine)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna =Jon Thread, Part X”(thread ten)

The R+L=J thread, part XI” (thread eleven)

The R+L=J thread, part XII” (thread twelve)

R+L=J Part XXIII” (thread thirteen)

R+L=J Part XXIV” (thread fourteen)

R+L=J XXV” (thread fifteen)

R+L=J v.16” (thread sixteen)

R+L=J v.17” (thread seventeen)

R+L=J v.18” (thread eighteen)

R+L=J v.19” (thread nineteen)

R+L=J v.20” (thread twenty)

R+L=J v.21” (thread twenty-one)

R+L=J v.22” (thread twenty-two)

R+L=J v.22a” (thread twenty-two (a))

R+L=J v.23” (thread twenty-three)

R+L=J v.24” (thread twenty-four)

R+L=J v.25” (thread twenty-five)

R+L=J v.26” (thread twenty-six)

R+L=J v.27” (thread twenty-seven)

R+L=J v.28” (thread twenty-eight)

R+L=J v.29” (thread twenty-nine)

R+L=J v.30” (thread thirty)

R+L=J v.31” (thread thirty-one)

R+L=J v.32” (thread thirty-two)

R+L=J #33” (thread thirty-three)

R+L=J v.34” (thread thirty-four)

R+L=J v.35” (thread thirty-five)

R+L=J v.36” (thread thirty-six)

R+L=J v.37” (thread thirty-seven)

R+L=J v.38” (thread thirty-eight)

R+L=J v.39” (thread thirty-nine)

"R+L=J v.40" (thread forty)


"R+L=J v. 41" (thread forty-one)

"R+L=J v.42" (thread forty-two)

"R+L=J v.43" (thread forty-three)

"R+L=J v.44" (thread forty-four)

"R+L=J v.45" (thread forty-five)

"R+L=J v.46" (thread forty-six)

"R+L=J v.47" (thread forty-seven)

"R+L=J v.48" (thread forty-eight)

"R+L=J v.49" (thread forty-nine)

"R+L=J v.50" (thread fifty)

"R+L=J v.51" (thread fifty-one)


"R+L=J v.52" (thread fifty-two)

"R+L=J v.53" (thread fifty-three)

"R+L=J v.54" (thread fifty=four)

"R+L=J v.55" (thread fifty-five)

"R+L=J v.56" (thread fifty-six)


"R+L=J v.57" (thread fifty-seven)

"R+L=J v 58" (thread fifty-eight)

"R+L=J v 59" (thread fifty-nine)

"R+L=J v 60" (thread sixty) 

"R+L=J v 61" (thread sixty-one) 

 

"R+L=J v 62" (thread sixty-two)

 

"R+L=J v 63" (thread sixty-three)



#4 Anath

Anath

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,638 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 04:42 AM

I think he was, so the only thing that might make him dishonor his wife would be the most obvious thing I think- love. Rhaegar would not be a man who would frequent brothels, or have mistresses, because I think he fully intended to honor the wife he didn't love, but was fond of until his heart became at odds with his honor.

 

Alia, I don't agree. Nothing in the descriptions we are given shows us that Rhaegar loved frequenting brothels. It was not a giant torture he endured for the sake of honouring his wife. We are not talking about Robert Baratheon here. He practically lived in those well before his expected marriage to Lyanna.

 

And I was not talking about Rhaegar being in love or not. I am saying that even the most inconsiderate of men usually would not have risked upsetting their pregnant wife like this, in love or not. Usually, even those give a thought about the child. And Rhaegar didn't care about Elia but he cared about the comet child.

 

And if he didn't care about insulting Elia, why didn't he take Lyanna immediately after the tournament if "love is the death of duty" was already in place?


Edited by Anath, 18 October 2013 - 05:37 AM.


#5 Ghost's Shadow

Ghost's Shadow

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,338 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:13 AM

How long did the Tourney at Harrenhal last? Weeks? And moving there, and back home again, is how long? Might it be they were removed from KL for a few months?

 

Elia knew she had a troublesome first pregnancy (bed-ridden), and might have realised that her next pregnancies, if blessed with them, might be equally difficult (she's known to be frailer of body, surely she knew it of herself, too). As the wife of a Crown Prince, she knows she must give him at least one son, and if there's a few extra, that's great. Would she have taken the risk of miscarrying just to stay at a silly tournament had she known she was newly pregnant?

 

I don't believe Elia was pregnant at the Tourney, but that she got pregnant not too long after. I think we've speculated before that Aegon might have only been a few months old when Rhaegar decided to elope with Lyanna.



#6 Anath

Anath

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,638 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:29 AM

Let alone the fact that Rhaegar surely would not let her undertake the travel to Harrenhall if he knew she was pregnant.



#7 theguyfromtheVale

theguyfromtheVale

    Kill the boy and let the man be born.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:34 AM

We're told the tourney lasted seven days, IIRC. And the distance KL-Harrenhal is rather short - you certainly don't need to travel a month between both places; a week seems far more likely.



#8 Ghost's Shadow

Ghost's Shadow

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,338 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:47 AM

Ah, okay. But yeah, it still seems a silly reason to risk a child, had at the very least she known she was pregnant.

 

With a little more patience, we might find out. :lol:



#9 aiiila

aiiila

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:51 AM

Even if Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, what will be expected of him? If his is the song of ice and fire, he will need to be reborn. And no matter how many times I read through an answer to that question: Is Rhaegar talking about Aegon or Jon in Dany's vision in the House of the Undying? Was Rhaegar simply wrong, or is it Jon?



#10 theguyfromtheVale

theguyfromtheVale

    Kill the boy and let the man be born.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 07:03 AM

Even if Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, what will be expected of him? If his is the song of ice and fire, he will need to be reborn. And no matter how many times I read through an answer to that question: Is Rhaegar talking about Aegon or Jon in Dany's vision in the House of the Undying? Was Rhaegar simply wrong, or is it Jon?

 

 

As for the second part, GRRM confirmed Dany saw Rhaegar holding Aegon, with Elia in the background. Rhaegar was wrong about Aegon being tPtwP, just as he was wrong about himself being tPtwP before.



#11 Anath

Anath

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,638 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 07:11 AM

 

 

As for the second part, GRRM confirmed Dany saw Rhaegar holding Aegon, with Elia in the background. Rhaegar was wrong about Aegon being tPtwP, just as he was wrong about himself being tPtwP before.

No. He confirmed that it was Elia nursing Aegon, with Rhaegar refusing to make a song for him because Aegon already had one and then turning his back on both of them (in most rooms, the window seat is at the window and the bed is in the bottom of the room) and picking up his harp. He stands completely detached from mother and child - an echo of Harrenhall where he (seemingly) first started distancing himself from Elia emotionally.

 

I think the moment is meaningful because that's our only encounter with Rhaegar as a father and it's clear that he isn't too interested in being one. Maybe this would have changed with Aegon growing up but for now, Elia clearly was a mother but Rhaegar was a prince first, a prophecy interpreter second and a father - a distant third.

 

Mind you, I am not saying that Rhaegar should have formed any kind of bond with his son who was still an infant and couldn't even communicate verbally. It was not expected in their society. But I do have a problem with posts that imply he was involved when judging by the little we've seen of him, he wasn't.


Edited by Anath, 18 October 2013 - 07:57 AM.


#12 Gala

Gala

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 447 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 07:17 AM

post luckily saved from thread closure!

 

 
About a year. Which could mean up to, say 14 months?
The Sack is right at the end of the rebellion. The only thing happening after that is Ned taking official surrenders at Storms End, really. there is also Dany's birth 9 months later and Jon;s within a month or so of the sack.
 
So Rhaegar probably has only about 2-3 months to witness Rhaegar's birth, then everything happens with Lyanna etc. However, thats not as difficult to fit in as might initially be thought.
 

 
No reason to assume Lyanna was up north. Everything points to her being still in the south, which is also more convenient for our timeline.
 
What we need then is:
Rhaegar from KL to Riverlands to find and "abduct" Lyanna - 2 weeks?
Brandon to hear of it - a few days?
Brandon to ride to KL - a few days
Aerys to send word to Rickard et all - less than a week
Rickard et all to turn up - a month, probably less
The trials - a few days
The demand for Robert and Ned's heads to get to Jon Arryn - a few days
Jon Arryn to reply - a few days
Bang, rebellion starts officially.

Note that we aren't told where he abducted her from, so no lies there! The Riverlands, Harrenhal or Riverrun being prime candidates seem most likely for reasons laid out elsewhere.

So, given everything is deliberately vague, and Martin himself confesses he's not too good on timeline stuff, it can all fit perfectly well within 2 months or a little more, and we probably have around that much time if not a little more. What is a turn anyway, a week? a season? a month?
 


Unless of course, its not as unspeakably stupid as people think. But they are all so ready to judge on so little data - because of the results of course, but not because it didn't make sense at the time.
IMO most people here also make huge judgements on how things in Westeros will be perceived by Westerosi, judgements on events that we just don't have the cultural or specific insight to necessarily understand. And IMO that greatly affects the apparent disconnect between how Westerosi seem to perceive Rhaegar and his apparent actions.

If things don't add up, thats usually because one of the ingredients is wrong. Which is more likely to be wrong - how they interpret events, or how we interpret events (given a huge gap in our basic knowledge)?

For example, Rhaegar is widely pilloried for 'insulting' Elia and passing her over as QoLaB. But that doesn't make sense. While the award can be used as a romantic statement, it isn't always (or even mostly, it seems) used as such. Jorah clearly did, and Barristan indicates he would have used-it-as-one-without-using-it-as-one (given his adherence to his vows) but the brothers and uncle of the Whent girl clearly didn't intend to, nor did Loras to Sansa (despite the show for the crowd), nor did (probably) the KG who beat Rhaegar in the final at Storms End, nor did the winners in the D&E stories (AFAICR). Instead it seems to me that everyone expected dutiful Rhaegar to award Elia, because that sort of boringly dutiful guy he was, so when he didn't there was initial shock (all the smiles died), excitement (ooh, something interesting, is it salacious) and anger (WTF, why did he do that, thats my betrothed/sister he's messing with). But we don't hear anything more about them until the abduction, the best part of a year later, so clearly those first reactions soon passed back to the status quo.

But we put something romantic on it, because of the later actions and the fact that later they were said to be in love. Perhaps they were even then, but that doesn't mean that he insulted Elia by passing her over and awarding QoLaB to Lyanna (secretly for her KotLT exploits).

I see, I understand all you're saying.  Thank you. Unfortunately, I do not have much time now to answer your post properly, but few words.

 

My point is: we do not know exactly how much time every travelling, every event took, we do not even know where Lyanna and Rickard were at the time of events. I understand that what is more convenient for the timeline is easy to take as a truth, but it doesn't make it the truth, the same thing concerns the Rhaegar's actions. You said "judge on so little data" that's exactly what I pointing out - too little data, just not only on the abduction info, but the whole story itself, the whole timeline. Not mentioning that every time you argue here on the forum, you get "this or that character is not exactly reliable", thus everything(well, some things) that is written in the book can actually be false. 

 

I am not trying to convince anyone that there are flaws in here, I just trying to figure them out to myself, or rather look from the different angle. 



#13 theguyfromtheVale

theguyfromtheVale

    Kill the boy and let the man be born.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 09:12 AM

No. He confirmed that it was Elia nursing Aegon, with Rhaegar refusing to make a song for him because Aegon already had one and then turning his back on both of them (in most rooms, the window seat is at the window and the bed is in the bottom of the room) and picking up his harp. He stands completely detached from mother and child - an echo of Harrenhall where he (seemingly) first started distancing himself from Elia emotionally.

 

I think the moment is meaningful because that's our only encounter with Rhaegar as a father and it's clear that he isn't too interested in being one. Maybe this would have changed with Aegon growing up but for now, Elia clearly was a mother but Rhaegar was a prince first, a prophecy interpreter second and a father - a distant third.

 

Mind you, I am not saying that Rhaegar should have formed any kind of bond with his son who was still an infant and couldn't even communicate verbally. It was not expected in their society. But I do have a problem with posts that imply he was involved when judging by the little we've seen of him, he wasn't.

The point I was making was that the scene showed Rhaegar, Aegon and Elia, not Rhaegar, Lyanna and Jon. That was the question asked, and it was the answer I gave.

 

As for the rest, we'll have to see, but I do think you're interpreting your own hatred of Rhaegar into the scene.



#14 Anath

Anath

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,638 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 09:24 AM

The point I was making was that the scene showed Rhaegar, Aegon and Elia, not Rhaegar, Lyanna and Jon. That was the question asked, and it was the answer I gave.

 

As for the rest, we'll have to see, but I do think you're interpreting your own hatred of Rhaegar into the scene.

Of course. Anyone who finds Rhaegar less than loving and caring to all the world should hate him. That's crystal clear.

 

You will notice, though, that I interpret my perception of Rhaegar into the scene GRRM wrote. I did not invent a scene of my own - Rhaegar holding Aegon, Elia in the background. Rhaegar was the one in the background. Elia was at the front, as she clearly was since Aegon's birth to his death in her arms while her husband had the good luck of dying first, so he did not see everyone he cared for dying.



#15 theguyfromtheVale

theguyfromtheVale

    Kill the boy and let the man be born.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,572 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 09:58 AM

No, anybody who already casts judgement over Rhaegar when we don't have many of the details yet and when nobody in the story save Robert seems to hate him probably hates him. I'm more than ready to admit that Rhaegar probably wasn't a loving husband to Elia, but we simply do not know enogh yet to cast a final judgement.

 

Yes, I see that, but that never was my point, and I'd love to stop bickering about this pointless tangent for now. It won't lead anywhere and bears no relation to the question originally asked.



#16 Agamemnon

Agamemnon

    Squire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 12:39 PM

Obligatory reminder to stop making R+L=J threads before GRRM gets pissed we figured it all out and kills off Jon for good.



#17 Apple Martini

Apple Martini

    The Snarker on the Wall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,967 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 12:40 PM

Obligatory reminder to stop making R+L=J threads before GRRM gets pissed we figured it all out and kills off Jon for good.

 

It's a good thing he doesn't read Internet forums or let said forums influence his narrative decisions.



#18 aiiila

aiiila

    Commoner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 05:51 PM

theguyfromtheVale: I just saw your motto

 

- kill the boy and let the man be born. 
 

I feel so stupid, I always thought it was only related to Jon becoming Lord Commander, but it can also be interpreted as a huge hint to him being reborn a man with a name. Killing the bastard boy, that seriously everyone underestimates, no matter how much he helps... and being reborn with influential, magical blood (speaking metaphorically here). 

Do you guys think the direwolves, especially Ghost will have something to do with the dragons? Theirs could be the song of ice and fire, too. 


Edited by aiiila, 18 October 2013 - 05:51 PM.


#19 corbon

corbon

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,489 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 08:28 PM

My point is: we do not know exactly how much time every travelling, every event took, we do not even know where Lyanna and Rickard were at the time of events. I understand that what is more convenient for the timeline is easy to take as a truth, but it doesn't make it the truth, the same thing concerns the Rhaegar's actions. You said "judge on so little data" that's exactly what I pointing out - too little data, just not only on the abduction info, but the whole story itself, the whole timeline. Not mentioning that every time you argue here on the forum, you get "this or that character is not exactly reliable", thus everything(well, some things) that is written in the book can actually be false. 

 

I am not trying to convince anyone that there are flaws in here, I just trying to figure them out to myself, or rather look from the different angle. 

 

Indeed. You said you had a problem with the timeline, all I did was point out that it may not be a problem.

 

And that if 'unspeakably stupid' doesn't make sense, then it probably isn't right.



#20 Gala

Gala

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 447 posts

Posted 19 October 2013 - 08:30 AM

 

Indeed. You said you had a problem with the timeline, all I did was point out that it may not be a problem.

 

And that if 'unspeakably stupid' doesn't make sense, then it probably isn't right.

I was trying to say that your comment about 'judging Rhaegar's actions with such little data is wrong' applies to the events as well. We are judging/have our own opinion about every character on the data we've got. That was a stupid act from the married prince (or was it planned?), even Dany at her 14-15 (do not know exactly) understands that idea of Daario taking her on the point of a sword is stupid. The logic explanation is that he was certain about prophecy (again).