wolfmaid7

Members
  • Content count

    6,292
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About wolfmaid7

  • Rank
    High Priestess of the King Heretic
  • Birthday 08/26/1980

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Under the sea where the Crows are white as snow
  • Interests
    Magic,Mythology,Cultural Anthropology,Global Health and Epidemiology.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,478 profile views
  1. Heresy 192 The Wheel of Time

    Ohhh i feel the need to correct this. Baphomet isn't the original Horned god.The archetype is way older. In fact its as old as when Man began to til the ground and work with nature in that way, basically when he became an "husband." Knowledge supposedly obtain by one of the "Watchers." Eliphias Levi who was the originator of making the association with the Knights Templar did so on account of the name being closely related to the name Mahomet and mysticism in Arabia. What's different when in comes to Baphomet is that he is most related to hidden knowledge and enlightenment. Anyways its a long way of saying he isn't the original.He is a horned god yes,but even his role is different from the others. Oh i know you aren't saying one is good or bad.But what i'm getting at is the characterization of it as an inversion.If we are basically seeing the same cycle with different faces to the same roles happening the same way how is it in reverse? When it come to the cycle aspect as i said i think we are seeing one cycle and in all truth we don't know what the next cycle would bring for this world. They may remain as they have for 8,000 years or they for the first time they may make some kind of progress. If as i believe this begins and ends with the greenseers then the way the cycle looks depend on how much involvement they choose to have .Now if some powerful characters are using conduits like the Weirwoods,flames and glass candles to influence people's choice. I can see that as a breaking using the elements.For me the only way for them to progress. If the cycle is a wheel then working in reverse or counter clockwise is the bad way to go. The cycle moving forward is for the GS to do a reset and fade away;giving footing to a more natural occurrence of magic vs sorcery which is what's going on. Which brings me to your final question and thoughts.I most definitely think that events are happening again,same archetypes and roles playing out.Why? Because that's the cyclical nature of things.What is important imo is the ability of some to use sorcery via elemental conduits like the Weirwoods,glass candles,dreams,flame etc to stand outside of time and make adjustments and influence choices to as to always maintain the status quo in every cycle. A true inversion to me wouldn't be to go back and fix no? The inks dry on the past.It would be for the roles to make different choices.If the COTF or some of them want the next cycle to be different they would have to urge certain people to make a different choice than the cycle(s) before.
  2. Heresy 192 The Wheel of Time

    Oh i do believe that one use of the thematic repetition is to give it more depth,but i'm mainly on the side of it being cyclical in nature.If you are familiar with the concept of "extinction cycles" in our world you can see the same tell tale signs in this story. I've longed believe amidst the many themes in the story is us witnessing another cycle coming to a close.The messed up thing about this story and we have spoken about it before is the lack of progress made in Westeros. I mean they have made no gains at all as a culture.They are exactly the same today as they were 8,000 yrs ago I think that this cannot be stated enough.As far as Rhaegar was concerned his son was part of something and if we include what Mel said.It is the same song that has been around since the beginning of time.What i think is interesting is the perspective of the individuals and ours too.Why are some of us in the mindset to see things as fire being good and cold being bad.This is where @Feather Crystal inversion may come in.The whole cold as bad and fire as distinctly good.Could it be some place in the middle where as we've also talked about good and bad being fought in the heart. Reminds me of that Cherokee proverb except in this case the identity of which wolf is which is kept hidden. Ohhh i like this,i like this a lot. The Santa/Satan analogy lay in line with something talked on here a lot...The Oak and Holly king two side of the same coin,both battling for the rule in their turn within the Wheel of the year.In some myths they are the same with two aspects. In others two brothers. Renly and Stannis are very good examples of this.With Renly the green,youthful being opposite to Stannis who is older and more cold. It is one of my theories that we haven't yet scratched the surface when it comes to who the man in in the weirwood throne is.If we use what VSixskins was going to do to Thistle and take into consideration that him loosing his gift to skinchange was based on Thistle the possibilities are immense. What if BR isn't BR but Bran the Builder with the help of the COTF luring those with "the gift" and taking their bodies so he can essentially live forever.How this relates to this topic lay in the ultimate meaning behind Ouroborus "one is all" and i'm not sure @Feather Crystal " labeling your findings as inversion does it justice.We are talking about a cycle being played out with different players but ultimately the cycle is the same.The goal for some is the same..Immortality. I like this.And i can't help but think of the story of Esau and Jacob.Jacob who tricked his father into thinking he was his brother stole his blessing as the first born.Fast forward years later when he is with Laban working toward marrying Rachael Laban purposely gave him all the spotted livestock (seen as bad) and kept the ones without blemish.Joke was on him because the spotted multiplied and produced livestock without blemish anyway. It may be an inversion because spotted from a biblical sense is not worthy of sacrificed as its seen as unclean. The book of Enoch actually gives the reason behind this aversion to "spotted and blemished" in a parable. God had a farm basically with white live stock and during the night a thief broke in with his livestock and had them mate with God's flock creating the spotted. Some say this was a story really about the angles coming down and getting freaky with the daughters of men mixing the bloodlines of two things that should never be. I truly love this passage.I think George has incorporated the music of the spheres here.The Starks and the Direwolves are corresponding notes.So to possibly are the Targs to their Dragons. Interesting take on it. A drowned prophet with horns
  3. Heresy 192 The Wheel of Time

    The inversions angle is something i'm not convinced is happening either. At least,not in the way or as meaningful beyond the repetition of the cyclical nature of cultures.There would be conquerors,signs in the skies,climate issues,wars,some supernatural stuff,a "big bad" and a messiah like figure(s) to make things right as rain again.This to can be embodied in te meaning of the Ouroboros which represents the perennial cyclic renewal of life and infinity.Its about the concept of eternity ;the everlasting return of things .All in all another representation of the cycle of life, death and rebirth. What we are seeing is Westeros in its cycles.The possibility that even though the ages may change that cycle will still be there.Different conqueror,climate issue,wars ...etc. I do love the listing of parallels though...More on this later.
  4. Heresy 192 The Wheel of Time

    I like that .Also, the origin of the word which in Celtic means "strength,power and force" and in Hebrew means " Father of a multitude."
  5. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    I wasn't responding to you here i think.
  6. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Okay everyone get your last thoughts in.I called for close. Also, i will be unavailable from Jan 15th to mid May.Hopefully by then we have good news of the WOW front.
  7. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Was Lyanna in the throne room? I wouldn't presume anything of a sort ( unless i was there and heard it) nor could Lyanna because she wasn't there.You can't just say something like that when the person wasn't there ,and there's no reason to believe telling a dying woman something like that would be helpful on her way out ....how? If you try to sell me Ned making that choice on his own based on what he's seen in the throne room.Very possible and works well with this theory.I don't see Ned telling her that while she was dying. Sansa is pleading a lot of things,but her pleads were because the threat to Lady was imminent.A future threat that would only come to fruition if your brother tells doesn't jive with this. Ned, never changed his mind about Robert having the capability to harm him or his.Never had that happened. Well we are debating who Jon is aren't we!! The whole point is,Ned has no reason to tell Robert about Jon even if Jon was Robert's himself.All around Jon would be in danger. I get what you are saying believe me i do.I'm just saying that some take into consideration the unreliable narrator and the author's own ambiguity and assertion through various behaviors that this is a mystery. Which brings me to this point and I'm not dismissing what the author said at all.I'am factoring GRRM's penchant for misdirection.The perception by a lot of fans is that he gave an answer which depends on Rhaella having been the person that Jamie saw.That's where the count begins.Readers i believe had been drawn into Jamie's expectation of the person being Rhaella. But there is a way that it is written that calls into question the above being the case and if its thought through,a decoy being used to disseminate false information about the Queen having left when she probably left way before that is more likely the case. Being an attentive reader is discerning that Jamie didn't actually see the Queen,he saw what he expected to see. Well it depends on if the clues you speak of are clues,or one big misdirection and play on reader expectation.Expectation,the girl always runs off with prince,and they always have a secret baby who needs to be hidden from some big bad.
  8. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Sorry SFDanny but i don't agree with @Kingmonkey and you here.Especially in determining whether something is credible or not.What is "the right time?" and who determines the criteria for that? The determination is based on and only George's statement that Jon was born 8-9 mths before Dany.I have voiced my problems with this but to do it again. 1.Jon's parentage is a secret.The author in several things he has done has establish that is the case.Therefore,i highly doubt George would sink this mystery with simple math.That's exactly what this is.The only reason for George to do that is made clear by how he chose to reply to the question.There is ambiguity on Dany's side of the equation her conception and birth is not as it is. And i know @Kingmonkey hates the Rhaella angle but its solid as a rebuttal.The way that is crafted by the author, what Jamie expected to see and who was actually under that hood was different. The cultural description of what constitutes a babe also serves as concealment of a child's age.No one would query was the babe newborn or otherwise.
  9. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    You know why i re-posted you saying this right?
  10. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Robert is comfortable with people making choices for him,or blaming others for what has befallen him and that's it.At that point in time Robert has given no one any indication that he is capable of such a thing.Nothing had happened to him whereby Ned or Lyanna could have made such a leap that Robert would kill her child. Bringing this up again as a point.Ned years after the fact believes Robert wouldn't hurt "him or his" .So if this was a matter of him believing Jon was a risk from Robert because he was Rhaegar's that didn't come across.It was better off just not to have put that in.Straw man,no .Its an observation that you can't claim she didn't know him and believe she knew him just enough to know he would kill babies. I think your muddling war stories in general vs telling your eight year old son that some guy kidnapped and raped his aunt.That's quite different. No matter how gritty this time is suppose to represent,Ned isn't telling Bran or anything like that. Well we know that some parts of that story might be different.Ned says his father was forced to watch Brandon strangle.We can conclude from Ned that he "thought" Brandon died first.Jamie says that Brandon strangled while trying to save Rickard we can conclude that Jamie who was actually a witness is thinking Brandon died first. From my perspective they watched each other die and this is one of George's lesson in different people seeing different things and drawing conclusions based on internal and external forces.Which brings me to this: We can't doubt that Rickard and Brandon died at the hands of Aerys because Jamie was an "eye witness" he told us what he saw and we can evaluate from his account what is objective and what is not. Objectively,there is no doubt that Rickard was the one hanging in the suit getting roasted and that Brandon was the one at the end of the contraption getting strangled. Its subjective and thus up to debate on who died first if we find that important. Maybe,in a flashback we will actually get an account of someone who saw the kidnapping take place and thus be able to evaluate what they saw.The way this story presents things we can get. 1. Some dudes wearing Targ armor grabbed her and it turns out hey,no Targ loyalists beneath them. 2.She could have ended up getting picked up by Rhaegar and co only to use her smarts and escape them 3.What Brandon heard had something to do with Lyanna,but it had nothing to do with her being kidnapped. We don't know what Ned knows because he never thinks about Lyanna in an abducted state or in a state of running off with another man.We have ambiguity such as " her's and Brandon's wolf blood led them to an early grave." That description in itself is open to all sought of interpretation "vis a vis" what does it mean to be wolf blooded? We don't know if Lord Borrel knew anything beyond Oye we rebelling its on.You with us or you with them? When did everyone know she was missing? During or after the rebellion? Clearly fighting to get a girl back wasn't mouthed by anyone during the rebellion.It was basically a Westside brawl and when it was over it was given a nice story to make it more clean. Of-course there is such a thing as unrequited love but Ned gives no indication that Robert's feeling was unrequited.He speaks of Lyanna as a loved one absent from them both. No its not my only evidence.I think again you are diminishing human behavior especially from Ned.If this was just a figment of Robert's emotion there's no literary reason to have Ned fuel and invoke such a hollow and meaningless thing.Nor is there any reason for him to look upon it profoundly and with fondness if it was one-sided. However, none of this matters unless we can prove a case for them having sex right. Robert believes Rhaegar raped her.A statement that is not based on knowing,its based on feeling.He has no basis for the rape accusation unless there's a CSI Westeros team that i don't know about. But as i've pointed out before we do get allusions to that taking place with Robert. What prompted Ned to think of pale blue roses? If we look at it Ned's waking moment recollection about the crowning it was an account of what happened. @Ygrain has argued that Rhaegar is the only connection to the roses,but that's not true.So is Robert in the above.Robert having sex with Lyanna Cersie prompted that connection from Ned. Then we have: Another allusion where we have a young girl as a stand in for Lyanna holding Robert's baby while extracting a promise from Ned. I mean its in the narrative and there's no connection i've seen to Rhaegar beyond the rumor mill. Look at it this way and in a nutshell....Robert could say what he said about what Lyanna wouldn't do because he did nothing to cause Lyanna to show her iron side. Again and i keep saying this like a broken record.Its a matter of perspective.From Ned's point he isn't wrong about how Lyanna would react.From Robert he isn't wrong because he gave her no cause to express that side to him.We need to think of from how Lyanna would have expressed this. Ned wasn't there Varys and Robert was.Lyanna telling Robert he had no buisness fighting in the Melee.Ned told him that and immediately what did Robert do.He pulled back.If Ned had said "Robert your not fighting in the Melee" Robert would have had a different reaction.Its not complicated.What he's saying is Lyanna wouldn't have given him a command in front of his court... Hell no he could update Lyanna without telling her that.How hard would it be to not mention that. I disagree Kingmonkey there's no reason to tell Lyanna that Rhaegar's kids were murdered by Tywin and Robert did nothing. I know its feasible he certainly may have had "time" .i don't believe that there was any time to get anything beyond "take care of my child" .What Ned didn't do with regard to Robert on his deathbed gives insight into Ned.What would be the reason to tell a dying woman that.There's no reason to hurt her so. Lyannas doesn't think that Ned is blind to Robert's womanizing,she thinks that Ned is naive when it comes to love. We don't know if Lyanna thought it possible because we don't have Lyanna's thoughts beyond "Promise.me Ned." I absolutely love your post of Ned's thoughts because it points to what i've been saying.Ned believes Robert won't hurt "his" at the end of the day his blood is Jon.Flashback, if Ned believes this currently,he has always believed it therefore this angle of Ned protecting Jon from Robert because he would have killed him is not part of the underlining narrative.
  11. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Thank you for stating why you think Ned's behavior could only meant what it does.His fierce protectiveness of Jon wasn't specific,it was general. They lived 12 miles from nowhere and south of nobody wants to go there if they could help it.They were far away from any single person who could possibly want to hurt Jon. Robert calling them dragonspawn was not an indictment against Robert killing Jon if he were Rhaegar's.Ned up until their discussion in agot believed Robert to be no Tywin Lannister and incapable of killing innocents.Which means 1. Ned believed no such thing about Robert at the point when Lyanna died and..... 2.Neither did Lyanna because again her having to extract such a promise from Ned would indicate she tgought Ned capable of putting her child on the chopping block in the first. So the premise is wrong about Lyanna having such a specific promise as to single out person X. I failed to put forth a convincing argument about why Lyanna wouldn't tell Robert? I haven't put forth anything on that matter at all .You are just asking me about that. Kingmonkey's challenge was about Ned keeping the secret so long as he did and why hat might have been. .As to why Lyanna would have kept this from Robert...This is kind of a strange rebuttal if we look at it in its entirety. Reason: In a culture that frowns on bastards,where they are taught that even the gods frown on them ,having a child before you say your vows kind of makes your sin abundantly clear.What could probably have gone through Lyanna's mind at this moment. Dishonor to herself ,her family.Plus who knows what would have happened to Robert.I'm sure all these things went through her mind and more.Given all these issues and the impact this would have i doubt this would be something she would risk putting in raven mail when she found out.I am guessing this would have been when she noticed. At this point she has two options plus there's one option that she has no say in. 1.Come clean completely,come clean and with hold info. 2. Bolt like a Bolton, Head to the Vale and tell Robert yourself,Figure things out and hope nothing happens to you in the meantime on your way there. This is is my Harrenhall conception proves true. If my second idea on this hold's true and Lyanna headed to the Vale with Robert and Ned.The conception would have been there.When Aerys calls for Robert and Ned's head she like in scenario one wouldn't know she was pregnant.By the time she did find out telling Robert at that time would cause more harm than good.Best tell him when all the fighting is done. Last option and i'm using every info including the beliefs of the pro toj side.,Lyanna and others find out she's preggers,if Robert finds out Lyanna is preggers he doesn't give a flying ass about any plan to oust the Targs .He'd be content living his life with his Lyanna and his baby at SE.Forces that be need Robert to be on board,more specifically his blood ties to the Targs. Lyanna is kept from telling Robert she's preggers. I never said Robert died because of Jon's parentage.I'm saying Ned was regretting a road not taken.Had he told Robert that Jon was his.He would of had no need to marry Cersie out of Jon Arryn's suggestion that the Kingdom needed an heir. What reliable source? You think Ned or Cat would be having this conversation with their kids,with Bran. Look how Cat speaks about Bran: Nahh i don't see this being something they'd talk to their children about.From the cooks and kennel masters yes.With all the secret hidey hole Bran knows about ,he heard some crap for sure. To answer your question about Ned and what should be expected of his behavior. Of course i don't think he should have been mounting a search party for her in the middle of a war.But as i said a few times if X doesn't show up in places it should be at the times it should be then the likely hood of X is slim.Never in any discussion by Ned does "he" ever say or even infer that Lyanna was kidnapped or ran off with Rhaegar. This is strange considering the widespread belief that in some degrees this was the case.So i would expect statements and behaviors from Ned that reinforces the widely held belief.This isn't a mystery as we well know there is a belief that Rhaegar kidnapped her and a between the line message that people believe they ran off together. In this one internal monologue below for instance my take away is there exist a frame for Brandon's death in Ned's internal monologue.He died at age 20 basically in the custody of King Aerys.There exist no frame in Ned's account for Lyanna. Then we have IMO the second part to this also indicates had Lyanna not died,she and Robert would have been married.Si i don't get the sense that she ran off from the wedding. Then there's the conversation with Lord Borrel where we get the whole Aerys wanted their heads tidbit,and about if the rebels would win.How Rhaegar would defeat Robert whom Borrel's Maester at this time labeled a rebel.There's no talk about fighting to get back a sister whom Rhaegar took.No talk from anyone "during" the rebellion of a missing girl.This whole thing about Lyanna being kidnapped or running off was seems a cover for what really happened. So to repeat.She wasn't missing because she was safe and something else was happening re her condition.Through a series of unfortunate events her death was grafted to bits and pieces of what people knew and they formed an incorrect conclusion.Case in point how Tyrion and Sansa were accused of killing Joff. You ask for proof of Lyanna loving Robert and put back in your court the question i ask you.But i think i will switch my answer and come at it from a different angle using Cersie and Robert's relationship as an example.This is all about human behavior Kingmonkey. Positive response to positive stimuli.So lets look at some text. I have to thank and give a shot out to MarkG171 for doing a really nice essay about Robert's feeling and behavior regarding this.He made some excellent observations on his thread The Broken Stag .We differ on a few things but Robert being infatuated with Lyanna no. Robert's behavior and feelings as well as Ned's description tells us whether Robert's feelings were reciprocated or not.Just like i would be able o tell from your behavior if you were in a loving relationship or not.This is Steinberg's triangular theory of love and Maslow's hierarchy at their finest. What can we gather from this?First we have a statement from Jamie that Robert didn't love Cersie because odf Cersie.It was her fault,and why? Because of the below. Cersie was cold and unloving.She didn't reciprocate any efforts by Robert in the beginning that would foster love.Showing interests in his interests or being affectionate. Surprisingly,she was right about Robert.He wanted to be loved. Cersie didn't return it and he went some where else.He didn't give a crap about her at all. If Lyanna didn't reciprocate,if she like Cersie was cold to him, Robert wouldn't have loved her and he wouldn't have cared for long after she died.. He returned to his whores because they gave him something Cersie didn't...As twisted as it is they gave him more affection and warmth so he always returned to them.His friends gave him something she didn't,so he returned to them.Just like he returned to Ned. Though dead,Lyanna gave him something and she never left his heart. Ned loved him for remembering a woman that never reciprocated any feelings ? What a dick Just as strange as evoking his love for Lyanna to stop him from killing Lady .Why?.Especially if Robert got nothing out of it.As yourself why Ned found it queer that Renly possibly thought himself and Margery as Robert and Lyanna? To say that Robert was infatuated with Lyanna is a gross mis-characterization of his feelings and especially one emphasized by others. Kingmonkey that's not true as it is not what Cersie did. Cersie forbade him.She sought to command him.She didn't ask him not to fight to different things. A point Ned clarified with Ned,Ned said Cersie "asked" him not to fight.Varys corrected him....She forbade him Oh i know you wren't implying anything else.I was just bitching about being busy and not being able to post. You are right Ned knew Rhaegar's kids were dead,but what would be the point of telling his dying sister pretty messed up knew like that.Its kind of the same when Robert died and Ned not telling him Joff is not his son.The best thing would be to have them go in peace not on a crappy note like that. True that...Its not necessary for the theory. Well Aerys left his trail of blood long before he killed her brother and father.He had a history of killing people.Dude tortured and tortured wet nurses into admitting to crimes they didn't do.Killed them and then killed their families. What would make Lyanna think that Robert would be the type to murder innocent babes? Yeah but being a womanizer is a far cry from killing babies. I don't think the conclusion is wrong,what i'm showing is Ned's general protectiveness covers pretty much anything and any theory.However, my issue is the notion that Ned didn't tell Robert because he would kill Jon when in Cat 2 he says: "Ned shook his head, refusing to believe. “Robert would never harm me or any of mine. We were closer than brothers. He loves me." Then later when Robert is seeking for a vote to send assassins to Dany Ned says "You are no Tywin Lannister to murder innocents." Ned's belief is what matters yes,but its Ned's belief when.This is after Lyanna's promise and Ned doesn't think him capable of that. As to your question about would Ned think Robert's bastard would be in danger.Yes,but i have to ask why does physical danger have to be the "it" whereby a theory is validated? But to answer if Ned would believe it dangerous to tell Robert and the world that Lyanna had his son.First,when you say Jon would be just another of Robert's bastard you diminish his significance and why.He would be the son of the woman he loved most in the world.You don't think Robert would want Jon at court with him? You don't think that Robert would say eff the gods social convention Jon's my heir? Ned couldn't stop Robert from taking his son to court in the south,but what does Ned think exist there This is what he thinks exist there...Deadly vipers. We also have this dialogue with Ned and Cat after Ned says he can't take Jon to court because he would be shunned: Ned believes that by their absence at court Cersie is the reason none of Roberts bastards are there.Which is important in of itself but it also indicates that Ned has been making a note of that. Possibly over the years.From this its safe to say that if he had seen or known of Robert's bastards being their it would have meant they were accepted at court by Robert's wife.It would have been a place where Jon would of had siblings to grow up with. As i said,i think the request was more general .Watch over my boy,protect him" yada yada. See Jon could have gone anywhere it didn't matter,Ned found it difficult to just let him be.Ned could have sent him anywhere and he'd be safe from Robert.He didn't have to keep and acknowledge Jon as a bastard at all. Wouldn't the best thing have been to reason with Ned about why Rhaegar's bastard would be better off with his kin on DS? The Kingsguard could have reasoned this out with Ned and 8 lives would have been saved if this was about protecting Jon. Thank you Kingmonkey. I was just wishing harvest blessings to all as i wasn't on for Thanksgiving for those who celebrate. Next esbat for my coven is Dec 13 " Full cold moon."
  12. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Or the connection is Ned being disappointed by Robert trying to behave the way Tywin would.Really? Robert's hatred of Targs is the reason Ned lied? Then why? Totally contradicts Ned's thoughts in the dungeon.
  13. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    The questions were not a problem in themselves.The amount was a problem to a very busy person.Plus,it took me like three days to reply because the thread wouldn't let me. While i can answer this,i disagree that an answer has to be a reason to validate a theory or not. I will tell you the problem i have with your answer and then give you my reason for Ned not telling Robert Jon was his son. We know that Lyanna knew Brandon and Rickard are dead.We do not know that Lyanna knew that Rhaegar's children are dead.So i don't think that's a solid argument to make.Next,this is another nail in the coffin of Lyanna and Robert not knowing each other.She would have to know Robert to believe he was capable of killing children. Lastly,for Lyanna to illicit such a promise from Ned,says a lot about her belief of Ned in that he would just tell Robert about Jon.Such a promise need not have been enacted against Ned unless she believed that without it Ned would tell Robert. As to Jon being the product of incest,i got no rebuttals.Hell yeah he was going to keep that.That's an abomination before men and the gods. The reason for me believing Ned would keep it from Robert is two-fold. I don't believe Lyanna was specific in her promises as in protect Jon from X person. I have two thoughts (One that Lyanna died defending Jon from being taken.Won't go into that) but the other and the one i wish to propose for now is that she simply told Ned "protect Jon" It was Ned who decided the parameters and what form that would take and how protecting Jon would look like.No big bad person that's a danger to Jon.Ned in general was very protective of Jon because that's what Lyanna asked Promise me you'll watch over him,protect him. What Tywin pulled and Robert's reaction.There was noway he was going to let Jon stay there.Ned would have convinced himself how effed up Robert would be when he found out about Lyanna and thought Jon was better off with him. Then we have the cultural aspect that Ned himself has already told us and society has already beaten down throats. At the end of the day,Jon is a bastard,and being a king's bastard wasn't going to make his life any easier.He would be shunned and he would be a threat to the children of any woman he would have married in this case it would have been Cersie.We know what would have happened. From a narrative point what we end up having is Robert's bastards being killed off by Lannisters anyway so its not surprising we get this: I think the way things are setting up Cersie would have more reason to kill and hate Jon. Now i would also like to point out something else and i believe i did already. This whole speech was about regret...The lie Ned told and the truth he hid from Robert would have most likely avoided this moment.A moment where Robert led a miserable life and died a horrible death.A moment where Ned was now in a dungeon facing death. Now what could Ned have lied and kept from Robert?I believe of-course it was his true parentage.It can't have been anyone else but Lyanna and Robert.For,that defeats the whole Ned kept it from Robert because,Robert would kill Jon. So to sum...Ned was the one who chose how to interpret what protecting Jon looked like.It was at his own discretion.It so has it Cersie and Joff were killing off Robert's bastards and they are still in danger from her..and Red Priestesses come to think of it.And culturally,Ned knows the troubles that would have faced Jon at court had Robert known about him. Note: Posted my reply to you @Kingmonkey and @SFDanny .Sorry it took so long.Busy major problems posting on thread. Happy harvest everyone.
  14. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    Been trying to post for days now but couldn't.For the sake of time i bypassed some unimportant things. To your first point concerning Lyanna missing.As i said before nobody how should have been concerned with Lyanna didn't act as though she was.Bran doesn't count. Brandon does count and his behavior calling for Rhaegar to come out and die.Never making any query after her.Robert dispatching Rhaegar before asking where she is and Ned never one in his recollection behaved as such.This tells me when i put all these people's behavior together that. A.Lyanna wasn't missing and that hold notion that she was,was a post rebellion concoction that served only to romanticize the event and to be a cover for what it really was....A coup. Secondly,having seen a baby before is irrelevant as there is no evidence Ned was trying to pass Jon off as a newborn baby.That idea is a fly in the rebuttal's ointment.From what we know the only info Ned gave is Jon being his son. There are hints subtle and not when put together paints a picture that this was brought up and an explanation was provided as to why "Bastards grow up faster." We know that Cat asked questions about Jon,and Ned shot her down. This is how one crafts a mystery,by laying trinkets to prompt the question of why? For example Cat's belief which is crutch she built that served to protect Robb's status and establish him as 1st son.Where is it stated or even inferred that anyone thought that the newborn and the toddler was the same age? We have them as teenagers being labeled "they were of an age" which is different and as proof with Tyrion thinking Jon was 12 is very subjective. Lastly,as i said based on customs that we have seen it is possible and highly likely that after Harrenhall Lyanna went with Ned and Robert to the Vale. On Dany,no they wouldn't have mentioned any specifics other than Rhaella's babe.This is the culture,they view a babe from anywhere between 0-4.General labels like these are very could at messing with reader perception while not being out of place in the vernacular of the characters culture without seeming sketchy.Again its the subtly i think is being missed. You still haven't answered me.How would your significant other 's family know you love him/her?It can't be done Kingmonkey.They would never make a statement that you love him/her just by you saying it over and over.They would have to observe you with them.See how you treat them, behave around them to make such a proclamation. Ned would never use such description if all he got was Robert continually saying he loved her.Which brings me to the second problem with this rebuttal of yours.Since when does it makes sense to love someone, have others speak of how intently you love that person when you've never spent time with the person? That makes no sense. So Ned's feelings and relationship with his sister is in doubt then by your reasoning.He was fostered in the Vale at the age of 8. On paper we have two interactions with them.The night of the betrothal and when Lyanna died,so how could Ned have possibly loved her with all his heart when we only saw them on paper twice?The way Ned speaks about her tells us that they spent time together for him to form those feelings. Kingmonkey,I'm pretty sure you forgot what an infatuation is,else you would never have described Robert's feeling as a short-lived passion or a crush. Incorrect about what Ned meant Kingmonkey in telling Robert "You didn't know Lyanna as i did,you only saw the beauty and not the iron beneath."You take that out of context.The context being that Ned thought Cersie asked Robert not to fight in the Melee.Something which Robert told Ned.Cersie forbade him,shamed him.Something Lyanna wouldn't have done.Varys corrected Ned later when he gave Ned the true run down of what happened and in front of who it happened. And Ned was probably right Robert never saw Lyanna's iron side because he never did anything to illicit Lyanna's ironside. We the readers were witness to what happened ,but more to the point we have a front row seat into how rumors like these can start.Its as simple as someone being guilty by having been near someone,or have a beef with them. Yeah the app.I think my thinking on that is made clear. I have no doubt the person in Dany's vision is Rhaegar and never did.I disagree with your interpretation though as i think Dany's vision among other things was colored by Viserys's stories i.e. " Rhaegar died for the woman he loved." Based on how Dany spoke about Lyanna it is clear she didn't know her name or anything about a supposed relationship. She called her "Rhaegar's northern girl," or "The Stark girl." There's no personal anything beyond her being some girl.Its actually the same with Elia " Did the Dornish woman mistreat him." Dany doesn't know anything,because her brother didn't know anything beyond what was part of the rumor mill. You see the bold part above? The story of Rhaegar kidnapping oh sorry running off with Lyanna is like the above.One of the reasons why i can't accept it. We get the Queen of Thorns asking Sansa about Joffrey before he and Margery were married. Sansa gave them an air full and the QOT's reply and the fact of how much she loved her along with GD Margery's confident attitude hinted at them making a power move.But that's not what i meant by bringing up that situation.It was more to how it looked from viewers perception. 1.Known by most how Tyrion and Joff didn't get along. Joff humiliated Tyrion and Sansa at their wedding and continued to do so at his wedding. This would serve as a reason why Tyrion would have killed him. 2. Sansa is mocked and beaten at Joff's behest.He kills her father.He's dead and she goes missing. To onlookers she most definitely had a reason to want him dead and the fact that she's missing doesn't look good. 3. Cersie was told by Tyrion one day her joy will, turn to ash etc.Now he's dead. Tyrion was there and accused by the queen in front of everyone as being the culprit .Queen says it was him so it must have been him. Parties insulted,the one that insulted turns up dead as a result of foul play,Insulted proclaimed to be the cause even though it is stupid to believe that they would do that and not expect to be fingered for the deed. That's what i meant. Yet,Rhaegar's family don't know anything more than the exact same rumor.Nothing intimate to add.No Rhaegar told me this or that about Lyanna. This is all an in world fabrication to either vilify both parties or romanticize both parties.The subtly tells us what was real and what wasn't
  15. Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

    I'll throw some light on this. If Lyanna had lived, we should have been brothers, bound by blood as well as affection."-Got pg.51. "Robert will never harm me or mine,we were closer than brothers.-Got.Pg 59. "You say you love Robert like a brother,would you leave your brother surrounded by Lannister?"-Got.Pg 63. "He looked across the room at Robert. His old friend, closer than any brother. "Please, Robert. For the love you bear me. For the love you bore my sister.Please."-Got.pg 158-159. "What's happened he(Jon) asked."The King is dead<snip> "Jon,I'm sorry, he was your father's friend wasn't he? "They were close as brothers once."Got pg 559-560 Now let's look at this repeated theme in light of the below: but then somehow he was back at Winterfell again, in the godswood looking down upon his father. Lord Eddard seemed much younger this time. His hair was brown, with no hint of grey in it, his head bowed. “… let them grow up close as brothers, with only love between them,” he prayed, “and let my lady wife find it in her heart to forgive …”<snip> We see this repeated theme of how close Robert and Ned were...Closer than or close as brothers. Baratheon and Stark.We see Ned praying a prayer and hoping that "they" grow up as close as brothers with love between them.Wishing Robb and Jon had the same relationship he and Robert had. We even for a bit of connectivity we have Jon himself evoking the phrase. First,off what? running around babbling!! Secondly,Ned didn't lie to Cat about Jon's age.He said nothing about that or when he fathered Jon to Cat.All he told Cat was "Jon is my blood that is all you need to know." We can retrospectively look at Bran's vision of Ned praying at the Heartree and get a better perspective of what happened regarding this. but then somehow he was back at Winterfell again, in the godswood looking down upon his father. Lord Eddard seemed much younger this time. His hair was brown, with no hint of grey in it, his head bowed. “… let them grow up close as brothers, with only love between them,” he prayed, “and let my lady wife find it in her heart to forgive me." From this its safe to say Ned was already at Winterfell with Jon and Cat had yet to arrive.That is is saying "let his wife forgive him," means he hadn't told her anything about Jon at that point. Cat may have found out about Jon before she arrived at WF,but what she knows is either based on the rumor mill or she found out about Jon when she arrived at WF. At which point when she couldn't take it anymore and she asked about Jon she got that famous reply " He is my blood and that's all you need to know." Cat didn't that Ned fathered a child or when.She cared that he brought Jon home to live with them.That was the affront.She said it herself,her mind wasn't on Ned and what he was doing and who he was doing it with.Her mind was on Robb. She doesn't care about if he was cheating. And again what she knows and how she knew it didn't come form Ned,so even she has no point of reference that is from te horses mouth at that time. You know what the difference between your bold and the below is? Her {Cersei’s} eyes burned, green fire in the dusk, <snip>. “The night of our wedding feast, the first time we shared a bed, he called me by your sister’s name. He was on top of me, in me, stinking of wine, and he whispered Lyanna.”Ned thought of pale blue roses, and for a moment he wanted to weep.—Ned,GoT, pg. 480.------ I am 100% sure Robert whispered Lyanna's name..Eye witness who was there telling us about it.I have context and circumstance Yours: I got nothing,no context no circumstances and coincidentally it "wasn't recorded"So i don't even know how it happened and if it did.