R + L = J v 72

[MtnLion]

Just one thing about Ned's speech - he says "your queen" not "the queen" and why would he call Viserys king when Ned considers Robert the true king? I think way too much is being read into these words. Calling Viserys "prince" is a courtesy that isn't strictly necessary as he's the son of a deposed/assassinated king, but Ned is a courteous dude so that makes sense. Calling him "King Viserys" would make no sense.

I also disagree that Ned was offering them an out to escape by saying "I thought you might have sailed with him" to Dragonstone. This is not an offer of anything, just an observation that he's surprised they're still around. I still don't get why anyone thinks this is Ned giving them a last chance to flee.

Ned says "Prince Viserys" as in crown prince, or heir to the throne. He is looking at events through the Kingsguard's eyes and looking for common footing. So, why did he mention things out of chronological order? Study the whole dialog and try to envision what is going on through the eyes of both parties. Ned offers them a chance to surrender to him, which is flatly refused. Then he mentions where "Prince Viserys" and "Queen Rhaella" are, which should be of paramount importance to the Kingsguard. Logically, if the Kingsguard had any motivation to guard either Viserys or Rhaella as the reason for their refusal to surrender they should broach the subject of withdrawal and terms. So, Ned is offering them a way out, and he is second in command to Robert, so he can grant them terms.

[Lyse Stark]

Just one thing about Ned's speech - he says "your queen" not "the queen" and why would he call Viserys king when Ned considers Robert the true king? I think way too much is being read into these words. Calling Viserys "prince" is a courtesy that isn't strictly necessary as he's the son of a deposed/assassinated king, but Ned is a courteous dude so that makes sense. Calling him "King Viserys" would make no sense.I also disagree that Ned was offering them an out to escape by saying "I thought you might have sailed with him" to Dragonstone. This is not an offer of anything, just an observation that he's surprised they're still around. I still don't get why anyone thinks this is Ned giving them a last chance to flee.

When Ned refers to the kingsguard's Queen, he is referring to Rhaella. Their response hints that Viserys is not king. So it must be a newborn Jon, since the rules of Targaryen succession states if the king dies, then the crown goes to his eldest son. If his son dies before the king, then it goes to the older son of the deceased prince, which is obiviously Aegon. But if the son dies without any issue, like Aegon did, then it goes to the oldest of the younger brothers. So in that essence, Aerys> Rhaegar>Aegon>Jon>>>>female claimants.

[MtnLion]

As you can tell, the ToJ leaves me flat on the actual parentage of Jon. Granted it's just circumstantial, but to many people base Jon's just those lines of dialogue.

To me, the most important evidence For is the behavior of Maester Aemon ( and by extension Bloodraven ). Aemon is the closest relative to Rhaegar emotionally, and seemingly closest philosophically in regards to the Prophesy.

I'll fill in more if you wish, but I'm at Taekwondo and have to get my son home! :)

It is not just those lines of dialog, though they stand on their own. Characterize Gerold Hightower. Then define his role in the Kingsguard.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

:blushes: Sorry.

:grouphug:

We're all here for the same basic reason, even when we disagree :)

[Ser Pollo Loco]

I love when people act like they knew Ned had nothing to do with Rhaegars children when we have characters talking about rumors such as Cat and Jaime doing the deed, cat cutting off his hand, and cat murdering Renly

They know his children are dead, not who did the deed and who complained about

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

I love when people act like they knew Ned had nothing to do with Rhaegars children when we have characters talking about rumors such as Cat and Jaime doing the deed, cat cutting off his hand, and cat murdering Renly

They know his children are dead, not who did the deed and who complained about

That's a fair point. To any bodyguard detail, the death or threatened death of a principal would mean heightened alert. Everyone without level one clearance would be suspect and have limited access to the principal(s).

[Lyse Stark]

That's a fair point. To any bodyguard detail, the death or threatened death of a principal would mean heightened alert. Everyone without level one clearance would be suspect and have limited access to the principal(s).

Exactly. The Kingsguard are denying Ned access to Jon, but he succeeded in defeating them, and took Jon away to Winterfell. He was raised as a bastard there, to ensure his safety.

[maudisdottir]

When Ned refers to the kingsguard's Queen, he is referring to Rhaella. Their response hints that Viserys is not king. So it must be a newborn Jon,

Yes that's my point, he is talking about "their" queen ie Rhaella, and the prince Viserys. The king (according to Ned) is Robert, and the Targaryen line of succession is redundant by then because their dynasty has ended. This is why I think too much is being read into what Ned says - it's all moot because Robert is king.

[Dagda]

It is not just those lines of dialog, though they stand on their own. Characterize Gerold Hightower. Then define his role in the Kingsguard.

Hightower is an interesting case of how the world of Westeros has been created. Without a doubt Gerold was an honorable LC, and obeyed a command, but who's command? He should have been with his King and it's Ned that has to tell them of the assassination. You end up with a situation where the LCKG is not doing his job.

[Dagda]

That's a fair point. To any bodyguard detail, the death or threatened death of a principal would mean heightened alert. Everyone without level one clearance would be suspect and have limited access to the principal(s).

But the principle in question would have been in Kingslanding. Why is the King being guarded by a kid Jamie?

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

But the principle in question would have been in Kingslanding. Why is the King being guarded by a kid Jamie?

Aerys is already dead by this time, as are the other heirs who would preempt Jon. Remember that there were four other KG with Aerys when Rhaegar left the ToJ. As far as we know, the three at the Tower may not have known the situation on the ground in KL until it was too late.

[MtnLion]

Hightower is an interesting case of how the world of Westeros has been created. Without a doubt Gerold was an honorable LC, and obeyed a command, but who's command? He should have been with his King and it's Ned that has to tell them of the assassination. You end up with a situation where the LCKG is not doing his job.

You see what you did there, I'm sure, you neglected to define Hightower's role within the Kingsguard. Once you do that you must deal with the fact that he is deciding what to do, based upon his understanding of the Kingsguards directives. You can read his understanding of the Kingsguard's directives, but Jaime gives the easy answer, "protect and defend the king." Ergo one must now define how the White Bull is fulfilling his mission at that tower.

[MtnLion]

Aerys is already dead by this time, as are the other heirs who would preempt Jon. Remember that there were four other KG with Aerys when Rhaegar left the ToJ. As far as we know, the three at the Tower may not have known the situation on the ground in KL until it was too late.

No, there is no doubt that they learned the Jaime had killed Aerys until it was too late, they even say so. ;)

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

No, there is no doubt that they learned the Jaime had killed Aerys until it was too late, they even say so. ;)

True indeed :)

But I was also referring to the fact that even before that they may have never known that Rhaegar took the other three with him to the Trident, which makes all the difference in the world to those who argue that the ToJ three leaving Aerys with just Jaime doesn't make sense.

[MtnLion]

True indeed :)

But I was also referring to the fact that even before that they may have never known that Rhaegar took the other three with him to the Trident, which makes all the difference in the world to those who argue that the ToJ three leaving Aerys with just Jaime doesn't make sense.

It makes strategic sense, since Rhaegar is directly responsible and Aerys indirectly. Rhaegar returned to King's Landing at Aerys' summons, but may not have known the reason for the summons. What we know is that Aerys has gone through several Hands, and very near this time he is on his Pyromancer Hand whose main responsibility to Aerys is the strategic placement of pots of wildfire. Aerys demands that Rhaegar lead the armies to put down the rebellion, and he needs to take some protection though he has sent three to the tower to guard his secret. Strategically three with the crown prince and three with his expectant wife in the open is good, but he must leave at least one with the King to coordinate the King's protection within the confines of King's Landing and the Red Keep (goldcloaks, etc.) and Aerys will not allow his leverage against Tywin out of sight. So, it is Aerys the demands that his protection rest on the fealty of Jaime, and no one thinks that it might fail. I don't see any questioning of it even in hindsight. ETA: What I mean is no one raised any questions about Jaime's loyalty before his act, not even Aerys who demanded that he bring his father's head.

[Dagda]

You see what you did there, I'm sure, you neglected to define Hightower's role within the Kingsguard. Once you do that you must deal with the fact that he is deciding what to do, based upon his understanding of the Kingsguards directives. You can read his understanding of the Kingsguard's directives, but Jaime gives the easy answer, "protect and defend the king." Ergo one must now define how the White Bull is fulfilling his mission at that tower.

Protect and defend the King. Again, what is he doing in Dorne if not commanded to be there by his King, irregardless if the new born child is now King. Aerys gave the order, or has the KG gone off the range on their own.

[Dagda]

I'll respond to the rest tomorrow, I need some sleep. Thank you for at least entertaining my question. :)

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

It makes strategic sense, since Rhaegar is directly responsible and Aerys indirectly. Rhaegar returned to King's Landing at Aerys' summons, but may not have known the reason for the summons. What we know is that Aerys has gone through several Hands, and very near this time he is on his Pyromancer Hand whose main responsibility to Aerys is the strategic placement of pots of wildfire. Aerys demands that Rhaegar lead the armies to put down the rebellion, and he needs to take some protection though he has sent three to the tower to guard his secret. Strategically three with the crown prince and three with his expectant wife in the open is good, but he must leave at least one with the King to coordinate the King's protection within the confines of King's Landing and the Red Keep (goldcloaks, etc.) and Aerys will not allow his leverage against Tywin out of sight. So, it is Aerys the demands that his protection rest on the fealty of Jaime, and no one thinks that it might fail. I don't see any questioning of it even in hindsight.

I actually don't challenge that interpretation at all. But to those who wonder why the ToJ three left Aerys with the kid Jaime I think it's a reasonable supposition to reply that they may not have known the disposition of their remaining four brothers until it was too late. Accusing them of some dereliction in that regard is a straw man of sorts.

@Dagda-- Aerys did order Hightower to the Tower (or at least to retrieve Rhaegar) What seems most likely is that Hightower followed the letter of his orders from Aerys, who may have failed to order him to return after finding the Crown Prince ;)

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

Before he departs for the Trident, Rhaegar says to Jaime that when he gets back, changes will be made. This leads into a little theory of mine ;)

To me, this would suggest that the Kingsguard stationed at the ToJ knew beforehand that Rhaegar meant to remove his father from the throne. Gerald Hightower knew just how out of hand the rebellion had become. He also knew that Aerys actions had made seeking peace with the rebels impossible, and even a man as duty bound as he knew the King was mad. I believe Gerald Hightower, Arthur Dayne, Oswell Whent, and Rhaegar discussed the rebellion, and knew that there were only 2 possible outcomes. Either Rhaegar defeats Robert and the Targaryens keep the Iron Throne, or Robert wins and the dynasty ends. I believe they agreed that if Rhaegar succeeded, Aerys would be removed from power. This would make Rhaegar the de facto King in their eyes when he left the ToJ.

There is more to this theory that I can expand upon if y'alls would be interested.

Also, I know that Hightower says that if he were there, he would have slain Jaime and Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne. That doesn't mean he wouldn't support Rhaegar over Aerys, otherwise he probably wouldn't have stayed behind at the ToJ.

[MtnLion]

Protect and defend the King. Again, what is he doing in Dorne if not commanded to be there by his King, irregardless if the new born child is now King. Aerys gave the order, or has the KG gone off the range on their own.

Does it take all seven to protect the king? How does that work, one must ask themselves. The Kingsguard take turns heading the defense of the king. The goldcloaks and men at arms in the service of the king are overseen by Kingsguard, as are armies in the field. Prince Rhaegar gave the three at the tower an order that can only be given and obeyed if Lyanna is his wife. Hightower, Whent, and Dayne stayed and defended the tower after Aerys' and Aegon's death, because they knew the child was the Targaryen heir. That is the only reasonable explanation.

ETA: Reported.