The Heresy essays: X+Y=J : Arthur + Lyanna=J

[Regular John Umber]

The key word is "reportedly", neither GRRM or D&D have actually confirmed the answer was right. Only that the answer was good enough for GRRM to give them the go ahead. To put it another way when you are sitting an exam it's possible to get a higher mark for a wrong answer where your working out of an answer still shows a strong knowledge of the subject, than you get for a right answer with no working out. D&D gave an answer that showed a strong knowledge of ASOIAF, not necessarily the right answer.

 

 I tend to agree with this, but I can't find the particular quote that makes me agree with you - it's the one where instead of answering, George apparently just gave a wry smile or something like that.. maybe I imagined that? In some interviews I've read, D&D seem to think they got it right.

[Regular John Umber]

Not accurate. You have to read the full quote.
He had asked Lord Eddard if the Kingsguard were truly the finest knights in the Seven Kingdoms. "No longer," he answered, "but once they were a marvel, a shining lesson to the world.""Was there one who was best of all?"
"The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne, ...
Arthur Dayne is referenced here not just a the finest knight, but as a Kingsguard that was a marvel, a shining example to the world, the finest knights in the Seven Kingdoms.
Kingsguards are a subset of knights, who are a subset of swordsmen. Ned referencing Arthur as the finest knight he ever saw does not ignore his Kingsguard status - that is inferred by the original subject, it merely expands Arthur's greatness. Not only was he the greatest KG, but also the greatest Knight, which is a wider population.

 I see what you're saying, but Ned's wording does give me pause. Bran is asking if the Kingsguard were the finest knights, and Ned focuses on one that he sees as the finest knight he ever saw. They're talking about knights.

 

[IceFire125]

The key word is "reportedly", neither GRRM or D&D have actually confirmed the answer was right. Only that the answer was good enough for GRRM to give them the go ahead. To put it another way when you are sitting an exam it's possible to get a higher mark for a wrong answer where your working out of an answer still shows a strong knowledge of the subject, than you get for a right answer with no working out. D&D gave an answer that showed a strong knowledge of ASOIAF, not necessarily the right answer.

They got it right.

“We had a whole conversation about it,” Mr. Benioff said, “and George was pleased that we got the answer right.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/arts/television/game-of-thrones-on-hbo-from-george-r-r-martin-novels.html?_r=3&

This NYtimes interview was done in 2011.  

And we have this 2013 Sundance Channel interview which is very consistent with their previous statements that they said before, that they got it right.

"We talked about it amongst ourselves before and we had an educated guess... which turned out to be right." - Dan

In interviews later than that, David and Dan start being vague about the answer to George (about Jon's Mother) being right.  After R+L=J became main stream in various media D&D back off from saying they got it right, to saying "George didn't really say that we got right... but we knew we got it right."

And in context, D&D talked with George in 2006, well before ADWD was released.

[corbon]

 

 I see what you're saying, but Ned's wording does give me pause. Bran is asking if the Kingsguard were the finest knights, and Ned focuses on one that he sees as the finest knight he ever saw. They're talking about knights.

 

He had asked Lord Eddard if the Kingsguard were truly the finest knights in the Seven Kingdoms. "No longer," he answered, "but once they were a marvel, a shining lesson to the world."
"Was there one who was best of all?"
"The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne

Bran asks if the KG were the finest knights. Eddard answers that once they were. So the subject is KG, not knights, although its KG as knights, so they are still talking about knights in a way.
The one who was best of all, in context must be from the KG, as that is the subject. Or the answer should be "no, the finest knight I ever saw was Ser XYZ of ABC, who was a finer knight than even the greatest of the Kingsguard"

[wolfmaid7]

They got it right.

“We had a whole conversation about it,” Mr. Benioff said, “and George was pleased that we got the answer right.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/arts/television/game-of-thrones-on-hbo-from-george-r-r-martin-novels.html?_r=3&

This NYtimes interview was done in 2011.  

And we have this 2013 Sundance Channel interview which is very consistent with their previous statements that they said before, that they got it right.

"We talked about it amongst ourselves before and we had an educated guess... which turned out to be right." - Dan

In interviews later than that, David and Dan start being vague about the answer to George (about Jon's Mother) being right.  After R+L=J became main stream in various media D&D back off from saying they got it right, to saying "George didn't really say that we got right... but we knew we got it right."

And in context, D&D talked with George in 2006, well before ADWD was released.

That Is very subjective do you have the time when RLJ became mainstream and do you have any proof that RLJ going mainstream correlated to D&D supposedly changing their tune?

 

This essay is called Lyanna + Arthur=Jon

If this is what they guessed this is in agreement with the OP that Lyanna is Jon's mom.The question was about Jon's mother,that is what they suppossedly got right.Has nothing to do with the father,that wasn't asked. So what exactly  is the problem?

 

[TRLR]

What's more telling was Martin asking them that question in the first place. His question was supposed to be a test of how much D&D knows about the books they wanted to adapt. That tells me that yes, the identity of Jon's mother is important to the series and is central to the narrative of ASOIAF. And that's there's something more to the story about Ned fathering a bastard and readers should pay attention. 

[IceFire125]

This essay is called Lyanna + Arthur=Jon

If this is what they guessed this is in agreement with the OP that Lyanna is Jon's mom.The question was about Jon's mother,that is what they suppossedly got right.Has nothing to do with the father,that wasn't asked. So what exactly  is the problem?

 

And people bring up alternative theories in previous version RLJ threads all the time.

 

My post is to correct the quoted user, anonnyscouse, which mentioned that D&D didn't necessarily get the answer to Jon's Mother, right.  To which I brought up relevant interviews that they admit, they got it right.

Yes, this thread is a focused discussion of clues, hints, narrative overall story, and what makes sense for each reader, regarding Arthur and Lyanna being Jon's true parents, I have no problems with it.  Just don't mistake that with people just gladly agreeing.  This isn't your thelasthearth website, where you can make your own rules (which is within your rights), this is asoiaf.westeros.org website, where threads will be questioned, debated, and discussed, for or against.

Like what GRRM wants us to.

 

 

 

[wolfmaid7]

You see the begining of this OP what it says. I suggest you read it again especially the part that says stick to the essay topic at hand NO reffering to other theories as if it is the default theory.I  require that of every single essay that is brought up here. That is my rule,just as the RLJ thread per the revised OP is for discussing the strengths of that theory .If people bring up other theories all the time despite your OP that's your buisness what you do an allow on your thread.That doesn't concern me.I'm trying to give other theories a space without it being bombarded with RLJ or any other theories and i hope if i missed any other posters feel free to call it out and keep it in line.

IceFire 125 you did and RLJ info dump in my thread and unsupported one at that.Things like that make it ery easy to draw the thread off topic and i don't want that.

"In interviews later than that, David and Dan start being vague about the answer to George (about Jon's Mother) being right. After R+L=J became main stream in various media D&D back off from saying they got it right, to saying "George didn't really say that we got right... but we knew we got it right."

And as i reminded others of the OP i am reminding you to please respect the parameters of the OPs.When the Rhaegar thread comes up you can do all the info dumps to your hearts desire and i won't step in.And if anyone decides to info dump on that thread i will do the same.

Can you abide by that or no? I don't mind and i welcome posts from all ,but keep it honest,keep it real and respect the person who took the time to do the OP by giving them honest and specific feedback to what "they" wrote.

Does that sound like something you are interested in? If so, looking forward to your post on the topic.If not this is where you should leave us and wait for RLJ essay or something.

[wolfmaid7]

And to posters again in general,i know its hard to critique without wanting to get a little of one's belief in there,but please try.Can you all look at a work through its own merit objectively,nothing else and have a discussion.We will get so much out of it if we can separate our preconcieved notions and our beliefs from what is before us.

Looking forward to this!

[Sly Wren]

He had asked Lord Eddard if the Kingsguard were truly the finest knights in the Seven Kingdoms. "No longer," he answered, "but once they were a marvel, a shining lesson to the world."
"Was there one who was best of all?"
"The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne

Bran asks if the KG were the finest knights. Eddard answers that once they were. So the subject is KG, not knights, although its KG as knights, so they are still talking about knights in a way.
The one who was best of all, in context must be from the KG, as that is the subject. Or the answer should be "no, the finest knight I ever saw was Ser XYZ of ABC, who was a finer knight than even the greatest of the Kingsguard"

Yeah--I'm not quite sure how we're going to be able to definitively parse Ned's intent here without more data. Is he making knights a subset of the KG? Or redirecting Bran from the KG, focusing more generally on knights? Is this a distinction? Or a distinction without a difference? With so little to go on, the text seems to support multiple readings.

But either way, the connections between the Starks and the Daynes are pretty undeniable in the novels, especially in Storm. All four of the Stark kids with POVs have some sort of reference to the Daynes in that novel. 

And the fact that Arthur is above an beyond other knights in general, let alone the Kingsguard--Jaime's idolization of him, not to mention Barristan's referencing Arthur in his "resignation"--Arthur seems to go above and beyond most knights. And to be significant to the Starks. And to Jon's identity.

[Wolf's Bane]

1.Ned + Wylla http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/135656-the-heresy-essays-xyj-ned-wylla/

2.Arthur + Lyanna

3.Howland + Lyanna

4.Mance + Lyanna

5.Rhaegar + Lyanna

6..Robert + Lyanna

7.Ned+ Ashara

8.Lyann+ Stark ( Would have loved for these to be individual,but no one took them)

9.Tywin ( Not really a prospect but a man behind the curtain kind of essay.

What do you mean by no one took them?  Do you need somebody to write a support essay for Lyanna + Brandon = Jon? 

[J. Stargaryen]

Well, can you think of any evidence tying either Jon or Lyanna to Whent? Or a bat? Or Harrenhal? Or something otherwise Whent-oriented?

A fair point. . . and the tournament is a bit of a puzzle. How did Rhaegar win everything? And seem unstoppable?

Because he was already arguably the best jouster in the 7K. Look at his known tourney record prior to HH. Only two losses. One to Dayne and one to Selmy. Both times in the finals. He entered the HH lists with a 1-1 record against those two knights.

And if we take Ser Jorah's tourney victory as a potential hint about HH, then we can assume Rhaegar was inspired romantically, or otherwise, by Lyanna.

First of all congratulations on all the hard work done for the OP.

My points of criticism.

1. I don't see the asserted disconnect of the crown to Rhaegar in Ned's mind. It is in the dungeon that he remembers the false spring, the tourney, Jaime Lannister becoming a KG, Rhaegar winning, Rhaegar putting the crown into Lyanna's lap, and that memory vision then zooms into the crown that he tries to grasp and the thorns hurting him and Lyanna's "promise me". It flows from the winning, the crowning to the reaching for the crown. There is no disconnect related to the crown. Quite the opposite - it is nothing but association.
2. I fail to follow the argument of Ned being saddened over Arthur and calling him the finest knight in combination with him being Jon's father. If Arthur soiled his cloak and let Rhaegar be the fall guy for it, then I seriously doubt he would still regard him the finest knight there was. Sure, saddened, not hostile, but not praising him as a knight.
3. While Lyanna and Ned might have feared that Jon would end up having purple eyes and ash/silver hair, clearly he never did, and then Jon's parentage is not a secret too dangerous to tell even Cat if Arthur was the father. Ned keeps his promises, but hardly ever in the way the one asking for the promise intended it (not with Barra's mother, not with Robert).
4. It basically comes down to this: that Ned soiled his own honor, not to protect Jon, but Arthur's reputation.

1. Agreed. The crown represents the beginning of a very dark time in Ned's life. He lost his father, brother and sister. And he can't exactly forget about it because of the walking, talking reminder living with him.

3. Also agreed. This is a real problem for the AD+L=J theory, imo. There's something going on with the Daynes. They're definitely involved. They're a little too present in the Stark and Targaryen stories from the period of the HH tourney through the rebellion. But I think it's more along the lines of what Sly Wren has theorized re: Jon as the SotM.

I'm not sure if the OP's explanation makes much sense. Once Ned, and possibly Howland, testify that Jon is Arthur's bastard son, it should go a long way to diffusing any potential problems. Especially since it would have the benefit of being true. In fact, probably the worst way to handle the scenario suggested by the OP -- that AD+L=J, but people would think R+L=J -- is for Ned to lie and claim Jon as his own. Because if someone discovers Ned is not his father, it's going to be a lot harder at that point to convince people that Arthur, rather than Rhaegar, is the father. Because AD+L=J isn't worth hiding, but R+L=J is.

[wolfmaid7]

What do you mean by no one took them?  Do you need somebody to write a support essay for Lyanna + Brandon = Jon? 

We couldn't get anyone to write and essay with this alternative as in no one volunteered doing it,but if you would like to do one that would be awesome.Go for it and when your done you can post it as one of the essays.

[wolfmaid7]

Because he was already arguably the best jouster in the 7K. Look at his known tourney record prior to HH. Only two losses. One to Dayne and one to Selmy. Both times in the finals. He entered the HH lists with a 1-1 record against those two knights.

And if we take Ser Jorah's tourney victory as a potential hint about HH, then we can assume Rhaegar was inspired romantically, or otherwise, by Lyanna.

1. Agreed. The crown represents the beginning of a very dark time in Ned's life. He lost his father, brother and sister. And he can't exactly forget about it because of the walking, talking reminder living with him.

3. Also agreed. This is a real problem for the AD+L=J theory, imo. There's something going on with the Daynes. They're definitely involved. They're a little too present in the Stark and Targaryen stories from the period of the HH tourney through the rebellion. But I think it's more along the lines of what Sly Wren has theorized re: Jon as the SotM.

I'm not sure if the OP's explanation makes much sense. Once Ned, and possibly Howland, testify that Jon is Arthur's bastard son, it should go a long way to diffusing any potential problems. Especially since it would have the benefit of being true. In fact, probably the worst way to handle the scenario suggested by the OP -- that AD+L=J, but people would think R+L=J -- is for Ned to lie and claim Jon as his own. Because if someone discovers Ned is not his father, it's going to be a lot harder at that point to convince people that Arthur, rather than Rhaegar, is the father. Because AD+L=J isn't worth hiding, but R+L=J is.

I would accurately put in that the Daynes are a focal point period.Not to anyone particular family.Presently,they have their hands in a lot of pots and it comes down to what they stirring.

If we go with coventional thinking of how people characterize Robert then Arthur as Jon's father would have the same consequence for Jon.He'd be son of a kidnapper.

Howland is the only one left alive and IF per se Arthur was Jon's father and it is revealed now his actions would be more understood by Jon who essentially did the same with Ygritte.Something one would look back on as irony.

Explain to me why AD+L=J isn't worth hiding? From a KGs prospective it is especially if you want your name in that white book unsoiled.

[IceFire125]

Explain to me why AD+L=J isn't worth hiding? From a KGs prospective it is especially if you want your name in that white book unsoiled.

The point of view is through Ned.  That's how we understood the story.

To keep a secret (Jon's true identity) even from the ones you love?? 

To keep Arthur's honor as a white knight?? that would equate to the heavy words that Ned told Arya?? that the lie was not without honor (Arya chasing Nymeria away, throwing rocks at her, lying that she doesn't want her), since the queen would kill the direwolf, to which Ned agreed.

“I told her to run, to go be free, that I didn’t want her anymore. There were other wolves for her to play with, we heard them howling, and Jory said the woods were full of game, so she’d have deer to hunt. Only she kept following, and finally we had to throw rocks. I hit her twice. She whined and looked at me and I felt so ’shamed, but it was right, wasn’t it? The queen would have killed her.”
“It was right,” her father said. “And even the lie was … not without honor.”

And compare that to Ned keeping Jon's identity a secret so that the 3KG's honor (who's connected since they were there together at the tower) would be upheld??

I don't think so.

 

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

The point is, people across the realm seemed to THINK Lyanna and Rhaegar were involved. And they certainly were. However it is logical to point out that them being in love and running off together, and him kidnapping her and raping her are not the only possible explanations for this widespread belief. It is an understandable mistake, Rhaegar DID crown her at Harrenhal over his wife. “All the smiles died.” It's hard to interpret it any other way, and yet, there ARE logically other possible explanations. The obvious one being that someone CLOSE to Rhaegar was carrying on with Lyanna, rather than that it was the Dragon Prince himself doing the deed.

If Rhaegar crowned Lyanna in Arthur's name, why not just allow Arthur to win? Rhaegar defeated Arthur. If they had wanted Arthur to have a chance of crowning Lyanna, Rhaegar could have let Arthur win in their tilt, after which the chances of Arthur winning would have been just as good as Rhaegar winning.

 

Well, the song is sad. Arthur was sad. Who's to say Arthur Dayne didn't write that song as a surreptitious love letter (or perhaps have Rhaegar write it for him), the same way he had his buddy Rhaegar lay the crown of blue winter roses in her lap? And why? To protect his reputation as a KG sworn to celibacy by not publicly soiling his cloak.

For one, Arthur is not described as an overall sad person. He's described to be sad on two occasions, where the circumstances are quite important. Rhaegar, for example, was described to be overall melancholy.

Second, Arhur Dayne is never associated with songs, or music, or love letters, hence, there is nothing to imply that Arhur would have asked Rhaegar to sing a love letter/song that he had written himsefl.

Third, as a KG knight, he was one of the few people who could actually have gotten away with crowning a woman who was promised to another. He had sworn an oath of celibacy, had sworn to die in his service, never to wed, never to take a wife. Yet, if he won, he would be allowed to crown any woman present, be they married, betrothed, or unpromised. If Arthur did so, it would not be a scandal. He could not take a wife, he was sworn to celibacy and thus would not be allowed to take a lover. So it would make little sense that Arthur would ask Rhaegar to crown Lyanna in his stead, so he himself could protect his reputation, whilst he would not be soiling his reputation, but Rhaegar would, in the act.

 

Myles Mooton – Slain at the Battle of the Bells. The time line is murky, but it's hard to father anybody when you're dead. But he's a young squire, it's hard to imagine a young boy inspiring much passion in Lyanna.

Richard Lonmouth – Mooton's replacement. Also a young squire. Same thing.

You seriously just above quoted that both Myles and Richard had been knighted. So calling them "a young squire" is completely wrong. They were men grown, closer in age to Lyanna than either Rhaegar or Arthur, though in all likelyhood older than her. 

 

Arthur says “blood is the seal of our devotion.

Does that sound like something a man who breaks his vows would say? 

 

And why is Arthur Dayne so sad? Could it be because he feels he bears responsibility for all that has happened? Why would he feel so unless it were true? Also there's seems to be a great fondness between Ned and Arthur. Years later, the memory of his death makes Ned viscerally sad:

  Quote

The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne, who fought with a blade called Dawn, forged from the heart of a fallen star. They called him the Sword of the Morning, and he would have killed me but for Howland Reed." Father had gotten sad then, and he would say no more. Bran wished he had asked him what he meant. - Bran, ACoK

This strange, deep fondness would make a lot of sense if Arthur was the father of Ned's sister's baby and Ned had to kill him

There is no evidence of fondness before Arthur's death, no evidence of Ned and Arthur having personally met before their duel. 

Also, very importantly, if Arthur had fathered a child on Lyanna, why would he refuse Ned entry into the tower (hence the duel), and why would there be any reason for Ned to kill Arthur?

 

I can't help but think of this gesture as a token of love and grief and mourning from Ned to his Nephew's father. And of course, to visit his dear Ashara, whom he very well may have been enamored of. 

Though even this rumor is dubious. Perhaps Ned let it fester around Winterfell on purpose, in case Jon did take on the appearance of a silver haired and/or purple eyed Dayne. It would make a convenient cover story to be sure. Ned even snaps at Cat in an uncharacteristic rage when confronted about the Ashara rumor. An effective way to make it seem as if he had no part in allowing or even perpetuating the rumor than Ned + Ashara = Jon, which, again, is the perfect cover story for Jon's possible Dayne-ish or “psuedo-Targaryen” appearance.

If Ned had any love for Arthur, he would not have dueled him. He had seen how Barristan Selmy had been pardonned, and there should be no reason for Ned to believe Robert would not do the same for Arthur, Whent, or Hightower. If Ned had wanted to, he could have offered that, but instead, he spoke only of roads the three KG could have taken, and before dueling Arthur. 

Nor does Ned allow the rumour about Ashara to 'fester around Winterfell'. He shuts it down as soon as he learns about it. 

That cut deep. Ned would not speak of the mother, not so much as a word, but a castle has no secrets, and Catelyn heard her maids repeating tales they heard from the lips of her husband’s soldiers. They whispered of Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, deadliest of the seven knights of Aerys’s Kingsguard, and of how their young lord had slain him in single combat. And
they told how afterward Ned had carried Ser Arthur’s sword back to the beautiful young sister who awaited him in a castle called Starfall on the shores of the Summer Sea. The Lady Ashara Dayne, tall and fair, with haunting violet eyes. It had taken her a fortnight to marshal her courage, but finally, in bed one night, Catelyn had asked her husband the truth of it, asked him to his face.

That was the only time in all their years that Ned had ever frightened her. “Never ask me about Jon,” he said, cold as ice. “He is my blood, and that is all you need to know. And now I will learn where you heard that name, my lady.” She had pledged to obey; she told him; and from that day on, the whispering had stopped, and Ashara Dayne’s name was never heard in Winterfell again.

 

The Dragonknight is revered as a hero in the Seven Kingdoms. Aegon the Unworthy is reviled. Of course no one wants to believe that it was the Dragonknight who's infidelity was chiefly responsible for all the bloodshed of the Blackfyre rebellions. And yet, the evidence is hard to ignore.
 

"Prince Aemon the Dragonknight cried the day Princess Naerys wed his brother Aegon," Sansa Stark said.” - Tyrion, ACoK

“The Dragonknight once won a tourney as the Knight of Tears, so he could name his sister the queen of love and beauty in place of the king's mistress.” Bran, ASoS

 

 

“He sang of... the Dragonknight and his love for his brother's queen, of Nymeria's ten thousand ships. They were beautiful songs, but terribly sad.” Sansa, ACoK

 

A sad song indeed. A tale of a KG who's forbidden love caused the devastating Blackfyre rebellion to rage throughout the Seven Kingdoms. How could a knight so highly revered as Aemon the Dragonknight, a man who has innumerable songs written about his unimpeachable valor, have fucked up everything so badly?

That Aemon and Naerys had an affair is a tale from the singers. If you want to be honest and fair, evaluate the account of the historians as well. They don't feel the need to alter details to make it a beautiful love story, after all.

The singers say that Aemon and Naerys both wept during the ceremony, though the histories tell us Aemon quarreled with Aegon at the wedding feast, and that Naerys wept during the bedding  rather than the wedding.

As well, 

it seems important to acknowledge that such rumours about Naerys and Aemon are only told where Daeron is concerned... Whereas I'd say that there is way more evidence for Naerys hoping that birthing Aegon one child would be sufficient to allow her to be freed from her marriage, which Aegon, against her wishes, denied. (Naerys was said to address her brother thus: “I have done my duty by you, and given you an heir. I beg you, let us live henceforth as brother and sister.” We are told that Aegon replied: “That is what we are doing.” Aegon continued to insist his sister perform her wifely duties for the rest of her life.) How would birthing another man's child help her in that aspect? It wouldn't.

Also, I'd say that Naerys would have had more reason to have an affair later in her marriage (after Aegon had had multiple affairs during their marriage, humiliated her, insulted her, and forced her to endanger herself - all things he hadn't done when they first married), and not in those first few months (and we know Daeron was conceived within the first few months). Yet no such rumour is ever stated about Daenerys, who was born whilst the Dragonknight still lived. 

No, instead, these rumours are only told about the boy who dared to speak against his King, and they are told and spread by the King, nonetheless. Yet if Aegon had any proof, Daeron would have lost his position as Prince of Dragonstone quite early on.

And lastly, consider the woman about who these rumours are told - the extremely pious young girl, who, according to the author, had wanted to become a septa.

 

 

A few parting questions:

- Why, in this scenario, would Rhaegar remain in hiding?

- Why, in this scenario, would Hightower ever consent to remain at the tower?

- Why, in this scenario, would Ned ever have a reason to fight Arthur, or Arthur Ned?

[Sly Wren]

Because he was already arguably the best jouster in the 7K. Look at his known tourney record prior to HH. Only two losses. One to Dayne and one to Selmy. Both times in the finals. He entered the HH lists with a 1-1 record against those two knights.

And if we take Ser Jorah's tourney victory as a potential hint about HH, then we can assume Rhaegar was inspired romantically, or otherwise, by Lyanna.

Very likely. The part that sticks out to me is still Barristan's thought that "if he'd been a better knight and unhorsed Rhaegar" he could have crowned Ashara. It's an odd phrase that may mean absolutely nothing. But why not "better fighter?" If I remember right, Barristan was considered to be the best lance. But without more data, it's all no more than a bug in my brain.

And agree that Rhaegar could have been fighting for love. But am also thinking it might have been for politics--Aerys' appearance is NOT helping. People seem to have been shocked at his appearance (if we're to believe the World Book). If Rhaegar wants to keep the support of the people putting on a REALLY good show in the lists. . . seems like that's also a good reason to ride well. With to without Lyanna.

[Sly Wren]

The point of view is through Ned.  That's how we understood the story.

To keep a secret (Jon's true identity) even from the ones you love?? 

To keep Arthur's honor as a white knight?? that would equate to the heavy words that Ned told Arya?? that the lie was not without honor (Arya chasing Nymeria away, throwing rocks at her, lying that she doesn't want her), since the queen would kill the direwolf, to which Ned agreed.

“I told her to run, to go be free, that I didn’t want her anymore. There were other wolves for her to play with, we heard them howling, and Jory said the woods were full of game, so she’d have deer to hunt. Only she kept following, and finally we had to throw rocks. I hit her twice. She whined and looked at me and I felt so ’shamed, but it was right, wasn’t it? The queen would have killed her.”
“It was right,” her father said. “And even the lie was … not without honor.”

And compare that to Ned keeping Jon's identity a secret so that the 3KG's honor (who's connected since they were there together at the tower) would be upheld??

I don't think so.

And the above interpretation--that Ned lies to protect Jon from the potential physical threat of Robert and the Lannisters--without doubt works.

But we also know that Ned lies for other reasons: to protect feelings, peace of mind. He lies for compassion and mercy--not just for physical protection. 

He's lied about Brandon and Rickard's deaths to his entire family. Even Cat. The fact that he could keep such a horrific and sensational set of facts from her is a testament to his dedication. And, far as I can see, the ONLY reason to do so, to carry that secret himself, is to protect her feelings.

If, hypothetically, Jon is Arthur's child, that means:

1. Ned was actively involved in killing the man who fathered Lyanna's child.

2. If the echoes of Sansa end up being hints at what happened with Lyanna, then the knight with the soiled cloak (Hound) was the true knight who protected the Stark maiden. And Ned killed him. Ned killed the finest knight he ever saw who was protecting his sister.

3. Ned is now the de facto father of the child of the man he killed--because he didn't understand what was going on.

Assuming those facts for the sake of hypothetical argument, I have little problem imagining Ned wouldn't want ANYONE letting those facts circulate and get back to Jon's ears. And I have little trouble imagining that Ned would want to put off telling Jon the truth for as long as possible: "Hey, boyo. You know I love you, right? Well, see, I'm not your real dad. But it's okay, because I killed your real dad. Who was a really good guy. Who was taking care of your mom. But I didn't know that. And. . . wait! No! I still love you! Really! It's all okay because I still love you!"

Throw in Ned's guilt and his having made more mistakes than Cersei can imagine, and that he's seen Cat's willingness to gossip about Jon's origins. . . Ned's guilt over the past and his fear of the pain coming to Jon. That might be an alternative way to explain the secret. Based on what we've seen of Ned.

[Sly Wren]

I would accurately put in that the Daynes are a focal point period.Not to anyone particular family.Presently,they have their hands in a lot of pots and it comes down to what they stirring.

Maybe--but they come up, directly or symbolically, in all four Stark kid POV's in Storm. Jaime won't shut up about him. But it's the Stark kids--Bran and Arya--who are being given information of specific ties to the Daynes of which they were unaware. Ties which seem to have the potential for revealing big parts of Stark family history. 

I agree that it will come down to what they are stirring--but the ties to all four Stark kids in one book--really think the Stark tie is specific and important.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

He's lied about Brandon and Rickard's deaths to his entire family. Even Cat. The fact that he could keep such a horrific and sensational set of facts from her is a testament to his dedication. And, far as I can see, the ONLY reason to do so, to carry that secret himself, is to protect her feelings.

He did?

I remember that Bran said something about his grandfather being beheaded and it makes sense that Ned wouldn't spell out the gory details for his extremely young son. But Cat would have reason to know the truth even without Ned. She was the eldest child of the Lord Paramount of the area where much of the war was fought - the war that resulted directly from the deaths of Lord Rickard and Brandon (her fiance). All the kingdoms learned of those deaths; they weren't a secret.

Are you saying that Cat never heard what happened there? If so, could you show textual support for that supposition?

ETA: And Cat, who was on the point of marrying Brandon, is suddenly told she is to marry Brandon's brother but not told why? Sorry, that makes no sense.