Heresy Project X+Y=S+L=J

[Kingmonkey]

On 17/01/2016 at 2:10 PM, Julia H. said:

Scenario 3: Rhaegar kidnaps Lyanna in order to obtain her magical bloodline to further the birth of a dragon. In this case, the question is whether he also purposefully kidnaps Benjen, thinking that both of them are needed, i.e., that Rhaegar specifically wants a Stark incest baby for some reason. Or does Rhaegar want to father a baby on Lyanna himself, with Benjen somehow managing to interfere? (If you think so, go back to Scenario 2.) If Rhaegar has plans with two Starks, will Benjen or Lyanna or both of them be willing participants? Or will they just do as they are told?

 

To be honest, in my opinion this scenario borders on horror, and granted, it wouldn’t be the first time in ASOIAF, but still… It would indicate that Robert is correct about Rhaegar, and it would be difficult to explain how Ned can be so calm when Rhaegar’s memory comes up or why he seems sad thinking of Arthur Dayne who apparently took part in what Ned would consider total abomination. How is it possible that Ned never thinks that Arthur Dayne wasn’t really the number one True Knight of the realm that everybody believes him to have been? Nor is it likely that Benjen would talk to Jon about sex and fathering bastards in that light-hearted way – he would probably recall having sex as experiencing a trauma, especially knowing the consequences.

 

We can shake this scenario up a bit to make it work a little better. Suppose KotLT was Lyanna, who had been secretly training with Benjen, and that the KotLTs piecemeal armour is the same one that Benjen told Howland that he could get his hands on. Rhaegar find out Lyanna was the KotLT and that she and Benjen are really close. He later learns, while travelling in the south, that Aegon as TPTWP is only half the equation -- as well as a Man of Fire, there needs to be a Great Wolf. He thinks of Lyanna and Benjen, realises that with a little encouragement and privacy they're already of a mind to be parents to the Great Wolf, and nabs them both. After Lyanna falls pregnant, he releases Benjen as a sign of good-will towards Ned. As a result, Ned becomes aware of the ToJ, and thus knows where to find Lyanna after the seige of Storms End is lifted. He sends Benjen back to Winterfell to fill the vacant role of Stark in Winterfell until he gets back, and sends him to the wall after that for his actions. 

Thus we have basically willing participants. No trauma, no reason to hate the people involved, and a good reason for Benjen's black cloak. 

[Ygrain]

Kingmonkey, I find it hard to believe that, whether I used „god of the gaps“ correctly or not, you wouldn’t be aware that your starkcest theory is based on the gap in the knowledge of Benjen’s whereabouts prior the Rebellion. On the other hand, we do know now that Rickard was already heading towards Riverrun when the news of Lyanna arrived, and as the only known remaining Stark to act as „Stark in Winterfell“ is Benjen, that’s where he most likely was. Lyarra - whose name and existence is, BTW, a complementary information - couldn't have been around at that time because she is not a factor even earlier, in Bran's vision of Lyanna and Benjen who are concerned with only father and Nan finding out, not mother.

As for the twincest, other users have explained you which factors contributing to Ned's conclusion you are failing to take into account, and your counters are moot. Ned wouldn't need Jaime as the main suspect for the murder of Jon Arryn because he already knows from Lysa's letter that it was Cersei's doing. Confiding to one's twin a secret that would cost you your life, lives of your children and possibly even the rest of your family is way beyond confiding "normal" adultery. Talking about the adultery and treason is nonsensical in the given situation while having sex is due to Jaime being horny because it was his first and only opportunity to have sex with Cersei during the whole journey to the North when he couldn't touch her.

That's about all I have to say here.

[sciteacher]

6 hours ago, Ygrain said:

 the only known remaining Stark to act as „Stark in Winterfell“ is Benjen,

As for the twincest, other users have explained you which factors contributing to Ned's conclusion you are failing to take into account, and your counters are moot.

Two things. First thank you for using the term moot correctly. I see so many people say something "is a mute point" and it makes me cringe.

And a real question about the Stark in Winterfell "rule". How confident are you that this means "no matter what, there must always be a Stark physically on the premises of Winterfell" as opposed to "The North depends on there always being a Stark to rule Winterfell".

Could it only mean that there shouldn't be a time when every single Stark (male?) is put in a position of great risk. That there shoul always be at least one Stark kept safe to preserve the bloodline.

 

[Ygrain]

40 minutes ago, sciteacher said:

Two things. First thank you for using the term moot correctly. I see so many people say something "is a mute point" and it makes me cringe.

And a real question about the Stark in Winterfell "rule". How confident are you that this means "no matter what, there must always be a Stark physically on the premises of Winterfell" as opposed to "The North depends on there always being a Stark to rule Winterfell".

Could it only mean that there shouldn't be a time when every single Stark (male?) is put in a position of great risk. That there shoul always be at least one Stark kept safe to preserve the bloodline.

 

Lol, you're welcome, but I am pretty sure that my English has other shortcomings :-)

I don't think I have ever considered the interpretation of the "rule" as it seems presented in a rather literal way when applied in the books. 

[Kingmonkey]

10 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Kingmonkey, I find it hard to believe that, whether I used „god of the gaps“ correctly or not, you wouldn’t be aware that your starkcest theory is based on the gap in the knowledge of Benjen’s whereabouts prior the Rebellion.

Fair enough. What makes a "God of the Gaps" argument is to suggest that a gap in knowledge is in itself evidence for a supposition. The classic example being an argument that God must exist because we do not have a complete understanding of the alternatives. It is very much the case that this Starkcest hypothesis relies on this gap in our knowledge of Benjen's whereabouts, but that gap is not presented as evidence for the case, rather as demonstrating that the case (unlike the Brendan Starkcest case) cannot be dismissed based on the evidence we have at hand.

This is normal. Both you and I favour RLJ over the Starkcest theory. Both of us rely on gaps that cannot be closed in another fashion to hold that hypothesis. The clearest and most obvious gap being that we do not know who Jon's parents are. There is room in that gap for the father to be Rhaegar. There is also room in that gap for it to be Benjen, and a few others. We have to consider other reasons than the mere existence of the gap to evaluate a hypothesis.

The Benjen/Starkcest theory does not arise as a conclusion from the Benjen gap. It arises from thematic parallels, from Ned's attitudes, and so on. Once we have the hypothesis, we must test the hypothesis, and the most fundamental test is to determine whether it is possible. Brendan's death means Brendan/Starkcest fails that most fundamental test. Ned sort of maybe could be possible at a stretch, but it's a fair old stretch. The Benjen gap means we cannot disprove the Benjen/Starkcest hypothesis. It passes that fundamental test of being feasible, and thus makes the thematic reasons for considering Starkcest worth the consideration. The curious case of Benjen taking the black adds nicely to the hypothesis. 

As I said at the start of the essay, I remain unconvinced by the hypothesis. It really isn't as strong as RLJ. It does however have some good reasons to consider it. While it fails to stand up to RLJ in many areas, there are some areas it seems to do a better job of explaining things. The purpose of this essay series was to explore the alternatives and see what sticks. I doubt any of the essay writers went into it believing that RLJ would lose its dominance as a result of the experiment, even if they, unlike myself, personally believe the hypothesis they present. The Benjen gap is indeed a gap in our knowledge that has to be filled with supposition to make it work, but the very fact that we have that gap means that this hypothesis cannot be easily dismissed.

10 hours ago, Ygrain said:

On the other hand, we do know now that Rickard was already heading towards Riverrun when the news of Lyanna arrived, and as the only known remaining Stark to act as „Stark in Winterfell“ is Benjen, that’s where he most likely was. Lyarra - whose name and existence is, BTW, a complementary information - couldn't have been around at that time because she is not a factor even earlier, in Bran's vision of Lyanna and Benjen who are concerned with only father and Nan finding out, not mother.

As I pointed out in my response to your post with the quote from the App, we don't actually know that Rickard was already heading to Riverrun, we only know that his wedding party was. We suppose he was with them. Like we suppose that Lyarra was dead by then. Like we suppose that Rickard took the "Stark in Winterfell" idea seriously enough that he wouldn't consider being at his heir's wedding more important if Benjen had failed to turn up on time.

This actually sort of is a God of the Gaps theory. We do not know who was the Stark in Winterfell at the time, so it must have been Benjen. I agree with you when you say "That's where he most likely was", as it happens -- but it remains an unproven supposition. We certainly can't use the supposition that he was the Stark in Winterfell at the time to disprove a theory that requires him to have been elsewhere. 

10 hours ago, Ygrain said:

As for the twincest, other users have explained you which factors contributing to Ned's conclusion you are failing to take into account, and your counters are moot. Ned wouldn't need Jaime as the main suspect for the murder of Jon Arryn because he already knows from Lysa's letter that it was Cersei's doing. Confiding to one's twin a secret that would cost you your life, lives of your children and possibly even the rest of your family is way beyond confiding "normal" adultery. Talking about the adultery and treason is nonsensical in the given situation while having sex is due to Jaime being horny because it was his first and only opportunity to have sex with Cersei during the whole journey to the North when he couldn't touch her.

I have to agree with Sciteacher, it always cheers me up to see someone use the word "moot" correctly. 

There is a simple inconsistency in your suggestion. Certainly confiding such a secret is a great risk, but it's less of a risk than actually doing the deed. If Jaime and Cersei were willing to take the risk of actually doing the deed, it really makes no sense to suggest they would have thought it too risky to take the significantly lesser risk of talking about it. It's a pretty fair bet that Cersei and Jaime felt there was no danger of discovery, or they would not have been shagging each other. If they were so sure there was no danger of discovery, then they'd have no reason not to talk about such secrets. 

Look at it from Ned's viewpoint. He realises that there must have been an attempt to silence Bran, to stop him from revealing some great secret. Ned knows what that secret is: Cersei's children are not Robert's. That is reason enough to silence Bran. This being the case, do you really propose that Ned would think "There's no chance that Cersei would risk mentioning her infidelity to Jaime in Winterfell, but she would risk having sex with him in Winterfell, so clearly he's the father?"

Again, a gap. There is a missing step in Ned's deductive process, which is simply not presented in the text. That's undeniable. We can propose that he hated Jaime so deeply that he'd think the worst of him. We can propose that he made an intuitive leap based on hair colour and proximity. We can propose that GRRM just made a common error in working back from the conclusion to the deduction. Or we can propose that the missing step was intentionally hidden because it stems from something kept from Ned's PoV, the Starkcest parentage of Jon -- and that this omission was in fact an intentional clue. These are all possibilities for what was going on in GRRMs mind when he wrote the deduction with a missing step, and you can prefer one or the other, but ultimately that is all it is, a preference. The gap, though it may be filled in a later book, remains. 

[SFDanny]

On January 22, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Again, a gap. There is a missing step in Ned's deductive process, which is simply not presented in the text. That's undeniable. We can propose that he hated Jaime so deeply that he'd think the worst of him. We can propose that he made an intuitive leap based on hair colour and proximity. We can propose that GRRM just made a common error in working back from the conclusion to the deduction. Or we can propose that the missing step was intentionally hidden because it stems from something kept from Ned's PoV, the Starkcest parentage of Jon -- and that this omission was in fact an intentional clue. These are all possibilities for what was going on in GRRMs mind when he wrote the deduction with a missing step, and you can prefer one or the other, but ultimately that is all it is, a preference. The gap, though it may be filled in a later book, remains. 

Again, kingmonkey, there is no error on Martin's part. You assume Ned must reach his conclusion based on evidence and you have been shown the evidence, but refuse to accept it as adequate without bringing in a theory for which the only evidence is your own theory itself.

What we are given is more than enough evidence to explain Ned's guess. He has a huge bias against Jaime for many reasons detailed in the series up to this point - his taking Robert's throne, his killing of a king he was sworn to protect, his supposed connection to killing Jon Arryn, Ned's belief he is tied into a plot to kill and silence Bran, Ned's witness of his callous orders to kill Jory and Wyl - and Ned has watched Cersei and Jaime's closeness during the most of the time covered in the opening book.

It is not a great leap for Ned to use his bias and that background to guess it is Jaime who is the father of Cersei's children. If we are looking at Sherlock Holmes solving a case, you maybe right, but we are not. Ned invites Cersei to the godswood and puts forward the claim he knows her children are not Robert's, and he guesses, based on all of the above, that Jamie is the father. If he is in a modern court of law, perhaps he should find out for sure who is the father rather than guessing, but he doesn't have to. He has his belief Cersei can't lie in a godswood - hardly logical in itself - but it works. Cersei confesses. Closer to Perry Mason, than Sherlock, but we got to the truth.

[Kingmonkey]

On 25/01/2016 at 0:08 AM, SFDanny said:

Again, kingmonkey, there is no error on Martin's part. You assume Ned must reach his conclusion based on evidence and you have been shown the evidence, but refuse to accept it as adequate without bringing in a theory for which the only evidence is your own theory itself.

Your objection applies equally to the counter-argument. Yes, people have given reasons that could explain why Ned came to the conclusions he did, but again those are not theories with evidence, they are supposition.

The key point here is that we do not know. There is quite simple nothing in the text that tells us how Ned came to those conclusions. There is a gap in the deductive process. Whenever someone proposes a reasoning for Ned, be it hatred of Jaime, reference to Targaryen incest, Jaime's presence at Winterfell, or the idea I suggested here -- they are guessing, because it's never stated in the text that this is what prompted Ned. 

 I certainly don't deny the possibility that in GRRMs mind, it was exactly these things that prompted Ned's guess. If they were though, that raises the question of why we never see Ned reflect on any of these issues when considering the question. Ned's deductive process is illustrated in his PoV right up to the conclusion that Cersei's children are not Roberts. The next step, the conclusion that they are Jaime's, is not present in the text. We see a leap from one conclusion to the next -- a narrative gap.

While the standard explanations that have been argued by you and others are perfectly reasonable explanations in plot terms, they do not answer the question of why GRRM omitted this part of Ned's thought process from the narrative. Perhaps he was simply going for impact by keeping that from the reader, but given the way GRRM writes, I would expect to see some kind of hint in Ned's PoVs to indicate he was thinking along those lines. People have come up with possible explanations, but not indications that these were explanations that Ned was considering in that context. The advantage of the hypothesis presented here is that it gives a reason why GRRM would chose to leave this part of the deductive process out of the narrative. 

 

 

 

[SFDanny]

11 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

Your objection applies equally to the counter-argument. Yes, people have given reasons that could explain why Ned came to the conclusions he did, but again those are not theories with evidence, they are supposition.

The key point here is that we do not know. There is quite simple nothing in the text that tells us how Ned came to those conclusions. There is a gap in the deductive process. Whenever someone proposes a reasoning for Ned, be it hatred of Jaime, reference to Targaryen incest, Jaime's presence at Winterfell, or the idea I suggested here -- they are guessing, because it's never stated in the text that this is what prompted Ned. 

 I certainly don't deny the possibility that in GRRMs mind, it was exactly these things that prompted Ned's guess. If they were though, that raises the question of why we never see Ned reflect on any of these issues when considering the question. Ned's deductive process is illustrated in his PoV right up to the conclusion that Cersei's children are not Roberts. The next step, the conclusion that they are Jaime's, is not present in the text. We see a leap from one conclusion to the next -- a narrative gap.

While the standard explanations that have been argued by you and others are perfectly reasonable explanations in plot terms, they do not answer the question of why GRRM omitted this part of Ned's thought process from the narrative. Perhaps he was simply going for impact by keeping that from the reader, but given the way GRRM writes, I would expect to see some kind of hint in Ned's PoVs to indicate he was thinking along those lines. People have come up with possible explanations, but not indications that these were explanations that Ned was considering in that context. The advantage of the hypothesis presented here is that it gives a reason why GRRM would chose to leave this part of the deductive process out of the narrative. 

"Whenever someone proposes a reasoning for Ned, be it hatred of Jaime, reference to Targaryen incest, Jaime's presence at Winterfell, or the idea I suggested here -- they are guessing, because it's never stated in the text that this is what prompted Ned."

What is the difference between those three proposals? The difference is that there is a huge build up of the antagonism between Ned and Jaime in the text prior to Ned's guess, there is also the establishment of Targaryen incest as a fact practice in the history of their rule, or the simple fact of Jaime's presence at Winterfell, and in the case of your proposal of Stark incest there is - what? There is your proposal and nothing else to support it other than your contention that there must be something more to explain Ned's deduction. kingmonkey, I'm not disputing that they are all guesses. I just think saying all of these are all just guesses misses the point. There is evidence supporting three of those guesses, making them more likely. Your guess is extremely unlikely because it has nothing that suggests the existence of Stark incest between Lyanna and any of her brothers or her father.

There is a reason, kingmonkey, why I referenced Sherlock Holmes and Perry Mason. They are two characters in detective novels who use very different methods of discovering the "who dunnit" of the crime. Ned is not modeled on either one. We don't expect Ned to give us every step in his deductive process to explain how he reached his guess that Jaime was the father of Cersei's children because it isn't the same type of novel that the detectives inhabit. In fact, in some ways, Ned is operating in the same type of mystery as a Colombo story - the reader knows who did it. We know there is incest going on between Cersei and Jaime from very early on from Bran's discovery. It isn't a story we need spelled out. We just need to know that Ned has guessed the fact and is finally catching up to the reader. Does the story suffer because he makes a guess, and that guess is right? I don't think so. If this was Sherlock, again, we would likely feel that the author had departed from the detective's deductive process, but we have no reason to think Ned thinks like Sherlock, and there is no reason in the story to assume he must. 

What Ned has in common with Perry Mason is that the lawyer always solves the case through putting the suspects under his "withering" cross examination. In this case that is reduced to asking Cersei to admit her crimes before the Godswood. Not exactly Perry's modus operandi, but as close as we can get with Ned.

But even if we, for the sake of argument, accept the idea there is incest going on in the Stark clan, it doesn't mean Jon is the product of that incest. If we want to talk about deductive leaps without support, then we have to acknowledge this conclusion is just that - without support of evidence. In fact all the evidence points the other way. It suggests that when Jon is conceived, Lyanna is separated by death from her Father and Brandon, and is very likely separated by many, many leagues and by warring armies from Ned and Benjen. It is only the wildest of speculation that can conjure up how either of her two living siblings could have come into contact with her during the time in question. Again, while we have the least of evidence surrounding Benjen, we have some evidence that he was in Winterfell at the time of Ned's return, and we have the author's remarks to point to him taking on the role as the Stark in Winterfell during the rebellion as likely meaning just that. With Ned the speculation getting Lyanna and him together is even wilder and crazier than with Benjen because we know where Ned was during many points of the rebellion and being near Lyanna just doesn't fit with those facts.

[Kingmonkey]

On 01/02/2016 at 10:30 PM, SFDanny said:

What is the difference between those three proposals? The difference is that there is a huge build up of the antagonism between Ned and Jaime in the text prior to Ned's guess, there is also the establishment of Targaryen incest as a fact practice in the history of their rule, or the simple fact of Jaime's presence at Winterfell, and in the case of your proposal of Stark incest there is - what? There is your proposal and nothing else to support it other than your contention that there must be something more to explain Ned's deduction. kingmonkey, I'm not disputing that they are all guesses. I just think saying all of these are all just guesses misses the point. There is evidence supporting three of those guesses, making them more likely. Your guess is extremely unlikely because it has nothing that suggests the existence of Stark incest between Lyanna and any of her brothers or her father.

There is certainly more evidence to support the circumstances of those three guesses than the incest hypothesis, I don't disagree. Why I think it's you who's missing the point is that you are not considering the fact that there is zero evidence that any of these three circumstances are relevant to Ned's deductive process.

When you look at these four hypotheses and question Starkcest as being unproven by comparison, you are making a false equivalence. The other three hypotheses are evidence from which you draw a possible conclusion, while the fourth is itself a conclusion for which I'm looking for evidence. 

These three hypotheses start from something we know. We know there was Targaryen incest. We know there was antagonism between Ned and Jaime. We know that Jaime was at Winterfell. The vital missing link is how we can get from those facts to Ned concluding that Jaime was the children's father.

The process of deduction requires that evidence points to a singular conclusion. In this case, the conclusion is an extraordinary one -- that the Queen's secret lover is her own brother. Not one of these three hypotheses comes remotely close to being sufficient to demonstrate the conclusion.

Ned hates Jaime, but there are many, many things that he does not blame Jaime for.

Targs practiced incest, but Lannisters supposedly don't.

The attempt on Bran's life implies that Bran stumbled across the secret, but does not imply that he actually witnessed Cersei's adultery taking place. Nor was Jaime by any stretch the only person in Winterfell. 

If one of these three hypotheses is what lead Ned to deduce that Jaime was the father, then Ned made a leap of logic to get there. I don't say that's something GRRM could not have chosen to write, but nonetheless we have no evidence for that leap of logic. Whatever caused Ned to come to this conclusion is omitted from the text.

To say that there is "nothing that suggests the existence of Stark incest" is overstating the case. Certainly it isn't even remotely on the same level of certainty as the basic arguments behind the other hypothesis. We know about Targ incest. We know Ned hates Jaime. We know Jaime was in Winterfall. There are reasons to consider the possibility of Stark incest. Firstly, there's that connection between the lead characters. Secondly, there's the mystery of Jon's birth coupled to the paralleling between Jon and Joff. Thirdly, there is the question of appearance.

This last point is a very important one in this context. We have had our attention drawn to two characters in this series whose appearance is unusual in that it appears to reflect only one parent, Joff and Jon. In the case of both characters, the question of their parentage is a central mystery of the novel. In one case one we see a PoV character solve, in the other it is left to the reader to solve. In the first case, his appearance leads to the realisation that the character is a child of incest. In the second case...

The question is not "How did Ned figure out Jaime was the father." We simply don't have the answer to that question, only guesses. The question is "Is there reason to suspect that Jon is a child of incest", and the point being made here is that if he was, we get a neat explanation for something that is otherwise somewhat mysterious.

The Targ incest hypothesis benefits from being based on something we know. However, it is not sufficient to lead to the conclusion, it does not follow in a visible line from the thought processes we have been shown, and there is no reason why GRRM would not have included it in the chain of Ned's thoughts shown to the reader.

Jaime's presence in Winterfell benefits from being based on something we know. However, it is not sufficient to lead to to the conclusion, does not follow in a visible line from the thought processes we have been shown, and there is no reason why GRRM would not have included it in the chain of Ned's thoughts shown to the reader.

Ned's hatred of Jaime benefits from being based on something we know. However, it is not sufficient to lead to to the conclusion, does not follow in a visible line from the thought processes we have been shown, and there is no reason why GRRM would not have included it in the chain of Ned's thoughts shown to the reader.

Starkcest does not have the benefit of being a known fact. However it IS sufficient to lead to the conclusion, it DOES follow in a visible line from the thought processes we have been shown, and there IS a reason why GRRM would not have included it in the chain of Ned's thoughts.

This is not an exercise in attempting to figure out what lead Ned to suspect Jaime, it's an exercise in determining whether there is a decent case for the Starkcest possibility. Of course the Starkcest answer isn't the only answer to Ned jumping to the conclusion he does. Of course there are other possibilities. However, none of them are as satisfying. All the other possibilities require Ned to have made a logical leap, and GRRM to have omitted a part of Ned's thought process for no reason. The Starkcest hypothesis makes for a far smaller deductive leap on Ned's behalf, and gives a reason for GRRM's omission. In short, this is a case where Starkcest would explain some things that other hypotheses leave unexplained, and that adds to the reason for considering Starkcest a possibility.   

 

[SFDanny]

On February 2, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Kingmonkey said:

There is certainly more evidence to support the circumstances of those three guesses than the incest hypothesis, I don't disagree. Why I think it's you who's missing the point is that you are not considering the fact that there is zero evidence that any of these three circumstances are relevant to Ned's deductive process.

When you look at these four hypotheses and question Starkcest as being unproven by comparison, you are making a false equivalence. The other three hypotheses are evidence from which you draw a possible conclusion, while the fourth is itself a conclusion for which I'm looking for evidence. 

These three hypotheses start from something we know. We know there was Targaryen incest. We know there was antagonism between Ned and Jaime. We know that Jaime was at Winterfell. The vital missing link is how we can get from those facts to Ned concluding that Jaime was the children's father.

The process of deduction requires that evidence points to a singular conclusion. In this case, the conclusion is an extraordinary one -- that the Queen's secret lover is her own brother. Not one of these three hypotheses comes remotely close to being sufficient to demonstrate the conclusion.

Ned hates Jaime, but there are many, many things that he does not blame Jaime for.

Targs practiced incest, but Lannisters supposedly don't.

The attempt on Bran's life implies that Bran stumbled across the secret, but does not imply that he actually witnessed Cersei's adultery taking place. Nor was Jaime by any stretch the only person in Winterfell. 

If one of these three hypotheses is what lead Ned to deduce that Jaime was the father, then Ned made a leap of logic to get there. I don't say that's something GRRM could not have chosen to write, but nonetheless we have no evidence for that leap of logic. Whatever caused Ned to come to this conclusion is omitted from the text.

Kingmonkey, before going over some of the same ground again, may I point out an important fact you keep leaving out about Ned's "leap of logic" to guess Jaime is the father of Cersei's twins - he isn't the only one to draw this conclusion. Stannis Baratheon draws the same conclusion Ned does independent  any contact with Ned. Davos even asks Stannis if he has any "proof" of the charge, but Stannis goes on about Edric Storm as a proof of a sort. A proof that has everything to do with Cersei being unfaithful but nothing to do with Jaime being the father. Obviously, Stannis makes the same sort of leap in logic Ned does. Are we to now assume that Stannis must have some experience with "Baratheoncest" for him to have made this leap? Is there some sort of pandemic of incest going on amongst the High Lords of Westeros? Or is it just that once one deduces that Cersei has been unfaithful to Robert and that her children are not his, then guessing who the father is really isn't that hard after viewing the twins for an extended period of time?

Why does Ned make this "leap of logic"? I think we have been given the reason. We see through Ned's eyes how he views both Cersei and Jaime. We know Ned's distrust of the Lannisters from almost the very beginning of the book, and his distrust of Jaime just continues to grow. We learn of Ned's encounter with Jaime on the Iron Throne, we know of his distrust for Jaime for his violation of Kingsguard oath in killing Aerys,  we know of Ned's suspicions concerning Jaime's involvement in trying to kill Bran and have an assassin finish the job, we know of his fear that Jaime or the Hound will find Arya, we know Ned blames the Lannisters for Jon Arryn's death, we know he fears for Robert being murdered in the melee from Lannister plots, and we know Ned witnesses Jaime's lesson with Jory and Wyl. On and on, we are shown why Ned hates and distrusts Jaime Lannister, and how he believes the twins to be part of plot to take over the kingdom, and in the process kill people he loves. The question becomes not why would Ned's guess be that Jaime's the father of Cersei's children, once he has solved the question of her infidelity, but but why would he not suspect him first?

Lastly, and once again, I'd ask you look at the scene of Ned and Cersei in the godswood. It is clear from the scene Ned guesses Jaime is the father, and it is clear that he knows as a fact Cersei has been unfaithful. Ned lays his suspicion of Jaime out as a question, that Cersei then confirms. There really isn't more of an explanation needed here. Certainly inventing "Starkcest" is not needed to explain the scene.

[Kingmonkey]

13 hours ago, SFDanny said:

 Stannis Baratheon draws the same conclusion Ned does independent  any contact with Ned. Davos even asks Stannis if he has any "proof" of the charge, but Stannis goes on about Edric Storm as a proof of a sort. A proof that has everything to do with Cersei being unfaithful but nothing to do with Jaime being the father. Obviously, Stannis makes the same sort of leap in logic Ned does. Are we to now assume that Stannis must have some experience with "Baratheoncest" for him to have made this leap?

Should we assume that Jaime threw Stannis' son from a tower, too? This one cuts both ways. The 'evidence' that has been proposed to give Ned his reasons don't apply to Stannis any more than the Starckcest concept does, so this argument doesn't help either case.

We simply do not know how Stannis came to his conclusion. We don't have a Stannis PoV where he considers it. However we do have a Ned PoV where he considers it, yet for some reason this part of the deduction is missing from the narrative, and we don't know how Ned came to his conclusion either. Whichever reason you think Ned had for jumping to the conclusion he did, this remains true. That in itself should give us pause. 

Obviously I'm not suggesting that a similar case in the detective's own family is the only possible explanation for coming to such a conclusion -- that would be absurd. However, like the other explanations given, it's a possible one. Unlike the other explanations given, it explains the narrative omission. 

13 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Why does Ned make this "leap of logic"? I think we have been given the reason. We see through Ned's eyes how he views both Cersei and Jaime. We know Ned's distrust of the Lannisters from almost the very beginning of the book, and his distrust of Jaime just continues to grow. We learn of Ned's encounter with Jaime on the Iron Throne, we know of his distrust for Jaime for his violation of Kingsguard oath in killing Aerys,  we know of Ned's suspicions concerning Jaime's involvement in trying to kill Bran and have an assassin finish the job, we know of his fear that Jaime or the Hound will find Arya, we know Ned blames the Lannisters for Jon Arryn's death, we know he fears for Robert being murdered in the melee from Lannister plots, and we know Ned witnesses Jaime's lesson with Jory and Wyl. On and on, we are shown why Ned hates and distrusts Jaime Lannister, and how he believes the twins to be part of plot to take over the kingdom, and in the process kill people he loves.

Yet as you point out above, Stannis comes to the same conclusion without any of that.

13 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The question becomes not why would Ned's guess be that Jaime's the father of Cersei's children, once he has solved the question of her infidelity, but but why would he not suspect him first?

Because these things aren't in any way connected. Yes, Ned dislikes and distrusts Jaime immensely, but he doesn't blame Jaime for every single sin that he might possibly have committed. Ned's not exactly a big fan of Tywin or of the Hound either, why doesn't he suspect either of them?

This argument can be reduced to:

A woman is discovered to have been cheating on her husband.

Her brother is a truly nasty and corrupt man.

Therefore the woman was having sex with her brother.

You really think this is a reasonable and obvious chain of inference?

13 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Lastly, and once again, I'd ask you look at the scene of Ned and Cersei in the godswood. It is clear from the scene Ned guesses Jaime is the father, and it is clear that he knows as a fact Cersei has been unfaithful. Ned lays his suspicion of Jaime out as a question, that Cersei then confirms. There really isn't more of an explanation needed here. Certainly inventing "Starkcest" is not needed to explain the scene.

What's missing is how Ned arrived at his guess. It's not just a shot in the dark here -- yes, he's asking her to confirm it, but he's already quite certain of his conclusion before he asks the question.

Quote

"Why here?" Cersei Lannister asked as she stood over him.
"So the gods can see."
She sat beside him on the grass. Her every move was graceful. Her curling blond hair moved in the wind, and her eyes were green as the leaves of summer. It had been a long time since Ned Stark had seen her beauty, but he saw it now. "I know the truth Jon Arryn died for," he told her.
"Do you?" The queen watched his face, wary as a cat. "Is that why you called me here, Lord Stark? To pose me riddles? Or is it your intent to seize me, as your wife seized my brother?"
"If you truly believed that, you would never have come." Ned touched her cheek gently. "Has he done this before?"
"Once or twice." She shied away from his hand. "Never on the face before. Jaime would have killed him, even if it meant his own life." Cersei looked at him defiantly. "My brother is worth a hundred of your friend."
"Your brother?" Ned said. "Or your lover?"
"Both." She did not flinch from the truth.

AGoT ch.45

We can see from Ned's first line that he's here to get a confession from Cersei, in front of the gods. Then he tells her that "I know the truth Jon Arry died for". That indicates he's already pretty confident what the answer is, he just wants to hear it from her. Yet there is no step from infidelity to incest. He doesn't try to get her to confirm that her children are not Roberts before going on to the question of the father, he jumps straight in with the idea of Jaime as her lover, and only after he's established that does the subject of the children come up. 

Quote

"All three are Jaime's," he said. It was not a question.

AGOT ch.45

It was not a question.

Ned's questioning here is not the reveal for him. He's already very confident he knows the answer. He knew before he ever came to the Godswood. He wants her to confess, so the gods know it too. 

 

 

[Melisandre's White Pubes]

Stannis may have had help from Melisandre - she may have seen something in her fires that gave Stannis the clue he needed to make the connection.

 

[SFDanny]

6 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

Should we assume that Jaime threw Stannis' son from a tower, too? This one cuts both ways. The 'evidence' that has been proposed to give Ned his reasons don't apply to Stannis any more than the Starckcest concept does, so this argument doesn't help either case.

We simply do not know how Stannis came to his conclusion. We don't have a Stannis PoV where he considers it. However we do have a Ned PoV where he considers it, yet for some reason this part of the deduction is missing from the narrative, and we don't know how Ned came to his conclusion either. Whichever reason you think Ned had for jumping to the conclusion he did, this remains true. That in itself should give us pause. 

Obviously I'm not suggesting that a similar case in the detective's own family is the only possible explanation for coming to such a conclusion -- that would be absurd. However, like the other explanations given, it's a possible one. Unlike the other explanations given, it explains the narrative omission. 

Yet as you point out above, Stannis comes to the same conclusion without any of that.

No, we should assume the particulars of Stannis's distrust comes from his own interaction with the Lannisters, and especially in his interactions with the twins. The individual actions that give both men the same hatred and suspicions are from their own histories. In Stannis's case he has a long history of working on the King's small council in King's Landing and observing and interacting with the twins. This culminates with his growing belief that the Queen is being unfaithful to Robert. Stannis goes to Jon Arryn to get him to help gather evidence, and Stannis is convinced - wrongly, but still convinced - that it is this investigation that causes the Lannisters to murder Jon Arryn. So we need to observe that both Stannis and Ned reach the conclusion, from reasons both share and ones that are particular to each, that the Lannisters killed Jon, that they are a danger to the realm, and the Queen has indeed been unfaithful to Robert. And one other very important perspective they share. Both Stannis, and Ned observe their enemies over a length of time - a much longer period in Stannis's case. They both cannot but notice the closeness of the twins, and we have no examples of other men sharing this closeness with the Queen remarked by either Stannis or Ned.

So, we have both men independently reaching the same conclusions based on some of the same information (the book of linages, visiting Robert's bastards, and observing the closeness of the twins, etc.) and through their own particular interactions with the Lannisters. Are we then to assume only those who have incest in their own family history can then make the educated guess that Jaime is the father of Cersei's children? No, I think not.

What it shows is that the correct guess can be made by two men with different experiences with the Lannisters, once they have both concluded Cersei has cheated on Robert and her children are not his.

Now, let us think on what would be the natural steps in both men's investigation once they have reached the conclusion of Cersei's infidelity. It would be to gather evidence on who she cheated with in order to set the best evidence before Robert. Unfortunately, there are no Maury Povich type shows who specialize in DNA tests and exposing cheaters in Westeros. They must rely instead on observation to see if the cheating continues because they both can't go back in time to observe the actual time of each child's conception. Again, unfortunately, neither has a spy network that can be trusted, so it is their own observations that must suffice in the conclusions they draw. Neither are going to get eyes in the Queen's bed chamber, so it is only their observations of who she spends her time with that can point the direction to the father.

But Ned goes one step further. He decides he must confront Cersei and see what she says and how she reacts. Ned's honorable way of putting Cersei  "to the question" or the "Perry Mason" method as I called it. His questioning has the drawback it can all be denied by Cersei if the charge is laid on her before others, but it confirms Ned's suspicions and belief he can convince Robert of the truth.

6 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

Because these things aren't in any way connected. Yes, Ned dislikes and distrusts Jaime immensely, but he doesn't blame Jaime for every single sin that he might possibly have committed. Ned's not exactly a big fan of Tywin or of the Hound either, why doesn't he suspect either of them?

This argument can be reduced to:

A woman is discovered to have been cheating on her husband.

Her brother is a truly nasty and corrupt man.

Therefore the woman was having sex with her brother.

You really think this is a reasonable and obvious chain of inference?

What's missing is how Ned arrived at his guess. It's not just a shot in the dark here -- yes, he's asking her to confirm it, but he's already quite certain of his conclusion before he asks the question.

I think the way you put the argument leaves out much of what I've said. I'd put it another way.

The Lannisters demonstrate they are capable of great crimes including kingslaying, murder, attempted murder, and are forever grasping of more power.

Evidence shows them to be involved in the assassination of the Hand of the King, and in plots against the King himself.

Independent investigations point to Queen Cersei being guilty of cuckolding the King and having placed three children falsely believed to be Robert's own in line for the throne.

The closeness of the twins suggests the Queen's own brother is the most likely candidate for the father of Cersei's children.

On confrontation with Cersei she admits this to be true.

What's missing is not what makes Ned likely to make the guess he does - again, Stannis reaches the same conclusion - or why Ned confronts Cersei to find out if his guess is true, but why Cersei tells Ned the truth? Perhaps it is the power of the Old Gods, or perhaps it is only Cersei believing she can get away with anything, but she does.

7 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

We can see from Ned's first line that he's here to get a confession from Cersei, in front of the gods. Then he tells her that "I know the truth Jon Arry died for". That indicates he's already pretty confident what the answer is, he just wants to hear it from her. Yet there is no step from infidelity to incest. He doesn't try to get her to confirm that her children are not Roberts before going on to the question of the father, he jumps straight in with the idea of Jaime as her lover, and only after he's established that does the subject of the children come up. 

It was not a question.

Ned's questioning here is not the reveal for him. He's already very confident he knows the answer. He knew before he ever came to the Godswood. He wants her to confess, so the gods know it too. 

 

 

What Ned is certain of is what he says before "It was not a question." He knows going in that the children are not Robert's. He suspects they are Jaime's. He asks the question, "your brother or your lover?" because of his suspicion and Cersei confirms it. She also confirms their involvement with Bran's attempted murder. He then makes the statement, "All three are Jaime's" telling her he knows the children are not Robert's. The reveal is that, other than admitting to killing Jon Arryn, Cersei admits to all of Ned's accusations. Accusations based on solid evidence, and on educated guesses.

[Kingmonkey]

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

No, we should assume the particulars of Stannis's distrust comes from his own interaction with the Lannisters, and especially in his interactions with the twins. The individual actions that give both men the same hatred and suspicions are from their own histories.

Do you not see how circular the reasoning is becoming here? Ned has a long-standing hatred  and distrust of the Lannisters. Where do you get the idea that Stannis shared that before he discovered Cersei's secret? It seems like you've concluded that this is how Ned drew his conclusions, so it must be how Stannis drew his.

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

 And one other very important perspective they share. Both Stannis, and Ned observe their enemies over a length of time - a much longer period in Stannis's case. They both cannot but notice the closeness of the twins, and we have no examples of other men sharing this closeness with the Queen remarked by either Stannis or Ned.

Indeed it's true that Stannis had a much longer period in which to observe the interaction of the twins, and that's why there isn't really a question about Stannis' conclusions. We don't know how he came to his conclusion, but then he had plenty of time to do so, off-screen. Ned on the other hand shares his thoughts with us through his PoV chapters, yet this step in his deduction is also missing.

The closeness of the twins does not demand that they are having sex -- that closeness could be expected even if they were not, for the simple reason that they were twins. We can propose that in Stannis' case, over an extended period of time, he saw things that were not normal even for twins, and that clued him in. There is no problem with this, because it all happened when we weren't looking. We have no such clues in Ned's PoV, while we were looking.

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

So, we have both men independently reaching the same conclusions based on some of the same information (the book of linages, visiting Robert's bastards, and observing the closeness of the twins, etc.) and through their own particular interactions with the Lannisters. Are we then to assume only those who have incest in their own family history can then make the educated guess that Jaime is the father of Cersei's children? No, I think not.

We don't know what evidence Stannis used to draw his conclusions. We know that Ned and Stannis shared some information (critically the lineages), but we have no idea what other information Stannis had that allowed him to draw his conclusions. As you pointed out yourself, Stannis was on this a lot longer than Ned. Why would you assume he was limited to the same observations Ned had made to draw his conclusions?

I have answered the "only those who have incest in their own family history" thing twice already. 

On 08/02/2016 at 0:01 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Obviously I'm not suggesting that a similar case in the detective's own family is the only possible explanation for coming to such a conclusion -- that would be absurd. However, like the other explanations given, it's a possible one. Unlike the other explanations given, it explains the narrative omission.

Come on SFDanny, repeating this is getting awfully close to a straw man argument, and you are way better than that. 

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

I think the way you put the argument leaves out much of what I've said. I'd put it another way.

The Lannisters demonstrate they are capable of great crimes including kingslaying, murder, attempted murder, and are forever grasping of more power.

Evidence shows them to be involved in the assassination of the Hand of the King, and in plots against the King himself.

Independent investigations point to Queen Cersei being guilty of cuckolding the King and having placed three children falsely believed to be Robert's own in line for the throne.

The closeness of the twins suggests the Queen's own brother is the most likely candidate for the father of Cersei's children.

On confrontation with Cersei she admits this to be true.

I don't think there's much in what you've said that was omitted in what I said, you just expanded it a bit. 

On 08/02/2016 at 0:01 PM, Kingmonkey said:

A woman is discovered to have been cheating on her husband.

This is the same as your step 3.

On 08/02/2016 at 0:01 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Her brother is a truly nasty and corrupt man.

This is the same as your steps 1 and 2. The only difference so far is that I have summarised more.

On 08/02/2016 at 0:01 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Therefore the woman was having sex with her brother.

And this is where we diverge, though I'm not quite sure you intended to. By mentioning only "the closeness of the twins", you've omitted any relevance for your first two points, which were the main points being given in favour of Jaime as suspect before. I did however omit the closeness issue. I could then insert a line before this which reads:

Her brother is her twin, and they are very close.

Twins very often are very close, but very rarely are having an incestuous affair. The fact that they are twins is sufficient to explain their closeness. If anything, this is an argument against the conclusion. If Jaime were Cersei's second cousin, it would be a more likely conclusion to come to, because you'd simply have to conclude that Jaime was a nasty piece of work and quite prepared to risk cuckolding the king. As they are twins, you must also conclude that he and Cersei are breaking a huge cultural taboo on top of that, while at the same time the closeness of the two becomes less noteworthy. 

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

What Ned is certain of is what he says before "It was not a question." He knows going in that the children are not Robert's.

What he says before "It was not a question" is not simply that the children are not Robert's, but "All three are Jaime's". That's what Ned is certain of.

On 08/02/2016 at 7:47 PM, SFDanny said:

He suspects they are Jaime's. He asks the question, "your brother or your lover?" because of his suspicion and Cersei confirms it. 

I think you're misreading the context of this question. Look at what he says this in response to:

"My brother is worth a hundred of your friend."

He already knows who Cersei is talking about, because she said it right there. This isn't really a question. He's presenting a false choice to Cersei. There's no situation where the correct answer could be "My lover, not by brother", because she's talking about her brother. This is not a matter of identity, but a matter of perspective. Ned already knows that her brother and her lover are the same person, and by asking that question in that way, he lets her know that he knows. The reason Cersei doesn't try to deny it is because she knows that he wouldn't be asking that question unless he was already convinced of the answer. Denying it wouldn't change his mind.

Ask yourself this: what would Ned have thought if Cersei denied it? Do you think he would have believed her and moved on to other suspects? If not, then what purpose does asking that question serve, other than to tell Cersei that he knows the truth -- which is exactly what he says right at the start of the meeting?

Quote

"I know the truth Jon Arryn died for," he told her.

 

[SFDanny]

3 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

Do you not see how circular the reasoning is becoming here? Ned has a long-standing hatred  and distrust of the Lannisters. Where do you get the idea that Stannis shared that before he discovered Cersei's secret? It seems like you've concluded that this is how Ned drew his conclusions, so it must be how Stannis drew his.

The only way you get to my reasoning being circular is if you don't read what I'm saying. I've given the examples stretching back to the sack of King's Landing to Ned's hatred and distrust towards the Lannisters. I don't think you really disagree with any of this. But then I say, 

On February 8, 2016 at 11:47 AM, SFDanny said:

No, we should assume the particulars of Stannis's distrust comes from his own interaction with the Lannisters, and especially in his interactions with the twins. The individual actions that give both men the same hatred and suspicions are from their own histories. In Stannis's case he has a long history of working on the King's small council in King's Landing and observing and interacting with the twins. This culminates with his growing belief that the Queen is being unfaithful to Robert. Stannis goes to Jon Arryn to get him to help gather evidence, and Stannis is convinced - wrongly, but still convinced - that it is this investigation that causes the Lannisters to murder Jon Arryn. So we need to observe that both Stannis and Ned reach the conclusion, from reasons both share and ones that are particular to each, that the Lannisters killed Jon, that they are a danger to the realm, and the Queen has indeed been unfaithful to Robert. And one other very important perspective they share. Both Stannis, and Ned observe their enemies over a length of time - a much longer period in Stannis's case. They both cannot but notice the closeness of the twins, and we have no examples of other men sharing this closeness with the Queen remarked by either Stannis or Ned.

So, I'm not sure what part of "from their own histories" or "Stannis's distrust comes from his own interaction with the Lannisters" gets you to conclude I'm saying I've "concluded that this is how Ned drew his conclusions, so it must be how Stannis drew his." My point is exactly the opposite. In my quote above, not only do I make this clear, but I lay out what we know of Stannis's history, as little as that is, that we can assume are factors in Stannis's distrust. These are different than Ned's, and yet they reach the same conclusion. Independent histories, different interactions with Lannisters, and with the twins in particular, but the two men reach the same conclusion. There is no circular reasoning. You are just missing the point of the importance of both of these men reaching the same conclusion.

The entire basis for your "Starkcest" idea rests on filling in the reason Ned makes the jump to the conclusion of Jaime's being the children's father because of a possible case of incest in his own family. Yet, given that both of us don't believe there is a incest in both the Stark and Baratheon families, we then have to ask if Stannis can make the same leap in logic without this personal experience with incest, then why do we make the assumption that this is a likely explanation for Ned's ability to make that leap in logic? Isn't it more logical that because both men make the same leap, and we agree that both don't likely share a history with incest, that it isn't necessary for that history of incest to exist to draw this conclusion, to make this leap in logic. Something other could, and likely does drive both of them to reach the same conclusion.

As an alternative, I share examples from the books that support both the distrust both men feel, and the fact of long time observation of the twins - much longer in Stannis's case, but substantial in Ned's case as well - by both men. I put forward the simple idea that an educated guess of Jaime as the father of Cersei's children, independently reached by Ned and Stannis, is not unlikely given both histories of the two men.

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

Indeed it's true that Stannis had a much longer period in which to observe the interaction of the twins, and that's why there isn't really a question about Stannis' conclusions. We don't know how he came to his conclusion, but then he had plenty of time to do so, off-screen. Ned on the other hand shares his thoughts with us through his PoV chapters, yet this step in his deduction is also missing.

The closeness of the twins does not demand that they are having sex -- that closeness could be expected even if they were not, for the simple reason that they were twins. We can propose that in Stannis' case, over an extended period of time, he saw things that were not normal even for twins, and that clued him in. There is no problem with this, because it all happened when we weren't looking. We have no such clues in Ned's PoV, while we were looking.

Yet what both men share is that they reach the conclusion that Cersei's children are not Robert's. The reach this conclusion for some of the same reasons. We know this because Ned follows Jon Arryn's and Stannis's investigation and some of the same clues - Grandmaester Malleon's tome, the look of Robert's bastards both men have seen, etc - and we know they both reach the same conclusion. It is this conclusion and the educated guess of who is the likely father that fills out the story form both Stannis and Ned.

So, you're right the closeness of the twins does not demand that they are having sex. But once one knows Cersei is having sex with someone other than Robert, then the question becomes who is that person? The observable closeness of Jaime to Cersei - observable by both Stannis and Ned over different stretches of time - and the lack of other notable candidates makes the guess that Jaime is the likely father not only believable, but likely, on the part of both Ned and Stannis.

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

We don't know what evidence Stannis used to draw his conclusions. We know that Ned and Stannis shared some information (critically the lineages), but we have no idea what other information Stannis had that allowed him to draw his conclusions. As you pointed out yourself, Stannis was on this a lot longer than Ned. Why would you assume he was limited to the same observations Ned had made to draw his conclusions?

We also know Stannis relies on the looks of Edric Storm in forming his conclusion. We know he goes to see Gendry, just as Ned does in following his footsteps. But there may well be more in terms of what sparks Stannis's suspicions. Far from disagreeing with you here, I assume there is, and we just don't know all the history.

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

I have answered the "only those who have incest in their own family history" thing twice already. 

Come on SFDanny, repeating this is getting awfully close to a straw man argument, and you are way better than that. 

No straw man here. As I said above my disagreement with you seems to be around you not understanding the significance of both men reaching the same conclusion without both having a presumed personal history of incest in their families. It is not that I think you believe both men have had engaged in incest. I read your response and accept you don't think that is true.

4 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

I don't think there's much in what you've said that was omitted in what I said, you just expanded it a bit. 

This is the same as your step 3.

This is the same as your steps 1 and 2. The only difference so far is that I have summarised more.

And this is where we diverge, though I'm not quite sure you intended to. By mentioning only "the closeness of the twins", you've omitted any relevance for your first two points, which were the main points being given in favour of Jaime as suspect before. I did however omit the closeness issue. I could then insert a line before this which reads:

Her brother is her twin, and they are very close.

Twins very often are very close, but very rarely are having an incestuous affair. The fact that they are twins is sufficient to explain their closeness. If anything, this is an argument against the conclusion. If Jaime were Cersei's second cousin, it would be a more likely conclusion to come to, because you'd simply have to conclude that Jaime was a nasty piece of work and quite prepared to risk cuckolding the king. As they are twins, you must also conclude that he and Cersei are breaking a huge cultural taboo on top of that, while at the same time the closeness of the two becomes less noteworthy. 

I think I've already answered all of this in the above. If I've missed something then draw it to my attention and I'll gladly respond.

5 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

 

What he says before "It was not a question" is not simply that the children are not Robert's, but "All three are Jaime's". That's what Ned is certain of.

I think you're misreading the context of this question. Look at what he says this in response to:

"My brother is worth a hundred of your friend."

He already knows who Cersei is talking about, because she said it right there. This isn't really a question. He's presenting a false choice to Cersei. There's no situation where the correct answer could be "My lover, not by brother", because she's talking about her brother. This is not a matter of identity, but a matter of perspective. Ned already knows that her brother and her lover are the same person, and by asking that question in that way, he lets her know that he knows. The reason Cersei doesn't try to deny it is because she knows that he wouldn't be asking that question unless he was already convinced of the answer. Denying it wouldn't change his mind.

Ask yourself this: what would Ned have thought if Cersei denied it? Do you think he would have believed her and moved on to other suspects? If not, then what purpose does asking that question serve, other than to tell Cersei that he knows the truth -- which is exactly what he says right at the start of the meeting?

 

Please note that Ned asks the questions "Your brother?" and "Or your lover?" before he lays out "the truth Jon Arryn died for." Up to this point he is guessing Jaime is the father of her children. He knows the children are not Robert's, but he guesses they are Jaime's. Cersei then admits Jaime is her lover as well as her brother. After hearing about Jaime's attempt to kill Bran, Ned then states, "all three are Jaime's" and the author tells us that Ned is no longer asking a question. Ned knows from his investigation and from Sansa's revelatory comment about how there is nothing alike between Joff and Robert, that the children are not Robert's. He has brought Cersei to the godswood to both see if she would deny what he knew and or confirm both what he knew and what he suspects. She does the latter. It is really not that complicated.

kingmonkey, let me just say I enjoy not only this discussion, but also the effort to explore if some of the more crackpot territory in these books is less crackpot than we think. I know this isn't the theory you think most likely. Please take my effort to engage in this debate as a sign of respect for your effort. Even though I find little to recommend the idea and much to refute it. 

[Kingmonkey]

On 11/02/2016 at 6:42 AM, SFDanny said:

The only way you get to my reasoning being circular is if you don't read what I'm saying. I've given the examples stretching back to the sack of King's Landing to Ned's hatred and distrust towards the Lannisters. I don't think you really disagree with any of this. But then I say, 

With apologies for taking so long to reply,

My point here is that your assumption that Stannis has a similar distrust of the Lannisters to Ned derives from the fact that he came to the same conclusions as Ned. You say:

Quote

  No, we should assume the particulars of Stannis's distrust comes from his own interaction with the Lannisters, and especially in his interactions with the twins. The individual actions that give both men the same hatred and suspicions are from their own histories.  In Stannis's case he has a long history of working on the King's small council in King's Landing and observing and interacting with the twins. This culminates with his growing belief that the Queen is being unfaithful to Robert. Stannis goes to Jon Arryn to get him to help gather evidence, and Stannis is convinced - wrongly, but still convinced - that it is this investigation that causes the Lannisters to murder Jon Arryn. So we need to observe that both Stannis and Ned reach the conclusion, from reasons both share and ones that are particular to each, that the Lannisters killed Jon, that they are a danger to the realm, and the Queen has indeed been unfaithful to Robert. 

Stannis and Jon had far more time to observe the twins than Ned. Enough time that the obvious counter to the closeness argument, that you'd expect them to be close, could be overcome. In Ned's case it's different. 

However we have no idea what Jon Arryn or Stannis thought of the Lannisters BEFORE they discovered the incest. The only reason for assuming that Stannis had the same prior distrust of the Lannisters that Ned did is because he figured out the incest, and that distrust seems to have fed into Ned's deductive process. That doesn't mean that a similar distrust fed into Stannis' conclusions.

Incidentally, the observation of Bran's fall from the tower was not available to Stannis and Jon, yet they concluded the same thing. Thus if we accept that as part of the evidence Ned used to come to his conclusion, we must necessarily also assume that Stannis and Jon had some different evidence which Ned was not privy too. Otherwise the Stannis and Jon made an even bigger leap than Ned did.

Quote

The entire basis for your "Starkcest" idea rests on filling in the reason Ned makes the jump to the conclusion of Jaime's being the children's father because of a possible case of incest in his own family. Yet, given that both of us don't believe there is a incest in both the Stark and Baratheon families, we then have to ask if Stannis can make the same leap in logic without this personal experience with incest, then why do we make the assumption that this is a likely explanation for Ned's ability to make that leap in logic?

Ok, firstly let's get one thing out of the way -- that's not even remotely the entire basis, it's one singular detail. The "more of the North" stuff, the direct contrast between Jon and Joff, the parallel between the three scions of the three big families each of whom where born as their mother died, these are far more important. The possible case of incest in Ned's family is not presented as evidence for the case, but rather as a way of filling in the gaps.

We do not know how Ned came to his conclusion. Whatever you believe, this is undeniable. The text does not state how he came to his conclusion, nor does it present an unambiguous path to the conclusion. We can make guesses, but are just that, guesses. The standard assumption is that he made a leap in logic based on Bran's fall and the distrust he has for the Lannisters. The Starkcest idea offers the possibility of an alternative to this standard assumption. IF there was Starkcest, then we no longer need to look for such a large leap in logic.

Your argument about a lack of incest in the Baratheon family does not hold any water. We do not know what extra information Stannis had. Again, this is undeniable, it's just not stated in the text. As I mentioned above, Stannis did not know about Bran, which is regularly provided as part of Ned's evidence. It's pretty reasonable to assume that with far longer to investigate and far more closeness to events, Jon Arryn and Stannis Baratheon knew more than Ned Stark did. Thus Ned might rely on Starkcest without Stannis having to rely on Baratheoncest. People can come to the same conclusion for different reasons. 

 

Quote

Isn't it more logical that because both men make the same leap, and we agree that both don't likely share a history with incest, that it isn't necessary for that history of incest to exist to draw this conclusion, to make this leap in logic. Something other could, and likely does drive both of them to reach the same conclusion.

Absolutely, but what reason is there for thinking that the "something other" is the same for both men? Stannis had far more insight into events at King's Landing than Ned, he wouldn't need that extra clue. Ned does, because the information we know that he had about Joff's parentage -- that the father could not be a Baratheon -- was not enough to draw the conclusion that Jaime was the father.

Quote

So, you're right the closeness of the twins does not demand that they are having sex. But once one knows Cersei is having sex with someone other than Robert, then the question becomes who is that person? The observable closeness of Jaime to Cersei - observable by both Stannis and Ned over different stretches of time - and the lack of other notable candidates makes the guess that Jaime is the likely father not only believable, but likely, on the part of both Ned and Stannis.

Why, in a city of a million people, do you think there was a lack of other candidates? What about Lancel? Or any of the other Kingsguard? Or any of a hundred courtiers who unlike Jaime wouldn't have had to overcome a massive taboo like incest?

The simple fact that Jaime and Cersei are siblings makes Jaime a very unlikely possibility. Thus to balance this, we would need to see a strong argument FOR Jaime. That he happens to be around a lot isn't sufficient. Jaime has every reason to be around Cersei a lot, whether he was banging her or not.

Over the years, Stannis and Arryn may have observed the two closely enough to suspect. That doesn't apply to Ned.

Quote

Please note that Ned asks the questions "Your brother?" and "Or your lover?" before he lays out "the truth Jon Arryn died for." Up to this point he is guessing Jaime is the father of her children. He knows the children are not Robert's, but he guesses they are Jaime's. Cersei then admits Jaime is her lover as well as her brother. After hearing about Jaime's attempt to kill Bran, Ned then states, "all three are Jaime's" and the author tells us that Ned is no longer asking a question.

It's one question. It's a reply to Cersei stating: "My brother is worth a hundred of your friend." Brother is not at question here, Ned is outright asking Cersei to confirm that her brother is also her lover. 

I think you're missing the importance of Ned asking this question immediately after saying "I know the truth Jon Arryn died for." Ned isn't really asking a question, he's asking for a confession.

Why the Godswood? Cersei is not a Northerner, there's no expectation that it will impact on Cersei's choice of what to say, that she would be worried about lying before the Old Gods. Rather Ned is doing it for his own satisfaction. He is going there to get her to confess. He knows what her secret is, and he expects her to confess it, and he wants her to confess it in front of the Old Gods, because that's how Ned does things. 

Quote

kingmonkey, let me just say I enjoy not only this discussion, but also the effort to explore if some of the more crackpot territory in these books is less crackpot than we think. I know this isn't the theory you think most likely. Please take my effort to engage in this debate as a sign of respect for your effort. Even though I find little to recommend the idea and much to refute it. 

Seconded. I do think that as cracked pots go, this one has the benefit of actually having some things in favour of it rather than just being a random possibility that isn't strictly excluded. However it's something to explore rather than to believe in. I do very much appreciate your willingness to debate an intriguing bit of crackpottery that people don't on the whole tend to skip debating because let's face it  -- probably nobody WANTS it to be true. 

[wolfmaid7]

Bump 

[St Daga]

I want to thank kingmonkey for initially writing up this theory, and wolfgirl7 for reposting in from TLH boards, where I initially seen it and responded to it. My response is cut and pasted from that initial post, so if it is formatted weird, that is my bad.

**The bolded comments are from the original post, the unbolded, underlined or italicized are my comments to the post

I will start this response by saying that, while I am new to this board, I spend time on the Westeros and the Reddit boards, mostly just creeping and thinking about theories, and one type of theory that I have always, flat out ignored, is the Stark incest theories. I don't like it. Nope. Not the Starks, not the good guys, right? 
 

kingmonkey said:

Yeah, I'm going there. Someone's got to. It's the nuclear option, and I'm pressing the button. BAM! Suck it in. This is the option that never gets discussed because as soon as anyone raises it, they get shouted down. Nobody wants it to be true.

Wait, what? Ew! No way. That's sick. No way is Jon an incest child. Sick!

 S? Who's S? S is Stark. Jon is an incest child.

 

But I found myself clicking on this thread, more to see what it was actually about, and when I realized it was Starkcest, I almost backed out, but the bit of humor caught my attention and I decided to just read a few more lines.

Jon looks like a Stark, he acts like a Stark, not surprising because one of his parents is a Stark, and he was raised in the North by a Stark. I read GOT right after the first season of the HBO show. After concluding that book, I was pretty positive that Lyanna was Jon's mother, Rhaegar his father and Ned the uncle/martyr that raised his sister's bastard. I seen what several of my friends who had also read the books did not and I was surprised they did not pick out the details that I saw that hinted at Jon's true parentage. There is so much text that seems to fit. Of course, I am not alone in this idea. Obviously about 90% of the world is on the R+L=J train. 

I felt out the Ashara and Wylla hints, and concluded Lyanna was the one. If Lyanna is the mother, then who is the father. I felt out those hinted at options as well and it seemed like Rhaegar was the obvious choice to be the father. He kidnapped her, or she kidnapped him, or they eloped, or aliens carried them to the ToJ and forced them to have sex until they produced the offspring that would save the world, aka Jon Snow, the Bastard of Winterfell, the White Wolf and the Bestower of the Lords Kiss. Actually the R+L=J didn't even seem like such a stretch, and it still doesn't, but I am not 100% sold, because after all, GRRM is a "tricksy bird" and is far smarter, more devious and more complicated that I could ever dream of being. So part of me expects some kind of awful, gut wrenching twist.

But incest in the Stark family? That idea hurts, a lot.
 

kingmonkey said:

Tyrion thinks of Jon that “Whoever his mother had been, she had left little of herself in her son, “ but he also tells Jon that “You have more of the north in you than your brothers.” He sees only Ned in Jon, while he sees Cat's influence in Jon's brothers. If Jon is Lyanna's son but the father was not a northerner, why would Jon have “more of the north” in him than his brothers? What Tyrion is observing is that the Stark characteristics are diluted in the other siblings, but undiluted in Jon. How do you get a child with undiluted Stark characteristics? Simple, you have two Stark parents.

 

I am not niave by any means, but this idea is a tough pill to swallow. It hurts, it get's stuck when you try to swallow, it lingers. And lingers. Actually, for the last week, I have been unable to clear it from my mind, or throat. I have been combing through my books, looking at this thread and responses over on Westeros, playing out possible scenerios in my mind ... and determined that it has a lot of merit. It is ugly and uncomfortable and makes me want to brush my teeth over and over, but it has merit.

Ned thought in GoT, after he had confronted Cersei in the Godswood (amazing scene, BTW) and she had admitted the truth, "How could they have all been so blind? The truth was there in front of them all the time, written on the children's faces. Ned felt sick." Honestly that is how I felt a little bit. Sick, and shocked by my blindness to deny the possibility that Jon, who has "more of the north in him than his brothers", is a Stark/Stark. I am not saying I am sold on the theory, but I think it has more merit than many other theories floating around in the ASOIAF gulf stream. Thanks kingmonkey , for using the right blend of deduction and humor to present the topic in a way that I did not run screaming from the room, tearing my eye balls from their sockets. 

kingmonkey said:

 

Deducing that Robert wasn't the father is simple if genetically somewhat dubious detective work. Deducing that Jaime must be the dad is a shot out of the blue.

So, this has actually always bothered me in GoT, how Ned got from point A to Z. Of course, there is a lot of hinting, ducking and weaving, and omission (purposefully, of course) in GRRM's writing, and we can try to fill in the blanks, or wait until he reveals the missing parts of the alphabet. Of course, Ned is gone, and so he can't fill us in on his deduction process, but the idea that Ned realized and accepted the incest pretty calmly, almost tenderly, and with no obvious judgement, is intriguing.

One of the reasons I can see the possibility is that the Stark v Lannister set up has always been a contrast and comparison. It starts out pretty black and white, as in Good Stark and Bad Lannister, and as characters and plots develop, we see that the contrasts are not as blunt and the comparisons are more similar than we ever thought they would be. So Ned and the Starks start as the paragons of honor and Jaime/Cersei and the Lannisters as the immoral demons, but will it end with Ned the big baddie and Jaime is glowing with heavenly light. Dear GRRM, please do not do that to my Ned! 

So there are mirror's between many characters, Jaime/Ned, Cersei/Lyanna, Joffrey/Jon, Tywin/Rickard (although we really don't know much about Rickard Stark, which must be a purposeful omission, but maybe Rickard was as evilly devious and ambitious as Tywin). So, if the Lannisters have committed the big bad sin of fornication with a sibling, does that mean the Stark's have, too? Not everything has a mirror in this series, but there are a lot of them. So once, I wrapped my head around this idea of possible Jon is a Stark/Stark, thoughts and possibilities just started to pour out. A theory worth thinking about, even if you don't want to believe it or do not actually believe it at all.

To make this theory possible, we need the X + Y, and we are calling X = Lyanna, so we need to think about the Y factor. So, who is the dirty Stark daddy that = Y? 

I am going to dismiss Rickard from my line of thinking, mostly because for the comparrision to the Lannisters, the incest would need to be siblings. Unless we can draw up something to support Tywin+Cersei=Joffrey, I am just erasing Rickard from the board. 

So, Brandon, the Wild Wolf ...
 

kingmonkey said:

Brandon the Womaniser is the obvious choice. Poor Brandon, everyone blames him for everything. He seems to have done the deed with every other woman in Westeros, so why not Lyanna? If Brandon was in love with Lyanna – and even more, if Brandon knew Lyanna was carrying his child – it would help explain why Brandon blew his top so spectacularly.

Brandon and Lyanna are thought of by Ned as having "wolf-blood" that lead them both to an early grave. Ok. They were wild, but wild enough to make the beast with two backs? Brandon did react strongly, both to Rhaegar giving Lyanna the crown of blue roses at Harrenhal as well as when he found out Rhaegar had "taken" Lyanna. I mean, he raced off willy nilly to Kings Landing, dared the Crown Prince to come out and die, handed himself over to Aerys (okay, he got captured but did he really fight), and got he and his father killed. Thinking like a man in love, or one who was at least possessive, and who wanted his toy back. (Eesh, makes me think of Ramsay/Reek, and I don't like it. Need to brush my teeth, again) Barbrey Dustin alludes to Brandon and Lyanna being close, but this close? If Barbrey suspected incest, I don't think she would be quite so in love with Brandon, but who really knows what floats her boat, as she could very well be diddling Roose, who is the creepiest dude in Westeros. 

I will take this time to say that I think the whole time line of Robert's Rebellion and the period leading up to it, as well as peoples whereabouts is very loose. Intended to be that way, by GRRM, and so it is hard to rule much out as a possibility, but it seems like Lyanna would have to be already prego with brother Brandon's baby before he raced off to KL and got choked out. But it is possible. Who know's when Jon was really born, any way? In the ToJ or not; before the Rebellions started, after the Rebellion ended, or sometime in the middle; either before or after Robb was born; maybe, or eight or nine months before Dany who was born eight or nine moons after the sack of Kings Landing, unless she was born some other time and place. Okay, what ever date that could be! The timeline around Jon's birth is real vague, to say the least. 

Brandon is a possibility, but it doesn't get my gut instinct (which feels just like heartburn) going.


So, Eddard, the Quiet Wolf ...

Good old Ned ... I have learned in life that you need to watch out for the quiet ones!
 

kingmonkey said:

So onto the middle brother, Eddard. It couldn't possibly be honourable Ned though. Ned wouldn't shag Lyanna, Right? Right? Not “Dearest Ned”, who “had loved her with all his heart”, and “dishonoured [himself] and dishonoured Catelyn, in the sight of gods and men”? Wait, what?

That's why he lies awake at night, his sleep troubled for fourteen years by the terrible knowledge that he hadn't actually done anything wron... uh, I mean... well. “Old guilts”, right?

That seems a little bit strong. Or not, if you were slipping your sister a length of Valyrian steel.Shame “The thought of Jon filled Ned with a sense of shame, and a sorrow too deep for words.”

 

After leaving Cat he could have rushed south at top speed to the Tower of Joy, had a quickie with Lyanna, high-fived Rhaegar, then raced up north to gather an army to overthrow Rhaegar's family.**

                                                  **Included because of the stunningly fabulous visual this inspired in my head!  

So let's talk about Ned, whom I love as a character beyond belief, as much as I love Jon Jon, the Snow boy. Ned, who was plagued by guilt, haunted by Lyanna, by her blue roses, by her tears of blood, by her memory in general, haunted by the disapproving Kings of Winter and their snarling stone direwolves. Ned, what did you do to make you feel this way? I have no answers, but Ned must have felt it was bad, really bad. Shagging your little sister kind of bad???

Ned has probably the easiest time openings in the pre-rebellion era and even once the rebellion started. All we really know is he was at Harrenhall for the Tourney. He was also upset about Lyanna's crown of roses from Rhaegar, was described as not being as angered as his brother Brandon, he was "calmer, but no more pleased" (TWOIAF) and Ned himself described that moment as the "moment when all the smiles died". So he did not like this happening to Lyanna, but really no reason as to why. Did it insult her honor? Maybe Ned was jealous? Of course, Harrenhal and all it's drama and speculation could fill millions of threads, and is not really what this is about. I think the next we know for sure where Ned is would be when he was in the Eyrie, and Aerys demanded his and Roberts heads. It is not until books later, aDwD I think, that we get the story of Ned, the fisherman's daughter, the three sisters and getting to the North to call his banners. Then we get Ned finally getting south and fighting some battles. Ned's where abouts are more laid out once he marched south, but there are still large gaps. So much is unclear or speculation, including Lyanna's possible location(s).

All we know is Ned loved Lyanna with all his heart, he was with her when she died, he blacked out after her death. Ned loved Lyanna just slightly less than Robert, who was going to marry her. Does this mean that Ned loved her enough to marry her, oops, except he can't because she is his sister? I really don't have a flipping idea, but ... I see parallel with Ned and Jaime all through the novels. So we know that Jaime had a incestuous relationship with his sister, one that Cersei pursued even though Jaime knew it wasn't right, that Jaime and Cersei created Joffrey (as well as Myrcella and Tommen), a relationship so dangerous that it started the War of the Five Kings. So, to parallell this, could Ned and Lyanna have had an incestuous relationship, possibly pursued by Lyanna even though Ned knew it wasn't right, possibly created Jon (and maybe more babes if Lyanna had not died), which just maybe started the war we know as Robert's Rebellion? So...
 

regular jon umber said:  Can't stop thinking about this for some reason. I mean, Jaime's "by what right does the Wolf judge the Lion" is placed into a very different light if the above is true.

Lot's of wild speculation, I know. But this kicks me in the gut like good old heart burn! Ned's grief, his guilt, his reaction to Cersei in the godswood is gentle and tender. There is the moment of "he felt sick", but there is no clue as to what that means. Sick because of the incest twins, or because he is remembering with shame his own sister loving? When Cersei describes her first night with Robert, and how he drunkenly mauled her while whispering Lyanna, we get "Ned Stark thought of pale blue roses, and for a moment he wanted to weep". Why? Because Robert was a rapist? Maybe raped Lyanna, maybe Ned got drunk and forced himself on Lyanna? Maybe Lyanna got drunk and forced herself on Ned? I don't know, but it has always struck me as pretty darn weird. Okay, enough of Neddard!


So, Benjen. the Pup ...

kingmonkey said: 

Benjen asks why Jon is not eating with his “brothers”. Jon tells him that Cat thought the royal family might be offended, and Benjen's response is a rather flat “I see,” and a glance back at his brother Ned. Again Benjen seems to be checking up on Jon, trying to make sure that Eddard is treating him like one of the family. As the two had agreed, perhaps.

Our first meeting with Benjen, and he does something that Jon does too. Jon ruffles Ghost's hair. Benjen ruffles Jon's hair. Ghost is Jon's pup. Does this hint that Jon is Benjen's pup? Sneaky old GRRM!

If Benjen was Jon's father, no wonder he needed a strong drink when that subject came up. 
 

AGoT said:

Benjen Stark stood up. "More's the pity." He put a hand on Jon's shoulder. "Come back to me after you've fathered a few bastards of your own, and we'll see how you feel."
Jon felt anger rise inside him. "I'm not your son!"
"You might, if you knew what it meant," Benjen said. "If you knew what the oath would cost you, you might be less eager to pay the price, son."
"I don't care about that!" Jon said hotly.
"You are a boy of fourteen," Benjen said. "Not a man, not yet. Until you have known a woman, you cannot understand what you would be giving up."

As if the price that Benjen paid included Jon not being his son.regret Now this really is a telling passage. Benjen went to the wall only a few months after Ned returned from the war, yet he apparently did understand what he was giving up. Maybe this is just something he learned from visits to Mole Town with his new brothers, but it certainly seems to suggest that Benjen had been sexually active before he paid the price. The line “after you've fathered a few bastards of your own” almost sounds like Benjen is saying “like I did”, and Benjen actually calls Jon “Son.” Jon, feeling rejected by Ben trying to talk him out of it, lashes out with “I'm not your son”, and Benjen's reaction is

 

Benjen and Lyanna were close, they were the two children that did not seem to be sent somewhere to be fostered so had time together at Winterfell. In a Bran vision, we get what appears to be Benjen and Lyanna in mock sword play. Maybe that is not all of the sword play they were involved in? I am not sure of their age difference, only that Benjen is referred to as the youngest. It could not have been many years, I would not think. Brandon and Ned are barely a year apart, that could have happened with Lyanna and Benjen. I have wondered if Lyanna and Benjen might be twins. Why that would not have been revealed is hard to say, unless the author is waiting to reveal "hey, the Starks have some incest twins of there own". 

Jon and Benjen do have some interesting dialogue during the feast at Winterfell. Benjen does allude to having some bastards, but he also tells Jon when talking about the Nights Watch, "none of us will ever father sons". So, if he already had fathered a son, that doesn't really fit. Jeor Mormont gave up the right to father any more son's after taking the black, but he never denied that he had fathered Jorah, even though Jorah had dishonored House Mormont. I don't think that Benjen fathered Jon, maybe he fathered a bastard daughter and that is what got him sent to the wall. Although, I think in TWOIAF, it talks about a nights watch man at the Harrenhal tourney recruiting at the Stark tents (I can't find the passage right now) but it made me think that Benjen was already thinking about going to the Wall. Why would he leave the sister he was having an affair with, although, if she as leaving to be married soon, he might have decided to leave Winterfell, too. Speculation is a dangerous thing. But, for me, no heartburn here.

In response to Benjen looking toward the raised table that Ned sat at, this was after Jon reported that Lady Stark had not wanted a bastard seated at the royal table. I think that Benjen's look is more toward Catelyn, who I think had a lot to do with Benjen going to the wall when he did, than toward Ned. 

 

markg171 said:

Can I ask why you didn't include Rickard? He falls under the same category as Brandon due to (at least perceived) timeline issues, but he at least over Brandon, Benjen, and Lyanna has a factor going for him that we know that he had a particular Stark feature which Jon inherited: the long face

The stonemason had known him well. He sat with quiet dignity, stone fingers holding tight to the sword across his lap, but in life all swords had failed him. In two smaller sepulchres on either side were his children.Lord Rickard Stark, Ned's father, had a long, stern face There were three tombs, side by side.

Whereas we only know that Brandon had grey eyes, Benjen is gaunt and sharp featured and has blue-grey eyes, and that Lyanna looks like Arya but never has any features actually described. So at least Rickard has a known feature that Jon has, and also being that his children ended up with at least partial Stark features, or in the case of Ned all the Stark features, then he and Lyarra had to have had the full mix at least between them. Which at least can explain how Jon also has the full Stark features

 

I think the Stark like features that Jon has are very interesting. Dark hair, grey eyes so dark they seemed almost black, long face, slender, dark, graceful and quick. I always noted it, and really enjoyed that he looked like a Stark more than any of the trueborn sons that Catelyn bore Ned, because I don't really like Cat that much and I enjoyed that this pissed her off. Yes, I am that kind of person! But I never thought of it like he is more Stark than any of his siblings be cause he is a Stark/Stark. People seem to think Jon looks like Ned, not Benjen with his hint of laughter blue-grey eyes, which no one every claims about Jon (the laughing eyes part, which always moved me away from Ashara as his mother), just that he looks like Ned, or he looks like Arya who looks like Lyanna. So Jon looks like Ned and Lyanna, hmmm! I have warmed up so much to this theory, I can't hardly believe it. I am not all in, but I am keeping the tums close.

In the end, I have no idea if this could even possibly be true, but I beleive that GRRM is very capable of throwing us a Stark incest angle. He is very bold with incest in the series. The Targaryen incest is accepted if not loved, he gives us Jaime and Cersei, but we don't like it. But there are other incidents, as well, such as when Theon is trying to bang his sister Asha (although in Theon's defense, he did not know Asha was his sister. And actually, Asha doesn't seem to very put off by his attempts either (and she knows Theon is her brother). We have the Gendry maybe banging Bella of the Stoney Sept who claims to be a bastard of Robert Baratheon's, and there is no reason to think she isn't. Of course Gendry and Bella have no idea that they could be siblings. So is more incest in this story possible? Why the heck not!

Also there is the idea in this series of magic in the blood. That is one of the reasons that R+L=J is so fitting, because it's Ice and Fire. Keeping the blood line pure/magic is why the Targaryen's interbred for centuries. The Stark blood is just as special, so maybe what is needed in the story is a very Stark Stark to make the magic of ice and winter!

So, Lyanna with Brandon, Eddard or Benjen are all three real possibilities. But Ned is the only one who is giving me heartburn. One thing that makes me shy away from both Brandon or Benjen and lead toward Ned as Jon's father in this theory, is why did Ned not just say Jon was a bastard of House Stark, either Brandon's or Benjen's, or even Rickard's honestly? But Ned did not do that. He claimed Jon as his son. Catelyn states about Ned bringing Jon to Winterfell, "He did more than that. The Starks were not like other men. Ned brought his bastard home with him, and called him "son" for all the north to see" (GoT). So Ned could have done something different, but he did not. He made sure everyone in the North knew (and in Westeros, I suppose), knew that Jon Snow was his son. He wanted the North to know that Jon was his. Why so adamant? Maybe because Jon was really his son. Just happened to be by his sister. Yup, eesh! *(Although this reasoning has opened the door for Ashara just a bit again, for me)

 

kingmonkey said:

As theories go, this really isn't a bad one. It certainly deserves far more consideration that it ever receives, and the value in this essay, if nothing else, is to address that imbalance. It doesn't have a mountain of evidence in support, but then it shares that with all the non-RLJ alternatives.

Who know's really was GRRM has up his sleeves for us ...
 

regular jon umber said:

Can't stop thinking about this for some reason. I mean, Jaime's "by what right does the Wolf judge the Lion" is placed into a very different light if the above is true.

I apologize that this post is so dang long. I actually wanted to say more, but reined it in. In person, I talk to much as well, especially when I am excited about something. Much more wordy than I intended, but the OP really got me into thinking and research mode. I know this thread has been up for a while and maybe people just want the dirty idea to go away, but I think this theory has some merit that needs to be looked at, which is ironic, because I avoided the Stark incest idea for a very long time! And now I have heart burn!

Read more: http://thelasthearth.com/thread/269/right-afraid?page=4#ixzz4V7JC2PeQ

[Kingmonkey]

On 07/01/2017 at 11:19 PM, St Daga said:

(Lots of interesting stuff)

I'm glad to see I got your cogs turning. It's kind of an annoying theory, isn't it? Sure, RLJ is stronger, but if you open your mind to this possibility, you can't quite shut up that voice at the back of your mind saying "Ah but if GRRM is being really tricksy, there's always this option. And GRRM likes being tricksy. Damnit, it fits..."

I really like your arguments in favour of Ned being the guilty brother. Driving the Lannister/Stark parallels to the point of your pairing Jaime & Ned is debatable but disturbingly compelling. As I gave my percentage likelihood of the brothers by the method I believe I described as "pulling numbers out of my arse" I wouldn't dismiss the possibility I underestimated the likelihood of Ned due to a subconscious desire for it not to be so.

I do think you give too much leeway on the matter of dating though. The 8-9 months or thereabout thing is pretty solid. Of course we can't dismiss the possibility of a surprise, but it surely has to be considered a major piece of evidence.

[Ygrain]

On 20. 3. 2016 at 1:31 AM, Kingmonkey said:

Why, in a city of a million people, do you think there was a lack of other candidates? What about Lancel? Or any of the other Kingsguard? Or any of a hundred courtiers who unlike Jaime wouldn't have had to overcome a massive taboo like incest?

Lancel definitely wasn't an option for fathering Cersei's kids, though. - Which is the mystery:  not infidelity per se, but the fact that Robert's children aren't his.

On 20. 3. 2016 at 1:31 AM, Kingmonkey said:

The simple fact that Jaime and Cersei are siblings makes Jaime a very unlikely possibility. Thus to balance this, we would need to see a strong argument FOR Jaime. That he happens to be around a lot isn't sufficient. Jaime has every reason to be around Cersei a lot, whether he was banging her or not.

What you perceive as a weakness is a strength at the same time, though. Exactly because it's Jaime, her brother, no-one ever suspected a thing, which allowed Cersei to give birth to three children, none of which was her husband's.

Besides, Ned himself thinks that the logic is rather obvious:

How could they have all been so blind? The truth was there in front of them all the time, written on the children’s faces.

Somehow, though, this doesn't prompt him into thinking "thanks to gods that people are so blind because I have the very same case at home". He even seems rather hypocritical about the whole business:

Ned felt sick.

That from the guy who did the same as Cersei, or whose siblings did? Really?