Arthur+Lyanna=Jon

[TPTWP Timett]

It's not really much of a theory yet however I thought if anyone could help it would be here. Basically I'm saying that Rhaegar was acting as a match maker between Lyanna and Arthur because he knew Arthur needed to have a child for the battle for dawn. I couldn't really find much evidence to support my idea as most signs point to R+L=J but I thought it was worth discussing. It would help explain why the Daynes seem so accepting of Ned however it doesn't explain why the kings guard where at the TOJ. Anyways I'd like to get some other opinions so please discuss. 

[Sly Wren]

3 hours ago, TPTWP Timett said:

It's not really much of a theory yet however I thought if anyone could help it would be here. Basically I'm saying that Rhaegar was acting as a match maker between Lyanna and Arthur because he knew Arthur needed to have a child for the battle for dawn.

There are some symbolic parallels between the fight at the tower and Mirri's tent ritual. @Kingmonkey 

and  @Pretty Pig here both have posted on the subject. Both are strong arguments for the idea of magic and prophecy around Jon.

Quote

I couldn't really find much evidence to support my idea as most signs point to R+L=J but I thought it was worth discussing. It would help explain why the Daynes seem so accepting of Ned however it doesn't explain why the kings guard where at the TOJ. Anyways I'd like to get some other opinions so please discuss. 

As for why the Kingsguard are "at" the tower, nothing in the text says when they got there, or if they were staying there, or if anyone else is in or at the tower. Full stop. Could be they've been staying there with someone in the tower. Could be they just got there. As it stands, we just don't know.

As for the Daynes being tied to the Battle for the Dawn--I'm right there with you. I'm completely sold that Jon's the next Sword of the Morning (see my signature if you doubt my crazy bird word).

And I think that the idea that the Sword of the Morning is an office that has to be earned goes back to the Battle for the Dawn (if not further)--only a fighter worthy of the sword can wield it. Which would help explain why Martin spends so much time on the idea of true knights. 

So--in the next Battle for the Dawn, does the Sword of the Morning need to be "extra special" (sorry--couldn't think of a better way to phrase that)? Would it require a personal sacrifice of some sort? A union of two of the most ancient bloodlines in Westeros? And did Rhaegar know anything about it?

Plus, Arthur being Jon's father would help explain Edric's interest in the Starks, as well as why the end of the Bael Tale fits so well with Ashara's suicide and the events which precipitate it.

Not to mention the fact that Lyanna's echoes (Sansa and Arya) are helped by knights and sworn brothers. And Sansa is attracted to knights and sexualizes a former Kingsguard.

[TPTWP Timett]

37 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

There are some symbolic parallels between the fight at the tower and Mirri's tent ritual. @Kingmonkey 

and  @Pretty Pig here both have posted on the subject. Both are strong arguments for the idea of magic and prophecy around Jon.

As for why the Kingsguard are "at" the tower, nothing in the text says when they got there, or if they were staying there, or if anyone else is in or at the tower. Full stop. Could be they've been staying there with someone in the tower. Could be they just got there. As it stands, we just don't know.

As for the Daynes being tied to the Battle for the Dawn--I'm right there with you. I'm completely sold that Jon's the next Sword of the Morning (see my signature if you doubt my crazy bird word).

And I think that the idea that the Sword of the Morning is an office that has to be earned goes back to the Battle for the Dawn (if not further)--only a fighter worthy of the sword can wield it. Which would help explain why Martin spends so much time on the idea of true knights. 

So--in the next Battle for the Dawn, does the Sword of the Morning need to be "extra special" (sorry--couldn't think of a better way to phrase that)? Would it require a personal sacrifice of some sort? A union of two of the most ancient bloodlines in Westeros? And did Rhaegar know anything about it?

Plus, Arthur being Jon's father would help explain Edric's interest in the Starks, as well as why the end of the Bael Tale fits so well with Ashara's suicide and the events which precipitate it.

Not to mention the fact that Lyanna's echoes (Sansa and Arya) are helped by knights and sworn brothers. And Sansa is attracted to knights and sexualizes a former Kingsguard.

Thanks for the link Sly Wren some interesting stuff in there i had never even thought of blood ritual being what kills Lyanna.  That would make for a pretty good sacrifice for the next sword of the morning.  I'm going to have to reread some stuff before I can come to a conclusion. 

[TPTWP Timett]

3 hours ago, b00gieman said:

My theory kind of lines up with yours but mine is R + L + A (reincarnated soul) = J.  I come to my conclusion as I believe that ASOIAF is mirroring The Wheel of Time (TWOT).  It hasn't let me down as of yet and things are still playing out in ASOIAF like they did in TWOT.  

I haven't read TWOT but some of this stuff sounds interesting so I think I will read it. Seems like I'll have plenty of time before I can read winds I'll send you a message when I finsh TWOT with my thoughts. 

[Hangover of the Morning]

I'd say A + L = J is incredibly unlikely, bordering on impossible for the simple fact that the actions of Rhaegar, Ned and Gerold Hightower make no sense if Arthur was the one bonking Lyanna in the tower. 

Even if Rhaegar was completely chilled about his sworn-to-celibacy-personal-bodyguard eloping with a noble woman who was already promised to a prominent lord; he had no reason to be there with them and every reason to at least publicly distance himself from this bff's actions. Arthur's scandalous behaviour would make The Crown and the Daynes look bad but neither could really be blamed for the events. The Crown prince as the culprit (or presumed culprit) is almost guaranteed to serve as a catalyst to a major conflict, particularly when so many lords felt already uneasy about Aerys' reign.

Ned might be stern but he's certainly not cruel, which he would be if he was lying to Jon and Cat about Jon's parentage all these years, when there was seemingly no reason to do so. Ned's silence only makes sense if Rhaegar is the father as he is doing it to protect his family.  

Hightower's known as a stickler for rules, yet he's seen helping his subordinate to abandon his duty and violate laws. He should have execute Arthur on the spot not help him bodyguard his mistress. 

There's always the possibility that Jon is truly Arthur's son whilst the three above or at minimum Ned think that he's Rhaegar's instead, as their actions would suggest. However, that's just one extra mystery on top of another, and would make Jon a "secretly Dayne secret Targaryen". A bit too much, if you ask me. 

The last possibility is that it has all to do with the prophecy and that Rhaegar was convinced that the saviour has to be a son born of a union of a Dayne and a Stark. The charismatic cult leader he was, he managed to persuade quite a few people to go on with his crazy plan. I'd hate that scenario simply because the morale of the story would be that some people in Westeros are better and more special than others because of their blood/ancestry and if you breed two kinds of these special people, you can manufacture a saviour of humanity. I'd be incredibely disapointed with George if that's were the books are heading as far as I can tell, there's little reason to think that it'd be the case. If anything, he keeps showing us the exact opposite.

Indirect evidence: R+L=J is almost certainly the canon for the show, otherwise we'd have seen the Daynes by now. 

[Knight Of Winter]

I've read this theory a few years ago, and then-OP's idea was Rhaegar had problems down there, so he asked his best buddy to perform instead of him.

 

That aside, I don't think it's remotely likely - mainly due to sheer amount to hints/evidence pointing out towards RLJ. Any theory that wishes to compete should have comparable amount of evidence behind it.

[Sly Wren]

9 hours ago, TPTWP Timett said:

Thanks for the link Sly Wren some interesting stuff in there i had never even thought of blood ritual being what kills Lyanna.  That would make for a pretty good sacrifice for the next sword of the morning.  I'm going to have to reread some stuff before I can come to a conclusion. 

I'm not at all sure I buy the idea of a "ritual in the tower." I don't buy that Lyanna was in the tower--might be, might not.

But the idea that Jon's birth has a magical element to it. An element tied to Arthur's death or even Ashara's death--that I buy.

And you might like this short discussion, too--it fits with your OP ideas--not an essay, just a short convo.

[Sly Wren]

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

I'd say A + L = J is incredibly unlikely, bordering on impossible for the simple fact that the actions of Rhaegar, Ned and Gerold Hightower make no sense if Arthur was the one bonking Lyanna in the tower. 

Nothing in the text says anyone's in the tower when Ned gets there for the fight. Nothing says how long the KG were there--did they just get there? Been camping out? Lots of options open. 

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Even if Rhaegar was completely chilled about his sworn-to-celibacy-personal-bodyguard eloping with a noble woman who was already promised to a prominent lord; he had no reason to be there with them and every reason to at least publicly distance himself from this bff's actions. Arthur's scandalous behaviour would make The Crown and the Daynes look bad but neither could really be blamed for the events. The Crown prince as the culprit (or presumed culprit) is almost guaranteed to serve as a catalyst to a major conflict, particularly when so many lords felt already uneasy about Aerys' reign.

Agreed--if Arthur were to be the father, the idea that he stole Lyanna for that from the start makes little sense. 

Especially in light of how Lyanna's plot line is echoed by Sansa and a bit by Arya. 

If Arthur's the father, I'd posit he and Rhaegar got her away from Aerys. Aerys has the Bael-Like motive. And a history of "stealing" the children of enemies/rivals.

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Ned might be stern but he's certainly not cruel, which he would be if he was lying to Jon and Cat about Jon's parentage all these years, when there was seemingly no reason to do so. Ned's silence only makes sense if Rhaegar is the father as he is doing it to protect his family.

But would Robert really care if Ned told him it was Arthur instead of Rhaegar? Would he hate the idea of that child any less? Be more likely to listen to Ned's vows that Lyanna loved the child's father? Or would he be thinking that Rhaegar and Arthur raped Lyanna together? Jon's in danger from Robert by being Lyanna's child. Because of Robert's anger and jealousy. 

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Hightower's known as a stickler for rules, yet he's seen helping his subordinate to abandon his duty and violate laws. He should have execute Arthur on the spot not help him bodyguard his mistress. 

Nothing in the text says they are guarding anyone in that tower. Only that they only mention Aerys and that they hate his enemies (the Usurper, Jaime). And, at the tower, they are now face-to-face with one of the Usurper's dogs. So, FIGHT!

No mention of Lyanna or Jon or anyone in the tower.

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

There's always the possibility that Jon is truly Arthur's son whilst the three above or at minimum Ned think that he's Rhaegar's instead, as their actions would suggest. However, that's just one extra mystery on top of another, and would make Jon a "secretly Dayne secret Targaryen". A bit too much, if you ask me. 

Agreed--if Arthur is Jon's father, I'm pretty sure Ned knows. 

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

The last possibility is that it has all to do with the prophecy and that Rhaegar was convinced that the saviour has to be a son born of a union of a Dayne and a Stark. The charismatic cult leader he was, he managed to persuade quite a few people to go on with his crazy plan. I'd hate that scenario simply because the morale of the story would be that some people in Westeros are better and more special than others because of their blood/ancestry and if you breed two kinds of these special people, you can manufacture a saviour of humanity. I'd be incredibely disapointed with George if that's were the books are heading as far as I can tell, there's little reason to think that it'd be the case. If anything, he keeps showing us the exact opposite.

I agree this is possible. Though I, too, don't like it.

It doesn't fit with the textual evidence Martin has given us via Sansa. And it's a BIG leap to go from "Rhaegar was interested enough in prophecy to train as a knight" to "Rhaegar was mad enough about prophecy to start a cult." We've seen fanatics--so far, can't see how we have evidence that Rhaegar was that kind of fanatic.

5 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Indirect evidence: R+L=J is almost certainly the canon for the show, otherwise we'd have seen the Daynes by now. 

Can't say that I agree with this--but we probably shouldn't go into this here.

[Meera of Tarth]

I will be re reading ned's chapters just to find evidence on that Arthur and not Rhaegar could be Jon's father. I think it is difficult to find anything concerning the former, but I'd be satisfied if I can read ned's chapters in another way. 

At least I'm not the only one who thinks that Jon may very well be somehow connected to that ancient house, which motto we don't even know yet....

[Sly Wren]

On January 26, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Meera of Tarth said:

I will be re reading ned's chapters just to find evidence on that Arthur and not Rhaegar could be Jon's father. I think it is difficult to find anything concerning the former, but I'd be satisfied if I can read ned's chapters in another way. 

In Ned's chapters, as well as Bran's chapter in Clash where he remembers Ned's take on Arthur, you can find some things.

But if Arthur turns out to be Jon's father, Martin's been laying groundwork throughout all of the books--in the "Bael" references, in Cat's thoughts on Ashara, in Sansa and Arya's storylines (Sansa even has a trip to an unnamed tower, for pity's sake). And in Jon's plot and "act"--what he sees, what he wants, what he learns and does.

So, some evidence in Ned, yes, But evidence in Jon and others, too.

On January 26, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Meera of Tarth said:

At least I'm not the only one who thinks that Jon may very well be somehow connected to that ancient house, which motto we don't even know yet....

You are most definitely not alone. I can still see paths to Rhaegar or others as Jon's father. But Arthur's definitely on the table. And well set up in the text if that's where Martin's going.

[Hangover of the Morning]

On 1/25/2016 at 3:11 PM, Sly Wren said:

1. Nothing in the text says anyone's in the tower when Ned gets there for the fight. Nothing says how long the KG were there--did they just get there? Been camping out? Lots of options open. 

2. But would Robert really care if Ned told him it was Arthur instead of Rhaegar? Would he hate the idea of that child any less? Be more likely to listen to Ned's vows that Lyanna loved the child's father? Or would he be thinking that Rhaegar and Arthur raped Lyanna together? Jon's in danger from Robert by being Lyanna's child. Because of Robert's anger and jealousy. 

3. Nothing in the text says they are guarding anyone in that tower. Only that they only mention Aerys and that they hate his enemies (the Usurper, Jaime). And, at the tower, they are now face-to-face with one of the Usurper's dogs. So, FIGHT!

No mention of Lyanna or Jon or anyone in the tower.

4. It doesn't fit with the textual evidence Martin has given us via Sansa. And it's a BIG leap to go from "Rhaegar was interested enough in prophecy to train as a knight" to "Rhaegar was mad enough about prophecy to start a cult." We've seen fanatics--so far, can't see how we have evidence that Rhaegar was that kind of fanatic.

5. Can't say that I agree with this--but we probably shouldn't go into this here.

I'm having trouble with the quoting system so I will only respond to some of the comments, which I highlighted and numbered. 

1. Fair point and I agree, though the geographical location of Jon's conception wasn't my point. The final showdown was at that tower and I'm reasonably certain that's were Lyanna gave birth but Jon could have been conceived at Starfall, on the road or somewhere else entirely.  

2. I'm honestly not 100% convinced that Robert would get Jon murdered even if he was Rhaegar's son but there was always a strong chance that he'll get talked into it by the likes of Tywin, Varys and Pycelle. Robert tuned the blind eye at the death of Aegon and Rhaenys but he wouldn't personally order such thing and he also never pursued Danny and Viserys, until the latter got married to Drogo. If Arthur was the father, Jon would pose no threat to Robert's reign. Robert is  not a cruel person and is known to be impulsive but running out of steam quickly. He also listens to Ned so if Ned would convince him that he'd take care of the baby or send him to the Wall or to be fostered by a family in Essos, I think he'd be OK with it. 

Why not tell the truth to Cat, and Jon eventually? Hiding Jon Targaryen is a treason that could cost Ned and his family their lives but hiding Jon Dayne is at worst lying to his best friend but is not punishable by any law. 

3. I disagree as I believe that the imagery is quite strong but even if so, how does the KG guarding an empty tower add any credit to A + L =J theory. 

4. I'm not saying that Rhaegar was mad, I just find the reasoning that Rhaegar suddenly realised that the PtwP has to be half-Stark and half-Dayne (yet somehow still had to be there to direct it) extremely weak as it could be used to peg virtually anyone as the potential father. According to the Ghost of High Heart, the magic saviour is supposed to come from the Aerys and Rhaella bloodline, which neither Lyanna nor Arthur do.

5. Do you think that the show is willing to change something as significant as Jon Snow's parentage?

[Sly Wren]

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

1. Fair point and I agree, though the geographical location of Jon's conception wasn't my point. The final showdown was at that tower and I'm reasonably certain that's were Lyanna gave birth but Jon could have been conceived at Starfall, on the road or somewhere else entirely.  

Sorry on the bolded--I got side-tracked.

As for giving birth in the tower--it would work with the magic of the question raised in the OP.

But--in the Bael the Bard tale, the true ending of the tale (according to Ygritte) is a battle where the Stark in Winterfell kills the father of the Stark maid's child. Then takes a trophy/artifact back to the castle where the Stark maid is. Only then is the full horror of the battle understood. And a woman throws herself from a tower and the Stark maid dies.

That plus Sansa's journey--she's "helped" by Bael-ish, taken to an unnamed tower that Bael-ish jokingly calls the Drearfort (as Rhaegar is said to call the tower the "tower of joy"); but they only stay there long enough to get the story straight. And to dye her hair. With the knowledge of the lady of the castle (and family member) they move to the Eyrie. With its white stone towers. Where the Stark maid is called a rose by a singer. And a woman who carried Bael-ish's child is thrown to her death. 

The echoes of Lyanna and Ashara in all that are hard to miss or ignore.

All that plus the absence of any mention in the text of other people in or around the tower makes me think it more likely Lyanna was in Starfall. Not set in stone, obviously. But it would fit the text. 

But it would still have the air of sacrifice--just less ritualized than what Dany does with the tent.

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

2. I'm honestly not 100% convinced that Robert would get Jon murdered even if he was Rhaegar's son but there was always a strong chance that he'll get talked into it by the likes of Tywin, Varys and Pycelle. Robert tuned the blind eye at the death of Aegon and Rhaenys but he wouldn't personally order such thing and he also never pursued Danny and Viserys, until the latter got married to Drogo. If Arthur was the father, Jon would pose no threat to Robert's reign. Robert is  not a cruel person and is known to be impulsive but running out of steam quickly. He also listens to Ned so if Ned would convince him that he'd take care of the baby or send him to the Wall or to be fostered by a family in Essos, I think he'd be OK with it. 

I agree that  Ned might have been able to reason with Robert. And that Jon posed no threat to Robert's reign.

But Arthur (hypothetically) still kept Robert's love from him. As Rhaegar took Robert's love from him. And Robert still dreams of killing Rhaegar--and it's never enough. I'm not sure he'd be less jealous and angry and reasonable if it was Rhaegar's bestie instead.

Also--if (again hypothetically) it was Arthur and Lyanna was at Starfall--the Daynes were involved. If they weren't at Starfall, the Daynes might still have been considered complicit. In keeping Robert's love from him.

The Daynes might (hypothetically) have though "Huh. Dayne, Dayne, rhymes with Reyne. Yeah--we're not telling Tywin (given what he's done to prove his loyalty) or Robert (given what he's just condoned)."

And Ned left Robert in a cold fury--horrified by what Robert did. Only Lyanna's death reconciled them. I could see him (hypothetically) making promises based on what Robert had just done. In that cold fury and anger. Assuming his de facto brother really might hurt that kid.

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Why not tell the truth to Cat, and Jon eventually? Hiding Jon Targaryen is a treason that could cost Ned and his family their lives but hiding Jon Dayne is at worst lying to his best friend but is not punishable by any law. 

Yeah--I struggle with the lie to Cat per se. Even with Rhaegar. 

His reaction to the mention of Ashara's name is. . . intense. Like he might be shutting down any mention of the connection to Starfall. The name is never mentioned again--though people still speculate about Jon's mother.

So, back to the hypothetical--if the Daynes were afraid of being found out, could see Ned's keeping the secret for everyone's sake. For the people who sheltered Lyanna. Even from Cat. 

And it really wouldn't be about the law, would it? But about Robert's anger and ability to do thoroughly horrible things. Which Ned knows first hand he can do. 

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

3. I disagree as I believe that the imagery is quite strong but even if so, how does the KG guarding an empty tower add any credit to A + L =J theory. 

Oh, no, sorry. I phrased that badly. Not that they are guarding an empty tower. Lyanna may be in the tower and they've all been holed up there (somehow not being noticed).

Or-- they just got there. Probably from "far away," where they were during the Trident. 

Given that the text in no way says they have been staying there or that anyone else is there, or that Ned leaves with anyone (alive or dead) other than Howland, or any extra baggage other than Dawn--if we just read the text straight, it makes ALJ very workable.

Though RLJ and other options are also workable under the "no one's in the tower" theory.

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

4. I'm not saying that Rhaegar was mad, I just find the reasoning that Rhaegar suddenly realised that the PtwP has to be half-Stark and half-Dayne (yet somehow still had to be there to direct it) extremely weak as it could be used to peg virtually anyone as the potential father. According to the Ghost of High Heart, the magic saviour is supposed to come from the Aerys and Rhaella bloodline, which neither Lyanna nor Arthur do.

Hopefully the OP will elucidate the reasoning on this. But I doubt it, too. 

3 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

5. Do you think that the show is willing to change something as significant as Jon Snow's parentage?

Nope. I'd be stunned if they did that. Seems like that would backfire enormously.

[Hangover of the Morning]

12 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

Sorry on the bolded--I got side-tracked.

As for giving birth in the tower--it would work with the magic of the question raised in the OP.

But--in the Bael the Bard tale, the true ending of the tale (according to Ygritte) is a battle where the Stark in Winterfell kills the father of the Stark maid's child. Then takes a trophy/artifact back to the castle where the Stark maid is. Only then is the full horror of the battle understood. And a woman throws herself from a tower and the Stark maid dies.

That plus Sansa's journey--she's "helped" by Bael-ish, taken to an unnamed tower that Bael-ish jokingly calls the Drearfort (as Rhaegar is said to call the tower the "tower of joy"); but they only stay there long enough to get the story straight. And to dye her hair. With the knowledge of the lady of the castle (and family member) they move to the Eyrie. With its white stone towers. Where the Stark maid is called a rose by a singer. And a woman who carried Bael-ish's child is thrown to her death. 

The echoes of Lyanna and Ashara in all that are hard to miss or ignore.

All that plus the absence of any mention in the text of other people in or around the tower makes me think it more likely Lyanna was in Starfall. Not set in stone, obviously. But it would fit the text. 

But it would still have the air of sacrifice--just less ritualized than what Dany does with the tent.

I agree that  Ned might have been able to reason with Robert. And that Jon posed no threat to Robert's reign.

But Arthur (hypothetically) still kept Robert's love from him. As Rhaegar took Robert's love from him. And Robert still dreams of killing Rhaegar--and it's never enough. I'm not sure he'd be less jealous and angry and reasonable if it was Rhaegar's bestie instead.

Also--if (again hypothetically) it was Arthur and Lyanna was at Starfall--the Daynes were involved. If they weren't at Starfall, the Daynes might still have been considered complicit. In keeping Robert's love from him.

The Daynes might (hypothetically) have though "Huh. Dayne, Dayne, rhymes with Reyne. Yeah--we're not telling Tywin (given what he's done to prove his loyalty) or Robert (given what he's just condoned)."

And Ned left Robert in a cold fury--horrified by what Robert did. Only Lyanna's death reconciled them. I could see him (hypothetically) making promises based on what Robert had just done. In that cold fury and anger. Assuming his de facto brother really might hurt that kid.

Yeah--I struggle with the lie to Cat per se. Even with Rhaegar. 

His reaction to the mention of Ashara's name is. . . intense. Like he might be shutting down any mention of the connection to Starfall. The name is never mentioned again--though people still speculate about Jon's mother.

So, back to the hypothetical--if the Daynes were afraid of being found out, could see Ned's keeping the secret for everyone's sake. For the people who sheltered Lyanna. Even from Cat. 

And it really wouldn't be about the law, would it? But about Robert's anger and ability to do thoroughly horrible things. Which Ned knows first hand he can do. 

Oh, no, sorry. I phrased that badly. Not that they are guarding an empty tower. Lyanna may be in the tower and they've all been holed up there (somehow not being noticed).

Or-- they just got there. Probably from "far away," where they were during the Trident. 

Given that the text in no way says they have been staying there or that anyone else is there, or that Ned leaves with anyone (alive or dead) other than Howland, or any extra baggage other than Dawn--if we just read the text straight, it makes ALJ very workable.

Though RLJ and other options are also workable under the "no one's in the tower" theory.

Hopefully the OP will elucidate the reasoning on this. But I doubt it, too. 

Nope. I'd be stunned if they did that. Seems like that would backfire enormously.

Thank you so much for answering my points. 

I'll admit I'm intrigued by the A + L = J idea, I just simply don't see it being possible. It requires too much mental gymnastics to fit for my taste. R + L =J is nowhere near clear cut either but has significantly less holes IMHO. 

Some of the small problems I see is why would Ned considered Arthur "the finest knight he ever saw", if the guy broke his vows and impregnated his sister who was already engaged to Ned's best friend. On top of that Arthur nearly killed Ned for just wanting to reach his sister, about whom he had no information for nearly a year. Even if the Arthur/Lyanna romance didn't lead to war and the death of Ned's father, brother, and companions, I can't see Ned being too impressed with Arthur's behaviour.

The final showdown has the three knights wearing white cloaks (hardly a useful item in a fight) and boasting about being true to their Kingsguard vow until their last breath. George hammers it down pretty hard both with their words as were as with the imaginary. Unless we just hand-wave it by Arthur being a massive hypocrite, I feel that it's a big dent into the A + L = J theory, which also links to my previous comment about Ned respecting Arthur. 

That's just some of the many problems/questions I have regarding the theory. 

Your "Bael the Bard tale" or "Sansa's journey" parallels are interesting but hardly a proof of anything. Yours is just one of myriads of possible interpretations. 

[purple-eyes]

Maybe Arthur did this because brandon dishonored and knocked up his sister Ashara, so "sister for sister, bastard for bastard".

 

[TPTWP Timett]

4 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

 

Hopefully the OP will elucidate the reasoning on this. But I doubt it, too. 

 

I wish I could but I really have nothing the more I try to find any evidence the more I find myself doubting this theory.  I think I may be bordering on fanfiction with this one.

4 hours ago, Hangover of the Morning said:

Thank you so much for answering my points. 

I'll admit I'm intrigued by the A + L = J idea, I just simply don't see it being possible. It requires too much mental gymnastics to fit for my taste. R + L =J is nowhere near clear cut either but has significantly less holes IMHO. 

Some of the small problems I see is why would Ned considered Arthur "the finest knight he ever saw", if the guy broke his vows and impregnated his sister who was already engaged to Ned's best friend. On top of that Arthur nearly killed Ned for just wanting to reach his sister, about whom he had no information for nearly a year. Even if the Arthur/Lyanna romance didn't lead to war and the death of Ned's father, brother, and companions, I can't see Ned being too impressed with Arthur's behaviour.

The final showdown has the three knights wearing white cloaks (hardly a useful item in a fight) and boasting about being true to their Kingsguard vow until their last breath. George hammers it down pretty hard both with their words as were as with the imaginary. Unless we just hand-wave it by Arthur being a massive hypocrite, I feel that it's a big dent into the A + L = J theory, which also links to my previous comment about Ned respecting Arthur. 

That's just some of the many problems/questions I have regarding the theory. 

Your "Bael the Bard tale" or "Sansa's journey" parallels are interesting but hardly a proof of anything. Yours is just one of myriads of possible interpretations. 

I have to agree there's just not any evidence for it Ned calling him the finest knight was pretty much the final nail in this theory's coffin for me. Good stuff Hangover and Sly I knew this was the place to go for this discussion. 

[Meera of Tarth]

On 27/1/2016 at 9:29 PM, Sly Wren said:

In Ned's chapters, as well as Bran's chapter in Clash where he remembers Ned's take on Arthur, you can find some things.

But if Arthur turns out to be Jon's father, Martin's been laying groundwork throughout all of the books--in the "Bael" references, in Cat's thoughts on Ashara, in Sansa and Arya's storylines (Sansa even has a trip to an unnamed tower, for pity's sake). And in Jon's plot and "act"--what he sees, what he wants, what he learns and does.

So, some evidence in Ned, yes, But evidence in Jon and others, too.

You are most definitely not alone. I can still see paths to Rhaegar or others as Jon's father. But Arthur's definitely on the table. And well set up in the text if that's where Martin's going.

Your thoughts on Sansa's trip are very interesting. I hadn't thought about it before 

[Dorian Martell]

On 1/25/2016 at 4:38 PM, TPTWP Timett said:

It's not really much of a theory yet however I thought if anyone could help it would be here. Basically I'm saying that Rhaegar was acting as a match maker between Lyanna and Arthur because he knew Arthur needed to have a child for the battle for dawn. I couldn't really find much evidence to support my idea as most signs point to R+L=J but I thought it was worth discussing. It would help explain why the Daynes seem so accepting of Ned however it doesn't explain why the kings guard where at the TOJ. Anyways I'd like to get some other opinions so please discuss. 

This fits perfectly into my theory that the great other is the bastard child of Optimus Prime and Megatron. And my theory has far more supporting text than A+L=J

[Sly Wren]

On January 28, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Hangover of the Morning said:

Thank you so much for answering my points. 

I'll admit I'm intrigued by the A + L = J idea, I just simply don't see it being possible. It requires too much mental gymnastics to fit for my taste. R + L =J is nowhere near clear cut either but has significantly less holes IMHO. 

All fair. 

On January 28, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Hangover of the Morning said:

Some of the small problems I see is why would Ned considered Arthur "the finest knight he ever saw", if the guy broke his vows and impregnated his sister who was already engaged to Ned's best friend.

A fair point. And under the OPs scenario, I can't think of a way to reconcile them. . . 

But both Sansa and Arya echo Lyanna's known plot points. Especially Sansa. And both Sansa and Arya are helped by sworn brothers--knights, KG, and Night's Watchmen. Helped to escape or deal with the Lannisters (who are wannabe Targs). 

If Lyanna were also in trouble with the Targs (very likely) and Arthur, a KG, helped her, I could seen Ned respecting him very much for that. Understanding why Lyanna might love him. Ned broke from Robert in defense of Dany, a girl he never met (as far as we know). Broke with Robert over honor. Hypothetically, I could easily see Ned respecting a Kingsguard who did the same for Lyanna.

On January 28, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Hangover of the Morning said:

On top of that Arthur nearly killed Ned for just wanting to reach his sister, about whom he had no information for nearly a year. 

Yeah--one way or another, the fight at the tower is odd. I keep thinking Hightower's doggedness (or would that be bullheadedness?) is part of the key. His insistence on following through. And we have at least one other KG who fights to the death for no good reason when all hope is lost--Oakheart (who sails for Dorne on the Lady Lyanna). 

But yes--Arthur's fighting Ned needs explaining. 

On January 28, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Hangover of the Morning said:

Your "Bael the Bard tale" or "Sansa's journey" parallels are interesting but hardly a proof of anything. Yours is just one of myriads of possible interpretations. 

Very true.

Would only argue that if we use the blue rose symbolism to discuss Jon's parentage, seems like we should look at the entire Bael tale and its context. . . 

But no, it's not definitive proof. So far, I can't find "definitive" proof of paternity. Multiple options still open.

[Sly Wren]

17 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Your thoughts on Sansa's trip are very interesting. I hadn't thought about it before 

Yeah--seems like it's easy for readers (or at least for me) to dismiss Sansa's echoes/parallels of Lyanna. But the plot points are there.

And the going to the unnamed tower but NOT staying there; instead, protecting herself under disguise (as does Arya) and going to a castle with a white tower from which a woman is thrown to her death; a death happening after a singer calls a Stark maid a rose. . . . the details are oddly specific inclusions if they aren't there to give us hints re: Lyanna.

[Anath]

Actually, with the whole thing being anything else but a planned elopment the lack of communication suddenly becomes easier to explain. People make the reasonable point that Rhaegar and Lyanna might have left a note but it got lost. Sounds good. But if we take it for a closer inspection, it's slightly ridiculous. You're taking off with the single most well-connected woman in Westeros (with the possible exception of Catelyn Tully) and all you leave is a note? There are accidents. Horses throw their riders. Ravens might get hurt. The normal, reasonable thing would be to let everyone of importance know that you've taken her and you intend to keep her in some capacity. That's, if you didn't really mind them to know. Like Stannis did with his proclamation of Cersei's children's bastardy. You don't place all your eggs in one basket and walk away happily without thinking to check some time later to see if the rider or raven made it to where they should be. That's basic caution.

If Rhaegar and his party indeed fell on Lyanna as she was in trouble (or she fell on them and witnessed something that wasn't meant for her), it makes more sense to take her and hope for the best, hiding from her attackers or just hidind her. You can't really send such a note proclaiming that you're saving it from the king and you certainly can't send it explaining, "Unfortunately. the lady saw something that she really shouldn't have..." Silence is of vital importance then, just like it was for Sansa and Arya to keep their identity in secret. And Arya was so, so close to beinf reunited with her family at one point. By Sandor. Perhaps Rhaegar and his men intended to bring Lyanna to her family but when they were finally able to, Brandon and Rickard were already in Aerys' hands and in doing so, they'd only stir his paranoid mind further?

It's also interesting how JonCon never thinks of Lyanna at all. People tend to focus at the fact that he doesn't think about her when he remember Rhaegar's wedding but I find the other episode where she is omitted more interesting. "The bells tolled for all of us that day. For Aerys and his queen, for Elia of Dorne and her little daughter, for every true man and honest woman in the Seven Kingdoms. And for my silver prince." I can understand that JonCon might not want to focus on Rhaegar's relationship with Lyanna since it's widely accepted (between those on their side) that Rhaegar loved her while he didn't love Elia. But for all his jealousy of Elia, JonCon seems to regard her as a victim. He feels guilty for his indirect role in her death. But for Lyanna - nothing at all. She isn't mentioned even between the more important (to him) victims of his failure. As if she wasn't special in any way at all which is very peculiar given the fact that she was the supposed reason for the war and the romantic tale of the Targaryen supporters claim Rhaegar died for her.

At the same time, JonCon, while not knowing about Jon at all because he was far away by the time Ned rode to Dorne, claims that Aegon was Rhaegar's "firstborn" son. Is it possible that Rhaegar sought a son from another woman but not Lyanna? In this case, he might have ended up with Allyria Dayne. That would fit with the song of the stupid lady who threw herself from a tower, plus the Bael-like motive with the tower suicide with the additional blow of Arthur's death, plus we'll end up with a young woman who's literally "bride of death", connecting her to Dany. She's one of the few things her repeatedly-dead-husband-to-be remembers from being alive. And right now, she's the hope of the Dayne line to continue until Edric reappears or it turns out that he has younger siblings. A little like Bael's son, right?