Not Confirmed

[rivers snow]

With regard to Lyanna - Rhaegar backstory exposition, they could just have Meera tell Bran the story just as she does in the book, no?

[CrypticWeirwood]

5 minutes ago, rivers snow said:

With regard to Lyanna - Rhaegar backstory exposition, they could just have Meera tell Bran the story just as she does in the book, no?

That would surely be more parsimonious of time and of costs than a grand tourney’s pomp and circumstance, full of flash and effects and one-time-use actors whom we’ll never see again.

[teej6]

16 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

All fair. Just between the books and the show, I can't see how Arthur isn't a viable option is all. 

But I take your point. 

Hopefully Martin will finish the next book before Season 7 and we can all know for sure long before next April.

Arthur Dayne and the rest of the Daynes are a footnote in the show. In the books, yes the Daynes may turn out to be crucial to the end game but the only reason they have Arthur Dayne in the show is so they could have a sword fight in the episode. For crying out loud D&D even butchered the character by having him fight with two swords instead of one. And you can argue all you want about Arthur Dayne being important on the show because Bran says that he was told that his father defeated Arthur Dayne when actually he didn't or about Ned placing Dawn at the foot of the bed, but really none of these things make the case for Arthur being the dad. I know for a long time you've argued against R+L=J but it's time to give it a rest and admit you were wrong. In the show, there's no reason for Lyanna to be afraid that Robert will kill her child if Arthur Dayne was the father. And in the books, Gerold Hightower, the LC of the KG and a stickler for rules is standing guard for one of his sworn brothers' (who btw broke the KG rules) mistress and child instead of rushing to his queen and Viserys, who should be King by your theory. Yes, that makes perfect sense. 

[ShadowKitteh]

3 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

That would surely be more parsimonious of time and of costs than a grand tourney’s pomp and circumstance, full of flash and effects and one-time-use actors whom we’ll never see again.

Unless they use them in the prequel-series HBO is most likely already working out the terms for..... if they have a functioning brainstem...

 

[ShadowKitteh]

3 hours ago, teej6 said:

 In the show, [and the books] there's no reason for Lyanna to be afraid that Robert will kill her child if Arthur Dayne was the father.

..... or ANYONE ELSE ON THE PLANET, other than Rhaegar Targaryen. (Which shouldn't have to be spelled out to anyone whose been paying attention. And ^^^YOU^^^ @teej6 your single sentence deserves it's own *Mic Drop* !!)

[yakisikli123]

3 hours ago, teej6 said:

In the show, there's no reason for Lyanna to be afraid that Robert will kill her child if Arthur Dayne was the father.

What if Robert doesn´t believe, Jon being Arthur´s child.

[Asvpxkvng]

After much much consideration and starting out like a lot of people who wanted it to be more complicated than R+L=J simply because of the cut sound bite I've arrived at the default conclusion, R+L=J. I've reviewed the Dayne theory and it seems to long protracted and reaching but most importantly too complicated to occur on show. There was an Aerys theory but I disqualified it because that was a little too crazy and the same as the Dayne theory I found that if they made this switch drop on us between Rhaegar and Aerys it would just be unnecessarily convoluted. If there are any other theories out there with any steam please tell me! I'd love to hear and analyze!

[Attitude]

HBO already confirmed R+L=J

[Asvpxkvng]

3 minutes ago, Attitude said:

HBO already confirmed R+L=J

If you are referring to the info graphic I didn't pay it much mind. Since the resurrection lies I trust nothing from official sources. Plus the graphic posited Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and we might get proof that it was not the case(at least that's what I'm hoping).

[Attitude]

12 minutes ago, Asvpxkvng said:

If you are referring to the info graphic I didn't pay it much mind. Since the resurrection lies I trust nothing from official sources. Plus the graphic posited Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and we might get proof that it was not the case(at least that's what I'm hoping).

What lies about the resurrection? They said he was dead, and he was dead. They didn't lie about that. 

I am not aware of any official statement about whether or not we could expect a resurrection, so if you have any official statement about that, please fill me in.

However, this info clearly stated that Rhaegar is Jons parent. So IMO there is no discussion required about R+L=J.

The only topics that are interesting (in my opinion) to discuss are:

- What will be the impact of R+L=J 
- R+L=J, but is Jon legit (can he claim the IT based on his name, and how does he want to prove this)
- Why did the showwriters leave out his name, but later on reveal the fact that he is a targaryen anyway?

[Darksky]

25 minutes ago, Asvpxkvng said:

If you are referring to the info graphic I didn't pay it much mind. Since the resurrection lies I trust nothing from official sources. Plus the graphic posited Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and we might get proof that it was not the case(at least that's what I'm hoping).

They show us what we know at this point. Revealing they were married would be giving a future plot point away.

No one lied about Jon because he was indeed dead. They all said 'he's dead' and that's what he was from 5.10 to 6.2

There's no point in covering or outright lying about the father. That's no plot twist like 'is he alive? dead? coming back or not? The show itself (multiple mentions of R+L) and the books have established who the father was anyway.

It's a case closed.

The only things that can be discussed are whether there was marriage and what Jon's real name is.

[Being Daenerys Targaryen]

On 27/06/2016 at 6:59 AM, Banner Without Brothers said:

R+L=J is not confirmed.

Now I'll probably get some hate for this and I have to start by saying that it is about 99% confirmed. But for anyone like me who hates the idea of Jon "Jesus" Targaryan being the magical Chosen royal blood Prophecy fulfiller I want to offer some hope, no matter how small. 

First big one the hair. We know how important hair is in the story. That baby is so blonde I think it would be more accurate to call it silver. If they wanted to 100% confirm Jon they would have had a baby with black hair. Of course babies hair can darken as they grow older but by the time that Ned brought him back to Winterfell? It's definitely a deliberate hole that will have to be filled in with either secret constant hair dye or magic, a glamour perhaps. https://youtu.be/dkvkT5D3fF4?t=280

No name. Why keep the name a secret? Is there really any need. Yes it was nicely done, the cut from the babies eyes into Jon's but we still could have had the name. Perhaps they could have had the "name is...." bit as the cut to Jon was happening. It's another deliberate hole 

Ah screw it, that's all I got if any other like minded optimists have anything else I'd love to hear it. But it's still enough for it to not be confirmed. It's just very, very, very likely that R+L=J.

Valar Morghulis R+L=D 

R+L=D? Darling you wound me!

R+L = D?!! What does it mean? Rhaegar + Lyanna = Daenerys?

So it also means that the baby was a girl? What kind of a girl was that? SORRY Baby! that was a boy! 

nah! nah! I saw a boy in Ned's arms...

[Being Daenerys Targaryen]

On 27/06/2016 at 6:59 AM, Banner Without Brothers said:

R+L=J is not confirmed.

Now I'll probably get some hate for this and I have to start by saying that it is about 99% confirmed. But for anyone like me who hates the idea of Jon "Jesus" Targaryan being the magical Chosen royal blood Prophecy fulfiller I want to offer some hope, no matter how small. 

First big one the hair. We know how important hair is in the story. That baby is so blonde I think it would be more accurate to call it silver. If they wanted to 100% confirm Jon they would have had a baby with black hair. Of course babies hair can darken as they grow older but by the time that Ned brought him back to Winterfell? It's definitely a deliberate hole that will have to be filled in with either secret constant hair dye or magic, a glamour perhaps. https://youtu.be/dkvkT5D3fF4?t=280

No name. Why keep the name a secret? Is there really any need. Yes it was nicely done, the cut from the babies eyes into Jon's but we still could have had the name. Perhaps they could have had the "name is...." bit as the cut to Jon was happening. It's another deliberate hole 

Ah screw it, that's all I got if any other like minded optimists have anything else I'd love to hear it. But it's still enough for it to not be confirmed. It's just very, very, very likely that R+L=J.

Valar Morghulis R+L=D 

So the hair colour proves that it's not R+L=J? Why? Have you seen the Stark's children hair colours? 

Sansa? different from Robb and Bran's hair. Rickon has curly hair. Does it change anything? they are all Eddard and Catlyn's children. Cercei is evil so was Joffrey. But Tommen and Myrcella weren't. Does it change anything. They're all Cersei and Jamie's children.

However, I have to admit that the hair colour is important in Game Of Thrones. Especially because it is that detail that showed that Joffrey wasn't Robert's child. All the Baratheons have Dark hair. but what do we know about the Starks and the Targeryans? Maybe all the Targeryans we know with Blonde hair are just a consequence of marriages of 100% Targeryans. Aerys was a Targ. So was his wife... Maybe that is the reason why Daenarys, Viserys and Rheagar have such blonde hairs. What do we know?

*Sorry for my twisted English*

---------------------------------------

P.S : Are they going to show us Rhaegar or NOT! They have to. He's such a major character! I knew they would have showed us Lyanna because they kept mentonning her throughout the show. We need to see him.

[Lady Claire]

I start by saying I believe R+L=J is proved, even if I don't understand why they left out the name if then they confirmed Jon is Rhaegar's son on HBO site. Maybe because in the series they didn't show much about Rhaegar, but in the end everyone knows who he is, so why not revealing the name? Just to have us wondering? Yeah, this is quite possible. 

They had to lie about Jon's death or goodbye cliffhanger, but this doesn't change the fact that they lied: yes Jon was really dead, but producers and actor also said that Kit wasn't going to come back but for the dead body scene. Harington even apologized to the fans for lying!

I hope they will explain how was the relationship of Lyanna and Rhaegar, beginning with "Did they marry or not?". Cause now I read a lot of comments considering Jon the legitimate heir to the throne or at least that he comes before Daenerys and this is clearly impossible if Lyanna and Rhaegar did not marry. I'm not sure if Rhaegar could have more than a wife, does it depend on the faith he followed?

 

[farm_ecology]

1 hour ago, Being Daenerys Targaryen said:

R+L=D? Darling you wound me!

R+L = D?!! What does it mean? Rhaegar + Lyanna = Daenerys?

So it also means that the baby was a girl? What kind of a girl was that? SORRY Baby! that was a boy! 

nah! nah! I saw a boy in Ned's arms...

The poster is saying that R+L = D is dead ( Valar Morghulis R+L=D).

There has been a theory around for some time that Danny was born in the Tower of Joy and is in fact, half stark. This episode seems to dismiss this theory for various reasons (the child being a boy being one of them).

[Cragen]

5 minutes ago, Lady Claire said:

I start by saying I believe R+L=J is proved, even if I don't understand why they left out the name if then they confirmed Jon is Rhaegar's son on HBO site. Maybe because in the series they didn't show much about Rhaegar, but in the end everyone knows who he is, so why not revealing the name? Just to have us wondering? Yeah, this is quite possible. 

They had to lie about Jon's death or goodbye cliffhanger, but this doesn't change the fact that they lied: yes Jon was really dead, but producers and actor also said that Kit wasn't going to come back but for the dead body scene. Harington even apologized to the fans for lying!

I hope they will explain how was the relationship of Lyanna and Rhaegar, beginning with "Did they marry or not?". Cause now I read a lot of comments considering Jon the legitimate heir to the throne or at least that he comes before Daenerys and this is clearly impossible if Lyanna and Rhaegar did not marry. I'm not sure if Rhaegar could have more than a wife, does it depend on the faith he followed?

 

I think they didn't let as heard name is because Jon is not his real name and that could be confusing. I think importance of Jon lineage is not about succession, but Jon's character development. His rise will not have anything to do with his lineage, but his skills. If he marry Dany and later find out about that will add great twist in his character development when he dealing with that. Also without marriage he will rethinks himself.

[Attitude]

10 minutes ago, Lady Claire said:

I start by saying I believe R+L=J is proved, even if I don't understand why they left out the name if then they confirmed Jon is Rhaegar's son on HBO site. Maybe because in the series they didn't show much about Rhaegar, but in the end everyone knows who he is, so why not revealing the name? Just to have us wondering? Yeah, this is quite possible. 

They had to lie about Jon's death or goodbye cliffhanger, but this doesn't change the fact that they lied: yes Jon was really dead, but producers and actor also said that Kit wasn't going to come back but for the dead body scene. Harington even apologized to the fans for lying!

I hope they will explain how was the relationship of Lyanna and Rhaegar, beginning with "Did they marry or not?". Cause now I read a lot of comments considering Jon the legitimate heir to the throne or at least that he comes before Daenerys and this is clearly impossible if Lyanna and Rhaegar did not marry. I'm not sure if Rhaegar could have more than a wife, does it depend on the faith he followed?

 

I agree with your first paragraph.

You were right, I remember them stating that Jon wasn't coming back (at least not as an alive person). Jon said so too, and yes they lied about this, but why would they spoil it? That wouldn't help anyone. Also, if you would like to state that they also 'lie' about rhaegar, I ask you (not you personally, but people who think this): What is their reason to lie about this? Probably 90% of the audience didn't even see it and about half of their audience barely know who Rhaegar is, what he did and what the Prince that was Promised prophecy means. 

That will be the main question from now on. However, I can see him rise to King (with Dany?) and thén find out that he actually is a Targ.. Just to show the audience: how you are born doesn't matter. He was born a targaryen and heir to the Throne, raised a bastard and became King on his own strength. You can call it a classic I guess. 

 

[Attitude]

5 minutes ago, Cragen said:

I think they didn't let as heard name is because Jon is not his real name and that could be confusing. I think importance of Jon lineage is not about succession, but Jon's character development. His rise will not have anything to do with his lineage, but his skills. If he marry Dany and later find out about that will add great twist in his character development when he dealing with that. Also without marriage he will rethinks himself.

I think they did it because they wanted people to talk about it, to make it trending (and keep it trending for a longer period of time). 

I also think that Jon will not become King (if he ever will) because of his name, but of his achievements. And after he is already there, he will know who he is, but it won't matter anymore.. 

[Lady Claire]

12 minutes ago, Attitude said:

I agree with your first paragraph.

You were right, I remember them stating that Jon wasn't coming back (at least not as an alive person). Jon said so too, and yes they lied about this, but why would they spoil it? That wouldn't help anyone. Also, if you would like to state that they also 'lie' about rhaegar, I ask you (not you personally, but people who think this): What is their reason to lie about this? Probably 90% of the audience didn't even see it and about half of their audience barely know who Rhaegar is, what he did and what the Prince that was Promised prophecy means. 

That will be the main question from now on. However, I can see him rise to King (with Dany?) and thén find out that he actually is a Targ.. Just to show the audience: how you are born doesn't matter. He was born a targaryen and heir to the Throne, raised a bastard and became King on his own strength. You can call it a classic I guess. 

 

I totally agree and I like the idea of him raising no matter the name nor being a bastard. Personally I don't think they lied about Rhaegar, I just don't believe we can take everything they say as gold generally. They showed nothing about Rhaegar, only a few lines from other storylines, so it makes sense not naming him. I just not understand why keep Jon's true name a secret, but I hope they will show us more about the past in the next season.

[Lady Claire]

30 minutes ago, Cragen said:

I think they didn't let as heard name is because Jon is not his real name and that could be confusing. I think importance of Jon lineage is not about succession, but Jon's character development. His rise will not have anything to do with his lineage, but his skills. If he marry Dany and later find out about that will add great twist in his character development when he dealing with that. Also without marriage he will rethinks himself.

I'd like this too. For me blood and name don't matter in the end, they not make who he really is.