Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread

[SFDanny]

15 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

That comes over very clearly in that celebrated conversation:

"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."

"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit on the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."

Those aren't the words of someone who has decided to give his loyalty to Rhaegar instead of Aerys.

If they are Ser Gerold's words, they are words stating he would have fought to save his king from the rebels and a traitor. They say nothing about where his loyalty would be between Aerys and Rhaegar. Rhaegar was dead when Jaime killed Aerys, so in the choice was between rebels and Aerys, and the Lord Commander would have chosen Aerys. Not a surprise, but it says nothing about a choice between Rhaegar and Aerys. I think the White Bull made that choice when he stayed at the Tower.

[LynnS]

57 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

That comes over very clearly in that celebrated conversation:

"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."

"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit on the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."

Those aren't the words of someone who has decided to give his loyalty to Rhaegar instead of Aerys.

That Ned shows up in a group of seven brings to mind the Trial by Seven custom.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Trial_of_seven

[Tucu]

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

And he would hardly keep that army outside Dorne.

The tower of joy in in the Prince's Pass insider Dorne. One of the main entry points and one of the most defended areas in Dorne. In the novels Doran has fortified/manned the Prince's Pass since ACoK even though he has not entered the war yet.

[kimim]

1 hour ago, Tucu said:

So you think they left the principal pass into Dorne unmanned and let bands of Northmen roam free just weeks after the Sack of KL while peace was unclear?

Yes. Sounds unlikely, but Dorne's behavior throughout is strange. Yes, Elia was married to Rhaegar. But, Rhaegar betrayed Elia, which seems to have led to a situation where Aerys was holding Elia and her kids hostage, in return for Dornish presence at the Trident. You would think that the murders of Elia and her kids would lead to open war, a declaration of independence of some sort from Dorne, at least a few tries at assassination, but no. No major battles are mentioned. There's a negotiated peace soon after ("months" of negotiation aren't that drastic) followed by no uprisings, no attempts at assassination, nothing. The peace with Dorne seems so secure that Tyrion can send Myrcella to Dorne during the War of the Five Kings as a safer option than having her stay in King's Landing. Oberyn was supposedly putting together an army for Viserys, but nothing comes of that. There is a marriage contract, but Dorne allows Viserys and Dany to beg their way through the Free Cities for a decade, culminating in Dany's marriage to Drogo. Oberyn shows up at KL, but it's the Tyrells who poison Joffrey, and Tyrion, who kills Tywin.

It's all very strange.

 

[Tucu]

11 minutes ago, kimim said:

Yes. Sounds unlikely, but Dorne's behavior throughout is strange. Yes, Elia was married to Rhaegar. But, Rhaegar betrayed Elia, which seems to have led to a situation where Aerys was holding Elia and her kids hostage, in return for Dornish presence at the Trident. You would think that the murders of Elia and her kids would lead to open war, a declaration of independence of some sort from Dorne, at least a few tries at assassination, but no. No major battles are mentioned. There's a negotiated peace soon after ("months" of negotiation aren't that drastic) followed by no uprisings, no attempts at assassination, nothing. The peace with Dorne seems so secure that Tyrion can send Myrcella to Dorne during the War of the Five Kings as a safer option than having her stay in King's Landing. Oberyn was supposedly putting together an army for Viserys, but nothing comes of that. There is a marriage contract, but Dorne allows Viserys and Dany to beg their way through the Free Cities for a decade, culminating in Dany's marriage to Drogo. Oberyn shows up at KL, but it's the Tyrells who poison Joffrey, and Tyrion, who kills Tywin.

It's all very strange.

 

It is indeed very strange. That is why I think there must be a better explanation than that the pass was not manned and Ned destroyed the tower because he needed some stones.

[Black Crow]

47 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

If they are Ser Gerold's words, they are words stating he would have fought to save his king from the rebels and a traitor. They say nothing about where his loyalty would be between Aerys and Rhaegar. Rhaegar was dead when Jaime killed Aerys, so in the choice was between rebels and Aerys, and the Lord Commander would have chosen Aerys. Not a surprise, but it says nothing about a choice between Rhaegar and Aerys. I think the White Bull made that choice when he stayed at the Tower.

Consider. The King's Guard are not merely bodyguards, but the King's agents; which is why three of them ended up commanding troops at the Trident rather than ranging themselves around the throne. The king is dead, long live the king and in this case Aerys named Viserys his heir and Prince Doran has raised a Dornish army in the name of King Viserys. Where therefore should the King's Guard go? Should they stand around Dragonstone looking decorative of should they join the King's army in Dorne?

Is Lord Eddard's primary task in riding into Dorne with just six companions to seek his long lost sister, or is it to seek the surrender of the last King's Guards and perhaps thereby ward off the Dornish threat?

Was the rencounter at the tower all about Lyanna, or did Ser Arthur Dayne tell of her whereabouts while he lay a-dying?

[Ser Creighton]

2 hours ago, Tucu said:

Rhaegar march's to the Trident didn't last a fortnight. That time frame is never specified. We only know that Rossart was Hand for a fortnight.

So you don't see anything odd on Ned freely walking into enemy territory through some of the most protected roads into Dorne? 10000 is half the strength of Dorne; do you think they left the passes unprotected?

 

I would not say odd no, I would say I am curious about some of the details but I don't need all of them either. When I look at the passages for Neds dream and right after when he is awake I mostly see the narrator relaying information. The narrator does not lie he relays information to the reader. This is how third person works, the third person relays the information to us. While a character can be mistaken or unreliable the narrator never is, there is no misremember for the narrator, no oops he simply relays the information. In the case of the tower it says he pulled it down. The information only relayed to the reader and nobody else. So he is not lying to anyone, he is awake, he qualifies the dream as an actual incident, he is upset by it, and he the narrator relays the Tower being pulled down, general location, the burials, and the rumored name. The name could be wrong. Almost impossible for the tower to be.

You are not suppose to get all the information, he may not even know all the information, but the information he does know is relayed to us by the narrator. While the narrator can play with words, like Ned remembered playing his XBOX 1, the key would be on Ned remembered. The memory does no have to be accurate, but the narrator relays this is what he remembers. But when the narrator simply states he tore down the tower. There is not much wiggle room there. It does not say he remembered pulling it down, it says he pulled it down. Cat had only heard stories of Starfall and Ned so there could of been wiggle room there, but Arya and Cersei and Martin all have given us information as well to say yes Ned was there and he returned the sword Dawn. So basically yes he was there, and the tower and tearing stuff down. 

It's really not that complex. There are questions of course, but weather he was at the tower and Dorne and Starfall does not appear at all to be a question.

So while the how remains a bit of a question, the what, where, when, and who not so much. The narrator only has so much room to work with here, and relayed what he relayed. Sure a character can make a mistake,

The narrator is never unreliable, the character can be but that does not mean every single word, step, memory, and occurrence are questionable.

Take Sansa this is a great example you are given the scene with Sansa and the hound. Later Sansa will have different recollection of that moment. The unkiss. The narrator never gave you the wrong information, he gave you the scene and he gave you Sansa's rather skewed recollection in later scene. The reader can identify that, and they did. That does not mean we are not seeing what Sansa sees, what we are seeing is that Sansa got a little wonky there. That is what you are suppose to think, that does not mean she did not speak to the hound or that she did not marry Tyrion or that she is not with Littlefinger presently in the Vale.

The narrator is not indicating anything odd while Ned is awake and it has no way of coming into question in the books with Ned being dead. It is not relayed to characters it was relayed to us. "Okay maybe Howland can show up and randomly say "Dorne? Tower of Joy? Starfall? Ned? What are people talking about me and Fred Stark were on Nuncle island, drinking Bahama mama's, he got some girl pregnant and brought the kid back. Lyanna who? What are people talking about?"

You can really only take the limited narrator so far. Ned has to know he tore down the tower in order for it to be relayed. The fact that he tore down the tower looks mostly like Martin adding some dramatic effect. I am not going to scold him on engineering either, this is an author who had Jon order the rebuilding of over a dozen castles using nothing but the stones around the castles and a hand full of unskilled labor, or that Braavos can build a fleet of ships in a matter of weeks and a warship in a day, I mean come on. Martin and engineering are not happening, martin and logistics are not happening, he is not good at them and honestly they only get in the way of what he wants to relay.

I think it is fine to question things, I just think it's going to far here and it does not appear necessary. I am not saying this to say anyone is wrong, but to me and from a technical writing standpoint it does not seem accurate. If people want to continue with their theory by all means, I just give you my perspective on it. You see it different, okay, well have at it.

[Tucu]

20 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

I would not say odd no, I would say I am curious about some of the details but I don't need all of them either. When I look at the passages for Neds dream and right after when he is awake I mostly see the narrator relaying information. The narrator does not lie he relays information to the reader. This is how third person works, the third person relays the information to us. While a character can be mistaken or unreliable the narrator never is, there is no misremember for the narrator, no oops he simply relays the information. In the case of the tower it says he pulled it down. The information only relayed to the reader and nobody else. So he is not lying to anyone, he is awake, he qualifies the dream as an actual incident, he is upset by it, and he the narrator relays the Tower being pulled down, general location, the burials, and the rumored name. The name could be wrong. Almost impossible for the tower to be.

You are not suppose to get all the information, he may not even know all the information, but the information he does know is relayed to us by the narrator. While the narrator can play with words, like Ned remembered playing his XBOX 1, the key would be on Ned remembered. The memory does no have to be accurate, but the narrator relays this is what he remembers. But when the narrator simply states he tore down the tower. There is not much wiggle room there. It does not say he remembered pulling it down, it says he pulled it down. Cat had only heard stories of Starfall and Ned so there could of been wiggle room there, but Arya and Cersei and Martin all have given us information as well to say yes Ned was there and he returned the sword Dawn. So basically yes he was there, and the tower and tearing stuff down. 

It's really not that complex. There are questions of course, but weather he was at the tower and Dorne and Starfall does not appear at all to be a question.

So while the how remains a bit of a question, the what, where, when, and who not so much. The narrator only has so much room to work with here, and relayed what he relayed. Sure a character can make a mistake,

The narrator is never unreliable, the character can be but that does not mean every single word, step, memory, and occurrence are questionable.

Take Sansa this is a great example you are given the scene with Sansa and the hound. Later Sansa will have different recollection of that moment. The unkiss. The narrator never gave you the wrong information, he gave you the scene and he gave you Sansa's rather skewed recollection in later scene. The reader can identify that, and they did. That does not mean we are not seeing what Sansa sees, what we are seeing is that Sansa got a little wonky there. That is what you are suppose to think, that does not mean she did not speak to the hound or that she did not marry Tyrion or that she is not with Littlefinger presently in the Vale.

The narrator is not indicating anything odd while Ned is awake and it has no way of coming into question in the books with Ned being dead. It is not relayed to characters it was relayed to us. "Okay maybe Howland can show up and randomly say "Dorne? Tower of Joy? Starfall? Ned? What are people talking about me and Fred Stark were on Nuncle island, drinking Bahama mama's, he got some girl pregnant and brought the kid back. Lyanna who? What are people talking about?"

You can really only take the limited narrator so far. Ned has to know he tore down the tower in order for it to be relayed. The fact that he tore down the tower looks mostly like Martin adding some dramatic effect. I am not going to scold him on engineering either, this is an author who had Jon order the rebuilding of over a dozen castles using nothing but the stones around the castles and a hand full of unskilled labor, or that Braavos can build a fleet of ships in a matter of weeks and a warship in a day, I mean come on. Martin and engineering are not happening, martin and logistics are not happening, he is not good at them and honestly they only get in the way of what he wants to relay.

I think it is fine to question things, I just think it's going to far here and it does not appear necessary. I am not saying this to say anyone is wrong, but to me and from a technical writing standpoint it does not seem accurate. If people want to continue with their theory by all means, I just give you my perspective on it. You see it different, okay, well have at it.

In the first book GRRM makes us think that the tower of joy is in an isolated place in Dorne. A place where the KG were hiding something. But in the following books he shows us that the tower was in the Prince's Pass, the main entry point to Dorne. This is like hiding in the Inn at the Crossroads. Then he keeps telling us how well defended the Prince's Pass is and how the Young Dragon lost thousands of troops and his life there during the Conquest of Dorne and the follow up rebellion. We are told that Oberyn was raising an army for Viserys; then we are told that one of the two main hosts to attack the Lannisters are assembling in the Prince's Pass.

Obviously you are free to ignore GRRM's hints if you want.

[LynnS]

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

Consider. The King's Guard are not merely bodyguards, but the King's agents; which is why three of them ended up commanding troops at the Trident rather than ranging themselves around the throne. The king is dead, long live the king and in this case Aerys named Viserys his heir and Prince Doran has raised a Dornish army in the name of King Viserys. Where therefore should the King's Guard go? Should they stand around Dragonstone looking decorative of should they join the King's army in Dorne?

Is Lord Eddard's primary task in riding into Dorne with just six companions to seek his long lost sister, or is it to seek the surrender of the last King's Guards and perhaps thereby ward off the Dornish threat?

Was the rencounter at the tower all about Lyanna, or did Ser Arthur Dayne tell of her whereabouts while he lay a-dying?

This is making way too much sense now.  LOL! This would also explain why Ned doesn't immediately ask Arthur about his sister in the first place.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

Consider. The King's Guard are not merely bodyguards, but the King's agents; which is why three of them ended up commanding troops at the Trident rather than ranging themselves around the throne. The king is dead, long live the king and in this case Aerys named Viserys his heir and Prince Doran has raised a Dornish army in the name of King Viserys. Where therefore should the King's Guard go? Should they stand around Dragonstone looking decorative of should they join the King's army in Dorne?

Is Lord Eddard's primary task in riding into Dorne with just six companions to seek his long lost sister, or is it to seek the surrender of the last King's Guards and perhaps thereby ward off the Dornish threat?

Was the rencounter at the tower all about Lyanna, or did Ser Arthur Dayne tell of her whereabouts while he lay a-dying?

There are three members of the kingsguard still free and one of them, at least, should be headed to Dragonstone. According to their oath that much is clear. What the other two should be doing is open to question, at least, until some orders come from Rhaella. All of which assumes the three men view the first duty of their oaths as guidance in the situation. They may have decided that Viserys is not worthy to be king, and in such a case other interests may motivate them. 

But you know all of this, Black Crow. You don't need me to repeat what I've said, and others as well, thousands of times before.

Let then also say, I don't think one goes hunting three members of the kingsguard with only six companions. The fact Ned meets them with only those numbers speaks to another need. A need for secrecy and only those he absolutely trusts and taken with him to ensure that aim. And, yes, I think Ned's primary mission is to find his sister. If he was trying to pacify Dorne, I think he would have tried to see Doran while in Starfall or taken an army with him. He did neither.

Considering we know both Lyanna and the Kingsguard die at the Tower, I'd say if Ser Arthur says anything about Lyanna's whereabouts, it is to tell Ned and Howland she is in the tower behind him.

None of this speaks to the point I made about what Ser Gerold's "remarks" does or doesn't mean about Hightower's view of Aerys and Rhaegar. Just noting that fact, my friend. Not a problem if you don't want to address it, but I'd be interested in what you think.

[WeaselPie]

3 hours ago, Tucu said:

That is why I think there must be a better explanation than that the pass was not manned

Consider the fact that Ned did not necessarily take Prince's Pass, in fact he may have avoided it entirely.  The more direct route from Storm's End to Dorne is to hang south at Summerhall and take the Boneway.  

[WeaselPie]

52 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I think Ned's primary mission is to find his sister

Yet he doesn't ask about her.  It defies logic.   Which oddly parallels Brandon never asking about her when he storms into KL and demands that Rhaegar come out and die.

54 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

we know both Lyanna and the Kingsguard die at the Tower

No.  We don't know that.

 

[Tucu]

2 minutes ago, WeaselPie said:

Consider the fact that Ned did not necessarily take Prince's Pass, in fact he may have avoided it entirely.  The more direct route from Storm's End to Dorne is to hang south at Summerhall and take the Boneway.  

That would have taken him through the heavily defended Boneyway to Yronwood, then Skyreach, Kingsgrave and finally the Tower of Joy. Possible, but full of dornish troops. At least in the maps that looks like a longer and harder route. They also arrived on horses, not mules; so it doesn't sound like they used hidden goat tracks like Daeron did while his other armies were distracting the main dornish armies in the Prince's Pass and Boneway.

[WeaselPie]

1 minute ago, Tucu said:

That would have taken him through the heavily defended Boneyway to Yronwood, then Skyreach, Kingsgrave and finally the Tower of Joy.

Not as far south as Yronwood, the ToJ is only halfway down the Boneway.  They'd pass through Vulture's Roost.

 

[Tucu]

29 minutes ago, WeaselPie said:

Not as far south as Yronwood, the ToJ is only halfway down the Boneway.  They'd pass through Vulture's Roost.

 

Ah, so follow the road until Wyl turn west, head to Vulture's Roost and then a goat track to cross the mountains. Possible with the caveat that garrons and mules seems to be the animals for those tasks in the books; not sure how Dustin's red stallion would have managed. I guess they could have let the guide go before the final part of the journey.

[WeaselPie]

2 minutes ago, Tucu said:

Ah, so follow the road until Wyl turn west before the Boneway, head to Vulture's Roost and then a goat track to cross the mountains. Possible with the caveat that garrons and mules seems to be the animals for those tasks in the books; not sure how Dustin's red stallion would have managed.

Dorne is not obsessed with needing mules, nor are garrons and stallions entirely different animals.  Unless you're saying a stallion never visited Vulture's Roost.  Which would be strange.

Anyway, my point was that there would be alternate ways of approaching the ToJ aside from the Prince's Pass, should one decide they needed one.

[Tucu]

16 minutes ago, WeaselPie said:

Dorne is not obsessed with needing mules, nor are garrons and stallions entirely different animals.  Unless you're saying a stallion never visited Vulture's Roost.  Which would be strange.

Anyway, my point was that there would be alternate ways of approaching the ToJ aside from the Prince's Pass, should one decide they needed one.

I mean in the maps the way from Wyl to Vulture's Roost looks like a valley, probably easy for horses. But after that it just shows peaks and no main pass. When Stannis is heading to the meet the Mountain Clans through goat tracks, Jon tells him that he needs sure footed garrons, not normal horses. Another example is that to go from the Gates of the Moon to the Eyre only mules are used.

Still not sure even with proper mounts. The Boneway from Summerhal to Wyl would have been as defended as the Prince's Pass.

[J. Stargaryen]

11 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

A  few but i don't see why that's relevant if any theory is true or not.

A few is what I thought. Why do you think that is? Let's forget about the staunch RLJers for a moment. There's still a good portion of your audience that is, to say the least, very open minded to the possibility that RLJ is a red herring. Why do you think you failed to win those people over?

[wolfmaid7]

4 hours ago, Ser Creighton said:

I would not say odd no, I would say I am curious about some of the details but I don't need all of them either. When I look at the passages for Neds dream and right after when he is awake I mostly see the narrator relaying information. The narrator does not lie he relays information to the reader. This is how third person works, the third person relays the information to us. While a character can be mistaken or unreliable the narrator never is, there is no misremember for the narrator, no oops he simply relays the information. In the case of the tower it says he pulled it down. The information only relayed to the reader and nobody else. So he is not lying to anyone, he is awake, he qualifies the dream as an actual incident, he is upset by it, and he the narrator relays the Tower being pulled down, general location, the burials, and the rumored name. The name could be wrong. Almost impossible for the tower to be.

You are not suppose to get all the information, he may not even know all the information, but the information he does know is relayed to us by the narrator. While the narrator can play with words, like Ned remembered playing his XBOX 1, the key would be on Ned remembered. The memory does no have to be accurate, but the narrator relays this is what he remembers. But when the narrator simply states he tore down the tower. There is not much wiggle room there. It does not say he remembered pulling it down, it says he pulled it down. Cat had only heard stories of Starfall and Ned so there could of been wiggle room there, but Arya and Cersei and Martin all have given us information as well to say yes Ned was there and he returned the sword Dawn. So basically yes he was there, and the tower and tearing stuff down. 

It's really not that complex. There are questions of course, but weather he was at the tower and Dorne and Starfall does not appear at all to be a question.

So while the how remains a bit of a question, the what, where, when, and who not so much. The narrator only has so much room to work with here, and relayed what he relayed. Sure a character can make a mistake,

The narrator is never unreliable, the character can be but that does not mean every single word, step, memory, and occurrence are questionable.

Take Sansa this is a great example you are given the scene with Sansa and the hound. Later Sansa will have different recollection of that moment. The unkiss. The narrator never gave you the wrong information, he gave you the scene and he gave you Sansa's rather skewed recollection in later scene. The reader can identify that, and they did. That does not mean we are not seeing what Sansa sees, what we are seeing is that Sansa got a little wonky there. That is what you are suppose to think, that does not mean she did not speak to the hound or that she did not marry Tyrion or that she is not with Littlefinger presently in the Vale.

The narrator is not indicating anything odd while Ned is awake and it has no way of coming into question in the books with Ned being dead. It is not relayed to characters it was relayed to us. "Okay maybe Howland can show up and randomly say "Dorne? Tower of Joy? Starfall? Ned? What are people talking about me and Fred Stark were on Nuncle island, drinking Bahama mama's, he got some girl pregnant and brought the kid back. Lyanna who? What are people talking about?"

You can really only take the limited narrator so far. Ned has to know he tore down the tower in order for it to be relayed. The fact that he tore down the tower looks mostly like Martin adding some dramatic effect. I am not going to scold him on engineering either, this is an author who had Jon order the rebuilding of over a dozen castles using nothing but the stones around the castles and a hand full of unskilled labor, or that Braavos can build a fleet of ships in a matter of weeks and a warship in a day, I mean come on. Martin and engineering are not happening, martin and logistics are not happening, he is not good at them and honestly they only get in the way of what he wants to relay.

I think it is fine to question things, I just think it's going to far here and it does not appear necessary. I am not saying this to say anyone is wrong, but to me and from a technical writing standpoint it does not seem accurate. If people want to continue with their theory by all means, I just give you my perspective on it. You see it different, okay, well have at it.

And the narrator as we have seen countless times can be unreliable,or in other cases it is our perception of what the character sees and says that is unreliable.Again i am reminded of Syrio's lesson of the Sealord's cat and the inclusion of this type of thinking should be a lesson to us about the type of story we have. Despite the Sealord declaring all these things about the Cat to the agreement of  others ,Syrio saw "what was there" Those little details that indicates something more.The Unkiss is not a case like this it is clear to the reader in how GRRM had that Sansa scene that she was more than a bit wonky.It indicates that Sansa's attraction to the Hound went against her earlier proclivities. She went googoo eyed over the beauty of the Prince,but showed attraction to the Beast.

What we have is Martin's statement that Ned's 'account' was in the context of a dream and dreams aren't literal.Elements show up that are symbolic and real and are not limited to time and space. What is the case. Ned's dream and waking moments about the dream leaves out something that should be there in the waking retelling-Lyanna

1 hour ago, WeaselPie said:

Yet he doesn't ask about her.  It defies logic.   Which oddly parallels Brandon never asking about her when he storms into KL and demands that Rhaegar come out and die.

No.  We don't know that.

 

This again is another clue you don't declare you are going to pull a rabbit out of a hat and forget the rabbit in the trick.

[wolfmaid7]

45 minutes ago, J. Stargaryen said:

A few is what I thought. Why do you think that is? Let's forget about the staunch RLJers for a moment. There's still a good portion of your audience that is, to say the least, very open minded to the possibility that RLJ is a red herring. Why do you think you failed to win those people over?

JStar are you going to put up the evidence for Lyanna and Rhaegar being in love or aren't you?Using how many people believe or don't believe in a theory to somehow gauge its validity is not something that's going to affect it being right,wrong or ridiculous.I don't care how many people buy it,its crystal clear with the statements of " That fat,drunk could never be Jon's father." Or "He was a womanizer and a drunk and Lyanna could have never love him"  what kind of prospect Robert would be no matter the proof.I've heard it all and I DO NOT CARE.What i care about is matching point for point the evidence.Starting with the claims of love which has been asserted by @Ygrain and many others as the "staple of RLJ" or its foundation.

So i want to start with that ,i want to compare and contrast the evidence that makes RLJ the truth with the other prospects evidence.Lets dispel with the games,the word throwing back and forth,character assinations,sweeping generalizations  etc.

Line up for us the evidence of what makes you and others believe Lyanna and Robert were in love.When we are done with that rounds we can move on.It should be noted,i am using what you all have touted as proof to weigh this.

I await evidence of this by anyone in your camp who has the time to post it.Thanks