Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 4

[wolfmaid7]

8 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

I'm not sure what that has to do with my post.  I was responding to the notion that Rhaegar's last word was a question, ie "Lyanna?".

Other parts of your quote,but to return to the issue of "Rhaegar's last word"

I'm sorry that is nonsense.If the app is suppose to give a certain kind of info then "He would die with Lyanna's name on his lips" is a red flag.The language is not objective it is romanticized.Clear fanfic.

Its either suppose to be a concordance and it fails that or its like the WB and prone to misinformation.

[Melifeather]

1 hour ago, maudisdottir said:

^So who is the Wylla at Starfall for the last decade plus?  Is Ned hallucinating when he mourns his dead sister?

Again, if Robert's the father - why the secrecy?  And the clues for that unlikely solution certainly weren't laid out in the first book.  Because there aren't any.  Lyanna and Robert did not sleep together in the books.

All we know about Wylla is that Ned told Robert that she was Jon's mother, and Edric says he and Jon were milk brothers since Wylla was his wet nurse. Anything else is pure speculation.

For some reason Ned associates the tower of joy, the missing Kingsguard, the deaths of the Kingsguard, the deaths of his men, and Lyanna's death together. That being said this is a recurring "fever dream". It's a fever dream and yet he recognizes it as an old dream, but the thing to remember is that he compares aspects of the dream to real life, meaning there are things in the dream that even he acknowledges didn't happen that way. I believe a lot of it is symbolic like the rose petals spilling from her palm and streaking across the sky. The rose petals simply symbolize her life force slipping away. And I would compare the streaking across the sky with what we witnessed when Varamyr's spirit was floating on the wind.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

I think @maudisdottir, instead of being snarky, is raising a valid point. I'd be interested in your answer too. As well, I have some other questions with regard to your previous post.

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

Jon's quote is from the banquet scene where Robert takes Ned's place in the procession escorting Catelyn to the dais.  Jon and Robert never actually speak to each other but they certainly see each other.  We get Jon's  reaction to Robert.  He's disappointed that Robert doesn't live up to the stories he's been told by Ned.

Is this really the case, though - that "they certainly see each other"? I don't doubt that Jon saw Robert, since the text plainly says so, but where is it indicated that Robert saw Jon? Where is it indicated that he was able to note Jon's presence and know who Jon was? I ask because, even though you are stating that Robert did indeed lay eyes on Jon, based on the absence of any text that says so, it can also reasonably be argued that picking Jon out of the crowd with him seated so far away from the king's table, with Robert's focus being eating, drinking and making merry more than being observant - as well as Jon's early exit from the feast - makes it a distinct possibility that Robert didn't notice him at all.

 

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

And we have Jon who looks like Arya (according to Arya) who looks like Lyanna.  Robert trolling Ned for information about Ned's bastard on the road to King's Landing.  If Jon does indeed resemble his mother; Robert would likely notice it and question Ned about it.

So did he? Did Robert notice it and question Ned about it? How would a reader know if he did? Do Robert's questions to Ned on the King's Road smack of him probing for information about Lyanna? If so, how? Because I think Robert's conversation could easily and reasonably be read as him reminiscing fondly of old times, along with a fair about of schadenfreude about honorable Ned's bastard. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Robert doesn't do any probing about Lyanna at all ever.

 

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

This in turn goes back to Lyanna's statement to Ned 'that love is sweet, but can't change a man's nature' and Ned's belief that marriage will change a man.  How does Lyanna know this about Robert; unless she had shared his bed and in spite of that Robert sleeps around like a Tony Soprano type character.

Is it true that only sharing his bed would enable Lyanna to have such an understanding of Robert's character? Isn't it reasonably possible that she gained her belief about his nature in other ways, like observation? I mean, we all have friends and/or family members that we know very intimately and have deep understanding of the natures of  - but that can't always mean that we only gained that understanding by sharing their beds.

 

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

If Lyanna got wind of something like this; she is likely to flee.

Is this what you believe happened? If so, how did you come that conclusion? Specifically, what in the text convinced you of this?

 

8 hours ago, LynnS said:

ETA:  Where does Lyanna go?  Far south from here to Starfall and Ashara Dayne who loves her brother; to the protection of a true knight, Arthur Dayne taking a new identity, Wylla.     

Am I correct that you're proposing that the "Wylla" the Edric Dayne speaks of as his wetnurse is the same person as Lyanna Stark? Do you interpret Edric's statement that "she's been with us for years and years" to mean that he is mentioning her in the present tense, i.e. that she is still alive and possibly still at Starfall?

If that is your meaning, then how would you explain Ned Stark's memories of the death of his sister and his near-constant grieving for her? Is he "faking it", even in his innermost thoughts? Or does he not know that his sister is (presumably) still alive?

 

What it boils down to is that I'm asking for textual support for your suppositions. Because all of them I've quoted here are equivocal at best; either with little-to-no textual support (that Robert and Jon "certainly" saw each other, for example), or dependent upon interpretations that are dubious (that Lyanna understood Robert's nature because she slept with him, for example). 

Theories are sweet, dearest @LynnS, but theories cannot change a text's nature. 

[Melifeather]

40 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Am I correct that you're proposing that the "Wylla" the Edric Dayne speaks of as his wetnurse is the same person as Lyanna Stark?

The Ned's Little Girl, I think you bring up some very valid points, but I'm only going to comment on this (above), because it's one of my crackpot theories that Lyanna and Ned were incestuous like Cersei and Jaime, and may be the reason why Ned was sent to the Eyrie. After all, Jon is said to have "more of the north in him" than the other Stark kids. 

Link if you're curious STARKCEST!

[LynnS]

59 minutes ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Theories are sweet, dearest @LynnS, but theories cannot change a text's nature. 

Words that everyone should take to heart about their own theories.  I've listened to RLJ for years.  At one time, I thought RLJ was the answer, then Ned and Ashara and I've cycled through any number of them.  The idea the the R in RLJ might stand for Robert didn't appeal to me.  I dismissed it right away because I don't like the character rather than ask myself how it could be true.   I'm interested in what hasn't been discussed at this point or what is different.  You couldn't always discuss these things here.  There is still plenty of snark.

I'm really not interested in talking to people who aren't open to other ideas or can't see past their own narratives.  Martin says in an interview that when legend and truth conflict; print the legend. The truth is something simple and so I'm asking if there is something less convoluted, less complicated than it needs to be. The romance angle of RLJ doesn't appeal to me anymore.  It has the feel of tabloid journalism, something Martin would know about through his journalism studies.  

Martin also said at one point that Jon's parentage could be determined from the text of the first book.  I assume these are very subtle clues and I don't assume that it's a lie.  I don't maintain the conceit that I have the answer.  I'm still looking for the answer. 

If you really want to explore this with me, then fine. 

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

All we know about Wylla is that Ned told Robert that she was Jon's mother, and Edric says he and Jon were milk brothers since Wylla was his wet nurse. Anything else is pure speculation.

Worth bearing in mind though that if Wylla was a wet nurse she may well have suckled Jon without first bearing him.

[Black Crow]

18 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Martin also said at one point that Jon's parentage could be determined from the text of the first book.  I assume these are very subtle clues and I don't assume that it's a lie.  I don't maintain the conceit that I have the answer.  I'm still looking for the answer. 

Depends how you define parentage. Jon is ever curious about his mother and while his belief that Lord Eddard was his father prevents any questions in that direction I'm still, [bearing in mind the 1993 synopsis], inclined to suspect that while there's little doubt that Jon's mother was Lyanna, his father may in the end turn out to be no more significant than Tyrion Tanner's

[Melifeather]

16 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

Worth bearing in mind though that if Wylla was a wet nurse she may well have suckled Jon without first bearing him.

I was just repeating what the text says. When Robert asked Ned the name of his bastard's mother, Ned names Wylla. As readers we suspect Lyanna is Jon's true mother, but it is not confirmed. It is also worth bearing in mind that Wylla may be Lyanna.

[LynnS]

13 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I was just repeating what the text says. When Robert asked Ned the name of his bastard's mother, Ned names Wylla. As readers we suspect Lyanna is Jon's true mother, but it is not confirmed. It is also worth bearing in mind that Wylla may be Lyanna.

Why would we think there has only ever been one Wylla.  There are noble ladies so named:  the warrior maiden Wylla of Wyl and the staunch Stark supporter Wylla Manderly.  I imagine the common folk might name their daughters after renowned Wyllas especially in Dorne.  So the question is whether or not Wylla who nursed Jon and Wylla who nursed Edric are the same person or whether he just thinks they are.  Since this places Jon at Starfall it opens the possibility that Jon was born there.  So would Lyanna use her own name if she was in hiding or a common name.  Then Ned's reply to Robert that his bastard's mother was named Wylla isn't a lie; but a subterfuge. 

[Sly Wren]

On October 26, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

There are several possibilities, I agree. Let's hope The Winds of Winter gives us more information on that!

Amen and hallelujah!

On October 26, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I do hope that the fact that Arianne and Areo are a POVs will provide us with more insights in what Dorne did and feel during the Rebellion, especially now that Aegon has entered the picture. Arianne could recall things her father did, or said, at whatever point in time, whereas Areo, provided that he returns to Doran's side (though we can only hope here) could give us information stated by Doran himself.

Agreed. I will say that what Areo and Doran have said about Dorne at the present time fits with the Dornish history the World Book presents. So, sound like there's a good chance the Dornish have often been rather fragmented. And thus a difficult place to trust too many people.

On October 26, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

I recall that Martin has said that by the end of the novels, we'll have all the information about the rebellion that we need (rendering a prequel unnecessary), but I do hope that this will include all the things that were happening in King's Landing.. Jaime could be one POV for this, Jon Connington as well (until we reach his exile), but Jaime cannot have seen everything, and the war continued for quite some time after Connington was exiled (assuming it occurred rather quickly after losing the battle). So are we going to learn those things? I sure hope so.

He has to give us some of this, right? And explain at least some of the Harrenhal stuff. I can easily see that he won't tell all of it--using POVs for narration makes a "complete" reveal of all unworkable. But he has to give us at least some of it. 

On October 26, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Sure. But if you suspect, for whatever reason, that there is a mistake, you can always either list it there, or contact someone more closely involved.

I tried asking on threads and tagging--no joy. But given all that's going on, I can't fault them for having too much on their plates.

[Melifeather]

10 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Why would we think there has only ever been one Wylla.  There are noble ladies so named:  the warrior maiden Wylla of Wyl and the staunch Stark supporter Wylla Manderly.  I imagine the common folk might name their daughters after renowned Wyllas especially in Dorne.  So the question is whether or not Wylla who nursed Jon and Wylla who nursed Edric are the same person or whether he just thinks they are.  Since this places Jon at Starfall it opens the possibility that Jon was born there.  So would Lyanna use her own name if she was in hiding or a common name.  Then Ned's reply to Robert that his bastard's mother was named Wylla isn't a lie; but a subterfuge. 

The Lyanna=Wylla is a crackpot. I was responding to BC's reply that Wylla could nurse without bearing Jon...which goes without saying...so I meant it as kind of a joke. But you do make interesting connections to other Wylla's...

[Sly Wren]

15 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Why would we think there has only ever been one Wylla.  There are noble ladies so named:  the warrior maiden Wylla of Wyl and the staunch Stark supporter Wylla Manderly.  I imagine the common folk might name their daughters after renowned Wyllas especially in Dorne.  So the question is whether or not Wylla who nursed Jon and Wylla who nursed Edric are the same person or whether he just thinks they are.  Since this places Jon at Starfall it opens the possibility that Jon was born there.  So would Lyanna use her own name if she was in hiding or a common name.  Then Ned's reply to Robert that his bastard's mother was named Wylla isn't a lie; but a subterfuge. 

YES!!! I've liked the idea that Lyanna was hiding under the name "Wylla" for a while. Would fit Sansa's hiding under another name. And Arya's hiding under multiple names--she hides under Nan for a while--a wet nurse.  And Baelish proposes pretending that Kella is Sansa's mother--at an unnamed, desolate tower. Before hiding Sansa under a presumed name at a castle with white towers.

And there could now be a woman at Starfall calling herself (or actually named) Wylla. So, if anyone remembers well enough to say, "wait, wasn't there a woman named Wylla who gave birth?" Well can just say, "yup! That's me!" Not unlike Kella has had so many children that no one would bat an eye at her being Sansa's mother.

And Jon's being born at Starfall would make a lot of practical and symbolic sense.

Yes--your idea re: Wylla and Lyanna's got to be an option on the table. 

Plus the bolded--a nice middle ground for the man who doesn't like lies.

[The Ned's Little Girl]

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

If you really want to explore this with me, then fine. 

Thank you for not assuming that I was being snarky. (Sometimes I am, mea culpa.) Because I really wasn't trying to be. The bulk of my argumentation in this particular series of topics has been, "What in the text led to this conclusion?" or "What is the basis for that belief?" I mean, it's one thing for a person to say "X means Y", I just want to know how that person came to that conclusion and what in the books supports that particular assertion. Especially if there is a reasonable, plausible explanation/interpretation already, in which case I'm interested in the question, "Why is this existing reasonable explanation insufficient?" That's kinda what I was getting at.

I'd be glad to hear your answers to my questions in that earlier post, if you're willing. (Unless @wolfmaid7 would consider it to be off-topic or outside the scope of this topic. I would of course comply with her judgement in this matter.)

[Kingmonkey]

On 26/10/2016 at 3:40 AM, Sly Wren said:

If I couldn't hide her in a well armed castle tower (vs. an abandoned watchtower) filled with servants and a maester and supplies, I could also go for a similarly well armed and supplied castle which also has at least one white stone tower (like the Eyrie's--the only two existing castles in the novels described as having purely white stone towers) and is on an island in a river at the base of a steep mountain valley and a waterfall on the shores of the Summer Sea. Who knows--maybe the Lady of Shallot will come floating by?  

Well now we're talking! You know where else had white towers? Whitewalls. Where a metaphorical dragon (a Targ) hatched from a metaphorical egg. Hmmm.

Just to clarify, my argument is not that the toj is the only possible answer to Lyanna's whereabouts. I'm open to other possibilities for part or all of Lyanna's sojourn. Starfall seems like a very strong one.  I'm arguing against the view that the toj is NOT a possible answer, a claim raised based on the frankly rather bizarre notion that it's impossible to hide out in thousands of square miles of mountainous terrain.

On 26/10/2016 at 3:40 AM, Sly Wren said:

Could really help. But Rhaegar and Arthur and Dawn--people would still ask questions. Or they could just run into random trouble--injuries, illness, running out of supplies--and need help. The longer they are isolated, the more likely something goes wrong. And getting news and sending messages--much easier to keep abreast of things if they are in a castle with ravens.

The good thing about mountains is that you can be hidden without being isolated. There would be hundreds of small valleys in the Red Mountains. You can be totally out of sight and still only a couple of hours from the nearest village and an afternoon's journey from a major town. 

 

[Kingmonkey]

4 hours ago, Feather Crystal said:

Link if you're curious STARKCEST!

Of course there's also Stark+Lyanna=Jon

[maudisdottir]

I also don't mean to come across as snarky with all my question marks, but I'm honestly just looking for answers.  A lot of speculation gets thrown around, not based on anything in the text, but just "what if X happened?  It's not impossible".  Which can be fun to pass the time between books/seasons but it's difficult to debate and people get defensive when they can't produce evidence other than "the books don't say it DIDN'T happen", when in order for certain theories to work it requires a lot of contortion, coincidence and a twist of time travel.

[Sly Wren]

1 hour ago, Kingmonkey said:

Well now we're talking! You know where else had white towers? Whitewalls. Where a metaphorical dragon (a Targ) hatched from a metaphorical egg. Hmmm.

Yup! And Whitewalls' stone came from the Vale. It also had a lot of weirwood in its construction--the Eyrie has the high seat.  Some other "Hmmms." 

And Whitewalls was the site of an attempted Targaryen Rebellion against other Targaryens.

Heresy's discussed the possibility that Jon Arryn was in cahoots with Rhaegar and even Tywin, not just with the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys. Not sure if that's just @Voice or @Black Crow who had these sorts of ideas, but the Eyrie may have been involved in multiple ways with a clandestine Targaryen rebellion (Rhaegar vs. Aerys).

And the Eyrie is clearly tied to the start of Robb's Rebellion. As well as Baelish's current endgame.

So, if the only other castle with white towers (Starfall) is also tied to a Targaryen Rebellion against another Targ--possibly one of the staging sites--that would be very interesting. Though no way on earth we have enough info to pin that down.

By the way, there is a castle with white and black towers (Stonehelm)--but Eyrie and Whitewalls and Starfall--the only ones we have with white stone towers in the novels.

Quote

Just to clarify, my argument is not that the toj is the only possible answer to Lyanna's whereabouts. I'm open to other possibilities for part or all of Lyanna's sojourn. Starfall seems like a very strong one.  I'm arguing against the view that the toj is NOT a possible answer, a claim raised based on the frankly rather bizarre notion that it's impossible to hide out in thousands of square miles of mountainous terrain.

On this, I completely agree. I object to the view that the text insists Lyanna was in the tower. But could she have been? Absolutely.

Quote

The good thing about mountains is that you can be hidden without being isolated. There would be hundreds of small valleys in the Red Mountains. You can be totally out of sight and still only a couple of hours from the nearest village and an afternoon's journey from a major town. 

True--though every small village is a chance of discovery. 

[Kingmonkey]

1 hour ago, Sly Wren said:

Heresy's discussed the possibility that Jon Arryn was in cahoots with Rhaegar and even Tywin, not just with the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys. Not sure if that's just @Voice or @Black Crow who had these sorts of ideas, but the Eyrie may have been involved in multiple ways with a clandestine Targaryen rebellion (Rhaegar vs. Aerys).

I wonder if there weren't two quite separate power-plays going on there. One Rhaegar+Lannister+Martell, one Baratheon+Stark+Arryn, with the Tullys a prize both were interested in. By appointing Jaime to the KG, Aerys nipped the Lannister/Tully link up in the bud. Harrenhal may have been intended as an opportunity for Rheagar's faction to sound out the B/S/A bloc. 

The reaction to Rhaegar's crowning of Lyanna seems to make more sense if it might be seen as an attempt to undermine the B/S/A bloc rather than work with it. There may also have been a feeling that Rhaegar was drawing his father's attention to the B/S/A "southron ambitions"   as a distraction from his own ambitions.

Of course there's the big unknown of Jon Arryn in this, who we know almost nothing about. He may have been an arch-manipulator up to all sorts of scheming. It's all a big unknown.

1 hour ago, Sly Wren said:

True--though every small village is a chance of discovery. 

As is every servant in a big castle. There are no perfect hiding places, but out in the mountains is about as close as it comes. Let's face it, it's a whole lot more likely Varys would have a spy at Starfall, the seat of one of Aerys' main political opponents, than some random small mountain village. 

It would of course help if they made sure that the smallfolk in any nearby mountain villages were on their side. Smallfolk tend not to care much about politics, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't think there was some money in talking. However rather usefully we know that one of the 3KG has a track record in winning local smallfolk around to his side. 

 

[wolfmaid7]

3 hours ago, The Ned's Little Girl said:

Thank you for not assuming that I was being snarky. (Sometimes I am, mea culpa.) Because I really wasn't trying to be. The bulk of my argumentation in this particular series of topics has been, "What in the text led to this conclusion?" or "What is the basis for that belief?" I mean, it's one thing for a person to say "X means Y", I just want to know how that person came to that conclusion and what in the books supports that particular assertion. Especially if there is a reasonable, plausible explanation/interpretation already, in which case I'm interested in the question, "Why is this existing reasonable explanation insufficient?" That's kinda what I was getting at.

I'd be glad to hear your answers to my questions in that earlier post, if you're willing. (Unless @wolfmaid7 would consider it to be off-topic or outside the scope of this topic. I would of course comply with her judgement in this matter.)

Seems like people are just talking anyway so go for it.

3 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

 

Just to clarify, my argument is not that the toj is the only possible answer to Lyanna's whereabouts. I'm open to other possibilities for part or all of Lyanna's sojourn. Starfall seems like a very strong one.  I'm arguing against the view that the toj is NOT a possible answer, a claim raised based on the frankly rather bizarre notion that it's impossible to hide out in thousands of square miles of mountainous terrain.

. 

 

I don't think the toj is "impossible" that is too strong a word. Its just that when it comes to the idea of concealment based on the info we have its either very far in the mountains;how many miles from the pass itself.Or its in the marchers which put it smack in the stormlands and the Reach where because of the fractions and territorial issues makes it hard to believe they would go unoticed.I include in that having to get food and water constantly if they were there for a long time.

Which based on the KGs answer to Ned indicates to me that not only were they not at the tower they were somewhere very far.

"I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them. “We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered. “Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell. “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 the Iron Throne,"

That is a problem for me because again it gives some sort of time frame for them.So now putting everything RLJ says and what has happened when; its more than just a tad problematic.

1.So when KL fell,is it safe to say they were not at the toj? We can all see that can we?

2. If according to RLJ Jon's birth was within 1 mth or so of the sack then based on the above that still couldn't have happened at the toj because given the connotation "far away" wasn't toj.

3. Then we have to think about a few  more things .If the new arguement about the toj being not close to the pass.They had a heavily pregnant woman riding through the mountains? That's reckless.You were better off at Starfall.

But that's just me. I still think Lyanna could be anywhere and that anywhere was a place that could facilitate the needs of  pregnant woman and take care of preparing a body effectively for travel.

2 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

I also don't mean to come across as snarky with all my question marks, but I'm honestly just looking for answers.  A lot of speculation gets thrown around, not based on anything in the text, but just "what if X happened?  It's not impossible".  Which can be fun to pass the time between books/seasons but it's difficult to debate and people get defensive when they can't produce evidence other than "the books don't say it DIDN'T happen", when in order for certain theories to work it requires a lot of contortion, coincidence and a twist of time travel.

One of the reasons i don't take stalk in "what if" arguement and to clarify throw a handful of rice in the air and each grain might fall on someone who sees something completely different.The right or wrong of it is only going to be settled by one person  and that's the author.Until then we all are speculating.

2 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

Yup! And Whitewalls' stone came from the Vale. It also had a lot of weirwood in its construction--the Eyrie has the high seat.  Some other "Hmmms." 

And Whitewalls was the site of an attempted Targaryen Rebellion against other Targaryens.

Heresy's discussed the possibility that Jon Arryn was in cahoots with Rhaegar and even Tywin, not just with the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys. Not sure if that's just @Voice or @Black Crow who had these sorts of ideas, but the Eyrie may have been involved in multiple ways with a clandestine Targaryen rebellion (Rhaegar vs. Aerys).

And the Eyrie is clearly tied to the start of Robb's Rebellion. As well as Baelish's current endgame.

So, if the only other castle with white towers (Starfall) is also tied to a Targaryen Rebellion against another Targ--possibly one of the staging sites--that would be very interesting. Though no way on earth we have enough info to pin that down.

By the way, there is a castle with white and black towers (Stonehelm)--but Eyrie and Whitewalls and Starfall--the only ones we have with white stone towers in the novels.

On this, I completely agree. I object to the view that the text insists Lyanna was in the tower. But could she have been? Absolutely.

True--though every small village is a chance of discovery. 

I think @Feather Crystal is the lead on that one.

[wolfmaid7]

5 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

YES!!! I've liked the idea that Lyanna was hiding under the name "Wylla" for a while. Would fit Sansa's hiding under another name. And Arya's hiding under multiple names--she hides under Nan for a while--a wet nurse.  And Baelish proposes pretending that Kella is Sansa's mother--at an unnamed, desolate tower. Before hiding Sansa under a presumed name at a castle with white towers.

And there could now be a woman at Starfall calling herself (or actually named) Wylla. So, if anyone remembers well enough to say, "wait, wasn't there a woman named Wylla who gave birth?" Well can just say, "yup! That's me!" Not unlike Kella has had so many children that no one would bat an eye at her being Sansa's mother.

And Jon's being born at Starfall would make a lot of practical and symbolic sense.

Yes--your idea re: Wylla and Lyanna's got to be an option on the table. 

Plus the bolded--a nice middle ground for the man who doesn't like lies.

This is cool except i disagree on the "Ned telling Robert Wylla was Jon's mother."  This to me is an example of what George does so well with the misdirection.

"And yet there was that one time . . . what was her name, that common girl of yours? Becca? No, she was one of mine, gods love her, black hair and these sweet big eyes, you could drown in them. Yours was . . . Aleena? No. You told me once. Was it Merryl? You know the one I mean, your bastard’s mother?” “Her name was Wylla,” Ned replied with cool courtesy, “and I would sooner not speak of her.” “Wylla. Yes.” The king grinned. “She must have been a rare wench if she could make Lord Eddard Stark forget his honor, even for an hour.

First it should be noted what Robert brought up.He was talking about Ned having a booty call with a girl.Just doing something that was uncharacteristic for him.

Secondly,its very obvious that if its a one time then Robert very well knows that the one time fathered Jon.He was fishing for her name. Based on his "knowledge" that Ned had a one time encounter with a girl throwing in "you know the one i mean" was othing more than a prod for Ned to give up the woman he slept with name.

But Ned,never told Robert Wylla was Jon's mom.Robert already believed that based on him knowing that Ned had one encounter with a girl.The subject wasn't Jon mom in truth,its the woman he had the one time with. That Robert assumed she was Jon's mother was his reasoning based on what he thought he knew.

So i disgree Ned is perpetrating a ruse.He just does what he always does.

And GRRM does what he always does,Writes in such a way its very ambigous  and misdirecting.In this case the misdirection is Robert saying "Your bastard's mother " which was followed up by Ned saying "Her name was Wylla" .

Look at it this way if Robert hadn't thrown in "Your bastard's mother" wouldn't it be a given based on Ned having a one time encounter that that encounter produced Jon?It just another Red herring imo.