Jon was born a bastard and remains a bastard.

[The Commentator]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

What vow are they referring to. The Kingsguard vow? Could be. But it could also be a specific vow they swore to Rhaegar to protect Lyanna (and the unborn child) from harm, or that they would do anything in their power to keep the existence of that child a secret should the war turn against the Targaryens.

It is clear that the Kingsguard thing is what caused them to stay with Lyanna, originally, but the Kingsguard vow is not necessarily the vow they are referring to here.

You might also consider an alternative explanation.  They were sent to kill any offspring that might result from that union.  Aerys sent them on a search and kill mission soon after the public execution of Rickard and Brandon.  The search took a long time because Rhaegar refused to expose the location of his hideout.  Eddard and company got there in the nick of time just shortly after the arrival of the Kingsguard.  This would explain why they had to fight. 

The memory of the war with the Blackfyres still fresh on everyone's minds, Aerys then disinherited Rhaegar to prevent future problems.  Rhaegar was acting like Aegon IV at this point and he might take it upon himself to legitimize his bastards after he takes the throne.  So he disinherits Rhaegar and passed the crown to Prince Viserys.  He then sent his three Kingsguard on a search and kill mission to find any baby that Rhaegar might have had with the Stark girl and kill it.

[The Fattest Leech]

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

George may have a plan to slowly uncover this mystery. Connington and Barristan are very good POVs to begin doing that. They won't be able to cover the tower of joy and Rhaegar-and-Lyanna-along-in-the-wild parts but they certainly can add crucial pieces to Harrenhal, the abduction, and how Rhaegar's actions were seen and interpreted at court. I never said either of them would have super good evidence. But a rumor about Lyanna being pregnant could very well be a true rumor, or a rumor people (Robert included) might have believed.

The whole thing is just too obvious for nobody ever thinking that Rhaegar might have impregnated Lyanna. The resolution for Ned there could be that he told a convincing story about a stillborn child upon his own return from the South. He would have had his bastard on his lap when telling that story.

Of course. 

[Protagoras]

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Snip

Have little amount of time, but yeah - we do seem to be mostly in agreement, apart from Tyrion being a consort of Daenerys and maybe something more. 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

You might also consider an alternative explanation.  They were sent to kill any offspring that might result from that union.  Aerys sent them on a search and kill mission soon after the public execution of Rickard and Brandon.  The search took a long time because Rhaegar refused to expose the location of his hideout.  Eddard and company got there in the nick of time just shortly after the arrival of the Kingsguard.  This would explain why they had to fight.

So, they were just waiting to murder a newborn child. And for that, Ned Stark, Lyanna's brother, with his firm views on infanticide, considered them "a marvel, a shining lesson to the world"; for that, he named Arthur Dayne "the finest knight I ever saw".

No, I can't say that this hypothesis is very convincing.

[Red Man Racey]

3 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

You might also consider an alternative explanation.  They were sent to kill any offspring that might result from that union.  Aerys sent them on a search and kill mission soon after the public execution of Rickard and Brandon.  The search took a long time because Rhaegar refused to expose the location of his hideout.  Eddard and company got there in the nick of time just shortly after the arrival of the Kingsguard.  This would explain why they had to fight. 

The memory of the war with the Blackfyres still fresh on everyone's minds, Aerys then disinherited Rhaegar to prevent future problems.  Rhaegar was acting like Aegon IV at this point and he might take it upon himself to legitimize his bastards after he takes the throne.  So he disinherits Rhaegar and passed the crown to Prince Viserys.  He then sent his three Kingsguard on a search and kill mission to find any baby that Rhaegar might have had with the Stark girl and kill it.

If they were there for that purpose then they wouldn't be waiting outside. It would have been a race into the tower to do the deed. Maybe they would have left two members outside to slow down Ned's party, but the third would have been quickly headed inside to finish the job. This explanation does not pass muster.

[Ygrain]

Okay, let's take a look again at a couple of facts:

- polygamy was not used frequently even by Valyrians themselves. Discontinuation of the practice per se therefore isn't an argument because it was always an exception rather than the rule.

- when Maegor pulled polygamy, HS threw a tantrum and incited an uprising, but the issue was further complicated by the Targ incest, different religion (Maegor's wedding was in the Valyrian right), and definitely not the least, the "spurned" wife being HS's relative. Outcome: Targs follow the Faith but incest continues and Faith militant is disbanded. That is pretty much telling who had an upper hand in this agreement: the Faith lost its military power and granted an exception to a practice which equalled to a mortal sin in every single Westerosi culture regardless of religion (note that before the Oldtown version of Faith spread, some regions of Westeros used to be polygamous)

- Daemon and Rhaenyra thought that polygamy was an option, Viserys I didn't. His ruling was definitely coloured with his dislike of Daemon, though, because even as a widower, Daemon still married Rhaenyra secretly because Viserys would have come up with another "reason" why the marriage was not possible. Moreover, there doesn't seem to be a law against polygamy, or at least not one considered fully binding for the royal family, or else the question would never be raised in the first place.

- when Jorah reminds Dany that she might follow Aegon's precedent, he never mentions any legal obstacles. He has his own agenda here directed towards Dany's panties but at that time, he is not so far gone as to propose something that would be, say, on the level of his selling of poachers.

- every couple of pages in the ASOIAF series, we are reminded that incest is totally unacceptable in Westeros and that the Targs were the only ones who had a free pass in the eyes of gods and men. The same reaction is shown when the topic surfaces in Dunk and Egg. Nowhere do we get such reactions about polygamy, all we have is the historical account of the Faith uprising and the quarrel between Daemon and Viserys. This is especially curious as we have multiple references to the incestuous aspect Aegon's marriage to both his sisters but none towards his polygamy. No-one bats a lash over Ygon Oldfather's eighteen wives, even though other moral shortcomings on the Wildlings' part are vocally commented. Craster's incest is frowned upon but the number of his daughter-wives does not seem to bother anyone.

- GRRM never said that polygamy was absolutely impossible in Westeros these days. When asked if there were any polygamous Targs after Maegor, he said that  he might come up with some, i.e. the possibility existed in his mind. He also said that there was and is precedent, which is in concord with the instance of Daemon and Rhaenyra thinking polygamy possible. He did say that without dragons, the Targs couldn't defy laws, customs, Faith etc so easily, i.e. polygamy would be a controversial move and may not be accepted.

Sooo: if polygamy was risky and controversial and what not but Aegon's precedent still valid (and it had to be valid, because the whole Targ dynasty issued from his second wife), why is it such a long shot that in a situation where Elia couldn't bear a third child, Rhaegar might have resorted to his ancestor's precedent if he thought that having three children was vital for saving Westeros? And why is it so inconceivable that at least some people would have respected the precedent and considered Jon legitimate?

[BalerionTheCat]

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is also possible that they were just very loyal men, to Rhaegar personally. Just as Stannis expects Justin Massey to continue the war in Shireen's name Rhaegar may have expected from the men he charged with taking care of Lyanna to continue to that, even if he died.

That is very good for me. But some will say it can't. Because the KG have their vows, and they can't abandon the old king. Maybe the orders given by Aerys to Hightower were not very specific. And they could choose to follow Rhaegar's orders, even if it was clearly something Aerys would not approve. But, admitting their presence at the Trident or at KL would have change the outcome is, IMO recognizing their failure in protecting the king. But no, they are heavily claiming they are at the ToJ for their vows, and completely unashamed of their decisions.

Or they could consider Aerys was insane and Rhaegar had taken charge. This was war, and it was impossible to convene a Great Council. Rhaegar gave them orders, no explanation, and they did what they were told. No less, no more! Possible?

But many things, starting with Harrendal, are very strange. And I don't believe we can explain rationally everything. I feel, the less absurd explanation, is to suppose some people, Rhaegar, possibly Lyanna, possibly the KG, were acting according to some, yet undisclosed prophecies. ASoIaF has quite a lot of them, in addition to legends and "wet nurse's stories". I believe some are important, the PtWP which influenced Rhaegar in particular.

15 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

Yeah, I can understand your viewpoint and respect it, there are many and more things that need to come to light in order to really get a full understanding on things regarding the Rebellion. I agree that Rhaegar is an enigma I don't think there is anyone left alive who knew everything that was going on in his head which leaves so many mysteries unsolved. We do know that he was right about the Others.

Just taking what happened on face value alone though I still feel like the Kingsguard were mismanaged by Rhaegar. From what I can gather Rhaegar wanted three children of his body to be the three heads of the dragon that would save the world. However I feel like he put the cart before the horse and that got his other two children and heads of the dragon killed. Hindsight is 20/20 but I'll always wonder why he didn't take at least Arthur or Ser. Gerold with him to the Trident.

I'm unsure if Rhaegar and the KG were really expecting to survive their respective fights. It looks like the famous blood sacrifice for me, the "death for life" of Mirri Maz Duur. You will say I extrapolate too much. But consider how many people died for Jon's birth, people close to Rhaegar  and Lyanna. It looks as if Rhaegar (or both) did everything for it.

[Lord Varys]

43 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

That is very good for me. But some will say it can't. Because the KG have their vows, and they can't abandon the old king.

If they do this, they are wrong. At least since ADwD (where Selmy revealed that the Kingsguard could actually be nothing but bodyguards for a king's mistress or bastard) and TWoIaF and TPatQ and TRP (where we learn a lot about some historical Kingsguard).

43 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Maybe the orders given by Aerys to Hightower were not very specific. And they could choose to follow Rhaegar's orders, even if it was clearly something Aerys would not approve.

The fact that Hightower was at the tower and not at the side in itself proved that the man chose Rhaegar/Lyanna over Aerys for some reason. He chose to follow the authority of Rhaegar (or perhaps even Lyanna) over Aerys'. Why he did that I don't know. A pretty good explanation would be to assume that, perhaps, Ser Gerold wasn't as keen to watch his king burn people alive or rape his sister-wife as Jaime's POV suggests. Hightower may have felt as sick as Jaime at Aerys' court but unlike Jaime others would have not been able to read his feelings in his face (unlike Hightower clearly could with Jaime).

If Hightower had wanted to return to KL he could have just ignored Rhaegar's orders/requests. Hightower was the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard and could as such only be commanded by the king himself, or the Hand when he is speaking with the King's Voice.

43 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

But, admitting their presence at the Trident or at KL would have change the outcome is, IMO recognizing their failure in protecting the king. But no, they are heavily claiming they are at the ToJ for their vows, and completely unashamed of their decisions.

They are, because those vows presumably shaped their decision-making process, leading them to the place where they are now. They are, after all, still knights of the Kingsguard. But that doesn't mean they have to protect a king.

43 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

Or they could consider Aerys was insane and Rhaegar had taken charge. This was war, and it was impossible to convene a Great Council. Rhaegar gave them orders, no explanation, and they did what they were told. No less, no more! Possible?

I entertain the idea that Aerys II, eventually realizing that Rhaegar had not, in fact, plotted against him with the Starks nor was he a part of the rebels around Robert and Ned (who were crying for his head as well as Aerys'), had named Rhaegar Protector of the Realm when he sent Hightower to fetch him back. That could, perhaps, given Rhaegar sufficient authority over Hightower, too. After all, Rhaegar later isn't his father's Hand yet he still leads the Targaryen army to the Trident and issues binding orders to Kingsguard knights like Jaime (whom he leaves behind), making it clear in the process that he is making the decisions, not Aerys.

43 minutes ago, BalerionTheCat said:

But many things, starting with Harrendal, are very strange. And I don't believe we can explain rationally everything. I feel, the less absurd explanation, is to suppose some people, Rhaegar, possibly Lyanna, possibly the KG, were acting according to some, yet undisclosed prophecies. ASoIaF has quite a lot of them, in addition to legends and "wet nurse's stories". I believe some are important, the PtWP which influenced Rhaegar in particular.

I don't deny that. The question is whether a man like Hightower believed in stuff like that. Arthur and Oswell might, if they were as close to Rhaegar as we are led to believe they were. But even Rhaegar's friends could have thought he was basically nuts and remain his friends. That's not mutually exclusive.

I think personal loyalty to a man they looked up to and worshiped as the king who should be, the man to take the reins from the mad embarrassment on the Iron Throne, is more likely than the idea that they were motivated by the belief in a cryptic prophecy. Neither they (nor we) don't know for sure what the promised prince prophecy actually means.

[Rippounet]

Ok, I'll bite.

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

<snip>

The problem is... Even if one assumes there was a polygamous marriage making Jon legitimate in the eyes of some people...
It stil can't work as an explanation of why the KG were there in the first place since they had no way of knowing that i) Rhaegar and Aegon would die and ii) Lyanna would have a boy. So the KG's presence can only be explained by a very simple assumption: they were ordered to be there, most probably by Rhaegar.
The entire theory that Jon is legitimate because he was guarded by three KG falls apart due to the chronology. What this argument really relies on is the fact that in Ned's fever dream the KG stand their ground and fight rather than let him see his sister (and discover Jon). In other words, it's saying that the KG saw Ned as such a threat to his own nephew that they wouldn't even want him to know why they were fighting... Is that really honorable behavior? Would Ned admire these men for this? I find it kind of odd.

[Makk]

12 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Ok, I'll bite.

The problem is... Even if one assumes there was a polygamous marriage making Jon legitimate in the eyes of some people...
It stil can't work as an explanation of why the KG were there in the first place since they had no way of knowing that i) Rhaegar and Aegon would die and ii) Lyanna would have a boy. So the KG's presence can only be explained by a very simple assumption: they were ordered to be there, most probably by Rhaegar.
The entire theory that Jon is legitimate because he was guarded by three KG falls apart due to the chronology. What this argument really relies on is the fact that in Ned's fever dream the KG stand their ground and fight rather than let him see his sister (and discover Jon). In other words, it's saying that the KG saw Ned as such a threat to his own nephew that they wouldn't even want him to know why they were fighting... Is that really honorable behavior? Would Ned admire these men for this? I find it kind of odd.

They are speaking with the current situation in mind. I'm unclear about a lot of things that happened and the timing, particularly around when Hightower joined them and when Rahegar left (presumably to go to the trident). But just because I am unclear about some of those things, I am not going to ignore all the hints we actually have text about. 

My post will be entirely speculative as there is virtually no information about this at all, or if there is I have missed or forgotten about it.

Rhaegar had not been in Kingslanding for some time, living in Dragonstone and then in Dorne, it would not be unexpected that two Kingsguard were with him, fully in accordance with their vows.  

When did Gerold Hightower arrive? Was it his arrival that made Rhaegar depart or did he depart earlier. Did he stay at the Tower of Joy for that period of time or return after he saw kings landing sacked?

There are all sorts of possibilities. They all realised that Aerys was crazy. They knew he tortured his wife. As Jaime says there are many vows they need to break to actually guard Aerys. It is just so much easier for them to follow the vows that they deem morally right.  

The day had been windy when he said farewell to Rhaegar, in the yard of the Red Keep. The prince had donned his night-black armor, with the three-headed dragon picked out in rubies on his breastplate. "Your Grace," Jaime had pleaded, "let Darry stay to guard the king this once, or Ser Barristan. Their cloaks are as white as mine."

Prince Rhaegar shook his head. "My royal sire fears your father more than he does our cousin Robert. He wants you close, so Lord Tywin cannot harm him. I dare not take that crutch away from him at such an hour."

Jaime's anger had risen up in his throat. "I am not a crutch. I am a knight of the Kingsguard."

"Then guard the king," Ser Jon Darry snapped at him. "When you donned that cloak, you promised to obey."

Rhaegar had put his hand on Jaime's shoulder. "When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but . . . well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return."

Those were the last words Rhaegar Targaryen ever spoke to him. Outside the gates an army had assembled, whilst another descended on the Trident. So the Prince of Dragonstone mounted up and donned his tall black helm, and rode forth to his doom.

One of the few bits of text we have shows Rhaegar freely speaking about making changes in front of most of the Kingsguard, almost certainly referring to his insane father (note Rhaegar doesn't refer to him as king). The kingsguard still support him. We know how much Sir Barristan thought of Rhaegar and wanted him to be king. No one actually wanted to stay and guard Aerys.

In conclusion it is most likely that as far as the Kingsguard are concerned, their vow was to the lineage itself and Aerys was quite clearly not fit for duty.

[l2 0 5 5]

Rhaegar legally annulled his marriage with Elia which makes a marriage with Lyanna legit, and makes Jon a royal, trueborn heir. That's the only thing I can think of.

[JLE]

If Rhaegar foresaw that his third child was to be some kind of hero who would save the realm, and possibly humanity itself, from destruction, what does it matter whether he is legitimate or not - or indeed, whether the said third child is a boy or a girl?

Such a child would need to be protected against all comers until the destiny was to be fulfilled - whether the child was male or female, bastard or legitimate-born (or even, bastard-born but subsequently legitimized) - even if the destiny in question was to die in the saving of the realm or humanity, and never to rule or even be in the line of succession.

Example from another fantasy world: Dumbledore being so concerned that Harry Potter has to be kept alive until the right moment, when he is supposed to (a) be Voldemort's last soul-fragment, not-quite-a-Horcrux, having destroyed all the true Horcruxes, and then (b) die at Voldemort's own hand to render Voldemort truly mortal once more, for someone else to finish the job. (And the get-out clause by which, Voldemort having used Harry's own blood for his resurrection ritual, this ties Harry to life and allows him to survive having been "killed", and to finish off Voldemort himself - but Dumbledore could not possibly have known that would happen, until it actually did.)

The moral of the story: Sometimes what you've got to do is keep the Chosen One alive for long enough to do their thing - even if they don't survive doing it, and even if doing it doesn't rely on being male, female, legitimate, bastard, or anything else (beyond Rhaegar's belief that the dragon must have three heads, interpreted as the belief that he must sire three children, and either the third or all three will be necessary to the saving of the world, and Elia was incapable of giving him another. Of course, the idea that the three dragonheads are Rhaegar's three chilren was lost with the murder of Princess Rhaenys, whether or not Aegon also died - and I believe he did: but the Kingsguards were not to know that yet.)

In that case, it wouldn't matter whether Rhaegar and Lyanna married or not: it wouldn't even matter whether they *eloped* or whether it really was a kidnapping and rape: the three remaining Kingsguards think they're protecting the future saviour of the world from the wrath of an uncle who might conceivably see him/her as a stain on the family honour that needs to be expunged, being not just a bastard but sired by an enemy and by someone whom *Ned* thinks is a rapist and kidnapper, whether he actually was or not.

[Ygrain]

4 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Ok, I'll bite.

The problem is... Even if one assumes there was a polygamous marriage making Jon legitimate in the eyes of some people...
It stil can't work as an explanation of why the KG were there in the first place since they had no way of knowing that i) Rhaegar and Aegon would die and ii) Lyanna would have a boy. So the KG's presence can only be explained by a very simple assumption: they were ordered to be there, most probably by Rhaegar.
The entire theory that Jon is legitimate because he was guarded by three KG falls apart due to the chronology. What this argument really relies on is the fact that in Ned's fever dream the KG stand their ground and fight rather than let him see his sister (and discover Jon). In other words, it's saying that the KG saw Ned as such a threat to his own nephew that they wouldn't even want him to know why they were fighting... Is that really honorable behavior? Would Ned admire these men for this? I find it kind of odd.

And what makes you think that the reason why the KG originally stayed at ToJ must be the same as the reason why they stayed and confronted Ned? At the time of Rhaegar's departure from ToJ, there were four more KG to fulfill the primary duty to protect the King, and the trio were given a perfectly legitimate order from Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and her unborn baby. After the Sack, though, there are no more KG left, they are either dead or defected, and then it becomes highly peculiar why all three KG stay at ToJ, well aware that Viserys has no KG with him, yet claiming that they are fulfilling their duty as Kingsguard by staying at ToJ.

As for the decision to confront Ned in fight, I believe the answer is simple: that dratted honour. For the people of our times, is is a no-brainer that family comes first. For the people in this pseudomedieval environment, the loyalty to the liege comes first - or theoretically should. Most of them do prefer family anyway, but there is the notion that the honourable thing is to fulfill your allegiance no matter what. Stannis admits that technically, he should have stayed loyal to Aerys instead of siding with his brother. Now take Ned and the KG trio - all men of honour, all following the same principles. Honour demands that Ned disregards the family bond and informs Robert of a new Targaryen baby aka a threat to his reign, and the KG know that this is what they would be required to were the tables reversed. They also know that now that the war is lost, secrecy is Jon's best protection. Even if Ned could be compelled to side with family (love is the death of duty, after all), there are six more men with him who might view things differently, or simply babble something when drunk etc, because someone always tells. Hence, the KG are left with no choice but to try and silence them all even despite their personal inclinations (Dayne's sadness for having to do what he doesn't want to), and the tragedy of this decision is something that Ned would understand.

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

And what makes you think that the reason why the KG originally stayed at ToJ must be the same as the reason why they stayed

What makes you say they have to be different?
It's a rhetorical question. I'm just pointing out that for the KG's presence to be meaningful you need to start making assumptions, speculations, or interpret the text in a very specific way, which completely invalidates the meaningfulness of the presence that is supposed to be there in the first place.
Or to put it differently, the KG's presence would be meaningful if the whole ToJ thing took place long after the Sack. But the chronology doesn't really allow for that or else you begin having other much bigger problems.
The real reason why you believe there are two sets of reasons is because you are starting from the conclusion and not from the facts.

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

They also know that now that the war is lost, secrecy is Jon's best protection. Even if Ned could be compelled to side with family (love is the death of duty, after all), there are six more men with him who might view things differently, or simply babble something when drunk etc, because someone always tells. Hence, the KG are left with no choice but to try and silence them all even despite their personal inclinations (Dayne's sadness for having to do what he doesn't want to), and the tragedy of this decision is something that Ned would understand.

This doesn't address my point. I'm asking you how is it honourable to start a fight to the death without explaining it. Your reasoning here is actually circular.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

Well, aren't I just the big meanie. Pointing out the flaws in someone's very poor argument. 

 

 

 

 

[Lord Varys]

Can somebody tell @Ygrain that this is nonsense (I think she is not reading my posts ;-)):

14 hours ago, Ygrain said:

- Daemon and Rhaenyra thought that polygamy was an option, Viserys I didn't. His ruling was definitely coloured with his dislike of Daemon, though, because even as a widower, Daemon still married Rhaenyra secretly because Viserys would have come up with another "reason" why the marriage was not possible. Moreover, there doesn't seem to be a law against polygamy, or at least not one considered fully binding for the royal family, or else the question would never be raised in the first place.

Daemon asked Viserys I to set aside his marriage with Rhea Royce so that he could marry Rhaenyra. And she and Daemon only did marry in the end after both their spouses - Laena and Laenor Velaryon - were dead.

If polygamy had been an option than Viserys I himself could have taken Alicent Hightower to wife before Aemma Arryn died, Daemon and Rhaenyra could have married each other while one (or both) of them also had other spouses, Aegon the Unworthy could have married some (or all) of the women he allegedly loved (his mistresses), and Daemon Blackfyre could have married both Rohanne of Tyrosh and Princess Daenerys.

Polygamy was never an accepted practice in Westeros. Some First Men kings got away with it, and it was ignored in one Targaryen king - Aegon I - because he conquered the continent and married before his conquest. In Maegor's case the people constantly rebelled against his rule and eventually deposed him, his many marriages being one reason to do so. But Rhaegar wasn't a king, and unlike Prince Maegor he didn't even have a dragon. And even in Maegor's case - Aenys I, the Faith, and the entire Realm didn't give a damn about the fact that he was the rider of the largest dragon alive. They forced him into exile. A less forgiving king than Aenys I would have taken Maegor's head for this kind of thing.

8 hours ago, l2 0 5 5 said:

Rhaegar legally annulled his marriage with Elia which makes a marriage with Lyanna legit, and makes Jon a royal, trueborn heir. That's the only thing I can think of.

Such a thing, if happened, would have likely made Rhaenys and Aegon bastards. An annulment isn't a divorce, it means the marriage never actually existed. Any children from such a non-existing union would, most likely, not be legitimate.

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Or to put it differently, the KG's presence would be meaningful if the whole ToJ thing took place long after the Sack. But the chronology doesn't really allow for that or else you begin having other much bigger problems.

That is an important point. If we had some Kingsguard aside from Jaime in KL who survived the Sack and then disappeared only to show up with Lyanna at the tower (instead of with the new king, Viserys III, and the Queen Dowager on Dragonstone) we could see that as an important statement. Just as Selmy searching out Dany after Joffrey dismissed means something.

But that's not what happened. The men where already where (or with the person) they were long before Rhaegar, his children, or King Aerys were killed. We don't even know whether it was know that Lyanna Stark was pregnant by the time Rhaegar left her (and assigned them to her). Even if he did, he had no way of knowing that she would carry the child to term, that it would live, or that it would be male.

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

The real reason why you believe there are two sets of reasons is because you are starting from the conclusion and not from the facts.

Yeah, that is circular reasoning. If you presuppose the following points:

1. There is a very fixed line of succession demanding that the eldest surviving son of the eldest becomes the king (which has been scrapped by TWoIaF)

2. Everyone upholds and follows that succession as if it was holy scripture (which has been scrapped by TWoIaF).

3. Kings become kings immediately after their predecessors die, and not through rituals of state like proclamations, coronations, and anointments (we know the Kingsguard do not make kings).

4. That Kingsguard hanging out with certain persons means something more than them just having accepted the mission to protect certain persons (Daemon Blackfyre being assigned a Kingsguard does not make him king).

5. That Jon Snow was born a king or should be born a king (an assumption some people like to make).

Then it is pretty easy to interpret the thing there in a certain manner.

And in fact, before we got our ADwD knowledge about Kingsguard protection royal mistresses and bastards and the TWoIaF information that Aerys II had named Viserys his new heir after the Trident I, too, considered it pretty likely that the men at the tower may have thought Lyanna's son had the best claim to the Iron Throne now - assuming there was a (secret) marriage and they believed it was valid.

But that became exceedingly less likely with the information we have gotten in the meantime.

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

This doesn't address my point. I'm asking you how is it honourable to start a fight to the death without explaining it. Your reasoning here is actually circular.

That would be part of the reason why the dream conversation is pretty unrealistic and incomplete - and thus not very trustworthy. The chances that Ned made no inquiries and the knights did not explain anything simply does not make any sense. Even if Ned knew everything already the men at the tower did not know that he knew everything already.

[King Ned Stark]

The fact that polygamy is rare is a clue in and of itself, to me.  Kind of like the out-of-nowhere Beric resurrection, by a largely unfaithful priest.  Martin seems keen on laying down precedents, so later surprises don't seem so far fetched.  If the majority of Targ kings had multiple wives, then everyone would assume Rhaegar would.  Making it rare, hides it in plain sight.

Regarding the KG, I think Hightower is the key, as it seems fairly clear that Whent and Dayne were firmly with Rhaegar, in for a penny, in for a pound.  I think Rhaegar managed to swing HT to his side, as Gerold was unhappy with Aerys, but as Jaime said, "That's the Old Bull, loyal to the end and a better man than me, all agree".  Maybe that's a clue as well, that they both turned on their king, but Jaime did so in a violent way, but Hightower only acquiesced after hearing Rhaegar's plan for a peaceful transition; a la Maximus in Gladiator.  Once he had command and loyalty of the army, he could march in and plant whomever he wanted on the throne.

Getting back to the precedent thing, I think Robert keeping Barry in for his will, and then Ned having him read the will is important.  It's let's us know that the Lord Commander of the KG has authority and is entrusted with kings wills and decrees.  On a personal, tinfoily, note, I think Hightower was sent with Aerys's decree legitimizing Rhaegar's second marriage, in a trade off for putting down the rebellion. I think Rhaegar was in communication with Aerys (and Tywin, who was unresponsive) for sometime, hence Aerys running through multiple Hands' of the King.  And why Rhaegar left Jaime as a hostage against Tywin.

[Free Northman Reborn]

I think Rhaegar DID plot to overthrow Aerys - but peacefully. He stated as much to someone about the changes that would be forthcoming after some Great Council after the War, if I recall correctly.

And I think key members of the Kingsguard - the three at the Tower specifically - had sided with him in this plot. To them, he was already their King.

 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

I actually have to agree with @Lord Varys in that I have long suspected that certain people know far more about the situation regarding Rhaegar & Lyanna than we are led to believe upon our initial reading. 

And that the coming book will slowly begin to reveal this, 

Quote

I expect the next Connington chapters - especially when the man meets another Elia with a personality like Lyanna - to touch upon Connington's memories of Lyanna, giving us crucial pieces of the Harrenhal and the abduction mystery.

A very good explanation as to why Ned ends up to hide Jon the way he does is that it was actually known that Lyanna was pregnant, and that some people - Targaryen loyalists and Rhaegar's friends - might now not be unwilling to use such a child as a pawn to start a rebellion against Robert. Especially after Rhaegar's children by Elia were dead.

Vice versa, Robert would have to have a very good reason to (threaten to) kill Lyanna's child - something he wouldn't have had if the child was just a bastard born of rape.

1

It is simply absurd to suggest that no one knew anything more than that Rhaegar took Lyanna and no one saw them for a year, then he returned to KL spoke not one word to anyone about her, what they were doing or why etc. Then died taking those secrets to the grave. And Ned just happened to find her at the ToJ. 

I've been saying this for some time and have had no small number of scoffs at the suggestion that anyone knows anything. 

One person who may know a bit more about what happened is Daenerys for a start. In Dance; as she travels to her wedding with Hizdhar she muses upon Daario. And thinks that if he truly loved her he would carry her off at swordpoint, as Rhaegar had done with his northern girl. 

Now, How does Dany know Rhaegar carried Lyanna off at sword point because he truly loved her? And why is it on the way to a wedding that she must go through with for duty that she thinks on this? 

Someone has to have told Dany the story of Rhaegar & Lyanna and my guess is Darry, because I doubt 7-year-old Viserys was in the know to a great extent as to his brother's motives and actions. But why would the old sword master know them? My guess he learnt of them from Rhaella. because if you had been hiding out for the best part of a year you would go see your mum when you returned, and mum would have a few questions about what the fuck you thought you were doing?  So we have to ask, what does Daenerys know that she doesn't yet really understand is important? She might know Rhaegar married Lyanna. So when she meets Jon and learns whose son he is the question of legitimacy is null and void. She damn well knows he is legitimate?

Or Barristan, he travelled to the Trident with Rhaegar, and would have rode alongside him the entire way as his KG. What might have passed between the Prince and the man who had guarded him his whole life. Barristan joined the KG the year Rhaegar was born.  that's a hellava bond to have with a man, he's seen him grow, watched him learn to walk, ride, fight and Rhaegar would have a relationship with him. Might he have told him that he truly loved his second wife. But not have mentioned the babe in her womb?

Connington may have witnessed a wedding but think nothing of Lyanna's child because he had returned to KL and then fled never knowing she carried a child. Or maybe Connington wasn't even of the 6 Rhaegar took to the RL?  maybe he didn't see a wedding but knew Rhaegar's motivations and feelings regarding Lyanna?

Who the fuck were those 6? It's highly likely that Dayne & Whent were two of them. But that leaves 4 more people (probably men, but maybe boys if anyone took a squire, and yes I know this is me referencing my own pet theory, but seriously the chances are high they had at least one between them.)   So the remaining 4 know something. They might have witnessed the union but wisely kept their mouths shut post Robert's victory at the Trident. As Pycelle said. once Rhaegar fell the war was lost. There is no sense in mentioning the fact he left a wife who may or may not have concieved a child by Rhaegar. especially not once Ned returns from the ToJ and says she is dead, with no mention of any children.

but one thing is for certain, there are possibly four men who know the truth in the woodwork who are very likely to come out and start talking in Winds. Lonmouth maybe? Connington perhaps? Others whom we don't know or suspect?

Jaime Lannister is another one who may know things he doesn't realise are relevant. he was at court he could have heard rumours, Rhaegar might have said things which once the marriage becomes public knowledge he connects the dots on and realises Jon is of their union.  

As to Whent, Dayne and Hightower. It is pretty obvious that they felt they were defending their King. At least to those who are open to Jon being legitimate. I suspect Hightower the stickler for the rules and fiercely loyal to the Targaryen kings actually "crowned" the babe already and that is why they had not fled to DS to protect Viserys & Rhaela.  

Having an actual crown is unimportant. We see baelor wear a crown of flowers, showing one can be improvised. All they needed to do was twist some grasses together or tear and plait some bedsheets.

 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

20 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The whole thing is just too obvious for nobody ever thinking that Rhaegar might have impregnated Lyanna. The resolution for Ned there could be that he told a convincing story about a stillborn child upon his own return from the South. He would have had his bastard on his lap when telling that story.

 

Indeed, or just that When he found Lyanna dead of a fever it was because she had miscarried late into a pregnancy, the dead child festering in her womb. Not all M/C's result in a labour to expel the dead foetus. most do of course but not all. 

Or that she caught a fever some other way and died whilst with child. 

The idea a man and woman can be having sex consensual or otherwise for the best part of a year without any pregnancy is slim. fertility is assumed on Lyanna's part and known on Rhaegars. So it would be quite dim to not conclude she got pregnant at some point over that year. 

I like your idea of a bear faced Ned cradling Jon in his arms whilst he spins a tail for Robert. LMAO.