SFDanny

R+L=J v.164

401 posts in this topic

What its worth is that affirmation by Maester Aemon [who has often been conjectured to know the truth of R+L=J] that bastard or not, Jon is fundamentally a son of Winterfell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am inclined to say Jon being a son of Winterfell is an indisputable fact, regardless what his parentage may be :) 

Edited by Serafina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2017 at 4:53 AM, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

The basic flaw of R+L=J is there is not strong enough evidence to support  that Jon is neither  Rhaegar  , Brandon or Ashara 's son .

If it were canon the house lineages would be updated by now.  It might be show canon, but that's still not enough to affect any change to Jon's status as Ned's son by an unknown woman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2017 at 3:30 PM, J. Stargaryen said:

@SFDanny

The link for v. 118 redirects to v. 117. Here is the correct link for v. 118: 

 

It should be corrected now. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2017 at 0:34 PM, LynnS said:

If it were canon the house lineages would be updated by now.  It might be show canon, but that's still not enough to affect any change to Jon's status as Ned's son by an unknown woman.

I think you and I have a very different view of what "canon" means, LynnS. Canon, to me, is not the same as "true" or "fact." It only means what appears in the works Martin has described as "canon." There are a lot of things in the canon that are lies, red herrings, false clues, or the like. So it is canon that Wylla is Jon's mother. I think that is false, but it's canon. So it might also be with all the clues that point to Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son. I think it unlikely, but I've been wrong before.

My view is simple. When Martin writes the reveal of just who are Jon's parents we still can continue to argue endlessly whether or not it is true. Even then it may be better to wait until the series ends (book 7 or 8 or ...?) and then decide what are the facts. What happens in the show has nothing to do with any of this. I think on that point we certainly agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I think you and I have a very different view of what "canon" means, LynnS. Canon, to me, is not the same as "true" or "fact." It only means what appears in the works Martin has described as "canon." There are a lot of things in the canon that are lies, red herrings, false clues, or the like. So it is canon that Wylla is Jon's mother. I think that is false, but it's canon. So it might also be with all the clues that point to Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son. I think it unlikely, but I've been wrong before.

My view is simple. When Martin writes the reveal of just who are Jon's parents we still can continue to argue endlessly whether or not it is true. Even then it may be better to wait until the series ends (book 7 or 8 or ...?) and then decide what are the facts. What happens in the show has nothing to do with any of this. I think on that point we certainly agree.

I think it would be canon to say that Eddard reminds Robert that he once told him that the mother of Jon Snow was named Wylla. I think we are given enough contrary information in the story to say that Wylla being Jon's mother is not canon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

I think it would be canon to say that Eddard reminds Robert that he once told him that the mother of Jon Snow was named Wylla. I think we are given enough contrary information in the story to say that Wylla being Jon's mother is not canon. 

LM, perhaps we disagree on this as well. To me "canon" only means what appears in the books Martin has designated as canon. It does not mean it is true or factual. We agree there is enough contradictory information in the canon for a reader to have very good reason not to believe Ned's naming of Wylla as Jon's mother in response to Robert's question is a truthful answer. It is a simple fact that Ned does so in A Game of Thrones - a part of Martin's ASoI&F canon. "Canon," it seems to me, clearly does not mean "true."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, SFDanny said:

LM, perhaps we disagree on this as well. To me "canon" only means what appears in the books Martin has designated as canon. It does not mean it is true or factual. We agree there is enough contradictory information in the canon for a reader to have very good reason not to believe Ned's naming of Wylla as Jon's mother in response to Robert's question is a truthful answer. It is a simple fact that Ned does so in A Game of Thrones - a part of Martin's ASoI&F canon. "Canon," it seems to me, clearly does not mean "true."

Oh, I suspect we agree more than we disagree. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Lost Melnibonean said:

Oh, I suspect we agree more than we disagree. :)

I  suspect you are right! :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, a question, if I may: don't you happen to have a link to GRRM's statement that Ashara wasn't in KL during the Rebellion? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Guys, a question, if I may: don't you happen to have a link to GRRM's statement that Ashara wasn't in KL during the Rebellion? Thanks.

Im still waiting for you to provide this link to this statement. All ive ever seen is him state that she wasn't nailed to the floor in Starfall but goes on to throw out that she was a lady in waiting to Elia Martell and was such, would have been at court. Barristan even states that she was a maid not long to court, so she definitely spent time at court, and was not nailed to the floor in Starfall during the rebellion. 

Quote

 

JULY 11, 1999

CHRONOLOGY
I'm trying to figure out how Jon's day of birth fits in the timeline of the war, and assumed you wouldn't just tell me when he was exactly born.:-)

In his first chapter at the Wall, Jon reflects that his name day passed a fortnight before. I assume this was his 15th one. Dany's 14th name day was at the end of her chapter, on the far side of the Dothraki sea.

Now, if this was after Jon's chapter -- and (apparent) name day, it could be concluded, that Jon was born more than 1 year before Dany, and at least 3 months before Queen Rhaella left King's Landing.

I will spare you the rest of my speculations about the date of Jon's birth, since their only real conclusion is that Catelyn seems a little thick when she thinks that Ned fathered Jon as he returned 'Dawn' to Ashara Dayne.

Ah... I see what you're driving at here, I guess...

I will confess, the chronology of these books sometimes gives me fits. You would not believe how often I reshuffle the chapters, trying to find the one true perfect sequence. And then just when I have it exactly right, my editors weigh in from both sides of the Atlantic, each suggesting a slightly different chapter order.

It is always a balancing act, since I want the chapters to have a certain dramatic flow, I worry about certain storylines being forgotten if they are "off stage" too long, and there is a constant tug of war between character time and reader time (a character may have two chapters, taking place one day apart, but if two hundred pages of stuff about other characters separate those two chapters, the reader is going to perceive a long time as having passed, even if I begin the second chapter with, "When he woke up the very next morning..."

All of which is a long winded way of saying, no, Jon was not born "more than 1 year" before Dany... probably closer to eight or nine months or thereabouts.

I do intend to publish a timeline as an appendix in one or other of the later volumes, but even when I do, I am not certain I'm going to start detailing things down to months and days. With such a huge cast of characters, just keeping track of the =years= drives me half mad sometimes. Not to mention the colors of everybody's eyes.

As to your speculations about Catelyn and Ashara Dayne... sigh... needless to say, All Will Be Revealed in Good Time. I will give you this much, however; Ashara Dayne was not nailed to the floor in Starfall, as some of the fans who write me seem to assume. They have horses in Dorne too, you know. And boats (though not many of their own). As a matter of fact (a tiny tidbit from SOS), she was one of Princess Elia's lady companions in King's Landing, in the first few years after Elia married Rhaegar.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Im still waiting for you to provide this link to this statement. All ive ever seen is him state that she wasn't nailed to the floor in Starfall but goes on to throw out that she was a lady in waiting to Elia Martell and was such, would have been at court. Barristan even states that she was a maid not long to court, so she definitely spent time at court, and was not nailed to the floor in Starfall during the rebellion. 

Quote

Which is why I've placed the question here. Unfortunately, most of my usual sources are not around any more or turn up only rarely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Which is why I've placed the question here. Unfortunately, most of my usual sources are not around any more or turn up only rarely.

I tried googling for it but can only find the one listed above :/ I just would love to see anything more that can tell us something about Ashara, no matter which way it swings things. Really hope she is brought up more in the next book and not saved for the last book, idk if i can bare the wait haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Guys, a question, if I may: don't you happen to have a link to GRRM's statement that Ashara wasn't in KL during the Rebellion? Thanks.

Not at home right now but what I remember is GRRM’s statement about Ashara not being “nailed to the floor” in Dorne. In addition there is evidence that Ashara was in King’s Landing as a lady in waiting to Princess Elia from sometime around Elia’s wedding to Rhaegar up to her having to leave in disgrace from that position after Harrenhal. Where she is during the time of the rebellion it seems to me to be purposefully quite hazy.

But perhaps you are remembering a remark by Martin that I don’t recall. Quite possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The World Book seems to have Rhaegar and Elia residing at Dragonstone, and seemingly spending little time at court over their short marriage.

The only times we can confidantly put Elia in King's Landing is when she and Rhaegar were married there in 280, and when she was in Aerys's possession from as early as the aftermath of the Battle of the Bells until she was murdered in the Sack.

Elia was still on Dragonstone up to the beginning of 282, when Rhaegar set off with half a dozen of his closest friends and confidants leading up to his abduction of Lyanna.

So Selmy obviously saw Ashara at court at some point(s), but we don't have a lot of known times she was at court. He recalls her having not been at court long at the time of the Harrenhal Tourney in late 281.

If she was still with Elia when Aerys brought her and the kids to KL, it is hard to see how she wouldn't have been stuck in KL for the end of the war. 

I suppose it's possible, but nothing has given me that impression, or the impression that Ned and Ashara met in KL shortly before meeting in Starfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ygrain I think the best evidence that Ashara is absent from King's Landing is in Ser Barristan's memories of her. It seems clear that Selmy thoughts on Ashara place her removed from him from the time of her disgrace to her seeming death. Selmy should have spent most of that time in King's Landing or nearby to do his duties to Aerys. Which would point to it being unlikely she is seen at court during the same period. We are talking about the late, late part of 281 until the sack in early fall 283. That doesn't mean she could not have traveled to the capital without announcing her presence in a way Selmy would not know. My guess is she is seldom in the capital unless she is doing work for those at the Tower of Joy, or Rhaegar and Elia. Pure speculation on my part, but for whatever it's worth.

Let me know if you need more help on this. I'll be back late tonight.

Edited by SFDanny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SFDanny said:

But perhaps you are remembering a remark by Martin that I don’t recall. Quite possible.

I seem to recall a statement that Ashara was not with Elia in KL during the Rebellion/the Sack but can't recall where it came from. It may have been some expansion on "not nailed to the floor or Starfall" but it's been such a long time... Yet, I am quite sure it must have been sourced, I don't tend to pick up information without seeing the source for myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, a whole week without a new RLJ comment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2017 at 4:20 AM, Lost Melnibonean said:

Wow, a whole week without a new RLJ comment...

Is that a record? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two questions;

First, is the app considered canon?

And second, can someone who has it confirm what it says about Lyanna? I read in one of the threads that she rode at rings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.