Jump to content

Heresy 199 Once upon a Time in the West


Black Crow

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ReturnOfCaponBreath said:

promise me Ned.

Promise me you won't tell Robert that I gave him a bastard son that he will shower with gifts like he is known to do with his other bastards.

Promise me you won't let Robert acknowledge Jon like he has done with Edric Storm.

On lots of levels Jon is not Roberts. Genetically the clues are there unless you choose convoluted and unlikely interpretations.

Plot wise it would make little or no sense.

Trope busting wise (as this seems to be a strong part of any R+l=J rejection) it doesnt really solve the issue. "Sorry Jon you aren't the prince that was promised but great news you are the son Of The former King.

Almost all Of The other logistical and communication issues for R+L=J are the same as for the other R+L=J but for a less satisfying outcome and with the added complication that there is no real reason for the Promise me speech afterwards.

 

I'm hoping to do a post later if i get time on what I think are the relative options and likelihoods of Jons parents as I haven't up to this point had much of an opinion but I consider Robert + Lyanna  a much less likely option than Ned & Wylla or Ned & Ashara.

You have every right to your opinion.You believing its a strong case or weak one doesn't change if its true or not or give it weight.I find it stronger than any other but my opinion doesn't give it weight.

You look at the evidence through an Rlj lens and thus the questions you pose in the above are relevant to that theory because imo you assume the questions Rlj seem to answer are important and necessary for Jon's parentage.But ignore the problems spawned from them.

Thank goodness Ned had a crystal ball and saw that Jon would grow with Stark features.This is a huge huge problem for this theory.

Why not tell Robert....

Legitimized or not social and religious taint on that scale would be grand for Jon he wouldn't be happy.

Quote

“The old High Septon told my father that king's laws are one thing, and the laws of the gods another. Trueborn children are made in a marriage bed and blessed by the Father and the Mother, but bastards are born of lust and weakness, he said. King Aegon decreed that his bastards were not bastards, but he could not change their nature. The High Septon said all bastards are born to betrayal”---Egg to Dunk.

Quote

Bastard children were born from lust and lies, men said; their nature was wanton and treacherous. Once Jon had meant to prove them wrong, to show his lord father he could as good a true son as Robb Stark.” ---Jon Snow.

 

Quote

“You know I cannot take him south. There will be no place for him at court. A boy with a bastard’s name . . . you know what they will say of him. He will be shunned (AGOT,Cat

 

In agot after Ned wanted Jon to stay at wf this followed:

Quote

“They say your friend Robert has fathered a dozen bastards himself.” “And none of them has ever been seen at court!” Ned blazed. “The Lannister woman has seen to that.

 

Ned knows and has been watching. What would have happened if Roberts bastards were allowed i wonder? Would he have felt free to tell Robert.Maybe,I think his internal monologue in his cell was imo regret about that.Things may have turned out differently if he did tell Robert..

Quote

“I failed you, Robert, Ned thought. He could not say the words. I lied to you, hid the truth. I let them kill you.”AGOT,Ned Chpt 58.

It is your opinion that the promise me Ned was specific. I think it was specifically general.Just 

Take care of my boy,watch over from him,keep him safe kind of thing. It wasn't to keep him from any particular person. Ned decided what this looked like.For you all it has to be this protection from getting killed from this man who would kill him.Its as simple as Ned knowing Jon would be more happy in WF. Where 

 'Let them grow as brothers with nothing but love between them'

As he and Robert were.

He was protective of Jon in general per Cat.Protection doesn't only mean physical,emotional too.

As for the plot....At present who is in danger? Robert's real kids from Cersie who has been picking them off.The narrative of Robert killing Rhaegar's kids.....Nah...Presently,who is in danger and why?

 

Quote

1.“Once, after that sorry business with the cat, he (Robert) had made some noises about bringing some baseborn daughter of his to court. “Do as you please," she'd told him, "but you may find that the city is not a healthy place for a growing girl.”(AFFC,Cersie).

Quote

2.“There was another bastard, a boy (Gendry), older. I took steps to see him removed from harm's way...but I confess, I never dreamed the babe would be at risk. A base born girl, less than a year old, with a whore for a mother, what threat could she pose?” "She was Robert’s that was enough for Cersei it would seem (Tyrion&Varys ACOK).

Quote

3. “Cersei could not have been pleased by her lord husband's by-blows, yet in the end it mattered little whether the king had one bastard or a hundred. Law and custom gave the baseborn few rights. Gendry,  the girl in the Vale, the boy at Storm's End, none of them could threaten Robert's trueborn children.”

Quote

4.“He gave Ned a sideways glance. “I’ve also heard whispers that Robert got a pair of twins on a serving wench at Casterly Rock, three years ago when he went west for Lord Tywin's tourney. Cersei had the babes killed, and sold the mother to a passing slaver. Too much an affront to Lannister pride, that close to home."

Quote

5.“He remembered the angry words they had exchanged when Tywin Lannister had presented Robert with the corpses of Rhaegar's wife and children as a token of fealty. Ned had named that murder; Robert called it war…………. You are no Tywin Lannister, to slaughter innocents.

 

Quote

6.“Your Robert got me with child once,” she said, her voice thick with contempt. “My brother found a woman to cleanse me .AGOT---Cersie to Ned.

Quote

7.“Catelyn Tully was a mouse, or she would have smothered this Jon Snow in his cradle. Instead, she's left the filthy task to me (AFFC Cersie).”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

If Ned isn't expecting these 3 are here and isn't there for Lyanna,  what possible reason could he have to be in Dorne with 6 vassals?

I didn't say he wasn't expecting to meet them at the tower. As Ned's own questions and the world book both make clear he was down in the south mopping up the last Targaryen armies. When he meets the King's Guard he and his companions [not his army] are there to try and settle things like gentlemen.

That's what the dialogue is about. Its not a hostage situation.

At no point do we get even a whisper of "let the girl go and everybody gets to walk away from here".

There's none of that. Its all about persuading the King's Guard to surrender because the war is over, and their refusing and insisting on fighting to the death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

I didn't say he wasn't expecting to meet them at the tower. As Ned's own questions and the world book both make clear he was down in the south mopping up the last Targaryen armies. When he meets the King's Guard he and his companions [not his army] are there to try and settle things like gentlemen.

That's what the dialogue is about. Its not a hostage situation.

At no point do we get even a whisper of "let the girl go and everybody gets to walk away from here".

There's none of that. Its all about persuading the King's Guard to surrender because the war is over, and their refusing and insisting on fighting to the death.

Why are the Kingsguard there?  If they were good Samurai and simply would rather die than accept defeat, wouldn't they rather go down fighting on the Trident?  Doesn't GRRM tell us they were following orders?  If those orders weren't to guard Lyanna or her son, what could they be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

 

You look at the evidence through an Rlj lens and thus the questions you pose in the above are relevant to that theory because imo you assume the questions Rlj seem to answer are important and necessary for Jon's parentage.But ignore the problems spawned from them

 

It's an interesting point, until this thread I have never really given any thought to what I think about Jon's parentage so if it comes across as R+L=J thens that's clearly some subliminal bias on my part. I'm hoping to do a post later time permitting to lay out the options and proabilities as I see at as I Genuinely am not clear on what I think and the process of laying things out will probably help me make up my mind

That said I'm pretty sure it won't be Robert & Lyanna so the debate can continue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:
Spoiler

 

The premise that X could have impregnated Lyanna Stark is "easily plausible within the text."  

But this true for any X, not just for Rhaegar.  

The problem, as I see it, comes down to questionable justification and sources for the claim that X = R .  

When you boil it down, R+L is Robert Baratheon's Theory. And it's a rape story... not a romance.  Many readers forget that Robert is the one who first suggests the idea in the text - but he does so quite early (AGOT chapters 4 and 12) and quite forcefully.  Robert is adamant that Rhaegar sexually assaulted Lyanna "hundreds of times."  And whether it's true or not, he's got plenty of incentive for believing and advancing that story... after all, it forms the basis for his claim to the throne. 

Thing is, by the end of AGOT, Martin's pulled a bait and switch on his readers. Back in chapter 12, Robert was the heroic king and Rhaegar the kidnapper who raped Ned's sister. But after 72 chapters we realize (1) that Robert was a fool... and (2) that nobody else had much of a problem with Rhaegar. In fact, Rhaegar's begun to look like a model citizen prince. He's certainly no womanizer, according to anyone but Robert. 

So this, in a nutshell, is the problem with RLJ:

 

  • RLJ is the theory that Rhaegar raped Lyanna.  (Robert's Theory)
  • But perpetrating rape seems out of character for Rhaegar.  
Spoiler

It is fundamentally a fool's theory... because Robert was a fool. But for some reason we readers cling to it.  And the various iterations of RLJ amount to little more than attempts to overcome the cognitive dissonance captured in these two bullet points. 

 

I can't agree with you there.

I see a number of possible scenarios for R+L=J, including a marriage between R and L.

In any case, the whole incident of ToJ is vexatious and shall only be resolved by the author in a later book.

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Bingo.But the Targ features are a dime a dozen.

Spoiler

 

Saying Robb or some  nameless  person X is stronger than Jon is not establishing Jon as not being strong.There are many people stronger than Jon.It doesn't take away that his feats do not jive with his look.

As for Jon not being established as strong.

 

 


 

 

And what did Jon do to Emmett? Same Emmet who among other things strength was the pride of EW.

 

 

 

It took 3 of people to restrain Jon.Somethings i left blank because they made my point.

 

 

A dime a dozen?

Possibly. 

Then why the insistence on pharaonic matrimonies?

Dragons are the only reason that I know of. Unless we count vanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Black Crow said:

He doesn't know that Lyanna is with them and isn't mounting a rescue.

I'm going to have to disagree. As noted by Brad, the composition of Eddard's party is odd, and I think it reflects Eddard's intent--he wanted to be clandestine, and he brought along men he could trust to keep a secret.

A planned encounter, even against ostensibly honorable men, can easily become a disaster--if he's ambushed by, not just the KG, but some token force of Dornishmen and Targaryen loyalists, they suddenly have multiple valuable hostages, or can even undermine the stability of the new regime by killing one of Robert's most important allies.

Furthermore, Eddard didn't bring along the best of the best of what Robert's army had to offer, he appears to have specifically chosen Northmen, nobles with whom there is an existing relationship. Granted, if you're going into a dangerous fight, you want to be surrounded by people you trust, but this doesn't look like a crew that was put together to kill the best swordsman in all of Westeros, and two other swordsmen of (we must assume) dangerous caliber. 

Keep in mind what is being risked here, if Eddard's intent is to find and battle the last remaining KG: he's risking the Lord of Winterfell, the future Lord of the House Reed, and the Lord of Barrowton. Even for a man who might be the sort to respect the idea of the "honorable duel," this would be extraordinarily reckless, and I'm not certain that he went south with the expectation that he was going to find himself in a duel to the death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

The premise that X could have impregnated Lyanna Stark is "easily plausible within the text."  

But this true for any X, not just for Rhaegar.  

No other "Lyanna + X" scenario can cite text to establish motive and opportunity. Some can establish motive, some can establish opportunity, but only Rhaegar has both going for him--for now.

2 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

When you boil it down, R+L is Robert Baratheon's Theory. And it's a rape story... not a romance.  Many readers forget that Robert is the one who first suggests the idea in the text - but he does so quite early (AGOT chapters 4 and 12) and quite forcefully. 

Yes, that is the way we are introduced to the R+L premise, which is why it's immediately plausible. Again, "romance" is not a necessary assumption for RLJ to be true!

Nonetheless, what future volumes have done is to add nuance and information to Robert's point of view, to add context. With five volumes, the trend of that context has not been to undermine the idea that Rhaegar was infatuated with Lyanna Stark, but to put a more 'favorable' spin on Rhaegar's intentions than Robert's interpretation.

2 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

But perpetrating rape seems out of character for Rhaegar.

Maybe, but we don't really know what Rhaegar was capable of, because we're at the mercy of biased POVs. A potential issue here is that, just because someone is admired, that doesn't mean they're good, at least as we would define it; this is an important element of Jamie Lannister's POV insight into Aerys II's KG, widely admired men...who stood by as Aerys II tortured people to death, savaged his own wife, and probably would have allowed Aerys to burn down King's Landing with wildfire, had any of them been in Jamie's place.

Rhaegar is the beneficiary of being born a handsome, intelligent man whose last name is Targaryen--compare that to the way Tyrion is unfairly perceived within the world. Now, I don't believe Rhaegar was a rapist, but I don't think we need to attempt to reconcile Rhaegar's actions with the fact that he was well-liked and admired--almost regardless of what the truth turns out to be, he appears to have made major mistakes that contributed to the downfall of House Targaryen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever secret Ned was keeping from Robert it troubled his sleep: 

“You were not there,” Ned said, bitterness in his voice. Troubled sleep was no stranger to him. He had lived his lies for fourteen years, yet they still haunted him at night. “There was no honor in that conquest.”

What was Ned hiding that made the conquest dishonorable? Could it be that Rhaegar never kid napped Lyanna after all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

As noted by Brad, the composition of Eddard's party is odd, and I think it reflects Eddard's intent--he wanted to be clandestine, and he brought along men he could trust to keep a secret.

Would be just the right composition and size for a Trial of Seven, though.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

Why are the Kingsguard there?  If they were good Samurai and simply would rather die than accept defeat, wouldn't they rather go down fighting on the Trident?  Doesn't GRRM tell us they were following orders?  If those orders weren't to guard Lyanna or her son, what could they be?

Its entirely possible and indeed likely that those were their orders, but whether Ned knew that at the time is a different matter. As I said, he looked for them on the Trident, at King's Landing and even Storms End and Dragonstone; all the places where the Kings Guard and especially the Lord Commander, should be. He's plainly puzzled to find them down in the Dornish Marches, but as I said that conversation is about ending the war - its not a hostage situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

Furthermore, Eddard didn't bring along the best of the best of what Robert's army had to offer, he appears to have specifically chosen Northmen, nobles with whom there is an existing relationship. Granted, if you're going into a dangerous fight, you want to be surrounded by people you trust, but this doesn't look like a crew that was put together to kill the best swordsman in all of Westeros, and two other swordsmen of (we must assume) dangerous caliber. 

I think you are absolutely correct that these 7 northmen were specifically chosen for a reason other than their combat abilities.   The geography is a big hint here. 

Again, posting from a phone and can't copy, but I worked out a most intriguing connection elsewhere that I will post later if anyone is interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

Would be just the right composition and size for a Trial of Seven, though.  

 

Interesting idea, but Ned follows northern gods, the Kingsguard is 4 men short, and if this were the goal, Ned would pick 6 of the best fighters he could. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect Ned chose the 6 men most loyal to him.   Robert and Jon Arynn were not picked, maybe they were unavailable,  but I think Ned wanted people who would obey without question.   Robert and Jon Arynn being headstrong and seeing themselves as superior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

Would be just the right composition and size for a Trial of Seven, though.  

 

I agree.  I brought this up once before and the  counter-argument was that it did not qualify because the KG were only three.  That does not negate Ned planning for a trial by combat himself and bringing the necessary trusted companions.

Rather than taking an army with him, Ned is given safe passage since the Dornish also honor the queensbury rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, PrettyPig said:

I think you are absolutely correct that these 7 northmen were specifically chosen for a reason other than their combat abilities.   The geography is a big hint here. 

Again, posting from a phone and can't copy, but I worked out a most intriguing connection elsewhere that I will post later if anyone is interested.

I'm interested. Please do!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ReturnOfCaponBreath said:

It's an interesting point, until this thread I have never really given any thought to what I think about Jon's parentage so if it comes across as R+L=J thens that's clearly some subliminal bias on my part. I'm hoping to do a post later time permitting to lay out the options and proabilities as I see at as I Genuinely am not clear on what I think and the process of laying things out will probably help me make up my mind

That said I'm pretty sure it won't be Robert & Lyanna so the debate can continue. 

It is one of those challenges we who don't believe rlj face;that is being asked to answer questions imo not relevant to the question at large.The promise me Ned is always seen under the lens that it must be about protecting Jon from Robert.

It has to specifically be that or she must have said that.It couldn't be a general death bed request to watch over a child who would not have a mother.

I were Ned coupled with the other things I mentioned.I would be inclined to say ;he is my sister's son a Stark of WF he belongs in WF.Keep him the he'll away from royal court.Den of Adders he called them.

1 hour ago, Brad Stark said:

If Lyanna is the mother,  has anyone proposed a father other than Rhaegar or Robert?

Some believe Arthur Dayne,Mance and Howl and Reed.

41 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Whatever secret Ned was keeping from Robert it troubled his sleep: 

“You were not there,” Ned said, bitterness in his voice. Troubled sleep was no stranger to him. He had lived his lies for fourteen years, yet they still haunted him at night. “There was no honor in that conquest.”

What was Ned hiding that made the conquest dishonorable? Could it be that Rhaegar never kid napped Lyanna after all?

I for one don't believe he kidnapped her.I believe Ned always knew where Lyanna was.

31 minutes ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

Would be just the right composition and size for a Trial of Seven, though.  

 

Ohhhh nice one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brad Stark said:

but (1) Ned follows northern gods, (2) the Kingsguard is 4 men short, and (3) if this were the goal, Ned would pick 6 of the best fighters he could. 

Sure. But (1) Ned is in the South, headed toward a southern keep; (2) he may or may not have expected the KG in the Prince's Pass; and (3) a trial of seven is primarily about justice and honor, and requires a fighter's willingness to lay his own life down for another. Ned, recall, is the guy who - later in his life - instructed his son:  "Know the men who follow you... and let them know you. Don't ask your men to die for a stranger."

Anyway. What's interesting to me is the possibility that Ned had some personal atonement to make... that it might have have involved House Dayne in some way.

Martin offers enough material there to make that an entertaining thought experiment (IMO).  But the most intriguing might be this reflection by old Barry Selmy:

Quote

Ashara's daughter had been stillborn, and his fair lady had thrown herself from a tower soon after, mad with grief for the child she had lost, and perhaps for the man who had dishonored her at Harrenhal as well. (ADWD, Chp. 67)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Snowfyre Chorus said:

Sure. But (1) Ned is in the South, headed toward a southern keep; (2) he may or may not have expected the KG in the Prince's Pass; and (3) a trial of seven is primarily about justice and honor, and requires a fighter's willingness to lay his own life down for another. Ned, recall, is the guy who - later in his life - instructed his son:  "Know the men who follow you... and let them know you. Don't ask your men to die for a stranger."

I wouldn't even emphasise the south. Lord Eddard is playing by the rules of Westeros and his king is Robert Baratheon, first of his name etc etc. Naturally he will pick his companions carefully, but they are indeed seven and as I've been arguing this whole encounter is a formal meeting or rencounter on a pre-arranged ground and Eddard's coming prepared for a Trial of Seven is both consistent with that and supportive of it. The tragedy of it is that he is offering those men an honourable way out by the rules and they refuse to take it.

As to Ser Arthur Dayne, there might indeed be guilt if Eddard only survived because Howland Reed shot Ser Arthur in the back, but given that there's no mention of Lyanna in the verbal exchange, I still favour the idea that as he lay dying Ser Arthur revealed to to Lord Eddard for the first time that his long lost sister was still alive and at... and therefore Eddard owes him a debt of gratitude as well as regrets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...