Heresy 204; of cabbages, prophecies and kings

[LynnS]

50 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

I was noting it in relation to Varys because I think, if his only interest were instilling good rule, he might theoretically have supported conspiracies to remove Aerys via council, or even groom Viserys for the role--he could have taken paths don't require mass bloodshed and ruin, which somewhat calls into question his "for the realm" rhetoric. It may be that he believes war is an acceptable price to pay for a "good king," but I do wonder if his motives go deeper than that.

It's difficult to know what motivates him but given that he will steal children and cut their tongues out; he's prepared to sacrifice the most innocent for his cause in the most ruthless manner.  .

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Tyrion II

"Then why do I have this bitter taste in my mouth?" He pressed his fingers into his temples. "I told them to throw Allar Deem into the sea. I am sorely tempted to do the same with you."

"You might be disappointed by the result," Varys replied. "The storms come and go, the waves crash overhead, the big fish eat the little fish, and I keep on paddling. Might I trouble you for a taste of the wine that Lord Slynt enjoyed so much?"

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Prologue

Too far, Cressen thought dully, looking at where Ser Davos was seated. Half of the lords bannermen were between the smuggler and the high table. I must be closer to her if I am to get the strangler into her cup, yet how?

Patchface was capering about as the maester made his slow way around the table to Davos Seaworth. "Here we eat fish," the fool declared happily, waving a cod about like a scepter. "Under the sea, the fish eat us. I know, I know, oh, oh, oh."

A Storm of Swords - Davos V

Under the sea the old fish eat the young fish," the fool muttered at Davos. He bobbed his head, and his bells clanged and chimed and sang. "I know, I know, oh oh oh."

A Dance with Dragons - Jon XIII

"Sers." Jon inclined his head to the knights in question. "May you find happiness with your betrothed."

"Under the sea, men marry fishes." Patchface did a little dance step, jingling his bells. "They do, they do, they do."

I'm quite confused about Varys' reference to Patchface's fish ditties since these seem to relate to the under the sea metaphor for greenseers and the cotf or the drowned god.  When he says that he does everything for the children, what does he mean?  Children in general;  Dany, Aegon and possibly Jon? Or the children of the forest?  

Varys and Illyrio are heavily involved in Dany, the mother of dragons and Aegon the pwip.  So I wonder if the game Varys plays isn't the game of thrones but the great game - the song of ice and fire. 

Edit: Is it possible that when Varys was cut and told to go away and die, but didn't die; that he can be compared to Patchface who was dead but then wasn't?  Is this why Ned thinks that Varys smells foul and sweet like something dead?  

[Melifeather]

49 minutes ago, LynnS said:

- So what has been provided, clues if you will, are not facts that support one narrative over another (specifically a romance or a rape)  or,

- they are facts we've been given, and the narrative has yet to be verified?

Because some people clearly think that every fragment they have been given about Rhaegar is a fact that supports only one of these two conclusions or some combination that gets them to Jon is a Targ.  Something that seems to rest entirely on the meaning of blue roses or follow the roses.

- a blue rose growing from a chink in a wall of ice = Bran/Black Gate

- a storm of rose petals blue as the eyes of death = Bran/wights & WW

- a blood red sky = Dany, red comet, dragons = red dawn= the rising winds, the coming storm

- a black rose = Jon

- a crown of roses with hidden thorns = treachery, deceit

- blood and winter roses = Stark bloodline

- blood and fire = Targ bloodline

 

There are readers that prefer a literal translation and those that prefer a symbolic one, and there are some that pick and choose based on their preferred narrative!

I freely admit that my perspective is based on my belief in an inverted wheel of time, thus since Myrcella suffered a blow to the head by Gerold Dayne that nearly cut her ear off, I suspect Lyanna's crown of blue flowers is actual a symbolic way of saying she suffered a similar wound. A cut along the forehead would draw blood - it would "bloom", and if that wound led to her death then the wound could symbolically look like a crown - Jesus style, like his crown of thorns - and the blow could have sent blood flying, sending the "blue pedals" flying in the wind. 

 

8 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

In contrast, my interest in Selmy's info is not strictly related to its quality (though that's an important question), I find it worth exploring because I believe there is more than one way to interpret the idea that, say, he was restating something that Rhaegar had told him.

In essence, I believe many things can be simultaneously true, eg:
-Rhaegar told Barristan that he loves Lyanna, even if he doesn't in truth, and he had some reason to purposely promote a false narrative
-Rhaegar loved Lyanna, but she did not love him back, she was a hostage, Jon isn't Rhaegar's son

And various permutations thereof. 

Not only is the fact that Barristan was with Rhaegar in the march to the Trident potentially interesting, I also tend to relate it to this SSM:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/The_Baratheon_Brothers/

Now, we can't know specifically what Martin means here by Rhaegar's "treatment of Elia," but this gives us insight into the morale of Rhaegar's army. 

To revisit what I said a few posts back, the picture being created is that Rhaegar did not sufficiently reassure his allies after he reappeared (or perhaps he didn't even make an attempt at damage control), which I find personally interesting. One point of view is to relate this to RLJ, but it's hardly the only point of view.

For example, was Rhaegar content to let the realm believe he'd run off with Lyanna because, despite it hurting his political image, the cover story is protecting a secret that Rhaegar considered to be far more important than his repututation--more important, even, than the fate of his dynasty?

I'm feeling salty because such questions can barely be raised--not just in pro-RLJ threads, but even here, where being "anti-RLJ" (as opposed to skeptical of RLJ) is such an ideological position that it perpetually derails discussion; in this case, the very idea of treating Barristan's point of view as potentially credible is a non-starter, because treating his point of view as credible is seen as some implicit endorsement of RLJ, so the discussion then becomes about why we should dismiss what Barristan has to say.

It's this annoying thing where any subject that might tangentially relate to RLJ ideas becomes this proxy argument, often where my personal experience is that people are responding to me with arguments against things I wasn't even proposing. 

eg "I think RLJ is the third most plausible theory for Jon's parentage, behind, Eddard+Wylla and Eddard+Ashara." 'Jon will never be King of Westeros! This story isn't about some hidden heir trope!'
"The GoHH says that the PtwP will be of the line of Aerys and Rhaella." 'Jon isn't a combination of Ice and Fire! This isn't a story about some singular figure saving the world!'
"Rhaegar and Lyanna's disappearances are repeatedly treated by characters as interrelated events in the narrative--as initially introduced by Robert's point of view." 'This isn't some cliche love story!'

Truly, RLJ is the worst thing to happen to ASOIAF discussion.

Please accept my apologies if I've ever assumed your position on anything! And I think most of Heresy tries to be more accepting of alternate explanation than other places on this site. Other forums are even more accepting. But you are right - RLJ is the worst thing to talk about on this forum! When the conversation starts debating the merits - I usually back off, because I'm just so sick of it! I'd much rather discuss alternate theories for Jon's parents without that comparison even coming up, but you cannot avoid it. 

[LynnS]

20 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

There are readers that prefer a literal translation and those that prefer a symbolic one, and there are some that pick and choose based on their preferred narrative!

I freely admit that my perspective is based on my belief in an inverted wheel of time, thus since Myrcella suffered a blow to the head by Gerold Dayne that nearly cut her ear off, I suspect Lyanna's crown of blue flowers is actual a symbolic way of saying she suffered a similar wound. A cut along the forehead would draw blood - it would "bloom", and if that wound led to her death then the wound could symbolically look like a crown - Jesus style, like his crown of thorns - and the blow could have sent blood flying, sending the "blue pedals" flying in the wind. 

Nice!  Matches with Rhaegar's rubies.  Makes me wonder how close Arthur came to killing Ned.

[wolfmaid7]

1 hour ago, LynnS said:

- So what has been provided, clues if you will, are not facts that support one narrative over another (specifically a romance or a rape)  or,

- they are facts we've been given, and the narrative has yet to be verified?

Because some people clearly think that every fragment they have been given about Rhaegar is a fact that supports only one of these two conclusions or some combination that gets them to Jon is a Targ.  Something that seems to rest entirely on the meaning of blue roses or follow the roses.

- a blue rose growing from a chink in a wall of ice = Bran/Black Gate

- a storm of rose petals blue as the eyes of death = Bran/wights & WW

- a blood red sky = Dany, red comet, dragons = red dawn= the rising winds, the coming storm

- a black rose = Jon

- a crown of roses with hidden thorns = treachery, deceit

- blood and winter roses = Stark bloodline

- blood and fire = Targ bloodline

This is very true Lynn.That's why I said it's all in the eye of the beholder.

Many readers have determined in their own mind what are clues and what these clues mean.

Some have arrogantly stated that because Rhaegar gave Lyanna a crown of  blue roses it can only mean there is a connection between both of them.As one poster said " she is the only one Rhaegar gave blue roses to " 

Obviously that means there was a romantic relationship between them ( rolls eyes).

That of course is not true.Rhaegar gave her that true...Context debatable.But I challenge anyone to look at the moments where blue roses regarding Lyanna occur.See what context they occur in and with whom.

@Black Crow Pappa Crow we can do a blue rose study just for the he'll if it next Heresy.

My point is there is the(our) narrative and there is the( GRRM) narrative.

1 hour ago, Black Crow said:

We as readers have been told a tale, or rather two tales, both incomplete and both with the aid of multiple parties. Both  may be equally true in the mind of the narrators; they are not trying to deceive, but as I said earlier the problem is that rather than weigh them up critically there is a widespread tendency to believe without question that because version B follows after version A, then it must be the unvarnished truth.

And no, I'm not arguing that A was the true version all along, but life is rarely simple and especially in GRRM's world

This is also true.Its the thing that grinds my gears. RLJ is one  narrative that can be gleaned.I don't agree with it.I actually think its weak,but I can see how it came to be.

But we are in a situation where A is considered canon and so every other theory is measured from a standard that is as flawed or even more flawed than others.

In the end we get posters arrogantly stating it is "the only" narrative that makes sense.

No it isn't, and we who say no are viewed as pariahs because we deny that narrative as the only viable one.

[Matthew.]

29 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

Please accept my apologies if I've ever assumed your position on anything!

No apologies necessary, as I don't recall either way whether you have, and I don't think an apology would be necessary even if you had. On the one hand, I'm annoyed when a discussion gets derailed; on the other hand, I should, you know, be more emotionally mature than to get annoyed at an Internet discussion over fantasy books. The burden is on me to ensure that I am communicating clearly...though, with RLJ stuff specifically, sometimes, even spelling out one's position in excruciating detail isn't always enough to avoid being misunderstood/misrepresented. 
 

29 minutes ago, Feather Crystal said:

I'd much rather discuss alternate theories for Jon's parents without that comparison even coming up, but you cannot avoid it. 

The latter, unfortunately, appears to be true; it's an inescapable storm cloud. The specific issue is that it is no longer viewed just through the lens of "here's a theory about Jon's parents," it's a thing where it's almost as though people are expected to pick sides, when "sides" shouldn't exist in the first place. To some extent, the tribalism is fascinating, but it has worn out its welcome.

[LynnS]

29 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

The latter, unfortunately, appears to be true; it's an inescapable storm cloud. The specific issue is that it is no longer viewed just through the lens of "here's a theory about Jon's parents," it's a thing where it's almost as though people are expected to pick sides, when "sides" shouldn't exist in the first place. To some extent, the tribalism is fascinating, but it has worn out its welcome.

I don't mind the difference of opinion... I do mind the tribalism or the notion that something is popular so it must be so.   When someone uses that as an argument; what they are really asking me is whether or not I want to be part of the popular group.  I guess the answer is no.

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, Matthew. said:

In contrast, my interest in Selmy's info is not strictly related to its quality (though that's an important question), I find it worth exploring because I believe there is more than one way to interpret the idea that, say, he was restating something that Rhaegar had told him.

In essence, I believe many things can be simultaneously true, eg:
-Rhaegar told Barristan that he loves Lyanna, even if he doesn't in truth, and he had some reason to purposely promote a false narrative
-Rhaegar loved Lyanna, but she did not love him back, she was a hostage, Jon isn't Rhaegar's son

And various permutations thereof. 

Not only is the fact that Barristan was with Rhaegar in the march to the Trident potentially interesting, I also tend to relate it to this SSM:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/The_Baratheon_Brothers/

Now, we can't know specifically what Martin means here by Rhaegar's "treatment of Elia," but this gives us insight into the morale of Rhaegar's army. 

To revisit what I said a few posts back, the picture being created is that Rhaegar did not sufficiently reassure his allies after he reappeared (or perhaps he didn't even make an attempt at damage control), which I find personally interesting. One point of view is to relate this to RLJ, but it's hardly the only point of view.

For example, was Rhaegar content to let the realm believe he'd run off with Lyanna because, despite it hurting his political image, the cover story is protecting a secret that Rhaegar considered to be far more important than his repututation--more important, even, than the fate of his dynasty?

I'm feeling salty because such questions can barely be raised--not just in pro-RLJ threads, but even here, where being "anti-RLJ" (as opposed to skeptical of RLJ) is such an ideological position that it perpetually derails discussion; in this case, the very idea of treating Barristan's point of view as potentially credible is a non-starter, because treating his point of view as credible is seen as some implicit endorsement of RLJ, so the discussion then becomes about why we should dismiss what Barristan has to say.

It's this annoying thing where any subject that might tangentially relate to RLJ ideas becomes this proxy argument, often where my personal experience is that people are responding to me with arguments against things I wasn't even proposing. 

eg "I think RLJ is the third most plausible theory for Jon's parentage, behind, Eddard+Wylla and Eddard+Ashara." 'Jon will never be King of Westeros! This story isn't about some hidden heir trope!'
"The GoHH says that the PtwP will be of the line of Aerys and Rhaella." 'Jon isn't a combination of Ice and Fire! This isn't a story about some singular figure saving the world!'
"Rhaegar and Lyanna's disappearances are repeatedly treated by characters as interrelated events in the narrative--as initially introduced by Robert's point of view." 'This isn't some cliche love story!'

Truly, RLJ is the worst thing to happen to ASOIAF discussion.

I'm rather in agreement with the latter part of this post and as to Rhaegar's march to the Trident and whatever preceded it, I have to say that it destroys any romantick notion that he would have made a good king. The realm is in crisis - Rhaegar is far away; then there's a begrudging air to going up to the Trident at all; and then the business of the reluctant Dornishmen which impacts on the whole army because if they are seriously unhappy it isn't likely to inspire anybody else with great confidence. To be fair, so far as we know he has never fought a in a battle before, let alone commanded a corporal's guard let alone an army. Armies can be fragile things. With Lewen Martell down and the Dornishmen broken the battle was already lost before he got himself killed

 

[LynnS]

4 hours ago, Matthew. said:

Now, we can't know specifically what Martin means here by Rhaegar's "treatment of Elia," but this gives us insight into the morale of Rhaegar's army. 

This does seem very incriminating. Stories and rumor are themselves weapons and I can see the Martels becoming as riled up over Elia as Robert was over Lyanna. 

Quote

 

A Storm of Swords - Sansa VI

"I also planted the notion of Ser Loras taking the white. Not that I suggested it, that would have been too crude. But men in my party supplied grisly tales about how the mob had killed Ser Preston Greenfield and raped the Lady Lollys, and slipped a few silvers to Lord Tyrell's army of singers to sing of Ryam Redwyne, Serwyn of the Mirror Shield, and Prince Aemon the Dragonknight. A harp can be as dangerous as a sword, in the right hands.

 

 

[wolfmaid7]

4 hours ago, Matthew. said:

In contrast, my interest in Selmy's info is not strictly related to its quality (though that's an important question), I find it worth exploring because I believe there is more than one way to interpret the idea that, say, he was restating something that Rhaegar had told him.

In essence, I believe many things can be simultaneously true, eg:
-Rhaegar told Barristan that he loves Lyanna, even if he doesn't in truth, and he had some reason to purposely promote a false narrative
-Rhaegar loved Lyanna, but she did not love him back, she was a hostage, Jon isn't Rhaegar's son

And various permutations thereof. 

Not only is the fact that Barristan was with Rhaegar in the march to the Trident potentially interesting, I also tend to relate it to this SSM:

Very true,i have no aversion to that train of thought.But we won't jump to gun and start asking if Rhaegar lied to Barristan.We have to look to Barristan and deduce if Rhaegar told him any such thing.If he did then we can figure out if its a lie. If he didn't then there is no lie to figure out.

Quote

 

"But that was the tourney when he crowned Lyanna Stark as queen of love and beauty!" said Dany. "Princess Elia was there, his wife, and yet my brother gave the crown to the Stark girl, and later stole her away from her betrothed. How could he do that? Did the Dornish woman treat him so ill?"

"It is not for such as me to say what might have been in your brother's heart, Your Grace. The Princess Elia was a good and gracious lady, though her health was ever delicate."

 

I look at the context,what is known and believed.Is there a need to for the author to conceal what is already a belief?

At this point Rhaegar is dead any info Selmy might give ,if he had any goes toward supporting what many in the realm believe.There would be nothing to conceal here. Here would be the perfect time to say  something like

" Dany Eventhough Elia was a swell gal your brother said he loved Lyanna etc.

The context of this entire conversation was prime with moments where Selmy could have told Dany " what was in her brother's heart." He didn't know anything factual he could guess what might have been.

Even here.

Quote

Better for Daenerys, and for Westeros. Daenerys Targaryen loved her captain, but that was the girl in her, not the queen. Prince Rhaegar loved his LadyLyanna, and thousands died for it. Daemon Blackfyre loved the first Daenerys, and rose in rebellion when denied her. Bittersteel and Bloodraven both loved Shiera Seastar, and the Seven Kingdoms bled."

Here we have an internal monlogue and no detail.Infact, it is just another tale for Selmy among the community board of Westros.Its nothing he has personal details on.I look at the quality of info,how he's telling it.The intimacy of it and its just something else.

Compare that to:

Quote

"Lyanna had only been sixteen, a child-woman of surpassing loveliness. Ned had loved her with all his heart. Robert had loved her even more. She was to have been his bride"

 

Quote

The night of our wedding feast, the first time we shared a bed, he called me by your sister's name. He was on top of me, in me, stinking of wine, and he whispered Lyanna."

 

Quote

 

I bring her flowers when I can," he said. "Lyanna was … fond of flowers."

The king touched her cheek, his fingers brushing across the rough stone as gently as if it were living flesh.

 

 

The above is what's missing from this Rhaegar and Lyanna a story.This is what's missing from a story many believe to be fact.There is no detail about i heard him say,or i saw him do. There is no context to anything regarding Rhaegar and Lyanna.Yet conclusions were made.

He gave her flowers- No context, yet it must have been romantic.

He whisphered a woman's name,the app he whisphered Lyanna's name.No context.

Yet,Rhaegar and Lyanna have a romantic story?

As to the SSM,Selmy's statement,Elia and Rhaegar's treatment of her.There are many ways to interpret what this could mean.None having anything to do with Lyanna.

5 hours ago, Matthew. said:

To revisit what I said a few posts back, the picture being created is that Rhaegar did not sufficiently reassure his allies after he reappeared (or perhaps he didn't even make an attempt at damage control), which I find personally interesting. One point of view is to relate this to RLJ, but it's hardly the only point of view.

For example, was Rhaegar content to let the realm believe he'd run off with Lyanna because, despite it hurting his political image, the cover story is protecting a secret that Rhaegar considered to be far more important than his repututation--more important, even, than the fate of his dynasty?

Well i don't think the realm knew what they were fighting for.All these fighting men knew was the high lord's called banners ,and in some cases " we about to get paid"

There is no evidence that "the realm knew" Lyanna was missing.Nobody was fighting for " The Rickard's little girl." 

Robert and Ned were about to get beheaded and Arryn called his banners "for  that" .As far as anyone and everyone knew this was open rebellion about???? Who cares.

As i said before, i don't even believe Rhaegar knew anything about Lyanna "going missing".If she even was.

This tragic love story got concocted afterwards because it sounded better and would draw more crowds at parties.

Rhaegar didn't reassure his men about Lyanna because

1.There was nothing to reassure them about,they just turned up because banners were called.

2.He can't reassure anyone about something he don't even know about.

 

With his dying breath Rhaegar whisphers "Lyanna?"

End scene.

 

[LynnS]

This is what the wiki says about Doran:
 

Quote

Robert's Rebellion

Main article: Robert's Rebellion

In 279 AC, Elia was betrothed to Rhaegar, whom she married the next year.[25] When Rhaegar won the tourney at Harrenhal in 281 AC, he passed over Elia to name Lyanna Stark the Queen of Love and Beauty. A year later, he apparently abducted Lyanna, sparking Robert's Rebellion.[26] Prince Doran Martell, furious at Elia's mistreatment, was slow to lend aid to the Targaryens during the war, but eventually sent ten thousand men to fight for the throne at the Battle of the Trident.[27] One of the casualties at the battle was Prince Lewyn Martell of the Kingsguard. A fortnight later, Princess Elia and her two young children were brutally murdered by two Lannister knights, Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch, during the Sack of King's Landing.[28][21][29]

This is what Jaime says about that statement:

Quote

A Storm of Swords - Jaime V

He floated in heat, in memory. "After dancing griffins lost the Battle of the Bells, Aerys exiled him." Why am I telling this absurd ugly child? "He had finally realized that Robert was no mere outlaw lord to be crushed at whim, but the greatest threat House Targaryen had faced since Daemon Blackfyre. The king reminded Lewyn Martell gracelessly that he held Elia and sent him to take command of the ten thousand Dornishmen coming up the kingsroad.

SSM States this:

Quote

Ned's army did not accompany him to Dorne, no. There were no battles in Dorne during Robert's Rebellion, though doubtless there were minor skirmishes along the borders. But it's not entirely correct that the Martells stayed out of the war. Rhaegar had Dornish troops with him on the Trident, under the command of Prince Lewyn of the Kingsguard. However, the Dornishmen did not support him as strongly as they might have, in part because of anger at his treatment of Elia, in part because of Prince Doran's innate caution. .

So Doran is angry and cautious because Elia is a hostage and Lewyn is angry because Elia is a hostage and is reluctant to move his troops until forced.  How does that affect Rhaegar's troops who may hold him responsible for Elia as much as they would Aerys?  Why didn't Rhaegar err on the side of caution?  Did he trust Tywin Lannister over a pit viper?   

[Matthew.]

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Very true,i have no aversion to that train of thought.But we won't jump to gun and start asking if Rhaegar lied to Barristan.We have to look to Barristan and deduce if Rhaegar told him any such thing.

As a matter of discussion, we cannot fully deduce what Barristan knows and how he knows it with the published content, which is why I am not presenting Barristan's point of view as an either/or choice, but as a "withhold judgment" situation where there is value in discussing his beliefs from all perspectives. So why do we have to know the provenance of Barristan's information before we can utilize it for a line of discussion?

This to me is just another shade of this 'pick a side' approach where exploring a particular theoretical road is treated as some sort of commitment. Toward what end? There are not real world consequences - false imprisonment, adopting a socially harmful point of view regarding science, etc. - or stakes attached to speculating about fiction. The 'stakes' are that we might, with the information we have, say "Maybe character X's beliefs are correct," and then learn later that Character X's beliefs were incorrect.
 

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

At this point Rhaegar is dead any info Selmy might give ,if he had any goes toward supporting what many in the realm believe.There would be nothing to conceal here. Here would be the perfect time to say  something like

" Dany Eventhough Elia was a swell gal your brother said he loved Lyanna etc.

An interesting quote, yet we do know what Barristan believes internally--the question you raise does not relate to the context. Dany is not asking whether Rhaegar loved Lyanna, she's asking why her brother would choose one woman over another, especially to the detriment of the realm and his rule; "how could he do that?" A far more complicated question. More succinctly, "why do you love someone" is a different question from "who do you love?" 

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

There is no evidence that "the realm knew" Lyanna was missing.Nobody was fighting for " The Rickard's little girl." 

Robert and Ned were about to get beheaded and Arryn called his banners "for  that" .As far as anyone and everyone knew this was open rebellion about???? Who cares.

The war wasn't strictly about Lyanna, but what the realm knew (or thought it knew) about Lyanna was not clear, and in the case of the Starks and Robert, couldn't have been too far from their minds. "Say, been a while since we've seen Lyanna. I wonder where she's gotten off to? Eh, whatever, we've got a war to fight."

At the least, Jaime's relation of events is that Brandon had heard something about Lyanna that prompted him to undertake the extraordinarily reckless action of going to the Red Keep and demanding that Rhaegar "come out and die." 
 

1 hour ago, wolfmaid7 said:

As to the SSM,Selmy's statement,Elia and Rhaegar's treatment of her.There are many ways to interpret what this could mean.None having anything to do with Lyanna.

Right. There are many ways to interpret it that do not have anything to do with Lyanna (I explicitly said that we don't know what Martin means by Rheagar's "treatment of Elia"), yet the bolded quote is doing the exact thing I wanted to avoid: preemptively judging the information being raised as an implicit endorsement of RLJ, and derailing it into another proxy war about RLJ.
 

[Matthew.]

59 minutes ago, LynnS said:

So Doran is angry and cautious because Elia is a hostage and Lewyn is angry because Elia is a hostage and is reluctant to move his troops until forced.  How does that affect Rhaegar's troops who may hold him responsible for Elia as much as they would Aerys?  Why didn't Rhaegar err on the side of caution?  Did he trust Tywin Lannister over a pit viper?   

Ah! Yes, that makes a lot of sense. 

As Black Crow says, this doesn't paint Rheagar in a light that is especially saavy as regards military and political leadership; I'm strongly inclined toward the read that Tywin was hedging his bets and paying lip service to both sides. The speed at which Tywin's army arrives at King's Landing (before Robert or Eddard) suggests his army was already on the move, and he was prepared to sweep in heroically once the Trident was decided.

Did Rheagar not do his due diligence because the two had been in regular contact, and he expected Tywin to march on the Trident?

Edit: At the risk of rambling, I'm getting shades of this comment from Tywin:

Quote

Joffrey, when your enemies defy you, you must serve them steel and fire. When they go to their knees, however, you must help them back to their feet. Elsewise no man will ever bend the knee to you. And any man who must say 'I am the king' is no true king at all. Aerys never understood that, but you will. When I've won your war for you, we will restore the king's peace and the king's justice.

If I'm not mistaken, the realm prospered under Tywin's time as Hand, and I'm curious as to what his relationship was like with a young Rhaegar--in particular, if Tywin was viewed as an admirable figure, a model of good leadership, someone he might rely on later in life if he came to the uncomfortable conclusion that Aerys II was unfit to be king...and even more so if Rheagar himself was not especially eager to actually rule the realm, and would be more than happy to have a highly active Hand.

[LynnS]

25 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

If I'm not mistaken, the realm prospered under Tywin's time as Hand, and I'm curious as to what his relationship was like with a young Rhaegar--in particular, if Tywin was viewed as an admirable figure, a model of good leadership, someone he might rely on later in life if he came to the uncomfortable conclusion that Aerys II was unfit to be king...and even more so if Rheagar himself was not especially eager to actually rule the realm, and would be more than happy to have a highly active Hand.

I think that would suit Tywin well.  I don't think it would take long for Cersei to replace Elia in that scenario.

[Brad Stark]

When GRRM first talked to D.B. Weiss and David Benioff about the TV version, he wanted to know how carefully they read the books, and chose to ask them "Who is Jon Snow's mother?".  Now we don't know what they answered or if it proves to be correct, but we do know GRRM felt their answer to this question was meaningful.  He could have asked asked "What happened at Hardhome?", "Who has the Horn of Winter?", "What happened to Benjen" or an almost infinite number of questions with a definite answer, "How many towers in Winterfell?".  He expected a specific answer to this question,  and felt it was very telling about the reader.

[Frey family reunion]

10 hours ago, LynnS said:

- So what has been provided, clues if you will, are not facts that support one narrative over another (specifically a romance or a rape)  or,

- they are facts we've been given, and the narrative has yet to be verified?

Because some people clearly think that every fragment they have been given about Rhaegar is a fact that supports only one of these two conclusions or some combination that gets them to Jon is a Targ.  Something that seems to rest entirely on the meaning of blue roses or follow the roses.

- a blue rose growing from a chink in a wall of ice = Bran/Black Gate

- a storm of rose petals blue as the eyes of death = Bran/wights & WW

- a blood red sky = Dany, red comet, dragons = red dawn= the rising winds, the coming storm

- a black rose = Jon

- a crown of roses with hidden thorns = treachery, deceit

- blood and winter roses = Stark bloodline

- blood and fire = Targ bloodline

Technically it’s not necessarily a blue rose growing from a chink in a wall of ice, it’s a blue flower.

 

Quote

A blue flower grew from a chink in a wall of ice, and filled the air with sweetness

 And I’m beginning to wonder if  might be a cornflower, i.e. Centaurea cyanus.

Quote

Brandon was fostered with old Lord Dustin, the father of the one I’d later wed, but he spent most of his time riding the Rills.  He loved to ride.  His little sister took after him in that.  A pair of centaurs, those two.

 

Quote

He rose and dressed in darkness, as Mormont’s raven muttered across the room.  “Corn,” the birds said, and, “King,” and “Snow, Jon Snow, Jon Snow.”  That was queer. The bird had never said his full name before, as best Jon could recall.

 

[PrettyPig]

4 hours ago, Matthew. said:

I'm strongly inclined toward the read that Tywin was hedging his bets and paying lip service to both sides. The speed at which Tywin's army arrives at King's Landing (before Robert or Eddard) suggests his army was already on the move, and he was prepared to sweep in heroically once the Trident was decided.

My completely manufactured and unsupported tinfoil says that Tywin had left Casterly Rock with his army quite some time before, and were hiding out inside the walls of Harrenhal courtesy of House Whent (or maybe not at their courtesy, given that extant members of House Whent save for Lady Shella nearabout vanished after the Rebellion).
 

Quote

 

Yet they walked all that day and most of the next before at last they reached the fringes of Lord Tywin's army, encamped west of the castle amidst the scorched remains of a town. Harrenhal was deceptive from afar, because it was so huge. Its colossal curtain walls rose beside the lake, sheer and sudden as mountain cliffs, while atop their battlements the rows of wood-and-iron scorpions looked as small as the bugs for which they were named.

The stink of the Lannister host reached Arya well before she could make out the devices on the banners that sprouted along the lakeshore, atop the pavilions of the westermen. From the smell, Arya could tell that Lord Tywin had been here some time. The latrines that ringed the encampment were overflowing and swarming with flies, and she saw faint greenish fuzz on many of the sharpened stakes that protected the perimeters.

 

Quote

The size of the castle made even Gregor Clegane seem small. Harrenhal covered thrice as much ground as Winterfell, and its buildings were so much larger they could scarcely be compared. Its stables housed a thousand horses, its godswood covered twenty acres, its kitchens were as large as Winterfell's Great Hall, and its own great hall, grandly named the Hall of a Hundred Hearths even though it only had thirty and some (Arya had tried to count them, twice, but she came up with thirty-three once and thirty-five the other time) was so cavernous that Lord Tywin could have feasted his entire host, though he never did.

 

Aerys sent word to Tywin at the Rock, but no answer came.   My guess is that Tywin wasn't there to give one - he was already parked at Harrenhal, lying in wait as lions do.

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, PrettyPig said:

My completely manufactured and unsupported tinfoil says that Tywin had left Casterly Rock with his army quite some time before, and were hiding out inside the walls of Harrenhal courtesy of House Whent (or maybe not at their courtesy, given that extant members of House Whent save for Lady Shella nearabout vanished after the Rebellion).
 

 

Aerys sent word to Tywin at the Rock, but no answer came.   My guess is that Tywin wasn't there to give one - he was already parked at Harrenhal, lying in wait as lions do.

Seems pretty reasonable to me

 

[Black Crow]

7 hours ago, Matthew. said:

As a matter of discussion, we cannot fully deduce what Barristan knows and how he knows it with the published content, which is why I am not presenting Barristan's point of view as an either/or choice, but as a "withhold judgment" situation where there is value in discussing his beliefs from all perspectives. So why do we have to know the provenance of Barristan's information before we can utilize it for a line of discussion?
 

more pertinently why should we attach any real significance to it?

Its pretty obvious Baristan is talking cautiously because he knows the stories, but doesn't actually know himself what may or may not have been going on. 

[Black Crow]

8 hours ago, wolfmaid7 said:

Very true,i have no aversion to that train of thought.But we won't jump to gun and start asking if Rhaegar lied to Barristan.We have to look to Barristan and deduce if Rhaegar told him any such thing.If he did then we can figure out if its a lie. If he didn't then there is no lie to figure out.

I look at the context,what is known and believed.Is there a need to for the author to conceal what is already a belief?

At this point Rhaegar is dead any info Selmy might give ,if he had any goes toward supporting what many in the realm believe.There would be nothing to conceal here. Here would be the perfect time to say  something like

" Dany Eventhough Elia was a swell gal your brother said he loved Lyanna etc.

The context of this entire conversation was prime with moments where Selmy could have told Dany " what was in her brother's heart." He didn't know anything factual he could guess what might have been.

Even here.

Here we have an internal monlogue and no detail.Infact, it is just another tale for Selmy among the community board of Westros.Its nothing he has personal details on.I look at the quality of info,how he's telling it.The intimacy of it and its just something else.

Compare that to:

 

 

 

The above is what's missing from this Rhaegar and Lyanna a story.This is what's missing from a story many believe to be fact.There is no detail about i heard him say,or i saw him do. There is no context to anything regarding Rhaegar and Lyanna.Yet conclusions were made.

He gave her flowers- No context, yet it must have been romantic.

He whisphered a woman's name,the app he whisphered Lyanna's name.No context.

Yet,Rhaegar and Lyanna have a romantic story?

As to the SSM,Selmy's statement,Elia and Rhaegar's treatment of her.There are many ways to interpret what this could mean.None having anything to do with Lyanna.

Well i don't think the realm knew what they were fighting for.All these fighting men knew was the high lord's called banners ,and in some cases " we about to get paid"

There is no evidence that "the realm knew" Lyanna was missing.Nobody was fighting for " The Rickard's little girl." 

Robert and Ned were about to get beheaded and Arryn called his banners "for  that" .As far as anyone and everyone knew this was open rebellion about???? Who cares.

As i said before, i don't even believe Rhaegar knew anything about Lyanna "going missing".If she even was.

This tragic love story got concocted afterwards because it sounded better and would draw more crowds at parties.

Rhaegar didn't reassure his men about Lyanna because

1.There was nothing to reassure them about,they just turned up because banners were called.

2.He can't reassure anyone about something he don't even know about.

 

With his dying breath Rhaegar whisphers "Lyanna?"

End scene.

 

Yes, I can pretty well agree with all of this, especially of if we revert to the old discussion about the political currents swirling around Harrenhal and the likelihood that Rhaegar's gesture with the crown was a political rather than a romantick one and that the Blessed St. Jon of Arryn may not have been an innocent. He did after all end up running the country

 

 

[LynnS]

5 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Technically it’s not necessarily a blue rose growing from a chink in a wall of ice, it’s a blue flower.

She says blue flower because she doesn't know much about flowers.  It's Jorah who calls it a rose probably associating blue flower, ice, and sweet smell with winter roses.

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Daenerys V

"Perhaps," she said reluctantly. "Yet the things I saw . . ."

"A dead man in the prow of a ship, a blue rose, a banquet of blood . . . what does any of it mean, Khaleesi? A mummer's dragon, you said. What is a mummer's dragon, pray?"

  Bran is the one who is asked for corn:

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Bran III

The voice was high and thin. Bran looked around to see where it was coming from. A crow was spiraling down with him, just out of reach, following him as he fell. "Help me," he said.

I'm trying, the crow replied. Say, got any corn?

Jon is also a rose of Winterfell  and could use the power of Wall at some point; but I don't think he's growing from it like a weirwood.  Although, I do think he will become the 3EC.   I think between them they represent the oak and holly kings.

I think of the black rose as representing Jon and the Night's Watch; something she is clutching in her hand until Ned promises to take him before she will let go.