R+L=J v.39

[Ser Leftwich]

Brynden was Hoster's brother, while Robert was only Aery's cousin through the female line of the family that's a lot different.

True, it is different, but it is still within the realm of possible. When it comes to family relations, inheritance, etc.

There is also the case of Arnolf Karstark trying to marry Alys to his son.

There is no rule that older male relatives get to arrange marriages for younger relatives. Lords get to do that for their children and younger siblings, which is why Hoster was angry with Ser Brynden. But there is no rule that older cousins get to arrange the marriages of younger ones.

There are very few hard and fast rules in Westeros.

Also, how often did Aerys need a rule or law to enforce his actions.

[Dragonfish]

There are very few hard and fast rules in Westeros.

Also, how often did Aerys need a rule or law to enforce his actions.

You're avoiding the issue. The question is why Aerys would've been angry with Robert over his choice of bride in the first place. You claimed it's because it was his right to choose his bride, but that claim has been debunked. So with that argument dispensed with, what other reason would Aerys have for being angry with Robert's choice of bride?

[Ser Leftwich]

You're avoiding the issue. The question is why Aerys would've been angry with Robert over his choice of bride in the first place. You claimed it's because it was his right to choose his bride, but that claim has been debunked. So with that argument dispensed with, what other reason would Aerys have for being angry with Robert's choice of bride?

I do not think that my claim that Aerys thought he had some right or wish to be involved in Robert's choice of bride has been debunked. It is not outside the realm of possible that Aerys was pissed about it, regardless as to if he had actual lordly or older sibling legal right to arrange a marriage, but in that he perceived that he did, in being an older relative of Robert's.

For all we know, Aerys had Lyanna a court for a few months and didn't like her.

[Ludd]

Aerys might quite rightly be alarmed at the marriage alliances. Stark and Tully plus Stark and Stormlands pus Tully and Arryn. A very scary alliance for the Targs. Four great houses seeming to merge.

Perhaps the whole Lyanna thing was a deliberate effort to PREVENT a dangerous alliance

[Dragonfish]

I do not think that my claim that Aerys thought he had some right or wish to be involved in Robert's choice of bride has been debunked. It is not outside the realm of possible that Aerys was pissed about it, regardless as to if he had actual lordly or older sibling legal right to arrange a marriage, but in that he perceived that he did, in being an older relative of Robert's.

None of this makes any sense. Aerys has no reason to perceive that he has this right. There's no precedent anywhere for older cousins to be able to arrange the marriages of younger ones. Especially since Robert has at least one relative, Lord Estermont, who is even older than Aerys and is more directly related to Robert, being his maternal grandfather.

[Zupoleon]

Aerys might quite rightly be alarmed at the marriage alliances. Stark and Tully plus Stark and Stormlands pus Tully and Arryn. A very scary alliance for the Targs. Four great houses seeming to merge.

Perhaps the whole Lyanna thing was a deliberate effort to PREVENT a dangerous alliance

Wow, that would be the definition of the dumbest way to PREVENT an alliance. The events following Lyanna's "abduction" is exactly what galvanized said alliances.

[Jon Icefyre]

Aerys might quite rightly be alarmed at the marriage alliances. Stark and Tully plus Stark and Stormlands pus Tully and Arryn. A very scary alliance for the Targs. Four great houses seeming to merge.

Perhaps the whole Lyanna thing was a deliberate effort to PREVENT a dangerous alliance

Wow, that would be the definition of the dumbest way to PREVENT an alliance. The events following Lyanna's "abduction" is exactly what galvanized said alliances.

I agree with Zupoleon on this. Plus the Arynn and Tully alliance didn't happen until after the rebellion was offcially started. Lysa Tully and Jon Arryn didn't marry until after the rebellion started, and the only reason for that marriage/alliance was the actions of Aery's to begin with. So the idea that Aery's had Lyanna kidnapped as an attempt break the 4 house alliance doesn't even make sense, since it wasn't officially formed until the rebellion was already under way.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

^ Yeah, the Starks-Baratheons was the only eventually legally binding (by Robert and Lyanna's marriage) alliance. Arryn fostered both Ned and Robert, but it was Aerys murdering Rickard and Brandon that drove the Tullys and Arryn into the binding quad-alliance, and it was that quad alliance that gave Robert the manpower necessary to defeat the Targaryens.

[Ser Leftwich]

None of this makes any sense. Aerys has no reason to perceive that he has this right. There's no precedent anywhere for older cousins to be able to arrange the marriages of younger ones. Especially since Robert has at least one relative, Lord Estermont, who is even older than Aerys and is more directly related to Robert, being his maternal grandfather.

Robert's grandfather is a good point. Depending on how close Aerys and Steffon were, (I am guessing that they were close in age, 4-5 years apart), taking into account that Aerys sent Steffon to look for a wife for Rhaegar and that Steffon was dead, Aerys might make up some familial reason to want to have a say in Robert's wedding.

I admit it is far fetched, but it does not make "no sense."

[Ribupr]

39??? Fuck me, right?

[Greymoon]

Has anyone ever thought about the possibility that Rickard Stark and Hoster Tully were planning to overthrow the mad king and place Robert on the throne? What if Lyanna, sweet, brave, stubborn Lyanna, got wind of it, and decided to ride out to kings landing to warn Rhaegar (whom she would have met before) ? Now... you might wonder why on earth Brandon would believe she was kidnapped.... it's not too much of a stretch to think that Lord Stark would try to safe face and thus claim (to preserve both Lyanna's honor and his own) that his daughter was 'stolen'....and how convenient for him that Lyanna caught the Prince's eye at the tournament...

Of course, the lie would never hold in Kingslanding, but, if Stark/Tully/Baratheon were already plotting against the king, Lyanna's 'betrayal' would be a catalyst to war, no matter what; so, in telling his little lie, it's not the Mad King and his court Lord Stark means to win favors from, but the Baratheons, the Tullys and his own banner men. Basically, Lyanna being 'stolen' gives Rickard Stark a legitimate reason to call the banners without ever being seen as a traitor to the rest of the realm. I think, Brandon screaming bloody murder was the one thing Rickard could not have foreseen and certainly didn't count on. And yes, of course, for this theory to work, Brandon himself, would need to have been left in the dark concerning his father's lie and motives.

The Stark/Tully/Baratheon and, lets not forget Arryn (with Eddard and Robert being fostered there) alliance, does seem a bit suspicious, if not out right dangerous.

Also...I read something in one of these forums, about Rickard's maester meddling in affairs of the realm, whispering to his lord?... there are a few conspiracy theories out there pointing at the Citadel and it's possible involvement in Robert’s rebellion, I think....

All this aside...I really don't think Jon's parentage is all that important. If he does survive, he'll make a name of his own. He'll be known as Jon Snow, (or Jon Wolfskin, or "The King of Bastards and Wolves" or... "Black Jon" ...) regardless of his father, whether Eddard or Rhaegar. What I see happening is, in fact, Jon discovering right at the very end that he is the son of Rhaegar, and dismissing the information as 'unimportant' or even seeing it as a very unwelcome revelation...

[Greymoon]

Robert's grandfather is a good point. Depending on how close Aerys and Steffon were, (I am guessing that they were close in age, 4-5 years apart), taking into account that Aerys sent Steffon to look for a wife for Rhaegar and that Steffon was dead, Aerys might make up some familial reason to want to have a say in Robert's wedding.

I admit it is far fetched, but it does not make "no sense."

I would further say.... that Aerys being a blood relative of Robert has no true relevance. Aerys is King. As I see it, he can do whatever he wants, whether he can justify it or not. The way I perceive Aerys, I see him sort of as a big fan and supporter of absolutism, enamored in himself, paranoid, prone to sudden fits of rage, capricious etc...

I wouldn't be overly surprised if Aerys did invent new rules and create new rights for the Monarch left and right, on a simple whim, to suit his purpose. Being quite Mad, I'd imagine the Lords at court would be alright with Aerys inventing rights and rules, as long as they continued to have his favor and were able to influence his decisions.

For the power hungry court politicians, Aerys would have been the ideal king. His madness makes him a weak ruler and susceptible to suggestions. So...I don't know whether your theory holds, but I'd say, okay, why not? If Aerys did decide, for some reason or another to get involved in Robert's marriage, or forbid it, I however, don't believe he had a true motive to do it (besides being paranoid and quite mad, that is). There are some motives one could imagine, of course, but was Aerys even really aware of politics at this point of time? What we know, is that he sees rebellion and threats everywhere, he doesn't even seem to trust his own son and heir... so...?

[Jon Icefyre]

Has anyone ever thought about the possibility that Rickard Stark and Hoster Tully were planning to overthrow the mad king and place Robert on the throne? What if Lyanna, sweet, brave, stubborn Lyanna, got wind of it, and decided to ride out to kings landing to warn Rhaegar (whom she would have met before) ? Now... you might wonder why on earth Brandon would believe she was kidnapped.... it's not too much of a stretch to think that Lord Stark would try to safe face and thus claim (to preserve both Lyanna's honor and his own) that his daughter was 'stolen'....and how convenient for him that Lyanna caught the Prince's eye at the tournament...

Of course, the lie would never hold in Kingslanding, but, if Stark/Tully/Baratheon were already plotting against the king, Lyanna's 'betrayal' would be a catalyst to war, no matter what; so, in telling his little lie, it's not the Mad King and his court Lord Stark means to win favors from, but the Baratheons, the Tullys and his own banner men. Basically, Lyanna being 'stolen' gives Rickard Stark a legitimate reason to call the banners without ever being seen as a traitor to the rest of the realm. I think, Brandon screaming bloody murder was the one thing Rickard could not have foreseen and certainly didn't count on. And yes, of course, for this theory to work, Brandon himself, would need to have been left in the dark concerning his father's lie and motives.

The Stark/Tully/Baratheon and, lets not forget Arryn (with Eddard and Robert being fostered there) alliance, does seem a bit suspicious, if not out right dangerous.

Also...I read something in one of these forums, about Rickard's maester meddling in affairs of the realm, whispering to his lord?... there are a few conspiracy theories out there pointing at the Citadel and it's possible involvement in Robert’s rebellion, I think....

All this aside...I really don't think Jon's parentage is all that important. If he does survive, he'll make a name of his own. He'll be known as Jon Snow, (or Jon Wolfskin, or "The King of Bastards and Wolves" or... "Black Jon" ...) regardless of his father, whether Eddard or Rhaegar. What I see happening is, in fact, Jon discovering right at the very end that he is the son of Rhaegar, and dismissing the information as 'unimportant' or even seeing it as a very unwelcome revelation...

There's no evidence to support this theory whatsoever. If this were the case then Rickard stark would have simply called all his banners the second Brandon was takin prisoner and he was summoned to KL. The same way Robb Stark did when Joeffry summoned him to KL after Ned was captured. I don't think Rickard when down to KL with the intent of starting a rebellion, he just simply wanted his son and daughter back.

Also if Jon Snow is legitimate and R+L=J is true(which it is) then he won't be known as Jon Snow or "The King of Bastards and Wolves" because he wouldn't be a bastard whether he liked it or not. If he became a King then he wouldn't be able to keep the surname Snow, because it's not a house name it's a general surname for all bastards of the north. So if he kept the last name Snow it would cause great confusion in the north down the road concerning Jon's possible descendents and general bastards with the surname snow, it's just not very logical. If anything he'll be known as something like The Ice Dragon, The North's Dragon, The Dragon King of the North, The Dragon of Winterfell, The winter Dragon, The hidden Dragon, The Dragon Savior, The promised Dragon/The Dragon that was promised something like that or simply Jon Targaryen ha.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

There's no evidence to support this theory whatsoever. If this were the case then Rickard stark would have simply called all his banners the second Brandon was takin prisoner and he was summoned to KL. The same way Robb Stark did when Joeffry summoned him to KL after Ned was captured. I don't think Rickard when down to KL with the intent of starting a rebellion, he just simply wanted his son and daughter back.

Also if Jon Snow is legitimate and R+L=J is true(which it is) then he won't be known as Jon Snow or "The King of Bastards and Wolves" because he wouldn't be a bastard whether he liked it or not. If he became a King then he wouldn't be able to keep the surname Snow, because it's not a house name it's a general surname for all bastards of the north. So if he kept the last name Snow it would cause great confusion in the north down the road concerning Jon's possible descendents and general bastards with the surname snow, it's just not very logical. If anything he'll be known as something like The Ice Dragon, The North's Dragon, The Dragon King of the North, The Dragon of Winterfell, The winter Dragon, The hidden Dragon, The Dragon Savior, The promised Dragon/The Dragon that was promised something like that or simply Jon Targaryen ha.

The theory of a pre-planned Robert's rebellion does seem to be a bit shaky. Though I certainly wouldn't go against an idea that there were mutterings and planning to replace Aerys with Rhaegar at the time.

Of course for Jon to be called any of those things you need R+L=J to be true (which I concede is the most likely outcome of the issue of his parentage), accepted in Westeros (let's not forget that even if FAegon is true if the lie is accepted then it doesn't make any difference it's a lie) and for Jon to actually want to become King. Oh and for Jon to live. Overall I'd be surprised if Jon would want to be king

[Greymoon]

There's no evidence to support this theory whatsoever. If this were the case then Rickard stark would have simply called all his banners the second Brandon was takin prisoner and he was summoned to KL the same way Robb Stark did when Joeffry summoned him to KL after Ned was captured. Also if Jon Snow is legitimate and R+L=J is true(which it is) then he won't be known as Jon Snow or "The King of Bastards and Wolves" because he wouldn't be a bastard whether he liked it or not. If he became a King then he wouldn't be able to keep the surname Snow, because it's not a house name it's a general surname for all bastards of the north. So if he kept the last name Snow it would cause great conusion in the north down the road concerning Jon's possible descendents and general bastards with the surname snow, it's not very logical. If anything he'll be known as something like The Ice Dragon, The North's Dragon, The Dragon King of the North, The Dragon of Winterfell, The winter Dragon, The hidden Dragon, The Dragon Savior, The promised Dragon/The Dragon that was promised something like that or simply Jon Targaryen ha.

uhm...alright. There might not be a lot of evidence to support the theory of a Stark/Tully/Baratheon conspiracy against the iron throne, but I don't think its more far fetched than any other theory out there, especially considering we have no evidence that Rhaegar fits the profile of a rapist/kidnapper.

Concerning Jon, I'd say it all depends on what kind of age Westeros is living in, and whether its time periods correspond to our ones when it comes to customs and such. If Westeros is living something similar to our early middle ages, then genealogies are still somewhat selective, and not at all ‘rigid’ or ‘fixed’…nor are they always following agnatic ties…either way. This is a fantasy world, so of course, who’s to know exactly how much worth a name carries? or how important blood ties are, really? We have Dany and Viserys who claim it's really important. But they are kind of fanatics with their 'Blood of the Dragon' non-sense. We have Melissandre, who thinks 'Kings blood' is powerfull... but we also have, on the other hand, Joffrey and Tommen, who are known bastards by the time of the fourth book, though still, the Tyrells support their claim... We have Stannis also, who claims Dragon blood, though he can't have more than a few drops... my point is: constructed genealogies and perceived realities play a major role in Westeros, just as they did, and do, in our own world.

Names do carry some worth in Westeros and belonging to one noble house or another seems to matter, too, I’ll give you that. However, a King without an army is no King at all. If Jon is to become King he needs an army. Being the son of a Stark or Targaryen will not give him an army, whatsoever. He, as a man, a soldier, and/or war general needs to give people enough reasons to believe in him. He’s not Robb. Robb called his banners as the known heir of Eddard Stark in a time of relative peace. The Northmen had faith in Robb’s endeavor. Now, there are plenty of other contestants to Winterfell, to the Iron throne, etc… So, if Jon is to play the game, he needs to make it clear that he is worth taking a risk for. Once that’s done, the truth of his birth may be a valuable tool to truly legitimize his claim on a throne. First however, he needs to win that throne. I’d point out that this is exactly what Robert did. He won the war, and then, he claimed the Iron Throne by right of conquest and of blood.

What matters in this case, is what people believe you are. Or WHO they believe you are. Right now, the northmen belive Jon to be the bastard son of Eddard Stark, and this, might proove reason enough for them to consider him a valid candidate for the Lordship of Winterfell or even the crown of the North.

If Jon fights the war against the Others with the name of Jon Snow, or wins back Winterfell, I doubt he’ll change his name afterwards, just because it’s the right and proper thing to do... Especially if he's grown to accept his status as a bastard and actually achieved something - on his own - to be proud of. He might of course, gain any and all of the epithets you gave him if he comes out as a hero by the end of the books.

If he did/does change his name to Targaryen/Stark, he'd need to do it pretty soon, and before he starts campaigning for any throne. Else, if he only does it at the very END of the series, I don't think the common folk would ever actually acknowledge it, so he'd still be known as Jon Snow, even if officially his name is Jon Targaryen/Stark or whatever...

As for known bastards, becoming sort of Monarchs…Charles Martel the great-papa of Charlemagne, might be a good example...

[Arya Wargface]

Hey everybody! I am a n00b to the R+L=J thread, but I certainly can see all the evidence that this theory points to. I am personally of the opinion that there is no definitive way to know eithier way (obviously, because it's a theory), and I will let George guide me either way. My question to those who believe in this theory is:

Would you hate the series if Jon is not Rhaegar and Lyanna's child?

I know it's very possible and nothing has happened to rule the theory out definitively, but even the most die-hard advocate has to admit that it's possible to not be true. I love hearing all theories about this series (yes, even the crackpots), I just don't really like it when fans take certain theories as fact before we know for sure. I hope this post wasn't offensive to anyone, I was just curious how R+L=J believers would feel if it didn't happen.

This is all under the assumption that George will not betray any of the characters or plot lines with the issue of Jon's parents, but I think we all trust George by now.

[The guy from the Vale]

Let me put it this way: If the theory turns out not to be true, GRRM will have a hell of a lot to explain. More than I can see him explaining in two more books. This theory, on the other hand, ties a large number of mysteries/open questions/issues together.

If I was a lawyer, I would say R+L=J is true beyond reasonable doubt. Not beyond all doubt, of course, but most rebuttals of the theory I have seen have not made much sense to me. I'd love to see such a theory, but none exists (yet?)

[Bear Island Bruiser]

As for known bastards, becoming sort of Monarchs…Charles Martel the great-papa of Charlemagne, might be a good example...

Well there is the obvious example of William the Bastard, or as he later became known William the Conqueror. Inherited the Duchy of Normandy and took throne of England.

[Dr. Pepper]

Hey everybody! I am a n00b to the R+L=J thread, but I certainly can see all the evidence that this theory points to. I am personally of the opinion that there is no definitive way to know eithier way (obviously, because it's a theory), and I will let George guide me either way. My question to those who believe in this theory is:

Would you hate the series if Jon is not Rhaegar and Lyanna's child?

I know it's very possible and nothing has happened to rule the theory out definitively, but even the most die-hard advocate has to admit that it's possible to not be true. I love hearing all theories about this series (yes, even the crackpots), I just don't really like it when fans take certain theories as fact before we know for sure. I hope this post wasn't offensive to anyone, I was just curious how R+L=J believers would feel if it didn't happen.

This is all under the assumption that George will not betray any of the characters or plot lines with the issue of Jon's parents, but I think we all trust George by now.

At this point, I take R+L=J as a fact that is all but explicitly confirmed. If it turned out to not be true, I'd be fine with it. But Martin would have to make it convincing and it would have to align with evidence we can find in previous books. It can't just come out of thin air, it has to match the timeline and the facts we already know. R+L=J works best because it aligns with the evidence we already have.

[The guy from the Vale]

At this point, I take R+L=J as a fact that is all but explicitly confirmed. If it turned out to not be true, I'd be fine with it. But Martin would have to make it convincing and it would have to align with evidence we can find in previous books. It can't just come out of thin air, it has to match the timeline and the facts we already know. R+L=J works best because it aligns with the evidence we already have.

Where is that like button when you need it? :crying: