R+L=J v.42

[Alia of the knife]

Yes, like the Angevin temper.

They were notorious for it.

Despite Brandon and Lyannas wildness, the Starks seem to have been perceived more for their coldness which was reflected in their display of anger.

[Jon Icefyre]

Guess what I think happens when his killers try and burn his body?

(And yes, I love irony too as Martins book is full of it). :laugh:

Wouldn't that be somethin..

[Jon Icefyre]

Yes, that and the time he lifts Alliser Thorne by the neck one-handed, when Thorne calls him a traitor. berserker!Jon is the best.

Yes, I always forget about that but it was such an epic moment!

Yes, like the Angevin temper.

They were notorious for it.

Despite Brandon and Lyannas wildness, the Starks seem to have been perceived more for their coldness which was reflected in their display of anger.

I can totally see that in him.

[Alia of the knife]

Wouldn't that be somethin..

I could only imagine the cinematic possibilities.

[Alia of the knife]

Yes, I always forget about that but it was such an epic moment!

I can totally see that in him.

Yes, the Angevins were said to have collapsed "and chewed the rushes" in their anger, which I suppose is a little like "beserker" Jon, but without the frothing. :stillsick:

[Twinslayer]

I said:

Here is what Barristan says:

Here is an exchange between Jaime and Cersei about how to defend the king, when Cersei wants to send Jaime to the Riverlands:

It is very possible that the 3 KG thought that the best way to "defend" Viserys "from harm or threat" was to stay with Lyanna. They weren't needed at Dragonstone. Robert could not invade immediately because it took him 9 months to build a fleet. But Lyanna was a valuable person. Remember, she's Ned's sister, and Robert (at least claims) that he still wanted to marry her. So if she was a prisoner, she was a valuable hostage. Even if she was not a prisoner, if they left her to die alone at the TOJ that would really hurt their ability to use her to forge a peace with the rebels. They may have felt that the best way to look out for Viserys' interests was to stay with her until she recovered and then take her to Dragonstone.

SFDanny said:

Twinslayer, the situations are not analogous. When Jaime goes to the Riverlands Tommen is still guarded by members the Kingsguard. Certainly members of the Kingsguard are used in such roles in the series. We don't have a situation, however, when loyal Kingsguard abandon their king to do other duties. Unless they are doing so at the Tower of Joy. But then they wouldn't be loyal would they?

My point is to demonstrate that the KG can discharge their first duty to defend the king "from harm or threat" without being physically present with the king. I gave the example of Jaime defending Tommen from a threat by leaving Tommen to pacify the Riverlands. Another example would be when Barristan left Aerys to go to the Trident with Rhaegar.

Now, we do have an example where a KG was ordered to leave the king without a KG in attendance. When Aerys and Jaime were alone in the throne room, Aerys ordered Jaime to leave and kill Tywin. You could argue that Jaime should have refused this order on the grounds that he was the only KG in KL and his "first duty" was to remain physically present with Aerys, but I don't think that would wash. Jaime could fulfill his obligation to defend the king (from the threat presented by Tywin) by carrying out the king's order.

Also, the situation with the KG at the TOJ was different. Rhaegar did not order them to "abandon" Viserys -- Viserys was not king when the order was given and they were not with Viserys when Viserys became king. The question is whether the KG had an obligation to disobey Rheagar's order in order to go to Viserys on the grounds that when Viserys became king there were no KG with him.

I suggested that keeping Lyanna safe and away from the rebels was a way that the KG could fulfill Rhaegar's order and fulfill their obligation to protect Viserys from a threat. But there is another possibility.

What was one of the biggest threats to Viserys at the time -- since we know he was on Dragonstone and he had a fleet and the rebels did not? Probably the biggest threat was dying without an heir. As far as the 3 KG were concerned -- since they did not know Rhaella was pregnant -- Viserys was in the same position as Robb Stark was in when he found out that Bran and Rickon were "dead."

But if Rhaegar had a bastard, one logical thing to do was what Robb Stark did -- legitimize the bastard so Viserys would have an heir. So Hightower, Dayne and Whent could obey Rhaegar's order and fulfill their "first duty" to protect Visyers from a threat by protecting Viserys' potential heir, the bastard Jon Snow. As soon as Jon and Lyanna could be moved, they would take him to Dragonstone where Viserys (or more likely, Viserys' regent) would decide what to do with him. If they did that, I don't see how they could be accused of breaking their vow to protect Viserys from harm or threat.

[SFDanny]

I said:

SFDanny said:

My point is to demonstrate that the KG can discharge their first duty to defend the king "from harm or threat" without being physically present with the king. I gave the example of Jaime defending Tommen from a threat by leaving Tommen to pacify the Riverlands. Another example would be when Barristan left Aerys to go to the Trident with Rhaegar.

Now, we do have an example where a KG was ordered to leave the king without a KG in attendance. When Aerys and Jaime were alone in the throne room, Aerys ordered Jaime to leave and kill Tywin. You could argue that Jaime should have refused this order on the grounds that he was the only KG in KL and his "first duty" was to remain physically present with Aerys, but I don't think that would wash. Jaime could fulfill his obligation to defend the king (from the threat presented by Tywin) by carrying out the king's order.

Also, the situation with the KG at the TOJ was different. Rhaegar did not order them to "abandon" Viserys -- Viserys was not king when the order was given and they were not with Viserys when Viserys became king. The question is whether the KG had an obligation to disobey Rheagar's order in order to go to Viserys on the grounds that when Viserys became king there were no KG with him.

I suggested that keeping Lyanna safe and away from the rebels was a way that the KG could fulfill Rhaegar's order and fulfill their obligation to protect Viserys from a threat. But there is another possibility.

What was one of the biggest threats to Viserys at the time -- since we know he was on Dragonstone and he had a fleet and the rebels did not? Probably the biggest threat was dying without an heir. As far as the 3 KG were concerned -- since they did not know Rhaella was pregnant -- Viserys was in the same position as Robb Stark was in when he found out that Bran and Rickon were "dead."

But if Rhaegar had a bastard, one logical thing to do was what Robb Stark did -- legitimize the bastard so Viserys would have an heir. So Hightower, Dayne and Whent could obey Rhaegar's order and fulfill their "first duty" to protect Visyers from a threat by protecting Viserys' potential heir, the bastard Jon Snow. As soon as Jon and Lyanna could be moved, they would take him to Dragonstone where Viserys (or more likely, Viserys' regent) would decide what to do with him. If they did that, I don't see how they could be accused of breaking their vow to protect Viserys from harm or threat.

You're missing the point, I think, my friend. The analogous situation with the Kingsguard trio would be if Viserys, if he was their king following the events at King's Landing, ordered them to stay at the Tower. They never even attempt to find out what their new king would order them to do. Perhaps Viserys would order them all away from him to do some other task. He never gives them that order, but the responsibility of the Kingsguard to guard their new king is there and they are seemingly unconcerned about his safety or his orders. By their remarks to Ned we know they believe they are fulfilling their duty by "warding the king with all of their strength" and by "giving their blood for his" but the his, in this situation, can't be Viserys, nor can it be that they are following his orders. In fact, they would be doing just what Martin says they can't do - making up their own orders, by ignoring their first duty to Viserys without his expressed order.

Also, let me point out that this has never been an "either/or" situation. The Kingsguard can fulfill both of their responsibilities to Rhaegar's last order, and to Viserys by sending one of their number to Dragonstone. They don't even attempt to do so, which should speak volumes to everyone about what the trio thinks about their responsibility to Viserys is. His safety, and his orders, are a very low priority on their list of things their oaths tell them they must do - hardly their "first duty."

[Ygrain]

Yes, that and the time he lifts Alliser Thorne by the neck one-handed, when Thorne calls him a traitor. berserker!Jon is the best.

My favourite scene just after "Fetch me a block." :-)

My point is to demonstrate that the KG can discharge their first duty to defend the king "from harm or threat" without being physically present with the king. I gave the example of Jaime defending Tommen from a threat by leaving Tommen to pacify the Riverlands. Another example would be when Barristan left Aerys to go to the Trident with Rhaegar.

And it has been pointed out to you that these are not comparable examples, as both Tommen and Aerys have other KG with them while Viserys doesn't.

Now, we do have an example where a KG was ordered to leave the king without a KG in attendance. When Aerys and Jaime were alone in the throne room, Aerys ordered Jaime to leave and kill Tywin. You could argue that Jaime should have refused this order on the grounds that he was the only KG in KL and his "first duty" was to remain physically present with Aerys, but I don't think that would wash. Jaime could fulfill his obligation to defend the king (from the threat presented by Tywin) by carrying out the king's order.

Here, Jaime is given the order by a single person entitled to do so, the king himself. Again, not the case with Viserys.

Also, the situation with the KG at the TOJ was different. Rhaegar did not order them to "abandon" Viserys -- Viserys was not king when the order was given and they were not with Viserys when Viserys became king. The question is whether the KG had an obligation to disobey Rheagar's order in order to go to Viserys on the grounds that when Viserys became king there were no KG with him.

Absolutely. Look at all those funny precautions Jaime makes when the KG confer, and once the rpesence of all of them is not necessary, one of them leaves immediately to go to the king.

What was one of the biggest threats to Viserys at the time -- since we know he was on Dragonstone and he had a fleet and the rebels did not? Probably the biggest threat was dying without an heir. As far as the 3 KG were concerned -- since they did not know Rhaella was pregnant -- Viserys was in the same position as Robb Stark was in when he found out that Bran and Rickon were "dead."

See above - Tommen was in no immediate danger, was well protected, yet a KG had to go to him ASAP.

But if Rhaegar had a bastard, one logical thing to do was what Robb Stark did -- legitimize the bastard so Viserys would have an heir. So Hightower, Dayne and Whent could obey Rhaegar's order and fulfill their "first duty" to protect Visyers from a threat by protecting Viserys' potential heir, the bastard Jon Snow. As soon as Jon and Lyanna could be moved, they would take him to Dragonstone where Viserys (or more likely, Viserys' regent) would decide what to do with him. If they did that, I don't see how they could be accused of breaking their vow to protect Viserys from harm or threat.

A legitimized bastard of Rhaegar's would go BEFORE Viserys - see Catelyn pointing out that legitimizing Jon would trump Arya's claim.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

Yes, like the Angevin temper.

They were notorious for it.

Despite Brandon and Lyannas wildness, the Starks seem to have been perceived more for their coldness which was reflected in their display of anger.

Well...Arya certainly has her moments! :lol:

[Ser Creighton]

Jon has a hot temper, that's the best argument yet. I am pretty sure Brandon had a temper as well. I got a temper but I am not not a Stark or Targ, Rhaegar didn't have temper. I believe that falls into the line of personality.

Hey people want to be entrenched in a view, that's fine, doesn't make the view right or wrong, just makes it a point of that your willing to except and ignore everything else. Wanting ot be right and being right are two different things. Coming up with theories to try and make yourself right does not make them right. But telling people their theories are wrong because they are only theories, is hypocrisy.

In any research if you ignore the alternatives your just doing a discredit to your own hypothesis.

Martin leaves himself options for a reason, all writers do, it's just flexablity. At best R+L=J is 50/50. Why? Because they day a writer locks in on one thing without exploring alternatives, is the day they stop writing. Writers are always looking to improve and progress a story as naturally as possible.

You're on vs. 42, have you proven your hypothesis? No? Then their are options.

R+L=J 50/50

A wedding or love story? That's total fanfic.

You want to accept your theory as fact, and don't want to except any alternatives to that theory? How exactly is that helping you?

My CO once asked me something. He said "do you want to be right, or do you want to discover the truth." I said I wanted to right. It was a joke, it was last time I ever made that joke.

Your on vs. 42 and your sure of it this time? With Martin as the writer? Good luck with your theory. I look forward to reading about the R+L wedding and their eternal (hold on a sec)

LOVE... Sorry thought i could type that without laughing.

By the way if your so sure about R+L=J why are you on version 42 and why are you posting? You know it right? It's lock, practically confirmed. So what is there to talk about, new people sure, but people with post number 30 thousand or whatever. Some of you get really defensive about it, I have been capped at, it was really scary. Ok yeah I have been under fire before, but caps? Yikes!

"Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools."

[Ygrain]

Jon has a hot temper, that's the best argument yet. I am pretty sure Brandon had a temper as well. I got a temper but I am not not a Stark or Targ, Rhaegar didn't have temper. I believe that falls into the line of personality.

Hey people want to be entrenched in a view, that's fine, doesn't make the view right or wrong, just makes it a point of that your willing to except and ignore everything else. Wanting ot be right and being right are two different things. Coming up with theories to try and make yourself right does not make them right. But telling people their theories are wrong because they are only theories, is hypocrisy.

In any research if you ignore the alternatives your just doing a discredit to your own hypothesis.

Martin leaves himself options for a reason, all writers do, it's just flexablity. At best R+L=J is 50/50. Why? Because they day a writer locks in on one thing without exploring alternatives, is the day they stop writing. Writers are always looking to improve and progress a story as naturally as possible.

You're on vs. 42, have you proven your hypothesis? No? Then their are options.

R+L=J 50/50

A wedding or love story? That's total fanfic.

You want to accept your theory as fact, and don't want to except any alternatives to that theory? How exactly is that helping you?

My CO once asked me something. He said "do you want to be right, or do you want to discover the truth." I said I wanted to right. It was a joke, it was last time I ever made that joke.

Your on vs. 42 and your sure of it this time? With Martin as the writer? Good luck with your theory. I look forward to reading about the R+L wedding and their eternal (hold on a sec)

LOVE... Sorry thought i could type that without laughing.

By the way if your so sure about R+L=J why are you on version 42 and why are you posting? You know it right? It's lock, practically confirmed. So what is there to talk about, new people sure, but people with post number 30 thousand or whatever. Some of you get really defensive about it, I have been capped at, it was really scary. Ok yeah I have been under fire before, but caps? Yikes!

"Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools."

I believe your points have been addressed several times and it is you who actually fails to acknowledge certain options; the fact that we are on thread 42 is due to the fact that new people who want to discuss the theory keep coming. Some of them offer fresh and valuable insights, some of them don't; that's the way life is. I have only one one question for you: have you actually written anything yourself, or at least studied any literary analysis? I've done both, and let me assure you that if you want to write a good story, without inconsistent, deus ex machina twists, you HAVE to know where you are taking the story from day one. If you want a RL example, take a look into the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy: with the change of the lead writer throughout the series, the main plot changed, as well, causing considerable plotholes and inconsistencies in the series and introducing a very poorly foreshadowed solution right at the end. Nothing I have ever read from GRRM provides a basis to think that he would make such a mistake.

[Jon Icefyre]

Jon has a hot temper, that's the best argument yet. I am pretty sure Brandon had a temper as well. I got a temper but I am not not a Stark or Targ, Rhaegar didn't have temper. I believe that falls into the line of personality.

Hey people want to be entrenched in a view, that's fine, doesn't make the view right or wrong, just makes it a point of that your willing to except and ignore everything else. Wanting ot be right and being right are two different things. Coming up with theories to try and make yourself right does not make them right. But telling people their theories are wrong because they are only theories, is hypocrisy.

In any research if you ignore the alternatives your just doing a discredit to your own hypothesis.

Martin leaves himself options for a reason, all writers do, it's just flexablity. At best R+L=J is 50/50. Why? Because they day a writer locks in on one thing without exploring alternatives, is the day they stop writing. Writers are always looking to improve and progress a story as naturally as possible.

You're on vs. 42, have you proven your hypothesis? No? Then their are options.

R+L=J 50/50

A wedding or love story? That's total fanfic.

You want to accept your theory as fact, and don't want to except any alternatives to that theory? How exactly is that helping you?

My CO once asked me something. He said "do you want to be right, or do you want to discover the truth." I said I wanted to right. It was a joke, it was last time I ever made that joke.

Your on vs. 42 and your sure of it this time? With Martin as the writer? Good luck with your theory. I look forward to reading about the R+L wedding and their eternal (hold on a sec)

LOVE... Sorry thought i could type that without laughing.

By the way if your so sure about R+L=J why are you on version 42 and why are you posting? You know it right? It's lock, practically confirmed. So what is there to talk about, new people sure, but people with post number 30 thousand or whatever. Some of you get really defensive about it, I have been capped at, it was really scary. Ok yeah I have been under fire before, but caps? Yikes!

"Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools."

Awwww is someone catching feelings? :crying: Haha sorry your Ned and Ashara/Jon having a distant Targ relative through Ned's mother's line theory fell flat on it's face. You bitch and moan constantly about how R+L=J has all these supposed "plot holes" and doesn't add up and then you give counter theories that in no way, shape, or form make even half as much sense as R+L=J, and then get all pouty faced when people destroy your theories revealing how shallow and weak your theory turns out to be when put next to R+L=J. You act as if R+L=J supporters don't use the text to support the theory, when the fact of the matter is R+L=J has the most textual evidence backing it up than any other counter theory that has been held against it. If you don't want to admit that fine, that's your prerogative. But stop with all the bitching and moaning just because the vast majority of ppl on this thread don't consider your theories to be on the same level of validity as R+L=J. Noone is claiming R+L=J is a fact, all ppl are saying/arguing is that based on what we've gotten so far in the series it is by far the most likely scenario in terms of who Jon's real parents are, which the majority on this thread seem to agree with. So if you can't handle the heat then get the fuck out of the kitchen. :rolleyes:

[Queen of Procrastination]

About the Jon and Rhaegar parallels:

Both of them show an interest in fighting women who don´t want to be perfect ladies and do what they want.

I always found this sentece from Clash very nice its from the scene where Jon fails in killing Ýgritte:

"He was his fahter´s son wasn´t he?"

Apart from the obvious hint that Jon isn´t Ned´s son I´ve allways wondered if Jon did what his father would have done.

I think Ned would have killed her, but Rhaegar ? I have my doubts he didn´t tell Aerys that Lyannna was the KotLT. I think Jon acted like Rhaegar in this scene.

[FrozenFire3]

Guess what I think happens when his killers try and burn his body?

(And yes, I love irony too as Martins book is full of it). :laugh:

:bowdown: Seven gods, yes!

I believe your points have been addressed several times and it is you who actually fails to acknowledge certain options; the fact that we are on thread 42 is due to the fact that new people who want to discuss the theory keep coming. Some of them offer fresh and valuable insights, some of them don't; that's the way life is. I have only one one question for you: have you actually written anything yourself, or at least studied any literary analysis? I've done both, and let me assure you that if you want to write a good story, without inconsistent, deus ex machina twists, you HAVE to know where you are taking the story from day one. If you want a RL example, take a look into the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy: with the change of the lead writer throughout the series, the main plot changed, as well, causing considerable plotholes and inconsistencies in the series and introducing a very poorly foreshadowed solution right at the end. Nothing I have ever read from GRRM provides a basis to think that he would make such a mistake.

Exactly. People tend to forget that this is not history. This is a story. An author plans a storyline, dips into his inner resources (talent, experience, emotions), gets loans from outer ones (cultural references, archetypal parallels, literary echoes) and build a very delicate structure whose foundation is the above mentioned storyline and whose bearing walls are clues, hints and foreshadowings. Displacement of any of these and the whole building collapses or gets seriously damaged.

After my first reading of the saga what really struck me were two elements: the centrality of Jon Snow and the overbearing presence of a character who's already dead at the very beginning of the narration :blink: Rhaegar is the 'stone guest' of ASOIAF. Every second page, main POVs mention him, think about him, remember him, dream about him, wonder about him, have visions about him, love, hate, idealise him. I wondered and still wonder why an author chooses to insist whis such an emphasis on a dead character unless his shadow is much longer and much more solid than what we could think at first reading. Unless he is somehow still alive (metaphorically speaking) and capable of influencing the story arc of major characters.

[The Singer]

"Promise me Ned" was what got me thinking, amongst other things. Also when Ned recalls he and his bannermen going to rescue Lyanna at the TOJ, he says 3 of the most prominent King's guard protecting her, why? The Kings guard are to protect the king and his heirs not some hostage, unless an heir was there. When he enters the tower he finds her in her bed of blood, this must be from childbirth because no one was out to harm her, nor could they with the protection of the King's guard.

This leads me to think that the real father of Jon is RT and Ned not to reveal this and to keep Jon safe would be the promise Lyanna asked.

[FrozenFire3]

About the Jon and Rhaegar parallels:

Both of them show an interest in fighting women who don´t want to be perfect ladies and do what they want.

I always found this sentece from Clash very nice its from the scene where Jon fails in killing Ýgritte:

"He was his fahter´s son wasn´t he?"

Apart from the obvious hint that Jon isn´t Ned´s son I´ve allways wondered if Jon did what his father would have done.

I think Ned would have killed her, but Rhaegar ? I have my doubts he didn´t tell Aerys that Lyannna was the KotLT. I think Jon acted like Rhaegar in this scene.

Absolutely. Emphasis on the reiteration: 'Wasn't he? Wasn't he?' So much irony, foreshadowing and parallels in one single sentence...

[Ghost's Shadow]

I'm somewhat surprised that not everyone gets it yet, that the thought still has so much opposition. All that's left to do, honestly, to point it out even more is to just put arrows next to the text and underline things.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

About the Jon and Rhaegar parallels:

Both of them show an interest in fighting women who don´t want to be perfect ladies and do what they want.

I always found this sentece from Clash very nice its from the scene where Jon fails in killing Ýgritte:

"He was his fahter´s son wasn´t he?"

Apart from the obvious hint that Jon isn´t Ned´s son I´ve allways wondered if Jon did what his father would have done.

I think Ned would have killed her, but Rhaegar ? I have my doubts he didn´t tell Aerys that Lyannna was the KotLT. I think Jon acted like Rhaegar in this scene.

:agree:

"Promise me Ned" was what got me thinking, amongst other things. Also when Ned recalls he and his bannermen going to rescue Lyanna at the TOJ, he says 3 of the most prominent King's guard protecting her, why? The Kings guard are to protect the king and his heirs not some hostage, unless an heir was there. When he enters the tower he finds her in her bed of blood, this must be from childbirth because no one was out to harm her, nor could they with the protection of the King's guard.

This leads me to think that the real father of Jon is RT and Ned not to reveal this and to keep Jon safe would be the promise Lyanna asked.

Pretty much this, in a nutshell! The rest (and most of the fun) of what is done here is just filling in the details :)

I'm somewhat surprised that not everyone gets it yet, that the thought still has so much opposition. All that's left to do, honestly, to point it out even more is to just put arrows next to the text and underline things.

IKR? And yet, I know quite a few intelligent people who don't see it and would happily argue against it :dunno:

[MtnLion]

Honestly, when I reached FFC and understood the Kingsguard's oath it pretty much sealed the deal. It is like GRRM had written explicitly that Jon was born legitimately to Lyanna and Rhaegar. Those who doubt can only be doubting because Jon doesn't know, yet. At the tower we have three of the most honorable, "shining example to the rest of the world", men willing to die defending their king, even though we never get told that explicitly. We don't get told explicitly that Jon is there, but Lyanna had just given birth. Lyanna died of a fever, and the rose slipped from her hand to next appear at the wall of ice. Yes, it was Jon. Treason is a good reason that the truth could not be shared even with those who were most loved. That Rhaegar had had another son that had not been slain at King's Landing would be treason if not revealed to King Robert. There is no doubt what Robert would have done with said child.

GRRM knows the ending of the story, or the major plot points along the way, and who dies, etc. He has written an outline of the ending and sealed it within a vault with HBO as part of the agreement for the series. To say that GRRM would change the story because it has been guessed, or that his mood may have changed, is a serious stretch of reality. When GRRM writes his story, the characters take life through him. Small details may change, but the overall plot will remain fixed.

[MtnLion]

Oh, and major plot points, anyone ever catch that the stag had been gored in the belly and that the direwolf had been stabbed in the neck by the stag?