R+L=J v.44

[Sasha Steelsong]

Yeah, I think you make a huge point about the Stark and the one dishonoring her not necessarily being the same. It's something a lot of people use interchangeably on here and draw conclusions on, but if you read what Barristan thinks about it, he doesn't ever say they're the same person.

And the bolded part is basically the entire gist of this person's argument.

Thank you. :) I always remember that about the scene but thanks to Alia putting the actual words down it was a point that just screamed out to be made, given the whole focus of the discussion. The interchangeability really ends up muddying the waters on the whole thing, which is why it always a good idea to go back to the text, As if I needed an excuse.

[aquintus]

I want to say it's in The Kingbreaker? He just thinks that if he had won the tournament, he would've crowned Ashara and Rhaegar wouldn't have crowned Lyanna and set off the whole mess, in his mind, and that Ashara might have known that he loved and would have "turned" to him instead of Stark. The man who "dishonored" her is never used interchangeably with the "Stark," nor is the specific Stark ever identified. On the contrary, you could feasibly read it as Ashara "turning to Stark" as a result of the man who "dishonored" her, not that the Stark dishonored her. Like I said, if you read it, the people going on about "the Stark dishonoring her at Harrenhal" are misreading the shit out of it.

Personally, I'm leaning towards "the Stark" that Ashara turned to being Lyanna. If the two of them became friends at Haranhall, it would go a long way towards explaining why Lyanna and Rhaegar ended up in Dorne of all places.

Edit: on a side note, autocorrect is stupid.

[Ygrain]

Personally, I'm leaning towards "the Stark" that Ashara turned to being Lyanna. If the two of them became friends at Haranhall, it would go a long way towards explaining why Lyanna and Rhaegar ended up in Dorne of all places.

Edit: on a side note, autocorrect is stupid.

That's an interesting point. I must admit that the line of Barristan's reasoning is not entirely clear to me - why the fact that Rhaegar crowned Lyanna caused Ashara to become romantically involved with Lyanna's brother - Ned didn't participate in the tourney, I think, and Brandon was unhorsed before, so Barristan winning instead of Rhaegar wouldn't really change a thing about the position of any Stark brother, only about Lyanna's. - That would be a nice fundament for my personal theory that the reason why GRRM specifically mentioned Ashara not being nailed to the floor of Starfall is that she hanged out with Lyanna at ToJ to keep her company in Rhaegar's absence.

[corbon]

That's an interesting point. I must admit that the line of Barristan's reasoning is not entirely clear to me - why the fact that Rhaegar crowned Lyanna caused Ashara to become romantically involved with Lyanna's brother - Ned didn't participate in the tourney, I think, and Brandon was unhorsed before, so Barristan winning instead of Rhaegar wouldn't really change a thing about the position of any Stark brother, only about Lyanna's. - That would be a nice fundament for my personal theory that the reason why GRRM specifically mentioned Ashara not being nailed to the floor of Starfall is that she hanged out with Lyanna at ToJ to keep her company in Rhaegar's absence.

Barristan thinks maybe she would have looked to him instead because by naming her QoLaB she would have noticed that he honoured and respected her and was someone she could look to. Without that notice, he's not someone she can expect to support her, just a random older KG.

I think she looked to Stark because she was involved with a Stark and/or a Stark was involved in the dishonour. I can't see any other reason why she would look to a Stark. "Look to" implies she expected some sort of support, which implies she either had a close connectionsome sort of relationship with Stark or a Stark 'owed' her (was involved in her dishonour).

Just because it doesn't actually say that she was dishonoured by a Stark, and its a common misreading that it says so, does not rule out a Stark as the dishonourer.

Theres plenty still to learn, but the most likely scenario I can put together is that she had a thing with Brandon Stark (the whole Ned thing is clearly a red herring when you examine the evidence for it closely) and either they/she got caught at the end of the tourney and was dishonoured there, whereupon maybe she appealed to Brandon as being involved but he was already betrothed, or her dishonour was only evident 3-6 months later when her 'bump' started showing and she appealed to Rickard or Brandon but they could not or would not assist her.

I think "Stark" whom she looked to is not Ned for several reasons.

First, Barristan knows Ned well and clearly respects him, which implies that he does not think Ned responsible for Ashara's disgrace, either as perpetrator or by failure to assist.

Second, related to the first, I don't see why Barristan would call Ned just "Stark", instead of "Ned Stark" or similar. There is a disconnect there, for me at least, between the grim, bare, and almost formal, naming of "Stark" in his head and the respect and relationship he has with Ned from when they worked together during Ned's hand-ship. To me it reads like he is thinking of a different Stark, one he either barely knows or dislikes/blames for Ashara's dishonour.

Third, Ned is just the second son. The 'Stark' with power to help would be Rickard or Brandon as Lord and heir.

But although I think this is the most likely based on current information, it could easily be turned completely around in moments.

[Ruby Chevrolet]

Ok, sorry I didn't catch that. Admittedly I only skimmed your post after that first paragraph, simply because I wanted to move on to the other posts in the thread and see if anyone else had addressed this issue.

In any case, yes, I can imagine Theon saying such a thing to Robb, just as Robert said the same thing to Ned even though he's aware the man supposedly had a bastard. The point is that this still doesn't change the fact that Ned's present-day personality and character is still broadly the same as his younger self.

No problem. I figured that was what happened. My point is just that Robert thinks Eddard was a stick in the mud based on the teenage years. He seems like a stick in the mud when he's older. But as Harwin said (and Robb experienced) sometimes the blood runs hot. Or as Eddard said, when ruminating on bastards, men are filled with "such lusts."

[Ruby Chevrolet]

Barristan thinks maybe she would have looked to him instead because by naming her QoLaB she would have noticed that he honoured and respected her and was someone she could look to. Without that notice, he's not someone she can expect to support her, just a random older KG.

I think she looked to Stark because she was involved with a Stark and/or a Stark was involved in the dishonour. I can't see any other reason why she would look to a Stark. "Look to" implies she expected some sort of support, which implies she either had a close connectionsome sort of relationship with Stark or a Stark 'owed' her (was involved in her dishonour).

Just because it doesn't actually say that she was dishonoured by a Stark, and its a common misreading that it says so, does not rule out a Stark as the dishonourer.

Theres plenty still to learn, but the most likely scenario I can put together is that she had a thing with Brandon Stark (the whole Ned thing is clearly a red herring when you examine the evidence for it closely) and either they/she got caught at the end of the tourney and was dishonoured there, whereupon maybe she appealed to Brandon as being involved but he was already betrothed, or her dishonour was only evident 3-6 months later when her 'bump' started showing and she appealed to Rickard or Brandon but they could not or would not assist her.

I think "Stark" whom she looked to is not Ned for several reasons.

First, Barristan knows Ned well and clearly respects him, which implies that he does not think Ned responsible for Ashara's disgrace, either as perpetrator or by failure to assist.

Second, related to the first, I don't see why Barristan would call Ned just "Stark", instead of "Ned Stark" or similar. There is a disconnect there, for me at least, between the grim, bare, and almost formal, naming of "Stark" in his head and the respect and relationship he has with Ned from when they worked together during Ned's hand-ship. To me it reads like he is thinking of a different Stark, one he either barely knows or dislikes/blames for Ashara's dishonour.

Third, Ned is just the second son. The 'Stark' with power to help would be Rickard or Brandon as Lord and heir.

But although I think this is the most likely based on current information, it could easily be turned completely around in moments.

This is good analysis even though I draw a different conclusion. First, I don't think it is odd that Barristan would refer to Eddard as "Stark." This happens a lot. During Lady's trial, Cersei calls him Stark. In the "breast plate stretcher" meeting in Robert's tent at the Tourney of the Hand, Robert calls him Stark.

Also, Robert calls Aerys "Targaryen" and he calls Rhaegar "Rhaegar." This implies that the surname refers to the head of the house, and Brandon was never head of House Stark.

Add that Allyria Dayne claims that her sister was in love with Eddard and the total lack of evidence that there was anything between Brandon and Ashara and I think Barristan is talking about Lord Eddard Stark.

As far as the dishonoring goes, that is a common way to refer to consensual extra marital liaisons. Look at Jon Snow's discussion of Ygritte with Tormund. Jon says that sleeping with her without being married would dishonor her. Later, he thinks about how his father (Eddard) dishonored himself in his mother's bed. Then Barristan says Ashara was dishonored at Harrenhal. It all fits.

[FrozenFire3]

I've been seeing quite a bit of this on the forum lately, actually. Rather disheartening.

Especially when it clashes both with what officially stated by Martin/D&D and with narrative logic.

Only yesterday, during the Emmy panel, GRRM said D&D were tested with certain questions and their answers were right. D.B. Weiss specified that these questions revolved around Jon Snow's mother and their answer was shocking... Ergo a shocking answer is the right one. Now what's shocking about candidates (Ashara, Wylla, the fisherman daughter) who are plainly mentioned as such in the books?

Not to mention characterial analysis: why would Ned, who clearly loves Jon, deny him the gift of truth? Ned and Ashara were both already dishonoured in the public eye. The rumour was vox populi. Also Jon was tormented by the ignorance of his mother's identity. To the point of hypothesizing she was a prostitute, hence his father's shame to even name her. Isn't it terribly cruel and completely out of character for Ned to leave his son in the dark when a private word would soothe his inner turmoil?

There is only one logical reason for Ned to keep the secret: safety. For Jon and for his family.

Ok! So, in GoT, Arya goes searching for Rhaegar's rubies as they cross the Trident. Maybe foreshadowing that Arya will somehow be involved in finding the seventh (i.e, Jon)? I like the RRT (Rhaegar's Rubies Theory, lol).

I haven't been so challenged with textual symbolic interpretation since my reading of... Dante's Inferno. It's such a gift to be able to enjoy a book/storyline and at the same time to be challenged by a good allegorical 'treasure hunt.'

The rubies metaphor is powerful and reiterated throughout the books. I'll put my two cents in: Oriental legends believe that rubies contain the spark of life. Just to add fire to the flame (and the ruby LOL).

[dragontamer]

I have suggested here that Ashara and Eddard could very easily have met at Harrenhal at the right time. The textual evidence for this is abundant, starting with the fact that half the realm, including Eddard's wife¹ (who spent a lot of time obsessing about this) thinks the timing is possible and running through the fact that we know Eddard was in the Riverlands (near Harrenhal) at the relevant time and culminating with Barristan Selmy thinking that Ashara was dishonored at Harrenal (he says "at Harrenhal", not "at Harrenhal during the tournament")².

1. Catelyn had no idea who Jon’s mother was; she just heard a rumour and a name and asked Eddard about it. I don’t think she did the math or calculated any timeline to see if it fitted. It was just the only clue she had and used it. The same way Cersei must have heard a rumour, since obviously there was one, but by now the readers should know how unreliable Cersei is.

But I have a question for you. If the woman was Ashara and if the place was Harrenhal and Eddard had been there due to matters of war wouldn’t Robert know?

2. What makes you think that Barristan could possibly have any knowledge of an intimate relationship between an enemy commander and any woman?

Do you really believe that he had the means of knowing something like that, something that even Robert doesn’t know or any other person who was closer to Eddard during the war?

Ygrain said :

Given Lady Whent's low fortunes, I presumed that similarly as the Darrys (also Tully bannermen, also with a KG relative), they were on the losing side and lost their

While it’s likely that you are correct it’s equally likely that you are not. As I see it since we obviously don’t know if I had to bet on one or the other I would say that they sided with the rebels because when Catelyn remembers and names her father’s banneremen she mentioned the Whents separately from the ones that chose to fight against their lord during the rebellion.

Btw imo neither is of great importance, since I don’t believe that an Eddard=Ashara meeting at Harrenhal during the rebellion is textual supported despite which side the Whents were on.

Bear Island Bruiser said :

Just to point out that being a 'mummer's dragon' doesn't necessarily mean a fake dragon. Could just be that he's the dragon of the Mummer. For example Varys was a mummer at one point so saying it's his dragon just might mean Aegon is Varys' candidate and he still might be a dragon. Now black or red and how much of a dragon are questions that remains unanswered.

I wasn’t talking about Quaithe’s “mummer’s dragon” warning but about Moqorro’s ‘false and true dragons” vision. In the latter case, a Blackfyre, if indeed Aegon is one, isn’t a false/fake dragon.

[FittleLinger]

I want to say it's in The Kingbreaker? He just thinks that if he had won the tournament, he would've crowned Ashara and Rhaegar wouldn't have crowned Lyanna and set off the whole mess, in his mind, and that Ashara might have known that he loved and would have "turned" to him instead of Stark. The man who "dishonored" her is never used interchangeably with the "Stark," nor is the specific Stark ever identified. On the contrary, you could feasibly read it as Ashara "turning to Stark" as a result of the man who "dishonored" her, not that the Stark dishonored her. Like I said, if you read it, the people going on about "the Stark dishonoring her at Harrenhal" are misreading the shit out of it.

Thank you.

My thoughts exactly. I even lean towards someone dishonorong her, and she turning to someone she trusts or loves beforehand. "Turning" may or may not include sleeping with him (because someone could make a point that if she was raped she may not want to sleep with someone again for some time).

Also, the verb "turning" kind of leads me to thoughts of "turning for comfort", like you would turn to a friend to cry your grief on their shoulder.

I agree for what it's worth, but would add the following: assuming she was romantically involved with a Stark (lets say Brandon), their tryst would automatically be seen as a 'dishonor' by outsiders, even if it was consensual. We are getting this from Barristan's POV, and we know he had fallen hard for Ashara, so of course he'll see it in a negative light. I guess I'm just leaving the possibility that the 'dishonor' wasn't necessarily a violent encounter at the hands Aerys or Robert or whoever...

Sure, but the wording... I don't know, does someone "turn" to someone who has "dishonored" them? Not impossible, sure, but I don't know whether Barristan would have used the word "turn" if he was talking about the same person.

[dragontamer]

That was a point that I had made with Ran (Elio), that it might have been that she was dishonored, rather than for the man. We know that she gave birth before or at the same time as Aegon's birth, which is before Brandon's ride to King's Landing. Once Brandon is arrested it takes at least a fortnight to summon Rickard. If Brandon had dishonored Ashara, and she had had a stillborn daughter, and Barristan is correct about her motivation, why not commit suicide before the war? Hence, Barristan has some faulty logic in there. If Aegon is her child, and Ned (when he returns Dawn) tells her his condition not knowing (not in a gentle way), it stands to reason that she would definitely be gloomy afterwards.

ETA clarity

IIRC you have expressed this idea before and have made me wondering about it ever since. Can you please explain it further, how do we know this?

[ckal]

Imagine all the possiblities (this kind of sounds like a slogan for a company making vacuum cleaners, but):

The realm backs up supporting Jon.

The realm finds out but refutes Jon.

The realm is divided because Jon is both King of the North by Robb's will and Targaryen king per birth.

The North refutes Jon because of the Targ thing despite Robb's will.

What about Bran?

What about Rickon?

Jon finds out and decides to persue conciliator ambitions.

Jon finds out but ignores it because he has another destiny to fulfill.

The realm who believe in the Ghost of High Heart's prophecy (whose prophecies have been rock solid, she is like the opposite of Mel in the prophecy department) back up Jon in his fight for the greater good.

Jon really is the PTWP and needs to fight the Others and, say, some book says that, and Mel/Dany/Anyone recognizes it.

Jon does the deed without this being known and people back him up, recognizing the hero in him, and maybe even never know his true identity.

Jon maybe never knows his true identity, but nevertheless, it doesn't matter anymore.

The possibilities are countless, really.

And I just want to add Apple Martini's brilliant theory about the three heads of the dragon. Heads have been used instead of crowns before - and those heads belong to the same person - King of the North (Stark, through Robb), King of the Iron Throne (Targ), and LC of the Night's watch.

And that's not even touching the heretical theories about him being the new Night's king as per his Stark connection, and as per being, you know, dead right now.

All those are heavily R+L dependent.

Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. The realm WILL find out about Jon's parentage and any number of unforeseen or unexpected things could happen. But whatever that is, it will have a big impact on the story. GRRM did not craft this great mystery for nobody to find out about it aside from the reader.

[Alia of the knife]

Personally, I'm leaning towards "the Stark" that Ashara turned to being Lyanna. If the two of them became friends at Haranhall, it would go a long way towards explaining why Lyanna and Rhaegar ended up in Dorne of all places.

Edit: on a side note, autocorrect is stupid.

Agree with Ygrain, and great call.

If Ashara needed a shoulder to cry on, it would more likely be another woman given the time period Westeros is supposed to be set in is pseudo-Medieval, (I can't see neither Brandon or Ned as Dr. Phil types).

Also, it fits Lyanna.

If Lyanna helped Howland Reed, she may have helped Ashara.

It also solves a conflict of interest for Ashara since she would be caught between Rhaegar, her Brother and Elia. If Lyanna did something for her, or they became true friends, she would be in Lyannas debt as Howland was, and it gives Lyanna a woman who knew her, since it's been pointed out that there are no female companions of Lyanna who can speak for her.

If Ashara is stll alive and tending the boy that she believes is Elias son, but was able to help Ned find Lyanna, she can serve both women as best she can.

Barristan thinks maybe she would have looked to him instead because by naming her QoLaB she would have noticed that he honoured and respected her and was someone she could look to. Without that notice, he's not someone she can expect to support her, just a random older KG.

I think she looked to Stark because she was involved with a Stark and/or a Stark was involved in the dishonour. I can't see any other reason why she would look to a Stark. "Look to" implies she expected some sort of support, which implies she either had a close connectionsome sort of relationship with Stark or a Stark 'owed' her (was involved in her dishonour).

Just because it doesn't actually say that she was dishonoured by a Stark, and its a common misreading that it says so, does not rule out a Stark as the dishonourer.

Theres plenty still to learn, but the most likely scenario I can put together is that she had a thing with Brandon Stark (the whole Ned thing is clearly a red herring when you examine the evidence for it closely) and either they/she got caught at the end of the tourney and was dishonoured there, whereupon maybe she appealed to Brandon as being involved but he was already betrothed, or her dishonour was only evident 3-6 months later when her 'bump' started showing and she appealed to Rickard or Brandon but they could not or would not assist her.

I think "Stark" whom she looked to is not Ned for several reasons.

First, Barristan knows Ned well and clearly respects him, which implies that he does not think Ned responsible for Ashara's disgrace, either as perpetrator or by failure to assist.

Second, related to the first, I don't see why Barristan would call Ned just "Stark", instead of "Ned Stark" or similar. There is a disconnect there, for me at least, between the grim, bare, and almost formal, naming of "Stark" in his head and the respect and relationship he has with Ned from when they worked together during Ned's hand-ship. To me it reads like he is thinking of a different Stark, one he either barely knows or dislikes/blames for Ashara's dishonour.

Third, Ned is just the second son. The 'Stark' with power to help would be Rickard or Brandon as Lord and heir.

But although I think this is the most likely based on current information, it could easily be turned completely around in moments.

I also agree witht the logic of this analysis.

This is a different time, so it's not "That Seventies Show" where Ahsara, Ned and Brandon are hanging out in the basement of Harrenhal partying and Ashara is telling them about some player who dissed her.

She would need a very good logical, not emotional, reason to turn to Stark; something they could do, or provide for her, or to exact influence over.

Also agree it could have been Rikcard

[UVA]

I even lean towards someone dishonorong her, and she turning to someone she trusts or loves beforehand.

I think you're spot on about the use of "turning to" -- I've always thought that it implied that Ashara sought comfort from a Stark, which is at odds with the supposition that she was dishonored by a Stark, "dishonored" having a more negative connotation in this context.

But what do you mean turning to someone she loves beforehand? Before her rape/tryst? I'm obtuse this morning.

[Alia of the knife]

Especially when it clashes both with what officially stated by Martin/D&D and with narrative logic.

Only yesterday, during the Emmy panel, GRRM said D&D were tested with certain questions and their answers were right. D.B. Weiss specified that these questions revolved around Jon Snow's mother and their answer was shocking... Ergo a shocking answer is the right one. Now what's shocking about candidates (Ashara, Wylla, the fisherman daughter) who are plainly mentioned as such in the books?

Not to mention characterial analysis: why would Ned, who clearly loves Jon, deny him the gift of truth? Ned and Ashara were both already dishonoured in the public eye. The rumour was vox populi. Also Jon was tormented by the ignorance of his mother's identity. To the point of hypothesizing she was a prostitute, hence his father's shame to even name her. Isn't it terribly cruel and completely out of character for Ned to leave his son in the dark when a private word would soothe his inner turmoil?

There is only one logical reason for Ned to keep the secret: safety. For Jon and for his family.

I haven't been so challenged with textual symbolic interpretation since my reading of... Dante's Inferno. It's such a gift to be able to enjoy a book/storyline and at the same time to be challenged by a good allegorical 'treasure hunt.'

The rubies metaphor is powerful and reiterated throughout the books. I'll put my two cents in: Oriental legends believe that rubies contain the spark of life. Just to add fire to the fame (and the ruby LOL).

And add to that the mysticism behind the number

Seven.

[FittleLinger]

I think you're spot on about the use of "turning to" -- I've always thought that it implied that Ashara sought comfort from a Stark, which is at odds with the supposition that she was dishonored by a Stark, "dishonored" having a more negative connotation in this context.

But what do you mean turning to someone she loves beforehand? Before her rape/tryst? I'm obtuse this morning.

I meant that if she loved Brandon and someone else dishonored her, she maybe turned to Brandon. Same with Ned.

Some offered Lyanna, which to be honest sounds like a typical Martinism (the Stark to be actually a woman), but I am rather inclined to think Barristan is talking about men there, his whole line of thought is why he didn't get the girl...

[UVA]

Some offered Lyanna, which to be honest sounds like a typical Martinism (the Stark to be actually a woman), but I am rather inclined to think Barristan is talking about men there, his whole line of thought is why he didn't get the girl...

Yeah, I don't think so either. 'Turning to a Stark [male]' makes the most sense in this context. Barry implies that he 'lost out' to a Stark in a romantic, competitive sense.

[Maxpey]

Especially when it clashes both with what officially stated by Martin/D&D and with narrative logic.

Only yesterday, during the Emmy panel, GRRM said D&D were tested with certain questions and their answers were right. D.B. Weiss specified that these questions revolved around Jon Snow's mother and their answer was shocking... Ergo a shocking answer is the right one. Now what's shocking about candidates (Ashara, Wylla, the fisherman daughter) who are plainly mentioned as such in the books?

Not to mention characterial analysis: why would Ned, who clearly loves Jon, deny him the gift of truth? Ned and Ashara were both already dishonoured in the public eye. The rumour was vox populi. Also Jon was tormented by the ignorance of his mother's identity. To the point of hypothesizing she was a prostitute, hence his father's shame to even name her. Isn't it terribly cruel and completely out of character for Ned to leave his son in the dark when a private word would soothe his inner turmoil?

There is only one logical reason for Ned to keep the secret: safety. For Jon and for his family.

I haven't been so challenged with textual symbolic interpretation since my reading of... Dante's Inferno. It's such a gift to be able to enjoy a book/storyline and at the same time to be challenged by a good allegorical 'treasure hunt.'

The rubies metaphor is powerful and reiterated throughout the books. I'll put my two cents in: Oriental legends believe that rubies contain the spark of life. Just to add fire to the fame (and the ruby LOL).

It is quite extraordinary how varied people's textual interpretations are.

After having been gone from the Westeros site for the past 6 months, I am finding it a little difficult to keep up!

[Jon Icefyre]

This is good analysis even though I draw a different conclusion. First, I don't think it is odd that Barristan would refer to Eddard as "Stark." This happens a lot. During Lady's trial, Cersei calls him Stark. In the "breast plate stretcher" meeting in Robert's tent at the Tourney of the Hand, Robert calls him Stark.

Also, Robert calls Aerys "Targaryen" and he calls Rhaegar "Rhaegar." This implies that the surname refers to the head of the house, and Brandon was never head of House Stark.

Add that Allyria Dayne claims that her sister was in love with Eddard and the total lack of evidence that there was anything between Brandon and Ashara and I think Barristan is talking about Lord Eddard Stark.

As far as the dishonoring goes, that is a common way to refer to consensual extra marital liaisons. Look at Jon Snow's discussion of Ygritte with Tormund. Jon says that sleeping with her without being married would dishonor her. Later, he thinks about how his father (Eddard) dishonored himself in his mother's bed. Then Barristan says Ashara was dishonored at Harrenhal. It all fits.

Yes but there's a huge hole/problem with this claim, in the same chapter where Edric tells Arya that Ashara and Ned were in love he also tells her that Wylla his wetnurse that was in service to House Dayne is Jon Snows mother so how does that make sense? Ned was in love with Ashara but he also slept with one of her servants? And if you honestly think Wylla was used as a cover story to hide the truth about Ashara Dayne being Jon's mother then let me ask you this, why would Ned need to hide the identity of Jon's mother to the degree that he does if his mother was indeed Ashara Dayne? What danger is there in Ashara being Jon's mother? Also why would Ned feel the need to take Jon away from her, she was a highborn lady it could be argued that perhaps Jon might have even had a better life raised by Ashara in Starfall away from Cat's resentment and the constant reminder that he was beneath his other trueborn brothers and sisters, not to mention we already know Dorne seems to be more accepting of bastards than the rest of Westeros. Regardless of the type of man ppl may think Ned was I don't think he can ever be described as being cruel so If Ashara was truly Jon's mother and Ned really loved her, there's just no way in my opinion that Ned would have taken Jon away from her especially when you consider he was already married to Cat who was with child or had just given birth at the time Ned would have taken Jon from Starfall.

[Zupoleon]

Yes but there's a huge hole/problem with this claim, in the same chapter where Edric tell Arya that Ashara and Ned were in love he also tells her that Wylla his wetnurse that was in service to House Dayne is Jon Snows mother so how does that make sense? Ned was in love with Ashara but he also slept with one of her servants? And if you honestly think Wylla was used as a cover story to hide the truth about Ashara Dayne being Jon's mother then let me ask you this, why would Ned need to hide the identity of Jon's mother to the degree that he does if his mother was indeed Ashara Dayne? What danger is there in Ashara being Jon's mother? Also why would Ned feel the need to take Jon away from her, she was a highborn lady it could be argued that perhaps Jon might have even had a better life raised by Ashara in Starfall away from Cat's resentment and the constant reminder that he was beneath his other trueborn brothers and sisters, not to mention we already know Dorne seems to be more accepting of bastards than the rest of Westeros. Regardless of the type of man ppl may think Ned was I don't think he can ever be described as being cruel so If Ashara was truly Jon's mother and Ned really loved her, there's just no way in my opinion that Ned would have taken Jon away from her especially when you consider he was already married to Cat who was with child or had just given birth at the time Ned would have taken Jon from Starfall.

Not to mention that there would be no reason under the sun as to why Ned would have to hide the identity of Jon's mother to Cat if that were the case...

[Maxpey]

Yes but there's a huge hole/problem with this claim, in the same chapter where Edric tell Arya that Ashara and Ned were in love he also tells her that Wylla his wetnurse that was in service to House Dayne is Jon Snows mother so how does that make sense? Ned was in love with Ashara but he also slept with one of her servants? And if you honestly think Wylla was used as a cover story to hide the truth about Ashara Dayne being Jon's mother then let me ask you this, why would Ned need to hide the identity of Jon's mother to the degree that he does if his mother was indeed Ashara Dayne? What danger is there in Ashara being Jon's mother? Also why would Ned feel the need to take Jon away from her, she was a highborn lady it could be argued that perhaps Jon might have even had a better life raised by Ashara in Starfall away from Cat's resentment and the constant reminder that he was beneath his other trueborn brothers and sisters, not to mention we already know Dorne seems to be more accepting of bastards than the rest of Westeros. Regardless of the type of man ppl may think Ned was I don't think he can ever be described as being cruel so If Ashara was truly Jon's mother and Ned really loved her, there's just no way in my opinion that Ned would have taken Jon away from her especially when you consider he was already married to Cat who was with child or had just given birth at the time Ned would have taken Jon from Starfall.

It's been a while since I read the passage you are referring to, but I seem to recall that Edric told Arya that Wylla was Jon's wetnurse, not his mother.