Jump to content

corbon

Members
  • Content count

    4,436
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About corbon

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,115 profile views
  1. Please provide evidence, not just a story you like. The problem is, your story doesn't match much of what we read. You need to provide the textual quotes (or GRRM quotes - those are harder to find) that provide evidence for each part of your story. https://asearchoficeandfire.com/ is a great resource that allows you to find quotes and cut and paste them here as needed. When someone disagrees with you, answer their points with reasons, and textual support. Don't just state what you think again and again, ignoring the points others have to make, or the questions they ask. The point of being here is to engage with others, learn things, discuss them, hear ideas of others you might not have thought of and give people a chance to assess your ideas. You only seem to repeat your ideas without actually defending them in any way. Why would anyone bother to engage with you if you won't engage with them? What you think is true is not an argument for it being true. Show why you think its true. Please.
  2. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    Just to add to this part. It could be that if one did exactly this, some (Allyria), many, or all would turn to Wylla. Who may then look at them in puzzlement and say "I was his wetnurse, not his mother'. Or just go to the gates. But both of those entirely possible within what we know, though only one of those fits with the awkward questions and is actually consistent with both our raw data and the observed behavioural patterns.
  3. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    I disagree. I think you are (unusually) blinding yourself with your conviction. The evidence does not in any way say or suggest that the source is Wylla. It only states that Wylla is the mother. No reason that that is likely. Its certainly not necessary and its certainly in now way indicated by Edric. No reason that this is unlikely. It also need not be a single source. "Known" information is often from many seemingly independent sources. Its evidence Wylla is the mother, yes. It is not evidence that Wylla is the source of this information. The source is not spoken to at all - or is Allyria in the case of Ashara stuff (which means she should be the default source for the Wylla stuff too). I agree completely. It does no such thing. The only things Ned's conversation with Robert reveals is that some time in the past Ned revealed the name Wylla to Robert when Robert asked him who a certain woman was, and that Robert believes that woman to be Jon Snow's mother. All else is entirely supposition. It may be that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, Wylla may come to the gate. But that is not in any way indicated by Robert's conversation with Ned. No one suggests that any other name is being said. And you will note, that Ned did not claim the second time that Wylla was Jon's mum. He merely answered Robert's question, which was "what was her name, that common girl of yours?" Robert then made a statement that she was Jon Snow's mum, but Ned did not respond to the statement, only answered the question. "Her name was Wylla". So its not 'very likely' that time, its literally untrue that time. Ned gave the name as 'the woman Robert was thinking of', not as 'Jon's mother'. And if its not even true the second time, its not at all 'very likely' the first time. Some points. 1. Ned never volunteers any information about Jon's origins to anyone that we see. The most is his answer to Robert, giving Wylla's name, which is reluctant, abrupt, and answers the question Robert answered precisely. True or not? 2. Ned, aggressively and successfully shuts down any conversations about Jon's origins, any origins, both with Catelyn and with Robert (which is every time we here anybody really try it on with him - Cersei's scatttergun accusations are more or less ignored immediately). True or not? 3. There are origin stories (rumours or theories if you will) for Jon at Winterfell, The Sisters, King Bob, Starfall, Winterfell and less clear, Casterly Rock (Cersei). All have different variations (if you accept that Robert's theory is different from Starfalls as he clearly sees Wylla as the special woman that made Ned put aside his honour for a moment whereas Starfall's sees Ashara as the special woman and Wylla... somehow on the side.) True or not? Some related questions. i) If Ned is willing to tell King Bob a story once, why does she shut down the conversation with Bob so aggressively when we see it? Why is he so clearly opposed to telling the same story again? ii) If Ned is willing to tell a story to King Bob, why is he not willing to tell the same story to Catelyn? Or to anyone else interested? iii) If Ned actually has a story, or wants varied stories out there to confuse the issue, why does he shut down any such conversation, and in fact root out and stop any whispering on the subject? Why not encourage one or more, or all, of the rumours? Even, especially, while giving the appearance of trying to shut them down. But no, he's actually very efficient at shutting them down. iv) If Ned and Wylla are both telling the same story, Ned's planned story, why are the stories from Robert and Starfall different? Why does Robert think Wylla is the one who was special to Ned and not bring up Ashara? As far as I've seen so far, your beliefs seem to be unable to provide reasonable answers to any of these questions. On the other hand, mine does. My belief is that, consistent with what we see, Ned never tells anyone anything voluntarily about Jon's origins and always shuts down those conversations as fast as possible. That covers i, ii and iii and matches exactly to 1, 2 while explaining 3 - there is no story from Ned so people everywhere make their own judgements based on the information available to them. So why are the stories different? I think Ned arrived at Starfall with Wylla and Jon in tow - having come from the ToJ, he would have needed a wetnurse immediately, either already at ToJ or as immediately as possible. So the Starfall people, and anyone who has direct reports of Ned's appearance there (King Bob), know that Ashara was not the mum, and lacking anyone else, assume Wylla is the mum. Everyone else hears about Ashara suiciding when Ned leaves Starfall with a bastard, and assume Ashara is the mum, except the Sisters area, who probably didn't even hear about Ashara and basically make up a local origin story as Ned passed through their area in roughly (very roughly, we know not actually right, but they don't) the right time frame. I posit that when Ned and Robert reconciled, Robert had had reports (from Varys?) about Ned's arrival at Starfall with a peasant woman and a bastard. He pressed Ned for information and in much the same way that we saw in the later conversation, Ned gave him Wylla's name without actually stating she was Jon's mother, while avoiding telling Robert anything of substance. In a similar way, he told Robert the absolute minimum necessary about Lyanna - likely that she died of a fever, in his arms. Or something similar. This fits precisely with the patterns we see later, exactly matches all the textual details we have, and answers all of the awkward questions cleanly. Your beliefs change the patterns we see from Ned, include/assume information we are not actually given in the text, and fail the awkward questions. Well, its not a 'secret'. But its also just a 'known' belief, unquestioned, unthought about even. That doesn't indicate that Wylla has ever been directly asked by young Ned. Well, I'm of the current opinion that Ashara did indeed take Aegon (who she believes to be real, but may have been mislead) to Essos. I don't think its part of a grand plan including Jon though, I think its two independent things that touched briefly in timing. Ashara was Elia's handmaid and friend, and Aegon would be the actual heir, so she'd be all about him. Jon would be the spare, maybe a bastard in her eyes, maybe of no interest to her as he was not Elia's, and possibly the result of a kind of betrayal of Elia by Rhaegar. And yes, her suicide is the cover story, or her. I think its a fortunate coincidence for both of them (Ned and Ashara) that the timing kind of worked to mix the two situations together and make both seem more reasonable. We can't really tell. I suspect that it was pretty much a case of 'all is lost, save his life' by the time Ned is by her deathbed, rather than 'this is the plan for his future'. Did Ned actually claim to be his father? Or just bring him back to Winterfell and treat him as his son? Catelyn's words could very easily by a general description of Ned's actions rather than a specific quote of his words, and everything else is assumption. We never actually see Ned say (or think) that Jon is his son.
  4. We aren't talking about a precise diagnosis, or even any diagnosis at all. We are pointing out how utterly unjustified, even contrarian to the limited evidence we have, this statement is.
  5. Yeah. But you know, that stuff is all perfectly reasonable. We can tell from it that he'd be a good, kind, if ineffectual, king. /s
  6. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    Just a reminder that there is no evidence that Wylla says she is Jon's mother. Or in fact says anything at all on the topic of Jon. I agree. There are many factors at play here, or potentially at play at least. Are you sure she knows the truth of Jon? She could easily be a local wetnurse hired by Ned after the ToJ. Frankly, I suspect she does, that she was at the ToJ before Ned arrived - you don't wait until after the birth to start looking for a wetnurse (the baby is going to be hungry within hours, if not immediately) and its likely the ToJ crew would have one prepared if the birth was imminent. Is she? Or is that just the rumour spoken behind her back in Starfall? The assumption they made when Ned arrived with her and Jon in tow? I think too many people assume a lot that we don;t know and isn't actually indicated in the text. Its possible, yes, but there is nothing that actually indicates Wylla's position or statements on anything. Its highly possible Ned just used her, a local girl from near the ToJ area, as Jon's wetnurse. In return, he made sure she had lifelong employment and a place. Its unlikely Winterfell was a good place for her (she's a foreigner used to a warmer climate plus hostility from Cat and the rest of the household following her lead no doubt), so Ned arranged a place for her at Starfall - the Daynes owe him plenty. Its even possible, as some suggest, that she stayed in Starfall and never went to Winterfell, though I can see nothing to indicate that and see no logic in the arguments they make. I'm not so sure about that, even assuming she was Ned's discarded lover, which I think very unlikely. She's basically got a relatively cushy castle life forever - thats a much bigger plus than some history with a nobleman from 3000 miles away who she'll never see again is a minus. Or she doesn't actually have anything to hide. This is possible too, especially if she was already at ToJ when Ned came. No reason the Daynes would know the depths behind Rhaegar's planning. And why would some random dornish peasant have any loyalty to Lyanna. Most likely Wylla has no huge secret. Or if she does, its the secret of Rhaegar and Lyanna at the ToJ, not her personal secret. And Loyalty to Rhaegar, or the Daynes, who are loyal to Rhaegar, is much more reasonable than loyalty to Lyanna. No, thats not a logical necessity.
  7. Or the 'waking the dragon' moments and threats.
  8. I think its possible and reasonable to extract out from Barristan's comments about him as a child, and the way he treated Dany, that there is a significant chance we would have been as cruel and nasty as Aerys. We can't know for sure, but its a lot more reasonable than outright stating that he wouldn't have been cruel, when that can't be known and the clues in the text certainly indicate he had that potential. In spades.
  9. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    Why would Ned carry a stinking, decomposing body across the mountains? Soldiers die in war. It is not expected to return all their remains home to their families when they die in battle. The only times we see remains being returned to families are those of noncombatants, hostages or prisoners - ie not killed through combat - and almost always as part of a negotiation or a gesture of attempted reconciliation. The one exception is Lewyn Martell, who died in battle. Jon Arryn returned his remains to Dorne - when he went there to negotiate the Dornish acceptance of King Robert's reign. Who really cares how he died though? The supposed killer is honourably returning the sword, when he has no need to do so. Isn't that enough of a clue? (see about 2/3 of the way down) Have a think about how important Dawn must be for the Daynes...
  10. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    Evidently? There's no indication she's heard that tale. Only that Lord Dustin died in the Red mountains of Dorne and was laid to rest there. No indication of any more detail than that. I agree entirely. But you are assuming information she makes not indication of having. And ignoring other information that relates to her anger. She knows Dustin died honourably somewhere in the red mountains of Dorne. She knows that he is laid to rest there. She knows that Ned bought Lyanna's bones back (and the Red Stallion). She does not display any knowledge that Dustin died in the same place as Lyanna. She also indicates that her father would have given her maidenhood to any Stark, but that Brandon wanted it and took it. Not that she offered it, but that Brandon took it - though it was a "sweet pain" afterward. She's bitter that she lost Brandon, and then Ned, and ended up with a mere Dustin. The lost him too, to the war. There's not even any clear indication that she's bitter in particular about Lyanna's bones being returned and not her husbands. Its merely mentioned (Lyanna's, not her husband's). It may be an additional point of bitterness or just an extra fact. She doesn't indicate any bitterness about Lord Dustin's bones not being returned, only anger at Ned and the Starks, who in effect took everything away from her. Any even that may be feigned, for all we know. She's talking to Reek/Theon at the time, after all, who she may well expect to report her words back to Ramsey Bolton. What we have in the text is suspect for a start, due to context, and a very long way from clearly indicating that she expects Lord Dustin's bones to have been returned. It puzzles me how people can extrapolate out from anything in the text anywhere about returning the bones of the dead that Ned "should have" returned the bones of any who fell at the ToJ, never mind the circumstances and resources available to him at the time. I'm a little curious about how you figure this. I don't see how anything he said could be construed this way? Lame imaginary dialogue that doesn't fit the paradigm is irrelevant. There is no problem! No one single character ever complains about the bones of the dead at the ToJ not being returned. Or other bones of fallen warriors during wartime. Not even Lady Dustin, who makes clear her complaint is about her earlier history with the Starks then references Lyanna's bones being returned without indicating Dustin's should have been, A few times it is noted that returning the bones of the dead to their families, in certain circumstances is a courtesy. It is not required, and not expected. Only one of those circumstances match to honourable battle - Jon Arryn returning Lewyn Martell's bones to Dorne, because he wanted to seal the new King's peace and do the diplomacy thing with Doran (much like the Freys wanted to do the diplomacy thing with Lord Manderly, despite having murdered his son). Lyanna though, like Wendel Manderley, or Lady, or even Eddard Stark, was a noncombatant, hostage or prisoner.
  11. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    Not the dream itself, the description of the dream, by the dreamer, who knows everything that is in it and what it is about. Lyanna was not only his sister, but a non-combatant. Men go off to war all the time, and accept that there will often be no way to have their bones returned. Non-combatants and not-in-times-of-war, its a different story and there are expectations. I wouldn't trust Lady Dustin's reasons. She was already pissed at the Starks after Brandon took her maidenhood and she didn't get her prize, or even the second prize (or third, if you count Benjen). We don't hear how the Wulls, Glovers, Ryswells etc are pissed at the Starks for not returning those bones. I don't think there is any real expectation that warriors at war will all get their bones returned. I don't think Lady Dustin is reasonable or representative here. I don't think it did create conflict, only bitterness in one already bitter woman. I don't think it was 'foreseeable' that it would create conflict. The "only"? I should think the mere fact that Ned knew that Lyanna was not enamored of Robert, and maybe knew or suspected that she was with Rhaegar voluntarily, might be enough, regardless of any child existing or no. There's a distinct chance Lyanna might have refused to marry Robert, period. In which case Ned will need to make other arrangements and keep them from Robert I don't know.. If its a watchtower from the times when Dorne was at war with the other kingdoms (its old) then chances are high its not on the pass/road proper but on a high place overlooking the pass. Unless armies travelling through are expecting trouble as they pass through, an abandoned (and familiarly so) tower thats awkward to get to is not likely to garner much attention. Even more so for common travellers. Sometimes hiding in plain sight is quite effective. An isolated old tower that no one bothers with, in the middle of a reasonably well used pass that people can come and go from relatively freely without questions. Seems like a pretty good choice to me, combining secrecy and security with freedom of access. Well, first note that its not 'a desert pass'. One end, the southern or 'desert' end is at Skyreach, known for its high perch and lofty towers. the other end is Nightsong, in the Dornish marches. From Skyreach the approach to the pass descends to the desert. On either side of Starfall (though there may be other locations between them) are Skyreach and Kingsgrave, two significant seats. House Fowler of Skyreach has led invasions of the Reach when they were kings and Skyreach is near a major river that flows to Yronwood. The point is here that your characterisation of the Prince's Pass as a 'desert pass' which implies hostile desert environment and more or less deserted region, is clearly misleading. There are a number of major seats at either end and inside the pass, and no doubt lesser seats between them. Its also a relatively significant trade route, being the easiest way to travel between Dorne and the Reach. Although I suspect most 'support' in the form of servants and staff, may have come through Starfall, there's no reason such would not be available relatively locally. Keeping her in such a public and well populated location is a major risk. Pretty much everyone on both/all sides would be interested to learn her location. Not Ned's dream. Ned's description of his dream. Its not the dream contents that place Lyanna there, its the fact that Ned's mind tells us, not inside the dream where dream-mode might be argued, but outside the dream, that this dream is all about Lyanna and her bed of blood. Starfall is on the coast, on an island at the mouth of a major river. Its general geographic region is the mountains of Dorne, but its not actually in the mountains. I don't think we have enough information to judge "it seems unlikely". Thats already covered. No additional reason is needed.
  12. corbon

    R+L=J v.166

    That analysis was a serious case of overthinking. If Lyanna was laid to rest on a hill somewhere, under a fruit tree etc etc, she'd still be buried in a grave or tomb or similar, with a likeness or headstone, just outdoors instead. Its still literally going to be the stone washed clean, not the real her - her bones are not going to be left exposed. Its very clear that Robert is referring to the stone being washed clean, since thats the only thing the rain would actually literally touch. He's also talking about her beauty and the dullness of the location as context, not her 'spiritual taint'. He also knows underneath, although he won't consciously acknowledge it because that breaks his comfort fantasy, that Lyanna was not 'tainted' by Rhaegar but chose him. This is evidenced by his comment that "He (Rhaegar) has her now" meaning Rhaegar and Lyanna are united in death, while Robert is stuck with Cersei. You don't express victims being united with their abusers in death, you express lovers reunited in death. Robert knows, even if subconsciously, that he lies to himself about Lyanna, he just refuses to acknowledge it. Robert's profound emotional investment is in his fantasy.
  13. corbon

    Poll: Is Jon Snow the son of a Dayne?

    What makes it clear though? And if he's already told Robert a story once, why is he so reticent later? Clear that Robert has never met her, sure. But why clear that Ned told Robert 'Wylla is Jon's mum" as opposed to Robert guessing that the wetnurse is the mum and asking her name (or the name of the woman with his son, for example), and Ned not telling him she wasn't. Why does Ned change tack, being willing to talk about it to Robert before, and not later? Why do you assume Robert learned the name from Ned telling him the whole story before, rather than Robert heard the story first from other sources and the name later from Ned? Actually, the woman doesn't claim to be Jon's mother (that we know of). The young Daynes just 'know' it to be true. They didn't say she ever said so. they 'know' it the same way they 'know' that Ashara and Ned were in love while Ned bonked Wylla. Its obviously more than coincidence that the story the Dayne's believe matches the story Robert believes. But there's nothing that tells us that it originates from either Ned or Wylla, except that Ned has told Robert Wylla's name at some time. Since neither Ned nor Wulla are shown to talk about it, I think it emerges from eth circumstances of Ned's visit to Starfall. Starfall residents, and Robert due to reports, have more information - that Ned arrived in Starfall with baby and 'wetnurse' already. Others have slightly less information - that Ned left Starfall with a bastard, and Ashara killed herself. Except that Ned explicitly and clearly quite thoroughly shuts down whispers about Ashara being Jon's mother. And don't tell me that Ned is subtle enough to promote a rumour by doing a poor job of shutting it down. Never mind that thats about as un-Ned as you could imagine, its also flat wrong. He did such a good job of shutting it down that Catelyn never heard the name Ashara at Winterfell again! While I don't think Ned is 'stupid' as many do, I also don't see him as that subtle. And I cannot accept as reasonable an idea that promotes the exact opposite of what we get clearly from the text - that Ned wants rumours about Ashara to spread even though he gets icy-angry when he hears of them and does a superb job of shutting them down where he can. There's no evidence that Ned or Wylla ever 'told' any story beyond Ned telling Ned Wylla's name at some time for some reason, and plenty of evidence that Ned in particular, did not, in his reactions and responses whenever anyone brings up either story. I submit that everything we have is entirely consistent with no story at all from Ned. And I submit that Ned telling any story at all to anyone, even Robert creates inconsistencies with what we have. Where am I wrong here?
  14. corbon

    Poll: Is Jon Snow the son of a Dayne?

    Why is it inconceivable? You can see the easy and natural assumptions everywhere. Ned arrives at Starfall with a baby and a wetnurse. Starfall assumes the baby is Ned's by the wetnurse, since Ned's clearly treating it as his own (blood), there's no other mother option around and its a convenient arrangement for all concerned. Harrenhal and others guess Ashara, since she supposedly suicides when Ned left Starfall with the baby - plus perhaps old knowledge of her being disgraced from court before with a Stark (must have been Ned, obviously!) involved. The Sisters' rumour is clearly a localisation thing, nothing to do with Ned really. And then all those assumptions, which include Ned being the father, are backed up by Ned acting as the father, even if he doesn't say so directly. Raising Jon in his household, part of his family. While I can even see Robert making the assumption on his own, and jocularly pushing Ned with it (and getting a similar stone faced one-word responses response from Ned back then), I think its more likely that Robert was informed (by Varus most likely) about Ned's visit to Starfall including that he arrived with a baby and wetnurse, no mother in sight. What really puzzles me though, if you assume that Ned actually told people a story, is why the story is different in different places, and why Ned doesn't continue to tell the story when he is pressed later. What we see is Ned clamming up whenever the subject is present, and people making their own assumptions. I don't understand what basis anyone can have for assuming it was different before, and Ned only clams up nowadays? Does she? Or is that another assumption? He didn't tell her when she confronted him that Jon was his "son" only his "blood". Note how even Catelyn puts quotation marks around "son" in that phrase. It seems to me that she's telling us the generic story, about Ned raising Jon, and having others treat Jon, as part of his immediate family, his blood, even if a bastard, and the widely held assumption that Jon was his bastard, rather than Ned's actual literal words. Why? Why has Ned changed his approach? Why, if he can tell a story to Robert, can he not tell the same story to anyone else? Why are the stories different, rather than based n Ned's own story? Nice touch. Indeed we will. I'll just point out again, because everyone seems to ignore this, or forget... Ned returned Dawn to the Daynes, when he had every right to keep it. He even went out of his way, hundreds of miles, at a time when he had far more important things to do - return home and take up Winterfell after more than a year's absence, gather his new bride and unseen son, report to his friend the King, etc etc, and he delayed all those things, apparently just to restore Dawn to the Daynes. Consider how integral that sword is to that house. To their honour, their history, their sigil, their fame, their uniqueness, their pride. And he went out of his way to return all that to them when he had no need to do so and many reasons not to. Cna you imagine the broken-ness of House Dayne without Dawn? You think thats not worthy of more respect and honour returned than anything we can imagine? I think their benevolent attitude is already very well explained, whatever his relationship or lack of such with Ashara.
×