Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About corbon

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

6,086 profile views
  1. Sure thing. We all have different times. Its not the middle of the day here. No, it isn't. As I very carefully and thoroughly broke down for you., its told by Robert. Ned did not, in any way, say or agree that Wylla was Jon's mother.
  2. And I think you are being weirdly irrational. You yourself explain that Ned 'tore down' the tower, but at the same time insist it was already down and he basically just grabbed a few broken rocks for cairns. Destroying a few remnant 4-5 ft high walls from and already destroyed 'tower' isn't 'tearing it down'. A straw man Dornish construction crew is getting carried away, I agree. Ned and a crowbar/lever up top while Howland leads half a dozen horsed roped to some key stones is easily enough to bring down most of those towers.
  3. Sure. And that makes sense for Cersei - she was supposed to marry Rhaegar and become queen, she thought. You said she hardly appears outside Bk1, but its more than just Cersei. You don't have to keep replying. But you challenged others to consider yours and their theories, to examine the evidence. I have. Many times. And written about some of it for you and others. I'm challenging you to do the same. Back up your assertions with some analysis. Answer the questions that arise. Explain why the N+W=J is so 'compelling' for you and the evidence for R+L=J is so 'little' and 'worthless'. Answer the hard questions about what fits and what doesn't, how motivations and character actions work and don't work. Persuade us of your truth, rather than just demanding we accept your beliefs as true.
  4. Its not a just single person. Ned has Howland Reed, maybe a few servants etc, and at least 10 horses.
  5. Ok. And the rest of the questions? It seems to be a well established narrative across the board in Westeros that Rhaegar loved her and stole her. Barristan, Dany and Kevan Lannister all reference it. You don't think she's the KotLT? (and if not, why put her in that story at all - as Meera said the Prince naming the wolf maid the QoLaB is a different, sadder story. Why didn't GRRM just have Ned being the one to support Howland in driving off the three squires?). Why does she appear to be in Theon's dream? Why does GRRM expend the effort to tell us about her horsemanship?
  6. If it makes you feel better you can recall that she cuckolded Robert on the very morning of their wedding.
  7. That was a funny one. So what is the evidence for Wylla then? 1. Robert believes it (though he never met Wylla himself) 2. Edric Dayne believes it (though he was born years after it all happened) ... Do you have anything else? Ned didn't deny it, or any other theory. He just refused to address it, same as other theories. Have you examined these pieces of evidence yourself? What were your conclusions about these pieces of evidence? I've given you a breakdown of Robert and Ned's conversation here already that clearly shows that nothing Ned said in that conversation indicated Wylla was Jon's mother. I've written more detailed explanations about Edric before, but here I explain how Edric's evidence makes no sense in itself, but actually fits well with Robert's different belief and R+L=J. There is more in other places about Allyria - essentially the evidence suggests she is not much older than Edric and probably also speaking hearsay only, rather than things she actually witnessed or knew from first hand experience. So what makes N+W=J so compelling? Why does Ned refuse to say anything, shut down conversations with Cat and Robert, under N+W=J? Why does Ned never tell Jon about Wylla under N+A=J? Why is there so much Lyanna-focused imagery appearing throughout the books if N+W=J? Lyanna now has no relevance to the wider story other than as a footnote to the start of Robert's rebellion 15 years before the books. What is the relevance of the blue rose growing in a wall of ice to Dany, under N+W=J? Why are the Undying Ones showing her that? What promises did Ned make to the dying Lyanna under N+W=J that cost him dearly or he broke?
  8. Oh, so do I. Big time. I think its obviously rubbish - to us. We know Ned isn't and wasn't, the 'fool around' type, yet Ned was in love with Ashara whilst tumbling Wylla? Its obviously wrong. But people who don't know Ned personally, such as Starfallians, especially children, don't understand that. I'm not suggesting that no one at Starfall knows the truth - very senior members of the house back then may well have been in on it. Just that the wider Starfallian populace, and especially the children, only know what has been widely 'seen' or publicly told. But it does tie in with what Robert thinks - not exactly, Robert think's Wylla was Ned's 'one time', Ashara's not even in the picture. And there must be a reason it ties in. So how does Robert think that? Some people argue that Ned told Robert the whole story way back, because Robert says Ned told him Wylla's name once before. But IMO thats inconsistent with what GRRM shows us. Ned gets angry and stiff every time Jon's parentage comes up, even with Robert, and shuts down the conversations as hard as he can with minimal to no information from his side. Thats not consistent with him 'telling all' to Robert in the past. If Ned has a 'story' he told Robert, then he should be willing to tell that story again, not just to Robert, but to Cat and anyone who asks. That story is his cover for R+L=J. He should be encouraging that rumour, not shutting down all the gossip at Winterfell. Winterfellians should all know Wylla was Jon's mother, but there is no mention of her from anyone at Winterfell at all. To me, the only way I can think of, or have heard from anyone else, that this all fits together is if Ned didn't tell Robert about Wylla*, but Robert found out about her from another source - which is very likely to be a report on Ned's visit to Starfall, where it appears Wylla is the accepted mother. Remember that newly crowned King Robert has kept Varys the Spider as his Master of Whispers despite Varys being Aerys' man. And Varys is in an uncertain position needing to prove his value to his new master. Do you think King Robert, after having had a huge fight with his best friend who then immediately left the capital for Storms End and then disappears with a small band of friends, doesn't want to hear anything he can about what Ned is up to? Of course, the 'loved Ashara while boning Wylla' part is silly romantic children's nonsense by Allyria that both we and Robert can tell is clearly untrue due to our personal knowledge of Ned, so whether that was in the report or not, Robert is going to ignore it. *no, I am of course not denying that Ned did tell Robert Wylla's name. I'm positing that, consistent with the conversation we saw (and from a Vary report most likely), Robert went into the earlier conversation with Ned with preconceived ideas, and Ned said as little as possible but did tell Robert that the name of the 'wetnurse' (the unofficial 'cover' for the bastard's mother in Robert's head - thats an old game dating as far back in part as Moses)was Wylla. In fact, I think the mostly likely scenario that resolves all these different views, including the 'they' at TOJ and the 'starving baby' problem, is that Wylla was selected by Arthur Dayne as a safe and reliable wetnurse for Lyanna's child and was already at ToJ when Ned arrived. Thus when Ned arrives at Starfall, Wylla is with him and nursing Jon. Jon is treated as Ned's blood/son at Starfall, so Starfallians, many of whom would have seen Ned and Wylla and Jon arrive together, believe Wylla is Jon's mother, absent any better option presenting itself. Varys supplies Robert a report from Starfall that says Ned arrived with Wylla and Jon, possibly including Starfallian rumours about Jon's parentage. Thus, everything is consistent with what we see. Cat doesn't see any such report of course so all she hears about is the suicide of the beautiful noble maiden (who may have already had a rumoured Stark connection to her disgrace at/after Harrenhal) coinciding with Ned bringing home a bastard, and thus her belief. Similar for Cersei who hears various bits and pieces and rumours. No doubt I'm not correct in every detail here. But there has been no other explanation that is consistent with Ned's behaviour, Edric's beliefs, Cat's beliefs and Robert's beliefs.
  9. Perhaps, at least partially. Given its location in the midst of a pass known (in the past) for border raids and military clashes, and its apparent lack as a 'population centre' as most 'castles' are. I think its a fairly high probability it was an abandoned watchtower. That would also make a great hiding place for the KG and anyone with them - a good view (as a watchtower), likely on a local high point overlooking the general roads, and accessible to the main pass but not right 'there' for anyone to spot people there as they travelled through. Thats the dream 'title', not a description within the dream. And the "tower long fallen' can equally (as in without other evidence) be a tower long fallen 'then' or a tower long fallen 'now, 15 years later'. The problem is the actual dream has it as a 'round tower' with no mention of it being fallen or badly damaged, at least at ground level. If your supposition is true, then it would make more sense for the word 'round' to be replaced by the word 'fallen' (or something similar), And its this that pushes the 'tower long fallen' very strongly IMO to a 'now, not then' type description. The tower needs to be 'round' when Ned arrives, 'up' enough for him to tear it down, and 'down' enough for it to be 'long fallen' 15 years later. So long as it satisfies all those things, and is not so strong that a handful of men with 10 or so horses couldn't do significant enough damage within a day or so to make it 'fallen', then it works for me. this is actually the clearest cleanest in-lie sequence from the dream. I think any argument that claims this part is not related to 'an actual memory', but entirely 'feverish imaginings' or whatever someone wants to call it, deserves short shrift. I can see something like this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Italian_Coast_Scene_with_Ruined_Tower-1838-Thomas_Cole.jpg (literally the first image google found under ruined tower') as being workable. An old tower, abandoned, perhaps partially crumbling, but easily turned into something quite habitable for a small group in hiding for a period. And equally, I think it wouldn't necessarily take much time and effort to pull down enough of it to count it as 'fallen' thereafter. It depends how much time and effort is required. I don't believe thats enough to satisfy the description. https://hirstarts.com/ruin/ruin.html for example - I think thats quite a bit more than Bran's tumbledown tower , and still not quite enough for ToJ tower, though maybe at an extreme stretch... A couple more 'suitable' (excluding squareness!) examples, IMO: https://www.stockfreeimages.com/24218483/Ruined-tower.html https://www.alamy.com/medieval-stone-tower-old-abandoned-crumbling-2-wood-doors-low-stone-wall-viviers-france-summer-vertical-image343199711.html And IMO 'not suitable': https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ruined_Tower_-_geograph.org.uk_-_32550.jpg (not enough 'shelter value IMO) (hey, did this one come through as an actual pic?!) This one looks not habitable enough IMO, and a bit dangerous even. But you could see that with not much more 'surviving' it could very easily be quite habitable for a small party. ETA: I do think the tower used in the TV series was much to big and in much to solid a state for Ned's 'tear it down' thing. It certainly wouldn't qualify as a reasonable facsimile for me!
  10. Understood, to a point. Its a Starfall source and all we have from Starfall. Edric didn't get any of his beliefs about Ned, Ashara, Wylla, Jon etc from Blackhaven. Maybe not all Starfallians think this (I'd guess most of them don't think anything at all about it), but its come from there and all we have from there thus far.
  11. Edric wasn't born until about 3 years later.
  12. Sometimes, more often that we'd like, people aren't really serious, just saying a dickhead thing to get a reaction or be different. But its not always easy to tell. Its usually better to either ignore them, or leave some basic facts that counter their narrative.* In other words, if a theory is really really silly, best not ask for an explanation at all! * and sometimes you're just in the mood for a discussion and this is the best available. Or their theories are crazy, but there is just enough in there to confuse people, so you want to make it clear why this theory isn't worth pursing for other people. And sometimes you shouldn't do either of those things but do them anyway. Or, you haven't heard it all before and genuinely want to know - it can be hard to pick out the crazy from the clever sometimes!
  13. Its called the ability to weigh evidence. Each piece of evidence has its own, different, unique relationship to the real truth, and thus its own 'value'. Sifting the evidence, comparing it against other pieces, considering how it was arrived at and who from and what they actually experienced, is what we do - some people more effectively than others - R+L=J has a lot of evidence. And though much of it is indirect, often the sources are more reliable than the sources for most alternate theory data. In comparison, the source data for the alternative theories is very weak. There is usually very little pointing to any particular theory other than 'someone said it' - and usually the people saying it (Cat, Robert, Cersei, Edric Dayne etc) do not have direct access or personal experience to know what they are saying is true. They might believe that what they say is true, but they weren't actually around to witness what they are talking about. An example of this is Robert's belief that Wylla was Jon;s mother. Yet Robert explicitly never met Wylla so he was never around Ned and Wylla together. Therefore he is not what we would call a primary source, and the value of his data is considerably lower than, say Ned saying "he is my blood, and thats all you need to know". It would be very interesting to know what Howland Reed thinks (as opposed to says, people can lie too, but they rarely lie to themselves, at least not in this way) for example. If HR doesn't think Jon is Lyanna's son, then that would pretty much kill the R+L=J theory, because a key part (there are many many other clues unrelated, but ToJ is definitely a direct part of the narrative of the theory) is the ToJ and HR was there. Its also important to think about why characters believe clearly wrong things (whichever theory you believe, characters who state other theories will be wrong, so by definition a bunch of them are wrong no matter what the truth is). R+L=J is also the only theory which provides a reasonable explanation for the various differing beliefs character offer. Ie if R+L=J is true, its possible to see a clear and reasonable path to the beliefs of characters who are wrong, but genuinely believe what they say is right.. But even then, there are plenty of people who disagree, often vehemently, with R+L=J as a theory. Many of whom are just as intelligent and well-informed as any R+L=J believer. You don't see them around as often because they had all these arguments before. They know the data, for and against, and they know they can't make a case that looks convincing, just as they know they won't be convinced to shift either - without more data from GRRM. Its usually the relative 'noobs' (no offense intended - and noob-ery or not doesn't make an argument stronger, only the data does that) who come in convinced they are right and ready to show everyone else up. Sorry, I guess i have a somewhat jaded view on this one. While that neither makes it right nor wrong, what you will find is that most casual readers read the books once (if at all) and didn't pay close attention to all the details. Most people who come to the forums (more true before the TV series, but still true) are the types who have read the books repeatedly, looked for details, discussed or read other's discussion of them, read and reread the surrounding source material and so on. Most casual readers have not done any of these things and as a consequence have much less knowledge with which to form their understandings. As a personal example, I first read the books (there were only 3 then) way way back and read through them at a great rate, keenly interested in 'what happens next', rather than the mysteries and details. I don't think it even occurred to me to wonder (or care) who Jon's mother was or that his father might not be Ned. But I did a reread to prepare for the release of AFfC, and before i finished that was all over R+L=J and in fact jumped on the internet exactly to find out if this was really a thing. I came here by way of the Tower of the Hand, where I learned much more of this and other theories. And continue to learn (I saw a very nice little side catch today they I'd never seen of heard before - that no longer happens often, but it still happens)
  • Create New...