Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ygrain

  1. I sure as hell didn't know Janos Slynt or Bowen Marsh had so many fans...
  2. Ygrain

    R+L=J v.165

    Reference guide The R+L=J theory claims Jon Snow most probably is the son of crown prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Ned's sister Lyanna Stark. The Tower of the Hand has an excellent analysis of this theory: Jon Snow's Parents And Westeros' Citadel also provides a summary: Jon Snow's Parents A Wiki of Ice and Fire: Jon Snow Theories Radio Westeros podcast: A Dragon, a Wolf and a Rose Kingmonkey's essay: R+L=J Frequently Asked Questions: How can Jon be a Targaryen if ordinary fire burned his hand? Targaryens are not immune to fire. It's a myth that has been refuted by a list of Targaryens being burned. Danaerys 'the unburnt' was indeed unscathed when she hatched the dragon eggs, but that has not stopped her being burned on other occasions. See this thread on Targaryen fire immunity. Don't all Targaryens have hallmark Valryian silver-golden hair and purple eyes? Not all of them: Valarr and Queen Alysanne had blue eyes. Bittersteel, who like Jon was half first men blood, had brown hair. Baelor Breakspear and his son(s) and Jon's own half-sister Rhaenys had the Dornish look (dark hair, black eyes, olive skin). Rhaenyra Targaryen's three sons all had brown hair and brown eyes even though both their parents had light silver-gold hair. Had Jon Valyrian features, it would give his parentage away: "He had the Stark face if not the name: long, solemn, guarded, a face that gave nothing away. Whoever his mother had been, she had left little of herself in her son." Tyrion got the bit about the mother wrong, though: his mother was the Stark. If Jon isn't Ned's son, then why does he look so much like him? Jon looks very like Arya, and Arya looks very like Lyanna. Jon is Ned's nephew, and Lyanna and Ned looked similar. Ned is too honourable to lie. If he says Jon is his son, doesn't that mean he must be? Ned tells Arya that sometimes lies can be honourable. His final words, a confession of his guilt, are a lie to protect Sansa. While a lie can be honourable, cheating on his wife isn't, so Ned's famed honour points to Jon not being his son. How can Jon be half-Targaryen and have a direwolf? He's also half Stark, through Lyanna. Ned's trueborn children are half Tully and that doesn't stop them having direwolves. Why doesn't Ned ever think about Lyanna being Jon's mother? Ned doesn't think about anyone being Jon's mother. If he did, there would be no mystery. He names 'Wylla' to Robert, but we do not see him thinking of Wylla being Jon's mother. There's a hidden hint at who Jon's mother might be: In chapter 4, Eddard's internal monologue goes "Lyanna ... Ned had loved her with all his heart." and in chapter 6, Catelyn thinks "Whoever Jon's mother had been, Ned must have loved her fiercely". Why would Ned not at least tell Catelyn? We don't have a list of what Ned promised to Lyanna, but know he takes his promises seriously. Maybe he promised not to tell anyone. In Chapter 45, Ned is uncertain what Cat would do if it came to Jon's life over that of her own children. If Catelyn knew that Jon was Rhaegar's son, she might feel that keeping him at Winterfell presented a serious risk to her own children. Ultimately, Catelyn did not need to know, so maybe Ned simply chose to be on the safe side. Doesn't Ned refer to Robb and Jon as "my sons in the very first chapter? In speech, not in thought. Ned is keeping Jon's parentage secret. He never thinks of Jon as his son: In Chapter 45, Ned thinks of his children "Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon and explicitly excludes Jon from the list. ADwD Chapter 34 has Bran's vision of younger Ned in the Winterfell godswood: "...let them grow up close as brothers, with only love between them," he prayed, "and let my lady wife find it in her heart to forgive..." which not make sense if they are brothers. Since Rhaegar was already married, wouldn't Jon still be a bastard? He might, or might not. There was a tradition of polygamy among Targaryens in the past, so the possibility that Rhaegar and Lyanna married is not easily ruled out. A pro-legitimacy argument is this: The presence of the three kingsguards at the Tower of Joy is best explained if they were defending the heir to the throne, which Jon would only be if he was legitimate. Can we be certain polygamy is not illegal? Aegon I and Maegor I practised polygamy. In Westeros, unlike a constitutional monarchy, royals are not subject to the law. So if there ever was a law against it, it did not apply to the Targaryens: In Chapter 33 it says "like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men". Examples demonstrate that it was considered an option for Targaryens: Aegon IV and Daemon Blackfyre may have considered it for Daemon, Jorah Mormont suggested it to Daenerys as a viable option, and she said the same about Quentyn Martell. George R.R. Martin says in this SSM: "If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want". There is alsothis SSM predating the worldbook. On Polygamy essay by Ygrain with additions by Rhaenys_Targaryen Weren't the Kingsguard at Tower of Joy on the basis of an order from Aerys, to guard Lyanna as a hostage? If so, why would they have apparently made no effort to use this leverage against Robert and Ned? Some argue their Kingsguard vows would have taken precedence and still have required them to leave the Tower to protect Viserys when he became heir -- unless there was another that took precedence [Jon]. Others think they were guarding Lyanna as a hostage at the Tower of Joy. Some say that makes little sense: She would better be kept hostage at King's Landing, and wouldn't require kingsguards to guard her. The mere presence of three kingsguards implies something more important: guarding members of the royal family or maybe the heir. Frequently suggested readings: At the tower of joy by MtnLion and support of the toj analysis by Ygrain Isn't there an SSM that says the 3 Kingsguard were following Rhaegar's orders though? The SSM you may be thinking of is probably this: The King's Guards don't get to make up their own orders. They serve the king, they protect the king and the royal family, but they're also bound to obey their orders, and if Prince Rhaegar gave them a certain order, they would do that. They can't say, "No we don't like that order, we'll do something else." We know from Barristan, protecting the king is the first and most important of all kingsguard duties. Jamie suggests some other KG to stay with the king when he wants to leave for the Trident and we also learn of a ritual that is performed when all KG meet and the king is guarded by someone who is not from the order. "Protect vs Obey" is an ongoing subject of debate that is unlikely to be settled until we know more. Either viewpoint is compatible with R+L=J. Wouldn't Viserys take precedence anyway? Rhaegar died without becoming king, and doesn't the world book call Viserys, not Aegon, Aerys' new heir? No, in the case of an eldest son dying before the king dies, a grandson comes before a younger son. Even in the case the grandson is yet unborn at the time of death, he would succeed (heir apparent vs. heir presumptive). The world book is written with a Lannister bias (it may be propaganda to undermine Dornish support for the Targaryens) and in hindsightby maesters who have never learned all of what we know from Ned's dreams and memories. If it still turns out to be true... see the next answer. Are matters of succession just as clear as presented here? Succession quarrels are a part of medieval power play and even a very clear inheritance could well be contested. So maybe in King's Landing things did happen as the world book says. Rhaegar and Aerys may have been at odds over the succession. Rhaegar told Jaime before leaving for the Trident that he intended to call a council, and The Great Councils of the past have dealt with matters of succession. Who would have accepted such a change is a question worth asking. Ned is dead. Who's going to tell anyone about it? Bloodraven and Bran may have learned of it through the weirwood network. Benjen might know. Checkov's CrannogmanHowland Reed is the sole survivor of the encounter at the Tower of Joy, and George R.R. Martin has stated he has not yet appeared because he knows too much about the central mystery of the book. "They had found him [Ned] still holding her [Lyanna's] body" tells that there also was someone else besides Howland to find Ned. Why is this important? What impact can it have on the story? The careful way the mystery of Jon's parentage was created is reason to believe it's important. What impact it will have on the rest of the series is still unknown. This theory is too obvious and too many people believe it to be fact. How can it be true? It is not so obvious to the majority of readers. Some will get it on their first read, but most will not. Readers who go to online fan forums, such as this, still represent a very small minority of the readership. Also, A Game of Thrones has been out since 1996. That's more than 18 years of readers being able to piece together this mystery. Crowd-sourced internet-based mystery solving like this inevitably make solved mysteries seem more obvious in hindsight. George R.R. Martin is a "breaker of tropes, there can be no hidden prince, it's simply too cliché. In order to break a trope it needs to be installed in the first place. It is yet unknown what will happen to Jon in the future. Being the son of Lyanna and Rhaegar does not imply the fairy-tale style happy ending associated with the hidden prince trope. Is there a list of all R+L=J clues that have been found? There is a list of R+L=J hints, clues and foreshadowing compiled by sj4iy. Since this theory has been refined so well, will Martin change the outcome of the story to surprise his fans? He has stated that he won't change the outcome of the story just because some people have put together all the clues and solved the puzzle. A thread for discussing strengths and weaknesses of the theory that Jon Snow's parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna. Previous editions: Please click on the spoiler below to reveal links to all previous editions of this thread
  3. You have just posted Jon's thoughts yourself where he assesses the future outcomes if he lets Slynt live, so how can you claim what you do? Are you seriously comparing a private conversation in which Sam pleads and expresses his fear of Randyll, with a public statement "shove it up your bastard ass"? If Grenn was plotting against Jon and couldn't be trusted to do his job, he would have died, as well. Just like Jon reasons in that quote above that you completely ignored. But such Grenn would never become Jon's friend.
  4. I didn't express myself correcly. I meant that in (pseudo)medieval times, you were way more likely to face death penalty, for offences that we consider minor these days. Based on what we have been shown about Slynt's character, I believe Jon was 100% right in his assessment of Slynt's future actions if he were allowed to live. The man had no principles and served only himself. Letting him openly challenge Jon's authority and get away without serious repercussions would terribly weaken Jon's not particularly strong position. Slynt had to be dealt with quickly, decisively and in a manner that would deter the others.
  5. Ygrain

    R+L=J v.165

    But how? He wasn't calling the shots for the loyalists, Aerys was. On the Rebel side, Robert wouldn't be willing to listen, either, and I don't think Ned and Jon Arryn would side with Rhaegar against Robert.
  6. At present day and place, it is. In Westeros? I am thinking about the less civilized times and places of our world, and I think that in quite a few, Slynt would die as well. I'll do some search when I have the time. So you think that the reasons Jon lists are not valid? That Slynt would indeed fall in line and stop conspiring and undermining Jon's authority? How about you quote his thoughts when the shit was actually happening? How exactly does letting the Wildlings in and using every possible resource to man and defend the Wall fight for and avenge the Starks?
  7. Yep. He does consider it, and reject it. And were Mormont in the same situation, do you think he wouldn't go along the same line of reasoning as Jon did? Do you think Jon's assessment of Slynt as detrimental to the unity and morale of the Watch was incorrect? —and confine him to an ice cell, he might have said. A day or ten cramped up inside the ice would leave him shivering and feverish and begging for release, Jon did not doubt. And the moment he is out, he and Thorne will begin to plot again. —and tie him to his horse, he might have said. If Slynt did not wish to go to Greyguard as its commander, he could go as its cook. It will only be a matter of time until he deserts, then. And how many others will he take with him? Yes, he would definitely be within his rights. Did his lenience undermine the ability of the Watch to act?
  8. Apples and pears. We are not talking about breaking the vow of chastity, we are talking about very public insubordination and insolence toward the commander in a paramilitary organisation consisting mainly of men of dubious morals. If it was Mormont giving Slynt the same order, and if Slynt dared to respond to him the same way he did to Jon, how would Mormont react?
  9. So, in your opinion, what would Mormont do if someone, publically, told him he wasn't going to obey an order and that Mormont could go fuck himself?
  10. Ygrain

    R+L=J vs N+A=J (GRRM looses either way)

    Amen to that. Cracking mysteries is awesome, and I bet a lot of the contending theories are just that - people wanting to experience that thrill for themselves, but since RLJ has already been established, they're twisting themselves into pretzels in order to feel like discoverers, too.
  11. I must have missed the part where Jon defied an order and publically insulted Lord Commander... Did Jon wish to off Slynt? Absolutely. Would Mormont, or any other commander, have Slynt executed for defying and insulting him like that? Absolutely. Jon's personal beef had nothing to do with the fact that he had to put stop to such insubordination and insolence, and do it in a manner that sent a clear message.
  12. “Honor,” she spat. “How dare you play the noble lord with me! What do you take me for? You’ve a bastard of your own, I’ve seen him. Who was the mother, I wonder? Some Dornish peasant you raped while her holdfast burned? A whore? Or was it the grieving sister, the Lady Ashara? She threw herself into the sea, I’m told. Why was that? For the brother you slew, or the child you stole? Tell me, my honorable Lord Eddard, how are you any different from Robert, or me, or Jaime?” My, how she hates the idea that someone might actually have some moral standards. Not only does she accuse him of being a rapist, but also of causing Ashara's suicide. The passage also shows that she is spinning tales - we don't have any details on Ned's journey to Starfall, but I am fairly sure no holdfasts were burning there as the war was over and Ned wouldn't allow his men to plunder, anyway. Ashara died in 283. Ned Dayne was born in 287. At that time, The Ned was already up North busy siring little Starks. As I was ninjaed to by @The Fattest Leech, he never was the boy he was. He had his standards fully developed back then. He confirmed it at some relatively recent (no more than a year or two ago) event, so there might be a recording. After the even, the information was all over the forums, with someone even claiming they were the one asking the question with the purpose of confirming Arthur's death. Anyway, Ned says that out of seven against three, only two lived to ride away and thinks about building eight cairns, so the math fits. People argue that some cairn(s) could be empty but I consider this unnecessary - if GRRM wanted to keep this ambiguous, he simply could have left out the numeral and say "built cairns for the fallen" or something like that.
  13. Ah, I see. We are missing one crucial piece - what Ned stated as the cause of Lyanna's death. I wonder whether he may have been so bold as to state that she died in childbirth along with the baby, or had a miscarriage. Either way, most people simply wouldn't question The Ned who never lies, either because they respected his honour, or thought him a simpleton who would never be able to pull such a coverup. Then there's the aspect mentioned in connection with Stannis - people love to believe the worst about individuals of outstanding morality, so the big honorable Ned Stark having a bastard is just the kind of stain that people love to smear. Plus, having bastards, especially during wartime, is considered such a commonplace that no-one ever gives it a second thought. Furthermore, there is another missing piece, and that is the transportation of Jon to Winterfell. I believe that for Ned's lie to work, and for no devious mind to ever start suspecting, it was essential to put as much time and distance between Lyanna's death and Jon as possible. IMHO, the detour to Starfall to return Dawn served as a ruse to obtain means of transport that would allow for Jon's safe and secret passage to the North, without anyone outside Starfall knowing about his existence. Ned would then take a separate route, perhaps to report back to Robert, and return to Winterfell on his own. In this way, the news that he had a bastard would reach the South many months (or even years) later, which would perfectly obscure any connection to Lyanna as no-one would know how old Jon really was or where he came from. IMHO, Ned's unwillingness to take Jon South might actually come out of fear that the ruse would be undermined if people learned about Jon's age or the fact that he doesn't even know his mother.
  14. And is thoroughly refuted by GRRM's confirmation that Ned and Howland were the only two men to leave ToJ (if "they were seven against three, yet only two lived to ride away" requires confirmation).
  15. Which is why I call utter bullshit. In the years here, I have read much, much better attempts at an alternative parentage (and delivered without condescension). Just another of the mammoth-sized holes in this theory. If Ned was no longer available and Hoster insisted on sealing the alliance with marriages, he would simply have opted for Jon Arryn for Cat and Benjen for Lysa instead of something so thoroughly dishonorable for everyone involved, and going not only against Ned's character but against the Tully's, as well - you know, those who go by "family, duty, honor".
  16. Ygrain

    R+L=J v.165

    An understatement of the year, I suppose... And yeah, I'd paid in gold to read that exchange, too.
  17. I am aware that you were merely presenting their theory while stating you don't really believe it yourself. I just wanted to point out some flaws that they merely gloss over or don't adress at all, and given the high horse they are riding, I couldn't be bothered with courtesy. Not sure what you mean here. I was referring to the fact that people like Cersei or even the young Ned Dayne stating/speculating about N+A doesn't constitute for a clue that such a relationship ever existed. Also, it is not so difficult to see where the rumour might have come from - Ashara is seen with a Stark/Starks, has a baby, Ned Stark visits Starfall, Ashara commits suicide, Ned Stark is raising a bastard of an unknown mother. An easy conclusion to jump to, on the surface.
  18. Which has zero text support. Don't you think that if Ned had a lady visiting him in the Vale, Robert would ,mention it at some point? Yet, he he never does, not once, even though it would have been a pretty rare thing for the boy he never was Ned to have a lady visitor. Not to mention that the pseudomedieval Westeros is not exactly a place where highborn maidens go visiting an unrelated male without causing a huge scandal. Because that's what happens to strikingly beautiful noble ladies. Ned Stark travelled in nobleman's clothes and was identified as Ned Stark all the way, but Ashara put on commoner's clothes. And he never, ever, pays any thought to Ashara or to Lyanna's baby, doesn't feel any guilt about his bigamy and the like. Ever. I guess I could claim that Ned is a Flying Spaghetti Monster believer, we just never hear in his PoVs. No, just no. This is not how GRRM operates - if something like that took place, he would place hints at it somewhere. Yet, there is nothing. Ever. It might be interesting if they wrote it as a fanfic. Sorry but people who aren't first-hand witnesses claiming something doesn't constitute evidence, not to mention that there are other people - Harwin, and apparently Robert, who never mentions a thing, plus the rumours at Winterfell that Jon's mother was commonborn - that think otherwise. So we have rumours X and rumours Y, not evidence. The KotLT story and Barristan's account are ambiguous. The former states that Brandon spoke on Ned's behalf but it doesn't say that Ned had asked him to. The latter mentions a Stark in connection with Ashara but doesn't say which one. Plus, Barristan always refers to Ned as Lord Eddard/Stark and has nothing but respect for him, which doesn't really fit with Ned being the guy who ruined Ashara's reputation and life. This is a myth that needs to die. The only information contained solely in the dream is the dialogue with the KG and the tower as the place where Lyanna died, the rest of events is corroborated by Ned's thoughts and memories. When he wakes up, he is perfectly lucid and he thinks about what followed after the fight with the KG, and his thoughts are consistent with what was shown in the dream. Lyanna's death being tied to blood, roses and the promises is mentioned right in his very first PoV, and appear again when Ned recalls the events of Harrenhall in the Black Cells, which is consistent with the description of the dream as "old", i.e. recurring dream. The dream cannot be considered an exact recording of what transpired but it definitely shouldn't be handwaved. The clues are what is actually missing, people speculating about something doesn't make it a clue.
  19. Because Wylla. We hear her name back in AGOT, when Robert forces the name out of Ned, but we have no idea who she might have been. And then we learn that she is a servant at Starfall and indeed claims to be Jon's mother - which she cannot be, because the secrecy makes zero sense. Yet, since Wylla corroborates Ned's story, she is apparently somehow involved in the secret, and so are the Daynes, to an extent. - Not the young Ned but the older generation, who must have had some idea about Arthur guarding Rhaegar and the missing Stark girl, and might very well have connected the dots when Ned brought them Dawn. Because the question is: why did Ned take the pains to return Dawn in person ASAP instead of having it delivered later, after taking the same route back? IMHO, returning Dawn was only a pretext for going to Starfall, either to pick up Jon who had been sent there prior, with Wylla poising as his mother, or to find means of transport that would allow him to send Jon North while he himself could return to KL without any baby along.
  20. Since the NW doesn't take part in the politicking, it's the only place where Jon would be safe, should the truth of his origin out. Plus, there was Uncle Benjen in a position to look out for Jon, so between the secret and Cat's unwillingness to put up with Jon any longer, Ned probably felt it wasn't such a bad solution. I am Arthur, and so is my wife! Ninjaed to that! Jon is Ned's son by Wylla and Ned's relationship with Ashara was purely platonic. It must be true because a kid born two years later was definitely told the truth of it. That's what I think very likely, too. Especially if he did have an unreciprocated crush on her. Or perhaps Ned was being paranoid about his secret and worried - not unreasonably - that someone like Varys might put two and two together?
  21. Not to mention, who the hell is Lyanna's child and why do his promises to her haunt Ned so much? I don't think the promise went "send my child away and never ever bother thinking about him/her again".
  22. Let me tell you a little secret: as Rhaegar's son, Jon has Dayne blood, as well. Not to mention that it is in no way a certain that Dawn is Lightbringer, or that it will even be needed, so basing Jon's parentage on the ability to wield it is putting the horses before the cart.
  23. About the same here. Basically, the Order coming up with some theory means it 100% ain't true. Nothing in Ned's PoVs indicates any guilt towards Catelyn other than bringing Jon to Winterfell, nowhere does he indicate that his children aren't trueborn. And when asked if he loves his children, he leaves out Jon from the mental list. The one person haunting his memories and dreams is Lyanna, not Ashara, though under the theory, both Ashara and Catelyn should be the ones filling him with guilt and bad dreams. And so on.
  24. "The city watch is looking for a certain ugly girl, known to frequent the Purple Harbor, so best you have a new face as well.” He cupped her chin, turned her head this way and that, nodded. “A pretty one this time, I think. As pretty as your own." I don't think the kindly man is the type for false compliment, so it is pretty (pun intended) safe to assume that at this point, Arya is no longer the ugly duckling she used to be. Also, not really sure where the talk about Lyanna being average comes from - besides Ned mentioning her beauty several times, we have Robert, a notorious womanizer, smitten with her (and given that Ned points out that Robert didn't really know her, it was the looks, not the character, that appealed to Robert). Even Cersei fan Kevan points out that there was something about Lyanna ("wild beauty").
  25. Ygrain

    Drogo's Life Paid for the Dragons

    Then what is the significance of the HotU vision, showing "Mirri Maz Duur shrieked in the flames, a dragon bursting from her brow"? Rhaego wasn't even in the pyre and Drogo was dead already, so neither should count as a sacrifice. Whereas Mirri... by burning her, Dany actually followed the family recipe of Fire and Blood, to the letter.