SFDanny

At this point almost all things are possible. However, I lean to the sources being different. Perhaps because I think the person who tells Ned Lyanns's location will turn out to be someone relatively unimportant to the story. All it takes is someone in King's Landing or among the besiegers at Storm's End that have heard the rumors that sent Ser Gerold Hightower there. I doubt the White Bull arrives at the Tower by himself, or that Rhaegar has no one with him on his travels back to King's Landing. Alternatively anyone who helped supply the Tower would have the information Ned needs to find his sister. After the sack or the lifting of the siege, such a person would have very valuable piece of information to use to ingratiate themselves with Lord Stark. The name Rhaegar gives the Tower was likely limited to a smaller circle. So, I would think it more likely Ned hears the name from whomever travels south to Starfall with him. But many variations are certainly possible.

@Megorova am I right in thinking you believe Lyanna died at Starfall, not at the Tower of Joy? We are told explicitly in the app that is where she died. Ned's dream also ties her death to that location. What then is the basis for claiming she dies in Starfall, if I read you right? How and why would the Daynes let Ned into Starfall while the war is still ongoing? I would also point to maesters living a life of service. Normally they reside either at some lord's court or the Citadel. Why do you think Marwyn would be in an old watchtower overlooking the Prince's Pass? I have long advocate for the idea that he is the trusted maester in attendance to Lyanna to help her through her pregnancy. If we have the cause of death right as being Puerperal Fever, then he is likely also the unwitting cause of her death. Perhaps he should have studied with Mirri Maz Duur before that time. I do think there is some very creative thinking here in an area we have little information about.

You repeat things I've already said and call it "simplistic"? Try again, LV. I do think it is possible the exchange does not reflect an accurate conversation between Ned and the Kingsguard. Possible but uncertain. We can be sure that the things in Ned's dream do reflect moments that have and continue to trouble him greatly. This is a recurring dream after all. We can also be sure that what Ned says is based on the actual history of events that are verified elsewhere in the story. It does tell us, that even if this is a "reconstruction of events by Ned's subconscious" and not an "accurate representation of their actual exchange" that the motivations of these men in forcing a duel still troubles Lord Stark, and that he is deeply troubled by not being able to avoid this battle. You seem to lay this at the feet of the Kingsguard's dereliction of duty. That somehow Ned has a recurring dream admonishing them for not doing what a Kingsguard Oath tells them they should do. This view does fly in the face of Ned's professed respect for at least Dayne. I would say you don't understand Ned's character if that is what you reduce this dream to. It is much more likely that Ned is troubled by, and even obsessed by, what he sees as the needless deaths of his companions and the Kingsguard themselves. It is the fact of Hightower, Whent, and Dayne seeing it their duty to kill Ned and his party to prevent them from getting to at least his sister that makes Ned dream this dream over and over. In hindsight Ned can see why the three would see him as a threat to Lya and, perhaps, to Jon. He knows his love for his sister is what brings him there. He knows it isn't to capture her and turn her over into a forced marriage to Robert. He knows, that he would not harm or let any harm come to Lyanna's child. But the Kingsguard do not know this, and it is this perceived threat he and his party represent to Lyanna and Jon that force the bloodshed spilt at the Tower. It is a great tragedy that haunts Ned's dreams that the deaths could not be avoided. If you think Ned is troubled over and over again by the Kingsguard not doing their duty, then you have misread this scene, in my humble opinion. And, again, I think you grossly misread Ned's character. It is my read of this scene that Ned regrets this fight precisely because he would have done the same thing the Kingsguard did if the roles were reversed. He would have died protecting her from a threat he knows that even Lyanna herself saw in him. The fear in her eyes that goes away when Ned gives her his promises is proof of that. Lyanna is fearful that Ned will put his honor bound duty to Robert ahead of her pleas to the loving brother she once knew. The Kingsguard see him as a commander of the rebellion, a loyal man to Robert, and a threat to Lyanna and her child because of those things. Lastly, let me say that Ned's respect for Dayne includes his knowledge that Ser Arthur was Rhaegar's best friend and confidant as well as his most loyal sworn sword and protector. If Whent was to be despised for his help to Rhaegar in his plots to set aside his father, then why is Ser Arthur exempt from Ned's scorn? Because of his skills in battle? Because he has such a great "bitchin" sword and title? That's not Ned. He admires these men because they lay their lives down to protect his sister and her child - from him! That's the reason he dreams this dream over and over again some 15 years later. That's what Martin wants us to understand from this scene, and why it is so import to the story. To the bolded, some readers do, even if you are not one of them. To your last sentence, if the dream tells us anything it tells us to pay attention to the why of what motivates the Kingsguard's actions. It may include questions of loyalties, kingship, and, depending on what you mean by the phrase "legal implications" it may include those as well. The rest we agree upon. I will respond to the rest of your post later. Now, back to bed. It's very late here in the smoke filled city of San Francisco.

My belief is that is both Jon and Lyanna that the Kingsguard are protecting from the usurper's best friend and co-commander of the rebellion against Targaryen rule. The Kingsguard has to look on Lord Stark as a threat to both. They, meaning Hightower, Whent and Dayne, have every reason to think Ned's primary loyalty is to Robert. That is true even if they know of the argument between Robert and Ned at Robert's coronation. After all, Ned continues in the rebel cause after he leaves King's Landing and leads rebel forces to Storm's End. Now, Ned may believe it is possible Lyanna is or was pregnant, but I hesitate to say for certain he knows of Jon before the fight. I would argue - not with you, but with others - that the fear Ned sees in Lyanna's eyes is because even she doesn't know for certain what her beloved brother will do if forced to choose between Robert and Jon. To me, and we have talked of this before, it is the critical point in understanding Lord Eddard Stark. Here is where Ned makes the choice between honor and love that Maester Aemon asks Jon about so many years later. But Jon's answer is wrong. Ned chose love. Not love of his nephew he would grow to love like a son, but love of his dying sister over any honor bound oath of fealty to his newly crowned king.

Let me ask a very simple question here. How do you think the people at the Tower of Joy fed themselves for the months they were there? We are led to believe that Hightower finds Rhaegar there and he orders the three Kingsguard to stay there. Is the land about the Tower a garden of Eden in which food is in such abundance they can live off the land about them in their isolation? Not in Ned's description of the Tower. Perhaps our author ignores the issue, but I think it rather more likely there are people who perform supporting roles in bringing supplies to the tower. That implies a method by which information can be brought to the Tower. From what information we are given, about the location of the hideaway, and the people we know to be there, it makes it very likely they maintain methods of contact with the outer world and for their everyday needs. Both Hightower and Dayne have commanded men in long campaigns, and presumably are skilled in logistical supply lines and the need for methods of getting and receiving information. They are not about to spend months starving and ignorant of events. Nor is Rhaegar likely to have left them without a method of dealing with such problems. It is vitally important to view this history from the perspective of the factional fighting between father and son. Rhaegar had partisans of his political efforts to fight with the lickspittle lords on the council, his father, and in his plans to replace his father. I strongly suspect we will sometime find the Tower of Joy sits in territory of a local lord who was loyal to Rhaegar's cause. So when Ned's tortured recurring dream of the immediate prelude to the fight to the death between Ned's party and the three men it tell us what he expected the Kingsguard to know, and we need to take this background into account in making judgements about what is likely true and what is not. The idea the tower is so isolated it receives no news and has no method of supply isn't believable. There is a reason Ned's dream shows he expected these men to know of these events he questions them about. Does that mean they must have known the news Viserys was named Aerys's new heir after Rhaegar's death? No, but it makes it unlikely they didn't. I would hazard an educated guess that there was in fact a way Rhaegar regularly got information to his network of supporters, and that included some method of regularly getting information to the Tower. The local Rhaegar partisan would be only one of the many people who heard word from other supporters. It is likely this meant the events at the Trident, and the events in its aftermath were quickly sent out to supporters across Westeros. Ravens, couriers, ships, and gossip were not just limited to Lord Varys, Pycelle, or the rest of the small council.

How much of the dream is a reflection of reality isn't really the point. By which I mean we can't be sure the conversation between Ned and the Kingsguard takes place exactly as Ned's dream has it replayed. But the point is that Ned is dreaming about what he believes the Kingsguard knew. He questions them in his dream about why they were not in places he thinks they should have been, and the underlying message is he doesn't understand why they would be standing between himself and his sister when they should have been elsewhere. All of which tell us that Ned believes these men should have known the news his questions relate. He is troubled almost a decade and a half later by the fact they have to fight to the death because they won't let him get to his sister. What the dream sequence also tells us is that everything Ned asks about in his dream is verified in the rest of the series. This information, if not the actual details of the encounter, is not just a dream. It is history. The problem here isn't that too many people take the dream itself as a true recounting of actual events in every detail, but that too many readers try to dismiss the significance of what happens in the dream based solely on the fact it is a dream. If it is only viewed as Ned's attempt to understand the motivations of the kingsguard in their actions, it is massively important to the story.

I have no doubt Rhaegar's death at the Trident goes far and wide across Westeros as fast as word can travel. Be that by raven or courier or word of mouth by people gossiping about the shocking news. Nor do I think Aerys is likely to make his announcement of Viserys as his heir is some kind of closely guarded secret. Secret heirs are almost a contradiction in terms - Jon being a possible exception to this rule for obvious reasons discussed over and over again in these threads. Aerys also has the added motive of punishing the Dornish for his belief of their betrayal at the Trident. Aerys wants everyone to know he names the next king, not people disrespectful of his wishes or interests contrary to his. We have the example of both Robb's naming of Jon as his heir and asking his bannermen to witness his decree, and of Viserys I Targaryen calling his vassals to court to pledge their support of his daughter. Aerys has every reason to do the equivalent concerning his young son Viserys. Meaning to make it as widely known as he can under the circumstances. The question is really, to me anyway, is the Tower of Joy so remote and without sources of information that the three Kingsguard don't know the news of the naming of Viserys. I find it hard to believe they are. Not only does Ned's dream seem to reflect his belief the Kingsguard knew of Aerys's death at the hands of Jaime, but they look to have known about Rhaegar's death, the surrender of the besiegers of Storm's End, and that Rhaella, Viserys, and Ser Willem are at Dragonstone. If Ned's dream is by and large mostly true, as I think it is, it makes if likely the news of Viserys as the new heir is also known at the Tower of Joy. On top of this is the skills of the Kingsguard at the Tower. Both Hightower and Dayne, at least, are skilled military commanders who are unlikely to have left themselves with no sources of information from the outside world. Nor does the nature of the partisan political battles between Aerys and Rhaegar likely mean that Rhaegar has no supporters in the area of the Tower. It does raise questions about the motivations of the Kingsguard. I've laid out my arguments of what I think those motivations are likely to be in my signature, so I won't repeat them here.

We agree here. Which is why I never just dismiss any of the theories based on Ashara, Wylla, or the Fisherman's daughter being Jon's mom. I think each is highly unlikely for many reasons but each has the benefit of clues that point directly to them. Even the timeline issues we often argue about don't completely make it impossible for any of these theories from turning out to be the truth. We don't know enough of Ned's whereabouts during the critical time period after his wedding to Catelyn. Nor do we know almost anything about where Ashara, Wylla, or the Fisherman's Daughter are at the same time. For instance, we could well find out that Ashara visited Ned during the rebellion. Part of a peace mission? Pure speculation, but i expect Martin to keep each theory alive until he is ready to reveal the truth. I just find it highly unlikely the truth will be anything but Lyanna as Jon's mom.

Given the mess of the last three Star Wars, and the terrible fate of Martin's novels in the hands of the HBO show runners, there is ample evidence of the dangers of handing over unfinished works into the hands of others. Is the money ever worth it? But then no one has ever offered me truckloads of money for the rights to my non-existent novels. Given the chance I'd likely make the same mistake of both of the Georges.

George has been leading the reader to wrong conclusions since the start of the series, but those wrong conclusions are clearly pointed at making the reader think Jon is the son of Wylla, Jon is the son of Ashara Dayne, or Jon is the son of the Fisherman's Daughter. Each of these possibilities has been laid out for the reader, but no place are we given a story of Jon being the son of Lyanna Stark. Martin has left clues for attentive readers that point to Lyanna as Jon's mother, but it is not given to us as one of the contending and contradictory tales that we have about Wylla, Ashara, and the nameless Fisherman's Daughter. It's hard to see the accumulation of clues pointing at Lyanna as just another "wrong conclusion." I do believe Martin has very skillfully laid false trails, red herrings, or whatever you want to call them, but I don't believe Lyanna giving birth to Jon at the Tower of Joy is one of those. The Twilight Zone twist IS Lyanna as Jon's mother. Perhaps that is hard to believe given the years of discussions in this thread, but think of this question from the point of view of the reader who starts the series now without any idea about Jon's identity. Martin means this series to have been read that way. Hopefully this will finally be laid out for us in The Winds of Winter.

Viserys and Daenerys worth as pretenders to the Iron Throne is far more valuable than they would be as sex slaves. While the powers that be in the Free Cities wait to see how secure Robert really is as a usurper, it makes a lot of sense for them to hedge their bets by giving the Targaryens sanctuary, however temporary. The two are hardly left on their own to be prey for slavers. It is also important to see the hidden hand of Westerosi Targaryen supporters in the wanderings of Viserys and Daenerys. By that I don't just mean Varys and Illyrio. Their control seems to come very late in the game. The Martells and, perhaps others haven't forgotten the Targaryens. They too have plans for them, and that includes keeping them out of the hands of sex slavers.

I agree. Too many people forget the "thereabouts" in his quote. Which is why I think it is important to give a three month window on Jon's birth. It would be very nice if we had an actual date of the sack of King's Landing and or the Battle of the Trident. I don't expect that until possibly Fire & Blood volume 2. Which is why I don't conclude Jon is older. Jon may be older. We don't know yet. What we do know is that Robb is thought to be older, and that the boys are of a similar age. Here I disagree. This is not a convoluted logic problem for George. This is a note keeping problem for George. Somewhere Martin has notes which say when his characters were born, what their hair and eye color is, when important events take place, etc. For us trying to sort out timelines from the clues our author leaves us is a monstrous logic matrix puzzle, but it is not that for George. Martin's challenge is keeping his sequencing right, and that has much more to do with the timing of events in differing story lines as they develop than it does the date of character births.

Sorry, for stating the obvious, but I really was only trying to respond to a poster I respect - you.

No, there is no reason to think a infant would be that aware of his surroundings. If we take Robb, or any child of a noble family, for an example we would expect both mother and child would not be expected to travel shortly after birth. I would guess Robb is something on the order of six months old before he and Catelyn venture out from Riverrun on their way north. I would not expect Robb to remember anything about Riverrun as the place of his birth or of the surrounding Riverlands. He would, however, know as he grows up that was where he was born. Jon is the exception to this rule, if he really is the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna, born at the Tower of Joy. Our suspicions are that Jon, based on the things I've said earlier is born sometime from around the sack of King's Landing to maybe six weeks later. We know, or at least most of us think we know, Lyanna dies at the Tower after Ned arrives. This places Jon age when Ned arrives from a newborn child to less than two months old. A popular theory has always been that Lyanna dies of the "doctor's disease" or puerperal fever. Which, if true, means a birth less than a fortnight before Lyanna's death. The point being, Jon would likely be traveling to Starfall in the company of a wet nurse at less than a month old. The question is then, why does Ned risk taking Jon to Starfall? Obviously, I think the answer is that he knows what reception he will find there. I believe he goes there in an effort to hide Jon's origins and knows he will get help in doing so from the Daynes. One reason I think it likely Ashara is among those who travels with Ned, Jon, Howland, and Wylla there. But none of this means Ned would inform Jon of the place of his birth as he grows older. Far from it. In fact, I think it likely Ned's Northern troops first learn of Jon's existence when Neds returns to them from Starfall - thus the rumors of Ashara - but Ned is also unlikely to tell any of them exactly where he picked up Jon in his journey since he left them at Storm's End. As far as they know, Jon could have joined Ned's party in the Stormlands, the Reach, or Dorne. So, we have no reason to expect anyone to be able to tell Jon anything about the place of his birth other than rumors.

Because we are not figuring the nine moons from the date of conception - presumably from Aerys's rape of Rhaella that Jaime relates in his story. We are taking the nine moons from the time of the flight to Dragonstone. A known event after the Trident's news reaches King's Landing and preceding the sack. Nine moons as a general estimation of time from conception to birth is fine guide, but it will vary in Martin's world by a matter of weeks. What we know from Doran's remarks of Elia's birth is that a premature child of one month early is expected to die, even under the best care available. So, what we are talking about is not the timing from conception, but from the flight to birth. Both are known dates in Martin's world even if we don't know them ourselves. Everyone is Westeros must know when the sack of King's Landing take place. Daenerys's birth is tied to the day in which a great storm destroys the Targaryen fleet in Dragonstone's harbor. Hence the appellation of "Stormborn" by which Daenerys is known, and to which the Citadel teaches their students, and by which Stannis's fleet narrowly misses getting to Dragonstone to capture Viserys and the newborn Daenerys. This is not a made up story of Viserys; it is accepted history. Which should tell us that Daenerys's retelling of the story she learns of her birth from Viserys and/or Ser Willem is rock solid, and the estimate of "nine moons" between the flight and birth is also a solid estimation. What this understanding does is give us a way to determine when the flight to Dragonstone takes place if we can come up with a timeframe in which Dany's name day falls. It turns out we can by the length of time of Rhaego's birth back to the scene in which Dany's handmaids discovers her pregnancy on her fourteenth name day. The long and short of this is that we can estimate Dany's name day to midsummer - give or take perhaps a month. That tells us the flight takes place nine months before that based on nothing but what is in the text. The timing of Jon's name day as it relates to Martin's comments of the Jon/Dany age difference being "eight or nine months, or thereabouts" puts his birth from about the time of the Trident to perhaps six weeks after the flight. The later part of this window overlaps with a possible timing of Robb's birth in early October. This opens up the possibility that Robb could really be older than Jon, as is the accepted fact in the text, or that Jon could be actually older by a small amount of time. I'm pretty sure "close to a year" means what it says. The war, depending on how Ned figures what constitutes the "rebellion" lasts approximately a year. Some people want that to mean "less than a year" others, myself included, just read it as sometime near a year - including perhaps shorter or perhaps longer than a year. As a guideline it is helpful. It doesn't determine everything. No it does not ensure Jon is older. It does make it possible, perhaps even likely. But once again, what people in Westeros believe is that Robb is older. The truth may well be different. If Jon is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child, Ned has a very powerful reason to lie about Jon's age. I thought I've hammered this point enough to make what I think clear. No, I'm saying that there is a considerable time period of some many months, perhaps up to seven or eight months between the wedding and the Trident. This is not something I've just made up. Please read the Citadel's piece, written long ago, entitled "What Happened When During Robert's Rebellion." That essay states the following: I add another month, give or take.

@Megorova sorry, I've been dealing with some health issues, so I'm not responding as quickly as I'd like. A word of caution on your calculations. Martin is extremely focused on sequence, but pays little attention to real world expectations of travel times. Many people have tried to figure out timelines based on real world calculations and have failed when they have done so. I think it is fine to try to use some of this as guidelines, but be prepared to throw it all away. The time of Tyrion's travel from Winterfell down to the Inn of the Crossroads, and the time for Stannis's fleet to get to Eastwatch are examples of this. A better method is a calculation of days passed in the text as a minimum time passed between various events. For instance, the time we can tell for sure it takes Robb to march from Riverrun to the Twins is at a minimum about one month based on a close reading of days passing in the text. It is likely closer to two months. Why is this important? One reason is because we know Robb's sixteenth name day takes place shortly before Robb sets out on the journey. Combine this with the important sequence of the news of Robb's and Catelyn's deaths reaching King's Landing shortly before the royal wedding and the first day of the new year, what we get is the elimination of December/12 month as a possible time for Robb's birth. It helps verify the calculation of a October - November (10th - 11th month) as the proper timeframe for his name day. My suggestion is forget the travel time calculations based on real world expectations and look to the text. As to the issue of timing of Ned's possible visit with the Fisherman's daughter, @Bael's Bastard has it right. These are the very early days of the rebellion. Just after the news of Robert's victory at Gulltown reaches Sisterton and well before Ned gets to the North to take command his Northern levies. Even if we assume Benjen has called the banners together, this means a considerable length of Ned's time is taken in bringing his Northern army south to engage in the rebellion. What you do is collapse events to the point you make a rebellion that takes at least a year, down to eight or nine months maximum and possibly even less. This should tell you have made a mistake in your calculations. I'm happy to continue this conversation now, or when it is good for you, but let me apologize in advance if I'm a little slower in responding that usual.

I do appreciate the fact you are doing detailed timeline calculations. Like so many of us who have done similar research you reach some of the same conclusions all of us have. It shows you are an attentive reader, or like my own case, some one obsessed with this stuff. However, I think you make some serious mistakes in trying to draw too much from real world parallels. I also think you are making some mistakes here. Let me say why I think so. Lord Godric's fishermen's daughter tale places Jon's conception well outside the "eight or nine months, or thereabouts" Martin tells is the difference in Dany and Jon's ages. He also makes clear in the same quote that Jon is not over a year older than Dany. If Jon was conceived during the time period Lord Godric tells Davos of, it would directly contradict the timeframe. This would also directly contradict what both Catelyn and Ned tell us that Jon was conceived after their wedding. One must ask just why Ned not only conceal this timing from Catelyn when it would make both of their lives so much easier if true. Why would Ned go to the lengths of lying to Robert as well? A bastard son conceived before a betrothal is not breaking any vows to Catelyn. If Ned had just periodically sent money to raise his bastard or found a place for him outside Winterfell it would have made his marriage to Cat a lot easier. Instead he brings the child home. Why? And why would the child appear after he returns from Starfall? You also make the mistake that Ned and Robert must have been together from Stony Sept onward? Why? There is much of this period we don't know about, and Martin has told us there other battles and skirmishes that the ones we know about, so why must they have been together for this whole period. They weren't before Stony Sept, and the same is true after the sack, so why the assumption? I would also caution that even while they are together, it doesn't mean they are always together. Robert had a very bad habit of sleeping around while he was supposedly fighting a war to win his "true love" back. I really don't think Ned went with him in search of Robert's lustful needs. I would also suggest, this known and possible separateness allows for the remote possibility that Ned's story is true. Meaning he did lapse in his vows after he left his new bride in Riverrun. Something Martin has tried very hard to keep possible. Instead let me say once again, I think if far more likely Lord Godric's story is part of a cover story for Wylla's origins. If Wylla was someone Ned had an affair with during the war, then there is a strong likelihood that some of his own troops would know her. A camp follower in the commander's tent at night would cause gossip amongst the Northern troops. Instead they bring home tales of Ashara. If Wylla was in Ned's company and she became pregnant with a child that he brought home, then it would be a simple fact known widely who was Jon's mother. It isn't. As to Jon and Robb's ages, I've already said I think it possible Jon is secretly older than Robb. What is clear is they are of a similar age. In both reality and in the cover story Ned tells to Catelyn and Robert. What we absolutely disagree upon is that it is accepted knowledge, by Catelyn or just about anyone else, that Jon is older. Nor do Catelyn or any of the people of Westeros just not notice that Jon's name day falls before Robb's each year. No, all evidence shows that it is accepted as fact Robb is the oldest of the two. Again, that maybe a lie know only to a few (Ned, Wylla, Howland Reed, Ashara, and anyone else who accompanies Ned on his trip to Starfall.

I think you've overlooked much more likely sources than gossip and Cersei supposedly questioning the small folk of Winterfell during her visit. It is much more likely that Cersei gets her information from reports on Neds story investigated by those who question it. Tywin or Lord Varys are much better guesses for where her information comes from. Stannis also seems to have some information he has heard about Jon's mother given his "fishwife" comment and Lord Godric's tale. It is hard to believe Ned's story hasn't been heard and considered closely by his political enemies or competitors. While Ned stays isolated in Winterfell it is hardly a huge problem, but when Ned returns to King's Landing from Starfall and, especially, when he comes back as Hand of the King, all of this becomes extremely important. Cersei's time in Winterfell has little likely impact on this.

I'm unaware of any evidence that connects days in Westerosi history to significant dates in real world history, real world religious practices, or real world astrologies. Perhaps you have such evidence beyond just speculation? I'm not saying Martin couldn't have based his books on such things, but I doubt this is a consistent guide to his work. I keep going up against such things as just trying to understand basic facts of the Westerosi calendar. Martin tells us that there are twelve turns of the moon, and each moon - we learn from Arya- has thirty days, but simple math puts that as a year of 360 days, not 365 or 366. I've speculated that it is likely Martin uses real world calendars as his method of keeping track of his fictional history, but that is just my own guess. If I'm right, there remains the problem of the missing five or six days each year. In short, I don't see how we can assume such one to one correspondence between Westeros and the real world. I really don't agree with assuming, without evidence, that Martin is making his world conform to any particular religious or mystical beliefs. Does he borrow some themes from them? Absolutely, but assuming, for instance, Jon is conceived on Christmas because George thought that symbolism was important in his fictional world, is a huge leap without evidence. I'd much rather we sort out the possible ranges for these Westerosi events based on the evidence Martin has actually given us instead of imposing connections we can't really soundly make. To me that means finding evidence from the books and what the author has said that gives us ranges of possibilities for when events occur. I do agree with you that it is possible Jon was conceived in a late 282 to early 283 timeframe. Stating flatly he was conceived on Christmas seems just simple speculation.

Parsing much?

I don't quite understand your objection to my statement. You admit what Ned tells Robert is exactly what I said he did. So, what is there to doubt about what is clearly on the written page? Doubting the truth of Ned's statement to Robert is something we both share, but there is no doubt of what Ned tells Robert. It is right there for every reader to read for themselves. There is no doubting this is the story Ned tells Robert. That he tells him he conceived Jon after he left his new wife pregnant with Robb. It is likely a lie, but that is what dear Lord Eddard says to his king and friend.

When Martin tells us that Ashara’s body was never found that is indeed evidence. However the fact Bran doesn’t mention Robb’s 15th isn’t. That is only the absence of evidence. Now, we agree, and I’ve reached the same conclusions for quite some time. I should say I have Jon born in the timeframe of anywhere from the end of August to early October. The overlap in October with Robb’s possible nameday makes it possible Robb is actually a little older.

@Megorova We have gone over this before, and @corbon and @Alexis-something-Rose have provided the necessary quotes and arguments. So, let me just restate my belief there is no doubt Catelyn believes Jon is younger than Robb. Nor is there much of any doubt the rest of most of Westeros believes so as well. Let me also not only agree that the absence of evidence is not evidence, but that using chapter sequence as a argument to support timeline sequence is an extremely faulty method to use in timeline questions. Chapters from later go back in time from the ones previous to them. We have to sort out the individual timelines and how they intersect to get any real understanding of sequence. That being said, let me also say, I actually agree that it is likely that Jon is a little bit older than Robb. I just don't think the characters have obvious reasons to know this. I think Ned lies about this, and everyone is forced to accept his version without proof to the contrary.

He is a self admitted "gardener" not an "architect" but that does not mean he does not obsess over details. I'd say he obsesses over sequence, motive, and logic. Distances, or rather the time it takes to realistically travel them, not so much. But then I've never really known an author who does. Martin has his magic winds to speed a fleet from Dragonstone to Eastwatch, and Tolkien had his eagles. I love JRRT, and GRRM, but those kind of "cheats" are legendary. But a author doesn't obsess over many years on the sequence of events needed to untie the "Meereenese Knot" if he doesn't care about the mundane little details. He does. Many in Westeros do question Lord Eddard's "math." I'd reread Cersei's words to Ned in the King's Landing godswood to see abundant evidence that people have not only questioned his tale, but seriously doubt it. Which raises the question of from where does Cersei get her suspicions? Out of her own head, or from Tywin, Lord Varys, or others? The real question is did Ned construct a believable enough cover story to stop people from not only questioning his story, but being able to prove it a lie. It helps tremendously that Ned's friend, the king, wants to believe his closer-than-a-brother fellow rebel. It also helps that Catelyn is forced to stop her own questioning of events by her husband's orders. And it helps that Howland Reed, Wylla the wet-nurse, and the Daynes of Starfall all support Ned's story.The rest of Westeros just has to take their doubts and live with them unless they can prove Lord Eddard Stark not only a liar, but a traitor. Add to all of this the fact Ned provides of tale of guilt and fallen grace that the small people and the little lords and ladies love to believe and this isn't hard to see as something that Ned uses successfully to hide his actions. Stupidity really doesn't enter into the equation. People have a squalid little tale of romance, broken vows, and suicide. That's a hell of a diversion.

To the bolded, all evidence shows this not to be the case. Catelyn believes Jon is younger because Ned is supposed to have conceived him sometime after he leaves Cat pregnant with Robb. That this is also the story Ned tells Robert is beyond doubt. Catelyn is afraid of the place Jon's mother may have had in Ned's heart. She is afraid Lord Eddard's relationship with Robert could allow him to have Jon's bastard status removed, and therefore place him in line for the Lord's seat in Winterfell, but not because she thinks Jon is older. She doesn't.