Why did the Kings guard at the ToJ try keep Eddard away from Lyanna?

[The guy from the Vale]

1) she is Val the wildling

2) Ned only brought back Rhaegars meloncolic harp

3) she isn't hiding

4) it a figure of speech, the Lyanna he knew has died

1. Val is blond, Lyanna had brown hair.

2. Ned remembers bringing back her bones iirc

3. What's she doing north of the Wall then?

4. He remembers how Lyanna died in his arms. I don't see any ambiguity in the scene.

Also, Theon sees dead Lyanna in his weirwood dream. Lyanna is dead and buried in the Winterfell crypts.

Jon snow is a bastard will always be a bastard doesnt matter what people wishes if it where true that jon is rightful heir, than gendry is to to the baratheon dynasty. so quite japping about the toj that they where protecting the rightful heir .

Eh... If Jon's parents were married, he's not a bastard by the definition of bastard.

[The Broke Howard Hughes]

I've never seen or read that SSM entry before, thank you so much for pointing it out! Medieval history is one of my great passions and one of the reasons I was so drawn to the series in the first place. I'm really impressed (though not really surprised) by the knowledge and understanding of medieval history and politics that GRRM displays in that entry. Some of the lines that really jumped out at me:

"Well, the short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modeled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations and often contradictory."

I'd always suspected that GRRM had modeled the inheritance laws of the Seven Kingdoms on those from medieval history, but this is the first confirmation of it I've seen of it directly from him. It makes me reconsider some of my thoughts on certain events and characters from that perspective. GRRM is absolutely correct in his assessment that inheritance laws in medieval times were ambiguous, and un-condified. I also thoroughly agree with him that:

"In fact, if you look at medieval history, conflicting claims were the cause of three quarters of the wars."

He then goes on to give an impressive list of examples from a wide variety of medieval kingdoms, inheritance laws and the conflicts that resulted from them. He concludes with what I think is one of the most astute assessments of medieval politics and power struggles I've ever seen:

"The medieval world was governed by men, not by laws. You could even make a case that the lords preferred the laws to be vague and contradictory, since that gave them more power. In a tangle like the Hornwood case, ultimately the lord would decide... and if some of the more powerful claimants did not like the decision, it might come down to force of arms. The bottom line, I suppose, is that inheritance was decided as much by politics as by laws. In Westeros and in medieval Europe both.

Another thing that I think is important to consider is the fact that by the time Ned arrives at the TOJ, the Targaryens are now a dynasty in exile; they are totally disempowered and on the brink of extinction. This a set of circumstances for which there is no precedent in the their 300 year history as the rulers of Westeros. It would make deciding who the next king in exile should be even more complicated because realistically, a dynasty in exile needs to be lead by the claimant who could rally the most political and military support to retake their throne. That claimant may or may not be the person who would have had the best claim by birth and precedence when the dynasty was still in power.

For all the above reasons, I think I'm going to have to agree with you that as far as who the next Targaryen king in exile would be:

Very clear and concise answer from the writer himself yet STILL won't end the debate.

[raegal_targaryen]

1. Val is blond, Lyanna had brown hair.

2. Ned remembers bringing back her bones iirc

3. What's she doing north of the Wall then?

4. He remembers how Lyanna died in his arms. I don't see any ambiguity in the scene.

Also, Theon sees dead Lyanna in his weirwood dream. Lyanna is dead and buried in the Winterfell crypts.

Eh... If Jon's parents were married, he's not a bastard by the definition of bastard.

dude rhaegar was allready married and u know aerys kinda also has to agree to it, they never did and its no proof that he is a true born son but its so far proved he is a bastard ehhhh

[The Dragon has three heads]

dude rhaegar was allready married and u know aerys kinda also has to agree to it, they never did and its no proof that he is a true born son but its so far proved he is a bastard ehhhh

The text proves a northern wedding is nothing more than a few words and a cloak exchange in front of a heart tree.

They could have been married anywhere there's a heart tree, sure it's unproven, but it's absolutely within the the realms of possibility.

Does it matter if only one or two people know? No it doesn't but for Jon finding out who he is, its one of his most driving ambitions, it will define him, regardless of whether he wants to claim the IT or not. Which lets be honest is all but impossible given the context of the story so far.

[The guy from the Vale]

dude rhaegar was allready married and u know aerys kinda also has to agree to it, they never did and its no proof that he is a true born son but its so far proved he is a bastard ehhhh

I have a question for you: Do you remember which one of his sisters Aegon the Conqueror married?

Both of them... there is precedent for polygamous Targaryens.

As for Aerys agreeing... no, he doesn't need to actually. The Dragon has three heads has already given one reason above, but even for believers in the faith of the Seven the father doesn't need to approve; Tyrion could marry Tysha without Tywin's agreement too.

How is it proven Jon is a bastard? As for there being no proof he was trueborn - I guess a Targaryen wedding cloak in Lyanna's tomb could do the trick.

[mambru]

The text proves a northern wedding is nothing more than a few words and a cloak exchange in front of a heart tree.

When we actually SAW a Northern wedding, it seemed to require witnesses, and a specific male to "give" the woman to her groom before the heart tree. Granted, these may be dispensible parts of the ceremony, but we don't know whether and how they are dispensed with, so we don't really have it spelled out what the minimal requirements of validity are. or what requirements the participants have to have (including lack of previous marriage). Just because there's no clergy, we can't assume there are no rules, especially in a country like Westeros, where a valid marriage is a hugely important thing to verify for the aristocracy.

...even for believers in the faith of the Seven the father doesn't need to approve; Tyrion could marry Tysha without Tywin's agreement too.

Tywin seemed to have no difficulty setting the marriage aside as invalid; granted, we don't know if he legally did that or whether he just threatened the septon to deny it ever happened - but that would be risky for him if proof ever surfaced when he wanted to marry Tyrion off. And if we go by medieval rules (which GRRM seems to follow in other cirumstances) a minor cannot marry without his lord father's permission.

[Fred of Ashai]

I've never seen or read that SSM entry before, thank you so much for pointing it out! Medieval history is one of my great passions and one of the reasons I was so drawn to the series in the first place. I'm very impressed (though not really surprised) by the knowledge and understanding of medieval history and politics that GRRM displays in that entry. Some of the lines that really jumped out at me:

"Well, the short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modeled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations and often contradictory."

I'd always suspected that GRRM had modeled the inheritance laws of the Seven Kingdoms on those from medieval history, but this is the first confirmation of it I've seen of it directly from him. It makes me reconsider some of my thoughts on certain events and characters from that perspective. GRRM is absolutely correct when he states that inheritance laws in medieval times were ambiguous, often contradictory, and subject to the the whims and political agendas of the powerful. I also thoroughly agree with him when he notes that:

"In fact, if you look at medieval history, conflicting claims were the cause of three quarters of the wars."

He gives an impressive list of examples from a wide variety of medieval kingdoms, inheritance laws and the conflicts that resulted from them. He concludes with what I think is one of the most astute assessments of medieval politics and power struggles I've ever read:

"The medieval world was governed by men, not by laws. You could even make a case that the lords preferred the laws to be vague and contradictory, since that gave them more power. In a tangle like the Hornwood case, ultimately the lord would decide... and if some of the more powerful claimants did not like the decision, it might come down to force of arms. The bottom line, I suppose, is that inheritance was decided as much by politics as by laws. In Westeros and in medieval Europe both.

Another thing that I think is important to consider is the fact that by the time Ned arrives at the TOJ, the Targaryens are now a dynasty in exile; they are totally disempowered and on the brink of extinction. This a set of circumstances for which there is no precedent in the their 300 year history as the rulers of Westeros. It would make deciding who the next king in exile should be even more complicated because the political reality of a dynasty in exile is that it needs to be lead by the claimant who can rally the most political and military support to retake their throne. That claimant may or may not be the person who would have had the best claim by birth and precedence when the dynasty was still in power.

For all the above reasons, I think I'm going to have to agree with you that as far as who the next Targaryen king in exile would be:

Thank you. I agree. This is what I have been trying to explain, but Martin (and you) have done a better job articulating it.

[raegal_targaryen]

I have a question for you: Do you remember which one of his sisters Aegon the Conqueror married?

Both of them... there is precedent for polygamous Targaryens.

As for Aerys agreeing... no, he doesn't need to actually. The Dragon has three heads has already given one reason above, but even for believers in the faith of the Seven the father doesn't need to approve; Tyrion could marry Tysha without Tywin's agreement too.

How is it proven Jon is a bastard? As for there being no proof he was trueborn - I guess a Targaryen wedding cloak in Lyanna's tomb could do the trick.

dude just because aegon did doesnt mean rhaegar did, and how many of the targaryens had 2 wives at the same time not many after aegon the conqueror so and the dragon has three heads dont need to marry to get three heads for the dragon, and yeah he is called a bastard by everyone including well everyone so its been established that he is a bastard, and that northern marriage thing your hoping for i dont think they did that nor is there any proof they married.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

dude just because aegon did doesnt mean rhaegar did, and how many of the targaryens had 2 wives at the same time not many after aegon the conqueror so and the dragon has three heads dont need to marry to get three heads for the dragon, and yeah he is called a bastard by everyone including well everyone so its been established that he is a bastard, and that northern marriage thing your hoping for i dont think they did that nor is there any proof they married.

If everyone call the miller's sons Rickon and Bran it means that they are Rickon and Bran? Very interesting approach.

[raegal_targaryen]

If everyone call the miller's sons Rickon and Bran it means that they are Rickon and Bran? Very interesting approach.

thats one stupid comparison i gotta tell u the truth we have povs showing bran is alive and rickon, we dont have that too show us they married and that he is not a bastard,missess qeen consort i just wonder how U MADE that interesting approach.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

thats one stupid comparison i gotta tell u the truth we have povs showing bran is alive and rickon, we dont have that too show us they married and that he is not a bastard,missess qeen consort i just wonder how U MADE that interesting approach.

We have Bran's PoV, do we have any PoV that proves that Jon is a bastard?

[raegal_targaryen]

We have Bran's PoV, do we have any PoV that proves that Jon is a bastard?

u argue like a six year old, so in the books so far has it not been established that jons a bastard? jon does think himself as a bastard born nor his friends so all fo that robbs letter making him legit thats all bullshit, show my a fact proof he isnt a bastard.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

u argue like a six year old, so in the books so far has it not been established that jons a bastard? jon does think himself as a bastard born nor his friends so all fo that robbs letter making him legit thats all bullshit, show my a fact proof he isnt a bastard.

I http://www.google.gr/imgres?sa=X&espvd=210&es_sm=93&biw=1024&bih=677&tbm=isch&tbnid=7XzqmB7730HHXM%3A&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fgroupthink.jezebel.com%2F%3FstartTime%3D1370468819361&docid=uHNPAFkDHbKywM&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.gawkerassets.com%2Fimg%2F17bk2yazhat1ajpg%2Fk-medium.jpg&w=320&h=180&ei=TKLyUoUjh5W1Bp7BgIAE&zoom=1&ved=0CIcBEIQcMBE&iact=rc&dur=280&page=2&start=15&ndsp=19 the fact that Jon think that he is a bastard made him one? Cersei thinks that she is lion is she one? Dany thinks that she has dragon blood means that she has dragon's DNA?

[raegal_targaryen]

I http://www.google.gr/imgres?sa=X&espvd=210&es_sm=93&biw=1024&bih=677&tbm=isch&tbnid=7XzqmB7730HHXM%3A&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fgroupthink.jezebel.com%2F%3FstartTime%3D1370468819361&docid=uHNPAFkDHbKywM&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.gawkerassets.com%2Fimg%2F17bk2yazhat1ajpg%2Fk-medium.jpg&w=320&h=180&ei=TKLyUoUjh5W1Bp7BgIAE&zoom=1&ved=0CIcBEIQcMBE&iact=rc&dur=280&page=2&start=15&ndsp=19 the fact that Jon think that he is a bastard made him one? Cersei thinks that she is lion is she one? Dany thinks that she has dragon blood means that she has dragon's DNA?

well jon is a bastard, and cersei is a lioness not a lion hihi and yeah dany do have the blood of the dragon. now am not sure if ur trying to troll me :D

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

So Bran and Rickon aren't dead?

[Ygrain]

dude just because aegon did doesnt mean rhaegar did, and how many of the targaryens had 2 wives at the same time not many after aegon the conqueror

There weren't many before Aegon, either. What matters is that his precedent (followed by Maegor) was never made illegal, in books or in SSMs.

and the dragon has three heads dont need to marry to get three heads for the dragon

Of course they do - bastards are not dragons.

and yeah he is called a bastard by everyone including well everyone so its been established that he is a bastard

Up till the "seed is strong" moment, everyone calls Joffrey Robert's trueborn son, does it make him one? It's not like all those people who call Jon bastard were present when his supposed father was, you know, siring him.

and that northern marriage thing your hoping for

Hope really has nothing to do with it. It's just a combination of several factors, such as Rhaegar being supposedly honourable, marriage being the honourable thing to do if you want to have sex with someone, no need for septons and the likes under the northern rite, some conveniently placed weirwoods in the South (the Isle of faces) as well as a certain kid currently accessing the weirnet, Kingsguard claiming they are doing their duty by guarding Lyanna, Ned thinking that Rhaegar was the better man than Robert who whored and fathered bastards, and no explicit mention of polygamy being illegal.

i dont think they did that nor is there any proof they married.

There is no proof for lots of things to happen/ that have happened yet. There is a set of clues, such as the ones above, the existence of which will allow a particular plot twist. If GRRM wants to pull the polygamy card, he has prepared the grounds for it.

u argue like a six year old, so in the books so far has it not been established that jons a bastard? jon does think himself as a bastard born nor his friends so all fo that robbs letter making him legit thats all bullshit, show my a fact proof he isnt a bastard.

No, it hasn't. It is all hearsay based on the word of a single person, who claimed Jon as his bastard. And if Ned lied about the first part, why should necessarily the other be true?

[Chilli]

and yeah he is called a bastard by everyone including well everyone so its been established that he is a bastard

He's been called Ned's son too, while he probably isn't.

And Joffrey Baratheon is never called a bastard.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

well jon is a bastard, and cersei is a lioness not a lion hihi and yeah dany do have the blood of the dragon. now am not sure if ur trying to troll me :D

So Cersei has lion's DNA and Dany dragon's? :bang:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/69608-isnt-rhaegars-son-jon-still-a-bastard/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/64223-why-jon-snow-is-not-a-targaryen/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/76527-targaryen-polygamy/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/92224-targaryen-polygamy-examined/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/74288-targs-and-polygamy/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/97460-questiondid-rhaegar-have-a-polygamous-marriage-after-elia/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/73386-jon-trueborn-or-baseborn/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/103029-do-you-believe-rhaegar-and-lyanna-were-married/

[raegal_targaryen]

So Cersei has lion's DNA and Dany dragon's? :bang:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/69608-isnt-rhaegars-son-jon-still-a-bastard/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/64223-why-jon-snow-is-not-a-targaryen/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/76527-targaryen-polygamy/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/92224-targaryen-polygamy-examined/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/74288-targs-and-polygamy/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/97460-questiondid-rhaegar-have-a-polygamous-marriage-after-elia/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/73386-jon-trueborn-or-baseborn/

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/103029-do-you-believe-rhaegar-and-lyanna-were-married/

hehe ur always so hard working queen consort hehe it never fails hehe :D

[Jon's Queen Consort]

hehe ur always so hard working queen consort hehe it never fails hehe :D

So to summarize, you have nothing to say, you have no text proof, no actual argument and you expect people to answer you? Seriously?