R + L = J v 70

[Ygrain]

Perfectly reasoned. In hiding a legitimate Jon from Robert, Ned is not only betraying his friend, he is betraying his friend and king to whom he is sworn. He is committing high treason, not only a personal betrayal. Bastard/betrayal vs legitimate/treason. Quite a tragic burden...

ETA Fire Eater's post about Ned'd moral obligation to protect Cat by not sharing the truth is another very valid and insightful point.

"Some secrets are best kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share."

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Perfectly reasoned. In hiding a legitimate Jon from Robert, Ned is not only betraying his friend, he is betraying his friend and king to whom he is sworn. He is committing high treason, not only a personal betrayal. Bastard/betrayal vs legitimate/treason. Quite a tragic burden...

ETA Fire Eater's post about Ned'd moral obligation to protect Cat by not sharing the truth is another very valid and insightful point.

Another great point. Ned's act really is only treason in the legalese sense if Jon is legitimate. If Jon is a bastard, he has no claim that could challenge Robert's and thus harboring him, while not really kosher, is not treason.

[FrozenFire3]

"Some secrets are best kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share."

Exactly. For love is the bane of honor, the death of duty. While Ned could never lie for honor, he could lie (and commit treason) for love after all...

[Lyse Stark]

Exactly. For love is the bane of honor, the death of duty. While Ned could never lie for honor, he could lie (and commit treason) for love after all...

And the great price that Ned paid to ensure Jon's safety haunted him for a long time.

And when Jon finds out, he won't be happy Ned lied to him, but the fact that his safety was paramount in Ned's mind really speaks to how much he loved Lyanna.

[Ygrain]

Exactly. For love is the bane of honor, the death of duty. While Ned could never lie for honor, he could lie (and commit treason) for love after all...

Which actually further supports the case of the three KG at ToJ: no matter their personal feelings towards Rhaegar, at the end of day, they were staying for duty. They were the paragons of the strictest, unbending, unforgiving honour. They could not foresee that Ned would bend his honour for love because they never would themselves. Even more tragically, he probably hadn't known he would himself until that very day.

[FrozenFire3]

Which actually further supports the case of the three KG at ToJ: no matter their personal feelings towards Rhaegar, at the end of day, they were staying for duty. They were the paragons of the strictest, unbending, unforgiving honour. They could not foresee that Ned would bend his honour for love because they never would themselves. Even more tragically, he probably hadn't known he would himself until that very day.

And in this I can't help but wonder about the tragic similarities between Jon's two dutiful fathers...

[Lyse Stark]

And in this I can't help but wonder about the tragic similarities between Jon's two dutiful fathers...

Both died because they loved someone so much they were willing to forgo duty.

[Ygrain]

Both died because they loved someone so much they were willing to forgo duty.

And both put the honour of the woman they loved above their own - Robb was indeed Ned's son in that, as well.

[Bluecore]

Who would be alive in the books currently that could prove Jon was legitimate? You have Ned and Howland Reed who know of his parentage presumably, but no one I can think of to prove he is legitimate. You would likely not just need someone who was present at the wedding, but probably the person who married them. It would also have to be someone reputable. Who? All of the Kingsguard who would have known and presumably be above reproach among people that matter died at the Tower. Someone already in the story, or someone to be revealed?

I also highly doubt Robert would kill a child of the woman he went to war for, and the nephew of his best friend, legitimate or not. I base that on nothing other than my own logic and my judgment of Robert's love for Lyanna...don't think he'd do it. That's hard for me to swallow, but it's counter factual and a theory so hard to argue. Still, it does make a bit of sense and it's very thought provoking if the aforementioned people still exist...

[FittleLinger]

Who would be alive in the books currently that could prove Jon was legitimate? You have Ned and Howland Reed who know of his parentage presumably, but no one I can think of to prove he is legitimate. You would likely not just need someone who was present at the wedding, but probably the person who married them. It would also have to be someone reputable. Who? All of the Kingsguard who would have known and presumably be above reproach among people that matter died at the Tower. Someone already in the story, or someone to be revealed?

I also highly doubt Robert would kill a child of the woman he went to war for, and the nephew of his best friend, legitimate or not. I base that on nothing other than my own logic and my judgment of Robert's love for Lyanna...don't think he'd do it. That's hard for me to swallow, but it's counter factual and a theory so hard to argue. Still, it does make a bit of sense and it's very thought provoking if the aforementioned people still exist...

Bran through a weirwood - most likely. If they married infront of a weirwood.

A septon that married them - less likely.

Something left in the crypts of WF - a dragon egg, a wedding cloak, Rhaegar's harp have been suggested.

Anyone through a glass candle is also an option.

Otherwise, probably Wylla the midwife, Howland as you said, Ashara Dayne if she is alive, and any of the aforementioned KG trio, which some people crack pots about being alive (something I don't believe).

As for Robert killing Jon, if he thinks that Rhaegar raped the shit out of Lyanna (which he does), then it's very likely for him to wish to kill the dragonspawn that was the product of this atrocity.

[FittleLinger]

A tangent thought I'd like to point out. In AGOT, when Ned finds out about Needle and asks Arya how she got it, she answers nothing, lowers her gaze and thinks something like, "She wouldn't tell on Jon, even to their father". Which to me is a parallel to how Ned wouldn't tell on Jon even to Robert, and similarly avoids talking about it, so that he doesn't have to lie.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I also highly doubt Robert would kill a child of the woman he went to war for, and the nephew of his best friend, legitimate or not. I base that on nothing other than my own logic and my judgment of Robert's love for Lyanna...don't think he'd do it. That's hard for me to swallow, but it's counter factual and a theory so hard to argue. Still, it does make a bit of sense and it's very thought provoking if the aforementioned people still exist...

FittleLinger answered your main question, but I absolutely think Robert would try to kill Jon. And if not Robert, the Lannisters.

[Lyse Stark]

Who would be alive in the books currently that could prove Jon was legitimate? You have Ned and Howland Reed who know of his parentage presumably, but no one I can think of to prove he is legitimate. You would likely not just need someone who was present at the wedding, but probably the person who married them. It would also have to be someone reputable. Who? All of the Kingsguard who would have known and presumably be above reproach among people that matter died at the Tower. Someone already in the story, or someone to be revealed?

I also highly doubt Robert would kill a child of the woman he went to war for, and the nephew of his best friend, legitimate or not. I base that on nothing other than my own logic and my judgment of Robert's love for Lyanna...don't think he'd do it. That's hard for me to swallow, but it's counter factual and a theory so hard to argue. Still, it does make a bit of sense and it's very thought provoking if the aforementioned people still exist...

FittleLinger answered your main question, but I absolutely think Robert would try to kill Jon. And if not Robert, the Lannisters.

And I wouldn't be surprised if Ned concealed Jon in order to keep the Lannisters and Baratheons from killing him if the truth that he was trueborn came out.

[Fire Eater]

FittleLinger answered your main question, but I absolutely think Robert would try to kill Jon. And if not Robert, the Lannisters.

Yes, because one has to take into account that they had just overthrown Jon's family and killed his father, grandfather and siblings. Letting him live would come with the constant fear of Jon growing up and raising an army to take back his family's throne and endanger Robert and his family along with the Lannisters.

Think in the beginning of The Godfather Part II, when Vito's mother pleads to the Don Ciccio to spare him, after he killed her husband and older son, Paolo, to which Ciccio refuses arguing that Vito will eventually grow up, and he will come back to avenge his family.

[WhitewolfStark]

While I generally believe this theory to be correct, I don't think it means he's going to become King (and no offense to Dany/Jon shippers--but I don't see that happening). I always took it that if Jon were supposed to be King by accordance to bloodline--how genre defying would it be that the person who's supposed to be King not only doesn't want it, but chooses to abandon such notions of ever taking it up?

Others before have mentioned the parallels to the in-world Old Nan tale of the last time a Stark daughter had been kidnapped for a year--and if anything I see that as a potential set up for what we should expect to be coming, something truly tragic. I could easily see that being turned into a number of possibilities...

I also like how in that tale the mother's blood ended up being more important than the father's. Too often when I read supporters of this theory elsewhere (though sometimes here as well) the overemphasis of him being "Rhaegar's son" is played up to the point where I nearly want to start disavowing the theory completely. Personally I like the idea that it would be Lyanna's blood ending up being the more important of the two, that Jon associates and more importantly identifies more as a Stark than as a Targ.

I would like to see the remaining Starks eventually reunite and fight together as a "pack", but I know that's a little too idealistic of me to expect that. What'll more likely happen before that is that they each gather together on different sides and tragically end up fighting one another on the battlefields to their bloody ends, becoming the best fighters or assessts of each syion fighting for the Iron Throne. Sansa usurping and fighting with remains of Littlefinger's Vale lords (I don't foresee Littlefinger living to the end of the series, I think the majority of his "generation" will be dead by the series' end--and Littlefinger's training of Sansa marks me as the setup for his downfall, for it'll be his apprentice that'll seal his doom), Jon on Stannis' side, Rickon--if he's not rescued by Davos--perhaps going native and leading his own Skagosi warriors ironically moving for Skagos to become independent of the North or something oddly ironic as that, Arya for Daenerys as her own personal assassin, and Bran powerless to stop it all as he watches horrified as his family unknowingly kills each other off. Hell, I can even easily imagine a scene where Arya is charged to assassinate one of them by Daenerys and it isn't until Arya has just killed the person that she realizes she just killed her own family, sending her into a long fit of madness from which she never recovers--that would be a fitting end to her arc, the girl who wanted to learn to fight and use weapons, learns to kill and by doing so kills her own family (for some reason I see this happening to Sansa or Jon).

If not that idealism or hellish nightmare, then I'd settle for perhaps some of them fighting together in a bittersweet manner, and the most likely situation I see for this occuring is if Jon after "dying" and being "resurrected" were to fight in a Robert of Caen manner for the defense of Rickon whom Davos has managed to spirit away from Skagos.

[Fire Eater]

While I generally believe this theory to be correct, I don't think it means he's going to become King (and no offense to Dany/Jon shippers--but I don't see that happening). I always took it that if Jon were supposed to be King by accordance to bloodline--how genre defying would it be that the person who's supposed to be King not only doesn't want it, but chooses to abandon such notions of ever taking it up?

Others before have mentioned the parallels to the in-world Old Nan tale of the last time a Stark daughter had been kidnapped for a year--and if anything I see that as a potential set up for what we should expect to be coming, something truly tragic.

The foreshadowing points to Jon being king. Stories in mythology are full of heroes refusing the call initially, but circumstances push them in that direction.

The setup is already tragic with the story of the Stark girl told by Ygritte, given both Rhaegar and Lyanna died along with Rhaegar's family and Lyanna's father and brother, and many people in the realm killed in Robert's Rebellion.

Personally I like the idea that it would be Lyanna's blood ending up being the more important of the two, that Jon associates and more importantly identifies more as a Stark than as a Targ.

It is a song of ice and fire, or finding balance between the two, so I think the Targaryen aspect would equal in importance to the Stark aspect.

[Alia of the knife]

The foreshadowing points to Jon being king. Stories in mythology are full of heroes refusing the call initially, but circumstances push them in that direction.

The setup is already tragic with the story of the Stark girl told by Ygritte, given both Rhaegar and Lyanna died along with Rhaegar's family and Lyanna's father and brother, and many people in the realm killed in Robert's Rebellion.

It is a song of ice and fire, or finding balance between the two, so I think the Targaryen aspect would equal in importance to the Stark aspect.

But, there is also the flip side of Jons nature that "covets" very much so.

[Lyse Stark]

While I generally believe this theory to be correct, I don't think it means he's going to become King (and no offense to Dany/Jon shippers--but I don't see that happening). I always took it that if Jon were supposed to be King by accordance to bloodline--how genre defying would it be that the person who's supposed to be King not only doesn't want it, but chooses to abandon such notions of ever taking it up?

Others before have mentioned the parallels to the in-world Old Nan tale of the last time a Stark daughter had been kidnapped for a year--and if anything I see that as a potential set up for what we should expect to be coming, something truly tragic. I could easily see that being turned into a number of possibilities...

I also like how in that tale the mother's blood ended up being more important than the father's. Too often when I read supporters of this theory elsewhere (though sometimes here as well) the overemphasis of him being "Rhaegar's son" is played up to the point where I nearly want to start disavowing the theory completely. Personally I like the idea that it would be Lyanna's blood ending up being the more important of the two, that Jon associates and more importantly identifies more as a Stark than as a Targ.

I would like to see the remaining Starks eventually reunite and fight together as a "pack", but I know that's a little too idealistic of me to expect that. What'll more likely happen before that is that they each gather together on different sides and tragically end up fighting one another on the battlefields to their bloody ends, becoming the best fighters or assessts of each syion fighting for the Iron Throne. Sansa usurping and fighting with remains of Littlefinger's Vale lords (I don't foresee Littlefinger living to the end of the series, I think the majority of his "generation" will be dead by the series' end--and Littlefinger's training of Sansa marks me as the setup for his downfall, for it'll be his apprentice that'll seal his doom), Jon on Stannis' side, Rickon--if he's not rescued by Davos--perhaps going native and leading his own Skagosi warriors ironically moving for Skagos to become independent of the North or something oddly ironic as that, Arya for Daenerys as her own personal assassin, and Bran powerless to stop it all as he watches horrified as his family unknowingly kills each other off. Hell, I can even easily imagine a scene where Arya is charged to assassinate one of them by Daenerys and it isn't until Arya has just killed the person that she realizes she just killed her own family, sending her into a long fit of madness from which she never recovers--that would be a fitting end to her arc, the girl who wanted to learn to fight and use weapons, learns to kill and by doing so kills her own family (for some reason I see this happening to Sansa or Jon).

If not that idealism or hellish nightmare, then I'd settle for perhaps some of them fighting together in a bittersweet manner, and the most likely situation I see for this occuring is if Jon after "dying" and being "resurrected" were to fight in a Robert of Caen manner for the defense of Rickon whom Davos has managed to spirit away from Skagos.

I doubt everything you say. You should re-read the Stark chapters again and look at the direction GRRM is going more closely.

What he is getting at is that the game of thrones is pointless if a big threat is coming, and I think that the Starks will be back and stronger, especially as the southron houses are going to tear each other throats out, and the same with the dragons squabbling amongst themselves on who should be on the throne. These petty arguments will cost these parties dearly, especially if Jon wants the realm to be united in order to face the impeding onslaught of the Others. If he see these squabbles and ambitions continuing to define the parties involved, I have no doubt that he will leave them to die at the Others' hands in order to teach them that their feud is worthless in his eyes. And after his stabbing, Jon will have no patience for the kind of BS that tore Westeros apart.

[WhitewolfStark]

Lyse, you mistake my nightmare scenario for what I actually think will happen. I easily see Jon and Rickon teaming up and think that the most likely scenario--whether that be Rickon as boy King in the North or boy Lord of Winterfell--with Jon acting as regent or not is the difference.

And while I agree the Starks are going to be back and stronger,than they were before that doesn't mean they will all be back and working together necessarially--hence the nightmare scenario.

Martin has also said that the Others aren't necessarially "evil"--which to me says there's more to be explored on that front than we've gotten thus far. I've seen it mentioned elsewhere that they might perhaps be a greater force bringing balance by bringing back a revival of older ways prior to the overrun of new gods, new ways, etc. of Westeros--that seems to me to be a likely way to have them still be antagonistic without making it sappy or too melodramatic. That they're beating back what's percieved to be an overextension of "fire" associated and "new ways" peoples across Westeros.

To be honest I see either the Iron Throne being meaningless at the end of the series or it being held by someone who has such little right to sit in it (which would make it meaningless in a completely different manner) that one could consider it to be a complete wash of all the previous claims that came prior to it. It would be akin to Henry Tudor taking the throne of England at the end of the Wars of the Roses. The complete and utter end of a dynasty (Targs) and all claims connected to that past dynasty (Baratheons have claim through Targ blood) being wiped out or disavowing it (Jon, if this theory proove true).

[Bluecore]

Bran through a weirwood - most likely. If they married infront of a weirwood.

A septon that married them - less likely.

Something left in the crypts of WF - a dragon egg, a wedding cloak, Rhaegar's harp have been suggested.

Anyone through a glass candle is also an option.

Otherwise, probably Wylla the midwife, Howland as you said, Ashara Dayne if she is alive, and any of the aforementioned KG trio, which some people crack pots about being alive (something I don't believe).

As for Robert killing Jon, if he thinks that Rhaegar raped the shit out of Lyanna (which he does), then it's very likely for him to wish to kill the dragonspawn that was the product of this atrocity.

On Bran: I was watching a GRRM interview on the Tube yesterday, and one of his pet peeves is the believability of a story. I really think the Bran scneario is a stretch. I don't dismiss the possibility that he would see such a thing, sure, but his witness as a basis for legitimacy by itself is absurd to me. The people who matter have to believe it...and that's a realllly tough sell for Bran to just see it and then there, that's it, it's gospel for all the high lords and families. (How would he even communicate it to everyone?) However, as you said, if it ends up being someone relevant who is still alive and was thought to be dead, etc, then we're on to something. The problem with that line of thinking is I don't see much evidence for that, but then again I guess that's why we're on these boards, haha.

On Crypt paraphernalia: I would think that a relic like that would be left near Lyanna's tomb, where Ned frequents and has been a location in the text, and therefore would have been noticed by now. Other than that it's certainly plausible. Perhaps in your Howland Reed theory, he might be privy to a different location of such an object, or whoever this mystery person may be. Again, really no evidence though, seems like a guess.

After getting my thoughts down on paper and reading what you guys said, I am more inclined to agree at least regarding the reason for keeping Jon anonymous. Even if I still think Robert might not have done it, Ned and/or Lyanna certainly had reasons (not to mention evidence) to believe that Robert would or that in general his life would be in danger. I had this typed out:

"Recall that they quarreled over the murder of (f)Aegon and his sister to the degree that Ned left town to finish off the war because he was so mad about it. If that same argument had involved his sister's child, everyone here is prepared to say that 1. Robert would have killed Ned to get to Jon or 2. Ned would have allowed Robert to murder a member of his own family?"

...but then realized that it was precisely the reason that Ned would have wanted to keep Jon's entire identity as Lyanna's child a mystery, regardless of whether or not Robert would actually try to kill him.

I think that the weight of Ned's burden regarding Robert is that explaining the entire thing would obviously involve telling him that Lyanna was legitimately in love with Rhaegar, chose him over Robert, and was not taken against her will. Doing so would call in to question everything Robert ever did. The King engaged in rebellion on the basis of a lie? If that got out, it would likely prompt another rebellion, not to mention crush Robert emotionally. I do concede that for whatever reason, Ned and/or Lyanna thought it best to not tell Robert.

Ned told Jon as he saw him off to the Wall that the next time they met, they would discuss his mother. Of course, we will never know what Ned was really going to tell him. Based on that, it's a possibility that Lyanna's promise could have simply been to keep Jon's true lineage a secret from the rest of the realm, and not necessarily Jon himself. In the context of Jon Arryn's murder, Lysa's letter, and the imminent danger Ned believes himself and the King to be in, I believe he was going to tell him the truth. Thoughts?