Jump to content

R+L = J v 86


Stubby

Recommended Posts

It really comes down to individuals who did not catch the R+L=J in their reading having sour grapes. They don't want to admit (even to themselves) that they missed this. So they spend a lot of time trying to debunk it. Most people get fixated on one element of the theory thinking if they can just disprove this they have in some way disproved the entire theory. As an example the earlier poster who was trying so hard to argue that the KG would only have been at the TOJ because they were commanded to be, and not to guard the heir to the throne. What they miss is even if they could prove that the KG were there on orders and not to guard the heir, it still does nothing to disprove R+L=J. The fact that they have to try so hard to disprove only one portion of the evidence (leaving many, many others) should tell them something.

People arguing about the reasons for the presence of the KG at the TOJ don't agree with Jon being legitimate, not R+L=J. I think that lot of people on that thread need to understand that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But he can't really tell anyone about that battle because it raises a lot of questions.

Well, he did return Dawn and the horse, so he was probably questioned all the same. My idea is that he deliberately destroyed evidence, not just because it was inconvenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he did return Dawn and the horse, so he was probably questioned all the same. My idea is that he deliberately destroyed evidence, not just because it was inconvenient.

He was probably questioned, but he probably gave a very brief description of the battle.

What sort of evidence do you think he destroyed? Burning the tower/tearing it down, would destroy the baby evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he did return Dawn and the horse, so he was probably questioned all the same. My idea is that he deliberately destroyed evidence, not just because it was inconvenient.

Well, keep in mind that a lot of us are theorizing that the Daynes were in on it anyway. At the very least they were Targ loyalists (I think this is canon) and they could actually explain it to them. And it's likely they were part of the subsequent cover-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, keep in mind that a lot of us are theorizing that the Daynes were in on it anyway. At the very least they were Targ loyalists (I think this is canon) and they could actually explain it to them. And it's likely they were part of the subsequent cover-up.

Yup. They managed to keep everyone at Starfall quiet and sticking to the agreed upon story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. They managed to keep everyone at Starfall quiet and sticking to the agreed upon story.

Really, the Daynes are the perfect people for Ned to involve, even if they weren't involved before. They're a family who's loyal to the Targs but who appear to respect Ned personally and so aren't just going to kill him on sight (there's a lot of cryptic Ashara history in there, I think). And of course they're relatively nearby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Returning bodies and burying your death is a big deal for Westerosi nobility. Ned, who is all about honor and duty, just biulds some cairns and tells nobody how they died. His five most trusted and loyal friends, and the KGs, of whom we know he respected greatly. We don't even know if he told anybody about Whent or Hightower, much less if anybody knows where all of these men are buried. Now, why would Ned do that? It's because the location/dead could make some quite powerful and influental lords suspicious about Jon (or potentially other theories like Dayne being alive).

I admit, it's more likely that digging up the dead is a huge no-no in Westeros and the location is widely known amongst aforementioned lords.

We don't know if he told anyone how they died or not. We also don't know if Lady Dustin actually even asked. Keep in mind the entire story Lady Dustin gives us is most likely just to cover up the fact that she is looking for proof that Bran and Rickon are alive. I'm sure that there are portion of it that are true, but I actually don't think she was that upset about not getting her Husbands Bones. I think we actually agree overall so it's not a big deal. It is possible that he didn't want the location widley known in case it arroused suspicion. Were that the case it would support R+L=J. If it was just a logistics issue it neither supports or discredits it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know if he told anyone how they died or not. We also don't know if Lady Dustin actually even asked. Keep in mind the entire story Lady Dustin gives us is most likely just to cover up the fact that she is looking for proof that Bran and Rickon are alive. I'm sure that there are portion of it that are true, but I actually don't think she was that upset about not getting her Husbands Bones. I think we actually agree overall so it's not a big deal. It is possible that he didn't want the location widley known in case it arroused suspicion. Were that the case it would support R+L=J. If it was just a logistics issue it neither supports or discredits it.

This is also true. While she may have truly been upset about that (and about Brandon being a player), it's not the primary reason she's in the crypts--that's the excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand you correctly--and I am not sure I do because you spend more time sniping at other people's theories than making your theories clear--you agree with most of my conclusions (and the conclusions of the majority who have been addressing you on this issue). Specifically, it appears that you agree with us on the following:

1) R&L considered themselves to be married.

2) L gave birth to J in ToJ.

3) N promised L something in terms of keeping J safe (you say raise as N's son, although I am not sure the promise was that specific, but the exact wording of the promise is not that critical--what is critical is that N promised L something about J that has led N to let the world believe J is N's son even though J is L's son).

4) J is TPTWP.

Here is what I think we disagree about:

1) You believe--3 KG stayed at ToJ due to orders from R or to protect L (a "royal" princess) and had no care for J's well being. We believe--3 KG stayed at ToJ (after learning of death of Aerys and Viserys having gone to Dragonstone) only because they were fulfilling their duty to guard the king--Jon.

2) You believe--L was still pregnant during the showdown, and only after the showdown does L give birth in the presence of N and then dies shortly (or maybe immediately) after giving birth. We believe--L gave birth prior to the showdown (probably 3-10 days if the puerperal fever theory is correct) and was slowly dying and finally died shortly after the showdown in N's presence.

3) You believe--there is no evidence of a wetnurse or other servants at ToJ. We believe--a wetnurse (probably Wylla) and likely other servants from Starfall (or other friendly supporting location) were at ToJ giving assistance.

If I have misinterpreted your position, please clarify. I think I have distilled the basics of our agreements and disagreement. If my interpretation of your position is correct, then I am not sure our differences are as meaningful as I had thought. From the point of view of the significance for the rest of the series, I am not sure it matters whether J was born before or after the showdown or exactly why the 3 KG stayed at ToJ through the showdown or whether a wetnurse or other servants were at ToJ. None of these differences really would have any impact on the unfolding of the story. J would still be the rightful heir to the Targaryen dynasty. J could still be one of the heads of the dragon and TPTWP. So I am not sure why we are quibbling over details that really don't affect how the series unfolds.

But because almost no issue is too small for me to try to parse, I will give it a shot at explaining why I still disagree with you on the issues of disagreement outlined above (assuming, again, that I have correctly interpreted where we agree and where we disagree).

1) Why were the KG still at ToJ at the time of the showdown? While it is true that guarding other members of the royal family is consistent with their vows, royal family members other than the king can be guarded by non-KG only. The king, on the other hand, generally must have at least 1 KG assigned to him. Do you disagree with this proposition? The KG are required to obey the king's orders--not necessarily other members of the royal family. Not to say that if assigned to a member of the royal family, the KG don't follow that person's orders, the king's orders must prevail. I form my basic conclusion regarding why the KG were at ToJ based on the exchange between Ned and the KG. While the exchange is just a dream, and I agree that it is not necessarily a word-for-word recreation of the scene, it is in some respects even better. This is an old dream--one N has had many times before. It is the distillation of his understanding of what happened, and must be consistent with his understanding of the facts as he understands them now. So some detail may have been altered in his mind based on facts he learned later. My suspicion is that at the time he did not think "now it ends" but filled that in the dream based on his knowledge now that the KG all die. Similarly, I don't think that a sick L was yelling "Eddard" from the window, I think his dream being interrupted by someone calling him "Lord Eddard" got filled into the dream. But the exchange between N and KG must be consistent with N's understanding of the facts even if not a word-for-word recreation. In that sense, the dream is even better than a recreation--it is a summary of what N views is important from that day.

Here is the key part of the exchange:

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.

Based on this exchange, I just don't see how the KG could be doing anything other than guarding the king--Jon. If there was any doubt of what the KG knew before N arrived at ToJ, N is telling the KG that Viserys is on Dragonstone. He has already clarified that R, Aerys and Aegon are dead (I can re-print that part of the conversation if you need me to). So N is giving them an out--they can go to their king, Viserys, and N will let them pass (that is how I interpret N's statement). But the KG do not take N up on his offer. They say that KG do not flee then or NOW and that they swore a VOW. If J is not yet born, there is a 50/50 chance that J will be a girl--right? So at that point in time, if J is not yet born, at least one of the KG would have had to try to leave and get to V, who has a 50% chance of being king. If V is potentially king, then going to him is not fleeing. The words then or now are critical because they are saying that when V first left, Aerys was still king, so they could not flee to Dragonstone because the king was still on Westeros and these KG had other duties on Westeros (at ToJ). But they add the words NOW. That is very important (IMHO). They are saying that even after the death of Aerys, it would still be fleeing to go to V. It would not be fleeing if V is king or a 50% chance to be king. That statement--to me--only makes sense if they already know that J is king. Hightower then follows up with "We swore a VOW." If you look at what happened when Robert died, the KG believe that their duty is to go to the new king--Joffrey (they have no knowledge that Joffrey might not be the true heir). Following the old command of the dead crown prince (not even of the dead king) should not supersede the need to send at least one KG to guard V if V might be king. But following orders of the crown prince is not even one of the stated duties of the KG (guard perhaps, but obey, not listed)--although obviously in general they will follow them. It makes no sense that they would make such a big deal about not fleeing and following a vow if V has a 50% chance to be king, the only vow they would be following is an old order from a dead prince (guarding the princess L is only a duty if assigned by the king to do so, the KG cannot pick and choose when to guard someone else of the royal family other than the king).

You seem to believe that they are not fleeing and are keeping a vow because they swore to R to stay at ToJ and protect Princess L. You may find that plausible given the other facts I have outlined above, but I do not. I am not back-filling the evidence to fit a preferred theory (I really have no preferred theory). I simply am following the clues we have been given and making the most logical conclusions that make the most sense to me. I might be wrong--GRRM certainly has created enough ambiguity to go in your direction or a dozen other directions. But the clues he left lead me to believe the KG were guarding the king.

2) Was J born before the showdown? I really don't think I need any additional analysis. Everything that I put forth for point 1) is essentially the same evidence for my belief in point 2). J had to have been born prior to the showdown in order that the vow to protect the king was clearly a duty that the KG had to J and not V. Based on the puerperal fever theory, my best guess is J was born 3-10 days prior, but maybe longer under other theories (precise date of birth not really critical to my theory).

3) Was a wetnurse or other servants at ToJ? This issue is kind of pointless. As I noted above, the text clearly states that others were there, "They had found him [Ned] still holding her [Lyanna's] body, silent with grief." Who is the "they"? Someone other than Howland was there. At a minimum, some servants were there. Once you conclude that J was born prior to the showdown (as I have shown in 1) and 2) above), and once you think through the stories about Wylla being J's mother or wetnurse, the existence of a wetnurse at ToJ seems likely. J did survive while his mother was dying (assuming my conclusion about the birth prior to showdown is correct), so logic suggests a wetnurse was present. It is a logical deduction based on clues and other conclusion (not merely "made up out of thin air" as you suggest).

I don't expect to convince you, but hopefully this post clarifies our areas of disagreement and demonstrates the evidence (or at least the main evidence--there likely is more if I searched more) to support my conclusions. I admit that just because the majority on the board seems to agree with me does not make me right--you might be the small minority that read GRRM's clues correctly. But look at the clues again and consider the possibility that we are correct.

3) N promised L something in terms of keeping J safe (you say raise as N's son, although I am not sure the promise was that specific, but the exact wording of the promise is not that critical--what is critical is that N promised L something about J that has led N to let the world believe J is N's son even though J is L's son).

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yes safe but not safe from any remote threat.

A widow dying leaving an infant. The concern is how the boy will live and what hiis life will be. A a dying widow would want hope rather than specific security.

Ned thinks of blood and broken promises. Though Ned tried to raise Jon as a son, he knows that Jon was never truly accepted. He both kept and broke the promise he made to Lyanna. He both raised Jon as his son and as his bastard.

Ned thinks of all that keeping his promise to Lyanna has cost him. Jon's security cost Ned nothing. Raising Jon as a son strained his relationship with Cat terribly. It also caused him a stain on his honor.

I formed the wording of the promise to encompass all that Ned said and thought about it. "Promise to raise Jon as your son." is the most basic phrase that can fill all of the criteria.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You believe--3 KG stayed at ToJ due to orders from R or to protect L

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think the KG at the ToJ prove something very important to R was there-- my stated position

I did not specify orders or the method of enticement, I also did not specify Lyanna or her baby, I did not specify a purpose for the KG.

Method of enforcement (orders, a vow, personal loyalty etc) would be speculation. What was important to Rhaegar (the dynasty, the prophecy, his love, his child etc) would be speculation. The KG's purpose (protect the princess, protect the king, protect the prince, protect the dynasty etc) would again be speculation.

KG at the ToJ prove something very important to R was there-- is a statement of fact without speculation.

ASOD

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You believe--L was still pregnant during the showdown

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I belive bed of blood refers to childbirth. I belive Ned's association of blood to Lyanna may indicate he was present for a birth.

I think Ned was present for Jon's birth

Nothing aside from speculation that pinpoints the time of Jon's birth, The closest we have is Ned chapter 39 where the promise follows the showdown in the sequence of an interrupted dream, In dreamland, Lyanna died immediately after the ToJ,

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You believe--there is no evidence of a wetnurse or other servants at ToJ.

UNMASKEDLURKER

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

There is no evidence of a wetnurse or servants at the ToJ... regardless of my belief. Choosing not to speculate should not be called a speculation.

I chose not to speculate on the presence of a wetnurse or servants at the ToJ is my position.

ASOD

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The king, on the other hand, generally must have at least 1 KG assigned to him. Do you disagree with this proposition?

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I agree with the position. Because it is right: "Generally"

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The KG are required to obey the king's orders--not necessarily other members of the royal family. Not to say that if assigned to a member of the royal family, the KG don't follow that person's orders, the king's orders must prevail.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I agree with that because it is from the text and i could cite specific examples of it being correct.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While the exchange is just a dream, and I agree that it is not necessarily a word-for-word recreation of the scene, it is in some respects even better. This is an old dream--one N has had many times before. It is the distillation of his understanding of what happened, and must be consistent with his understanding of the facts as he understands them now. So some detail may have been altered in his mind based on facts he learned later.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I agree that it was just a dream and that certain specifics may have changed over time. I also recognize that dreams cannot be used to establish chronology. Twp events from hours, days, weeks, or even months can be compressed into a single dream. The basic format of the dream defies an attempt to put a calendar to it.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think that a sick L was yelling "Eddard" from the window, I think his dream being interrupted by someone calling him "Lord Eddard" got filled into the dream.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You are right on the money there. I could not have said it better. Most mistakenly use that to indicate that Lyanna is dying in the tower during the showdown.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on this exchange, I just don't see how the KG could be doing anything other than guarding the king--Jon.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You correctly removed Lyanna dying from the sequence of the showdown. If we are now to assert that Jon is born we must reinsert it where we already agreed it did not belong. We are also required to expand the "bed of blood" for a period of up to 6 weeks. We have to also ignore the indicators that Ned was present for Jon's birth,

That is where you lose me--If Jon must have been born.. What you assert the KG's dialogue meant is absolutely correct, However, you can't be certain Jon had been born. You can't transfer your certainty of what the KG meant into certainty that Jon had been born because Jon's birth was a prerequisite of your interpretation of what the KG was saying.

I am not asserting that your conclusion is false. I am asserting that your method for reaching it is flawed.

If you start with the assumption that Jon is born... the motives of the KG must be to protect the king

If you start with the assumption that jon was not born... the motives of the KG are something else entirely.

If you start with neither assumption, no conclusion on the KG's motives can be made.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You seem to believe that they are not fleeing and are keeping a vow because they swore to R to stay at ToJ and protect Princess L

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think the KG at the ToJ prove something very important to R was there-- my stated position

I did not specify orders or the method of enticement, I also did not specify Lyanna or her baby, I did not specify a purpose for the KG.

Method of enforcement (orders, a vow, personal loyalty etc) would be speculation. What was important to Rhaegar (the dynasty, the prophecy, his love, his child etc) would be speculation. The KG's purpose (protect the princess, protect the king, protect the prince, protect the dynasty etc) would again be speculation.

my actual position includes your position, as well as the position you assigned to me....

KG were there to protect the King is a subset of KG at the ToJ prove something very important to R was there.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Was J born before the showdown? I really don't think I need any additional analysis. Everything that I put forth for point 1) is essentially the same evidence for my belief in point 2).

J had to have been born prior to the showdown in order that the vow to protect the king was clearly a duty that the KG had to J and not V.

(precise date of birth not really critical to my theory).

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You can't assert "had to have been" born and when..as well as "not really critical"

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on the puerperal fever theory, my best guess is J was born 3-10 days prior, but maybe longer under other theories

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The puerperal fever theory is pinpoints the time of Lyanna's death at 3 to 10 days after birth. It does not pinpoint Lyanna's death as immediately following the showdown, (We agreed that the sequence of events in dreams is not necessarily chronological) So without an established birth, the fever theory adds nothing.

ASOD

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Was a wetnurse or other servants at ToJ? This issue is kind of pointless. As I noted above, the text clearly states that others were there, "They had found him [Ned] still holding her [Lyanna's] body, silent with grief." Who is the "they"? Someone other than Howland was there. At a minimum, some servants were there.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Absolutely, some servants were there when Lyanna died.

ASOD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't expect to convince you, but hopefully this post clarifies our areas of disagreement and demonstrates the evidence (or at least the main evidence--there likely is more if I searched more) to support my conclusions. I admit that just because the majority on the board seems to agree with me does not make me right--you might be the small minority that read GRRM's clues correctly. But look at the clues again and consider the possibility that we are correct.

UNMASKEDLURKER

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have already included the possibility that you are correct. My argument is the same as yours. I just stop before you do. I can't prove KG were there to protect the king. I can prove-- KG were at the ToJ because something important to Rhaegar was there.

If i could prove KG were protecting king Jon without using my conclusion to support my premise, I would hold that position. Just because the logic is not correct does not mean the argument is not correct. You could be right.

ASOD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize, I've completely lost track of the quote tree here with all the bolding and big!font and stuff. I'm not quite sure which of the arguments in your post is yours. :/

Edited... all my statements are not bold... all your statements are...

No big font,,,

used underline and cross out for emphasis instead of big font...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edited... all my statements are not bold... all your statements are...

No big font,,,

used underline and cross out for emphasis instead of big font...

I haven't bolded anything, so I'm totally lost. I've got to do some work now, sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't bolded anything, so I'm totally lost. I've got to do some work now, sorry.

In my post, the bolded portions are what I took out of your post and put in to mine...

I did that so you can easily see when I am making a statement (unbolded) and when I am using your statements (Bolded)

Yes you did not use bold type. I bold your statements when I include them in my pNOost.

----final edit----- included name tags with each statement and separated statements with solid lines.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

This discussion is getting way too into the weeds, but I wanted to address just one point. While I don't think we can prove from the evidence available exactly when J was born, I think the evidence is very strong that he was born before the showdown. I think 3-10 days before the showdown is likely (based on information about puerperal fever), but I admit the evidence is less clear on that point which is why I acknowledged lack of certainty on exact time of birth. But birth before the showdown seems not just likely but overwhelmingly likely. You think the action of KG can be explained by them guarding something that was important to Rhaegar. I just don't find that convincing. Once they know that Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon are dead, guarding something important to Rhaegar is insufficient explanation for their actions and words to Ned. To me, their total lack of concern for Viserys and statement that they would be fleeing and not keeping their vow if they went to Dragonstone makes no sense unless they are, at that moment, guarding the person they consider to be rightful king. If V is 50% likely to be king, they would not be fleeing if they went to V "now" (i.e., at that moment). So, no, I do not believe that I am back-filling evidence to fit my favored theory. I think I have looked to the evidence and find your alternative inconsistent with the evidence. I believe that the KG statements and actions are consistent only with Jon already being born at that time not because it is support for my favored theory but because I believe it is the only reasonable explanation consistent with their words and deeds. You disagree--I understand. You interpret their duties a bit differently--I understand. I still disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my post, the bolded portions are what I took out of your post and put in to mine...

I did that so you can easily see when I am making a statement (unbolded) and when I am using your statements (Bolded)

Yes you did not use bold type. I bold your statements when I include them in my post.

Actually, I think the bolded portion of your post is from my post (UnmaskedLurker) and not the post of Ygritte (the poster to whom you were responding), which might be a source of the confusion on the part of Ygritte.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The KG could not have known they were at the ToJ to protect the heir. The KG could not have known that the baby in the womb would be Jon,

Let's pause and think this through carefully . . . Why is Aery Oakheart in Dorne, exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People arguing about the reasons for the presence of the KG at the TOJ don't agree with Jon being legitimate, not R+L=J. I think that lot of people on that thread need to understand that.

Truthfully, it goes both ways. We in the R+L=J camp as a whole are all theory believers and are open to both discussion of Jon being legitimate or not. What I don't like is that people who do not believe Jon is legitimate don't give the same ground of faith and speculation as the people that do believe he is legitimate.

If the ones that are anti-legitimate Jon believe it because of their deduction of logic, meaning, that the KGs do not really have to stay there for Jon but only by orders of Rhaegar, then that's fine, but also give proper due to the ones that do believe it and took their vows and sworn duty further to its ultimate point, that they were protecting the rightful heir, the next in line to the Iron Throne.

Personally, all the hints and clues of about Jon being royalty, being King in the end, written ever since AGOT, wouldn't make sense, personally, for me. So I do take the faith that GRRM was intending Jon born of royal and dragon blood.

-The comment from Benjen to Jon, looking to his brother, Ned, from where he is at the end of the hall, similar to Viserys raging at Drogo's insistence that he should sit at the end of the hall, and said, that this isn't a place for a king.

-From Jon to Arya, saying that bastards do not hit princes.

-From Jon to Arya, some roads lead to the same castle.

-Ned and Robert, that Kings are a rare sight in the north, they are hiding under Snow.

-Bloodraven using Mormont's raven, to help and assist Jon, declaring him King, corn, corn, corn (Celtic Norse myth- Corn King to die, reborn in the spring)

-The comment of Jon saying that Mance has no more royal blood than mine.

-Aemon's parallel counsel to Jon as he did with Egg, the great council chose him to mount the Iron Throne.

-Aemon sees much promises in Jon.

-In front of Dany, the Dothraki grass bow down and Dany hurt/trip by a stone (stone means something/someone is hidden) and bending the knee to Drogon (the symbol of The Dragon standing amidst crackling flames in her dream, this is before the 3 dragons hatched, meaning that Dragon is Jon, he is the Stone Dragon--hidden dragon).

-Jon's wound smoke as did Drogon and Stormcloud from the tPatQ (whose rider, end up being king).

-Mel's chapter, the crackling flames whisper to her, Jon Snow, sees him when asking for her king/AA).

-Tyrion's shadow clear across the yard (where Jon was) as tall as a king.

-Tyrion felt sorry for Jon that he has chosen to take the black and the hard life, then he paused, instead maybe the hard life has chosen him.

-BR to Bran, once in a great while, the old gods would give a great gift of one with red eyes (Ghost), as a sign and marked symbol to the chosen one, Jon.

-Varamyr looking at Ghost, a second life worthy for a King (Jon needs to apply that second life, he needs to enter Ghost).

-Val to Jon, ashes and cinders, Kings and Dragons, under the snow lay grey ash and cinders.

From just the top of my head, I'm sure there are more, all of this on top of what transpired at the TOJ; on top of Ned's burden to keep Jon hidden and alive, yet still have high regards to the 3KGs at the TOJ.

I said to state last time, that Jon being a Stark and King in the North in the end with Torrhen's crown, could very well be possible, but that pay off undermines Jon's hints of being a true Targaryen and dragon blood so far, one to sit on the iron throne. And for GRRM to bypass Rickon who's still alive makes it underwhelming, if Jon were to have that right over him.

But again, we're all discussing what makes more sense to each of us personally, so I think it goes both ways. I give respect and due to the fans that believe Jon is not legitimate, it's your beliefs and what makes sense to you, but likewise, I believe GRRM (the old gods) chose Jon, ever since he chose Ghost to be a symbol marked for Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This discussion is getting way too into the weeds, but I wanted to address just one point. While I don't think we can prove from the evidence available exactly when J was born, I think the evidence is very strong that he was born before the showdown. I think 3-10 days before the showdown is likely (based on information about puerperal fever), but I admit the evidence is less clear on that point which is why I acknowledged lack of certainty on exact time of birth. But birth before the showdown seems not just likely but overwhelmingly likely. You think the action of KG can be explained by them guarding something that was important to Rhaegar. I just don't find that convincing. Once they know that Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon are dead, guarding something important to Rhaegar is insufficient explanation for their actions and words to Ned. To me, their total lack of concern for Viserys and statement that they would be fleeing and not keeping their vow if they went to Dragonstone makes no sense unless they are, at that moment, guarding the person they consider to be rightful king. If V is 50% likely to be king, they would not be fleeing if they went to V "now" (i.e., at that moment). So, no, I do not believe that I am back-filling evidence to fit my favored theory. I think I have looked to the evidence and find your alternative inconsistent with the evidence. I believe that the KG statements and actions are consistent only with Jon already being born at that time not because it is support for my favored theory but because I believe it is the only reasonable explanation consistent with their words and deeds. You disagree--I understand. You interpret their duties a bit differently--I understand. I still disagree.

While I don't think we can prove from the evidence available exactly when J was born,--unmasked lurker

you "don't think we can prove from evidence" because there is no evidence of exactly when J was born. The lack of evidence is a matter of fact not a matter of opinion.

I think the evidence is very strong that he was born before the showdown.--unmasked lurker

Let's add this sentence to the one before it

I don't think we can prove from (the very strong)evidence available exactly when (before the showdown)J was born

I think the (available) evidence is very strong (can't prove exactly when) that he was born before the showdown

These appear to be completely contradictory statements. If we would like to be exact the "evidence available" is in Ned Chapter 39 and consists of an interrupted dream. It is not like there are a variety of scenes that could possibly establish the time of birth.--Just the one.

I think 3-10 days before the showdown is likely (based on information about puerperal fever)--unmaskedlurker

Puerperal fever usually happens 3 to 10 days after birth, There is no logical connection between the fever and the showdown,

but I admit the evidence is less clear on that point which is why I acknowledged lack of certainty on exact time of birth.--Unmaskedlurker

The evidence of the fever is perfectly clear from Ned's memory: the fever had taken her strength... there is absolutely no evidence linking the fever to the showdown. There is Ned chapter 39 an interrupted dream sequence that contain's both Lyanna's request for Lord Eddard to promise and the Showdown at the ToJ.

But birth before the showdown seems not just likely but overwhelmingly likely.---unmaskedlurker

Luckily we already covered completely contradictory. overwhelmingly likely lack of certainty

You think the action of KG can be explained by them guarding something that was important to Rhaegar. I just don't find that convincing.

do you find that Rhaegar did not leave 3 KG at the ToJ?

do you find that there was nothing important to Rhaegar at the ToJ?

do you hold that Rhaegar leaving the KG at the ToJ would not forseeably lead to the KG being at the ToJ unless something else unforseeable happened?

If you hold any of the above to be true, you are not convinced. (and a bit of a loony)

Had Rhaegar not left them the KG would not be there.

If nothing important to Rhaegar was in the ToJ-- you abandon R plus L equals J.

If you hold the KG could not foreseeably carry out their duties-- you abandon KG mean king present.

Once they know that Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon are dead, guarding something important to Rhaegar is insufficient explanation for their actions and words to Ned.--unmasked lurker

Rhaegar, Aerys, and Aegon dying make whatever that was important to Rhaegar in the ToJ that was insufficient to explain their actions and words to Ned. That is a fair paraphrase.

Lyanna was important to Rhaegar and a third child was important to Rhaegar... I did not specify whatever leaving me free to assert it now.

You now hold a contradictory position.--- The king's presence is now insufficient to explain the purpose of the 3 KG at the ToJ for the purpose of guarding the king.

That being established I reassert.... something important to Rhaegar

To me, their total lack of concern for Viserys and statement that they would be fleeing and not keeping their vow if they went to Dragonstone makes no sense unless they are, at that moment, guarding the person they consider to be rightful king.and not keeping their vow if they went to Dragonstone --unmaskedlurker

The statement was not what you represent..Kingsguard did not flee then and will not flee now. ´ That is a paraphrase. it says the same thing in different words without adding or subtracting from the meaning. KG does not flee to dragonstone with viserys... adds a subject to an objective statement and completely alters its meaning. I do not kill... should not be paraphrased into I do not kill on sundays when it is raining.

.

The concern of the KG for V is limited to calling his protector "a good man and true," It more or less fair to describe that as a lack of concern. However, it fails to account for the fact any concern they showed would be providing information to a man they considered an enemy. A burglar states "I know you have a safe in your basement" are you going to correct him and tell him "no, it's in the bedroom"

The KG never mention "not keeping a vow"...They do explain "we swore a vow" Me saying "I want chocolate"... is not the same thing as me saying "I don't want pizza" I can understand the desire to speculate as to the nature of the vow. However when, I speculate I do not attempt to hide it behind self affirming assertions.

So, no, I do not believe that I am back-filling evidence to fit my favored theory. ---unmaskedlurker

You are not backfilling. you are running in circles.

You used the presence of the KG to establish the time of Jon's birth. Then you used Jon's birth to establish the presence of the KG.

I think I have looked to the evidence and find your alternative inconsistent with the evidence. ---unmasked lurker

The evidence you refer to is Ned chapter 39...which you agreed is inconclusive and the circular reasoning mentioned above.

My alternative simply eliminates the circular reasoning.... so you asserting you find circular reasoning to be consistent. In that you are absolutely correct. Circular reasoning is completely consistent. It is also completely flawed but it is consistent at it.

I believe that the KG statements and actions are consistent only with Jon already being born at that time not because it is support for my favored theory but because I believe it is the only reasonable explanation consistent with their words and deeds--unmaskedlurker.

You also state that you "don't think we can prove from the evidence available exactly when J was born,"--UL You are now using Jon being born to support the presence of the KG and the presence of the KG to support Jon being born. That is consistent (internally) but calling it "reasonable" is blatantly inaccurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...