R+L=J v.90

[BearQueen87]

Because of the line later. "The fire burned away my hair, but elsewise it did not touch me. It had been the same in Daznak's Pit."

Right, it burned away her hair again. But she has blisters on her hands from the spear she pulls from Drogon.

[The guy from the Vale]

Hair burns quickly. If Drogon had really hit her with his flame, her clothes should have burned... but they are intact later in the Dothraki sea when she shreds them. Also, she says that while looking at the blisters on her hands!

[Arlan of Pennytree]

As to the speculation of whether Lyanna and Rhargar were married or not (and, in turn, Jon's legitimacy) we have this excerpt from aCoK, P. 497-98 (2012 Bantam Books Mass Market Tie-In Edition) that lends credence, as I see it, to them being married.

". . .but incest was a monstrous sin to both old gods and new, and the children of such wickedness were named abominations in sept and godswood alike. The dragon kings had wed brother to sister, but they were the blood of old Valyria where such practices had been common, and like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men."

This, in conjunction with the POV 'remembrances' of Rhaegar that suggest he possessed some honor in him regarding his relations with women, and it being directly related to a prophecy he risked all for, strongly suggests that he would have done honor to Lyanna and himself by claiming her as his wife before any consummation.

If, as Catelyn suggests, "Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men", I think it stands to reason that the faith of The Seven would've had no say in the matter (or Red R'hllor). How polygamistTargaryen marriages were 'legitimized' is another question in itself, if they required any legitimization at all. But whatever that process was, I don't think it had anything to do with a septon/priest/priestess.

I believe the Targaryen's most likely had their own marriage ritual, enitrely seperate from any faith. If this is the case, Rhaegar and Lyanna could have just said 'the words' or swore a marriage vow that the Targaryen polygamists held to. Then, for Rhaegar's purposes, the child would've been of his blood with his name.

[honeyed chicken]

This may have been covered a billion times, but I just wanted to see if I could get some thoughts. If Jon is half Targaryen, why does he have literally none of the traits of a Targaryen and all of the traits of a Stark? I'm not just talking about the physical features. He also has no immunity to fire as referenced when he viciously burns himself in AGOT. The scar is referenced in his first ACOK chapters as stretched halfway to his elbow. I recognize all of the evidence that Jon is a Targaryen, but these holes are large indeed. One would assume that the Targaryen immunity to fire is how they are able to maintain some modicum of control over their dragons. If I am entirely wrong on that, feel free to correct me. Perhaps Daenerys is the only Targaryen with such ability, but that would seem strange.

I'm laughing because this was me a few days ago.

I call myself a 2% doubter. I buy into most everything about R+L=J.

It would be great if there was something Jon where you could say, that's pure Targ right there. But as others have pointed out, if there was something really obviously Targ. about Jon, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

As it is, there's just enough grey area to make it a debate.

This way it works

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Years_after_Aegon%27s_Conquest/Calculations_Ages_%28Continued2%29#Petyr_Baelish

My phone messed the previous one.. and left me unable to fix it, because it messed it up every time I tried.

Short summary: LF was born in 268AC, and in 282/283AC would thus have been 13/14/15, depending on where in the years you look.

Also, the second link links to a thread (which correctly links to the beginning of the page I tried to link for LF specifically earlier, and to the pages going with it)

Thanks!

I did find it through the second link from Jon Weirgaryen (I think it was him).

Their logic and analysis seemed unnecessarily tortured to me.

- Ned was 35 at the start of AGOT.

- Robb & Jon are 14,

- so Ned would be about 20 when he and Catelyn wed.

- Ned is about a year younger than Brandon and Brandon was 20 when he fought LF.

- So 16 years have passed since LF was sent away from RR.

- This link gives LF's age at 13-15 at the time of the duel,

= so taking 14 as average, LF is about 30 at the start of AGOT.

[Aeron_Damphair]

In reading this thread and all of the others since I've become active I really do think the concept of default and burden of proof is really at the heart of the question: Was Jon legitimate?

The Targaryen dynasty is in ruins and all of the known members of the royal family are at Dragonstone yet the 3 remaining KG are not only guarding a largely irrelevant tower 900 miles away, they seem to be largely indifferent to the fate of Viserys and Rhaella.

What case, if any, can be made against this statement being the default assumption?: These KG are protecting the rightful heir.

Default assumption does not automatically mean correct assumption, but isn't the onus on those who wish to offer an alternative explanation for the KG presence to meet a lofty burden of argument?

I honestly think that 90% of the disagreement from those who are well read on the subject comes from not understanding this basic tenet of debate.

(Of course, the above assumes that we are in agreement that Jon is in the tower)

[stateofdissipation]

This may have been covered a billion times, but I just wanted to see if I could get some thoughts. If Jon is half Targaryen, why does he have literally none of the traits of a Targaryen and all of the traits of a Stark? I'm not just talking about the physical features. He also has no immunity to fire as referenced when he viciously burns himself in AGOT. The scar is referenced in his first ACOK chapters as stretched halfway to his elbow. I recognize all of the evidence that Jon is a Targaryen, but these holes are large indeed. One would assume that the Targaryen immunity to fire is how they are able to maintain some modicum of control over their dragons. If I am entirely wrong on that, feel free to correct me. Perhaps Daenerys is the only Targaryen with such ability, but that would seem strange.

Now, why not start from the beginning

He dreamt an old dream, of three knights in white cloaks. and a tower long fallen, and Lyanna in her bed of blood.---aGoT page 409 paperback.

As they came together in a rush of steel and shadow, he could hear Lyanna screaming. .---aGoT page 410 paperback.

Promise me Ned, his sister had whispered from her bed of blood.--aGoT page 608 paperback."I know every secret of the bloody bed, silver lady, nor have I ever lost a babe." Mirri Maz Duur replied.--aGoT page 650 paperback.

All of that makes sense when you add.

"I know every secret of the bloody bed, silver lady, nor have I ever lost a babe." Mirri Maz Duur replied.--aGoT page 650 paperback.

"That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain."

- AFfC p. 21

Lyanna Had a baby.

Prince Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna and thousands died for it.--Barristan Selmy aDwD chapter 67

Interesting.

In aGoT 58 aSoS 24 and 43 we learn that Rhaegar gave Lyanna a crown of blue roses naming her the "queen of love and beauty"

Ned remembered the way she had smiled then, how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life, the rose petals spilling from her palm, dead and black.--aGoT chapter 4

It is not a stretch to say Rhaegar and Lyanna had a baby.

Rhaegar died, Lyanna died...aGoT chapter 4.

It is not a stretch to say that baby is not living with his or her parents.

it is also not a stretch to say that Ned did not kill or leave the baby.

...said Ned, "i don't kill children" aGot chapter 45

The rest is just details.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Thanks!

I did find it through the second link from Jon Weirgaryen (I think it was him).

Their logic and analysis seemed unnecessarily tortured to me.

- Ned was 35 at the start of AGOT.

- Robb & Jon are 14,

- so Ned would be about 20 when he and Catelyn wed.

- Ned is about a year younger than Brandon and Brandon was 20 when he fought LF.

- So 16 years have passed since LF was sent away from RR.

- This link gives LF's age at 13-15 at the time of the duel,

= so taking 14 as average, LF is about 30 at the start of AGOT.

When Catelyn meets him in KL in Game, in 298AC, LF is still "shy of thirty". He would indeed turn 30 later that year. :)

[Arlan of Pennytree]

1) Looks: literary thing. If he looks like a Targ, the gig is up. (Side note: in the graphic comic, he has Rhaegar's nose)

2) Traits: he is quite a bit like Rhaegar in that he's quiet and honorable. Also like Ned, I know

3) Targaryen's are not fire proof. See: Aeiron Brightflame

. . .And the books have clearly laid out for us that one parents traits can be completly wiped out by the stronger seed. We know this from Ned's observation of every time Baratheon and Lannister genes came together.

Maybe this has to do with the blood of the First Men being dominant over the blood of Old Valyria. Or possibly Stark genes overpower Targaryen genes as Baratheon does Lannister, its entirely possible, even probable.

Isn't Danerys Targaryen the only Targaryen that we are told is immune to fire? Am I wrong here?

[The guy from the Vale]

. . .And the books have clearly laid out for us that one parents traits can be completly wiped out by the stronger seed. We know this from Ned's observation of every time Baratheon and Lannister genes came together.

Maybe this has to do with the blood of the First Men being dominant over the blood of Old Valyria. Or possibly Stark genes overpower Targaryen genes as Baratheon does Lannister, its entirely possible, even probable.

Isn't Danerys Targaryen the only Targaryen that we are told is immune to fire? Am I wrong here?

Well, Viserys said all Targs were fireproof, but seeing how they were usually cremated after death, I'd rather say none of them were and Viserys bought too much into the propaganda.

As for Dany, she's not fire proof either; her surviving the pyre might have a lot more to do with the spell Mirri was chanting while being stripped to said pyre, than with any innate fire immunity.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Isn't Danerys Targaryen the only Targaryen that we are told is immune to fire? Am I wrong here?

Partially. she's the only one, so far, who has been immune to fire in THAT specific event. If we roast her again, she might not survive.

[Dave Grose]

Now, why not start from the beginning

All of that makes sense when you add.

Lyanna Had a baby.

Interesting.

In aGoT 58 aSoS 24 and 43 we learn that Rhaegar gave Lyanna a crown of blue roses naming her the "queen of love and beauty"

It is not a stretch to say Rhaegar and Lyanna had a baby.

Rhaegar died, Lyanna died...aGoT chapter 4.

It is not a stretch to say that baby is not living with his or her parents.

it is also not a stretch to say that Ned did not kill or leave the baby.

The rest is just details.

Yes, I've read and I don't dispute all of the evidence. I just find it convenient that Jon would be so lucky as to look nothing like a Targaryen, have no affinity for dragon dreams after a brief allusion in book 1, and none of the same abilities as Dany. Oh and he is the Targaryen Ned is trying to hide. I mean Ned didn't even have to try to hide Jon. No one would take him for a Targaryen. Aegon had hid for years and it didn't take Tyrion very long to figure him out.

[honeyed chicken]

In reading this thread and all of the others since I've become active I really do think the concept of default and burden of proof is really at the heart of the question: Was Jon legitimate?

The Targaryen dynasty is in ruins and all of the known members of the royal family are at Dragonstone yet the 3 remaining KG are not only guarding a largely irrelevant tower 900 miles away, they seem to be largely indifferent to the fate of Viserys and Rhaella.

What case, if any, can be made against this statement being the default assumption?: These KG are protecting the rightful heir.

Default assumption does not automatically mean correct assumption, but isn't the onus on those who wish to offer an alternative explanation for the KG presence to meet a lofty burden of argument?

I honestly think that 90% of the disagreement from those who are well read on the subject comes from not understanding this basic tenet of debate.

(Of course, the above assumes that we are in agreement that Jon is in the tower)

I do understand that is at the center of the debate and a good deal of today's discussion has centered on that point.

I could try to come up with an alternate explanation, but it's most honest to say the default is weak, but I have nothing better.

[BearQueen87]

Yes, I've read and I don't dispute all of the evidence. I just find it convenient that Jon would be so lucky as to look nothing like a Targaryen, have no affinity for dragon dreams after a brief allusion in book 1, and none of the same abilities as Dany. Oh and he is the Targaryen Ned is trying to hide. I mean Ned didn't even have to try to hide Jon. No one would take him for a Targaryen. Aegon had hid for years and it didn't take Tyrion very long to figure him out.

It is convenient. BUT if Jon even had the slightest hint of the Targaryen look, Robert Baratheon would order his death.

He does have dreams though; specifically of the crypt in Winterfell. I wonder what's down there.....

I think you're giving Dany's abilities a bit too much credence here. She is not immune to fire or even sickness. She was plenty sick after she lost Rhaego, and plenty sick on the Dothraki Sea. Her hands are blistered. What happened to her on Drogo's pyre has a lot to do with magic reentering the world. And at first, she could not stand the heart from his pyre. It's only after MMD begins to die that Dany can face the flames.

[Aeron_Damphair]

I do understand that is at the center of the debate and a good deal of today's discussion has centered on that point.

I could try to come up with an alternate explanation, but it's most honest to say the default is weak, but I have nothing better.

I think the default is weakish because the best we can do by way of a wedding between Rhaegar and Lyanna is to infer that it happened. It more pertains to the extraordinary circumstances and where we would naturally expect the KG to be in light of them. Moreover it's about how unusual it is that they are not at the first place we would expect them to be, with the person who the general public assumes is the rightful heir, at Dragonstone.

So I see your point, it isn't necessarily as strong as a traditional "default position," but nevertheless I think it's the one we're left with.

[stateofdissipation]

In reading this thread and all of the others since I've become active I really do think the concept of default and burden of proof is really at the heart of the question: Was Jon legitimate?

The Targaryen dynasty is in ruins and all of the known members of the royal family are at Dragonstone yet the 3 remaining KG are not only guarding a largely irrelevant tower 900 miles away, they seem to be largely indifferent to the fate of Viserys and Rhaella.

What case, if any, can be made against this statement being the default assumption?: These KG are protecting the rightful heir.

Default assumption does not automatically mean correct assumption, but isn't the onus on those who wish to offer an alternative explanation for the KG presence to meet a lofty burden of argument?

I honestly think that 90% of the disagreement from those who are well read on the subject comes from not understanding this basic tenet of debate.

(Of course, the above assumes that we are in agreement that Jon is in the tower)

What case, if any, can be made against this statement being the default assumption?: These KG are protecting the rightful heir.

We know why they were there

Ser Arthur Dayne, Ser Gerold Hightower, and Ser Oswell Whent were ordered by Rhaegar to stand guard at the 'tower of joy' near Dorne. All three died there (I: 354-356)

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Concordance/Section/2.1.3.2./

Text or canon basis for information other than that arriving at ToJ

NONE

Text or canon basis that Ned was present for the birth of Lyanna's baby

He dreamt an old dream, of three knights in white cloaks. and a tower long fallen, and Lyanna in her bed of blood.---aGoT page 409 paperback.

Promise me Ned, his sister had whispered from her bed of blood.--aGoT page 608 paperback.

As they came together in a rush of steel and shadow, he could hear Lyanna screaming. .---aGoT page 410 paperback.

"I know every secret of the bloody bed, silver lady, nor have I ever lost a babe." Mirri Maz Duur replied.--aGoT page 650 paperback.

"That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain."

- AFfC p. 21

Text or canon support of "bed of blood" describing anything other than birth:

NONE

[JonCon's Red Beard]

^I think they meant Dany being unable to catch viruses and stuff. Which isn't true either, because many Targaryens died during the Great Spring Sickness.

[Aeron_Damphair]

It is convenient. BUT if Jon even had the slightest hint of the Targaryen look, Robert Baratheon would order his death.

He does have dreams though; specifically of the crypt in Winterfell. I wonder what's down there.....

I think you're giving Dany's abilities a bit too much credence here. She is not immune to fire or even sickness. She was plenty sick after she lost Rhaego, and plenty sick on the Dothraki Sea. Her hands are blistered. What happened to her on Drogo's pyre has a lot to do with magic reentering the world. And at first, she could not stand the heart from his pyre. It's only after MMD begins to die that Dany can face the flames.

Who can forget?

Probably best left unread. :rofl:

"Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew, and her thirst sent her crawling to the stream to suck up more water."

[BearQueen87]

^I think they meant Dany being unable to catch viruses and stuff. Which isn't true either, because many Targaryens died during the Great Spring Sickness.

Very true. IIRC, a couple of heirs which is how we ended up with Maeker I

[BearQueen87]

Who can forget?

"Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew, and her thirst sent her crawling to the stream to suck up more water."

Thaaaaanks for that.

[Dave Grose]

The other question I have is more from a writer's perspective. What does Jon being a Targaryen do for the character? If it is revealed that he is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, what is gained from that knowledge? He would have been in line for the succession if he hadn't taken his vows to the NW. What we're left with is another Targaryen on the Wall. I am and have been a believer in R+L=J, let me get that out. I believe it, because we haven't been offered anything as strong as that theory, but the evidence on which that theory is based is shaky at best. What we have is that Jon Snow was born. Lyanna was probably pregnant. Rhaegar was likely the father. Lyanna probably died giving birth to said child. The KG were with Lyanna. Ned made a promise to Lyanna. So Jon was the child? Even if they were guarding the one true heir, why is it Jon? I will buy into the theory until something else is provided, but going on the information we have at the moment, we cannot be certain.