Jump to content

R+L=J v.90


Jon Weirgaryen

Recommended Posts

About Jon's likeness to his parents, I just remembered something.



Years ago, I met with some school friends and they met my son. They both told me that my son COMPLETELY looked like me. He does look like me but he also have some very specific features of his dad (the frame of the eyes, the chin), who my friends didn't know. So, anything my son looks like his dad, for them, made no sense and they ignored it. Our brain "fills the gaps" it can process, and I think this is the case: they only saw the likeness of my son to me because they recognise and know my face since we were children (one of them knows me since we were six years old, and my son was four). Had they known my son's father, they would have seen it as well. I think that's the case with Jon. They only see the North because they all are Northern and they knew Lyanna. Anything that seems "odd" in his face, for them, it's probably "some Stark uncle or grandfather" letting his genes to show in Jon, when it's actually the Targaryen genes.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

About Jon's likeness to his parents, I just remembered something.

Years ago, I met with some school friends and they met my son. They both told me that my son COMPLETELY looked like me. He does look like me but he also have some very specific features of his dad (the frame of the eyes, the chin), who my friends didn't know. So, anything my son looks like his dad, for them, made no sense and they ignored it. Our brain "fills the gaps" it can process, and I think this is the case: they only saw the likeness of my son to me because they recognise and know my face since we were children (one of them knows me since we were six years old, and my son was four). Had they known my son's father, they would have seen it as well. I think that's the case with Jon. They only see the North because they all are Northern and they knew Lyanna. Anything that seems "odd" in his face, for them, it's probably "some Stark uncle or grandfather" letting his genes to show in Jon, when it's actually the Targaryen genes.

Great theory and IMO it seems at least plausible. But this is in fact no support for R+L=J.

Don't get me wrong, but I am stuborn and I will never believe for 100% that R+L=J (legit or not) until it's being told in the books / showed in the serie / stated by GRRM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was the next in line, couldn't the regent legitimize him? Or if it came down to a Council and choosing between Jon and Viserys I think they'd pick Jon lol.

As to why the KG were there, married or not, they'd protect the next in line. They may even already hold reservations against Viserys that might actually make a Kingmaker situation happen if events went that way. By all accounts he was already a bit of a crazy, and I doubt they wanted another Aerys. They could also see the chance to influence the child well from the start. If he was raised by those KG instead if Ned he'd have come out much more solid I feel, growing up in the North always a bastard jaded him.

Also Robb's Will legitimizes him as a Stark right? That's all he needs to be KitN, screw the iron throne. After the Bolton's are out that might hold sway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was the next in line, couldn't the regent legitimize him? Or if it came down to a Council and choosing between Jon and Viserys I think they'd pick Jon lol.

As to why the KG were there, married or not, they'd protect the next in line. They may even already hold reservations against Viserys that might actually make a Kingmaker situation happen if events went that way. By all accounts he was already a bit of a crazy, and I doubt they wanted another Aerys. They could also see the chance to influence the child well from the start. If he was raised by those KG instead if Ned he'd have come out much more solid I feel, growing up in the North always a bastard jaded him.

Also Robb's Will legitimizes him as a Stark right? That's all he needs to be KitN, screw the iron throne. After the Bolton's are out that might hold sway.

If Lyanna and Rhaegar weren't married then Jon isn't legit, and then he isn't the next in line. He could become legit if the King declared him so.

This ONLY two reasons why the KG would stay at the ToJ I can think of are:

1. The true heir of the Iron Throne was there (so that would be Jon most likely).

2. They swore a vow to stay there no matter what to the King (Rhaegar). But in this case, I can't think of any other reason for Rhaegar to make them stay there because his (legit) son is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Lyanna and Rhaegar weren't married then Jon isn't legit, and then he isn't the next in line. He could become legit if the King declared him so.

This ONLY two reasons why the KG would stay at the ToJ I can think of are:

1. The true heir of the Iron Throne was there (so that would be Jon most likely).

2. They swore a vow to stay there no matter what to the King (Rhaegar). But in this case, I can't think of any other reason for Rhaegar to make them stay there because his (legit) son is there.

It seems unlikely that Hightower would have remained at the tower if his true king had been without KG protection.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems unlikely that Hightower would have remained at the tower if his true king had been without KG protection.

I Didn't really read into any specific person in asoiaf, so neither Hightower. But those who did, can probably state this. I for one will not, because I don't know it for sure. What I do know is that the KG will always protect the king(or follow his order).

I think a big question is; what is the 'vow they swore' which Ser Gerold talked about? The 'vow of the KG to protect the king' or a specific vow Rhaegar made them swore. Because in the last case, it could be a different reason. (Even though highly unlikely IMO)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a big question is; what is the 'vow they swore' which Ser Gerold talked about? The 'vow of the KG to protect the king' or a specific vow Rhaegar made them swore. Because in the last case, it could be a different reason. (Even though highly unlikely IMO)

Take a look at the final part of the ToJ dialogue and filter the interruptions caused by the switching speakers, introductory clauses etc:

"Kingsguard doesn't flee because we swore a vow." ("because" = "explained")

They are referring to the KG vow, no other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at the final part of the ToJ dialogue and filter the interruptions caused by the switching speakers, introductory clauses etc:

"Kingsguard doesn't flee because we swore a vow." ("because" = "explained")

They are referring to the KG vow, no other.

Ah I missed that. I think the strongest point in this sentence is the fact that Ser Gerold says 'Kingsguard' in stead of 'we'. If he would have said: 'We don't flee because we swore a vow', then it could be either one. But since he didn't you can say it's the KG vow. Thanks for pointing that out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah I missed that. I think the strongest point in this sentence is the fact that Ser Gerold says 'Kingsguard' in stead of 'we'. If he would have said: 'We don't flee because we swore a vow', then it could be either one. But since he didn't you can say it's the KG vow. Thanks for pointing that out!

You're welcome, and I commend on your attitude :P People often just gloss over this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah I missed that. I think the strongest point in this sentence is the fact that Ser Gerold says 'Kingsguard' in stead of 'we'. If he would have said: 'We don't flee because we swore a vow', then it could be either one. But since he didn't you can say it's the KG vow. Thanks for pointing that out!

Also worth noting is the use of "vow", which is, in Westeros, often seen as more significant than a promise/duty/order. The Night's Watch, for instance, often refer to the content of the NW oath and commitments as vows. The conflict over breaking those vows is a huge element in Jon's story and character development. I see vows being equal to oaths, if I'm reading correctly. Sacred. Lifelong. I don't think they'd refer to a command in this fashion.

While the truth of Jon being legitimate is questionable, if we can accept that Wylla was likely sent from SF to tend Lyanna, why not also that a septon from nearby was available for a hasty marriage, a la Tyrion and Tysha? There's precedent for unpopular, unfavorable, or unapproved marriages built into the story, I'd like to assume for a reason.

Eta: If we take that marriage as a hint/parallel of this one (secret wedding, hid lover away in a private location, shared marital bliss until discovered, tragedy), Tyrion's wedding earns slightly more significance to the overall story. Not just to motivate his character's actions, but as evidence of the nature of R+L. It seems like a Martin thing to do, and it makes the marriage of R+L feel less contrived when placed side by side with the story's most repetitive doomed romance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great theory and IMO it seems at least plausible. But this is in fact no support for R+L=J.

Don't get me wrong, but I am stuborn and I will never believe for 100% that R+L=J (legit or not) until it's being told in the books / showed in the serie / stated by GRRM.

Hey!

A fellow "not 100% believer"! I throw out the number 98% because I like Jon and think it would be pretty neat if Lyanna and Rhaegar were his parents. And I think the case is almost iron clad. I heavily suspect there's an Achille's heal to the argument somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also worth noting is the use of "vow", which is, in Westeros, often seen as more significant than a promise/duty/order. The Night's Watch, for instance, often refer to the content of the NW oath and commitments as vows. The conflict over breaking those vows is a huge element in Jons story and character development. I see vows being equal to oaths, if I'm reading correctly. Sacred. Lifelong. I don't think they'd refer to a command in this fashion.

Exactly. If you swear a vow to do something, it is a sacred duty. Distance or difficulty is no excuse for not performing it, and switching allegiance from it would be oathbreaking, dark and treacherous business.

While the truth of Jon being legitimate is questionable, if we can accept that Wylla was likely sent from SF to tend Lyanna, why not also that a septon from nearby was available for a hasty marriage, a la Tyrion and Tysha? There's precedent for unpopular, unfavorable, or unapproved marriages built into the story, I'd like to assume for a reason.

Or we have a conveniently placed weirwood grove in the South, right close to the main road and the place where Rhaegar and Lyanna first met.

Concerning unapproved marriages, could someone familiar with TPAQ check if I'm getting this right?
Daemon and Rhaenyra were caught in flagranti, which is why Daemon immediately proposed and Viserys turned him down, supposedly on the basis that he was already married. Yet, after Daemon's wife died, he and Rhaenyra still married in secret for fear that Viserys would have put a stop to it, even though he had no "objective" objection any more. So, Viserys' rejection stemmed not from the fact that Daemon was already married but from his dislike of the match in general

Hey!

A fellow "not 100% believer"! I throw out the number 98% because I like Jon and think it would be pretty neat if Lyanna and Rhaegar were his parents. And I think the case is almost iron clad. I heavily suspect there's an Achille's heal to the argument somewhere.

You are welcome to try and find it. I don't recall the last time someone's objection posed a real challenge. In fact, in all my time here, I don't recall any.

On the other hand, if there is a weak point somewhere and the whole theory will fall apart, what is the alternate theory? The one which needs equally strong or even stronger hints, which must be there and must be recognisable, at least in retrospect? The same as above - there hasn't been any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey!

A fellow "not 100% believer"! I throw out the number 98% because I like Jon and think it would be pretty neat if Lyanna and Rhaegar were his parents. And I think the case is almost iron clad. I heavily suspect there's an Achille's heal to the argument somewhere.

Yeah if I read the things in these topics I also feel like there is a 'but'. I mean, I think stacking all the evidence makes it quite clear that R+L=J. But certainly about the 'legit' part I have my doubts.

"let's assume R+L=J is true":

I think Rhaegar wasn't with Lyanna when she gave birth to him? Is there any way that he could have made Jon legit before she gave birth to him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah if I read the things in these topics I also feel like there is a 'but'. I mean, I think stacking all the evidence makes it quite clear that R+L=J. But certainly about the 'legit' part I have my doubts.

"let's assume R+L=J is true":

I think Rhaegar wasn't with Lyanna when she gave birth to him? Is there any way that he could have made Jon legit before she gave birth to him?

He could have married her. No other option; legitimization can only be done by the king, and we have never seen any case of pre-natal legitimization either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites






Concerning unapproved marriages, could someone familiar with TPAQ check if I'm getting this right?


Daemon and Rhaenyra were caught in flagranti, which is why Daemon immediately proposed and Viserys turned him down, supposedly on the basis that he was already married. Yet, after Daemon's wife died, he and Rhaenyra still married in secret for fear that Viserys would have put a stop to it, even though he had no "objective" objection any more. So, Viserys' rejection stemmed not from the fact that Daemon was already married but from his dislike of the match in general

.




TRP: The exact text has three versions of what happened. One was that he was doing some creepy Littlefinger "training" with her to teach her how to seduce Ser Criston, and when she disgraced herself, he asked for her hand because "no one else would want her". The other is that she fell in love with Daemon and asked her father for permission to marry him, and he refused because of Daemon's current wife. In both cases, he obviously didn't want them to get married.





I'm going on the assumption that only Targ kings generally get a pass on the multiple wives issue. It's certainly not a socially popular/favorable thing to do. However, "setting aside" a wife has mention in the main story. Robert could have done so to Cersei, following Renly's plan with Margaery. Cersei's fear of that possibility lends it weight as an option. Whether this makes the children of a previous marriage invalid as claimants to the throne, I'm not sure. Has this ever been answered?



Clarity edit, sorry.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going on the assumption that only Targ kings generally get a pass on the multiple wives issue. It's certainly not a socially favored thing to do. However, "setting aside" a wife has mention in the main story, as Robert may have done to Cersei. Whether this makes the children of a previous marriage invalid as claimants to the throne, I'm not sure. Has this ever been answered?

I'd say no. A bastard is from a women you aren't married with. Of you are a widower / devorced and get married with another women again, doesn't make the children from your first marriage bastards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And excellent observation. Recently, with Jon as LC, I've been thinking about Jaime's recollection of iron in Rhaegar's voice - perhaps Jon was developing character traits and mannerism that might have set some people thinking "now, what was it the Stark's sister died of?"

Eh...

"You never knew Lyanna as I did, Robert. You saw her beauty, but not the iron underneath."

And it seemed to Jaime that he knew that voice, the iron tones that had once belonged to Rhaegar, Prince of Dragonstone.

Dragonbone is black because of its high iron content, the book told him.

The scent reminded him of [...] the way iron smelled when red-hot; the scent was smoke and blood. Kissed by the fire, he thought
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say no. A bastard is from a women you aren't married with. Of you are a widower / devorced and get married with another women again, doesn't make the children from your first marriage bastards.

That depends on how the marriage is set aside. I know of a RL example when a king had his marriage annulled and removed his children, including an adult heir, from the succession line, so that he could get himself a hot young wife from a more noble family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh...

As always, you take it even further. I was thinking merely in terms of something recognisably Rhaegarish in Jon :-) But, yeah, the woman is important, too!

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...