[TWOIAF Spoilers] R+L=J without spoiler tags v.2

[BearQueen87]

1. If they knew about everything else they should not have known, they could have known that as well...

This strongly suggests that a lot of the dream conversation was reinvented by Ned later on after he learned the truth. We cannot be sure that he thought those knights were honorable when he killed them, after all.

2.By the way: What do you make of the Ned-Arthur-single-combat idea?

1. But this goes back to when did Aerys make Viserys his heir? If it's pre-Rhaegar's death but post-Rhaegar coming home to KL, then no the KG wouldn't know.

2. Help me out here, I still don't have a book (I hate you, Amazon)

[BearQueen87]

As to Connington and Rhaegar wedding or not wedding Lyanna. It would all depend on when they parted ways. I can't recall where, but somewhere it has been stated that it were Whent and Dayne who helped Rhaegar "kidnap" Lyanna, suggesting that the party had split and gone their separate ways prior to Rhaegar and Lyanna coming face to face once more.

Isn't that the app?

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Isn't that the app?

Probably.

[MoIaF]

The speculation about ice dragons means that even in dragons, there are those of ice and those of fire. We have had just Old Nan's tales, but good to see it being a topic discussed by maesters. And their melting away is nicely juxtaposed with the Targaryan custom of turning (returning?) to ash.

We are also told that the pact went unfulfilled---hopefully that is fleshed out.

One thing stands out to me: why have a picture of Jon Snow in an "in universe" historical piece? Are LCs always featured in similar texts?

Just a conceit to get Jon included (right after a picture of Dany, nonetheless) in the book?

That might just have been for our enjoyment....don't want to get into crackpot

[KyleLitke]

Yeah that's probably relevant. It ties into a problem I've always had with that part of the theory. The Kingsguard do not get to choose who the next king is. (Criston Cole did not act alone.)

I don't know that it's relevant, though, because we don't know when exactly it was decided Viserys came after Rhaegar, rather than Aegon. All we know is that after Rhaegar died, Viserys was named heir, and it's entirely possible the Kingsguard aren't even aware of Viserys being the heir. They were likely already at the Tower of Joy by then, since by that point we know they weren't at the Trident fighting with Rhaegar, and weren't guarding Aerys, Elia, Viserys, or anyone else in the royal family. It's not like everyone magically knows immediately who the heir is. The way I read it (and I could be mistaken), Aerys names Viserys his heir after Rhaegar's death, in large part because he is blaming the Dornish for Rhaegar's death, and not that Viserys was automatically the heir after Rhaegar no matter how many kids he had. If that's the case, the Kingsguard wouldn't even know Viserys was the heir.

Also I'm not sure it matters. The presence of the Kingsguard is the one thing that convinced me that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have been married in secret (because I don't believe the Kingsguard would have been in the right to leave the rest of the royal family to guard Rhaegar's mistress and his bastard kid, even if ordered by Rhaegar...that seems like a very questionable thing for them to do). If they were, then it doesn't necessarily matter who the heir is. Their child would be a trueborn member of the royal family and thus entitled to Kingsguard protection. The Kingsguard don't automatically just guard the King or heir...they guard any member of the royal family. When Myrcella was sent to Dorne, she was given a Kingsguard member for protection, despite the fact that she was neither Queen nor heir. When Joffrey died, nobody expected Arys to abandon her and immediately run to Tommen just because he's the new king. As long as Rhaegar and Lyanna's child was trueborn, then the Kingsguard could have (and, if ordered, should have) been there no matter who the heir was. Jon could have been 5th in line, and they were still correct to be there if that was what they were ordered to do.

And with two of the three KG being in Rhaegar´s close group, apparently involved in his secret plans, they might not even have cared. If Rhaegar in their eyes was already the king, in all but name, they would consider Rhaegar´s children heirs over anyone Aerys could name heir.

Agreed. Beyond that as well, if Jon is trueborn (i.e., if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married in secret), it doesn't matter who the heir is. I think people get confused about this sometimes, as if the Kingsguard solely protects the King and sometimes the heir. That's not the case, and we see evidence of it in the books. Myrcella isn't queen and isn't the heir, yet Arys Oakheart is sent to Dorne to protect her (and doesn't suddenly abandon her when Joffrey dies). Now, if Viserys was the new King after Aerys' death and he (or his regent) chose to recall the three Kingsguard at the Tower, that'd be a different story, but since he didn't, they were right to continue guarding the member of the royal family (if he is trueborn) regardless of where he fell in the line of succession.

[UnmaskedLurker]

I would add to this list the fact that, after Rhaegar died, Viserys came before Rhaegar's children in the succession. People can disagree about what this means but it is certainly relevant to the theory that the 3KG stayed at the TOJ because Rhaegar's son came before Viserys.

It is also interesting that Rhaegar had six companions when he abducted Lyanna. It is likely that one of them was Connington. When Barristan lists out Rhaegar's friends, they include Myles Mooten, Richard Lonmouth, Lord Connington, who was "dear to him," and Arthur Dayne. And Jaime says Connington was "the next best thing" to Rhaegar.

So what does Connington think of all this?

Note the use of the singular: "wedding." So Connington only remembers one wedding, the one between Elia and Rhaegar.

Further, Connington thinks a married man is not "free" to take a second wife.

So, if Connington was one of Rhaegar's six companions, then either (1) Rhaegar never married Lyanna, or (2) Connington was never told that they would wed and it happened some time after Rhaegar and Connington parted ways. The latter seems unlikely to me. If Rhaegar was going to marry Lyanna, he would have done it right away, and Connington would have known about it.

Most likely, JonCon had separated from Rhaegar before the wedding. But alternatively, maybe he knew about the wedding but personally disapproved and thus makes a point of only referring to one wedding and stating that a married man cannot take a second wife--because he is personally expressing his disapproval of Rhaegar's actions. But more likely, I think they just separated before the wedding. We know JonCon did not go to ToJ, so at some point they separated. No reason to assume they did not separate before the wedding.

[The Twinslayer]

1. But this goes back to when did Aerys make Viserys his heir? If it's pre-Rhaegar's death but post-Rhaegar coming home to KL, then no the KG wouldn't know.

2. Help me out here, I still don't have a book (I hate you, Amazon)

I don't think Aerys had to change the order of succession to make Viserys his heir. Under the precedent set when the Great Council chose Egg, the son of the king comes before the son of a dead prince. And we know from The Rogue Prince that these precedents matter, since Viserys I had to overrule the precedent set at the Great Council of 101 when he named Rhaenys his heir.

Even if I am wrong about that, we have no reason to think the 3KG knew Aegon was dead. It does not come up in their discussion with Ned, and it was a secret for a time after it happened -- Tywin did not reveal it until after Robert limped into King's Landing, after the Sack.

Anyway, if there was time for them to find out about Aegon, there was time for them to find out Viserys was the new heir. If there wasn't time for this information to reach them, then the KG think Aegon is alive and Jon still can't be king.

[UnmaskedLurker]

I don't know that it's relevant, though, because we don't know when exactly it was decided Viserys came after Rhaegar, rather than Aegon. All we know is that after Rhaegar died, Viserys was named heir, and it's entirely possible the Kingsguard aren't even aware of Viserys being the heir. They were likely already at the Tower of Joy by then, since by that point we know they weren't at the Trident fighting with Rhaegar, and weren't guarding Aerys, Elia, Viserys, or anyone else in the royal family. It's not like everyone magically knows immediately who the heir is. The way I read it (and I could be mistaken), Aerys names Viserys his heir after Rhaegar's death, in large part because he is blaming the Dornish for Rhaegar's death, and not that Viserys was automatically the heir after Rhaegar no matter how many kids he had. If that's the case, the Kingsguard wouldn't even know Viserys was the heir.

Also I'm not sure it matters. The presence of the Kingsguard is the one thing that convinced me that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have been married in secret (because I don't believe the Kingsguard would have been in the right to leave the rest of the royal family to guard Rhaegar's mistress and his bastard kid, even if ordered by Rhaegar...that seems like a very questionable thing for them to do). If they were, then it doesn't necessarily matter who the heir is. Their child would be a trueborn member of the royal family and thus entitled to Kingsguard protection. The Kingsguard don't automatically just guard the King or heir...they guard any member of the royal family. When Myrcella was sent to Dorne, she was given a Kingsguard member for protection, despite the fact that she was neither Queen nor heir. When Joffrey died, nobody expected Arys to abandon her and immediately run to Tommen just because he's the new king. As long as Rhaegar and Lyanna's child was trueborn, then the Kingsguard could have (and, if ordered, should have) been there no matter who the heir was. Jon could have been 5th in line, and they were still correct to be there if that was what they were ordered to do.

I don't think so. The KG knew that Viserys did not have any KG with him and that he was potentially in mortal danger, given that Robert just won the war against Aerys. If the KG thought that Viserys might be king, there is no doubt that at least one of the three would have gone to guard him. The only reasonable explanation I can imagine for keeping all 3 at ToJ is if the KG had no reason to even consider the possibility that Viserys might be the legal king. Absent a GC, the normal order of descent had been followed during the Targ history--and the KG would have had no reason to think Jon was anything other than king--but only if a marriage occurred. But even if a marriage occurred, if the KG thought Viserys might legally be king under Targ law--one of the KG would have gone to guard Viserys.

[KyleLitke]

I don't think Aerys had to change the order of succession to make Viserys his heir. Under the precedent set when the Great Council chose Egg, the son of the king comes before the son of a dead prince. And we know from The Rogue Prince that these precedents matter, since Viserys I had to overrule the precedent set at the Great Council of 101 when he named Rhaenys his heir.

Even if I am wrong about that, we have no reason to think the 3KG knew Aegon was dead. It does not come up in their discussion with Ned, and it was a secret for a time after it happened -- Tywin did not reveal it until after Robert limped into King's Landing, after the Sack.

Anyway, if there was time for them to find out about Aegon, there was time for them to find out Viserys was the new heir. If there wasn't time for this information to reach them, then the KG think Aegon is alive and Jon still can't be king.

I don't believe there's any indication that the Great Council set a precedent when they chose Egg, though. They were choosing someone for that specific case because of some extenuating circumstances. I don't believe they set any official precedent. Could be wrong, though.

Regardless, it doesn't matter. What makes everyone think the Kingsguard are required to only guard king and heir? If Jon is trueborn, he is a member of the royal family and entitled to protection. See: Myrcella among others. He does not have to be the heir for the three KG to stay there. I assume he would have to be trueborn, but not the heir or the king.

[The Twinslayer]

I don't know that it's relevant, though, because we don't know when exactly it was decided Viserys came after Rhaegar, rather than Aegon. All we know is that after Rhaegar died, Viserys was named heir, and it's entirely possible the Kingsguard aren't even aware of Viserys being the heir. They were likely already at the Tower of Joy by then, since by that point we know they weren't at the Trident fighting with Rhaegar, and weren't guarding Aerys, Elia, Viserys, or anyone else in the royal family. It's not like everyone magically knows immediately who the heir is. The way I read it (and I could be mistaken), Aerys names Viserys his heir after Rhaegar's death, in large part because he is blaming the Dornish for Rhaegar's death, and not that Viserys was automatically the heir after Rhaegar no matter how many kids he had. If that's the case, the Kingsguard wouldn't even know Viserys was the heir.

Also I'm not sure it matters. The presence of the Kingsguard is the one thing that convinced me that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have been married in secret (because I don't believe the Kingsguard would have been in the right to leave the rest of the royal family to guard Rhaegar's mistress and his bastard kid, even if ordered by Rhaegar...that seems like a very questionable thing for them to do). If they were, then it doesn't necessarily matter who the heir is. Their child would be a trueborn member of the royal family and thus entitled to Kingsguard protection. The Kingsguard don't automatically just guard the King or heir...they guard any member of the royal family. When Myrcella was sent to Dorne, she was given a Kingsguard member for protection, despite the fact that she was neither Queen nor heir. When Joffrey died, nobody expected Arys to abandon her and immediately run to Tommen just because he's the new king. As long as Rhaegar and Lyanna's child was trueborn, then the Kingsguard could have (and, if ordered, should have) been there no matter who the heir was. Jon could have been 5th in line, and they were still correct to be there if that was what they were ordered to do.

Agreed. Beyond that as well, if Jon is trueborn (i.e., if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married in secret), it doesn't matter who the heir is. I think people get confused about this sometimes, as if the Kingsguard solely protects the King and sometimes the heir. That's not the case, and we see evidence of it in the books. Myrcella isn't queen and isn't the heir, yet Arys Oakheart is sent to Dorne to protect her (and doesn't suddenly abandon her when Joffrey dies). Now, if Viserys was the new King after Aerys' death and he (or his regent) chose to recall the three Kingsguard at the Tower, that'd be a different story, but since he didn't, they were right to continue guarding the member of the royal family (if he is trueborn) regardless of where he fell in the line of succession.

Mistresses and bastards can get KG protection, too. Baristan says this explicitly in Dance With Dragons.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

1. But this goes back to when did Aerys make Viserys his heir? If it's pre-Rhaegar's death but post-Rhaegar coming home to KL, then no the KG wouldn't know.

2. Help me out here, I still don't have a book (I hate you, Amazon)

The section of Dorne (a special page for the Sword of the Morning) only mentions that Arthur was killed by Ned:

He died nobly with his sword brothers at the end of Robert's Rebellion, after Lord Eddard Stark was said to have killed him in single combat. Lord Stark then returned Dawn to Starfall, and to Ser Arthur's kin, as a sign of respect.

page 239

[UnmaskedLurker]

I don't think Aerys had to change the order of succession to make Viserys his heir. Under the precedent set when the Great Council chose Egg, the son of the king comes before the son of a dead prince. And we know from The Rogue Prince that these precedents matter, since Viserys I had to overrule the precedent set at the Great Council of 101 when he named Rhaenys his heir.

Even if I am wrong about that, we have no reason to think the 3KG knew Aegon was dead. It does not come up in their discussion with Ned, and it was a secret for a time after it happened -- Tywin did not reveal it until after Robert limped into King's Landing, after the Sack.

Anyway, if there was time for them to find out about Aegon, there was time for them to find out Viserys was the new heir. If there wasn't time for this information to reach them, then the KG think Aegon is alive and Jon still can't be king.

OK, I realize we have had this debate before, but I will give my view again anyway. I disagree that the GC that chose Egg intended to set a new precedent--they never said they were changing the normal rules (as the earlier GC stated they were doing--or maybe in that case "clarifying" the rules), they only explained why they were making an exception to the rule that one time. Sure, under similar circumstances, another GC could use that precedent to justify another exception--but it was not stated as a change in the general rule.

As to the flow of information--we just don't know. There are reasons to believe that the KG source was in Dorne (perhaps Starfall). There are reasons why Aerys would not make the announcement about Viserys being named heir known to Dorne, given that it was an intentional slight against Elia and her children. The news of Aegon's death, on the other hand, could have been told to someone with connections in Dorne. So it is not a matter of "time" to find out. It is a matter of what information was told to whom.

[BearQueen87]

The section of Dorne (a special page for the Sword of the Morning) only mentions that Arthur was killed by Ned:

He died nobly with his sword brothers at the end of Robert's Rebellion, after Lord Eddard Stark was said to have killed him in single combat. Lord Stark then returned Dawn to Starfall, and to Ser Arthur's kin, as a sign of respect.

page 239

That's not too different from what we already know, yeah? It just leaves out whatever the heck HR did (frog!)

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

That's not too different from what we already know, yeah? It just leaves out whatever the heck HR did (frog!)

Exactly ;) Or, I forgot something, but in The Fall of the Dragons, nothing is mentioned, and in the section on The North. So I fear that as far as Arthurs' death is concerned, we learn nothing new in this book.

[Lord Varys]

The single combat thing is the interesting part. I always thought it was seven against three.

Whether the Great Council intends to set a precedent is irrelevant. It does so by default. Every king sets a precedent when he chose an heir, and the Great Council in 233 chose to pass over a male claimant in his favor of an older claimant from a farther removed cadet branch. That's exactly what Aerys did when he chose Viserys - his own flesh and blood - over the Dornish smelling brats of his ingrate elder son.

More importantly, it seems that after the Dance all kings explicitly named their heirs (i.e. installed them as Princes of Dragonstone). Aerys I recognized all his three heirs as such. Maekar apparently did not yet name Prince Maegor Prince of Dragonstone before his death, explaining why Bloodraven called a Great Council. I imagine Daenora enjoyed some support as well, as Bloodraven apparently feared another Dance may break out without a Great Council.

[BearQueen87]

The single combat thing is the interesting part. I always thought it was seven against three.

I think we knew that Ned and Arthur faced on one on one; Ned tells Bran that Dayne would have killed him if not for HR, so I think the implication is that Dayne and Stark fought in single combat while Ned's companions and other KG were fighting/dying.

[UnmaskedLurker]

I think we knew that Ned and Arthur faced on one on one; Ned tells Bran that Dayne would have killed him if not for HR, so I think the implication is that Dayne and Stark fought in single combat while Ned's companions and other KG were fighting/dying.

Yes, but obviously at some point HR steps in and does something to help Ned--so not entire single combat. But more to the point, I think the chapter simply confirms that the rest of the world were never told by Ned what really happened. He had to tell them that he killed Dayne because he returned the sword publicly. Apparently, none of the other events were publicly revealed, including the 7 on 3 and included HR's assistance.

[The Twinslayer]

I don't think so. The KG knew that Viserys did not have any KG with him and that he was potentially in mortal danger, given that Robert just won the war against Aerys. If the KG thought that Viserys might be king, there is no doubt that at least one of the three would have gone to guard him. The only reasonable explanation I can imagine for keeping all 3 at ToJ is if the KG had no reason to even consider the possibility that Viserys might be the legal king. Absent a GC, the normal order of descent had been followed during the Targ history--and the KG would have had no reason to think Jon was anything other than king--but only if a marriage occurred. But even if a marriage occurred, if the KG thought Viserys might legally be king under Targ law--one of the KG would have gone to guard Viserys.

Viserys was not in any immediate danger. He was safe on Dragonstone with Willem Darry and the Targaryen fleet. It was another year before Viserys faced any threat.

Certainly, he was in less danger than Aegon II, who fled King's Landing with a nameless bastard knight while the two KG who were with him left him to go elsewhere.

Under these circumstances, it would be perfectly reasonable for the KGs to stay with Rhaegar's pregnant mistress, who had no other defenders, and to trust Willem Darry and the Targaryen fleet to protect Viserys -- at least until Lyanna could be moved.

[Marcus Agrippa]

Robert doesn't joust.

I was more or less referring to why he didn't learn. He loved combat. Why just train as a melee combatant

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I was more or less referring to why he didn't learn. He loved combat. Why just train as a melee combatant

Who says Robert never trained for jousting? He just loved the melee more, and thus participated in those.