Jump to content

Archived

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

Salafi Stannis

R+L=J v.112

Recommended Posts

Reference guide

The Tower of the Hand has an excellent analysis of this theory:
Jon Snow's Parents

And Westeros' Citadel also provides a summary:
Jon Snow's Parents

A Wiki of Ice and Fire:
Jon Snow Theories

Frequently Asked Questions:

How can Jon be a Targaryen if he has a burned hand?
Targaryens are not immune to fire. Aerion Brightflame died drinking wildfire. Aegon V and his son Duncan are thought to have died in a fire-related event at Summerhall. Rhaenyra was eaten by Aegon II's dragon, presumably roasted by fire before the dragon took a bite. Viserys died when he was crowned with molten gold. Dany suffered burns from the fire pit incident at the end of A Dance with Dragons. Finally, the author has stated outright that Targaryens are not immune to fire. Jon's burned hand does not mean he is ineligible to be part Targaryen. For more information about the myth of Targaryen fire immunity, see this thread.

How can Jon be a Targ if he doesn't have silver hair and purple eyes?
Not all Targaryens had the typical Valyrian look. Alysanne had blue eyes. Baelor Breakspear and his son(s) had the Dornish look. Some of the Great Bastards did not have typical Valyrian features. Jon's own half-sister Rhaenys had her mother's Dornish look.

If Jon isn't Ned's son, then why does he look so much like him?

Much is made over the fact that Arya looks like Lyanna, and Jon looks like Arya. Ned and Lyanna shared similar looks.

How can Jon be half-Targ if he has a direwolf?
Ned's trueborn children are half Stark and half Tully. Being half Tully didn't prevent them from having a direwolf so there is no reason to think being half Targaryen would prevent Jon from having a direwolf. If Lyanna is his mother, then he's still half Stark. Furthermore, there is already a character who is half Targaryen and half blood of the First Men and was a skinchanger: Bloodraven.

Since Rhaegar was already married, wouldn't Jon still be a bastard?
The evidence that Jon is legitimate is that Targaryens have a history of polygamous marriages which makes it a possibility that Rhaegar had two wives. Three Kingsguards were present at the Tower of Joy when Ned arrived. Even after Ned said that Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon were dead and Viserys had fled to Dragonstone, the Kingsguard opted to stay at the Tower of Joy stating they were obeying their Kingsguard vow. The heart of a Kingsguard's vow is to protect the king. With Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon dead, the new king would have been Viserys, unless Lyanna's child was legitimate making him the new king of the Targaryen dynasty. For a comprehensive analysis of Jon's legitimacy, see the detailed explanations in the two linked articles.


But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?
The practice was never made illegal and there may have been some less prominent examples after Maegor, as stated in this SSM. Furthermore, Jorah suggests it to Dany as a viable option.

Weren't the Kingsguard at Tower of Joy on the basis of an order from Aerys, to guard Lyanna as a hostage?
Aerys was sane enough to realize how taking someone hostage works even at the end of the Rebellion, and he would hardly miss the opportunity to bring Ned and Robert in line any time after the situation started to look really serious. Furthermore, regardless of on whose order the Kingsguard might have stayed at Tower of Joy, they would still be in dereliction of their duty to guard the new king.


This theory is too obvious and too many people believe it to be fact. How can it be true?
The theory is not obvious to the majority of readers. Some will get it on first read, most will not. Keep in mind that readers who go to online fan forums, such as this one, represent a very small minority of the A Song of Ice and Fire readership. Also, A Game of Thrones has been out since 1996. That's more than 18 years of readers being able to piece together this mystery.

Why doesn't Ned ever think about Lyanna being Jon's mother
?
Ned doesn't think about anyone as being his mother. He says the name 'Wylla' to Robert, but does not actively think that Wylla is the mother. He also doesn't think of Jon as his son. There are numerous mysteries in the series, and Jon's parentage is one of those. If Ned thought about Jon being Lyanna's son, it would not be a mystery.

Why should we care who Jon's parents are? Will Jon care? Who cares if he's legitimate?
Once one accepts that the evidence is conclusive and that Jon's parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna and that he is most probably legitimate, these become the important questions.

Since this theory has been refined so well, will Martin change the outcome of the story to surprise his fans?
No, he said he won't change the outcome of the story only because some people have put together all the clues and solved the puzzle.

Previous editions:

Please click on the spoiler below to reveal links to all previous editions of this thread

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread one)

Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread” (thread two)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III)” (thread three)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part IV)” (thread four)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part V)” (thread five)

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part VI)” (thread six)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread Part VII” (thread seven)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII” (thread eight)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part IX” (thread nine)

The Rhaegar + Lyanna =Jon Thread, Part X”(thread ten)

The R+L=J thread, part XI” (thread eleven)

The R+L=J thread, part XII” (thread twelve)

R+L=J Part XXIII” (thread thirteen)

R+L=J Part XXIV” (thread fourteen)

R+L=J XXV” (thread fifteen)

R+L=J v.16” (thread sixteen)

R+L=J v.17” (thread seventeen)

R+L=J v.18” (thread eighteen)

R+L=J v.19” (thread nineteen)

R+L=J v.20” (thread twenty)

R+L=J v.21” (thread twenty-one)

R+L=J v.22” (thread twenty-two)

R+L=J v.22a” (thread twenty-two (a))

R+L=J v.23” (thread twenty-three)

R+L=J v.24” (thread twenty-four)

R+L=J v.25” (thread twenty-five)

R+L=J v.26” (thread twenty-six)

R+L=J v.27” (thread twenty-seven)

R+L=J v.28” (thread twenty-eight)

R+L=J v.29” (thread twenty-nine)

R+L=J v.30” (thread thirty)

R+L=J v.31” (thread thirty-one)

R+L=J v.32” (thread thirty-two)

R+L=J v.33” (thread thirty-three)

R+L=J v.34” (thread thirty-four)

R+L=J v.35” (thread thirty-five)

R+L=J v.36” (thread thirty-six)

R+L=J v.37” (thread thirty-seven)

R+L=J v.38” (thread thirty-eight)

R+L=J v.39” (thread thirty-nine)

"
R+L=J v.40" (thread forty)

"
R+L=J v.41" (thread forty-one)

"
R+L=J v.42" (thread forty-two)

"
R+L=J v.43" (thread forty-three)

"
R+L=J v.44" (thread forty-four)

"
R+L=J v.45" (thread forty-five)

"
R+L=J v.46" (thread forty-six)

"
R+L=J v.47" (thread forty-seven)

"
R+L=J v.48" (thread forty-eight)

"
R+L=J v.49" (thread forty-nine)

"
R+L=J v.50" (thread fifty)

"
R+L=J v.51" (thread fifty-one)

"
R+L=J v.52" (thread fifty-two)

"
R+L=J v.53" (thread fifty-three)

"
R+L=J v.54" (thread fifty-four)

"
R+L=J v.55" (thread fifty-five)

"
R+L=J v.56" (thread fifty-six)

"
R+L=J v.57" (thread fifty-seven)

"R+L=J v.58" (thread fifty-eight)

"R+L=J v.59" (thread fifty-nine)

"R+L=J v.60" (thread sixty)

"R+L=J v.61" (thread sixty-one)

"R+L=J v.62" (thread sixty-two)

"R+L=J v.63" (thread sixty-three)

"R+L=J v.64" (thread sixty-four)

"R+L=J v.65" (thread sixty-five)

"R+L=J v.66" (thread sixty-six)

"R+L=J v.67" (thread sixty-seven)

"R+L=J v.68" (thread sixty-eight)

"R+L=J v.69" (thread sixty-nine)

"R+L=J v.70" (thread seventy)

"R+L=J v.71" (thread seventy-one)

"R+L=J v.72" (thread seventy-two)

"R+L=J v.73" (thread seventy-three)

"R+L=J v.74" (thread seventy-four)

"R+L=J v.75" (thread seventy-five)

"R+L=J v.76" (thread seventy-six)

"R+L=J v.77" (thread seventy-seven)

"R+L=J v.78" (thread seventy-eight)

"R+L=J v.79" (thread seventy-nine)

"R+L=J v.80" (thread eighty)

"R+L=J v.81" (thread eighty-one)

"R+L=J v.82" (thread eighty-two)

"R+L=J v.83" (thread eighty-three)

"R+L=J v.84" (thread eighty-four)

"R+L=J v.85" (thread eighty-five)

"R+L=J v.86" (thread eighty-six)

"R+L=J v.87" (thread eighty-seven)

"R+L=J v.88" (thread eighty-eight)

"R+L=J v.89" (thread eighty-nine)

"R+L=J v.90" (thread ninety)

"R+L=J v.91" (thread ninety-one)

"R+L=J v.92" (thread ninety-two)

"R+L=J v.93" (thread ninety-three)

"R+L=J v.94" (thread ninety-four)

"R+L=J v.95" (thread ninety-five)

"R+L=J v.96" (thread ninety-six)

"R+L=J v. 97" (thread ninety-seven)

"R+L=J v. 98" (thread ninety-eight)

"R+L=J v. 99" (thread ninety-nine)

"R+L =J v.100" (thread one hundred)

"R+L =J v.101" (thread one hundred one)

"R+L =J v.102" (thread one hundred two)

"R+L =J v.103" (thread one hundred three)

"R+L=J v.104" (thread one hundred four)

"R+L=J v.105" (thread one hundred five)

"R+L=J v.106" (thread one hundred six)

"R+L=J v.107" (thread one hundred seven)

"R+L=J v. 108" (thread one hundred eight)

"R+L=J v. 109" (thread one hundred nine)

"R+L=J v. 110" (thread one hundred ten)

"R+L=J v. 111" (thread one hundred eleven)

TWoIaF version:

You can now also view a full list of R+L=J threads in which you can openly discuss spoilers from TWoIaF

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.1"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.2"

"[TWoIaF Spoilers] R+L=J v.3"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go on.

For one, I don't think it will be revealed to Westeros through Howland - to the readers, maybe. My money is either on some physical proof from the crypts, or the Daynes.

There are no more Daynes. Edric is a child and his aunt was probably very young during the Rebellion. I doubt they would have any credibility in Westeros.

Unless you mean that Dayne who doesn't like the day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go on.

There are no more Daynes. Edric is a child and his aunt was probably very young during the Rebellion. I doubt they would have any credibility in Westeros.

Unless you mean that Dayne who doesn't like the day...

Does Edric mention that his mother is dead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Edric mention that his mother is dead?

Not that I remember. I wonder who is...

Ran mentioned that Martin had a family trees for the Daynes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't quote these properly cause they're from the last thread



BearQueen said:



Are you making our case for us? lol. But interesting catch! Tyrion might be joking (he does that, bless him) but he could also be making a serious offer since his life is on the line.


I was sarcastically making your case for you, yes. I'm sure Tyrion couldn't give him two wives anymore than he could give him two castles. I found that while looking for the "Jorah encourages Daenerys to take two husbands" bit. I gave up looking and went to sleep by the way, does anyone remember where that was?



Ygrain said:




That Reach thing is weird. Did the Reach have a different religion? I was under the impression that all of Seven Kingdoms minus the North were the Faith. So, if the lord of the Reach is of the Faith, and the Faith hates polygamy, how come he had more than one wife? Good old "might makes right"? Or they weren't actually legal wives but, say, official concubines?



Plus, one more aspect: even if Jaehaerys did outlaw polygamy, I doubt very much that the law would apply to the Targaryens themselves, just like the incest thing.





It is weird. I don't remember how far back this king with multiple wives was, but it's worth noting that he abandoned his wives to take a Hightower wife and bring Oldtown into the Reach. Oldtown being the home of the Faith and all, maybe this is why he had to ditch his multiple wives instead of just adding the Hightower girl to the list? I don't know.



I actually agree with you about that last part to an extent. It doesn't apply to the king, or anyone he gives his blessing to. If it just plain did not apply to Targaryens then Daemon being stuck with Lady Royce doesn't make much sense. But yes the laws in Westeros are never perfectly and evenly applied, and how much of an obstacle this hypothetical law would be to Rhaegar is unclear. I do think the law is probably there, and is what stops skeevy dudes like Walder Frey from having a harem of wives.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't quote these properly cause they're from the last thread

BearQueen said:

I was sarcastically making your case for you, yes. I'm sure Tyrion couldn't give him two wives anymore than he could give him two castles. I found that while looking for the "Jorah encourages Daenerys to take two husbands" bit. I gave up looking and went to sleep by the way, does anyone remember where that was?

Lol, do I remember where Jorah says things? Cute. Yes, it's ASOS Dany I, last paragraph, pretty much one of the last things he says before the chapter ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, do I remember where Jorah says things? Cute. Yes, it's ASOS Dany I, last paragraph, pretty much one of the last things he says before the chapter ends.

Yes I found it now. I was wondering why he would suggest she take two husbands since he was exiled before she took the first. You know wouldn't he want her to himself? Sadly re-reading the passage didn't shed any light on that. Is his self esteem so low that the only way he thinks she'll marry him is if she's free to marry another as well?

Also I have to question Jorah's credibility a bit. Not only does he seem to think Daenerys can take two husbands, he also seems to think he'll be able to ride a dragon... (and no I don't mean Daenerys. Though that's also pretty delusional.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I found it now. I was wondering why he would suggest she take two husbands since he was exiled before she took the first. You know wouldn't he want her to himself? Sadly re-reading the passage didn't shed any light on that. Is his self esteem so low that the only way he thinks she'll marry him is if she's free to marry another as well?

Also I have to question Jorah's credibility a bit. Not only does he seem to think Daenerys can take two husbands, he also seems to think he'll be able to ride a dragon... (and no I don't mean Daenerys. Though that's also pretty delusional.)

I think the three husbands thing was about completing the trio of dragonriders... Doesn't really make a lot of sense, but the "the dragon has three heads" came from Aegon and his sisters, so maybe Jorah thinks the new riders have to be married too.

Also, I think he knows that if Dany tries to conquer Westeros, she might need a husband who brings more military power. So Jorah says she can take more than one husband because if she settled with one, that one likely wouldn't be him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I found it now. I was wondering why he would suggest she take two husbands since he was exiled before she took the first. You know wouldn't he want her to himself? Sadly re-reading the passage didn't shed any light on that. Is his self esteem so low that the only way he thinks she'll marry him is if she's free to marry another as well?

Also I have to question Jorah's credibility a bit. Not only does he seem to think Daenerys can take two husbands, he also seems to think he'll be able to ride a dragon... (and no I don't mean Daenerys. Though that's also pretty delusional.)

Jorah's self esteem is at play, I think because he knows that he is not young and handsome (hence why, in part Daario bothers him a great deal), but like I said a thread back Jorah doesn't want her to marry another. He's possessive and doesn't like the idea of her having anyone else in her life, but the fact that he's counseling that she CAN do this, to me, says that he knows it's legal and a viable option.

And no, I don't think Jorah thinks he can ride a dragon. He's saying that "the dragon has three heads" has several meanings. One of them is Aegon and his two wives--not just dragon riders. Jorah doesn't envision himself being Dany's equal in dragon riding or even being her equal in ruling. He doesn't use the word King, he just calls himself a potential husband.

And Dany doesn't take it as such either. Later she just thinks about marrying both Jorah and Daario but never thinks of either of them as "king" or "dragon rider." Just husband.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Your Grace,” he conceded, “the dragon has three heads, remember? You have wondered at that, ever since you heard it from the warlocks in the House of Dust. Well, here’s your meaning: Balerion, Meraxes, and Vhagar, ridden by Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya. The three-headed dragon of House Targaryen - three dragons, and three riders.”

“Yes,” said Dany, “but my brothers are dead.”

“Rhaenys and Visenya were Aegon’s wives as well as his sisters. You have no brothers, but you can take husbands. And I tell you truly, Daenerys, there is no man in all the world who will ever be half so true to you as me.”

I seems to me he's suggesting that he wed her and become one of her dragon riders. He gets to the idea of marriage by mentioning that she needs three riders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seems to me he's suggesting that he wed her and become one of her dragon riders. He gets to the idea of marriage by mentioning that she needs three riders.

I disagree. He has no interest in being a dragon rider. He's pointing out that three-heads mean many things: husbands, brothers, king/queens, and dragon riders. He's not proposing that he be a brother as well. He's saying that he could be her husband and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But polygamy hadn't been practiced in centuries, is it still even legal?

The practice was never made illegal and there may have been some less prominent examples after Maegor, as stated in this SSM. Furthermore, Jorah suggests it to Dany as a viable option.

This should probably be changed in future versions of the thread now that we know there were no other examples after Maegor. I'd also change that first part to "There's no indication the practice was ever made illegal."

By the way Jorah also thought selling people into slavery was a viable option...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should probably be changed in future versions of the thread now that we know there were no other examples after Maegor. I'd also change that first part to "There's no indication the practice was ever made illegal."

By the way Jorah also thought selling people into slavery was a viable option...

His reasons for selling people into slavery were complicated. "The things we do for love," but he knows it was shameful, and also knows it was illegal. If anything he knows he broke the law and therefore knows the law. And I really don't know what the two have to do with one another. Just because he made a big mistake in breaking the law in regards to slavery doesn't mean that polygamy was outlawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His reasons for selling people into slavery were complicated. "The things we do for love," but he knows it was shameful, and also knows it was illegal. If anything he knows he broke the law and therefore knows the law. And I really don't know what the two have to do with one another.

I'm not sure I follow that logic. Criminals make the best lawyers? I don't doubt that as a lord Jorah is aware of most of the laws of Westeros.

Just because he made a big mistake in breaking the law in regards to slavery doesn't mean that polygamy was outlawed.

Of course it doesn't. However I don't really see how you can use Jorah's statement as evidence polygamy is legal while conveniently ignoring the statements of Barristan, Connington and probably others. (Jorah was clearly the most biased of the three, he wanted to be one of her husbands and as you said knew he had no shot if she could only chose one.) There's also the fact that Daenerys considers herself a ruling queen, (with dragons no less) and thus can get away with anything she wants. So I'm just surprised "Jorah said it would be fine" is up there as one of the main pieces of evidence that polygamy is still legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I follow that logic. Criminals make the best lawyers? I don't doubt that as a lord Jorah is aware of most of the laws of Westeros.

Of course it doesn't. However I don't really see how you can use Jorah's statement as evidence polygamy is legal while conveniently ignoring the statements of Barristan, Connington and probably others. (Jorah was clearly the most biased of the three, he wanted to be one of her husbands and as you said knew he had no shot if she could only chose one.) There's also the fact that Daenerys considers herself a ruling queen, (with dragons no less) and thus can get away with anything she wants. So I'm just surprised "Jorah said it would be fine" is up there as one of the main pieces of evidence that polygamy is still legal.

It is a main piece of evidence because polygamy is discussed in the books infrequently. GRRM hides big mysteries by not talking about them a lot. So when Jorah offhandley assumes that Dany could take a second husband, it serves as a pretty big clue that it is not illegal in Westeros because he would not be recommending she go to win over Westeros having broken on of its laws (while slavery in Essos is a matter of the laws of Essos and thus a different matter).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×