R+L=J v.112

[The Twinslayer]

He wanted a "dragon". Bastards aren't 'dragons'.

Daemon Blackfyre and Bloodraven both took dragons as their sigils. And, in the case of Jon, Mormont puts a firewood (symbol of House Stark) on Longclaw. Bastards can be dragons, or dire wolves, etc.

[RumHam]

No, we don't - I presume you are talking about the part when Aegon is being smuggled out of KL? The KG are protecting him by not drawing attention to him by their presence, which is not a situation applicable to Viserys.

But by your logic they've broken their oath. Also if that was the concern I don't see why they couldn't have ditched the white cloaks and dressed in rags or whatever. You can't tell me the face of a kingsguard is more recognizable than that of the king.

No, he wasn't. He was a Blackfyre- even when he was legitimized, he still wasn't a "Targaryen". But being a bastard Targaryen doesn't automatically make you a Blackfyre...Jon would be a Sand or a Snow. Targaryens are dragons. Their bastards are not.

And you're still missing the point. It's not about whether the prophecy would be 'okay' with a bastard Targaryen- it's about what Rhaegar thought the prophecy was saying. If he believes this prophecy is important enough to:

1. Leave his wife and newborn

2. Leave his insane father in charge instead of forging ahead with his plans to depose him

3. And stay hidden for many, many months while a war caused in part by his own actions wages on all around him

Then it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that he would simply leave anything "up to chance". If HE thinks there needs to be a third head to the dragon, he's going to make damn sure that third head IS a dragon in every way possible. Otherwise, none of Rhaegar's actions make any sense at all.

So the black dragon was not a dragon. Got it. I never said Jon was a "Targaryen" I said he might fit the bill for the "dragon" called for in the ancient prophecy.

You really think this whole theory falls apart if they weren't married? I think his actions still make sense as the guy trying to save the world who just didn't realize how serious a threat these rebels were. I'm not sure what his exact interpretation of the role of the other two heads of the dragon were, or why you are so sure they would have to be legitimate. Even if he wanted the third head to be a dragon in every way possible, if polygamy was illegal than marrying Lyanna was not possible.

Viserys is only the recently named heir to the Maester because in a few days, he would be. No one knows about Jon, remember. So it's likely that Aerys never actually did anything like declaring Viserys his heir, but to the world Viserys was Aerys' heir after Rhaegar and Aegon died, so the Maester is just putting that in there.

I think that's a really weak explanation. He had Pycelle's first hand accounts of all this stuff, and I don't think a maester would write something false just to sorta condense the narrative a little. I love how every little detail is some subtle clue when people think it supports their theory, but when something runs counter to the theory it's clearly a mistake or bullshit.

Can you think of any example where a bastard Targ is called/thought of as a dragon BY A TRUE BORN TARG. You have to keep in mind what Rhaegar thought--not what we think...but Rhaegar.

The only Targaryen PoV we've had is Daenerys, so I'm not sure how I'm supposed to do this. Daemon is clearly thought of as a "dragon" by many people. But we're never privy to a legitimate Targaryen's thoughts about him. I'm not convinced Rhaegar would think "The dragon must have three heads...and they all must have my last name."

[The Twinslayer]

No, we don't - I presume you are talking about the part when Aegon is being smuggled out of KL? The KG are protecting him by not drawing attention to him by their presence, which is not a situation applicable to Viserys.

That is not right.

It was Lord Larys who decreed the fugitives should part company as well, so that even if one were taken, the others might win free. Ser Rickard Thorne was commanded to deliver two-year-old Prince Maelor to Lord Hightower. Princess Jaehaera, a sweet and simple girl of six, was put in the charge of Ser Willas Fell, who swore to bring her safely to Storm's End. Neither knew where the other was bound so neither could betray the other if captured.

And only Larys himself knew that the king, stripped of his finery and clad in a salt-stained fisherman's cloak, had been concealed amongst a load of codfish in a fishing skiff in the care of a bastard knight...

The two KGs, Fell and Thorne, were not sent away to avoid drawing attention to he King. They are sent away to protect other people who are not the King. Including a "simple" Princess who almost certainly will never inherit.

And, note that Fell "swore to bring her to safety at Storm's End." Presumably, once he swore that vow, he would keep it, because "the Kingsguard does not flee" from its vows.

Thorne, on the other hand, did not seem to think a vow was necessary. He fulfilled his duty by following an order from Lord Larys, who was on the Small Council, that meant that the King had no KGs with him.

Meanwhile, Daemon is looking for them on the Trident. And, as King's Landing is falling, Rhaenyra is wondering where they are.

The parallels to the TOJ sequence are striking, and they are probably intentional.

[BearQueen87]

Daemon Blackfyre and Bloodraven both took dragons as their sigils. And, in the case of Jon, Mormont puts a firewood (symbol of House Stark) on Longclaw. Bastards can be dragons, or dire wolves, etc.

It doesn't matter if they took dragons for their sigils. It matters what true born Targs (of which Rhaegar was one) would have thought about bastards = / = dragons.

The only Targaryen PoV we've had is Daenerys, so I'm not sure how I'm supposed to do this. Daemon is clearly thought of as a "dragon" by many people. But we're never privy to a legitimate Targaryen's thoughts about him. I'm not convinced Rhaegar would think "The dragon must have three heads...and they all must have my last name."

Both times that Rhaegar named TPTWP, it was a true born dragon. Both of his "two heads" thus far were true born dragons--Rhaenys and Aegon. Why in the world would the third head (and possible TPTPW) be different?

[RumHam]

Both times that Rhaegar named TPTWP, it was a true born dragon. Both of his "two heads" thus far were true born dragons--Rhaenys and Aegon. Why in the world would the third head (and possible TPTPW) be different?

Because the first two came from his wife and the last from his mistress. :)

Also I'm curious where are you getting the idea that true born Targaryens have a different idea of what a "dragon" is than normal people? It also occurs to me that Viserys (III) was not considered a dragon by Daenerys despite being just as legitimate as she or Rhaegar.

[BearQueen87]

Because the first two came from his wife and the last from his mistress. :)

Or Rhaegar married Lyanna which makes much more sense given all the evidence not only from the World Book but from the 5 first five novels. :)

[sj4iy]

So the black dragon was not a dragon. Got it. I never said Jon was a "Targaryen" I said he might fit the bill for the "dragon" called for in the ancient prophecy.

You really think this whole theory falls apart if they weren't married? I think his actions still make sense as the guy trying to save the world who just didn't realize how serious a threat these rebels were. I'm not sure what his exact interpretation of the role of the other two heads of the dragon were, or why you are so sure they would have to be legitimate. Even if he wanted the third head to be a dragon in every way possible, if polygamy was illegal than marrying Lyanna was not possible.

I think you are still, stubbornly, missing my point.

This isn't about what I think or what YOU think.

This is about what Rhaegar would think in his situation.

He wants three children- TRUEBORN children, because he believes they will be the three heads of the dragon who will help save the world. His wife can't give him the third child. Why would he suddenly think "Well, I'll go knock up that broad I crowned at the Tourney- that'll be good enough. I'm sure the prophecy isn't looking for an actual Targaryen...it just wants my genetics."

That makes absolutely NO sense given the information we are presented about Rhaegar and the prophecies. If he believes that the fate of the world hinges on this third child being born a dragon, and he knows that he has precedent to marry, why would he NOT marry Lyanna? He's already burned his bridges- it's not like he can possibly offend anyone more than he already did simply by running off with her in the first place.

THAT'S my point. Whether I would consider a bastard a real dragon or not is irrelevant. The point is that Rhaegar would not. He wouldn't consider his bastard a dragon in every sense when he knows the prophecy is calling for a third dragon's head.

[RumHam]

I think you are still, stubbornly, missing my point.

This isn't about what I think or what YOU think.

This is about what Rhaegar would think in his situation.

He wants three children- TRUEBORN children, because he believes they will be the three heads of the dragon who will help save the world. His wife can't give him the third child. Why would he suddenly think "Well, I'll go knock up that broad I crowned at the Tourney- that'll be good enough. I'm sure the prophecy isn't looking for an actual Targaryen...it just wants my genetics."

That makes absolutely NO sense given the information we are presented about Rhaegar and the prophecies. If he believes that the fate of the world hinges on this third child being born a dragon, and he knows that he has precedent to marry, why would he NOT marry Lyanna? He's already burned his bridges- it's not like he can possibly offend anyone more than he already did simply by running off with her in the first place.

THAT'S my point. Whether I would consider a bastard a real dragon or not is irrelevant. The point is that Rhaegar would not. He wouldn't consider his bastard a dragon in every sense when he knows the prophecy is calling for a third dragon's head.

I understand your point. I just don't think it's a given he thought the third head had to be legitimate. Presumably the prophecy doesn't mention the word "Targaryen" at all, or include a clause that the three heads' parents must be married.

Or Rhaegar married Lyanna which makes much more sense given all the evidence not only from the World Book but from the 5 first five novels. :)

Well I guess it's gonna be a while until we find out. Wanna play scrabble or something in the meantime instead of having this argument every day?

Edit: and to clarify I'm totally open to the possibility of them being married. I'm not at all sure that they weren't. I'm not at all sure that polygamy is illegal, it's probably not. It's just that since everyone else is so certain they were married, I'm drawn to playing devil's advocate. I really think your arguments for them being married aren't as air tight as you guys seem to think. If it happens you can say "the clues were there" but it's not like you can look at the evidence and logically conclude they must have been married.

[sj4iy]

I understand your point. I just don't think it's a given he thought the third head had to be legitimate. Presumably the prophecy doesn't mention the word "Targaryen" at all, or include a clause that the three heads' parents must be married.

If that was the only clue we had, I would agree with you.

But it's not.

We have numerous foreshadowing about 'trueborn princes' and 'kings' surrounding Jon. We have the 3 KG at the ToJ. We have precedence for polygamy AND running away to marry in secret. Once you take ALL of it into consideration, it makes less and less sense that Jon is a bastard and more sense that he is not.

[The Twinslayer]

Edit: and to clarify I'm totally open to the possibility of them being married. I'm not at all sure that they weren't. I'm not at all sure that polygamy is illegal, it's probably not. It's just that since everyone else is so certain they were married, I'm drawn to playing devil's advocate. I really think your arguments for them being married aren't as air tight as you guys seem to think. If it happens you can say "the clues were there" but it's not like you can look at the evidence and logically conclude they must have been married.

Let's assume for a minute that Rhaegar and Lyanna did go through a marriage ceremony. Do you think people would accept that this makes Jon legitimate? I don't. Or at least, some would accept it and some would not. For example, if the "current" High Septon is still in office, I can't see him anointing Jon to be King as a true born Targaryen.

[RumHam]

If that was the only clue we had, I would agree with you.

But it's not.

We have numerous foreshadowing about 'trueborn princes' and 'kings' surrounding Jon. We have the 3 KG at the ToJ. We have precedence for polygamy AND running away to marry in secret. Once you take ALL of it into consideration, it makes less and less sense that Jon is a bastard and more sense that he is not.

I don't even try to counter the foreshadowing, because it's so nebulous. Until the thing that's being foreshadowed happens you really don't know.

I've proposed an alternate explanation for the Kingsguard being at the Tower of Joy: because Rhaegar told them to stay there and guard it no matter what. They swore to obey. I honestly think that explanation is more reasonable than the idea that they took it on themselves to proclaim Jon king. Especially considering the rebellion, and that they may have gotten word that Viserys was the new heir.

There is indeed precedence for polygamy, but I was surprised when I learned that Maegor was the last example. Jaehaerys' deal with the Faith and the unification of the kingdoms under one set of laws happened right after Maegor. So I thought "maybe this is not a coincidence" and formed a theory that Jaehaerys may have outlawed the practice. This is mostly what I've been arguing with people about. I acknowledge it's probably not correct. But if I am correct, then Rhaegar wouldn't have been able to marry Lyanna. (it's possible that he'd try anyway, and that such a marriage may not be considered valid by others for legal,religious, cultural or political reasons.) I agree that marrying in secret isn't really an issue. Though there's still the risk crazy Aerys would use it as a pretext to disinherit him.

[RumHam]

Let's assume for a minute that Rhaegar and Lyanna did go through a marriage ceremony. Do you think people would accept that this makes Jon legitimate? I don't. Or at least, some would accept it and some would not. For example, if the "current" High Septon is still in office, I can't see him anointing Jon to be King as a true born Targaryen.

Yeah, the current one probably wouldn't. Of course he wasn't the High Septon at the time. If Aerys was still ruling he'd probably defer to Aerys for fear of being burnt alive. If Rhaegar seizes power he'd probably be fine with it, what choice does he have. It might be more acceptable because Jon wouldn't be expected to inherit. I guess if the High Septon was really against the marriage or Jon being considered legitimate he could try to sway public opinion or something.

[Ygrain]

But by your logic they've broken their oath. Also if that was the concern I don't see why they couldn't have ditched the white cloaks and dressed in rags or whatever. You can't tell me the face of a kingsguard is more recognizable than that of the king.

The king was dug in a pile of fish, no? So no-one would see his face at all, unless someone was searching the ship because they recognized a KG and wondered what his presence meant.

ETA: So, no, they didn't break their oath at all. They were still protecting the king even though they were not with him, and they were not with him because they couldn't.

[Consigliere]

Is it established somewhere that your orders become invalid once the person who gave them dies?

Your question is neither here nor there and comes across as clutching at straws. It is clearly established that protecting the king is the number 1 priority of the KG. Following Rhaegars order initially does not contravene this since at that stage Aerys had four KG in KL. It makes no sense for the KG to remain at the ToJ following the Sack unless they were actually fulfilling their primary duty.

[BearQueen87]

Let's assume for a minute that Rhaegar and Lyanna did go through a marriage ceremony. Do you think people would accept that this makes Jon legitimate? I don't. Or at least, some would accept it and some would not. For example, if the "current" High Septon is still in office, I can't see him anointing Jon to be King as a true born Targaryen.

But nobody is even suggesting this. And no one has suggested it. I can't think of anyone here at RLJ so thinks that the second Jon's legitimacy is uncovered, he'll suddenly be accepted at the rightful king of Westeros.

I do think Jon will be King, but not because he's Rhaegar's true born son.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Let's assume for a minute that Rhaegar and Lyanna did go through a marriage ceremony. Do you think people would accept that this makes Jon legitimate? I don't. Or at least, some would accept it and some would not. For example, if the "current" High Septon is still in office, I can't see him anointing Jon to be King as a true born Targaryen.

It is irrelevant what others would think--only what Rhaegar would think. He is trying to fulfill a prophesy. To him, being married to the mothers of the three heads of the dragon was necessary. The opinions of others would be irrelevant. This issue is not about Jon being accepted by Westeros as a prince--it is about Rhaegar believing that within the meaning of the prophesy, Jon is a dragon. And for that, Rhaegar most likely thought marrying Lyanna was necessary.

There is indeed precedence for polygamy, but I was surprised when I learned that Maegor was the last example. Jaehaerys' deal with the Faith and the unification of the kingdoms under one set of laws happened right after Maegor. So I thought "maybe this is not a coincidence" and formed a theory that Jaehaerys may have outlawed the practice. This is mostly what I've been arguing with people about. I acknowledge it's probably not correct. But if I am correct, then Rhaegar wouldn't have been able to marry Lyanna. (it's possible that he'd try anyway, and that such a marriage may not be considered valid by others for legal,religious, cultural or political reasons.) I agree that marrying in secret isn't really an issue. Though there's still the risk crazy Aerys would use it as a pretext to disinherit him.

A point that was mentioned either above or in a related thread (hard to keep everything straight these days) is that the SSM where GRRM was asked if any polygamy happened after Maegor and he said something along the lines that he would have to look or, more likely, make one up. Well, we have not seen that additional "made" up case of polygamy after Maegor yet. That leaves us with two possibilities, GRRM changed his mind after the SSM or the additional one he would have to make up is Rhaegar and Lyanna. I think the latter is much more likely.

[MtnLion]

A point that was mentioned either above or in a related thread (hard to keep everything straight these days) is that the SSM where GRRM was asked if any polygamy happened after Maegor and he said something along the lines that he would have to look or, more likely, make one up. Well, we have not seen that additional "made" up case of polygamy after Maegor yet. That leaves us with two possibilities, GRRM changed his mind after the SSM or the additional one he would have to make up is Rhaegar and Lyanna. I think the latter is much more likely.

It was on this thread, and indeed that was what I was saying. GRRM has suggested that all of the known polygamous Targaryen marriages were not all inclusive. He said that he would have to check his notes, and if needed write additional ones, as necessary. (sly grin)

[The Twinslayer]

Is it established somewhere that your orders become invalid once the person who gave them dies?

No. For example, when Robb issues his will, he includes orders that he expects his bannerman to follow after he dies. Similarly, when Viserys I died Otto Hightower was Hand.

Viserys had granted him the authority to rule over the Seven Kingdoms, and "until such time as our new king is crowned," that rule would continue.

Based on Mormont's recounting of the Great Council that chose Egg, there was an interregnum after King Maekar died. Someone had the authority to call the Great Council and to make decisions until the new king was crowned. Presumably, it was whomever Maekar left in charge when he went to battle.

So the 3KG would be bound to follow whatever Rhaegar's order was until the competent authority (probably Rhaella and whichever Lords were still loyal to the Targs on Dragonstone) could crown a new king -- which they did around the time Jon was born. From the app:

Viserys was declared king on Dragonstone. Nine turns of the moon later, the Royal fleet was smashed in a storm.

That storm happened the day Dany was born, which was 8 or 9 months after Jon's birth.

[sj4iy]

I don't even try to counter the foreshadowing, because it's so nebulous. Until the thing that's being foreshadowed happens you really don't know.

I never said we knew for certain. It's another one of those 'take it as a whole' pieces of evidence.

As far as the 'king' foreshadowing, that's plain as day. The raven calls Jon "King" three times. THREE TIMES. That's not an accident, nor can it be misconstrued as 'wishful thinking'. It's straight up foreshadowing in the most obvious way possible.

I've proposed an alternate explanation for the Kingsguard being at the Tower of Joy: because Rhaegar told them to stay there and guard it no matter what. They swore to obey. I honestly think that explanation is more reasonable than the idea that they took it on themselves to proclaim Jon king. Especially considering the rebellion, and that they may have gotten word that Viserys was the new heir.

There is indeed precedence for polygamy, but I was surprised when I learned that Maegor was the last example. Jaehaerys' deal with the Faith and the unification of the kingdoms under one set of laws happened right after Maegor. So I thought "maybe this is not a coincidence" and formed a theory that Jaehaerys may have outlawed the practice. This is mostly what I've been arguing with people about. I acknowledge it's probably not correct. But if I am correct, then Rhaegar wouldn't have been able to marry Lyanna. (it's possible that he'd try anyway, and that such a marriage may not be considered valid by others for legal,religious, cultural or political reasons.) I agree that marrying in secret isn't really an issue. Though there's still the risk crazy Aerys would use it as a pretext to disinherit him.

The problem with your way of thinking is that you have to come up with a counter-explanation for every single thing...oftentimes, you lack evidence. I have ONE explanation that covers everything with evidence to back up all of my assertions. If there's one explanation that cover everything vs a bunch of explanations that don't, why would I choose the latter when the former is clearly more supported by the text?

You really haven't provided any real reason that Rhaegar WOULDN'T have married Lyanna. You're simply saying "Well, it's been a long time". But it doesn't matter HOW long it's been...the precedent is there and there's nothing stopping Rhaegar from doing it again. There's no law against polygamy noted anywhere in any of the texts. There is literally nothing at all stopping Rhaegar from marrying Lyanna if he wanted to.

Rhaegar plans on deposing Aerys anyway, so why should it matter what Aerys thinks of Rhaegar's actions? Rhaegar clearly thought of this as more important than what Aerys (or Westeros) thought, and did it anyway...without much secrecy, considering ALL of Westeros ended up knowing. If he truly cared what Aerys thought, he wouldn't have attempted it until after he had deposed him. Rhaegar's actions clearly contradict your assumptions that Rhaegar would be worried about what Aerys thought or did...because he obviously didn't.

[UnmaskedLurker]

No. For example, when Robb issues his will, he includes orders that he expects his bannerman to follow after he dies. Similarly, when Viserys I died Otto Hightower was Hand.

Based on Mormont's recounting of the Great Council that chose Egg, there was an interregnum after King Maekar died. Someone had the authority to call the Great Council and to make decisions until the new king was crowned. Presumably, it was whomever Maekar left in charge when he went to battle.

So the 3KG would be bound to follow whatever Rhaegar's order was until the competent authority (probably Rhaella and whichever Lords were still loyal to the Targs on Dragonstone) could crown a new king -- which they did around the time Jon was born. From the app:

That storm happened the day Dany was born, which was 8 or 9 months after Jon's birth.

I really don't understand this logic. I agree that orders don't automatically go away when the person who gave the orders die. But the orders also cannot remain forever. And if you are correct that Rhaella had authority until there was a crowning (and presumably appointment of a reagent), how in the world were the 3 KG supposed to get orders from her when she did not know where they were and they were making no attempt to get to her? You are setting up a catch-22 where the KG cannot leave the ToJ until they receive new orders but they cannot get new orders without leaving the ToJ.

More reasonably, after the death of Rheagar (so he could no longer adjust his orders) and the death of Aerys and Aegon (so the new king, if Viserys, would no longer be guarded by KG), the 3 KG would send at least one of the KG (they had two to spare to continue to guard ToJ if they still thought it necessary) to Dragonstone to be with Viserys and/or get orders from Rhaella (or whomever was left with the power to give orders).

But in any event, in reference back to the Ned/KG conversation, I still maintain that saying that the KG do not "flee" really makes no sense in reference to going to the new king. Going to the new king simply in now way can be considered "fleeing" as it is a known duty of KG to be with the king. If it was a matter of orders, perhaps they could say, KG follow orders. But saying that KG do not flee is a nonsense response to asking why they did not go to Viserys on Dragonstone if Viserys really is king.