Jump to content

Archived

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

Jon Weirgaryen

R+L=J v.114

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)

"R+L=J v.112" (thread one hundred twelve)

"R+L=J v.113" (thread one hundred thirteen)

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 think that the question I have been wrestling with is why did GRRM include the reference to Viserys being the new heir at all? What message was GRRM sending to the reader? Is it meant to suggest that Aerys did actually name Viserys as the new heir, and if so, does this fact have any other significance to the plot (i.e., Jon as the "real" heir during battle of ToJ)? I am not someone who just dismisses evidence because it does not support my preferred theory (I support legit J). I agree that it might just be the maesters conflating the situation because from their point of view Viserys became the heir shortly thereafter when Aegon was apparently killed. But we cannot assume that is the reason. So back to my original question, what clue, if any, was GRRM telling the readers with this information? I still cannot decide for sure.

I don't think it changes much, if anything, regarding Jon's legitimacy. As Rhaegar's oldest living trueborn son, Jon would have been the natural heir to the IT, according to Westerosi law. Nor do I see this possibility as damaging or problematic for the popular interpretation of the KG half of the ToJ dialogue. Which boils down to the KG believing Jon was the rightful Targaryen heir, by the time Ned arrived. At least that is how I've often described it. The only difference would be that their belief was based on Jon's claim, rather than an absolute truth.

The more I think about it, the more I don't hate this variation, if it turns out Viserys was indeed placed ahead of Rhaegar's children in the succession. As opposed to a case of 'condensed wording' by the maester. As Twinslayer noted, Dany was Viserys's heir, even styled as Princess of Dragonstone by Illyrio. So, even though Jon has the better claim according to Westerosi (re: Viserys) and Targaryen (re: Dany) succession laws, Dany was known as the official heir, and that counts for something.

Also, this might be the sort of twist -- well, at least one of them -- some have been expecting concerning the hidden prince trope in Jon's story. Hidden prince screwed out of rightful inheritance after crazy king alters succession. Story at 9.

Fwiw, a while back I posted about some rather striking parallels between Jon and Viserys in AGoT, Jon II and Daenerys V. Specifically, the feast at Winterfell and the feast in Vaes Dothrak, when Viserys dies. - Link1, Link2.

I was never quite certain why those two characters were being connected in that way. Yet, clearly they were. Perhaps it has something to do with the new information from the WoIaF we're discussing here, especially as it pertains to the succession.

Af the point that having to ask the king for permission means that the action is illegal: total nonsense. By this logic, monogamous marriage would be illegal, as well, because if a prince wants to get married, he has to ask the king's permission first... or go ahead and marry without the permission and face the consequences, which, however, doesn't make the marriage illegal. Daemon and Rhaenyra as well as a couple of spoilers say hello here.

Good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Near the end of v113, it would brought up that Aerys might have legitimized Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna to lure him back to KL to take over the battle. Do people really think it is likely that Aerys knew about the marriage? Wasn't one of the apparent purposes of going into hiding to keep the marriage a secret until Rhaegar was ready to reveal it? I am not really arguing one way or the other at this point--I am really interested in hearing out the arguments. I have heard the theory before, but I have never seen anyone flesh out the theory as to how Aerys would have found out about the marriage at all.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to RumHam from the previous thread:

RumHam said:


Why do you think it would only be known in the Red Keep? The people on Dragonstone would learn from Rhaella, Viserys and their escort. It's possible ravens were sent, or at least that word got further than the Red Keep and into the city itself. There was time between the Trident and the Sack. (You probably have a better idea of how much time than I do.) Naming someone heir to the throne, especially when passing over someone else, is something you'd want to proclaim as wide an audience as possible.

I guess that

Red Keep only was a bad formulation of words. What I meant by it was that it wouldn't be that well known. Between the Trident and the Sack, little time passed. From the wording in the chapter "the end", it sounds like Rossart became Hand after the Trident, so about a fortnight passed between the Trident and the Sack. Aerys had bigger worries, than announcing to the realm who his heir was. There was a big army coming to his gates, after all, led by a rebel.

And as Aerys was prepared to burn himself, Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon to the ground, along with the (1/2) million other people living in KL, what would such an announcement have accomplished? Aerys was going to kill both himself, and Aegon, so Viserys would be the last male left in any case.. and thus the only heir, in Aerys' eyes.

How does this passage come into play now that we have the World Book?

“Far be it from me to question your cunning, Father, but in your place I do believe I’d have let Robert Baratheon bloody his own hands.”
Lord Tywin stared at him as if he had lost his wits. “You deserve that motley, then. We had come late to Robert’s cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever. And Robert’s relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar’s children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure.

You could say that, if a King excluded you from the line of succession, no matter who has all died (Aerys, Rhaegar, Viserys, Daenerys), the person who was excluded still doesn't have any right to the throne. So if Aerys truly had named Viserys his heir, specifically, thereby excluding Aegon from the line of succession, Aegon couldn't form a good threat anymore against Robert. Of course, there would always have been those who would have tried to install Aegon over Robert, given the chance (if there was anything to gain from it), but Robert would have a rather good legal claim over Aegon at such a point..

Also, a random thought. As I was looking up a quote earlier today (which I couldn't find), I came across this, something completely unrelated to my search, but something possibly related here:
(Bronn has just defeated Ser Vardis during Tyrion's trial by combat in the Eyrie)
Is it over, Mother?” the Lord of the Eyrie asked.
No, Catelyn wanted to tell him, it’s only now beginning.
This made me think about
And now it begins,” said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.
“No,” Ned said with sadness in his voice. “Now it ends.
Because, in a way, Ned was wrong. It did not end after that fight. The life filled with lies only just then begun.
I also found this:
The king swirled the wine in his cup, brooding. He took a swallow. “No,” he said. “I want no more of this. Jaime slew three of your men, and you five of his. Now it ends.

Ned arrived with seven men to fight three. When all the killing was done, only two remained. Five of Neds men died, three of the KG´s men. The situation with Ned versus Jaime is reversed, in that five of Jaime´s men died, and three of Neds.

The first quote, I guess could be seen as a subtle (subtle) hint that, for Ned, "it" only then began.. the lying about what he would find.. Because both men were right. Ned was right to say that it ended right there with the fight, because that can be seen as the end of a chapter in the rebellion. Just like that, Lord Robert was right to ask if "it" was over.. he was talking about the fighting, which had indeed ended. The "now it begins/it is only now beginning" could then be seen as a show that the consequences are only then beginning. In Catelyn's case, the war that would come forth from the confrontation. In Neds/Arthurs case, a life filled with lies about the child in the tower.

The second quote I just found a funny parallel in reverse. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ygrain said...

Af the point that having to ask the king for permission means that the action is illegal: total nonsense. By this logic, monogamous marriage would be illegal, as well, because if a prince wants to get married, he has to ask the king's permission first... or go ahead and marry without the permission and face the consequences, which, however, doesn't make the marriage illegal. Daemon and Rhaenyra as well as a couple of spoilers say hello here.

Clearly marrying in secret is not illegal, I'm not arguing otherwise. That was never the point of contention for me, it was the polygamy. You're supposed to get your parent's blessing, but it's not a requirement. And yes even if a prince breaks the law and for example murders somebody without the king's blessing there's a chance he could withstand the consequences and come out ok. Or that the king will make a decree sorta legalizing your actions after the fact.

Keep in mind I'm arguing "polygamy was probably made illegal throughout the Seven Kingdoms when Jaehaerys unified the laws" not necessarily that Rhaegar didn't at least try to do it anyway. Even if it turns out that all Targaryens, not just the king, are essentially above that law I still think there would be a law against it for everyone lower on the hierarchy. I don't buy that "cultural pressure" is what stops people like Walder Frey or some of the northerners from practicing polygamy. Anyway Look at the actual wording of the passage:

This seems plausible enough, but a different tale claims that Daemon was not so much opposed to wedding Rohanne of Tyrosh as he was convinced that he could follow in the footsteps of Aegon the Conqueror and Maegor the Cruel and have more than one bride. Aegon might even have promised to indulge him in this (some of Blackfyre’s partisans later claimed this was the case) but Daeron was of a different mind entirely. Not only did Daeron refuse to permit his brother more than one wife, but he also gave Daenerys’s hand to Maron Martell, as part of the bargain to finally unite the Seven Kingdoms with Dorne.

Why would Daemon have to be "convinced that he could follow in the footsteps of" Aegon and Maegor if it was commonly accepted that Targaryens could take multiple wives? Why is it worded as "refuse to permit his brother more than one wife?" instead of "refused to grant him his cousin's hand" or something similar?

UnmaskedLurker, I don't know. Possibly he and Ran and Linda are trying to make it less obvious that Jon has a claim? Or maybe when writing all that stuff they realized that that is just what Aerys would do in that situation, since he was convinced the Dornish betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident and while a child king sucks it's better than an infant king. And the wildfire thing. I really don't think conflation is the explanation. If he had said just "heir" then maybe, but "new heir" suggests that a decree was made.

In response to RumHam from the previous thread:

RumHam said:


Why do you think it would only be known in the Red Keep? The people on Dragonstone would learn from Rhaella, Viserys and their escort. It's possible ravens were sent, or at least that word got further than the Red Keep and into the city itself. There was time between the Trident and the Sack. (You probably have a better idea of how much time than I do.) Naming someone heir to the throne, especially when passing over someone else, is something you'd want to proclaim as wide an audience as possible.

I guess that

Red Keep only was a bad formulation of words. What I meant by it was that it wouldn't be that well known. Between the Trident and the Sack, little time passed. From the wording in the chapter "the end", it sounds like Rossart became Hand after the Trident, so about a fortnight passed between the Trident and the Sack. Aerys had bigger worries, than announcing to the realm who his heir was. There was a big army coming to his gates, after all, led by a rebel.

And as Aerys was prepared to burn himself, Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon to the ground, along with the (1/2) million other people living in KL, what would such an announcement have accomplished? Aerys was going to kill both himself, and Aegon, so Viserys would be the last male left in any case.. and thus the only heir, in Aerys' eyes.

I think they would have at least made an announcement, probably along with their attempt at spinning the news of the Trident. I'm picturing like the announcer guy from Rome in the town square. I dunno if you've ever seen that show. I think it's likely Pycelle sent some birds off too. It's not like he spent the whole two weeks preparing the city's defenses. Aerys did not resign to burning himself and his city after the Trident. It was a (horrible) back up plan in the event the city was going to be captured. Up until Tywin showed his true colors Aerys had not committed to burning the place down.

How does this passage come into play now that we have the World Book?

“Far be it from me to question your cunning, Father, but in your place I do believe I’d have let Robert Baratheon bloody his own hands.”
Lord Tywin stared at him as if he had lost his wits. “You deserve that motley, then. We had come late to Robert’s cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever. And Robert’s relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar’s children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure.

You could say that, if a King excluded you from the line of succession, no matter who has all died (Aerys, Rhaegar, Viserys, Daenerys), the person who was excluded still doesn't have any right to the throne. So if Aerys truly had named Viserys his heir, specifically, thereby excluding Aegon from the line of succession, Aegon couldn't form a good threat anymore against Robert. Of course, there would always have been those who would have tried to install Aegon over Robert, given the chance (if there was anything to gain from it), but Robert would have a rather good legal claim over Aegon at such a point..

Yeah you answered that one yourself. People would always try to use them regardless of the declarations of the Mad King. I mean why did Aemon have to go to the Wall to avoid people using him against Egg? As a Maester he had no legal claim to the throne.

By the way, by drafting up a document naming Viserys his chosen heir, does that mean he's disinheriting Aegon and Rhaenys totally or just placing his son ahead of them in line. I guess we'd have to see the wording of the document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Near the end of v113, it would brought up that Aerys might have legitimized Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna to lure him back to KL to take over the battle. Do people really think it is likely that Aerys knew about the marriage? Wasn't one of the apparent purposes of going into hiding to keep the marriage a secret until Rhaegar was ready to reveal it? I am not really arguing one way or the other at this point--I am really interested in hearing out the arguments. I have heard the theory before, but I have never seen anyone flesh out the theory as to how Aerys would have found out about the marriage at all.

I don't think Aerys knew. First, how would he have found out? Varys, most likely. Someone still alive, working inside KL and who's never given any hint that he suspects anything about RL or RLJ (and Varys being a smart cookie would have figured out RLJ given what we--and everyone else--know about Ned, Lyanna, and Rhaegar).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am starting to think that Aerys came up with an insane yet brilliant plan to win the war against Robert. He was planning to lure the rebel armies into King's Landing and then blow the whole place up. He had no intention of fighting to protect the city -- otherwise he would have summoned Mace Tyrell to leave Storm's End, and he would have summoned the Targaryen fleet to come down from Dragonstone to protect him.

So he parked Viserys and Rhaella on Dragon stone, and he left Mace and the Redwynes at Storm's End. His plan was to kill all the rebels, plus himself and Rhaegar's children, so that when the dust settled Viserys would be the only claimant left. Then Viserys would be king, supported by the only troops left -- all the power of Highgarden and both the Redwyne and Targaryen fleets.

As far as the new information from TWOIAF

that may be intended to set up the second Dance of the Dragons. Aegon may stake a claim as Rhaegar's heir while Dany will stake a claim as Viserys' heir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, a random thought. As I was looking up a quote earlier today (which I couldn't find), I came across this, something completely unrelated to my search, but something possibly related here:
(Bronn has just defeated Ser Vardis during Tyrion's trial by combat in the Eyrie)
Is it over, Mother?” the Lord of the Eyrie asked.
No, Catelyn wanted to tell him, it’s only now beginning.
This made me think about
And now it begins,” said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.
“No,” Ned said with sadness in his voice. “Now it ends.
Because, in a way, Ned was wrong. It did not end after that fight. The life filled with lies only just then begun.
I also found this:
The king swirled the wine in his cup, brooding. He took a swallow. “No,” he said. “I want no more of this. Jaime slew three of your men, and you five of his. Now it ends.

Ned arrived with seven men to fight three. When all the killing was done, only two remained. Five of Neds men died, three of the KG´s men. The situation with Ned versus Jaime is reversed, in that five of Jaime´s men died, and three of Neds.

The first quote, I guess could be seen as a subtle (subtle) hint that, for Ned, "it" only then began.. the lying about what he would find.. Because both men were right. Ned was right to say that it ended right there with the fight, because that can be seen as the end of a chapter in the rebellion. Just like that, Lord Robert was right to ask if "it" was over.. he was talking about the fighting, which had indeed ended. The "now it begins/it is only now beginning" could then be seen as a show that the consequences are only then beginning. In Catelyn's case, the war that would come forth from the confrontation. In Neds/Arthurs case, a life filled with lies about the child in the tower.

The second quote I just found a funny parallel in reverse. :)

:stunned:

A. ???

B. Littlefinger sets the Starks against Lannisters.

A. Rhaegar "steals" Lyanna.

B. Catelyn steals Tyrion.

A. Brandon goes beserk.

B. Jaime goes beserk.

A. A war starts.

B. A war starts.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they would have at least made an announcement, probably along with their attempt at spinning the news of the Trident. I'm picturing like the announcer guy from Rome in the town square. I dunno if you've ever seen that show. I think it's likely Pycelle sent some birds off too. It's not like he spent the whole two weeks preparing the city's defenses. Aerys did not resign to burning himself and his city after the Trident. It was a (horrible) back up plan in the event the city was going to be captured. Up until Tywin showed his true colors Aerys had not committed to burning the place down.

Yeah you answered that one yourself. People would always try to use them regardless of the declarations of the Mad King. I mean why did Aemon have to go to the Wall to avoid people using him against Egg? As a Maester he had no legal claim to the throne.

By the way, by drafting up a document naming Viserys his chosen heir, does that mean he's disinheriting Aegon and Rhaenys totally or just placing his son ahead of them in line. I guess we'd have to see the wording of the document.

Would they have made an announcement throughout the realm? Possible, but still, there was more going on.

But I am still in doubt about whether Aerys even named Viserys his specific heir. The passage

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsil during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart - a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

already names Rhaella pregnant, which we know they couldn't have known yet.. So why is it so strange to consider that "new heir, Viserys", is also simply Yandel, and not Aerys?

What I bolded in your response (difficult to see in spoiler tags :p ) , you are right about that. It would mostly depend on what Aerys said in such a document, and how.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:stunned:

A. ???

B. Littlefinger sets the Starks against Lannisters.

A. Rhaegar "steals" Lyanna.

B. Catelyn steals Tyrion.

A. Brandon goes beserk.

B. Jaime goes beserk.

A. A war starts.

B. A war starts.

Thoughts?

That part about someone behind the events leading to Robellion just like there was LF behind Wot5K has been proposed before. I never realized that Brandon-Jaime parallel but to develop on the general theme, it has been suggested that someone told Jaime where to look for Ned, just as someone might have intentionally misinformed Brandon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:stunned:

A. ???

B. Littlefinger sets the Starks against Lannisters.

A. Rhaegar "steals" Lyanna.

B. Catelyn steals Tyrion.

A. Brandon goes beserk.

B. Jaime goes beserk.

A. A war starts.

B. A war starts.

Thoughts?

That part about someone behind the events leading to Robellion just like there was LF behind Wot5K has been proposed before. I never realized that Brandon-Jaime parallel but to develop on the general theme, it has been suggested that someone told Jaime where to look for Ned, just as someone might have intentionally misinformed Brandon.

If I said I was having suspicions about Lonmouth....

If Lonmouth really is alive as Lem Lemoncloak (and I think Lady Gwyn is right about that) then has to be a reason for GRRM keeping him alive. What if he was okay with Rhaegar overthrowing Aerys but not okay with the Lyanna aspect, given that Lonmouth and Robert seem to be somewhat friendly. It might not have been with the same intentions as Littlefinger (chaos) but I wouldn't be surprised if Rhaegar was betrayed by someone he considered a friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:stunned:

A. ???

B. Littlefinger sets the Starks against Lannisters.

A. Rhaegar "steals" Lyanna.

B. Catelyn steals Tyrion.

A. Brandon goes beserk.

B. Jaime goes beserk.

A. A war starts.

B. A war starts.

Thoughts?

The first A: small council members set Aerys against Rhaegar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would they have made an announcement throughout the realm? Possible, but still, there was more going on.

But I am still in doubt about whether Aerys even named Viserys his specific heir. The passage

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsil during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart - a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery.

already names Rhaella pregnant, which we know they couldn't have known yet.. So why is it so strange to consider that "new heir, Viserys", is also simply Yandel, and not Aerys?

What I bolded in your response (difficult to see in spoiler tags :P ) , you are right about that. It would mostly depend on what Aerys said in such a document, and how.

Well the difference is whether they knew or not, she was pregnant at the point in time Yandel is speaking about. Yandel is writing this years later. That she herself and those around her were unaware of this at the time does not effect Yandel looking back at the situation. Wheras if you are correct Viserys was not his "new heir" at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Aerys knew. First, how would he have found out? Varys, most likely. Someone still alive, working inside KL and who's never given any hint that he suspects anything about RL or RLJ (and Varys being a smart cookie would have figured out RLJ given what we--and everyone else--know about Ned, Lyanna, and Rhaegar).

I tend to agree. Hopefully, someone who think Aerys legitimized the marriage can explain how Aerys found out about the marriage--and as you point out, why Varys seems to have no knowledge of the marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Viserys' claim to the throne, Jaime has an interesting memory in ASOS. He has just killed Aerys and Roland Crakehall finds him in the throne room. Jaime orders Crakehall to announce the death of the king.

"Shall I proclaim a new king as well?" Crakehall asked, and Jaime read the question plain: Shall it be your father, or Robert Barratheon, or do you mean to try to make a new dragon king.? He thought for a moment of the boy Viserys, fled to Dragonstone, and of Rhaegar's infant son Aegon, still in Maegor's with his mother.

So when he thinks of proclaiming a new Targaryen king, he thinks first of Viserys and only second of Aegon. This may be a hint that Jaime

knew that Viserys was the "new heir" as soon as Rhaegar died

On what Hightower, Dayne and Whent knew, here is a rough timeline of relevant events.

Day 1: Dany is conceived in King's Landing. Jaime and Jon Darry are present. Rossart becomes Hand until he dies 2 weeks later.

Day 2: Rhaegar, J Darry and others leave for the Trident.

Day 14: Rhaegar and J Darry die on the Trident. Tywin sets out from Casterly Rock and Ned leaves the Trident with Robert's vanguard.

Robert is too wounded to go with Ned. Robert's Maester treats Robert and then treats Barristan.

Day 15: Aerys learns that Rhaegar is dead.

Viserys is the "new heir" either by Royal decree or automatically as the only surviving son of the king.

. Aerys sends Viserys and Rhaella (now 2 weeks pregnant) to Dragonstone and keeps Aegon, Elia and Rhaenys in King's Landing.

Day 21: Tywin and Ned arrive in King's Landing. The Sack. Aerys' death is announced by Crakehall. Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon "die" too, but Tywin conceals this.

Day 22: Rhaella learns of Aerys' death. Viserys is proclaimed king on Dragonstone. Presumably, Ravens are sent everywhere announcing the new Targaryen king. Viserys starts his 9 month reign on Dragonstone.

Day 24: (Estimating that it takes Ned and the cavalry 7 days to reach KL but it takes Robert and the infantry 10 days). Robert arrives in King's Landing. Tywin dramatically reveals the death of "Aegon." Ned leaves to fight the last battles of the rebellion alone.

Day 31: Ned arrives at Storm's End.

Day 32: the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dip their banners.

Day 40: Ned reaches the TOJ, kills he 3KGs. Sometime later, Lyanna dies

Day 225: Dany is born, 9 moons after Rhaella fled KL. Soon after, she and Viserys flee to Essos.

So, what did the 3KG at the TOJ know, and when did they know it?

They know that Robert won on the Trident, and that Aerys died in the Sack. So they have pretty good information up to the time of Aerys' death.

Since we know that

Viserys was the heir for almost a week before Aerys died, and for probably at least 3 weeks before Ned got to the TOJ, then if their source of information knew this, they would know it too. So the only question is whether Viserys' status as the heir was a secret.

Finally, whoever their source was had to have known Viserys was the new heir. The only way that would be a secret is if Aerys wanted it to be secret. But that would defeat the whole purpose of naming a new heir (if it was even necessary to do that). Every king who names a new heir does it publicly. Viserys II and Robb both had all the available lords bear witness when they named new heirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That part about someone behind the events leading to Robellion just like there was LF behind Wot5K has been proposed before. I never realized that Brandon-Jaime parallel but to develop on the general theme, it has been suggested that someone told Jaime where to look for Ned, just as someone might have intentionally misinformed Brandon.

Might Varys be a candidate? Knowing what (we think) we know about his true identity, he had motive to destabilize the Targaryen hold on the 7K. Probably no better way to do that than to involve them in a conflict with one of the great Houses from the Stark-Baratheon-Tully-Arryn alliance, since a conflict with one is a conflict with all. And, as we saw, that alliance was strong enough to defeat actually the Targaryens in civil war.

There is a also a sort of symmetry with LF's later actions, since Varys and LF are both high level, behind-the-scenes players in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checking in :)

Reminder that book quotes relating to R+L=J are linked in my signature.

Share this post


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

×