Jump to content

Archived

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

BearQueen87

R+L =J v. 115

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)

"R+L = J v. 114 (thread one hundred fourteen)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shiny!



For some reason the TWOIAF spoiler section isn't formatting right...? Here's the linkage for future



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

There's only two more days on the spoiler embargo, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's only two more days on the spoiler embargo, right?

Yes, I think you're right. That'll be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think you're right. That'll be nice.

Indeed. It's a bit tiresome having two different conversations about it :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, lets start all over again.

Ok!

Proposition: Jon Snow, known bastard and man of the Night's Watch, is actually the legitimate offspring of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Lady Lyanna Stark of Winterfell.

I know it sounds too obvious and crackpotty...but I think it has merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's only two more days on the spoiler embargo, right?

No, the embargo is lifted tomorrow (11/27), so only a few more hours of embargo left. See, for example, this wiki page that states that posting about WOIAF should be withheld until 11/27. It does not specify time zone, so I don't know exactly when the embargo is considered lifted, but when I get up tomorrow, I am posting spoilers galore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok!

Proposition: Jon Snow, known bastard and man of the Night's Watch, is actually the legitimate offspring of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Lady Lyanna Stark of Winterfell.

I know it sounds too obvious and crackpotty...but I think it has merit.

No way--too predictable. :cool4:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok!

Proposition: Jon Snow, known bastard and man of the Night's Watch, is actually the legitimate offspring of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Lady Lyanna Stark of Winterfell.

I know it sounds too obvious and crackpotty...but I think it has merit.

Nope, don't believe it for a second. Martin would never write anything so cliched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok!

Proposition: Jon Snow, known bastard and man of the Night's Watch, is actually the legitimate offspring of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Lady Lyanna Stark of Winterfell.

I know it sounds too obvious and crackpotty...but I think it has merit.

I don't accept the premise that anyone in universe didn't figure out that R+L=J.

I also don't accept the premise that it is a book or that authorial intent exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MtnLion says:



"The blue rose represents the union of Rhaegar and Lyanna."



BearQueen87 says:



"Rhaegar is the one who gave Lyanna the blue rose. Like MtnLion says it's Jon; the blue rose growing from the Wall is clearly Jon who is the product of both his parents--Rhaegar and Lyanna. The blue winter rose (thing that grows in winter despite normally needing a warm summery climate) is Jon himself, who only came about because of R and L. It's not just L and J (unless you want to argue that parthenogenesis is a thing now)"



J.Stargaryen says:



"In Ned's ToJ dream, he sees blue rose petals. The inspiration for which is the crown Rhaegar won, and then gave to Lyanna at HH.



People can object to the connection of Rhaegar to the blue roses if they want, however; before they do, they should remember that Rhaegar won the crown of blue roses and gave it to Lyanna.



Note "Promise me, Ned," . . . and "bed of blood" right after the blue roses. The latter two make for compelling evidence Lyanna had a baby, and Rhaegar was the father. In fact, I'm pretty sure the crowning is symbolic of Jon's conception. Rhaegar moves on from Elia to Lyanna, and places the crown in her lap with the tip of his penis metaphor.



ETA: Also, what BQ87 and MtnLion said."



-------------------------



No, the idea that the blue rose represents Jon just doesn't make sense. And the notion that the "trail of blue roses" begins chronologically at the Harrenhal tourney is simply wrong. Is it also your position that, in the song o' the winter rose, it is Lord Stark's grandson and heir (Bael's son) who is represented by the blue rose? If so, then I respectfully suggest that you are misreading the story:



'All I ask is a flower,' Bael answered, 'the fairest flower that blooms in the gardens o' Winterfell.' "



"Now as it happened the winter roses had only then come into bloom, and no flower is so rare nor precious. So the Stark sent to his glass gardens and commanded that the most beautiful o' the winter roses be plucked for the singer's payment. And so it was done. But when morning come, the singer had vanished… and so had Lord Brandon's maiden daughter. Her bed they found empty, but for the pale blue rose that Bael had left on the pillow where her head had lain."



The flower is the Stark's maiden daughter. If you want to proceed with botanical metaphors, then the child is the fruit. (And in this case, as I've suggested elsewhere, the Bael fruit in particular. The general apple metaphor is something I've covered rather extensively elsewhere.) The end of that song makes the distinction between the flower and the child even more clear, to my mind. The child and the rose are two different persons - one left "in payment for" the other:



"...what's certain is that Bael left the child in payment for the rose he'd plucked unasked, and that the boy grew to be the next Lord Stark." (2.51, JON)




I'll grant you the possibility that Rhaegar's behavior at Harrenhal may have been inspired, in part, by the song of the winter rose (though that's by no means a sure thing.) But if that's the case, it only confirms that Rhaegar's crown is not the beginning or the source of the blue rose symbolism. Rather, it is only a more recent event to be interpreted through the lens of the earlier story. And in that earlier story, the blue winter rose is a metaphor for Lord Stark's daughter. Not her child. And certainly not the man who plucks her from the Winterfell garden.



Also, in the context of sexuality, Martin uses the flower metaphor primarily (and generally) to represent the feminine or the female. Given that fact, it's rather curious that readers insist on interpreting Dany's vision of the "blue flower [growing] from a chink in a wall of ice" as a metaphor for Jon Snow. A survey of when and how Martin employs the floral analogy weighs heavily against the idea that the symbolic flower would represent a male character - and there's nothing about that particular vision to suggest anything different. So all things considered, I do find it a bit strange that folks would think it was natural for Martin to suddenly identify Jon Snow as a flower.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all things considered, I do find it a bit strange that folks would think it was natural for Martin to suddenly identify Jon Snow as a flower.

So all things considered, please inform us your opinion what is the blue flower growing from the chink in the wall of ice? and how do you come to that conclusion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue flower in a chink of ice.

Pretty hard to see that as representing anyone but Jon since Rhaegar and Lyanna were never at the Wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue flower in a chink of ice.

Pretty hard to see that as representing anyone but Jon since Rhaegar and Lyanna were never at the Wall.

Yes, symbolism needs to be taken in context. In one context, the blue flower might represent Lyanna or Rhaegar and Lyanna together, but in this context, I agree that it does not seem that in can be anything other than the product of the union of Rhaegar and Lyanna--i.e., Jon. What would point be of having the vision somehow represent Lyanna at the wall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the idea that the blue rose represents Jon just doesn't make sense. And the notion that the "trail of blue roses" begins chronologically at the Harrenhal tourney is simply wrong. Is it also your position that, in the song o' the winter rose, it is Lord Stark's grandson and heir (Bael's son) who is represented by the blue rose? If so, then I respectfully suggest that you are misreading the story:

Also, in the context of sexuality, Martin uses the flower metaphor primarily (and generally) to represent the feminine or the female. Given that fact, it's rather curious that readers insist on interpreting Dany's vision of the "blue flower [growing] from a chink in a wall of ice" as a metaphor for Jon Snow. A survey of when and how Martin employs the floral analogy weighs heavily against the idea that the symbolic flower would represent a male character - and there's nothing about that particular vision to suggest anything different. So all things considered, I do find it a bit strange that folks would think it was natural for Martin to suddenly identify Jon Snow as a flower.

Just a couple of quick points for now. I'll try and get to the rest of this later, but it might not be until tomorrow. Given the context, I thought it was bloody obvious that the roses I was referring to were Lyanna's. As in: Where did Lyanna's roses come from? The answer: Rhaegar.

Note that Jon's Stark blood is from his mother; aka, through the female line. Also, I wouldn't discount the Wars of the Roses as an influence here. That doesn't necessarily mean Jon will end up with a blue rose sigil, though he might. But, it provides a counter to the 'feminine' argument. In other words, roses need not be feminine.

ETA: Most of my thoughts on the topic can probably be found in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the idea that the blue rose represents Jon just doesn't make sense. And the notion that the "trail of blue roses" begins chronologically at the Harrenhal tourney is simply wrong. Is it also your position that, in the song o' the winter rose, it is Lord Stark's grandson and heir (Bael's son) who is represented by the blue rose? If so, then I respectfully suggest that you are misreading the story:

'All I ask is a flower,' Bael answered, 'the fairest flower that blooms in the gardens o' Winterfell.' "

"Now as it happened the winter roses had only then come into bloom, and no flower is so rare nor precious. So the Stark sent to his glass gardens and commanded that the most beautiful o' the winter roses be plucked for the singer's payment. And so it was done. But when morning come, the singer had vanished… and so had Lord Brandon's maiden daughter. Her bed they found empty, but for the pale blue rose that Bael had left on the pillow where her head had lain."

The flower is the Stark's maiden daughter. If you want to proceed with botanical metaphors, then the child is the fruit. (And in this case, as I've suggested elsewhere, the Bael fruit in particular. The general apple metaphor is something I've covered rather extensively elsewhere.) The end of that song makes the distinction between the flower and the child even more clear, to my mind. The child and the rose are two different persons - one left "in payment for" the other:

"...what's certain is that Bael left the child in payment for the rose he'd plucked unasked, and that the boy grew to be the next Lord Stark." (2.51, JON)

Well, since Martin never mentions blue rosehips, the flower-fruit metaphor is apparently not one he used. Besides, the way the blue rose is used in Bael's story is not necessarily the same as the way it is used in R+L - the most important distinction being that Bael kept the rose for himself and didn't gift it to the girl.

I'll grant you the possibility that Rhaegar's behavior at Harrenhal may have been inspired, in part, by the song of the winter rose (though that's by no means a sure thing.) But if that's the case, it only confirms that Rhaegar's crown is not the beginning or the source of the blue rose symbolism. Rather, it is only a more recent event to be interpreted through the lens of the earlier story. And in that earlier story, the blue winter rose is a metaphor for Lord Stark's daughter. Not her child. And certainly not the man who plucks her from the Winterfell garden.

See above. The notion that the blue rose must function in the same way in two entirely different stories ir rather unfounded.

Also, in the context of sexuality, Martin uses the flower metaphor primarily (and generally) to represent the feminine or the female. Given that fact, it's rather curious that readers insist on interpreting Dany's vision of the "blue flower [growing] from a chink in a wall of ice" as a metaphor for Jon Snow. A survey of when and how Martin employs the floral analogy weighs heavily against the idea that the symbolic flower would represent a male character - and there's nothing about that particular vision to suggest anything different. So all things considered, I do find it a bit strange that folks would think it was natural for Martin to suddenly identify Jon Snow as a flower.

General use in a particular case may not alway be the right one, and neither is the male/female distinction. Rhaegar gave the roses to Lyanna. That is what makes this particular case different, and the way Lyanna is depicted with the crown of the blue roses is different from the general use, as well. Swap roses for a ring - you'd have no problem to believe that it signifies the union. Sticking to rose = female and therefore cannot signify the uninon narrows the reading substantially (and Loras Tyrell disagrees).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare "plucking the blue rose of Winterfell" to "dragons plucking giant krakens from the sea" which probably foreshadows that Dany and Victarion will meet in the Dothraki Sea and marry.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I think it's difficult to use the blue flower as a metaphor for anyone but Jon, Snowfyre does make a good point. The blue flower was growing from a chink in a wall of ice and it filled the air with sweetness. If you speculate on Jon's future, post-horrific-stabbing, you have to assume that he'll play an integral role in the Second War for the Dawn, and this particular line might point to that.



In the same vein, it might be beneficial to look at Jon as the 'wall of ice' itself, with Lyanna's selfless devotion to her son and even her own blood that would make this otherwise implacable, stark [please forgive the pun] image seem more forgiving, accepting. I mean, a wall's primary purpose is to keep things on the other side of it and Jon has already shown that he's willing to do the opposite, if only for the sake of the realm.



And, in many cases, when a POV character who is not friendly with The Ned thinks about him, they think of his eyes as cold, like ice.



ETA: word choice


Share this post


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

×