R+L =J v. 115

[ToTheWolves]

You're just making shit up now. None of that even makes any sense and much of it is downright wrong.

You don't "lose" your honor for fighting against a tyrant who murdered your family.

You don't "lose" your honor by giving a mother and her children the chance the escape certain death. Nor does one lose it when they refuse to tell a dying man that his wife was lying to him.

And he simply clarified Robert's will- he didn't change the intent.

Everytime you're debating on these topics I find myself rooting for you lol!

[Alia of the knife]

Sorry, that came out wrong. I have a hard time believing she was 100% tomboy, no "girl", and all of a sudden, just because of a hot guy, she starts liking "girly" things like flowers and singing.

To your point, (and maybe this is why I have a soft spot for Lyanna and Arya), my mom died when I was young and my dad raised me by himself.

I grew up on Monday night football, WW2 documentaries, model cars, comic books, action movies and more than a few fistfights.

But I also read at least two books a week, War and Peace at ten, and loved Dr. Zhivagos soundtrack.

To this day, I would choose Iron Man over a "chick flick,"(for which my husband is truly grateful), and I would have DIED before I let a boy know I thought he was cute and was embarrassed by it.

I never flirted, and figured if a guy wanted me, he knew where to find me, but it wasn't going to be easy.

Arya is clearly touched by the story of the maiden who threw herself from a tower over the death of her prince, (which sounds a lot like her ancestor who killed herself over Bael when he was killed by their son), but she still calls it "stupid."

[Ygrain]

Case in point: all objections are the same, can be grouped together and dismissed as haters.

Correction: all the currently raised objections can be dismissed - for various reason but the outcome is the same.

[MtnLion]

On my end, no, I think Aerys was already dead. The earliest parameter for Jon's birth is the Sack, during which Aerys died. The latest he could have been born is a few weeks to a month after, give or take. So the window falls mostly after Aerys's death.

I love your posts, and you are generally on the mark. This has been a frustrating point for me to make. Daenerys is conceived a fortnight before the sack (at least). Daenerys is eight to nine moons younger than Jon. That places Jon's birth a fortnight before or a fortnight after the sack. Lyanna can have lingered for up to ten days after the birth (some have historically lingered longer, but GRRM has set a precedent of three days). Since Ned arrives in time for Lyanna's death, the birth must have occurred at the latest window, or there be wormholes in Westeros (GRRM's prerogative). The key is that Jon could have been born two weeks before the sack, to two weeks after the sack. (GRRM may backtrack, but I doubt it, it makes sense to have Jon's birth near the day of the sack. In Daenerys' memories she is born nine moons after the flight to Dragonstone, so GRRM did have a point of reference to answer the question.)

[sj4iy]

How about you PROVE that Rhaegar had a child with another woman? Ned is connected with having slept with 4 different women: Cat, Wylla, Ashara, and the fisherman's daughter. Rhaegar is only connected with having slept with Elia, though Robert believes he raped Lyanna. So that leaves 3 possible women that Ned could have gotten a child with, while only one for Rhaegar.

And the second bolded is completely lol. The fact of the story is that Jon is Ned's bastard. That literally is the fact of the story. That's how it's written. You and every R+L = J believer are just believers. The story says Jon is Ned's. I hope even the firmest believers in the R+L = J theory can at least admit that, because if you can't then you should seriously get your eyes checked as nowhere is it ever written that Jon is anything but Ned's bastard. There are worded sections that can lead you to think otherwise, but the story very clearly says he's Ned's. You have to reach your own conclusions after that to come to R+L= J, as it's not written in the book. If it's not written in the book, then it's not a fact of the story.

And why does Ned have to tell Jon who his mother was? Jon's different enough as he is from Ned's other children, why widen the gap? If Ned tells Jon who his mother is, that just further widens the gap between Jon and his other children which we know is something he did not wish as Bran sees him praying to the old gods that Jon and Robb would grow up like brothers. Not only that, but it also would serve to further separate Ned and Cat. We already knew that they wed for duty and spent the first year of their marriage apart, why throw in the name of who Ned spent part of that year with? Their marriage was awkward enough as it was without specifically mentioning who Ned cheated on her with.

Bullshit. Jon goes off to the Wall, giving Ned the perfect opportunity to tell him who his mother was- and he doesn't.

You brush this off as if it doesn't mean anything, when it's a pretty big damn deal in the story. Ned refuses to tell anyone at all- even Jon. If he were Ashara's son, it would be disingenuous of Ned not to let Jon know, because it would open up possible opportunities with the Daynes. But no...he says nothing and let's Jon go off to the Wall. Sounds pretty damn selfish for a man who felt so guilty about having a bastard that he brought him home and raised him amongst his trueborn children.

But, I said before- you are simply making shit up at this point because you don't have actual answers. You come in here on the offensive and start spouting things like "Ned wasn't honorable!" and "Jon wasn't attractive like his parents were!" because your position is too weak to defend with actual facts- so you twist the truth. I've dealt enough with people who do that, and they aren't worth debating with, because they simply keep making things up to defend their indefensible position.

So don't expect more responses from me.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

Correction: all the currently raised objections can be dismissed - for various reason but the outcome is the same.

Same thing.

[Ellfoy]

Who doesn't like flowers anyway ?!

Lyanna probably liked flowers before HH and got even more attached to blue winter roses after. That's all.

[Greymoon]

How about you PROVE that Rhaegar had a child with another woman? Ned is connected with having slept with 4 different women: Cat, Wylla, Ashara, and the fisherman's daughter. Rhaegar is only connected with having slept with Elia, though Robert believes he raped Lyanna. So that leaves 3 possible women that Ned could have gotten a child with, while only one for Rhaegar.

And the second bolded is completely lol. The fact of the story is that Jon is Ned's bastard. That literally is the fact of the story. That's how it's written. You and every R+L = J believer are just believers. The story says Jon is Ned's. I hope even the firmest believers in the R+L = J theory can at least admit that, because if you can't then you should seriously get your eyes checked as nowhere is it ever written that Jon is anything but Ned's bastard. There are worded sections that can lead you to think otherwise, but the story very clearly says he's Ned's. You have to reach your own conclusions after that to come to R+L= J, as it's not written in the book. If it's not written in the book, then it's not a fact of the story.

And why does Ned have to tell Jon who his mother was? Jon's different enough as he is from Ned's other children, why widen the gap? If Ned tells Jon who his mother is, that just further widens the gap between Jon and his other children which we know is something he did not wish as Bran sees him praying to the old gods that Jon and Robb would grow up like brothers. Not only that, but it also would serve to further separate Ned and Cat. We already knew that they wed for duty and spent the first year of their marriage apart, why throw in the name of who Ned spent part of that year with? Their marriage was awkward enough as it was without specifically mentioning who Ned cheated on her with.

You say Ned is connected to four women? He isn't. Ned is rumored to have had sex with two women outside of marriage; and claimed to have had sex with one, outside of marriage..... The first two are really only rumors propagated or believed by in-universe characters. Catelyn, Cersei, the Manderlys. There is absolutely no proof that Ned dishonored these women; Ned's POV does not reveal anything about it, either.

We don't know who fathered Ashara's child, for instance. We only know that she was dishonored and that Ned danced with her. It's a common assumption in universe that Ned dishonored Ashara; but it is never explicitly stated in the narrative. The only POV who seems to have 'intimate' knowledge of the matter is Ser Barristan Selmy, but even then, the wording is open to interpretation and the Stark Barristan refers to may or may not be Ned.

What we do know however, is that it is unlikely for Ned to have been near Ashara at the time Jon was conceived; after Ned's marriage to Catelyn, around 9 months before the sack.

The timeline also makes it highly unlikely for Jon to be the fisherman's daughter's son: According to that rumor, Ned got the girl with child while on his way North to call the banners. That places the conception of the child before Ned's marriage to Catelyn and probably over a year before the sack; this would make Jon months older than Robb. Which, he isn't.

(I'm counting months, because I do believe it took that long from the moment Ned crossed the fingers, to the time he married Cat.)

Small infants and toddlers develop really quickly, an age difference of a few months would be obvious -- even if Jon was a particularly small baby and Robb a particularly big and healthy one, the development of motors skills and body strength would be telling.... So, Ned could not imo, possibly have lied about Jon's age.

In any case, whatever did happen with Ashara and the fisherman's daughter, Ned himself put another name forward. And according to the way you have argued, and presented your skepticism, Wylla, is really, the only candidate we should consider because she is the only one Ned tells us about, and the only 'mother-candidate' the narrative allows: 1) because she was confirmed by Edric Dayne, a source 'close' to Wylla; and 2) because we have no indication as to how, or when Ned and Wylla met; where Wylla came from -- or where she was before Starfall. Our knowledge of Wylla is sufficiently vague that we cannot discredit Ned's claim based on the timeline alone.

It's not so much that all other rumors concerning Ned should be disregarded -- it's that you are not being objective when you claim that Rhaegar is connected to having slept with only 1 woman, and Ned with 4. Officially, Ned was only with one other woman besides Catelyn; and officially, Rhaegar captured and raped Lyanna -- and rape can result in pregnancy just as easily as consensual intercourse, no? So officially, Ned was with two women and officially Rhaegar was with two women. I don't know why you would not count Lyanna.

I would love to find out that Ned did in fact leave the fisherman's girl with child, or that he did truly, dishonor Ashara, or even bed Wylla. However, logic dictates that neither of these women can be Jon's mother. The first two are dismissed because of the timing, and the last -- because (as with the fisherman's girl) there would have been no reason to keep her name secret or lie to Catelyn about it. More importantly, if Wylla was Jon's mother, there would have been absolutely no reason for Ned not to tell Jon.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not 100% convinced of everything that is part of the R+L=J theory -- or rather, of the way it is presented at times, on these forums. Some things I disagree about, like the finer details of the story; the motivations behind the 'kidnap,' etc.... I totally understand people who propose X + L = J, because it's fun to look at other possibilities, to try a different angle -- even if R + L is the most evident, and the better supported one.

What I'm saying is that there's a lot of things that can be questioned, but the one thing that seems unquestionable to me, is that Lyanna died of childbirth. If we refute that possibility, then, we must find an explanation for Lyanna's death.... in your opinion, what did Lyanna die of, if not childbirth? Because that's a question few R+L (or X+L=J) skeptics manage to answer...I mean, it looks like according to you Rhaegar kept Lyanna in captivity but did not so much as touch her. So...how did she die?

These things are told us:

• Ned spoke to Lyanna as she lay dying > implying a slow/not sudden death.

Lyanna was weak and feverish > again, not a sudden death as the fever needed time (a few hours at the least) to develop.

Lyanna was lying in a 'bed of blood' > if we disregard the first meaning (birthing-bed) we are still left with the image of Lyanna, lying in a bed that is stained with blood > indicating either a heavy blood loss, or a slow, constant, blood loss.

That leaves as possible death causes:

• the honorable Kingsguard opened up her belly before Ned arrived at the ToJ; they decided against giving her a quick death because they enjoyed seeing her suffer.

Rhaegar tortured her for weeks, leaving her near death before he marched on the trident.

Lyanna took ill, a maester was called to heal her -- and the maester's healing methods included bloodletting.

Lyanna tried to kill herself, and failed.

None of these possibilities seem reasonable. The most obvious answer is that Lyanna died of childbirth -- pregnancy is after all a consequence that can be expected of consensual intercourse. Of rape also, if you prefer to believe Robert's version. So, if Lyanna died of childbirth, what happened to her child?... It seems that we have a boy who's missing a mother and a mother who's missing a child. You do the math.

btw; 'let them grow up like brother'... I don't remember the correct wording, but doesn't the sentence imply, that in truth, Jon and Robb are not brothers?

[sj4iy]

*reads morning posts*

*gives up*

This.

[sj4iy]

I don't think the simplicity is a function of the theory's increasingly mainstream status. If anything, I'd say it's the other way 'round. I've introduced several Joe book readers to the idea - my sense is that, once the possibility is pointed out to them, there're enough accessible clues in the text for them to feel like the idea could make sense. They're fully capable of taking the idea and running with it, if they haven't figured it out already.

I do agree that Martin is doing something more complex, in the end. R+L is clearly a piece of that, I just don't believe it is the thing itself - and often, the discussions here seem to overcomplicate the issue.

Personally, I think a lot of the clues tossed about in these threads can be a bit misleading. Ideas get conflated and confused, unnecessarily. For instance, foreshadowing that Jon is (or will be) a king is often used as evidence to support the idea that R+L=J. But clearly, neither possibility depends on, or necessitates, the other. Jon may be(come) a king, even if he is not the child of R+L. And/or Jon may be the child of R+L, without that having anything to do with his be(com)ing king.

This is an issue that keeps coming up. Somehow there seems to be this idea that if you disagree that R+L=J then, in order to be taken seriously, an persuasive alternative must be presented. Meanwhile, many advocates of RLJ are not merely persuaded; they are actually writing clues themselves, finding hints, meanings, and connections where there are none.

I mean - the red, grey, and black walls of Qarth qualify as evidence that R+L=J? Really? If so, then I'll go ahead and admit that I can't compete. No one who sees RLJ in Qarth will be persuaded to reconsider on the basis of my humble objections.

If you want to disprove a theory, the best way is to do so with an alternate theory that makes more sense. It's a common tactic used in everyday life when people want to disprove a story or a rumor. But you can't simply say " I didn't do it" without giving a more believable story for people to grasp. Without that, people will doubt you.

[sj4iy]

Everytime you're debating on these topics I find myself rooting for you lol!

XD

[JonSnow4President]

To your point, (and maybe this is why I have a soft spot for Lyanna and Arya), my mom died when I was young and my dad raised me by himself.

I grew up on Monday night football, WW2 documentaries, model cars, comic books, action movies and more than a few fistfights.

But I also read at least two books a week, War and Peace at ten, and loved Dr. Zhivagos soundtrack.

To this day, I would choose Iron Man over a "chick flick,"(for which my husband is truly grateful), and I would have DIED before I let a boy know I thought he was cute and was embarrassed by it.

I never flirted, and figured if a guy wanted me, he knew where to find me, but it wasn't going to be easy.

Arya is clearly touched by the story of the maiden who threw herself from a tower over the death of her prince, (which sounds a lot like her ancestor who killed herself over Bael when he was killed by their son), but she still calls it "stupid."

I'm not saying tomboys don't exist, that they're not women, or that they can't like "girly" things.

I do hate the idea of taking that tomboy character, and then because she met a hot guy, all of a sudden likes the "girly" things she previously didn't like before (this all started after someone implied Rhaegar brought her in touch with her feminine side). To me, it comes across as "she wasn't a real woman, but Rhaegar sure got her to act right" which is the type of B-grade crap I would never think Martin wrote. It'd be like Brienne suddenly going around wearing dresses and learning to sew because Jaime "made a woman out of her." I think both of us can agree that that is at least a little discriminatory to women, and patently ridiculous.

I would never say she shouldn't like those things because she's a tomboy, and that stuff belongs to "girly" girls. Like I said before, I'm "manly" in almost every way, but my two favorite movies are Disney Princess movies and I actually have enjoyed just about every chick flick I've gotten 10 minutes into.

[The Twinslayer]

That ain't something you say about two children that are actually brothers by the way.

This is why Ned wants them to grow up "as brothers."

"He's our brother," Arya said.

"Our half brother," Sansa corrected.

[MtnLion]

As far I know, Ned is never called honourable until after Robert's Rebellion. If he fathered Jon Snow, he did it before or during the Rebellion. So fathering a bastard before he was known for being honourable doesn't affect that all.

So, you need to neglect the passage:

Robert Baratheon had always been a man of huge appetites, a man who knew how to take his pleasures. That was not a charge anyone could lay at the door of Eddard Stark.

[Alia of the knife]

Who doesn't like flowers anyway ?!

Lyanna probably liked flowers before HH and got even more attached to blue winter roses after. That's all.

My take on it is that these flowers seem to have their "home' in the Winterfell glass gardens. In other words, the Starks win the blue ribbon every year at the county fair for these roses, so its a part of them.

I'm not saying tomboys don't exist, that they're not women, or that they can't like "girly" things.

I do hate the idea of taking that tomboy character, and then because she met a hot guy, all of a sudden likes the "girly" things she previously didn't like before (this all started after someone implied Rhaegar brought her in touch with her feminine side). To me, it comes across as "she wasn't a real woman, but Rhaegar sure got her to act right" which is the type of B-grade crap I would never think Martin wrote. It'd be like Brienne suddenly going around wearing dresses and learning to sew because Jaime "made a woman out of her." I think both of us can agree that that is at least a little discriminatory to women, and patently ridiculous.

I would never say she shouldn't like those things because she's a tomboy, and that stuff belongs to "girly" girls. Like I said before, I'm "manly" in almost every way, but my two favorite movies are Disney Princess movies and I actually have enjoyed just about every chick flick I've gotten 10 minutes into.

And I agree with you.

The whole "Lyanna cried proves she fell in love with Rhaegar" thing always seemed a little too simplistic and less nuanced.

Especially when GRRM follows it up later in Dance that everyone cried when Rhaegar sings, so while it might have been unusual for her personality, it wasn't really an unusual occurance.

It is a clue as to the origins of her feelings and how they might have evolved, but when she pours wine on Benjens head, that says to me she pretty much recovered herself and snapped out of it, at least on the surface and for the moment, because she would die before she let anyone know it touched her. ;)

I'm also very serious when I speculate that when Rhaegar came upon her as tKotLT, its a good bet she probably sucker punched him :fencing: or maybe bit him and tried to run because you don't corner a wolf.

I doubt she swooned however.

Lyanna, Arya and Brienne are unconventional, but they are human and the idea they would not have the same human needs as anyone else, (especially when it comes to the topic of an adult Arya one day falling in love that some seem to really object to), is a little unrealistic.

While they may feel awkward, or uncomfortable with such feelings that doesn't mean they don't have them.

[MtnLion]

Also, the crown of winter roses symbolizes Rhaegar and Lyanna's union, just like Jon. Equivalence.

Finally, someone else has stated it. Blue roses = R + L; R + L = J; Blue roses = J

[sj4iy]

Finally, someone else has stated it. Blue roses = R + L; R + L = J; Blue roses = J

Agreed.

[MtnLion]

I'm not saying Jon couldn't be someone else's child, just that the story says he's Ned. You have to ignore what the story says, and then reach certain conclusions based off the imagined importance of certain words used or said to come to the conclusion that Jon is someone else's. I can admit that if you follow the logic of the theory that you can come to this conclusion, just that the actual textual evidence says he's Ned's and until something is written that's a bit more concrete than all the leaps that are required to get to R+L = J, I won't be convinced.

Just take a quick unbiased read of the tower of joy sequence that is analyzed in the link of my signature. It is written pretty clearly that Lyanna had given birth (bed of blood always refers to birthing bed in the story) and that the Kingsguard were defending their king. That means that Lyanna gave birth to the king (Rhaegar's son), and Ned raised him as Jon. After that things just drop into place, if you think about GRRM's humor and wanting people to reread his stories for the easter eggs.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I love your posts, and you are generally on the mark. This has been a frustrating point for me to make. Daenerys is conceived a fortnight before the sack (at least). Daenerys is eight to nine moons younger than Jon. That places Jon's birth a fortnight before or a fortnight after the sack. Lyanna can have lingered for up to ten days after the birth (some have historically lingered longer, but GRRM has set a precedent of three days). Since Ned arrives in time for Lyanna's death, the birth must have occurred at the latest window, or there be wormholes in Westeros (GRRM's prerogative). The key is that Jon could have been born two weeks before the sack, to two weeks after the sack. (GRRM may backtrack, but I doubt it, it makes sense to have Jon's birth near the day of the sack. In Daenerys' memories she is born nine moons after the flight to Dragonstone, so GRRM did have a point of reference to answer the question.)

Where did GRRM set this precedent of three days?

The world book tells us that Jeyne Marbrand died within a month after birthing Gerion.. We see a few women die during childbirth (Joanna Lannister and Rhaella Targaryen amongst them), and they seem to have died rather quickly after the birth, but Jeyne´s death occured "within a month", which might have been a few days, but could also have been two or three weeks..

Which could then perhaps apply to Lyanna as well, I suppose? Or would this not be possible..?

So, you need to neglect the passage:

Robert Baratheon had always been a man of huge appetites, a man who knew how to take his pleasures. That was not a charge anyone could lay at the door of Eddard Stark.

Also,

“What do you say, Ned? Just you and me, two vagabond knights on the kingsroad, our swords at our sides and the gods know what in front of us, and maybe a farmer’s daughter or a tavern wench to warm our beds tonight.”

“Would that we could,” Ned said, “but we have duties now, my liege... to the realm, to our children, I to my lady wife and you to your queen. We are not the boys we were.”

“You were never the boy you were,” Robert grumbled. “More’s the pity. And yet there was that one time... what was her name, that common girl of yours?

[BearQueen87]

I'm also very serious when I speculate that when Rhaegar came upon her as tKotLT, its a good bet she probably sucker punched him :fencing: or maybe bit him and tried to run because you don't corner a wolf.

I doubt she swooned however.

At the very least, Lyanna sassed him and challenged him verbally, which probably only helped impress Rhaegar even more.

Finally, someone else has stated it. Blue roses = R + L; R + L = J; Blue roses = J

Agreed.