R+L=J v.117

[Ser Leftwich]

Maybe you hadn't had the time to read the arguments to defend Aegon in ToJ.

1. It was Hightower who took him there.

2. The KGs arrived in ToJ long before Jon, so they weren't guarding him.

3. YG is not Aegon, nor Varys has anything to do with Aegon (well, he might have helped with the fake corpse, but this doesn't count).

4. It's not clear who the Targ king would be. If you've read TWOIAF, there are instances when a council had to summoned to chose the heir. If Aegon were dead, I'd vote for Viserys. And don't forget Rhaella, She was a king's daughter herself, and she hadn't died yet. Anyway it's not the KG task to choose the new king.

1) So Hightower, when tasked to find Rhaegar by Aerys, decided to smuggle out Baegon (Baby Aegon) on his own? Or on the orders of Varys? It does not seem within character for Hightower to do it because Varys ordered it, only if Aerys ordered it, which he wouldn't.

Also, what is the point of Baegon being at the ToJ? What would it add to the story? Oh, yet another infans ex machina, Howland Reed telling us, "Oh yeah, that nobody dude from nowhere who has not actually been mentioned before in the story, that is actually Rhaegar's son, Aegon."

ETA: It was not on Varys's orders (see your point 3 above) then Hightower did it on his own. No way. Hightower went and found Rhaegar came back to KL and took Aegon, but didn't tell Aerys. No way. Not credible.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I believe he's called Kingmaker derisively, and considered one of the worst Kingsguard exactly because he played the Game of Thrones. I was surprised when The Princess and the Queen came out, I expected him to be the driving force behind Aegon's crowning. As I recall all he really did was kill Beesbury and then place the crown on Aegon's head. He couldn't even secure the loyalty of all of his own men. Without the support of the Hand, Queen and the rest of the Small Council (which he did help sure up by killing Beesbury) he never would have been able to proclaim Aegon II king.

O no, definitly.

But it does show that sometimes, there are KG who decide to participate in selecting the new king. I'm not saying it was a clever idea.

We know that Rhaegar was most likely trying to dispose of Aerys.. And Dayne and Whent were his closest friends, and close confidants, so probably, in their eyes, Rhaegar was their king, even if he hadn't been crowned yet (the way Criston Cole saw Aegon as his king and not Rhaenyra as his Queen - whatever his personal reasons might have been).

As to Hightower himself, it has been stated often why he might have remained... If Aerys hadn't specifically ordered his return, Rhaegar could have ordered him to stay behind.. By the time the news of the deaths of Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon have all reached them, Jon was born.. While Rhaegar would not have been allowed, technically, to choose his own king, he might have believed that Jon was the king he needed to protect.. We can't really say what went on in Hightowers head.

[IceFire125]

O no, definitly.

But it does show that sometimes, there are KG who decide to participate in selecting the new king. I'm not saying it was a clever idea.

We know that Rhaegar was most likely trying to dispose of Aerys.. And Dayne and Whent were his closest friends, and close confidants, so probably, in their eyes, Rhaegar was their king, even if he hadn't been crowned yet (the way Criston Cole saw Aegon as his king and not Rhaenyra as his Queen - whatever his personal reasons might have been).

As to Hightower himself, it has been stated often why he might have remained... If Aerys hadn't specifically ordered his return, Rhaegar could have ordered him to stay behind.. By the time the news of the deaths of Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon have all reached them, Jon was born.. While Rhaegar would not have been allowed, technically, to choose his own king, he might have believed that Jon was the king he needed to protect.. We can't really say what went on in Hightowers head.

I agree, but you have to keep going and complete the circle.

Gerold stayed not only seeing Lyanna with the baby, but that the baby was a trueborn. If it was trueborn and a royal birth, it should ring alarm bells to ask Arthur and Oswell and demand that he sees the proof of Rhaegar's marriage with Lyanna (if Rhaegar didn't get the chance to tell him). It is the only justification that Gerold need to stay further at the tower, because if there were no proofs, Lyanna is just a mistress, the baby is low birth and a bastard. He will command Arthur and Oswell, or volunteer himself, to start packing and make leave for Dragonstone, because Viserys would be the true heir to the throne. Yet he didn't, all three stayed at the tower.. to uphold their vow as Kingsguard.

[sj4iy]

1) So Hightower, when tasked to find Rhaegar by Aerys, decided to smuggle out Baegon (Baby Aegon) on his own? Or on the orders of Varys? It does not seem within character for Hightower to do it because Varys ordered it, only if Aerys ordered it, which he wouldn't.

Also, what is the point of Baegon being at the ToJ? What would it add to the story? Oh, yet another infans ex machina, Howland Reed telling us, "Oh yeah, that nobody dude from nowhere who has not actually been mentioned before in the story, that is actually Rhaegar's son, Aegon."

I agree- it's completely unbelievable. Aerys needs Aegon at KL to ensure Dorne's loyalty. He would never order Aegon to leave KL when he's an incredibly valuable hostage. Nor would Hightower smuggle the crown prince's heir out of KL without the order of the King.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I agree, but you have to keep going and complete the circle.

Gerold stayed not only seeing Lyanna with the baby, but that the baby was a trueborn. If it was trueborn and a royal birth, it should ring alarm bells to ask Arthur and Oswell and demand that he sees the proof of Rhaegar's marriage with Lyanna (if Rhaegar didn't get the chance to tell him). It is the only justification that Gerold need to stay further at the tower, because if there were no proofs, Lyanna is just a mistress, the baby is low birth and a bastard. He will command Arthur and Oswell, or volunteer himself, to start packing and make leave for Dragonstone, because Viserys would be the true heir to the throne. Yet he didn't, all three stayed at the tower.. to uphold their vow as Kingsguard.

Indeed..

Rhaegar could have easily told Hightower, btw. It's not like Rhaegar needed to race back to KL the second Hightower appeared :)

[The Twinslayer]

Admittedly I stared reading this thread from the back this morning. I thought the issue was if a Bael and his Stark princess would be considered married when she was returned with the kid. They would not. The kid would be a bastard.

Do the wildlings even have laws? I'm at a loss for how that would work in times where there was no King Beyond the Wall. Surely you'd have clans with leaders but I doubt there was anything resembling a code of law for most wildlings. I'd also be curious to know if you could steal a woman form the guy who stole her without killing the guy. Divorce wildling style.

It started with a discussion of whether the King in the North who was Bael's son was trueborn or a legitimized bastard. Someone suggested that Bael and the Stark Princess were married in the wildling way, which led me to point out that Tormund draws a distinction between stealing and marrying and agrees that even though Jon stole Ygritte their children would still be bastards.

I think you are right that wildlings don't have laws. But they worship the old Gods, and we know from Ned's POV that the Old Gods frown on bastards. So I think it is clear that wildlings recognize bastardy as a religious matter even if it is not a legal construct beyond the Wall.

[ToTheWolves]

It started with a discussion of whether the King in the North who was Bael's son was trueborn or a legitimized bastard. Someone suggested that Bael and the Stark Princess were married in the wildling way, which led me to point out that Tormund draws a distinction between stealing and marrying and agrees that even though Jon stole Ygritte their children would still be bastards.

I think you are right that wildlings don't have laws. But they worship the old Gods, and we know from Ned's POV that the Old Gods frown on bastards. So I think it is clear that wildlings recognize bastardy as a religious matter even if it is not a legal construct beyond the Wall.[/quote

And iirc when jon first tells ygritte his name she replies something like "snow? That's an evil name" or something like that. Although who knows if she was referring to something else, but I read it as she replied that way because he had a bastards last name.

[The Twinslayer]

And iirc when jon first tells ygritte his name she replies something like "snow? That's an evil name" or something like that. Although who knows if she was referring to something else, but I read it as she replied that way because he had a bastards last name.

When Craster is told Jon's last name, he has a similar reaction. And later, Sam thinks in how Craster "hates bastards, just before Karl calls him a bastard and he goes nuts.

[IceFire125]

If anything, GRRM wants us to know that the old gods know... and in the ASOIAF universe, we are seeing the designs of the world and its time through the blue-eyed giant (GRRM).

Let Stannis have his secrets. The gods know that I have mine.

Jon is true to the old gods (reject Lordship/Winterfell rather than burning the heart tree) and Ghost is that mark and symbol of the old gods favor with Jon.

The direwolf had no answer, but he licked Jon’s face with a tongue like a wet rasp, and his eyes caught the last light and shone like two great red suns.

Red eyes, Jon realized, but not like Melisandre’s. He had a weirwood’s eyes. Red eyes, red mouth, white fur. Blood and bone, like a heart tree. He belongs to the old gods, this one.

“In a sense. Those you call the children of the forest have eyes as golden as the sun, but once in a great while one is born amongst them with eyes as red as blood, or green as the moss on a tree in the heart of the forest. By these signs do the gods mark those they have chosen to receive the gift. The chosen ones are not robust, and their quick years upon the earth are few, for every song must have its balance. But once inside the wood they linger long indeed. A thousand eyes, a hundred skins, wisdom deep as the roots of ancient trees. Greenseers.”

[markg171]

But Mother had only laughed and said no, Arya was her daughter and Sansa’s trueborn sister, blood of their blood.

... 'cause Arya is described as Cat's daughter, by Cat, whereas Ned says “Never ask me about Jon,” he said, cold as ice. “He is my blood, and that is all you need to know. And now I will learn where you heard that name, my lady.”, and never identifies Jon in this passage as his son.

Just another reading comprehension fail.

My point was that in that passage, yes Arya is described as Cat's daughter, she's just not described as Ned's. Just his blood. Ergo, you could say that she's not Ned's, like you guys say that Jon isn't Ned's because he's only his blood, not his son.

[JonSnow4President]

My point was that in that passage, yes Arya is described as Cat's daughter, she's just not described as Ned's. Just his blood. Ergo, you could say that she's not Ned's, like you guys say that Jon isn't Ned's because he's only his blood, not his son.

Except later in the book, Ned specifically thinks of all his children, including Arya, as his children. Curiously, he leaves Jon out.

[markg171]

Nicely said. Not quite the only viable option, but certainly by far the best supported option. I think it's pretty clear by now that it's extremely unlikely anything is going to come up that will shift that without new material appearing.

There's a lot more besides that's up in the air:

What exactly triggered the fight at the ToJ?

Ran's "Jon at Starfall" hypothesis.

Was it really a kidnapping?

Who were the "they" who found Ned after Lyanna died?

What was Ashara's involvement?

Why are the Daynes apparently pro-Stark?

What are the literary and mythic precedents to the story?

What promises did Ned make, and which were kept and which broken?

Why did Ned take only 7 men to the ToJ?

Who told Ned where to find it?

What exactly was Rhaegar trying to achieve?

Why was Arthur sad?

What was Ned's itinerary after the ToJ?

Why has Howland Reed not left the neck since the rebellion?

Enough to keep this thread interesting until WoW if people don't let it get bogged down.

I don't see how this is important. Ned only left the north once since the rebellion before becoming Hand.

[markg171]

Except later in the book, Ned specifically thinks of all his children, including Arya, as his children. Curiously, he leaves Jon out.

You guys are so obsessed with saying that "bloody bed" must mean childbirth, so saying someone is your blood must mean they're your child as it's only used to refer as such.

I can play this game too.

[markg171]

I'm confused why you think it wouldn't mean anything. It would likely mean that they would not be considered legally married in the Seven Kingdoms. If a wildling stole a noble lady and then returned her pregnant and said "btw we're married now." I don't really see that going well. Different cultures have different marriage rights and don't always recognize those of foreigners. For example:

We're also told that the laws of gods and men extend to the Wall. From the Wall down, we've seen 3 examples of marriages:

• in front of a weirdwood

with a septon

with a red priest

Stealing someone is a wildling tradition, north of the Wall. We are told specifically that the laws north of the Wall and the laws south of the Wall are different. South of the Wall, you need a weirwood, a septon, or a red priest.

[BearQueen87]

You guys are so obsessed with saying that "bloody bed" must mean childbirth, so saying someone is your blood must mean they're your child as it's only used to refer as such.

I can play this game too.

No.

Bloody bed = childbirth

Saying someone is your blood = family or a relationship that is close enough to family. For example, Drogo and his bloodriders are not literal family (they do not share DNA) but they call him "blood of my blood" which is a way of saying "family" and even something stronger than family.

But when you have a woman and a bloody bed it is a reference to childbirth.

[markg171]

If anything, GRRM wants us to know that the old gods know... and in the ASOIAF universe, we are seeing the designs of the world and its time through the blue-eyed giant (GRRM).

Let Stannis have his secrets. The gods know that I have mine.

Jon is true to the old gods (reject Lordship/Winterfell rather than burning the heart tree) and Ghost is that mark and symbol of the old gods favor with Jon.

The direwolf had no answer, but he licked Jon’s face with a tongue like a wet rasp, and his eyes caught the last light and shone like two great red suns.

Red eyes, Jon realized, but not like Melisandre’s. He had a weirwood’s eyes. Red eyes, red mouth, white fur. Blood and bone, like a heart tree. He belongs to the old gods, this one.

“In a sense. Those you call the children of the forest have eyes as golden as the sun, but once in a great while one is born amongst them with eyes as red as blood, or green as the moss on a tree in the heart of the forest. By these signs do the gods mark those they have chosen to receive the gift. The chosen ones are not robust, and their quick years upon the earth are few, for every song must have its balance. But once inside the wood they linger long indeed. A thousand eyes, a hundred skins, wisdom deep as the roots of ancient trees. Greenseers.”

And how exactly did Jon gain the old gods favour, before he ever did any of that stuff? He got Ghost first, not the other way around.

[markg171]

No.

Bloody bed = childbirth

Saying someone is your blood = family or a relationship that is close enough to family. For example, Drogo and his bloodriders are not literal family (they do not share DNA) but they call him "blood of my blood" which is a way of saying "family" and even something stronger than family.

But when you have a woman and a bloody bed it is a reference to childbirth.

You guys have arbitrarily decided that bloody bed must mean childbirth. It is never stated that that is its definition. You guys came up with that.

Cat refers to Arya as "their blood" (hers and Ned's)

Ned refers to Jon as "my blood"

Ergo, I'm arbitrarily deciding that referring to someone as your blood can only mean you are talking about your child.

Just because someone decides something must mean something, doesn't mean it's true. As you guys will be sure to remind me in answering this post.

[The Twinslayer]

No.

Bloody bed = childbirth

Saying someone is your blood = family or a relationship that is close enough to family. For example, Drogo and his bloodriders are not literal family (they do not share DNA) but they call him "blood of my blood" which is a way of saying "family" and even something stronger than family.

But when you have a woman and a bloody bed it is a reference to childbirth.

It's a little more complicated than that. A bloody bed might mean childbirth. It can also mean flowering (see Sansa's description in ACOK), first lover (Barbry in reference to herself and Cersei in reference to Margaery Tyrell) or a violent death (Cersei's description of discovering Shae's body in Tywin's bed). So, for example, when Mirri Maaz Duur says she knows all the secrets of the bloody bed, she might mean that she knows all about women's medicine from beginning to end or she may just mean that she knows all the secrets of childbirth.

This means that when Ned refers to Lyanna's "bed of blood," it could mean the bed where she flowered, had her first lover, had a baby, or was murdered.

Similarly, "my blood" or "my own blood" can mean "my own child." LC Mormont tells Jon that joining the Watch means that Jon will never hold a child of his "own blood" even though Jon may very well hold a child of Robb, Sansa, etc. Jon thinks that if he marries Val, it will give him an opportunity to hold a son of his own "blood." But it could also mean a nephew. For example, Tyrion thinks of Joffrey as his "own blood."

So unless "my blood" means something different in the North than it means in the South, Ned's reference to Jon being "my blood" could mean "son" or it could mean "nephew."

[BearQueen87]

It's a little more complicated than that. A bloody bed might mean childbirth. It can also mean flowering (see Sansa's description in ACOK), first lover (Barbry in reference to herself and Cersei in reference to Margaery Tyrell) or a violent death (Cersei's description of discovering Shae's body in Tywin's bed). So, for example, when Mirri Maaz Duur says she knows all the secrets of the bloody bed, she might mean that she knows all about women's medicine from beginning to end or she may just mean that she knows all the secrets of childbirth.

This means that when Ned refers to Lyanna's "bed of blood," it could mean the bed where she flowered, had her first lover, had a baby, or was murdered.

Process of elimination then.

1) Flowering: Lyanna is already a maiden and has had her first moons blood. Not that.

2) First lover: yes, most likely Rhaegar was her first lover. However, they had been together now for many months when Ned arrived and Rhaegar was not at the Tower when Ned found her and had not been for a few weeks. In other words, her first time with a man would have been long before Ned showed up. Not that.

3) Murdered: well...by whom? Unless you're proposing that the 3KG went up there and killed her.

4) Childbirth. Hmm..yup. Fits.

So unless "my blood" means something different in the North than it means in the South, Ned's reference to Jon being "my blood" could mean "son" or it could mean "nephew."

Look, I agree with that. But given the rest of the story and Ned's own thoughts on Jon then no, it does not mean "son".

GRRM is clever. We all agree on this, right? He gives hints for what is to come throughout. Ned calling Jon my blood is perfectly normal until you realize that Ned never thinks of Jon as his son. That's the way GRRM writes. Slow and careful revelations that are spaced apart. His own editor talks about that!

[JonSnow4President]

It's a little more complicated than that. A bloody bed might mean childbirth. It can also mean flowering (see Sansa's description in ACOK), first lover (Barbry in reference to herself and Cersei in reference to Margaery Tyrell) or a violent death (Cersei's description of discovering Shae's body in Tywin's bed). So, for example, when Mirri Maaz Duur says she knows all the secrets of the bloody bed, she might mean that she knows all about women's medicine from beginning to end or she may just mean that she knows all the secrets of childbirth.

This means that when Ned refers to Lyanna's "bed of blood," it could mean the bed where she flowered, had her first lover, had a baby, or was murdered.

Similarly, "my blood" or "my own blood" can mean "my own child." LC Mormont tells Jon that joining the Watch means that Jon will never hold a child of his "own blood" even though Jon may very well hold a child of Robb, Sansa, etc. Jon thinks that if he marries Val, it will give him an opportunity to hold a son of his own "blood." But it could also mean a nephew. For example, Tyrion thinks of Joffrey as his "own blood."

So unless "my blood" means something different in the North than it means in the South, Ned's reference to Jon being "my blood" could mean "son" or it could mean "nephew."

Show me bloody bed in any of those scenes. Not blood on the covers, or there was a blood stain in the matress. Bloody. F***ing. Bed. Then we'll talk.

You guys have arbitrarily decided that bloody bed must mean childbirth. It is never stated that that is its definition. You guys came up with that.

Cat refers to Arya as "their blood" (hers and Ned's)

Ned refers to Jon as "my blood"

Ergo, I'm arbitrarily deciding that referring to someone as your blood can only mean you are talking about your child.

Just because someone decides something must mean something, doesn't mean it's true. As you guys will be sure to remind me in answering this post.

Unlike bloody bed, there are several instances of someone using blood to refer to kinship, or familial like relationships, some of which have been mentioned on this f***ing page.