R+L =J v.135

[Alia of the knife]

Lord Commander Runcel Hightower forgot his vows and attempted to bequeath Castle Black and the Night's Watch to his bastard son. He almost destroyed the Night's Watch.

Otto Hightower also fucked with the inheritance.

Abelarr Hightower challenged Valarr Targaryen during the Tourney of Ashford and he lost the tilt to the prince on purpose.

• {Walys Flowers}, son of a Hightower girl and an archmaester of the Citadel. Maester to the late Lord Rickard Stark.

The High Septon was High Septon of the Faith of the Seven during the Faith Militant uprising that occurred during the reign of Aenys I Targaryen and Maegor the Cruel. His real name is unknown as High Septons once elected to office abandon their names. It is known that he was a member of House Hightower and was the uncle of Ceryse Hightower and the brother of Martyn Hightower who was Lord of Oldtown.

I'm not up on the backstory or history, so bear with me, but who was the mother of Runcels, (Runcel?), child? A northerner, a Stark? I mean, I thought the Starks kind of were the ones who sort of kept an eye on the doings of the Wall and the NW, and might have been silent controllers.

Well said!! Until now did not see the deadwood connection but you are so right about how it could go.

Yeah, which would be very disappointing. :bang:

Just curious but there is something. Now Ned basically just got done with a war, which is bad, and what happens at KL with Elia and Rhaegars children is really bad. He is not on good terms with Robert to say the least. And the Lannisters are right next to Robert and claim to be serving him. So what really would be his biggest concern? Now we don't have all the info leading up to events, but might he have been concerned that these three KG were going to attempt to put Jon on the throne and maybe they were. Which after KL would be a rather dangerous thing to attempt. Can't really allow that.

I think they made her pregnant for shock value, but I think they had to end her story because they can't pay an actress to sit around and do nothing. Kind of like Jojen they killed him because they really had no need for him anymore. That story is over and so was hers. They know how relevant certain characters are, they know whow they can get rid of and not get rid of.

I did not like the Loras and Renly sterotype, but Reny does not exactly have a huge part either. I know the actor that played Loras thought it was stupid as well. Though I have to say if we are talking stereotype have you seen the gay parody?

Didn't even think about the Oberyn thing, Oberyn did like to party that is in the books. Though on the show I thought he was using it as a way to play down who he really was. I am pretty sure he got his bad ass on, and Pedro rocked the part, and he was great and his "I will be your champion moment was awesome." He also gave insight into the Rhaegar back story, which thank god, which I found intresting because it was Ned leaving a brothel that also gave us some insight into Rhaegar.

Missy and the Worm has taken all of 4-5 minutes, and he is clearly replacing her brothers as a person for her to care about. Which is part of her story and also relates to Dany.

As for Jaime and Cersei, will see where it goes, he maybe breaking from her. But I think they did a nice Job keeping Jaime, Jaime but still having have the feels for Brie. Only one scene bothers me with Jaime and everyone knows that scene.

Honestly those are very small points, given the show is on season 5. But here is the idea, D&D know more about the future of the books, than we do, a lot more and they have a direct line to Martin for anything they need in that reguard. We fans assuming all sorts of things right now, like they are probably not going to do Karl Ned but clearly that will be in the books. We don't have their job, we don;t have access to Martin and we don't know what they know. They may also have multiple chapters for a rough draft of Winds, we don't know.

teej6 complained about the changes, but feelt they finally handled the Wall and Jon properly last year. Yet did they not add multiple changes to that story? When did Jon go to Crasters searching for Bran? When did we get Crasters after Sam left? When did Jon ever charge into the Pit and beat up all the bad guys? Great action scene but not in the books. When did Sam get all I am not nobody anymore? When did the Thenn's become cannibals? When did Olly exist and when did he shoot Yiggy in the books? When did Jon magically heal from being shot with three arrows? When did the battle of Castle black and the battle of the Wall occure on the same day. When did the Goat ever come to the wall to find Bran? But finally the wall was handled properly, I hate the changes, except when I like the changes?

It's like the most popular show in the world right now changes and all, and so I think D&D have done their Job. I get 3 more seasons, of high quality tv, I can nit pick the shit out of the show if I want. But I try to understand that things like Missy and Worm, are easy to do because they already have a set and they are two previously hired actors. Casting the Iron Born army and fleet, and Griff and the Gang = multiple new sets and locations, and lots and lots of extra actors. That 5 minutes they spend on Missy and Worm does not equal that. Just like Crasters does not = an entire cast for the Iron Born for 2 seasons and all their ships. I mean just look at Dany's cast, when was the last time you saw a Dothraki? If they had 300 million dollars and 20 episodes a year, and this is what I got I would complain, a lot. But they don't have that and they have to cut to the chase. Some times they add or combine little things because they have too, sometimes you get a crasters because you need an action beat. And sometimes you have to skip battles because you can't afford them. And sometimes you have to except the fact that the Wall does not always have a lot going on. Jon goes to Hardhome, why? Because outside of head cutting it's mostly talking.

You also have to accept the fact that Tormund has replaced Val. Which makes some sense as Jon and Tormund have often been seen talking about his member. So Jon shall steal him and it's honeymoon at Hardhome. It will be like Oberyn but with Jon and Tormund. The actor is he blonde or strawberry blonde? Works either way for Jon's character. It's like Yiggy meets Val but with more facial hair and a penis.

The thing is is that they could have kept Jeyne, and if they wanted to show King Robb stupid enough to bring his pregnant queen into the House of the family whose daughter might have been queen, then hey, go for it.

Of course it would pit them against the Lannisters, OR they could have just left the scene as it was which was horrible enough.

Turning Loras into a fop was :bang:

Dany and Arya can't find their way out of a wet paperbag, but Cat could flit from one kings camp to the other, and now Sansa is in the bowels of a burned out WF. I do hope she does something terrible since she is dressed like "evil Lily" from "Legend."

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8pbFZ_9UVlIA3LKJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTIzNGx1cm81BHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZANmYWU0MmMxNDI4ZjBlOWFmYjE1M2RjN2JkZDFmZDdkOARncG9zAzE4BGl0A2Jpbmc-?.origin=&back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3F_adv_prop%3Dimage%26va%3Devil%2Blily%2Bfrom%2Blegend%26fr%3Dyhs-iry-fullyhosted_003%26hsimp%3Dyhs-fullyhosted_003%26hspart%3Diry%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D18&w=324&h=269&imgurl=www.figmentfly.com%2Flegend%2Fgifs%2Fevil.gif&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.figmentfly.com%2Flegend%2Fbackground2.html&size=48.7KB&name=Lili+%28Mia+Sara%29+in+the+wedding+dress+given+to+her+by+Darkness+%28Tim+...&p=evil+lily+from+legend&oid=fae42c1428f0e9afb153dc7bdd1fd7d8&fr2=&fr=yhs-iry-fullyhosted_003&tt=Lili+%28Mia+Sara%29+in+the+wedding+dress+given+to+her+by+Darkness+%28Tim+...&b=0&ni=21&no=18&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=11h4eqbaa&sigb=154lo157u&sigi=117mdcjnr&sigt=126l02crd&sign=126l02crd&.crumb=8NtDMZBDxJj&fr=yhs-iry-fullyhosted_003&hsimp=yhs-fullyhosted_003&hspart=iry

[RumHam]

Does Yandel even know that Lyanna was there? His "official" story claims that Ned fought 1v1 combat against Arthur which we are fairly certain didn't occur that way.

I assume Ned didn't keep Lyanna's presence and death there secret. I'm guessing neither Ned nor Howland really wanted to get into specifics about the skirmish there. We also don't know how exactly Howland intervened to save Ned's life.

In other news Ran finally commented on the possibility of the Viserys was Aery's heir thing being a mistake:

Not an error. Primogeniture is customary, but not binding... especially not to a king. We have other examples of people being passed over, or potentially passed over, for others.

Maester Yandel is merely reporting based on historical records on events of the time.

[markg171]

In other news Ran finally commented on the possibility of the Viserys was Aery's heir thing being a mistake:

http://pousadaluadecristal.com.br/index/wp-content/gallery/black-kid-reaction-gif-672.gif

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

In other news Ran finally commented on the possibility of the Viserys was Aery's heir thing being a mistake:

So Aerys specifically named Viserys his heir. A mixture of mistrusting Rhaegar and mistrusting the Dornish?

Perhaps having your hostage being your heir isn't the most logical step? You'd usually try to protect your heir, but you have to be willing to sacrifice your hostage...

[Alia of the knife]

So Aerys specifically named Viserys his heir. A mixture of mistrusting Rhaegar and mistrusting the Dornish?

Perhaps having your hostage being your heir isn't the most logical step? You'd usually try to protect your heir, but you have to be willing to sacrifice your hostage...

It sounds like Aerys was never fond of the Dornish anyway, so he would have been willing to take Aegon off the table as a later threat to Viserys.

[Alia of the knife]

Nasty time for Princes in the Medieval period where even they could be executed for treason.

[BearQueen87]

So Aerys specifically named Viserys his heir. A mixture of mistrusting Rhaegar and mistrusting the Dornish?

Perhaps having your hostage being your heir isn't the most logical step? You'd usually try to protect your heir, but you have to be willing to sacrifice your hostage...

Or his eldest son just died and it's only logical to make the child who isn't a squalling infant your successor.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

It sounds like Aerys was never fond of the Dornish anyway, so he would have been willing to take Aegon off the table as a later threat to Viserys.

Why would you say 'never'? The first indication had been that Rhaenys smelled Dornish. Before, he had allowed two dornishmen into his KG (though Lewyns entry might have been part of Elia's marriage deal), and married his heir to a dornishwoman.

In the 260ties, he seemed pleasant enough with the dornish.

I think, as Rhaegar got closer with the Dornish, it caused Aerys to trust them less and less. Before that, he had no problem with them. And in the end, he mistrusted them not for potentially backing Rhaegar, but for possibly betraying him. O the irony..

[RumHam]

So Aerys specifically named Viserys his heir. A mixture of mistrusting Rhaegar and mistrusting the Dornish?

Perhaps having your hostage being your heir isn't the most logical step? You'd usually try to protect your heir, but you have to be willing to sacrifice your hostage...

I think mostly mistrusting the Dornish, he was convinced that Leywn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the trident after all.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Rhaegar died and Aerys cracked. I think that's what happened. He kept Viserys close to him because he was paranoid. I think it's likely he would name him his heir because he believed he wouldn't betray him. He wasn't wrong: Viserys kept fighting until his death to retake his father's throne.

[SFDanny]

It fits with what we know of Aerys for him to translate his paranoia about the Dornish and his belief in keeping the "blood pure" for him to name Viserys over Aegon, but it changes the character of the three kingsguard if they knew of the decree and they chose not to follow their vows.

[Alia of the knife]

Why would you say 'never'? The first indication had been that Rhaenys smelled Dornish. Before, he had allowed two dornishmen into his KG (though Lewyns entry might have been part of Elia's marriage deal), and married his heir to a dornishwoman.

In the 260ties, he seemed pleasant enough with the dornish.

I think, as Rhaegar got closer with the Dornish, it caused Aerys to trust them less and less. Before that, he had no problem with them. And in the end, he mistrusted them not for potentially backing Rhaegar, but for possibly betraying him. O the irony..

"Never" would indeed be hypocritical given that Aerys had Dornish blood himself, but he seemed to be a "blood purity" kind of guy.

I always suspected that Elias mother, in spite, made a beeline for Aerys per Tywins refusal of betrothing their children.

Given that neither Rhaegar nor Elia was either familys first choice, (Steffon B. lost his life finding a bride for Rhaegar) and Elias mother wanted Joannas children for her own, I think the Princess of Dorne might have subtly threatened Aerys with the loss of Dorne, if he didn't agree.

Aerys might have realized the game being played and it added to his resentment.

[Alia of the knife]

It fits with what we know of Aerys for him to translate his paranoia about the Dornish and his belief in keeping the "blood pure" for him to name Viserys over Aegon, but it changes the character of the three kingsguard if they knew of the decree and they chose not to follow their vows.

Crispen Cole.

[SFDanny]

Crispen Cole.

I'd say closer to Barristan Selmy, but, yes, if they knew of the decree they put their feelings for Rhaegar and his children before their first duty. That's easy to understand in some ways, because they would likely have reached the same conclusion about Viserys being "Aerys's son" that Selmy reveals to Daenerys. It also undermines the case that I've argued for many years that Jon is the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna based partly on the actions of these three men's faithfully following their oaths. If they would abandon Viserys knowing of Aerys's decree making him his heir, then the reasons cannot include that the three had the rightful heir with them. It could be Jon is legitimate and they wanted to place him on the throne, but it also could mean that they just were not going to fight for Viserys after having fought for his father and being dishonored by his actions. Meaning Jon could either be a bastard or legitimate but the kingsguard's actions don't tell us which. There are other things that point to Jon being legitimate - Rheagar's trying to recreate Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters/wives, Lyanna's character, etc. but it punches a large hole in the argument if they knew of the decree.

[teej6]

teej6 complained about the changes, but feelt they finally handled the Wall and Jon properly last year. Yet did they not add multiple changes to that story? When did Jon go to Crasters searching for Bran? When did we get Crasters after Sam left? When did Jon ever charge into the Pit and beat up all the bad guys? Great action scene but not in the books. When did Sam get all I am not nobody anymore? When did the Thenn's become cannibals? When did Olly exist and when did he shoot Yiggy in the books? When did Jon magically heal from being shot with three arrows? When did the battle of Castle black and the battle of the Wall occure on the same day. When did the Goat ever come to the wall to find Bran? But finally the wall was handled properly, I hate the changes, except when I like the changes?

It's like the most popular show in the world right now changes and all, and so I think D&D have done their Job.

Okay I do not wish to derail this thread with this discussion, I was just responding to your criticism and generalization of show watchers who have issues with the show. When you say complain about the changes, it has such a negative connotation to it. I think most people agree that the show is entertaining and it is impossible for the show to be a literal adaptation of the books. But then again, there are good changes and there are the really bad ones. And I know, this will depend on individuals' preferences. Changing the character of Stannis was a bad change IMO. You seem to be generalizing everyone who has some issues with the show with the show naysayers. As I said before, I do, for most part, LIKE the show and do appreciate the effort that goes into making it. But I still have a right to state that I do not like this change or that. We've all read the books and have our own interpretations so it's only human to dislike this or that aspect of the show. That does not make me a complainer or whiner. In regards to the Wall storyline, I said up until last season, it was handled poorly. I said nothing about liking it last season. I hated the pointless NW march to Crasters, which did not develop the story or characters in anyway instead just wasted 10 mins of an episode. Compared to past seasons where the Wall scenes seemed like an after thought, in S4, D&D decided to pay some attention to that storyline. That's all I meant. And to argue that the Missandei/Greyworm scenes took only 5 mins is not a valid argument IMO when D&D is trying to compress massive books with hundreds of characters and plots into 10 hrs of TV. Those 5 mins make a lot of difference, especially when they are cutting other relevant plots/characters from the show. And finally, I don't know if the show is the most popular show in the world or not (there probably is some soap on Chinese or Indian TV watched by more people) but I do feel that the popularity of the show is not a gauge of whether D&D got it right or not. Many crappy shows and movies are popular. Now that's not to say that GOT is crappy just that popularity does not necessarily translate to quality.

[Alia of the knife]

I'd say closer to Barristan Selmy, but, yes, if they knew of the decree they put their feelings for Rhaegar and his children before their first duty. That's easy to understand in some ways, because they would likely have reached the same conclusion about Viserys being "Aerys's son" that Selmy reveals to Daenerys. It also undermines the case that I've argued for many years that Jon is the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna based partly on the actions of these three men's faithfully following their oaths. If they would abandon Viserys knowing of Aerys's decree making him his heir, then the reasons cannot include that the three had the rightful heir with them. It could be Jon is legitimate and they wanted to place him on the throne, but it also could mean that they just were not going to fight for Viserys after having fought for his father and being dishonored by his actions. Meaning Jon could either be a bastard or legitimate but the kingsguard's actions don't tell us which. There are other things that point to Jon being legitimate - Rheagar's trying to recreate Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters/wives, Lyanna's character, etc. but it punches a large hole in the argument if they knew of the decree.

Or simply they had their own agendas.

I happen to think that it was a personal preference, (something that makes Selmy different, since he would not involved himself in such plots given he is a "by-the-book-and-KG-don't-play-the-GOT" kind of guy), which seems to be what he is alluding to when he thinks back on Rhaegar, the Red Keep and its secrets.

I speculate that he thinks had Rhaegar trusted him as opposed to Dayne, whom we know now is a distant kinsman of Rhaegars as much as the Martells, Selmy would have set him straight on whatever he was planning with his father.

Some KG were "by the book," but I think just as many were like Cole, (and paralleling the Praetorian Guard), wanted to have control over the "Caesar" that led them. In the case of Cole, I happen to think that Mushrooms tale of Cole being offended by Rhays advances is wrong and it was the other way around. She would not give up the throne, therefore she found a man who would be content to play "second fiddle" to her throne.

Cole was angry and went to the other side, and playing a KG "Warwick," helped to create a civil war.

I think there was a Rhaegar faction with all his bright, young nobles and an Aerys faction, and that in itself might have played into their reasons for being at the TOJ, which is why I've never much depended upon that alone to think that Jon was legitimate.

I've always considered Lyanna the "unknown variable," or outlier in all of these plans, and that she mucked them up. If Rhaegar was plotting with the Dornish, then she destroyed those plans as well, which would explain their anger, (GRRM confirmed this Martell anger), and possibly justify Prince Lewyn in fact betraying Rhaegar.

[SFDanny]

Or simply they had their own agendas.

I happen to think that it was a personal preference, (something that makes Selmy different, since he would not involved himself in such plots given he is a "by-the-book-and-KG-don't-play-the-GOT" kind of guy), which seems to be what he is alluding to when he thinks back on Rhaegar, the Red Keep and its secrets.

I speculate that he thinks had Rhaegar trusted him as opposed to Dayne, whom we know now is a distant kinsman of Rhaegars as much as the Martells, Selmy would have set him straight on whatever he was planning with his father.

Some KG were "by the book," but I think just as many were like Cole, (and paralleling the Praetorian Guard), wanted to have control over the "Caesar" that led them. In the case of Cole, I happen to think that Mushrooms tale of Cole being offended by Rhays advances is wrong and it was the other way around. She would not give up the throne, therefore she found a man who would be content to play "second fiddle" to her throne.

Cole was angry and went to the other side, therefore helping to create a civil war.

I think there was a Rhaegar faction with all his bright, young nobles and an Aerys faction, and that in itself might have played into their reasons for being at the TOJ, which is why I've never much depended upon that alone to think that Jon was legitimate.

I've always considered Lyanna the "unknown variable," or outlier in all of these plans, and that she mucked them up. If Rhaegar was plotting with the Dornish, then she destroyed those plans as well, which would explain their anger, (and GRRM confirmed this), and possibly justify Prince Lewyn in fact betraying Rhaegar.

I'm sure you're right that there are many agendas going on here, but I'm not sure we can say we have any Coles in Aerys's Kingsguard. I say this not because I don't think there weren't some who had already made a commitment to support Rhaegar in setting aside his father - I think it clear that Whent and Dayne fall into this camp, but that's a little different than trying to control your sovereign. I don't think that is what they aspire to, based on admittedly little evidence about the two of them other than it appears that Rhaegar is calling the shots when it comes to their actions. Selmy, on the other hand, is, up to his near fatal combat at the Trident, a "by the book" kingsguard. It is his decision, which he tells Daenerys amounts to treason, to join Robert instead of trying to get to Viserys that I'm talking about when I make the comparison. Ser Barristan tells Daenerys why he did it, and the role of his observations of the young Viserys in doing so. In some ways it is tragic that Viserys didn't have a Ser Barristan to guide him along with Darry while he was alive. In other ways, it is likely better that even a Viserys who benefitted from Ser Barristan's guidance wasn't trusted with the crown. Regardless, Selmy made his choice and it looks like the trio at the tower may have made the same one he did. Can't say I blame them, but it does change how we must view the men, I think.

Like you, I've also tried to point out other parts of this story that also point in the direction of Jon as the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. And like you I think our read of Lyanna's character is very important in all of this. I don't think she accepts anything less than her child being "trueborn." I also think Rhaegar's obsession with his understanding of prophecy meant he was trying to recreate Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters. That means a polygamous marriage.

[Alia of the knife]

I'm sure you're right that there are many agendas going on here, but I'm not sure we can say we have any Coles in Aerys's Kingsguard. I say this not because I don't think there weren't some who had already made a commitment to support Rhaegar in setting aside his father - I think it clear that Whent and Dayne fall into this camp, but that's a little different than trying to control your sovereign. I don't think that is what they aspire to, based on admittedly little evidence about the two of them other than it appears that Rhaegar is calling the shots when it comes to their actions. Selmy, on the other hand, is, up to his near fatal combat at the Trident, a "by the book" kingsguard. It is his decision, which he tells Daenerys amounts to treason, to join Robert instead of trying to get to Viserys that I'm talking about when I make the comparison. Ser Barristan tells Daenerys why he did it, and the role of his observations of the young Viserys in doing so. In some ways it is tragic that Viserys didn't have a Ser Barristan to guide him along with Darry while he was alive. In other ways, it is likely better that even a Viserys who benefitted from Ser Barristan's guidance wasn't trusted with the crown. Regardless, Selmy made his choice and it looks like the trio at the tower may have made the same one he did. Can't say I blame them, but it does change how we must view the men, I think.

Like you, I've also tried to point out other parts of this story that also point in the direction of Jon as the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. And like you I think our read of Lyanna's character is very important in all of this. I don't think she accepts anything less than her child being "trueborn." I also think Rhaegar's obsession with his understanding of prophecy meant he was trying to recreate Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters. That means a polygamous marriage.

All good points.

I think for me, the thing with prophesy is that its typically fulfilled when you aren't "living" it.

Thats why I think at the TOJ, (Rhaegar gave it its name), that is where he lived, rather than existed and that Jon was not as planned, or "engineered," as some think, which would make his conception all the more "special."

At some point, Rhaegar "changed" his mind that Aegon was tPtwP, what was the motivation?

Also, no one remembers Rhaegar as being prophetic, but Kevan does remember Rhaegar as wanting sons.

I think that when we look at Martins theme, inspired by Faulkner, "conflicts of the heart," I think we get a clearer picture of what this is really coming down to.

[teej6]

All good points.

I think for me, the thing with prophesy is that its typically fulfilled when you aren't "living" it.

Thats why I think at the TOJ, (Rhaegar gave it its name), that is where he lived, rather than existed and that Jon was not as planned, or "engineered," as some think, which would make his conception all the more "special."

At some point, Rhaegar "changed" his mind that Aegon was tPtwP, what was the motivation?

Also, no one remembers Rhaegar as being prophetic, but Kevan does remember Rhaegar as wanting sons.

I think that when we look at Martins theme, inspired by Faulkner, "conflicts of the heart," I think we get a clearer picture of what this is really coming down to.

When all is said and done, Rhaegar might turn out to be the most tragic character in the series. I think Aemon's speech about love being the death of duty aptly defines Rhaegar's character and story. And to think, Aemon was saying that to Rhaegar's son. Come to think of it, although the ToJ was remote, Rhaegar may have found a way to stay in touch with Aemon, and Aemon may have known that Rhaegar was in love with Lyanna and that she was carrying his child. He may not have known that the child survived. To me, Rhaegar did not seek Lyanna to fulfil a prophesy instead he truly fell in love with her. He may have later come to believe that the child in Lyanna's womb would be the tPtwP.

[Kingmonkey]

I disagree.

He is icily angry about discussion of Jon's origins, not Ashara.

He doesn't even mention Ashara himself, or ask any details about the discussion of her - she is only mentioned as possibly Jon's mother by Catelyn.

He has no interest in Ashara's name, what he wants Catelyn to divulge is the source of the rumour.

His entire and only goal indicated in that text is to stop anyone discussing Jon's origins. He displays no interest whatsoever in Ashara in that text.

"He is my blood, and that is all you need to know. And now I will learn where you heard that name, my lady." To me, that doesn't sound like he has no interest in Ashara's name. On the contrary he addresses the issue of Jon's parentage and then goes on to specifically ask about the Ashara's name coming into it.

Certainly he doesn't want people spreading rumours about Jon's origins, but he goes further than this. "That was the only time in all their years that Ned had ever frightened her." He obviously does not want to talk about Wylla either, but there simply isn't that strong a reaction when talking about Wylla as there is talking about Ashara. Whether that's because he had an affair with Ashara before his marriage to Cat or not, it surely represents a strong feeling relating to Ashara.

Thats a painfully bad mischaracterisation of the data.

Argument for Brandon consists roughly equally of at least 4 parts.

1. Barristan's thoughts that young girls always choose fire men over mud men - and Barristan's known experience of young girls being Dany and... Ashara, since he was around at Harrenhal and no doubt paying close attention to his personal crush-from-afar.

2. Ned's general characterisation and complete lack of thought of or interest in Ashara

3. Brandon's general characterisation and history

4. Barristan's displayed respect for Ned.

and in a way...

5. Complete lack of anything solid pointing to Ned once the data that appears to point to N+A is examined closely

Sorry, but I see very little difference between my "painfully bad mis-characterisation of the data" and your summary.

1. Barristan's fire men vs. mud men point is primarily about Barristan himself as a mud man. To apply it to Ned vs. Brandon requires the assumption that Ned is a mud man and Brandon is a fire man. I see very little reason to describe Ned as a mud man. Sure he's the quiet wolf, but he's not the boring wolf. Brandon of course can't keep his pants on, so yeah he's a fire man.

Another thing about this line of argument is that it assumes Barristan knows what he's talking about when it comes to women, which is an odd assumption. Frankly it's just as likely that this is a hint that Ashara would chose Ned over Brandon as the other way around: it would hardly be unique for GRRM to be using someone being wrong as a hint to what actually happened.

2. Except we do see interest in Ashara. In the passage above, Cat remembers him reacting with extreme emotion to Ashara's name. We know he was attracted to Ashara at HH. We can't expect to see Ashara in Ned's PoV thoughts for the same reason he doesn't think about Jon's parentage in his PoV thoughts. GRRM wants to keep his secrets. Finally consider this passage:

Ned Stark thought of pale blue roses, and for a moment he wanted to weep. "I do not know which of you I pity most."

The queen seemed amused by that. "Save your pity for yourself, Lord Stark. I want none of it."

"You know what I must do."

"Must?" She put her hand on his good leg, just above the knee. "A true man does what he will, not what he must." Her fingers brushed lightly against his thigh, the gentlest of promises. "The realm needs a strong Hand. Joff will not come of age for years. No one wants war again, least of all me." Her hand touched his face, his hair. "If friends can turn to enemies, enemies can become friends. Your wife is a thousand leagues away, and my brother has fled. Be kind to me, Ned. I swear to you, you shall never regret it."

"Did you make the same offer to Jon Arryn?"

She slapped him.

"I shall wear that as a badge of honor," Ned said dryly.

"Honor," she spat. "How dare you play the noble lord with me! What do you take me for? You've a bastard of your own, I've seen him. Who was the mother, I wonder? Some Dornish peasant you raped while her holdfast burned? A whore? Or was it the grieving sister, the Lady Ashara? She threw herself into the sea, I'm told. Why was that? For the brother you slew, or the child you stole? Tell me, my honorable Lord Eddard, how are you any different from Robert, or me, or Jaime?"

"For a start," said Ned, "I do not kill children. You would do well to listen, my lady. I shall say this only once. When the king returns from his hunt, I intend to lay the truth before him. You must be gone by then. You and your children, all three, and not to Casterly Rock. If I were you, I should take ship for the Free Cities, or even farther, to the Summer Isles or the Port of Ibben. As far as the winds blow."

"Exile," she said. "A bitter cup to drink from."

"A sweeter cup than your father served Rhaegar's children," Ned said, "and kinder than you deserve. Your father and your brothers would do well to go with you. Lord Tywin's gold will buy you comfort and hire swords to keep you safe. You shall need them. I promise you, no matter where you flee, Robert's wrath will follow you, to the back of beyond if need be."

The queen stood. "And what of my wrath, Lord Stark?" she asked softly. Her eyes searched his face. "You should have taken the realm for yourself. It was there for the taking. Jaime told me how you found him on the Iron Throne the day King's Landing fell, and made him yield it up. That was your moment. All you needed to do was climb those steps, and sit. Such a sad mistake."

"I have made more mistakes than you can possibly imagine," Ned said, "but that was not one of them."

Ned feels pity for Cersei. He feels sadness about Lyanna and the events that have led to this moment. He reacts to Cersei's slap with dry humour. Yet when Cersei brings up Ashara (and Arthur, I suspect that's important too) his attitude changes dramatically. He is no longer advising her, he is flatly laying out the law. He no longer feels pity for her, but says that exile is "kinder than she deserves." Finally, he refers to "more mistakes than you can possibly imagine" which gives an idea of where his thoughts have turned.

Yes, he thinks about Ashara, we just don't get to see his thoughts internally.

3. Yeah, Brandon can't keep his pants on.

4. Why wouldn't Barristan respect Ned? He could perfectly well have once been jealous that Ashara had "looked to" Ned rather than him but still respect Ned. Ned hadn't taken marriage vows at that point, so it's not like he'd been breaking any vows. Barristan might have thought it foolish and dangerous, but then he thinks that people do foolish and dangerous things for love without losing respect for them. See Dany & Daario.

5. I completely agree there's nothing solid pointing to N+A, but that's simply no argument for B+A. What is there that actually points to B+A? It's simply not enough to say that N+A isn't solid, B+A has to be MORE solid than N+A. You've shown a few reasons why N+A isn't solid, but I don't see that you've moved any closer to B+A than my original "Brandon couldn't keep his pants on" which you dismissed as mis-characterising the data.