R+L=J v. 148

[IceFire125]

So people love the idea of R+L=J because it almost sounds like a fairy tale but as we all know there are a lot of theories. One's that are vague and others that seem very close to what might actually have happened. Suffice it to any possibilities that aren't to far off the mark are true contenders for what really occurred.

Where did you get this idea?

I don't understand that thought at all. R+L=J is not based on fairy tale. If you read the books, you should conclude that THOUSANDS DIED, because of Rhaegar choosing to love Lyanna. The conclusion of Jon's birth ended the page with gruesome brutality clashing with sacred oaths, duty and a heart breaking promise. That promise was not even certain it could be fulfilled, leaving Lyanna hanging on a tiny thread of hope until Ned gave her his word. This word of this promise was immense, the burden of which was the full weight of treason, against the new king and friend... Ned carried it for 15 years.

Yes, Martin admitted openly that he is a romanticist, but this is not a fairy tale.

[Prince of Ghost]

I don't think it's that we dismiss them. It's that all the other possible combination of letters--B, A, N, M, W, and the rest of the alphabet soup--do not stand up to the same scrutiny that RLJ does. Is RLJ perfect? Nope. But we've got 2 books to go. But all the other theories fail because of timeline, because of symbolic importance, because of the way the characters (like Ned, for one) act, because of SSMs, because of the almost insurmountable evidence that points to RLJ. Anyone who wants to put forth a non-RLJ theory for Jon Snow's parents has to present evidence that hasn't been heard before and explained why that evidence fails for whatever reason.

I'll add 100$ to this imaginary pot.

Well what I proposed is for members to wager against themselves. For example you could wager $5 US Dollars that R+L=J is true. If it is true then good for you, you can feel vindicated that your theory turned out to be true. If R+L=J is not true you would then donate the money to one of GRRM's favorite charities such as

The Food Depot in Santa Fe, NM.

https://donatenow.ne...ood.org/1441899

and/or

The Wild Spirit Wolf Sanctuary.

http://www.wildspiri...memberships.php

I already donated $10 US dollars to each. Or you can always donate just for fun! :)

[Crimsonsmile]

You don't need dates. You do need to know that Lyanna was missing for at least a year, and Brandon was imprisoned and murdered right after she went missing. You also need to know that Dany was born 9 months after the Sack and Jon 8-9 months before her, which makes his birthdate around the Sack or even after, a year or more after Lyanna went missing. Case closed.

there you have it at least a year. But how long did the war last? About a year. Not a year, not even half a year but a about a year. Numerically speaking how would you quantify about? Me it means a year give or take a couple of months.

[BearQueen87]

infer just like rhaegar and lyanna

Well that's just silly, TBH. There is evidence--both symbolic and and actual stated evidence--that R and L were having sex.

You're argument for Brandon being Jon's father is that he MIGHT have been alive at the time of conception and he MIGHT have been having sex with Lyanna, therefore your number#1 for who is Jon Snow's baby Daddy is Brandon Stark. But your evidence is holey to the point of non existence.

[Prince of Ghost]

Well that's just silly, TBH. There is evidence--both symbolic and and actual stated evidence--that R and L were having sex.

You're argument for Brandon being Jon's father is that he MIGHT have been alive at the time of conception and he MIGHT have been having sex with Lyanna, therefore your number#1 for who is Jon Snow's baby Daddy is Brandon Stark. But your evidence is holey to the point of non existence.

Can you find me in the cannon where it states explicitly where Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex? and not hearsay from Robert.

[BearQueen87]

there you have it at least a year. But how long did the war last? About a year. Not a year, not even half a year but a about a year. Numerically speaking how would you quantify about? Me it means a year give or take a couple of months.

What you consider to be "about a year" = / = what GRRM (and his canon) consider to be "about a year." You seem to be adding/subtracting months as you see fit in order to support your theory, not letting the evidence in the text lead you to a better theory. We know roughly (if not exactly) when Jon was born. We know fairly accurately (if not exactly) when Brandon was killed by Aerys. It was before Jon could be conceived given that gestation on Planetos is the same as it is on Planet Earth, which is to say nine months. You don't need exact dates; the rough outline of the timeline will do in this case.

[wolfmaid7]

You're right that most of the proposals for different parentage come from people who do not know their ASOIAF very well and are mostly based on a hunch or preference or whatever. On the other hand, there was once a very well thought out essay on Mance being the father, very well argued, avoiding the usual pitfalls and inconsistencies. The problem was that while it fit the facts (as they were known then; the poster presumed that Lyanna disappeared from Winterfell and now we know that it was near Harrenhal), there was nothing in the text to base it on. This is what I am also arguing with Crimsonsmile below: the lack of textual support. Even if we dismiss the timeline issue as unreliable, there is no imagery, no symbolism, tying Lyanna to any other partner but Rhaegar. - BTW, how are the essays going? You promised to link us.

Considering the "bagasse": you must realize that the majority of stuff which gets posted these days are merely discoveries of wordplay or speech patterns to which R+L adds an extra sense, not clues as such. We need a new book to chew on :-)

As for the parametres: a successful theory needs to fit all the criteria that R+L does, equally successfully or better. I.e., there shouldn't be timeline issues, it should go with the characteristics of the people involved, explain certain mysteries and characters' behaviour, fit with symbolism etc. If we take e.g. Brandon+Lyanna:

- timeline: doesn't fit

- Ned's silence: a good explanation (shame) but inconsistent with the thoughts of secrets too dangerous to share

- blue roses: no connection

- textual support: no hints of anything improper going on between those two, even though there are situations (Targaryen incest, twincest) which are a direct parallel

See? Out of four points, and I could come up with way more, three don't fit already, and fatally. I see no reason to continue dissecting the theory because it clearly doesn't fit.

I'm getting at the way GRRM writes - foreshadowing, imagery etc. There is a whole lot of hints towards R+L but none towards B+L (no matter which brother you pick as B)

Ok my first bolded is part of what i mean.Where Lyanna went missing be it WF or Harrenhal has nothing to do with who Jon's father is.Yet,you all dsmissed it,because the location for her going missing was wrong!!!!Ygrain,that has no bearing on if Mance is Jon's dad.

Second bolded.Sadly Ygrain that is not true and you will see it for the essays which are going quite good from those i've seen.I haven't seen all.Ned,Arthur and Howland are pretty good. Robert is pretty awesome...But i might be a bit biased there seeing as i wrote it :laugh:

Yeah the wordplay bit needs to be tossed out by you guys because you can do that with any of the prospects. I have a page of that just for fun.

You confuse my meaning.I know what a successful theory entails,i just wanted to see what the prevailing though on that was here and what i see as flaws in how you all determine a theory is not viable.

Case in point dimissing Mance because Lya's kidnapping something no one knew until the WB suggested near Harrenhal.

The others i agree with as being included.

1. Timeline- Which is flawed like hell by the way and for that i defer to GRRM's warning about it because i think,no i know he put clues that is not dependent on conventional timelines.

2.Evidence linking any Stark and a proponent sexually be it by symbolism,hints in the text etc

3.Imagery

4 I will add Myth to that.

5. I will also add connections between Jon and the proponent ( NOT word play,that is foolhardy and not analysis).

Does this echo as sound?

[Crimsonsmile]

Well that's just silly, TBH. There is evidence--both symbolic and and actual stated evidence--that R and L were having sex.

You're argument for Brandon being Jon's father is that he MIGHT have been alive at the time of conception and he MIGHT have been having sex with Lyanna, therefore your number#1 for who is Jon Snow's baby Daddy is Brandon Stark. But your evidence is holey to the point of non existence.

stated you me gossip and rumor? when has gossip ever been true? 100% of the time or 50%? Read back whenever they mention Rhaegar. You feel like your being pulled in that direction of RLJ. I'm trying to say hes a red herring literally.

[BearQueen87]

Can you find me in the cannon where it states explicitly where Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex? and not hearsay from Robert.

I meant Robert. He believes that R was raping L. Ned does not seek to squash this assumption. Ned does not try to assuage his friends belief that the woman he (Robert) loved was being raped by Rhaegar, the man Robert killed in order to exact revenge. Ned cannot tell Robert the truth--that it was likely NOT rape--but he won't outright lie that they weren't engaging in something either.

[BearQueen87]

stated you me gossip and rumor? when has gossip ever been true? 100% of the time or 50%? Read back whenever they mention Rhaegar. You feel like your being pulled in that direction of RLJ. I'm trying to say hes a red herring literally.

to what end? So that GRRM can go "ha! fooled you all! Because way back when I sat down to write this series I knew that RLJ would become really popular so I wanted to pull the wool over your eyes! GOTCHA!"

Nope. Read some of GRRM's interviews. He likes mystery stories. And if the evidence points to the butler--then it's the butler. His words (if paraphrased by me)

[Ygrain]

Ok my first bolded is part of what i mean.Where Lyanna went missing be it WF or Harrenhal has nothing to do with who Jon's father is.Yet,you all dsmissed it,because the location for her going missing was wrong!!!!Ygrain,that has no bearing on if Mance is Jon's dad.

You have misread what I wrote. We didn't know back then that Lyanna was taken at HH (though some of us theorized so). We dismissed the theory because there was nothing in the text that we could pin it on. No symbolism for Mance that would tie to Lyanna, no mention of Mance being at the right place in the right time, only a big unknown where he might have been back then. Also, at that time we knew that Jon'w parentage could be figured from AGOT only, and Mance is barely mentioned there.

[Sly Wren]

to what end? So that GRRM can go "ha! fooled you all! Because way back when I sat down to write this series I knew that RLJ would become really popular so I wanted to pull the wool over your eyes! GOTCHA!"

Nope. Read some of GRRM's interviews. He likes mystery stories. And if the evidence points to the butler--then it's the butler. His words (if paraphrased by me)

Fully agree that he likes mystery stories. But he already did a "gotcha!" As Lady Darry pointed out last thread, Cersei and Jaime were about as close to "the butler did it" as could be. Everyone was convinced. Then, a la Agatha Christie (mystery story) or Perry Mason, had a very awkward monologue from Lyssa, basically telling all readers (myself included), gotcha! You thought all that evidence meant one thing. Nope!

Just saying--he hasn't boxed himself in. Made a strong case for RLJ, yes. Boxed himself in? No. Just no.

[SFDanny]

Can you find me in the cannon where it states explicitly where Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex? and not hearsay from Robert.

Looking into cannon is dangerous business, that best be left to trained artillerymen. Especially when one is looking for proof of sex. The nervous tension can set things off.

Seriously, you are of course right that there are no first hand accounts of witnesses to sex between Lyanna and Rhaegar, but there are plenty clues of attraction between the two and proximity during the right time. That counts for something when trying to figure this mess out.

[Crimsonsmile]

What you consider to be "about a year" = / = what GRRM (and his canon) consider to be "about a year." You seem to be adding/subtracting months as you see fit in order to support your theory, not letting the evidence in the text lead you to a better theory. We know roughly (if not exactly) when Jon was born. We know fairly accurately (if not exactly) when Brandon was killed by Aerys. It was before Jon could be conceived given that gestation on Planetos is the same as it is on Planet Earth, which is to say nine months. You don't need exact dates; the rough outline of the timeline will do in this case.

what is your definition of about? your acting like i created the word to make my point. If your point was to say I used it to achieve my point then your correct. But saying you know roughly when Brandon died is a half truth. You know what year he died but you don't know if it was early in the year or midway in the year. Why even mention him at all. We don't need to know that his favorite pastime was taking maidenheads. We don't need to know that he and his sister were close. That he wanted to fight and tragically die for her.

[wolfmaid7]

You have misread what I wrote. We didn't know back then that Lyanna was taken at HH (though some of us theorized so). We dismissed the theory because there was nothing in the text that we could pin it on. No symbolism for Mance that would tie to Lyanna, no mention of Mance being at the right place in the right time, only a big unknown where he might have been back then. Also, at that time we knew that Jon'w parentage could be figured from AGOT only, and Mance is barely mentioned there.

Ok got you.

Wait no symbolism for Mance!!! Really?

Him being in the right place at the right time eh i don't know.I haven't seen the Mance essay yet so maybe it will be answered,maybe not.

[Prince of Ghost]

I meant Robert. He believes that R was raping L. Ned does not seek to squash this assumption. Ned does not try to assuage his friends belief that the woman he (Robert) loved was being raped by Rhaegar, the man Robert killed in order to exact revenge. Ned cannot tell Robert the truth--that it was likely NOT rape--but he won't outright lie that they weren't engaging in something either.

Yes Robert believes that Rhaegar raped Lyanna. There is no explicit evidence in the cannon that they had sex. Just hearsay. That is all there is. There is evidence--both symbolic and and actual stated evidence--that R and L were having sex. These are your words. There is not stated evidence, just hearsay.

[BearQueen87]

Fully agree that he likes mystery stories. But he already did a "gotcha!" As Lady Darry pointed out last thread, Cersei and Jaime were about as close to "the butler did it" as could be. Everyone was convinced. Then, a la Agatha Christie (mystery story) or Perry Mason, had a very awkward monologue from Lyssa, basically telling all readers (myself included), gotcha! You thought all that evidence meant one thing. Nope!

Just saying--he hasn't boxed himself in. Made a strong case for RLJ, yes. Boxed himself in? No. Just no.

No he hasn't boxed himself in. He's still in charge of this shindig and if he chooses to suddenly go, "nope. It was Brandon and Lyanna/ Lyanna and Arthur/ Ned and Ashara/ Ned and Random Peasant #45661/ Jon was hatched from an egg and is secretly the spaghetti monster!" then he is entitled to do since it's his creative genius, not mine. But, as a reader, I'm entitled to say that's cheap and pointless and bad writing after 5 books and constant clues for RLJ while every other theory is cast down in light of the timeline or evidence.

Except the spaghetti monster of course. That one is obviously true.

[wolfmaid7]

You have misread what I wrote. We didn't know back then that Lyanna was taken at HH (though some of us theorized so). We dismissed the theory because there was nothing in the text that we could pin it on. No symbolism for Mance that would tie to Lyanna, no mention of Mance being at the right place in the right time, only a big unknown where he might have been back then. Also, at that time we knew that Jon'w parentage could be figured from AGOT only, and Mance is barely mentioned there.

Ok got you.

Wait no symbolism for Mance!!! Really?

Him being in the right place at the right time eh i don't know.I haven't seen the Mance essay yet so maybe it will be answered,maybe not.

[BearQueen87]

Yes Robert believes that Rhaegar raped Lyanna. There is no explicit evidence in the cannon that they had sex. Just hearsay. That is all there is. There is evidence--both symbolic and and actual stated evidence--that R and L were having sex. These are your words. There is not stated evidence, just hearsay.

Fine. Hearsay. I'll concede that I used a wrong word while typing quickly. This does not, however, dismiss all the evidence that does point to RLJ.

Ok got you.

Wait no symbolism for Mance!!! Really?

Him being in the right place at the right time eh i don't know.I haven't seen the Mance essay yet so maybe it will be answered,maybe not.

But the evidence for Mance--at least what I read people point to--really just seems like evidence for Rhaegar, like Bael the Bard story (which as many have already pointed out is pretty closely linked to RLJ). So, forgive me, but what else is there?

[Prince of Ghost]

No he hasn't boxed himself in. He's still in charge of this shindig and if he chooses to suddenly go, "nope. It was Brandon and Lyanna/ Lyanna and Arthur/ Ned and Ashara/ Ned and Random Peasant #45661/ Jon was hatched from an egg and is secretly the spaghetti monster!" then he is entitled to do since it's his creative genius, not mine. But, as a reader, I'm entitled to say that's cheap and pointless and bad writing after 5 books and constant clues for RLJ while every other theory is cast down in light of the timeline or evidence.

Except the spaghetti monster of course. That one is obviously true.

I don't think it would be "cheap and pointless and bad writing" lulling most of the hardcore fan base into thinking that R+L=J is true and then actually revealing that it was a red herring and Jon having different parents would surprise many in the fan base. It would be very fascinating because so many people would be blindsided by it.