Jump to content

Archived

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

Prince of Ghost

R+L=J v 150

Recommended Posts

*blinks rapidly*

 

So....this is new? Or rather old?

 

They had trouble updating and reverted the forum to the old version in the meantime. Nothing posted between now and the eventual update will be saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, of Dustin, Glover, Cassel, Ryswell, Wull, Whent, Hightower, and Dayne, is there ever anything concrete to say they are dead and not just in hiding somewhere?


Read down about a page from the dream and you get this, which seems pretty conclusive.

It would have to be his grandfather, for Jory's father was buried far to the south. Martyn Cassel had perished with the rest. Ned had pulled the tower down afterward, and used its bloody stones to build eight cairns upon the ridge. It was said that Rhaegar had named that place the tower of joy, but for Ned it was a bitter memory. They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They had trouble updating and reverted the forum to the old version in the meantime. Nothing posted between now and the eventual update will be saved.

 

O__________O Well that's.....unfortunate.

 

 

Read down about a page from the dream and you get this, which seems pretty conclusive.
 

 

Wasn't there also an SSM recently that said Ned and Howland were the only two men to ride away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read down about a page from the dream and you get this, which seems pretty conclusive.
 

Thank you. I was reading one of the Athur Dayne is alive threads and reread only part of the chapter. I completely forgot about that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire Eater,

 

well, I'd hope that Corlys Velaryon knew the boys were his if he was the one who fathered them - and by the way, that is pretty much given considering to what lengths Corlys later goes to protect Addam from Rhaenyra's wrath. He'd do that for a son but not necessarily for one of his own son's bastards. Not to mention that he later also arranges the marriage between his granddaughter Baela and Alyn, subsequently naming Alyn heir to Driftmark in the process (that's what I assume, at least, it makes no sense to assume that Alyn would have been allowed to marry Baela and become Lord of Driftmark if Corlys hadn't arranged all that in the first year of the Regency.

If I get the thing right - I've written some longer posts on Alyn Velaryon and Corlys over there in the Cregan Stark thread in TWoIaF forum - then Jacaerys, Marilda, and Corlys came up with the idea to legitimize Addam and Alyn as Laenor's bastards rather than Corlys' to give Corlys' heirs of his own body (and subsequently tricking Joffrey Velaryon, Jace's younger brother, out of Driftmark - which would be why Rhaenyra was reluctant to go through with it) while, in turn, Jace and Rhaenyra profited from the whole arrangement in the sense that it dealt a blow to the 'Strong story' since Laenor fathering bastards would make it appear more likely that he was also the father of Rhaenyra's sons.

 

Considering that Princess Rhaenys - the only reason why Corlys never acknowledged the Hull boys as his sons - was already dead when they were legitimized there was no real reason to not legitimize them as Corlys' sons. That is, if the purpose wasn't to put Addam and Alyn before Joffrey in the succession to Driftmark. Technically, Corlys' younger sons should come after Laenor and his sons.

Yeah, I think Corlys still resented the idea of bastards not of his blood born from his good-daughter horning his son inheriting his seat. At least Addam and Alyn were of his blood, and he was only able to do this after Rhaenys died. I don't think the Strong bastards knew of their true parentage. 

 

 

This whole thing was no 'trial'. Marilda of Hull knew pretty well who the father of her sons was, and this is why she sent them to Dragonstone to try to mount a dragon. As Laenor's half-brother Addam had no trouble with Seasmoke, but Alyn failed to mount Sheepstealer because the dragon wasn't accustomed to the presence of humans - that didn't disprove his heritage in the process.

 

You don't have to be particularly original to try to dismiss the 'Jon Snow is Lyanna and Rhaegar's son' story - Dany claiming he could be a descendant of Aegon the Unworthy on his mother's side would be just one of them. Perhaps the Daynes also have a drop of Targaryen blood? If Ashara was Jon's mother he could have Targaryen blood through her (that is actually not completely unlikely since the Targaryens considered Dyanna Dayne a worthy match for Prince Maekar, and a descendant of Maron and Daenerys could easily have married into House Dayne).

 

The whole Melisandre talk in ADwD makes it quite likely that Jon will soon have to explore his full potential as a skinchanger. That will, I suppose, become crucial for his resurrection/return into his own body. Varamyr seemed to believe you lose your skinchanging ability if you are permanently trapped in an animal skin (or human skin) but that may not be the case. The assumption that Bran will be able to push Jon back into his body isn't all that convincing to me - he most likely will explain him what to do, but I guess he'll have to do the deed himself. That Jon Snow is a warg is pretty well-known at the Wall, though. If he realizes his skinchanger abilities are important in the coming war - gathering information, attacking the wights, etc. could all be done by using animals - he surely will explore all that. Else George would have dropped the skinchanger element for Jon and Arya.

Yet, Addam and his brother weren't legitimized and accepted as Velaryons until after he mounted Seasmoke. Alyn was accepted given he was Addam's full-blood brother, and the dragon Addam mounted was ridden before compared to Sheepstealer. This provides precedent for dragons being used to prove one's heritage. 

 

Something tells me Dany wouldn't come up with that explanation in the moment, especially given her limited knowledge of Targaryen monarchs. GRRM said the Daynes aren't Valyrian, so I guess that includes them not having any Valyrian blood. Dany no doubt never heard of Ashara Dayne's story, so I doubt she might go there. Ashara Dayne isn't Jon's mom, but more likely, HR's wife. If that is the case, Ashara knew both Elia and Rhaegar, and her brother, Arthur, was Rhaegar's oldest friend, so I doubt she would be believed to be a conspirator for a Stark bastard to take the IT, especially with no ravens at GW. Besides, Dany would present the challenge to mount a dragon as a way for Jon to prove his heritage in this scenario. She would have to keep her word on this one. 

 

Bran and BR will likely need to do some magical healing for Jon given warging won't heal his injuries. Jon could practice skinchanging with Ghost as Borroq would likely mentor him on that, and HAggon was a master skinchanger yet he only bonded with wolves and dogs. SKinchanging is alreayd important at this moment since it is what saves him. Devloping this skll would be important if it leads to him being able to pass a crucial test: mounting a dragon.     

 

 

We don't know how long Ned Stark was down there. There may be more to 'the last battles of the war' than we presently know - but anyone trying to discredit Jon Snow's heritage won't care about those details. He'll only be accepted as a Targaryen if a Targaryen accepts him. Just as Aegon will get into trouble if Dany publicly rejects him, Jon Snow won't be able to convince anyone of his heritage if the Targaryen queen ignores or dismisses him.

 

The Howland Reed question is important if we believe the man knows stuff about prophecy, though. Surely the savior should know that he is the savior to become the savior/do saviorly stuff? Howland keeping his mouth shut could be a sign that he is never going to talk to Jon about that - unless Jon is going to push him about that. My guess is that Bran is going to tell Jon about his true parents, not Howland Reed or anybody else, and Jon will then later confront Howland Reed as to why his so-called father never found the courage to tell him the truth.

 

I think Jojen and Meera knowing is hinted at by the fact that they are quite irritated/surprised by the fact that Bran doesn't know the story about the Knight of the Laughing Tree. That would be part of the story of Lyanna and Rhaegar which would end with Jon Snow's birth - and they seemed to assume that Ned Stark told his children/Bran who they half-brother actually was.

None of the last battles were in the Red Mountains. Dany will have trouble convincing a lot of Aegon's supporters and others, regardless. Although, admittedly Jon will appear to have less, but he benefits from the people involved in his smuggling being known as honest men compared to Varys and Illyrio. The hints don't point to Dany rejecting him, but the lie regarding his heritage is the last thing she slays. Why would GRRM hint at Jon's heritage just to have it denied? Then there is no point to including it in the story. Dany would be initially skeptical, but GRRM has no shortage of plot gifts. Dany would likely pose the challenge thinking that if Jon fails, he would be killed, and that would be the end of him with no one doubting he was a false pretender.  

 

HR is not versed in prophecies far across the Narrow Sea. I agree BranRaven will tell Jon. Why would Jon go all the way to the Neck just to confront HR, especially when he has more important matters at hand?

 

The Reeds likely could know about Rhaegar and Lyanna's romance, but Jon is another story given the dangerous implications. I don't think HR would risk Ned and Jon's necks by telling children the whole story.  

 

 

O__________O Well that's.....unfortunate.

 

 

 

Wasn't there also an SSM recently that said Ned and Howland were the only two men to ride away?

"Two men," and one isn't considered to reach manhood until age 16, so that works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Two men," and one isn't considered to reach manhood until age 16, so that works. 

 

 

Exactly. That's a clever line from GRRM, like saying "Ned named Jon" but right before saying Tyrion and Dany were named by parents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
O__________O Well that's.....unfortunate.
 
 
 
Wasn't there also an SSM recently that said Ned and Howland were the only two men to ride away?


Mind pointing me to this SSM? Because I heard that he said "only Eddard and Howland"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I officially no longer believe in the theories involving Jon Snow... Lol, I cant tell you how much time & energy in all that I put into speculating this. And It all got shot down in a matter of minutes during which I read an article telling how Game of Thrones director David Nutter confirms to President Obama that Jon Snow is really dead. For the first time yet, I am actually taking his death seriously. Sad... BUT, maybe dead version Catelyn Stark will be the savior against the army of the dead, since shes already dead? lol

 

Wtf is this? 

 

So you say that when a producer says to his fans: JS = dead, you still have some doubts. But when he says it to the 'President of the United States of America' is has to be true AND there is no way that JS won't 'revive' (in one way or another). That's bullshit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire Eater,

 

the crucial thing about the legitimation thing is that Princess Rhaenys was already dead at that point, not the fact that Addam mounted a dragon. Not to mention that they were legitimized as the wrong Velaryon's sons - we don't know who Corlys' immediate Targaryen ancestor is. If it is not Aerea or Rhalla (or Rhaena, in a third marriage) then it may be a Targaryen girl from before the Conquest, putting over hundred years between Addam/Alyn and their Targaryen ancestor. If you can become a dragonrider if you Targaryen ancestor is this far removed then Jon Snow mounting a dragon would prove nothing. Especially not if Daenerys/Tyrion/whoever isn't incline to buy the Rhaegar-Lyanna-story.

 

I'm not sure Corlys was dead-set against Juke or Joff becoming the Lord of Driftmark - Rhaenyra and Laenor had betrothed the boys to Laena's daughters shortly after the latter's birth, after all, ensuring that at least Corlys' great-grandchildren would have his and Rhaenys' blood - but Luke died at Storm's End, and while Baela was apparently still betrothed to Jace (if Mushroom's story of Jace marrying Cregan's bastard sister in secret is nonsense) while Rhaena may have been chosen to marry into House Stark (most likely Cregan himself) in the Pact of Ice and Fire which would leave Joff without a Velaryon-Targaryen bride.

 

Again, if dragon-mounting was seen as a trial of sorts then surely Nettles, Ulf, and Hugh could have used their successes to claim that this was prove now that they were the descendants of this or that Targaryen king, no? Even if they invented the whole story... Laenor fathering the Addam and Alyn was invented, too, after all.

 

If Jon Snow's heritage ever becomes a topic of negative discussion among Daenerys and her allies - and I really don't think that this will be the case considering that it is very unlikely that he'll put forth a claim to the Iron Throne - then Dany would of course gather information on the boy. And it shouldn't be difficult to uncover the official story.

 

The Daynes aren't a Valyrian house but that doesn't mean they cannot have Targaryen blood - especially not through a Martell match taking place after the marriage between Maron and Daenerys. You know, both younger sons and daughters of House Martell would have to be married off, and since House Dayne is one of the prestigious Dornish houses I expect many marriages between the Daynes and the Martells.

 

I don't see how Bloodraven and Bran could heal Jon's body. This is not a fairy-tale setting. There is no hint that greenseer can magically heal dying/dead people from the far end of the world. And I'm pretty sure Jon is already dead. That was the point of this assassination plot. Borroq will be the one telling others that his spirit is now permanently in Ghost - considering that it has been established that skinchangers always recognize each other - but there is little chance that he'll be able to teach him anything in that form. Bran, however, could reach out to Ghost-Jon in that form and maybe help him finding out how he could return to his body. That body may than be resurrected either by Melisandre with the kiss of fire or become an ice wight which Jon can then overtake (likely how Coldhands controls his body now - the man actually might be a wightified skinchanger who successfully retook his body after it had become a wight).

 

The idea that our poor hero is getting out of that whole assassination/being dead issue without paying a huge price is quite silly in such a series.

 

Now you yourself suggest skinchanging may be crucial in claiming a dragon? If that's the case why the hell is Targaryen blood then important? Or rather, why the hell would people believe he has Targaryen blood if he claims a dragon if they also know he is a skinchanger - even more so, if he actually said he controlled his dragon the same he controlled Ghost (i.e. that he could merge spirits and be the dragon when he wanted to)?

 

Not to mention that this whole dragon trial thing presupposes that there will be a spare dragon around at that time. Yes, I think that Jon Snow will become a dragonrider but hardly with a stupid trial but out of necessity in the fight against the others. If Jon is the third dragon head then whoever Dany and Tyrion choose in the meantime won't be the person they can trust completely - and if they are trying to fulfill prophecy they might actually give Aegon that dragon considering that everything would point toward him being the important guy. Especially in light of Daenerys' vision in the House of the Undying. The idea that Dany and Tyrion would consider Brown Ben or Victarion one of the dragon heads if they become dragonriders is very unlikely if you ask me. Perhaps the usual take the Second Dance is wrong and Aegon decides to double-cross Tyrion and Daenerys after they had come to Westeros and formed an alliance...

 

Jojen and Meera seemed to expect that Bran knew the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree. That in itself suggests that they might have thought Ned's children knew the story about Lyanna and Rhaegar - which they do not. Part of that story is also Jon Snow, and there wouldn't be much harm in telling that story to Ned's immediate family. Jon Snow wouldn't be in mortal danger then, that's just a silly idea. Robert would never turn against his old friend, and if he did he would like another incarnation of Aerys II who did the same thing - commanding the death of innocents - and his whole power base would crumble. Jon Arryn and Hoster Tully wouldn't fight at Robert's side against the North, perhaps he'd have the Lannisters on his side but that wouldn't be enough. And in the end Eddard could actually use Jon Snow as a Targaryen figurehead pretender to rally the Targaryen loyalists to his cause and put an end to the Targaryen-Baratheon dynasty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of dragon riders, GRRM said that the third head need not be a Targaryen, which that could make room for Tyrion, or fAegon.

But, then again, if Aegon is a Blackfyre, he is still a "dragon," just not Rhaegars dragon.

 

I can't help but feel that Jons ultimate awakening is not just physical and maybe along the lines of Danys with someone else paying a blood price, (Mel)?

 

But also "awakening" to truth and awareness, which then will make his presence both physically and emotionally pretty powerful not just to his dragons blood, but I also think that he will also learn some very dark truths about his Stark blood and the Others as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In WOIAF, Addam of Hull was a bastard of uncertain origin claiming to be the son of Laenor Velaryon, who by virtue of his marriage to Rhaenyra, Princess of Dragonstone, was the late Prince of Dragonstone. He was accepted into House Velaryon after proving his heritage by mounting a dragon.  
 
Brings to mind a certain bastard who will need some way to undoubtedly prove that he is the son of the late Prince of Dragonstone. 


Why would this bastard need or want to prove he is a Targaryen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the crucial thing about the legitimation thing is that Princess Rhaenys was already dead at that point, not the fact that Addam mounted a dragon. Not to mention that they were legitimized as the wrong Velaryon's sons - we don't know who Corlys' immediate Targaryen ancestor is. If it is not Aerea or Rhalla (or Rhaena, in a third marriage) then it may be a Targaryen girl from before the Conquest, putting over hundred years between Addam/Alyn and their Targaryen ancestor. If you can become a dragonrider if you Targaryen ancestor is this far removed then Jon Snow mounting a dragon would prove nothing. Especially not if Daenerys/Tyrion/whoever isn't incline to buy the Rhaegar-Lyanna-story.

 

I'm not sure Corlys was dead-set against Juke or Joff becoming the Lord of Driftmark - Rhaenyra and Laenor had betrothed the boys to Laena's daughters shortly after the latter's birth, after all, ensuring that at least Corlys' great-grandchildren would have his and Rhaenys' blood - but Luke died at Storm's End, and while Baela was apparently still betrothed to Jace (if Mushroom's story of Jace marrying Cregan's bastard sister in secret is nonsense) while Rhaena may have been chosen to marry into House Stark (most likely Cregan himself) in the Pact of Ice and Fire which would leave Joff without a Velaryon-Targaryen bride.

 

Again, if dragon-mounting was seen as a trial of sorts then surely Nettles, Ulf, and Hugh could have used their successes to claim that this was prove now that they were the descendants of this or that Targaryen king, no? Even if they invented the whole story... Laenor fathering the Addam and Alyn was invented, too, after all.

 

If Jon Snow's heritage ever becomes a topic of negative discussion among Daenerys and her allies - and I really don't think that this will be the case considering that it is very unlikely that he'll put forth a claim to the Iron Throne - then Dany would of course gather information on the boy. And it shouldn't be difficult to uncover the official story.

Yet after Rhaenys death, Addam didn't show up until Jace put the word out he was looking for dragonriders. Addam wasn't accepted right after Rhaenys's death, but after he mounted a dragon. The Targaryens intermarried with Velaryons several times up to that point. The boys were passed off not as Corlys's sons, but Laenor's, and Laenor was a dragonrider with a Targaryen mother. 

 

Corlys pushed for Addam and Alyn's legitimization, clearly meaning he would rather they would inherit Driftmark than Rhaenyra's sons. 

 

No, because everyone knew who Ulf and Hugh's parents were, and unlike Jon, they would have no reason to go into hiding. If they were the bastards of the late king or Prince of Dragonstone they clearly would have been recognized as such given TPatQ mentioning that the mothers of Targaryen bastards were recognized and were treated well and looked after. Viserys I had children of his blood who were the trueborn heirs to the IT. 

 

Jon would press his claim if he thought it was the only way to get the dragons and Dany's army to the Wall. In the situation I imagine, they would be pressed for time given the Others are marching south past the Wall. A dragonriding test would settle things. 

 

 

The Daynes aren't a Valyrian house but that doesn't mean they cannot have Targaryen blood - especially not through a Martell match taking place after the marriage between Maron and Daenerys. You know, both younger sons and daughters of House Martell would have to be married off, and since House Dayne is one of the prestigious Dornish houses I expect many marriages between the Daynes and the Martells.

 

I don't see how Bloodraven and Bran could heal Jon's body. This is not a fairy-tale setting. There is no hint that greenseer can magically heal dying/dead people from the far end of the world. And I'm pretty sure Jon is already dead. That was the point of this assassination plot. Borroq will be the one telling others that his spirit is now permanently in Ghost - considering that it has been established that skinchangers always recognize each other - but there is little chance that he'll be able to teach him anything in that form. Bran, however, could reach out to Ghost-Jon in that form and maybe help him finding out how he could return to his body. That body may than be resurrected either by Melisandre with the kiss of fire or become an ice wight which Jon can then overtake (likely how Coldhands controls his body now - the man actually might be a wightified skinchanger who successfully retook his body after it had become a wight).

 

The idea that our poor hero is getting out of that whole assassination/being dead issue without paying a huge price is quite silly in such a series.

 

Now you yourself suggest skinchanging may be crucial in claiming a dragon? If that's the case why the hell is Targaryen blood then important? Or rather, why the hell would people believe he has Targaryen blood if he claims a dragon if they also know he is a skinchanger - even more so, if he actually said he controlled his dragon the same he controlled Ghost (i.e. that he could merge spirits and be the dragon when he wanted to)?

There is no record of a Dayne-Martell marriage after Maron's marriage to Daenerys, although it is possible. Even so, it would be a very convoluted claim. If Jon would have had been conceived at Harrenhal in 281 AC, then by the time Ned arrived at Starfall in 283 AC Jon would have been 1-2 years-old, older than Robb when everyone says Jon is younger than him by a few months. Jon also wouldn't be 14 at the time the series starts, but 15-16, there would be a discrepancy in age. The month of Jon's birth also likely wouldn't have matched his nameday.  

 

They are greenseers, and a sacrifice at the weirwood in the lake at Stannis's camp could pay for Jon's healing. Jon clearly isn't dead, GRRM hinted as much. GRRM also said he doesn't like full-scale resurrections, and Jon being dead to be brought back to life would be going against GRRM's own words. The point of the assassination plot wasn't to kill Jon there are political implications to it. GRRM won't resurrect Jon with the kiss of fire as that would be a cheap overuse of that trick, and Jon's character arc would stop there. He would cease to be a POV character like Cat was after her resurrection. It wouldn't be as an ice wight either for the same reasons. Jon likely isn't dead, but comatose. Borroq wouldn't teach Jon in Ghost, I never said that, but after Jon wakes up. Jon still needs to be healed, and sacrifice by ice from the weirwoods in Stannis's camp and one by fire by Melisandre (Gerrick Kingsblood, Mel is always looking for "kingsblood" for her spells) akin to Dany burning MMD to give life to her dragon eggs, could do the trick.  

 

So the situation at the Wall going to hell with members of the NW and wildlings slaughtered is a small price? Then by that standard the RW was no big deal for Cat. 

 

It would not be unreasonable for Jon to attempt to skinchange the animal to avoid a terrible death by dragonflame. Targaryen blood is important as it gets your foot through the door so to speak. Again, no one south of the Wall knows Jon is a skinchanger; name to me one person south of the Wall who does. By skinchanging into the dragon, Jon would in a way do what Aerion and Aerys II wanted but never could do: become a literal dragon.  

 

 

Not to mention that this whole dragon trial thing presupposes that there will be a spare dragon around at that time. Yes, I think that Jon Snow will become a dragonrider but hardly with a stupid trial but out of necessity in the fight against the others. If Jon is the third dragon head then whoever Dany and Tyrion choose in the meantime won't be the person they can trust completely - and if they are trying to fulfill prophecy they might actually give Aegon that dragon considering that everything would point toward him being the important guy. Especially in light of Daenerys' vision in the House of the Undying. The idea that Dany and Tyrion would consider Brown Ben or Victarion one of the dragon heads if they become dragonriders is very unlikely if you ask me. Perhaps the usual take the Second Dance is wrong and Aegon decides to double-cross Tyrion and Daenerys after they had come to Westeros and formed an alliance...

 

Jojen and Meera seemed to expect that Bran knew the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree. That in itself suggests that they might have thought Ned's children knew the story about Lyanna and Rhaegar - which they do not. Part of that story is also Jon Snow, and there wouldn't be much harm in telling that story to Ned's immediate family. Jon Snow wouldn't be in mortal danger then, that's just a silly idea. Robert would never turn against his old friend, and if he did he would like another incarnation of Aerys II who did the same thing - commanding the death of innocents - and his whole power base would crumble. Jon Arryn and Hoster Tully wouldn't fight at Robert's side against the North, perhaps he'd have the Lannisters on his side but that wouldn't be enough. And in the end Eddard could actually use Jon Snow as a Targaryen figurehead pretender to rally the Targaryen loyalists to his cause and put an end to the Targaryen-Baratheon dynasty. 

Dany has three dragons, and the third rider is a tossup. In every tale, when a hero has to prove his heritage or prove he is worthy of a crown, bride, etc, he has to perform a seemingly impossible task. For Arthur, Jon's parallel, he had to pull the sword from the stone, and for Aragorn, another reference, he had to become King of Gondor and Arnor to marry Arwen. It is three heads of the "dragon" not "dragons" so I doubt it refers to three people. I think Jon is the three-headed dragon. They won't form an alliance, because there will be a second Dance of Dragons. Dany and Tyrion will likely know the truth about Aegon before they land in Westeros. Dany and Tyrion would need someone to ride Rhaegal, and they could think Dany on Drogon and Tyrion on Viserion could keep BBP in cheque.

 

They expected him to know about the tourney given Ned had gone there, and his sister was the KoLT. It doesn't suggest they know R+L=J. I doubt Ned would tell young children such dangerous info. Jojen is likely smart enough to know Ned wouldn't avoid telling the Stark kids that. Telling them wold be risking the safety of his whole family given the chances that one or more of them let it slip. Ned would have been found to have committed treason against Robert by hiding and raising Rhaegar's last remaining son. Avoid commanding the death of innocents? Must I remind you this is the same Robert who put a hit on Dany, 14 year-old girl and when he looked at Rhaenys and Aegon's corpses, said "I see no babes, only dragonspawn." Robert's hatred of Targaryens is well-known, and this is the son of the Targaryen he hated most. Robert wouldn't feel comfortable with the idea of an almost adult son of Rhaegar within his realm, especially since there were and are still Targaryen supporters. Robert would be risking the survival of his dynasty by turning a blind eye to Jon, who could potentially undo everything. Jon Arryn is Robert's Hand, and would likely go to war alongside Robert should Ned refuse to cooperate in handing over Jon. Ned had seen enough war, and didn't want to go to war against his childhood friend and be forced to choose between his family and his friend. 

 

Why would this bastard need or want to prove he is a Targaryen?

Why is he given a secret royal heritage if it isn't going to play a part in the storyline? Jon would press it if he thought it was the only way he could get Dany and her dragons and army to deal with the Others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Why is he given a secret royal heritage if it isn't going to play a part in the storyline? Jon would press it if he thought it was the only way he could get Dany and her dragons and army to deal with the Others. 

Perhaps so he can fullfill the prophecy.. but in order to fullfill the prophecy, does he need to proof his lineage to all of Westeros? Imo, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joffrey, Tommen, and Myrcella have also been given a non-royal parentage yet at least Joffrey died never learning whose son he was. That might be different for Myrcella and Tommen, but I'd not count on that. This series is not acting every possible storyline out for every character - and it would have been quite fun for Joffrey to learn who he actually was and to be publicly humiliated because of that, no?

 

Fire Eater,

 

reread the whole stuff on Marilda's sons. She sends them to Dragonstone when Jace puts forth his call for dragonseeds. She wants her sons to make a try on dragons - but that doesn't mean that she ever wanted them to become legitimized or that Corlys, she, or Jace demanded of them to prove their heritage before they would do that. In fact, it is Corlys and Jace who convince Rhaenyra to legitimize them suggesting that at least Jace knew perfectly well whose son he actually was. He was as much involved in the whole legitimation thing as Corlys was.

 

We don't know who Hugh, Ulf, or Nettles' parents were. We only know that Ulf was a man-at-arms on Dragonstone, that Hugh was the bastard of a blacksmith, and that Nettles was a foul-mouthed brown girl. That's it. Who exactly Hugh's father was, who Ulf's parents were, and where the hell Nettles came from we don't know. The magic word there is 'unrecognized Targaryen bastard'. If Hugh's father and a Targaryen/Velaryon had an affair with his mother it is quite likely that he was proclaimed to be the father (not to mention that the mother could have been a Targaryen bastard, too). Ulf's father could have been a Targaryen, too, or both his parents could have been Targaryen bastards. We simply do not know. But considering that they are all people from Dragonstone/Driftmark it is actually quite likely considering that most of the population on those islands may have Valyrian ancestors.

 

If Corlys and Rhaenys had issue with Rhaenyra's sons they hid it perfectly well. It wasn't Rhaenyra's fault that their son Laenor was incapable or unwilling to father children on her. And I'm pretty sure Corlys and Rhaenys knew their own son perfectly well - it is no coincidence that he wasn't betrothed to anyone when Viserys I considering marrying him to Rhaenyra - suggesting that the heir of the richest man of Westeros wasn't exactly willing or eager to get a wife and refused all previous offers for his hand.

 

Who cares about the actual facts regarding Jon Snow's birth? Daenerys certainly wouldn't care if she doubted his heritage. All she needs to do is to stick to the official story - if she has an army and dragons (and Jon Snow does not) nobody will care what he says. Just as nobody cares what Stannis says. Nobody will care about that bog-devil either - I'm pretty sure most of the Realm doesn't even know the name of that so-called Lord of the crannogmen. The man didn't leave his swamps for nearly two decades. You don't have the reputation of being an honest guy if nobody knows who you even are. Aegon has Jon Connington, Jon Snow will have one or two nobodies (if Wylla shows up).

 

Not to mention that this entire scenario of Jon vs. Daenerys makes no sense whatsoever in this series. We have Tyrion who already befriended Jon Snow (as well as Aemon, Varys, Illyrio, and Aegon) and who will hook up with Daenerys. He should be able to prevent any tensions between these - especially in light of this whole Others thing. I expect Jon Snow to run and beg Daenerys for help, not her offering him help - to threaten the whole Realm the Others have to actually threaten the Realm in a perceivable manner and that should only work if they actually sent the few survivors of the wildlings, NW, Northmen running down south as far as they can. The Neck could then become a second frontier but all the lands north of it should be lost as soon as the Wall falls. But even the Neck cannot stand for long, I imagine, since the Others will freeze the water, kill all the lizard lions, and turn them against the crannogmen.

 

If Jon Snow did look like a Targaryen or was not raised as a bastard he could have a chance to put forth a claim. But if Daenerys puts Aegon down simply because she wants the throne for herself as Queen Regnant (i.e. she is not willing to resolve the crisis by marrying Aegon VI Targaryen to become his co-ruler and Queen Consort) - and not because of all that unproven Blackfyre talk - then there is no reason why the hell anyone in her team would then suddenly switch to Jon Snow's cause or care whatever the hell he says. A claim is only as good as you can make it sound - Stannis' is no good because nobody likes the man; if nobody likes you, nobody cares about your legal rights - and Jon Snow cannot have the men to actually challenge Daenerys' claim.

 

The irony of this whole thing may actually be that both will realize that Jon Snow should have been king - but never will be because of the things Ned Stark did. Had he sent Jon to Rhaella on Dragonstone, so that the boy could go into exile with Viserys and Daenerys he may have become king in the end. But not this way. It may even be that people only begin to buy into Jon's heritage because Dany and Tyrion accept him as their Targaryen relations. Perhaps this whole thing will remain a secret throughout the whole series simply because there is no time or need to publicly announce (nobody would care anyway if there are more wights than living people by then - winter is going to be cruel).

 

There is simply no need for Jon Snow's body to be still alive. That would be cheap. His spirit survives in Ghost which is why he isn't dead. Varamyr isn't dead, either, right? Merely living his second life. Jon could spend the remainder of the series in Ghost and would still be technically not dead in the ultimate sense. His spirit wouldn't be affected by any resurrection spell that brings back his body - be it the kiss of fire or the wight spell - since the spirit is safe and separate in Ghost. The problem will be to unite body and spirit again (or to find a new body for Jon which could also be a possibility - Varamyr tried it, and where he failed Jon could succeed) not the resurrection thing.

 

George is already using resurrection stuff as a cheap trick in his story. Yes, his resurrected people aren't the same, but they are still resurrected - it was he who introduced the whole concept in the first place, no one was asking for that. He has only said Cat won't be a POV again - I actually think that's a mistake since nothing could show her changed character better than actually depicting her thought process - not that this is a general rule. Besides, only Catelyn and Beric were actually dead - Jon Snow will have been alive all that time, being trapped in Ghost. In his case, only his body will have been that, and that does not count. His spirit won't be restored by the resurrection spell since it was in the wolf. Now, Jon will still be changed quite severely thereafter considering how much time he spends in Ghost since the animal slowly takes over the mind of the warg during his second life. I'd imagine George wants to explore that angle with Jon Snow 2.0 or else he wouldn't established that skinchanger rule in the first place (or we'll get a cheap excuse as to why Jon isn't affected by that). Or perhaps the wolfish behavior will subside in time after he is permanently back in his own body.

 

We don't even know yet that there will be a sacrifice in Stannis' camp, not to mention that all we do know is that greenseers themselves feed of the life energy/blood that is sacrificed to a heart tree, suggesting that the whole thing will fuel Bran's powers as a greenseer rather than come off as weird-distance spanning transfer of life energy. I mean, that's fan fiction expectancy, right? Jon isn't even close to a heart tree right now, and there is no reason to believe that people will take him beyond the Wall to the grove. Just as the weird notion is that Shireen is going to be sacrificed by Mel to revive Jon accidentally while she is actually trying to resurrect Stannis whose alleged corpse would be far away. The Shireen sacrifice thing will involve Stannis, if it happens this way in George's books, and thus it will only happen after father and daughter are at the same place again. Not to mention that Mel has no reason to actually try to resurrect Jon Snow - she could do so by accident if she gives him the kiss as part of the traditional R'hllorian burial rites, but there is no possible reason why the hell she would believe that Jon Snow is actually worth saving. Surely his death proves that he is not Azor Ahai. And an alliances/working relationship between Bran/Bloodraven and Mel is out of the question for the time being considering that she thinks they are agents of the Great Other.

Jon as a wight is actually even more likely considering that this whole 'corpses in the ice cells' plot has to lead anywhere (and it is no coincidence that they were brought up again in the last chapter) - if Jon Snow's corpse is going to be thrown in there, he may very well become infected with the Others' wight spell when they are activated, too. Ice is pretty good at conserving dead meat, the notion that it will also help to keep a comatose guy alive is ridiculous. The man would simply freeze to death in there even if he does not bleed out. You know, people who no longer eat and drink and have lost quite a lot of blood have serious issues keeping their body temperature constant. Not to mention that everybody at the Wall should have more pressing concerns in the very near future than trying bring Jon Snow back. Staying alive and in charge/regaining power will become more important for Jon's allies than bringing him back - especially since pretty much nobody should consider that possible or a great idea. I'd be surprised if we got five or so Ghost chapters before Jon finally returned into his body - if he continues to be a POV at all (which we don't know yet - Melisandre has been introduced as a POV to continue to tell the story at the Wall, that much is clear).

 

If there was only one hero in this story, and if there weren't three Targaryen siblings married to each other who took the three-headed dragon as their symbol, and if not all the explicit clues we have been given by the author since AGoT pointed towards the fact that the three dragon heads are going to be the three dragonriders, this three-headed dragon thing could make some sense. It isn't the case, though, and thus it doesn't. It makes no sense at all. No author in his right mind writing a story as complex as this comes up with such esoteric notions. Explaining this kind of twist to the casual reader not familiar with fringe theories on the Internet would then need a rather awful amount of reasoning to explain that. I mean, you realize that Daenerys is the one who gets lots and lots of prophecy and magic thrown into her face, and every tiny bit of that underlines and refers to her specialness while Jon Snow gets nothing of that throughout the first five books (which are supposed to be more than two thirds of the entire series). If that was all distraction or more or less for nothing the whole Dany story is going to turn out to be a waste of pages. This isn't a one woman show, but that girl is at the center of everything.

 

Robert stuff:

 

Ned says 'Robert would never harm me or mine'. That would include Jon Snow. According to Ned, Robert loved Lyanna even more than Ned loved Lyanna. That is a strong thing to say after everything that has transpired in the war - and we know that Ned loved Lyanna enough to break with the Stark statue tradition in the crypts. Jon Snow isn't only Rhaegar's son, he is Lyanna's, too. Go on, and claim that it is a certainty that Robert would kill the only thing that remains from Lyanna Stark, an innocent child, the nephew of his best friend. I don't buy that. Elia Martell was nothing to Robert, and he very much hated Rhaegar. But he did not command the murder of Rhaegar's children, he simply did not punish Tywin for the deed. Not to mention that he was right about the fact that they had to kill Aerys - all he did was not punishing Jaime for that, either. Which is actually the nice thing to do. Fifteen years later the man realizes that the exiled Targaryens may become a serious threat to his dynasty. That is another matter - Daenerys as Drogo's wife is a threat to the Baratheon dynasty, and despite the fact that he is not alive to see it, a Targaryen dynasty is the biggest threat his heirs and successor will have to face.

 

However, a Targaryen prince raised as Ned Stark's bastard who conveniently also did not look Targaryen would be no real threat to Robert. I'm pretty sure if Robert had been with Ned at the tower they would have come up with that plan to hide Lyanna's child together. Ned may have originally feared for the life of the child considering his fallout with Robert over the murder of Rhaegar's son back in KL, but that changed upon his return when Robert learned about Lyanna's death. Nobody thought Ned would conspire with Theon and Balon against Robert despite the fact that he had Balon's son as his ward - the chances that any Targaryen loyalists would rise for a Starkish looking boy who may actually be Ned Stark's bastard is ridiculous. How could they be really sure that this wasn't just talk? Not to mention that no Targaryen loyalist ever rose for Viserys III during Robert's reign. A potential pretender completely under the control of the Lord of Winterfell was no threat to anyone.

 

Your idea that Jon Arryn would choose between Robert and Ned is completely baseless, not to mention that Ned would still have the Tullys as his allies. The man would do everything in his power to prevent such a thing, not to mention that Ned himself agreed to force Jon to join the NW. If the truth ever came out that would have always been the way to settle things. Crushing Jon's head against a Wall wouldn't be the only way to settle things, you know.

 

And who knows - perhaps Robert actually suspects something about that. He asks about Jon's mother during the same conversation in which he eventually talks to Ned about Dany's marriage to Khal Drogo. A mere coincidence or something more? If there is a man who should raise more than one eyebrow at the thought of Ned Stark fathering a bastard it would be his best friend...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet truth is stranger than fiction.

 

In actual history, a man who had less claim to the throne than Jon does, King Henry VII ascended to the throne of England though he was twice descended from an allegedly bastard line, Catherine of Valois, dowagar Queen and Owen Tudor.

And through his mother, he claimed the throne by way of his mother who was descended from the bastard line of John of Gaunt and Katheryn Swynford.

 

He is sometimes referred to as "the Winter King." Now, fAegon, if he is a Blackyre fits that template more, being a cross between Henry and Perkin Warbeck, a pretender.

 

I think the faux history of Westeros is extemely important as it sets the narrative for the origins and precedents of the the conflict, but GRRM is taking his cue from actual history, but perhaps turning them about for the sake of unpredictability, though I have heard a rumor that the end result will be that the Targaryens as we know them WILL ultimately die out as the Plantaganets did, exactly three hundred years after the Targ/Plantaganets began their rule.

 

Nettles:

 

There is actually an alternative theory that Nettles is Leaf, a hybrid product whose mother was a CotF and a human father, (perhaps a Stark? With the exception of appearance, Arya and Nettles sound like they have a lot in common in terms of spirit).

Leaf was said to have wandered the world until heart ache brought her back to the north, (Prince Daemon)?

If this is true, she may have lured Sheep Stealer with a song, because his taking to her was gradual, not instantaneous as the other dragons and their riders seemed to be, or at least that is my perception.

 

Back to Jon:

 

It is potentially problematic about who will speak for Jon. This might be where Ashara Dayne might have more weight if the theory is true she is actually with Howland.

 

HOWEVER, I go back to the notion "that someone always tells," and that someone  very important knows the existance of Jon. Maybe even Jon Connington. If you listen to his very carefully worded and parced introduction of Aegon, he refers to him as the "first born" son of Rhaegar and the Princess Elia Martell.

Why the disclaimer for what should be the obvious? Unless there is a "second born" son by someone else.......

 

As far as Dany goes, there is no indication on the part of the Westerosi that Dany would be any more welcomed. That is the assumption.

They don't know her, and she was prepared to bring into the kingdom thousands of marauding "barbarians" and foreign unsullied as her soldiers.  While the Westerosi aren't "all that," they aren't the Dothraki, and I can't imagine they would be welcomed.

Her entourage would likely breed more fear and hostility, and then unity amongst the Westerosi than welcome. Jons Wildlings are no better, but at least they are on the same Continent, and at one time,(allegedly), perhaps offshoots of old northern nobility before they were left on the wrong side of the Wall.

 

I speculate that after Jon wakes up, it will be somewhat a magically impactful moment as Danys, with maybe Mel or Stannis paying the blood price. I think under the circumstances, his "death" releases him from his vows, but more than that, I think the Wall crumbles under not only the corruption, (much like the KG is breaking down), but certainly due to the Others.

Like Danys Dothraki some Wildlings and Brothers will run off, but I think most will "bend the knee," and Jon will be quite changed and a formiddable angry force.

This may be where JonCon breaks the news to Aegon that he has a baby brother who is now rampaging his way down to the Boltens, Lannisters and Freys, and that they should join their forces, taking the South, ready to take on the Others.

 

I actually don't agree that dragons, (unless its a "special" one), will be effective against the Others in full on Winter. If you take real reptiles, their very movement depends upont their body temperatures. If its cold, they literally can't survive. This is why you have alligators in Florida and not in New England.

If Aegon the Conquerors dragons were sidelined in the Riverlands due to a rainstorm, dragons are not going to have any traction with the Others bringing blizzards and ice with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alia,

 

can you perhaps PM me a bibliography of really in-depth works for the whole English royal history stuff relevant to this topic? I'm not really well-versed in all that but if I get the time I'll really try to read about it. Henry Tudor greatly profited from his marriage, though, since his wife had a much better claim, right? If she had taken a different husband her sons may have come back to hunt him, right?

 

Nettles' possible esoteric origin doesn't matter here. The point is that we don't know anything about the parents or ancestors of the other dragonseeds, nor do we know if their actual parentage was known to their contemporaries - it never comes up. But the historians of later days would have been reluctant to suggest that Two Betrayers were actually (close) kin to the Targaryens simply because how hated they were. But I imagine that Prince Daemon didn't suggest to give Casterly Rock and Storm's End to Hugh and Ulf for no reason - knowing that they were his close kin could have had something to do with that.

 

I say Nettles was Daemon's bastard daughter fathered on some sailor woman during his campaigns on the Stepstones. Thus we would have a nice father-daughter incest thing we are still lacking to this day in the Targaryen history (unless we count Aegon IV and Jeyne Lothston). Or possible a father-daughter bonding thing rather than a love story. We still lack the full picture there.

 

Until we have a reason to assume that Nettles was Leaf I don't go with that. It causes massive problems: Why didn't she take Daemon with her beyond the Wall? Why didn't she come to his rescue on her dragon (she would have known where he went, and she could have laid low near Harrenhal until she saw Vhagar approaching)? What the hell was she doing in the Mountains of the Moon? Why the hell didn't she take Sheepstealer with her beyond the Wall?

 

I expect that the scale of this story will grow far bigger than people usually imagine. It doesn't matter whether Daenerys will be welcomed in Westeros or not. She'll come with a huge army of Dothraki, Ghiscari, Volantenes, sellswords, Ironborn, etc. and they will conquer Westeros regardless whether everybody there or only some factions will oppose her. If there is a Second Dance I expect the whole South to be more or less united against her, meaning Targaryen loyalists as well as neutral guys (Vale) as well as whoever remains of the Lannisters and Tyrells (Cersei excluded). Not only the dragons but the people Daenerys will lead to Westeros to fight in the War for the Dawn at the side of whoever remains in Westeros. The idea that the people in Westeros can deal with the Others on their own is silly if the Others are truly supposed to be a big threat. Especially in light of the fact that the continuing warfare and the coming grey plague in the South will weaken the Realm further.

 

 

Connington may know stuff about Jon Snow, but I don't think he'll ever talk about that. I don't expect him to live very long. He cannot hide the greyscale forever, and as soon as his associates find out what happened to him (i.e. as soon as new greyscale cases become known) Aegon will have him assassinated quietly to prevent that his good name is smeared by this moron. The whole campaign will fail should Aegon VI become publicly known as 'the Grey King'...

Not to mention that an alliance with Jon Snow is out of the question while that guy is still allied with Stannis Baratheon (which is most likely not going to change in the near future since Jon is dead and Stannis is not - at least in the books).

 

Realistically speaking, if there is to be a Second Dance it has to be in the South and any devastating Wall-breaching attacks of the Others have to be postponed until that is done - if not, then there is simply no reason to believe that there would be an all-out civil war unless it is between Aegon/Dany and Euron (who wouldn't give a shit about Others or wights). North and South are already pretty separate right now, and if the Others strike swiftly when they strike the South might only learn about what has happened when the some survivors fleeing the North have crossed the Neck. If the Others blow the Horn of Joramun there won't be any time to send a raven to anyone. It will cause a massive earthquake and everyone hanging out at the Wall will be smashed by an avalanche of breaking ice. No ideal situation to write a message to warn somebody.

 

I expect Dany's war with Aegon becoming a partial religious war about the question who is destined to save mankind (that could explain why it may make sense to fight a war even if the parties involved already know and believe in the Others threat by then). The Faith will champion Aegon whereas Marwyn and the Essosi R'hllorians will champion Daenerys.

 

In the books, the Others are still far away from attacking anyone. They have yet to gather new troops at Hardhome, and the whole Jon Snow assassination thing seems more like a filler than an important story point to me. It's aftermath - as well as the war in the North - could make some fine chapters in TWoW but it is certainly not going to become all that important in regards to the plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alia,
 
can you perhaps PM me a bibliography of really in-depth works for the whole English royal history stuff relevant to this topic? I'm not really well-versed in all that but if I get the time I'll really try to read about it. Henry Tudor greatly profited from his marriage, though, since his wife had a much better claim, right? If she had taken a different husband her sons may have come back to hunt him, right?
 
Nettles' possible esoteric origin doesn't matter here. The point is that we don't know anything about the parents or ancestors of the other dragonseeds, nor do we know if their actual parentage was known to their contemporaries - it never comes up. But the historians of later days would have been reluctant to suggest that Two Betrayers were actually (close) kin to the Targaryens simply because how hated they were. But I imagine that Prince Daemon didn't suggest to give Casterly Rock and Storm's End to Hugh and Ulf for no reason - knowing that they were his close kin could have had something to do with that.
 
I say Nettles was Daemon's bastard daughter fathered on some sailor woman during his campaigns on the Stepstones. Thus we would have a nice father-daughter incest thing we are still lacking to this day in the Targaryen history (unless we count Aegon IV and Jeyne Lothston). Or possible a father-daughter bonding thing rather than a love story. We still lack the full picture there.
 
Until we have a reason to assume that Nettles was Leaf I don't go with that. It causes massive problems: Why didn't she take Daemon with her beyond the Wall? Why didn't she come to his rescue on her dragon (she would have known where he went, and she could have laid low near Harrenhal until she saw Vhagar approaching)? What the hell was she doing in the Mountains of the Moon? Why the hell didn't she take Sheepstealer with her beyond the Wall?
 
I expect that the scale of this story will grow far bigger than people usually imagine. It doesn't matter whether Daenerys will be welcomed in Westeros or not. She'll come with a huge army of Dothraki, Ghiscari, Volantenes, sellswords, Ironborn, etc. and they will conquer Westeros regardless whether everybody there or only some factions will oppose her. If there is a Second Dance I expect the whole South to be more or less united against her, meaning Targaryen loyalists as well as neutral guys (Vale) as well as whoever remains of the Lannisters and Tyrells (Cersei excluded). Not only the dragons but the people Daenerys will lead to Westeros to fight in the War for the Dawn at the side of whoever remains in Westeros. The idea that the people in Westeros can deal with the Others on their own is silly if the Others are truly supposed to be a big threat. Especially in light of the fact that the continuing warfare and the coming grey plague in the South will weaken the Realm further.
 
 
Connington may know stuff about Jon Snow, but I don't think he'll ever talk about that. I don't expect him to live very long. He cannot hide the greyscale forever, and as soon as his associates find out what happened to him (i.e. as soon as new greyscale cases become known) Aegon will have him assassinated quietly to prevent that his good name is smeared by this moron. The whole campaign will fail should Aegon VI become publicly known as 'the Grey King'...
Not to mention that an alliance with Jon Snow is out of the question while that guy is still allied with Stannis Baratheon (which is most likely not going to change in the near future since Jon is dead and Stannis is not - at least in the books).
 
Realistically speaking, if there is to be a Second Dance it has to be in the South and any devastating Wall-breaching attacks of the Others have to be postponed until that is done - if not, then there is simply no reason to believe that there would be an all-out civil war unless it is between Aegon/Dany and Euron (who wouldn't give a shit about Others or wights). North and South are already pretty separate right now, and if the Others strike swiftly when they strike the South might only learn about what has happened when the some survivors fleeing the North have crossed the Neck. If the Others blow the Horn of Joramun there won't be any time to send a raven to anyone. It will cause a massive earthquake and everyone hanging out at the Wall will be smashed by an avalanche of breaking ice. No ideal situation to write a message to warn somebody.
 
I expect Dany's war with Aegon becoming a partial religious war about the question who is destined to save mankind (that could explain why it may make sense to fight a war even if the parties involved already know and believe in the Others threat by then). The Faith will champion Aegon whereas Marwyn and the Essosi R'hllorians will champion Daenerys.
 
In the books, the Others are still far away from attacking anyone. They have yet to gather new troops at Hardhome, and the whole Jon Snow assassination thing seems more like a filler than an important story point to me. It's aftermath - as well as the war in the North - could make some fine chapters in TWoW but it is certainly not going to become all that important in regards to the plot.


I'll be out most of the day, but when I get in, I'll PM you some really great books on topic.
If you have to commute at all, audible books are great! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOWEVER, I go back to the notion "that someone always tells," and that someone  very important knows the existance of Jon. Maybe even Jon Connington. If you listen to his very carefully worded and parced introduction of Aegon, he refers to him as the "first born" son of Rhaegar and the Princess Elia Martell.
Why the disclaimer for what should be the obvious? Unless there is a "second born" son by someone else.......


Or maybe it's the fact that Aegon wasn't Rhaegar's firstborn child so he's qualifying that Aegon is the first male child which is all that matters in terms of succession... because there's a girl called Rhaenys who was Rhaegar's firstborn child.

From Jaime's White Book entry:

Ser Jaime of House Lannister. Firstborn son of Lord Tywin and Lady Joanna of Casterly Rock.


We know that Jaime is not Tywin's firstborn child. Cersei is. Firstborn son just means that they're the firstborn son, even if they're not the firstborn child.

And firstborn son can be used to describe someone who has no brothers. From Barristan's White Book entry:

Ser Barristan of House Selmy. Firstborn son of Ser Lyonel Selmy of Harvest Hall.


There's no mention of Barristan having any brothers, but it seems unlikely given this speech by Barristan:

I gave up all claim to my ancestral keep. The girl I was to wed married my cousin in my place


That's from AGOT where we also get this:

Eddard Stark had married her in Brandon's place, as custom decreed


Custom decreed (at least at the time of when George wrote AGOT as he later changed it that Ned married Cat to win Hoster's support in the Rebellion and not because of custom) that the next male marries your betrothed if you cannot. When Barristan joined the Kingsguard and gave up his marriage, his cousin married her in his stead. So his cousin was his next male kin which means that Barristan has no brothers, yet he's still described as Lyonel Selmy's firstborn son.

There's absolutely nothing special about Jon calling Aegon Rhaegar's firstborn son. He is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note:  Assume R+L is true, equals Jon, and that Lyanna is a willing partner.

 

What I wonder is why Lyanna acted as she did?  We get Rhaegar's prophecy, his ill, now barren wife, his need for another child and so on ...blah, blah, blah....it's all about Rhaegar.  What I need is a reason for Lyanna Stark to do what she did, to run away from her family and friends to be with Rhaegar.  I realize that first I need to shed modern sensibilities regarding Lyanna's behavior.  But when I turn to the book, we are given to understand Lyanna as smart, self-aware, strong, and a good and loyal friend.  It ends up that I still need a reason, even without modern bias.

 

Why, other than being besotted with Rhaegar's total emo self, would she do this?  I have a theory.  I believe that Lyanna also knew of a prophecy and she was bent on fulfilling it. I believe that this prophecy is matrilineal, handed down through the ages, to the Stark women and other Wilding women of old. My theory holds that Val is in the book for a reason and that reason is because she knows the prophecy.  The problem with this theory is that it needs proof.  

I started with re-reading all of old Nan's stories, as somebody on here compiled them (ty, unknown person).  After reading all of them, I came away with the impression that the stories were all about BOYZ and that there was no evidence of a story that would appeal to a teenage girl.  Sansa does have her head turned about tales of courts, dancing, and knights, but no prophecies that I could find (could have missed them, sure).

 

Next, I re-read the Jon and Sam POVs for the last three books where and when Val appeared.  Clearly Val is a princess because Martin must tell us a zillion times that she is NOT a princess :-)  But other than a few provocative lines, I found nothing.  We have Val telling Jon

-I know the forest better than all your black cloaked rangers. The forest holds no ghosts for me. (ADwD)

-Let me help.  You have, you brought me Tormund.  I can do more.  (why on earth doesn't he ask for her meaning?  You know nothing, Jon Snow!)

-She is not my queen.  If truth be told, the day of her departure cannot come come too fast for me. And if the gods are good, she will take Mel with her. (Jon speaking, ADwD, funny that he seems to equate her to Mel)

 

So, to the point of this post.  I think giving Lyanna agency would be a terrific balance to the Marsha, Marsha, Marsha Rhaegar, Rhaegar, Rhaeger story and the idea of a matrilineal prophecy relating to the female Starks would be a twist, a nice one.  There has to be some reason for Val to be included in the books and there is always a hint, or the whiff of a hint, that this woman is more powerful than Jon guesses.  Her appearance, her eye color, her demeanor - something is up.  

 

Some folks here have thousands of posts.  I am asking for direction since I cannot believe this is a novel thought.  Is there some thread, some earlier discussion where either Lyanna's reasons, or Val's purpose are discussed. Can I be pointed in some new direction...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe it's the fact that Aegon wasn't Rhaegar's firstborn child so he's qualifying that Aegon is the first male child which is all that matters in terms of succession... because there's a girl called Rhaenys who was Rhaegar's firstborn child.

From Jaime's White Book entry:


We know that Jaime is not Tywin's firstborn child. Cersei is. Firstborn son just means that they're the firstborn son, even if they're not the firstborn child.

And firstborn son can be used to describe someone who has no brothers. From Barristan's White Book entry:


There's no mention of Barristan having any brothers, but it seems unlikely given this speech by Barristan:


That's from AGOT where we also get this:


Custom decreed (at least at the time of when George wrote AGOT as he later changed it that Ned married Cat to win Hoster's support in the Rebellion and not because of custom) that the next male marries your betrothed if you cannot. When Barristan joined the Kingsguard and gave up his marriage, his cousin married her in his stead. So his cousin was his next male kin which means that Barristan has no brothers, yet he's still described as Lyonel Selmy's firstborn son.

There's absolutely nothing special about Jon calling Aegon Rhaegar's firstborn son. He is.

Um, since Jaime has another brother, Tyrion, I think the phrasing is very telling because it's in the context of who the heir is.
Neither Cersei nor Rhaenys would be heirs in which case, JonCon would just say:"I give you Prince Aegon, son of Prince Rhaegar and the Princess Elia Martell," as opposed to "I give you Prince Aegon, firstborn son of Prince Rhaegar and the Princess Elia Martell."
In fact, comparing this to the others who have other male siblings is very compelling.
As for Lyonel Selmy, He very well could have fathered other SONS, just not legitimately.
Certainly such formal language of the times indicates birth order of heirs, and to a blood-line obsessed society where land was wealth, such language would be deliberate.

Share this post


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

×