Jump to content

Archived

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

HelenaExMachina

R+L=J v.151

Recommended Posts

Some more Heretic essays on Jon's parentage:
 
http://thelasthearth.freeforums.net/thread/107/eddard-wylla-jonby  markg171
 
The essay rests on only six points - Ned doesn't lie, Jon looks like Ned and has dark complexion, my blood = my son, the weirwood vision "as brothers" still applies to half-brothers, Ned doesn't talk about Jon's mother because his family don't ask at a later point.
 
The claim that Ned is too honourable to lie/is a poor liar, completely ignores the fact that Ned believes that some lies are not without honour (Arya lying to protect Nymeria) and that Ned lied of his own volition to protect Cat, claiming that she abducted Tyrion at his order, and was blackmailed to lie about his treason to protect Sansa. In both cases, he lies to protect a loved person and takes the fallout of his lie; in the first case, he lies even to his friend and king. Most importantly, how has Ned been living lies under this scenario?
 
Not going about the whole "Jon looks like Ned not Lyanna" here again but Jon is not dark-skinned. He is darker in comparison with Robb, who has fair complexion (as people with blue eyes and reddish hair tend to), but no character ever comments on him being dark. If he had Dornish tone of skin, Tyrion would hardly fail to mention that when saying that Jon has more of the North in him than his brothers. 
 
"My blood" argument is a failure of logic. A implies B doesn't mean that B implies A. My son is my certainly my blood, but my blood is not necessarily my son, it applies to any other relative, as markg perhaps missed in a quote he posted elsewhere:
 
Brother? Arya did not understand. But youre from Dorne. How could you and Jon be blood
Milk brothers. Not blood. My lady mother had no milk when I was little, so Wylla had to nurse me. 
 
The part about half-brothers growing up as brothers might have some  merit, though I'd argue that were that an instance, the use is a bit redundant but the last point is totally off as it ignores Jon's trauma of not knowing his mother's name (as well as Cat's, but here we could argue that having asked once with such a disastrous outcome, she never dared another try). 
 
All in all, the same arguments as before, and seeing them together instead in separate posts makes them even less convincing.
 
 
 
http://thelasthearth.freeforums.net/thread/108/eddard-ashara-jonby  wolfmaid7
 
This is not really an essay but a selection of quotes that, as wolfmaid claims, link Ned to Ashara every single time her name turns up.
 
However, the quotes do not explain why e.g. Cat's or Cersei's opinion that Ned and Ashara were an item should be more valid than Harwin's that it was not so, or than Edric Dayne's who claims that Ned loved Ashara but fathered Jon on Wylla. Or why Barristan doesn't name Ned as the man who dishonoured Ashara, or how come that Ned dishonoured himself by getting Ashara pregnant without marrying her, and so on.


I did not see you over there debating this essay. Why not post your responses there? Don't be scared to look at the text for ALL the possibilities GRRM gave for Jon's parents. After all, Rhaegar as Jon's father is just one fan theory/conjecture/assumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snip

 

While I agree that this would be a risky ploy, there's a pretty clear logic to it. Create friction between the southron ambitions alliance (SAA) and House Targaryen; i.e., not just Rhaegar. Specifically, to make a mess which his father would have to deal with. In dealing with this situation, Aerys would likely see the extent of the opposing alliance, and he might realize he has need of his son. And if someone needs you, you have leverage over them. Or, rather than an issue of leverage, Rhaegar's goal may have been to create a scenario in which he and his father had common cause. Either way, I assume the goal would have been to ensure Rhaegar's place in the succession.

 

Btw, if Aerys just hands over Rhaegar, it weakens House Targaryen in both perception and reality. Concerning the latter, the Targs were already low on numbers, and offing Rhaegar just exacerbates that problem. Especially if his children were disinherited. Regarding the former, what does it say about the royal family if some lords can march into your castle and makes demands of the king?

 

A slight variation on this idea is that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna in order to out the SAA. By taking Lyanna, Rhaegar forced the SAA to show itself. In turn forcing his father to deal with the issue -- an alliance against House Targaryen -- Rhaegar could probably count on becoming his father's ally once again. After all, he was the one who forced the plotters to declare themselves. Again, not only does this likely secure Rhaegar's position as crown prince, but it wipes away an issue that could have potentially crippled Rhaegar's reign as king.

 

Imagine you're the crown prince and you see that half of the kingdom is forming its own alliance under your father's nose. Now try to imagine what your reign as king will be like. You would only have nominal power over the North, riverlands, stormlands, and Vale. King Rhaegar I, the Toothless Dragon. The alternative would probably be civil war. And as we saw, it's no sure bet that the loyalists would win.

 

Whether or not any of this is even a part of what Rhaegar was thinking when he took Lyanna, it turns out Aerys did side with his son over the Starks et al. So, while it looks like a gamble to us, maybe Rhaegar knew something we didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole question is just silly. We know that Rhaegar didn't love Elia, and the only other reasonable candidate for a woman he may have loved is Lyanna. You don't need the App to come to this remarkable conclusion, you can just read the books and think.

 

SFDanny,

 

while it may be possible that the guys at the tower had some news - that would greatly depend on their access to news spread via raven as well as how time passed between the Sack and Ned's arrival (and we actually have no real data on that) - it is entirely likely that Lyanna also feared for the well-being of her child simply because she knew she was dying, and that the father of the boy was dead. Any mother would fear for her child under such circumstances, not only a mother whose family was greatly involved in war against the family of her husband. And imagine for a moment Aerys had won the war but Rhaegar was still killed at the Trident - a son of Rhaegar's by Lyanna may have been as much in danger under King Aerys II as he would have been under Robert I.

 

We don't really have to assume Lyanna had the whole picture of events at KL nor do we have to assume that she knew of Robert's (alleged) Targaryen hatred for her to be concerned for her child's well-being and future. Perhaps she was even afraid what the Kingsguard would do with the child after she died. If we assume that Lyanna wanted for her son to live a long and happy life it is quite likely she had no intention of him becoming a pawn in a game for the throne. But then, considering what some people believe Serra (or only Illyrio) want for Aegon, it is quite likely that Lyanna may actually have wanted that her son become king.

 

Because Barry said he was "fond" of Elia? Barristan's conclusion is that of an outsider and during 5 books he has yet to actually disclose any information he's witnessed first hand regarding the intimacies of Rhaegar.So we can't come to this conclusion because we have nothing.If anything of all the things we do hear of Rhaegar it would lead one to believe the dude was 'asexual'

 

Naturally. People aren't arguing about the context, which is probably why it's not being addressed, for the most part. It's not the issue.

 

All of the people listed outlived Rhaegar. Dany and Jon were yet to be born, the former yet to be conceived. Maybe I'm mistaken, and "We are all just waiting for the seventh" is a reference to the Stranger and not Jon. Or maybe those two aren't mutually exclusive. I don't believe that Rhaegar's rubies are just rubies though. Do you? If so, why are they repeatedly brought up? Don't you think it's a bit coincidental that, in real life, the Black Prince's Ruby is one of the Crown Jewels of England? Not only that, but it's front and center on the English Crown.

 

It seems like the historians aren't completely sure why Edward of Woodstock is called the Black Prince, but one of the theories is that it's because he had a suit of black armor. So, black armor and a famous ruby.

 

"the Targaryen prince armored all in black. On his breastplate was the three-headed dragon of his House, wrought all in rubies that flashed like fire in the sunlight.” - AGoT, Eddard I

 

“The crown prince wore the armor he would die in: gleaming black plate with the three-headed dragon of his House wrought in rubies on the breast.” - AGoT, Eddard XV

 

“The prince had donned his night-black armor, with the three-headed dragon picked out in rubies on his breastplate.” - AFfC, Jaime I

 

 

Exactly.

 

 

What's up MarkG with a proxy IP?

 

This is what I think. Or at least, no one else in universe is aware that he died with that name on his lips. Shouldn't he have had his helmet on in the first place? Whether it was vision or memory, I don't think it makes a difference. It's all information.

 

If you're not going to answer my question, why should I answer yours?

 

 

Yeah right.

I'm sorry i missed this post or i don't think i answered to everything in it busy busy busy.On the matter of Rhaegar's Rubies. You get no disagreement from me concerning the importance of the Rubies or Rubies in general per this story.The whole " we are all waiting for the seventh" does have a sense of destiny about it.What we differ in is what the Rubies signify you think it's Targs from the line of Aerys and Rhegella no? Rhaegar's rubies never signified lost and found Targs to me.Those rubies that were found meant nothing. The one that's missing is and that's not a person atleast not to me.

 

As to your "yeah right" if you believe it or not it doesn't matter,i'm just stating a fact.I don't care,its just another puzzle to figure out.The free space in my mind is more occupied with...how badass the new Deadpool movie is going to be and if i'll enjoy the new Fantastic 4 :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now where is it stated in this prophecy that Rhaegar is supposed to save the world?

And how is he achieving this?

Here is what we pretty much know from the series. Rhaegar was basically bookish and uninterested in learning battle skills. Then he read something in a book and went and decided that he needed to be a warrior and learned battle techniques. We know that Rhaegar once thought he himself was TPTWP (probably why he thought he needed to become a warrior). Then he changed his mind and decided that his son, Aegon, is TPTWP. He also stated that the dragon has three heads -- there must be one more (Aegon and Rhaenys were already born at that point).

 

We know Rhaegar was in contact with Aemon and discussed the issue of TPTWP. We know that Aemon believes that Dany might be TPTWP and thinks that if he, himself, were younger he might be one of the heads of the dragon and could go and help her.

 

I am not someone who is merely going to say, "Well, we don't know for sure that Rhaegar thought that the three heads of the dragon were needed to save the world." What else could it all be about? To me, these clues are absolutely clear that Rhaegar believed that a prophecized savior from the Targ line (descendant of the Aerys/Rhaella line as the woods witch stated) would team up with two other Targs (the other two heads) who needed to be prepared for some apocalyptic battle. 

 

What is he doing to save the world? I believe he is trying to be sure that his children are the three heads of the dragon, train them to be warriors and leaders and war generals, and then wait for the moment to come when their prophecized duty comes into play. Of course, Rhaegar was wrong about Aegon and Rhaenys being heads of the dragon and he died before ever getting this plan under way. But I think the evidence is incredibly strong that this is what Rhaegar believed and this is what Rhaegar was trying to accomplish.

 

At a minimum, even if someone does not find this evidence as compelling as I do, any discussion of why Rhaegar went off with Lyanna and had a child with her needs to consider this scenario as a distinct possibility regarding what Rhaegar was trying to do. Simply ignoring this possibility is ignoring strong evidence right in the text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should people on this site join another site to discuss articles that people have come to these RLJ threads to hype.

 

This. Not to mention, it's the internet. There's no rule saying I can't read something one place and discuss it at another. Aside from the occasional tweet, all of my online ASoIaF-related discussions happen here.

 

And, this really shouldn't need to be said, but given some of the comments made about some of us over at TLH's predecessor, and the contentious relationship some of us have with TLHers, it shouldn't come as any surprise if we don't post there. Another thing, given that the posters on SH spent so much time discussing this site and its members -- not sure if that's been the case at TLH -- I don't understand why there is a problem with us discussing things said on TLH.

 

I'm sorry i missed this post or i don't think i answered to everything in it busy busy busy.On the matter of Rhaegar's Rubies. You get no disagreement from me concerning the importance of the Rubies or Rubies in general per this story.The whole " we are all waiting for the seventh" does have a sense of destiny about it.What we differ in is what the Rubies signify you think it's Targs from the line of Aerys and Rhegella no? Rhaegar's rubies never signified lost and found Targs to me.Those rubies that were found meant nothing. The one that's missing is and that's not a person atleast not to me.

 

That was the original idea, which tied in with the PtwP. That list excluded Aerys and Rhaella, and included Rhaegar and Rhaego. The latter was always a contentious inclusion, since he was stillborn. There were good arguments made to support his inclusion though; e.g., being stillborn meant he was just another deceased Targaryen. But when TWoIaF came out we saw that Aerys and Rhaella had a number of stillbirths, which more or less proved the inclusion of Rhaego to be untenable.

 

IIRC, a short time prior to the release of the World book Consigliere suggested an alternative list, with Aerys and Rhaella in place of Rhaegar and Rhaego. This idea made a good deal of sense too, since the idea is that the rubies represent Rhaegar's family. And including him in a list of his own family is kind of awkward, if you think about it. Though no one had brought it up before then.

 

As to your "yeah right" if you believe it or not it doesn't matter,i'm just stating a fact.I don't care,its just another puzzle to figure out.The free space in my mind is more occupied with...how badass the new Deadpool movie is going to be and if i'll enjoy the new Fantastic 4 :dunno:

 

Of course I cannot accurately measure how you feel or anything but, at least from what I've seen, you sure don't act like you don't care. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure I've seen you say something like, "RLJ is a big red herring that needs to die." Sound familiar?

 

And frankly, when you go around accusing others of being emotionally invested, it looks like you're the one who is. Insulting people over the issue, and repeatedly personalizing disagreements, hardly bespeaks of emotional detachment.

 

The Deadpool trailers were awesome. Can't wait. Otoh, Fantastic 4 seems to be getting poor to average reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I agree that this would be a risky ploy, there's a pretty clear logic to it. Create friction between the southron ambitions alliance (SAA) and House Targaryen; i.e., not just Rhaegar. Specifically, to make a mess which his father would have to deal with. In dealing with this situation, Aerys would likely see the extent of the opposing alliance, and he might realize he has need of his son. And if someone needs you, you have leverage over them. Or, rather than an issue of leverage, Rhaegar's goal may have been to create a scenario in which he and his father had common cause. Either way, I assume the goal would have been to ensure Rhaegar's place in the succession.

 

Btw, if Aerys just hands over Rhaegar, it weakens House Targaryen in both perception and reality. Concerning the latter, the Targs were already low on numbers, and offing Rhaegar just exacerbates that problem. Especially if his children were disinherited. Regarding the former, what does it say about the royal family if some lords can march into your castle and makes demands of the king?

 

A slight variation on this idea is that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna in order to out the SAA. By taking Lyanna, Rhaegar forced the SAA to show itself. In turn forcing his father to deal with the issue -- an alliance against House Targaryen -- Rhaegar could probably count on becoming his father's ally once again. After all, he was the one who forced the plotters to declare themselves. Again, not only does this likely secure Rhaegar's position as crown prince, but it wipes away an issue that could have potentially crippled Rhaegar's reign as king.

 

Imagine you're the crown prince and you see that half of the kingdom is forming its own alliance under your father's nose. Now try to imagine what your reign as king will be like. You would only have nominal power over the North, riverlands, stormlands, and Vale. King Rhaegar I, the Toothless Dragon. The alternative would probably be civil war. And as we saw, it's no sure bet that the loyalists would win.

 

Whether or not any of this is even a part of what Rhaegar was thinking when he took Lyanna, it turns out Aerys did side with his son over the Starks et al. So, while it looks like a gamble to us, maybe Rhaegar knew something we didn't.

This would have to be in play, I think. 

 

I agree that Rhaegar wants to avoid civil war. But if the hints in the World Book are accurate, seems like Rhaegar was trying to work with the great houses. His strategy wasn't "aggravate" but "work with people." Seems a bit idealistic, but Rhaegar shows at least a few signs of being an idealistic guy.

 

Taking Lyanna seems guaranteed to foment anger. And if the point was to get people to show themselves, he never came back with her. Never made demands from the North or his father (far as we know) re: keeping her. 

 

So, seems like either this wasn't his strategy, or he did know something we don't know, or he was excessively foolish. Giving the crown to Lyanna was very foolish--so we have some precedent. But this seems to go well beyond that.

 

No one says he didn't take her. No hint of that in text. So seem safe assuming it for now. Why? Am still scratching my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember -- the dragon must have three heads. I think that statement from Rhaegar is a huge clue on why he ran off with Lyanna, why he has a child with her and likely why they got married. Rhaegar thought he needed to save the world -- having a third child was necessary to save the world -- the dragon must have three heads. It is irrelevant whether this view makes sense (we know he was wrong in many aspects of his understanding of who would be the three heads), but his actions are easier to understand once we keep in mind that he apparently thought that his three children would be the prophecized three heads of the dragon and Elia could not have a third child.

Agree that the visions provide a possible motive.

 

But there are at least a few problems with taking the visions as reality. They're visions, for one (apologies for obviousness). Dany sees them under the influence of something. The Undying had their own motives.

 

And then the vision itself--Rhaegar turns as if to look at Dany--why? Is this a realistic part or something else? And he never says he needs a third child. Can be implied from the text, but he also looks at Dany. The idea that one of R's siblings might do (in his mind) has to be on the table.

 

Then we don't know why "three heads." Is this part of the prophecy? Assume so, but not spelled out.

 

Finally, he seems happy in the vision with Elia. For all the talk of not loving, Dany sees it as a family (maybe it's the hallucinogens, but still). So, they decided together to get another kid? He decided on his own? Somehow managed to talk Lyanna into this? Decided to take her and damn the consequences? All of that seems out of line with what we've learned about Rhaegar and Lyanna. 

 

There's a BIG gap in the text re: how "taken" and why. And we only have glimpses at their personalities. So, is there space for Rhaegar to do something really crazy? Sure. But also seems like current info undermines the possibilities a bit. We do know they disappeared. No one in text denies that. How and why? Still makes me throw my hands up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would have to be in play, I think. 

 

I agree that Rhaegar wants to avoid civil war. But if the hints in the World Book are accurate, seems like Rhaegar was trying to work with the great houses. His strategy wasn't "aggravate" but "work with people." Seems a bit idealistic, but Rhaegar shows at least a few signs of being an idealistic guy.

 

Taking Lyanna seems guaranteed to foment anger. And if the point was to get people to show themselves, he never came back with her. Never made demands from the North or his father (far as we know) re: keeping her. 

 

So, seems like either this wasn't his strategy, or he did know something we don't know, or he was excessively foolish. Giving the crown to Lyanna was very foolish--so we have some precedent. But this seems to go well beyond that.

 

No one says he didn't take her. No hint of that in text. So seem safe assuming it for now. Why? Am still scratching my head.

 

Maybe my point isn't clear, because I don't see a contradiction between the bold and what I've said. The basic idea is that Rhaegar wanted to create a situation where his father needed his help, and pitting him against the angry SAA was that situation. And that kidnapping Lyanna was an ideal way to anger the SAA. Further, he would have been betting that his father would not be able to successfully deal with that situation.

 

In none of my scenarios would Rhaegar have been expected to show up in KL in the way you suggest. The whole point would be to make his father come to him first. That way he would be in a better position to make certain 'requests' in return for his service, than if he just showed up and offered it. Not to mention, if he just showed up his father might arrest him. However, if he waited until his father realized that he needed his help, he wouldn't have to worry about being arrested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe my point isn't clear, because I don't see a contradiction between the bold and what I've said. The basic idea is that Rhaegar wanted to create a situation where his father needed his help, and pitting him against the angry SAA was that situation. And that kidnapping Lyanna was an ideal way to anger the SAA. Further, he would have been betting that his father would not be able to successfully deal with that situation.

 

In none of my scenarios would Rhaegar have been expected to show up in KL in the way you suggest. The whole point would be to make his father come to him first. That way he would be in a better position to make certain 'requests' in return for his service, than if he just showed up and offered it. Not to mention, if he just showed up his father might arrest him. However, if he waited until his father realized that he needed his help, he wouldn't have to worry about being arrested.

Yes--I did misunderstand you a bit--apologies.

 

But I still think there's a problem with the strategy based on the little we know of what Rhaegar's strategy was re: Harrenhal. Work with people. Not foment anger. Purposely pitting his unstable father against more people--seems like a recipe for disaster. Aerys is already paranoid--and paranoid about Rhaegar. Am struggling to see how Rhaegar would think fueling the paranoia would help.

 

If Rhaegar were really desperate, I guess anything is possible. And there are huge gaps in the narrative as well as the psychological profiles of these people. But, based on what we "know" of Rhaegar's "plans," actively stirring things up doesn't seem like his style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should people on this site join another site to discuss articles that people have come to these RLJ threads to hype.


Nobody needs to join anything, don't get yer panties in a twist; but MarkG can't really sign in over here to defend his essay and discuss it with anyone. I presume his essay is interesting enough to be discussed since it was posted here and commented on.

However, should anyone wish to discuss his essay over there, please note that nobody will be disrespected for having a difference of opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without trying to sound like markg, it's possible.  Me and my middle brother look nothing alike, but the youngest has enough common traits with each of us that everyone can tell he is either of our brothers.  

 

With that said, literary devices tend to rely on probability rather than possibility.  Anyone making an argument to something being possible as a theory to something being probable is generally grasping at the last desperate straws they have for or against something.

Yeah, but the issue is that Ned, Jon and Arya all do look alike and share a family look.

 

Ygrain, um excuse me but I did not write Ashara and Ned I just posted it on behalf of Voice of the First Men.My essay is Robert and Lyanna which hasn't been posted yet.Just for clarification...You got the authors wrong hun.

Well, hun, if you post on someone's behalf, you might want to state so instead of "The body of my argument can be summarized in but a single word: canon. Every reference to Ashara Dayne, literally, every single reference to her throughout the five novels, connects her to Eddard Stark." I do not possess powers of divination nor do I memorize who was supposed to write which essay.

 

I did not see you over there debating this essay. Why not post your responses there? Don't be scared to look at the text for ALL the possibilities GRRM gave for Jon's parents. After all, Rhaegar as Jon's father is just one fan theory/conjecture/assumption.

 

Why should people on this site join another site to discuss articles that people have come to these RLJ threads to hype.

 

 

This. Not to mention, it's the internet. There's no rule saying I can't read something one place and discuss it at another. Aside from the occasional tweet, all of my online ASoIaF-related discussions happen here.

 

And, this really shouldn't need to be said, but given some of the comments made about some of us over at TLH's predecessor, and the contentious relationship some of us have with TLHers, it shouldn't come as any surprise if we don't post there. Another thing, given that the posters on SH spent so much time discussing this site and its members -- not sure if that's been the case at TLH -- I don't understand why there is a problem with us discussing things said on TLH.

This and this, dear adwf. But do feel free and discuss my points over there, I so miss the publicity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sly Wren, apologies for the gender error, and in advance if it happens again (it probably won't now that I've apologised, but I could easily forget). Its not a case of making an assumption either way, simply of not having any (remembered) data and needing to use something.
 

Because Barry said he was "fond" of Elia? Barristan's conclusion is that of an outsider

 
That is bullshit.
Barristan is not an outsider the way it is used here, which is 'someone who does not know this person and has no way of accurately knowing this information'. He is very much an insider in this context - a man who has been in close proximity to Rhaegar for Rhaegar's entire life, a man who has worked with him closely and recently and who knows him well and respects him. Not only has Barristan had that lifetime of knowing Rhaegar and being around him, in the last weeks or months of Rhaegar's life Barristan was his immediate subordinate working closely with him as a senior commander in the army Rhaegar led to the Trident.

Where Barristan is an 'outsider' is to Rhaegar's closest inner secrets. He is not a close friend that was deeply confided in. But he was around and working with Rhaegar and does have an opportunity to have a great deal of knowledge that does not require access to Rhaegar's closest group.

I wish I had time to discuss more, sorry I can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes--I did misunderstand you a bit--apologies.

 

But I still think there's a problem with the strategy based on the little we know of what Rhaegar's strategy was re: Harrenhal. Work with people. Not foment anger. Purposely pitting his unstable father against more people--seems like a recipe for disaster. Aerys is already paranoid--and paranoid about Rhaegar. Am struggling to see how Rhaegar would think fueling the paranoia would help.

 

If Rhaegar were really desperate, I guess anything is possible. And there are huge gaps in the narrative as well as the psychological profiles of these people. But, based on what we "know" of Rhaegar's "plans," actively stirring things up doesn't seem like his style.

 

But the HH plot was an utter failure. Perhaps plan B required something a bit more drastic. Also, he may have come to view the SAA as a looming threat, and/or realized that he wouldn't be able to work with these lords in the way that he had hoped, because they had their own plans. Again, he has his own future reign to worry about, not to mention Aegon's. He couldn't turn to the lords as he had hoped, nor could he turn to his father. Or, and here's another take, maybe he wanted to pit his father against the SAA and see who reached out to him first. If it was the SAA, he would obviously have to provide them with a good excuse for taking Lyanna. But I'm sure he would have one ready, if need be.

 

Whatever the reason, just kidnapping Lyanna was very likely to fuel his father's paranoia. So I'm not sure that line of reasoning can be used to effectively counter an argument about motive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This. Not to mention, it's the internet. There's no rule saying I can't read something one place and discuss it at another. Aside from the occasional tweet, all of my online ASoIaF-related discussions happen here.

 

And, this really shouldn't need to be said, but given some of the comments made about some of us over at TLH's predecessor, and the contentious relationship some of us have with TLHers, it shouldn't come as any surprise if we don't post there. Another thing, given that the posters on SH spent so much time discussing this site and its members -- not sure if that's been the case at TLH -- I don't understand why there is a problem with us discussing things said on TLH.

 

 

That was the original idea, which tied in with the PtwP. That list excluded Aerys and Rhaella, and included Rhaegar and Rhaego. The latter was always a contentious inclusion, since he was stillborn. There were good arguments made to support his inclusion though; e.g., being stillborn meant he was just another deceased Targaryen. But when TWoIaF came out we saw that Aerys and Rhaella had a number of stillbirths, which more or less proved the inclusion of Rhaego to be untenable.

 

IIRC, a short time prior to the release of the World book Consigliere suggested an alternative list, with Aerys and Rhaella in place of Rhaegar and Rhaego. This idea made a good deal of sense too, since the idea is that the rubies represent Rhaegar's family. And including him in a list of his own family is kind of awkward, if you think about it. Though no one had brought it up before then.

 

 

Of course I cannot accurately measure how you feel or anything but, at least from what I've seen, you sure don't act like you don't care. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure I've seen you say something like, "RLJ is a big red herring that needs to die." Sound familiar?

 

And frankly, when you go around accusing others of being emotionally invested, it looks like you're the one who is. Insulting people over the issue, and repeatedly personalizing disagreements, hardly bespeaks of emotional detachment.

 

The Deadpool trailers were awesome. Can't wait. Otoh, Fantastic 4 seems to be getting poor to average reviews.

Nah i'm a pup and i really don't care except for the purpose of it being another puzzle .I'm 100% sure i was being sarcastic about the RLJ needs to die bit.Somethings i'm dead serious about what i feel and i'll say it.Take it or leave it.But you and anyone have the right to believe whatever and hold true to that.I hold to my statement that some of you get too bent out of shape with this and tend to start making comments that shouldn't be made and you know what that breeds insults  form others. I don't care just as long as people don't get personal because thennnn i will play the  vindictive card it bothers me not. I take the good and the bad and recognize that i can be nice and naughty.But no hard feelings on my part when it comes to you guys,its all good.I can have a drag out disagreement with someone and in one hour have  a beer with them. If i say i feel X about you its just my feelings, one insigniicant bit of feelings in a universe full of them.

 

Ok i see how you guys came up with Rubies = Rhaegar's family and honestly  i can't say i agree with the process but hey different strokes for different folks.It seemed too much of trying very hard to have an element fit a theory but that's just me i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but the issue is that Ned, Jon and Arya all do look alike and share a family look.

 

Well, hun, if you post on someone's behalf, you might want to state so instead of "The body of my argument can be summarized in but a single word: canon. Every reference to Ashara Dayne, literally, every single reference to her throughout the five novels, connects her to Eddard Stark.I do not possess powers of divination nor do I memorize who was supposed to write which essay.

 

 

 

This and this, dear adwf. But do feel free and discuss my points over there, I so miss the publicity.

Ygrian those are "all" Voice of the First men's words if you had read the thread dear you would have seen "him" arguing the case.If you had read the thread and i don't think you did you would have seen me thanking "him" for writing the piece when he was not slated to in such a short time.

 

No divination required...Observation and reading things in context and its entirety. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sly Wren, apologies for the gender error, and in advance if it happens again (it probably won't now that I've apologised, but I could easily forget). Its not a case of making an assumption either way, simply of not having any (remembered) data and needing to use something.
 

 
That is bullshit.
Barristan is not an outsider the way it is used here, which is 'someone who does not know this person and has no way of accurately knowing this information'. He is very much an insider in this context - a man who has been in close proximity to Rhaegar for Rhaegar's entire life, a man who has worked with him closely and recently and who knows him well and respects him. Not only has Barristan had that lifetime of knowing Rhaegar and being around him, in the last weeks or months of Rhaegar's life Barristan was his immediate subordinate working closely with him as a senior commander in the army Rhaegar led to the Trident.

Where Barristan is an 'outsider' is to Rhaegar's closest inner secrets. He is not a close friend that was deeply confided in. But he was around and working with Rhaegar and does have an opportunity to have a great deal of knowledge that does not require access to Rhaegar's closest group.

I wish I had time to discuss more, sorry I can't.

Slywren didn't say that.You quoted my quote. But i respectfully disgaree with you.Close proximity to Rhaegar i have no doubt but that doesn't make him an insider at all.He has noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (no mistake with those nos) information of an intimate nature which to state.Barristan himself confessed not being in his inner circle and went on to state that "no man truly knew Rhaegar." 

 

Corbon i guarantee you ,i double guarrantee you that my case presents knowledge on three levels of intimacy with regards to Lyanna and another prospect and its subtle and overt and it is evidence.

 

We have no direct info from Rhaegar concerning Lyanna,or secondary info where someone who heard Rheagar said thus concerning Lyanna.Nor do we have any info from Lya.There is nothing in this sea of Rhaegar running off with Lya,Westrosi belief that he chose her and ran off with her.There is nothing concrete that links them intimately except for Robert and Bran's statement that Rhaegar raped her.

 

I will shout this from the roof tops in 5 books of info Barristan can tell us anything else except anything that was actually said.....Why because nothing like that exists because his conclusions like everyone else is drawn from

 

1.Rhaegar chose Lyanna by crowning her  QOLAB

2. It was said and is common knowledge in Westeros that he ran off with her

 

Therefore,he loved her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah i'm a pup and i really don't care except for the purpose of it being another puzzle .I'm 100% sure i was being sarcastic about the RLJ needs to die bit.Somethings i'm dead serious about what i feel and i'll say it.Take it or leave it.But you and anyone have the right to believe whatever and hold true to that.I hold to my statement that some of you get too bent out of shape with this and tend to start making comments that shouldn't be made and you know what that breeds insults  form others. I don't care just as long as people don't get personal because thennnn i will play the  vindictive card it bothers me not. I take the good and the bad and recognize that i can be nice and naughty.But no hard feelings on my part when it comes to you guys,its all good.I can have a drag out disagreement with someone and in one hour have  a beer with them. If i say i feel X about you its just my feelings, one insigniicant bit of feelings in a universe full of them.

 

Ok i see how you guys came up with Rubies = Rhaegar's family and honestly  i can't say i agree with the process but hey different strokes for different folks.It seemed too much of trying very hard to have an element fit a theory but that's just me i guess.

 

The more you try and convince me that you don't care, the less I believe you. The lady doth protest too much.

 

As for the rubies, thanks for the input. Though I have a feeling that last sentence of yours is going to seem rather ironic once your RB+L=J essay is published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Kat just told me the WB is unreliable:


And this illustrates the point I was trying to address earlier. How can we decide to cherry pick what's real and what's not in the WB? I feel like this happens around here, and it's not about disrespecting anyone. This is why I suggest eliminating the WB when coming up with explanations rather than the series.


It's not just the world book: people cherry pick from the main series too. If you're invested in a theory, you tend to do that.

We have to include the World Book. It's written from the perspective of a character in the ASOIAF universe, just as every word of this story is written from the perspective of a character in the ASOIAF universe.

Share this post


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

×