R+L=J v.153

[Mithras]

Mithras,

 

come on, don't annoy people with stuff like that - Ceryse and Alicent Hightower, Mariah Martell, Celia Tully, and Olenna Redwyne were perfectly fine brides for Targaryen princes and kings - without so much as a single drop of Targaryen blood.

 

You know the difference between these and Rhaegar's case. Who among these were arranged for Prince of Dragonstone, future king?

[Lord Varys]

When I last Viserys I was king when he married Alicent Hightower. Celia Tully was also betrothed to the Prince of Dragonstone when Prince Jaehaerys broke the engagement. Not to mention that there are those who argue that Jena Dondarrion, the wife of another Prince of Dragonstone, had no Targaryen blood, either (I'm not one of them, but a I admit that this is a possibility). It makes no sense to cite 'possible Targaryen blood' as motive as to why Tywin thought or wanted to marry Cersei to Rhaegar. He wanted his grandson to be a Targaryen king, that's why he wanted to do that, and he thought that Lannister blood was noble enough for a Prince of Dragonstone. Not to mention that he was Aerys' friend and thought the man would be receptive to such an offer, and see the benefit in it. Especially since one assumes that Cersei's dowry would have been quite high...

[Mithras]

When I last Viserys I was king when he married Alicent Hightower. Celia Tully was also betrothed to the Prince of Dragonstone when Prince Jaehaerys broke the engagement. Not to mention that there are those who argue that Jena Dondarrion, the wife of another Prince of Dragonstone, had no Targaryen blood, either (I'm not one of them, but a I admit that this is a possibility). It makes no sense to cite 'possible Targaryen blood' as motive as to why Tywin thought or wanted to marry Cersei to Rhaegar. He wanted his grandson to be a Targaryen king, that's why he wanted to do that, and he thought that Lannister blood was noble enough for a Prince of Dragonstone. Not to mention that he was Aerys' friend and thought the man would be receptive to such an offer, and see the benefit in it. Especially since one assumes that Cersei's dowry would have been quite high...

 

As I recall, you were the one who proposed that Jenna Dondarrion must have Targaryen ancestry.

 

:kiss:

[corbon]

I am always wondering how Reed saved Ned from Arthur?

We don't know and don't have any real clues. It could have been 'magic', it could have been unusual mundane techniques, it could have been standard extra-man-in-combat, it could have been a shouted warning, it could have been a simple distraction, the possibilities are literally limitless.
 

And how come they two survived and Arthur died?

Because GRRM decided? Because it was necessary for his story? Why not that way?
 

Meera said: he could breathe mud and run on leaves, and change earth to water and water to earth with no more than a whispered word. He could talk to trees and weave words and make castles appear and disappear
 
Did reed just turn the earth into water then Arthur drowned to death (Reed dragged Ned out)?

Did reed use his magic to break the TOJ (how two people destroyed a guard tower)?

Did reed behave like Merry and Arthur was like Angmar?

 
I incline towards Meera's statement not actually referring to any 'real' magic but simply being a typical allusion to the swamp-life skills that her people have that seem like 'magic' to any who don't have them. For example, following a dangerous swamp trail would appear very much like turning water to earth (when its the safe step) and earth to water (when its the unsafe step) for someone that doesn't have the skills to tell the difference. And making castles appear and disappear is just understanding (and perhaps knowing some ways of manipulating the currents etc) the way the floating island that Greywater Watch is said to be built on moves.
OTOH, we can't rule out some supernatural abilities entirely for all that they are vanishingly rare in ASoIaF.

 

Oh, and the ToJ being pulled down? They had at least 10 horses, probably more, and Ned would be a trained military engineer (even a second son let alone a first would be trained in how to build, and demolish, fortifications). And it was probably a fairly small tower, given it was merely a watchtower in a pass (I know I've read somewhere that it was several hundred years old and abandoned over a hundred years before, but am unable to find the reference so that might not be true).
Think this, or this, add a military engineer, a dozen horses, some rope, maybe a fire to weaken the structure...
 

OK here is something I am very sketchy on.....
 
All I have ever heard about Lyanna is that she died of a "summer chill"  - fair enough

 

Well, Ned tells us she died of a fever that took the last of her strength (in his arms). I think thats where your 'summer chill' has been (somewhat poorly IMO) extrapolated out from, wherever you picked up the idea.
 

But then we have the 3 very famous KG and then their cairns. So how do people think they died?  A summer chill? Coincidentally all in the same spot.

 
I don't believe anyone knows. At all.
Everyone 'knows' Arthur Dayne was killed by Ned and his men, because Ned returned Dawn to the Daynes, and that could only be taken from Arthur's dead body. And that also explains Ned's losses. But I very much doubt Ned actually told anyone any story about that, they just assumed it from the data available and he didn't need to deny it. There's no real clear link between Arthur's death and Lyanna's death, especially if Ned states she died of a fever.
 

Surely both the families and the crown would want to know what happened to the KG.
 
Do they know Ned killed them. And if so what was the reason?  Just a random meet up  or "guarding" Lyanna.

 
So what if they do? Why would Ned say anything? There's just been a year long civil war, people die and people disappear. And these guys hadn't been seen for a long time, after being detached on duties away from the King and the conventional army. There's actually no solid reason really for people to assume that Ned has anything to do with the disappearance of two of them, and if Ned says nothing, which is clearly the best policy for him...
 

There are many loose ends. One doesn't have to be Varys to piece together Stark Bastard, Dead Lyanna, Dead KG.
 
Regardless of if anyone clues on the bastard, Ned fighting 3 KG - and the level of the KG involved - and killing them all would seem to be a tale that would be told and part of Ned's reputation.

 

You are quite right that one doesn't need to be Varys to piece together Stark Bastard, Dead Lyanna and 3 KG. Yet no one appears to have done so. This to me is the clearest indication that no one knows about the three KG, that Ned simply hasn't mentioned two of them and probably just ignored the rumours about the third, to his benefit.

 

What is recorded in the White Book about their deaths?

 
In the series, so far we don't know anything. In the show they put some stuff in but it wasn't a feature of a scene, just an open page in the  background that clever observers were able to capture stills of. I think that the show producers put that in there as a clue to R+L=J for the really really observant and I don't think they thought through the implications at all (the show people are not exactly noted as thoughtful continuists, which is fine when they are telling a different story as they are by now).
I think a similar thing was put in the WoIaF world book, and again I think thats a rare continuity error by much more astute writers. I think on this occasion they forgot that what we know and what Barristan Selmy (who must have written the White Book entry) knows are two very different things. OTOH, its possible that Rhaegar told Barristan more than we think likely after his return and Barristan figured out even more after learning that Ned returned Dawn to the Daynes and lost 5 companions in the south, and wrote it in the White Book which, well, no one really reads.

Or, I am simply wrong and the details of the 3 KG's finale are known by quite a few people - who are all quite stupid not to have figured out enough to be quite suspicious about Ned's bastard...
 

I'm not clear where I got it, wiki, and analysis essay, a video....

Regardless, what explanation was given to Robert who would probably have wondered where the F his queen was. What do you tell Benjen. Barbie Dustin?

Ned has no responsibility to tell them anything. Its war, people die. Heck, people die in peace just travelling, getting sick, falling of their horse, being waylaid by bandits etc etc. An honourable boss like Ned makes it home and says with sorrow that his companions are dead and he mourns them, who is going to successfully press him for more details?
 

The entire cause of the war is Lyanna.

This is the equivalent of after the Trojan War, no one really gives two shakes what became of Helen.

 

Ahh, no it isn't, for all Robert's posturing. Lyanna's 'abduction' appears to be the spark (note that as far as we know Brandon didn't actually mention her, but we make the obvious conclusion), but the war was begun only when Aerys' called for Robert and Ned's heads (both uninvolved and innocent, and High Lords) and Jon Arryn said 'enough!'
Its more like the equivalent of whatever happened to Archduke Ferdinand's heir...

[King of the Narrow Sea]

The World Book says that Arthur died beside his sworn brothers facing Ned

 

 

For this reason, the Swords of the Morning are all famous throughout the Seven Kingdoms. There are boys who secretly dream of being a son of Starfall so they might claim that storied sword and its title. Most famous of all was Ser Arthur Dayne, the deadliest of King Aerys II's Kingsguard, who defeated the Kingswood Brotherhood and won renown in every tourney and mêlée. He died nobly with his sworn brothers at the end of Robert's Rebellion, after Lord Eddard Stark was said to have killed him in single combat. Lord Stark then returned Dawn to Starfall, and to Ser Arthur's kin, as a sign of respect.

 

So it has to be fairly common knowledge that Ned killed the 3 KG if Yandel knows. Ned's soldiers talked about him fighting Arthur in Winterfell, who knows what Howland's said to anybody, Ned tells Bran that he and Howland fought Arthur etc. The stories that we know are all in the north so Yandel would need a northern source for knowing that Arthur, Oswell, and Gerold all died together facing Ned, or it's just common knowledge in the realm that the 3 KG faced Ned at the end of the Rebellion. Jaime at least knows that Gerold, Oswell, and Arthur are all dead, and that Hightower was loyal to the end so he indicates that it's known what the KG were doing when they died.

 

ETA: Barbrey also knows that her husband died in a battle for Lyanna as she's angry that Ned brought Lyanna's bones home but only brought Dustin's horse back as he'd buried him where he died.

[corbon]

The World Book says that Arthur died beside his sworn brothers facing Ned
 
 
So it has to be fairly common knowledge that Ned killed the 3 KG if Yandel knows.

Yes, I pointed that out above. But as I said, I think thats a rare continuity error by the authors of that book, forgetting that Yandel does not know all that we know on this occasion.

 

The alternative is really that everyone else in the series is as thick as pigshit, not even suspecting Ned's bastard story despite knowing that the 3 KG were together defending Lyanna...  That simply doesn't add up to me.

No one has mentioned ToJ, no one has mentioned the ends of the 3KG, no one has mentioned Lyanna being found, no one has put together even as a suspicion what these factor mean beside Ned's mysteriously appearing bastard. It seems far simpler and more reasonable to me that that is because they don't have these facts, not because they are stupid. And this is only reinforced when you consider that the only way they could get this information is if Ned or HR talked about it, something which is very much not in their best interest (or character) if they are hiding Jon's heritage.

 

Ned's soldiers talked about him fighting Arthur in Winterfell, who knows what Howland's said to anybody, Ned tells Bran that he and Howland fought Arthur etc. The stories that we know are all in the north so Yandel would need a northern source for knowing that Arthur, Oswell, and Gerold all died together facing Ned, or it's just common knowledge in the realm that the 3 KG faced Ned at the end of the Rebellion. Jaime at least knows that Gerold, Oswell, and Arthur are all dead, and that Hightower was loyal to the end so he indicates that it's known what the KG were doing when they died.

 

Ned's soldiers clearly don't have a clue what they are talking about and are just gossiping without any source. They base their stories on Ned returning Dawn to the Daynes.
Ned does not tell Bran that 'he fought Arthur etc' just that Arthur would have killed him if not for HR. Nor does he say how (or if) they fought,  or what HR did to prevent Ned being killed.

 

There is no indication Jaime knows how the KG died or that Hightower was loyal to the end. All Jaime's data points are equally consistent with simple generalised assumptions - the other two are dead because they've been missing for 15 years and are not the sorts to just run away, and Hightower was simply a better man than Jaime all round, all agree, including loyalty.
 

ETA: Barbrey also knows that her husband died in a battle for Lyanna as she's angry that Ned brought Lyanna's bones home but only brought Dustin's horse back as he'd buried him where he died.

That is not a logical conclusion. Just because Dustin died during a months long trip to the south and Lyanna's bones were found on the same months long trip to the south does not follow logically that the two events are directly connected.

In fact logically you would assume Dustin's death is more likely related directly to the recovery of Dawn (Arthur Dayne being a famous warrior and all), rather than the recovery of Lyanna's bones. And there is very little to connect those two events when Ned is gone for weeks or months at the far end of the continent. And not talking about it.

[purple-eyes]

A new question here. Daemon blackfyre loved first dany so he asked for her hand firstly.
He probably had wife and children at that time and dany was also promised to martell.
So it looks like a similar case as rhaegar.
Daemon received a big no but he did not run off with dany. In stead, after some years, he started a rebellion.
Why not rhaegar depose his father firstly and then try to get lyanna when he a practical king regent?
That would be much easier and honorable.

[corbon]

A new question here. Daemon blackfyre loved first dany so he asked for her hand firstly.
He probably had wife and children at that time and dany was also promised to martell.
So it looks like a similar case as rhaegar.
Daemon received a big no but he did not run off with dany. In stead, after some years, he started a rebellion.
Why not rhaegar depose his father firstly and then try to get lyanna when he a practical king regent?
That would be much easier and honorable.

 

Did he have time?

She was already betrothed.

His father was getting worse...
His first effort (perhaps) to depose his father had already failed (Harrenhal, perhaps) and made it significantly harder and more dangerous to try again?

 

Its very difficult to judge these things without more data

[purple-eyes]

Did he have time?
She was already betrothed.
His father was getting worse...
His first effort (perhaps) to depose his father had already failed (Harrenhal, perhaps) and made it significantly harder and more dangerous to try again?
 
Its very difficult to judge these things without more data

Why not?
He can take a couple of years to depose his dad. Then he is king regent and he can try to kill or capture Robert and make lyanna a widow, then marry her and have a child. Only a few years later.
This is indeed a better way to do. At lease the would not risk losing his throne.

[King of the Narrow Sea]

Yes, I pointed that out above. But as I said, I think thats a rare continuity error by the authors of that book, forgetting that Yandel does not know all that we know on this occasion.

 

The alternative is really that everyone else in the series is as thick as pigshit, not even suspecting Ned's bastard story despite knowing that the 3 KG were together defending Lyanna...  That simply doesn't add up to me.

No one has mentioned ToJ, no one has mentioned the ends of the 3KG, no one has mentioned Lyanna being found, no one has put together even as a suspicion what these factor mean beside Ned's mysteriously appearing bastard. It seems far simpler and more reasonable to me that that is because they don't have these facts, not because they are stupid. And this is only reinforced when you consider that the only way they could get this information is if Ned or HR talked about it, something which is very much not in their best interest (or character) if they are hiding Jon's heritage.

 

Ned reminds Robert that he was with her when she died when Robert complains about Lyanna being buried in Winterfell. That means he had already told Robert at least some version of her death for Robert to think that the crypts isn't enough for her.

 

As to no one mentioning their ends, we have Ned's own soldiers saying he killed Arthur in single combat, Yandel saying Ned killed Arthur, Oswell, and Gerold, and we have Jaime reflecting on all his KG brothers being dead and Hightower being loyal to the end. There's no reason to assume that people don't know that happened to them.

 

 

There is no indication Jaime knows how the KG died or that Hightower was loyal to the end. All Jaime's data points are equally consistent with simple generalised assumptions - the other two are dead because they've been missing for 15 years and are not the sorts to just run away, and Hightower was simply a better man than Jaime all round, all agree, including loyalty.

 

Why would Jaime think some generalized concept? The app makes it clear the 3 KG were ordered to guard Lyanna. If Jaime knew they'd died doing so he's thing they'd been loyal to the end, no explanation needed.

 

That is not a logical conclusion. Just because Dustin died during a months long trip to the south and Lyanna's bones were found on the same months long trip to the south does not follow logically that the two events are directly connected.

In fact logically you would assume Dustin's death is more likely related directly to the recovery of Dawn (Arthur Dayne being a famous warrior and all), rather than the recovery of Lyanna's bones. And there is very little to connect those two events when Ned is gone for weeks or months at the far end of the continent. And not talking about it.

 

 

If Dustin died after pretty much all of the main fighting died, , and Arthur Dayne died in this period, then he has to have died doing something rather important. There's no reason to have separated the events and said that Ned went to Dorne for multiple reasons, and then never conquered Dorne (as Jon Arryn did peacefully and as GRRM said that no rebel armies ever were in Dorne)

[Lord Varys]

Actually, it is mentioned in AGoT that Ned Stark supposedly slew Arthur Dayne in single combat. Yandel isn't giving us special information there, just retelling what everybody or at least many people know.

 

It makes no sense that Ned Stark could actually keep the deaths of the KGs a secret, especially not since people at court should have known where the hell they were and whom they had been commanded to protect. Unless one believes Rhaegar had the authority to take three KGs from his father on a secret mission and nobody asked him about that (or concluded what was going on, since, you know, Lyanna didn't come with him back to KL).

 

As I've said above, Ned most likely actually told the truth about Lyanna and the knights as far as he could, just tweaking the details into Lyanna dying in childbirth delivering a stillborn daughter which was then cremated at the tower by the knights. By keeping his own bastard away from court and not mentioning him and his mother more often than he had to (there must have been a good official story for Robert and other friends of Ned who would have been surprised about him cheating on Cat, and also interested in the looks and character of the woman who 'made Ned Stark forget his marriage vow').

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Lord Varys,

 

Wouldn't it have been easier for Ned (and less suspicious for Jon) to tell everyone that Lyanna died of a fever (which she did)? The only thing he would be ommitting concerning the cause of her death, would be the cause of the fever.

 

That might draw less attention than telling everyone that Lyanna had died giving birth to a stillborn daughter who had been cremated, which would mean he had to lie about both the daughter, as well as her cremation, instead of only ommitting info.

[Lord Varys]

Rhaenys,

 

that would work if, and only if, Rhaegar for some convenient reason didn't mention to the court and his father and mother back in KL that he was married to Lyanna Stark (if this wasn't already known to them), and that she was about to give birth to his child, and that she only didn't come with him because she was in no condition to travel. Considering Rhaegar's relative position of strength at this point, and his intention to survive the Trident and make changes there would really be no reason to keep that all a secret. And if Aerys' court knew, then the rebels would have learned the truth to, by the time Ned returned from the South - in fact, Ned himself may have learned what was going on from people in KL who had spoken to Rhaegar.

 

If people had known Lyanna was pregnant, then people would have wanted to know what had happened to her child. And, strictly speaking, we don't really know Lyanna died 'of a fever'. We know she was feverish when she died, but the fever may actually only have been part of the affliction that killed her. If Ned was tight-lipped about the whole thing and only willing to say Lyanna died of 'a fever' then pretty much everyone would have wanted to get more details, right? We know that Ned and Robert reconciled over Lyanna's death when they mourned for her together. I don't see that happening if Ned wasn't willingly to speak as openly about Lyanna's last hours as he could, omitting only the things he had to, and successfully projecting the image of a man who had nothing to hide about this whole thing.

 

But considering that this whole deception is actually pretty easily to look through - especially if you live in this world and know much more than George actually tells us - one actually wonders whether Robert and other people close to Ned actually saw through the whole charade, but didn't mention it because, you know, a potential royal heir disguised as a bastard about whom the Targaryen loyalists knew nothing about wasn't exactly posing a threat to Robert. We know that the older Robert is very good at closing his eyes to things he doesn't want to see - would Robert really want to address or investigating the possibility that Ned's bastard may actually be Lyanna's son by Rhaegar? Would he really want to antagonize his best friend this way? I don't think so.

[Mithras]

Telling people that Lyanna died in giving birth to a stillborn child while bringing Jon would be stupid. 

[Lord Varys]

Not if people knew she was pregnant. And not to people who actually know she had had sexual intercourse with Rhaegar. (Repeated) rape can cause pregnancies, you know. And usually don't care if a woman conceives or not if you are raping her, right? Robert would have been brain dead to not consider the possibility that Lyanna had been pregnant.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Why not?
He can take a couple of years to depose his dad. Then he is king regent and he can try to kill or capture Robert and make lyanna a widow, then marry her and have a child. Only a few years later.
This is indeed a better way to do. At lease the would not risk losing his throne.

I think you misunderstand Rhaegar's character and intentions. First, creating the third head of the dragon was of paramount importance and was the issue that required the most urgency. So waiting to take Lyanna later as a widow is not an option for Rhaegar. Rhaegar also does not kill people to get their wives. Just as Rhaegar never considered having a child with anyone other than Elia until he had no choice when she is told she can have no more children -- Rhaegar does not kill men for their wives. 

 

Rhaegar also had no assurance that he could overthrow his father. If the Harrenhal theory is accurate, he seemed to think he needed the first line up support from the Lords. That process is difficult because word can leak out. Harrenhal was an opportunity to speak to them all at once -- but Varys caught wind and Aerys showed up. Just his presence at the tourney kept Rhaegar from taking steps. Now when Rhaegar tells Jaime that things will change after Rhaegar returns from battle, the situation is different. Aerys is much further gone and support from the Lords more assured and less risky as at that point it was clear that Aerys had little to no support.

But taking years to depose his father was never an option if it meant waiting to create the third head of the dragon. Rhaegar's first priority, if I am reading all the clues correctly, seems to be having 3 children of his born so that he can train them to win the war for the dawn 2.0. Given that goal and the post-Harrenhal situation, running off with Lyanna probably seemed like the least bad option of all the bad options available. He would marry her, have a child and then return to KL with wife and child presented as a done deal. Either Aerys accepts the marriage and Rhaegar stays in Westeros and trains the 3 heads and waits for his father to die -- OR Aerys does not accept the marriage and Rhaegar takes his 2 wives and 3 children to Essos to train the 3 heads. Either way -- the priority is the prophecy. Rhaegar's desire to replace his father comes second -- and Rhaegar never considered the possibility that he was starting a series of unlikely events (i.e., Brandon's recklessness and Aerys's insane insistent on the deaths of Ned and Robert) that would lead to the demise of his family and the Targ House.

 

Rhaenys,

 

that would work if, and only if, Rhaegar for some convenient reason didn't mention to the court and his father and mother back in KL that he was married to Lyanna Stark (if this wasn't already known to them), and that she was about to give birth to his child, and that she only didn't come with him because she was in no condition to travel. Considering Rhaegar's relative position of strength at this point, and his intention to survive the Trident and make changes there would really be no reason to keep that all a secret. And if Aerys' court knew, then the rebels would have learned the truth to, by the time Ned returned from the South - in fact, Ned himself may have learned what was going on from people in KL who had spoken to Rhaegar.

 

If people had known Lyanna was pregnant, then people would have wanted to know what had happened to her child. And, strictly speaking, we don't really know Lyanna died 'of a fever'. We know she was feverish when she died, but the fever may actually only have been part of the affliction that killed her. If Ned was tight-lipped about the whole thing and only willing to say Lyanna died of 'a fever' then pretty much everyone would have wanted to get more details, right? We know that Ned and Robert reconciled over Lyanna's death when they mourned for her together. I don't see that happening if Ned wasn't willingly to speak as openly about Lyanna's last hours as he could, omitting only the things he had to, and successfully projecting the image of a man who had nothing to hide about this whole thing.

 

But considering that this whole deception is actually pretty easily to look through - especially if you live in this world and know much more than George actually tells us - one actually wonders whether Robert and other people close to Ned actually saw through the whole charade, but didn't mention it because, you know, a potential royal heir disguised as a bastard about whom the Targaryen loyalists knew nothing about wasn't exactly posing a threat to Robert. We know that the older Robert is very good at closing his eyes to things he doesn't want to see - would Robert really want to address or investigating the possibility that Ned's bastard may actually be Lyanna's son by Rhaegar? Would he really want to antagonize his best friend this way? I don't think so.

Why would you think that Rhaegar told anyone that Lyanna was pregnant? What would you think Rhaegar told anyone that he was married to Lyanna? Until Rhaegar is ready to take wife and baby back to KL, Rhaegar's best play is to say nothing about Lyanna. We have no clues whatsoever that Rhaegar ever told anyone that Lyanna was still with him or that she was pregnant. I think you have invented way too many steps without textual support getting you to a cover story about a dead daughter. I think Occam's Razor should apply here -- Rhaegar never says anything about Lyanna and Ned says as little as possible. Ned finds her and she dies of a fever. That is all that is told. No one knows for sure that the KG were with her. No one knows for sure how she got the fever. That alternative seems simplest and most likely the stories told. I am just not sure why you think otherwise.

[Lord Varys]

UL,

 

actually, a duel for Lyanna's hand or the murder of Elia to make way for Lyanna as his only wife would be the more rational cause of action if we assume Rhaegar was doing all this 'to save the world'. Ask Stannis, you can even kill innocent children to save all the other children.

 

Daemon Targaryen won Laena's hand in such a duel, and Rhaegar may actually have been able to command Ser Arthur Dayne to do the dirty work. He would have made short work out of Robert, right? It would have been a much cleaner way to take Lyanna than the way he did.

 

We also don't know that creating the third dragon head was a matter of the utmost urgency. We have no textual basis for that assumption. In fact, the fact that Yandel indicates that Rhaegar wasn't on his way to take to Lyanna but went to some other place in the Riverlands first doesn't suggests that there was much urgency there. 

 

We don't know whether love or prophecy stuff caused him to take Lyanna at the time and the way he did. That's part of the mystery. I'm on board with prophecy playing a role in all that, but how big a role it played is as of yet unclear. Say, he visited the Ghost of High Heart first, and got another prophecy from her. What if that prophecy wasn't about the promised prince or a dragon head but his own destiny and the fact that the Ghost foresaw he would follow his heart and take Lyanna now? Then prophecy would have played strong role there, but the ultimate motivation would have been love.

 

We have no textual evidence for this whole 'Rhaegar would keep things secret until they had a baby' idea. I don't even where this is coming from. The fact that nobody seems to be discussing Rhaegar and Lyanna's relationship in the series isn't proof that it was top secret. In fact, everybody knew that Prince Rhaegar had abducted Lyanna, right? What do you think Targaryen loyalists thought about all that? Don't you think they wondered what Rhaegar wanted with that woman, why he ran way, what he was doing? Don't you think the man had give some answer to his family, friends, and court upon his return? Not to mention that Aerys most likely would not allow him to command his armies if he refused to reveal what he had been doing all those months. I cannot imagine him not being forced to tell pretty much everything he knew - and, who knows, perhaps Aerys or Rhaella actually partially approved or at least understood his actions. After all, they had married each other also because of destiny and prophecy. Neither can I believe he would feel the need to keep the story a secret if there was some sort of reconciliation or compromise. Sure, he might not have given his father directions to the place where Lyanna was, but there was no real reason to keep his relationship to her, their marriage (if it wasn't already public knowledge) or Lyanna's pregnancy a secret. Not to mention that we have, as of yet, no explanation as to why Rhaegar and Lyanna went underground in the first place. Was this because they chose to do this because they had no longer any interest in the outside world, or were they forced to do that? In the former scenario Rhaegar would more or less have been mad with love, not caring about anything but Lyanna, and most likely not giving a fig about prophecy or destiny.

 

Finally, I really think we should consider the possibility that Rhaegar thought the dragon heads were Viserys, Aegon, and eventually Lyanna's son. An openness to the idea that girls could be 'special' in this way could also have opened up the possibility of a girl being the promised prince himself - and nobody apparently thought about that before Aemon learned about Dany and her dragons.

[Alia of the knife]

In regards to what was important to Rhaegar at the time he acts on taking Lyanna, I think there are a lot of assumptions.

Its rather like the chicken and egg question and what came first, but in this case was it prophesy and then Lyanna, or Lyanna and THEN prophecy?

His best plan is to sire super dragon babies? What if the Others come when they're still toddlers?

Oops.

Or, what if one or two of the super babies die before reaching adulthood? (Wait, that did happen).

What if it was supposed to be himself, Viserys and Dany?

(Do we know if Rhaegar would NOT have known of Rhaellas pregnancy)?
Could Hightower have told him?

Or, what if it was Viserys children to be the three heads?

(Whatever Rhaegar read had better have been succinct and to the point).

And yet, Rhaegar never visited the Wall, WF, or the North and the Court remembers that Rhaegar wanted SONS, which without them, is just as potentially deadly to Rhaegars line of succession if he doesn't have any heirs by the time of his own death.

Prophesy may be a factor, but it looks like Rhaegar is just as caught up in politics as well, and if prophesy was a factor, it only became one after he let it go and loved Lyanna.

In regards to Neds tale, I would think given the culture of the times people would have been more unbelieving or cynical ABSENT a child, no matter what Rhaegar made public.

[Lord Varys]

I think we can be reasonably sure that neither Aemon, nor Aegon V, Jaehaerys II, Aerys II, or Rhaegar expected anything to happen beyond the Wall. Else the NW would have gotten much more support since, you know, the Iron Throne could actually have made the NW a top priority.

[Regular John Umber]

I think we can be reasonably sure that neither Aemon, nor Aegon V, Jaehaerys II, Aerys II, or Rhaegar expected anything to happen beyond the Wall. Else the NW would have gotten much more support since, you know, the Iron Throne could actually have made the NW a top priority.

That's an interesting observation because if Rhaegar felt that there was some prophecy he needed to fulfill, surely it would have had to do with 'beyond the wall'? His non-support of the watch is therefore telling that perhaps that's not what he was trying to do.