R+L=J v.155

[purple-eyes]

The Starks seem to be especially obsessed with their honor, which would include the maidenheads of their women. Lyanna's affair with Rhaegar wouldn't have prevented her father and brothers to defend her honor and punish her for being a slut especially since it shamed both the Starks and the Baratheons due to the marriage contract. Rickard may have seen opportunity there despite the shame since he had those southron ambitions, but Brandon was too stupid for that.

 

Even so, not all nobles were happy with kings making their daughters or sisters their whores. And it is a difference if a father or brother gives his daughter or sister to the king willingly, or whether a prince thinks he just can take her by force.

 

No, only Ned and his children. 

Brandon was known as "blood stained sword" and he is the most likely candidate for the father of Ashara's daughter. 

Lyanna ran off with a married man while she was betrothed for a long time. 

Beiyen was quite young so we have no clue. 

[RumHam]

 

Brandon was known as "blood stained sword" and he is the most likely candidate for the father of Ashara's daughter. 

 

 

Eh? That was a private moment between Brandon and Lady Dustin. I don't think he had any sort of nickname indicating he enjoyed sleeping with virgins. 

 

 

 

A maiden having a child out of wedlock is a great dishonor to herself and her house during medieval times.  The man responsible would be persecuted, if he is revealed by the maiden.  Nothing can redeem such a man in the eyes of the house, except a marriage.  It does not matter under what circumstances the congress occurred.  It is nothing that Ned ever reflects on, thus there was no dishonor done to Lyanna or House Stark.  They were legally married.  Further, the dream only makes sense to Ned if they are legally married and Jon is the heir to the Iron Throne.  finis

 

Comparing the popularity of Maegor the Cruel to Aerys, it is likely that Aerys would be more popular.  At least we know the people cheered for him, although they cheered twice as loud for Tywin.  Then Rhaegar gets redoubles Tywin's popularity.  Making any comparison between how Rhaegar's family would be received to how Maegor the Cruel's family was received falls utterly FLAT. 

 

This is not logically sound. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  Just because we never hear Ned reflecting on it is not evidence that it didn't happen. By your logic the whole R+L=J theory falls apart, because Ned never reflects on how Jon is really his nephew. You did something similar with the Viserys as heir situation, claiming that because nobody ever mentioned it before it couldn't possibly be true. It just doesn't work that way. 

 

[Avalatis]

Regarding how Ned perceived Rhaegar and felt about him. Assuming Rhaegar did marry Lyanna, wouldn't he be upset about Polygamy? Would this seem to suggest that Rhaegar had planned on setting Elia aside? Or do we assume that Ned had no problem with his sister being involved in a polygamous marriage?

[UnViserion]

What theory fails to answer all the question?

 

Is that in reference to mine?

I'd like a complete breakdown of every area in which it "fails to answer all the questions"

[UnViserion]

 

No, only Ned and his children. 

Brandon was known as "blood stained sword" and he is the most likely candidate for the father of Ashara's daughter. 

Lyanna ran off with a married man while she was betrothed for a long time. 

Beiyen was quite young so we have no clue. 

 

Agreed, Brandon was hardly the definition of chaste. If Lyanna ran off willingly with a married man to enter a polygamous relationship, she's also dumping on the sanctity of marriage.

 

 

Regarding how Ned perceived Rhaegar and felt about him. Assuming Rhaegar did marry Lyanna, wouldn't he be upset about Polygamy? Would this seem to suggest that Rhaegar had planned on setting Elia aside? Or do we assume that Ned had no problem with his sister being involved in a polygamous marriage?

 

Being the second wife in a polygamous marriage would probably not be viewed as a great honor to their house. Westeros doesn't abide polygamy except for in the Iron Islands, and that more closely echoes forced sexual slavery then anything.
 

[purple-eyes]

 
Agreed, Brandon was hardly the definition of chaste. If Lyanna ran off willingly with a married man to enter a polygamous relationship, she's also dumping on the sanctity of marriage.
 
 
 
Being the second wife in a polygamous marriage would probably not be viewed as a great honor to their house. Westeros doesn't abide polygamy except for in the Iron Islands, and that more closely echoes forced sexual slavery then anything.
 

True.
Maegor's second secret wife was still called " whore of harroway" in the court.
And this marriage was at least approved by queen visenya.

[UnViserion]

True.
Maegor's second secret wife was still called " whore of harroway" in the court.
And this marriage was at least approved by queen visenya.

 

Is it possible the maester just made that up??

[Bael's Bastard]

There is nothing anyone could do after the fact if Rhaegar and Lyanna married. The idea that it would produce a bastard because Rhaegar was already married is completely baseless. If they were married according to whatever rites of whatever gods, that is that, no matter how much damage it may or may not do politically.

[UnViserion]

There is nothing anyone could do after the fact if Rhaegar and Lyanna married. The idea that it would produce a bastard because Rhaegar was already married is completely baseless. If they were married according to whatever rites of whatever gods, that is that, no matter how much damage it may or may not do politically.

 

I don't entirely agree with that.

 

And would the Iron Throne just sit vacant while everybody waited with bated breath for the love child of this disastrous union to be born so they could determine if it was actually the heir? Hello no.

After Rhaegar, Aerys, and Aegon were killed, the throne would pass to Viserys. An unborn, possible male child does not have rights to it.

 

Again, Aerys naming Viserys would trump everything. Just because the KG didn't know it doesn't make Jon a King. In which case, even if he was born a legitimate Targaryen, he's still just a prince.. and thus can be promised.  

 

 

Edit -- I may have misunderstood your post. my initial reading led me to believe you were saying "there is nothing anyone could do Jon is now the heir" but after reading it a second time I'm not so sure that was what you were arguing. I apologize if I misconstrued your post

[Ygrain]

After Rhaegar, Aerys, and Aegon were killed, the throne would pass to Viserys. An unborn, possible male child does not have rights to it.

I don't think we have a Westerosi precedent for such a situation but we do in RL - when the queen was pregnant at the time of the king's death, there was interregnum - no-one was king but they waited for the birth of the child, and if it was male, it was an heir.

 

BTW, if Roose died and Fat Walda was pregnant... are you sure that the baby wouldn't have a claim?

[purple-eyes]

After a super slow lunch and a heavy rain and a coffee, you guys are still debating if there is a marriage or king in TOJ. :)

[UnmaskedLurker]

 

 

Eh? That was a private moment between Brandon and Lady Dustin. I don't think he had any sort of nickname indicating he enjoyed sleeping with virgins. 

 

 

 

 

This is not logically sound. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  Just because we never hear Ned reflecting on it is not evidence that it didn't happen. By your logic the whole R+L=J theory falls apart, because Ned never reflects on how Jon is really his nephew. You did something similar with the Viserys as heir situation, claiming that because nobody ever mentioned it before it couldn't possibly be true. It just doesn't work that way. 

 

 

Except here there is more than just absence of evidence. There are points where Ned thinks about Lyanna and has very specific feelings about her and Rhaegar that would not make sense if Ned thought Lyanna was dishonored. The most glaring is the thought of Rhaegar not going to a brothel. Yes, I know that technically Rhaegar could be guilty of dishonoring Lyanna and still not go to a brothel, but it is strange that the readers would get that thought from Ned if Ned also thought that Rhaegar dishonored Lyanna. Also, we do get clues from Ned's thoughts that perhaps Jon is not his real son. The most commonly mentioned example is the reference to Jon as "blood" rather than "son" which seems like a clue. So if Ned consistently had inner thoughts of Jon as his son, that would be a problem for the RLJ theory. But instead, we get thoughts regarding being his "blood" which supports the theory. So that analogy really argues the other way. Of course, GRRM cannot give too much away regarding a mystery, but in the context of what can and cannot be given away, GRRM gives hints that Ned does not consider Jon to be his son. On the other hand, GRRM give NO clues that Ned might think Rhaegar did anything wrong toward Lyanna -- and instead what clues we have suggest the opposite.

 

 

 

Is that in reference to mine?

I'd like a complete breakdown of every area in which it "fails to answer all the questions"

Actually, it was a question for JCRB as I was not sure what she meant in terms of which theory she thought answered all questions and which did not.

 

But if you want to remind me of the gist of your theory, I will tell you where I think either it does not answer all questions or otherwise is inconsistent with some piece of information that I think has been given to the readers.

[purple-eyes]

I don't think we have a Westerosi precedent for such a situation but we do in RL - when the queen was pregnant at the time of the king's death, there was interregnum - no-one was king but they waited for the birth of the child, and if it was male, it was an heir.
 
BTW, if Roose died and Fat Walda was pregnant... are you sure that the baby wouldn't have a claim?

Fat Walda is his indisputable legal wife. So yes.
Is Lyanna so?
Please face the reality. Lyanna by default is a mistress in the eyes of westeros even there is a secret tree marriage.
Rhaegar needed to do a lot of things to change people's mind. Unluckily he did not have chance.

[UnViserion]

I don't think we have a Westerosi precedent for such a situation but we do in RL - when the queen was pregnant at the time of the king's death, there was interregnum - no-one was king but they waited for the birth of the child, and if it was male, it was an heir.

 

BTW, if Roose died and Fat Walda was pregnant... are you sure that the baby wouldn't have a claim?

 

They are different circumstances, but I'll humor the idea anyways.

 

Differences:

Roose Bolton is the recognized Warden of the North and Fat Walda his bride. This is known throughout the realm. Ramsay is a legitimized bastard, but a trueborn son will always have more sway (in theory).

 

Rhaegar and Lyanna would represent the first polygamous marriage in Westeros in 300 years, and it was a union forged in a dishonest, secretive and distructive way. Its easy to say that on paper this is all legitimate, but the rest of the realm might not see it that way. Jon's crown would be contentious to say the least.

 

Now, with regards to what claims Roose and Walda's hypothetical son would have, a claim is only as good as the people backing you. Stannis currently has the best claim to the throne (through Baratheon conquest), but many people reject the notion that Joffrey and Tommen are not Robert's. Many more just don't care. Stannis' claim is irrelevant to them.  The North will categorically refuse to acknowledge the child of the Traitor Roose Bolton and Walda 'effing Frey as their Lord.

 

In much the same way, the people of Westeros could well decide that Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna is null and void because he already had a wife, and polygamy hasn't been practiced in centuries. [IMO] There would also be a tremendous amount of resentment and relectunce by many to consider the child of their polygamous union, which brought war and chaos to every corner of the realm, heir to the throne. He has a claim, but Viserys derives his directly from the Aerys, who was still living when Rhaegar died. After all of Rhaegar's known family is obliterated, Viserys is the obvious Targaryen heir (and possibly the recognized heir by Aerys).. [/IMO]

 

I think it's a huge overstep to just assume that Westeros would accept the polygamous marriage as legitimate. A possible heir from a marriage no one knows about and will likely reject does not prevent Viserys from being the rightful Targaryen heir.

[purple-eyes]

Except here there is more than just absence of evidence. There are points where Ned thinks about Lyanna and has very specific feelings about her and Rhaegar that would not make sense if Ned thought Lyanna was dishonored. The most glaring is the thought of Rhaegar not going to a brothel. Yes, I know that technically Rhaegar could be guilty of dishonoring Lyanna and still not go to a brothel, but it is strange that the readers would get that thought from Ned if Ned also thought that Rhaegar dishonored Lyanna. Also, we do get clues from Ned's thoughts that perhaps Jon is not his real son. The most commonly mentioned example is the reference to Jon as "blood" rather than "son" which seems like a clue. So if Ned consistently had inner thoughts of Jon as his son, that would be a problem for the RLJ theory. But instead, we get thoughts regarding being his "blood" which supports the theory. So that analogy really argues the other way. Of course, GRRM cannot give too much away regarding a mystery, but in the context of what can and cannot be given away, GRRM gives hints that Ned does not consider Jon to be his son. On the other hand, GRRM give NO clues that Ned might think Rhaegar did anything wrong toward Lyanna -- and instead what clues we have suggest the opposite.
 
 
Actually, it was a question for JCRB as I was not sure what she meant in terms of which theory she thought answered all questions and which did not.
 
But if you want to remind me of the gist of your theory, I will tell you where I think either it does not answer all questions or otherwise is inconsistent with some piece of information that I think has been given to the readers.

You are seeing things you want to see.
Nothing in Ned's mind hinted us there was a marriage in TOJ.
Ned thought Lyanna's "wolf blood" caused her early death.
Do you think this is a proper comment for a wife and a husband and their tree blessed happy wedding? Why do you need "wolf blood" to do a totally legal marriage (in your opinion)? Isn it suppose to be natural and blissful?

[UnViserion]

 Isn it suppose to be natural and blissful?

 

Only the lovemaking. Which it clearly was, since Rhaegar named the place the Tower of Joy.
 

[Ygrain]

 

They are different circumstances, but I'll humor the idea anyways.

 

Differences:

Roose Bolton is the recognized Warden of the North and Fat Walda his bride. This is known throughout the realm. Ramsay is a legitimized bastard, but a trueborn son will always have more sway (in theory).

 

Rhaegar and Lyanna would represent the first polygamous marriage in Westeros in 300 years, and it was a union forged in a dishonest, secretive and distructive way. Its easy to say that on paper this is all legitimate, but the rest of the realm might not see it that way. Jon's crown would be contentious to say the least.

 

Now, with regards to what claims Roose and Walda's hypothetical son would have, a claim is only as good as the people backing you. Stannis currently has the best claim to the throne (through Baratheon conquest), but many people reject the notion that Joffrey and Tommen are not Robert's. Many more just don't care. Stannis' claim is irrelevant to them.  The North will categorically refuse to acknowledge the child of the Traitor Roose Bolton and Walda 'effing Frey as their Lord.

 

In much the same way, the people of Westeros could well decide that Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna is null and void because he already had a wife, and polygamy hasn't been practiced in centuries. [IMO] There would also be a tremendous amount of resentment and relectunce by many to consider the child of their polygamous union, which brought war and chaos to every corner of the realm, heir to the throne. He has a claim, but Viserys derives his directly from the Aerys, who was still living when Rhaegar died. After all of Rhaegar's known family is obliterated, Viserys is the obvious Targaryen heir (and possibly the recognized heir by Aerys).. [/IMO]

 

I think it's a huge overstep to just assume that Westeros would accept the polygamous marriage as legitimate. A possible heir from a marriage no one knows about and will likely reject does not prevent Viserys from being the rightful Targaryen heir.

Ah, I think we are talking a bit at crossed purposes. 

 

I challenged your claim that an unborn child has no claim, I never asserted that its claim would be unproblematic, and I meant the Boltons' claim to Dreadfort, not North (tho which they have no claim at all).

 

Perhaps a better example: if claims of unborn children didn't matter, Jaime wouldn't have made such a fuss over Jeyne not being allowed to marry for two years, lest her child might be considered Robb's heir.

 

I fully agree that Jon's status as a product of polygamous union would be problematic but it doesn't make Viserys rightful heir. There would be some that would acknowledge Jon's claim, just like some acknowledged Rhaenyra's even though it defied the customs, and others would support Viserys, just like some supported Aegon because it was in concord with customs. "Tremendous amount of resentment" is unsupported by the text and I believe it to be highly exaggerated, as we never hear anyone challenging the legitimacy of Aegon's marriage to both his sisters (which would basically undermine the legitimacy of the whole dynasty). 

[UnViserion]

Aegon and his sisters had dragons. After their passing, the natives of Westeros began bitching about incest and polygamy.. and the Targs tossed them a bone and scrapped the polygamy.

 

That's how I see it. And again, an unacknowledged (to this day even) polygamous marriage does not make Jon's claim better than Viserys'

[UnViserion]

Also, if Viserys had been hypothetically crowned (following the death of all known royal kin), he would be the King. Jon entering the picture later would not change that.

 

I do not believe that an unborn possible heir from an unacknowledged, polygamous marriage would supersede Viserys' claim. I think that is a different scenario than Roose and Walda's hypothetical heir.

[RumHam]

Except here there is more than just absence of evidence. There are points where Ned thinks about Lyanna and has very specific feelings about her and Rhaegar that would not make sense if Ned thought Lyanna was dishonored. The most glaring is the thought of Rhaegar not going to a brothel. Yes, I know that technically Rhaegar could be guilty of dishonoring Lyanna and still not go to a brothel, but it is strange that the readers would get that thought from Ned if Ned also thought that Rhaegar dishonored Lyanna. 

 

My point is that Ned not dwelling on how Rhaegar dishonored Lyanna and his family fifteen years later is not evidence that it never happened. We also don't hear him thinking negatively about the moment all the smiles died, but that doesn't suggest that he didn't care or wasn't shocked when Rhaegar named Lyanna the queen of love and beauty. I'm not sure what points you're talking about beyond the brothel comment. It's a bit of a leap from "they guy didn't frequent brothels" to "He never did anything remotely dishonorable." The logic that they must have been married because Ned doesn't think negatively about Rhaegar does not hold up. 

 

 

Also, we do get clues from Ned's thoughts that perhaps Jon is not his real son. The most commonly mentioned example is the reference to Jon as "blood" rather than "son" which seems like a clue. So if Ned consistently had inner thoughts of Jon as his son, that would be a problem for the RLJ theory. But instead, we get thoughts regarding being his "blood" which supports the theory. So that analogy really argues the other way. Of course, GRRM cannot give too much away regarding a mystery, but in the context of what can and cannot be given away, GRRM gives hints that Ned does not consider Jon to be his son. On the other hand, GRRM give NO clues that Ned might think Rhaegar did anything wrong toward Lyanna -- and instead what clues we have suggest the opposite.

 

I think you misunderstood my point. I'm not trying to say there aren't clues that Jon is not Ned's son, or that Ned not thinking of him as his nephew suggests that he must be his son. I was just using that as an example to point out MntLion's flawed logic. 

 

Edit: Ned actually does bring up the moment the smiles died, my bad. My point still stands. There are plenty of things Ned does not think about in his limited POV time that still happened.