R+L=J v.156

[purple-eyes]

Side question here,
since jon is the only remaining child of rhaegar in Ned's mind, why did he agree to let jon to the wall?
Jon is not like benjen, who has two elder brothers before him for their house. Jon is the only remaining child of rhaegar. This act will apparently end the line of rhaegar.
Maybe ned thought there was viserys so jon is not very important or necessary for targaryen?
But still he is making "line of rhaegar" extinct by doing this.

[Ser Creighton]

Hi SC! :)

I've always wondered that about BR, and makes me think that is a bit "grey" because that is somewhat of a violation, almost what Bran does with Hodor.

I've always wanted to pull the bench out from under Forest, though I loved Captain Dan.

What's up Ali with an a?

 

Yeah I think it is very grey, he is not taking over anyone's mind but he clearly enters Bran's mind and influences it. Does it seem like the only time he has done that before? We know he did it with Jojen who tells Bran about it.

 

Then you get this.

 

"Bran looked down. There was nothing below him now but snow and cold and death, a frozen wasteland where jagged blue-white spires of ice waited to embrace him. They flew up at him like spears. He saw the bones of a thousand other dreamers impaled upon their points. He was desperately afraid."

 

If he placed all these dreamers in the same situation as Bran and he seems to favor doing it to children. He is forcing them to try and do something, and we know this is his method for reaching out. At least one of them. Then Bran of course gets to the cave and says this "It's weirwood roots," he said. Remember the heart tree in the godswood, Hodor? The white tree with the red leaves? A tree can't hurt you."

 

Never a good thing to say in Martins world. Then we get the stone like spires in the cave stalactites and stalagmites. 

 

Then  Bones. All kinds of bones, including human bones. Then Bran meets his second dead talking human. When you got roots growing through your body and out your eye and mushrooms growing on your head where most of your flesh is gone, you're a corpse. So if this zombie, who comes to children in their dreams when they are sick and puts them in a trial of life or death tells me there are rules, I got to question what exact rules is he following?

 

Now he has been watching the Starks for some time, he watched Bran's birth and that of his father. He vanished in 252 at the age of 77, six-seven years later Rhaegar is born. Ned is born in 263, so at minimum he has been watching the Starks for 37 years. What drew his interest to them, and what are the chances he had been watching Lyanna? He is watching everyone else in the family after all, and he has always played by his own rules. So when did the the Woods Witch come to KL with Jenny? Rhaella was only 14 when Rhaegar was born in 259.

 

It's hard for me to imagine that he was not watching all of this, and does not have his hand in events. There are some odd things about Bloodraven and his time at the wall. Like the guy who was lord commander before him was Sleepy Jack of house Musgood his sigil was a Laural and Pavilion. He blows it and the Kings beyond the wall Red Beard gets through he loses and his brother the Red Raven flees north, and his decendant is called Kingsblood. Not sure why I need the imagery of a Red Raven and his decendant being called Kings Blood and LC with a pavilion and laurel.  Anyway not important and I know you know most of this stuff, but I have to figure he was watching and he seems to have a problem being a hands off observer.

 

Oh and Captain Dan was that movie.

 

You know I have been sitting on something since the show ended and I posted it in a rather obscure location on the forum awhile back. So this is show related and I gave it to Ran on a review thread awhile ago but I thought you might like to see it as sometimes the show drops a clue bomb. As far as I know nobody picked up on this and many people made fun of certain aspects that the show went into but I think I know the reason. It's about 2 new characters and a birthmark. It's also short. Sorry if this has been discussed already I have not been here for a while. Now this won't change your mind about anything but it is interesting, because the show has picked up on more aspects of Martins writing than some think. I am also posting it because this was a topic here awhile back that was a discussion, that involved a parallel between two characters.

 

[spoiler] It's about Olly and Oliver. You ever wonder why they used the same name for two characters? The answer is the parallel between Jon and Loras. Now remember that Loras is in fact a rose, and even  the show has played that up from time to time. So Loras a rose has a squire named Oliver that points out his birthmark is in the shape a Dorne. Oliver will betray this rose associated with Dorne, while at the wall another Olly betrays a rose associated with Dorne. I was wondering why the birthmark and why the two Olly's, the two betrayals and the two roses and I think the answer was the simple use of a parallel. They also sun and mooned Jon and Dany this year, just saying, white and black and that is why Dany and Jon both behead someone, one was love and one was hate. Hope you liked, it's just an observation. [/spoiler]

 

Something else to add, sorry, just remembered. Now I know you have an interest in the love aspect of this story and it's been a little rough for you lately. But do you remember the old parallel done between Rhaegar and Loras? There is a reason I posted that spoiler as a sort of reminder, but then I forgot. So I am editing this in. Loras the Knight of flowers with the blue roses on and emeralds and all that, at the tourney of KL gives Sansa a rose. The scene and text is similar to Harrenhal in that moment. Now Loras does not love Sansa, so it would seem to support the later argument. But, there is an inverse as we know in this series Blue and Red are polarities, natural opposites. We see this in the Shade trees and the Weirwood trees. Red and White, Black and Blue, the 4 primary colors of the series. Loras gave Sansa a red rose, nut it is not about love. Rhaegar gives Lyanna a blue rose, so what is the symbolic suggestion?

 

Also wanted to point out that Jon Snow Armored in Black Ice and holding a red flaming sword. People often talk about Azur there and that's fine, but that is not Jon Snow. That is Jon Targaryen, those are Targ Colors, in fact those are Drogon's colors and if you remember Dany's second mount to dread, in her last chapter in Dance. Well when Drogon returns to her Martin describes him as a king.

 

I do love working both sides of a debate.

[UnViserion]

Side question here,
since jon is the only remaining child of rhaegar in Ned's mind, why did he agree to let jon to the wall?
Jon is not like benjen, who has two elder brothers before him for their house. Jon is the only remaining child of rhaegar. This act will apparently end the line of rhaegar.
Maybe ned thought there was viserys so jon is not very important or necessary for targaryen?
But still he is making "line of rhaegar" extinct by doing this.

 

My guess?

 

He promised Lyanna he would protect Jon. I'm sure the terms of his protection were not.. shall we say, negotiated. He promised he'd raise him as his own and keep the knowledge of his identity secret to protect him from Robert's possible wrath. Robert referred to Rhaegar's children with Elia as dragonspawn, one can imagine how that would make Ned fearful of any child of Rhaegar's with Lyanna.

 

Once a man takes the Black, he's absolved of any crimes, real or imagined.

In this particular case, it did not matter what sort of offense Jon's father paid Robert. In the off chance that when Jon's identity was made known to him and he wished to pursue his bloodstained claim, he'd have forfeited all claims and titles. He'd simply be a man of the Night's Watch. For an honorable man like Ned, it was probably the best way he saw possible to kill two birds with one stone

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Hmmm, we have an option for Mya's age of 17

 

-or-

 

18.

 

Ned does not specify that it is one or the other, and clearly she can be 18, when Ned suggests that Robert was younger when he did the deed.  Ned never seems to know precisely Robert's age, on my recollection.  And, generally, I would say that Ned is reminiscing about the young friend of his getting in trouble (or what should have been trouble) at what was a younger age.  Clearly, if Mya is 19 in 300 AC, she was born in 281 AC.  But, for some reason there is a denial here. 

 

ETA:  I have done what Ned may have done, trying to recall a younger one's age . . .  17, no 18 . . .  17 or 18, yeah 18. Rhaenys' age, 2 or 3. 

If she was 19 in 300 AC, she could have been born in 281 AC. She could also have been born in 280 AC, as she could be turning 20 later in the year. Just as Sansa was 12 for most of 299 AC, turned 13 just before the end of the year, and thus was born in 286 AC.

 

You are the one in denial, here. Ned's judgement, as well as Catelyn's judgement, of Mya's age, gives her three options for years of her birth. Ned gives us another specification: Robert himself was younger than what Mya might be at that time, when he fathered her. He was 16, or even younger, when fathering Mya. And with Robert's birth in 262 AC, that eliminates 281 AC as a possible year of birth.

 

The appendix of ASOS states that Mya is 19 years old. ASOS mostly takes place in 299 AC, and only a short period in 300 AC. On what part of the story Mya's age reflects, is not known. Does the appendix mean to say that Mya counts as 19 years old from the start of the story? That would make her 19 in 299 AC, and says nothing about her age later that year, or in early 300 AC. Or does the appendix mean to say that Mya is 19 years old from the moment that we meet her?

Compare to Margaery, who is mentioned to be 15 in the appendix of ASOS. By the time she makes her first appearance, in Sansa I, she is already 16 (as per Sansa's description of Margaery as the girl arrived in KL before the chapter). She's mentioned only once before, in Tyrion I, where she is still on her way to KL. Seems to me that in between the time that the book began and her arrival in KL, she turned 16. At least that's what the info available seems to suggest.

 

If indeed so, Mya being 19 would mean that she was 19 in late 299 AC, which means that she had either turned 19 that year (born in 280 AC), or would turn 20 later that year (born in 279 AC).

 

So saying that she was 19 in 300 AC (which is not stated anywhere) must mean that she was born in 281 AC, is completely ignoring that her nameday can still occur in the year.

[RumHam]

It's like traveling back in time... I guess when we make the switch to this software we'll just lose the current R+L=J thread. 

[IceFire125]

Oh wow!!

 

NICE lay out!!  And to make this a relevant post. I believe in R+L= J, that R+L married, thus Jon is royal blood... and the true heir to the throne.

[UnmaskedLurker]

The "reboot" makes it look like no one has discussed RLJ since September. I don't have anything innovative to add, but for those of us who believe RLJ to be the most logical answer to who are Jon's parents, I will say that I think Ned got lucky that no one at Starfall (other than any co-conspirators that might have been in the RLJ cover-up with Ned) knew enough about Wylla's whereabouts during the relevant period of time to be certain that she could not be Jon's mother. Otherwise, a lot more questions might have been asked, and those questions could have led to uncomfortable conclusions. And if those problematic conclusions got back to KL and Robert -- Ned might have had even bigger problems. 

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

It's like traveling back in time... I guess when we make the switch to this software we'll just lose the current R+L=J thread. 

Hah!  I guess the back-up date was September 27th..

I read a post saying it might be possible to restore the data until October 13th (IIRC, but definitly somewhere mid-October), so we might get some of the threads back. We'd be missing only a month, in that case.

[UnmaskedLurker]

 

Hah!  I guess the back-up date was September 27th..

I read a post saying it might be possible to restore the data until October 13th (IIRC, but definitly somewhere mid-October), so we might get some of the threads back. We'd be missing only a month, in that case.

I don't see how that is possible at this point given that we are now responding to this version -- how could that data be added without affecting these new posts to the same thread? I strongly suspect that if this launch ends up being the "official launch" of the new software, this data is it.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I don't see how that is possible at this point given that we are now responding to this version -- how could that data be added without affecting these new posts to the same thread? I strongly suspect that if this launch ends up being the "official launch" of the new software, this data is it.

I have no idea. I guess we'll see..

 

We may eventually be able to restore content up to October 13th. We'll also make the former forum available once we sort out some of the details regarding how to do that.

[Lord Varys]

Considering that this is some sort of a blank slate here now, and I'm pretty occupied very closely rereading AGoT right now, has anybody ever asked/discussed Robert's claim in Eddard I that he has sworn to kill Rhaegar for what he had done to Lyanna?

The way this line is presented does not seem to suggest that it is a sort of throw-away line or something he never actually did. It seems as if Robert Baratheon well and truly did actually vow (semi-)publicly to avenge Lyanna Stark on Rhaegar Targaryen. That, in turn, suggests that whatever Rhaegar did to Lyanna was actually perceived as hurting her by Robert and, presumably also by Ned, at the time they learned about it.

It also indicates that whatever Aerys later on did to Rickard and Brandon wasn't all that important to Robert. His reason to rebel/kill Rhaegar was utterly about Lyanna, not so much what the Mad King did to Ned's father and brother. It certainly would have played a role but I think it is quite evident from Robert's fixation on Rhaegar that Storm's End would have rebelled against Aerys in any case.

[Black Crow]

I don't see how that is possible at this point given that we are now responding to this version -- how could that data be added without affecting these new posts to the same thread? I strongly suspect that if this launch ends up being the "official launch" of the new software, this data is it.

There's a note from Linda saying they're looking at a read-only archive

[UnmaskedLurker]

 LV--

I don't follow your logic. Even if one assumes that Robert would have wanted to kill Rhaegar -- vowed to kill Rhaegar -- due to what happened to Lyanna, that does not mean that the stormlands would have rebelled against the IT. Without the support of other regions, I doubt Robert would try to send his military in alone -- without any support from the North, the Vale or other regions. And it seems as though what Rhaegar did to Lyanna (or was believed to have done) was not enough to get the other regions involved. Even the deaths of Rickard and Brandon seem insufficient to motivate rebellion. Only the demand upon Jon Arryn for Ned and Robert was enough to motivate going to war. And wanted to kill Rhaegar really is not the same thing as being willing to go to war over it -- so it is not clear that Robert would have even wanted to go to war.

So whatever Robert might have said about killing Rhaegar, I don't think we really have any evidence that war would have resulted absent the actions by Aerys. And I assume Robert would have more sense than Brandon and would not go to KL demanding Rhaegar's head. So I think Robert would have stewed in his juices, waiting for an opportunity to confront Rhaegar and challenge him. I don't think we have any reason to think the stormlands would have gone to war against the IT solely in response to Robert's desire to kill Rhaegar.

[Lord Varys]

As far as we know Lyonel Baratheon also crowned himself the new Storm King without having the support of any other great house, so this is entirely likely.

Not to mention that Robert Baratheon was not only the head of House Baratheon but also a great-grandson of Aegon V. He had a legal claim to the Iron Throne himself, a fact that could greatly help him in a rebellion/war against the Targaryens - which it then actually did.

What I'm saying is essentially that Robert would eventually have rebelled anyway once he returned to SE. He couldn't possibly call his banners while being in the Vale. At least not very efficiently.

[RumHam]

 

Hah!  I guess the back-up date was September 27th..

Actually sadly the backup was done on the 17th. They just opened this forum up for testing on the 27th, so any posts made during the testing phase are still here. 

[SFDanny]

What I'm saying is essentially that Robert would eventually have rebelled anyway once he returned to SE. He couldn't possibly call his banners while being in the Vale. At least not very efficiently.

I'd question this conclusion, LV. Robert could do just what Ned did in AGoT. He sends word to Robb to call the banners together, and Robert could have sent word to Stannis to do the same thing. In fact, he may have. Robert's presence in Storm's End is important, but it is not necessary to start the rebellion. My take on this is that Robert views this as a personal affront to his honor by Rhaegar. He wants very much to kill Rhaegar himself, not necessarily at this point rebel against the Iron Throne and Aerys's rule. For Robert's honor to be besmirched does not require he believes Lyanna is harmed. Only that what is by right his has been taken away. HIS Lyanna is with Rhaegar, and the Crown Prince is likely having sex with Robert's property.

I do agree that there is important parts of this backstory we know nothing about. I'd like to know, for instance, why Aerys's calls for Ned and Robert's heads? Have they done something that gives Aerys a pretext to kill them? Has Aerys decided to do away with House Stark and Baratheon? If, so, why not call for the heads of Benjen, Stannis, and Renly as well? Something has happened with Robert and Ned before Aerys sends his demand to Jon Arryn.

[Lord Varys]

SFDanny,

I actually expect/think that Robert has sent a raven to Stannis calling at least some of the Stormlords either after Jon Arryn had decided to rebel or prior to that. Robert has to have had some levies which he later used at Summerhall, not to mention that he would have to have a not so small army once he decided to march into the Reach. Those men must have come from somewhere.

But the point I was trying to make is that Stannis or Catelyn/Robb simply wouldn't have had the authority the actual Lord and head of the house has. Especially if you think of the Robert-Stannis comparison.

The other thing with this whole question is what Ned believed about the Lyanna affair. Assuming that Robert swore that vow in Ned's presence - and Ned doesn't question this whole thing, asking when or why exactly Robert made such a vow suggesting that this is the case - could make it rather likely that at least Eddard Stark pretty much believed the same thing about Rhaegar-Lyanna as Robert still believes later on.

Assuming that Robert was pissed about the whole thing from the start he may have not gotten the support of the Starks in his rebellion - if Rickard had come to an agreement with Aerys or Rhaegar - but he may still have gotten the support of the Vale through Jon Arryn. Considering the relative weakness of the North in numbers the Northmen on his side wouldn't have been all that important.

[UnmaskedLurker]

 LV--

Why would the Vale agree to go to war simply to assuage Robert's ego? You really think that Jon Arryn would be willing to go to war simply due to Rhaegar running off with Lyanna -- especially before they even return so that he can find out exactly what happened to Lyanna? War is not something to enter lightly. When Jon is faced with betraying his wards or fighting a war -- he chooses war. But I doubt any action already taken and past -- like Rhaegar taking Lyanna -- would be enough to bring Jon Arryn to war.

As to what Ned thought -- I am not sure we can assume he thought the same as Robert either. He might have -- but what if Robert is 100% certain that Rhaegar abducted Lyanna and is raping her, and Ned thinks it is 50/50 whether Lyanna went willingly (just assume for purposes of this example). Is Ned going to try to correct Robert? Is there anything Ned could say that would change Robert's mind? Just because Ned did not argue with Robert does not mean that Ned agreed with Robert. And in the end -- it did not matter because the war was about something else for Ned -- keeping himself alive.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Actually sadly the backup was done on the 17th. They just opened this forum up for testing on the 27th, so any posts made during the testing phase are still here. 

Well, that explains why in most other threads only went up to the 17th

There's a note from Linda saying they're looking at a read-only archive

I thought that that was mostly/only for the content otherwise lost? The month we'd be missing between mid-October and now, and potentially the content that was lost in the transfer, if it can't be restored.

[SFDanny]

SFDanny,

I actually expect/think that Robert has sent a raven to Stannis calling at least some of the Stormlords either after Jon Arryn had decided to rebel or prior to that. Robert has to have had some levies which he later used at Summerhall, not to mention that he would have to have a not so small army once he decided to march into the Reach. Those men must have come from somewhere.

But the point I was trying to make is that Stannis or Catelyn/Robb simply wouldn't have had the authority the actual Lord and head of the house has. Especially if you think of the Robert-Stannis comparison.

I agree with you here.

The other thing with this whole question is what Ned believed about the Lyanna affair. Assuming that Robert swore that vow in Ned's presence - and Ned doesn't question this whole thing, asking when or why exactly Robert made such a vow suggesting that this is the case - could make it rather likely that at least Eddard Stark pretty much believed the same thing about Rhaegar-Lyanna as Robert still believes later on.

Assuming that Robert was pissed about the whole thing from the start he may have not gotten the support of the Starks in his rebellion - if Rickard had come to an agreement with Aerys or Rhaegar - but he may still have gotten the support of the Vale through Jon Arryn. Considering the relative weakness of the North in numbers the Northmen on his side wouldn't have been all that important.

Assuming Lyanna did go willingly, we know she expressed her reservations about Robert's character to Ned, and Ned was with Lyanna at Harrenhal, so it is likely he knows of her feelings towards Rhaegar exhibited there. Which makes me think Ned, along with the rest of the Starks, knew this wasn't a question of a true kidnapping with the accompanying threat to Lyanna's person.

Which comes to the question why Ned doesn't tell Robert. I think Robert knows as well, but he won't let himself accept it and he fundamentally doesn't care if Lyanna went willingly. When Robert, on his death bed talks of how "Rhaegar won" and how Rhaegar has Lyanna, it is a reflection of Robert viewing this as a contest between himself and Rhaegar for Lyanna's love and for the possession of her. Robert views this, like his ancestor did, as a question of honoring his rights to Lyanna. With such a view, what is the point of Ned telling him Lyanna didn't love him? Ned may, at this point in his life, even agree with Robert that it doesn't matter what Lyanna wanted. It was her duty to his father to honor the marriage pact. I think this likely. There is a reason Lyanna has fear in her eyes when trying to get Ned to agree with her dying wish.