R+L=J v.157

[Ser Creighton]

On 1/21/2016 at 8:41 PM, purple-eyes said:

Oh, sure, GRRM did not need to repeat the whole thing. Or maybe he just recycle his elements in different books.

But after you brought this up, I did notice that Arthur and Oswell had some similarity with Gormon and Tommard.

Gorman was considered the greatest knight of his time and he was from Starpike. Sounds like Arthur.

Tommard was son-in-law of the sponsor of the tourney, sort of like Oswell was the brother of the sponsor of the HH tourney.

Gorman and Tommard were planning to make Daemon as winner secretly, but Daemon was unaware.

Arthur and Oswell can certainly plan the same thing if they were really loyal to Rhaegar.

Only difference is that an innocent Glendan Flowers defeated Daemon, but an innocent Barristan lost to Rhaegar.

And this Daemon favored mystery knight Dunk (sexually), while Rhaegar favored mystery knight Lyanna!

 

 

Gormon and Tommard completes the general idea yes but be careful with parallels. It's not a one to one deal, and you have to look really closely to see what direction the clues take you. Lyanna the Lunk seems a bit of a stretch for me, though she faced three and Dunk faced 1.

I don't know if Daemon sexually wanted Dunk, but he did dream of him. A prophetic dream, sooo that may lead you right past Lyanna. Daemon dreamed of one dragon being born at White Walls, and Rhaegar wanted how many heads?

Though Glendon escapes me, red comet symbolism is all good. And the Targaryen winning and the Blackfyre losing are all good with an inverse, it's a cyclical pattern one is the beginning and one is the end, the same but opposite, like the head and the tail of an ouroborus.

I don't know I would have to reread the entire novella over, then find every single mention or quote on HH to do a proper parallel. I am telling you, you have to be really careful when doing them, been doing them for years, and they can bite you in the ass like a prophecy if you miss one clue or interpret one thing wrong. And while I am sure their is something there, and that there is an inverse parallel going on, I don't have enough information on HH to do an accurate one.

I think you can pick up on some basics but I can't claim anyone took a dive because it seems there is an inverse. The question becomes where does the inverse begin an end with each aspect. Daemon and Rhaegar are easy, Maybe even Dunk and Lyanna, just remember that Dunk/Daemon is one sided. It's more vague than what I usually see Martin do, without more HH info it's difficult to tell some things.

Personally I think it point more towards prophecy with Rhaegar and Lyanna, but that is a long standing claim on my part that has support from other parts of the main series. I would like to figure out the Glendon flowers thing personally, I am sure it has something to do with the red comet. I just can't locate it at HH, maybe house Martell, but I have no information on what Oberyn or Elia were doing during all of this. Ashara is also something too look into, does she have a parallel at Whitewalls?
 

The Comet might be perspective, Daemon not only misjudges who the Dragon will be, he misjudges Fireball, these lead to his downfall. Rhaegar may have also misjudged what he thought was the red comet and who was the Prince or the three heads. Well we pretty much know he screwed up but we lack the finer details. Wrong about Comet, Wrong about Dragons.

 

[purple-eyes]

33 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

Gormon and Tommard completes the general idea yes but be careful with parallels. It's not a one to one deal, and you have to look really closely to see what direction the clues take you. Lyanna the Lunk seems a bit of a stretch for me, though she faced three and Dunk faced 1.

I don't know if Daemon sexually wanted Dunk, but he did dream of him. A prophetic dream, sooo that may lead you right past Lyanna. Daemon dreamed of one dragon being born at White Walls, and Rhaegar wanted how many heads?

Though Glendon escapes me, red comet symbolism is all good. And the Targaryen winning and the Blackfyre losing are all good with an inverse, it's a cyclical pattern one is the beginning and one is the end, the same but opposite, like the head and the tail of an ouroborus.

I don't know I would have to reread the entire novella over, then find every single mention or quote on HH to do a proper parallel. I am telling you, you have to be really careful when doing them, been doing them for years, and they can bite you in the ass like a prophecy if you miss one clue or interpret one thing wrong. And while I am sure their is something there, and that there is an inverse parallel going on, I don't have enough information on HH to do an accurate one.

I think you can pick up on some basics but I can't claim anyone took a dive because it seems there is an inverse. The question becomes where does the inverse begin an end with each aspect. Daemon and Rhaegar are easy, Maybe even Dunk and Lyanna, just remember that Dunk/Daemon is one sided. It's more vague than what I usually see Martin do, without more HH info it's difficult to tell some things.

Personally I think it point more towards prophecy with Rhaegar and Lyanna, but that is a long standing claim on my part that has support from other parts of the main series. I would like to figure out the Glendon flowers thing personally, I am sure it has something to do with the red comet. I just can't locate it at HH, maybe house Martell, but I have no information on what Oberyn or Elia were doing during all of this. Ashara is also something too look into, does she have a parallel at Whitewalls?
 

The Comet might be perspective, Daemon not only misjudges who the Dragon will be, he misjudges Fireball, these lead to his downfall. Rhaegar may have also misjudged what he thought was the red comet and who was the Prince or the three heads. Well we pretty much know he screwed up but we lack the finer details. Wrong about Comet, Wrong about Dragons.

 

no matter what, I literally laughed when I saw this:

Quote:

(Daemon): "my dreams do not lie."

Lord Gormon remained after Ser John had gone. "His dreams will be the death of all of us."

 

I can certainly see this happen:

Rhaegar said: "my dreams do not lie."

Then Arthur remained at TOJ after Rhaegar had gone to KL and said to Oswell and Hightower: "his dreams will be the death of all of us."

 

Rhaegar is every ounce of Daemon II.

Although He won the jousting, he still lost his rebellion as Daemon.

 

[Ser Creighton]

10 hours ago, purple-eyes said:

no matter what, I literally laughed when I saw this:

Quote:

(Daemon): "my dreams do not lie."

Lord Gormon remained after Ser John had gone. "His dreams will be the death of all of us."

 

I can certainly see this happen:

Rhaegar said: "my dreams do not lie."

Then Arthur remained at TOJ after Rhaegar had gone to KL and said to Oswell and Hightower: "his dreams will be the death of all of us."

 

Rhaegar is every ounce of Daemon II.

Although He won the jousting, he still lost his rebellion as Daemon.

 

It's an inverse, he would of thought his dreams would of saved them all more than likely. Or that the prophecy would, look at the outcome, first time with Daemon the Blackfyre's lose, second time the Targaryens are overthrown. Bloodraven shows up the first time, a Targaryen or legitamized Targaryen. Which may point to Vary having a hand in this, Bloodraven used magic, Varys does not appear to be a fan though both were spy masters. So if the Blackfyre's lost the first time, the idea is they came out on top this time, which would point to Varys having his hand in the HH outcome. Varys seems strangely absent from the fall of the Targaryens, yet so many things have worked out in his favor, and he did not show up in KL on a whim, it's not like he needed the job. So now you have to wonder if there is a Blackfyre plotting some of the events at HH to help bring down the Targaryens.

[IceFire125]

1 hour ago, Ser Creighton said:

It's an inverse, he would of thought his dreams would of saved them all more than likely. Or that the prophecy would, look at the outcome, first time with Daemon the Blackfyre's lose, second time the Targaryens are overthrown. Bloodraven shows up the first time, a Targaryen or legitamized Targaryen. Which may point to Vary having a hand in this, Bloodraven used magic, Varys does not appear to be a fan though both were spy masters. So if the Blackfyre's lost the first time, the idea is they came out on top this time, which would point to Varys having his hand in the HH outcome. Varys seems strangely absent from the fall of the Targaryens, yet so many things have worked out in his favor, and he did not show up in KL on a whim, it's not like he needed the job. So now you have to wonder if there is a Blackfyre plotting some of the events at HH to help bring down the Targaryens.

And also, that "inverse" is...

fAegon (paper/mummer's dragon, a Blackfyre claiming to be a red dragon) 

vs

Jon (trueborn Red dragon, lived as a bastard, owning the black as his color)

One of them claiming he is the trueborn son of Rhaegar.  While the other, it will be other factors (Ned's spirit/Lyanna's crypt, Howland, riding on a dragon for the lords to see at the Great Council) claiming him to be the trueborn son of Rhaegar, not of his own will.  But it will be thrust upon him to fulfill his duty... to the realm, as king.

 

[purple-eyes]

33 minutes ago, IceFire125 said:

And also, that "inverse" is...

fAegon (paper/mummer's dragon, a Blackfyre claiming to be a red dragon) 

vs

Jon (trueborn Red dragon, lived as a bastard, owning the black as his color)

One of them claiming he is the trueborn son of Rhaegar.  While the other, it will be other factors (Ned's spirit/Lyanna's crypt, Howland, riding on a dragon for the lords to see at the Great Council) claiming him to be the trueborn son of Rhaegar, not of his own will.  But it will be thrust upon him to fulfill his duty... to the realm, as king.

 

Yeah, keep dreaming, good luck.

No matter how many dragons Jon Snow will manage to ride, he is still a bastard from a union of a hypocrite, selfish woman and a cold-blooded, unfaithful husband (and father). Sure, this is not his fault, but this can not make him a true-born.

 

 

[UnmaskedLurker]

47 minutes ago, purple-eyes said:

Yeah, keep dreaming, good luck.

No matter how many dragons Jon Snow will manage to ride, he is still a bastard from a union of a hypocrite, selfish woman and a cold-blooded, unfaithful husband (and father). Sure, this is not his fault, but this can not make him a true-born.

 

 

If the "right" people in Westeros want to promote Jon as true-born -- then he will be sold as true-born. Perception is reality. We cannot really know at this point who might have it in their interest to tout Jon as the true-born son of Rhaegar Targaryen by the end of the story. And if enough of the Lords decide that promoting that position is in their interest -- then that is how Jon will be viewed.

[IceFire125]

7 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

If the "right" people in Westeros want to promote Jon as true-born -- then he will be sold as true-born. Perception is reality. We cannot really know at this point who might have it in their interest to tout Jon as the true-born son of Rhaegar Targaryen by the end of the story. And if enough of the Lords decide that promoting that position is in their interest -- then that is how Jon will be viewed.

"Dragons will win the lords over quicker than ravens"

Doubts and accusers will follow Jon all the way in the halls of the Great Council, just like it was in the halls of Castle Black for the election of a new Lord Commander.  However, just as the raven mount Jon's shoulder causing the droves of votes for Jon, it will be the inverse of Jon mounting on a dragon, in front of the lords of Westeros to see, that will be the final push for the lords to vote him as king.

[purple-eyes]

22 hours ago, The Twinslayer said:

I think that there were several other passages, like this one from ASOS where Selmy explains why he took Robert's pardon, that were quoted to show that Selmy believes that it is chivalry and not skill at arms that makes a good knight:

"Some truths are hard to hear.  Robert was a . . . a good knight . . . chivalrous, brave . . . he spared my life, and the lives of many others . . . "  The idea being that Selmy joined Robert because he thought Robert had honor, not because Robert was good at fighting.  

And this one from ADWD:

"He spoke to them about what it meant to be a knight.  'It is chivalry that makes a true knight, not a sword,' he said.  "Without honor, a knight is no more than a common killer.  It is better to die with honor than to live without it.'"  In other words, how well you fight is of little importance.  What matters is how honorably you fight.  

So I think the theory was that, when Selmy says:  "If I had been a better knight . . . if I had unhorsed the prince in that last tilt, as I unhorsed so many others, it would have been for me to choose the queen of love and beauty" -- he means that he dishonored himself by taking a dive for Rhaegar at the Harrenhal tournament.  He does not mean that he would have been the champion if he just had a little more skill with a lance.    

Sure, at the same time dany also rides a bigger dragon, tyrion rides another one, they all show up in that great council you imagined. 

Will tyrion be supported as true born son if aerys by claiming aerys had a secret polygamy wedding with Joanna? 

 

[purple-eyes]

28 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

If the "right" people in Westeros want to promote Jon as true-born -- then he will be sold as true-born. Perception is reality. We cannot really know at this point who might have it in their interest to tout Jon as the true-born son of Rhaegar Targaryen by the end of the story. And if enough of the Lords decide that promoting that position is in their interest -- then that is how Jon will be viewed.

Exactly, most people viewed Joff as real king, but we know he is a bastard.

In your scaenaio, although people can surely sell him as a true-born son of rhaegar (just like those people who fake birth certificates nowadays), but we know that Jon snow was born as a bastard from a union of one cheating husband and another woman. There is no doubt about that.

 

[Ser Creighton]

1 hour ago, IceFire125 said:

And also, that "inverse" is...

fAegon (paper/mummer's dragon, a Blackfyre claiming to be a red dragon) 

vs

Jon (trueborn Red dragon, lived as a bastard, owning the black as his color)

One of them claiming he is the trueborn son of Rhaegar.  While the other, it will be other factors (Ned's spirit/Lyanna's crypt, Howland, riding on a dragon for the lords to see at the Great Council) claiming him to be the trueborn son of Rhaegar, not of his own will.  But it will be thrust upon him to fulfill his duty... to the realm, as king.

 

Well that is kind of how the Ouroboros works, something is the head and something is the tail, it's cyclical? Check, it's essentially the same because it is one thing, check. It's also the opposite. That is why sun and moon is the perfect example, Day the head, Night the tail, cyclical? It's definition of cyclical, opposite, yes.  The same? Oh yeah.

So when you get into comparing Dragons, I am not sure Jon is the comparison. He could be, but it's like you need a little more info to really start working out a parallel. But you got their meetings with Tyrion, Tyrion went on a Journey with Jon and Aegon, You get a Mormont connected to the story, there are some good connections to be made, I did it once awhile back, just can't think of it off the top of my head.

Oh I remember one, Blackfyre. Daemon did not have Blackfyre and we have yet to see Aegon with it, it was big deal for Daemon not to have this. Nobody has seen Blackfyre since the Redgrass fields if I recall. Of course Nobody has seen Blackfyre or Darksister, so it becomes very interesting if someone gives Aegon Blackfyre, if anyone in the GC actually has it. I am not sure they do, but they may. In which case you have the only two known Valyrian bastard swords in existence. Funny how Jon has one, and funny how it just happens to be in a place that Bloodraven commanded. They say Bitterstell took Blackfyrem a sword nobody would ever see again despite repetitive invasions. Yet a Bastard Valyrian sword is found in the LC's chamber after a fire. Of course it belongs to the Mormonts for 500 years claims Jeor. Have you ever heard Jorah mention Longclaw? A Valyrian Sword the LC forgot his family owned for 500 years and for some odd reason is not on Bear Island.

Of course a new hilt was put on it, now if only I knew of someone who could effect a persons memory.Now maybe it is or maybe it isn't, either way their is a parallel to Blackfyre.

[purple-eyes]

20 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

Well that is kind of how the Ouroboros works, something is the head and something is the tail, it's cyclical? Check, it's essentially the same because it is one thing, check. It's also the opposite. That is why sun and moon is the perfect example, Day the head, Night the tail, cyclical? It's definition of cyclical, opposite, yes.  The same? Oh yeah.

So when you get into comparing Dragons, I am not sure Jon is the comparison. He could be, but it's like you need a little more info to really start working out a parallel. But you got their meetings with Tyrion, Tyrion went on a Journey with Jon and Aegon, You get a Mormont connected to the story, there are some good connections to be made, I did it once awhile back, just can't think of it off the top of my head.

Oh I remember one, Blackfyre. Daemon did not have Blackfyre and we have yet to see Aegon with it, it was big deal for Daemon not to have this. Nobody has seen Blackfyre since the Redgrass fields if I recall. Of course Nobody has seen Blackfyre or Darksister, so it becomes very interesting if someone gives Aegon Blackfyre, if anyone in the GC actually has it. I am not sure they do, but they may. In which case you have the only two known Valyrian bastard swords in existence. Funny how Jon has one, and funny how it just happens to be in a place that Bloodraven commanded. They say Bitterstell took Blackfyrem a sword nobody would ever see again despite repetitive invasions. Yet a Bastard Valyrian sword is found in the LC's chamber after a fire. Of course it belongs to the Mormonts for 500 years claims Jeor. Have you ever heard Jorah mention Longclaw? A Valyrian Sword the LC forgot his family owned for 500 years and for some odd reason is not on Bear Island.

Of course a new hilt was put on it, now if only I knew of someone who could effect a persons memory.Now maybe it is or maybe it isn't, either way their is a parallel to Blackfyre.

Hold on, it is not clear that blackfyre is a great sword or bastard sword. 

Dark-sister is likely a long sword, not a bastard either. 

How do you know both these swords are bastard swords? 

[Ser Creighton]

1 hour ago, IceFire125 said:

"Dragons will win the lords over quicker than ravens"

Doubts and accusers will follow Jon all the way in the halls of the Great Council, just like it was in the halls of Castle Black for the election of a new Lord Commander.  However, just as the raven mount Jon's shoulder causing the droves of votes for Jon, it will be the inverse of Jon mounting on a dragon, in front of the lords of Westeros to see, that will be the final push for the lords to vote him as king.

Well, I don't doubt Jon will ride a dragon, Martin likes to make people wait for moments like that. Even with Dany it took 5 books. But people need to except the fact that their is reason Dany was given the eggs by Martin, and why she hatched them, and why she is the mother of dragons. That happens to be a big part of the story.

Now the theme you are talking about is mentioned multiple times in the series and it appears in the extended universe. Now Dany is not adverse to that idea, in fact she expects it. She even says as much, she believes their may be two men out there who are meant to share this with her, two men she can trust. Though the Mummers dragon prophecy will probably give her cause for concern.  Lucky for Jon, Aegon popped up. I figure that situation will sort itself out.

Now some feel warging will be a part of it. I don't know if that is true, we don't know if their is a range on warging, or how that relationship works, but even Bran had to meet the animals he warged and as of yet Jon has not had Dragon dreams. He has not seen the Dragon yet, Dany very clearly saw the dragon. The Dragons are very attached to her.

Now as Lemore pointed out, she could very easily make Aegon, all she has to do is support him. She has no idea he is even a thing. She has a role as a key of sorts for any Targaryen, weather it's the dragons or her support. She happens to be the known factor, it was always written that way. She is who Martin says she is and there is no maybe to it, we already know, that story is already written.

Now that all still goes back to Jon's dream, fire on one side ice on the other, but he is fighting the Ice. Don't blame him as it does not seem like fun ice, but scary ice. I have written about what I feel is the Night's King, Jon, Dany triangle, I don't know how it plays out, but the triangle itself is what I think is a thing. Like the Robert, Lyanna, Rhaegar triangle, or the Cersei, Jaime, Brei Triangle, etc...

I can't really point to a specific direction it will go, maybe all three die, maybe only one dies, maybe 2 die, I don't know. But chances are it will not be resolved till the end of the series. The war for the dawn is the climax, nothing is really going to top that in this series, or come close. And we already know how close Jon is to that subject, we also know on multiple occasions, that Dany has pretty much seen it, not to mention she dreams of a dream guy with a nice face, and also an ice penis that scares her. She has the cold breath of death hunting her, and if it catches her she dies. But that is a thing, that is from the books, she dreams about the ice army, she dreams about Darkness hunting her, she dreams about the cold breath.

So that is why I tend to point to the War for the Dawn 2.0 or 3.0 or however many .0's it is at this time as the climax. Rather than war for the dawn and then some random Dance. Granted I am not a fan of the idea of her or Jon dying, because you do all this work to stop the apocalypse, and I happen to think you deserve a spa day or two. You earn it, granted the Night's King has done a lot of work too, but I don't like him, he wouldn't like a spa anyway, and he can go fuck himself, because he is a dick. 

But I get worried, because so far all of her husbands have been slavers, and I define Thralls as slaves, so does the dictionary, and her first husband was a slaver and a Stallion and I think the Horn Lord and the Night's King are very similar, and the constellation is the same. Stallion is the Horned Lord. However if she makes it to the next cycle, it should invert. Her and Jon have that in common, the Free Folk and the Freemen. She does not like slavery but is forced into these husbands. She may save Jon, but Jon may have to save her. Or there are just a lot of options, where there are, but the climax probably revolves around those three. Does Jon make a unity between Dany and the Night's King? It is hard for me to imagine that, it would seem like a really bad thing but who knows. You can't really undo the Wight's, all that dead. The Night's King is basically a hybrid Vampire/ Lich, I don't think you can fix that. And I really don't think you want those two armies to merge. Clearly it seems there should be a conflict, and cold, blue, undead things, symbolized but giant, cold, blue hearts, have a history of wanting to suck the life out of Dany and make them part of their little gang. And soul sucking tends to go in just fine with the Night's King, he seems all good with it. Dany not so much, and the first time she was saved by a? By a? By a? A? A? A? Bueller? Bueller? A black Dragon? What was Jon's color again, which one did he adopt? Was it pink? Yellow? Orange? It was orange of the Night's watch?

See it get's really tricky with symbolism. We shall see. Maybe the Dragon in Black, has a particular sword? Orangefyre. Maybe not, I don't know. But if she can have a white Shadow, Selmy. Then she can have a black shadow too.

[Ser Creighton]

1 hour ago, purple-eyes said:

Hold on, it is not clear that blackfyre is a great sword or bastard sword. 

Dark-sister is likely a long sword, not a bastard either. 

How do you know both these swords are bastard swords? 

It's 100% Blackfyre is a bastard sword.

"Blackfyre - The ancestral sword of House Targaryen. Last known to be wielded by Bittersteel, one of Aegon IV's Great Bastards, after the death of Daemon Blackfyre and his sons on the Redgrass Fields. Whereabouts unknown since his death in the Blackfyre Rebellion, although his half-brother Bittersteel took up the sword on the battlefield and may have carried it off into exile. Martin has described it as having been a hand-and-a-half sword"

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/FAQ/Entry/Which_are_the_known_Valyrian_steel_swords

Once upon a time, back in the day, when only the worthy did battle upon the forum, there was an old thread about Blackfyre and Longclaw, which led to much debate about Blackfyre, and what kind of sword it was. Because it was originally listed as a great sword, and some thought MtM wielded it. Ran and Martin would later clarify this, it was a hand and half sword otherwise known as a bastard sword, and no mention of MtM actually wielding it. Nope redgrass is it's last known location and Bloodraven just happened to be a Redgrass, and he does love to take things involving his house.  Dragon egg, Darksister, and maybe Blackfyre, it would not be beyond him, and it is the type of thing he would take and probably have a plan for.

Never said Darksister was a bastard Sword, I said he probably took it.

[UnmaskedLurker]

1 hour ago, purple-eyes said:

Exactly, most people viewed Joff as real king, but we know he is a bastard.

In your scaenaio, although people can surely sell him as a true-born son of rhaegar (just like those people who fake birth certificates nowadays), but we know that Jon snow was born as a bastard from a union of one cheating husband and another woman. There is no doubt about that.

 

Now you are just trying to get under my skin because you know I won't agree with this statement while acting like you think I will.

Jon being considered as a true-born son of Rhaegar is nothing like Joffrey or a fake birth certificate. With Joffrey, the facts were not known. People believed he was the son of Robert, but we find out that he is really the son of Jaime. Similarly, with a fake birth certificate, a lie is being perpetuated.

If Jon is considered true-born it will be because the actual facts are uncovered. If it turns out that people find out that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married -- and valid evidence exists to demonstrate as much -- then the people of Westeros may consider the marriage to be legit and thus Jon to be true-born.

The laws of Westeros are not the laws of the U.S. (or similar countries). If the Lords of Westeros decide to accept this marriage as legit -- then it is legit -- no matter whether you think the laws of Westeros should work that way. So if Jon is accepted as true-born under these circumstances (not saying he will -- just that he might) -- then he will be viewed as true-born.

Others might disagree about the application of the law -- and consider him a bastard -- sure. But that is totally different than the Joffrey or fake birth certificate situation where the issue is one of facts -- i.e., where the real facts are being hidden from people and if proven would change people's position. Here all the facts would be known -- there just might be a difference of opinion on how the law applies to those facts. And if the majority decide to apply the law in one way -- then that is the law.

[purple-eyes]

15 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Now you are just trying to get under my skin because you know I won't agree with this statement while acting like you think I will.

Jon being considered as a true-born son of Rhaegar is nothing like Joffrey or a fake birth certificate. With Joffrey, the facts were not known. People believed he was the son of Robert, but we find out that he is really the son of Jaime. Similarly, with a fake birth certificate, a lie is being perpetuated.

If Jon is considered true-born it will be because the actual facts are uncovered. If it turns out that people find out that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married -- and valid evidence exists to demonstrate as much -- then the people of Westeros may consider the marriage to be legit and thus Jon to be true-born.

The laws of Westeros are not the laws of the U.S. (or similar countries). If the Lords of Westeros decide to accept this marriage as legit -- then it is legit -- no matter whether you think the laws of Westeros should work that way. So if Jon is accepted as true-born under these circumstances (not saying he will -- just that he might) -- then he will be viewed as true-born.

Others might disagree about the application of the law -- and consider him a bastard -- sure. But that is totally different than the Joffrey or fake birth certificate situation where the issue is one of facts -- i.e., where the real facts are being hidden from people and if proven would change people's position. Here all the facts would be known -- there just might be a difference of opinion on how the law applies to those facts. And if the majority decide to apply the law in one way -- then that is the law.

The point is that there was no marriage at all.

There was no proof that they married, no matter in front of a tree or with a drunk septon. These are all your imagination. Not that different from "oh, one county clerk from my town travelled to Westeros by riding a red comet then he verified the marriage of rhaegar and Lyanna and issued them a marriage certificate with the stamp of California! "

If you can imagine this marriage out of nowhere, then we can also imagine Aerys and Joanna married secretly so that Tyrion is a true born prince. After all Tyrion had imagined himself as a Targ prince, and Aerys declared that "he married a wrong wife".

 

[Ser Creighton]

7 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Now you are just trying to get under my skin because you know I won't agree with this statement while acting like you think I will.

Jon being considered as a true-born son of Rhaegar is nothing like Joffrey or a fake birth certificate. With Joffrey, the facts were not known. People believed he was the son of Robert, but we find out that he is really the son of Jaime. Similarly, with a fake birth certificate, a lie is being perpetuated.

If Jon is considered true-born it will be because the actual facts are uncovered. If it turns out that people find out that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married -- and valid evidence exists to demonstrate as much -- then the people of Westeros may consider the marriage to be legit and thus Jon to be true-born.

The laws of Westeros are not the laws of the U.S. (or similar countries). If the Lords of Westeros decide to accept this marriage as legit -- then it is legit -- no matter whether you think the laws of Westeros should work that way. So if Jon is accepted as true-born under these circumstances (not saying he will -- just that he might) -- then he will be viewed as true-born.

Others might disagree about the application of the law -- and consider him a bastard -- sure. But that is totally different than the Joffrey or fake birth certificate situation where the issue is one of facts -- i.e., where the real facts are being hidden from people and if proven would change people's position. Here all the facts would be known -- there just might be a difference of opinion on how the law applies to those facts. And if the majority decide to apply the law in one way -- then that is the law.

"The short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modelled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations, and often contradictory."

I have an even shorter answer. They are whatever Martin says they are in a given moment.

I don't get that into the laws because of what he said, basiclly if he wants something to happen he can make it work because of the way he has described the laws themselves. Which is not codified, vague, varying interpretations, and contradictory. Lots of room to play and in the main series it's not really the peoples court. We say you be guilty demon monkey. I demand a trial by combat. Ahhh the legal system. You are not suppose to be able to force a marriage, that did not stop Ramsey... twice. It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world.

[purple-eyes]

19 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

It's 100% Blackfyre is a bastard sword.

"Blackfyre - The ancestral sword of House Targaryen. Last known to be wielded by Bittersteel, one of Aegon IV's Great Bastards, after the death of Daemon Blackfyre and his sons on the Redgrass Fields. Whereabouts unknown since his death in the Blackfyre Rebellion, although his half-brother Bittersteel took up the sword on the battlefield and may have carried it off into exile. Martin has described it as having been a hand-and-a-half sword"

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/FAQ/Entry/Which_are_the_known_Valyrian_steel_swords

Once upon a time, back in the day, when only the worthy did battle upon the forum, there was an old thread about Blackfyre and Longclaw, which led to much debate about Blackfyre, and what kind of sword it was. Because it was originally listed as a great sword, and some thought MtM wielded it. Ran and Martin would later clarify this, it was a hand and half sword otherwise known as a bastard sword, and no mention of MtM actually wielding it. Nope redgrass is it's last known location and Bloodraven just happened to be a Redgrass, and he does love to take things involving his house.  Dragon egg, Darksister, and maybe Blackfyre, it would not be beyond him, and it is the type of thing he would take and probably have a plan for.

Never said Darksister was a bastard Sword, I said he probably took it.

OK, so it was listed as a great sword, then GRRM decided that it is a bastard sword.

He mentioned that Blackfrye will come back one day to the story, so I guess it is inside the gift box of Illriyo.

 

[UnmaskedLurker]

1 minute ago, purple-eyes said:

The point is that there was no marriage at all.

There was no proof that they married, no matter in front of a tree or with a drunk septon. These are all your imagination. Not that different from "oh, one county clark from my town travelled to Westeros by riding a red comet then he verified the marriage of rhaegar and Lyanna and issued them a marriage certificate with the stamp of California! "

If you can imagine this marriage out of nowhere, then we can also imagine Aerys and Joanna married secretly so that Tyrion is a true born prince. After all Tyrion had imagined himself as a Targ prince, and Aerys declared that "he married a wrong wife".

 

You are totally missing my point. If there is no evidence of a marriage -- then Jon most likely will not be put forth as a true-born son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. I don't know if there is such proof -- there might be or there might not be. I should have clarified this point above when I talked about the circumstances under which the "right" people might put him forth as true-born. 

As a predicate to any such effort -- of course there would need to be evidence of such a marriage. Without such evidence, then it would be just like Joffrey, I supposed, but without even as good a cover story. Neither of us knows whether such evidence exists. It might -- and if it does -- it could be the basis for putting Jon forth as the true-born Targ heir -- if the "powers that be" decide to recognize the polygamous marriage as a real marriage. This story being fiction -- GRRM is free to come up with such evidence if he chooses.

[UnmaskedLurker]

2 minutes ago, Ser Creighton said:

"The short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modelled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpretations, and often contradictory."

I have an even shorter answer. They are whatever Martin says they are in a given moment.

I don't get that into the laws because of what he said, basiclly if he wants something to happen he can make it work because of the way he has described the laws themselves. Which is not codified, vague, varying interpretations, and contradictory. Lots of room to play and in the main series it's not really the peoples court. We say you be guilty demon monkey. I demand a trial by combat. Ahhh the legal system. You are not suppose to be able to force a marriage, that did not stop Ramsey... twice. It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world.

SC -- I am not asserting what the laws in Westeros are. To the contrary, I am basically saying what you are saying. That the laws at any time are what the people in power say they are. And thus they can decide that a marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna is a legit marriage -- or can decide it is not a legit marriage (assuming evidence of the marriage comes forth at all).

[purple-eyes]

1 minute ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

You are totally missing my point. If there is no evidence of a marriage -- then Jon most likely will not be put forth as a true-born son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. I don't know if there is such proof -- there might be or there might not be. I should have clarified this point above when I talked about the circumstances under which the "right" people might put him forth as true-born. 

As a predicate to any such effort -- of course there would need to be evidence of such a marriage. Without such evidence, then it would be just like Joffrey, I supposed, but without even as good a cover story. Neither of us knows whether such evidence exists. It might -- and if it does -- it could be the basis for putting Jon forth as the true-born Targ heir -- if the "powers that be" decide to recognize the polygamous marriage as a real marriage. This story being fiction -- GRRM is free to come up with such evidence if he chooses.

I understood your point.

Let us say some people wanted to put Jon Snow on the throne for some reason. Then dany also had her claim, which is a true born daughter. To strengthen his claim, somebody brought up this: " hey, there were two Targ kings married multiple wives before, we know Rhaegar loved Lyanna. maybe Rhaegar and Lyanna married secretly like Maegor and Alys Hallowway? then Jon Snow can be a true-born with a much better claim!" Then some people would say: "oh, terrific! good idea! rhaegar surely would want to do that! Jon Snow is indeed a true born!" Then when Jon Snow sat on the throne successfully, this story would become a true version.

I can see this happen for sure. People believe they want to believe and a lie will become a fact after being repeated for one thousand times.

But this can not change the fact that R and L never married in the very beginning.